Common use of March 21 Order Clause in Contracts

March 21 Order. 103. The March 21 Order provided that: With respect to SPP’s annual membership fee, we accept SPP’s statement that this fee is for membership in Southwest Power Pool, Inc. and is not required to participate in Regional Entity activities. To clarify this distinction, we direct SPP to revise its bylaws to explicitly state that membership in the Regional Entity is open to any entity and that SPP will not charge a fee for such participation.[50] 104. With respect to funding, the March 21 Order found that SPP’s proposed funding mechanism, as set forth in Exhibit E, section 5 to the SPP Delegation Agreement, failed to address how the funds collected by SPP for non-statutory expenses will be kept separate from funds collected under FPA section 215. Accordingly, the Commission directed NERC and SPP to establish, at section 5, the procedures necessary to ensure this separation of accounts, or otherwise justify the existing provision.51 50 March 21 Order, 122 FERC ¶ 61,245 at P 213. 51 Id. P 216. Docket No. RR06-1-016, et al. -35- 105. The Commission also stated that it remained concerned regarding the adequacy of the separation of functions between the SPP RTO and SPP Regional Entity. The March 21 Order noted that Commission staff is auditing SPP Regional Entity’s organizational structure and practices, and a final Commission determination regarding the adequacy of the separation of functions between SPP Regional Entity and SPP RTO will remain pending the results of the audit.

March 21 Order. 103. The March 21 Order provided that: With respect to SPP’s annual membership fee, we accept SPP’s statement that this fee is for membership in Southwest Power Pool, Inc. and is not required to participate in Regional Entity activities. To clarify this distinction, we direct SPP to revise its bylaws to explicitly state that membership in the Regional Entity is open to any entity and that SPP will not charge a fee for such participation.[50] 104. With respect to funding, the March 21 Order found that SPP’s proposed funding mechanism, as set forth in Exhibit E, section 5 to the SPP Delegation Agreement, failed to address how the funds collected by SPP for non-statutory expenses will be kept separate from funds collected under FPA section 215. Accordingly, the Commission directed NERC and SPP to establish, at section 5, the procedures necessary to ensure this separation of accounts, or otherwise justify the existing provision.51 50 March 21 Order, 122 FERC ¶ 61,245 at P 213. 51 Id. P 216. Docket No. RR06-1-016, et al. -35- 105. The Commission also stated that it remained concerned regarding the adequacy of the separation of functions between the SPP RTO and SPP Regional Entity. The March 21 Order noted that Commission staff is auditing SPP Regional Entity’s organizational structure and practices, and a final Commission determination regarding the adequacy of the separation of functions between SPP Regional Entity and SPP RTO will remain pending the results of the audit.

March 21 Order. 103. The March 21 Order provided that: With respect to SPP’s annual membership fee, we accept SPP’s statement that this fee is for membership in Southwest Power Pool, Inc. and is not required to participate in Regional Entity activities. To clarify this distinction, we direct SPP to revise its bylaws to explicitly state that membership in the Regional Entity is open to any entity and that SPP will not charge a fee for such participation.[50] 104. With respect to funding, the March 21 Order found that SPP’s proposed funding mechanism, as set forth in Exhibit E, section 5 to the SPP Delegation Agreement, failed to address how the funds collected by SPP for non-statutory expenses will be kept separate from funds collected under FPA section 215. Accordingly, the Commission directed NERC and SPP to establish, at section 5, the procedures necessary to ensure this separation of accounts, or otherwise justify the existing provision.51 50 March 21 Order, 122 FERC ¶ 61,245 at P 213. 51 Id. P 216. Docket No. RR06-1-016, et al. -35- 105. The Commission also stated that it remained concerned regarding the adequacy of the separation of functions between the SPP RTO and SPP Regional Entity. The March 21 Order noted that Commission staff is auditing SPP Regional Entity’s organizational structure and practices, and a final Commission determination regarding the adequacy of the separation of functions between SPP Regional Entity and SPP RTO will remain pending the results of the audit.