Below are summaries of the agenda items for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's June 17, 2021 open meeting, pursuant to the agenda issued on June 10, 2021. Items E-5, E-10, and G-3 have not been summarized due to omission.
In this issue…
- Electric Items
- Gas Items
- Hydro Items
- Certificate Items
Electric
E-1 – Joint Federal-State Task Force on Electric Transmission (Docket No. AD21-15-000). Agenda item E-1 may be a draft proposal for consideration regarding a joint federal-state task force on electric transmission.
E-2 – State Voluntary Agreements to Plan and Pay for Transmission Facilities (Docket No. PL21-2-000). Agenda item E-2 may a proposed policy statement for consideration regarding state voluntary agreements to plan and pay for transmission facilities.
E-3 – ConocoPhillips Company, Tenaska Power Services Company, Exelon Generation Company, LLC, Mercuria Energy America, LLC, Tucson Electric Power Company, UNS Electric, Inc., BP Energy Company, Public Service Company of New Mexico, Mesquite Power, LLC, Guzman Energy, LLC, Shell Energy North America (US), L.P., TransAlta Energy Marketing (U.S.) Inc., Brookfield Renewable Trading and Marketing LP, PacifiCorp El Paso Electric Company, Uniper Global Commodities North America LLC, Macquarie Energy LLC, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc., EDF Trading North America, LLC, Direct Energy Business Marketing, LLC, Nevada Power Company (Docket Nos. ER21-40-000, ER21-42-000, ER21-43-000, ER21-43-001, ER21-46-000, ER21-47-000, ER21-48-000, ER21-51-000, ER21-51-001, ER21-52-000, ER21-55-000, ER21-56-000, ER21-57-000, ER21-58-000, ER21-59-000, ER21-60-000, ER21-61-000, ER21-61-001, ER21-64-000, ER21-65-000, ER21-135-000, ER21-326-000, ER21-434-000, & ER21-62-000). The above-captioned entities submitted cost justification filings pursuant to Commission order providing an extension of time to file cost justifications for sales over the soft price cap in the Western Electric Coordination Council geographic area. Agenda item E-3 may be an order on the cost justification filings.
E-4 – Participation of Distributed Energy Resource Aggregations in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators (Docket No. RM18-9-003). On September 17, 2020, the Commission issued Order No. 2222 adopting reforms to remove barriers to the participation of distributed energy resources aggregations in the Regional Transmission Organization (RTO) and Independent System Operator (ISO) markets (RTO/ISO markets). A number of parties moved for rehearing and/or clarification of Order No. 2222. On March 18, 2021, the Commission issued Order No. 2222-A dismissing or disagreeing with most arguments for rehearing. Several parties moved for rehearing and/or clarification of Order No. 2222-A. Agenda item E-4 may be an order on the requests for rehearing and/or clarification of Order No. 2222-A.
E-5 – Omitted
E-6 – Broadview Solar, LLC (Docket No. QF17-454-007). On September 1, 2020, the Commission issued an order denying Broadview Solar, LLC's (Broadview) application seeking Commission certification that Broadview's proposed hybrid solar photovoltaic (PV) facility is a qualifying small power production facility (QF) pursuant to the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA) and section 292.207(b) of the Commission's regulations. Also in the September 1, 2020 order, the Commission revoked Broadview's self-certification of QF status filed on January 29, 2020, while the application for Commission certification was still pending. On March 19, 2021, the Commission issued an order on rehearing modifying and setting aside the September 2020 order in part, and concluded that Broadview's proposed facility meets PURPA's requirements for a qualifying small power production facility. Several parties moved for rehearing of the Commission's March 19, 2021 order. Agenda item E-6 may be an order on the requests for rehearing of the Commission's March 19 order.
E-7 – Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. (Docket No. EL21-75-000). Information regarding agenda item E-7 is not publicly available. Agenda item E-7 may be a proceeding against Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. instituted by the Commission pursuant to Section 206 of the Federal Power Act.
