July 18, 2025

Challenge to FERC’s Approval of Gas Industry’s Emergency Petition

By Tyson Slocum

access the full .pdf filing here PCingaaRehearing

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s order granting the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America’s Emergency Petition for a temporary waiver of regulations to increase blanket certificate cost limitations in docket CP25-208-001 contains fatal errors that renders the order unlawful. The order accepts as fact a National Energy Emergency declaration that is so devoid of any verifiable substantiation that it is an inadmissible citation for a junior high school assignment, let alone a federal adjudicatory proceeding. Neither the Emergency Petition nor the Order provides any supportable basis for emergency conditions. Second, the Commission failed to provide public notice of the waiver request, thereby unreasonably depriving the public of a meaningful opportunity to participate. Indeed, we joined a substantive protest that was filed literally minutes after the order. Had the Commission issued notice of a comment deadline, we would have submitted such comments prior to a Commission order.

1. Section 1 of The Natural Gas Act commands that “the business of transporting and selling natural gas for ultimate distribution to the public is affected with a public interest.” Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act requires a certificate of public convenience and necessity be issued by the Commission prior to construction and operation of a natural gas pipeline. The “primary aim” of the Natural Gas Act is “to protect consumers against exploitation at the hands of natural gas companies.” FPC v. Hope Natural Gas Co., 320 U.S. 591, 610 (1944).
2. Interstate pipelines that hold a certificate of public convenience and necessity pursuant to section 7 of the Natural Gas Act may obtain a blanket certificate to undertake pipeline modifications or construction without first having to obtain a case-by-case certificate authorization by the Commission. Currently, blanket certificate activities are limited to a maximum cost of $41.1 million per project undertaken subject to prior notice, with the cost threshold adjusted annually for inflation. The effect of the blanket certificate is to exempt review of the modifications or upgrades without having to demonstrate their compatibility with the public convenience and necessity. So a natural gas company that seeks to add a compressor station in a residential neighborhood in order to increase the volume to gas moving through the pipeline at a cost below the threshold would simply have to notify affected landowners about the project, and then the Commission would automatically green light the construction. The blanket certificate process cuts the public out of an opportunity to protest or raise objections to the planned pipeline upgrades.
3. On April 14, 2025, a trade association representing natural gas pipelines, the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA), filed an “Emergency Petition”, declaring that “The United States is in a declared state of national energy emergency”, providing a citation to the January 20, 2025 National Energy Emergency declaration by President Donald J. Trump. Other than a footnoted citation, INGAA’s “Emergency Petition” does not reproduce the actual text of the President’s National Energy Emergency declaration.
4. INGAA’s “Emergency Petition” requested the Commission decline to establish notice and comment procedures, and establish an emergency two year waiver doubling the cost limitations of the blanket certificate prior notice authorizations from $41.1 million to $82.2 million, without providing any demonstration that such a change is consistent with the Natural Gas Act (Petition at 2, 13).
5. The Commission never noticed the April 14 Emergency Petition for public comment. The Commission’s June 18 order offers no explanation for its failure to notice the Emergency Petition for public comment.
6. On June 18, the Commission granted INGAA’s Emergency Petition request in part, increasing the threshold by 50% from $41.1 million to $61.65 million for a two year period. Expanding the dollar threshold will allow a significant amount of pipeline modifications and construction to effectively evade direct challenges by affected community members before FERC.
7. The Commission’s order (at ¶ 3) states that INGAA’s petition “cites an urgent, nationwide need for enhanced and expanded natural gas infrastructure, as well as Executive Order 14156, Declaring a National Energy Emergency.”
8. The Commission’s order continues (at ¶ 4) that “In a letter dated April 30, 2025, U.S. Department of the Interior Secretary Burgum, acting in his capacity as Chairman of the National Energy Dominance Council, endorsed INGAA’s Petition as necessary to address the current national energy emergency.” Burgum’s letter urged the Commission to act “without notice and comment” because of the January 20 National Energy Emergency declaration by President Trump.
9. At no point in the order does the Commission question the legitimacy of the President’s declared National Energy Emergency. The Commission also neglected to include any actual language from the declared energy emergency into the record. The Commission does site that record exports of natural gas to foreign countries are a significant part of increased natural gas demand (at ¶ 7), but doesn’t appear to reconcile how record LNG exports comports with domestic energy shortages in an alleged declared energy emergency.
10. Attached as Exhibit A is the full text of President Trump’s National Energy Emergency that the Commission relied upon to not provide public notice and comment of INGAA’s Emergency Petition.
11. It seems important to dissect the President’s National Energy Emergency declaration to ascertain its factual assessment of energy emergency conditions.
12. The National Energy Emergency declaration claims: The policies of the previous administration have driven our Nation into a national emergency, where a precariously inadequate and intermittent energy supply, and an increasingly unreliable grid, require swift and decisive action … These numerous problems are most pronounced in our Nation’s Northeast and West Coast, where dangerous State and local policies jeopardize our Nation’s core national defense and security needs, and devastate the prosperity of not only local residents but the entire United States population. The United States’ insufficient energy production, transportation, refining, and generation constitutes an unusual and extraordinary threat to our Nation’s economy, national security, and foreign policy. In light of these findings, I hereby declare a national emergency.
13. These are remarkable and serious allegations that the Commission has accepted as part of its decision to waive public notice and comment procedures in order to address the Emergency Petition. So let us examine the evidence the President provided to justify these serious allegations.
14. Let us start with the President’s charge that “These numerous problems are most pronounced in our Nation’s Northeast and West Coast, where dangerous State and local policies jeopardize our Nation’s core national defense and security needs, and devastate the prosperity of not only local residents but the entire United States population.” FERC relying on a Presidential declaration that “dangerous State and local policies jeopardize our Nation’s core national defense and security needs” surely features some form of documented justification. The following numbered paragraph contains all of the supporting documentation of “dangerous” State and local policies that have caused the energy emergency:
16. As evidenced in the proceeding empty paragraph, there is not a shred of evidence that any “Northeast” or “West Coast” U.S. state adopted any “dangerous” policies that would have caused an energy emergency. There has been no proof presented to the Commission that any state legislature or Governor’s Energy and Climate Solutions office has implemented any “dangerous” laws or regulations causing an energy emergency.
17. That said, if the National Energy Emergency declaration blames “dangerous” state policies in the “Northeast” and “West Coast” United States, then at a minimum the Commission should only be applying blanket certificate modifications for those specific geographic regions. The Commission’s Order instead applies the changes nationwide, and offers no explanation for the discrepancy.
18. The failure of the Commission to provide the necessary notice and comment has directly harmed the public interest. Just minutes after the Commission issued its Order, Environmental Defense Fund, Public Citizen, Inc. and Citizens Utility Board filed a Protest in this proceeding – an effort that was months in the making.[6] But because our Protest was filed minutes after the Commission’s Order, the facts we presented are not reflected in the Order. Had there been a notice and comment period, we would have filed a timely Protest that the Commission would have been bound to address in its Order. We attach our June 18 Protest into the record of our rehearing request as Exhibit B.