Electronic Notification of Commission Issuances, 8720-8726 [05-3476]

Agencies

• DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
• Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 23, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8720-8726]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-3476]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Parts 5, 16, 156, 157, and 385

[Docket No. RM04-9-000; Order No. 653]


Electronic Notification of Commission Issuances

February 10, 2005.

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is amending its 
regulations to provide for electronic notification of Commission 
issuances to service list recipients. In most instances, the Commission 
will now send such notices by e-mail. This change will increase the 
speed with which participants receive notice, reduce the Commission's 
costs, and provide for more accurate service lists. Allowance will be 
made for participants who are unable to utilize e-mail. Other revisions 
to the Commission's regulations will allow it to send electronic 
notifications to mailing list recipients once a system for doing so 
becomes operational. This final rule also makes revisions that are 
intended to increase the utilization of electronic forms of service 
between participants, and to clarify the Commission's regulations to 
ensure that documents with certification or verification requirements 
may be filed electronically.

DATES: Effective Date: The rule will become effective on March 21, 
2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wilbur Miller, Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, 
(202) 502-8953.

SUPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

    Before Commissioners: Pat Wood, III, Chairman; Nora Mead 
Brownell, Joseph T. Kelliher, and Suedeen G. Kelly.

    1. On June 23, 2004, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking (NOPR) requesting comments on proposed revisions to its 
regulations regarding service of documents. Electronic Notification of 
Commission Issuances, 107 FERC ] 61,311, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,574 
(2004). The Commission, in the NOPR, proposed to begin serving notice 
of Commission issuances to persons on service and mailing lists via e-
mail rather than postal mail, with exemptions for persons unable to 
receive notice electronically. The NOPR also proposed to make service 
by electronic means the standard form of service in Commission 
proceedings, and to clarify the Commission's regulations to ensure that 
documents with signature certification or verification requirements 
could be filed electronically.

I. Background

    2. The NOPR's proposal, which this Final Rule adopts, was to 
initiate in early 2005 an eService program that will require each 
person on a service list to provide an e-mail address, registered 
through the Commission's eRegistration system, at which that person can 
receive notification of Commission issuances. The Commission views this 
program as an important element in its efforts to reduce the use of 
paper in compliance with the Government Paperwork Elimination Act.\1\ 
This revision is intended to provide faster notification to 
participants in Commission proceedings while also reducing the 
Commission's mailing costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 44 U.S.C. 3504.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. This Final Rule implements the eService system by amending Rule 
2010 \2\ to require persons eligible to receive service to eRegister 
pursuant to 18 CFR 390.1 (2004). This requirement applies only to 
proceedings initiated on or after March 21, 2005. A person submitting 
an initial filing on behalf of one or more participants will designate 
the official contact for those participants on the service list. That 
person will, however, be able to designate additional contacts who will 
also be included on the service list if they are eRegistered. Persons 
for whom electronic notification is impractical may apply for a waiver 
and register by a paper form, as provided in 18 CFR 390.3 (2004). Such 
persons will receive postal mail notification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 18 CFR 385.2010 (2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. As a backup in the early stages of the eService system, the 
Secretary will continue to send copies of Commission issuances by 
postal mail. This will continue for three months from the time this 
Final Rule becomes effective, after which notification will be solely 
by e-mail to contacts who are fully eRegistered, unless a waiver or 
exemption applies.
    5. In addition to service by the Commission, this final rule adopts 
the NOPR's proposal to make electronic service the standard form of 
service under Rule 2010(f).\3\ The Commission is amending its service 
rule to provide that, with the exception of those who are unable to 
receive such service, senders and recipients will serve documents upon 
one another by electronic means unless they agree otherwise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 18 CFR 385.2010(f) (2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. The Commission will not at this time be implementing the system, 
proposed in the NOPR, of electronic notification for persons on the 
Commission's various mailing lists. It will, however, do so in the 
future. As explained in the NOPR, the Commission maintains a variety of 
mailing lists that it utilizes to inform potentially affected persons 
of certain developments in proceedings related to hydroelectric 
projects and natural gas facilities. Recipients include state and 
federal agencies, elected officials, Indian tribes, landowners, and 
other potentially interested persons and entities. The Commission 
intends to institute a system whereby mailing list recipients

[[Page 8721]]

are given the ability to sign up to receive e-mail notifications of 
matters in which they might have an interest. There will be an option 
for receipt of postal notification for persons for whom electronic 
notification is impractical. The Commission will provide further 
information to the public once the manner in which this system will 
operate has been established.
    7. The Commission is adopting in this Final Rule the regulatory 
revisions that the NOPR proposed to facilitate electronic notification 
to mailing list recipients. These revisions do not place any 
requirements on such recipients and thus can be adopted now, without 
need for a further rulemaking once the Commission has determined the 
precise manner in which electronic notification will work. The 
Commission is revising the following sections of 18 CFR:
     Sec.  5.4(b)(1)(iii)--Request for acceleration of license 
expiration date.
     Sec.  5.8(e)(3)--Commencement of proceeding and scoping 
document, or approval to use traditional licensing process or 
alternative procedures.
     Sec.  5.19(c)(2)--Tendering notice and schedule.
     Sec.  16.6(d)(1)(iii)--Notification under Section 15 of 
the Federal Power Act.
     Sec. Sec.  16.9(d)(1)(iii), (d)(2)(ii)--License 
applications under Sections 14 and 15 of the Federal Power Act.
     Sec.  156.8--Applications for orders under Section 7(a) of 
the Natural Gas Act.
     Sec.  157.9--Applications for certificates of public 
convenience and necessity and for orders approving abandonment under 
Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act.
    8. Finally, the Commission is adopting the NOPR's proposal to 
revise Rule 2003(c) \4\ to provide specifically that any requirement 
for certification, notarization, verification, or any similar means by 
which a witness represents that his statement is true, may be satisfied 
through the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 1746. Consequently, a declaration 
under penalty of perjury will suffice for verification purposes. Under 
Rule 2005(c),\5\ the typed characters of the signer's name are 
sufficient to show that that person signed an eFiled document. These 
two provisions, taken together, will remove potential barriers to the 
electronic filing of documents requiring signature and verification. 
The Commission is requiring, however, that a document with an original 
signature be maintained by the submitter until the relevant proceeding 
has been concluded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 18 CFR 385.2003(c) (2004).
    \5\ 18 CFR 385.2005(c) (2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Comments and Discussion

    9. The Commission received eleven comments on the NOPR.\6\ The 
commenters were uniformly positive about the proposal in general and 
offered a number of suggestions for features that they believe will 
improve the utility and efficiency of the system. As explained below, 
the Commission in some cases has incorporated these suggestions in the 
system that will become operational by March 21, 2005. In other cases, 
the Commission intends to add the suggested features, or similar ones, 
in the future. The eService system that will be released when this 
rulemaking becomes effective will not be the final iteration, as the 
Commission will endeavor on an ongoing basis to improve all of its 
information systems in ways that will add value to the public. The 
Commission will make public announcements as further enhancements 
become available. The comments that the Commission received, as well as 
other forms of input from users of its online systems, will continue to 
play an important role in its efforts to provide information quickly 
and efficiently to industry and the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Comments are listed in Appendix A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. Some commenters also requested clarification or further 
explanation of the system's operation. These comments also are 
addressed below.

