NYISO on Monday updated the Transmission Planning Advisory Subcommittee on a phased window approach to its generator interconnection queue to potentially replace the current process.

The construct would enable groups of overlapping projects, which proceed in separate phases in a single queue window, to be evaluated simultaneously throughout the interconnection process; add decision periods and milestone requirements to give developers more flexibility; and replace individual system reliability impact studies.

Since the 2019 passage of New York’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, NYISO has been devising ways to hasten its existing three-part interconnection study process, including narrowing some study scopes, adding more staff and considering tariff revisions. (See NYISO Begins 2023 Class Year with Nearly 100 Projects.)

Thinh Nguyen, senior manager of interconnection projects, told stakeholders that the window approach seeks to reduce study times, increase efficiency without compromising reliability and give developers the ability to “get off the train” by opting out of the process without disrupting other studies.

Although encouraged that NYISO is investigating queue enhancements, stakeholders still sought clarity on many aspects of the approach.

Mark Younger, president of Hudson Energy Economics, asked whether a project would still “have another bite at a future queue window” and rejoin later if it decides to not proceed as part of their assigned queue window.

Visual representation of NYISO’s proposed interconnection queue window approach | NYISO

 

Nguyen responded it would but added that projects electing to withdraw from their current queue window “actually have no more bite but can jump to the next queue window.”

Doreen Saia, an attorney with Greenberg Traurig, asked how the approach would interface with state agencies, such as the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), and their solicitations.

Nguyen said that “it’s probably easy for NYSERDA to look at our new process and create the new rules that will be applicable for any solicitation,” to which Saia responded that she would “definitely encourage that those conversations happen in the relatively near team, because I don’t want [NYISO] to go too far down this path and then have [state agencies] say that it’s just not going to work.”

Stakeholders asked additional questions, such as about how study deposits would be treated if a project withdraws, whether the ISO could elaborate on certain definitions or terms, the role consultants would play and how elements of the current interconnection study process would fit into the new approach.

Nguyen addressed these lines of questioning but reiterated that NYISO was “not going to go too deep … because [stakeholders and the ISO] have not yet agreed to move forward with the new process.”

NYISO will continue soliciting feedback and spend part of the April 14 TPAS meeting addressing any remaining questions or unresolved issues, Nguyen said.

Long Island PPTN Report

NYISO on Monday also released its draft public policy transmission planning report, which included sensitivity results for 16 offshore wind projects that participated in the Long Island public policy transmission needs (PPTN) process. (See “Offshore Wind,” NYISO Stakeholders Propose Three Areas for Public Policy Transmission.)

In the coming months, NYISO will continue to review the results with stakeholders, add further details on additional sensitivities for consideration and include ISO-recommended rankings for all the submitted projects.

Developers are invited to present their projects to NYISO’s Board of Directors on April 17; on June 13 the ISO will conduct an “appeal-like process” for stakeholders to raise concerns and provide other feedback directly to the board.