Blog

FERC Finalizes Interconnection Queue Reforms

summer.gu@bracewell.com — Wed, 02 Aug 2023 21:25:19 +0000

FERC Finalizes Interconnection Queue Reforms

summer.gu@brac… Wed, 08/02/2023 - 05:25pm

On July 28, 2023, following up on its June 2022 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“Generator Interconnection Reform NOPR”), the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC” or “Commission”) issued its long-awaited rulemaking order, Order No. 2023, requiring reforms to FERC’s pro forma interconnection procedures and pro forma interconnection agreements found in Transmission Providers’ Open Access Transmission Tariffs (“OATTs”).

Against the backdrop of burgeoning interconnection queues across the country and pressure to integrate renewable energy resources expeditiously, the unanimous and bipartisan Order No. 2023 targets perceived inadequacies in FERC’s generator interconnection processes that FERC believes are creating barriers to the timely, efficient and cost-effective integration of generation resources.

The central aim of Order No. 2023 is to transition the currently effective “first-come, first-served” approach found in many Transmission Providers’ OATTs to the first-ready, first-served cluster model. The “first-ready, first-served” cluster approach—which is already in place in most organized markets—is intended to increase efficiency and decrease the number of speculative generation projects that enter interconnection queues. In addition, the Commission’s reforms include other efforts to accelerate the interconnection process, such as replacing the “reasonable efforts” standard with penalties that cannot be recovered in transmission rates for Transmission Providers that fail to conduct studies in a timely manner. Order No. 2023 also implements a set of reforms intended to incent the use of new grid and transmission technologies.

The Commission’s reforms are widely viewed as common-sense measures and are described in more detail below. Transmission Providers (or independent system operators/regional transmission organizations [“ISOs/RTOs”]) are required to submit revisions to their pro forma interconnection procedures 90 calendar days after publication of the new rules in the Federal Register, which has not yet occurred. The revised OATT provisions for the Transmission Provider or ISO/RTO will become effective following a FERC order accepting the revisions.

PROCEDURAL CONTEXT

Order No. 2023 is part of a holistic re-evaluation of FERC’s policies regarding both generator interconnection processes and transmission planning and follows FERC’s July 15, 2021 Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“ANOPR”) and June 16, 2022 Generator Interconnection Reform NOPR. In addition to Order No. 2023, and also directly stemming from the ANOPR, on April 21, 2022, FERC requested comments in a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on proposed reforms for long-term transmission planning (“Long-Term Transmission Planning NOPR”). The Commission has not yet issued a final rule on the proposed long-term transmission planning reforms, which we anticipate may occur later in 2023. If the generator interconnection reforms work as intended, Order No. 2023—together with FERC’s actions in the Long-Term Transmission Planning NOPR proceeding—could accelerate the interconnection of proposed generators as well as shift certain transmission investment taking place through the generation interconnection process to the transmission planning process.

As further context, in November 2022, FERC accepted PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.’s (“PJM”) interconnection process reforms that shifted PJM’s process to a first-ready, first-served cluster approach requiring interconnection customers to satisfy certain benchmarks to enter and remain in the queue. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., 181 FERC ¶ 61,162 (2022). Many of the issues that prompted PJM’s interconnection reform are the very same issues that underpin Order No. 2023. Before filing the reforms, PJM implemented a two-year pause on new interconnection requests and has represented that it has a significant backlog of interconnection requests.[1] Indeed, in 2022, PJM represented that it had approximately 2,500 projects in its queue. The amount of new generation capacity pending in the PJM interconnection queue likely far exceeds projections of PJM’s actual needs for generation capacity (renewable or otherwise).

In PJM and elsewhere, there has been a proliferation of renewable energy projects resulting from, among other things, state policies promoting renewable generation, increased corporate demand for virtual power purchase agreements that allow corporations to meet “renewable” or “green” energy targets and federal tax incentives. Order No. 2023 recognizes that there are a significant number of generation projects planned for development but that many of the projects in Transmission Providers’ queues will not reach commercial operation. Both PJM’s interconnection reforms and Order No. 2023 attempt to balance requirements intended to expedite processing of interconnection requests for those projects likely to achieve commercial operation, on the one hand, with more stringent requirements for generation projects to enter and remain in the queue in an effort to weed out projects that are not viable, on the other hand.

GENERATOR INTERCONNECTION REFORMS

I. First-ready, First-served Cluster Process

A. Cluster Process Reforms to Increase the Speed of Queues

The Commission adopts the Generator Interconnection Reform NOPR proposal to make the first-ready, first-served cluster study model the universally required interconnection study method. Under a first-ready, first-served cluster study process, interconnection requests are studied in groups (meaning, individual requests submitted during a certain time window are processed together with the same priority) and interconnection customers face increasing financial commitments and readiness requirements as they proceed through the queue. In contrast, a serial study approach assigns each interconnection request a unique queue position based on when they enter the queue.

FERC suggests that requiring cluster studies will make interconnection processes more efficient by allowing Transmission Providers to perform larger interconnection studies that cover numerous interconnection requests and scenarios, as opposed to performing studies on an individual interconnection request basis. FERC also maintains that cluster studies will help alleviate interconnection queue backlogs by reducing the risk of cascading re-studies, which are triggered under the serial approach when a higher-queued interconnection customer withdraws or modifies its interconnection request. The Commission’s move from the serial method to the cluster method is unsurprising, given that versions of a first-ready, first-served cluster approach are already in place in many ISOs/RTOs, and with PJM having recently initiated its official transition to the cluster method as of July 10, 2023.[2]

B. Shared Network Upgrades

Cost Allocation Within Clusters

The Commission adopts the Generator Interconnection Reform NOPR proposal, with some modifications, to require Transmission Providers to allocate network upgrade costs based on a proportional impact method, meaning to the degree to which each generator in the cluster study contributes to the need for a specific System Network Upgrade. The Commission directs Transmission Providers to craft procedures to establish a technical basis for determining which customers contribute (and by how much) towards the need for a given upgrade. For its rationale, the Commission explains that the proportional impact allocation reflects its interconnection pricing policy for network upgrades needed for the interconnection of the cluster. The Commission also updates the definition of “Stand Alone” network upgrades to avoid disputes over which customer in the cluster had the right to construct which facilities.

The Commission creates an exception to the proportional impact allocation methodology. For costs of substation network upgrades needed by specific generator(s) (and not by all generators in the cluster), the Transmission Provider would allocate all such costs to the specific customer(s), recognizing that it would be inconsistent with cost causation for other generators, not interconnecting at that substation, to bear those costs. In other words, such substation upgrade costs would be allocated per capita to the generators interconnecting at that substation. In addition, the Commission requires Transmission Providers to assign directly the costs of Interconnection Facilities but requires per capita sharing of costs when customers agree to share the costs of Interconnection Facilities, unless the parties reach a different agreement.

