Draft Order Would Terminate RPS Fifth Quarter Make-up Period
January 13, 2020 Email This Story Copyright 2010-20 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • firstname.lastname@example.org
The following story is brought free of charge to readers byEC Infosystems, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
A proposed decision from the Connecticut PURA would terminate the ability for retail electric suppliers and EDCs to use a fifth quarter "make up" period for RPS compliance
Public Act No. 17-186 repealed the portion of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 16-245a authorizing the fifth quarter, which allowed an electric distribution company or electric supplier to make up any deficiency with its annual RPS compliance within the first three months of the succeeding calendar year.
However, PURA had allowed the use of the fifth quarter to continue, due to the timing of the Act and market expectations. An administrative rule allowing for the fifth quarter RPS period also remains on the books
The proposed order would find that such rule is no longer a valid regulation, and would end the fifth quarter RPS allowance for meeting RPS obligations accrued during calendar year 2020 and thereafter
Concurrent with the elimination of the fifth quarter, the proposed order would change PURA's practice to now use 90-Day Resettlement figures in determining a load-serving entity’s "total output or services" for RPS compliance, rather than the Post-90-Day figures.
The proposed decision notes that, subsequent to the repeal of former subsection (e) of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 16-245a, effective July 1, 2017, the Authority continued to allow electric distribution companies and electric suppliers to use the fifth quarter for RPS compliance.
The proposed decision notes that, in doing so, The Authority reasoned that, "since the Public Act became effective on July 1, 2017, which is halfway into the 2017 RPS compliance year, and the companies might have already taken actions based upon reliance on the former version of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 16-245a(e), the Authority will maintain the [fifth quarter] allowance as well as the Authority’s current practices for the 2016 and 2017 RPS compliance filings."
The proposed decision notes that language in its January 23, 2019 Decision in Docket No. 17-06-23 raises a plausible uncertainty regarding the continuation of the fifth quarter.
"The Authority seeks to resolve all uncertainty and to eliminate future reliance on the fifth quarter," the proposed decision states
"To effectuate this, the Authority proposed to allow the fifth quarter to remain in effect for meeting RPS obligations for calendar year 2019, but to disallow it for meeting RPS obligations accrued during calendar year 2020 and thereafter (i.e., parties can use Q1 of calendar year 2020 as a fifth quarter for calendar year 2019 RPS pursuant to current practice, but cannot use Q1 of calendar year 2021 as a fifth quarter for calendar year 2020 RPS)," the proposed decision states
"The Authority finds that phasing out the fifth quarter as proposed is a reasonable and just resolution for the elimination the fifth quarter. The Authority will allow the fifth quarter to remain in effect for meeting RPS obligations for calendar year 2019, and will disallow it for meeting RPS obligations accrued during calendar year 2020 and thereafter. The use of the fifth quarter is thus eliminated for meeting RPS obligations accrued on or after January 1, 2020," the proposed decision states
Concurrent with the elimination of the fifth quarter for meeting RPS obligations accrued on or after January 1, 2020, the proposed decision would change PURA's practice to use the 90-Day Resettlement figures in determining a load-serving entity’s "total output or services" for RPS compliance purposes rather than the Post-90-Day figures.
In comments to PURA, Direct Energy had suggested a reporting process requiring the EDCs to provide annual RPS load to the Authority, which then would convey the RPS load obligation to each supplier.
The proposed decision would reject such a process. "Direct Energy’s articulated reporting process differs from the current process in Connecticut and the Authority declines to change its reporting practices at this time. Suppliers will continue to receive RPS load obligation from the electric distribution companies. Further changes to RPS compliance obligations will be addressed in Docket No. 19-10-26, Regulations for Renewable Portfolio Standards" the proposed decision states