Associated Gas Distributors v. F.E.R.C., No. 85-1811

CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
Writing for the CourtBefore MIKVA, BORK and WILLIAMS; WILLIAMS; MIKVA
Citation824 F.2d 981,263 U.S.App.D.C. 1
Decision Date23 June 1987
Docket NumberNo. 85-1811
Parties, 83 P.U.R.4th 459 ASSOCIATED GAS DISTRIBUTORS, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, Respondent, Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., et al., Algonquin Gas Transmission Company, Alabama-Tennessee Natural Gas Company, American Bakers Association, American Gas Association, American Public Gas Association, American Paper Institute, Inc., Arkla, Inc., Amoco Production Company, Arco Oil and Gas Company, Ashland Exploration, Inc., Armstrong World Industries, Associated Gas Distributors, Association of Texas Intrastate Natural Gas Pipelines, Atlanta Gas Light Company, Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, Brooklyn Union Gas Company, Cabot Corporation, Carolina Utility Customers Association, Inc., Cascade Natural Gas Corporation, Central Illinois Light Company, Champlin Petroleum Company, Chemical Manufacturers Association, Chevron U.S.A. Inc., Cities Service Oil and Gas Corporation, Citizens Energy Corporation, City of Wilcox, Arizona and Arizona Electric Power Cooperative, Inc., Columbia Gas Distribution Companies, Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation, Columbia Nitrogen Corporation and Nipro, Inc., Commonwealth of Kentucky Public Service Commission, Conoco, Inc., Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., Consumers Power Company and Michigan Gas Storage Company, Delhi Gas Pipeline Corporation, Department of Public Service Commission of the State of New York, Diamond Shamrock Exploration Company, El Paso Natural Gas Company, Entex, Inc., Exxon Corporation, Fertilizer Institute, Florida Gas Transmission Company, Foothills Pipe Lines (Yukon) Ltd., Gas Distributors Information Service, Laclede Gas Company, Shell Offshore, Inc., Shell Western E & P, Inc., State of Louisiana, Tenneco Oil Company, Tenngasco Corporation, Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation, Texaco, Inc., Texas Gas Exploration Corporation, Texas Gas Transmission Corporation, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation, Transok, Inc., Transwestern Pipeline Company, Trunkline Gas Company, Weirton S

Page 981

824 F.2d 981
263 U.S.App.D.C. 1, 83 P.U.R.4th 459
ASSOCIATED GAS DISTRIBUTORS, Petitioner,
v.
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, Respondent,
Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., et al., Algonquin Gas
Transmission Company, Alabama-Tennessee Natural Gas Company,
American Bakers Association, American Gas Association,
American Public Gas Association, American Paper Institute,
Inc., Arkla, Inc., Amoco Production Company, Arco Oil and
Gas Company, Ashland Exploration, Inc., Armstrong World
Industries, Associated Gas Distributors, Association of
Texas Intrastate Natural Gas Pipelines, Atlanta Gas Light
Company, Baltimore Gas and Electric Company, Brooklyn Union
Gas Company, Cabot Corporation, Carolina Utility Customers
Association, Inc., Cascade Natural Gas Corporation, Central
Illinois Light Company, Champlin Petroleum Company, Chemical
Manufacturers Association, Chevron U.S.A. Inc., Cities
Service Oil and Gas Corporation, Citizens Energy
Corporation, City of Wilcox, Arizona and Arizona Electric
Power Cooperative, Inc., Columbia Gas Distribution
Companies, Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation, Columbia
Nitrogen Corporation and Nipro, Inc., Commonwealth of
Kentucky Public Service Commission, Conoco, Inc.,
Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., Consumers
Power Company and Michigan Gas Storage Company, Delhi Gas
Pipeline Corporation, Department of Public Service
Commission of the State of New York, Diamond Shamrock
Exploration Company, El Paso Natural Gas Company, Entex,
Inc., Exxon Corporation, Fertilizer Institute, Florida Gas
Transmission Company, Foothills Pipe Lines (Yukon) Ltd., Gas
Distributors Information Service, Laclede Gas Company, Shell
Offshore, Inc., Shell Western E & P, Inc., State of
Louisiana, Tenneco Oil Company, Tenngasco Corporation, Texas
Eastern Transmission Corporation, Texaco, Inc., Texas Gas
Exploration Corporation, Texas Gas Transmission Corporation,
Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation, Transok, Inc.,
Transwestern Pipeline Company, Trunkline Gas Company,
Weirton Steel Corporation, Westcoast Transmission Company
Limited, West Virginia Consumer Advocate, Wisconsin Power &
Light Company, Union Oil Company of California, Valero
Transmission Company, United Distribution Companies, UGI
Corporation, Kansas Power and Light Company, State of
Michigan and Michigan Public Service Commission, South
Jersey Gas Company, Washington Gas Light Company, Arizona
Public Service Company, Sun Exploration and Production
Company, Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Intervenors.
No. 85-1811.
United States Court of Appeals,
District of Columbia Circuit.
Argued Oct. 14 and 15, 1986.
Decided June 23, 1987.