Cost Allocation to Later Clusters (Shared Network Upgrades)

The Commission declines to adopt the Generator Interconnection Reform NOPR proposal that later clusters who benefit from earlier network upgrades contribute to the funding of such network upgrades. The Commission explains that the proportional impact funding mechanism will provide customers with more cost certainty during the interconnection process and will allow for sharing of network upgrade costs between customers that benefit from those upgrades within the same cluster. The Commission also realizes that its Generator Interconnection Reform NOPR proposal carries significant administrative burdens for Transmission Providers and could erode cost certainty for customers, contrary to key objectives of the rulemaking. The Commission also asserts that its existing crediting policy would mitigate free-rider concerns with later-in-time customers benefitting from upgrades constructed by earlier-in-time customers.

C. Increased Financial Commitments to Decrease Speculative Generation Projects

A key objective of Order No. 2023 is to disincentivize the submission of speculative interconnection requests. In furtherance of this objective, the Commission requires steadily increasing financial commitments and readiness requirements throughout the cluster study process. Order No. 2023 also establishes requirements that are designed to ensure that interconnection customers demonstrate the viability of their projects, and their intention to develop those projects, earlier in the interconnection process. These are summarized below.

Increased Study Deposits

Order No. 2023 requires customers to provide study deposits to the Transmission Provider via a tiered approach based on project size, recognizing that larger projects within a cluster generally cost more to study than smaller projects. The following deposits are required:

For facilities between 20 MW and 80 MW, a $35,000 deposit plus $1,000 per MW;
For facilities between 80 MW and 200 MW, a $150,000 deposit; and
For facilities larger than 200 MW, a $250,000 deposit.

Notably, whereas Generator Interconnection Reform NOPR proposed that customers submit a study deposit at each phase of the cluster study process, Order No. 2023 requires that the transmission provider collect a single initial study deposit at the time that the project submits its interconnection request. In addition, the Commission also eliminates a proposed requirement that transmission providers issue monthly invoices to interconnection customers for work conducted on facilities studies.

Site Control

Order No. 2023 establishes more stringent site control requirements, adopting key proposals (with some modifications) in the Generator Interconnection Reform NOPR. Specifically, for site control, interconnection customers now will be required to demonstrate exclusive rights to develop, construct, operate, and maintain a project at the time of submission of the interconnection request, though the Commission declined to provide technology-specific acreages. The interconnection customer is required to provide evidence of 100% site control at the time of execution of the facilities study and when executing or requesting the unexecuted filing of the Large Generator Interconnection Agreement (“LGIA”). The Commission reasons that this new requirement will balance stringent site control requirements with development challenges faced by interconnection customers.

Site control is established by “(1) ownership of, a leasehold interest in, or a right to develop a site of sufficient size to construct and operate the Generating Facility; (2) an option to purchase or acquire a leasehold site of sufficient size to construct and operate the Generating Facility; or (3) any other documentation that clearly demonstrates the right of Interconnection Customer to exclusively occupy a site of sufficient size to construct and operate the Generating Facility.”

Co-location of projects on the same site is allowed. To the extent that a project will be co-located with one or more projects on the same site and behind a single point of interconnection, interconnection customers must demonstrate site control and shared land use by a contract or other agreement. Projects that are to be co-located must also demonstrate that the site is large enough to host multiple projects.

The Commission also adopts the proposal allowing for a limited option for a deposit in lieu of site control. This initial deposit allowance is for those projects where regulatory limitations prohibit the customer from obtaining site control. Interconnection customers facing such regulatory limitations may submit a deposit of $10,000 per MW, subject to a floor of $500,000 and a ceiling of $2 million. This deposit is held until the interconnection customer can demonstrate 90% site control prior to the execution of the facilities study agreement or 100% site control at or after the execution of the facilities study agreement.

Commercial Readiness

The Commission adopts the proposals requiring interconnection customers to demonstrate commercial readiness through financial deposits linked to the size of the generator while eliminating non-financial commercial readiness demonstrations, such as executed terms sheets or contracts for the sale of energy from the generator. This commercial readiness requirement is established through the payment of a commercial readiness deposit at the beginning of each study in the cluster study process (i.e., the initial cluster study, the cluster restudy and the facilities study). The commercial readiness deposits are based first on the study deposit and then on percentages of the interconnection customer’s identified network upgrade costs.

LGIA Deposit

The Commission adopts, with modification, the Generator Interconnection Reform NOPR’s proposal to require an LGIA deposit at the time of executing the LGIA (or requesting that the LGIA be filed unexecuted) in an amount increasing the total commercial readiness deposit to equal 20% of the estimated network upgrade costs identified in the LGIA. This deposit also is subject to withdrawal penalties in the event the project is withdrawn after execution of the LGIA or a request for filing an unexecuted LGIA.

Withdrawal Penalties

Though withdrawing interconnection customers are eligible to receive a refund of their study deposits to the extent their deposits exceed the study costs incurred by the Transmission Provider, such refunds are subject to any applicable withdrawal penalties, which have the potential to wipe out potential refunds.

The withdrawal penalties may apply to those projects where “(1) the interconnection customer withdraws its interconnection request at any point in the interconnection process; (2) the interconnection customer’s interconnection request has been deemed withdrawn by the Transmission Provider at any point in the interconnection process; or (3) the interconnection customer’s generating facility does not reach commercial operation (such as when an interconnection customer’s LGIA is terminated prior to reaching commercial operation).”

Withdrawal penalties can range from two times study costs to 20% of network upgrade costs. The scale of withdrawal penalties depends on the stage at which the project withdraws. The amount of the penalty increases as the interconnection customer proceeds through the interconnection process. The Commission also eliminated withdrawal penalty caps.

Order No. 2023 provides that Transmission Providers are allowed to impose withdrawal penalties only in those instances where the withdrawal has a material impact on either the cost or timing of any interconnection request for those projects that have an equal or lower queue position. In addition, Order No. 2023 provides that an interconnection customer is exempt from withdrawal penalties if the reason for the withdrawal is significant, unanticipated increases in network upgrade cost estimates included in the cluster study report or facilities study report.

D. Transition Process

FERC concludes that moving to the new cluster study process exclusively without a transition process could create large initial clusters causing delays. FERC also finds that if Transmission Providers used only a serial study process to transition, existing interconnection requests could be at greater risk of “cascading withdrawals” that could delay the adoption of standard cluster study processes.

Order No. 2023 identifies three paths for the processing of pending interconnection requests during the transition to the new interconnection process rules, depending on which phase of the serial study process their interconnection requests are in:

Path 1: Proceed under a transitional serial study process (i.e., a transitional serial interconnection facilities study);
Path 2: Proceed under a transitional cluster study (composed of a clustered system impact study and individual facilities study); or
Path 3: Withdrawal from the interconnection queue without penalty.

