August 8, 2020

Volume X, Number 221

August 07, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

August 06, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Update: FERC Revises “Tolling” Order Language to Address Recent Court of Appeals Decision; Seeks Legislative Fix

As discussed previously in Pierce Atwood’s Energy Infrastructure Blog, on June 30, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit ruled that FERC lacks authority to issue tolling orders that postpone rehearing decisions on natural gas project orders solely to give the agency more time to consider rehearing requests and which delay opposing parties’ efforts to file appeals court challenges.  Allegheny Defense Project v. FERC, No. 17-1098 (D.C. Cir. June 30, 2020).  On July 1, 2020, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) issued its first order since the Allegheny Defense decision addressing a rehearing request that it did not act on within the 30-day statutory time period under the Natural Gas Act.

Incorporating suggestions from the court’s opinion, in Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., 172 FERC ¶ 61,009 (2020), FERC issued a Notice of Denial of Rehearing by Operation of Law and Providing for Further Consideration.  That notice debuted new language reflecting the Allegheny Defense decision.

In the absence of Commission action on the request for rehearing within 30 days from the date the request was filed, the request for rehearing (and any timely requests for rehearing filed subsequently) may be deemed denied. 16 U.S.C. §825(a) (2018); 18 C.F.R. §385.713 (2019); Allegheny Defense Project v. FERC, No. 17-1098 (D.C. Cir. June 30, 2020).

As provided in 16 U.S.C. §825(a) (2018), the rehearing request of the above-cited order filed in this proceeding will be addressed in a future order to be issued consistent with the requirements of such section. As also provided in 16 U.S.C. §825(a), the Commission may modify or set aside its above-cited order, in whole or in part, in such manner as it shall deem proper. As provided in 18 C.F.R. §385.713(d), no answers to the rehearing request will be entertained.  (footnote omitted)

The revised “tolling” language, which has since been used in other dockets as well, reserves FERC’s opportunity to address substantive rehearing arguments in a future order, but also permits the petitioners to seek judicial review of FERC’s prior order because rehearing may be deemed denied.  The language is consistent with the suggestions in the Allegheny Defense decision and the concurring opinion.

Also, on July 2, 2020, FERC Chairman Neil Chatterjee and Commissioner Richard Glick issued a joint statement calling on the U.S. Congress “to consider providing FERC with a reasonable amount of additional time to act on rehearing requests involving orders under both the Natural Gas Act and the Federal Power Act.”  The joint statement further requests that “such legislation should make clear that, while rehearing requests are pending, the Commission should be prohibited from issuing a notice to proceed with construction and no entity should be able to begin eminent domain proceedings involving the projects addressed in the orders subject to those rehearing requests.”

On July 6, 2020, FERC filed a motion requesting a stay of the court’s mandate for 90 days to allow FERC time to assess how to revise its rehearing process to implement the court’s opinion and to consider whether to pursue Supreme Court review. On July 8, 2020, the Allegheny Defense Fund requested the court deny FERC’s motion, explaining that further delay will create more uncertainty as to whether parties with pending rehearing requests that have already been tolled can seek judicial review, and harm parties whose rehearing requests may be tolled in the next 90 days.

©2020 Pierce Atwood LLP. All rights reserved.National Law Review, Volume X, Number 191


About this Author

Randall S. Rich Pierce Atwood Partner DC Energy Energy Infrastructure Project Development & Finance

Randall Rich is the Leader of our Energy Practice Group and the partner-in-charge of the Washington, DC office. Throughout his over 38 years of experience, beginning in the Office of General Counsel of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and continuing for more than 23 years at Bracewell, LLP, Randy always strives to form close personal bonds with clients as well as trusting relationships with both regulators and his colleagues in the energy bar. He gains an intimate understanding of the business and legal needs of clients by working for extended periods in their offices, hand-...

202- 530-6424
Valerie L. Green Pierce Atwood Partner DC  Energy Energy Infrastructure Project Development  Finance Litigation

Valerie Green focuses her practice on natural gas, electricity, renewable energy, and regulatory and compliance issues involving the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and other administrative agencies. Clients rely on Valerie’s responsiveness, attention to detail, and deep knowledge of regulatory process and precedent in proceedings involving administrative litigation, compliance audits and investigations, and in appellate litigation before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Valerie’s focus on coalition and consensus building in situations involving difficult, contentious issues frequently results in successful, advantageous settlements for her clients.

Valerie has extensive experience with a wide range of energy-related issues, including regulation under the Natural Gas Act, Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978, the Federal Power Act, the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act, and FERC’s regulations implementing those statutory regimes. Valerie advises natural gas shippers on pipeline rate and tariff issues, and has advised natural gas pipelines on their rate cases, Standards of Conduct, FERC’s capacity release rules, and other regulatory issues.

Drawing on her deep knowledge of Independent System Operator and Regional Transmission Organization (ISO/RTO) tariffs and operations, Valerie regularly assists clients as they navigate electric transmission issues, and she protects her clients' business interests in the electric grid.