Speaking Energy
As the energy industry continues to grow and change with new technologies, markets and resources, the Speaking Energy blog provides readers with key updates and insights.
Filter by Category
Search Results
Speaking Energy
On March 5, 2025, the United States Department of Energy (DOE) approved Golden Pass LNG Terminal LLC’s (GPLNG) request to extend a deadline to begin
exporting liquefied natural gas (LNG) from its terminal facility currently under construction in Sabine Pass, Texas for 18 months, from September 30, 2025, to
March 31, 2027 (the Order). The Order amends GPLNG’s two existing long-term orders authorizing the export of domestically produced LNG to countries with
which the United States does and does not have free trade agreements (FTA).1 The Order does not amend the authorizations’ end date, which remains
December 31, 2050. Under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), the DOE may authorize exports to non-FTA countries following completion of a “public
interest” review, whereas exports to FTA countries are deemed to be in the public interest and the DOE is directed to issue authorizations without
modification or delay.
exporting liquefied natural gas (LNG) from its terminal facility currently under construction in Sabine Pass, Texas for 18 months, from September 30, 2025, to
March 31, 2027 (the Order). The Order amends GPLNG’s two existing long-term orders authorizing the export of domestically produced LNG to countries with
which the United States does and does not have free trade agreements (FTA).1 The Order does not amend the authorizations’ end date, which remains
December 31, 2050. Under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), the DOE may authorize exports to non-FTA countries following completion of a “public
interest” review, whereas exports to FTA countries are deemed to be in the public interest and the DOE is directed to issue authorizations without
modification or delay.
Speaking Energy
On January 30, 2025, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) approved a Stipulation and Consent Agreement (Agreement)
between the Office of Enforcement (OE) and Stronghold Digital Mining Inc. (Stronghold) resolving an investigation into whether Stronghold had violated the
PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM) tariff and Commission regulations by limiting the quantity of energy made available to the market to serve a co-located
Bitcoin mining operation.1 This order appears to be the first instance of a public enforcement action involving co-located load and generation and comes at a
time when both FERC and market operators2 are scrutinizing the treatment of co-located load due to the rapid increase in demand associated with data
center development.
between the Office of Enforcement (OE) and Stronghold Digital Mining Inc. (Stronghold) resolving an investigation into whether Stronghold had violated the
PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM) tariff and Commission regulations by limiting the quantity of energy made available to the market to serve a co-located
Bitcoin mining operation.1 This order appears to be the first instance of a public enforcement action involving co-located load and generation and comes at a
time when both FERC and market operators2 are scrutinizing the treatment of co-located load due to the rapid increase in demand associated with data
center development.
Speaking Energy
Under a second Trump presidency, the U.S. is expected to consider reversal of many of the Biden administration’s climate and environmental policies, in
addition to a markedly different approach to trade policy and oil & gas regulation. This includes expanding oil & gas development on public lands and
offshore, lifting the pause on liquified natural gas (LNG) exports to non-Free Trade Agreement countries and repealing the methane fee.
addition to a markedly different approach to trade policy and oil & gas regulation. This includes expanding oil & gas development on public lands and
offshore, lifting the pause on liquified natural gas (LNG) exports to non-Free Trade Agreement countries and repealing the methane fee.
Speaking Energy
We are pleased to share a recording of Akin’s recently presented webinar, “Drilling Down: What Oil & Gas Companies Can Expect from Federal Agencies
During Trump’s Second Administration.”
During Trump’s Second Administration.”
Speaking Energy
On January 6, 2025, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued a Final Rule to amend its regulations governing the maximum civil monetary
penalties assessable for violations of statutes, rules and orders within FERC’s jurisdiction. The Final Rule is a result of the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation
Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015, which requires each federal agency to issue an annual inflation adjustment by January 15 for each civil monetary
penalty provided by law within the agency’s jurisdiction. The adjustments in the Final Rule represent an increase of approximately 2.6% for each covered
maximum penalty. FERC’s adjusted maximum penalty amounts, which will apply at the time of assessment of a civil penalty regardless of the date on which
the violation occurred, are set forth here and will become effective upon publication in the Federal Register.
penalties assessable for violations of statutes, rules and orders within FERC’s jurisdiction. The Final Rule is a result of the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation
Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015, which requires each federal agency to issue an annual inflation adjustment by January 15 for each civil monetary
penalty provided by law within the agency’s jurisdiction. The adjustments in the Final Rule represent an increase of approximately 2.6% for each covered
maximum penalty. FERC’s adjusted maximum penalty amounts, which will apply at the time of assessment of a civil penalty regardless of the date on which
the violation occurred, are set forth here and will become effective upon publication in the Federal Register.
Speaking Energy
On December 16, 2024, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) issued an Order to Show Cause and Notice of Proposed Penalty
proposing to assess staggering civil penalties against American Efficient, LLC and its affiliates (collectively, American Efficient) in connection with an alleged
scheme to manipulate the capacity markets operated by PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM) and the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
(MISO).1 The Order directs American Efficient to show cause as to why it should not be required to pay a civil penalty of $722 million and disgorge $253
million.2
proposing to assess staggering civil penalties against American Efficient, LLC and its affiliates (collectively, American Efficient) in connection with an alleged
scheme to manipulate the capacity markets operated by PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM) and the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.
(MISO).1 The Order directs American Efficient to show cause as to why it should not be required to pay a civil penalty of $722 million and disgorge $253
million.2
Speaking Energy
On November 27, 2024, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued Venture Global CP2 LNG, LLC, an order that sets aside, in part, the Commission’s
prior authorization of the CP2 LNG Terminal and CP Express Pipeline Project (collectively, the CP2 Project) under sections 3 and 7 of the Natural Gas Act
(NGA).
prior authorization of the CP2 LNG Terminal and CP Express Pipeline Project (collectively, the CP2 Project) under sections 3 and 7 of the Natural Gas Act
(NGA).
Speaking Energy
On November 27, 2024, in Venture Global, CP2 LNG, LLC,1 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC or Commission) explicitly overruled precedent
set in Northern Natural Gas Co.,2 a 2021 decision in which FERC made an affirmative finding that an interstate natural gas pipeline project it was certificating
under section 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) would not make a “significant” contribution to global climate change. Northern Natural is the only FERC decision
in which a so-called significance determination was made with respect to greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) arising from a FERC-regulated natural gas
infrastructure project. In Venture Global, FERC rejected arguments that it needed to follow Northern Natural and assess the significance of GHG emissions in
all NGA certificate proceedings to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA requires federal agencies, including FERC, that perform
“major federal actions,” which include issuing NGA section 7 certificates, to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) if the action will “significantly ...
set in Northern Natural Gas Co.,2 a 2021 decision in which FERC made an affirmative finding that an interstate natural gas pipeline project it was certificating
under section 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) would not make a “significant” contribution to global climate change. Northern Natural is the only FERC decision
in which a so-called significance determination was made with respect to greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) arising from a FERC-regulated natural gas
infrastructure project. In Venture Global, FERC rejected arguments that it needed to follow Northern Natural and assess the significance of GHG emissions in
all NGA certificate proceedings to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA requires federal agencies, including FERC, that perform
“major federal actions,” which include issuing NGA section 7 certificates, to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) if the action will “significantly ...
Speaking Energy
On November 21, 2024, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) issued Order No. 1920-A1 addressing requests for rehearing and
clarification of FERC’s landmark final rule on transmission planning and cost allocation issued in May 2024. While the Commission largely affirmed the final
rule, the order grants rehearing of some of the more controversial aspects of Order No. 1920.
clarification of FERC’s landmark final rule on transmission planning and cost allocation issued in May 2024. While the Commission largely affirmed the final
rule, the order grants rehearing of some of the more controversial aspects of Order No. 1920.