U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

26–074 WASHINGTON : 2018

S. HRG. 115–256 

PENDING NOMINATIONS OF BROUILLETTE, 

CHATTERJEE AND POWELSON 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE 

COMMITTEE ON 

ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

ON 

THE NOMINATIONS OF THE HONORABLE DAN R. BROUILLETTE TO BE 

DEPUTY SECRETARY OF ENERGY AND NEIL CHATTERJEE AND THE 

HONORABLE ROBERT F. POWELSON TO BE MEMBERS OF THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 

MAY 25, 2017 

( 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Chairman 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho 

MIKE LEE, Utah 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

CORY GARDNER, Colorado 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

LUTHER STRANGE, Alabama 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

RON WYDEN, Oregon 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia 

MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico 

MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii 

ANGUS S. KING, JR., Maine 

TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois 

CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada 

COLIN HAYES, Staff Director 

PATRICK J. MCCORMICK III, Chief Counsel 

KELLIE DONNELLY, Deputy Chief Counsel 

ANGELA BECKER-DIPPMANN, Democratic Staff Director 

SAM E. FOWLER, Democratic Chief Counsel 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Page 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from Alaska ................... 1 

Toomey, Hon. Patrick J., a U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania .............................. 5 

McConnell, Hon. Mitch, a U.S. Senator from Kentucky ....................................... 6 

Franken, Hon. Al, a U.S. Senator from Minnesota ............................................... 9 

Cornyn, Hon. John, a U.S. Senator from Texas .................................................... 11 

WITNESSES 

Brouillette, Hon. Dan R., nominated to be Deputy Secretary of Energy ............ 13 

Chatterjee, Neil, nominated to be a Member of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission ........................................................................................................... 18 

Powelson, Hon. Robert F., nominated to be a Member of the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission ....................................................................................... 22 

ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED 

Advanced Energy Economy: 

Statement for the Record ................................................................................. 204 

Air Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute, et al.: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 207 

Brouillette, Hon. Dan R.: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 13 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 16 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 56 

Cantwell, Hon. Maria: 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 2 

Chatterjee, Neil: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 18 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 20 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 106 

Cornyn, Hon. John: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 11 

Daines, Hon. Steve: 

Statement for the Record ................................................................................. 208 

Energy Equipment & Infrastructure Alliance: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 209 

EnerNOC, Inc.: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 211 

Franken, Hon. Al: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 9 

Hoffman, Patricia A., U.S. Department of Energy: 

Letter dated May 19, 2017 to Dr. Robert Weisenmiller, Chair of the 

California Energy Commission .................................................................... 212 
Page

IV 

Laborers’ International Union of North America: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 214 

National Association of Manufacturers: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 216 

McConnell, Hon. Mitch: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 6 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 1 

Powelson, Hon. Robert F.: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 22 

Written Testimony ............................................................................................ 25 

Responses to Questions for the Record ........................................................... 153 

SoCalGas: 

Letter dated April 28, 2017 to Mr. Stephen Berberich, Mr. Michael 

Picker, and Mr. Robert Weisenmiller .......................................................... 218 

Toomey, Hon. Patrick J.: 

Opening Statement ........................................................................................... 5 

Utilities Technology Council: 

Letter for the Record ........................................................................................ 222 
(1) 

PENDING NOMINATIONS OF BROUILLETTE, 

CHATTERJEE AND POWELSON 

THURSDAY, MAY 25, 2017 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:45 a.m. in Room 

SD–366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Lisa Murkowski, 

Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

The CHAIRMAN. Good morning. We will call the Committee to 

order. 

It should be noted for the record that sitting next to me this 

morning is not my Ranking Member, Senator Cantwell, but I am 

joined this morning by Senator Franken, who will be filling in for 

Senator Cantwell, who is a little bit under the weather this morning. I know she wanted to be here and she has a statement that 

she will submit as part of the record. 

[The information referred to follows:] 
2 

Opening Statement of Senator Maria Cantwell 

DOE AND FERC Nominations Hearing 

Thursday May 25, 2017 

Thank you Madam Chairman for scheduling this hearing to consider the President's nominations of Dan 

Brouillette to serve as Deputy Secretary of Energy (DOE), and Neil Chatterjee and Robert Powelson to 

serve on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission). These nominees, if 

confirmed, are going to play an important role in forming our nation's energy policies at a critical point 

in time as the United States seeks to continue to lead in developing the technologies that are 

revolutionizing the way energy is produced and consumed. 

Deputy Secretary of Energy 

The Department of Energy plays an essential role in protecting our national security, our economic 

security, our energy security, and our environmental security. Its wide-ranging missions impact virtually 

every part of our lives. As the second in command at DOE, the Deputy Secretary has a number of 

significant responsibilities, not the least of which is managing the Department's operations. 

I had the opportunity to meet with Mr. Brouillette yesterday and we had a good discussion about the 

important work DOE performs on a daily basis. For instance, the Department continues to have a legal 

and moral obligation to the communities that are home to the waste left over from the nuclear 

production mission that was vital to our nation's success in World War II and the Cold War. And we 

have an obligation to the workers today, who are grappling with very complex and hazardous missions 

at these nuclear weapons facilities. I was pleased to hear from Mr. Brouillette that cleaning-up the 

Hanford site and ensuring workers there are safe will be at the top of his priorities list should he be 

confirmed to serve as the Deputy Secretary. 

In addition, Mr. Brouillette committed to prioritizing the increasingly critical issue of protecting the 

electric grid from the growing threat of cyber-attacks. In 2015, the Russians reportedly hacked into 

three Ukrainian distribution utilities, knocking power out to more than 225,000 customers. And it 

appears the Russians may have recently done it again. Several months ago a utility in northern Kiev 

reported that its grid was brought down as a result of a cyber-attack that was very similar to the 2015 

attack. 
3 

Fortunately, the U.S. grid has not yet been successfully attacked. But we do know that there are 

frequent attempts to hack into our utility systems. The Department of Energy is the Sector Specific 

Agency with the responsibility to protect our nation's electric infrastructure from attack. 

Unfortunately, the President's Budget for Fiscal Year 2018, which was released earlier this week, 

proposes to cut funding for DOE's Office of Electricity Delivery and Reliability by approximately 50 

percent. Spending on DOE's cybersecurity programs would be reduced by $32 million. 

The Budget proposal also slashes funding for numerous key Department programs. It also would 

auction-off the transmission facilities of the Bonneville Power Administration and the other Federal 

Power Marketing agencies, raising electric rates. 

We need a Deputy Secretary of Energy that will fight for the Department and its programs. I hope that, 

if he is confirmed, Mr. Brouillette will bring his experience and judgement to an agency that is currently 

lacking both. 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

We also will be hearing from nominees for two FERC seats. The Commission has been operating without 

a quorum since early February. There are currently three vacant seats and Commissioner Honorable 

recently announced she will be leaving the Commission at some point this year. I was disappointed by 

her decision. Commissioner Honorable served at FERC with great distinction and she will be missed. 

We are still waiting for the President to nominate two more people to the Commission- one 

Democratic and one Republican. I will be working with Senator Schumer to ensure that we retain the 

party balance at FERC that is required by law. 

I look forward to hearing from the two FERC nominees before us today about their views on the key 

issues pending before the Commission. For example, I want to be sure that the pending change in 

leadership at FERC does not mean we are going to roll-back the progress we have made in preventing 

and punishing manipulation of our gas and electric markets. I will want assurances from the FERC 

nominees that they will not allow that to happen. 
4 

I look forward to hearing from the nominees this morning. 

Thank you. 
5 

The CHAIRMAN. We are here this morning to consider three nominations: Dan Brouillette, to be Deputy Secretary of Energy; and 

Neil Chatterjee and Robert Powelson, to be members of the Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). 

I want to welcome all three of the nominees to the Commission 

and thank them for their willingness to serve our country. 

To start, we will hear introductions from Majority Leader 

McConnell, from Senator Cornyn and from Senator Toomey. They 

have come to provide introductions and to speak to the nominees’ 

qualifications. 

I recognize that we do not have two of our three, but I would like 

to welcome you, Senator Toomey, to the Committee. If you would 

like to go ahead with the introduction of Mr. Powelson, we can 

commence and then hopefully Senator Cornyn and Leader McConnell will be joining us as well. After you have made your comments, 

we will have an opportunity to provide ours and turn to the nominees themselves. 

Thank you for joining us this morning. 

STATEMENT OF HON. PATRICK J. TOOMEY, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM PENNSYLVANIA 

Senator TOOMEY. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman, and 

thank you to the ‘‘Giant of the Senate’’ for filling in for Ranking 

Member Cantwell. 

Senator FRANKEN. You are quite welcome. 

Senator TOOMEY. Senator Franken, good to see you both, as always. 

We have three outstanding nominees that your Committee will 

be hearing from today, and I am delighted that your Committee is 

doing so. It is my personal honor to introduce Rob Powelson to the 

Committee. 

Mr. Powelson is a native of Chester County, Pennsylvania. And 

he has had a successful career both in business and in public service and he has certainly established himself as one of America’s 

leading experts in energy policy and particularly, electricity markets, serving, as he currently serves as a Commissioner on the 

Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission. 

I think it’s entirely fitting that President Trump chose to nominate a FERC Commissioner from Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania is 

now a top energy-producing state. We are number two in the nation in natural gas production. The development of the Marcellus 

shale has been a tremendous boon to the Pennsylvania economy 

and job creation. And Pennsylvania ranks number three in the nation in electricity generation. We’re a net exporter of electricity, utilizing all sources of energy, including coal and natural gas and nuclear. 

Energy infrastructure needs improvement, especially in Pennsylvania, but beyond. We need to keep pace with the natural gas production that has come online recently, and we need to make sure 

that we maintain affordable prices for consumers. 

Rob Powelson, as I mentioned, has served on the Pennsylvania 

Public Utility Commission. He has done so since 2008 when he was 

unanimously confirmed by the Pennsylvania Senate. He was the 

Chairman for four years and in that capacity oversaw Pennsylva-
6 

nia’s electricity, water, natural gas and telecommunication markets. He managed a staff of 500 employees and served on a statewide task force for natural gas development where he focused on, 

among other things, the feasibility of compressed natural gas vehicles in Pennsylvania. 

He also has a record of improving our pipeline safety, hired a significant number of additional pipeline safety inspectors and worked 

with federal and state lawmakers to pass common sense safety reforms. 

Mr. Powelson oversaw the cleanup after Hurricane Sandy where 

we had to restore electricity to one and a half million affected customers and implemented electric utility response plans for future 

emergency events. 

Mr. Powelson is the current president of the National Association 

of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) which represents 

state utility regulators across the country. And prior to his public 

service, Mr. Powelson served as the CEO and President of the 

Chester County Chamber of Business and Industry, an organization that he led for 14 years and which received accreditation from 

the U.S. Chamber of Commerce during his tenure. 

He also currently serves on the Board of Trustees of Drexel University. 

It is an honor for me to be able to be here today to introduce and 

to be an advocate for Rob Powelson. He will certainly provide the 

FERC with a wealth of knowledge and experience. I know he will 

support American energy independence and to ensure the reliability of our electric grid. 

So, again, I want to thank Chairwoman Murkowski and all the 

members of the Committee. And I appreciate the opportunity to be 

with you today. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Toomey, we appreciate that, 

and I know Mr. Powelson appreciates your introduction as well. 

Leader McConnell, it is good to have you before the Committee. 

We are pleased to finally begin the processing of these FERC nominees, and you have a special relationship with one of them this 

morning so we welcome you to the Committee to introduce Mr. 

Chatterjee. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MITCH McCONNELL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM KENTUCKY 

Senator MCCONNELL. I do indeed, Madam Chairman. Thank you 

so much, members of the Committee. 

I am here this morning to recommend an extremely well qualified Kentuckian. Let me start with the headline that Neil 

Chatterjee is going to make a great addition to the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission. 

He has worked in my office for about a decade. And for those of 

you who know him, and I know several of you do, he is someone 

with a real passion for energy policy. His mastery of the issues is 

extremely impressive. He knows the ins and outs of just about 

every energy topic you can think of, and if you let him, he will talk 

your ear off about it. 

I have no doubt he would approach matters that come before the 

Commission with the same kind of thoughtfulness and enthusiasm. 
7 

Of course, it’s one thing to have a great idea. It’s another to get 

the idea enacted. And Neil has gotten that, clearly, over the years. 

He knows the importance of building bridges and finding common 

ground. He’s got a real gift for forging strong and lasting relationships, sometimes with Republicans, sometimes with Democrats. 

And more often than you might think, believe it or not, with Barbara Boxer. We call Neil the Boxer whisperer in my office. 

[Laughter.] 

It is a term of endearment, I assure you. 

[Laughter.] 

Let me give you an example. His work was key in forging alliances between Senator Boxer, myself, some would argue a rather 

odd couple, and others that ultimately resulted in a bipartisan 

agreement on issues that once seemed completely intractable, the 

five-year highway bill is one notable example. WERTA is another. 

Both of these bills, obviously, had strong infrastructure component 

and an agency like FERC, that considers issues related to infrastructure, having that kind of varied experience, which Neil has, 

will be a particular asset. 

So here is what Senator Boxer said on the Senate Floor after one 

of our legislative successes together about Neil. She said, ‘‘Neil 

helped us greatly to know the lay of the land. He said this is where 

we have problems. This is where we can come together. I hope,’’ 

Senator Boxer added, ‘‘I do not ruin his career by thanking him.’’ 

[Laughter.] 

Well I think the fact that we’re having this hearing today proves 

that Senator Boxer didn’t ruin his career. Neil has repeatedly 

shown how to get a good result while listening to good ideas, proposing those of his own and ultimately working in good faith to get 

things accomplished. He’s got the right attitude when it comes to 

thoughtfully hearing out all sides of an argument as well. He is, 

by every measure, exceptionally well qualified for the position to 

which he’s been nominated. 

I will also note that in addition to Neil’s background in energy 

and infrastructure issues, he also has experience working on environmental matters. His efforts on TSCA, another important bipartisan accomplishment for our country, is another example. 

As the members of this Committee know, it is long past time to 

get FERC working again and the quorum it needs. I think the 

President made wise choices in the selection of Robert Powelson 

and Neil Chatterjee for these important positions. 

Obviously, I hate to lose Neil, but I know that FERC and our 

country will benefit from the expertise, the talent, the good humor, 

I have come to know this nominee possesses over the years. 

Thank you so much for your consideration today of this outstanding nominee. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Leader McConnell. 

Many of us here in this room have had an opportunity to work 

with Neil as we attempted to move our energy bill, not only 

through the Senate last year, but through the whole entire process, 

and Neil was a great friend and ally. 

We are going to have an opportunity to re-up that, perhaps not 

with Neil’s expertise, but an opportunity to continue much of the 
8 

good work there. So we appreciate that. We appreciate you coming 

over to the Committee, and we appreciate your time. 

We are still waiting for Senator Cornyn, but I think what I 

would like to do is at this time ask the nominees to come forward 

and take their seats. I will make my opening statement and ask 

Senator Franken to make his. After that, if Senator Cornyn has 

joined us, we will hear from him, but we will then swear in each 

of the nominees, hear their testimony and also ask for the introduction of their family members, many are here with us this morning. 

As has been noted, this is a significant hearing. It is significant 

because this is a step toward restoring a crucial, independent commission to functionality. FERC has been operating without a 

quorum since February 3rd, for two reasons. First, was President 

Obama’s failure to nominate anyone for the two Republican seats 

that were vacated in 2015 and 2016. Then also, former Commissioner Norman Bay’s decision to resign from his term in February, 

well before it was scheduled to end. As a result of those two factors, 

this is the first time in 40 years that FERC has lacked a quorum, 

and according to Bloomberg, up to $50 billion in projects are now 

at risk. 

So we need to move quickly to restore FERC’s ability to do its 

important work. If we care about the business of a critical, independent, expert agency, we need to have a fully functioning commission. That is why I am pleased that we are able to hold a hearing featuring two very qualified nominees. 

Our first nominee, Neil Chatterjee, is well known to all of us 

here on the dais. As I mentioned, he has been instrumental here 

with the Committee, helping us on energy-related matters. He is 

a first-rate energy professional. Almost all of us have worked with 

him on bills that drew bipartisan support and passed the Senate, 

in part, because of his efforts and his guidance. Neil is known to 

consider all points of view and has repeatedly brought decisionmakers with distinct perspectives together, and I think we heard 

that just now from the Majority Leader. I have worked with Neil 

now for five years. I am pleased to support his nomination, and I 

believe that his approach will well serve the Commission. 

Our second nominee, Robert Powelson, has been a leader on the 

Public Utility Commission of Pennsylvania for years and is now the 

President of the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, NARUC. 

His colleagues, including several of my friends from Alaska, have 

recognized his leadership. They share their support for his confirmation to the FERC, and I likewise support Mr. Powelson’s nomination. 

Our third nominee this morning is Dan Brouillette. This will be 

his second term at the Department of Energy (DOE), having served 

as Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental 

Affairs from 2001 to 2003. Following his time at DOE, he served 

as the Staff Director of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Vice President of Ford and is currently Senior Vice President at USAA. He is well qualified for the role of Deputy Secretary. 

He has the confidence of Secretary Perry, and I believe he will be 

a capable partner at the Department. 
9 

All of us are very well aware that the President’s budget request 

proposes significant cuts to basic research and applied energy programs, along with the elimination of certain programs that have 

proven to be effective for accelerating innovation. While Mr. 

Brouillette will play a significant role in developing and implementing any changes that are made at DOE, I think we should all 

remember that the budget request was written without him. Now 

I do not agree with everything in it and questions about his views 

and his priorities are certainly fair this morning, but I don’t think 

it is going to do us much good to try to hold Mr. Brouillette personally accountable for the budget proposal or try to delay his confirmation based on it. 

So for members who have questions of our nominees, and I am 

sure all will, I will be here for as long as possible this morning. 

Should members have additional questions after the hearing any 

questions for the record will be due at the close of business today. 

I would just advise members to be prepared to report these nominees, as well as the nomination of Mr. Bernhardt, to be Deputy 

Secretary of the Interior, right after we come back from our work 

period after this next week. 

With that, I will now turn to Senator Franken. I thank you for 

filling in this morning on this very important hearing and appreciate your comments this morning as well. 

STATEMENT OF HON. AL FRANKEN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for 

your comments. 

We have three very important nominations before us this morning. We are experiencing a dramatic transformation in our energy 

sector. American innovation is not only changing how we produce 

and use energy, it is also providing an enormous economic opportunity in a growing global market for clean energy technologies. 

According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance, $7.8 trillion will be 

invested in new, renewable energy facilities between now and 2040. 

The International Energy Agency estimates that an additional $23 

billion will be spent on the energy efficiency during this same period. It is essential that our government invest in research and development and that we adopt the appropriate policies to maintain 

the United States as the world’s clean energy leader. 

Both the Department of Energy, DOE, and the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, FERC, can play a key role in this clean 

energy revolution or they can hold us back while our international 

competitors reap the rewards. That is the prism through which I 

will consider the nominees that we hear from today. 

The Deputy Secretary of Energy is the Department’s second 

highest ranking official. He serves as the Department’s Chief Operating Officer and is often assigned the Department’s biggest challenges. 

The next Deputy Secretary will have an especially difficult job. 

He will help manage the nuclear arsenal. He must continue to enhance our nuclear non-proliferation capabilities. He must ensure 

that DOE meets its obligations to clean up the weapons complex. 
10 

If Ranking Member Cantwell were here, she would underscore that 

the Hanford cleanup is a key part of this discussion, wouldn’t she? 

The CHAIRMAN. She absolutely would. 

Senator FRANKEN. Yes, she would. 

The Deputy Secretary must also maintain DOE’s preeminent role 

as a global scientific and technology powerhouse. The Department’s 

support for basic and applied research and for technology innovation through its national laboratories is absolutely essential. 

The Department of Energy is our investment in the future. We 

look to DOE and its researchers for innovations that keep our nation secure and our infrastructure and economy strong. The next 

Deputy Secretary will face an especially difficult job because the 

President, who has nominated him, does not seem to understand 

any of this. 

The budget the President released earlier this week proposes to 

slash many of DOE’s essential programs. It would devastate our 

emerging clean energy economy, and it would raise electricity rates 

across the country by auctioning off public assets to the highest 

bidder. The President’s budget would kill science, innovation and 

the jobs DOE supports today, and it would foreclose on the trilliondollar promise of the global energy economy of the future. 

When Secretary Perry appeared before this Committee during 

his confirmation hearing, he was asked several times about media 

reports that the Trump Administration was planning to devastate 

a number of important DOE programs and whether he would commit to defending the good work that the Department performs. Because he never gave this Committee a straight answer and failed 

to give me any confidence during a follow-up discussion, I voted 

against Secretary Perry’s confirmation. 

If he is confirmed I hope Mr. Brouillette will be a voice of experience and reason in the Administration. The Deputy Secretary 

needs to have the wisdom and the courage to be an advocate for 

his Department and its important programs. He should not embrace and implement misguided policies. Instead, he should advocate and champion wise ones. 

We also will hear from nominees for two seats on FERC. It is unfortunate that the Commission has not had a quorum since early 

January. Then Chairman Bay told the transition team he would resign if replaced as Chair and that is exactly what happened. It 

then took the White House approximately three months to send us 

nominees that could restore the quorum. 

I am disappointed that one of our two sitting Democratic Commissioners has chosen not to seek another term. Commissioner 

Honorable has served with great distinction, and she has my sincerest thanks. 

It is important that we restore the quorum at the Commission, 

but it is equally important that the President nominate two more 

members to fill the remaining vacancies, one Democratic and one 

Republican and maintain the party balance that the law requires. 

We on the Committee will be working with Senator Schumer to ensure that that happens. 

FERC will eventually have a new chair and four new commissioners that will be called up to make numerous decisions that will 

impact our energy future. In my view, the Commission needs to en-
11 

sure that incumbent utilities do not discriminate against new technologies such as wind and solar power, distributed generation and 

energy storage. Similarly, FERC must continue to play a key role 

in protecting the reliability of the bulk power system, especially in 

enhancing the industry’s ability to guard against the growing 

threat of cyberattack. 

I will want assurances from the FERC nominees that they recognize the gravity of this issue. The law establishing the Commission 

requires its members to be ‘‘individuals who, by demonstrated ability, background, training, or experience are especially qualified to 

assess fairly the needs and concerns of all interests affected by federal energy policy.’’ I look forward to hearing from both of the 

FERC nominees this morning. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Franken. 

Senator Cornyn has joined the Committee. We have already 

heard from Leader McConnell and Senator Toomey in the introduction of Mr. Chatterjee and Mr. Powelson, but we would welcome 

your introduction this morning, Senator Cornyn, of Mr. Brouillette 

to be nominee within the Department of Energy. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN CORNYN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS 

Senator CORNYN. Well, thank you, Chairman Murkowski, Acting 

Ranking Member Franken. Thank you for holding this hearing to 

consider these nominations today, all of which are very important. 

I’m here particularly to introduce Dan Brouillette, who has been 

nominated as Deputy Secretary of the Department of Energy, and 

it’s an honor to introduce him and to see his large, beautiful family. 

Dan hails from my hometown of San Antonio, also known as 

Military City, USA. Although he may tell you he is not a native 

Texan, he did get there as fast as he could. And let me also say 

Dan is glad to have his wife, Adrienne, here and all their children. 

And of course, it has always been a pleasure. The one thing that 

always impresses me about Dan and his wife is just how incredibly 

well behaved your children are. You all have done really well. 

In San Antonio, Dan serves as Senior Vice President at USAA, 

a Texas-based company made up of a tremendous team of hard 

working people with a heart for serving military families. But before his role there, Dan’s career was one marked by dedicated public service, that service began in the United States Army as a tank 

commander and reserve drill instructor. 

After serving eight years in the Army, Dan didn’t want to give 

up on government service, so he became a legislative director on 

the House side for eight more years learning the ins and outs of 

Congress which will serve him well in his new role. 

Later, he was nominated by President George W. Bush to serve 

as Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental 

Affairs at the Energy Department, a job that requires a keen understanding of how to get the Executive and Legislative branches 

on the same page to achieve results. 

Following his first tour at DOE, Dan came back to the Hill to 

serve as Majority Staff Director on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. 
12 

And most recently, Dan served on Louisiana’s Mineral and Energy Board for three years. 

Dan’s the kind of man we should all want in a senior position 

at the Department of Energy. He doesn’t just have policy chops, 

but he also knows the Executive Branch can work in tandem with 

Congress to produce good results for the American people. There’s 

absolutely no doubt in my mind that a man of his caliber, someone 

who’s demonstrated great leadership, a zeal for public service and 

a firm understanding of our nation’s energy needs, will serve the 

United States well. That is why I wholeheartedly support his nomination and encourage the Committee to do the same. 

I look forward to working with him and Secretary Perry and the 

rest of the Administration to make the United States an even 

stronger player in the global energy landscape, something which, 

Madam Chairman, I know you support enthusiastically. 

Thank you very much. 

The CHAIRMAN. Enthusiastically. 

We appreciate you being here this morning and for your welcome 

and introduction. I do note for the record that we are getting a little bit Texas heavy here, but that is okay. 

Senator CORNYN. There’s no such thing, no such thing. 

The CHAIRMAN. We can help balance it out with Alaska, I am 

sure. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator Cornyn, thank you for joining the Committee. 

At this time, I will invite the nominees to please stand. 

The rules of the Committee which apply to all nominees require 

that they be sworn in connection with their testimony. So I would 

ask you each to raise your right hand. 

Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you are about to give 

to the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources shall 

be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? 

[Each nominee responds, I do.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Before you begin your statements, you can go 

ahead and keep standing, but I would just ask you to lower your 

hand. 

Before you begin your statement, I will ask you three questions 

addressed to each nominee before this Committee. 

Will you be available to appear before this Committee and other 

Congressional Committees to represent departmental positions and 

respond to issues of concern to the Congress? 

[Nominees respond with Yes.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Are you aware of any personal holdings, investments or interests that could constitute a conflict or create an appearance of such a conflict should you be confirmed and assume the 

office to which you have been nominated by the President? 

Mr. Chatterjee? 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. My investments, personal holdings and other 

interests have been reviewed both by myself and appropriate ethics 

counselors within the Federal Government. I’ve taken appropriate 

action to avoid any conflicts of interests. There are no conflicts of 

interest or appearances thereof, to my knowledge. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Powelson? 
13 

Mr. POWELSON. Madam Chair, I would echo what Nominee 

Chatterjee presented to you. 

I have no ethical or financial disclosure issues to report. 

The CHAIRMAN. And then finally, are you involved or do you have 

any assets held in blind trusts? 

[Nominees respond with No.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. You may sit down and we will proceed with your testimony. 

As each of you have already been introduced, at this time I 

would invite you to introduce your family and provide the Committee with your opening statement. We would ask that you try to 

limit your statement to just about five minutes and your full comments will be included as part of the record. 

Mr. Brouillette, we will begin with you and then we will go down 

the line. So if you would like to commence your comments this 

morning and your introduction of your beautiful family. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DAN R. BROUILLETTE, NOMINATED TO 

BE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF ENERGY 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Thank you, Chair Murkowski. 

Thank you, Chairman Murkowski and Acting Ranking Member 

Franken. It is my honor to be here today and all told, the staff, the 

professional staff of this Committee and the professional staff of 

the individual offices, thank you for the opportunity to appear before this Committee as the President’s nominee to be Deputy Secretary of Energy. 

Each of you have been extremely generous with your time and 

gracious with your counsel, and it’s been truly a pleasure to sit 

down with you and understand your special, your particular policy 

interests and more importantly, your expectations of the Department of Energy. 

I’d also like to thank the President and Secretary Perry for the 

confidence that they have placed in me with this nomination. It is 

truly humbling to be here today and, if I’m fortunate enough to be 

confirmed to this important position, I look forward to working 

with them and with you, this Committee, to advance our nation’s 

energy and national security interests. 

I know they’ve been introduced already, but Madam Chairman, 

as important a position as this is I actually hold a more important 

position and that is as father and husband. And I’ll take a moment 

just to introduce the rest of our family. With me is my wife of 29, 

28 years? How long has it been? 

[Laughter.] 

It’s been a long time. She’s been my best friend for nearly 30 

years and we have been together a long time. But my wife, Adrienne, is here, and our nine children. And if I can quickly name 

them all. Christopher is right here in the front row. We have Stephen and his wife Lauren. We have Julia, Danielle. I can’t see 

them. Danielle, Sam, Catherine, Jackie, Joelle, Adelaide, and 

Christopher. 

The CHAIRMAN. Can we ask them all to stand? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. I’m sorry? 

The CHAIRMAN. Will you ask them all to stand so we can recognize them? 
14 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. There we go. 

[Applause.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. There we go. 

We also have with us this weekend my mom from Louisiana, 

Deanna Brouillette, my sister-in-law, Laura Brouillette, and many, 

many friends and family, friends and colleagues that we do consider family. It’s never lost upon me that without them, I wouldn’t 

be here today. 

If confirmed to this position, it will be the third time, as Senator 

Cornyn said, in a three-decade career that I take an oath to defend 

the Constitution of the United States. 

My path to this Committee to here today, leads through the 

United States Army, where I served as a young tank commander 

in the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment. Many years ago, we stood 

in the ‘‘Fulda Gap’’, which was then the ‘‘furthest frontier of freedom.’’ It was the front line of our nation’s efforts to deter Russian 

nuclear and conventional aggression. 

From there, service in the U.S. Congress, as Senator Cornyn alluded to, and the Department of Energy. And I also served with 

Congressman ‘‘Billy’’ Tauzin of Louisiana and later served as his 

Staff Director to the counterpart of this Committee in the U.S. 

House, the House Energy Committee. It was with Billy that I 

learned the value of bipartisanship. He was a gifted legislator. He’s 

a gifted lawyer and he taught me well while I was there. 

From there, I served with two iconic American companies, Ford 

Motor Company and USAA. And in each of those roles I’ve been 

fortunate to work with individuals who are truly visionary and capable. 

For Calvary troopers across the world, Lieutenant General and 

now National Security Advisor, H.R. McMasters, a modern-day 

Patton. I was fortunate enough to serve in the Army and for all of 

us who were in the cavalry and tank commanders, we looked up 

to him and we learned a lot from him. 

In this room, several Chairs of this Committee have served as informal mentors. Senators Murkowski, Bingaman, Johnston, Landrieu and Domenici. 

At Ford and USAA, I was honored to serve next to individuals 

who helped develop market technologies we now take for granted, 

adaptive cruise control, hybrid vehicle power systems, and remote 

deposit capture, which is a technology that USAA invented that allows you to take a picture of a check and have the funds immediately deposited to your banking account. Many of those people 

were former DOE scientists. 

Additionally, at USAA I’ve had the extreme privilege of serving 

our nation’s military community at times they most needed us— 

and that was during the difficult moments that followed a natural 

catastrophe or personal tragedy. All of these experiences are diverse and varied, just as the Energy Department itself, and each 

experience has prepared me well, I think, for the dynamic challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. 

If I’m fortunate enough to be confirmed, I’ll look forward to serving as Deputy Secretary, along with the members of this Committee, Secretary Perry and the incredible workforce at DOE to ad-
15 

dress the wide array of opportunities and challenges facing the Department with expanding obligations. 

Chairman Murkowski, Acting Ranking Member Franken and I 

will say, Ranking Member Cantwell because we had a fantastic 

meeting yesterday and I did get an opportunity to learn from her, 

thank you again for the opportunity to be here today. 

It is an honor and I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Brouillette follows:] 
16 

Opening Statement of Dan Brouillette, Nominee for U.S. Deputy Secretary of Energy 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, May 25, 2017 

Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, members of the committee, and to the 

professional staff of the committee and your individual offices, thank you for the opportunity to 

appear before you as the President's nominee to be Deputy Secretary of Energy. Each of you 

have been extremely generous with your time and gracious with your wise counsel. It has been 

a pleasure to learn of your specific policy interests, as well as your experiences with and 

expectations of the Department. Thank you. I would also like to thank the President and 

Secretary Perry for the confidence they have placed in me with this nomination. It is humbling 

and, if I am fortunate enough to be confirmed to this important position, I look forward to 

working with them and with you to advance our nation's energy and national security interests. 

As important a position as this is within our government, I'd be remiss if I didn't mention 

another very important position I already hold, perhaps even more important, and that is as a 

husband and a father. Madam Chairman, with your approval I'd like to introduce my family to 

the committee. With me today are my incredible wife and best friend of 28 years, Adrienne, 

and our nine children, Stephen, along with his wife Lauren, Julia, Danielle, Sam, Catherine, 

Jackie, Joelle, Adelaide, and Christopher. Also with me are my mom, Deanna Brouillette 

Gaudet, two of my sisters-in-law, Karen Kornfeld and Laura Brouillette, and many, many friends 

and colleagues we consider our family. It is never lost upon me that without their selfless 

support I would not be here today. 

If confirmed to this position, it will be the third time in a three-decade career I will take an oath 

to defend the Constitution of the United States. My path here leads through the United States 

Army, where as a young tank commander in the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment we served in 

the "Fulda Gap", then the "furthest frontier of freedom" and front line of our Nation's effort to 

deter Soviet nuclear and conventional aggression, to service as an Assistant Secretary of the US 

Department of Energy, as a congressional staffer to US Rep W.J. "Billy" Tauzin and later as Staff 

Director of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, to service in the senior executive 

ranks of two iconic American corporations: Ford Motor Company and USAA. 

In each of these roles I have been fortunate to work with and learn from visionary and truly 

capable leaders. For cavalry troopers around the world, Lieutenant General and now National 

Security Advisor HR McMaster is a modern-day Patton. Chairman Tauzin taught me the 

importance of bipartisanship. In this room, several chairs of this committee have served as 

informal mentors: Senators Murkowski, Bingaman, Johnston, Landrieu, and Domenici. At Ford 

and USAA, I was honored to serve next to individuals who helped develop market technologies 

we now take for granted: adaptive cruise control, hybrid vehicle power systems, and remote 

deposit capture, a technology invented by USAA that allows the use of smart devices to deposit 

funds into our banking accounts. Additionally, at USAA I have had the extreme privilege of 

serving our country's military community at times they needed us most: during the difficult 

moments that follow either a natural catastrophe or personal tragedy. 
17 

These experiences are diverse and varied, just as the Energy Department itself. Each 

experience has prepared me for the dynamic challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. 

Additionally, my tenure as Assistant Secretary for Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs 

gave me extraordinary exposure to the work of this incredible department. With its 17 

National Laboratories, the Department plays the central role in advancing America's leadership 

in scientific research and development, energy technology, and nuclear security. Collectively 

these labs comprise the most comprehensive research network of its kind in the world, and 

over 100 Nobel Prizes are directly associated with their work. Their continuous improvement 

of enabling technologies such as particle accelerators, high-performance computing, and the 

modeling of complex physical systems have led to entirely new areas of research within the 

scientific community. Anyone benefitting from an MRI, or medical treatments newly available 

because of our deeper understanding of genomics, can likely attribute those successes to work 

done by a scientist in a DOE laboratory. The labs are also critical to maintaining our strong 

national defense posture. Since the commencement of the Manhattan Project the Department 

has maintained a safe, secure, reliable and militarily effective nuclear weapons stockpile. 

The labs can and do also play a crucial role in ensuring the reliability of our electric grid and 

protecting against cyber security attacks. I intend to work with Secretary Perry to develop and 

implement enhanced security measures where necessary and to assist with resilience efforts, 

so that Americans can depend on stable sources of power. I will draw upon my military 

experience, as well as my prior experience at the Department of Energy and in the private 

sector, to help organize emergency response personnel to handle disasters effectively and 

efficiently. 

If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed, I look forward to working as the Deputy Secretaryalong with the members of this Committee, Secretary Perry and the incredible workforce at 

DOE- to address the wide array of opportunities and challenges facing a Department with 

expanding obligations and tightening budgets. Among those challenges will be working with 

the Senate and the House to develop and implement appropriate budgets that will allow the 

Department's work on crucial science, research, national security and environmental 

management to move forward. The recent events at the Hanford complex remind us of the 

importance of prioritizing the work of the Department. I stand firmly committed to the mission 

at Hanford, as does the new Administration, and, if confirmed, stand ready to lead with you the 

effort to see its ultimate completion. 

Chairman Murkowski and Ranking Member Cantwell, thank you again for the opportunity to be 

here. I ask the committee for your favorable consideration of the President's nomination, and I 

look forward to your questions. 
18 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Brouillette. 

Mr. Chatterjee, welcome to the Committee. We welcome your 

comments and the introduction of your family as well. 

STATEMENT OF NEIL CHATTERJEE, NOMINATED TO BE A 

MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. Thank you, Chairman Murkowski, Acting 

Ranking Member Franken, Senator Cantwell, members of the Committee, thank you for this opportunity. It is my distinct privilege 

to come before you today as a nominee to serve as a Commissioner 

on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 

If confirmed, I will serve to the best of my ability, always seeking 

what is right for our country and for the American people. 

I want to express my sincere appreciation to President Trump for 

presenting me the opportunity to serve my nation in this manner 

and to Chairman Murkowski for her support, her encouragement 

and her efforts in scheduling this hearing without delay. 

I’d also like to thank Leader McConnell for being here with us 

and introducing me today. Words cannot convey how grateful and 

humbled I am by this opportunity. Serving as the Leader’s energy 

policy advisor has truly been the honor of a lifetime, and, put simply, I would not be where I am today without him entrusting me 

with this great responsibility all these years. 

Growing up in Lexington, Kentucky, I remember seeing the work 

Senator McConnell did on behalf of the Commonwealth and I 

dreamed of eventually serving under him in the Senate. Of course, 

back then, I couldn’t have known that I’d actually achieve that 

goal, much less that I’d be sitting before this distinguished Committee as a nominee for Commissioner, with the Leader speaking 

on my behalf. 

The experience I’ve gained while working for Leader McConnell 

these past years extends well beyond the ins and outs of energy 

policy, though of course that’s a significant part of why I’m here 

today. But of equal importance, are the many principles about one’s 

temperament, about discipline, about judgment and about patience 

that the Leader has taught me by example. Each of these lessons 

has had a profound impact on who I am, and who I will continue 

striving to be if confirmed to this new role serving our country. 

There are several others I’d like to recognize, without whom none 

of this would even be possible. I am joined today by my amazing 

wife, Rebecca, my son, Bo, my son, Anderson, and my daughter, 

Lane. Rebecca and I have been together since high school and I 

have no doubt that it’s because of her love and support, at every 

step of the way, that I am sitting before you now. 

The CHAIRMAN. We welcome the whole family to the Committee. 

Nice to have you here. 

[Applause.] 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. I am also proud to be joined today by my parents, Drs. Sunil and Malaya Chatterjee, as well as my sister 

Sumana. My family has sacrificed a great deal to pave the way for 

me to reach this moment and I know I will never be able to thank 

them enough for their strength, for their wisdom and for their dedication. But today, I’d like to try. 
19 

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is an independent 

agency responsible for ensuring just and reasonable wholesale 

rates while maintaining reliability. Its broad jurisdiction covers a 

wide array of energy matters and it plays an increasingly critical 

role in the development and maintenance of our nation’s energy infrastructure. As the members of this Committee know well, this is 

a crucial time for the Commission and for America’s energy future. 

Having had a front row seat to the legislative process over the 

last eight years, I’ve had the distinct privilege of working to address many matters that impact the entire country, from the Chairman’s home state of Alaska, to the Commonwealth of Kentucky 

and just about everywhere in between. I’ve also had the opportunity to work with, I believe, nearly every Senator on this Committee at some point in time. Because of my experience developing 

sound policy with of different backgrounds and ideologies, I believe 

I can bring a much-needed perspective to the Commission should 

I be granted the opportunity. 

As my colleagues in the Senate on both sides of the aisle can attest, I have always endeavored to be pragmatic, fair and transparent in my interactions. In an effort to gain majority support on 

key legislative priorities, I have proven my commitment to hearing 

all sides of an issue and looking for common ground. It is only 

then, I believe, that we can forge lasting and meaningful solutions 

to the critical challenges facing our nation. 

To cite some examples from my time in the Senate. I have 

worked with Chairman Murkowski and Ranking Member Cantwell 

on major bipartisan energy legislation; with Senators Portman and 

Shaheen on energy efficiency solutions; with Senator Stabenow on 

farm bills and on critical resources for the crisis in Flint; and with 

Senators Barrasso, Daines and Gardner on energy production 

issues, just to name a few. I’ve also, obviously, worked on a number 

of coal issues with Senator Manchin, and on energy efficiency 

issues with your team, Senator Franken, as well. 

I hope to be able to bring the same equitable, level-headed approach that I’ve taken here in the Senate with me to the Commission so that we can move our country forward on the numerous big 

issues before us. 

Former Commission Chairman, Joe Kelliher, often reminded us 

that FERC speaks loudest when it speaks with one voice. I couldn’t 

agree more. 

If confirmed, I feel confident that my straightforward approach 

and reputation as a consensus builder can help foster that environment in the years to come. 

With that, I’d like to once again thank the members of the distinguished Committee for allowing me the opportunity to be here 

today. At this time, I look forward to answering any questions you 

may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Chatterjee follows:] 
20 

Statement of Neil Chatterjee 

Nominee to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

Before the 

Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

United States Senate 

May 25, 2017 

Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, Members of the Committee: thank you for this opportunity. It's my 

distinct privilege to come before you today as a nominee to serve as a Commissioner on the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission. If confirmed, I will serve to the best of my ability, always seeking what is right for our country 

and for the American people. 

I want to express my sincere appreciation to President Trump for presenting me the opportunity to serve my nation in 

this manner, and to Chairman Murkowski for her support, her encouragement, and her efforts in scheduling this 

hearing without delay. 

I'd also like to thank Leader McConnell for being here with us and introducing me today. Words cannot convey how 

grateful and humbled I am by this opportunity. Serving as the Leader's energy policy advisor has truly been the honor 

of a lifetime, and, put simply, I would not be where I am today without him entrusting me with this great responsibility 

all these years. 

Growing up in Lexington, Kentucky, I remember seeing the work Senator McConnell did on behalf of the 

Commonwealth and I dreamed of eventually serving under him in the Senate. Of course back then, I couldn't have 

known that I'd actually achieve that goal, much less that I'd be sitting before this distinguished Committee as a 

nominee for Commissioner, with the Leader speaking on my behalf. 

The experience I've gained while working for Leader McConnell these past eight years extends well beyond the insand-outs of energy policy- though of course that's a significant part of why I'm here today. But of equal importance, 

are the many principles -about one's temperament, about discipline, about judgment and about patience -that the 

Leader has taught me by example. Each of these lessons has had a profound impact on who I am, and on who I will 

continue striving to be if confirmed to this new role serving our country. 

There are several others I'd like to recognize, without whom none of this would even be possible, I am joined today 

by my amazing wife Rebecca, my son Bo, my son Anderson, and my daughter Lane. Rebecca and I have been 

together since high school, and I have no doubt that it's because of her love and support- at every step of the way 

-that I am sitting before you now. I am also proud to be joined by my parents, Drs. Sunil and Malaya Chatterjee, as 

well as my sister Sumana. My family has sacrificed a great deal to pave the way for me to reach this moment, and I 

know I will never be able to thank them enough for their strength, for their wisdom, and for their dedication. But today, 

I'd like to try. 

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is an independent agency responsible for ensuring just and reasonable 

wholesale rates while maintaining reliability. Its broad jurisdiction covers a wide array of energy matters, and it plays 

an increasingly critical role in the development and maintenance of our nation's energy infrastructure. As the 

Members of this Committee know well, this is a crucial time for the Commission and for America's energy future. 

Having had a front row seat to the legislative process over the last eight years, I've had the distinct privilege of 

working to address many matters that impact the entire country, from the Chairman's home state of Alaska to the 
21 

Commonwealth of Kentucky and just about everywhere in between. I've also had the opportunity to work with, I 

believe, nearly every Senator on this Committee at some point in time. Because of my experience developing sound 

policy with Members of different backgrounds and ideologies, I believe I can bring a much-needed perspective to the 

Commission should I be granted the opportunity. 

As my colleagues in the Senate on both sides of the aisle can attest, I have always endeavored to be pragmatic, fair, 

and transparent in my interactions. In an effort to gain majority support on key legislative priorities, I have proven 

my commitment to hearing all sides of an issue and looking for common ground. It is only then, I believe, that we can 

forge lasting and meaningful solutions to the critical challenges facing our nation. To cite some examples from my 

time in the Senate: I have woriked with Chairman Murikowski and Ranking Member Cantwell on major bipartisan 

energy legislation, with Senators Portman and Shaheen on energy efficiency solutions, with Senator Stabenow on 

farm bills and on critical resources for the crisis in Flint, and with Senators Barrasso, Daines and Gardner on energy 

production issues, just to name a few. 

I hope to be able to bring the same equitable, level-headed approach that I've taken here in the Senate with me to 

the Commission so that we can move our country forward on the numerous big issues before us. 

Former Commission Chairman Joe Kelliher often reminded us that FERC speaks loudest wihen it speaks with one 

voice. I couldn't agree more. If confirmed, I feel confident that my straightforward approach and reputation as a 

consensus builder can help foster that environment in the years to come. 

With that, I'd like to once again thank the Members of the distinguished Committee for allowing me the opportunity to 

be here today. At this time, I look forward to answering any questions you may have. 

### 
22 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Neil. We appreciate you 

being here and for your comments this morning. 

Mr. Powelson, welcome to the Committee. It is an honor to have 

you before us, and we appreciate your willingness to step forward 

and to serve in this capacity as well. 

Your introduction, please. 

STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT F. POWELSON, NOMINATED TO 

BE A MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Mr. POWELSON. Well, good morning Chairman Murkowski and 

belated happy birthday. And Acting Ranking Member Franken, I 

also thank you for the opportunity to be here this morning. 

Let me first start off by personally thanking the entire Committee staffs, both on the Republican and Democratic side, for their 

steadfast commitment to, not only helping and listening to nominees but the work that they do on behalf of American energy. 

I’m deeply honored to be here today as a nominee to serve on the 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. I’d also like to thank 

President Trump for this incredible opportunity. 

I’m also humbled by the introduction here this morning from my 

home state Senator, Pat Toomey, for his very generous introduction. I’m proud of my lifelong residency in the Commonwealth of 

Pennsylvania for many reasons, and one of them is the Commonwealth’s rich tradition of bipartisanship and collegiality among its 

congressional delegation. 

You know, anytime you get to an opportunity like this, is I’d like 

to say, it’s your family that’s here. And I want to take this opportunity to thank my family members. My wife of 19 years and Dan, 

I’m inching toward you. 

[Laughter.] 

Lauren and I are lifelong Philadelphians and we’re proud parents of our two sons. Ryan, who is not with us here today—he’s on 

a mission trip. He’s 14 years old, a proud student at Malvern Preparatory, and he sent me a beautiful text message last night saying, Dad, good luck here this morning. But my other son, who’s got 

the gift to be maybe a governor someday, Shane, who’s 11 years 

old—and I’m very proud of his accomplishments this past year in 

his school year and his ice hockey. And then my wife of 19 years, 

her unwavering support of me throughout this process and my public service. I know she jokes with me, someday I’m going to get a 

real job, she says. I respectfully submit to her, it’s been an honor 

to be a public servant in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 

And a dear family friend, my former Board Member and Godfather to my sons, just a great gentleman, John McGowan, is with 

me here. 

I also want to recognize a young lady who’s worked for me for 

six years but started her career working at the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, my Chief of Staff, April Baloo. This young 

lady is just an incredible asset to me. She’s a great, just an unbelievable asset, and I’m proud that she’s with me here today. 

The CHAIRMAN. Wonderful to have your family and your friends. 

Thank you. 

Mr. POWELSON. Thank you. 
23 

[Applause.] 

To the members of the Committee, thank you for conducting today’s hearing. I know many of you are, kind of, impatient with the 

fact that it’s taken this long to get here, but I want to personally 

say, we appreciate this opportunity here today. I am truly honored 

by the nomination, and I look forward to answering your questions 

and discussing the important energy issues facing our nation. 

If confirmed, I pledge to you I will bring a steadfast commitment 

to upholding FERC’s mission to ensure that rates are just and reasonable by which utilities operate and more importantly, that we 

protect the public interest standard in our decision-making. 

Now, as you heard from Senator Toomey, for the past 8-1/2 

years, I have served as a public utility commissioner in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. And I believe that my experience there 

has suited me well for this potential opportunity. 

I was nominated to the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission 

in 2008 by Democratic Governor Ed Rendell and was approved 

unanimously by the Pennsylvania State Senate. In 2011, Republican Governor Tom Corbett appointed me to serve as Chairman. 

And in 2014, I was re-nominated by the Pennsylvania State Senate 

to serve a second term and again, was unanimously confirmed, excuse me, by the Pennsylvania State Senate. 

During my time as chairman, I often look back over that wonderful experience, but I had a number of events that I had to deal 

with. As Senator Toomey mentioned, the restoration associated 

with Super Storm Sandy was really a life-changing experience for 

me. Pennsylvania was impacted dramatically by that weather 

event and we worked very closely with our federal agencies, our 

National Guard and others, to really create, what I consider to be, 

a national success story when it comes to power restoration. Most 

Pennsylvanians were restored power in less than four days. 

I’m also proud of the fact that Pennsylvania was one of the first 

states in the nation to adopt a Distribution System Improvement 

Charge to get at antiquated, hazardous distribution pipeline in our 

gas distribution systems. 

During my tenure at the Commission, I also oversaw the successful implementation of Act 129 which is Pennsylvania’s energy efficiency and conservation law. And I’m also proud of the fact that as 

Chairman I administered Pennsylvania’s very successful renewable 

portfolio standard. 

And Senator Franken, I appreciate your comments around clean 

tech investment because we’re going to need it all in this 21st century environment. 

Let me conclude that one of the greatest honors that has been 

bestowed on me is to serve as our President of the National Association of Regulatory Commissioners and NARUC is a wonderful 

organization, founded in 1889. I can tell you that looking back on 

just my tenure working across the 50-state compact and more recently, our international outreach, it’s been truly a wonderful opportunity. What I learned from my experience in NARUC is that 

what works in Pennsylvania might not work in other jurisdictions 

and the proud appreciation we all have for our individual states’ 

rights in supporting our state energy policies. As I like to say, the 

states have been the incubations of energy policy. 
24 

So, Madam Chair, I really thank you for this opportunity and 

look forward to your questions from the Committee members here 

this morning. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Powelson follows:] 
25 

Statement of Honorable Robert F. Powelson 

Nomination Hearing 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 

Good morning Chairman Murkowski, Ranking Member Cantwell, and members 

of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. I am deeply honored to be here 

today as a nominee to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. I would like to thank 

President Trump for this incredible opportunity. I would also like to extend a personal 

thank you to my home state Senator Pat Toomey for his generous introduction. I am 

proud to be a Pennsylvanian for many reasons, including the Commonwealth's rich 

tradition of bipartisanship and collegiality among its congressional delegation. 

I would like to recognize my wife, Lauren, and my sons, Ryan and Shane, and 

thank them for their steadfast and unwavering support throughout this process. Ryan 

regrets that he is not able to attend today's hearing, as he is on a mission trip to Central 

America with classmates. My family and my faith have been the cornerstone of my 

success as a public servant, and I am very appreciative of the support they have given me. 

To the members of the Committee, thank you for conducting today's hearing and 

for taking the time to meet with me over the past few weeks. I recognize and appreciate 

the hard work of this Committee on energy issues that affect the lives of Americans every 

day. I am extremely honored by the nomination, and I look forward to answering your 

questions and discussing some of the important energy issues facing our nation. If 

confirmed, I will bring a steadfast commitment to upholding FERC's mission to ensure 

that the rates and terms of service by which utilities operate arc just and reasonable and 

will do my part to uphold the public interest standard to which the agency is bound. 

For the past eight and a half years, I have served as a public utility commissioner 

in Pennsylvania, and I believe that experience makes me well suited to be a FERC 

Commissioner. I was appointed to the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission in 2008 

by Democratic Governor Ed Rendell and was approved unanimously by the Pennsylvania 

State Senate. In 2011, Republican Governor Tom Corbett appointed me to serve as 

Chairman. In 2014, I was re-nominated by Governor Corbett to serve a second term and 

was unanimously confirmed by the Pennsylvania Senate. 

During my time as chairman, the Pennsylvania Commission accomplished a great 

deal that I am proud of, including measures to address pipeline safety and aging utility 
26 

infrastructure. Pennsylvania was one of the first states in the nation to implement a 

Distribution System Improvement Charge (DSIC), an innovative ratemaking tool that has 

helped Pennsylvania utilities proactively address the aging infrastructure problem. 

Ensuring that our nation's utility infrastructure is in sound operating condition is not only 

a reliability issue, but a safety issue. I am proud that, during my tenure, we were able to 

expand the Pennsylvania Commission's authority to enforce federal pipeline safety laws 

under Act 127 and hire eight new pipeline safety inspectors. Pennsylvania is home to the 

Marcellus Shale play, one of the world's largest natural gas formations. As chairman, I 

oversaw the implementation of Pennsylvania's "impact fee" legislation. To date, the 

Pennsylvania Commission has collected and distributed over $1 billion in impact fee 

revenue to the counties and municipalities across the Commonwealth. 

During my tenure at the Pennsylvania Commission, I also oversaw the successful 

implementation of Act 129, Pennsylvania's energy efficiency and conservation law, 

whereby Pennsylvania reduced its electric consumption and peak demand over the course 

of several phases. Pennsylvania is currently implementing Phase III of Act 129, which is 

projected to result in a savings of 6,629,460 MWh across the Commonwealth and achieve 

net benefits of approximately $1.5 billion over the lifetime of the efficiency measures 

installed. I also helped implement a state law requiring the Commonwealth's electric 

distribution companies to procure a portion of their electric generation from renewable 

resources. Today, Pennsylvania acquires 13 percent of its electricity from these 

alternative resources, which is up from six percent in 2007. 

Throughout my career, I have been a steadfast supporter of competitive markets. 

In 2010, the Commission initiated a Retail Markets Investigation, which resulted in 

numerous enhancements to the competitive electricity and natural gas markets. 

Pennsylvania is a restructured state, and, thanks to competitive electric and gas markets, 

Pennsylvania consumers have enjoyed some of the lowest energy rates in the nation, not 

to mention innovative product offerings and a robust generation mix. 

In 2012, the Pennsylvania Commission played a key role in the Hurricane Sandy 

restoration effort, which was a national success story because of our storm preparedness 

efforts and the work done by utilities' mutual assistance crews in the Commonwealth. In 

2014, the Polar Vortex hit Pennsylvania, as it did the rest of the East Coast, and resulted 

in price spikes for many utility customers. In response, the Pennsylvania Commission 

undertook extensive efforts to improve consumer protections and utility disclosure 

requirements. 

2 
27 

Beyond my experience in Pennsylvania, I am also the president of the National 

Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC). Founded in 1889, NARUC 

is a non-profit organization dedicated to representing the state commissions that regulate 

our nation's utilities. With over 200 state commissioners as members, NARUC's mission 

is to serve the public interest by improving the quality and effectiveness of public utility 

regulation. In working with state commissions across the country, I have gained an 

appreciation of the diversity in utility regulation that exists across the 50 state compact. 

What works in Pennsylvania does not necessarily work in other markets, and, should I be 

confirmed, I will continue to value the variety of perspectives that the states bring to an 

issue. 

My experience as NARUC president and state commissioner has prepared me well 

for the complexities faced by FERC. It is an exciting and challenging time to work in the 

energy sector, and FERC plays an important role in navigating these issues. It is a great 

honor to be nominated, and, if confirmed, I would be committed to taking an impartial 

and fair-minded approach to carrying out the duties and obligations of the position of 

FERC commissioner. 

Thank you for your consideration of my nomination, and I look forward to your 

questions. 

3 
28 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Powelson. 

We thank each of you. 

We will now begin a round of questions. Hopefully, we will have 

time for a second round, depending on the interest of Committee 

members. 

Let me begin with our FERC nominees first, and this is just generally related to the Alaska gas line. 

Back in 2015, the DOE granted conditional—— 

[Protester shouting in the background.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Back in 2015, there was conditional authorization for the Alaska gas line to export LNG to countries that do not 

have a free trade agreement with the United States. This was a 

pretty major milestone for our efforts in the state with the gas line 

in terms of how we can move forward toward achieving the investment necessary, helping to build out the jobs and really build the 

economic growth. In April of this year the Alaska Gas Line Development Corporation filed their application with FERC. It is a 

58,000-page application. It is substantive. 

The question for both of you is, and I am not going to ask you 

to prejudge any specific application. I know you can’t do that. But 

just generally, do you support Alaska’s effort to market its stranded gas? And then in terms of complications, again, of this size, I 

think we need to have some level of commitment that you will do 

what you can, provided you are approved, to see that not only the 

Alaska application but all applications can proceed through a process in a timely and a predictable way. I am going to ask the same 

question to both of you. Mr. Chatterjee, if you want to begin? 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. Thank you for the question, Chairman. 

Certainly, I believe in states and local communities seeking 

projects that are in their interests and would be supportive of 

projects that enable us to utilize our domestic energy resources. 

Should I have the opportunity to be confirmed, I will happily look 

to read through those 58,000 pages and take very seriously the considerations made by folks and stakeholders on all sides of the issue. 

As you know from working with me here in the Senate, I try to 

be productive, to hear out stakeholders on all sides and come to decisions that are in the interest of the country and—— 

[Protester shouting in the background.] 

The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will be in order, please. 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. And I hope to work with stakeholders in Alaska should I have the opportunity to perform. 

[Protester shouting in the background.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Powelson? 

Mr. POWELSON. Thank you, Chairman, for the question here. 

The CHAIRMAN. You need to push the button there a little bit. 

Mr. POWELSON. Thank you, Senator, for your question. 

I think you put it best one time, you look at the investment that 

we have oversight of, if nominated. It’s $400 billion per annum of 

critical infrastructure that needs to be approved by the FERC. 

And to echo what Neil said in his answer, respecting that state 

right compact, the states’ ability to develop their energy resources 

and do it in a safe manner. Pipeline safety is critically important, 

and I stand behind that. 
29 

And so, as these projects develop, I want to be fair and balanced, 

look at the record and obviously, the business case, as you know, 

we don’t build these projects on speculation. And so, I would give 

you my steadfast commitment to be fair, balanced and do my homework in approving, if I have to give an approval to these projects. 

The CHAIRMAN. I appreciate that. 

Mr. Brouillette, we had an opportunity to discuss the high-energy 

crisis in Alaska, particularly rural Alaska. In many of my communities we have folks that are paying upwards of $9 a gallon for 

home heating fuel and this is not just a challenge for many, it is 

a crisis. 

We spoke generally about your commitment to work with us to 

help do what we can to reduce the price of energy in Alaska and 

in other areas where we are significantly impacted. And again, we 

generally ask for your continued commitment to do just that. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Yes, ma’am. You have that and whatever else 

I may be able to do to help the people of Alaska. 

As you and I discussed in your office yesterday, and thank you 

very much for that opportunity, I sincerely appreciated the chance 

to talk to you and learn more about that. 

There’s many things that we can do from technology to supply, 

and we can do it in ways now that we couldn’t do 50 or 60 years 

ago. So it’s very important that we increase domestic production, 

and I think you’ll see that from this Administration, from this Department of Energy. I look forward to working with you and Secretary Perry on those matters. 

The CHAIRMAN. And we look forward to having you and the Secretary up North so that you can see for yourself some of the impacts there. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. I would be honored to visit. 

The CHAIRMAN. Very good. Thank you. 

Senator Franken. 

Senator FRANKEN. I believe Senator Manchin is on a tight schedule, so I will yield to him. 

The CHAIRMAN. Certainly. 

Senator MANCHIN. Thank you, my friend. I appreciate that, 

Madam Chairman and Senator Franken. 

As you know, I come from West Virginia. We do a lot of heavy 

lifting and we are really dependent upon FERC, a working FERC. 

So we are very glad that we have two qualified people up for this 

nomination, and we will get to work as quick as we can. 

I would ask both of you, Neil and Robert, what are your concerns 

in the FERC? What do you think is the most critical challenge you 

have as FERC, as a FERC regulator? 

Mr. Powelson? 

Mr. POWELSON. Thank you, Senator Manchin, for that question. 

I think there are a number of issues in front of us. Obviously, 

first and foremost, is the backlog of cases that are sitting there 

right now. I think Chairwoman LaFleur, to her credit, has done a 

remarkable job leading the organization and trying to keep some 

semblance in managing the day-to-day operations of the Commission. 

But let me go through the suite of issues from cybersecurity to 

physical security, to infrastructure investment, to, you know, deal-
30 

ing with market issues. We are certainly not lacking issues right 

now at the FERC. It is not only an exciting time but a very challenging time. 

Senator MANCHIN. If I may ask? Do you all know that there has 

been a request for a grid study? I think Mr. Brouillette understands me. We had a good conversation about this. 

Can I ask you all? Where do you believe the reliability, if you are 

looking at what the role of price is a big consideration, the grid system, PJM is big in this whole area, as you know. How do you rank 

reliability? 

Neil? 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

I think, you know, overseeing reliability is at the core of the 

Commission’s mission, along with ensuring just and reasonable 

rates. And I think the key to ensuring that reliability is that we 

have a diverse fuel source, including a strong base load power. 

I think, obviously, coming from a region of the country, West Virginia and Kentucky, we’ve been dependent and we’ve been the 

beneficiaries in Kentucky of safe, affordable, reliable electricity 

from coal-fired generation. There is, obviously, considerable pressure on coal and coal’s role in our generation mix. I think we need 

to have a diversified fuel mix going forward. 

Senator MANCHIN. Let me ask you this, if I could? 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. Yes, sir. 

Senator MANCHIN. You know how tight we are on time here. 

How do you define base load, base load fuel? Very quickly. 

Mr. POWELSON. So coming from Pennsylvania and we’re good 

neighbors. Always commend you as a former governor of a state. 

How do I define base load? If I look at the PJM mix right now 

it’s nuclear, it’s coal and it’s natural gas, but renewables are playing a part of this energy mix. 

Senator MANCHIN. Sure. 

Mr. POWELSON. But they’re the resources right now that seem to 

be evolving and on a national level as well. 

Senator, I can tell you, there’s a tectonic shift taking place across 

the U.S. In Pennsylvania right now, 30 percent of our generation, 

as you know, I came on the Commission in 2008, natural gas was 

less than 20 percent of the energy mix. It’s up to 30 percent now. 

We’re diversifying. 

Senator MANCHIN. In Pennsylvania, yes. 

Mr. POWELSON. Yup. 

Senator MANCHIN. It is coming up strong in West Virginia. Coal 

is still 90, but it is coming up strong, and we are all for renewables 

too. 

Mr. POWELSON. And we’re going to need it all, to your point. 

[Protester shouting in the background.] 

Senator MANCHIN. Neil, if you could—— 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. I agree with Commissioner Powelson. We need 

it all. We need coal, we need nuclear, we need hydro, and we need 

renewables. And then, I think, obviously, gas plays an important 

role, sometimes it serves as base load, sometimes it serves as 

backup and sometimes it’s used opportunistically. 

[Protester shouting in the background.] 

Senator MANCHIN. The previous discussions—— 
31 

[Protester shouting in the background.] 

The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will come to order. 

Senator MANCHIN. I hope this does not count against my time. 

The CHAIRMAN. It will not count against your time, Senator. 

[Laughter.] 

[Protester shouting in the background.] 

Senator MANCHIN. Oh, boy. 

[Protester shouting in the background.] 

Senator MANCHIN. Is there anybody else in the audience who 

wants to say something before I get started again? 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Manchin, your time has not been deducted from you, if you would like to proceed? 

Senator MANCHIN. Thank you, and God Bless America. 

My main concern, basically, is base load, and I am afraid that 

the polar vortex about took us down. 

Mr. Powelson, you know, and I think Mr. Chatterjee, you know 

how critical that was. And that is all we are asking for is the proper mix. 

I am being told by the utility companies that the proper mix, 

they are being forced because of certain conditions and certain requirements that the previous FERC has put on them, not to have 

the proper mix that they think to make the reliability. That is 

what we are concerned about. 

There is going to be a fuel of the future, I am sure, 10, 20, 30 

years from now, but right now we have to use the cleanest fashion 

we can, what we have that we can depend on. So that is mine. 

Mr. Brouillette, if I can, real quickly. You know there are some 

severe requests for budget cuts, and with that there is a recommendation on the NETL, the National Energy Technology Labs. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Yes, sir. 

Senator MANCHIN. Consolidation. 

If you could speak about that and what your concerns would be 

and how you intend to take that on? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Yes, sir. I appreciate the question. And thank 

you, again, sir, for spending time with me yesterday. I really appreciate it. 

Senator MANCHIN. Sure. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. The opportunity we had to chat in your office. 

If I could just back up, just real quickly and opine quickly on this 

grid study. 

As I told you yesterday—— 

Senator MANCHIN. It was given to your new forthcoming agency. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Exactly. 

I’ve not been briefed on the study. But I’m told that it is and 

based on press accounts, it is to understand this new balance that 

may be affecting the marketplace. So, that’s it’s intent. I think it’s 

going to be an internal study at this point to review a lot of literature that’s been already been written by the laboratories. 

Senator MANCHIN. Sure. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. I know NETL is an important part of the laboratory components at the Department of Energy. 
32 

The budget, as the Chairwoman, Chairman, explained earlier, 

I’ve not been a part of. I have read the paper accounts. I do understand that there are cuts. 

You know, I guess from my background, I understand full well 

what the process is too, sir. 

The President has made a request. And it does lay out his policy 

directives. But the process, as you all know better than I, involves 

both the House and the Congress. And I look forward, if confirmed, 

to working with the Congress to arrive at an appropriate number 

for the scientific labs. 

Senator MANCHIN. Well, that is all we would ask, and we want 

to make sure that we do the most effective and efficient thing we 

can for our country. I would hope that you would look into Morgantown, the NETL lab, which is a very, very productive lab and does 

an awful lot of heavy lifting and a lot of work. And it’s tied into 

WVU’s research centers, so it’s really been very effective there. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Yes, sir. They do outstanding work. 

Senator MANCHIN. Yes. 

I just want to thank all of you for your interest in serving. I really do. I know it is very difficult and it is very challenging, but I 

thank your families for the support they give to you all and for you 

all giving of yourselves because it is going to be very demanding 

in the next few years. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Manchin. 

Senator Lee. 

Senator LEE. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Thanks to all of you for being here today. 

As you are aware, in many parts of the country there are public 

and private entities alike that are waiting for the approval of infrastructure projects, projects that would serve each community well 

and provide for substantial employment opportunities and opportunities for economic growth. 

In Utah, the Lake Powell pipeline project is something that 

would help to develop Utah’s allocation of water from the Colorado 

River. If built, would help provide water to one of Utah’s driest regions and also a region that is experiencing really fast growth. 

They need water. 

The preliminary licensing and environmental review documents 

have been filed with FERC. To date, we are 11 years into the 

project and, to date, about $32 million has been spent just in this 

process. Yet it is still nowhere near where it needs to be. 

I would like to ask some questions of those who have been nominated to serve in FERC. We will start with you, Mr. Chatterjee. 

What could you do to work to make sure that there is better coordination between agencies, between FERC, entities like the BLM 

and other agencies and departments? And would you consider supporting review deadlines for projects waiting for FERC approval? 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

I share your sentiment that this type of infrastructure development is critical to not just job creation, but to stimulating economic 

growth. And FERC plays a critical role in approving this, these, infrastructure projects moving forward. 
33 

While I don’t want to speak to the specific project you referenced, 

certainly, you know, philosophically, I want to make sure that the 

approval system is working as efficiently as possible. I do know 

that FERC often interacts with myriad agencies through the approval process. 

And you have my assurance that I would work to better coordinate and streamline this process in a responsible manner. 

I think one of the advantages that I can bring to the position is, 

you know, having served here in the legislative branch, with a national portfolio, I’ve developed relationships across a number of 

these agencies, as well as throughout the Congress. So I can reach 

out directly to some of these related agencies to ensure that the 

project can be better streamlined. 

But again, I need to stress, we need to do it responsibly because 

what we don’t want to do is, in our push to do it expeditiously, create any kind of legal liability on the back end. But no question, we 

need to really look at making sure of the processes as efficient as 

possible. 

Senator LEE. How about you, Mr. Powelson? 

Mr. POWELSON. Senator, thank you for your question. And I 

would start just to pick up on Mr. Chatterjee’s point. If nominated, 

I think the first thing that I would do is really, kind of, do some 

root cause analysis of where these snags are presenting themselves 

in the Office of Energy Projects. 

And I think to Mr. Chatterjee’s point, you know, not sacrificing 

things like pipeline safety or, you know, these delays, as you know, 

cost real money. And so, for me, personally as a state regulator, 

getting immersed in where are the issues, what’s causing the problem and the delay. 

And then one thing I’d get a greater appreciation for in the time 

that I’ve spent here in DC, is kind of, there’s still this silo mentality of different agencies sometimes not coordinating on that effort, whether it’s Army Corps, EPA, DOE and others. So, I think 

we’ve got to start having these conversations if, again, we’re talking about a state like yours, that wants to go forward with a 

project of this magnitude, that we’re all moving in the same direction. 

Senator LEE. Yes. 

Mr. Brouillette, let’s talk a little bit about the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. 

Are you open to the idea of reforming that and what do you think 

of what some, including the Trump Administration, have suggested 

about the idea of selling oil for deficit reduction? And if we are 

going to do that sort of thing, anytime we sell it, what can we do 

to optimize the price to make sure that we are getting our value 

out of it? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Thank you for the question, Senator, and 

thank you as well for the opportunity to meet. I really enjoyed our 

conversation in your office. 

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve, as you know, was set up for a 

very specific reason and that was to maintain an emergency supply 

of fuel. The definitions and the conditions under which it could be 

sold, are very clearly defined in federal law. 
34 

I am not familiar with the discussions, the policy discussions, 

that the Administration may have had to determine the level of 

sales that they have included in their budget request to the Congress. 

I can tell you as a general matter, I would stand by the federal 

law. I do think the Strategic Petroleum Reserve serves a valuable 

purpose. As the Chairman and I discussed as well, I am open to 

better mousetraps, if you will. I am not convinced that a single repository or a series of repositories in one location in the country is 

going to serve us well in certain moments or certain catastrophes. 

So, if confirmed, sir, I would be more than open to having a conversation about how we might reform that and make it much better and more effective. 

Senator LEE. Thank you. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Lee. 

Senator Franken. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

This is for the FERC nominees. Over the past decade we have 

seen a transformation in the way electricity is generated and delivered in the United States. With new technologies challenging the 

traditional grid model because of energy efficiency, electricity demand is down and this is saving households and businesses money. 

The plummeting prices of wind turbines and solar panels have 

driven more renewables and distributed power generation into the 

marketplace, and we are developing more efficient and effective energy storage systems which improves the reliability and resilience 

of the grid and allows increasing amounts of variable renewable energy sources. 

My state of Minnesota is on track to be 25 percent renewable by 

2025. It is working so well the state is actually looking at ways of 

increasing that target to 50 percent by 2020. And this transformation to clean, flexible resources is going to continue and the 

future of our grid will be fundamentally different than it is today. 

Mr. Chatterjee, Mr. Powelson, I would like to hear your visions 

for the future of the grid. In your view, what needs to be done to 

allow distributed energy technologies to meaningfully participate in 

the marketplace? 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. Thank you for the question, Senator Franken. 

There’s no question in states like Minnesota and other regions of 

the country you are seeing rapidly increased deployments as there 

have been dramatic developments in technology. You know, I’m in 

favor of markets, I’m in favor of competition, and I’m in favor of 

technology, particularly when technology is in the best interest of 

consumers. I think that the Commission plays a critical role in the 

development of infrastructure and getting those, that infrastructure, permitted. 

Senator Lee asked a specific question about infrastructure. I 

think we need to look at our grid infrastructure to make sure that 

it’s prepared to deal with this transformation as different technologies and renewables come into the marketplace. And I think I 

would take that same view, should I have the opportunity to be 

confirmed and serve at the Commission. 
35 

I’ve met with a number of folks in this space and have been impressed with the innovation that has been ongoing. I was pleased 

yesterday to actually receive an endorsement from AEE, an advanced energy group who I’d met with on occasion and demonstrated my willingness to really learn about the advancements 

that are occurring and how to best integrate them into our energy 

mix. 

Mr. POWELSON. Senator Franken, thank you for the question. 

I will wear my Pennsylvania hat and then go to another hat 

here. 

One is, I think, like your state, Pennsylvania, as you heard in 

my opening comments, we have a statewide energy efficiency program. It was adopted in 2008. Utilities have spent close to $1 billion in energy efficiency with a total resource cost to customers receiving net benefit of close to $1.8 billion. Those programs are 

working. I’m very proud of our record in Pennsylvania with what 

we’ve done with energy efficiency. 

I also support, you know, what you said about renewables. I 

mean, look, low, clean tech investment is part of this 21st century 

landscape. I live right on the border of a new plant that Governor 

Markell brought to Delaware. 

A decade ago you couldn’t have defined what an oxidized fuel cell 

was. Now we have a company like Bloom Energy with their East 

Coast operation bringing oxidized fuel cells to the market. 

You mentioned battery storage, another critical part. I serve on 

the Electric Power Research Institute. I mean, we’re going to have 

wind farms with battery storage capability here. EV charging, you 

know, solar and wind cost curves coming down dramatically, new 

metering technologies. Pennsylvania, like your state, we have advanced metering technology. So it is a dynamic marketplace. 

I’ll leave you with one note, like my good friend here from Kentucky. In meeting with groups like the Advanced Energy Economy, 

the first thing I did as NARUC President was to implement an innovation task force to bring all these new technology providers into 

a working conversation with NARUC Commissioners. And it’s been 

off to a great start. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you for that answer. 

Thank you, both. I know I have run out of time. Just one thing, 

I would like to respond to Mr. Powelson in terms of storage and 

wind. That is part of the base load that we are talking about when 

we talk about base load. 

Mr. Brouillette, I was going to ask you about the DOE budget 

cuts. I have run out of time so I am not going to do that, but I 

would like to remark, the Chairwoman told me that you and your 

wife homeschooled your children. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. We do, sir. 

Senator FRANKEN. All nine of them? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. All nine. 

Senator FRANKEN. Are you going to have time to do this job? 

[Laughter.] 

I see some of them have aged out of—— 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Given my wife’s organizational skills, I’m 

starting to wonder if the wrong Brouillette was nominated. 

[Laughter.] 
36 

She is very good at what she does. 

Senator FRANKEN. Okay. And you do the math and science part? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. I try to, sometimes. 

Senator FRANKEN. Okay, alright. 

[Laughter.] 

Okay. 

The CHAIRMAN. Okay. 

Senator FRANKEN. Back to you. 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Franken. 

Senator Gardner. 

Senator GARDNER. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator Franken, I think that is exactly why he needs a laboratory system that has advanced computational ability, to help with 

the process there. 

So I want to thank you, all of you, for being here today, the witnesses who are here today. I know there are a number of children 

in the room today and thank you for being here. I have three kids 

myself. And the fact is, moms and dads are doing this, they are 

willing to commit to public service because they believe that this 

is a way they can pay back the country and make this a very special place even that more special. So thanks to all the children who 

are here seeing their moms and dads go through a confirmation 

process because I know it takes away time from you all as well. 

Thanks for that service, that sacrifice and that commitment. 

Mr. Brouillette, I would like to start with you. I would be remiss 

if I did not talk about, carry on the conversation that we had in 

our office just a couple days ago, talking about the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Colorado. We discussed the importance 

of that. We discussed the importance of grid reliability, diversified 

fuel mix. And I think nobody does that better and the understanding of how that works in combination with the diverse fuel 

mixture and making sure we have grid reliability than the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). 

Both you and Secretary Perry have expressed support for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, but I want to make sure that 

it is clear that I will oppose any attempts to shut down lab operations. With the figures that I have in 2015, fiscal year, NREL received approximately $357 million across 13 EERE, energy efficiency and renewable energy office programs, research programs. 

The President’s budget proposal provides about $636 million to 

EERE. 

I realize you are not at the Department yet, but you have been 

nominated to serve as the second in charge, second in command. 

So please explain to me how, if confirmed, you will work to reconcile the differences in order to ensure the Renewable Energy 

Laboratory programs ensure cyber and advanced computing will be 

continued, that those are priorities of the Administration at NREL. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Thank you, Senator. I sincerely appreciated 

our opportunity to chat yesterday in your office. 

It’s always enlightening to me. You have spent much more time 

at NREL than I have, but I have been there, many times. It’s a 

fascinating place and it’s a place filled with incredible talent. I’m 

always drawn there when I meet the folks there. 
37 

As you mentioned with this particular budget I was not part of 

the process. But you have my assurance, if confirmed to serve in 

this role, that I will advocate for the programs of the Department. 

You have my assurance on that and I will always be available to 

you. 

The good people of NREL have not only invented much of the renewable technologies that we talked about with regard to potential 

base load application, they have enabled it. Much of the technology 

that they have developed is now in the marketplace because of 

their good work. 

So again, sir, if confirmed, I look forward to working with you 

and I will be an advocate for the programs. 

Senator GARDNER. Thank you. 

Additionally, the support for grid modernization, the ease of energy systems integration facility, not clearly stated in the budget. 

Industry engagement, though, is showing that these are both critical to innovation. How would you advise Secretary Perry on where 

federal dollars should be spent in order to best prepare this country 

for energy leadership and cyber readiness? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. I’m sorry, can you repeat that again? 

Senator GARDNER. Just the ease of program on cyber and I will 

submit that for the record because I will run out of time here. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Sure. 

Senator GARDNER. I want to get to the two FERC nominees, both 

to Mr. Chatterjee as well as Mr. Powelson. 

I spoke to both of you in the office. Thanks for coming in. I 

talked about my support for the liquefied natural gas export 

projects and facilities. I spoke of my support for a project called 

Jordan Cove that would take Colorado’s Western Slope natural gas 

from the Piceance Basin, which is spelled a little bit like 

Brouillette, you have to figure out how to get them both spelled, 

to markets in Asia. I have long supported this project and look forward to the refiling of that project at FERC this summer during 

a time when we will have the quorum filled at FERC. 

I know you probably cannot comment on the Jordan Cove filing 

specifically, but I would like your position on LNG exports in general, if you can, Mr. Chatterjee and Mr. Powelson. 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

Yes, I’ve been advised I can’t speak to any action that may come 

before the Commission. But I do think that permitting LNG facilities is an important part of FERC’s role and it’s a responsibility 

that I would take seriously. There are stakeholders on all sides of 

the issues. But while I certainly would look to try and get these 

projects sited, I would also be certain to hear feedback from folks 

on all sides of the issues and make the most responsible decision 

I could. 

Senator GARDNER. Mr. Powelson? 

Mr. POWELSON. Senator Gardner, thank you for the question and 

also thank you for the time you took out of your hectic schedule 

to meet with me. 

This is an issue that, just look at the 2008 timeframe when I 

came on the Commission we had $14 per MM BTU gas and we 

were an import nation. Today we are moving forward toward really 

dominating the international landscape with export opportunity. 
38 

To reiterate what Nominee Chatterjee mentioned, public input, 

stakeholder process is all part of this equation. People have to have 

peace of mind that there’s transparency in that process, but as I 

said earlier in comments, you know, we don’t build pipelines on 

speculation. 

And in here we are reversing flows from 2008, in less than in an 

8-1/2 year window, now we have an opportunity to be exporting. 

And exporting, in my view, is a geopolitical, creates geopolitical upside for the U.S. 

I had a great opportunity with our former Governor to go to 

Chile, one of our true democracies, and met with Sebastian Panira 

and talked about the need as they’re, kind of, decarbonizing themselves, they needed natural gas and they don’t have it in Chile. So 

these are the opportunities that abound if we do it right. 

Senator GARDNER. Mr. Powelson, last question. At the state and 

federal authority, we talked about that a little bit in our meeting. 

In the context of wholesale power markets and state energy policies, including the state renewable energy portfolio, where would 

you come down on using federal authority to preempt state laws? 

Mr. POWELSON. That’s a great question, Senator, and I will respectfully start with the work that’s being done right now at the 

FERC because this is a very big issue. I come from an organized 

market and there’s organized markets and then there’s the bilateral markets. 

The first thing that, I think, the FERC is doing responsibly is 

hold the work that Chairman LaFleur did to start the conversation 

around this tech conference and gathering feedback from states, 

generators and other market participants. 

So to answer your question, I am not, I respect states’ rights but 

also we, as Federal Energy Regulatory Commissioners, if confirmed 

here, have a responsibility to uphold the Federal Power Act and we 

also have responsibility around the Natural Gas Act. And how 

states develop these policies, if there’s an inference in the market 

design, that’s where we have to step in and make those decisions. 

But I, today, will tell you that I think the FERC has, to its credit, 

tried to be respectful of the state energy policies. 

Senator GARDNER. Thank you. 

In general, I think it is important to look at, when we are talking 

about grid reliability issues or if studies are being embarked upon, 

I think it is important that we look at all of the experts, whether 

they are at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory or utilities. 

Take Xcel Energy, they have done a remarkable job of integrating 

various sources, fuel mixes, into the grid while maintaining superior reliability. 

So I think it is important to listen to all those voices. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Cortez Masto. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Gentlemen, welcome and thank you for your willingness to serve 

and welcome to your family and friends here as well. 

Mr. Brouillette, let me start with you. 

First of all, thank you for coming to visit with me. I wanted to 

follow up on the conversation we were having with respect to Yucca 

Mountain. As you well know, the President’s full budget provides 
39 

$120 million to restart licensing activities for a Yucca Mountain 

nuclear waste repository. 

I am opposed to it. My colleague, Senator Heller, is opposed to 

it. The state is opposed to it. Very directly, are you in favor of 

siting the nation’s nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Thank you for the opportunity, Senator. I sincerely appreciated our conversation as well. 

I’m in favor of following the law, as we talked about—— 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Thank you. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. In your office. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. And I appreciate that. 

So let me ask you this. Do you agree that science should dictate 

whether high level nuclear waste should be safely stored in a permanent repository? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Yes, ma’am, I do. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Nevada has submitted hundreds of contentions that objectively demonstrate that the site is scientifically 

unsafe. If the site is declared scientifically unsafe, do you agree 

that nuclear waste should not be stored at Yucca Mountain? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Yes, ma’am. I’m aware as well that there is 

a review underway. And as we discussed in your office, obviously, 

if the science is so definitive as to show that the site is unsafe, I 

don’t think it’s in the interest of anyone to place nuclear waste and 

endanger the lives of Americans anywhere. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Thank you. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. But, if the science were to show that it is safe, 

we would be obligated to follow the law. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Do you support the continuation of 

DOE’s current work on consent-based siting for storage and disposal facilities? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. I’m sorry, ma’am, I apologize, I didn’t hear. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Sure. 

Do you support the continuation of DOE’s current work on consent-based siting for storage and disposal facilities? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. I think it’s important that states have input 

into the process. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. I agree. Thank you. 

[Laughter.] 

Listen, I appreciate that. I only have so much time. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Sure. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Again, thank you. It was great conversation we had. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Yes, ma’am. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. I really appreciate your candor. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Yes, ma’am. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. And the conversation. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Thank you very much. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Gentlemen, I have not had a chance, unfortunately, to meet with you so I have a few questions for you as 

well. 

I am going to just throw these questions out to both of you and 

ask that you respond, if you would. 

In late 2016, FERC issued a proposed rule that would eliminate 

barriers to the participation of renewable energy and electric stor-
40 

age in wholesale markets. Will you support approval of the proposed rule and what changes, if any, would you support before 

issuing a final rule? 

Mr. POWELSON. Senator, thank you for the question. 

And if confirmed, I pledge to you that I will read through the 

record and the comments. As I mentioned to Senator Franken, we 

need to recognize these new resources that are coming into the 

market. So I will keep an open mind to that. I don’t want to, as 

you know, as FERC Commissioners we don’t pick the winners and 

losers in the market. But we do have a responsibility as these technologies are emerging and they’re going to market, that we have 

to provide rules and proper incentives for these resources to compete in the market. 

I will pledge to you to keep an open mind and continue to work 

constructively so that we’re not, again, getting in a situation of displacing these resources that are providing, believe it or not in my 

state, a lot of benefits to customers. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Thank you, as well in Nevada. So thank 

you. 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. Thank you, Senator. I’d like to echo Commissioner Powelson’s comments. 

While, you know, I can’t speak to the matter before the Commission, nor prejudge it, I would like to echo the conversation I had 

with Senator Franken. I’m certainly supportive of technological innovation, and there’s been tremendous innovation in this space. 

You know, I’m for competition and access to markets and particularly when it’s in the consumer’s interest. I would most certainly judiciously study this issue should I have the opportunity to 

be confirmed and have it come before me. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Thank you. 

Do you both agree that the evidence shows that solar and wind 

power can be reliably integrated into the power grid? 

Mr. POWELSON. Well, as a state public utility commissioner, I can 

tell you it’s playing a large part in our energy mix, whether it’s 

rooftop or utility-based solar. 

Now Pennsylvania only in its RPS, it only counts for 0.5 percent 

where if you go across the Delaware River in New Jersey is one 

of the leading states for solar development. So as the Senator mentioned, as these cost curves come down, it’s creating a new opportunity for customers and now we’re having a discussion at NARUC 

about community-based solar. Again, keeping an open mind to all 

these resources that are coming into the power generation mix is 

something that I stand behind. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Thank you. 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. I’d just like to echo the Commissioner’s comments, you know, safe, affordable and reliable electricity delivery 

is essential. And as these new technologies come online I will certainly look to adhere to FERC’s core mission and ensure that those 

principles are maintained. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Thank you. 

Madam Chair, I noticed my time is up. I’ll submit the rest of my 

questions for the record. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. I appreciate that very much. 
41 

Senator Heinrich. 

Senator HEINRICH. I just want to thank my colleague from Nevada, as well as my colleague from Minnesota, for those questions. 

They were very much along the lines of my first question for both 

of the nominees for the FERC. 

I just wanted to mention a story this morning about Tucson Electric Power just inking a deal for three cents a kilowatt/hour. So 

when we talk about solar PPA and when we talk about benefits to 

consumers and even on a levelized cost basis, we are seeing many 

of the analysis come out with solar and wind lower even than combined cycle natural gas, much less things like peaking power. That 

is incredibly important for consumers across the country, and I 

think we are just beginning to be able to access what is the tip of 

the iceberg there. 

I want to switch gears since both of you commented on that to 

transmission. In New Mexico we have enormous supplies of wind 

and solar resources but what we now lack after substantial development, particularly in wind in the last year, year and a half, is 

the transmission capacity to deliver that energy to other markets 

because we are net energy exporter. Without new investment in 

transmission these resources will simply not fully be developed. 

Do you think the Commission has a role to help facilitate investment in new interstate transmission capacity that benefits consumers? And do you think the Commission has sufficient authority 

to engage or to encourage investment in a new electric transmission capacity or is this an area that Congress should be taking 

another look at? 

Mr. POWELSON. Senator, thank you for your question and it really is a big issue. 

You know, we first look at our bulk power system and we look 

at the, as I mentioned earlier, these tectonic shifts in our generation fleet. 

We’re doing this on a long-haul transmission system that’s carbon 44 tested. And so, there is going to have to be an investment 

made in transmission to get renewables and other resources to load 

centers. 

Senator HEINRICH. Right. 

Mr. POWELSON. To the credit of the former chair, Wellinghoff, 

and that set of Commissioners, I think we’re coming up on a sixyear anniversary on FERC Order 1000 which was envisioned to 

create this highway system for competitive transmission to be built 

and to recognize these new resources coming into the marketplace. 

I still think, as we do a look back on FERC Order 1000, if confirmed, one thing I want to do immediately is sit down with our 

regional transmission organizations, our independent system operators and kind of see where these bottlenecks are, what’s working, 

what’s not working, because again, to your credit as a state, you 

guys are putting these, you’re making an investment around these 

resources. 

Like I joke about Marcellus shale, I’d love to use all 500 trillion 

cubic feet of natural gas. It’s just not the reality. We’ve got to move 

these molecules and we’ve got to move these renewable electrons 

as well. 
42 

So that’s, kind of, where I look at the issue. I pledge to you, if 

confirmed, that we, you know, I would first want to get educated, 

but more importantly see what’s working—— 

Senator HEINRICH. You see it as a priority. 

Mr. POWELSON. I do. I do. 

Senator HEINRICH. Mr. Chatterjee, do you want to add to that? 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. Yes, just to build on what Commissioner 

Powelson laid out, I just want to echo and stress the importance 

of transmission. 

Whatever our generation mix, power delivery will rely on continued maintenance of a robust, reliable grid. I agree with you that 

we need continued investment, and we need to make sure that the 

return on equity is sufficient to achieve that goal of that needed investment. I would certainly be supportive. And it would be something, should I be fortunate enough to be confirmed, that I would 

make a priority. 

Senator HEINRICH. I want to thank you both for your answers on 

that, and I want to shift gear to our nominee for the Deputy Secretary position. 

I want to start with the most important question which is how 

do I say your name correctly because I was not here at the beginning. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. It’s Brouillette, sir. 

Senator HEINRICH. Okay, Brouillette. 

I am really pleased to see the Office of Technology Transitions 

trying some new approaches to promote tech transfer at our DOE 

labs. We had the chance to talk a little bit about that in my office 

yesterday. 

One example is a really innovative voucher program that pairs 

small businesses with scientists and engineers at those labs and 

helps get them up to speed on commercialization of technologies. 

How familiar are you with the program? And do you think it is a 

good model for moving new technologies from the labs into the commercial sector? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Senator, thank you, again, for the opportunity 

to chat yesterday. I really enjoyed our conversation. 

I am not an expert in the program. I am vaguely familiar with 

it. I have studied it at a high level. 

I can tell you that I’m firmly committed to technology transfer 

within the Department of Energy and the labs, generally. Anything 

that we can do to move these great ideas from the lab to the marketplace is going to benefit all Americans. 

So I will strongly support and, if confirmed, I’ll look forward to 

working with you to advance those issues. 

Senator HEINRICH. Thank you, Mr. Brouillette. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Thank you, sir. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Heinrich. 

Senator Cassidy. 

Senator CASSIDY. Mr. Brouillette, I know how to pronounce your 

name, you know what I am saying. 

[Laughter.] 

It is good to see my constituent back there, and whatever we can 

do to serve you, please let us know. If you want a tour of the Capitol, let us know. We are glad to have folks visit. 
43 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Thank you, sir. 

Senator CASSIDY. I also note that when you were naming your 

nine children, you actually had their names listed. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. That’s important. 

Senator CASSIDY. You did not want to skip a name, right? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. That’s important. 

Senator CASSIDY. Yes, nine gets you there. Yes, I hope they are 

LSU fans. 

[Laughter.] 

So anyway, just to go there. 

A couple things. 

Last year the Department of Energy issued its first conditional 

loan commitment for an advanced fossil fuel project at the Lake 

Charles methanol plant. This $2 billion commitment matched with 

$1.9 billion in private equity capital and taking petroleum coke, we 

are both familiar with that, kind of an end product of the refinement of oil into a methanol facility. 

For all the folks who have been yelling in our hearings, it actually takes a by-product of the central products but does something 

with it capturing the CO2, using it for enhanced oil recovery. 

Again, so for those yelling, it should achieve a goal they want 

which would be to decrease emissions. 

So my question is for you. The President’s budget proposes to 

eliminate the Title 17 program, canceling the remaining loan volume authority including that which would include this. 

Now aside from environmental and what do we do with pet coke, 

it creates about 1,000 construction jobs and 200 permanent jobs in 

my state but also jobs in Texas for enhanced oil recovery which 

again, is what we should be doing worldwide, energy security, economic development, et cetera. 

So, I guess this is, kind of, a beg to answer question but assuming the projects continue to prove its creditworthiness, will you 

work with me to advance this unique energy project through the 

appropriate process? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. The short answer, sir, is yes. I look forward 

to visiting with you further about that, if I’m confirmed. 

As we mentioned earlier, or as I mentioned earlier in the Committee, to the Committee, I was not part of the budget process and 

I understand full well that this is the President’s request to the 

Congress, but at the end of the day the Congress will work, both 

the House and the Senate, to determine the final appropriate numbers for these programs. 

Once you do that and once you complete your process, I will certainly execute to the letter of the law. 

Senator CASSIDY. Now let me just ask your attitude because my 

goal, my idea, is that you have this, kind of, large-scale, first-ofkind project and the equity markets really do not quite know how 

to price it. 

As long as the federal taxpayer gets a return on her investment, 

we have got to protect the federal taxpayer, but it is a way to, kind 

of, show that you can do it, taking it to scale. Again, doing a lot 

of positive things. Would you agree with that or, philosophically 

saying? 
44 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. I do agree that on occasion it is appropriate 

for the government to step in and provide that type of assistance. 

I think you’re referring to some of the loan programs and perhaps 

the ARPA-E program within the Department of Energy. 

I would like the opportunity, sir, if confirmed, to get there and 

to learn more about the structure of those two agencies, the structure of those two programs. Coming from a finance background or 

financial institution, I think it’s important that they have proper 

underwriting and they have proper standards around those loans 

and around those grants. We just need to understand what the risk 

portfolio represents. 

Senator CASSIDY. Sounds great. 

Thank you. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. So I will look forward to working with you, if 

confirmed. 

Senator CASSIDY. Thank you. 

Mr. Powelson, obviously, the Marcellus shale has done fantastic 

in Pennsylvania. It has created an incredible number of jobs. I noticed, speaking in my home state, a lot of folks with French last 

names have moved to Pennsylvania to help teach the Pennsylvanians how to develop that gas. That said, what impact has the increased use of natural gas in your power grid had upon greenhouse 

gas emissions in your state? 

Mr. POWELSON. Senator Cassidy, thank you for your question 

and I appreciate the opportunity to have met with you on this 

topic. 

First of all, we are an open border state, so we love having raging Cajuns come into the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator CASSIDY. It has upgraded your food, I will tell you that. 

Mr. POWELSON. It certainly has. 

[Laughter.] 

You mentioned Marcellus development, you know, this has been 

an economic, if I can use the word, game changer, for Pennsylvania, but it’s hit on all levels. 

So the climate piece. Pennsylvania has seen a 32 percent reduction in NOx, SOx and mercury. 

Senator CASSIDY. I only have about 30 seconds left. 

Mr. POWELSON. Yes. 

Senator CASSIDY. And you attribute that to the transition to natural gas? 

Mr. POWELSON. I think natural gas is a huge driver in that. I 

won’t discount, though, renewables. 

Senator CASSIDY. But as a percent of your overall energy generation, what percent does renewables? What percent is natural gas? 

Mr. POWELSON. Sir, the renewable piece is less than eight percent of the energy mix and nuclear. Pennsylvania is the second 

largest nuclear production—— 

Senator CASSIDY. And your net gas is what percent? 

Mr. POWELSON. Gas is upwards to about 30 percent of the energy 

mix now. 

Senator CASSIDY. What we have observed is that if we can export 

this gas to other countries, replacing coal in their fuel mix with our 
45 

natural gas, we create jobs here, but we also lower their greenhouse gas emissions. 

Clearly FERC will be instrumental in that because you all are 

going to permit those LNG export terminals, correct? 

Mr. POWELSON. Well, again, on a case-by-case basis with thorough review and public input? Yes, I think we’ll come to conclusions on these projects. 

Senator CASSIDY. I will point out that I think you mentioned earlier, or somebody did, that we are now exporting gas to Chile and 

they are trying to use natural gas again to improve their greenhouse gas emission profile. So for all those concerned with greenhouse gas emissions, natural gas is the way to go. 

That said, I yield back. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Cassidy. 

Senator Duckworth. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. 

Gentlemen, I was deeply alarmed late last year by reports that 

the Trump Administration transition team was collecting names of 

career civil servants at DOE who worked on climate change matters. 

My concerns only increased when subsequent reports emerged 

that the Secretary of Energy was actively working to manipulate 

DOE’s research efforts to produce studies that advance a non-scientific partisan agenda. 

Mr. Brouillette, do you think it is appropriate for the Department 

of Energy to conduct a witch hunt against scientists who have 

worked on climate change? I know you were not at the Department 

when some of this happened, but do you support that type of activity or will you disavow it now? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Thank you, Senator, I appreciate the question. 

I, obviously, disavow any witch hunt. That is not our intention. 

I am not familiar with the activities of the Department. I am aware 

that a letter was sent to federal employees within the building. I 

read the press accounts of that and I did see Secretary Perry’s testimony to that effect. I’m aware that I don’t think he asked for 

that. I can assure you that if I am confirmed, that is not something 

I will pursue. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Thank you. 

As the Chief Operating Officer of the Department, will you protect career civil servants who are doing important scientific research from political interference and politically motivated budget 

cuts? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Yes. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Thank you and thank you also for your 

service. 

Let me just say it speaks well of you that you come to this from 

USAA—as many of my fellow veterans and I call it, the ‘‘Mother 

Ship.’’ 

[Laughter.] 

Senator DUCKWORTH. You certainly know customer service, so 

thank you for—— 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Thank you for that and thank you for your 

service as well. 
46 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Thank you. 

This next question is for Mr. Chatterjee and Mr. Powelson. Approximately 30 states have passed renewable portfolio standards 

and multiple states, including Illinois, have adopted policies who 

support existing nuclear power plants. We are the number one. 

[Laughter.] 

States are enacting these policies for a wide variety of reasons, 

including energy diversity, environmental benefits and economic 

development. These policies were passed by state legislatures and 

I know this was discussed, but do you agree that state legislature 

is the appropriate place for these policies to be decided? As FERC 

Commissioners, would you act to preempt these laws as some have 

suggested? 

Mr. POWELSON. Senator, thank you for your question. 

And this is an issue that is probably coming before the Commission, so I don’t want to prejudge it but your question about—I’m 

a states’ rights individual. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Great. 

Mr. POWELSON. And I respect, I’m familiar with what Governor 

Rauner signed into law to support those nuclear plants. 

If we’re talking about climate, I will say at a high level, nuclear 

power is part of that energy mix. We’re going to need it. 

So as this comes our way, I just pledge to you that I will keep 

an open mind. I always come from the idea or the philosophy of do 

no harm to the states. We should—we don’t want people losing 

jobs, and we want these units to run because we want the clean 

energy resource, the base load resource. 

So again, looking at the technical conference that Chairwoman 

LaFleur put together, I thought was a good first step. And then 

we’ll, obviously, have a discussion, I think, as a FERC Commission 

on what the next iteration or the conversation is at the higher policy level. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Well, we are deeply concerned in Illinois 

that there would be any moves that would prohibit the state from 

being able to provide clean energy incentives to our nuclear power 

plants which would then cause them to have to shut down and we 

would lose those jobs. Yes? 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

As I stated earlier, I believe in states’ rights. I believe in local 

communities making these determinations. I also believe that to 

ensure safe, affordable and reliable electricity delivery, we need 

fuel diversity. And I understand that there are some very complex 

questions around how to maintain that fuel diversity with some of 

the market challenges that we face. 

To echo Commissioner Powelson, I understand FERC had a technical conference on this earlier this month and, should I be fortunate enough to be confirmed, I know this is one of the critical matters that will come before the Commission and I will certainly look 

very closely at it and have an open mind as I go into it. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Thank you. 

This next question is for all three witnesses. Do you agree that 

human activities are warming the planet or will you advance the 

Trump Administration position that mandates climate change is 
47 

not real or a problem deserving of attention? Which one is it? I believe that this will affect your role. 

Mr. POWELSON. Senator, thank you for the question. 

I am not a climate denier, so I recognize that there’s human activity. CO2 emissions is a big, very big, public policy discussion and 

I will let you know that in my state, as I’ve mentioned to you, we’re 

very proud of where we’re going with our energy policy and it recognizes reductions in CO2. 

I will just let you know, one statistic which is amazing about the 

U.S. right now, for the first time since 1970 in this country, the 

U.S. power sector had lower CO2 emissions than the transportation 

sector. So that tells me we’re seeing market-based outcomes toward 

decarbonization, and I think it’s a good thing for the environment. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Or from the Clean Power Plan which the 

Trump Administration is now actively working to reverse. 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. Senator, to your question, I think it is important to look at, should I be fortunate to be confirmed, what role I 

would play at FERC. 

FERC’s instrumental role is in overseeing reliability. I think that 

any policy put forward by Congress or the Administration that 

would seek to mitigate carbon emissions would have to ensure that 

it not have a negative impact on reliability. And I think it’s key for 

public acceptance that there not be a negative impact on reliability. 

And should those policies be put forward, I would certainly work 

very closely with proponents of the policy to ensure that that reliability impact not, that there not be a negative impact of reliability. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Thank you. 

Mr. Brouillette? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Quite simply, Senator, the climate is changing, and we’re all living here so we must have some impact. 

I look forward to working with you, if confirmed, to find out what 

we might do with the DOE labs to help us understand the impact 

more clearly and perhaps in the future, perhaps balance some of 

the actions that we take. 

Senator DUCKWORTH. Thank you. 

Madam Chairwoman, thank you, you have been very generous. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Risch, you came in next. 

Senator RISCH. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. 

First of all, let me say that I think all three of these nominees 

we have in front of us are highly qualified people, and I think the 

President should be commended for his choices in these areas. I 

want to particularly thank you for being willing to take on this 

public service. 

I am particularly grateful to have Mr. Brouillette where he is. He 

has, on a very parochial basis, I know you would never do this, 

Madam Chairman, but on a very parochial basis, he has an indepth understanding of what happens at the Idaho National Laboratory. He has a long history there. I look forward to working with 

him on some of the challenges we have there and also in cultivating the great work that the lab does for the American people 

and really for the world in the areas they work in. 

So—— 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Thank you, Senator. 
48 

Senator RISCH. Thank you, again, all of you, for being willing to 

serve. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator. 

Senator Flake. 

Senator FLAKE. Thank you. 

Sorry I was not here for much of the testimony, but I appreciate 

the meeting in my office with Mr. Brouillette. 

I wanted to talk about WAPA, the Western Area Power Association. As you know, it is the power marketing administration that 

falls under your purview at DOE, and we have been working to 

bring some clarity and transparency that is lacking. 

We believe that WAPA, now Secretary Perry, committed to ensuing transparency there, and you and I discussed that earlier this 

week in my office. But you described, at that point, your role as 

running the day-to-day operations at the Department. How will 

that impact and what do you plan to do with regards to PMAs? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Well, sir, I think—and thank you as well for 

the opportunity to meet with you earlier this week. I really appreciated that. 

My role, as the Deputy Secretary of Energy, should I be confirmed, is to be the Chief Operating Officer, it is to operate the 

agency from day-to-day, and that would include compliance with 

the federal law. It would also include, I’m sorry, I misspoke there, 

with the rules and regulations of the Department and included in 

that or complies with Whistle Blower Acts and the rules and regulations of the Department. 

I can commit to you that we will work together, if confirmed, to 

increase the transparency at WAPA, to fix some of the issues that 

we know or I’ve read about in the paper and to ensure that there 

is strict compliance with the Whistle Blower Acts. 

Senator FLAKE. Thank you. 

There is a long history of American development and innovation 

in energy technologies, as we all know, and the Department’s research programs have played an important role in this area. Historically, these research programs have had greatest impact when 

they were focused on clear and specific goals, like when the world’s 

first nuclear plant was developed in under a year. Goals can also 

focus resources in times of declining budgets and tight budgets as 

we face today. 

How do you think that DOE research programs can benefit by establishing specific goals on such things as advanced nuclear reactors or grid scale storage that can take advantage of the intermittent power generation that we have today, particularly with renewables? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. I think renewables are an important component of where we’re going to be, not only five years from now, but 

tomorrow. It’s moving very, very fast, as we mentioned earlier in 

other testimony on the Committee, and the base load, other issues 

are changing very, very rapidly within the energy space. 

With regard to the labs, if confirmed I look forward to working 

with them to ensure that their technology moves to market 

quicker. I’m going to, hopefully, take some of the business experience that I’ve had and define very measurable, or at least put to-
49 

gether very measurable metrics that we can use to gauge their performance. That’s something, I think, they’ve done pretty well in the 

past, and I look forward to working with them to improve that. 

Senator FLAKE. Well, great. Obviously we want to take advantage of the intermittent generation, particularly renewables, but 

without grid scale storage at this point, we want carbon-free base 

load and a lot of that comes with nuclear. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. It does. 

Senator FLAKE. But until we can have the advanced technologies 

that allow these plants to throttle down in the appropriate times, 

then we are not going to fully take advantage here. 

Let me talk about the licensing process for a minute with the 

other two gentlemen. Nuclear power plants are critical, obviously, 

as we said, and not emitting base load generation. 

How do you envision FERC addressing the current market issues 

of maintaining reliability and recognizing the states’ interests in 

supporting carbon-free generation while maintaining a reliable, 

carbon-free generation with a reliable portfolio without cost-effective, as I said, commercially available grid scale storage at this 

point? 

Mr. POWELSON. Senator, thank you for your question. If confirmed, I would, obviously, get myself immersed in what took place 

in the first week of May here with the technical conference. 

We all know at a macro level what’s going on. I mean, a lot of 

these nuclear units are being displaced economically in markets because of, what I considered the Pennsylvania phenomena of $1.92 

per MM BTU gas coming out of the well head. And in my state 

what’s happening is these stand-alone reactors are under tremendous pressure to clear in the market construct. 

What we’re also seeing though is nuclear units that are going 

through relicensing projects and that’s a good thing, but we’ve only 

built three new nuclear units right now in the country. And I remember sitting in a room with one of your colleagues, Senator 

Lamar Alexander, when we were talking in 2008 about the nuclear 

renaissance. 

And so today, three new reactors. We are seeing these uprates 

take place at existing reactors, but it seems to be these stand-alone 

reactors are under tremendous pressure because of cheap natural 

gas and honestly there’s issues with wind, negative wind, pricing 

at night creating what was once considered a too-cheap-to-meter 

unit of power production being under siege by the integration of 

new renewables into the grid. 

So, just to answer your question, I think it’s going to be critically 

important for the FERC to, kind of, look at all the moving parts 

of this public policy issue and figure out a way, probably work with 

the NRC and other groups, DOE, through the grid study, how do 

we keep these things viable. 

Senator FLAKE. Great. 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. Just quickly, to that Senator, I strongly believe 

in the need for fuel diversity. 

We need it all. We need nukes, we need renewables, we need 

hydro, we need coal, we need gas, and we need these innovative 

technologies. 

Senator FLAKE. Well, thank you. 
50 

A post note, we need a part of DOE to make sure that we focus 

our resources on research to get to these new modular, smaller 

units that can throttle down and take advantage, as I said, of 

intermittent generation. 

Then on the licensing side with FERC, we really need to move 

more quickly than we have in the past to bring these new technologies to the market. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Flake. 

Senator Barrasso and then Senator King. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. 

Congratulations to all of you. 

Mr. Brouillette, I would like to ask you about foreign control of 

American businesses. It was reported in the Wall Street Journal 

last week that the state-owned, Russian oil company may be in a 

position to take over U.S. energy assets of Citgo, if Citgo’s parent 

company defaults on its debt. Its energy assets in the United 

States include refineries, pipelines, numerous petroleum platforms, 

foreign investment in the U.S., especially by an adversary like Russia has national security implications. 

So the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States 

(CFIUS) is charged with, as you know, reviewing transactions that 

could result in control of a U.S. business by a foreign entity. CFIUS 

is authorized to block transactions or to impose conditions on a 

transaction in order to mitigate any threat to our nation’s security. 

The Secretary of Energy and by delegation, the Deputy Secretary, 

is a member of CFIUS. The Russia/Citgo deal is deeply concerning 

to me because it would place critical U.S. energy assets under the 

control of a foreign adversary. 

Can you just share with us some of your thoughts on this and 

what reassurance you may want to be able to give me and to give 

all of us in terms of what steps you will take to ensure that the 

Russia/Citgo deal does not pose a threat to our nation’s security? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Thank you, Senator. Thank you for the question. 

I am familiar with the CFIUS process. Unfortunately, I am not 

familiar with the details around this particular deal. And if confirmed, I can commit to you to work closely with you. 

But respectfully, sir, I would like to take that question for the 

record, so I would have the opportunity to learn more about it before I make a public comment about it. 

Senator BARRASSO. We will be happy to get you that report that 

came out in the Wall Street Journal last week. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Thank you, sir. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you. 

For the other two nominees, and we can start with Mr. Powelson 

and then I will ask you, Mr. Chatterjee, to jump in. 

In 1978 Congress passed the Public Utility Regulation Policies 

Act, commonly known as PURPA. It was a response to skyrocketing oil prices at the time caused by the oil embargo of 1973. 

The goal was to reduce the use of foreign oil in power generation, 

to provide the U.S. with greater energy independence. To achieve 

that goal, this legislation required all electric utilities, including 

municipal utilities and rural electric cooperatives, to purchase all 
51 

electric power made available from renewable power generation resources known as qualifying facilities. 

Well, times have changed since 1978. The energy industry has 

experienced revolutionary changes in fuel supply, in production and 

in regulation and in particular, renewable resource generation is 

now increased substantially. About 15 percent of all U.S. electrical 

generation is from renewable sources. The oil, on the other hand, 

has decreased from 16 percent of U.S. electric generation back 

when this law was passed to less than one percent today. 

Due to these revolutionary changes, some have called on FERC 

to reform its regulations with regard to PURPA and to reflect current industry conditions. Could both of you weigh in on what 

changes you might plan to make to FERC’s PURPA regulations? 

Mr. POWELSON. Senator, thank you for the question. 

I think you teed it up nicely. I mean, PURPA is a 1978 vintage 

document. It was addressing a scarcity issue and here we are 

today, as I mentioned in prior comments, we’re leaning toward energy independence and the generation mix has changed dramatically. I’m aware that the FERC has sought or has instituted a technical conference months back, or maybe a year ago, seeking comment. 

I come from a state that we very much believe in what we call 

‘‘least cost procurement’’ because again, on the consumer protection 

side we want to, you know, not put our thumb on the scale, but 

we want those resources, the least cost, to provide that benefit to 

the consumer. 

So I would pledge to you, if confirmed, I mean, I say this respectfully, a congressional review of PURPA, a PURPA 2.0 doctrine may 

be part of a potential energy bill. But for now, I think, if confirmed, 

I would do my part to look at the record and see how, what’s working in PURPA and what’s not. 

Senator BARRASSO. Mr. Chatterjee? 

Mr. CHATTERJEE. Thank you for the question, Senator. 

To echo what Commissioner Powelson says, I understand that 

FERC did undertake a technical conference on this matter within 

the last year. Should I be fortunate enough to be confirmed, I will 

certainly work with my colleagues to review the findings of that 

conference. 

But I will say that any major changes to PURPA would be made 

by Congress. And while you have my assurance I would work very 

seriously on these issues, should I be confirmed, I think any major 

changes need to come from this body and not from FERC. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Barrasso. 

Senator King. 

Senator KING. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Welcome, gentlemen, thank you for your willingness to serve our 

country. 

Mr. Brouillette, I am very concerned about the depth of cuts to 

the Department of Energy that are proposed in the President’s 

budget. I understand that you are not a member of the Administration yet and that you will, I presume, honor the decisions made 
52 

here in the Congress in terms of what those budgets ultimately 

look like. 

Here is what we are talking about: ARPA-E, Advanced Research 

Projects Agency, eliminated, gone; Advanced Technology Vehicle 

Manufacturing, gone; research program cuts; Office of Science, 17 

percent cut; Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, cut 

by 70 percent; and this is the one that really bothers me, Office of 

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, cut by 48 percent. 

We had a hearing in this room about two weeks ago about the 

grave risk of disruption of our grid by malign actors via cyber. To 

be cutting the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability 

by almost 50 percent is irresponsible in the extreme. 

So also fossil fuel energy research and development, cut by 58 

percent. 

These cuts are absolutely unacceptable, and they are cutting in 

exactly the wrong place. It was the research funds from the Department of Energy that helped give us the fracking revolution 

that has revolutionized the energy situation in this country, and to 

cut these kinds of funds so dramatically is just shortsighted. 

Now I expect, I hope, what you are going to tell me is you will 

enforce the law, you will implement the law and you will, if these 

funds are re-appropriated by this Congress, you will steward them 

appropriately according to the instructions of the Congress. Is that 

correct? 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Yes, sir, that’s exactly what I’m going to tell 

you. 

Senator KING. Thank you. 

[Laughter.] 

Thank you for finding a question buried in there. 

[Laughter.] 

But—— 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Yes, sir. 

Senator KING. I am not making a speech here, I am sincerely 

worried about this. I am on the Intelligence and Armed Services 

Committees and I can tell you our grid is a target. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Yes, sir. 

Senator KING. And to be cutting funds that involve grid reliability is just not prudent in any way, shape or form. 

I guess for our FERC nominees, I understand there has already 

been—and I apologize for coming in and out. I have three hearings 

this morning at the same time, minor hearings, Armed Services 

and Budget, so I do apologize. But I hope that FERC will look at 

the distribution system and look at the issues involved with distributed energy, demand response because, I think, that is an important part of the future of our energy system and we have to find 

a way to value it appropriately and not allow the development of, 

what I believe, is a national security development by decentralizing 

the grid to be artificially constrained by arbitrary fees and costs 

that are designed not to reflect true cost, but are designed to impede the development of this important part of our energy sector. 

Mr. Powelson, your thoughts? 

Mr. POWELSON. Well, thank you, Senator, for the question. And 

again, I appreciated the opportunity to meet with you and your 

staff. 
53 

This is really where we’re headed as a country with recognizing 

this diverse energy portfolio and states are driving that. So as you 

and I talked, I mean, combined heat and power systems, demand 

side management tools for residential consumers and industrial 

customers is really a good thing and it’s part of this new energy 

mix. 

And I can pledge to you that, you know, look at our Pennsylvania 

experience. I mentioned earlier in the hearing, utilities have been 

close to $1 billion on these programs with a net value to customers 

or what we call a total resource cost value of $1.8 billion in benefit 

to consumers. 

Senator KING. Pretty good return on investment. 

Mr. POWELSON. That’s a pretty good return, you’re right. And so, 

if confirmed, I will pledge to you my continued support for distributed energy resources and the value they play. 

And I want to commend the former FERC Chairman, Norman 

Bay. One of the things that he did was to start a docket around 

fast start resources and creating a value food chain for those resources in the markets. 

I told you earlier, my experience with Hurricane Sandy and how 

these resources played a critical role in grid resiliency is so important. You mentioned cyber as well. So these are all part of this 

new, what I consider, 21st century landscape. 

Senator KING. Finally, Mr. Brouillette, the Department has, particularly through the labs, established some important relationships to us in Maine at our University of Maine with Oak Ridge, 

for example. I believe those labs are national treasures and should 

be protected and preserved. I also hope that you will commit to me 

to maintain those relationships. I would like to invite you to Maine 

to visit the University of Maine composites lab and see the work 

that they are doing with Oak Ridge which is really extraordinary. 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. Yes, sir. 

I’d be honored. If confirmed, I’d be honored to join you in Maine. 

And yes, I will continue to be an advocate. 

Senator KING. I look forward to introducing you to some of your 

kinfolk in the St. John family. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. BROUILLETTE. I look forward to it as well, sir. Thank you. 

Senator KING. Thank you. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator King. 

Gentlemen, thank you for being here this morning. I certainly 

have additional questions, but like Senator King, I have another 

Committee hearing that I am expected to attend. I know that many 

of our members will have questions, and we ask that they be submitted for the record by the close of business today. We would anticipate and expect your prompt responses. 

As I indicated in my initial statement this morning, my hope is 

to be able to advance your names quickly, along with that of Mr. 

Bernhardt, so that we can process these nominees for the FERC 

and DOE and allow for business to proceed. 

We thank you for your willingness to serve. We thank your families that support you every day and to the children that have been 
54 

here, you have been extraordinarily well behaved. I think you set 

a fine example for grownups, so we appreciate that a great deal. 

[Laughter.] 

With that, ladies and gentlemen, we stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:52 a.m. the hearing was adjourned.] 
(55) 

APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED 
56 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Questions from Ranking Member Maria Cantwell 

Question 1: The transportation sector remains the top contributor greenhouse gas (GHG) 

emissions and foremost consumer of oil in the United States. But strong standards, coupled with 

new vehicle technology developed with the support of the Department of Energy and our 

national labs, have helped to reduce emissions and oil consumption. In fact, current fuel 

economy standards have slashed emissions by almost 130 million metric tons of C02- roughly 

the amount ofGHGs emitted to power about 20 million homes for one year. 

• Will you encourage the Administration to support strong automobile efficiency standards 

that help save consumers money? 

Answer: I will encourage the Administration to strongly support standards that work best for 

American families. 

• How do you see the Department of Energy partnering with industry to further promote 

fuel efficiency and reduced em iss ions? 

Answer: It is my understanding the Department is already partnering with industry and if 

confirmed, I look forward to being fully briefed and ensuring these important relationships 

continue. 

