[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 194 (Wednesday, October 7, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 53853-53859]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-26720]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Parts 4, 153, 157 and 375

[Docket No. RM98-16-000]


Collaborative Procedures for Energy Facility Applications; Notice 
of Proposed Rulemaking

September 30, 1998.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is 
proposing to expand its procedural regulations governing the 
authorization of natural gas facilities and services, and is 
considering revising its procedural regulations governing applications 
for licenses for hydroelectric projects. The proposed regulations are 
intended to offer prospective applicants seeking to construct, operate 
or abandon natural gas facilities or services the option, in 
appropriate circumstances and prior to filing an application, of using 
a collaborative process to resolve significant issues. In addition, a 
significant portion of the environmental review process could be 
completed as part of the pre-filing collaborative process. This pre-
filing collaborative process is comparable to the process the 
Commission recently adopted with respect to applications for 
hydroelectric licenses, amendments and exemptions and, like those 
regulations, is optional and is designed to be adaptable to the facts 
and circumstances of the particular case. The proposed regulations 
would not delete or replace any existing regulations. Finally, the 
Commission is inviting comment on whether the existing collaborative 
process for hydroelectric license and exemption applications, as well 
as the proposed collaborative process for natural gas facilities and 
services, should be made mandatory.

DATES: Comments on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking are due December 
7, 1998 and January 5, 1999 for reply comments. Comments should be 
filed with the Office of the Secretary and should refer to Docket No. 
RM98-16-000.

ADDRESSES: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, 
N.E., Washington, DC 20426.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Richard Hoffmann, Office of Pipeline Regulation, 888 First Street, N.E. 
Washington, D.C. 20426, (202) 208-0066
Lon Crow, Office of Hydropower Licensing, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, (202) 219-2651
Gordon Wagner, Office of the General Counsel, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 219-0122
Merrill Hathaway, Office of the General Counsel, 888 First Street, 
N.E., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 208-0825

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In addition to publishing the full text of 
this document in the Federal Register, the Commission provides all 
interested persons an opportunity to inspect or copy the contents of 
this document during normal business hours in the public reference 
room, Room 2A, 888 First Street, N.E., 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, RVJ International, 
Inc. RVJ International, Inc., is located in the Public Reference Room 
at 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426.

[[Page 53854]]

I. Introduction

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is proposing 
to expand its procedural regulations governing the authorization of 
natural gas facilities and services, and is considering revising its 
procedural regulations governing applications for licenses, amendments 
and exemptions for hydroelectric projects. The proposed regulations are 
intended to offer prospective applicants seeking to construct, operate 
or abandon natural gas facilities or services the option, in 
appropriate circumstances and prior to filing an application, of using 
a collaborative process to resolve significant issues. In addition, a 
significant portion of the environmental review process could be 
completed as part of the collaborative process. This pre-filing 
collaborative process is comparable to the process the Commission 
recently adopted with respect to preparing applications for 
hydroelectric licenses, amendments and exemptions and, like those 
regulations, is optional and is designed to be adaptable to the facts 
and circumstances of the particular case. The proposed regulations 
would not delete or replace any existing regulations. Finally, the 
Commission is inviting comment on whether the existing collaborative 
process for hydroelectric license and exemption applications, as well 
as the proposed collaborative process for natural gas facilities and 
services, should be made mandatory.

II. Background

    As part of a comprehensive examination of its regulatory processes, 
the Commission's staff reviewed and compared how applications for 
energy facilities are currently processed in the Office of Pipeline 
Regulation and the Office of Hydropower Licensing.1 The 
staff specifically reexamined how it does its work and interacts with 
applicants and participants. Although there are statutory and technical 
differences between gas facilities and hydropower projects, the staff 
found some common elements with respect to review under the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).2 The staff also noted the 
growing level of controversy associated with siting gas facilities and 
relicensing hydropower projects in dynamic and competitive energy 
markets and industries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This comprehensive review is called ``FERC First!''.
    \2\ 42 U.S.C. 4321-4307a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission believes that its major challenge in this area is to 
ensure the development of hydropower projects and natural gas pipeline 
and storage projects that are sustainable, i.e., that are economically 
viable and protect the environment. Indeed, the Commission believes 
that increasing awareness of environmental concerns translates into the 
need for greater collaboration between the Commission and all those 
concerned including federal and state agencies, local governments, 
citizens' groups, landowners, Indian tribes, and the general public.
    In October 1997, the Commission adopted a rule authorizing use of a 
new process in the hydropower program that embodies cooperation and 
consensual approaches to promote solutions to issues before they become 
the subject of an adversarial administrative proceeding. These new 
regulatory approaches, contained in Order No. 596,3 now 
known as the alternative procedures, provide an alternative pre-filing 
consultation process to prospective hydropower applicants and 
participants. The alternative process is not mandatory. While the 
alternative process is a substitute for the standard pre-filing 
consultation process required for hydropower applicants,4 
and allows for expanded staff involvement, early initiation of the NEPA 
process, and the discussion of issues presented by the prospective 
applicant's proposal, the Commission did not curtail the rights of 
parties to intervene and participate in the hearing on the hydropower 
application after it has been filed. The decision to request use of 
this alternative approach is left to the prospective applicant, who 
must demonstrate that a consensus supporting the use of the alternative 
procedure exists among those interested in the proposed project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Final Rule, Regulations for the Licensing of Hydroelectric 
Projects (October 29, 1997), Docket No. RM95-16-000, 81 FERC para. 
61,103, 62 FR 59802 (November 5, 1997). See 18 CFR 4.34(i).
    \4\ See 18 CFR 4.38, 16.8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Approximately 20 hydropower license applicants (involving 
approximately 32 hydropower projects) are currently using the 
alternative procedure. Because of the procedure's inherent adaptability 
and potential to address a wide range of issues, including its 
flexibility to function properly in very diverse circumstances, the 
Commission is proposing to make the benefits of this approach available 
to applicants for authorization for natural gas facilities and 
services.
    The staff has had contacts with a cross-section of the gas industry 
and other interested parties to determine the level of interest in 
procedures for gas applicants analogous to those promulgated for 
hydropower applicants. Some indicated an interest in adapting the 
alternative hydropower procedure to the gas authorization process, 
while others questioned whether such a process would produce benefits, 
such as lower costs and shorter processing times, vis-a-vis the 
standard gas application process. The Commission does not know the 
answers to these questions, but, based on the experience with the 
alternative hydropower procedures, it believes that providing gas 
applicants and participants with options is preferable to maintaining 
the ``one size fits all'' process.

III. Discussion

    Order No. 596 offered applicants for hydroelectric licenses, 
amendments and exemptions the option to combine the required pre-filing 
consultation process with the required environmental review process, 
which is customarily begun only after the filing of an application. 
This alternative pre-filing process was intended to encourage 
communication among participants, identify, clarify, and resolve 
contentious issues, and diminish the time required for Commission 
action on an application. The regulations proposed herein would offer 
applicants for gas certificate authorizations and abandonment approvals 
a similar option, whereby applicants could elect to combine a new pre-
filing consultation process with an environmental review as a means to 
simplify and expedite the application procedure. While, unlike the 
hydroelectric licensing process, there is now no mandatory pre-filing 
consultation for gas applications, we believe that allowing for a more 
robust pre-filing process patterned on the alternative hydroelectric 
process for consultation and environmental review may provide 
significant benefits to all concerned.
    Accordingly, we are proposing a voluntary pre-filing consultative 
process for applicants seeking to construct and operate natural gas 
facilities under sections 3 or 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act 
(NGA),5 or to abandon certificated facilities or services 
under section 7(b) of the NGA.6/ This optional process would 
cover all jurisdictional natural gas facilities, including pipelines, 
compressors, meters and regulators, liquefied natural gas terminals, 
and replacement facilities where an environmental review is required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ 15 U.S.C. Secs. 717b and 717f(c).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 717f(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposal would establish an optional pre-filing consultation 
process for potential applicants that would

