Mobile Gas Serv. Co., 000 X.X. 000 (1956) and Federal Power Comm’n v. Sierra Pac. Power Co., 350 U.S. 348 (1956). Each Party agrees that if it seeks to amend any applicable power sales tariff during the Term, such amendment shall not in any way materially and adversely affect this Agreement without the prior written consent of the other Party. Each Party further agrees that it shall not assert, or defend itself, on the basis that any applicable tariff is inconsistent with this Agreement.
Mobile Gas Serv. Corp., 350 U.S. 332 (1956) and Federal Power Commission v. Sierra Pacific Power Co., 350 U.S. 348 (1956) (the Mobile-Sierra doctrine), as clarified in Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx Capital Group, Inc.
Mobile Gas Serv. Co., 000 X.X. 000 (1956) and Federal Power Comm’n v.
Mobile Gas Serv. Co., 000 X.X. 000 (1956) and Federal Power Comm’n v. Sierra Pac. Power Co., 000 X.X. 000 (1956), and clarified by Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx Capital Group, Inc. v.
Mobile Gas Serv. Corp., 000 X.X. 000 (1956) and Federal Power Comm’n v. Sierra Pacific Power Co., 350 U.S. 348 (1956).
Mobile Gas Serv. Corp., 350 U.S. 332 (1956); FPC v. Sierra Pac. Power Co., 350 U.S. 348 (1956) (Mobile-Sierra). 18 ITC Great Plains Answer at 2-3. 19 Western Farmers Answer at 2-3. it determines the best course of action regarding its issues with the terms of the NITSA.20 Additionally, Western Farmers disagrees with ITC Great Plains’ assertion that the Mobile-Sierra presumption applies to the NITSA.21
Mobile Gas Serv. Corp., 350 U.S. 332 (1956); FPC v. Sierra Pac. Power Co., 350 U.S. 348 (1956) (together, “Mobile-Sierra”); Xxxxxx Xxxxxxx Cap. Grp. Inc. v. Pub. Util.
Mobile Gas Serv. Co., 000 X.X. 000 (1956) and Federal Power Comm’n v. Sierra Pac. Power Co., 000 X.X. 000 (1956), as such standard may be subsequently clarified by the Supreme Court of the United States or inferior courts. The Parties further agree and acknowledge that the standard of review for any proposed avoidance, breach, rejection, termination, or other cessation of performance or changes to any portion of this integrated, non-severable Agreement (as described in Section 14.10) over which the United States District Court or the United States Bankruptcy Court for the district in which a proceeding is pending, whether proposed by the Seller, the Buyer, or a non-party, shall be the standard of review set forth in In re Mirant Corp., 318 B.R. 100 (N.D. Tex. 2004). In connection with the application of such standards, the Parties agree that any failure to perform the Agreement on behalf of Seller would cause a disruption in the supply of electricity and may lead to an increase in rates paid by Buyer’s customers. Nothing in this paragraph shall adversely affect, in any way, the protections afforded to a non-debtor counterparty under the United States Bankruptcy Code.
Mobile Gas Serv. Corp., 350 U.S. 332 (1956); FPC v. Sierra Pacific Power, 350 U.S. 348 (1956); and United Gas Pipeline Co. v. Memphis Light, Gas and Water Div., 358 U.S. 103 (1958).
Mobile Gas Serv. Corp., 350 U.S. 332 (1956) and Federal Power Commission v.
