Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment 

I. Background 

In Order No. 890, the Commission permitted resellers of point-to-point 

transmission capacity to charge market based rates. The rates for these 

reassignments had previously been limited to a cost-based price cap – the 

maximum of the original purchase price, the transmission provider’s current tariff 

rate, or the assignor’s opportunity costs capped at the cost of expansion.1

 The 

removal of the price cap was intended to help expand the secondary market, and 

further the goals stated in Order No. 888 which began allowing capacity 

reassignment in 1996. In Order No. 888 the Commission found that allowing 

holders of firm transmission capacity rights to reassign capacity would help parties 

manage the financial risks associated with their long term commitments, reduce 

the market power of transmission providers by allowing customers to compete, 

and foster efficient capacity allocation.2

The Commission limited reassignments above the price cap to a study 

period ending October 1, 2010 in Order No. 890-A.3

 The Commission directed 

staff to closely monitor the secondary market for transmission capacity during that 

time and prepare a report to assist the Commission in deciding whether to extend 

the rule beyond the study period. In Order No. 890-B the Commission clarified 

that the report should focus on the competitive effects of removing the price cap 

for reassigned capacity. Staff was directed to consider the number of 

reassignments occurring over the study period, the magnitude and variability of 

resale prices, the term of the reassignments, and any relationship between resale 

prices and price differentials in related energy markets. Staff was also directed to 

examine the nature and scope of reassignments undertaken by the transmission 

provider’s affiliates and include in its report any evidence of abuse in the 

 1 Preventing Undue Discrimination and Preference in Transmission 

Service, Order No. 890, 72 FR 12,266 (March 15, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 

31,241 (2007) (Order No. 890) at P 778. 

2 See Order No. 890 at P 808. 

3

 Preventing Undue Discrimination and Preference in Transmission Service, 

Order No. 890, 72 FR 12,266 (March 15, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,241 

(2007) (Order No. 890), order on reh’g, Order No. 890-A, 73 FR 2984 (Jan. 16, 

2008), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,261 (2007) (Order No. 890-A) at P 390 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission - 2 - 

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment 

secondary market for transmission capacity, whether by those affiliates or other 

customers.4

This report presents staff’s findings on the secondary market for capacity 

reassignments subsequent to Order No. 890, based on the required Electronic 

Quarterly Report (EQR) filings for all transmission providers over the period Q2-

2007 through Q4-2009 (study period).5

 

Summary

Twenty-six transmission providers reported capacity reassignments during 

the study period.6

 There were almost 35,000 transactions totaling 65 TWh of 

transmission capacity reassigned. The secondary market experienced strong 

growth during the study period, as the Commission intended in issuing Order No. 

890. Both the number of transactions and capacity volume reassigned rose 

throughout the two and one half year time span. 

Reassignments of hourly, daily, monthly, and yearly terms were reported. 

Hourly transactions were the most numerous; however, longer term transactions 

 4 Preventing Undue Discrimination and Preference in Transmission 

Service, Order No. 890, 72 Fed. Reg. 12,266 (March 15, 2007), FERC Stats. & 

Regs. ¶ 31,241, order on reh’g, Order No. 890-A, 73 Fed. Reg. 2984 (January 16, 

2008), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,261 (2007), order on reh’g, Order No. 890-B, 

123 FERC ¶ 61,299 (2008) at P 83. 

5 The Commission required transmission providers to report all 

transmission capacity reassignments since the effective date of Order No. 890 

(May 14, 2007) in their EQR filings. Transmission providers were ordered to 

correct filings from past quarters. (Order No. 890-B at P 84). Subsequent refilings have corrected initial filing errors identified by Staff. The results held 

within this report may be influenced by any remaining unidentified filing 

inaccuracies as of April 12, 2010 made by transmission providers.

6 Transactions on the Bonneville Power Administration system were not 

reported by the transmission provider, but instead were reported by four entities: 

Powerex, Idaho Power, Puget Sound Energy, and Portland General Electric. 

Northeast Utilities reported for its subsidiaries Connecticut Light & Power, Public 

Service New Hampshire, Western Massachusetts Electric Company, and Holyoke 

Water Power. Southern Company reported as SCS Inc. in 2007.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission - 3 - 

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment 

had the most total volume reassigned. Transactions of all terms rose in number 

and volume over the study period. 

The pricing of reassignments seemed to be reflective of an uncongested 

transmission system with little scarcity of available capacity. The number of 

transactions above the cap increased each year in the study period. There was a 

fairly tight range of resale prices, which were almost all under $3.00/MWh. Less 

than one percent of the total number of reassignment transactions was priced 

above the cap. For most of these reassignments, the resale prices were not 

significantly above the tariff rate. 

One affiliate reseller negotiated capacity reassignments above the tariff 

rate. These 32 transactions accounted for less than one percent of all affiliate 

transactions during the study period. 

1. Number of Reassignments

Almost 35,000 capacity reassignment transactions were reported in the 

study period, encompassing 65 TWh of total volume transferred. Throughout the 

study period, the number of reported capacity reassignment transactions and the 

volume reassigned increased each year. In 2007, there were slightly more than 

200 transactions. The number of reassignment transactions rose dramatically to 

almost 3,000 in 2008 and almost 32,000 in 2009. Almost 36 TWh flowed on 

reassigned paths in 2009, up from 25 TWh in 2008 and 3 TWh in 2007. 

Many transmission providers did not report any reassignments. There was 

significant variability in the number of transactions among the 26 transmission 

providers that did see reassignment of capacity transactions on their systems. The 

most active markets for reassignment were in the Western United States and in the 

Northeast. There were some noticeable gaps across the country, particularly in 

regions where transmission must be purchased to move power for sale in nearby 

markets (i.e., non-RTO areas), such as the Southeast. One explanation for the 

variability in reassignment volumes among transmission providers is that the 

energy market may be a viable substitute in most areas. The market price of the 

capacity should be equivalent to the price spread between the energy markets at 

the points of receipt and delivery. Therefore the primary capacity holder may 

choose to transact in the energy market rather than the secondary capacity market. 

Other factors that may contribute to the variability in capacity reassignments 

across markets are the volume of trading activity, the availability of primary 

capacity, and the size of the price spread between locations. 

 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission - 4 - 

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment 

The majority of the transactions, 79 percent in the evaluation period, 

occurred on the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) system. Central 

Vermont Public Service Corporation (CVPS) also reported a large number of 

transactions, accounting for 17 percent of the dataset.7

 

Table 1 

Capacity Reassignment Transactions by Year 

 2007 2008 2009 

BPA 18 1,204 26,442 

CVPS 15 1,365 4,554 

All Others 197 360 785 

Total 230 2,929 31,781 

There were yearly increases in reported transactions for BPA8

 and CVPS, 

as well as all other transmission providers in aggregate.9

Despite accounting for 79 percent of the transactions, BPA only comprised 

11 percent of the volume in TWh because it tended to have more short term 

reassignment transactions. CVPS, similarly, comprised less than 3 percent of the 

volume. There were six transmission providers that each had over 5 TWh of 

capacity reassigned.10

Table 2 

Capacity Reassignments Above the Price Cap 

 2007 2008 2009 

Number 1 28 105 

Volume (MWh) 18,600 3,769,440 2,713,228 

 7 Staff believes the large number of CVPS transactions may be due, in part, 

to reporting conventions. For EQR reporting purposes, each line of data is 

counted as one transaction. 

8

 Portland General Electric, the largest filer for BPA, began submitting data 

in Q4 2008 and did not report transactions that occurred prior to December 2008. 

Based on data available, it is unclear whether BPA transactions increased over 

time or whether the increase was solely due to Portland General Electric’s 

reporting. 

9

 See APPENDIX A for quarterly transactions by transmission provider. 

10 See APPENDIX B for quarterly reassignment volume by transmission 

owner. 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission - 5 - 

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment 

The total number of reassignments above the price cap was 134, less than 

one percent of the transactions during the study period.11 The volume of capacity 

reassigned above the cap was 6.5 TWh, ten percent of the total volume.12 The 

number of capacity reassignments above the cap increased significantly over the 

evaluation period. There was one in 2007, 28 in 2008, and 105 in 2009. The 

volume reassigned was 18.6 GWh in 2007, 3.8 TWh in 2008 and 2.7 TWh in 

2009. 

2. Magnitude and Variability of Resale Prices

Prices for capacity reassignments were fairly consistent and low. The 

resale price was less than or equal to $2.00/MWh for 81 percent of transactions 

and less than or equal to $3.00/MWh for 99 percent of transactions. The majority 

of the resale prices, 99 percent were at or below the price cap. Of the 26 

transmission providers with capacity reassignments, 8 had some transactions 

above the price cap, 7 had all transactions at the price cap, and 11 had all 

transactions at or below the price cap.13

The large proportion of reassignments below the cap indicates that 

reassignments may be mostly competing with primary capacity. If customers can 

buy available transmission capacity (ATC) directly from the transmission provider 

at the tariff rate, the reseller must offer a lower price. 

If the delivered price spread between delivery and receipt points expands 

above the tariff rate due to weather, outages, or other scarcity events, ATC is used 

up first and then buyers have to go to the secondary market. Resellers may 

command the price equal to the spread. Staff would expect that the ability to 

price based on the market value would produce a wide range of resale prices 

during the study period. 

 11 Prices varied by quarter for long term contracts reported by Northeast 

Utilities’ subsidiaries. For purposes of this report, each quarter was treated as a 

separate transaction.

12 See APPENDIX E, APPENDIX F, and APPENDIX G for statistics on 

reassignments above the cap. 

