Below are summaries of the agenda items for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's open meeting to be held on May 18, 2023, pursuant to the sunshine notice released on May 11, 2023.

In this issue…

• Electric Items
• Gas Items
• Hydro Items
• Certificate Items

Electric

E-1 – North American Electric Reliability Corporation (Docket No. RD22-4-001). On February 15, 2023, as amended on March 13, 2023, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) filed a work plan (Work Plan) providing NERC's proposed approach to identify and register owners of inverter-based resources (IBRs) connected to the Bulk-Power System but not registered with NERC. The Work Plan proposes that NERC coordinate with regional entities and stakeholders to develop a new registered entity function within the NERC Rules of Procedure for unregistered IBRs. A number of interested parties have filed comments with respect to NERC's proposed Work Plan. Agenda item E-1 may be an order relating to NERC's proposed Work Plan for unregistered IBRs.

E-2 – Arroyo Solar LLC (Docket Nos. ER23-1511-000, TS23-3-000). On March 27, 2023, pursuant to Sections 35.28(d) & (f)(3) of the Commission's regulations, Arroyo Solar LLC (Arroyo Solar) submitted a request for waiver of the open access transmission tariff, open access same-time information system, and standards of conduct requirements for the limited and discrete transmission provider interconnection facilities and other customer interconnection facilities for the TP Facilities constructed by Arroyo Solar. Agenda item E-2 may be an order relating to Arroyo Solar's waiver request.

E-3 – PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Docket No. ER22-2359-000). On July 12, 2022, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C (PJM) submitted for filing a compliance filing in accordance with Commission Order Nos. 881 and 881-A regarding Managing Transmission Line Ratings, requiring transmission providers to implement ambient adjusted line ratings on the transmission lines over which they provide transmission service. Several interested parties and stakeholders intervened and filed comments with respect to PJM's July 12 filing. Agenda item E-3 may be an order relating to PJM's Order No. 881 compliance filing.

E-4 – Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (Docket No. ER22-2339-000). On July 12, 2022, Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (SPP) submitted for filing a compliance filing in accordance with Commission Order Nos. 881 and 881-A regarding Managing Transmission Line Ratings. Several interested parties and stakeholders intervened and filed comments with respect to SPP's July 12 filing. Agenda item E-4 may be an order relating to SPP's Order No. 881 compliance filing.

E-5 – PacifiCorp (Docket No. ER22-2310-000). On July 8, 2022, PacifiCorp submitted for filing a compliance filing in accordance with Commission Order Nos. 881 and 881-A regarding Managing Transmission Line Ratings. Agenda item E-5 may be an order relating to PacifiCorp's Order No. 881 compliance filing.

E-6 – Dominion Energy South Carolina, Inc. (Docket No. ER22-2293-000). On July 7, 2022, Dominion Energy South Carolina, Inc. (Dominion South Carolina) submitted for filing a compliance filing in accordance with Commission Order Nos. 881 and 881-A regarding Managing Transmission Line Ratings. Agenda item E-6 may be an order relating to Dominion South Carolina's Order No. 881 compliance filing.

E-7 – Portland General Electric Company (Docket No. ER22-2317-000). On July 8, 2022, Portland General Electric Company (PGE) submitted a compliance filing to revise PGE's Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT), to incorporate pro forma OATT Attachment M with proposed revisions, in compliance with Order Nos. 881 and 881-A, to improve the accuracy and transparency of electric transmission line ratings used by transmission providers. Agenda item E-7 may be an order on PGE's compliance filing.

E-8 – El Paso Electric Company (Docket No. ER22-2346-000). On July 12, 2022, El Paso Electric Company (EPE) submitted a compliance filing to revise EPE's OATT to incorporate new pro forma Attachment O Transmission Line Ratings. EPE submitted these revisions in compliance with Order No. 881, requiring transmission providers to implement ambient adjusted line ratings on the transmission lines over which they provide transmission service. Agenda item E-8 may be an order on EPE's compliance filing.

E-9 – Public Service Company of Colorado (Docket No. ER22-2356-000). On July 12, 2022, Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCo) submitted its compliance filing proposing revisions to PSCo's OATT to incorporate new pro forma Attachment S Transmission Line Ratings as required by Order No. 881. PSCo proposed four clarifying edits to OATT Attachment S, the first edit clarifies that transmission line ratings are calculated for North American Reliability Corporation (NERC) bulk electric system transmission lines over which PSCo sells transmission service. The second edit is to the definition of "Seasonal Line Rating" clarifying the forecast used to determine the seasonal rating. The third and fourth proposed edits to Attachment S clarifies that transmission service (both Point-To-Point and Network) may be curtailed based on actual scheduled deliveries. Agenda item E-9 may be an order on PSCo's compliance filing.

E-10 – NorthWestern Corporation (Docket No. ER22-2345-000). On July 12, 2022, NorthWestern Corporation (NorthWestern) submitted its compliance filing proposing revisions to NorthWestern's OATT to incorporate new pro forma Attachment Q Transmission Line Ratings adopted in Order No. 881. The proposed NorthWestern's revisions conformed to Appendix B of Order No. 881. Agenda item E-10 may be an order on NorthWestern's compliance filing.

E-11 – Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. (Docket No. ER22-2360-000). On July 12, 2022, Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. (Tri-State) submitted its compliance filing proposing revisions to Tri-State's OATT to incorporate new pro forma Attachment R Transmission Line Ratings adopted in Order Nos. 881 and 881-A. In its compliance filing Tri-State, without modification, adopted the Commission's pro forma Attachment to implement, among other things, ambient-adjusted ratings on transmission lines that provide transmission service in compliance with the directives of Order Nos. 881 and 881-A. Agenda item E-11 may be an order on Tri-State's compliance filing.

E-12 – Evergy Kansas Central, Inc.; Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (Docket Nos. ER23-430-001; ER23-431-001; ER23-433-001). On February 10, 2023, Kansas Electric Power Cooperative, Inc., Kansas Municipal Energy Agency, and Kansas Power Pool (jointly, Kansas Customers) filed a rehearing request for the Commission's January 13, 2023 order accepting Evergy Kansas Central, Inc.'s (Evergy KC) changes to the calculation of Common Stock (Common Stock Formula) in (i) the Transmission Formula Rate in Attachment H to Evergy KC's OATT and in Attachment H to Southwest Power Pool, Inc.'s (SPP) OATT, and (ii) the generation formula rate templates used in certain wholesale power service rate schedule. Kansas Customers argued that the January 13 order errs by finding that the Common Stock Formula has been shown to be just and reasonable and so request rehearing of the January 13 order and specifically request the Commission issue a rehearing order reversing its prior determinations and set these proceedings for hearing and settlement procedures. If the Commission did not grant its rehearing request, the Kansas Customers requested that the Commission further explain its reasoning. Agenda item E-12 may be an order on the Kansas Customers' rehearing request.

E-13 – Omitted

E-14 – Panorama Wind, LLC (Docket Nos. ER22-2385-000, ER22-2385-001). On July 15, 2022, Panorama Wind, LLC (Panorama Wind) submitted a rate schedule for Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation Sources Service, pursuant to section 205 of the Federal Power Act (FPA). Specifically, the proposed rate schedule specified the revenue requirement for Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from Generation or Other Sources Service, as defined in the Open Access Transmission Tariff (OATT) of Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. (Tri-State), for the Panorama Wind generating facility. On August 5, 2022, Tri-State filed a motion to intervene and protest, asserting that Panorama Wind did not provide adequate cost support for the reactive rate filing and requesting that the Commission set the matter for hearing and settlement procedures due to the uncertainty surrounding the reactive power compensation for non-synchronous resources. On September 12, 2022, the Commission issued an order accepting and suspending the rate schedule and establishing hearing and settlement judge procedures. Following a period of negotiations between Panorama Wind and Tri-State over the course of three settlement conferences, Panorama Wind submitted a Joint Offer of Settlement and Settlement Agreement on March 10, 2023. The settlement purports to resolve all outstanding issues in the proceeding, setting the annual revenue requirement for Panorama Wind among other provisions. On April 13, 2023, the settlement judge issued a certification of uncontested offer of settlement and, on April 19, 2023, the chief judge issued an order terminating settlement judge procedures. Agenda item E-14 may be an order on the settlement agreement between Panorama Wind and Tri-State.

E-15 – Pacific Gas and Electric Company (Docket Nos. ER16-2320-007, ER16-2320-009). On July 29, 2016, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) submitted a request to increase its stated transmission rates. By order dated September 30, 2016 (TO18 Order), the Commission, pursuant to section 219 of the FPA, granted PG&E 50 basis point return-on-equity (ROE) incentives for its membership in the California Independent System Operator Corporation (CAISO). In making its determination, the Commission rejected California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) arguments that PG&E should not be eligible for RTO participation incentives because California state law requires PG&E's participation in the CAISO. On October 15, 2020, the Commission issued an order on initial decision regarding, inter alia, whether the rates proposed by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) in its eighteenth revised transmission owner tariff filing are just and reasonable and not unduly discriminatory or preferential (Opinion No. 572). In November 2020, PG&E, the Transmission Agency of Northern California, and the City of Santa Clara, California requested rehearing of Opinion No. 572. On April 15, 2021, the Commission issued an order on the rehearing request, addressing arguments raised and setting aside the prior order (in part). Therefore, the Commission found that rates for January 2018 and February 2018 should reflect the decrease in the federal income tax rate and required PG&E to adjust its test-year data so that its transmission rates reflect the reduction in the federal corporate income tax rate effective as of January 1, 2018. On May 17, 2021, PG&E submitted a compliance filing in accordance with the April 15 order, consisting of its adjusted Transmission Revenue Requirement (TRR) to reflect the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act on the TRR from January to February of 2018. On June 7, 2021, the Cities of Anaheim, Azusa, Banning, Colton, Pasadena, and Riverside submitted a protest, stating that the proposed changes by PG&E to its TO18 TRR do not fully implement the reduction in federal corporate income tax and result in an unjust and unreasonable TRR. On July 2, 2021, PG&E submitted a revised compliance filing, requesting that the Commission defer the calculation of any and all refunds until all issues in TO18 are resolved either by the Commission or courts with jurisdiction on this matter. On March 10, 2022, PG&E filed a motion to lodge private letter ruling from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and request for additional corrective actions, stating that the IRS private letter ruling confirms that that April 15 rehearing order may result in normalization violations and asserting that its revised compliance filing represents a good faith effort to prevent such a violation before it occurs. Agenda item E-15 may be an order on the revised compliance filing and/or the request for additional corrective actions as brought forward by PG&E.

E-16 – California Independent System Operator Corporation (Docket Nos. ER21-2455-003, ER21-2455-004). On July 19, 2021, the California Independent System Operator Corporation (CAISO) submitted an amendment to its Tariff in compliance with Order No. 2222, as released by the Commission on September 17, 2020. Pursuant to the guidance furnished in Order No. 2222, CAISO proposed to revise the provisions of its Tariff in order to remove barriers to distribute energy resource aggregations (DERAs) participating in the capacity, energy, and ancillary services markets. In the filing, CAISO asserted that it has preemptively incorporated DERAs into its grid since 2016 and met the majority of requirements from Order No. 2222 prior to its issuance. CAISO stated that the incremental changes to its Tariff relating to DERAs would, among others: lower the minimum capacity requirement from 500 kW to 100 kW; provide an opt-out for small utilities; revise its definition of a DER to mirror Commission language; and create a heterogeneous DERA model that can include demand response. On June 17, 2022, the Commission approved and rejected in part CAISO's compliance filing, requesting CAISO submit a further compliance filing addressing the remaining barriers to participation for DERs in wholesale markets through aggregation. On August 15, 2022, CAISO submitted a compliance filing in accordance with the directives furnished in the June 17 order, namely to conform with certain changes made by the Commission in Order No. 2222. Agenda item E-16 may be an order on the Order No. 2222 compliance filing by CAISO.

