FERC Paves the Way for Higher Capacity Prices in Advance of the Upcoming ISO-NE Capacity Market Auction

Jan 28, 2014

Reading Time : 3 min

FERC’s January 24 orders are the result of two proceedings initiated last fall. On October 31, 2013, the New England Power Generators Association (NEPGA) filed a complaint against ISO-NE alleging that certain provisions of the ISO-NE Tariff relevant to the Forward Capacity Market were unjust, unreasonable, and unduly discriminatory. NEPGA’s October 31 complaint warned that recent market dynamics in ISO-NE gave rise to a high risk that ISO-NE’s upcoming Forward Capacity Auction (called “FCA 8”) would not attract sufficient capacity resources. Specifically, NEPGA argued that low clearing prices last year combined with the recent announcement of more than 3,000 MW of generation resources would lead to a capacity shortfall in the 2017/18 delivery year absent additional financial incentives. To encourage participation from both new and existing resources, NEPGA urged FERC to increase the administrative price for FCA 8 in instances of inadequate supply or insufficient competition from $3.47/kW-month to $11.00/kW-month, a level that NEPGA argued was consistent with recent assessments of the cost of new entry in the region.

On November 25, 2013, ISO-NE filed its own proposal with FERC, agreeing that the current administrative pricing provisions would be insufficient to attract sufficient capacity resources. ISO-NE stopped short of endorsing NEPGA’s proposed price increase, however, asking FERC instead to double (not triple) the administrative price for FCA 8 in instances of inadequate supply or insufficient competition, to $7.025/kW-month. ISO-NE’s proposal drew criticism from all sides, with generators arguing that the proposed price was too low to encourage participation in the upcoming auction, and state and municipal parties and retail supplier and consumer interests arguing that the proposed rate was too high and would lead to rate shock.

On January 24, 2014, FERC sided with ISO-NE, accepting the grid operator’s proposed administrative price of $7.025/kW-month. In addition, FERC made the revised administrative pricing provisions effective as of January 24 so that they will be in place when the upcoming capacity auction for the 2017/18 delivery year, FCA 8, is held next week on February 3. In doing so, FERC indicated its belief that the middle ground proposed by ISO-NE reflected an appropriate balance between the existing price advocated by state, retail supplier, and consumer interests and the higher price advocated by NEPGA in its complaint against ISO-NE. On this point, Commissioner Clark dissented, concluding that NEPGA had demonstrated that its proposed administrative price of $11.00/kW-month was correct because, in auctions when new entry is needed, the administrative price “should reflect a reasonable estimate of the cost of new entry.”

While FERC accepted ISO-NE’s administrative price hike for the upcoming capacity auction, the agency concluded that there are larger issues with the region’s market design that will require further adjustments. In conjunction with its administrative pricing proposal, ISO-NE took the position that a downward sloping demand curve would eliminate the need for future administrative pricing rules and expressed its intent to file a downward sloping demand curve in the summer of 2014.  In response, FERC directed ISO-NE to file its revised market design proposal no later than April 1, 2014, in order to ensure that the market reforms needed are implemented before the February 2015 capacity market auction.

Thus, while Friday’s orders resolve an important pricing issue in time for next week’s capacity market auction, a broader debate over the design of ISO-NE’s capacity market and the appropriate balancing of interests is certain to continue through the end of 2014.

Copies of FERC’s January 24 orders on ISO-NE’s proposed administrative price increase and the NEPGA complaint are available here and here, respectively.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Speaking Energy

July 8, 2026

On June 18, 2026, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) issued an order to ISO New England Inc. (ISO-NE) directing ISO-NE and ISO-NE participating transmission owners to show cause as to why ISO-NE’s tariff should not be found to be unjust and unreasonable (ISO New England Inc., 195 FERC ¶ 61,215 (2026) (Order)) because it fails to sufficiently:

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

July 7, 2026

On June 29, 2026, the Supreme Court granted a petition for certiorari in Leonard Hoffmann v. WBI Energy Transmission, Inc. (Hoffmann), which presents the question whether section 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) requires pipeline companies using federal eminent domain authority to pay landowners’ attorney’s fees in states where landowners can recover those fees under state law. In the decision giving rise to the Supreme Court’s review, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that a group of ranchers were not entitled to recover their $383,300 in attorney’s fees incurred while negotiating their compensation—creating a circuit split with four other courts of appeals. Hoffmann will be heard during the Court’s October 2026 Term, and marks the second time in five years that the Court has agreed to interpret NGA section 7.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

July 6, 2026

On June 29, 2026, the United States Supreme Court issued Trump v. Slaughter, fundamentally reshaping presidential removal authority over independent regulatory agencies. The decision overruled a 90-year-old precedent established in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which had upheld the constitutionality of commissioner removal protections in the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTC Act). As written, the FTC Act permits a commissioner’s removal “only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” In Slaughter, the Court was asked to reevaluate this standard following the President’s removal of a Democratic-appointed FTC commissioner from office in 2025 without cause. Finding for the President, the Court held that removal was permissible because the FTC Act’s for-cause removal protections for commissioners violate the separation of powers, specifically, the President’s removal power under Article II. The Court explained that the FTC exercises executive power because it promulgates binding rules, investigates and enforces those rules through administrative adjudications, and brings civil enforcement actions in federal court. It found that because it exercises these executive powers, its commissioners “must therefore be controlled by the Chief Executive, in whom such power is vested.” While previous recent cases addressing the scope of the Removal Power, Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Collins v. Yellen purported to preserve some kernel of Humphrey’s, the Court made clear that “[i]f anything more is left of Humphrey’s, we overrule it.”

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

June 25, 2026

On June 18, 2026, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) issued an order to the California Independent System Operator Corporation (CAISO) directing CAISO and CAISO transmission owners to show cause as to why CAISO’s tariff should not be found to be unjust and unreasonable (California Indep. Sys. Operator Corp., 195 FERC ¶ 61,214 (2026) (the Order)) because it fails to sufficiently:

...

Read More

© 2026 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.