FERC Staff Oil Pipeline Handbook Volume II picks up where Volumes One left off to provide practitioners of energy law with a single resource which contains all relevant statutes and regulations - January 1992.

Jnofflclal FERC-Generated PDF of 20050808-0261 Issued by FERC OSEC 08/08/2005 in Docket#: - Buckeye Pine Line Company, Order Terminating an Oil Pipeline Rate Suspension, Prescribing a General Rule For Determining the Appropriate Duration of Such Suspensions, Directing The Commission's Oil Pipeline Board to Refrain from Suspending for More Than a Single Day, and Further Directing That Body to Reform Its Previous Suspension Orders So as to Conform to the One-Day Standard Prescribed by This Order 13 F E R C 61,267 (1980). This order changed the Commission's policy on the suspension period applied to oil pipeline rate filings. Previous policy provided that shorter suspension periods were warranted only when rigid adherence to the maximum statutoryperiod led to harsh and inequitable resul~s. Bockeve Pine Line Comnanv, 13 F E R C 61,267,61,593 (1980). Pursuant to the previous policy, Buckeye Pipe Line Company's (Buckeye) rate filingwas suspended for seven months by the Oil Pipeline Board, the maximum period allowed under Section 15(7) of the Interstate Commerce Act. (49 App. U.S.C. 15(7) (1988). However, in this order, the Commission stated that at the time its overall suspension policy was formulated it had not "focused" on its applicability to oil pipelines as opposed to the policy's application to natural gaS and electric rate filings. It further stated that this was the case because the Interstate Commerce Act permits the Commission to delegate its authority. Therefore, it created the Oil Pipeline Board (Board) and gave it suspension authority. The Board suspended Buckeye's filing for seven months. O__d.at 61,593). The Commission found in this order that the duration of oil pipeline suspensions should be governed by a different rule than the one applied to electric power and natural gas cases. The Commission further found there was nothing in Buckeye's fact situation to warrant a suspension for more than one day. ~I. at 61,593). The Commission then stated its reasons: (1) oil pipeline shippers who use the common carrier oil pipeline system are not the same as consumers in natural gaS and electric rate cases. Gas and electric consumers tend to be migratory and therefore need longer suspension periods. This is because refunds of overcollectious will not give full redress to those consumers who moved, ffL~.at 61,593-94),(2) the statutory collectionsubject m refund enables utilitiesto force their customers to loan them money which the Commission believes should not be allowed; and (3) there is nothing to suggest that there have been or willbe many cases in which ...