Below are brief summaries of the agenda items for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's April 16, 2020 meeting, pursuant to the agenda as issued on April 9, 2020. Agenda items E-2, E-3, E-13, E-16, and C-8 have not been summarized due to omission from the agenda.
In this issue…
- Electric Items
- Hydro Items
- Certificate Items
Electric
E-1 – Public Utility Transmission Rate Changes to Address Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes (Docket No. RM19-5-001). On November 21, 2019, the Commission issued a final rule titled "Public Utility Transmission Rate Changes to Address Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes" (Order No. 864). Order No. 864 requires public utility transmission providers with formula rates pursuant to an Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT), a transmission owner tariff, or rate schedule, to modify such formula rates to account for impacts of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Generally, such formula rates must include a mechanism to account for any excess or deficient accumulated deferred income taxes in the rate bases of affected public utilities. Numerous entities requested rehearing and or clarification of Order No. 864. Agenda item E-1 may be an order on the requests for rehearing and clarification of Order No. 864.
E-2 – Omitted
E-3 – Omitted
E-4 – Calpine Corporation, Dynegy Inc., Eastern Generation, LLC, Homer City Generation, L.P., NRG Power Marketing LLC, GenOn Energy Management, LLC, Carroll County Energy LLC, C.P. Crane LLC, Essential Power, LLC, Essential Power OPP, LLC, Essential Power Rock Springs, LLC, Lakewood Cogeneration, L.P., GDF SUEZ Energy Marketing NA, Inc., Oregon Clean Energy, LLC and Panda Power Generation Infrastructure Fund, LLC v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Docket No. EL16-49-001); PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Docket Nos. EL18-178-001, ER18-1314-002 (Consolidated)). On June 29, 2018, the Commission issued an order addressing two underlying proceedings that were initiated due to increasing out of market support or state subsidies that were having a suppressive effect on the price of capacity procured by PJM Interconnection L.L.C. (PJM) through its Reliability Pricing Model (RPM) capacity market (June Order). In the first underlying proceeding, Calpine Corporation (Calpine) and other generation entities filed a complaint against PJM pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA) alleging that the Minimum Offer Pricing Rule (MOPR) in PJM's OATT was unjust and unreasonable because it did not account for the impact on the RPM of existing resources receiving out of market subsidies. In the second underlying proceeding, PJM, pursuant to section 205 of the FPA filed proposed revisions to its OATT that included two alternate proposals to address the suppressive effects of out of market support for certain resources. The June Order rejected PJM's alternate proposals, found PJM's OATT unjust and unreasonable, granted Calpine's complaint in part, and also initiated a proceeding under section 206 of the FPA in a new docket because the Commission could not make a final determination regarding the just and reasonable replacement rate. On July 30, 2018, numerous entities requested rehearing of the June Order. Agenda item E-4 may be an order on the requests for rehearing of the June Order.
E-5 – Calpine Corporation, Dynegy Inc., Eastern Generation, LLC, Homer City Generation, L.P., NRG Power Marketing LLC, GenOn Energy Management, LLC, Carroll County Energy LLC, C.P. Crane LLC, Essential Power, LLC, Essential Power OPP, LLC, Essential Power Rock Springs, LLC, Lakewood Cogeneration, L.P., GDF SUEZ Energy Marketing NA, Inc., Oregon Clean Energy, LLC and Panda Power Generation Infrastructure Fund, LLC v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Docket No. EL16-49-002); PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Docket No. EL18-178-002 (Consolidated)). On December 19, 2019, the Commission issued an order, inter alia, directing PJM to submit a replacement rate that retains PJM's current review of new natural gas-fired resources under the MOPR and extends the MOPR to include both new and existing resources, internal and external, that receive, or are entitled to receive, certain out of market payments, with certain exemptions (December Order). In January 2020, numerous entities requested rehearing and clarification of the December Order. Agenda item E-5 may be an order on the requests for rehearing and clarification of the December order.
E-6 – CPV Power Holdings, L.P., Calpine Corporation and Eastern Generation, LLC v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Docket No. EL18-169-000). On May 31, 2018, pursuant to sections 206 and 306 of the FPA, CPV Power Holdings, L.P., Calpine, and Eastern Generation, LLC filed a complaint against PJM (CPV Complaint), requesting that the Commission protect the RPM capacity market from below-cost offers for resources receiving out of market or state subsidies. The complaint, inter alia, requests that the Commission adopt a "Clean Minimum Offer Pricing Rule" that is applicable to all subsidized resources and without categorical exemptions such as those found in PJM's "MOPR-Ex" proposal. Agenda item E-6 may be an order on the CPV Complaint.
E-7 – Consumers Energy Company v. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. and Michigan Electric Transmission Company, LLC (Docket No. EL19-59-000). On April 3, 2019, pursuant to sections 201 and 206 of the FPA, Consumers Energy Company (Consumers) filed a complaint against Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO) and Michigan Electric Transmission Company, LLC asking the Commission to conclude that MISO cannot approve or mandate the construction of a local electric distribution facility as part of MISO's 2018 Transmission Expansion Plan (MTEP18). Consumers' complaint, inter alia, asks FERC to determine that the proposed Morenci Interconnection project is not a transmission project, and to require MISO to remove the project from MTEP18. Agenda item E-7 may be an order on Consumers' complaint.
E-8 – City and County of San Francisco v. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (Docket No. EL19-38-000). On January 28, 2019, pursuant to sections 206, 306, and 309 of the FPA, the City and County of San Francisco (San Francisco) filed a complaint against Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) alleging that PG&E unreasonably denied service to San Francisco under its Wholesale Distribution Tariff (WDT) and that PG&E is implementing the WDT in an unjust, unreasonable, and unduly discriminatory manner. San Francisco's complaint asks that Commission direct PG&E to comply with the WDT by offering San Francisco secondary and primary-plus wholesale distribution service, direct PG&E to refund San Francisco consistent with filed rates, and take any other actions that the Commission deems necessary to address PG&E's WDT violations. Agenda item E-8 may be an order on San Francisco's complaint against PG&E.
E-9 – Wilderness Line Holdings, LLC (Docket No. ER20-511-002). On February 19, 2020, pursuant to section 205 of the FPA, Wilderness Line Holdings, LLC (Wilderness Line) filed an OATT in anticipation of acquiring a co-tenancy ownership interest in a 9-mile, 230 kV radial transmission line located in Kern County, California from Sky River LLC. Agenda item E-9 may be an order pertaining to the Wilderness Line OATT.
E-10 – Wilderness Line Holdings, LLC (Docket Nos. ER20-519-000, TS20-2-000). On December 4, 2019, Wilderness Line requested that the Commission grant it waivers of the Standards of Conduct and the requirements of Order Nos. 889 and 1000, stating that it qualifies for such waivers because it will own and operate limited and discrete transmission facilities and that it meets the definition of a small public utility. Agenda item E10 may be an order on Wilderness Line's request.
E-11 – Entergy Arkansas, Inc. (Docket No. ER19-211-001). On September 30, 2019, the Commission issued an order accepting a Joint Ownership and Operating Agreement filed by Entergy Services, LLC (Entergy Services) that identifies the terms and conditions pursuant to which certain affiliated Entergy operating companies will jointly own undivided interests in two transmission control centers after their acquisition and pursuant to which Entergy Services will continue to provide certain operational and maintenance services to the affiliated Entergy operating companies (September Ownership Agreement Order). On October 30, 2019, the Louisiana Public Service Commission requested rehearing of the September Ownership Agreement Order. On the same date, the Arkansas Public Service Commission, Mississippi Public Service Commission, and Mississippi Public Utilities Staff requested clarification, or in the alternative, rehearing of the September Ownership Agreement Order. Agenda item E-11 may be an order on the requests for rehearing and clarification of the September Ownership Agreement Order.
E-12 – Entergy Services, LLC, Entergy Arkansas, Inc., Entergy Louisiana, LLC, Entergy Mississippi, Inc., Entergy New Orleans, LLC, and Entergy Texas, Inc. (Docket No. EC19-18-001). On September 30, 2019, the Commission issued an order authorizing the transfer of undivided ownership interests in two transmission control centers from Entergy Services to various Entergy operating companies which include Entergy Arkansas, Inc., Entergy Louisiana, LLC, Entergy Mississippi, Inc., Entergy New Orleans, LLC, and Entergy Texas, Inc. (September Order). On October 30, 2019, the Louisiana Public Service Commission requested rehearing of the September Order. On the same date, the Arkansas Public Service Commission, Mississippi Public Service Commission, and Mississippi Public Utilities Staff requested clarification and rehearing of the September Order. Agenda item E-12 may be an order on the requests for rehearing and clarification of the September Order.
E-13 – Omitted
E-14 – Potomac Economics, Ltd. v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Docket No. EL17-62-000). On April 6, 2017, pursuant to sections 206 and 306 of the FPA, Potomac Economics, Ltd. (Potomac Economics) filed a complaint against PJM, asking the Commission to direct PJM to revise its OATT and Reliability Assurance Agreement Among Load-Serving Entities in the PJM Region to eliminate the existing requirement that resources located external to PJM seeking to offer as Capacity Performance Resources in PJM be pseudo-tied into PJM. Agenda item E-14 may be an order on Potomac Economics' complaint.
E-15 – Radford's Run Wind Farm, LLC v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Docket No. EL18-183-000). On June 26, 2018, Radford's Run Wind Farm LLC (Radford's Run) filed a complaint pursuant to FPA section 206 asking the Commission to find that Radford's Run is entitled to 279 MW of Incremental Capacity Transfer Rights (ICTRs) into the Commonwealth Edison Company (ComEd) Locational Deliverability Area beginning with the 2020/2021 Delivery Year. Agenda item E-15 may be an order on Radford's Run's complaint.
E-16 – Omitted
E-17 – PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Delaware Public Service Commission and Maryland Public Service Commission v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. and Certain Transmission Owners Designated under CTOA RS FERC No. 42 (Docket Nos. ER15-2563-002, EL15-95-002). On August 28, 2015, pursuant to section 205 of the FPA, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM), in accordance with Schedule 12 of the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff (Tariff) and section 1.6 of Schedule 6 of the Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of PJM (Operating Agreement), filed amendments to Schedule 12-Appendix A of the PJM Tarff. Also on August 28, 2015, the Maryland Public Service Commission (Maryland Commission) and the Delaware Public Service Commission (Delaware Commission), pursuant to section 206 of the FPA, filed a complaint that the use of a solution-based distribution factor (DFAX) method to allocate the costs of certain transmission projects that were approved through the PJM Regional Transmission Expansion Planning (RTEP) process is unjust, unreasonable, and unduly discriminatory and preferential State Commission Complaint or Complaint. On April 22, 2016, the Commission issued an order denying the complaint and accepting PJM's proposed cost responsibility assignments. On May 23, 2016, parties filed requests for rehearing of the Commission's April 22 order. Agenda item E-17 may be an order on the requests for rehearing of the Commission's order.
E-18 – PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Docket No. ER19-105-004). On October 12, 2018, as amended on October 26, 2018, pursuant to section 205 of the FPA, PJM filed its quadrennial revision of its Variable Resource Requirement (VRR) Curve used in the Reliability Pricing Model (RPM). On April 15, 2019, the Commission issued an order accepting the proposed VRR Curve revisions, effective January 17, 2019. On May 15, 2019, parties filed requests for rehearing of the Commission's April 15 order. Agenda item E-18 may be an order on the requests for rehearing of the Commission's order.
E-19 – Delmarva Power & Light Company and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Docket No. ER19-6-003). On October 1, 2018, as amended on November 29, 2018 and February 27, 2019, PJM filed on behalf of Commonwealth Edison Company, Delmarva Power & Light Company (Delmarva), Potomac Electric Power Company, Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, and Atlantic City Electric Company, revised tariff records pursuant section 205 of the FPA to revise their respective formula transmission rates to provide a mechanism to refund or recover certain deferred income tax excesses and deficiencies on an ongoing basis. On April 26, 2019, the Commission issued an order accepting the formula rate filing and suspending them for a nominal period of time, subject to refund, and setting the filings for hearing and settlement judge procedures. On May 28, 2019, Delmarva filed a request for clarification, or, in the alternative, request for rehearing of the Commission's April 26 order. Agenda item E-19 may be an order on Delmarva's request.
E-20 – New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (Docket No. ER20-922-000). On January 20, 2020, New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO) submitted a request for a temporary waiver of the restrictions of the definition of "Public Power Entity" in the NYISO services tariff to allow NYISO to continue its current practice of providing unsecured credit in the amount of up to $1 million to government entities that are not "municipally owned electric systems" irrespective of whether they own or control distribution facilities and provide electric service. Agenda item E-20 may be an order on NYISO waiver request.
ER-21 – Portland General Electric Company (Docket No. ER19-1927-002). On May 22, 2019, as amended on July 8, 2019, Portland General Electric Company (Portland General) submitted proposed revisions to its Open Access Transmission Tariff in compliance with the requirements of Order Nos. 845 and 845-A, which amended the Commission's pro forma Large Generator Interconnection Agreement (LGIA) and pro forma Large Generator Interconnection Procedures (LGIP). On November 22, 2019, the Commission issued an order finding Portland General's compliance filing partially complied with the requirements of Order Nos. 845 and 854-A, and directed Portland General to submit a further compliance filing. On January 21, 2020, Portland General submitted a further compliance filing in response to the Commission's directive. Agenda item E-21 may be an order on Portland General's January 21 compliance filing.
E-22 – Duke Energy Progress, LLC (Docket No. ER09-1165-000). On May 15, 2019, Duke Energy Progress, LLC (Duke Energy) submitted an information filing to update its annual transmission revenue requirement pursuant to the protocols of its formula transmission rate. On September 30, 2019, North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation (NCEMC) submitted a Formal Challenge pursuant to section 3.b of DEP's formula transmission rate protocols. Agenda item E-22 may be an order on NCEMC's Formal Challenge.
E-23 – Golden Spread Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Docket No. ER19-1900-002). On May 20, 2019, as amended on July 11, 2019 and clarified on July 25, 2019, Golden Spread Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Golden Spread) submitted proposed revisions to its Open Access Transmission Tariff in compliance with the requirements of Order Nos. 845 and 845-A. On November 22, 2019, the Commission issued an order finding Golden Spread's compliance filing partially complied with the requirements of Order Nos. 845 and 854-A, and directed Golden Spread to submit a further compliance filing. On January 21, 2020, Golden Spread submitted a further compliance filing in response to the Commission's directive. Agenda item E-23 may be an order on Golden Spread's January 21 compliance filing.
E-24 – ISO New England Inc. (Docket No. ER19-470-003). On December 3, 2018, ISO New England Inc. (ISONE), joined by the New England Power Pool (NEPOOL) Participants Committee, submitted proposed revisions to the Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT) and Market Rule 1, sections II and III, respectively, of the ISO-NE Transmission, Markets and Services Tariff in compliance with the requirements of Order No. 841 regarding participation by storage resources. On November 22, 2019, the Commission issued an order accepting the December 3 filing, with a limited number of revisions subject to a further compliance filing. On December 23, 2019, ISO-NE submitted a request for rehearing of the Commission's November 11 order. Agenda item E-24 may be an order on the request for rehearing.
E-25 – Tampa Electric Company (Docket No. ER19-1920-002). On May 20, 2019, as amended on July 11, 2019 and clarified on July 25, 2019, Tampa Electric Company (Tampa Electric) submitted proposed revisions to its Open Access Transmission Tariff in compliance with the requirements of Order Nos. 845 and 845-A. On November 22, 2019, the Commission issued an order finding Tampa Electric's compliance filing partially complied with the requirements of Order Nos. 845 and 854-A, and directed Tampa Electric to submit a further compliance filing. On December 12, 2019, Tampa Electric submitted a further compliance filing in response to the Commission's directive. Agenda item E-25 may be an order on Tampa Electric's December 12 compliance filing.
E-26 – Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Entergy Corporation, Entergy Services Inc., Entergy Louisiana, LLC, Entergy Arkansas, Inc., Entergy Mississippi, Inc., Entergy New Orleans, Inc., Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, L.L.C., and Entergy Texas, Inc. Entergy Services, Inc. (Docket Nos. EL10-65-006, ER142085-002, ER11-3658-002, ER12-1920-002, ER13-1595-002). On March 15, 2018, the Commission issued Opinion No. 560 affirming the Initial Decision in a complaint brought by the Louisiana Public Service Commission (LPSC) against the above-named Entergy companies (Entergy) regarding the following issues: (1) whether the Sale/Leaseback of 9.3 percent of the Waterford 3 nuclear plant (Waterford 3 Sale/Leaseback) is a capital lease, whether Entergy has properly accounted for the Waterford 3 Sale/Leaseback Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes (ADIT) and whether Entergy should include the Waterford 3 Sale/Leaseback ADIT in the bandwidth formula; (2) whether Entergy should include interruptible load in the fifth and sixth annual bandwidth calculations; and (3) whether Entergy properly accounted for its Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFUDC) for the River Bend nuclear facility in the bandwidth formula. On April 16, 2018, the LPSC filed a request for rehearing of Opinion No. 560. Agenda item E-26 may be an order regarding LPSC's request for rehearing of Opinion No. 560.
Hydro
H-1 – Nevada Irrigation District (Docket No. P-2266-102). On April 15, 2011, Nevada Irrigation District (NID) filed an Application for New Major License for the existing Yuba-Bear Project located in Nevada and California. On May 17, 2013, the Commission issued the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS), which furnished the recommendation of licensing the project with staff modifications and additional measures to mitigate potential environmental impacts. On December 19, 2014, the Commission issued the Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS), generally re-affirming the Draft EIS by stating the project should be granted a new license contingent upon adhering to staff recommendations and certain additional measures recommended by relevant federal agencies. Agenda item H-1 may be an order on NID's application for a new license.
H-2 – Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Washington (Docket No. P-943-131). On October 16, 2019, Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan County, Washington (Chelan PUD) filed an Application for Approval of Contract for the Sale of Power under section 22 of the Federal Power Act (FPA) for the existing and licensed Rock Island Project No. 943 located in Washington. Chelan PUD seeks authorization to sell and deliver power beyond the expiration of its existing license on December 31, 2028 in order to honor an agreement with Avista Corporation through December 31, 2020. Agenda item H-2 may be an order on Chelan PUD's application.
H-3 – McMahan Hydroelectric, LLC (Docket No. P-14858-002). On March 3, 2017, McMahan Hydroelectric, LLC (McMahan Hydro) submitted an application pursuant to section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) for the Bynum Project located in North Carolina. On October 25, 2018, the Commission issued the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the project, finding that there would be no significant impact on the human environment, conditioned on adherence to mitigation measures. On September 20, 2019, NCDEQ issued its certification under section 401 of the CWA to McMahan Hydro, containing conditions necessary to comply with North Carolina state environmental and water quality laws. Simultaneously on September 20, 2019, the Commission issued an order approving McMahan Hydro's application and concluding that NCDEQ had waived its authority to issue a section 401 certification for the project, citing an agreement to a withdraw and refile. On October 18, 2019, NCDEQ filed a request for rehearing of the September 20 order, asserting that the Commission improperly determined that NCDEQ waived its authority under section 401 of the CWA to issue a water quality certification for the Bynum Project. Agenda item H-3 may be an order on NCDEQ's request for rehearing of the September 20 order.
Certificates
C-1 – Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC (Docket No. CP19-477-000). On June 3, 2019, Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC (Mountain Valley) submitted a Prior Notice Request for authorization to construct, operate, and maintain the Green Interconnect Project in order to interconnect with the system operated by Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC (Columbia Gas). Mountain Valley seeks to expand on the blanket certificate granted to the project in order to install a new metering and regulating station and associated facilities. On August 13, 2019, the Commission issued the Environmental Assessment Report, finding that the project would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Agenda item C-1 may be an order on Mountain Valley's prior notice request to construct new facilities.
C-2 – National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation (Docket No. CP20-2-000). On October 2, 2019, National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation (National Fuel) submitted an application, pursuant to sections 7(b) and 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), for a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN). The application seeks authorization to construct and operate certain facilities related to the Queen Storage Facility Project following the sale and abandonment on a portion of the project to a new purchaser. On November 18, 2019, the Commission issued the Environmental Assessment Report, finding that the project would warrant a categorical exclusion. Agenda item C2 may be an order on National Fuel's CPCN application.
C-3 – Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (Docket No. CP17-101-001). On March 27, 2017, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (Transco) submitted an application, pursuant to section 7(c) of the NGA, for authorization to construct and operate the proposed Northeast Supply Enhancement Project. The project would transport natural gas originating from shale plays in the Marcellus Shale to energy markets in New York City. On March 23, 2018, the Commission issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Draft EIS), find that the project would not constitute a major federal action affecting the quality of the human environment. On January 25, 2019, the Commission issued the Final EIS, re-affirming the Draft EIS by stating the project would not cause adverse environmental impacts if Transco complied with staff mitigation recommendations. On May 3, 2019, the Commission issued an order approving the application and granting the CPCN. On June 3, 2019, NY/NJ Baykeeper, Food & Water Watch – New Jersey, Central Jersey Safe Energy Coalition, the Princeton Manor Homeowners Association, and the Surfrider Foundation (collectively, Intervenors) filed a request for rehearing and rescission of the May 3 order, asserting that the Commission did not act in the public interest by withholding information from the Intervenors stemming from respective requests during the proceeding, particularly the environmental assessment component. Agenda item C-3 may be an order on the request for rehearing and rescission brought forward by the Intervenors.
