Skip Navigation
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

New Petitions
Text Size small medium large

Many Commission decisions are challenged or enforced in the Federal courts. The Office of the Solicitor, OGC, has independent authority to defend the Commission in court, typically the U.S. Courts of Appeals, unless the matter goes to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The defense normally entails preparing motions and briefs and presenting oral arguments before three-judge panels. It may also involve responding to petitions for writ of mandamus and requests to stay the underlying Commission action. At times, the Office files briefs as a "friend of the court," and in certain limited circumstances also defends the Commission or enforces its initiatives in the U.S. district courts.

  1. Utility Workers Union of America Local 464 and Robert Clark v. FERC
    No. 16-1408 (D.C. Cir. filed 11/23/2016)
      Results of 10th ISO-NE Forward Capacity Auction; bidding behavior and retirement of Brayton Point facility. ISO New England, Inc., 155 FERC ¶ 61,273 PDF (2016), reh’g denied, 157 FERC ¶ 61,060 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. ER16-1041

  2. City of Osceola, Ark. v. FERC
    No. 16-1401 (D.C. Cir. filed 11/17/2016)
      Denial of complaint seeking refund of rough production cost equalization bandwidth payments. City of Osceola, Arkansas v. Entergy Arkansas and Entergy Services, Inc., 154 FERC ¶ 61,099 PDF (2016), reh’g denied, 156 FERC ¶ 61,184 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. EL16-7

  3. Louisiana Pub. Serv. Comm’n v. FERC
    No. 16-1382 (D.C. Cir. filed 11/4/2016)
      Order on remand from LPSC v. FERC, 772 F.3d 1297 (D.C. Cir. 2014), concerning denial of refunds. Louisiana Pub. Serv. Comm’n, et al. v. Entergy Corp. and Entergy Services, Inc., 155 FERC ¶ 61,120 DOC (2016), reh’g denied, 156 FERC ¶ 61,221 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. EL00-66, et al.

  4. Michigan Public Service Commission and Verso Corp., et al. v. FERC
    Nos. 15-1049, et al. and 16-1385, et al. (D.C. Cir. filed 11/4/2016 and later)
      Refund of previously-allocated costs associated with the operation of System Support Resource generating units, located in the American Transmission Co. service territory, under the MISO tariff. Pub. Serv. Comm’n of Wisconsin v. Midcontinent Indep. System Operator, Inc., et al., order on reh’g & compl., 150 FERC ¶ 61,104 PDF (2015), and earlier orders; order on reh’g & clar., 156 FERC ¶ 61,205 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. EL14-34

  5. Alliance Pipeline L.P. v. FERC
    Nos. 16-1017, et al. (D.C. Cir. filed 10/21/2016)

  6. ESI Energy, LLC v. FERC
    No. 16-1342 (D.C. Cir. filed 9/30/2016)
      Assignment of costs of constructing network upgrade to interconnecting generator, based on tariff language and cost allocation policy; which version of PJM tariff to use. PJM Interconn., L.L.C., 153 FERC ¶ 61,327 PDF (2015), order on reh’g, compl. & clar., 156 FERC ¶ 61,090 PDF (2016) (on remand from West Deptford Energy v. FERC, D.C. Cir. 2014).
      FERC Docket No. ER11-4073

  7. Sierra Club, et al. v. FERC
    Nos. 16-1329 and 16-1387 (D.C. Cir. filed 9/21/2016 and later)
      Order authorizing, subject to conditions, Florida Southeast, Transco, and Sabal Trail to construct and operate natural gas pipeline projects to serve Florida and southeast markets. Florida Southeast Connection, LLC, et al., 154 FERC ¶ 61,080 DOC (2016), order on reh’g, 156 FERC ¶ 61,160 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. CP14-554, et al.

  8. MISO Transmission Owners v. FERC
    Nos. 16-1325 and 16-1326 (D.C. Cir. filed 9/19/2016)
      Orders on 2013 and 2015 complaints challenging the MISO transmission owners’ return on equity, reflected in MISO’s tariff. Ass’n of Businesses Advocating Tariff Equity, et al. v. Midcontinent Indep. Sys. Operator, Inc., et al., 149 FERC ¶ 61,049 PDF (2014), order on reh’g, 156 FERC ¶ 61,060 PDF (2016); and Arkansas Elec. Coop. Corp., et al. v. ALLETE, Inc., et al., 151 FERC ¶ 61,219 PDF (2015), order on reh’g, 156 FERC ¶ 61,061 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. EL14-12, et al.

  9. BP America, et al. v. FERC
    No. 16-60604 (5th Cir. filed 9/7/2016)
      Investigation into whether BP profited from market conditions in the aftermath of Hurricane Ike by manipulating the price of natural gas in the Houston region, in violation of FERC anti-manipulation regulations. BP America Inc., et al., 147 FERC ¶ 61,130 PDF (2014), order on initial decision & reh’g, Opinion No. 549, 156 FERC ¶ 61,031 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. IN13-15

  10. Arkansas Pub. Serv. Comm’n v. FERC
    No. 16-1305 (D.C. Cir. filed 8/30/2016)
      Allocation of proceeds from a settlement agreement between Union Pacific and Entergy Arkansas, following withdrawal of Entergy Arkansas from Entergy System Agreement. Entergy Services, Inc., Opinion No. 547, 154 FERC ¶ 61,173 PDF (2016), order on reh’g and compl., 156 FERC ¶ 61,112 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. ER13-432

  11. Ameren Services Co., et al. v. FERC
    No. 16-1304 (D.C. Cir. filed 8/29/2016)
      MISO tariff provisions for funding of network upgrades by interconnecting generators. Otter Tail Power Co. v. Midcontinent Indep. Sys. Op., Inc., 151 FERC ¶ 61,220 PDF (2015), order on reh’g & clar., 153 FERC ¶ 61,352 PDF (2015), reh’g denied, 156 FERC ¶ 61,099 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. EL15-36, et al.

  12. Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC v. FERC
    No. 16-1296 (D.C. Cir. filed 8/22/2016)
      Issuance of new license to continue operation and maintenance of 819 MW Catawba-Wateree Hydroelectric Project, located on the Catawba and Wateree Rivers in North Carolina and South Carolina. Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, 153 FERC ¶ 62,134 DOC (2015), order on reh’g & clar., 156 FERC ¶ 61,010 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. P-2232

  13. ANR Storage Co. v. FERC
    No. 16-1285 (D.C. Cir. filed 8/11/2016)
      Denial of market-based rate authority for natural gas storage service. ANR Storage Co., Opinion No. 538, 153 FERC ¶ 61,052 PDF (2015), order on reh’g, 155 FERC ¶ 61,279 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. RP12-479

  14. ITC Midwest LLC v. FERC
    Nos. 16-1272 and 16-1273 (D.C. Cir. filed 8/3/2016)
      Orders requiring ITC to recalculate and reduce its rates to simulate the taking of bonus depreciation for eligible facilities in its federal income taxes. Midcontinent Indep. System Operator, Inc. and ITC Midwest LLC, 154 FERC ¶ 61,187 PDF (2016), order on reh’g & compl., 155 FERC ¶ 61,248 PDF (2016); ITC Midwest LLC, 154 FERC ¶ 61,188 PDF (2016), reh’g & reconsid. denied, 155 FERC ¶ 61,247 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. ER15-1250, et al.

  15. City of Clarksville, Tennessee v. FERC
    No. 16-1244 (D.C. Cir. filed 7/18/2016)
      Service area determinations for natural gas distribution facilities that extend across the Tennessee/ Kentucky border into Kentucky. City of Clarksville, Tenn., 146 FERC ¶ 61,074 PDF (2014), reh’g denied, 155 FERC ¶ 61,184 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. CP13-508

  16. United Airlines, Inc. and UPS Fuel Services, Inc. v. FERC and United States of America
    No. 16-1245 (D.C. Cir. filed 7/16/2016)
      Order granting in part complaints, alleging that Enterprise has violated a settlement by no longer accepting nominations for the transportation of jet fuel or distillates, and establishing limited hearing on the issue of damages. CHS Inc., et al. v. Enterprise TE Products Pipeline Co., LLC; Chevron Products Co. v. Enterprise TE Products Pipeline Co., LLC, 145 FERC ¶ 61,056 PDF (2013), order on reh’g, 155 FERC ¶ 61,178 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. OR3-25, et al.

  17. MISO Transmission Owners v. FERC
    No. 16-3791 (6th Cir. filed 7/15/2016)
      Financial obligations of a transmission owner withdrawing from MISO, for costs of regionally planned transmission projects. Midwest Indep. Transm. System Operator, et al., Op. No. 539, 153 FERC ¶ 61,101 PDF (2015), reh'g denied, 155 FERC ¶ 61,174 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. ER12-715, et al.

