The answer to the question of how many lawsuits can be aimed at one natural gas supplier, El Paso Natural Gas, came to the fore again Monday, and the answer: nobody knows! The lawsuits seem to continue unabated, with the latest being Nevada’s state consumer advocate in its attorney general’s office suing the Houston-based pipeline company for “perhaps hundreds of millions of dollars.”

Nevada officials and energy company executives have speculated about alleged manipulation of the California border gas prices for some time.

The latest action piggybacks on lawsuits filed by the state of California, some of its electric utilities, local municipalities and class-action law firms. Tim Hay, Nevada’s state consumer advocate, filed the lawsuit on behalf of Attorney General Frankie Sue Del Papa, estimating damages could total “tens of millions to perhaps hundreds of millions in damages.” Under Nevada law, the judgment could be trebled because it involves allegations of restraint of trade, Hay told local news media.

The attorney general was quoted in local media as saying that El Paso conspired with other energy players to “knowingly and intentionally” carry out an alleged illegal plan to take advantage of both natural gas and electricity consumers. Therefore, customers of both Las Vegas-based utilities, Nevada Power and Southwest Gas, could have damages coming. Hay indicated his lawsuit in a Las Vegas-based state court is a class action suit on behalf of thousands of local energy utility customers.

“We haven’t seen the complaint but we’re anxious to learn more about its specifics,” said Walter Higgins, CEO of Nevada Power’s parent, Reno-based Sierra Pacific Resources. “We have believed for a long time and have said many times that it is likely there was significant manipulation in the California and western marketplace. That is why we have filed suit against Enron in the bankruptcy court and we are continuing to closely examine all aspects of the issue. This includes our suits against power marketers, including El Paso, at FERC.”

Like the many suits in its neighboring state to the west, the Nevada legal action alleged that El Paso and Sempra Energy’s Los Angeles-based Southern California Gas Co. utility, which own two dominant gas pipelines, sought to drive up the prices of gas at the California-Arizona border. Sempra and its second major utility, San Diego Gas and Electric Co., also are defendants in the lawsuit.

Enron Corp. and some subsidiaries are identified as co-conspirators, but the lawsuit stated that they cannot be named as defendants because they are in bankruptcy. As in the California cases, there is an alleged “conspiracy” hatched in September 1996 in a Phoenix motel room near its Sky Harbor Airport, involving El Paso and SoCalGas executives, as well as others.

As part of that clandestine agreement, SoCalGas was to strongly oppose expansion of the Kern River pipeline from Wyoming into California. Even with El Paso and SoCal both opposing the expansion, Kern River began a $1.26 billion pipeline upgrade and expansion this past summer.

FERC’s chief administrative law judge, Curtis Wagner, in September found in a preliminary decision that El Paso illegally withheld natural gas from California during the 2000-2001 energy crisis, and the federal regulatory body is investigating whether energy traders manipulated prices for natural gas and electricity. El Paso and others involved have steadfastly and vociferously denied they did anything wrong. An unprecedented hearing before FERC commissioners on the El Paso charges is scheduled for early December.

An El Paso spokeswoman told business news media that the company had not yet seen Nevada’s suit, but added that the it “has no merit based on the press release we’ve seen.” Denise King, a spokeswoman at SoCalGas, told the same news media essentially the same thing: the nation’s largest distribution utility had not seen Nevada’s allegations, which she confirmed are similar to those in the California lawsuits.

“Our position on the California case is that it has no merit, overlooks critical facts and is based on false speculation,” said King.

©Copyright 2002 Intelligence Press Inc. Allrights reserved. The preceding news report may not be republishedor redistributed, in whole or in part, in any form, without priorwritten consent of Intelligence Press, Inc.