A nationwide alliance of consumer advocates and manufacturers takes issue with the recent request filed by Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company and 8 other utilities in asking federal regulators to remove the competitive bidding requirement for construction of distribution lines for major power grids. It accused them of being “tone deaf” to the affordability crisis.
The Electricity Transmission Competition Coalition, in response to OGE and other utilities who argued competitive bidding led to delays and higher costs, filed a request with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to reject the complaint filed by the utilities who fall under the Southwest Power Pool and the Mid-Continent Independent System Operator grids.
“Without competition, a monopoly incumbent utility has zero incentive to reduce costs because the more they spend the more their profits increase. The complaint is inconsistent with President Trump’s Ratepayer Protection Pledge, a pledge that consumers do not pay higher rates due to data center expansion and his Executive Order “Reducing Anti-Competitive
Regulatory Barriers,” ETCC will urge the US Department of Justice to review the complaint,” stated the coalition in its filing with FERC.
OG&E, covering much of Oklahoma and Empire District Company based in Joplin, Missouri, another utility that has thousands of customers in Oklahoma, were among 9 utilities asking FERC to suspend the required competitive bidding across the 18 states covered by the SPP and MISO. They filed a complaint Tuesday with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission that seeks to temporarily eliminate the competitive solicitation provision in FERC’s landmark Order 1000, which broadly reformed electric transmission planning and cost allocation.
The ETCC accused the utilities of being against ratepayer protections and claimed the transmission competition in the two grids historically enhanced cost, schedule discipline and accountability while non-competitive projects did not.
“For example, six near-term SPP competitive projects reduced costs on average by 21 percent and eight MISO projects 38
percent. Despite this, most projects were not competitively bid. Halting competition, even temporarily, would deprive ratepayers of the cost and schedule protections built into the competitive selection process, without providing any offsetting or meaningful benefits,” argued the Coalition.
The group also contended the complaint filed by the utilities “rests on the false premise that competition delays transmission development” and the premise was not supported by the record.
“The complaint is tone deaf to the electricity affordability crisis facing Americans,” said Paul Cicio, Chair of the Electricity Transmission Competition Coalition.
“Suspending competition for five years in MISO and SPP would expose consumers in these regions to unchecked cost escalation for years, guaranteeing higher utility bills. MISO and SPP competitive transmission projects have been shown to have a better track record of adhering to cost containment and completion schedules than non-competitive projects. A moratorium would move us backward at precisely the wrong time.”
The electric utilities that filed the complaint and are against ratepayer protections include: International Transmission Co; Michigan Electric Transmission Co; ITC Midwest; ITC Great Plains; Ameren Services; American Transmission Co; Cleco Power LLC; Entergy; Evergy Inc; Oklahoma Gas & Electric; Empire District Electric Company; and Xcel Energy.