[[Page 53855]]

combine efforts to address NGA issues with the NEPA review process in a 
single pre-filing collaborative process that could also include the 
administrative processes associated with the Clean Water Act, the 
National Historic Preservation Act, the Endangered Species Act, and 
other relevant statutes. We believe that such an option could foster 
constructive dialog in a collaborative group consisting of, among 
others, the potential applicant and its potential customers, resource 
and other regulatory agencies, Indian tribes, local governments, land 
owners, citizens' groups, the general public and the Commission's 
staff.
    We are not proposing to delete or replace any existing regulations; 
instead we intend to supplement the existing regulations by offering 
potential applicants an opportunity to use the proposed pre-filing 
collaborative procedures. Entering into a pre-filing collaboration will 
not bar an applicant from interrupting pre-filing efforts by exercising 
its existing option to file an application.
    Potential applicants seeking to use this voluntary pre-filing 
collaborative process would not be required to obtain express consent 
of all potential participants in order to submit an initial request to 
use this proposed process. However, in order to employ the proposed 
process, an applicant would have to demonstrate that it has made a 
reasonable effort to contact all potentially interested entities and 
that the weight of opinions expressed by the participating entities 
makes it reasonable to conclude that under the circumstances the use of 
the collaborative process will be productive. The prospective 
applicant's consent to the use of this process is obviously required, 
but agreement of everyone interested is not.
    With its request, the prospective applicant must also submit a 
communications protocol governing how the applicant and participants, 
including the Commission's staff, could communicate with each other 
during the pre-filing process, and designating how such communications 
would be documented and made available to the participants and the 
public. Staff involvement during the pre-filing process could aid in 
identifying contentious issues, facilitate resolution of disputes among 
the participants and advise them whether a proposed action appeared to 
be consistent with Commission policy and practice.
    The Commission would give public notice in the Federal Register and 
the prospective applicant would inform potentially interested entities 
of a request to use the collaborative pre-filing process. Interested 
entities could comment upon the request and the Commission would 
consider such comments in deciding whether to grant or deny the 
prospective applicant's request. Authority to grant or deny an 
applicant's request to use the pre-filing collaborative process would 
be delegated to the Director of the Office of Pipeline Regulation, 
comparable to the authority that has already been delegated to the 
Director of the Office of Hydropower Licensing. Consistent with the 
existing regulations providing for alternative procedures for 
applicants for hydropower facilities,7 the decision of the 
Director of the Office of Pipeline Regulation on the request would be 
final and not subject to interlocutory rehearing or appeal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 18 CFR 4.34(i)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We propose that all aspects of an application for construction or 
abandonment authorization could be considered in this pre-filing 
collaborative process. For example, the issues addressed by the 
collaborative group could include the need for the proposed project, 
competing projects, capacity allocation, the terms and conditions of 
service, the rates to be charged for such service, and the effect of 
abandonments on existing customers, in addition to the environmental 
impact of the proposal. A prospective applicant authorized to use the 
pre-filing process would, as appropriate, either prepare a preliminary 
draft environmental assessment (EA) or pay a contractor or consultant 
selected and supervised by the Commission to prepare a preliminary 
draft environmental impact statement (EIS).8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See 40 CFR 1506.5 (Council on Environmental Quality's 
regulations describing agency responsibility with respect to the 
preparation of an environmental assessment and environmental impact 
statement).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We believe that combining the proposed pre-filing consultation and 
environmental review into a single pre-filing process could simplify 
and expedite the authorization of new gas facilities and services. The 
proposed pre-filing process is intended to promote cooperative efforts 
between the prospective applicant and other participants. We hope that 
an application filed after the proposed collaborative process would be 
accompanied by a settlement agreement or offer of settlement. We would 
expect that applications made following pre-filing consultation and 
environmental review will raise fewer contested issues, will clearly 
identify remaining contested issues, and will not require the applicant 
to complete extensive additional environmental studies. We believe that 
the resulting improvement in the quality and completeness of 
applications would permit the Commission to expeditiously resolve 
issues in a manner that is supported by affected entities, result in 
fewer issues raised on rehearing before the Commission, and reduce the 
range of issues that may be subject to litigation in judicial review.
    We recognize that in spite of collaborative efforts, some issues 
may remain unresolved. Considering that there are sometimes contentious 
non-environmental issues that may undermine successful collaboration, 
we seek comment on whether the proposed process should only address the 
environmental issues associated with a potential application.
    With respect to both natural gas authorizations and hydroelectric 
licensing, the Commission invites comment on whether it would be 
appropriate to extend the collaborative pre-filing process beyond the 
stage of preparing a preliminary draft EIS (18 CFR Part 4). For 
instance, would it be appropriate in this process for the Commission 
staff to issue a draft EIS and for the participants in the process to 
review the comments on the draft EIS and prepare either a final EIS or 
a preliminary draft of a final EIS? Should the Commission staff be 
permitted to issue the draft EIS (or issue a preliminary draft of the 
final EIS) and invite comment on it prior to the filing of the 
application, without first issuing a notice inviting interested persons 
to intervene as parties to a formal proceeding? 9
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The collaboratively-prepared EIS would be filed with the 
Commission as part of the application package. The ultimate 
hydropower licensing or gas authorization decision would be made by 
the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also invites comment on whether any limitations of 
time should be placed on the collaborative process. If so, what 
limitations might be appropriate? We invite comment on how best to 
ensure that all of the participants in the process have a full and fair 
opportunity to participate in a manner that facilitates cooperative 
progress within a reasonable time frame.
    Finally, the Commission seeks comment on whether the voluntary pre-
filing collaborative process proposed herein with respect to 
applications for authorizations for gas facilities and services, as 
well as the voluntary alternative pre-filing process currently in 
effect with respect to applicants for the licensing of hydroelectric 
projects

[[Page 53856]]

pursuant to Order No. 596, should be made mandatory for all applicants 
for such gas and/or hydroelectric authority. We invite the commenters 
to describe the advantages and disadvantages they perceive in requiring 
that an applicant for authorization for energy facilities and services 
first complete a combined consultation and environmental review process 
before filing an application. If the Commission were to adopt such a 
requirement, how would it work, especially in cases where no consensus 
exists among the participants that investing in a collaborative process 
would be a wise use of limited resources? If compelling an applicant to 
successfully complete a pre-filing collaboration is considered 
impractical, should the Commission instead mandate that all applicants 
make good faith efforts to undertake a pre-filing collaboration? Should 
the Commission then reject applications that do not document adequate 
good faith efforts to engage in the pre-filing process or do not 
justify the failure of the applicant's efforts?
    While the proposed collaborative procedures may not be appropriate 
for every applicant or project, the Commission wants to extend the 
availability of this option to proposed gas facilities and services in 
light of the projected number of future gas certificate filings. The 
Commission understands that growing demand in New England, the Mid-
Atlantic, and the Midwest will continue to lead to applications for 
major pipeline extensions and new pipelines to serve these regions. The 
Commission also expects to receive applications for storage development 
and liquefied natural gas facilities to be used for peaking capability 
and supply flexibility. As the national pipeline grid ages, the 
Commission anticipates a significant number of applications for 
replacement facilities.
    In short, potential applicants for authorizations for gas 
facilities and services who are given permission to use collaborative 
pre-filing procedures would, with the support and assistance of those 
participating, conduct necessary and appropriate scientific studies and 
prepare a preliminary draft environmental assessment or preliminary 
draft environmental impact statement, before filing the application. 
Optimally, this procedure could result in the applicant and 
participants agreeing on a partial or complete offer of settlement, a 
joint stipulation of contested issues, or documentation of all issues 
(both resolved and unresolved). On the other hand, applicants for NGA 
authorizations could proceed under the standard process, where the NEPA 
review and staff involvement in settlement efforts would begin only 
after the application has been filed with the Commission.

IV. Environmental Analysis

    Commission regulations describe the circumstances where preparation 
of an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement 
will be required.10 The Commission has categorically 
excluded certain actions from this requirement as not having a 
significant effect on the human environment.11 No 
environmental consideration is necessary for the promulgation of a rule 
that is clarifying, corrective, or procedural, or that does not 
substantially change the effect of legislation or regulations being 
amended.12
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Regulations Implementing National Environmental Policy Act, 
52 FR 47,897 (Dec. 17, 1987), codified at 18 CFR Part 380.
    \11\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
    \12\ 18 CFR 380.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This proposed rule is procedural in nature. It proposes an optional 
pre-filing collaborative process that a prospective applicant for a 
natural gas authorization may wish to use. Thus, no environmental 
assessment or environmental impact statement is necessary for the 
requirements proposed in the rule.

V. Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) 13 
generally requires a description and analysis of final rules that will 
have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. Pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, the Commission hereby 
certifies that the proposed regulations, if promulgated, will not have 
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 5 U.S.C. Secs. 601-612.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The procedures proposed herein are purely voluntary in nature, and 
are designed to reduce burdens on small entities (as well as large 
entities) rather than to increase them. The pre-filing collaborative 
process proposed herein would be optional, would not alter or replace 
the procedures currently prescribed in our regulations, and would not 
be available unless it is the consensus of the persons interested in 
the proceeding, as discussed herein, to use that process. Under this 
approach, each small entity would be able to evaluate for itself 
whether the pre-filing process would be beneficial or burdensome, and 
could oppose its adoption if the proposed process appeared to be more 
burdensome than beneficial. Under these circumstances, the economic 
impact of the proposed rule would be either neutral or beneficial to 
the small entities affected by it.

VI. Information Collection Statement

    The regulations proposed in this Notice would impose reporting 
burdens only on those applicants that voluntarily choose to use the 
pre-filing collaborative process, and would only require minor 
additional filing requirements, as most of the reporting burdens 
associated with preparing and filing an application for natural gas 
facilities or services are imposed by existing regulations. The other 
additional burdens of the proposed process do not involve filings with 
the Commission, but would consist of various outreach efforts of the 
potential applicant and related interactions with entities interested 
in its proposal. An applicant would presumably only incur such 
additional burdens if it believed that, in the long run, it would save 
on litigation and other costs incurred to pursue its application using 
only the standard procedures.
    The Commission invites comments on the need for and utility of this 
information, the accuracy of the projected burden estimates, ways to 
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be 
collected, and suggestions for minimizing the respondents' burden.
    The Commission has made approximate estimates of the additional 
time that may be required of an applicant to comply with the pre-filing 
collaborative process. It is difficult to be precise about such 
estimates, because the time required for one applicant could vary 
considerably from the time required for other applicants, depending 
upon the circumstances involved, including the complexity of the issues 
raised, the total number of participants in the pre-filing process, and 
how cooperatively those participants worked together. If the pre-filing 
collaborative process were successful and resulted, for example, in the 
filing of an agreement or an offer of settlement with the Commission, 
the applicant might be able to save substantially more time by avoiding 
litigation than was invested in the use of that process. If an 
applicant requested and was allowed to use the pre-filing collaborative 
process for an average project requiring a significant EA or an EIS, 
the main additional burden areas, with the estimated hours to comply 
with each, are:

[[Page 53857]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                       Burden (hours of
                       Process                              effort)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Contact interested entities.....................  80
(2) Prepare and submit request, including             80
 communications protocol.
(3) Prepare and distribute scoping and hold related   32
 meetings.
(4) Develop agenda and other documents, including     802
 minutes, for all meetings and prepare and
 distribute them (only additional time as compared
 to presently required meetings).
(5) Prepare and publish public notices..............  88
(6) Prepare and submit progress reports and make      84
 other required Commission filings.
(7) Maintain a complete record of the pre-filing      208
 consultation proceedings that would be open to the
 public.
                                                     -------------------
    Total...........................................  1374
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It is estimated that to prepare and distribute the preliminary 
draft environmental review document would not take any more time than 
to prepare an environmental report under the standard process. 
Therefore, the estimated additional burden of the tasks required of an 
applicant if it voluntarily undertakes the alternative process totals 
1374 hours.
    Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 14 approval is 
required for certain information collection requirements imposed by 
agency rules. Accordingly, pursuant to OMB regulations, the Commission 
is providing notice of its proposed information collections to OMB for 
review under Section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1995.15. The Commission identifies the information provided 
under Parts 153 and 157 of its regulations as FERC-539 and FERC-537, 
respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 5 CFR 1320.11.
    \15\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Title: FERC-537, Gas Pipeline Certificates: Construction, 
Acquisition, and Abandonment, and, FERC-539, Gas Pipeline Certificate: 
Import/Export.
Action: Proposed Data Collection.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0060 and 1902-0062.
    An applicant shall not be penalized for failure to respond to this 
collection of information unless the collection of information displays 
a valid OMB control number.
    Respondents: Businesses or other for profit, including small 
businesses.
    Frequency of Responses: On occasion.
    Necessity of Information: The proposed rule will revise the 
Commission's regulations contained in 18 CFR parts 153 and 157. 
Implementation of the proposed rule will offer prospective applicants 
seeking to construct, operate, or abandon natural gas facilities or 
services the option, in appropriate circumstances and prior to filing 
an application, of using a collaborative process.
    Internal Review: The Commission has assured itself, by means of its 
internal review, that there is specific, objective support for the 
burden estimates associated with the information requirements. The 
Commission's Office of Pipeline Regulation (OPR) will use the data 
included in applications to determine whether proposed facilities, 
services, or abandonments are in the public interest as well as for 
general industry oversight. This determination involves, among other 
things, an examination of adequacy of design, costs, reliability, 
redundancy, safety, and environmental acceptability of the proposal. 
These requirements conform to the Commission's plan for efficient 
information collection, communication, and management within the 
natural gas industry.
    Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting 
requirements by contacting the following: Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426 [Attention: 
Michael Miller, Office of the Chief Information Officer, Phone: (202) 
208-1415, fax: (202) 273-0873, E-mail: [email protected]].
    For submitting comments concerning the collection of information 
and the associated burden estimates, please send comments to the 
contact listed above and to the Office of Management and Budget, Office 
of Information and Regulatory Affairs, [Attention: Desk Officer for 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, phone (202) 395-3087, fax: (202) 
395-7285].

VII. Comment Procedure and Technical Conferences

    The Commission invites interested persons to submit written 
comments on the matters proposed in this notice. An original and 14 
copies of the written comments must be filed with the Commission no 
later than December 7, 1998 for comments and January 5, 1999 for reply 
comments. Comments should be submitted to the Office of the Secretary, 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, and should refer to Docket No. RM98-16-000. 
Commenters also can submit comments on computer diskette in WordPerfect 
6.1 or lower format or in ASCII format, with the name of the filer and 
Docket No. RM98-16-000 on the outside of the diskette. All comments 
will be placed in the public files of the Commission and will be 
available for inspection at the Commission's Public Reference Room, at 
888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, during regular business 
hours.
    In order to provide some measure of interaction and dialogue in the 
comment process, for the benefit of both the commenters and the 
Commission, the Commission intends for its staff to hold technical 
conferences on the proposed regulations, in Washington, D.C., Houston, 
Texas, and Chicago, Illinois, approximately 30 days from the date of 
publication of this Notice in the Federal Register.

List of Subjects

18 CFR Part 4

    Administrative practice and procedure, Electric power, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements.

18 CFR Part 153

    Exports, Imports, Natural gas, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

18 CFR Part 157

    Administrative practice and procedure, Natural gas, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements.

18 CFR Part 375

    Authority delegations (Government agencies), Seals and insignia, 
Sunshine Act.


[[Page 53858]]


    By direction of the Commission.
David P. Boergers,
Secretary.

    In addition to comments invited on possible changes affecting 18 
CFR part 4 in the Supplementary Information section, the Commission 
proposes to amend Parts 153, 157 and 375 of Chapter I, Title 18, Code 
of Federal Regulations, as set forth below.

PART 153--APPLICATIONS FOR AUTHORIZATION TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE OR 
MODIFY FACILITIES USED FOR THE EXPORT OR IMPORT OF NATURAL GAS

    1. The authority citation for Part 153 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717b, 717o; E.O. 10485, 3 CFR, 1949-1953 
Comp., p. 970, as amended by E.O. 12038, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 136, 
DOE Delegation Order No. 0204-112, 49 FR 6684 (February 22, 1984).

    2. Section 153.12 is added to subpart B, to read as follows:


Sec. 153.12  Collaborative procedures for applications for 
authorization to site, construct, maintain, connect, or modify 
facilities to be used for the export or import of natural gas.

    The pre-filing collaborative procedures for certificate 
applications in Sec. 157.22 of this Chapter are applicable to 
applications under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act filed pursuant to 
subpart B of this part.

PART 157--APPLICATIONS FOR CERTIFICATES OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND 
NECESSITY AND FOR ORDERS PERMITTING AND APPROVING ABANDONMENT UNDER 
SECTION 7 OF THE NATURAL GAS ACT

    3. The authority citation for Part 157 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717-717w; 3301-3432; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352.

