NYISO And FERC Knowledge Energy Market Clients Trust
Read and Laniado, LLP, has in-depth knowledge of the New York state energy markets, including the New York Independent System Operator’s (“NYISO”) tariffs and rules and developments at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”). The firm assists clients with interpretations of the NYISO tariffs and can guide new projects, including renewable energy generators, through the NYISO interconnection process. Read and Laniado, LLP, has also guided clients through NYISO Public Policy Transmission Planning Process.
In addition to individual energy companies, we represent the Independent Power Producers of New York, Inc. (“IPPNY”), a trade association comprised of independent power producers that generate nearly 80% of the energy supply in New York State. The firm advises IPPNY and constituent members on energy market matters, including policies being developed and adopted at the Office of Renewable Energy Siting, the NYISO, FERC, New York State Public Service Commission, and New York State Department of Environmental Conservation.
Read and Laniado, LLP, routinely works with NYISO tariffs and rules covering matters such as the wholesale energy and capacity markets, rate recovery, planning, the interconnection process, and governance. The firm files many pleadings at the NYISO and FERC concerning the interpretation of their respective requirements. In addition, as part of asset sales or acquisitions, the firm has filed notices for many self-certifications for small production facilities at FERC.
Cricket Valley Energy Center Lc v. New York Independent System Operator, Inc., 180 FERC ¶ 61,180 (September 22, 2022).
New York State Public Service Commission v. New York Independent System Operator, Inc., 173 FERC ¶ 61,022 (October 7, 2020). Represented Independent Power Producers of New York, Inc. (“IPPNY”) before FERC in support of a determination made by the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (“NYISO”) that payments received under the Commercial System Distribution Load Relief Programs (“CSRP”) cannot be excluded from the calculation of offer floors for new Special Case Resources (“SCR”). On rehearing, FERC agreed with IPPNY and upheld the NYISO’s determination.
New York State Public Service Commission v. New York Independent System Operator, Inc., 170 FERC ¶ 61,119 (February 20, 2020). Represented IPPNY in a proceeding before FERC in response to a complaint alleging that the NYISO’s existing buyer-side market power mitigation measures are unjust and unreasonable. FERC agreed with IPPNY’s argument that the complainants had failed to meet its burden to demonstrate that the mitigation rules are unjust, unreasonable, or unduly discriminatory.
New York Independent System Operator, Inc., 158 FERC ¶ 61,028 (January 17, 2017). Represented IPPNY before FERC in defense of the NYISO’s decision to: (1) use the F class frame turbine as the peaking plant technology for the ICAP demand curves and (2) include SCR emissions controls in the peaking plant designs. FERC agreed with IPPNY’s argument and directed the NYISO to include SCR emissions controls in the peaking plant design for the NYC, LI, and G-J Locality ICAP Demand Curves.
New York Independent System Operator, Inc., 134 FERC ¶ 61,058 (January 28, 2011). Represented IPPNY before FERC in a proceeding considering the adoption of NYISO’s proposed demand curves. IPPNY argued in defense of the NYISO’s determination that a peaking generating unit on Long Island be used to set the Demand Curves for the entire New York Control Area and challenged the NYISO’s determination to exclude deliverability costs. FERC agreed with IPPNY’s arguments and directed the NYISO to develop non-Long Island based peaking unit demand curve for the rest of the State, and to include deliverability costs.
New York Independent System Operator, Inc., 131 FERC ¶ 61,170 (May 20, 2010). Represented IPPNY before FERC arguing that FERC should reject NYISO’s proposed conduct threshold. FERC agreed with IPPNY and directed NYISO to change both the conduct threshold and that the impact threshold to be the greater of $2/kW-month and 15 %.
New York Independent System Operator, Inc., 126 FERC ¶ 61,046 (January 15, 2009). Represented IPPNY in a FERC proceeding on a NYISO filing to amend its Market Administration and Control Area Services Tariff. IPPNY successfully argued that: (1) the definition of Energy Resource Interconnection Service be amended to add clarity and (2) section VIII.B.3 of attachment S to the tariff should be clear in differentiating the requirements for those customers seeking Capacity Resource Interconnection Service from requirement for those who will take Energy Resource Interconnection Service.
New York Independent System Operator, Inc., 124 FERC ¶ 61,301 (September 30, 2008). Represented IPPNY in its filing of a protest against the NYISO to that it impermissibly attempted to expand the definition of “control” in its tariff. FERC agreed, holding that NYISO’s definition went beyond FERC’s previous directive as to defining “control” for purposes of the pivotal supplier test.
New York Independent System Operator, Inc., 118 FERC ¶ 61,182 (March 6, 2007). Represented IPPNY and other independent power producers before FERC protesting the NYISO’s proposal modify the installed capacity (“ICAP”) market mitigation measures applicable to certain generating units serving New York City (in-city generation) by lowering the price cap for capacity offered into the in-city ICAP market. FERC agreed with IPPNY and issued an order rejecting proposed revisions to NYISO’s MST because the NYISO failed to offer sufficient economic justification.
Albany Energy 2 LLC, Notice of Self-Certification for its Small Power Production Facility Located in Albany, New York (February 19, 2010).
Santa Cruz Energy LLC, Notice of Self-Certification of Santa Cruz Energy LLC for its Small Power Production Facility Located in Santa Cruz, California (May 11, 2009).
Obtain Experienced Assistance For Your NYISO Or FERC Matter
For comprehensive guidance through NYISO and FERC tariff and regulation matters, meet with the attorneys at Read and Laniado, LLP. To arrange a consultation with the Albany office of Read and Laniado, LLP, call 518-465-9313, or contact the firm online.