Transmission Providers will be required to offer Path 1 (the transitional serial interconnection facilities study option) to interconnection customers that have been tendered a facilities study agreement (even if the customer has not yet executed the agreement), as of 30 calendar days after the Transmission Provider’s initial filing to comply with Order No. 2023. Such customer may also withdraw its interconnection request without penalty (Path 3). With respect to Path 2, Transmission Providers are required to offer the transitional cluster study option to interconnection customers with an assigned queue position as of 30 calendar days after the filing date of the Transmission Provider’s initial Order No. 2023 compliance filing. Such a customer may also opt to withdraw its interconnection request without penalty (Path 3). FERC also implemented a transitional study withdrawal penalty equal to nine times the study cost in order to deter speculative interconnection requests in both the standard cluster study and the transition process.

FERC states that interconnection customers will have 120 calendar days after publication of Order No. 2023 in the Federal Register to achieve eligibility for the transition process (90 calendar days for Transmission Providers to make the required compliance filings plus the 30-day calendar day eligibility cut-offs).

FERC also emphasizes that the transition provisions of Order No. 2023 are not intended to interfere with in-progress cluster studies and transition processes. Transmission Providers that have already adopted a cluster study process or are undergoing a transition to a cluster study process will not be required to implement a new transition process.

II. Accelerating Interconnection Queue Processing

A. Penalties for Delay

FERC eliminates the “reasonable efforts” standard in the pro forma Large Generator Interconnection Procedures (“LGIP”) that previously governed Transmission Providers’ study timeliness. Instead, the pro forma LGIP will provide that delays of cluster studies beyond the tariff-specified deadline will incur a penalty of $1,000 per business day; delays of cluster restudies beyond the tariff-specified deadline will incur a penalty of $2,000 per business day; delays of affected system studies beyond the tariff-specified deadline will incur a penalty of $2,000 per business day and delays of facilities studies beyond the tariff-specified deadline will incur a penalty of $2,500 per business day. The Commission also specified that (1) there will be no study delay penalties until the third cluster study cycles after the effective date of a Transmission Provider’s Order No. 2023 compliance filing; (2) a 10-business day grace period applies before a penalty will be assessed; (3) deadlines may be extended for a particular study by 30 business days by mutual agreement of Transmission Provider and all interconnection customers with interconnection requests in the relevant study; (4) penalties will be capped at 100% of the initial study deposits received for all of the interconnection requests in the cluster for cluster studies and restudies, 100% of the initial study deposit received for the single interconnection request in the study for facilities studies, and 100% of the study deposits that the Transmission Provider acting as an affected system operator collects for conducing the affected system study and (5) Transmission Providers will have the ability to appeal any study delay penalties to FERC with FERC determining whether good cause exists to grant the relief requested.

Order No. 2023 also specifies that Transmission Providers must distribute study delay penalties to interconnection customers in the relevant study on a pro rata basis per interconnection request or affected system interconnection customer to offset their study costs. FERC also holds that non-RTO/ISO Transmission Providers and transmission owning members of RTOs/ISOs may not recover study delay penalties through transmission rates. In addition, FERC will allow RTOs/ISOs, as non-profit entities, to submit an FPA Section 205 filing to propose a default structure for recovering study delay penalties and/or to recover the costs of any specific study delay penalties. Order No. 2023 provides that revised interconnection procedures require Transmission Providers to make quarterly informational postings regarding penalties on their Open Access Same-Time Information Systems or other publicly accessible website.

B. Affected Systems

Order No. 2023 also adopts new rules (including new pro forma agreements) for projects that impact affected systems, i.e., systems other than the region in which the project will have a direct interconnection. The process requires initial notification of the affected system of a potential impact to the affected system, a study process, cost allocation procedures (to allocate affected system upgrade costs using a proportional impact method), and a financial penalties assessment. FERC also is requiring affected system Transmission Providers to study affected system interconnection requests in clusters and is requiring Transmission Providers to adopt a pro forma Affected System Study Agreement as well as a pro forma Affected System Facilities Construction Agreement. The stated purpose of these revisions is to more closely involve affected systems from the outset of the interconnection process.

Importantly, Order No. 2023 also requires all affected system transmission providers to use the Energy Resource Interconnection Service (“ERIS”) standard when conducting affected system studies, where presently transmission providers have discretion on whether to use ERIS or the higher Network Resource Interconnection Service (“NRIS”) standard. FERC explains this change avoids the affected system transmission provider studying the interconnection request as a network resource on its own system when that affected system transmission provider has no obligation to continually ensure deliverability on its system. Moreover, FERC also requires affected system transmission providers to repay the costs of network upgrades on its system to the affected system interconnection customer over a period not more than 20 years.

III. Incentivizing the Study and Deployment of New Technologies

Order No. 2023 adopts a variety of revisions to help promote the consideration and possible adoption of new technologies through the interconnection process. These reforms include the following:

Flexibility in Co-Location: Order No. 2023 requires Transmission Providers to allow more than one resource to co-locate on a shared site behind a single point of interconnection and share a single interconnection request.
Changes to Material Modification Provisions: Order No. 2023 alters the material modification analysis so that it is more permissive for technological changes that do not result in a change in a facility’s output. However, Order No. 2023 also allows for an exception from these revised rules for transmission providers, such as the Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., that employ fuel-based dispatch assumptions in their interconnection studies.
Surplus Interconnection Service: Order No. 2023 requires Transmission Providers to allow interconnection customers to access surplus interconnection service prior to commercial operation, by allowing access to this service once the original interconnection customer has executed an interconnection agreement. The purpose is to allow unused interconnection capacity to be accessed at an earlier point than what is currently typically allowed.
Incorporating Alternative Transmission Technologies: Order No. 2023 requires Transmission Providers to evaluate an enumerated list of alternative transmission solutions (statin synchronous compensators, static VAR compensators, advanced power flow control devices, transmission switching, synchronous condensers, voltage source converters, advanced conductors, and tower lifting) during cluster studies and restudies, without the need for a request from an interconnection customer.

Order No. 2023 also imposes a variety of changes regarding modeling and assumptions used in interconnection studies to, for example, better study the incorporation of non-synchronous and electric storage facilities onto the grid.

IV. Next Steps for Compliance with Order No. 2023 Directives

Order No. 2023 requires Transmission Providers, including ISOs/RTOs, to revise the LGIP, LGIA, Small Generator Interconnection Procedures (“SGIP”) and Small Generator Interconnection Agreement (“SGIA”) in their OATTs. The deadline for a Transmission Provider Order No. 2023 compliance filings is 90 calendar days from Order No. 2023’s publication in the Federal Register rather than the 180 calendar days FERC proposed in the Generator Interconnection Reform NOPR. On the FERC-approved effective date of such compliance filing, the Transmission Provider will commence the transition study process. Transmission Providers and interconnection customers will not be subject to the requirements of Order No. 2023 until FERC issues an order on a Transmission Provider’s compliance filing with a FERC-approved effective date for the tariff revisions.

