FirstEnergy's Pennsylvania Default Service Program


PJM 00006 (revised 12/03/2015)
Published On: 01/29/2014

Question: PJM's Energy Market Uplift Senior Task Force is pursuing changes to the energy market that could have an impact on energy prices in the ATSI zone. Specifically, on 12/20/13, the task force posted a document (see link below) that indicates they are contemplating "extending existing logic" for certain "inflexible units" to set LMP when they are called upon to resolve transmission constraints.

The implications of this according to the task force are "More congestion on the system; Higher prices in areas where generation is running under these circumstances; Incremental costs will be removed from uplift as long as these constraints bind."

The task force also indicates that ATSI is one of the areas that would be sensitive to such a change. They propose to implement the new logic on June 1, 2014.

What are the implications of this proposed change on the products offered in the Default Service Auctions?

Answer: FirstEnergy's Pennsylvania utilities do not possess information outside what has been presented through the efforts of the Energy Market Uplift Senior Task Force ("EMUSTF") at PJM.  Auction participants in the FirstEnergy's Pennsylvania Default Service Program procurements are responsible for most if not all of the impacted market mechanisms (such as energy, operating reserves, congestion, etc.) because they are deemed hedgeable and within the control of a potential auction winner.  The best source of information on the EMUSTF efforts is directly from the PJM Task Force itself.

PJM 00010
Published On: 01/08/2015

Question: In its recent capacity performance filing, PJM has proposed procuring 2500 MW of additional capacity resources through RMR contracts for PJM Planning Year 2015-2016. If costs associated with these procurements are billed under billing line item 1930 in Appendix D of the Default Service Supplier Master Agreement, will they be the responsibility of the EDC or the DS Supplier? If costs associated with these procurements are billed under a different or new billing line item, will they be the responsibility of the EDC or the DS Supplier?

Answer: In accordance with the Default Service Program documents, the Default Service Supplier is responsible for capacity and such other services or products that the DS Supplier may be required to provide.  Should PJM purchase additional capacity the DS Supplier would be responsible for the additional cost of such purchases regardless of the line item where the charge would be placed on the PJM bill.

PJM 00011 (revised 09/21/2016)
Published On: 01/08/2015

Question: PJM is proposing changes to its capacity market, but how those changes will be implemented is still unknown. If transition period charges are put into invoice line item 1930 for RMR, will they still be a pass-thru to the EDC under the Default Service Supplier Master Agreement (SMA) as it stands? If a new Capacity RMR line item is created for charges on the PJM invoice, will that be the responsibility of the EDC?

Answer: In accordance with Section 2.2 of the Bidding Rules, obligations of Default Service Suppliers exclude Reliability Must Run / Generation Deactivation ("RMR") charges that are implemented after the approval of the Companies' Default Service Plan ("DSP-III") on July 24, 2014.  Charges and credits associated with generating plants that began before the approval of DSP-III by the Commission are captured on the PJM bill on lines 1930 and 2930.  Should PJM create a new line item associated with RMR that includes RMR units after the July 24, 2014 date, the Companies will be responsible for these RMR charges and credits.  Should PJM include charges or credits in lines 1930 and 2930, or in new line items associated with RMR, that are not RMR-related, the Companies will evaluate the charges at that time for proper allocation based on the Bidding Rules and the Default Service Supplier Master Agreement.

PJM 00012
Published On: 02/18/2015

Question: Do the Companies schedule 2 separate load contracts in the InSight Scheduling System, one for the 95% and the second for the 5%, or do they include all the load in one single contract.

Answer: The Companies include the entire amount of load in one PJM InSchedule. The breakdown of the 95% and 5% volume pricing is performed in each Company's monthly Settlement process.

PJM 00015 (revised 01/18/2017)
Published On: 04/28/2015

Question: Could you disclose the charge (monthly cost per MWh or other format) for PJM meter error corrections (billing item 1250) in Met-Ed and Penelec zones? Are the utilities currently allocated this charge?

Answer: Appendix D to the Companies' Supplier Master Agreement lists which PJM billing statement line item charges are allocated to and are the responsibility of Met-Ed and Penelec, and which are the responsibility of the Default Service Supplier.  As shown in Appendix D, line item 1250 (meter error correction) is the responsibility of utility.  It is possible Default Service Suppliers may be allocated and responsible for 1250 meter error correction charges related to EDCs other than Met-Ed and Penelec, however, meter error corrections that are related to Met-Ed and Penelec are not allocated to and are not the responsibility of their Default Service Suppliers.  The PJM billing line item may be a charge or credit each month.  The rate and volume used to determine the charge/credit vary month to month (and therefore so does the charge/credit), but the amounts typically are considered small.

PJM 00016 (revised 09/21/2016)
Published On: 10/13/2015

Question: If PJM begins including additional line items on their bill, will those new line items be the responsibility of the Default Supplier or the Company?

Answer: For the delivery period of June 1, 2015 through May 31, 2021, any new line items that PJM may begin billing will remain the responsibility of the Default Service Supplier under the Companies' Commission-approved plans.

PJM 00017
Published On: 10/15/2015

Question: Can you confirm that the volume of MWh's a Default Service Supplier will be paid on will equal the volume of MWh's a Default Service Supplier will be charged for by PJM? For example if a Default Service Supplier delivers and is paid for 100 MWh, will the PJM bill reflect a 100 MWh charge for the same time period?

Answer: A Default Service Supplier will paid for the de-rated MWh volumes from PJM's InSchedules, which also are the basis for PJM's energy charges to the Supplier.

PJM 00018 (revised 11/04/2015)
Published On: 10/15/2015

Question: What PJM line items are covered on the Delegation of Authority that the winning bidder must sign as part of the confirmation process?

Answer: Please refer to Appendix D of the Default Service Supplier Master Agreement for a list of PJM line items the winning bidder is responsible for. Due to the implementation of PJM’s Billing Line Item Tool, the Delegation of Authority no longer is completed as part of the confirmation process. Billing line item transfers will be created by FirstEnergy’s Regulated Settlements Group and then approved by the winning bidders using the Billing Line Item Tool.

PJM 00019 (revised 01/18/2017)
Published On: 04/05/2016

Question: This question is about the price that load pays for capacity. Can you confirm that the Final Zonal Net Load Price ($/MW-day) for Met-Ed and Penelec zones is $163.21/MW-day, which includes the premium for capacity performance, and not the Adjusted Zonal Capacity Price from the 3rd Incremental auction of $123.35/MW-day?

Answer: PJM posts the final zonal net load prices for capacity on its Website.  Values for each of the FirstEnergy Pennsylvania load zones for capacity can be found at  Questions on the PJM RPM posted values should be directed to PJM.

PJM 00021 (revised 10/12/2016)
Published On: 10/11/2016

Question: As per PJM’s FERC EL05-121-009 Settlement Agreement, the Settlement establishes cost responsibility for charges or credits to transmission customers in the PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (“PJM”) region with respect to transmission projects operating at or above 500 kV approved by the PJM Board prior to February 1, 2013. For PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., Docket No. EL05-121-009, the document "Settlement Agreement and Offer of Settlement" states in section 2.2(b), "Rates and Charges for Covered Transmission Enhancements," that “PJM shall collect from Responsible Customers through the PJM Tariff, as two separate line items on their bills: (i) the applicable Current Recovery Charges … and (ii) the applicable Transmission Enhancement Charge Adjustments." We would like to confirm if further to the Supplier Master Agreements (SMAs) for DSP-III and DSP-IV if such charges or credits will be the responsibility of the EDC or the Default Service Supplier.

Answer: At this time, FERC has not issued an order that relates to FERC Opinion 494.  Once an order is issued by FERC, the PA FirstEnergy operating companies will meet with the PaPUC to seek approval for the retail implementation of the order.  In accordance with section 2.5 of the SMA (PJM Agreement Modifications), both the Default Service Supplier and the EDC shall cooperate to make conforming changes to the SMA and to fulfill the purposes of the SMA.  In this case, it is our intent to pursue EDC responsibility for such credits or charges that may result from implementation of the order.

PJM 00022
Published On: 10/13/2016

Question: On September 15, 2016, FERC issued an order agreeing with PJM’s filing to shift the allocation of balancing congestion cost from FTR holders to Real-time load & exports. Please let us know if FE-PA expects wholesale suppliers to bear the additional cost due to allocation of balance congestion once the order is implemented. Balancing congestion cost has been several hundred million dollars in the last five planning years. PJM is expecting to implement this in June 2017, please advise how the cost will be allocated by the four utilities.

Answer: At this time, PJM has not made its compliance filing on how it intends to implement the FERC order.  Once the filing has been made and an order is issued by FERC, the PA FirstEnergy operating companies will meet with the PaPUC to seek approval for the implementation of the order to their Supply Master Agreement.  In accordance with section 2.5 (PJM Agreement Modifications) of the Supplier Master Agreement (SMA), both the Default Service Supplier and the electric distribution company (EDC) shall cooperate to make conforming changes to the SMA and to fulfill the purposes of the SMA.  In this case, it is our intent to pursue load serving entity responsibility for balancing congestion from financial transmission rights (FTR) holders to real-time load.

PJM 00023
Published On: 12/05/2016

Question: What PJM Zone is the historical generation for West Penn Power and Penn Power located in for auction revenue rights (ARR) purposes?

Answer: West Penn Power is part of the APS Zone.  Penn Power is part of the ATSI Zone.  Historical generation resources for ARR purposes are associated with those respective zones.

PJM 00024
Published On: 01/10/2017

Question: Can you provide the historical generation for ARR auction purposes for West Penn Power and Penn Power?

Answer: Refer to FAQ GEN 00044.

PJM 00025
Published On: 01/13/2017

Question: Is the sink for the Auction Revenue Rights (ARR) auctions for Penn Power ATSI_RESID_AGG or Penn_Power_Resid_Agg?

Answer: PENNPOWER_RESID_AGG - Please refer to FAQ SMA 00011.

PJM 00026
Published On: 01/18/2017

Question: On October 28, 2016, MAIT filed forward-looking formula rates for NITS with FERC effective Jan 1, 2017. Will there be changes to the stated MAIT rate of $22,612.39 per MW-year for 2018 and beyond? Will there be changes to the West Penn or Penn Power (Non-MAIT utilities) NITS rate for 2017, 2018, or 2019?

Answer: Please see FAQ GEN 00031 and FAQ GEN 00059.

PJM 00027 (revised 01/20/2017)
Published On: 01/20/2017

Question: On October 28, 2016, MAIT filed forward-looking formula rates for NITS with FERC effective Jan 1, 2017. Will there be changes to the stated MAIT rate of $22,612.39 per MW-year for 2018 and beyond? Will there be changes to the West Penn or Penn Power (Non-MAIT utilities) NITS rate for 2017, 2018, or 2019?

Answer: Please refer to FAQ GEN 00071.

PJM 00028
Published On: 01/20/2017

Question: Can you please provide the historical NITS rates for APS and ATSI for the past 5 years?

Answer: The NITS rates for the APS zone since March 1, 2002 are posted at  The historical ATSI zone rates can be found below.

ATSI Zone (includes Penn Power) NITS Rates ($/MW/Year)
Start Stop 138 KV and above Below 138KV
June 1, 2012 May 31, 2013 9,264.59 13,717.33
June 1, 2013 May 31, 2014 9,921.36 16,348.58
June 1, 2014 December 31, 2014 14,894.53
January 1, 2015 December 31, 2015 34,415.90
January 1, 2016 December 31, 2016 43,391.43
January 1, 2017 December 31, 2016 45,057.62

Note: From June 1, 2012 through December 31, 2014, there were two NITS Rates depending on service voltage.

PJM 00029 (revised 01/20/2017)
Published On: 01/20/2017

Question: What is the difference between NITS charges and Transmission Enhancement Charges (TEC)? What is the function of each?

Answer: See PJM's Guide to Billing, which includes definitions for Network Integration Transmission Service (NITS) and Transmission Enhancement Charge (TEC):

PJM 00030
Published On: 02/12/2018

Question: Are PJM sub-accounts required for each EDC? If so, how and when are those set up?

Answer: For PJM Pennsylvania Default Service (DS) load reporting, a unique PJM sub-account is required for each EDC/product.  For example, if a DS supplier is serving Penelec commercial, Penelec residential, and Met-Ed residential DS load, three PJM sub-accounts would be required.  These PJM sub-accounts must be unique to the given load (EDC/product).  PJM sub-accounts are established by submitting a PJM Customer Account Manager Designation Form B to PJM which can be found at the following location:  Questions relating to creating PJM sub-accounts can be directed to:

PJM 00031
Published On: 03/07/2018

Question: The Part 1 Application requests the applicant to provide documentation from PJM that the Applicant has a PJM E-Account. What documentation satisfies this requirement and what are these e-accounts?

Answer: A screenshot of the applicant's PJM E-Account will be sufficient proof that the applicant is a PJM Market Participant and Load Serving Entity in PJM.  If the applicant does not currently have an E-Account, they may certify in the Part 1 Application that "there exist no known impediments for the Applicant to establish the PJM E-Accounts necessary to provide Default Service Supply and execute the PJM E-Account contract(s) for the supply period prior to the beginning of the supply period."

