File #: Details 2018-183    Version: 1 Name:
Type: M - Miscellaneous Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 8/22/2018 In control: PUC Agenda Meeting
On agenda: 9/13/2018 Final action:
Title: * PL6580/M-06-1063; Greater Minnesota Transmission, LLC; PL6580/M-13-91; PL6580/M-13-94; PL6580/M-14-386; G022/M-14-342; PL6580/M-14-578; PL6580/M-14-1056; PL6580/M-15-967; PL6580/M-15-968; PL6580/M-15-1041; PL6580/M-16-936; PL6580/M-16-1026 GMT's Annual Load Factor Utilization Report, by Pipeline Segment. 1. Should the Commission accept Greater Minnesota Transmission's January 12, 2018 annual load factor utilization report as compliant with Commission Orders? 2. Should the Commission require additional analysis on Greater Minnesota Gas' high utilization of Greater Minnesota Transmission overrun capacity service? 3. Should the Commission require Greater Minnesota Gas to demonstrate that it holds sufficient Northern Natural Gas and Greater Minnesota Transmission mainline and lateral capacity to serve its retail firm sales customers located on these pipeline segments? (PUC: Brill, Bonnett, Bartusch)
Attachments: 1. Order Dkt Nos. 15-967 & 15-968 - 2-18-2016, 2. Order Dkt No. 15-1041 - 3-1-2016, 3. Order Dkt No. 16-936 - 5-26-2017, 4. Order Dkt No. 16-1026 - 5-26-2017, 5. PUBLIC GMT - 2017 Annual Load Factor Utitlization Report - 1-12-2018, 6. PUBLIC GMT - Response to Commission Data Requests - 6-25-2018, 7. PUBLIC GMT Response to Briefing Papers 9-6-18, 8. Briefing Papers

title

*                     PL6580/M-06-1063;                     Greater Minnesota Transmission, LLC;

PL6580/M-13-91;

PL6580/M-13-94;                     

PL6580/M-14-386;

G022/M-14-342;

PL6580/M-14-578;

PL6580/M-14-1056;

PL6580/M-15-967;

PL6580/M-15-968;

PL6580/M-15-1041;

PL6580/M-16-936;

PL6580/M-16-1026

GMT’s Annual Load Factor Utilization Report, by Pipeline Segment.

 

1.                     Should the Commission accept Greater Minnesota Transmission’s January 12, 2018 annual load factor utilization report as compliant with Commission Orders?

2.                     Should the Commission require additional analysis on Greater Minnesota Gas’ high utilization of Greater Minnesota Transmission overrun capacity service?

3.                     Should the Commission require Greater Minnesota Gas to demonstrate that it holds sufficient Northern Natural Gas and Greater Minnesota Transmission mainline and lateral capacity to serve its retail firm sales customers located on these pipeline segments? (PUC: Brill, Bonnett, Bartusch)