[Senate Hearing 119-208]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 119-208
SWETT AND LACERTE NOMINATIONS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
to
CONSIDER THE NOMINATIONS OF LAURA SWETT TO BE A MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL
ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION AND DAVID LACERTE TO BE A MEMBER OF THE
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
__________
SEPTEMBER 4, 2025
__________
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
61-930 WASHINGTON : 2026
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
MIKE LEE, Utah, Chairman
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico
JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho RON WYDEN, Oregon
STEVE DAINES, Montana MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
TOM COTTON, Arkansas MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
DAVID McCORMICK, Pennsylvania ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine
JAMES C. JUSTICE, West Virginia CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado
CINDY HYDE-SMITH, Mississippi ALEX PADILLA, California
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
Wendy Baig, Majority Staff Director
Patrick J. McCormick III, Majority Chief Counsel
Jasmine Hunt, Minority Staff Director
Sam E. Fowler, Minority Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Lee, Hon. Mike, Chairman and a U.S. Senator from Utah............ 1
Heinrich, Hon. Martin, Ranking Member and a U.S. Senator from
New Mexico..................................................... 3
Cassidy, Hon. Bill, a U.S. Senator from Louisiana................ 4
WITNESSES
Swett, Laura, nominated to be a member of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission.......................................... 8
LaCerte, David, nominated to be a member of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission.......................................... 13
ALPHABETICAL LISTING AND APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
American Cement Association et al.:
Letter for the Record........................................ 65
Cassidy, Hon Bill:
Opening Statement............................................ 4
Earthjustice:
Questions for consideration for nominees to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission............................... 70
Heinrich, Hon. Martin:
Opening Statement............................................ 3
LaCerte, David:
Opening Statement............................................ 13
Written Testimony............................................ 15
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 53
Landry, Hon. Jeff, Governor of the State of Louisiana:
Letter for the Record........................................ 5
Lee, Hon. Mike:
Opening Statement............................................ 1
Natural Gas Council:
Letter for the Record........................................ 67
Swett, Laura:
Opening Statement............................................ 8
Written Testimony............................................ 11
Responses to Questions for the Record........................ 39
SWETT AND LACERTE NOMINATIONS
----------
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 2025
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m. in
Room SD-366, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Mike Lee,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE LEE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM UTAH
The Chairman. The Committee will come to order. Good
morning and welcome to everyone.
Before I begin my opening statement, I want to let my
colleagues know basically how we are going to proceed today. I
also want to thank Senator Heinrich and his staff for working
with us on today's hearing, getting it scheduled and set up,
and thanks to all the Senators for your participation.
Today is the Committee's ninth hearing on nominations for
the current administration. We are going to hear from two
nominees, two people who have been nominated to serve on the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, known as FERC--Laura
Swett and David LaCerte.
I thank President Trump for sending both nominees over. The
Commission is what is known as an independent agency, one that
plays a critical role in America's energy dominance. As the
Supreme Court explains, FERC's mission is ``to encourage the
orderly development of plentiful supplies of electricity and
natural gas at reasonable prices.'' FERC accomplishes this
mission by overseeing the reliable interstate transmission of
electricity and transportation of natural gas and of oil. FERC
regulates wholesale power prices and reviews proposals for
major energy products, such as natural gas pipelines, LNG
terminals, and hydroelectric dams. FERC also protects the
reliability and security of the bulk power system. It enables
those it regulates to provide affordable, reliable energy to
millions, and must adopt policies that keep pace with today's
economy.
We will meet those nominees and invite each one of them to
give an opening statement and introduce family and friends here
in a moment. Our first nominee today is Laura Swett. Ms. Swett
currently works as an energy and litigation counsel at the law
firm of Vinson and Elkins, where her principal area of practice
is federal energy regulatory litigation. She represents
pipelines and other regulated entities before the Commission.
She previously served as senior legal and policy advisor to
then FERC Chairman Kevin McIntyre and Commissioner Bernard
McNamee. Before that, she was a lawyer in the FERC Office of
Enforcement, where she led and supported investigations.
Second, we will hear from David LaCerte. Mr. LaCerte
recently returned to his position as special counsel with the
law firm of Baker Botts, where he focused on energy litigation
and environmental safety and incident response. Earlier this
year, he served as principal advisor to the Director of the
U.S. Office of Personnel Management, where he also served in
the Trump administration in the first go-around. He continues
to serve there as an unpaid special government employee. Mr.
LaCerte previously served as Executive Counsel to the Chairman
of the U.S. Chemical Safety Board, overseeing the Agency's
response to major chemical incidents nationwide. Mr. LaCerte
also held several key leadership roles within the Louisiana
state government, including Secretary of the Louisiana
Department of Veterans' Affairs. A combat veteran of the United
States Marine Corps, Mr. LaCerte served as an infantryman with
the First Battalion, First Marine Division.
So welcome to both of our nominees. Let's begin. I will now
turn to my opening remarks.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission holds enormous
influence over America's ability to power its homes and to fuel
its industries, and thereby indirectly strengthening American
national security. When it functions well, families see
affordable bills, communities see investment, and businesses
are more able to grow. When it fails, the consequences are felt
in every corner of the country, in every economic way
imaginable. Under the Biden administration, FERC was too often
steered in a direction that was harmful, and that harmed
hardworking Americans. Costs rose----
[Protester interrupts.]
The Chairman [continuing]. Infrastructure projects
languished in regulatory limbo. Vital pipelines and terminals
were delayed or denied, while demand for reliable power only
continued steadily to increase. The record left the nation more
vulnerable to energy scarcity and more dependent on foreign
suppliers. The task before today's nominees is to help reverse
that course. If confirmed, Ms. Swett and Mr. LaCerte will be
charged with ensuring FERC applies the law as written, not as
reimagined by regulators. They will need to evaluate the
policies that have been put in place by the previous
administration and roll back those that drove up costs, stifled
innovation, or weakened the resilience of our grid. Both
nominees will bring with them valuable experience that can
serve FERC well. Ms. Swett spent years working directly with
FERC--at FERC--giving her an inside understanding of how the
agency operates. And Mr. LaCerte has held leadership roles at
both the state and federal levels, bringing the perspective of
a combat veteran who has led under great pressure. These are
qualities that, if applied, can help ensure FERC has the proper
focus, providing affordable and reliable energy for the
American people.
The stakes in this really couldn't be higher. Americans
deserve a Commission that takes seriously and sticks to this
focus on a mission to encourage the orderly development of
plentiful supplies of electricity and natural gas at reasonable
prices. That mission determines whether families can afford
their homes, to heat their homes in the winter weather, or
military bases will have the power that they need to operate,
and whether our economy will have a foundation for sustained
growth. This hearing brings an opportunity for both nominees to
make clear how they will approach these responsibilities. We
need to know how they view the ongoing legal debate about the
status of so-called independent agencies and what that means
for accountability to the law and to the American people, what
they see as FERC's most important statutory responsibility in
today's rapidly changing energy landscape, and what their top
priorities might be in overseeing the natural gas and energy
sectors, given those sectors' central importance to the U.S.
economy, especially now. This Committee has a responsibility to
hold nominees to that standard, and FERC is too important to
American life to be paralyzed by delay or distracted from its
core mission. It must focus squarely on the law, on
reliability, and on the needs of the American people.
I thank both witnesses--both nominees--for being here
today, and for their willingness to serve. I look forward to a
candid conversation about how they would take on this
responsibility at such a critical moment for our nation's
energy future.
I will now turn to our Ranking Member, Senator Heinrich,
for his opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN HEINRICH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Heinrich. Thank you Chairman, and welcome to Ms.
Swett and Mr. LaCerte.
Most of the offices under our Committee's jurisdiction do
not have statutorily required qualifications. The Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission is, however, an exception. The DOE
Organization Act requires that members of the Commission be
``individuals who, by demonstrated ability, background,
training, or experience, are specially qualified to assess
fairly the needs and concerns of all interests affected by
federal energy policy.'' The reason for this distinction is
simple: much of the Commission's work is quasi-judicial. Like
our courts, FERC must be impartial and non-partisan. Office and
bureau heads, deputy secretaries, assistant secretaries in both
the Interior and Energy Departments may take their lead from
their secretaries, and their secretaries from their president.
Commission members do not.
The Commission was established as an independent regulatory
commission whose members serve fixed terms, not at the pleasure
of the president. And their performance of the Commission's
functions is not subject to the supervision or direction of the
administration. The Commission was designed to serve no
president, no political party, and no political agenda. Its job
is to serve the public interest fairly and impartially, guided
by our laws and the Constitution, not by political whims from
the White House. The independence of our independent public
institutions, from the Federal Reserve to the Smithsonian
Institution is under attack by this administration, and
destroying the independence of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission would do irreparable damage to public confidence in
the Commission's decision-making, to regulatory stability, and
to our energy security. Consequently, our job this morning is
not only to understand Ms. Swett's and Mr. LaCerte's ability to
assess fairly the needs and concerns of all interests affected
by federal energy policy, but also to assess their commitment
to FERC's independence.
The Chairman. Thank you so much, Senator Heinrich.
We will now turn to our colleague from Louisiana, Senator
Cassidy, to introduce David LaCerte.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BILL CASSIDY,
U.S. SENATOR FROM LOUISIANA
Senator Cassidy. It is my privilege to do so, and before I
begin, I will introduce a letter from my Governor, who is
supporting Mr. LaCerte's nomination.
The Chairman. That will be admitted into the record,
without objection.
[The letter referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Cassidy. Thank you all.
Thank you, Chairman Lee, Ranking Member Heinrich, and
fellow Committee members. I have the privilege of introducing
David as a nominee for Commissioner of the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission. He is a lot of things--a combat veteran
of the Marine Corps, an attorney, a true conservative, Emily's
husband, and father to four kids, who are truant today--not
going to school--but they are all behind him. He attended law
school at LSU before going on to become a highly successful
attorney working in energy litigation, practiced privately at
Sternberg, Naccari and White in New Orleans before serving as
Special Counsel at Baker Botts, advising clients in the energy
sector on some of the most complex challenges facing the energy
industry today.
After rising through the ranks with the Louisiana
Department of Veterans Affairs, he was appointed to serve in
various federal positions, including most recently as White
House Liaison and Senior Advisor to the Director of the U.S.
Office for Personnel Management, where he continues to offer
counsel. Prior to that, he served a term appointment at the
U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, where he
oversaw the agency's response to major chemical incidents
nationwide. That gave him hands-on experience with energy
infrastructure and safety at the national level, invaluable for
a FERC Commissioner.
David's firsthand exposure to Louisiana's energy economy,
which is based firmly upon petrochemicals, combined with his
legal and regulatory experience, gives him an intuitive
understanding of the challenges and opportunities facing the
LNG industry. David knows liquefied natural gas. Louisiana
knows liquefied natural gas. And he understands how to move
projects forward while protecting workers, communities,
taxpayers, and the environment. He knows what's at stake, and
how to get results. President Trump is unleashing American
energy. David LaCerte is a FERC Commissioner who can help him
do so.
Thank you for once more answering the call to the American
people and thank you to your family for supporting you as they
do.
Thank you. With that, I yield.
The Chairman. Thank you so much, Senator Cassidy.
Okay, the rules of the Committee require that all nominees
be sworn in connection with their testimony. If you would, both
please stand and raise your right hand.
Do you solemnly swear that the testimony that you are about
to give before the Committee will be the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?
[Witnesses sworn.]
The Chairman. Thank you. The record will reflect that both
nominees answered in the affirmative.
You may be seated.
Before you begin your opening statements, I am going to ask
the nominees three questions that we pose to all of the
nominees that come before this Committee. You can just signify
by saying yes or no. You don't have to stand for this part.
First, will you be available to appear before this
Committee and other congressional committees to represent the
Commission's positions and respond to issues of concern to
Congress?
Mr. LaCerte. Yes.
Ms. Swett. Yes.
The Chairman. Second, are you aware of any personal
holdings, investments, or interests that could constitute a
conflict of interest, or create the appearance of such
conflict, should you be confirmed and assume the office to
which you have been nominated by the President of the United
States?
Mr. LaCerte. No.
Ms. Swett. No.
The Chairman. And third, are you involved in or do you have
any assets in a blind trust?
Ms. Swett. No.
Mr. LaCerte. No.
The Chairman. Okay. The record will reflect that both
witnesses answered in the affirmative to the first question,
and in the negative to the second and third questions. And
incidentally, those are the correct answers. You both scored
100 percent there.
As I turn to the two witnesses, I will invite each, as he
or she may prefer, to introduce any friends or family members
who are here with you today.
Ms. Swett, we will start with you and then we will proceed
to Mr. LaCerte after that. Go ahead, Ms. Swett.
STATEMENT OF LAURA SWETT, NOMINATED TO BE A MEMBER OF THE
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Good morning, Chairman Lee, Ranking Member Heinrich, and
distinguished members of the Committee. I am grateful to appear
before you today and for your considering my nomination to be a
Commissioner at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. I am
deeply honored that the President nominated me for this role
and I am grateful to the members of the Committee who
graciously met with me before today.
I would not be here without the support of many incredible
people, including those who are behind me. My mother and
father, Jackie and Charles Swett; My husband, John, who has
steadfastly supported my goals, and who fathered our two
beautiful children--a conscientious kindergartener and a fiery
baby girl; my sister, who happens to be one of the many
talented, dedicated civil servants who works at FERC; and
incredible mentors who have given me both great opportunity and
unwavering guidance are also here today.
My grandmother lived destitute in the Mekong River Delta of
Vietnam. My mother escaped the violent oppression of communism
and fled to the safety of our great country. Her family arrived
here in 1974 with nothing. My father grew up in a low-income
New York City housing project in the 1950s. He dedicated over
40 years to serving the people of this country as a civilian at
the Pentagon, but not before he was a TSA agent at JFK airport
in the 70s, if you can imagine. His dedication to the United
States inspired me to enter civil service myself. I served two
stints at FERC, first during law school as an unpaid extern,
and second as a young lawyer in the Office of Enforcement and
as an advisor to a former Chairman and Commissioner.
My parents both clawed tooth and nail for every opportunity
they ever had. They raised me and my sister with the hope of a
better life and with a profound love of America. That I am
before you today is the realization of the American dream--for
them, for the generations of ancestors behind them, and the
sacrifices that all of them made to get me here today. Given
this background, I am so eternally grateful for your time and
consideration.
My passion for energy began when I was about five years
old. Shortly after my parents bought a standalone house, they
generously began to shelter other Vietnamese refugees who
sought the promise of a better life in America. At that point,
all I had known of Vietnam was pictures of a war-torn country
and villagers in rice paddies. On those refugees' first
evenings on U.S. soil, in my parents' basement, at dusk, I
turned on all the lights, the TV, and brought all of my
whirring electric toys. At their great delight, I wholly
believed in my five-year-old heart that I performed magic for
them at my command of power. I treasured electricity from that
point on. From that tender age, and reinforced by my mother
throughout adulthood, I have appreciated deep in my bones how
lucky we are in this country to have reliable energy and
everything that enables. How lucky we are to power our
hospitals and schools, to air condition our houses, and even to
have hot showers. I actually think about that every day. This
is why FERC's mission, as created and empowered by Congress,
has been my work for the past 15 years, and will continue to be
for the rest of my life in whatever form that comes.
Sitting before you is the pinnacle of my career,
particularly after working for years myself as a FERC civil
servant. In my mind, the role of each FERC Commissioner is not
only to vote on specific orders, but it is as a steward of this
country's economic present and future and an advocate for the
hundreds of millions of Americans who are impacted by FERC
jurisdiction. If I have the honor of being confirmed, I will do
everything in my power to honor the law and the facts of every
single matter before me, squarely within the confines of the
laws that you, Congress, granted FERC. And within these
confines, I would prioritize three core goals for our country,
based on my independent experience. Our country is also at a
historic crossroads, and these goals are more important than
ever:
One, we must keep the lights on and the pipelines that are
the pillars of our economy flowing at just and reasonable
rates.
Two, we must preserve national and economic security by
doing everything within FERC's power to buttress the AI
revolution and facilitate the connection of large load and data
centers, so that data centers are not forced to build in other
countries, making every American vulnerable to foreign
adversaries.
Three, we must maximize FERC's ability to encourage and
facilitate infrastructure development. This development has
faced crippling regulatory uncertainty over the recent past,
the well functioning and increase of which is critical to
reliability, safety, and our economy.
After working alongside the mission-driven, hardworking men
and women of FERC, and representing electric utilities and oil
and gas pipelines, I now know that energy is not the magic I
believed it to be when I was young. Now I know that energy, the
backbone of our great nation, flows day in and day out from the
dedication and toiling of thousands of men and women across
America and in FERC itself. Those men and women keep the lights
on, enable us to heat and cool our homes, and are the reasons
that our planes fly, our trains run, and that we enjoy many
modern comforts. I truly appreciate the honor bestowed upon me
of being in front of you here today, and thank you so much for
your time and consideration.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Swett follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Thank you so much, Ms. Swett.
Mr. LaCerte, you may begin.
STATEMENT OF DAVID LACERTE, NOMINATED TO BE A MEMBER OF THE
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you, Chairman Lee, Ranking Member
Heinrich, and members of the Committee. I am especially
thankful for the kind words from Senator Cassidy, and I would
like to thank him for his distinguished service as a champion
for the people of Louisiana.
It is an honor to appear before you today. I humbly come
before you as President Trump's nominee for Commissioner of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. I would first like to
recognize some of the core figures in my life. Without their
support, this nomination would have never been possible. First,
I would like to acknowledge my wife, Emily. She is uniquely
special in so many ways. She forever inspires me with her
kindness, her wisdom, and most of all her passion for life. She
encourages me to continue my public service, and I would most
certainly not be here today without her positive influence. I
want to thank my children and my stepchildren who are with me
today, Ava, Margaret, Louisiana, and Robert. Special
recognition goes to their schools in Baton Rouge--St. Jude the
Apostle and our Lady of Mercy--who have prepared my children
with just the right amount of Catholic Mass to prepare them for
today. Every day over the past eight months I have fought to
make America a better place to live, to work, to raise a
family, and to prosper. We do this not only for my children but
for everyone's children, and for their generations to come. I
want to directly acknowledge the burden carried by the families
of our public servants. These burdens are profound, and the
patience and grace given to me by my children carries me
through the demanding days of life as an appointee.
Thank you to my parents, Steve and Carol, who are watching
at home, and raised me up until the day they handed me off to
Uncle Sam. Thank you to those present and watching at home who
have fought alongside me in the United States Marine Corps. The
Marine Corps and our shared ethos have made me into the man
that stands before you today. Thank you to those currently
serving, and especially those who gave their last full measure
of devotion to their country and never made it home. You are a
guiding light in my life and it's my honor to carry your
legacy.
I have been a public servant for most of my career and I
have sworn an oath to the Constitution on many occasions. I
have led infantry Marines in the invasion and occupation of
Afghanistan. I have led state and federal agencies, including
an independent agency under both the Trump and Biden
administrations. I have practiced law at one of the oldest and
most respected energy law firms in the country. These unique
experiences have afforded me an understanding of the
intersections of government and industry that has left me well-
prepared for the role in which I am considered today before
this honorable Committee.
Today, FERC is at a historic crossroads. The demand for
energy is growing, and the infrastructure which has allowed
this country to thrive for so many decades needs continued
improvement and investment. The challenge of increasing the
reliability and resiliency of our grid while simultaneously
protecting our ratepayers has never been a more important
balance. It's a foundation that is built brick by brick, and
decision by decision. Artificial Intelligence, data centers,
and reindustrialization present a compounding of these issues,
which will require diligent planning, forecasting, and
regulatory oversight from both the states as well as FERC. This
is a challenge that must be met and cannot be delayed. The
administrative burden placed upon those who seek to invest in
our infrastructure is staggering. Delays in federal reviews and
decision-making make energy less reliable and more expensive.
Reducing processing time and the associated administrative
burden will speed projects along, allowing those cost savings
to be passed to ratepayers.
I believe my background as a government executive and my
experience as an environmental attorney provide strong
qualifications and a fresh perspective on these issues
challenging FERC. The outstanding career staff at FERC cannot
do this alone. As the Committee has noted, FERC is most
functional with a fully seated board of complementary
Commissioners, prepared to work together, along with
stakeholders, to develop solutions for the problems of today
and tomorrow. Once again, Chairman Lee, Ranking Member
Heinrich, and members of the Committee, I appreciate the
opportunity to appear before you, and I look forward to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. LaCerte follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Thanks so much to both of you.
We will now start five-minute rounds of questions,
alternating between Republicans and Democrats. I will go first,
then Senator Heinrich, and then alternating between Republicans
and Democrats in order of seniority, subject to the early
arrival rule.
Mr. LaCerte, let's start with you. One might observe that
you haven't had direct experience at the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, but you do bring to the table a wealth
of personal and professional experience to the role. Tell me
and the Committee how your background has prepared you well to
serve as a FERC Commissioner, and how your perspective is
something that can benefit the Commission's work on behalf of
the American people?
Mr. LaCerte. Senator, thank you for that question. I
appreciate the opportunity to answer it.
I know you have all heard my paper resume. I have worked at
an independent agency before that is bipartisan in nature with
both Republicans and Democrats. I have practiced as an attorney
at an energy law firm. I think that the most important
qualification I have is that I can bring a common-sense
approach to get problems solved and get things done, and I have
proven that to the President of the United States. I have an
outstanding set of experiences in safety, in cyber, and in a
multitude of issues that help FERC. At the end of the day, I
think that we can bring a common-sense approach to FERC, to
work together with the fellow commissioners to kind of have a
return to the baseline statutes and make energy more affordable
and more reliable.
The Chairman. Thank you.
I am going to ask both of you this next question. There is
currently litigation moving through the federal courts
challenging the result in a case called Humphrey's Executor.
That case, of course, addressed the question of the President's
authority to remove a member of a so-called independent agency,
to remove somebody in one of those positions from an office
before the end of a statutorily defined term. We will start
with you, Mr. LaCerte, and then go to Ms. Swett.
Mr. LaCerte, what is your view on the issue, and how might
that impact your performance or your perspective as a
commissioner, should you be confirmed?
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you, Senator. I am aware of the trend in
cases from Humphrey's Executor. First, I would like to say, we
are always going to follow the law, if I am confirmed as a FERC
Commissioner, but I personally would welcome a modification on
Humphrey's Executor. If the Supreme Court rules in that
direction, we will follow the law. Every day that I get to
serve the American people and the American public is a gift. I
appreciate that every day. I go to work every day and I give my
best effort, 100 percent, until my service is no longer needed,
or until the good Lord calls me home, and I am going to
continue to do that, if confirmed.
The Chairman. Semper Fi.
Ms. Swett.
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
I share my potential colleague's views that it would be a
true honor to be confirmed to serve on the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission. And of course, I will follow the law and
honor the law in everything that I do and consider the merits
of every single issue, the law, and the facts before me,
irrespective of where the litigation comes out in the length of
my term. Thank you.
The Chairman. And Ms. Swett, what would be your top
priority as a commissioner while regulating the natural gas and
energy sectors? You know, the energy commodities that are
subject to FERC's jurisdiction represent between three and six
percent of U.S. GDP, and core inputs of that energy--those
inputs end up having a multiplier effect on the economy. So,
with that in mind, what would be your top priority, if
confirmed as a FERC Commissioner, when regulating natural gas
and electricity?
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
I agree with you. FERC's mission is more important than
ever, given its impact on the economy and the unprecedented,
historic load growth and demand and also resource adequacy
issues facing our country. If I have the honor of being
confirmed, I will always go back to the statute that Congress
has authorized, and that is encouraging the orderly development
of plentiful supplies of electricity and natural gas at
reasonable prices for American consumers. And hand-in-hand with
that is FERC's mission of ensuring that the lights are on. We
have to ensure that our grid is stable and that all Americans
have access to electricity that is reliable.
The Chairman. Sound objectives and very consistent with
FERC's statutory mandate. What do you see as some of the most
significant impediments to achieving those outcomes?
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator. The
increasing load that we are facing today, particularly given
the AI revolution in our country, which is integral to national
security and our economic stability, makes reliability more
important than ever. And FERC has dealt with those issues, and
so have the states, and it's squarely within the crosshairs of
jurisdiction of federalism. And so, that is something that we
must navigate very thoughtfully, very carefully, and very
specific to each instance in which it arises in front of FERC.
The Chairman. Great.
Thank you very much. My time has expired. I will turn the
time over to Senator Martin Heinrich.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman.
Earlier this year, President Trump signed an executive
order asserting to give the White House greater control over
independent agencies. As both of you know, FERC is a
statutorily independent agency with a very clearly defined
mandate. Ms. Swett, let me start with you. Can you tell me why
maintaining FERC's independence is so critical?
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
Maintaining FERC's independence is critical because that is
exactly how Congress created the agency. In the DOE
Organization Act of 1977, Congress carved FERC out of DOE's
jurisdiction and explicitly provides that no FERC action is
under review by anyone at DOE. And thus, as a lawyer who has
been practicing FERC law for 15 years, I will always go back to
the statute, and that is exactly what Congress directed, and I
will not exceed the jurisdiction that Congress has given the
agency, if I am confirmed.
Senator Heinrich. Mr. LaCerte, same question.
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
First, I want to say, I certainly am no stranger to the
value of the assertion of independence at independent agencies,
having spent time at the CSB as the acting managing director,
acting general counsel, the executive council, and the senior
advisor to the chairman. I am very familiar with navigating
independent agencies. And I think the independence of FERC is
derived from its individual structure via the commissioners.
Those five individuals have independent voice, and it's
important that we nominate people and confirm people that honor
that independence and follow the law and apply the facts.
Senator Heinrich. According to EIA data, despite all that
we have heard about affordability today, household electric
bills are up 10 percent nationally since the beginning of this
administration--in less than a year, actually, a double-digit
increase in electric bills. Former Republican FERC Chairman
Chatterjee has said that we need every single available
electron on the grid. Both of you have referenced the increased
demand as a result of data centers and artificial intelligence.
Would you agree that in the face of incredible rising demand,
probably the greatest demand increase we have seen since the
onset of air conditioning, that the grid right now requires
more, not less affordable and reliable energy?
Ms. Swett.
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator. I
absolutely agree with you that the grid needs more generation,
and more reliable generation, and that we should do whatever we
can to ensure that the lights are on. That said, under the
Federal Power Act, Congress has explicitly stated that FERC's
mission is to ensure that there is no undue discrimination in
the rates that are charged pursuant to its jurisdiction, and I
agree with that, of course, per Congress's wisdom. And if I
have the honor of being confirmed, I will honor that in every
matter that I examine.
Senator Heinrich. Let's take that one step deeper down.
Right now, and for the next several years, actually, probably
for at least the next four, 95 percent of the projects slated
to come onto the grid to serve that demand are represented by
wind, solar, and battery storage. We don't have--when you look
at other generation sources, if they aren't already in the
queue, things like combined-cycle natural gas has a five-year
waiting period for combined-cycle natural gas turbines.
Nuclear, obviously, has permitting challenges that, oftentimes,
it takes ten years to get nuclear generation built.
What would the impact be if we, without replacement
generation, took that 95 percent out of the pipeline of
oncoming generation?
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
As a humble lawyer who is not an economist or a scientist,
I am not going to try to guess what the impact of taking that
huge amount out of the queue would be. However, it is
incredibly important that we thoughtfully ensure that as much
generation is available as is necessary to meet the
unprecedented demand that our country is facing that will rise
with every passing year. So I commit to you that if I have the
honor of being confirmed, I will take a hard look at the
matters before me, including interconnection, which I
understand is under challenge in several federal courts at this
time. So I don't want to prejudge anything, but if it comes
before me and I am confirmed, then I will do everything I can
to work with my colleagues to come to a solution.
Senator Heinrich. I am not an economist, but as the son of
a lineman, I can tell you that if we took that generation off,
out of the pipeline, we would see incredible increasing costs.
And that's why I think everyone at this dais is incredibly
concerned about that.
Mr. LaCerte, can you commit to maintaining FERC's
independence and commit that a generator's technology, which
traditionally has not been considered when making
interconnection decisions and permitting decisions, that FERC
will maintain its agnostic approach to generation?
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you for the question, Senator.
As my potential colleague Laura has noted, under the law we
must remain neutral as it relates to such decisions, and we
will always follow the law.
Senator Heinrich. Mr. LaCerte, the baseline statute--I
think that was the word you used--the baseline statute for FERC
requires that ``the Chairman and members of the Commission
shall be individuals who, by demonstrated ability, background,
training, or experience, are specially qualified to assess
fairly the needs and concerns of all interests affected by
federal energy policy.'' Do I understand it that you have not
represented clients before the FERC?
Mr. LaCerte. Correct, I have not represented clients before
FERC, Senator, and I believe that that is a strength of mine
and not a negative. As former Chairman Christie has noted in
his swan song departing this Commission, there is a real fear
of regulatory capture of FERC. So, I think a fresh perspective
and a common-sense approach amongst one of the five members
would be a welcome addition.
Senator Heinrich. So you have never signed any pleading on
a client's behalf with FERC on any matter?
Mr. LaCerte. Correct.
Senator Heinrich. Describe to me the energy work that you
have done at your firm.
Mr. LaCerte. Sure. Most of my work is done under the Clean
Air Act, predominantly from a focus of safety and environment.
I was housed within the energy litigation section of Baker
Botts, which is one of the preeminent law firms in Texas that
practice energy law. Within the energy litigation group there
is an environmental safety and incident response section, and
that would run the gamut all the way up and down the stream of
energy, all the way from well heads to refineries,
transportation and pipelines, which is a crossover from my time
and jurisdiction on the Chemical Safety Board, all the way to
specialty chemical refining.
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman.
The Chairman. Senator Barrasso.
Senator Barrasso. Thanks so much, Mr. Chairman.
For both of you, congratulations, welcome to the Committee.
And now, this is a Committee that gets work done. Last year, we
passed permitting legislation 15 to 4--bipartisan, because for
a long, long time, we all agreed that environmental permitting
requirements have delayed and halted needed infrastructure
projects for our country to make sure that we have the energy
and the ability to transmit that energy. Part of this is
pipelines.
So, Ms. Swett, even the courts have realized that this is
out of control. The Supreme Court, as we have discussed, this
year issued an 8 to 0 ruling that determined that reviews have
become unreasonably burdensome. In the Seven County decision,
Justice Kavanaugh wrote that the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) ``is a procedural cross-check, not a substantive
roadblock.'' But it has turned into a roadblock, and so the
Supreme Court agreed eight to nothing. He continued, ``the goal
of the law is to inform agency decision-making, not to paralyze
it.''
So, how do you believe this decision is going to impact how
FERC reviews projects?
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
As someone who has been part of the NEPA process for many
applications in front of FERC, I share your sentiments that the
regulatory process can be difficult to navigate and also
creates quite a bit of uncertainty for infrastructure
developers who invest billions of dollars into securing our
nation's energy future. I see Seven County as significantly
narrowing the scope of environmental review required under
NEPA, and now it's more clear what FERC is required to do in
examining the projects before it under the procedural statutes
of NEPA. I am confident that we, if I have the honor of being
confirmed, that with my colleagues, we should be able to take a
hard look at FERC's processes to see what efficiencies are
available to see what we can make more transparent for the
industry and to the benefit of the American people.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Mr. LaCerte, we talked about FERC being not really widely
known about outside Washington, DC, but the Commission's
actions have a really big impact on the lives of Americans all
across the country. The decisions that the Commission makes
determine whether the lights reliably go on when people flip
the switch. So please provide us your views of FERC's role in
ensuring reliability and affordability of energy.
Mr. LaCerte. Absolutely, Senator. I welcome that question
and thank you for discussing it with me.
Reliability and affordability are the bedrock of FERC's
work. So, if confirmed, I will be certain to follow the law,
but I would ask two questions of every single action in which
we undertake at FERC as Commissioner: does this make our grid
and energy structure more reliable, and the second question we
would ask is, does this make our grid and infrastructure more
affordable? And if the answer to those questions is no, then
ask why we are doing it and why we are undertaking those
things. So, it is a fundamental balance of we need
affordability and reliability that impacts every aspect of our
entire industry within our country. As Senator Lee said, you
know, it's such a large percentage of our GDP. It's important
that outside of FERC those impacts are recognized, and those
perspectives are welcome.
Senator Barrasso. And Ms. Swett, you know, we have had
years of stagnant electric demand, but that has really changed
because we are expecting a rapid growth with AI, with data
centers, electrification. As I pointed out to this Committee in
the past, that peak demand in the summer is expected, five
years from now, because of all these things, to actually
increase as if adding an entire new California to the grid,
even to the point that the New York Times had that as a front-
page story. The demand is growing. Clearly, FERC is going to
play a vital part in managing and helping with this growth. Can
you share your views on the importance of meeting the demand
growth and FERC's role in supporting that effort?
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
I actually have lost sleep a few nights worrying about how
our country will meet the demand that it faces, and if I had
the honor of being confirmed, I would do everything I can,
within the powers clearly drawn by Congress for the agency, and
that is to ensure that there is a plentiful supply of energy at
just and reasonable rates and taking a hard look at the merits
of every single matter before me, including the specific
geographic market characteristics of each matter, which are
extremely different depending on what market they are, the type
of company that's in front of the Commission, and also how it
interconnects to the grid. I would weigh all of those to ensure
that FERC is mindfully encouraging connection and development
of whatever it can.
Senator Barrasso. Okay.
Mr. Chairman, my time is expired. Thank you very much.
Congratulations.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Barrasso.
Senator King, you are up next.
Senator King. Thank you very much.
Mr. LaCerte, I am a little confused. Senator Lee asked you
the question about the Humphrey's Executor decision, and you
seemed to indicate that you felt that the President would--and
should--have the power to fire a FERC Commissioner. Is that
your position?
Mr. LaCerte. No. Senator, thank you for the question. My
position is that we will follow the law, and if the Supreme
Court of the highest court in the land changes that law, then
we will follow that, too.
Senator King. Well, it's hard for me to imagine how the
President having the power to fire Commissioners could--how you
could still call the Commission independent. That, to me, is an
ultimate compromise.
Let's talk about the central reality that we're facing
today, which has been mentioned several times, and that is the
incredible increase of demand of electricity. The Chairman, in
the last hearing that we had, indicated some data that we are
looking at a two percent per-year increase in demand. Over ten
years compounded, that's 30 percent. That's a staggering
increase. The question is--there are two issues--one is the
power availability, and the second is time--how soon can it
come?
Ms. Swett, what is the cheapest form of electricity
generation today in the country?
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
I have not looked into that issue, but I am happy to look
into it and answer any questions.
Senator King. Well, I'll help you--it's wind and solar, by
a mile, by a factor of two. The fellow who left here under
difficult circumstances actually was correct. The cheapest
forms of energy today are wind and solar by a longshot.
Do you know--let's take a case study--Iowa. Any idea how
much wind power supplies to the economy of the electricity
supply of Iowa?
Ms. Swett. No, sir, I don't know the specific number.
Senator King. Sixty percent. Iowa has the 15th lowest
electricity cost in the country, and in the past year, as we
have already learned, average electricity prices across the
county have gone up between six and ten percent. In Iowa, it
has actually gone down a half a percent. The point is, you both
have talked about being agnostic. I hope you will hold to that
because we can't ignore the reality around us that this
administration is extremely hostile--and that's a mild term--to
renewable energy. And yet, and the second point, as I talked
about price, is speed. There is no question that wind and solar
are the quickest to deploy. Senator Heinrich mentioned if you
wanted a new gas turbine plant today, it would be about seven
years between permitting and the fact that there is a five-year
wait time for a turbine. A major solar project can go online in
a year/year-and-a-half. So, I just hope that you all will be
true to your word today and not follow what amounts to an
ideology that says we can't have wind and solar.
Mr. LaCerte, will you commit to being agnostic as to energy
sources and focus entirely on reliability, cost, and
availability?
Mr. LaCerte. Senator, the Federal Power Act requires that a
Commissioner be neutral in those decisions, and I commit to
following the law.
Senator King. And I want to emphasize, again, speed is an
issue here. This demand growth that we are seeing is going to
be taking place in the next two, three, four, five, six years.
We don't have two, three, four, five, six years to somehow
conjure electrons out of the sky. Actually, we can conjure them
out of the sky if we are talking about solar power.
So, the second issue--we were talking about supply--is the
grid. The grid is not prepared for this increase in demand. And
one of the concerns I have is that the cost of expanding the
grid to meet this demand is going to be gigantic. And we have
to be sure that the expansion of the grid is done in a cost-
effective way, and that's where FERC comes in, and that's where
what I call GETs--grid-enhancing technologies--come in.
Ms. Swett, talk to me about utilizing grid-enhancing
technologies as opposed to simply building in the old way and
adding this cost to the consumers.
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
I fully share your sentiment that we should be maximizing
the resources that we already have, including the existing
grid. And as someone who has represented transmission owners in
the past, I understand the technology behind that and the
potential benefits that can be realized from GETs, so----
Senator King. But you also understand, if you have done
that kind of representation, that the incentive to the
transmission owner is to build, not do the low-cost, no-cost
improvements. And therefore, I think FERC has to think about
how do we incentivize the adoption of these technologies,
because letting the market play as it normally would, the
transmission owner has the incentive to actually build rather
than make the grid more efficient. So I hope you will bear that
in mind.
Ms. Swett. Thank you, Senator. Yes, I understand that
transmission incentives have been heavily litigated at FERC,
and FERC has been facing those very difficult issues for many
years. And I commit to you that I will take a hard look at any
of those related matters if they come before me, if I am
confirmed.
Senator King. My time is expired, but very quickly, just, I
hope you both, assuming you are confirmed, and that's up to the
Committee and the Senate, take a serious look at the
interconnection queues at the RTOs. That--remember we talked
about time. The average wait in many RTOs around the country is
five years. And that is unacceptable. And some of the RTOs are
now talking about using AI in the analysis, the engineering
analysis for interconnection. I think that has got to be part
of the solution. Again, time is our enemy here. If we don't
meet this demand, we are going to see some very negative
consequences.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you so much, Senator King.
Senator Cortez Masto.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
Ms. Swett, Mr. LaCerte, congratulations on your nomination.
Thank you for meeting with me. Welcome to your families. I
appreciate you taking the time to answer some of my questions.
I want to do some follow-up today on those questions for the
record as well.
We have been talking about a lot of the independence, and
the importance of the independence of FERC, and you both
admitted to that when we were talking--the importance of that
independence. But I want to just confirm my understanding of
the law and your understanding of it as well. Currently, the
law allows FERC to promulgate significant regulations, correct?
The law allows you to do that?
Mr. LaCerte. Yes.
Ms. Swett. Yes, Senator.
Senator Cortez Masto. And there is a process for doing
that, correct?
Mr. LaCerte. Yes.
Ms. Swett. Yes.
Senator Cortez Masto. Does the current law require review
of those regulations by the President of the United States
before you go through your process?
Yes or no?
Mr. LaCerte. Senator, I have to defer to the Administrative
Procedure Act on that, and I haven't reviewed that in
preparation for the hearing for that particular question.
Senator Cortez Masto. Well, I can tell you that APA doesn't
allow that. So, you know that.
Ms. Swett, as an attorney, does the law currently in the
APA and the rules that you follow for FERC, for regulatory
agencies, when you are promulgating rules, there is process to
follow, and in that legal process, does it require review of
the President prior to moving forward?
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
I am unaware of any law passed by Congress that states
that.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
Because that's the crux of this issue, and that's what I
want, somebody just to be honest with me in the law. I am an
attorney. I read it. I know. I know there is no requirement by
the President to review anything that we have set in law for a
regulatory agency to do, but that's what he has put in his
executive order, and that's my concern. There should be none of
that oversight. Under the law, it doesn't exist. You are right,
it's going to be before a court, and the court will make a
determination, and that may change what we have really codified
here in federal statute.
So let me move on. As we have discussed today,
manufacturing and data centers are two industries causing a
massive surge in electricity demand across the country. In my
home State of Nevada, it's experiencing this through new
battery manufacturing facilities and data operation centers
across the Silver State. We talked about that. In anticipation
of this boom, NV Energy has taken innovative steps to utilize
grid-enhancing technologies to reconductor lines and bolster
the capacity and reliability of existing power lines. From each
of your perspectives, do you think the existing grid can be
improved and maximized by new technologies to help mitigate
some of those costs?
Mr. LaCerte, let me start with you.
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
I fully support maximizing technology as it relates to the
grid. And as we continue to innovate, those grid-enhancing
technologies will only get more efficient and more effective,
so it has to be a continuous process. I do know that FERC, to
date, has required an analysis on grid-enhancing technologies
through one of their orders, and I fully support a continued
analysis and a continued encouragement of their usage as we
continue to evolve in these areas and we continue to find new
and innovative ways to deliver electricity.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
Ms. Swett.
Ms. Swett. Thank you, Senator. I fully share my potential
colleague's views on this matter.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
Let me just also say, and despite recent FERC orders,
generation interconnection queues across the country are
notoriously backlogged, and this is preventing the connection
of new energy resources needed to meet growing power demands on
regional grids. In fact, there was a recent report by Lawrence
Berkeley National Lab that determined that nearly 2,300
gigawatts of generation and storage capacity was held up in
interconnection queues at the end of 2024. So, if confirmed,
how do you believe FERC can best fix this backlog and address
the growing demand?
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you, Senator. I appreciate that
question. And quite frankly, there is too long of a line for
almost everything, the interconnection queue being one of them.
I know this is a multi-faceted issue, and I do know that it's a
discussion that will have to be had with RTOs. So I welcome
their perspective on this issue, if I am confirmed. We will
have to work together as partners amongst the states, the RTOs,
and the ISOs to come up with solutions to that issue and a
number of other issues which, quite frankly, take too long, sap
the work of the FERC career staff, and make it too hard for
those that want to invest in our infrastructure to do so.
So it's important. It's a bipartisan issue, I believe. And
we need to come forward to find solutions for not only the
interconnection queue, but the long list and long wait times to
do business across the board.
Senator Cortez Masto. Yes. Ms. Swett, anything else to add?
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
The interconnection queue, I personally know, has been
something that FERC has been wrangling with for many years, and
many staff were devoted to issuing FERC's recent rulemakings
related to that. And given that it is under appeal in several
federal courts, I don't want to prejudge where it would come
out. However, if I had the honor of being confirmed, I would
certainly work very hard with my colleagues to see what FERC
can do to solve that problem.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
My time is up. Thank you, both.
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you.
The Chairman. We will turn now to Senator Daines, who just
paid me a profound compliment noting my uncanny resemblance to
Mr. LaCerte, which is a huge compliment to me and a put down to
Mr. LaCerte. You know, 20 years ago you had a lot of the women
in the country getting their Rachel haircut, and now, we are
all getting the LaCerte.
Senator Daines.
Senator Daines. If the Chairman would put away his razor
for about a month, I think we would have a real uncanny
resemblance there. So thank you, Chairman Lee, as well as
Ranking Member Heinrich.
I want to first congratulate the nominees today, and I want
to invite you both to come out to Montana to see the issues
that we are talking about here today. We are rich in energy
resources in Montana, which we are very grateful for.
FERC's mission, as stated on their website, is, and I
quote, ``to assist consumers in obtaining reliable, safe,
secure, and economically efficient energy.'' FERC is not and
should not be a climate regulator. FERC is and should remain an
independent body that focuses on safety and economics and stays
true to the mission.
My first question is for both Ms. Swett and Mr. LaCerte,
and it has been the same for many of the FERC nominees that
have come before this Committee over the past several years.
It's a yes or no question. Do you agree that FERC's primary
mission is to be an economic and safety regulator?
I will start with Ms. Swett.
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
Yes, I absolutely agree that FERC is an economic regulator,
primarily.
Senator Daines. Mr. LaCerte.
Mr. LaCerte. Yes, Senator.
Senator Daines. Will you commit to review each decision
that comes before you at the Commission fairly, impartially,
and through the lens of providing affordable, reliable, and
safe energy?
Ms. Swett.
Ms. Swett. Yes, Senator, I make that commitment
wholeheartedly.
Senator Daines. Mr. LaCerte.
Mr. LaCerte. Yes, Senator, absolutely.
Senator Daines. Thank you.
I want to pivot and talk a bit about hydropower permitting
reform. Hydropower provides the second largest share of
electricity generation in Montana. It's a wonderful source of
renewable energy and baseload power and very affordable and
reliable power. Many of the existing dams are currently
undergoing relicensing. Unfortunately, the existing process is
broken, and it can take nearly a decade--a decade--to relicense
a hydropower dam that has been operating for four decades. I
have worked long and hard in a very bipartisan way in this
Committee to make changes to that process. This includes modest
changes to speed up the process, and focus it on the actual
effects of the project moving forward instead of a wish list of
mandatory conditions from agencies and outside stakeholders.
A question for Ms. Swett and Mr. LaCerte. Do you agree that
we need to speed up licensing and relicensing for hydropower in
order to continue to grow and maintain renewable baseload
sources?
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
Given the unprecedented demand that we are facing, getting
every single molecule of electricity on the grid is of
paramount importance, and that includes hydro, and the
wonderful resource it is, particularly for your state. And I
understand that these hydro license owners are facing
diminishing resources and it is very difficult for them, in
general, to operate in many cases. And I am committed to doing
whatever I can, if I have the honor of being confirmed, to
taking a hard look at FERC's piece of the relicensing process,
although I understand there are many players there, as you
mentioned--states and several federal agencies. So, within the
powers that Congress grants the agency, I commit to you that I
will take a hard look at it, if I am confirmed, with my
colleagues to see what we can do to be more efficient for your
license owners.
Senator Daines. Thank you.
Mr. LaCerte.
Mr. LaCerte. Senator, thank you.
I first want to acknowledge that hydro is an important
component of our energy mix, and we need to do a better job of
not only reforming the licensing for hydro, but across the
board. It takes too long to do business with our government. It
takes too long to invest in our infrastructure. And we need to
do a better job everywhere, and first, and also I want to
confirm for the record here that I accept your invitation to
come to Montana.
Senator Daines. All right, thank you. It could involve a
fly rod, speaking of hydropower.
Mr. LaCerte. I will do whatever it takes, Senator.
Senator Daines. All right, thank you.
Well, thank you. And let me just close with this brief
statement. And Ms. Swett, you just mentioned the demands and
needs that we have going forward here in terms of energy in our
country. If we are going to meet demand, we simply need more of
virtually every energy source. We simply need to be building
more, which includes permitting more and trying to accelerate
getting, as you said, more of these electrons on the grid--more
natural gas, more coal, more hydropower, more nuclear, more
geothermal, more wind, more solar. We need more electrons.
I encourage the nominees to keep that in the back--and I
might argue the front--of your minds when you are making
decisions on the future of U.S. energy policy. So thank you for
being before this Committee today and for your willingness to
serve in these very important roles for our great country.
The Chairman. Thanks, Senator Daines.
Senator Padilla.
Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and again, welcome
to both of the nominees. I appreciate the opportunity to raise
some questions and issues with you.
First, as we all know, FERC is critically important. It
serves as a central regulator for America's interstate energy
system, shaping everything from grid reliability to our monthly
bills, as well as the pace of project deployment. And all this
work is made possible not just by the Commissioners but by the
professional staff. So my first question for both of you is a
yes or no question. Do you agree that the FERC staff is
critical to the operations and success of FERC?
Ms. Swett.
Ms. Swett. Yes, Senator, thank you for the question. I
absolutely agree with that premise.
Senator Padilla. Mr. LaCerte.
Mr. LaCerte. Yes, Senator, FERC will not be successful
without the outstanding career staff that are there.
Senator Padilla. I very much appreciate your answers, and
the reason I lead with that is because, as I imagine you are
aware, in February of this year, President Trump issued an
executive order requiring that agency heads undertake
preparations to initiate large-scale reductions in force at
their respective agencies. So, given your acknowledgement that
the staff at FERC is critical to its mission success, will you
commit to protecting FERC staff from directed reductions in
force, whether they come from the President, whether they come
from DOGE, or anybody else at the White House?
Mr. LaCerte.
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you for the question. I don't foresee a
large-scale reduction in force at FERC. The mission of FERC is
directly in line with the President's management agenda, and I
don't foresee anyone asking that of FERC.
Senator Padilla. Ms. Swett.
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator. As someone
who worked alongside FERC staff myself, I know how hard they
work, how mission-driven they are, how technically strong and
legally strong they are, and the value of each employee there.
Senator Padilla. Okay, I'm not getting a clear ``yes, I'm
going to go to bat for the professional staff,'' and you may
not foresee a directed reduction in staff, but we have seen it
across the administration for months and months and months now,
so yes or no, are you going to go to bat for maintaining
staffing levels?
Mr. LaCerte. Yes.
Senator Padilla. Yes or no, Ms. Swett?
Ms. Swett. Yes, Senator.
Senator Padilla. Thank you very much.
The second area--I wanted to just echo a concern that
Senator Heinrich has raised a couple of times, and Senator
King, for that matter, respecting the independence of FERC and
how critical that independence is for the job that it does.
Ms. Swett, I am satisfied with the answer you have given
earlier, but Mr. LaCerte, you kind of gave a little bit of a
caveat, referencing the Supreme Court and whether they would
change anything in terms of the President's ability to hire or
fire commissioners. What is your commitment to maintaining the
independence of FERC regardless of the outcome of any case
against the Supreme Court?
Mr. LaCerte. Senator, I will do the utmost of my ability
under the law to maintain the independence of FERC, 100
percent.
Senator Padilla. Okay, because I just can't imagine, and
again, this is not hypothetical--we have seen the President
threaten it and actually follow up on those threats in agency
after agency, both those directly under his jurisdiction and
authorities, and many of those that are not. So that is a
significant concern.
The last area I do want to bring up is transmission and
generation. Obviously, it's critical for fulfilling our growing
needs as a country and as an economy. What we have seen since
last Congress is continued delays and consistent projections of
load growth as well as increasing energy cost. That's the data
before us at this moment. So, what specific steps should FERC
take to accelerate the interconnection queue processing,
particularly for transmission-level projects. I know Senator
Cortez Masto raised this, but I want to be more specific and
precise here. Specific proposals or ideas?
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you, Senator.
First, I would like to acknowledge that we need more
transmission. That's beyond debate. I think that to meet the
coming needs, I have seen some of the growth projections and I
have seen some of the need projections, and I certainly
understand where you are coming from on that. So transmission
is going to be part and parcel to maintaining that growth and
sustaining that growth over the long term, but it's important
to note also that we need to do so while protecting the
ratepayers. It needs to be an important balance. As I noted in
my opening, that needs to be done decision by decision and
brick by brick. That's the way policy is implemented at FERC,
and that is my commitment to you, if I am confirmed.
Senator Padilla. So one follow-up comment and one follow-up
question to that, and then, of course, Ms. Swett, I will ask
you to chime in.
One, there are proposals being kicked around, particularly
as we have gone through our permitting reform negotiations here
at this Committee level--standardized timelines and penalties
for transmission owners who fail to meet those deadlines is
certainly one balanced carrot-and-stick approach to move the
ball forward, but the follow-up question, and my final question
at this moment is, do you commit to doing that job and meeting
those objectives regardless of resource type if we are in such
need of additional energy on the grid? I know this
administration is a big fan of fossil fuels, but electrons are
electrons, whether they are natural gas plants that are
generating that electricity or whether it is geothermal
generating the electricity. We have talked about hydro in this
hearing. I want an equal commitment to solar projects, to wind
projects, whether it's onshore or offshore.
Yes or no, Mr. LaCerte and Ms. Swett?
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you, Senator.
The Federal Power Act requires that a FERC Commissioner be
neutral in such a thing, so I am going to follow the law and I
am going to maintain that neutrality.
Senator Padilla. Thank you.
Ms. Swett.
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator. I echo my
colleague's sentiments here that FERC cannot unduly
discriminate against any type of generation.
Senator Padilla. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The Chairman. We will now turn to the former Governor of
North Dakota and North Dakota's current Senior Senator, Senator
John Hoeven.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to both of
you for being here, I appreciate it very much.
The first question I have for both of you is that coal
provides an incredible amount of the baseload power generation
in the country. Certainly, in our area, for example, North
Dakota, two of our regional grid operators, MISO and SPP both
get a lot of their baseload from coal-fired electric plants we
have in our state. And we have got to have more baseload for
the stability of the grid writ large. So, if confirmed--and I
will start with you, Ms. Swett and then Mr. LaCerte--if
confirmed, how would you approach the challenge of new demand
growth, recognizing that we need baseload for the stability of
the grid to have that available 24/7?
Ms. Swett. Thank you for your question, Senator, and I
really appreciated the time to meet with you yesterday.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you.
Ms. Swett. If I have the honor of being confirmed, then I
believe that ensuring that the FERC jurisdictional markets are
sending accurate price signals will value all types of
generation, including the value of baseload. If we can do
whatever FERC can in its jurisdiction to ensure that those
markets are well functioning, then I am committed to that goal,
if I am confirmed.
Senator Hoeven. Well, I agree with that, and you have to
send the right market signals. Do you have thoughts on how you
do that? In other words, if you take two projects, and one is
just continuing to add intermittent energy to the grid, which
is creating less stability versus adding more baseload and you
give them the exact same pricing signal, then you're not
getting the more baseload that we need. So, do you have some
thoughts on how to do that?
Ms. Swett. Yes, Senator, I do have thoughts after working
on this for the Chairman, who I served under during my time at
FERC. Every market is struggling with different resource
adequacy issues and also trying to integrate the states'
decisions that are in those markets on their generation mix and
their portfolios, which is fully within their jurisdiction
under the law. And so, the best thing that FERC can do is take
all of the inputs that it gets from those states and their
generation choices and every generator before it and the rates
that it is considering to ensure that just and reasonable rates
are achieved for the American people under the Federal Power
Act.
Senator Hoeven. Okay, thank you.
Mr. LaCerte.
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you, Senator. I enjoyed our conversation
in your office this week.
Senator Hoeven. Appreciate it.
Mr. LaCerte. You know, it's important that we note that
coal is a vital component of our energy mix and the value that
it gives to baseload power. And I have seen the studies. I have
seen the supply and demand coming out of some of the RTOs, and
we are going to need more reliable baseload power moving
forward, and coal certainly plays an important component in
that mix, absolutely.
Senator Hoeven. Yeah, and in fact, as far as developing
more--and in our state, we have it all. I mean, we have
biofuels, we have wind, we have solar, we have a lot of oil and
gas, we have coal. We have it all. We do it all. I mean, we
don't just say all-of-the-above, we actually do it, okay, and
you know, the different forms of power have their role. But
even to put more intermittent on, we are going to have to have
more baseload or it doesn't work, right? Would you agree with
that?
Mr. LaCerte. Absolutely.
Senator Hoeven. Yeah.
Talk, each of you, a little bit, and again, to follow up
our conversation, the other challenge we have is, as we are
moving energy to market--and we see that because we are in
North Dakota--we move a lot of energy to, like, a 12-state
region. So, transmission lines, pipelines, all those kinds of
things, how do we build those projects, but at the same time,
make sure that we protect states' rights and property rights?
How do we, you know, what are your ideas in that regard?
And Ms. Swett, we will start with you again.
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
I agree that building big transmission projects is
essential to our reliability as a nation, and I am committed to
doing whatever FERC can to ensure that its part encourages
infrastructure development. That said, also, if I am confirmed,
I will faithfully execute the laws as passed by Congress, and
FERC does not have siting authority over transmission. It only
has a very small portion of the law for eminent domain within a
DOE-designated corridor. And so, whatever the guidance of
Congress is on that matter, I will faithfully execute, if the
law is changed as well.
Senator Hoeven. But certainly, sensitive to protecting
private property rights?
Ms. Swett. Yes, absolutely, Senator. I am very aware that
landowner rights are--they are very important, very personal,
and I would take a hard look at them in any matter before me,
if I am confirmed.
Senator Hoeven. Thank you.
Mr. LaCerte.
Mr. LaCerte. Senator, thank you, I appreciate that
question. You know, as a former state cabinet secretary, I
certainly appreciate the value of states' rights, and you know,
the lack of federal encroachment upon those rights. It's
important to me. I know we discussed that in your office the
other day. You know, it's important also to note, as a South
Louisianan, you know, it's important that we take into account
landowners' rights when we are permitting and we are planning
our pipelines and our transmission. And I think, you know, it's
definitely an important factor within those particular realms.
Senator Hoeven. Yes. Again, thanks to both of you,
appreciate it very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Hoeven.
We will turn next to Senator Gallego.
Senator Gallego. Thank you, Chairman Lee and Ranking Member
Heinrich, and thank you to our witnesses for your attendance
today.
Energy affordability and reliability is extremely important
in Arizona, particularly, of course, to stay cool. Arizonans
have to shell out an extra $100 compared to their winter
electric bills per month, which is the highest additional cost
anywhere in this country. In addition, we do have growth of
data warehouses, as well as great chip manufacturing. So, as
the load growth demand rises, Arizonans deserve federal leaders
that will ensure that their energy cost does not get more
expensive, and of course, dangerously less reliable.
I first want to echo some of the concerns of my colleagues
around FERC's independence--some of that, I think, we have been
wary to see, not just with FERC, but other independent
committees that have slowly, slowly, I think, been crept into
by this administration, so I want to make sure that you
continue to do that.
Mr. LaCerte, especially in Arizona summers, our energy grid
faces very, very high demand. In 2023, a study was actually
done that a multi-day blackout, which has happened in other
states, could cause nearly half the city to require emergency
department care and could potentially kill thousands of
Arizonans and Phoenicians. And we are certainly not the only
state that is dealing with extreme heat and other weather
disasters. How will you partner with public utility regulators
to identify and respond to emerging reliability challenges
across the country?
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you, Senator. I first want to note,
thank you for your service. You know, my grandfather is buried
in the Veterans' Cemetery in Chandler, Arizona.
Senator Gallego. Oh, excellent.
Mr. LaCerte. I wanted to note that and thank you for that,
but you are absolutely correct, the impact of reliability on
our systems is one of public health. It's important to note,
especially in your home State of Arizona, air conditioning
isn't just a nicety, it's a necessity. I certainly understand
that. And it just goes back to one of my earlier comments,
which is that we need to return FERC's decision-making to where
every question we need to ask is, will this decision make our
grid more reliable and more resilient and will it make the grid
more affordable? And if the answer to that is no, then we
should question why we are doing it. I think we need to pare
back down to the baseline statute within the Federal Power Act.
We need to have that be our guiding light, our home base, in
everything that we do within FERC.
Senator Gallego. Ms. Swett.
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
I, given my time at FERC, understand that the Western
Interconnection is both geographically and scientifically
different, has different components. Your load centers in the
West are further apart. The bulk power grid also has issues
that the Eastern Interconnection doesn't have. And all of those
factors would be components that are required by a sitting FERC
Commissioner's analysis of what would be a just and reasonable
rate in the matters before them. So, if I am confirmed, then I
will honor the law and look at every single fact as it pertains
to your state and of course every other state.
Senator Gallego. One of the areas that is very important in
Arizona--we have 22 federally recognized tribes, some of the
largest representation in the country. They are fairly far
displaced--hard to get to, in terms of energy and connection
for those tribes, which creates problems when it comes to
economic growth and when it comes to even any type of general
welfare. And so, one of the things that FERC's website talks
about is the agency's commitment to engaging with tribes and
upholding the trust responsibility in the decision-making
process. And you will see that some of these tribal governments
want to work with FERC or with other government agencies, but
sometimes they're not treated with the respect that they are
due through the trust responsibility. And so, as the agency
regulates--intermission and transmission and gas projects,
first decisions to impact tribal energy and affordability and
reliability will certainly matter to them.
So, will you commit to maintaining FERC's tribal liaison
and gas tribal coordinator roles? And why that matters for
Arizonans is because if you see some of the routes where we can
bring in new pipelines, and new lines in general, it's going to
have to cross through a lot of tribal lands. And it's easier if
you are working with them ahead of time and through tribal
consultation in a more of a dedicated manner than not.
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you for your question, Senator.
I agree that we could do a better job of working with our
partners. That includes state public service commissions. That
includes RTOs. That includes Indian tribes. The Native American
tribes are an important component of our partnerships. And you
made mention, you know, you need to work with these leaders in
order to develop strategies and solutions that work, and you
need to do that over a longer term. You know, I, myself, am
from South Louisiana. I grew up adjacent to the Pointe-au-Chien
Indian tribe. I dealt with the Houma tribe, the Choctaws, and I
am very familiar from my background in Louisiana working with
tribal leaders.
I think that importance is known across the Federal
Government, but especially within FERC itself.
Senator Gallego. And more specifically, I am asking, are
you maintaining the tribal liaison positions for both of you?
It's just a yes or no.
Mr. LaCerte. I am not seated yet. I am not familiar with
the tribal liaison seating, but I certainly support the
mission.
Senator Gallego. Ms. Swett.
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator. I agree
with the premise that every voice must be heard, and FERC's
statutory role under NEPA is to consider everything on the
record, and that includes tribal voices if they are filed in a
project record that is before FERC. So, I commit to you that I
would take a hard look at all of that information, and given
that, like my colleague, I am not seated at FERC right now, I
am not familiar with what the program is regarding tribal
liaisons, but I will absolutely take a hard look at that, if I
am confirmed.
Senator Gallego. Thank you. I yield back.
Senator King. Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Yes, go ahead, Senator King.
Senator King. Just one quick follow-up on the technology we
haven't talked about, which is batteries. And there is a
discussion about baseload power, and, of course, renewables
plus batteries is baseload, but batteries can also have an
important role to play in transmission.
Ms. Swett, can you discuss that, in stabilizing the grid?
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
I have not looked into the battery engineering components
as they relate to the grid, but I would absolutely be open to
any type of technology that would stabilize or enhance our
existing grid, if I had the honor of being confirmed.
Senator King. Mr. LaCerte, thoughts on batteries?
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you, Senator. I agree in premise that
batteries could be an important component of increasing the
reliability of baseload. I think as our technologies evolve,
those batteries will become more and more efficient and
effective, and I think it definitely warrants continued
monitoring and usage, and is something that should be reviewed
by FERC.
Senator King. Yeah, the development is occurring very
rapidly in terms of the technology, the cost, and the
availability that batteries can provide in order to buffer,
whether it's renewables or any other problems that may be
encountered on the grid. So, I hope that's something you will
have in the back of your mind in terms of your regulatory
authority. Batteries, I believe, are going to become a much
bigger part of the grid than they are today, and that's going
to be happening fast. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Hickenlooper.
Senator Hickenlooper. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thanks to both
of you for being willing to subject yourselves to the questions
and for your public service.
Ms. Swett, let me start with you. And as we discussed
yesterday, thank you both for spending some time and being
willing to answer any question, which I appreciate. As we
discussed, Ms. Swett, your experience focuses really on oil and
gas. And as you know, FERC's authority goes well beyond oil and
gas, as we discussed to a certain extent. As I'm sure you could
feel from the direction of my questions yesterday, regional
transmission planning and cost allocation electricity markets
are essential to some of its most fundamental statutory
responsibility. And as we talked about--the reliability and the
affordability, I think, are the two bulwarks.
Actually, I can ask both of you this question. Unlike most
other places in the world, our grid is regionalized, and it
doesn't operate under a unified policy. Therefore, the
oversight of FERC is essential. So I guess the question would
be, how can you work to ensure the electric reliability and
affordability through the regional transmission planning and
the--let's just call it the market oversight--the electricity
market oversight?
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator, and I
really enjoyed the time speaking with you yesterday. I actually
spent over half my career working for electric utilities and
transmission owners. And given my experience with them, I am
very aware of the competing interests that go into regional
transmission planning, the decisions on the physical grid, also
cost allocation planning, taking into account congestion points
and all the science that goes behind it. And FERC has a very
difficult role as the federal agency tasked with ensuring that
all of that is combined into a just and reasonable rate.
I am confident that if we really put our heads to it, we
can figure out a solution that will ensure that American
consumers pay a just and reasonable rate, given all of the
factors in front of FERC.
Senator Hickenlooper. Great.
Mr. LaCerte, do you want to add anything to that?
Mr. LaCerte. Senator, thank you. And I would like to note,
that's the trillion-dollar question.
[Laughter.]
Mr. LaCerte. It's one which is not going to be solved here
in two minutes, but I can tell you that it's something that
requires very intensive discussion with all the stakeholders at
the table, and it's a multi-faceted issue, and it's definitely
a challenge facing FERC, today and tomorrow.
Senator Hickenlooper. Great. I appreciate that.
And Mr. LaCerte, I will stick with you with this question,
which we discussed a little bit yesterday, but I thought about
it more. You know, interregional transmission helps deliver the
lowest-cost energy sources from where they are generated to
where electricity is needed, and oftentimes that's reflected in
the cost, you know, where it's more valuable. This Committee
recently had a whole hearing looking at how do we meet demand
in an efficient way, and we heard that transmission is going to
be clearly needed to address the AI boom--what's called, for
lack of a better term, an AI boom.
So, do you agree that transmission across state lines
increases the reliability of the grid? In other words, as we
cross state lines, is that one of the basic methods to increase
reliability?
Mr. LaCerte. Yeah, I would agree, Senator, that interstate
transmission, when properly planned and executed, will increase
the reliability.
Senator Hickenlooper. Great.
And then, are there reforms, in terms of how do we do that?
Again, we touched on this a little bit yesterday. What are the
reforms we need to make sure that we do that build-out in the
appropriate way?
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you, and I know we spent some time
talking about this yesterday in your office. I think we need to
make it easier to do business with the Federal Government, and
by reducing some of the barriers to entry, by reducing some of
the exclusion of the mid and smaller companies that can do
business with the company, we are going to invite more
investors to the table to invest in our grid, invest in our
infrastructure. And that's going to pay dividends in both the
reliability and the affordability of our energy systems.
Senator Hickenlooper. Right. And is it your sense that we
are going to need to expand our transmission capacity in order
to address the load growth, given AI and all the other things
that are coming?
Mr. LaCerte. Senator, it only makes sense that increased
load growth will require increased transmission, yes.
Senator Hickenlooper. Yeah, I think that's basic.
Ms. Swett, do you want to add anything to that, either of
those?
Ms. Swett. Thank you for the question, Senator.
As a general premise--and this matter is under litigation
in various stages--however, as a general premise, increasing
the amount of transmission available increases the geographic
availability of new generation to join the grid. As you know,
high-population load centers are not good places to build
increased generation that we need. And if we have more
accessibility across state lines, like you are proposing, then
that means that there is more flexibility for generators to use
the specific characteristics of the land around them, wherever
that may make sense for it to be per the state's decisions.
Senator Hickenlooper. Exactly. I could not ask for--we
agree.
Anyway, I am out of time, as always. Thank you both, again,
for your willingness to serve the country.
Mr. LaCerte. Thank you.
The Chairman. Okay, as we are wrapping up, I just want to
hit a couple things.
First of all, once you are confirmed, assuming you are
confirmed, I look forward to working with both of you on
prioritizing permitting reform. Senator Barrasso and others
have referred to that effort today, and it's a priority. I look
forward to working with both of you on that, as FERC has an
important role in the permitting process for the areas we have
discussed.
I also wanted to clarify, since we have had some discussion
surrounding the APA, I want to clarify that while the APA
doesn't require presidential reviews on draft rules, there is
also nothing in there prohibiting it.
In any event, I want to thank both witnesses, both
nominees, Ms. Swett and Mr. LaCerte, for being here, for your
families, for the members who have participated and their
cooperation this morning in this hearing.
Questions for the record for the hearing are due by 6:00
p.m. this evening, September 4th.
And on behalf of the Committee, I congratulate both
nominees and look forward to working with each of you.
The hearing stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 10:58 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
APPENDIX MATERIAL SUBMITTED
----------
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]