Steve DeVries

“Right now, the plate that we have before us is that FERC has asserted exclusive jurisdiction. Until that changes, FERC and federal jurisdiction preempt state law and would preempt the regulatory commission from taking any action.”

“we would look at prudence if the issue is raised. Utility practices are presumed prudent unless they are challenged when a cost is being reviewed by us in a docket. It is when they are challenged and a record is to be developed that shows that it is likely or that serious questions have been raised as to the prudent practices or prudent utility practice of a utility in question that calls the prudence of that decision into question, then we would— then it would be before us to adjudicate.”

“its certificated service area is only allowed to charge rates for services it provides in its certificated service area. If it wanted to expand its service area to include Fairbanks, it would need to apply for a new certificate in order to do so. Whether rates charged for a Fairbanks service area would be the same as those charged for Anchorage or current service area would have to be decided in a particular docket to see whether or not there was a justifiable reason for doing so.”

“the first step would be for FERC to decline or express or to demonstrate that it no longer is exerting exclusive jurisdiction over the pipe. If that was the case, then we would see the situation come before us, the regulatory commission, as to whether or not the state would— state meaning the regulatory commission— would have jurisdiction to regulate that, the pipeline under those circumstances.”

“There's a big difference in how the Commission reviews costs to consumers from gas supply contracts and how the commission reviews all other costs. And the reason for that is because there's a specific provision in Title 42, and that statute is on slide 7, which specifically and narrowly constrains our review authority.”