On September 12, 2024, FERC’s Chief Accountant issued a notice of proposed accounting release (“NOPAR”) to modify the transferability of income tax credits (“ITCs”) related to certain energy projects under the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”), which allows entities to monetize such ITCs via transfers to independent third parties…

On September 10 and 11, 2024, FERC staff held a two-day workshop at its headquarters in Washington, DC on opportunities to further refine the generator interconnection queue process. Panelists and FERC staff discussed potential enhancements to transmission planning and processing interconnection requests over the course of six panels on discrete…

On August 20, 2024, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) issued an order rejecting, without prejudice, a contested proposal from Basin Electric Power Cooperative (“Basin”) to establish special wholesale power sales rate schedules for cryptocurrency (“crypto”) operations and other new large loads.  While FERC expressed sympathy for Basin’s concerns regarding its ability to serve expected load growth reliably and economically, FERC found that Basin failed to justify its proposal to treat crypto currency mining loads differently from other large loads and therefore rejected the differential rate proposal.

On August 5, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (“Eighth Circuit”) denied Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc.’s (“AECI”) petition for review of a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) order upholding FERC’s decision to exercise primary jurisdiction over emergency energy sales between Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (“SPP”) and AECI during Winter Storm Uri and FERC’s decision that SPP properly compensated AECI pursuant to SPP’s Open Access Transmission Tariff (“Tariff”). The Eighth Circuit denied the AECI’s petition and upheld FERC’s determination that AECI was appropriately compensated according to the existing tariff rates filed with FERC and, accordingly, rejected AECI’s claims that SPP had breached an alleged oral contract with SPP personnel made during the storm.

On July 25, 2024, FERC issued an order granting in part and denying in part a complaint raised by American Municipal Power, Inc., the People’s Counsel for the District of Columbia, and the PJM Industrial Customer Coalition (collectively, “Complainants”) against PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (“PJM”) arguing, principally, that PJM violated Schedule 6 of the PJM Operating Agreement by failing to execute Designated Entity Agreements in all situations with each “Designated Entity,” or the entity designated to build transmission projects that PJM selects in the PJM Regional Transmission Expansion Plan (“RTEP”). FERC also granted in part and denied in part a separate request by PJM under section 206 of the Federal Power Act to revise Schedule 6 of the PJM Operating Agreement (the “PJM 206 Filing”) governing the RTEP process and associated requirements for Designated Entity Agreements. FERC established paper hearing procedures to develop a record to determine PJM’s responsibilities concerning Designated Entity Agreements for certain RTEP projects already in process and whether remedial actions are required to address the Operating Agreement violations.

On July 19, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (“D.C. Circuit”) issued an Order denying Tenaska Clear Creek Wind, LLC’s (“Clear Creek”) challenges to FERC’s orders allowing the allocation of costs for network upgrades.  Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (“SPP”) assigned costs of more than $100 million to Clear Creek to pay for upgrades required on SPP’s system to accommodate the interconnection of Clear Creek’s wind turbine-powered electrical generation project (the “Project”).

On July 16, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (“D.C. Circuit”) found that FERC failed to adequately consider a liquefied natural gas (“LNG”) project’s greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions and failed to properly assess the cumulative effects of the LNG project’s nitrogen dioxide (“NO2”) emissions. While the D.C. Circuit remanded to FERC for further consideration, it did so without vacatur.

On July 9, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (“D.C. Circuit”) vacated orders issued by the FERC that required six wholesale power sellers (the “Sellers”) to issue refunds to customers for power sales made above FERC’s “soft” price cap during the 2020 heatwave in California.  The court held that FERC “should have conducted [a] Mobile-Sierra analysis prior to ordering refunds,” and therefore remanded the orders so that FERC could “change its refund analysis for above-cap sales going forward.”

On July 9, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (“D.C. Circuit”) declined to stay a new Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) rule that seeks to limit methane emissions in the oil and gas industries (“Methane Rule”), thereby allowing the Methane Rule to remain in effect while litigation proceeds.

On June 27, 2024, FERC accepted Midcontinent Independent System Operator Inc.’s (“MISO”) proposed tariff revisions that sought to implement a downward-sloping Reliability Based Demand Curve (“RBDC”) in the MISO Planning Resource Auction (“Auction”) beginning with the 2025/2026 Planning Year.  FERC determined that MISO’s proposal is not only consistent with its acceptance of similar sloped curves in other Regional Transmission Owners/Independent System Operators capacity markets but that MISO’s proposal to adopt a downward-sloping RBDC will reduce volatility in Auction Clearing Prices, increase the stability of the capacity revenue stream over time, and render capacity investments less risky, thereby encouraging greater investment and at a lower financing cost.