Getting to know Montana Public Service Commissioner candidates

Montana Public Service Commission (via PSC Twitter account).

About these Q&As

The Daily Montanan sent candidates in this race a list of five questions prepared by staff members. Candidates who do not appear with the rest of the candidates in the race did not submit answers to the Daily Montanan. If you have any questions, please reach out to info@dailymontanan.com

A lot of power bills and garbage service in Montana are overseen by elected Public Service Commissioners, and three of five seats are up for grabs this year.

In District No. 2, two former Republican commissioners face off in the primary, Sen. Brad Molnar of Laurel and Kirk Bushman of Billings.

One Democrat, Susan Bilo of Bozeman, is running unopposed in the primary.

In District No. 3, Republican Sen. Jeff Welborn of Dillon is running against Suzzann Nordwick of Butte and Rob Elwood of Harlowtown.

Leonard “Lenny” Williams of Butte is the lone Democrat in the race.

In District No. 4, incumbent Republican Jennifer Fielder is vying to keep her seat from Al Dunlap of Saint Regis.

All five current commissioners are Republicans.

The body that regulates monopoly utilities in the state has been under scrutiny over the last year as it granted significant rate increases to both NorthWestern Energy and Montana-Dakota Utilities. It undertakes a petition this year to consider the effects of climate change on its decisions.

District No. 2, Republican Kirk Bushman

Montana’s largest public utility service has been criticized for embracing more fossil fuels and not doing enough to promote renewables. What is the Montana Public Service Commission’s role in steering Montana’s energy future?

The PSC has no role regarding Climate Change. The PSC’s role is to apply regulation that stems from Montana State Law MCA Title 69 and Federal Law -Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). There are some regulations that promote renewables. But it is not the role of the PSC to make regulations.

As a regulator, the Public Service Commission ensures that public utilities get a fair rate of return on their services while ensuring captive consumers are not charged too much for energy. How would you describe the balance between those two interests currently?

This balance is currently reasonable, especially if we look to the future. This balance is at great risk from the following three challenges. Inflation, higher interest rates, and ill-conceived federal regulations. A recent press release from the department of energy has announced $6 billion of spending focused on eliminating carbon emissions. The Biden Administration’s “Net Zero” program has plans for building out transmission for wind and solar with a focus on ESG & DEI policies. These policies are a real threat to electricity prices across the state, not just utilities regulated by the PSC, but local co-ops as well. We need our senators, congressmen, and the governor to be involved in this debate at both the state and federal levels

Last year, the Public Service Commission approved rate hikes for two power companies in Montana over public outcry the increases were historic and unsustainable for residents and small businesses. Do you agree with the PSC’s decisions? Why or why not?

Perhaps the PSC could have taken steps to reduce the size of the rate increases, but the PSC does not have the authority to arbitrarily deny cost recovery. The law supports the utility to choose what kind of generation assets to add to the portfolio. It does this using historical data and forecasting models that are publicly reviewed by the Commission. State and federal regulations dictate the cost recovery of additional transmission and generation. I think the PSC could do a better job implementing federal regulations regarding wind and solar.

If you could get one thing accomplished during your tenure on the PSC, what would it be?

I would like the citizens of Montana to benefit from Montana’s resources. The utility generation portfolio should be able to provide a surplus of power that can be marketed to the industrial sector and other states with the benefits of these sales used to relieve the cost to Montana citizens.

Should Montana’s PSC be made up of elected politicians or should it be run by appointed utility experts?

I think commissioners should be elected. I believe appointed commissioners are still susceptible to politics but are not accountable to the voters.

District No. 2, Republican Brad Molnar

Montana’s largest public utility service has been criticized for embracing more fossil fuels and not doing enough to promote renewables. What is the Montana Public Service Commission’s role in steering Montana’s energy future?

Montana statute does not allow for externalities being considered by the Mt PSC. So, we are not allowed to “promote” one form of generation/fuel over another. Each has to prove their worth, in a contested proceeding, to provide an affordable and reliable outcome.

As a regulator, the Public Service Commission ensures that public utilities get a fair rate of return on their services while ensuring captive consumers are not charged too much for energy. How would you describe the balance between those two interests currently?

The balance is often skewed. What is often viewed as justified, legal outcomes are too often overturned by the courts as they inject their personal biases into the equation. Even simple things like who will pay for the interconnection costs on the grid. The PSC said it should be the entity that wants to connect. The courts shifted it to NWE customers. As the incentives for renewables change the costs are magnified. This specific one was known as the Sun case.

Last year, the Public Service Commission approved rate hikes for two power companies in Montana over public outcry the increases were historic and unsustainable for residents and small businesses. Do you agree with the PSC’s decisions? Why or why not?

Yes, the less than a dollar-a-day increase (NWE 24%) (In a separate case MDU went up 7%) were historic and there was “outcry” from Democratic front groups. None have challenged the arithmetic forming the final ruling. That case was a year in the making. I cannot adequately answer here. More than happy for an in-depth discussion. Or perhaps you could invite the Consumer Counsel as they signed off on the final outcome.

Across the West many are experiencing similar and greater rate increases due to federal, state legislatures, and court, interventions into the energy market. Critics should do so with specific facts and figures.

In 2001 I drafted the legislation that stopped the advancement of the economic juggernaut created in part by the collapse of the California energy market and the illegal manipulations of Enron (HB 640). In 2009 I worked with the legislature to kill an environmentalist proposal to force the co-ops under the PSC to adjudicate conservation goals with huge penalties for missing the goals (HB 641). In 2010 I reversed a rate computation (inclined block model) to increase electricity bills on low- and middle-income Montanans.  Consumer protection is not accomplished with one vote. It comes from being vigilant before an item becomes imbedded then coming forward in a rate case as a mandated outcome.

While the PSC may deserve some criticism, those responsible for the various inputs that caused the rate increases they now complain about should also be held up for scrutiny.

If you could get one thing accomplished during your tenure on the PSC, what would it be?

A reduced dependence on utility reported interplay concerning their regional market generation pursuits.

Should Montana’s PSC be made up of elected politicians or should it be run by appointed utility experts?

The majority of states use appointed commissioners. And like Texas they are in a constant state of flux and failure. When one is appointed, his resignation is taken for when a political debt must be paid. The utilities often donate to both gubernatorial candidates then pick their own regulators. Many commissioners from those states openly note that political donations and nepotism played a major role in their appointments.

Any “energy expert” may run for the Commission. During the 2021 session, SB 160 tried to mandate appointed commissioners. I played a major role in its defeat. See video of floor debate. It received 16 votes.

District No. 2, Democrat Susan Bilo

Montana’s largest public utility service has been criticized for embracing more fossil fuels and not doing enough to promote renewables. What is the Montana Public Service Commission’s role in steering Montana’s energy future?

The PSC has a significant role in determining what energy-producing projects are built and operated in Montana. The fuel used has a direct impact on ratepayer costs as well as societal and ecosystem health.

The PSC’s role is to ensure utilities provide adequate service to customers at “reasonable rates.” Reasonable rates can be achieved by implementing efficiency measures and building utility-scale wind and solar electric power plants. They are cost-competitive and often cheaper than fossil fuel-powered plants, which contribute to climate change. Renewable fuels are clean and free. And, battery storage makes these systems reliable with electricity available when needed.

I believe the PSC’s role is to give fair consideration of the pros and cons of multiple energy sources and be open to the multiple benefits of renewable energy. This can be accomplished three ways. The PSC can 1. give renewables fair consideration during oversight of utility long-term plan development, 2. develop fair and reasonable Qualifying Facility contract terms that attract businesses that want to build renewable energy projects, and 3. consider participation in western organized energy markets for trading and buying cheaper wholesale electricity that often comes from southwestern U.S. photovoltaic, concentrating solar, and geothermal electric power plants.

As a regulator, the Public Service Commission ensures that public utilities get a fair rate of return on their services while ensuring captive consumers are not charged too much for energy. How would you describe the balance between those two interests currently?

It appears to me an imbalance currently exists, and that is one reason I am running for the PSC.

Many Montanans want more renewable energy integrated into our energy infrastructure because they know it is cheaper and cleaner than fossil fuels. Energy has become partisan and contentious. It appears current commissioners tend to side with the utilities that want to continue investing in coal and mainly build new natural gas-fueled electric power plants.

At least one utility refuses to acknowledge that there are strategies used by other utilities that they can adopt for integrating renewables and that renewable energy can be cost-effectively stored in batteries making it reliable and available when needed – including during peak demand.

An imbalance will remain as long as the PSC ignores climate impacts and the multiple benefits of renewable energy as it regulates utilities.

Last year, the Public Service Commission approved rate hikes for two power companies in Montana over public outcry the increases were historic and unsustainable for residents and small businesses. Do you agree with the PSC’s decisions? Why or why not?

I disagree with the PSC’s decisions because I know there are strategies utilities can implement to lower energy use as well as generate or provide and distribute that energy in a more affordable manner.

The first step is energy efficiency. Utilities can expand their efficiency rebates and better market them to create awareness of their existence. This will lead to reduced energy use and lower bills. Montana’s utility grid must be modernized for efficiency as well as reliability. Upgrades can include micro-grids that reduce line losses and prevent widespread power outages. Smart-grid technologies give ratepayers control over when and how they use energy to reduce peak demand and costs.

Utilities often want to own facilities, but if they are unwilling to consider the most cost-effective and clean options, the PSC can invite competition by developing fair and reasonable Qualifying Facility contract terms that attract businesses that want to build cost-effective renewable energy projects. The PSC must also consider the benefits of participating in western organized energy markets for trading and buying cheaper wholesale electricity.

I am unaware of these measures being considered to keep energy prices affordable. The PSC must ensure that long-term resource plans proactively include these efficiency and affordability measures and direct the utilities to follow the plan.

If you could get one thing accomplished during your tenure on the PSC, what would it be?

My most important accomplishment would be to spearhead the effort of the PSC considering climate impacts in its regulatory decision-making. For Commissioners and PSC staff, I would organize an expert presentation on the Montana Climate Assessment, Greater Yellowstone Climate Assessment, and the Climate Change and Human Health in Montana report.

Should Montana’s PSC be made up of elected politicians or should it be run by appointed utility experts?

Neither. I think the best mix would be governor-appointed representatives from specific entities that typically provide input to long-term resource plans and testify at customer class and rate making hearings. The PSC staff includes attorneys, engineers, economists, and rate analysts that would support appointed commissioners. The specific entities could represent fossil fuel and renewable energy companies, citizens, businesses, institutions, and a variety of non-profits.

District No. 3, Republican Suzzann Nordwick

Montana’s largest public utility service has been criticized for embracing more fossil fuels and not doing enough to promote renewables. What is the Montana Public Service Commission’s role in steering Montana’s energy future?

The PSC is basically a public interest protection organization that leans heavily towards a judicial function. The PSC is not a legislative body. Even something as simple as designating hydroelectric power as a renewable energy source is outside the PSC’s scope. Its role is to ensure that applicable laws are not violated, and that just and reasonable decisions are made in the long-term best interests of all Montanans.

Securing Montana’s future energy solutions is a critical scope area of the PSC. One way to help realize this goal is for Montana to strive for energy independence through development and advancement of all forms of cost-effective energy generation and energy storage. Additionally, all of these publicly deployed forms of energy should be allowed equal access to the grid.

My platform in running for Public Service Commission is to help deploy Montana First regulatory policies, to ensure Montana has good-paying jobs in a strong economy, with constant, reliable, affordable utilities, as well as a safe and healthy environment in which to live.

