February 8, 2021
Docket No.  
ER21-632-000

I support today’s order granting Toms River Merchant Solar, LLC (Toms River) market-based rate authority and agree with the order’s determination that the PJM Market Monitor has not rebutted the presumption that PJM’s market monitoring and mitigation is sufficient to address any potential market power concerns presented by Toms River.  Specifically, I agree with the order’s finding that “where a protestor identifies a flaw in the mitigation rules, that flaw is useful to rebut the presumption … only if the protestor ties the flaw to the specific market seller’s ability to exercise market power.”  

However, I believe in cases like this one, where a protestor presents credible, potential issues with an RTO/ISO’s monitoring and mitigation, a best practice would be for the Commission to strengthen the record by requiring the seller to submit the market-based rate indicative screens or other evidence to help evaluate whether the seller has market power.[1]  Here, I am comfortable granting Toms River market-based rate authority because there is sufficient record evidence to demonstrate that Toms River, which owns an approximately 21 megawatt solar facility, would pass the market-based rate indicative screens in the PJM market, which would establish a rebuttable presumption that it does not possess horizontal market power in PJM.[2] 

With that said, I want to underscore the importance of the concerns raised by the PJM Market Monitor in this proceeding.  As noted in the order, the PJM Market Monitor “has raised its concerns regarding the effectiveness of PJM’s capacity market mitigation rules in a section 206 complaint, which has been pending before the Commission.”[3]  Therefore, I want to state my agreement with Chairman Glick’s separate statement in Albemarle that the PJM Market Monitor’s complaint “raises serious allegations that go to the core of the Commission’s responsibility to ensure that rates remain just and reasonable and it deserves the Commission’s attention sooner rather than later.” [4]

For these reasons, I respectfully concur.

Allison Clements
Commissioner


[1] Refinements to Horizontal Mkt. Power Analysis for Sellers in Certain Reg’l Transmission Orgs. & Indep. Sys. Operator Mkts., Order No. 861, 168 FERC ¶ 61,040, at P 27 (2019).

[2] 18 CFR 35.37 (c)(1).

[3] Toms River Merchant Solar, LLC, XXX FERC ¶ XXX at P 25 (citing PJM Independent Market Monitor, Complaint, Docket No. EL19-47-000 (Feb. 21, 2019).

[4] Albemarle Beach Solar, LLC, 173 FERC ¶ 61,215 (2020) (Glick, Comm’r, concurring at P 2).

This page was last updated on February 09, 2021