Skip to content

Menu

ChannelsSubscribePublishers
Arizona Attorney Daily logo
About
Join
Search
Close

Issue of Coordination with Affected Systems Rises to Forefront at FERC

By Erin Jauregui
March 12, 2018
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
https-jsslaw-com-wp-content-uploads-2018-03-blog-energy-coordination-ferc-jpg

Energy

Blog

Issue of Coordination with Affected Systems Rises to Forefront at FERC

March 12, 2018

Practice Area: Energy

The issue of coordination with Affected Systems has long been a proverbial “elephant in the room” when generation project developers request interconnection service from a Transmission Provider and the interconnection may impact neighboring systems. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) largely side-stepped the issue when it originally promulgated its pro forma Large Generator Interconnection Procedures (LGIP) and Large Generator Interconnection Agreement (LGIA) in Order No. 2003.  The pro forma LGIP, for example, includes loose concepts of “coordination” and “cooperation,” without specific details or deadlines.  A Transmission Provider generally is required to coordinate studies with Affected System Operators to determine the impact of an interconnection request, but the Transmission Provider must include the results of the Affected System Operators’ studies in the Transmission Provider’s own studies only “if possible” and “if available.” The Interconnection Customer and Affected System Operator generally are required to cooperate with the Transmission Provider in matters related to the conduct of studies. There is no language, however, that specifically compels an Interconnection Customer to execute a study agreement with an Affected System Operator by a set deadline nor is there any language requiring an Affected System Operator to complete a study by a set deadline after the execution of such a study agreement.  This may change, however, following a technical conference scheduled by FERC to occur on April 3-4, 2018.

The technical conference will address issues raised in a complaint filed recently by EDF Renewable Energy, Inc. (EDF) against the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO), PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM), and Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (SPP) as well as in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Reform of Generator Interconnection Procedures and Agreements (NOPR) released by FERC in 2016.  In EDF’s complaint, it argued that the PJM, SPP, and MISO tariffs and joint operating agreements do not contain sufficient detail on Affected Systems coordination, which unjustly and unreasonably hinders proposed generation developers from assessing the commercial viability of projects.  The NOPR proposed reforms to the pro forma LGIP and LGIA with the aim of improving certainty and transparency in the interconnection process, including with respect to coordination with Affected Systems.

Topics to be addressed at the technical conference include:

  • Allocation of Affected System Costs among MISO, SPP, and PJM;
  • Timing of Affected System Coordination among MISO, SPP, and PJM;
  • Modeling and Study Procedures Used for Affected Systems Information between MISO, SPP, and PJM;
  • General Affected Systems Coordination Processes;
  • Affected Systems Studies & System Reliability; and
  • Affected Systems Coordination Best Practices and Guidelines.

Often, after a technical conference, FERC will provide an opportunity for the submission of written comments. Thus, if these issues are of concern to your company, it will be important to watch for a notice setting a comment deadline.

* The author thanks Ms. Hanna Burt for her assistance with the preparation of this blog.

For more information on this topic or other energy matters, please contact any of the following attorneys at Jennings, Strouss & Salmon, P.L.C.

Debra Roby – [email protected]

Andrea Sarmentero Garzon – [email protected]

Omar Bustami – [email protected]

Joel Greene – [email protected]

Gary Newell – [email protected]

Alan Robbins – [email protected]

Debbie Swanstrom – [email protected]

Share
  • Share on Facebook
  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on Linkedin

About the Author

Debbie Swanstrom

Read Bio

About Jennings, Strouss & Salmon, P.L.C.

Jennings, Strouss & Salmon, P.L.C., has been providing legal counsel for 75 years through its offices in Phoenix and Peoria, Arizona; and Washington, D.C. The firm’s primary areas of practice include advertising and media law; agribusiness; automobile dealership law; bankruptcy, reorganization and creditors’ rights; construction; corporate and securities; employee benefits and pensions; energy; family law and domestic relations; health care; intellectual property; labor and employment; legal ethics; litigation; professional liability defense; real estate; surety and fidelity; tax; and trust and estates. For additional information please visit and follow us on LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter.

Please note that this client alert has been prepared by Jennings, Strouss & Salmon, P.L.C. for informational purposes only. These materials do not constitute, and should not be considered, legal advice, and you are urged to consult with an attorney on your own specific legal matters. Transmission of the information contained in this client alert is not intended to create, and receipt by the reader does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Jennings, Strouss & Salmon or any of its individual attorneys.

The post Issue of Coordination with Affected Systems Rises to Forefront at FERC appeared first on Jennings Strouss.

  • Posted in:
    Energy
  • Blog:
    Energy Law Blog
  • Organization:
    Jennings, Strouss & Salmon, PLC
  • Article: View Original Source

Get the Front Page News

Receive Arizona Attorney Daily Front Page Updates by email

Subscribe to our feed

State Bar of Arizona logo
RSS Facebook LinkedIn Twitter
State Bar of Arizona
4201 N. 24th St., Suite 100
Phoenix, AZ 85016-6266
Phone: 1-602-252-4804
Privacy PolicyDisclaimer

The State Bar of Arizona is a non-profit organization that operates under the supervision of the Arizona Supreme Court. The Bar regulates approximately 18,500 active attorneys and provides education and development programs for the legal profession and the public. The Bar’s mission states that it exists to serve and protect the public with respect to the provision of legal services and access to justice.

Read More...
Copyright ©2026, State Bar of Arizona All Rights Reserved.
Legal content Portal by LexBlog LexBlog Logo