One of the three legislators who went to the State Supreme Court in an attempt to stop Corporation Commissioner Todd Hiett from voting on certain utility rate cases is making a full-court press by filing a large number of claims and complaints in the cases before the state regulators.
One of the cases (2025-000038) is the recent 2-1 vote in which Commissioner Hiett opposed the move by Oklahoma Gas and Electric to win preapproval of its major power expansion projects. It’s the case where OG&E filed a request with the commission to force recusal by Hiett. But as Hiett made clear last week, he will not recuse himself and said he was only doing what he was elected to do.
Rep. Tom Gann, one of the three legislators fighting Hiett’s participation in other cases before the Oklahoma Supreme Court proceeded at the start of December to file more complaints and arguments against the commissioner.
One of his first filings included a 42-page 2008 study and report by the National Regulatory Research Institute and two authors, Scott Hempling and Scott Strauss. Hempling was Executive Director of the Institute from 2006 to 2011 and served as an Administrative Law Judge with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission from 2021 to 2024.
The study was entitled “When And Under What Conditions Should Regulators Commit Ratepayer Dollars to Utility-Proposed Capital Projects?” The question focused on the very subject of the Corporation Commission’s 2-1 vote. OG&E had also asked for authority to implement Construction Work in Progress on a battery storage project at Woodward but it was not included in the final order as drawn up by the commission.
The Institute’s study did not oppose pre-approval or CWIP but it urged regulators to use careful approaches to approval or denial, such as, ” Any pre-approvals are granted only upon a supported showing that regulatory action will benefit customers. Regulatory actions are based on full review of the relevant facts, and are supported by evidentiary showings.”
It also urged public utility commissions to “Whatever regulatory action is taken is appropriately limited or conditioned.” The study also explained that approval of a utility’s option as a “prudent choice is not the same thing as approving the inclusion in rates of whatever dollars are expended to pursue it.”
Rep. Gann has filed objections in a growing number of rate cases.
PUD2005-000425 – ONG Line Loss Recovery case
TD2020-000007 – ONG Rule exception case
PUD2022-000073 – ONG/OG&E/PSO Franchise fees case
PUD2023-000056 – Liberty-Empire District integrated resource plan case
PUD2023-000086 – PSO rate case
PUD2023-000087 – OG&E rate case
PUD2024-000010 – ONG rate case CY 2023
PUD2024-000013 – PSO energy efficiency case
PUD2024-000023 – AOG rate case
PUD2024-000029 – Liberty-Empire District RESCTA case
PUD2024-000032 – PSO IRS case
PUD2024-000038 – OG&E FAC CY 2023 case
PUD2024-000039 – Liberty-Empire District FAC CY 2023 case
PUD2024-000040 – PSO FAC CY 2023 case
PUD2024-000045 – OG&E bonds case
PUD2024-000047 – ONG FAC CY 2023 case
PUD2024-000048 – OG&E demand portfolio case
PUD2024-000057 – PSO preapproval case