RECB Update – 10-28-2011
RECB is wrapping up its change to Market Efficiency Projects by mid-November and is teeing up FERC Order 1000 issues and Entergy integration issues. Summaries of those issues are below.
Market Efficiency Proposal: Comments on MEP proposal by November 14th to Amanda Brower. MISO intends to file its Market Efficiency Project tariff to FERC before November 23d. Below is a comparison of the proposal to the current MEP:
FERC ORDER 1000: MISO is splitting the FERC Order 1000 issues among the PAC, RECB and workshops held outside of a committee or task force. MISO has created a FERC Order 1000 website that can be accessed from the planning tab of the MISO website.
RECB will be handling the cost allocation issues and directives in Order 1000, PAC will address the planning issues and directives in Order 1000 and the remaining issue will be addressed in workshops. MISO has identified eight cost allocation issues and believes it is compliant with six of those issues. One open issue relates to the implementation of para. 646 of Order 1000 and the requirement that B/C ratios be less than 1.25 and how that impacts the Market Efficiency Projects. The second issue relates to para. 603 of Order 1000 and the cost allocation methods are just and reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential as it relates to each of the regional cost allocation principles.
MISO has asked for comments on the cost allocation issues arising from FERC Order 1000 by Novemebr 15th to Jesse Moser and Jeremiah Doner.
Entergy Transition: MISO intends to treat Entergy as a second planning region for five years. The goal is that it will take five years to fully incorporate Entergy into the MISO planning process. During that time, MISO’s focus will be on making Entergy consistent with MISO for Reliability Projects, Market Efficiency Projects (MEPs) and Multi-Value Projects (MVPs). Reliability projects should be up-to-speed relatively quickly in comparison to MEP and MVPs.
During the transition period, Entergy will be evaluated as its own planning region for the purpose of an MVP portfolio. That portfolio must demonstrate a cost benefit ratio greater than 1 and must not degrade the benefit of the current MVP portfolio. In making that latter determination, MISO will combine the Entergy MVP portfolio with the MVP portfolio approved in December (“Approved MVP portfolio”) and then run a separate benefit-cost analysis. That benefit-cost analysis must yield a ratio that is greater than or equal to the benefit-cost ratio of the Approved MVP portfolio.
During the Transition Period, the cost of Network Upgrades terminating entirely in one planning area (either the MISO Planning Region or the Entergy Planning Region) will be allocated only within that planning area. The cost of non-MVP Network Upgrades partly terminating in both the Entergy Planning Region and the MISO Planning Region will be allocated regionally throughout combined footprint according to the cost allocation criteria in Attachment FF.
After the Transition Period the Attachment FF regional cost sharing rules will apply to Network Upgrades terminating in either Entergy or MISO, approved after the transition period.
Entergy customers will not be allocated any costs associated with the Approved MVP portfolio during the five year transition period. At the end of the transition period, MVP cost sharing will be phased in over an eight year period at a constant rate (of 12.5% per year), if the MVP comparability conditions are met. Following the transition period all new Multi Value Project costs will automatically go into the system wide rate.
MISO has asked for comments on the Entergy transition issue to Jenifer Curran by November 14th.
