DOCSLIB.ORG

January 26, 2017 Hon. Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
January 26, 2017 Hon. Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal Joshua A. Konecni Associate Counsel Rockland Electric Company 4 Irving Place, Room 1815-S, New York, NY 10003 Tel.: 212-460-3593 Email: [email protected] January 26, 2017 Hon. Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20426 Re: Rockland Electric Company, Docket No. ER17-___856-000 Dear Ms. Bose: Pursuant to Sections 205 and 219 of the Federal Power Act,1 Part 35 of the Commission’s Regulations,2 and Order No. 679,3 Rockland Electric Company (“RECO”) respectfully requests that the Commission approve: (1) the attached Tariff sheets updating RECO’s stated annual transmission revenue requirement, transmission rates, and rate for Schedule 1A services;4 (2) a new RECO base return on equity (“ROE”) of 10.2 percent; and (3) a 50 basis point ROE adder for RECO’s continued participation in PJM Interconnection L.L.C. (“PJM”), a Regional Transmission Organization (“RTO”) (“RTO Participation Incentive”).5 RECO is thus seeking a new total ROE of 10.7 percent, which is less than its current ROE of 11.11 percent. In support of this filing, RECO submits the testimony and associated exhibits of: (1) Francis Peverly, Vice President - Operations, Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc. (“O&R”); (2) the accounting panel of John de la Bastide, Jack Deem, and Wenqi Wang, (“Accounting Panel”); and (3) Adrian McKenzie. RECO also submits the cost of service 1 16 U.S.C. §§ 824d and 824s (2012). 2 18 C.F.R. §35.13 (2016). 3 Promoting Transmission Investment through Pricing Reform, Order No. 679, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,222 (2006), order on reh’g, Order No. 679-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,236, order on reh’g, 119 FERC ¶ 61,062 (2007) (Order No. 679). 4 Schedule 1A covers Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch Service. 5 Pursuant to Order No. 714, this filing is submitted by PJM on behalf of RECO as part of an XML filing package that conforms with the Commission’s regulations. PJM has agreed to make all filings on behalf of the PJM Transmission Owners in order to retain administrative control over the PJM Tariff. Thus, RECO has requested that PJM submit its proposed updated Tariff Sheets in the eTariff system as part of PJM’s electronic Intra PJM Tariff. Kimberly D. Bose January 26, 2017 Page 2 statements and other information required by the Commission’s regulations, to the extent applicable. RECO respectfully requests that the Commission approve the updated Tariff sheets, ROE, and RTO Participation Incentive, without suspension or hearing, effective April 3, 2017. However, in the event that the Commission decides to set this case for hearing and settlement judge procedures, RECO respectfully requests that in its order on this filing the Commission: (1) approve RECO’s request for a 50 basis point ROE adder for continued participation in PJM; and (2) confirm that the basic methodology RECO used to calculate its updated annual revenue requirement—which the Commission has previously approved—remains just and reasonable, and as such, is not an issue set for hearing or settlement. I. BACKGROUND A. Description of RECO and its Affiliates RECO is an electric-only utility that provides transmission, retail distribution, and provider of last resort service to approximately 73,000 customers in northern New Jersey. As a New Jersey utility, RECO is subject to the retail jurisdiction of the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities. RECO’s service territory includes parts of three counties that border New York—Bergen, Passaic, and Sussex— but the majority of its customers (more than 59,000) reside in Bergen County. RECO classifies its Bergen County service territory as its “Eastern Division,” its Passaic County service territory as its “Central Division,” and its Sussex County service territory as its “Western Division.” As discussed below, RECO is a PJM transmission owner because it has turned over operational control of its Eastern Division transmission assets to PJM. RECO’s Central and Western Divisions, which are not geographically contiguous to its PJM service area, along with O&R, are members of the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (“NYISO”). In 2015, RECO’s peak load for its Eastern Division was 396 MW.6 RECO is a wholly owned subsidiary of O&R,7 which in turn is a wholly owned subsidiary of Consolidated Edison, Inc. (“CEI”), the parent company of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (“Con Edison”).8 O&R is an electric and gas utility 6 In the remainder of this letter, references to “RECO” are to RECO’s Eastern Division, which is the Division in PJM. 7 O&R also owned Pike County Light & Power Company, an electric and gas utility located in Pennsylvania until 2016. 