Question 2: The Department of Energy has published an annual U.S. Energy and Employment 

Report during each of the last two years. This report provides an overview of the current 

national energy employment landscape across a variety of sectors and is an important tool for 

pol icy makers, energy stakeholders, workers, and the energy industry at large. 

• Will you commit that the Department of Energy will continue to publish the U.S. Energy 

and Employment Report on an annual basis? 

Answer: Employment data is, indeed, an important tool for policy makers and others. The most 

recent edition of the U.S. Energy and Employment Report was published by the Department on 

January 3, 2017. If confirmed, I will review this report and be fully briefed. 

• The most recent U.S. Report found that 73 percent of energy companies found it difficult 

to hire skilled employees. How will you make workforce training a priority at the 

Department of Energy? 

Answer: A highly skilled workforce is vital to America's energy needs. If confirmed, !look 

forward to ensuring work force training is appropriately prioritized. 
57 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to he Deputy Secretary ofEuergy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Question 3: The Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant will treat the radioactive 

and hazardous wastes currently stored in 177 underground tanks and convert them to glass waste 

forms for disposal through a process known as vitrification. Hanford has been an interim storage 

site for 70-plus years. 

The final report of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future urged the Obama 

Administration to conduct a review of policy to dispose of defense waste. After this review was 

completed the Administration decided to seek to site a separate facility to safely store defense 

waste. 

Defense waste has different physical characteristics than commercial. In addition, several states 

have legally-binding site clean-up commitments that require the Department of Energy to 

remove defense waste by a specific date. Moreover, scientific analysis has shown there are both 

technical advantages and potential cost-savings associated with a separate Defense Waste 

Repository. 

Can we count on you to provide a disposal option for the Defense Waste that has resided 

at Hanford for 70 years? 

• Will you ensure that any decisions that are made about how waste is processed will be 

done with input from the state of Washington Department of Ecology and the entire 

Washington congressional delegation? 

Answer: Visiting these sites and understanding the nature of this waste, as well as options for 

waste processing that enable us to achieve our obligation to the taxpayers will be a high priority 

for me. If I am confirmed, I will work with the State of Washington, the Washington 

congressional delegation, and other stakeholders to ensure we are making sustainable, riskinformed, and fiscally wise decisions regarding the processing of this waste. 

Question 4: Nuclear nonproliferation is an important mission throughout the Department of 

Energy. The National Nuclear Security Administration's (NNSA's) Defense Nuclear 

Nonproliferation program is critical to our security. The NNSA works with the National 

Laboratories to provide partner countries and the International Atomic Energy Agency with the 

expertise needed to prevent nuclear materials and technology from reaching the hands of 

terrorists and rogue states. 

Yet, despite the importance of the work done by the National Laboratories and the NNSA to 

prevent dangerous nuclear materials getting in the hands of terrorists the Trump Administration 

has proposed to cut the Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation account. 

2 
58 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Kesources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

It strikes me as ridiculous that this Administration advocates building a wall to keep us safe but 

then cuts programs that protect us from 21 '' century threats such as nuclear weapons, cyber 

threats, and terrorist attacks with WMDs. 

• Will you impress upon the Administration the importance of the Defense Nuclear 

Nonproliferation program to keep our nation safe? 

~ If confirmed, I commit that I will advocate for the Department in interagency 

deliberations. The Department is committed to nuclear security, including its nonproliferation 

functions. !look forward to being fully briefed on the Department's nonproliferation functions if 

I am confirmed. 

Question 5: 97 percent of climate scientists believe that climate change is real, is already 

happening and is going to get worse. If we don't heed this scientific consensus, the U.S. will be 

forced to spend tens of billions of dollars a year responding to the impacts of extreme weather, 

sea level rise, and infrastructure damage due to climate change. You may ask, how can our 

economy afford to do what is necessary to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 

• How can we afford not to act? 

Answer: I believe the climate is changing. We're all living here, so we must have some impact. I 

agree with Secretary Perry that the question is how we address it in a thoughtful way that doesn't 

compromise economic growth, the affordability of energy, or American jobs. 

• Do you believe it is in the nation's best interest to continue to collect and make available 

to the scientific community the data and modeling capabilities necessary to understand 

how our climate is changing, and 1vhat it means for our national security, our 

infrastructure investments, our economy and our citizens? 

Answer: I believe the climate is changing. We're all living here, so we must have some impact. I 

agree with Secretary Perry that the question is how we address it in a thoughtful way that doesn't 

compromise economic growth, the affordability of energy, or American jobs 

Question 6: The Department of Energy's appliance efficiency standards program has been 

extremely successful. For example, today the typical new refrigerator uses one-quarter the 

energy it did in 1973 -despite offering 20 percent more storage capacity and being available at 

half the retail cost. New clothes washers use 70 percent less energy than they did in 1990 and air 

conditioners use about half the energy. 

3 
59 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

The typical household spends about $500 less a year on utility bills thanks to existing national 

efficiency standards for appliances and equipment. Starting with the first standard finalized by 

President Reagan, appliance efficiency standards will have saved American consumers and 

businesses nearly $2 trillion on their utility bills by 2030. 

• The appliance efficiency program has a long history of bipartisan support going back to 

President Reagan. Do you agree that the program is valuable? 

Answer: I believe we owe it to the American people to examine all programs to see how they are 

being implemented and make sure that all programs work for the benefit of the country. 

Question 7: Secretary Perry told this Committee during his contlrmation hearing that 

cybcrsecurity is going to be one of his top priorities at the Department of Energy. 

• How can cybersecurity be a top priority if the agency's budget proposes to cut spending 

on cybersecurity by 32%? 

Answer: I support the President's budget. Cybersecurity remains a top priority and, if 

confirmed, I will work within the resources provided by Congress to ensure we support this 

important mission. 

• How can the Department protect our critical energy infrastructure from cyber intrusions if 

you do not have the funds to do so? 

Answer: I support the President's budget. Cybersecurity remains a top priority and, if confirmed, 

I look forward to working alongside our national security experts to support this important 

mission. 

Question 8: Modernizing the Columbia River Treaty is of critical importance to Washington 

Stale, the Pacific Northwest, and the country. Tribes, power companies, environmental interests, 

transportation and agriculture interests, the fishing industry, counties, and towns are all intently 

focused on how and when the treaty will be modernized. 

I personally discussed this issue with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Secretary of 

State John Kerry, and I urged the Obama Administration to finalize its negotiating position. In 

October, 2016, the State Department finalized the United States negotiating authority, and we 

currently have a chief negotiator in place. However, the Canadians have not appointed a chief 

negotiator, and under the current administration, progress has been extremely slow. 

4 
60 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

• Will you commit the Department of Energy to help expedite the negotiations with 

Canada should you be confirmed? 

Answer: Should I be confirmed, I will learn more about this effort from Bonneville Power 

Administration (BPA) officials. I also will support SPA's effort to modernize the Columbia 

River Treaty in a manner consistent with the Administration's goal of renegotiating or 

terminating international agreements that no longer benefit the interests of the United States. 

• Can you ensure that the critical voice of the stakeholders in my state and region can 

remain in regular contact with the Administration during the negotiations? 

Answer: Yes 

Question 9: The President's Budget proposes to sell approximately 270 million barrels of 

Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) crude oil by 2027; leaving roughly half of the remaining SPR 

inventory after all sales currently authorized by law are completed. 

Forty years ago, we created the SPR to prevent economic and security impacts of crude oil 

supply disruptions. That's exactly what had happened with the Arab oil embargo in 1973. The 

core policy reason for the reserve hasn't changed since then- nor should it. The SPR is our most 

important, federal, energy security asset. 

• Do you agree that we should auction off our energy security by selling the Strategic 

Petroleum Reserve? 

Answer: I have not been part of the discussion to draw down the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. I 

look forward to being briefed on this matter and working with you going forward should I be 

confirmed. 

• Do you believe oil markets are subject to price volatility that affects U.S. consumers? 

Answer: Yes. Price volatility-- especially price spikes-- does impact consumers. 

• Do you believe the core policy reasons for the establishment of the Strategic Petroleum 

Reserve still exist today? 

Answer: The core reasons exist, though there is room for discussion as to the actual size needed 

and the footprint of the reserve itself. 

5 
61 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Question 10: Our 140 million residential and commercial buildings consume 40 percent ofthe 

nation's energy that's more than any other sector of the economy. That is why I am a strong 

supporter of"smart buildings"- which uses advanced technologies, such as improved building 

controls, sensors, and more efficient equipment to increase efficiency. 

In 2014 efficiency measures reduced energy bills for home and building owners by $70 billion. 

When energy efficiency reduces our utility bills it has a direct, positive effect on the overall 

economy. The American Council on an Energy Efficient Economy estimates that for each dollar 

saved due to energy efficiency, the economy benefits by 2 dollars and 24 cents. 

The Department of Energy, through its Building Technologies Office and the National Labs, has 

played a critical role in advancing energy efficiency in buildings by, for example, improving 

building monitoring and control equipment to enable significant additional building energy 

savings. 

At a cost of less than $2 per household, the Building Technologies Office helps consumers save 

almost $500 per year. The budget proposal released on Tuesday cuts this program by two-thirds. 

• Do you agree with me that it's critical to use the Department of Energy's capabilities to 

help building owners make retrofit and construction choices that employ smart 

technologies to make dramatic reductions in building energy consumption? 

Answer: Yes, and l believe this is possible under the President's proposed budget. 

• In your opinion, isn't helping energy bill payers cut energy waste in order to unleash 

American productivity an important function of the premiere energy R&D agency? 

Answer: I agree that helping to cut energy waste is an important function and I believe this will 

happen under the President's proposed budget. 

Question 11: DOE's Weatherization Assistance Program (W AP) lowers energy use and costs 

for low income families by supporting energy efficiency home retrofits through state-managed 

networks of local weatherization providers. 

Although W AP has improved more than 7 million homes since the program began in 1976, 

approximately 39.5 million households are eligible for WAP services today. 

• Mr. Brouillette, are you aware that every dollar invested in the program attracts one 

matching utility program dollar and produces $2.5 I in benefits to households and 

6 
62 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

society? Isn't this the kind of return on federal investment we should be expanding not 

eliminating? 

Answer: I have not read the study that this question references. If confirmed, I look forward to 

being fully briefed on this matter. 

Are you aware that DOE's Weatherization Assistance Program is also a job creator? 

W AP funds support approximately 8,500 direct and indirect jobs per year. 

Weatherization programs have also trained more than 200,000 American workers, 

boosting their eligibility for jobs and helping to grow the clean energy workforce. 

Answer: I need to learn more about this program and its effectiveness. I support the President's 

budget and believe that it leaves more money in the private sector, allowing the private sector to 

create sustainable jobs. 

Question 12: During his confirmation hearing, Secretary Perry committed to adequately fund 

Hanford to continue progress being made at the site and protect the workers there. The 

President's Budget makes the Secretary's commitment ring hollow. The budget does not allow 

for progress to be made on the Central Plateau of Hanford, where recently a tunnel containing 

radioactive materials collapsed. 

The budget remained flat for the Hanford Tank Farms where just last week a workers' clothing 

was contaminated with radioactive constituents. The budget cuts community support by 46%, 

this money is used for oversight and outreach purposes and perhaps most importantly funding the 

Richland School district. This is baffling. Mr. Brouillette, you previously served at the 

Department and knows how important it is that we adequately fund the work being done there. 

What actions will you take immediately to change the Administration's thinking on 

Hanford? How will you educate them on how critical this mission is to the people of 

Washington and the nation? 

• I toured the tunnel collapse two weeks ago and it is extremely close to active work sites. 

We were extremely lucky that no one was hurt. But I would rather not have luck dictate 

worker safety. I need you to meet with the proper DOE officials to determine what funds 

are needed to stabilize facilities at Hanford. Will you do that and get back to me this 

month? 

Answer: Visiting the Hanford Site and other former defense sites across the nation is a highpriority for Secretary Perry. If confirmed, I will commit to using the information I learn about 

7 
63 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Hanford to better inform members of this administration and strengthen our decision-making 

process. 

Question 13: We have an obligation to the people working at the Hanford site. In just the past two 

weeks a tunnel collapsed adjacent to the Plutonium-uranium extraction facility, which contains 

fatally harmful radioactive constituents and more recently radioactive contamination was found on a 

workers clothing. 

These events of course highlight how dangerous Hanford is and the extreme focus we must maintain 

on the safety mission whether that be improving union-contractor relations, maintaining a robust 

research and development program to improve safety and remediation technology, and improving 

the workers compensation program. 

The complexity of the Hanford clean-up and safety risks requires oversight and that is why I have 

requested the Department of Energy Office ofthe Inspector General to investigate the workers 

compensation program at Hanford, which was recently initiated and asked the National Institute for 

Occupational Safety and Health and the Department of Energy Office of Enterprise Assessments to 

maintain an annual oversight mission of the safety practices at Hanford and development of new 

technology. 

Do you acknowledge the extreme risk to workers at the Hanford site and commit to 

improving worker safety and improving the worker compensation program and the 

Departments contribution the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation 

Program. 

• Do you acknowledge that the Department has a lot of work to do to improve how it helps 

sick workers? 

Will you commit to work with me to fix the Departments deficiencies and work with the 

unions and advocacy groups to get to the bottom of the problems plaguing the workers 

compensation program at Hanford? 

• Will you commit to working with us to ensure the workers at Hanford are receiving the 

proper training and equipment and that they are not exposes to chemical vapors? 

~I am committed to cleaning up the Hanford site and will make it a priority if confirmed. 

Protecting workers and the surrounding communities is of paramount importance. I look forward 

to getting up to speed on these issues and working with the State of Washington, its 

Congressional delegation, and other relevant stakeholders. 

8 
64 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Question 14: The Hanford facility in the state of Washington pioneered the plutonium extraction 

process and produced plutonium in support of our national defense for more than 40 years. The 

site now represents the largest cleanup operation in the United States and, arguably, the most 

technically challenging on the planet. 

Each new Administration comes in and thinks they can cut corners at Hanford and the other 

nuclear weapons complex sites. But it never works. My constituents and I- and the State of 

Washington need your word that you will support sufficient funding levels for the Hanford 

cleanup, including the completion of the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant. 

• Do you understand the moral and legal obligations as well as the urgency for the 

Department of Energy to properly fund and proceed with the cleanup effort at the 

Hanford site, including construction of the Waste Treatment Plant? 

Answer: I take the Department's moral obligations and regulatory commitments seriously. 

understand that we arc actively working to meet our cleanup commitments while continuing key 

risk reduction and remediation activities at Hanford. 

• Will you commit to working with the State of Washington, to uphold the Federal 

government's commitments pursuant to the Tri-Party Agreement? 

Answer: If confirmed, I will work with you, the State of Washington and others to ensure we are 

making sustainable, risk-informed, and fiscally wise decisions regarding our Environmental 

Management obligations at Hanford. 

Will you ensure that you will impress upon the Administration that any changes in the 

Department's approach must include input from the state of Washington before moving 

forward. This is critical to avoid costly litigation that will only hamper progress. You 

must be aware of how sensitive of an issue this is to my constituents and how hard we are 

willing to fight any decisions that we believe will harm the environment or potentially the 

public. Do I have your word you will work with the Washington delegation and state of 

Washington on the Hanford cleanup? 

Answer: Yes 

Question 15: During Secretary Perry's confirmation process, he said: "the Department can be a 

great resource in cooperating with the private sector to spur innovation, particularly by investing 

in cutting-edge research." However, the President's budget proposal jeopardizes the very science 

and technology programs that Secretary Perry said he values, which undermines U.S. energy 

9 
65 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

leadership and kills American jobs. The President has proposed to dramatically slash funding for 

and, in some cases, eliminate several important DOE programs. 

The Department of Energy is a science and technology leader, with an unrivaled network of 

national laboratories, accelerating innovation in energy, manufacturing, and nuclear security. 

This budget will lose 17,000 scientists jobs from our national labs, universities, research 

institutions and businesses across the country. 

• The budget proposes to eliminate ARPA-E, which advances high-potential, high-impact 

energy technologies that are too early for private-sector investment. Do you support 

eliminating ARPA-E? 

Answer: I support the President's budget. lfi am confirmed, I look forward to finding 

alternative solutions to advance these goals. 

• The budget proposes to eliminate the Weatherization Assistance Program and State 

Energy Program, which provide critical technical assistance and state-controlled 

competitive grant funding to all 50 states to support state- and county-level energy 

projects. Do you support eliminating the Weatherization Assistance Program and State 

Energy Program? 

Answer: I support the President's budget and, if confirmed, I look forward to finding alternative 

solutions to advance these goals. 

• The budget proposal includes draconian cuts to the Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy, the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, and other 

applied energy programs. These programs invest in all stages of innovation cross a 

diverse portfolio of energy technologies to enhance economic competitiveness and secure 

America's long-term energy security. Do you agree with these cuts? Do you believe there 

is a Federal role in investing in R&D in these areas? 

Answer: I support the President's budget. I believe there can be a role in spending taxpayer 

dollars on R&D. 

• The budget proposes to cut 17 percent of the Office of Science, which is the largest 

federal sponsor of basic research in the physical sciences. Do you agree that Federal 

investments in basic research arc critical for maintaining U.S. leadership in science and 

technology and creating future jobs? 

10 
66 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatter,jee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: I support the President's budget and know that basic research will continue under it to 

maintain our leadership. I am committed to both investing in energy innovation and using 

taxpayer dollars responsibly. lfl am confirmed, I will explore ways to make technology and 

scientific development at the Department and the labs available to interested parties. I also 

believe in engaging with the private sector. While being careful not to duplicate private sector 

efforts, the Department can be a great resource in cooperating with the private sector to spur 

innovation, particularly by investing in cutting-edge research. 

Question 16: Cybersecurity vulnerabilities in our nation's energy infrastructure pose grave 

national security and economic risks to the country. The Department of Homeland Security 

reported that 56% of cyber incidents against critical infrastructure in 2013 were directed at 

energy infrastructure. This number has since decreased: in 2016 it was down to 20%, but it is 

still too high. Although we have mandatory cybersecurity standards for electric utilities, natural 

gas pipelines are subject to merely voluntary guidelines issued by the Transportation Security 

Administration (TSA). 

• DOE's most recent Quadrennial Energy Review suggested that DOE should assess 

whether any additional or mandatory cybersecurity guidelines are necessary for natural 

gas pipelines given the increased dependence between the electric and natural gas sectors. 

Do you agree? 

Answer: Cyberseeurity of the networks on which we rely and the threats to our critical 

infrastructure are evolving at a very rapid pace. Flexibility is most important to stay ahead of 

tomorrow's threats rather than merely addressing yesterday's. We can achieve this by partnering 

with infrastructure owners and enriching cross-sector collaboration and preparedness efforts. 

Question 17: The President's budget proposes to auction-off to the highest bidder the Bonneville 

Power Administration's transmission facilities and the transmission assets owned by the other 

Federal power marketing administrations (PMAs). 

Mr. Brouillette, you previously served at the Department of Energy and were around this town 

for a long time. l am certain that you are aware that Presidents from both parties have over the 

years proposed to sell-off the PMAs and on each occasion, Congress on a bipartisan basis 

said absolutely not! 

The President's proposal could allow private companies to substantially raise transmission rates 

which will raise the price of power for consumers in more than 30 states. 

II 
67 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

• Please tell me the Department isn't seriously going to pursue this proposal to auction off 

the PMA transmission lines, including those owned by the Bonneville Power 

Administration? 

~: Congress and the President will arrive at a budget agreement, as they have in the past. 

and I will work to ensure that the Bonneville Power Administration's customers receive 

dependable service at a reasonable price. 

Question 18: In 2015 a Blue Ribbon Commission referred to the National Laboratories as a-

"place where sustained, long-term, complex research and development programs can be 

managed and executed across a range of basic and applied research areas". 

Our labs and DOE work across the R&D spectrum, from basic to applied research and including 

demonstration of technologies before handing-off their work to industry for commercialization. 

That's how our innovation machine works. 

Based on Tuesday's proposed budget, I can only assume the Trump Administration has 

misunderstood the rule of DOE and the Labs to be basic research alone. If not corrected, I 

believe this will cripple the innovation pipeline in this country that we have worked so hard to 

build, with significant impacts to American competitiveness and economic strength. 

• Can you please explain what you understand to be the innovation pipeline in this country 

and what role the National Labs play in basic and applied research as well as the 

demonstration of the feasibility of technologies? 

Answer: If confirmed, I commit to working to increase the effectiveness of taxpayer dollars 

spent by the Department for the greatest benefit and opportunities for innovation. I strongly 

believe that the scientific research that is conducted and funded by the Department is absolutely 

critical. Because the national labs conduct the best research in the world, I believe it is necessary 

to provide a pathway and an opportunity for that research and technology to reach the market, 

which will generate tremendous economic opportunities. 

Question 19: Last month, Secretary Perry sent a memo to his Chief of Staff asking that the 

Department prepare a study examine the state of wholesale electricity markets, especially why 

coal and nuclear plants are having a hard time competing with natural gas and renewable 

resources. The Secretary's memo also hinted that state and federal renewable energy incentives 

are to blame. 

The Secretary followed this up a few days later with a speech in New York during which he 

suggested that the Trump Administration may try to preempt state programs, such as renewable 

12 
68 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

energy standards. It does not take a rocket scientist to know that it is low natural gas prices, not 

renewable energy, that is making coal and nuclear power uncompetitive. 

But it is also troubling that the Administration appears to be suggesting that adding more 

renewable energy threatens grid reliability especially when our national labs have repeatedly 

found this is not true. It is even crazier that Secretary Perry is making these false statements 

since Texas has more wind power than any other state. 

• Are you aware that the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has found that 

the eastern grid and the western grid could each reliably accommodate 30 percent 

renewable energy rates without and changes and that a third NREL study concluded that 

renewable energy will be able to reliably generate 80% of U.S. power needs by 2050 if 

we invest in increased grid flexibility? 

Answer: If confirmed, !look forward to reviewing these studies, alongside the study 

commissioned by the Secretary, and engaging with you and your staff. 

• Do I have your commitment that the Department will not attempt to preempt state 

renewable energy programs, such as renewable portfolio standards, in an attempt to 

bolster less competitive sources of energy, such as coal? 

Answer: I believe state governments should be able to exercise their autonomy to the fullest 

extent possible under our federal system, as prescribed by the Constitution. 

Question 20: I am deeply troubled by continuous reports that DOE has delayed awarding funds 

and, in some cases, is refusing to release funds altogether for various activities for which 

Congress has already provided appropriations in order to ensure that these activities are 

consistent with President Trump's priorities. 

It is unlawful for the President and DOE to ignore statutory requirements or funding direction 

provided by appropriations legislation already enacted by Congress. Although DOE last week 

did finally release funds for three ARPA-E projects, I am told that this issue has not been 

resolved. 

• Will you commit that DOE will follow the law to fund projects as directed by 

Congressional intent and appropriations, notwithstanding the policy priorities included in 

the Administration's budget proposal? 

Answer: If confimed, I will follow the law. 

13 
69 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

• When you arrive at DOE, will you investigate these issues and resolve them 

immediately? 

~If confirmed, l will look into these matters you have raised. I will work to ensure that 

all statutory requirements related to appropriations legislation are followed and that the 

American people recieve the best value for their tax dollars. 

Question 21: If confirmed, you will serve as the Chair of the Department's Credit Review 

Board, which reviews loan applications and recommends to the Secretary whether to issue a loan 

guarantees under the Title XVII program. There are a number of current DOE loan applicants 

that arc very far along in the application process but now face uncertainty given the President's 

budget proposal. 

• Will you commit to allowing existing DOE loan applicants the opportunity to complete 

the loan approval process, if they meet the requirements of the Title XVII program? 

Answer: If confirmed, I commit to receiving full briefings on this program. 

• Existing loan applicants have paid hundreds of thousands of dollars in application fees to 

DOE and spent months, if not years, going through the loan process under the expectation 

that DOE would honor their applications. How will you handle existing DOE loan 

applicants given the President's budget proposal? 

~If confirmed, I commit to receiving full briefings on this program. 

• According to DOE's numbers, the loan programs have helped create or save more than 

56,000 jobs. Unfortunately, the President's budget proposes eliminating these 

programs. I know of2 potential projects that would support over 2,000 jobs. I am 

concerned that these job losses were not considered when this budget proposal was put 

together. Frankly, this seems to run contrary to the President's stated objectives to support 

economic growth and American jobs. Can you work with us to make sure these real job 

impacts get their due consideration? 

Answer: Yes 

Question 22: The United States has enjoyed a formal energy relationship with Israel since 2007, 

rooted in a joint research and development program to allow U.S. and Israel scientists to partner 

in the creation of new energy technologies. This Committee has prioritized the expansion of this 

relationship, supporting funding for the program and looking to expand the parameters of that 

partnership. 

14 
70 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary ofEuergy, and Mr. Neil Chatter,jee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dau Brouillette 

In 2014 Congress passed the U.S.-Israel Strategic Partnership Act, which included a significant 

energy title. The bill encourages enhanced research and development, elevated dialogue 

opportunities, collaboration between U.S. national labs and Israeli research institutes, and the 

creation of a new platform- a U.S.-Israel center on energy and water to link our governments, 

academia to further joint research and development and technology transfer. 

• How do you view the U.S.-Israel energy relationship as it stands today and what 

opportunities do you see for growth? 

Answer: DOE values our long-standing partnership with Israel. I understand that Israel and the 

United States have made great progress in expanding our bilateral strategic economic 

relationship. But, I believe there is more we can do to expand our energy cooperation, both 

bilaterally and multilaterally. Collaboration in the energy-water nexus, on desalination in 

particular, and on cybersccurity, are potential areas of collaboration that could help achieve U.S. 

domestic energy priorities. 

• Do you share my belief that enhanced cooperation in water management is particularly 

pressing, given the state of much of the American west? 

Answer: I agree. Present day water and energy systems are interdependent and it is important to 

engage on the energy-water nexus. 

• If confirmed, how would you work toward the implementation of the US-Israel Center on 

Energy and Water? 

Answer: DOE has a robust collaboration with Israel. 1 believe both the U.S. and Israel could 

benefit from expanded collaboration on energy and water. If Congress provides the resources, 

I'd be happy to work toward implementation of the U.S-Israel Center on Energy and Water. 

Question from Senator John Barrasso 

Question: On May 18, 2017 the Wall Street Journal reported that PAO Rosneft, the state-owned 

Russian oil company, may be in a position to take over the U.S. energy assets ofCitgo ifCitgo's 

parent company defaults on its debt. Citgo's energy assets in the U.S. include oil refineries, 

pipelines, and numerous petroleum platforms. 

Foreign investment in the U.S., especially by an adversary like Russia, has national security 

implications. The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) is charged 

with reviewing transactions that could result in control of a U.S. business by a foreign entity. 

CFIUS is authorized to block transactions or impose conditions on a transaction in order to 

15 
71 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

mitigate any threat to national security. The Secretary of Energy, and by delegation the Deputy 

Secretary, is a member ofCFlUS. 

What steps will you take to ensure that the Russia-Citgo deal does not pose any threat to national 

security? 

~ CFIUS, as a matter of policy and under its regulations applicable to DOE- to protect 

the confidentiality of parties that may be before the Committee- does not comment on subject 

cases that may or may not be actively before the Committee; this includes not commenting on 

matters that appear in the media and that may or may not be before the Committee. However, I 

can assure you that the Department takes its responsibilities as full time members ofCFIUS very 

seriously. If confirmed, l commit to working closely with you on this matter. 

Questions from Senator Ron Wyden 

Question 1: Mr. Brouillette, as we discussed in my office, I'm seriously concerned about the 

administration's budget proposal to privatize the transmission assets of the Bonneville Power 

Administration. This amounts to highway robbery in the Northwest. Oregon families' dollars--

especially the communities in rural Oregon, who most rely on the Bonneville system -- are 

already stretched too thin without the administration trying to raise their monthly utility bills. 

Other administrations have tried this before, and I fought it. I will oppose this attempt as well. 

When we met in my office, I asked if you would commit to opposing the sale or privatization of 

Bonneville. As you may know, this was the same commitment that Energy Secretaries Abraham 

and Bodman gave to me during their nomination hearings when a similar privatization gimmick 

was proposed by the Bush Administration. 

So let me ask you, for the record, will you make the same commitment that Secretaries Abraham 

and Bodman made to oppose selling off or privatizing Bonneville? 

Answer: I recognize the importance of Bonneville to the citizens of the Northwest. Congress and 

the President will arrive at a budget agreement, as they have in the past, and I will work to 

execute that agreement to the letter. I will also work to ensure BP A customers receive 

dependable service at a reasonable price. 

Question 2: The 17 DOE laboratories make up a federal research powerhouse, providing the 

United States with the best in energy technology innovation and scientific research. Would you 

agree that the national labs, like the National Energy Technology Lab facility located in Albany, 

Oregon, represent crucial one-of-a-kind assets to this country, which should be maintained and 

invested in? And will you commit to maintaining the existing network of labs? 

16 
72 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: I agree that our national laboratories are a critical part of the DOE enterprise and a 

national treasure. Our national laboratories are the crown jewels of the nation and I plan to 

support and advocate for their work. I support the President's budget and, if confirmed, I plan to 

visit as many national labs as possible and learn from our outstanding men and women who work 

there. 

Question 3: Mr. Brouillette, the Pacific Northwest has been a dumping ground for high-level, 

radioactive nuclear waste going back to the Manhattan Project. The Federal Government has an 

obligation to clean up this waste, but the Department of Energy, which is in charge of the effort, 

has spent tens of billions of dollars over 3 decades without processing a single gallon of the 

waste. This is a problem that both Democratic and Republican Administrations have failed to fix. 

What are you going to do to turn things around at Hanford? 

Answer: I fully understand the magnitude and importance of the Environmental Management 

mission in this country. If I am confirmed, I very much look forward to visiting sites like 

Hanford in Washington State that directly contributed to our nation's victories and national 

security. If confirmed, I will work with you to ensure we are moving this important mission 

forward while making sustainable, risk-informed, and fiscally wise decisions in the future. 

Question 4: Senator Grassley and I head up a bi-partisan caucus here in the Senate to try to 

protect whistleblowers. As you may know, whistleblowers have been mistreated at Hanford and 

across the Department--with multiple examples of retaliation and intimidation. As Deputy 

Secretary, what are you going to do to change the culture at DOE so that employees can come 

forward and tell you, and Congress, when things are going off the rails without losing their jobs? 

Answer: When there are issues, I encourage people to come forward. If confirmed, I will look 

into current protocols in place, including the new whistleblower protection structure. It is my 

intention to emphasize the processes under that structure and to protect the people who take pride 

in looking after the good work of the Department of Energy. 

Question 5: U.S. government clean energy research and development (R&D) is at risk due to 

the administration's proposed FY 2018 budget cuts at the Department of Energy (DOE). Around 

3.3 million Americans are already employed in the clean energy sector, and job growth has been 

experiencing record highs. And yet there is no guarantee that the United States will retain a 

leadership position on clean energy. If DOE R&D programs are weakened, it's quite possible that 

China or another growing economy will fill our leadership vacuum. Consider that China, who is 

hosting the Clean Energy Ministerial and Mission Innovation meetings this year, is already 

poised to take the lead, with the second largest Mission Innovation pledge after the United 

States. What, specifically, would you do at the program level within DOE to ensure continued 

U.S. leadership on clean energy technology? 

17 
73 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: I understand that Secretary Perry will be attending the Clean Energy Ministerial and 

Mission Innovation meetings in June. If confirmed, I look forward to discussing this topic with 

Secretary Perry to ensure the U.S. remains committed to these overarching goals. 

Question 6: Will you commit to upholding full U.S. participation in the Mission Innovation 

(MI) initiative, including by keeping the pledge to double U.S. clean energy investment, by 

partnering with the private sector to deploy game-changing technologies, and by engaging 

actively in the MI steering committee and sub-groups-beginning with attending the Clean 

Energy Ministerial (CEM) and MI meetings next month in Beijing? 

Answer: I understand that Secretary Perry will be attending the Clean Energy Ministerial and 

Mission Innovation meeting in June. If confirmed, !look forward to discussing this topic with 

Secretary Perry to ensure the U.S. remains committed to these overarching goals. 

Question 7: Mr. Brouillette, it is important for DOE to execute programs and deploy funds 

previously allocated and obligated. It has been disheartening to hear of DOE delaying 

expenditures of funds with little to no justification. Can you commit today to ensuring that DOE 

follows through on its funding commitments for the good of the U.S. energy sector without 

undue partisan considerations? 

Answer: I understand that a process is in place to provide an equitable review of all applications 

for funding assistance. If I am confirmed, I will work to ensure that all statutory requirements 

related to appropriations legislation will continue to be followed and that taxpayer dollars are 

allocated in a manner that provides the best value to the American people. 

Question 8: Mr. Brouillette, energy storage is one of the most rapidly growing energy 

technologies out there, and it can provide multiple benefits to the grid, including enhanced grid 

reliability. And yet, many energy storage technologies arc still in their infancy, requiring further 

research and development, which historically requires a significant governmental role. Do you 

support increasing funding levels at the Department of Energy for energy storage research, 

development, and demonstration? 

Answer: I have not been briefed on DOE's energy storage research and look forwarded to being 

briefed on this important issue ifl am confirmed. 

Question 9: I am aware of the study that Secretary Perry has called for on the relationship 

between renewable energy and coal and nuclear retirements. I am concerned by what appears to 

be an attack on renewables. Can you assure me that, if confirmed, you will continue to prioritize 

renewable energy research, development and deployment at the Department of Energy? 

18 
74 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: I have not been fully briefed on the study you reference in your question. If confirmed, 

I will advocate for the programs of the Department. 

Question 10: Will you commit to defending the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy and Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-e) in DOE's budget and 

operations? 

Answer: I support the President's budget. Congress and the President will arrive at a budget 

agreement, as they have in the past, and if confirmed I will work to ensure that agreement. If 

confirmed !look forward to finding alternative solutions to advance these goals. 

Question 11: I am currently thinking about the "next big things" in the energy and energy 

efficiency sectors. For instance, I am very curious about the potential to extract savings from the 

efficiencies generated when devices and buildings become connected and those connections 

optimized. This is commonly referred to as "systems efficiency" and it has applications in 

building energy codes, appliance and equipment standards, workforce development, and the 

various research activities underway at DOE. What do you think is the potential at DOE, across 

the federal government, and in states to capture these savings and deliver greater benefits to 

homeowners, consumers, and businesses? What are some barriers that we in Congress could 

consider removing to unlock even greater savings? 

Answer: There is vast potential for improvement. lfl am confirmed, I look forward to working 

with DOE staff and your staff to identify any barriers Congress could consider removing. 

Question 12: Mr. Brouillette, given your experience, I am sure you recognize the importance of 

federal support of state efforts to help homeowners, consumers, and businesses lower their 

energy consumption. Yet the budget proposal released on Tuesday would cut funding by over 

two-thirds for the DOE office responsible for helping state and local governments adopt building 

energy codes and eliminate funding for state energy programs and weatherization for lowerincome families. Oregon alone would stand to lose over $500,000 for our state energy office and 

funding that helped improve the energy efficiency of over 1.700 homes. What will you do, if 

confirmed, to ensure these programs arc funded and continue to generate savings and benefits? 

Answer: [support the President's budget and, if confirmed, [look forward to finding alternative 

solutions to advance these goals. I will ensure that the will of Congress, as expressed through 

statute, is carried out. 

Question 13: What role do you see the Trump administration's DOE should have in fighting 

climate change? 

19 
75 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: A strong, vibrant economy is the best defense to a number of concerns, including 

climate change. I believe the climate is changing. Some of it is naturally occurring, but we are all 

living here so we must have some impact. If confirmed, I look forward to working with DOE 

laboratories to find balanced answers to this issue. 

Question 14: What specifically would you do at the DOE to protect the electricity grid--and 

American citizens--from cyber-attack? 

Answer: As the Sector-Specific Agency for the energy sector, DOE serves as the voice of the 

sector. If confirmed, I look forward to collaborating with the private sector to strengthen the 

security of the grid and protecting American citizens from a cyber-attack. 

Question 15: Our troops are often reliant on dangerous fuel convoys to keep them operating. Do 

you think tightening vehicle efficiency standards and supporting the deployment of renewable 

energy technologies is worth supporting, to help minimize the risk to our troops? 

Answer: I support giving the troops the tools they need to best carry out their mission and the 

focus is obviously on the safety and security of our troops. 

Question 16: Mr. Brouillette, our electricity grid--once touted by the National Academy of 

Engineering as the single greatest engineering achievement of the twentieth century--is in need 

of serious help. Can you commit on working to modernize our electric grid? If so, what steps 

will you take to advance grid modernization? 

~Yes, if I am confirmed, I commit to working with other agencies of government and 

with the Congress to modernize our electric grid. The Secretary has commissioned an agencywide study on the electric grid, which is due shortly. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing 

this study and engaging with you and your staff. 

Question 17: Mr. Brouillette, I'm sure you realize that energy storage and an increasing number 

of aggregated distributed energy resources (DERs) can provide a range of valuable services to 

the electricity grid, such as frequency regulation and capacity. In many parts of the country there 

are no means for remunerating these technologies for the services that they provide, which 

creates a market distortion against these technologies. What will you do at the Department of 

Energy, and in your relationship with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, to ensure that 

the full suite of technologies are identified for the value-streams they provide to the grid? For 

example, would your DOE continue working to better define the value different services the grid 

can provide? 

20 
76 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: The Secretary has commissioned an agency-wide study on the electric grid, which is 

due shortly. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing this study and engaging with you and your 

staff. 

Question 18: Considering the integrity and security of the nation's electricity system, as well as 

the efficiency with which smart-grid enabled appliances and equipment are deployed in the 

market, do you believe it would be useful to promote open interoperability standards for smartgrid enabled technology? And if so, how would you recommend doing so? 

~ It is my understanding the Department has funded a wide array of advanced grid R&D 

technologies and, if confirmed, I look forward to being briefed further. 

Question 19: Utility data access is important for many businesses capable of providing services 

to consumers, such as enabling more accurate modeling and forecasting of locational electricity 

demand needs. What is your view on utility data access, and how would you work to make sure 

both sides of this debate get a fair shake? 

Answer: I am not familiar with the issue but, if confirmed, !look forward to learning more and 

being briefed on it. 

Question 20: Electric vehicles (EVs) have come a long way. The problem is that we're talking 

about two very separate, siloed industries with very few interconnections. With more EV-grid 

integration, it's possible for EVs to even provide valuable services back to the grid when needed. 

What can we expect from you in supporting further electric vehicle-grid integration, and in 

facilitating dialogue between US automakcrs and electricity companies? 

Answer: I believe that the key to resolving such issues is through dialogue. If I am confirmed, I 

hope to be able to facilitate such a dialogue between the automakers and electricity companies. 

Questions from Senator Bernard Sanders 

Lessons from past positions 

Question I: Based on your experiences as an executive at Ford, what can DOE do to support 

the production and use of electric vehicles? 

~ From my time at Ford, I learned that the private sector must make cars and trucks that 

the American public demand. To support the production and use of electric vehicles, we need to 

make sure that electric vehicles are at the right price and have the features that work for 

American families. 

21 
77 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Question 2: At USAA, you served military members and their families. Military members at 

lower ranks can face considerable financial challenges. A number of federal energy programssuch as the Weatherization Assistance and Low Income Home Energy Assistance programsbenefit low-income Americans. What lessons did you learn from working with low-income 

families at USAA that you believe are applicable to DOE? 

~One of the important lessons !learned is the value of the private sector in helping lowincome Americans. A strong and vibrant economy is the best defense to many problems. It is 

important that we maintain a level of economic growth that will mitigate the need for federal 

assistance. 

Question 3: A common critique of Energy Secretary Perry's administration while he was 

governor of Texas was that his largest campaign donors received benefits in the form of 

preferential access, contracts, appointments, and even multi-million dollar tax cuts for their 

businesses. You have also substantially contributed to Secretary Perry's gubernatorial and 

presidential campaigns: 

Donations of$5,000 to Secretary Perry's 2012 presidential campaign, and in 2006 

and 2009 nearly $2,000 for his gubernatorial campaigns. 

Collection of$77,000 from other donors as a "bundler" for Perry's 2012 

presidential campaign. 

Contributions of almost $49,000 to USAA-PAC. USAA-PAC donated $210,000 

to Perry's gubernatorial campaigns and donated $64,500 to RickPerry.org toward 

his 2012 presidential campaign. 

The Texas "pay to play" political culture raised significant concerns during Secretary Perry's 

nomination. These donations suggest loyalty to Secretary Perry. If confirmed, how will you 

ensure that the Texas "pay to play" political culture does not affect DOE decisions and 

management? 

Answer: I was a supporter of then Governor Perry and am glad to have had the opportunity to 

help elect him at the time. [f [ am confirmed, I will work with the employees at the Department 

of Energy to promote the best possible solutions facing the Department because that is what the 

American people deserve and expect. 

22 
78 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Briefings 

Question 4: If confirmed, do you commit to regular scientific briefings on the subjects of 

nuclear waste and nuclear security? 

Answer: If confirmed, I commit to receiving regular briefings on all important subjects in my 

purview, including nuclear waste and nuclear security. 

Question 5: If confirmed. will you encourage the President to receive regular briefings on 

nuclear waste and national security? 

Answer: I understand that the President already receives regular briefings on national security 

matters. If confirmed, I will advocate for the Department in interagency deliberations. 

Climate change 

Question 6: President Trump has suggested in the past that climate change is a hoax. Is the 

President correct? Is climate change a hoax? 

Answer: I believe the climate is changing. We're all living here, so we must have some impact. I 

agree with Secretary Perry that the question is how we address it in a thoughtful way that doesn't 

compromise economic growth, the affordability of energy, or American jobs. 

Question 7: Do you agree with the vast majority of scientists that climate change is real, it is 

caused by human activity, and that we must aggressively transition away from fossil fuels toward 

energy efficiency and sustainable energy like wind, solar, and geothermal? 

Answer: I believe that the climate changes and I believe that the cost of the benefits of climaterelated policies need to make sense for American families. 

Question 8: Do you agree with the vast majority of scientists that the combustion of fossil fuels 

contributes to climate change? 

Answer: As previously stated, I believe the climate is changing. Some of it is naturally 

occurring, but we are all living here so we must have some impact. If confirmed, I look forward 

to getting a better understanding of the dynamics. 

Question 9: Do you believe that DOE has a role in reducing the extraction and use of fossil 

fuels? 

23 
79 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to he Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to he Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: According to the DOE Organization Act, I believe the Department's roles were created 

by Congress and can be updated by Congress. For example, Congress has stated that "a strong 

national energy program is needed to meet the present and future energy needs of the Nation 

consistent with overall national economic, environmental and social goals." I believe in those 

goals, and, if confirmed, I will be a public servant and my job will be to follow the law. 

Question 10: How important do you think it is to reduce the amount of fossil fuels that we usc 

to support our energy needs? 

~As noted in the previous question, and as expressed by Congress, I believe "a strong 

national energy program is needed to meet the present and future energy needs of the Nation 

consistent with overall national economic, environmental and social goals." I believe a strong 

energy program can include natural gas, oil, and coal. 

Question 11: What do you believe are the best current and prospective DOE policies to 

effectively reduce carbon pollution from energy development and use? 

Answer: !look forward to being briefed by DOE staff on DOE's current policies in this area. 

Question 12: What role should the United States play in the Paris climate agreement? 

~As the President has said that the Paris Agreement is under review and, if confirmed, I 

will carry out the President's decision. 

Question 13: If confirmed, how will you work to address climate change? 

~As previously stated, I believe the climate is changing. Some of it is naturally 

occurring, but we are all living here so we must have some impact. If confirmed, I look forward 

to getting a better understanding of the dynamics. 

Energy future 

Question 14: What technologies do you think are most important for the United States to invest 

in to meet our long-term energy needs? 

Answer: The 17 national labs are the crown jewels of the nation and if I am confirmed, I look 

forward to exploring ways in which to make technology and scientific development available to 

interested parties. I believe in engaging with the private sector. While being careful not to 

duplicate private sector efforts, the Department can be a great resource in cooperation with the 

private sector to spur innovation, particularly by investing in cutting-edge research. 

24 
80 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

I also believe that taxpayer dollars should be spent on things that make sense. 

Question 15: What do you believe is the role of renewable energy in our energy future? 

Answer: I support the President's all of the above energy strategy, and renewable energy plays 

an important role in that strategy. 

Question 16: What role should nuclear power play in our energy future? 

Answer: I support the President's all of the above energy strategy. Nuclear power will remain an 

important component of our energy mix providing inexpensive and clean base load power. 

Question 17: What role do you think DOE should have in the future extraction and use of fossil 

fuels? 

Answer: I envision the Department continuing to develop technologies that produce energy 

more efficiently and in an environmentally friendly way. I believe, as Congress has said in the 

Department of Energy Organization Act, that "a strong national energy program is needed to 

meet the present and future energy needs of the Nation consistent with overall national 

economic, environmental and social goals." I believe that this strong national energy program 

can include natural gas, oil, and coal. 

Question 18: What are the geopolitical consequences of U.S. fossil fuel consumption on our 

national security? 

Answer: l believe the State or Defense Departments may be more qualified to answer this 

question. 

Question 19: What do you believe the role of tax incentives should be in the future of American 

energy? If confirmed, will you commit to supporting tax credits for renewable resources like 

wind, solar, and geothermal? 

Answer: If confirmed, my role at DOE will be to execute the law. To my knowledge, DOE does 

not have statutory or regulatory authority over these tax credits. 

Question 20: What do you think our energy sources will be at the end of this century? 

Answer: I cannot predict what energy sources we may be using at the end of the century. 

know our national labs are on the cutting edge of many new technologies and I am confident 

they will play a significant role in developing future energy sources. 

25 
81 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Question 21: Oil, gas, and coal are global commodities subject to market supply and demand. 

Even if the United States completely met its own demand for fossil fuel energy-as it is close to 

achieving-consumers would remain subject to significant variability in fuel prices. For solar 

and wind energy, however, the electricity produced by these sources of energy remains in the 

United States. Would it not make more sense to prioritize solar and wind-generated electricity 

that can't be exported from the United States and is invulnerable to global pricing swings? 

Answer: I believe it makes the most sense to consider the risks, the costs, and the benefits of a 

wide range of energy sources. I would also prioritize reliability and affordability. 

Question 22: The availability of cheap natural gas through the process commonly known as 

fracking has drastically changed the economics of electricity generation. Coal-fired and nuclear 

power plants are closing because they are unable to economically compete with high-efficiency 

gas-fired power plants. What DOE efforts or incentives would you consider appropriate to assure 

that the nation's capacity to generate electricity through means other than uneconomic coal, 

nuclear and natural gas-fired power stations, while assuring stable electricity prices? 

Answer: The Secretary has commissioned an agency-wide study on the electric grid, which is 

due shortly. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing this study and engaging with you and your 

staff. 

Clean coal 

Question 23: The Kemper "clean" coal project received some $500 million in DOE grants by 

DOE's Office of Fossil Energy. The most expensive power plant per megawatt ever built in the 

United States doesn't work, and costs five times its initial budget of$1.2 billion. Yet DOE 

continues to support this boondoggle that saddles local utility customers with unsustainable rate 

increases. This is a failed project many times the size of the much-criticized Solyndra. If 

confirmed, will you commit to review the Kemper project and DOE's costly investment of 

taxpayer money? 

Answer: Yes, if confirmed, I will undertake a review of the previous administration's Kemper 

plan and the Department's expenditures. 

Clean energy 

Question 24: Vermont is a leader in clean energy innovation and jobs, from companies that 

assemble solar arrays to firms that specialize in making homes and businesses more energyefficient. The State of Vermont has set a goal of90 percent clean energy by 2050. How will you 

support Vermont's efforts? 

26 
82 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: I have not been fully briefed on the tools available to help Vermont move forward with 

their goals. If confirmed, I look forward to learning more about how the Department can help 

support Vermont's efforts. 

Question 25: In Vermont, Act 56 requires that Vermont utilities assist customers with adopting 

new technologies that reduce carbon emissions. If confirmed, how will you support Vermont's 

efforts to protect low-income communities? 

Answer: I have not been fully briefed on the tools available to help Vermont move forward with 

their goals. If confirmed, !look forward to learning more about how the Department can help 

support Vermont's efforts. 

Question 26: If confirmed, what specific actions will you take as deputy secretary of DOE to 

expand access to equitable clean energy and to clean energy jobs in low-income communities, 

communities of color, and tribal communities? 

Answer: A growing economy helps all Americans. If confirmed, I will focus on making sure 

energy is affordable as a key strategy to expanding an inclusive economy and helping all 

Americans. 

Question 27: Electricity costs represent a disproportionate share of the household spending of 

low-income households, as pointed out by DOE's Quadrennial Energy Review. What specific 

actions will you take to ensure that DOE programs, technical assistance, and regulations provide 

low-income households with access to affordable clean energy so that they do not bear a 

disproportionate burden of investments in the power system? 

Answer: Affordable electricity is important for all of America, including tribal communities, 

communities of color, and low-income communities. Making sure that communities have access 

to affordable energy of all types is the best way to solve the problem. If confirmed, I will look 

into making sure our electricity grid is not only reliable but also has affordable electricity for all. 

Solar and wind 

Question 28: The DOE SunS hot Initiative is a hugely successful research and development 

program that has made solar more affordable. The program is 70% of the way toward achieving 

its goal of making solar fully cost-competitive with traditional energy sources by 2020. It has 

helped contribute to a 22% increase in employment year over year totaling more than 260,000 

solar industry jobs as of2016. Jobs in the solar industry are growing at a rate 12 times taster than 

the overall economy. If you are confirmed, will you commit to finishing what SunShot started? 

27 
83 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: If confirmed, I commit to learning more about the solar program's goals and progress. I 

further commit to faithfully execute the law. 

Question 29: China leads the world in solar photovoltaic manufacturing. The largest markets 

for solar and wind are also in China. Do you believe the US is falling behind in clean energy? 

Will competing with China to develop renewable technology be a priority if you are confirmed? 

Answer: No, I do not believe the U.S. is falling behind in any energy technology. Competing 

with China to develop not only renewable technology, but all kinds of technology, will be a 

priority if! am confirmed. I should note that one of the things that makes American great is that 

we have a vibrant private sector that is actively competing with China. The U.S. has led the 

world and will continue to lead the world on clean energy technologies. 

Question 30: President Trump has tweeted that "[n]ot only are wind farms disgusting looking, 

but even worse they are bad for people's health." There are more than 10,000 wind turbines 

installed across the state of Texas. Do you agree with the President's characterization of the wind 

industry as "bad for people's health"? 

Answer: I share the President's commitment to an '·all of the above" energy strategy. There are 

positives and negatives to all sources of energy, including some downsides to wind turbines. If 

confirmed, I will work to help reduce the downsides of all sources of energy. 

Nuclear fuel and power 

Question 31: In using railroads to transport Spent Nuclear Fuel, how would you propose to 

balance state and local government needs for assuring public safety against the US railroad 

industry's rights to select transportation routes and manage commodity (i.e. the spent fuel) 

movement as guaranteed by "Common Carrier" law? 

~If confirmed, l look forward to receiving a briefing on the transport of our nation's 

spent nuclear fuel. I believe these objectives can and should be achieved in a balanced way that 

respects our federal system and the rule oflaw. 

Question 32: If confirmed, will you commit to considering altering the pace and scope of 

nuclear modernization plans if significant taxpayer savings can be achieved while meeting 

national security requirements? 

Answer: It is my understanding that the Nuclear Posture Review is already underway. If 

confirmed, I commit to receiving briefings on this subject. 

28 
84 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natnral Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Nuclear weapons 

Question 33: If you are confirmed, will you undertake a comprehensive review of the need and 

affordability of current nuclear weapons modernization plans? 

Answer: It is my understanding that the Nuclear Posture Review is already underway. If 

confirmed, I commit to receiving briefings on this subject. 

Question 34: What would be the strategic consequences of countries such as Russia, China, 

India, or Pakistan resuming nuclear tests? Will you support international norms against nuclear 

testing? 

Answer: I support the President's FY 2018 Budget Request, which would fund international 

monitoring and verification capabilities and continue our partnership with the International 

Atomic Energy Agency. 

Question 35: It has been more than 15 years since the Senate last considered the 

Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). Since that time, there have been two National 

Academy of Sciences reports and several National Intelligence Estimates that have documented 

the remarkable progress made in the United States to sustain the nuclear weapons arsenal without 

testing and the United States and international community's ability to monitor and verify 

compliance under the treaty. 

If confirmed, will you commit to reviewing the large body of new evidence in support of the 

CTBT that has emerged since the Senate last considered the treaty in 1999? 

Answer: If confirmed, I commit to receiving briefings on this subject. 

Question 36: If confirmed, will you commit to promoting the ratification ofthe Comprehensive 

Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty? 

Answer: I believe your question would be best addressed to The Department of State. 

Question 37: Would you support developing and implementing an international detection 

system, where costs are shared by a coalition of governments, which would allow us to detect a 

nuclear explosion and determine if a country was in compliance with the Nuclear 

Nonproliferation Treaty? If no, why not? 

29 
85 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: I support the President's FY 2018 Budget Request, which would fund international 

monitoring and verification capabilities and would continue to fund our partnership with the 

International Atomic Energy Agency. 

Question 38: The National Nuclear Security Administration's science-based stockpile 

stewardship program has successfully maintained the nation's nuclear weapons deterrent for 

more than 20 years without underground nuclear testing. Our country's leading universities play 

an important role in this program. They not only train and educate the future workforce on 

science issues relevant to the stockpile, but they also build and operate world-class facilities and 

instrumentation to help resolve issues related to an aging stockpile. Do you support academic 

programs in support of the science-based stockpile stewardship program? 

Answer: If confirmed, I will be proud to work alongside the highly skilled men and women of 

the National Nuclear Security Administration. I support the President's FY 2018 Budget 

Request, which would continue funding basic science related to stockpile stewardship and 

academic programs to train the next generation. 

Question 39: The National Nuclear Security Administration project to build a plant to fabricate 

plutonium (MOX) fuel from excess United States weapons plutonium is decades behind schedule 

and is projected to cost $50 billion or more. The plant is being built to comply with a U.SRussian agreement, but Russia has suspended implementation of its side ofthe compact. Do you 

agree that this wasteful project should be terminated and a cheaper and more efficient method for 

disposing of waste plutonium be developed instead? 

Answer: I support the President's FY 2018 Budget Request, which proposes to terminate the 

project and pursue "dilute and dispose," an alternative strategy. 

Question 40: If con tinned, will you support the DOE continuing to assist the International 

Atomic Energy Agency in its ongoing work ensuring Iranian compliance with the Joint 

Comprehensive Plan of Action? 

Answer: Yes. I support the President's FY 2018 Budget Request, which would fund 

international monitoring and verification capabilities and continue our partnership with the 

International Atomic Energy Agency. The Department's ongoing work in monitoring Iranian 

compliance with the JCPOA is vital to our national security. 

Tribal issues 

Question 41: Please describe the relationship between the federal government and American 

Indian tribes as it relates to sovereignty. 

30 
86 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

~· American Indian tribes retain a considerable quantum of sovereignty. The Department 

of Energy recognizes this sovereignty as a limitation on federal, State, and local jurisdiction, as 

well as the foundation for a trust-based obligation to protect tribal land and powers of selfgovernment. 

Question 42: What obligations do federal agencies have to formally consult with American 

Indian tribes? 

~The Department of Energy has implemented Executive Order 13175 and the 2009 

Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies Regarding Tribal Consultation 

through DOE Order 144.1, which creates mechanisms to ensure that all DOE offices and 

components engage in outreach and consultation to ensure that tribal rights and interests are 

considered and protected in the development and execution of all DOE policies and programs. 

Question 43: What procedures should be to !lowed by the federal government regarding the 

permitting of infrastructure projects that could potentially impact American Indian tribes and 

their citizens? 

~If confirmed, I look forward to being briefed by the appropriate personnel on the 

intersection of American Indian and permitting issues. 

Question 44: How do you interpret the United Nations Declaration on the Rights ofindigenous 

Peoples, especially as it relates to the obligations of the tederal government? 

Answer: The primary significance of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is 

that it urges the U.S. to engage in meaningful consultation with tribes. 

Question 45: What is the role of inter-agency cooperation on American Indian issues? 

Answer: It is my understanding there is a Memorandum of Understanding between the 

Department of Energy and the Interior Department. If confirmed, I commit to being fully briefed 

on this matter. 

Programmatic support 

Question 46: What is your position on each of the following programs, and if confirmed, will 

you commit to continuing their funding? 

31 
87 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

1. Photovoltaic Regional Test Centers 

2. Nuclear Energy 

3. Weatherization and Intergovernmental Programs 

4. Solar Energy 

5. Dedicated Funding for Advanced Heat Pump Deployment 

6. Northern Border Regional Commission 

Answer: If confirmed, !look forward to reviewing all programs and to working with Congress 

on the FY 2018 budget request to ensure the critical missions of the Department of Energy are 

accomplished. 

Energy Information Agency 

Question 47: One of the many DOE offices you will oversee is the Energy Information Agency 

(EIA), which provides critical data that industry relies on to make long-term decisions. For this 

reason, the integrity of EIA's data is critical. If confirmed, will you honor the independence of 

this data collection agency and maintain their funding? 

Answer: Yes. The independence ofEIA is fundamental to its mission. 

The Holman Rule 

Question 48: What is your position on the Holman Rule, which allows any member of Congress 

to propose amending an appropriations bill to single out a government employee or cut a specific 

program? 

Answer: I have briefly read about the Holman rule, but cannot comment at this time. I am 

committed to the outstanding staff and work ofthe Department. 

Question 49: If confirmed, will you support or oppose Congressional passage of an amendment 

under the Holman Rule that targets one of your employees? 

Answer: If confirn1ed, I am committed to the outstanding staff and work of the Department and 

believe that personnel decisions are best made by the people closest to the employees. 

Question 50: If confirmed, do you believe that you will be better able to recruit and retain top 

talent at DOE if Congress is able to individually target employees based on political criteria? 

32 
88 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: If confirmed, I believe my background and experience can be useful in recruiting and 

retaining top talent. As mentioned above, I believe that personnel decisions are best made by the 

people closest to the employees. 

Question 51: Do you support or oppose Congress targeting and altering the salaries of 

individuals at DOE? 

Answer: I believe that personnel decisions are best made by the employing authority. 

Question 52: How would you describe the division of responsibility and authority between 

Congress and DOE on agency personnel issues? 

~It is my understanding that the responsibilities and authorities are set forth in the 

Constitution, statutes, and judicial decisions. If confirmed, I will faithfully execute the laws. 

Scientific integrity 

Question 53: Are you familiar with the Department of Energy's scientific integrity policy? If 

so, what do you sec as its strengths and weaknesses? 

~ l have not had the chance to review the documents in full, but I support the goal of 

ensuring a culture of scientific integrity. Should I be confirmed, I look forward to being briefed 

on current laws and practices. 

Question 54: Professional development is important to most federal employees. To stay current 

in their field of research and be most effective in serving the taxpayer, DOE scientists must be 

able to participate in scientific society meetings, where they learn about new research and 

develop new collaborations with academic and private sector scientists. Recently, the White 

House clarified guidance for federal agencies to ensure that federal scientists are able to travel to 

scientific meetings in a fiscally responsible way. What steps would you take to ensure that this 

balance is maintained? 

Answer: l support our scientists being at the forefront of innovation in their respective fields. l 

look forward to being briefed on current laws and practices. 

Question 55: Should DOE scientists be allowed to express their personal opinions about any 

issue as private citizens as long as they provide a disclaimer that they are speaking in a personal 

capacity and not for the department? 

33 
89 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: I believe there are standards in place that allow for the free expression of belief so long 

as the employee docs not appear to speak on behalf of the Department of Energy when 

expressing personal opinions. 

Question 56: Should DOE scientists have the right of last review to ensure the accuracy of 

materials that rely on their scientific work or expertise-including scientific reports, executive 

summaries, Congressional testimony, press releases, and websites? 

Answer: Should I be confirmed, I look forward to being briefed on current policies and 

practices. 

Question 57: Are there any parts of the DOE website that you believe contain incorrect, 

incomplete, or erroneous information or descriptions of climate change science? 

~I have not reviewed the full website. But, I believe it is important to maintain accurate 

and helpful information for the benefit of the American people. 

Question 58: Do you think that DOE collects sufficient data to address environmental and 

public health threats? If not, what additional data is worth collecting? 

Answer: Should I be confirmed, I look forward to being briefed on data collection. 

Question 59: Are you committed to ensuring that DOE data is proactively made available to the 

public, consistent with privacy and confidential business information laws? 

Answer: While I have not had the occasion to review all the privacy and confidential business 

information laws, I believe the Department should follow the law. 

Question 60: Will you ensure that all data and data interpretations that are currently on the DOE 

websites continue to be publicly available, and if they become out of date, are archived in an 

accessible manner? 

Answer: I am not aware of current archival practices. If confirmed I will ensure the Department 

is compliant with the law. 

Question 61: Do you believe that the Freedom of Information Act has an assumption of 

openness-that documents should be made available to the public unless there is a compelling 

need to withhold them? 

Answer: Yes, the Freedom of Information Act has an assumption of openness. 

34 
90 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Question 62: The most robust scientific integrity policies allow government scientists to speak 

openly with the press and the public about scientific matters. Would you improve your agency's 

policies to make this explicit? 

Answer: I have not had the chance to review the documents in lull, but I support the goal of 

ensuring a culture of scientific integrity. Should I be confirmed, I look forward to being briefed 

on current laws and practices. 

Question 63: Do you agree that only scientists and technical experts should edit scientific and 

technical content? 

Answer: Should I be confirmed, I look forward to being briefed on current policies and 

practices. 

Question 64: Do you think public affairs officers have a role in editing scientific or technical 

content? If so, why? 

~The job of public affairs officers in the Department of Energy, in general, is to make 

information understandable to non-scientific general audiences. 

Questions from Senator AI Franken 

Question l: Earlier this week, President Trump released a budget that guts funding for research 

and development across the government. This is especially pronounced at the Department of 

Energy. 

a. I know that you did not help conceive these plans, but do they adhere to your vision for 

the department? 

b. Do you support the federal government funding applied research? 

c. Do you support the President's proposal to eliminate ARPA-E? 

d. Do you support the President's plan to eliminate the federal energy loan program? 

Answer: I support the budget's broad goal of shifting the Department's focus to early-stage 

research and development at our national laboratories to more efficiently and cost effectively 

advance American dominance in scientific and energy research. Congress and the President will 

ultimately arrive at an agreement to fund the Department's programs, and I will faithfully 

implement that agreement. 

Question 2: OMB Director Mulvaney made his views on climate research evident in describing 

the President's budget proposal: "Regarding the question as to climate change, I think the 

35 
91 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

President was fairly straightforward we're not spending money on that anymore; we consider 

that to be a waste of your money to go out and do that." 

a. Do you agree with Mr. Mulvaney? 

b. Do you agree with the overwhelming scientific consensus that we need to address 

human-caused climate change? 

Answer: I believe the climate is changing. We're all living here, so we must have some impact. I 

agree with Secretary Perry that the question is how we address it in a thoughtful way that doesn't 

compromise economic growth, the aftordability of energy, or American jobs. 

Question 3: Last month, Secretary Perry ordered a 60-day review of U.S. electricity policy to 

determine whether coal and nuclear plants are being "unfairly" pushed off the grid. He 

suggested that renewable resources-like wind and solar-were threatening grid reliability and 

that because of that, we need to prop up coal and nuclear plants. 

a. Are you familiar with an extensive two year study, completed by the Department of 

Energy last year, which found that the U.S. energy grid could accommodate up to 80 

percent wind and solar power with no loss of reliability? 

Answer: No. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing this study, alongside the study directed 

by the Secretary, and engaging with you and your staff. 

b. E&E News reports that the nation's top energy experts are notably not being consulted as 

part of the new "study." Does this concern you? 

Answer: It is my understanding the 60 day study is using the research and institutional 

knowledge of the Department's foremost career and contractor employees across all relevant 

program offices and National Laboratories. If confirmed, I look forward to being fully briefed on 

this study and many others. 

c. Minnesota and other states have renewable portfolio standards that drive the transition to 

clean energy. Do you believe states should be able to implement these kinds of policies 

without federal interference? 

Answer: I believe state governments should be able to exercise their autonomy to the fullest 

extent possible under our federal system, as prescribed by the Constitution. 

Question 4: Because of its low prices, more and more Americans are using natural gas, both in 

homes and in industry. And the DOE Energy Information Administration projects that use of 

natural gas will continue to grow. At the same time, the federal government has already issued 

36 
92 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

final authorizations for liquid natural gas export volumes of over 72 billion cubic feet per daywhich is equal to about 96 percent of U.S. demand. Explain to me how increasing exports of 

domestic natural gas won't drive up the price Americans pay to power their factories and heat 

their homes. 

Answer: I understand that DOE has produced a number of reports on LNG exports. If! am 

confirmed, I commit to being fully briefed on these reports. 

Question from Senator Steve Daines 

Question: In Montana, coal and hydropower provide much needed baseload power that keeps 

electricity affordable and reliable. As we look at growing global energy demand through 2040-

especially with the planned coal and natural gas plants in China, Japan-America has an 

opportunity for global energy dominance through exports. At the same time, we also need to 

protect existing fleets to keep our grid secure and help spur innovation here at home. In your 

view, how important is protecting baseload energy to electric grid security and our national 

security? 

~Power generation fueled by natural gas, coal, hydropower. and nuclear energy is 

essential to our nation's economy and security, providing a continuous and reliable source of 

electricity. The Secretary has commissioned an agency-wide study on the electric grid, which is 

due shortly. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing this study and engaging with you and your 

staff. 

Questions from Senator Joe Man chin III 

Question 1: West Virginia's existing installed capacity is 90% coal (12,584 MW). The 

remainder is natural gas, hydro, wind and a little bit of oil. Overall, in PJM, coal represents 34% 

of capacity and natural gas is slightly higher than that. The Energy Information Administration 

states that "West Virginia typically generates more electricity than it consumes. Although more 

than two-fifths of West Virginia households use electricity as their primary source for home 

heating, retail sales to all customers account for less than half of West Virginia's net electricity 

generation. As a result, West Virginia is a net supplier of electricity to the regional grid. West 

Virginia is a leader in the nation in net interstate sales of electricity." 

Do you believe that the regional grid (P JM specifically) can continue to operate without the 

contributions of West Virginia's fleet of power plants? 

Answer: West Virginia's power plants make essential contributions to the security of the 

regional grid. 

37 
93 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powcl son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Question 2: Earlier this week, E&E news published an article regarding the cybersecurity 

challenges facing our natural gas infrastructure. They highlighted a five-year old attack on our 

nation's natural gas utilities which was perpetrated by Chinese hackers who were also members 

of that country's military. Gerry Cauley, President of the North American Electric Reliability 

Council (NERC) a frequent witness before this committed stated that "Undercutting the gas 

supply is certainly a threat to the electric system." While NERC, utilities, and regional 

transmission operators (RTOs) like PJM arc planning for multiple scenarios like extreme weather 

events (a repeat Polar Vortex for example), I'm also interested in your perspective on how FERC 

and DOE can further support natural gas utilities in their efforts to harden their systems not just 

again natural threats but against cyber threats. 

Understanding that these energy stakeholders can't always pull back the curtain for us because of 

the threat of revealing too much to potential enemies, what more can DOE and FERC do to 

support natural gas pipeline operators in the face of these threats? 

Answer: Additional efforts to bolster pipeline operators' cybersecurity efforts include closer 

alignment with state and regional energy assurance planning; stronger collaboration in industry, 

regional, and national exercises; enhancing information sharing through enabling technologies; 

and advocating that key leaders in the industry receive actionable classified threat intelligence 

when needed. 

Question 3: West Virginia is hurting. The decline of the coal industry has been devastating. We 

are losing businesses and population. So, in addition to doing everything we can to stop the 

bleeding and help our people in the near-term, we are also looking for ways to revitalize our 

home state economy. One of the ideas that I am intrigued by and increasingly optimistic about is 

an opportunity that we have because of the wet gas in the Marcellus and Utica shale plays. We 

are working with the Mid-Atlantic Technology Research and Innovation Center (MA TRIC) to 

help realize the potential of an Appalachian Storage Hub which could bring jobs to West 

Virginia. It would ensure we are maximizing the opportunities associated with our vast reserves 

of natural gas liquids (NGLs) such as ethane. According to MATRIC, about 20% of the value in 

the Marcellus Shale alone is ethane, propane and butane natural gas liquids. So, ideally, the 

cultivation of such a hub would attract manufacturing companies that need reliable affordable 

access to these feedstocks. With safety and the environment top of mind, I'd like to see the 

Storage Hub move forward and it seems to me that this type of effort is what the creators of the 

Title XVII loan program at the Department of Energy envisioned when the Energy Policy Act of 

2005 was passed. The loan program would help provide access to low cost financial capital that 

would alleviate investor concerns regarding technology and market risks. 

Putting aside that the President's budget proposes the elimination of the loan program, what is 

your perception of this program which has a 97% repayment rate? 

38 
94 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: I support the Prcsident"s budget. If confirmed, I look forward to finding alternative 

solutions to advance these goals. 

Can you commit to work with me on how the Department of Energy can help the Appalachian 

Storage Hub? 

Answer: Yes. Natural gas liquids are a part of the American energy renaissance, particularly in 

the Appalachian region, and if confirmed, I look forward to working with you and your staff. I 

am aware that this concept received bipartisan legislative support at the Committee in the last 

Congress, under Chairman Murkowski's leadership. 

Question from Senator Cory Gardner 

Question: Industry engagement is showing that grid modernization and the Energy Systems 

Integration Facility (ESIF) at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory are both critical to 

innovation. How would you advise Secretary Perry on where federal dollars should be spent 

within the Department's budget in order to best prepare the country for energy leadership and 

cyber readiness? Would it include grid modernization and ESIF? 

Answer: I understand that ESIF is funded in the President's FY 2018 Budget request, including 

the initial phase to double the high performance computing capacity. 

Questions from Senator Mazie K. Hirono 

Question 1: Your written testimony makes not a single mention of climate change. Given the 

Department of Energy's National Laboratories provide world-class scientific and technological 

research and development capabilities, I found this omission concerning. I am interested in your 

thoughts on the threat climate change poses to our national security. In Hawaii, we are 

witnessing the direct impact on homes and businesses from rising sea levels and higher rates of 

coastal erosion that are attributable to climate change. This Memorial Day weekend, in fact, 

Hawaii is expected to experience severe flooding due to sea swells in the 8 to 12 foot range 

combined with astronomical King tides. The severity of the flooding will come at an economic 

cost to our communities. 

a) Do you believe that our climate is changing in ways that are presenting a danger to our 

communities and our way oflife? 

Answer: Quite simply, I believe the climate is changing. Some of it is naturally occurring, but 

we are all living here so we must have some impact. If confirmed, I look forward to getting a 

39 
95 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

better understanding of the dynamics. Additionally, our national laboratories are the crown 

jewels of the nation and I plan to support and advocate for their work. 

b) Do you believe the Department of Energy and its National Laboratories have a role to 

play in discovering and deploying energy innovation solutions to address climate change? 

~Yes. For example, I believe a strong, vibrant economy is the best defense to a number 

of concerns, including climate change. If confirmed, I will work to implement pro-growth and 

pro-environment policies at DOE that will empower more people to address impacts of climate 

change. 

c) The Department of Defense considers climate change a "threat multiplier" and has 

identified climate change in the 2010 and 2014 Quadrennial Defense Reviews as threats 

to U.S. national security as it exacerbates droughts, intensifies extreme weather, and can 

lead to instability and conflict over resources and other matters. Will you push the 

President and Congress to fund the Department of Energy to carry out its vital roles in 

funding scientific research and developing solar, wind, and other low-carbon energy 

technologies to build our clean energy economy and reduce our impact on climate 

change? 

Answer: The Department of Energy Organization Act states that "a strong national energy 

program is needed to meet the present and future energy needs of the Nation consistent with 

overall national economic, environmental and social goals." I believe that DOE's goals, as 

written by Congress into the DOE Organization Act, are critical and I will support the enacted 

funding levels to carry out these roles. 

Question 2: As one of the most isolated island chains in the world, the state of Hawaii has had 

to rely on imported fossil fuels for over 90 percent of our energy production. Research, technical 

assistance, and grants, particularly the Department of Energy's State Energy Program have been 

key to supporting Hawaii's shift towards locally produced renewable energy. In 2014, the DOE 

renewed a memorandum of understanding with Hawaii to provide technical assistance and 

collaborate on the Hawaii's goals of energy technology innovation and eliminating the state's 

reliance on imported oil. Hawaii bas increased local, renewable electricity production to 23% in 

2015 steady progress towards the state's ambitious goal of 100% renewable energy by 2045. 

a) Do you believe the Department of Energy has a role to play in providing technical 

assistance to States to advance their respective energy initiatives? 

Answer: I support the President's FY 2018 budget request and bel icve that providing and 

sharing information is an important role of the Department of Energy. 

40 
96 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

b) I am troubled by the President's budget proposal which terminates the State Energy 

Program. This program is very helpful to Hawaii. If confirmed, will you commit to 

saving the program from termination? What assurances can you give me that you will 

help to save the State Energy Program? 

~I support the President FY 2018 Budget proposal. I believe Congress and the President 

will come to an agreement and I will carry out the laws passed by Congress. 

Question 3: During Secretary Perry's confirmation hearing earlier this year, he and I discussed 

how the Department of Energy under his leadership would be able to effectively pursue an all-ofthe-above energy strategy- as he testified the Department would do- if the Trump 

Administration held true to its threat to completely eliminate a core program like the Office of 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) which focuses on transitioning to a cleaner, 

renewable energy economy. Secretary Perry said, "Well, Senator, maybe they'll have the same 

experience I had and forget that they said that." 

While this was a humorous response, I was hopeful once Governor Perry became Secretary he 

would take this effort seriously. We now know that the Trump Administration did not forget. 

The President's budget proposes to cut the EERE program by 70 percent. The program was 

funded at $2.1 billion in FY 2017 and is proposed to be funded at $636 million in FY 2018. 

a) How can the Department lead an all-of-the-above energy strategy if so much of the 

Department's all-of-the-above capabilities are being eliminated or marginalized through 

drastic funding cuts? Do you support these cuts? 

Answer: I support the President's FY 2018 budget proposal. DOE and EERE can achieve great 

things at lower funding levels. 

Question 4: You noted in your testimony the important of ensuring the reliability of our electric 

grid. The state of Hawaii is unique in that each of the Hawaiian Islands operates as its own 

isolated grid. Consequently, the State faces a number of unique challenges as it seeks to 

incorporate more intermittent renewable energy into its power supply. Last Congress, I 

introduced a number of bills that would improve upon the Department of Energy's ability to spur 

grid modernization and energy storage. In recent years, the Department has also been a key 

partner with the State as it seeks to modernize its electric grid. 

a) What steps will you take at DOE to help to modernize and improve the electric grid, and 

can non-contiguous territories and states like Hawaii and Alaska count on DOE's 

continued support to improve electricity transmission and distribution? 

41 
97 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: The Secretary has commissioned an agency-wide study on the electric grid, which is 

due shortly. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing this study and engaging with you and your 

staff. 

b) Do you agree energy storage is a critical component of a resilient, reliable grid, and what 

steps will you take to move forward on energy storage if you are confirmed? 

Answer: The Secretary has commissioned an agency-wide study on the electric grid, which is 

due shortly. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing this study and engaging with you and your 

staff. 

Question 5: The Department of Energy is a science-focused agency at its core, and there are 

several advisory boards and councils that provide the Secretary with advice and scienti fie 

recommendations. It has been reported in the press that the Secretary's Energy Advisory Board 

has remained dormant since all 19 advisors resigned on January 20. 

a) If confirmed, do you plan to extend the charters of the SEAB and the other advisory 

boards and councils, and what areas will you direct them to focus on? 

Answer: If confirmed, I will review all advisory boards and councils to ensure they provide 

expertise on a wide range of scientific research issues and stakeholder input. 

Questions from Senator John Hoeven 

Question I: North Dakota produces a lot of energy- from oil, coal, and gas, to wind and 

geothermal. We know the importance of having that cooperative relationship between 

stakeholders- states, industry, the federal government, and research institutions- to help 

leverage all our abundant natural resources, which provide jobs, economic growth, and improve 

our energy security. 

I want to hear more about your energy philosophy and how you would help run the Energy 

Department. 

• In broad terms, what does an "all-of-the-above" energy approach mean to you? 

Answer: An "all-of-the above" approach means harnessing all energy resources available. 

• And what role will traditional energy- oil, coal, natural gas have in how you develop 

the Department's strategy going forward? 

42 
98 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: For the foreseeable future, the traditional energy sources such as oil, coal, and natural 

gas will continue to provide the bulk of global energy. Going forward, the Department should 

strive to develop technology that allows for the extraction and use of these fuels in a safe, 

environmentally sound, and economically efficient manner. 

Question 2: The University ofNorth Dakota's Energy and Environmental Research Center 

(EERC) has an ongoing cooperative agreement funded through the Energy Department's Office 

of Fossil Energy and administered by the National Energy Technology Laboratory. 

EERC is conducting fundamental and applied research that will assist industry in deploying and 

commercializing efficient, low-carbon, nonpolluting energy technologies that can compete 

effectively in meeting requirements for clean fuels, chemicals, electricity, and water resources. 

EERC secures a minimum overall 20 percent cost share from nonfederal partners. 

The EERC leads the Plains C02 Reduction (PCOR) Partnership, a collaboration of more than 80 

U.S. and Canadian stakeholders that are working to take CCS out of the lab and into the field. 

Will you work with us on continuing these important cooperative agreements with the 

Department? 

Answer: If confirmed, !look forward to learning more about the PCOR project and engaging 

with you and your staff on this initiative. 

Question 3: One of the projects North Dakota industry is working on is Project Tundra. It is 

about the near-term viability of coal. It's a CCS retrofit technology pilot project on an existing 

coal facility. The captured C02 will be used for enhanced oil recovery in North Dakota's oil 

fields, with an option to utilize C02 storage in geologically appropriate zones near the plant. 

Project Tundra (455-MW) would scale-up the design optimization from the current Petra Nova 

project (240-MW) located near Houston, Texas. Instead of using natural gas (flue gas), Project 

Tundra would utilize low-rank coal, encounter different climate conditions, improve waste heat 

utilization and overall plant thermal efficiencies, and will leverage the experiences gained at 

Petra Nova. 

In the Fiscal Year 2017 funding bill, I secured a $6 million solicitation to help develop 

commercially viable carbon capture and sequestration. 

• Do you support research and development of initiatives like Project Tundra to extend the 

use of existing power plants? 

43 
99 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Answer: I am not familiar with the details of this project. However, I understand the Department 

has been a strong supporter of sequestration and the Petra Nova project. I would expect this to 

be continued should I be confirmed. 

Question 4: North Dakota industry is also trying to advance the Allam Cycle technology, which 

is a new supercritical C02 technology. This is next-generation CCS and about the long-term 

future of coal. 

NET Power is finalizing a 50 megawatt pilot project in La Porte, Texas, funded with only private 

investment. If successful, there is an opportunity to advance to a larger demonstration phase at a 

new location. 

Last August, North Dakota industry representatives met with the Energy Department to talk 

about North Dakota's initiatives and the importance of the Department to support demonstrationscale C02 capture projects on a range of sizes for coal-fueled generating units. 

• Will you work with us to provide cost-share support to bring these technologies from 

technically feasible to commercially viable? 

Answer: Yes, I look forward to working with you should I be confirmed. 

• Will you be an advocate supporting public-private partnerships for fossil energy research 

and development? 

Answer: If confirmed, I will advocate for public-private partnerships that have been the 

cornerstone of the Department's activities for many years. 

Question from Senator Angus S. King, Jr. 

Question: The DOE has invested significant time in recent years in reducing the barriers to the 

successful deployment of offshore wind here in the US, including in technology at the University 

of Maine. In your role as Deputy Secretary of Energy can you commit to continuing the DOE's 

support for offshore wind energy, including the Offshore Wind Advanced Technology 

Demonstration Program? 

Answer: Congress and the President will arrive at a budget agreement, as they have in the past, 

and if confirmed I will work to ensure that it is executed to the letter. I look forward to learning 

more about the Offshore Wind Program. 

44 
100 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Questions from Senator Rob Portman 

Question 1: On April 26, 2017 Secretary Perry updated, as mandated by law, the Secretarial 

Determination regarding the transfer of uranium from DOE stockpiles to the uranium market. 

This determination lowered the amount of uranium that is allowed to be bartered by 450 MTU. 

As you know, the cleanup of the former Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion site in Piketon, Ohio 

receives both appropriated dollars and the proceeds of the barter to fund the decommissioning 

and decontamination work. Without proper coordination with Congress, lowering the barter limit 

could lead to job losses at the site and ultimately cost the federal government more in the long 

run to clean up the site. Will you commit to working with Congress and my office when the next 

Secretarial Determination is decided in May of20 19? 

~Yes, if confirmed, I look forward to working with you on this very important issue. 

Question 2: For the first time since the Manhattan Project, the U.S. has no capability to enrich 

uranium for either national security or commercial purposes. In 2015 the Department of Energy 

made a conscious decision to delay the build-out of a domestic enrichment capacity for 23 years, 

meaning we will not be enriching uranium with U.S. made and owned machines until2038. At 

the same time, the Department acknowledged that delaying this program so long will double or 

even triple the cost to the taxpayer, adding billions of dollars to the bottom line, making their 

decision inexplicable. 

If confirmed, would you be willing to re-evaluate the Obama Administration's decision to end 

the domestic uranium enrichment demonstration program? 

Answer: If confirmed, I look forward to learning more about the demonstration project to ensure 

our nation's future nuclear security needs will be met. 

Question 3: If after your review you and the Secretary decide that the previous Administration 

made a mistake in shutting down the enrichment program, would you be willing to move forward 

with the build-out of a national security enrichment capacity? 

Answer: If confirmed, !look forward to learning more about the demonstration project to ensure 

our nation's future nuclear security needs will be met. 

Question 4: Another area within the Department of Energy that is also very important to me is 

energy efficiency. I have worked in a bipartisan way with my colleague, Senator .Jeanne Shaheen 

from New Hampshire, on energy efficiency legislation that we first introduced in 20 II. Called 

the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act, this legislation is projected to reduce 

45 
101 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

emissions by the equivalent oftaking 22 million cars off the road, create more than 190,000 jobs, 

and save consumers $16.2 billion per year- all by 2030. 

If confirmed, will you support my efforts with Senator Shaheen on our efficiency legislation, and 

work with this committee on ways to improve our nation's energy efficiency? 

~ If confirmed, look forward to being briefed on your legislation and I will work with the 

committee on improving energy efficiency in ways that help American families. 

Question 5: Will you commit to working with me to advance building energy codes and provide 

states with the necessary resources and technical assistance needed to adopt model codes? 

Answer: If confirmed, I look forward to being briefed on building codes and will work with you 

on the issue. 

Question 6: In 2012, Congress passed the American Medical Isotope Production Act (AMJPA), 

with the goal of bringing domestic production of medical isotopes online as early as 2013. To 

date, none of the projects have come online and a number have been cancelled. We are now 

facing shut-downs of international facilities which will threaten the ability for our doctors to 

carry out 50,000 life-saving diagnostic tests every day in the United States, equaling 20,000,000 

procedures a year involved in the early detection of heart disease, cancer, and dementia, among 

other illnesses. 

A 2016 report issued by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine stated 

that: "Although the current supply ofmolybdenum-99 and technetium-99m- isotopes used 

worldwide in medical diagnostic imaging is sufficient to meet domestic and global demand, 

changes to the supply chain before year-end could lead to severe shortages and impact the 

delivery of medical care .... The capacity to supply molybdenum-99 will be reduced substantially 

when the reactor in Canada stops production at the end of October 2016. Canada will then 

become a supplier of last resort- producing molybdenum-99 only in case of severe global 

shortages- until its reactor shuts down permanently at the end of March 2018." 

According to a 2015 Report by the Nuclear Science Advisory Committee, Moly99 

Subcommittee, there is no domestic production of medical isotopes despite the fact that the U.S. 

makes up 50% of world demand. Given the lack of domestic supply, and the impeding shortage 

American medical professionals will face, are you committed to following through with the goals 

of AMJPA and establishing a domestic supply source? 

~While I have not been briefed on the issue of medical isotopes, if confirmed, I commit 

to following the law. 

46 
102 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Question 7: In order to increase domestic production of medical isotopes without the use of 

weapons grade, highly enriched uranium, AMIPA requires that project costs with non-federal 

partners be cost-shared through the NNSA up to 50% as set forth in the Section 988 of the 

Energy Policy Act of2005. In the past administration, DOE and NNSA did not make available 

the full portion of the 50% cost-share by imposing a $25 million cap on eligible projects, despite 

report language included in the FY 2016 Consolidated Appropriations Act (H.R. 2029) 

reminding NNSA to "fund eligible projects up to the full portion of the 50% cost-share of 

construction as allowed under AMIPA". This has prevented innovative projects from moving 

forward, as the arbitrary gap is preventing private investment. Are you willing to closely 

examine the cap put in place by NNSA? 

Answer: If confirmed, I commit to being briefed on the issue and will closely examine the cap. 

Questions from Senator Catherine Cortez Masto 

Question 1: The President's full budget provides $120 million to restart licensing activities for a 

Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository. As you know, I am firmly in opposition to forcing a 

permanent repository against the will of the State especially when it would put our communities 

and economy at great risk. I appreciated your time the other day to discuss my concerns, so I 

want to follow up on your position. Are you in favor of siting the Nation's nuclear waste at 

Yucca Mountain? 

~I am in favor of following the law and process as outlined in the Nuclear Waste Policy 

Act to determine whether Yucca Mountain is safe. 

Question 2: Do you believe that sound science should govern the rc-licensing process? 

Answer: Yes, all scientific decisions related to Yucca Mountain should be based on sound 

science. If confirmed, I will ensure scientific decisions related to Yucca Mountain continue to be 

based on sound science. 

Question 3: Nevada has submitted hundreds of contentions that objectively demonstrate that the 

site is unsafe. If the site is deemed scientifically unsafe, will you still support it? 

Answer: Yes, all scientific decisions related to Yucca Mountain should be based on sound 

science. If confirmed, I will ensure scientific decisions related to Yucca Mountain continue to be 

based on sound science. 

Question 4: Are you aware of the legislation I introduced with Senator Heller and the Nevada 

delegation requiring consent based siting for all repository host states, including Nevada, as 

47 
103 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

recommended by the Blue Ribbon Commission. If confirmed, would you support the passage of 

this bill? 

Answer: I am not familiar with the bill but, if confirmed, I look forward to learning more about 

the specifics of your legislation and engaging with you and your staff on this important issue. 

Question 5: Do you support the Blue Ribbon Commission's recommendations? 

Answer: If confirmed, I look forward to learning more about the recommendations of the Blue 

Ribbon Commission and working with you and your staff on this important issue. Nevertheless, 

as you know, the Department is obligated to adhere to existing law such as the Nuclear Waste 

Policy Act. 

Question 6: Are you aware that DOE has estimated that $15 billion has already been spent on 

Yucca and that DOE and the NRC would need $2 billion more just to complete there-licensing 

process? 

Answer: I am not completely familiar with all of the past expenditures for the Yucca Mountain 

program, nor am I aware of the cost projections for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the 

licensing proceedings on Yucca Mountain. As an independent agency, the NRC is responsible 

for developing their own estimates of costs. 

Question 7: Do you believe that is cost effective considering interim storage alternatives? 

Answer: I support the President's FY 2018 Budget Request that includes funding for a robust 

interim storage program. 

Question 8: Secretary Perry has stated that he believes a robust interim storage program should 

be a part of the solution-do you agree with that statement? 

Answer: l support the President's FY 2018 Budget Request that includes funding for a robust 

interim storage program. 

Question 9: Would you support the continuation of DOE's current work on consent-based siting 

for storage and disposal facilities? 

~ I am not sufficiently familiar with DOE's past program to adequately respond; 

however, if confirmed, I do believe interim storage can play a role in helping to solve the 

nation's nuclear waste dilemma. 

48 
104 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Question 10: The National Academy of Sciences and Blue Ribbon Commission made 

recommendations for measures to manage the radiological and social impacts of spent nuclear 

fuel transportation. If you are confirmed as the Deputy Secretary, would you support the 

Academy's recommendation that the repository transportation program be removed from DOE? 

Answer: Because of the remarkable safety record of the current transportation system, as 

acknowledged by both the National Academy of Sciences and the Blue Ribbon Commission, I 

would be careful about making changes to the current system. However, if confirmed, I will 

study the recommendations of these two organizations to determine if improvements should be 

made. 

Question 11: Would you support the Commission's recommendation that repository shipments 

of spent nuclear fuel should be fully regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission? 

Answer: Currently, the NRC regulates the casks but various agencies besides the NRC, such as 

the US Department of Transportation, regulate other aspects of shipments of hazardous materials 

such as these. Because of the exemplary track record of safety for these shipments, if confirmed, 

I would want to be careful about making regulatory changes. Nevertheless, I am open to 

recommendations supported by facts and science that will improve the safety of the 

transportation of these materials. 

Question 12: President Trump's full budget for the Department of Energy is extreme and cuts 

and eliminates many programs that foster renewable energy technologies, R&D, and 

commercialization. My state is leading the charge for a clean energy economy, so these drastic 

measures would threaten my state's economy and future growth. Is that your position and how 

would you address these concerns? 

Answer: I support the President's FY 2018 budget and believe that it will produce economic 

growth for our nation. 

Questions from Senator Luther Strange 

Questions: A few years ago, the Center for Strategic and International Studies issued a report 

called "Restoring U.S. Leadership in Nuclear Energy: A National Security Imperative." The 

report notes the economic pressure on commercial nuclear power from low natural gas prices and 

subsidies for renewable power, and observes: "[A) contraction would have a significant impact 

beyond the commercial nuclear energy sector, affecting university physics and engineering 

programs, materials, science laboratories, manufacturers, labor programs for training nuclear 

welders, and much more. It would undoubtedly affect the defense establishment and our nuclear 

49 
105 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25, 2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

And Mr. Robert F. Powel son to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Questions for the Record Submitted to Mr. Dan Brouillette 

Navy's capabilities, as well as the United States' ability to shape global standards for safety, 

security, operations, emergency response and nonproliferation." 

These impacts are not only domestic. There are currently about 60 nuclear power reactors being 

built in 14 countries. As the CSIS report concludes: "Without a strong commercial presence in 

new nuclear markets, America's ability to influence nonproliferation policies and nuclear safety 

behaviors worldwide is bound to diminish. In this context. federal action to reverse the U.S. 

nuclear industry's impending decline is a national security imperative." 

Mr. Brouillette, do you understand that the health of the U.S. nuclear industry is not only an 

economic issue, and commit to incorporate these national security considerations in the 

Department's policies? 

Answer: I believe that the United States must maintain its world leadership in the nuclear 

industry, including for economic and national security reasons. No mission is more important 

than the Department's commitment to nuclear security. 

How important is it to our national security that the reactors currently under construction be 

completed? 

Answer: While I cannot comment on specific projects, if confirmed, I can assure you that I 

recognize the critical importance of being able to construct and safely operate large-scale 

projects, such as nuclear reactors. Our strength abroad depends on our strength here at home. 

50 
106 

Questions for the Record and Responses for Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

June I, 2016 

Questions from Ranking Member Maria Cantwell 

Question 1: Chairman Murkowski and I tried to enact energy legislation last Congress that 

included reforms to hydroelectric licensing at FERC. 

45 percent of FERC-licensed projects accounting for one-third of licensed capacity will begin 

pre-filing for new licenses by 2030. For many of these projects, it will be the tlrst time they will 

participate in the licensing process Congress in 1986 amended the Federal Power Act directing 

FERC to given equal consideration to environmental factors. 

I believe that, rather waiting for Congress to Act, FERC can, on its own, could make several 

changes that would improve interagency cooperation in the licensing process. For example, 

FERC could adjust how it implements its ex parte rules to encourage more of its sister federal 

agencies to accept cooperating agency status under the National Environmental Policy Act. 

FERC could also accept more requests from its sister agencies for studies likely to be required in 

any event under other federal statutes (e.g., the Endangered Species Act) at a later stage. 

• If confirmed, will you help identify and reduce barriers to interagency cooperation within 

FERC's existing statutory authority? 

~: I am aware that the hydropower licensing process can be complex and that, as a matter 

of law, decision making does not rest solely with the Commission, but also with other agencies 

that have mandatory conditioning authority. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to 

help identify and reduce potential barriers to interagency cooperation in the hydroelectric 

licensing process. 

Question 2: Under its existing policy, FERC only considers investments in a project on a 

forward-looking basis as part of the licensing process. This creates a perverse incentive to delay 

potential investments that could benefit the environment and ratepayers. 

The Commission recently asked tor comments on whether it should revise its current policy with 

respect to establishing the length of new license terms for hydroelectric projects. 

I have supported legislation to require the Commission to treat project investments by licensees 

under existing licenses (beyond those already required by the license) the same way it treats 

investments made under new licenses. This provision has been referred to as the "early action" 

provision. While accounting for prior investments may complicate the Commission's 

determination of an appropriate length license term, changing this policy could accelerate 

improvements in fish passage, turbine efficiency, and other project upgrades. 

• Will you commit to considering changing the Commission's current policy with respect 

to establishing the length of hydroelectric license terms by removing the perverse 

incentive to delay investments under current licenses? 
107 

Chatterjee 2 

Answer: I have appreciated working with you and your staff on hydroelectric legislation. As 

you note, the Commission has issued a notice of inquiry on the subject of its policy for setting 

new license terms for hydropower projects, which the Federal Power Act requires to be between 

30 and 50 years. The Commission asked for comments on a number of issues, including "early 

action" and whether there should be a 50-year default license term. If confirmed, I will review 

responses to the notice, and I look forward to addressing this matter with my colleagues. 

Question 3: Unlike the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the Securities and 

Exchange Commission, FERC cannot license or ban individual traders from trading in 

jurisdictional markets. It is estimated that more than 2,500 firms and thousands of individual 

traders participate in physical electricity and natural gas markets. Little is publicly known about 

which banks, hedge funds, utilities, and marketers are active players. 

Furthermore, a repeat offender previously fined by FERC can continue to trade. A trader 

convicted of criminal fraud, or a former securities or commodities trader who had their securities 

or commodities trading license revoked would still be permitted to trade over FERC markets. 

• Do you think that FERC should explore adopting a registry to keep track of repeat 

violators of market manipulation restrictions? 

• Do you think FERC should explore a licensing regime to, among other things, keep those 

convicted of market manipulation in other markets from participating in FERC-regulated 

markets? 

Answer: I believe that it is important to be able to track repeat violators in the energy markets 

and those who may have committed manipulation in other markets. If confirmed, I look forward 

to discussing this issue with my colleagues and determining whether FERC needs to enhance this 

capability, whether through a licensing regime or otherwise. 

Question 4: The Federal Power Act (FPA) limits FERC's jurisdiction with respect to certain 

utilities and FERC's authority to require participation in organized markets. Governmental 

entities and non-public utilities, including federal power marketing agencies, municipal utilities, 

rural electric cooperatives, and public utility districts, are exempt from most regulatory oversight 

by the Commission. 

• What is your understanding of the limitations on FERC's authority with respect to the 

Bonneville Power Administration? 

• What is your understanding about FERC's authority to require utilities to participate in 

organized markets? 

• Will you abide by these limitations if confirmed? 

Answer: In most respects, FERC's authority with respect to Bonneville is more limited than 

with respect to public utilities. Pursuant to the Pacific Northwest Electric Power Planning and 
108 

Chatterjee 3 

Conservation Act (Northwest Power Act), FERC's review of Bonneville's regional power and 

transmission rates is limited to whether Bonneville's rates meet the three specific requirements: 

(i) whether the rates are sufficient to assure repayment of the Federal investment in the 

Federal Columbia River Power System over a reasonable number of years after first 

meeting other costs; 

(ii) they must be based upon the Administrator's total system costs; and 

(iii) whether insofar as transmission rates are concerned, they must equitably allocate the 

costs of the Federal transmission system between Federal and non-Federal power. 

FERC also has limited authority with respect to Bonneville under provisions of the 

Federal Power Act, such as with respect to reliability standards adopted pursuant to 

section 215 of that statute. 

If confirmed, I would abide by those statutory limitations, unless the law is changed. 

In addition, my understanding is that FERC has ruled that the decision of whether to join a 

regional transmission organization or independent system operator, which operate organized 

markets in various parts of the country, is voluntary. 

Question 5: Just before resigning Commissioner Bay wrote a Concurring Opinion to an order 

granting a natural gas pipeline certificate in which he suggested that the Commission should 

reconsider its use of precedent agreements between pipelines and potential future customers to 

assess whether a proposed new pipeline is needed. In particular, Commissioner Bay argued that 

precedent agreements involving pipeline affiliates are particularly suspect. 

• Do you agree with Commissioner Bay that the Commission should reexamine its policies 

for assessing whether a new pipeline is necessary? If not, why not? 

Answer: I understand that the Commission's current policy regarding demonstrating need was 

established in 1999. I believe that agencies should, from time to time, review their policies to 

ensure they are functioning effectively. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the 

Commission's current policies for considering pipeline applications with my colleagues to 

ensure that all relevant factors are appropriately considered in the Commission's review process. 

Question 6: Just before resigning Commissioner Bay wrote a Concurring Opinion to an order 

granting a natural gas pipeline certificate in which he suggested that the Commission should 

engage in a broad regional assessment of the environmental impacts of the Marcellus and Utica 

shale gas development activities. 

• Do you agree with this recommendation? If not, why not? 

Answer: I believe it is important that the Commission ensure that its procedures for reviewing 

and acting upon applications for new infrastructure are both efficient and in compliance with all 

applicable statutes. If confirmed, !look forward to addressing with my colleagues any 

opportunities for furthering these goals. 
109 

Chatterjee 4 

Question 7: When FERC grants a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to a 

proposed interstate natural gas pipeline, the developer is also granted eminent domain authority. 

Sometimes the eminent domain authority is used before the Commission has acted on a Request 

for Rehearing of its initial order and before a party to the proceeding has had an opportunity to 

seek judicial review of the order. 

• Do you believe that a pipeline should have the opportunity to utilize eminent domain 

authority if it remains possible that the Commission, pursuant to a Rehearing Order, or an 

appellate court, can still issue an order reversing FERC's decision to grant the 

Certificate? Please explain. 

~: It is my understanding that the authority for the developer of a natural gas pipeline to 

use eminent domain is established by the Natural Gas Act and is enforced by state and federal 

courts, not the Commission. That said, if confirmed, !look forward to working with my 

colleagues to ensure that the concerns of landowners affected by infrastructure projects are 

appropriately addressed in the Commission's processes. 

Question 8: Both the Federal Power Act and the Natural Gas Act require that a rate or tariff 

change proposed by a jurisdictional utility or interstate natural gas pipeline goes into effect if the 

Commission fails to act within 60 days of the proposal. There have been instances in which a 

rate increase has been permitted to go into effect because a tie vote prevented the Commission 

from acting. An appellate court has ruled that, in those circumstances, a party opposing the rate 

increase has no standing to challenge the rate change in court because FERC never issued an 

order on the matter. 

Senator Markey has proposed legislation that would enable opponents of a rate or tariff 

change to seek judicial review even if the Commission fails to issue an order due to a tie 

vote. Do you support this legislation? 

Answer: I am reluctant to comment on the proposed legislation that you noted, but I believe in 

general that it is appropriate for parties to a FERC proceeding who are adversely affected by a 

rate or tariff change to have the opportunity to seek relief. 

Question 9: FERC Order No. 1000, which among other things, requires regional transmission 

planning, has received mixed reviews in part because it has not led to the development of 

transmission lines connecting separate energy planning regions, which would help access 

remotely located renewable electricity resources, such as wind and solar. 

• What do you believe FERC should do, if anything, to encourage interregional 

transmission planning? 

Answer: In June 2016, the Commission held a technical conference to explore issues related to 

the competitive transmission development processes that were established to comply with Order 

No. 1000. Issues related to interregional transmission coordination and regional transmission 

planning were included in the scope of that conference and in the follow-up responsive 

comments sought by FERC. I believe that development of that record and continued discussions 
110 

Chatterjee 5 

with industry to understand the issues surrounding interregional planning could be a productive 

next step. I understand the importance of transmission development to providing reliable 

electricity service, and, if confirmed, I look forward to addressing this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 10: Last year the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held a hearing on 

natural gas pipelines. We heard testimony that, in some instances, existing natural gas pipelines 

are not being fully utilized. For instance, several interstate pipelines serving the northeast were 

not fully utilized during the Polar Vortex. 

• Do you believe we should explore how to use existing natural gas pipeline capacity more 

efficiently before the Commission grants new Certificates to build additional pipeline 

capacity in the same region? 

~: I believe both that it is important to make efficient use of existing natural gas pipeline 

capacity and that our nation may need additional natural gas pipeline infrastructure. Making 

efficient use of existing capacity ensures that consumers obtain maximum benefit from prior 

pipeline investment. Investment in new pipelines can ensure that customers receive needed gas 

and enhance the resilience of the gas pipeline network. 

Question 11: I am concerned that sophisticated energy traders can engage in schemes designed 

to manipulate energy markets without actually being in violating of a tariff on file with FER C. 

These traders argue that FERC's anti-manipulation authority does not apply if there is no specific 

tariff violation? 

• Don't you believe that FERC's market manipulation authority can apply even ifthere is 

not a specific tariff violation? 

Answer: Yes, it is my understanding that FERC's anti-manipulation authority may apply even 

where there is no specific tariff violation. 

Question 12: Cybersecurity vulnerabilities in our nation's energy infrastructure pose grave 

national security and economic risks to the country. The Department of Homeland Security 

reported that 56% of cyber incidents against critical infrastructure in 2013 were directed at 

energy infrastructure. This number has since decreased: in 2016 it was down to 20%, but it is 

still too high. Although we have mandatory cybersecurity standards for electric utilities, natural 

gas pipelines are subject to merely voluntary guidelines issued by the Transportation Security 

Administration (TSA). 

• Given the increased dependence on natural gas for power generation for many ofFERC 

regulated utilities, don't you agree that there should be a mandatory standards regime for 

gas pipeline cybersecurity, just as there is for electric utility cybersccurity? 

~: I defer to Congress and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) as to the 

adequacy ofTSA 's natural gas pipeline cybersecurity program. Congress has granted TSA 

authority to establish mandatory cybersecurity regulations for natural gas pipelines. It is my 
111 

Chatterjee 6 

understanding that TSA is reviewing its voluntary cybersecurity guidelines for pipelines and that 

FERC staff has offered assistance with that effort. 

Question 13: The 2000-200 I western energy crisis did a lot of damage to my constituents and 

the economy throughout the region. It became clear to me in the aftermath that FERC did not 

have sufficient authority to prevent market manipulation and punish those engaged in these acts. 

Through the Energy Policy Act of2005 we gave FERC the authority it needed. The 

Commission has since investigated more than 100 cases of alleged manipulation, 32 ofwhich 

have been settled. The Commission has imposed approximately $547 million in civil penalties. I 

understand that the industry thinks FERC's Enforcement Office has been too aggressive and that 

the new Trump Administration provides a golden opportunity to weaken the anti-manipulation 

program. 

• I need your commitment that you will support a strong Office of Enforcement that acts as 

"the cop on the beat" to prevent utilities and marketers from taking advantage of 

consumers. Will you give that commitment? 

~: Absolutely. I believe in strong markets and I believe that strong markets are 

dependent on strong enforcement. Market participants have to have faith that there is not 

manipulation and I will work to ensure that enforcement is effective, fair and transparent. The 

commitment ofFERC to continue to actively combat market manipulation is essential. I believe 

that greater transparency produces stronger markets and that is also true in the enforcement 

context. FERC has been working with other agencies to foster better coordination and I believe 

my experience and relationships across such agencies will add to that enhanced coordination. 

Question 14: Last month, Secretary Perry sent a memo to his Chief of Staff asking that the 

Department prepare a study examine the state of wholesale electricity markets, especially why 

coal and nuclear plants are having a hard time competing with natural gas and renewable 

resources. The Secretary's memo also hinted that state and federal renewable energy incentives 

are to blame. 

The Secretary followed this up a few days later with a speech in New York during which he 

suggested that the Trump Administration may try to preempt state programs, such as renewable 

energy standards. It does not take a rocket scientist to know that it is low natural gas prices, not 

renewable energy, that is making coal and nuclear power uncompetitive. 

But it is also troubling that the Administration appears to be suggesting that adding more 

renewable energy threatens grid reliability especially when our national labs have repeatedly 

found this is not true. It is even crazier that Secretary Perry is making these false statements 

since Texas has more wind power than any other state. 

• Arc you aware that the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has found that 

the eastern grid and the western grid could each reliably accommodate 30 percent 

renewable energy rates without any changes and that a third NREL study concluded that 

renewable energy will be able to reliably generate 80% of U.S. power needs by 2050 if 

we invest in increased grid flexibility? 
112 

Chatterjee 7 

Answer: Yes, I am aware of those studies. As I mentioned during my confirmation hearing, we 

need to be able to call on all forms of resources to meet our needs, including renewable 

resources. In pursuing this goal, we also must maintain our commitment to grid reliability. 

Question 15: There is a growing tension between state energy policies and federally regulated 

electricity markets. Low wholesale electricity prices are benefiting consumers and challenging 

the economics of coal and nuclear power plants. The revolution in natural gas is the main cause. 

Commissioner Powelson in particular has been a big booster of the benefits of the Marcellus 

Shale. 

Meanwhile, states continue to exercise their authority to encourage particular types of generation 

-especially zero emissions technologies. These policies have taken different forms, including: 

renewable portfolio standards (29 states), carbon caps (the Northeast and California), and direct 

payments to nuclear power plants (New York and Illinois). 

Last year, the Supreme Court made clear that the Power Act prohibits state policies that directly 

intervene in wholesale markets. But the Court left clear room for states to continue to preferring 

some resources over others. Given these facts, I worry about FERC rushing to judgment based 

on an outdated or ideological view of the grid. 

• Do you agree that FERC should not intervene and use the Federal Power Act to preempt 

state clean energy policies? 

Answer: At times, state policy decisions potentially interact with FERC-jurisdictional wholesale 

electricity markets. FERC's role is to ensure that wholesale electricity rates remain just and 

reasonable. I appreciate that states and the Commission need to be respectful of each other's 

boundaries under the law. Thus, I will be respectful of state boundaries while carrying out my 

duties as a FERC commissioner, if confirmed. 

Question 16: Since 1978, Section 210 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) 

has required monopoly utilities to purchase competitive renewable energy from independent 

producers. While Congress has relaxed this requirement for utilities in organized electric 

markets, PURPA remains a key driver of renewable energy and competitive prices in the West 

and the Southeast. 

Last June, FERC held a technical conference on the implementation ofPURPA. Utilities used 

the technical conference to argue for greater FERC intervention to limit opportunities for small 

renewable energy developers. I believe state commissions already have many ways to tailor the 

must-purchase requirement to address local concerns. I am deeply skeptical about utilities 

running to Congress and FERC when they don't get their way with their own regulators. 

• Do you agree that regulators in traditional monopoly states have powerful ways to adjust 

the "must-purchase" requirement under PURPA? 
113 

Chatterjee 8 

• Given the states' own authority under PURPA, why would FERC need to intervene to 

limit one of the only federal mechanisms that encourage independent power production in 

those states? 

Answer: Both FERC and the states have important roles under PURPA. Last year, FERC 

convened a technical conference on a number of issues related to the statute's implementation. 

As I mentioned during the hearing, I believe that any major changes to PURPA need to come 

from Congress. 

Question 17: Would you continue FERC's encouragement of a holistic approach to 

transmission planning that incorporates non-wires alternatives, high-voltage transmission lines, 

and advanced transmission technologies (such as high-capacity and high-efficiency conductors, 

compact transmission towers, and variable frequency transformers)? 

~: FERC's Order Nos. 890 and 1000 require open, transparent transmission planning 

processes for public utility transmission providers. These planning processes provide the 

opportunity for consideration of various alternatives in identifying more efficient or costeffective solution to transmission needs. I support planning that incorporates viable alternatives, 

including those that may be non-wires. 

Question 18: FERC is responsible for protecting against corporate affiliate abuse in a variety of 

transactions, including power sales and facility acquisition. Transactions between a public utility 

and a merchant affiliate can expose the utility's captive customers to cross-subsidizing the 

affiliate and its shareholders. 

• Are you familiar with the provisions of the Federal Power Act that prohibit public 

utilities from inappropriately cross-subsidizing non-utility corporate affiliates? 

• Will you commit to enforcing existing FERC standards applied to reviewing market rate 

contracts between corporate affiliates? 

• Do you agree that the transfer offacilities subject to FERC jurisdiction between a public 

utility and its merchant affiliate must always be scrutinized for cross-subsidization? 

Answer: Yes, lam familiar with the provisions of section 203 ofthe Federal Power Act that 

prohibit public utilities from inappropriately cross-subsidizing non-utility corporate affiliates. I 

am also familiar with the Commission's policies under section 205 of the Federal Power Act that 

protect customers from the effect of inappropriate cross-subsidization between a public utility 

and its market regulated power sales affiliates. 

I am generally aware of the Commission's precedent that applies to market rate contracts 

between corporate affiliates, and if confirmed, I will ensure compliance with the Commission's 

rules and regulations. 

Question 19: In 2013, Congress passed the Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act, directing 

FERC to investigate the feasibility of issuing a license for hydropower development at non-
114 

Chatterjee 9 

powered dams and closed loop pumped storage projects during a two-year period. FERC 

implemented a pilot program, ultimately applied to one non-powered dam project in Kentucky, 

and issued a license for the project within two years. Members of this committee look forward to 

FERC's report, required under the 2013 law, on this process, following a workshop held by the 

Commission this spring. 

• If confirmed, how would you approach the challenge of reducing disincentives in the 

licensing process and potentially inadequate compensation in the wholesale markets to 

the development of hydropower at existing non-powered multi-purpose dams and at 

appropriately sited and designed pumped storage projects? 

Answer: I believe that we should be able to rely on all forms of energy resources, including 

hydroelectric resources. I understand that Commission staff submitted to Congress the report 

required by the 2013 law on May 25, 20 I 7, and that the report said hydropower licenses have 

been and can be issued in two years or less under the right circumstances. If confirmed, I look 

forward to discussing with my colleagues ways in which FERC could further improve the 

procedures for the development of hydropower. 

Questions from Senator Ron Wyden 

Question 1: It appears that the White House has thrown its support behind the Jordan Cove 

liquefied natural gas project, being discussed in my home state of Oregon. Should you be 

confirmed as FERC commissioner, will you commit to avoiding any step that could be 

interpreted as political interference from the White House in FERC's deliberative permitting 

process in Oregon and nationwide? And will you commit to leading a thorough and transparent 

stakeholder process, where all community voices in Oregon-- including tribal community voices 

-- can be heard? 

Answer: The Commission is an independent agency and is required by the Natural Gas Act to 

issue decisions based on information set forth in the public record of each proceeding. That is an 

approach that l support and that I expect to continue. I believe that the Commission's processes 

should be open and transparent. Also, as I mentioned at the hearing, I appreciate that there are 

stakeholders with a variety of viewpoints on these issues, and all sides of the issues should be 

heard before a decision is made. If confirmed, I look forward to considering all comments in the 

record during deliberations on any project with my colleagues before making any decision. 

Question 2: As you know, FERC has authority under the Natural Gas Act to review gas pipeline 

applications. What factors would lead you to deny approval for a new or expanded pipeline? 

Does that calculation change if there are customers for the proposed pipeline's capacity? 

Answer: I recognize the importance of natural gas pipeline infrastructure to meeting the energy 

needs of our nation's consumers. The Natural Gas Act requires the Commission to determine 

that proposed pipeline projects are consistent with the public convenience and necessity. If 

confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the Commission's policies and processes for considering 

pipeline applications with my colleagues to improve their efficiency while ensuring that all 

relevant factors are appropriately considered. 
115 

Chatterjee 10 

Question 3: Former chairman Bay made comments before he left FERC noting that it is 

"inefficient to build pipelines that may not be needed over the long term and that become 

stranded assets." He also suggested that simply considering precedent agreements may not be an 

adequate measure of need. How would you define need for a gas pipeline? Is having customers 

for the pipeline's capacity enough? How is that decision-making changed if those customers are 

the same entities-- or affiliates of those entities--involved in seeking approval for the pipeline? 

Answer: I recognize the importance of natural gas pipeline infrastructure to meeting the energy 

needs of our nation's consumers. The Natural Gas Act requires the Commission to determine 

that proposed pipeline projects are consistent with the public convenience and necessity. If 

confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the Commission's policies and processes for considering 

pipeline applications with my colleagues to improve their efficiency while ensuring that all 

relevant factors are appropriately considered. 

Question 4: As commissioner, what steps would you take to promote public participation, 

transparency, and confidence in FERC's pipeline certification process by incorporating 

community, landowner and scientific inputs? 

Answer: I agree that public engagement is important to FERC proceedings. Development of a 

record that reflects comments on all sides of an issue enhances FERC's ability to make 

appropriate decisions. The Commission is required to issue decisions based on the facts set forth 

in the public record (including input from affected landowners, general public, and other 

agencies), as well as based on legal precedent and policy. If confirmed, I look forward to 

addressing with my colleagues any steps the Commission may take in promoting public 

participation, transparency and trust in the pipeline certification process. 

Question 5: Also in his departing comments from FERC, former chairman Bay noted that it is 

"in light of the heightened public interest and in the interests of good government, I believe the 

Commission should analyze the environmental effects of increased regional gas production from 

the Marcellus and Utica." As Commissioner, if confirmed, can you commit to directing 

Commission staff to conduct such studies on new and expanded pipelines? 

Answer: I believe the Commission's consideration of pipeline applications should ensure that 

its procedures for reviewing and acting upon applications for new infrastructure are both 

efficient and in compliance with all applicable statutes. If confirmed, I look forward to 

addressing with my colleagues any opportunities for flirthering these goals. 

Question 6: Chairman Bay also noted that "where it is possible to do so, the Commission 

should also be open to analyzing the downstream impacts of the use of natural gas and to 

performing a life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions study." It is my opinion that FERC should 

incorporate climate considerations into their evaluation of the environmental impacts of 

proposed natural gas pipelines and liquefied natural gas export facilities, as required under the 

National Environmental Policy Act. As Commissioner, if confirmed, can you commit to 

including climate change considerations and analysis in the environmental review conducted on 

new and expanded pipelines? 
116 

Chatterjee I I 

Answer: I understand that the Commission's environmental analysis for a proposed natural gas 

pipeline or liquefied natural gas export facility considers the greenhouse gas emissions 

associated with the construction and operation of that project, as well as impacts potentially 

resulting from climate change over the region in which the project is located. If confirmed, I 

look forward to working with my colleagues in determining how information regarding climate 

impacts is addressed appropriately in such proceedings. 

Question 7: I am concerned about abuse of eminent domain by the natural gas and pipeline 

industries in recent years, aided and abetted by premature and improper FERC authorization of 

eminent domain. A review ofFERC's approval process is needed, because of the ramifications of 

the certificate, which grants the holder the ability to exercise eminent domain. If confirmed, will 

you take steps to review, and revise if necessary, the eminent domain proceedings at FERC? 

Also, can you commit to holding an evidentiary hearing, as articulated in FERC's official policy, 

when a significant amount of eminent domain is implicated in a project? 

Answer: It is my understanding that the Natural Gas Act grants the ability to exercise eminent 

domain to the pipeline company once the Certificate is issued. However, if confirmed, !look 

forward to addressing with my colleagues the issue of how best to ensure that the concerns of 

landowners affected by infrastructure projects are appropriately taken into account in the 

Commission's decision making process. 

Question 8: Mr. Chatterjee, a broad coalition in Oregon, including consumer advocates, electric 

utilities and environmental groups, championed recent legislation to increase the renewable 

portfolio standard to 50% for our state. The state legislature made that decision and the governor 

signed that into law. Now, in some FERC-supervised markets, this sort of democratic process is 

under attack. FERC recently held a technical conference to explore those assaults on state 

authority. Do you support the federal government trampling states' rights to pursue state energy 

policies, such as renewable portfolio standards? Or do you think states should have the authority 

to establish their own energy policy through their constitutional rights? 

~: I believe that states should have the authority to make resource decisions within their 

jurisdiction. However, we need to be sensitive to instances where state policy intrudes into 

PERC-jurisdictional wholesale electricity markets and into FERC's role to ensure that wholesale 

electricity rates are just and reasonable. I also believe to ensure safe and reliable electricity we 

need fuel diversity, and I understand that there are some very complex questions about how to 

maintain that fuel diversity given some of the market challenges. FERC recently held a technical 

conference with respect to the interaction between state initiatives and FERC-jurisdictional 

wholesale electricity markets. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the record in the 

Commission's proceeding and working with my colleagues on these issues. 

