| Docket No. |
PR16-58-000 |
| Citation |
156 FERC ¶ 61,094 |
| Date Issued |
August 4, 2016 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Atmos Pipeline – Texas / Commission Letter Order |
| Comment |
- Clarified that all state rate certifications must be filed through the eTariff portal. Further clarified that any filing using the optional notice procedures must be filed through the eTariff portal.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
CP09-12-001 |
| Citation |
155 FERC ¶ 61,159 |
| Date Issued |
May 11, 2016 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Narragansett Electric Company / Commission Letter Order |
| Comment |
- Clarified that all Hinshaw informational rate filings should be submitted through the eTariff portal. Consistent with Consumers Energy Co., 94 FERC ¶ 61,287 (2001), the informational filing must be submitted in the form specified in §154.313 of the Commission’s regulations.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
PR13-65-000 |
| Citation |
145 FERC ¶ 61,168 |
| Date Issued |
November 25, 2013 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Lobo Pipeline Company L.P. / Commission Letter Order |
| Comment |
- Identifies the support a pipeline must file to support a State Rate Certification filing.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
Order No. 781
RM12-17 |
| Citation |
144 FERC ¶ 61,034 |
| Date Issued |
July 18, 2013 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Revisions to Procedural Regulations Governing Transportation by Intrastate Pipelines |
| Comment |
- Adds §§ 284.123(g) to the Commission’s the regulations to provide optional notice procedures for processing rate filings by NGPA section 311 and Hinshaw pipelines. Under the procedures a pipeline commits to meeting the Commission’s periodic rate review policy in exchange for a less burdensome and more efficient regulatory process of the filing.
- Adds § 284.123 (h) that codifies the procedure for section 311 and Hinshaw pipelines to withdraw any filing.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
Order No. 735-A
RM09-2-001 |
| Citation |
131 FERC ¶ 61,216 |
| Date Issued |
December 16, 2010 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Contract Reporting Requirements of Intrastate Natural Gas Companies |
| Comment |
- Retracts the increased requirements for firm storage contract end dates and per-customer revenue, info only on an annual basis.
- Extends the filing deadline from 30 to 60 days after each reporting quarter.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
Order No. 735
RM09-2-000 |
| Citation |
133 FERC ¶ 61,150 |
| Date Issued |
May 20, 2010 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Contract Reporting Requirements of Intrastate Natural Gas Companies |
| Comment |
- Revises the contract reporting requirements for the natural gas pipelines that fall under the Commission’s jurisdiction pursuant to NGPA section 311 or NGA section 1(c). The order increases the reporting frequency from annual to quarterly and the reporting includes certain additional types of information and covers storage transactions as well as transportation transactions.
- Reports must be filed publicly in a uniform electronic format and posted on the Commission’s website.
- Periodic filings of rate reviews are extended from three years to five.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
PR07-9 |
| Citation |
126 FERC ¶ 61,018 |
| Date Issued |
January 12, 2009 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Bay Gas Storage Company, Ltd./ Order Approving Settlement and Establishing Stuff Panel |
| Comment |
- Requires Bay Gas to remove provision authorizing Bay Gas to include language in contracts overriding other provisions in its Statement of Operating Condition.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
Order No. 714
RM01-5-000 |
| Citation |
124 FERC ¶ 61,270 |
| Date Issued |
September 19, 2008 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Electronic Tariff Filing |
| Comment |
- Revised regulations to require that all tariffs, tariff revisions, and rate change applications for the public utilities, natural gas pipelines, oil pipelines and power administrations must be filed electronically according to a set of standards developed in conjunction with the North American Energy Standards Board.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
Order No. 703
(RM07-16-000) |
| Citation |
121 FERC ¶ 61,171 |
| Date Issued |
November 15, 2007 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Filing Via the Internet |
| Comment |
- Revised regulations to provide that all documents are eligible for filing by means of the Commission’s eFiling system, with exceptions posted by the Secretary of the Commission on the Commissions website. Spreadsheets in native file format with formulas are expected. Electronic filing requires all SOCs to be searchable.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
PR04-6, et al. |
| Citation |
112 FERC ¶ 61,268 |
| Date Issued |
September 13, 2005 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Cranberry Pipeline Corporation / Order Rejecting Partial Settlement, Establishing Transportation and Storage Rates, and Directing Filings |
| Comment |
- Required removal of all references to intrastate transportation services and rates from the company’s Statement of Operating Conditions.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
PR00-9-003 |
| Citation |
109 FERC ¶ 61,350 |
| Date Issued |
December 27, 2004 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
GulfTerra Texas Pipeline, L.P. / Order on Rehearing |
