Whether remand without vacatur is the appropriate remedy where the record indicates that an agency's inadequately reasoned decision could be corrected on remand and vacatur of the decision could result in serious, and potentially life-threatening, disruptive consequences

QUESTION PRESENTED The Spire STL Pipeline is a critical source of natural gas for the St. Louis region. The pipeline—which became operational in 2019—was constructed to diversify the supply of natural gas to the region by enabling St. Louis to access natural gas from the Rockies and Appalachia. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) issued a certificate of public convenience and necessity that authorized the construction and operation of the pipeline after finding that there was a need for the project. In the decision below, however, the D.C. Circuit held that FERC had not sufficiently justified its decision to authorize the pipeline. The D.C. Circuit concluded that the appropriate remedy was vacatur of FERC’s order, rather than remand without vacatur, even though it acknowledged that “there may be some disruption” from vacating authorization for an already-operational pipeline and despite leaving open the possibility that FERC would be able to rely on existing record evidence to reissue the pipeline’s certificate. According to the D.C. Circuit, vacatur was appropriate because it was “far from certain” and “not at all clear” to the court that FERC could rehabilitate its reasoning on remand. As a result, hundreds of thousands of St. Louis-area households and businesses face the prospect of losing their natural-gas service during the winter months. The question presented is whether remand without vacatur is the appropriate remedy where the record indicates that an agency’s inadequately reasoned decision could be corrected on remand and vacatur of the decision could result in serious, and potentially life-threatening, disruptive consequences.