Interconnection issues. (a) If <Service Provider> considers that an Interconnection Event has occurred or is likely to occur, then:
(i) as soon as reasonably practicable <Service Provider> will notify
(A) <User> must not deliver Gas into the AGA GDS at any Physical Gate Point affected by the Interconnection Event, unless
(B) <User> must not take delivery of Gas at a Delivery Point associated with any Physical Gate Point affected by the Interconnection Event, unless <Service Provider> permits
(ii) <Service Provider>, acting as a reasonable and prudent network operator38:
(A) may refuse to accept, partly or wholly, any quantity of Gas at the Receipt Point associated with any Physical Gate Point affected by the Interconnection Event; and
(B) may wholly or partly Curtail the quantity or pressure of Gas deliveries to <User> at a Delivery Point associated with the Receipt Point associated with any Physical Gate Point affected by the Interconnection Event.
(b) If a contract that exists in respect of the Interconnection Arrangement for a Physical Gate Point associated with a Receipt Point specified in the Delivery Point Register is terminated or breached:
(i) as a result of the negligence or default of <Service Provider> then, subject to this Haulage Contract, <Service Provider> is liable to 37 S 16 of the Gas Standards Act 1972 (WA) allows for regulations to be made providing for the commingling of Gas of different qualities in a distribution system, while Part 3A of the Gas Standards Regulations deals with entry and commingling of gas of different qualities. ATCO Gas Australia has an approved management plan (the Higher Heating Value Management Plan) in accordance with Regulation 17C of the Gas Standards Regulations. 38 This may be interpreted to mean a network operator who exercises that degree of reasonableness, diligence, prudence and foresight that would reasonably and ordinarily be exercised by a skilled and experienced person doing a similar thing in similar circumstances and conditions in accordance with applicable laws and standards that are at least equivalent to practices and standards generally accepted in the gas industry in Australia (this is the definition of “reasonable and prudent person” in rule 2 of the Retail Market Rules). <User> for any Direct Damage suffered by <User> as a result of an interruption or Curtailment of Gas delivery under clause 7.6(a)(ii); or
(ii) other than as a result of the negligence or default of <Service Provider>, then <Service Provider> may C...
Interconnection issues. (a) If <Service Provider> considers that an Interconnection Event has occurred in relation or is likely to a Physical Gate Pointo ccur, then:
(i) as soon as reasonably practicable thereafter <Service Provider> will notify <User> in writing of the Interconnection Event, whereupon:
( A) (i) <User> must not deliver Gas into the WAGNA GA GDS at thata ny Physical Gate Point affected by the Interconnection E vent, unless <Service Provider> permits partial delivery under partial Curtailment at that Physical Gate Point; and
( B) (ii) <User> must not take delivery of Gas at a Delivery Point associated with thata ny Physical Gate Point a ffected by the Interconnection Event, unless <Service Provider> permits <User> to partly take art delivery of Gas under partial Curtailment at a Delivery Point associated with that Physical Gate Point; and
(ii) <Service Provider>, acting as a reasonable and prudent network operator,38:
Interconnection issues. (a) If <Service Provider> considers that an Interconnection Event has occurred or is likely to occur, then:
(i) as soon as reasonably practicable <Service Provider> will notify <User> in writing of the Interconnection Event, whereupon:
(A) <User> must not deliver Gas into the AGA GDS at any Physical Gate Point affected by the Interconnection Event, unless <Service Provider> permits partial delivery under partial Curtailment at that Physical Gate Point; and
(B) <User> must not take delivery of Gas at a Delivery Point associated with any Physical Gate Point affected by the Interconnection Event, unless <Service Provider> permits <User> to take part delivery of Gas
Interconnection issues. Numerous challenges threaten timely and cost-effective interconnections, resulting in bottlenecks. Requests to interconnect unviable projects Speculative applications filed at multiple queue locations Highly variable, location-dependent, system upgrade costs Projects changing size and parameters or Point of Interconnection, necessitating re-studies Quantity of new interconnection requests complicates deriving System Impact Study results image source: xxxx://xxxxxxxx.xxx/blog/start-ups/2013/03/how-to-identify-your-products-bottleneck/ 6/6/2013 Approved by FERC and Implemented May of 2012: • Six month queue cycle to replace three-month cycle; resulting in fewer restudies and greater accuracy in modeling • Modification of project size may require project to “slide back” in queue, depending on impact on later queued project timing and cost allocation • Alternate queue for projects 20 MW or less that do not require PJM to upgrade its transmission system January 17, 2013 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR), to revise FERC’s Small Generator Interconnection Procedures. Proposes four significant modifications:
