AUC Rule 017: June 14, proposed changes

Transcription

1 AUC Rule 017: June 14, proposed changes Stakeholder comments: Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO), AltaLink Management Ltd. (AltaLink), ATCO Electricity Generation (ATCO), Capital Power Corporation (Capital Power), Cogeneration Working Group 2 represented by Power Advisory (CWG), EPCOR Utilities Inc. (EPCOR), ENMAX Energy Corporation (ENMAX), Independent Power Producers Society of Alberta (IPPSA), Industrial Power Consumers Association of Alberta (IPCAA), Market Surveillance Administrator (MSA), MEG Energy (MEG), TransAlta Corporation (TransAlta), TransCanada Energy (TCE), Utilities Consumer Advocate (UCA) Section Subsection Existing Proposed changes Stakeholder comment AUC staff response Part 1: General matters Part 1: General matters 1 Definitions Definitions 1.1 The definitions from the Electric Utilities Act apply to these rules. The definitions from the Electric Utilities Act apply to these rules In these rules: (a) ISO means the Independent System Operator. (b) ISO rule means a rule made by the ISO under its authority in the Electric Utilities Act that: i. has been approved by the Commission after August 1, 2018; or ii. was made by the ISO before August 1, 2018 and has not been amended or removed on or after August 1, In these rules: (a) ISO means the Independent System Operator. (b) ISO rule means a rule made by the ISO under its authority in the Electric Utilities Act that: i. has been approved by the Commission after August 1, 2018; or ii. was made by the ISO before August 1, 2018 and has not been amended or removed on or after August 1, Part 2: Procedures and process for development of proposed rules and application for Commission approval Part 2: Procedures and process for development of proposed rules and application for Commission approval Definitions Definitions IPCAA: Notes the terms proposed provisional rule, The AUC notes that it has provided definitions for the 2 The CWG is comprised of TransCanada, Suncor, Cenovus, Canadian Natural Resources Limited, Dow, Imperial Oil, MEG Energy, Husky, Nova Chemicals Corporation, Syncrude, Lafarge, and InterPipeline. Page 1 of 30

2 In this Part: In this Part: proposed initial rule, and terms listed by IPCAA in the proposed rule are used relevant Part of the Rule. If (a) proposed rule means a proposed new ISO rule, a (a) proposed rule means a proposed new ISO rule, a often interchangeably there are additional concerns proposed amendment to an existing ISO rule, a proposed proposed amendment to an existing ISO rule, a proposed without any definitions IPCAA may provide further removal of an existing ISO rule, or a renewal of an existing removal of an existing ISO rule, or a renewal of an existing provided. comment. ISO rule that has a fixed term. ISO rule that has a fixed term. 3 Application Application 3.1 This Part does not apply to proposed provisional rules or proposed initial rules as those terms are defined in Part 3. This Part does not apply to proposed provisional rules or proposed initial rules as those terms are defined in Part Notice for development of proposed rules When the ISO identifies an issue, or receives a proposal under Section of the Electric Utilities Act, that, in the opinion of the ISO, may require a proposed rule, the ISO must issue written notice to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and other interested parties prior to developing a proposed rule and must post the notice on the ISO s website. Notice for development of proposed rules When the ISO identifies an issue, or receives a complete proposal pursuant to its process under Section of the Electric Utilities Act, that, in the opinion of the ISO, may require a proposed rule, the ISO must issue written notice to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and other interested parties prior to developing a proposed rule and must post the notice on the ISO s website. AESO: Disagree with concept of posting a notice once an issue that may require a rule is identified. Too early in the process, will result in large volume of rules that appear to be on the go despite not being the case. Please see the proposed revisions. This will be included as an item for discussion at the June 26 Suggest requiring the AESO to post a notice once a determination has been made that an ISO rule is in fact needed and that the rule development/ amendment will be moving forward. Process does not work for many ISO rule amendments, notably administrative amendments and those that are a result of a new or revised Alberta reliability standard or ISO glossary definition. ATCO: AESO should be required to issue written notice if it receives a proposal for a new or modified rule that the AESO Page 2 of 30

3 believes is not required, with an explanation. Capital Power: Require AESO to issue written notice on its website when it determines that an issue does not require a proposed rule. CWG: The AESO should always be required to provide notices when it receives a proposed rule. If the AESO deems this proposed rule is not needed, it needs to notify market participants that a consultation process will not proceed with rationale as to why the rule is not required If the notice is required because of a proposal received by the ISO under Section of the Electric Utilities Act, the ISO must issue notice within 30 days of receipt of the proposal. If the notice is required because of receipt of a complete a proposal received by the ISO pursuant to its process under Section of the Electric Utilities Act, the ISO must issue notice within 30 days of receipt of the complete proposal. AESO: 30 day window is not achievable. It is not sufficient time to understand the scope of a potential issue, engage with market participants, issue information requests if needed or conduct the analysis required. Please see the proposed revisions. This will be included as an item for discussion at the June The notice must set out: The notice must set out: (a) the issue that a proposed rule is intended to address; (a) the issue that a proposed rule is intended to address; (b) a description of the potential objective or purpose of the proposed rule; (b) a description of the potential objective or purpose of the proposed rule; (c) the manner in which the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and other interested parties may: (i) submit written comments; and (ii) make a request to participate in consultation; (d) the deadline date for comments, which must not be less (c) the manner in which the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and other interested parties may submit: (i) submit written comments; and (ii) make a request notice of intent to participate in Page 3 of 30

4 than 15 days from the later of: consultation; and (i) The date the notice is issued to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and other interested parties; or (ii) The date the notice is issued on the ISO s website; and (e) where the information set out in subsection 4.4 can be accessed. (ii)(iii) comments on the form of consultation; (d) the deadline date for comments, which must not be less than 15 days from the later of: (i) Tthe date the notice is issued to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and other interested parties; or (ii) Tthe date the notice is issued on the ISO s website; and (e) where the information set out in subsection 4.4 can be accessed When the notice is posted on the ISO s website, the ISO must also post a copy of any relevant material related to the need for, the development of, removal of, or renewal of the proposed rule. When the notice is posted on the ISO s website, the ISO must also post a copy of any relevant material the ISO considers to be relevant that is related to the need for, the development of, removal of, or renewal of the proposed rule. AESO: Any relevant material being posted is overboard. This will be included as an item for discussion at the June Comments The Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and interested parties may: (a) provide general written comments to the ISO on the need for, the development of, removal of, or renewal of a proposed rule; and (b) submit a request to participate in consultation with the ISO. Comments The Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and interested parties may: (a) provide general written comments to the ISO on the need for, the development of, removal of, or renewal of a proposed rule; and (b) submit a request notice of intent to participate in consultation with the ISO; and (b)(c) comment on the form of AESO: Limit this section to where the AESO intends to proceed with a proposed rule, alternatively tie this section to the notice issued by the AESO under subsection 4.1 AltaLink: No requirement for AESO to respond to comments. MSA comments in particular need to be addressed. The expectation would be that comments would be general in nature given that a rule has not yet been developed. Replies from the ISO at this stage may not be necessary, however the AUC has added subsection 5.2 to have the received comments posted. The AUC has made changes in regard to the UCA s comments. UCA: In part (b), change submit a request to submit a notice of intent to participate in consultation. As currently written, it implies that there should be some criteria that the AESO uses to decide if the request is granted or rejected. Page 4 of 30

5 5 5.2 Within 5 business days of receipt of comments, the ISO must: (a) post all submissions received pursuant to subsection 5.1 on the ISO s website; and (a)(b) provide written notice to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants and other interested parties regarding where the information set out in subsection 5.2(a) can be accessed Consultation for development of proposed rules Upon receipt of any request to participate in consultation, the ISO must: (a) form a working group or working groups composed of any parties who submitted a request to participate in consultation; (b) consult with the working group(s) in a manner determined by the ISO to: (i) determine the need for a proposed rule; and (ii) develop a proposed rule if, in the opinion of the ISO a proposed rule is necessary. Consultation for development of proposed rules Upon receipt of any request notice of intent to participate in consultation, the ISO must: (a) form a working consultation group or working consultation groups composed of any parties; (i) who submitted a request tonotice of intent to participate in consultation; or (i)(ii) that the ISO thinks may be directly affected by the proposed rule; (b) consult with the working consultation group(s) in a manner determined by the ISO to: (i) determine the need for a proposed rule; and (ii) develop a proposed rule if, in the opinion of the ISO a proposed rule is necessary. AESO: Ability to assess how to engage with market participants and interested parties in a manner that is best suited to the specific proposed rule. The AESO needs the ability to determine what form of engagement is most appropriate in the specific circumstance and working groups may not be the most effective vehicle to advance ISO rule projects. Should working groups be needed for a rule, enable the AESO to invite market participants and interested parties that it thinks may be directly affected by the proposed rule but who did not submit a request under Section 5 to participate. AESO would prefer not to restrict participation. Please see the proposed revisions. This will be included as an item for discussion at the June 26 ATCO: AESO must post comments received to its website within 5 days. Benefits stakeholders knowing other positions and recommendations. Page 5 of 30

6 Capital Power: Current wording too broad. Should include in response to a Notice issued under Section 4 with respect to a proposed ISO rule following request to participate in consultation. Enable the AESO to exercise discretion in establishing the level and form of consultation undertaken (working groups or alternative forums) as well as the composition of members. Working groups may not be appropriate in all circumstances. ENMAX: In 6.1(b), add fairly after consult. IPCAA: Instead use a permanent stakeholder committee of interested parties that reviews all rules and provides recommendations to the AESO Board prior to a rule s approval would be a more fair and transparent process. Stakeholder committees must have a composition that is fair and representative of the market, including equal consumer representation When the ISO undertakes consultation with a working group or working groups under subsection 6.1, the ISO must provide an opportunity for members of the working group(s) to make submissions regarding the information required in subsections 7.2(b) through 7.2(i) of this rule. When the ISO undertakes consultation with a working consultation group or working consultation groups under subsection 6.1, the ISO must provide an opportunity for members of the working consultation group(s) to make submissions regarding the information required in subsections UCA: Should include a deadline on consultation so that they are not dragged out. Consultation processes may vary in time and scope depending on the issue. The AUC does not see timelines Page 6 of 30

7 7.2(b) through 7.2(i) of this rule. for the ISO s consultation process to be feasible Following development of a proposed rule, the ISO must solicit comments on the proposed rule by way of written notice to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants and other interested parties and the notice must: (a) be posted on the ISO s website; (b) include the information required by subsection 4.3, excluding the requirement in subsection 4.3(c)(ii); and (c) include the information required by subsection 4.4. Following development of a proposed rule, the ISO must provide written notice to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants and other interested parties and solicit comments on the proposed rule by way of a: (a) proposed rule comment matrix; and (b) request for comment on whether the proposed rule is technically deficient. written notice to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants and other interested parties and the notice must: be posted on the ISO s website; include the information required by subsection 4.3, excluding the requirement in subsection 4.3(c)(ii); and include the information required by subsection 4.4. Capital Power: All written comments provided to the AESO be posted publicly by the AESO. Current Rule 017 requires the AESO to consider comments received and prepare a reply, including whether the draft rule has changed. The reply must also be sent to all participants. This type of language must be retained and added to the draft rule. ENMAX: Minimum of 15 days for the comment periods. Please see the proposed revisions. This will be included as an item for discussion at the June 26 AESO files publicly available responses to the outstanding concerns raised in the consultation process. EPCOR: The existing Rule 017 requires the AESO to reply to all comments received during consultation and include whether it made changes to the draft rule as a result and explain why positions were accepted/rejected. Amend to include this requirement tthe notice required by subsection 6.3 must: (a) be posted on the ISO s website; (b) include the information required by subsection 4.3, excluding the requirement in subsection 4.3(c)(ii) and The unchanged language was pulled from the previous version of subsection 6.3 to create new subsection 6.4. Page 7 of 30

8 4.3(c)(iii); and (c) include the information required by subsection Within 5 business days of receipt of comments received pursuant to subsection 6.3, the ISO must: After consulting under Section 6, the ISO may proceed to make an application to the Commission under Section Application for Commission approval of proposed rules The ISO must apply to the Commission for approval of a proposed rule Subject to subsection 7.3, an application for approval of a proposed rule should include the following information: (a) a description of the consultation process that was undertaken by the ISO including a list of parties who participated and copies of any submissions made by parties under subsections 6.2 and 6.3; (b) an explanation of whether the proposed rule relates to: (i) the capacity market and why; or (ii) the electricity market and why; (c) if the proposed rule relates to the capacity market, an explanation of whether or not the proposed rule will be in effect for a fixed term and why; (d) a description of the objective or purpose of the proposed rule; (e) a copy of any analysis conducted or commissioned by the ISO supporting the proposed rule, with a description of assumptions and methodology; (f) an explanation of why the proposed rule, taken together with all ISO rules and in light of the principle of a fair, efficient and openly competitive market, was proposed; (a) post all submissions on the ISO s website; and (a)(b) provide written notice to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants and other interested parties regarding where the submissions referred to in subsection 6.5(a) can be accessed. After consulting under Section 6, the ISO may proceed to make an application to the Commission under Section 7. Application for Commission approval of proposed rules The ISO must apply to the Commission for approval of a proposed rule. Subject to subsection 7.3, an application for approval of a proposed rule should must include the following information: (a) a description of the consultation process that was undertaken by the ISO including a list of parties who participated and copies of any submissions made by parties under subsections 6.2 and 6.3; (b) an explanation of whether the proposed rule relates to the capacity market and why;: (i) the capacity market and why; or (ii) the electricity market and why; (c) if the proposed rule relates to the capacity market, an explanation of whether or not the proposed rule will be in effect for a fixed term and why; (d) a description of the objective or purpose of the proposed rule; (e) a copy of any analysis conducted or commissioned by the ISO supporting the proposed rule, with a description of assumptions and methodology; (f) an explanation of why the proposed rule, taken together with all ISO rules and in light of the principle of a fair, Page 8 of 30 AltaLink: Use of should lessens the information requirements, may result in incomplete record. In part (a), there should be an opportunity for market participants to challenge/add to the written record to fully reflect what they thought was relevant during the ATCO: Require AESO to explain if a rule relates to both capacity and energy markets in part (b). Part (f) should also require the AESO to include the tariff in its FEOC explanation. Part (g), require AESO to describe all alternatives that were proposed and why they Market participants are not precluded from participating in a Commission proceeding. It is up to the ISO and market participants to conduct the consultation prior to a rule being brought to the Commission. If market participants are not satisfied with the rule as proposed by the ISO in its application to the Commission, they will be able to add to the record through the proceeding. The AUC had made the distinction between the capacity market and the electricity market as this distinction is made in Bill 13. AUC staff have proposed to instead just specify the capacity market as capacity