As a regulator, the Public Service Commission ensures that public utilities get a fair rate of return on their services while ensuring captive consumers are not charged too much for energy. How would you describe the balance between those two interests currently?

The PSC must always remain focused on its work of regulating monopolies; but with a heart for the consumer, I as a commissioner will insist that corporations put value on the wellbeing of their ratepayers in addition to their corporate goals. Furthermore, I will insist that companies provide the utmost service reliability and customer care. Historically, the best way to realize those is through completive free market principles. Since it is not the key role of the PSC to engage in protectionism, as a Public Service Commissioner, I will insist that companies pay fully for their bad business decisions. Those costs should never be passed on to the consumer. The PSC should regulate monopolies as though they are operating in a free market economy. The PSC’s role is to protect the ratepayer. It is not to save a monopoly from itself through avoidance of accountability. It is my view that regulation must approximate a competitive environment, rewarding good business decisions, while providing incentive for appropriate business discipline.

Last year, the Public Service Commission approved rate hikes for two power companies in Montana over public outcry. The increases were historic and unsustainable for residents and small businesses. Do you agree with the PSC’s decisions? Why or why not?

Just like everyone else, I’m not excited about my power bill going up; also, I want a reliable and well-maintained power grid. The PSC must consider all the factors and economic circumstances affecting a utility‘s ability to operate. These decisions to approve or disapprove rate hikes have historically relied upon detailed accounting and complex calculations. To argue with these decisions is to argue with the equations used, and I am the best qualified candidate for that job running in PSC-District 3.  As an engineer with experience in analysis of complex systems, I will not only bring fresh eyes to the PSC’s rate calculations, but also an understanding of mathematical principles, which could be adopted to ensure these calculations are reasonable.

Furthermore, I am committed to instituting more transparency into the rate-setting process. The official government website’s current explanation of how utility rates are is short and uninformative. Under the Commission’s constitutionally mandated duties of ensuring open government, I will encourage development of better educational materials to provide the public with tools to understand these decisions. Transparency can transform ambiguous discontent into constructive criticism and improvement.

If you could get one thing accomplished during your tenure on the PSC, what would it be?

I want Montana to realize energy independence going forward. I believe ample, affordable, available electricity directly correlates into growth and good-paying jobs for Montana. I am running as the most qualified candidate in PSC-District 3 because I am willing and able to serve Montana. I have a professional reputation for dedication, hard work, and commitment, which I will bring with me full-time to this job.

My 30-years of engineering, project management and technology application experience provides me with the skills required to hit the ground running to make objective and critically thought-out decisions that are best for Montana and Montanans.

I have worked on many projects that directly relate to the strategic focus areas of the Montana PSC, including being internationally recognized for some of my engineering research employing electrical currents. I have specialized training and expertise in materials science and natural resources, including environmental impacts. My real-word experience is diverse and makes me a great fit for the PSC. I have the knowledge to keep our trains on the tracks, our lights on, and our Montana homes heated throughout the winter.

Should Montana’s PSC be made up of elected politicians or should it be run by appointed utility experts?

It would be best for Montanans if Public Service Commissioners were elected experts and that is why I am running. Election by geographical districts provides commissioners with a diversity of viewpoints and they must work together to reach a consensus that works across all of Montana.

The PSC’s purpose is to protect the rate payers. Appointees would be more likely to inherit a bias from the politicians who appointed them and could easily consolidate power to favor utility monopolies removing direct accountability away from the people.

The PSC is more technical than other elected offices, so expertise matters. I think Montanans should elect candidates who are well-rounded professionals and not career politicians. Again, that is why I am running. Please vote for me. Thank you.

District No. 3, Republican Jeff Welborn

Montana’s largest public utility service has been criticized for embracing more fossil fuels and not doing enough to promote renewables. What is the Montana Public Service Commission’s role in steering Montana’s energy future?