8 Con Edison is a regulated public utility that provides electric service in New York City and most of Westchester County, gas service in parts of New York City, and steam service within the borough of Manhattan. Con Edison serves approximately 3.3 million electric customers, 1.1 million gas customers, and 1,700 steam customers. Con Edison is a transmission owner in the NYISO’s control area, a load serving entity, and a distribution provider in New York City and parts of Westchester County. Kimberly D. Bose January 26, 2017 Page 3 and a transmission owner in the NYISO’s control area. O&R serves more than 225,000 electric customers and more than 130,000 gas customers in three New York counties: Rockland, Orange, and Sullivan. Two of these counties, Rockland and Orange, border RECO’s service territory. In 2015, O&R’s peak load was 1009 MW. RECO has no operating employees; O&R provides all of RECO’s administrative and operating services. Legal and other corporate services are provided to RECO by Con Edison. In addition, since the RECO and O&R transmission systems have historically been operated as a single system, O&R continues to design and operate them as a single integrated system (“Integrated Transmission System”) from its control center in Spring Valley, New York. In 2015, the peak load of the Integrated Transmission System was 1405 MW. B. RECO’s Move to PJM And Approval of Current Rates RECO joined PJM by transferring operational control of its Eastern Division transmission facilities from the NYISO to PJM in 2001 (“PJM Transfer”). RECO requested the PJM Transfer to facilitate its participation in New Jersey’s restructuring of the retail market.9 Before that, RECO did not have its own annual revenue requirement or transmission rates. Instead, its costs were factored into O&R’s transmission revenue requirement which is a rate under the NYISO Tariff. The Commission approved RECO’s current annual revenue requirement and transmission rates at the same time it approved the PJM Transfer.10 Because, as noted above, the RECO and O&R transmission systems are designed and operated as a single integrated system, RECO proposed to establish its annual revenue requirement in PJM by segregating and assigning costs to the PJM part of its load. RECO accomplished this by multiplying the annual revenue requirement for the Integrated Transmission System by the ratio of the RECO system peak load to the system peak load for the Integrated Transmission System: Rockland started with the overall O&R 1994 system-wide annual TRR of $32,820,759, which resulted from the settlement approved by the Commission in Docket No. OA96-210-000.[] In order to allocate an appropriate amount of transmission costs to the Rockland pricing zone, Rockland determined that the Rockland single system peak load in 1994 was 367 MW of the total 1994 O&R system- wide peak load of 1,022 MW. Using the ratio of 367/1022 and applying it to the overall O&R TRR, Rockland calculated a TRR for the Rockland pricing zone of 9 Rockland Elec. Co, 97 FERC ¶ 61,357 at P 9 (2001) (“RECO Order”). 10 Id. P 9. Kimberly D. Bose January 26, 2017 Page 4 $11,785,928. The resulting annual transmission rate is $32.114 per kW/year based on the prior Commission- approved TRR.11 The Commission approved RECO’s proposed rates and proposed method without comment. 12 C. Investment in the Integrated Transmission System As explained by Company witness Peverly, and as set forth in Exhibit No. RECO- 4, there has been significant investment in the Integrated Transmission System since 2001 that justifies RECO updating its transmission rates. For example, in 2003, RECO completed the South Mahwah-Upper Saddle River Project, which entailed replacement of approximately 0.70 miles of 69kV direct buried transmission cable between the South Mahwah and Upper Saddle River Substations in Bergen County with new cable in a manhole and duct system. Placing this project in service improved reliability for customers. In 2004, RECO completed construction of two new 138kV transmission line terminals for the underground cables required to feed its Darlington Substation. This project improved reliability and service to residential and commercial customers in Bergen County. In 2006, RECO completed the Closter to Cresskill Project, which included the upgrade of a double circuit 34.5kV wood pole transmission line to 69kV, as well as an upgrade of the Cresskill Substation. Construction of new double circuit transmission Lines 61 and 751 provided two 69kV transmission sources to the Cresskill Substation. In 2011, the Integrated Transmission System was enhanced by the Corporate Drive Project, which entailed construction of an underground extension to 138kV Lines 702 and 703 and the construction of an overhead to underground transition structure in Orangeburg, New York. Finally, in 2016, the Integrated Transmission System was enhanced by the addition of a 175 MVA 138-69kV autotransformer bank, Bank 167, at the Sterling Forest Substation in Tuxedo, New York.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Weakest Link: the Consistent Refusal to Consider Far-Removed Indirect Effects of the Expansion of Lng Terminals
    RHODES FINAL 11/16/17 THE WEAKEST LINK: THE CONSISTENT REFUSAL TO CONSIDER FAR-REMOVED INDIRECT EFFECTS OF THE EXPANSION OF LNG TERMINALS Synopsis: The D.C. Circuit has recently ruled on numerous cases challenging the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) approval of the expansion of liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals to allow both export and import activity. Much of its analysis has focused on the delegation of authority between the De- partment of Energy (DOE) and FERC under the Natural Gas Act (NGA). Envi- ronmental groups raised challenges to the Environmental Assessment (EA) com- pleted by FERC in each case, arguing that FERC failed to adequately consider direct and indirect effects of the expansion. The indirect effects would arise via a chain of events ultimately depending on the increased production and consump- tion of LNG. In each case, the Court has pointed out that FERC only has authority to regulate the expansion of the facilities themselves. Without approval by the DOE to allow the additional import or export at the individual terminal at issue, FERC’s approval can cause no indirect effects. Moreover, the Court has reiterated multiple times that since FERC’s approval does not cause these indirect effects, but the DOE’s approval does, these suits should have been brought against the DOE. In this note, I discuss one of these cases, EarthReports v. FERC, at length, as well as incorporate portions of other similar cases to come to an understanding regarding what steps potential challengers to similar approvals should take. If challengers hope to convince a court, particularly the D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Gas Imports and Exports Second Quarter Report 2019
    DOE/FE- 0615 Natural Gas Imports and Exports Second Quarter Report 2019 Prepared by: U.S. Department of Energy Office of Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement Division of Natural Gas Regulation Map shows the Exports of Domestically-Produced LNG Delievered by Vessel. (Cumulative starting from February 2016 through June 2019.) NATURAL GAS IMPORTS AND EXPORTS SECOND QUARTER REPORT 2019 Division of Natural Gas Regulation Office of Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement Office of Oil & Natural Gas Office of Fossil Energy U.S. Department of Energy 202-586-7991 [email protected] Table of Contents Summary ......................................................................................... 1 1 Quarterly Summary ...................................................................... 3 Maps of Imports & Exports by Point of Entry/Exit ........................................ 5 Graphical Summaries & Comparisons ............................................................ 11 Tabular Summaries & Comparisons ............................................................... 23 1a Quarter in Review ........................................................................................................................ 25 1b All Import/Export Activities YTD 2019 vs. YTD 2018 ........................................................... 26 1c All Import/Export Activities 1st Quarter 2019 vs. 4th Quarter 2018 ...................................... 27 1d All Import/Export Activities 1st Quarter 2019 vs. 1st Quarter 2018 .....................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Changing Energy Landscape and Its Impact on Economic Development in America
    The Changing Energy Landscape and its impact on economic development in America The Changing Energy Landscape And its Impact on Economic Development in America International Economic Development Council IEDC is the world’s largest membership organization serving the economic development profession, with more than 5,000 members and a network of more than 25,000 economic development professionals and allies. From public to private, rural to urban, and local to international, our members represent the entire range of economic development experience. Through a range of services including conferences, training courses, webinars, publications, research and technical assistance efforts, we strive to provide cutting-edge knowledge to the economic development community and its stakeholders. For more information about IEDC, visit www.iedconline.org. Craig J. Richards, CEcD, FM President & CEO Tampa Hillsborough Economic Development Corporation, FL 2018 Chairman of the Board, IEDC Michael Langley, FM, HLM President & CEO Greater Minneapolis Saint Paul Regional Economic Development Partnership, MN 2017 Chairman of the Board, IEDC Jeffrey A. Finkle, CEcD President & CEO International Economic Development Council © Copyright 2018 International Economic Development Council 2 | E D R P – The Changing Energy Landscape Economic Development Research Partners The EDRP Program is the “think tank” component of IEDC, designed to help economic development professionals weather the challenges and grab opportunities from economic changes affecting our communities. EDRP members are leaders in the field of economic development, working through this program to improve the knowledge and practice of the profession. IEDC would like to thank the Economic Development Research Partners program for providing the impetus and resources for this project.
