Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

FERC Rejects SPP’s Proposal to Set Scarcity Prices

By Russell Kooistra & Daniel Archuleta on September 26, 2017
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On September 20, 2017, FERC rejected Southwest Power Pool, Inc’s (“SPP”) Order No. 825 compliance filing that would have created a demand curve to set scarcity prices for energy shortages.  Specifically, FERC held that SPP’s establishment of a demand curve to set scarcity prices was outside the scope of Order No. 825, which required SPP to establish triggers for shortage pricing, rather than change the actual shortage pricing levels.

In Order No. 825, FERC, among other things, required regional transmission organizations (“RTOs”) and independent system operators (“ISOs”) to establish a mechanism to trigger scarcity pricing for intervals in which there is a shortage of energy or operating reserves.  As noted by FERC, Order No. 825 did not require RTOs/ISOs to change the amount paid to resources when shortage pricing is triggered, but rather required RTOs/ISOs to establish triggers for scarcity pricing.

To comply with this directive, on January 11, 2017, SPP submitted to the Commission several revisions to its tariff to establish mechanisms that trigger scarcity pricing for intervals in which there is a shortage of energy or operating reserves.  Among other revisions, SPP proposed to utilize a demand curve to set scarcity prices during energy or operating reserve shortages.  In addition, SPP proposed to remove resource capacity constraints, resource ramp constraints, and global power balance constraints from its tariff “in order to establish scarcity pricing.”

In its order, while FERC found that SPP’s proposed scarcity pricing revisions partially complied with Order No. 825, FERC rejected SPP’s revisions that would set scarcity prices using a demand curve as outside the scope of Order No. 825’s requirements.  In doing so, FERC found that Order No. 825 required SPP to establish a mechanism to trigger shortage pricing, but not to change shortage pricing levels.  Moreover, FERC held that, to the extent SPP removed capacity constraints, resource ramp constraints, and global power balance from its tariff to facilitate the creation of the demand curve, SPP should reinsert those constraints or explain why their removal complies with Order No. 825.  Finally, FERC concluded that if SPP wishes to change the level of scarcity prices, it may do so by making a separate filing pursuant to section 205 of the Federal Power Act.

A copy of FERC’s order is available here.

Photo of Russell Kooistra Russell Kooistra

Russell Kooistra counsels an array of energy companies on various issues related to natural gas and electricity markets. Russell uses his in-depth knowledge of Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) policy and regulations to advise clients on complex regulatory matters.

Read more about Russell KooistraEmail
Photo of Daniel Archuleta Daniel Archuleta

Daniel Archuleta helps energy clients handle critical matters, especially those pertaining to the FERC in both the gas pipeline and electric utility industries.

Read more about Daniel ArchuletaEmail
  • Posted in:
    Energy and Utilities
  • Blog:
    Washington Energy Report
  • Organization:
    Troutman Pepper Locke
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo