email_body: Tony, I thought there would be a case that stated that if an interstate  pipeline posts the criteria under which it will evaluate capacity bids, it  must stick to those criteria and not award the capacity to a bidder on some  other basis.
  It seems a simple enough extension of the principle that  capacity must be awarded on a nondiscriminatory basis.
  However, I did not  find any case that stands for that exact proposition.
  As you may be aware,  the Commission made Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America (NGPL) come up  with a way to ensure that it awarded capacity one a nondiscriminatory  basis...because NGPL was found to have been giving preferential treatment to  its shippers.
  NGPL's solution was to come up with an auction process, and  there is a whole line of cases if you're interested.
  The underlying  presumption is that if you set up a system under which all capacity is  awarded and stick with that system, there is no way you could be acting  discriminatorily.
  But of course the Commission never comes out and says this  even though it should be obvious.
  Probably the best we can do is extrapolate from 1) the tariff and 2) the NGA  (doesn't it also say we have to provide service on a not unduly discrim.
  basis?).
  Also, in your memo I'd give an example; i.e., if we notify shippers  of our auction process and set a deadline for bidding, but then award the  capacity to Sempra (assuming Sempra requested capacity after the posting), we  will have unduly discriminated against all the other shippers who had to  participate in the auction process.
  Maybe in future postings on Enrononline we should include a statement to the  effect that the capacity posted will not be awarded except thru the  Enrononline process.
  Now for some trivia.
  Remember we were discussing with Shelley whether we  could post a different method (other than that prescribed in the tariff) for  determining best bid?
  In my Westlaw search I ran across the relevant case.
  In Northwest Pipeline, 85 FERC P 61,335, the Commission stated:  "The  Commission has previously given pipelines the leeway, in open season  provisions, to either include in their tariff a single non-discriminatory bid  evaluation methodology, or provide themselves the flexibility of choosing  different non-discriminatory bid evaulation methods for different  transactions, provided that the pipeline posts the bid evaluation methodology  before the bidding process begins."
  The only problem is I am not sure we  have that "flexibility" since the tariff does not expressly allow us to post  a different method.
  Maybe next time we do a tariff cleanup we could add some  language allowing us to do so.
  I have to move on to my next project but if you want me to comment on what  you write I'd be happy to.
  
subject_line: thoughts on Enrononline
  