July 15, 2021
Docket No. RM21-17-000
Item E-1
I concur with the issuance of this Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANOPR) because the Commission is always entitled to solicit comments on possible changes to existing rules and a number of the questions raised here are worthy of consideration.
I write separately to highlight one overarching concern. The ANOPR poses several questions where the answer is “no.” Many of the contemplated proposals would exceed or cede our jurisdictional authority, violate cost causation principles, create stifling layers of oversight and “coordination,” trample transmission owners’ rights, force neighboring states’ ratepayers to shoulder the costs of other states’ public policy choices, treat renewables as a new favored class of generation with line-jumping privileges, and perhaps inadvertently lead to much less transmission being built and at much greater all-in cost to ratepayers.
There are obviously problems with the existing transmission regime. I, for example, have long been troubled by interconnection logjams and have wondered whether we are needlessly propping up fantasy projects while viable projects get lost in the crowd.[1] This is but one example; there are any number of other critical transmission planning reforms that bear investigation.
My hope therefore is that commenters will supply us with a full record on each issue raised in the ANOPR: whether and why the existing rule works or not, and whether and why the possible reform may work or not. With every proposed change, I specifically solicit comments on two subjects. First: is the contemplated reform a proper exercise of the Commission’s authority, i.e., is it within our jurisdiction? That is always the threshold question before we turn to policy. Second: what will be the ultimate effect on ratepayers? I fear that in the enthusiasm to build transmission, many may tout the benefits of new transmission while overlooking the costs that will eventually be borne by ratepayers. No proposed policy, however worthy, can evade our statutory duty to ensure that rates are just and reasonable.
I encourage everyone with an interest to file. I look forward to learning from the parties that submit comments and to engaging with my colleagues to consider whether there are legally durable, economically sound reforms that we might consider to improve the reliability of the transmission system at just and reasonable rates.
For these reasons, I respectfully concur.
[1] See, e.g., PacifiCorp, 171 FERC ¶ 61,112 (2020) (Danly, Comm’r, concurring).