E-17 – Soltage Executive Employees, LLC (Docket No. EL23-42-000). On February 16, 2023, Soltage Executive Employees, LLC (Soltage) submitted a petition for declaratory order requesting an exemption from the access to books and records requirements under the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 2005 (PUHCA). Soltage states that its current and future subsidiary companies are holding or associated service companies exempt under 18 C.F.R. 366.3(a) and that certain Soltage companies are developing and eventually will own and operate grid-charged battery energy storage systems. As a result, the storage subsidiaries may not qualify for the non-traditional utility exemption and Soltage requests that the Commission ensures the exemption will be retained notwithstanding their direct or indirect ownership of the new storage facilities. Agenda item E-17 may be an order on the petition for declaratory order by Soltage.

E-18 – Otter Tail Power Company (Docket No. ER23-1544-000). On March 31, 2023, Otter Tail Power Company (Otter Tail) submitted a request for incentive rate treatment for two Multi-Value Projects (MVPs), pursuant to section 205 of the FPA. Otter Tail stated that the MVPs were approved by the Board of Directors of the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO) as part of a portfolio of eighteen long range transmission projects. Namely, Otter Tail seeks two types of incentive rate treatments authorized by Order No. 679: 1) 100 percent of prudently incurred Construction Work in Progress; and 2) recovery of 100 percent of prudently incurred cost of transmission facilities that are cancelled or abandoned beyond the control of Otter Tail. Agenda item E-18 may be an order on the incentive rate treatment request by Otter Tail.

E-19 – Louisville Gas and Electric Company and Kentucky Utilities Company (Docket Nos. EC98-2-005, ER18-2162-004). On August 3, 2018, Louisville Gas and Electric Company (LG&E) and Kentucky Utilities Company (KU) (collectively, LG&E/KU) filed a request to remove certain merger-related obligations related to the merger of the two companies effectuated in 1998 and subsequent rate schedule modifications. Namely, LG&E/KU request Commission approval to discontinue the horizontal market power mitigation agreement, which de-pancakes transmission rates for certain municipal customers and cities (collectively, Kentucky Municipals) between LG&E/KU and the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO). LG&E/KU assert that, twenty years following the merger, this specific provision is no longer necessary and does not affect existing other forms of mitigation pertaining to horizontal and vertical market power issues. KU states that customers now have an array of first-tier supply options available through competitive processes and continuing this mitigation rate would be unjust and unreasonable. A number of stakeholders and interested parties filed motions to intervene and comments, in addition to protests highlighting that LG&E/KU had the burden to prove that there were no longer horizontal market power concerns stemming from the merger and that their request was in the public interest. On March 21, 2019, the Commission issued an order that conditionally granted a request filed by LG&E/KU pursuant to section 203(b) of the FPA to remove a market power mitigation measure imposed to resolve horizontal market power concerns originating from LG&E/KU's 1998 merger and from LG&E/KU's subsequent 2006 withdrawal from MISO. Multiple parties filed requests for rehearing and clarification of the March order. On September 10, 2019, the Commission issued an order denying rehearing, but granting clarification of the March order. Multiple parties requested rehearing and clarification of the September order. On November 18, 2019, LG&E/KU filed a Petition for Review against the Commission contesting the September 10 order in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (DC Circuit) in Case No. 19-1236. On September 17, 2020, the Commission issued an order addressing arguments raised on rehearing, modifying the discussion and setting aside the September order for matters such as the specific contracts eligible for the transition mechanism. On October 19, 2020, Kentucky Municipals submitted a request for rehearing of the September 2020 order; the Commission issued an order denying the rehearing request on November 18, 2020. On November 19, 2020 and January 26, 2021, respectively, Kentucky Municipals filed Petitions for Review in the DC Circuit under Case Nos. 20-1459 and 21-1025 regarding the September 2020 order. Agenda item E-19 may establish a new sub-docket relating to the outstanding material issues in this proceeding.

