143 FERC ¶ 61,012
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20426
April 2, 2013
In Reply Refer To:
New York Independent System
Operator, Inc.
Docket No. ER13-1124-000
Gloria Kavanah
New York Independent System Operator, Inc.
10 Krey Boulevard
Rensselaer, NY 12144
Dear Ms. Kavanah:
1. On March 15, 2013, New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO) filed
a request for limited waiver of section 5.16.4 and, to the extent necessary, section 5.16.3
of its Market Administration and Control Area Services Tariff (Services Tariff). First,
NYISO seeks a limited waiver of section 5.16.4 of its Services Tariff to give it an extra
thirty (30) calendar days, i.e., until April 30, 2013, to comply with the requirement that it
report the results of the New Capacity Zone Study (NCZ Study) and submit tariff
revisions to “establish and recognize” one or more New Capacity Zones. Second, to the
extent necessary, NYISO requests a limited waiver of the March 1 deadline of section
5.16.3 of the Services Tariff for NYISO to determine the Indicative NCZ Locational
Minimum Installed Capacity (ICAP) Requirement to permit it to meet such requirement by April 30, 2013. As discussed below, we grant the requested waivers.
2. On August 30, 2012, the Commission accepted NYISO’s proposed revisions to its
Services Tariff to provide the timing and sequence of steps required to evaluate and
create a new capacity zone.1 The revisions included a new section 5.16.4 which required
NYISO, on or before March 31 of an ICAP Demand Curve Reset Filing Year, to submit
the results of its NCZ Study and, if the NCZ Study identifies a constrained Highway
interface, propose tariff revisions necessary to establish and recognize the New Capacity
1 New York Independent System Operator, Inc. 140 FERC ¶ 61,160 (2012) (August 30, 2012 Order), reh’g pending.
Docket No. ER13-1124-000- 2 -
Zone or Zones. If the NCZ Study does not identify a constrained Highway interface,
NYISO is required to file with the Commission its determination that the NCZ Study did not indicate that any New Capacity Zone is needed. Section 5.16.4 further states that NYISO must provide an opportunity for the Market Monitoring Unit to review and
comment on the NCZ Study and any proposed tariff revisions, consistent with Services Tariff Attachment O section 30.4.6.3.2.
3. The revisions accepted by the August 30, 2012 Order also included a new section
5.16.3 which provides that, for each load zone or groups of load zones identified in the
NCZ Study, NYISO shall determine the Indicative NCZ Locational Minimum ICAP
Requirement2 on or before March 1 of each ICAP Demand Curve Reset Filing Year.
4. On March 15, 2013, NYISO submitted a request for a limited waiver of sections
5.16.4 and, to the extent necessary, 5.16.3 of its Services Tariff.
5. NYISO states that granting the requested waiver of section 5.16.4 will provide
NYISO and its stakeholders additional time to review and, if necessary, address technical issues raised during the stakeholder review process, further analyze the potential
consumer impacts of establishing a New Capacity Zone, and to further review and
discuss with its stakeholders these matters and the possible additional specific tariff
revisions needed to establish a New Capacity Zone. NYISO adds that the additional time would also give it the opportunity to address stakeholder comments and to attempt to
address concerns and resolve disputed issues.
6. NYISO states that granting the requested waiver of section 5.16.3 would permit it
to revise, if necessary, based on the further ongoing technical analyses, the Indicative
NCZ Locational Minimum ICAP Requirement. NYISO states that it determined the
Indicative NCZ Locational Minimum ICAP Requirement on March 1, 2013, which,
according to NYISO, satisfied the Services Tariff section 5.16.3 but it is seeking a waiver
to the extent necessary to allow it to revise that March 1, 2013 determination after the
section 5.16.3 deadline, if NYISO determines that such a revision is warranted. NYISO
adds that if it determines such a revision is appropriate, it will first provide an opportunity
for stakeholders to review and comment on the proposed revision and then will establish
the revised Indicative NCZ Locational Minimum ICAP Requirement by April 30, 2013.
2 The Indicative [Narrow Constrained Area] Locational Minimum ICAP
Requirement is defined in the Services Tariff section 2.9 as “[t]he amount of capacity that
must be electrically located within a New Capacity Zone, or possess an approved
Unforced Capacity Deliverability Right, in order to ensure that sufficient Energy and
Capacity are available in that NCA and that appropriate reliability criteria are met.”
Docket No. ER13-1124-000- 3 -
7. In support of its request, NYISO contends that its requested waivers are of limited
scope in that it is requesting a brief extension of the filing deadline for section 5.16.4 and,
to the extent necessary, a limited waiver to allow revision of the March 1, 2013 Indicative
NCZ Locational Minimum ICAP Requirement determination after the section 5.16.3
deadline. NYISO asserts that it has worked diligently and has met all of the deadlines in
the New Capacity Zone timetable. NYISO further asserts that it does not anticipate that
granting the requested extension would delay: (1) the implementation of the tariff
revisions to establish the NCZ; (2) the establishment of an ICAP Demand Curve for the
New Capacity Zone as part of the November 2013 Demand Curve reset filing; (3) the
inclusion of any proposed New Capacity Zone in NYISO’s revised deliverability
methodology for the Class Year Interconnection Facilities Study for Class Year 2012; or
(4) the implementation of the New Capacity Zone at the start of Capability Year 2014/2015.
8. NYISO also states that its requested waivers will address a concrete issue that
needs to be remedied. NYISO explains that this is the first time that it has engaged in the
process to evaluate and establish a New Capacity Zone and certain questions regarding
the implementation of the New Capacity Zone could benefit from additional analysis
before the section 5.16.4 filing is made. Further, according to NYISO, the additional
technical review initiated in response to stakeholder comments might result in it being
appropriate to review the Indicative NCZ Locational Minimum ICAP Requirement
established on March 1, 2013. NYISO adds that the waivers should also allow it to work
to reduce the number and scope of disputed issues that eventually reach the Commission.
9. NYISO contends that the waivers will not have undesirable consequences and will not harm third parties. NYISO reiterates that it does not anticipate that the waivers will
prevent it from meeting each milestone of the established New Capacity Zone timetable. NYISO asserts that in seeking the waivers, it is acting in good faith to address
outstanding issues without altering its ability to meet the New Capacity Zone
implementation timetable.
10. Notice of NYISO’s March 15, 2013 filing issued with comments, protests and interventions due on or before March 25, 2013.
11. Exelon Corporation filed a motion to intervene. Entergy Nuclear Power
Marketing, LLC (ENPM) and the New York Transmission Owners (NYTOs)3 filed
3 The NYTOs consist of Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation,
Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., Long Island Power Authority, New
York Power Authority, New York State Electric & Gas Corporation, Niagara Mohawk
Power Corporation, Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc., and Rochester Gas and Electric
Corporation.
Docket No. ER13-1124-000- 4 -
answers to NYISO’s motion. Pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission’s Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 18 C.F.R. § 385.214 (2012), the timely, unopposed motion to
intervene serves to make the entity that filed it party to this proceeding. Because NYISO
captioned its waiver request as being made in Docket No. ER12-360-000, which is
closed, we will also grant intervention in the instant docket to ENPM and the NYTOs.
12. The NYTOs state that they support NYISO’s request for an extension of time and limited waivers of Services Tariff sections 5.16.4 and 5.16.3 and believe it meets the
Commission’s criteria for tariff waivers. They add that granting the motion will provide the Commission with the most complete record upon which to examine NYISO’s
compliance efforts.
13. ENPM states that it does not oppose NYISO’s waiver requests provided that
NYISO’s additional analysis will be conducted transparently and will be completed, with
results discussed among all stakeholders, before NYISO makes its April 30 compliance
filing. ENPM argues that New Capacity Zone issues have been pending before the
NYISO stakeholder process since 2007 and the Commission’s prior orders in this
proceeding establish that the evaluation of the need for and, if necessary, the creation of,
New Capacity Zones is critical to the market’s proper functioning. It adds that on
September 8, 2011, the Commission addressed NYISO’s proposed New Capacity Zone
testing methodology and expressed the need for prompt action on the part of NYISO.4 It
notes that while the August 30, 2012 Order accepted NYISO’s proposed implementation
timetable, it did so based on NYISO’s repeated representations that it had allowed
adequate time for all necessary steps so that any New Capacity Zone could be established
concurrent with the next ICAP Demand Curve Reset process.
14. Accordingly, ENPM requests that the Commission place NYISO on notice that no
delay will be sanctioned with respect to: (1) the implementation of tariff revisions to
establish the New Capacity Zone that NYISO notes has been identified through its
studies; (2) the establishment of an ICAP Demand Curve for the New Capacity Zone and
the overall completion of NYISO’s Demand Curve Reset Process by the November 30,
2013 deadline; (3) the inclusion of the identified New Capacity Zone in NYISO’s revised
deliverability methodology for the Class Year Interconnection Facilities Study for Class
Year 2012; and/or (4) the implementation of the New Capacity Zone at the start of
Capability Year 2014/2015 (i.e., May 1, 2014). Specifically, it requests that the
Commission condition any relief on the requirement that NYISO strictly adhere to the
remaining New Capacity Zone and Demand Curve Reset Process deadlines, and that it
vet any additional “analysis” through the normal stakeholder process within the requested
30-day period.
4 Entergy Nuclear Power Marketing March 19, 2013 Answer at 2-3 (citing New York Indep. Sys. Operator, Inc., 136 FERC ¶ 61,165 (2011)).
Docket No. ER13-1124-000- 5 -
15. The Commission has previously granted limited waivers of tariff provisions, inter alia, when: (1) the underlying error was made in good faith; (2) the waiver is of limited scope; (3) a concrete problem needed to be remedied; and (4) the waiver did not have undesirable consequences, such as harming third parties.5 We find that NYISO has
demonstrated good cause to grant limited tariff waivers because its requested waivers satisfy the aforementioned conditions.
16. First, there has been no error and we find that NYISO has acted in good faith in
attempting to meet the Service Tariff’s deadlines. We note that NYISO has met the other
New Capacity Zone tariff deadlines and has conducted extensive stakeholder discussions
in order to meet the New Capacity Zone tariff filing deadline. We also recognize that this
is the first time NYISO has engaged in the process to evaluate and establish a New
Capacity Zone and, therefore, recognize that, in this unique circumstance, unanticipated
issues might well arise warranting more time to meet the Service Tariff’s deadlines.
17. Second, the requested waivers are of limited scope. Both waivers result in short
extensions of time until April 30, 2013, to meet the Service Tariff’s requirements related
to the filing of a New Capacity Zone proposal. We find that the waivers reflect the
specific and unique facts presented here and do not constitute precedent that would allow
NYISO to avoid these or any other requirements set forth in the Services Tariff.
18. Third, the waiver will remedy a concrete problem. NYISO has explained that
questions have been raised by the stakeholders regarding its New Capacity Zone
proposal. The waivers will grant NYISO more time to analyze and address these
questions with its stakeholders. A limited waiver of the Service Tariff’s time deadlines
will, therefore, ensure that stakeholders can participate in resolving these issues. Further,
waiver of the time deadline of section 5.16.3 will allow NYISO additional time to revise,
if necessary, NYISO’s March 1, 2013 Indicative NCZ Locational Minimum ICAP
Requirement determination based on further technical analysis, including addressing
questions raised in stakeholder comments that could affect its March 1, 2013
determination.
5 See, e.g., PJM Interconnection, LLC, 137 FERC ¶ 61,184, at P 13 (2011); PJM
Interconnection, LLC, 137 FERC ¶ 61,109, at P 11 (2011); PJM Interconnection, LLC,
135 FERC ¶ 61,069, at P 8 (2011); ISO-NE, 134 FERC ¶ 61,182, at P 8 (2011); CAISO,
132 FERC ¶ 61,004 at P 10 (2010); Hudson Transmission Partners, 131 FERC ¶ 61,157,
at P 10 (2010); Pittsfield Generating Co., L.P., 130 FERC ¶ 61,182, at P 9-10 (2010);
ISO New England Inc. - EnerNOC, 122 FERC ¶ 61,297 (2008); Central Vermont Public
Service Corp., 121 FERC ¶ 61,225 (2007); Waterbury Generation LLC, 120 FERC
¶ 61,007 (2007); Acushnet Co., 122 FERC ¶ 61,045 (2008).
Docket No. ER13-1124-000- 6 -
19. Fourth, we find that granting the waivers will not lead to undesirable
consequences. We find that no harm would result from the waivers because they should not prevent NYISO from meeting the other established milestones of the New Capacity Zone timetable in time to coincide with NYISO’s filing of proposed Demand Curves for the New Capacity Zone.
20. Finally, we reject ENPM’s request to condition waiver on NYISO meeting certain future deadlines of the Services Tariff, such as the requirement to file to establish an
ICAP Demand Curve by November 30 of the same year in which it filed to establish the New Capacity Zone, or the requirement to implement the New Capacity Zone by May 1 of the following year, and to require stakeholder involvement. NYISO has not requested waiver of those deadlines and there is no basis to assume it will not meet them. Further, NYISO has indicated that it will be engaged in discussions with its stakeholders
regarding its proposed New Capacity Zone filing and Indicative NCZ Locational
Minimum ICAP Requirement determination. However, we strongly encourage NYISO to continue its best efforts to meet all remaining deadlines.
21. For the foregoing reasons, the Commission grants NYISO’s request for limited
waiver of section 5.16.4 and, to the extent necessary, section 5.16.3 of its Services Tariff.
By direction of the Commission.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
