Copies of Opening Briefs of CAlifornians for Renewable Energy, Inc., and California Public Utilities Commission under CP04-58, and CAlifornians for Renewable Energy, Inc. v. FERC, No. 04-73650 9th Circuit

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Nos. 04-73650 & 04-75240 CALIFORNIANS FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY, INC. & CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Petitioners, v. FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FERC Docket Nos. CP04-58-000 and CP04-58-001 OPENING BRIEF OF PETITIONER CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION January 3, 2005 Randolph L. Wu, SBN 78651 Arocles Aguilar, SBN 94753 Harvey Y. Morris, SBN 87902 Attorneys for Petitioner California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness Avenue, Room 5138 San Francisco, California 94102 (415) 703-1086 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................................................................... iv INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................1 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION .........................................................................3 ISSUES PRESENTED...............................................................................................4 STATEMENT OF THE CASE..................................................................................5 STATEMENT OF FACTS ........................................................................................8 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ...............................................................................12 STANDARD OF REVIEW .....................................................................................14 ARGUMENT ...........................................................................................................16 I. The FERCs Assertion Of Jurisdiction Over The Proposed LNG Facilities Is Contrary To The Plain Meaning Of Section 3 of The Natural Gas Act ...................................................................................16 A. Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act Does Not Grant the FERC Jurisdiction Over LNG Facilities...................................16 1. Section 3, on its face, pertains only to imports and exports of gas, not to gas facilities .................................16 2. The terms and conditions clause in section 3(a) does not give the FERC authority over facilities ...........18 B. The Legislative History of the EPAct Does Not Support the FERCs Interpretation of Section 3, as Amended ..............22 C. The FERCs Finding of Congressional Acquiescence to FERCs Purported Practice Is Contrary to the Law .................25 II. Even If The FERC Has Authority To Condition Authorization Of SES's Imports With Requirements As To Its Facilities, That Would Not Confer Jurisdiction to FERC Over the Proposed Facilities ..............................................................................................31 i A. Congress Did Not Delegate to the FERC Jurisdiction to Preempt State Authority over Intrastate Facilities, Which Are Not Used for Sales or Transportation in Interstate Commerce ..................