[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 190 (Monday, October 1, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59739-59745]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23806]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 357

[Docket No. RM11-21-000; Order No. 767]


Revision to Form No. 6

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this Final Rule, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
amends the instructions on page 700 of FERC Form No. 6 (Form 6) to 
ensure that oil pipelines report interstate-only barrel and barrel-mile 
data on lines (11) and (12) of page 700 and not a combination of 
interstate and intrastate throughput. The Commission also directs 
pipelines that reported combined interstate and intrastate data in any 
field on lines (1) through (12) of page 700 of their 2010 Form 6 or 
page 700 of their 2011 Form 6 to file within 90 days of the final 
rule's publication in the Federal Register revised page 700 data 
containing only interstate data for the years 2009, 2010 and 2011.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will become effective December 31, 
2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andrew Knudsen (Legal Information), 
Office of the General Counsel, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 
20426, (202) 502-6527, [email protected]. Michael Lacy (Technical 
Information), Office of Energy Market Regulation, 888 First Street NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8843, [email protected]. Brian 
Holmes (Technical Information), Office of Enforcement, 888 First Street 
NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-6008, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

140 FERC ] 61,218

Before Commissioners: Jon Wellinghoff, Chairman; Philip D. Moeller, 
John R. Norris, Cheryl A. LaFleur, and Tony T. Clark.

Revision to Form No. 6

[Docket No. RM11-21-000]

Order No. 767

Final Rule
Issued September 20, 2012.
    1. In this Final Rule, the Commission amends the instructions on 
page 700, Annual Cost of Service Based Analysis Schedule, of FERC Form 
No. 6, Annual Report of Oil Pipeline Companies, (Form 6) to ensure that 
oil pipelines report interstate-only barrel and barrel-mile data on 
lines (11) and (12) of page 700 and not a combination of interstate and 
intrastate throughput.\1\ The Commission also directs pipelines that 
reported combined interstate and intrastate data in any field on lines 
(1) through (12) of page 700 of their 2010 Form 6 \2\ or their 2011 
Form 6 \3\ to file within 90 days of the final rule's publication in 
the Federal Register

[[Page 59740]]

revised page 700 data containing only interstate data for the years 
2009, 2010, and 2011.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Concurrent with the issuance of this Final Rule, the 
Commission is proposing additional changes to Page 700 of Form 6 in 
a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in Docket No. RM12-18-000.
    \2\ Pipelines filed their 2010 FERC Form 6 on April 18, 2011.
    \3\ Pipelines filed their 2011 FERC Form 6 on April 18, 2012.
    \4\ 2009 data will be reported in Column C of the revised 2010 
Form 6, page 700. 2010 data will be reported in Column B of the 
revised 2010 Form 6, page 700 and Column C of the revised 2011 Form 
6, page 700. 2011 data will be reported in Column B of the revised 
2011 Form 6, page 700.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background

    2. Page 700 of Form 6 serves as a preliminary screening tool for 
shippers to evaluate interstate pipeline rates subject to the 
Commission's jurisdiction.\5\ Thus, in Order Nos. 620 and 620-A, the 
Commission clarified that page 700 must include only jurisdictional 
costs and jurisdictional revenues (i.e. interstate costs and interstate 
revenues) and not a combination of jurisdictional and non-
jurisdictional data.\6\ Page 700 contains data for the current year and 
previous year, which allows shippers and the Commission to evaluate the 
pipeline's cost changes during the prior year.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ All jurisdictional pipelines are required to file page 700, 
including pipelines exempt from filing the full Form 6. 18 CFR 
Sec. Sec.  357.2(a)(2) and (a)(3) (2011).
    \6\ Revisions to and Electronic Filing of the FERC Form No. 6 
and Related Uniform Systems of Accounts, Order No. 620, FERC Stats. 
& Regs. ] 31,115, at 31,959, on reh'g, 94 FERC ] 61,130, at 61,498 
(2001).
    \7\ Page 700 of the 2010 Form 6 contains data for 2010 and 2009. 
Following the issuance of the NOPR, pipelines filed the 2011 Form 6 
on April 18, 2012, which contains page 700 data for 2011 and 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. On July 29, 2011, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (NOPR) \8\ proposing to modify the instructions for line 
(11) \9\ and line (12) \10\ of page 700 to specify that pipelines must 
report only interstate barrels and interstate barrel-miles, not a 
combination of interstate and intrastate throughput. The NOPR observed 
that the current instructions on page 700 for lines (11) and (12) may 
inadvertently have caused some pipelines to report barrel and barrel-
mile throughput that combines interstate and intrastate data.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Revision to Form No. 6, 76 FR 46668 (Aug. 3, 2011), FERC 
Stats. & Regs. ] 32,677 (2011) (NOPR).
    \9\ Instruction number 4 on page 700 of the Form 6.
    \10\ Instruction number 5 on page 700 of the Form 6.
    \11\ Specifically, the instruction for line (12) on page 700 
directs pipelines to report the same barrel-mile figures as those 
reported on line 33a of page 600 of the Form 6. Similarly, the 
instruction for line (11) on page 700 directs pipelines to report 
the same barrel figures as those reported on line 33b of page 601 of 
the Form 6. Thus, the instructions on page 700 specify that the 
throughput data reported on page 700 is the same throughput data 
that is reported on page 600-601. The instructions for page 600 
direct pipelines to include ``all oils received'' by the pipeline, 
which consequently may have led some filers to report combined 
interstate and intrastate barrel-miles on lines (11) and (12) of 
page 700.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. In addition to modifying the instructions for the page 700, the 
NOPR further proposed to require any pipeline that reported combined 
interstate and intrastate data in lines (1) through (12) on page 700 to 
file a revised page 700 of the 2010 Form 6 containing interstate-only 
data for 2009 and 2010.
    5. On April 18, 2012, following the issuance of the NOPR and after 
the filing of comments in this proceeding, pipelines filed the 2011 
Form 6, which contains page 700 data for 2011 and 2010.

II. Comments

    6. Comments on the NOPR were due on October 3, 2011. Comments were 
filed by Valero Marketing and Supply Company (Valero); Air Transport 
Association of America and the National Propane Gas Association (ATA/
NPGA); Magellan Pipeline, L.P. (Magellan); Association of Oil Pipelines 
(AOPL); \12\ Enbridge Pipelines Inc.; and R. Gordon Gooch (Mr. Gooch). 
AOPL, Valero and Mr. Gooch filed reply comments, which the Commission 
accepts as they assisted our decision-making process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ AOPL states that it is a nonprofit trade association that 
represents the interests of common carrier oil pipelines. AOPL 
states that its members transport almost 85 percent of the crude oil 
and refined petroleum products shipped through pipelines in the 
United States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

A. Clarification to Page 700 Requiring That All Pipelines Report 
Interstate-Only Barrels and Barrel Miles

1. The NOPR
    7. The NOPR proposed to modify the instructions for line (11) and 
line (12) of page 700 to specify that pipelines must report only 
interstate barrels and interstate barrel-miles and not a combination of 
interstate and intrastate throughput.
2. Comments
    8. Valero, ATA/NPGA, and Mr. Gooch support the clarification that 
pipelines are to report on page 700 only interstate barrels and barrel-
miles. They state that this change is consistent with the purpose of 
page 700. Magellan also states that it supports the proposal. AOPL and 
Enbridge state that they do not oppose the proposal to change the 
instructions on page 700.
3. Discussion
    9. The Commission adopts the proposal to clarify that the barrel 
and barrel-mile data reported on lines (11) and (12) of page 700 must 
include interstate-only data and may not comingle interstate and 
intrastate data. None of the parties oppose this change. This 
modification will ensure that the interstate-only revenues and costs 
currently required to be reported on page 700 are accompanied by 
interstate-only volumes.

B. Filing Revised Page 700

1. The NOPR
    10. The NOPR proposed that pipelines that reported combined 
interstate and intrastate data in lines (1) through (12) on page 700 
should file a corrected 2010 Form 6 page 700 containing interstate only 
data for 2009 and 2010.
2. Comments
i. Initial Comments
    11. Valero, ATA/NPGA, and Mr. Gooch support requiring pipelines 
that included intrastate data in the page 700 on the 2010 Form 6 to 
file revised 2009 and 2010 data containing interstate-only information. 
In addition, Valero and ATA/NPGA request that the Commission require 
pipelines to re-file corrected page 700 going back to the 2005 Form 6. 
Valero, ATA/NPGA, and Mr. Gooch state that once the Commission has 
gathered the page 700 information, it should then re-evaluate the 
appropriateness of the current oil pipeline index \13\ based upon the 
prior years' page 700 information. The current index adjustment is the 
result of the Commission's recent five-year review of the index 
conducted in 2010.\14\ Shipper parties had proposed using page 700 in 
the 2010 five-year review of the index level and now claim that the 
Commission rejected the use of the page 700 data only due to the 
interstate/intrastate mismatch on page 700, which is being remedied by 
this proceeding. Valero argues that burden on pipelines of re-filing 
data back to 2005 is likely to be negligible. Extrapolating from the 
cost estimates in the NOPR, Valero asserts that re-filing corrected 
Form 6, page 700 going back to 2005 would be $171.10 for a pipeline 
that is re-filing all five-years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Under the index, an oil pipeline may change its ceiling 
rates effective every July 1 by multiplying the previous index 
year's ceiling rates by the index multiplier published by the 
Commission. The index is currently set at the Producer Price Index 
for Finished Goods (PPI-FG) plus an adjustment factor of 2.65 
percent.
    \14\ Five-Year Review of Oil Pipeline Pricing Index, 133 FERC ] 
61,228, at P 64-85 (2010) (2010 Five-Year Index Review), reh'g 
denied, 135 FERC ] 61,172, at P 27-43 (2011) (2010 Five-Year Index 
Review Rehearing).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    12. In contrast, AOPL, Magellan, and Enbridge oppose requiring any 
pipeline

[[Page 59741]]

that comingled interstate and intrastate costs to re-submit 2009 page 
700 data. AOPL and Magellan assert that there is no compelling 
regulatory need for the 2009 data. AOPL argues that requiring 2009 data 
is a retroactive action that is contrary to the precepts of 
administrative law.\15\ These parties do not raise objections to filing 
interstate-only 2010 data as part of the 2011 Form 6 to be filed on 
April 18, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ AOPL Comments at 6 (citing Bowen v. Georgetown Univ. 
Hospital, 488 U.S. 204, 208 (1988)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    13. Additionally, AOPL and Magellan dispute the NOPR's estimate 
that re-filing 2009 and 2010 data will only be one hour per filer. AOPL 
contends that it can be difficult to determine whether a movement is 
interstate or intrastate. Similarly, Magellan states that until the 
most recent 2010 Form 6 filed on April 18, 2011, Magellan filed 
comingled interstate and intrastate throughput and operating cost data 
on its page 700. Based upon its own experience, Magellan estimates that 
revisions to 2009 data for other pipelines would require forty man-
hours over a three-week period involving multiple personnel.
ii. Reply Comments
    14. In its reply comments, AOPL asserts that Valero, ATA/NPGA, and 
Mr. Gooch's proposal to require re-filing of page 700 data going back 
the 2005 Form 6 is an improper collateral attack on the Commission's 
decisions in the 2010 Five-Year Index Review. AOPL adds that if the 
Commission considers using page 700 to calculate the index in the 
future, the Commission must address the objections that were raised in 
the last five-year review.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ AOPL Comments at 3 (citing Reply Comments of the 
Association of Oil Pipe Lines at 30-37, Docket No. RM10-25-000 
(Sept. 20, 2010); Response of the Association of Oil Pipe Lines at 
19-28, Docket No. RM10-25-000 (Oct. 20, 2010)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    15. Also in its reply comments, AOPL reiterates its position that 
the request for corrected 2009 data has not been justified. AOPL 
contends that the burden of recalculating the 2010 Form 6, page 700 
data substantially exceeds the one hour per filer estimated by the 
NOPR. AOPL states that sorting out the jurisdictional status of 
individual pipeline movements and recalculating the correct number of 
barrels and barrel-miles to each destination can be quite time 
consuming. Responding to Valero, ATA/NPGA, and Mr. Gooch, AOPL states 
that the further back in time the recalculation is required, the more 
difficult the data is to reconstruct. AOPL adds that there have been 
significant changes in pipeline ownership and operations since 2005, 
making it more difficult to reconstruct historic data.
    16. In its reply comments, Valero denies that its request is a 
collateral attack on the 2010 Five-Year Index Review. Valero emphasizes 
the importance of the index level for shipper costs. Citing the NOPR's 
estimate of a total cost of $11,362.70 to correct the referenced 
reporting errors for the years 2009 and 2010, Valero asserts that 
requiring pipelines to file corrected data for 2006, 2007, and 2008 
would cost $35,000. Valero disputes AOPL's and Magellan's claims 
regarding burden of filing revised interstate-only page 700 
information. Valero observes that only one pipeline (Magellan) raised 
objections to the Commission's burden estimate. Valero states that 
pipelines such as Magellan already report intrastate and interstate 
revenue on page 301 of the Form 6. Thus, Valero concludes that 
pipelines should be fully aware of the corresponding interstate and 
intrastate movements, barrels, and barrel-miles, underlying these 
reported revenue amounts. Valero notes that pipelines are already 
required to report interstate-only data for lines (1) through (10).
3. Commission Determination
    17. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to require any pipeline 
that reported comingled interstate and intrastate data on lines (1) 
through (12) of the 2010 Form 6, page 700 to file revised 2010 Form 6, 
page 700 data for the years 2010 and 2009. In addition, following the 
issuance of the NOPR and after the filing of comments, pipelines filed 
the 2011 Form 6 on April 18, 2012, which contains page 700 data for 
2011 and 2010.
    18. Accordingly, the Commission directs any pipeline that reported 
combined interstate and intrastate data in any field on lines (1) 
through (12) of page 700 of its 2010 Form 6 or page 700 of its 2011 
Form 6 to file revised page 700 data containing only interstate data 
for the years 2009, 2010 and 2011.
    19. This action ensures the availability of complete interstate 
cost per barrel-mile data consistent with the Commission's regulation 
of interstate oil pipeline rates and the intent of page 700 to enable 
the Commission and shippers to analyze interstate pipeline costs. For 
example, the interstate-only information for the year 2009, 2010 and 
2011 will provide the Commission with useful information during the 
next five-year review of the Commission's index level.\17\ In the 
recent 2010 Five-Year Index Review, parties urged the Commission to 
modify its existing practice and to use page 700 data to calculate the 
oil pipeline index.\18\ The Commission determined that it could not use 
data from page 700 because the page 700 instructions, which are being 
corrected by this order, created a ``mismatch between the page 700 
total cost-of-service, which includes only interstate data, and the 
page 700 throughput data, which includes interstate and intrastate 
data.'' \19\ Thus, by collecting the interstate-only page 700 data for 
2009, 2010 and 2011, as directed by this order, the Commission will 
have available complete page 700 data for the five-year (2009-2014) 
period to use during the 2015 Five-Year Index Review if deemed 
appropriate.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Under the index, an oil pipeline may change its ceiling 
rates effective every July 1 by multiplying the previous index 
year's ceiling rates by the index multiplier published by the 
Commission. The Commission reviews the index level every five years 
to determine whether it continues to track oil pipeline cost changes 
and to revise the index level if necessary. The Commission completed 
its most recent review, establishing an index level to be effective 
for the period July 1, 2011, through June 30, 2016, of the Producer 
Price Index for Finished Goods (PPI-FG) plus an adjustment factor of 
2.65 percent. 2010 Five-Year Index Review, 133 FERC ] 61,228, reh'g 
denied, 135 FERC ] 61,172.
    \18\ The Commission has historically used data from elsewhere on 
the Form 6, not the page 700. Specifically the Commission has used 
data drawn from the Form 6: Carrier Property, page 110; Accrued 
Depreciation, page 111; Operating Revenues and Operating Expenses, 
page 114; Crude and Products Barrel-Miles, page 600. 2010 Five-Year 
Index Review, 133 FERC ] 61,228 at n.9.
    \19\ 2010 Five-Year Index Review, 133 FERC ] 61,228 at P 83.
    \20\ In each five-year review, the Commission has considered 
cost per barrel mile changes over the prior five year period. E.g., 
2010 Five-Year Index Review, 133 FERC ] 61,228 at P 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    20. The Commission will not require pipelines to file revised page 
700 data for the years prior to 2009. The sole purpose given by Valero, 
ATA/NPGA, and Mr. Gooch for requesting this information is to 
reconsider the conclusions of the Commission's 2010 Five-Year Index 
Review. The proposal to revisit the indexing calculation is a 
collateral attack on the recently completed 2010 Five-Year Index 
Review, which has been administratively final as of the Commission's 
order on rehearing.\21\ A request to further reconsider the 
Commission's indexing methodology and to re-calculate the index level 
is unnecessary given the scope of that proceeding and the use of the 
Commission's established methodology.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 2010 Five-Year Index Review Rehearing, 135 FERC ] 61,172.
    \22\ Id. P 43.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    21. In response to AOPL, Magellan, and Enbridge, the Commission 
does not view the re-filing requirement for the

[[Page 59742]]

2010 Form 6, page 700 and the 2011 Form 6, page 700 as creating an 
undue burden. The Commission is not persuaded that requiring pipelines 
to file revised 2009, 2010 or 2011 interstate only page 700 data will 
be as difficult or costly as AOPL, Magellan, and Enbridge suggest. This 
requirement will only affect pipelines that filed comingled interstate 
and intrastate data on the page 700. Regarding cost and revenue data, 
the Commission's directive does not impose an expense on pipeline 
parties that is not already embodied in existing Commission rules. The 
Commission clarified over a decade ago that cost and revenue 
information reported on lines (1) through (10) of page 700 data should 
include interstate-only data.\23\ No party disputes this.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ In Order No. 620-A, the Commission stated:
    The Commission never intended in the Final Rule to have a 
pipeline report its non-jurisdictional costs on page 700.* * * [W]e 
take this opportunity to clarify Order No. 620 that the cost-of-
service and revenue data reported on page 700 will be the cost of 
service and revenues related to FERC jurisdictional services.
    94 FERC at 61,498.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    22. Regarding the barrel and barrel-mile data on lines (11) and 
(12), Magellan and AOPL contend that it is sometimes difficult to 
determine whether a shipment is interstate or intrastate. However, 
compliance with the existing requirement for pipelines to file only 
interstate costs and revenues on lines (1) through (10) requires a 
similar determination distinguishing between interstate shipments and 
intrastate shipments.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Page 301 of the Form 6 also requires pipelines to 
separately identify interstate revenues and intrastate revenues. 
Furthermore, under the Interstate Commerce Act (ICA), carriers must 
charge the correct rate on file for transportation service, and 
shippers are required to provide accurate information regarding the 
nature of their shipments in order to ensure that the correct rate 
is charged, which would include distinguishing interstate and 
intrastate rates. See 49 app. U.S.C. 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Magellan's Request for Clarification