PJM 00032
Published On: 03/12/2018

Question: We understand PJM is moving to 5 minute settlement for real-time trading. Could you tell us if/how this would affect the settlement for Default Supply?


PJM’s transition to 5-minute settlements will have no impact on the pricing of the Default Service products.  As per the Supplier Master Agreement, the LMP used for variable pricing is the real-time hourly LMP for the given delivery point.

PJM 00033
Published On: 06/25/2018

Question: There has been discussion at PJM regarding the introduction of a new PJM Billing Line Item #1115, which is for a "Black Box" settlement related to a FERC Order in regards to reallocation of historical Transmission Enhancement Charges. This line item will allocate charges based on FERC EL05-121 TEC Settlement Agreement beginning in July 2018. Will the charges/credits for this line item be the responsibility of the FEPA EDCs or of the Default Service Supplier?

Answer: The Companies’ interpretation of their Default Service auction documents, including the Supplier Master Agreement (SMA), is that the EDCs will bear responsibility for new line item 1115 charges/credits.  In order to clarify this responsibility, the Companies proposed to include this line item in their documents in their pending Default Service Program (DSP-V) proceeding, which treatment was agreed to in an unopposed settlement reached by the parties.  That settlement is pending review by the PA Public Utility Commission at this time.  Therefore, the Companies are currently determining whether they need to make an interim filing to adjust their supplier coordination tariffs and SMAs to reflect the use of this line item beginning in August 2018.

PJM 00034
Published On: 10/29/2018

Question: Given that the three out of the four zones in the FirstEnergy Pennsylvania auction use a formula-based NITS cost, are there any plans for West Penn Power to move to a formula? Are there any known plans to increase the West Penn Power NITS rate?

Answer: There has been nothing filed to convert to a formula-based NITS rate for West Penn Power and there are currently no known plans to increase the West Penn Power NITS rate.

PJM 00035
Published On: 10/29/2018

Question: FEPA’s Website usually posts lower transmission rates than PJM posts on its Website (see the attachment or the Website link). For example, PJM’s rate for MAIT is $26,069 while FEPA's posted rate is $25,131.56. Which rate is correct? Currently we are charged by PJM’s rate. Are we overcharged?

Answer: The MAIT transmission rate as of January 2018 was $26,069.  Effective July 2018, the MAIT transmission rate changed to $25,131.56.

PJM 00036 (revised 01/16/2019)
Published On: 01/16/2019

Question: Do you know if Allegheny Power Zone (West Penn Power) has any plans to update its current NITS rate some time between now and 2021? Its NITS rate has not changed since 2002. Has it filed any changes to FERC that bidders should be aware of regarding its NITS rate?

Answer: On March 15, 2018, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued a Stated Rate Order to Show Cause to public utilities that use a stated transmission rate under an open access transmission tariff to address the effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 reduction in the federal corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent.  On November 15, 2018, in FERC docket number ER18-1595-000, the FERC approved the APS rate change (with effective rates retroactive to March 21, 2018) associated with the reduction in the federal corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent.  West Penn Power is not able to speculate on future APS NITS rate updates. The NITS rate for Allegheny (West Penn Power) can be found at

PJM 00037
Published On: 01/22/2019

Question: In the file published 1/16/19 by PJM (located here: the APS NITS rate is $17,895/MW-Year. Why does the NITs rate published on 1/15/19 on the FE PA Information Site not agree with PJM’s published rate?


The $17,895/MW/Year NITS rate, published on PJM’s Website, does not include two applicable credits as provided within Allegheny Power’s Attachment H-11 of the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff. The current effective tariff (as accepted in FERC Docket No. ER18-1595) states, "For Network Integration Transmission Service … customers in the AP Zone a credit of $2,499 per megawatt per year will be applied, reducing the effective rate to $15,396 per megawatt per year for such customer’s delivery points existing on, or added after, April 1, 2002…." The tariff goes on further to state, "As of March 21, 2018, the effective rate for these customers is $14,364 per megawatt per year." Consequently, per the tariff, the current effective NITS rate is $14,364/MW/Year.

FAQs Disclaimer

The information provided in the Frequently Asked Questions (“FAQs”) section of the Site has been prepared by the Companies and its advisors for the purposes of facilitating the auction process. 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 auction process. 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 auction process. 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.

Copyright © 2019 CRA International, Inc.   | Forward-Looking Statements |  Privacy Statement  |  Terms of Use