Recognizing the potential for an increasing number of intervenor complaints predicated on the fraud, abuse, or similar grounds exception to guaranteed passthrough, the Commission sets forth the elements of a cognizable claim under section 601(c)(2) which it expects to apply in cases in which fraud, abuse, or similar grounds is raised. The provisions of this policy statement do not establish a binding norm but instead provide general guidance. In particular cases, both the underlying validity of the policy and its application to particular facts may be challenged and are subject to further consideration. The procedure prescribed conforms with the NGPA's general guarantee of passthrough by placing the burden of pleading the elements and proving the elements of a case on intervenors who would allege fraud, abuse, or similar grounds as a basis for denying passthrough of gas prices incurred by an interstate pipeline.

In order for the issue of fraud, as that term is used in section 601(c) of the NGPA, to be considered in a proceeding, an intervenor or intervenors must file a complaint alleging that:

The interstate pipeline, any first seller who sells natural gas to the interstate pipeline, or both acting together, have made a fraudulent misrepresentation or concealment; and

Because of that fraudulent misrepresentation or concealment, the amount paid by the interstate pipeline to any first seller of natural gas was higher than it would have been absent the fraudulent conduct.

In order for the issue of abuse, as that term is used in section 601(c) of the NGPA, to be considered in a proceeding, an intervenor or intervenors must file a complaint alleging that:

The interstate pipeline, a first seller who sells to the interstate pipeline, or both acting together, have made a negligent misrepresentation or concealment, or other misrepresentation or concealment in disregard of a duty; and

Because of that negligent misrepresentation or concealment, or other misrepresentation or concealment in disregard of a duty, the amount paid by the interstate pipeline to any first seller of natural gas was higher than it would have been absent the negligent misrepresentation or concealment, or other misrepresentation or concealment made in disregard of a duty.

In order for the issue of similar grounds, as that term is used in section 601(c) of the NGPA, to be considered in a proceeding, an intervenor or intervenors must file a complaint alleging that:

The interstate pipeline, any first seller who sells natural gas to the interstate pipeline, or both acting together, have made an innocent misrepresentation of fact; and

Because of that innocent misrepresentation of facts, the amount paid by the interstate pipeline to any first seller of natural gas was higher than it would have been absent the innocent misrepresentation of fact.