Statement of Commissioner James P. Danly
February 16, 2023
ER22-495-002 and ER22-495-003
I concur with today’s order[1] addressing arguments raised on rehearing and compliance and write separately to draw the reader’s attention to my separate statement to the underlying order accepting, subject to condition, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.’s (MISO) proposed revisions to its Open Access Transmission, Energy and Operating Reserve Markets Tariff to establish a seasonal resource adequacy construct.[2] I also want to reiterate that the question before the Commission is not whether there are other changes that should be made to MISO’s construct, or whether this proposal is better than MISO’s existing tariff; rather, the question is whether MISO has demonstrated that this proposal is just and reasonable[3]—which indeed it has.
For these reasons, I respectfully concur.
[1] Midcontinent Indep. Sys. Operator, Inc., 182 FERC ¶ 61,096 (2023).
[2] See Midcontinent Indep. Sys. Operator, Inc., 180 FERC ¶ 61,141 (2022) (Danly, Comm’r, concurring).
[3] See Neb. Pub. Power Dist. v. FERC, 957 F.3d 932, 943 (8th Cir. 2020) (recognizing that “courts have made it clear that FERC ‘restricts itself to evaluating the confined proposal”’ and “[t]herefore, FERC ‘need only find the proposed rates to be just and reasonable.”’) (citations omitted); Advanced Energy Mgmt. All. v. FERC, 860 F.3d 656, 662 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (“When acting on a public utility’s rate filing under section 205, the Commission undertakes ‘an essentially passive and reactive role’ and restricts itself to evaluating the confined proposal.”) (quoting City of Winnfield v. FERC, 744 F.2d 871, 875-76 (D.C. Cir. 1984)).