AGR 00001 (revised 02/19/2021) Published On: 09/18/2013
Question: Will the payments made by AES Ohio be based on the same level of load as the PJM energy charges or are the distribution losses part of the product?
Answer: Suppliers will be paid for all MWh delivered to the delivery point. Suppliers are required to deliver to the delivery point sufficient supply to serve the slice of system load of AES Ohio’s Standard Service Offer load customers including distribution losses.
AGR 00002 (revised 03/24/2017) Published On: 10/01/2013
Question: Are changes allowed to the Master SSO Supply Agreement?
Answer: No changes are allowed to the Master SSO Supply Agreement.
AGR 00003 Published On: 10/11/2013
Question: Is the PJM Sample Invoice (Appendix G of the Master SSO Supply Agreement) an accurate representation of the responsible party for each ID# (charges and credits)? In other words, can a SSO Supplier expect to only be billed for the PJM items that are labeled "SSO Supplier" under the responsible party?
Answer: The Sample Invoice is intended to identify the responsible parties for each line item. Auction suppliers are responsible for all load serving entity charges except those specifically listed in Attachment A to the Declaration of Authority. Appendix G is also subject to PJM-administered changes.
AGR 00004 Published On: 10/11/2013
Question: Can you please confirm that the winning supplier will be paid the product of the Price, as set forth in Appendix A, and PJM load without losses associated with non-shopping SSO customers?
Answer: Suppliers will be paid the winning price for their tranches multiplied by the MWh delivered to the delivery point.
AGR 00005 (revised 02/22/2021) Published On: 10/18/2013
Question: Can you clarify the provision in Section 6.8 of the Master SSO Supply Agreement whereby when an Early Termination Date occurs, irrespective of who is the Defaulting Party, AES Ohio may exercise rights of setoff and liquidation and draw on any LC. We understand that the Master SSO Supply Agreement may not be revised but we have no precedent for an agreement where a party other than the non-defaulting party may exercise such rights and we are required to provide an explanation for our contracts review process. Is there a requirement of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio or other similar explanation that you can perhaps provide to explain the particular wording of Section 6.8.
Answer:
In the event of a termination, section 5.3(c) provides a process that establishes a Termination Payment that can result in payments made to or from either party, irrespective of which defaults. Section 6.8 provides AES Ohio with a security interest in the specified funds or credit instruments to ensure that it gets paid if the Termination Payment is owed to it.
Section 6.8 is standard language in Ohio. See, e.g., section 5.8 of Duke Energy, Inc.’s Master SSO Supply Agreement.
AGR 00006 (revised 09/15/2015) Published On: 10/25/2013
Question: The Master SSO Supply Agreement states that SSO Service “includes the load of customers served via the Percentage of Income Payment Plan (“PIPP”), unless or until Ohio Development Services Agency (ODSA) initiates and accepts a PIPP aggregation effort." Is there currently a PIPP aggregation effort underway and if so, when is the PIPP load expected to be carved out of the SSO Service?
Answer: The passage of Ohio House Bill 64 made changes to the law regarding the aggregation of PIPP customers. These changes become effective September 29,2015. The process, timing, and nature of PIPP aggregation action is uncertain. At present, the details of PIPP aggregation efforts are not available.
AGR 00007 (revised 02/22/2021) Published On: 10/25/2013
Question: Will new PJM charges be the responsibility of the SSO Supplier or AES Ohio? Section 2.4 of the Master SSO Supply Agreement states that “Each SSO Supplier is responsible, at its sole cost and expense, for any changes in PJM products and pricing during the Term”. Additionally, SSO Supply is defined as “unbundled load-following Energy, Capacity and Ancillary Services, transmission and distribution losses, congestion and imbalance costs associated with the provision of the foregoing services, other obligations or responsibilities currently imposed or that may be imposed by PJM or NERC and such other services or products that are provided by a CRES Supplier or an SSO Supplier to fulfill its obligations to serve customer load, as required by Section 4928.141 of the Ohio Revised Code and shall further include any market-based transmission and ancillary services necessary to import electric power into PJM.” These two definitions seem to contradict Section 2.3(b) of the Master SSO Supply Agreement which states that “Any new PJM charges not reflected in Appendix G will be assigned based on how similar charges were assigned within Appendix G”.
Answer: AES Ohio cannot predict what new PJM products or pricing may apply during the term, and therefore cannot predict appropriate ultimate responsibility for those charges/credits. SSO Suppliers should initially assume responsibility for any new charges/credits, particularly those that are load-following. AES Ohio will review any new PJM charges/credits as they are introduced and will assign responsibility in a manner consistent with similar existing charges/credits. If AES Ohio determines it should be responsible for the new charge/credit, AES Ohio will notify SSO Suppliers and will work with them to update the signed DOA accordingly.
AGR 00008 (revised 02/22/2021) Published On: 10/25/2013
Question: In Appendix G (PJM Invoice) of the MSA, items 1302 (PJM Scheduling - System Control and Dispatch Service - FTR Administration ) and 1309 (PJM Scheduling - System Control and Dispatch Service Refund - FTR Administration) are listed as the responsibility of the Electric Distribution Co. However, under the Rider column, they are listed under TCRR-B (all other costs that are the responsibility of the Electric Distribution Co. are listed under rider TCRR-N). Can you please confirm that the costs for 1302 and 1309 will not be borne by the SSO Supplier?
Answer: AES Ohio inadvertently posted an incorrect version of Appendix G (PJM Invoice) to the Information Website. This version has been removed and the correct Appendix G has been posted. Items 1302 and 1309 will be the responsibility of the SSO Supplier.
