NOPR in RM19-12 published in Fed. Reg.

1412

Proposed Rules

Federal Register
Vol. 84, No. 23
Monday, February 4, 2019

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
18 CFR Parts 141 and 385
[Docket No. RM19–12–000]

Revisions to the Filing Process for
Commission Forms
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, DOE.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:

The Commission is proposing
to transition from the current use of the
Visual FoxPro software, which is no
longer supported by its developer, to a
type of Extensible Markup Language
(XML) called eXtensible Business
Reporting Language (XBRL). The XBRL
standard would be used to file the
Commission’s Form Nos. 1, 1–F, 2,
2–A, 3–Q electric, 3–Q natural gas, 6, 6–
Q, 60, and 714. The use of XBRL should
make the information in these forms
easier for filers and data users to analyze
and assist in automating regulatory
filings and business information
processing. In addition, the Commission
believes that transitioning from the
current Visual FoxPro system to XBRL
will decrease the costs, over time, of
preparing the necessary data for
submission and complying with future
changes to filing requirements set forth
by the Commission. The Commission is
also proposing to revise its regulations
to require filers of Form No. 1–F to file
their report in electronic media.
DATES: Comments are due March 6,
2019.
ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by
docket number, may be filed
electronically at http://www.ferc.gov in
acceptable native applications and
print-to-PDF, but not in scanned or
picture format. For those unable to file
electronically, comments may be filed
by mail or hand-delivery to: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission,
Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. The

amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1

SUMMARY:

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:11 Feb 01, 2019

Jkt 247001

Comment Procedures Section of this
document contains more detailed filing
procedures.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Hudson (Technical Information),
Office of Enforcement, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20426,
(202) 502–6620, Robert.Hudson@
ferc.gov.
Michael Chase (Legal Information),
Office of General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE, Washington, DC
20426, (202) 502–6205,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents

Paragraph

I. Background .......................................
II. Discussion ........................................
A. Proposed Adoption of XBRL ...
B. Proposed Process for Developing the XBRL Based Solution
C. Regulatory Text Revisions .......
III. Information Collection Statement
IV. Environmental Analysis ................
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act ...............
VI. Comment Procedures .....................
VII. Document Availability ..................

1.
4.
4.
19.
22.
23.
33.
34.
38.
42.

I. Background
1. Under the Commission’s
regulations, certain entities are required
to report information to the Commission
by filing one or more forms.1 Currently,
these entities use a Commissiondistributed software application called
Visual FoxPro. Each entity is required to
gather its relevant financial and other
data and enter the data into Visual
FoxPro, which the entity maintains on
its own computer system. The entity
1 See 18 CFR 141.1 (requiring annual filing of
FERC Form No. 1, Annual report of Major electric
utilities, licensees and others); 18 CFR 141.2 (2018)
(requiring annual filing of FERC Form No. 1–F,
Annual report for Nonmajor public utilities and
licensees); 18 CFR 260.1 (requiring annual filing of
FERC Form No. 2, Annual report for Major natural
gas companies); 18 CFR 260.2 (requiring annual
filing of FERC Form No. 2–A, Annual report for
Nonmajor natural gas companies); 18 CFR 141.400
and 18 CFR 260.300 (requiring quarterly filing of
FERC Form No. 3–Q, Quarterly financial report of
electric utilities, licensees, and natural gas
companies); 18 CFR 357.2 (requiring annual filing
of FERC Form No. 6, Annual Report of Oil Pipeline
Companies); 18 CFR 357.4 (2018) (requiring
quarterly filing of FERC Form No. 6–Q, Quarterly
report of oil pipeline companies); 18 CFR 141.51
(requiring annual filing of FERC Form No. 714,
Annual Electric Balancing Authority Area and
Planning Area Report); and 18 CFR 366.23 and 18
CFR 369.1 (requiring annual filing of FERC Form
No. 60, Annual reports of centralized service
companies).

PO 00000

Frm 00001

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

then uses the Visual FoxPro software to
transmit the information to the
Commission. However, Microsoft
Corporation, the developer of Visual
FoxPro, no longer supports this
product.2
2. Recognizing that Microsoft
Corporation no longer supports Visual
FoxPro, on April 25, 2015, the
Commission issued an order
announcing its intention to replace the
current Visual FoxPro filing format for
Form Nos. 1, 1–F, 2, 2–A, 3–Q electric,
3–Q natural gas, 6, 6–Q, 60, and 714
(collectively, the VFP Forms) with an
XML-based filing format.3 The
Commission stated that XML is the
current industry standard for
submission of electronic data, such as
that captured in its forms, and that the
XML data format has significant
advantages over other approaches
because it is non-proprietary, and would
establish a single standard for nearly all
Commission forms while also providing
consistency with the Commission’s
current electronic tariff (eTariff) filings
and the Electric Quarterly Report (EQR)
systems.4 The XML format facilitates the
sharing of data across different
information systems, particularly via the
internet, by structuring the data using
tags to identify particular data elements.
3. The Commission noted that the
North American Energy Standards
Board (NAESB) 5 had helped facilitate
meetings to develop the Commission’s
eTariff system, and the Commission
directed Commission staff to seek
NAESB’s assistance in the process of
developing standards for the submission
of the VFP Forms to the Commission in
the new XML format.6 NAESB
facilitated 18 meetings during which the
transition of the forms was discussed.
Commission staff also discussed the
filing of financial forms with other
federal agencies.
2 The Commission has used Visual FoxPro, a
Microsoft Windows-based programming language,
since 1997.
3 Electronic Filing Protocols for Commission
Forms, 151 FERC ¶ 61,025 (2015) (April 2015
Order).
4 Id. P 5.
5 NAESB serves as a forum for the development
and promotion of standards for wholesale and retail
natural gas and electric industries. In response to
the Commission’s request on this matter, NAESB
performed specific outreach to the oil pipeline
industry to include participation from that sector.
6 April 2015 Order, 151 FERC ¶ 61,025 at P 10.

E:\FR\FM\04FEP1.SGM

04FEP1

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 23 / Monday, February 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules
II. Discussion

amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1

A. Proposed Adoption of XBRL
4. Based on these discussions, while
we continue to find that XML is the
most suitable format for filing
Commission forms, we think a standard
built on XML called eXtensible Business
Reporting Language (XBRL) would be a
superior method for both the
Commission and filing entities to use.
XBRL was developed specifically for
reporting financial data and is used
widely for reporting business and
financial information.
5. The energy industry currently uses
XML format to submit other filings and
reports to the Commission, including
eTariff and EQR.7 In the April 2015
Order, the Commission noted that XML
is commonly used to submit electronic
data, and the Commission explained the
features of XML that give it significant
advantages over other approaches. In
the April 2015 Order, the Commission
also noted that other potential means of
communicating electronic data, such as
uploading a file formatted in commaseparated value (CSV) or using webbased forms either alone, or in
combination, are less flexible and
efficient than XML file uploads, and
would be more expensive and timeconsuming to develop and maintain.8
Among other things, the Commission
noted that CSV uploads are difficult to
error check, would require conversion
that has the potential to create data
errors, and will not easily accommodate
the large and complex footnotes that
often accompany financial data.
6. In the April 2015 Order, the
Commission determined that, rather
than filers having to input their data
into a proprietary database application,
the XML format would permit filers to
develop, or obtain from third-party
vendors, a system for collecting form
information that is best suited to their
own internal systems.9 This approach
would enable filers to maintain their
own information and data in the formats
that they prefer and then repackage that
material for submission to the
Commission at the appropriate time.
Using the XML format similarly would
reduce costs for the Commission to
process the information. Adopting the
XML format also would eliminate the
need for the Commission to provide
software to filers. This approach allows
for the independent design and
implementation of future filing
7 The Commission has required filers to submit in
XML for eTariff and provides an XML option for
filing EQRs.
8 April 2015 Order, 151 FERC ¶ 61,025 at P 8.
9 Id. P 6.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:11 Feb 01, 2019

Jkt 247001

1413

requirements rather than dependence on
a vendor’s continued development and
support of their proprietary software.
7. There are two options available to
an organization that chooses XML as the
format for data submission. One option
is to develop a customized XML system
that meets the business reporting needs
of an organization, the result of which
is generally proprietary and unique to
the organization and data collection.
The Commission currently uses
customized XML solutions for certain of
its data collections, such as eTariff and
EQR. The other option is to use a
standard built upon the XML format,
such as XBRL.10 As explained in more
detail below, the Commission believes
that the use of the XBRL standard for
certain forms offers significant
advantages over the use of customized
XML.
8. The XBRL standard provides
features tailored to submission of
business data and builds upon the
advantages of the XML format set forth
in the April 2015 Order.11 The XBRL
standard includes all the advantages of
the XML format, such as its nonproprietary nature, its efficient sharing
of data across different information
systems, and its ability to include
identified proprietary formats (e.g., PDF,
Microsoft Word, etc.). The XBRL
standard has clearly defined
mechanisms to handle important
aspects of business data that add to
these benefits by structuring the data
with tags that utilize standard
taxonomies in order to capture not only
the value of the data, but also the
inherent characteristics of the
information.
9. As an international standard for
digital reporting, XBRL enables the
reporting of comprehensive, consistent,
interoperable data that allows industry
and other data users to automate
submission, extraction, and analysis.
XBRL is a language in which reporting
terms can be authoritatively defined.
Those terms can then be used to
uniquely represent the contents of the
Commission’s data collections. XBRL is
currently required for filing forms by a
number of other federal agencies.12

10. XBRL provides an efficient way to
exchange information inherent to the
XML format and applies a standard way
to capture the characteristics of that
information. This is made possible
through a number of interrelated
technical specifications 13 developed
and published by XBRL International,
collectively referred to as the XBRL
Specification. XBRL provides a way to
define unambiguous, reusable
definitions; report individual facts
against those definitions; and, where
necessary (and permitted), extend those
definitions to take account of unique
reporting ideas or aggregations. XBRL
also allows filers to test the resulting
report against the constraints set out in
the definitions, file or publish the
finished report, and process entire
reports or individual data points in a
platform-independent, vendor-neutral
way. XBRL is supported by a large
number of common off-the-shelf
software packages and by a large
number of service providers. All of
these features, and the specific
advantages discussed below, enhance
interoperability with systems currently
in use by many industries and
governments. Furthermore, the open
XBRL specifications are freely licensed
to anyone seeking to use the standard.
11. Another advantage of using XBRL
is that, in addition to collecting
information (numbers and text), the
XBRL International Units Registry
(Registry) provides clear definitions and
a standardized mechanism to record
characteristics of information.14 For
example, XBRL requires that the time
period be selected from the Registry and
recorded in the same way by every
reporting entity. In a customized XML
collection, time period and other
common characteristics are defined by
the designer of the data collection
system, and separate collection systems
likely use different definitions.
Moreover, when financial data
collection systems are built on XML,
CSV, or some other format, the method
used to define units such as currencies,
periods of time, the entity the data
relates to, and disaggregation of data is
recreated every time. This means data

10 XBRL International, Inc. (XBRL International),
the global non-profit organization that develops and
maintains the XBRL standard and related
specifications, states that the standard is used by
over 100 regulators, including the Department of
Energy (DOE), Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC), and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation,
more than 10 million companies, is accepted in
over 60 countries, and supported by more than 200
software packages.
11 April 2015 Order, 151 FERC ¶ 61,025 at P 5.
12 For example, the SEC requires the use of XBRL
for filing 10–Q and 10–K forms, the DOE has
launched an initiative through its Solar Energy

Technologies Office to set data standards for the
solar industry using XBRL, and members of the
Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council
require the forms collectively referred to as the Call
Report to be filed in XBRL.
13 A specification is a set of documented
requirements to be satisfied by a material, design,
product, or service.
14 XBRL version 2.1 requires that all numeric facts
be associated with a unit. The Registry provides a
centralized list of units that promotes the consistent
use of units across preparers and jurisdictions. The
Registry is available at: http://www.xbrl.org/utr/
utr.xml.

PO 00000

Frm 00002

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

E:\FR\FM\04FEP1.SGM

04FEP1

amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1

1414

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 23 / Monday, February 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules

cannot be easily compared without
manual reconciliation. The XBRL
standard enables each number’s context
to be captured in a way that
communicates definition, time period,
units, and name of reporting entity
consistently.
12. An additional advantage of the
XBRL standard is that it defines
relationships between elements
separately from the element itself. This
makes it possible to express multiple
relationships and hierarchies among
many elements. Unlike XBRL, XML
specifies the relationship as part of the
definition of an element. While it is
possible to express multiple
relationships in customized XML,
developers must create custom code in
order to do so. XBRL also allows the
fields in a hierarchical relationship to
share the same properties because the
taxonomy allows relationships between
concepts to be defined separately. For
example, consider a balance sheet item
such as Cash. The taxonomy would
include the definition of Cash and
would also demonstrate how Cash may
relate to other balance sheet items
(within the taxonomy) such as rolling
up to Current Assets and eventually
Total Assets. All three of these items
(Cash, Current Assets, and Total Assets)
are interrelated financial concepts that
are defined and presented in the
taxonomy as elements.
13. Furthermore, XBRL standardizes
many unique characteristics of business
reporting data, such as units, time
period, entity identification, decimal
places, and data labels, and allows the
database designer to define its own
custom characteristics for additional
business reporting data. XBRL uses tags
to apply these characteristics to the
data, such as ‘‘current’’ for period,
‘‘transmission’’ for entity identification,
‘‘dollars’’ for units, and ‘‘thousands’’ for
decimal places. This means that XBRL
would define a simple term like
‘‘Assets’’ with a combination of defined
tags for each characteristic, offering
dimensionality. By contrast, customized
XML, without custom code to address
dimensionality, would likely have
unique fields for every combination of
characteristics, resulting in numerous
fields with long descriptive names, such
as ‘‘Current_Assets_Transmission_
Dollars_Thousands’’ or ‘‘PreviousYear_
Assets_Transmission_Dollars_
Thousands’’ and no standardization
across elements within the forms.
14. The XBRL standard also offers
greater flexibility than a customized
XML format as it results in the creation
of a ‘‘taxonomy,’’ whereas customized
XML solutions result in wholly custom,
permanent documents, and code.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:11 Feb 01, 2019

Jkt 247001

Taxonomies are files containing relevant
business terminology, their meanings,
their data types, relationships among
terms, and the rules or formulas they
must follow. Taxonomies are not
permanent documents, but rather are
code that describes elements that can be
used in other programs and software.
Thus, unlike a customized XML
solution, XBRL would operationalize
with a taxonomy all information needed
to create a form submission into
publicly available code that can be used
in many applications, and can be reused
in other collections, saving time in
developing those collections.
15. XBRL would also facilitate the
implementation of changes to the
reporting requirements. Any change to
reporting requirements in a customized
XML solution requires costly upgrades
to the applications used by filers,
organizations that extract and analyze
data, and software providers that make
the tools to create and use the data.
Unlike customized XML solutions,
XBRL-based solutions enable future
changes, such as adding, amending, and
deleting defined elements and
relationships, without the need for
costly development procedures. The
Commission would also benefit from the
advantages XBRL systems provide in
terms of administering the various VFP
Form data collections. Specifically,
XBRL would allow more substantive
changes to the taxonomy as a result of
Commission directives, as well as
enabling the Commission to make minor
technical changes to maintain and
revise the taxonomy, without costly
development procedures.
16. Implementing an XBRL-based
solution would lead to greater data
quality through easier validation checks.
XBRL taxonomies support simple
formulas such as addition and
subtraction and allow more complex
formulas to be defined with a set of
guidelines. In the Commission’s current
XML-based collection systems, such as
the EQR system, filers may check their
files prior to making their submission
through a test submission feature on the
Commission’s website. This process
requires a filer to submit their data into
the test submission feature to receive an
email detailing errors in their file. XBRL
taxonomies contain validations that can
be used to check a submission by filers
on their own system without uploading
anything to the Commission. This
enables filers to confirm that their VFP
Form submission is error-free prior to
submission, thereby saving time and
reducing burden on the filers.
Furthermore, the taxonomy will contain
instructions on how the Commission’s
system will convert the submission to a

PO 00000

Frm 00003

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

human-readable form. These
instructions can be used to create the
same human-readable form on the filer’s
computer prior to submission. Under
the VFP system, filers have been able to
view their submission in a humanreadable format only after it has been
filed.
17. Another advantage of a collection
designed using the XBRL standard is
that it simultaneously supports all
previous taxonomies published for that
form. Occasionally, a filer may be
required to refile a form using a version
of the form that is not current. With a
customized XML approach, all filings
must conform to the current version of
the schema for the system to accept the
submission. As a result, if the form
changes substantively between the
original submission and the subsequent
refiling, the filer or the Commission
must make certain technological
adjustments to enable the submission of
the refiling. By contrast, with the XBRL
submission method, a refiling can be
submitted using any prior version of the
taxonomy at any time. This is possible
because the structure of the XBRL
submission file will be the same, and
the validations are tied to each version
of the taxonomy. Once the submission
is accepted, it can then be compared
with the prior filing for the same period
to determine what has changed. Most
XBRL software products allow filers to
select a taxonomy version each time
they create their submission to file.
18. Finally, the proposed XBRL-based
FERC Form Nos. 1, 1–F, and 3–Q
electric will incorporate energy storagerelated data which the Commission
required be submitted under Order No.
784.15 Currently, utilities with energy
storage assets and those that acquire the
assets report using existing schedules
and footnotes not intended for energy
storage assets pending the availability of
new and revised schedules.16 The
proposed XBRL-based forms will allow
utilities to submit this data directly into
the forms.
B. Proposed Process for Developing the
XBRL Based Solution
19. Parties should submit comments
on the proposed adoption of the XBRL
standard in lieu of a customized XML
solution. Should the Commission adopt
XBRL in the Final Rule in this
proceeding, the Commission plans to
15 See Third-Party Provision of Ancillary Services;
Accounting and Financial Reporting for New
Electric Storage Technologies, Order No. 784, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,349 (2013) (crossed-referenced at
144 FERC ¶ 61,056).
16 See Accounting and Reporting Guidance for
New Electric Storage Technologies, Docket No.
AI14–I–000 (February 20, 2014).

