Generation

Subscribe to Generation via RSS

On October 15, 2020, FERC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NOPR”) to revise its regulations implementing the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (“PURPA”) to permit Solid Oxide Fuel Cell systems with integrated natural gas reformation equipment to be certified as cogeneration qualifying facilities (“QFs”). FERC proposed the changes in response to what it termed the “technical evolution of cogeneration,” and in response to Bloom Energy Corporation’s (“Bloom Energy”) petitioning FERC for such revisions.

On September 30, 2020, FERC accepted the California Independent System Operator Corporation’s (“CAISO”) proposals to: 1) permit electric vehicle charging stations to participate in CAISO’s demand response program separately from their host facilities (“EV Proposal”); and 2) incentivize behind-the-meter energy storage in CAISO’s demand response programs to “load shift” by consuming energy during over supply conditions and returning that energy to the system during times of need (“Load Shifting Proposal”). FERC held that CAISO’s proposals would enhance its demand response programs, which compensate load, storage, and generation resources for curtailing their demand in response to CAISO’s instructions. FERC also found that the proposals would ensure that CAISO’s policies keep pace with rapidly evolving electric vehicle and behind-the-meter storage technologies, and would permit these resources to participate in the CAISO market under rules that capture their unique characteristics and benefits.

On September 17, 2020, FERC issued a final rule (“Order No. 2222”) amending its regulations to require Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators (“RTO/ISO”) to revise their tariffs to facilitate the participation of distributed energy resource (“DER”) aggregations in organized wholesale electric markets. In the order, FERC found current RTO/ISO DER aggregation market rules to be unjust and unreasonable, established new definitions for DERs and DER aggregations, and detailed RTO/ISO tariff revisions that will allow DER aggregations to participate in RTO/ISO markets. Commissioner Danly dissented from the order, contending that FERC was overextending its jurisdictional authority and that, through the order, FERC was imprudently encouraging “resource development by fiat.” RTO/ISOs are required to file the tariff changes needed to comply with Order No. 2222 within two hundred seventy (270) days of publication of the order in the Federal Register.

On September 4, 2020, FERC rejected the New York Independent System Operator, Inc.’s (“NYISO”) proposed revisions to its buyer-side mitigation (“BSM”) rules that sought to prioritize storage, wind, solar, and other zero-emitting resources (“Public Policy Resources”) in NYISO’s Installed Capacity (“ICAP”) Market, rather than prioritizing new resources purely on a least-cost basis. While NYISO argued the state’s carbon and nitrogen oxide emissions reduction goals mean that a resource’s cost structure is no longer the best predictor of whether it will ultimately be developed, FERC held that NYISO’s proposal was unduly discriminatory because it prioritized Public Policy Resources over other non-Public Policy Resources. The decision sparked a dissent from Commissioner Richard Glick, who characterized FERC’s order as appearing to stake out the “radical” position that it is improper for NYISO to design its Tariff in a way that acknowledges state public policies, and a departure from FERC precedent focused on balancing the effects of state policies with measures to address how those policies affect capacity market prices.

On July 17, 2020, FERC issued three orders relating to the executed cost-of-service agreement (“Mystic Agreement”) among Constellation Mystic Power, LLC (“Mystic”), Exelon Generation Company, LLC (“Exelon”), and ISO New England Inc. (“ISO-NE”).  The Mystic Agreement provides for cost-of-service compensation to Mystic for the continued operation of two gas-fired generating units.  In the first two orders, FERC addressed requests for rehearing of its 2018 orders accepting the Mystic Agreement (the “July 2018 Order” and the “December 2018 Order”), including its conclusion that Mystic should recover from ratepayers 91% of the operating costs of the Everett Marine Terminal (“Everett”), a non-jurisdictional liquified natural gas import terminal.  In its third order, FERC accepted in part a Mystic compliance filing submitted in response to the December 2018 Order.  Commissioner Glick issued dissents to each of the July 17 orders.  Commissioner Glick concluded that FERC was forcing consumers to pay the full cost of service for Mystic in order to “bail out” Everett, and that each of the orders exceeded FERC’s jurisdiction under the Federal Power Act (“FPA”).

On July 22, 2020, FERC approved a mitigation proposal that Sun Jupiter Holdings, LLC (“Sun Jupiter”) and El Paso Electric Company (“El Paso”) (together, “Applicants”) submitted in response to FERC’s March 30, 2020 order (“March 2020 Order”) conditioning approval of Sun Jupiter’s merger with and into El Paso and requiring the Applicants to address the transaction’s adverse impact on competition in certain circumstances. FERC also dismissed, on procedural grounds, United States Senators Jeffrey A. Merkley (D-OR), Edward J. Markey (D-MA), and Bernard Sanders (D-VT) (collectively, “Senators”) request for rehearing, and denied Public Citizen, Inc.’s  (“Public Citizen”) request for rehearing of FERC’s March 2020 Order.

On July 16, 2020, FERC dismissed a petition for declaratory order by the New England Ratepayers Association (“NERA”) that asked FERC to assert jurisdiction over net metering, finding that the petition failed to identify a specific controversy or harm that warranted a generic response from FERC. NERA’s petition had requested that FERC declare: (1) that all flows of electricity from behind-the-meter generators under state net metering programs back to the interconnected utility are wholesale sales subject to FERC’s exclusive jurisdiction, and (2) such sales should be priced in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Power Act (“FPA”) or the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (“PURPA”). Commissioners Bernard L. McNamee and James Danly issued separate concurring opinions, noting that though NERA’s petition was procedurally unsound, the issues raised could be addressed on the merits in a different proceeding.

On July 16, 2020, FERC responded to a petition for declaratory order filed by a group of merchant generators (“Petitioners”) requesting that the Commission provide guidance and clarification on six areas of its cost-based reactive power ratemaking policy. While FERC declined to address five of Petitioners’ specific requests, explaining that it would address them in another ongoing reactive rate proceeding, FERC established paper hearing procedures on a single question: “what proxies, if any, may be used by merchant generators for reactive power service ratemaking purposes other than the use of the capital structure and the cost of capital of the interconnected utility.”

On June 18, 2020, FERC denied a complaint by Anbaric Development Partners, L.L.C. (“Anbaric”) against PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (“PJM”) alleging that PJM’s transmission interconnection procedures denied meaningful open access interconnection service to Anbaric’s proposed offshore transmission projects (see December 11, 2019 edition of the WER). FERC’s June 18 order concluded that Anbaric failed to demonstrate that PJM’s transmission interconnection procedures are unjust and unreasonable, or that the requirements for merchant transmission projects are either inconsistent with open access transmission service or unreasonably limit transmission expansion. FERC also highlighted its upcoming technical conference to discuss offshore wind integration in organized markets (see June 24, 2020 edition of the WER). Commissioner Bernard McNamee issued a separate concurring statement in which he highlighted his support for the technical conference.

On June 17, 2020, FERC issued two notices of upcoming technical conferences. First, a Commissioner-led technical conference is scheduled for Wednesday, September 30, 2020 to discuss considerations related to state adoption of mechanisms to price carbon dioxide emissions, commonly referred to as “carbon pricing,” in regions with FERC-jurisdictional organized wholesale electricity markets. Second, a staff-led technical conference will be held on October 27, 2020 to: (i) discuss whether existing transmission, interconnection, and merchant transmission facility frameworks in Regional Transmission Organizations/Independent System Operators (“RTOs/ISOs”) can accommodate anticipated growth in offshore wind generation in a manner that safeguards open access transmission principles; and (ii) consider possible changes or improvements to the current framework should they be needed to accommodate such growth.