9 Supports 7.2(e) but add and accompanying non- Section Subsection Existing Proposed changes Stakeholder comment AUC staff response (g) a description of any alternatives that were considered to achieve the objective or purpose of the proposed rule and a brief explanation as to why they were rejected; efficient and openly competitive market, was proposed; market rules have additional legislative tests. (h) if the rule relates to the capacity market, a description of how the proposed rule supports ensuring a reliable supply of electricity at a reasonable cost to customers; and (i) an explanation of how the proposed rule supports the public interest. (g) a description of any alternatives that were considered explored during consultation to achieve the objective or purpose of the proposed rule and an brief explanation as to why they were rejected; (h) if the rule relates to the capacity market, a description of how the proposed rule supports ensuring a reliable supply of electricity at a reasonable cost to customers; and (i) an explanation of how the proposed rule supports the public interest. Page 9 of 30 were rejected. Concern that as written, AESO can pick and choose what it considered. Add that the AESO show a rule is not technically deficient. AESO should address any stakeholder concerns arising in consultation of technical deficiency. Capital Power: Explanation of which market a rule relates creates an unhelpful and unnecessary separation of the two markets. Rules must be considered within the context of the entire market. Recommend changing (b) to: an explanation of how the proposed rule impacts and relates to: (i) the capacity market and why; (ii) the electricity market and why; and/or (iii) the ancillary service market and why; Regarding fixed term rules (part (c)), foundations of rules regarding parameters requiring regular updates should be general enough to allow these types of updates to be approved by the AUC without changing the market rules. Sees no purpose for part 7.2(c). Want confidence and do not want the market framework to be re-opened. Fixed term rules are contemplated in Bill 13 for ISO rules that relate to the capacity market. The use of a fixed term rule is for the ISO to determine. Comments regarding technical deficiency have been addressed in an earlier section.

10 commercially sensitive data to the end. Recommends adding at the end a requirement stating a description of how the proposed rule is not technically deficient. CWG: AESO should be required to respond to all alternatives, not only those that, in the opinion of the AESO, were considered to achieve the objective or purpose. Change (g) to alternatives that were considered or proposed). ENMAX: Replace should with must. Members of consultation working groups should have an explicit opportunity to comment on whether a proposed rule is technically deficient. Add a criterion on whether a rule is technically deficient/sufficient. 7.2(b), replace whether with how and in (i) make use of and/or instead of just or. 7.2(c), replace and why with, why there is a need for a fixed term, and why the proposed term is appropriate 7.2(g) replace any alternatives with all alternatives. Page 10 of 30

11 EPCOR: Requirement to include any working papers and data used in the AESO s analysis and development of a proposed rule, analysis of alternatives such that no parties are at an informational disadvantage. If unable to provide this for confidentiality or other reasons, require the AESO to seek AUC approval to omit this information. Explain how a proposed rule relates to and impacts existing ISO rules to ensure consistency and decrease redundancy of rules. Page 11 of 30 IPCAA: All submissions or comments provided to the AESO by the MSA should be included in the submission. MSA: Reliable supply of electricity at a reasonable cost to consumers can be impacted by both capacity and electricity market rules. Suggest changing wording in part (h) from if the rule relates to the capacity market to if applicable. TransAlta: Minimum filing requirements must prescribe a high level of disclosure. This section should use must instead of should. Add the following requirements of AESO: more rigorous, transparent modelling/analysis; work with market participants to

12 develop and use best data; explain how rule relates to EAS and capacity markets; quantify short- and long-term price and volume impacts, customer price impact; analysis of alternatives; analysis of impacts on private investment, competition, reliability, and transmission tariff. AESO must demonstrate technical sufficiency In the event that any of the information set out in subsection 7.2 is not included in the application, the ISO must provide an explanation for not doing so. Part 3: Procedures and process for development of proposed provisional rules and proposed initial rules and application for Commission approval In the event that any of the information set out in subsection 7.2 is not included in the application, the ISO must provide an explanation for not doing so. Part 3: Procedures and process for development of proposed provisional rules and proposed initial rules and application for Commission approval Definitions In this Part: (a) proposed initial rule means a proposed new ISO rule, a proposed amendment to an existing ISO rule, a proposed removal of an existing ISO rule, or a renewal of an existing ISO rule that has a fixed term that: Definitions In this Part: (a) proposed initial rule means a proposed new ISO rule, a proposed amendment to an existing ISO rule, a proposed removal of an existing ISO rule, or a renewal of an existing ISO rule that has a fixed term that: ENMAX: Limit definition of proposed initial rule to be those subject to the 24 month period in Section of Bill 13. As such, recommend deletion of 8.1(a)(ii). Please see earlier responses. (i) has received provisional approval from the Commission under Section of the Electric Utilities Act; or (ii) has not received provisional approval from the Commission under Section of the Electric Utilities Act and was: 1. directed by the Commission to be considered under Section of the Electric Utilities Act pursuant to Section 20.22(4)(c) of the Electric Utilities Act; or (i) has received provisional approval from the Commission under Section of the Electric Utilities Act; or (ii) has not received provisional approval from the Commission under Section of the Electric Utilities Act and was: 1. directed by the Commission to be considered under Section of the Electric Utilities Act pursuant to Section 20.22(4)(c) of the Electric Utilities Act; or IPCAA: Notes the terms proposed provisional rule, proposed initial rule, and proposed rule are used often interchangeably without any definitions provided. 2. developed by the ISO pursuant to Section 41.42(1) of the Electric Utilities Act. 2. developed by the ISO pursuant to Section 41.42(1) of the Electric Utilities Act. (b) proposed provisional rule means a proposed new ISO (b) proposed provisional rule means a proposed new ISO Page 12 of 30

13 rule, a proposed amendment to an existing ISO rule, or a proposed removal of an existing ISO rule that is developed by the ISO pursuant to Section 41.42(3) of the Electric Utilities Act. rule, a proposed amendment to an existing ISO rule, or a proposed removal of an existing ISO rule that is developed by the ISO pursuant to Section 41.42(3) of the Electric Utilities Act. 9 Application Application 9.1 This Part expires on the date the Commission issues a decision under Section of the Electric Utilities Act. This Part expires on the date the Commission issues a decision under Section of the Electric Utilities Act Notice for development of proposed provisional rules When the ISO identifies an issue, or receives a proposal under Section of the Electric Utilities Act, that, in the opinion of the ISO, may require a proposed provisional rule, the ISO must issue written notice to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and other interested parties prior to developing a proposed provisional rule and must post the notice on the ISO s website. Notice for development of proposed provisional rules When the ISO identifies an issue, or receives a proposal under Section of the Electric Utilities Act, that, in the opinion of the ISO, may require a proposed provisional ruledevelops or intends to develop a proposed provisional rule, the ISO must issue written notice to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and other interested parties prior to developing a proposed provisional rule and must post the notice on the ISO s website. AESO: Disagree with concept of posting a notice once an issue that may require a rule is identified. Too early in the process, will result in large volume of rules that appear to be on the go despite not being the case. Suggest requiring the AESO to post a notice once a determination has been made that an ISO rule is in fact needed and that the rule development/ amendment will be moving forward. Please see the proposed revisions. This will be included as an item for discussion at the June 26 Process does not work for many ISO rule amendments, notably administrative amendments and those that are a result of a new or revised Alberta reliability standard or ISO glossary definition. ATCO: AESO should be required to issue written notice if it receives a proposal for a new or modified rule that the AESO believes is not required, with an explanation. Page 13 of 30

