
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 18 (Monday, January 30, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8739-8741]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-01939]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission


Order on Simultaneous Transmission Import Limit Values for the 
Southwest Region and Providing Direction on Submitting Studies

Before Commissioners: Norman C. Bay, Chairman; Cheryl A. LaFleur, 
and Colette D. Honorable.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                      Docket Nos.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Service Company of New Mexico.........  ER10-2302-006
Tucson Electric Power Company................  ER10-2564-006
UNS Electric, Inc............................  ER10-2600-006
UniSource Energy Development Company.........  ER10-2289-006
El Paso Electric Company.....................  ER10-2721-006
Arizona Public Service Company...............  ER10-2437-003
Public Service Company of Colorado...........  ER10-1818-012
Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota     ER10-1819-014
 corporation.
Northern States Power Company, a Wisconsin     ER10-1820-017
 corporation.
Southwestern Public Service Company..........  ER10-1817-013
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. In December 2015 and January 2016, Public Service Company of New 
Mexico; Tucson Electric Power Company (Tucson Electric), UNS Electric, 
Inc., and UniSource Energy Development Company; El Paso Electric

[[Page 8740]]

Company; Arizona Public Service Company (Arizona Public Service); 
Public Service Company of Colorado, Northern States Power Company, a 
Minnesota corporation, Northern States Power Company, a Wisconsin 
corporation and Southwestern Public Service Company (collectively, 
Transmission Owners) submitted updated market power analyses for the 
Southwest region in accordance with the regional reporting schedule.\1\ 
The Transmission Owners included Simultaneous Transmission Import Limit 
(SIL) values for the December 2013-November 2014 study period for 
balancing authority areas in the Southwest region.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Refinements to Policies and Procedures for Market-Based 
Rates for Wholesale Sales of Electric Energy, Capacity and Ancillary 
Services by Public Utilities, Order No. 816, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 
31,374, at P 353 (2015), order on reh'g, Order No. 816-A, FERC 
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,382 (2016). See also Market-Based Rates for 
Wholesale Sales of Electric Energy, Capacity and Ancillary Services 
by Public Utilities, Order No. 697, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,252, at 
PP 882-893, clarified, 121 FERC ] 61,260 (2007), order on reh'g, 
Order No. 697-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,268, clarified, 124 FERC ] 
61,055, order on reh'g, Order No. 697-B, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 
31,285 (2008), order on reh'g, Order No. 697-C, FERC Stats. & Regs. 
] 31,291 (2009), order on reh'g, Order No. 697-D, FERC Stats. & 
Regs. ] 31,305 (2010), aff'd sub nom. Montana Consumer Counsel v. 
FERC, 659 F.3d 910 (9th Cir. 2011), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 26 
(2012).
    \2\ We note that Public Service Company of Colorado, Northern 
States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, Northern States Power 
Company, a Wisconsin corporation, and Southwestern Public Service 
Company are not in the Southwest region and therefore their market 
power analyses were not due in December 2015, when transmission 
owners in the Southwest region must file their analyses. However, 
these utilities submitted an updated market power analysis in 
January 2016 to help coordinate review of the SILs. Additionally, we 
note that subsequent to December 2015 and January 2016, some of the 
Transmission Owners amended their filings to reflect updated and 
corrected information with respect to the SIL studies and values.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. In this order, the Commission accepts the SIL values identified 
in Appendix A (Commission-accepted SIL values).\3\ SIL studies are used 
as a basis for calculating import capability to serve balancing 
authority area load when performing market power analyses. SIL values 
quantify the simultaneous transmission import capability into a market 
or balancing authority area from its aggregated first-tier area. The 
SIL values accepted herein are based on SIL studies submitted by the 
Transmission Owners with their updated market power analyses. As 
discussed below, the Commission-accepted SIL values identified in 
Appendix A will be used by the Commission to analyze updated market 
power analyses for the Southwest region. The updated market power 
analyses for the Transmission Owners, including any responsive 
pleadings, will be addressed in separate orders in the relevant 
dockets.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The Commission issued an order accepting SIL values for the 
Tucson Electric Power Company balancing authority area in Tucson 
Electric Power Co., 156 FERC ] 61,228 (2016).
    \4\ We note that other transmission owners in the Southwest 
region also submitted updated market power analyses. The updated 
market power analyses for those transmission owners have been or 
will be addressed in separate orders in the relevant dockets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Additionally in this order, the Commission provides further 
direction and clarification on the performance and reporting of SIL 
studies.

I. Background

    4. In Order No. 697, the Commission adopted a staggered filing 
approach for filing updated market power analyses. The Commission 
recognized that the transmission-owning utilities have the information 
necessary to perform SIL studies and therefore determined that 
transmission-owning utilities would be required to file their updated 
market power analyses in advance of other entities in each region.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Order No. 697, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,252 at P 889.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. The Transmission Owners provided SIL studies for their 
respective balancing authority areas and, in most cases, their 
respective first-tier balancing authority areas, including balancing 
authority areas that are not operated by public utilities as defined 
under Part II of the Federal Power Act.\6\ Specifically, SIL studies 
were submitted for the following first-tier balancing authority areas: 
Salt River Project; Los Angeles Department of Water and Power; Western 
Area Power Administration-Lower Colorado (WALC); Western Area Power 
Administration-Colorado Missouri (WACM); and the Imperial Irrigation 
District (IID). The Transmission Owners coordinated on the preparation 
of their SIL studies and shared with each other SIL values for their 
respective balancing authority areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 16 U.S.C. 824 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion

    6. We begin by commending the Transmission Owners for coordinating 
on the preparation of their SIL studies and sharing the SIL values for 
their respective home balancing authority areas with each other. Such a 
coordinated approach leads to more accurate and consistent SIL study 
results. We have selected, from among the SIL values submitted, the 
Commission-accepted SIL values that we will use in assessing 
transmission import capability for purposes of measuring market power 
within the Southwest region.
    7. The SIL studies prepared by the Transmission Owners generally 
were done correctly and in a manner consistent with prior Commission 
direction.\7\ However, our review of the SIL studies and acceptance of 
the SIL values was hindered and delayed because of various modeling 
issues and incomplete or ambiguous reporting of results. Therefore, we 
take this opportunity to address some of these issues and offer 
guidance so that future filers have a better understanding of how the 
Commission expects such studies to be performed and reported.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See, e.g., Puget Sound Energy, Inc., 135 FERC ] 61,254, 
Appendix B (2011).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. The contingencies used in SIL studies are vital to determining 
the limiting element(s) and, subsequently, the final SIL values. Filers 
should study contingencies that are ``historically used and identified 
in the seller's [available transfer capability (ATC)] methodology and 
[Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS)] practices 
documentation.'' \8\ This requirement applies for both the study area 
and the first-tier areas. As balancing authorities are already expected 
to communicate with each other on system conditions, the Commission 
believes that this is a reasonable and comprehensive approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Id., Appendix B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    9. Each filer should provide documentation to support that the 
contingency lists provided are consistent with the balancing authority 
area's OASIS practices. The contingency lists used by each filer must 
be valid, representative of the study area and first-tier OASIS 
practices, and must solve in powerflow simulations. Valid contingencies 
take into account the realistic conditions and operating procedures for 
the filer's system and the first-tier areas. For example, parallel 
lines are typically designed and operated such that the loss of one 
line would not overload the other line(s). If a contingency appears to 
overload other parallel line(s), the filer must explain this in its 
contingency results report. Additionally, methods for modeling the 
transmission system may include breaking elements up into segments. The 
contingency of such an element should be represented by these segments.
    10. Every contingency checked must solve in each powerflow case in 
which it is used. If a contingency does not solve when run in the 
powerflow simulation, confirming that it would not cause an overload 
somewhere within

[[Page 8741]]

the system is difficult. This potential overload could be a limiting 
element that would affect the final SIL values.
    11. The Commission notes that inaccurate normal and emergency line 
ratings in the powerflow models can result in erroneous calculated SIL 
values. As such, filers should review the line ratings of their study 
area and the first-tier areas to ensure that they are accurate. In 
order to aid in verifying line overloads, filers must submit facility 
rating documents for themselves and any study area for which they are 
performing a SIL analysis. Historically accurate line ratings should 
aid in confirming the validity of line overloads identified in the SIL 
study.
    12. Generating units that are fully committed under long-term power 
purchase agreements (PPAs) should not be scaled up or down, regardless 
of where they are operating in the model. Partially committed units 
should only be scaled above the amount of their commitment. Solar and 
wind units should not be scaled either up or down. This generation 
generally is not dispatchable and typically is fully committed under 
long-term PPAs. If the study assumes that certain solar or wind 
generation units are dispatchable, historical evidence must be 
provided. Filers should provide a list of all partially and fully 
committed generation units in the study area and first-tier areas.
    13. As stated in Order No. 697, filers may use historical capacity 
factors for certain energy-limited resources, such as hydroelectric and 
wind capacity.\9\ The historical data used to perform the sensitivities 
and determine the capacity factors should be consistent in both the SIL 
and economic studies submitted by the filer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Order No. 697, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,252 at P 344.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    14. Changes in SIL values from the previous study period should be 
explained in the filing. Significant changes that affect the study area 
should be identified, for example, major generation capacity additions 
or retirements, the addition of a new high-voltage transmission line or 
other topology changes, modified line ratings, and changes in operating 
procedures or study methodology. Clearly explaining and identifying 
significant changes in the SIL study results that occur between filings 
will prevent delays in the analysis of filings and reduce the need for 
Commission staff to request filers to provide additional information. 
Documentation of any changes should extend back approximately five 
years from the study period utilized in the filing to show how the 
study area's topology has evolved over time.
    15. The Commission will use the Commission-accepted SIL values 
identified in Appendix A when reviewing the currently pending updated 
market power analyses submitted by the Transmission Owners as well as 
the updated market power analyses filed by the non-transmission owning 
filers in the Southwest region for this study period. Future filers 
submitting screens for the areas and study period identified in 
Appendix A are encouraged to use these Commission-accepted SIL values. 
In the alternative, such filers may propose different SIL values 
provided that their SIL studies comply with Commission directives and 
they explain why the Commission should consider a different SIL value 
for a particular balancing authority area rather than the Commission-
accepted SIL values provided in Appendix A. In the event that the 
results \10\ for one or more of a particular seller's screens differ if 
the seller-supplied SIL value is used instead of the Commission-
accepted SIL value, the order on that particular filing will examine 
the seller-supplied SIL study and address whether the seller-supplied 
SIL value is acceptable. However, when the overall results of the 
screens would be unchanged, i.e., the seller would pass using either 
set of SIL values or fail using either set of SIL values, the order 
would be based on the Commission-accepted SIL values found in Appendix 
A and would not address the seller-supplied SIL values.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Results refer to the results of the market share and/or 
pivotal supplier screens. For example, if a seller fails the market 
share screen for a particular season in a particular market using 
either SIL value, we would consider the result unchanged. Similarly, 
if the seller passes the screen using either value, the result is 
also unchanged.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Commission Orders

    (A) The specific Commission-accepted SIL values identified in 
Appendix A to this order are hereby adopted for purposes of analyzing 
updated market power analyses for the Southwest region, as discussed in 
the body of this order.
    (B) The Secretary is hereby directed to publish a copy of this 
order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.

    Issued: January 24, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-01939 Filed 1-27-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