E-8 – Chalk Point Power, LLC, Dickerson Power, LLC, Lanyard Power Marketing, LLC, Morgantown Power, LLC & Morgantown Station, LLC (Docket Nos. ER21-573-002, ER21-574-002, ER21-575-002, ER21-577-002 & ER21-578-002). On December 4, 2020, as amended December 7, 2020, Chalk Point Power, LLC, Dickerson Power, LLC, Lanyard Power Marketing, LLC, Morgantown Power, LLC, and Morgantown Station, LLC (collectively, Applicants) submitted for filing pursuant to Section 205 of the FPA applications for authorization to make wholesale sales of energy, capacity, and certain ancillary services at market-based rates. On December 28, 2020, the Independent Market Monitor for PJM filed a protest. On April 15, 2020, the Commission issued a deficiency notice to the Applicants regarding their applications. Applicants submitted information in response to the deficiency notice shortly thereafter. Agenda item E-8 may be an order regarding the above-named Applicants' applications for market-based rate authorization.
E-9 – PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Docket No. EL21-78-000). Information regarding agenda item E-9 is not publicly available. Agenda item E-9 may be a proceeding against PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.'s (PJM) instituted by the Commission pursuant to Section 206 of the Federal Power Act.
E-10 – Omitted
E-11 – Bitter Ridge Wind Farm, LLC (Docket No. ER20-2446-003). On July 16, 2020, as amended September 17, 2020, Bitter Ridge Wind Farm, LLC (Bitter Ridge) submitted, pursuant to Schedule 2 of the PJM Interconnection, LLC Open Access Transmission Tariff, a rate schedule for Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation Sources Service (Reactive Rate). The Reactive Rate set forth the proposed annual revenue requirement of $975,927.95 for Bitter Ridge's 146 MW wind turbine generating facility located in Jay County, Indiana. On September 11, 2020, the Commission issued a deficiency letter with respect to the Reactive Rate filing, to which Bitter Ridge responded on September 17, 2020. On November 16, 2020, the Commission issued an Order accepting Bitter Ridge's proposed Reactive Rate for filing, to become effective on the later of September 15, 2020, or the date Bitter Ridge achieved commercial operation. The Commission also set the matter for hearing and settlement judge procedures pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act. The Bitter Ridge wind facility reached commercial operation on September 29, 2020. Following informal discovery and settlement conferences, Bitter Ridge submitted an uncontested Offer of Settlement, consisting of a black box annual revenue requirement of $597,296.52, on March 4, 2021. Agenda item E-11 may be an order addressing the Offer of Settlement.
E-12 – Hamilton Liberty LLC; Hamilton Patriot LLC (Docket Nos. ER20-2452-001, ER20-2452-002, ER20-2453-002, ER20-2453-003). On February 19, 2021, Hamilton Liberty LLC and Hamilton Patriot LLC (collectively, the Hamilton Project Companies) filed, pursuant to Schedule 2 of the PJM Interconnection, LLC (PJM) Open Access Transmission Tariff, an informational filing in advance of a proposed transaction involving the transfer of 50% of the indirect ownership interests in the Hamilton Project Companies from an affiliate of EIG Asset Management, LLC to an affiliate of The Carlyle Group Inc. The filing was made in connection with revenue requirements for Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generator or Other Sources Service (Reactive Service) provided by generating facilities in PJM. On April 16, 2021, the Hamilton Project Companies submitted, at the request of FERC staff, the revised reactive supply and voltage control from generation or other source service rate schedules reflecting prior corporate name changes to facilitate processing of the February 19th filing. The revised Reactive Power Rate Schedules were previously filed with a prior notice of succession filed in Docket Nos. ER20-2452-000 and ER20-2453-001. Agenda item E-12 may be an order addressing the Informational Filing and Reactive Power Rate Schedules.
E-13 – Paulding Wind Farm IV LLC (Docket No. ER20-2503-002). On July 23, 2020, as amended September 24, 2020, Paulding Wind Farm IV LLC (Paulding Wind) filed, pursuant to section 205 of the Federal Power Act, a proposed rate schedule for Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation Sources Service (Reactive Rate), as defined in Schedule 2 of the PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Open Access Transmission Tariff. The Reactive Rate set forth the proposed annual revenue requirement of $691,974.71 for Paulding Wind's 126 MW wind turbine generating facility located in Paulding County, Ohio. On November 23, 2020, the Commission accepted Paulding Wind's proposed Reactive Rate, suspended it for a nominal period, to become effective September 22, 2020, subject to refund, and established hearing and settlement judge procedures. Following settlement negotiations, Paulding Wind filed an uncontested Offer of Settlement, consisting of a black box annual revenue requirement of $450,000, on April 1, 2021. Agenda item E-13 may be an order addressing the Offer of Settlement.