Question 9: Energy storage and distributed energy resources are some of the most rapidly 

growing energy technologies out there, and they can provide multiple benefits to the grid. And 

yet, there are unfair barriers to energy storage and distributed energy resources in the wholesale 

electricity markets. Do you agree FERC should be promoting technology-neutral competitive 
117 

Chatterjee 12 

markets? More specifically, do you think energy storage assets--and ''distributed energy 

resourccs"--should be able to compete in wholesale electricity markets? 

In your view, should FERC have a significantly different process for its certification of gas 

pipelines than it does for interstate transmission lines? 

Answer: As l mentioned at my confirmation hearing, I believe that the nation should seek to 

rely on all forms energy resources, including storage resources. The Commission recently 

proposed new requirements to improve the opportunities for electric storage participation in 

organized wholesale electric markets. In issuing its proposed rule, the Commission stated that it 

has observed that market rules designed for traditional generation resources can create barriers to 

entry for emerging technologies, and I understand that the proposal seeks to eliminate or 

minimize those barriers. If confirmed, !look forward to addressing this matter with my 

colleagues. 

Both types of infrastructure raise similar siting issues. After Congress in 2005 granted the 

Commission limited backstop authority with respect to the siting of electric transmission 

facilities, the Commission adopted implementing regulations based in part on its experience with 

permitting natural gas pipelines. However, the effectiveness of that statutory authority has been 

diminished by court decisions regarding when the Commission's backstop siting authority could 

be exercised and the sufficiency of the Department of Energy's national interest electric 

transmission corridor designations (which underline the Commission's backstop siting 

authority). 

Question 10: As commissioner, what steps would you take to promote public participation, 

transparency, and confidence in FERC's pipeline certification process by incorporating 

community, landowner and scientific inputs? 

~: Please see my response to your Question 4 above. 

Question 11: Given that FERC has endorsed markets and competition for energy and ancillary 

services, is it your opinion that this approach can be successfully used for any and all providers 

of all reliability-related services? 

Answer: Both energy markets and the manner by which ancillary services are obtained differ in 

various regions of the country. I believe that organized markets benefit consumers in those parts 

of the country that have chosen that structure. I also respect the decisions of other parts of the 

country not to pursue that path and, instead, to rely on a more traditional approach. 

Question 12: Inter-regional, and economically beneficial electricity transmission is often 

neglected by the utility industry because of divisions in service areas, slate's boundaries, and 

preferences of utilities to take narrow view of economic benefits. How will you support 

infrastructure investments, specifically electricity transmission, that bring lower energy costs to 

consumers? 
118 

Chatterjee 13 

Answer: FERC's Order No. I 000 may provide a platform for further discussion on ways to 

support needed transmission investment that brings reliable, cost-effective energy to consumers. 

I understand that much of the regional planning pursuant to Order No. I 000 is relatively recent 

and that FERC recently has directed increased focus and attention to interregional coordination. 

Finally, dialogue with state regulators over matters of beneficiaries and siting may prove 

beneficial. 

Question 13: Do you believe there's been a lack of development of interregional transmission 

facilities, and if so, are there actions the Commission should take to facilitate such development? 

Answer: The Commission has explored the issue of interregional transmission development in 

recent years. The Commission issued Order No. I 000 in 2011, a Final Rule that required 

improved coordination between neighboring transmission planning regions lor new interregional 

transmission facilities. In addition, Order No. I 000 required each public utility transmission 

provider to participate in a regional transmission planning process that has an interregional cost 

allocation method. To date, the Commission has issued final orders approving interregional 

transmission coordination procedures for all the pairs of neighboring transmission planning 

regions that were required to comply with the Final Rule. As these pairs of regions have worked 

to implement their interregional transmission coordination procedures, the Commission has 

continued to examine issues related to interregional transmission development. I support this 

continued effort to make sure FERC policies are meeting their intended goals. In June 2016, the 

Commission convened a technical conference addressing competitive transmission development, 

including interregional transmission coordination. Several speakers at the technical conference, 

as well as some FERC Commissioners, questioned whether the Commission should do more to 

facilitate interregional transmission development. After the technical conference, the 

Commission requested post-technical conference comments on several issues related to 

interregional transmission development. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the record 

and addressing this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 14: How will you facilitate the development of interregional transmission projects 

shown to provide more efficient or cost-effective solutions to regional needs? 

~: In response to the preceding question, I noted that this issue is currently under 

consideration at the Commission following the June 2016 technical conference and subsequent 

request for post-technical conference comments. The technical conference proceeding has 

provided the Commission with a record that details various commenters' concerns with the 

interregional transmission coordination procedures in place today, as well as their suggestions 

for supporting more efficient or cost-effective interregional transmission development. If 

confirmed, I look forward to reviewing this record and addressing this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 15: How will you promote joint and coordinated planning between regional 

transmission planners for needed inter-regional transmission? 

Answer: The June 2016 technical conference on transmission development referenced in my 

response to the preceding question also explored the issue of joint and coordinated planning for 

interregional transmission facilities. Moreover, numerous commenters addressed issues relating 
119 

Chatterjee 14 

to joint and coordinated interregional transmission planning in their post-technical conference 

comments. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing this record and addressing this issue with 

my colleagues. 

Question 16: Will you ensure interregional transmission project proposals have the opportunity 

to be studied by each affected RTO? 

Answer: As I described in my answer to Question 13, the Commission issued Order No. 1000 

in 20 I 1. In Order No. I 000, the Commission required that, to be eligible for interregional cost 

allocation, an interregional transmission project must be selected in each region's regional 

transmission plan for purposes of cost allocation. As a result, Order No. I 000 provides that all 

potential interregional transmission projects must be considered through each transmission 

planning region's regional transmission planning process before they are eligible for 

interregional cost allocation. Because Order No. I 000 applies to all public utility transmission 

providers, this is true regardless of whether or not the transmission planning region is also a 

Regional Transmission Organization. 

Question 17: How will you ensure that interregional evaluation processes and cost allocation 

methods encompass the full range of benefits (e.g., reliability, resilience, security, facilitating 

state policies, and congestion/planning reserve margin reduction) provided by interregional 

projects? 

Answer: As I noted in my answer to Question 13, in June 2016 the Commission convened a 

technical conference on competitive transmission development, including interregional 

transmission development. At the technical conference, both the speakers and FERC 

Commissioners raised issues relating to the evaluation processes and interregional cost allocation 

methods that apply to interregional transmission facilities. Commenters also addressed these 

issues in their post-technical conference comments. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing 

this record and addressing these issues with my colleagues. 

Questions from Senator Bernard Sanders 

Climate change 

Question 1: President Trump has suggested in the past that climate change is a hoax. Is the 

President correct? Is climate change a hoax? 

Answer: I do not believe climate change is a hoax. 

Question 2: Do you agree with the vast majority of scientists that climate change is real, it is 

caused by human activity, and that we must aggressively transition away from fossil fuels toward 

energy efficiency and sustainable energy like wind, solar, and geothermal? 

Answer: I believe there is much we can do to achieve a sensible balance between protecting the 

environment from climate change and other threats while still maintaining a robust economy and 

the affordable and reliable power necessary to meet society's needs. 
120 

Chatterjee 15 

Question 3: Do you agree with the vast majority of scientists that the combustion of fossil fuels 

contributes to climate change? 

Answer: Yes. 

Question 4: Do you believe that FERC has a role in reducing the extraction and use of fossil 

fuels? 

Answer: It is my understanding that the Natural Gas Act gives the Commission no direct role 

regarding the extraction or use of fossil fuels. 

Question 5: If confirmed, how will you work to address climate change? 

Answer: I think it is important to look at the actual role FERC plays in addressing this issue. 

Any policy to mitigate carbon emissions should originate in Congress; it should not be designed 

at FER C. Addressing climate change will require policy changes that the public accepts, and 

maintaining and enhancing affordability and reliability is vital to gaining that public acceptance. 

Should I be fortunate enough to be confirmed, my role as a FERC commissioner would be to 

ensure that any such policy not have a deleterious impact on reliability and affordability of our 

energy supply. 

Energy system transformations 

Question 6: What do you believe are the best ways to achieve a sustainable, carbon-free energy 

future? 

Answer: While FERC's policies are resource- and fuel-neutral, the energy industry continues 

evolve and changes to the generation mix require that we continue to evaluate the performance 

of energy markets. This is critical because FERC relies on competitive markets to provide just 

and reasonable rates and reliable service for consumers, and to send appropriate investment 

signals for developers. On May 1-2, 2017, in Docket No. AD17-11, FERC held a technical 

conference to explore the interplay between wholesale markets and policy goals of states, 

including their support of particular resource attributes or externalities. 

Comments are expected in that proceeding, and if confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the 

record and these matters with my colleagues. 

Question 7: What ways can FERC prevent economic harm to low-income Americans during 

transformations of the energy system? 

Answer: I believe FERC's responsibility to ensure just and reasonable rates is key to protecting 

consumers. If confirmed, I will carefully consider the matters before the Commission to reach 

decisions that ensure just and reasonable rates. 
121 

Chatte~jee 16 

Question 8: What role do you see FERC has in increasing the reliability of the electric grid to 

increasingly extreme weather while ensuring generation is sustainable and low-carbon? 

Answer: The Commission reviews reliability standards for approval and enforces those 

standards under section 215 of the Federal Power Act. FERC may require the Electric 

Reliability Organization (i.e., North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC)) to 

develop a reliability standard to address a matter. The reliability standards are largely resource 

neutral. My understanding is that FERC looks to NERC to perform event analysis tor extreme 

weather events on an interconnection wide basis; such analysis considers the use/performance of 

all resources to assess the risks to reliability during the extreme weather. If confirmed, I will 

work with my colleagues and engage stakeholders on these matters. 

Question 9: If confirmed, what steps will you take at FERC to help the U.S. transform its 

energy system as quickly as possible from one based on carbon-intensive fuels to one based on 

clean, sustainable fuels? 

Answer: Please see my response to your Question 6 above. 

Question 10: Energy prices impact all American families. Yet climate change poses 

catastrophic economic, environmental and social threats to all Americans. Delaying action on 

climate change has severe long-term costs. Moreover, renewable energy sources like wind and 

solar are the cheapest available, and aren't subject to the sorts of wild price fluctuations that we 

see with fossil fuels. When combined with aggressive energy efficiency, they can provide 

cheaper energy over the long term than dirty fossil fuels. 

If confirmed, what steps will you take at FERC to help the U.S. transform its energy system, as 

quickly as possible, from one based on carbon-intensive fuels to one based on clean, sustainable 

fuels? 

Answer: Please see my response to your Question 6 above. 

Question 11: In Vermont, energy efficiency investments have saved $279 million in avoided 

regional transmission system upgrades. What additional steps can FERC take to aggressively 

promote the use of energy efficiency and other strategies to avoid unnecessary expensive new 

transmission lines and new baseload power plants? 

Answer: FERC has taken certain steps to allow the integration of customer demand resources, 

such as energy efficiency, into the markets it oversees. For example, customer demand resources 

must be considered on a comparable basis to the services provided by comparable generation 

resources in local transmission planning processes where appropriate. Order No. 1000 required 

each public utility transmission provider to consider proposed non-transmission alternatives on a 

comparable basis when evaluating potential transmission solutions in their regional transmission 

planning processes. In addition, two of the wholesale markets that the Commission regulates, 

PJM and ISO-NE provide a mechanism for energy efficiency investments to participate in and 

receive compensation for their capacity value from the wholesale capacity market. 
122 

Chatterjee 17 

Question 12: What steps can FERC take to prioritize dispatching clean distributed renewable 

energy before dispatching fossil fuel generation? 

Answer: RTO/ISO markets (e.g., !SO-New England) dispatch the least cost resources to meet 

demand. Resources offer their supply into the markets based on their marginal cost of 

production and RTOs/ISOs clear their markets in a manner that minimizes costs to consumers of 

electricity while recognizing transmission constraints and other reliability issues. Many 

renewable energy resources have no fuel costs, and have low or zero marginal costs, and thus are 

economic to dispatch whenever they are available. They are fully dispatched by the RTO/ISO 

markets unless transmission lines become overloaded or other reliability constraints prevent their 

full dispatch. 

Question 13: If confirmed, will you commit to encouraging utilities around the country to 

dramatically expand rooftop solar and other types of distributed generation? 

Answer: The increase in rooftop solar and distributed generation has generally been driven by 

state-level forces. FERC has sought to remove barriers to the participation of resources such as 

distributed generation in the wholesale markets. Market operators like ISO-NE already 

recognize distributed generation capacity when establishing its capacity requirement so that 

states get the capacity benefit of actions designed to encourage rooftop solar and other 

distributed generation. In addition, late last year, FERC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

on Electric Storage Participation in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations 

and Independent System Operators proposed to address such barriers by providing a way by 

which distributed energy resource aggregators can participate in the organized wholesale electric 

markets. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the comments the Commission received in 

response to the proposal and addressing this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 14: In 2013, you wrote: "renewable energy is simply not competitive, affordable or 

widely available, even with significant, expensive government support." Would you still make 

that claim? If so, why? If your opinion has changed, what are the factors behind your decision? 

Answer: While natural gas, coal and nuclear remain America's principal sources of electricity, 

wind and solar power use has taken off across the U.S. thanks in part to tax incentives and 

supportive government policies. Renewable power is now cost-competitive with other sources 

of electricity in some parts of the U.S. I gained an appreciation for this while working with 

numerous Senators on tax provisions in this area that were included in the 2015 omnibus. 

Question 15: Grid reliability is an important priority for FERC, but opponents of renewable 

energy often use this "reliability" argument as excuse for dismissing or undervaluing renewable 

energy. What steps will you take to ensure that FERC can protect the reliability of the grid while 

also transforming our energy system? 

~: The nation's resource fuel mix is changing. One component of this transition is 

identifying the types and levels of essential reliability services needed for reliable operation of 

the grid. 
123 

Chatterjee 18 

If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to address whether and how renewable energy 

resources can and should provide essential reliability services, where technically feasible. 

Question 16: Arc reforms needed to the wholesale market structures to support distributed 

energy resources? If not, do you commit to ensuring that wholesale markets continue to support 

distributed energy resources? If so, what could be done to ensure wholesale markets better 

support distributed energy resources? 

Answer: I understand that FERC has taken steps to remove barriers to the participation of 

resources, such as distributed generation, in the wholesale markets. For example, late last year, 

FERC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Electric Storage Participation in Markets 

Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators proposed 

to address such barriers by providing a way by which distributed energy resource aggregators 

can participate in the organized wholesale electric markets. If confirmed, I look forward to 

reviewing the comments the Commission received in response to the proposal and addressing 

this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 17: If confirmed, what steps will you take to move the American grid to a distributed, 

interconnected system? 

~: The Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Electric Storage 

Participation in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent 

System Operators in November 2016. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission 

proposed to remove barriers to the participation of aggregations of distributed energy resources 

in the organized wholesale electric markets. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing this 

record with my colleagues. 

Question 18: If confirmed, will you support the development of large and small-scale storage, 

which will make our grid more resilient and encourage the buildout of renewable energy 

technology? 

Answer: I believe that the nation should be able to rely on all forms of energy resources, which 

includes renewable and electric storage resources. I understand that the Commission is currently 

exploring potential barriers to the participation of electric storage resources in the organized 

wholesale electric markets. In fact, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in 

November 2016 that proposed to remove barriers to the participation of electric storage resources 

and distributed energy resource aggregations in the organized wholesale electric markets. If 

confirmed, I look forward to addressing this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 19: Do you see a role for FERC in encouraging ancillary and reliability services 

markets to ensure all generators can compete to provide services to maintain grid reliability and 

get compensated for those services? 

Answer: FERC has identified ancillary services that are necessary to maintain reliable operation 

of the grid. As our nation's energy fuel mix changes, we need to identify the types and levels of 

essential reliability services needed for reliable operation. In both of these contexts, offering 
124 

Chatterjee 19 

opportunities for resources that are technically capable of providing these services to do so can 

benefit consumers. 

Question 20: The 2017 Infrastructure Report Card produced by the American Society of Civil 

Engineers rates our nation's energy infrastructure as aD+. Most electric transmission and 

distribution infrastructure was built in the 1950s and 1960s with a 50-year life expectancy and 

the over 640,000 miles of backbone transmission infrastructure is at full capacity. How will you 

facilitate the transmission infrastructure investment needed to modernize and expand our grid, 

particularly on an interstate basis? 

Answer: There are several ways in which FERC can promote investment in the transmission 

infrastructure needed to maintain and modernize our grid. For example, the transmission rates 

that FERC approves include a return on equity and, where appropriate, may include incentives 

consistent with the direction of Congress in the Energy Policy Act of2005. FERC can use these 

ratemaking tools to promote investment, while also ensuring that rates are just and reasonable. 

In addition, FERC has spurred development of regional transmission planning processes that are 

intended to identify and then remove barriers to development of more efficient or cost-effective 

transmission solutions. 

Question 21: The Public Utility Regulatory Policy Act (PURPA) allows industrial companies to 

build and operate combined heat and power (CHP) and waste heat to power (WHP) facilities that 

can simultaneously produce economical steam and electricity with energy efficiencies up to 80 

percent. Do you support maintaining PURPA as currently enacted? 

Answer: Whether to maintain PURPA as currently enacted is a matter for Congress. 

Supporting the policy goals of individual states 

Question 22: Given your slated dedication to state rights to dictate in-state energy policies, how 

will you ensure that states retain control of policies that inccntivize distributed generation? 

Answer: I appreciate that states and the Commission need to be respectful of each other's 

boundaries under the law. Late last year, FERC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that 

would govern the participation of aggregated distributed resources in the organized wholesale 

markets. The Commission proposed to require coordination with the operation of the 

distribution system. Additionally, FERC recently held a technical conference with the objective 

of exploring how FERC-jurisdictional wholesale electricity markets can select resources of 

interest to state policy makers. These resources can include distributed generation incentivizcd 

and controlled by the states. If confirmed, I look forward to working with my colleagues to 

address these important issues. 

Question 23: Approximately 30 states have passed renewable portfolio standards. States are 

enacting these policies for a wide variety of reasons including fuel diversity, environmental 

benefits, and economic development. If confirmed, how would you act to protect states' rights to 

decide their own energy policy? 
125 

Chatterjee 20 

Answer: States have authority to make resource decisions within their individual states. At 

times, those state policy decisions potentially interact with PERC-jurisdictional wholesale 

electricity markets. PERC's role is to ensure that wholesale electricity rates remain just and 

reasonable. I appreciate that states and the Commission need to be respectful of each other's 

boundaries under the law. Thus, I will be respectful of state boundaries while carrying out my 

duties as a FERC commissioner, if confirmed. 

Question 24: While recognizing that PERC must place a premium on system reliability, many 

states have established aggressive energy policy goals. Vermont, for instance, is committed to 

reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 90% by 2050. Should you be confirmed, what steps will 

you take to give more weight to the policy goals of individual states? 

Answer: If I am confirmed, I will make every effort to balance PERC's responsibility to ensure 

that the reliability of the bulk electric system is maintained and wholesale electricity rates are 

just and reasonable with the states' energy policy goals. As you may be aware, PERC recently 

held a technical conference to address these issues, and, if confirmed I look forward to working 

with my colleagues to review the record in that proceeding. 

Stakeholder influence and FERC management 

Question 25: What specific issues in FERC regulation of energy markets cause you concern? 

Answer: The U.S. has one of the most reliable and affordable energy systems in the world. The 

system functions due to a high degree of coordination and strong markets. Should I be 

confirmed, I will work to ensure that there is strong oversight at the Commission to keep the 

markets properly functioning. 

Question 26: If confirmed, how will you work to prevent undue influence on PERC by the 

fossil fuel industry? 

Answer: I will not be unduly influenced by any group nor will! pre-judge any action that could 

come before me should I be confirmed to the Commission. FERC is an independent agency and 

I will take that independence seriously. 

Question 27: As a result of the Enron scandal, Congress changed FERC's enforcement and civil 

penalty authority under the Energy Policy Act of2005. What lessons does the Enron scandal still 

have for FERC? 

Answer: The Enron scandal demonstrated that as markets evolved, FERC needed to engage in 

strong oversight and to be able to deter market manipulation through surveillance, investigations, 

and appropriate penalties. The Energy Policy Act of2005 expanded FERC's enforcement 

authority, and since that time, FERC has greatly enhanced its corresponding capabilities. If 

confirmed, I look forward to working with my colleagues to assure that the enforcement program 

continues to improve. 
126 

Chatterjee 21 

Question 28: One ofFERC's most important responsibilities is to investigate and enforce 

against market manipulation. Is FERC devoting adequate resources to these enforcement 

activities? Are the fines sufficient? If confirmed, what steps will you take to sustain and improve 

on FERC' s enforcement capacity and success? 

Answer: I understand that FERC has provided significant resources to its enforcement activities 

and, if confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to ensure that the enforcement program 

continues to receive adequate resources to carry out its responsibilities. 

Question 29: After the 2003 electricity blackout, Congress included federal backstop siting 

provisions for interstate transmission lines in the Energy Policy Act of2005. These included 

Section 1221 for National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors, which has never been 

implemented effectively. Would you support FERC taking on the responsibilities of the corridor 

designation authority if the Department of Energy was willing to delegate its role to FERC, 

which would consolidate the designation authority with the backstop siting authority FERC 

already has under the Energy Policy Act? 

~: While I cannot speak for the Department of Energy and whether it would want to 

delegate this role to the Commission, I would expect that, if confirmed, I would take action 

consistent with whatever authority is granted to the Commission. If confirmed, I would address 

with my colleagues and, as appropriate, the Department of Energy, the best way to implement 

the Commission's role with respect to federal backstop transmission siting authority. 

Question 30: FERC is incredibly complicated, and the barrier to entry for someone to simply 

understand FERC proceedings, much less to participate, is extremely high. Stakeholders with 

considerable financial resources can participate, but everyone else is effectively excluded. How 

can FERC do a better job of ensuring all interested parties can meaningfully participate in FERC 

processes? 

Answer: I understand the importance ofFERC's proceedings being transparent and accessible. 

I support FERC's efforts to promote accessibility. 

Question 31: If confirmed, would you support the creation of a "consumer advocate" office at 

FERC? 

~: If confirmed, I will most certainly consider the issue. 

FERC abuses of power in reviewing and approving pipeline infrastructure 

Question 32: While instilling important powers in the federal government, the Clean Water Act 

also ensures the protection and respect of states' rights. Section 401 of the Act explicitly states 

that no [federal] license or permit shall be granted until the certification required by this section 

has been granted or waived. Similarly, the U.S. Supreme Court has said Section 401 requires 

States to provide a water quality certification before a federal license or permit can be issued and 

without [Section 40 I] certification, FERC lacks authority to issue a license. 
127 

Chatterjee 22 

Given the language of the Clean Water Act and its interpretation by the Courts, do you think it 

appropriate that FERC is routinely issuing its Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity 

for pipeline projects prior to all affected states rendering their decisions on Section 40 I 

certification? If con finned, will you commit to ensuring all relevant state level permits are 

granted prior to issuing a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for any pipeline 

project? 

Answer: It is my understanding that it has been Commission policy to issue conditional 

certificates of public convenience and necessity for natural gas pipeline projects, and that those 

certificates preclude natural gas companies from commencing construction until they have 

obtained all necessary authorizations under federal law, including Clean Water Act certification. 

I also understand that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit recently 

held that a certificate conditioned on the receipt of state water quality certification did not 

authorize a discharge into the navigable waters of the United States and so did not violate the 

Clean Water Act. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to ensure that all Commission 

decisions regarding natural gas pipeline projects are consistent with law. 

Question 33: Under federal law, a private party is not allowed to legally challenge FERC 

approval of a pipeline project until they have first submitted a rehearing request to FERC, and 

FERC has affirmatively granted or denied that request. Rather than do one or the other, FERC's 

practice has been to issue a tolling order in response to such requests, which puts the request 

under further consideration. The result is that communities are put into legal limbo, unable to 

challenge the FERC decision until a final grant or denial is issued from the agency. Routinely 

FERC leaves people in that legal limbo for months, and sometimes over a year, while it allows 

the applicant to exercise the power of eminent domain and advance construction. 

Do you see the use of tolling orders as an abuse of power by FERC? If confirmed, will you 

commit to either affirmatively grant or deny a rehearing request? 

Answer: Congress gave FERC 30 days under the NGA and the FP A to address rehearing 

requests tiled with FERC. I understand that the courts have upheld FERC's use of tolling orders. 

I appreciate that in some instances this process places a burden on those affected by a FERC 

order. I cannot and will not prejudge how I will act on rehearing requests. However, if 

confirmed, I would consider with my colleagues whether tolling orders have been used too 

frequently and, if so, what reforms are necessary. I also commit to work to ensure the FERC's 

processes on filings are as efficient as possible. 

Future of nuclear power 

Question 34: What do you envision as the future of nuclear power? 

Answer: I believe that the nation should rely on all forms of energy resources, which includes 

nuclear energy. I believe it is important to maintain America's leadership on nuclear energy and 

a path for people who are relatively early on in careers in energy to have options for meaningful 

work in the nuclear sector. I am also aware that the future economic viability of these resources 

is in question. For example, the relatively low cost of natural gas and the emergence of new 
128 

Chatterjee 23 

technologies has helped drive down energy prices and revenues. In addition, state and federal 

policies that impose new environmental requirements and seek to procure specific resource types 

have challenged nuclear resources. 

FERC policies should focus on ensuring electric markets that promote the delivery of reliable 

power in a manner that is nondiscriminatory and resource-neutral, resulting in efficient price 

signals that market participants can rely on to make investment decisions. 

In June 2014 in Docket No. AD14-14, FERC initiated a proceeding to evaluate issues regarding 

price formation in the energy and ancillary services markets operated by RTOs/ISOs. This 

ongoing effort strives to improve the accuracy of energy prices for all resources, including 

nuclear. Also, the Commission has recently held a technical conference regarding state policies 

and wholesale markets that may inform the Commission on this issue. lf confirmed, !look 

forward to reviewing these matters with my colleagues. 

Question 35: What do you believe is the proper role of FERC in the future direction of nuclear 

power in the United States? 

Answer: Please see my response to your Question 34 above. 

Question 36: Do you think any market reforms are needed to support the future direction of 

nuclear power in the United States? 

Answer: Please see my response to your Question 35 above. 

IMAPP and regional initiatives 

Question 37: New England has a regional Independent System Operator (ISO), and over the 

past several years consumer costs have skyrocketed as the ISO has implemented and tweaked its 

forward capacity market. In the regional process known as IMAPP integrating markets and 

public policy- the ISO and FERC are beginning to acknowledge these administrative markets 

are in conflict with some of the objectives states have with regard to energy policy. 

If confirmed, would you support efforts, such as in New England, to develop fixes to wholesale 

markets to better implement state policy goals in wholesale markets? 

Answer: I understand that this is an issue that the Commission is focusing on through a recent 

technical conference and follow-up request for post-technical conference comments on the 

interplay of state policy goals and the wholesale energy and capacity markets. If confirmed, l 

look forward to addressing this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 38: Energy markets do not accurately reflect environmental costs, including the social 

costs of carbon pollution. Do you believe that FERC and wholesale market operators should 

continue to explore how to better integrate the real cost of carbon pollution into our energy 

markets? 
129 

Chatterjee 24 

Answer: PERC's policies are resource and fuel neutral and FERC develops market rules with 

the intent of encouraging competition. Nevertheless FERC has developed a record in a recent 

technical conference in order to explore ways to accommodate state policy efforts while 

retaining competitive market trameworks. 

Question 39: Are you open to allowing !SO-New England to walk back from the capacity 

market model and return to a structure that allows load-serving entities to meet their needs 

through bilateral contracts with a residual market for capacity not otherwise procured through 

such bilateral contracts? 

If confirmed, will you commit to just and reasonable rates for consumers, not just for market 

participants? 

Answer: I have and will maintain an unwavering commitment to ensuring the rates are just and 

reasonable. I am mindful that the responsibility of the Commission is to ensure that rates arc just 

and reasonable, independent of the mechanism used to satisfy resource adequacy obligations. I 

am not aware of any ongoing efforts from !SO-New England to abandon its current capacity 

market as a tool to ensure resource adequacy in the region. I appreciate that there are different 

approaches to satisfying resource adequacy obligations in various regions of the country. 

Question 40: Earlier this month, FERC held a technical conference to examine how to better 

incorporate states' environmental policy objectives into wholesale markets. Stakeholders are 

working to address challenges in these markets, particularly as it relates to price formation like 

carbon pricing. More active leadership from FERC, however, may be necessary to direct 

wholesale market operators to develop solutions to address these price formation challenges. 

If confirmed, would you help FERC take a more active role to assist state and market operator 

efforts to resolve price formation issues associated with states' environmental policies? 

Answer: I am reluctant to speculate what decisions may come out of the recent technical 

conference; if confirmed, I look forward to taking a role with my colleagues in addressing the 

issues explored at the technical conference regarding the interplay between state policy goals and 

wholesale markets. 

Question 41: Do you think there are ways to account tor environmental costs in price 

algorithms that appropriately value the benefits of carbon free generation? 

Answer: Theoretically, yes. 

Question 42: New England is making considerable progress implementing renewable portfolio 

standards, renewable energy standards, and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. These 

reforms will be an enduring aspect of the region's energy strategy. 

If confirmed, will you commit to work with !SO-New England to ensure that wholesale market 

rules complement state policies and regional agreements? 
130 

Chatterjee 25 

Answer: Yes, consistent with the obligation that, if confirmed, I will have as a Commissioner to 

treat all parties fairly and make decisions based on the record. If confirmed, I also look forward 

to addressing these issues with my colleagues. 

Forward capacity auctions 

Question 43: The New England region saw considerable price increases in the region's forward 

capacity auctions (FCAs) in 2014. In recent auctions, costs have come down, while the region 

has been able to secure sufficient resources to maintain system reliability. Part of the reason why 

auction prices came down is because !SO-New England included more renewable energy in its 

installed capacity requirement (ICR). !SO-New England has continued to improve its inclusion 

of renewable energy in the ICR calculation, but could do better. 

How can !SO-New England's consideration of energy, efficiency, renewable generation, and 

improved metrics in the forward capacity auctions that value the benefits of carbon-free 

generation help reduce system costs and improve system reliability? 

Answer: I am aware that in recognition of certain public policy initiatives, ISO New England 

recently prioritized the modeling of behind the meter renewable resources in making adjustments 

to the !CR. I understand the importance of reducing system costs and ensuring reliability. 

Further, I recognize efforts by independent system operators like ISO New England to 

accommodate efforts by the states to promote certain public policy initiatives. As noted above, 

this was the subject of a recent Commission technical conference. 

Question 44: Carbon-free generation currently faces a large barrier for bidding into the FCAs 

because ofupfront costs. If confirmed, will you commit to working with our ISOs to continue 

reducing the barriers to including more renewables into the ICR and for bidding into our energy 

auctions? 

Answer: Please see my response to your Question 42 above. 

Hvdro reliccnsing 

Question 45: As states implement policies to address climate change it is becoming increasingly 

clear that hydroelectric generation will continue to be a central component of the U.S. energy 

portfolio. Yet the licensing process for hydroelectric facilities can last a decade or more, cost 

hundreds of thousands of dollars, and often results in decreased electric production due to water 

quality concerns. What do you see as steps FERC can take to streamline this process, and how 

would you ensure state and federal environmental and water quality concerns are maintained? 

~: As I noted at the hearing, I believe that the nation should rely on all forms of resources 

to meet its needs, including hydroelectric resources. I understand, however, that the hydropower 

licensing process can be lengthy and expensive, and that water quality issues are often a major 

concern. If confirmed, I will look forward to addressing with my colleagues the issue of 

streamlining the licensing process while satisfying federal and state water quality concerns. 
131 

Chatterjee 26 

Natural gas infrastructure 

Question 46: Natural gas and pipeline advocates vocally hailed your nomination as a sign that 

future and pending fossil fuel infrastructure will be rubber stamped on your watch. What will 

you do to demonstrate your independence from fossil fuel special interest groups? 

Answer: I will not be unduly influenced by any group nor will! pre-judge any action that could 

come before me should I be confirmed to the Commission. FERC is an independent agency and 

I will take that independence seriously. 

Question 47: How will you evaluate climate impacts during the review of applications tor the 

construction and operation of natural gas pipelines? 

Answer: It is my understanding that the Commission's environmental analysis for each pipeline 

project includes the greenhouse gas emissions associated with the construction and operation of 

that project, as well as impacts potentially resulting from climate change over the region in 

which the project is located. If confirmed, !look forward to working with my colleagues in 

determining how information regarding climate impacts is addressed appropriately in such 

proceedings. 

The Holman Rule 

Question 48: What is your position on the Holman Rule, which allows any member of Congress 

to propose amending an appropriations bill to single out a government employee or cut a specific 

program? 

Answer: I have no direct experience with the Holman Rule. If it becomes an issue for the 

Commission and I am confinncd, I will evaluate the matter with my colleagues. 

Question 49: If confirmed, will you support or oppose Congressional passage of an amendment 

under the Holman Rule that targets one of your employees? 

~: Please see my response to your Question 48 above. 

Question 50: If confirmed, do you believe that you will be better able to recruit and retain top 

talent at FERC if Congress is able to individually target employees based on political criteria? 

Answer: Please see my response to your Question 48 above. 

Question 51: Do you support or oppose Congress targeting and altering the salaries of 

individuals at FERC? 

Answer: Please see my response to your Question 48 above. 

Question 52: How would you describe the division of responsibility and authority between 

Congress and FERC on agency personnel issues? 
132 

Chatterjee 27 

Answer: Please see my response to your Question 48 above. 

Questions from Senator AI Franken 

Question 1: Minnesota and other states have renewable portfolio standards that drive the 

transition to clean energy. Do you believe states should be able to implement these kinds of 

policies without federal interference? 

Answer: States have jurisdiction over the resource mix in their individual states, but the 

Commission also has responsibilities under the Federal Power Act. I appreciate the importance 

of these issues to states. I understand the Commission recently held a technical conference with 

the objective of further exploring how the competitive wholesale markets can incorporate 

resources promoted by state energy policies while ensuring that wholesale electricity rates 

remain just and reasonable and that the reliability of the bulk power system is maintained. If 

confirmed, I look forward to working with my colleagues on this matter. 

Question 2: As Senator Cortez Masto mentioned in the hearing, late last year, FERC started a 

process to "remove barriers to the participation of electric storage resources and distributed 

energy resource aggregations in the capacity, energy, and ancillary service markets." 

a. What role do you see energy storage playing in the future in the organized wholesale 

electricity markets and transmission system? 

b. And how can FERC help ensure that energy storage is receiving proper compensation for 

the multiple benefits it provides to the grid? 

Answer: I believe that the wholesale electricity markets should offer opportunities for all types 

of resources that are technically capable of providing needed services, which includes storage 

resources. For example, FERC's price formation effort has identified opportunities to improve 

energy market price signals. Actions like a change in the settlement interval and the requirement 

to trigger shortage pricing any time a physical shortage occurs should provide more accurate 

price signals for flexible resources like energy storage. Also, the Commission is currently 

considering a proposal to eliminate barriers to the participation of electric storage resources in 

the organized markets. In addition, in a recent policy statement, the Commission provided 

clarification and guidance on how storage resources could be compensated for both market- and 

cost-based services in the organized markets. If confirmed, I look forward to addressing these 

issues with my colleagues. 

I understand that the Commission has taken several actions to ensure adequate compensation for 

resources, including electric storage resources. For example, in Order No. 755, FERC provided 

for compensation of fast-acting resources, such as storage, to provide frequency regulation 

service. Similarly, FERC's price formation effort has identified opportunities to improve energy 

market price signals. Actions like a change in the seitlement interval and the requirement to 

trigger shortage pricing any time a physical shortage occurs should provide more accurate price 

signals for flexible resources like energy storage. Further, in January, FERC issued a policy 
133 

Chatterjee 28 

statement providing guidance to storage resources seeking compensation for both cost-based and 

market-based services. 

Question 3: FERC Order 1000 was intended to help identify such transmission needs and solicit 

competitive transmission projects by requiring regional transmission planning and interregional 

coordination. 

a. Do you support FERC order 1000? 

b. What are the barriers to interregional transmission lines and what can FERC do to 

remove those barriers? 

Answer: I support the goals of Order 1000, which I understand to be to promote the 

identification of more efficient or cost-effective transmission facilities and to remove certain 

obstacles to the development of those facilities. In June 2016 the Commission convened a 

technical conference to discuss competitive transmission development. The technical conference 

proceeding has provided the Commission with a record that details various commenters' 

concerns with the interregional transmission coordination procedures currently in place, as well 

as their suggestions for supporting interregional transmission development. If confirmed, I look 

forward to reviewing this record and addressing this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 4: A few years ago during the severe winter polar vortex, coal stockpiles at utilities in 

Minnesota repeatedly dropped to dangerously low levels, due to inadequate rail delivery of coal. 

At least four coal power plants in Minnesota were shut down, so that their stockpiles could be 

built back up before the cold winter months. And in the end, the cost of this unreliable rail 

service was passed on to the public, as they paid for the more expensive replacement power that 

was purchased to make up for lost generation. 

During this time period, I sent a letter to FERC highlighting my concerns about Minnesota 

utilities' low coal stockpiles, and asking FERC to work with all other stakeholders to find a 

solution to this ongoing issue. 

a. What do you think FERC should do to mitigate the problems with rail delivery issues, 

since these issues impact the electricity markets? 

b. Last Congress I introduced the Emergency Fuel Supply Coordination Act, which would 

require coordination among key federal agencies when a fuel emergency is declared. Do 

you think this coordination is a good idea, and in what ways could FERC support such an 

effort? 

Answer: Although the Commission does not have authority over the shipment of coal over the 

nation's rail lines, if confirmed, I would be willing to meet with utilities or the rail regulators to 

assess what type of assistance the Commission may provide. I believe that coordination among 

key regulators is prudent when a fuel emergency is declared. 

Question 5: Because of its low prices, more and more Americans are using natural gas, both in 

homes and in industry. And the DOE Energy Information Administration projects that use of 

natural gas will continue to grow. At the same time, the federal government has already issued 
134 

Chatterjee 29 

final authorizations for liquid natural gas export volumes of over 72 billion cubic feet per daywhich is equal to about 96 percent of U.S. demand. 

Explain to me how increasing exports of domestic natural gas won't drive up the price 

Americans pay to power their factories and heat their homes. Does FERC have a role to play 

here in making sure we are not unnecessarily increasing the cost of energy for Americans? 

~: Jurisdiction over LNG exports is shared by DOE and the Commission. The 

Commission is responsible for the physical LNG export facilities under its National 

Environmental Policy Act responsibilities while DOE is responsible for authorizing the import or 

export of the natural gas commodity. 

Question 6: Last month, Secretary Perry ordered a 60-day review of U.S. electricity policy to 

determine whether coal and nuclear plants are being "unfairly" pushed off the grid. He 

suggested that renewable resources-like wind and solar-were threatening grid reliability and 

that because of that, we need to prop up coal and nuclear plants. Since FERC is tasked with 

ensuring the reliability of the grid, do you share Secretary Perry's concerns about increasing 

integration of renewables? 

Answer: In fulfilling its responsibilities under the Federal Power Act, FERC works closely with 

the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, which FERC certified as the Electric 

Reliability Organization, as well as with the industry and other interested stakeholders. As the 

nation's energy resource fuel mix continues to change, it is important to maintain our 

commitment to ensuring grid reliability. 

Question 7: As you know, FERC's approval process for natural gas pipelines has gained 

national attention. Former Chairman Norman Bay released a statement on his last day 

recognizing the increased public interest surrounding the approval process and encouraging the 

agency to change how it determines whether approving a pipeline is within the national interest. 

Traditionally, FERC has relied on a contract with potential shippers to show market demand and 

therefore demonstrate that a project is in the national interest. But, this is fairly myopic view and 

Mr. Bay suggests that more comprehensive cost-benefit analysis may be necessary. Mr. Bay also 

recommended that FERC consider the environmental impacts of increasing gas production 

allowed by pipeline construction as well as an assessment of lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions. 

Do you agree with the former Chairman's assessment? If not, why not, and if so, what changes 

would you suggest? 

Answer: I recognize the importance of natural gas pipeline infrastructure to meeting the energy 

needs of our nation's consumers. The Natural Gas Act requires the Commission to determine 

that proposed pipeline projects are consistent with the public convenience and necessity. If 

confirmed, !look forward to reviewing the Commission's policies and processes for considering 

pipeline applications with my colleagues to improve their efficiency while ensuring that all 

relevant factors are appropriately considered 

Question 8: Senator Shaheen and I recently reintroduced legislation, the Public Engagement at 

FERC Act (S. 1240), that will improve public involvement at the FERC and facilitate advocacy 
135 

Chatterjee 30 

at the agency on behalf of residential and small commercial energy consumers. Specifically, the 

Public Engagement at FERC Act would build off existing language in the Public Utility 

Regulatory Policy Act (PURPA) and establish an Office of Public Participation and Consumer 

Advocacy to ensure the public has a strong role in shaping our nation's energy future. It is 

important that anyone who assumes the role of a FERC Commissioner understands how their 

decisions are directly or even indirectly impacting private citizens. When FERC evaluates 

whether a project or agreement is "in the public interest" it is vital that the Commission indeed 

consult the public. 

a. Do you agree that public engagement should be prioritized during the various 

proceedings administered by FERC? 

b. If confirmed, what steps will you take to make commission proceedings and processes 

more accessible to the public? 

c. While I'm not asking you to weigh in on the legislation directly, do you agree with 

allowing more public participation in the agency through the creations of a dedicated 

office? 

~: FERC's procedures provide several means for members of the public, whether acting 

individually or as a group, to raise their concerns with FERC. They may intervene and actively 

participate in FERC proceedings. They also may file comments on rules and regulations that 

FERC proposes in Notices of Proposed Rulemakings. State utility commissions, who seck to 

protect the interests of retail and residential customers, regularly intervene directly in FERC 

cases and comment on FERC's proposed rules and regulations. If confirmed, I will work with 

my colleagues to see whether there are further steps FERC can take to make its proceedings and 

processes more accessible to the public. 

Question 9: In 2006, FERC started requiring wholesale generators to file Form 556 Certificate 

of Qualifying Facility (QF) Status for a small power production facility. I'm concerned that some 

small, community wind facilities across the country may have missed this change. These projects 

went through an extensive study process to facilitate interconnection of their wind projects with 

the transmission grid. These interconnections were ultimately approved by FERC as exempt 

wholesale generators and have been operating safely. However, in 2006 FERC established a 

filing requirement for all facilities larger than IMW, but some missed this change. The filing 

requires announcing the total electricity generated by the QF. 

In one case, a company Min Wind failed to start filing with FERC, and subsequently sought a 

waiver from FERC for the Form 556 filing arguing that they did not know about the rule. But, 

the waiver was denied and the company was assessed a substantial repayment obligation 

equivalent to the interest that they have been unfairly accruing since 2006. The amount was large 

enough that they were forced to file for bankruptcy. While I do not know the specifics of this 

case, in general, this seems like an onerous requirement that if not handled appropriately could 

drive more companies into bankruptcy. Will you commit to working with me to find a solution to 

this issue? 
136 

Chatterjee 3 I 

Answer: I understand the necessity of providing adequate notice of regulatory requirements to 

industry and having appropriate remedies for failures to comply. If confirmed, I would be 

pleased to work with you, and I look forward to discussing this issue with my colleagues. 

Question from Senator Steve Daines 

Question: FERC has a role in ensuring the grid is secure. Will you keep in mind impacts to 

base load sources as you make decisions? 

Answer: Y cs. 

Questions from Senator Joe Manehin III 

Question 1: West Virginia's existing installed capacity is 90% coal (12,584 MW). The 

remainder is natural gas, hydro, wind and a little bit of oil. Overall, in PJM, coal represents 34% 

of capacity and natural gas is slightly higher than that. The Energy Information Administration 

states that "West Virginia typically generates more electricity than it consumes. Although more 

than two-fifths of West Virginia households use electricity as their primary source for home 

heating, retail sales to all customers account for less than half of West Virginia's net electricity 

generation. As a result, West Virginia is a net supplier of electricity to the regional grid. West 

Virginia is a leader in the nation in net interstate sales of electricity." 

Do you believe that the regional grid (P JM specifically) can continue to operate without the 

contributions of West Virginia's fleet of power plants? 

~: As I stated during my confirmation hearing, I believe that to ensure safe and reliable 

electricity we need fuel diversity. I also believe that FERC's responsibility to oversee grid 

reliability is critical. Maintaining fuel diversity in the context of wholesale electric markets that 

dispatch generation and other resources on a cost basis is a complex challenge. If confirmed I 

look forward to considering this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 2: In 2011, FERC issued an Order Number 1000- which asserted agency 

jurisdiction over transmission planning in areas that were previously thought to be a state's 

responsibility. It's my understanding that- while intended to make transmission planning easier 

-it has bogged down the process more. Former FERC Commissioner Tony Clark expressed 

concern that "there is so much process built into Order 1000," that each step of that process 

"becomes an opportunity for litigation and delay." Andy Ott, the CEO ofPJM, concluded that 

Order No. 1000 "was almost like a solution in search of a problem .... It's actually creating more 

challenges to investment." Nick Brown, the CEO ofSPP, stated that Order No. 1000 has 

·'created more overhead and uncertainty at a time we didn't need more overhead in order to 

invest in transmission." We need transmission planning to work efficiently, and we need costs to 

be allocated where they belong. 

Will you work with the Committee on ways to improve transmission planning and cost 

allocation? 
137 

Chatterjee 32 

Answer: If I am confirmed I will look forward to working with the Committee on matters of 

interest to them regarding these issues, as well as with my colleagues. After issuance of Order 

No. !000, the Commission has continued to examine issues relating to transmission planning and 

cost allocation. I support this continued effort to make sure FERC policies are meeting their 

intended goals. For example, in June 2016, the Commission convened a technical conference on 

issues concerning competitive transmission development. Following the technical conference, 

the Commission requested post-technical conference comments on issues related to competitive 

transmission development, interregional transmission coordination, and regional transmission 

planning. 

Question 3: Earlier this week, E&E news published an article regarding the cybersecurity 

challenges facing our natural gas infrastructure. They highlighted a five-year old attack on our 

nation's natural gas utilities which was perpetrated by Chinese hackers who were also members 

of that country's military. Gerry Cauley, President of the North American Electric Reliability 

Council (NERC)- a frequent witness before this committed stated that "Undercutting the gas 

supply is certainly a threat to the electric system." While NERC, utilities, and regional 

transmission operators (RTOs) like PJM are planning for multiple scenarios like extreme weather 

events (a repeat Polar Vortex for example), I'm also interested in your perspective on how FERC 

and DOE can further support natural gas utilities in their efforts to harden their systems not just 

again natural threats but against eyber threats. 

Understanding that these energy stakeholders can't always pull back the curtain for us because of 

the threat of revealing too much to potential enemies, what more can DOE and FERC do to 

support natural gas pipeline operators in the face of these threats? 

Answer: The intrusion campaign uncovered in2012 underscores the importance of 

cybersecurity mitigation measures tor the natural gas pipeline industry. 

To this end, I understand that FERC assists states in better understanding cybersecurity threats to 

pipelines. For example, FERC has coordinated with other federal agencies to facilitate both 

unclassified and classified security briefings to state regulators. 

1 also understand that FERC assists to pipeline operators with identification and application of 

best practices for cybersecurity measures. As an example, FERC and Transportation Security 

Administration (TSA) staff have developed a joint, voluntary assessment program to conduct indepth cybersccurity reviews of pipeline entities. As a further example, FERC has established a 

similar program with the US Coast Guard to review the cybersecurity of jurisdictional LNG 

terminals. I understand that TSA is reviewing its voluntary cybersecurity guidelines for 

pipelines and that FERC has offered to assist with that effort. 

FERC also could explore whether, pursuant to its authority under the Natural Gas Act, further 

steps are appropriate to address concerns that the industry may have with respect to recovery of 

costs for cybersecurity measures. 

Question 4: I think it's fair to say that everyone knows West Virginia as an energy exporting 

state. Our state's coal miners helped power this nation through war and into prosperity in the 
138 

Chatterjee 33 

second half of the last century. And we continue to produce energy for our neighbors. But, we 

are an all-of-the-above energy state, and I think it's important to note that we have some critical 

hydropower resources. Hydropower is the most prevalent form of renewable energy used today 

to generate electricity. While hydro in West Virginia is small, it is also growing. The Glen Ferris 

project on the Kanawha River powers about 4,500 households. The Hawks Nest project is a 102 

megawatt plant on the New River. These plants' licenses will expire later this year. Then there's 

the New Martinsville Hydroelectric Plant- a 36 megawatt project in Wetzel County that 

produces enough power for a city seven times the size of New Martinsville which has a 

population of about 7,000. And, furthermore, it's my understanding that there are untapped 

opportunities for additional hydropower on the Ohio River. I'd even love to see a plant along the 

Hatfield-McCoy Trail. I also introduced a bill S. 710- which would help provide certainty to 

the Jennings-Randolph dam. 

But, what is your understanding of what FERC can do to improve and expedite the relicensing of 

these renewable energy projects? 

Answer: I am aware that the hydropower licensing process can be lengthy and complex. As a 

matter of law, decision making does not rest solely with the Commission, but also with other 

agencies that have mandatory conditioning authority not only under the Federal Power Act, but 

also under other statutes. If confirmed, I will look forward to addressing with my colleagues the 

issue of any changes to make the relicensing process more efficient. 

Questions from Senator Lamar Alexander 

Question l: In the past five years, six nuclear reactors have shut down prematurely due in part to 

financial concerns. Analysts have warned dozens of additional nuclear reactors could potentially 

shut down over the next I 0 years due to market challenges. New York and Illinois have taken 

steps to help keep the nuclear reactors within their borders operating. These states recognize the 

importance of reliable nuclear power, which provides 60% of our country's carbon-free 

electricity. What can the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission do to help keep existing 

nuclear reactors operating and preserve low-cost, reliable, and clean nuclear power for the 

United States? 

Answer: Congress tasked FERC with ensuring that the rules that govern wholesale electric 

markets promote the deli very of reliable power in a manner that is nondiscriminatory and 

resource-neutral, resulting in efficient price signals that market participants can rely on to make 

investment decisions. I believe that all resources should be fairly compensated for the value they 

provide the system. 

The Commission has some generic proceedings where these issues are being examined in greater 

detail with broad stakeholder input. 

If confirmed, I look forward to working with my colleagues in evaluating the issues explored at 

the technical conference. 
139 

Chatterjee 34 

Question 2: The federal wind production tax credit (PTC) has been in place for twenty-five 

years and has been extended by Congress ten times. The most recent extension in 2015 will cost 

taxpayers more than $20 billion over ten years. The wind PTC not only costs the taxpayers 

billions, it also distorts the price of electricity. The subsidy to Big Wind is so generous that, in 

some markets, wind producers can literally give their electricity away and still make a profit. 

This phenomenon is called negative pricing. What can the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission do to minimize the unfair impact that negative pricing has on reliable generation 

like coal, natural gas, and nuclear? 

~: Generally, RTO/ISO market dispatch rules are designed to tlnd the lowest cost of 

dispatching resources, based on their bids, to serve load while respecting transmission system 

limitations. 

At the recent May 2017 technical conference on the interplay between state policy goals and 

wholesale markets, there was a suggestion that RTOs/lSOs explore whether negative pricing 

continues to meet the goals of finding the lowest cost of dispatching resources. If confirmed, I 

look forward to addressing these matters with my colleagues. 

Questions from Senator John Hoeveu 

Question 1: Electric reliability is a critical issue, especially as it relates baseload power and 

ensuring our country has the assets needed to maintain low-cost electricity. 

For example, the previous Administration's EPA has promulgated substantial new regulations on 

electricity producers that would have subjected them to unachievable mandates and artificial 

compliance schedules. Together, the EPA's unwarranted attempts to reduce emissions would 

have driven up electricity rates for customers and potentially compromise the reliability of our 

power grid. 

In another example, the Aliso Canyon natural gas storage facility provides electricity for 

southern California. However, state regulators have shut down the facility and now the Energy 

Department has registered concerns about having a sufficient baseload for summer energy 

demand. 

• How will you approach reliability issues going forward? 

• How do fossil fuels play a role in ensuring electric reliability and baseload power? 

~: I recognize the importance of FERC's responsibilities under the Federal Power Act 

with respect to the reliability of the bulk power system. 

In fulfilling those responsibilities, FERC works closely with the North American Electric 

Reliability Corporation as well as with the industry and other interested stakeholders. In the 

midst of a transition in our nation's energy resource fuel mix, it is important to maintain our 

commitment to ensuring grid reliability. I believe that a resource portfolio that includes the use 

of fuels that support the provision ofbaseload power makes an important contribution toward 

that goal. 
140 

Chatterjee 35 

Question 2: In order to become truly North American energy secure, we need the infrastructure 

to deliver our energy resources from producers to consumers. I have sponsored the North 

American Energy Infrastructure Act that would require FERC to approve natural gas import or 

export applications to Canada or Mexico within 30 days of filing. 

• What is your view on the increased need for energy infrastructure? 

• What is FERC's role in ensuring adequate pipeline capacity? 

• Do you support efforts to increase our energy infrastructure network with Canada and 

Mexico? 

Answer: As I noted at the hearing, ensuring adequate infrastructure is important for the nation's 

economy. Having adequate infrastructure also best ensures that consumers have access to a 

variety of energy resources. The Commission is obligated to approve natural gas pipeline 

projects that are required by the public convenience and necessity, which may include facilities 

for the import or export of energy with our trading partners to the north and south. 

Question 3: In North Dakota, rural electric co-ops ensure that over 350,000 consumers have 

access to reliable and affordable electricity. The Federal Power Act exempts rural electric co-ops 

from FERC jurisdiction and this statutory exemption contributes to the state's affordable 

electricity rates. 

Do you plan to adhere to the Federal Power Act and continue to exempt rural electric coops from FERC jurisdiction? 

~: Electric cooperatives that receive a certain type of financing or that sell less than a 

certain amount of electricity per year are exempt from certain provisions of the Federal Power 

Act. If confirmed, I commit to adhere to the provisions in the Federal Power Act regarding 

jurisdiction over electric cooperatives. 

Question 4: Two of the industries FERC regulates electricity and natural gas- are growing 

closer together as gas increases its share in electricity markets. This ties together the reliability 

of natural gas supply and the reliability of electricity supply like never before. This makes it all 

the more important that gas pipelines get sited timely when they are needed and not get bogged 

down in environmental reviews that, in the name of being thorough, lose all common sense. We 

have had projects delayed, for example, by consideration of greenhouse gas emissions. 

Fortunately the guidance requiring consideration ofGHGs was rescinded in April. 

Both Congress and the Administration have made it plain in law and by executive action that 

they want infrastructure reviews to be accelerated. 

Will you work to ensure that gas infrastructure is sited promptly and not unnecessarily 

delayed by overly bureaucratic reviews? 

Answer: Yes. 
141 

Chatterjee 36 

Questions from Senator Angus S. King, Jr. 

Question 1: How do you view the relationship between state energy policies, such as 

Renewable Portfolio Standards, and the wholesale electricity markets? Do you believe there is a 

conflict present between state goals and the operation of those wholesale markets? How do you 

think that conflicts that arise can and should be addressed by FERC? 

~: States have jurisdiction over the resource mix in their individual states but the 

Commission also has responsibilities under the Federal Power Act. I appreciate the importance 

of these issues to states. [understand the Commission recently held a technical conference with 

the objective of further exploring how the competitive wholesale markets can incorporate 

resources promoted by state energy policies while ensuring that wholesale electricity rates 

remain just and reasonable and that the reliability of the bulk power system is maintained. If 

confirmed, I look forward to working with my colleagues on this matter. 

Question 2: Do you believe that the competitive wholesale electricity markets are adequately 

incentivizing the development of renewable energy? If not, what market mechanisms can be put 

into place to do so? 

Answer: !understand that FERC rules that govern organized and bilateral wholesale electric 

markets are meant to promote the delivery of reliable power in a manner that is 

nondiscriminatory and resource-neutral, resulting in efficient price signals that market 

participants can rely on to make investment decisions. 

The Commission must be aware of changes in the industry, including changes to the resource 

mix, state actions and technology developments, and then adapt to these developments in order 

to carry out its statutory responsibilities. 

Question 3: Do you believe FERC has a role to play in supporting and helping to manage the 

increase of distributed energy resources connected to the grid? If so, what is that role? 

Answer: FERC has a role in fostering resource neutral, non-discriminatory policies with respect 

to the wholesale markets. This would include removing barriers to the participation of resources, 

such as distributed energy resources, in the wholesale markets. For example, late last year, 

FERC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Electric Storage Participation in Markets 

Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators proposed 

to address such barriers by providing a way by which distributed energy resource aggregators 

can participate in the organized wholesale electric markets. If confirmed, I look forward to 

reviewing the record developed in response to the proposal and addressing this issue with my 

colleagues. 

Question 4: FERC has held that the costs of transmission infrastructure built to fulfill a 

reliability need can be recovered regionally from all beneficiaries. If a resource other than 

traditional transmission infrastructure, such as energy storage or a combination of other 

resources, is proposed and can meet the same reliability need, should the cost of that project be 

recovered in the same manner? 
142 

Chatterjee 3 7 

Answer: Through Order Nos. 890 and 1000, the Commission has allowed the consideration of 

those non-transmission alternatives in local and regional transmission planning processes. In 

other proceedings, the Commission also has recognized that resources other than traditional 

transmission infrastructure are capable of providing transmission service in certain 

circumstances, such that it may be appropriate to allocate costs of those resources through 

transmission rates. More recently, in January 2017, the Commission issued a policy statement to 

clarify its precedent and provide guidance on the ability of electric storage resources to provide 

services and seek to recover their costs through both cost-based and market-based rates 

concurrently. If confirmed, I will review these matters with my colleagues. 

Question 5: New England currently pays by far the highest costs for transmission in all of the 

organized markets, and yet billions of dollars in additional investment in transmission will be 

needed in order to unlock new renewable resources in the region. What will you do to keep 

transmission costs under control for consumers in New England? 

~: Investment in transmission is key to bringing about a diverse resource mix. 

Renewable resources are often located at a distance from consumers. It is my understanding that 

the Commission recently held a technical conference to consider issues related to the competitive 

transmission development processes that were established to comply with Order No. 1000, 

including the usc of cost containment provisions, the relationship of competitive transmission 

development to transmission incentives, and other ratemaking issues. If confirmed, !look 

forward to addressing this issue with my colleagues. 

Question from Senator Bill Cassidy 

Question: If confirmed, one of your key responsibilities as a Commissioner will be to ensure 

grid reliability. I want to bring your attention to the worrisome decision by the California Public 

Utilities Commission regarding the shutdown of the Alison Canyon underground gas storage 

facility. The Department of Energy and SoCalGas have both written letters to the commission 

warning of possible blackouts and supply disruptions due to the Aliso Canyon decision, which l 

would like to submit for the record. This appears to be a significant problem waiting to happen. 

Will you commit to studying this issue and ensure that the FERC docs everything in their 

authority to protect the reliability of the grid for potentially effected consumers all along the 

transmission line? 

Answer: Yes. I agree that grid reliability is a critical aspect of the Commission's mission. If 

confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to best ensure the reliability of the grid. 

Questions from Senator Tammy Duckworth 

Question 1: With respect to concerns for our aging energy infrastructure, how do you view the 

need to balance what consumers can afford with the tremendous expense to upgrade existing 

facilities and/or to add new infrastructure? 
143 

Chatterjee 3 8 

~: I agree that the Commission has a statutory responsibility to both promote adequate 

investment in needed energy infrastructure and ensure that the rates subject to the Commission's 

jurisdiction are just and reasonable. The development of a record that renects a wide range of 

perspectives, including those of consumers, is essential to the Commission's ability to strike the 

right balance between these critical interests. 

Question 2: Just and reasonable cost allocations for electric transmission projects have been a 

subject for discussion at FERC. As I'm sure you arc aware, FERC Order I 000 established the 

"roughly commensurate" criteria for costs and benefits of transmission. How would you define 

"roughly commensurate"? Is that a standard that you believe is appropriate for all infrastructure 

costs? 

Answer: My understanding is that, drawing upon a term coined by the U.S. Court of Appeals 

for the Seventh Circuit, the Commission in Order No. 1000 required that the costs of new 

regional or inter-regional transmission facilities be allocated in a manner that is at least "roughly 

commensurate" with their benefits. In Order No. I 000, the Commission also required that the 

costs of such transmission facilities should not be allocated involuntarily to entities that receive 

no benefit from those transmission facilities. While I cannot now say whether this standard may 

be appropriate for all types of infrastructure costs, I support the general principle. 

Question 3: Regional Transmission Organizations (or RTOs/JSOs) typically build or upgrade 

new infrastructure to remedy reliability violations. What role, in your view, should cost play in 

the selection of transmission projects under order 1000 and as planned by RTOs? 

Answer: Order No. 1000, which the Commission issued in 2011, set forth new requirements 

with respect to transmission planning and cost allocation. The Order was intended to promote 

the identification of more efficient or cost-effective transmission facilities and to remove certain 

obstacles to the development of those facilities. Regional Transmission Organizations and 

Independent System Operators must consider costs in their regional transmission planning 

processes to comply with the requirements of Order No. 1000. 

The Commission has continued to examine issues related to interregional transmission 

development. I support this continued effort to make sure FERC policies are meeting their 

intended goals. In June 2016, the Commission convened a technical conference addressing 

competitive transmission development, including interregional transmission coordination. 

Several speakers at the technical conference, as well as some FERC Commissioners, questioned 

whether the Commission should do more to facilitate interregional transmission development. 

After the technical conference, the Commission requested post-technical conference comments 

on several issues related to interregional transmission development. If confirmed, !look forward 

to reviewing the record and addressing this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 4: FERC Order I 000 provided opportunity for competitive transmission investments 

by independent transmission companies. What, if any, transmission investments do you feel 

should be exempted from the order 1000 competitive transmission process? 
144 

Chatterjee 39 

~: Under Order No. 1000, many transmission projects are not subject to competitive 

transmission development processes. Order No. l 000 only requires that transmission facilities 

selected in the regional transmission plan for purposes of cost allocation are subject to 

competitive transmission development processes. In addition, Order No. I 000 did not require 

that local transmission facilities, which are defined as transmission facilities located solely 

within a public utility transmission provider's retail distribution service territory or footprint that 

are not selected in the regional transmission plan for purposes of cost allocation, be subject to 

competitive transmission development processes. The Commission also stated in Order No. 

I 000 that its reforms were not intended to affect the right of an incumbent transmission provider 

to build, own, and recover costs for upgrades to its own transmission facilities, regardless of 

whether an upgrade has been selected in the regional transmission plan for purposes of cost 

allocation. In later orders, the Commission further allowed certain transmission planning regions 

to exempt from their competitive transmission development processes transmission facilities 

needed in the near-term to address reliability concerns. 

More recently, the Commission convened a technical conference in June 2016 on competitive 

transmission development, at which the speakers discussed exemptions from the competitive 

transmission development process. Following the technical conference, the Commission issued 

a post-technical conference request for comments, which included questions on whether the 

Commission should broaden or narrow the type of transmission facilities that must be selected 

through competitive transmission development processes. If confirmed, I look forward to 

reviewing this record and addressing this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 5: FERC's use ofRTOs to plan and manage competitive markets has recently come 

under fire from various public interest groups. They point out that public interest has an 

extremely limited voice in RTO Stakeholder discussions and RTO actions taken behind closed 

doors seem to be condoned by FERC. Do you believe this is a valid concern and if so how 

would you address it? If not, where and how do you see public interest being considered at 

FERC? 

~: I understand that FERC has worked to maintain the transparency and responsiveness 

of RTO and ISO processes over the years. I recognize the importance of these efforts and the 

need for all stakeholders to be heard. If confirmed, !look forward to working with my 

colleagues on these issues. 

Question 6: What role should FERC play in any attempts to work toward a cleaner 

environment? 

Answer: FERC's policies ensure that the rules that govern organized and bilateral wholesale 

electric markets promote the delivery of reliable power in a manner that is nondiscriminatory and 

resource-neutral, resulting in efficient price signals that market participants can rely on to make 

investment decisions. 

The Commission must be aware of changes in the industry, including changes to the resource 

mix, state actions and technology developments, and then adapt to these developments in order 

to carry out our statutory responsibilities. 
145 

Chatterjee 40 

If confirmed, !look forward to working with my colleagues on these issues. 

Question 7: The recent "Wannacry" ransomware incident has once again brought cybersecurity 

to the forefront. Should FERC do more to ensure best practices are shared among utilities 

regarding detecting and preventing cybersecurity threats? How much information should be 

shared with state regulators? What role do you see at FERC for cybersecurity issues? 

Answer: My understanding is that FERC coordinates with federal and state government 

partners, and with industry stakeholders, to address cybersecurity issues. Through these efforts, 

FERC provides leadership, expertise, and assistance in identifying, communicating, and seeking 

comprehensive solutions to significant potential cybersecurity risks to PERC-jurisdictional 

energy infrastructure. 

For example, FERC is promoting identification and use of best practices in this area. FERC 

conducts analysis and outreach to share threat information and best practices tor defensive and 

recovery measures to help mitigate risk. These efforts complement other programs at FERC 

such as the mandatory reliability standards that FERC has adopted to protect the bulk power 

system from cybersecurity threats. 

Recognizing both the interconnected nature of utility systems and the nature of cybersecurity 

threats, 1 believe it is also valuable for FERC to work closely with states to share threat 

information and help implement best practices. It is my understanding that FERC assists states 

to better understand the cybersecurity threats to pipelines, such as by coordinating with other 

federal agencies to facilitate both unclassified and classified security briefings to state regulators. 

FERC also has a seat at the table of the Electricity Subsector Coordinating Council, a group that 

includes governmental leaders and CEOs from utilities who work together to prepare for largescale events to coordinate the response. 

Question 8: States that are split into two RTOs are encountering issues where generating 

resources have been separated from the loads that they were built or contracted to serve. How 

should proximity to resources, actual power flows, and pre-existing transmission rights be 

considered in RTO modeling? 

Answer: I cannot comment on these matters because the Commission has several open 

proceedings regarding inter-RTO coordination. If confirmed, !look forward to reviewing these 

matters with my colleagues. 

Questions from Senator Rob Portman 

Question 1: During the 114'h Congress, Sen. McCaskill and I co-sponsored legislation that 

became Title 41 of the FAST Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4370m ("FAST-41 "). FAST-41 created a new 

process to streamline permitting for significant infrastructure projects designated as "covered 

projects." Would it be beneficial for the FERC permitting and licensing process to operate 

within this new regulatory construct? 
146 

Chatterjee 41 

Answer: I am aware that the Commission designated both a Councilmember and a Chief 

Environmental Review and Permitting Officer to support the Federal Permitting Improvement 

Steering Council established by the FAST Act. In addition, the Commission has the greatest 

number of projects listed on the inventory of any federal agency. If confirmed, I look forward to 

working with my colleagues to ensure that up-to-date permitting information is presented to the 

public, as well as in establishing how independent agencies can effectively interact with the other 

permitting agencies subject to FAST-4!. 

Question 2: Do you support designating FERC as the lead agency in the licensing and 

permitting process, including the ability to set schedules for the review, comment, and permitting 

activities of other federal agencies? 

Answer: As provided by Congress in the Energy Policy Act of2005 and in the Federal Power 

Act, the Commission is the lead federal agency responsible for setting the environmental review 

schedule for all agencies acting on a federal permit. However, the Commission's scheduling 

authority does not override permit schedules, or agency processes otherwise established by law. 

If confirmed, !look forward to working with my colleagues to determine how the Commission 

can best coordinate the activities of multiple agencies that are subject to different statutes. 

Question 3: Do you believe the current hydropower licensing process is well functioning? If 

not, what changes do you recommend? 

Answer: I am aware that the hydropower licensing process is complex and that, as a matter of 

law, decision making does not rest solely with the Commission, but also with other agencies that 

have mandatory conditioning authority not only under the Federal Power Act, but also under 

other statutes. If confirmed, I will look forward to addressing the licensing process with my 

colleagues. 

Question 4: What are your views on how RTO-administered capacity markets arc working? 

Specifically, arc these markets supporting the development of a diverse array of electric 

generating facilities in light of past and pending coal plant retirements, while minimizing adverse 

impacts on consumers? If not, what steps would you take to improve or modify them? 

Answer: I believe that RTO-administered capacity markets have largely achieved their 

objectives in procuring adequate resources to meet their reliability criteria. However, changes 

may still be needed to support the development of electric generating facilities in light of past 

and pending coal plant retirements. Two of FERC 's core responsibilities are to ensure that the 

reliability of the bulk electric system is maintained and that wholesale electricity rates are just 

and reasonable. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to ensure that we meet these core 

responsibilities when evaluating RTO capacity markets. 

Question 5: I represent a state that choose to deregulate its electricity sector and leverage free 

market principles to deliver safe and reliable electricity to Ohio consumers. I am one of the few 

members on this committee who represents a state that has deregulated its electricity market. The 

rapid adoption of new technologies, low natural gas prices, and out-of-market subsidies have 
147 

Chatterjee 42 

been distressing competitive wholesale electricity markets. If confirmed, will you support FERC 

taking a leadership role in protecting wholesale electricity markets in order to ensure that 

electricity in these markets continues to be delivered safely and reliably? 

Answer: Congress tasked FERC with supporting the reliability of the bulk electric system and 

ensuring that wholesale electric rates are just and reasonable. If confirmed, I will ensure that 

PERC fulfills its role with regard to wholesale markets. 

Question 6: The Federal Power Act directs FERC to ensure that wholesale power rates are "just 

and reasonable." How do you believe that mandate applies today in the world ofRTOs? 

~: I believe that the Federal Power Act's mandate that FERC ensure just and reasonable 

wholesale power rates applies equally in both non-RTO and RTO regions. In regions where 

RTOs are in place, FERC reviews the justness and reasonableness of the market design, 

including effective oversight of that design, to ensure that the rates are just and reasonable. 

Question 7: In Ohio, rural electric co-ops ensure that over 885,000 consumers have access to 

reliable and affordable electricity. The Federal Power Act exempts rural electric co-ops from 

FERC jurisdiction and this statutory exemption contributes to the state's affordable electricity 

rates. Do you plan to adhere to the Federal Power Act and continue to exempt rural electric coops from FERC jurisdiction? 

Answer: Electric cooperatives that receive a certain type of financing or that sell less than a 

certain amount of electricity per year are exempt from certain provisions of the Federal Power 

Act. If confirmed, I commit to adhere to the provisions in the Federal Power Act regarding 

jurisdiction over electric cooperatives. 

Question 8: On May I" and 2"d ofthis year, FERC held a technical conference on the potential 

conf1icts between state policies and electricity grid operators. If confirmed, will you commit to 

reviewing the findings of the technical conference? 

Answer: If confirmed, !look forward to reviewing the findings of the technical conference and 

addressing these important issues with my colleagues. 

Questions from Senator Catherine Cortez Masto 

Question 1: In late 2016, FERC issued a proposed rule that would eliminate barriers to the 

participation of renewable energy and electric storage in wholesale markets. Will you support 

approval of the proposed rule? What changes, if any, would you support before issuing a final 

rule? 

~: I am reluctant to address the specifics of a final rule given that I have not had the 

opportunity to study the record, but if confirmed !look forward to addressing this issue with my 

colleagues. 

Question 2: Do you support removing market barriers so that renewable energy and electric 

storage resources can provide services in wholesale markets? 
148 

Chatterjee 43 

Answer: I believe that all resources should be able to compete for the ultimate benefit of 

consumers. Eliminating unjust and unreasonable barriers to participation in the market is an 

important aspect to ensuring competition among resources. 

Question 3: What additional actions could FERC take to allow distributed energy resources 

access to wholesale electricity markets? 

Answer: Late last year, FERC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Electric Storage 

Participation in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent 

System Operators proposed to address such barriers by providing a way by which distributed 

energy resource aggregators can participate in the organized wholesale electric markets. If 

confirmed, !look forward to reviewing the many comments the Commission received in 

response to the proposal and addressing this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 4: In the state ofNcvada, we have a successful renewable portfolio standard and have 

made great strides in creating a clean energy economy. Do you agree that states have the 

authority to establish the resource mix that best serves their customers? 

Answer: States have jurisdiction over the resource mix in their individual states, but the 

Commission also has responsibilities under the Federal Power Act. 1 appreciate the importance 

of these issues to states. I understand the Commission recently held a technical conference with 

the objective of further exploring how the competitive wholesale markets can incorporate 

resources promoted by state energy policies while ensuring that wholesale electricity rates 

remain just and reasonable and that the reliability of the bulk power system is maintained. If 

confirmed, I look forward to working with my colleagues on this matter. 

Question 5: If yes: How would you protect that authority? 

~: Should I be confirmed, you have my assurance that I will be committed to protecting 

states' rights. 

Question 6: If no: Why not? 

Answer: Please see my response to your Question 5 above. 

Question 7: Different regions of the country are reliably integrating renewable energy resources 

into the grid at very high levels. Numerous studies have shown that the grid can integrate far 

higher total levels of renewable energy on the grid than exist today. Do you agree that the 

evidence shows that solar and wind power can be reliably integrated into the power grid? 

Answer: We can rely on all forms of resources to ensure reliable and reasonably priced energy, 

including reliance on solar and wind power. Those resources are playing an ever increasing part 

in our energy mix and we need to find a way to make sure those resources can be reliably 

integrated. Thus, while 1 am aware of some studies that show certain levels of integration can be 

achieved, my focus if confirmed will be on what the Commission can do to get resources 

integrated in a reliable and cost-effective manner. 
149 

Chatte~jee 44 

Question 8: As levels of wind and solar energy resources expand, how important will regional 

coordination be in ensuring that these and other variable energy resources are cost-effectively 

integrated into the power grid? 

Answer: I believe regional coordination is crucial in enabling cost-effective and reliable 

integration of all resources into the electric grid. By taking advantage of a larger pool of 

geographically-diverse resources, regional coordination is necessary to help balance power 

supplies, maintain grid reliability, and reduce power costs for customers. 

Question 9: What can FERC do to facilitate this integration? 

Answer: I believe that FERC has a role with regard to the integration of variable energy 

resources in a cost-effective and reliable manner. 

I understand that FERC has sought to remove barriers to the integration of variable energy 

resources in its regulations. It has issued Order No. 764 requiring each public utility 

transmission provider to: (!)offer intra-hourly transmission scheduling; and, (2) incorporate 

provisions into the pro forma Large Generator Interconnection Agreement requiring 

interconnection customers whose generating facilities are variable energy resources to provide 

meteorological and forced outage data to the public utility transmission provider for the purpose 

of power production forecasting. 

If confirmed, [ look forward to working with my colleagues to monitor and review any proposed 

adjustments to specific markets or generic opportunities to ensure cost-effective integration of all 

resources including renewable energy resources. 

Question 10: What are the main barriers to identifYing transmission needs and getting these 

projects built? 

Answer: In recent years, the Commission has considered ways to address barriers to needed 

transmission development. Order No. I 000, which the Commission issued in 20 II, reformed 

public utility transmission providers' transmission planning processes and cost allocation 

mechanisms. As transmission planning regions work to implement both their Order No. I 000-

compliant regional transmission planning processes and interregional transmission coordination 

procedures, the Commission has examined a number of issues related to transmission planning 

and cost allocation. For example, the Commission convened a technical conference in June 2016 

on competitive transmission development. I support this continued effort to make sure FERC 

policies are meeting their intended goals. Following the technical conference, the Commission 

issued a request for post-technical conference comments on issues related to competitive 

transmission development, interregional transmission coordination, and regional transmission 

planning. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing this record and addressing this issue with 

my colleagues. 

Question 11: How will you promote joint and coordinated planning among regional 

transmission planners for necessary interregional transmission? 
150 

Chatterjee 45 

Answer: Interregional transmission development, including joint and coordinated interregional 

transmission planning, has been an issue before the Commission for several years now. Order 

No. 1000 required improved coordination between neighboring transmission planning regions 

for new interregional transmission facilities and that each public utility transmission provider 

participate in a regional transmission planning process that has an interregional cost allocation 

method for the costs of interregional transmission facilities. To date, the Commission has issued 

final orders approving interregional transmission coordination procedures for all the pairs of 

neighboring transmission planning regions that were required to comply with the Final Rule. 

Moreover, the technical conference on competitive transmission development that the 

Commission convened in June 2016 described in my response to the preceding questionfeatured a discussion of interregional transmission coordination, including joint and coordinated 

interregional transmission planning. Several speakers at the technical conference, as well as 

some FERC Commissioners, questioned whether the Commission should do more to facilitate 

interregional transmission development. After the technical conference, the Commission 

requested post-technical conference comments on several issues related to interregional 

transmission development. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the record and addressing 

this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 12: The lack of transmission is a barrier to transporting solar and wind energy to 

population centers. FERC Order No. 1000, requiring regional transmission planning and 

interregional coordination, was supposed to help identify transmission needs and solicit 

competitive transmission projects. Do you think that Order No. 1000's requirements tor regional 

transmission planning were a step in the right direction towards facilitating necessary 

transmission infrastructure? 

Answer: Order No. I 000 required each public utility transmission provider to amend its tariff to 

describe procedures that provide for the consideration of transmission needs driven by public 

policy requirements. This requirement applied to both local transmission planning processes and 

regional transmission planning processes. Specifically, the Commission required that each 

public utility transmission provider establish procedures through which it will identify 

transmission needs driven by public policy requirements in its local and regional transmission 

planning processes and evaluate potential solutions to those identified transmission needs. 

Question 11: What are the main barriers to identifying transmission needs and getting these 

projects built? 

Answer: In recent years, the Commission has considered ways to address barriers to needed 

transmission development. Order No. I 000, which the Commission issued in 2011, reformed 

public utility transmission providers' transmission planning processes and cost allocation 

mechanisms. As transmission planning regions work to implement both their Order No. I 000-

compliant regional transmission planning processes and interregional transmission coordination 

procedures, the Commission has examined a number of issues related to transmission planning 

and cost allocation. For example, the Commission convened a technical conference in June 2016 

on competitive transmission development. I support this continued effort to make sure FERC 

policies are meeting their intended goals. Following the technical conference, the Commission 

issued a request for post-technical conference comments on issues related to competitive 
151 

Chatterjee 46 

transmission development, interregional transmission coordination, and regional transmission 

planning. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing this record and addressing this issue with 

my colleagues. 

Question 12: How will you promote joint and coordinated planning among regional 

transmission planners for necessary interregional transmission? 

~: Interregional transmission development, including joint and coordinated interregional 

transmission planning, has been an issue before the Commission for several years now. Order 

No. 1000 required improved coordination between neighboring transmission planning regions 

for new interregional transmission facilities and that each public utility transmission provider 

participate in a regional transmission planning process that has an interregional cost allocation 

method for the costs of interregional transmission facilities. To date, the Commission has issued 

final orders approving interregional transmission coordination procedures for all the pairs of 

neighboring transmission planning regions that were required to comply with the Final Rule. 

Moreover, the technical conference on competitive transmission development that the 

Commission convened in June 2016- described in my response to the preceding questionfeatured a discussion of interregional transmission coordination, including joint and coordinated 

interregional transmission planning. Several speakers at the technical conference, as well as 

some FERC Commissioners, questioned whether the Commission should do more to facilitate 

interregional transmission development. After the technical conference, the Commission 

requested post-technical conference comments on several issues related to interregional 

transmission development. If confirmed, !look forward to reviewing the record and addressing 

this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 13: Should FERC consider the underutilization of current pipelines when considering 

the need for a new pipeline? 

Answer: As !understand the Commission's current policy, underutilization of current pipelines 

is one of the factors to be considered. If confirmed, I look forward to ensuring that all factors 

relevant to a determination that a proposed pipeline will serve the public interest are 

appropriately considered. 

Question 14: Should FERC consider long-term stranded cost risk in examining the need for new 

pipelines? 

~: My understanding is that the Commission evaluates the economic aspects of new 

interstate natural gas pipeline proposals. At present, such consideration is based on principles 

established in a 1999 Policy Statement. Under the Policy Statement, the pipeline applicant may 

not rely on its existing customers to help pay for the new project. This threshold requirement 

that the applicant must be willing to financially support the project without relying on existing 

customers appears to put the financial risk of overbuilding on the pipeline and not its existing 

customer. 

Question 15: Who should be responsible for the costs of any wasteful overbuilding? 
152 

Chatterjee 47 

Answer: As I stated during my confirmation hearing, we need to strike the right balance 

between ensuring consumer protection while allowing for responsible energy development 
153 

Questions for the Record and Responses for Mr. Robert Powelson 

June l, 2017 

Questions from Ranking Member Maria Cantwell 

Question 1: Chairman Murkowski and I tried to enact energy legislation last Congress that 

included reforms to hydroelectric I icensing at FERC. 

45 percent of FERC-Iicensed projects accounting for one-third of licensed capacity will begin 

pre-tiling for new licenses by 2030. For many of these projects, it will be the first time they will 

participate in the licensing process Congress in 1986 amended the Federal Power Act directing 

FERC to given equal consideration to environmental factors. 

I believe that, rather waiting for Congress to Act, FERC can, on its own, could make several 

changes that would improve interagency cooperation in the licensing process. For example, 

FERC could adjust how it implements its ex parte rules to encourage more of its sister federal 

agencies to accept cooperating agency status under the National Environmental Policy Act. 

FERC could also accept more requests from its sister agencies for studies likely to be required in 

any event under other federal statutes (e.g .. the Endangered Species Act) at a later stage. 

• If confirmed, will you help identify and reduce barriers to interagency cooperation within 

FERC's existing statutory authority? 

Answer: It is my understanding that the current hydropower licensing process is complex and 

involves not only input from numerous stakeholders but also gives mandatory conditioning 

authority to multiple agencies. If I am confirmed I look iorward to working with my colleagues 

to identify and address barriers to interagency coordination with regard to the hydroelectric 

licensing process. 

Question 2: Under its existing policy, FERC only considers investments in a project on a 

forward-looking basis as part of the licensing process. This creates a perverse incentive to delay 

potential investments that could benefit the environment and ratepayers. 

The Commission recently asked for comments on whether it should revise its current policy with 

respect to establishing the length of new license terms for hydroelectric projects. 

I have supported legislation to require the Commission to treat project investments by licensees 

under existing licenses (beyond those already required by the license) the same way it treats 

investments made under new licenses. This provision has been referred to as the "early action" 

provision. While accounting for prior investments may complicate the Commission's 

determination of an appropriate length license term, changing this policy could accelerate 

improvements in fish passage. turbine efficiency, and other project upgrades. 

• Will you commit to considering changing the Commission's current policy with respect 

to establishing the length of hydroelectric license terms by removing the perverse 

incentive to delay investments under current licenses? 
154 

Powelson 2 

Answer: As you indicate, the Commission has issued a notice of inquiry soliciting comments on 

its policy for setting new license terms for hydropower projects. Currently, the Federal Power 

Act requires these license terms to be between 30 and 50 years. The Commission's current 

policy bases license terms on the amount of developmental and environmental measures required 

by a new license. In the notice of inquiry, the Commission asked for comments on whether it 

should: retain the existing license-term policy; consider measures implemented during a prior 

license term; establish a 50-year default license term; include a more quantitative cost-based 

analysis; and establish license terms based on negotiated settlement agreements when 

appropriate. If confirmed, I will fully consider all of the responses to the notice and !look 

forward to addressing this issue with my colleagues. 

Question 3: Unlike the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the Securities and 

Exchange Commission, FERC cannot license or ban individual traders from trading in 

jurisdictional markets. It is estimated that more than 2,500 firms and thousands of individual 

traders participate in physical electricity and natural gas markets. Little is publicly known about 

which banks, hedge funds, utilities, and marketers are active players. 

Furthermore, a repeat offender previously fined by FERC can continue to trade. A trader 

convicted of criminal fraud, or a former securities or commodities trader who had their securities 

or commodities trading license revoked would still be permitted to trade over FERC markets. 

• Do you think that FERC should explore adopting a registry to keep track of repeat 

violators of market manipulation restrictions? 

• Do you think FERC should explore a licensing regime to, among other things, keep those 

convicted of market manipulation in other markets from participating in FERC-regulated 

markets? 

~: I believe in a strong enforcement of the Commission's rules and regulations. Ensuring 

that markets are free from fraud and manipulation is an impm1ant element of the FERC's work. 

To help protect the energy markets from manipulation, it would be useful to track repeat 

violators and those found to have engaged in manipulation in other markets. If confirmed, I look 

forward to discussing this issue with my colleagues and determining whether additional tools are 

needed. It is my understanding that legislation may be necessary if Congress wishes to develop a 

trader licensing regime. 

Question 4: The Federal Power Act (FPA) limits FERC'sjurisdiction with respect to certain 

utilities and FERC's authority to require participation in organized markets. Governmental 

entities and non-public utilities, including federal power marketing agencies, municipal utilities, 

rural electric cooperatives, and public utility districts, are exempt from most regulatory oversight 

by the Commission. 

• What is your understanding of the limitations on FERC's authority with respect to the 

Bonneville Power Administration? 
155 

Powelson 3 

• What is your understanding about FERC's authority to require utilities to participate in 

organized markets? 

• Will you abide by these limitations if confirmed? 

~: I recognize the importance of the Bonneville Power Administration to the Pacific 

Northwest. I am also aware that, FERC's authority over Bonneville is more limited than its 

authority over traditional public utilities. For example, pursuant to the Pacific Northwest 

Electric Power Planning and Conservation Act (Northwest Power Act), FERC's review of 

Bonneville's regional power and transmission rates is limited to whether Bonneville's rates meet 

the three specific requirements: (i) whether the rates are sufficient to assure repayment of the 

Federal investment in the Federal Columbia River Power System over a reasonable number of 

years after first meeting other costs; (ii) they must be based upon the Administrator's total system 

costs; and (iii) whether insofar as transmission rates are concerned, they must equitably allocate 

the costs of the Federal transmission system between Federal and non-Federal power. 

Separately, FERC has limited authority with respect to Bonneville under provisions ofthe 

Federal Power Act, such as with respect to reliability standards adopted pursuant to section 215 

of that statute. 

Additionally, I am aware that it is a voluntary decision on the part of an entity whether to join a 

regional transmission organization or independent system operator, the bodies that operate 

organized markets in various parts of the country. 

The limitations I address in this response are based in law, whether statute or prior FERC 

decisions. If confirmed, I would abide by those limitations, unless the law is changed. 

Question 5: Just before resigning Commissioner Bay wrote a Concurring Opinion to an order 

granting a natural gas pipeline certificate in which he suggested that the Commission should 

reconsider its use of precedent agreements between pipelines and potential future customers to 

assess whether a proposed new pipeline is needed. In particular, Commissioner Bay argued that 

precedent agreements involving pipeline affiliates are particularly suspect. 

• Do you agree with Commissioner Bay that the Commission should reexamine its policies 

for assessing whether a new pipeline is necessary? If not, why not? 

Answer: It is my understanding that the basic tenants employed by the Commission to 

determine whether a company has demonstrated that its proposed project is needed were 

established in 1999. If confirmed, 1 will work with my colleagues to review the Commission's 

policies for reviewing pipeline applications to ensure the Commission gives appropriate weight 

to all relevant factors. 

Question 6: Just before resigning Commissioner Bay wrote a Concurring Opinion to an order 

granting a natural gas pipeline certificate in which he suggested that the Commission should 

engage in a broad regional assessment of the environmental impacts of the Marcellus and Utica 

shale gas development activities. 
156 

Powelson 4 

Do you agree with this recommendation? If not, why not? 

Answer: I respectfully disagree with that recommendation. As a Pennsylvania state regulator 

who served on Governor Corbett's Marcellus Shale Commission and Governor's Wolf Pipeline 

Infrastructure Task Force, J believe that this issue would be better addressed at the state level. 

State environmental regulators and state public utility commissions are closer to the issues of 

shale gas development and are better equipped than the federal government to undertake such an 

assessment. 

Question 7: When FERC grants a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity to a 

proposed interstate natural gas pipeline, the developer is also granted eminent domain authority. 

Sometimes the eminent domain authority is used before the Commission has acted on a Request 

for Rehearing of its initial order and before a party to the proceeding has had an opportunity to 

seek judicial review of the order. 

• Do you believe that a pipeline should have the opportunity to utilize eminent domain 

authority if it remains possible that the Commission, pursuant to a Rehearing Order, or an 

appellate court, can still issue an order reversing FERC's decision to grant the 

Certificate? Please explain. 

~: It is my understanding that the Natural Gas Act confers on a pipeline company the 

ability to exercise the right of eminent domain once a Certificate of Public Convenience and 

Necessity is issued. However, if confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to review matters 

related to the concerns of landowners atTected by infrastructure projects. In my view, it is 

critically important for FERC to engage stakeholders in a collaborative manner and provide the 

highest level of transparency throughout the certification process. 

Question 8: Both the Federal Power Act and the Natural Gas Act require that a rate or tariff 

change proposed by a jurisdictional utility or interstate natural gas pipeline goes into effect if the 

Commission fails to act within 60 days of the proposal. There have been instances in which a 

rate increase has been permitted to go into effect because a tie vote prevented the Commission 

from acting. An appellate court has ruled that, in those circumstances, a party opposing the rate 

increase has no standing to challenge the rate change in court because FERC never issued an 

order on the matter. 

• Senator Markey has proposed legislation that would enable opponents of a rate or tariff 

change to seekjudieial review even if the Commission fails to issue an order due to a tie 

vote. Do you support this legislation? 

Answer: I believe this is an issue that is best addressed by Congress, as the situation described 

in the question results from FERC's authorizing statutes. However, as a general practice, I 

believe that it is appropriate for parties to a FERC proceeding who are adversely affected by a 

rate or tariff change to have the opportunity to seek relief in court. 
157 

Powelson 5 

Question 9: FERC Order No. I 000, which among other things, requires regional transmission 

planning, has received mixed reviews in part because it has not led to the development of 

transmission lines connecting separate energy planning regions, which would help access 

remotely located renewable electricity resources, such as wind and solar. 

• What do you believe FERC should do, if anything, to encourage interregional 

transmission planning? 

Answer: In Order No. I 000, FERC required public utility transmission providers to, among 

other things, develop and implement interregional coordination procedures with the public utility 

transmission providers in neighboring transmission planning regions for sharing information 

regarding the respective transmission needs of each region and for identifying and jointly 

evaluating potential interregional transmission solutions to those needs. 

I am a strong advocate for interregional transmission planning and, in my view, the 

Commission's implementation Order No. !000 is a work in progress. In 2016, FERC convened 

a technical conference on Order No. I 000 that considered a number of issues, including 

interregional transmission coordination. I believe that the technical conference was a step in the 

right direction and that an ongoing dialogue on interregional transmission development is 

important. If confirmed, I will continue to pursue a review of Order No. I 000 to determine what 

is working and what needs improvement. 

Question 10: Last year the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee held a hearing on 

natural gas pipelines. We heard testimony that, in some instances, existing natural gas pipelines 

are not being fully utilized. For instance, several interstate pipelines serving the northeast were 

not fully utilized during the Polar Vortex. 

• Do you believe we should explore how to use existing natural gas pipeline capacity more 

efficiently before the Commission grants new Certificates to build additional pipeline 

capacity in the same region? 

Answer: Making efficient use of existing capacity ensures that consumers benefit fully from 

previous investment in this type of infrastructure. I believe that it is important to make efficient 

use of existing natural gas pipeline capacity and that our nation is likely to need additional 

natural gas pipeline infrastructure. 1 also recognize, however, that investment in new pipelines 

can offer consumers greater opportunity to benefit economically from the emergence of shale 

gas. Such investment also may have the benefit of enhancing the resilience of the gas pipeline. 

Question 11: I am concerned that sophisticated energy traders can engage in schemes designed 

to manipulate energy markets without actually being in violation of a tariff on file with FERC. 

These traders argue that FERC' s anti-manipulation authority does not apply ifthere is no specific 

tariff violation? 

• Don't you believe that FERC's market manipulation authority can apply even if there is 

not a specific tariff violation? 
158 

Powelson 6 

Answer: Yes, I believe the Commission has made it clear in numerous orders that a tariff 

violation is not required in order to violate FERC's Anti-Manipulation rule. I understand that the 

prohibition against market manipulation stands separate from tariff provisions and other 

regulations which also must be followed. 

Question 12: Cybersecurity vulnerabilities in our nation's energy infrastructure pose grave 

national security and economic risks to the country. The Department of Homeland Security 

reported that 56% of cyber incidents against critical infrastructure in 2013 were directed at 

energy infrastructure. This number has since decreased: in 2016 it was down to 20%, but it is 

still too high. Although we have mandatory cybersecurity standards for electric utilities, natural 

gas pipelines are subject to merely voluntary guidelines issued by the Transportation Security 

Administration (TSA). 

• Given the increased dependence on natural gas for power generation for many ofFERC 

regulated utilities, don't you agree that there should be a mandatory standards regime for 

gas pipeline cybersecurity, just as there is for electric utility cybersecurity? 

Answer: I certainly agree that there is not a more critical and complex issue facing our country 

than ensuring that our nation's energy infrastructure is safe from cyber-attacks. However, with 

respect to the issue raised in your question, it is the Transportation Security Administration 

(TSA), and not FERC, that currently has the authority to establish mandatory cybersecurity 

regulations for natural gas pipelines. As such, Congress and the TSA are in the best position to 

evaluate TSA 's current natural gas pipeline security authority to determine if natural gas 

pipelines should be subject to additional or mandatory cybersecurity standards. Although lam 

unaware of any mandatory measures being planned by TSA, l understand that the agency is 

reviewing its voluntary cybersecurity guidelines for pipelines and FERC staff has offered to 

assist with this initiative. 

Question 13: The 2000-2001 western energy crisis did a lot of damage to my constituents and 

the economy throughout the region. It became clear to me in the aftermath that FERC did not 

have sufficient authority to prevent market manipulation and punish those engaged in these acts. 

Through the Energy Policy Act of2005 we gave FERC the authority it needed. The 

Commission has since investigated more than 100 cases of alleged manipulation, 32 of which 

have been settled. The Commission has imposed approximately $547 million in civil penalties. I 

understand that the industry thinks FERC's Enforcement Office has been too aggressive and that 

the new Trump Administration provides a golden opportunity to weaken the anti-manipulation 

program. 

• I need your commitment that you will support a strong Office of Enforcement that acts as 

"the cop on the beat" to prevent utilities and marketers from taking advantage of 

consumers. Will you give that commitment? 

Answer: Yes, l am committed to maintaining a strong FERC Office of Enforcement. 

If confirmed, I will bring to FERC the same enforcement discipline that I employed as a 

Pennsylvania state commissioner over the past 8Y2 years. My track record is very clear that I am 

not afraid to punish bad actors in the marketplace. 
159 

Powelson 7 

Question 14: Last month, Secretary Perry sent a memo to his Chief of Staff asking that the 

Department prepare a study examine the state of wholesale electricity markets, especially why 

coal and nuclear plants are having a hard time competing with natural gas and renewable 

resources. The Secretary's memo also hinted that state and federal renewable energy incentives 

are to blame. 

The Secretary followed this up a few days later with a speech in New York during which he 

suggested that the Trump Administration may try to preempt state programs, such as renewable 

energy standards. It does not take a rocket scientist to know that it is low natural gas prices, not 

renewable energy, that is making coal and nuclear power uncompetitive. 

But it is also troubling that the Administration appears to be suggesting that adding more 

renewable energy threatens grid reliability especially when our national labs have repeatedly 

found this is not true. It is even crazier that Secretary Perry is making these false statements 

since Texas has more wind power than any other state. 

• Are you aware that the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has found that 

the eastern grid and the western grid could each reliably accommodate 30 percent 

renewable energy rates without any changes and that a third NREL study concluded that 

renewable energy will be able to reliably generate 80% of U.S. power needs by 2050 if 

we invest in increased grid flexibility? 

Answer: I am aware of those studies and value the work of all of our National Laboratories. 

also believe that we as a nation should seek to rely on all forms of energy resources, including 

renewable resources. However, it is also important to be mindful of grid reliability. 

Question 15: There is a growing tension between state energy policies and Federally regulated 

electricity markets. Low wholesale electricity prices are benefiting consumers and challenging 

the economics of coal and nuclear power plants. The revolution in natural gas is the main cause. 

Commissioner Powelson, you in particular, have been a big booster of the benefits of the 

Marcellus Shale. 

Meanwhile, states continue to exercise their authority to encourage particular types of generation 

-especially zero emissions technologies. These policies have taken different forms, including: 

renewable portfolio standards (29 states), carbon caps (the Northeast and California), and direct 

payments to nuclear power plants (New York and Illinois). 

Last year, the Supreme Court made clear that the Power Act prohibits state policies that directly 

intervene in wholesale markets. But the Court left clear room for states to continue to preferring 

some resources over others. Given these facts, I worry about FERC rushing to judgment based 

on an outdated or ideological view of the grid. 

• Do you agree that FERC should not intervene and use the Federal Power Act to preempt 

state clean energy policies? 
160 

Powelson 8 

~: As a member of a state regulatory commission, I have a great appreciation for the need 

for FERC and the states to respect each other's boundaries. As you note, the Supreme Court 

found that a specific Maryland program impermissibly encroached on FERC-jurisdictional 

wholesale markets, and therefore is preempted. However, I understand that the Court also 

acknowledged that states may regulate within their domain even when their laws may have an 

incidental effect on areas within FERC's domain. I am aware that on May 1-2, 2017, the 

Commission held a technical conference on the interplay of state policy goals and the wholesale 

energy and capacity markets, and I believe this was a good first step in addressing the issue. At 

the conference, FERC Commissioners and state commissioners engaged in a discussion of 

potential options for solutions to reconcile the competitive market framework with the policy 

interests of states. I look forward to further examining this issue and reading the post-technical 

conference comments to determine if any next steps are necessary. 

Question 16: Since 1978, Section 210 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) 

has required monopoly utilities to purchase competitive renewable energy Jrom independent 

producers. While Congress has relaxed this requirement for utilities in organized electric 

markets, PURP A remains a key driver of renewable energy and competitive prices in the West 

and the Southeast. 

Last June, FERC held a technical conference on the implementation ofPURPA. Utilities used 

the technical conference to argue for greater FERC intervention to limit opportunities for small 

renewable energy developers. I believe state commissions already have many ways to tailor the 

must-purchase requirement to address local concerns. 1 am deeply skeptical about utilities 

running to Congress and FERC when they don't get their way with their own regulators. 

• Do you agree that regulators in traditional monopoly states have powerful ways to adjust 

the "must-purchase" requirement under PURPA? 

• Given the states' own authority under PURPA, why would FERC need to intervene to 

limit one of the only federal mechanisms that encourage independent power production in 

those states? 

Answer: PURPA sets forth specific roles for both FERC and the states. As I mentioned during 

my confirmation hearing, since the enactment ofPURPA the resource mix has and is continuing 

to change. PURPA was developed at time when the U.S. was facing severe scarcity in its power 

resources. Today, our country is approaching energy independence. I respect the established 

roles given to FERC and the states and if confirmed, I will review this matter with my colleagues 

to understand what is and is not working with respect to the Commission's implementation of 

PURPA. But as I also noted at my confirmation hearing, I believe it would make sense to make 

PURPA review a part of a future energy bill. Given the major shift in our country's energy 

landscape, I would support Congressional action to modernize PURPA to reflect the new energy 

landscape which includes combined heat and power (CHP), clean tech investment, distributed 

energy resources, just to name a few. 

Question 17: Would you continue FERC's encouragement of a holistic approach to 

transmission planning that incorporates non-wires alternatives, high-voltage transmission lines, 
161 

Powelson 9 

and advanced transmission technologies (such as high-capacity and high-efficiency conductors, 

compact transmission towers, and variable frequency transformers)? 

Answer: FERC, through Order Nos. 890 and I 000, placed requirements on public utility 

transmission providers to have open, transparent transmission planning processes that, among 

other things, identify a variety of solutions that may resolve the transmission planning region's 

needs more efficiently or cost-effectively. I support these efforts. 

Question 18: FERC is responsible for protecting against corporate affiliate abuse in a variety of 

transactions, including power sales and facility acquisition. Transactions between a public utility 

and a merchant affiliate can expose the utility's captive customers to cross-subsidizing the 

affiliate and its shareholders. 

• Are you familiar with the provisions of the Federal Power Act that prohibit public 

utilities from inappropriately cross-subsidizing non-utility corporate affiliates? 

• Will you commit to enforcing existing FERC standards applied to reviewing market rate 

contracts between corporate affiliates? 

• Do you agree that the transfer of facilities subject to FERC jurisdiction between a public 

utility and its merchant affiliate must always be scrutinized for cross-subsidization? 

Answer: Yes, I am familiar with the provision in section 203 of the Federal Power Act that 

prohibits transactions subject to the Commission'sjurisdiction that will result in crosssubsidization of a non-utility associate company or the pledge or encumbrance of utility assets 

for the benefit of an associate company absent Commission approval. I am also familiar with the 

Commission's policies under the section 205 of the Federal Power Act that protect customers 

from prohibited sales between a public utility and its market regulated power sales affiliates. 

I am familiar with FERC's standards that apply to market rate contracts between a public utility 

and its market regulated power sales affiliate, and if confirmed, I will, as with all of the 

Commission's rules and regulation, ensure compliance with them. 

Question 19: In 2013, Congress passed the Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act, directing 

FERC to investigate the feasibility of issuing a license for hydropower development at nonpowered dams and closed loop pumped storage projects during a two-year period. FERC 

implemented a pilot program, ultimately applied to one non-powered dam project in Kentucky, 

and issued a license for the project within two years. Members of this committee look forward to 

FERC's report, required under the 2013 law, on this process, following a workshop held by the 

Commission this spring. 

• If confirmed, how would you approach the challenge of reducing disincentives in the 

licensing process and potentially inadequate compensation in the wholesale markets to 

the development of hydropower at existing non-powered multi-purpose dams and at 

appropriately sited and designed pumped storage projects? 
162 

Powelson 10 

~: I understand that on May 25, 2017, Commission staff submitted to Congress the report 

required by the 2013 law, and that Commission staff stated in that report that hydropower 

licenses have been and can be issued in two years or less under the right circumstances. At the 

hearing, I mentioned that I believe that we should be able to rely on all forms of energy 

resources, including hydroelectric resources. If confirmed, I look forward to working with my 

colleagues to explore how the Commission could further reduce possible disincentives to the 

development of hydroelectric resources in appropriate circumstances. 

Questions from Senator Ron Wyden 

Question 1: It appears that the White House has thrown its support behind the Jordan Cove 

liquefied natural gas project, being discussed in my home state of Oregon. Should you be 

confirmed as FERC commissioner, will you commit to avoiding any step that could be 

interpreted as political interference from the White House in FERC's deliberative permitting 

process in Oregon and nationwide? And will you commit to leading a thorough and transparent 

stakeholder process, where all community voices in Oregon -- including tribal community voices 

-- can be heard? 

Answer: As a sitting public utility commissioner, I understand the need for both independence 

and public engagement in making decisions regarding infrastructure that serves the public 

interest. As I noted at the hearing, public input has to be part of the equation. An agency's 

decisions need to be based on established, transparent policies and sound technical analysis. If 

confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to issue decisions based on the record before us. 

Question 2: As you know, FERC has authority under the Natural Gas Act to review gas pipeline 

applications. What factors would lead you to deny approval for a new or expanded pipeline? 

Does that calculation change if there are customers for the proposed pipeline's capacity? 

~: I understand that pursuant to its responsibilities under the Natural Gas Act, FERC 

conducts both a non-environmental and an environmental review of proposed natural gas 

pipelines. The non-environmental review focuses on the engineering design, rate, and tariJI 

considerations. The environmental review involves coordination with multiple agencies to 

ensure the project can be completed in an environmentally safe and responsible manner. Should 

a proposed pipeline project fail to meet the requirements in the statute, that would warrant 

denying approval of the project. 

Question 3: Former Chairman Bay made comments before he left FERC noting that it is 

''inefficient to build pipelines that may not be needed over the long term and that become 

stranded assets.'' He also suggested that simply considering precedent agreements may not be an 

adequate measure of need. How would you define need for a gas pipeline? Is having customers 

for the pipeline's capacity enough? How is that decision-making changed if those customers are 

the same entities-- or affiliates of those entities--involved in seeking approval for the pipeline? 

Answer: There are many factors that must be considered in determining whether, as required by 

the Natural Gas Act, construction of a proposed pipeline is in the public interest. The standards 
163 

Powelson I l 

in place today were developed in 1999. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to ensure 

that the Commission considers all relevant factors in reviewing a project. 

Question 4: As commissioner, what steps would you take to promote public participation, 

transparency, and confidence in FERC's pipeline certification process by incorporating 

community, landowner and scientific inputs? 

~: As a state commissioner I appreciate the importance of public participation in an 

agency's proceeding. A full record that reflects comments on all sides of an issue enhances an 

agency's ability to make appropriate decisions. I am aware that, in order to satisfy the 

Commission's obligations under the National Environmental Policy Act, the agency has many 

long-standing practices for promoting public participation. The Commission also makes the 

project docket available to the public through its website, and solicits comments from any 

interested stakeholder. If confirmed, I will consider with my colleagues any additional steps that 

might be taken to increase public participation and confidence in the Commission's proceedings. 

Question 5: Also in his departing comments from FERC, former chairman Bay noted that it is 

"in light of the heightened public interest and in the interests of good government, I believe the 

Commission should analyze the environmental effects of increased regional gas production from 

the Marcellus and Utica." As Commissioner, if confirmed, can you commit to directing 

Commission staff to conduct such studies on new and expanded pipelines? 

Answer: I respectfully disagree with Chairman Bay's statement. This work is already being 

done by the states. In my home state of Pennsylvania, the Department of Environmental 

Protection (DEP) is effectively handling this responsibility. Given the states' expertise and 

closeness to the issues surrounding the production of natural gas, I believe they arc better 

equipped than the federal government to undertake any such assessment. 

Question 6: Chairman Bay also noted that "where it is possible to do so, the Commission 

should also be open to analyzing the downstream impacts of the use of natural gas and to 

performing a life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions study." It is my opinion that FERC should 

incorporate climate considerations into their evaluation of the environmental impacts of 

proposed natural gas pipelines and liquetied natural gas export facilities, as required under the 

National Environmental Policy Act. As Commissioner, ifcont1rmed, can you commit to 

including climate change considerations and analysis in the environmental review conducted on 

new and expanded pipelines? 

~: I understand that this issue has been raised in many of the pipeline cases recently 

before the Commission. I also understand that the Commission's environmental documents 

contain a section describing impacts potentially related to climate change tor regions in which a 

project is located. If confirmed, I will review this matter with my colleagues to determine how 

the Commission may best factor such information into its decisions. 

Question 7: I am concerned about abuse of eminent domain by the natural gas and pipeline 

industries in recent years, aided and abetted by premature and improper FERC authorization of 

eminent domain. A review ofFERC's approval process is needed, because of the ramifications of 
164 

Powelson 12 

the certificate, which grants the holder the ability to exercise eminent domain. If confirmed, will 

you take steps to review, and revise if necessary, the eminent domain proceedings at FERC? 

Also, can you commit to holding an evidentiary hearing, as articulated in FERC's official policy, 

when a significant amount of eminent domain is implicated in a project? 

~: It is my understanding that the Natural Gas Act confers on a pipeline company the 

ability to exercise the right of eminent domain once a Certificate of Public Convenience and 

Necessity is issued. However, if confirmed, I will review with my colleagues how concerns of 

landowners affected by infrastructure projects are addressed by the Commission, including 

whether it would be appropriate to implement any process changes. In my view, it is critically 

important for FERC to engage stakeholders in a collaborative manner and provide the highest 

level of transparency throughout the certification process. 

Question 8: Mr. Powelson, I was encouraged to see in your January 19 letter to the 

administration, that you support the rights of states to create their own energy policies, such as 

renewable portfolio standards. A broad coalition in Oregon, including consumer advocates, 

electric utilities and environmental groups, championed recent legislation to increase the 

renewable portfolio standard to 50% for our state. The state legislature made that decision and 

the governor signed that into law. Now, in some FERC-supervised markets, this sort of 

democratic process is under attack. FERC recently held a technical conference to explore those 

assaults on state authority. Do you support the federal government trampling states' rights to 

pursue state energy policies, such as renewable portfolio standards? Or do you think states 

should have the authority to establish their own energy policy through their constitutional rights? 

Answer: I do not support the federal government trampling states' rights to pursue energy 

policies and I agree that states have jurisdiction over the resource mix in their individual states. 

However, from time-to-time the state policies and PERC-jurisdictional wholesale electricity 

market rules intersect in a way that may burden the wholesale markets and the Commission's 

ability to ensure that wholesale electricity rates are just and reasonable. FERC is already 

considering these important issues and recently held a technical conference exploring these stateFERC issues. If confirmed, I will carefully consider all comments in record and look forward to 

working with my colleagues on these important issues going forward. 

Question 9: Energy storage is one of the most rapidly growing energy technologies out there, 

and it can provide multiple benefits to the grid. To get my vote, I'm going to need to see you 

commit to removing unfair barriers to energy storage--and other emerging technologies, like 

distributed energy resources--in the wholesale electricity markets. Do you agree FERC should be 

promoting technology-neutral competitive markets? More specifically, do you think energy 

storage assets--and "distributed energy resources" --should be able to compete in wholesale 

electricity markets? 

Answer: As I mentioned at my confirmation hearing, I believe the Commission should ensure 

that new technologies, such as storage and distributed generation, are not discriminated against 

in the markets. Energy storage has the potential to be a game changer for the bulk power system, 

in that it has the potential to supply substantial economic and reliability benefits to the grid. As a 
165 

Powelson 13 

member of the Electric Power Research Institute Advisory Board (EPRI), I am aware and 

encouraged by the exciting research underway on battery storage as a distributed resource. 

Last November, the Commission issued a notice of proposed rulemaking proposing to require 

RTOs and ISOs to establish market rules that accommodate the participation of electric storage 

resources in the RIO/ISO markets and allow aggregations of distributed energy resources to 

participate directly in the organized wholesale electric markets. The Commission stated that it is 

proposing these reforms to remove barriers to the participation of electric storage resources and 

distributed energy resource aggregations in the organized wholesale electric markets. If 

confirmed, I look forward to participating in rulemaking and reviewing this issue with my 

colleagues. 

Question 10: In your view, should FERC have a significantly different process for its 

certification of gas pipelines than it does for interstate transmission lines? 

Answer: There may be similarities in how a gas pipeline and an interstate transmission line 

should be sited. I understand that the Energy Policy Act of 2005 established backstop electric 

transmission line authority for the Commission, and the Commission subsequently issued 

regulations to implement that authority. However, appellate court decisions have limited the 

Commission's ability to use that authority and the sufficiency of the Department of Energy's 

designation of national interest transmission corridors. 

Question 11: Given that FERC has endorsed markets and competition for energy and ancillary 

services, is it your opinion that this approach can be successfully used tor any and all providers 

of all reliability-related services? 

Answer: Ancillary services are obtained through different mechanisms in various regions of the 

country. For those regions that choose to participate in organized markets, I believe that those 

markets bring benefits to the consumers in them. But organized markets are voluntary, and I 

believe they should continue to be voluntary to allow other parts of the country to rely on their 

own approaches to procuring resources. 

Question 12: Inter-regional, and economically beneficial electricity transmission is often 

neglected by the utility industry because of divisions in service areas, state's boundaries, and 

preferences of utilities to take narrow view of economic benefits. How will you support 

infrastructure investments, specifically electricity transmission. that bring lower energy costs to 

consumers? 

Answer: There are multiple ways that, if confirmed, I would support electric transmission 

infrastructure investment. Ncar the top of the list would be to provide regulatory certainty to 

industry by working with my colleagues to act as expeditiously as possible on the many cases 

pending before the Commission, including those on transmission planning, cost allocation, and 

rate matters. I would also work with my colleagues at the FERC and state commissions to 

continue the discussion the Commission started last year on regional transmission planning and 

interregional transmission coordination. 
166 

Powelson 14 

Question 13: Do you believe there's been a lack of development of interregional transmission 

facilities, and if so, are there actions the Commission should take to facilitate such development? 

Answer: The Commission has been considering the issue of interregional transmission 

development for a number of years now. In 201 I, the Commission issued Order No. 1000, 

which required improved coordination between neighboring transmission planning regions for 

new interregional transmission facilities and that each public utility transmission provider 

participate in a regional transmission planning process that has an interregional cost allocation 

method. In the years following the issuance of Order No. I 000, the Commission has issued 

further orders establishing interregional transmission coordination procedures for all the pairs of 

neighboring transmission planning regions. The Commission has continued to consider the issue 

of interregional transmission development as the regions have worked to implement their 

interregional transmission coordination procedures. I support this continued review. 

In June 2016, the Commission convened a technical conference on competitive transmission 

development, including interregional transmission coordination. At the technical conference, 

several speakers and FERC Commissioners raised questions regarding the state of interregional 

transmission development and, in particular, whether there is more that the Commission canand should-do to facilitate the development of interregional transmission projects. The 

Commission also requested post-technical conference comments on several issues related to 

interregional transmission development. If confirmed, I will review the record on this matter 

with my colleagues. 

Question 14: How will you facilitate the development of interregional transmission projects 

shown to provide more efficient or cost-effective solutions to regional needs? 

~: As l stated in my response to the preceding question, the Commission is currently 

considering this issue after its June 2016 technical conference. Through the technical conference 

proceeding, the Commission has developed a record reflecting a wide range of parties' concerns 

with existing interregional transmission coordination requirements and ideas for facilitating more 

efficient or cost-effective interregional transmission development. If confirmed, I will review 

the record on this matter with my colleagues. 

Question 15: How will you promote joint and coordinated planning between regional 

transmission planners for needed inter-regional transmission? 

Answer: As noted in response to your previous questions, the issue of joint and coordinated 

planning for interregional transmission facilities was addressed at the June 2016 technical 

conference and the subject of many post-technical conference comments. If confirmed, l will 

review this record with my colleagues. 

Question 16: Will you ensure interregional transmission project proposals have the opportunity 

to be studied by each affected Regional Transmission Organization? 

~: Order No. 1000, which the Commission issued in 2011, requires that to be eligible for 

interregional cost allocation, an interregional transmission project must be selected in each 
167 

Powelson 15 

region's regional transmission plan for purposes of cost allocation. Thus, all potential 

interregional transmission projects must be considered through each transmission planning 

region's regional transmission planning process before they are eligible for interregional cost 

allocation under Order No. l 000. This is the case in both those regions in which the Regional 

Transmission Organization is the regional transmission planner and in those regions without 

Regional Transmission Organizations. 

Question 17: How will you ensure that interregional evaluation processes and cost allocation 

methods encompass the full range of benefits (e.g., reliability, resilience, security, facilitating 

state policies, and congestion/planning reserve margin reduction) provided by interregional 

projects? 

Answer: As I stated in my response to Question 13, the Commission convened a technical 

conference last year to address issues relating to competitive transmission development, 

including interregional transmission development. The issues of the evaluation processes and 

interregional cost allocation methods that apply to interregional transmission facilities were 

discussed both at this technical con terence and in the post-technical conference comments. If 

confirmed, I will review this record with my colleagues. 

Questions from Senator Bernard Sanders 

Climate change 

Question 1: President Trump has suggested in the past that climate change is a hoax. Is the 

President correct? Is climate change a hoax? 

Answer: As I stated in my confirmation hearing, I am not a climate change denier. I have seen 

first-hand the impacts of storms like Super Storm Sandy and other weather related events and 

their impact on our state and region. So, I would not use the word hoax to describe climate 

change and the science behind it. 

Question 2: Do you agree with the vast majority of scientists that climate change is real, it is 

caused by human activity, and that we must aggressively transition away from fossil fuels toward 

energy efficiency and sustainable energy like wind, solar, and geothermal? 

~: Yes, I agree that climate change is real and that we need to develop strategies to 

address climate change that include energy efficiency, clean technology investment, renewables, 

new nuclear, clean coal and natural gas. 

Question 3: Do you agree with the vast majority of scientists that the combustion of fossil fuels 

contributes to climate change? 

~: Yes, I agree with that statement. 
168 

Powelson 16 

Question 4: Do you believe that FERC has a role in reducing the extraction and use of fossil 

fuels? 

Answer: It is my understanding that FERC's policies arc resource- and fuel-neutraL The 

Commission relies on competitive markets to provide just and reasonable rates and reliable 

service for consumers, and to send appropriate investment signals for developers. Moreover, the 

Natural Gas Act does not give the Commission the authority to regulate natural gas extraction or 

use. 

Question 5: If confirmed, how will you work to address climate change? 

Answer: If confirmed, I will support the market-based policies that have driven the reduction in 

carbon dioxide emissions that we are seeing in the power sector today in the United States. 

Energy system transformations 

Question 6: In 2015, you advocated for on-bill financing so that customers can more easily 

finance energy-saving home measures. I am also a fan of on-bill financing. You also said it will 

be difficult for electric utilities to buy into on-bill financing without cutting the link between 

electricity sales and profits. "Personally l think Pennsylvania needs to come out of the stone ages 

here," were your exact words. Do you still support decoupling of electricity sales and profits? If 

confirmed, how will you consider proposals to decouple wholesale electric rates? 

Answer: As evidenced by my time at the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, I have been 

a progressive regulator with respect to encouraging new and innovative technologies in the 

electricity markets. I strongly support decoupling on the retail side, as empirical evidence shows 

that it brings about more sustainable investment in energy efficiency and conservation measures 

at the state level. On the wholesale side, I supported FERC's efforts in Order No. 745, which 

were eventually affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court. 

Question 7: What do you believe are the best ways to achieve a sustainable, carbon-free energy 

future? 

Answer: In my view, the best way to achieve a sustainable, carbon-free future is to support a 

21 "'Century energy policy that encourages innovation in the way we generate, transmit and 

distribute power. Thanks to these market-based efforts, we are already seeing improvements in 

the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions in the U.S. According to the EPA, greenhouse gas 

emissions in 2012 were I 0 percent below 2005 levels. ln my home state of Pennsylvania, carbon 

dioxide emissions have fallen over 30 percent since 2005. Moreover, according to the Energy 

Information Administration, this past year the U.S. power sector emitted less carbon dioxide than 

the nation's transportation sector. I believe the market is driving these changes and that we need 

to support that going forward. 

Question 8: What ways can FERC prevent economic harm to low-income Americans during 

transformations of the energy system? 
169 

Powelson 17 

Answer; FERC has always remained diligent in ensuring that wholesale market participants 

adhere to market rules. In addition, the PERC's core responsibility is to ensure just and 

reasonable wholesale electricity rates and natural gas transmission rates. These roles are critical 

to protecting customers. If confirmed, I will not waver in my commitment to ensuring that 

FERC continues to adhere to these principles. 

Question 9; What role do you see FERC has in increasing the reliability of the electric grid to 

increasingly extreme weather while ensuring generation is sustainable and low-carbon? 

~; Under section 215 of the Federal Power Act, the Commission reviews reliability 

standards for approval and enforces those standards. Under certain circumstances, FERC may 

require NERC to develop a reliability standard to address a matter. The reliability standards are 

largely resource neutral. My understanding is that FERC looks to the Electric Reliability 

Organization to perform event analysis for extreme weather events on an interconnection wide 

basis; such analysis considers the use/performance of all resources to assess the risks to 

reliability during the extreme weather. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues and engage 

relevant stakeholders on such matters. 

Question 10: If confirmed, what steps will you take at FERC to help the U.S. transform its 

energy system as quickly as possible from one based on carbon-intensive fuels to one based on 

clean, sustainable fuels? 

Answer: My understanding is that FERC's policies are resource- and fuel-neutral. The 

Commission relies on competitive markets to provide just and reasonable rates and reliable 

service for consumers, and to send appropriate investment signals for developers. However, on 

May 1-2, 2017, FERC held a technical conference to explore the interplay between wholesale 

markets and policy goals of states, including their support of particular resource attributes or 

externalities. If confirmed, I expect to further evaluate the interaction of the Commission's and 

state policy goals. 

Question 11: Energy prices impact all American families. Yet climate change poses 

catastrophic economic, environmental and social threats to all Americans. Delaying action on 

climate change has severe long-term costs. Moreover, renewable energy sources like wind and 

solar are the cheapest available, and aren't subject to the sorts of wild price fluctuations that we 

see with fossi I fuels. When combined with aggressive energy efficiency, they can provide 

cheaper energy over the long term than dirty fossil fuels. 

If confirmed, what steps will you take at FERC to help the U.S. transform its energy system, as 

quickly as possible, from one based on carbon-intensive fuels to one based on clean, sustainable 

fuels? 

Answer: If confirmed, I will refrain from picking "winners and losers" in the energy 

marketplace, as that is not FERC's role. Please see my response to your Question I 0 above. 

Question 12: In Vermont, energy efficiency investments have saved $279 million in avoided 

regional transmission system upgrades. What additional steps can FERC take to aggressively 
170 

Powelson 18 

promote the use of energy efficiency and other strategies to avoid unnecessary expensive new 

transmission lines and new base load power plants? 

~: I support state initiatives on energy efficiency. Vermont and Pennsylvania are national 

success stories on the adoption of energy efficiency investments. In Pennsylvania, I oversaw the 

successful implementation of Act 129, which is Pennsylvania's energy efficiency and 

conservation law. Utilities spent close to $1 billion in energy efficiency measures, which 

resulted in customers receiving net benefit of close to $1.8 billion. Those programs are working. 

FERC has a different role with respect to energy efficiency. With respect to transmission 

planning, the Commission requires that public utility transmission providers allow consideration 

of non-transmission alternatives in both their local and regional transmission planning processes. 

In addition, two of the wholesale markets that the Commission regulates, PJM and ISO-NE, 

provide a mechanism for energy efficiency investments to participate in and receive 

compensation for their capacity value from the wholesale capacity market. Additionally, FERC 

should remain vigilant in making sure that demand side resources are adequately compensated 

for the benefits that they provide. The success of Order No. 745 is a prime example of that 

effort. 

Question 13: What steps can FERC take to prioritize dispatching clean distributed renewable 

energy before dispatching fossil fuel generation? 

~: It is not FERC's role to pick one resource over another. However, with strong market 

rules, I am confident that investments in clean technology will continue well into the future. 

Moreover, my understanding is that the RTO/ISO markets dispatch the least cost resources to 

meet demand, subject to reliability constraints. Resources offer their supply into the markets 

based on their marginal cost of production. Many renewable energy resources have no fuel 

costs, and have low or zero marginal costs, and thus are economic to dispatch whenever they are 

available. They are fully dispatched by the RTO/JSO markets unless transmission lines become 

overloaded or other reliability constraints prevent their full dispatch. Most renewable energy 

resources that are connected to the retail distribution system are not dispatched by the RTO/ISO 

markets, but those also typically generate when they are available. They displace the higher 

marginal cost resources that the RTO/JSO would otherwise need to operate to meet load. 

Question 14: If confirmed, will you commit to encouraging utilities around the country to 

dramatically expand rooftop solar and other types of distributed generation? 

Answer: To date, the increasing penetration of rooftop solar has been driven by state policy 

choices, and other drivers that are not directly under the control of the Commission. 

Nonetheless, FERC has sought to remove barriers to participation by various types of resources 

in the markets it oversees. For example, FERC has approved rules that allow market operators 

like JSO-NE to recognize distributed generation capacity when establishing its capacity 

requirement so that states get the capacity benefit of actions designed to encourage rooftop solar 

and other distributed generation. In addition, the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Electric 

Storage Participation in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and 

Independent System Operators that the Commission issued in November 2016 included a 
171 

Powelson 19 

proposal to address potential barriers to the participation of aggregations of distributed energy 

resources in the organized wholesale electric markets. The Commission is currently considering 

comments on this issue, and ifcont1rmed, I will review this input and look forward to working 

with my colleagues on these important issues. 

Question 15: Grid reliability is an important priority for FERC, but opponents of renewable 

energy often use this "reliability" argument as an excuse for dismissing or undervaluing 

renewable energy. What steps will you take to ensure that FERC can protect the reliability of the 

grid while also transforming our energy system? 

Answer: Our nation's energy resource fuel mix is going through a transition. One component 

of this transition is identifying the types and levels of essential reliability services needed for 

reliable operation. If cont1rmed, I would work collaboratively with my colleagues to consider 

whether and how renewable energy resources can and should provide such essential reliability 

services, where technically capable of doing so. 

It is clear to me that clean energy is good business. When you look across the U.S. today. 

renewable energy makes up almost 15 percent of the energy portfolio and that percentage is 

growing. FERC will need to work with states, industry, and other stakeholders to promote 

system modernization and develop sound regulatory policies. 

Question 16: Are reforms needed to the wholesale market structures to support distributed 

energy resources? If not, do you commit to ensuring that wholesale markets continue to support 

distributed energy resources? If so, what could be done to ensure wholesale markets better 

support distributed energy resources? 

Answer: Removing barriers to the participation of new technologies such as distributed energy 

resources in the markets that FERC oversees can bring benefits to consumers. As I have noted, 

this issue is currently under consideration at the Commission. In November 2016, the 

Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Electric Storage Participation in 

Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators 

in which it proposed a number of reforms to remove potential barriers to the participation of 

electric storage resources and distributed energy resource aggregations in the organized 

wholesale electric markets. Specit1cally, the Commission proposed to require each Regional 

Transmission Organization and Independent System Operator to revise its tariff to allow 

distributed energy resource aggregators to participate directly in the organized wholesale electric 

markets. The Commission received a signit1cant number of comments in response to this 

proposal. If cont1rmcd, !look forward to reviewing this matter with my colleagues. 

Question 17: If cont1rmed, what steps will you take to move the American grid to a distributed, 

interconnected system? 

Answer: As noted, in November 2016, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking on Electric Storage Participation in Markets Operated by Regional Transmission 

Organizations and Independent System Operators. The Commission proposed to remove barriers 

to the participation of aggregations of distributed energy resources in the organized wholesale 

electric markets. If confirmed, I will review the record in this proceeding with my colleagues. 
172 

Powelson 20 

Question 18: If confirmed, will you support the development of large and small-scale storage, 

which will make our grid more resilient and encourage the buildout of renewable energy 

technology? 

~: My view is that we should be able to call on all types of energy resources to serve the 

nation's needs, which includes renewable and electric storage resources. Barriers that keep 

otherwise competitive resources out of the market interfere with being able to rely on all types of 

resources. Potential barriers to the participation of electric storage resources in the organized 

wholesale electric markets is an issue that the Commission is currently considering. 

In addition, in December 2016, FERC proposed revisions to its rules governing generator 

interconnection that would specifically include storages resources in the definition of generating 

facilitating, thereby allowing storage resources to use these generator interconnection processes 

to interconnect with the grid. The proposal included revisions that would help leverage existing 

assets in the interconnection process, which would help storage interconnect more quickly. 

If confirmed, I will review these matters and look forward to working with my colleagues on 

these important issues. 

Question 19: Do you see a role for FERC in encouraging ancillary and reliability services 

markets to ensure all generators can compete to provide services to maintain grid reliability and 

get compensated for those services? 

Answer: FERC has identified ancillary services that are necessary to maintain reliable operation 

of the grid. As noted in my response to your Question 15, one component of the transition in our 

nation's energy fuel mix is identifying the types and levels of essential reliability services needed 

for reliable operation. In both of these contexts, offering opportunities for resources that are 

technically capable of providing these services to do so can benefit consumers. 

Question 20: The 2017 Infrastructure Report Card produced by the American Society of Civil 

Engineers rates our nation's energy infrastructure as aD+. Most electric transmission and 

distribution infrastructure was built in the 1950s and 1960s with a 50-year life expectancy and 

the over 640,000 miles of backbone transmission infrastructure is at full capacity. How will you 

facilitate the transmission infrastructure investment needed to modernize and expand our grid, 

particularly on an interstate basis? 

~: There is no doubt that our nation's bulk transmission system is aging and needs 

modernization so that we can continue to move towards a clean energy future. There are several 

ways FERC can promote investment in the transmission infrastructure that is needed to maintain 

and modernize our grid. One is to provide the regulatory incentives to make these investments 

viable over the next decade. I believe that FERC can use its ratemaking tools to promote 

investment, while also ensuring that rates are just and reasonable. In addition, I understand that 

FERC has taken steps for regional transmission planning processes that are intended to identify 

and then remove barriers to development of more efficient or cost-effective transmission. 
173 

Powelson 21 

Question 21: The Public Utility Regulatory Policy Act (PURPA) allows industrial companies to 

build and operate combined heat and power (CHP) and waste heat to power (WHP) facilities that 

can simultaneously produce economical steam and electricity with energy efficiencies up to 80 

percent. Do you support maintaining PURPA as currently enacted? 

~: PURPA was developed at time when the U.S. was facing severe scarcity in its power 

resources. Today, our country is approaching energy independence. Given the major shift in in 

our country's energy landscape, I would support Congressional action to modernize PURPA to 

reflect the new energy landscape which includes CHP, clean tech investment, distributed energy 

resources, just to name a few. 

Supporting the policy goals of individual states 

Question 22: Given your stated dedication to state rights to dictate in-state energy policies, how 

will you ensure that states retain control of policies that incentivize distributed generation? 

Answer: In FERC's proposal to allow for aggregated distributed resources to participate in the 

organized markets, the centralized wholesale markets must coordinate this participation with the 

operation of the distribution system. In additions, the Commission recently conducted a 

technical conference to specifically explore how the competitive wholesale markets supervised 

by FERC can select resources of interest to state policy makers-including those to incentivize 

distributed resources-while preserving the benefits of regional markets and economic resource 

selection. If confirmed, I look work with my fellow commissioners on these important issues. 

Question 23: Approximately 30 states have passed renewable portfolio standards. States are 

enacting these policies for a wide variety of reasons including fuel diversity, environmental 

benefits, and economic development. If confirmed, how would you act to protect states' rights to 

decide their own energy policy? 

Answer: States may determine their individual resource mix within their jurisdiction. State 

policies sometimes interact with FERC-jurisdictional wholesale electricity markets. If 

confirmed, I will make every effort to respect state jurisdiction over their resource mixes while 

carrying out FERC's core responsibility of ensuring that wholesale electricity rates are just and 

reasonable. 

Question 24: While recognizing that FERC must place a premium on system reliability, many 

states have established aggressive energy policy goals. Vermont, for instance, is committed to 

reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 90% by 2050. Should you be confirmed, what steps will 

you take to give more weight to the policy goals of individual states? 

~: Congress has tasked FERC with ensuring that the bulk power system remains reliable 

and that wholesale electricity rates are just and reasonable. I recognize states' rights and the 

importance of state energy policy goals. If confirmed, I wi II make every effort to respect those 

state energy decisions while carrying out my responsibilities under federal law. 
174 

Powelson 22 

Stakeholder influence and FERC management 

Question 25: What specific issues in FERC regulation of energy markets cause you concern? 

Answer: During my experience as a state regulator, I have come to believe that it is important to 

"do the boring well." If given the opportunity to serve as a Commissioner at FERC, that will 

mean ensuring that the agency abides by its core mission of ensuring just and reasonable rates for 

wholesale electric and natural gas providers. It is my understanding that because FERC has been 

operating without a quorum for the past few months, there is a lot of work to be done to address 

the backlog of issues that have built up without a full complement of Commissioners. If 

confirmed, my first order ofbusiness will be to address the outstanding issues that are pending 

before the Commission and get the agency back up to speed. 

Beyond that, if confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the post-technical conference comments 

regarding Order No. !000 and examining the success of the Commission's efforts to encourage 

transmission planning. The issue of state policies and their impacts on organized markets is 

another important topic that I look forward to examining given the widespread implications it has 

for the future of markets. 

Question 26: If confirmed, how will you work to prevent undue influence on FERC by the 

fossil fuel industry? 

Answer: I believe in the importance of robust and transparent participation of all interested 

parties in matters before FERC. To be an effective regulator, you must be able to call the balls 

and strikes, and if confirmed, I intend to do that in an unbiased and transparent fashion. During 

my 8 y, years as a state utility regulator in Pennsylvania, I have learned the value of considering 

all points of view before making a decision and if confirmed, I will continue that practice that 

approach at FERC. 

Question 27: As a result of the Enron scandal, Congress changed FERC's enforcement and civil 

penalty authority under the Energy Policy Act of2005. What lessons does the Enron scandal still 

have for FERC? 

Answer: In my view, the Enron scandal serves as a stark reminder that, notwithstanding the 

Commission's best efforts to design and implement well-functioning competitive markets, FERC 

must be vigilant in its oversight of the energy markets. Products and technology arc constantly 

evolving, so FERC's monitoring must constantly evolve as well. I understand that FERC has 

developed a surveillance program to detect potential manipulation and, if confirmed, I look 

forward to learning more about that program and doing what I can to assure that it continues to 

keep up with changes in the markets. 

Question 28: One of FERC's most important responsibilities is to investigate and enforce 

against market manipulation. Is FERC devoting adequate resources to these enforcement 

activities? Arc the fines sufficient? If confirmed, what steps will you take to sustain and improve 

on FERC's enforcement capacity and success? 
175 

Powelson 23 

~: I believe that the penalties provided in the Energy Policy Act of2005 are sufficient to 

deter and penalize market manipulation. I understand that FERC has significantly enhanced its 

investigatory and enforcement capabilities over the decade since enactment of that statute. If 

confirmed, I look forward to learning more about these capabilities in an effort to improve 

further FERC's enforcement program. 

Question 29: After the 2003 electricity blackout, Congress included federal backstop siting 

provisions for interstate transmission lines in the Energy Policy Act of2005. These included 

Section 1221 for National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors, which has never been 

implemented effectively. Would you support FERC taking on the responsibilities of the corridor 

designation authority if the Department of Energy was willing to delegate its role to FERC, 

which would consolidate the designation authority with the backstop siting authority FERC 

already has under the Energy Policy Act? 

Answer: I appreciate that although it would be a decision for the Department of Energy (DOE) 

to decide whether to delegate the corridor designation authority to the Commission, I would 

comply with whatever authority that the DOE chose to delegate to the Commission. If 

confirmed, and such authority is delegated by DOE, I will review this matter with my colleagues 

and with DOE, as appropriate, to determine the most efficient and effective way to implement 

the delegated authority. 

Question 30: FERC is incredibly complicated, and the barrier to entry for someone to simply 

understand FERC proceedings, much less to participate, is extremely high. Stakeholders with 

considerable financial resources can participate, but everyone else is effectively excluded. How 

can FERC do a better job of ensuring all interested parties can meaningfully participate in FERC 

processes? 

~; While some of the issues within FERC's purview can be complex, FERC proceedings 

are on the record and open to any interested party. In addition, FERC's website provides a wide 

variety of information both the substance of FERC's policies as well as the process for 

participating in its proceedings. FERC should continue to maintain as much transparency as 

possible into its work in order to ensure that both industry and the public can meaningfully 

participate in Commission proceedings. 

Question 31: If confirmed, would you support the creation of a "consumer advocate" office at 

FERC? 

Answer: I do not believe that the creation of such an office at FERC is necessary. In my view, 

the public comment process at FERC provides all interested parties with the ability to participate 

in the process and express their positions on issues. Moreover, each RTO and ISO has an 

independent market monitor that oversees and reports on activities within the market to FERC. 

In addition, FERC has a very robust investigative and enforcement unit that can adequately 

address any problems it identifies within the wholesale markets. Given the safeguards already in 

place at FERC, I do not believe there is a need for such an office at this time. 

Conflicts of interests 
176 

Powelson 24 

Question 32: The Edison Electric Institute (EEl) represents all U.S. investor-owned electric 

utilities. As President ofthe National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners 

(NARUC), you may know that in the 1980s, NARUC conducted a 20-month investigation into 

EEl's misuse of money collected from ratepayers for lobbying and public relations. One of the 

final audits from NARUC revealed that 50% of EEl's expenditures went to pay for these 

political activities. Yet, NARUC stopped auditing EEl data in the early-2000s. Ifcont!rmcd, will 

you commit to ensuring that rate-payers arc protected from paying for lobbying that seeks to 

protect or improve private profits? 

Answer: Under FPA sections 205 and 206, FERC ensures that the rates, terms and conditions of 

sales for resale of electric energy and transmission service in interstate commerce by public 

utilities are just, reasonable, and not unduly discriminatory or preferential. The Commission's 

Uniform System of Accounts Account No. 426.4 captures expenditures related to lobbying and 

other activities. Clarity of expenses included in this Account allows for scrutiny in a rate 

proceeding. In addition, the Commission has held that the portion of expenses used for lobbying 

activities may not, under any circumstances, be included in the utility's cost of service. Finally, I 

would note that the Commission may investigate and address any accounting impropriety that 

may develop. 

FERC abuses of power in reviewing and approving pipeline infrastructure 

Question 33: While instilling important powers in the federal government, the Clean Water Act 

also ensures the protection and respect of states' rights. Section 401 ofthe Act explicitly states 

that no [federal] license or permit shall be granted until the certitlcation required by this section 

has been granted or waived. Similarly, the U.S. Supreme Court has said Section 401 requires 

States to provide a water quality certification before a federal license or permit can be issued and 

without [Section 40 1] certification, FERC lacks authority to issue a I icense. 

Given the language of the Clean Water Act and its interpretation by the Courts, do you think it 

appropriate that FERC is routinely issuing its Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity 

for pipeline projects prior to all affected states rendering their decisions on Section 40 l 

certification? If confirmed, will you commit to ensuring all relevant state level permits are 

granted prior to issuing a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for any pipeline 

project? 

Answer: I understand that it has been Commission policy to issue conditional certificates of 

public convenience and necessity for natural gas pipeline projects which preclude natural gas 

companies from commencing construction until they have obtained all necessary authorizations 

under federal law, including Clean Water Act certification. It is also my understanding that the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit recently held that a certificate 

conditioned on the receipt of state water quality certification did not authorize a discharge into 

the navigable waters of the United States and so did not violate the Clean Water Act. If 

confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to ensure that all Commission decisions regarding 

natural gas pipeline projects are consistent with law. 
177 

Powelson 25 

Question 34: Under federal law, a private party is not allowed to legally challenge FERC 

approval of a pipeline project until they have first submitted a rehearing request to FERC, and 

FERC has affinnatively granted or denied that request. Rather than do one or the other, FERC's 

practice has been to issue a tolling order in response to such requests, which puts the request 

under further consideration. The result is that communities are put into legal limbo, unable to 

challenge the FERC decision until a final grant or denial is issued from the agency. Routinely 

FERC leaves people in that legal limbo for months, and sometimes over a year, while it allows 

the applicant to exercise the power of eminent domain and advance construction. 

Do you see the use of tolling orders as an abuse of power by FERC? If confirmed, will you 

commit to either affirmatively grant or deny a rehearing request? 

~: Under the NGA and the FPA, Congress gave FERC 30 days to address rehearing 

requests that parties nie with FERC. My understanding is that Federal courts have upheld 

FERC's usc of tolling orders in this situation. The use of tolling orders provides more time for 

FERC to conduct a thorough review of rehearing requests, which often involve complex issues, 

and to ensure that all arguments arc considered and addressed. 

I appreciate that in some instances this process places a burden on those affected by a FERC 

order. While l cannot prejudge how l will act on rehearing requests, if! am confirmed l commit 

to work to ensure the FERC's processes on filings are as efficient as possible. 

Future of nuclear power 

Question 35: What do you envision as the future of nuclear power? 

Answer: As I noted at my confirmation hearing, I believe that the nation should rely on all 

forms of energy resources, which includes nuclear energy. Nuclear generation plays a critical 

role in our nation's resource mix. However, I am aware that certain nuclear resources are being 

displaced because they are unable to recover their costs in the wholesale power markets. The 

relatively low cost of natural gas has helped drive down energy prices. In addition, policies that 

impose new environmental requirements and seek to procure specific resource types have 

challenged nuclear resources. Finally, the emergence of new competitive technologies has also 

challenged nuclear resources. 

Although I believe that FERC policies should focus on nondiscriminatory and resource-neutral 

rules, I also believe that it is critically important that the Commission take a look at this issue, 

especially if we want to maintain a diverse resource mix. 

In June 2014 in Docket No. ADI4-14, FERC initiated a proceeding to evaluate issues regarding 

price formation in the energy and ancillary services markets operated by RTOs/JSOs. This 

ongoing effort strives to improve the accuracy of energy prices for all resources, including 

nuclear. Also, the Commission recently convened a technical conference on state policies and 

wholesale markets that may shed some light on this issue. If confirmed, I will carefully review 

these matters with my colleagues. 
178 

Powelson 26 

Question 36: What do you believe is the proper role ofFERC in the future direction of nuclear 

power in the United States? 

Answer: Please sec my response to your Question 35 above. 

Also, FERC has taken steps to better understand the challenges facing nuclear power. FERC has 

participated in joint meetings with NRC to discuss the reliability of the bulk power system, 

nuclear power safety and security, and market factors influencing nuclear power economics. 

Question 37: Do you think any market reforms are needed to support the future direction of 

nuclear power in the United States? 

Answer: Please see my response to your Question 36 above. 

IMAPP and regional initiatives 

Question 38: New England has a regional Independent System Operator (ISO), and over the 

past several years consumer costs have skyrocketed as the ISO has implemented and tweaked its 

forward capacity market. In the regional process known as IMAPP- integrating markets and 

public policy- the ISO and FERC are beginning to acknowledge these administrative markets 

are in conflict with some of the objectives states have with regard to energy policy. 

If confirmed, would you support efforts, such as in New England, to develop fixes to wholesale 

markets to better implement state policy goals in wholesale markets? 

Answer: The Commission recently held a technical conference on this issue of the interplay of 

state policy goals and the wholesale energy and capacity markets. At the conference, FERC and 

state commissioners engaged in a discussion of potential options for solutions to harmonize the 

competitive market framework with the state policies. If confirmed, I will review this issue with 

my colleagues. 

Question 39: Energy markets do not accurately reflect environmental costs, including the social 

costs of carbon pollution. Do you believe that FERC and wholesale market operators should 

continue to explore how to better integrate the real cost of carbon pollution into our energy 

markets? 

Answer: FERC's policies are resource and fuel neutral. However, the Commission has recently 

convened a technical conference to explore ways to accommodate state policy efforts while 

retaining competitive market frameworks. 

Where states or regions have taken steps to incorporate a carbon price, the wholesale markets 

have been able to incorporate that carbon price into the centralized wholesale energy market. 

Question 40: Are you open to allowing !SO-New England to walk back from the capacity 

market model and return to a structure that allows load-serving entities to meet their needs 

through bilateral contracts with a residual market for capacity not otherwise procured through 

such bilateral contracts? 
179 

Powelson 27 

If confirmed, will you commit to just and reasonable rates for consumers, not just for market 

participants? 

Answer: I am not aware of any ongoing efforts from !SO-New England to abandon its current 

capacity market as a tool to ensure resource adequacy in the region. However, I am not opposed 

to bilateral contracting by load-serving-entities. 

Question 41: Earlier this month, FERC held a technical conference to examine how to better 

incorporate states' environmental policy objectives into wholesale markets. Stakeholders are 

working to address challenges in these markets, particularly as it relates to price formation like 

carbon pricing. More active leadership from FERC, however, may be necessary to direct 

wholesale market operators to develop solutions to address these price formation challenges. 

If confirmed, would you help FERC take a more active role to assist state and market operator 

efforts to resolve price formation issues associated with states' environmental policies? 

Answer: Although I am reluctant to speculate on any next steps that may come out of the 

technical conference, if confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to address the issues explored 

at the technical conference regarding the interplay between state policy goals and wholesale 

markets. 

Question 42: Do you think there are ways to account for environmental costs in price 

algorithms that appropriately value the benefits of carbon free generation? 

Answer: RTO/ISO markets do not independently determine environmental costs but I 

understand that such costs can be and in some cases are incorporated in price algorithms if those 

costs are known. 

Question 43: New England is making considerable progress implementing renewable portfolio 

standards, renewable energy standards, and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. These 

reforms will be an enduring aspect of the region's energy strategy. 

If confirmed, will you commit to work with !SO-New England to ensure that wholesale market 

rules complement state policies and regional agreements? 

Answer: As a state regulator, I understand the importance of ensuring that wholesale markets 

and state and regional policies complement, rather than conflict, with each other. FERC recently 

held a technical conference on the complex and important issue of the interplay of state policy 

goals and the wholesale energy and capacity markets. During that conference, FERC 

Commissioners and state commissioners engaged in a discussion of potential options for regional 

solutions. If confirmed, I will review this issue with my colleagues. 

Forward capacity auctions 

Question 44: The New England region saw considerable price increases in the region's forward 
180 

Powelson 28 

capacity auctions (FCAs) in 2014. In recent auctions, costs have come down, while the region 

has been able to secure sufficient resources to maintain system reliability. Part of the reason why 

auction prices came down is because !SO-New England included more renewable energy in its 

installed capacity requirement (ICR). !SO-New England has continued to improve its inclusion 

of renewable energy in the ICR calculation, but could do better. 

How can !SO-New England's consideration of energy, efficiency, renewable generation, and 

improved metrics in the forward capacity auctions that value the benefits of carbon-free 

generation help reduce system costs and improve system reliability? 

~: As you note, !SO-New England revised the calculation of its ICR for FCA 10 

(associated with the 2019/2020 delivery year) to reflect the forecast penetration of behind-themeter solar photovoltaic resources. It is my understanding that this revision had the effect of 

reducing the ICR for FCA 10 by almost 400 MW. I am supportive of market innovations that 

reduce costs without impacting system reliability. 

Question 45: Carbon-free generation currently faces a large barrier for bidding into the FCAs 

because of up front costs. If confirmed, will you commit to working with our ISOs to continue 

reducing the barriers to including more renewables into the ICR and for bidding into our energy 

auctions? 

~: I understand that all new capacity resources in New England face a minimum offer 

price in order to prevent the exercise of buyer-side market power in the FCA. However, in 

recognition of certain public policy choices by the New England states, there is an annual 

exemption from the minimum offer price rule of200 MW, with a potential three year carry-over 

of up to 600 MW for certain renewable resources. As I previously noted, I support a diverse fuel 

mix that supports a safe and reliable grid, and I support the elimination of barriers to new 

resources. 

Hvdro relicensing 

Question 46: As states implement policies to address climate change it is becoming increasingly 

clear that hydroelectric generation will continue to be a central component of the U.S. energy 

porttolio. Yet the licensing process for hydroelectric facilities can last a decade or more, cost 

hundreds of thousands of dollars, and often results in decreased electric production due to water 

quality concerns. What do you see as steps FERC can take to streamline this process, and how 

would you ensure state and federal environmental and water quality concerns are maintained? 

Answer: I support the notion that the country should rely on all forms of resources, including 

hydroelectric resources. The hydroelectric licensing process, however, is complex and involves 

multiple agencies. If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to determine what steps FERC 

can take to streamline the hydropower licensing process, while ensuring that federal and state 

environmental and water quality concerns are appropriately addressed. 

Natural gas infrastructure 
181 

Powelson 29 

Question 47: Natural gas and pipeline advocates vocally hailed your nomination as a sign that 

future and pending fossil fuel infrastructure will be rubber stamped on your watch. What will 

you do to demonstrate your independence from fossil fuel special interest groups? 

Answer: If confirmed, you have my steadfast commitment that I will review the record in each 

case with an open mind and with the aim of understanding the points of view of all participants 

to the case. I believe in the importance of robust and transparent participation of all interested 

parties in matters before FERC. To be an effective regulator, you must be able to call the balls 

and strikes, and if confirmed, I intend to do that in an unbiased and transparent fashion. During 

my 8 1-i years as a state utility regulator in Pennsylvania, I have learned the value of considering 

all points of view before making a decision and if confirmed, I will continue that practice at 

FERC. 

Question 48: How will you evaluate climate impacts during the review of applications for the 

construction and operation of natural gas pipelines? 

Answer: I understand that this issue has been raised in many of the pipeline cases recently 

before the Commission. I am aware that the Commission's environmental documents contain a 

section describing impacts potentially related to climate change for regions in which a project is 

located. If confirmed, I will review this matter with my colleagues to determine how the 

Commission may best address such information in its decisions. 

The Holman Rule 

Question 49: What is your position on the Holman Rule, which allows any member of Congress 

to propose amending an appropriations bill to single out a government employee or cut a specific 

program? 

Answer: I have no position on the Holman Rule. 

Question 50: If confirmed, will you support or oppose Congressional passage of an amendment 

under the Holman Rule that targets one of your employees? 

~: lt is within the purview of Congress to decide whether or how to implement the 

Holman Rule. 

Question 51: If confirmed, do you believe that you will be better able to recruit and retain top 

talent at FERC if Congress is able to individually target employees based on political criteria? 

Answer: I was very pleased to hear that the Partnership for Public Service ranked FERC as the 

fourth best place to work among midsize federal agencies, based on the Federal Employee 

Viewpoint Survey conducted by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. In my estimation, 

FERC is filled with talented employees and I am optimistic that the agency will continue to 

recruit such talent. 
182 

Powelson 30 

Question 52: Do you support or oppose Congress targeting and altering the salaries of 

individuals at FERC? 

Answer: As I stated previously, it is within the purview of Congress to decide whether or how 

to implement the Holman Rule. 

Question 53: How would you describe the division of responsibility and authority between 

Congress and FERC on agency personnel issues? 

Answer: FERC is an independent agency funded by assessments on the utilities it regulates. As 

a general matter, I believe individual agencies are best suited to deal with their own personnel 

issues. However, if confirmed, I am aware that I am bound to act within the authority delegated 

to FERC by Congress. 

Questions from Senator AI Franken 

Question 1: Minnesota and other states have renewable portfolio standards that drive the 

transition to clean energy. Do you believe states should be able to implement these kinds of 

policies without federal interference? And furthermore, do you think that FERC should be able 

to coerce states into changing energy policies? 

Answer: As a member of a state regulatory commission, I have a great appreciation for the need 

for FERC and the states to respect each other's boundaries. I am also aware that on May 1-2, 

2017, the Commission held a technical conference on the interplay of state policy goals and the 

wholesale energy and capacity markets, and I believe this was a good first step in addressing the 

issue. At the conference, FERC Commissioners and state commissioners engaged in a 

discussion of potential options for solutions to reconcile the competitive market framework with 

the policy interests of states. If confirmed, I look forward to further examining this issue and 

reading the post-technical conference comments to determine if any next steps are necessary. 

Question 2: As Senator Cortez Masto mentioned in the hearing, late last year, FERC started a 

process to "remove barriers to the participation of electric storage resources and distributed 

energy resource aggregations in the capacity, energy, and ancillary service markets." 

a. What role do you see energy storage playing in the future in the organized wholesale 

electricity markets and transmission system? 

b. And how can FERC help ensure that energy storage is receiving proper compensation for 

the multiple benefits it provides to the grid? 

Answer: As I mentioned at my confirmation hearing, I believe that we should seek to rely on all 

types of energy resources to meet the nation's needs, which includes electric storage resources. 

Participation of electric storage resources is the subject of an ongoing proceeding at the 

Commission in which the Commission proposed a number of reforms to remove barriers to the 

participation of electric storage resources and distributed energy resource aggregations in the 

organized wholesale electric markets. In addition, the Commission also issued a Notice of 
183 

Powelson 31 

Proposed Rulemaking on the Reform of Generator Interconnection Procedures and Agreements 

in December 2016 in which it proposed a number ofretorms designed to improve certainty, 

promote more informed interconnection, and enhance interconnection processes for all resources 

interconnecting to the transmission system, including new electric storage resources. If 

confirmed, I look forward to reviewing this matter with my colleagues. 

I understand that the Commission has taken several actions to ensure adequate compensation for 

resources, including electric storage resources. For example, in Order No. 755, FERC provided 

for compensation of fast-acting resources, such as storage, to provide frequency regulation 

service. Similarly, FERC's price formation effort has identified opportunities to improve energy 

market price signals. Actions like a change in the settlement interval and the requirement to 

trigger shortage pricing any time a physical shortage occurs should provide more accurate price 

signals for flexible resources like energy storage. Further, in January, FERC issued a policy 

statement providing guidance to storage resources seeking compensation for both cost-based and 

market-based services. 

Question 3: FERC Order !000 was intended to help identify such transmission needs and solicit 

competitive transmission projects by requiring regional transmission planning and interregional 

coordination. 

a. Do you support FERC order I 000? 

b. What arc the barriers to interregional transmission lines and what can FERC do to 

remove those barriers? 

Answer: My understanding is that Order No. l 000 is intended to promote the identification of 

more efficient or cost-effective transmission facilities and to remove certain obstacles to the 

development of those facilities. I support those goals. I also support continued review of Order 

No. I 000 to ensure that it is functioning as intended and to explore whether there are further 

steps that the Commission to advance the goals of Order No. 1000. To that end, the Commission 

convened a technical conference in June 2016 on competitive transmission development and 

requested post-technical conference comments on several issues, including issues related to 

regional transmission planning and competitive transmission development. lfconfirmed, I will 

review this record with my colleagues. 

Question 4: A few years ago during the severe winter polar vortex, coal stockpiles at utilities in 

Minnesota repeatedly dropped to dangerously low levels, due to inadequate rail delivery of coal. 

At least four coal power plants in Minnesota were shut down, so that their stockpiles could be 

built back up before the cold winter months. And in the end, the cost of this unreliable rail 

service was passed on to the public, as they paid for the more expensive replacement power that 

was purchased to make up for lost generation. 

During this time period, I sent a letter to FERC highlighting my concerns about Minnesota 

utilities· low coal stockpiles, and asking FERC to work with all other stakeholders to find a 

solution to this ongoing issue. 

a. What do you think FERC should do to mitigate the problems with rail delivery issues, 
184 

Powelson 32 

since these issues impact the electricity markets? 

b. Last Congress I introduced the Emergency Fuel Supply Coordination Act, which would 

require coordination among key federal agencies when a fuel emergency is declared. Do 

you think this coordination is a good idea, and in what ways could FERC support such an 

eftort? 

Answer: l understand that the Commission's authority over this matter is limited. Although the 

Commission does not have authority over the shipment of coal over the nations' rail lines, if 

confirmed, l would be willing to meet with utilities or the rail regulators to assess what type of 

assistance the Commission may provide under the circumstances at the time. I believe that 

coordination among key regulators when a fuel emergency is declared is a prudent step to take. 

Question 5: Because of its low prices, more and more Americans are using natural gas, both in 

homes and in industry. And the DOE Energy Information Administration projects that use of 

natural gas will continue to grow. At the same time, the federal government has already issued 

final authorizations for liquid natural gas export volumes of over 72 billion cubic feet per daywhich is equal to about 96 percent of U.S. demand. 

Explain to me how increasing exports of domestic natural gas won't drive up the price 

Americans pay to power their factories and heat their homes. Does FERC have a role to play 

here in making sure we are not unnecessarily increasing the cost of energy for Americans? 

Answer: Section 3 of the NGA addresses imports and exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG). 

Jurisdiction under section 3 is shared between DOE and the Commission. Although the 

Commission authorizes the construction of facilities, it is DOE that has jurisdiction over the 

import or export of the natural gas commodity. 

Question 6: Last month, Secretary Perry ordered a 60-day review of U.S. electricity policy to 

determine whether coal and nuclear plants are being "unfairly'' pushed off the grid. He 

suggested that renewable resources-like wind and solar-were threatening grid reliability and 

that because of that, we need to prop up coal and nuclear plants. Since FERC is tasked with 

ensuring the reliability of the grid, do you share Secretary Perry's concerns about increasing 

integration of renewables? 

Answer: It is my understanding that the study referenced in your question is aimed at reviewing 

the value ofbaseload resources in organized markets to make sure these resources are being 

adequately compensated for their attributes. FERC clearly has a role to play in this discussion as 

it is FERC's responsibility under the Federal Power Act to ensure the reliability of the bulk 

power system. In fulfilling that responsibility, FERC works closely with the North American 

Electric Reliability Corporation, which FERC has certified as the Electric Reliability 

Organization, as well as with the industry and other interested stakeholders. In the midst of a 

transition in our nation's energy resource fuel mix, it is important to maintain our commitment to 

ensuring grid reliability. 

Question 7: As you know, FERC's approval process for natural gas pipelines has gained 

national attention. Fonner Chairman Norman Bay released a statement on his last day 
185 

Powelson 33 

recognizing the increased public interest surrounding the approval process and encouraging the 

agency to change how it determines whether approving a pipeline is within the national interest. 

Traditionally, FERC has relied on a contract with potential shippers to show market demand and 

therefore demonstrate that a project is in the national interest. But, this is fairly myopic view and 

Mr. Bay suggests that more comprehensive cost-benefit analysis may be necessary. Mr. Bay also 

recommended that FERC consider the environmental impacts of increasing gas production 

allowed by pipeline construction as well as an assessment oflitecycle greenhouse gas emissions. 

Do you agree with the former Chairman's assessment? If not, why not, and if so, what changes 

would you suggest? 

Answer: The Natural Gas Act requires the Commission to determine that proposed pipeline 

projects are consistent with the public convenience and necessity. Whether the pipeline is 

"needed" is part ofthat determination. If confirmed, I look forward to working with my 

colleagues to review the Commission's policies for pipeline applications to ensure that all 

relevant factors are appropriately considered in the Commission's review process. 

It also is my understanding that the Commission's analysis of environmental issues for a 

proposed natural gas pipeline includes greenhouse gas emissions associated with the construction 

and operation of the project, as well as impacts potentially resulting from climate change over 

the region in which the project is located. If confirmed, !look forward to working with my 

colleagues in determining how information regarding climate impacts may be addressed 

appropriately in such proceedings 

Question 8: Senator Shaheen and I recently reintroduced legislation, the Public Engagement at 

FERC Act (S. 1240), that will improve public involvement at the FERC and facilitate advocacy 

at the agency on behalf of residential and small commercial energy consumers. Specifically, the 

Public Engagement at FERC Act would build off existing language in the Public Utility 

Regulatory Policy Act (PURPA) and establish an Office of Public Participation and Consumer 

Advocacy to ensure the public has a strong role in shaping our nation's energy future. It is 

important that anyone who assumes the role of a FERC Commissioner understands how their 

decisions are directly or even indirectly impacting private citizens. When FERC evaluates 

whether a project or agreement is "in the public interest" it is vital that the Commission indeed 

consult the public. 

a. Do you agree that public engagement should be prioritized during the various 

proceedings administered by FERC? 

b. If confirmed, what steps will you take to make commission proceedings and processes 

more accessible to the public? 

c. While I'm not asking you to weigh in on the legislation directly, do you agree with 

allowing more public participation in the agency through the creations of a dedicated 

office? 

Answer: I agree that public engagement is important to FERC proceedings. Development of a 

record that reflects comments from all sides of an issue enhances FERC's ability to make 

appropriate decisions. 
186 

Powelson 34 

I understand that there are already a number of ways for members of the public, individually or 

as a group, to be heard at FERC. For example, they may intervene and actively participate in 

FERC proceedings and they may file comments on rules and regulations that FERC proposes in 

Notices of Proposed Rulemakings. In addition, it is common for state utility commissions, who 

seck to protect the interests of retail and residential customers, to intervene directly in FERC 

cases and comment on FERC's proposed rules and regulations. If confirmed, I will work with 

my colleagues to identify further steps that FERC could take to make its proceedings and 

processes more accessible to the public. 

Question 9: In 2006, FERC started requiring wholesale generators to file Form 556 Certificate 

of Qualifying Facility (QF) Status for a small power production facility. I'm concerned that some 

small, community wind facilities across the country may have missed this change. These projects 

went through an extensive study process to facilitate interconnection of their wind projects with 

the transmission grid. These interconnections were ultimately approved by FERC as exempt 

wholesale generators and have been operating safely. However, in 2006 FERC established a 

filing requirement for all facilities larger than IMW, but some missed this change. The filing 

requires announcing the total electricity generated by the QF. 

In one case, a company Min Wind failed to start filing with FERC, and subsequently sought a 

waiver from FERC for the Form 556 filing arguing that they did not know about the rule. But, 

the waiver was denied and the company was assessed a substantial repayment obligation 

equivalent to the interest that they have been unfairly accruing since 2006. The amount was large 

enough that they were forced to file for bankruptcy. While I do not know the specifics of this 

case, in general, this seems like an onerous requirement that if not handled appropriately could 

drive more companies into bankruptcy. Will you commit to working with me to find a solution to 

this issue? 

Auswer: I appreciate your concern and agree that FERC-regulated entities must have adequate 

notice of regulatory requirements. If confirmed, I would be pleased to work with you and I 

commit to understanding the issue more fully to review this matter with my colleagues. 

Question from Senator Steve Daines 

Question: Your experience as a utility commissioner in Pennsylvania will be invaluable to your 

role at FER C. However, as you know, the energy markets in Montana are regulated much 

differently than they are in Pennsylvania. As commissioner, will you take into consideration the 

makeup of different regions when making decisions at FERC? 

~: As I mentioned at my confirmation hearing, I appreciate that regions of the country 

have chosen differing paths for providing energy services to customers. I respect these 

differences and can assure you that I will take them into consideration, ifl am confirmed. 

Questions from Senator Joe Manchiu III 

Question 1: West Virginia's existing installed capacity is 90% coal (12,584 MW). The 

remainder is natural gas, hydro, wind and a little bit of oil. Overall, in PJM, coal represents 34% 

of capacity and natural gas is slightly higher than that. The Energy Information Administration 
187 

Powelson 35 

states that "West Virginia typically generates more electricity than it consumes. Although more 

than two-fifths of West Virginia households use electricity as their primary source for home 

heating, retail sales to all customers account for less than half of West Virginia's net electricity 

generation. As a result, West Virginia is a net supplier of electricity to the regional grid. West 

Virginia is a leader in the nation in net interstate sales of electricity." 

Do you believe that the regional grid (PJM specifically) can continue to operate without the 

contributions of West Virginia's fleet of power plants? 

Answer: Senator, West Virginia is a power production state just like Pennsylvania. Without 

electrons coming from West Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, there would be serious power 

reliability issues in the PJM marketplace. We would not have adequate power flows or meet grid 

reliability standards without the contributions of West Virginia's power fleet as part ofthc grid 

interconnect. 

Question 2: Earlier this week, E&E news published an article regarding the cybersecurity 

challenges facing our natural gas infrastructure. They highlighted a five-year old attack on our 

nation's natural gas utilities which was perpetrated by Chinese hackers who were also members 

of that country's military. Gerry Cauley, President of the North American Electric Reliability 

Counci I (NERC) -a frequent witness before this committed stated that "Undercutting the gas 

supply is certainly a threat to the electric system." While NERC, utilities, and regional 

transmission operators (RTOs) like PJM are planning for multiple scenarios like extreme weather 

events (a repeat Polar Vortex for example), I'm also interested in your perspective on how FERC 

and DOE can further support natural gas utilities in their efforts to harden their systems not just 

again natural threats but against cyber threats. 

Understanding that these energy stakeholders can't always pull back the curtain for us because of 

the threat of revealing too much to potential enemies, what more can DOE and FERC do to 

support natural gas pipeline operators in the face of these threats? 

~: I understand that FERC provides assistance to pipeline operators with identification 

and application of best practices for cybersecurity measures. As examples, FERC and 

Transportation Security Administration (TSA) staff have developed a joint, voluntary assessment 

program to conduct in-depth cybersccurity reviews of pipeline entities, and FERC has 

established a similar program with the U.S. Coast Guard for LNG terminals. In addition, I 

understand that TSA is reviewing its voluntary cybersecurity guidelines for pipelines and that 

FERC has offered to assist them with this initiative. 

I also understand that through the work of Joe McClelland and the Of1ice of Energy 

Infrastructure Security (OEIS), FERC assists states in better understanding cybersccurity threats 

to pipelines. For example, in conjunction with other federal agencies, FERC has facilitated both 

unclassified and classified security briefings to state regulators. OEIS has also played a key role 

in helping state regulators better understand the cyber security facing the energy industry. More 

recently, the FERC has promoted the adoption of best practices by providing voluntary 

architectural reviews of the control systems of numerous electric and gas utilities in the U.S. 
188 

Powelson 36 

In addition, per its authority under the Natural Gas Act, FERC could explore whether further 

steps are appropriate to alleviate potential industry concerns about recovery of costs for 

cybersecurity measures. 

Question 3: One of the major criticisms that pipeline opponents in state is that FERC does not 

allow for enough public engagement and is "abusing" their power. You have expressed support 

for the importance of public engagement in the siting of pipelines. As you know, there are 

several major pipelines being developed in the mid-Atlantic and Northeast. I support the 

environmentally responsible development of energy infrastructure as long as that development 

includes public engagement particularly for landowners along the pipeline route- so that their 

voices are heard. 

Can you explain how you will support public engagement at FERC? 

Answer: As a sitting public utility commissioner, I understand the need for, and value of, public 

engagement in making decisions regarding infrastructure. The public needs to have peace of 

mind that we can build out our energy infrastructure safely and with a steadfast commitment to 

the environment. From my Pennsylvania experience, it is critically important that pipeline 

developers engage stakeholders in a transparent and collaborative process to achieve a worldclass pipeline system. If confirmed, I will review the Commission's public engagement process 

with my colleagues to best determine ways for effective public engagement, particularly with 

those whose lands may be crossed by a proposed pipeline route. 

Question 4: In 20 ll, FERC issued an Order- Number I 000- which asserted agency 

jurisdiction over transmission planning in areas that were previously thought to be a state's 

responsibility. It's my understanding that- while intended to make transmission planning easier 

-it has bogged down the process more. Former FERC Commissioner Tony Clark expressed 

concern that "there is so much process built into Order 1000," that each step of that process 

"becomes an opportunity for litigation and delay." Andy Ott, the CEO ofPJM, concluded that 

Order No. 1000 "was almost like a solution in search of a problem .... It's actually creating more 

challenges to investment." Nick Brown, the CEO of SPP, stated that Order No. 1000 has 

"created more overhead and uncertainty at a time we didn't need more overhead in order to 

invest in transmission." We need transmission planning to work efficiently, and we need costs to 

be allocated where they belong. 

Will you work with the Committee on ways to improve transmission planning and cost 

allocation? 

Answer: If confirmed, I will look forward to working with both my colleagues at the 

Commission and with the Committee on issues related to transmission planning and cost 

allocation. 

The Commission issued Order No. I 000 in 2011. I note that as the transmission planning 

regions have implemented their Order No. 1 000-compliant regional transmission planning 

processes and interregional transmission coordination procedures, the Commission has continued 

to consider the issue of transmission planning and cost allocation. I support this continued 
189 

Powelson 37 

review. Specifically, the Commission convened a technical conference in June 2016 on 

competitive transmission development and requested post-technical conference comments on 

several issues, including issues related to competitive transmission development, interregional 

transmission coordination, and regional transmission planning. 

Questions from Senator Lamar Alexander 

Question 1: In the past five years, six nuclear reactors have shut down prematurely due in part 

to financial concerns. Analysts have warned dozens of additional nuclear reactors could 

potentially shut down over the next I 0 years due to market challenges. New York and Illinois 

have taken steps to help keep the nuclear reactors within their borders operating. These states 

recognize the importance of reliable nuclear power, which provides 60% of our country's 

carbon-free electricity. What can the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission do to help keep 

existing nuclear reactors operating and preserve low-cost, reliable, and clean nuclear power for 

the United States? 

Answer: Senator, let me begin by applauding you for your leadership on behalf of nuclear 

generation in the U.S. The issues facing the nuclear industry are daunting at so many levels. 

Although the Commission's policies are resource- and fuel-neutral, I do believe that we should 

seek to develop and rely on all types of resources to ensure competitively priced and reliable 

energy supplies. In addition, I believe that resources should be fairly compensated for the value 

they provide the system. 

FERC has taken several steps to address this issue. For example, FERC held a technical 

conference on May 1-2, 2017, to discuss the interplay between state policy goals and wholesale 

markets. FERC also has an ongoing price formation effort in exploring whether energy and 

ancillary service prices appropriately reflect the costs to serve load. FERC's price formation 

initiative, which commenced in 2014, has gathered input from stakeholders and market experts 

to find areas for potential reform in the RTO/ISO energy and ancillary services markets. In 

addition, FERC has approved final rules reforming shortage pricing, settlement intervals, and 

offer caps in RTO/ISO markets. 

If confirmed, I look forward to evaluating the issues explored at the technical conference and the 

Commission's other proceedings on this issue. 

Question 2: The federal wind production tax credit (PTC) has been in place for twenty-five 

years and has been extended by Congress ten times. The most recent extension in 2015 will cost 

taxpayers more than $20 billion over ten years. The wind PTC not only costs the taxpayers 

billions, it also distorts the price of electricity. The subsidy to Big Wind is so generous that, in 

some markets, wind producers can literally give their electricity away and still make a profit. 

This phenomenon is called negative pricing. What can the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission do to minimize the unfair impact that negative pricing has on reliable generation 

like coal, natural gas, and nuclear? 
190 

Powelson 38 

Answer: Senator, as I understand it, Congress has agreed to phase-out of the federal wind 

production tax credit (PTC), so we may see a transition in this situation shortly. However, 

currently RTO/ISO market dispatch rules are designed to find the lowest cost of dispatching 

resources, based on their bids, to serve load while respecting transmission system limitations. 

During the May 1-2 technical conference, I understand that several panelists suggested that the 

centralized wholesale market operators should explore whether negative pricing continues to 

meet the goals of finding the lowest cost of dispatching resources. If confirmed, !look forward 

to evaluating the issue. 

Questions from Senator John Hoeven 

Question 1: Electric reliability is a critical issue, especially as it relates base load power and 

ensuring our country has the assets needed to maintain low-cost electricity. 

For example, the previous Administration's EPA has promulgated substantial new regulations on 

electricity producers that would have subjected them to unachievable mandates and artificial 

compliance schedules. Together, the EPA's unwarranted attempts to reduce emissions would 

have driven up electricity rates for customers and potentially compromise the reliability of our 

power grid. 

In another example, the Aliso Canyon natural gas storage facility provides electricity for 

southern California. However, state regulators have shut down the facility and now the Energy 

Department has registered concerns about having a sufficient baseload for summer energy 

demand. 

• How will you approach reliability issues going forward? 

• How do fossil fuels play a role in ensuring electric reliability and baseload power? 

Answer: The reliability of the nation's electric grid is paramount because it is essential to a 

robust and growing economy. I recognize the importance ofFERC's responsibilities under the 

Federal Power Act with respect to the reliability of the bulk power system. 

In fulfilling those responsibilities, FERC works closely with the North American Electric 

Reliability Corporation, which FERC has certified as the Electric Reliability Organization, as 

well as with the industry and other interested stakeholders. In the midst of a transition in our 

nation's energy resource fuel mix, it is important to maintain our commitment to ensuring grid 

reliability. l believe that a resource portfolio that includes the use of fuels that support the 

provision ofbaseload power makes an important contribution toward that goal. 

Question 2: In order to become truly North American energy secure, we need the infrastructure 

to deliver our energy resources from producers to consumers. I have sponsored the North 

American Energy Infrastructure Act that would require FERC to approve natural gas import or 

export applications to Canada or Mexico within 30 days of filing. 

• What is your view on the increased need for energy infrastructure? 

• What is FERC's role in ensuring adequate pipeline capacity? 
191 

Powelson 39 

• Do you support efforts to increase our energy infrastructure network with Canada and 

Mexico? 

Answer: I agree that we need to ensure there is adequate infrastructure to best assure the 

availability of reliable and reasonably priced energy. Under the Natural Gas Act, the 

Commission is required to approve proposed natural gas pipeline projects that are required by the 

public convenience and necessity, which may include facilities for import and export. 

Question 3: In North Dakota, rural electric co-ops ensure that over 350,000 consumers have 

access to reliable and affordable electricity. The Federal Power Act exempts rural electric co-ops 

from FERC jurisdiction and this statutory exemption contributes to the state's affordable 

electricity rates. 

• Do you plan to adhere to the Federal Power Act and continue to exempt rural electric coops from FERC jurisdiction? 

Answer: Section 201(1) of the Federal Power Act exempts electric cooperatives that receive a 

certain type of financing or that sell less than a certain amount of electricity per year from certain 

provisions of the Federal Power Act. If confirmed, I commit to adhere to the provisions in the 

Federal Power Act regarding jurisdiction over electric cooperatives. 

Question 4: Two of the industries FERC regulates electricity and natural gas- are growing 

closer together as gas increases its share in electricity markets. This ties together the reliability 

of natural gas supply and the reliability of electricity supply like never before. This makes it all 

the more important that gas pipelines get sited timely when they are needed and not get bogged 

down in environmental reviews that, in the name of being thorough, lose all common sense. We 

have had projects delayed, for example, by consideration of greenhouse gas emissions. 

Fortunately the guidance requiring consideration ofGHGs was rescinded in April. 

Both Congress and the Administration have made it plain in law and by executive action that 

they want infrastructure reviews to be accelerated. 

• Will you work to ensure that gas infrastructure is sited promptly and not unnecessarily 

delayed by overly bureaucratic reviews? 

Answer: I agree that we need adequate pipeline infrastructure to allow for the delivery of 

reliable and reasonably priced gas supplies to consumers. However, as a regulator, I also need to 

make sure that gas pipelines go through a review required by law. If confirmed, I will work with 

my colleagues to ensure that we strike that right balance to ensure all relevant factors are 

considered. 

Questions from Senator Angus S. King, Jr. 

Question 1: How do you view the relationship between state energy policies, such as 

Renewable Portfolio Standards, and the wholesale electricity markets? Do you believe there is a 
192 

Powelson 40 

conflict present between state goals and the operation of those wholesale markets? How do you 

think that conflicts that arise can and should be addressed by FERC? 

Answer: As a state regulator, I appreciate the role that states must continue to play in setting 

state energy policies. However, the Commission has a statutory responsibility to both promote 

adequate investment in needed energy infrastructure and ensure that the rates subject to the 

Commission's jurisdiction are just and reasonable. I understand the Commission recently held a 

technical conference with the objective of further exploring how the competitive wholesale 

markets can incorporate resources promoted by state energy policies while ensuring that 

wholesale electricity rates remain just and reasonable and that the reliability of the bulk power 

system is maintained. If confirmed, I look forward to working with my colleagues on this 

matter. 

Question 2: Do you believe that the competitive wholesale electricity markets are adequately 

incentivizing the development of renewable energy? If not, what market mechanisms can be put 

into place to do so? 

Answer: I understand that the Commission has long supported the development of competitive 

wholesale power markets that support investment and are fair to all types of technologies and 

sources of power, including renewable energy. I believe that the Commission should continue to 

assess our competitive power markets in the upcoming years to, among other things, ensure they 

properly value the contributions of all types of resources. 

Question 3: Do you believe FERC has a role to play in supporting and helping to manage the 

increase of distributed energy resources connected to the grid? If so, what is that role? 

Answer: I support efforts by FERC to remove barriers to the participation of new technologies 

such as distributed energy resources in the markets it oversees. In November 2016, the 

Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Electric Storage Participation in 

Markets Operated by Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators, 

in which, among other things it proposed a number of reforms to remove barriers to the 

participation of distributed energy resource aggregations in the organized wholesale electric 

markets. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the record on this matter and considering 

these important questions with my colleagues. 

