FERC told six California power suppliers Friday that they mustjustify $55 million worth of wholesale electricity sold duringStage Three emergencies in the month of February or pay refunds.
Defend
Articles from Defend
Six CA Suppliers Told to Defend $55M in Power Sales
FERC told six California power suppliers Friday that they mustjustify $55 million worth of wholesale electricity sold duringStage Three emergencies in the month of February or pay refunds.
Cross Bay Sponsors Asked to Defend Pipe Project
FERC last week directed the Cross Bay Pipeline Co. L.L.C. torespond to a series of questions mostly focusing on the East Coastproject’s byzantine financial and capacity-lease arrangements thathave prompted protests from customers.
Cross Bay Sponsors Asked to Defend Pipe Project
FERC has directed the Cross Bay Pipeline Co. LLC to respond to aseries of questions dealing with the financing, leasing,engineering, operations and rate design of the East Coast projectthat has come under fire from customers.
NGPL Vows to Fight DOJ Complaint
Kinder Morgan Inc. said it has filed a “motion to dismiss” inColorado Federal District Court and will defend itself against acomplaint filed Dec. 20 by the Justice Department on behalf of theEnvironmental Protection Agency. The complaint alleges KMIsubsidiary Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America (NGPL) failed toobtain all necessary air quality permits when constructing theAkron Compressor Station in Weld County, CO, more than 20 yearsago. It requests penalties up to the statutory maximums of $25,000per day of violation prior to January 30, 1997 and $27,500 for eachday of violation after January 31, 1997.
Lawsuit Seeks to Quash Wisconsin Utility Merger
WICOR Inc., parent of Wisconsin Gas, says it intends to”vigorously defend” itself against a shareholder class-actionlawsuit that seeks to put the brakes to the company’s proposedacquisition by Wisconsin Energy Corp.
Sempra, KN Defend Against Market Power Claims
Merger partners Sempra Energy and KN Energy contend that QuestarPipeline, which claims the marriage would subvert gas and electriccompetition in southern California, is seeing monsters where noneexist. Nevertheless, they agreed to make certain concessions toQuestar to remove a potential threat to their merger transaction.
Sempra, KN Defend Merger Against Market Power Claims
Merger partners Sempra Energy and KN Energy contend that QuestarPipeline, which claims their marriage would subvert gas andelectric competition in southern California, is seeing monsterswhere none exist. Nevertheless, they agreed to make certainconcessions to Questar to remove a potential threat to their mergertransaction.
Third Remand Affects Penalty Revenue
In another case the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission isgoing to have to defend its policy of not requiring pipelines toflow through penalty revenues, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruledFriday in remanding a case involving NorAm Gas Transmission (No.97-1607). The 2-1 decision in Amoco v. FERC, with Judge Randolphconcurring in part and dissenting in part, did not object toNorAm’s raising penalty rates, but it does ask for an explanationof why the Commission believes penalty revenues will be soinsignificant as to warrant no consideration. In the year prior toNorAm’s rate filing the pipeline had collected $1.8 million inpenalty revenue. The court noted FERC appeared to believe thatbecause penalty rates were raised, the incidence of penalties woulddecrease. But “even if a lesser number of penalties are imposed,the increased penalty rate might result in a gross increase inpenalty revenue. Moreover – and this is the key imponderable -whether a shipper will be willing to incur the penalty depends onhis cost in securing alternative supplies in a tight market.”
Second Remand Affects Penalty Revenue
In another case the FERC is going to have to defend its policyof not requiring pipelines to flow through penalty revenues, theU.S. Court of Appeals ruled Friday in remanding a case involvingNorAm Gas Transmission (No. 97-1607). The 2-1 decision in Amoco v.FERC, with Judge Randolph concurring in part and dissenting inpart, did not object to NorAm’s raising penalty rates, but it doesask for an explanation of why the Commission believes penaltyrevenues will be so insignificant as to warrant no consideration.In the year prior to NorAm’s rate filing the pipeline had collected$1.8 million in penalty revenue. The court noted FERC appeared tobelieve that because penalty rates were raised, the incidence ofpenalties would decrease. But “even if a lesser number of penaltiesare imposed, the increased penalty rate might result in a grossincrease in penalty revenue. Moreover – and this is the keyimponderable – whether a shipper will be willing to incur thepenalty depends on his cost in securing alternative supplies in atight market.”