150 FERC ¶ 61,210 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Before Commissioners: Cheryl A. LaFleur, Chairman; Philip D. Moeller, Tony Clark, and Norman C. Bay. Southwest Power Pool, Inc. Docket Nos. ER13-1939-000 Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC ER13-1928-000 Duke Energy Progress, Inc. Louisville Gas and Electric Company ER13-1930-000 Ohio Valley Electric Corporation ER13-1940-000 Alabama Power Company ER13-1941-000 (not consolidated) ORDER ON COMPLIANCE FILINGS (Issued March 19, 2015) Paragraph Numbers I. Background ............................................................................................................................ 4. II. Compliance Filings ............................................................................................................... 6. A. SPP Compliance Filing (Docket No. ER13-1939-000) and SERTP Filing Parties Compliance Filing (Docket Nos. ER13-1928-000, ER13-1930-000, ER13-1940-000, and ER13-1941-000) .............................................................................................................. 6. III. Notice of Filing and Responsive Pleadings ......................................................................... 11. A. SPP Compliance Filing (Docket No. ER13-1939-000) ................................................... 11. B. Duke Carolinas Compliance Filing (Docket No. ER13-1928-000) ................................ 12. C. LG&E/KU Compliance Filing (Docket No. ER13-1930-000) ........................................ 13. D. OVEC Compliance Filing (Docket No. ER13-1940-000) ............................................... 14. E. Southern Companies Compliance Filing (Docket No. ER13-1941-000) ......................... 15. Docket No. ER13-1939-000, et al. - 2 - IV. Discussion ........................................................................................................................... 16. A. Procedural Matters ........................................................................................................... 16. B. Substantive Matters .......................................................................................................... 18. 1. Interregional Transmission Coordination Requirements .............................................. 19. a. General Requirements .............................................................................................. 19. i. Compliance Filings ............................................................................................... 20. ii. Protests/Comments .............................................................................................. 23. iii. Commission Determination ................................................................................ 24. b. Limited Waiver Request .......................................................................................... 29. i. SPP Compliance Filing ....................................................................................... 29. ii. Protests/Comments .............................................................................................. 34. iii. Answers .............................................................................................................. 37. iv. Commission Determination ................................................................................ 41. c. Implementation of the Interregional Transmission Coordination Requirements ..... 44. i. Data Exchange and Identifying Interregional Transmission Facilities ................ 44. ii. Procedure for Joint Evaluation .......................................................................... 71. iii. Transparency and Stakeholder Participation ...................................................... 102. 2. Cost Allocation ............................................................................................................. 117. a. Compliance Filing ................................................................................................... 130. b. Protests/Comments ................................................................................................... 153. c. Answers .................................................................................................................... 170. d. Commission Determination ..................................................................................... 178. 3. Other Proposals ............................................................................................................. 198. a. Compliance Filings ................................................................................................... 198. b. Protests ..................................................................................................................... 202. c. Commission Determination ...................................................................................... 204. Appendix A: Abbreviated Names of Intervenors Appendix B: Abbreviated Names of Initial Commenters Appendix C: Abbreviated Names of Reply Commenters Appendix D: eTarrif Records 1. On July 10, 2013, Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC and Duke Energy Progress, Inc. (together, Duke Carolinas);1 Louisville Gas and Electric Company and Kentucky Utilities Company (LG&E/KU);2 Southern Company Services, Inc., acting as agent for Alabama 1 Docket No. ER13-1928-000 (Duke Carolinas Compliance Filing). Duke Carolinas states that its Order No. 1000 interregional compliance filing is submitted under protest. Duke Carolinas Compliance Filing at 3 (citing Duke Carolinas, Request for Rehearing, Docket No. ER13-83-001 (filed March 25, 2013)). 2 Docket No. ER13-1930-000 (LG&E/KU Compliance Filing). Docket No. ER13-1939-000, et al. - 3 - Power Company, Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, and Mississippi Power Company (collectively, Southern Companies);3 and Ohio Valley Electric Corporation (OVEC)4 (collectively, SERTP Filing Parties)5 separately submitted, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA),6 common revisions to each of their respective Open Access Transmission Tariffs (OATT)7 to comply with the interregional transmission coordination and cost allocation requirements of Order No. 1000,8 with respect to the public utility transmission providers in the Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (SPP) transmission planning region.9 3 Docket No. ER13-1941-000 (Southern Companies Compliance Filing). Southern Companies state that they provisionally submit their Order No. 1000 interregional compliance filing under protest, subject to the resolution of any appeals pending before the United States Court of Appeals and subject to the outcome of Southern Companies’ request for rehearing of Order No. 1000, and that they do not waive their right to later challenge the application of Order No. 1000’s requirements to Southern Companies. Southern Companies Compliance Filing at 3 (citation omitted). 4 Docket No. ER13-1940-000 (OVEC Compliance Filing). 5 SERTP Filing Parties are the public utility transmission providers that are enrolled in the Southeastern Regional Transmission Planning Process (SERTP) transmission planning region. We refer to the Duke Carolinas Compliance Filing, LG&E/KU Compliance Filing, Southern Companies Compliance Filing, and OVEC Compliance Filing collectively as the SERTP Filing Parties Compliance Filing. 6 16 U.S.C. § 824e (2012). 7 Tariff records filed by the entities are listed in Appendix D to this order. 8 Transmission Planning and Cost Allocation by Transmission Owning and Operating Public Utilities, Order No. 1000, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,323 (2011); order on reh’g, Order No. 1000-A, 139 FERC ¶ 61,132; order on reh’g, Order No. 1000-B, 141 FERC ¶ 61,044 (2012) aff'd sub nom. S.C. Pub. Serv. Auth. v. FERC, 762 F.3d 41 (D.C. Cir. 2014). 9 Each of the SERTP Filing Parties submitted in a single compliance filing separate tariff records to comply with the Order No. 1000 interregional transmission coordination and cost allocation requirements with respect to the public utility transmission providers in all five of the SERTP region’s neighboring transmission planning regions: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO); PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM); SPP; South Carolina Regional Transmission Planning (SCRTP); and Florida Reliability Coordinating Council, Inc. (FRCC). In this order, we (continued…) Docket No. ER13-1939-000, et al. - 4 - 2. On July 10, 2013, SPP10 submitted, pursuant to section 206 of the FPA, revisions to its OATT to comply with the interregional coordination and cost allocation requirements of Order No. 1000, with respect to the public utility transmission providers in the SERTP transmission planning region. SPP also includes, as part of its compliance filing, a request for waiver of Order No. 1000 interregional transmission coordination and cost allocation requirements with respect to the SERTP transmission planning region. 3. In this order, the Commission conditionally accepts the SPP Compliance Filing and the SERTP Filing Parties Compliance Filing, subject to further compliance filings, as discussed below. Additionally, we deny SPP’s request for waiver of Order No. 1000 interregional transmission coordination and cost allocation requirements for SPP’s seam with SERTP, as discussed below. I. Background 4. In Order No. 1000, the Commission adopted a package of reforms addressing transmission planning and cost allocation that, taken together, are designed to ensure that Commission-jurisdictional services are provided at just and reasonable rates and on a basis that is just