Page 987

Petitions for Review of Orders of the Federal Energy Regulatory commission.

William W. Brackett, with whom Daniel F. Collins and G. Mark Cook, Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for ANR Pipeline Co., et al., petitioners in Nos. 86-1055 and 86-1067. Terry O. Vogel, Jeffrey M. Goldsmith, and William M. Lange, Washington, D.C., entered appearances.

Roberta L. Halladay, with whom Jerome C. Muys, Washington, D.C., and C. William Cooper, for United Distribution Companies, petitioners in No. 86-1006 and intervenors in Nos. 85-1811, 86-1016, 86-1067, 86-1087, and 86-1153; William Warfield Ross and Daniel Koffsky, Washington, D.C., for Consumers Power Co., petitioner in No. 86-1047 and intervenor in No. 85-1811, and Thomas Patrick and Karen Cargill, Chicago, Ill., for The Peoples Gas Light and Coke Co. and North Shore Gas Co., petitioners in No. 86-1155 and intervenors in Nos. 85-1811 and 86-1153, were on the joint brief. Janet M. Robins, Washington, D.C., for Consumer Power Co., et al. and Mark McGuire, Chicago, Ill., for The Peoples Gas Light and Coke Co., et al. also entered appearances.

John T. Miller, Jr., Washington, D.C., for Elizabethtown Gas Co., petitioner in No. 85-1836.

Robert A. Nelson, Jr., Helena, Mont., for Northwest Natural Gas Co., with whom Donald K. Dankner and Daniel F. Stenger, for CP National Corp. and Thomas F. Brosnan, Washington, D.C., for Washington

Page 988

Natural Gas Co. were on the joint brief, for petitioners in No. 86-1097.

Kenneth J. Neises, for Laclede Gas Co., petitioner in No. 86-1001 and intervenor in No. 85-1811.

David B. Robinson, Washington, D.C., with whom William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., State of La., and Theodore L. Jones, Baton Rouge, La., for State of La., petitioners in No. 86-1053 and 86-1051 and intervenor in No. 85-1811; Patrick J. Nugent, James M. Costan, and Elisa J. Grammer, Washington, D.C., for Association of Texas Intrastate Natural Gas Pipelines, intervenor in No. 85-1811; J. Paul Douglas, with whom Brian J. Heisler and Kevin Sweeney, Washington, D.C., for Amoco Gas Co., petitioner in Nos. 86-1081 and 86-1154 and intervenor in Nos. 85-1811, 86-1016, and 86-1055; C. Burnett Dunn, Tulsa, Okl., for Oklahoma Natural Gas Co., intervenor in Nos. 85-1811, 86-1067, 86-1088, and 86-1153; and William I. Harkaway, Washington, D.C., for Consolidated Edison of NY, Inc., petitioner in No. 86-1094 and intervenor in No. 85-1811, were on the joint brief. Timothy Keegan, Washington, D.C., for Association of Texas Intrastate Natural Gas Pipelines, Diane Siler, for the State of La., and Barbara M. Gunther and Steven I. Kalish, New York City, for Consolidated Edison of NY, Inc. also entered appearances.

Edward J. Grenier, Jr., with whom William H. Penniman, Glen S. Howard, Gail S. Gilman, James P. Rathvon, and James M. Bushee, Washington, D.C., for the Process Gas Consumers Group and the American Iron & Steel Institute, petitioners in Nos. 86-1007 and 86-1008 and intervenors in Nos. 85-1811, 86-1226, 86-1235, and 86-1246; Nicholas W. Fels and David N. Heap, Washington, D.C., for Air Products & Chemicals, Inc., et al., intervenor in Nos. 85-1811, 86-1016, and 86-1017; Stephen A. Herman and John G. Froemming, Washington, D.C., for the Fertilizer Institute and American Bakers Ass'n, intervenors in Nos. 85-1811, 86-1016, and 86-1017; Rigdon H. Boykin, New York City, and Thomas E. Hirsch, III, Washington, D.C., for American Paper Institute, petitioner in No. 86-1089 and intervenor in Nos. 85-1811, 86-1016, and 86-1017; and John W. Hardwicke, Baltimore, Md., for Maryland Indus. Group, intervenor in Nos. 85-1811, 86-1016, and 86-1017 were on the joint brief.