    4. Section 157.22 is added, to read as follows:


Sec. 157.22  Collaborative procedures for applications for certificates 
of public convenience and necessity and for orders permitting and 
approving abandonment.

    (a) A potential applicant may submit to the Commission a request to 
approve the use of collaborative procedures for pre-filing consultation 
and the filing and processing of an application for certificate or 
abandonment authorization that is subject to part 157 of this chapter.
    (b) The goals of the pre-filing collaborative procedures are to:
    (1) Combine into a single pre-filing collaborative process, the 
environmental review processes under the National Environmental Policy 
Act, and the administrative processes associated with the Clean Water 
Act, the National Historic Preservation Act, the Endangered Species 
Act, the Coastal Zone Management Act, and other statutes;
    (2) Facilitate greater participation by, and improve communication 
among, the prospective applicant, resource agencies, Indian tribes, 
affected landowners, customers, the public, and Commission staff in a 
flexible pre-filing collaborative process tailored to the circumstances 
of each case;
    (3) Allow for the preparation of a preliminary draft environmental 
assessment by an applicant or its contractor or consultant, or of a 
preliminary draft environmental impact statement by a contractor or 
consultant selected and supervised by the Commission and funded by the 
applicant;
    (4) Promote cooperative efforts by the potential applicant and 
interested entities and encourage them to share information about 
resource impacts and mitigation and enhancement proposals and to narrow 
any areas of disagreement and reach agreement or settlement of the 
issues raised by the certificate or abandonment application; and
    (5) Facilitate an orderly and expeditious review by the Commission 
of an agreement or offer of settlement regarding a certificate or 
abandonment proposal.
    (c) A potential applicant requesting to use the pre-filing 
collaborative procedures must provide a list of potentially interested 
entities invited to participate in a pre-filing collaborative process 
and:
    (1) Demonstrate that a reasonable effort has been made to contact 
all resource agencies, Indian tribes, citizens' groups, landowners, 
customers, and others affected by the applicant's proposal and that a 
consensus exists that the use of the collaborative process is 
appropriate under the circumstances;
    (2) Submit a communications protocol, supported by interested 
entities, governing how the applicant and other participants in the 
pre-filing collaborative process, including the Commission staff, may 
communicate with each other regarding the merits of the applicant's 
proposal and recommendations of interested entities; and
    (3) Submit a request to use the pre-filing collaborative process 
and the day thereafter send a copy of the request, along with the 
docket number of the request and instructions on how to submit comments 
to the Commission, to all affected resource agencies, Indian tribes, 
citizens' groups, landowners, customers, and other entities.
    (d) As appropriate under the circumstances of the case, the request 
to use the pre-filing collaborative procedures must include provisions 
for:
    (1) Distribution of a description of the proposed project 
(including its intended purpose, location and scope, and the estimated 
dates of its construction), and scheduling of an initial information 
meeting (or meetings, if more than one such meeting is appropriate) 
open to the public;
    (2) The cooperative scoping of environmental issues (including 
necessary scientific studies), the analysis of completed studies and 
any further scoping; and
    (3) The preparation of a preliminary draft environmental assessment 
or preliminary draft environmental impact statement and related 
application.
    (e) The Commission will give public notice in the Federal Register 
and the prospective applicant will inform potentially interested 
entities of a request to use the pre-filing collaborative procedures 
and will invite comments on the request. The Commission will consider 
the submitted comments in determining whether to grant or deny the 
applicant's request to use the pre-filing collaborative procedures. 
Such a decision will not be subject to interlocutory rehearing or 
appeal.
    (f) If the Commission accepts the use of a pre-filing collaborative 
process, the following provisions will apply:
    (1) To the extent feasible under the circumstances of the process, 
the Commission will give notice in the Federal Register, and the 
applicant will give notice in a local newspaper of general circulation 
in the county or counties in which the facility is proposed to be 
located, of the initial information meeting or meetings and the scoping 
of environmental issues. The applicant shall also send notice of these 
events to a mailing list approved by the Commission. The mailing list 
must contain the names and addresses of landowners affected by the 
project.
    (2) Every two months, the applicant shall file with the Commission 
a report summarizing the progress made in the pre-filing collaborative 
process, referencing the public file maintained by the applicant as 
provided in Sec. 157.22(f)(5) where additional information on that 
process can be obtained. Summaries or minutes of meetings held as part 
of the collaborative process may be used to satisfy this filing 
requirement.

[[Page 53859]]

    (3) The applicant must also file with the Commission a copy of the 
initial description of its proposed project, each scoping document, and 
the preliminary draft environmental review document.
    (4) All filings with the Commission under this section shall be 
made in the manner prescribed in Secs. 157.6(a), 157.14(a) and 385.2011 
of this chapter. The applicant shall send a copy of these filings to 
each participant that requests a copy.
    (5) At a suitable location (or at more than one location if 
appropriate), the applicant will maintain a public file of all relevant 
documents, including scientific studies, correspondence, and minutes or 
summaries of meetings, compiled during the pre-filing collaborative 
process. The Commission will maintain a public file of the applicant's 
initial description of its proposed project, scoping documents, 
periodic reports on the pre-filing collaborative process, and the 
preliminary draft environmental review document.
    (6) An applicant authorized to use the pre-filing collaborative 
procedures may substitute a preliminary draft environmental review 
document and additional material specified by the Commission instead of 
an environmental report with its application as required by Sec. 380.3 
of this chapter and need not supply additional documentation of the 
pre-filing collaborative process with its application. The applicant 
will file with the Commission the results of any studies conducted or 
other documentation as directed by the Commission, either on its own 
motion or in response to a motion by a party to the proceeding.
    (7) Pursuant to the procedures approved, the participants will set 
reasonable deadlines requiring all resource agencies, Indian tribes, 
citizens' groups, and interested entities to submit to the applicant 
requests for scientific studies or alternative route analyses during 
the pre-filing collaborative process. Additional requests for studies 
may be made to the Commission after the filing of the application only 
for good cause shown.
    (8) During the pre-filing collaborative process the Commission may 
require deadlines for the filing of preliminary resource agency 
recommendations, conditions, and comments, to be submitted in final 
form after the filing of the application.
    (9) Any potential applicant, resource agency, Indian tribe, 
citizens' group, or other entity participating in the pre-filing 
collaborative process may file a request with the Commission to resolve 
a dispute concerning the process (including a dispute over required 
studies), but only after reasonable efforts have been made to resolve 
the dispute with other participants in the process. No such request 
will be accepted for filing unless the entity submitting it certifies 
that the request has been served on all other participants. The request 
must document what efforts have been made to resolve the dispute.
    (g) If the potential applicant or any resource agency, Indian 
tribe, citizens' group, or other entity participating in the pre-filing 
collaborative process can show that it has cooperated in the process 
but that a consensus supporting the use of the pre-filing collaborative 
process no longer exists and that continued use of that process would 
not be productive, the participant may petition the Commission for an 
order directing the use by the potential applicant of appropriate 
procedures to complete its application. No such request will be 
accepted for filing unless the participant submitting it certifies that 
the request has been served on all other participants. The request must 
recommend specific procedures that are appropriate under the 
circumstances.
    (h) The Commission staff may participate in the pre-filing 
collaborative process (and in discussions contemplating initiating a 
collaboration) and assist in the integration of this process and the 
environmental review process in any case. Commission staff positions 
are not binding on the Commission.

PART 375--THE COMMISSION

    3. The authority citation for Part 375 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 551-557; 15 U.S.C. 717-717w, 3301-3432; 16 
U.S.C. 791-825r, 2601-2645; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352.

    4. In Sec. 375.307, a new paragraph (h) is added, to read as 
follows:


Sec. 375.307  Delegations to the Director of the Office of Pipeline 
Regulation.

* * * * *
    (h) Approve, on a case-specific basis, and make such decisions as 
may be necessary in connection with the use of pre-filing collaborative 
procedures, for the development of an application for certificate or 
abandonment authorization under section 7 of the Natural Gas Act, or 
the development of an application for facilities under section 3 of the 
Natural Gas Act, and assist in the pre-filing collaborative and related 
processes.

[FR Doc. 98-26720 Filed 10-6-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P