Summaries of the agenda items for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's monthly open meeting to be held on June 27, 2024, pursuant to the sunshine notice released on June 20, 2024.
In this issue…
- Electric Items
- Gas Items
- Hydro Items
- Certificate Items
On June 13 and 14, 2024, respectively, the United States Senate confirmed the nominations of three new Commissioners. Most notably, the Commission will avoid a lack of quorum in the near-term, which would have hindered the ability of the agency to issue significant orders and act on major transactions under its jurisdiction. The Commission will also now operate with a full complement of five sitting Commissioners. Democrats hold a 3-to-2 advantage until at least June 30, 2026, when the term of Chairman Willie Phillips is set to expire.
The new Commissioners, and their terms, are as follows:
- David Rosner (D-Massachusetts), for a three-year term ending on June 30, 2027;
- Lindsey S. See (R-West Virginia), for a four-year term ending on June 30, 2028;
- Judy Chang (D-Massachusetts), for a five-year term ending on June 30, 2029.
Chang will replace the outgoing Allison Clements, who has served as Commissioner since December 8, 2020 and will depart the agency upon the expiration of her term on June 30, 2024.
Electric
E-1 – Implementation of Dynamic Line Ratings (Docket No. RM24-6-000). The formal record of this docket has not yet been populated. Agenda item E-1 may be an action that is being taken sua sponte by the Commission in order to initiate a rulemaking proceeding with respect to dynamic line ratings.
E-2 – Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (Docket Nos. ER23-2977-000, ER23-2977-001, ER23-2977-002). On September 29, 2023, Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO) filed proposed tariff revisions (PRA Tariff Revisions) to replace the vertical demand curve currently in use in MISO's planning resource auction (PRA) with an administratively determined, downward-sloping Reliability-Based Demand Curve (RBDC). MISO requested an effective date of June 3, 2024 to ensure the proposed RBDC is implemented for the 2025/2026 planning year. On October 19, 2023, the Louisiana Public Service Commission (LPSC) and the Mississippi Public Service Commission (MPSC) filed a Motion for Extension of Comment Date until November 3, 2023. On October 20, 2023, the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) filed comments in support of MISO's PRA Tariff Revisions. On October 20, 2023, the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUCT) filed an Answer in Support of the MPSC's and LPSC's Motion for Extension of Time. On October 25, 2023, the Commission issued a Notice of Extension of Time, extending the comment period until November 3, 2023. On November 3, 2023, the Organization of MISO States, Inc. (OMS), the Illinois Commerce Commission, Rainbow Energy Center, LLC, Calpine Corporation, the Electric Power Supply Association, Vistra Crop, DTE Electric Company, the Michigan Public Service Commission, the Kentucky Public Service Commission, Consumers Energy Company, and the Coalition of Midwest Power Producers all submitted comments in support of MISO's PRA Tariff Revisions. On November 3, 2023, American Municipal Power, Inc., Missouri Joint Municipal Electric Utility Commission d/b/a the Missouri Electric Commission, Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency and WPPI Energy (collectively, the Midwest TDUs) the Mississippi Public Service Commission and the Mississippi Public Utilities Staff (together, the MPSC), the Public Interest Organizations (PIOs), Vistra Corp. and Dynegy Marketing and Trade, LLC (collectively, Vistra), and LPSC, Entergy Services, LLC and Cleco Power LLC (collectively, Entergy), and the Public Utilities Commission of Texas and the Arkansas Public Service Commission (collectively, the Indicated Retail Regulators and, together with the Midwest TDUs, the MPSC, the PIOs, Vistra, the LPSC, and Entergy collectively the Protesting Parties) filed comments and protests in opposition to MISO's proposed PRA Tariff Revisions. On November 22, 2023, the Commission issued a Deficiency Letter in response to MISO's proposed PRA Tariff Revisions requesting additional information. On December 6, 2023, MISO filed a Motion for Leave to Answer and Answer in response to the comments and protests filed by the Protesting Parties. On December 21, 2023, MISO submitted its response to the Commission's deficiency letter. On April 23, 2024, the Commission issued a Second Deficiency Letter requesting additional information from MISO. On May 13, 2024, MISO submitted its Response to the Second Deficiency letter. Agenda item E-2 may be an order on MISO's proposed PRA Tariff Revisions.
E-3 – PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Docket No. ER17-1433-005). The formal record in this sub-docket has not yet been populated. The last action in this proceeding was taken on May 5, 2022 by the Commission in Docket No. ER17-1433-004 in the Commission's Order Addressing Arguments Raised on Rehearing. On January 31, 2022, the Commission issued an order accepting revisions to PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.'s (PJM) Amended and Restated Operating Agreement and Open Access Transmission Tariff related to PJM's Financial Transmission Rights (FTR) forfeiture rule (FTR Forfeiture Rule). The Commission also declined to require refunds in this proceeding. XO Energy, LLC and XO Energy MA, LP (collectively, XO Energy) filed a request for rehearing of the January 31, 2022 Order. On May 5, 2022, the Commission modified its discussion of the January 31, 2022 Order but ultimately reached the same result. Agenda item E-3 may be an action that is being taken sua sponte by the Commission related to its May 5, 2022 order regarding PJM's FTR and FTR Forfeiture Rule revisions.
E-4 – North American Electric Reliability Corporation (Docket No. RD24-5-000). On February 16, 2024, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) filed a Petition for Approval of Proposed Reliability Standards, specifically proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 applicable to Generator Owners (the Freeze Protection Standards). The Freeze Protection Standards are aimed at improving power plant reliability and system performance in the winter months, in particular through competitive market designs. On March 21, 2024, the New England Power Generators Association Inc. (NEGPA) filed Comments in support of NERC's proposed Freeze Protection Standards. On March 21, 2024, Independent System Operators and Regional Transmission Organizations Council (IRC) filed a Protest in opposition to the proposed Freeze Protection Standards. On April 1, 2024, the Electric Power Supply Association (EPSA) submitted its answer to support the comments filed by the NEGPA on March 21, 2024 in support of NERC's Petition for Approval of Proposed Reliability Standards, specifically proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 applicable to Generator Owner. On April 4, 2024, NERC filed a response to IRC's Protest filed on March 21, 2024.
On October 30, 2023, NERC submitted a petition seeking approval of proposed Reliability Standards EOP-011-4 (Emergency Operations) and TOP-002-5 (Operations Planning) in Docket No. RD24-1-000. On February 15, 2024, the Commission approved the proposed Reliability Standards EOP-011-4 and TOP-002-5 and their associated violation risk factors and violation severity levels. The Reliability Standards EOP-011-4 and TOP-002-5 build on the 2021 and 2023-approved cold weather Reliability Standards, further reducing the risks posed by extreme cold weather to the reliability of the Bulk Power System. On April 30, 2024, the Commission issued a Notice on its Information Collection Activities seeking public comment on the requirements and burden of the information collection FERC- 725S - Mandatory Reliability Standards: Emergency Preparedness and Operations (EOP) Reliability Standards and FERC-725A - Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System associated with the reliability standards accepted in its February 15, 2024 order. Agenda item E-4 may be an order on the proposed reliability standards in Docket No. RD24-5-000 and on the Commission's Notice on Information Collection Activities to the Cold Weather Reliability Standards approved in Docket No. RD24-1-000.
E-5 – Revisions to Regulations on Electric Reliability Organization Performance Assessments (Docket No. RM21-12-000). On January 19, 2021, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Revisions to Regulations on Electric Reliability Organization Performance (ERO) Assessments (NOPR) proposing that the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) submit performance assessments every three years rather than the current five years along with certain changes to the assessment and process. Amongst other things, the NOPR proposal would include changes to formalize the method for the ERO to receive and respond to recommendations by the regional entities, users, owners and operators of the Bulk-Power System, and other interested parties for improvement of the ERO's operations, activities, oversight and procedures. Agenda item E-5 may be order relating to the NOPR.
E-6 – North American Electric Reliability Corporation (Docket No. RR24-2-000). On March 19, 2024, in accordance with Commission orders issued in Docket No. RR22-4, NERC submitted pursuant to Section 215 a petition for approval for proposed revisions to its Rules of Procedures to address registration requirements and registry criteria for non-Bulk Electric System (BES) Inverter-Based Resources (IBRs). Under the proposal, NERC would create a new Generator Operator and Generator Owner category (Category 2 GOs and Category 2 GOPs) for entities that own or operate non-BES inverter based generating resources that (i) either have or contribute to an aggregate nameplate capacity of greater than or equal to 20 MVA, (ii) connected through a system designed primarily for delivering such capacity to a common point of connection at a voltage greater than or equal to 60 kV. Agenda item E-6 may be an order relating to NERC's petition.
E-7 – Gregory and Beverly Swecker (Docket No. EL24-6-000). On October 26, 2023, individuals Gregory and Beverly Swecker submitted a request seeking a Commission order under the Public Utilities Regulatory Policy Act of 1978 (PURPA) and the Commission's rules and regulations thereunder directing Midland Power Cooperative (Midland) to provide a rate at which Midland purchases power from the Central Iowa Power Cooperative (CIPCO). Agenda item E-7 may be an order relating to the request for Commission action under its PURPA regulations.
E-8 – Southern California Edison Company (Docket No. EL24-71-000). On February 7, 2024, Southern California Edison Company (SCE), pursuant to Section 219 of the Federal Power Act (FPA) and Rule 207(a) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, submitted a Petition for Declaratory Order seeking specific incentive rate treatment for certain transmission upgrade projects referred to as the Del Amo-Mesa-Serrano 500 kV Reinforcement Project and Lugo-Victor-Kramer 230 kV Upgrade Project. Specifically, SCE requested a Commission order granting SCE authority to (i) recover all prudently incurred costs if the upgrade projects are cancelled or abandoned and (ii) include in transmission rate base during construction 100 percent cost recovery of its construction work in progress (CWIP). On March 8, 2024, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) filed an intervention and protest to SCE's petition and requested relief. Agenda item E-8 may be an order regarding SCE's petition for a declaratory order.
E-9 – Missouri River Energy Services v. Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (Docket No. EL24-3-000). On October 13, 2023, Missouri River Energy Services (Missouri River) filed a complaint against Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (SPP) for violating its Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT) by allocating zero Long Term Congestion Rights (LTCR) to Missouri River and thus charging them more than the filed rate (Missouri River Complaint). On October 20, 2023, SPP filed a Motion for Extension of Time and Request for Expeditious Action on the Missouri River Complaint, arguing that the lack of LTCR awards for Missouri River does not prove a tariff violation. On October 26, 2023, Missouri River filed an Answer urging the Commission to deny SPP's Motion for Extension of Time. On October 27, 2023, the Commission issued an Extension of Time. On November 17, 2023, SPP filed its Answer to the Missouri River Complaint arguing that, because Missouri River waited seven years to bring its concerns to the Commission, it does not satisfy the fast-track complaint requirements. On November 17, 2023, the Nebraska Public Power District filed Comments in support of SPP and urged the Commission to deny the Missouri River Complaint. On November 30, 2023, the United States Senator John Thune and others submitted Comments requesting that the Commission grant fair and timely consideration of the Missouri River Complaint. On December 7, 2023, Missouri River filed a Motion to Leave to Answer and Answer in response to SPP's November 17, 2023 Answer, arguing that Missouri River is entitled to LTCR to meet its reasonable needs and that not allocating any LTCRs to Missouri River falls short of the minimum amount required under the tariff. On January 5, 2024, SPP filed a Motion to Leave and Answer arguing that Missouri River's most recent Answer provided no new arguments. On January 12, 2024, Missouri River filed a Motion for Leave to Answer and Limited Answer arguing that their most recent Answer did provide new substance and the Brattle Group Report document should be considered by the Commission. On January 19, 2024, Missouri River submitted another Motion for Leave to Answer to the SPP's Answer on October 13, 2023, saying that the Commission should not wait or delay for proposed changes to the tariff to rule on this Complaint. On May 16, 2024, Missouri River submitted another Motion for Leave to Answer to SPP's Answer on November 17, 2023, noting that the SPP's April 17, 2024 filing of Tariff Revisions to Implement Congestion Hedging Improvements in Docket No. ER24-1775 will not increase the likelihood in the future of Missouri River being allocated LTCR (the source of the Missouri River Complaint). Agenda item E-9 may be an order on the Missouri River Complaint.
E-10 – Southern Power Company (Docket No. ER23-150-000). On October 20, 2022, Southern Power Company (Southern Power) submitted a tariff filing to make affiliate sales between itself and Georgia Power Company (Georgia Power), both of which are wholly owned subsidiaries of Southern Company. Southern Power claims that the authorization would help Georgia Power meet its supply-side resource plan at a cost more favorable to them and to ratepayers than alternatives offered. On November 10, 2022, the Southface Energy Institute, Inc. (Southface) and the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (SACE) filed a Motion to Intervene arguing that the Commission should reject Southern Power's request because Georgia Power's Request for Proposals (RFP) eliminated other more economic options and instead created an undue preference for Southern Power's generation sources. Southface and SACE argue that the request should be rejected, and at the minimum, the Commission should request for more information on Georgia Power's RFP development before acting on the request. On November 30, 2022, Southern Power filed an answer in response to the protest, arguing that the RFP process included active independent oversight and public comments, and that the PPA in question was not a product of unduly discriminatory or preferential RFP process. On December 2, 2022, Georgia Power filed an answer to the Southface and SACE protest and requested that the Commission decline Southface's and SACE's request which lacks a credible claim of any affiliate preference. Georgia Power explained its resource procurement process that resulted in the affiliate agreements in question. On December 16, 2022, Southface and SACE filed a Motion for Leave to Answer and Answer arguing that Southern Power and Georgia Power mischaracterized their original protest. On December 21, 2022, Georgia Power filed a Motion for leave to Answer and Limited Answer arguing that Southface's and SACE's response undermines the credibility of their original argument and Georgia Power emphasized again that its RFP process followed the required regulatory process. On March 11, 2024, Georgia Power filed Comments requesting that the Commission issue an order approving the power sales, especially given that this is a "routine affiliate power sales filing," where the only protest came from Southface and SACE, a non-bidding energy policy interest group. Agenda item E-10 may be an order on the initial request from Southern Power and Georgia Power to make affiliate sales.
E-11 – Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (Docket No. ER22-1697-002). On April 28, 2022, Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (SPP) submitted its initial compliance filing with respect to Order No. 2222. On March 1, 2024, the Commission issued an order accepting the compliance filing, subject to a further compliance filing and information filing to be filed by April 30, 2024. On March 18, 2024, SPP filed a request to extend the deadline of the further compliance filing to August 28, 2024, in order to engage with stakeholders and perform the additional analysis noted in the order, which the Commission granted on March 26, 2024. On March 29, 2024, American Electric Power Service Corporation, Evergy, Oklahoma Gas & Electric Company, and Xcel Energy (collectively, the Joint Utilities) filed a request for rehearing of the March 1 order. In the rehearing request, the Joint Utilities allege that SPP has indeed satisfied the locational requirements of Order No. 2222, despite the Commission finding it had failed to. The Joint Utilities assert that SPP demonstrated that a single-node aggregation of distributed energy resources is the only suitable option in SPP, and, pursuant to Order No. 2222, provided a "detailed, technical explanation" to support that design. Additionally, the Joint Utilities request clarification on the effective date for Order No. 2222 compliance; per the March 1 order, SPP was directed to propose an effective date in the third quarter of 2025. The Joint Utilities referred to the length of time that passed during the initial Order No. 2222 compliance filing (15 months) and, accordingly, expressed concern that the Commission has imposed an impractical and unattainable effective date given the similar length of time for compliance. Agenda item E-11 may be an order on the request for rehearing brought by the Joint Utilities.
E-12 – Oak Trail Solar, LLC (Docket Nos. ER23-1752-003, EL24-63-004). On April 28, 2023, Oak Trail Solar, LLC (Oak Trail), pursuant to section 205 of the FPA, submitted its proposed annual revenue requirement for the provision of Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation Sources Service under Schedule 2 of the PJM Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT). Oak Trail proposed a revenue requirement of $1,600,586.84 with an effective date of June 30, 2023. On May 19, 2023, Northern Virginia Electric Cooperative, Inc., Old Dominion Electric Cooperative, and Dominion Energy Services, Inc. (collectively, the Joint Customers) filed a protest, stating that the proposed revenue requirement was extraordinarily high and that Oak Trail had not submitted information sufficient to constitute a complete application for the Commission to review and rule on. On February 16, 2024, the Commission issued an order accepting the revenue requirement and setting the effective date as July 7, 2023, the date on which the facility began commercial operations. The Commission also established an investigation pursuant to section 206 of the FPA, based on its preliminary analysis that the Oak Trail revenue requirement might be unjust, unreasonable, unduly discriminatory, or otherwise unlawful. The Commission established a potential refund effective date of February 29, 2024. On March 18, 2024, the Joint Customers filed a request for rehearing of the February 16 order. Joint Customers expressed concern that the Commission allowed a rate schedule under investigation to go into effect as of a date that preceded the filing date for the proposed rate (i.e., the gap between July 7, 2023 and February 29, 2024). Agenda item E-12 may be an order on the request for rehearing brought by the Joint Customers.
E-13 – Cometa Energia, S.A. de C.V., /o/b/o., Energia Azteca X, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. California Independent System Operator Corporation (Docket No. EL24-92-000). On March 20, 2024, Saavi, on behalf of its affiliates Cometa Energia, S.A. de C.V. and Energia Azteca X, S. de R.L. de C.V., filed a formal complaint against the California Independent System Operator Corporation (CAISO), pursuant to sections 206, 306, and 309 of the FPA. In the complaint, Saavi alleged that CAISO unlawfully terminated the Full Capacity Deliverability Status associated with one of its generating resources with CAISO interconnection rights. According to Saavi, under its Commission-approved Non-Conforming Generator Agreement, Saavi has the right to be dispatched in the CAISO market, or the Comisión Federal de Electricidad (CFE) in Mexico, through defined processes that accommodate the ability of the unit to switch its generation dispatch. CAISO elected to terminate the agreement with the cross-border generating facility after it temporarily disconnected from CAISO to serve CFE. On April 9, 2024, CAISO submitted an answer to the complaint, stating that the generation unit has not been connected to CAISO for nearly seven years, and therefore, the relief would lead to an unjust result by reducing deliverability for active generators providing resource adequacy services. Agenda item E-13 may be an order on the complaint by Saavi.
E-14 – Canisteo Wind Energy LLC (Docket No. ER24-1881-000). On April 26, 2024, Canisteo Wind Energy LLC (Canisteo) filed a request for prospective waiver of Section 30.4.4.5.1 in Attachment X of the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO) Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT). In particular, Canisteo sought a waiver whereby the commercial operation date, as included in the Large Generation Interconnection Agreement, would not extend more than four years from the completion date of its interconnection study process. Canisteo stated that its project is in jeopardy because it is not possible to achieve commercial operations by February 8, 2025, four years since the completion date of its interconnection study. Canisteo requested a waiver so that the commercial operations date would be December 17, 2027, which would ensure that the project would not be required to withdraw from the interconnection queue prior to completion. On May 17, 2024, NYISO submitted comments, in order to highlight a recent change in its rules for extending the commercial operation date of a project and establishes a process by which Canisteo would be able to extend the commercial operation date under the NYISO OATT. Agenda item E-14 may be an order on the request for prospective waiver by Canisteo.
E-15 – PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Docket No. ER23-1067-002). On February 8, 2023, PJM submitted proposed amendments to establish new rules regarding the application of Capacity Interconnection Rights (CIRs) to Generation Capacity Resources, within the context of the Effective Load Carrying Capacity (ELCC) construct. The reforms would reduce the capacity injection rights for all ELCC resources owners and require ELCC resource owners to submit an additional interconnection request to maintain its capacity value. On April 7, 2023, the Commission issued an order approving the proposal and setting an effective date of April 10, 2023. On May 5, 2023, the American Clean Power Association, Solar Energy Industries Association, and Advanced Energy United (collectively, the Associations) submitted a request for rehearing of the April 7 order, contending that the Commission erred in setting the effective date only three days after issuance of the order as well as erred by violating its precedent by allowing a change to the capacity rights of certain interconnection customers and owners of existing resources. Agenda item E-15 may be an order on the request for rehearing.
E-16 – Roy J. Shanker v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Docket No. EL23-13-000). On November 30, 2022, Roy J. Shanker (Dr. Shanker) filed a formal complaint against PJM, pursuant to sections 206 and 306 of the FPA. The complaint alleged that PJM improperly included output Energy Resources in its ELCC process and the associated accreditation of the Accredited Unforced Capacity (AUCAP) offered for sale in its Reliability Pricing Model (RPM) capacity auctions by intermittent resources. Dr. Shanker alleged that PJM has not honored the provisions with respect to CIRs that were awarded via Interconnection Service Agreements, particularly when there is a discrepancy between the amount of energy a resource will produce when the total output will exceed its awarded CIRs. Accordingly, Dr. Shanker requested that the Commission direct PJM to properly implement its Tariff by only allowing accredited capacity, based on hourly energy production up to its associated CIRs, to participate in future capacity auctions in order to assure reliability and resource adequacy. On January 17, 2023, PJM submitted its answer, stating that the complaint relied on a novel interpretation of one sentence within its Tariff, which had been adopted for 17 years prior. PJM also stated that, given its rule that Generation Capacity Resources cannot offer above their CIRs, there is no justiciable claim of a Tariff violation. PJM also alluded to two prior instances where similar allegations were made, and dismissed by, the PJM Board of Managers and against MISO, which was denied by the Commission. Further, PJM referred to ongoing efforts related to the interaction of CIRs with the ELCC methodology in order to accommodate the penetration of new renewable resources and capture the attendant expected shift in loss of load risk patterns. PJM stated that it intends to offer a filing in the future, pursuant to section 205 of the FPA, and that entertaining the complaint would derail the attempts to reach a solution through ongoing PJM-sanctioned stakeholder processes. Multiple stakeholders filed respective protests and comments, generally stating the PJM had not contravened the provisions of its Tariff and had been working to bring forward a new proposal in order to address the evolving role of CIRs with respect to new renewable resources. On January 27, 2023, Dr. Shanker submitted an answer to the PJM answer and intervenor comments, acknowledging the prospective revisions as contemplated in the ongoing stakeholder discussions and potential future submissions to the Commission, but also pointing to certain violations that were still occurring that would conceivably affect the outcome of the Base Residual Auction taking place during the proceeding. Agenda item E-16 may be an order on the complaint by Dr. Shanker against PJM.
Gas
G-1 – Gulf South Pipeline Company, LLC (Docket No. RP24-395-001). On February 8, 2024, Gulf South Pipeline Company, LLC (Gulf South) filed proposed updates to its capacity sales procedures, pursuant to section 4 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), set forth in its NGA Gas Tariff, to be effective March 11, 2024. Gulf South requested the updates to allow the award of existing capacity available for firm transportation service that is requested at the maximum applicable tariff rate for a term of less than one year without conducting a formal auction. In the filing, Gulf South stated that the change in procedure would enable it to assess and award short-term capacity requests in a responsive fashion without incurring undue administrative burdens. On February 20, 2024, BP Energy Company (BP) submitted a protest, asserting that Gulf South had not sufficiently demonstrated that the proposed tariff revisions would be just and reasonable. BP stated that the proposal would allow for deals to be effectuated without other market participants, including existing customers of firm transportation service, being made aware of the availability of additional capacity until after the deal would be consummated. On March 8, 2024, the Commission issued an order rejecting the proposed updates to the Gulf South tariff, finding that the procedure would represent an unsupported departure from long-standing Commission policy, namely by allowing the first-come, first-served allocation of capacity only if the pipeline posts all available firm capacity in a public fashion. Accordingly, Gulf South, by seeking to avoid the pre-auction disclosure of additional available capacity, would not comport with pre-auction posting and bidding requirements. On April 8, 2024, Gulf South filed a request for rehearing of the March 8 order. Agenda item G-1 may be an order on the rehearing request.
Hydro
H-1 – Pacific Gas and Electric Company (Docket No. P-77-320). On February 22, 2024, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) filed a minimum instream flow variable request due to restricted storage capacity for the Potter Valley Hydroelectric Project. PG&E indicated that, after evaluating the seismic risk at Scott Dam as part of its Dam Safety Program, it determined that the seismic risk is greater than previously known; accordingly, PG&E requested the flow variance from current license requirements in order to reduce river flows and proactively manage reservoir storage in a manner that will safeguard Project facilities and continue compliance with the Endangered Species Act. Agenda item H-1 may be an order on the request.
H-2 – City of Seattle, Washington, (Docket No. P-553-245). On September 19, 2023, the City of Seattle, Washington, through its City Light Department (Seattle City Light), filed a petition for declaratory order stating that it is not required to obtain a special use permit from the National Park Service (NPS) to undertake operations and maintenance activities at the Skagit River Hydroelectric Project. Seattle City Light had received notice from the NPS that it must obtain a special use permit prior to deploying drones to inspect the facilities located in remote areas on federal lands within the boundary of the Project. Seattle City Light contended that, as the licensee of the Project, the jurisdiction under the FPA over operations and maintenance for hydroelectric projects provides the necessary authorization. Agenda item H-2 may be an order on the petition for declaratory order.
H-3 – Grand River Dam Authority (Docket No. P-1494-468). On December 26, 2018, the City of Miami, Oklahoma (City) filed a formal complaint against Grand River Dam Authority (GRDA). In the complaint, City alleged that Grand River had violated Standard Article 5 of the Pensacola Hydroelectric Project by not expending an estimated $150 million in acquiring approximately 13,000 acres of non-Project properties outside of the Project boundary. On April 29, 2020, Commission Staff issued a letter order stating that it found no violation of the project license held by GRDA. On May 29, 2020, City submitted a request for rehearing of the April 29 letter order, which was subsequently denied by the Commission in an order issued on September 17, 2020. On January 18, 2022, the US Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (D.C. Circuit) granted the petition for review of the September 17 order and remanded the case to the Commission. On January 18, 2024, the Commission issued the order on remand, finding that GRDA, not the Army Corps of Engineers, holds the exclusive responsibility to acquire property interests to support flood control operations. The order on remand therefore instructed GRDA to identify and acquire non-Project lands that would serve a purpose for the Project. On February 16, 2024, GRDA submitted a request for rehearing of the January 18 order on remand, alleging that the Commission had incorrectly applied section 28 of the FPA in imposing the requirement to acquire additional property to GRDA. Agenda item H-3 may be an order on the rehearing request.
Certificates
C-1 – Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Docket No. CP24-49-000). On January 30, 2024, Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin) filed a Prior Notice request (Prior Notice) with the Commission under its Blanket Certificate issued in FERC Docket No. CP87-317-000. Specifically, Algonquin proposes to offset and replace a segment of pipeline on its G-2 System located in Newport County, Rhode Island at a crossing of the Sakonnet River, referred to as the Sakonnet River Replacement (Project). Specifically, such project includes installation of approximately 1.9 miles of new 12-inch-diameter pipeline; capping, grouting and abandoning in place approximately 1.9 miles of existing 6-inch-diameter pipeline; and removal of approximately 190 feet of existing 6-inch-diameter pipeline, as well as installation of a new launcher and receiver. According to the Prior Notice, approximately 8,720 feet of the replacement segment would be installed via horizontal directional drill and about 1,390 feet of the replacement segment would be installed using conventional open-cut construction methods. Multiple protests were received pursuant to 18 C.F.R. § 157.205(e) that initiated a 30-day reconciliation period to which Algonquin requested waiver on April 22, 2024. On June 5, 2024, Commission staff issued an environmental assessment report (EA) for the Prior Notice, determining that Algonquin would complete the Project in accordance with the requirements under sections 157.205 and 157.208 of the Commission's regulations and that, based on the environmental analysis set forth in the EA, approval of 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 the Prior Notice.
C-2 – Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Docket No. CP24-21-000). On November 30, 2023, Algonquin Gas Transmission, LLC (Algonquin) filed a Prior Notice request (Prior Notice) with the Commission under Docket Number CP24-21-000, to modify its existing E System Tap Site (Tap Site) located in the Town of Coventry, Tolland County, Connecticut (such modification, the Project). According to the Prior Notice, the purpose of the Project is to prevent a pressure reduction on Algonquin's Cromwell to Chaplin 24-inch-diameter main line and 30-inch-diameter L30B pipeline due to regulated pressure reductions on the E1 or E1L lateral systems. Algonquin states that the Project would have no impact on the certificated capacity of its system, and there would be no abandonment or reduction in service to any customer of Algonquin because of the Project. Multiple protests were received pursuant to 18 C.F.R. § 157.205(e) that initiated a 30-day reconciliation period to which Algonquin requested waiver on February 16, 2024. On April 16, 2024, Commission staff issued an environmental assessment report (EA) for the Prior Notice, that Algonquin would complete the activities in accordance with the requirements under section 157.208(b) of the Commission's regulations and that, based on the environmental analysis set forth in the EA, approval of the Project would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Agenda item C-2 may be an order on the Prior Notice.
C-3 – Spire STL Pipeline LLC (Docket No. CP17-40-018). On August 3, 2018, the Commission issued Spire STL Pipeline LLC (Spire) a certificate of public convenience and necessity and related authorizations to construct and operate the Spire STL Pipeline (Certificate Order), a new 65-mile-long interstate natural gas pipeline system, extending from an interconnection with Rockies Express Pipeline LLC (REX) in Scott County, Illinois, to interconnections with Spire Missouri and Enable Mississippi River Transmission, LLC (MRT) in St. Louis County, Missouri. As pertinent here, on March 18, 2021, the Commission issued an Order on Environmental Compliance (March 18 Order), in response to an August 14, 2020 report from the IDOA documenting its inspections of seven landowner's properties, including Mr. Jacob Gettings's property, and IDOA's assertion that Spire failed to comply with certain agricultural mitigation measures required by the AIMA. Spire began the restoration required by the March 18 Order at the Gettings property on September 7, 2022, and completed the work over two weeks, ending on September 20, 2022. Central Land Consulting (CLC) also submitted numerous filings asserting that the restoration of the Gettings property was inadequate. On May 5, 2023, Commission staff issued a letter order (May 5 Letter Order) responding to CLC's filings, including CLC's December 13, 2022 Petition to Show Cause. In the May 5 Letter Order, Commission staff found that the restoration activities Spire performed on the Gettings property complied with the requirements of the Commission's March 18 Order. On May 15, 2023, CLC filed comments on Commission staff's May 5 Letter, citing to CLC's previous filings and taking issue with Commission staff's decision to formulate its own conclusions regarding restoration instead of adopting the conclusions of IDOA. On May 26, 2023, Spire filed comments in response to CLC, outlining the steps Spire has taken to communicate with the landowner and to remediate the property. On May 30, 2023, CLC filed comments responding to Spire and documenting its outstanding restoration issues across the landowners represented by CLC. On June 5, 2023, Mr. Jacob Gettings, Mr. Larry Meyer, and CLC requested rehearing of the May 5 Letter Order, asking the Commission to set aside Commission staff's conclusions in the May 5 Letter Order regarding the Gettings property and to require Spire to perform the restoration activities identified by the landowner. On March 6, 2024, the Commission issued an order addressing such request for rehearing of the May 5 Letter Order (March 6 Rehearing Order), in which the Commission modified the discussion in the May 5 Letter Order and set aside the May 5 Letter Order, in part. Specifically, the Commission directed Spire in the March 6 Rehearing Order to conduct certain restoration measures for various properties across the Spire STL Pipeline project. Numerous landowners and the CLC subsequently filed requests for rehearing of the March 6 Rehearing Order, which the Commission denied by operation of law by order dated May 6, 2024 (May 6 Rehearing Order). Agenda item C-3 may be a further order on the May 6 Rehearing Order (and the rehearing requests related thereto).
C-4 – Spire STL Pipeline LLC (Docket No. CP17-40-019). See agenda item C-4 for additional background. Following the March 6 Rehearing Order, and in addition to various rehearing requests filed with the Commission thereafter, Central Land Consulting (CLC) and Mr. Jacob Gettings also filed a motion for clarification, or in the alternative reconsideration, of the March 6 Rehearing Order (April 5 Motion). Specifically, the April 5 Motion asserts that the Commission must clarify its position on outstanding restoration issues on the Gettings property in relation to the Commission's Upland Erosion Control, Revegetation, and Maintenance Plan (FERC Plan), not the March 18 Order, and that the Commission must either revise the March 6 Rehearing Order or issue a new order to Spire that requires (a) targeted debris removal, (b) soil decompaction, (c) direct train tile investigation, (d) contour restoration, and (e) a remediation plan filing after consultation with Mr. Gettings; if it does not, the April 5 Motion asserts that the Commission must vacate the March 6 Rehearing Order as an arbitrary and capricious departure from the law of the case and which is not justified by substantial evidence. Agenda item C-4 may be an order on the April 5 Motion.
C-5 – Venture Global CP2 LNG, LLC and Venture Global CP Express, LLC (Docket Nos. CP22-21-000 and CP22-22-000). On December 2, 2021, Venture Global CP2 LNG, LLC (CP2 LNG) and Venture Global CP Express, LLC (CP Express and together with CP2 LNG, the Applicants) filed with the Commission a joint application (Application) for authorization for new liquefied natural gas facilities in Cameron Parish, Louisiana, and related pipeline facilities in Louisiana and east Texas (collectively, the Project). Commission staff issued a draft environmental impact statement (EIS) on January 19, 2023, and a final EIS on July 28, 2023. In the final EIS, Commission staff conclude that approval of the Project would result in some adverse environmental impacts, but that, with the exception of climate change impacts, these impacts would be reduced to less-than-significant levels because of avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures proposed by the Applicants and those recommended by Commission staff in the final EIS. Such final EIS further provided that climate change impacts associated with the Project are not characterized as significant or insignificant. Following issuance of the final EIS, Commission staff issued a number of engineering and environmental information and related data requests for the Project, and numerous interested parties continued to file comments opposing the Project. In addition to responding to those information requests and opposing comments, Applicants also filed a letter on February 15, 2024, requesting urgent Commission action on the Application. Agenda item C-5 may be an order on the Application.
C-6 – Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (Docket No. CP22-495-001). On August 9, 2022, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (Transco) filed an application (Application) for a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct and operate the Texas to Louisiana Energy Pathway Project in Fort Bend, Hardin, and Victoria Counties, Texas (Texas to Louisiana Project). According to the Application, the Texas to Louisiana Project is designed to provide 364,400 dekatherms per day of firm transportation service for a new customer through a combination of: (1) the conversion of IT Feeder System service to firm transportation service; (2) the turnback of firm transportation service by existing customers; and (3) the addition of incremental firm transportation service made possible by the construction of a new compressor station in Fort Bend County, Texas, and modifications to existing compressor stations in Hardin and Victoria Counties, Texas. On January 18, 2024, the Commission issued Transco a certificate of public convenience and necessity and related authorizations for the Texas to Louisiana Project (Certificate Order). On February 16, 2024, Sierra Club filed a request (Rehearing Request) for rehearing of the Certificate Order, which Transco answered and the Commission denied by operation of law by order (Rehearing Order), each dated March 18, 2024. Agenda item C-6 may be a further order on the Rehearing Order.
White & Case means the international legal practice comprising White & Case LLP, a New York State registered limited liability partnership, White & Case LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated under English law and all other affiliated partnerships, companies and entities.
This article is prepared for the general information of interested persons. It is not, and does not attempt to be, comprehensive in nature. Due to the general nature of its content, it should not be regarded as legal advice.
© 2024 White & Case LLP
