Commissioner James Danly Statement
November 16, 2023
Docket Nos. ER23-2656-000, et al. & EC98-2-006, et al.
I dissent from the two above-captioned orders issued today.[1] I remain dismayed by the majority’s imposition of a requirement that exceeds the Commission’s authority under Federal Power Act section 203,[2] as described in my earlier statement in Docket Nos. EC98-2-005, et al.[3] I write separately to direct the reader’s attention to my separate statement in that underlying order.
For these reasons, I respectfully dissent.
[1] Louisville Gas & Elec. Co., 185 FERC ¶ 61,121 (2023) (order addressing arguments raised on rehearing); Louisville Gas & Elec. Co., 185 FERC ¶ 61,120 (2023) (order addressing a compliance filing and requiring an additional compliance filing, accepting a certificate of concurrence, rejecting transition mechanism agreements and related concurrences as moot, directing refunds and dismissing a settlement agreement).
[2] 16 U.S.C. § 824b.
[3] Louisville Gas & Elec. Co., 183 FERC ¶ 61,122 (2023) (Danly, Comm’r, dissenting).