VALLEY FORGE, Pa., — PJM will continue the generator testing begun last winter with only minor changes after members rejected proposals to expand the program.
More than 62% of more than 130 stakeholders who responded to a poll said they preferred continuing the program — begun last winter in response to the high number of generator outages during the 2014 polar vortex — with only minor changes, PJM’s David Schweizer told the Operating Committee last week.
The proposal included only minor changes requiring generators to submit a primary and alternate date for the exercise; submit results of the exercise to PJM; and report completion of the cold weather preparation checklist through eDART. Manual 14D: Generator Operational Requirements also will be revised to clarify combined-cycle offers for generators exercising one combustion turbine on alternate fuel.
Members rejected three other options that would have made larger changes to the program, including option 2, which would not compensate Capacity Performance resources for participating after the winter 2015/2016. It received only 42% support.
Option 3, which received 34% support, would have expanded the exercise period -– currently the month of December -– to Nov. 1 through Jan. 15; increased the maximum temperature to 40 F from 35 F in the southern zones; and increased the maximum test allowed daily from 1,000 MW to 1,200 MW. It also would have included a reevaluation of the program after winter 2015/16 to determine whether it should be continued.
Option 4, a combination of options 2 and 3, also received 34% support.
The testing, which cost about $7 million last year, was credited with improving generator performance during the winter of 2014/15. (See Why Did PJM Grid Fare Better This Winter?)
PJM Seeks to Eliminate Disconnect on Metering Requirements
PJM plans to modify Manual 1: Control Center and Data Exchange Requirements to “close the gap” between PJM requirements and generator practices regarding metering.
PJM’s Ryan Nice presented the OC with a first read on a problem statement to create a task force to draft new manual language. “Some of these gaps are pretty extensive,” Nice said.
Nice said the revised manual will clearly delineate requirements for monitoring and control metering used by PJM’s state estimator and revenue metering used in settlements.
“This is the raw data” for settlements and operations, Nice said. “So it really behooves everyone to pay attention to this.”
Members should send the names of those interested in joining the task force to ryan.nice@pjm.com.
PJM Moves to Tighten Training, Certification Requirements
The System Operations Subcommittee will consider ways to increase compliance with PJM training and certification requirements under an issue charge approved by the OC.
The SOS will only suggest changes to section 3.3 of Manual 40: Certification and Training Requirements, which deals with compliance, and not to the actual requirements, as detailed in section 3.2, said Glen Boyle, manager of system operator training. The subcommittee’s work will also not deal with North American Electric Reliability Corp. requirements, Boyle said.
PJM has been tracking non-compliance among several generation dispatchers, demand response providers and energy storage device operators for months and the situation has not improved. The subcommittee will “look for options to get these companies back into compliance,” Boyle said. (See “Generators’ Non-Compliance Continues” in PJM Operating Committee Briefs, June 15, 2015.)
PJM also briefed members on other changes to Manual 40. The changes, intended to clarify PJM’s processes, will be brought to a vote at the next OC meeting.
Closed-Loop Interface Set for Dominion Chesapeake
PJM last week declared a closed-loop interface near Norfolk, Va., in the Dominion zone to address voltage or thermal problems that could result from an N-1-1 contingency during transmission upgrades expected to be completed by the end of the year.
The interface, effective Aug. 14, will allow the RTO to set sub-zonal real-time prices for load management or generation during high load conditions or emergency transmission outages in the Dominion Chesapeake area, protecting the load pocket. The interface would be modeled for the day-ahead market but not for financial transmission rights.
Bath County SPS Extended for Cloverdale-Lexington Outage
PJM will extend the Bath County special protection scheme (SPS) during an outage required for upgrades to the Cloverdale-Lexington 500-kV tie line between the Dominion and American Electric Power zones.
The line is expected to be out of service from January through June 2016 during a reconductoring project and again from mid-September 2016 through mid-October 2016 for replacement of the Cloverdale transformers. The SPS will address the loss of one of six generators in Bath County and potential congestion on a 138-kV line as a result of the outage.
The SPS was initiated in September 2014 for the Dooms-Lexington 500-kV project, which is expected to be complete by the end of 2015.
PJM and Dominion will consider extending the SPS beyond 2016 to address other pending upgrades in the western Virginia area, PJM’s Liem Hoang told the OC.
Behind-the-Meter Initiative Yields 1,000 MW
PJM has identified about 1,000 MW of behind-the-meter generation as a result of an initiative following the September 2013 heat wave that caused two days of load shedding.
PJM was forced to cut power to 44,000 customers in southern Michigan, northern Ohio and northwest Pennsylvania as temperatures unexpectedly hit the mid-90s and the RTO found itself without enough generation during the fall maintenance period.
A third day of load sheds was avoided after the city of Sturgis, Mich., provided 8 MW of relief through conservation and its behind-the-meter generator. PJM had not been aware of the generator before the emergency. (See Heat Wave To-Do List Grows Longer.)
“If we had seen that [generation] early, we have indications that [Sturgis] would have been happy to come on to avoid having to shed load,” PJM Vice President of Operations Mike Bryson told the OC.
As a result of the incident, PJM began seeking information on other behind-the-meter generation in February. The project identified the nearest Bulk Electric System substations, so that operators can conduct distribution factor studies to determine how effective they would be in addressing constraints.
PJM’s Joe Mulhern said any relief from the generators would come on a voluntary basis because the RTO’s current rules provide no way to compel or compensate them. Such generators are eligible for energy market and ancillary service revenues, however.
Bryson said PJM will have to discuss the issue with each of its 14 states individually because of varying jurisdictional rules.
“We would be open to any of these kinds of discussions with them,” Bryson said.
PJM to Tighten Long-Term Transmission Outage Rules
PJM plans to revise its rules regarding long-term transmission outages in order to protect FTR revenues.
The current rules in Manual 3: Transmission Operations require transmission owners to submit any outages longer than 30 days by Feb. 1 so that they can be accounted for in the annual FTR auction.
But Simon Tam told the OC that some TOs have submitted two or more consecutive outages of less than 30 days at the same location and were not covered by the requirement. “Sometimes they’re not able to project every single piece of work they need to do … and need to extend the outage,” he said in a second briefing to the Market Implementation Committee.
Under the new rules, which will be added to the manual during a scheduled revision this fall, PJM will evaluate outages exceeding 30 days on the same line or transformer within an eight-month time span. If the outage causes a shortfall in FTR revenue, PJM will require the TO to reschedule it or pay for the congestion it causes, Tam said. The plan will be phased in over a year for TOs unable to meet the Feb. 1, 2016, implementation.
PPL’s Frank “Chip” Richardson expressed concern with the change at the MIC briefing, saying it could delay upgrades needed for the reliability of the system. He added that TOs have no way to recover congestion costs they might be assessed.
“We’re not going down the road of wanting TOs to pay for congestion,” Tam responded. “The intent is for the TO to do a little more advanced planning.”
If the upgrade in question is critical and should not be delayed, PJM can declare an emergency and the TO can complete the upgrade without a congestion charge, Tam said.
— Rich Heidorn Jr. and Michael Brooks
