Jurisdictional

The attempt by California regulators to assert jurisdiction over proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities in Long Beach harbor “casts a cloud of uncertainty” over the development of the project, the project developer told FERC Tuesday.

One week after California regulators announced they had asserted jurisdiction over proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities in Long Beach harbor, the state’s chief regulator Michael R. Peevey last Monday personally extended an olive branch to FERC Chairman Pat Wood in the “spirit of cooperation” to resolve any potential conflicts between the two agencies.

One week after California regulators announced they had asserted jurisdiction over proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities in Long Beach harbor, the state’s chief regulator Michael R. Peevey on Monday personally extended an olive branch to FERC Chairman Pat Wood in the “spirit of cooperation” to resolve any potential conflicts between the two agencies.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has issued accounting guidance on how jurisdictional natural gas pipeline and public utility affiliates should treat deposits and withdrawals from intra-corporate money pool arrangements. The clarification went into effect today (Aug. 1).

Federal jurisdiction over the formation of regional transmission organizations (RTOs), transmission rates and electric reliability may appear a little cloudy to some, but not to FERC Commissioner Pat Wood. Wood, who will become chairman of the Commission next month, said during a wide ranging interview with NGI, it’s all spelled out quite clearly in Sections 211, 212 and 213 of the Federal Power Act.

As predicted by National Energy Board (NEB) member Jean-Paul Theoret in a winter speech to a Quebec lawyers’ conference, the first results of unleashing competition in the formerly stable Canadian natural gas pipeline community are “messy markets” and potentially “messy outcomes.” That became clear in one of the first tests of the NEB’s declared intentions to encourage growth of a true market in transportation services by making flexibility and adaptability the watchwords for a new era of light-handed regulation.

As predicted by National Energy Board (NEB) member Jean-PaulTheoret in a winter speech to a Quebec lawyers’ conference, thefirst results of unleashing competition in the formerly stableCanadian natural gas pipeline community are “messy markets” andpotentially “messy outcomes.” That became clear in one of the firsttests of the NEB’s declared intentions to encourage growth of atrue market in transportation services by making flexibility andadaptability the watchwords for a new era of light-handedregulation.

An Indiana case that confronts the issue of whether regulatingheretofore FERC-jurisdictional pipeline laterals should be sharedwith states has yielded somewhat conflicting decisions at theregulatory level so far. As a result, the potentiallyprecedent-setting issue seems destined for resolution by state andfederal appellate courts.

Putting an end to several years of squabbling, Kansas PipelineCo. has acquiesced to FERC jurisdiction but only on the conditionthat the Commission grandfather the existing, state-approved ratesin its contracts until it is ordered to file a Section 4 rate case.