Document ID: FERC-2007-1964-0001
Agency: ferc
Document Type: Notice
Title: Meetings: Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.; technical conference
Posted Date: 2007-11-27T05:00Z

[Federal Register: November 27, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 227)]
[Notices]               
[Page 66164-66165]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27no07-77]                         

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. ER07-1372-000, ER07-1372-001]

 
Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.; Notice of 
Staff Technical Conference

November 19, 2007.
    Take notice that on December 6, 2007, a staff technical conference 
will be held

[[Page 66165]]

at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to discuss the market power 
analysis and mitigation measures set forth in the Midwest Independent 
Transmission System Operator, Inc.'s (Midwest ISO) ancillary services 
market proposal. This technical conference was established in an Order 
Establishing Technical Conference in the above-captioned dockets, 
issued November 19, 2007. It will be held in the Commission Meeting 
Room at the headquarters of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 
888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC from 9 a.m.-4 p.m. (EST).
    The technical conference will be divided into two sessions. The 
first session will address market power issues and the second session 
will address mitigation issues. The format of the conference and 
sessions will be as follows:
    Staff and Midwest ISO Introduction To Conference: 9-9:15.
    First Session: Market Power Issues:
    Independent Market Monitor (IMM) Presentation Addressing Appendix 
Questions: 9:15-9:45.
    (See attached Appendix to this Notice)
    Questions and Issues From Parties: 9:45-11:30.
    Staff Follow-up Questions: 11:30-12.
    Lunch: 12-1.
    Second Session: Mitigation Issues:
    IMM Presentation Addressing Appendix Questions: 1-1:30.
    Questions and Issues From Parties: 1:30-3:15.
    Staff Follow-up Questions: 3:15-3:45.
    Next Steps; 3:45-4.
    The conference is open for the public to attend. The conference 
will not be transcribed and telephone participation will not be 
available.
    The Commission will accept written comments on the discussion at 
this technical conference no later than 5 p.m. Eastern Time on December 
20, 2007, and reply comments no later than 5 p.m. Eastern Time on 
January 7, 2008.
    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the 
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please 
send an e-mail to accessibility@ferc.gov or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or 202-208-1659 (TTY), or send a FAX to 202-208-2106 with 
the required accommodations.
    For more information about this conference, please contact: John 
Nail, Office of Energy Market Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory 

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.

Appendix

    The following questions pertain to aspects of the Midwest ISO 
proposal that require further clarification. The Midwest ISO is 
requested to provide materials at the conference addressing these 
questions and to be prepared to discuss them. The Midwest ISO should 
provide its full and complete answers to all questions for the 
record of this proceeding in its filing of comments.

Questions To Be Discussed in the First Session

     Provide a market power analysis for the spring and fall 
shoulder seasons. Present the results of the new analysis at the 
technical conference.
     The definition of ancillary services sub-markets:
     Provide the basis for how the sub-markets and reserve 
zones are defined and explain the differences between the two.
     Is the IMM market power analysis for only illustrative 
purposes or is it intended to be relied on in this proceeding?
     How will the potential for market power be evaluated as 
a result of any zonal reconfiguration?
     Either submit separate analyses for spinning and 
supplemental reserves or provide an analysis demonstrating that the 
two products are substitutes for each other. Present the results of 
the analysis at the technical conference.
     Provide historical data, separately for each ancillary 
services product (regulating reserves, spinning reserves and 
supplemental reserves), since the start of the Midwest ISO energy 
markets that indicates: (1) The capacity (in MWs) and number of 
generator resources that could provide ancillary services; and (2) 
the actual ancillary services provided, in MW and number of 
generator resources. Present the results of the analysis at the 
technical conference.

Questions To Be Discussed in the Second Session

     What is the basis for the IMM's conclusion that there 
will be sufficient competition to ensure just and reasonable prices 
in those hours and locations when mitigation thresholds are not 
triggered?
     Explain how reference levels are determined for 
suppliers in constrained areas, such as those identified in the IMM 
analysis. In his testimony, the IMM indicates reference levels are 
based on competitive offers. Please provide the basis for this 
assertion and explain whether all offers by suppliers in constrained 
areas are considered to be offers made under competitive conditions. 
If not, how does the IMM determine which offers are made under 
competitive conditions?
     Is a backstop reference price, such as is used in the 
New York Independent System Operator (NYISO), appropriate for sub-
markets with only one or two suppliers? Explain the reasons 
underlying your response.
     Considering the market power characteristics of the 
Midwest ISO ancillary services market and its sub-markets, what are 
the pros and cons of conduct/impact mitigation compared to 
mitigating offers at a cost-based rate?
     What method and criteria will the IMM use to audit and 
identify any supplier that withholds power in either the energy or 
ancillary services markets, including during periods of scarcity 
pricing?
     The Midwest ISO states that variations of how it 
intends to mitigate its ancillary services market are being used by 
existing RTOs/ISOs. Explain the similarities and differences between 
the Midwest ISO mitigation proposal and the PJM Interconnection 
(PJM) and California Independent System Operator (CAISO) ancillary 
services markets mitigation programs.
     The Midwest ISO states that there are no unreasonable 
barriers to entry that would compromise the competitiveness of the 
Regulating Reserve market. Prospectively, what will the Midwest ISO 
do to ensure a lack of barriers to entry and encourage suppliers to 
bid into the congested submarket areas?

[FR Doc. E7-23038 Filed 11-26-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P