13 See APPENDIX C for pricing by transmission provider. 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission - 6 - 

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment 

However, it does not appear that buyers and sellers are transacting in the 

secondary market when spreads are high. There was very little variability in 

prices above the cap, and overall price levels were low for capacity reassignment 

transactions. All reassignments above the cap exceeded the cap by less than 

$2.00/MWh.14

3. Term of the Reassignments

Capacity was reassigned for hourly, daily, monthly and yearly terms during 

the study period. The majority of capacity reassignment transactions executed 

were for hourly transmission service, followed by those for daily, monthly and 

yearly reassignments. There were 33,790 hourly transactions, accounting for 

almost 97 percent of transactions. The largest hourly resellers were on the BPA 

and CVPS systems. 

Table 3 

Capacity Reassignments by Term 

 Hourly Daily Monthly Yearly 

Number 33,790 905 166 79 

Volume (MWh) 5,422,949 2,207,709 26,835,752 30,044,800 

While hourly transactions were by far the most numerous, long term 

transactions were associated with higher volumes during the evaluation period. In 

particular, almost half of the volume, 30 TWh of transmission, was resold for 

terms of one year or more, and another 27 TWh of transmission was sold for terms 

of one month to one year. These longer term contracts accounted for 88 percent of 

the reassigned transmission volume during the study period. 

Of the 26 transmission providers that reassigned transmission capacity 

during the study period, there were 10 with hourly reassignments, 13 with daily 

reassignments, 18 with monthly reassignments, and 12 with yearly 

reassignments.15

 14 See APPENDIX D for number of transactions by price level by 

transmission provider. 

15 See APPENDIX I and APPENDIX J for number of contracts and 

contract volume by transmission provider and term. 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission - 7 - 

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment 

Table 4 

Capacity Reassignment Volume by Term and Year 

 2007 2008 2009 

Hourly 221,962 1,092,118 4,108,870 

Daily 161,972 546,188 1,499,549 

Monthly 389,585 9,894,145 16,552,023 

Yearly 2,278,032 13,720,001 14,046,767 

For all contract durations, the total reassigned capacity increased every 

year. The largest year over year increase was seen between 2007 and 2008 for 

yearly reassignments, from 2.2 TWh to 13.7 TWh. Monthly reassignments also 

experienced high growth, increasing by 9.5 TWh in 2008 and 6.6 TWh in 2009.16

The presence of resales for all terms indicates that the secondary market is a 

viable method for owners of primary capacity to sell excess capacity on a short or 

long term basis. 

4. Relationship between resale prices and price differentials in related energy 

markets

As explained earlier, most of the reassignments in the study period had low 

resale prices. The resale rate was less than or equal to $2.00/MWh for 81 percent 

of reassignments and less than or equal to $3.00/MWh for 99 percent of 

reassignments. The intra-day variability of market prices may exceed the resale 

prices for these transactions, making it difficult to accurately compare the energy 

market spread to the capacity reassignment price. 

Most of the reassignment transactions during the study period had receipt 

and delivery points in locations without reported energy price indices. However, 

there were some reassignments between RTOs for which extensive price reporting 

is available. Resale prices of these transactions can be compared to the market 

spreads for energy. 

There were numerous transactions between points in New England and 

Quebec with prices similar to the average spread in energy prices between the 

regions. All reassignments for CVPS and subsidiaries of Northeast Utilities17

 16 See APPENDIX H for contract volume by term by quarter. 

17 These include Northeast Utilities subsidiaries Connecticut Light & 

Power, Public Service of New Hampshire, Western Massachusetts Electric Co., 

and Holyoke Water Power. 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission - 8 - 

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment 

were for capacity on the Phase I/II HVDC facility, which connects New England 

and Quebec. 

The average price differential between these locations for all hours during 

the study period was $2.15/MWh.18 This can be compared to the resale rates for 

all of the NU subsidiaries which had long term monthly and yearly transactions 

ranging from $0.44/MWh to $2.91/MWh. CVPS had numerous transactions for 

firm and non-firm service with hourly, daily and longer terms all with the same 

resale price of $3.00/MWh. 

From this we conclude that, at least for the transactions where receipt and 

delivery points were in locations with reported energy price indices, the value of 

capacity reassignments rarely exceeded the price differentials between relevant 

energy markets. 

5. Reassignments undertaken by the transmission provider’s affiliates

During the study period, there were 6,012 transactions (16 percent) where 

the reseller was an affiliate of the transmission owner. Ten companies accounted 

for all of these transactions, including eight in which all transactions were by 

affiliates. CVPS had 5,934 of the affiliate transactions.19

Thirty two affiliate transactions were negotiated above the tariff rate, 

accounting for less than one percent of all affiliate transactions. All of these 

transactions were long term and the reseller was Northeast Utilities. The weighted 

average mark-up was $0.85/MWh, 58% above the tariff rate. 

