Summaries of the agenda items for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's monthly open meeting to be held on March 19, 2026, pursuant to the sunshine notice released on March 12, 2026.
Electric
E-1 – Martha Coakley, Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, et al. v. Bangor Hydro-Electric Company, et al.; ENE (Environment Northeast), et al. v. Bangor Hydro-Electric Company, et al.; Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, et al. v. Bangor Hydro-Electric Company, et al.; Belmont Municipal Light Department, et al. v. Central Maine Power Company, et al.; ISO New England Inc. (Docket Nos. EL11-66-001, EL11-66-004, EL11-66-005, EL13-33-000, EL13-33-002, EL14-86-000, EL16-64-000, EL16-64-002, ER15-414-004). On November 24, 2014, the Commission issued an order on the above-captioned complaint dockets, pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), consolidating the proceedings and establishing hearing procedures. The respective complaints, the first of which was filed on September 30, 2011 against the New England Transmission Owners (NETOs), contended that the NETOs' 11.14 percent base return on equity (ROE) reflected in the ISO New England, Inc. (ISO-NE) open access transmission tariff (OATT) was unjust and unreasonable. Additionally, the complaints asserted that the application of the two-step discounted cash flow (DCF) methodology would have demonstrated that the appropriate base ROE for the NETOs would be 8.84 percent. In 2008, the Commission issued Opinion No. 489, which established a base ROE of 11.14 percent, comprised of an initial base ROE of 10.4 percent with an upward adjustment of 74 basis points to account for anomalous changes in capital market conditions. The November 24 order followed an Initial Decision issued by the presiding Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) on August 6, 2013, which found that the base ROE was unjust and unreasonable. Following the publication of Opinion No. 531, in which the Commission altered its approach in determining the ROE for public utilities by adopting a two-step DCF methodology, the Commission issued an order on October 16, 2014 that found the just and reasonable ROE for the NETOs was 10.57 percent and, including any incentive ROE adders, could not exceed 11.74 percent (i.e., the top of the zone of reasonableness).
In accordance with the procedural schedule set by the Commission on December 4, 2024, the respective parties filed Briefs on the Equity Data Cutoff Date on December 18 and 19, 2014. On February 5, 2015, the ALJ issued an order setting the equity data cutoff date as May 26, 2015. On June 15, 2015, the respective parties filed their Prehearing Briefs in advance of the hearing convened on June 25, 2015. Subsequently, on July 29, 2015, the parties filed their Initial Briefs and, on August 26, 2015, the parties filed their Reply Briefs. On March 22, 2015, the ALJ issued the Initial Decision on the consolidated proceedings, finding that in accordance with Opinion No. 531, the zone of reasonableness produced by a DCF analysis does not create a "zone of immunity" for the ROE of a utility. The Initial Decision held that the just and reasonable ROEs, based on the "properly run" DCF methodology, and the maximum ROEs for transmission incentive projects for the refund period in Docket No. EL13-33-02 would be 9.59 percent and 10.42 percent; for Docket No. EL14-86-000, 10.90 percent and 12.19 percent, respectively. Following the issuance of the Initial Decision, the respective parties filed Briefs on Exceptions on April 21, 2016, followed by Briefs Opposing Exceptions on May 20, 2016.