Thomas G. Johnson, with whom M.G. Brookshier and Charles McClees, Jr., Houston, Tex., for Shell Offshore, Inc. and Shell Western E. & P. Inc., petitioner in Nos. 86-1016, 86-1017, and 86-1018 and intervenor in Nos. 85-1811, 85-1812, and 85-1813; Harris S. Wood, Houston, Tex., and Michael G. Maloney for Arco Oil & Gas Co., intervenor in Nos. 85-1811, 85-1087, and 86-1153; Thomas J. Eastment and Charles M. Darling IV, Washington, D.C., for Ashland Corp., petitioner in No. 86-1092 and intervenor in No. 85-1811; Roscoe C. Elmore, Houston, Tex., for Cabot Corp., intervenor in No. 85-1811; James B. Atkin, Norma J. Rosner, and David J. Evans, Washington, D.C., for Chevron U.S.A., Inc., petitioner in No. 86-1050 and intervenor in No. 85-1811; Michael L. Pate, Washington, D.C., for Cities Service Oil and Gas Corp., intervenor in No. 85-1811; Ernest J. Altgelt, III, Houston, Tex., for Conoco, Inc., intervenor in Nos. 85-1811 and 86-1016; Edmunds Travis, Jr., Houston, Tex., Glenn H. Mapes, Jr., Corpus Christi, Tex., and Douglas W. Rasch, Houston, Tex., for Exxon Corp., petitioner in No. 86-1029 and intervenor in No. 85-1811; John J. Akins, Oklahoma City, Okl., for Kerr-McGee Corp., petitioner in No. 86-1083; Gary M. Prescott, Houston, Tex., for Marathon Oil Co., intervenor in No. 85-1811; Robert D. Haworth, Jay G. Martin, and Thomas George Wagner, Houston, Tex., for Mobil Oil Corp., et al., intervenors in Nos. 85-1811, 86-1016, 86-1067, 86-1087, 86-1088, and 86-1153; John B. Chapman, El Paso, Tex., John K. McDonald, Charles E. Suffling, Washington, D.C., and Mary Lee Pieper, Houston, Tex., for Pennzoil Co., et al., petitioners in Nos. 86-1016 and 86-1103 and intervenors in Nos. 85-1811, 85-1812, 85-1813, and 85-1818; John L. Williford, Larry Pain, and Jennifer A. Cates, Bartlesville, Okl., for Phillips Petroleum Co., et al., petitioners in No. 86-1087 and intervenors in Nos. 85-1811, 86-1016, 86-1055, and 86-1087; Ronald D. Hurst and Paul W. Hicks,

Page 989

Dallas, Tex., for Placid Oil Co., intervenor in No. 85-1811; JoAnn P. Russell, Houston, Tex., for Sohio Petroleum Co., intervenor in No. 85-1811; Glen E. Taylor, Phyllis Rainey, and F. Nan Wagoner, Houston, Tex., for Tenneco Oil Co., petitioner in No. 86-1046 and intervenor in No. 85-1811; Karen A. Berndt, Ralph J. Pearson, Jr., and David Lindberg, Houston, Tex., for Texaco, Inc., petitioner in No. 86-1088 and intervenor in No. 85-1811; B. James McGraw and James M. Appelt, Houston, Tex., for Texas Gas Exploration Corp., intervenor in No. 85-1811; and Lois Ellen Gold, Los Angeles, Cal., for Union Oil Co., intervenor in Nos. 85-1811 and 86-1016, were on the joint brief. Stephen L. Teichler, Washington, D.C., for Ashland Exploration, Inc., Paul M. Young, for Cities Service Oil & Gas Corp., William G. Robb, Houston, Tex., for Conoco, Inc., Steven R. Severy, Houston, Tex., for Marathon Oil Co., John M. Young, Houston, Tex., for Pennzoil Co., et al., Nancy J. Shancke, for Sohio Petroleum Corp., Albert Sylvia III, Los Angeles, Cal., for Union Oil Co., of California, and Joseph G. Stiles, Washington, D.C., for Exxon Corp. also entered appearances.

