NOPR

FERC's attempt to standardize markets have some state regulators up in arms.

The fight over standard market design (SMD) looms large as regulators face the coming year. Passions are heightened on the subject-and everyone has an opinion.

In these pages, takes SMD and other questions right to the top policymakers in six states-Alabama, California, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, and Texas-for a snapshot of what the thinking is on hot topics. And of course we included the man of the hour, FERC's chairman Pat Wood.

This September, Pat Wood III completed his first year as chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Some long-time FERC watchers gave Fortnightly some insights into how this chairman has performed so far, and what we might expect from him in the future.

 

Why power plants should pay for grid upgrades.

Do we make all generators equal-using affirmative action to give rights to merchants that are "comparable" to utility-owned plants?

Or, do we let the locational price signals shine through-trusting all plant developers, whether regulated or not, to act in self-interest?

 

How rules muted price signals and did not ensure efficient siting.

Of the new rules proposed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for interconnecting new power plants to the transmission grid, the most controversial (for transmission providers and generators alike) is FERC's choice of who should pay to construct the various categories of required new facilities.

One might say, when it comes to FERC, some state public utilities commissions' lack of faith is disturbing—to paraphrase Lord Vader. It's also necessary, as any journalist would tell you. The FERC NOPR on standard market design (SMD)—which completes the "trilogy" of regulation on wholesale markets, as chairman Pat Wood described it—had some state PUCs blasting the NOPR even before its July 31 release.