Not a real answer to your question, see below.
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\begin{document}
\begin{equation}
\underline{W}^1_{\,q,\rho} =
\biggl\lceil \frac{1}{m-1}
\biggl(\,
\sum_{v \in Q, v \neq q}\underline{C}_{\,v} +
\sum_{i=\rho+1}^{|\Omega^{(U)}_q|}p_i +
\sum_{i \in U \setminus \Omega^{(U)}_q}p_i +
\underline{TT}_{\,q, \rho}
\biggr)
\biggr\rceil,
\end{equation}
\end{document}

Note that you don't need \limits
when in a display; also \backslash
should be \setminus
. Note also that \left
and \right
would give an inferior result, because they would cover also the big upper limit, which is not necessary.
You can easily adapt this for a two column format:
\documentclass[twocolumn]{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\begin{document}
\begin{multline}
\underline{W}^1_{\,q,\rho} =
\biggl\lceil \frac{1}{m-1}
\biggl(\,
\sum_{v \in Q, v \neq q}\underline{C}_{\,v} + {}\\
\sum_{i=\rho+1}^{|\Omega^{(U)}_q|}p_i +
\sum_{i \in U \setminus \Omega^{(U)}_q}p_i +
\underline{TT}_{\,q, \rho}
\biggr)
\biggr\rceil,
\end{multline}
\end{document}

Why does that horrible result appear? Because the main fraction line is set on the “formula axis” and fences are set to cover the material and be centered on the axis.
nicefrac
package to circumvent this issue.\frac{1}{m-1}
before the long expression in the numerator.