Under its statutory authority, FERC has the power to influence retail rates for natural gas and electricity, including by preventing market manipulation in wholesale natural gas and electricity markets and enforcing gas spot market transparency. We urge the Commission to use its existing regulatory authority to ensure that households’ energy bills are not driven up by manipulation, obfuscation, or other malfeasance from regulated entities, and to work collaboratively with other agencies to address energy debt.

• Deploying more than $20 billion in federal financing tools, including through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law’s new $2.5 billion Transmission Facilitation Program, $3 billion expansion of the Smart Grid Investment Grant Program, and more than $10 billion in grants for states, Tribes, and utilities to enhance grid resilience and prevent power outages, and through existing tools, including the more than $3 billion Western Area Power Administration Transmission Infrastructure Program, and a number of loan guarantee programs through the Loan Programs Office.
  

(1) Transmission Facilitation Program. The IIJA establishes a new $2.5B revolving fund to
facilitate the construction of high capacity new, replacement, or upgraded transmission lines. This program will prioritize projects that improve resilience and reliability of the grid, facilitate inter-regional transfer of electricity, lower electric sector greenhouse gas emissions, and use advanced technology. DOE is authorized to do so through three separate tools.
• DOE is authorized to serve as an anchor customer on new and upgraded transmission lines in order to facilitate the private financing and construction of the line. Under this authority, DOE would buy up to 50 percent of planned capacity from the developer for a term of up to 40 years. A purchase of capacity will not be considered a “major federal action” that would trigger environmental review pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). DOE will then market the capacity it has purchased to recover the costs it has incurred once the project’s long-term financial viability is secured.

DOE is authorized to make loans for the cost of carrying out eligible transmission projects.

DOE is authorized to enter into public-private partnerships to co-develop projects that are located in a National Corridor or that are necessary to accommodate an increase in demand for interstate transmission, among other criteria. Such co-development can entail the design, development, construction, operation, maintenance, or ownership of a project.

“Anti” in MDN’s parlance means “anti-fossil fuel.” Being anti-fossil fuel is a wholly insane philosophical position to take, yet many in the Democrat Party have taken that position. (Yes, we’re calling some Democrats insane.) People like Sen. Elizabeth “Pocahontas” Warren, Sen. Ed “Lackey” Markey, and Sen. “Crazy” Bernie Sanders, and others in Congress, bash away and demand the end of fossil fuels. Yet those same antis who demand an end to fossil energy have just sent a letter to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) demanding FERC do something to lower the price of oil, natural gas, and electricity in their blue states. Why? Because they don’t want to be voted out of office for their obviously failed policies.

Skelly said markets and mechanisms are critical, “so that private actors can come in and compete and beat the crap out of each other and bring costs down.”

“It’s not a gale-force wind, but it’s a little bit of momentum out there in the world for us to tap into,” said Michael Skelly, the CEO of Grid United, a Houston-based transmission developer.

You would think in eight years, you would have sort of a lull, but it’s a sort of a mad dash every day to move these projects forward,” Skelly said. “It’s more like an Ironman [Triathlon], not a marathon. It’s more like a decathlon, but it goes on for eight years.”

That “could accelerate everything we’re doing in our clean energy transition and probably provide some pretty nice [cash flow] features to fund additional capital investment,” said James Chapman, the chief financial officer at Virginia-based Dominion Energy Inc. “So it all seems pretty good.”

Gale Klappa, executive chairman of Milwaukee-based WEC Energy Group, said he expected that extensions of renewable tax credits would happen. “It’s such a sausage-making machine in Washington as you know, but if I were a betting man, I think something will pass,” Klappa said, referring to the “Build Back Better” plan under consideration through the budget reconciliation process.

One of the lessons was that power companies need to engage the public early and be willing to change course in the face of well-reasoned criticism, as opposed to ramming through a project.

...new transmission can be sited and routed with broad support from the public and the communities most impacted by it.

Power companies can reduce conflict by building transmission lines in existing corridors, like along highways and railroads, but those options can be more complicated and costly.

The changes—which include giving the federal government more authority to intervene in state-level permitting decisions—are meant to expedite the approval of new transmission lines, which often encounter regional opposition and face years of delays.

Developers expect the new measures to streamline approvals but say they might not be enough. Companies proposing transmission lines say they often face local opposition, protracted state-level study processes or pushback from rival companies that don’t want new sources of electricity coming into regional markets.

“You look at the history in the U.S., and it’s very tough,” said Mike Garland, chief executive of transmission and renewables developer Pattern Energy Group, which recently started operating a 155-mile transmission line in New Mexico that took about seven years to finish.

“A couple of people can stop a transmission line, and that’s really bad news,” Mr. Garland said. “For us, the infrastructure bill provides a number of benefits that can help. It doesn’t solve the problem.”

Rob Gramlich, founder and president of power-sector consulting firm Grid Strategies LLC and executive director of advocacy group Americans for a Clean Energy Grid, said the Energy Department’s expanded ability to resolve and perhaps override state-level decisions could have a significant effect on efforts to expedite projects. But he said it remains unclear how the agency would use the new tools.
“It may just be the big stick they carry around while speaking softly in these regional transmission efforts and state siting proceedings,” Mr. Gramlich said. “But when everybody knows that stick exists, their behavior might change.”

Critics of transmission projects over the years have cited various concerns including the use of eminent domain, environmental impacts and potential effects on property values, among other factors.

Transmission line projects often face pushback during the permitting process, including opposition from established power providers. Companies that own nuclear and fossil-fuel plants have raised concerns about their ability to compete with wind, solar or hydropower delivered from other markets.

Maine residents last month voted to reject a $950 million transmission line under construction by Spain’s Iberdrola SA that would carry Canadian hydropower into the New England market. NextEra Energy Inc., a power company that operates a nuclear plant and an oil-fueled power plant in Maine, donated about $20 million to a political-action committee opposing the project and was joined by several other companies with plants in the area.NextEra declined to comment. Avangrid Inc., the U.S. subsidiary of Iberdrola that is behind the project, is fighting the ballot measure in court.

“This is really about the transition from the old to the new, and how we manage that,” said Avangrid’s deputy chief executive, Bob Kump.
Some Maine residents also raised concerns about the project’s potential harm to state forests and questioned whether the developer overstated its environmental benefits.
Sandi Howard, a music professor and Registered Maine Guide who leads a grass-roots opposition group, said the removal of tree canopy could hurt tourism and pose environmental and wildlife harms, including disturbing deer wintering areas and hurting native brook trout.
“Sometimes people throw up NIMBY,” said Ms. Howard, referring to the acronym for “not in my backyard.” “It’s bigger than that.”

Chris Miller, the council’s president, said he remains concerned that the federal government could override state-level decisions on transmission projects without having to consider alternatives with potentially less environmental impact.
“You’re basically taking state and local self-determination and exchanging it for the administrative fiat of FERC,” he said. “If your goal is to protect the environment, that is not acceptable.”