Pg&e

Pg&e v. Ferc

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 18, 200604-70635California4,586 words

Opinion

Opinion

Thomas PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY v. FERC 11481, J.

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 

COMPANY,

Petitioner,

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA POWER

AGENCY; WILLIAMS POWER

COMPANY INC.; POWEREX

CORPORATION; RELIANT ENERGY

POWER GENERATION, INC.; DUKE

ENERGY NORTH AMERICA, LLC,

DUKE ENERGY TRADING AND

MARKETING, LLC, (COLLECTIVELY, No. 04-70635 “DUKE ENERGY”); CALIFORNIA ELECTRICTY OVERSIGHT BOARD; FERC No.

DYNEGY POWER MARKETING, INC.,  EL00-746-000

EL SEGUNDO POWER LLC, LONG through -003

BEACH GENERATION LLC, CABRILLO OPINION

POWER I LLC, AND CABRILLO

POWER II LLC (COLLECTIVELY,

“DYNEGY”); M-S-R PUBLIC POWER

AGENCY; THE MODESTO IRRIGATION

DISTRICT; CITY OF SANTA CLARA,

CALIFORNIA; THE MODESTO

IRRIGATION DISTRICT; CITY OF

REDDING, CALIFORNIA; AVISTA

ENERGY INC.; PUGET SOUND

ENERGY, INC.,

Intervenors, 

11477 11478 PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY v. FERC

v. 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY

COMMISSION,

Respondent, 

CALIFORNIA INDEPENDENT SYSTEM

OPERATOR CORPORATION,

Intervenor. 

CALIFORNIA INDEPENDENT SYSTEM 

OPERATOR…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.