14 If the notice is required because of a proposal received by the ISO under Section of the Electric Utilities Act, the ISO must issue notice within 30 days of receipt of the proposal. If the notice is required because of a proposal received by the ISO under Section of the Electric Utilities Act, the ISO must issue notice within 30 days of receipt of the proposal. AESO: 30 day window is not achievable. It is not sufficient time to understand the scope of a potential issue, engage with market participants, issue information requests if needed or conduct the analysis required. Please see the proposed revisions. This will be included as an item for discussion at the June 26 Capital Power: Request this section be removed. Unaware of circumstances where a provisional rule would be brought forward under Allowing such an option creates uncertainty The notice must set out: The notice must set out: (a) the issue that a proposed provisional rule is intended to address; (a) the issue that a proposed provisional rule is intended to address; (b) a description of the potential objective or purpose of the proposed provisional rule; (b) a description of the potential objective or purpose of the proposed provisional rule; (c) the manner in which the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and other interested parties may: (i) submit written comments; and (ii) make a request to participate in consultation; (d) the deadline date for comments which must not be less than 15 days from the later of: (iii) the date the notice is issued to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and other interested parties; or (c) the manner in which the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and other interested parties may submit: (i) submit written comments; and (ii) make a request notice of intent to participate in consultation; and (ii)(iii) comment on the form of consultation; (d) the deadline date for comments which must not be less than 15 days from the later of: (iv) the date the notice is issued on the ISO s website; and (e) where the information outlined in subsection 10.4 can be accessed. (i) the date the notice is issued to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and other interested parties; or (ii) the date the notice is issued on the ISO s website; and (e) where the information outlined in subsection can be Page 14 of 30

15 accessed When the notice is posted on the ISO s website, the ISO must also post a copy of any relevant material related to the need for, the development of, or removal of the proposed provisional rule. When the notice is posted on the ISO s website, the ISO must also post a copy of any relevant material the ISO considers to be relevant that is related to the need for, the development of, or removal of the proposed provisional rule. AESO: Any relevant material being posted is overboard. This will be included as an item for discussion at the June Comments The Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and interested parties may: (a) provide general written comments to the ISO on the need for a proposed provisional rule; and (b) submit a request to participate in consultation with the ISO. Comments The Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants, and interested parties may: (a) provide general written comments to the ISO on the need for a proposed provisional rule; and (b) submit a request to participate in consultation with the ISO; and (b)(c) comment on the form of AESO: Limit this section to where the AESO intends to proceed with a proposed rule, alternatively tie this section to the notice issued by the AESO under subsection 10.1 UCA: Same as for section 5.1. In part (b), change submit a request to submit a notice of intent to participate in consultation. The expectation would be that comments would be general in nature given that a rule has not yet been developed. The AUC has added subsection 11.2 to have the received comments posted. The AUC has made changes in regard to the UCA s comments Within 5 business days of receipt of comments, the ISO must: (a) post all submissions received pursuant to subsection 11.1 on the ISO s website; and (a)(b) provide written notice to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants and other interested parties regarding where the information set out in subsection 11.2(a) can be accessed Consultation for development of proposed provisional rules Upon receipt of any request to participate in consultation, the ISO must: (a) form a working group or working groups composed of any parties who submitted a request to participate in consultation; (b) consult with the working group(s), subject to Section 13, in a manner determined by the ISO to: Consultation on for development of proposed provisional rules Upon receipt of any request notice of intent to participate in consultation, the ISO must: (a) form a working consultation group or working consultation groups composed of any parties: (i) who submitted a request to participate in consultation; or (i)(ii) that the ISO thinks may be directly affected by AESO: Ability to assess how to engage with market participants and interested parties in a manner that is best suited to the specific proposed rule. The AESO needs the ability to determine what form of engagement is most appropriate in the specific circumstance and working groups may not be the most Please see the proposed revisions. This will be included as an item for discussion at the June 26 Page 15 of 30

16 (i) determine the need for a proposed provisional rule; and the proposed provisional rule; effective vehicle to advance ISO rule projects. (ii) develop a proposed provisional rule if, in the opinion of the ISO, a proposed provisional rule is necessary. (b) consult with the working consultation group(s), subject to Section 13, in a manner determined by the ISO to further develop the proposed provisional rule.: (c) determine the need for a proposed provisional rule; and (d)(b) develop a proposed provisional rule if, in the opinion of the ISO, a proposed provisional rule is necessary. Should working groups be needed for a rule, enable the AESO to invite market participants and interested parties that it thinks may be directly affected by the proposed rule but who did not submit a request under Section 11 to participate. AESO would prefer not to restrict participation. ATCO: AESO must post comments received to its website within 5 days. Benefits stakeholders knowing other positions and recommendations. Capital Power: Current wording too broad. Should include in response to a Notice issued under Section 10 with respect to a proposed ISO rule following request to participate in consultation. Enable the AESO to exercise discretion in establishing the level and form of consultation undertaken (working groups or alternative forums) as well as the composition of members. Working groups may not be appropriate in all circumstances. ENMAX: In 12.1(b), add fairly after consult. Page 16 of 30

