FERC Takes Modest Step Forward in RTO/ISO Price Formation

Sep 29, 2015

Reading Time : 3 min

Specifically, FERC is proposing to revise its regulations to require that each RTO/ISO:

  • settle real-time energy transactions at the same time interval that the RTO/ISO uses to dispatch energy (e.g., every five minutes), and settle operating reserves transactions in the real-time market at the same time interval used to price operating reserves
  • trigger shortage pricing measures during any dispatch interval where there is an actual shortage of energy or operating reserves, regardless of the duration of the shortage.

While this is an important first step in addressing inefficient market rules, the NOPR offers only incremental reforms and leaves many of the larger issues discussed in the price formation proceeding for another day.  FERC intends to take further action at a later date to address other price formation topics, including offer caps, energy market mitigation and uplift.

Settlement Intervals

With respect to settlement of real-time energy and operating reserves transactions, FERC notes that some RTOs/ISOs (ISO New England, Midcontinent ISO and PJM Interconnection) price energy and dispatch resources at five-minute intervals, but settle transactions (i.e., pay producers for their energy) based on an hourly average price.  FERC preliminarily concludes in the NOPR that this settlement practice is unjust and unreasonable, because it may result in distorted price signals and may contribute to markets failing to respond to system operating needs. 

FERC explains that hourly average prices may not reflect the value of the service that resources provide during a specific five-minute dispatch interval.  The Commission also states that hourly average prices can send an inappropriate signal to resources to disregard dispatch instructions.  For example, FERC explains that high prices in the early dispatch intervals of an hour can encourage resources to ramp up their production to capture those high prices across the hour, even as demand and prices fall and resources receive instructions to correspondingly reduce their output in later dispatch intervals.  FERC pointed to higher uplift payments as another disadvantage to hourly settlements. 

Anticipating concerns that modifying RTO/ISO settlement systems will be burdensome and costly, FERC proposes to allow RTOs/ISOs 12 months from the date of their compliance filings (which would be due four months from the effective date of a Final Rule in the proceeding) to implement the required settlement reforms.  FERC also asks for comment on the software and equipment changes that may be required to implement the settlement reforms, whether those changes would be necessary to implement other planned reforms and whether this implementation period could be shortened.

In addition, FERC seeks comment on whether the proposed settlement reforms which would apply to transactions only within an RTO’s/ISO’s borders, should also apply to transactions at the intertie between RTOs/ISOs. 

Shortage Pricing

FERC’s Order No. 719 (adopted in 2008) required RTOs/ISOs to have in place shortage pricing rules that raise the price of energy during operating reserve shortages to a level that “reflects the value of energy” during such an event.  In the NOPR, FERC expresses concern that some RTOs/ISOs (including PJM and Southwest Power Pool) do not initiate their shortage pricing rules in all operating reserve shortage events, instead triggering the higher prices only for certain kinds of shortages or only for shortages that last more than a minimum amount of time.  According to the Commission, not invoking shortage pricing during an operating reserve shortage, regardless of the duration of the shortage or its cause, “may result in unjust and unreasonable rates because prices do not accurately reflect the value of energy during a shortage.”  FERC emphasizes in the NOPR that it is proposing reforms to only the triggers for invoking shortage pricing–not to the level of shortage prices that resources receive.

Comments on the NOPR are due 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Speaking Energy

March 19, 2026

International trade policy has emerged as a dominant force shaping the oil & gas sector, with sweeping tariffs imposed on products from virtually every nation using authorities including IEEPA, Section 232 and Section 301. President Trump's "America First Trade Policy" leverages duties as negotiation tools to secure bilateral deals featuring significant oil & gas purchase commitments, making trade considerations essential for any cross-border transaction. Energy dominance serves as a cornerstone of the administration's economic and national security strategy, placing the industry squarely in the spotlight. 

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

March 10, 2026

Federal energy regulators are assuming expanded roles as the administration prioritizes energy dominance and infrastructure development to meet unprecedented power demand. FERC Chairman Laura Swett has vowed to expedite data center interconnections while addressing jurisdictional challenges, warning that unmet electricity demand could drive data centers abroad and create national security risks. The agency is processing pipeline applications faster than in prior years and considering blanket authorizations for certain LNG and hydroelectric projects to streamline approvals. 

Pipeline projects previously stalled by Clean Water Act permits are being revitalized, particularly in northeastern states where historically high electricity prices have increased openness to natural gas infrastructure. The Department of Energy is expanding its emergency authority to require retention of generation resources and has granted major LNG export approvals, signaling commitment to expanding U.S. export capacity under a streamlined framework that deprioritizes climate considerations.  

The Administration is bullish on the opportunities for the U.S. energy industry in Venezuela and eager to support companies willing to navigate the political risk inherent in the operations at the moment. Early meetings with President Trump and industry leaders showed the path forward may be longer and more complex than anticipated by the President. 

As permitting reforms advance and the pendulum swings toward fossil fuel favorability, the regulatory and policy landscape is fundamentally reshaping energy infrastructure development timelines and investment opportunities. 

Oil & Gas in 2026: Energy Policy & Regulation 

Delve into the complete regulatory & policy outlook at our Oil & Gas in 2026 report.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

March 3, 2026

Macroeconomic turbulence and volatile commodity markets significantly influenced oil & gas M&A activity throughout 2025, with deals showing renewed momentum only in the year's second half.  

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

February 24, 2026

On February 19, 2026, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued an order rescinding the soft price cap for bilateral spot market energy sales in the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) region.1 As previously covered, on July 15, 2025, FERC initiated a Federal Power Act Section 206 proceeding following the D.C. Circuit’s decision finding that FERC must apply the Mobile-Sierra public interest standard before ordering refunds for above-cap bilateral sales and vacating FERC’s orders requiring refunds for certain bilateral spot market transactions in the WECC region that exceeded the $1,000 MWh soft price cap.2 FERC’s Order follows through on the proposal it made last July to eliminate the WECCs soft price cap and marks a recognition that Western wholesale markets have evolved over the past two decades to become sufficiently competitive to render the soft price cap unnecessary.  

...

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.