124 FERC ¶ 61,269 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 

18 CFR Parts 260, 284 and 385 

(Docket No. RM07-10-001; Order No. 704-A)

Transparency Provisions of Section 23 of the Natural Gas Act 

(Issued September 18, 2008) 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Order on Rehearing and Clarification. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission affirms its basic 

determinations in Order No. 704, while granting rehearing in part and clarification 

regarding requirements that certain natural gas market participants report information 

regarding their reporting of transactions to price index publishers and their blanket sales 

certificate status. These natural gas market participants must report annually certain 

information regarding their physical natural gas transactions for the previous calendar 

year. As clarified in the Order on Rehearing and Clarification, certain market 

participants engaged in a de minimis volume of transactions will not be required to report 

information regarding their transactions for the calendar year. The reported information 

will make it possible to assess the formation of index prices and the use of index pricing 

in natural gas markets. These regulations facilitate price transparency in markets for the 

wholesale sale of physical natural gas in interstate commerce as contemplated by section 

23 of the Natural Gas Act, 15 U.S.C. § 717t-2. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 2 -

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule will become effective [insert date 30 days after 

publication in the FEDERAL REGISTER]. The revisions to FERC Form No. 552 are 

applicable for the reporting of transactions occurring in calendar year 2008. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Matthew L. Hunter (Technical) 

Office of Enforcement 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

888 First Street NE 

Washington, D.C. 20426 

(202) 502-6409 

Matthew.Hunter@ferc.gov 

Christopher J. Peterson (Technical) 

Office of Enforcement 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

888 First Street NE 

Washington, D.C. 20426 

(202) 502-8933 

Christopher.Peterson@ferc.gov 

Gabe S. Sterling (Legal) 

Office of Enforcement 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

888 First Street NE 

Washington, D.C. 20426 

(202) 502-8891 

Gabriel.Sterling@ferc.gov 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
124 FERC ¶ 61,269 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Before Commissioners: Joseph T. Kelliher, Chairman; 

 Suedeen G. Kelly, Marc Spitzer, 

 Philip D. Moeller, and Jon Wellinghoff. 

Transparency Provisions of Section 23 of 

the Natural Gas Act 

 Docket No. RM07-10-001 

ORDER NO. 704-A 

 ORDER ON REHEARING AND CLARIFICATION 

(Issued September 18, 2008) 

I. Introduction

1. On December 26, 2007, the Commission issued Order No. 704, which imposed an 

annual reporting requirement on certain natural gas market participants. 1 The order 

requires certain natural gas buyers and sellers to file annually FERC Form No. 552 and 

report summary information about physical natural gas transactions for each calendar 

year. 

2. Order No. 704 has its genesis in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005).2

 

EPAct 2005 added section 23 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), 15 U.S.C. §717t-2 (2000 & 

Supp. V 2005) to authorize the Commission “to facilitate price transparency in markets 

 1

 Transparency Provisions of Section 23 of the Natural Gas Act, Order No. 704, 

74 FR 1014 (Jan. 4, 2008), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,260. 

2

 Energy Policy Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-58, 119 Stat. 594 (2005). 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 2 -

for the sale or transportation of physical natural gas in interstate commerce, having due 

regard for the public interest, the integrity of those markets, and the protection of 

consumers.” Section 23 further provides that the Commission may issue such rules as it 

deems necessary and appropriate to “provide for the dissemination, on a timely basis, of 

information about the availability and prices of natural gas sold at wholesale and 

interstate commerce to the Commission, State commissions, buyers and sellers of 

wholesale natural gas, and the public.” 

3. Section 23 of the NGA enhances the Commission’s authority to ensure confidence 

in the nation’s natural gas markets. The Commission's market-oriented policies for the 

wholesale natural gas industry require that interested persons have broad confidence that 

reported market prices accurately reflect the interplay of legitimate market forces. 

Without confidence in the fairness of price formation, the true value of transactions is 

very difficult to determine. Further, price transparency makes it easier for us to ensure 

that jurisdictional prices are "just and reasonable."3

4. The performance of Western electric and natural gas markets early in the decade 

shook confidence in posted market prices for energy. In examining these markets, the 

Commission's staff found that some companies submitted false information to the 

publishers of natural gas price indices, so that the resulting reported prices were 

 3

 See sections 4 and 5 of the Natural Gas Act, 15 U.S.C. sections 717c and 717d. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 3 -

inaccurate and untrustworthy.4

 As a result, questions arose about the legitimacy of 

published price indices, remaining even after the immediate crisis passed. Moreover, 

market participants feared that the indices might have become even more unreliable, 

since reporting (which has always been voluntary) declined to historically low levels in 

late 2002. 

5. One of the Commission’s responses to these developments was the issuance, on 

July 24, 2003, of a Policy Statement on Electric and Natural Gas Price Indices (Policy 

Statement) that explained our expectations of natural gas and electricity price index 

developers and the companies that report transaction data to them.5

 The Policy 

Statement, among other things, directed the Commission’s staff to continue to monitor 

price formation in wholesale markets, including the level of reporting to index developers 

and the amount of adherence to the Policy Statement standards by price index developers 

and by those who provide data to them.6

 In adhering to this directive, Commission staff 

documented improvements in the number of companies reporting prices from back 

 4

 See Initial Report on Company-Specific Separate Proceedings and Generic 

Reevaluations; Published Natural Gas Price Data; and Enron Trading Strategies - Fact 

Finding Investigation of Potential Manipulation of Electric and Natural Gas Prices, 

Docket No. PA02-2-000 (August 2003). 

5

 Price Discovery in Natural Gas and Electric Markets, 104 FERC ¶ 61,121 

(2003). 

6

 Id. P 43. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 4 -

offices, adopting codes of conduct, and auditing their price reporting practices.7

 These 

efforts resulted in significant progress in the amount and quality of both price reporting 

and the information provided to market participants by price indices.8

 It is against this 

backdrop that Congress passed EPAct 2005 and provided us with expanded authority to 

mandate additional reporting and improve market confidence through greater price 

transparency. 

6. In an April 19, 2007 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission proposed 

regulations consistent with these new responsibilities.9

 The April 2007 NOPR contained 

both an annual transaction reporting requirement for market participants as well as a daily 

posting requirement for pipelines. On December 26, 2007, the Commission issued Order 

No. 704 regarding the annual reporting requirement. The daily pipeline posting 

requirement proposal was separated from the annual filing requirement and a new Notice 

 7

 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Report on Natural Gas and Electricity 

Price Indices, at 2, Docket Nos. PL03-3-004 et al. (2004). 

8

 See, e.g., GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE, NATURAL GAS AND 

ELECTRICITY MARKETS: FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ACTIONS TO IMPROVE 

PRIVATE PRICE INDICES AND STAKEHOLDER REACTION (December 2005). 

9

 Transparency Provisions of Section 23 of the Natural Gas Act, 72 FR 20791 

(Apr. 26, 2007), FERC Stats. and Regs. ¶ 32,614 (2007) (April 2007 NOPR). 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 5 -

of Proposed Rulemaking regarding the pipeline posting requirement was issued 

concurrently in Docket No. RM08-2-000.10

7. Order No. 704 required natural gas wholesale market participants, including a 

number of entities that may not otherwise be subject to the Commission’s traditional 

NGA jurisdiction, to identify themselves and report summary information about their 

physical natural gas transactions on an annual, calendar year basis. To facilitate such 

reporting, Order No. 704 created FERC Transaction Report FERC Form No. 552: 

Annual Report of Natural Gas Transactions (Form No. 552) and various implementing 

regulations. Form No. 552 is to be filed by May 1, 2009, for transactions occurring in 

calendar year 2008 and by May 1 of each year thereafter for each previous calendar year. 

8. Thirteen requests for rehearing or clarification of Order No. 704 were timely filed. 

No request for rehearing or clarification argues that the rule is unnecessary or should not 

have been issued. Rather, the requests seek modification or clarification of specific 

aspects of Order No. 704. Commission staff held two technical conferences during 

which potential filers of Form No. 552 and other industry stakeholders discussed the 

form. Stakeholders at these two technical conferences represented a broad spectrum of 

market participants and observers, including producers, interstate pipelines, intrastate 

 10 Pipeline Posting Requirements under Section 23 of the Natural Gas Act, 73 FR 

1116 (Jan. 7, 2008), FERC Stats. and Regs. ¶ 32,626 (2007). A technical conference has 

been held in Docket No. RM08-2-000 and the pipeline posting requirement is pending 

further action by the Commission. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 6 -

pipelines, natural gas marketers, commodities traders, local distribution companies 

(LDCs), electric generation end-users, industrial end-users, and natural gas price index 

developers. Many conference participants filed comments following one or both of these 

conferences. 

9. As discussed below, we largely affirm Order No. 704, granting a limited number 

of rehearing requests and clarifying the order. 

II. Discussion

 A. The Value of Aggregated Annual Data Regarding Volumes that Utilize, 

 Contribute to, or Could Contribute to the Development of Price 

 Indices

10. Order No. 704 focused primarily on “price formation in spot markets” and 

accordingly sought information about the “amount of daily or monthly fixed-price trading 

that [is] eligible to be reported to price index publishers as compared to the amount of 

trading that uses or refers to price indices.”11 As we stated in the order, the “information 

collected under this requirement is focused specifically on daily and monthly physical 

spot or ‘cash’ market activity and the contracting based on the prices developed in those 

markets.”12 The rationale for this focus is that a “[b]etter understanding of the role and 

functioning of wholesale natural gas spot markets can increase confidence that posted 

 11 Order No. 704 at P 3. See also id. P 13. 

12 Id. P 67. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 7 -

market prices of natural gas accurately reflect the interplay of legitimate market forces.”13 

Additionally, information on price index utilization and formation would greatly enhance 

the Commission’s efforts to monitor price formation in the wholesale markets in support 

of the Commission’s market-oriented policies.14 As we explained, “without confidence 

in the basic processes of price formation, market participants cannot have faith in the 

value of their transactions, the public cannot believe that the prices they see are fair, and 

it is more difficult for the Commission to ensure that jurisdictional prices are ‘just and 

reasonable.’”15

11. Our recognition of the importance of price formation on market confidence is, of 

course, not new. The Commission has often remarked on the need to ensure price 

transparency and accurate price reporting, including, for example, our 2003 Policy 

Statement on price reporting to index developers. As we there recognized: 

Price indices are widely used in bilateral natural gas and 

electric commodity markets to track spot and forward prices. 

They are often referenced in contracts as a price term; they 

are related to futures markets and used when futures contracts 

go to delivery; basis differentials in indices are used to hedge 

natural gas transportation costs; indices are used in many 

gas pipeline tariffs to settle imbalances or determine penalties; 

and state commissions use indices as benchmarks in 

reviewing the prudence of gas or electricity purchases. Since 

 13 Id.

14 Id. P 7 and 62. 

15 Id. P 66 (citing sections 4 and 5 of the NGA, 15 U.S.C. sections 717c and 717d). 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 8 -

index dependencies permeate the energy industry, the indices 

must be robust and accurate and have the confidence of 

market participants for such markets to function properly and 

efficiently.16

We continue to believe that ensuring price transparency is a vital policy goal, especially 

as it relates to transactions that utilize, contribute, or could contribute to a price index. 

12. Section 23(a)(4) of the NGA requires us to “consider the degree of transparency 

provided by existing price publishers and providers of trade processing services, and [] 

rely on such publishers and services to the maximum extent possible.” We have 

reviewed existing price index publications and, while the Commission recognizes the 

substantial value that these publications have enhancing market transparency, we 

determine that the additional data required on Form No. 552 is necessary. Section 23 is 

consistent with our belief that transparency is furthered by shedding light on price indices 

and their formation. 

13. The Commission reiterates that the focus of Form No. 552’s data collection is 

transactions that utilize an index price, contribute to index price formation, or could 

contribute to index price formation. Specifically, the Commission finds that volumes 

reportable on Form No. 552 should include volumes that utilize next-day or next-month 

price indices, volumes that are reported to any price index publisher, and any volumes 

that could be reported to an index publisher even if the respondent has chosen not to 

 16 Policy Statement at P 6. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 9 -

report to a publisher. By “could be reported to an index publisher,” we mean bilateral, 

arms-length, fixed price, physical natural gas transactions between non-affiliated 

companies at all trading locations.17 Transactions that do not occur at a specific location 

currently designated by an index developer as a reporting location are nonetheless 

reportable on Form No. 552. 

14. This focus on index price-related transactions will increase market participant 

confidence by providing greater transparency in the use of index prices and how well 

index prices reflect market forces. This data will also allow the Commission’s staff, state 

commissions, and all other industry observers to evaluate the level of index price usage at 

both a company level and nationally.18 Data on index development and use would be of 

substantial value in the Commission’s transparency and market monitoring missions. 

15. We also clarify that Form No. 552 does not seek the broader range of transaction 

data necessary to evaluate the size of the national physical natural gas market. While 

Order No. 704 mentioned such a calculation as one result of the data to be collected,19 we 

 17 We note that this understanding tracks closely with our discussion of 

transactions that are reportable to index developers in the Policy Statement. See Policy 

Statement at P 34. 

18 Further, as discussed in greater detail below, observers will be able to parse data 

to compare activities of purchasers and sellers in the market. 

19 Order No. 704 at PP 18 and 69. Similarly, P 5 of the order indicates that an 

understanding “in broad terms” of the extent of the natural gas market is a goal of the 

rule. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 10 -

elect not to craft Form No. 552 to capture the data necessary to calculate a national 

market. At this time, we do not believe that such data would further the transparency of 

the natural gas markets other than determining an aggregate approximation of the entirety 

of physical gas transactions. Further, unless volumes that utilize price indices or that 

could contribute to such indices were separately reported on Form No. 552 (with an 

additional, substantial reporting burden), the analytical benefits noted above would be 

lost. Lastly, any attempt to rationally estimate the size of the physical gas market on a 

national level would require reporting from a substantially larger group of respondents 

than the narrower focus adopted in Order No. 704. Respondents would necessarily 

include smaller market participants for whom the reporting burden would be undue. For 

these reasons, we reiterate and emphasize our determination that data provided on Form 

No. 552 should be limited to transactions that utilize, contribute to, or could contribute to 

index price formation. However, the Commission understands that the natural gas market 

is ever evolving and dynamic. At a future date we may elect to amend Form No. 552 to 

obtain additional information necessary to facilitate transparency of the market. 

 B. Both Sales and Purchase Data are to be Included on Form No. 552

16. Order No. 704 required the annual reporting both of relevant natural gas sales and 

purchases. We explained that purchase information was the opposing side of a sale 

transaction and, thus, was as relevant to the Commission’s transparency mission as the 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 11 -

reporting of sales.20 Further, we noted that we have often found the reporting of purchase 

information beneficial both independent of sales figures and as a cross-check on such 

volumes.21

17. Although we understand that some participants in the technical conferences 

objected to the collection of purchase data in various contexts, we continue to believe that 

purchase data is a vital component to Form No. 552 and the Commission’s transparency 

goals. Not only is purchase information important as a cross-check on reported sales 

volumes, but it has independent value. If only sales were reported on Form No. 552, 

Commission staff, state commissions, and other market observers would be unable to 

discern, for example, whether significant numbers of gas purchasers were transacting 

under contracts referencing an index price. Analysis of Form No. 552 purchase 

information will also provide trend data regarding purchase activity, which would be very 

useful for those charged with monitoring the natural gas markets. With purchase data, 

the public will be able to discern which purchasers are utilizing index-based contracts, 

whether there is geographic disparity regarding use of price indices among purchasers, 

the overall reliance upon gas price indices by purchasers, and other information relevant 

to market analysis and market confidence. While we acknowledge that removing 

 20 Id. P 86. 

21 Id. PP 85-86. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 12 -

purchases from volumes that must be reported on Form No. 552 would somewhat reduce 

the reporting burden on certain market participants, we continue to believe that the 

substantial benefits of having such data publicly available outweigh this burden. 

 C. The De Minimis Reporting Threshold

18. Section 23(d)(2) of the NGA requires the Commission to exempt from new 

transparency reporting requirements “natural gas producers, processors or users who have 

a de minimis market presence.”22 Consistent with this directive, Order No. 704 provided 

that most buyers or sellers of less than a de minimis volume of natural gas are not 

required to submit Form No. 552.23 The order set the de minimis threshold at 2.2 million 

MMBtus; that is, annual sales plus annual purchases of more than 2.2 million MMBtus 

required a market participant to report transaction information. In setting this threshold, 

the Commission “sought to require reporting from a sufficient number of significant 

market participants to ensure, in the aggregate, an accurate picture of the physical natural 

gas market as a whole.”24 The Commission explained that: 

 22 15 U.S.C. section 717t-2(d)(2). 

23 Form No. 552 must be submitted by any section 204.402 or section 284.284 

blanket certificate holder even if the entity has aggregate purchases and sales less than the 

de minimis threshold. Such an entity must provide identification information on Form 

No. 552 and must answer questions regarding price reporting to price index publishers, 

but need not submit Form No. 552’s aggregate volume data. Order No. 704 at P 60. 