E–14 – Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (Docket Nos. ER20-2322-000, ER20-2323-000, ER20-2354-000, ER20-2355-000). On January 26, 2018, The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an Opinion finding that the Commission failed to adequately justify its decisions to prevent transmission owners from unilaterally electing to provide initial funding for construction associated with interconnection facilities and network upgrades, and vacated the Commission's orders and remanded for further consideration. On December 20, 2019, the Commission responded by issuing an Order on Briefing, Compliance, and Rehearing directing, among other things, that Generator Interconnection Agreements and Facilities Construction Agreements entered into between June 24, 2015 and August 31, 2018 should be revised to allow transmission owners and affected system operators to unilaterally elect to provide initial funding for network upgrades, if they so choose. MISO submitted several compliance filings in response to the Commission's directives. On July 6, 2020, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO) submitted a Facilities Service Agreement among Northern States Power Company (NSP), Otter Tail Power Company (Otter Tail), and MISO for Original Service Agreement No. 3526. On July 7, 2020, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO) submitted a Facilities Service Agreement among Interstate Power and Light Company (IPL), ITC Midwest LLC (ITCM), and MISO for Original Service Agreement No. 3523. On July 9, 2020, MISO submitted a Facilities Service Agreement among Northern States Power Company (Northern States), Montana-Dakota Utilities Co. (MDU), and MISO for Original Service Agreement No. 3525. On July 9, 2020, MISO submitted a Facilities Service Agreement among Northern States Power Company (Northern States), Montana-Dakota Utilities Co. (MDU), and MISO for the First Revised Service Agreement No. 3056. Agenda item E-14 may be an order addressing MISO's compliance filings.
E–15 – Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (Docket Nos. ER20-2352-000, ER20-2352-001, ER20-2353-000, ER20-2353-001). On January 26, 2018, The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an Opinion finding that the Commission failed to adequately justify its decisions to prevent transmission owners from unilaterally electing to provide initial funding for construction associated with interconnection facilities and network upgrades, and vacated the Commission's orders and remanded for further consideration. On December 20, 2019, the Commission responded by issuing an Order on Briefing, Compliance, and Rehearing directing, among other things, that Generator Interconnection Agreements and Facilities Construction Agreements entered into between June 24, 2015 and August 31, 2018 should be revised to allow transmission owners and affected system operators to unilaterally elect to provide initial funding for network upgrades, if they so choose. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO) submitted several compliance filings in response to the Commission's directives. On July 9, 2020, MISO submitted a Generator Interconnection Agreement among Great River Energy (GRE), Otter Tail Power Company (Otter Tail), and MISO for Fourth Revised Service Agreement No. 1972. On July 9, 2020, MISO submitted a Facilities Service Agreement among Great River Energy (GRE), Otter Tail Power Company (Otter Tail), and MISO for Original Service Agreement No. 3510. Agenda item E-15 may be an order addressing MISO's compliance filings.
E–16 – Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (Docket Nos. ER20-2364-000, ER20-2364-001, ER20-2373-000). On January 26, 2018, The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an Opinion finding that the Commission failed to adequately justify its decisions to prevent transmission owners from unilaterally electing to provide initial funding for construction associated with interconnection facilities and network upgrades, and vacated the Commission's orders and remanded for further consideration. On December 20, 2019, the Commission responded by issuing an Order on Briefing, Compliance, and Rehearing directing, among other things, that Generator Interconnection Agreements and Facilities Construction Agreements entered into between June 24, 2015 and August 31, 2018 should be revised to allow transmission owners and affected system operators to unilaterally elect to provide initial funding for network upgrades, if they so choose. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO) submitted several compliance filings in response to the Commission's directives. On July 10, 2020, MISO submitted a Facilities Service Agreement among Northern States Power Company (NSP), as both Interconnection Customer and Transmission Owner, and MISO for Original Service Agreement No. 3512. On July 10, 2020, MISO submitted an Amended and Restated Generator Interconnection Agreement among Northern States Power Company (NSP), as both Interconnection Customer and Transmission Owner, and MISO for First Revised Service Agreement No. 3049. Agenda item E-16 may be an order addressing MISO's compliance filings.
E-17 – Daylight I, LLC, Edwards Solar Line I, LLC and Sanborn Solar Line I, LLC (Docket No. ER21-1638-000). On April 2, 2021, Daylight I, LLC (Daylight I), Edwards Solar Line I, LLC (ES I), and Sanborn Solar Line I, LLC (SS I) submitted, pursuant to Rule 204 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Commission, a request for waivers of accounting and financial reporting obligations, consistent with those granted to other owners of limited and discrete Interconnection Customer Interconnection Facilities (ICIF), and blanket authorization under section 204 of the Federal Power Act for all future issuances of securities. Agenda item E-17 may be an order addressing the request for waivers and blanket authorization.
E-18 – Lone Tree Wind, LLC (Docket No. ER20-2953-002). On September 23, 2020, Lone Tree Wind, LLC (Lone Tree) filed, pursuant to section 205 of the Federal Power Act, a proposed rate schedule for Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation Sources Service (Reactive Rate), as defined in Schedule 2 of the PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. Open Access Transmission Tariff. The Reactive Rate set forth the proposed annual revenue requirement of $803,489.87 for Lone Tree's 88.68 MW wind turbine generating facility located in Bureau County, Illinois. On November 17, 2020, the Commission accepted Lone Tree's proposed Reactive Rate, suspended it for a nominal period, to become effective November 23, 2020, subject to refund, and established hearing and settlement judge procedures. Following settlement negotiations, Lone Tree filed an uncontested Offer of Settlement, consisting of a black box annual revenue requirement of $383,000, on March 23, 2021. Agenda item E-18 may be an order addressing the Offer of Settlement.
E-19 – New York Independent System Operator, Inc. and LS Power Grid New York Corporation (Docket No. ER20-716-004). On April 8, 2019, the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO) designated LS Power Grid New York Corporation (LSPGNY) and the New York Power Authority (NYPA) to develop, own, and operate the Marcy to New Scotland Project (Segment A Project). On December 31, 2019, as amended on March 26, 2020, the NYISO filed, pursuant to section 205 of the Federal Power Act, a request, on behalf of LSPGNY, to utilize a company-specific formula rate template and protocols to determine and recover the costs of LSPGNY's investment in the Segment A Project transmission facilities, and to establish transmission rate incentives for its portion of the transmission project. On May 26, 2020, the Commission granted LSPGNY's requests for certain incentives, accepted LSPGNY's Formula Rate and proposal for a performance-based rate incentive and cost cap, suspended them for a nominal period to become effective May 27, 2020, subject to refund, and established hearing and settlement judge procedures. Following several procedural maneuvers in opposition to the proposed formula rate and transmission incentives initiated by the New York Public Service Commission, including requests for rehearing and petitions for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, the parties engaged in settlement negotiations culminating in the April 9, 2021 uncontested Offer of Settlement. Agenda item E-19 may be an order addressing the Offer of Settlement.
E-20 – Harbor Cogeneration Company, LLC (Docket No. ER21-1321-000). On March 10, 2021, Harbor Cogeneration Company, LLC (Harbor) filed a Petition for Limited Waiver, or in the Alternative, Remedial Relief pursuant to Section 309 of the Federal Power Act (FPA). Harbor sought the waiver of the California Independent System Operator Corporation (CAISO) Tariff provisions governing the Resource Adequacy (RA) must-offer obligations and the RA Availability Incentive Mechanism (RAAIM) penalties. Harbor stated that it was unduly assessed RAAIM penalties by CAISO for October and November 2020 attributable to inadvertently incorrect information sharing. Agenda item E-20 may be an order on the Petition for Limited Waiver of RAAIM penalties as brought forward by Harbor.