    [Show full text]
  • GIIGNL Annual Report Profile
    The LNG industry GIIGNL Annual Report Profile Acknowledgements Profile We wish to thank all member companies for their contribution to the report and the GIIGNL is a non-profit organisation whose objective following international experts for their is to promote the development of activities related to comments and suggestions: LNG: purchasing, importing, processing, transportation, • Cybele Henriquez – Cheniere Energy handling, regasification and its various uses. • Najla Jamoussi – Cheniere Energy • Callum Bennett – Clarksons The Group constitutes a forum for exchange of • Laurent Hamou – Elengy information and experience among its 88 members in • Jacques Rottenberg – Elengy order to enhance the safety, reliability, efficiency and • María Ángeles de Vicente – Enagás sustainability of LNG import activities and in particular • Paul-Emmanuel Decroës – Engie the operation of LNG import terminals. • Oliver Simpson – Excelerate Energy • Andy Flower – Flower LNG • Magnus Koren – Höegh LNG • Mariana Ortiz – Naturgy Energy Group • Birthe van Vliet – Shell • Mika Iseki – Tokyo Gas • Yohei Hukins – Tokyo Gas • Donna DeWick – Total • Emmanuelle Viton – Total • Xinyi Zhang – Total © GIIGNL - International Group of Liquefied Natural Gas Importers All data and maps provided in this publication are for information purposes and shall be treated as indicative only. Under no circumstances shall they be regarded as data or maps intended for commercial use. Reproduction of the contents of this publication in any manner whatsoever is prohibited without prior
    [Show full text]
  • Dominion Energy Kewaunee, Inc. Snm-2501 Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc
    0V- Dominion Resources Services, Inc. 5000 Dominion Boulevard, Glen Allen, VA 23060 £# Dominion® April 27, 2006 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Se rial No.: 06-279 Attention: Document Control Desk NLLOS/MB Washington, DC 20555-0001 Dcocket Nos.: 50-280/281 50-338/339 50-245/3361423 50-305 72-16 72-2 Lic,ense Nos.: DPR-32/37 NPF-4/7 DPR-21/65 NPF-49 DPR-43 SNM-2507 DOMINION ENERGY KEWAUNEE, INC. SNM-2501 DOMINION NUCLEAR CONNECTICUT, INC. VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY KEWAUNEE POWER STATION MILLSTONE POWER STATION UNITS 1. 2 & 3 NORTH ANNA POWER STATION UNITS 1 & 2 AND ISFSI SURRY POWER STATION UNITS 1 & 2 AND ISFSI SUBMISSION OF ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.71 (b) and 10 CFR 72.80(b), attached are copies of the Annual Report to Securities and Exchange Commission on Form 10K for 2005 for Dominion Resources, Inc. and Virginia Electric and Power Company. If there are any questions, please contact Mr. Dave Sommers at (804) 273-2823. Very truly yours, Eugene S. Grecheck Vice President - Nuclear Support Services Attachments: Form 1Ok for 2005 for Dominion Resources, Inc. Form 1Ok for 2005 for Virginia Electric and Power Company Commitments made by this letter: None (KAcb)4 - - SN 06-279 2005 Annual Financial Report cc: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I .475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406-1415 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center '1 Forsyth St., SW, Suite 23 T85 Atlanta, GA 30303-8931 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region IlIl 2443 Warrenville Road Suite 210 Lisle, IL 60532-4352 ,Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Gas Imports and Exports First Quarter Report 2019
    DOE/FE- 0614 Natural Gas Imports and Exports First Quarter Report 2019 Prepared by: U.S. Department of Energy Office of Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement Division of Natural Gas Regulation Map shows the Exports of Domestically-Produced LNG Delievered by Vessel. (Cumulative starting from February 2016 through March 2019.) NATURAL GAS IMPORTS AND EXPORTS FIRST QUARTER REPORT 2019 Division of Natural Gas Regulation Office of Regulation, Analysis, and Engagement Office of Oil & Natural Gas Office of Fossil Energy U.S. Department of Energy 202-586-7991 [email protected] Table of Contents Summary ......................................................................................... 1 1 Quarterly Summary ...................................................................... 3 Maps of Imports & Exports by Point of Entry/Exit ........................................ 5 Graphical Summaries & Comparisons ............................................................ 11 Tabular Summaries & Comparisons ............................................................... 23 1a Quarter in Review ........................................................................................................................ 25 1b All Import/Export Activities YTD 2019 vs. YTD 2018 ........................................................... 26 1c All Import/Export Activities 1st Quarter 2019 vs. 4th Quarter 2018 ...................................... 27 1d All Import/Export Activities 1st Quarter 2019 vs. 1st Quarter 2018 .....................................