24 Id. P 78. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 13 -

[T]he [2.2 million MMBtu] figure was based on the simple 

calculation of one-ten thousandth (1/10,000th) of the annual 

physical volumes consumed in the United States, which is 

approximately 22 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) (or roughly 22 

billion MMBtus). Looked at another way, a de minimis

market participant would trade the equivalent of less than one 

standard NYMEX futures contract per day. Although a 

market participant that contracts for 1/10,000th of the nation’s 

annual physical volume may appear to have little effect on 

natural gas prices, that participant may be transacting only at 

one location and, thus, have a much greater pricing effect 

there. 

Requests for Clarification or Rehearing

19. Copano Energy L.L.C. (Copano) requests rehearing of the de minimis threshold 

and argues that 2.2 million MMBtu is such a low threshold so as to render meaningless 

the NGA’s directive that the Commission exempt from annual reporting requirements 

market participants that have a de minimis market presence.25 Copano argues that the 

Congressional purpose behind the de minimis threshold was to exclude entities that are 

too small to have an impact on market prices in the interstate, wholesale gas market. 

Copano states that a threshold one-hundred times as large (i.e., 220 million MMBtu/year) 

would represent less than 1 percent of annual physical volumes of gas consumed in the 

country and “would therefore have no ability to impact prices in the wholesale, interstate 

natural gas market.”26 Copano notes that Order No. 704 justifies the selected threshold 

 25 Copano comments at 8. 

26 Id. 5. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 14 -

by noting that even small amounts of gas purchases can have a price effect at certain 

locations.27 Copano believes that this reinforces its conclusion that a threshold should be 

established that measures market presence at market hubs.28 Instead of a single-number 

de minimis threshold, Copano suggests a two-pronged approach that considers both the 

impact of a market participant’s transactions on the overall wholesale gas market (a 

twenty-two million MMBtu threshold) and the impact of a market participant’s 

transactions at market hubs (5 percent of the total jurisdictional sales at the hub).29

20. American Public Gas Association (APGA) requests clarification of section 

260.401(b) of the Commission’s regulations. As currently written, the regulation 

exempts an entity that does not hold a blanket sales or marketing certificate from the 

reporting requirement if the entity either made fewer than 2.2 million Dth of wholesale 

sales or 2.2 million Dth of wholesale purchases. APGA proposes that the Commission 

clarify this language so as to ensure that an entity with fewer than 2.2 million MMBtu of 

purchases is exempted from reporting purchases and an entity with fewer than 2.2 million 

MMBtu of sales is exempted from reporting sales.30

 27 Id. at 6. 

28 Id. at 7. 

29 Id. at 7-8. 

30 APGA comments at 2. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 15 -

21. Shell requests that the Commission clarify whether purchases and sales should be 

aggregated for purposes of calculating an entity’s total reportable volumes.31 

Additionally, Shell seeks guidance regarding how market participants are to determine 

whether they fall into the de minimis exception when part of the relevant total sales or 

purchases are to an affiliate or under other circumstances.32 Shell also requests 

clarification as to whether volumes that total exactly 2.2 TBtu fall into or out of the de

minimis exception as the rule references amounts above and below the threshold, but not 

precisely at the threshold.33

Commission Determination

22. Regarding the appropriate de minimis threshold, we affirm our findings in Order 

No. 704 and retain the 2.2 million MMBtu level. As the Commission stated in Order No. 

704, even market participants with total reportable volumes slightly above the threshold 

may have a significant effect on local wholesale markets.34 While it is possible that a 

respondent that exceeds the de minimis threshold exemption does not actually contribute 

to price formation, it is certain that some do and, in any event, market observers cannot 

 31 Shell is, collectively, Shell Gulf of Mexico, Shell Offshore, Inc., Shell Rocky 

Mountain Production LLC, and SWEPI LP. Shell comments at 28. 

32 Id. at 28-29. 

33 Id. at 29. 

34 Order No. 704 at P 81. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 16 -

yet know with any degree of assuredness which market participants have or do not have 

local price relevance. Likewise, these entities may rely upon price indices for a sizeable 

portion of their natural gas transactions. Form No. 552 seeks data only for volumes that 

either reference price indices or could contribute to the formation of price indices. A 

number of transactions are not reportable (as identified on Form No. 552, as discussed in 

Order No. 407, and as clarified in this order). Market participants should bear in mind 

that the Commission is not seeking data on all gas sales and purchases made by an entity, 

but rather a subset of these transactions.35

23. Nothing in Copano’s request for rehearing provides new information regarding the 

establishment of a proper de minimis threshold. While we acknowledge that there are a 

number of rational ways to establish a de minimis threshold consistent with our 

Congressional mandate, we continue to believe that 2.2 million MMBtu is an appropriate 

threshold for the reasons expressed herein and in Order No. 704. 

24. Regarding APGA and Shell’s requests involving how volumes are to be calculated 

to determine whether an entity meets or exceeds the de minimis threshold, the 

Commission clarifies that an entity that has 2.2 million MMBtu of reportable sales or 

purchases must file Form No. 552. That is, a potential respondent with either reportable 

 35 For example, we clarify below that a bundled retail transaction made at a stateapproved tariff rate is not reportable. We anticipate that this clarification will 

significantly limit the reporting obligation on smaller market participants. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 17 -

purchases equal to or greater than 2.2 million MMBtu or reportable sales36 equal to or 

greater than 2.2 million MMBtu must submit the form. The following table, regarding 

reportable purchase and sale volumes, explains how the de minimis threshold will apply: 

Reportable Sales 

Volumes 

Reportable Purchase 

Volumes 

Does the Entity Report? 

≥ 2.2 million MMBtu ≥ 2.2 million MMBtu Yes, both sales and purchases 

≥ 2.2 million MMBtu < 2.2 million MMBtu Yes, both sales and purchases 

< 2.2 million MMBtu ≥ 2.2 million MMBtu Yes, both sales and purchases 

< 2.2 million MMBtu < 2.2 million MMBtu No (unless the entity has a 

blanket certificate, in which case 

it will provide non-volume 

information only) 

25. We also clarify that sales and purchase volumes do not “net each other out” for 

purposes of determining whether an entity meets or exceeds the de minimis threshold. 

Additionally, an entity that must file Form No. 552 must report both reportable sales and 

reportable purchases regardless of the total volumes associated with each component 

volume. For example, if a potential respondent has annual reportable sales of 2.0 million 

MMBtu and reportable purchases of 3.0 million MMBtu, then it must file Form No. 552 

as its purchases exceed the de minimis threshold of 2.2 million MMBtu. Further, it 

would report both its sales and purchases on the form.37

 36 Reportable sales include off-system, balancing, and other assorted reportable 

sales as discussed elsewhere in this order. 

37 APGA’s request for clarification on this point is therefore denied. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 18 -

26. We further clarify that, if a transaction is reportable on Form No. 552, then 

volumes associated with the transaction should be counted towards the threshold. The 

converse is also true: if a transaction volume would not be included on the form, then 

volumes associated with it should not be counted towards the threshold. We emphasize 

that not all physical natural gas purchases and sales count towards the threshold.38

27. If a company chooses to aggregate volumes from affiliates, then such volumes are 

aggregated for purposes of determining whether the corporation meets or exceeds the de

minimis threshold. In response to Shell’s requested clarification, Order No. 704 already 

makes clear that “a company with multiple affiliates may choose to report separately or in 

aggregate, as best meets its needs.”39 A company with multiple affiliates that chooses to 

aggregate must, however, aggregate all of its affiliates’ data (i.e., it may not choose to 

aggregate some affiliates but not others). Consistent with Shell’s other requests, we have 

modified Form No. 552 to make clear that entities that meet or exceed the de minimis

volume must submit the form. 

 38 As detailed herein, physical transactions of companies that fall below the 

de minimis threshold are excluded from the data collected by Form No. 552. Physical 

transactions need not be reported if they are not Next-Day or Next-Month transactions as 

those terms are defined in Form No. 552. In this same vein, financial transactions, 

transactions between affiliates, and traditional retail transactions (as discussed below), are 

not reportable on Form No. 552. 

39 Order No. 704 at PP 60 and 97. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 19 -

28. Regarding the format of amounts reported on Form No. 552, the Commission will 

require that volumetric entries on Form No. 552 be rounded to the nearest tenth of a 

TBtu. We understand that there was some confusion among participants at the technical 

conferences regarding the rounding of volume figures on Form No. 552. Form No. 552 

currently requests reporting of volumes to the nearest TBtu (i.e., a reportable volume of 

2.499 TBtu would be reported as 2.0 TBtu). We direct respondents to round volumes up 

or down, as appropriate, to the nearest tenth of a TBtu. Rounding to the nearest tenth of a 

TBtu will make the reporting obligation consistent with the proposed de minimis

threshold volume calculation, which is measured to the nearest tenth of a TBtu. Further, 

more precise reporting of data would allow for a more accurate review of market activity 

and we believe that aggregating volumes to the nearest tenth of a TBtu would be no more 

burdensome for respondents than the rounding currently required in the form. 

 D. Certain End-Use Transactions Should be Reported on Form No. 552

29. Several commenters to the April 2007 NOPR objected to the inclusion of end-use 

transactions in the annual report.40 Order No. 704 addressed these concerns by 

exempting certain types of transactions from the reporting requirement. The order states 

that the rule “focuses the reporting requirement solely on wholesale buyers and sellers by 

 40 These commenters included American Forest & Paper Association (AF&PA), 

Industrial Energy Consumers of America (IECA), and Natural Gas Supply Association 

(NGSA). 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 20 -

excluding retail transactions.”41 The order did not require “end-use customers or retail 

buyers” to report transaction information unless those entities also made wholesale sales 

or purchases that were greater than the de minimis threshold.42 Likewise, the order stated 

that “a transaction made to an end-user is not to be included in the volumes reported on 

the form.”43

30. However, the order did not adequately distinguish between two distinct types of 

end-use transactions (i.e. transactions that utilize or could contribute to a price index and 

transactions to customers as part of a bundled retail sale). The American Gas Association 

(AGA) and the National Energy Marketers Association (NEM), for example, specifically 

argued in comments on the April 2007 NOPR that end-use sales at retail should be 

excluded from the reporting requirement.44 These types of end-use transactions involved 

retail service provided by a LDC to consumers subject to the LDC’s state commissionapproved tariff. Other commenters argued for a broader exemption, including all end-use 

transactions.45 These types of transactions would include not only bundled retail service 

 41 Order No. 704 at P 3. 

42 Id. P 90. 

43 Id.

44 AGA NOPR comments at 3; NEM NOPR comments at 5. See also NGSA 

NOPR comments at 12. 

45 AF&PA NOPR comments at 5. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 21 -

subject to traditional state jurisdiction, but also direct end-use deliveries by interstate 

pipelines (an activity traditionally subject to the Commission’s jurisdiction). 

31. Order No. 704 correctly, though summarily, describes these participants’ 

comments,46 but then proceeded to utilize the term “retail” interchangeably with “enduse” when describing transactions that would be exempt from the reporting 

requirement.47 For example, under a section entitled, “Exclusion of Retail Transactions,” 

the order states that “[a]lthough some transactions reported to indices may include 

purchases by large end-users, the Commission is generally interested in wholesale 

prices.”48 Our exclusion in Order No. 704 is aimed at traditional retail transactions (i.e., 

those that are in markets functionally separate from the wholesale markets) rather than 

other end-use transactions involving volumes in the wholesale market -- although the 

language of the rule’s exclusion could easily be read so as to reach to all end-use 

transactions. 

Requests for Clarification or Rehearing

32. NGSA requests clarification or rehearing regarding a seller’s obligation to exclude 

end-use volumes from volumes reported on Form No. 552. NGSA quotes paragraph 90 

 46 Order No. 704 at PP 39-40. 

47 See, e.g., Order No. 704 at PP 60, 89, and 90. 

48 Id. P 90. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 22 -

of Order No. 704 indicating that “a transaction made to an end-user is not to be included 

in the volumes reported on the form.”49 NGSA argues that requiring the seller to 

delineate between end-use and non-end-use customers is unduly burdensome and that 

requiring such disclosure to sellers from purchasers would limit market liquidity.50 

NGSA requests that the Commission clarify that, when in doubt, it is acceptable for a 

seller to include end-use volumes in Form No. 552.51 Any exclusion of end-use 

transactions should be applied from the buyers’ perspective, argues NGSA.52

33. We understand that a number of participants at the technical conference (including 

AGA, Encana,53 and others) had both substantive and technical questions regarding Order 

No. 704’s references to “end-use” transactions and “retail” transactions. There was 

significant confusion regarding whether certain types of transactions to consumers of 

natural gas were reportable. AGA filed supplemental comments in the docket requesting 

 49 NGSA comments at 3. 

50 Id. 4. 

51 Id.

52 Id. 5. 

53 Encana Marketing (USA) Inc. (distinct from its joint rehearing request as part of 

the Canadian Suppliers). 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 23 -

various clarifications regarding an LDC’s responsibility to report sales to end-users, 

among other transactions.54

Commission Determination

34. The Commission clarifies here that there will be no categorical exclusion of enduse transactions from Form No. 552. Nevertheless, Form No. 552 will collect only 

information regarding that subset of end-use transactions that relies upon price indices or 

that could be utilized to form a price index. Accordingly, as we explain below, reporting 

of traditional, bundled retail transactions made by an LDC at a state-approved tariff rate 

(i.e., the majority of transactions to retail customers) would not contribute to the 

Commission’s transparency mission and are not subject to reporting. We believe that this 

is a “bright-line” rule easily understood by potential respondents.55

35. While Order No. 704 utilized the phrase “retail” transactions interchangeably with 

“end-use” transactions,56 the overall thrust of our order was that transactions that are 

typically perceived to be at retail are not reportable while transactions that utilize, 

contribute to, or may contribute to price indices should be reportable. Depending upon 

the type of transactions involved, end-use transactions can have a substantial impact on 

 54 AGA supplemental comments at 3-5. 

55 NGSA’s request for rehearing or clarification of this issue is, therefore, denied. 

56 See, e.g., Order No. 704 at PP 60, 89, and 90. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 24 -

price formation and the functioning of the wholesale markets, particularly in localized 

areas. 

36. While precise data is not readily available (indeed, obtaining that data is one of the 

goals of Form No. 552), it is our experience and industry common knowledge that many 

end-use transactions utilize price indices and/or could be relied upon to form price 

indices. End-use transactions, specifically transactions involving large consumers of 

natural gas that compete directly with wholesale market participants, are very relevant to 

the Commission’s transparency mission. For example, use of natural gas for power 

generation has increased markedly since 2000. According to annual figures from the 

Energy Information Administration (EIA), natural gas used to produce electric power is 

up from 14.2 Bcf/d in 2000 to 18.8 Bcf/d in 2007, an increase of 32 percent. As a result, 

natural gas generation’s share of overall gas use is up, too. In 2000, EIA figures indicate 

that natural gas used for power generation accounted for 18 percent of total U.S. natural 

gas consumption; by the end of 2007 it represented 30 percent.57 On a peak day in the 

summer, natural gas generation’s share of gas use can be much higher. According to 

EIA, the U.S. delivered a total of 21.3 Tcf of natural gas to consumers in 2007 or on 

 57 Derived from information provided by EIA on their Natural Gas Navigator 

website, http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/ng/hist/n3045us2a.htm. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 25 -

average about 58.3 Bcf per day.58 On August 8, 2007, estimates of gas use for power 

generation reached 38 Bcf/d or 65 percent of 2007 average daily gas use.59 Moreover, in 

many regional power markets, natural gas is the marginal fuel during the majority of 

hours power plants are being dispatched, therefore a better understanding of how natural 

gas indices are formed will aid the Commission and the public in understanding power 

market dynamics. For these reasons, we conclude that where a transaction could 

contribute to the formation of price indices and/or relies upon a price index, the 

transaction should be reportable even if the reporting entity is a natural gas end-user. 

37. Requiring end-users to supply transaction data if the transaction utilizes, 

contributes to, or could contribute to price index formation is well within EPAct 2005’s 

Congressional mandate. The Commission accurately stated in Order No. 704 that price 

formation in natural gas markets makes no distinction between transactions that are 

traditionally jurisdictional to the Commission and those that are not.60 Congress, 

recognizing this fact, gave the Commission expansive jurisdiction under the transparency 

provisions of EPAct 2005. The Commission’s traditional jurisdiction under sections 4, 5, 

 58 Derived from information provided by EIA on their Natural Gas Navigator 

website, http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/ng/ng_sum_lsum_dcu_nus_a.htm. 

59 Derived from the “U.S. Power Burn Report”, Bentek Energy, LLC. 

60 Order No. 704 at P 6. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 26 -

and 7 of the NGA is limited to “natural gas companies.”61 In contrast, section 23(a) of 

the NGA directs the Commission “to facilitate price transparency in markets for the sale 

or transportation of physical natural gas in interstate commerce”62 including obtaining 

information from “any market participant.”63 There is no applicable statutory limitation 

on the collection of information that may involve transportation through distribution-level 

facilities, as applies to the Commission’s traditional jurisdiction.64

38. In addition, the first sentence of section 23(a)(2) gives the Commission broad 

authority to “prescribe such rules as the Commission determines necessary and 

appropriate to carry out the purposes of this section,” i.e. facilitating price transparency. 

This broad grant of authority is followed, in the second sentence of the section, with the 

requirement that the “rules shall provide for the dissemination on a timely basis of 

information about the availability and prices of natural gas sold at wholesale and in 

interstate commerce.” The requirement in the second sentence, including the reference to 

“gas sold at wholesale,” does not limit the broad authority granted by the first sentence. 

Rather, the rules required by the second sentence should be viewed as a subset of the 

 61 15 U.S.C. section 717b-717i. 

62 15 U.S.C. section 717t-2(a)(1). 

63 15 U.S.C. section 717t-2(a)(3)(A). 

64 Section 1(b) of the NGA, 15 U.S.C. section717(b), provides in part that the 

Commission’s jurisdiction generally does not apply to “the local distribution of natural 

gas.” 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 27 -

rules the first sentence of section 23(a)(2) authorizes the Commission to adopt. Put 

another way, section 23(a)(2) should be interpreted as providing that the Commission 

may adopt rules collecting information about any transactions, including non-wholesale 

end-use transactions, if necessary to facilitate price transparency, but such rules must

include the collection of information about wholesale transactions in interstate 

commerce. 

39. This interpretation is buttressed by the fact that section 23(a)(3)(A) expressly 

permits the Commission to obtain “the information described in paragraph (2) from any 

market participant,” a term which includes end-users. EPAct 2005’s de minimis

threshold requirement in section 23(d)(2) provides further support for this position. That 

provision states: 

The Commission shall not require natural gas producers, 

processors, or users who have a de minimis market presence 

to comply with the reporting requirements of this section.65

The logical corollary to this Congressional directive is that a user that has greater than de

minimis market presence could be made subject to the reporting requirement. By 

establishing a de minimis threshold volume of 2.2 million MMBtu (and, as further 

explained herein, exempting traditional retail transactions from reporting), the 

Commission appropriately limits reporting by end-users only to those users with a more 

 65 15 U.S.C. section 717t-2(d)(2) (emphasis added). 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 28 -

than a de minimis market presence and only to those end-use transactions that utilize, 

contribute to, or could contribute to price index formation. 

40. While a large industrial end-user may not be a customer “at wholesale,” it is 

doubtless a “market participant” in the interstate wholesale energy market and its actions 

may have a direct impact on the wholesale market or market indices, especially in a 

localized area. We also note that the collection of information on an annual basis is 

qualitatively different than our customary regulation of rates, terms, and conditions 

applicable to natural gas companies. Requiring reporting from large end-users that 

engage in 2.2 million MMBtu of annual sales or purchase transactions (other than 

transactions associated with bundled retail tariff service) is a conservative outcome 

compared to the broad authority granted to us by Congress in section 23 of the NGA. 

Our approach strikes a balance between the data that the Commission requires to meet its 

transparency-related obligations and the burden placed upon market participants to 

provide this data. 

41. However, not all end-use transactions have the potential to contribute to the 

formation of price indices or rely upon price indices. For example, traditional retail 

transactions, even those involving annual volumes greater than the de minimis threshold, 

neither utilize an index for a price nor contribute to index price formation. These retail 

transactions are not relevant to the Commission’s transparency goals. A bundled retail 

transaction through an LDC at a state-approved tariff rate is properly excluded from 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 29 -

purchase and sales volumes to be reported on Form No. 552.66 The reporting burden on 

retail consumers would greatly outweigh any minimal transparency benefit. To the 

extent that a potential respondent purchases or sells gas at a bundled retail tariff rate, it 

should not count those volumes towards the de minimis threshold and, if required to 

submit Form No. 552, it would not include those volumes in its report.67 We note that 

this “bright-line” clarification would also resolve NGSA’s concerns regarding a selling 

entity’s ability to identify what purchasers are consuming gas – if gas is sold by an LDC 

under a bundled retail tariff rate, then it need not be reported. 

42. This proposed approach is similar, though not identical, to the Commission’s 

jurisdictional reach over natural gas transportation service to end-users. FERC exerts its 

customary jurisdiction over direct transportation of natural gas from an interstate pipeline 

 66 We have drawn a parallel distinction in the electric context. In Order No. 888, 

the Commission exercised its jurisdiction over unbundled transmission to end-users in 

interstate commerce, yet declined to exert jurisdiction over bundled retail transmission. 

See Promoting Wholesale Competition Through Open Access Non-discriminatory 

Transmission Services by Public Utilities; Recovery of Stranded Costs by Public Utilities 

and Transmitting Utilities, Order No. 888, 61 FR 21540 (May 10, 1996), FERC Stats. & 

Regs. ¶ 31,036, at p. 31,781 (1996). The U.S. Supreme Court approved of this distinction 

in New York v. FERC, 535 U.S. 1, 28 (2002). While not a jurisdictional question, in this 

rulemaking, we incorporate a similar distinction between unbundled natural gas 

transactions to consumers (which are reportable in Form No. 552 if they utilize or 

contribute to the formation of a price index) and bundled transactions through an LDC 

subject to state-approved tariff rates (which are not reportable). 

67 One caveat is that, if the end-user or other market participant holds a blanket 

certificate from the Commission, it must, at a minimum, submit the identification and 

price reporting data required on Form No. 552. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 30 -

to an end-user.68 However, the Commission has traditionally declined to exercise 

jurisdiction over transportation to “retail customers in a localized geographical area 

behind either a town border station or behind facilities . . . that connect to rural delivery 

points outside the boundaries of towns.”69 Where transportation to an end-user occurs in 

interstate commerce and not as part of local distribution, the Commission has jurisdiction. 

43. We conclude that exempting from reporting those volumes associated with 

bundled retail transactions made at state-approved tariff rates, while including volumes 

associated with direct pipeline-to-end-user and other end-user transactions, is appropriate. 

This modification regarding the reportability of certain end-use transactions necessitates 

changes to the language of Form No. 552.70

 E. Respondents Need Not Distinguish Between Transactions Based upon 

 Location

44. Order No. 704 provided that a market participant must categorize transaction 

volumes by whether each transaction was made at a “reportable location.” Reportable 

 68 See, e.g., Public Utilities Commission of the State of California v. FERC, 

900 F.2d 269 (D.C. Cir. 1990). 

69 Kinder Morgan Interstate Gas Transmission LLC, 99 FERC ¶ 61,186, at n.30 

(2002). 

70 One such modification is the definition of “Physical Natural Gas Transactions” 

in the Definitions portion of current Form No. 552. The definition clearly indicates that 

reportable volumes are only those that utilize, contribute to, or may contribute to the 

formation of price indices. The definition also explicitly excludes volumes associated 

with bundled retail sales and purchases at state-approved tariff rates. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 31 -

locations are locations where index developers currently collect fixed-price information 

for transactions with Next-Day or Next-Month Delivery obligations, and produce index 

prices. Thus, Order No. 704 tied the meaning of “fixed-price” reported volumes to 

volumes that may be reported to index developers at specific points. To this end, we 

directed our staff to list on the Commission’s website all reportable locations at which 

fixed-price volumes were to be reported on Form No. 552.71

Requests for Rehearing and Clarification

45. NGSA requests rehearing of Order No. 704 so as to require submission of data at 

all trading locations rather than limited to specific reportable locations.72 NGSA argues 

that this approach would be consistent with the Policy Statement on price reporting.73 

Further, NGSA states that designated “reportable locations” will change over time, 

hampering the Commission’s long-term analysis of the market.74 NGSA argues that 

limiting reported data only to specific reportable locations would be more burdensome to 

most respondents than reporting all aggregate, relevant data.75 Lastly, NGSA asserts that 

different index developers utilize different means to collect data at the same index point 

 71 Order No. 704 at PP 60 and 101-102. 

72 NGSA comments at 5. 

73 Id. at 6 (citing the Policy Statement). 

74 Id. at 6-7. 

75 Id. at 7. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 32 -

and, thus, data collected from market participants for particular reportable points will not 

offer a reasonable comparison to reported indices.76

46. Participants at the technical conferences echoed some of these themes. The 

NiSource Companies (NiSource) and Encana, for example, questioned how reporting was 

to be accomplished for certain reportable locations given that different reporting services 

defined the locations in multiple ways. 

Commission Determination

47. We grant rehearing of Order No. 704 on this issue and provide that respondents 

need not categorize volumes based upon whether such volumes relate to transactions at 

specific price index locations. We agree with NGSA that: (1) it would be substantially 

less burdensome for market participants to provide aggregate data regarding their 

transactions than to differentiate between volumes that occur within or outside reportable 

locations; (2) defining workable “reportable locations” would be difficult, would require 

substantial detail regarding geographic scope and types of transactions at specific 

locations, and would unduly complicate respondents’ Form No. 552 responses; and 

(3) specific reportable locations would change on a yearly basis, limiting the value of 

data collected by location. We also understand that participants at the technical 

conferences indicated a substantial preference for this modification. 

 76 Id.
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 33 -

48. The Policy Statement provides that the minimum standards for data providers 

include a commitment to report “each bilateral, arm’s-length transaction between nonaffiliated companies in the physical (cash) markets at all trading locations.”77 

Modification of Form No. 552 to eliminate data collected at specific reporting locations 

would make the annual reporting obligation consistent with the Policy Statement. 

Consequently, for respondents that already comply with the Policy Statement standards, 

data collection and reporting on Form No. 552 would be significantly less burdensome. 

In fact, we believe that it would be easier for most entities that do not comply with the 

Policy Statement standards to provide aggregate data for all reportable transactions rather 

than to segregate data regarding transactions at specific locations. 

49. Further, comments by conference participants and NGSA’s request for rehearing 

make clear that it would be administratively difficult to geographically define each 

reportable location in a way that would capture all transactions that were eligible for 

reporting to the various price indices. This is due to the fact that different data collection 

methodologies are used by index developers at the same point as well as the fact that 

different index developers accept different transactions from these points to form indices. 

50. For these reasons, we grant rehearing of Order No. 704 and determine that 

respondents need only provide aggregated data for reportable transactions at all 

 77 Policy Statement at P 34 (emphasis added). 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 34 -

transaction locations. Respondents need not provide data segregated by reportable 

location.78

 F. Balancing, Cash-out, Operational, and In-Kind Transactions are 

 Reportable

51. In Order No. 704, we required market participants to report sale and purchase 

volumes related to cash-outs, imbalance make-ups, and operations.79 We noted that, 

while some volumes related to such transactions are not utilized to create price indices, 

many volumes do refer to or utilize such indices.80 The Commission concluded that the 

data collected from such transactions is useful in assessing how spot prices are being used 

commercially. Specifically, the order required market participants to include on Form 

No. 552 volumes related to royalty-in-kind transactions and purchases and sales related to 

production and gathering functions.81

Requests for Rehearing or Clarification

52. Regarding transactions on interstate pipelines, Shell and NGSA seek rehearing of 

Order No. 704 so as to exclude cash-out, imbalance makeup, and operational volumes 

 78 Consistent with the determination, we will no longer direct the Commission’s 

staff to retain a list of reportable locations on the Commission’s website. 

79 Order No. 704 at P 107. 

80 Id. P 108. 

81 Id.
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 35 -

from the realm of reportable transactions. Both Shell and NGSA argue that such 

transactions do not affect the interstate natural gas market, though they may often rely 

upon natural gas indices for their price.82 Shell states that data regarding such 

transactions may not reflect actual market activity as prices may vary according to 

whether the pipeline or shipper owes gas and there is a one-month lag on the timing of 

many makeup transactions.83 For this reason, the use of index prices in makeup 

transactions, Shell argues, does not reflect the value of natural gas for purposes of 

assessing wholesale natural gas spot markets and will actually distort relevant data 

received by the Commission.84 In the alternative, if rehearing on this point is denied, 

Shell seeks clarification that, if a pipeline provides imbalance cash-out data, then shippers 

need not provide the identical data on Form No. 552.85 NGSA reiterates many of these 

arguments, adds that pipeline balancing transactions are governed by the pipeline’s tariff, 

 82 Shell comments at 14-15; NGSA comments at 11. 

83 Shell comments at 14-15. 

84 Id. at 15. 

85 Id. at 16. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 36 -

and argues that balancing should not be considered a purchase or sale in the wholesale 

market.86

53. Regarding intrastate pipelines, Copano seeks clarification or rehearing regarding 

whether “non-interstate pipeline” market participants must report, and include for 

purposes of meeting the de minimis threshold, volumes related to cash-outs and other 

operational activities.87 Copano argues, much as does Shell and NGSA regarding 

interstate pipelines, that these sorts of transactions are operational in nature, are not based 

on market conditions, and provide no benefit to the Commission’s transparency goals.88

54. Regarding transactions involving end-users, AF&PA and IECA, in a joint 

submittal, seek clarification or rehearing to exempt balancing-type transactions from 

reporting. Additionally, these entities request that blanket certificate holders under 

section 284.402, that hold such a certificate solely by virtue of their status as a pipeline 

customer engaged in balancing or cash out transactions pursuant to a consumer level gas 

service contract, be allowed to forego filing of Form No. 552.89 AF&PA and IECA argue 

that the benefit of obtaining this information is minimal compared to the burden of 

 86 NGSA comments at 9-10. NGSA repeats many of these same arguments in its 

subsequent supplemental comments at 4-6. See also Shell comments at 15-16 (stating in 

passing that imbalance trading transactions should not be considered a purchase or sale). 

87 Copano comments at 8-9. 

88 Id. at 9-10. 

89 AF&PA/IECA comments at 6. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 37 -

reporting the data. They contend that: (1) such transactions are often “involuntary” and 

that it may be very difficult for end-users to determine whether their balancing activity 

exceeds the de minimis threshold; (2) the applicable volumes already likely are reported 

at the pipeline level; and (3) balancing transactions that occur pursuant to individual enduse contracts will not factor appreciatively into wholesale price formation.90 They also 

state that it is likely that many end-user blanket certificate holders under section 284.402 

do not know that they hold such certificate authority or that balancing provisions in 

existing contracts with pipelines could trigger the rule’s annual reporting requirement.91

55. Shell seeks clarification that “in-kind” balancing transactions of all stripes are not 

reportable transactions under the rule as such transactions do not involve a “sale” or a 

“purchase.”92 Relatedly, NGSA requests clarification or rehearing, as necessary, that the 

entity that purchases or sells royalty-in-kind interests is responsible for reporting royaltyin-kind transactions – not well operators.93 NGSA argues that well operators do not 

necessarily have knowledge of the contractual relations of royalty interest holders.94

 90 Id. at 4-6. 

91 Id. at 6-7. 

92 Shell comments at 15-16. 

93 NGSA comments at 12-13. 

94 Id. at 12. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 38 -

56. Shell also seeks clarification regarding the location that cash-out, in-kind, or other 

imbalance transactions occur for purposes of determining whether the transaction occurs 

at a “reportable location.”95 Shell requests further clarification as to whether such 

transactions are considered “next-day,” “next-month,” or “other” for purposes of 

completing Form No. 552.96 Finally, Shell seeks clarification that all production-related 

balancing activities, such as those between producers and working interest owners, are 

not to be reported.97 We understand that producers at the technical conferences requested 

similar clarification from staff. 

57. In supplemental comments, NGSA suggests that, if the Commission continues to 

require the submission of cash-out transaction data (including thermal reduction 

volumes), such data should be reported on a separate line on Form No. 552.98

58. A significant number of commenters at the technical conferences raised questions 

regarding balancing transactions of various types. Commenters wished to know whether 

balancing transactions were to be reported on a “net” basis for each year or whether 

activity in each direction (cash-ins and cash-outs) should be separately accounted. 

 95 Shell comments at 17. 

96 Id.

97 Id.

98 NGSA supplemental comments at 4. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 39 -

Commission Determination

59. We deny the requests for rehearing. Balancing, cash-out, operational, in-kind, and 

similar transactions must be reported on Form No. 552 if they rely upon, contribute to, or 

could contribute to a price index. 

60. Section 23 of the NGA requires that our data collection have “due regard” for “the 

integrity of [the physical natural gas] markets, [and] fair competition.”99 Public 

confidence in the reporting of natural gas prices to gas price index developers and the 

reasonable use and reliance on such indices in the market is squarely within the 

Commission’s purview. This includes not just transactions that directly impact wholesale 

price formation, but also transactions that reference indices. As we stated in Order No. 

704, one of the goals of Form No. 552 is to allow the Commission to “not only 

understand the transactions used to formulate price indices; it is to understand how 

influential price indices are in the overall transacting of natural gas in U.S. wholesale 

markets.”100 It has been our experience that a significant number of balancing, cash-out, 

and similar transactions include references to price indices. Understanding the magnitude 

of this reliance on price indices is therefore a legitimate policy goal. Form No. 552 will 

 99 15 U.S.C. section 717t-2(a)(1). 

