 Okay, so you've heard a lot of things today including from that last fine panel about new technologies, distributed energy resources, digitalists and digital that and I'm telling you it's an exciting new world. Let's return for a minute to that wires and substations network and try to take a look at it in that in that context. We have with us a terrific panel that is going to wrap up and put a capstone on this great discussion today. Laura Mans has done a wires presentations on a number of past occasions. She's the director of the energy practice at Navigant and with a focus on transmission policy technology planning markets and operations. She's a former VP of the Cal ISO and she has worked in restructuring wholesale markets in various places including PJM and ERCOT. I want to especially thank her for being here because Navigant is a new member of wires. Stephen Harper comes to us from Intel regardless of what the slide says. I think we messed that one up I think. He's from Navigant too. I'm sorry. He's from Intel and thanks to the grid wise alliance and Ledeen Fremont, Stephen was able to join us today. He's the global director of environment energy sustainability policy at Intel and in that capacity is responsible for advising senior management and leading companies influencing efforts on a wide variety of topics. He is a University of Colorado and University of Chicago MBA and Stephen is in Washington apparently but I'm delighted to meet him for the first time today and I hope we see a lot more of him in the future. Our third panelist is Tim Ash. Tim is with AES and is going to talk a little bit about storage. He works on a lot of utility system issues and has quite a following I'm finding out. As he discusses batteries and other energy storage technologies I think you'll find his knowledge basically really incredible. He holds a master in public policy from the Harvard Kennedy School and a BA from the U.S. Air Force Academy so another great panel and we're going to try and get to this quickly. I am going to ask Steve Harper to go first because he has a train to catch or a dog to catch or something to catch and I think you need to be out of here in a half hour. Thanks Jim actually I got to be back at my desk at 4 to tell my CEO what our policy position should be on climate change in the new political environment and if I'm not there on time I not only will get fired but he'll probably decide for himself what our policy will be and that's always dangerous as you know if you're a staff person you don't want to let your CEO make decisions you got to tell him you know what the decision should be. Now I appreciate being here my job is an interesting one I cover lots of topics globally we make things as well as operate plants and sell products and so my team and I have a wide range of issues from getting chemicals approved so that we can keep factories open to making sure that our products meet energy efficiency specifications and one of the nice things about Intel over the last four or five years is we are producing a lot more variety of products and we're reaching out into a wide range of new markets including the utility market we've been in the utility market for many years but it's always been servers on the back end and now we're selling a lot of internet of things gateway devices usually in partnership with OEMs but I think most of the utilities that are here have been on the panels are in one way or another customer of ours. One of the things about five or six years ago and I was where I met not met but we met Ledeen started to work smart grid issues and I would go to these conferences and meetings and I always felt that the utility folks were slightly pissed off you know because the term smart grid makes it sound like the grid we've had all these years is done and so we started to use the term smarter grid which sounds less judgmental and I also was in a lot of conversations where people would say well gee you know it's great if the grid became more like the internet oh but by the way the internet gets hacked from time to time so maybe you know there's some negatives as well as positives but I think as a general proposition we feel very strongly that the increased IT content some of the internet of things related some of it just good old-fashioned chips has has been and will continue to be a positive in increasing the services the energy services provided by the grid to our society and I'm going to break down four five or six different areas where I think IT can make a difference. One is in the area of resilience notwithstanding what I said about the hacking issue. The products that our industry sells into the utility industry can help in major ways to improve predictive grade grid maintenance capabilities sensors and analytical software that I think allow operators grid operators transmission system operators to have a lot more visibility to problems that might arise and greater ability to reroute electricity. I know I'm in the what used to be PEPCO region in Montgomery County Maryland and the I used to refer to it as the Panama Electric Power Company because the grid would go down quite frequently the reliability has increased tremendously over the last few years some of which is because they've increased the amount of money spent on trimming trees but a lot of it is an increase in the investment in sensors and IT capability. So I think enhanced visualization ability to spot problems before they occur what we call edge intelligence of the ability to really see out to the very edge of the system and AMI. AMI is huge in terms of fault detection and being able to isolate and rectify problems. Storage is another area where IT can play a big, big role. I was at a conference recently in Atlanta where a partnership we have with General Electric we were working with and talking to a group of folks from various utilities. I think everybody knows about the use of water heaters as a potential storage device in the home but it turns out a lot of other appliances can be designed to be batteries and as part of the two-way transmission of information and power in the grid I think that's going to be something that you'll see more of in the future. The partnership we have is in developing specifications and standards such that there can be a real-time interchange of power from the home to the grid and back and the system can without need for intervention or monitoring on a real-time basis by human being readily see how much power is being transferred, what the quality of that power is, and set up a Bitcoin kind of environment where the accounting can be automated and payments can be automated where they're appropriate. So I think that's one area where IT can really play a big role and I think storage as most of us know or feel advances in storage and battery capabilities is one of the areas where technology in the electrical system, generation and distribution, transmission system has lagged. Renewables. Storage and renewables are inherently interrelated in the need to balance the grid on a second by second basis. I think you're seeing more and more micro grid development or at least pilot projects. Interestingly enough in our experience at least the area or the sector of society where the most work has been done on this area is in the Defense Department and the effort to make facilities, DOD facilities and bases more resilient and more independent of a broader grid. So I think the idea of distributed renewables at least in theory ties also with resilience. I think again at least in theory, a distributed system which can accomplish or accommodate a greater percentage of renewables from the market is inherently more resilient. Another area related to renewables that's very, very important is energy efficiency. One of the things that I've spent a lot of time on not so successfully is trying to convince Congress to pass legislation that would basically create an ownership right for utility customers over their electricity generation or electricity consumption information. With the idea, again we've seen this in a number of states where smart meters have been installed and various forms of ownership and or at least sharing of information with the customer has been tried. You see companies like Opower and a dozen or two dozen other companies arise that sell services to the consumer and in some cases, in many cases, the consumer's business that allows the consumer to take greater control over when they use energy and therefore greater control over their footprint and the cost, you know, what they pay in the monthly bill. So we think, you know, that there's a lot more innovation that can be spurred in our industry if we went to a system nationwide where people had real-time access to what their energy consumption is. Now, of course, a lot of people, me included probably, are not going to take advantage of the full functionality of those kinds of technologies, but I think there is enough known about the market to say that many people well and the advantages and benefits would be significant. There's been a huge amount of progress in building energy management systems and home energy management systems. Everything from CAD systems which allow the modeling of buildings before they're built in terms of their energy envelope, the modeling of renovations before they're commenced to real-time systems for managing the energy envelope of homes and buildings, or of systems. We have, for example, a partnership with Daiken, the Japanese chiller company, which is the largest manufacturer of refrigeration equipment in the world, where they are selling commercial chillers that have our sensors and our CPUs and our energy gateways or data gateways implemented on their devices such that if you own a lot of commercial real estate and you've got 2,000 chillers around the world that are sitting on warehouse roofs or building roofs that you can sit in your office wherever and monitor on a real-time basis how those machines are operating and you can set them and operate them to optimize for energy efficiency or pretty much any other parameter you want to. And importantly, they also are able to do predictive maintenance so they manage and monitor system operation in a way that they can spot signals which suggest that some aspect of the system is going to go down and repairs can be affected before the systems actually do go down. So I think that's a pretty exciting example and just one example of building energy management technologies that are out there. And then finally, just in the area of sustainability, a lot of the data that systems like this entail are lodged in the cloud. The cloud is a buzzword, big data is a buzzword. The cloud has been around in one form or another for many, many years. But one of the things that we're excited about because 98% of the servers in the world run on our chips is that the cloud is inherently more sustainable, more energy efficient and more carbon, less carbon intensive than non-cloud solutions, you know, the old habit of companies to operate their own data centers or offices to have a closet, you know, in the back corner of the office where you had a couple of computers which operated as servers very inefficiently. So the move of all this big data into the cloud is in and of itself a benefit to society. And then finally, two last thoughts. Number one, another buzzword, smart cities. You know, everybody would love to see a systematic approach, a systems approach at the city level or at the national level of the implementation of these systems, whether it's a smart grid or other kinds of smart city technology. As one of the previous speakers mentioned, there are lots of reasons why these things tend to happen from the ground up rather than to top down in our society. And whether that's good or bad, I think it's probably good. It does mean that the rollout of these technologies in a systematic way is slower, but that also allows for learning. That also allows for later adopters to learn the lessons of early adopters and save time and money in adopting the technologies. And then the final thing is we believe very strongly in any number of these areas, you know, there's this trade off very often in society between technology and jobs. And you know, one of the big questions for economists today and for policymakers is where are the jobs going to come from that will replace the jobs that are being displaced by various forms of automation? We think in this area there actually is going to be job creation, net, net, net job creation rather than job destruction, we'll see over time. But we also think that if the systems are put in place to educate sufficient numbers of people that these will be high-pay jobs, these will be, you know, good, solid middle-class jobs, and I think given the economics of the country today, that in and of itself is a very positive attribute of these technologies. Thank you. Go backwards. There I am. I'm Laura Mans. I now work for Navigant. I've worked for just about everybody at some point. I've been a grid operator, a grid planner. I know how to do all that stuff that they said they didn't know how to do. And I've also worked on the distribution side. I got to the privilege of working at Viridity Energy for Audrey Zibelman before she went to New York. And my favorite quote from Byron Washam is that he has a Mensa grid in San Diego, which is my hometown. So we have a lot of fun. I have a question for the audience since it's late in the day, and I'm going to have a war story comparison with Rob Granlick because my flight's been canceled to go home. So I'm going to be on the next red eye. Who in this room would today just hop in a self-driving car? Who thinks maybe five to 10 years out they might give it a try? And who thinks, hmm, it ain't going to happen? All right. That's where we are with the power grid today. We have a lot of capabilities that are new. The utilities are sort of like, hmm, self-driving grid. I don't know. Now I'm a race car driver. I'm a driving instructor. I'm not getting in a self-driving car. But five to 10 years from now might do that. And so I just want to offer that advanced technology is going to need a couple of things. First of all, it's going to need the financial, the values aligned with what the grid can do. And we've had some conversations today, but I really think the whole rate making on the transmission piece and also the markets on how you couple the value of generation all the way to the value of load is going to be important. And then how you get that value of load, which we know how to do on the bulk grid, the transmission grid, all the way through to the distribution appliances and components is our future. And that's where we're headed. We're not close yet, but we I think have some, we have some possibilities. The other thing that I think we need to do is work past traditional. Now I spent last summer working on New York Rev as an engagement group facilitator for figuring out what is renewing the energy vision. And the things that we started to talk about were, how do you use non-wires alternatives? And to me, some of the funny things were some of the advanced technologies like our friends at SmartWires, they are a transmission non-wires alternative. And so you start thinking about, well, what does this really mean? What it means is that we want to use every tool in our toolbox to use the assets that we have in a wonderful way. I've also been working lately on FERC's Brightline test and distributed energy. And there are the seven-factor tests. And I always tell people, we'll just go to the seven-factor test. Well, the seven-factor test says, and power only flows in one direction. Well, now power's flowing back in the other direction. And so we are in this cloud, this hopefully conundrum that turns into something that modifies our thinking and really transforms our thinking. So it's a paradigm shift. And so the things that we are taking out of advanced technology, and it's funny to me because when I was a grid operator, a lot of our technology to operate the power grid came out of the space program. We are not innovators necessarily in our bones in the power utility industry, but we're really good at adapting other technologies into our own grid. And so what I see now are the cars, I think self-driving cars are the analogy that I want to use. All this control, all this self-control, self-healing, all of that is probably where we're going to head. I've done nothing to talk about what Navigant sent me here to talk about, but hopefully this is more interesting. So customers, I'm not even going to read off the slides. I mean, this is essentially it, is that customers are going to use the grid in a way that's completely different, it's completely new, and it's changing the way we think about the grid. Incumbent utilities are going to have to adapt. They're going to have to figure out how do you deal with power coming back on the grid? How do we solve the safety issues and deal with that? The other thing that I think is a significant paradigm shift is that we are trying to keep the grid reliable. We're trying to do all the traditional planning we've done. We're trying to bake in now what we call hardening. So it's protecting from cyber attacks. It's protecting from weather like Hurricane Sandy. The other thing that is transformational is we're building in resiliency. We go, all right, what if it does all come apart? How quickly can we put this back together? And that's a new way of thinking about the grid. The grid is something that can be quickly reassembled. There's definitely a world for microgrids. I'm really glad that everyone else in this room had their last blackout in 2003. Mine was in 2011 in San Diego, and we were in the dark. One of the nice things about that San Diego blackout is that we have the Navy, thank you to the Navy, because they can backfeed into the power grid and put San Diego back up. And also the microgrid at UC San Diego, which has self-starting capability. And they can put the grid in San Diego back up. So where we are is kind of the beginning of the change. We have a long line out to the desert, Borego. I don't know if you've ever been out to Palm Springs, but it's sort of like out there past San Diego. You have to go over these huge mountains to get out there. People are saying, it's not worth it to build another transmission line. Let's build a microgrid, let's stand that up. Let's tap into some of the local supply and solar power and things. So we're in the beginning of a change. I'll offer that the new technologies that are gonna get us there are the things that provide situational awareness. We know things now that we never knew before. They have fancy stuff called hardware in the loop. And that means there's a device sitting out on the grid that's telling you in real time what's happening in the system. A totally different way of planning than when I was a grid operator, as you can imagine. So we have all this data, now we have to do something with the data. So that's the next challenge is how do we process all this information coming in? Where are the new computers? Where are the new algorithms? Where are the fast ways to manage big data? I'm gonna offer that me as a 60 hertz gal. I don't have that answer, but I know it has to be answered. And so once we have the awareness, once we have the processing, then we have the control. That's the grid of the future. And so my slide here, which will include smart wires, is to talk about these technologies. Once you have the awareness, the analysis, you can then start feeding these devices and other devices to essentially have the grid start organizing itself. And so that to me is the self-driving car. You sit there, you enjoy your cold beer, you enjoy your hot coffee, and the grid is just doing its thing because you have these devices that are able to talk to the data. I think I'm supposed to mention the cloud of information. I don't know what that is exactly. But it's the big data. Where the big data lives. So, and in the end of it, it's all seamless. So that's the other thing. When I was first starting my career, we talked about a grid that went all the way through, and this was back in the 80s, and it was really innovative. But here we are, and the grid really is all the way connected and talking and on its way. So I wish you a smart, healthy, self-driving grid. Thank you. All right, I've frightened everyone away from the podium. All right, I am Tim Ash. I'm a Market Director with AS Energy Storage. We're headquartered just across the river in Arlington, Virginia. And I believe I am the last presenter for the day. So I promise to not keep you any longer from that hot coffee or cold beverage or your family or plane ride. Scotch and cigars. So really one simple message, I guess, as we wrap up the day from the perspective of an energy storage provider, is that, one, energy storage is a transmission technology. Two, energy storage can and should be treated as transmission assets under current regulatory regimes. And three, deploying energy storage as transmission will improve resiliency of the transmission grid and reduce costs. So if you remember that tomorrow or even 30 minutes from now while you're sipping Scotch and having a cigar, you succeeded. So to be clear, AS Energy Storage, when we talk about energy storage, I'm talking about batteries on the grid. Lots of batteries, the same batteries that are in your electric vehicle or in your friend's electric vehicle, aggregated into a big building. So lots of batteries in a big building at scales that are similar to a gas plant. Why energy storage? Why is it happening now? First, there's a trend to electrify everything. Electricity is becoming the motive force in our economy in more and more ways. If you look at the deployment of electric vehicles and the use of electricity for transportation, that's really the next big wave. So what's happening on the load side is you're getting more unpredictability on load. At the same time, renewables are accelerating. Regardless of where policy goes, the economics are taking over. Renewables are here with us. They will continue to grow and grow quickly. So now it's more unpredictable on the generation side. Energy storage is increasingly the solution because essentially by putting energy storage into the grid, you give it the flexibility it needs to live in that new age. The reason it's happening now is because energy storage technology has matured. It's proven in terms of performance, the cost of decline rapidly in large part because of the scale you're getting from all those lithium ion batteries in your cell phones and all the lithium ion batteries in your cars and in your airplanes and everywhere else. So it's here now and you're really at the tipping point. You'll see exponential growth in the near future. And the last point is just why? Why is energy storage helpful in the transmission network? And we recently did some work with IHS looking at a range of different distribution networks, everything from food to natural gas to communications to transportation. And bottom line is storage in the network makes it more resilient, makes it more responsive, makes it more efficient. Storage in any network delivers those capabilities. It's the same if you're delivering electrons or delivering frozen fish. If you compare the amount of energy storage that's in our transmission and distribution networks today compared to other networks, you see that little dot on the bottom left-hand side of this page. You have the equivalent of about 20 minutes worth of storage if you look at the entire energy storage system in the United States. Most of that is pump hydro storage that was built back in the 50s and 60s to support nuclear as it came online. Very little of that is battery-based energy storage like we're deploying or compressed air or the many other technologies that are out there. But again, the tool is there, it's mature, it's growing quickly, and it will increasingly be seen as and deployed as a transmission asset. Happy to have a much longer conversation as it's helpful. Again, we're just across the river. Thank you very much and I hope you enjoyed the day. Well, I hope you have a half hour of questions for Tim. Actually, we're past our time. I want to appreciate your patience. Jim Lucere is still here. Sugandar is still here. If you have questions for them, you're certainly welcome to raise them. But it's been, I think, a very fruitful day from my perspective. Any questions for Tim? Yes. Oh, here, let's use the mic. All right, when you talk about battery, is it basically for industrial or is it also include residential? So energy storage is being deployed kind of across the network. AES as an electric power company, our focus has really been on deploying storage as a grid resource, so in the transmission network or in the distribution networks. There are other companies focused on residential energy storage like a STEM or Tesla. You're seeing increasingly commercial applications as well. But what we really focus on and where we've been deploying storage is within the electric power grid itself. Jim. Well, can you, yeah, Tim, a fascinating presentation and I drive by your building whenever I go through Arlington, so I appreciate the local focus on this. Question one, what sort of storage projects would you be working on within the states and where does the United States stand with respect to other countries as far as deployment of storage goes? Yeah, those are good questions. The primary market for energy storage in the US has been California to date. They have a mandate to deploy, I think it's around 1,300 megawatts of energy storage by I think it's 2020 or 2021. So that's really been the largest market in the US. The PGM interconnection has been probably the second largest where energy storage has been deployed as a frequency regulation resource, primarily as merchant resources in that market. Next up, I think will be Massachusetts. They have a state mandate for energy storage that should come online, I believe, by July of this year. But several other states are looking at it to include Maryland and a few others. In terms of where the US stands compared to others, if you look at actual deployments, the US is the largest market so far for grid-scale energy storage resources, likely to continue to be so, mainly just because the size of the electric power network here in the US lends itself to that. And again, California in particular with their mandate has really kind of sparked, that and PGM have really sparked growth in the US. Yes, ma'am. I'm just curious. We had the electric car about the mid-1800s. Before the combustion engine. And in a recently written autobiography, Vick Cahn and Doyle, he built an all-electric house in the mid-1800s, relying on batteries. So I'm wondering, where were we then in comparison to where we're going today and how might we have gotten there sooner? Yeah, that's a great question. Our CTO actually wrote an article recently as well, which cited some notes from Thomas Edison, where it was, I think maybe from Pearl Street Station, but essentially they had batteries in the network then and we're thinking about the use of energy storage and its flexibility at the very beginning of the growth of the electric power distribution transmission grids as well. What's changed