Commissioner James Danly Statement
October 21, 2021
Docket No. ER10-2906-014

I concur with the result and holding of this order.  I write separately to highlight that the Independent Market Monitor’s concerns in this case would properly be rejected even if the Commission had not recently ordered PJM to adopt a unit-specific review of all offers in the capacity market.[1]  I opposed unit-specific review of all offers because doing so will likely result in over-mitigation.[2]  In this order, the Commission notes its adoption of unit-specific review as a recent mitigation change in PJM.[3]  Unit-specific review is not required to adequately mitigate market power concerns, and today’s order in no way indicates otherwise.

For these reasons, I respectfully concur.


[1] See Indep. Mkt. Monitor for PJM v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., 176 FERC ¶ 61,137 (2021).

[2] See id. (Danly, Comm’r, dissenting).

[3] See Morgan Stanley Capital Grp. Inc., 177 FERC ¶ 61,026, at P 28 (2021).

Contact Information

This page was last updated on October 21, 2021