Filings Against FERC's Pro Forma Tariffs
AS ONE MIGHT EXPECT, THE VARIATIONS REFLECT THE HISTORIC TENSION BETWEEN NATIVE LOAD AND WHOLESALE TRANSACTIONS.
With the passage of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct), and the issuance in March 1995 of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) on open-access transmission1 by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the debate in transmission policy has shifted to the terms and conditions of transmission service. Later, in June and September 1995, the FERC moved to encourage electric utilities to file open-access transmission tariffs based on the NOPR's pro forma tariffs, promising more streamlined filing requirements and approval of market-based rates with no refund liability. Since then (as of this writing), over 30 utilities have filed, bringing the total number of open-access tariffs to 54.
Certain provisions in the
pro forma tariffs have not at- tracted a warm reception from transmission-owning electric utilities. Thus, the differences in
nonrate terms and conditions between individual tariffs may reflect what utilities believe tariffs should and should not include
(see table below). These variations also reflect a historic tension between transmitting utilities that want to use their transmission system to serve native load and conduct their own wholesale power transactions, and transmission customers that need access for their own wholesale power transactions.
Drawing from FERC orders issued in the last half of 1995 and early 1996, this article offers a