Below is a summary of the issues scheduled to be brought to a vote at the PJM Markets and Reliability and Members committees Thursday. Each item is listed by agenda number, description and projected time of discussion, followed by a summary of the issue and links to prior coverage in RTO Insider.

RTO Insider will be in Valley Forge, Pa., covering the discussions and votes. See next Tuesday’s newsletter for a full report.

Markets and Reliability Committee

1. Fuel Security Senior Task Force Charter (9:20-9:35)

PJM will ask the Markets and Reliability Committee to approve the charter for its controversial Fuel Security Senior Task Force on Thursday.

Stakeholders reluctantly endorsed a problem statement and issue charge in March after some doubted the necessity of the conversation and even inferred that PJM already had a solution in mind. (See PJM Stakeholders Reluctantly OK Fuel Security Initiative.)

If approved, the task force will report back to the MRC in September with any possible recommendations for addressing the first four key work activities outlined in the issue charge: providing education on the issue; quantifying the risk of selected scenarios that could risk fuel security; defining fuel/energy security; and determining whether there is a quantifiable and/or locational requirement for fuel/energy security. The MRC will provide a timeline for completion of the remaining goals at the September meeting.

2. Manual 6 Amendments (9:35-9:50)

Staff will seek endorsement of revisions to Manual 6: Financial Transmission Rights as part of their cover-to-cover review.

The revisions contain language reflecting recent and upcoming FTR market changes. They would remove all details on FTR credit policy, providing a reference to credit rules in the RTO’s Credit Policy and Attachment Q of the Tariff, which address the recently added mark-to-auction requirement.

Brian Chmielewski, manager of market simulation, said at last month’s MRC that staff are continuing their look into rule changes around FTR mark-to-auction credit requirements detailed in Section 6.7, but they’re moving ahead with default settlement rule updates, realignments to the OASIS refresh and the hourly cost component change, pending FERC approval.

3. Manual 14B Amendments (9:50-10:30)

LS Power’s proposed Manual 14B revisions are scheduled for a vote after two deferrals back to the Planning Committee for further work.

During the June PC meeting, PJM Manager of Transmission Planning Aaron Berner said stakeholders appeared close to agreeing on tweaks to the language and would be ready for an MRC discussion later that month.

Sharon Segner, vice president of LS Power, first offered the revisions at the January MRC meeting after expressing concern over the growing number of supplemental projects languishing in the Regional Transmission Expansion Plan. Supplemental projects are proposed by transmission owners and are not required for compliance with PJM’s reliability, operational performance or economic criteria.

Segner’s proposed language specifies that a TO’s supplemental project “will generally be removed from the RTEP” following a final order by a state siting agency rejecting it. A special session of the Planning Committee has been meeting over the last three months to review a variety of legal issues related to FERC Orders 890 and 1000. (See “RTEP Removal Language Vote Deferred, Again,” PJM MRC/MC Briefs: April 25, 2019.)

Berner will also present feedback received from stakeholders about the direction of the special PC discussion on the RTEP language. (See “RTEP Poll,” PJM PC/TEAC Briefs: June 13, 2019.)

Members Committee

1. Must-offer Exception Process (1:25-1:45)

The Members Committee will be asked to endorse rule changes for PJM’s must-offer exception process after months of debate among stakeholders.

The MRC endorsed a joint plan from PJM and the Independent Market Monitor in April that would strip capacity interconnection rights (CIRs) from generators seeking must-offer exceptions without a plan to become capable of meeting Capacity Performance requirements.

Stakeholders approved the proposal in a sector-weighted vote of 3.74 to 1.26, with unanimous support from both electric distributors and end-use customers. The two sectors shot down PJM’s original plan to take CIRs from resources after a three-year period of lost CP capability, which had been approved by 79% of the Market Implementation Committee in November. The sectors also rejected an alternative from Exelon that would have allowed capacity resources to switch voluntarily to energy-only status and disallowed PJM to force such a switch. (See Load Interests Endorse PJM-IMM Must-offer Proposal.)

– Christen Smith