Docket No. ER26-570-000  1

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20426

 

OFFICE OF ENERGY MARKET REGULATION

 

In Reply Refer To:

New York Independent System Operator,

Inc.

Docket No. ER26-570-000

 

Issued: January 16, 2026

 

Alex M. Schnell

New York Independent System Operator, Inc.

10 Krey Boulevard

Rensselaer, NY  12144

 

Dear Alex Schnell:

 

On November 21, 2025, New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO) submitted proposed revisions to its Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT) and its Market Administration and Control Area Services Tariff (Services Tariff) to implement new market rules regarding operating, scheduling, and managing transmission service for the Champlain Hudson Power Express Merchant Transmission Facility (MTF),[1] a 1,250 megawatt (MW) controllable direct current line connecting Quebec to New York City.[2] 

NYISO explains that in 2020, in Docket No. ER20-1214-000, the Commission authorized CHPE LLC (CHPE) to charge negotiated rates for transmission rights on the MTF, noting that CHPE will turn over operational control of the transmission line to NYISO, which will operate the line pursuant to NYISO’s OATT.[3]  NYISO states that its proposed revisions to the OATT are necessary for the MTF to interface its physical transmission reservation process with NYISO’s financial reservation system and to turn over control of the line to NYISO. 

Please be advised that the filing is deficient and that additional information is required to process the filing.  Please provide complete responses to the following questions.

  1.      CHPE OASIS

NYISO proposes that CHPE, in its role as MTF Provider, operate a limited purpose Open Access Same Time Information System (OASIS) on which the information necessary to administer physical MTF Reservations will be posted.[4]  NYISO explains that the proposed limited delegation of responsibility to CHPE is necessary because NYISO employs a purely financial transmission reservation process and would have to develop new software capabilities to integrate the MTF’s physical reservation system into NYISO’s financial reservation system.  NYISO’s proposed revisions to section 2.4 and the newly proposed section 41 of its OATT state that CHPE will post on the CHPE OASIS, among other things, available transfer capability for the MTF, the MTF Reservation[5] holder, quantity in MW, duration of service, and estimated line losses from the MTF Point of Receipt to the MTF Point of Delivery.   

  1.      Where NYISO’s OASIS posting requirements in section 2.4 do not apply to CHPE’s OASIS in section 41.1, please explain how having a separate CHPE OASIS is consistent with or superior to the Commission’s OASIS posting requirements established by Order Nos. 888, 889, and 890 and Parts 37 and 38 of the Commission’s regulations.[6]  Alternatively, explain whether waiver is sought of the requirements for the CHPE OASIS and why.[7]  In your response, please address the following:
    1.        The proposed CHPE OASIS provisions[8] do not include the requirement from the pro forma OATT that transmission providers “post on OASIS and its public website an electronic link to all rules, standards and practices that (i) relate to the terms and conditions of transmission service, (ii) are not subject to a North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB) copyright restriction, and (iii) are not otherwise included in this Tariff. The Transmission Provider shall post on OASIS and on its public website an electronic link to the NAESB website where any rules, standards and practices that are protected by copyright may be obtained.”[9]  Please explain how this deviation is consistent with or superior to the Commission’s pro forma OATT.    
    2.     The pro forma OATT OASIS provisions state that terms and conditions of OASIS and standards of conduct are in 18 C.F.R. Parts 37 and 38.[10]  CHPE’s OASIS provisions do not contain this language.[11]  Please explain how this deviation is consistent with or superior to the Commission’s pro forma OATT.    
  1.      MTF Reservations
    1.      Proposed sections 41.8.1, 41.8.2, 41.8.3, and 41.18 provide procedures for the sale, assignment or transfer of physical transmission rights on the MTF.  Please explain how the proposed language is consistent with or superior to the Commission’s pro forma OATT provisions on capacity reassignment.[12]

This letter is issued pursuant to 18 C.F.R. § 375.307 and is interlocutory.  This letter is not subject to rehearing under 18 C.F.R. § 385.713.  A response to this letter must be filed with the Secretary of the Commission within 30 days of the date of this letter by making a deficiency filing in accordance with the Commission’s electronic tariff requirements.  For your response, use Type of Filing Code 170 if your company is registered under program code “M” (Electric Market Based Rate Public Utilities) or Type of Filing Code 180 if your company is registered under program code “E” (Electric Traditional Cost of Service and Market Based Rates Public Utilities).[13]  In addition, submit an electronic version of your response to Tessa Talebi at tessa.talebi@ferc.gov.  The information requested in this letter order will constitute an amendment to your filing and a new filing date will be established.[14]  A notice will be issued upon receipt of your filing.

Pending receipt of the above information, a filing date will not be assigned to your filing.  Failure to respond to this letter order within the time period specified may result in a further order rejecting your filing.

 

Issued by: Leanne Khammal, Acting Director, Division of Electric Power Regulation – East

 

 

[1] NYISO Proposed OATT, Attachment II (Proposed Attachment II) § 41.1- Definitions, defines the MTF as “a 1,250 MW, high voltage direct current controllable Merchant Transmission Facility extending from [] the US-Canada border [] to the rest of the NYS Transmission System at the Astoria Annex 345 kV GIS Substation in Queens, New York within Zone J.”

[2] Filing, Transmittal Letter (Transmittal) at 1.

[3] Id. (citing CHPE, LLC, 171 FERC ¶ 61,186, at P 19 (2020)).

[4] Id. at 7.

[5] Capitalized terms that are not defined in this order have the meaning specified in the OATT.

[6] Promoting Wholesale Competition Through Open-Access Non-discriminatory Transmission Servs. by Pub. Utils.; Recovery of Stranded Costs by Pub. Utils. & Transmitting Utils., Order No. 888, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,036, at n.434 (1996); Open-Access Same-Time Information Sys. (formerly Real-Time Information Networks) & Standards of Conduct, Order No. 889, FERC Stats. &Regs. ¶ 31,035 (1996); Preventing Undue Discrimination & Preference in Transmission Serv., Order No. 890, 118 FERC ¶ 61,119, at PP 109, 373-377 (2007); 18 C.F.R. pts. 37, 38.

[7] As noted above, the MTF will be a physical reservation system.  .  See, e.g., N.Y. Indep. Sys. Operator, Inc., 133 FERC ¶ 61,208 (2010) (granting NYSIO’s request for waiver of certain OASIS posting requirements under Part 37 of the Commission’s regulations because they are rules for physical reservation systems and therefore are not applicable to NYISO’s financial transmission reservation system). 

[8] Proposed Attachment II § 41.1.

[9] Pro forma OATT § 4.

[10] Id.

[11] Proposed Attachment II § 41.1 - MTF Provider OASIS.

[12] Pro forma OATT § 23; supra note 9.  

[13] The filing must include at least one tariff record to restart the statutory timeframe for Commission action even though a tariff revision might not otherwise be needed.  See generally Elec. Tariff Filings, 130 FERC ¶ 61,047, at PP 3-8 (2010) (explaining that the Commission uses the data elements resulting from the tariff filing process to establish statutory filing and other procedural dates).

[14] See Duke Power Co., 57 FERC ¶ 61,215, at 61,713 (1991) (“The Commission will consider any amendment or supplemental filing filed after a utility’s initial filing . . . to establish a new filing date for the filing in question.”).