The Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) is opposing a proposal in Congress to increase the number of its commissioners from five to nine, arguing that an expansion would likely institutionalize gridlock and that the core problem is a lack of competitive compensation to attract top talent.
ERC chairman Francis Saturnino Juan said the commission submitted its position paper on the pending bill, which aims to amend the Electric Power Industry Reform Act of 2001.
“We actually raised concern on the proposal for the increase in the number of the commissioners,” Juan said.
“What we said was, it’s more in reaction to what was happening and that failure is not because of the current structure but because of something else,” he said
The ERC’s position paper said that increasing the number of commissioners does not correlate with a higher rate of case resolution or expedited decision-making. Instead, it warned, “An increase in the number of voices may result in more protracted debates, deeper divisions, and greater challenges in achieving the majority consensus necessary for critical decisions. This reform addresses a non-existent problem while creating a new one.”
The regulator’s central argument focuses on personnel quality, not quantity. It noted that despite past increases in its budget and personnel, there has been no proportional rise in the quantity and quality of core outputs, such as orders, decisions, and rules.
“The backlog of cases continued to grow, demonstrating that simply adding more people without addressing underlying productivity, management, and skill-set issues is an exercise in futility,” the paper said.
The ERC concluded its challenge is “not primarily a lack of personnel, but a lack of highly competent and experienced personnel.”
The ERC struggles to compete with the private sector for top-tier talent, including seasoned engineers, economists, and utility practitioners. To address this, the commission supported initiatives that grant it the budgetary flexibility and exemptions necessary to offer competitive compensation packages.
The ERC said this is not a request for a blanket budget increase, but a “targeted tool to poach, train, and retain the very best technical and regulatory minds from the industry. The ERC must be able to compete on salary and benefits to attract the expertise it desperately needs,” it said.
The ERC also proposed tweaking its internal organizational structure, subject to presidential approval. This, the commission said, would allow for “a surgical, needs-based adjustment to improve workflow and efficiency, rather than a legislatively-mandated, one-size-fits-all restructuring.”
The regulator also supported legislation that would require it to publish clear performance metrics, including timelines for case resolution and targets for reducing backlogs, to foster accountability and transparency.
The ERC said it believes the most significant change would be the appointment of a chairperson and commissioners who are not only technically competent but also “possess proven managerial acumen, integrity and the ability to foster a collaborative and decisive internal culture.”