A. Basic Requirements of eService

    11. Several commenters \7\ suggest that the system be designed to 
serve filings automatically upon persons included in the service list. 
The Commission agrees that this feature would add considerable value to 
the system by making it unnecessary in most cases for the filer to 
serve documents. It will not be possible to include this feature in the 
system by the effective date of this rulemaking, but the Commission may 
add it via a subsequent rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Edison Electric Institute (EEI), p. 7; Spiegel & McDiarmid, 
p. 7; Sullivan & Worcester, LLP. (Sullivan & Worcester), pp. 3-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    12. One of the more difficult issues presented by the conversion to 
electronic service, and one addressed by many commenters,\8\ is the 
question whether e-mail notifications should link to a document in the 
Commission's eLibrary database or, instead, contain the served document 
as an attachment. Each solution presents a potential difficulty: filed 
documents are not always available immediately in eLibrary, and 
attachments may become voluminous and overburden a recipient's e-mail 
system, particularly in a proceeding in which numerous filings may be 
due on a specific date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ FPL Group, Inc. (FPL Group), pp. 2-3; Interstate Natural Gas 
Association of America, pp. 1-2; Miller, Balis & O'Neil, P.C. 
(Miller, Balis), p. 2; Missouri Public Service Commission (MPSC), 
pp. 3-4; NiSource, Inc., pp. 3-4; Spiegel & McDiarmid, pp. 6, 8-9; 
Sullivan & Worcester, pp. 2-3; Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline 
Company (Williston Basin), pp. 3-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    13. The Commission is revising Rule 2010 to provide that the person 
responsible for making service may do so by sending a link to the 
document in the Commission's eLibrary system or by alternate means that 
are reasonably calculated to make the document available to the 
recipients. Service of a link to eLibrary will be easy to accomplish. 
When a document is filed electronically, the person making the filing 
will receive a confirmation e-mail. The e-mail contains a link to the 
document. Even though the document will not yet be in eLibrary, the 
same link will take a viewer to the document once it is in eLibrary. 
Therefore, the person making the filing may simply forward the 
confirmation e-mail to the recipients on the service list. In rare 
instances, there may be some delay before a document becomes available 
in eLibrary. The revisions therefore provide that, where a document 
does not become available within two business days, the sender must 
provide service immediately by alternate means.
    14. The revised Rule 2010 leaves open the possibility that 
participants may wish to employ means of service other than links to 
eLibrary. In many cases, participants may wish to use means such as 
service of documents as attachments or service of links to web sites 
operated by the filing participant. Although the rule will not require 
participants to agree on alternate means of service, the Commission 
anticipates that in most proceedings, participants will voluntarily 
settle upon some mutually acceptable means. Alternate means of service 
are being employed now in many proceedings before the Commission. In 
some larger proceedings, Commission staff currently is establishing 
listservs on which parties may post filings, making them quickly and 
conveniently available to all parties in a proceeding. Available 
technology offers numerous means of exchanging documents quickly and 
efficiently. The Commission is loath to constrain the ability of 
participants in its proceedings to take advantage of such technology 
and is confident that participants will cooperate with one another in 
doing so to the greatest possible degree.

[[Page 8722]]

    15. Several commenters \9\ suggest the use of standardized language 
in the subject line of e-mails for service both by the Commission and 
by participants. Such a requirement would make it easier for 
participants to set e-mail filters to avoid blocking messages relating 
to Commission proceedings. The Commission agrees that such a 
requirement is desirable and will include directions for standardized 
subject lines at a prominent location in the system. Participants will 
be directed to include the phrase ``Document Service'' in the subject 
line of service e-mails.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Miller, Balis, p. 3; MPSC, p. 3; Spiegel & McDiarmid, p. 2; 
Sullivan & Worcester, pp. 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    16. One commenter \10\ asked that, if it could do so with little or 
no delay, the Commission make this rule effective with the start of a 
new docket year, which would be October 1. The timing has, however, 
worked out in such a way as to make it impractical. The eService system 
could not have been functional by October 1, 2004, and the Commission 
does not wish to delay the benefits of the system until late 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Miller, Balis, p. 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    17. One commenter \11\ requested that the ``default'' for service 
among participants be changed to allow participants to employ 
electronic service even without advance agreement among the 
participants. The Commission also received the suggestion \12\ that the 
service rule be clarified to state that, where one participant is 
unable to receive electronic service, the remaining participants may 
still serve each other via electronic service. The Commission agrees 
with both comments. It is revising Rule 2010(f) to provide that service 
shall be by electronic means unless the participants otherwise agree, 
except where a participant is unable to receive electronic service. 
This provision will not be limited to proceedings commenced after the 
effective date of this Final Rule. In addition, the revised rule will 
make clear that electronic service is still to be employed among 
participants who are able to use it. This is what the Commission 
originally intended.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ EEI, p. 6.
    \12\ EEI, pp. 5-6; Spiegel & McDiarmid, pp. 7-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. One commenter \13\ asked how service of protected documents 
will be handled. Currently, the Commission's regulations on service do 
not require that protected documents be served electronically, nor do 
they prohibit it. The owner of the document retains the ability to 
decide whether to transmit it electronically to other participants in a 
proceeding. Obviously, in this situation serving a link to eLibrary 
will not work, so participants will have to make other arrangements. 
This Final Rule makes no change on this issue. Participants are best 
left to assess for themselves the risks and benefits of different 
methods of transmitting protected information, as the most desirable 
method undoubtedly will vary from case to case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ Spiegel & McDiarmid, p. 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Miscellaneous Features.

    19. One commenter \14\ states that it has experienced problems with 
group interventions in the Commission's electronic filing system. The 
commenter reports that placing more than two representatives on the 
service list when filing electronically has been difficult and that the 
system does not always pick up the correct designations of principals 
and counsel when members of a group intervene jointly. This comment is 
outside the scope of the NOPR, but the Commission expects the new 
interface for its eFiling system to resolve this problem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Miller, Balis, p. 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    20. A commenter \15\ suggests that the Commission's eSubscription 
system allow subscription by applicant name. This comment also is 
outside the scope of the NOPR, but a later revision to the 
eSubscription system will allow applicant-name-based subscription.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Miller, Balis, p. 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    21. The U.S. Postal Service suggests that the Commission utilize 
its Electronic Postmark (EPM) system to provide security for its 
eService system. The EPM system requires payment of a fee, however, and 
the Commission believes that it can achieve sufficient levels of 
security without EPM.
    22. Some commenters \16\ suggest that the Commission allow users to 
employ a second e-mail address, that is, an e-mail address other than 
the one they use for eRegistration, for eService. Some also suggest the 
allowance of group e-mail addresses for service purposes. They state 
that such capability will make it easier for them to route service e-
mails within their organizations. The Commission does not consider this 
approach practical. Part of the Commission's purpose in initiating the 
eRegistration system was to obtain cleaner service and mailing lists by 
reducing duplicative and conflicting entries. Creating a system of e-
mail addresses that would be separate from the eRegistration would 
defeat this purpose. In addition, standardizing the subject line of 
service e-mails--possibly by requiring inclusion of docket numbers--
should make it possible for companies and law firms to establish their 
own internal forwarding rules, which would achieve the same purpose 
addressed by the comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ FPL Group, p. 2; Spiegel & McDiarmid, pp. 3-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    23. One commenter \17\ suggested that the Commission employ a 
format that would allow a downloaded service list to be inserted into 
e-mail programs. The Commission intends to add a feature of this type 
in the future. For this release, the eService system will only provide 
a file download of all the e-mail addresses on a service list. In a 
later release, however, it should be possible for the user to open a 
new message in the user's e-mail application so that the ``To'' field 
will automatically be populated with all the e-mail addresses on the 
relevant service list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Miller, Balis, p. 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    24. A commenter \18\ suggested that the system provide a drop list 
of users who are already registered, which the commenter believed might 
be useful for various purposes. It would not be possible to implement 
such a functionality in this release of the system. The Commission may 
revisit this point, however, in designing future releases. One concern 
is privacy. Obviously, e-mail addresses contained on service lists must 
be exposed to the view of participants who are eFiling, but the use of 
a drop list might arguably be an inappropriate level of exposure. The 
Commission intends to examine the appropriate balance of privacy and 
ease of use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Spiegel & McDiarmid, pp. 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    25. One commenter \19\ suggested that the Commission design the 
system to alert other participants if a participant receives a waiver 
of the eRegistration requirement. Such a function should not be 
necessary, because the identity of persons receiving waivers will be 
apparent from the service list, which will show their mailing addresses 
but no e-mail addresses. Similarly, it would be impractical at this 
time to implement a function that would provide participants with 
notice that people they added to the service list were receiving 
service. Generally speaking, failure to receive service would become 
apparent in the same manner as with postal mail. A person who adds 
others to the service list would simply need to verify that the others 
received service of the first document after they were added.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ EEI, p 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    26. One commenter \20\ requested that the Commission clarify what 
would happen if the Commission serves an

[[Page 8723]]

issuance on a person after that person has been prompted by the system 
to eRegister but before the person has had a chance to do so. This 
scenario will not arise because the system, as designed, will require 
that all contacts listed by a filer be eRegistered. The system will not 
send out notifications to persons (who are not eRegistered) inviting 
them to eRegister. The signer or counsel of record would be responsible 
for serving other contacts who are not eRegistered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Spiegel & McDiarmid, p. 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    27. One commenter \21\ requested an explanation of the statement in 
the NOPR that the person submitting the initial filing on behalf of a 
participant would by default become the representative contact on the 
service list. The commenter asked whether a paralegal filing for an 
attorney would need to log in as the attorney to ensure that the 
attorney was the representative. Another commenter \22\ suggested that 
the signer of the document be the ``default'' contact. The new system 
will address this issue. Until now, the field for the ``signer'' of a 
document defaulted to the login ID--i.e., the paralegal--so that if the 
paralegal did not enter the attorney's e-mail address, the paralegal 
would become the contact. In the new system, there will be no default, 
so the paralegal will be required to enter an e-mail address, which 
will be the attorney's e-mail address.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Spiegel & McDiarmid, pp. 5-6.
    \22\ Sullivan & Worcester, p. 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    28. One commenter \23\ asked for clarification of whether programs 
used by some organizations to download and clean up service lists will 
still function despite the security measures that the Commission will 
have to implement to ensure that e-mail addresses remain available only 
to persons who are eRegistered. Currently, third party programs of this 
nature access contact information such as street addresses, but not e-
mail addresses. The initial release of the eService system will 
continue to allow access by third party software to contacts' 
information such as street addresses, but will not allow access to 
their e-mail addresses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Spiegel & McDiarmid, p. 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    29. One commenter \24\ suggested that the Commission include an ID 
number on mailings in hydroelectric and natural gas proceedings--i.e., 
to mailing lists as opposed to service lists--to eliminate the need for 
a private link or a complicated URL to allow the recipient to access 
Non-Internet Public (NIP) documents. The Commission cannot, consistent 
with its security requirements, provide IDs to eLibrary to allow access 
to non-public documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Spiegel & McDiarmid, p. 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    30. One commenter \25\ preferred that the Commission not adopt the 
requirement, proposed in the NOPR, that a participant retain physically 
signed copies of electronically served, signature-required documents. 
The commenter stated that it is attempting to go entirely 
``paperless.'' The Commission does not wish to impede the commenter's 
efforts, but believes this requirement will have very limited impact. 
The requirement is needed to ensure that a signature's validity will 
not be subject to challenge in later administrative or judicial 
proceedings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Williston Basin, p. 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    31. One commenter \26\ suggested that the Commission maintain 
service lists in hydroelectric proceedings for the separate proceedings 
and not for entire dockets. This comment is outside the scope of the 
NOPR. The Commission will, however, investigate the possibility of 
making such a change at a later time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Spiegel & McDiarmid, pp. 9-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    32. One commenter \27\ stated that the Commission should recognize 
facsimile transmissions, commonly called ``fax'' transmissions, as 
electronic transmissions within this rulemaking. The Commission does 
not consider facsimile transmissions to be electronic transmissions in 
the same manner as, for instance, e-mails. Although a facsimile 
transmission is an electronic means of sending a document, it produces 
only a paper document. Thus, it does not adequately further the 
Commission's, and Congress', goal of reducing the use of paper. The 
Commission therefore does not regard it as an alternative form of 
electronic transmission for purposes of this Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Adirondack Mountain Club.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Information Collection Statement
    33. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations require OMB 
to approve certain information collection requirements imposed by 
agency rule.\28\ This Final Rule does not contain any information 
collection requirements and compliance with the OMB regulations is thus 
not required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ 5 CFR 1320.12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Environmental Analysis
    34. 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.\29\ The 
Commission has categorically excluded certain actions from this 
requirement as not having a significant effect on the human 
environment. Included in the exclusion are rules that are clarifying, 
corrective, or procedural or that do not substantially change the 
effect of the regulations being amended.\30\ This Final Rule is 
procedural in nature and therefore falls under this exception; 
consequently, no environmental consideration is necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. & 
Regs., Regulations Preambles 1986-1990, ] 30,783 (Dec. 10, 1987) 
(codified at 18 CFR part 380).
    \30\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
    35. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 \31\ generally requires 
a description and analysis of final rules that will have significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The 
Commission is not required to make such analyses if a rule would not 
have such an effect. The Commission certifies that this Final Rule will 
not have such an impact on small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 (https://www.ferc.gov ) and in FERC's 
Public Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 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 in the Commission's document management system, 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. For assistance, please contact FERC 
Online Support at 1-866-208-3676 (toll free) or 202-502-6652 (e-mail at 
FERCOnlineSupport@FERC.gov), or the Public Reference Room at 202-502-
8371, TTY 202-502-8659 (e-mail at public.referenceroom@ferc.gov).
Effective Date
    39. These regulations are effective on March 21, 2005.
    40. The provisions of 5 U.S.C. 801 regarding Congressional review 
of Final

[[Page 8724]]

Rules does not apply to this Final Rule, because the rule concerns 
agency procedure and practice and will not substantially affect the 
rights of non-agency parties.

List of Subjects

18 CFR Part 5

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

18 CFR Part 16

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

18 CFR Part 156

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

18 CFR Part 157

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

18 CFR Part 385

    Administrative practice and procedure, Electric utilities, 
Penalties, Pipelines, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    By the Commission.
Linda Mitry,
Deputy Secretary.

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends parts 5, 16, 
156, 157, and 385, Chapter I, Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as 
follows.

PART 5--INTEGRATED LICENSE APPLICATION PROCESS

0
1. The authority citation for part 5 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r, 2601-2645; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352.

0
2. Amend Sec.  5.4 by revising paragraph (b)(1)(iii) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  5.4  Acceleration of a license expiration date.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) Notifying appropriate Federal, state, and interstate resource 
agencies and Indian tribes, and non-governmental organizations likely 
to be interested, by electronic means if practical, otherwise by mail.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec.  5.8 by revising paragraph (e)(3) to read as follows:


Sec.  5.8  Notice of commencement of proceeding and scoping document, 
or of approval to use traditional licensing process or alternative 
procedures.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) Notifying appropriate Federal, state, and interstate resource 
agencies, state water quality and coastal zone management plan 
consistency certification agencies, Indian tribes, and non-governmental 
organizations, by electronic means if practical, otherwise by mail.

0
4. Amend Sec.  5.19 by revising paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  5.19  Tendering notice and schedule.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (2) Notifying appropriate Federal, state, and interstate resource 
agencies, state water quality and coastal zone management plan 
consistency certification agencies, Indian tribes, and non-governmental 
organizations, by electronic means if practical, otherwise by mail.
* * * * *

PART 16--PROCEDURES RELATING TO TAKEOVER AND RELICENSING OF 
LICENSED PROJECTS

0
5. The authority citation for part 16 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352.

0
6. Amend Sec.  16.6 by revising paragraph (d)(1)(iii) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  16.6  Notification procedures under section 15 of the Federal 
Power Act.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) Notifying the appropriate Federal and state resource 
agencies, state water quality and coastal zone management consistency 
certifying agencies, and Indian tribes, by electronic means if 
practical, otherwise by mail.
* * * * *

0
7. Amend Sec.  16.9 by revising paragraphs (d)(1)(iii) and (d)(2)(ii) 
to read as follows:


Sec.  16.9  Applications for new licenses and nonpower licenses for 
projects subject to sections 14 and 15 of the Federal Power Act.

* * * * *
    (d) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (iii) Notifying appropriate Federal, state, and interstate resource 
agencies, Indian tribes, and non-governmental organizations, by 
electronic means if practical, otherwise by mail.
    (2) * * *
    (ii) Provide the notice to appropriate Federal, state, and 
interstate resource agencies and Indian tribes, by electronic means if 
practical, otherwise by mail; and
* * * * *

PART 156--APPLICATIONS FOR ORDERS UNDER SECTION 7(a) OF THE NATURAL 
GAS ACT

0
8. The authority citation for part 156 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 52 Stat. 824, 829, 830; 56 Stat. 83, 84; 15 U.S.C. 
717f, 717f(a), 717n, 717o.

0
9. Revise Sec.  156.8 to read as follows:


Sec.  156.8  Notice of application.

    Notice of each application filed, except when rejected in 
accordance with Sec.  156.6, will be published in the Federal Register 
and copies of such notice sent to the State affected thereby via 
electronic means if practical, otherwise by mail.

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

0
10. The authority citation for part 156 continues to read as follows:

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

0
11. Revise Sec.  157.9 to read as follows:


Sec.  157.9  Notice of application.

    Notice of each application filed, except when rejected in 
accordance with Sec.  157.8, will be issued within 10 days of filing, 
and subsequently will be published in the Federal Register and copies 
of such notice sent to States affected thereby, by electronic means if 
practical, otherwise by mail. Persons desiring to receive a copy of the 
notice of every application shall so advise the Secretary.

PART 385--RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

0
12. The authority citation for part 385 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 551-557; 15 U.S.C. 717-717z, 3301-3432; 16 
U.S.C. 791a-825r, 2601-2645; 28 U.S.C. 2461; 31 U.S.C. 3701, 9701; 
42 U.S.C. 7101-7352; 49 U.S.C. 60502; 49 App. U.S.C. 1-85 (1988).

0
13. Amend Sec.  385.2005 by adding paragraph (b)(3) and revising 
paragraph (c) to read as follows:

[[Page 8725]]

Sec.  385.2005  Subscription and verification (Rule 2005).

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (3) Any requirement that a filing include or be supported by a 
sworn declaration, verification, certificate, statement, oath, or 
affidavit may be satisfied by compliance with the provisions of 28 
U.S.C. 1746, provided that the filer, or an authorized representative 
of the filer, maintains a copy of the document bearing an original, 
physical signature until after such time as all administrative and 
judicial proceedings in the relevant matter are closed and all 
deadlines for further administrative or judicial review have passed.
    (c) Electronic signature. In the case of any document filed in 
electronic form under the provisions of this Chapter, the typed 
characters representing the name of a person shall be sufficient to 
show that such person has signed the document for purposes of this 
section.

0
14. Amend Sec.  385.2010 by revising paragraphs (a) through (g), 
redesignating paragraphs (h) and (i) as (j) and (k), and adding new 
paragraphs (h) and (i), and to read as follows:


Sec.  385.2010  Service (Rule 2010).