On October 5, 2017, the NETOs filed a motion for dismissal of the pancaked return on equity complaints, alternative motion for resolution of the remaining issues through a consolidated paper hearing, and motion for stay of the evidentiary hearing in the consolidated dockets. In the motion, NETOs requested that the Commission dismiss the four complaint proceedings in light of the decision rendered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) in Emera Maine v. FERC earlier in 2017. Namely, the D.C. Circuit vacated Opinion No. 531 and rejected certain portions of the previous ROE analysis by the Commission. As a result, the NETOs asserted that the D.C. Circuit affirmed that the Commission failed to prove that the prior ROE was unjust and unreasonable, rather than accepting a new ROE under a different DCF analysis as tantamount to demonstrating that the prior ROE needed to be revised downward. On October 16, 2018, the Commission issued an order proposing a methodology to address the issues raised in Emera Maine and establishing a paper hearing on how the methodology should apply to the proceedings with respect to the ROE of the NETOs. Namely, the methodology would be comprised of an average of the central tendencies of the zones of reasonableness produced by the DCF, capital-asset pricing model (CAPM), and Expected Earnings analyses together, which would result in a preliminary 10.41 percent just and reasonable ROE for the NETOs, exclusive of incentives. On January 11, 2019, a number of parties filed respective Initial Briefs on the paper hearing; Reply Briefs were filed on March 8, 2019. On November 13, 2024, the NETOs submitted a motion to file a Supplemental Brief, stating that, despite the protracted nature of the consolidated proceedings, there is "no valid interpretation" of section 206 of the FPA that would permit refunds beginning in 2011, when the first complaint was raised. As such, the NETOs argued that, if the Commission were to make any finding that the pre-existing ROE had been unjust and unreasonable, and attempt to apply it to 2014 or any other historical period, any refund relief beyond the 15-month refund period would contravene section 206(b) of the FPA. Agenda item E-1 may be an order on the consolidated complaint proceedings and the proposed ROE methodology and/or refund periods in light of the Emera Maine decision.
E-2 – Virtualization Reliability Standards (Docket No. RM24-8-000). On July 10, 2024, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) filed a petition for approval of proposed modifications to eleven (11) Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) Reliability Standards and definitions, pursuant to section 215 of the FPA. The filing sought to update the standards to enable the secure application of virtualization and other emerging technologies. On September 18, 2025, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) with respect to the modifications. The proposed rule also sought comments on the proposal to eliminate the existing technical feasibility exception program in favor of a new "per system capability" approach. NERC stated that transition was designed to accommodate the rapid evolution of technology supporting industrial control systems and enhance reliability by allowing for adaptable, modern architecture. Agenda item E-2 may be a Final Rule adopting the modifications to the CIP Reliability Standards.
E-3 – Critical Infrastructure Protection Reliability Standard CIP-003-11 – Cyber Security – Security Management Controls (Docket No. RM25-8-000). On December 20, 2024, NERC filed a petition for approval of a proposed CIP Reliability Standard, pursuant to section 215 of the FPA. The new Reliability Standard would include new security management controls to mitigate the risk of coordinated cyberattacks on low-impact facilities. On September 18, 2025, the Commission issued a NOPR proposing to approve the new Reliability Standard and seeking comments on evolving threats. The proceeding focused heavily on addressing supply chain risks and whether additional measures, such as vendor electronic access controls, were necessary for low-impact cyber systems. Agenda item E-3 may be a Final Rule adopting the new CIP Reliability Standard.
E-4 – North American Electric Reliability Corporation (Docket No. RD25-8-000). On December 20, 2024, NERC filed a petition for approval of proposed Reliability Standard CIP-002-8, pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act. The filing proposed modifications to the categorization and impact rating criteria for Bulk Electric System Cyber Systems. The revisions aimed to provide clearer guidance to registered entities regarding the identification of critical assets, thereby standardizing compliance efforts across the grid. Agenda item E-4 may be an order addressing the proposed Reliability Standard.
E-5 – Filing Process And Data Collection For The Electric Quarterly Report (Docket No. RM23-9-000). On October 19, 2023, the Commission issued a NOPR in order to modify the filing process and data collection requirements for Electric Quarterly Reports (EQR). The proposed rule sought to transition the filing format to the eXtensible Business Reporting Language-Comma-Separated Values (XBRL-CSV) standard, streamline data fields, update the data dictionary, and require Regional Transmission Organizations and Independent System Operators to produce standard transaction data reports for sellers. On February 26, 2024, various industry stakeholders, including the California Independent System Operator Corporation and the Electric Power Supply Association, filed comments supporting the modernization of the reporting system but requesting sufficient implementation time, pre-formatted templates, and further technical conferences to alleviate compliance burdens. Agenda item E-5 may be a Final Rule implementing the revisions to the EQR data collection process.
