146 FERC ¶ 61,201

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

18 CFR Part 284

[Docket No. RM14-2-000]

Coordination of the Scheduling Processes of Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines and Public 

Utilities

(March 20, 2014)

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is proposing, 

as part of a series of orders, to revise its regulations at section 284.12 to better coordinate 

the scheduling of natural gas and electricity markets in light of increased reliance on 

natural gas for electric generation, as well as to provide additional flexibility to all 

shippers on interstate natural gas pipelines. The proposed revisions in this Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking deal principally with revision of the operating day and scheduling 

practices used by interstate pipelines to schedule natural gas transportation service. 

These proposed revisions affect the business practices of the natural gas industry, which 

the industry has developed through the North American Energy Standards Board, and 

which the Commission has incorporated by reference into its regulations. The 

Commission, therefore, is providing the natural gas and electric industries with 

six months to reach consensus on standards, consistent with the Commission’s guidance, 

including any revisions or modifications to the proposals provided herein.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 - 2 -

DATES: Comments are due [INSERT DATE: 240 days after publication in the Federal 

Register].

ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by docket number, may be filed in the following 

ways: 

• Electronic Filing through http://www.ferc.gov. Documents created electronically 

using word processing software should be filed in native applications or print-toPDF format and not in a scanned format.

• Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable to file electronically may mail or hand-deliver 

comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426.

Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, see the Comment Procedures Section of this 

document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

David Maranville (Legal Information)

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Office of the General Counsel

888 First Street, NE

Washington, DC 20426

202-502-6351

Anna Fernandez (Legal Information)

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Office of the General Counsel

888 First Street, NE

Washington, DC 20426

202-502-6682

Caroline Daly Wozniak (Technical Information)

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Office of Energy Policy and Innovation
Docket No. RM14-2-000 - 3 -

888 First Street, NE

Washington, DC 20426

202-502-8931

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Coordination of the Scheduling Processes of Interstate 

Natural Gas Pipelines and Public Utilities

Docket No. RM14-2-000

NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Paragraph Numbers

I. Background ...............................................................................................................................12.

A. Current Natural Gas and Electric Scheduling Systems.....................................................13.

1. Nationwide Scheduling for Natural Gas Interstate Pipeline Transportation .................13.

2. Electric Scheduling .........................................................................................................19.

3. Commission Conferences...............................................................................................22.

II. Discussion................................................................................................................................27.

A. Overview.............................................................................................................................27.

B. Gas Day ..............................................................................................................................36.

1. Background and Issues...................................................................................................36.

2. Commission Proposal.....................................................................................................39.

C. Natural Gas Transportation Timely Nomination Cycle ....................................................41.

1. Background and Issues .................................................................................................41.

2. Commission Proposal.....................................................................................................48.

D. Modified Intra-Day Nomination Timeline.........................................................................55.

1. Background and Comments Received............................................................................55.

2. Commission Proposal ...................................................................................................63.

E. Clarification Regarding the “No-Bump” Rule for Pipelines with Enhanced 

Nomination Services................................................................................................................71.

F. Multi-Party Transportation Contracts.................................................................................76.

III. Notice of Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards................................................................82.

IV. Information Collection Statement .........................................................................................83.

V. Environmental Analysis..........................................................................................................87.

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Certification ......................................................................................88.

VII. Comment Procedures...........................................................................................................90.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 ii

VIII. Document Availability........................................................................................................94.

List of Tables, Figures, and Equations

Table 1: NAESB Gas Nomination Cycles..................................................................................16.

Figure 1 - Recent winter load – Eastern and Central Regions (non-holiday weekdays, 

Dec.-Feb.) ....................................................................................................................................40.

Figure 2 - Recent winter load – Mountain and Pacific Regions (non-holiday weekdays, 

Dec.-Feb.) ....................................................................................................................................40.

Table 2: Electric Commitment Results Publication Timetable...................................................43.
146 FERC ¶ 61,201

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Coordination of the Scheduling Processes of Interstate 

Natural Gas Pipelines and Public Utilities

Docket No. RM14-2-000

NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING

(March 20, 2014)

1. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Proposed Rule or NOPR), and in two 

contemporaneous orders, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is 

proposing interrelated actions to address certain natural gas and electric industry 

coordination challenges that arise, in part, from increased reliance on natural gas for 

electricity generation. The Commission’s proposed actions focus primarily on the 

scheduling practices of the natural gas transportation and electricity markets. The 

reforms proposed herein and the two contemporaneous orders build upon the comments 

made during Commission staff technical conferences and in comments filed in Docket 

No. AD12-12-000.

2. In this Proposed Rule, the Commission proposes to amend its regulations at 

section 284.12 relating to the scheduling of transportation service on interstate natural gas 

pipelines to better coordinate the scheduling practices of the natural gas and electricity 

industries, as well as to provide additional scheduling flexibility to all shippers on 

interstate natural gas pipelines. In a separate order, the Commission is instituting a 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 2

proceeding, under section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA),

1 to coordinate the dayahead scheduling of Independent System Operators (ISOs) and Regional Transmission 

Organizations (RTOs) with the revised interstate natural gas pipeline schedule. 2

 In 

addition, in a separate order, the Commission is also instituting a proceeding, under 

section 5 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA),

3 to examine whether interstate natural gas 

pipelines are providing notice of offers to purchase released pipeline capacity in 

accordance with section 284.8(d) of the Commission’s regulations.4 

The Commission’s existing regulations5 3. regarding interstate natural gas pipelines’ 

scheduling incorporate by reference the standards of the North American Energy 

Standards Board (NAESB) Wholesale Gas Quadrant (WGQ), a consensus standards 

organization representing all segments of the natural gas industry as well as the wholesale 

electric power industry. 6

 Since 1996 these standards have established nationwide 

 1 16 U.S.C. § 824e (2012).

2 California Independent System Operator Corp., et al., Order Initiating 

Investigation into ISO/RTO Scheduling Practices and Establishing Paper Hearing 

Procedures, 146 FERC ¶ 61,202 (2014).

3 15 U.S.C. § 717d.

4 Posting of Offers to Purchase Capacity, 146 FERC ¶ 61,203 (2014). See also 

18 CFR 284.8(d)(2013).

5 See 18 CFR 284.12(a) and (b) (2013).

6 NAESB is accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) as an 

 (continued ...)
Docket No. RM14-2-000 3

timelines that the industry and the Commission have determined most efficiently 

schedule natural gas transactions across interconnecting pipelines. This standardized 

nomination timeline has resulted in a complementary standard timeframe in which parties 

acquire natural gas supplies.

4. The Commission meanwhile has accepted regional variation in the development of 

scheduling practices in ISO and RTO markets, each of which has established its own 

timelines for submission of bids and posting of awards.

5. While the nationwide natural gas nomination timeline has proven resilient over the 

last 17 years, recent developments in electricity markets signal that changes to the gas 

nomination schedule may be needed. Reliance on natural gas as a fuel for electric 

generation has steadily increased in recent years.7

 This trend is expected to continue, 

resulting in greater interdependence between the natural gas and electric industries. 8

 

 

accredited standards organization, which ensures that NAESB complies with ANSI’s 

requirements that its procedures are open to materially affected parties and that the 

standards represent a reasonable consensus of the industry without domination by any 

single interest or interest category.

7 See, e.g., Energy Information Administration, Fuel Competition in Power 

Generation and Elasticities of Substitution (June 2012); ISO-NE, Addressing Gas 

Dependence at 3 (July 2012) (reliance on natural gas-fired electricity in the region 

increased from five percent in 1990 to 51 percent in 2011), http://www.isone.com/committees/comm_wkgrps/strategic_planning_discussion/materials/natural-gaswhite-paper-draft-july-2012.pdf.

8 See, e.g., North American Electric Reliability Corporation, 2013 Special 

Reliability Assessment: Accommodating an Increased Dependence on Natural Gas for 

 (continued ...)
Docket No. RM14-2-000 4

Several events over the last few years, such as the Southwest Cold Weather Event, 9 and 

the recent extreme and sustained cold weather events in the eastern U.S. in January 

2014,10 show the crucial interrelationship between natural gas pipelines and electric 

transmission operators and underscore the need for improvements in the coordination 

 

Electric Power; Phase II: A Vulnerability and Scenario Assessment for the North 

American Bulk Power System at 1 (May 2013) (“Over the past decade, natural gas-fired 

generation rose significantly from 17 percent to 25 percent of U.S. power generation and 

is now the largest fuel source for generation capacity. Gas use is expected to continue to 

increase in the future, both in absolute terms and as a share of total power generation and 

capacity.”);

http://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/ra/Reliability%20Assessments%20DL/NERC_PhaseII_F

INAL.pdf; Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2013 Early 

Release Overview (2013) (showing electric generation from natural gas rising from 

13 percent in 1993 to 30 percent in 2040);

http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/er/early_elecgen.cfm; The New England State 

Committee on Electricity, Natural Gas Infrastructure and Electric Generation: A Review 

of Issues Facing New England (Dec. 14, 2012), 

http://www.nescoe.com/uploads/Phase_I_Report_12-17-2012_Final.pdf.

9 See FERC/NERC, Report on Outages and Curtailments During the Southwest 

Cold Weather Event of February 1-5, 2011 (2011), available at

http://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/08-16-11-report.pdf.

10 The widespread and record low temperatures during January 2014 resulted in 

coincident record peak demand for natural gas throughout the Midwest, Northeast, MidAtlantic, and Southeast regions leading to constrained pipeline capacity and high natural 

gas prices. In addition, in February 2014, arctic temperatures limited the availability of 

natural gas to supply New Mexico and Southern California leading CAISO to issue a 

system alert and a request for consumers to reduce power demand around the system. 

CAISO invoked increasingly stringent measures throughout the day to move generation 

off natural gas, reduce demand, and maintain sufficient supply to meet firm load. See

FERC Staff Presentation “Recent Weather Impacts on the Bulk Power System” January 

16, 2014, http://www.ferc.gov/CalendarFiles/20140116102908-A-4-Presentation.pdf.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 5

of natural gas and electric markets. The differences between the nationwide natural gas 

scheduling timeline and the regional electric scheduling timelines can create 

complications for interstate pipelines and electric transmission operators in coordinating 

the scheduling of the two industries. 

6. In light of these concerns, the Commission, since early 2012, has engaged in a 

dialogue with natural gas pipelines, electric transmission operators, and other market 

participants and stakeholders in both industries regarding natural gas and electric industry 

coordination.11 In a report issued on November 15, 2012, Commission staff noted that, 

among other topics, industry participants highlighted the need for greater alignment of 

natural gas and electric scheduling practices.12 At the direction of the Commission, staff 

conducted a further technical conference in April 2013 to consider natural gas and 

electric scheduling practices, where participants again discussed, among other matters, 

whether and how natural gas and electric industry schedules could be harmonized in 

order to achieve the most efficient scheduling systems for both industries, whether 

 11 See Coordination Between Natural Gas and Electricity Markets, Docket 

No. AD12-12-000 (Feb. 15, 2012), available at 

http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/common/opennat.asp?fileID=12893828.

12 Staff Report on Gas-Electric Coordination Technical Conferences, Docket 

No. AD12-12-000 (Nov. 15, 2012) (November Staff Report), available at

http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/File_List.asp. 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 6

additional nomination opportunities for natural gas transportation can be provided and, if 

so, under what conditions.13

7. During the technical conference, some ISOs and RTOs expressed concern about 

the potential reliability effects on their systems if gas-fired generators encounter 

difficulty in acquiring natural gas or are subject to curtailment of natural gas supplies, 

particularly during periods of high demand on both the interstate pipeline and electric 

transmission systems. Interstate pipelines expressed similar concern about the effect on 

their ability to deliver natural gas when electric generators are dispatched and need to 

burn more natural gas than they have nominated. Generators and transmission operators 

raised concerns that managing fuel procurement risk can be a challenge because of the 

different operating days used by the natural gas and electric industries and because the 

timeframe for nominating natural gas pipeline transportation service is not synchronized 

with the timeframe during which generators receive confirmation of their bids in the dayahead electric markets. These differing timelines can cause significant price and/or 

supply risk for gas-fired generators because, to obtain the best gas price, the generators 

would need to nominate pipeline transportation service before they know if their electric 

 13 Coordination between Natural Gas and Electricity Markets, Docket No. AD12-

12-000 (Mar. 5, 2013) (Notice of Technical Conference), available at

http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/File_list.asp?document_id=14095482.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 7

bid has been confirmed.14 Generators, including generators in non-RTO markets, raised 

concerns about the flexibility of the gas scheduling system to accommodate their need to 

revise nominations in light of weather events or other operational needs. Several 

conference participants stressed that, due to the difficult policy questions involved, they 

would need Commission policy guidance before they would be able move forward on 

coordination of their existing scheduling practices. 

8. Based on the current trend of increased use of natural gas as a fuel for electric 

generation, and in consideration of the discussions at the 2012-2013 technical 

conferences and filed comments, the Commission is proposing a set of related actions to 

address concerns regarding the impacts of divergent interstate natural gas pipeline and 

electric utility scheduling practices, as well as concerns regarding the flexible and 

efficient use of pipeline capacity by natural gas-fired generators and other shippers.15 

The Commission has identified three major areas in which revisions to the nationwide 

 14 November Staff Report at 32.

15 The Commission has recognized that even the most efficient standards need to 

be modified to accord with changing realities. Standards for Business Practices of 

Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines, Order No. 587, 61 FR 39053 (July 26, 1996), FERC 

Stats. & Regs. Regulations Preambles July 1996 – December 2000 ¶ 31,038, at 30,060 

(1996). See American National Standards Institute, ANSI Essential Requirements: Due 

Process Requirements for American National Standards § 4.7.1 (accessed 12/8/13) 

(requiring periodic updates of standards); Eviatar Zerubavel, The Standardization of 

Time: A Sociohistorical Perspective, 88 American Journal of Sociology 1, 5-7 (July 

1982) (uniform standards of time are needed to coordinate industries). 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 8

natural gas scheduling system seem appropriate. Therefore, in this Proposed Rule, the 

Commission is proposing to:

a. Start the natural gas operating day (Gas Day) earlier in order to ensure that 

gas-fired generators are not running short on gas supplies during the 

morning electric ramp periods. The Commission is proposing to move the 

start of the Gas Day from 9:00 a.m. Central Clock Time (CCT) to 4:00 a.m. 