    (a) By participants. (1) Any participant filing a document in a 
proceeding must serve a copy of the document on:
    (i) Each person whose name is on the official service list, or 
applicable restricted service list, for the proceeding or phase of the 
proceeding; and
    (ii) Any other person required to be served under Commission rule 
or order or under law.
    (2) If any person receives a rejection letter or deficiency letter 
from the Commission, the person must serve a copy of the letter on any 
person previously served copies of the rejected or deficient filing.
    (b) By the Secretary. The Secretary will serve, as appropriate:
    (1) A copy of any complaint on any person against whom the 
complaint is directed;
    (2) A copy of any notice of tariff or rate examination or order to 
show cause, on any person to whom the notice or order is issued;
    (3) A copy of any rule or any order by a decisional authority in a 
proceeding on any person included on the official service list, or 
applicable restricted service list, for the proceeding or phase of the 
proceeding, provided that such person has complied with paragraph (g) 
of this section.
    (c) Official service list. (1) The official service list for any 
proceeding will contain:
    (i) The name, address and, for proceedings commenced on or after 
March 21, 2005, e-mail address of any person designated for service in 
the initial pleading, other than a protest, or in the tariff or rate 
filing which is filed by any participant; and
    (ii) The name of counsel for the staff of the Commission.
    (2) Any designation of a person for service may be changed by 
following the instructions for the Commission's electronic registration 
system, located on its Web site at https://www.ferc.gov or, in the event 
that the proceeding was commenced prior to March 21, 2005, or the 
person designated for service is unable to use the electronic 
registration system, by filing a written notice with the Commission and 
serving the notice on each person whose name is included on the 
official service list.
    (d) Restricted service list. (1) For purposes of eliminating 
unnecessary expense or improving administrative efficiency, the 
Secretary, an office director, or the presiding officer may establish, 
by order, a restricted service list for an entire proceeding, a phase 
of a proceeding, one or more issues in a proceeding, or one or more 
cases in a consolidated proceeding.
    (2) Any restricted service list will contain the names of each 
person on the official service list, or the person's representative, 
who, in the judgment of the decisional authority establishing the list, 
is an active participant with respect to the proceeding or consolidated 
proceeding, any phase of the proceeding, or any issue in the 
proceeding, for which the list is established.
    (3) Any restricted service list is maintained in the same manner 
as, and in addition to, the official service list under paragraph (c) 
of this section.
    (4) Before any restricted service list is established, each person 
included on the official service list will be given notice of any 
proposal to establish a restricted service list and an opportunity to 
show why that person should also be included on the restricted service 
list or why a restricted service list should not be established.
    (5) Any designation of a person for service on a restricted service 
list may be changed by filing written notice with the Commission and 
serving that notice on each person whose name is on the applicable 
restricted service list.
    (e) Intervenors. If a motion to intervene or any notice of 
intervention is filed, the name, address and, for proceedings commenced 
on or after March 21, 2005, e-mail address of any person designated for 
service in the motion or notice are placed on the official service list 
or any applicable restricted service list, provided that such person 
has complied with paragraph (g) of this section. Any person placed on 
the official service list under this paragraph is entitled to service 
in accordance with this section. If a motion to intervene is denied, 
the name, address and e-mail address of each person designated for 
service pursuant to that motion will be removed from the official 
service list.
    (f) Methods of service. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (g) of 
this section, service of any document must be made by electronic means 
unless the sender and all recipients agree otherwise, except in the 
case of a recipient who has secured a waiver under the provisions of 
Sec.  390.3 of this Chapter, or is exempt under the provisions of Sec.  
390.4 of this Chapter, in which case service upon that recipient only 
shall be made by:
    (i) United States mail, first class or better; or
    (ii) Delivery in a manner that, and to a place where, the person on 
whom service is required may reasonably be expected to obtain actual 
and timely receipt.
    (2) Service of a document by electronic means shall be made by the 
transmission of a link to that document in the Commission's eLibrary 
system or by alternate means reasonably calculated to make the document 
available to required recipients. Alternate means may include but are 
not limited to, attachment of an electronic copy of the document to an 
e-mail or transmission of a link to an Internet site containing the 
document. It is the sender's responsibility to take reasonable steps to 
ensure that the means employed for service will be within the 
technological capabilities of the recipients.
    (g) Methods of Service by the Secretary. Service by the Secretary 
shall be made by electronic means, unless such means are impractical, 
in which case service shall be made by United States mail.
    (h) Electronic registration. In the case of proceedings commenced 
on or after March 21, 2005, any person, to be included on a service 
list, must have complied with the procedures for electronic 
registration made available on the Commission's Web site, at https://
www.ferc.gov, unless such person has secured a waiver under the 
provisions of Sec.  390.3 of this Chapter, or is exempt under the 
provisions of Sec.  390.4 of this Chapter.

[[Page 8726]]

    (i) Timing of service. (1) Service is made under this section when 
the document served is deposited in the mail or is delivered in another 
manner.
    (2) Service of any document must be made not later than the date of 
the filing of the document.
    (3) In the case of a document served through a link to the 
Commission's eLibrary system, as specified in paragraph (f)(2) of this 
section, if a link to the document does not become available in 
eLibrary within two business days after the document is filed, the 
person responsible for serving the document must immediately serve the 
document by other means, as specified in paragraph (f)(1) or (f)(2) of 
this section.
* * * * *

    Note: The following appendix will not appear in the Code of 
Federal Regulations.

Appendix A

Adirondack Mountain Club
Edison Electric Institute
FPL Group, Inc.
Interstate Natural Gas Association of America
Miller, Balis & O'Neil, P.C.
Missouri Public Service Commission
NiSource, Inc.
Spiegel & McDiarmid
Sullivan & Worcester, LLP.
United States Postal Service
Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Company

[FR Doc. 05-3476 Filed 2-22-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P