On September 30, 2025, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals denied a joint petition for review brought by Sierra Club and Appalachian Voices (together, Petitioners) challenging FERC’s grant of a certificate of public convenience and necessity (CPCN) to Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (Tennessee Gas) to construct a new natural gas pipeline on grounds that FERC failed to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Natural Gas Act (NGA). The D.C. Circuit upheld FERC’s analyses under NEPA and the NGA and emphasized that after the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado, 145 S. Ct. 1497 (2025) (Seven County) (see May 30, 2025, edition of the WER), “the era of searching NEPA review is over.”
In 2022, Tennessee Gas applied to FERC for a CPCN to construct a new 32-mile natural gas pipeline (Project) that would allow the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) to replace one of two existing coal-fired power units at the Cumberland Fossil Plant (Cumberland Plant) with a natural gas turbine. FERC issued a CPCN for the Project in 2024, finding (i) under the NGA, Tennessee Gas established a market need for the Project, and (ii) under NEPA, the Project’s benefits outweighed its potential adverse effects.
On appeal, Petitioners argued FERC violated the NGA by finding that (1) the Project would serve a market need, and (2) the Project’s benefits outweigh its costs. Petitioners also argued FERC violated NEPA by (1) incorrectly crediting Tennessee Gas with enabling the emissions reduction from the “gas-for-coal” swap of a power unit at TVA’s Cumberland Plant, (2) erroneously applying the “no action alternative,” and (3) failing to analyze the Project and TVA’s Cumberland Plant as connected actions.
The D.C. Circuit rejected Petitioners’ arguments, holding that FERC neither violated the NGA nor NEPA. Regarding Petitioners’ NGA arguments, the D.C. Circuit held that FERC reasonably relied on Tennessee Gas’ 20-year precedent agreement with TVA for 100% of the Project’s capacity to determine market need and that the environmental assessment informing FERC’s analysis of the Project’s benefits and costs was adequate. As for Petitioners’ NEPA arguments, the court noted that the Project does not “exist in a vacuum” and found FERC did not err in crediting Tennessee Gas with the emissions reduction from the “gas-for-coal” swap. The court also determined that FERC reasonably concluded that even if Tennessee Gas did not build this specific pipeline, a different pipeline would still be built to allow TVA to retire its coal-fired unit. The court similarly held that FERC properly declined to consider the Project and Cumberland Plant as connected actions because FERC lacks jurisdiction over electric generating plants, and even if FERC did err in this regard, such error was harmless.
In conclusion, the D.C. Circuit stressed that the Supreme Court’s decision in Seven County abrogated much of the precedent Petitioners relied on in their arguments. The court emphasized that “[a]fter Seven County, the era of searching NEPA review is over—or at least it should be.”
The D.C. Circuit’s full opinion, issued in Case No. 24-1099, can be accessed here.
