Opinion ID: 187082
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Network Upgrades

Text: Petitioners first argue that Section 37.2 of the Tariff does not apply to their rate filing because their substation and 1,800 feet of transmission line are not Network Upgrades. Petitioners contest FERC's classification of their transmission facilities as Network Upgrades for two reasons: one, transmission facilities cannot also be classified as Network Upgrades; and two, no document refers to their transmission facilities as Network Upgrades, while other facilities were expressly defined as Network Upgrades. In order for Section 37.2 to apply to Petitioners' rate filings, their interconnection facilities must be either Local Upgrades or Network Upgrades. Tariff § 37.2 (referring only to payment responsibility for Network and Local Upgrades). Network Upgrades are defined as [m]odifications or additions to transmission-related facilities that are integrated with and support the Transmission Provider's overall Transmission System for the general benefit of all users of such Transmission System. Tariff § 1.26. Petitioners do not object to FERC's acknowledgment that even Petitioners recognize[ ] the facilities they own are modifications and additions to the existing transmission system, an admission that plainly places them in the category of Network Upgrades. Order Denying Rehearing, 116 FERC at 61,702. Petitioners contend only that because their facilities are transmission facilities, they cannot also be Network Upgrades. FERC sensibly rejected this either/or contention, determining that Network Upgrades can also serve as transmission facilities and noting that the Tariff makes no distinction . . . between network upgrades and transmission facilities. Id. FERC also reasonably found that the lack of designation of these facilities as Network Upgrades in the TOA or Tariff or any other part of the record is irrelevant. Id. at 61,703. The only reason for designating the facilities in such a way would be to ensure that Petitioners repay another entity for the cost of constructing the facilities. Id. There was no reason to designate Petitioners' facilities as Network Upgrades when Petitioners were already paying for the construction costs themselves.