  18. Advanced Energy Management Alliance, et al. v. FERC
    Nos. 16-1234, et al. (D.C. Cir. filed 7/8/2016 and later)
      Conditional acceptance of PJM’s proposal to establish a Capacity Performance Resource, on a phased-in basis, to provide greater assurance of delivery of energy and reserves during emergency conditions. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., et al., 151 FERC ¶ 61,208 DOC (2015), order on reh’g and compl., 155 FERC ¶ 61,157 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. ER15-623, et al.

  19. Comite Dialogo Ambiental, Inc. v. FERC and United States of America
    No. 16-1229 (D.C. Cir. filed 7/5/2016)
      Order authorizing construction and operation of liquefied natural gas terminal on southern shore of Puerto Rico; various issues, including consultation process under the Endangered Species Act. Aguire Offshore GasPort, LLC, 152 FERC ¶ 61,071 DOC (2015), reh’g denied, 155 FERC ¶ 61,139 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. CP13-193

  20. Ameren Services Co., et al. v. FERC
    Nos. 16-1223, et al. (D.C. Cir. filed 7/1/2016 and later)

  21. Alliance Pipeline L.P. v. FERC
    No. 16-1207 (D.C. Cir. filed 6/24/2016)

  22. Michigan Pub. Serv. Comm’n, et al. v. FERC
    Nos. 16-1205, et al. (D.C. Cir. filed 6/24/2016 and later)
      Order on MISO’s proposed System Support Resource cost allocation methodology, assigning SSR costs directly to load-serving entities serving loads requiring the operation of various SSR units for reliability purposes. Midcontinent Indep. Sys. Operator, Inc., 152 FERC ¶ 61,216 PDF (2015), order on reh’g and compl., 155 FERC ¶ 61,134 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. ER14-2952, et al.

  23. Occidental Chemical Corp. v. FERC
    No. 16-1199 (D.C. Cir. filed 6/19/2016)
      Whether Entergy has an obligation under PURPA, on a service territory-wide basis, to purchase electric energy capacity from Qualifying Facilities larger than 20MW; whether Occidental rebutted presumption that MISO offers non-discriminatory access to wholesale markets. Entergy Services, Inc., et al., 154 FERC ¶ 61,035 PDF (2016), reh’g denied, 155 FERC ¶ 61,069 DOC (2016).
      FERC Docket No. QM14-3

  24. ExxonMobil Pipeline Co., ConocoPhillips Transp. Alaska, and BP Pipelines (Alaska) Inc. v. FERC and United States of America
    Nos. 16-1196, et al. (D.C. Cir. filed 6/17/2016 and later)
      Filing of revised rates and preliminary refunds in compliance with Opinion No. 544; initiation of hearing procedures and direction to make preliminary refunds. BP Pipelines (Alaska) Inc., et al., 155 FERC ¶ 61,054 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. IS11-335, et al.

  25. Tucson Electric Power Co. v. FERC
    No. 16-1194 (D.C. Cir. filed 6/17/2016)
      Refunds for late filing of, and unauthorized service under, FERC-jurisdictional agreements. Tucson Electric Power Co., 155 FERC ¶ 61,070 DOC (2016), on rehearing of earlier delegated letter orders.
      FERC Docket No. ER15-1861, et al.

  26. Arkansas Pub. Serv. Comm’n v. FERC
    No. 16-1193 (D.C. Cir. filed 6/16/2016)
      Entergy Arkansas’ responsibility for making bandwidth payments, despite withdrawal from Entergy System Agreement. Louisiana Pub. Serv. Comm’n v. Entergy Services, Inc., 153 FERC ¶ 61,032 PDF (2015), order on reh’g & clar., 155 FERC ¶ 61,118 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. EL01-88

  27. American Rivers and Alabama Rivers Alliance v. FERC and U.S. Sec. of Interior
    Nos. 16-1195, et al. (D.C. Cir. filed 6/15/2016 and later)
      Relicensing for the continued operation and maintenance of the Coosa River hydroelectric project; consideration of dissolved oxygen levels for the protection of aquatic species, and other issues. Alabama Power Co., 143 FERC ¶ 61,249 DOC (2013), order on reh’g & clar., 155 FERC ¶ 61,080 PDF (2016), reh’g denied, 156 FERC ¶ 61,171 PDF (2016).
      FERC Docket No. P-2146