Pg&e
Pg&e v. Ferc
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.