Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Cities of Anaheim and Riverside, California v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Southern California Edison Company, Intervenor

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Decided November 5, 1982No. 81-2141Published

1ConcurrenceMikva, Circuit Judge

I agree with the majority that those portions of the Commission’s orders discussing section 6 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. § 799 (1976), are not ripe for review. In those discussions, the Commission expressly reserved decision on whether substantial alterations to licenses presently held by Southern California Edison Company (SCE), and thus consent from SCE, would be necessitated by any license application that might be submitted by the Cities of Anaheim and Riverside (Cities). The court should neither review potential decisions of the Commission nor comment upon discussions by the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Abbott Laboratories v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Papago Tribal Utility Authority v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Arizona Public Service Company and Arizona Power Authority, IntervenorsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
  3. Udall v. Federal Power CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. Delmarva Power & Light Co. v. Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1982
  5. City of Dothan, Alabama v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1982

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API