โ Scribed by Haskell, Mark R.
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
the regulatory regime 0 applied to interstate pipeline affiliate gathering changed profoundly. On that day, FERC issued a series of orders that, among other things, clarified and reshaped the scope of the commission's review of "spin-downs" of gathering facilities to pipeline gathering affiliates.
Rehearings have been filed, challenging both what FERC did and what it did not do. For purposes of this article, it is assumed that the commission's new regime will remain in place either through element or through litigation. regulatory affairs, has addressed the nature of the commission's reforms in this publication. He has highlighted some of the important and presently unresolved questions surrounding FERC's new gathering policy, in "Gathering Orders Helpful for Producers," Natural Gas 16(Juiy 1994). The focus of this William T. Benham, Amoco's vice-president for Mark R. Haskell Is a partner with the law firm Travis & Gooch In Washington, DC. Although both Mr. Haskeli and Travis & Gooch have represented producers of natural gas and independent gatherlng companies in proceedings before The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author's law firm or any clients of the author's law firm.
๐ SIMILAR VOLUMES
When addressing questions regarding the jurisdictional status of a natural gas delivery system, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission relies on the primary function test enuciated in Farmland Industries, Inc. (the Farmland test)? Although application of the Farmland test is subjective and often r