May 23, 2012

FERC Finds Market Manipulation in ISO-NE

On November 29, 2011, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved a Stipulation and Consent Agreement between the Office of Enforcement (Enforcement) and Holyoke Gas and Electric Department (Holyoke) in which Holyoke stipulated that it failed to report to ISO New England, Inc. (ISO-NE) three planned outages of two of its generating units serving as ISO-NE capacity resources, as required under the ISO-NE tariff. Holyoke is a municipally owned utility located in Holyoke, Massachusetts, that owns and operates two dual-fuel peaking units, Cabot Unit 6 and Cabot Unit 8, both of which it registered as Installed Capacity Resources (ICAP) in ISO-NE’s capacity market. Under its tariff, ISO-NE pays Holyoke a monthly ICAP payment for each Cabot Unit. In return, Holyoke is required to offer the Cabot Units’ energy into ISO-NE energy markets and must notify ISO-NE of any outages of the Cabot Units. Holyoke must also schedule in advance any planned outages required for nonemergency maintenance, inspection, or repair. Additionally, each month Holyoke must submit General Availability Data (GADS Data) for the Cabot Units for the previous month.

On December 28, 2008, ISO-NE sought to dispatch Cabot Unit 8 for next-day service and learned that it had been out of service for three months, triggering an ISO-NE investigation. ISO-NE determined that Holyoke failed to comply with the outage scheduling and notice requirements of the tariff. Subsequently, Enforcement concluded that Holyoke misrepresented the availability of Cabot Unit 8 in violation of 18 C.F.R. § 1c.2. Holyoke then voluntarily disclosed to Enforcement two other planned outages ISO-NE was unaware of, one occurring on Cabot Unit 6 and the other on Cabot Unit 8.

During each outage, despite the fact that the affected Cabot Unit could not have provided energy if dispatched by ISO-NE, Holyoke offered its energy into the ISO-NE day-ahead and real-time energy markets and submitted GADS Data indicating that the unit was available for dispatch during the reported period. When ISO-NE did request dispatch, Holyoke placed the Cabot Unit on forced outage status—a status reserved for outages due to emergency, unanticipated failures, or other causes beyond the generation owner’s control—without informing ISO-NE that the Cabot Unit had already been out of service. Holyoke then stopped making energy offers for the remainder of the planned outage.

In the Stipulation and Consent Agreement, Holyoke stipulated that it offered the Cabot Units’ energy for dispatch during the three outages and reported them as available for GADS Data purposes despite knowing that the Cabot Units could not have provided energy if dispatched by ISO-NE. However, it did not admit or deny that its failure to report and schedule the outages while reporting the Cabot Units as available for dispatch violated 18 C.F.R. § 1c.2. Pursuant to the Stipulation and Consent Agreement, Holyoke agreed to make certain compliance monitoring reports to Enforcement and disgorge the $336,267.86, plus interest, of capacity payments it received from ISO-NE during the outages.

Copyright © 2012 by Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP. All Rights Reserved.

About the Author

Partner

Mark R. Haskell is a partner in Morgan Lewis's Energy Practice. Mr. Haskell's practice focuses on Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) matters, including FERC investigations, litigation and related court appeals, as well as Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) investigations affecting the energy industry.

202-739-5766

About the Author

Of Counsel

George D. Billinson is of counsel in Morgan Lewis's Energy Practice. Mr. Billinson has more than 25 years of experience in regulatory, complex litigation, and antitrust matters. His practice focuses on Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) matters, including investigations and audits, regulatory compliance, antitrust, and litigation. Mr. Billinson's prior experience as a general counsel, as a FERC staff member in the Office of Market Oversight and Investigations, and as a partner in another prominent law firm give him a unique perspective on the issues...

202-739-5219

Contributors

Associate

Pamela C. Tsang is an associate in Morgan Lewis's Energy Practice. Attorneys in this practice counsel clients in the electric, nuclear, oil, gas, and water industries on a broad range of energy issues. We offer clients advice on domestic and international energy regulations and represent them in arbitration, in high-stakes regulatory and commercial disputes, and in litigation before state and federal courts. Our Energy Practice provides an array of services-transactional, counseling, regulatory, and litigation-to address all of our energy clients' legal needs.

202.739.5199

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.