CCT.16

b. Start the first day-ahead gas nomination opportunity (Timely Nomination 

Cycle) for pipeline scheduling later than the current 11:30 a.m. CCT. Due 

to the fact that the Timely Nomination Cycle is the most liquid of the gas 

nomination cycles, this change will allow electric utilities to finalize their 

scheduling before gas-fired generators must make gas purchase 

arrangements and submit nomination requests for natural gas transportation 

service to the pipelines. The Commission is proposing to move the Timely 

Nomination Cycle to 1:00 p.m. CCT.17

c. Modify the current intraday nomination timeline to provide four intraday

nomination cycles, instead of the existing two, to provide greater flexibility 

 16 The NAESB WGQ standards refer to Central Clock Time which reflects daylight savings changes.

17 The Commission is not proposing any changes to the Evening Cycle. 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 9

to all pipeline shippers. The Commission is proposing to revise the existing 

standard intraday nomination cycles, including adding an early morning

nomination cycle with a mid-day effective flow time and a new lateafternoon nomination cycle during which firm nominations would have 

precedence over or be permitted to bump already scheduled interruptible 

service. However, bumping would not be permitted during the proposed 

final intraday nomination cycle. In summary, the Commission is proposing 

to provide four standard intraday nomination cycles to occur at 8:00 a.m. 

CCT (bump), 10:30 a.m. CCT (bump), 4:00 p.m. CCT (bump) and 7:00 

p.m. CCT (no-bump).18

9. The Commission also clarifies in this Proposed Rule its policy concerning the 

ability of a pipeline to permit firm shippers to bump an interruptible shipper’s nomination 

during any enhanced nomination opportunity proposed by the pipeline (beyond the 

standard nomination opportunities). We also propose to require all interstate pipelines to 

offer multi-party service agreements, similar to those already offered by some interstate 

pipelines. Such multi-party service agreements can provide multiple shippers the 

flexibility to share interstate pipeline capacity to serve complementary needs in an 

efficient manner.

 18 See the Appendix for a Table summarizing the Commission’s proposed 

scheduling timeline.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 10

10. Although we present specific proposed reforms to existing natural gas industry 

scheduling practices in this Proposed Rule, we continue to recognize that the natural gas 

and electricity industries are best positioned to work out the details of how changes in 

scheduling practices can most efficiently be made and implemented, consistent with the 

policies discussed here. Therefore, we are providing the natural gas and electric 

industries, through NAESB, with a period of 180 days after publication of the Proposed 

Rule in the Federal Register to reach consensus on any revisions to the Commission’s

proposals and either file consensus standards with the Commission or notify the 

Commission of its inability to reach consensus on any revisions to the Commission’s 

proposals. The Commission appreciates the recent work of the Natural Gas Council 

(NGC), the Desert Southwest Pipeline Stakeholders (DSPS), and others to formulate 

proposals for Commission consideration. These efforts represent a significant step 

forward in helping to address the scheduling issues confronting the natural gas and 

electric industries, and we encourage these parties to continue their work and participate 

in the NAESB process to formulate a consensus proposal, consistent with the policies 

discussed herein. In addition, while the proposals in this Proposed Rule focus on natural 

gas industry regulations, we expect the electric industry (particularly the ISOs and RTOs) 

to participate in these efforts to help ensure that the resulting consensus reasonably 

accommodates the interests of both industries. 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 11

11. In the event that NAESB is able to reach a consensus on revisions to the 

Commission’s proposals, comments on those consensus standards, as well as comments 

on the Commission’s proposals, are to be filed 240 days after publication of the Proposed 

Rule in the Federal Register. Because NAESB is an ANSI accredited consensus 

standards organization, the Commission could incorporate by reference in a final rule 

consensus standards filed by NAESB.19 In the event that NAESB in unable to reach a 

consensus on any revisions to the Commission’s proposals, comments on the 

Commission’s proposals also are to be filed 240 days after publication of the Proposed 

Rule in the Federal Register. If the Commission adopts regulations that have not been 

approved by NAESB, it will expect NAESB to integrate the Commission’s regulations 

into its standards within 90 days of the effective date of the final rule and to notify the 

Commission when the standards have been approved.

I. Background

12. In order to put these related Commission actions in context, we first provide a 

description of the current interstate natural gas and electric utility scheduling systems and 

the issues raised during the Commission conferences and in filed comments in Docket 

No. AD12-12-000.

 19 Pub L. No. 104-113, 12(d), 110 Stat. 775 (1996), 15 U.S.C. 272 note (1997); 

OMB Circular A-119 (agency “must use voluntary consensus standards, both domestic 

and international, in its regulatory” as well as procurement activities).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 12

A. Current Natural Gas and Electric Scheduling Systems

1. Nationwide Scheduling for Natural Gas Interstate Pipeline 

Transportation

13. The nationwide natural gas standards originated in 1995, when all segments of the 

natural gas industry agreed to form the Gas Industry Standards Board (GISB) (the 

precursor to NAESB) as its vehicle to formalize the creation of industry-wide 

communication standards.20 Later in 1995, after conducting an industry technical 

conference, the Commission issued an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(ANOPR), requesting the submission of proposals by GISB to standardize business 

practices across the interstate natural gas pipeline grid.21 One of the Commission’s 

principal concerns was the standardization of nomination and confirmation schedules.

14. After the issuance of the ANOPR, the industry mobilized under the GISB 

procedures, with over 500 individuals participating in 45 days of meetings over a period 

of 53 business days to produce consensus on a comprehensive set of business practice 

standards covering nominations and confirmations, flowing gas, invoicing, capacity 

 20 Under its charter and by-laws, GISB was open to all members of the gas 

industry and utilized open and balanced consensus voting procedures to ensure that a 

standard was acceptable to all industry segments.

21 Standards for Business Practices of Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines, Advanced 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 73 FERC ¶ 61,104 (1995).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 13

release, and electronic communication.22 The industry concluded that a nationwide 

timeline for scheduling and nominating natural gas transportation was needed given the 

interconnected nature of pipelines. As GISB stated, “the standard nomination timeline 

allows a shipper whose transaction spans more than one pipeline the certainty that the 

transaction will really ‘work’ as contemplated.”23 In Order No. 587, the Commission 

incorporated these nationwide standards into its regulations, recognizing the need for 

nationwide, as opposed to regional scheduling, for interstate natural gas pipeline 

service.24 Since 1996, the nationwide framework of scheduling timelines has remained in 

place, with numerous improvements and modifications, such as the addition in 1997 of 

standardized intraday nomination opportunities.25 

 22 Standards for Business Practices of Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines, Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking, 61 FR 19211 (May 1, 1996), FERC Stats. & Regs. ProposedRegulations 1988-1998 ¶ 32,517, at 33,209 (1996).

23 Order No. 587, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,038, at 30,067.

24 “An integrated pipeline grid means that an East Coast LDC can nominate gas 

from a producer located in any time-zone on the North American continent. If an 

upstream-downstream system or a regional system were used, the LDC would not get 

confirmation of the first leg of the journey until well after it gets confirmation of the final 

downstream leg (which is probably well after the close of its business day).” Id. at 

30,068.

25 See Standards for Business Practices of Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines; Order 

No. 587-G, 63 FR 20072 (Apr. 23, 1998), FERC Stats. & Regs. Regulations Preambles 

July 1996 – December 2000 ¶ 31,062 (1998); Order No. 587, FERC Stats. & Regs. 

¶ 31,038, at 30,060 (recognizing that standards development requires continuous adaption 

to changed circumstances: “standards development is not like a sculptor forever casting 

 (continued ...)
Docket No. RM14-2-000 14

15. The natural gas scheduling system is based on several underlying principles. First, 

the Gas Day is standard nationwide, beginning at 9:00 a.m. CCT and ending at 9:00 a.m. 

CCT the following day. All nominations for transportation service are for a daily 

quantity to be transported over that 24-hour period. The rate at which a shipper may use 

its contracted quantity, also known as a flow rate, on a given pipeline is determined by 

the individual pipeline’s tariff and the flexibility of that pipeline to permit non-ratable 

flows. Except for special services, pipeline services are generally based on the 

assumption of uniform hourly flows over the Gas Day. While Table 1 below lists the 

effective times for nominations, changes to these nominations are limited by the 

remainder of a shipper’s daily quantity and the remaining hours of the Gas Day.26 

Second, interstate natural gas pipelines schedule their systems based on the priority of the 

transportation contract held by the shipper. Nominations of firm transportation from a 

primary receipt point to a primary delivery point (primary firm nominations) have the 

 

his creation in bronze, but like a jazz musician who takes a theme and constantly revises, 

enhances, and reworks it”).

26 For example, if a shipper with a contract for 2,400 Dth/day, schedules 1,200 Dth 

at the Timely Nomination Cycle, and submits an intraday nomination at the Intra-Day 1 

cycle, that shipper can increase its scheduled capacity, assuming capacity availability, by 

no more than 1,600 Dth, bringing its total scheduled quantity to 2,000 Dth/day. This 

occurs because the shipper has already operated for eight hours based on a daily 

nomination of 1,200 Dth (50 Dth/hour). (8 hrs * 50 = 400 Dth). This leaves the shipper 

only 16 hours to increase its flow rate to 100 Dth/hr, bringing its total daily quantity to 

2,000 Dth (400 Dth for the first 8 hours + 1,600 for the remaining 16 hours).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 15

highest priority,27 followed by secondary–firm, within-the-path28 nominations, 

secondary-firm, outside of the path nominations, and finally nominations from shippers 

holding interruptible transportation capacity.

16. The current NAESB WGQ standards establish four standard nomination periods 

(i.e., periods during which a shipper can request transportation service under its contract) 

for a Gas Day. As summarized in the figure below, the first two nomination 

opportunities occur the day before gas flows, and the second two opportunities occur 

during the day of gas flow.

Table 1: NAESB Gas Nomination Cycles

Nomination 

Cycle

Nomination 

Deadline (CCT)

Notification of 

Schedule (CCT)

Nomination Effective 

(CCT)

Bumping 

of IT

Timely 11:30 a.m. 4:30 p.m. 9:00 a.m. Next Day N/A

Evening 6:00 p.m. 10:00 p.m. 9:00 a.m. Next Day Yes

Intra-Day 1 10:00 a.m. 2:00 p.m. 5:00 p.m. Current Day Yes

 27 A firm shipper’s primary receipt and delivery points are listed in its service 

agreement and define the guaranteed firm transportation service the pipeline has 

contracted to provide that shipper. The Commission also requires pipelines to permit 

shippers to use all other points in the rate zones for which they pay on a secondary-firm 

basis.

28 Secondary-firm nominations are firm nominations that include at least one 

secondary point. Within-the-path nominations are nominations where the secondary 

nomination point is contained wholly within the primary points listed in the shipper’s 

contract.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 16

Nomination 

Cycle

Nomination 

Deadline (CCT)

Notification of 

Schedule (CCT)

Nomination Effective 

(CCT)

Bumping 

of IT

Intra-Day 2 5:00 p.m. 9:00 p.m. 9:00 p.m. Current Day No

Before a pipeline schedules a shipper’s requested quantity under these standards, the 

pipeline confirms the shipper’s nomination with upstream and downstream parties to 

make sure the shipper has contracted for sufficient gas with an upstream supplier to fulfill 

its nomination, and to ensure the downstream entity, such as a Local Distribution 

Company (LDC), has sufficient capacity to accept that gas.

17. The Timely Nomination Cycle is the most liquid time to acquire both natural gas 

supply and transportation capacity. During that cycle, all of the pipeline’s nomination 

priorities are in effect: primary-firm nominations have priority over secondary-firm 

nominations, and secondary-firm nominations have priority over interruptible 

transportation.29 In subsequent nomination cycles, firm service scheduled in an earlier 

cycle cannot be displaced or bumped by another firm nomination for that Gas Day. 30 In 

addition, firm intraday nominations have priority over, and thus can displace or bump 

 29 See P 14 supra.

30 Transwestern Pipeline Company, 99 FERC ¶ 61,356, at P 12 (2002) (“the 

Commission's long standing policy on firm service is that once scheduled, whether at 

primary or alternate points, the service may not be bumped by a nomination by another 

firm shipper”).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 17

scheduled and flowing interruptible transportation.31 This policy recognizes that “firm 

shippers are paying reservation charges for priority rights and those rights should include 

the right to have a nomination become effective as early as possible on the Gas Day 

following the nomination.”32 However, the final intraday nomination (Intra-Day 2) cycle 

is a “no-bump” cycle, meaning that interruptible transportation previously arranged for 

cannot be displaced or bumped by a firm Intra-Day 2 nomination. In approving this 

arrangement (referred to as the “No-Bump Rule”), the Commission found that it would 

create a fair balance between firm and interruptible shippers and provide necessary 

stability in the nomination system. 

18. Individual pipelines may offer additional scheduling opportunities beyond the 

standard nomination cycles. However, shippers transporting gas over multiple pipeline 

systems may have limited ability to utilize these additional scheduling opportunities if the 

upstream or downstream pipelines cannot confirm those scheduling changes. Currently, 

several pipelines offer additional nomination cycles.33

 31 18 CFR 284.12(b)(1)(i) (2013); Order No. 587-G, FERC Stats. & Regs. 

¶ 31,062 at 30,672.

32 Id. at 30,671.

33 See, e.g., Texas Gas Transmission LLC, 137 FERC ¶ 61,093 (2011), order on 

compliance, 138 FERC ¶ 61,176 (2013) (Texas Gas); Gulf South Pipeline Company LP,

141 FERC ¶ 61,262 (2012).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 18

2. Electric Scheduling

19. Scheduling practices in the electric industry vary by region. In terms of processes 

that are run by the ISOs and RTOs, the practice of scheduling resources generally 

includes the commitment and dispatch of sufficient, deliverable generation to supply load 

in a least cost manner, all based on generator availability and the transmission facilities 

that will be in service that day. These processes for scheduling resources also account for 

imports and exports, the provision of ancillary services, and contingencies that may limit 

the availability of certain generation or transmission assets during the operating day. 

20. To perform the unit commitment and dispatch processes used to develop daily 

resource schedules, ISOs and RTOs collect supply offers from generators and expected 

demand from load serving entities. The ISOs and RTOs then run market algorithms that,

accounting for transmission constraints and other operational limitations, determine the 

least cost set of resources that can be used to serve load. Additionally, each ISO and

RTO also performs a reliability unit commitment process to procure resources, in

addition to those resources committed to serve the load bid into the day-ahead market, as

necessary to meet the ISO’s or RTO’s own forecast of the next day’s load and, in some

cases, other system needs. These reliability processes vary in each ISO and RTO – both

in name and in details of implementation. 

21. In terms of when resource scheduling processes take place, for most electric 

utilities the 24-hour operating day begins at 12:00 a.m. local time. In ISO and RTO 

regions, the system operators run the day-ahead unit commitment and dispatch in the day 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 19

leading up to the operating day. Once these processes are run, they become effective at 

the beginning of the operating day. Each ISO and RTO establishes its own timing for 

executing the day-ahead and reliability scheduling processes, including the times of day 

when bids and offers are due to the system operator, when the market and reliability 

processes are run, and when the results of the scheduling processes are made available to 

generators. The individual ISO and RTO day-ahead schedules are discussed in greater 

detail below. 

In non-ISO and RTO systems, the Commission’s pro forma OATT specifies that firm 

interchange schedules need to be submitted by 10:00 a.m. day-ahead or a reasonable time 

that is generally accepted in the region and is consistently adhered to by the Transmission 

Provider.34

3. Commission Conferences

22. As noted above, the Commission has engaged in an extensive dialogue with 

industry on gas-electric coordination issues. These efforts were first formalized on 

February 15, 2012, when the Commission issued a notice in Docket No. AD12-12-000 

requesting comments on various aspects of gas-electric interdependence and coordination 

 34 Pro forma OATT §13.8. Schedules for Non-Firm Point-To-Point Transmission 

Service must be submitted to the Transmission Provider no later than 2:00 p.m. of the day 

prior to commencement of such service. Pro forma OATT §14.6.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 20

in response to questions posed by members of the Commission.35 In order to better 

understand the interface between the electric and natural gas pipeline industries and 

identify areas for improved coordination, the questions covered a variety of topics 

including market structures and rules, scheduling, communications, infrastructure and 

reliability. In response to the notice, the Commission received comments from 79 

entities that raised concerns, including the need for alignment of natural gas and electric 

scheduling.

23. During August 2012, the Commission convened five regional conferences for the 

purpose of exploring these issues and obtaining further information from the electric and 

natural gas industries regarding coordination between the industries. Representatives 

from a cross-section of both industries attended the regional conferences, with total 

attendance exceeding 1,200 registrants. As noted above, the November Staff Report

following these conferences stated that, among other topics, participants highlighted the 

need for alignment of natural gas and electric scheduling. Generators participating in the 

 35 Coordination Between Natural Gas and Electricity Markets, Docket No. AD12-

12-000 (Feb. 15, 2012) (Notice Assigning Docket No. and Requesting Comments), 

available at http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/common/opennat.asp?fileID=12893828. See 

also Commissioner Philip D. Moeller, Request for Comments of Commissioner Moeller 

on Coordination between the Natural Gas and Electricity Markets (Feb. 3, 2012), 

available at http://www.ferc.gov/about/com-mem/moeller/moellergaselectricletter.pdf;

Commissioner Cheryl A. LaFleur, Statement regarding Standards for Business Practices 

for Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines (Feb. 16, 2012, available at

http://www.ferc.gov/media/statements-speeches/lafleur/2012/02-16-12-lafleur-G-1.asp.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 21

ISO and RTO markets stated that managing fuel procurement risk can be a challenge 

because the natural gas and electric operating days are not aligned. Many participants 

voiced concerns related to whether establishing a standard energy day for both industries 

is warranted, whether and how utilities can most effectively match their scheduling times 

with the nationwide natural gas scheduling timeline, whether additional nomination 

opportunities for natural gas can be provided and, if so, under what conditions. 

Participants also pointed out that changes to natural gas scheduling practices can have 

national implications given the operational structure of the pipeline system and that 

whether changes to the scheduling practices of the natural gas or electric industries are 

necessary to better align these two markets has been a matter of debate among the 

industries for a number of years.

24. On November 15, 2012, the Commission issued an order directing further 

technical conferences and reports.36 In this order, the Commission recognized that 

questions raised at the conferences, related to scheduling and other issues, were of 

sufficient importance that they warranted a separate technical conference to focus on the 

details relating to scheduling.37 Therefore, the Commission directed, among other things, 

 36 Coordination Between Natural Gas and Electricity Markets, 141 FERC 

¶ 61,125 (2012) (November 15 Order).

37 Id. P 6.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 22

that Commission staff convene a technical conference to identify areas in which 

additional Commission guidance or potential regulatory changes could be considered. 38

25. Pursuant to the November 15 Order, the Commission held a technical conference 

on April 25, 2013 (April 2013 technical conference) regarding natural gas and electric 

scheduling practices, and issues related to whether and how natural gas and electric 

industry schedules could be harmonized in order to achieve the most efficient scheduling 

systems for both industries.

39 More than 300 persons, representing a cross-section of 

industry, participated in the April 2013 technical conference, and discussed four major 

topic areas: natural gas and electric operating day, natural gas nomination cycles, the NoBump Rule, and electric scheduling and market rules.40

26. The participants in these conferences identified a number of specific areas in 

which the differences between the nationwide natural gas schedule and the regional 

electric schedules can affect the ability to provide reliable service and may create 

inefficiencies in scheduling that result in less cost effective use of resources. The major 

 38 Id. P 8.

39 Coordination Between Natural Gas and Electricity Markets, Docket No. AD12-

12-000 (Mar. 5, 2013) (Notice Of Technical Conference), available at 

http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/File_list.asp?document_id=14095482.

40 Supplemental Notice of Technical Conference, Docket, No. AD12-12-000, at 

4-7 (Apr. 3, 2013) (Supplemental Notice of Technical Conference), available at 

http://elibrary.ferc.gov:0/idmws/doc_info.asp?document_id=14104023. 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 23

issues identified by the participants were: 1) the discontinuity between the operating 

days of electric utilities (including ISOs and RTOs) and the standardized operating day of 

interstate natural gas pipelines; 2) the lack of coordination between the day-ahead process 

for nominating interstate natural gas pipeline transportation services and the day-ahead 

process for scheduling electric generators, particularly those of the ISOs and RTOs; and 

3) the lack of intraday nomination opportunities on interstate natural gas pipelines, which 

may limit the ability of gas-fired electric generators, as well as other shippers, to revise 

their nominations during the operating day.

II. Discussion

A. Overview

27. The growing reliance on natural gas as a fuel for electric generation, combined 

with differences in business practices between the two industries, has the potential to 

create challenges for interstate natural gas pipelines, electric transmission operators and 

electric generators in assuring reliable and efficient operations. This problem is 

particularly acute for some ISOs and RTOs and those gas-fired generators operating in 

their markets. At the same time, in areas of the country where bilateral markets are 

prevalent and storage is minimal, customers are looking for added flexibility. The 

Commission is proposing in this NOPR, and the related orders, to take actions that 

provide for better coordination in scheduling between the industries, while respecting the 

differences between the industries in their operational and business needs. These 

proposed reforms will help to ensure just and reasonable rates and terms and conditions 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 24

of service for both wholesale electric generation and transmission and natural gas 

transportation.

28. Scheduling practices on the interstate natural gas pipeline system and electric 

transmission systems are similar in some respects. For both systems, planning and 

scheduling take place one day ahead of the operating day based on weather forecasts and 

other factors affecting demand. In addition, scheduling on both systems needs to be 

adjusted during the operating day as energy supply and demand factors change. 

However, physical and operational differences exist between the systems. Due in part to 

limited electric storage, electric transmission operators continuously and near 

instantaneously need to balance supply and demand to ensure the system remains in 

equilibrium. Natural gas, on the other hand, moves at a much slower rate than 

electricity.41 Pipelines maintain balance between supply and demand through the use of 

linepack and operational storage, and allow for variations in customer deliveries from 

 41 See American Gas Association, “How Does the Natural Gas Delivery System 

Work?” at 

http://www.aga.org/KC/ABOUTNATURALGAS/CONSUMERINFO/Pages/NGDelivery

System.aspx (last visited Dec. 17, 2013) (“Natural gas moves through the transmission 

system at up to 30 miles per hour, so it takes several days for gas from Texas to arrive at 

a utility receipt point in the Northeast”). While most pipelines schedule service based on 

an assumption of same day deliverability of natural gas from receipt to delivery point, 

this ability is provided through the pipeline’s ability to plan for nominated service by 

increasing line pack to support expected loads.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 25

equal hourly flow rates on an as available or best-efforts basis.42 As a result, an interstate 

pipeline must plan in advance so that it has sufficient linepack and/or storage to satisfy 

variations in expected hourly demand on the system. Such advance planning is 

particularly important for serving gas-fired generators, because electric generators can 

draw significant volumes of natural gas off a pipeline, sometimes as much as industrial 

users or a small city. Accordingly, increased use of natural gas by the electric industry 

can have a significant impact on the delivery capabilities of interstate natural gas 

pipelines.43 Consequently, improvements in the coordination of the electric and natural 

gas nomination and scheduling practices could provide greater opportunities for gas-fired 

generators to obtain needed natural gas supplies and for pipelines to plan for their 

expected demands. Providing these opportunities will be beneficial for both industries in 

helping to ensure reliable and efficient operations. 

 42 During much of the year, most interstate natural gas pipelines can accommodate 

significant variations in hourly flow rates. However, during high demand periods when 

pipeline capabilities are being fully utilized to provide firm transportation services, a 

constrained pipeline may announce a critical notice period, where shippers are expected 

to stay in balance. Some pipelines also offer enhanced services that permit shippers to 

subscribe to services providing more variable hourly flow rates. 

43 See North American Electric Reliability Corp., Special Reliability Assessment: 

A Primer of the Natural Gas and Electric Power Interdependency in the United States, at 

85-86 (Dec. 2011) (“the electric utility loads are as large, or larger, than many of the 

LDC loads and, in some cases, can exceed the capabilities of the smaller diameter 

pipelines”).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 26

29. The Commission has identified specific areas of concern with respect to the lack 

of coordination between the scheduling practices of the industries. In most ISO or RTO 

markets, a natural gas-fired generator does not know if it is going to be dispatched until 

after the ISO or RTO processes day-ahead or real-time market bids and determines which 

resources are economical to run on a particular day or hour. Because day-ahead electric 

generation commitments generally occur after the natural gas transportation Timely 

Nomination Cycle, a natural gas-fired generator must either submit its nomination for 

natural gas transportation services before it knows when and how much electricity it will 

be committed to produce the next day, or it must wait until it receives its day-ahead 

commitment to nominate natural gas transportation services, with the risk that during 

some periods transportation capacity may not be available or economical, given the dayahead market clearing price.44 A generator that opts to see if it is scheduled before 

acquiring natural gas and pipeline transportation therefore will not be able to obtain 

natural gas and transportation during the time period when these markets are the most 

liquid.45 While during many periods of the year interstate natural gas pipelines may have 

 44 A natural gas-fired generator also faces different risks depending on whether it 

enters into long-term natural gas purchase arrangements or relies on short-term spot 

market natural gas purchases.

45 Currently, only NYISO provides the results of its day-ahead market clearing 

process to generators before the deadline for submitting natural gas transportation 

nominations for the Timely Nomination Cycle. See Table 2, below.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 27

available capacity to provide service to gas-fired generators, during periods when the 

pipeline is constrained, the ability of generators to arrange transportation service when 

the market is most liquid may be critical to that gas-fired generators’ ability to provide 

service.

30. Even in areas outside of the ISOs and RTOs, gas-fired generators have concerns 

regarding their ability to revise their pipeline nominations during the operating day to 

respond to changing weather conditions and other operational needs when capacity 

becomes constrained. Some natural gas-fired generators have sought to ensure reliability 

by subscribing to firm pipeline service, but have found that the standard, nationwide 

nomination opportunities for interstate natural gas pipeline transportation service may not 

provide them with sufficient opportunities to reschedule gas supplies for unanticipated 

weather events after the Timely Nomination Cycle. 

31. The Commission concludes that these concerns, and other issues identified during 

our dialogues with industry, warrant further action in this proceeding and the two related 

proceedings we are instituting concurrently with this Proposed Rule. These concerns 

generally fall into two categories. 

32. First, the Commission is concerned about the potential impact on the reliable and 

efficient operation of electric transmission systems and interstate natural gas pipelines of 

divergences between the start times of the natural gas and electric operating days, and

mismatches in the timelines for scheduling interstate natural gas pipeline transportation 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 28

service and scheduling wholesale electric sales made by gas-fired generators for the next 

day. In particular, the Commission is concerned that 

1) the current 9:00 a.m. Central Clock Time (CCT) start of the Gas Day 

occurs in the middle of the morning electric load ramp in some regions, creating a 

situation where electric load is increasing at the same time natural gas-fired 

generators may be running out of their daily nomination of natural gas, resulting in 

the gas-fired generator being unable to meet its obligations under the terms of their 

electric offers; and 

2) in most ISO and RTO regions, the timelines for announcing the results of 

the day-ahead energy market process and committing generating units to run the 

next operating day occur after the deadline for the Timely Nomination Cycle

(11:30 am CCT), meaning gas-fired generators are not certain they will be called 

upon to operate until after the period when pipeline capacity is most available and 

natural gas supply markets are most liquid. 

33. Second, the Commission is concerned that existing interstate natural gas pipeline 

scheduling practices and the application of some of the Commission’s regulations by 

pipelines may not provide sufficient flexibility to meet the needs of natural gas-fired 

generators, and could be limiting the efficient use of existing pipeline infrastructure, 

thereby making less capacity available to shippers (including natural gas-fired 

generators). Specifically, the limited number of standard intraday nomination cycles for 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 29

interstate natural gas pipeline transportation may not be sufficient to meet the needs of 

gas-fired generators to obtain capacity to deliver additional natural gas supplies during 

the electric operating day. In addition, even where interstate natural gas pipelines 

provide additional intraday opportunities to obtain transportation service, there appears to 

be a lack of clarity as to how the Commission’s regulations regarding the “bumping” of 

interruptible customers should be applied to those additional nomination cycles. Finally, 

while some pipelines currently permit multiple shippers, including natural gas-fired 

generators, the flexibility to share pipeline capacity under a single firm transportation 

contract, the Commission’s regulations do not require all pipelines to offer shippers this 

option. 

34. We recognize that making modifications to the nationwide natural gas scheduling 

system and instituting the other reforms proposed in these three proceedings will not, and 

cannot, resolve all of the concerns that may arise with increased utilization of natural gas 

by electric generators. However, we conclude that the adjustments to the Gas Day and 

interstate natural gas pipeline nomination timeline proposed herein promise to provide 

significant assistance in helping to improve coordination of the natural gas and electric 

nomination and scheduling systems, while maintaining the substantial efficiencies gained 

through standardization of the natural gas scheduling system. The Commission intends 

that these reforms, along with the additional actions we propose in Docket Nos. EL14-22-
Docket No. RM14-2-000 30

000, et al. and RP14-442-000, will serve to better ensure the reliable and efficient 

operation of both interstate natural gas pipeline and electricity systems. 

35. While we are putting forth specific proposals (described in more detail below) in 

these areas, we continue to recognize that the natural gas and electricity industries are 

best positioned to work out the details of how changes in scheduling practices can most 

efficiently be made and implemented, consistent with the policies discussed here. For 

this reason, as noted above, we are providing time for the two industries to reach 

consensus on standards in these areas, including standards potentially different than the

specific proposals herein. Participants in the NAESB process should explore whether 

consensus can be reached on any changes to the scheduling practices at issue in this 

Proposed Rule that would address the policy concerns identified herein. We urge both 

the natural gas and electric industries to once again marshal their resources and jointly 

consider all proposals and seek reasonable compromise on a broadly supported and 

comprehensive set of standards that will achieve the needed integration of the natural gas 

and electric industry scheduling practices.

B. Gas Day

1. Background and Issues

36. As noted, the natural gas and electric operating days are each 24 hours long, but 

they begin at different times. As a result, each electric operating day currently extends 

over two Gas Days and a gas-fired generator committed for one electric operating day 

must manage fuel and transportation arrangements across two Gas Days. Several 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 31

commenters in the Docket No. AD12-12-000 proceeding have indicated that the current 

Gas Day start time presents operational challenges because it occurs when gas-fired 

generation is critically needed to ensure that supply is available to match demand during 

the morning electric load ramp. As gas-fired generators approach the end of the Gas Day 

during the morning electric load ramp, they could exhaust either the contractual 

entitlements of their transportation contracts or their supply of natural gas.46 In addition, 

the Gas Day start time straddles a time of peak gas demand for other pipeline shippers, 

such as LDCs. 

37. In support of an earlier start to the Gas Day, ISO-NE and NYISO have expressed 

concern that gas-fired generators sometimes exhaust their daily gas entitlements before 

the end of the Gas Day and subsequently may not be able to meet increasing morning 

electricity demands during the last hours of the Gas Day. When this occurs, ISO-NE and 

NYISO assert that they must search for alternative available generating units while 

electric load is ramping up and approaching its morning peak. ISO-NE and NYISO 

commented that shifting the start of the Gas Day earlier would improve gas-electric 

coordination and, NYISO noted, would also improve reliability.47 They noted that 

 46 Natural gas transportation contracts are based on volumetric entitlements over a 

single Gas Day.

47 NYISO Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5 (filed June 25, 2013); ISONE Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 9 (filed July 5, 2013).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 32

moving the start of the Gas Day earlier would enable gas-fired resources needed for the 

peak morning period to timely nominate and schedule supply to support their ability to 

generate electricity at the start of the morning electrical peak,48 and would provide 

generators more flexibility in attaining balancing services to avoid derating their units.49 

NYISO also argued that, as a result of its proposed change, any generator derates that 

occurred at the end of the Gas Day would occur during the overnight hours, which is a 

preferable period from an electric reliability perspective.

50

38. Additional commenters noted support for or willingness to move the Gas Day start 

time earlier. In particular, INGAA and NGSA indicated willingness to consider moving

the Gas Day earlier, but provided no specific suggestions on a new start time.51 

However, NGSA expressed concerns that an earlier start to the Gas Day may introduce 

safety risks associated with manual field operations for field crews.52 For example, 

NGSA stated that currently a producer may need to divert gas from one pipeline 

 48 ISO-NE Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 9-10 (filed July 5, 2013).

49 NYISO Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5 (filed June 25, 2013); ISONE Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 9-10 (filed July 5, 2013).

50 NYISO Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5-6 (filed June 25, 2013).

51 INGAA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 7 (filed June 26, 2013); 

NGSA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 9 (filed July 16, 2013).

52 NGSA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 9 (filed July 16, 2013). 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 33

connected to a field to another pipeline, because of price changes, market demand, or 

pipeline maintenance. NGSA stated that starting the gas operating day when it is still 

dark raises safety concerns for employees making these adjustments. According to 

NGSA, these concerns will result in either: (1) increased costs to light all production 

areas to avoid potential safety issues, or (2) a reduced ability to use more than one 

interconnected pipeline.53 In addition, INGAA asserts that the Commission must ensure 

that producers are able to physically deliver natural gas into a pipeline if the Gas Day is 

moved to an earlier time; otherwise INGAA states that an earlier start may not be 

workable. PJM stated that moving the start of the Gas Day to 5:00 a.m. CCT could 

potentially be helpful because the peak electric period would no longer split the Gas 

Day.54 While MISO stated it is not experiencing issues related to natural gas-fired unit 

derates, MISO indicated that it would support moving the start of the Gas Day earlier if it 

minimizes the uncertainty surrounding fuel procurement for gas-fired generators, as long 

as the nomination schedule did not also move to an earlier time.55

 53 Id. n.7.

54 PJM Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5 (filed July 3, 2013).

55 MISO Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 4 (filed July 3, 2013).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 34

2. Commission Proposal

39. To alleviate some of the problems resulting from the misalignment of the gas and 

electric operating day, the Commission proposes to move the start of the Gas Day to

earlier than its current 9:00 a.m. CCT time to better accommodate the load increase 

during the morning for both the electric and natural gas systems, which, in some time 

zones, begins prior to the 9:00 a.m. CCT start of the Gas Day. Moving the start of the 

Gas Day earlier should address instances in which gas-fired generators find that they are 

running out of scheduled natural gas capacity during the morning ramp period, and have 

to wait until 9:00 a.m. CCT before being able to rely on their next day gas nomination. 

As a consequence, gas-fired generators should be less likely either to incur imbalances on 

pipelines or inform electric transmission operators that they are unavailable.

40. The Commission is proposing to move the start of the Gas Day to 4:00 a.m. CCT. 

4:00 a.m. CCT would preserve the nationwide scheduling efficiencies for natural gas,

while reasonably accommodating the timing of morning electric ramp periods across all 

four time zones. As Figures 1 and 2 below show, a 4:00 a.m. CCT Gas Day start time 

would occur at the beginning of the morning electric ramp in the East, and before the 

morning electric ramp in other regions of the country. Moving the Gas Day to 4:00 a.m. 

CCT as compared to 9:00 a.m. CCT would mean that generators in all regions would be 

able to approach the morning electric peak, as well as most of the morning ramp period,

with new daily gas nominations. This should largely eliminate the concern that some 

gas-fired generators will be unable to run during a substantial part of the morning ramp 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 35

period, because they have burned through their nominated gas before the start of the next 

Gas Day. 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 36

Figure 1 - Recent winter load – Eastern and Central Regions (non-holiday 

weekdays, Dec.-Feb.) 56

 56 Source: Velocity Suite. Data covers 2012/13 winter for all regions except 

SERC, which depicts 2011/12 winter. Figures 1 and 2 were created with data from 

Ventyx’s Energy Velocity software suite, which makes available a dataset of total hourly 

load for all North American ISOs and RTOs, and total hourly historical demand for 

certain non-ISO/RTO planning areas. From these datasets, Commission staff isolated 

data relating to the regions shown above, and focused on a “winter” period of December 

2012, January 2013, and February 2013 (except where noted by an asterisk). Each line 

represents the average hourly load during said winter period for non-holiday weekdays 

and is normalized to the average peak load for that period by dividing by each line’s 

maximum value.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 37

Figure 2 - Recent winter load – Mountain and Pacific Regions (non-holiday 

weekdays, Dec.-Feb.) 57

The Commission recognizes that moving the start of the Gas Day to 4:00 a.m. CCT may 

result in increased costs to mitigate potential safety issues associated with employees 

conducting manual operations in the dark.58 However, it is unclear the frequency with 

 57 Source: Velocity Suite. Data covers 2012/13 winter for regions except DSW 

and NWPP, which depict 2011/12 winter.

58 NGSA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 10 & n.7 (filed July 16, 2013).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 38

which those circumstances occur.

59 On balance, the Commission finds that the overall 

benefits to both industries of moving the Gas Day earlier so that the morning ramp period 

for gas-fired generators and other gas consumers is included in a single Gas Day 

outweigh the potential for increased costs that may be incurred. In addition, as discussed 

below, we are also proposing changes in the intraday nomination cycles, which should 

minimize concerns expressed by NGSA and others that an earlier start to the Gas Day 

may adversely affect the ability of shippers to balance their gas flows by the next Gas 

Day. Both industries should consider whether modifications to this proposal could 

reduce overall costs without unduly jeopardizing coordination between the industries. 

C. Natural Gas Transportation Timely Nomination Cycle

1. Background and Issues 

41. In addition to the industries having different start times to their operating days, the 

natural gas and electric industries operate on different schedules within those days. As 

shown in Table 1 above, under the current NAESB WGQ Standard 1.3.2 and the 

Commission’s regulations,60 natural gas pipelines must offer pipeline shippers a 

 59 While NGSA states that there are situations during the normal course of 

business in which a producer may need to make manual adjustments to divert gas from 

one pipeline to another, it does not state how often such adjustments are required or the 

extent to which those adjustments would need to be performed at the start of the Gas 

Day. NGSA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 10 & n.7 (filed July 16, 2013).

60 18 CFR 284.12 (2013).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 39

minimum of four nomination opportunities to schedule natural gas transportation. 

Two of those standard nomination opportunities, the Timely Nomination Cycle and 

the Evening Nomination Cycle, occur the day before gas flows, while the other 

two nomination opportunities, Intra-Day 1 and Intra-Day 2, are revising nominations the 

day of gas flow. The Gas Day starts at 9:00 am CCT and natural gas pipeline customers 

are required to submit nominations for the Timely Nomination Cycle by 11:30 a.m. CCT. 

42. As described above, wholesale electricity markets operated by the ISOs and RTOs 

also use a day-ahead energy market to set contractual commitments for the next operating

day.61 Market participants place day-ahead offers and bids to sell and purchase, and

these participants must make such commitments prior to the close of the market. If the

market clearing process accepts these commitments, they become binding for the

following day. Additionally, each ISO and RTO also performs a reliability unit

commitment process to procure resources, in addition to those resources committed to

serve the load bid into the day-ahead market, as necessary to meet the ISO’s or RTO’s

own forecast of the next day’s load and, in some cases, other system needs.

 61 SPP’s Integrated Marketplace, including implementation of a day-two market

launched March 1, 2014. See Southwest Power Pool, Inc., 144 FERC ¶ 61,224 (2013). 

For the purposes of describing SPP’s expected operation of its Integrated Marketplace in 

this order, we will refer to SPP’s most recently approved schedules that the Commission 

accepted effective as of March 2014.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 40

43. The following table represents the times that bids must be submitted and that the

ISOs and RTOs post successful bids accepted in their respective day-ahead markets. As

demonstrated by Table 2, all ISOs and RTOs (with the exception of NYISO) publicize

accepted day-ahead dispatch bids after the current 11:30 a.m. CCT nomination deadline

for the Timely Nomination Cycle for day-ahead natural gas transportation nominations.

Table 2: Electric Commitment Results Publication Timetable

ISO/RTO Time for Submission of

Bids (CCT)

Time for Publication of

Day-Ahead Commitment

Bids (CCT)

California Independent

System Operator

Corporation (CAISO)

12:00 p.m. 3:00 p.m.

ISO New England Inc. (ISONE)9:00 a.m. 12:30 p.m.

PJM Interconnection, LLC

(PJM)

11:00 a.m. 3:00 p.m.

Midcontinent Independent

System Operator, Inc.

(MISO)

10:00 a.m. 2:00 p.m.

New York Independent

System Operator, Inc.

(NYISO)

4:00 a.m. 10:00 a.m.

Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

(SPP)

11:00 a.m. 4:00 p.m.

44. The market for acquiring natural gas supply is most liquid on weekday mornings 

between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. CCT, prior to the Timely Nomination Cycle deadline, 

and the majority of shippers place nominations for next-day gas transportation service by 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 41

the Timely Nomination Cycle deadline.62 Commenters assert that although natural gas 

supply can be purchased throughout the day through a limited secondary market, there is 

a premium for natural gas supply and interstate natural gas pipeline transportation 

capacity services procured after the Timely Nomination Cycle.63 After the Timely 

Nomination Cycle, the Evening Nomination Cycle beginning at 6:00 p.m. CCT offers the 

only standard opportunity to reschedule gas transportation for the next Gas Day.

45. The issue arising from the current timing of the Timely Nomination Cycle is 

whether the electric markets are better served by notifying gas-fired generators of their 

dispatch requirements before the deadline for timely nominations or by allowing 

generators to determine the most current gas prices before they must submit their bids 

into the electric markets. Some generators prefer bidding into the ISO and RTO markets 

after the Timely Nomination Cycle deadline so their bids to supply electricity reflect the 

current natural gas prices, whereas other generators want to know if they have been 

committed by the ISO or RTO to operate before entering the market to obtain natural gas 

 62 November Staff Report at 31-32.

63 Natural gas is traded in bilateral markets. Daily transactions are mostly 

consummated in the morning hours before the Timely Nomination Cycle deadline. The 

ability to find willing buyers and sellers to act as counterparties of a commodity 

transaction is greatest during these normal trading periods; the gas market is “liquid” 

during this time of day.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 42

supply and interstate natural gas pipeline transportation capacity. 64 Some ISOs and 

RTOs are concerned that when their markets clear after the deadline for submitting 

nominations in the Timely Nomination Cycle generators may not have procured gas and 

transportation due to uncertainty with bids being accepted by the ISO/RTO. This fuel 

uncertainty may result in reliability problems if these generators ultimately cannot run as 

expected.65

46. INGAA filed comments indicating a willingness to move the Timely Nomination 

Cycle to 1:00 p.m. CCT to accommodate ISO and RTO needs on the condition that the 

ISOs and RTOs reevaluate their schedules for performing their market processes and 

committing generators to ensure that generators will learn from their ISO or RTO 

whether they will be dispatched before nominating for interstate natural gas pipeline 

transportation service.66 INGAA contends that the Timely Nomination Cycle, 

 64 See, e.g., Calpine Corporation Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 7 (filed 

Mar. 30, 2012) (“problems may occur when a unit that has not been scheduled for 

dispatch is called upon after the first day-ahead nomination period has passed.”); 

Equipower Resources Corp. Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 3-4 (filed Mar. 30, 

2012) (“natural gas-fired generator is forced to purchase and nominate natural gas 

supplies before it knows whether its output will clear the day-ahead market and be 

assigned a generation commitment. . . . Consequently, a generator faces substantial risk 

that it did not purchase the correct volume of natural gas, potentially leaving it with a 

substantial surplus or deficiency of natural gas”).

65 PJM Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5 (filed July 3, 2013); NYISO 

Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 3 (filed June 28, 2013).

66 INGAA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 3 (filed June 26, 2013).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 43

confirmation and scheduling process should occur during normal business hours to 

ensure the availability of counterparties necessary for the confirmation process. 

Consistent with these comments, INGAA requests that the Timely Nomination Cycle, 

including the confirmation and scheduling notification processes, be completed no later 

than 5:00 p.m. CCT.67

47. NGSA similarly commented that any changes to the existing gas operating 

schedule must provide sufficient time between the Timely Nomination Cycle scheduling 

notification and the time that nominations are required for the next available cycle. 68 

NGSA notes that it is particularly critical that shippers not scheduled during the Timely 

Nomination Cycle have time to secure alternative gas supply and transportation 

arrangements during ordinary business hours. NGSA further notes that after nominations 

are submitted the confirmation process itself may require a series of time consuming 

communications, and suggests that operators need a minimum of two hours to 

communicate among all the relevant parties between the close of the Timely Nomination 

Cycle and the time in which nominations are confirmed, and possibly longer for instances 

in which interconnecting pipelines have non-conforming nomination cycles. Like 

 67 Id.

68 NGSA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 7-8 (filed July 16, 2013).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 44

INGAA, NGSA stresses that the confirmation deadline for the Timely Nomination Cycle 

must occur during normal business hours.

2. Commission Proposal

48. The Commission proposes to move the deadline for submitting nominations in the 

Timely Nomination Cycle later than the current 11:30 a.m. CCT deadline, to 1:00 p.m. 

CCT, in order to provide sufficient time for electric utilities to complete their processes 

for selecting generating resources to operate prior to this first, and most liquid, time in the 

natural gas supply and interstate natural gas pipeline transportation service markets. It 

appears that our objective of a later deadline for submitting nominations in the Timely 

Nomination Cycle can be accomplished without any other changes to the Timely 

Nomination Cycle or Evening Cycle timelines, including the 4:30 p.m. CCT deadline for 

the pipeline to provide notice of scheduled quantities. The three and a half hour period 

from 1:00 pm CCT to 4:30 p.m. CCT is consistent with INGAA and NGSA’s comments 

that several hours are needed for pipelines to confirm and provide scheduled quantities to 

shippers. However, the industry can consider whether any revisions or changes are 

necessary to accommodate a later Timely Cycle nomination deadline. 

49. To make sure that ISO and RTO market clearing processes will sufficiently align 

with this later proposed nomination deadline for submitting nominations in the Timely 

Nomination Cycle, the Commission also is instituting a proceeding under section 206 of 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 45

the Federal Power Act (FPA)69 (in a contemporaneous order in Docket No. EL14-22-000

et al.) to ensure that the ISOs and RTOs modify their day-ahead market processes and 

scheduling such that generators will receive dispatch instructions in sufficient time to be 

able to acquire natural gas and transportation by the start of the Timely Nomination Cycle 

(as revised in the instant proceeding) and to complete their supplemental reliability 

dispatch in sufficient time for generators to use the Evening Cycle. In addition, while the 

comments received by the Commission in Docket No. AD12-12-000 mainly discuss the 

effect of such a change on the ISO and RTO markets, a later Timely Nomination Cycle 

deadline also should help ensure that gas-fired generation resources in other regions are 

able to acquire interstate natural gas pipeline transportation capacity and natural gas 

supply in time for day-ahead commitments.70

50. Under the current scheduling timelines, a gas-fired generator in ISO and RTO 

markets that completes its scheduling after the Timely Nomination Cycle must decide 

whether (a) to line-up supply and nominate interstate natural gas pipeline transportation 

during the Timely Nomination Cycle without knowing whether the gas-fired generator’s 

electric energy bid will subsequently clear the energy market; or (b) to wait to see 

 69 California Independent System Operator Corp., et al, Order Initiating 

Investigation into ISO/RTO Scheduling Practices and Establishing Paper Hearing 

Procedures, 146 FERC ¶ 61,202 (2014).

70 See Pro Forma OATT §13.8 (firm day-ahead schedules must be submitted by 

10:00 a.m. local time).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 46

whether its bid clears the energy market, and then line-up fuel supply and natural gas 

pipeline transportation in a later nomination cycle. If a generator acquires natural gas and 

transportation prior to learning whether it is dispatched, it runs the risk of having to 

dispose of its natural gas supply and interstate natural gas pipeline transportation capacity 

during the less liquid Evening or Intra-Day nomination periods.71 However, if the 

generator first waits to see if its bid clears the day-ahead market, it must try and acquire 

natural gas and transportation during the less liquid Evening or intraday gas 

transportation nomination cycles. In this event, the generator runs the risk of potentially 

not being able to find transportation capacity if the pipeline is fully scheduled. 

51. We recognize that gas-fired generators face commercial business decisions that 

inform whether they prefer to bid into the day-ahead electric markets before or after they 

have secured their gas supply and transportation needs. There are also differences of 

opinion as to whether electric scheduling should be completed prior to the submission of 

interstate natural gas pipeline transportation nominations. Some favor having the 

pipelines’ Timely Nomination Cycle clear prior to submission of bids into ISO/RTO 

 71 See, e.g., Equipower Resources Corp. Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 

3-4 (filed Mar. 30, 2012) (a generator that purchases capacity and gas during the timely 

cycle and is not dispatched “is forced to sell excess volumes or purchase the volume it is

short in the intraday market. But the intraday market is highly illiquid and sometimes 

nonexistent, resulting in the generator (1) being exposed to imbalance penalties on the 

pipeline if it cannot find a market for excess gas; (2) being unable to operate its generator 

at expected output; (3) having to purchase additional supplies at a premium; or (4) having 

to sell excess supply at a discount”).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 47

markets, maintaining that gas-fired generators will obtain the most accurate gas prices to 

inform their energy bids into the organized markets. Others, however, maintain that if 

electric market schedules clear first, gas-fired generators will know by the Timely 

Nomination Cycle how much natural gas and interstate natural gas transportation they 

need to procure and the generators will have less need to obtain transportation and natural 

gas during less liquid times.

52. Taking these considerations into account, we are proposing that the electric 

markets clear prior to the pipelines’ Timely Nomination Cycle. We conclude that 

moving the Timely Nomination Cycle later than the current 11:30 a.m. CCT deadline, 

along with examining whether the ISOs and RTOs should modify their day-ahead market 

processes, could expand the options available to gas-fired generators. Currently, gasfired generators in some regions are not provided the opportunity to buy natural gas and 

arrange natural gas transportation at a time when they know the results of the day-ahead 

electric market and the natural gas markets are most liquid. Gas-fired generators, 

therefore, must either procure natural gas supply and transportation prior to knowing 

whether they were committed or after the close of the Timely Nomination Cycle, when 

the natural gas supply and transportation markets are less liquid. Under our proposal, 

gas-fired generators would have the option of arranging natural gas supply and 

transportation at the Timely Nomination Cycle knowing the results of the day-ahead 

electric market. In particular, this would forward the objective of minimizing situations 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 48

in which gas-fired generators, particularly those that opt to procure natural gas supply and 

transportation after the day-ahead electric market results are posted, are unable to procure 

sufficient resources to fulfill their electric market commitments and to contribute to 

reliable system operation.

53. Furthermore, as discussed above, a gas-fired generator’s inability to know whether 

its bid in the day-ahead market has been selected prior to the deadline for the Timely 

Nomination Cycle may lead to instances in which gas-fired generators must sell off 

excess natural gas supply, procure more expensive natural gas supply, de-rate, or burn 

more expensive fuels. We are concerned that any of these scenarios could result in 

increased electricity costs and a shift away from the least-cost mix of supply resources as 

determined by the ISO or RTO’s day-ahead dispatch and unit commitment. These 

circumstances could lead to higher costs being passed on to wholesale customers. On the 

other hand, if gas-fired generators know whether they were committed in the day-ahead

electric market prior to the Timely Nomination Cycle, these generators may have a 

greater opportunity to procure natural gas transportation in the Timely Nomination 

Cycle—when there is the greatest opportunity to procure pipeline capacity. This, in turn,

could reduce the potential for gas-fired generators to engage in costly actions that raise 

real-time energy market prices. Thus, electric market outcomes may better reflect 

expected operating costs if gas-fired generators were provided with day-ahead market 

results prior to the Timely Nomination Cycle.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 49

54. We understand that moving the Timely Nomination Cycle to later in the day may 

impose systems and administrative costs on other interstate natural gas pipeline shippers. 

In balancing all of the interests of the many affected customers, a 1:00 p.m. CCT start 

time for the Timely Nomination Cycle would appear to provide a reasonable balance of 

the electric and natural gas industries’ concerns: the natural gas industry will have 

sufficient time to complete the Timely Nomination Cycle during normal business hours, 

as requested by INGAA and NGSA, while electric transmission operators will be able to 

complete their scheduling sufficiently prior to the Timely Nomination Cycle to permit 

gas-fired generators to acquire natural gas and pipeline capacity during the Timely 

Nomination Cycle. After considering the potential effects of this proposal, the long-term 

benefits of ensuring a better coordinated natural gas and electric industry appear to 

warrant this change. The industries, however, should consider whether a different 

timeline better fits their combined business needs.

D. Modified Intra-Day Nomination Timeline

1. Background and Comments Received

55. In addition to the Timely and Evening Nomination Cycles, pipelines currently 

must offer shippers at least two opportunities to nominate natural gas during the day that 

gas is flowing. These nomination opportunities are known as the Intra-Day 1 and IntraDay 2 nomination cycles. The current nomination deadline for Intra-day 1 is 10:00 a.m. 

CCT on the current Gas Day, with confirmation at 2:00 p.m. CCT, for gas flow at 5:00 

p.m. CCT that same Gas Day, and the deadline for Intra-day 2 nominations is 5:00 p.m. 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 50

CCT on the current Gas Day with confirmation and flow at 9:00 p.m. CCT that same Gas 

Day. As with nominations made at the Timely or Evening Cycles, nominations for firm 

service at the Intra-Day 1 cycle can “bump” an already scheduled interruptible 

nomination. Pursuant to the “No-Bump Rule,” however, nominations for firm service 

made at the Intra-Day 2 cycle cannot “bump” scheduled interruptible service. 

56. Some pipelines offer additional intraday nomination cycles or other enhanced 

services.72 Even if additional nomination cycles are not detailed in the pipeline’s tariff, 

some pipelines’ tariffs provide that the pipeline will make best efforts to accommodate 

such incremental nominations throughout the day on a best efforts basis.73 These 

enhanced nomination opportunities are not standardized across the nation, however, and 

therefore are not available to all shippers. Consequently, for gas transactions that require 

transportation on more than one pipeline, these additional intraday nomination 

opportunities may have limited value because the pipelines without enhanced nomination 

opportunities may not confirm the nominations. Thus, if not all pipelines in the 

nomination chain offer additional nomination opportunities, a shipper transporting gas on 

 72 See, e.g., Texas Gas Transmission LLC., 137 FERC ¶ 61,093 (2011); Florida 

Gas Transmission Co., LLC, 141 FERC ¶ 61,161 (2012) (order accepting pipeline 

proposal to add an Intra-day 3 Nomination Cycle to accommodate anticipated flow 

changes for the final six hours of the gas day). 

73 See, e.g., Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, LLC’s Tariff, GT&C 

Section IV.2(e).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 51

a pipeline that offers such enhanced nominations may not be able to take advantage of 

that opportunity, and therefore may not be able to schedule its capacity until the next 

nation-wide nomination cycle.

A number of commenters74 57. suggested that the standard, nation-wide nomination 

opportunities that are currently available may not provide gas-fired generators or other 

shippers with sufficient flexibility to adjust their nominations to respond to real-time 

changes in their need for natural gas. These commenters requested that additional, 

standardized intraday nomination opportunities be required on interstate natural gas 

pipelines. 

58. For example, ISO-NE and NYISO suggest that the lack of nomination 

opportunities impacts their ability to use gas-fired generation capacity to respond to real 

time events.75 Specifically, ISO-NE asserts that it is unable to anticipate which or when 

gas-fired units will be able to respond to real time dispatch requests, and that this 

uncertainty results in ISO-NE asking multiple units to come online. 

 74 See, e.g., APS Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5 (filed Apr. 19, 2013), 

NYISO Comments, Docket No., AD12-12-000, at 3-2 (filed June 28, 2013) ISO-NE 

Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 6 (filed July 5, 2013), Desert Southwest 

Pipeline Stakeholders Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 14 (filed Jan. 31, 2014). 

75 ISO-NE Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 6-7 (filed July 7, 2013), 

NYISO Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 3 (filed June 28, 2013).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 52

In addition, APS and the Desert Southwest Pipeline Stakeholders76 59. (DSPS) argue

that gas-fired generators in their region typically hold firm pipeline transportation 

capacity but cannot make full use of that capacity to respond to a contingency that occurs 

during or after their peak load period because of a lack of sufficient opportunities to 

adjust nominations. According to APS and DSPS, the peak demand for electricity in 

Arizona typically does not occur until approximately 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time, while the 

only intraday nomination deadlines are 8:00 a.m. Pacific Time (Intra-Day 1) and the nobump 3:00 p.m. Pacific Time (Intra-Day 2).77 APS and DSPS maintain that firm shippers

should have superior rights to interruptible shippers and should not be limited to bumping 

interruptible service only at 8:00 a.m. Pacific Time. APS and DSPS notes that they need 

to use gas-fired generators to balance Variable Energy Resource production in the 

Southwest. APS and DSPS state that during the extreme summer months when capacity 

is often constrained, gas-fired electric utilities in the Southwest routinely have to submit 

their final flow day nomination for their gas requirements 2 to 9 hours before its system 

hits its peak with 16 to 23 hours remaining in the current Gas Day. Accordingly, APS 

 76 The core members of the DSPS include The Arizona Corporation Commission, 

Arizona Public Service Company, El Paso Electric Company, New Mexico Gas 

Company, Inc., Public Service Company of New Mexico, Salt River Project Agricultural 

Improvement and Power District, Southwest Gas Corporation, and Tucson Electric Power 

Company/UNS Gas, Inc.

77 APS Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 4 (filed Apr. 19, 2013).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 53

suggests that, at a minimum, two additional intraday nomination cycles be added; one 

bumpable cycle between the current Intra-Day 1 and Intra-Day 2 cycles and another 

nomination opportunity after Intra-Day 2.78 NRG also supports the addition of a 

nomination cycle after Intra-day 2. 

60. DSPS also proposes that the current NAESB nomination timeline be modified to 

add an additional intraday nomination opportunity.

79 DSPS proposes that the Intra-Day 1

cycle would continue to permit bumping and maintain the current nomination deadline of

10:00 a.m. CCT on the current Gas Day, but that Intra-Day 2 would provide an additional 

bumping opportunity with a nomination deadline of 7:00 p.m. CCT, with confirmation at 

9:00 p.m. CCT, for gas flow at 10:00 p.m. on the current Gas Day. DSPS also proposes a 

no-bump Intra-Day 3 cycle with a nomination deadline of 10:00 p.m. CCT, with 

confirmation at 1:00 a.m. CCT for gas flow at 1:00 a.m. on the current Gas Day. DSPS 

asserts that its proposal would provide IT shippers with a final no-bump cycle that 

guarantees that an IT shipper that is scheduled in Intra-Day 2 cannot be bumped in the 

final cycle of the current Gas Day and would therefore have a minimum of eleven hours 

of flow.80 

 78 Id. at 5-6.

79 DSPS Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 28-29 (filed Jan. 31, 2014).

80 DSPS Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 29 (filed Jan. 31, 2014).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 54

61. Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) argues that the Commission’s No-Bump Rule 

creates an artificial barrier to firm service and should be removed.81 TVA indicated that 

it has contracted for firm service, including enhanced services for each of its gas-fired 

generation facilities, but claims those services have limited value when attempting to 

nominate capacity at an intraday cycle because the No-Bump Rule allows interruptible 

transmission service to have priority over firm service in the Intra-Day 2 nomination 

cycle.

62. Several commenters, including INGAA, were open to the creation of additional 

standard nomination cycles.82 They noted that, while several pipelines offer services that 

provide additional flexibility, these services and nomination opportunities are not 

standardized or available to all shippers. INGAA requests, however, that gas flow for 

any additional nomination cycles should occur at least eight hours prior to the end of the 

Gas Day.83 NGSA commented that it is willing to consider additional intraday 

 81 See, e.g., TVA Response, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 3-4 (filed July 29, 

2013). See also APS Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 7-9 (filed Apr. 19, 2013).

82 INGAA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5 (filed June 26, 2013).

83 INGAA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 6 & n.6 (filed June 26, 2013) 

(noting that such timing would be a “natural extension of the current NAESB nomination 

standards,” and reasoning that because the gas flow for the current Intra-Day 1 cycle is 

one third of the way through the Gas Day, and the gas flow for the Intra-Day 2 cycle is 

halfway through the Gas Day, that is seems logical for gas flow for a third intraday 

opportunity to begin two-thirds of the way through the Gas Day).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 55

nomination cycles provided that (1) the No Bump Rule remains intact for any nomination 

opportunities after the existing Intra-Day 2 cycle; (2) changes in nominations after 

business hours are voluntary and mutually agreeable to all parties to the transaction; 

(3) bumped parties are afforded sufficient time between the pipeline’s confirmation 

deadline and the next nomination deadline to secure alternative supply and transportation 

arrangements; and (4) consideration is given to upstream gas supply limitations and 

producers’ ability to respond to nomination changes.84 NGSA also states that it supports 

individual pipeline efforts to offer enhanced nomination cycles beyond the NAESB 

standardized schedule.

2. Commission Proposal 

63. To address concerns that the current standard, nation-wide intraday nomination 

opportunities do not provide shippers – especially natural gas-fired generators – with 

sufficient flexibility, the Commission proposes to modify the current natural gas

nomination timeline so that in addition to the Timely and Evening nomination cycles, 

shippers will have four intraday cycles to reschedule gas rather than the existing two. 

The additional intraday nomination cycles will maximize shippers’ ability to make 

significant changes in their intraday nominations, as well as provide firm shippers an 

additional, bumpable late-afternoon nomination cycle. These proposed revisions will 

 84 NGSA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 7 (filed July 16, 2013).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 56

provide gas-fired generators as well as other pipeline customers with greater flexibility to 

revise their nominations to adjust to system conditions and changes to load throughout 

the Gas Day. The last change to the standardized intraday nomination schedule occurred 

in 1998, in Order No. 587-G, and with the advancements in computer technology over 

the last 15 years, pipelines today should be able to provide greater nomination 

flexibility.85

64. The timelines we propose below are based on the proposed adoption of 4:00 a.m.

CCT as the start of the Gas Day. The proposed intraday nomination schedules seek to 

preserve a reasonable number of hours between the intraday nomination periods and the 

end of the Gas Day.

86 This will provide shippers with reasonable opportunities to 

reschedule gas based on the amount of contract demand or flow remaining.87 While we 

propose nomination times below, we continue to recognize that the natural gas and 

electricity industries are best positioned to work out the details of how changes in 

 85 Order No. 587-G, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,062 at 30,672. 

86 The Appendix indicates the number of hours remaining in the Gas Day for each 

of the proposed intraday nomination opportunities.

87 As discussed earlier, supra at text accompany n.26, intraday nominations are 

limited by the remainder of a shipper’s daily quantity relative to the remaining hours of 

the Gas Day. Under the current standard nomination timeline, a 4:00 a.m. CCT start of 

the Gas Day would have meant that shippers could only revise their nomination at Intraday 1 for an effective flow time of 5:00 p.m. CCT by less than half of their remaining 

entitlements. Comparatively, under the Commission’s proposed nomination timeline, 

shippers could revise their nomination at Intra-Day 1 for an effective time of 12:00 p.m. 

CCT for up to 66 percent of their entitlements.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 57

scheduling practices can most efficiently be made and implemented, consistent with the 

policies discussed here. NAESB may also consider different approaches to providing 

flexibility.88 The Commission proposes the following new timeline for intraday 

nominations:

• Intra-Day 1. To accommodate the proposed move of the start of the Gas Day 

from 9:00 a.m. CCT to 4:00 a.m. CCT, the proposed Intra-Day 1 cycle 

would provide an early morning opportunity for shippers to nominate gas 

with nominations submitted by 8:00 a.m. CCT and an effective time of 

12:00 p.m. CCT.

• Intra-Day 2. The proposed Intra-Day 2 cycle would replace the current

Intra-Day 1 mid-morning nomination cycle and would permit bumping. We 

propose to move the current deadline for shippers to submit gas nominations 

for delivery the same Gas Day from 10:00 a.m. CCT to 10:30 a.m.

 88 For example, NAESB could consider whether more frequent nominations could 

be accommodated if all parties in the confirmation chain scheduled electronically.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 58

CCT. In addition, nominations would become effective at 4:00 p.m. CCT, rather 

than at 5:00 p.m. under the current standards.

• Intra-Day 3. The proposed Intra-Day 3 cycle would provide an additional 

bumping opportunity for firm shippers, with nominations submitted by 4:00 

p.m. CCT, notice to bumped shippers would be provided at 6:00 p.m. CCT, 

and the nomination would become effective at 7:00 p.m. CCT.

• Intra-Day 4: Intra-Day 4 would replace the current no-bump cycle. We 

propose to move the current nomination deadline from 5:00 p.m. CCT to 

7:00 p.m. CCT, which will provide interruptible shippers bumped during 

the Intra-Day 3 cycle with one hour to reschedule bumped service. The

effective flow time for Intra-Day 4 would be at 9:00 p.m. CCT.89

65. The Commission’s proposal to modify the current intraday nomination timeline to 

provide four intraday nomination cycles, instead of the existing two, will create 

additional national nomination opportunities that would be available to all shippers, not 

just those shipping on interstate pipelines that voluntarily allow more flexible nomination 

opportunities. Thus, the proposal would enhance scheduling flexibility for intraday 

transactions that require transportation on more than one pipeline. Further, the addition 

 89 The Commission at this time is not proposing specific deadlines for upstream 

and downstream pipelines to confirm the nominations for the revised intra-day timeline,

but leaves such determinations to the industry.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 59

of standardized nationwide intraday nomination opportunities should benefit all firm 

shippers and enhance gas-fired generators’ ability to respond to real time events by 

providing additional opportunities for capacity procurement. 

66. The proposed addition of a new Intra-Day 1 early morning cycle is consistent with 

the proposed change to the start of the Gas Day from 9:00 am CCT to 4:00 am CCT. 

Currently, gas flow for Intra-Day 1 starts one-third of the way, or eight hours, into the 

Gas Day.90 We propose to retain that same time span between the newly proposed start 

of the Gas Day and the flow of gas for Intra-Day 1 nominations that will flow that same 

day.

67. We propose to maintain a mid-morning bumpable intraday nomination 

opportunity for shippers that need to respond to forecasted changes in weather or other 

events occurring later than the early morning cycle. We propose to move the nomination 

deadline one half hour later from 10:00 a.m. CCT to 10:30 a.m. CCT and to move the 

effective or gas flow time one hour earlier from 5:00 p.m. CCT to 4:00 p.m. CCT. 

The gas flow time for this proposed Intra-Day 2 Cycle will be half way through the 

proposed 4:00 a.m. to 4:00 a.m. Gas Day, and thus confirmed nominations in our 

proposed Intra-Day 2 Cycle will flow for 12 hours, as under the existing Intra-Day 2 

 90 INGAA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 6 & n.6 (filed June 26, 2013).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 60

Cycle.91 We are proposing that nominations for this intraday cycle be submitted by 10:30 

a.m., in order to give pipelines two and a half hours to confirm those nominations before 

the 1:00 p.m. deadline for day-ahead nominations to be submitted in the Timely 

Nomination Cycle.

68. The new proposed late-afternoon Intra-Day 3 cycle that permits bumping will 

provide firm shippers, including gas-fired generators, with greater ability to use the 

reserved firm service for which they are paying. Under the Commission’s current 

regulations, pipelines must give scheduling priority to an intraday nomination submitted 

by a firm shipper over nominated and scheduled volumes for interruptible shippers.92 

The ability of firm shippers to make the most use of the service for which they pay a 

monthly reservation charge is compromised by their inability to bump interruptible 

service after the current Intra-Day 1 nomination cycle. Over the last fifteen years, 

pipelines have increasingly held firm shippers to much stricter tolerances on gas flow, so 

that firm shippers may need additional intraday nomination opportunities to maintain 

 91 Consistent with INGAA’s comments, the Commission proposes to adjust the 

Intra-Day 1 and Intra-Day 2 nomination cycles so that they remain eight and twelve hours 

after the start of the proposed gas flow day. See INGAA Comments, Docket No. AD12-

12-000, at 5 (filed June 26, 2013).

92 18 CFR 284.12(b)(1)(i)(A) (2013). Because we are proposing to include in the 

regulations the standard nomination cycles which specify when interruptible shippers’ 

scheduled quantities can and cannot be reduced, the first sentence of section 

284.12(b)(1)(i)(A) to which the text refers is no longer necessary and we propose to 

remove it. 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 61

flow rates.93 Pipelines also have increasingly held gas-fired generators’ natural gas 

transportation nominations to much stricter tolerances.94 In light of these changes, the 

additional bumping nomination opportunity will help gas-fired generators with firm 

service, and other firm shippers, realign their nominations in accord with weather or other 

operational changes within the Gas Day. West Coast shippers, in particular, are unable 

under the current standards to use their firm service to adjust to system conditions and 

load changes by making an intraday nomination after 8:00 a.m. Pacific Time if such 

nomination would bump scheduled interruptible service. The proposed new Intra-Day 3

cycle, which is a 4:00 p.m. CCT late-afternoon bump cycle, should provide firm shippers, 

even those on the West Coast, with sufficient time to react to revised weather forecasts 

and other demand changes and schedule needed quantities. Under this proposal, 

pipelines would provide notice of bumping to affected shippers at 6:00 p.m. CCT, and the 

nominations would become effective at 7:00 p.m. CCT. 

69. The proposed Intra-Day 4 cycle will provide interruptible shippers with an

opportunity to reschedule bumped volumes after notice of bumping in the new proposed 

 93 See El Paso Natural Gas Co., 114 FERC ¶ 61,305, at P 29 (2006). 

94 See, e.g., Trailblazer Pipeline Co. LLC, 143 FERC ¶ 61,084 (2013) 

(Commission approved enhanced nomination service requiring electronic flow 

measurement and flow control facilities). See also Texas Gas Transmission Corp., 

Docket No. CP82-407-000, 2002 Annual Report of Blanket Certificate Activities, 

http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/common/opennat.asp?fileID=10463248. 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 62

Intra-Day 3 cycle.95 The deadline for submitting nominations in the Intra-Day 4 cycle 

would be at 7:00 p.m. CCT, one hour after notice of bumping in the Intra-Day 3 cycle. 

As NGSA maintains, and as the Commission has previously recognized, interruptible 

shippers need some stability in the nomination system. In Order No. 587-G, the 

Commission accepted a consensus of the gas industry, including both firm and 

interruptible shippers, and accepted standards that provide that the last intraday 

nomination opportunity would not permit bumping of interruptible service. In adopting 

this standard, the Commission recognized that making the last intraday nomination 

opportunity no-bump would provide stability to the nomination system.96 We continue to 

recognize that such stability is needed, and the proposed intraday nomination schedule 

we outline here is intended to provide a reasonable balance between the interests of firm 

and interruptible shippers. Maintaining the No-Bump Rule during the proposed IntraDay 4 cycle will provide such assurances for interruptible shippers, while allowing 

 95 See Texas Gas Transmission, LLC, 137 FERC ¶ 61,093 (2011), order on 

compliance, 138 FERC ¶ 61,176 (2012) (Texas Gas) (accepting one hour advance notice 

to bumped interruptible shippers).

96 Standards for Business Practices of Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines, Order 

No. 587-G, (Apr. 23, 1998), FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles July 1996 –

Debember 2000 ¶ 31,062 (1998), order on rehg, Order No. 587-I, 63 FR 53565, 53569 

(Oct. 6, 1998), FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles July 1996 – December 2000

¶ 31,067 (1998).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 63

bumping during the proposed new Intra-Day 3 cycle will permit firm shippers to utilize 

the higher priority service for which they are paying.

70. In summary, given the proposed 4:00 a.m. start of the Gas Day, our proposed 

schedule for four intraday nomination opportunities appears to provide a reasonable 

balance between the interests of firm and interruptible shippers. The 4:00 p.m. CCT lateafternoon bump cycle should provide firm shippers, even those on the West Coast, with 

sufficient time to react to revised weather forecasts and other demand changes. 

Interruptible shippers will be provided with advance notice and an opportunity to 

reschedule bumped volumes, as is the case under the current standards.

97 However, as 

indicated above, the industry should consider these proposals and determine if they can 

reach consensus on revisions that they believe better fit the business practices of the 

industries.

E. Clarification Regarding the “No-Bump” Rule for Pipelines with 

Enhanced Nomination Services

71. As we have stated before, the NAESB nomination timelines establish only the 

minimum requirements, and pipelines may propose additional nomination opportunities 

that better fit their own system needs.98 Many pipelines have implemented enhanced 

 97 See Texas Gas, 138 FERC ¶ 61,176 (accepting one hour advance notice to 

bumped interruptible shippers).

98 Standards for Business Practices for Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines; 

Standards for Business Practices for Public Utilities, Order No. 698, FERC Stats. 

 (continued ...)
Docket No. RM14-2-000 64

nomination services for firm shippers, providing shippers additional nomination 

opportunities. Some pipelines specifically developed these services to provide gas-fired 

generation with the ability to effectuate gas deliveries quickly to meet changing demand 

throughout the Gas Day while managing such things as weather changes and the variable 

nature of renewable supply sources.

99 Other pipelines provide more than the current four 

standard nomination times for all shippers.100

72. The current NAESB WGQ Standard 1.3.2 provides that bumping is not allowed 

during the Intraday 2 Nomination Cycle. In Texas Gas Transmission, LLC, the 

Commission accepted an enhanced nomination schedule with eleven additional 

nominations that permits interruptible shippers to be bumped until the nomination 

deadline for the Intra-Day 2 cycle (currently 5:00 p.m. CCT), but provided preliminary 

notice of bumping prior to 5:00 p.m. and permitted any bumped shipper to renominate 

bumped volumes at the 6:00 p.m. CCT enhanced nomination cycle or any of the 

subsequent enhanced nomination cycles.101

 

& Regs. ¶ 31,251, at P 69 (2007).

99 See Texas Gas, 138 FERC ¶ 61,176 at P 4.

100 See e.g. Texas Eastern Transmission LP Tariff, 4.1, Scheduling of Storage and 

Transportation Services, 1.0.0 (flexible intraday nominations), Tennessee Gas Pipeline 

Tariff, Fourth Revised Sheet No. 313 (hourly nomination changes).

101 Texas Gas, 137 FERC ¶ 61,093, order on compliance, 138 FERC ¶ 61,176; 

Gulf South Pipeline Co. LP, 141 FERC ¶ 61,262 (2012).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 65

73. Participants at the conferences noted that the interaction of these enhanced 

nomination services with the No-Bump Rule was not clear. We provide clarification 

below as to how the Commission policy would be implemented under the proposals in 

this NOPR. Under the current NAESB WGQ standards and the Texas Gas policy,

pipelines may propose to bump shippers up to 5:00 p.m. CCT as long as they provide 

notice and renomination opportunities similar to those accepted in Texas Gas. Under the 

revised intraday nomination timelines proposed here, the Commission believes that 

pipelines offering enhanced nomination services should be permitted to bump 

interruptible shippers at least until the time when the bumping notice under the newly 

proposed Intra-Day 3 schedule is provided (in the Commission’s proposal 6:00 p.m. 

CCT). The proposed Intra-Day 4 nomination cycle would guarantee that any bumped 

interruptible shipper will have an opportunity to renominate its bumped volumes at 

7:00 p.m. If a pipeline proposes enhanced nomination services that permit bumping of 

interruptible services after 6:00 p.m., the Commission will consider the proposal on a 

case-by-case basis to determine whether such proposal provides an adequate subsequent 

opportunity to renominate any bumped volumes. 

74. In addition, an issue has arisen with respect to the interaction of enhanced 

nominations and WGQ Standard 1.3.39, which provides that bumping affecting 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 66

transactions on pipelines will occur at grid-wide synchronization times only.102 Some of 

the pipelines offering enhanced nomination services would have been unable to offer 

such enhanced nomination services if they could not reduce the gas flow of the bumped 

interruptible shipper on the same schedule as they increase flow for the firm shippers.103 

These proposals conflicted with Standard 1.3.39 because they would have permitted all 

interruptible shippers to be bumped at other than grid-wide nomination periods. In these 

circumstances, the Commission accepted proposals (and granted waivers of Standard 

1.3.39) to permit bumping of interruptible shippers at other than grid-wide nomination 

times when the pipelines have proposed alternative opportunities for interruptible 

shippers to renominate bumped volumes at the enhanced nomination periods.104

75. The Commission finds the continuation of this approach with respect to enhanced 

nomination proposals by pipelines reasonably balances the interest of firm and 

interruptible customers by permitting the firm shippers to utilize the rights for which they 

pay reservation charges and by permitting interruptible shippers to renominate bumped 

 102 Under the current NAESB system, the daily grid-wide synchronization times 

for scheduled flow are 9:00 a.m. CCT, 5:00 p.m. CCT, and 9:00 p.m. CCT. Standard 

1.3.41.

103 See Texas Gas, 137 FERC ¶ 61,093, order on compliance, 138 FERC 

¶ 61,176; Gulf South, 141 FERC ¶ 61,262.

104 See ANR Pipeline Co., 145 FERC ¶ 61,089 (2013); Gulf South, 141 FERC 

¶ 61,262 at P 33; Trans-Union Interstate Pipeline L.P, et al., 141 FERC ¶ 61,167, at 

P 41 (2012) (granting waiver to Texas Gas Transmission LLC).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 67

volumes as quickly as possible. NAESB should consider revisions to Standard 1.3.39 

and Standard 1.3.41 to reflect these policies to alleviate the need for pipelines to seek 

waiver or make other filings regarding Standard 1.3.39.105

F. Multi-Party Transportation Contracts

76. The Commission is also proposing to revise its regulations to require pipelines 

to offer multi-party transportation contracts, under which multiple shippers can share 

interstate natural gas pipeline capacity under a single service agreement. While some 

pipelines already offer this option, the Commission does not currently require pipelines 

to do so. Companies have indicated that providing more flexibility to shippers to use 

their capacity, such as by allowing multiple parties to share transportation service, might 

permit more efficient and effective use of transportation capacity. 

77. The Commission’s regulations require that all transfers of firm pipeline capacity 

from one shipper to another shipper take place pursuant to the capacity release program 

in section 284.8 of our regulations to assure that such capacity transfers are transparent 

and not unduly discriminatory.106 Utilizing capacity release to effectuate sharing of 

 105 Until such changes are adopted by the Commission, pipelines intending that 

firm shippers be able to bump interruptible service during enhanced nomination periods 

must include in their tariff filings a revision to their incorporation by reference of the 

NAESB standards indicating that this standard is not incorporated.

106 See Pipeline Service Obligations and Revisions to Regulations Governing SelfImplementing Transportation and Regulation of Natural Gas Pipeline After Partial 

Wellhead Decontrol, Order No. 636, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,939, at 30,416-20, order 

 (continued ...)
Docket No. RM14-2-000 68

capacity between entities makes sharing of capacity less efficient due to the need to 

comply with the capacity release posting and bidding requirements as well as the need for 

the replacement shipper to enter into a contract with the pipeline for each release. In 

recent years, however, the Commission has accepted several pipeline proposals to offer 

multiple shippers the option of entering into a single contract for transportation service, 

with a single agent or asset manager managing the capacity under the contract. 107 As 

approved by the Commission, this option permits several shippers to share the subject 

capacity without the need to use the capacity release program to transfer the capacity 

among themselves. In order to satisfy the Commission’s shipper-must-have-title policy, 

the pipelines proposed, and the Commission accepted, tariff provisions ensuring that each 

 

on reh'g, Order No. 636-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,950, at 30,554 (1992). See also

Regulation of Short-Term Natural Gas Transportation Services and Regulation of 

Interstate Natural Gas Transportation Services, Order No. 637, FERC Stats. & Regs. 

¶ 31,091, at 31,300 (2000).

107 Southern Natural Gas Co., 124 FERC ¶ 61,145 (2008) (pipeline modified Rate 

Schedule FT to allow a single contract option for multiple shippers affiliated with a single 

agent or asset manager); Florida Gas Transmission Co., LLC, 128 FERC ¶ 61,284 

(2009), order on compliance filing, Docket No. RP09-922-001 (Nov. 17, 2009)

(delegated letter order) (pipeline modified provisions of Rate Schedules FT and IT to 

allow a single contract option for multiple shippers that have designated a single agent on 

their behalf); Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp., Docket No. RP10-1099-000 (Sept. 

14, 2010) (delegated letter order) (pipeline modified provisions of Rate Schedules IT, 

PAL and Pooling, and ICTS to allow a single contract option for multiple shippers that 

have designated a single agent on their behalf); Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co., L.L.C., 

142 FERC ¶ 61,200 (2013) (pipeline modified provisions of Rate Schedules FT, IT and 

PAL to allow a single contract option for multiple shippers that have designated a single 

agent on their behalf). 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 69

shipper under a multi-party service agreement agree to be jointly and severally liable for 

all obligations of all shippers and the agent under the single service agreement. 108 The 

Commission has permitted multi-party transactions even when the shippers under such an 

agreement are not affiliated with one another.109 

78. This contracting flexibility has been utilized by entities to meet their collective 

load obligations in a more efficient manner. For example, certain affiliated utilities of 

Southern Company, which have long operated as an integrated public utility electric 

system through the joint commitment and economic dispatch of their gas-fired generating 

resources, have entered into a single interstate natural gas pipeline transportation service 

agreement, with Southern Company Services (their affiliated agent) arranging for the gas 

supplies used in their generating facilities.110 Under this single transportation service 

agreement, on any given day Southern Company Services can use up to its overall 

 108 See, e.g., Southern, 124 FERC ¶ 61,145 at P 12. As the Commission explained, 

multi-party agreements must include joint and several liability to comply with the 

Commission’s shipper-must-have-title policy. Without joint and several liability, 

shippers under the multi-party agreement that are not liable for the total charges under the 

agreement would be in violation of the Commission’s shipper-must-have-title policy to 

the extent they used capacity in excess of that for which they were liable to pay.

109 See, e.g., Florida Gas Transmission Co., LLC, 126 FERC ¶ 61,055 (2009).

110 See, e.g., Southern Natural Gas Co., Transmittal, Docket No. RP01-205-016 

(May 14, 2009); Southern, 124 FERC ¶ 61,145. The affiliates were Alabama Power 

Company, Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, Mississippi Power 

Company, Savannah Electric and Power Company and Southern Power Company.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 70

contractual entitlement under the service agreement to provide service to any one of its 

affiliated utilities.

79. The use of shared capacity can make the purchase of firm pipeline capacity more 

affordable, including for gas-fired generators. For example, a gas-fired generator could 

decide to defray its pipeline capacity costs by sharing capacity among a number of 

generators or by sharing capacity with a LDC that has differing peak needs for natural 

gas transportation service. Similarly, an industrial plant, which has a relatively constant 

need for gas when its plant is operating but which has the flexibility to reduce its 

operations and gas usage on relatively short notice, could arrange to share its capacity 

with another shipper, such as a gas-fired generator, which only needs gas during short 

intervals and which has less control over when it runs. Permitting such entities to enter 

into a single contract with the pipeline gives those entities the flexibility to choose 

contracting partners with complementary needs for pipeline capacity and to enter into 

an ongoing contractual relationship concerning how they will share the capacity.

80. In order to provide this contracting flexibility to shippers on all interstate 

pipelines, the Commission proposes to revise Part 284 of its regulations to require 

interstate natural gas pipelines that offer firm transportation service under subpart B or G 

of Part 284 to allow multiple shippers associated with a designated agent or asset 

manager to be jointly and severally liable under a single firm transportation service 

agreement, subject to reasonable terms and conditions. Consistent with the multi-party 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 71

contract tariff provisions the Commission has previously approved, such reasonable 

terms and conditions may include requirements that (1) the shippers and agent 

demonstrate their agency relationship in writing and (2) the shippers are willing to be 

treated collectively as one shipper for nomination, allocation, and billing purposes under 

the contract.

81. The Commission proposes only to require pipelines to offer multi-party service 

agreements for firm service, because a primary benefit of such service agreements is the 

fact they permit parties to share firm capacity without the need to engage in capacity 

releases. However, we recognize that some pipelines currently offer multi-party service 

agreements to interruptible, as well as firm customers. The Commission requests 

comment on whether the Commission should require pipelines to offer multi-party 

service agreements for interruptible transportation service.

III. Notice of Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards

82. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-119 (section 11 (February 10, 1998) 

provides that federal agencies should publish a request for comment in a NOPR when the 

agency is proposing to use a government-unique standard in lieu of a voluntary consensus 

standard, provide a statement which identifies such standards and provides a preliminary 

explanation for the proposed use of a government-unique standard in lieu of a voluntary 

consensus standard. While the Commission previously has adopted NAESB standards 

regarding natural gas and electric utility scheduling, NAESB has thus far been unable to 

reach consensus on standards coordinating the scheduling between these two industries 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 72

because these issues involve policy questions more appropriate for resolution by the 

Commission.111 In this NOPR, the Commission is proposing, and seeking comment on 

whether, revisions to the NAESB standards are necessary to provide more efficient 

coordination between the two industries to reduce costs and to promote the provision of 

reliable service. However, the Commission is providing NAESB an opportunity, as it has 

in the past, to consider these policy goals and develop consensus standards that may 

better fit the business practices of the two industries.

IV. Information Collection Statement

83. The following collections of information contained in this proposed rule are being 

submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review under section 

3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507(d). The Commission 

solicits comments on the Commission's need for this information, whether the 

information will have practical utility, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected, and any 

suggested methods for minimizing respondents' burden, including the use of automated 

information techniques. The burden estimates are for one-time implementation of the 

 111 North American Energy Standards Board, Gas-Electric Harmonization 

Committee Report, at 4 (September 2012) (“although this Committee has identified 

discrete areas where standards could be considered, the Committee recognizes that the 

ability of NAESB to reach consensus on certain standards may not be possible absent 

further policy guidance by regulators or other appropriate public bodies”).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 73

information collection requirements of this NOPR (including tariff filing, documentation 

of the process and procedures, and IT work), and ongoing burden.

84. The collections of information related to this NOPR fall under FERC–545 (Gas 

Pipeline Rates: Rate Change (Non-Formal)) 112 and FERC–549C (Standards for Business 

Practices of Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines). 113 The following estimates of reporting 

burden are related only to this NOPR and anticipate the costs to pipelines for compliance 

with the Commission’s proposals to (1) move the start of the Natural Gas Operating Day 

earlier than the current 9:00 a.m. CCT, (2) start the first day-ahead gas nomination 

opportunity (Timely Nomination Cycle) later than 11:30 a.m. CCT, (3) add additional 

intraday nominations, and (4) allow multiple shippers to share pipeline capacity under a 

single firm transportation service agreement. The burden estimates are for one-time tariff 

filing, implementation, and on-going costs.

Public Reporting Burden:

 112 FERC-545 covers rate change filings made by natural gas pipelines, including 

tariff changes.

113 FERC-549C covers Standards for Business Practices of Interstate Natural Gas 

Pipelines.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 74

NOPR in RM14-2

Number 

of 

Responde

nts 114

(1)

Number of 

Responses 

per 

Responden

t

(2)

Average 

Burden 

Hours Per 

Response

(3)

Total 

Annual 

Burden 

Hours

(1)x(2)x(3)

Total Annual 

Cost ($)115

FERC-545 (OMB Control No. 1902-0154)

Tariff Filing 

(one-time)116 166 1 10 1,660 $138,892

FERC-549C (OMB Control No. 1902-0174)

 114 An estimated 166 natural gas pipelines (Part 284 program) are affected by this 

NOPR. Although some natural gas pipeline companies may utilize business practices 

that satisfy parts of the proposals in this NOPR (e.g., provide additional nomination 

opportunities), the full cost of industry compliance is estimated for the total number of 

approximately 166 potential respondents.

115 Wage data is based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics data for 2012 (“May 2012 

National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates, [for] Sector 

22 - Utilities” at http://bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm) and is compiled for the top 10 

percent earned. For the estimate of the benefits component, see

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm.

116 The mean hourly cost of tariff filings and implementation for interstate natural 

gas pipelines is $83.67. This represents the average composite wage (salary and benefits 

for 2,080 annual work-hours) of the following occupational categories: “Legal” ($128.02 

per hour), “Computer Analyst” ($83.50 per hour), and “Office and Administrative” 

($39.49 per hour). Wage data is available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics at 

http://bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm and is compiled for the top 10 percent earned. 

For the estimate of the benefits component, see

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 75

Implementatio

n of proposed 

business 

standards, 

including 

process, 

procedures, 

and IT support 

(one-time)117 166 1 240 39,840 $3,071,664 

Annual 

operations, 

including 2 

additional 

intraday 

nominations 

(ongoing) 118 166 1 365 60,590 $4,268,566

Total onetime (for 

FERC-545 

and FERC549C) 41,500 $3,210,556

Total ongoing 

(for FERC549C) 60,590 $4,268,566

 117 The average hourly cost is $77.10. This represents the average composite wage 

(salary and benefits for 2,080 annual work-hours) of the following occupational 

categories: “Legal” ($128.02 per hour), “Computer Analyst” ($83.50 per hour), “Gas 

Plant Operator” ($57.40) and “Office and Administrative” ($39.49 per hour). 

118 For ongoing operations, we estimate 1 hour per calendar day per respondent (or 

365 hours annually per respondent). The average hourly cost is $70.45. This represents 

the average composite wage (salary and benefits for 2,080 annual work-hours) of the 

following occupational categories: “Computer Analyst” ($83.50 per hour), and “Gas 

Plant Operator” ($57.40).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 76

Information Collection Costs: The Commission seeks comments on the costs to comply 

with these requirements. We estimate the total costs for all respondents to be:

• Year 1 (including the one-time tariff-filing, and implementation and 

ongoing costs) ): $7,479,122 

• Years 2 and 3, each (ongoing costs only): $4,268,566

Title: FERC-545, Gas Pipeline Rates: Rates Change (Non-Formal); and

FERC-549C, Standards for Business Practices of Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines.

Action: Proposed revisions to information collections.

OMB Control Nos.: 1902-0154 and 1902-0174. 

Respondents: Business or other for profit enterprise (Natural Gas Pipelines). 

Frequency of Responses: One-time filing and implementation and ongoing.

Necessity of Information: The proposals in this NOPR would, if implemented, upgrade 

the industry’s current business practices by specifically: (1) creating or revising 

standards to start the natural gas operating day earlier than the current 9:00 a.m. CCT; 

(2) creating or revising standards to delay the start of the first day-ahead gas nomination 

opportunity for pipeline scheduling until after 11:30 a.m. CCT; (3) creating or revising 

standards to add two additional intraday nomination cycles in the afternoon and evening, 

and (4) allow multiple shippers to share pipeline capacity under a single firm 

transportation service agreement. 

The implementation of these standards and regulations will promote additional efficiency 

and reliability of the gas industry’s operations.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 77

Internal Review: The Commission has reviewed the requirements pertaining to business 

practices of natural gas pipelines and made a preliminary determination that the proposed 

revisions are necessary to establish more efficient coordination between the natural gas 

and electric industries. Requiring such information ensures common business practices 

for participants engaged in the sale of electric energy at wholesale and the transportation 

of natural gas. These requirements conform to the Commission's plan for efficient 

information collection, communication, and management within the natural gas pipeline 

industry. The Commission has assured itself, by means of its internal review, that there is 

specific, objective support for the burden estimates associated with the information 

requirements.

85. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting requirements by 

contacting the following: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, 

Washington, DC 20426 [Attention: Ellen Brown, Office of the Executive Director, 

e-mail: DataClearance@ferc.gov, phone: (202) 502-8663, fax: (202) 273-0873].

86. Comments concerning the collections of information and the associated burden 

estimates, should be sent to the Commission and to the Office of Management and 

Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20503 

[Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, telephone: 

(202) 395-4638, fax: (202) 395-4718]. For security reasons, comments to OMB should 

be submitted by e-mail to: oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. Comments submitted to 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 78

OMB should include Docket Number RM14-2-000 and OMB Control Numbers 1902-

0154 and 1902-0174.

V. Environmental Analysis

87. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental Assessment or an 

Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may have a significant adverse effect 

on the human environment.119 [Insert whether the action has been categorically excluded 

from EA/EIS, 18 CFR § 380.4 or if the Commission has done an EA/EIS, explain 

findings.]

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Certification

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA)120 88. generally requires a description 

and analysis of proposed rules that will have significant economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The RFA mandates consideration of regulatory alternatives that 

accomplish the stated objectives of a rule and that minimize any significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Small Business Administration's 

(SBA) Office of Size Standards develops the numerical definition of a small business as 

 119 Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act, Order No. 

486, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 1986-

1990 ¶ 30,783 (1987).

120 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 79

matched to North American Industry Classification System Codes (NAICS).121 The 

SBA has established a size standard for pipelines transporting natural gas, stating that a 

firm is a small entity if its annual receipts are less than $25.5 million.122

Approximately 166 interstate pipeline entities are potential respondents subject to the 

NOPR reporting requirements. For the year 2012, eleven companies unaffiliated with 

larger companies had annual revenues of less than $25.5 million (7 percent of 166 

potential respondents) and are defined by the SBA as “small entities.” The Commission 

anticipates that the estimated compliance cost of the proposals in this NOPR is 

$7,479,122 (or $45,055 per entity) in Year 1 (one-time and ongoing costs), and 

$4,268,566 (or $25,714 per entity) in Years 2 and 3 (ongoing cost), regardless of entity 

size. The Commission does not consider the estimated impact per company to be 

significant. Adoption of consensus standards helps ensure the reasonableness of the 

standards by requiring that the standards draw support from a broad spectrum of industry 

participants representing all segments of the industry. 

Accordingly, pursuant to § 605(b) of the RFA,123 89. the regulations proposed herein 

should not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

 121 13 CFR 121.101.

122 13 CFR 121.201, subsection 486. 

123 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
Docket No. RM14-2-000 80

VII. Comment Procedures

90. The Commission invites interested persons to submit comments on the matters and 

issues proposed in this notice to be adopted, including any related matters or alternative 

proposals that commenters may wish to discuss. Comments are due [INSERT DATE 

240 days after publication in the FEDERAL REGISTER]. As noted above, on this 

date commenters should submit comments on any consensus proposals that may result 

from the 180-day period provided to the industries to address these matters and issues 

through NAESB, as well as comments on the Commission’s proposals. Comments must 

refer to Docket No.RM14-2-000, and must include the commenter's name, the 

organization they represent, if applicable, and their address in their comments.

91. The Commission encourages comments to be filed electronically via the eFiling 

link on the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.gov. The Commission accepts 

most standard word processing formats. Documents created electronically using word 

processing software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not 

in a scanned format. Commenters filing electronically do not need to make a paper 

filing.

92. Commenters that are not able to file comments electronically must send an 

original of their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the 

Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.

93. All comments will be placed in the Commission's public files and may be viewed, 

printed, or downloaded remotely as described in the Document Availability section 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 81

below. Commenters on this proposal are not required to serve copies of their comments 

on other commenters.

VIII. Document Availability

94. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the Federal Register, the 

Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the 

contents of this document via the Internet through the Commission's Home Page 

(http://www.ferc.gov) and in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal 

business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street, NE, Room 2A, 

Washington DC 20426.

95. From the Commission's Home Page on the Internet, this information is available 

on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on eLibrary in PDF and 

Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or downloading. To access this 

document in eLibrary, type the docket number excluding the last three digits of this 

document in the docket number field.

96. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission’s website during 

normal business hours from the Commission’s Online Support at 202-502-6652 (toll free 

at 1-866-208-3676) or email at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the Public Reference 

Room at (202) 502-8371, TTY (202) 502-8659. E-mail the Public Reference Room 

at public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 82

List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 284

Natural gas

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements

By direction of the Commission. Commissioner Clark is dissenting with a separate 

 statement attached.

( S E A L )

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,

Deputy Secretary.
Docket No. RM14-2-000 83

In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission proposes to amend Part 284, 

Chapter I, Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows.

PART 284 – CERTAIN SALES AND TRANSPORTATION OF NATURAL GAS 

UNDER THE NATURAL GAS POLICY ACT OF 1978 AND RELATED 

AUTHORITIES

1. The authority citation for Part 284 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717-717z, 3301-3432; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352; 43 U.S.C. 

1331-1356.

2. In § 284.12, paragraph (a)(1)(ii) is revised to read as follows:

(a) ***

(1) ***

(ii) Nominations Related Standards (Version 2.0, November 30, 2010, with Minor 

Corrections Applied Through December 2, 2011), with the exception of Standards 1.3.1, 

1.3.2, and 1.3.41;

* * * * *

3. In § 284.12, revise paragraph (b)(1)(i), redesignate paragraph (b)(1)(ii) as 

paragraph (b)(1)(iv) and add new paragraphs (b)(1)(ii), (b)(1)(iii), and b(1)(v) to read as 

follows:

(b) ***

(1) ***

(i) Standard time for the gas day should be 4 a.m. to 4 a.m. (central clock time or 

CCT).

(ii) A pipeline must support the following standard nomination cycles (all times 

are central clock time):

(A) Timely Nomination Cycle. The deadline for shippers to submit gas 

nominations to a pipeline for delivery the next gas day is 1:00 p.m.; the pipeline must 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 84

provide notice to shippers of scheduled quantities by 4:30 p.m.; and scheduled quantities 

for the Timely Nomination Cycle shall be effective for flow at 4:00 a.m. on the next gas 

day.

(B) Evening Nomination Cycle. The deadline for shippers to submit gas 

nominations to a pipeline for delivery the next gas day is 6:00 p.m.; the pipeline must 

provide notice to shippers of scheduled quantities and provide notice to interruptible 

shippers whose scheduled quantities will be reduced by an Evening Nomination by a firm 

shipper by 10:00 p.m.; and scheduled quantities for the Evening Nomination Cycle shall 

be effective for flow at 4:00 a.m. on the next gas day.

(C) Intraday 1. The deadline for shippers to submit gas nominations to a 

pipeline for delivery the same gas day is 8:00 a.m.; the pipeline must provide notice to 

shippers of scheduled quantities and provide notice to interruptible shippers whose 

scheduled quantities will be reduced by an Intraday 1 Nomination by a firm shipper by 

11:00 a.m.; and scheduled quantities for the Intraday 1 Nomination Cycle shall become 

effective for flow at 12:00 p.m. the same gas day.

(D) Intraday 2. The deadline for shippers to submit gas nominations to a 

pipeline for delivery the same gas day is 10:30 a.m.; the pipeline must provide notice to 

shippers of scheduled quantities and provide notice to interruptible shippers whose 

scheduled quantities will be reduced by an Intraday 2 Nomination by a firm shipper by 

2:00 p.m.; and scheduled quantities for the Intraday 2 Nomination Cycle shall become 

effective for flow at 4:00 p.m. the same gas day.

(E) Intraday 3. The deadline for shippers to submit gas nominations to a 

pipeline for delivery the same gas day is 4:00 p.m.; the pipeline must provide notice to 

shippers of scheduled quantities and provide notice to interruptible shippers whose 

scheduled quantities will be reduced by an Intraday 3 Nomination by a firm shipper by 

6:00 p.m.; and scheduled quantities for the Intraday 3 Nomination Cycle shall become 

effective for flow at 7:00 p.m. the same gas day. 

(F) Intraday 4. The deadline for shippers to submit gas nominations to a 

pipeline for delivery the same gas day is 7:00 p.m.; the pipeline must provide notice to 

shippers of scheduled quantities by 9:00 p.m.; and scheduled quantities for the Intraday 4 

Nomination Cycle shall become effective for flow at 9:00 p.m. the same gas day. An 

interruptible shipper’s scheduled quantities cannot be reduced as a result of an Intraday 4 

Nomination by a firm shipper.

 (iii) When an interruptible shipper's scheduled volumes are to be reduced as a 
Docket No. RM14-2-000 85

result of an intraday nomination by a firm shipper, the interruptible shipper must be 

provided with advance notice of such reduction and must be notified whether penalties 

will apply on the day its volumes are reduced.

(iv) ***

(v) A pipeline must allow multiple shippers associated with a designated agent or 

asset manager to be jointly and severally liable under a single firm transportation service 

agreement, subject to reasonable terms and conditions.

* * * * *
Docket No. RM14-2-000 86

Note: The following appendix will not appear in the Code of Federal 

Regulations

APPENDIX. 

Nomination 

Cycle

Nomination 

Deadline 

(CCT)

Notification 

of Schedule

Nomination 

Effective 

(CCT)

Bumping 

of IT

Hours 

Until 

End of 

Gas 

Day

Maximum 

% Change 

in 

Nomination

Timely 1:00 p.m. 4:30 p.m. 4:00 a.m. 

Next Day

N/A 24 100%

Evening 6:00 p.m. 10:00 p.m. 4:00 a.m. 

Next Day

Yes 24 100%

Intra-Day 1 8:00 a.m. 11:00 a.m. 12:00 p.m. 

Current Day

Yes 16 ~66%

Intra-Day 2 10:30 a.m. 2:00 p.m. 4:00 p.m. 

Current Day

Yes 12 50%

Intra-Day 3 4:00 p.m. 6:00 p.m. 7:00 p.m. 

Current Day

Yes 9 37.5%

Intra-Day 4 7:00 p.m. 9:00 p.m. 9:00 p.m. 

Current Day

No 7 ~29.2%
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Coordination of the Scheduling Processes of Interstate 

Natural Gas Pipelines and Public Utilities

Docket No. RM14-2-000

(Issued March 20, 2014)

CLARK, Commissioner, dissenting:

My dissent from today’s order stems from factors related to both its timing and its 

process going forward. 

For the past several months, a number of groups have been organizing efforts to develop 

a framework that might ultimately lead to a gas-electric industry consensus proposal. While 

the success of these efforts is no sure thing, I would have preferred that we give industry more 

time. A firm deadline of perhaps another 3-4 months should have been sufficient to determine 

whether these efforts stood any chance of success. The downside risk of giving these groups 

more time seems small considering that the timeline envisioned in this order still puts the 

proposed solutions in place after next winter. Even if industry-led efforts failed, the 

Commission would still have had enough time to put forward a proposal similar to this in time 

for the winter of 2015-16. I fear that by releasing this NOPR now, we are doing a disservice to 

those involved in industry-led efforts, by giving them just enough time to get started, but also 

ensuring they do not have enough time to complete their work. In retrospect, if the 

Commission was not fully supportive of giving these groups until the middle of this year to 

complete discussions, we should have saved everyone the hassle and simply issued a NOPR 

months ago.

My second concern is related to a concurrent NAESB process the Commission proposes 

simultaneous to this NOPR. As a consensus-driven organization, NAESB is dependent on all 

parties having a reason to negotiate and compromise upon sometimes difficult technical issues 

in which there are vested interests. I worry this effort may be less-than-fruitful now that the 

Commission has already set out its marker and put its thumb on the scale. Parties that might 

have had an interest in negotiating in good faith may see little reason to do so if they feel like 

they will ultimately get from this Commission most of what they wanted in the first place. We 

have effectively short-circuited any chance for industry to collaborate or compromise in the 

spirit of true negotiation, perhaps consigning the NAESB process to the same fate we have 

now given to other consensus-driven efforts.

For these reasons, I respectfully dissent.

________________________

Tony Clark

Commissioner