Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc., 121610 FERC, ER10-1791-000

Docket Nº:ER10-1791-000
Party Name:Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.
Judge Panel:Before Commissioners: Jon Wellinghoff, Chairman; Marc Spitzer, Philip D. Moeller, John R. Norris, and Cheryl A. LaFleur. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary.
Case Date:December 16, 2010
Court:Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
 
FREE EXCERPT

133 FERC ¶61, 221

Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.

No. ER10-1791-000

United States of America, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

December 16, 2010

Before Commissioners: Jon Wellinghoff, Chairman; Marc Spitzer, Philip D. Moeller, John R. Norris, and Cheryl A. LaFleur.

ORDER CONDITIONALLY ACCEPTING TARIFF REVISIONS

Table of Contents

Paragraph Numbers

I. Background .............................................................................................................................................5.

A. Commission-Directed Reform of Transmission Planning Process ..............................................................5.

B. Existing Midwest ISO Cost Allocation Methodologies .............................................................................9.

C. Stakeholder Process ...............................................................................................................................18.

II. The Instant Filing .....................................................................................................................................26.

III. Notice of Filing and Responsive Pleadings ..............................................................................................44.

IV. Procedural Matters ................................................................................................................................45.

V. Substantive Matters .................................................................................................................................48.

A. Demonstration of Benefits Being Commensurate with Costs ......................................................................52.

1. Comments ................................................................................................................................................58.

a. General .....................................................................................................................................................58.

b. Criterion 1 ................................................................................................................................................66.

c. Criterion 2 and Criterion 3 ........................................................................................................................ 104.

d. Voltage Criteria .........................................................................................................................................115.

e. No Direct Cost Assignment of MVPs to Generators ...................................................................................119.

f. Transmission Studies, Cost Causation, and the Illinois Commerce Commission Decision ...............................135.

2. Filing Parties’ Answer ................................................................................................................................153.

3. Other Answers ..........................................................................................................................................172.

4. Calls for Annual Reporting .........................................................................................................................186.

5. Commission Determination .........................................................................................................................191.

a. Criteria .......................................................................................................................................................208.

b. Portfolio Approach .................................................................................................................................... 222.

c. Stakeholder Process ...................................................................................................................................225.

d. Studies .......................................................................................................................................................228.

e. Alternative Cost Allocation ..........................................................................................................................240.

f. Annual Reporting .........................................................................................................................................244.

B. Other Issues Raised Regarding MVP Criteria ..............................................................................................246.

1. Comments ...................................................................................................................................................249.

a. $20 Million Cost Threshold ..........................................................................................................................249.

b. Arguments that MVP Criteria 2 and 3 Projects will Subsume RECB I and II Projects ...................................251.

c. Exclusion of Projects Driven Solely by Interconnection Requests or Transmission Service Requests ...............255.

2. Answers ......................................................................................................................................................258.

3. Commission Determination ...........................................................................................................................261.

C. Proposals Regarding Generator Interconnection Cost Allocation and Planning Processes ..............................266.

1. 90-Percent Participant Funding and Shared Network Upgrades ....................................................................266.

a. Comments ....................................................................................................................................................269.

b. Answers .......................................................................................................................................................305.

c. Commission Determination ............................................................................................................................333.

2. Coordination of Generator Interconnection Process with Transmission Planning Process .................................339.

a. Comments .....................................................................................................................................................340.

b. Answers ........................................................................................................................................................346.

c. Commission Determination .............................................................................................................................351.

D. Cost Recovery ..............................................................................................................................................356.

1. Proposed MVP Usage Rate ...........................................................................................................................356.

a. Comments ......................................................................................................................................................357.

b. Answers .........................................................................................................................................................383.

c. Commission Determination ..............................................................................................................................384.

2. Financial Transmission Right and Auction Revenue Right Allocation ..................................................................391.

a. Comments and Answers ..................................................................................................................................392.

b. Commission Determination ..............................................................................................................................396.

3. Application of MVP Usage Rate to Exports and Wheel-Through Transactions .................................................397.

a. Comments ......................................................................................................................................................400.

b. Answers .........................................................................................................................................................417.

c. Commission Determination ..............................................................................................................................440.

4. No Cost Assignment to Grandfathered Agreements .........................................................................................446.

a. Comments ......................................................................................................................................................447.

b. Answers .........................................................................................................................................................449.

c. Commission Determination ..............................................................................................................................451.

E. Exiting and Entering Transmission Owners...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP