BPS/ESS/ITS Agenda July 8-9, 2008 s2

North American Energy Standards Board 801 Travis, Suite 1675, Houston, Texas 77002 Phone: (713) 356-0060, Fax: (713) 356-0067, E-mail: [email protected] Home Page: www.naesb.org

via posting

TO: Wholesale Gas Quadrant (WGQ) Business Practices Subcommittee (BPS) and Interested Industry Parties FROM: Elizabeth Mallett, NAESB Deputy Director RE: Draft Minutes from January 4, 2018 WGQ BPS Conference Call DATE: January 4, 2018

WHOLESALE GAS QUADRANT Business Practices Subcommittee Conference Call with Webcasting Thursday, January 4, 2018 from 9:30 AM to 11:30 AM Central

DRAFT MINUTES 1. Administrative Mr. McCluskey opened the meeting and welcomed the participants. Ms. Mallett conducted the introductions and delivered the Antitrust Guidelines and Other Meeting Policies reminder. Mr. McCluskey reviewed the draft agenda with the participants. Ms. Van Pelt, seconded by Ms. Munson moved to adopt the draft agenda as final. The subcommittee reviewed the draft minutes from November 30, 2017 meeting as redlined by Ms. McCain and Hogge. Ms. McCain, seconded by Ms. Van Pelt, moved to adopt the redlined November 30, 2017 draft minutes as final. The motion passed without opposition. The November 30, 2017 final meeting minutes may be accessed at the following link: https://www.naesb.org/pdf4/wgq_bps113017fm.doc. 2. Discussion and Possible Vote on Standards Request R17006

Standards Request R17006 was submitted by Aquilon Energy in September and requests to define a standard time frame for information to be displayed and retained on the Customer Activities Website. Ms. Munson reviewed the Work Paper for R17006 as revised during the November 30, 2017 conference call with the participants. She noted that, during the November conference call, “published” was replaced with “provided” throughout the document.

The participants discussed whether a review of data elements was necessary to investigate any unintended consequences. Mr. Connor asked whether the motion would have the support to be approved even if no unintended consequences were found. Ms. Munson stated that the time period that pipelines make data available online is inconsistent across the industry and it would be beneficial for those seeking information to know that it will be posted for a standardized, specified amount of time. She explained that the regulations require that all pipelines have the data available through written request, but there is no specific time period for online data. Ms. Munson noted that the request would address an issue that frequently occurs, as she knows of at least six companies that have had multiple instances per month for every pipeline.

Mr. Gracey stated that there is no accounting information in the dataset and suggested that the entities should download any information needed every day. He provided an example wherein the production period for the month of October could be reallocated for up to six months after. Ms. Munson stated that a request for the reallocation statement for the last year in the month of September would reflect the reallocation that had occurred in December. Mr. Gracey stated that that would be the case if they are prior period adjustments (PPA) and noted that the requestor would receive the best information available. He explained that the PPA could be left open to interpretation. On one hand, the requestor may receive the PPA for September only or, on the other hand, the requestor may receive all

WGQ Business Practices Subcommittee Conference Call Draft Minutes – January 4, 2018 Page 1 of 3 North American Energy Standards Board 801 Travis, Suite 1675, Houston, Texas 77002 Phone: (713) 356-0060, Fax: (713) 356-0067, E-mail: [email protected] Home Page: www.naesb.org accounting periods related to that production period. He stated that to receive the information in the manner requested, an entity would need the ability to request a different accounting period, as there is no date effective of the data. Mr. Gracey noted that, for some pipelines, to store the data in the way that the request proposes would create significant changes to their systems. Ms. Munson stated that the pipelines currently have the capability to access the data, as a written request could lead to the scheduled quantity statement of the year before. Mr. Gracey stated that the systems within his company were built from the user inquiry point of view to examine the best available data at any point in time. Ms. McCain stated that her company’s system does not have historical data for allocations or imbalance statements, but only the most current information. Mr. Durocher stated that the pipelines will always have the most current volume data available, but the only way to track the requested information is to do inquiries of the measurements from the operator perspective. He noted that, in some cases, entities may not be authorized to see specific information. Ms. Munson stated that the request was not intended to be a significant burden on the pipelines. She stated that she will withdraw R17006.

3. Discussion and Possible Vote on Standards Request R17007 Standards Request R17007 was submitted by Aquilon Energy and asks for new NAESB standard requiring historic retrieval to reflect the data in the time period in which the information was originally provided. Ms. Munson stated that she would withdraw R17007 because it is related to R17006 which will also be withdrawn. 4. Discussion and Possible Vote on Standards request R17008 Standards Request R17008 was submitted by Aquilon Energy and requests to convert the Invoice datasets – NAESB Standards 3.4.1 and 3.4.4, the Allocation dataset, and the imbalance datasets to the XML standard for the next available release of the NAESB standards. Ms. Munson reviewed the posted work paper for R17008. Ms. Mendoza asked whether the request is to have XML only and no longer provide EDI. Ms. Munson clarified that the request does propose switching from EDI to XML for the Invoice datasets only. Ms. Mendoza asked whether those entities that currently receive the information through EDI would need to reprogram their systems. Ms. Munson stated that her original request would have been to have EDI and XML side-by-side, but, after surveying a number of pipelines, she found that only one pipeline had implemented Invoice and that was done in XML. She added that the entities that she spoke to suggested that the request be limited to XML only, as XML is easier to read and more accessible for programs. Ms. Munson noted that Kinder Morgan recently had a request for EDI, but that she knew of no others. She stated that a lot of pipelines have not developed the EDI solution because there have been no requests for it. The subcommittee discussion centered on which electronic method (EDI or XML or both) should be used to provide the invoice. Mr. Connor asked for the advantages of XML. Ms. Munson stated that XML is a common tool that is available with a lot of technology, it can be implemented inexpensively, and may be modified easily through an Excel spreadsheet. She explained that EDI is a restrictive technique that is over 40 years old and requires a translator because it is not native technology in those systems. Mr. Connor asked for any downsides to using XML. Ms. Munson stated that, if the subcommittee were to utilize XML for transactional data, it should be careful that the data transfer feed is not slowed. Ms. McCain stated that her company has received a request for EDI invoicing since the last WGQ BPS conference call in November. Mr. Gracey stated that there was an XML presentation during a recent joint Information Requirements and Technical Subcommittees (IR/Tech) meeting and encouraged the participants to review the lists of pros and cons contained within. Ms. Van Pelt asked whether Ms. Munson would be amenable to creating a Mutually Agreed standard XML schema that could be used if two parties wanted to implement the invoice in XML. Ms. Munson stated that she would support that effort. The subcommittee will continue to discuss R17008 during its next meeting. 5. Adjourn Ms. Munson moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:45 AM Central. The motion passed without opposition.

WGQ Business Practices Subcommittee Conference Call Draft Minutes – January 4, 2018 Page 2 of 3 North American Energy Standards Board 801 Travis, Suite 1675, Houston, Texas 77002 Phone: (713) 356-0060, Fax: (713) 356-0067, E-mail: [email protected] Home Page: www.naesb.org

6. Attendees Name Organization Segment Karl Almquist Tallgrass Operations Pipeline Wayne Benoit Boardwalk Pipeline Partners, LP Pipeline Pete Connor Representing American Gas Association LDC Mary Draemer Energy Transfer Equity, L.P. Pipeline Jeremy Durocher MCP Operating LLC Pipeline Douglas Field Southern Star Central Gas Pipeline Pipeline Mark Gracey Kinder Morgan Inc. Pipeline Max Hermis Enbridge (U.S.) Inc. Pipeline Micki Hoffee Northern Natural Gas Pipeline Rachel Hogge Dominion Energy Transmission Inc. Pipeline Tom Hogner Oneok Partners, GP, LLC Pipeline Thomasz Lange Tenaska, Inc. Pipeline Lynn Lindblom WBI Energy Transmission, Inc. Pipeline Dianne Loepker Bonneville Power Administration End User Nichole Lopez Kinder Morgan Inc. Pipeline Elizabeth Mallett North American Energy Standards Board N/A Marcy McCain Enbridge (U.S.) Inc. Pipeline Willis McCluskey Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement & Power End User Steven McCord TransCanada Pipelines USA, Ltd. Pipeline Michelle Mendoza Duke Energy LDC Richard Moreno Energy Transfer Equity, L.P. Pipeline Sylvia Munson Aquilon Energy Services Christi Nicolay Macquarie Energy Services Emily Perryman Quorum Business Solutions Services Michael Russ National Fuel Gas Supply Corp. Pipeline Ben Schoene ConocoPhillips Company Producer Joe Sterrett Tallgrass Energy Pipeline Robert Sullivan California Independent System Operator End User Kim Van Pelt Boardwalk Pipeline Partners, LP Pipeline Randy Young Boardwalk Pipeline Partners, LP Pipeline

WGQ Business Practices Subcommittee Conference Call Draft Minutes – January 4, 2018 Page 3 of 3