Dan L. Duncan, et al.; Analysis of Proposed Agreement Containing Consent Order To Aid Public Comment, 50423-50426 [E6-14142]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 165 / Friday, August 25, 2006 / Notices
Trans No.
Acquiring
Acquired
20061484 ...............
20061487 ...............
20061493 ...............
Empire Merchants, LLC ...............
Corus Phama, Inc. .......................
Reliant Pharmaceuticals, Inc .......
Empire Merchants, LLC.
Corus Pharma, Inc.
Reliant Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
NPA LLC ......................................
Cycle Express LLC.
20061496 ...............
20061498 ...............
Charmer Industries, Inc ...............
Gilead Sciences, Inc ....................
Oscient Pharmaceuticals Corporation.
Transportation Resource Partners, L.P.
Green Equity Investors IV, L.P ....
PCT Equity 2 Limited ...................
PETCO Animal Supplies, Inc ......
Jeffrey A. Kramer .........................
20061502 ...............
Hoak Media, LLC .........................
Wicks Communications & Media
Partners, L.P.
PETCO Animal Supplies, Inc.
Bullet Line, Inc.
Kwik Klik, LLC.
Community Television Services, Inc.
20061510 ...............
Sun Capital Partners IV, L.P .......
Bruckmann, Rosser, Sherrill &
Co., L.P.
50423
20061495 ...............
Entities
Wicks Communications & Media Partners, L.P.
Real Mex Restaurants, Inc.
Transactions Granted Early Termination—08/08/2006
20061499 ...............
20061500 ...............
Oak Investment Partners X, L.P ..
AMVESCAP PLC .........................
First Avenue Networks, Inc .........
Wilbur L. Ross, Jr. .......................
20061501 ...............
20061506 ...............
20061509 ...............
Kemira Oyj ...................................
Wolseley plc .................................
Water Street Capital Partners,
L.P.
Cytec Industries, Inc ....................
Mr. David B. McNair ....................
Matria Healthcare, Inc .................
First Avenue Networks, Inc.
Ross CG Management L.P.
Ross Expansion Associates L.P.
WL Ross & Co. LLC.
Cytec Industries, Inc.
Northern Water Works Supply, Inc.
Facet Technologies, LLC.
Transactions Granted Early Termination—08/09/2006
20061462 ...............
Gary L. and Mary E. West ...........
West Corporation.
Gary L. and Mary E. West ...........
West Corporation.
Gary L. and Mary E. West ...........
West Corporation.
20061467 ...............
20061468 ...............
Quadrangle Capital Partners II
L.P.
Thomas H. Lee Equity Fund VI,
L.P.
Thomas H. Lee Parallel Fund VI,
L.P.
Ashtead Group plc .......................
Charys Holding Company, Inc .....
NationsRent Companies, Inc .......
Cotton Holdings 1, Inc .................
20061479
20061504
20061505
20061507
James W. Duffy ...........................
Kohlberg Investors V, L.P ............
The Home Depot, Inc ..................
Group 1 Automotive, Inc ..............
Rapid Industrial Plastics Co., Ltd
Niagra Corporation ......................
Edson Electric Supply, Inc ...........
Marty Sussman ............................
NationsRent Companies, Inc.
Cotton Commercial USA, LP.
Cotton Holdings 1, Inc.
Cotton Restoration of Central Texas, LP.
Rapid Industrial Plastics Co., Ltd.
Niagara Corporation.
Edson Electric Supply, Inc.
E&M Associates.
ERMAR Associates, L.P.
Marty Sussman, Inc. d/b/a Sussman Honda and
Marty Sussman BM.
Marty Sussman Limited, Inc. d/b/a/ Marty
Sussman Acura.
MES & EES Associates, L.P.
Sussman Auto, Inc. d/b/a Sussman Acura.
20061463 ...............
20061464 ...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
Transactions Granted Early Termination—08\10\2006
20061434 ...............
Croda International Plc ................
Imperial Chemical Industries PLC
ICI Uniqema Inc.
Unichema Chemie B.V.
Uniqema (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd.
Transactions Granted Early Termination—08\11\2006
20061515 ...............
Cooper Industries, Ltd .................
20061527 ...............
20061541 ...............
Insight Enterprises, Inc ................
Solidus Networks, Inc ..................
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sandra M. Peay, Contact Representative
or Renee Hallman, Contact
Representative, Federal Trade
Commission, Premerger Notification
Office, Bureau of Competition, Room H–
303, Washington, DC 20580; (202) 326–
3100.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Aug 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
OCM/GFI Power Opportunities
Fund II, L.P.
Level 3 Communications, Inc ......
S&H Greenpoints, Inc ..................
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 06–7139 Filed 8–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750–01–M
PO 00000
Cannon Technologies, Inc.
Software Spectrum, Inc.
S&H Greenpoints, Inc.
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
[File No. 051 0108]
Dan L. Duncan, et al.; Analysis of
Proposed Agreement Containing
Consent Order To Aid Public Comment
AGENCY:
Frm 00041
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\25AUN1.SGM
Federal Trade Commission.
25AUN1
50424
ACTION:
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 165 / Friday, August 25, 2006 / Notices
Proposed Consent Agreement.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this
matter settles alleged violations of
Federal law prohibiting unfair or
deceptive acts or practices or unfair
methods of competition. The attached
Analysis to Aid Public Comment
describes both the allegations in the
draft complaint and the terms of the
consent order—embodied in the consent
agreement—that would settle these
allegations.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before September 18, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are
invited to submit written comments.
Comments should refer to ‘‘Dan L.
Duncan, et al., File No. 051 0108,’’ to
facilitate the organization of comments.
A comment filed in paper form should
include this reference both in the text
and on the envelope, and should be
mailed or delivered to the following
address: Federal Trade Commission/
Office of the Secretary, Room 135–H,
600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20580. Comments
containing confidential material must be
filed in paper form, must be clearly
labeled ‘‘Confidential,’’ and must
comply with Commission Rule 4.9(c).
16 CFR 4.9(c) (2005).1 The FTC is
requesting that any comment filed in
paper form be sent by courier or
overnight service, if possible, because
U.S. postal mail in the Washington area
and at the Commission is subject to
delay due to heightened security
precautions. Comments that do not
contain any nonpublic information may
instead be filed in electronic form as
part of or as an attachment to email
messages directed to the following
e-mail box: consentagreement@ftc.gov.
The FTC Act and other laws the
Commission administers permit the
collection of public comments to
consider and use in this proceeding as
appropriate. All timely and responsive
public comments, whether filed in
paper or electronic form, will be
considered by the Commission, and will
be available to the public on the FTC
Web site, to the extent practicable, at
https://www.ftc.gov. As a matter of
discretion, the FTC makes every effort to
remove home contact information for
individuals from the public comments it
receives before placing those comments
1 The comment must be accompanied by an
explicit request for confidential treatment,
including the factual and legal basis for the request,
and must identify the specific portions of the
comment to be withheld from the public record.
The request will be granted or denied by the
Commission’s General Counsel, consistent with
applicable law and the public interest. See
Commission Rule 4.9(c), 16 CFR 4.9(c).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Aug 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
on the FTC Web site. More information,
including routine uses permitted by the
Privacy Act, may be found in the FTC’s
privacy policy, at https://www.ftc.gov/
ftc/privacy.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amanda L. Wait, Bureau of
Competition, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326–
2220.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade
Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C.
46(f), and § 2.34 of the Commission
Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is
hereby given that the above-captioned
consent agreement containing a consent
order to cease and desist, having been
filed with and accepted, subject to final
approval, by the Commission, has been
placed on the public record for a period
of thirty (30) days. The following
Analysis to Aid Public Comment
describes the terms of the consent
agreement, and the allegations in the
complaint. An electronic copy of the
full text of the consent agreement
package can be obtained from the FTC
Home Page (for August 18, 2006), on the
World Wide Web, at https://www.ftc.gov/
os/2006/08/index.htm. A paper copy
can be obtained from the FTC Public
Reference Room, Room 130-H, 600
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20580, either in person
or by calling (202) 326–2222.
Public comments are invited, and may
be filed with the Commission in either
paper or electronic form. All comments
should be filed as prescribed in the
ADDRESSES section above, and must be
received on or before the date specified
in the DATES section.
Analysis of Agreement Containing
Consent Order To Aid Public Comment
The Federal Trade Commission,
subject to its final approval, has
accepted for public comment an
Agreement Containing Consent Order
(‘‘Consent Agreement’’) with Dan L.
Duncan, EPCO, Inc., Texas Eastern
Products Pipeline Company, LLC, and
TEPPCO Partners, L.P. (collectively
‘‘Duncan’’). The Consent Agreement
remedies the anticompetitive effects that
otherwise would be likely to result from
the acquisition described herein. The
terms of the Consent Agreement require
Duncan to divest its interests in the
Mont Belvieu Storage Partners natural
gas liquids storage facility and related
pipeline, land, and other assets to a
buyer approved by the Commission.
The proposed Consent Agreement has
been placed on the public record for
thirty (30) days to solicit comments
from interested people. Comments
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
received during this period will become
part of the public record. After thirty
(30) days, the Commission again will
review the proposed Consent Agreement
and the comments received, and will
decide whether it should withdraw the
proposed Consent Agreement or make it
final.
On February 24, 2005, EPCO, Inc.,
through DFI GP Holdings, L.P., acquired
from Duke Energy Field Services, LLC:
(1) TEPPCO’s general partner, Texas
Eastern Products Pipeline Company,
LLC, for $1.1 billion, and (2) 2.5 million
limited partnership units of TEPPCO
Partners, L.P., at an estimated value of
$100 million (collectively ‘‘the
acquisition’’). The acquisition was not
reportable under the Hart-Scott-Rodino
Act. Both EPCO and TEPPCO are
leading providers of salt dome storage
for natural gas liquids (‘‘NGLs’’) in Mont
Belvieu, Texas. EPCO operates the
Enterprise NGL storage facility in Mont
Belvieu. TEPPCO operates the Mont
Belvieu Storage Partners NGL storage
facility in Mont Belvieu. As a result of
this acquisition, two of the four
commercial storage providers for NGLs
were placed under Enterprise’s control.
I. The Parties
Enterprise Products Partners L.P.
(‘‘Enterprise’’) is one of the largest
publicly traded midstream energy
partnerships in the United States, with
an enterprise value of approximately
$15 billion. Enterprise’s services
include NGL fractionation,
transportation, import/export
terminaling, and storage. Enterprise
owns the largest and most liquid NGL
storage facility in Mont Belvieu, along
with several pipelines into and out of
Mont Belvieu, and substantial brine
handling capacity in Mont Belvieu.
Enterprise also markets NGLs in Mont
Belvieu. Dan L. Duncan ultimately
controls Enterprise and EPCO, Inc.
(‘‘EPCO’’), the general partner of
Enterprise.
TEPPCO Partners, L.P. (‘‘TEPPCO’’) is
a publicly traded master limited
partnership. TEPPCO’s general partner
is Texas Eastern Products Pipeline
Company, LLC (‘‘Texas Eastern’’),
which, post-acquisition, ultimately is
controlled by EPCO and Dan L. Duncan.
Through various subsidiaries, TEPPCO
owns and operates NGL transportation
and storage assets. TEPPCO’s Mont
Belvieu NGL storage assets are owned
by Mont Belvieu Storage Partners, a 50/
50 joint venture between TEPPCO and
Louis Dreyfus Energy Services L.P.
TEPPCO controlled, and continues to
control, the day-to-day operations of the
Mont Belvieu Storage Partners NGL
storage facility, through its wholly-
E:\FR\FM\25AUN1.SGM
25AUN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 165 / Friday, August 25, 2006 / Notices
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
owned subsidiary, TE Products Pipeline
Company, Limited Partnership. TEPPCO
also owns and operates the TE Products
Pipeline, the primary source of propane
to the northeastern United States and an
important outlet for NGLs stored at the
Mont Belvieu Storage Partners facility.
Since the acquisition, the general
partners of Enterprise and TEPPCO have
maintained separate boards of directors
and management teams. The practical
result of the acquisition, however, is
that Dan L. Duncan ultimately owns and
controls both entities.
II. Salt Dome Storage for Natural Gas
Liquids in Mont Belvieu, Texas
The relevant market in which to
analyze the effects of the acquisition is
the market for salt dome storage for
natural gas liquids (‘‘NGLs’’) in Mont
Belvieu, Texas. NGLs are a group of
light hydrocarbons—including ethane,
propane, normal butane, isobutane, and
natural gasoline—which are used,
among other uses, as feedstocks in the
production of ethylene and propylene,
as fuel for heating or industrial
processes, and in blending components
for motor gasoline. NGLs primarily are
stored in large underground wells
formed out of geological salt domes
under the Earth’s surface until they are
delivered to end-users, usually via
pipeline. Mont Belvieu, Texas,
comprises the largest NGL storage
system in the world and pipeline
connections that allow NGL marketers
to reach the broadest array of end use
markets. There are no viable
competitive alternatives to salt dome
storage for NGLs in Mont Belvieu.
The market for salt dome storage for
NGLs in Mont Belvieu, Texas, is highly
concentrated, with Enterprise and
TEPPCO as the two largest suppliers
based on storage volumes, and two of
the three largest suppliers based on
permitted storage volume. Together the
two account for about 70% of storage
volume in Mont Belvieu. Targa
Resources, Inc. and Valero Energy
Corporation are the two other
competitors that account for the
remaining volume.
Storage wells are differentiated by
their connectivity, both to pipelines
bringing product into the wells from
fractionators, and to pipelines taking
product out of storage to the major
product pipelines that transport NGLs to
markets throughout the United States.
Mont Belvieu’s attraction as a storage
hub for NGLs stems from the flexibility
it provides to owners to move their
product to various markets. Storage
customers evaluate wells on the basis of
the flexibility they provide in receiving
and moving product.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Aug 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
Prior to the acquisition, Enterprise
and TEPPCO directly competed for
storage volumes in Mont Belvieu based
on price and service levels. Both
Enterprise and TEPPCO are connected
to the Dixie Pipeline and competed for
storage volumes for customers wishing
to ship product, primarily propane, into
the Southeastern United States. In
addition, Enterprise and TEPPCO, along
with Targa Resources, Inc., competed
for storage customers’ marginal
volumes. Many customers must store
minimum volumes at certain facilities
due to pipeline connections or other
restrictions. Finally, Enterprise and
TEPPCO competed for trading volumes.
Because Enterprise and TEPPCO are the
two most liquid storage providers, many
trading customers ranked them as their
first and second choice for storage.
The acquisition significantly
increased concentration in the Mont
Belvieu market for salt dome storage for
NGLs, leaving EPCO controlling a
dominant share of storage volume and
capacity. A combined Enterprise/
TEPPCO would have an enhanced
ability unilaterally to exercise market
power in the market because many
customers view the two suppliers as
first and second choices and the handful
of other viable suppliers are incapable
of replacing the competition lost as a
result of the merger. Reducing the
already small number of competitors
also increases the likelihood of
coordinated interaction after the merger.
Thus, eliminating competition between
the two leading suppliers likely would
result in higher prices and lower levels
of service for storage customers.
III. Entry
Entry into the Mont Belvieu storage
market is unlikely to deter or counteract
the likely anticompetitive effects. Entry
is difficult and time-consuming and
potential entrants would face
substantial barriers in the form of permit
requirements and land use restrictions.
IV. Terms of the Proposed Consent
Agreement
The proposed Consent Agreement
effectively remedies the acquisition’s
alleged anticompetitive effects by
requiring TEPPCO to divest its interests
in Mont Belvieu Storage Partners and
certain related pipeline, land, and other
assets (collectively the ‘‘divested
assets’’). The Commission’s purposes
with respect to the divestiture are: (1)
To ensure the continuation of the
divested assets as a going concern in the
same manner as of the date the Consent
Agreement was signed, and (2) to
remedy the lessening of competition
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
50425
resulting from the acquisition as alleged
in the Commission’s Complaint.
In order to achieve these purposes,
Paragraph II of the proposed Consent
Agreement directs Duncan to sell
TEPPCO’s interests in certain Mont
Belvieu NGL storage assets and related
pipeline, land, and other assets to a
Commission-approved buyer no later
than December 31, 2006, and in a
manner approved by the Commission,
subject to the Commission’s final
approval. If Duncan is unable to divest
this set of assets to a Commissionapproved buyer within this timeframe,
Paragraph III of the proposed Consent
Agreement contains the standard
divestiture trustee provisions pursuant
to which the Commission may appoint
a trustee to divest the assets to a
Commission-approved buyer.
Paragraph IV.A of the proposed
Consent Agreement requires Duncan to
provide prior notice to the Commission
of its planned acquisitions,
operatorships, or management of any
NGL storage facility in Mont Belvieu,
Texas, for a period of ten (10) years.
Paragraph IV.C requires Duncan to send
copies of all new NGL storage leases
with third party NGL storage facilities in
Mont Belvieu within the earlier of
fifteen (15) days of being signed or
becoming effective. These provisions
ensure that subsequent acquisitions or
leases do not adversely impact
competition in the market at issue and
undermine the remedial goals of the
proposed Consent Agreement.
In order to achieve successfully the
Commission’s purposes, Paragraph II of
the proposed Consent Agreement
contains provisions that ensure that the
acquirer receives all resources necessary
to operate the divested assets. First,
Paragraph II requires Duncan to give the
acquirer the opportunity to interview
and hire employees who spend more
than ten percent (10%) of their time
working on the divested assets, and
prevents Duncan from offering these
employees incentives to decline the
acquirer’s offer of employment. This
will ensure that the acquirer has access
to staff who are familiar with the NGL
storage, pipelines, and other related
assets. Second, Paragraph II requires
Duncan to convey to the acquirer
licensed intangible property necessary
for the operation of the divested assets
to ensure that the acquirer has the
software and other assets necessary to
operate the divested assets in the same
manner as of the day the parties signed
the Consent Agreement.
To maintain the competitive viability
of the divested assets, including
TEPPCO’s interest in Mont Belvieu
Storage Partners, in the same manner as
E:\FR\FM\25AUN1.SGM
25AUN1
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
50426
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 165 / Friday, August 25, 2006 / Notices
of the date the Consent Agreement was
signed, the proposed Consent
Agreement contains several provisions
relating to the operation of TEPPCO’s
TE Products Pipeline. TEPPCO provides
‘‘open stock’’ service to propane
shippers from Mont Belvieu Storage
Partners, a service whereby shippers
who ship on the pipeline and who have
adequate inventory in the TEPPCO
system, given certain inventory and
availability requirements, can take
delivery of propane at any of TEPPCO’s
terminals along the pipeline without
having to wait for the pipeline transit
time it would take to move the product
physically from origin to destination.
The open stock service allows TEPPCO
to transfer product from any origination
point along the pipeline it chooses to
meet shippers’ needs, irrespective of the
storage facility in which the shipper
actually has inventory. EPCO’s plans to
build a pipeline connecting its Mont
Belvieu storage facility to the TEPPCO
pipeline raises several concerns
regarding its ability to disadvantage any
prospective acquiror of TEPPCO’s
interest in Mont Belvieu Storage
Partners. First, TEPPCO could decline to
offer the open stock service at Mont
Belvieu Storage Partners, or offer the
service there at less advantageous terms
than at EPCO’s Mont Belvieu facility.
Second, TEPPCO could impede Mont
Belvieu Storage Partners’ ability to
market its storage capacity by allocating
product from other storage facilities
along the pipeline to meet shipper’s
needs, keeping Mont Belvieu Storage
Partners’ capacity occupied
disproportionately. The proposed
Consent Agreement contains provisions
addressing these concerns.
First, the proposed Consent
Agreement requires TEPPCO to
continue to operate the TE Products
Pipeline on open stock service for
propane. Second, if Duncan builds a
pipeline, referred to in the proposed
Consent Agreement as the ‘‘New
Pipeline,’’ connecting the TE Products
Pipeline to any NGL storage facility it
owns in Mont Belvieu, Texas, the
proposed Consent Agreement requires
Duncan to (1) connect the new pipeline
to the Mont Belvieu Storage Partners
NGL storage facility at its own cost, (2)
operate the TE Products Pipeline for
propane on an open stock basis for
shippers who ship from Mont Belvieu
Storage Partners on terms and
conditions that are no less advantageous
than those for shippers who ship
propane from an NGL storage facility in
Mont Belvieu owned by Duncan, and (3)
operate the TE Products Pipeline for
products other than propane on terms
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:57 Aug 24, 2006
Jkt 208001
and conditions that are no less
advantageous than those for shippers
who ship products other than propane
from an NGL storage facility in Mont
Belvieu owned by Duncan.
Third, the proposed Consent
Agreement contains provisions relating
to the implementation of new allocation
procedures for the TE Products Pipeline.
Paragraph IV.B requires TEPPCO to
provide advance written notice to the
Commission of any new allocation
procedures relating to the movements of
NGLs on the TE Products Pipeline
originating in Mont Belvieu, Texas.
Paragraph VI requires any new
allocation procedures to include a
requirement that shippers originating
product movements on the pipeline
from the Mont Belvieu Storage Partners
NGL storage facility nominate that
movement to both TEPPCO and Mont
Belvieu Storage Partners and also
provides that such new allocation
procedures shall allow shippers who
ship product originating at Mont
Belvieu Storage Partners’ facility to ship
on terms and conditions that are no less
advantageous than those given to
shippers who ship from an NGL storage
facility owned by Duncan.
The purpose of the provisions relating
to the operation of the TE Products
Pipeline is to maintain the competitive
viability of the Mont Belvieu Storage
Partners NGL storage facility in the
same manner as of the date the Consent
Agreement was signed by ensuring that
Duncan cannot disadvantage shippers
who originate product movements from
the Mont Belvieu Storage Partners’
facility in favor of shippers who
originate product movements from its
own storage facility in the event that
Duncan interconnects an NGL storage
facility it owns in Mont Belvieu, Texas,
to the TE Products Pipeline.
V. Opportunity for Public Comment
By accepting the proposed Consent
Agreement, subject to final approval, the
Commission anticipates that the
competitive problems alleged in the
Complaint will be resolved. The
purpose of this analysis is to invite
public comment on the proposed
Consent Agreement, including the
proposed divestitures, to aid the
Commission in its determination of
whether it should make final the
proposed Consent Agreement contained
in the agreement. This analysis is not
intended to constitute an official
interpretation of the proposed Consent
Agreement or modify the terms of the
proposed Consent Agreement in any
way. Further, the proposed Consent
Agreement has been entered into for
settlement purposes only and does not
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
constitute an admission by Dan L.
Duncan, EPCO, Texas Eastern, or
TEPPCO that it violated the law or that
the facts alleged in the Complaint, other
than jurisdictional facts, are true.
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6–14142 Filed 8–24–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750–01–P
GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION
Establishment of a Transaction Fee for
Transportation Services Provided for
the GSA, Office of Global Supply
Federal Supply Service, GSA.
Final Notice
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: GSA is amending the Freight
Management Program (FMP), Standard
Tender of Service (STOS), to
incorporate a 4% transaction fee for
transportation services provided for the
GSA, Office of Global Supply.
Transportation Service Providers (TSPs)
will be required to remit a 4%
transaction fee to GSA on a quarterly
basis.
DATES: The effective date is January 1,
2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Mary Anne Sykes, Transportation
Programs Branch, by telephone at 703–
605–2889 or by e-mail at
transportation.programs@gsa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The final
notice is applicable to the Freight
Management Program (FMP), Standard
Tender of Service (STOS), for
transportation services provided to the
Eastern Distribution Center (EDC),
Burlington, NJ; Western Distribution
Center (WDC), French Camp, CA; and
the National Industries for the Blind
(NIB) and NISH. It applies to all
transportation service providers (TSPs)
transporting these shipments. The final
notice and implementation procedures
take into account the comments
received from transportation service
providers (TSPs) in response to the
notices published in the Federal
Register at 70 FR 73248 on December 9,
2005, and an extension to that notice at
70 FR 76455 on December 27, 2005,
soliciting comments on the
establishment of a 4% transaction fee
for transportation services provided for
the GSA, Office of Global Supply. GSA
published the response to the comments
on the proposed rule in the Federal
Register at 71 FR 38403 on July 6, 2006.
The Transportation Management
Services Solution (TMSS) pre-payment
E:\FR\FM\25AUN1.SGM
25AUN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 165 (Friday, August 25, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50423-50426]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-14142]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
[File No. 051 0108]
Dan L. Duncan, et al.; Analysis of Proposed Agreement Containing
Consent Order To Aid Public Comment
AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.
[[Page 50424]]
ACTION: Proposed Consent Agreement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this matter settles alleged
violations of Federal law prohibiting unfair or deceptive acts or
practices or unfair methods of competition. The attached Analysis to
Aid Public Comment describes both the allegations in the draft
complaint and the terms of the consent order--embodied in the consent
agreement--that would settle these allegations.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 18, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties are invited to submit written comments.
Comments should refer to ``Dan L. Duncan, et al., File No. 051 0108,''
to facilitate the organization of comments. A comment filed in paper
form should include this reference both in the text and on the
envelope, and should be mailed or delivered to the following address:
Federal Trade Commission/Office of the Secretary, Room 135-H, 600
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580. Comments containing
confidential material must be filed in paper form, must be clearly
labeled ``Confidential,'' and must comply with Commission Rule 4.9(c).
16 CFR 4.9(c) (2005).\1\ The FTC is requesting that any comment filed
in paper form be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible,
because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission
is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions. Comments
that do not contain any nonpublic information may instead be filed in
electronic form as part of or as an attachment to email messages
directed to the following e-mail box: consentagreement@ftc.gov.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The comment must be accompanied by an explicit request for
confidential treatment, including the factual and legal basis for
the request, and must identify the specific portions of the comment
to be withheld from the public record. The request will be granted
or denied by the Commission's General Counsel, consistent with
applicable law and the public interest. See Commission Rule 4.9(c),
16 CFR 4.9(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FTC Act and other laws the Commission administers permit the
collection of public comments to consider and use in this proceeding as
appropriate. All timely and responsive public comments, whether filed
in paper or electronic form, will be considered by the Commission, and
will be available to the public on the FTC Web site, to the extent
practicable, at https://www.ftc.gov. As a matter of discretion, the FTC
makes every effort to remove home contact information for individuals
from the public comments it receives before placing those comments on
the FTC Web site. More information, including routine uses permitted by
the Privacy Act, may be found in the FTC's privacy policy, at https://
www.ftc.gov/ftc/privacy.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amanda L. Wait, Bureau of Competition,
600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580, (202) 326-2220.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 6(f) of the Federal
Trade Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C. 46(f), and Sec. 2.34 of
the Commission Rules of Practice, 16 CFR 2.34, notice is hereby given
that the above-captioned consent agreement containing a consent order
to cease and desist, having been filed with and accepted, subject to
final approval, by the Commission, has been placed on the public record
for a period of thirty (30) days. The following Analysis to Aid Public
Comment describes the terms of the consent agreement, and the
allegations in the complaint. An electronic copy of the full text of
the consent agreement package can be obtained from the FTC Home Page
(for August 18, 2006), on the World Wide Web, at https://www.ftc.gov/os/
2006/08/index.htm. A paper copy can be obtained from the FTC Public
Reference Room, Room 130-H, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20580, either in person or by calling (202) 326-2222.
Public comments are invited, and may be filed with the Commission
in either paper or electronic form. All comments should be filed as
prescribed in the ADDRESSES section above, and must be received on or
before the date specified in the DATES section.
Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Order To Aid Public Comment
The Federal Trade Commission, subject to its final approval, has
accepted for public comment an Agreement Containing Consent Order
(``Consent Agreement'') with Dan L. Duncan, EPCO, Inc., Texas Eastern
Products Pipeline Company, LLC, and TEPPCO Partners, L.P. (collectively
``Duncan''). The Consent Agreement remedies the anticompetitive effects
that otherwise would be likely to result from the acquisition described
herein. The terms of the Consent Agreement require Duncan to divest its
interests in the Mont Belvieu Storage Partners natural gas liquids
storage facility and related pipeline, land, and other assets to a
buyer approved by the Commission.
The proposed Consent Agreement has been placed on the public record
for thirty (30) days to solicit comments from interested people.
Comments received during this period will become part of the public
record. After thirty (30) days, the Commission again will review the
proposed Consent Agreement and the comments received, and will decide
whether it should withdraw the proposed Consent Agreement or make it
final.
On February 24, 2005, EPCO, Inc., through DFI GP Holdings, L.P.,
acquired from Duke Energy Field Services, LLC: (1) TEPPCO's general
partner, Texas Eastern Products Pipeline Company, LLC, for $1.1
billion, and (2) 2.5 million limited partnership units of TEPPCO
Partners, L.P., at an estimated value of $100 million (collectively
``the acquisition''). The acquisition was not reportable under the
Hart-Scott-Rodino Act. Both EPCO and TEPPCO are leading providers of
salt dome storage for natural gas liquids (``NGLs'') in Mont Belvieu,
Texas. EPCO operates the Enterprise NGL storage facility in Mont
Belvieu. TEPPCO operates the Mont Belvieu Storage Partners NGL storage
facility in Mont Belvieu. As a result of this acquisition, two of the
four commercial storage providers for NGLs were placed under
Enterprise's control.
I. The Parties
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. (``Enterprise'') is one of the
largest publicly traded midstream energy partnerships in the United
States, with an enterprise value of approximately $15 billion.
Enterprise's services include NGL fractionation, transportation,
import/export terminaling, and storage. Enterprise owns the largest and
most liquid NGL storage facility in Mont Belvieu, along with several
pipelines into and out of Mont Belvieu, and substantial brine handling
capacity in Mont Belvieu. Enterprise also markets NGLs in Mont Belvieu.
Dan L. Duncan ultimately controls Enterprise and EPCO, Inc. (``EPCO''),
the general partner of Enterprise.
TEPPCO Partners, L.P. (``TEPPCO'') is a publicly traded master
limited partnership. TEPPCO's general partner is Texas Eastern Products
Pipeline Company, LLC (``Texas Eastern''), which, post-acquisition,
ultimately is controlled by EPCO and Dan L. Duncan. Through various
subsidiaries, TEPPCO owns and operates NGL transportation and storage
assets. TEPPCO's Mont Belvieu NGL storage assets are owned by Mont
Belvieu Storage Partners, a 50/50 joint venture between TEPPCO and
Louis Dreyfus Energy Services L.P. TEPPCO controlled, and continues to
control, the day-to-day operations of the Mont Belvieu Storage Partners
NGL storage facility, through its wholly-
[[Page 50425]]
owned subsidiary, TE Products Pipeline Company, Limited Partnership.
TEPPCO also owns and operates the TE Products Pipeline, the primary
source of propane to the northeastern United States and an important
outlet for NGLs stored at the Mont Belvieu Storage Partners facility.
