The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) convened a meeting to discuss the implications of Order 1920, which has sparked significant controversy regarding regional transmission planning and cost allocation rules. The order has faced strong opposition from the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) and numerous states, with 19 states, including Alabama, Florida, and South Carolina, filing appeals in federal court.

During the meeting, FERC Chairman Phillips defended Order 1920, asserting that it adheres to the principle of cost causation, which mandates that costs should be allocated in accordance with the benefits received. He highlighted a letter from 33 bipartisan commissioners praising the order, claiming it reflects a broad consensus on the need for expanded grid reliability and affordability.

However, dissenting voices within the commission raised concerns about the order's fairness and its alignment with the Federal Power Act. Commissioner Christie expressed skepticism, arguing that the order undermines consumer protection by diminishing the role of state regulators, who are seen as essential advocates for consumer interests. He emphasized that the final rule diverged significantly from the proposed rule, which had promised a more substantial role for states in the regulatory process.

The discussions underscored a deep divide within the commission and among state regulators regarding the balance of power in energy regulation and the potential impact on consumers. As the debate continues, the implications of Order 1920 remain a focal point for stakeholders in the energy sector, with ongoing legal challenges likely to shape the future of energy policy in the United States.