Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupport
Contact Us
Search
Close

FERC Reaffirms Go-Ahead of Natural Gas Construction During Appeals

By Richard Bonnifield & Emily Starobin on March 4, 2026
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission headquarters building exterior in Washington, DC

At the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (“FERC” or the “Commission”) monthly open meeting on February 19, 2026, the Commission reaffirmed that it will not reinstate its ban on gas pipeline work during appeals.

As discussed in our previous post, FERC issued a final rule on October 7, 2025, “Removal of Regulations Limiting Authorizations to Proceed with Construction Activities Pending Rehearing” (Docket No. RM25-9-000, 193 FERC ¶61,014 (2025)). This rule rescinded Biden-era Order No. 871, which removed Section 157.23 of FERC’s regulations, thereby pausing construction of natural gas projects during the 30-day rehearing request period, or while such rehearing requests were pending. By repealing this rule, FERC permitted natural gas project construction to continue during the appeal period.

Since FERC’s October approval of the final rule, environmentalists have urged FERC to reconsider, claiming that the Commission (1) unreasonably relied on arguments discredited by FERC in Allegheny Defense Project v. FERC, 964 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2020) (en banc); (2) failed to provide evidence that Section 157.23 meaningfully impeded gas infrastructure development; (3) failed to show that stakeholders have other protections available to sufficiently address the potential harms of starting construction during the rehearing period; and (4) issued the rule without proper notice-and-comment.

The Commission denied this rehearing request in the February Order Addressing Arguments Raised on Rehearing. FERC denied all the petitioners’ arguments, holding that removal of Section 157.23 is warranted for several reasons. These include greater national benefits from removing Section 157.23, the existence of sufficient alternative protection for stakeholders, and the fact that the rulemaking process included an appropriate notice-and-comment period.

During the February open meeting, FERC Chairman Laura Swett explained that “today’s energy emergency” justifies the Commission’s action. In recent years, more than 100 GW of new gas-fired facilities have been announced, and most are expected to come online before 2030. Swett emphasized, “We urgently need natural gas to supply new generation and fuel our expanding economy. FERC is not going to stand in the way of that.”

What This Order Means for You

For industry participants, FERC’s reaffirmation offers greater certainty and fewer delays by allowing authorized natural gas projects to proceed during rehearing and appeals. The decision reduces construction and financing risk and signals the Commission’s current policy direction: prioritizing timely infrastructure development to support reliability and economic growth.

Photo of Richard Bonnifield Richard Bonnifield

Rich draws on more than four decades of experience in energy law—including stints in-house at a major public utility company and within the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)—to provide developers, independent power producers, and utility companies with strategic legal advice.

Read more about Richard BonnifieldEmail
Photo of Emily Starobin Emily Starobin

Emily handles energy regulatory matters, focusing on renewable energy, environmental compliance, and navigating evolving regulations for clients in a changing industry.

Read more about Emily StarobinEmail
  • Posted in:
    Energy and Utilities
  • Blog:
    Climate Solutions Legal Digest
  • Organization:
    Husch Blackwell LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo