United States DC Circuit

In case where petitioners are developing a proposal to build a natural gas pipeline from the North Slope of Alaska to the contiguous U.S., petitions for review of two regulations in which respondent has asserted authority to condition a certificate of public convenience and necessity on the project sponsor's willingness to allow respondent to increase the capacity or expandability of the project are denied as neither regulation is facially invalid.

Appellate Information

• Argued 12/05/2006
• Decided 07/27/2007
• Published 07/27/2007

Judges

• Before:  GINSBURG, Chief Judge, and SENTELLE and RANDOLPH, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States DC Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Donald B. Craven argued the cause for petitioners.   With him on the briefs was C. Fairley Spillman.  Frederick T. Kolb, Douglas W. Rasch, and Bruce A. Connell entered appearances., Robert H. Loeffler, Edward J. Twomey, Seth M. Galanter, and David W. Marquez, Attorney General, Attorney General's Office of the State of Alaska, were on the brief for intervenor State of Alaska.


• For Appellees:
  
• Judith A. Albert, Attorney, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, argued the cause for respondent.   With her on the brief were John S. Moot, General Counsel, and Robert H. Solomon, Solicitor., Karol L. Newman argued the cause for intervenors Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, et al. and amicus curiae Legislative Budget and Audit Committee of the Alaska State Legislature in support of respondent.   With her on the brief were Jason B. Tompkins, James C. Moffatt, Jonathan D. Simon, and Donald C. Shepler, Jr.