now and kind of where we stand today is really the technology has matured in terms of both performance and price, global supply chain. So from a commercial perspective, at least battery-based energy storage in our view has matured in the past few years. So I think that's allowing it to grow. And then second is just the grid now, as it's more interconnected, as you have more variability, it looks a little bit different and so the need for that flexibility is growing now as well. I'm not sure how we could have sped it up before now, but we certainly hope to speed it up going forward. I think some slight tweaks to existing market rules and more experience among utilities and grid operators with storage will make this, make energy storage really take off in the near future. Yes. Thanks, hi. Pascha ACEEEEEE. I had a question actually for Mr. Lucier. You had made a great comment about fortune cookies I wanted to touch on. Talked about the fortune cookie slips and it was a comical note about how the somewhat arbitrary nature of the proxy groups are forming the DCF analysis by FERC. And my question was, I think there's kind of a serious element to it as well, which is that those that are excluded from the proxy groups tend to be higher ROE. So my question is, wouldn't it kind of solve some of the problems if we were to reconsider how we form those proxy groups and include those outliers that are excluded from the groups that tend to have the higher ROEs and therefore bring in more investment that we were hoping for? Well, I have a good friend in the power business, actually a lobbyist for many of the major utility companies and he has a great description of what the proxy group is like. He calls it a knife fight. It's the toughest night fight in the industry because you're trying to figure out not only who goes in the proxy group, but who comes out of the proxy group. And it becomes essentially an arbitrary political process. My father worked in Capitol Hill for 30 years and told me that the thing he learned about, the thing he learned from working in the US Senate for three decades was that decisions get made first and rationalized afterward. I mean, if you look at Christie's wonderful diagram here showing the target rate that FERC's model generates and the reality is that regulators know what rates are necessary most of the time to actually get something built. So the question is, how do you rationalize a decision and make sure that you've got at least some market basis? You know, I think you could streamline the system in any number of ways. Either go for more rapid or widespread application of formula rates. Have some sort of federal equivalent of a formula rate just making up as I go along here. You know, other states have looked at rates that reset periodically. The opportunity that FERC has is, you know, their response to the DC Circuit vacator of Order 531 where, you know, FERC has asked to justify its decision to choose something that is in the midpoint of the upper range. You know, why did they do that? At least with the two-stage DCF calculation they were taking some of the uncertainty out of the process. So I think we've got an opportunity now for people to put on their hats and try to figure out what is gonna be the more streamlined, predictable, less random type of process. And I'm not sure I have a good answer, but I think that the nature of the problem is very, very apparent that these decisions are protracted, they're complicated, they're opaque and they get litigated forever and ever and ever and ever. And none of these are constructive developments. Yeah, I would add to that that the WIRE's group sent a petition to FERC in 2013 asking for greater predictability in the setting of ROEs and what we got as a result was Order 531 or Opinion 531, which seemed like a big improvement at the time. But as our speakers suggested today, there is still a lot of unpredictability in the system and regulators sort of understand that intuitively. I remember back in my days on the staff at the commission we used to joke about the rate of return dartboard and that they probably got about the same results. But I appreciate Jim's observations and to Christie's as well. Any other questions today? Okay, yes, Jenny. From investor perspective, they look for certainty, they look for kind of, you know, mitigate the risk and the policy makers are actually stirring up all of the dust and create all kinds of uncertainty. So as a former regulator, now the council and founder for the WIRE's group, how do you kind of know balance that and try to mitigate the risk and have the investor have the confidence actually from the capital market, really put money in this investment and projects. It's the most complicated industry, most risk, who pays for it and how they're going to pay it and you know, how much actually risk premium you have to build into and let the regulator understand it. All of the questions are big question mark and you know, before you have the answer, don't expect investor really jumping into it. I'm sorry to tell you. Well, investors have in fact found transmission to be a good investment but it does tie up a lot of capital for a long period of time. You have to have a strong stomach, you know, to get into transmission investment. I think what Tim has suggested that there are ways that you can make an impact on the system and improve the system with what we call non-wire technologies, although they're not really non-wire, they're