Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 30, 2021 / Rules and Regulations the Commission believes its prior approach to the interconnections of QFs that participate in distributed energy resource aggregations was already consistent with Order No. 2222s holding that the Commission will not assert jurisdiction over distributed energy resources in distributed energy resource aggregations.120 Xcel asks the Commission to clarify whether the interconnection of QFs seeking to participate in distributed energy resource aggregations will be subject to the Commissions jurisdiction.121 Xcel also asks the Commission to hold a technical conference and to consider a rulemaking to simplify its interconnection rules, which Xcel states could provide additional guidance for following the existing rules that both utilities and resource developers could rely upon.122
b. Commission Determination
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES

42. We deny AEE/AEMAs request to clarify what is meant by directly engaging in wholesale transactions.
With regard to single-resource aggregations, the Commission already explained in Order No. 2222 that the Commission will not exercise jurisdiction over the interconnection to a distribution facility of a distributed energy resource for the purpose of participating in RTO/ISO markets exclusively through a single-resource distributed energy resource aggregation.123 As to AEE/AEMAs suggestion to clarify what happens after the triggering of first use, we reiterate that the Commission will not exercise jurisdiction over the interconnection to a distribution facility of a distributed energy resource for the purpose of participating in RTO/ISO markets exclusively through a distributed energy resource aggregation, even after first-use has been triggered.
43. We grant Xcels request to clarify the Commissions jurisdictional approach to the interconnections of QFs that participate in distributed energy resource aggregations. Specifically, as discussed further below, we clarify that we decline to exercise our jurisdiction over the interconnections of distributed energy resources, including the interconnections of QFs, to distribution facilities for the purpose of participating in RTO/ISO markets exclusively as part of a distributed energy resource aggregation.
120 Xcel
Request for Clarification at 3.
at 1, 3.
122 Id. at 12, 6. AEE/AEMA support Xcels request for a technical conference. AEE/AEMA
Request for Rehearing at 3, 26.
123 Order No. 2222, 172 FERC 61,247 at P 186.
121 Id.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

15:52 Mar 29, 2021

Jkt 253001

44. As explained in Order No. 2222, the Commission in Order Nos. 2003 and 2006 established the first use test for distribution system interconnections.124
With respect to QFs, the Commission found that when an electric utility interconnecting with a QF does not purchase all the QFs output and instead transmits the QFs power in interstate commerce, the Commission exercises jurisdiction over that interconnection.125 Thus, for purposes of Order Nos. 2003 and 2006, the Commission concluded that it exercises jurisdiction over a QFs interconnection to a Commission-jurisdictional transmission system if the QFs owner sells any of the QFs output to an entity other than the electric utility directly interconnected with the QF.126 The Commission later clarified that, where a QF seeks interconnection to a distribution facility not subject to an OATT to make jurisdictional wholesale sales, the Commission has jurisdiction over this interconnection, even though Order No. 2003 does not apply.127 Thus, the Commission has interpreted its authority over QFs to include all interconnections of QFs that intend to make wholesale sales, not just interconnections of QFs to distribution facilities that are already subject to an OATT.
45. The Commission has also clarified that its jurisdiction applies to a new QF
that plans to sell its output to a third party, and to an existing QF
interconnected to a Commissionjurisdictional transmission system that historically sold its total output to an interconnected utility or on-site customer and now plans to sell output to a third party.128 However, the Commission stated in Order No. 2003
that a former QF that plans to sell to a third party need not submit a new interconnection request if it represents that the output of the generating facility 124 See id. P 72 citing Order No. 2003, 104 FERC
61,103 at P 804.
125 Order No. 2003, 104 FERC 61,103 at P 813;
Order No. 2006, 111 FERC 61,220 at P 516.
126 Order No. 2003, 104 FERC 61,103 at PP 813
814; Order No. 2006, 111 FERC 61,220 at PP 516
517. Order No. 2003 describes the term Transmission System to include distribution facilities already being used for transmission in interstate commerce. Order No. 2003, 104 FERC
61,103 at P 804.
127 PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., 123 FERC
61,087, at P 7 2008.
128 Order No. 2003, 104 FERC 61,103 at P 814.
The Commission has explained that it will exercise jurisdiction or require the filing of an interconnection agreement only if there is some manifestation of a QFs plan to sell output to third parties. Fla. Power & Light Co., 133 FERC
61,121, at P 21 2010.

PO 00000

Frm 00015

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

16521

will be substantially the same as before.129
46. We agree with Xcel that it would be helpful to provide clarification regarding the Commissions jurisdictional approach to the interconnections of QFs participating in distributed energy resource aggregations. We clarify that, in finding that the final rule does not revise the Commissions jurisdictional approach to the interconnections of QFs, the Commission was not modifying how it has applied any of its existing QF
interconnection policies. As described above, the Commission has generally exercised jurisdiction over a QFs interconnection if the QF sells any of its output to an entity other than the electric utility directly interconnected with the QF.130 However, the presence of distributed energy resource aggregations represents a new circumstance not previously considered in the Commissions QF interconnection precedent. Order No. 2222 addresses only distributed energy resource aggregators participation in RTO/ISO
markets, which, as the final rule itself makes clear, is meaningfully different from a distributed energy resources direct participation in those markets.131
The Commission has not previously addressed how an aggregated participation model affects the Commissions QF interconnection policies.
47. Here we clarify that the interconnections of QFs that participate in RTO/ISO markets exclusively through distributed energy resource aggregations will be treated the same under the final rule as the interconnections of non-QF distributed energy resources that participate in distributed energy resource aggregations. This approach helps to avoid a significant increase in the number of distribution-level QF
interconnections subject to the Commissions jurisdiction, which, as the Commission observed in Order No.
2222, could create uncertainty and potentially impose an overwhelming 129 Order
No. 2003, 104 FERC 61,103 at P 815.
No. 2003, 104 FERC 61,103 at PP 813
814; Order No. 2006, 111 FERC 61,220 at PP 516
517.
131 See Order No. 2222, 172 FERC 61,247 at P
97 As such, only a distributed energy resource requesting interconnection to the distribution facility for the purpose of directly engaging in wholesale transactions i.e., not through a distributed energy resource aggregation would create a first use and any subsequent distributed energy resource interconnecting for the purpose of directly engaging in wholesale transactions would be considered a Commission-jurisdictional interconnection..
130 Order
E:FRFM30MRR1.SGM

30MRR1