[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 51 (Wednesday, March 18, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11539-11540]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-5776]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM08-2-001]


Pipeline Posting Requirements Under Section 23 of the Natural Gas 
Act; Notice of Agenda for Technical Conference

March 11, 2009.
    On February 24, 2009, the Commission issued a Notice of Technical 
Conference (February 24 Notice), to be held March 18, 2009, in the 
above referenced proceeding. The technical conference is being held by 
staff for the purpose of discussing certain issues raised in the 
requests for rehearing filed in response to Order No. 720.\1\ As stated 
in the February 24 Notice, the technical conference will be held at the 
headquarters of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First 
Street, NE., Washington, DC, from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. (EDT).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Pipeline Posting Requirements under Section 23 of the 
Natural Gas Act, Order No. 720, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,281 (2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Attached is an agenda for the March 18, 2009, technical conference. 
The February 24 Notice identified three topics for discussion: (1) The 
definition of major non-interstate pipelines; (2) what constitutes 
``scheduling'' for a receipt or delivery point; and, (3) how the 15,000 
MMBtu per day design capacity threshold should be applied. As reflected 
in the attached agenda, Panel 1 will address the first topic, with a 
focus on contiguous and non-contiguous networks, stub lines and other 
gathering issues; Panel 2 will address the second and third topics, 
with a focus on how pipeline systems account for high capacity receipt 
and delivery points (i.e., greater than 15,000 MMBtu per day) where 
scheduling does not occur; and, Panel 3 will focus on estimating the 
cost of compliance with Order No. 720.
    This conference will be transcribed. There is no registration 
required to attend and no registration fee. For additional information, 
please contact Saida Shaalan of FERC's Office of Enforcement at (202) 
502-8278 or by e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#287b49414c49067b404949444946684e4d5a4b064f475e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d281b3bbb6b3fc81bab3b3beb3bc92b4b7a0b1fcb5bda4">[email protected]</span></a>.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.

Agenda for Technical Conference

Order No. 720 Rehearing Issues Technical Conference RM08-02-001

March 18, 2009
Commission Meeting Room
9-9:10 a.m.--Opening Remarks
9:10-9:50 a.m.--Defining Major Non-Interstate Pipelines
    Assessing contiguous and non-contiguous networks

--What constitutes a contiguous pipeline system for the purpose of 
applying the annual 50 million MMBtu delivery threshold?
--What are the market differences between non-contiguous pipeline 
systems with the same owner and a single pipeline system?

    Stub lines and other gathering issues

--What role do stub lines play in the market? How are they operated?
--What gathering functions do not occur upstream of a processing plant? 
How widespread are those activities (e.g., volumes)?

Panelists:
    Representative from TPA
    Representative from Southwest Gas
    Representative from AGA
9:50 a.m.-12 p.m.--Accounting for High Capacity Receipt and Delivery 
Points (i.e., Greater than 15,000 MMBtu Per Day) Where Scheduling Does 
Not Occur
    Is there some rule of thumb to identify points at which advance 
notice of receipts/deliveries is required for operational purposes?
    How do companies without scheduling information address the risk of 
demand volatility from large scale consumers receiving unbundled 
service?
    How do pipelines reconcile nominations with actual flows at pooled 
points?
Panelists:
    Representative from TPA
    Representative from SoCal Gas
    Representative from Nicor
    Representative from AGA
12:10-12:50 p.m.--Estimating the Cost of Compliance
    What is the basis for cost estimates in the rehearing requests?
    Are there alternative approaches that

[[Page 11540]]

would reduce costs?
Panelists:
    Representative from SoCal Gas
    Representative from TPA
12:50-1 p.m.--Closing Remarks

[FR Doc. E9-5776 Filed 3-17-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>