Xcel Energy 2010 Annual Report Download - page 37

27
Revenue Sufficiency Guarantee (RSG) Charges — The MISO tariff charges certain market participants a real-time RSG charge,
which is designed to ensure that any generator scheduled or dispatched by MISO will receive no less than its offer price for start-
up, no-load and incremental energy.
In August 2010, the FERC issued two RSG-related orders, one in which, among other items, it affirmed its initial decision to not
require refunds for MISO’s failure to include virtual supply offers in its RSG calculations. The second order rejected various
provisions of MISO’s redesign proposal, which was intended to replace the current RSG methodology. In December 2010, MISO
filed a revised RSG tariff reflecting the 2009 “indicative” tariff proposal and subsequent FERC orders, to be effective March
2011.
Pacific Northwest FERC Refund Proceeding — In July 2001, the FERC ordered a preliminary hearing to determine whether
there may have been unjust and unreasonable charges for spot market bilateral sales in the Pacific Northwest for December 2000
through June 2001. PSCo supplied energy to the Pacific Northwest markets during this period and has been a participant in the
hearings. In September 2001, the presiding ALJ concluded that prices in the Pacific Northwest during the referenced period were
the result of a number of factors, including the shortage of supply, excess demand, drought and increased natural gas prices.
Under these circumstances, the ALJ concluded that the prices in the Pacific Northwest markets were not unreasonable or unjust
and no refunds should be ordered. Subsequent to the ruling, the FERC has allowed the parties to request additional evidence.
Parties have claimed that the total amount of transactions with PSCo subject to refund is $34 million. In June 2003, the FERC
issued an order terminating the proceeding without ordering further proceedings. Certain purchasers filed appeals of the FERC’s
orders in this proceeding with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
In an order issued in August 2007, the Court of Appeals remanded the proceeding back to the FERC. The Court of Appeals also
indicated that the FERC should consider other rulings addressing overcharges in the California organized markets. The Court of
Appeals denied a petition for rehearing in April 2009, and the mandate was issued. The FERC has yet to act on this order on
remand; currently, certain motions concerning procedures on remand are pending before the FERC.
FERC Audit of Wholesale FCA — In October 2009, the FERC notified NSP-Minnesota and NSP-Wisconsin that the FERC audit
division began an audit of compliance with the FERC’s accounting and reporting regulations related to the calculation of the
NSP-Minnesota and NSP-Wisconsin wholesale FCA for the period commencing Jan. 1, 2008.
FERC Audit of Transmission Incentives Compliance — In December 2007, the FERC granted NSP-Minnesota and NSP-
Wisconsin approval to recover a return on CWIP on their investments in the BRIGO, Chisago, Minn. to Apple River, Wis. and
CapX2020 transmission projects. The incentives are recovered through MISO transmission rates. In December 2010, the FERC
notified NSP-Minnesota and NSP-Wisconsin that the FERC audit division is beginning an audit of their compliance with the
FERC’s rules and orders related to collection of wholesale transmission investment incentives commencing December 2007.