Petition for Declaratory Order of North Dakota Pipeline Company LLC under OR14-21.

EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION REQUESTED UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION ) North Dakota Pipeline Company LLC ) Docket No. OR14- ) PETITION FOR DECLARATORY ORDER OF NORTH DAKOTA PIPELINE COMPANY LLC Of Counsel: Steven Reed Bizunesh Scott Helene C. Long Joseph Hicks Associate General Counsel Glenna Riley Liquids Pipeline Regulatory Law STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP Enbridge Pipelines Inc. 1330 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. 3000, 425 1st Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20036-1795 Calgary, Alberta T2P 3L8 (202) 429-6232 (403) 231-5774 Counsel for North Dakota Pipeline Company LLC February 12, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................. 2 SPECIFIC RULINGS REQUESTED ................................................................................. 7 REQUEST FOR EXPEDITED CONSIDERATION .......................................................... 8 BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................. 9 I. Current North Dakota Pipeline System .................................................................. 11 A. Scope of Sandpiper Project ......................................................................... 14 B. Public Interest and Shipper/Producer Benefits............................................ 18 C. Proposed Tariff Structure ............................................................................ 22 1. Committed Tariff Rates.................................................................... 26 2. Uncommitted Tariff Rates................................................................ 28 D. Proposed Apportionment Principles............................................................ 30 DISCUSSION............................................................................................. 31 I. The Proposed Committed Rate Structure Conforms to Commission Precedent and Should Be Approved. ...................................................................... 32 A. The Proposed Rate Structure Is Not Unduly Discriminatory...................... 32 B. Priority Service Is Provided Only at a Premium Above the Uncommitted Rate. ...................................................................................... 37 II. The Commission Should Provide Assurance that the Committed Shippers that Executed TSAs During the Open Season Will Pay the Committed Rates for which They Contracted, During the Term of the TSAs.......................... 39 III. Approval of the Proposed Tariff Rate Structure for Uncommitted Shippers is Consistent with Commission Precedent. ............................................................ 41 A. The Commission Should Confirm that the Upstream Expansion Costs Can Be Spread Over All Volumes Moving to or Beyond Clearbrook. .................................................................................................. 45 B. The Commission Should Approve the Proposed Structur