Alex Spratley

Subscribe to Alex Spratley's Posts

On October 7, 2025, FERC rescinded the regulation that precluded natural gas pipeline companies from receiving authorization to proceed with construction of their new projects during the period for filing requests for rehearing of certificate orders, or while rehearing is pending. In doing so, FERC stated that its rescission will…

On September 30, 2025, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals denied a joint petition for review brought by Sierra Club and Appalachian Voices (together, Petitioners) challenging FERC’s grant of a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN) to Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (Tennessee Gas) to construct a new natural gas…

In the latest chapter in a long-running saga dealing with certain credits for transmission upgrades in the Southwest Power Pool (SPP), on September 18, 2025, FERC directed SPP to submit a compliance filing addressing certain aspects of SPP’s proposed plan (Refund Plan) for unwinding credit payment obligations assessed by SPP.

On July 11, 2025, the D.C. Circuit upheld PJM Interconnection L.L.C.’s (“PJM”) assessment of $12 million in penalties against Energy Harbor, LLC (“Energy Harbor”) for failing to perform when called upon by PJM during a major winter storm in December 2022. The D.C. Circuit held that PJM-approved maintenance at Energy Harbor’s coal-fired generation facility, the W.H. Sammis Plant (“Sammis Plant”), was not the sole cause of the Sammis Plant’s nonperformance, and therefore Energy Harbor was not excepted from penalties under PJM’s Open Access Transmission Tariff (“OATT”).

On June 18, 2025, FERC temporarily raised the cost limits for blanket certificate natural gas pipeline projects constructed and placed into service by May 31, 2027, from $41 million to $61.65 million. Citing what it called a pressing nationwide near-term demand for expanded natural gas transportation capacity and reliability concerns…

On May 23, 2025, FERC upheld on rehearing its prior orders authorizing Venture Global CP2 LNG, LLC to build a new liquified natural gas (“LNG”) export terminal (“CP2 LNG Terminal”) and granting Venture Global CP Express, LLC (together, with Venture Global CP2 LNG, LLC, “Venture Global”) a certificate of public convenience and necessity (“CPCN”) to construct and operate a new natural gas pipeline (“CP Express Pipeline,” together, with the CP2 LNG Terminal, the “Projects”) to connect the CP2 LNG Terminal to the existing natural gas pipeline grid (“May 23 Rehearing Order”). In its May 23 Rehearing Order, FERC continued to find that the Projects are environmentally acceptable actions and not inconsistent with the public interest.

On May 9, 2025, fifteen democratic states (“Plaintiff States”) sued the Trump Administration in Washington District Court, claiming that President Trump’s executive order “Declaring a National Energy Emergency” (“Executive Order”) is unlawful. The Plaintiff States argue that the Executive Order commands federal agencies to disregard the law and applicable regulations to fast-track activities that will damage waters, wetlands, endangered species, and the people and wildlife that rely on these resources.

On April 24, 2025, FERC denied NGO Transmission, Inc.’s (“NGO Transmission”) application under 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act (“NGA”) to abandon its jurisdictional facilities and reclassify them from jurisdictional transmission facilities to non-jurisdictional local distribution facilities. FERC concluded that NGO Transmission’s facilities do not directly serve end-use customers in…

On April 10, 2025, FERC addressed arguments on rehearing that clarified, but did not modify the outcome of, a November 1, 2024, order (“Rejection Order”) rejecting PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.’s (“PJM”) proposal to increase the co-located data center load at a Susquehanna Nuclear, LLC (“Susquehanna”) nuclear generating facility. FERC again found that PJM’s amended Interconnection Service Agreement’s (“ISA”) non-conforming provisions were not necessary deviations from the pro forma ISA. However, FERC did clarify that the Rejection Order did not prevent other entities from filing non-conforming ISAs to address issues relating to co-located data center load.