[U]tilities are forbidden to charge any rate other than the one on file with the Commission [FERC], a prohibition that has become known as the "filed rate doctrine." See NSTAR Elec. & Gas Corp. v. FERC, 481 F.3d 794, 800 (D.C.Cir.2007); see also Arkansas La. Gas Co. v. Hall, 453 U.S. 571, 577, 101 S.Ct. 2925, 69 L.Ed.2d 856 (1981) (describing filed rate doctrine under the Natural Gas Act). That requirement of transparent, public filing of rates ensures evenhandedness, fairness, stability, and predictability in the prices charged for electrical energy. West Deptford Energy, LLC v. FERC, 766 F. 3d 10 (DC Cir. 2014).
The filed-rate doctrine requires that, to charge for services under a tariff, a carrier must provide its services in exactly the way the carrier describes them in that tariff. Bryan v. BellSouth Commc'ns, Inc., 377 F.3d 424, 429 (4th Cir.2004); Brown v. MCI WorldCom Network Servs., Inc., 277 F.3d 1166, 1170 (9th Cir.2002). CoreTel Virginia, LLC v. Verizon Virginia, LLC, 752 F. 3d 364 (4th Cir. 2014).
[T]he heart of the filed rate doctrine is not that the rate mirrors a competitive market, nor that the rate is reasonable or thoroughly researched, it is that the filed rate is the only legal rate. The policy behind the filed rate doctrine is to prevent price discrimination[,] to preserve the role of agencies in approving rates and to keep courts out of the rate-making process. [Citations omitted]. Coll v. First American Title Ins. Co., 642 F. 3d 876 (10th Cir. 2011).
Under the filed-rate doctrine, "[w]hen the Commission [FERC] accepts a formula rate as a filed rate, it grants waiver of the filing and notice requirements of [§ 205] [, and] [t]he utility's rates, then, can change repeatedly, without notice to the Commission, provided those changes are consistent with the formula." Pub. Utils. Com'n of State of Cal. v. FERC, 254 F.3d 250, 254 (D.C.Cir. 2001) (alterations in the original). "[T]he formula itself is the filed rate that provides sufficient notice to ratepayers for purposes of the doctrine[]." Louisiana Public Service Com'n v. FERC, 761 F. 3d 540 (5th Cir. 2014).
Under the [] doctrine, "[t]he rate filed by [a] wholesale seller of electricity or fixed by FERC is the only lawful charge and deviation from it is not permitted upon any pretext." California ex rel. Lockyer v. FERC, 383 F.3d 1006, 1012 (9th Cir. 2004) (internal quotation marks and alteration omitted); see also Montana-Dakota Utils. Co. v. Nw. Pub. Serv. Co., 341 U.S. 246, 251-52 (1951). Not only must utilities adhere to the filed rate, but "[FERC] itself has no power to alter a rate retroactively." Ark. La. Gas Co. v. Hall, 453 U.S. 571, 578 (1981). Even where FERC finds an existing rate to be unjust and unreasonable under the FPA, its replacement rate applies only prospectively. See id. Louisiana Public Service Commission v. FERC, (5th Cir. Nov. 18, 2014).
The so-called "filed rate doctrine" is an application of the [Federal Power Act]'s statutory grant of authority to FERC. See Borough of Ellwood City v. FERC, 583 F.2d 642, 648 (3d Cir.1978) (calling the filed rate doctrine "not so much a judicially created 'doctrine' as an application of explicit statutory language"). It may be understood for our purposes as the rule that "interstate power rates filed with FERC or fixed by FERC must be given binding effect by state utility commissions determining intrastate rates." Nantahala Power & Light Co. v. Thornburg, 476 U.S. 953, 962, 106 S.Ct. 2349, 90 L.Ed.2d 943 (1986). The filed rate doctrine thus "concern[s] the pre-emptive impact of federal jurisdiction... on state regulation." Miss. Power & Light Co. v. Mississippi, 487 U.S. 354, 371, 108 S.Ct. 2428, 101 L.Ed.2d 322 (1988). The doctrine of federal pre-emption, in turn, is rooted in the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, which provides that federal law "shall be the supreme Law of the Land[,] ... any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding." U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 2; see also Nantahala, 476 U.S. at 963, 106 S.Ct. 2349 (stating that the application of the filed rate doctrine to state tribunals is "a matter of enforcing the Supremacy Clause"). Metropolitan Edison v. Pennsylvania Public Utility, 767 F. 3d 335 (3rd Cir. 2014).
THIS CASEBOOK contains a selection of 25 U. S. Court of Appeals decisions that interpret and apply the filed-rate doctrine. The selection of decisions spans from 2011 to the date of publication.