October 5, 2024
PJM Filing Renews MISO Monitor’s Call for Pseudo-Tie Elimination
Monitor David Patton said PJM’s filing signals a good time for MISO to again propose replacing pseudo-ties with a firm capacity delivery procedure.

By Amanda Durish Cook

NEW ORLEANS — MISO Independent Market Monitor David Patton last week used PJM’s proposed pro forma pseudo-tie agreement to renew his call for an end to pseudo-ties.

On March 9, PJM made a Section 205 filing with FERC to add criteria for accepting pseudo-ties (ER17-1138). PJM would require that it have dispatch control over new and existing pseudo-ties from NYISO and MISO. (See PJM to Tighten Pseudo-Tie Rules Despite Stakeholder Pushback.)

On Thursday, PJM officials delayed a stakeholder vote on the agreements. (See related story in PJM Markets and Reliability and Members Committees Briefs.)

Having NYISO units dispatched by PJM — which may not be fully aware of all the ISO’s data — is not a sound idea, considering New York’s transmission congestion, Patton said. He added that at least 18 units in MISO would be dispatched by the other RTO in the 2017/18 planning year beginning June 1. PJM currently dispatches 13 MISO units.

“It’s very inefficient. … It’s just a terrible idea,” Patton told the Markets Committee of the Board of Directors on Thursday.

MISO PJM pseudo-ties
Curran | © RTO Insider

Patton said PJM’s filing signals a good time for MISO to again propose replacing pseudo-ties with a firm capacity delivery procedure. MISO’s proposal would guarantee the delivery of the capacity purchased by PJM by the host RTO scheduling a firm export in the real-time market and having the external capacity supplier settle the export with both RTOs. Patton said MISO’s proposal is an “attractive” idea. (See “MISO IMM Warns Again of PJM Pseudo-Ties,” MISO Market Subcommittee Briefs.)

MISO Director Michael Curran said the creation of pseudo-ties itself was an “emotional response” to manage electricity flows from different balancing authorities in the early days of RTOs. “It’s difficult to try to get this to work, because it never worked in the first place. It sounds like it’s coming to a critical point here, and we’ll have to work with New York to bring some sanity to the situation,” Curran said.

Patton said MISO and NYISO might face resistance from PJM because PJM staff and stakeholders generally view the pseudo-tie concept as a way to maintain control of the quality and reliability of the generation on its system.

“I wouldn’t be opposed to a megawatt limit” on the volume of exports from MISO to PJM, Patton added.

Curran did not let the comment go unnoticed. “I’m shocked by that. You’re a fundamentalist, and suddenly you’re in favor of limits,” Curran said lightheartedly. “I’d hate to see you close the borders.”

MISO PJM pseudo-ties
Krumsiek | © RTO Insider

Director Barbara Krumsiek asked which of PJM’s neighbors support the RTO’s proposal.

“That’s a good question,” Patton said laughing. He added that NYISO has no pseudo-ties with PJM and would most likely want to keep it that way.

Director Baljit Dail asked when the pseudo-tie issue might be solved.

Richard Doying, MISO executive vice president of operations and corporate services, said resolving the issue would be a long-term project. He said MISO would consult both its Monitor and stakeholders before proposing a Tariff solution to FERC.

Energy MarketGenerationMISOOther NYISO CommitteesPJM

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *