[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 155 (Wednesday, August 12, 1998)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43075-43079]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-21573]
[[Page 43075]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
18 CFR Part 161
[Docket No. RM98-7-000; Order No. 599]
Reporting Interstate Natural Gas Pipeline Marketing Affiliates on
the Internet
Issued July 30, 1998.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is
amending its Standards of Conduct regulations to require that
interstate natural gas pipelines identify the names and addresses of
their marketing affiliates on their web sites on the Internet and
update the information within three business days of any change.
Pipelines will also be required to state the dates the information was
last updated.
EFFECTIVE DATE: September 11, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street,
N.E., Washington, DC 20426.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Stuart Fischer, Office of General
Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E.,
Washington, D.C. 20426, Telephone: (202) 208-1033.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In addition to publishing the full text of
this document in the Federal Register, the Commission also provides all
interested persons an opportunity to inspect or copy the contents of
this document during normal business hours in the Public Reference Room
at 888 First Street, N.E., Room 2A, Washington, D.C. 20426.
The Commission Issuance Posting System (CIPS) provides access to
the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission. CIPS can be
accessed via Internet through FERC's Homepage (http://www.ferc.fed.us)
using the CIPS Link or the Energy Information Online icon. The full
text of this document will be available on CIPS in ASCII and
WordPerfect 6.1 format. CIPS is also available through the Commission's
electronic bulletin board service at no charge to the user and may be
accessed using a personal computer with a modem by dialing 202-208-
1397, if dialing locally, or 1-800-856-3920, if dialing long distance.
To access CIPS, set your communications software to 19200, 14400,
12000, 9600, 7200, 4800, 2400, or 1200 bps, full duplex, no parity, 8
data bits and 1 stop bit. User assistance is available at 202-208-2474
or by E-mail to [email protected]
This document is also available through the Commission's Records
and Information Management System (RIMS), an electronic storage and
retrieval system of documents submitted to and issued by the Commission
after November 16, 1981. Documents from November 1995 to the present
can be viewed and printed. RIMS is available in the Public Reference
Room or remotely via Internet through FERC's Homepage using the RIMS
link or the Energy Information Online icon. User assistance is
available at 202-208-2222, or by E-mail to [email protected]
Finally, the complete text on diskette in WordPerfect format may be
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, La Dorn System
Corporation. La Dorn Systems Corporation is located in the Public
Reference Room at 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426.
I. Introduction
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is amending
its regulations in section 161.3 to require that interstate natural gas
pipelines identify the names and addresses of their marketing
affiliates on their web sites on the Internet. By doing so, the
Commission will make it easier for the public to identify each
interstate gas pipeline's current marketing affiliates. The new
regulation is necessary to further assist the Commission in its
oversight efforts as well as to permit shippers to effectively monitor
transportation transactions between pipelines and their affiliated
marketers.
II. Background
A. Regulatory History
The Commission, in Order Nos. 497 et seq.1 and Order
Nos. 566 et seq.,2 established rules intended to prevent
interstate natural gas pipelines from providing preferential treatment
to their marketing or brokering affiliates. Specifically, the
Commission adopted Standards of Conduct (codified at Part 161 of the
Commission's regulations) 3 and reporting requirements
(codified in sections 161.3(h)(2) and 250.16).4
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Order No. 497, 53 FR 22139 (June 14, 1988), FERC Stats. &
Regs. 1986-1990 para. 30,820 (188) (Order No. 497); Order No. 497-A,
order on rehearing, 54 FR 52781 (December 22, 1989), FERC Stats. &
Regs. 1986-1990 para. 30,868 91989); Order No. 497-B, order
extending sunset date, 55 FR 53291 (December 28, 1990), FERC Stats.
& Regs. 1986-1990 para. 30,908 (1990); Order No. 497-C, order
extending sunset date. 57 FR 9 (January 2, 1992), FERC Stats, &
Regs. 1991-1996 para. 30,934 (1991), rehearing denied, 57 FR 5815
(February 18, 1992), 58 FERC para. 61,139 (1992); Tenneco Gas v.
FERC (affirmed in part and remanded in part), 969 F.2d 1187 (D.C.
Cir. 1992); Order No. 497-D, order on remand and extending sunset
date, FERC Stats. & Regs. 1991-1996 para. 30,958 (December 4, 1992),
57 FR 48978 (December 14, 1992); Order No. 497-E, order on rehearing
and extending sunset date, 59 FR 243 (January 4, 1994), 65 FERC
para. 61,381 (December 23, 1993); Order No. 497-F, order denying
rehearing and granting clarification, 59 FR 15336 (April 1, 1994),
66 FERC para. 61,347 (March 24, 1994); and Order No. 497-G, order
extending sunset date, 59 FR 32884 (June 27, 1994), FERC Stats. &
Regs. 1991-1996 para. 30,996 (June 17, 1994).
\2\ Standards of Conduct and Reporting Requirements for
Transportation and Affiliate Transactions, Order No. 566, 59 FR
32885 (June 27, 1994), FERC Stats. & Regs. 1991-1996 para. 30,997
(June 17, 1994) (Order No. 566); Order No. 566-A, order on
rehearing, 59 FR 42896 (October 20, 1994), FERC Stats. & Regs. 1991-
1996 para. 31,002 (October 14, 1994) (Order No. 566-A); Order No.
566-B, Order on rehearing, 59 FR 65707 (December 21, 1994), 69 FERC
para. 61,334 (December 14, 1994).
\3\ 18 CFR 161.3 (1998).
\4\ 18 CFR 161.3(h)(2) and 250.16 (1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Standards of Conduct govern the relationships between pipelines
and their marketing affiliates. In general, they provide that pipelines
and their marketing affiliates must function independently of each
other. Pipelines cannot favor their marketing affiliates of providing
transportation services or in providing transportation information or
transportation discounts not available to non-affiliates.
However, there was no requirement in the Commission's regulations
for pipelines to report the names of their marketing affiliates or
changes in the status of marketing affiliates as they occur through,
for example, acquisitions of new affiliates, or divestitures,
consolidations, or name changes of prior affiliates.
[[Page 43076]]
B. The NOPR
The May 13, 1998 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) 5
proposed to add section 161.3(l), which would require pipelines to post
on their web sites on the Internet, the names and addresses of their
marketing affiliates and to update this information within three
business days of any change. A pipeline would also be required to state
the date the information was last updated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 83 FERC para. 61,146 (1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NOPR stated that the proposed new regulation was necessary to
further assist the Commission's oversight efforts as well as to enable
the public to monitor pipeline-affiliate transactions. Marketing
affiliations change rapidly in today's business climate. It is
important for the public and the Commission to have a current picture
of the pipelines' marketing affiliates to determine if pipelines are
complying with the regulatory requirements.
The NOPR further stated that posting marketing affiliates' names
and addresses on a pipeline's web site on the Internet would minimize
the burden on pipelines and the Commission's administrative resources.
The NOPR concluded that the burden on pipelines would be slight, as
pipelines are already required to have web sites under Order No. 587-C
and would only have to add the affiliate information.
C. Federal Register Notice and Comments
The NOPR was published in the Federal Register on May 19,
1998,6 with comments due on or before June 19, 1998. The
Commission received seven comments, which are discussed below. The
commenters are: Shell Gas Pipeline Company (Shell); Michigan Gas
Storage Company (MGSC); Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Company
(Williston); Great Lakes Gas Transmission Limited Partnership (Great
Lakes); Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (PUCO); the Interstate
Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA); and the Enron Interstate
Pipelines (Enron).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 63 Fed. Reg. 27526 (May 19, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Discussion
A. Scope of the Rule
1. Comments
Shell states that, because the NOPR proposes an amendment to Part
161 of the Commission's regulations, the rule should be ``applicable
only for pipelines and marketing affiliates to which this Part applies,
as specified by section 161.1.'' Specifically, Shell asks for
clarification that the rule would not apply to interstate gas pipelines
that do not engage in transportation transactions with their marketing
affiliates.
Great Lakes comments that requiring a pipeline to list marketing
affiliates that it does not conduct business with places an unnecessary
burden on the pipeline to monitor the actions of its parents and
subsidiaries, and adds to the burden on the Commission and on non-
affiliated shippers to monitor companies that may never conduct
transactions with the pipeline subject to Commission oversight.
2. Commission Ruling
Section 161.1 of the Commission's regulations, 18 CFR 161.1 (1998),
limits the applicability of the standards of conduct to any pipeline
that has transportation transactions with its marketing or brokering
affiliate.7 The new Standard of Conduct is only applicable
to interstate natural gas pipelines that meet the criteria of section
161.1. Thus, the posting requirements would not apply to interstate
natural gas pipelines that do not have transportation transactions with
their marketing affiliates. Nor does the name and address of a
marketing affiliate have to be posted unless the marketing affiliate
has transportation transactions on the affiliated pipeline. We note
that a marketing affiliate need not be a shipper to have a
transportation transaction with its affiliated pipeline.8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Section 161.1 identifies transportation under Part 157,
Subpart A (Natural Gas Act certificate) and Part 284, Subparts B
(Natural Gas Policy Act) or G (blanket certificate under the Natural
Gas Act).
\8\ See Order No. 566, FERC Stats. & Regs. 1991-1996 at 31,068-
69 and Order No. 566-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. 1991-1996 at 31,126. For
example, a marketing affiliate may act as an agent in a transaction
by arranging for gas supplies and/or transportation for a shipper on
the related pipeline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Posting Requirements
All of the commenters either supported or did not oppose the
requirements that interstate natural gas pipelines identify the names
and addresses of their marketing affiliates on their web sites and
update the information.
Enron states that the posting requirement provides an excellent
opportunity to update the Commission's regulations to take advantage of
advances in information technology.
PUCO states that it believes that the proposed rule will assist
Commission oversight efforts to ensure that pipelines adhere to the
standards of conduct. It further comments that the posting requirement
will ensure the availability of timely information, which is important
in today's environment of increasing and numerous acquisitions and
mergers. PUCO states that requiring the disclosure of affiliated
marketer information on each pipeline's web site will not impose a
significant additional burden on the pipeline, as the Commission has
previously required that each pipeline post information on a web site.
Finally, PUCO states that the availability of the names and addresses
of pipeline marketing affiliates will be important to its staff for
obtaining necessary and timely information.
Great Lakes states that it supports the Commission's effort to
utilize Internet technology to provide timely and relevant information
in a convenient way.
C. Timing of Postings
1. Comments
Several commenters opposed the proposal to update postings of the
names and addresses of marketing affiliates within three business days
of a change in the information. Williston commented that it did not
oppose the three business day deadline, but would be opposed to a
shorter period.
Enron and MGSC raised specific concerns that a three day period for
updates would be burdensome.9 Enron contends that a three
day reporting deadline will add a burden on pipeline staff and
resources without providing any additional protection against
discrimination. Enron states that the Commission does not fully
appreciate the resources that would be required for companies like
Enron to identify and post name changes within three days. It states
that most energy companies today are diverse organizations with
affiliates engaged in many different enterprises. By way of example,
Enron states that in 1997 its corporate family had 109 incorporations,
101 acquisitions, 43 name changes and six dissolutions, and that the
majority of the companies involved are not marketing affiliates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ In their comments, Enron, MGSC and Great Lakes referred to
the update period as three days, not three business days as stated
in the NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enron contends that, to ensure compliance with the proposed rule,
pipelines must make a daily review of a complete roster of affiliates,
and that jointly-owned or partnership pipelines have the additional
task of reviewing records of both operating and non-operating companies
or partners. Enron states that only by reviewing a comprehensive
affiliate list, together with information on whether an affiliate buys
or sells or transports gas on the affiliated pipeline, can a pipeline
determine if a change must be posted.
MGSC comments that no showing has been made in the NOPR that the
posting
[[Page 43077]]
needs to be made as quickly as three days or 24 hours.10
MGSC states that pipelines do not have contemporaneous knowledge of
their marketing affiliates' business activities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ In a concurring opinion to the NOPR, Commissioner Massey
advocated a 24-hour period after a change occurs as a deadline for
posting updated information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
MGSC further comments that ``marketing affiliates,'' as defined in
section 161.2(a) of the Commission's regulations, can be distantly
related to a pipeline.11 MGSC states that its first
marketing affiliate was a partnership, a partner of which is a
subsidiary of MGSC's parent. MGSC states that its parent has one
representative on the management committee of the partnership, which is
primarily engaged in generating electricity. MGSC asserts that it is
not in a position to post or know of changes in the affiliate's
activities and status on a day-to-day basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Section 161.2(a) of the Commission's regulations states
that ``affiliate,'' when used in reference to any person in Part 161
or section 250.16, means another person which controls, is
controlled by, or is under common control with, such person. 18 CFR
161.2(a) (1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Both Enron and MGSC contend that a three-day update requirement
would lead to greater communications between pipelines and their
marketing affiliates. Enron states that the imposition of a 24-hour or
three-day update requirement would necessitate increased day-to-day
communications between the pipeline and the affiliate. MGSC states
that, under the proposed posting requirements, pipelines would be
required to keep closer contact with their marketing affiliates' plans
and activities. MGSC contends that this would be inconsistent with the
prohibitions against inappropriate entanglements between pipelines and
marketing affiliates.
INGAA proposes an alternative to the NOPR's three business day
update requirement, which was supported in the comments by Enron and
Great Lakes. INGAA proposes that pipelines report changes in marketing
affiliate names and addresses contemporaneously with any new
transportation transactions or discounts with their marketing
affiliates. Citing language from Order No. 497, INGAA argues that if a
marketing affiliate has no transactions on its affiliated pipeline,
then there is no possibility for abuse.12
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Order No. 497, FERC Stats. & Regs. 1986-1990 at 31,131.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enron contends that INGAA's suggestion that pipelines post names
contemporaneously with discounts or new transactions meets the
objective to protect against discrimination without requiring a lot of
time searching corporate records. Enron further argues that, unless the
pipeline enters into a new transaction or discount, the pipeline has no
immediate reason to know or anticipate affiliate name changes.
Great Lakes supports INGAA's comments and states that the
Commission's goal to enable it and nonaffiliated shippers to
efficiently monitor pipeline-affiliate transactions can be achieved by
more limited requirements than those described in the NOPR. Great Lakes
suggests that pipelines should report marketing affiliate names and
addresses contemporaneously with any regulated transaction that the
affiliate conducts with the pipeline.
Enron, Great Lakes and MGSC also suggested alternative time periods
for updating changes in the names and addresses of marketing
affiliates. Enron asks that, if the Commission does not accept INGAA's
proposal, it adopt a 30-day deadline to update marketing affiliate
names. Great Lakes proposes that a pipeline should be responsible for
updating its posting of the names and addresses of its marketing
affiliates only after it has become aware of changes, regardless of the
actual effective dates of the changes. MGSC asserts that, because
marketing affiliates are customers of the pipelines, pipelines will
learn of their affiliates' changes in names and addresses in the
ordinary course of business. MGSC contends that the NOPR did not
present any reason for needing, or even wanting, such status changes
posted on a more expedited basis.
Finally, two commenters, Enron and Williston, specifically
addressed the 24-hour update deadline proposed in the concurrence to
the NOPR. Enron contends that the examples in the concurrence of 24-
hour reporting deadlines are not comparable to the updates proposed in
the NOPR. Enron contends that the 24-hour deadlines for electric
utilities to report emergency deviations on the OASIS and for
hydroelectric power licensees to report deviations from state water
quality standards involve exception-based reporting. In contrast, Enron
states that keeping track of changes to marketing affiliates would
require a continuous review of corporate organizational records. Enron
further states that the 24-hour posting deadline for discounts comports
with INGAA's suggestion to post name changes concurrently with posting
discounts to the marketing affiliate.
Williston states that requiring updates within a shorter time frame
than three business days would increase the administrative burden
associated with monitoring affiliate names and addresses and create
havoc if changes were received on short notice and the necessary
administrative personnel to post such information were unavailable.
Williston states that employees are not informed instantaneously of
companies that the pipeline has purchased. It asserts that closings
take place before the information is disseminated to pipeline
employees, making it difficult to ensure that the marketing affiliate
information is accurate in less than three business days. Williston
contends that the three business day requirement for posting changes to
marketing affiliate names and addresses affords the Commission and the
public adequate notice of any changes without causing the problems that
would be associated with a shorter time frame.
2. Commission Ruling
The Commission is retaining the three business day time period
after a change occurs in which a pipeline must update the names and
addresses of its marketing affiliates.
As discussed earlier, a pipeline must only post and update the
names and addresses of marketing affiliates that are involved in
transportation transactions on its pipeline facilities. Such
transactions are subject to the marketing affiliate rules.
Consequently, it is important that the pipeline, the marketing
affiliate, the Commission and the public know of the affiliate
relationship when such transactions occur. Pipelines have an obligation
to have up-to-date information on the identities of their marketing
affiliates, and to communicate that information to their employees, to
enable the employees to observe the marketing affiliate rules. For
example, under section 161.3(f), to the extent a pipeline provides to a
marketing affiliate information related to the transportation of
natural gas, it must provide that information contemporaneously to all
potential shippers, affiliated and non-affiliated, on its
system.13 Pipeline employees must know the identities of
relevant marketing affiliates to comply with that rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 18 CFR 161.3(f) (1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We believe that three business days is a sufficient and reasonable
period of time in which to provide the Commission and non-affiliated
shippers with a meaningful and timely opportunity to monitor pipelines'
compliance with the marketing affiliate rules. As Enron points out, the
pace of markets today is brisk. As a result,
[[Page 43078]]
unduly discriminatory actions must be corrected quickly if the
correction is to be meaningful. A deadline of three business days to
update changes in the names and addresses of marketing affiliates
should provide enough time for pipelines to obtain information about
changes and to update their web sites.
Williston does not object to the three business day
requirement.14 Only Enron and MGSC raised specific arguments
that three business days is an inadequate period of time in which to
update changes in the names and addresses of marketing
affiliates.15 Enron argues that it would have to conduct a
daily review of all of its corporate affiliations because of the
numerous changes that occur. However, because pipelines must post only
the names and addresses of marketing affiliates that have
transportation transactions with their affiliated pipelines, Enron
should not have to conduct an involved search to comply with this Final
Rule. Moreover, because pipelines are already required to know the
identities of their marketing affiliates so that they can comply with
the preexisting Standards of Conduct, we are unpersuaded that the
difficulty cited by MGSC concerning locating marketing affiliates
associated with a partnership is a legitimate reason for requiring a
longer update period than three business days.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Because the Commission is retaining the three business day
update period from the NOPR, we need not address Williston's and
Enron's comments concerning an update period of less than three
business days.
\15\ Great Lakes generally argued that it is not in a position
to ensure its compliance with the requirement, but did not provide
details. INGAA provided an alternative proposal, but did not address
why it believed that the three business day requirement would be
inadequate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
None of the alternative proposals made by the commenters would
further the purpose of enabling the Commission and non-affiliated
shippers to monitor transactions between a pipeline and its marketing
affiliates in a timely manner. INGAA proposed that a pipeline report
changes in a marketing affiliate's name or addresses contemporaneously
with any new transportation transaction or new discount with the
marketing affiliate. However, INGAA's proposal is inadequate for
monitoring all types of conduct covered by the Standards of Conduct in
Part 161 because it excludes existing transactions involving newly
acquired or renamed affiliates. For example, section 161.3(c) prohibits
preferences to affiliates in scheduling, balancing and curtailments,
all matters that apply to existing transactions. Further, pipelines
that have existing transportation agreements with marketing affiliates
may not disclose non-affiliated shipper information covered by section
161.3(e) or selectively disclose transportation information under
section 161.3(f). Accordingly, INGAA's proposal would leave an
information gap because marketing affiliates in existing transactions
would not be covered.
We also reject the alternate posting time periods proposed by MGSC,
Great Lakes and Enron. Choosing an amorphous standard such as when a
pipeline learns of the change in the ordinary course of business, as
suggested by MGSC and Great Lakes, or a 30-day deadline, as proposed by
Enron, would defeat the purpose of making up-to-date information
concerning pipelines' transactions with their marketing affiliates
publicly available.
Finally, we are unconvinced that, as suggested by Enron and MGSC,
keeping track of changes in the names and addresses of marketing
affiliates is inconsistent with the principles of separation between
pipelines and their marketing affiliates. The Standards of Conduct do
not prohibit transactions between a pipeline and its marketing
affiliates but place restrictions on those transactions to prevent
pipelines from providing undue preferences to their affiliates. To
ensure compliance with the marketing affiliate regulations, pipelines
must be aware of newly acquired marketing affiliates and changes in
status of preexisting marketing affiliates.