Following the conclusion of the transition study process, the Transmission Provider will begin the first standard cluster study process and the Transmission Provider is required to indicate in its compliance filing the number of calendar days after the conclusion of the transmission study process it will begin the first standard cluster study process.

Consistent with FERC’s approach in Order No. 888, FERC will apply a “consistent with or superior to” standard when considering deviations from Order No. 2023’s requirements. FERC will also continue to use the “independent entity variation” standard when considering proposals from RTOs/ISOs. In addition, for Transmission Providers that are not in RTOs/ISOs, FERC will continue to allow these public utilities to use a “regional differences rationale” to seek variations made in response to established reliability requirements.

FERC does not intend to interfere with efforts by Transmission Providers that have already adopted or are in the process of adopting similar reforms to those adopted by Order No. 2023. On compliance, FERC suggests that such Transmission Providers can propose deviations from the Order No. 2023 requirements, including deviations seeking to minimize interference with ongoing transition plans and demonstrate how those deviations satisfy the standards FERC articulates above.

FERC is also requiring those non-jurisdictional entities with OATTs to satisfy the reciprocity requirement of Order No. 888 to update their OATTs to reflect changes to the LGIP, LGIA, SGIP and SGIA.

CONCLUSION AND TAKEAWAYS

Order No. 2023 is only part of FERC’s larger proposal to mitigate the extensive delays the industry is experiencing in interconnecting new generation and storage facilities. Aside from the Order No. 2023 reforms, there are issues raised in the ANOPR that have not yet been addressed in a follow-on rulemaking, including interregional transmission planning (separate from the regional planning reforms proposed in the Long-Term Transmission Planning NOPR); transmission incentive reforms; participant-funding reforms and transmission development reforms (likely focused on cost control related to transmission development). FERC has previously expressed concerns about the need for enhanced oversight of investment in transmission and related cost recovery to ensure that ratepayers are not responsible for transmission investment that is not necessary or prudent. FERC has suggested state commission or independent oversight to monitor transmission spending in each transmission region.[3]

The efficacy of the Order No. 2023 reforms also will depend in part on any final rule adopting reforms to the long-term transmission planning process. FERC’s Long-Term Transmission Planning NOPR highlighted FERC’s concerns about the tendency for interconnection-related needs to be identified repeatedly in interconnection studies, only for these needs to go unresolved due to the withdrawal of generation resources from the process. To address that issue, FERC’s Long-Term Transmission Planning NOPR proposes to require that Transmission Providers evaluate for possible selection in the regional transmission plan and corresponding cost allocations, regional transmission facilities to address interconnection-related needs that have been identified in at least two interconnection queue cycles during the preceding five years; have a voltage of at least 200 kV and/or an estimated cost of at least $30 million and have not been developed due to the withdrawal of interconnection customers. FERC’s proposal in the Long-Term Transmission Planning NOPR would be a step towards harmonizing the generator interconnection process with regional transmission planning—processes that historically have employed different assumptions when evaluating reliability needs, with the result that many reliability issues identified in the generator interconnection process remain unresolved.

[1] It is worth mentioning that the queue backlog and PJM’s decision to “pause” the generator interconnection queue has had wide and unexpected consequences, affecting projects other than new generation development. Existing generation projects are required to enter the interconnection queue to the extent that they seek to materially modify their resources, including modifying the technical characteristics of their resources or adding additional capacity behind the same point of interconnection. Also, certain requests for transmission service are required to be processed through the PJM queue and have been adversely affected due to the pause in PJM’s queue.

[2] PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., Notification of Occurrence of Transition Date, Docket Nos. ER22-2110-000 and ER22-2110-001 (filed July 11, 2024).

[3] In a case currently pending before FERC, the California Independent System Operator Corporation has pointed out that the transmission developer agreed to a cost cap of $258,961,024 for a transmission project and is seeking recovery of almost $300 million more than the binding cost cap. California Independent System Operator Corp., Motion to Intervene and Comments, Docket No. ER23-2309-000 (filed July 21, 2023).

August 1, 2023

Hide in lists

Off

Download and Print PDF

From the Archives: “Despite the Insults, I’m Proud to Be a Lawyer”

Bob.Schranz@bracewell.com — Thu, 29 Apr 2021 14:45:28 +0000

From the Archives: “Despite the Insults, I’m Proud to Be a Lawyer”

Bob.Schranz@br… Thu, 04/29/2021 - 10:45am

Every year since 1961, the United States has observed Law Day on May 1 to reflect on the role of law and its social importance. This year, as we look back at our 75 years as a firm, we find inspiration from Eugene Cook (1938–2020), who in 1997 published an Op-Ed in The Dallas Morning News about the contributions made by lawyers throughout US history.

Cook served as a Justice on the Texas Supreme Court from 1988 to 1992, serving as the principal architect of “The Texas Lawyer’s Creed—A Mandate for Professionalism.” Cook joined Bracewell in 1992 as a senior partner and head of the firm’s appellate group. He retired in 2002.

“The first thing we do, we kill all the lawyers.” When William Shakespeare’s Dick the Butcher speaks those lines, he is recognizing that to overthrow a legitimate government, it is necessary to kill those who oppose tyranny: the lawyers. But despite their meaning, the lines usually are taken out of context and employed as the favorite jest of lawyer bashers everywhere.

No one, it appears, likes lawyers. Lawyer bashing is a national pastime, the theme of regular articles and letters to editors, the punch line of countless jokes and a sure-fire ratings booster for radio talk-show hosts.

Despite those insults, I am proud to be a lawyer. I know what many members of the public apparently don’t: History is filled with generations of lawyers who, like those Dick the Butcher would exterminate, have stood against tyranny to build a free society.

Of the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence, 30 were lawyers. The author, Thomas Jefferson, was a lawyer. Of the 55 delegates to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia who hammered out our Constitution, 31 were lawyers.

A few years later, during the War of 1812, the British invaded and captured the nation’s young capital. A Washington citizen went on board a British ship to secure the release of a US prisoner.

The young Washingtonian maintained an all-night vigil aboard the vessel while the British relentlessly bombarded Baltimore.

Generations of Americans know the triumph he felt when he saw, in the dawn’s early light, that the flag was still there. He was Francis Scott Key, author of “The Star-Spangled Banner,” and he was a lawyer.

Twenty-five of the nation’s 42 presidents were lawyers. Some of them led us through our country’s most difficult conflicts. Most Americans know that Abraham Lincoln, president during the Civil War, was a lawyer. But many don’t know that Woodrow Wilson, who led us through World War I, was a lawyer. Franklin Roosevelt, our president during most of World War II, also was a lawyer.

