Sec. 4. Transmission planning and cost allocation
1,146 words·~5 min read·
/bill/118/hr/5154/ih/section-4A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Commission shall promulgate a final rule that— establishes transmission planning processes and cost-allocation processes that— ensure that transmission providers— engage in interregional transmission planning processes and interconnection-wide transmission planning processes, in conjunction with transmission planning processes within transmission planning regions; harmonize interregional transmission planning processes and interconnection-wide transmission planning processes with other regional transmission planning processes, such as by using a joint model on a consistent timeline with a unified set of minimum requirements regarding needs, input assumptions, and benefit metrics; include as part of planning and cost-allocation processes the use of grid-enhancing transmission technologies and alternative transmission technologies that increase delivery of power over transmission networks, including, at a minimum— dynamic line ratings; topology optimization; power flow control; advanced conductors and superconductors; and storage-as-transmission; conduct interregional and interconnection-wide planning regularly and not less frequently than once every 5 years; conduct interregional and interconnection-wide planning based on a range of possible future load and generation scenarios; and are required to incorporate in a transmission planning process the full scope of benefits of transmission investment, including, at a minimum— reduced costs of electric energy to customers, including reduced costs associated with lower quantities of necessary capacity, ancillary services, and reserve margins; access to resources in neighboring transmission planning regions; the transmission of renewable energy or the ability of renewable energy to connect to the grid; improvements in reliability, resilience, and flexibility of the grid, including, at a minimum— reduced loss of load probability; increased resource diversity; increased climate hardening; and increased ability to maintain functionality during regionally appropriate weather conditions and severe weather scenarios; leveraging resources across climatological patterns or time zones to account for resource availability and weather patterns; avoidance, to the maximum extent practicable, of sensitive environmental areas and cultural heritage sites; reasonable and economical use of existing rights-of-way; market facilitation benefits, including, at a minimum, increased competitiveness, liquidity, and integrity of broader geographic markets; avoided costs and deferred cost savings, including reduced generation costs and reduced future transmission investment costs; the integration of grid-enhancing technologies; meeting local, State, and Federal policy goals, including goals established in decarbonization, climate, and clean energy laws (including regulations); protections to maintain just and reasonable rates for customers; and any other production costs savings or other economic benefits from proposed transmission projects; require that regional and interregional cost-allocation methodologies allocate costs on the basis of the multiple benefits described in subclauses
(I)through
(XIII)of subparagraph (A)(vi); incorporate a 10- to 20-year future resource mix for each load-serving entity and State; ensure that local or regional transmission planning processes do not impair interregional and interconnection-wide transmission planning processes; require transmission providers to maximize the use of portfolio-based cost allocations; in cases in which costs and benefits are difficult to quantify, may allocate transmission investment costs among transmission system customers in proportion to— in the case of regional projects, the share of electricity of each customer in the region; or in the case of interregional projects, the share of electricity of each customer in each applicable region; and to the extent practicable, prevent transmission providers from using cost-allocation methodologies that— discourage distributed generation, energy efficiency, demand response, or storage if more economic than transmission; are constrained by consideration only of benefits that are easy to allocate; or undermine previous cost-allocation agreements for projects already in operation; and allows a transmission developer of an interregional transmission project to submit to the Commission a request to recover all or a portion of the costs of the project under section 205 of the Federal Power Act ( 16 U.S.C. 824d ) if— the project is selected through a transmission planning process that meets the criteria described in paragraph (1), in accordance with the transmission planning processes and cost-allocation processes established under that paragraph; or the transmission developer demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Commission that— the project connects more than 1 transmission planning region; and the benefits of the project substantially outweigh the costs of the project after accounting for any transmission projects developed pursuant to a transmission planning process that meets the criteria described in paragraph (1). In making a determination under subsection (a)(2)(B)(ii) of whether a transmission developer has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Commission that the benefits of a project substantially outweigh the costs of the project, the Commission shall consider the benefits described in subsection (a)(1)(A)(vi). For transmission projects that meet the criteria of subparagraph
(A)or
(B)of subsection (a)(2), the Commission shall allocate the costs of those transmission projects to customers in the applicable regions that benefit from those projects— using the benefits described in subsection (a)(1)(A)(vi); or in cases in which those benefits are difficult to quantify, using the cost allocation methodology described in subsection (a)(1)(F). Nothing in this section limits, or may be construed to limit, any rights of transmission developers to submit and have rates approved by the Commission pursuant to section 205 of the Federal Power Act ( 16 U.S.C. 824d ). The Commission may require a load-serving entity to make publicly available any applicable resource plans, including any plans relating to the requirement described in subsection (a)(1)(C), if, in the determination of the Commission, the plans are not adequately described in publicly stated plans in Securities and Exchange Commission filings, State agency filings, and power purchase contracts. As part of the rulemaking process under subsection (a), the Commission may convene a technical conference to consider implementation details, as the Commission determines to be appropriate. A technical conference convened under paragraph
(1)may be led by the members of the Commission, subject to subparagraph (B). On election under subparagraph
(A)by members of the Commission to lead a technical conference, the Commission shall invite to participate in the technical conference representatives of residential ratepayers, transmission providers, environmental justice and equity groups, Tribal communities, Independent System Operators, Regional Transmission Organizations, consumer protection groups, renewable energy advocates, State utility commission and energy offices, and such other entities as the Commission determines to be appropriate. The Commission may establish and enforce a timeline for a technical conference convened under paragraph
(1)that discourages actions by participants that may unnecessarily delay the conference. The Commission may provide an opportunity for public comment on the topics considered by a technical conference convened under paragraph (1). The Commission shall consult the Office of Public Participation during the rulemaking process under subsection (a), including with respect to— guidance on public participation requirements; communications with the public concerning transmission planning that may impact local communities and landowners, including Tribal, indigenous, and environmental justice communities; and minimum data transparency and access requirements. The Commission may consult the Joint Federal-State Task Force on Electric Transmission in any actions that— involve shared Federal and State regulatory authority and processes; or would benefit from a combined Federal and State perspective.
Connectionstraces to 1
Traces to 1 document
Citation graph
cites case law
Sec. 4
Transmission planning and cost allocation
Cites 1Cited by 0 across 0 sources