    23. Magellan requests that the Commission permit flexibility in the 
methodology that pipelines adopt for allocating intrastate and 
interstate cost data in page 700. Magellan asserts that it is not 
possible to precisely segregate interstate cost data from intrastate 
cost data in all instances. Thus, Magellan asserts that a dual use 
pipeline will need to develop its own methodology for allocating such 
costs. Magellan states that prior to the Form No. 6 it filed in 2010, 
Magellan included both interstate and intrastate data on page 700. 
Magellan states that to do so, it developed and adopted a methodology 
to allocate operating expenses between interstate and intrastate 
movements based upon a barrel-mile analysis. Thus, Magellan states that 
it used this methodology to allocate operating expenses between 
interstate and intrastate movements on a barrel-mile basis.
    24. The Commission will deny Magellan's request. We will not pass 
judgment in this proceeding on past or future page 700 submissions or 
the methodologies used to separate interstate from intrastate. The 
purpose of this order is to modify the instructions for lines (11) and 
(12) of page 700 related to reporting barrels and barrel-miles of 
throughput. In filing page 700, pipelines are required to follow the 
Commission's cost-of-service methodology. Magellan's request for 
clarification is further inapposite because the Commission clarified a 
decade ago in Order No. 620-A\25\ that pipelines were only to report 
interstate (as opposed to interstate and intrastate) costs on lines (1) 
through (10) of page 700. To the extent that Magellan is concerned that 
its system creates novel circumstances, Magellan can seek specific 
guidance from the Commission or Commission Staff regarding the 
particular allocation methodology that it has adopted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Order No. 620-A, 94 FERC at 61,498.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Other Issues

1. Comments
    25. The parties raised multiple issues related to other aspects of 
page 700 or Form 6. Valero and ATA/NPGA contend that revisions should 
be made to page 700 so that each pipeline and/or system is separately 
reported on page 700.\26\ Valero and ATA/NPGA also argue that pipelines 
should be required to provide the workpapers supporting page 700 to the 
shippers. ATA/NPGA also proposes to require pipelines to file the 
entire Form 6 before they can file for an index rate increase.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Currently, page 700 data contains total company data that 
is not broken down by pipeline or system. Valero Comments at 16. For 
example, Valero states that Mid-America Pipeline Company, LLC, has 
three distinct and separate systems, each with their own separate 
cost of service. Valero states that without being able to evaluate 
the cost of service for the specific segments at issue, it is 
impossible for shippers to determine the appropriateness or 
reasonableness of a particular segment's rates.
    \27\ Currently, pipelines with operating revenues less than 
$500,000 but more than $350,000 are only required to file page 301, 
``Operating Revenues Accounts (Account 600)'' and page 700. 18 CFR 
Sec.  357(a)(2) (2011). Pipelines with operating revenues less than 
$350,000 must only file page 700. Id. Sec.  357(a)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    26. Parties also raised issues not involving Form 6. ATA/NPGA 
further asserts that the Commission should change the interest rate 
applicable to refunds and reparations. ATA/NPGA and Mr. Gooch also 
raise issues related to alleged over-recoveries by certain pipelines. 
ATA/NPGA and Mr. Gooch argue that pipelines showing over-recoveries on 
their Form No. 6 annual report should be required to show cause why 
their rates should not be considered unjust and unreasonable. Mr. Gooch 
also objects to the Commission's regulations and policies regarding 
protests and complaints against oil pipeline rates. Valero asserts that 
the Commission should clarify that shippers retain the right to 
challenge, via protest or complaint, the 2011 index rate increases for 
pipelines that have filed deficient cost and revenue data on page 700. 
Mr. Gooch also asks that the Commission clarify precisely how barrel-
miles may be used to demonstrate reasonable grounds to believe that the 
rate increase is ``substantially divergent'' from the costs so that the 
resulting rates may not be just and reasonable.
    27. In its reply comments, AOPL states that these comments are 
beyond the scope. AOPL adds that the Shippers have repeatedly raised 
and the Commission has repeatedly rejected (a) proposals to segregate 
Form 6 and page 700 data by pipeline system and (b) require pipelines 
to file their page 700 workpapers with the Form 6.\28\ AOPL states that 
nothing has changed since the Commission last rejected these proposals 
in 2008. Specifically responding to Mr. Gooch's comments regarding 
pipeline over-recoveries, AOPL states that shippers have the option to 
file a complaint to the extent that they are concerned with the level 
of individual pipeline rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ AOPL Reply Comments at 5 (citing Cost of Service Reporting 
and Filing Requirements for Oil Pipelines, Order No. 571, FERC 
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,006, at 31,168-169 (1994); Order No. 620, FERC 
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,115 at 31,959; Review of FERC Form Nos. 6 and 6-
Q, 125 FERC ] 61,308, at P 5-9 (2008)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    28. In his reply comments, Mr. Gooch contends that his comments are 
not beyond the scope because, he argues, they are a constitutionally 
protected petition for a redress of grievances. Mr. Gooch also 
reiterates his comments regarding alleged over-recoveries by certain 
pipelines and asserts that it is difficult to file complaints.
2. Commission Decision
    29. These issues are beyond the scope of this proceeding, which is 
limited to a minor correction to the throughput levels reported on page 
700 and obtaining corrected data for 2009, 2010, and 2011. No party 
opposed the limited change to page 700 that was actually

[[Page 59743]]

presented in the NOPR. Given the limited nature of the NOPR, this 
proceeding is not the appropriate forum for considering additional 
changes to FERC Form No. 6, such as the segregation of data or changing 
Commission policy to make available pipeline cost-of-service 
workpapers. Other issues, such as the Commission's policies regarding 
protests to pipeline rates, are also not before the Commission and will 
be addressed as they arise in litigation.

IV. Information Collection Statement

    30. The Commission's estimate of the additional Public Reporting 
Burden and cost related to the final rule in Docket RM11-21-000 follow. 
The Commission recognizes that there will be a one-time increased 
burden involved in the initial implementation associated with: (a) 
Using only interstate figures for lines 1-12 of page 700, and (b) re-
filing of revised data for lines (1) through (12) of page 700 for 2009, 
2010, and 2011. Given the time it takes to verify data and file it with 
the Commission, we may have underestimated the one hour average per 
filer. Consequently we have revised the average burden to four hours 
for filing corrected 2009 and 2010 page 700 data. In this final rule, 
the Commission is also seeking revised 2011 data. Thus, we estimate an 
additional one-time burden of six hours per filer for the combined 
implementation and the re-filing of the page 700 for the 2009, 2010, 
and 2011 data. For the recurring effort involved in filing interstate 
data on lines (1) through (12) of page 700 for 2012 and future years, 
we estimate that the change in burden is negligible (after the initial 
implementation).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Estimated         Total         Estimated
                                                                    additional       estimated      additional
              RM11-21, FERC Form 6                Annual No.  of     one-time       additional    one-time  cost
                                                      filers        burden per       one-time     per  filer ($)
                                                                    filer (Hr.)    burden (Hr.)        \29\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation Burden (one-time); and Re-filing         \30\ 166               6             996         $414.06
 of Page 700, lines 1-12 for 2009-2010 (one-
 time)..........................................
    Total.......................................             166  ..............             996      $68,733.96
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The additional one-time burden of 996 hours is being spread over 
the three years for the purposes of submittal to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB), giving an average additional annual burden 
of 332 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Based on an estimated average cost per employee for 2012 
(including salary plus benefits) of $143,540, the estimated average 
hourly cost per employee is $69.01. The average work year is 2,080 
hours.
    \30\ Although 166 pipelines file page 700, the number of 
pipelines that must file corrected information will likely be 
substantially less. Some pipelines only transport interstate 
shipments and thus would have reported only interstate data on page 
700. Other pipelines may have reported only interstate data on lines 
(1)-(12) on page 700, and these pipelines would not need to file 
additional data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Information Collection Costs: The Commission seeks comments on the 
costs and burden to comply with these requirements.
    Total additional one-time cost = $68,733.96.
    Title: FERC Form No. 6, Annual Report of Oil Pipeline Companies.
    Action: Revision to the FERC Form 6.
    OMB Control No: 1902-0022.
    Respondents: Public and non-public utilities.
    Frequency of Responses: Initial implementation and one-time re-
filing of selected data for 2009, 2010, and 2011.
    Necessity of the Information: This action ensures the availability 
of complete interstate cost per barrel-mile data consistent with the 
Commission's regulation of interstate oil and petroleum product 
pipeline rates and the intent of page 700 to enable the Commission and 
shippers to analyze interstate pipeline costs.
    Internal review: The Commission has reviewed the proposed changes 
and has determined that the changes are necessary. These requirements 
conform to the Commission's need for efficient information collection, 
communication, and management within the energy industry. The 
Commission has assured itself, by means of internal review, that there 
is specific, objective support for the burden estimates associated with 
the information collection requirements.
    31. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting 
requirements by contacting: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 
First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426 [Attention: Ellen Brown, Office 
of the Executive Director, email: [email protected], Phone: (202) 
502-8663, fax: (202) 273-0873]. Comments on the requirements of this 
rule may also be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503 
[Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission]. 
For security reasons, comments should be sent by email to OMB at [email protected]. Please reference OMB Control No. 1902-0022, 
FERC-6 and the docket number of this rulemaking in your submission.

