Yesterday, the NJ BPU issued an order setting a new hearing on the matter. Questions the BPU will be exploring at the hearing include:
- Are incumbent generators submitting projects for the purpose of taking up positions in the PJM interconnection queue to the detriment of new entrants?
- Is it inappropriate to have PJM transmission-owning entities (“TOs”) perform interconnection studies given that some of the TOs are part of holding companies that own generation through other affiliates or subsidiaries that participate in the PJM markets? Are such TOs causing intentional delays in the interconnection process to benefit incumbent generation affiliates?
- Are there any inconsistencies between the transmission assumptions made in the PJM Regional Transmission Expansion Planning (“RTEP”) process and the transmission assumptions made in calculating the Capacity Emergency Transfer Limits (“CETL”) for the Locational Deliverability Areas (“LDAs”) modeled in RPM (e.g., double-circuit tower line criteria violations)?
- Since implementation of the RPM in 2007, why has the market responded with disproportionately greater amounts of new generation capacity built outside of LDAs with higher capacity prices such as those that comprise New Jersey?
- Does structural market power play a role in obstructing the development of new capacity in the constrained LDAs that serve New Jersey electric consumers? What are the precise means by which incumbent generators with structural market power obstruct or could potentially obstruct the development of new capacity projects in these markets?
- What actions can the Board take to dilute existing structural market power and thwart any abuse of incumbents who exercise it to impede capacity development?
Ut-oh, PJM! Looks like your continued bias has made you and your power company masters a dangerous enemy!