FR 2024-28248

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has issued a notice seeking public comments on its collection activities involving several specific forms and applications. These forms—FERC-519, FERC-520, FERC-546, and FERC-580—are tools for monitoring and regulating activities within the utility and natural gas sectors, particularly regarding mergers, directorate positions, natural gas rates, and fuel and energy purchasing practices. The initiative aims to ensure compliance with the Federal Power Act and keep a steady oversight of these industries. The feedback period for public comments is open until February 3, 2025.

General Summary of the Document

At its core, this document lays out the mechanisms by which FERC manages compliance and regulatory obligations through structured data collection. Each form serves a unique purpose: FERC-519 governs utility mergers and acquisitions, FERC-520 focuses on permissions for holding multiple director roles, FERC-546 deals with natural gas pipeline rates, and FERC-580 evaluates energy purchase practices. Each of these forms contributes to FERC's broader mandate to oversee and enforce statutes like the Federal Power Act and the Natural Gas Act.

Significant Issues or Concerns

Several potential issues emerge from the document. Most notably, the "estimated annual burden" of these collection activities is mentioned but lacks specific data, leaving stakeholders uncertain about the exact resource implications. The document employs specialized language, such as "automatic adjustment clauses" and "interlocking directorates," which might confuse readers without regulatory knowledge. Details on FERC Form 580 suggest that while administrative changes are anticipated, their nature is unspecified, creating potential uncertainty for stakeholders preparing submissions. Additionally, the methodology for integrating public feedback is unclear, raising questions about how comments might influence the final policies.

Impact on the Public

For the broader public, this regulatory activity ensures the accountability and transparency of utility services, potentially affecting energy prices, service reliability, and how utilities handle mergers or reorganizations. While the document directly targets industry stakeholders, it indirectly upholds consumer protection by overseeing utility transactions and practices to prevent monopolistic or unfair practices.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

The specific stakeholders, such as public utilities, directors, and gas pipeline companies, face more direct impacts. They must comply with FERC's data requests, potentially incurring administrative costs or obligations to align with regulatory expectations. On the positive side, these processes offer a predictable framework for handling applications and related industry activities, which can be favorable for operations stability and planning.

The notice seeks to balance regulatory oversight with industry cooperation, aiming for a more transparent and efficient utility sector. While some challenges in clarity and engagement exist, improvements in process transparency and communications could enhance stakeholder and public engagement in shaping effective regulatory practices.

The document in question from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) outlines a request for comments on several currently approved information collections under its jurisdiction. Within this context, several financial references and allocations are made, especially regarding potential mergers and consolidations.

Financial Thresholds for Mergers and Acquisitions

The document specifies the conditions under which public utility officers must seek authorization for mergers or consolidations involving facilities. Specifically, authorization is required if the facilities being merged or consolidated have a value in excess of $10 million. Additionally, if facilities to be acquired have a value in excess of $1 million, a notification filing is mandated even when Commission authorization is not otherwise required under certain amendments. These financial thresholds are critical as they set the parameters for regulatory oversight, ensuring that significant financial transactions are scrutinized, potentially protecting public and private interests by preventing unchecked mergers or acquisitions that could affect market competition or other public policy goals.

Costs of Performing Regulatory Tasks

A consistent financial reference is the calculation of the average salary and benefits for a FERC full-time equivalent (FTE) employee, pegged at $207,786 per year or $100 per hour. This figure is used as a basis for estimating the cost implications of various regulatory tasks associated with the information collections. The choice of this salary figure suggests that FERC associates the professional and technical labor needed for these regulatory duties with significant expertise, reflecting both the complexity and the importance of these tasks.

Relation to Identified Issues

It is noted that while the document discusses "estimated annual burden," it does not provide explicit numerical data regarding the total financial burden and cost for each information collection (FERC-519, FERC-520, etc.). This lack of detailed financial cost analysis makes it challenging for stakeholders to assess the overall resource allocation implications for their organizations, which could lead to uncertainty in planning for compliance costs.

Furthermore, the repeated mention of the salary for FERC employees highlights the high cost of effective regulatory enforcement but does not directly relate to any specific changes in financial rules or allocations that stakeholders should anticipate. This lack of direct connection between costs and specific changes enhances the complexity of responding appropriately without additional guidance.

In summary, financial references in the document emphasize thresholds for regulatory oversight initiation and provide a standard for the operational costs of regulatory activities. However, there remains a gap in providing clarity and detailed breakdowns on how these thresholds and cost benchmarks translate into direct financial impact for stakeholders, potentially leading to difficulty in assessing compliance burdens.