E-20 – Joint Federal-State Task Force on Electric Transmission (Docket No. AD21-15-000). On June 17, 2021, the Commission issued an order establishing a joint federal-state task force and soliciting nominations. Under section 209(b) of the FPA, the Commission is authorized to confer with state public utility commissions regarding the rate structures, costs, accounts, charges, practices, classifications, and regulations of public utilities subject to the jurisdiction of state bodies and of the Commission. Pursuant to the relationship codified in the FPA, the Commission sought to convene a new joint task force in order to identify collaborative mechanisms for new transmission development and associated infrastructure, particularly in the matters of reliability, customer protection, and environmental issues. The joint task force will be comprised of all sitting Commissioners as well as ten state commissioners. On August 30, 2021, the Commission issued an order listing the members selected to the joint task force, announcing the date of the first meeting, and inviting agenda topic suggestions. In the ensuing years, meetings have been conducted in regular order with the full complement of task force members. On May 2, 2023, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC) informed the Commission that two state commissioners resigned from the task force effective as of May 1, 2023. Consequently, NARUC submitted two new nominations to fill the vacancies. Agenda item E-20 may be an order on the nominations to occupy the two open state commissioner positions on the joint task force.

Gas

G-1 – Policy Statement on Proposed Penalty Guidelines for Natural Gas Act Project Violations (Docket No. PL23-2-000). The record in Docket No. PL23-2-000 has not yet been populated. Agenda item G-1 may reflect a new Commission policy regarding the penalties the Commission intends to apply to natural gas infrastructure projects that violate the Natural Gas Act and the Commission's implementing regulations.

Hydro

H-1 – Nevada Hydro Company, Inc. (Docket No. P-15261-000). On February 8, 2022, Nevada Hydro Company, Inc. (Nevada Hydro) submitted an application for a preliminary permit for the proposed Lake Elsinore Advanced Pumped Storage Project, FERC Project No. 14227. Nevada Hydro previously filed an application for the same project in a separate docket, ultimately denied by the Commission on December 8, 2021. Nevada Hydro filed a request for rehearing of the December 8 order on January 7, 2022. In the other proceeding, the Commission justified the rejection due to the application being premature without certain additional information which the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) had requested in support of its evaluation of the Project under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). In the new application under the above-captioned docket, Nevada Hydro states that it is working with the USFS to obtain the necessary information and intends to refile its license application thereafter. Agenda item H-1 may be an order on the preliminary permit license application by Nevada Hydro.

H-2 – Omitted

H-3 – Badger Mountain Hydro, LLC (Docket No. DI21-1-001). On March 10, 2021, Badger Mountain Hydro, LLC (Badger Mountain) submitted a declaration of intention for the proposed Badger Mountain Pumped Storage Project to be located near the town of East Wenatchee, Wisconsin. In the filing, Badger Mountain stated that it did not believe that the project would trigger jurisdiction under section 23(b) of the FPA and, therefore, requested that the Commission rule that the project would not require a license. On December 15, 2022, the Commission issued an order, finding that since the proposed project would use water derived from a navigable water source, its jurisdiction under section 23(b)(1) of the FPA would apply and, as a result, Badger Mountain is compelled to acquire a license for the project. On January 13, 2023, Badger Mountain filed a request for rehearing of the December 15 order. Agenda item H-3 may be an order on the rehearing request.