100 Order No. 704 at P 73. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 40 -

provide this information and we can conceive of no less intrusive way to obtain this 

relevant data. 

61. In any event, we do not agree with the proposition that balancing transactions, as 

described by commenters, could not themselves contribute to the formation of price 

indices. The fact that a purchase or sale is made for operational or balancing, rather than 

market, reasons is irrelevant. This includes, for example, base or cushion gas purchases 

for storage facilities, balancing between pipelines or between a supplier and a customer, 

and purchases of gas for compression. Some portion of these transactions could be 

utilized to establish index prices. Balancing, cash-out, operational, and in-kind 

transactions should therefore be reportable on Form No. 552 to the same extent as other 

types of transactions.101

62. Further, reporting of balancing transactions by all entities subject to the annual 

reporting requirement is entirely appropriate. Specifically, balancing transactions 

involving end-users are likely a significant total of natural gas contracts that reference 

price indices. Understanding the prevalence of such contracts may allow the 

 101 As with the reporting of purchase and sale transactions, we clarify that 

balancing transactions should be reported for both cash-ins and cash-outs and not on a net 

basis. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 41 -

Commission and other market observers to assess weaknesses in price index 

development.102

63. For all these reasons, we continue to require that reportable sales and purchases on 

Form No. 552 include balancing, cash-out, operational, and in-kind transactions that 

utilize, contribute to, or could contribute to the formation of a price index. 

 G. Safe Harbor

64. In Order No. 704, we noted our intent not to prosecute or penalize companies for 

inadvertent reporting errors on Form No. 552.103 However, we drew a clear distinction 

between the safe harbor provided to voluntary reporting to price index publishers in the 

Policy Statement and the mandatory annual report required by Order No. 704.104 The 

Commission rejected calls to include a similar safe harbor for the submission of Form 

No. 552. 

 102 Technical requests regarding how these types of transactions should be 

reported on Form No. 552 are addressed through clarifications discussed elsewhere in 

this order. Regarding the request for clarification by AF&PA and IECA on this point, the 

Commission declines to clarify the Final Rule in the manner suggested by the 

commenters. While AF&PA and IECA did not supply sufficient detail in their request 

regarding the transactions of concern to their members for us to offer more specific 

guidance, we expect that the clarifications provided in this order will allow these 

organizations’ members to determine both whether they must submit Form No. 552 and 

the transaction volumes that must be reported therein. 

103 Order No. 704 at P 114. 

104 Id.
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 42 -

Requests for Rehearing or Clarification

65. Shell notes that the Commission stated that it “does not intend to prosecute or 

penalize parties for inadvertent errors in reporting,” but did not include a safe harbor 

provision for market participants that attempt to comply in good faith with Order No. 

704. Shell urges the Commission to adopt an explicit, rebuttable presumption of good 

faith as it did in the Policy Statement on price reporting.105

66. Powerex Corporation (Powerex) notes that, in the April 2007 NOPR, the 

Commission responded to queries from “several data providers . . . as to whether they 

may report certain classes of products traded, but not others.”106 The April 2007 NOPR 

stated that “a data provider remains eligible for the safe harbor provisions if it reports 

certain products, but not others, provided that it provides all of the same type of 

transactions and that it notifies the Commission which products it will report in its annual 

filing or other notification.”107 The Commission stated that it would repeat this safe 

harbor clarification in the final rule. However, no such clarification was included in 

Order No. 704. 

67. In supplemental comments to the technical conferences, AGA requests that the 

Commission institute a “pilot program” for compliance with Order No. 704 for calendar 

 105 Shell comments at 29-31. 

106 Powerex comments at 5. 

107 Id.
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 43 -

year 2008 data.108 AGA suggests that the Commission not penalize market participants 

that make good faith efforts to complete Form No. 552 but “make errors” or “include data 

that is inconsistent with the way other market participants have completed the form.”109 

NGSA, in supplemental comments, requests that the Commission adopt a safe harbor for 

2008 calendar-year data, including allowing respondents “to base information . . . on 

transaction data collected using existing processes and systems.”110

Commission Determination

68. The Commission herein adopts a one-year safe harbor, covering transactions 

occurring in calendar year 2008 and reported on Form No. 552 on May 1, 2009. 

However, we decline to extend this safe harbor for additional calendar year reporting. 

69. The Policy Statement includes a safe harbor provision that grants a data provider 

that adopts the Policy Statement standards a rebuttable presumption that data submitted to 

index developers is accurate, timely, and submitted in good faith.111 However, a similar 

perpetual safe harbor is not warranted regarding the reporting of data on Form No. 552. 

The Policy Statement set forth standards that data providers could choose to adopt should 

 108 AGA supplemental comments at 2-3. 

109 Id.

110 NGSA supplemental comments at 3. 

111 See Policy Statement at P 37. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 44 -

they voluntarily elect to provide data to price index developers. One goal of the Policy 

Statement was to “encourage [industry participants] voluntarily to report energy 

transactions to the providers of price indices.”112 The safe harbor that we adopted in the 

Policy Statement was a direct extension of this policy goal. 

70. Form No. 552 is a mandatory annual filing adopted consistent with EPAct 2005, 

not the voluntary reporting of price data to an index developer. There is no policy need 

to provide an incentive for the filing of Form No. 552 similar to the encouragement to 

reporting price data to index developers. Other mandatory forms, such as FERC Form 

No. 2, do not include such a safe harbor. For this reason, we are not persuaded that a 

perpetual safe harbor is warranted. 

71. However, a one-year safe harbor (including data collected for calendar year 2008 

and reported by May 1, 2009) is appropriate. Market participants have begun data 

collection for the current calendar year without the benefit of an order on rehearing of 

Order No. 704. We acknowledge that this Order on Rehearing and Clarification is issued 

well after respondents’ data collection has been underway for 2008. Further, we herein 

offer a number of clarifications of Order No. 704 that may impact such data collection 

activities. A one-time safe harbor for the 2009 Form No. 552 is, under these unique 

circumstances, reasonable. Consistent with the Policy Statement, the Commission finds 

 112 Id. P 3. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 45 -

that respondents submitting Form No. 552 in 2009 will benefit from a rebuttable 

presumption that the data provided is accurate and submitted in good faith. Further, we 

do not intend to penalize respondents for errors in reporting on Form No. 552 provided 

that respondents use reasonable efforts to comply with the regulations regarding and 

instructions for Form No. 552. We emphasize that the Commission expects respondents 

submitting Form No. 552 in 2009 to do so in good faith and on a timely basis. 

 H. Additional Clarifications

72. In addition to resolution of the rehearing and clarification issues discussed above, 

we clarify a number of minor or technical aspects of Form No. 552. 

Some volumes associated with transactions outside the lower 48 states should be 

reported

73. The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), Canadian Suppliers,113

and Powerex request clarification, or in the alternative, rehearing, that reported data 

should include only sales or purchases made inside the geographic boundaries of the 

United States.114 Marathon Oil Company (Marathon) and NGSA request clarification or 

 113 Collectively, Encana Marketing (USA) Inc., Nexen Marketing (USA) Inc., 

Petro-Canada Hydrocarbons Inc., and Talisman Energy Inc. 

114 CAPP comments at 1; Canadian Suppliers comments at 3; Powerex comments 

at 6-7. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 46 -

rehearing regarding the scope of the rule vis-à-vis natural gas production in Alaska.115 

AGA, in supplemental comments, also requests that the Commission address this issue.116

74. Regarding transactions involving possible international transportation, we clarify 

that: (1) volumes originating outside the lower 48 states and delivered at locations 

outside the lower 48 states are not reportable; (2) volumes originating from inside the 

lower 48 states and delivered outside the lower 48 states are reportable; and (3) volumes 

delivered inside the lower 48 states are reportable. Thus, any volumes that originate or 

are delivered into the lower 48 states should be reported on Form No. 552 to the same 

extent as purely domestic volumes. Form No. 552 is designed to capture all transactions 

that reference price indices or that could contribute to price indices and these types of 

international transactions are not categorically excluded. 

