Opinion ID: 411637
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Retention of Base Years for High Priority Users

Text: 133 Petitioners Atlanta Gas Light Company and Consolidated Edison Company of New York challenge FERC's decision to provide for curtailment of essential agricultural use on the basis of 100% of current requirements while retaining a base-year method for calculating curtailment of supply to other uses of natural gas, including high-priority users. Petitioners challenge this action under two theories. First, they argue that the practical effect of the rule is to subvert the statutory priority scheme of section 401 of the Natural Gas Policy Act. Their second argument is that the retention of base-years for high-priority consumers and abolition of base-years for essential agricultural users is undue discrimination under North Carolina v. FERC, supra. 134 Prior to the enactment of the NGPA, the use of base-year periods to calculate curtailment of gas deliveries was the accepted method. 32 Because the Secretary of Agriculture certified 100% of current requirements of certain agricultural users as the essential volume under the Act, FERC was faced with the task of implementing a current requirements quota within a system that normally used a historical figure to set future quotas and curtailments. The Commission chose to abandon the base-year method for calculating curtailment of gas deliveries for essential agricultural uses, determining that abandonment was preferable to some kind of base-year method. 33 The Secretary of Agriculture does not certify the volume of high-priority gas, nor does any other agency. The Commission retained the prior base-year method for implementing curtailment of high-priority gas. 135 Petitioners contend that FERC's action is contrary to the statutory command of section 401 of the NGPA, which provides in relevant part as follows: 136 Not later than 120 days after November 9, 1978, the Secretary of Energy shall prescribe and make effective a rule, which may be amended from time to time, which provides that, notwithstanding any other provision of law (other than subsection (b) of this section) and to the maximum extent practicable, no curtailment plan of an interstate pipeline may provide for curtailment of deliveries of natural gas for any essential agricultural use, unless such curtailment-- 137 (1) does not reduce the quantity of natural gas delivered for such use below the use requirement specified in subsection (e) of this section; or 138 (2) is necessary in order to meet the requirements of high-priority users. 139