By William Opalka
Transmission developer LS Power Transmission is protesting Order 1000 compliance filings by NYISO, SPP and ISO-NE, saying they still favor regulated incumbents over independent developers. NextEra Energy also filed a protest in NYISO’s docket.
The protests, submitted last week, are to compliance filings the three regions made in response to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission orders in April and May.
FERC accepted NYISO’s Order 1000 compliance filing in April while denying multiple requests for rehearing. (See FERC Denies Rehearing Requests on NYISO Order 1000 Compliance Filing.)
LS Power praised NYISO for its handling of the stakeholder process, saying it was an “open dialogue that actually valued the exchange of ideas, rather than a perfunctory process, for process sake, that occurred in some regions that oppose Order No. 1000 at the regional planner level.”
It said its protest to the ISO’s developer agreement is limited to “sections that provide no ratepayer benefit but that have the potential to substantially increase costs either through increased financing costs or through a significant mismatch to the obligations undertaken by incumbent transmission owners proposing regulated backstop solutions.”
“Because both regulated and alternative projects will be evaluated against each other under the Order No. 1000 compliant process, it is important that the developer agreement impose no more stringent obligations on the developer of an alternative regulated solution than are imposed on incumbent transmission developers,” it wrote (ER13-102-007).
NextEra said the agreement burdens alternative developers without guaranteeing faster project completion. It said the deadlines within the agreement do not reflect the reality of project development schedules and that NYISO should not be given latitude to terminate a project agreement when the project is faced with obstacles beyond the developer’s control.
LS Power said SPP’s compliance filing fails to meet the requirements of Order 1000 because its exceptions to competitive bidding are overly broad. (See FERC Rejects Rehearing Request on SPP Order 1000 Filing.)
It said competitive bidders should only be disqualified if the only feasible route would alter an incumbent transmission owner’s use and control of its existing right of way and law or regulation prevents use of alternatives to those rights-of-way (ER13-366).
In New England, LS Power said ISO-NE failed to delete certain language as ordered by FERC following its second compliance order from 2013 regarding backstop transmission solutions (ER13-193).