Docket No. ER25-3167-001
I dissent from today’s order for the same reasons I dissented from the underlying order.[1] Specifically, I do not believe that a theoretical risk of harm to interconnection customers—with no claim of any actual harm from an interconnection customer or anyone else for that matter in the record—should be a sufficient basis to deny a waiver. Here, PJM, the grid operator, supported Dominion’s request and agreed to develop “hold harmless” language that Dominion and PJM intended to include in the relevant interconnection agreements as an additional assurance that no third party would be harmed.
Put simply, in an era of high prices and with an urgent need to connect more generation in the PJM region, I support granting an uncontested waiver that would have saved Dominion customers millions of dollars.
For these reasons, I respectfully dissent.
[1] See PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., 192 FERC ¶ 61,214 (2025) (Rosner, Chairman, dissenting).