Because LSEs must still offer fixed capacity prices under Order No. 872, and given the trend in decreasing prices for renewables, the Final Rule’s impacts on LEO formation may actual be fairly significant, particularly in states viewed as hostile
Latest from PURPA and Distributed Energy Resources Blog - Page 5
PURPA Final Rule Post I – Which of FERC’s Resolutions of the “Big Three Issues” Is Most Significant?
In Post I, we explore the three “big” issues that the Final Rule highlights at Paragraphs 13-20 – the (potential) reduction of the 20 MW cap to a 5 MW cap for renewables as to the must-purchase obligation on utilities
PURPA Final Rule – Order No. 872
Order No. 872 probably deviated more in favor of QFs, from the highly controversial NOPR that spawned it, than some expected. Nonetheless, it still will trigger a deluge of rehearing requests largely from environmental, public policy, and QF interests. The
The Lesson of the Appeal of Order No. 841 – Be Careful What You Ask For
On July 10, 2020, the D.C. Circuit issued its opinion on various Petitioners’ appeals of Order No. 841. As predicted, the Court denied Petitioners’ claim that FERC lacks the authority to prohibit States from barring electric storage resources
FERC Declines to Answer Question of Impact of Off-System QFs Choosing Constrained Points of Delivery
In a July 2, 2020 Order, FERC declined to answer a question in a Petition for Declaratory Order (PDO) concerning whether a set of off-system QFs could deliver power to a utility at a Point of Delivery (POD) that
Order No. 841 Oral Argument Analysis: Has Everyone Forgotten TAPS v. FERC?
Although there were tempting things to write about in last few months, client considerations meant not writing about certain “hot” topics such as net metering. The Order No. 841 oral argument at the D.C. Circuit, however, demanded an article. The
A Lesson for State Commissions In Classifying QFs
About a decade ago, FERC opened the door to state commissions setting different avoided cost rates and adopting different standard contracts for different types of QFs. Although the ultimate legality of so-called “tiered avoided cost pricing” remains to be tested
A New Mexico Federal District Court Tries to Slam Shut the PURPA “Implementation” Claims Window
In the last year, two decisions from judges sitting on the bench of the United States Court for the District of New Mexico have opined that PURPA claims made by plaintiffs were “as applied” rather than “implementation” claims and thus
Not All States Are Awaiting a FERC Final Rule In Re-Examining PURPA Rates and Contracts (Updated)
In light of the pending FERC PURPA NOPR, some states have stayed or delayed ruling on pending cases involving PURPA contracts and avoided cost rate, particularly where a standard contract or rate is involved. In two states, however, December 9,
Transmission Costs and Congestion: Relationship to Avoided Costs
PURPA presents interesting issues regarding how state commissions may deal with “transmission costs” caused by qualifying facilities (QFs), particularly when QFs are wheeling to a utility to which they are not interconnected. FERC previously has stated that a QF only