Challenging

In the first action of its kind, a Denver, CO-based marketer is challenging the right of an interstate natural gas pipeline to demand up-front payment of collateral equal to a full year of reservation charges from shippers that are perceived to be potential credit risks.

In the first action of its kind, a Denver, CO-based marketer is challenging the right of an interstate natural gas pipeline to demand up-front payment of collateral equal to a full year of reservation charges from shippers that are perceived to be potential credit risks.

El Paso Natural Gas and affiliate El Paso Merchant Energy are challenging FERC’s decision last month to re-open an investigation into allegations that the bidding for transportation capacity on the pipeline’s system was skewed to favor its merchant power generation affiliates.

Oneok Inc., the successful bidder for Southwest Gas Corp., threwdown the gauntlet earlier this week, challenging losing bidderSouthern Union (SU) to present evidence by today to support itsallegations that Oneok conspired to illegally influence SouthwestGas in its choice of merger partner.

In a classic states’ rights confrontation, California ischallenging FERC jurisdiction over the operation of the state’s twononprofit organizations created to make electric restructuring runsmoothly, the Independent System Operator (ISO) overseeing thetransmission grid and the Power Exchange (PX) providing a wholesalespot electricity market. Two bills have been proposed in the statelegislature to change the status of the ISO and PX in directresponse to FERC jurisdictional questions.

In the wake of last week’s Oklahoma Corporation Commission (OCC)order on upstream unbundling, an appeal filed Thursday by OklahomaNatural Gas (ONG) promises to at least put a damper on upstreamcompetition and possibly delay it while the case winds through thecourt.

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals last week denied a petitionchallenging FERC-approved tariff revisions of South Georgia NaturalGas on the grounds that it in part amounted to a “collateralattack” on Order 636, which the court previously upheld.