Carmen Legato, with whom Paul J. Kaleta, Lynn A. Monk, Thomas C. Gorak, Scott P. Klurfeld were on the brief, for Maryland People's Counsel, petitioner in Nos. 85-1813 and 86-1246 and intervenor in Nos. 85-1811, 85-1830, and 86-1016.

Harold L. Talisman, with whom Jeffrey D. Komarow, Washington, D.C., for Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co., petitioner in No. 85-1821; Arnold D. Berkeley and Richard L. Chaifetz, Washington, D.C., for the City of Willcox, Ariz. and Arizona Elec. Power Co-op., Inc., petitioner in Nos....

To continue reading

Request your trial
161 practice notes
  • In the Matter of Assessment of Personal Property Taxes against Missouri Gas Energy, 2008 OK 94 (Okla. 10/21/2008), No. 103355
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oklahoma
    • October 21, 2008
    ...¶ 61,405, order on reh'g, Order No. 436-E, 34 F.E.R.C. ¶ 61,403 (1986), vacated and remanded sub nom. Associated Gas Distributors v. FERC, 824 F.2d 981 (D. C. Cir.1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 1006, 108 S. Ct. 1468, 1469, 99 L. Ed.2d 698 57. United Distribution, supra note 55 at 1123. 58. I......
  • Midland Cogeneration Venture Ltd. Partnership v. Public Service Com'n, Docket Nos. 124705
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan (US)
    • April 19, 1993
    ...along to other customers of the utility in the form of credits. In Associated Gas Distributors v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm., 263 U.S.App.D.C. 1, 824 F.2d 981 (1987), cert. den. 485 U.S. 1006, 108 S.Ct. 1468, 99 L.Ed.2d 698 (1988), the court generally approved the rule, but vacated it on ......
  • Oceana, Inc. v. Bryson, No. C–11–6257 EMC.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Eastern District of California
    • April 12, 2013
    ...While agencies may certainly prioritize in setting which initiatives they wish to pursue, see Associated Gas Distributors v. F.E.R.C., 824 F.2d 981, 1039 (D.C.Cir.1987), here Plaintiff is not alleging that NMFS failed to pursue certain policy agendas; rather, Plaintiff alleges the NMFS appr......
  • Verizon v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, Nos. 11–1355
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • January 14, 2014
    ...solution for a problem that exists only in isolated pockets.’ ” Verizon's Br. 51 (quoting Associated Gas Distributors v. FERC, 824 F.2d 981, 1019 (D.C.Cir.1987)). Rather, as the Commission explained, these incidents—which occurred “notwithstanding the Commission's adoption of open Internet ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
161 cases
  • In the Matter of Assessment of Personal Property Taxes against Missouri Gas Energy, 2008 OK 94 (Okla. 10/21/2008), No. 103355
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Oklahoma
    • October 21, 2008
    ...¶ 61,405, order on reh'g, Order No. 436-E, 34 F.E.R.C. ¶ 61,403 (1986), vacated and remanded sub nom. Associated Gas Distributors v. FERC, 824 F.2d 981 (D. C. Cir.1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 1006, 108 S. Ct. 1468, 1469, 99 L. Ed.2d 698 57. United Distribution, supra note 55 at 1123. 58. I......
  • Midland Cogeneration Venture Ltd. Partnership v. Public Service Com'n, Docket Nos. 124705
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan (US)
    • April 19, 1993
    ...along to other customers of the utility in the form of credits. In Associated Gas Distributors v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm., 263 U.S.App.D.C. 1, 824 F.2d 981 (1987), cert. den. 485 U.S. 1006, 108 S.Ct. 1468, 99 L.Ed.2d 698 (1988), the court generally approved the rule, but vacated it on ......
  • Oceana, Inc. v. Bryson, No. C–11–6257 EMC.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. Eastern District of California
    • April 12, 2013
    ...While agencies may certainly prioritize in setting which initiatives they wish to pursue, see Associated Gas Distributors v. F.E.R.C., 824 F.2d 981, 1039 (D.C.Cir.1987), here Plaintiff is not alleging that NMFS failed to pursue certain policy agendas; rather, Plaintiff alleges the NMFS appr......
  • Verizon v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, Nos. 11–1355
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (District of Columbia)
    • January 14, 2014
    ...solution for a problem that exists only in isolated pockets.’ ” Verizon's Br. 51 (quoting Associated Gas Distributors v. FERC, 824 F.2d 981, 1019 (D.C.Cir.1987)). Rather, as the Commission explained, these incidents—which occurred “notwithstanding the Commission's adoption of open Internet ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT