|
Did you ever fail to follow up with someone who helped advance your career to thank them, and subsequently update them on your progress? I suspect we all have.
A similar dynamic plays out frequently in the energy industry with public officials. These leaders make the difficult decisions to support critical infrastructure investments, and those votes often go unacknowledged. Additionally, and more importantly, industry neglects to keep them informed of the progress of these investments and the benefits that accrue to customers.
During my nearly 10 years as a commissioner at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, I voted on scores of highly controversial projects. I recall the Capacity Performance Plan for PJM. Regardless of your view of the merits of this plan, its underlying goal was clear: to strengthen system reliability by ensuring that facilities receiving payments through PJM’s Capacity Market would perform when needed most — ultimately benefiting customers during periods of high demand. Generators, in turn, benefited through increased capacity market prices.
It was a costly and hotly debated proposal that faced intense opposition before eventually being approved. While recognition for carrying out my regulatory duties was not expected, I did assume I would be kept informed of the plan’s implementation and effectiveness. Unfortunately, that ongoing communication did not occur.
Similar experiences followed with transmission projects and liquified natural gas facilities — all contentious proposals that involved heated opposition from interest groups and politicians. After approval, communication often went silent, making it difficult to assess how these controversial decisions played out.
In contrast, one significant proposal followed a different path. MISO’s Multi Value Projects (MVP) in the 2010 timeframe was also extremely controversial due to its cost and wide-ranging impact throughout the Midwest. This project had the benefit of several years of collaboration by state officials who worked to coalesce support for this extensive build out of the transmission system. Although it faced significant opposition from customer groups and some governors, the MVP projects were eventually approved. What distinguished this process, however, was the ongoing engagement. MISO along with the regional leaders were greatly appreciative and kept the Commission updated throughout the extensive implementation period — a level of transparency that was informative and constructive. It’s difficult to imagine MISO today without the MVP projects in service.
As our nation continues to need extensive investments in transmission projects, it’s essential that we support the public officials — especially at the state level — who have the courage to endorse these investments. And as the infrastructure is being developed, the industry needs to proactively plan and maintain a communication approach that keeps these officials updated on both the progress of development and the benefits that accrue to customers. It’s essential to develop a plan and execute it, involving CEOs, regulatory experts and legislative experts. Involving third-party voices such as the EPC contractors and labor only helps the cause.
So, WIRES members, go forth and build! And don’t forget to express appreciation and keep the public officials updated and informed. Consistent communication is essential for earning continued trust and support.
| 
