rp_0206_5.html
RTO West Faces Fierce Opposition
Two months ago the region's largest transmission owners, including every investor-owned utility in the Northwest and the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) , submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) their proposal for Regional Transmission Organization (RTO) West . Many of the region's other energy stakeholders weighed in on the proposal this month and are urging FERC to reject the proposal. The harshest condemnation came from a coalition of publicly owned utilities calling itself Northwest Power Works , which includes Seattle City Light , Snohomish PUD , Eugene Water & Electric Board , Clark Public Utilities , Tacoma Power , and almost every public utility in Washington state.
The Public Power Council (PPC) , an umbrella group of 110 publicly owned utilities in the region, joined the newly formed coalition in arguing that "The RTO West Proposal will not produce benefits to NW consumers sufficient to make the proposal just and reasonable. ... The proposal should be rejected ... and [FERC] should seat an independent RTO West Board and direct it to develop a new proposal." Not every utility in the region took an entirely negative view of the RTO West filing. Two associations, NW Requirements Utilities and PNGC Power , representing about 50 smaller utilities and co-ops, had pointed criticisms but didn't reject the proposal as a whole. Instead they asked FERC to order major modifications before granting approval.
The NW Energy Coalition (NWEC) also filed comments opposing the proposal. Coalition members and allies concluded the RTO is unnecessary and that existing regional institutions could execute its functions at a lower cost and with less risk than could a new organization answerable only to the federal government. The Coalition's comments also stated, however, that if FERC insists on moving ahead with RTO West, then major changes are needed.
The Renewable Northwest Project , Natural Resources Defense Council and the American Wind Energy Association support the proposal and agree with NWEC's proposed changes. Needed changes include:
Remove the proposal's bias against non-wires solutions to transmission problems. The proposal doesn't allow RTO West to fund energy efficiency, load management and other non-wires solutions to relieve congestion and other transmission problems. Neither does the proposal provide incentives for energy developers to build in the most efficient locations.
Make it more responsive to, and representative of, the public interest. Many of RTO West's most important decisions would not allow for full public input or participation in dispute resolution.
Make the proposal less restrictive and more able to adjust to new circumstances. Critical decisions under the proposal would be incorporated into hard-to-amend contracts between RTO West and utilities. NWEC recommended that much of the proposal instead be incorporated into an amendable rate-setting process.
Remove the Proposal's bias toward the incumbent utilities. The proposal was not created in a collaborative process and as result is biased in many ways toward the interests of the transmission-owning utilities which proposed it.
Clearly determine who is responsible for setting and enforcing reliability standards. The proposal is very vague about who will be responsible for keeping the lights on once the RTO is operational. NWEC believes local utilities and their regulators should continue to be responsible for reliability because they are ultimately responsible to their customers and can invest in energy efficiency and other non-wire measures to enhance reliability. RTO West, as proposed, would be responsible for keeping the lights on, but would be limited only to building more wires in the face of reliability threats.
—
Steven Weiss