E-21 – Greenleaf Energy Unit 2 LLC (Docket No. ER20-1947-003). On June 1, 2020, Greenleaf Energy Unit 2 LLC (Greenleaf) submitted an unexecuted version of the agreement between itself and CAISO designating the facility as a reliability must run (RMR) unit. Greenleaf had not participated in CAISO markets to that point and asserted that CAISO could not compel Greenleaf to provide RMR services, but nonetheless produced an agreement. On July 1, 2020, the Commission issued an order accepting the RMR agreement. On August 31, 2020, Greenleaf submitted a notice of termination of the RMR agreement. On December 15, 2020, during settlement judge procedures, the presiding judge declared an impasse and an Administrative Law Judge was assigned to the negotiations ongoing between Greenleaf and CAISO. On March 17, 2021, Greenleaf and CAISO submitted a Joint Offer of Settlement purporting to resolve the outstanding material issues in the proceeding. Namely, the settlement would resolve a number of critical issues for the parties, including Greenleaf operating as an RMR service provider in the CAISO market. The settlement would establish Greenleaf as an RMR for an initial term lasting through 2021 and includes the applicable terms and conditions of such an agreement. In addition, the settlement would establish the annual fixed revenue requirement and variable operations and maintenance rate for each forthcoming RMR contract year. On April 29, 2021, the Administrative Law Judge issued a certification of uncontested settlement. Agenda item E-21 may be an order on the Joint Offer of Settlement as brought forward by Greenleaf and CAISO.
E-22 – Public Utilities Commission of the State of California v. Sellers of Long-Term Contracts to the California Department of Water Resources (Docket No. EL02-60-007); California Electricity Oversight Board v. Sellers of Long-Term Contracts to the California Department of Water Resources (Docket No. EL02-62-006). On February 25, 2002, the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California (CPUC) and the California Electricity Oversight Board (EOB) filed separate complaints to the Commission seeking to modify 30 long-term wholesale energy contracts between 2000 and 2001, a period of significant market dysfunction in the western region of the US. CPUC and EOB entered into the contracts with multiple sellers, including Shell and Iberdrola. In the complaints, CPUC and EOB argued that the sellers exerted market power in obtaining the contracts and therefore this unjust exercise resulted in a violation of the FPA as well as damage to California ratepayers. On April 25, 2002, the Commission issued an order dismissing the allegations as to the contracts entered into after June 20, 2001 (including the Iberdrola contract) and set the outstanding issues for a hearing. The Commission ordered the scope of the hearing as contemplating whether the dysfunctional California spot markets adversely affected the long-term bilateral markets, and, if so, whether modification was warranted of any individual contract at issue. On January 16, 2003, the presiding Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) issued a partial decision, holding that the Mobile-Sierra public interest standard of review applied to negotiated contracts. On June 26, 2003, the Commission affirmed the ALJ decision and found that CPUC and EOB had not sufficiently demonstrated adverse public interest concerns and, consequently, denied their separate complaints. CPUC and EOB then filed an appeal to the June 26, 2003 order in the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. On appeal, the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded the Commission's prior orders, finding that the Commission mistakenly applied the Mobile-Sierra precedent to conclude that the challenged contracts were just-and-reasonable. On August 28, 2014, CPUC and the Attorney General of the State of California submitted a Second Motion for an Order Setting Procedures on Remand from the Ninth Circuit. The motion requested that the Commission assign the case to an ALJ in order to reopen the record and open a proper discovery process in order to identify potentially relevant evidence following the Supreme Court decision in Morgan Stanley Capital Group, Inc. v. Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County, in which the Supreme Court found that the long-term contracts at issue were protected by the Mobile-Sierra presumption of just and reasonable rates and ordered a remand to the Commission for further fact-finding on the question of whether the Mobile-Sierra presumption had been either avoided or overcome. On November 17, 2014, the Commission issued an Order on Remand, assigning an ALJ to a trial-type, evidentiary hearing to supplement the existing record in the proceeding. Following a lengthy hearing spanning the year of 2005, the ALJ issued the Initial Decision on April 12, 2016. The decision mainly proffered the finding that the Mobile-Sierra doctrine of presumptive justness and reasonableness did not apply to either contract in question. On December 2, 2016, April 4, 2018, and April 6, 2020, respectively, CPUC and Shell submitted letters to the Commission requesting issuance of an order responsive to the Initial Decision. The parties separately implored the Commission to act upon the matter as it enters its third decade of litigation and would provide clarity on the regulatory issue of the application of Mobile-Sierra to wholesale market-based rate contracts. Agenda item E-22 may be an order on the CPUC and EOB complaints.
