Stingray Pipeline Company, L. L. C.

Third Revised Volume No. 1

 Contents / Previous / Next / Main Tariff Index



Effective Date: 11/01/2008, Docket: RP08-436-000, Status: Effective

Second Revised Sheet No. 167 Second Revised Sheet No. 167

Superseding: First Revised Sheet No. 167






EXAMPLE (4) Assume:


Capacity Release Request = 100,000/Day for 5 Years


Qualified Bids:


Maximum Bid Unit Bid Minimum

Volume Term Value Bid Volume

----------- -------- -------- ----------


Bid (a) 60,000/Day 5 Years $.18 0

Bid (b) 60,000/Day 5 Years $.18 0

Bid (c) 70,000/Day 5 Years $.18 45,000

Bid (d) 50,000/Day 5 Years $.18 15,000

Bid (e) 30,000/Day 5 Years $.18 10,000

Bid (f) 40,000/Day 5 Years $.17 0


Winning Qualified Bids: Bid (a) receives 30,000; Bid (b) receives

30,000; Bid (d) receives 25,000; and Bid (e) receives 15,000.



Explanation: There are many combinations of Bids (a), (b), (c),

(d) and (e) with the same Winning Bid Value. Each Bid has the

same Unit Bid Value. There is insufficient capacity being

released to provide all the Maximum Bid Volumes for Bids (a), (b),

(c), (d) and (e). Pursuant to Section 16.10(d)(2), a pro rata

allocation is attempted. This would result in each bidder

receiving 100/270 of its Maximum Bid Volume. In the case of Bid

(c), Bid (c) would receive 70,000 (100/270) = 25,925 Dth. Since

this figure is below Bid (c)'s Minimum Bid Volume of 45,000, Bid

(c) must be discarded. Bids (a), (b), (d) and (e) are able to be

allocated capacity based on a 100/270 pro rata factor. With Bid

(c) discarded, the pro rata allocation factor is now 100/200

(i.e., one-half) so that Bids (a), (b), (d), and (e) each receive

half of their Maximum Bid Volumes. Bid (c) receives zero (0)

because its Minimum Bid Volume was too high for the initial pro

rata allocation.