    [Show full text]
  • Calvert County Comprehensive Plan May 2018 Draft
    CALVERT COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAY 2018 DRAFT CA VERT 2040 Your county. Your future. Acknowledgements Board of County Commissioners Evan K. Slaughenhoupt, President; Tom HejI, Vice President; Pat Nutter; Mike Hart; and Steven R. Weems County Administrator Terry Shannon, County Administrator Planning Commission Carolyn McHugh, Chair; Greg Kernan, Vice Chair; Rob Reed; Richard Holler; Steve Jones; Maria Buehler; and John Toohey Department of Planning & Zoning Core Team J. Mark Willis, Director; Britany Waddell, AICP, Deputy Director/Planning; Mary Beth Cook, Deputy Director/Zoning Officer; Carolyn Sunderland, AICP, Planning Commission Administrator; Jenny Plummer-Welker, AICP, Long Range Planner; Patricia Haddon, AICP, Principal Planner; Will Selman, CNU-A, Community Designer; Rachel O'Shea, Rural Planner III; Kirsti Uunila, RPA, Historic Preservation Planner Ill; Tay Harris, Planner II; Ronald Marney, AICP, CFM, Planner II; George W. "Will" Hager, Planner I; Judy Holt, Planner I; and Rebekah Swieringa, Planning Intern Other Staff Ray Alvey; Michael Bayer; Tamara Blake Wallace; Chris Breedlove; Dr. Dave Brownlee, AICP; Denise Cherry; Christine Finamore; Ashleigh Goedeke; Lindsay Halterman; Felicia Harrod; Jennifer Jackson; Judy Mackall; Becky Parkinson; John Schwartz, CFM; Rick Stotler; Olivia Vidotto; and Roxana Whitt Calvert Library Carrie Plymire, Director, and Robyn Truslow Calvert Marine Museum Sherrod Sturrock, Director, and Jeff Murray Department of Communications and Media Relations Linda Vassallo, Director, Ruthie Buckler, Angela
    [Show full text]
  • Maryland Power Plants and the Environment (Ceir-19)
    PPRP – CEIR-19 DNR Publication No. 12-102920-260 Maryland Power Plants and the Environment A review of the impacts of power plants and transmission lines on Maryland's natural resources December 2017 Lawrence J. Hogan, Jr., Governor u Boyd K. Rutherford, Lt. Governor The Maryland Department of Natural Resources (DNR) seeks to preserve, protect and enhance the living resources of the state. Working in partnership with the citizens of Maryland, this worthwhile goal will become a reality. This publication provides information that will increase your understanding of how DNR strives to reach that goal through its many diverse programs. Mark J. Belton, Secretary Maryland Department of Natural Resources The facilities and services of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources are available to all without regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, age, national origin or physical or mental disability. This document is available in alternative format upon request from a qualified individual with a disability. Maryland Department of Natural Resources Tawes State Office Building 580 Taylor Avenue Annapolis, Maryland 21401-2397 Toll Free in Maryland: 1-877-620-8DNR x8660 Outside Maryland: 1-410-260-8660 TTY users call via the Maryland Relay www.dnr.maryland.gov Printed on Recycled Paper PPRP – CEIR – 19 DNR Publication No. 12-102920-260 Maryland Power Plants and the Environment A review of the impacts of power plants and transmission lines on Maryland's natural resources December 2017 MARYLAND POWER PLANTS AND THE ENVIRONMENT (CEIR-19) Table of Contents Chapter 1 – Background ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 The Role of PPRP ............................................................................................................................. 2 1.2 Power Plant and Transmission Line Licensing ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Dominion Covepoint Petition2007.Pdf
    -J Sevilla­ To Peter GoldlR3/USEPAlUS@EPA. Paul <qmakeda~chesapeake.net> Amold/R3/USEPAlUS@EPA. Dave a CampbeIVR3/USEPAlUS@EPA. Donald cc "Abrams. Ben" <[email protected]>. 101021200702:12 AM <[email protected]>. <[email protected]>. .. <[email protected]>. "Governor" bcc Subject Fw: APPEAL to EPA Re: Dominion Cove Point LNG - MOE Final Decision to Renew Title V Part 70 Operating Permit . ~i~tOfY:;; ... 'l'''~~~ ThI;~~ge~a~ been-fo~a~ded:- .•...=.__. Mr. Stephen L. Johnson, US EPA Headquarters Mr Oonald Welsh - EPA Region 3 Per letter from Peter Gold, below, I am resubmitting my appeal to the EPA and also the appeal on behalf of citizens of High Risk Communities (scroll down to appeal email sent July 24,2007, sent per instructions from MOE). I have also included a "big picture" drawing of the situation regarding this appeal. This "big picture" illustrates the situation at Cove Point and provides an integrated view of our concerns which have been detailed in the attached documents previously submitted to MOE and EPA. This appeal also reiterates the emphasis that must be placed on the "big picture" which affects us all, not just Cove Point. Human health, the environment, Homeland Security, and Maryland's seafood commerce are just a few of the reasons why we are appealing to regulators to look at this perspective to do the right thing. This means putting human health and the environment at the forefront. The reason EPA and MOE were established are evident in the agency titles and in your mission statements.
