FERC Judicial Review Tracker

This track­er was launched February 14, 2022. It was last updat­ed September 1, 2022.

The State Energy & Environmental Impact Center has created this tracker to collect court decisions reviewing orders of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).1 This tracker will be updated as new decisions are issued. It will also be expanded to cover earlier years.

Background

Under the statutes governing judicial review of FERC orders, the Federal Power Act and the Natural Gas Act, an aggrieved party must seek rehearing from FERC before filing a petition for review.2 Court decisions reviewing FERC orders thus typically review two orders – an order, and an order on rehearing.

FERC is composed of five members, with no more than 3 from any one political party. The chair is determined by the president.3 FERC must have a quorum of three commissioners participating to take an action. A commissioner might not participate in a case if they are recused due to a conflict or other issue.

In this tracker, we include the history of the FERC orders on review. We list the Commissioner composition and Chair at the time of the final FERC order that was subject to the court decision. And we note which orders include a dissent or partial dissent (commissioners also sometimes concur, but we have not separately listed that data in this tracker for brevity’s sake).

117 cases match your search. 13 were granted, 90 were denied, 13 were granted in part, denied in part.   Download as CSV

Narragansett Indian Tribal Historic Preservation Office v. FERC 2/7/2020

Judicial Review

Court
Judge Ideology 4
Case Type
Petitioner Type
Outcome
D.C. Circuit
Democrat
Gas
Tribal Gov
Denied
Petition for review of FERC order denying motion to amend FERC regulations around the National Historic Preservation Act brought by Narragansett Tribe denied for lack of standing.

FERC Proceeding

Commissioner Composition 5
Chair 6
Participating Commissioners
Dissenting Commissioners 7
Republican
Chatterjee
3
0

FERC Orders on Review

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co., L.L.C., 162 FERC ¶ 61,013 (2018) (and earlier 4/12/17 notice to proceed), reh’g denied, 165 FERC ¶ 61,170 (2018).

Northern Virginia Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. FERC 12/20/2019

Judicial Review

Court
Judge Ideology
Case Type
Petitioner Type
Outcome
D.C. Circuit
Democrat
Electric
Industry
Denied

Petition challenging FERC’s decision to allocate costs for Dominion’s construction of underground power lines in Virginia (as required by state government) to only Virginia customers denied.

FERC Proceeding

Commissioner Composition
Chair
Participating Commissioners
Dissenting Commissioners
Republican
Chatterjee
3
0

FERC Orders on Review

Old Dominion Elec. Coop., 146 FERC ¶ 61,200 (2014), reh’g denied, 161 FERC ¶ 61,055 (2017).

INEOS USA LLC v. FERC and United States of America 10/18/2019

Judicial Review

Court
Judge Ideology
Case Type
Petitioner Type
Outcome
D.C. Circuit
Democrat
Gas
Industry
Denied

Petition challenging FERC approval of pipeline ownership transfer tariffs without investigation, claiming transfer discriminated against non-affiliates of pipeline, denied for lack of standing (failure to show injury in fact).

FERC Proceeding

Commissioner Composition
Chair
Participating Commissioners
Dissenting Commissioners
Republican
McIntyre
5
0

FERC Orders on Review

Leveret Pipeline Co. LLC, 160 FERC ¶ 62,020 (2017), reh’g denied, 162 FERC ¶ 61,038 (2018), reh’g denied again, 163 FERC ¶ 61,180 (2018).

City of Oberlin, Ohio v. FERC 9/6/2019

Judicial Review

Court
Judge Ideology
Case Type
Petitioner Type
Outcome
D.C. Circuit
Democrat
Gas
Local Gov
Granted in part, denied in part

Petition challenging FERC order under Natural Gas Act authorizing company to construct natural gas pipeline and exercise eminent domain, denied in part and remanded without vacatur for further explanation for decision.

FERC Proceeding

Commissioner Composition
Chair
Participating Commissioners
Dissenting Commissioners
Republican
McIntyre
5
2

FERC Orders on Review

Nexus Gas Transmission, LLC, 160 FERC ¶ 61,022 (2017), order on reh’g, 164 FERC ¶ 61,054 (2018).

Allegheny Defense Project, et al. v. FERC 8/2/2019

Judicial Review

Court
Judge Ideology
Case Type
Petitioner Type
Outcome
D.C. Circuit
Democrat
Gas
NGO
Denied

Petition challenging order authorizing gas pipeline construction for alleged NEPA and other procedural violations denied.

