2017 FERC Report on Enforcement

Federal regulators of U.S. energy markets and infrastructure described an increase in litigation activities in the most recent fiscal year. According to the eleventh annual Report on Enforcement issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s Office of Enforcement, the office has five cases pending in various federal district courts.

The Commission is responsible for enforcing various laws and regulations affecting energy markets and infrastructure. On November 16, 2017, staff from its Office of Enforcement presented to the Commission on the office's activities in Fiscal Year 2017 (October 1, 2016 through September 30, 2017).

According to the 2017 Report on Enforcement, the office has maintained the previous year's enforcement priorities: (1) fraud and market manipulation; (2) serious violations of reliability standards; (3) anticompetitive conduct; and (4) conduct that threatens transparency in regulated markets.

As noted in the Commission press release announcing the 2017 enforcement report, "Conduct involving fraud and market manipulation poses a significant threat to the wholesale energy markets because it undermines FERC’s goal of ensuring efficient energy services at reasonable cost, and it erodes confidence in those markets to the detriment of consumers and competitors." The report notes that conduct which is anticompetitive or which threatens market transparency "undermine confidence in the energy markets and harm consumers and competitors." It also emphasizes the importance of compliance with reliability standards established by Electric Reliability Organization NERC.

The report describes activities by each division of the Office of Enforcement, including staff negotiation of five settlements that resulted in more than $51 million in civil penalties and disgorgement of more than $42 million in unjust profits. These settlements are in addition to the Commission’s November 7, 2017, settlement with Barclays Bank and three traders that requires Barclays to pay a $70 million penalty and disgorge $35 million in unjust profits.

While noting that at least one litigation matter has settled since the close of the fiscal year, the report states that Enforcement staff continues litigating five Federal Power Act matters in United States District Courts, along with two Order to Show Cause proceedings under the Natural Gas Act. According to the report, "In total, as of the end of FY2017, counting all pending federal court matters and the two NGA OSC proceedings before the Commission, staff sought to recover $806,865,000 in civil penalties and $53,987,678 in unjust profits through seven litigation proceedings."

Looking forward, the report emphasizes that in FY2018 the Office of Enforcement will continue to pursue these priorities.

FERC approves Berkshire Power settlement

Federal energy regulators have approved a stipulation and consent agreement under which two companies admit violations of the Federal Power Act and regulations prohibiting energy market manipulation.

The case involves Berkshire Power Company LLC (Berkshire), and Power Plant Management Services LLC. Berkshire owns an approximately 245 MW natural gas-fired, combined-cycle generating facility in Agawam, Massachusetts. Berkshire hired PPMS to provide project management and administrative services at the plant.

According to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission documents, at the direction of a general manager hired by PPMS, "Berkshire Power engaged in a fraudulent scheme to perform unreported maintenance work and to conceal that work and associated maintenance outages from ISO-NE."  The documents allege that individuals at the plant scheduled maintenance work for times when the plant was unlikely to be dispatched, and then failed to notify ISO-NE about the work or the associated Plant unavailability.  In at least six instances, this led to representations to ISO New England dispatchers that the plant was starting up or was able to start up when it was, in fact, unavailable due to ongoing maintenance or other technical problems.

The Commission's Office of Enforcement initiated its investigation in June 2014, following a referral from the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts.  Following fact-finding, Enforcement concluded that Berkshire and PPMS violated section 222 of the Federal Power Act and the Commission’s Anti-Manipulation Rule by concealing its maintenance work and associated outages from ISO-NE. That rule prohibits any entity from using a fraudulent device, scheme, or artifice, or engaging in any act, practice, or course of business that operates or would operate as a fraud; with the requisite scienter; in connection with a transaction subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission.

Enforcement also concluded that Berkshire violated Commission regulations by violating provisions of the ISO-NE tariff requiring it to schedule and disclose plant maintenance and to accurately report on plant availability, and by making false and misleading representations to ISO-NE. Finally, Enforcement concluded that Berkshire violated Commission-approved reliability standards by withholding information regarding its planned maintenance outages and plant capabilities and availability.

According to the order, the Office of Enforcement, Berkshire, and PPMS have resolved the matter by a stipulation and consent agreement.  Under that deal, Berkshire and PPMS stipulate to the facts, admit the violations set out in the Agreement, and agree to pay a civil penalty of $2,000,000 to the United States Treasury. Berkshire agrees to pay to ISO-NE disgorgement of $1,012,563, plus interest. Berkshire further agrees to pay a civil penalty of $30,000 to the United States Treasury for its violations of the Reliability Standards.

In its March 30, 2016 order accepting that settlement, the Commission noted Enforcement's consideration of the factors in the Revised Policy Statement on Penalty Guidelines.  Factors cited here as supporting "the appropriate remedy" include "that both companies cooperated fully and comprehensively throughout the investigation, both accepted responsibility for their violations, and neither has a prior history of violations."  The order notes that the remedy also reflects that neither company had an effective compliance program in place during the relevant period, and that a high-level employee at the plant directed the scheme.

The order directs Berkshire and PPMS to make the disgorgement and civil penalty payments as required by the Agreement within ten business days of its Effective Date. ISO-NE was directed to allocate the disgorgement funds pro rata to network load during the applicable period. The order also directs Berkshire and PPMS to comply with the provisions in the Agreement also requiring them to implement procedures to improve compliance going forward, subject to monitoring via submission of semi-annual reports for at least one year.