Study Group: Gas Utilities Experts: Lawyers (US)
Council Members in this Study Group: 61
This study group may include professors, attorneys, former regulatory officers, and consultants knowledgeable on topics such as law and litigation issues, lobbying, policy and government, elections, antitrust, immigration, intellectual property, and legislation, among others.
Contact Gerson Lehrman Group to survey or consult with members of this Study Group
Leading institutions connect with members of this Study Group through GLG
Leading Experts in this Study Group
Paul ForshayPartner
SUTHERLAND, ASBILL & BRENNAN L.L.P.
Paul F. Forshay is a Partner with Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan in Washington, DC, where he concentrates on federal and state energy regulatory matters concerning the electric power, natural gas and oil pipeline industries. Mr. Forshay has extensive experience...
Robert WeishaarMember, Member-in-Charge of DC Office
WALLACE MCNEES & LLC NURICKRobert A. Weishaar is a Member and Head of the Washington DC office of McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC. His practice focuses on matters involving the state and federal regulation of electricity. He represents primarily large consumers of utility services...
- Robert Strong
Partner
CLARK HILL PLCRobert A.W. Strong is Partner at Clark Hill in Birmingham, Michigan, where he has represented industrial clients in all areas of energy and utility law, including contracting, rate negotiation, ratemaking, environmental permitting, energy pricing and...
- Margaret Morris
Partner
Reger Rizzo Kavulich & Darnall LLPMargaret Morris is a Partner at Reger Rizzo Kavulich & Darnall. Previously, she was a Senior Attorney at Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, where she has expertise in the fields of electric, gas, telecommunications, water and rail...
- Karl Zobrist
Partner
SONNENSCHEIN, NATH & ROSENTHAL, LLP
Karl Zobrist is Partner with Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal in Kansas City, Missouri, where he represents energy, telecommunications, water resource and other companies in various regulatory proceedings, before legislative bodies, and in complex and class-action...
GLG NewsSM Analyses by this Study Group's Leading Experts(?)
Opinions and analyses expressed in GLG News are solely those of the author. See the Terms of Use for details.
-
FERC's Standards of Conduct NOPR: Back to the Future?
April 3, 2008
Analysis by: Paul Forshay, Partner,FERC Standards of Conduct Notice of Proposed Rulemaking | www.ferc.gov
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's recently issued Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the Standards of Conduct applicable to natural gas and electric transmission providers would establish revised standards for preventing anti-competitive information sharing between those trasmission providers and their marketing affiliates. FERC’s rulemaking bluntly acknowledges that the standards of conduct adopted with much fanfare in Order No. 2004 have proven too difficult for both industry and regulators to interpret and enforce, and seeks a return to the "functional separation" regulatory approach that prevailed prior to Order No. 2004.
-
“Affirmative Benefits” and the Public Interest: A Higher Hurdle for Utility Mergers?
March 19, 2007
Analysis by: Paul Forshay, Partner,PUC ordered to reconsider Verizon, MCI merger issue | www.pennlive.com
- Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court's decision in Popowsky underscores the importance of rate-related benefits in demonstrating that a proposed merger affords sufficient "affirmative benefits" to satisfy the statutory "public interest" standard.
- Popowsky indicates that promises of continued "good corporate citizenship" and locally-based management, without more, are not sufficient to satisfy the "affirmative benefits" test.
- Popowsky suggests that merger applicants will not be able to rely on federal-level approvals to avoid a state-level inquiry into a proposed merger's potential anti-competitive effects.
- Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court's decision in Popowsky underscores the importance of rate-related benefits in demonstrating that a proposed merger affords sufficient "affirmative benefits" to satisfy the statutory "public interest" standard.
-
FERC’s Standards of Conduct: Back to the Drawing Board
December 1, 2006
Analysis by: Paul Forshay, Partner,National Fuel unit settles with FERC | washington.bizjournals.com
-- D.C. Circuit decision in National Fuel Gas Supply Corp. v. FERC vacates and remands Order No. 2004 as applied to natural gas pipelines.-- The Commission's theoretical concerns with potential anti-competitive conduct, without actual evidence of such conduct, were insufficient to justify imposing Standards of Conduct on pipelines and their non-marketing affiliates.-- The Commission may attempt to satisfy the Court's concerns on remand and repromulgate Order No. 2004. In the meantime, it is unclear what Standards of Conduct, if any, apply to natural gas pipelines and their affiliates. -
FERC Opens Door to Changes in Cost of Equity Model
October 27, 2006
Analysis by: Paul Forshay, Partner,Opinion 486 and Order on Initial Decision re Kern River Gas Transmission Co with Commissioner Sptizer's concurring statement attached under RP04-274 | elibrary.ferc.gov
- FERC's Kern River decision opens the door to future changes in the Commission's traditional DCF model for setting pipeline equity returns.
- FERC indicates a willingness to consider future DCF proxy groups that include properly adjusted MLP distributions.
- FERC also indicates a willingness to consider DCF proxy groups that include energy companies with substantial monopoly utility revenues.
Members in this Study Group include these company types:
- Law Firm (general practice/large)
- Law Firm (Boutique / Specialized)
- Law firm (small / solo)
- Individual Attorney
Members in this Study Group often have these job titles:
- Partner
- Attorney