Abbreviated Application of Compass Pass LLC for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity pursuant to Part 157, Subpart A and a Blanket Certificate pursuant to Part 157, Subpart F under CP04-114 et al. Part 2 of 4.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 505 VAN NESS AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94102-3298 April 23, 2004 Via Electronic Delivery Honorable Magalie Roman Salas Office of the Secretary Docket Room Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E., Room 1A, East Washington, D.C. 20002 Re: Sound Energy Solutions, Docket No. CP04-58-000 Dear Ms. Salas: Enclosed for filing in the above-docketed proceeding, please find an electronic filing of the Request for Rehearing of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California, which is accompanied by the Supplemental Affidavit of Wendy Maria Phelps. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, /s/ HARVEY Y. MORRIS Harvey Y. Morris Principal Counsel 415-703-1086 (voice) 415-703-2262 (fax) hym@cpuc.ca.gov HYM:cdl Enclosure 171575 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Sound Energy Solutions Docket No. CP04-58-000 REQUEST FOR REHEARING OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AROCLES AGUILAR HARVEY Y. MORRIS JONATHAN A. BROMSON Attorneys for the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California 505 Van Ness Avenue, Room 5138 San Francisco, CA 94102 Dated: April 23, 2004 Phone: (415) 703-1086 i TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................... 1 II. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 6 A. Procedural Background............................................................................... 6 B. Pertinent Factual Background..................................................................... 7 1. This Facility Does Not Involve or Implicate Interstate Commerce ....................................................................................... 7 2. There Are Significant Issues Involving the Safety of SESs Proposed LNG Facilities................................................................. 7 3. The Siting and Safety Issues Involve Local Conditions Wholly Within the State Of California ........................................... 9 III. SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS .......................................................................... 11 IV. ARGUMENT........................................................................................................ 18 A. The FERCs Assertion Of Jurisdiction Over The Siting, Construction And Operation Of The LNG Facilities Is Contrary To The Plain Meaning And Statutory Framework Of The Natural Gas Act............................................................................................................. 18 1. The Plain Meaning of Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act Does Not Grant the FERC Jurisdiction Over LNG facilities................. 19 2. Because of the EPAct Amendments to Section 3, Distrigas Is Not Controlling ............................................................................