Lawyers were no less active as leaders during other challenging periods of American history. Who among us can remain untouched by the work — and the words — of Texas’ own Barbara Jordan during Watergate? “My faith in our Constitution is whole. It is complete. It is total.”

Ms. Jordan wasn’t the first Texas lawyer to defend the cause of freedom. More than 150 years ago, six stubborn lawyers fortified themselves with more than 180 other souls to defend the Alamo against impossible odds.

William B. Travis, commander of the Alamo, was only 26 when he wrote an open letter to the people of Texas and all Americans, promising that he would “never surrender or retreat.” What most people don’t know is that Mr. Travis had a law practice in Anahuac and, later, San Felipe before he sacrificed his life at the Alamo.

The colorful James Butler Bonham was 29 when he died at the Alamo. Long before he traveled there, he achieved fame as a spirited lawyer in South Carolina. One day at court, another lawyer insulted Mr. Bonham’s female client. Mr. Bonham interrupted the proceedings and took a buggy whip in court to the surprised opponent. Mr. Bonham’s subsequent jail sentence was relieved by the ladies of the town, who saw to it that he was well fed and outfitted with whatever comforts his jailers would allow.

Mr. Bonham’s reckless courage later made him a natural choice to ride through enemy lines in search of reinforcements for the besieged Texas forces. He fought his way through a blistering assault to return to the Alamo. Once back inside, Mr. Bonham manned a cannon. Rumor has it he died trying to explode its powder magazine to keep it from falling into enemy hands.

As Americans and Texans, we have only to look back through our own history to find portraits of honorable men and women who have served the society as lawyers. We have only to picture the Alamo and then, 46 days later, the Battle of San Jacinto and the commander who led Texas to victory in the war’s decisive battle. He was Sam Houston, a courageous man, a hero committed to building a strong and free society, a capable leader. But first, he was a lawyer.

Disreputable lawyers are justly criticized. The public, as well as the legal profession, are well served by their exposure. But they aren’t the whole story of the legal tradition. That tradition has been built by the men of the Constitutional Convention, our country’s presidents and other leaders and by the people laboring within the legal profession today. For every charlatan, we can find a dozen honorable lawyers to offset the jokes and the negative reports.

Originally published in The Dallas Morning News, June 16, 1997. Reprinted with permission.

April 30, 2021

Bracewell Life

Hide in lists

Off

Thumbnail Image

Download and Print PDF

Everything’s Coming Up Roses in Pearland

Bob.Schranz@bracewell.com — Wed, 29 May 2019 20:02:18 +0000

Everything’s Coming Up Roses in Pearland

Bob.Schranz@br… Wed, 05/29/2019 - 04:02pm

The Rose Parade will have an extra-special meaning for one Bracewell family this coming New Year’s Day.

CIO Kirk Scruggs and his wife, Christine, are booster club presidents of The Pride of Pearland Marching Band in which their son, Nicholas, currently plays the tuba. The couple’s two eldest sons, Jacob and Zachary, are Pearland Band alumnus. Come this January, the Pearland Band will be one of only 20 bands from around the world that will march in the 2020 Rose Parade.

Pearland was chosen to march in the 2020 Rose Parade because of its musicianship, performance ability and the selflessness its members demonstrated during Hurricane Harvey. The school and band hall provided temporary shelter for individuals and families who lost their homes to the storm.

Earlier this month, Pasadena Tournament of Roses President Laura Farber traveled to Houston to extend a formal invitation to the Pearland Band to participate in this coming year’s parade. Bracewell hosted a reception with Farber — who is a litigation partner at a Pasadena law firm — and her husband, Tomás Lopez, to celebrate the band’s achievement.

May 29, 2019

Bracewell Life

Hide in lists

Off

Thumbnail Image

Download and Print PDF

London Partner Adam Blythe: Running the Good Race

Bob.Schranz@bracewell.com — Tue, 07 May 2019 17:44:05 +0000

London Partner Adam Blythe: Running the Good Race

Bob.Schranz@br… Tue, 05/07/2019 - 01:44pm

Adam Blythe has long wanted to run the marathon in the city he has called home for 14 years. On April 28, Adam finally got his opportunity by running in the 39th Virgin Money London Marathon.

Adam finished with a personal-best time of 2:28:08. To put that into perspective, Kenyan long-distance runner and Olympic marathoner Eliud Kipchoge surpassed his own London course record with a winning time of 2:02:37.

Adam placed 54th overall in a race where more than 42,000 runners crossed the finish line.

“I have long wanted to do a sub two-thirty marathon,” said Adam. “I have never managed that before.”

London was Adam’s fourth marathon. He completed courses in Bournemouth and Abingdon in the UK, as well as the Paris marathon. Adam began his training for the London race on December 24, 2018, logging somewhere between 80 to 100 miles a week. He ran seven days a week when work and family commitments permitted.

“Ideally, I run in the mornings because that’s the easiest timewise to try and keep free,” explained Adam. “I also know better that I’m not going to have a work conflict or something come up.”

He has always been a keen runner. Adam grew up in the Cotswolds, a rural part of southwest England near Worcester, where he participated in track and field at Prince Henry’s High School. His dad was also a runner and his sister still runs from time to time, but as Adam tells “more for fun rather than to compete or to do races.”

Adam does not always run competitively either. He also uses it as an opportunity to “escape” and as “a stress buster.” Running has become part of his habitual routine.

“I do it as part of my commute to work,” Adam expounded. “I won’t always do both ways, but I usually do one way.”

His commuter runs can be anywhere from six miles to up to 15 miles, depending on the route he takes and if he is training.

Adam displays the same discipline in his practice as he does in his running regime. Elected a partner in 2018, he was the first “homegrown” partner in Bracewell’s London office. Adam’s practice focuses on oil and gas related transactions, and he has been recognized by The Legal 500 United Kingdom as a Next Generation Lawyer for Oil & Gas Projects since 2017. He has also been recommended for Projects in the 2017 and 2019 editions of the IFLR1000 Financial & Corporate Guide.

While most walk before they run, Adam will be doing the opposite. Next up for him will be a 100 kilometer walk in June around the Jurassic Coast in South West of England with his family to raise money for the hospice that recently cared for his mom.

From courses to contracts, Adam continues to run the good race on all fronts.

Photos by MarathonFoto.

May 7, 2019

Oil & Gas

Bracewell Life

Hide in lists

Off

Thumbnail Image

Download and Print PDF

Creating Tomorrow’s Lawyers Today: The Houston Bar Association Minority Opportunities Boot Camp

Bob.Schranz@bracewell.com — Wed, 17 Apr 2019 20:18:59 +0000

Creating Tomorrow’s Lawyers Today: The Houston Bar Association Minority Opportunities Boot Camp

Bob.Schranz@br… Wed, 04/17/2019 - 04:18pm

On April 6, Bracewell LLP played host to the Houston Bar Association’s Minority Opportunities in the Legal Profession Committee (MOILP) Boot Camp. The program offers law students advice and best practices from a diverse group of lawyers from across the area. For Bracewell, hosting the Boot Camp allows the firm to create a welcoming environment for participating students, as well as to support HBA’s ongoing mission to build a diverse and inclusive local bar.

The 2019 Boot Camp opened with a legal writing presentation by Hao Le, general counsel of Texas Southern University. This was followed by a transactional presentation by Rafael Boza, regional lead counsel for the Americas at Sarens USA. These presentations set the stage for a panel discussion on interrelated issues of best practices, etiquette, networking, diversity and the minority experience. The panel was moderated by Staci Wilson, partner at Bracewell and co-chair of the MOILP Committee. Staci was joined by a group of panelists that included Jeffery B. Vaden, partner at Bracewell, and Brittny Mandarino, a second-year student at South Texas College of Law and a 2018 MOILP Law Clerk.

The MOILP Committee organizes and implements a summer clerkship program for first-year law students from the three prominent Houston law schools. To assist participating students in preparing for their clerkships, the Committee puts on its annual MOILP Boot Camp. The program is specifically designed to encourage equal opportunities for minority lawyers in the legal profession.

Most law firms and companies hire only second-year law students for summer clerkships. MOILP works to extend employment and mentoring opportunities to include minority first-year law students. The positions provide mentoring and real work experiences for students who might not otherwise have the opportunity to compete for those positions.

A number of MOILP clerks have gone on to accept permanent positions with employers they first met through the program. Some have even gone on to become partners in those firms.

The Boot Camp is one of a number of programs that participating students have the opportunity to attend. These initiatives all foster the development of minority law students by providing practical experience and advice before they commence their on-campus interviews during their second year of law school, and before they embark on their legal careers.

For Staci, programs like the Boot Camp are an important part of HBA’s mission to serve the needs of the legal community by creating a vibrant and inclusive local bar.

“This year, the MOILP program helped nearly 50 students obtain summer clerkship positions with a variety of employers, including law firms, corporations, state and federal judges, and nonprofit and government organizations,” said Staci. “This has been one of HBA’s most successful programs to date. We wanted to make sure that the students placed in these positions have all of the tools necessary to continue that success and, more importantly, excel in their summer clerkships.”

April 18, 2019

Bracewell Life

Hide in lists

Off

Thumbnail Image

Download and Print PDF

Paving the Way to a More Diverse and Inclusive Legal Community

Bob.Schranz@bracewell.com — Tue, 16 Apr 2019 14:35:47 +0000

Paving the Way to a More Diverse and Inclusive Legal Community

Bob.Schranz@br… Tue, 04/16/2019 - 10:35am

On March 30, Yvonne Y. Ho received the 2019 Diversity and Inclusion Award from the University of Houston Law Alumni Association at its 43rd Annual Law Gala and Auction. The award annually recognizes a University of Houston Law Center (UHLC) alumnus or alumna who has demonstrated significant commitment to diversity and inclusion by fostering a more diverse and inclusive legal community.

“I am touched to be recognized for mentoring other lawyers and striving to ensure that all individuals have equal opportunities to advance their legal careers,” says Yvonne, who chairs Bracewell’s Diversity and Inclusion Committee. “This is especially true because I strongly believe that we share a common responsibility to pave the way for the next generation of lawyers. After all, everyone that has achieved any measure of success has done so only because others have shown them the way.”

Throughout her career, Yvonne has served as a dedicated mentor to law students and worked to improve opportunities for young lawyers.

Yvonne is a past co-chair and long-standing member of the Houston Bar Association Minority Opportunities in the Legal Profession Committee, which connects first-year minority law students with summer internship opportunities at local courts, nonprofits, governmental entities and law firms. As a current and past co-chair of the HBA Professionalism Committee, Yvonne has promoted a mentoring program that pairs newly licensed lawyers with senior attorneys across the legal community.

Since 2009, she has served on the UHLC Clerkship Committee, advising dozens of students applying for clerkships with federal and state court judges.

“Serving as a mentor has made me appreciate how much my own mentors have contributed to my success,” explains Yvonne. “I’ve also realized that you don’t have to have the ‘right’ answer to everything to have something valuable to offer. Sometimes what mentees need is a safe sounding board as they puzzle through difficult challenges. And from time to time, serving as a mentor has inspired me to implement my own advice.”

Yvonne earned her J.D. in 2006 from the UHLC, where she graduated summa cum laude and was valedictorian of her class. She previously received the Rising Star Award from the University of Houston Law Alumni Association in 2014. Yvonne also volunteers time to her law school by serving on the board of directors of the Houston Law Review and the Houston Law Review Alumni Association.

April 16, 2019

Litigation

Bracewell Life

Hide in lists

Off

Thumbnail Image

Download and Print PDF

How Congaree Is Shaping the Lives of Youth Through Golf

Bob.Schranz@bracewell.com — Wed, 10 Apr 2019 19:49:07 +0000

How Congaree Is Shaping the Lives of Youth Through Golf

Bob.Schranz@br… Wed, 04/10/2019 - 03:49pm

While the Masters Tournament at Augusta National Golf Club grabs the collective conscious of the golf world each April, a course about 100 miles southeast in South Carolina’s Lowcountry is clutching the hearts of golf enthusiasts from around the world.

Congaree Golf Club, which opened in 2017, is an 18-hole, par-71 course located in Ridgeland, South Carolina. Situated on an historic 18th century estate, Congaree is a world-class course designed by renowned architect Tom Fazio. In 2018, Golf Digest named Congaree the best private course in the United States.

But what makes Congaree truly special is its founding purpose.

Dan Friedkin, chair and CEO of The Friedkin Group, and Robert C. “Bob” McNair, the late owner of the NFL’s Houston Texans, established the Congaree Golf Club and the Congaree Foundation with the goal to create an elite golf course with a philanthropic mission at its core. With support of the Congaree Golf Club, the Congaree Foundation “provides resources for educational and vocational mentorship opportunities to help shape the lives of underserved and ambitious youth who share a passion for golf.”

The course and its mission were brought to life through the creation of the Foundation, which Bracewell’s public finance team helped facilitate.

Led by Partner Todd Greenwalt, Bracewell assisted the Foundation with its certificate of formation and bylaws. The public finance team also assisted the Foundation with its application for tax exempt status. Bracewell continues today to advise the Foundation on tax exempt matters such as donations and fundraising activities.

For Todd, who picked up the game of golf at the age of 12 and played competitively in high school, representing the Foundation has been a labor of love.

“The legal work itself is not that dissimilar to that of other clients engaged in charitable matters,” explains Todd. “But the fact that this project involves the use of golf to help kids and generate social change certainly makes it more special to me and our public finance team.”

