Summary:  Commission rejected the proposed plan claiming that the amended plan was same as the original plan.

Facts:  When the matter was remanded for further examination, the petitioners Chenery Group proposed the same plan that the commission had earlier rejected in another case of the petitioners. The commission reaffirmed its original order. The commission claimed that though petitioners had submitted an amended plan but it was the same as the original plan.

Issue:  Whether the petitioner's amended plan has to be admitted?

Holding:  No, the petitioner's amended plan could not be admitted.

Procedure:  Application of the petitioners was dismissed.

Rule:  The statute limits the power and duty of the commission for withholding the approval solely to the cases where someone had to establish from the evidence that actual misconduct was accompanied by conflicting interests.

Rationale:  There is was no evidence to suggest that the rule had to be promulgated immediately or the petitioners would suffer injury. Hence, the plan was rejected by the commission.