C-4 – Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (Docket No. CP18-18-001). On December 12, 2018, the Commission issued an order approving the Gateway Expansion Project as brought forward by Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Company, LLC (Transco). On January 11, 2019, Food and Water Watch, Essex Greens Renewable Energy Campaign, the Borough of Roseland, Roseland Against the Compressor Station, New Jersey Sierra Club, and 350NJ (collectively, Petitioners) filed a request for rehearing of the December 12 order. Petitioners allege that the Commission erroneously granted approval to the project, stating that its necessity is overstated due to a number of other gas projects in the region that will provide sufficient supply and that the local and broad environmental impacts of the project were not appropriately considered in evaluating the project. Agenda item C-4 may be an order on the request for rehearing.
C-5 – PennEast Pipeline Company, LLC (Docket No. RP20-41-001). On September 10, 2019, the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued its decision relating to PennEast Pipeline Company, LLC (PennEast). In the decision, the Third Circuit ruled that the Eleventh Amendment to the US Constitution prohibits a natural gas certificate holder from bringing an action in federal court pursuant to section 7(h) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) to condemn property in which a state or agencies hold an interest. In rendering the decision, the Third Circuit did not account for any interpretation of the matter by the Commission and potential ripple effects to the natural gas industry, which has operated under the NGA to construct pipelines on state-owned land for nearly a century. On October 4, 2019, PennEast filed a petition for declaratory order seeking Commission action to assert that in delegating the eminent domain authority vested to the federal government, Congress exempted certificate holders from claims of state sovereign immunity. A number of parties filed comments and protests opposing the petition and aiming to uphold the Third Circuit decision. On January 30, 2020, the Commission issued an order granting the petition in part, and denying the petition in part. The Commission concluded that a critical component of the NGA, as proffered by Congress and employed throughout decades, was the power of eminent domain in order to acquire lands needed for projects that were authorized by the Commission. On February 26, 2020, the Delaware Riverkeeper Network (DRN) filed a request for rehearing of the January 30 order issued by the Commission. DRN asserts that the Commission has no role in the exercise of eminent domain nor in analyzing constitutional amendments, and accordingly, has issued an order beyond its purview. Agenda item C-5 may be an order on the request for rehearing and motion to vacate as brought forward by DRN.
C-6 – Adelphia Gateway, LLC (Docket No. CP18-46-002). On August 31, 2018, Adelphia Gateway, LLC (Adelphia) filed an application for certificates of public convenience and necessity (CPCNs) authorizing acquisition, construction, and operation of certain pipeline facilities and for related authorizations concerning its proposed Adelphia Gateway Project. The project would convert an existing mainline and construct two new pipeline laterals in Delaware and Pennsylvania. On December 20, 2019, the Commission issued an order approving the project. On January 21, 2020, the Delaware Riverkeeper Network (DRN) filed a request for rehearing and stay of certificate of the December 20 order, citing the lack of consideration given to climate change concerns and environmental impacts during the review process of the project. Namely, DRN states that the greenhouse gas emissions analysis conducted during the environmental assessment by the Commission inadequately incorporates that finding into the decision-making which ultimately led to approval of the project. Agenda item C-6 may be an order on the request for rehearing and stay of certificate as brought forward by DRN.
C-7 – Texas Eastern Transmission, LP (Docket No. CP19-104-001); Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC (Docket No. CP19-103-001). On July 8, 2019, the Commission issued an order retroactively approving the abandonment of Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC (Columbia)'s exchange service with Texas Eastern Transmission (Texas Eastern). On August 7, 2019, Washington Gas Light Company (WGL) filed a request for rehearing of the July 8 order. WGL asserts the order was unjustified due to the reliance it places on Columbia gas services and that its customers may incur rate increases or service degradation. Agenda item C-7 may be an order on the request for rehearing by WGL.
C-8 – Omitted
C-9 – Freeport LNG Development, L.P. (Docket No. CP14-57-000). On January 24, 2014, Freeport LNG Development, L.P. (FLNG) filed an application for authorization, pursuant to section 3 of the NGA, to integrate and operate a boil-off gas refrigeration unit at its existing liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal offshore Texas. On March 12, 2014, the Commission issued the Environmental Assessment (EA) for the project, finding that there would be no significant impact if certain measures were implemented during project construction. On March 28, 2014, the Commission issued an order approving the project. On December 18, 2019, FLNG filed a request to vacate authorization of the project, as the facility has not been utilized since July of 2019 due to other liquefaction projects becoming fully operational and capable of producing LNG without the refrigeration service. Agenda item C-9 may be an order on FLNG's request to vacate authorization.
This publication is provided for your convenience and does not constitute legal advice. This publication is protected by copyright.
© 2020 White & Case LLP
