The proposal currently on the table is a step backwards and would clearly limit the ability of the media to cover the NYISO, Heidorn said. | AP Photo Proposal before grid operator would restrict press coverage

ALBANY — A proposal being mulled by energy market players would severely limit media coverage of how billions of dollars flow through the electricity markets and what steps New York's independent grid operator is taking to support the state's climate goals.

A draft proposal to change the bylaws of the New York Independent System Operator, which has a major role in the electricity rates paid by every residential and business customer in the state, would effectively bar publications from reporting on early discussions of issues ranging from pricing carbon to valuing energy storage.


The proposal would limit what reporters could write about meetings in exchange for the ability to attend them, including barring any direct reports on discussions at lower-level meetings and allowing individuals to refuse to be quoted at higher-level meetings. At the moment, meetings are open to media attending in-person, without conditions.

The plan has not been finalized and may be abandoned after some market participants raised concerns about press access.

“The NYISO, [its] stakeholders, its policies, and most importantly consumers are best served by a transparent process that admits plenty of daylight. Few good things but mushrooms grow well in the dark,” said Aaron Breidenbaugh, a consultant with Luthin Associates which represents Consumer Power Advocates — a group that advocates on behalf of institutional energy customers such as hospitals, universities and cultural institutions.

Breidenbaugh said, while some accommodations might make sense to facilitate open dialogue, "the current proposal to completely prevent the press from reporting on deliberations at the working group level at all is overkill.”

Proponents of limiting coverage argue it will allow robust discussions of sensitive issues and protect against potential errors by the media.

Staff, consultants and lawyers for the New York Power Authority, Department of Public Service, New York City, utilities, generating companies, storage developers, consumers, energy marketers and other interests regularly air their positions on proposed changes to market rules that often have major implications for the state’s energy policies and the bottom line of private companies and electricity consumers.

Some hope to strike a compromise on the issue.

“Our position is to maximize transparency, taking into account folks' legitimate concerns about being accurately quoted and people who need appropriate permissions internally before they make public statements are given the opportunity to get those approvals,” said Eastern Generation’s Liam Baker. “That’s a balancing act we’re certainly supportive of.”

The latest proposal discussed last week at a NYISO bylaws subcommittee meeting would prohibit reporting on discussion at working groups where much of the in-depth policy-making occurs. The press could report on publicly posted presentations by NYISO staff made at working groups, but not the questions asked by market participants or any ensuing discussions.

“Everyone knows that’s where the sausage is made,” Baker said.

Development of the plan to put a price on carbon in the electric markets — which would have a significant impact on electric customers — has taken place in the working group setting. Those representing an array of energy interests have debated the impacts to ratepayers, the role of transmission, how to address out-of-state imports and the treatment of New York Power Authority revenues in these settings.

The working group venue is where a fight over how to value energy storage resources played out, with power generation companies and NYISO staff raising concerns about reliability. State officials pushed back, allying with energy storage developers.

Mark Younger, who runs a consulting firm called Hudson Energy Economics, in a July 2018 email expressed support for barring quotes from participants at the working group level.

The proposal would also require reporters to get approval to quote participants in higher-level committee meetings. An individual could refuse to be quoted and a media outlet could be barred from future meetings for violating these rules.

Such arrangements requiring prior approval of quotes before publication is a departure from standard journalistic practices in the U.S.

“The draft proposal by stakeholders to revise the Management Committee By-Law participation rules was for discussion purposes only,” said Kevin Lanahan, NYISO’s vice president of external affairs and corporate communications in a statement. “There was an array of opinions expressed in the discussion, including support for media access. All stakeholder feedback is being considered for next steps, including calls to maintain the current rules without changes.”

The discussion of media access to NYISO meetings was initiated by RTO Insider, a trade publication that exhaustively covers grid operators in New York and across the country. The publication unsuccessfully sought, through a complaint with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, to allow unfettered coverage of New England Power Pool stakeholder meetings after the membership-based group banned press from attending.

FERC ruled that the press could attend meetings as a member but restrictions on reporting about discussions at meetings remain in place. Grid operators like NYISO, while holding major sway over power prices, are considered private entities and are not subject to the same standards of transparency as government bodies.

There are also requirements for prior approval at lower-level meetings in PJM and notification requirements for quoting participants in higher-level committees, said RTO Insider editor and co-publisher Rich Heidorn Jr. in an interview.

In the case of NYISO, RTO Insider proposed that the outlet’s reporters should be allowed to dial in to meetings, which members of the press or public are currently prohibited from doing.

Some energy market players saw an opportunity to restrict media coverage of the NYISO process.

The possibility of barring media altogether from working group level meetings was considered — with exceptions potentially granted by the management committee — according to a March 2018 presentation by NYSEG’s Patricia Caletka posted on NYISO’s website. (Caletka was seeking to synthesize discussion by various stakeholders and was not presenting a company position, according to NYSEG.)

The proposal currently on the table is a step backwards and would clearly limit the ability of the media to cover the NYISO, Heidorn said.

“The supporters of this change say that when people are at working groups they’re thinking out loud, and their positions may change,” he said. “Nobody gets nailed to the wall for a position they took in month one. … That’s kind of a red herring.”

Heidorn said he wants his reporter who covers both ISO New England and the NYISO to be able to dial in to meetings because conflicts may arise — and does not regret making the request.

“I feel like it’s an ongoing dialogue and I think there are times when stakeholders will feel it’s in their public interest to have their views amplified by being published,” he said. “I have regrets that people are fearful of transparency and I hope to convince them that it’s not a bad thing.”

Two major utilities indicated they do not support moving forward with any restrictions.

“NYSEG supports an open and transparent NYISO stakeholder process,” said NYSEG spokesperson Michael Jamison in a statement. “That includes access for media that may be interested in covering committee meetings taking place. … Any proposals to change the [management committee’s] by-laws moving forward should be tabled and our focus stay on the important issues that impact our customers on a daily basis.”

Con Edison also opposes moving forward with changes.

“We support transparency, including media access that exists today, to NYISO stakeholder discussions,” spokesperson Michael Clendenin said in a statement.

The Natural Resources Defense Council, which is an environmental party at the NYISO, sees transparency as crucial.

“We think it’s important to allow people to be informed about decisions that are being made about the electric grid,” said NRDC’s Bruce Ho. “These are important decisions about the evolution of our electric grid, what kind of power plants are being built and supported, about how state policies are being reflected or not reflected. … We don’t think it’s appropriate to keep the public or the press in the dark.”

The New York Power Authority, which is a party to the NYISO agreement and has a vote on matters, declined to comment on the proposal.