Certificates

C-1 – Midship Pipeline Company, LLC (Docket No. CP17-358-021). On August 13, 2028, the Commission issued Midship Pipeline Company LLC (Midship) a certificate of public convenience and necessity pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA). On April 16, 2020, the Commission granted Midship's in-service request. On December 16, 2021, the Commission issued an Order to Show Cause (Show Cause Order) which, among other things, directed Midship to (i) file a detailed plan for conducting an investigation to determine the extent of buried rock and construction debris throughout the entire Midship easement (Assessment Plan) and (ii) file, for Commission review, a remediation plan for removing rock and debris found during such investigation (Remediation Plan). On February 14, 2022, Midship submitted its proposed Assessment Plan for review and approval. Midship also responded to several Environmental Information Requests from Commission staff and submitted further revisions and clarification to its proposed Assessment Plan. On October 6, 2022, Commission staff conditionally approved Midship's proposed Assessment Plan and required Midship to file a revised Assessment Plan that reflected the conditions outlined in such approval letter. On October 18, 2022, Midship submitted a revised Assessment Plan, which the Commission approved on October 27, 2022. On November 8, 2022, Midship filed the Remediation Plan for Commission approval, which the Commission granted on February 3, 2023 (such approval, the Remediation Plan Order). On February 10, 2023, Central Land Consulting (CLC) requested clarification of the Remediation Plan Order, or in the alternative, rehearing of the Remediation Plan Order (Clarification Request). Specifically, CLC argues that the Commission must clarify that the Remediation Plan Order requires Midship to prepare and submit for approval a remediation plan to remove all debris from the easement only after the assessment process is completed. If not, CLC argues that the Commission must grant rehearing of the Remediation Plan Order on the grounds that departs from the Show Cause Order, which CLC alleges mandates a two-step process of assessing and then restoring the tracts. CLC also asserts that the Remediation Plan filed by Midship falls short of its obligations under the Show Cause Order because it allows Midship to determine remediation without further Commission oversight. On March 6, 2023, Midship filed a limited request for rehearing (Rehearing Request) of the Remediation Plan Order. Midship asserts the Commission erred in the Remediation Plan by (1) denying Midship's emergency motion requesting that the Commission prevent CLC from conducting any assessments that would interfere with Midship's own planned assessment activities and (2) simultaneously requiring Midship to conduct immediate remediation, while not restricting the consistent pattern of interference by CLC. On April 6, 2023, the Commission issued a notice of denial of rehearing by operation of law with respect to the Rehearing Request while providing that the Commission would address the Rehearing Request in a future order. Agenda item C-1 may be an order on the Clarification Request and/or the Rehearing Request.

C-2 – Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC (Docket No. CP22-514-000). On September 29, 2022, Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC (CCL) filed an abbreviated application (Application) with the Commission seeking authorization under Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) to acquire as part of its operating Liquefaction Project (authorized by the Commission in Docket No. CP12-507-000) approximately 3,700 linear feet of existing, operating 48-inch and 36-inch-diameter natural gas pipeline segments and ancillary facilities (the Terminal Supply Line) in San Patricio County, Texas. According to the Application, the Terminal Supply Line connects the outlet of the existing Cheniere Corpus Christi Pipeline L.P. (CCPL) pipeline and metering and regulating station to the existing feed gas inlet for the CCL liquefied natural gas terminal (LNG Terminal). CCL states that the Terminal Supply Line would no longer be part of CCPL's interstate pipeline system behind the meter, but instead would be part of CCL's integrated feed gas header facilities within the LNG Terminal. The Application further provides that CCPL plans to abandon the Terminal Supply Line by sale to CCL under CCPL's blanket certificate authorization, pursuant to NGA Section 7(b), after CCL receives the Commission authorization requested. The transfer of the Terminal Supply Line from CCPL to CCL also will have no effect on the operation or authorized capacity of the CCPL pipeline. CCL states in the Application that the acquisition and reclassification will not require or result in any construction, new environmental authorizations, or modification of any previously approved operation of the facilities. On October 18, 2022, Commission staff issued an Environmental Assessment Report, concluding that the Application does not involve the modification of existing capacity, the construction of new facilities, or the modification of existing facilities, and therefore no environmental impacts would occur as a result of the Application. Agenda item C-2 may be an order on the Application.

C-3 – Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC and Corpus Christi Liquefaction Stage III, LLC (Docket No. CP18-512-000). On November 22, 2019, the Commission issued an order (Order) granting Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC (CCL) and Corpus Christi Liquefaction Stage III (CCL Stage III) authorization under Section 3 and Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) for construction and operation of an expansion of the Corpus Christi Liquefaction Project (such expansion, the Stage III Project). The Stage III Project includes seven midscale liquefaction trains, one 160,000 cubic meter full-containment LNG Storage Tank (Storage Tank), and appurtenant facilities. On March 27, 2023, CCL submitted (i) a variance request (Variance Request) to incorporate two (2) Acid Gas Flare Knockout Drums and seven (7) Thermal Oxidizer Knockout Drums into the Stage III Project scope, (ii) a motion (Motion) to vacate, in part, the NGA Section 3 authorization granted in the Order to site, construct, and operate the Storage Tank and associated ancillary facilities. On March 29, 2023, CCL submitted a request for approval (Approval Request) to construct the ISBL Containment Sump, in compliance with Conditions 75 and 76 of the Order. Agenda item C-3 may be an order on the Motion and/or the Variance Request and/or the Approval Request.

C-4 – Commonwealth LNG, LLC (Docket No. CP19-502-000). On August 20, 2019, Commonwealth LNG, LLC (Commonwealth) filed an application (Application) seeking authorization under Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) to construct and operate the Commonwealth LNG Project. On July 8, 2021, Commonwealth filed an application with the Commission seeking a limited amendment to its Application to modify the design of the Commonwealth LNG Project's storage tanks. On November 17, 2022, the Commission issued an order (Order) authorizing Commonwealth to construct and operate the Commonwealth LNG Project. On December 19, 2022, Sierra Club and other environmental intervenors (collectively, Sierra Club) filed a request for rehearing (Rehearing Request) of the Order, alleging that (i) the Order violated the NGA, the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and the Administrative Procedures Act and (ii) the Commission failed to meet its responsibilities under the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) to consider alternatives, greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution, and impacts on environmental justice communications. On January 3, 2023, Commonwealth LNG filed an answer (Answer) to the Rehearing Request, asserting that the Commission's approval of the Commonwealth LNG Project was consistent with its statutory mandate under NGA Section 3, that the Commission's final Environmental Impact Statement's (FEIS) alternatives analysis was sufficient under NEPA, that the Order's consideration of greenhouse gas emissions was sufficient under NEPA, that the Commission's air impact and environmental justice analyses in the FEIS are not arbitrary and capricious, and that the Commission's consideration of impacts on threatened and endangered species in the FEIS was consistent with NEPA and the ESA. Commonwealth LNG also asserted that the Commission must dismiss comment letters filed after issuance of the Order. Agenda item C-4 may be an order on the Rehearing Request and Answer.

C-5 – Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (Docket No. CP22-461-000). On May 23, 2022, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (Transco) filed an application (Application) with the Commission requesting authorization pursuant to Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations to construct, modify, own, and operate the Southside Reliability Enhancement Project. Specifically, the Southside Reliability Enhancement Project consists of one new compressor station and the modification of two existing compressor stations and three existing meter stations that would collectively increase firm transportation capacity along Transco's existing interstate natural gas transmission system in North Carolina and Virginia by an incremental 423,000 dekatherms per day. Commission staff issued a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Southside Reliability Enhancement Project on October 21, 2022 and a final EIS for the Southside Reliability Enhancement Project on February 24, 2023. Commission staff concluded in the final EIS that construction and operation of the Southside Reliability Enhancement Project, with the mitigation measures recommended in the final EIS, would result in some adverse environmental impacts; however, such impacts would be reduced to less-than-significant levels. Commission staff did not characterize climate change impacts as significant or insignificant in the final EIS. Agenda item C-5 may be an order on the Application.