 Few of the reassignments by affiliates were transacted above the tariff rate 

during the study period. The rate of transactions priced above the cap was 0.5% 

for affiliates, which was roughly the same as the 0.4% rate for non-affiliates. This 

seems to alleviate concerns that transmission providers would try to channel 

capacity to their affiliates in order to charge higher prices for their transmission 

capacity. Other forms of affiliate abuse, such as providing preferential treatment 

 18 Based on average hourly real-time prices for all hours 5/14/2007- 

12/31/2009 reported by ISO-NE for the HQ Interface and Vermont Zone. 

19 See APPENDIX K for number of affiliate and non-affiliate transactions 

above the tariff rate by transmission owner. 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission - 9 - 

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment 

in the allocation of reassigned capacity to an affiliate such that it could be sold 

above the cap, were not detected during the study period. 

Conclusion

Order No. 890 lifted the price cap on transmission capacity reassignments 

to encourage the development of the secondary market. To some degree this goal 

has been achieved. Over the two and one half years in the study period, it appears 

that the secondary market has grown substantially. The number of transactions 

and transaction volume has increased over time. There were higher volumes of 

hourly, daily, monthly, and yearly capacity reassigned each year. 

However, it does not appear that the removal of the price cap was primarily 

responsible for the observed growth in the secondary market. The number and 

volume of reassignments above the cap were relatively small. There were only 

134 out of almost 35,000 transactions reassignments above the price cap. 

Almost all of the reassignments were priced below the cap, likely due to 

low price spreads between markets and the availability of primary capacity at the 

tariff rate. The few transactions priced above the cap have small mark-ups. It is 

not apparent from the data why there are no transactions with larger mark-ups. It 

is possible that either the primary capacity holders choose to capture the spreads in 

the energy market, or there has just been very little congestion on the transmission 

paths in the study period. 

There did not appear to be any evidence of abuse by resellers. There were a 

few transactions priced above the cap by affiliates, but given that the percentage of 

transactions above the cap was about the same for affiliates and non-affiliates, this 

does not lead us to believe there was affiliate abuse. 

It is not certain whether the removal of the price cap was the primary driver 

of the growth of the secondary market. However, based on the study period data, 

the removal of the cap does not seem to be causing problems. During the study 

period, it appears that resellers used the secondary market mainly to derive value 

from unneeded capacity. Prices were depressed below the tariff rate due to 

availability of primary capacity or low market price spreads between the points. 

When resellers did charge above the cap, the price differential was small. There 

was no indication that participants were able to or did take advantage of their 

capacity rights to manipulate prices. In the future, unrestricted secondary market 

prices may enable capacity reassignments to increase as an alternative to 

transacting in the energy market and provide price signals to indicate scarcity and 

appropriate areas for new investment. 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment - Appendices

APPENDIX ATotal Transactions (By Start Date)

2Q07 3Q07 4Q07 1Q08 2Q08 3Q08 4Q08 1Q09 2Q09 3

APS - - - - 4 - - - - 

 

Avista Corp - - - - 10 - - - 8 

 

Black Hills - - - - - - - 1 - 

 

Central Vermont 9 - 6 217 485 276 387 267 1,636 1

 

Cross Sound Cable 15 66 16 23 36 27 20 26 17 

 

EPE - - - - 1 - 1 1 - 

 

Entergy 11 - - 1 3 4 1 13 2 

 

Idaho Power - - - 3 2 3 3 5 2 

 

Maine PS - - - - - - - 1 - 

 

MidAmerican - - 1 - - - - - - 

 

MAPP 37 - 3 - - - - - - 

 

MISO - - - 1 - - - - 1 

 

Nevada Power - - - - - 1 1 - - 

 

Northwestern - - 8 3 2 32 4 3 18 

 

CL&P - - - 2 2 2 2 2 2 

 

PSNH - - - 2 2 2 2 - 2 

 

WMECO - - - - - - - 2 4 

 

WMECO & HWP - - - 2 2 2 2 - - 

 

Pacificorp 1 - - - 1 11 12 - - 

 

PNM - - - - 4 - - - - 

 

Puget Sound - - - - - - 1 - 1 

 

Southern 22 - 17 12 47 20 - - 4 

 

SPP - - - 1 - 1 - - 1 

 

Tampa Electric - - - - - - 40 43 2 

 

TVA - - - - - - - 1 - 

 

Total w/o BPA 66 95 51 267 601 381 476 365 1,700 2

 

BPA 17 - 1 1 87 401 715 4,583 8,039 8

 

Total 66 112 52 268 688 782 1,191 4,948 9,739 11

 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment - Appendices

APPENDIX BTotal Volume Reassigned (MWh)

2Q07 3Q07 4Q07 1Q08 2Q08 3Q08 4Q08 1Q09 2Q09 3

APS - - - - 86,640 220,800 220,800 216,000 218,400 220

 

Avista Corp - - - - 19,152 - - - 20,352 16

 

Black Hills - - - - - - - 43,200 43,680 44

 

Central Vermont 154,821 - 154,560 159,002 162,132 174,757 177,963 179,706 189,949 183

 

Cross Sound Cable 1,886 17,410 5,766 10,118 10,560 4,952 3,372 3,163 1,303 

 

EPE - - - - 26,400 220,800 437,856 503,280 508,872 514

 

Entergy 493,480 - - 982,800 61,312 112,320 160 617,704 142,968 1,398

 

Idaho Power - - - 67,272 206,088 158,496 31,104 117,440 323,232 326

 

Maine PS - - - - - - - 20,832 61,152 61

 

MidAmerican - - 2,088 - - - - - - 

 

MAPP 27,611 - 6,000 - - - - - - 2

 

MISO - - - 7,200 - - - - 148,800 

 

Nevada Power - - - - - 213,840 640,891 598,315 - 

 

Northwestern - - 198,377 583,124 670,046 764,562 580,700 568,076 642,559 1,040

 

CL&P - - - 807,840 807,840 816,816 816,816 798,864 807,840 816

 

PSNH - - - 460,080 460,080 465,192 465,192 - 460,080 465

 

WMECO - - - - - - - 162,336 168,480 170

 

WMECO & HWP - - - 168,480 112,320 170,352 170,352 - - 

 

Pacificorp 33,120 - 33,120 32,760 54,720 74,304 40,320 32,400 - 1,170

 

PNM - - - - 24,816 207,552 207,550 - - 

 

Puget Sound 607,200 - 607,200 600,600 600,600 607,200 664,272 594,000 982,800 496

 

Southern 41,928 - 415,464 667,536 699,384 696,408 662,400 648,000 909,600 1,699

 

SPP - - - 2,562,000 546,000 732,000 1,104,000 540,000 1,099,200 1,126

 

Tampa Electric - - - - - - 6,054 12,142 101 

 

TVA - - - - - - - 5,880 - 

 

Total w/o BPA 17,410 1,360,046 1,422,574 7,108,812 4,548,091 5,640,351 6,229,802 5,661,338 6,729,368 9,755

 

BPA 238,720 - 12,800 58,700 769,216 736,970 160,510 616,616 1,468,440 2,184

 

Total 17,410 1,598,766 1,435,374 7,167,512 5,317,307 6,377,321 6,390,312 6,277,954 8,197,808 11,939

 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment - Appendices

APPENDIX CPricing $/MWh

Market Rate Tariff Rate Difference

Min Average Max Min Average Max Min Average Max

APS $ 2.56 2.24 $ 2.85 $ 2.24 $ 2.56 $ 2.85 $ - $ - $ - $ 

Avista Corp $ 1.24 0.25 $ 2.25 $ 1.40 $ 1.54 $ 4.00 $ (1.75) $ (0.31) $ 0.60 $ 

Black Hills $ 2.88 2.88 $ 2.88 $ 2.88 $ 2.88 $ 2.88 $ - $ - $ - $ 

BPA $ 1.51 - $ 3.72 $ 1.25 $ 3.74 $ 3.74 $ (3.74) $ (2.23) $ - $ 

Central Vermont $ 3.00 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.50 $ 3.54 $ 3.82 $ (0.82) $ (0.54) $ (0.50) $ 

Cross Sound Cable $ 16.20 12.76 $ 26.79 $ 12.76 $ 16.20 $ 26.79 $ - $ - $ - $ 

EPE $ 0.82 0.56 $ 1.19 $ 0.56 $ 1.19 $ 2.08 $ (0.89) $ (0.37) $ - $ 

Entergy $ 2.27 1.85 $ 3.00 $ 1.88 $ 2.26 $ 3.00 $ (0.02) $ 0.00 $ 0.79 $ 

Idaho Power $ 0.64 - $ 2.16 $ 1.00 $ 1.78 $ 2.28 $ (2.28) $ (1.13) $ - $ 

Maine PS $ 2.63 2.63 $ 2.63 $ 2.63 $ 2.63 $ 2.63 $ - $ - $ - $ 

MidAmerican $ 2.21 2.21 $ 2.21 $ 2.21 $ 2.21 $ 2.21 $ - $ - $ - $ 

MAPP $ 1.70 - $ 3.00 $ 0.24 $ 0.59 $ 2.30 $ (2.30) $ 1.11 $ 2.66 $ 

MISO $ - - $ - $ - $ 1.36 $ 4.08 $ (4.08) $ (1.36) $ - $ 

Nevada Power $ 0.64 0.64 $ 0.64 $ 1.94 $ 1.94 $ 1.94 $ (1.30) $ (1.30) $ (1.30) $ 

Northwestern $ 3.07 2.00 $ 4.68 $ 2.00 $ 3.31 $ 4.68 $ (2.43) $ (0.25) $ - $ 

CL&P $ 1.31 0.60 $ 2.08 $ 1.25 $ 1.47 $ 1.60 $ (1.00) $ (0.16) $ 0.50 $ 

PSNH $ 2.82 2.55 $ 2.91 $ 1.25 $ 1.45 $ 1.60 $ 0.95 $ 1.37 $ 1.66 $ 

WMECO $ 1.11 0.44 $ 1.39 $ 1.25 $ 1.30 $ 1.60 $ (1.16) $ (0.19) $ 0.14 $ 

WMECO & HWP $ 1.61 1.06 $ 2.39 $ 1.58 $ 1.59 $ 1.60 $ (0.54) $ 0.02 $ 0.81 $ 

Pacificorp $ 0.95 0.11 $ 5.48 $ 2.77 $ 2.79 $ 2.81 $ (2.66) $ (1.84) $ 2.71 $ 

PNM $ 2.84 2.84 $ 2.84 $ 2.84 $ 2.84 $ 2.84 $ - $ - $ - $ 

Puget Sound $ - - $ - $ - $ 0.32 $ 3.86 $ (3.86) $ (0.32) $ - $ 

Southern $ 1.86 - $ 3.50 $ 3.05 $ 3.91 $ 4.16 $ (4.16) $ (2.05) $ - $ 

SPP $ 1.97 1.25 $ 2.44 $ 1.26 $ 2.00 $ 2.47 $ (0.03) $ (0.03) $ (0.02) $ 

Tampa Electric $ - - $ - $ 1.62 $ 1.62 $ 1.62 $ (1.62) $ (1.62) $ (1.62) $ 

TVA $ 3.88 3.88 $ 3.88 $ 3.88 $ 3.88 $ 3.88 $ - $ - $ - $ 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment - Appendices

APPENDIX DNumber of Transactions By Rate

Above Tariff At Tariff Below Tariff Total

APS 4 - - 4Avista Corp - 10 45 55Black Hills 1 - - 1BPA 1 - 27,663 27,664

Central Vermont - - 5,934 5,934

Cross Sound Cable 269 - - 269EPE 1 - 2 3

Entergy 57 4 28 89

Idaho Power 21 - 15 36

Maine PS 1 - - 1MidAmerican 1 - - 1MAPP - 86 40 126MISO 2 - 1 3

Nevada Power - - 2 2

Northwestern 174 - 32 206

CL&P - 6 10 16PSNH - 14 - 14

WMECO - 8 6 14

WMECO & HWP - 4 4 8Pacificorp 6 2 103 111

PNM 4 - - 4Puget Sound 1 - 1 2

Southern 1 - 281 282

SPP - - 4 4

Tampa Electric - - 90 90

TVA 1 - - 1

 545 134 34,261 34,940
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment - Appendices

APPENDIX ENumber of Transactions Above the Tariff Rate

2Q07 3Q07 4Q07 1Q08 2Q08 3Q08 4Q08 1Q09 2Q09 3

APS - - - - - - - - - 

 

Avista Corp - - - - 10 - - - - 

 

Black Hills - - - - - - - - - 

 

BPA - - - - - - - - - 

 

Central Vermont - - - - - - - - - 

 

Cross Sound Cable - - - - - - - - - 

 

EPE - - - - - - - - - 

 

Entergy 1 - - - - - - 2 - 

 

Idaho Power - - - - - - - - - 

 

Maine PS - - - - - - - - - 

 

MidAmerican - - - - - - - - - 

 

MAPP - - - - - - - - - 

 

MISO - - - - - - - - - 

 

Nevada Power - - - - - - - - - 

 

Northwestern - - - - - - - - - 

 

CL&P - - - 2 2 - - - 2 

 

PSNH - - - 2 2 2 2 - 2 

 

WMECO - - - - - - - - 4 

 

WMECO & HWP - - - - 2 - 2 - - 

 

Pacificorp - - - - - 2 - - - 

 

PNM - - - - - - - - - 

 

Puget Sound - - - - - - - - - 

 

Southern - - - - - - - - - 

 

SPP - - - - - - - - - 

 

Tampa Electric - - - - - - - - - 

 

TVA - - - - - - - - - 

 

 1 - - 4 16 4 4 2 8 

 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment - Appendices

APPENDIX FVolume Above Tariff Rate (MWh)

2Q07 3Q07 4Q07 1Q08 2Q08 3Q08 4Q08 1Q09 2Q09 3

APS - - - - - - - - - 

 

Avista Corp - - - - 19,152 - - - - 

 

Black Hills - - - - - - - - - 

 

BPA - - - - - - - - - 

 

Central Vermont - - - - - - - - - 

 

Cross Sound Cable - - - - - - - - - 

 

EPE - - - - - - - - - 

 

Entergy 18,600 - - - - - - 23,040 - 

 

Idaho Power - - - - - - - - - 

 

Maine PS - - - - - - - - - 

 

MidAmerican - - - - - - - - - 

 

MAPP - - - - - - - - - 2

 

MISO - - - - - - - - - 

 

