FERC Filings
EPSA's Protest On the OMS Offer of Proof
Preface
Pursuant to Rule 211 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission), 18 C.F.R. § 385.211, the Electric Power Supply Association (EPSA) respectfully files this protest in the above-captioned proceeding. The Organization of MISO States’ (OMS) Offer of Proof (Offer) responds to an order the Commission issued on September 30, 2004, granting the OMS 120 days to develop an offer of proof regarding the Midwest ISO’s data confidentiality proposal. In that order, the Commission directed the OMS to: clarify why the OMS and the states need access to wholesale market data that is comparable to the Commission’s access and need; provide assurances of the states’ ability to keep confidential the data they do properly receive; and, describe the purposes for which the data will be used.
EPSA recognizes that the states play an important role in the development of Regional Transmission Organizations (RTO) and have an essential interest in the universal goal of ensuring that wholesale power markets remain competitive. In fact, EPSA appreciates the degree to which the OMS has committed itself to ensuring that the new bid-based markets in the Midwest ISO fully benefit regional wholesale and retail electricity customers. As explained below, EPSA believes that the OMS improperly relies on an expansive interpretation of the “interdependence” of state-federal regulatory functions, predicated on the need for “vertical inputs.” EPSA is understandably concerned about the potential damage to the competitive process when such inputs present the possibility of untimely public disclosure of confidential, commercially sensitive information possessed by wholesale buyers and sellers which underpins the market-based bid and offer curves submitted in the Midwest ISO spot markets.
The OMS approach, unfortunately, dismisses the legitimate need to align the Midwest ISO confidentiality protocols with those of PJM and other regions that are already approved and implemented. While EPSA appreciates the preference of OMS to have a broader set of protocols than PJM or other regions, it is concerned that the OMS approach will unduly co-opt the role of Independent Market Monitors (IMM), Midwest ISO staff and FERC itself, while misconstruing legally and operationally significant jurisdictional distinctions. Accordingly, EPSA urges the Commission to endorse the approach contained in the Midwest ISO’s February 17 Informational Filing (Informational Filing), and certain fundamental provisions described below, as the best balance of all parties’ interests.