In 2008, the Commission acknowledged that AMAs were bringing significant benefits to market participants and took steps to facilitate the increased use of AMA. In Regulation 712, the Commission found that AMMs will maximize the use and value of pipeline capacity by creating a mechanism for capacity holders to call on third-party experts to ensure their capacity. The Commission found that AAMs ultimately result in savings for end-customers, as they provide for reduced gas supply costs and more efficient use of pipeline capacity. In order to facilitate the increased use of AMA, the Commission exempted qualified CASs (which meet certain requirements for the volume of the asset manager`s gas supply or purchase obligations) in Regulation 712 from the tendering requirements of the intergovernmental ironc rules for the release of pipeline capacity. This derogation, codified in Section 284.8 of CEC regulations, allows FERC capacity holders to free up PIPELINE capabilities in conjunction with an AMA to an asset manager without providing tender capacity (although approvals are still publicly published). Recognizing that AMAs are complex agreements, the Commission also exempted qualified CAPs from prohibiting the opening of intergovernmental pipeline capacity on foreign terms. Finally, the Commission found that its prohibition on sale/sale transactions did not prevent a party from managing its own gas purchase contracts, but relied on an asset manager to manage its pipeline capacity, whereas these agreements could include sale/sale transactions prohibited elsewhere. With the increase in domestic natural gas production, supply AMS has become an increasingly important tool for natural gas producers and other major sellers to manage the marketing functions and capabilities of pipelines. By specifying that the buy/sell prohibition does not apply to certain buy/sell transactions with an asset manager, natural gas producers and large sellers should have more flexibility in hosting AMA and be better able to benefit from the services provided by asset managers.

The October 15 order states that these transactions in the asset management agreements on the supply side are certainly buy/sell agreements, but they are not prohibited purchase/sale agreements. In its October 15 order, FERC confirmed that Order 712 exempted AMA from the purchase/sale ban on the delivery side, based on the finding that exempt transactions did not constitute the type of sales transactions prohibited by Order 636. Ferc then clarified that the prohibition on sale/sale did not apply, in the same way, to the quantities of gas that the asset manager, on the supply side, acquires from its passenger shipper and then resells to that shipper. Ferc argued that this was not a matter of evading the requirements of the capacity release rules «because the liberating shipper does not release the unreserved capacity, but capabilities that continue to be used for the same purpose for which the liberating shipper of the AMA supply company originally purchased it – to transport its natural gas to the market.» In summary, the October 15 decision specifies that these transactions in the amAs on the supply side may be buy/sell agreements, but that these are not purchase/sale agreements.