Kentucky Natural Gas Corp. v. FEDERAL POWER COM'N, 10132.
| Decision Date | 20 January 1947 |
| Docket Number | No. 10132.,10132. |
| Parties | KENTUCKY NATURAL GAS CORPORATION v. FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION et al. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
A. Shelby Winstead, of Louisville, Ky. (Ernest Woodward, A. Shelby Winstead, and Woodward, Dawson, Hobson & Fulton, all of Louisville, Ky., and Carroll E. Byron, of Owensboro, Ky., on the brief), for appellant-petitioner.
A. D. Stevens, of Springfield, Ill. , for Central Illinois Public Service Co., respondent.
Chas. E. McGee, of Washington, D. C. (Bradford Ross, Charles E. McGee, Melvin Richter, William L. Brunner, and Joseph F. Weiler, all of Washington, D. C., for Federal Power Commission.
Before HICKS, ALLEN, and MILLER, Circuit Judges.
The petitioner, Kentucky Natural Gas Corporation, hereinafter referred to as Kentucky Natural, proceeding under the provisions of § 717r, Title 15 U.S.C.A., seeks a review of an order of the Federal Power Commission entered September 7, 1945. The order complained of granted a certificate of public convenience and necessity to Central Illinois Public Service Company, hereinafter referred to as Central Illinois, to construct and operate transmission pipeline facilities of approximately 20 miles connecting its local distribution system in Central Illinois with the East-West pipeline facilities of Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company, hereinafter referred to as Panhaudle, at Tuscola, Illinois, for the purpose of providing the natural gas required by Central Illinois for service to its consumers in the area surrounding Mattoon, Illinois. The order denied the application of Kentucky Natural for a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct and operate such facilities. Kentucky Natural and Central Illinois are in agreement that public convenience and necessity justify the construction and operation of the proposed new facilities, but Kentucky Natural contends that the certificate should have been issued to it instead of to Central Illinois.
The Commission made the following findings of fact which are supported by substantial evidence and are conclusive. § 717r(b), Title 15 U.S.C.A. Central Illinois owns and operates a natural gas transmission pipeline system in the State of Illinois extending from a point on the Illinois-Indiana state line in a generally westerly direction to Effingham, Illinois, connecting its various distribution systems in Paris, Kansas, Ashmore, Charleston, Mattoon, Neoga, Sigel and Effingham. It purchases its natural gas supply for its Mattoon area from Kentucky Natural, which gas is produced primarily in Texas and Kansas, and and is transported eastwardly from the producing states by Panhandle across intervening states (including Illinois) to Montezuma, Indiana, where it is delivered by Panhandle to Kentucky Natural. Kentucky Natural in turn transports such natural gas westwardly to a point on the Indiana-Illinois state line which is the Eastern terminus of Central Illinois' transmission pipeline. From that point, Central Illinois in turn, transports such gas westwardly to its various distribution systems in the Mattoon area. The present pipeline system of Central Illinois is inadequate to supply the estimated future demands in the communities which it now serves in the Mattoon area due to lack of capacity of such system west of Paris, Illinois. In order to increase its present system capacity to the extent required to adequately supply its present market with natural gas purchased at the Illinois-Indiana state line, it will be necessary for Central Illinois to expend at least $350,000 for additional pipeline facilities, whereas its estimated cost of the proposed new interconnection, referred to above, will be approximately $182,900. The proposed 6-inch natural gas transmission pipeline will have a capacity in excess of 5,000 Mcf of gas per day which will be adequate to meet the now anticipated natural gas requirements of Central Illinois in the Mattoon area through 1950. Based upon present operations, Central Illinois will be unable to meet its peak day demand for the winter of 1945-1946 to the extent of 1043 Mcf. By the winter of 1949-1950 this deficit, as estimated, will increase to 2290 Mcf. The reserves of Panhandle are the common source of natural gas which will be obtained regardless of which company constructs and operates the facilities. Panhandle will have available adequate reserves to meet the requirements resulting from the proposed operation of the facilities referred to. Central Illinois and Kentucky Natural are each financially able to construct and operate the new facilities.
The Commission found as its conclusions in the matter that (1) public convenience and necessity do not require the issuance of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to Kentucky Natural; (2) it is in the public interest that Central Illinois be authorized to construct and operate the proposed transmission pipeline between Tuscola and Mattoon, Illinois, as an integral part of its transmission pipeline system, and obtain its natural gas supply directly from Panhandle; (3) the delivery of the natural gas requirements of Central Illinois will not place any undue burden upon Panhandle, and will not impair its ability to render adequate service to its customers; (4) the construction and operation by Central Illinois of the facilities referred to are and will be required by the present and future public convenience and necessity, and a certificate authorizing such proposed construction and operation should be issued; and (5) Central Illinois is able and willing properly to do the acts and perform the service proposed, and to conform to the provisions of the Natural Gas Act as amended and the requirements, rules and regulations of the Commission thereunder. The order complained of followed.
The question is controlled...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ohio Power Co. v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
...whether the Commission's order is arbitrary or capricious or not in accordance with the purpose of the Act. Kentucky Natural Gas Corp. v. F. P. C., 159 F.2d 215 (6th Cir.); J. M. Huber Corp. v. F. P. C., 294 F.2d 568 (3rd Cir.). (Footnotes omitted.) These principles, enunciated in a natural......
-
Ashland Oil & Refining Co. v. FEDERAL POWER COM'N
...whether the Commission's order is arbitrary or capricious or not in accordance with the purpose of the Act. Kentucky Natural Gas Corp. v. F. P. C., 159 F.2d 215 (6th Cir.); J. M. Huber Corp. v. F. P. C., 294 F.2d 568 (3rd We cannot say that the Commission's construction of § 4(d) of the Act......
-
Wbi Energy Transmission, Inc. v. Twp. 2 S.
...Counties, Maine, et al., 537 F.Supp.2d 223, 227 (D. Maine 2008); Kentucky Natural Gas Corporation v. Federal Power Commission et al., 159 F.2d 215, 218 (6th Cir. 1947) ("The basic purpose of the Natural Gas Act is protection of the public interest.").Page 14 9. Final determination of just c......
-
Wbi Energy Transmission, Inc. v. Twp. 2 S.
...in Hancock and Penobscot Counties, Maine, et al., 537 F.Supp.2d 223, 227 (D. Maine 2008); Kentucky Natural Gas Corporation v. Federal Power Commission et al., 159 F.2d 215, 218 (6th Cir. 1947) ("The basic purpose of the Natural Gas Act is protection of the public interest."). 9. Final deter......