In an order issued February 15, 2018 (“February 15 Order”), FERC found that several transmission owners participating in the PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (“PJM”) market have been acting inconsistently with FERC Order No. 890, and that certain terms and conditions in PJM’s Open Access Transmission Tariff (“OATT”) are unjust and unreasonable.  In particular, FERC concluded that the PJM transmission owners’ planning processes ran afoul of the coordination and transparency principles in Order No. 890 by allowing the incumbent transmission owners to bypass input and, effectively, competition, from other transmission planning stakeholders.  FERC ordered the transmission owners to revise the OATT and Operating Agreement in compliance with Order No. 890.

In response to concerns regarding the changing nature of the nation’s energy supply portfolio and the emergence of promising energy storage technologies, the Commission in recent years issued several notices of inquiry, notices of proposed rulemaking, and policy statements regarding various energy storage and ancillary service supply issues.  Additionally, the Commission considered but ultimately declined to pursue the Department of Energy-initiated rulemaking on grid resiliency and reliability.  On February 15, 2018, however, the Commission took concrete action by issuing a pair of Final Rules, addressing (i) storage participation in regional markets; and (ii) the provision of primary frequency response, a critical grid support service.

On February 12, 2018, the White House issued its proposed framework for an infrastructure bill to Congress.  Notably, the White House’s infrastructure plan proposes to (1) establish a firm deadline of 21 months for lead agencies to complete their National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) reviews and an additional 3 months thereafter to approve or deny a permit (i.e., a decision on an interstate natural gas pipeline project or hydropower license application must be made within 2 years of the application); and (2) amend the Clean Water Act (“CWA”) to set a deadline for a state agency to determine whether a CWA section 401 certificate application is complete.

On February 2, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (“D.C. Circuit”) remanded FERC’s decision denying complaints that the ISO New England, Inc.’s (“ISO-NE”) rules locking in prices for new entrants to ISO-NE’s Forward Capacity Market (“FCM”) result in price suppression and discriminatory rates for existing suppliers.  In doing so, the D.C. Circuit held that FERC did not adequately explain why its prior decision to reject a similar proposal did not apply to ISO-NE’s rules.

On February 5, 2018, FERC conditionally accepted a proposal by the PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (“PJM”) to amend its Open Access Transmission Tariff (“OATT”) and Amended and Restated Operating Agreement (“Operating Agreement”) to accommodate additional pseudo-tied and dynamically scheduled resources into the PJM region.  FERC accepted the proposal and provided an effective date of November 9, 2017, provided that PJM submits a compliance filing addressing FERC’s limited concerns in the order.

On February 2, 2018, FERC conditionally granted FirstEnergy Service Company (“FirstEnergy”) a limited waiver of certain market-based rate affiliate restrictions to allow for the establishment of a centralized regional transmission organization (“RTO”) interface group.  The affiliate restrictions protect captive customers from potential harm if a franchised public utility interacts with its affiliates in ways that would transfer benefits to the affiliate to the detriment of the captive customer.  FERC granted the waiver to FirstEnergy, with the condition that it must keep sufficient records to permit the Commission to audit whether FirstEnergy’s representations that it would not harm captive customers are true.

On February 2, 2018, FERC directed Commission Staff to convene a technical conference to explore issues concerning interconnection issues that affect neighboring utilities or regions.  In particular, the technical conference is to address issues raised in a complaint by EDF Renewable Energy, Inc. (“EDF”) against the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (“MISO”), Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (“SPP”), and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (“PJM) related to the Affected Systems coordination procedures contained in the MISO, SPP, and PJM tariffs, the MISO-PJM Joint Operating Agreement (“JOA”), and the MISO-SPP JOA, as well as the Affected Systems coordination issues raised in FERC’s Interconnection Reform Rulemaking proceeding in Docket No. RM17-8-000 (see December 20, 2016 edition of the WER).

On January 26, 2018, a divided panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (“D.C. Circuit”) vacated a series of FERC orders that removed from transmission owners in the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (“MISO”) the ability to elect to fund the construction of network upgrades on their transmission systems to accommodate the interconnection of new generation.  The D.C. Circuit vacated FERC’s orders and remanded the case back to FERC for further proceedings.

On January 25, 2018, as amended on January 31, 2018, FERC Office of Enforcement Staff (“OE Staff”) answered BP America Inc., BP Corporation North America Inc., BP America Production Company, and BP Energy Company’s (collectively, “BP”) arguments that FERC must dismiss its order assessing civil penalties and disgorgement against BP for violating FERC’s anti-market manipulation rule due to the five-year statute of limitations for civil penalties.  Among other things, OE Staff argued that (1) enforcement actions under the Natural Gas Act (“NGA”) are distinct from the enforcement process under the Federal Power Act (“FPA”), and thus similar federal district court precedent in the FPA context is inapplicable to BP; and (2) FERC’s issuance of disgorgement is more remedial than punitive and thus not subject to the statute of limitations.

On January 31, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (“D.C. Circuit”) denied requests for an en banc rehearing of an August 2017 decision (Sierra Club v. FERC) vacating FERC’s approval of the Southeast Market Pipelines Project (“SMP Project”), a natural gas pipeline currently under construction in the southeastern United States.  In its August decision, the D.C. Circuit held that FERC failed to analyze the greenhouse gas emissions that would result from the SMP Project, as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”).  On February 2, 2018, the developers for the SMP Project filed a request at FERC for expedited reissued construction approval certificates, or in the alternative, temporary emergency certificates, arguing that halting work on the SMP Project will cause “irreparable harm.”