124 FERC ¶ 61,117

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Before Commissioners: Joseph T. Kelliher, Chairman;

Suedeen G. Kelly, Marc Spitzer,

Philip D. Moeller, and Jon Wellinghoff.

  -------------------------------------------- ----------- --------------
  Stingray Pipeline Company, L.L.C.            Docket No.  RP08-436-000

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

Order Accepting and Suspending

Tariff Sheets Subject to Refund and FUrther

review and Establishing Hearing Procedures

(Issued July 30, 2008)

1.  On June 30, 2008, Stingray Pipeline Company, L.L.C. (Stingray) filed
    original and revised tariff sheets[^1] pursuant to section 4 of the
    Natural Gas Act (NGA) proposing a general increase in its
    transportation rates. In addition to the rate increase, Stingray
    proposes to include a commodity surcharge mechanism that Stingray
    states will enable it to better manage the cost impacts and
    volatility associated with natural disasters affecting its system.
    Furthermore, Stingray includes in the instant filing numerous other
    tariff revisions, including revisions to its General Terms and
    Conditions (GT&C) and to the provisions of various rate schedules.

2.  As discussed below, the Commission will accept and suspend the
    tariff sheets setting forth its revised rates and commodity
    surcharge mechanism[^2]to be effective January 1, 2009, subject to
    refund and the outcome of the hearing established below. The
    Commission will also accept and suspend the tariff sheets setting
    forth the other tariff changes,[^3] subject to further Commission
    review, to be effective January 1, 2009, or on an earlier date
    specified by subsequent Commission order. Finally, the Commission
    will allow time for additional comments on Stingray's proposed
    tariff changes. Initial comments will be due 20 days after the date
    this order issues, with reply comments due 30 days after the date
    this order issues.

    **[Background]{.underline}**

3.  Stingray is a jurisdictional Outer Continental Shelf natural gas
    pipeline company engaged in the business of transporting natural
    gas. Stingray's transmission system operates in the shallow waters
    of the central Gulf of Mexico as a dual-phase aggregation system
    that collects a blended stream of undehydrated natural gas and
    injected condensate offshore, and delivers that production to
    onshore gas treatment and gas processing plants owned by third
    parties. Stingray's current rates were made effective on January 1,
    2003, following a settlement of Stingray's last rate case filed in
    Docket No. RP99-166-000.[^4] Since that time, Stingray states, it
    has experienced several significant developments that have prompted
    the instant filing.

    **[Details of Filing]{.underline}**

4.  Stingray proposes to increase its reservation rate for firm
    transportation service from \$2.99 to \$7.76 per dekatherm (Dth), an
    increase of about 260 percent. Stingray recognizes that the rate
    increase it proposes is extraordinary, but asserts that this
    increase is necessary because of the dramatic throughput decreases
    Stingray has experienced on its system since its last rate increase
    in 2003. Stingray states that its throughput is entirely dependent
    upon continuing exploration and development of new production
    supplies in geographic proximity to its pipeline facilities to
    offset the continuing and rapid natural production decline rates of
    connected sources of supply. Because additions have not kept pace
    with declines, Stingray states that it has significantly more
    available capacity than demand.

5.  Furthermore, Stingray states that it has filed the proposed rate
    increase to recover through its transportation rates the increases
    in operating costs experienced by Stingray since 2003 and an
    increase in its return on equity that appropriately reflects the
    significant risks associated with Stingray's offshore operations.
    Stingray contends these cost increases are attributable to many
    factors, including general inflation, a highly competitive labor
    market with limited availability of the specialized resources
    required to operate in the offshore environment and cost escalations
    that occurred in the wake of Hurricanes Rita and Katrina.

6.  Stingray calculates the cost of service for its proposed rate
    increase using the twelve-month base period ending February 29,
    2008, incorporating adjustments made during a test period ending
    November 30, 2008. Stingray states that the adjustments in rates
    have been occasioned by increases in costs that are known and
    measurable and which are now effective or will become effective
    within the nine-month test period ending November 30, 2008.

7.  Stingray bases its rates on a proposed \$19,924,183 annual cost of
    service. The proposed rates would produce an increase in annual
    revenue of about \$8.3 million above the revenue collected during
    the base period. Stingray's cost of service includes \$12,775,457 in
    operation and maintenance expenses, \$3,269,864 in depreciation and
    amortization expenses, \$1,249,222 in taxes and a \$3,528,120
    return. Stingray's cost of service also includes \$2,408,762 in
    revenue credits.

8.  Stingray derived its \$3,528,120 overall return based on a total
    rate base of \$35,760,356 and an overall rate of return of 9.87
    percent. Stingray states that, in addition to production, commercial
    and general operational risks faced by all natural gas pipelines,
    its dual-phase pipeline system, which is located primarily offshore
    in the Gulf of Mexico, faces even greater risks than the average
    onshore natural gas pipeline. Stingray states that the increased
    operational risk exposes Stingray to higher operating costs, as well
    as more volatility associated with those costs, than the average
    onshore interstate natural gas pipeline. Stingray asserts these
    include risks associated with: (1) logistical complexity; (2)
    operating a subsea pipeline with portions that are unburied; (3)
    having a limited pool of contractors to perform maintenance and
    repairs; (4) being dependent upon single production sources to
    maintain operating flows in sections of the system; and (5) outages
    due to system damage caused by hurricanes and other severe storms in
    the Gulf of Mexico. The capital structure underlying the 9.87
    percent rate of return is comprised of 52.82 percent debt and 47.18
    percent equity with a debt cost of 6.93 percent and a return on
    equity of 13.23 percent, respectively.

9.  In addition to the rate increase, Stingray is proposing a commodity
    surcharge mechanism (Event Surcharge) that Stingray states will
    enable it to better manage the cost impacts and volatility
    associated with natural disasters affecting its system. Stingray
    asserts that it has no way to predict when major natural disasters,
    such as Hurricane Rita, will occur, but when they do, the impact on
    its operations can be significant. Stingray states that, while
    repair costs associated with such events are not necessarily
    regularly recurring, Stingray's then-existing shippers receive the
    immediate benefit of any such repairs. Therefore, Stingray states
    that it is proposing to add an Event Surcharge to its tariff to
    recover actual costs incurred in connection with preventing,
    preparing for, and repairing damages caused by major storms and
    other significant natural disasters that affect its system. Stingray
    also contends that the Event Surcharge is intended to recover only
    actual costs incurred and to provide Stingray with the revenue
    certainty it needs to justify rebuilding its system in the event of
    damage caused by such an event.

10. Furthermore, Stingray includes in the instant filing numerous tariff
    revisions. The majority of the proposed changes to Stingray's tariff
    are general clean-up changes, such as standardizing the use of
    defined terms and updating contact information, etc. However,
    Stingray states that it has also proposed to make a number of other
    changes to its tariff to provide it and its shippers with greater
    flexibility to facilitate administrative consistency in implementing
    its service agreements and to address issues that have arisen since
    Enbridge Inc. acquired an interest in Stingray on December 31, 2004.
    These changes include, but are not limited to: (1) adding a form of
    Reserve Dedication Agreement to Rate Schedule FTS-2; (2) adding
    forms of agreements for a Confirmation of Agreement on trade
    Imbalances and a Released Capacity Transportation Service
    Contract; (3) adding a Service Request form, (4) adding provisions
    to allow shippers under Rate Schedule ITS the option to increase
    their MDQ without executing a new service agreement; (5) adding a
    provision to allow for different term options in the service
    agreements; (6) adding a provision to allow for extension of service
    agreements; (7) adding provisions to permit the assignment and
    succession of FTS-2 and ITS Service Agreements when dedicated
    reserves are assigned, without the need to follow the capacity
    release provision of the tariff; and (8) further clarify Stingray's
    Agency Agreement to ensure that Stingray can rely on the acts and
    instructions of the shipper's agent. In addition, Stingray proposes
    to revise its interruptible transportation curtailment policies and
    its monthly imbalance cash-out process and to permit Stingray to
    obtain capacity on other interstate pipelines.

    **[Notice of Filing, Intervention and Protest]{.underline}**

11. Notice of Stingray's filing was issued on July 7, 2008.
    Interventions and protests were due as provided in section 154.210
    of the Commission's regulations.[^5] Pursuant to Rule 214,[^6] all
    timely filed motions to intervene and any motions to intervene
    out-of-time filed before the issuance date of this order are
    granted. Granting late intervention at this stage of the proceeding
    will not disrupt this proceeding or place additional burdens on
    existing parties. On July 14, 2008, the Indicated Shippers[^7] filed
    a protest. The Indicated Shippers request the Commission to suspend
    the filing for the maximum allowable period and establish an
    evidentiary hearing to fully explore all issues raised in the
    instant filing. On July 18, 2008, Stingray filed an answer to the
    protest. Under Rule 213(a)(2) of the Commission's Rules of Practice
    and Procedure,[^8] answers to protests are not accepted unless
    otherwise ordered by the decisional authority. The Commission will
    accept Stingray's answer because it further clarifies the issues.

12. The Indicated Shippers argue that Stingray has failed to justify its
    proposed rate increases in accordance with section 4 of the NGA. The
    Indicated Shippers state that, not only did Stingray fail to
    establish sufficient justification for why it must be placed above
    the median of any proxy group chosen for establishing its return on
    equity, but Stingray did not establish that the cost increases it
    alleges have occurred since Hurricanes Rita and Katrina would
    continue or that its proposed throughput levels would be sustained.

13. The Indicated Shippers further argue that the Commission should deny
    Stingray's proposed Event Surcharge because it would allow Stingray
    to collect costs on an annual basis, which are more properly
    included in general section 4 rate case filings where the costs and
    revenues can be more thoroughly examined. In addition, the Indicated
    Shippers aver that the proposed surcharge is too broad. The
    Indicated Shippers state that the proposed surcharge would allow
    Stingray to include preventative costs, even though an event may not
    occur and includes items that are not limited to special "Events,"
    such as smart pigging, installation of fencing, construction of new
    pipeline interconnections, and removal of pipelines or other
    equipment.

14. Furthermore, given the vast amount of proposed tariff changes, the
    Indicated Shippers request the Commission to allow additional
    investigation into the proposed changes to ensure they comply with
    Commission precedent and protect shippers' rights. The Indicated
    Shippers state that this includes, but is not limited to, the
    proposed Reserve Dedication Agreement to Rate Schedule FT-2, the
    proposed charge of \$10.00 per barrel to a shipper or the onshore
    separation plant for injection of free water, and the provision that
    allows Stingray to subscribe for capacity on other pipelines for
    operational purposes.

15. For the foregoing reasons, the Indicated Shippers argue that
    longstanding Commission policy requires the Commission to suspend
    both the proposed rate increases and tariff provisions for the full
    five-month statutory period under section 4 of the NGA. The
    Indicated Shippers thus request a five-month suspension of the
    proposed rate increases and ask that the Commission set all issues
    raised by Stingray's filing for a full evidentiary hearing.

    **[Discussion]{.underline}**

16. The Commission finds that Stingray's proposed rate increases raise
    issues that are best addressed in a hearing, including but not
    limited to those rate issues raised in the protest to the filing.
    Accordingly, we accept Stingray's proposed tariff sheets setting
    forth its revised rates and the Events Surcharge, listed in Appendix
    A, for filing and suspend their effectiveness for the period set
    forth below, to become effective January 1, 2009, subject to refund
    and the outcome of the hearing established herein.

17. Additionally, due to the voluminous nature of this Stingray filing,
    the Commission has not been able to complete its review of
    Stingray's proposed tariff changes. Therefore, the Commission
    accepts and suspends the other tariff sheets, listed in Appendix B,
    subject to further Commission review, to be effective January 1,
    2009, or on an earlier date specified by subsequent Commission
    order. In order to ensure that Stingray's proposed tariff changes
    comply with Commission precedent and do not violate shippers'
    rights, the Commission will allow the parties to file additional
    comments relating to Stingray's tariff changes within 20 days of the
    date this order issues. Stingray will be permitted to file reply
    comments within 30 days of the date this order issues.

    **[Suspension]{.underline}**

18. Based upon a review of the filing, we find that Stingray has not
    shown the proposed tariff sheets listed in the Appendices to this
    order to be just and reasonable, and may be unjust, unreasonable,
    unduly discriminatory, or otherwise unlawful. Accordingly, we accept
    Stingray's proposed tariff sheets for filing and suspend their
    effectiveness for the period set forth below, to become effective
    January 1, 2009, subject to the conditions set forth in this order.