I believe it’s incumbent on the PSC to strike the balance between reliable and affordable, and when and how renewables fit in that space, such as hydro power currently, or hydrogen or nuclear power generation may at some point. I also feel the PSC should encourage more Montana-based research at the University level on renewable viability,  i.e battery storage for better reliability for wind and solar; more efficient ways to utilize our existing thermal resources like coal and natural gas. What the PSC should not be doing is picking winners and losers or subsidizing any particular energy source.

As a regulator, the Public Service Commission ensures that public utilities get a fair rate of return on their services while ensuring captive consumers are not charged too much for energy. How would you describe the balance between those two interests currently?

What is more affordable for the utility is also more affordable for the consumer. Based on what ratepayers are telling me, folks want reliable power above all else, but affordability also goes without saying. It doesn’t matter whether they are retired folks, working families, or small business owners, the refrain is consistent. It takes thoughtful consideration, and someone willing to take a deep dive into the nuances of keeping things fair for the consumer, while allowing the utility to operate at a margin that allows them to keep investments made in existing infrastructure, to ensure services are delivered in a safe, reliable, and cost effective manner. My background as a leader on both energy and budgeting matters in the Legislature make me uniquely qualified among District 3 candidates to take on this role effectively from day one.

Last year, the Public Service Commission approved rate hikes for two power companies in Montana over public outcry the increases were historic and unsustainable for residents and small businesses. Do you agree with the PSC’s decisions? Why or why not?

I wasn’t on that panel, so I wont speculate on their findings or why the decision was made. I do feel folks are quick to judge the commission for rubber stamping an increase, so perhaps there was an educational component missing from the commission to the public to better explain their decision-making process.

Here’s what I do know: The Commission’s role is to regulate private investor-owned natural gas, electric, telephone, water, and sewer companies, certain motor carriers, and oversees natural gas pipeline safety and intrastate railroad safety. The Commission’s job is to ensure that Montanans receive safe and reliable service, from regulated public utilities, while paying reasonable rates. This takes a commissioner that is fair, open minded, and willing to do the right things for the right reasons, like myself. Again, striking a balance, while never picking winners and losers. Ratepayers can feel comfortable that I will always dive deep into the details and keep the balance of the dual priorities of reliability and affordability at the center of every vote I cast on the PSC.

If you could get one thing accomplished during your tenure on the PSC, what would it be?

Increasingly, Montana’s energy policy is dictated by forces outside our borders. We need Montana-based resources, capable of delivering in all weather conditions. Whether it’s at regional energy forums, public hearings before the Environmental Protection Agency or Department of Energy, or other public-facing opportunities, our Commissioners need to play a more active role in discussions and decisions impacting customers and generation facilities in the state. I welcome the opportunity  to lead that effort. Also I would like to see more outreach, to educate public on the role of the PSC, and encourage folks to weigh in on Commission work, either with their respective commissioners, or the through the Consumer Council, which is the people’s advocate agency and serves as the conduit for folks to take an active role, via a public process. Similar to what DEQ is undertaking now related to MEPA, I hope to help pull back the curtain on the PSC and bring increased transparency and accessibility to the job.

Should Montana’s PSC be made up of elected politicians or should it be run by appointed utility experts?

Appointed experts would add an element of expertise that could be beneficial, but a major downside is they would also serve at the whim of elected representatives, be it the executive or legislative branch (or both), making it also hyper-partisan. The system in place now, although not perfect,  still allows the commissioners to be elected by the people of Montana, so you have that accountability built in, and those commissioners always have the ability to hire different experts to help guide the commission with good data and advice, as they seek to make sound decisions. The tools for reaching sound decisions exist under the current structure, but it takes commissioners that recognize strengths and weaknesses among themselves, also recognizing when it may be better to to rely on qualified people, aside from the commissioners themselves, for input prior to making decisions.

The post Getting to know Montana Public Service Commissioner candidates appeared first on Daily Montanan.