Date: April 28, 2023 Venue: U.S. Court of Appeals 3rd Circuit Docket: Case 23-1808 Summary: On Friday, April 28, EPSA filed a petition for review (PFR) in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals (CA3) of FERC’s orders in the PJM LDA Revisions proceeding in which PJM proposed and FERC accepted revisions to the Reliability Requirement for […]
Read MoreEPSA and P3 Joint Petitioners’ Brief Appealing PJM Operating Reserve Demand Curve Orders from FERC
February 23, 2023 U.S. Court of Appeals Sixth Circuit Case 22-3176 EPSA and P3 have filed their joint initial brief in the appeals at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit of FERC’s orders on PJM’s Operating Reserves Demand Curve (ORDC). The brief argues that then-Chairman Rich Glick’s unilateral directive that FERC’s lawyers […]
Read MoreReply Brief for Motion to Strike in Appeals of PJM Focused MOPR Orders: PJM Power Providers Group and Electric Power Supply Association v. FERC
Date Filed: September 26, 2022 Venue: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Case Nos.: 21-3068 & 21-3205, consolidated with 21-3243, 22-1158 Filers: Electric Power Supply Association, The PJM Power Providers Group Summary: Petitioners EPSA and P3 in the appeals of PJM’s Focused MOPR FERC proceeding have filed a reply in support of Petitioners’ […]
Read MoreReply Brief of Petitioners in PJM Market Seller Offer Cap Appeals
The reply brief from Joint Petitioners finalizes the briefing in this case, which seeks court review of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) orders approving revisions to PJM’s Market Seller Offer Cap (MSOC) because, as approved, the mechanism fails to properly reflect the risks and costs imposed on suppliers and is at odds with PJM’s Capacity Performance structure. Petitioners seek vacatur as the appropriate remedy from the court and focus on three arguments in this brief: FERC failed to justify the exclusion of opportunity costs from capacity offers; FERC failed to justify its categorical exclusion of key risks from capacity offers; and FERC’s determination that capacity sellers lack Section 205 rights is contrary to law.
Read MoreEPSA and P3 Motion to Strike Brief Filed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Solicitor
Petitioners EPSA and P3 in the appeals of PJM’s Focused MOPR FERC proceeding have filed a motion to strike the Respondent brief filed with the 3rd Circuit by FERC’s Solicitor as the brief does not represent the Commission as a body because the Commission did not vote on an order addressing the issues put forth in the brief.
Read MoreReply Brief of Petitioner EPSA on Petition for Review of FERC Action on PJM Focused MOPR
EPSA filed its final brief on its petition for review of FERC’s action on PJM’s Focused MOPR mechanism (US Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit). EPSA explains how the Commission’s default acceptance of the Focused MOPR is unlawful for multiple reasons, and that Section 205(g) does not relieve FERC, as a body, to provide a reasoned explanation for its having allowed this rule to take effect.
Read More