Commissioner Richard Glick Statement
November 19, 2020
Docket No. EL19-80-001
Order:  E-17

I dissented in part from the underlying order in this proceeding “because I do not believe that ITC Great Plains, LLC (ITC Great Plains) is sufficiently independent to justify an ROE adder.”[1]  Although I agreed with the Commission that ITC Great Plains’ then-existing ROE adder was unjust and unreasonable, I disagreed with the decision to nevertheless award ITC Great Plains a 25-basis-point ROE adder. 

Today’s order concludes that the Commission correctly found that ITC Great Plain’ pre-existing ROE adder was unjust and unreasonable.  I continue to support that conclusion and, therefore, join today’s order except insofar as it concludes that a 25-basis-point ROE adder is just and reasonable.[2]  For the reasons given in my dissent from the underlying order,[3] I would instead eliminate ITC Great Plains’ ROE adder altogether. 

For these reasons, I respectfully dissent in part.



[1] Kansas Corp. Comm’n v. ITC Great Plains, LLC, 172 FERC ¶ 61,037 (2020) (July Order) (Glick, Comm’r, dissenting at P 1).

[2] See Kansas Corp. Comm’n v. ITC Great Plains, LLC, 173 FERC ¶ 61,160, at P 12 (2020). 

[3] July Order, 172 FERC ¶ 61,037 (Glick, Comm’r, dissenting at PP 4-8).

Contact Information

This page was last updated on November 19, 2020