Document ID: FERC-2020-0461-0001
Agency: ferc
Document Type: Notice
Title: Meetings: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.; Technical Conference
Posted Date: 2020-04-16T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 74 (Thursday, April 16, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21223-21226]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08021]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER20-588-000]

Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.; Notice of 
Technical Conference

    By order dated March 10, 2020,\1\ the Commission directed staff to 
convene a technical conference regarding Midcontinent Independent 
System Operator, Inc.'s (MISO) filing of proposed revisions to its Open 
Access Transmission, Energy and Operating Reserve Markets Tariff to 
allow for the

[[Page 21224]]

selection of a storage facility as a transmission-only asset (SATOA) in 
the MISO Transmission Expansion Plan (MTEP). The technical conference 
will explore issues including, but not limited to, MISO's proposed 
evaluation and selection criteria for SATOAs, the SATOA's market 
activities and any potential wholesale market impacts of those 
activities, how MISO's current formula rate structure accommodates cost 
recovery for SATOAs, a SATOA's potential effects on the generator 
interconnection queue, and operating guides that will apply to a 
SATOA.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Midcontinent Indep. Sys. Operator, Inc., 170 FERC ] 61,186 
(2020).
    \2\ Id. P 56.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Take notice that the Commission will hold this staff-led technical 
conference on Monday, May 4, 2020, between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. 
(Eastern Time). This conference will be held remotely, as further 
described below.
    Participants should be prepared to discuss, at minimum, the 
following:

A. Evaluation and Selection Criteria for SATOAs

    MISO proposes Tariff language stating that, to be selected for 
inclusion in Appendix A of the MTEP as a transmission asset, a proposed 
SATOA must demonstrate:
    a. Unique characteristics or circumstances of the proposed SATOA 
necessary to meet the identified Transmission System performance 
requirements and not otherwise available at comparable costs from other 
proposed solutions, including speed of operation, lead-time to 
implement, right-of-way, or other property considerations.
    b. A need to resolve the Transmission Issue(s) through the storage 
facility's functioning as a SATOA instead of as a Resource that 
participates in [MISO's] markets.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ MISO Dec. 12 Filing, Tab A, proposed MISO Tariff Att. FF, 
Sec.  II.G.1.c.i (71.0.0).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    MISO states that an example of a unique characteristic is the 
storage asset's ability to rapidly inject and withdraw real or reactive 
power in solving transmission issues that could not otherwise be 
resolved if the storage asset was participating in markets.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ MISO Dec. 12 Filing, Transmittal Letter at 2 n.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. What is an ``identified Transmission System performance 
requirement?'' How and where are they identified? What is the 
difference between an identified Transmission System performance 
requirement and a Transmission Issue? What are examples of Transmission 
System performance requirements that can be addressed by a proposed 
SATOA?
    2. What criteria will MISO consider when determining whether a 
proposed SATOA has unique characteristics or circumstances necessary to 
meet the identified transmission system performance requirements? How 
does MISO intend to communicate these criteria to stakeholders and 
participants in the MTEP? What does MISO mean by ``other property 
considerations''?
    3. What criteria will MISO consider when determining whether there 
is a need for the storage facility to solve the transmission issue 
through the storage facility's functioning as a SATOA instead of as a 
resource that participates in MISO's markets? How does MISO intend to 
communicate these criteria to stakeholders and participants in the 
MTEP?
    4. With regard to MISO's example of a unique characteristic-i.e., a 
storage asset's ability to rapidly inject and withdraw real or reactive 
power in solving transmission issues-how can storage as transmission be 
distinguished from storage resources participating in markets that 
could have their dispatch schedules adjusted to rapidly inject or 
withdraw real or reactive power to solve transmission issues if needed 
as part of the normal security constrained dispatch of market 
resources?
    5. If a traditional transmission project and a SATOA can both meet 
a transmission system performance requirement equally well, how will 
MISO determine which solution to select in the regional transmission 
planning process? If multiple SATOA proposals have unique 
characteristics or circumstances necessary to meet the identified 
transmission system performance requirements, how will MISO determine 
which solution to select in the regional transmission planning process?
    6. If the entity that proposes a SATOA does not provide sufficient 
information for MISO to determine whether the SATOA meets the criteria 
outlined in the Tariff excerpted above, how will MISO proceed? For 
instance, will MISO attempt to determine if the SATOA meets the 
criteria using MISO's own independent analysis? Will that analysis be 
available to other participants in the regional transmission planning 
process?
    7. How will MISO's evaluation criteria ensure that SATOAs are 
limited to only those electric storage resources that are performing a 
transmission-specific function?
    8. Please explain how MISO will communicate its decision in 
approving a SATOA. For instance, MISO stated in its filing that there 
is currently a storage resource pending as a recommended project in 
MTEP19. Is the explanation provided in the MTEP19 executive summary 
regarding this recommended project representative of the type of 
explanation that MISO intends to provide in the future? What steps will 
MISO take if additional information is requested from participants in 
the regional transmission planning process?
    MISO states that comparative evaluations of a proposed SATOA will 
include the minimum and maximum capacity required to address the 
transmission issue to ensure that excess storage capacity is not 
treated as a transmission asset. MISO further states that cost recovery 
under transmission rates is limited to the cost of the maximum capacity 
to be determined needed to address the transmission issue.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ MISO Dec. 12 Filing, Tab A, proposed MISO Tariff Att. FF, 
Sec.  II.G.1.a.ii (71.0.0).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    9. How will MISO determine the maximum capacity needed to address 
the transmission issue? Please explain.

B. SATOA Market Activities and Market Impacts

    MISO states that the SATOA owner is responsible for maintaining the 
necessary state of charge to be ready to serve the transmission 
function for which it was approved in the MTEP, and MISO will exercise 
functional control of the SATOA for transmission purposes only, i.e., 
charging and discharging to meet the transmission need will be done at 
the direction of MISO.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ MISO Dec. 12 Filing, Transmittal Letter at 6-7; MISO Answer 
at 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. What does it mean for a SATOA to be under MISO's ``functional 
control,'' while making the SATOA owner responsible for maintaining 
state of charge? Will MISO tell the SATOA when to charge and discharge 
while the SATOA is performing to meet the transmission need? What is 
the practical difference, if any, between charging/discharging to 
``meet'' the transmission need and charging/discharging to be ``ready 
to serve'' the transmission need?
    11. How will MISO ensure that a SATOA under its ``functional 
control'' is available (e.g., not fully charged when needed to withdraw 
power and not fully discharged when needed to inject power) to solve a 
transmission issue?
    12. Please explain your view on whether and, if so, how the 
charging/discharging activities of the SATOA directed under MISO's 
functional control or, in connection with the SATOA owner's 
responsibility to maintain state of charge, impact the wholesale energy 
and capacity markets. For example, would these activities impact 
transmission capacity, congestion, and/or other resources'

[[Page 21225]]

ability to meet energy and ancillary services needs, etc.? Please 
explain.
    MISO proposes that the SATOA owner will need a registered market 
participant to receive energy net costs when charging and discharging 
under MISO's functional control. MISO states that the market 
participant for a SATOA will be credited the applicable Real-Time Ex 
Post LMP for Non-Excessive Energy and will be charged for Non-Excessive 
Energy withdrawals. MISO explains that the SATOA market participant 
then must provide the net revenues back to the transmission owner, and 
those net revenues will offset the transmission revenue requirement 
associated with the resource.\7\ MISO states that the SATOA will be a 
price taker.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ MISO Dec. 12 Filing, Transmittal Letter at 23, Tab A, 
proposed MISO Tariff, Module C, Sec.  40.3.3.3.a.i (44.0.0).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    13. Does a SATOA's direct participation in the wholesale energy 
markets as a price-taker create potential impacts on the wholesale 
energy and capacity markets by, for instance, displacing otherwise 
marginal or infra-marginal resources and possibly changing the energy 
market price? Why or why not? If energy market impacts occur, will they 
be minimal or might they be mitigated, and if so how?
    14. Please provide further information on: (1) What types of entity 
could serve as the SATOA's market participant; (2) whether such market 
participant and/or the SATOA owner would have market-based rate 
authority; and (3) if the market participant were affiliated merchant 
function staff, how the standards of conduct would be met.

C. Cost Recovery for SATOAs

    MISO proposes that costs resulting from a SATOA's market activities 
directed under MISO's functional control be collected through 
transmission rates in a manner consistent with the treatment of costs 
associated with the transmission project type in which the SATOA is 
included in Appendix A to the MTEP. Any revenues collected from the 
SATOA's market activities directed under MISO's functional control 
would be credited through transmission rates in a manner consistent 
with the treatment of costs associated with the transmission project 
category in transmission rates.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ MISO Dec. 12 Filing, Transmittal Letter at 22, Tab A, 
proposed MISO Tariff, Att. FF Sec.  II.G.6 (71.0.0).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    15. How does MISO's current formula rate structure in Attachments 
O, GG, or MM accommodate cost recovery for SATOAs? Are any of those 
provisions sufficient to allow net market revenue to be credited 
through the transmission revenue requirement? Will the net energy 
revenue be credited outside the existing formulas, e.g., through a 
separate rider?
    16. If the existing formulas will need to be modified to 
accommodate SATOAs, what types of modifications are needed and when 
will such modifications be filed to ensure that they are effective 
before a SATOA becomes operational?

D. Impact on the Generator Interconnection Queue

    MISO proposes that, if it or a stakeholder identifies a potential 
impact to newly-interconnecting generation resources in the 
interconnection study process, MISO will assess whether the proposed 
SATOA will have an impact. If the assessment demonstrates that the 
necessary operating mode of the proposed SATOA will cause the need for 
additional system mitigation, the cost of such mitigation will be 
included in the evaluation of the proposed SATOA as compared with other 
potential transmission solutions. MISO proposes that its impact 
assessment may include targeted contingency analyses applying NERC TPL 
and applicable regional and local planning criteria to evaluate the 
incremental impact.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ MISO Dec. 12 Filing, Transmittal Letter at 20-21, Tab A, 
proposed MISO Tariff Att. FF, Sec.  II.G.1.d (71.0.0).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    17. Please provide further details on how MISO would assess the 
impact of a proposed SATOA on newly-interconnecting generation 
resources and compute costs if system mitigation is needed. Would MISO 
account for changes due to restudies in the interconnection study 
process and, if so, how? Could a SATOA be considered a contingent 
facility? Will MISO's interconnection procedures be modified to include 
any of these details? Does MISO intend to include any of these details 
in its Business Practice Manuals? Will the analysis of the impact of 
the proposed SATOA on the newly-interconnecting generation resources be 
available to market participants in the regional transmission planning 
process and/or interconnection customers in the interconnection queue?
    18. Will MISO's assessment of impacts include assessment of delays 
in the interconnection queue, and if so, how would MISO mitigate those 
delays? If not, why is it not necessary to assess potential delays to 
the interconnection queue as a result of a proposed SATOA?
    19. MISO states that the cost of additional mitigation if the SATOA 
affecting newly-interconnecting generation resource is selected as the 
preferred transmission solution in the MTEP will be included in the 
evaluation of the proposed SATOA. Will such costs also be included in 
the total SATOA cost recovered through transmission rates and, if so, 
how?

E. Operating Guides

    MISO states that it will coordinate with the SATOA owner, MISO 
Operations, and the transmission operator to develop an operating guide 
that will establish (1) conditions for which the SATOA should be 
discharged and charged to meet the anticipated planning objective and 
(2) boundaries for operation that will be consistent with this 
objective and will reflect the unique operating parameters of the 
individual SATOA.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ MISO Dec. 12 Filing, Transmittal Letter at 21, proposed 
MISO Tariff, Att. FF, Sec.  II.G.2 (71.0.0).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    20. Please provide a summary and explanation of the information 
that may be contained in the operating guides. Please provide specific 
examples of the information to be contained in the operating guides.

F. Miscellaneous

    21. Are there any scenarios where a SATOA might be called upon 
under emergency conditions to relieve an issue outside of the specific 
transmission issue for which the SATOA was selected? If so, how will 
MISO handle any out-of-market payments that the SATOA receives?
    22. Are SATOAs studied for reliability impacts in the same way as 
storage as non-transmission alternatives, particularly regarding 
dynamic stability? If not, why not? Please explain in detail how SATOAs 
will be studied for reliability impact.
    The technical conference will be led by Commission staff, and is 
open to the public. All people interested in participating in the 
conference must register at the following link: https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/05-04-20-form.asp by no later than noon on May 
1, 2020. There is no registration fee. Information on joining the 
technical conference will be posted on the Events Calendar available at 
https://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx?View=listview.
    The conference will include discussions between Commission staff 
and MISO. If time permits, there may be an opportunity for parties that 
are participating in the conference to ask questions or provide 
comments. The proposed agenda for the technical conference is described 
below. Procedures to be followed at the

[[Page 21226]]

conference and any changes to the proposed agenda will be announced by 
staff at the opening of the conference. The technical conference will 
not be transcribed.
    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the 
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations, please 
send an email to accessibility@ferc.gov or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or 202-502 -8659 (TTY); or send a fax to 202-208-2106 with 
the required accommodations.
    Following the technical conference, the Commission will consider 
post-technical conference comments submitted on or before May 25, 2020. 
The written comments will be included in the formal record of the 
proceeding, which, together with the record developed to date, will 
form the basis for further Commission action.
    For more information about this technical conference, please 
contact Mark Byrd, 202-502-8071, mark.byrd@ferc.gov. For information 
related to logistics, please contact Sarah McKinley, 202-502-8368, 
sarah.mckinley@ferc.gov.

    Dated: April 10, 2020.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.

Storage as a Transmission-Only Asset (SATOA) in MISO Technical 
Conference--Webex Teleconference

Monday, May 4, 2020, 9:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.

9:00 a.m.-10:30 a.m. Evaluation and Selection Criteria for SATOA
     Identified Transmission System performance requirement
     Unique Characteristics or Circumstances
     Functioning as SATOA Compared to Market Participant
10:30 a.m.-10:45 a.m. Break
10:45 a.m.-11:30 a.m. Evaluation and Selection Criteria for SATOA 
(continued)
     Traditional Transmission Project compared to SATOA
     SATOA Evaluation Criteria
     Communication of Decision Approving a SATOA
11:30 a.m.-12:45 p.m. SATOA Market Activities and Market Impacts
     Meaning of ``Functional Control''
     Impact of SATOA Activity on Wholesale Market
     Information Regarding Market Participant
12:45 p.m.-1:30 p.m. Lunch
1:30 p.m.-2:15 p.m. Cost Recovery for SATOAs
     Formula Rate Structure
2:15 p.m.-3:30 p.m. Impact on the Generator Interconnection Queue
     Assessing the Impact of a SATOA on Newly Interconnecting 
Generating Resources
     Assessment of Delays and Mitigation
3:30 p.m.-3:45 p.m. Break
3:45 p.m.-4:15 p.m. Operating Guides
     Information in Operating Guides
4:15 p.m.-5:00 p.m. Miscellaneous
     Emergency Conditions
     Reliability Impacts

[FR Doc. 2020-08021 Filed 4-15-20; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P