Commissioner James Danly Statement
November 18, 2022
RP21-1187-000
I dissent from this order rejecting the request for rehearing of the Commission’s finding that certain portions of section 45 of the General Terms and Conditions of Eastern Gas Transmission & Storage, Inc.’s tariff to be unjust and unreasonable.[1] I dissented from the underlying order because, in arriving at this decision, the Commission failed to provide substantial evidence and articulate a rational connection between the facts found and choice made. These failures ran afoul of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and the Administrative Procedure Act.[2]
Today’s order on rehearing attempts to cure these deficiencies.[3] Even so, I question whether the Commission should exercise its NGA section 5 authority to correct what amounts to merely an annoyance.
For these reasons, I respectfully dissent.
[1] E. Gas Transmission & Storage, Inc., 181 FERC ¶ 61,141 (2022) (Rehearing Order).
[2] See generally E. Gas Transmission & Storage, Inc., 180 FERC ¶ 61,014 (2022) (Danly, Comm’r, dissenting).
[3] See, e.g., Rehearing Order, 181 FERC ¶ 61,141 at P 28. However, the majority continues to make unsupported assertions, including “even if the risk of occurrence is relatively low, the harm caused as a result of a single incident could be quite high.” Id. P 22. “An agency’s unsupported assertion does not amount to substantial evidence.” Algonquin Gas Transmission Co. v. FERC, 948 F.2d 1305, 1313 (D.C. Cir. 1991).