Nevada Power - - - - - - - - - 

 

Northwestern - - - - - - - - - 

 

CL&P - - - 807,840 807,840 - - - 807,840 

 

PSNH - - - 460,080 460,080 465,192 465,192 - 460,080 465

 

WMECO - - - - - - - - 168,480 

 

WMECO & HWP - - - - 112,320 - 170,352 - - 

 

Pacificorp - - - - - 1,392 - - - 

 

PNM - - - - - - - - - 

 

Puget Sound - - - - - - - - - 

 

Southern - - - - - - - - - 

 

SPP - - - - - - - - - 

 

Tampa Electric - - - - - - - - - 

 

TVA - - - - - - - - - 

 

Total - 18,600 - 1,267,920 1,399,392 466,584 635,544 23,040 1,436,400 468

 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment - Appendices

APPENDIX GTransactions Above Tariff Rate

Number MWh

Weighted Avg 

Rate

Weighted Avg 

Tariff Rate Difference % Difference

Avista Corp 19,152 10 2.00 $ 1.40 $ 0.60 $ 43%

Entergy 42,112 4 2.08 $ 2.03 $ 0.05 $ 2%

MAPP 152,580 86 2.42 $ 0.71 $ 1.71 $ 241%

CL&P 2,423,520 6 1.76 $ 1.48 $ 0.29 $ 19%

PSNH 3,241,008 14 2.82 $ 1.45 $ 1.37 $ 95%

WMECO 338,832 8 1.38 $ 1.25 $ 0.13 $ 10%

WMECO & HWP 282,672 4 2.12 $ 1.59 $ 0.53 $ 33%

Pacificorp 1,392 2 4.69 $ 2.77 $ 1.92 $ 69%

 6,501,268 134 2.30 $ 1.44 $ 0.86 $ 60%
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment - Appendices

APPENDIX HVolume by Quarter and Transaction Duration

Active Contract Volume (MW)

2Q07 3Q07 4Q07 1Q08 2Q08 3Q08 4Q08 1Q09 2Q09 3

Hourly 3,652 17,720 2,545 3,763 36,372 41,241 55,315 423,207 779,836 911

 

Daily 2,129 4,000 1,212 664 19,091 9,065 290 1,731 11,159 21

 

Monthly 257 - 267 1,250 1,265 1,617 1,695 1,375 1,830 4

 

Yearly 551 - 800 1,461 1,481 1,649 1,748 1,655 1,917 1

 

Total 21,720 6,589 4,824 7,138 58,209 53,572 59,048 427,968 794,742 938

 

Active Contract Volume (MWh)

2Q07 3Q07 4Q07 1Q08 2Q08 3Q08 4Q08 1Q09 2Q09 3

Hourly 185,986 17,410 18,566 16,240 468,027 535,847 72,003 525,059 1,106,713 1,708

 

Daily 127,220 - 34,752 19,536 278,168 238,972 9,512 53,000 315,325 721

 

Monthly 191,208 - 198,377 2,691,939 1,985,801 2,510,200 2,706,203 2,680,043 2,786,131 5,958

 

Yearly 1,094,352 - 1,183,680 4,439,796 2,585,310 3,092,301 3,602,594 3,019,851 3,989,639 3,550

 

Total 17,410 1,598,766 1,435,374 7,167,512 5,317,307 6,377,321 6,390,312 6,277,954 8,197,808 11,939

 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment - Appendices

APPENDIX ITotal Contracts

Hourly Daily Monthly Yearly Total RANK

APS - - - 4 4 16

Avista Corp 55 - - - 55 10

Black Hills - - - 1 1 23

BPA 270 27,391 2 1 27,664 1

Central Vermont 39 5,838 1 56 5,934 2

Cross Sound Cable - 269 - - 269 4

EPE - - 1 2 3 19

Entergy 38 11 39 1 89 9

Idaho Power 15 6 14 1 36 11

Maine PS - - 1 - 1 23

MidAmerican 1 - - - 1 23

MAPP 31 94 1 - 126 6

MISO 1 - 2 - 3 19

Nevada Power - - 2 - 2 21

Northwestern 138 39 22 7 206 5

CL&P - - 16 - 16 12

PSNH - - 14 - 14 13

WMECO - - 14 - 14 13

WMECO & HWP - - 8 - 8 15

Pacificorp 21 66 23 1 111 7

PNM - - 4 - 4 16

Puget Sound - - 1 1 2 21

Southern 279 2 - 1 282 3

SPP - - 1 3 4 16

Tampa Electric 16 74 - - 90 8

TVA 1 - - - 1 23

Total Contracts 33,790 905 166 79 34,940
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment - Appendices

APPENDIX JContract Volume (MWh)