In conclusion, we find that three business days is an adequate and
reasonable amount of time for a pipeline to update on its web site
changes in the names and addresses of its marketing affiliates.
D. Effect on Other Regulatory Requirements
INGAA asks that the Commission relieve pipelines from the
``redundant'' requirement to update their tariffs to reflect marketing
affiliate name and address changes. However, there was no prior
requirement in the Commission's regulations that pipelines report the
names and addresses of their marketing affiliates in their tariffs.
There is a requirement, in section 250.16, that pipelines include
in tariff provisions a complete list of operating personnel and
facilities shared by the pipeline and its marketing affiliates, and the
procedures used to address and resolve complaints by shippers and
potential shippers. 18 CFR 250.16 (1998). This Final Rule does not
duplicate the requirements of section 250.16 and is not redundant.
Great Lakes asks that the Commission eliminate the requirement that
pipelines list all of their affiliated entities, including marketing
affiliates, in their annual Form 2 filings. Great Lakes argues that the
annual data in the Form 2 does not keep abreast of changes in affiliate
status and does not distinguish marketing or brokering affiliates.
We reject Great Lakes's request. The purpose of the Form 2 is to
provide adequate financial and statistical data on an annual basis to
allow the Commission, other government agencies and the public to
adequately assess a pipeline's operations and financial condition. To
this end, the requirement to list affiliates in the Form 2 includes all
affiliates, not just marketing affiliates. The Form 2 data serve a
valid purpose that the information required by this Final Rule does not
duplicate.
E. Waivers
The NOPR did not address waivers of the requirements that a
pipeline post and update the names and addresses of its marketing
affiliates on its web site. At the time the Commission issued the NOPR,
it had not granted waivers of the GISB web site requirements of Order
No. 587, et seq.,16 that extended beyond June 1, 1998.
However, the Commission recently granted several waivers extending
beyond that date, including waivers to pipelines that have filed
Standards of Conduct.17
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Standards For Business Practices Of Interstate Natural Gas
Pipelines, Order No. 587, 61 FR 39053 (Jul. 26, 1996), III FERC
Stats. & Regs. Regulations Preambles para. 31,038 (Jul. 17, 1996);
Order No. 587-B, 62 FR 5521 (Feb. 6, 1997), III FERC Stats. & Regs.
Regulations Preambles para. 31,046 (Jan. 30, 1997); Order No. 587-C,
62 FR 10684 (Mar. 10, 1997), III FERC Stats. & Regs. Regulations
Preambles para. 31,050 (Mar. 4, 1997); Order No. 587-D, order
denying rehearing, 62 FR 19921 (Apr. 24, 1997), III FERC Stats. &
Regs. Regulations Preambles para. 31,052 (Apr. 18, 1997); Order No.
587-E, order denying rehearing and request for waiver, 62 FR 25842
(May 12, 1997), III FERC Stats. & Regs. Regulations Preambles para.
31,053 (May 6, 1997); Order No. 587-G, 63 FR 20072 (April 23, 1998),
III FERC Stats. & Regs. Regulations Preambles para. 31,062 (April
16, 1998); and Order No. 587-H, 63 FR 39509 (July 23, 1998), III
FERC Stats. & Regs. Regulations Preambles para. ________(July 15,
1998).
\17\ E.g., KO Transmission Company (Docket No. RP98-200-000),
Midcoast Interstate Transmission Company (Docket No. RP97-278-000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
No commenter raised the waiver issue. Nevertheless, we do not want
to force pipelines that received waivers of the Order No. 587
requirements to have to seek additional waivers of the requirements of
this Final Rule. All of the pipelines with a waiver of the Order No.
587 requirements for posting information on a web site use either an
electronic bulletin board (EBB) or some
[[Page 43079]]
other means approved by the Commission to comply with other Standard of
Conduct requirements (e.g., section 161.3(h)).18 Such
pipelines can comply with the requirements of this Final Rule during
the waiver period by identifying the names and addresses of their
marketing affiliates on their EBBs, or if the Commission has granted
the pipeline a waiver of the EBB requirements, through the facility
approved by the Commission in lieu of an EBB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ For example, the Commission approved KO Transmission
Company's use of a telephone recorded message instead of an EBB. KO
Transmission Company, 74 FERC para. 61,101 at 61,311 (1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) 19
generally requires a description and analysis of rules that will have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
In the NOPR, the Commission concluded that the proposed rule would
benefit small entities by making it easier for small customers to
monitor pipelines' transactions with their marketing affiliates. No
comments were submitted alleging any significant economic effect on
small entities. Accordingly, pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, the
Commission hereby certifies that the regulations proposed herein will
not have a significant adverse impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612 (1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Environmental Analysis
The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental Assessment
or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may have a
significant adverse effect on the human environment.20 The
Commission has categorically excluded certain actions from these
requirements as not having a significant effect on the human
environment.21 This Final Rule falls within the categorical
exclusion which specifies that information gathering, analysis, and
dissemination are not major federal actions that have a significant
effect on the human environment.22 The Final Rule also falls
under the categorical exclusion for rules concerning the sale,
exchange, and transportation of natural gas that requires no
construction of facilities.23 Thus, neither an environmental
impact statement nor an environmental assessment is required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Order No. 486, Regulations Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Statutes
and Regulations, Regulations Preambles 1986-1990 para. 30,783
(1987).
\21\ 18 CFR 380.4 (1998).
\22\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(5) (1998).
\23\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(27) (1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Information Collection Statement and Reporting Requirements
The OMB regulations require OMB to approve certain reporting and
record keeping (collections of information) imposed by agency
rule.24 OMB has approved the NOPR without comment. The Final
Rule will affect one existing data collection, FERC-592.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ 5 CFR 1320.11 (1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Respondents subject to the filing requirements of this Final Rule
will not be penalized for failing to respond to these collections of
information unless the collections of information display a valid OMB
control number.
Title: FERC-592, Marketing Affiliates of Interstate Pipelines.
Action: Proposed Data Collection, OMB Control No. 1902-0157.
Respondents: Interstate natural gas pipelines (Business or other
for-profit, including small businesses).
Frequency of Responses: On Occasion.
Necessity of Information: The Final Rule revises the filing
requirements contained in 18 CFR Part 161.3 for Standards of Conduct
for interstate natural gas pipelines. The pipelines are being required
to identify the names and addresses of their marketing affiliates on
their web sites on the Internet. The new requirements are necessary for
the Commission's oversight activities and for the public to be able to
monitor pipeline-affiliate transactions. This additional information
provides the Commission and the public with current information on
marketing affiliates to make a determination that pipelines are in
compliance with regulatory requirements.
The Commission received seven comments on its NOPR but none on its
reporting or cost estimates. The Commission's responses to the comments
are addressed in Part III of this Final Rule. The Commission is
submitting a copy of this Final Rule to OMB for information purposes
because the Final Rule is not significantly different from the NOPR.
Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting
requirements by contacting the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426 [Attention: Michael Miller,
Office of the Chief Information Officer, (202) 208-1415 or send
comments to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) (Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (202) 395-3087, fax: (202) 395-7285).]
VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification
This Final Rule will take effect on September 11, 1998. The
Commission has determined, with the concurrence of the Administrator of
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of
Management and Budget, that this rule is not a ``major rule'' within
the meaning of section 251 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996.25 The Commission will submit the rule
to both houses of Congress and the Comptroller General prior to its
publication in the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 161
Natural gas, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
By the Commission.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends Part 161,
Chapter I, Title 18 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth
below.
PART 161--STANDARDS OF CONDUCT FOR INTERSTATE PIPELINES WITH
MARKETING AFFILIATES
1. The authority citation for Part 161 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717-717w, 3301-3432; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352.
2. In Sec. 161.3, paragraph (l) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 161.3 Standards of Conduct.
* * * * *
(l) A pipeline must post the names and addresses of its marketing
affiliates on its web site on the public Internet and update the
information within three business days of any change. A pipeline must
also state the date the information was last updated. Postings must
conform with the requirements of Sec. 284.10 of this chapter.
[FR Doc. 98-21573 Filed 8-11-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
