Subject: Turnback of EPNG Capacity
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 11:48:06 -0700 (PDT)

Regarding our discussions about the subject issue, I believe that the following orders would sufficiently document FERC's policy regarding solicitation of capacity turnback from existing customers to get El Paso's attention:

From "Order Denying Rehearing and Accepting Compliance Filing", issued  March 19, 2001, Mississippi Canyon Gas Pipeline, LLC, Docket No. RP00-226-002 and -003 (94 FERC ? 61,324)

Prior Solicitation of Capacity Turnback

BP claims (Petition at 4-7) that MCGP should be required to solicit the voluntary turnback of capacity from its shippers prior to requiring them to submit production profiles.  As BP correctly notes (Petition at 4-5), the Commission did state in the Northern Border case that a pipeline should solicit turnback capacity from its shippers before filing an application to construct expansion facilities.

7Northern Border Pipeline Company, 90 FERC ? 61,263 at 61,879 (2000).

From "Order Issuing Certificate", issued March 16, 2000, Northern Border Pipeline Company, Docket Nos. CP99-21-000, CP99-21-001, and CP99-21-002 (90 FERC ? 61,263)

Further, we find below that Northern Border properly applied the Commission's policy regarding the solicitation of turnback capacity.  (from Footnote 46)

and

We conclude that Northern Border properly complied with the Commission's requirement that pipelines solicit turnback capacity before filing an application for authority to construct new capacity.

Do you want to talk to them again before we send them a letter?  Let me know what they say.