FERC Filings
Motion of EPSA for Leave to Intervene and Protest on Entergy's Generator Imbalance Agreement
Introduction
Due to Entergy’s current status as a load serving entity, generation owner, and transmission and distribution company, and the fact that it will be a long time before an independent transmission entity will be operational in the Entergy region, its GIA proposal warrants close Commission scrutiny. The proposal represents a striking departure from existing practices and models and was not the result of a stakeholder process as similar proposals in the Southwest Power Pool have been. The GIA and GRS proposals will allow Entergy to assume responsibility for activities with significant operational and market implications but Entergy provides little if any explanation of the need or justification for its proposal, or why it is the proper entity to be implementing such proposals. Despite joining or proposing different transmission entities since 1998, Entergy remains fully vertically integrated and thus fails all the independence requirements associated with Regional Transmission Organizations (RTO) or Independent Transmission Companies (ITC).
Competitive suppliers have commented previously on Entergy’s GIA in Docket No. ER00-1743 and have sought through the settlement process to reach a GIA that is reasonable and not discriminatory. The June 1 filing is not that proposal and it is not the result of a consensus process. The Entergy filing is complex and presents new issues regarding regulation service and creditworthiness that are clearly outside the GIA process. These proposed changes represent significant modifications to Entergy’s Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT) that will further prevent the development of a competitive wholesale market in the Southeast.
Entergy is proposing a Generator Regulation Service (GRS) charge as a revision to the GIA settlement. In the GRS proposal, Entergy notes the Commission’s recognition that, “Generator Regulation Service is a capacity service that is separate and apart from generator imbalance service currently in place.” However, the GRS is the most significant change Entergy is proposing in its GIA revisions and includes many provisions that do not operate like any other regulation service. The GIA revisions also include new creditworthiness requirements that will suspend service to customers failing to meet the requirements, including financial assurances.
Due to the far-reaching nature of the Entergy proposal, EPSA submits that the Commission should either reject or suspend the filing for the maximum period and convene a technical conference so that Entergy’s filing and its impact on competitive wholesale power markets can be fully understood. The GIA changes were not developed with stakeholder input and by Entergy’s own admission, were created solely by Entergy. Therefore on the areas of the Entergy proposal that must be resolved with input from market participants either through a technical conference or the development of a whole new proposal by Entergy, EPSA submits the following comments.