Reliant settles with Ferc for up to $50m
The US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Ferc) yesterday reached agreement with subsidiaries of Houston-based Reliant Resources to settle all its investigations in connection with its review of manipulation of the Californian energy markets. The proceeds of the settlement could total $50 million, the Ferc said.
Reliant did not admit to the violations in agreeing the settlement, which calls for the company to pay $15 million in cash within 30 days. Two more instalments of $5 million each are due by September 30, 2005, and September 30, 2006. As much as another $25 million could also be derived from Reliant’s auctioning of 824 megawatts of generation capacity over the next three years.
The settlement proceeds from the three annual auctions will be dependent upon market conditions, the Ferc said, but they will not exceed $25 million. California’s investor-owned and municipal utilities will have the right of first refusal for this low-cost capacity, the Ferc added. The settlement funds will be deposited into a special treasury fund for the benefit of California and western-US electricity customers, and the Ferc plans to address dispersal of those funds in a future proceeding.
The agreement also calls for strict reporting by Reliant to the Ferc’s Office of Market Oversight and Investigations of all sales for one year. Reliant is also required to retain all telephone conversation tapes of employees trading electricity for three years.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Esma supervision proposals ensnare Bloomberg and Tradeweb
Derivatives and bonds venues would become subject to centralised supervision
Industry frowns on FCA’s single-sided trade reporting efforts
Buy side warns UK attempt to ease Mifir burden may miss target; dealers aren’t happy either
One vision, two paths: UK reporting revamp diverges from EU
FCA and Esma could learn from each other on how to cut industry compliance costs
Market doesn’t share FSB concerns over basis trade
Industry warns tougher haircut regulation could restrict market capacity as debt issuance rises
FCMs warn of regulatory gaps in crypto clearing
CFTC request for comment uncovers concerns over customer protection and unchecked advertising
UK clearing houses face tougher capital regime than EU peers
Ice resists BoE plan to move second skin in the game higher up capital stack, but members approve
ECB seeks capital clarity on Spire repacks
Dealers split between counterparty credit risk and market risk frameworks for repack RWAs
FSB chief defends global non-bank regulation drive
Schindler slams ‘misconception’ that regulators intend to impose standardised bank-like rules