FERC Proceeding

Commissioner Composition
Chair
Participating Commissioners
Dissenting Commissioners
Republican
McIntyre
5
0

FERC Orders on Review

Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC, 158 FERC ¶ 61,125 (2017), order on reh’g, 161 FERC ¶ 61,250 (2017), reh’g denied, 162 FERC ¶ 61,192 (2018).

Arizona Public Service Company v. FERC 6/14/2019

Judicial Review

Court
Judge Ideology
Case Type
Petitioner Type
Outcome
9th Circuit
Republican
Electric
Industry
Granted in part, denied in part

Petition challenging FERC decision on reimbursement payment for terminating transmission agreement between power companies (denied), and challenging FERC determination that prior expiration agreement modifying larger transmission agreement should have been previously filed with FERC (granted, remanded).

FERC Proceeding

Commissioner Composition
Chair
Participating Commissioners
Dissenting Commissioners
Republican
Chatterjee
3
0

FERC Orders on Review

Arizona Public Service Company, 156 FERC ¶ 61,006 (2016), reh’g denied, 161 FERC ¶ 61,022 (2017).

Southwest Airlines Co. and American Airlines, Inc. v. FERC and the United States of America 6/14/2019

Judicial Review

Court
Judge Ideology
Case Type
Petitioner Type
Outcome
D.C. Circuit
Democrat
Petroleum
Industry
Granted

Petition challenging (first time) use of post-rate increase data to justify oil pipeline rate increase index as arbitrary and capricious, granted.

FERC Proceeding

Commissioner Composition
Chair
Participating Commissioners
Dissenting Commissioners
Republican
McIntyre
5
0

FERC Orders on Review

Hollyfrontier Refining & Marketing LLC v. SFPP, L.P., 157 FERC ¶ 61,186 (2016), order on reh’g, 162 FERC ¶ 61,232 (2018).

Lori Birckhead, et al. v. FERC 6/4/2019

Judicial Review

Court
Judge Ideology
Case Type
Petitioner Type
Outcome
D.C. Circuit
Democrat
Gas
Other
Denied

Petition claiming FERC authorization of natural gas compression facility construction and operation violated NEPA for failing to adequately address alternatives and environmental effects of increased productions and consumption denied.

FERC Proceeding

Commissioner Composition
Chair
Participating Commissioners
Dissenting Commissioners
Republican
McIntyre
5
1

FERC Orders on Review

Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co., L.L.C., 156 FERC ¶ 61,157(2016), reh’g denied, 163 FERC ¶ 61,190 (2018).

Otsego 2000, et al. v. FERC 5/9/2019

Judicial Review

Court
Judge Ideology
Case Type
Petitioner Type
Outcome
D.C. Circuit
Democrat
Gas
NGO
Denied

Petition challenging FERC order granting certificate for construction of supplemental compression facilities for existing natural gas pipeline as violating NEPA and for violating notice and comment (in not providing additional enviornmental information), dismissed for lack of organizational (or associational) standing.

FERC Proceeding

Commissioner Composition
Chair
Participating Commissioners
Dissenting Commissioners
Republican
McIntyre
5
2

FERC Orders on Review

Dominion Transmission, Inc., 155 FERC ¶ 61,106 (2016), reh’g denied, 163 FERC ¶ 61,128 (2018).

Sunland Estate Homeowners Association v. FERC 4/23/2019

Judicial Review

Court
Judge Ideology
Case Type
Petitioner Type
Outcome
9th Circuit
Democrat
Hydro
Other
Denied

Petition challenging FERC order amending hydroelectic project’s boundary denied.

FERC Proceeding

Commissioner Composition
Chair
Participating Commissioners
Dissenting Commissioners
Republican
Chatterjee
3
0

FERC Orders on Review

Pub. Util. Dist. No. 2 of Grant Cty., Washington, 158 FERC ¶ 61,036 (2017), reh’g denied, 160 FERC ¶ 61,096 (2017).

  1. Court decisions are gathered from FERC’s website.
  2. 15 U.S.C. § 717r; 16 U.S.C. § 825l.
  3. The list of current and previous chairs is available here.
  4. This tracker uses the affiliation of the president who nominated the reviewing judge as a proxy for the judge’s ideology. If the decision was issued by a panel of judges that were not all nominated by a president of the same political party, we have indicated the party affiliation of the president for the majority of judges on the panel.
  5. This indicates the political party affiliation of the majority of the FERC commissioners participating in the last decision on review in the relevant court case. “Split” indicates that there was an even number of Democrats and Republicans on the Commission at the time.
  6. This indicates the FERC chair at the time of the last decision on review in the relevant court case.
  7. This includes Commissioners who dissented in part from the order or concurred in part and dissented in part.