    [Show full text]
  • Dominion Cove Point LNG, 2009
    Dominion Cove Point LNG Page 1 of 2 Dominion Cove Point LNG Dominion Cove Point LNG is located on the Chesapeake Bay in Lusby, Maryland, south of Baltimore. It is one of the nation's largest liquefied natural gas (LNG) import facilities. Dominion acquired Cove Point from Williams on Sept. 5, 2002, and began receiving ships in the summer of 2003. In 2009, Dominion finished an expansion project that increased Cove Point's storage and production capacity by nearly 80 percent. Explore the left-margin links to learn more about the facility and LNG. Dominion Cove Point will play an increasingly critical role in coming years. Natural gas is the energy of choice for many Americans, and demand is expected to grow through the next decade. Although there are vast reserves of natural gas in the United States, many are not yet available. Reserves in a number of other countries are available and for sale, but the gas has to be transported. The most efficient way to transport natural gas across the ocean is to liquefy it and transport it in specially built ships. Dominion Cove Point is strategically located where it can receive transport vessels, store the LNG onshore, then transform it back to gas when it is needed to meet demand. Facility Operation Dominion Cove Point has a storage capacity of 14.6 billion cubic feet (BCF) and a daily send-out capacity of 1.8 BCF. The terminal connects, via its own pipeline, to the major Mid-Atlantic gas transmission systems of Transcontinental Gas Pipeline, Columbia Gas Transmission and Dominion Transmission.
    [Show full text]
  • CP13-113-000 Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP
    148 FERC ¶ 61,244 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Before Commissioners: Cheryl A. LaFleur, Chairman; Philip D. Moeller, Tony Clark, and Norman C. Bay. Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP Docket No. CP13-113-000 ORDER GRANTING SECTION 3 AND SECTION 7 AUTHORIZATIONS (Issued September 29, 2014) Paragraph Numbers I. Background ............................................................................................................................ 3. II. Proposal ................................................................................................................................. 7. A. Dominion’s Cove Point Liquefaction Project .................................................................. 7. B. Virginia Facilities ............................................................................................................. 12. C. Services ............................................................................................................................. 18. III. Public Notice ....................................................................................................................... 20. IV. Discussion ........................................................................................................................... 26. A. Dominion’s Cove Point Liquefaction Project .................................................................. 26. B. Virginia Facilities ............................................................................................................. 34. 1. Subsidization
    [Show full text]
  • March 13, 2020 J. Patrick Nevins Latham & Watkins LLP 555 11Th
    March 13, 2020 J. Patrick Nevins Latham & Watkins LLP 555 11th Street, N.W. Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20004-1304 RE: Statement and Notice of Change in Control Dominion Energy Cove Point LNG, LP FE Docket Nos. 11-115-LNG, 11-128-LNG, 18-180-LNG, 19-156-LNG Dear Mr. Nevins: This correspondence constitutes the response of the Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Fossil Energy (FE), to your letter filed on behalf of Dominion Energy Cove Point LNG, LP (DECP) on October 23, 2019,1 as supplemented on February 11, 2020,2 in the above-referenced proceedings. In those filings, DCEP provides information regarding changes to its ownership in light of DOE/FE’s Change in Control Procedures.3 I. BACKGROUND DECP, a Delaware limited liability partnership, is the owner and operator of the Cove Point LNG Terminal located in Lusby, Maryland. DECP is a wholly-owned, indirect subsidiary of Dominion Energy, Inc. (DEI), a Virginia corporation.4 DECP’s general partner is Cove Point GP Holding Company, LLC (Cove Point GP), a Delaware limited 1 Dominion Energy Cove Point LNG, LLP, FE Docket Nos. 11-115-LNG et al., Notification Regarding Planned Change in Indirect Ownership In Accordance with Procedures for Changes in Control (Oct. 23, 2019) [hereinafter DECP Notification]. 2 See Email from J. Patrick Nevins, Counsel for DECP, to DOE/FE (Feb. 11, 2020) [hereinafter DECP Update]. 3 See U.S. Dep’t of Energy, Procedures for Changes in Control Affecting Applications and Authorizations to Import or Export Natural Gas, 79 Fed. Reg. 65,541 (Nov.
    [Show full text]