[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