The signature program of the Foundation is the Congaree Global Golf Initiative, an immersive collegiate preparatory curriculum tailored toward high school students in the United States and abroad. Participants come to Congaree over the summer to work with educators, guidance counselors, life-skill mentors, athletic trainers and golf instructors to advance their preparation for the college admissions process and prepare them for success in life. The intense four-week program includes a mix of college preparatory class work, fitness training, counseling, mentorship, golf lessons and even club fitting. The support for the “Congaree kids” continues after they leave, as advisors and counselors monitor their development while they finish high school and prepare for college.

Founder Dan Friedkin is technically the only course member at the 3,200-acre property. Everyone else is an “ambassador,” asked to join by invitation or referral only. Ambassadors are successful, influential figures who support Congaree and its philanthropic mission. There are also no initiation fees. Instead, ambassadors are strongly encouraged to donate to the Foundation. The only “requirement” for ambassadors is to get involved in the lives of these students, acting as mentors and offering guidance.

Congaree turns to PGA pro ambassadors — such as World Golf Hall of Famer Mark O’Meara, LPGA star Morgan Pressel and 39-time PGA Tour winner Tom Watson — to help identify participants who are passionate about golf and show academic promise, but do not have the means or support to fulfill their potential.

Named after a Native American tribe that once called the area home, Congaree is located in one of the poorest counties in South Carolina. Jasper County, where the course sits, has a population where more than 20 percent live below the poverty line. Congaree is bringing light to the children in Jasper County by undertaking projects in the surrounding area, which includes updating the facilities at the local Boys & Girls Club and partnering with the Lowcountry Food Bank to provide free fruits and vegetables to more than 300 households. Congaree, with aid from equipment manufacturer Ping, also donated golf clubs to the local Ridgeland-Hardeeville High School. There are additional plans to help the local community as well, including partnering with programs that provide mentorship to kids and families. Whether it’s an afterschool program, motivational speakers, helping to learn a trade or pursue higher education, Congaree and its ambassadors are ready to lend support.

The Congaree Foundation was Todd’s second opportunity to work on a project of this nature. He also did similar work in the creation of the World Health & Golf Association, which is now known as The Spirit Golf Association. The former WHGA was founded in 1999 as a 501(c)3 organization for the purpose of promoting amateur golf activities for the benefit of charity.

“Each project was set around building activities to expose underserved youth to the character-building aspects of golf,” said Todd. “And while it may not be important in and of itself to learn the rules of the game, it is a great exercise in teaching kids the social etiquette and discipline needed in life that are displayed through the game of golf.”

Congaree photos courtesy of The Friedkin Group.

April 10, 2019

Public Finance

Bracewell Life

Hide in lists

Off

Thumbnail Image

Download and Print PDF

Salute to Service: Jason W. Keating

Bob.Schranz@bracewell.com — Fri, 16 Nov 2018 14:13:50 +0000

Salute to Service: Jason W. Keating

Bob.Schranz@br… Fri, 11/16/2018 - 09:13am

Bracewell concludes its week-long Salute to Service series with a feature on an active-duty Army Reserve Captain.

Jason Keating is an associate in Bracewell’s business and regulatory section. But for one weekend a month and approximately two weeks over the summer, Jason serves as a Captain in the United States Army Reserve.

Jason enrolled in Army ROTC as an undergraduate at the University of Delaware, and has served as an Army Reserve officer for the last nine years.

“I am blessed and very grateful that the firm supports my military service and allows me to make the time commitment to attend my monthly drill weekends and annual trainings,” said Jason.

Jason is in command of a petroleum supply company consisting of approximately 120 soldiers. The company’s doctrinal mission is to mobilize into an austere environment in order to construct, install and operate a petroleum pipeline to support the transportation of fuel. If the assets already exist, the unit might move in and take over operation of that pipeline.

“There are a limited number of units across all echelons of the Army (Active, Reserve and National Guard) that perform this type of mission,” explained Jason. “So we are very valuable to the Army as a whole in terms of being an organic asset with a unique skillset of performing petroleum pipeline operations.”

This past August, Jason and his company took part in a large-scale exercise at Fort McCoy, which is a training installation in the vicinity of Sparta, Wisconsin. For its part of the exercise, the company got on the ground and moved out into an open field where there was no existing infrastructure. The company lived there organically using the equipment and supplies it had on hand, while proceeding to execute its mission: constructing and installing a pipeline with the support of adjacent units.

Jason’s company is trained and equipped to handle a variety of different mission sets. As an example, the company could be asked to construct and operate a single pipeline that would move petroleum directly from a supply point to the maneuver units that require it, such as the infantry, armor or artillery. The company could also construct and operate single or multiple pipelines used as links in a chain to move petroleum from supply point to supply point – with the ultimate goal of getting the fuel into the hands of the end user. For this exercise, an engineer company began by digging trenches. Upon completion, Jason’s unit was able to move in with their equipment and install a pipeline to be used to move petroleum from a staging area to a collection point. While the unit did not actually transport fuel for purposes of the exercise due to environmental considerations, they did test the operation and functionality of the line by transporting water through it, and separately ran lab tests on provided samples of fuel.

“It was great experience for me and I look forward to doing future exercises like that again,” added Jason.

What makes this exercise so valuable to Jason’s law practice is that he represents lending institutions, money center banks and regional banks in a wide array of financing transactions, including energy securitizations and project finance. Being based in the Houston office, these transactions frequently involve the development and exploration of oil and natural gas.

“It is unique for me to be able to work on so many energy and oil and gas transactions as part of my practice here at Bracewell, and then ultimately see how the development of that petroleum and fuel translates into utilization at the customer level,” described Jason. “This is especially true with the Department of Defense, which is one of the largest purchasers of bulk petroleum product in the US.”

November 16, 2018

Hide in lists

Off

Thumbnail Image

Download and Print PDF

Salute to Service: Tyler S. Johnson

Bob.Schranz@bracewell.com — Thu, 15 Nov 2018 14:35:50 +0000

Salute to Service: Tyler S. Johnson

Bob.Schranz@br… Thu, 11/15/2018 - 09:35am

In a week-long Salute to Service, Bracewell continues its series of stories from across the various sectors of military life.

Spending 87 consecutive days operating a nuclear power plant sounds daunting in itself. What if we told you Bracewell Associate Ty Johnson did just that while submerged in water?

No, this is not a modern-day Harry Houdini stunt or something out of a science fiction novel. Ty served as a US Naval officer aboard the USS Louisville (SSN 724), a nuclear-powered, Los Angeles-class submarine based out of Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. His duties included operating the nuclear power plant onboard and conducting ship-board operations.

“Our longest stretch under water was 87 days,” said Ty. “We pretty much ran out of food towards the end. I lost about 10 or 15 pounds, and I didn’t have much to lose on me to begin with. It was a good bit of weight drop, but it was all worth it. I loved my time in the Navy.”

Ty says most people he talks with about his Navy days want to hear about life aboard a submarine. Questions vary, from how did you do laundry? What did you eat? Where did you store things?

“A Los Angeles-class submarine has a maximum 90-day stay time underwater since it is limited by the amount of food the sub can carry,” explained Ty. “There were about 170 sailors when I was aboard. That’s a lot of food needed. We would typically stack up food on the decking. You basically ate your way down to the original deck level.”

Submarines typically deploy for six months every year-and-a-half. Ty deployed on the Louisville in 2002 for operations in the western Pacific before being called to the Red Sea in the winter 2003. After a month in the Red Sea, the Louisville was ordered to launch 16 Tomahawk missiles against targets in Iraq. The “shock and awe” campaign in the opening days of Operation Iraqi Freedom had begun. Ty and the Louisville’s deployment was extended to nearly nine months in support of the campaign. The Louisville and its crew were awarded the Navy Unit Commendation for their role in the operation.

Ty was on the Louisville for almost three years and moved to the Pacific Northwest in January 2005 to do a tour at the Naval Base Kitsap located on the Kitsap Peninsula in Washington State.

Before any of these deployments and tours, Ty went through nearly two years of training before joining the crew of the Louisville. Most his studies were nuclear power related. Ty, who joined the Navy in 1999 and started officer candidate school in 2000, studied nuclear physics, thermodynamics, electrical theory, radiation theory, chemistry and an abundance of math.

“The Navy’s nuclear power program is one of the most academically stringent, rigorous program in the entire military,” stated Ty.

This education not only prepared him for his service in the Navy, but also laid the groundwork for his career as a power regulatory lawyer.

“When I came aboard the submarine, I had to use all I had learned to understand the nuclear plant on the sub, the propulsion systems and the power distribution systems,” explained Ty. “The sub operated like its own little power station. The nuclear plant not only provided the steam that drove the main turbines, but also provided the steam that ran large turbine generators that produce the electricity to run the pumps, the air conditioning and everything else onboard.”

For Ty, this was a hands-on introduction to the operation of a power plant. Now with Bracewell, Ty deals with the regulatory side of transmission systems and the moving of power across interstate lines.

“My experience on the Louisville gave me a great primer for understanding how the larger transmission systems work in the US,” added Ty. “It was a leg-up in wading into the very technical world of an electricity regulation lawyer.”

In 2007, following seven years in the Navy, Ty enrolled in law school to become an energy regulatory lawyer. The energy regulatory world was a natural fit to build upon Ty’s technical background with the nuclear Navy.

“If you asked me if I was going to be a lawyer when I graduated from college, I would say you were crazy,” Ty said with a laugh. “But after my seven years in the Navy, I was really looking for a professional field to get into and law seemed like a good fit.”

Even nowadays, Ty leverages his Naval experience to lead clients through complex regulatory proceedings.

“I regularly look back upon my Navy days when reviewing a new transmission issue, utility proposal or federal agency proposal,” said Ty.

November 15, 2018

Energy Regulatory

Power

Energy

Bracewell Life

Hide in lists

Off

Thumbnail Image

Download and Print PDF

Salute to Service: Jeffery B. Vaden

Bob.Schranz@bracewell.com — Mon, 12 Nov 2018 19:09:02 +0000

Salute to Service: Jeffery B. Vaden

Bob.Schranz@br… Mon, 11/12/2018 - 02:09pm

In a week-long Salute to Service, Bracewell presents a series of stories from across the various sectors of military life. We open with a feature on Partner Jeff Vaden, who served in the Army National Guard.

Bracewell Partner Jeff Vaden fondly remembers the National Guard Armory in his hometown of Sulphur Springs, Texas. Little did he know in high school that it was going to be his primary base after joining the Army National Guard, where he served from 1985 to 1991.

“Most of our annual training was done in Fort Hood, Texas, and my basic and advanced training was done in Fort Benning, Georgia,” explained Jeff. “But our unit’s primary base was in Northeast Texas in my hometown of Sulphur Springs.”

Jeff was assigned to a mechanized infantry unit and went through US Army Infantry School at Fort Benning.

“That was certainly a leadership and confidence building experience,” said Jeff about his time in Infantry School.

Leadership and confidence were Jeff’s guiding traits in the Army National Guard. They also characterize his service as a prosecutor for more than 16 years and in his current role as a white collar defense lawyer. Prior to joining Bracewell, Jeff was an assistant US attorney in the Southern District of Texas and assistant district attorney in the Harris County District Attorney’s Office.

As a former prosecutor and a current white collar defense attorney, Jeff sees some parallel benefits to military service and being a lawyer.

“For what I do, you really need trial experience,” added Jeff. “But, it’s hard to get trial experience as a young lawyer. You have to go work for the government either as a prosecutor or as a military lawyer to get trial experience.”

For many lawyers with government experience, particularly federal prosecutors, there is a fair number of those who get recruited from the Judge Advocate General’s Corps or JAG Corps of the various branches of the military.

So many people in our society, including in the legal field, have served in some branch of the military. Jeff says it is that shared experience that allows him to have a deeper understanding of those people. His time in the National Guard has also aided him in dealing with foreign law enforcement counterparts from outside the United States, especially with counter terrorism, national security and international issues.

“We have laws preventing the military from getting involved with law enforcement matters,” explained Jeff. “But when you deal with some foreign countries, the military is the police in certain circumstances. So my time in the National Guard has really helped me in understanding those relationships.”

Even when reading an investigative report or an article that has military or intelligence aspects, Jeff says he understands it better than if he did not have the military experience. This serves to add another commonality among the military and working in law.

Jeff also noted another significant benefit of joining the service that still applies today.

“For many people, the military helps to defray your educational costs,” said Jeff. “You can use those benefits not just for an undergraduate education, but you can extend to post-graduate work as well.”

Jeff is thankful for the knowledge and experiences gained in his time with the National Guard, but he also understands that not all military service is the same.

“There was no active conflict when I served, so I did not get deployed,” Jeff added about his years in the National Guard. “I hold those who did deploy in combat in the highest regard.”

Jeff served in the National Guard during the mid-1980s. Despite this being a period of elevated Cold War tension between the United States and the Soviet Union, the decade was a time where the US was not engaged in any large-scale fighting. This was the post-Vietnam era and just prior to the Gulf Wars.

A self-proclaimed military history buff, Jeff has a deep appreciation for those veterans of foreign wars. For Jeff, Veterans Day has always held a special place in his heart.

“I have always been pro military even before my time in the service,” relished Jeff. “Each Veterans Day we put the flag up in our yard, it is such a special day.”

November 12, 2018

Government Enforcement & Investigations

Bracewell Life

Hide in lists

Off

Thumbnail Image

Download and Print PDF