Document ID: FERC-2013-1502-0001
Agency: ferc
Document Type: Notice
Title: Meetings: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.; Technical Conference
Posted Date: 2013-11-18T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 222 (Monday, November 18, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69079-69080]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27526]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER13-2124-000]

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

    As announced in the Notice of Technical Conference issued on 
October 25, 2013, and as required in the Commission's October 16, 2013, 
order in this docket, there will be a technical conference in this 
proceeding on November 19, 2013, at the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC, Hearing Room 6.\1\ 
The technical conference will be led by staff, and will be open for the 
public to attend. Attendees may register in advance at the following 
Web page: https://www.ferc.gov/whats-new/registration/miso-11-19-13-form.asp. Advance registration is not required, but is encouraged. 
Parties attending in person should still allow time to pass through 
building security procedures before the 9:00 a.m. (Eastern Time) start 
time of the conference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., 145 FERC ] 
61,044 (2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The conference will not be webcast, but will be accessible via 
telephone. Parties wishing to participate by phone should fill out the 
registration form and check the box indicating that they wish to 
participate by conference call, and do so no later than 5:00 p.m. 
(Eastern Time) on Friday, November 15, 2013. Parties selecting this 
option will receive a confirmation email containing a dial-in number 
and a password before the conference. To the extent possible, 
individuals calling from the same location should share a single 
telephone line.
    FERC 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 866-208-3372 
(voice) or 202-208-1659 (TTY), or send a FAX to 202-208-2106 with the 
required accommodations.
    For further information regarding this conference, contact Cristie 
DeVoss at cristie.devoss@ferc.gov or 202-502-8441, or Melissa Nimit at 
melissa.nimit@ferc.gov or 202-502-6638.
    The conference will consist of three sessions, as detailed below. 
For each session, a representative of Midcontinent Independent System 
Operator, Inc. (MISO) and a representative of MISO's Independent Market 
Monitor should be prepared to make opening statements that address the 
questions below. After statements by the MISO and Independent Market 
Monitor representatives, Commission staff will ask questions; as time 
permits, other attendees (including telephone participants) may also 
ask questions. The times given below are approximate and may change, as 
needed.

Session 1: Schedule 46 (9:00 a.m.-10:15 a.m.)

    1. Explain in detail each step of the Constraint Management Charge 
Allocation Factor determination process under proposed Schedule 46.
    a. For step one, define the terms ``Hourly Real-Time RSG MWP'' and 
``Resource CMC Real-time RSG MWG'' and explain why the terms are equal 
for each hour and active transmission constraint, as stated in Schedule 
46. Also, explain the determination of the Constraint Management Charge 
capacity committed (CMC--CAP--COM).
    b. For step two, define the terms ``RES--LP--VOL,'' ``TP--Next--
Hour,'' ``RT--BLL--MTRGEN,'' and ``TP--Current--Hour.'' 
Explain the determination of the hourly Headroom Available (HR--AVAIL), 
the Operations Headroom Need (HR--NEED), and the Capacity MW Needed 
(CAP--MW--NEED).
    c. For step three, explain the criteria for determining whether a 
resource was available for commitment for a capacity resource 
commitment analysis period. Also, explain how MISO will select the 
Constraint Management Charge Replacement Resource (CMC--RR) and 
determine the associated Capacity Commitment Make-Whole Payment (CAP--
COM--MWP).
    d. For step four, explain the determination of the Capacity 
Contribution (CAP--CON), Constraint Management Charge Contribution 
(CMC--CON), and Constraint Management Charge Allocation Factor.
    2. Explain in detail how the calculation of the Constraint 
Management Charge Allocation Factor under proposed Schedule 46 accounts 
for real-time Revenue Sufficiency Guarantee (RSG) costs allocated to 
Voltage and Local Reliability, the RSG Second Pass Distribution, and 
Day-Ahead Schedule Deviation and Headroom Charges. For example, explain 
why the product of the aggregate applicable real-time RSG credits and 
the difference between one and the Constraint Management Charge 
Allocation Factor equals the RSG costs funded through Day-Ahead 
Schedule Deviation and Headroom Charges, pursuant to the proposed 
revisions to section 40.3.3.a.v.

Break: (10:15 a.m.-10:30 a.m.)

Session 2: Constraint Management Charges (10:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m.)

    3. The description of the Constraint Management Charge in proposed 
Schedule 46 states that the Constraint Management Charge Allocation 
Factor Study determines the share of real-time RSG costs attributable 
to the ``commitment of Resources for Active Transmission Constraints.'' 
Should this instead be ``Resources committed in any R[eliability] 
A[ssessment] C[ommitment] process or the L[ook] A[head] C[ommitment] 
process for an Active Transmission constraint and not otherwise 
attributable to Topology Adjustment and Transmission De-rates,'' 
consistent with the definition of the Constraint Management Charge in 
section 1.537a of the existing MISO tariff?
    4. Provide numerical examples demonstrating (a) MISO's existing 
Constraint Management Charge formula under sections 40.3.3.a.iv and v, 
and (b) how MISO's proposed revisions to its tariff will change this 
formula. Provide examples illustrating these formulas in the event that 
the Constraint Management Charge rate cap does and does not apply.
    5. MISO states that the Constraint Management Charge Allocation 
Factor should be a better indicator than the Constraint Contribution 
Factor of the real-time RSG costs attributable to an active 
transmission constraint and that the Constraint Management Charge 
should ``no longer be limited by the C[onstraint] C[ontribution] 
F[actor] of the Resource committed to address the relevant 
constraint.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ MISO August 7, 2013 Filing at 4, 7-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. Explain in detail why MISO should continue using the Constraint 
Contribution Factor in section 40.3.3.a.iv to calculate the ``adjusted 
deviations'' used to determine the real-time RSG Constraint Management 
Charges to be paid by market participants in sections 40.3.3.a.iv(a) 
and 40.3.a.iv(b).

