Northern Municipal Distributors Group v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

D.C. Circuit

Northern Municipal Distributors Group v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

80 F. App'x 117

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedOctober 29, 2003

DocketNo. 02-1180

StatusPublished

This text of 80 F. App'x 117 (Northern Municipal Distributors Group v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Northern Municipal Distributors Group v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 80 F. App'x 117 (D.C. Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

JUDGMENT

This petition for review was considered on the record from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, was briefed and argued by counsel. It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the petition for review be denied. The bulk of petitioners’ arguments either directly or indirectly assail the basic concept of the Commission’s longstanding policy of allowing discounts based on differences in demand, which we have found to be within the Commission’s authority under the Nat[118]*118ural Gas Act. Associated Gas Distributors v. FERC, 824 F.2d 981, 1011-12 (D.C.Cir.1987). With respect to the policy stated in Natural Gas Pipeline Co., 69 FERC ¶ 61,029, 61,116-17, 1994 WL 550607 (1994), regarding the application of discounts to base rates and surcharges, which the Commission evidently assumed would be applicable in principle to the surcharges at issue here, see Northern Natural Gas Co. 99 FERC ¶ 61,051, 61,228, 2002 WL 552276 (2002), petitioners have given no adequate basis for us to conclude that the reasons offered by the Commission for its non-application at this stage, see id. at 61,223-26, are arbitrary and capricious or not in accordance with law.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App.P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

JUDGMENT

This petition for review was considered on the record from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, was briefed and argued by counsel. It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the petition for review be denied. The bulk of petitioners’ arguments either directly or indirectly assail the basic concept of the Commission’s longstanding policy of allowing discounts based on differences in demand, which we have found to be within the Commission’s authority under the Nat[118]*118ural Gas Act. Associated Gas Distributors v. FERC, 824 F.2d 981, 1011-12 (D.C.Cir.1987). With respect to the policy stated in Natural Gas Pipeline Co., 69 FERC ¶ 61,029, 61,116-17, 1994 WL 550607 (1994), regarding the application of discounts to base rates and surcharges, which the Commission evidently assumed would be applicable in principle to the surcharges at issue here, see Northern Natural Gas Co. 99 FERC ¶ 61,051, 61,228, 2002 WL 552276 (2002), petitioners have given no adequate basis for us to conclude that the reasons offered by the Commission for its non-application at this stage, see id. at 61,223-26, are arbitrary and capricious or not in accordance with law.

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App.P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 F. App'x 117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/northern-municipal-distributors-group-v-federal-energy-regulatory-cadc-2003.