E-23 – California Independent System Operator Corporation (Docket No. ER04-835-014). On August 28, 2019, the Commission issued an order determining the calculation of interest amounts required pursuant to the CAISO Refund Report and 2014 Resettlement reached with Shell Energy North America US, L.P. (Shell). On August 25, 2020, the Commission issued a deficiency letter to obtain certain information relating to the 2014 Resettlement. CAISO responded to the deficiency letter on September 24, 2020. On March 1, 2021, the Commission issued an order concluding the longstanding compliance process relating to Shell. The Commission granted the CAISO waiver request and precluded external review of pre-2010 data, which Shell argues for in its March 31, 2021 request for rehearing. Agenda item E-23 may be an order on the request for rehearing of the March 1 order as brought forward by Shell.
E-24 – Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (Docket No. ER18-99-006). On October 18, 2017, Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (SPP) filed, pursuant to section 205 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), proposed tariff revisions to add an annual transmission revenue requirement (ATRR) and implement a formula rate template and implementation protocols for transmission service using the facilities of GridLiance. The filing was made in response to GridLiance's proposed acquisition of transmission assets from the City of Nixa, Missouri (Nixa Assets) and transfer of control of the Nixa Assets to SPP. SPP proposed to place the Nixa Assets in SPP Pricing Zone 10. On March 15, 2018, the Commission issued an order accepting the proposed tariff revisions and establishing hearing and settlement judge procedures to determine whether the placement of the Nixa Assets in Pricing Zone 10 is just and reasonable. On July 12, 2018, after the parties failed to reach settlement, Settlement Judge H. Peter Young declared an impasse. Jennifer M. Long was designated as the Presiding Judge and a hearing was held March 5 to March 7, 2019. At the conclusion of the hearing, Presiding Judge Long referred the case to the Commission's Alternative Dispute Resolution Division and encouraged settlement pending completion of the hearing procedures. On July 10, 2019, GridLiance and the ARKMO Cities filed a joint motion to suspend the procedural schedule to allow sufficient time to submit a settlement agreement prior to the issuance of an Initial Decision. The Offer of Settlement was filed on August 30, 2019. Multiple parties filed comments opposing the Offer of Settlement. On May 27, 2020, Presiding Judge Long certified the contested settlement. On February 18, 2021, the Commission issued an order rejecting the contested settlement. The outstanding material issues were assigned to an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) and set for settlement judge procedures on February 22, 2021. On March 22, 2021, GridLiance submitted a request for rehearing of the February 18 order. Agenda item E-24 may be an order on the request for rehearing as brought forward by GridLiance.
E-25 – George Berka v. Andrew M. Cuomo, North American Electric Reliability Corporation, Northeast Power Coordinating Council, New York Independent System Operator, Inc., New York Public Service Commission, Entergy Corporation, and Holtec Decommissioning International (Docket No. EL21-61-000). On March 24, 2021, George Berka (Berka) filed a Formal Complaint against the aforementioned entities concerning the deactivation of Indian Point Energy Center (Indian Point), a nuclear generating facility in the state of New York. The complaint raises issues surrounding the threat to electric system reliability posed by climate change and extreme weather events, particularly in light of the closure of a baseload facility such as Indian Point. Berka requests that the Commission order continued operation until at least the year 2035 and do not possess the authority under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to restrict issuance of Clean Water Act (CWA) permitting for the facility that would enable continued operations. Agenda item E-25 may be an order on the complaint as brought forward by Mr. Berka.
E-26 – Californians for Renewable Energy and Michael E. Boyd v. California Independent System Operator Corporation, California Public Utilities Commission, Pacific Gas & Electric Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, and Southern California Edison Company (Docket No. EL20-69-001). On August 31, 2020, Californians for Renewable Energy and Michael E. Boyd (collectively, Complainants) filed a Formal Complaint against the aforementioned entities pursuant to Section 206 of the FPA. The complaint alleges that the markets for energy and ancillary services operated by the respondents in California have produced unjust and unreasonable rates and require relief as granted by the Commission, particularly by reducing the energy bid cap from $1,000/MWh to $250/MWh. The complaint specifically furnishes information regarding higher than average market prices during a limited period in mid-August 2020. The respondents filed respective answers and motions to dismiss the complaint, such as CAISO stating that Complainants have failed to meet the legal burden under a section 206 investigation as well as Order No. 831 which will raise the energy bid cap to $2,000/MWh effective March 21, 2021 rather than decrease it per the Complainants' request. On March 18, 2021, the Commission issued an order denying the complaint and notice of intent not to act. On April 19, 2021, the Complainants filed a request for rehearing of the March 18 order. Agenda item E-26 may be an order on the rehearing request.
E-27 – NextEra Energy, Inc., Evergy, Inc., American Electric Power Company, Inc., Exelon Corporation, and Xcel Energy Services Inc. (Docket No. EL21-14-001). On October 30, 2020, NextEra Energy, Inc.,
American Electric Power Company, Inc., Evergy, Inc., Exelon Corporation, and Xcel Energy Services Inc. (collectively, Petitioners) filed an Expedited Petition for Declaratory Order in order to resolve issues stemming from Order Nos. 860 and 860-A. Namely, Petitioners seek Commission declarations pertaining to the voting securities of a public utility when a financial institution acquires up to 20 percent of said securities as well as determinations if such ownership interests are passive in nature based on utility-sourced judgment and judicial analysis and precedent. A number of stakeholders filed comments and protests in opposition to the petition, commonly stating that granting Petitioners' requests would expand a safe harbor for “horizontal shareholding” from Section 203 to Section 205 of the FPA, and would ostensibly limit the reporting of information necessary for the Commission to oversee financial institutions' ownership of securities in public utilities. On March 18, 2021, the Commission issued an order denying the petition. On April 19, 2021, Edison Electric Institute and NextEra Energy, Inc. filed respective requests for clarification and rehearing of the March 18 order. Agenda item E-27 may be an order on the requests for rehearing.
Gas
G-1 – Equinor Natural Gas LLC and The Brooklyn Union Gas Company (Docket No. RP21-622-000). On March 16, 2021, Equinor Natural Gas LLC (Equinor) and The Brooklyn Union Gas Company d/b/a National Grid NY (National Grid) submitted a joint petition requesting a temporary waiver of (1) the Commission's capacity release regulations and policies, (2) the applicable capacity release provisions of Texas Eastern Transmission, LP's and Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, L.L.C.'s FERC gas tariffs, and (3) any other waivers or authorizations deemed necessary to allow Equinor to permanently release two negotiated rate firm transportation service agreements to National Grid. Agenda item G-1 may be an order on Equinor and National Grid's petition.
G-2 – Antero Resources Corporation and MU Marketing LLC (Docket No. RP20-879-000). On June 29, 2020, the Commission issued a delegated letter (June Order) order that granted Antero Resources Corporation's (Antero) and MU Marketing LLC's (MU Marketing) request for temporary waiver of various capacity release regulations and policies, the related gas tariff provisions of the pipelines on which Antero holds capacity, and the Commission's shipper-must-have-title policy, to effectuate a corporate reorganization. The June Order stipulated that the requested waivers would remain in effect for 365 days from the issuance date of the order, and only to the extent necessary to facilitate the transaction described in Antero and MU Marketing's petition. On March 10, 2021, Antero and MU Marketing requested an extension for the waivers granted in the June Order. Agenda item G-2 may be an order on Antero and MU Marketing's request for extension.
G-3 – Omitted
G-4 – Equinor Marketing & Trading (US) Inc. v. Mustang Pipe Line LLC (Docket No. OR21-5-000). On March 20, 2021, pursuant to sections 1(4), 1(6), 3(1), 13, 15 and 16 of the Interstate Commerce Act (ICA), Equinor Marketing & Trading (US) Inc. (Equinor) filed a complaint against Mustang Pipe Line LLC (Mustang) alleging that Mustang unlawfully allocated capacity on its system in violation of its rules and regulations tariff and the proration policy incorporated by reference therein, the ICA, and the Commission's regulations. Agenda item G-4 may be an order on Equinor's complaint.
Hydro
H-1 – PacifiCorp; Klamath River Renewal Corporation, State of Oregon, and State of California (Docket Nos. P-2082-062, P-14803-000, P-14803-004). On January 13, 2021, pursuant to section 8 of the Federal Power Act, PacifiCorp, jointly with the Klamath River Renewal Corporation (Renewal Corporation), the State of California, and the State of Oregon (collectively, Applicants) submitted a joint application for, inter alia, approval of the transfer of the Lower Klamath Project No. 14803 hydroelectric license from PacifiCorp to the Renewal Corporation and the States of California and Oregon as co-licensees. Agenda item H-1 may be an order on the Applicants' license transfer application.
