Latest news

02/09/2012
Former Owner of Illinois Technology Company Sentenced to Serve 30 Months in Prison for Role in Multi-State Scheme to Defraud Federal E-Rate Program
Read More »

02/09/2012
Food Storage and Processing Facility in Washington State Agrees to Resolve Seizure Action
Read More »

02/09/2012
Federal Government and State Attorneys General Reach $25 Billion Agreement with Five Largest Mortgage Servicers to Address Mortgage Loan Servicing and Foreclosure Abuses
Read More »

02/09/2012
Justice Department Dismisses Antitrust Lawsuit Against Deutsche Borse and NYSE Euronext
Read More »

02/09/2012
Libya: UN welcomes adoption of electoral laws
Read More »

02/09/2012
UN wraps up year of forests by highlighting their social and economic value
Read More »

02/09/2012
Wave of prison deaths in South America sparks alarm from UN human rights office
Read More »

02/09/2012
Rap artist 50 Cent visits Horn of Africa with UN food relief agency
Read More »

02/09/2012
UN official urges Syria to immediately end violations against children
Read More »

02/08/2012
U.S. and Chinese Defendants Charged with Economic Espionage and Theft of Trade Secrets in Connection with Conspiracy to Sell Trade Secrets to Chinese Companies
Read More »



02/23/2010

News / Justice Department Requires KeySpan to Disgorge $12 Million in Profits from Anticompetitive Agreement

Derivative Contract Led to Higher Prices for Electricity Generating Capacity in New York City

WASHINGTON — The Department of Justice today announced a settlement with KeySpan Corporation that requires KeySpan to pay $12 million for violating the antitrust laws by entering into an agreement restraining competition in the New York City electricity capacity market. The department said the financial derivative agreement likely resulted in a price increase for retail electricity suppliers and, in turn, an increase in electricity prices for consumers.

The department’s Antitrust Division today filed a civil antitrust complaint in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, along with the proposed settlement that, if approved by the court, would resolve the lawsuit. The settlement provides for disgorgement of profits for a violation of the antitrust laws and requires KeySpan to pay $12 million to the United States.

According to the complaint, KeySpan and a financial services company entered into an agreement in January 2006 that gave KeySpan a financial interest in the electricity capacity sales of its largest competitor, Astoria. At the time of the agreement, KeySpan was the largest seller of electricity capacity in the New York City market. By providing KeySpan revenues from its competitor’s capacity sales, as well as its own, the agreement with the financial services company had the anticompetitive effect of eliminating KeySpan’s incentive to sell its electricity capacity at lower prices. As a result, retail electricity prices in New York City were likely higher than they would have been without this anticompetitive agreement. The anticompetitive effects of the agreement lasted until March 2008, when regulatory conditions eliminated KeySpan’s ability to affect the market price of electricity capacity.

New York City’s electricity generating capacity market was created to ensure that sufficient generation capacity exists to meet expected electricity needs. Electricity retailers serving consumers in the city are required to purchase capacity from generators in amounts related to their expected peak energy demand. Electricity generators offer to sell their capacity to electricity retailers in regularly held auctions.

KeySpan is a New York corporation and has its headquarters in New York City. Until 2008, KeySpan owned approximately 2400 megawatts of electric generating capacity at its Ravenswood electrical generation facility located in New York City. KeySpan was purchased by National Grid in August 2007.

The proposed settlement, along with the department’s competitive impact statement, will be published in The Federal Register, as required by the Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act. Any person may submit written comments concerning the proposed settlement within 60 days of its publication to Donna N. Kooperstein, Chief, Transportation, Energy and Agriculture Section, Antitrust Division, U.S. Department of Justice, 450 5th St. NW, Suite 8000, Washington, D.C. 20530. At the conclusion of the 60-day comment period, the court may enter the Final Judgment upon a finding that it serves the public interest.

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/February/10-at-176.html

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 138 | 139 | 140 | 141 | 142 | 143 | 144 | 145 | 146 | 147 | 148 | 149 | 150 | 151 | 152 | 153 | 154 | 155 | 156 | 157 | 158

 




Educational

Besides making sure that your documents will be accepted abroad by obtaining an Apostille or Consular Legalization, we can also play an important role in helping you create, retrieve and translate your documents. Evaluation Education Invitation Letter



Divorce Certificate

Besides making sure that your documents will be accepted abroad by obtaining an Apostille Divorce Certificate Divorce Decree