• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Electric Power Supply Association

  • Podcast
  • About EPSA
    • Our Policy Principles
    • EPSA Members
    • Our Staff
    • Careers
  • Contact
  • FAQ
EPSA

EPSA

  • Filings
    • Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
    • Federal
    • Judiciary
    • State
    • ISOs/RTOs
  • Newsroom
    • Press Releases
    • Media Contacts
    • Power Moves Newsletter
    • Factsheets and White Papers
    • Opinion and Commentary
    • Social Media
    • Podcast
  • Competitive Solutions
    • Reliable Power
    • Cost Savings
    • Environmental Progress
      • Competitive Emissions Policy Primers
    • Energy Innovation
    • In Your State
  • For Members
    • EPSA Membership
    • Committees
  • PowerFacts Blog
Home / Filings / EPSA Reply Comments & Affidavit on Reactive Power Compensation NOI

March 23, 2022

EPSA Reply Comments & Affidavit on Reactive Power Compensation NOI

By EPSA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Reactive Power Capability Compensation } Docket No. RM22-2-000

REPLY COMMENTS OF THE ELECTRIC POWER SUPPLY ASSOCIATION

On March 23, 2022, the Electric Power Supply Association (“EPSA”) filed reply comments responding to certain initial comments regarding the November 18, 2021 Notice of Inquiry (“NOI”) issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ( the “Commission) with respect to reactive power compensation and market design. EPSA highlights that the initial comments filed in response to the NOI reflect a broad consensus, across parties representing different types of resources, regarding the continuing need to ensure that resources are properly compensated for the costs they must incur to ensure that they are capable of providing reactive power. The reply testimony of Adrian J. Kimbrough (“Kimbrough Reply Testimony”) also explains that suggestions by certain commenters that the Commission should make reactive power compensation dependent on some type of “needs” based analysis is not only practically infeasible, but would jeopardize reliability.  Mr. Kimbrough further states that the AEP methodology remains the best way to compensate all resources for their reactive power capability.  Accordingly, in acting on the NOI, the Commission should make clear that all resources have the right to seek compensation to fully recover their reactive power costs under the AEP methodology.

Primary Sidebar

Download PDF

Share

Home Page Help Area

Sign up for EPSA’s Power Moves newsletter – a monthly update on the road to a cleaner, affordable and reliable energy future that works for all Americans.

LEARN MORE

Footer

1401 New York Ave. NW
Suite 950
Washington, DC 20005

p 202.628.8200
f 202.628.8260

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
  • Home
  • About EPSA
  • Filings
  • Newsroom
  • For Members
  • Contact
  • PowerFacts Blog
  • FAQ

Copyright © 2023 | Electric Power Supply Association. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy >