[House Report 118-427]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


118th Congress    }                                     {       Report
                       HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session       }                                     {      118-427

======================================================================



 
          GUARANTEEING RELIABLE INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT ACT

                                _______
                                

 March 19, 2024.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

Mrs. Rodgers of Washington, from the Committee on Energy and Commerce, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                             MINORITY VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 6185]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Energy and Commerce, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 6185) to require coordination among Federal 
agencies on regulatory actions that affect the reliable 
operation of the bulk-power system, having considered the same, 
reports favorably thereon without amendment and recommends that 
the bill do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
Purpose and Summary..............................................     2
Background and Need for Legislation..............................     2
Committee Action.................................................     4
Committee Votes..................................................     5
Oversight Findings and Recommendations...........................     8
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures     8
Congressional Budget Office Estimate.............................     8
Federal Mandates Statement.......................................     9
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives............     9
Duplication of Federal Programs..................................     9
Related Committee and Subcommittee Hearings......................     9
Committee Cost Estimate..........................................    11
Earmark, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff Benefits.......    11
Advisory Committee Statement.....................................    11
Applicability to Legislative Branch..............................    11
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation...................    11
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............    12
Minority Views...................................................    19

                          Purpose and Summary

    H.R. 6185, the ``Guaranteeing Reliable Infrastructure 
Development (GRID) Act'' was introduced by Representative 
Duncan (R-SC) on November 2, 2023. This legislation would 
require coordination among Federal agencies on regulatory 
actions that affect the reliable operation of the bulk-power 
system.

                  Background and Need for Legislation

    This legislation amends the Federal Power Act (FPA) to 
require coordination between the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission (FERC) and any Federal agency that promulgates a 
regulation that could have a significant negative impact on the 
reliable operation of the bulk power system. This legislation 
ensures that electric reliability authorities under the FPA are 
given adequate input in the regulatory process when proposed 
regulations pose a threat to grid reliability.
    FERC is the agency that oversees and regulates the 
interstate transmission of natural gas, oil, and electricity 
through its authority under the Natural Gas Act and FPA. Under 
the FPA, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation 
(NERC) is the Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) certified 
to establish and enforce reliability standards, subject to FERC 
review and approval.\1\ NERC has stated that ``[e]nvironmental 
regulations and energy policies that are overly rigid and lack 
provisions for electric grid reliability have the potential to 
influence generators to seek deactivation despite a projected 
resource adequacy or operating reliability risk; this can 
potentially jeopardize[e] the orderly transition of the 
resource mix.''\2\ Additionally, NERC has repeatedly warned in 
its reliability assessments that a majority of North America is 
at risk of energy shortfalls during periods of high demand and/
or periods when intermittent resources like wind and solar do 
not produce electricity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/16/824o.
    \2\Available at: https://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/ra/
Reliability%20Assessments%20DL/NERC_LTRA_2023.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Electric system reliability is a pillar of economic and 
national security. The accelerated retirement of generation 
resources like coal, natural gas, and nuclear that produced 
77.5 percent of all electricity in 2022 threatens 
reliability.\3\ These retirements are occurring because of 
regulations limiting production from fossil fuel resources and 
from increasing environmental compliance costs on fossil fuel 
resources. Other policies that support intermittent resources 
like wind and solar make it more difficult for reliable 
resources to recover costs in markets. The consequences of 
these retirements are magnified by the fact that the wind and 
solar that replace retiring resources do not have the same 
attributes or provide the same level of reliability as retiring 
coal, natural gas, and nuclear resources. The Committee has 
held multiple hearings on electric reliability and, through 
these hearings and testimony, the Committee has heard from 
utilities, states, grid operators, and FERC Commissioners that 
there is an increasing threat to grid reliability that could 
lead to extensive, system-wide outages.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/electricity/electricity-in-
the-us.php.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has finalized or 
proposed multiple rules impacting fossil fuel generators.\4\ 
Most recently in May 2023, EPA proposed ``New Source 
Performance Standards for Greenhouse Gas Emissions from New, 
Modified, and Reconstructed Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric 
Generating Units: Emission Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas 
Emissions from Existing Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating 
Units'' (the Clean Power Plan 2.0) that would set limits for 
new gas-fired combustion turbines, certain existing gas-fired 
combustion turbines, and existing coal, oil, and gas-fired 
steam generating units.\5\ The Clean Power Plan 2.0, 
effectively requires coal and natural gas generation resources 
to commit to retire, limit operation to a percentage of their 
capacity, co-fire with hydrogen, and/or install costly 
infrastructure to capture carbon emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\Those rules include the Interstate Transport Rule, Regional 
Haze, Risk and Technology Review for the Mercury Air Toxics Rule, 
effluent limitations, and a legacy coal combustion residue rule.
    \5\https://www.regulations.gov/docket/EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0072.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    While compliance strategies face technical hurdles and many 
questions remain regarding the legality of the Clean Power Plan 
2.0. EPA proposing the rule impacts the retirement decisions of 
existing resources and the financial outlook potential new 
resources that would remain in operation absent EPA's proposal. 
In addition, there are serious unanswered questions about the 
ability of resources acting in good faith to comply with the 
Clean Power Plan 2.0's timelines.
    A major theme of the Committee's hearing with FERC in June 
2023 was the concerning trend of premature retirements of 
dispatchable electric generation, particularly nuclear, coal, 
and natural gas.\6\ Republican Commissioners Danly and Christie 
repeatedly noted concerns from grid operators and reliability 
entities while Democrat Commissioner Clements noted it as a 
concern if the trend continues at its current pace. At the 
September 28, 2023 hearing, many grid operators expressed 
serious concern about the premature retirement of their 
dispatchable generators because of policies and regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\``Oversight of FERC: Adhering to a Mission of Affordable and 
Reliable Energy for America'' | Committee Repository | U.S. House of 
Representatives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In August 2023, the grid operators ERCOT, MISO, PJM, and 
SPP jointly filed comments on EPA's proposed Clean Power Plan 
2.0. In their comments, the grid operators stated that their 
systems will need to rely even more on generation able to 
provide critical reliability attributes, like coal and natural 
gas, as more intermittent resources come onto the system.\7\ 
The grid operators also noted that the Clean Power Plan 2.0 
could result in material, adverse impacts to reliability if 
significant technological advances in carbon capture and 
storage and hydrogen supply and transport do not occur at the 
pace or scale anticipated by the EPA.\8\ In December 2023, the 
same grid operators filed comments to EPA's Supplemental Notice 
in its Clean Power Plan 2.0 proposal that stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\https://www.regulations.gov/comment/EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0072-0673.
    \8\Id.

          [T]he proposed Rule and associated implementation 
        timelines would accelerate the retirement of generators 
        with the attributes needed to support grid reliability. 
        . . . Without waiving our previously stated concerns 
        with the Rule, the Joint ISO/RTOs propose herein 
        several `reliability safety valve' options that could 
        arise during Rule implementation. The Joint ISOs/RTOs 
        certainly hope that none of these reliability assurance 
        mechanisms will need to be utilized. However, in our 
        view, it would be imprudent to adopt a rule that does 
        not contain measures to ensure reliability.''\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\https://www.regulations.gov/comment/EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0072-8207.

    In November 2023, FERC held its annual technical conference 
on reliability and received testimony from EPA, grid operators, 
utilities, states, and trade groups. There was overwhelming 
consensus that the EPA's Clean Power Plan 2.0 would have 
disastrous effects on electric reliability. Multiple 
stakeholders requested that FERC formally study the Clean Power 
Plan 2.0's impact on reliability. To date, FERC has not 
committed to studying the Clean Power Plan 2.0's impact on 
reliability despite its statutory authority under the FPA to 
ensure reliability.

                            Committee Action

    On June 6, 2023, the Subcommittee on Environment, 
Manufacturing, and Critical Minerals held a hearing entitled 
``Clean Power Plan 2.0: EPA's Latest Attack on Electric 
Reliability.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from:
           Patrick O'Loughlin, President and CEO, 
        Buckeye Power Inc. and Ohio Rural Electric 
        Cooperatives;
           Todd Snitchler, President and CEO, Electric 
        Power Supply Association (EPSA);
           Michael J. Nasi, Partner, Jackson Walker; 
        and
           Jay Duffy, Litigation Director, Clean Air 
        Task Force.
    On June 13, 2023, the Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, and 
Grid Security held a hearing entitled ``Oversight of FERC: 
Adhering To A Mission Of Affordable And Reliable Energy For 
America.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from:
           The Honorable Willie Phillips, Chairman, 
        FERC (Democrat);
           The Honorable James Danly, Commissioner, 
        FERC (Republican);
           The Honorable Mark Christie, Commissioner, 
        FERC (Republican); and
           The Honorable Allison Clements, 
        Commissioner, FERC (Democrat).
    On September 13, 2023, the Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, 
and Grid Security held a hearing on H.R. 6185. The title of the 
hearing was ``Keeping the Lights On: Enhancing Reliability and 
Efficiency to Power American Homes.'' The Subcommittee received 
testimony from:
           Gene Rodrigues, Assistant Secretary for 
        Electricity, Office of Electricity, U.S. Department of 
        Energy;
           David Ortiz, Director, Office of Electric 
        Reliability, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission;
           Kevin Messner, Executive Vice President and 
        Chief Policy Officer, Association of Home Appliance 
        Manufacturers;
           B. Robert ``Bob'' Paulling, President and 
        CEO, Mid-Carolina Electric Cooperative, on behalf of 
        the National Rural Electric Cooperatives Association;
           Ben Lieberman, Senior Fellow, Competitive 
        Enterprise Institute; and
           Andrew deLaski, Executive Director, 
        Appliance Standards Awareness Project.
    On September 28, 2023, the Subcommittee on Energy, Climate, 
and Grid Security held a hearing entitled ``Powering America's 
Economy, Security, and our Way of Life: Examining the State of 
Grid Reliability.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from:
           Gordon van Welie, President & Chief 
        Executive Officer, ISO New England;
           Paul Suskie, Executive Vice President, 
        Regulatory Policy & General Counsel, Southwest Power 
        Pool;
           Richard J. Dewey, President & Chief 
        Executive Officer, New York ISO;
           Todd Ramey, Senior Vice President, Markets 
        and Digital Strategy, Midcontinent ISO;
           Woody Rickerson, Senior Vice President & 
        Chief Operating Officer, ERCOT;
           Neil Millar, Vice President for 
        Infrastructure and Operations Planning, California ISO; 
        and
           Frederick S. Bresler III, Senior Vice 
        President--Market Services, PJM Interconnection, LLC.
    On November 14, 2023, the Subcommittee on Environment, 
Manufacturing, and Critical Minerals held a hearing entitled 
``Clean Power Plan 2.0: EPA's Effort to Jeopardize Reliable and 
Affordable Energy for States.'' The Subcommittee received 
testimony from:
           L. David Glatt, Director, North Dakota 
        Department of Environmental Quality;
           Chris Parker, Director, Utah Department of 
        Commerce Division of Public Utilities;
           Michelle Walker Owenby, Director, Division 
        of Air Pollution Control, Tennessee Department of 
        Environment and Conservation; and
           Serena McIlwain, Secretary of the 
        Environment, State of Maryland.
    On October 24 and 25, 2023, the Subcommittee on Energy, 
Climate, and Grid Security met in open markup session and 
forwarded H.R. 6185, without amendment, to the full Committee 
by a record vote of 15 yeas and 12 nays.
    On December 5 and 6, 2023, the full Committee on Energy and 
Commerce met in open markup session and ordered H.R. 6185, 
without amendment, favorably reported to the House by a record 
vote of 24 yeas and 21 nays.

                            Committee Votes

    Clause 3(b) of rule XIII requires the Committee to list the 
record votes on the motion to report legislation and amendments 
thereto. The following reflects the record votes taken during 
the Committee consideration:

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                 Oversight Findings and Recommendations

    Pursuant to clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII, the Committee held hearings and made findings that 
are reflected in this report.

   New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax Expenditures

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII, the Committee 
finds that H.R. 6185 would result in no new or increased budget 
authority, entitlement authority, or tax expenditures or 
revenues.

                  Congressional Budget Office Estimate

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII, the following is 
the cost estimate provided by the Congressional Budget Office 
pursuant to section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974:

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    H.R. 6185 would require the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission (FERC), in consultation with the Electric 
Reliability Organization (ERO), to review standards and 
regulations proposed by other federal agencies that could 
negatively affect the reliability of the bulk-power system in 
North America. Agencies could not finalize those actions until 
they respond to any concerns raised by FERC as part of that 
review.
    Using information from FERC, CBO expects that the agency 
would need additional staff and would need to acquire new data 
to fulfill the bill's requirements. CBO estimates that 
implementing those requirements would cost FERC less than $10 
million each year. However, because FERC is authorized to 
recover 100 percent of its costs through user fees, any change 
in agency costs (which are controlled through annual 
appropriation acts) would be offset by an equal change in fees 
that the commission charges. Accordingly, CBO estimates that 
implementing those provisions would result in no net change in 
discretionary spending for FERC.
    CBO further estimates that the costs for other agencies 
(primarily the Department of Energy) to coordinate with FERC on 
those reviews would total $1 million over the 2024-2029 period; 
that spending would be subject to the availability of 
appropriated funds.
    Finally, enacting H.R. 6185 would increase direct spending 
and revenues because spending by the ERO is recorded on the 
budget as direct spending, and the organization assesses fees, 
which are recorded as revenues, to cover its costs. CBO 
estimates that consulting with FERC would increase costs for 
the ERO by less than $500,000 over the 2024-2034 period. 
Because any amounts collected would be spent soon thereafter, 
CBO estimates that the net effect on the deficit would be 
negligible.
    If FERC and the ERO increase fees as a result of the bill, 
it would increase the cost of an existing mandate on public and 
private entities, such as electric utilities, that are required 
to pay those fees. CBO estimates that the additional amount 
collected would average several million dollars annually and 
fall well below the annual threshold established in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act for intergovernmental and private-
sector mandates ($100 million and $200 million in 2024, 
respectively, adjusted annually for inflation).
    The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Aaron Krupkin 
(for federal costs) and Brandon Lever (for mandates). The 
estimate was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Director 
of Budget Analysis.
                                         Phillip L. Swagel,
                             Director, Congressional Budget Office.

                       Federal Mandates Statement

    The Committee adopts as its own the estimate of Federal 
mandates prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office pursuant to section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform 
Act.

         Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general 
performance goal or objective of this legislation is to amend 
the Federal Power Act to require coordination between FERC and 
any Federal agency that promulgates a regulation that could 
threaten the reliable operation of the bulk power system to 
ensure that electric reliability authorities are given adequate 
input in the regulatory process when such regulations pose a 
threat to grid reliability or resource adequacy.

                    Duplication of Federal Programs

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of rule XIII, no provision of 
H.R. 6185 is known to be duplicative of another Federal 
program, including any program that was included in a report to 
Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139 or the 
most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance.

              Related Committee and Subcommittee Hearings

    Pursuant to clause 3(c)(6) of rule XIII, the following 
hearings were used to develop or consider H.R. 6185:
           On June 6, 2023, the Subcommittee on 
        Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Minerals held 
        a hearing entitled ``Clean Power Plan 2.0: EPA's Latest 
        Attack on Electric Reliability.'' The Subcommittee 
        received testimony from:
                   Patrick O'Loughlin, President 
                and CEO, Buckeye Power Inc. and Ohio Rural 
                Electric Cooperatives;
                   Todd Snitchler, President and 
                CEO, Electric Power Supply Association (EPSA);
                   Michael J. Nasi, Partner, 
                Jackson Walker; and
                   Jay Duffy, Litigation Director, 
                Clean Air Task Force.
           On June 13, 2023, the Subcommittee on 
        Energy, Climate, and Grid Security held a hearing 
        entitled ``Oversight of FERC: Adhering To A Mission Of 
        Affordable And Reliable Energy For America.'' The 
        Subcommittee received testimony from:
                   The Honorable Willie Phillips, 
                Chairman, FERC (Democrat);
                   The Honorable James Danly, 
                Commissioner, FERC (Republican);
                   The Honorable Mark Christie, 
                Commissioner, FERC (Republican); and
                   The Honorable Allison Clements, 
                Commissioner, FERC (Democrat).
           On September 13, 2023, the Subcommittee on 
        Energy, Climate, and Grid Security held a hearing on 
        several bills, including a discussion draft: H.R. __, 
        the ``GRID Act.'' The title of the hearing was 
        ``Keeping the Lights On: Enhancing Reliability and 
        Efficiency to Power American Homes.'' The Subcommittee 
        received testimony from:
                   Gene Rodrigues, Assistant 
                Secretary for Electricity, Office of 
                Electricity, U.S. Department of Energy;
                   David Ortiz, Director, Office of 
                Electric Reliability, Federal Energy Regulatory 
                Commission;
                   Kevin Messner, Executive Vice 
                President and Chief Policy Officer, Association 
                of Home Appliance Manufacturers;
                   B. Robert ``Bob'' Paulling, 
                President and CEO, Mid-Carolina Electric 
                Cooperative, on behalf of the National Rural 
                Electric Cooperatives Association;
                   Ben Lieberman, Senior Fellow, 
                Competitive Enterprise Institute; and
                   Andrew deLaski, Executive 
                Director, Appliance Standards Awareness 
                Project.
           On September 28, 2023, the Subcommittee on 
        Energy, Climate, and Grid Security held a hearing 
        entitled ``Powering America's Economy, Security, and 
        our Way of Life: Examining the State of Grid 
        Reliability.'' The Subcommittee received testimony 
        from:
                   Gordon van Welie, President & 
                Chief Executive Officer, ISO New England;
                   Paul Suskie, Executive Vice 
                President, Regulatory Policy & General Counsel, 
                Southwest Power Pool;
                   Richard J. Dewey, President & 
                Chief Executive Officer, New York ISO;
                   Todd Ramey, Senior Vice 
                President, Markets and Digital Strategy, 
                Midcontinent ISO;
                   Woody Rickerson, Senior Vice 
                President & Chief Operating Officer, ERCOT;
                   Neil Millar, Vice President for 
                Infrastructure and Operations Planning, 
                California ISO; and
                   Frederick S. Bresler III, Senior 
                Vice President--Market Services, PJM 
                Interconnection, LLC.
           On November 14, 2023, the Subcommittee on 
        Environment, Manufacturing, and Critical Minerals held 
        a hearing entitled ``Clean Power Plan 2.0: EPA's Effort 
        to Jeopardize Reliable and Affordable Energy for 
        States.'' The Subcommittee received testimony from:
                   L. David Glatt, Director, North 
                Dakota Department of Environmental Quality;
                   Chris Parker, Director, Utah 
                Department of Commerce Division of Public 
                Utilities;
                   Michelle Walker Owenby, 
                Director, Division of Air Pollution Control, 
                Tennessee Department of Environment and 
                Conservation; and
                   Serena McIlwain, Secretary of 
                the Environment, State of Maryland.

                        Committee Cost Estimate

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII, the Committee 
adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by the Director of 
the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

       Earmark, Limited Tax Benefits, and Limited Tariff Benefits

    Pursuant to clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI, the 
Committee finds that H.R. 6185 contains no earmarks, limited 
tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits.

                      Advisory Committee Statement

    No advisory committees within the meaning of section 5(b) 
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act were created by this 
legislation.

                  Applicability to Legislative Branch

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

             Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation


Section 1. Short title

    Section 1 provides that the Act may be cited as the 
``Guaranteeing Reliable Infrastructure Development Act'' or the 
``GRID Act.''

Section 2. Coordination process to protect electric reliability

    Section 2 amends Section 215 of the FPA and redesignates 
subsections (h) through (k) as subsections (i) through (l), 
respectively. Section 2 then amends Section 215 of the FPA to 
include the legislation in the new subsection (h) Commission 
Review and Comment for Proposed Covered Agency Actions.
    The new subsection (h)(1) includes the requirement that the 
Commission (FERC) or a State commission provide to the 
Commission for review the covered agency action that is likely 
to have a significant negative impact on reliability and 
adequacy of the bulk-power system. Subsection (h)(1)(A) 
requires that the agency action for review shall be provided to 
the Commission when the proposed covered agency action is 
provided to the Office of Management and Budget or another 
Federal agency for review. Subsection (h)(1)(B) requires that 
the proposed covered agency action be submitted to the 
Commission within 90 days of publication in the Federal 
Register if the proposed covered agency action is not provided 
to the Office of Management and Budget or another Federal 
agency for review and comment.
    Subsection (h)(2) clarifies that the Commission shall 
consult with the ERO (NERC) to provide comments to the agency 
proposing the covered agency action. Subsection (h)(3)(A) 
requires that an agency proposing a covered agency action may 
not finalize a proposal covered in subsection (h)(1) until the 
agency head responds to the Commission in writing with an 
explanation of how the agency has modified, or why it proposes 
to not modify, the action in response to comments provided by 
the Commission. Subsection (h)(3)(B) states that the agency may 
not finalize the proposal if the agency has not modified the 
proposed to prevent a significant negative impact on 
reliability and adequacy of the bulk-power system based on the 
comments provided by the Commission.
    Subsection (h)(4)(A) provides that an agency head shall 
include comments and responses in the Federal Register or 
otherwise publicly available under subsection (h)(4)(B).
    Subsection (h)(5) provides definitions for terms used 
throughout this section.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law 
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new 
matter is printed in italics, and existing law in which no 
change is proposed is shown in roman):

                           FEDERAL POWER ACT




           *       *       *       *       *       *       *
PART II--REGULATION OF ELECTRIC UTILITY COMPANIES ENGAGED IN INTERSTATE 
COMMERCE

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *



SEC. 215. ELECTRIC RELIABILITY.

  (a) Definitions.--For purposes of this section:
          (1) The term ``bulk-power system'' means--
                  (A) facilities and control systems necessary 
                for operating an interconnected electric energy 
                transmission network (or any portion thereof); 
                and
                  (B) electric energy from generation 
                facilities needed to maintain transmission 
                system reliability.
        The term does not include facilities used in the local 
        distribution of electric energy.
          (2) The terms ``Electric Reliability Organization'' 
        and ``ERO'' mean the organization certified by the 
        Commission under subsection (c) the purpose of which is 
        to establish and enforce reliability standards for the 
        bulk-power system, subject to Commission review.
          (3) The term ``reliability standard'' means a 
        requirement, approved by the Commission under this 
        section, to provide for reliable operation of the bulk-
        power system. The term includes requirements for the 
        operation of existing bulk-power system facilities, 
        including cybersecurity protection, and the design of 
        planned additions or modifications to such facilities 
        to the extent necessary to provide for reliable 
        operation of the bulk-power system, but the term does 
        not include any requirement to enlarge such facilities 
        or to construct new transmission capacity or generation 
        capacity.
          (4) The term ``reliable operation'' means operating 
        the elements of the bulk-power system within equipment 
        and electric system thermal, voltage, and stability 
        limits so that instability, uncontrolled separation, or 
        cascading failures of such system will not occur as a 
        result of a sudden disturbance, including a 
        cybersecurity incident, or unanticipated failure of 
        system elements.
          (5) The term ``Interconnection'' means a geographic 
        area in which the operation of bulk-power system 
        components is synchronized such that the failure of one 
        or more of such components may adversely affect the 
        ability of the operators of other components within the 
        system to maintain reliable operation of the facilities 
        within their control.
          (6) The term ``transmission organization'' means a 
        Regional Transmission Organization, Independent System 
        Operator, independent transmission provider, or other 
        transmission organization finally approved by the 
        Commission for the operation of transmission 
        facilities.
          (7) The term ``regional entity'' means an entity 
        having enforcement authority pursuant to subsection 
        (e)(4).
          (8) The term ``cybersecurity incident'' means a 
        malicious act or suspicious event that disrupts, or was 
        an attempt to disrupt, the operation of those 
        programmable electronic devices and communication 
        networks including hardware, software and data that are 
        essential to the reliable operation of the bulk power 
        system.
  (b) Jurisdiction and Applicability.--(1) The Commission shall 
have jurisdiction, within the United States, over the ERO 
certified by the Commission under subsection (c), any regional 
entities, and all users, owners and operators of the bulk-power 
system, including but not limited to the entities described in 
section 201(f), for purposes of approving reliability standards 
established under this section and enforcing compliance with 
this section. All users, owners and operators of the bulk-power 
system shall comply with reliability standards that take effect 
under this section.
  (2) The Commission shall issue a final rule to implement the 
requirements of this section not later than 180 days after the 
date of enactment of this section.
  (c) Certification.--Following the issuance of a Commission 
rule under subsection (b)(2), any person may submit an 
application to the Commission for certification as the Electric 
Reliability Organization. The Commission may certify one such 
ERO if the Commission determines that such ERO--
          (1) has the ability to develop and enforce, subject 
        to subsection (e)(2), reliability standards that 
        provide for an adequate level of reliability of the 
        bulk-power system; and
          (2) has established rules that--
                  (A) assure its independence of the users and 
                owners and operators of the bulk-power system, 
                while assuring fair stakeholder representation 
                in the selection of its directors and balanced 
                decisionmaking in any ERO committee or 
                subordinate organizational structure;
                  (B) allocate equitably reasonable dues, fees, 
                and other charges among end users for all 
                activities under this section;
                  (C) provide fair and impartial procedures for 
                enforcement of reliability standards through 
                the imposition of penalties in accordance with 
                subsection (e) (including limitations on 
                activities, functions, or operations, or other 
                appropriate sanctions);
                  (D) provide for reasonable notice and 
                opportunity for public comment, due process, 
                openness, and balance of interests in 
                developing reliability standards and otherwise 
                exercising its duties; and
                  (E) provide for taking, after certification, 
                appropriate steps to gain recognition in Canada 
                and Mexico.
  (d) Reliability Standards.--(1) The Electric Reliability 
Organization shall file each reliability standard or 
modification to a reliability standard that it proposes to be 
made effective under this section with the Commission.
  (2) The Commission may approve, by rule or order, a proposed 
reliability standard or modification to a reliability standard 
if it determines that the standard is just, reasonable, not 
unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the public 
interest. The Commission shall give due weight to the technical 
expertise of the Electric Reliability Organization with respect 
to the content of a proposed standard or modification to a 
reliability standard and to the technical expertise of a 
regional entity organized on an Interconnection-wide basis with 
respect to a reliability standard to be applicable within that 
Interconnection, but shall not defer with respect to the effect 
of a standard on competition. A proposed standard or 
modification shall take effect upon approval by the Commission.
  (3) The Electric Reliability Organization shall rebuttably 
presume that a proposal from a regional entity organized on an 
Interconnection-wide basis for a reliability standard or 
modification to a reliability standard to be applicable on an 
Interconnection-wide basis is just, reasonable, and not unduly 
discriminatory or preferential, and in the public interest.
  (4) The Commission shall remand to the Electric Reliability 
Organization for further consideration a proposed reliability 
standard or a modification to a reliability standard that the 
Commission disapproves in whole or in part.
  (5) The Commission, upon its own motion or upon complaint, 
may order the Electric Reliability Organization to submit to 
the Commission a proposed reliability standard or a 
modification to a reliability standard that addresses a 
specific matter if the Commission considers such a new or 
modified reliability standard appropriate to carry out this 
section.
  (6) The final rule adopted under subsection (b)(2) shall 
include fair processes for the identification and timely 
resolution of any conflict between a reliability standard and 
any function, rule, order, tariff, rate schedule, or agreement 
accepted, approved, or ordered by the Commission applicable to 
a transmission organization. Such transmission organization 
shall continue to comply with such function, rule, order, 
tariff, rate schedule or agreement accepted, approved, or 
ordered by the Commission until--
          (A) the Commission finds a conflict exists between a 
        reliability standard and any such provision;
          (B) the Commission orders a change to such provision 
        pursuant to section 206 of this part; and
          (C) the ordered change becomes effective under this 
        part.
If the Commission determines that a reliability standard needs 
to be changed as a result of such a conflict, it shall order 
the ERO to develop and file with the Commission a modified 
reliability standard under paragraph (4) or (5) of this 
subsection.
  (e) Enforcement.--(1) The ERO may impose, subject to 
paragraph (2), a penalty on a user or owner or operator of the 
bulk-power system for a violation of a reliability standard 
approved by the Commission under subsection (d) if the ERO, 
after notice and an opportunity for a hearing--
          (A) finds that the user or owner or operator has 
        violated a reliability standard approved by the 
        Commission under subsection (d); and
          (B) files notice and the record of the proceeding 
        with the Commission.
  (2) A penalty imposed under paragraph (1) may take effect not 
earlier than the 31st day after the ERO files with the 
Commission notice of the penalty and the record of proceedings. 
Such penalty shall be subject to review by the Commission, on 
its own motion or upon application by the user, owner or 
operator that is the subject of the penalty filed within 30 
days after the date such notice is filed with the Commission. 
Application to the Commission for review, or the initiation of 
review by the Commission on its own motion, shall not operate 
as a stay of such penalty unless the Commission otherwise 
orders upon its own motion or upon application by the user, 
owner or operator that is the subject of such penalty. In any 
proceeding to review a penalty imposed under paragraph (1), the 
Commission, after notice and opportunity for hearing (which 
hearing may consist solely of the record before the ERO and 
opportunity for the presentation of supporting reasons to 
affirm, modify, or set aside the penalty), shall by order 
affirm, set aside, reinstate, or modify the penalty, and, if 
appropriate, remand to the ERO for further proceedings. The 
Commission shall implement expedited procedures for such 
hearings.
  (3) On its own motion or upon complaint, the Commission may 
order compliance with a reliability standard and may impose a 
penalty against a user or owner or operator of the bulk-power 
system if the Commission finds, after notice and opportunity 
for a hearing, that the user or owner or operator of the bulk-
power system has engaged or is about to engage in any acts or 
practices that constitute or will constitute a violation of a 
reliability standard.
  (4) The Commission shall issue regulations authorizing the 
ERO to enter into an agreement to delegate authority to a 
regional entity for the purpose of proposing reliability 
standards to the ERO and enforcing reliability standards under 
paragraph (1) if--
          (A) the regional entity is governed by--
                  (i) an independent board;
                  (ii) a balanced stakeholder board; or
                  (iii) a combination independent and balanced 
                stakeholder board.
          (B) the regional entity otherwise satisfies the 
        provisions of subsection (c)(1) and (2); and
          (C) the agreement promotes effective and efficient 
        administration of bulk-power system reliability.
The Commission may modify such delegation. The ERO and the 
Commission shall rebuttably presume that a proposal for 
delegation to a regional entity organized on an 
Interconnection-wide basis promotes effective and efficient 
administration of bulk-power system reliability and should be 
approved. Such regulation may provide that the Commission may 
assign the ERO's authority to enforce reliability standards 
under paragraph (1) directly to a regional entity consistent 
with the requirements of this paragraph.
  (5) The Commission may take such action as is necessary or 
appropriate against the ERO or a regional entity to ensure 
compliance with a reliability standard or any Commission order 
affecting the ERO or a regional entity.
  (6) Any penalty imposed under this section shall bear a 
reasonable relation to the seriousness of the violation and 
shall take into consideration the efforts of such user, owner, 
or operator to remedy the violation in a timely manner.
  (f) Changes in Electric Reliability Organization Rules.--The 
Electric Reliability Organization shall file with the 
Commission for approval any proposed rule or proposed rule 
change, accompanied by an explanation of its basis and purpose. 
The Commission, upon its own motion or complaint, may propose a 
change to the rules of the ERO. A proposed rule or proposed 
rule change shall take effect upon a finding by the Commission, 
after notice and opportunity for comment, that the change is 
just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, is 
in the public interest, and satisfies the requirements of 
subsection (c).
  (g) Reliability Reports.--The ERO shall conduct periodic 
assessments of the reliability and adequacy of the bulk-power 
system in North America.
  (h) Commission Review and Comment for Proposed Covered Agency 
Actions.--
          (1) Requirement.--If the Commission or a State 
        commission determines, on its own motion or on a 
        request from another Federal agency, that a covered 
        agency action proposed by a Federal agency other than 
        the Commission is likely to have a significant negative 
        impact on the reliability and adequacy of the bulk-
        power system in North America, the agency head with 
        respect to such proposed covered agency action shall 
        provide to the Commission such proposed covered agency 
        action for review and comment--
                  (A) on the first date on which such proposed 
                covered agency action is provided to the Office 
                of Management and Budget or any other Federal 
                agency for review and comment; or
                  (B) if such proposed covered agency action is 
                not provided to the Office of Management and 
                Budget or any other Federal agency for review 
                and comment, not later than 90 days before the 
                date on which the agency head publishes in the 
                Federal Register or otherwise makes available 
                for public inspection or comment such proposed 
                covered agency action.
          (2) Commission comments.--The Commission, in 
        consultation with the ERO, shall, by order, provide to 
        the agency head that provides a proposed covered agency 
        action to the Commission under paragraph (1) comments 
        on such proposed covered agency action.
          (3) Agency response.--An agency head may not finalize 
        a proposed covered agency action for which a 
        determination is made under paragraph (1)--
                  (A) until the agency head has responded in 
                writing to the Commission with an explanation 
                of how the agency head has modified, or why the 
                agency head has determined not to modify, such 
                proposed covered agency action in response to 
                each comment provided by the Commission under 
                paragraph (2); or
                  (B) if the Commission finds that the agency 
                head has not modified such proposed covered 
                agency action based on the comments provided by 
                the Commission under paragraph (2) to prevent a 
                significant negative impact on the reliability 
                and adequacy of the bulk-power system in North 
                America.
          (4) Public availability of comments and responses.--
        An agency head shall include the comments and responses 
        for the proposed covered agency action in the proposed 
        agency action as--
                  (A) submitted to the Federal Register for 
                publication; or
                  (B) otherwise made available for public 
                inspection or comment.
          (5) Definitions.--In this subsection:
                  (A) Agency head.--The term ``agency head'' 
                means the head of a Federal agency that 
                proposed a covered agency action.
                  (B) Covered agency action.--The term 
                ``covered agency action'' means a rule, 
                regulation, standard, criteria document, 
                deadline, or determination.
                  (C) Federal agency.--The term ``Federal 
                agency'' means an Executive department (as that 
                term is defined in section 101 of title 5, 
                United States Code) or any other Executive 
                agency that is in the President's cabinet.
  [(h)] (i) Coordination With Canada and Mexico.--The President 
is urged to negotiate international agreements with the 
governments of Canada and Mexico to provide for effective 
compliance with reliability standards and the effectiveness of 
the ERO in the United States and Canada or Mexico.
  [(i)] (j) Savings Provisions.--(1) The ERO shall have 
authority to develop and enforce compliance with reliability 
standards for only the bulk-power system.
  (2) This section does not authorize the ERO or the Commission 
to order the construction of additional generation or 
transmission capacity or to set and enforce compliance with 
standards for adequacy or safety of electric facilities or 
services.
  (3) Nothing in this section shall be construed to preempt any 
authority of any State to take action to ensure the safety, 
adequacy, and reliability of electric service within that 
State, as long as such action is not inconsistent with any 
reliability standard, except that the State of New York may 
establish rules that result in greater reliability within that 
State, as long as such action does not result in lesser 
reliability outside the State than that provided by the 
reliability standards.
  (4) Within 90 days of the application of the Electric 
Reliability Organization or other affected party, and after 
notice and opportunity for comment, the Commission shall issue 
a final order determining whether a State action is 
inconsistent with a reliability standard, taking into 
consideration any recommendation of the ERO.
  (5) The Commission, after consultation with the ERO and the 
State taking action, may stay the effectiveness of any State 
action, pending the Commission's issuance of a final order.
  [(j)] (k) Regional Advisory Bodies.--The Commission shall 
establish a regional advisory body on the petition of at least 
two-thirds of the States within a region that have more than 
one-half of their electric load served within the region. A 
regional advisory body shall be composed of one member from 
each participating State in the region, appointed by the 
Governor of each State, and may include representatives of 
agencies, States, and provinces outside the United States. A 
regional advisory body may provide advice to the Electric 
Reliability Organization, a regional entity, or the Commission 
regarding the governance of an existing or proposed regional 
entity within the same region, whether a standard proposed to 
apply within the region is just, reasonable, not unduly 
discriminatory or preferential, and in the public interest, 
whether fees proposed to be assessed within the region are 
just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, 
and in the public interest and any other responsibilities 
requested by the Commission. The Commission may give deference 
to the advice of any such regional advisory body if that body 
is organized on an Interconnection-wide basis.
  [(k)] (l) Alaska and Hawaii.--The provisions of this section 
do not apply to Alaska or Hawaii.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                             MINORITY VIEWS

    H.R. 6185, the ``Guaranteeing Reliable Infrastructure 
Development Act'' would amend the Federal Power Act (FPA) to 
allow the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to block 
any rule, regulation, standard, criteria document, deadline, or 
determination from any other Federal agency under the guise of 
reliability concerns. Committee Democrats strongly oppose the 
bill, as it unnecessarily duplicates FERC's existing ability to 
provide feedback on proposed rulemakings from other agencies. 
FERC itself does not think that it currently has the capacity 
to implement the bill, and it would unnecessarily slow down 
environmental regulations with clear benefits to public health.
    The bill amends section 215 of the FPA to add a subsection 
(h) that would give FERC the ability to prevent any proposed 
covered action by another agency from going into effect until 
the agency is able to mollify FERC's concerns through changes 
to the proposed action. The majority's report compares this to 
``consultation,'' however it is much more onerous than 
consultation. It would in effect give FERC veto power over any 
agency action that FERC--or a state public utility commission--
seeks to alter, an unprecedented expansion of FERC's power.
    The power given to state commissions by the bill is 
particularly troubling. It would give state commissions the 
ability to bring any pending rulemaking process at any agency 
to a halt, by demanding that FERC consult with the North 
American Reliability Corporation (NERC) to provide comments to 
the head of the agency proposing such action. It would create 
50 different veto points throughout the nation, and it is far 
too easy to imagine a particularly pernicious partisan state 
commission voting to subject every proposed Federal rule to 
this scrutiny, sending FERC, NERC, and the rest of the Federal 
government into gridlock.
    These fears were validated during a Subcommittee on Energy, 
Climate, and Grid Security hearing on a draft version of H.R. 
6185, where the Subcommittee heard testimony from Gene 
Rodrigues, Assistant Secretary for Electricity at the U.S. 
Department of Energy. Assistant Secretary Rodrigues testified 
that the real-world impact of the bill would be to create a 
vague standard that would make it ``impossible for [the 
Department of Energy] to meet our legislative and court-ordered 
mandates'' and anticipated that every single rule would be 
challenged by a State commission and would see its 
implementation delayed as FERC studied the proposed action.\1\ 
Additionally, during that same hearing, the Subcommittee also 
heard testimony from Dr. David Ortiz, Director of FERC's Office 
of Electric Reliability. Dr. Ortiz testified that FERC lacked 
the staffing, data, and computational modeling resources 
necessary for FERC to implement the bill as written.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Testimony of Gene 
Rodrigues, Assistant Secretary for Electricity, U.S. Department of 
Energy, Hearing on Keeping the Lights on: Enhancing Reliability and 
Efficiency to Power American Homes, 118th Cong. (Sept. 13, 2023).
    \2\House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Testimony of Dr. David 
Ortiz, Director, Office of Electric Reliability, Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, Hearing on Keeping the Lights on: Enhancing 
Reliability and Efficiency to Power American Homes, 118th Cong. (Sept. 
13, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The majority's report seems particularly focused on a 
proposed rule by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
regarding new source performance standards for greenhouse gas 
emissions for certain electric power plants.\3\ However, FERC 
already enjoys broad authority to comment and consult on the 
potential reliability impacts of other agency's regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\The majority's report makes several unfounded claims about EPA's 
proposal. Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is clearly authorized and 
legally obligated to control greenhouse gas pollution from power 
plants. The majority's report further ignores that Congress 
specifically directed EPA to reduce this pollution in the Inflation 
Reduction Act, and inaccurately describes the requirements and 
available, affordable technologies underpinning EPA's proposal.'' See 
e.g. Comment from Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. and Sen. Thomas R. Carper, to 
Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-0072 (Sept. 12, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In April 2023--before the proposed rule was released, FERC 
staff within the Office of Electric Reliability met with EPA 
staff regarding their comments on the proposed rule.\4\ On 
November 9, 2023, FERC held its annual reliability technical 
conference. It devoted the entirety of the afternoon session of 
the conference to the EPA's proposed rule, and Principal Deputy 
Assistant Administrator Joseph Goffman presented to FERC 
Commissioners and took questions. FERC staff then led two 
additional panels featuring stakeholder perspectives on the 
rule.\5\ FERC Chair Willie Phillips has committed to providing 
a link to the complete docket record of the technical 
conference to the EPA, and a transcript of the conference is 
publicly available.\6\ Furthermore, former FERC Commissioner 
James Danly submitted two comments to the EPA.\7\\8\ Eleven 
days after the technical conference, EPA noticed in the Federal 
Register a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking, 
specifically soliciting comments on how the proposed rule 
related to reliability.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Response from Dr. David 
Ortiz, Director, Office of Electric Reliability, Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, to a Question for the Record from Chair Jeff 
Duncan, Hearing on Keeping the Lights on: Enhancing Reliability and 
Efficiency to Power American Homes, 118th Cong. (Sept. 13, 2023).
    \5\ Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 2023 Annual Reliability 
Technical Conference (Nov. 9, 2023).
    \6\Response letter from Chairman Willie Phillips, Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, to Rep. McMorris Rodgers, Chair, House Committee 
on Energy and Commerce, et al. (Dec. 6, 2023).
    \7\Commissioner James Danly, Comment to Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-
0072 (Aug. 8, 2023).
    \8\Commissioner James Danly, Comment to Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2023-
0072 (Dec. 20, 2023).
    \9\Environmental Protection Agency, New Source Performance 
Standards for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From New, Modified, and 
Reconstructed Fossil Fuel-Fired Electric Generating Units, 88 Fed. Reg. 
80682. (Nov. 20, 2023) (proposed rule).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In short, the current feedback mechanisms that FERC 
possesses--including both its ability to call technical 
conferences and submit comments to a rulemaking docket--appear 
more than sufficient to meet the majority's alleged goal of 
ensuring that FERC has adequate ability to provide feedback to 
EPA on its rules.
    For the reasons stated above, we dissent from the views 
contained in the Committee's report.

                                        Frank Pallone, Jr.,
                                                    Ranking Member.

                                  [all]