AGR 00009 (revised 02/22/2021) Published On: 08/18/2014
Question: This is a two part question about unaccounted for energy (UFE). a) How did AES Ohio calculate or determine the UFE? and b) Does the supplier gets paid for the PJM settlement load, which includes UFE?
Answer: The SSO Supplier is paid for all MWh delivered to the delivery point in association with its SSO Supplier Responsibility Share. Suppliers will need to deliver sufficient supply as to cover UFE, and would therefore be paid for UFE. UFE is calculated hourly by comparing aggregate profiled load to actual metered zonal load. UFE is allocated by load ratio share to each non-interval customer account. Please refer to the Master SSO Supply Agreement available on the Information Website for more details on the obligations of SSO Suppliers.
AGR 00010 (revised 02/22/2021) Published On: 09/04/2014
Question: PJM may propose changing capacity market rules: http://www.pjm.com/~/media/committees-groups/committees/mrc/20140626/20140626-item-11-rpm-performance-issue-charge.ashx This performance risk premium could increase capacity price and/or capacity-related costs for Planning Year 2016/17+. Will SSO suppliers be responsible for this potential change?
Answer: AES Ohio cannot provide specific comments on the likelihood that a performance risk premium proposal will be adopted and, if so, how those charges may be assigned among PJM market participants. Section 2.1 of the Master Standard Service Offer Supply Agreement requires the SSO Supplier to purchase capacity from PJM. Thus, to the extent that any such charges affect the price of capacity as charged by PJM, the SSO Supplier would be responsible. Additionally, Section 2.3(b) specifies that any new PJM charges reflected in new line items on the PJM bill that are not currently assigned between the SSO Supplier and AES Ohio under Appendix G, will be assigned based on how similar charges are assigned under Appendix G. For more information on the PJM charges and how they are assigned, please refer to Article 2 of the Master Standard Service Offer Supply Agreement and Appendix G available on the Information Website.
AGR 00011 Published On: 09/08/2015
Question: The sample PJM LSE invoice (Appendix G) shows the SSO supplier as the responsible party for the following charges ID# 1302, 1309 and 1340. Please confirm if the EDC should be responsible for these since the charges are non-market based ancillaries.
Answer: The sample PJM LSE invoice (Appendix G) is correct and the SSO supplier is the responsible party for charges 1302, 1309, and 1340. By way of further explanation, Charges 1302 and 1309 are PJM administration fees and are only charged to FTR holders. It is the decision of the SSO supplier if it wants to participate in the FTR market. It is our understanding that SSO suppliers will not be billed for charges 1302 and 1309 if they choose not to participate in the FTR market. Charge 1340 is assigned to the SSO supplier because these are regulation and frequency response service charges that result from the regulation market that PJM conducts. Therefore Charge 1340 is properly charged to load serving entities.
AGR 00012 Published On: 03/01/2017
Question: Can you confirm that under the Master SSO Supply Agreement, the definition of SSO Service does not include PIPP load?
Answer: PIPP customer load is excluded from the SSO product under the Master SSO Supply Agreement.
AGR 00013 Published On: 03/21/2017
Question: Can you please confirm the delivery point is "DAY_RESID_AGG"?
Answer: Confirmed.
AGR 00014 (revised 02/22/2021) Published On: 03/21/2017
Question: Are SSO and PIPP suppliers responsible for Unaccounted For Energy?
Answer: Yes. SSO and PIPP suppliers are obligated to delivery sufficient energy to the delivery point for AES Ohio to meet the needs of its SSO and PIPP customers. For more information on the obligations of suppliers, please refer to the Master SSO Supply Agreement posted to the Information Website.
AGR 00015 Published On: 03/28/2017
Question: In Appendix G, Sample PJM LSE Invoice, Line Item 1375 (Balancing Operating Reserves) says that both the EDC and the SSO supplier are responsible for the charge. Can you please explain what this means?
Answer: The SSO supplier will be responsible for all of its charges associated with Bill Line Item 1375 (Balancing Operating Reserves). The EDC may also occasionally incur charges separately under Bill Line Item 1375, i.e. Balancing Operating Reserve Local Constraint Charge, which is a charge assessed directly to the EDC as a PJM transmission owner, but the SSO will not be responsible for such EDC charges.
AGR 00016 Published On: 03/31/2017
Question: For the upcoming auction, please confirm that the delivery point is Dayton Load Zone (PnodeID: 34508503) as stated in Master SSO Supply Agreement, and not Dayton Residual Aggregate (PnodeID: 116472937).
Answer: The delivery point is Dayton Residual Aggregate (PnodeID: 116472937).
AGR 00017 (revised 02/22/2021) Published On: 05/08/2017
Question: Can you confirm suppliers will be paid at PJM derated load level, which can be derived from hourly load * (1-deration factor) from historical load file.
Answer: Suppliers are paid for all MWh delivered to the delivery point. Suppliers need to deliver sufficient supply to meet the metered load needs of AES Ohio's default service customer load, including distribution losses.
The information provided in the Frequently Asked Questions (“FAQs”) section of the Site has been prepared by AES Ohio and its advisors for the purposes of facilitating the CBP. The information presented and distributed here is subject to update, modification and/or amendment. The information is current as of the posting date. The material presented and distributed here is for informational purposes only and is made available with the understanding that any individual accessing it will use it for the sole purpose of participating in the aforementioned CBP. The information is not intended to form any part of the basis of any investment decision, valuation, or any bid that may be submitted during the CBP. This information should not be relied upon, and each recipient should make its own independent assessment of the subject opportunity after making all investigations it deems necessary.