H-2 – Oregon State University (Docket No. P-14616-002). On March 1, 2021, the Commission issued an order (March 1 Order) granting an original license to Oregon State University (OSU) to construct, operate, and maintain the proposed 20 MW PacWave South Hydrokinetic Project No. 14616, which will be located on approximately 5,238.6 acres of the outer continental shelf, 6 nautical miles off the coast of Newport, Oregon. On March 31, 2021, OSU requested rehearing of the March 1 Order. On May 3, 2021, the Commission issued a Notice of Denial of Rehearing by Operation of Law (May Notice) stating that the rehearing request filed in the proceeding will be addressed in a future order. Agenda item H-2 may be the future order referenced in the Commission's May Notice.
H-3 – Truckee-Carson Irrigation District (Docket No. P-7828-020). On August 28, 2020, Truckee-Carson Irrigation District (TCID) filed an application with the Commission for an exemption from the Hydropower Annual Charges for the New Lahontan Hydroelectric Project No. 7828, located at the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation's Lahontan Dam on the Carson River in Churchill County, Nevada. On March 29, 2021, Commission staff issued a delegated letter order (March 29 Order) denying TCID's request. On April 28, 2021, TCID requested rehearing of the March 29 Order. On June 1, 2021, the Commission issued a Notice of Denial of Rehearing by Operation of Law (June Notice) stating that the rehearing request filed in the proceeding will be addressed in a future order. Agenda item H-3 may be the future order referenced in the Commission's June Notice.
Certificates
C-1 – Freeport LNG Development, L.P., FLNG Liquefaction, LLC, FLNG Liquefaction 2, LLC, and FLNG Liquefaction 3, LLC (Docket No. CP20-455-000). On May 13, 2020, pursuant to section 3(a) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), Freeport LNG Development, L.P., FLNG Liquefaction, LLC, FLNG Liquefaction 2, LLC, and FLNG Liquefaction 3, LLC (collectively, Freeport LNG) filed an application requesting authorization to site, construct, and operate modifications to Freeport LNG's existing Pretreatment Facility in Brazoria County, Texas to allow for the extraction of helium from an existing compressed boiled-off gas pipeline. On December 18, 2020, Commission staff issued an environmental assessment on Freeport LNG's proposed modifications to the Pretreatment Facility. On January 21, 2021 Freeport LNG submitted comments and requested clarification of the environmental assessment. Agenda item C-1 may be an order on Freeport LNG's application or request for clarification of the environmental assessment.
C-2 – Northern Natural Gas Company (Docket No. CP20-504-000). On July 31, 2020, pursuant to section 7 of the NGA, Northern Natural Gas Company (Northern) filed an application requesting authorization to (1) abandon in-place Northern's Lake City 1st branch line located in Webster and Calhoun counties, Iowa; (2) construct and operate an extension of the Lake City 2nd branch line; (3) uprate the maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) of the Lake City 2nd branch line and associated aboveground facilities; (4) uprate the MAOP of the Callender branch line; (5) uprate the MAOP of the Manson 2nd branch line; and (6) install associated aboveground facilities in Webster and Calhoun counties, Iowa. On February 26, 2021, Commission staff issued an environmental assessment on Northern's proposed project. Agenda item C-2 may be an order on Northern's proposed project.
C-3 – Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC (Docket No. CP21-17-000). On December 11, 2020, Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC (Columbia Gas) filed a prior notice request seeking Commission authorization to abandon 9 injection/withdrawal wells and associated pipelines and appurtenances, located in its Wellington Storage Field in Lorain and Medina Counties, Ohio. On February 16, 2021, Commission staff issued an environmental assessment report for Columbia's proposed abandonment project. Agenda item C-3 may be an order on Columbia's prior notice request.
White & Case means the international legal practice comprising White & Case LLP, a New York State registered limited liability partnership, White & Case LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated under English law and all other affiliated partnerships, companies and entities.
This article is prepared for the general information of interested persons. It is not, and does not attempt to be, comprehensive in nature. Due to the general nature of its content, it should not be regarded as legal advice.
© 2021 White & Case LLP
