Overview
Title
Notice of Changes To Enable Filers Making eTariff Filings To Designate Applicants and To Add Service List Entries; Electronic Tariff Filings
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is making it easier for companies to fill out online forms by letting them pick more than one name if they need to and adding extra names to a list of people who get a copy. If a company is sending a form for someone else, they can decide if they want to be on that list too.
Summary AI
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has updated its systems to help filers make eTariff filings by allowing them to designate both lead and additional applicants and to add more names to the service list. For filings where the lead applicant and company are the same, only the company's email on record will be used. When the filing company acts as the lead applicant for another entity, they can choose whether to be added to the service list as an additional applicant. These updates aim to simplify the process now and improve it further in the future. Questions can be directed to specific FERC contacts provided in the notice.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document from the Federal Register notifies readers of new changes implemented by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to enhance how filers make electronic tariff filings, known as eTariff filings. These updates allow users to designate lead and additional applicants and to add more names to the service list using FERC Online.
General Summary
The notice primarily focuses on the new ability for companies making eTariff filings to distinguish whether they want to be recognized as lead applicants or identified in conjunction with other entities as additional or co-applicants. The document details procedures for handling email addresses related to these filings, which are connected to essential filing tasks and communication needs.
Significant Issues or Concerns
Several notable issues arise from the notice. The technical jargon used, such as "lead_applicant_id" and "company_id," is likely to perplex individuals who are not familiar with regulatory or legal terminologies, necessitating further clarification or definitions. Additionally, while the document sets forth directives for distinguishing between additional and co-applicant statuses, these instructions are complex and might challenge filers without explicit, step-by-step guidance or examples.
Another concern lies with the potential administrative burden introduced through managing additional emails and modifying service lists. There is no evaluation provided in the document regarding possible increases in cost or labor, which could affect stakeholders differently, especially if resources are limited.
Furthermore, the document includes contact information for specific FERC personnel for questions, raising concerns about privacy and the potential overwhelming of these contacts if inquiries surge due to the complexity of the new procedures.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, this document signifies a shift towards streamlining and modernizing the eTariff filing process. For the general public, this may not bear immediate consequences but serves as a crucial step in fostering a more efficient regulatory system for energy tariffs, which could potentially lead to long-term benefits such as improved regulatory clarity and reduced filing errors.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For those directly involved in filing eTariffs, the updates offer a mixed impact. On the positive side, these changes are aimed at providing more flexibility by correctly identifying applicants and ensuring that appropriate parties receive necessary communications. However, small companies or entities with limited administrative capacities might face initial hurdles adapting to these new processes, including managing multiple email inputs and understanding the detailed procedures.
In conclusion, while FERC's updates represent a commendable effort towards simplifying regulatory processes, the effectiveness of these changes will largely depend on user familiarity with the underlying systems and the availability of clear, accessible guidance to navigate these new requirements.
Issues
• The document uses specific terms such as 'lead_applicant_id' and 'company_id' without providing definitions or context, which might be unclear to individuals unfamiliar with these terms.
• The instructions for differentiating between 'Additional' or 'Co-Applicant' status are somewhat complex and might be difficult for filers to understand without additional guidance.
• There is no evaluation of potential administrative cost or burden associated with the additional email management and service list modifications. It would be beneficial to have an assessment for optimization and efficiency.
• The document includes technical directives (e.g., email registration and management processes) that may require further elaboration or practical examples to ensure user compliance without errors.
• The direct contact quotes for reaching out to specific individuals (Michael Goldenberg and James Sarikas) could raise privacy or workload concerns, and may not be sustainable if the number of inquiries is high.