wire related, I guess a better way to put it. But yeah, one of the distinguishing characteristics of being a former chairman is that you have absolutely no say as to how regulators minimize risk other than taking an association like wires or the Electric Manufacturers Association or the Grid-Wise Alliance and trying to present them with the best possible ideas. And that's not just for FERC. State regulators are involved in this in a major way and our friends across the street in Congress are going to be bigger and bigger players if they take infrastructure seriously. But they're the decision makers and that's what today's meeting is all about. You have to recognize the risk and you have to develop a strategy for addressing it. And I know that you've been an observer of this industry for a while and a lot of the problems like who pays for transmission, how do costs get allocated, how do we overcome some of these siting problems, and how do we implement incentives and a more streamlined way of setting ROEs. All of those issues are still around. They were around 10 years ago and they're still around. And we're working on it. That's all I can tell you. Let me just close with a couple of remarks. And then I just want to express my thanks to everybody here for sticking it out all day. I think it's been very productive from my standpoint. I will say that this entire session, morning and afternoon, has been videotaped and we will post this on our website. And I think maybe EASI will post it as well. And the PowerPoints will be available. You can sit through this again and I strongly suggest that if our individual panelists raise questions that you want answered that you contact them directly because they're very smart people. There are a few takeaways at least that I have. Certainly somebody made the comment that linear infrastructure is always controversial. And we know that inherently and we tried not to spend a whole lot of time today talking about how complicated and sometimes dysfunctional the regulatory system is because there are a lot of cooks in the kitchen when it comes to approving a transmission, permitting transmission. And a lot of that is just baked in the cake. I don't think that Congress is going to rejigger the allocation of jurisdictional responsibilities to regulate the transmission system. We're just gonna have to find ways to make it better and to do what Jenny suggested which is to minimize risk. I think you heard that the future is electric. A lot of people and Tim made that point quite bluntly. The penetration of electricity, electric energy into the economy, into the way we live, into the way we manufacture things, how we transport things is going to be greater in the years to come. That to me places a premium on investment and infrastructure, particularly transmission but new technologies, distribution and generation. We just need to find a way to plan it all better so we aren't spending more money than we absolutely need to. Transmission I think is recognized by most of our panelists today as one major way that we can preserve optionality for the electric system. We can't see down the road real far. We can do scenario planning but we can certainly make sure that the grid is robust and capable of adapting to new technologies, to new economic realities as time goes on. So I think that it's a very critical infrastructure from that standpoint. I think what we heard today is that distributed energy resources and new technologies are a compliment to transmission and can improve the way the grid works and the grid is gonna be asked to do a whole lot of things in the future that it wasn't designed to do in 1960, in 1970 when it was built. And it's already really supporting bulk power markets that are continuing to evolve. I think we heard that paying attention to stakeholder needs. This is probably the most overstakeholder industry I can think of. I can't imagine if FERC could have more stakeholder meetings or states or RTOs could have more stakeholder meetings but we're gonna have to do more of that and we're gonna have to ensure that the public has an understanding of what the benefits to them will be in the future. So it's kind of a day at a time but I think there's a lot of room here for recognizing the direction this is heading in. And the fact that renewable energy, more diverse energy resources are gonna be critical and are going to have to be accommodated by the grid. So it's worth talking about the things we brought up today other than simply griping about regulation. We've talked about the importance of investment to labor. We've talked about new technology, certainly spent a lot of time on that, that international trade, particularly in North America, certainly including Canada now but potentially Mexico is going to be a real job creator and a boon to the economy. And we talked about markets, sort of. We don't talk about that enough. Transmission supports bulk power markets and bulk power markets is where we're achieving enormous savings now over what we had in the past. So there's a lot of value to deliver and I hope you carry that message. I just wanted to close by saying thank you to Carol Werner and her folks, Amari Laport and Carol's right over here. This is the EESI folks that done a great job to Julie Russell over here who backs me up on everything at Wires and Cassidy who unfortunately had to go back to the office and pay attention to some other clients of mine. So thank you all for being here.