OCCIDENTAL CHEMICAL CORP. v. F.E.R.C.

Nos. 551-555 and 556, Dockets 88-4086, 88-4088, 88-4108, 88-4116, 88-4118 and 88-4136.

869 F.2d 127 (1989)

OCCIDENTAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION, and People of the State of New York, and The Public Service Commission of the State of New York, Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, Long Lake Energy Corporation, National Independent Energy Producers, Ultrasystems Development Corporation, Petitioners, v. FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION, Respondent, Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc., Rockland Electric Co. and Pike County Light & Power Co., American Ref-Fuel, Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, The Independent Power Producers of New York, Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., Edison Electric Institute, National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, The Connecticut Light and Power Company, Potomac Electric Power Company, Cogeneration & Independent Power Coalition of America, Inc., Ultrasystems Development Corp., Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority, Intervenors.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Decided February 22, 1989.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Earle H. O'Donnell, Washington, D.C. (Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan, Michael L. Denger, John D. Sharer, Judith A. Center, of counsel), for petitioner Occidental Chemical Corp.

Lawrence G. Malone, New York State Public Service Com'n, Albany, N.Y. (Robert A. Simpson, Acting Counsel to the Public Service Com'n, Kathryn C. Brown, Jonathan D. Feinberg, of counsel), for appellants People of New York State and New York State Public Service Com'n.

Billie E. Ramsey, Asst. Counsel, Pennsylvania Public Utility Com'n, Harrisburg, Pa. (John C. Povilaitis, Deputy Chief Counsel, Daniel P. Delaney, Chief Counsel, of counsel), for petitioner Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission.

Robert L. Sills, New York City (Reboul, MacMurray, Hewitt, Maynard & Kristol, Donald B. Dillport, Sanford L. Hartman, Michael E. Twomey, Olwine, Connelly, Chase, O'Donnell & Weyher, W. Harrison Wellford, Robert F. Schiff, of counsel), for petitioners Long Lake Energy Corp. and Nat. Independent Energy Producers.

Jerome M. Feit, Sol. F.E.R.C., Washington, D.C. (Catherine C. Cook, Gen. Counsel, Frank R. Lindh, of counsel), for respondent.

Gerard A. Maher, New York City (Nixon, Hargrave, Devans & Doyle, Andrew Gansberg, Frank H. Penski, of counsel), for intervenors Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc., Rockland Elec. Co. and Pike County Light & Power Co.

Allen B. Taylor, Hartford, Conn. (Day, Berry & Howard, Philip M. Small, Peter Garam, Carl D. Hobelman, Peter B. Kelsey, Edward H. Comer, Bonnie A. Suchman, Allen C. Barringer, of counsel), for intervenors Edison Elec. Institute, Consol. Edison Co. of New York, Inc., The Connecticut Light and Power Co., Western Massachusetts Elec. Co., Holyoke Power & Elec. Co., and Potomac Elec. Power Co.

Paul Rodgers, Gen. Counsel, Nat. Ass'n of Regulatory Utility Com'rs, Washington, D.C. (Charles D. Gray, Asst. Gen. Counsel, of counsel), for intervenor Nat. Ass'n of Regulatory Com'rs.

Peter W. Brown, Concord, N.H. (Peter J. Lynch, Brown, Olson & Wilson, Charles E. Schwenck, Daniel J. Regan, Jr., Pillsbury, Madison & Sutro, Michael J. Zimmer, Wickwire, Gavin & Gibbs, of counsel), for petitioner Ultrasystems Development Corp. and intervenors The Independent Power Producers of New York and Cogeneration & Independent Power Coalition of America, Inc.

Thomas A. Rouse, Hartford, Conn. (Byrne, Slater, Sandler, Shulman & Rouse, of counsel), for intervenor Conn. Resources Recovery Authority.

James A. Yates, Albany, N.Y. (Karen R. Kaufmann, of counsel), amicus curiae The Assembly of the State of New York.

Before PRATT and ALTIMARI, Circuit Judges, and SAND, District Judge.


SAND, District Judge.

Petitioners seek review of an order issued on April 14, 1988 by The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("Commission"). The Commission has stayed the order, which is said to be prospective only, and commenced a rulemaking proceeding addressing the identical issues raised by this appeal. We hold that judicial review is premature and dismiss the petitions without prejudice.

BACKGROUND

Section 210 of the Public Utility Regulatory...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases