FERC this month accepted an unexecuted facilities service agreement (FSA) between SPP, Southwestern Public Service (SPS) and Ponderosa Wind II, finding it to be “just and reasonable and not unduly discriminatory or preferential” (ER23-672).
The FSA replaces an unexecuted generator interconnection agreement (GIA) filed by SPP in July and amended in September. In accepting the substitute agreement May 5, the commission said it conformed to the SPP tariff’s pro forma GIA.
The original agreement included a 20-year default term and allowed SPS to recover the return on and of the capital investment through a network upgrade charge that continued for the FSA’s term. Ponderosa protested the 20-year term, arguing that the FSA would double the overall amount paid for upgrades under the GIA. Instead, the developers proposed a three-year term to pay the money back faster.
The commission found the 20-year term to be just and reasonable because it will allow SPS to recover upgrade costs over a time period based on the utility providing interconnection service to Ponderosa. It said it was reasonable to expect interconnection service under the GIA to match or exceed 20 years.
Ponderosa II will add an additional 100 MW of capacity to the existing 200-MW facility in the Oklahoma Panhandle. The wind farms are subsidiaries of NextEra Energy Resources.
Evergy Compliance Filing OK’d
FERC also this month accepted Evergy Kansas Central’s compliance filing after protests from several transmission customers challenged the utility’s implementation of its transmission formula rate (ER22-1205).
The commission on May 5 found that Evergy had complied with its directives in a December order by correcting its formula rates’ application in its 2022 annual update. It said the filing details how the revised formula rate billings’ calculations reduced its annual revenue requirement by more than $15 million.
Evergy also said it will provide refunds with interest in the next rate year’s annual projection.
FERC denied the utility’s rehearing request but granted its clarification petition.
Kansas Electric Power Cooperative, Kansas Municipal Energy Agency and Kansas Power Pool challenged Evergy’s initial filing last year, arguing that it incorrectly applied its formula rate according to its own instructions. They also contended that Evergy double-counted its undistributed subsidiary earnings in the formula’s equity capitalization component.
The transmission customers requested that FERC direct Evergy to correct the formula rate’s implementation and refund excess amounts collected in previous years. The commission in December granted in part and denied in part the formal challenge.