| Comment |
- Denied request for rehearing of triennial review filing requirement
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
PR99-4-003 |
| Citation |
94 FERC ¶ 61,287 |
| Date Issued |
March 15, 2001 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Consumers Energy Company / Order on Remand |
| Comment |
- In order to monitor the rates of Consumers (a Hinshaw pipeline) in accordance with NGA section 5, Consumers must file cost and throughput data, specified in section 154.313 of the regulations, and other information sufficient to allow the Commission to determine whether any change in Consumers’ rate pursuant to NGA section 5 should be ordered. Hinshaw pipelines, as NGA companies pursuant to section 1 of the NGA, may not be required to make a filing under section 4 of the NGA.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
PR99-18, et al. |
| Citation |
95 FERC ¶ 61,452 |
| Date Issued |
June 27, 2001 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Northern Illinois Gas Company / Order Approving Contested Settlement as Modified, Accepting Revised Operating Statement and Denying Authority to Negotiate Rates |
| Comment |
- Section 311 and Hinshaw pipelines are not allowed to have negotiated rate authority to ensure that they will not have a regulatory advantage over their interstate competitors.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
PR94-9-002 |
| Citation |
85 FERC ¶ 61,080 |
| Date Issued |
October 19, 1998 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Michigan Consolidated Gas Company
ANR Pipeline Company v. FERC / Order On Remand |
| Comment |
- The Court overturned an order wherein the Commission allowed a Hinshaw pipeline to use a blended rate for interstate storage even though the interstate pipeline it directly competed with was required to use SFV, because it gave the Hinshaw an unfair competitive advantage. Therefore, Hinshaw pipelines and section 311 companies should file rates based on the SFV rate design.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
PR97-13-000 |
| Citation |
81 FERC ¶ 61,053 |
| Date Issued |
October 20, 1997 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Tejas Gas Pipeline Company /
Order Rejecting Operating Conditions |
| Comment |
- Intrastate pipelines that wish to participate in the NGPA section 311 program cannot discriminate against Interstate customers by according Interstate service a lower priority than comparable Intrastate service.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
GP88-8-000 |
| Citation |
42 FERC ¶ 61,397 |
| Date Issued |
March 31, 1988 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Volkswagen of America. Inc. / Declaratory Order |
| Comment |
- Volkswagen sought a declaratory order that its subsidiary, Westmoreland Pipeline, qualified as an intrastate pipeline under NGPA section 2(16). This pipeline was built to serve the VW plant from an interconnection with TETCO, both in PA. The pipeline would perform no other services. The Commission found that Westmoreland does not qualify as an intrastate pipeline as it would be transporting gas as the last link in a stream of interstate commerce originating in Louisiana and Texas and would actually be engaged in transportation subject to the Natural Gas Act.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
CP79-240 |
| Citation |
11 FERC ¶ 61,267 |
| Date Issued |
June 4, 1980 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Seagull Pipeline Corporation / Declaratory Order |
| Comment |
- Seagull sought a declaratory order finding that a new facility, separate from its existing intrastate facilities, constructed by Seagull for the purpose of providing section 311 (a)(2) transportation would qualify as an "intrastate pipeline" within the meaning of section 2(16) of the NGPA. The Commission found that this new facility does not change the intrastate status of the existing facility and the new facility also qualifies as an intrastate facility. The definition in section 2(16) does not apply to discreet facilities, but rather attaches itself to the corporate entity.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
CP79-295 |
| Citation |
8 FERC ¶ 61,241 |
| Date Issued |
August 31, 1979 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Black Warrior Pipeline. Inc. and Rayar Pipeline, Inc. / Order Authorizing Transportation of Gas by an Intrastate Pipeline, Approving Rates and Charges and Granting Petitions to Intervene |
| Comment |
- The Commission held that an intrastate pipeline could extend its existing facilities solely to transport gas for an interstate pipeline under section 311 without rendering the facilities jurisdictional.
|
| |
|
| Docket No. |
CP79-117 |
| Citation |
6 FERC ¶ 61,151 |
| Date Issued |
February 16, 1979 |
| Company Name/ Order Title: |
Texas Sea Rim Pipeline Inc. / Declaratory Order |
| Comment |
- Texas Sea Rim sought a declaratory order stating that it was an intrastate pipeline within the meaning of NGPA section 2(16) so that it could transport gas pursuant to section 311 (a) (2) on behalf of Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America (NGPL). Texas Sea Rim was a new pipeline and had not yet commenced intrastate transportation. The Commission found that it qualified as an intrastate pipeline because of: (1) the existence of a contract between an intrastate seller and an intrastate purchaser; (2) the intention of transportation of the intrastate sales volumes through the existing facilities; and (3) the pending application to construct a separate interstate line for transportation of NGPL's gas.
|
