20180529Admitted Exhibit 308.pdf

O 139 FERC ¶61,133
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL
ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Before Commissioners:Jon Wellinghoff,Chairman;
Philip D.Moeller,John R.Norris,
and Cheryl A.LaFleur.
Portland General Electric Company Docket No.ERl2-1293-000
ORDER GRANTING REQUESTFOR LIMITED WAIVER
(Issued May 18,2012)
1.On March 19,2012,Portland General Electric Company (Portland General)
requested that the Commission grant a one-year waiver of certain provisionsof its open
access transmission tariff (OATT)that govern interconnection studies and transmission
service requests for the Cascade Crossing Transmission Project (Cascade Crossing).For
the reasons set forth below,the Commission will grant Portland General's request.
I.Background
2.Portland General is a vertically-integratedpublic utility located in the Western
Electricity CoordinatingCouncil region.Portland General owns generation,
transmission,and distribution facilities that serve both wholesale and retail customers in
Oregon.
3.Portland General explains that Cascade Crossing is a 500 kV transmission line that
it is developingto connect renewable and other generating resources that are located east
of the Cascade Mountains to Portland General's transmission system.'Portland General
states that the project'sdevelopmentis in response to numerous requests for
interconnection and transmission service.Portland General states that it has received
approximately3000 MW of requests for interconnection service,and another 1500 MW
of requests for transmission service associated with Cascade Crossing.2 Portland General
i Portland General's Transmittal Letter at 2.Portland Generalproposes to
construct Cascade Crossing on a path parallelto an existinghigh-voltagetransmission
line from Boardman to Salem,Oregon.See
http://www.cascadecrossingproject.com/pge.aspx.
Exhibit No."g,PIIC
Case NO.PAC-E-17-07
PGE OATT Waiver from FERC
Docket No.ERl2-1293-000 -2 -
'
estimates that the cost of Cascade Crossing is between $800 million and $1 billion,which
it states is "significantly in excess"of Portland General's current transmission rate base.'
As a result of challengesin financing a project of this magnitude,Portland General states
that it has been exploringthe possibilityof jointly constructing Cascade Crossing with
other transmissionproviders in the region."
II.Portland General's Filing
4.Portland General asserts that with approximately3000 MW of requests in its
interconnection queue and 1500 MW of requests in its transmission service queue,it is
difficult to evaluate each request serially,even though all requests seek service over the
same transmission project.Moreover,assessing the overall demand for Cascade
Crossing and the commercial viability of the configurationoptions for the project has
been challengingusing the current study approach.5 Such serial evaluation is currently
set forth in sections 6-8,19-20,and 32,and section 7.4 of Attachment O of Portland
General's OATT.
5.Portland General states that,because of the high volume of requests associated
with Cascade Crossing,in June 2011,it notified customers that it proposed to hold an
"open season"to solicit financial commitments to purchase transmission capacity and
interconnection services on Cascade Crossing.'Portland General then held a customer
meeting and solicited comments on its open season proposal.Portland General observed
that,while customers had questions,none objected to havingits individual study placed
on hold.'After a second customer meeting in November 2011,Portland General decided
3 Id.
4 Portland General explains that it entered into memoranda of understandingwith
Idaho Power Company in October 2008 and with PacifiCorp in July 2010 to consider the
possibilityof joint developmentand ownership options for Cascade Crossing.Portland
General states that,while no agreements have yet been reached,it is still in negotiations
with Idaho Power Company and PacifiCorp.Id.
5 The two main configurations are:(1)a single 500 kV circuit with a minimum of
1200 MW of capacity,or (2)a double 500 kV circuit with greater capacity if connected
both to Portland General's Bethel substation and a Bonneville Power Administration
substation.Id.
6 To facilitate the open season process,Portland Generalnotified its customers that
it intended to suspend action on queue-based individual studies.
7Id.at4.
O
Exhibit No._,PIIC
Case NO.PAC-E-17-07
PGE OATTWaiver from FERC
'Docket No.ERl2-1293-000 -3 -
O not to move forward with the open season because many generators in the
interconnection and transmissionservice queues for Cascade Crossing intend to
participate in Portland General's future request for proposals (RFP)for generating
capacity."As a result,Portland General contends that the continuation of an open season
would require existingcustomers to post substantialfinancial security without knowing
the results of the RFP to determinetheir projects'commercial viability."In Portland
General's estimation,this uncertainty could potentiallyunderminethe value of the open
season in assessing aggregate demand for the project or allocatingits limited capacity.'"
6.Additionally,Portland General asserts that many critical issues remain to be
negotiated,particularlythe allocation of capacity to the project in the West of Cascades
South Path.For this reason,the total allocated capacity of the projectremains uncertain,
further complicatingPortland General's ability to hold an open season for that capacity.
