PSC Seeks Comment On Changes To SOS Procurement Due To Delay Of PJM 2022-23 Capacity Auction
August 30, 2019 Email This Story Copyright 2010-19 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • email@example.com
The following story is brought free of charge to readers byEC Infosystems, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
The District of Columbia PSC invited stakeholder comments on proposed changes to an upcoming SOS procurement due to the indefinite delay of the 2022-2023 PJM Base Residual Auction for capacity pending further FERC order.
As exclusively first reported by EnergyChoiceMatters.com, Pepco has filed with the District of Columbia PSC a report concerning a work group meeting that was convened to discuss how to address an upcoming SOS procurement that is scheduled to include, for residential and small commercial customers (RSC), a three-year contract, for approximately one-third of the load, that would start on June 1, 2020 and extend into the 2022-2023 delivery period
Pepco had said participants at the work group considered the following options:
1. Option 1: Status quo
2. Option 2: Change RSC 3-year term to 2-year term (June 1, 2020 through May 31, 2022). Hold an auction for remaining year (June 2022 through May 31, 2023) in the 2019 procurement cycle (contingency tranche or later).
3. Option 3: Change RSC 3-year term to 2-year term. Hold an auction for remaining year during the 2020 procurement cycle or subsequent cycle.
4. Option 4: Suppliers to incorporate a capacity price of $0/MW-day into their bids for deliver year 2022/2023. Pepco will reimburse SOS suppliers the final Pepco zone capacity price for delivery year 2022/23 times the daily UCAP obligation.
During the meeting, the participants did not agree on eliminating any options or come to a consensus on a preferred option, Pepco had said. In addition, participants did not promote additional options for consideration
Following the meeting, Pepco sent out a poll with the 4 options and requested respondents rank the options in terms of preference. A total of eight suppliers responded to the poll. Option 4 was preferred by four suppliers. Option 3 was preferred by three suppliers and Option 1 was preferred by one supplier.
"Pepco, in its role as SOS Administrator, takes no formal position on the 4 options discussed at the working group meeting," Pepco has said
The PSC invited stakeholder comments on the upcoming SOS RFP, including the proposed potential changes listed above, and the attendant wholesale full requirements agreement.