17 In 12.1(b), delete subject to Section 13 and make it explicit that consultations outlined in Section 13 cannot fully satisfy the consultations required by Rule 017. IPCAA: Instead use a permanent stakeholder committee of interested parties that reviews all rules and provides recommendations to the AESO Board prior to a rule s approval would be a more fair and transparent process. Stakeholder committees must have a composition that is fair and representative of the market, including equal consumer representation When the ISO undertakes consultation with a working group or working groups under subsection 12.1, the ISO must provide an opportunity for members of the working group(s) to make submissions regarding the information required in subsections 14.2(b) through 14.2(j) of this rule. When the ISO undertakes consultation with a working consultation group or working consultation groups under subsection 12.1, the ISO must provide an opportunity for members of the working consultation group(s) to make submissions regarding the information required in subsections (b) through (j) of this rule. TransAlta: Clarify that the AESO will not be allowed to file a rule only relying on consultation from June 2017 to June This section should require additional consultation that requires the AESO to allow submissions from working group members on what the application for the rule should be required to include. Please see the proposed revisions. This will be included as an item for discussion at the June 26 UCA: Should include a deadline on consultation so that they are not dragged out Following development of a proposed provisional rule, the ISO must solicit comments on the proposed provisional rule by way Following development of a proposed provisional rule, the ISO must provide written notice to the Market Surveillance Capital Power: All written comments provided to the Please see the proposed revisions. This will be Page 17 of 30

18 of written notice to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants and other interested parties and the notice must: (a) be posted on the ISO s website; (b) include the information required by subsection 10.3, excluding the requirement in subsection 10.3(c)(ii); and (c) include the information required by subsection Administrator, market participants and other interested parties and solicit comments on the proposed provisional rule by way of a: (a) proposed provisional rule comment matrix; and (b) request for comment on whether the proposed provisional rule is technically deficient. written notice to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants and other interested parties and the notice must: be posted on the ISO s website; include the information required by subsection 10.3, excluding the requirement in subsection 10.3(c)(ii); and include the information required by subsection AESO be posted publicly by the AESO. Current Rule 017 requires the AESO to consider comments received and prepare a reply, including whether the draft rule has changed. The reply must also be sent to all participants. This type of language must be retained and added to the draft rule ENMAX: Minimum of 15 days for the comment periods. AESO files publicly available responses to the outstanding concerns raised in the consultation process. EPCOR: The existing Rule 017 requires the AESO to reply to all comments received during consultation and include whether it made changes to the draft rule as a result and explain why positions were accepted/rejected. Amend to include this requirement. included as an item for discussion at the June tthe notice required by subsection 12.3 must: (a) be posted on the ISO s website; (b) include the information required by subsection 10.3, excluding the requirement in subsection 10.3(c)(ii) and 10.3(c)(iii); and (c) include the information required by subsection The unchanged language was pulled from the previous version of subsection 12.3 to create new subsection Within 5 business days of receipt of comments received pursuant to subsection 12.3, the ISO must: Page 18 of 30

19 (a) post all submissions on the ISO s website; and (a)(b) provide written notice to the Market Surveillance Administrator, market participants and other interested parties regarding where the submissions referred to in subsection 12.5(a) can be accessed After consulting with the working group(s), the ISO may proceed to make an application to the Commission under Section 14. After consulting with the working group(s), the ISO may proceed to make an application to the Commission under Section Reliance on completed consultation The ISO may refer to consultations with: (a) the adequacy and demand curve working group; (b) the eligibility and capacity value working group; (c) the energy and ancillary service market changes working group; (d) the market mechanics working group; (e) the procurement and hedging working group; (f) the design working group; (g) technical working group; and (h) other public ISO stakeholder sessions and comments; that took place during the period of June, 2017 to June, 2018 in order to support the requirements for consultation on a proposed provisional rule. Reliance on completed consultation The ISO may refer to consultations with: (a) the adequacy and demand curve working group; (b) the eligibility and capacity value working group; (c) the energy and ancillary service market changes working group; (d) the market mechanics working group; (e) the procurement and hedging working group; (f) the design working group; (g) technical working group; and (h) other public ISO stakeholder sessions and comments; that took place during the period of June, 2017 to June, 2018 in order to support the requirements for consultation on a proposed provisional rule. AESO: Believes that if a party joins an ISO rule working group under section 12 who was not part of the SAM/CMD working group process, the AESO is unable to rely on section 13. Recommends Section 13 be drafted in a more general nature to reference working groups as the list in the section is not exhaustive. Requests the removal of the reference to June 2017 to June 2018 as consultation began prior to June 2017 and is intended to continue through AltaLink: Clarity around technical working groups and the resulting rule development process. When does consultation for technical rules commence and who needs to be consulted (i.e. MSA)? Does all documentation from those existing technical working groups form part of the submission to the AUC? Please see the proposed revisions. This will be included as an item for discussion at the June 26 ATCO: Change heading to Reference to completed Page 19 of 30