Therefore,Portland General proposes to postpone the open season and,in the interim,
conduct a general facilities study,which is effectivelya cluster study of the network
upgrades necessary to serve all customers in the queue for interconnection or
transmission service from Cascade Crossing (General Facilities Study)."Portland
General states that no customers objected to its proposal.12
7.Portland General explainsthat its instant waiver proposal has four key elements.
First,Portland General requests Commission approvalto defer,for one year from the date
of Commission action in this proceeding,the processing of the requests in its
interconnection and transmission service queues associated with Cascade Crossing.
8.Second,Portland General intends to conduct the General Facilities Study of
Cascade Crossing so as to effectivelyreplace the individual facilities studies that are
"Accordingto Portland General's submittal,winningbids from the RFPs will not
be selected until late 2012 or early 2013,at the earliest.
*Id
io Id
"Portland General states that it will bear all costs associated with conducting the
General Facilities Study for Cascade Crossing.Id.at 5,n.4.
12 Id.
O
Exhibit No.N,PIIC
Case NO.PAC-E-17-07
PGE OATT Waiver from FERC
Docket No.ERl2-1293-000 -4 -
required under its OATT.3 The General Facilities Study will include a nonbinding
estimate of the costs of the two main configurationoptions for Cascade Crossing,and
Portland Generalwill post the study on its open access same time information system
when it is completed.
9.Third,Portland General submits that,althoughthe General Facilities Study will
not include sole use interconnection facilities for those generators that may connect to the
project,it will perform such studies upon request.'"Portland General commits that,if a
customer requests a study of its specific interconnection facilities during the one-year
waiver period,it will conduct a separate study and will charge the customer the
associated costs for processing the study.is
10.Fourth,before the end of the one-year waiver period,Portland Generalstates that
it will discuss with its customers the appropriate next steps for service on Cascade
Crossing,which may include an open season or other process to seek the requisite
financial commitments to support the project'sconstruction.Once the next steps are
chosen,Portland General will make a filing with the Commission before the conclusion
of the waiver period and request any necessary approvals.16 Portland General notes that
it does not anticipate incurring any incremental costs to perform the General Facilities
Study and commits that,in any event,it will not directly assign any costs for the study to
--17customersintheinterconnectionortransmissionservicequeues.
11.Portland General asserts that its waiver proposal is consistentwith Commission
precedent that encourages public utilities to evaluatetheir queue management procedures,
particularlyinterconnection practices.Portland Generalstates that while the "first-come,
3 Portland General explainsthat the General Facilities Study will utilize the same
design that is currently proposed in its state,federal,and tribal permittingprocesses.Id.
at 5.
I4 Id.
is Portland General acknowledgesthat there may be instances where some discrete
network upgrades associated with specific requests for service will not be fully evaluated
until a customer-specific interconnection facilities study is performed.Portland General
neverthelessasserts that the General Facilities Study will evaluate the vast majorityof all
anticipated network upgrades associated with Cascade Crossing.Id.at 5,n.3.
"Id.at 6.
17 Id.at 5,n.4.
O
Exhibit No._,PIIC
Case NO.PAC-E-17-07
PGE OATTWaiver from FERC
'Docket No.ERl2-1293-000 -5 -
O first-served"approach of Order No.2003'"made sense at the time it was issued,such
approach may have inadvertentlyled developers to reserve space in interconnection
queues for projects that were not commerciallyviable."Portland General adds that in
Order No.890,the Commission observed that coordinated studies could be more
beneficial to transmissionplanningthan individual studies performed iteratively.
12.Portland General asserts that its request for a one-year waiver is consistentwith
the Commission's standards because it is of limited scope,addresses a concrete problem,
and will not have undesirable consequences.2'It emphasizes that the waiver request is
limited in scope from the perspective that it will only last for one year,and only apply to
Cascade Crossing.In addition,Portland General states that the limited waiver will have
no effect on the existingqueue positionof any customers or the customer's right to
request an individual study."Portland General states that its proposal is consistentwith
or superior to the pro forma OATT in several respects.First,all customers in the
Cascade Crossing queue will have the benefit of a general study while they wait to learn
if their proposals have been selected;second,Portland General will complywith all
remaining obligationsof its OATT,including facilities studies;and third,before the
expirationof the one-year waiver period,Portland General will communicate with its
customers and the Commission about any changes to Portland General's OATT needed at
that time to accommodate Cascade Crossing.
is Standardization of Generator Interconnection Agreements and Procedures,
Order No.2003,FERC Stats.&Regs.¶31,146 (2003),order on reh 'g,Order No.2003-
A,FERC Stats.&Regs.¶31,160,order on reh'g,Order No.2003-B,FERC Stats.&
Regs.¶31,171 (2004),order on reh 'g,Order No.2003-C,FERC Stats.&Regs.¶31,190
(2005),affd sub nom.Nat'l Ass'n of RegulatoryUtil.Comm'rs v.FERC,475 F.3d 1277
(D.C.Cir.2007).
19 Id.at 6,citing Interconnection Queuing Practices,122 FERC ¶61,252,at P 15
(2008),and Order No.2003,supra n.18.
2o Id.,citing PreventingUndue Discrimination and Preference in Transmission
Service,Order No.890,FERC Stats.&Regs.¶31,241,at P 543,order on reh 'g,Order
No.890-A,FERC Stats.&Regs.¶31,261 (2007),order on reh 'g,Order No.890-B,
123 FERC ¶61,299 (2008),order on reh 'g,Order No.890-C,126 FERC ¶61,228
(2009).
21 1d.at 9.
22 Id.
O
Exhibit No._,PilC
Case NO.PAC-E-17-07
PGE OATTWaiver from FERC
Docket No.ERl2-1293-000 -6 -
III.Notiçeof Filing gnd Responsiye Pleadings
13.Notice of Portland General's filing was publishedin the Federal Register,77 Fed.
Reg.19,660 (2012),with interventions and protests due on or before April 9,2012.None
was filed.
IV.Commission Determination
14.The Commission has found good cause to grant waiver where the waiver is of
limited scope,where there are no undesirableconsequences,and where there are resultant
benefits to customers.23
15.The Commission finds Portland General's argumentsin support of its request for a
limited waiver,i.e.,that circumstanceswarrant such a waiver,to be persuasive,and
grants the requested waiver.Portland General's request for waiver of certain OATT
provisionsthat provide for individual studies for both interconnection and transmission
services,for the limited period of one year,satisfies the Commission's standards for tariffwaivers.24 Specifically,we find that Portland General's requested waiver is limited in
scope,addresses a concrete problemthat needs to be remedied,and will not have
undesirable consequences,such as harming third parties.25 We also find that Portland
General's request for waiver is limited in scope because it will only be in effect for one
year and will only be applicable to interconnection and transmission service queues
related to the Cascade Crossing project.Additionally,we find that Portland General's
request addresses a concrete probleminsofar as Portland Generalwill be conducting the
General Facilities Study for a projectwhere it was faced with multiplerequests for
interconnection and transmission service but where it also was unclear which potential
project participants would,in fact,be able and willing to go forward.We also find that
23 See,e.g.,Cal.Indep.Sys.OperatorCorp.,133 FERC ¶61,020,at P 8 (2010);
Cal.Indep.Sys.OperatorCorp.,132 FERC ¶61,132,at P 14 (2010),order on reh'g,
137 FERC ¶61,062 (2011);Cal.Indep.Sys.OperatorCorp.,124 FERC ¶61,031,at
P 19,reh'g denied,124 FERC ¶61,293 (2008);Cal.Indep.Sys.OperatorCorp.,
l18 FERC ¶61,226,at P 24,order on clarification,120 FERC ¶61,180 (2007).
24 See,e.g.,Pub.Serv.Co.ofN.M.,136 FERC ¶61,231,at P 79 (2011)(allowing
clustering when doing interconnection studies);see generallyOrder No.890,FERC
Stats.&Regs.¶32,241 at P 543.
25 See,e.g.,PJAlf Interconnection,L.L.C.,128 FERC ¶61,162,at P 8 (2009);ISO
New EnglandInc.,l17 FERC ¶61,171,at P 21 (2006)(addressing temporary tariff
waivers).
O
Exhibit No._,PIIC
Case NO.PAC-E-17-07
PGE OATTWaiver from FERC
Docket No.ERl2-1293-000 -7 -
underthe circumstancesthe waiver will not have undesirableconsequences.Although
Portland General believes that the need for individual studies would be highly unlikely,it
also remains committed to perform serial studies for customers who may request one.
16.Moreover,all costs associated with conducting the General Facilities Study for
Cascade Crossing will be paid by Portland General,as opposed to directly assigned to
individual customers,and the study will not affect existingcustomers'queue positions
for Cascade Crossing.
The Commission orders:
The Commission hereby grants Portland General's limited waiver request,as
discussed in the body of this order.
By the Commission.
(SEAL)
Nathaniel J.Davis,Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
O
Exhibit No.N,PIIC
Case NO.PAC-E-17-07
PGE OATT Waiver from FERC