Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC
Fourth Revised Volume No. 1
Contents / Previous / Next / Main Tariff Index
Effective Date: 09/01/2006, Docket: RP06-463-000, Status: Effective
Original Sheet No. 533 Original Sheet No. 533 : Effective
FORM OF SERVICE AGREEMENT
Applicable to Agreements Executed After April 1, 2002
Firm Transportation Service - Market Area (continued)
FTS-2
(g) Unless otherwise mutually agreed by the parties, after the expiration of the
primary term of this Agreement, Shipper shall pay Transporter the rates established
under Transporter's Rate Schedule FTS-2, as filed with and approved by the FERC.
(h) If Shipper proposes or supports a change in the rate design methodologies on which
the currently effective FTS-2 rates are based, as set forth in Sections III.2.c and
d, and III.3.b of the Phase III Settlement, and such proposals or changes are
approved by a final non-appealable order, the Final Rate Cap shall be deemed
waived. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if Transporter proposes, or any other party
proposes and Transporter either supports or does not oppose, a change to any of
such rate design methodologies in any Section 4 or Section 5 proceeding, then
Shipper may take a position on that particular rate design methodology in that
proceeding, whether or not consistent with the position taken by Transporter,
without waiving the Final Rate Cap, and unless otherwise agreed by Transporter and
Shipper, approval of such a proposed change in the rate design methodology by a
final non-appealable order, in such Section 4 or Section 5 proceeding, shall not
affect the continuing applicability of the Final Rate Cap. Specifically, the rate
design methodologies referenced in this section (h) are as follows:
(i) the straight fixed variable method of rate design, and of classifying and
allocating costs,
(ii) unless otherwise agreed to by both parties hereto, the system-wide postage
stamp rate for FTS-2 service to the Market Area,
(iii) the levelized rate methodology through March 31, 2005, and thereafter, the
traditional cost-of-service methodology, and
(iv) the methodology of allocating the operation and maintenance ("O&M") costs
between Rate Schedules FTS-1 and FTS-2; provided, however, that without
waiving its final Rate Cap under this section (h)(iv), and with respect to
the allocation of administrative and general ("A&G") expenses only, a
Shipper may challenge, on a prospective basis only, Transporter's use of
the Kansas-Nebraska methodology in the Section 4 rate case to be filed by
Transporter in accordance with Article XI of the Settlement approved by the
FERC in Docket No. RP04-12; and provided further, that Shipper may, without
waiving its Final Rate Cap (and regardless of any position taken by
Transporter), argue for any allocation methodology that allocates no more
O&M costs to Rate Schedule FTS-2 than would otherwise be allocated by use
of:
(a) the Phase III Settlement methodology for allocating all O&M costs
except for A&G expenses, and
(b) the Kansas-Nebraska methodology for allocating A&G expenses.