pipeline operator is denied a Certificate because it is also operating as a common carrier under federal law, then the operator would not be able to provide both intrastate and interstate service. at 27-28. Sunoco indicates that it is regulated by FERC as a Id. common carrier and by the Commission as a public utility. at 28. Id. Sunoco contends that the Initial on February Decision’s reliance FERC’s 15, 2013 Order to support the finding that Sunoco is not a public utility corporation was misplaced. According to Sunoco, FERC ensured that a percentage of Sunoco’s pipeline would remain available for intrastate shipments by providing that ten percent of the pipeline remained for uncommitted shippers. Additionally, Sunoco states that the FERC decision is factually different from its Amended Petitions that are before the Commission, because when Sunoco petitioned FERC for a declaratory order, Sunoco was planning to use the Mariner East pipeline to provide interstate transportation service of NGLs and was not planning to provide intrastate transportation service for propane at that time. Sunoco indicates that, due to the increased shipper demand for intrastate shipments of propane in 2013 to 2014, it modified the scope of the first phase of the Mariner East project to provide for the acceleration of intrastate pipeline transportation service. at Id. 29. Sunoco notes that these changes occurred after the FERC proceeding concluded in February 2013. Sunoco avers that the FERC Order did not relate to or impact Sunoco’s ability to provide intrastate service or otherwise affect its status as a public utility. at Id. 30. Sunoco asserts that the Initial on is also Loper, supra, Decision’s reliance misplaced, as that case is legally and factually distinguishable. Sunoco states that, like the FERC Order, the decision was issued before Sunoco modified its business Loper plans to address the rising demand for intrastate shipments of propane. Sunoco explains that, in the court rejected argument that it met the definition of a public Loper, Sunoco’s utility corporation under the BCL because it was a common carrier regulated by FERC
pipeline operator is denied a Certificate because it is also operating as a common carrier under federal law, then the operator would not be able to provide both intrastate and interstate service. Id. at 27-28. Sunoco indicates that it is regulated by FERC as a common carrier and by the Commission as a public utility. Id. at 28. Sunoco contends that the Initial Decision’s reliance on FERC’s February 15, 2013 Order to support the finding that Sunoco is not a public utility corporation was misplaced. According to Sunoco, FERC ensured that a percentage of Sunoco’s pipeline would remain available for intrastate shipments by providing that ten percent of the pipeline remained for uncommitted shippers. Additionally, Sunoco states that the FERC decision is factually different from its Amended Petitions that are before the Commission, because when Sunoco petitioned FERC for a declaratory order, Sunoco was planning to use the Mariner East pipeline to provide interstate transportation service of NGLs and was not planning to provide intrastate transportation service for propane at that time. Sunoco indicates that, due to the increased shipper demand for intrastate shipments of propane in 2013 to 2014, it modified the scope of the first phase of the Mariner East project to provide for the acceleration of intrastate pipeline transportation service. Id. at 29. Sunoco notes that these changes occurred after the FERC proceeding concluded in February 2013. Sunoco avers that the FERC Order did not relate to or impact Sunoco’s ability to provide intrastate service or otherwise affect its status as a public utility. Id. at 30. Sunoco asserts that the Initial Decision’s reliance on Loper, supra, is also misplaced, as that case is legally and factually distinguishable. Sunoco states that, like the FERC Order, the Loper decision was issued before Sunoco modified its business plans to address the rising demand for intrastate shipments of propane. Sunoco explains that, in Loper, the court rejected Sunoco’s argument that it met the definition of a public utility corporation under the BCL because it was a common carrier regulated by FERC
1324005.docx