E-6 – RWE Clean Energy, LLC v. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Docket No. EL26-7-000). On October 24, 2025, RWE Clean Energy, LLC (RWE) filed a formal complaint against PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM), pursuant to sections 206 and 306 of the FPA. In the complaint, RWE alleged that PJM had violated its Tariff or acted contrary to the processes furnished in its Manual in the allocation of the costs of Network Upgrades. RWE also stated that recent changes to the PJM interconnection queue timeline disproportionately penalized renewable developers facing supply chain delays. On November 17, 2025, PJM submitted a response, contending that its rules had been applied uniformly and that RWE had not sufficiently demonstrated that any Tariff provisions or practices by PJM had been unjust, unreasonable, unduly discriminatory, or preferential. On January 21, 2026, RWE filed a motion for expedited action. Agenda item E-6 may be an order on the complaint.
E-7 – Cleco Cajun LLC; Macquarie Energy LLC; Macquarie Energy Trading LLC; Wheelabrator Baltimore, L.P.; Wheelabrator Bridgeport, L.P.; Wheelabrator Concord Company, L.P.; Wheelabrator Falls Inc.; Wheelabrator Millbury Inc.; Wheelabrator North Andover Inc.; Wheelabrator Portsmouth Inc.; Wheelabrator Saugus Inc.; Wheelabrator Westchester, L.P. (Docket Nos. ER19-289-009, ER19-2462-007, ER18-2264-009, ER13-1485-013, ER10-3253-013, ER19-461-004, ER14-1777-011, ER18-1310-004, ER10-3240-013, ER10-3230-013, ER15-2722-009, ER10-3239-013). In mid-2023, Cleco Cajun LLC, Macquarie Energy LLC, Macquarie Energy Trading LLC, and various Wheelabrator generating companies filed updated market power analyses for the Northeast region, pursuant to section 205 of the FPA and section 35.37 of the Commission's regulations. The respective filings served to demonstrate that the above-captioned entities continued to meet the criteria for market-based rate authority and lack horizontal and vertical market power. Following an extended initial review, on December 16, 2025, Commission staff issued a deficiency letter requesting additional information to assist in evaluating the updated market power analyses, including identifying any other intermediate affiliated owners and/or ultimate upstream owners and relevant business activities. The deficiency letter also requested that, for any new ultimate upstream affiliates since the time of submission, a revised asset appendix should be included in the response. On January 15, 2026, the applicants filed a response to the deficiency letter providing the requested data and clarifications, and stated that there were no ultimate upstream affiliates not previously identified and therefore no revised asset appendix was necessary. Agenda item E-7 may be an order on the market power analyses.
E-8 – Hill Top Energy Center, LLC and Hill Top Energy LLC (Docket No. EC25-148-000). On October 15, 2025, Hill Top Energy Center, LLC and Hill Top Energy LLC filed a joint application for authorization of a transaction, pursuant to section 203 of the FPA. The application requested approval for an indirect transfer of membership interests resulting in the generation facilities being acquired by Blackstone from Ardian US LLC and Ardian France S.A. On November 25, 2025, the Independent Market Monitor for PJM submitted comments regarding the transaction, urging the Commission to ensure the consolidation would not adversely affect market competition in the region. Agenda item E-8 may be an order on the proposed transaction.
E-9 – Conetoe II Solar, LLC, Pumpjack Solar I, LLC, Rio Bravo Solar I, LLC, Rio Bravo Solar II, LLC, Seville Solar One LLC, Seville Solar Two, LLC, Tallbear Seville LLC, Shoreham Solar Commons LLC, Wildwood Solar I, LLC and Wildwood Solar II, LLC (Docket No. EC26-13-000). On October 21, 2025, Conetoe II Solar, LLC, and several affiliated solar project companies filed a joint application for authorization of a transaction, pursuant to section 203 of the FPA. The application requested approval for a transaction in which BlackRock, Inc. would acquire controlling ownership interests in the solar generation facilities. The applicants asserted that the transaction would not have an adverse effect on competition, rates, or regulation. Subsequently, on March 10, 2026, the applicants submitted an errata correcting the legal names from the initial notice. Agenda item E-9 may be an order on the proposed transaction.
E-10 – Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (Docket No. ER25-177-000). On October 22, 2024, Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (SPP) filed proposed revisions to its Tariff, pursuant to section 205 of the Federal Power Act. The filing proposed to add a new compensation mechanism for System Support Resources to ensure generators needed for local reliability were adequately compensated. On November 14, 2024, SPP submitted a supplemental filing to provide further details and structural clarification on the compensation framework. Agenda item E-10 may be an order addressing the proposed tariff revisions.
E-11 – Mercuria Energy America, LLC (Docket No. ER21-46-002). On December 30, 2024, Mercuria Energy America, LLC (Mercuria Energy) filed an updated market power analysis, pursuant to section 205 of the FPA and section 35.37 of the Commission's regulations. The filing demonstrated ongoing compliance with the Commission's criteria for market-based rate authority. Mercuria Energy noted that it relied primarily on financial trading and did not possess affiliated generation that could trigger horizontal market power concerns. Agenda item E-11 may be an order on the updated market power analysis.
E-12 – Tucson Electric Power Company (Docket No. ER21-47-002). On December 30, 2024, Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) filed an updated market power analysis, pursuant to section 205 of the FPA and section 35.37 of the Commission's regulations. The filing served to demonstrate that the applicant continued to meet the criteria for market-based rate authority. TEP also submitted updated transmission infrastructure models to confirm that it could not erect barriers to entry for competing generators. Agenda item E-12 may be an order on the updated market power analysis.
E-13 – El Paso Electric Company (Docket No. ER21-61-004). On December 30, 2024, El Paso Electric Company filed an updated market power analysis, pursuant to section 205 of the FPA and section 35.37 of the Commission's regulations. The filing served to demonstrate that the company continued to lack horizontal and vertical market power. The analysis confirmed that the company passed all indicative screens within the relevant geographic markets of the Southwest. Agenda item E-13 may be an order on the updated market power analysis.
E-14 – Southern Indiana Gas and Electric Company v. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (Docket No. EL26-38-000). On January 5, 2026, Southern Indiana Gas and Electric Company (Southern Indiana) filed a complaint requesting fast-track processing against the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO), pursuant to sections 206 and 306 of the FPA. In the complaint, Southern Indiana alleged that MISO's cost allocation methodology for certain reliability operations to keep certain generating units online following a Department of Energy (DOE) emergency order, invoked under section 202(c) of the FPA, was unjust and unreasonable. As a result, Southern Indiana sought relief to prevent retail customers from bearing disproportionate costs for regional stability measures. Agenda item E-14 may be an order addressing the complaint.
E-15 – Northern Indiana Public Service Company LLC v. Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (Docket No. EL26-36-000). On December 10, 2025, Northern Indiana Public Service Company LLC (NIPSCo) filed a complaint against MISO, pursuant to sections 206 and 306 of the FPA. In the complaint alleged issues related to the transmission provider's tariff application following the retirement of the Schahfer generating units and subsequent emergency orders issued by DOE under section 202(c) of the FPA. On January 20, 2026, MISO submitted an answer defending its adherence to the tariff's emergency operating procedures. Agenda item E-15 may be an order addressing the complaint.
E-16 – bp Energy Company; Mesquite Power, LLC (Docket Nos. ER21-51-004, ER21-55-003). On December 30, 2024, bp Energy Company and Mesquite Power, LLC filed updated market power analyses, pursuant to section 205 of the FPA and section 35.37 of the Commission's regulations. The filings served to demonstrate that the entities continued to satisfy the requirements for market-based rate authority. The generation owners respectively submitted data affirming that recent asset acquisitions had not materially altered their market share. Agenda item E-16 may be an order on the updated market power analyses.
E-17 – Qualifying Facility Rates and Requirements; Implementation Issues Under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (Docket Nos. RM19-15-002, AD16-16-002). On July 16, 2020, the Commission issued Order No. 872, which effectuated revisions to its regulations implementing sections 201 and 210 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA). On September 5, 2023, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit remanded the order without vacatur, directing the Commission to prepare an environmental assessment analyzing the potential impacts of the regulatory changes on climate change and air quality pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act. Throughout 2024 and 2025, Commission staff issued multiple notices updating the procedural schedule for the preparation of the environmental assessment to ensure a comprehensive review. Agenda item E-17 may be an order addressing the environmental assessment on remand and finalizing the associated regulatory requirements.
E-18 – Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (Docket No. ER24-2046-002). On May 16, 2024, MISO submitted proposed tariff revisions in order to comply with Order Nos. 2023 and 2023-A, pursuant to section 205 of the FPA. The initial filing proposed to comprehensively reform the generator interconnection process by implementing a first-ready, first-served cluster study framework designed to alleviate severe queue backlogs. Multiple stakeholders filed protests raising concerns regarding the imposition of an automatic penalty regime for study delays and MISO's request for an independent entity variation. In an order issued on June 26, 2025, the Commission accepted the broad framework of the compliance filing but directed MISO to submit a further compliance filing to correct several deficiencies. On August 25, 2025, MISO subsequently submitted the revised compliance filing to address those directives. Agenda item E-18 may be an order on the revised compliance filing.
Gas
G-1 – Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Washington Gas Light Company v. Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC (Docket No. RP25-740-001). On March 25, 2025, Baltimore Gas and Electric Company and Washington Gas Light Company (collectively, the Complainants) filed a formal complaint against Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC (Columbia), pursuant to sections 5, 7, and 16 of the Natural Gas Act. The complaint alleged that Columbia failed to comply with its obligations to provide firm transportation and no-notice service stemming from a service disruption due to a line rupture on July 25, 2023. Columbia subsequently filed answers justifying its methodologies and requesting that the Commission dismiss the complaint. On October 16, 2025, the Commission issued an order finding that Columbia misapplied the Commission's force majeure policy and instructing Columbia to recalculate the reservation charge credits. On November 17, 2025, Columbia filed a request for rehearing of the October 16 order, primarily asserting that it had properly invoked force majeure by conducting prompt, unscheduled testing in order to safeguard against future incidents. On January 22, 2026, Commission staff issued a supplemental data request; Columbia Gas filed its response on March 9, 2026. Agenda item G-1 may be an order on the rehearing request.
Hydro
H-1 – Appalachian Power Company (Docket No. P-2514-209). On March 8, 2022, Appalachian Power Company (Appalachian Power) filed an application for a new license for the Byllesby-Buck Hydroelectric Project, pursuant to Part I of the FPA. On September 5, 2024, Commission staff issued a revised procedural schedule for the environmental review. On December 27, 2024, Commission staff issued the Environmental Assessment, concluding that licensing the project, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Agenda item H-1 may be an order on the license application.
H-2 – Central Nebraska Public Power and Irrigation District (Docket No. P-1417-277). On December 31, 2020, Central Nebraska Public Power and Irrigation District (Central Nebraska Public Power) filed an application for a non-capacity amendment of its license for the Kingsley Dam Hydroelectric Project, pursuant to Part I of the FPA. The amendment proposed to modify the project boundary based on the findings of a final project boundary review report, removing certain lands that were no longer needed for project operations or other public purposes. On April 12, 2024, Commission staff issued the Environmental Assessment analyzing the effects of the proposed boundary change. Agenda item H-2 may be an order on the license amendment.
Certificates
C-1 – Rio Grande LNG, LLC, Rio Bravo Pipeline Company, LLC, Rio Grande LNG Train 4, LLC and Rio Grande LNG Train 5, LLC (Docket Nos. CP16-454-009, CP16-455-006, CP20-481-003, CP24-70-001). On August 29, 2025, the Commission issued an Order on Remand addressing the authorizations for the Rio Grande LNG Terminal, pursuant to section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). Following the issuance of the remand order, South Texas Environmental Justice Network, Vecinos para el Bienestar de la Comunidad Costera, Sierra Club, and the City of Port Isabel filed a timely joint request for rehearing on September 29, 2025, arguing that the environmental justice analysis remained deficient. Previously, on February 22, 2024, Rio Grande LNG, LLC (Rio Grande LNG), Rio Bravo Pipeline Company, LLC, Rio Grande LNG Train 4, LLC, and Rio Grande LNG Train 5, LLC filed an application for the partial transfer of the section 3 authorizations for the terminal facilities. Agenda item C-1 may be an order on the rehearing request regarding the remand authorizations.
C-2 – Golden Triangle Storage, LLC (Docket No. CP25-167-000). On March 31, 2025, Golden Triangle Storage, LLC (Golden Triangle) filed a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) application for the Spindletop Expansion Project, pursuant to section 7(c) of the NGA. The project proposed to add 30.75 billion cubic feet of working gas capacity and 24.2 billion cubic feet of base gas capacity at an existing natural gas storage facility in Jefferson County, Texas. Following a data request issued by Commission staff on July 1, 2025, Golden Triangle filed a supplemental response on October 30, 2025, to provide additional environmental and operational details. On December 15, 2025, Commission staff issued the Environmental Assessment, concluding that approval of the project would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Agenda item C-2 may be an order on the CPCN application.
C-3 – Rockies Express Pipeline LLC (Docket Nos. CP25-94-000, CP25-94-001). On February 28, 2025, Rockies Express Pipeline LLC (Rockies Express) filed a CPCN application for the Decatur Lateral Project, pursuant to section 7(c) of the NGA. The initial filing proposed the construction of a 15.9-mile natural gas transmission pipeline and associated facilities in Macon County, Illinois. On October 31, 2025, Rockies Express filed an amendment to its application to increase the project capacity from 181,000 dekatherms per day to 194,400 dekatherms per day due to a revision in its pressure-loss assumptions. On December 12, 2025, Commission staff issued the Environmental Assessment, concluding that the proposed project would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Agenda item C-3 may be an order on the CPCN application.
C-4 – Palo Duro Transmission L.P. and Palo Duro Pipelines (Texas Gathering), L.P. (Docket Nos. CP25-531-000, CP25-531-001). On August 1, 2025, Palo Duro Transmission L.P. (Palo Duro) and Palo Duro Pipelines (Texas Gathering), L.P. (Palo Duro Pipelines) filed a joint CPCN application and application for approval of a lease agreement on a portion of the Anadarko gathering system, pursuant to section 7(c) of the NGA. Following a data request issued by Commission staff on November 20, 2025, Palo Duro and Palo Duro Pipelines filed a response on December 12, 2025, to clarify aspects of the proposed lease arrangement and capacity allocations. Subsequently, on December 22, 2025, Palo Duro and Palo Duro Pipelines filed an amendment to the application to revise certain terms of the proposed lease agreement. Agenda item C-4 may be an order on the joint CPCN application and the proposed lease agreement.
C-5 – Rockies Express Pipeline LLC and MountainWest Overthrust Pipeline, LLC (Docket Nos. CP26-39-000, CP26-40-000). On December 10, 2025, Rockies Express Pipeline LLC (Rockies Express) filed an abbreviated application for the abandonment of a lease of capacity from near the Opal Hub in Lincoln County, Wyoming, to the Wamsutter Hub in Sweetwater County, Wyoming, pursuant to section 7(b) of the NGA. Concurrently, MountainWest Overthrust Pipeline, LLC filed a CPCN application to reacquire the capacity previously leased to Rockies Express, pursuant to section 7(c) of the NGA. On January 15, 2026, Chevron U.S.A. Inc. and EOG Resources, Inc. filed comments supporting the swift transition of the leased capacity to ensure no disruption in transportation services. Agenda item C-5 may be an order on the abandonment and CPCN applications.
C-6 – Northwest Pipeline LLC (Docket No. CP25-497-000). On June 16, 2025, Northwest Pipeline LLC (Northwest Pipeline) filed a CPCN application for the Wild Trail Project, pursuant to section 7(c) of the NGA. The project proposed to provide an additional 57,955 dekatherms per day of northbound firm transportation service from the existing Wild Horse Receipt Point to the Kern River Muddy Creek Delivery Point. On December 18, 2025, Commission staff issued the Environmental Assessment, concluding that approval of the project would not constitute a major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. Subsequently, on February 24, 2026, Northwest Pipeline submitted revised Exhibits G and G-II related to the CPCN application to reflect updated engineering diagrams. Agenda item C-6 may be an order on the CPCN application.
White & Case means the international legal practice comprising White & Case LLP, a New York State registered limited liability partnership, White & Case LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated under English law and all other affiliated partnerships, companies and entities.
This article is prepared for the general information of interested persons. It is not, and does not attempt to be, comprehensive in nature. Due to the general nature of its content, it should not be regarded as legal advice.
© 2026 White & Case LLP
