Skip Navigation
 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission



Enforcement Civil Penalties All Civil Penalty Actions

 
Text Size small medium large
All Civil Penalty Actions – 2012


To access the significant orders and federal district court papers related to all matters that have proceeded to Orders to Show Cause, see the Orders to Show Cause Proceedings page.

Subject(s) of Investigation and Order Sanctions, including Civil Penalties, Disgorgement, and Compliance Measures Description of Findings of Violations
EnerNOC Inc. and Celerity Energy Partners LLC,
141 FERC ¶  61,211  PDF (December 17, 2012)
$820,000 Civil Penalty; $656,806 Disgorgement; Compliance Enhancements; Compliance Monitoring. The Commission approved a settlement resolving admitted violations of the ISO-NE tariff, 18 C.F.R. Part 35 regulations related to Market Based Rate authority, and Celerity’s market based rate tariff for submission of inaccurate data to the ISO, receipt of overpayments for demand response services, and untimely filings with the Commission.
In re California Independent System Operator Corporation,
141 FERC ¶  61,209  PDF (December 14, 2012)
$200,000 Civil Penalty; Compliance Monitoring. The Commission approved a settlement resolving findings under the Reliability Standards for inappropriate load shedding based on failure to perform operational planning to replace generation requirements and failure to adequately train the operators on the circumstances that permit load shedding.
Alliance Pipeline LP,
141 FERC ¶  61,182  PDF (November 30, 2012)
$500,000 Civil Penalty; Compliance Monitoring. The Commission approved a settlement resolving findings under the Standards of Conduct for Transmission Providers, 18 C.F.R. Part 385, and Alliance’s transmission tariff for using its parent company to share non-public transmission information with an affiliate and for failure to make that information timely available to other customers.
In RE PacificCorp,
141 FERC ¶  61,156  PDF (November 28, 2012)
$265,000 Civil Penalty; Compliance Monitoring. The Commission approved a settlement resolving findings under 18 C.F.R. § 37.6(e)(1) and PacifiCorp’s OATT for failure to properly administer and enforce the customer mechanisms for reserving and paying for transmission.
Gila River Power, LLC
141 FERC ¶ 61,136  PDF (November 19, 2012)
$2,500,000 Civil Penalty; $910,553 Disgorgement; Compliance Enhancements; Compliance Monitoring. The Commission approved a settlement resolving admitted violations under the Anti-Manipulation Rule, 18 C.F.R. § 1c.2, and under 18 C.F.R. § 35.41(b) that Gila River falsely labeled transactions submitted to the CAISO in order to artificially relieve congestion at interties and thereby improve profits on certain imports.
Barclays Bank PLC, Daniel Brin, Scott Connelly, Karen Levine, and Ryan Smith, Order to Show Cause and Notification of Proposed Penalty, 141 FERC ¶ 61,084  PDF (October 31, 2012) Proposed $435,000,000 Civil Penalty, Barclays; $34,900,000 Disgorgement, Barclays; $15,000,000 Civil Penalty, trader Scott Connelly; $1,000,000 Civil Penalty each, traders Daniel Brin, Karen Levine, and Ryan Smith. The Commission issued an Order to Show Cause asking Barclays and the named individuals to explain to the Commission why they should not be found to have violated the Anti-Manipulation Rule, 18 C.F.R. § 1c.2, for trading electricity in the western United States to affect the index price at which related financial instruments settled.
In re Missouri Gas Energy
140 FERC ¶ 61,135  PDF (August 23, 2012)
$35,000 Civil Penalty; Compliance Monitoring. The Commission approved a settlement resolving admitted violations under 18 C.F.R. Part 284 for releases of short-term, discounted gas pipeline capacity without posting and bidding and for failure to post the terms and conditions of certain releases; and under the Commission’s capacity release program requirement that shipper must have title and the prohibition against buy/sell arrangements.
Richard Silkman, Docket No. IN12-13-000, Order to Show Cause and Notice of Proposed Penalty, 140 FERC ¶ 61,033  PDF (July 17, 2012) $1,250,000 Civil Penalty. The Commission issued an Order to Show Cause asking Silkman to show why the Commission should not issue an order finding a violation of the Anti-Manipulation Rule, 18 C.F.R. 1c.2, for fraudulently inflating baseline energy consumption in the New England ISO market in order to later claim greater energy curtailments, and payments, in the Day-Ahead Load Response Program (demand response).
Competitive Energy Services, LLC, Docket No. IN12-12-000, Order to Show Cause and Notice of Proposed Penalty, 140 FERC ¶ 61,032  PDF (July 17, 2012) $7,500,000 Civil Penalty; $166,841.13 Disgorgement. The Commission issued an Order to Show Cause asking Competitive Energy Services, LLC to show why the Commission should not issue an order finding a violation of the Anti-Manipulation Rule, 18 C.F.R. 1c.2, for fraudulently inflating baseline energy consumption in the New England ISO market in order to later claim greater energy curtailments, and payments, in the Day-Ahead Load Response Program (demand response).
Lincoln Paper and Tissue, LLC, Docket No. IN12-10-000, Order to Show Cause, 140 FERC ¶ 61,031  PDF (July 17, 2012) Disgorgement and civil penalties as follows, respectively: $379,016.03, in disgorgement. $5,000,000 in civil penalties. The Commission issued an Order to Show Cause asking Lincoln Paper and Tissue, LLC to show why the Commission should not issue an order finding a violation of the Anti-Manipulation Rule, 18 C.F.R. 1c.2, for fraudulently inflating baseline energy consumption in the New England ISO market in order to later claim greater energy curtailments, and payments, in the Day-Ahead Load Response Program (demand response).
Rumford Paper Company, Order to Show Cause and Notice of Proposed Civil Penalty, 140 FERC ¶ 61,030  PDF (Jul. 17, 2012) Proposed $10,000,000 Civil Penalty; $2,836,419.08 Disgorgement; Compliance Enhancements; Compliance Monitoring. The Commission issued an Order to Show Cause asking Rumford Paper Company to show why the Commission should not issue an order finding a violation of the Anti-Manipulation Rule, 18 C.F.R. 1c.2, for fraudulently inflating baseline energy consumption in the New England ISO market in order to later claim greater energy curtailments, and payments, in the Day-Ahead Load Response Program (demand response).
In re Vista Energy Marketing, L.P. 139 FERC ¶ 61,154  PDF (May 24, 2012) $350,000 Civil Penalty; Market Participation Restrictions (2 years) against individual investor. The Commission approved a settlement resolving findings under 18 C.F.R. § 35.41(b) and Vista’s market based rate tariff for misrepresentations and violation of Commission terms and conditions related to the extent of individual investor’s involvement in company activities.
Constellation Energy Commodities Group, Inc. 138 FERC ¶ 61,168  PDF (March 9, 2012) $135,000,000 Civil Penalty; $110,000,000 Disgorgement; Market Participation Restrictions against individual traders on behalf of Constellation; Compliance Enhancements; Compliance Monitoring. The Commission approved a settlement resolving findings under the Anti-Manipulation Rule, 18 C.F.R. § 1c.2, and under 18 C.F.R. § 35.41(b) for trading energy in ISO-NE and NYISO to affect market prices for the benefit of financial instruments based on those prices, and for misrepresenting the purpose of the trades when questioned by the NYISO market monitor.
In re Xcel Energy Inc. 138 FERC ¶ 61,026  PDF (January 17, 2012) $2,000,000 Civil Penalty; Compliance Monitoring. The Commission approved a settlement resolving findings under Xcel’s OATT and Southwest Power Pool, Inc.’s OATT for improper use of Network Integrated Transmission Service.
In re Joseph Polidoro, 138 FERC ¶ 61,018  PDF (January 11, 2012) $50,000 Civil Penalty; Market Participation Restrictions (2 years) against individual founding partner. The Commission approved a settlement resolving findings under the Anti-Manipulation Rule, 18 C.F.R. § 1c.2, for registering resources in PJM’s demand response program that he knew were unavailable to respond to events and receiving payments for load reduction those resources did not provide.
In re ConocoPhillips Company, 138 FERC ¶ 61,004  PDF (January 4, 2012) $545,000 Civil Penalty; $3,174,900 Disgorgement; Compliance Monitoring. The Commission approved a settlement resolving findings under 18 C.F.R. Part 284 for releases of short-term, discounted gas pipeline capacity without posting and bidding; and under the Commission’s Open Access Transportation requirement that shipper must have title and the prohibition against buy/sell arrangements.