ELR Citation: 52 ELR 20081
No(s). 20-1492 (D.C. Cir. Jul 8, 2022)

The D.C. Circuit denied a city's second petition to review FERC's order granting a certificate of public convenience and necessity for construction of a natural gas pipeline from Ohio to Michigan. In the city's initial petition, it argued FERC had not adequately justified its reliance on agreements to transport gas for export to Canada as evidence of need for the pipeline. The appellate court had agreed that the Commission had not explained why the agreements were lawful, and remanded without vacatur. FERC then explained its decision, and the city again petitioned for review, arguing the Commission's explanations were arbitrary and capricious and that its decision violated the Takings Clause. The appellate court found that FERC's justification for considering the agreements was well reasoned and comported with both the Natural Gas Act and the Takings Clause. It denied the city's petition.