E:\FR\FM\04FEP1.SGM

04FEP1

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 23 / Monday, February 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules

amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1

convene staff-led technical
conference(s), in consultation with
NAESB. The technical conference(s)
would enable interested industry
members to discuss and propose
revisions to the draft taxonomy that the
Commission plans to release following
the issuance of the Final Rule, along
with other important components of the
XBRL system.
20. The Commission also proposes
that its initial launch of the XBRL
system will include Commission
incorporation of the prior three years of
VFP Form data from the current VFP
system. Providing access to the prior
three years of form data in XBRL will
allow form filers to correct previously
filed data through refilings, when
necessary, consistent with the
Commission’s informal policy
concerning refilings of EQRs.17 The
Commission seeks comment on the time
period of historical VFP Form data that
should be converted by the Commission
to the new XBRL system upon launch of
the new XBRL system. After
implementation of the XBRL system, the
Commission anticipates ultimately
transferring approximately 10 years of
historical VFP Form data over to the
XBRL system.
21. Although we do not envision that
the Commission will need to make
frequent changes to the taxonomy and
related code, the Secretary of the
Commission, under Order No. 703, has
delegated authority to make such
modifications when necessary.18 Before
the Commission implements any such
changes, notice of the proposed change
will be provided sufficiently in advance
to notify companies and provide them
time to comply with the changes to the
taxonomy and related code.
C. Regulatory Text Revisions
22. With the exception of Form No.
1–F, current regulations already provide
for the filing of Form Nos. 1, 2, 2–A,
3–Q electric, 3–Q natural gas, 6, 6–Q,
60, and 714 in electronic format
according to the instructions for each
form and filing. The Commission
therefore sees no need for further
regulatory text changes pertaining to
these forms. Upon completion of the
technical conference process, however,
the Commission would issue an order
revising the format instructions for the
forms to accord with the results of the
17 The Commission’s informal policy directs filers
to correct the most recent 12 EQRs, or three years
of data, with a note placed in the EQR stating that
other reports may also contain the error. See Plan
for Retrospective Analysis of Existing Rules, Docket
No. AD12–6–000 (2011), https://www.ferc.gov/
legal/maj-ord-reg/retro-analysis/ferc-eo-13579.pdf.
18 18 CFR 375.302(z).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:11 Feb 01, 2019

Jkt 247001

technical conferences. These
instructions would cover only the
format for making the electronic filings
and will not include any revisions to the
substance of the required filings, which
the Commission will make when
necessary in appropriate separate
proceedings. The Commission is also
proposing to require Form No. 1–F filers
to submit Form No. 1–F in electronic
format rather than filing an original and
copies of the form on paper, as is
currently required. The Commission
therefore proposes to revise
§ 141.2(b)(1)(i) of the Commission’s
regulations 19 and Rule 2011 of its Rules
of Practice and Procedure 20 to require
Form No. 1–F filers to submit their
reports using electronic media as
prescribed in Rule 2011.
III. Information Collection Statement
23. The Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) 21 requires each federal agency to
seek and obtain Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) approval before
undertaking a collection of information
directed to ten or more persons or
contained in a rule of general
applicability. OMB’s regulations require
approval of certain information
collection requirements imposed by
agency rules.22 Upon approval of a
collection of information, OMB will
assign an OMB control number and an
expiration date. Respondents subject to
the filing requirements of an agency rule
will not be penalized for failing to
respond to these collections of
information unless the of information
display a valid OMB control number.
24. The revisions proposed in this
NOPR would update the filing process
for regulated entities required to file the
VFP Forms. The information collected
in the VFP Forms is required to be
submitted annually or quarterly to the
Commission under existing regulations
and reporting requirements adopted
under the Federal Power Act (FPA), the
Natural Gas Act (NGA), the Interstate
Commerce Act (ICA), and the Public
Utility Holding Company Act of 2005
(PUHCA 2005). The VFP Forms would
continue to be submitted to the
Commission under existing regulations
and reporting requirements. The
proposed new and amended regulations
and reporting requirements, if adopted,
would require regulated entities to
furnish the information collected in the
VFP Forms using tags in XBRL-Related
19 18

CFR 141.2(b)(1)(i).
CFR 385.2011.
21 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
22 5 CFR 1320.11.
20 18

PO 00000

Frm 00004

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

1415

Documents.23 The specified financial
and operational information already is
required to be collected and filed with
the Commission pursuant to existing
periodic and annual report
requirements. Under this NOPR
proposal, the information would need to
be filed with the Commission using
XBRL. The Commission anticipates that
the revisions to the filing process for the
VFP Forms, once effective, would
reduce ongoing regulatory burdens.24
The Commission will submit the
proposed reporting requirements to
OMB for its review and approval under
section 3507(d) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act.25
25. The Commission solicits public
comments regarding the accuracy of the
burden estimates and any suggested
methods for minimizing respondents’
burden. Specifically, the Commission
asks that any revised burden or cost
estimates submitted by commenters be
supported by sufficient detail to
understand how the estimates are
generated.
26. The Commission’s regulations
currently require certain regulated
entities to file information in VFP Forms
on an annual and quarterly basis.26 We
propose no substantive changes to the
information collected in the VFP Forms,
but rather to transition from the VFP
system currently used to collect the
information to an XBRL system.27
Compliance with the proposed new
filing process would be mandatory.
27. FERC Form No. 1 (OMB Control
No. 1902–0021), FERC Form No. 2
(OMB Control No. 1902–0028), and
FERC Form No. 6 (OMB Control No.
1902–0022) prescribe the information
that major electric utilities, licensees,
and others; major natural gas
companies; and oil pipeline companies,
respectively, must disclose annually
about their finances and operations.
FERC Form No. 1–F (OMB Control No.
1902–0029) and FERC Form No. 2–A
(OMB Control No. 1902–0030) prescribe
the information that nonmajor electric
23 XBRL-Related Documents for purposes of this
NOPR encompasses documents, code, and any
other file related to presenting information in XBRL
that are part of the filing submission.
24 Burden is the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate,
maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information
to or for a Federal agency. For further explanation
of what is included in the information collection
burden, refer to 5 CFR 1320.3.
25 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
26 See supra P 1 & n.1.
27 While the NOPR does not change the
information collected by any of the VFP Forms, the
NOPR proposes to incorporate the energy storagerelated data that the Commission required be
reported under Order No. 784 into the new XBRLbased FERC Form Nos. 1, 1–F, and 3–Q electric. See
infra P 18, n.15.

E:\FR\FM\04FEP1.SGM

04FEP1

1416

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 23 / Monday, February 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules

utilities and licensees; and nonmajor
natural gas companies, respectively,
must disclose annually about their
finances and operations. FERC Form No.
3–Q (OMB Control No. 1902–0205)
prescribes information that electric
utilities, licensees, and natural gas
companies must disclose quarterly
about their finances and operations.
FERC Form No. 6–Q (OMB Control No.
1902–0206) prescribes information that
oil pipeline companies must disclose
quarterly about their finances and
operations. FERC Form No. 714 (OMB
Control No. 1902–0140) prescribes
information that certain electric
transmitting utilities operating
balancing authority areas or planning
areas are required to file annually. FERC
Form No. 60 (OMB Control No. 1902–
0215) prescribes information that
centralized service companies must
disclose annually about their finances
and operations.

D 14 hours for each subsequent filing
in XBRL.
• Form No. 60
Æ Burden hours to tag in XBRL:
D 20 hours to prepare and submit the
first filing made in XBRL; and
D 3 hours for each subsequent filing.
• Form No. 714
Æ Burden hours to tag in XBRL:
D 15 hours to prepare and submit the
first filing made in XBRL; and
D 2 hours for each subsequent filing.
29. Public Reporting Burden: The
Commission’s burden estimates for the
proposal in this NOPR are for a one-time
implementation of the transition to
XBRL proposed in this NOPR, and an
ongoing estimate for maintenance of the
XBRL reporting system. The following
estimates of reporting burden are related
only to this NOPR and anticipate the
costs to filers for compliance with the
Commission’s proposal in this NOPR.

28. The compliance burden estimates
for the proposed revisions to the filing
process for the VFP Forms are based on
several assumptions and unique
assessments for each form. However, all
regulated entities required to submit the
VFP Forms would have to map the
reporting information to the
Commission’s standard XBRL taxonomy
and create a final submission file(s).
Based on discussions with other federal
agencies, subject matter experts in XBRL
data collection and the VFP Forms, and
entities that have prepared their
financial information in XBRL, we
estimate that filers would incur the
following average burden hours:
• XBRL Form Nos. 1, 1–F, 3–Q
electric, 2, 2–A, 3–Q natural gas, 6, and
6–Q 28
Æ Burden hours to tag in XBRL:
D 00 hours to prepare and submit the
first filing using XBRL; and

RM19–12–000 NOPR
[One-time implementation burden]

Requirement

Form No.
Form No.
Form No.
Form No.
Form No.
Form No.
gas.
Form No.
Form No.
Form No.
Form No.

Number of
respondents

Annual
number of
responses per
respondent

Total number
of responses

Average burden
& cost
per response 29

Total annual burden hours
& cost 30

Annual cost per
respondent ($)

(1)

(2)

(1) * (2) = (3)

(4)

(3) * (4) = (5)

(5) ÷ (1)

1 ................
1–F ............
3–Q electric
2 ................
2–A ............
3–Q natural

207
5
212
92
73
165

1
1
3
1
1
3

207
5
636
92
73
495

100 hrs.; $6,931 ..
100 hrs.; $6,931 ..
No Change 31 ......
100 hrs.; $6,931 ..
100 hrs.; $6,931 ..
No Change ..........

20,700 hrs.; $1,434,717 ........
500 hrs.; $34,655 ..................
No Change ............................
9,200 hrs.; $637,652 .............
7,300 hrs.; $505,963 .............
No Change ............................

$6,931.
$6,931.
No Change.
$6,931.
$6,931.
No Change.

6 ................
6–Q ...........
60 ..............
714 ............

244
244
39
176

1
3
1
1

244
732
39
176

100 hrs.; $6,931 ..
No Change ..........
20 hrs.; $1,386.20
15 hrs.; $1,039.65

24,400 hrs.; $1,691,164 ........
No Change ............................
780 hrs.; $54,062 ..................
2,640 hrs.; $182,977 .............

$6,931.
No Change.
$1,386.20.
$1,039.65.

Total for Implementation.
Burden ................

........................

........................

32 836

.............................

65,520 hrs.; $4,541,190 ........

RM19–12–000 NOPR
[Annual ongoing system maintenance burden]

amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1

Requirement

Form No.
Form No.
Form No.
tric.
Form No.
Form No.

Number of
respondents

Annual
number of
responses per
respondent

Total number
of responses

Average burden
& cost
per response 33

Total annual burden
hours & cost 34

Annual cost per
respondent ($)

(1)

(2)

(1) * (2) = (3)

(4)

(3) * (4) = (5)

(5) ÷ (1)

1 ...............
1–F ...........
3–Q elec-

207
5
212

1
1
3

207
5
636

14 hrs.; $970.34 .......
14 hrs.; $970.34 .......
No Change ...............

2,898 hrs.; $200,860
70 hrs.; $4,852 .........
No Change ...............

$970.34.
$970.34.
No Change.

2 ...............
2–A ...........

92
73

1
1

92
73

14 hrs.; $970.34 .......
14 hrs.; $970.34 .......

1,288 hrs.; $89,271 ..
1,022 hrs.; $70,835 ..

$970.34.
$970.34.

28 The internal burden hours for tagging Form
Nos. 1 and 3–Q electric are combined because the
annual information reported in Form No. 1 is a
compilation of the information reported in the prior
three quarters in Form Nos. 3–Q electric in addition

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:25 Feb 01, 2019

Jkt 247001

to the fourth quarter. Similarly, we have combined
the number of internal burden hours for tagging the
Form Nos. 2 and 3–Q natural gas and the Form Nos.
6 and 6–Q, respectively, because the annual Form
Nos. 2 and 6 are based on a compilation of the

PO 00000

Frm 00005

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

information reported in the prior three quarters in
Form Nos. 3–Q natural gas and 6–Q in addition to
the fourth quarter.

E:\FR\FM\04FEP1.SGM

04FEP1

1417

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 23 / Monday, February 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules
RM19–12–000 NOPR—Continued
[Annual Ongoing System Maintenance Burden]

Requirement

Number of
respondents

Annual
number of
responses per
respondent

Total number
of responses

Average burden
& cost
per response 33

Total annual burden
hours & cost 34

Annual cost per
respondent ($)

(1)

(2)

(1) * (2) = (3)

(4)

(3) * (4) = (5)

(5) ÷ (1)

Form No. 3–Q natural gas.
Form No. 6 ...............
Form No. 6–Q ..........
Form No. 60 .............
Form No. 714 ...........
Total for Ongoing Burden.

165

3

495

No Change ...............

No Change ...............

No Change.

244
244
39
176

1
3
1
1

244
732
39
176

14 hrs.; $970.34 .......
No Change ...............
3 hrs.; $207.93 .........
2 hrs.; $138.62 .........

3,416 hrs.; $236,763
No Change ...............
117 hrs.; $8,109 .......
352 hrs.; $24,397 .....

$970.34.
No Change.
$207.93.
$138.62.

........................

........................

35 836

..................................

9,163 hrs.; $635,087.

amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1

The Commission’s estimates for the
hourly wage figure (as related to the
implementation and ongoing burden
estimate) are based on the Bureau of
Labor Statistics data (for the Utilities
sector, at http://www.bls.gov/oes/
current/naics2_22.htm, plus benefits
information at http://www.bls.gov/
news.release/ecec.nr0.htm). The salaries
(plus benefits) for the eight occupational
categories are:
• Management (Occupation Code: 11–
0000): $94.28/hour
• Information Security Analysts
(Occupation Code: 15–1122): $60.90/
hour
• Legal (Occupation Code: 23–0000):
$143.68/hour
• Office and Administrative Support:
$41.34/hour
• Computer and Information Systems
Manager (Occupation Code: 11–3021):
$96.51
29 The average burden and cost per response is
calculated using the hourly wage figures described
in detail below.
30 Every figure in this column is rounded to the
nearest dollar.
31 There is no change to the internal burden hours
for filing Form Nos. 3–Q electric, 3–Q natural gas,
and 6–Q because the burden hours associated with
these quarterly forms are included in the burden
hours calculated for filing Form Nos. 1, 2, and 6.
32 This total number of responses does not
include the responses for Form Nos. 3–Q electric,
3–Q natural gas, or 6–Q because the burden hours
for tagging Form Nos. 1, 2, and 6 include the
number of hours required to tag the quarterly
responses. The quarterly filings are generally a
subset of the annual filings.
33 The average burden and cost per response is
calculated using the hourly wage figures described
in detail below.
34 Every figure in this column is rounded to the
nearest dollar.
35 This total number of responses does not
include the responses for Form Nos. 3–Q electric,
3–Q natural gas, or 6–Q because the burden hours
for tagging Form Nos. 1, 2, and 6 include the
number of hours required to tag the quarterly
responses. The quarterly filings are generally a
subset of the annual filings.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:11 Feb 01, 2019

Jkt 247001

• Management Analyst (Occupation
Code: 13–1111): $63.32/hour
• Computer and Information Systems
Analyst (Occupation Code: 15–1120):
$66.47/hour
• Accountants and Auditors
(Occupation Code: 13–2011): $56.59/
hour
The average hourly cost for all eight
of these categories is calculated
assuming the following weights in
correspondence to effort applied by
each respective occupation:
• Management (Occupation Code: 11–
0000): 5%
• Information Security Analysts
(Occupation Code: 15–1122): 5%
• Legal (Occupation Code: 23–0000):
5%
• Office and Administrative Support:
10%
• Computer and Information Systems
Manager (Occupation Code: 11–3021):
10%
• Management Analyst (Occupation
Code: 13–1111): 5%
• Computer and Information Systems
Analyst (Occupation Code: 15–1120):
35%
• Accountants and Auditors
(Occupation Code: 13–2011): 25%
Overall, the average hourly cost uses the
following calculation with all seven
occupations and their respective
weights included:
[($94.28/hour * 0.05) + ($60.90/hour *
0.05) + ($143.68/hour * 0.05) +
($41.34/hour * 0.1) + ($96.51/hour
* 0.1) + ($63.32/hour * 0.05) +
($66.47/hour * 0.35) + ($56.59/hour
* 0.25)] ÷ 8 = $69.31.
The number of responses related to
both the implementation and ongoing
burden is 836 responses.36
36 This total number of responses does not
include the responses for Form Nos. 3–Q electric,
3–Q natural gas, or 6–Q because the burden hours
for tagging Form Nos. 1, 2, and 6 include the

PO 00000

Frm 00006

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

The implementation burden will be
65,520 hours for Year 1.
The ongoing burden in Years 2 and 3
will be 9,163 hours per year.
The responses and burden for Years
1–3 for both the implementation and
ongoing burden are as follows:
836 responses/year; [(65,520 hours for
Year 1) + (9,163 hours for Year 2)
+ (9,163 hours for Year 3)] ÷ 3 years
= 27,949 hours/year (annual average
for Years 1–3).
30. Out-of-pocket expenses: We
estimate that filers would incur the
following out-of-pocket expenses for
software, consulting, or filing agent
services used in the Years 2 and 3
(following the first year of
implementation):
• XBRL Form Nos. 1, 1–F, 3–Q
electric, 2, 2–A, 3–Q natural gas, 6, and
6–Q:
Æ Out-of-pocket cost for software and
filing agent services: $4,912 for each
filing.
Æ Total out-of-pocket cost for
software and filing agent services per
year: (621 respondents) * ($4,912 for
each filing) = $3,050,352.
• Form No. 60:
Æ Out-of-pocket cost for software and
filing agent services: $982 for each
filing.
Æ Total out-of-pocket cost for
software and filing agent services per
year: (39 respondents) * ($982 for each
filing) = $38,298.
• Form No. 714:
Æ Out-of-pocket cost for software and
filing agent services: $737 for each
filing.
Æ Total out-of-pocket cost for
software and filing agent services per
year: (176 respondents) * ($737 for each
filing) = $129,712.
number of hours required to tag the quarterly
responses. The quarterly filings are generally a
subset of the annual filings.

E:\FR\FM\04FEP1.SGM

04FEP1

amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1

1418

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 23 / Monday, February 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules

31. Based on the number of filers we
expect to be subject to the proposed
requirements, the number of filings that
we expect those filers to make and the
burden hours and out-of-pocket cost
estimates described, we estimate that
the average yearly burden of the
proposed requirements over the first
three years would be 27,949 internal
hours per year and $2,145,575 in out-ofpocket expenses per year. This would be
incurred by an average of 836 filers for
an average yearly burden per filer of
33.4 internal hours and $2,566 in outof-pocket expenses over Years 1–3.
Titles: Form No. 1 (Annual Report of
Major Electric Utilities, Licensees and
Others); Form No. 1–F (Annual Report
of Nonmajor Public Utilities and
Licensees); Form No. 3–Q electric
(Quarterly Financial Report of Electric
Utilities, Licensees and Natural Gas
Companies); Form No. 2 (Annual Report
of Nonmajor Natural Gas Companies);
Form No. 3–Q gas (Quarterly Financial
Report of Electric Utilities, Licensees
and Natural Gas Companies); Form No.
6 (Annual Report of Oil Pipeline
Companies); Form No. 6–Q (Quarterly
Financial Report of Oil Pipeline
Companies); Form No. 60 (Annual
Reports of Centralized Service
Companies); Form No. 714 (Annual
Electric Balancing Authority Area and
Planning Area Report).
Action: Revision of Currently
Approved Collections of Information.
OMB Control Nos.: 1902–0021 (Form
No. 1), 1902–0029 (Form No. 1–F),
1902–0028 (Form No. 2), 1902–0205
(Form No. 3–Q), 1902–0022 (Form No.
6), 1902–0206 (Form No. 6–Q), 1902–
0215 (Form No. 60), and 1902–0140
(Form No. 714).
Respondents: Public utilities,
licensees, interstate natural gas
companies, oil pipeline companies,
centralized service companies,
Balancing Authorities, or other for profit
and/or not for profit institutions.
Frequency of Responses: Annual or
quarterly.
Necessity of the Information: The
Commission requires that the
information collected in Form Nos. 1,
1–F, 3–Q electric, 2, 2–A, 3–Q natural
gas, 6, 6–Q, 60, and 714 be submitted in
an updated electronic format that is
compatible with current technology and
ensures access to the information
required to be collected.
Internal Review: The Commission has
reviewed the reporting requirements
related to the VFP Forms and made a
determination that revising the filing
process for the VFP Forms will ensure
the Commission has the necessary data
to carry out its statutory mandates,
while reducing unnecessary burden on

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:11 Feb 01, 2019

Jkt 247001

industry. The Commission has assured
itself, by means of its internal review,
that there is specific, objective support
for the burden estimate associated with
the information requirements.
32. 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: Ellen
Brown, Office of the Executive Director,
email: [email protected], phone:
(202) 502–8663, fax: (202) 273–0873].
Please send comments concerning the
collection of information and the
associated burden estimates to the
Commission, and to the Office of
Management and Budget, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, 725
17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503
[Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, phone:
(202) 395–4638, fax: (202) 395–7285].
For security reasons, comments to OMB
should be submitted by email to: oira_
[email protected]. Comments
submitted to OMB should include
Docket Number RM19–2–000 and any
related information collection and its
respective OMB Control Number [Form
No. 1 (1902–0021), Form No. 1–F (1902–
0029), Form No. 2 (1902–0028), Form
No. 3–Q (1902–0205), Form No. 6
(1902–0022), Form No. 6–Q (1902–
0206), Form No. 60 (1902–0215), and
Form No. 714 (1902–0140)].
IV. Environmental Analysis
33. 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.37 The Commission has
categorically excluded certain actions
from this requirement as not having a
significant effect on the human
environment.38 The actions proposed
here fall within the categorical
exclusions in the Commission’s
regulations for rules that are clarifying,
corrective, or procedural, or do not
substantially change the effect of
legislation or regulations being amended
and for rules regarding information
gathering, analysis, and
dissemination.39 In addition, the
proposed rule is categorically excluded
as an electric rate filing submitted by a
public utility under sections 205 and
206 of the FPA 40 and as a rule regarding
37 Regulations Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Order No. 486,
FERC Stats. & Regs, ¶ 30,783 (1987) (crossreferenced at 41 FERC ¶ 61,284).
38 18 CFR 380.4.
39 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii) and 380.4(a)(5).
40 18 CFR 380.4(a)(15).

PO 00000

Frm 00007

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

sales, exchange, and transportation of
natural gas that require no construction
of facilities.41 Accordingly, no
environmental assessment is necessary
and none has been prepared in this
NOPR.
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act
34. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980 (RFA) 42 generally requires a
description and analysis of proposed
rules that will have significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The
Commission is not required to perform
this sort of analysis if the proposed
activities within the NOPR would not
have such an effect.
35. Approximately 213 electric utility,
licensees, and other companies are
required to file the Form Nos. 1 and
3–Q electric, or Form No. 1–F, and
therefore are subject to the requirements
adopted by this rule. Of those filers, the
Commission estimates approximately 40
will be small as defined by SBA
regulations.43 Approximately 244 oil
pipeline companies are required to file
the Form Nos. 6 and 6–Q, and therefore
are subject to the requirements proposed
in this NOPR. Of those oil pipeline
filers, the Commission estimates
approximately 23% will be small, as
currently defined for ‘‘All Other
Pipeline Transportation’’ companies
(NAICS code 486990) as a company
that, in combination with its affiliates,
has total annual receipts of $37.5
million or less. Approximately 165
interstate natural gas pipelines are
required to file the Form Nos. 2 and
3–Q natural gas, or Form No. 2–A, and
therefore are subject to the requirements
adopted by this rule. Most of the natural
gas pipelines regulated by the
Commission do not fall within the
RFA’s definition of a small entity,
which is currently defined for natural
gas pipelines (NAICS code 486210) as a
company that, in combination with its
affiliates, has total annual receipts of
$27.5 million or less. For the year 2018,
eleven companies not affiliated with
larger companies had annual revenues
in combination with its affiliates of
$27.5 million or less and therefore could
be considered a small entity under the
RFA. This represents about seven
percent of the total potential
respondents that may have a significant
burden imposed on them.
36. Approximately 39 holding
companies currently file Form No. 60.
41 18

CFR 380.4(a).
U.S.C. 601–612.
43 The small business size standards are provided
in 13 CFR 121.201. In 13 CFR 121.201, the SBA
uses the North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) codes.
42 5

E:\FR\FM\04FEP1.SGM

04FEP1

Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 23 / Monday, February 4, 2019 / Proposed Rules
Commission staff estimates that these
companies are not likely to fall within
the RFA’s definition of small 44 because
holding companies of public utilities or
natural gas pipelines are generally not
small businesses. Finally, there are
approximately 176 balancing authorities
(NAICS code 221121) that are required
to file Form No. 714. Of those balancing
authorities, 33 percent (or
approximately 58) are estimated to fall
within the RFA’s definition of small.
37. Accordingly, the Commission
finds that the revised requirements set
forth in this NOPR will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities,
and no regulatory flexibility analysis is
required.
VI. Comment Procedures

amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1

38. The Commission invites interested
persons to submit comments on the
matters and issues proposed in this
NOPR to be adopted, including any
related matters or alternative proposals
that commenters may wish to discuss.
Comments are due March 6, 2019.
Comments must refer to Docket No.
RM19–12–000, and must include the
commenter’s name, the organization
they represent, if applicable, and their
address in their comments.
39. The Commission encourages
comments to be filed electronically via
the eFiling link on the Commission’s
website at http://www.ferc.gov. The
Commission accepts most standard
word processing formats. Documents
created electronically using word
processing software should be filed in
native applications or print-to-PDF
format and not in a scanned format.
Commenters filing electronically do not
need to make a paper filing.
40. Commenters that are not able to
file comments electronically must send
an original of their comments to:
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20426.
41. All comments will be placed in
the Commission’s public files and may
be viewed, printed, or downloaded
remotely as described in the Document
Availability section below. Commenters
44 5 U.S.C. 601(3), citing to section 3 of the Small
Business Act, 15 U.S.C. 632. Section 3 of the Small
Business Act 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 NAICS defines, for
example, a small electric utility as one that,
including its affiliates, is primarily engaged in the
generation, transmission, and/or distribution of
electric energy for sale and whose quantity of
employees falls under a certain threshold
dependent on the type of utility and its applicable
NAICS code.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:11 Feb 01, 2019

Jkt 247001

on this proposal are not required to
serve copies of their comments on other
commenters.
VII. Document Availability
42. 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 the
Commission’s Home Page (http://
www.ferc.gov) and in the Commission’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.
43. From the Commission’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.
44. User assistance is available for
eLibrary and the Commission’s website
during normal business hours from the
Commission’s 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].
List of Subjects
18 CFR Part 141
Electric power, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
18 CFR Part 385
Electric power, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
By direction of the Commission.
Issued: January 17, 2019.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.

1419

§ 141.2 FERC Form No. 1–F, Annual report
for Nonmajor public utilities and licensees.

*

*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Generally. Each Nonmajor and
each Nonoperating (formerly designated
as Nonmajor) public utility and licensee
as defined in Part 101 of this chapter,
shall prepare and file with the
Commission FERC Form No. 1–F as
prescribed in § 385.2011 of this chapter
and as indicated in the General
Instructions set out in this form, and
must be properly completed and
verified. Filing on electronic media
pursuant to § 385.2011 of this chapter is
required.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 385—RULES OF PRACTICE AND
PROCEDURE

3. The authority citation for part 385
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 551–557; 15 U.S.C.
717–717w, 3301–3432; 16 U.S.C. 791a–825v,
2601–2645; 28 U.S.C. 2461; 31 U.S.C. 3701,
9701; 42 U.S.C. 7101–7352, 16441, 16451–
16463; 49 U.S.C. 60502; 49 App. U.S.C. 1–85
(1988); 28 U.S.C. 2461 note (1990); 28 U.S.C.
2461 note (2015).

4. Amend § 385.2011 by revising
paragraphs (a)(8) and (c)(3) to read as
follows:

■

§ 385.2011 Procedures for filing on
electronic media (Rule 2011).

*

*
*
*
*
(a) * * *
(8) FERC Form No. 1–F, Annual
report for Nonmajor public utilities and
licensees.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(3) With the exception of the FERC
Form Nos. 1, 1–F, 2, 2–A, 6, 60, and
714, the electronic media must be
accompanied by the traditional
prescribed number of paper copies.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2019–00460 Filed 2–1–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

In consideration of the foregoing, the
Commission proposes to amend parts
141 and 385 of chapter I, title 18 of the
Code of Federal Regulations, as follows.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

PART 141—STATEMENTS and
REPORTS (SCHEDULES)

[Public Notice: 9987]

1. The authority citation for part 141
continues to read as follows:

Privacy Act; STATE–01, Email Archive
Management Records

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 79; 15 U.S.C. 717–
717z; 16 U.S.C. 791a–828c, 2601–2645; 31
U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 7101–7352.2.

AGENCY:

■

2. Amend § 141.2 by revising
paragraph (b)(1)(i) to read as follows:

■

PO 00000

Frm 00008

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

22 CFR Part 171
RIN 1400–AE17

ACTION:

Department of State.
Proposed rule.

In this proposed rulemaking,
the Department of State proposes to

SUMMARY:

E:\FR\FM\04FEP1.SGM

04FEP1