Speaking Energy

On September 19, 2019, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the “Commission”) proposed to “modernize” its regulations under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA) to “better sync [them] with the modern energy landscape, while continuing to” protect consumers and “encourage development of qualifying facilities” or “QFs.”¹ Chairman Neil Chatterjee and Commissioner Bernard McNamee offered full support for the proposed reforms,² while Commissioner Richard Glick dissented in part, arguing that they would “effectively gut” PURPA and that such substantial changes should be made by Congress, not FERC.³

On December 16, 2015, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) issued an Order to Show Cause and Notice of Proposed Penalty (OSC) directing ETRACOM LLC and its principal member and trader, Michael Rosenberg, to show cause why they should not be found to have violated FERC’s Anti-Manipulation Rule in connection with certain allegedly uneconomic virtual supply trading activities in the California Independent System Operator (CAISO) wholesale electricity market, which FERC claims were intended to benefit ETRACOM’s Congestion Revenue Rights (CRRs) positions. In the OSC, FERC proposes to assess civil penalties of $2.4 million and $100,000 against ETRACOM and Rosenberg, respectively, and to require ETRACOM to disgorge $315,072 plus interest in unjust profits. The ETRACOM case is the latest in a series of cases in which FERC’s Office of Enforcement (OE) has alleged that market participants have violated the Anti-Manipulation Rule by engaging in uneconomic transactions for the purpose of affecting market prices to benefit related positions.

On October 16, 2015, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued Order No. 816, a Final Rule streamlining its requirements for authorization to make wholesale sales of electric energy, capacity and ancillary services at market-based rates (MBR), including eliminating or modifying certain filing requirements.¹ FERC stated that the purposes of the Final Rule are to reduce the administrative burden of the MBR program on sellers and FERC, provide clarification regarding the standards for obtaining and maintaining MBR authority, and increase transparency while ensuring that MBRs charged by public utilities are just and reasonable. This post summarizes FERC’s major modifications and clarifications in the Final Rule, which will become effective 90 days after publication in the Federal Register.