Hourly Daily Monthly Yearly Total RANK

APS - - - 1,404,240 1,404,240 14

Avista Corp 57,696 - - - 57,696 23

Black Hills - - - 175,200 175,200 21

BPA 1,076,168 5,173,993 122,760 826,700 7,199,621 3

Central Vermont 13,001 95,492 2,160 1,535,865 1,646,518 11

Cross Sound Cable - 63,411 - - 63,411 22

EPE - - 217,056 2,509,080 2,726,136 9

Entergy 242,296 4,338 3,699,935 299,472 4,246,041 7

Idaho Power 17,072 1,120 1,521,360 35,040 1,574,592 12

Maine PS - - 205,632 - 205,632 19

MidAmerican 2,088 - - - 2,088 26

MAPP 75,060 41,531 69,600 - 186,191 20

MISO 7,200 - 441,600 - 448,800 17

Nevada Power - - 1,453,046 - 1,453,046 13

Northwestern 200,501 8,572 3,136,539 2,439,683 5,785,294 6

CL&P - - 6,489,648 - 6,489,648 4

PSNH - - 3,241,008 - 3,241,008 8

WMECO - - 671,520 - 671,520 15

WMECO & HWP - - 621,504 - 621,504 16

Pacificorp 18,936 21,796 2,501,394 131,760 2,673,886 10

PNM - - 439,918 - 439,918 18

Puget Sound - - 57,072 6,200,400 6,257,472 5

Southern 486,120 - 1,797,600 5,652,000 7,935,720 2

SPP - - 146,400 8,835,360 8,981,760 1

Tampa Electric 5,691 12,696 - - 18,387 24

TVA 5,880 - - - 5,880 25

Total 5,422,949 2,207,709 26,835,752 30,044,800 64,511,210
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment - Appendices

APPENDIX KAffiliate Transactions

Affiliate Transactions Non-Affiliate Transactions All Transactions

Above Tariff Total Percent Above Tariff Total Percent Above Tariff Total Percent

APS - - - - 4 - - 4 -

Avista Corp - - - 10 55 18% 10 55 18%

Black Hills 1 - - - - - - 1 -

BPA - - - - 27,664 - - 27,664 -

Central Vermont 5,934 - - - - - - 5,934 -

Cross Sound Cable - - - - 269 - - 269 -

EPE - - - - 3 - - 3 -

Entergy - - - 4 89 4% 4 89 4%

Idaho Power 18 - - - 18 - - 36 -

Maine PS - - - - 1 - - 1 -

MidAmerican 1 - - - - - - 1 -

MAPP - - - 86 126 68% 86 126 68%

MISO - - - - 3 - - 3 -

Nevada Power - - - - 2 - - 2 -

Northwestern - - - - 206 - - 206 -

CL&P 16 6 38% - - - 6 16 38%

PSNH 14 14 100% - - - 14 14 100%

WMECO 14 8 57% - - - 8 14 57%

WMECO & HWP 8 4 50% - - - 4 8 50%

Pacificorp 2 - - 2 109 2% 2 111 2%

PNM 4 - - - - - - 4 -

Puget Sound - - - - 2 - - 2 -Southern - - - - 282 - - 282 -

SPP - - - - 4 - - 4 -

Tampa Electric - - - - 90 - - 90 -

TVA - - - - 1 - - 1 -

Total 32 6,012 0.5% 102 28,928 0.4% 134 34,940 0.4%
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Staff Report on Capacity Reassignment - Appendices

APPENDIX LTransmission Provider Key and Notes

Transmission Provider Name as Filed in EQR 

APS Arizona Public Service Company (Transmission)Avista Corp Avista CorporationBlack Hills Black Hills Power, Inc. on behalf of BHPI, BEPC & PRECBPA Bonneville Power Administration Central Vermont Central Vermont Public Service CorporationCross Sound Cable Cross-Sound Cable Company, LLCEPE El Paso Electric CompanyEntergy Entergy Services, Inc.Idaho Power Idaho Power CompanyMaine PS Maine Public Service CompanyMidAmerican MidAmerican Energy Co.MAPP Mid-Continent Area Power PoolMISO Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.Nevada Power Nevada Power CompanyNorthwestern NorthWestern EnergyCL&P NUSCO as agent for CL&PPSNH NUSCO as agent for PSNHWMECO NUSCO as agent for WMECOWMECO & HWP NUSCO as agent for WMECO and HWPPacificorp PacifiCorpPNM Public Service Company of New Mexico - Transmission and ReliabilityPuget Sound Puget Sound Energy, Inc.Southern Southern Company Services, Inc.SPP Southwest Power Pool, Inc.Tampa Electric Tampa Electric Company - RTVA Tennesse Valley AuthorityNotes: 1. Southern Company reported as SCS Inc. in 2007.2. Bonneville Power Administration was reported by Powerex, Idaho Power, Puget Sound Energy, and Portland General Electric.3. Transactions and volume occuring outside the study period (May 17, 2007 - December 31, 2009) were excluded.4. Prices varied by quarter for NUSCO transactions. Each quarter was treated as a separate transaction.