20 Current title may give impression that the AESO can fully satisfy its consultation requirement. Capital Power: Supports the use of consultation undertaken in the existing working groups. ENMAX: past consultations should complement consultation specific to a proposed rule. MSA: Requests clarification as to whether the MSA or any other party can make submissions that would be considered in an AUC proceeding if such a party was not a member of the working group. UCA: In relying on the consultations that took place between June 2017 and June 2018 the AUC must keep in mind that representation on the consultation teams was never balanced and consumer representatives were in the minority. TransAlta: Should change may refer to consultations to must refer to the consultations to ensure consultation is representative. 134 Application for Commission approval of proposed provisional rules and proposed initial rules The ISO must apply to the Commission for approval of a Application for Commission approval of proposed provisional rules and proposed initial rules The ISO must apply to the Commission for approval of a Page 20 of 30

21 134.1 proposed provisional rule and a proposed initial rule. proposed provisional rule and a proposed initial rule An application for approval of a proposed provisional rule or a proposed initial rule must include the following information: (a) A description of the consultation process that was undertaken by the ISO including a list of parties who participated and copies of any submissions made by parties under subsections 12.2 and 12.3, if applicable; (b) An explanation of whether the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial rule relates to: (i) the capacity market and why; or (ii) the electricity market and why; (c) If the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial rule relates to the capacity market, an explanation of whether or not the rule will be in effect for a fixed term and why; (d) A description of the objective or purpose of the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial rule; (e) A copy of any analysis conducted or commissioned by the ISO supporting the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial rule, with a description of assumptions and methodology; (f) An explanation of why the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial rule, taken together with all ISO rules and in light of the principle of a fair, efficient and openly competitive market, was proposed; (g) A description of any alternatives that were considered to achieve the objective or purpose of the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial rule and a brief explanation as to why they were rejected; (h) If the rule relates to the capacity market, a description of how the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial rule supports ensuring a reliable supply of electricity at a reasonable cost to customers; (i) An explanation of how the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial rule supports the public interest; and (j) For an application for approval of a proposed provisional rule, the ISO s targeted capacity procurement volumes for An application for approval of a proposed provisional rule or a proposed initial rule must include the following information: (a) A description of the consultation process that was undertaken by the ISO including a list of parties who participated and copies of any submissions made by parties under subsections 12.2 and 12.3, if applicable; (b) An explanation of whether the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial rule relates to the capacity market and why;: (i) the capacity market and why; or (ii) the electricity market and why; (c) If the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial rule relates to the capacity market, an explanation of whether or not the rule will be in effect for a fixed term and why; (d) A description of the objective or purpose of the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial rule; (e) A copy of any analysis conducted or commissioned by the ISO supporting the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial rule, with a description of assumptions and methodology; (f) An explanation of why the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial rule, taken together with all ISO rules and in light of the principle of a fair, efficient and openly competitive market, was proposed; (g) A description of any alternatives that were considered to achieve the objective or purpose of the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial ruleexplored during consultation and an brief explanation as to why they were rejected; (h) If the rule relates to the capacity market, a description of how the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial rule supports ensuring a reliable supply of electricity at a reasonable cost to customers; (i) An explanation of how the proposed provisional rule or proposed initial rule supports the public interest; and AltaLink: In part (a), there should be an opportunity for market participants to challenge/add to the written record to fully reflect what they thought was relevant during the ATCO: Require AESO to explain if a rule relates to both capacity and energy markets in part (b). Part (f) should also require the AESO to include the tariff in its FEOC explanation. Part (g), require AESO to describe all alternatives that were proposed and why they were rejected. Concern that as written, AESO can pick and choose what it considered. Add that the AESO show a rule is not technically deficient. AESO should address any stakeholder concerns arising in consultation of technical deficiency. Capital Power: Explanation of which market a rule relates creates an unhelpful and unnecessary separation of the two markets. Rules must be considered within the context of the entire market. Recommend changing (b) to: an Market participants are not precluded from participating in a Commission proceeding. It is up to the ISO and market participants to conduct the consultation prior to a rule being brought to the Commission. If market participants are not satisfied with the rule as proposed by the ISO in its application to the Commission, they will be able to add to the record through the proceeding. The AUC had made the distinction between the capacity market and the electricity market as this distinction is made in Bill 13. AUC staff have proposed to instead just specify the capacity market as capacity market rules have additional legislative tests. Fixed term rules are contemplated in Bill 13 for ISO rules that relate to the capacity market. The use of a fixed term rule is for the ISO to determine. Comments regarding technical deficiency have been addressed in an earlier section. Page 21 of 30