FERC Enforcement

Subscribe to FERC Enforcement via RSS

Executive Summary

On March 21, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) issued Order No. 2023-A (Final Rule), which reaffirmed aspects of Order No. 2023 — the Commission’s landmark order updating its generator interconnection procedures. As detailed further in this summary, the Commission largely upheld Order No. 2023, including some of the more controversial aspects of the order, such as penalties and the transmission capacity “heat map,” and provided further clarity on other aspects.

On December 19, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (“Sixth Circuit”), in Electric Power Supply Association; PJM Power Providers Group v. FERC, held that the former Chair of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”), Richard Glick, exceeded his authority when he reinstated market design features including a stepped demand curve and an $850/MWh price ceiling for the PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (“PJM”) Reserve Market, without the backing of his colleagues.  This ruling was made by a split Sixth Circuit.  In addition, on February 7, the Sixth Circuit denied Petitioners’ request for panel rehearing of the opinion.

On October 19, 2023, FERC issued a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (“NOPR”) proposing various changes to its Electric Quarterly Report (“EQR”) filing requirements. According to FERC, the proposed changes are designed to update the data collection process, improve data quality, increase market transparency, decrease costs of preparing necessary data for submission, and streamline compliance with future filing requirements. The following is a summary of the primary reforms proposed.

On September 21, 2023, the Commission issued separate orders on show cause proceedings finding that the existing tariffs of the California Independent System Operator Corporation (“CAISO”), ISO New England Inc. (“ISO-NE”), and the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (“NYISO”) remain just and reasonable as to their collateral requirements for financial transmission rights (“FTR”) market participants. On the contrary, the Commission continued to find that Southwest Power Pool, Inc.’s (“SPP”) tariff appears to be unjust, unreasonable, and unduly discriminatory and therefore directed further briefing on a list of specific questions or for SPP to explain what changes to its tariff it believes would remedy the concerns identified by the Commission, within 60 days of the order.

On January 23, 2023, FERC set New York Power Authority’s (“NYPA”) proposed revisions to its Formula Rate Template for hearing, including changing NYPA’s allocation methodology for administrative and general (“A&G”) costs to a multi-factor, modified Massachusetts method (“Massachusetts Method”). In doing so, FERC found that NYPA had not supported its claim that the Massachusetts Method is appropriate for its specific circumstances and organizational structure or how the change would affect rates. FERC also conditionally accepted proposed changes to NYPA’s Formula Rate Protocols implementing transmission rate incentives and cost containment mechanisms for the Smart Path Connect Project.

On November 2, 2022, FERC denied a complaint brought by the Iowa Coalition for Affordable Transmission (“ICAT”) alleging that ITC Midwest, LLC’s (“ITC Midwest”) capital structure, with a targeted 60%-40% equity-to-debt ratio, is unjust and unreasonable. FERC found that ICAT failed to demonstrate that ITC Midwest’s use of its actual capital structure to determine its equity ratio is unjust and unreasonable and that ICAT’s reliance on prior FERC precedent was misplaced. Given these findings, FERC declined to address ICAT’s arguments for a 53% equity ratio.

On October 20, 2022, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) issued an Order rejecting a request by the California Public Utilities Commission (“CPUC”) seeking a rehearing of a Justification Order.  FERC’s Order declining rehearing comes after an October 7, 2020 filing where Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. (“Tri-State”) filed its justification for spot market sales that exceeded the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (“WECC”) soft price cap of $1,000/MWh during the summer months of 2020.  On May 20, 2022, the Commission issued an order finding that Tri-State had sufficient justification for certain spot market sales above the soft price cap but had not justified amounts charged above the relevant index price.  Ultimately, the Commission rejected the CPUC’s rehearing request.

On September 30, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued an opinion in Save the Colorado, et al. v. Spellmon. The case arose from various conservation group challenges to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (Service) decision to grant the city and county of Denver, acting through its Board of Water Commissioners (Denver Water or municipality), a discharge permit to expand the reservoir of its Gross Reservoir Hydroelectric Project, which is licensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission). The central issue revolved around whether the U.S. courts of appeals have exclusive jurisdiction over challenges to non-FERC decisions arising under statutes related to the development of hydropower projects under the Federal Power Act (FPA). The Tenth Circuit ultimately held that petitions against orders by non-FERC agencies do not warrant exclusive jurisdiction in the U.S. courts of appeals.