Appellate Briefs

Constellation Energy, et al. v. FERC No. 11-1451 Rate design to address the problem of rate pancaking across the Midwest ISO-PJM seam; development and implementation of Seams Elimination Cost Adjustment (SECA). Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc., and PJM Interconnection, LLC, et al., 131 FERC ¶ 61,173 (2010), reh’g denied, 136 FERC ¶ 61,244 (2011). Circuit D.C. Cir.

Gunpowder Riverkeeper v. FERC No. 14-1062 Commission authorization to construct and operate 21 miles of pipeline and appurtenant facilities in Baltimore and Harford Counties, MD; claimed errors in approval process and adverse effect on private property interests. Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC, 145 FERC ¶ 61,153 (2013), reh’g denied, 146 FERC ¶ 61,116 (2014). Circuit D.C. Cir.

Aera Energy, et al. v. FERC Nos. 13-1138 and 13-1303 General rate case filing by Kern River; inclusion of Master Limited Partnerships in proxy group for determining rate of return, and various Period I and II rate design issues. Kern River Gas Transmission Co., Opinion No. 486, 117 FERC ¶ 61,077 (2006), on reh'g, 123 FERC ¶ 61,056 (2008), on reh’g, 129 FERC ¶ 61,240 (2009), on reh’g, 133 FERC ¶ 61,162 (2010), on initial decision, 136 FERC ¶ 61,045 (2011), on reh’g, 142 FERC ¶ 61,132 (2013). Circuit D.C. Cir.

Aera Energy, et al. v. FERC Nos. 13-1138 and 13-1303 General rate case filing by Kern River; inclusion of Master Limited Partnerships in proxy group for determining rate of return, and various Period I and II rate design issues. Kern River Gas Transmission Co., Opinion No. 486, 117 FERC ¶ 61,077 (2006), on reh'g, 123 FERC ¶ 61,056 (2008), on reh’g, 129 FERC ¶ 61,240 (2009), on reh’g, 133 FERC ¶ 61,162 (2010), on initial decision, 136 FERC ¶ 61,045 (2011), on reh’g, 142 FERC ¶ 61,132 (2013). Circuit D.C. Cir.

Midland Cogen. Venture LP v. FERC No. 12-1224 and 14-1020 Interconnection between Consumers Energy and Midland Cogeneration and assignment of Consumers’ transmission responsibilities to Michigan Electric; disputed filing and payment obligations. Michigan Electric Transmission Co., LLC, 138 FERC ¶ 61,202 (2012), and Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator and Consumers Energy Co., 138 FERC ¶ 61,204 (2012); order on reh’g and clar., 146 FERC ¶ 61,008 (2014). Circuit D.C. Cir.

Oneok, Inc. v. Learjet, Inc. No. 13-271 Merits brief of the United States as amicus curiae concerning review of Ninth Circuit decision holding that that the Natural Gas Act does not preempt state-law antitrust claims targeting manipulation of privately published natural-gas price indices. [Brief filed by the Solicitor General of the United States] Circuit S. Ct.

Pub. Serv. Comm’n of New York v. FERC No. 13-2316 Approval of modifications to definition of “bulk electric system” developed by NERC, and approval of procedures to add or remove facilities from the bulk electric system on a case-by-case basis. Revision to Electric Reliability Organization Definition of Bulk Electric System and Rules of Procedure, Order No. 773, 141 FERC ¶ 61,236 (2012), order on reh’g and clar., 143 FERC ¶ 61,053 (2013). Circuit 2nd Cir.

Cal. Pub. Utils. Comm’n v. FERC No. 13-74361 Denial of interlocutory appeal of ALJ’s decision not to hold FERC proceeding in abeyance, concerning recovery of wildfire costs from ratepayers, until decision in CPUC proceeding. San Diego Gas & Electric Co., 145 FERC ¶ 61,136 (2013) (rejecting rehearing of decision not to hear interlocutory appeal). Circuit 9th Cir.

Elec. Power Supply Ass’n v. FERC Nos. 11-1486, et al. Motion to stay issuance of mandate Circuit D.C. Cir.

PSEG Cos., et al. v. FERC No. 12-1382 (Supplemental Brief) Transmission planning under PJM-administered tariff; eligibility of non-incumbent transmission owners to build economic expansion projects, receiving cost-based or cost-of-service compensation, under PJM Regional Transmission Expansion Plan (RTEP) procedures. Primary Power, LLC, 131 FERC ¶ 61,015 (2010), order on reh’g, 140 FERC ¶ 61,052 (2012); Central Transmission, LLC v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., 131 FERC ¶ 61,243 (2010), order on reh’g, 140 FERC ¶ 61,053 (2012). Circuit D.C. Cir.

Tesoro Alaska Co., et al. v. FERC No. 13-1248, et al. Approval of contested settlement, addressing cost pooling among owners of the Trans Alaska Pipeline System. BP Pipelines (Alaska) Inc., et al., 144 FERC ¶ 61,025 (2013). Circuit D.C. Cir.

Missouri Pub. Serv. Comm’n v. FERC No. 13-1278 Order on remand from Missouri Pub. Serv. Comm’n v. FERC, 601 F.3d 581 (D.C. Cir. 2010), concerning FERC’s decision to allow MoGas Pipeline to include full purchase price of certain pipeline assets (including amount in excess of book value) in rate base, based on showing of ratepayer benefits. Missouri Interstate Gas Co., et al., 142 FERC ¶ 61,195 (2013), reh’g denied, 144 FERC ¶ 61,220 (2013). Circuit D.C. Cir.

Central Hudson Gas & Elec., et al. v. FERC Approval of new capacity zone in New York; redefinition of demand curves in New York installed capacity market. New York Indep. System Operator, Inc., 144 FERC ¶ 61,126 (2013), order on reh’g, 147 FERC ¶ 61,152 (2014); 146 FERC ¶ 61,043 (2014), reh’g & clar. denied, 147 FERC ¶ 61,148 (2014). Circuit 2nd Cir.

Louisiana Pub. Serv. Comm’n v. FERC No. 13-60784 Implementation of bandwidth remedy based on calendar year 2008 data – third annual bandwidth proceeding; consideration of various inputs to formula. Entergy Services, Inc., Op. No. 518, 139 FERC ¶ 61,105 (2012), order on reh’g & clar., 145 FERC ¶ 61,047 (2013). Circuit 5th Cir.

Turlock Irrigation Dist., et al. v. FERC Nos. 13-1250, et al. Determination that licensing is required for unlicensed 4.9 MW La Grange Project, on the Tuolumne River in California, because of findings based on navigability, federal lands, and post-1935 construction. Turlock Irrigation Dist. and Modesto Irrigation Dist., 141 FERC ¶ 62,211 (2012), order on reh’g and stay, 144 FERC ¶ 61,051 (2013). Circuit D.C. Cir.

Electric Power Supply Ass’n, et al. v. FERC Nos. 11-1486, et al. Petition for rehearing en banc. Regulations requiring that demand response provider, participating in an organized wholesale energy market, be compensated at the market (locational marginal) price, when dispatch of demand response resource is cost-effective and can balance supply and demand. Demand Response Compensation in Organized Wholesale Energy Markets, Order No. 745, 134 FERC ¶ 61,187 (2011), order on reh’g & clar., 137 FERC ¶ 61,215 (2011). Circuit D.C. Cir.

St. Paul Park Refining Co. v. FERC and USofA No. 13-1302 Order dismissing complaint that alleged that 2008 settlement, instituting a surcharge for an oil pipeline expansion project, no longer is just and reasonable. St. Paul Park Refining Co. LLC v. Enbridge Pipelines (North Dakota) LLC, 145 FERC ¶ 61,050 (2013). Circuit D.C. Cir.

In Re: People of the State of New York and Public Service Comm’n of the State of New York No. 14-1502 Opposition to petition for mandamus and stay of FERC order accepting creation of a new capacity zone for the Lower Hudson Valley. Circuit 2nd Cir.

Dept. of Interior v. FERC No. 13-2439 Replacement of the existing wooden flashboards of Pawtucket Dam in Lowell, Mass. with an inflatable crest gate system, to reduce risk of flooding; effect on historic preservation. Boott Hydropower and Eldred L. Field Hydroelectric Trust, 143 FERC ¶ 61,048 (2013), reh’g denied, 144 FERC ¶ 61,211 (2013). Circuit 1st Cir.

Midland Power Coop. and NRECA v. FERC No. 13-1184 Finding that Midland’s disconnection of service to the qualifying wind facility owned and operated by the Sweckers, over disagreement as to Midland’s avoided costs for purchasing the output of the facility, is inconsistent with Midland’s obligations under PURPA. Gregory and Beverly Swecker v. Midland Power Coop., 137 FERC ¶ 61,200 (2011), reh’g denied, 142 FERC ¶ 61,207 (2013). Circuit D.C. Cir.