Request of AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA for Rehearing of Dec. 16, 2010 Order under RM10-25.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Five-Year Review of ) Docket No. RM10-25-000 Oil Pipeline Pricing Index ) REQUEST FOR REHEARING OF THE AIR TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, INC. Pursuant to Section 17(6) of the Interstate Commerce Act ("ICA"), 49 U.S.C. app. 17(6), and Rule 713 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC" or "Commission"), 18 C.F.R. 385.713 (2010), the Air Transport Association of America, Inc. ("ATA") seeks rehearing of the Commission's Order Establishing Index for Oil Price Change Ceiling Levels, 133 FERC 61,228 (2010) ("2010 Index Order"). The 2010 Index Order revised the oil pricing index, initially established in Order No. 561, to be the Producer Price Index for Finished Goods plus 2.65 percent (PPI-FG+2.65) for the five-year period commencing July 1, 2011. In requesting rehearing, ATA respectfully submits that the 2010 Index Order was arbitrary and capricious, failed to provide a reasoned basis for its decision, and failed to address issues raised by the comments. The Order perpetuates a lack of balance and transparency in the Commission's approach to pipeline regulation which puts shippers and consumers at a disadvantage, and which ATA has repeatedly raised in prior filings and communications with the Commission. This results in an abdication by the Commission of its statutory responsibility to ensure that individual oil pipeline rates are just and reasonable. 49 U.S.C. App 1(5); Farmers Union Central Exchange, Inc. v. FERC, 734 F.2d 1486, 1507-08 (D.C. Cir. 1984), cert denied, 469 U.S. 1034 (holding that "not even a 'little unlawfulness is permitted'"). I. SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS AND STATEMENT OF ISSUES In accordance with Rule 713(c), ATA seeks rehearing with respect to the following errors in the 2010 Index Order: (1) The Commission erred in failing to address evidence over the last decade which shows that the existing index methodology has not reflected changes in actual pipeline costs. City of Idaho Falls v. FERC, No. 09-1120, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 13, at *21 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 4, 2011). As a result, the Commission's order runs afoul of the Interstate Commerce Act's requirements that rates for each individual pipeline be just and reasonable. 49 U.S.C. app. 1(5); Farmers Union Cent. Exchange Inc. v. FERC, 734 F.2d 1486, 1507-08 (D.C. Cir 1984), cert denied, 469 U.S. 1034 (1984) ("Farmers Union II"). Moreover, it is arbitrary and capricious and not reasoned decisionmaking for the Commission to justify an indexing methodology, in whole or in part, based on a shipper remedy (i.e., filing complaints) that the Commission has ...