Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
FERC adopts Order No. 1920‑A, increasing state role in long‑term regional transmission planning and cost allocation
Loading...
Summary
The commission adopted Order No. 1920‑A, which clarifies and modifies Order No. 1920 to expand state engagement in scenario development and cost-allocation processes, allows state-agreed ex ante allocation proposals to be filed and considered, and lengthens some compliance timing. Commissioner C did not participate in the E‑1 vote; Commissioner Christie concurred in part.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission adopted Order No. 1920‑A, a rehearing and clarification of Order No. 1920, aiming to preserve the rule’s forward-looking transmission-planning framework while enhancing state involvement in scenario development and cost allocation.
Chairman Phillips praised the staff and described key features of the adopted draft: a 20‑year planning horizon, an explicit state engagement period on cost allocation and added flexibility to extend that engagement if states request more time, and a requirement that transmission providers include any ex ante cost allocation method or state agreement process that relevant state entities have requested be added to compliance filings. "If you don't benefit, you don't pay," Chairman Phillips said, summarizing the order's approach to allocating different types of benefits.
Why it matters: The order modifies how long‑term regional transmission needs and costs are identified and apportioned, giving states a clearer, formal role in shaping scenario assumptions and cost‑allocation methods. Commissioners emphasized the order's goal of making transmission planning and cost allocation more workable and transparent so projects can proceed.
Key provisions and clarifications: Order No. 1920‑A (a) requires transmission providers to incorporate state input about scenario development and to include state‑agreed ex ante allocation methods or state agreement processes in compliance filings even if the transmission provider does not adopt them, (b) authorizes FERC to adopt state-proposed allocation methods that meet the order’s standards, (c) permits relevant state entities to request additional scenarios beyond the three required long‑term scenarios, and (d) in some instances sets aside or modifies prior requirements—most notably removing the mandatory inclusion of corporate commitments as part of factor category 7 in every required scenario.
Commissioners’ positions and vote: Several commissioners described the order as a bipartisan compromise. Commissioner Christie said she concurred in part and will file a written statement explaining the specific changes she supports, including the filing requirement for state-agreed allocation formulas and consultation before a transmission provider seeks to amend an adopted allocation method. Commissioner Chang, Commissioner Rosner and Chairman Phillips supported the order. Commissioner C did not participate in the E‑1 vote. The commission adopted the order.
Next steps: The order will move to compliance filings and a compliance phase in which transmission providers and relevant state entities will engage to meet the clarified requirements and to propose or consider cost allocation methods and scenarios.
