Missouri Public Service Commission v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
1ConcurrenceMillett, Circuit Judge
In my view, the Commission’s decision 'barely ekes past our deferential review. The near-fatai flaw is that the Commission persists in a bafflegab articulation of its rule for including acquisition premiums in rates. On the one hand, the Commission has said repeatedly that the prohibition on the inclusion of acquisition premiums in rates is .broad and emphatic, with the benefits exception being narrow and sparingly applied. To walk that narrow path, a pipeline must “show[ ] by clear and convincing evidence that the acquisition results in substantial benefits to ratepayers.” Longhorn Partners…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Rio Grande Pipeline Co. v. Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1999
- Wisconsin Public Power Inc. v. Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2007
- Sea Island Broadcasting Corporation of S. C. v. Federal Communications CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1980
- Missouri Public Service Commission v. Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2010
- Missouri Public Service Commission v. Federal Energy Regulatory CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2015
3Cited by1 opinion
- American Public Gas Association v. DOECourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2022