19. The Commission's policy regarding rate suspensions is that rate
    filings generally should be suspended for the maximum period
    permitted by statute where preliminary study leads the Commission to
    believe that the filing may be unjust, unreasonable, or that it may
    be inconsistent with other statutory standards.[^9] It is
    recognized, however, that shorter suspensions may be warranted in
    circumstances where suspensions for the maximum period may lead to
    harsh and inequitable results.[^10] Such circumstances do not exist
    here. Therefore, the Commission will exercise its discretion to
    suspend the revised tariff sheets listed in Appendix A to this order
    for five-months and will permit them to take effect January 1, 2009,
    subject to refund and the outcome of the hearing established herein.
    Additionally, the Commission will accept and suspend the tariff
    sheets listed in Appendix B, subject to further Commission review,
    to be effective January 1, 2009, or on an earlier date specified by
    subsequent Commission order.

    [The Commission orders]{.underline}:

    \(A\) The tariff sheets listed in Appendix A to this order are
    accepted and suspended, to be effective January 1, 2009, subject to
    refund and conditions and subject to the outcome of the hearing
    established in this proceeding.

    \(B\) The tariff sheets listed in Appendix B to this order are
    accepted and suspended, subject to further Commission review, to be
    effective January 1, 2009, or on an earlier date specified by
    subsequent Commission order.

    \(C\) Intervenors may file additional comments relating to
    Stingray's proposed tariff changes within 20 days of the date this
    order issues with reply comments due within 30 days of the date this
    order issues.

    \(C\) Pursuant to the authority of the NGA, particularly sections 4,
    5, 8 and 15 thereof, a public hearing will be held in Docket No.
    RP08-436-000 concerning the lawfulness of Stingray's proposed rates.

    \(D\) A Presiding Administrative Law Judge, to be designated by the
    Chief Administrative Law Judge for that purpose pursuant to 18
    C.F.R. § 375.304 (2008), must convene a prehearing conference in
    this proceeding to be held within twenty (20) days after issuance of
    this order, in a hearing or conference room of the Federal Energy
    Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20426.
    The prehearing conference shall be held for the purpose of
    establishing a procedural schedule. The

    Presiding Administrative Law Judge is authorized to conduct further
    proceedings in accordance with this order and the Rules of Practice
    and Procedure.

By the Commission.

( S E A L )

> Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
>
> Deputy Secretary.