V. Environmental Analysis

    32. 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.\31\ The 
actions taken here fall within categorical exclusions in the 
Commission's regulations for information gathering, analysis, and 
dissemination.\32\ Therefore, an environmental assessment is 
unnecessary and has not been prepared in this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy 
Act, Order No. 486, 486 FR 1750 (Jan. 22, 1988), FERC Stats. & Regs. 
] 30,783 (1987).
    \32\ 18 CFR Sec.  380.4(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    33. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) requires agencies 
to prepare certain statements, descriptions, and analyses of proposed 
rules that will have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities.\33\ Agencies are not required to make such an 
analysis if a rule would not have such an effect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ 5 U.S.C. 601-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    34. The Commission does not believe that this rule will have an 
adverse impact on small entities, nor will it impose upon them any 
significant costs of compliance. The Commission identified 29 small 
entities as respondents to the requirements in the proposed rule.\34\ 
As explained above,

[[Page 59744]]

the change to page 700 will not increase the burden of preparing page 
700. Further, the time required to implement changes and to file any 
necessary one-time revision of the page 700 data as specified in this 
order is minimal (an average of six hours per company). The Commission 
does not estimate that there are any other regulatory burdens 
associated with this final rule. Thus, the Commission certifies that 
the final rule would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ The RFA definition of ``small entity'' refers to the 
definition provided in the Small Business Act, which defines a 
``small business concern'' as a business that is independently owned 
and operated and that is not dominant in its field of operation. 15 
U.S.C. 632. The Small Business Size Standards component of the North 
American Industry Classification System defines a small oil pipeline 
company as one with less than 1,500 employees. See 13 CFR 121, 201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification

    35. These regulations are effective December 31, 2012. The 
Commission has determined, with the concurrence of the Administrator of 
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, that this rule 
is not a ``major rule'' as defined in section 351 of the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996.

VIII. Document Availability

    36. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the 
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an 
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the 
Internet through FERC's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and in FERC's 
Public Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 
p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 
20426.
    37. From FERC's Home Page on the Internet, this information is 
available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on 
eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or 
downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket 
number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket 
number field.
    38. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the FERC's Web 
site during normal business hours from FERC Online Support at (202) 
502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at 
[email protected], or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY (202) 502-8659. Email the Public Reference Room at 
[email protected].

    By direction of the Commission.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.

    Note: Appendix A will not be published in the Code of Federal 
Regulations.

Appendix A--Summary of Proposed Changes to FERC Form 6, Page 700

Instruction 4 is revised to read as follows:
    Enter on line 11, columns b and c, the interstate throughput in 
barrels for the current and previous calendar years.

Instruction 5 is revised to read as follows:
    Enter on line 12, columns b and c, the interstate throughput in 
barrel-miles for the current and previous calendar years.

Line 11 is revised to read as follows:
    Total Interstate Throughput in Barrels

Line 12 is revised to read as follows:
    Total Interstate Throughput in Barrel-Miles


    Note: Appendix B will not be published in the Code of Federal 
Regulations.

Appendix B: Revised Page 700 to Form 6

[[Page 59745]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01OC12.010

[FR Doc. 2012-23806 Filed 9-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P