Question 4: FERC has held that the costs of transmission infrastructure built to fulfill a 

reliability need can be recovered regionally from all beneficiaries. If a resource other than 

traditional transmission infrastructure, such as energy storage or a combination of other 

resources, is proposed and can meet the same reliability need, should the cost of that project be 

recovered in the same manner? 

Answer: In Order Nos. 890 and I 000, the Commission allowed consideration of nontransmission alternatives, including demand response resources, energy efficiency measures, and 

generation resources, as part of the transmission planning process. In addition, the Commission 

recently issued a policy statement on cost recovery by electric storage resources, clarifying its 

precedent and providing guidance regarding electric storage resources' ability to receive cost-
193 

Powelson 41 

based rate recovery for certain services while also receiving market-based revenues for providing 

market-based rate services. If confirmed, I will review this matter with my colleagues. 

Question 5: New England currently pays by far the highest costs for transmission in all of the 

organized markets, and yet billions of dollars in additional investment in transmission will be 

needed in order to unlock new renewable resources in the region. What will you do to keep 

transmission costs under control for consumers in New England? 

~: Transmission plays a key role in reliably serving customers by providing access to 

energy sources. ISO-NE recently implemented an Order No. I 000-compliant regional 

transmission planning process, which is designed to select the more efficient or cost effective 

transmission facilities that satisfy the identified need. The Commission, in June 2016, also held 

a technical conference to explore issues related to the competitive transmission development 

processes that were established to comply with Order No. I 000, including matters of cost 

containment As I stated during my confirmation hearing, if confirmed, I will bring a steadfast 

commitment to upholding FERC's mission to ensure that the rates and terms of service by which 

utilities operate are just and reasonable. This includes transmission rates. 

Question from Senator Bill Cassidy 

Question: If confirmed, one of your key responsibilities as a Commissioner will be to ensure 

grid reliability. I want to bring your attention to the worrisome decision by the California Public 

Utilities Commission regarding the shutdown of the Alison Canyon underground gas storage 

facility. The Department of Energy and SoCa!Gas have both written letters to the commission 

warning of possible blackouts and supply disruptions due to the Aliso Canyon decision, which I 

would like to submit for the record. This appears to be a significant problem waiting to happen. 

Will you commit to studying this issue and ensure that the FERC does everything in their 

authority to protect the reliability of the grid for potentially effected consumers all along the 

transmission I ine? 

Answer: Because, as you note, grid reliability is a critical aspect of the Commission's mission, 

if contlrmed, I will work with my colleagues to best ensure the reliability of the grid. 

Questions from Senator Tammy Duckworth 

Question I: With respect to concerns for our aging energy infrastructure, how do you view the 

need to balance what consumers can afford with the tremendous expense to upgrade existing 

facilities and/or to add new infrastructure? 

Answer: The Commission's statutory responsibility is to both promote investment in energy 

infrastructure and ensure rates subject to the Commission's jurisdiction are just and reasonable. 

A record that includes wide stakeholder input, including input from consumers, helps the 

Commission to strike the right balance between these critical interests. 
194 

Powelson 42 

Question 2: Just and reasonable cost allocations for electric transmission projects have been a 

subject for discussion at FERC. As I'm sure you are aware, FERC Order I 000 established the 

"roughly commensurate" criteria for costs and benefits of transmission. How would you define 

"roughly commensurate"? Is that a standard that you believe is appropriate for all infrastmcture 

costs? 

~: I am aware that FERC, in light of a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 

Seventh Circuit, has required that the costs of certain regional and inter-regional transmission 

facilities be allocated in a manner that is "roughly commensurate" with their benefits. Thus, 

FERC has held that entities that receive no benefit from transmission facilities should not be 

involuntarily allocated any of the costs. I see the standard as setting forth a useful general 

principle, but I cannot now say whether it would necessarily be appropriate for all types of 

infrastmcture costs. 

Question 3: Regional Transmission Organizations (or RTOs/JSOs) typically build or upgrade 

new infrastructure to remedy reliability violations. What role, in your view, should cost play in 

the selection of transmission projects under order 1000 and as planned by RTOs? 

Answer: In 2011, the Commission issued Order No. I 000, which established new requirements 

with respect to transmission planning and cost allocation. My understanding is that Order No. 

J 000 is intended to promote the identification of more efJicient or cost-effective transmission 

facilities and to remove certain obstacles to the development of those facilities. Consistent with 

those goals, Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators consider 

costs in their regional transmission planning processes. 

I note that as the transmission planning regions have implemented their Order No. 1000-

compliant regional transmission planning processes and interregional transmission coordination 

procedures, the Commission has continued to consider the issue of transmission planning and 

cost allocation. I support this continued review. Specifically, the Commission convened a 

technical conference in June 2016 on competitive transmission development and requested posttechnical conference comments on several issues, including issues related to competitive 

transmission development, interregional transmission coordination, and regional transmission 

planning. If confirmed, 1 will review this record with my colleagues. 

Question 4: FERC Order l 000 provided opportunity for competitive transmission investments 

by independent transmission companies. What, if any, transmission investments do you feel 

should be exempted from the order I 000 competitive transmission process? 

Answer: There are some existing limits to the transmission projects that are subject to 

competitive transmission development processes pursuant to Order No. 1000. In Order No. 

I 000, the Commission only required competitive transmission development processes for 

transmission facilities selected in the regional transmission plan for purposes of cost allocation 

and, in its orders on compliance, allowed certain transmission planning regions to exempt from 

their competitive transmission development processes transmission facilities needed in the nearterm to address reliability concerns. In addition, the requirement in Order No. 1000 to eliminate 

a federal right of first refusal does not apply to local transmission facilities, which are defined as 
195 

Powelson 43 

transmission facilities located solely within a public utility transmission provider's retail 

distribution service territory or footprint that are not selected in the regional transmission plan for 

purposes of cost allocation. This requirement also does not apply to the right of an incumbent 

transmission provider to build, own, and recover costs for upgrades to its own transmission 

facilities, regardless of whether an upgrade has been selected in the regional transmission plan 

for purposes of cost allocation. 

In June 2016, the Commission convened a technical conference on competitive transmission 

development, at which the speakers discussed exemptions from the competitive transmission 

development process. In its post-technical conference request for comments, the Commission 

included questions on whether the Commission should broaden or narrow the type of 

transmission facilities that must be selected through competitive transmission development 

processes. If confirmed, I will review this record with my colleagues. 

Question 5: FERC's use ofRTOs to plan and manage competitive markets has recently come 

under tire from various public interest groups. They point out that public interest has an 

extremely limited voice in RTO Stakeholder discussions and RTO actions taken behind closed 

doors seem to be condoned by FERC. Do you believe this is a valid concern and if so how 

would you address it? If not, where and how do you see public interest being considered at 

FERC? 

Answer: FERC has taken a number of actions over the years to enhance the transparency and 

responsiveness ofRTOs. For example, Order No. 719 required RTOs and ISOs to demonstrate 

how they meet four criteria for responsiveness to their customers and other stakeholders: 

inclusiveness, fairness in balancing diverse interests, representation of minority positions, and 

ongoing responsiveness. I support these actions and believe that FERC should continue to work 

to ensure that the RTO and ISO processes are open and transparent. 

Question 6: What role should FERC play in any attempts to work toward a cleaner 

environment? 

Answer: FERC policies focus on ensuring that the rules that govern organized and bilateral 

wholesale electric markets promote the delivery of reliable power in a manner that is 

nondiscriminatory and resource-neutral, resulting in efficient price signals that market 

participants can rely on to make investment decisions. Although the drivers of power supply 

changes are largely outside of the Commission'sjurisdiction, we must be aware of, and adapt to, 

these developments in order to carry out our statutory responsibilities to ensure just and 

reasonable rates, a reliable power grid, and fair and efficient markets. 

Question 7: The recent "Wannacry" ransomware incident has once again brought cybersecurity 

to the forefront. Should FERC do more to ensure best practices are shared among utilities 

regarding detecting and preventing cybersecurity threats? How much information should be 

shared with state regulators? What role do you see at FERC for cybersecurity issues? 

~: My understanding is that FERC currently provides leadership, expertise, and 

assistance in identifying, communicating, and seeking comprehensive solutions to significant 
196 

Powelson 44 

potential cybersecurity risks to PERC-jurisdictional energy infrastructure. Among other efforts, 

FERC collaborates with the Electricity Subsector Coordinating Council, which serves as the 

principal liaison between leadership in the Federal government and in the electric power sector, 

with the mission of coordinating efforts to prepare for national-level incidents or threats to 

critical infrastructure. I support FERC's continued work on these issues, in coordination with 

Federal and state government partners, as well as industry stakeholders. 

Specific to the electric sector, FERC is promoting development and implementation of best 

practices. This work complements the mandatory reliability standards adopted pursuant to 

section 215 of the Federal Power Act that provide a good foundation for protecting the bulk 

power system from cybersecurity threats. FERC's best practices efforts include conducting 

analysis and outreach to share threat information and best practices for defensive and recovery 

measures to help mitigate risk. 

Moreover, considering the interconnectivity of the utility systems as well as the nature of 

cybersecurity threats, I believe it is important to work closely with the states to share threat 

information and help implement best practices. In support of this goal, FERC has been assisting 

the states to better understand the cybersecurity threats to pipelines and has facilitated numerous 

information and training sessions with state utility commissions. In addition, FERC has 

coordinated with other federal agencies to facilitate both unclassified and classified security 

briefings to state regulators. 

Question 8: States that are split into two RTOs are encountering issues where generating 

resources have been separated from the loads that they were built or contracted to serve. How 

should proximity to resources, actual power flows, and pre-existing transmission rights be 

considered in RTO modeling? 

~: I am aware that the Commission has several open proceedings regarding inter-RTO 

coordination, so I cannot comment on them. If confirmed, I will review this matter with my 

colleagues. 

Questions from Senator Rob Portman 

Question 1: During the 114'" Congress, Sen. McCaskill and I co-sponsored legislation that 

became Title 41 of the FAST Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4370m ("FAST-41 "). FAST-41 created a new 

process to streamline permitting for significant infrastructure projects designated as "covered 

projects." Would it be beneficial for the FERC permitting and licensing process to operate 

within this new regulatory construct? 

~: I understand that the Commission and its staff have been actively involved with the 

Steering Council and the Executive Director created under Title 41 of the Fast Act since the 

statute was enacted in December 2015. If confirmed, I will review these efforts with my 

colleagues to determine how an independent regulatory agency like the Commission can best 

support FAST-41's goals of transparency and accountability. 
197 

Powelson 45 

Question 2: Do you support designating FERC as the lead agency in the licensing and 

permitting process, including the ability to set schedules for the review, comment, and permitting 

activities of other federal agencies? 

Answer: I understand that, under both the Natural Gas Act and the Federal Power Act, the 

Commission is the lead agency responsible for the environmental review for interstate natural 

gas pipeline infrastructure as well as for non-federal hydropower. However, the permitting 

requirements established by federal law are complex and a decision on a project does not rest 

with any single agency. If confirmed, I will review with my colleagues the issue of streamlining 

the Commission's permitting process while satisfying other agency obligations and concerns. 

Question 3: Do you believe the current hydropower licensing process is well functioning? If 

not, what changes do you recommend? 

~: Senator, I have heard a number of concerns regarding FERC's hydropower licensing 

process. It is my understanding that the current hydropower licensing process is complex and 

involves not only input from numerous stakeholders but also gives mandatory conditioning 

authority to multiple agencies. If eon firmed, I will review the licensing process with my 

colleagues to determine what is causing the delays and consider ways to further improve the 

licensing process. 

Question 4: What are your views on how RTO-administered capacity markets are working? 

Specifically, are these markets supporting the development of a diverse array of electric 

generating facilities in light of past and pending coal plant retirements, while minimizing adverse 

impacts on consumers? If not, what steps would you take to improve or modify them? 

~: I believe that RTO-administered capacity markets have achieved their objectives in 

procuring adequate resources to meet their reliability criteria. Let me start off by giving you a 

few good facts to consider. Since 2008, in the PJM footprint, wholesale power prices have 

dropped over 56 percent. In my state of Pennsylvania, natural gas has increased its share of 

Pennsylvania's power generation over 30 percent. In turn, total carbon dioxide emissions in 

Pennsylvania have fallen over 30 percent. Ohio and Pennsylvania are seeing new investments 

coming from Utica and Marcellus Shale producers. Examples include: new ethylene cracker 

facilities, increased refinery investments, short line rail upgrades and new tubular steel 

production opportunities. Cheap power prices are making Ohio and Pennsylvania attractive 

places to open new manufacturing facilities. And yes, we are seeing a huge shift in our 

generation fleets with new state of the art combined cycle gas plants being build. This is truly a 

national success story when you consider where the U.S. was in 2005. 

However, I am also aware that certain resources are retiring and that additional generation 

facilities may be needed to meet electricity demand. Plus, it may not be prudent to have one 

generation resource dominate the power mix in our markets. Simply put, we need fuel diversity 

and FERC is working hard to examine these issues to make sure capacity markets are providing 

appropriate price signals. Additional changes may need to be made to centralized capacity 

markets to support the development of electric generating facilities needed to meet system needs. 
198 

Powelson 46 

If confirmed, I will work with my colleagues to ensure that the organized capacity markets 

operate as intended. 

Question 5: I represent a state that choose to deregulate its electricity sector and leverage free 

market principles to deliver safe and reliable electricity to Ohio consumers. I am one ofthe few 

members on this committee who represents a state that has deregulated its electricity market. The 

rapid adoption of new technologies, low natural gas prices, and out-of-market subsidies have 

been distressing competitive wholesale electricity markets. If confirmed, will you support FERC 

taking a leadership role in protecting wholesale electricity markets in order to ensure that 

electricity in these markets continues to be delivered safely and reliably? 

Answer: One ofFERC's core responsibilities is to ensure that electricity is delivered reliably 

and that wholesale electricity rates are just and reasonable. If confirmed as a FERC 

commissioner, I commit to work with my colleagues to ensure the Commission fulfills its role 

under the Federal Power Act. 

Question 6: The Federal Power Act directs FERC to ensure that wholesale power rates are 'just 

and reasonable." How do you believe that mandate applies today in the world of RTOs? 

Answer: RTOs administer day-ahead and real-time energy markets that harness the forces of 

competition to ensure least-cost, reliable energy supplies. FERC ensures the justness and 

reasonableness of RTO wholesale power rates by ensuring that the market rules are not unduly 

discriminatory, foster competition, and are based on principles of economic efficiency while 

ensuring reliability of service. 

Question 7: In Ohio, rural electric co-ops ensure that over 885,000 consumers have access to 

reliable and affordable electricity. The Federal Power Act exempts rural electric co-ops from 

FERC jurisdiction and this statutory exemption contributes to the state's affordable electricity 

rates. Do you plan to adhere to the Federal Power Act and continue to exempt rural electric coops from FERC jurisdiction? 

Answer: Section 201(1) of the Federal Power Act exempts electric cooperatives that receive a 

certain type of financing or that sell less than a certain amount of electricity per year from certain 

provisions of the Federal Power Act. If confirmed, I commit to adhere to the provisions in the 

Federal Power Act regarding jurisdiction over electric cooperatives. 

Question 8: On May I" and 2"d of this year, FERC held a technical conference on the potential 

contlicts between state policies and electricity grid operators. If confirmed, will you commit to 

reviewing the findings of the technical conference? 

~: Yes, if confirmed I will review the findings of the technical conference and work with 

my colleagues on these important issues. 

Questions from Senator Catherine Cortez Masto 
199 

Powelson 47 

Question 1: In late 2016, FERC issued a proposed rule that would eliminate barriers to the 

participation of renewable energy and electric storage in wholesale markets. Will you support 

approval of the proposed rule? What changes, if any, would you support before issuing a final 

rule? 

Answer: I have not had the opportunity to review the record on this matter and, therefore, I am 

reluctant to address any possible changes. If confirmed, I look forward to reviewing the record 

and determining the next steps on this proposed rule with my colleagues. 

Question 2: Do you support removing market barriers so that renewable energy and electric 

storage resources can provide services in wholesale markets? 

Answer: Yes. My view is that we should be able to call on all types of energy resources to 

serve the nation's needs, which includes renewable and electric storage resources. Barriers that 

keep otherwise competitive resources out of the market interferes with being able to rely on all 

types of resources. 

Question 3: What additional actions could FERC take to allow distributed energy resources 

access to wholesale electricity markets? 

Answer: The Commission recently issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to remove 

potential barriers to the participation of electric storage resources in the organized wholesale 

electric markets. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking set forth a proposal that would require 

each Regional Transmission Organization and Independent System Operator to revise its tariff to 

allow distributed energy resource aggregators to participate directly in the organized wholesale 

electric markets. If confirmed I will review the comments on these issues to determine any next 

steps. 

Ouestion 4: In the state of Nevada, we have a successful renewable portfolio standard and have 

made great strides in creating a clean energy economy. Do you agree that states have the 

authority to establish the resource mix that best serves their customers? 

Answer: 1 agree that states have the ability to determine the resource mix within their 

jurisdiction. 

Question 5: If yes: How would you protect that authority? 

Answer: From time to time, state and Commission authority intersect. To the extent that state 

policies impact wholesale electricity markets, we need to ensure that rates are just and reasonable 

while respecting state jurisdiction and policies. The Commission has initiated a process to seek 

to address certain ofthose intersections. The Commission's May 1-2 technical conference is 

exploring these state-FERC issues. If confirmed, I will carefully consider all comments in record 

and look forward to working with my colleagues on these important issues. 

Question 6: If no: Why not? 

Answer: Please see my response to your Question 5 above. 
200 

Powelson 48 

Question 7: Different regions of the country are reliably integrating renewable energy resources 

into the grid at very high levels. Numerous studies have shown that the grid can integrate far 

higher total levels of renewable energy on the grid than exist today. Do you agree that the 

evidence shows that solar and wind power can be reliably integrated into the power grid? 

Answer: I believe that we should seek to rely on all forms of resources to ensure reliable and 

reasonably priced energy, including reliance on solar and wind power. Those resources are 

playing an ever increasing part in our energy mix and we need to find a way to make sure those 

resources can be reliably integrated. Thus, while I am aware of some studies that show certain 

levels of integration can be achieved, my focus if confirmed will be on what the Commission can 

do to get resources integrated in a reliable and cost-effective manner. 

Question 8: As levels of wind and solar energy resources expand, how important will regional 

coordination be in ensuring that these and other variable energy resources are cost-effectively 

integrated into the power grid? 

~: Regional coordination can help cost effectively and reliably integrate all resources into 

the electric grid, including variable energy resources such as wind and solar. By taking 

advantage of a larger pool of geographically-diverse resources, such as wind and solar which 

may be located far from each other and far from load centers, regional coordination can also help 

balance power supplies, enhance grid reliability, and reduce power costs for customers. 

Question 9: What can FERC do to facilitate this integration? 

Answer: FERC can facilitate the integration of variable energy resources through regional 

coordination by fostering continued market development within and across state lines. Apart 

from regional coordination, FERC also sought to remove barriers to the integration of variable 

energy resources in its regulations. In Order No. 764, FERC required each public utility 

transmission provider to: (I) offer intra-hourly transmission scheduling; and, (2) incorporate 

provisions into the pro forma Large Generator Interconnection Agreement requiring 

interconnection customers whose generating facilities are variable energy resources to provide 

meteorological and forced outage data to the public utility transmission provider for the purpose 

of power production forecasting. If confirmed, !look forward to exploring other opportunities to 

ensure cost-effective integration of all resources including renewable energy resources. 

Question 10: What are the main barriers to identifying transmission needs and getting these 

projects built? 

~: While barriers to the identification and development of needed transmission remain, 

the Commission has been working to address these barriers for quite some time. In 2011, the 

Commission issued Order No. I 000 to reform public utility transmission providers' transmission 

planning processes and cost allocation mechanisms. While monitoring closely implementation 

of Order No. I 000, the Commission also has continued to consider a range of issues related to 

transmission planning and cost allocation. In June 2016, the Commission convened a technical 

conference on competitive transmission development and requested post-technical conference 
201 

Powelson 49 

comments on several issues, including issues related to competitive transmission development, 

interregional transmission coordination, and regional transmission planning. If confirmed, I will 

review this record with my colleagues. 

Question 11: How will you promote joint and coordinated planning among regional 

transmission planners for necessary interregional transmission? 

~: The Commission has been considering the issue of interregional transmission 

development for a number of years now. Among other actions, Order No. !000 required 

improved coordination between neighboring transmission planning regions for new interregional 

transmission facilities and that each public utility transmission provider participate in a regional 

transmission planning process that has an interregional cost allocation method. In the years 

following the issuance of Order No. 1000, the Commission has issued final orders on the 

compliance filings establishing interregional transmission coordination procedures for all the 

pairs of neighboring transmission planning regions. In addition, the June 2016 technical 

conference on competitive transmission development discussed in my response to the 

preceding question featured a discussion of interregional transmission coordination, including 

joint and coordinated interregional transmission planning. At the technical conference, several 

speakers and FERC Commissioners raised questions regarding the state of interregional 

transmission development and, in particular, whether there is more that the Commission canand should--do to facilitate the development of interregional transmission projects. The 

Commission also requested post-technical conference comments on several issues related to 

interregional transmission development. If confirmed, I will review the record on this matter 

with my colleagues. 

Question 12: The lack of transmission is a barrier to transporting solar and wind energy to 

population centers. FERC Order No. 1000, requiring regional transmission planning and 

interregional coordination, was supposed to help identify transmission needs and solicit 

competitive transmission projects. Do you think that Order No. I OOO's requirements for regional 

transmission planning were a step in the right direction towards facilitating necessary 

transmission infrastructure? 

Answer: Order No. 1000 included a requirement that each public utility transmission provider 

amend its tariff to describe procedures that provide for the consideration of transmission needs 

driven by public policy requirements. This requirement applied to both local transmission 

planning processes and regional transmission planning processes. Specifically, the Commission 

required that each public utility transmission provider establish procedures through which it will 

identify transmission needs driven by public policy requirements in its local and regional 

transmission planning processes and evaluate potential solutions to those identified transmission 

needs. 

Question l1: What are the main barriers to identifying transmission needs and getting these 

projects built? 

~: While barriers to the identification and development of needed transmission remain, 

the Commission has been working to address these barriers for quite some time. In 2011, the 
202 

Powelson 50 

Commission issued Order No. 1000 to reform public utility transmission providers' transmission 

planning processes and cost allocation mechanisms. While monitoring closely implementation 

of Order No. 1000, the Commission also has continued to consider a range of issues related to 

transmission planning and cost allocation. In June 2016, the Commission convened a technical 

conference on competitive transmission development and requested post-technical conference 

comments on several issues, including issues related to competitive transmission development, 

interregional transmission coordination, and regional transmission planning. If confirmed, I will 

review this record with my colleagues. 

Question 12: How will you promote joint and coordinated planning among regional 

transmission planners for necessary interregional transmission? 

Answer: The Commission has been considering the issue of interregional transmission 

development for a number of years now. Among other actions, Order No. 1000 required 

improved coordination between neighboring transmission planning regions for new interregional 

transmission facilities and that each public utility transmission provider participate in a regional 

transmission planning process that has an interregional cost allocation method. In the years 

following the issuance of Order No. !000, the Commission has issued final orders on the 

compliance filings establishing interregional transmission coordination procedures for all the 

pairs of neighboring transmission planning regions. In addition, the June 2016 technical 

conference on competitive transmission development- discussed in my response to the 

preceding question- featured a discussion of interregional transmission coordination, including 

joint and coordinated interregional transmission planning. At the technical conference, several 

speakers and FERC Commissioners raised questions regarding the state of interregional 

transmission development and, in particular, whether there is more that the Commission canand should--do to facilitate the development of interregional transmission projects. The 

Commission also requested post-technical conference comments on several issues related to 

interregional transmission development. If confirmed, I will review the record on this matter 

with my colleagues. 

Question 13: Should FERC consider the underutilization of current pipelines when considering 

the need for a new pipeline? 

Answer: It is my understanding that this factor may currently be considered under the 

Commission's existing policy. In any event, if confirmed I look forward to reviewing the 

Commission's policies with my colleagues to ensure that all relevant factors are given 

appropriate consideration in the Commission's review of pipeline proposals. 

Question 14: Should FERC consider long-term stranded cost risk in examining the need tor new 

pipelines? 

Answer: The Commission issued a Policy Statement in 1999 that provides the analytical 

framework that it uses to evaluate the economic aspects of proposals for certificating new 

interstate natural gas infrastructure. Under the Policy Statement, the threshold requirement for 

pipelines proposing new projects is that the pipeline must be prepared to financially support the 

project without relying on subsidization from its existing customers. This approach appears to 
203 

Powelson 51 

place the risk of long-term stranded costs on the pipeline applicant and not on existing 

customers. 

Question 15: Who should be responsible for the costs of any wasteful overbuilding? 

Answer: As I noted above, the Commission's approach to evaluating the need for new pipelines 

appears to place the financial risk of overbuilding on the pipeline applicant. I believe the 

Commission should be mindful ofthe potential for overbuilding and the impact on the market 

and customers. 
204 

Statement of Advanced Energy Economy in Support of 

Neil Chatterjee's Nomination to Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission 

Washington, D.C., May 24, 2017- Tomorrow, the Senate Energy 

and Natural Resources Committee holds a hearing to consider the 

nominations of Neil Chatterjee and Rob Powelson to serve as 

commissioners of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

(FERC). AEE's VP of Federal Affairs, Arvin Ganesan, released the 

statement below in support of Neil Chatterjee's nomination. AEE 

also has a long-standing relationship with Mr. Powelson, in his roles 

as commissioner of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission and 

president of the National Association of Regulatory Utility 

Commissioners, but he was unable to meet with AEE, which is 

necessary for a formal endorsement, prior to tomorrow's 

confirmation hearing. 

"Advanced Energy Economy strongly supports the nomination of 

Neil Chatterjee to serve as a Commissioner at the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission. AEE is committed to an energy system 

that encourages innovation and allows all technologies to compete 

fairly in wholesale markets while also respecting the right of states 

to set policy goals of their own. We believe that market rules should 

not lock in old technologies at the expense of newer ones that can 

do more for less. Mr. Chatterjee shares our fundamental belief that 
205 

markets thrive when there is true competition on the basis of all the 

attributes various technologies have to offer, and in order to 

achieve this, we must ensure that barriers to competition are 

broken down. We look forward to working with Mr. Chatterjee and 

other commissioners of FERC to accomplish this goal." 

Background Materials: 

Why Advanced Energy Should Be Part of President Trump's 

'America Fiirst Energy Plan' 

AEE Urges FERC to Make Wholesale Electricity Markets More 

Competitive: Statement here. Filed comments here. 

FERC Agrees with AEE: Let All Advanced Energy Technologies 

Compete in Regional Power Markets 

A FERC challenge: Opening up Electricity Markets to Advanced 

Energy Technologies 

Advanced Energy Can Improve Reliability - If It's Allowed to 

Compete 

How Grid Governance Stands in the Way of Advanced Energy 

Progress 

AEE and R Street Institute Say to Congress: Improving Competitive 

Power Markets Can Lower Costs and Take Advantage of Advanced 

Energy Benefits 

Advanced Energy Economy Applauds FERC Inquiry on Barriers to 

Energy Storage. Calls for Electricity Market Participation of All 

Advanced Energy Technologies 
206 

Comments to FERC on Technology-Neutral Competition in 

Transmission Development 

About Advanced Energy Economy 

Advanced Energy Economy is a national association of businesses 

that are making the energy we use secure, clean, and affordable. 

Advanced energy encompasses a broad range of products and 

services that constitute the best available technologies for meeting 

energy needs today and tomorrow. AEE's mission is to transform 

public policy to enable rapid growth of advanced energy 

businesses. AEE and its State and Regional Partner organizations 

are active in 27 states across the country, representing more than 

1,000 companies and organizations in the advanced energy 

industry. Visit AEE online at www.aee.net. 

See this statement online here. 

Media Contact: 

Monique Hanis, mhanis@aee.net, 202-391-0884 
207 

President Donald J. Trump 

The White House 

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, DC 20500 

Dear Mr. President: 

February 15, 2017 

Americans rely on infrastructure to deliver the energy that powers our great nation. The 

undersigned associations appreciate the strong steps you have taken to accelerate the 

regulatory process for high-value energy infrastructure projects. However, the recent loss of a 

quorum at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FER C) has placed energy infrastructure 

permitting on an indefinite hold, creating an unexpected barrier to your recent streamlining 

actions and threatening their ultimate success. We ask that you fill the vacancies at FERC as 

quickly as possible to remedy this potentially crippling situation. 

FERC plays a critical role in ensuring Americans can count on the best energy 

infrastructure in the world. Regardless of the energy resource, moving energy safely and 

efficiently to where it is needed requires a modern and highly interconnected system. 

Innovation is driving new opportunities. Projects bring an influx of investment, and that means 

more money to spend in local economies. Energy infrastructure is delivering opportunity across 

America, so we cannot afford to delay progress another day. 

We ask you to nominate new FERC commissioners to fill the three vacancies as soon as 

possible. Investments to enhance our energy infrastructure to improve efficiency, affordability, 

reliability and security are placed in jeopardy when FERC seats are left empty. Robust energy 

infrastructure creates jobs, improves safety and spurs domestic investment. Nominating a full 

set of commissioners to FERC is a bold step toward a stronger future, and we ask that you do so 

as quickly as possible. 

Sincerely, 

Air Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute 

American Chemistry Council 

American Council of Engineering Companies 

American Forest & Paper Association 

American Iron and Steel Institute 

Consumer Energy Alliance 

Electricity Consumers Resource Council 

Energy Equipment and Infrastructure Alliance 

Industrial Energy Consumers of America 

National Association of Manufacturers 

National Electrical Manufacturers Association 

U.S. Chamber of Commerce 
208 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

May 25,2017 Hearing: The Nominations of 

Mr. Dan R. Brouillette to be Deputy Secretary of Energy, and Mr. Neil Chatterjee 

and Mr. Robert F. Powelson to be Members of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

Statement for the Record 

U.S. Senator Steve Daines 

I want to thank the nominees for coming before the Senate and for their testimony. It is also 

always great to sec the support of your families behind you. I want to stress the importance of 

this hearing and confirming these positions. FERC needs to have a quorum to function and DOE 

needs a second in command that can help guide the department. I am thrilled that the President 

has chosen well-qualified and intelligent members to these important positions. All three of of 

these nominees have the experience needed to serve the commission and the department well. 
209 

ENERGY 

EQUIPMENT & 

INFRASTRUCTURE 

ALLIANCE 

May 23, 2017 

The Honorable lisa Murkowski, Chairman 

Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

522 Hart Senate Office Building 

Washington, DC 20510 

The Honorable Maria Cantwell, Ranking Member 

Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

511 Hart Senate Office Building 

Washington, DC 20510 

Dear Chairman Murkowski and Ranking Member Cantwell: 

601 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 

Ste. 900 

Washington, DC 20004 

info@eeia.org • (202) 870-7715 

On behalf of the members of the Energy Equipment and Infrastructure Alliance (EEIA), I am writing to 

express our strong support for Neil Chatterjee and Robert Powelson to be confirmed as Commissioners 

of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). 

We represent the energy production and infrastructure supply chain, which includes millions of energy 

infrastructure workers employed in more than 120,000 companies, over 90% of which are small 

businesses. Our members work in sixty industries, annually contributing more than $170 billion to the 

U.S. economy, working in every state of the union, providing construction, equipment, supplies, 

logistics, professional services and technology to energy operations. These workers and companies are 

the hard-working backbone of America's energy economy. They are the builders of an energy 

production and distribution system that safely delivers clean, affordable and reliable energy to 

America's families, communities, businesses and our nation's power grid. 

Since early February, the absence of quorum at FERC has put in jeopardy many major energy-delivery 

infrastructure projects needed to lower energy costs to consumers and to supply clean-burning natural 

gas to electric generating plants. At stake in these delays are not only lower-cost supplies of natural gas 

to consumers and industrial customers, but also the necessary transmission capacity to supply the 

transition to clean-burning natural gas power generation, as well as the capacity necessary for 

integration of wind and solar power into the grid. 

Equally concerning is the loss of tens of thousands of supply chain jobs attributable to project delays 

caused by absence of a quorum at FERC. These are Main Street American jobs that support families and 

communities across our country. Make no mistake: besides consumers, the real victims of the noquorum situation are construction laborers, equipment operators and maintenance technicians, 

welders, pipefitters, truck drivers, and supporting professional, administrative, factory and warehouse 

workers, to name a few. 
210 

Page 2 

We urge you to support and expedite Committee approval of these FERC Commissioner nominees, and 

to work with Senate leadership and your colleagues to achieve their confirmation by the United States 

Senate at the earliest possible opportunity. 

Sincerely, 

Toby Mack 

President & CEO 
211 

@ENERNOC 

June 5, 2017 

The Honorable Lisa Murkowski 

Chairman 

Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

709 Hart Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

The Honorable Maria Cantwell 

Vice Chairman 

Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

511 Hart Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Dear Chairman Murkowski and Vice Chairman Cantwell, 

We are writing to express our strong support for Neil Chatterjee and Robert Powleson as nominees to the Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission. Both nominees are well positioned to help FERC achieve its mission and ensure 

that consumers receive reliable, secure energy at competitive prices. 

While on the Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commission, Commissioner Powleson consistently provided strong 

leadership and championed competitive outcomes. Commissioner Powleson's role leading the successful 

implementation of Act 129, which has resulted of billions of dollars in customer savings through reducing energy 

waste and inefficient grid usage in Pennsylvania, demonstrates his support for allowing all technologies to 

compete on a level playing field to meet reliability and the energy needs of our economy. As our grid continues to 

evolve, it is critical that FERC enable this more competitive, dynamic market to be unleashed. By virtue of his 

leadership role at NARUC and time as a Commissioner, Commissioner Powleson also has a clear appreciation for 

the need to harmonize state policy with competitive markets. 

From our interactions with Mr. Chatterjee, he has demonstrated the same support for competitive markets that 

allow all technologies to participate on a level playing field. He recognizes that by strengthening competition and 

eliminating unnecessary barriers to advanced energy technologies, FERC can drive more affordable outcomes for 

consumers. The Commission will benefit from this perspective, and Mr. Chatterjee's pragmatic, fair-minded 

nature. 

We respectfully request that you vote in favor of these two nominees. Thank you for your consideration of this 

letter, and for your leadership. 

Sincerely, 

Tim Healy 

Chairman and CEO, EnerNOC 

David Brewster 

President, EnerNOC 
212 

Dr. Robert Weisenmiller, Chair 

California Energy Commission 

1516 9th Street 

Department of Energy 

Washington, DC 20585 

May 19,2017 

Sacramento, California 95814-5512 

Dear Dr. Weisenmiller: 

l am writing to you to express my concern about the heightened and continuing energy 

reliability risks in Southern California induced by the closure of the regionally-important 

natural gas underground storage facility at Aliso Canyon. With a warmer than average 

summer predicted, the Department is concerned with regional reliability, in addition to 

longer-term concerns about overall grid stability. 

I recognize that since the shutdown of Aliso Canyon, you and your colleagues at other 

agencies and utilities (in California and in neighboring states), have shown extraordinary 

dedication in seeking new ways to use the existing electric and gas infrastructure more 

effectively to meet regional requirements; such as the addition of strategically sited new 

assets, including renewable generation facilities and energy storage devices. 

Concurrently, we are encouraged by last winter's rain and snowpack which underpin 

California's hydro-power capacity. 

Nevertheless, it appears that despite these efforts, without the availability of Aliso 

Canyon or some adequate functional equivalent, the region remains vulnerable to energy 

supply disruptions and possible electricity blackouts triggered by severe weather, 

unanticipated outages of key facilities, natural or man-made disasters, or a combination 

of these events. The reality is there are many constraints to the transmission of electricity 

and natural gas in California that are only exacerbated by Aliso Canyon being 

unavailable in its full capacity. 

l note that under your direction, many of the injection/withdrawal wells serving Aliso 

Canyon have successfully undergone a battery of rigorous safety tests. With this in mind, 

r urge you to seriously consider and if possible approve the near-term reopening of Aliso 

Canyon. 

At the same time l want to be clear that I am not suggesting a simple retum to the stalu.~ 

quo ante. Many lessons have been learned from the Aliso Canyon experience, one of the 

most important of which is that as our reliance on natural gas for the generation of 

electricity increases, we must identify potential fuel supply risks and take appropriate 

actions to mitigate them. 

Reopening Aliso Canyon would help to ease near-term reliability risks, v;hile providing an 

umbrella of protection under which appropriate longer-term actions can be planned and 
213 

2 

brought to reality. If Aliso Canyon is reopened, recharging it to its full capacity (86 Bef) 

will be a slow process. This means that whether Aliso Canyon could make a significant 

contribution to easing reliability challenges this summer is questionable, but reopening it 

soon is required for recharging and ensuring access for the winter of 2017-18. 

If the Depatiment can be of assistance to you in dealing with this challenge, whether 

through our able staff or through the expertise at our national laboratories, please let me 

know. I look forward to further dialogue with you on this subject and others of mutual 

interest as they arise. 

Sincerely, 

a ll~ll('",.,. , 

Patricia A. 1-loffinan 

Acting Under Secretary for Science and Energy 

Ofllce of the Under Secretary for Science and Energy 
214 

The Honorable Lisa Murkowski 

Chairman 

May 18,2017 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

522 Hart Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

The Honorable Maria Cantwell 

Ranking Member 

U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

511 Hart Senate Office Building 

Washington, D.C. 20510 

Dear Chairman Murkowski and Ranking Member Cantwell: 

On behalf of the 500,000 members of the Laborers' International Union of North 

America (LIUNA), I would like to express our support for Neil Chattcr:jee and Robert 

Powelson to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). UUNA also 

supports Kevin Mcintyre who is likely to be President Trump's third nomination to 

FER C. As you are aware, without a minimum of three commissioners, FERC does not 

have a necessary quomm to fult1ll its responsibilities to approve mt\ior energy projects, 

and so I urge swift action from the Senate on these nominees. 

Following Norman Bay's sudden resignation earlier this year, FERC was left with only 

two acting commissioners, forcing an immediate stop to the process for projects still 

waiting to be approved by the commission. Then, just last week, Commissioner Colette 

Honorable announced that she will not seck another term and will step down at the end 

of her current term on June 30, 2017. 

Environmental extremists are attempting to disrupt the nomination process because of 

the commission's control over permitting interstate gas pipelines. Without a proper 

quorum at FERC, significant economic growth is forfeited, energy independence is 

hindered, and thousands of good-paying union jobs are lost. Pipelines play a vital role 

in transporting product safely and securely, preventing the use of more dangerous and 

environmentally harmFul methods of transportation. 

Expanding our nation's energy infrastructure puts thoustmds of skilled Ll UNA men and 

women to work and provides millions of Americans with affordable energy. We 

cmrently have more than $50 billion worth of pipeline infrastructure pending that would 

put tens ofthousands of Building Trades men and women to work. Every day FERC is 
215 

FERC Commissioner Nominees 

May18,2017 

Page2 

unable to do its job approving these projects is another day our members cannot do their 

jobs improving America's energy infrastructure. 

I urge you to support and approve President Trump's FERC nominees so we can 

continue to grow ow· energy network and put LIUNA members to work. 

With kind regards, I am 

rj 

opeiu2liuna 

Sincerely yours, 

~0~ TERR\~ULLTV AN 

General President 
216 

Jay Timmons 

President and C£0 

Manufacturers 

The Honorable President Donald J. Trump 

President of the United Stales of America 

The White House 

1600 Pennsylvania Ave. NW 

Washington, DC 20500 

Dear Mr. President, 

February 15, 2017 

On behalf of the National Association of Manufacturers, representing manufacturers In 

every industrial sector and in all 50 states, I strongly urge you to move swiftly on nominations for 

key independent agencies like the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the 

U.S. Export-Import (Ex-lm) Bank. 

The NAM shares your goals of boosting economic growth and creating a business 

atmosphere that increases hiring. One important way to promote those goals is to support 

proven job creators. Unfortunately, key leadership vacancies at these agencies are causing 

unnecessary delays and costly hurdles for U.S. manufacturers. 

Both the Ex-lm Bank Board of Directors and FERC are currently without the necessary 

quorum to act on crucial decisions. With no chairman and only two of five commission slots 

currently filled, FERC does not have the authority to approve new energy infrastructure projects. 

The Ex-lm Bank is in a similar situation; with no chairman and only two administratively 

appointed Board members, it cannot approve high-value transactions or enact policy changes 

that would benefit exporters. 

FERC plays a critical role in ensuring Americans can count on the best energy 

infrastructure in the world. Moving energy safely and efficiently to where it is needed requires a 

modern and highly interconnected system. Energy infrastructure is delivering opportunity across 

America, and manufacturers cannot afford to delay progress on new projects. Investments to 

enhance our energy infrastructure to improve efficiency, affordability, reliability and security are 

placed in jeopardy-when FERC seats are left empty. Robust ensrgy infrastructure creates jobs, 

improves safety and spurs domestic investment. 

As the official export credit agency of the United States, the Ex-lm Bank assists in 

financing U.S. exports from thousands of American companies and bolsters our global 

competitiveness. Manufacturers of all sizes across the country tum to the Ex-lm Bank for 

financing and insurance when the private sector cannot provide comparable tools. Exports are 

more important than ever to grow U.S. manufacturing, and access to competitive export 

financing and working capital is oftentimes critical to secure overseas sales that sustain or grow 

U.S. jobs- especially in the face of substantial foreign competition. The Ex-lm Bank has been a 

vital tool in helping businesses in the United States fight on a level playing field in the face of at 

least 85 government-back export credit agencies around the world that work aggressively to 

support their own domestic industries at the expense of ours. If the agency's activities continue 

to be limited, without a Board quorum to approve certain transactions, U.S. exporters and their 

workers will lose access to this crucial "lender of last resort." 

Leading Innovation. Creating Opportum1y. Pursuing Progress. 

733 10• StrMt t<W, Suite 700, Washington, DC 20001 · • 202•637•3043 • • 202-£37•3460 • www.r>am.org 
217 

With every passing day that key independent agencies like FERC and Ex-lm Bank's 

Board of Directors lack the necessary quorum to complete new business, businesses in the 

United States are missing out on new business opportunities - to the detriment of local 

economies and American jobs. I urge you to move forward as quickly as possible in naming 

nominees that enable these agencies to carry out decisions that support U.S. manufacturers. 

With all best wishes I remain, 

Sincerely, 
218 

MsoCaiGas 

A~ Sempra E1wrgy utility 

April 28, 20 I 7 

Bret Lane 

President and 

Chief Operating Officer 

555 W. 5th M.l.. GT-21CI 

Los Angeles, 90013-1011 

Tel: 213.2.44.2100 

Fax: 2!3.244.8293 

Mr. Stephen Berberich, President and CEO, California Independent System Operator 

Mr. Michael Picker, President, California Public Utilities Commission 

Mr. Robert Weisenmiller, Chair, California Energy Commission 

Dear Messrs. Berberich, Picker, and Weisenmiller: 

The California Independent System Operator (CAISO), California Energy Commission (CEC) and 

California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) are the critical agencies charged with planning and 

managing California's energy reliability. Californians depend upon your agencies' expertise and 

authority to ensure dependable supplies of natural gas and electricity. We continue to stand ready 

to support your agencies' efforts. To further suppmt you and your agencies' efforts, we want to 

make you aware of serious concerns we have about our ability to safely and reliably serve our 

customers this summer and upcoming winter, based upon the current operating status of our 

system. 

The State was lucky this past year to have experienced a mild summer and winter. For the 

upcoming summer and winter seasons, Californians cannot rely on luck, and energy reliability 

should not depend upon unusually mild weather conditions. This is particularly true now, as tbe 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is forecasting a 60 to 70 percent chance for 

above normal temperatures throughout California this summer. 

Recently, your agencies directed us to perform an analysis of our system's maximum capabilities 

using a specitied set of assumptions, and we have provided your agencies with that analysis. 

SoCaiGas is concerned, hmvevcr, that the assumptions we were asked to utilize in our analysis 

assume perfect operating conditions and optimal market conditions. This could lead your agencies 

to reach conclusions that produce overly optimistic assessments that could put at risk the 

dependable supply of natural gas and electricity that Southern Californians will rely on to meet 

their energy needs this summer and upcoming winter. 

Our system's physical ability to provide reliable service on peak demand days and respond to 

abnormal operating conditions is at risk. As you are aware, currently, the ability of our storage 

fields to fulfill their critical role in supporting our system is diminished. The La Goleta, I [onor 

Rancho and Playa del Rey storage facilities have 40 percent less inventory than they did at this 

same time last year. The inventories in these three fidds are at reduced levels due to the increased 

utilization of these fields last winter as a nosult of the restrictions on the usc of Aliso Canyon. 
219 

SoCalGas is prohibited from injecting natural gas at Aliso Canyon and is limited to withdrawing 

gas under certain conditions. In past years, injections into and withdrawals from storage---

pt'imarily Aliso Canyon-had been sufficient to maintain system reliability when tlowing supplies 

and customer demand were not in balance. Cuncntly, the depleted inventory levels at La Goleta, 

Honor Rancho and Playa del Rey and restrictions on our use of Aliso Canyon could result in 

inadequate injection and withdrawal rates to respond to these imbalances during this summer and 

into the coming winter. The availability of storage ir~ection capacity also reduces the risk of over 

pressurization of segments of our pipeline system. Operating close to a pipeline's maximum 

pressure is a pipeline safety and compliance concern. 

Prudent planning promotes safety and incorporates contingencies t.o provide sufficient system 

resiliency and flexibility. As part of electric planning assessments, the electric industry plans for 

upsets under the":--! minus l" condition, which t·equires electric operators to plan their system to 

have sufficient resiliency to lose a critical component and continue operating. The gas industt·y 

does not have that planning requirement. For SoCa!Gas, onr system was designed to use our 

storage assets to create system resiliency. Storage acts as "shock absorbers" when we have 

f1uctuations during both supply and demand swings. In effect, having natural gas storage available 

within our system provides a similar "N minus I" contingency. Many of the assessment's 

assumptions, however, do not provide for sufficient contingency in the event of imperfect 

operating conditions and less than optimal market conditions. 

Our experience in these areas raises concerns about planning the region's energy reliability based 

upon assumptions that require almost perfect conditions. Our concerns with the assumptions can 

be summarized as follows: 

Assumption: 

Con,;.£rns: 

Assumption: 

Concerns: 

Full receipt point utilization. 

Full receipt point utilization only provides the upper bound of our system's 

ability to serve customer demand. This theoretical maximum is not a 

reasonahlc operational planning assumption. As you are aware, receipt point 

utilization is a market issue and is dependent upon the market participantsfrom upstream suppliers, shippers, and ultimately the core and non-core 

customers-to purchase, schedule, and deliver the gas. Full receipt point 

utilization is primarily dependent upon customer demand and does not 

rcllcct actual historical receipts. 

1.4 70 bcf per day storage withdrawal rates. 

Storage withdrawal rates of 1.470 bcfpcr day assumes significantly higher 

inventory at La Goleta and Honor Rancho, and full inventory at Playa del 

Rey. We are concerned that the limited injection that has occurred over the 

last month to restore depleted storage inventories, and I imitations and 

restrictions on the ability to replace gas withdrawn during the summer, will 

result in lower withdrawal rates. 

Currently, the combined inventory al La Goleta, Honor Rancho and Playa 

del Rey is approximately 40 percent lower than it was at this time last year. 

The inventories in these three fields are at reduced levels due to the 

2 
220 

Concerns: 

increased utilization of these fields last winter as a result of the restrictions 

on the use of Aliso Canyon. If depleted storage inventories arc not restored, 

we will be unable to achieve or maintain withdrawal rates of I .470 bcf per 

day. 

Restrictions on the use of injection at Aliso Canyon have a direct impact on 

the SoCaiGas system operator's ability to optimize storage injection at our 

other tlelds, reliably meet the variability of demand this summer, and 

prepare for this upcoming winter. The daily injection capacity provided by 

Aliso Canyon adds 2 to 2 Yo times the total available injection capacity for 

our system, allows the market to have more certainty and flexibility when 

scheduling gas into our system, and allows the SoCaiGas system operator to 

maximize injection at the other storage fields. !t also provides the SoCaiGas 

system operator the ability to better manage the pipeline system from a 

pressure perspective. Our system has been designed and operated with the 

injection, withdrawal and storage capacity of all the storage fields as integral 

parts of the overall system. 

Aliso Canyon is assumed to not be used this summer, but held in reserve as a 

planning contingency. 

It may be reasonable to assume conservatively that Aliso Canyon is 

unavai !able for withdrawal to provide a planning contingency within a 

modeling exercise. But, given the State's current restrictions on injection, it 

is not prudent to depend on Aliso Canyon as an operational backstop 

throughout the summer and winter to fill potential gaps during system upsets 

or when the perfect assumptions do not materialize. With Aliso Canyon's 

currently depleted inventory level, new operating configuration of the wells, 

and the current temporary moratorium on injection, once any withdrawals 

arc made from Aliso Canyon. its withdrawal capacity is anticipated to 

decline at what could be a dramatic rate. 

Daily average capacity accurately reflects the system's ability to meet 

customer demand. 

Assuming daily average capacities can he used to forecast the system's 

ability to meet customer demand results in system planning that docs not 

address the critical importance of hourly customer demand fluctuations, 

especially in supporting natural gas fired electric generation, in assessing 

system reliability, The availability of natural gas supply from our stomge 

fields provides critical flexibility in managing the di!Tcrenccs between 

relatively unithrm flow of supply from our receipt points and the hourly 

fluctuating demand of our customers, 

We continue to review historical data to assess in greater detail how these assumptions match up 

with our experience, As described in previous reports, disruptions from planned or unplanned 

outages on our systcrn and interconnecting pipeline systems can result in natural gas supply 

interruptions. In addition, we highlight two recent examples of how disruptions outside of our· 

system demonstrate the critical role our storage facilities play in supporting gas and electric system 

3 
221 

reliability and resiliency. Under current operating conditions, these events could result in 

significant energy shortages, including electric generator curtailment. 

Weather: In late July 20!5, Southern Califomia experienced three consecutive days of 

intense humidity and monsoonal storms. The heat and humidity drove an increased need 

for electric generation, and the cloud cover limited solar geueration, resulting in 11uctuating 

electric generation and attendant natural gas demand. During the event, use of natural gas 

fired electric generation increased significantly, with a total demand over a three-day period 

ranging between 11 and 25 percent above plan. Storage withdrawals were instrumental in 

managing the variable needs of the electric system and maintaining electric reliability. 

Electric Demand: [n August 2016, the Blue Cut fire in the Cajon Pass of Southern 

California, impacted major transmission lines operated by Los Angeles Department of 

Water and Power and CA!SO. Those lines were taken out of service during the fire, which 

required local natural gas fired electric generation to make up t<1r the loss of electric 

transmission capacity. Signitlcant storage withdrawals were used to respond to this 

unexpected 21 percent increase in natural gas demand from electric generation over a fiveday period. 

These examples demonstrate the importance of assessing our system's capabilities to meet 

customer demand under multiple scenarios, including scenarios that account for unexpected 

changes to natural gas supply and customer demand. Experience has shown that failure to address 

our system's need for resiliency and !lexibility risks energy shortages and the attendant safety 

issues. 

We hope that this information is helpful as your agencies perform their critical roles in planning 

and managing California's energy reliability and resiliency. We continue to stand ready to support 

you and your agencies' efforts and recognize the importance of continuing to work together as you 

reach conclusions critical to the State's ability to ensure a reliable supply of energy to fuel 

California's residents, businesses, and economy. 

President and Chief Operating Officer 

cc: Kevin De Leon, President pro Tempore, California State Senate 

Anthony Rendon, Speaker of the Assembly, California State Assembly 

Nancy McFadden, Executive Secretary to California Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. 

Edward Randolph, Energy Division Director, CPUC 

Mark Rocthleder, Vice President, Markel Quality and Renewable Integration, CAISO 

4 
222 

~Utilities 

~ 

J. Ill II Technology 

Council' 

May 25,2017 

Utilities Technology Council 

Statement for the Record 

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee 

Nomination Hearing to Consider DOE, FERC Nominees 

The Utilities Technology Council (UTC) appreciates the opportunity to submit a Statement for 

the Record in the U.S. Senate's Energy and Natural Resources Committee's hearing "Nomination 

Hearing to Consider DOE, FERC Nominees." Formed in 1948, UTC is a global trade association 

representing for-profit and not-for-profit electric, gas, and water utilities on issues involving utility 

information and communications technology (ICT). Our members work every day to ensure the safe, 

reliable and secure delivery of electricity. 

Life as we know it today is dependent on the reliable delivery of electricity, water and gas. What 

is not recognized often enough, however, is the absolutely critical need for electric, gas and water 

utilities to have access to the information and communications technology (ICT) they need to maintain 

not only day-to-day operations, but also operations during times of restoration and recovery from a 

variety of hazards, including natural disasters and outages caused by malicious physical or cyber attacks. 

As this Committee examines the nominees for both the Department of Energy (DOE) and the 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), UTC respectfully requests that the Committee 

encourage the nominees to explore ways they, in their new positions, can facilitate the inclusion of utility 

ICT needs, such as access to radiofrequency spectrum for utility wireless communications systems, in 

federal policies focused on securing the country's energy infrastructure. By encouraging the nominees to 

engage regularly with their counterparts at the Department of Commerce, which houses the National 

Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), and the Federal Communications 

Commission, which both have jurisdiction over spectrum and other aspects of policies related to ICT, the 

Committee has the opportunity to ensure that this absolutely essential component of grid resiliencereliable communications- is more holistically considered throughout our government. 

Additionally, UTC's electric utility members have worked diligently over the past number of 

years to develop a strong and robLlsl information sharing and strategic collaboration initiative embodied 

in the Electricity Subsector Coordinating Council (ESCC). They have also committed, through the North 

American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), to continuously improve the mandatory reliability 

standards process, which has enhanced the security and reliability of the bulk po'<ver system. Both DOE 

and FERC play critical roles in these efforts, and we would request that the Committee encourage the 

nominees to support the continued work occurring within both the ESCC and NERC. 

UTC would like to emphasize the following: 

Energy policymakcrs must closely examine cross sector interdependencies and enhance 

cross sector collaboration. UTC encourages this Committee to take a leading role in ensuring that as it 

1129 201

" Street, NW • Suite 350 • Washington, DC 20036 USA • 1.202.872.0030 • FAX: 1.202.872.1331 
223 

explores how to protect the electric grid from all hazards, it also considers how cross sector 

interdependencies can impact grid resilience. As it examines the DOE and FERC nominees, the 

Committee should encourage them to take a leading role in these efforts. Utility ICT needs, such as 

access to spectrum (essential to deployment of wireless communications) that is free from interference 

and congestion, are an integral component of discussions about securing the country's energy 

infrastructure. Unfortunately, electric utilities, despite their criticality to homeland security, face 

increasing challenges in accessing spectrum for mission critical communications, such as those used for 

Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCAD A) systems, which are fundamental to grid operations. 

The need for spectrum becomes even more acute as utilities increasingly rely on wireless technologies to 

enable smart grid devices that in turn manage fluctuations in intermittency in the grid due to solar and 

wind deployment. Utilities also need access to spectrum to deploy new technologies like drones that have 

the potential to enable greater situational awareness and enhanced grid resilience. Policymakers must 

address electric utilities' need for spectrum so they have access to the ICT they need for safe, reliable and 

secure electric service operations. Reliable communication systems are essential for maintaining 

operational safety, reliability and security, as well as for resiliency and restoration of service. 

In order to ensure that these needs are met, the Committee should encourage the nominees to 

meet more regularly with their counterparts at the Department of Commerce and the FCC. Regular 

intergovernmental engagement will facilitate better understanding of the operational needs of various 

critical infrastructures, thereby enhancing homeland security and safety. While each agency must stay in 

its jurisdictional "swim lane," understanding the cross sector impacts of its decision-making will yield 

better policies overall. At a time when cross-sector interdependencies are increasing, the need for crossgovernment engagement is essential. DOE and FERC, with their expertise about the energy sector, could 

provide needed education and collaboration with other agencies about the energy sector's !CT 

deployment and policy challenges. 

The public private partnership embodied in the ESCC is a robust and essential element of 

our members' critical infrastructure protection activities and should be supported at every 

opportunity. UTC's members serve on the ESCC, and UTC's President and CEO is an invited guest of 

the ESCC. This public private partnership has been instrumental in: 1) improving the communication 

between the government and the private sector on the threats and vulnerabilities that exist; 2) addressing 

the obstacles to expanding the real-time situational awareness electric utilities need to mitigate these 

rapidly-changing threats; 3) educating industry about cybersecurity best practices; and, 4) identifying 

technology gaps to better inform research and development. DOE's role in this effort has been 

foundational to its success, and UTC asks the Committee to encourage the nominees to build upon and 

strengthen this well-functioning structure. 

Standards alone will not get us the security we need. The carefully constructed relationship 

that exists between industry, NERC as the Electric Reliability Organization (ERO), and FERC is working 

well and should continue as is to ensure that industry and government can address the most critical issues 

from a risk-based perspective. The Committee should encourage the FERC nominees to support the 

existing process. 

UTC's members are also actively involved with NERC- both with the Electricity Sector 

Information Sharing and Analysis Center (E-ISAC) and the development and implementation of the 

Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) standards. Each of these functions within NERC play important 

and different roles needed for mitigating various threats to the grid. UTC believes that existing NERC 

CIP requirements have helped bring a much-needed spotlight on utility security. These baseline standards 

in conjunction with the efforts of the E-ISAC, the ESCC, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), 

the Nationallnstitute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and others to teach best practices on how to 

1129 201

h Street, NW • Suite 350 • Washington, DC 20036 USA • 1.202.872.0030 • FAX: 1.202.872.1331 
224 

mitigate the threat, are the type of multi-pronged approach that is needed for protecting these critical 

systems. 

In conclusion, UTC urges the Committee to request that the nominees work to align 

communications policy with energy policy. UTC believes that there is an opportunity to promote utility 

ICT as part of an integrated energy policy for affordable, reliable, and secure energy, which is essential 

to improving U.S. economic productivity, enhancing our quality of life, protecting our critical 

infrastructure, and ensuring our Nation's security. 

UTC looks forward to working with the Committee and the nominees to develop policies that 

protect utility infrastructure through the implementation of improved utility communications. 

0 

1129 20'" Street. NW • Suite 350 • Washington, DC 20036 USA • 1.202.872.0030 • FAX 1.202.872.1331