Opinion ID: 304693
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Hearing Question

Text: 6 Under the Natural Gas Act a proceeding to review a filed rate increase may be initiated by the FPC either upon complaint or upon its own motion. Section 4(e) of the Act provides in relevant part: 7 Whenever any such new schedule is filed the Commission shall have authority, either upon complaint of any State, municipality, State commission or gas distributing company, or upon its own initiative without complaint, at once, . . . to enter upon a hearing concerning the lawfulness of such rate, charge, classification, or service; . . . 8 8 Section 4(e) further states that the FPC, provided it orders a hearing, may suspend the rates in question in its review for a period of no longer than five months beyond the time when they would otherwise become effective. It may thereafter, by means of a refund procedure, make any order finding increased rates unjustified retroactive to the date the change became effective. 9 As the plain language of Section 4(e) and the Supreme Court's review of the Natural Gas Act in United Gas Pipe Line Co. v. Mobile Gas Service Corp. reveal, the suspension of a rate is discretionary with the Commission. Section 4(e) merely defines the power of the Commission; it does not require the FPC either to suspend a rate or to hold a hearing without suspension at the behest of a customer such as Penn Gas. 9 As the Court remarked with respect to the Act as a whole, In short, the Act provides no 'procedure' either for making or changing rates; it provides only for notice to the Commission of the rates established by natural gas companies and for review by the Commission of those rates. 10 10 In the case at bar the FPC decided, after reviewing the evidence before it, 11 that the rates successfully negotiated by Manufacturers with all of its customers except Penn Gas, and approved by the Commission staff, did not warrant further hearing. If it were not within the power of the Commission to do so, any customer of a natural gas company could tie up its supplier and the Commission for an indefinite period in the trial of a limitless variety of issues, where there is no genuine issue of material fact, despite the ease with which their inherent worth or worthlessness might otherwise be quickly determined.