Since the acquisition, the general partners of Enterprise and
TEPPCO have maintained separate boards of directors and management
teams. The practical result of the acquisition, however, is that Dan L.
Duncan ultimately owns and controls both entities.
II. Salt Dome Storage for Natural Gas Liquids in Mont Belvieu, Texas
The relevant market in which to analyze the effects of the
acquisition is the market for salt dome storage for natural gas liquids
(``NGLs'') in Mont Belvieu, Texas. NGLs are a group of light
hydrocarbons--including ethane, propane, normal butane, isobutane, and
natural gasoline--which are used, among other uses, as feedstocks in
the production of ethylene and propylene, as fuel for heating or
industrial processes, and in blending components for motor gasoline.
NGLs primarily are stored in large underground wells formed out of
geological salt domes under the Earth's surface until they are
delivered to end-users, usually via pipeline. Mont Belvieu, Texas,
comprises the largest NGL storage system in the world and pipeline
connections that allow NGL marketers to reach the broadest array of end
use markets. There are no viable competitive alternatives to salt dome
storage for NGLs in Mont Belvieu.
The market for salt dome storage for NGLs in Mont Belvieu, Texas,
is highly concentrated, with Enterprise and TEPPCO as the two largest
suppliers based on storage volumes, and two of the three largest
suppliers based on permitted storage volume. Together the two account
for about 70% of storage volume in Mont Belvieu. Targa Resources, Inc.
and Valero Energy Corporation are the two other competitors that
account for the remaining volume.
Storage wells are differentiated by their connectivity, both to
pipelines bringing product into the wells from fractionators, and to
pipelines taking product out of storage to the major product pipelines
that transport NGLs to markets throughout the United States. Mont
Belvieu's attraction as a storage hub for NGLs stems from the
flexibility it provides to owners to move their product to various
markets. Storage customers evaluate wells on the basis of the
flexibility they provide in receiving and moving product.
Prior to the acquisition, Enterprise and TEPPCO directly competed
for storage volumes in Mont Belvieu based on price and service levels.
Both Enterprise and TEPPCO are connected to the Dixie Pipeline and
competed for storage volumes for customers wishing to ship product,
primarily propane, into the Southeastern United States. In addition,
Enterprise and TEPPCO, along with Targa Resources, Inc., competed for
storage customers' marginal volumes. Many customers must store minimum
volumes at certain facilities due to pipeline connections or other
restrictions. Finally, Enterprise and TEPPCO competed for trading
volumes. Because Enterprise and TEPPCO are the two most liquid storage
providers, many trading customers ranked them as their first and second
choice for storage.
The acquisition significantly increased concentration in the Mont
Belvieu market for salt dome storage for NGLs, leaving EPCO controlling
a dominant share of storage volume and capacity. A combined Enterprise/
TEPPCO would have an enhanced ability unilaterally to exercise market
power in the market because many customers view the two suppliers as
first and second choices and the handful of other viable suppliers are
incapable of replacing the competition lost as a result of the merger.
Reducing the already small number of competitors also increases the
likelihood of coordinated interaction after the merger. Thus,
eliminating competition between the two leading suppliers likely would
result in higher prices and lower levels of service for storage
customers.
III. Entry
Entry into the Mont Belvieu storage market is unlikely to deter or
counteract the likely anticompetitive effects. Entry is difficult and
time-consuming and potential entrants would face substantial barriers
in the form of permit requirements and land use restrictions.
IV. Terms of the Proposed Consent Agreement
The proposed Consent Agreement effectively remedies the
acquisition's alleged anticompetitive effects by requiring TEPPCO to
divest its interests in Mont Belvieu Storage Partners and certain
related pipeline, land, and other assets (collectively the ``divested
assets''). The Commission's purposes with respect to the divestiture
are: (1) To ensure the continuation of the divested assets as a going
concern in the same manner as of the date the Consent Agreement was
signed, and (2) to remedy the lessening of competition resulting from
the acquisition as alleged in the Commission's Complaint.
In order to achieve these purposes, Paragraph II of the proposed
Consent Agreement directs Duncan to sell TEPPCO's interests in certain
Mont Belvieu NGL storage assets and related pipeline, land, and other
assets to a Commission-approved buyer no later than December 31, 2006,
and in a manner approved by the Commission, subject to the Commission's
final approval. If Duncan is unable to divest this set of assets to a
Commission-approved buyer within this timeframe, Paragraph III of the
proposed Consent Agreement contains the standard divestiture trustee
provisions pursuant to which the Commission may appoint a trustee to
divest the assets to a Commission-approved buyer.
Paragraph IV.A of the proposed Consent Agreement requires Duncan to
provide prior notice to the Commission of its planned acquisitions,
operatorships, or management of any NGL storage facility in Mont
Belvieu, Texas, for a period of ten (10) years. Paragraph IV.C requires
Duncan to send copies of all new NGL storage leases with third party
NGL storage facilities in Mont Belvieu within the earlier of fifteen
(15) days of being signed or becoming effective. These provisions
ensure that subsequent acquisitions or leases do not adversely impact
competition in the market at issue and undermine the remedial goals of
the proposed Consent Agreement.
In order to achieve successfully the Commission's purposes,
Paragraph II of the proposed Consent Agreement contains provisions that
ensure that the acquirer receives all resources necessary to operate
the divested assets. First, Paragraph II requires Duncan to give the
acquirer the opportunity to interview and hire employees who spend more
than ten percent (10%) of their time working on the divested assets,
and prevents Duncan from offering these employees incentives to decline
the acquirer's offer of employment. This will ensure that the acquirer
has access to staff who are familiar with the NGL storage, pipelines,
and other related assets. Second, Paragraph II requires Duncan to
convey to the acquirer licensed intangible property necessary for the
operation of the divested assets to ensure that the acquirer has the
software and other assets necessary to operate the divested assets in
the same manner as of the day the parties signed the Consent Agreement.
To maintain the competitive viability of the divested assets,
including TEPPCO's interest in Mont Belvieu Storage Partners, in the
same manner as
[[Page 50426]]
of the date the Consent Agreement was signed, the proposed Consent
Agreement contains several provisions relating to the operation of
TEPPCO's TE Products Pipeline. TEPPCO provides ``open stock'' service
to propane shippers from Mont Belvieu Storage Partners, a service
whereby shippers who ship on the pipeline and who have adequate
inventory in the TEPPCO system, given certain inventory and
availability requirements, can take delivery of propane at any of
TEPPCO's terminals along the pipeline without having to wait for the
pipeline transit time it would take to move the product physically from
origin to destination. The open stock service allows TEPPCO to transfer
product from any origination point along the pipeline it chooses to
meet shippers' needs, irrespective of the storage facility in which the
shipper actually has inventory. EPCO's plans to build a pipeline
connecting its Mont Belvieu storage facility to the TEPPCO pipeline
raises several concerns regarding its ability to disadvantage any
prospective acquiror of TEPPCO's interest in Mont Belvieu Storage
Partners. First, TEPPCO could decline to offer the open stock service
at Mont Belvieu Storage Partners, or offer the service there at less
advantageous terms than at EPCO's Mont Belvieu facility. Second, TEPPCO
could impede Mont Belvieu Storage Partners' ability to market its
storage capacity by allocating product from other storage facilities
along the pipeline to meet shipper's needs, keeping Mont Belvieu
Storage Partners' capacity occupied disproportionately. The proposed
Consent Agreement contains provisions addressing these concerns.
First, the proposed Consent Agreement requires TEPPCO to continue
to operate the TE Products Pipeline on open stock service for propane.
Second, if Duncan builds a pipeline, referred to in the proposed
Consent Agreement as the ``New Pipeline,'' connecting the TE Products
Pipeline to any NGL storage facility it owns in Mont Belvieu, Texas,
the proposed Consent Agreement requires Duncan to (1) connect the new
pipeline to the Mont Belvieu Storage Partners NGL storage facility at
its own cost, (2) operate the TE Products Pipeline for propane on an
open stock basis for shippers who ship from Mont Belvieu Storage
Partners on terms and conditions that are no less advantageous than
those for shippers who ship propane from an NGL storage facility in
Mont Belvieu owned by Duncan, and (3) operate the TE Products Pipeline
for products other than propane on terms and conditions that are no
less advantageous than those for shippers who ship products other than
propane from an NGL storage facility in Mont Belvieu owned by Duncan.
Third, the proposed Consent Agreement contains provisions relating
to the implementation of new allocation procedures for the TE Products
Pipeline. Paragraph IV.B requires TEPPCO to provide advance written
notice to the Commission of any new allocation procedures relating to
the movements of NGLs on the TE Products Pipeline originating in Mont
Belvieu, Texas. Paragraph VI requires any new allocation procedures to
include a requirement that shippers originating product movements on
the pipeline from the Mont Belvieu Storage Partners NGL storage
facility nominate that movement to both TEPPCO and Mont Belvieu Storage
Partners and also provides that such new allocation procedures shall
allow shippers who ship product originating at Mont Belvieu Storage
Partners' facility to ship on terms and conditions that are no less
advantageous than those given to shippers who ship from an NGL storage
facility owned by Duncan.
The purpose of the provisions relating to the operation of the TE
Products Pipeline is to maintain the competitive viability of the Mont
Belvieu Storage Partners NGL storage facility in the same manner as of
the date the Consent Agreement was signed by ensuring that Duncan
cannot disadvantage shippers who originate product movements from the
Mont Belvieu Storage Partners' facility in favor of shippers who
originate product movements from its own storage facility in the event
that Duncan interconnects an NGL storage facility it owns in Mont
Belvieu, Texas, to the TE Products Pipeline.
V. Opportunity for Public Comment
By accepting the proposed Consent Agreement, subject to final
approval, the Commission anticipates that the competitive problems
alleged in the Complaint will be resolved. The purpose of this analysis
is to invite public comment on the proposed Consent Agreement,
including the proposed divestitures, to aid the Commission in its
determination of whether it should make final the proposed Consent
Agreement contained in the agreement. This analysis is not intended to
constitute an official interpretation of the proposed Consent Agreement
or modify the terms of the proposed Consent Agreement in any way.
Further, the proposed Consent Agreement has been entered into for
settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by Dan L.
Duncan, EPCO, Texas Eastern, or TEPPCO that it violated the law or that
the facts alleged in the Complaint, other than jurisdictional facts,
are true.
By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-14142 Filed 8-24-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-P