Sierra Club v. FERC

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit · September 30, 2025 · No. 24-1099

Summary

The D.C. Circuit denied petitions for review challenging the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's approval of a 32-mile natural gas pipeline intended to supply a Tennessee Valley Authority power plant. The court held that FERC's environmental impact statement complied with the National Environmental Policy Act, emphasizing that judicial review of NEPA cases requires substantial deference to agency discretion regarding downstream emissions and alternative analyses. Additionally, the court found that FERC properly satisfied the Natural Gas Act's market need and public interest balancing requirements.

Court
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Writing for the Court
WALKER; PILLARD; KATSAS
Jurisdiction
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Decision date
September 30, 2025
Docket number
24-1099
Procedural posture
Petition for review of FERC certificate order
Standard of review
Deferential arbitrary‑and‑capricious standard under the APA; deference under NEPA as articulated in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, 145 S. Ct. 1497 (2025).
Precedential value
published
Parties
Sierra Club, Appalachian Voices v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

environmental impact reviewenvironmental lawadministrative lawadministrative procedure actjudicial review of agency action

Practice areas

environmental lawadministrative law

Questions Presented

  1. Whether FERC complied with NEPA in its environmental impact statement, including emissions analysis, no‑action alternative, and the connected‑action requirement
  2. Whether FERC complied with the Natural Gas Act’s market‑need and public‑interest requirements

Holdings

  1. FERC’s NEPA analysis was adequate; the court applies a deferential standard and does not require a combined analysis of the pipeline and TVA power plant as a "connected action."
  2. FERC satisfied the Natural Gas Act requirements; the precedent agreement with TVA established market need and the public‑interest balancing was reasonable.

Key quotations

The bedrock principle of judicial review in NEPA cases can be stated in a word: Deference.
NEPA does not require an agency to make the decision that the reviewing judges would have reached had they been members of the decision‑making unit of the agency.

Factual background

The Tennessee Valley Authority plans to replace a coal‑fired unit with a natural‑gas turbine. To supply the turbine, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company proposes a 32‑mile pipeline. FERC approved the pipeline after a 576‑page environmental impact statement, finding market need and net emissions reductions. The Sierra Club and Appalachian Voices sued, alleging violations of NEPA and the Natural Gas Act.

Procedural history

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued a certificate of public convenience and necessity for a 32‑mile pipeline to supply natural gas to the Tennessee Valley Authority’s new gas turbine. The Sierra Club and Appalachian Voices challenged the FERC approval under NEPA and the Natural Gas Act. The D.C. Circuit reviewed the agency action deference under the APA and NEPA.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…