UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

)Docket Nos. ER09-1682-000

New York Independent System Operator, Inc.)ER09-1682-001

)ER09-1682-002

COMPLIANCE FILING OF THE

NEW YORK INDEPENDENT SYSTEM OPERATOR, INC.

The New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (“NYISO”) submits this compliance
filing in response to the Order on Motion for Stay and Requests for Rehearing issued by the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“Commission”) on January 15, 2010 in the above
docket (“January 15 Order”).1  The January 15 Order directed the NYISO to provide “aggregated
Bid Production Cost Guarantee payment data for each generator, and the calendar period and the

total number of days within which the alleged conduct occurred...”2

I.Aggregated BPCG and Dates Data

The data requested in the January 15 Order is set forth below.  As specified in the January

15 Order, the data set forth below relates to Table 1 in each of the affidavits submitted by Mr. Joshua Boles, the NYISO's Supervisor, Monitoring, Analysis & Reporting Group, with the NYISO's September 4, 2009 filing in this docket, but with corrections as described in the
NYISO's December 3, 2009 filing in this docket.3  The data submitted below was compiled by Mr. Boles, and is provided for each of the relevant Generators.

1 New York Independent System Operator, Inc., Order on Motion for Stay and Requests for Rehearing, Docket No. ER09-1682-000, et al. (Jan. 15, 2010).

2 Id. at P 26.

3 Id. at P 25.

In the tables below, the entry for “Begin Date” sets forth the first date on Table 1 for

which the NYISO identified conduct by the relevant Generator that resulted in a Bid Production Cost guarantee (“BPCG”) payment that exceeded the BPCG payment that would have been made to the Generator had the Generator bid its reference levels for the applicable bid
parameters.  Similarly, the entries for “End Date” specify the last date on Table 1 on which such conduct was reported for the relevant Generator.

The entries for “Number of Days with BPCG above the BPCG that would have been paid if the Generator Bid at its Reference Levels” sets forth the number of days on and between the dates identified above on which the relevant Generator received a BPCG payment that exceeded the BPCG payment that would have been made to the Generator had the Generator bid at its
reference levels for the applicable bid parameters.

The entries for “Total Dollar Value of BPCG Payments above the BPCG that would have
been paid if the Generator Bid at its Reference Levels” sets forth the total dollar value of the
BPCG payments above the BPCG payments that would have been earned by the relevant
Generator if it had bid at the applicable reference levels, rounded to the nearest dollar.  The data
provided below incorporates the corrections described in the NYISO's December 3, 2009 filing
in this docket.  The calculations used to produce the data submitted below were determined as
described in the NYISO's filings and accompanying affidavits from Mr. Boles in this docket.

The requested data as described above is as follows:

Generator:  Sterling

Begin Date = 8/17/2009End Date = 8/21/2009

Number of Days with BPCG above the BPCG

that would have been paid if the Generator Bid at its Reference Levels = 5 Total Dollar Value of BPCG Payments above the BPCG

that would have been paid if the Generator Bid at its Reference Levels = $522,992

-2-

Generator:  Batavia

Begin Date = 8/10/2009End Date = 8/22/2009

Number of Days with BPCG above the BPCG

that would have been paid if the Generator Bid at its Reference Levels = 11 Total Dollar Value of BPCG Payments above the BPCG

that would have been paid if the Generator Bid at its Reference Levels = $1,096,149

Generator:  Saranac

Begin Date = 8/2/2009End Date = 8/22/2009

Number of Days with BPCGs above the BPCG

that would have been paid if the Generator Bid at its Reference Levels = 21 Total Dollar Value of BPCG Payments above the BPCG

that would have been paid if the Generator Bid at its Reference Levels = $1,096,907

II.Conclusion

WHEREFORE, the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. respectfully requests
that the Commission accept this filing as complying with the requirements of the January 15
Order.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/   Alex M. Schnell______________ Robert E. Fernandez, General Counsel Alex M. Schnell

New York Independent System Operator, Inc.

William F. Young

Hunton & Williams LLP

Counsel to the New York Independent System Operator,
Inc.

Dated:  January 20, 2010

-3-

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing document upon each person designated on the official service list compiled by the Secretary in this proceeding in accordance with the requirements of Rule 2010 of the Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 C.F.R. § 385.2010.

Dated at Washington, D.C. this 20th day of January, 2010.

/s/   William F. Young_____

William F. Young

Hunton & Williams LLP
1900 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Tel: (202) 955-1500
Fax: (202) 828-3740

E-mail: byoung@hunton.com

-4-