[[Page 69080]]

    b. In the event that the Constraint Management Charge rate cap does 
not apply, explain in detail why MISO should continue using the 
Constraint Contribution Factor in the denominator of the Constraint 
Management Charge formula provided in section 40.3.3.a.v to calculate 
the ``adjusted deviations,'' pursuant to section 40.3.3.a.iv, and to 
adjust topology adjustments or transmission de-rates.
    c. In the event that the Constraint Management Charge rate cap 
applies, explain in detail why MISO should use the Constraint 
Management Charge Allocation Factor, rather than the Constraint 
Contribution Factor, to adjust the applicable hourly economic maximum 
dispatch amounts in the denominator of the Constraint Management Charge 
rate.
    6. MISO proposes in section 40.3.3.a.v to modify the numerator of 
the Constraint Management Charge rate by multiplying the aggregate 
real-time RSG credits in an hour attributable to resources committed in 
the Reliability Assessment Commitment or Look-Ahead Commitment 
processes by ``the Constraint Management Charge Allocation Factor, 
pursuant to Schedule 46.''
    a. In the event that the Constraint Management Charge rate cap does 
not apply, explain in detail how MISO's proposal to begin adjusting the 
numerator of the rate by the Constraint Management Charge Allocation 
Factor, while continuing to use the existing Constraint Contribution 
Factor to calculate adjusted deviations and adjust topology adjustments 
or transmission de-rates in the denominator of the rate, will affect 
the applicable Constraint Management Charge rate. For example, will the 
proposal result in a decrease in Constraint Management Charge rates?
    b. In the event that the Constraint Management Charge rate cap 
applies, explain in detail how MISO's proposal to begin using the 
Constraint Management Charge Allocation Factor to adjust the numerator 
and denominator of the rate will affect the applicable Constraint 
Management Charge rate. Specifically, by multiplying both the numerator 
and denominator of the rate by the same term, does MISO intend those 
terms to cancel (e.g., so that the Constraint Management Charge rate 
cap will equal the applicable Economic Maximum Dispatch amounts)?

Break (12:00 p.m.-1:00 p.m.)

Session 3: Day-Ahead Schedule Deviation and Headroom Charge (1:00 p.m.-
2:45 p.m.)

    7. MISO states that load zones with net injections ``impact the 
management of congestion and may also result in a Post-Notification 
Deadline deviation in the Day-Ahead Schedule Deviation Charge rate 
formula.'' \3\ Explain in detail how load zones with net injections 
cause the incurrence of real-time RSG costs, including any costs 
associated with Headroom Need.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Id. at 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. Explain why MISO proposes in section 40.3.3.a.viii(6) to use 
``any positive difference'' between a load zone's actual energy 
withdrawal or injection adjusted by any associated demand response 
injections and its demand forecast in effect at the notification 
deadline when determining Day-Ahead Schedule Deviation and Headroom 
Charges. Contrast this with MISO's use, pursuant to section 
40.3.3.a.iii(4), of ``any difference'' between a load zone's demand 
forecast in effect at the notification deadline and its actual energy 
withdrawal or injection adjusted by any associated demand response 
injections when determining Constraint Management Charges.
    9. Explain in detail the determination of Day-Ahead Schedule 
Deviation and Headroom Charges if the sum of the Market-Wide Net 
Deviations and Headroom Need is (1) less than or equal to zero, (2) 
greater than or equal to the Economic Committed Capacity, or (3) 
greater than zero but less than the Economic Committed Capacity. 
Explain how this calculation accounts for situations where the Market-
Wide Net Deviations are negative but the Headroom Need is positive, 
such that their sum is greater than zero.
    10. MISO maintains that deviations that cause the commitment of 
additional resources are ``the most relevant'' causes of real-time RSG 
costs and that ``the operative fact is the commitment of additional 
Resources in [sic] R[eliability] A[ssessment] C[ommitment], not the 
pricing circumstances of the market into which those Resources will be 
committed.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Id. at 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    a. Describe the extent to which supply-increasing deviations that 
occur after the notification deadline affect the incurrence of real-
time RSG costs, such as by reducing costs by augmenting available 
capacity and increasing costs by reducing real-time prices.
    b. Using actual 2012 data, explain the extent to which supply-
increasing deviations that occurred after the notification deadline 
caused the incurrence of real-time RSG costs.
    c. Explain whether the implementation of MISO's Look-Ahead 
Commitment process would affect the incurrence of real-time RSG costs 
due to supply-increasing deviations that occur after the notification 
deadline.

Conference Conclusion: Next Steps (2:45 p.m.-3:00 p.m.)

    Staff will conclude the conference and outline next steps.

    Dated: November 8, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-27526 Filed 11-15-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P