18 C.F.R. § 385.714

Certified questions (Rule 714)

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) General rule. During any proceeding, a presiding officer may certify or, if the Commission so directs, will certify, to the Commission for consideration and disposition any question arising in the proceeding, including any question of law, policy, or procedure.

(b) Notice. A presiding officer will notify the participants of the certification of any question to the Commission and of the date of any certification. Any such notification may be given orally during the hearing session or by order.

(c) Presiding officer's memorandum; views of the participants. (1) A presiding officer should solicit, to the extent practicable, the oral or written views of the participants on any question certified under this section.

(2) The presiding officer must prepare a memorandum which sets forth the relevant issues, discusses all the views of participants, and recommends a disposition of the issues.

(3) The presiding officer must append to any question certified under this section the written views submitted by the participants, the transcript pages containing oral views, and the memorandum of the presiding officer.

(d) Return of certified question to presiding officer. If the Commission does not act on any certified question within 30 days after receipt of the certification under paragraph (a) of this section, the question is deemed returned to the presiding officer for decision in accordance with the other provisions of this subpart.

(e) Certification not suspension. Unless otherwise directed by the Commission or the presiding officer, certification under this section does not suspend the proceeding.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1984–1997 · leading case: Jersey Cent. Power & Light Co. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, Allegheny Elec. Coop., Inc., Intervenors, 810 F.2d 1168 (D.C. Cir. 1987).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Jersey Cent. Power & Light Co. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, Allegheny Elec. Coop., Inc., Intervenors, 810 F.2d 1168 (D.C. Cir. 1987). “See 18 C.F.R. § 385.714 (f) (1986). In pointing out the inadequacies of Jersey Central’s initial filing, the Commission clearly left the way open for a new rate proceeding that would include testimony and exhibits supporting a higher rate of return, as required by the…”

Exxon Corp. v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, Louisiana Gas Serv. Co., a Div. of Citizens Utils. Co., Intervenors, 114 F.3d 1252 (D.C. Cir. 1997). “18 C.F.R. § 385.714 (a). 10 . Under Rule 602(h)(l)(I), If the Commission determines that any offer of settlement is contested in whole or in part, by any party, the Commission may decide the merits of the contested issues if the record contains substantial evidence upon which to…”

City of Ukiah, California v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, Sonoma Cnty. Water Agency, Intervenor, 729 F.2d 793 (D.C. Cir. 1984). “18 C.F.R. § 385.714 (f) (1983). 7 . Ukiah argues that certain stream minimum and maximum flow requirements and Corps operating criteria for Warm Springs Dam prevent Sonoma from releasing its idle stored water in an arbitrary fashion.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.