**Appendix A**

**Stingray Pipeline Company, L.L.C.**

**FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1**

***Tariff Sheets Accepted and Suspended Effective January 1, 2009***

Eighteenth Revised Sheet No. 5

First Revised Sheet No. 209

Original Sheet No. 210

Original Sheet No. 211

Original Sheet No. 212

Original Sheet No. 213

**Appendix B**

**Stingray Pipeline Company, L.L.C.**

**FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1**

***Tariff Sheets Accepted and Suspended Effective January 1, 2009,***

***Or on an Earlier Date Specified by Subsequent Commission Order***

> Seventh Revised Sheet No. 0
>
> Twelfth Revised Sheet No. 2
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 3
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 4
>
> Sheets 11 - 39
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 42
>
> Eighth Revised Sheet No. 43
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 44
>
> Sixth Revised Sheet No. 45
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 46
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 47
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 48
>
> Fourth Revised Sheet No. 49
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 50
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 51
>
> Eighth Revised Sheet No. 52
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 53
>
> Sixth Revised Sheet No. 54
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 55
>
> Sixth Revised Sheet No. 56
>
> Sixth Revised Sheet No. 57
>
> Sixth Revised Sheet No. 58
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 59
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 60
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 61
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 62
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 63
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 64
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 66
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 67
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 68
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 69
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 70
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 71
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 72
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 73
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 74
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 75
>
> Original Sheet No. 75A
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 76
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 77
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 78
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 79
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 80
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 81
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 82
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 84
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 86
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 87
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 88
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 100
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 101
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 102
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 103
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 103A
>
> Eighth Revised Sheet No. 104
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 104A
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 106
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 107
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 108
>
> Original Sheet No. 108A
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 111
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 112
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 113
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 113A
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 114
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 115
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 116
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 117
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 117A
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 118
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 118A
>
> Eighth Revised Sheet No. 119
>
> Fourth Revised Sheet No. 119A
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 119B
>
> Original Sheet No. 119C
>
> Seventh Revised Sheet No. 120
>
> Fourth Revised Sheet No. 121
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 121A
>
> Fourth Revised Sheet No. 121B
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 121C
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 124
>
> Fourth Revised Sheet No. 126
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 127
>
> Fourth Revised Sheet No. 128
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 128A
>
> Seventh Revised Sheet No. 129
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 130
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 131A
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 132
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 133
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 134
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 134A
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 134B
>
> Fourth Revised Sheet No. 135
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 136
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 137
>
> Fourth Revised Sheet No. 138
>
> Sixth Revised Sheet No. 139
>
> Fourth Revised Sheet No. 140
>
> Fourth Revised Sheet No. 140A
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 140B
>
> Original Sheet No. 140C
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 142
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 148
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 148A
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 148B
>
> Original Sheet No. 148C
>
> Ninth Revised Sheet No. 150
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 150A
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 151
>
> Fourth Revised Sheet No. 152
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 153
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 154
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 155
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 156
>
> Original Sheet No. 156A
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 157
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 157A
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 158
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 159
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 160
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 161
>
> Original Sheet No. 161A
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 162
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 163
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 164
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 165
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 166
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 167
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 168
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 170
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 171
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 172
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 173
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 173A
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 173B
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 173C
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 174
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 174A
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 175
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 175A
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 176
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 177
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 177A
>
> Fourth Revised Sheet No. 178
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 178A
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 180
>
> Original Sheet No. 180A
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 181
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 182
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 183
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 183A
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 185
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 186
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 187
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 189
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 190
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 193
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 195
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 197
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 198
>
> Original Sheet No. 198A
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 201
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 202
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 203
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 205
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 206
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 207
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 208
>
> Original Sheet No. 214
>
> Sheets 215-299
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 300
>
> Original Sheet No. 300A
>
> Sixth Revised Sheet No. 301
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 301A
>
> Fourth Revised Sheet No. 302
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 302B
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 303
>
> Original Sheet No. 303A
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 304
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 305
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 305A
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 305C
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 306
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 307
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 308
>
> Fifth Revised Sheet No. 309
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 310
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 311
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 312
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 312A
>
> Original Sheet No. 312B
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 316
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 318
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 319
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 320
>
> Third Revised Sheet No. 321
>
> Second Revised Sheet No. 322
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 323
>
> First Revised Sheet No. 325
>
> Original Sheet No. 329
>
> Original Sheet No. 330
>
> Original Sheet No. 331
>
> Original Sheet No. 332
>
> Original Sheet No. 333
>
> Original Sheet No. 334
>
> Original Sheet No. 335
>
> Original Sheet No. 336
>
> Original Sheet No. 337
>
> Original Sheet No. 338
>
> Original Sheet No. 339
>
> Original Sheet No. 340
>
> Original Sheet No. 341
>
> Original Sheet No. 342
>
> Original Sheet No. 343
>
> Original Sheet No. 344
>
> Original Sheet No. 345
>
> Original Sheet No. 346
>
> Original Sheet No. 347
>
> Original Sheet No. 348
>
> Original Sheet No. 349
>
> Original Sheet No. 350

[^1]: *See* Appendices A and B.

[^2]: These sheets are listed in Appendix A.

[^3]: These sheets are listed in Appendix B.

[^4]: *Stingray Pipeline Company, L.L.C.*, 101 FERC ¶ 61,365 (2002).

[^5]: 18 C.F.R. § 154.210 (2008).

[^6]: 18 C.F.R. § 385.214 (2008).

[^7]: In this proceeding, the Indicated Shippers are Anadarko Energy
    Services Company, Chevron U.S.A. Inc., and Shell Energy North
    America (US), L.P.

[^8]: 18 C.F.R. § 385.213(a)(2) (2008).

[^9]: *See* *Great Lakes Gas Transmission Co*., 12 FERC ¶ 61,293 (1980)
    (five-month suspension).

[^10]: *See* *Valley Gas Transmission, Inc.*, 11 FERC ¶ 61,236 (1980),
    *order on reh'g*, 12 FERC ¶ 61,197 (1980) (one-day suspension).