Latest Breaking News On - Michigan electric transmission company - Page 11 : comparemela.com
Electric
E-1 – Electric Transmission Incentives Policy Under Section 219 of the Federal Power Act (Docket No. RM20-10-000). On March 20, 2020, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) relating to electric transmission incentives policy pursuant to the Federal Power Act (FPA). In the NOPR, the Commission furnished proposed revisions to transmission planning and cost allocation processes following significant developments in the sector, reflecting a potential new focus on reliability and economic benefits rather than the current risks and rewards approach associated with specific projects. Further, the NOPR acknowledged policy shifts in the fifteen years following Order No. 679, which codified an approach to evaluate requests for incentives made by transmission owners and operators, as well as Order No. 1000 and the 2012 Policy Statement on transmission incentives applications. Namely, the NOPR proposed to: offer public utilities an return on equity (ROE) incenti
New-yorkUnited-statesArkansasLouisianaUnionvilleMississippi-riverTexasWashingtonPoncaCaliforniaFloridaCity-of-anaheimThe Daily Reporter
The Union City divorce from the Michigan South Central Power Agency is closer, but it won’t meet the June 30 tentative deadline.
Attorney Steve Mann told the board of the current five-member joint power agency it will take 90 to 120 days to draft agreements and get approval from the municipalities of Clinton, Coldwater, Hillsdale, Marshall, and Union City once final details are worked out.
Both Union City and Marshall paid $36,000 to Chicago consultants MCR to evaluate Union City’s 4.68 megawatt interest in 110 megawatts of transmission the power agency acquired over the decades.
Thursday, board members agreed the agency should own the rights, not just Marshall. The problem is Clinton, second smallest member, who would pay almost $2,000 a year for the rights. The other remaining members would see an economic advantage of between $17,000 and $28,000 a year.
HillsdaleIllinoisUnited-statesUnion-cityMichiganChicagoChris-mathisDon-reidSteve-mannKevin-cornishJeff-buddTom-tarkiewiczTo embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
On February 19, 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (“D.C. Circuit”) upheld a decision by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC” or the “Commission”) cutting transmission incentives previously granted to three electric transmission companies.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005[1] amended the Federal Power Act to require FERC to promulgate a rule creating incentive-based rate treatment for electric transmission.[2] The rule was intended to “promote reliable and economically efficient transmission and generation of electricity by promoting capital investment in the enlargement, improvement, maintenance, and operation of all [transmission] facilities, . . . provide a return on equity that attracts new investment in transmission facilities, . . . [and] encourage deployment of transmission technologies and other measures to increase the capacity and efficiency of exi
United-statesCanadaMichiganSingaporeCanadianFortis-incUnited-states-courtEnergy-regulatory-commissionMichigan-electric-transmission-companyConsumers-energy-coIntl-transmission-co