Transactions related to exploration activities, production area operations, and 

gathering functions are not exempted from reporting

75. Shell and NGSA request clarification or rehearing of Order No. 704 so as to 

categorically exclude exploration activities, production area operations, and gathering 

functions from reporting. They argue that the entirety of the Commission’s rationale for 

including these transactions is that these transactions often make use of price indices.117 

 115 Marathon comments at 4-5; NGSA comments at 13-14. 

116 AGA supplemental comments at 6-9. 

117 Shell comments at 9; NGSA comments at 11-12. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 47 -

They also argue that these transactions do not impact the wholesale interstate gas market 

and are excluded from traditional NGA regulation under section 1(b) of the Act.118

76. In Order No. 704, the Commission stated that, “while these transactions may not 

affect the formation of price indices in wholesale markets, these transactions often make 

use of price indices . . . to the extent that transfers of value take place based on price 

indices, it is important that the Commission and other market observers be able to 

understand the extent of that transfer and its dependency on price indices as well.”119 As 

explained in the order, determining the scope of price index reliance in the market is a 

significant goal of this rulemaking. The public availability of this data will increase 

market transparency and confidence. Transactions involving exploration activities, 

production area operations, and gathering functions that rely upon or could contribute to 

the creation of price indices are to be reported in the same manner as other types of 

transactions. 

Transactions involving unprocessed gas are not reportable

77. Hess Corporation (Hess) requests rehearing of Order No. 704 so as to exclude 

entities engaged in transactions behind a processing plant priced pursuant to a 

percentage-of-proceeds contract under which the producer is entitled to receive a 

 118 Shell comments at 10; NGSA comments at 11. 

119 Order No. 704 at P 108. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 48 -

percentage of the proceeds realized by the buyer upon resale of the natural gas.120 

Similarly, the Oklahoma Independent Petroleum Association (OIPA) seeks rehearing of 

Order No. 704 so as to exempt producers of natural gas that sell wellhead gas at the initial 

first sales point under a percentage of proceeds contract.121

78. We agree with Hess and OIPA that transactions regarding unprocessed gas should 

not be reported on Form No. 552 and should not be counted when determining whether 

an entity falls below the de minimis threshold. Transactions involving unprocessed 

natural gas are not relevant to wholesale price formation. 

A customer of an asset manager is responsible for reporting volumes managed by 

the asset manager

79. Order No. 704 states that asset managers may not aggregate customer volumes and 

report the same on Form No. 552.122 NGSA requests that the Commission clarify that 

individual customers of asset managers are responsible for the submission of Form No. 

552 and reporting volumes managed by the asset manager as well as any other reportable 

sales or purchases.123

 120 Hess comments at 1. 

121 OIPA comments at 2. 

122 Order No. 704 at P 98. 

123 NGSA comments at 15. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 49 -

80. We clarify the rule in the manner suggested by NGSA. In Order No. 704, we 

stated that asset managers may not report aggregated information for their customers.124 

However, this statement should not be read so as to relieve customers that hire asset 

managers from their obligation to file Form No. 552 if they are required to do so. 

Individual customers of asset managers (assuming that their activities do not fall below 

the de minimis threshold) are responsible for reporting volumes both as managed by an 

asset manager and independently sold and purchased. The Commission also notes that an 

asset manager, to the extent that its market activities are not undertaken on behalf of an 

asset management client, may itself be required to submit Form No. 552. 

A public joint action agency may report an aggregate of members’ volumes

81. Order No. 704 does not directly address the filing of Form No. 552 by public joint 

action agencies. APGA requests clarification that a public joint action agency may 

aggregate members’ annual volume data for purposes of the report.125 APGA notes that, 

in Order No. 704, aggregation is permitted between privately-owned affiliates.126

82. We clarify that public joint action agencies, such as certain members of APGA, 

will be allowed to report members’ data on an aggregate basis in the same manner as 

 124 Order No. 704 at P 98. 

125 APGA comments at 2-3. 

126 Id. at 2 (citing Order No. 704 at P 94). 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 50 -

corporate affiliates. We see no reason to treat public joint action agencies differently 

from private corporate families. Allowing a public joint action agency to report 

members’ volumes will significantly reduce the reporting burden on those members. Of 

course, members of public joint action agencies and affiliates within a corporate family 

remain free to report separately, should they wish. Additionally, we clarify that armslength transactions between members of a public joint action agency may be reportable 

transactions. 

Physically-settled non-NYMEX options are reportable

83. Order No. 704 excluded from reporting NYMEX options that physically settle. 

The rationale for this exclusion was that data regarding these transactions did not 

necessarily relate to fixed-price spot price formation, the data was readily available to the 

public through NYMEX, and reporting these volumes on Form No. 552 would be 

duplicative and burdensome.127 However, Order No. 704 does not explicitly address nonNYMEX transactions that result in physical flow. When such options are exercised, they 

result in physical deliveries in the wholesale market. NGSA requests clarification and, if 

needed, rehearing to ensure that physically-settled, non-NYMEX options are included in 

reported volumes.128

 127 Order No. 704 at P 113. 

128 NGSA comments at 14. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 51 -

84. We agree with NGSA and grant the requested clarification. A physically-settled 

non-NYMEX transaction must be reported on Form No. 552 if it utilizes or could 

contribute to the formation of a price index. 

Certain “NYMEX Plus” contracts are reportable

85. Order No. 704 excluded from reporting any type of financially-settled 

transaction.129 NEM requests clarification regarding reporting of “NYMEX Plus” 

contract volumes. Specifically, NEM requests clarification regarding the definition of 

Physical Natural Gas on Form No. 552.130 The form excludes from reporting “any type 

of financially-settled transaction.” NEM is uncertain whether NYMEX Plus contracts 

fall into this exclusion. NEM explains that under a NYMEX Plus contract an entity 

purchases or sells a volume of gas on a wholesale basis at a reportable location for a 

month or series of months with the price determined by reference to the monthly 

settlement price of a NYMEX futures contract plus an adder.131 NEM is unsure whether 

such volumes should be reported on Form No. 552 line 5 as “prices that refer to 

published next-month gas price indices” or line 6 (the “other” category).132 NEM is also 

 129 Order No. 704 at P 111 and Form No. 552, Definition VII, Physical Natural 

Gas. 

130 NEM comments at 4-6. 

131 Id. at 3. 

132 Id. at 3-4. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 52 -

uncertain as to: (1) the calendar year and months in which contract volumes related to a 

multi-month or multi-year NYMEX Plus contract should be reported; and (2) the price 

that should be reported on Form No. 552 if a price is to be set at a future date.133

86. Based upon the facts as detailed by NEM, the Commission believes that only a 

subset of NYMEX Plus contracts should be reported. Specifically, we clarify that 

NYMEX Plus transactions are reportable only when: (1) executed during bid week and 

that can contribute to a next-month price index, or (2) they utilize a NYMEX settlement 

price during bid week that can contribute to a next-month index. In that regard, the 

Commission is adding a new line between current lines 6 and 7 to page 5 of Form No. 

552 for the purpose of reporting data regarding NYMEX Plus and other “triggered” 

physical gas transactions. 

87. Further, we clarify that, for all contracts where deliveries occur or may occur over 

multiple calendar years and such volumes are reportable, only volumes attributable for 

delivery that use or may contribute to the formation of price indices during the subject 

calendar year should be reported on Form No. 552. In Order No. 704, the Commission 

indicated that transactions are to be reported based upon whether their expected delivery 

dates are within the reporting year –contract formation dates are irrelevant.134 For 

 133 NEM comments at 4-5. 

134 Order No. 704 at P 60. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 53 -

example, for a contract that could contribute to the formation of a price index and 

requires deliveries at times between July of the first year through February of the next, 

the respondent should report July-December volumes for the Form No. 552 

corresponding to the first year’s volumes and January-February volumes in the next 

year’s Form No. 552. For a multi-year contract that relies on a price index to establish a 

price, the relevant volumes should be reported in the year in which the index is 

referenced. 

Bid-week, fixed price differential physical basis transactions tied to the last day of 

settlement are reportable

88. NGSA requests rehearing such that the definition of “Fixed Price” in Form No. 

552 includes bid-week fixed price differential physical basis transactions tied to the last 

day of settlement.135 NGSA notes that these agreements form a material portion of the 

reported transactions at index points.136 AGA, in supplemental comments in the docket, 

suggests that physical basis transactions be reported on a separate line on Form No. 

552.137 NGSA argues that including these volumes would ease the administrative burden 

 135 These types of transactions involve transfers of physical natural gas utilizing 

basis differentials. The transactions are executed during the bid-week at a fixed 

differential to the last day of settlement. 

136 NGSA comments at 8. 

137 AGA supplemental comments at 5-6. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 54 -

on respondents as these volumes would not need to be monitored and removed from 

aggregate volume numbers.138

89. The Commission agrees that Form No. 552 should include bid-week, fixed price 

differential physical basis transactions. These transactions are a significant aspect of 

wholesale natural gas markets and utilize or could contribute to the formation of price 

indices. Consistent with AGA’s recommendation, we will include a new line item in 

Form No. 552, requiring the reporting of all physical basis transactions, including fixed 

differential basis transactions that can contribute to or rely upon a price index. 

All data provided on Form No. 552 will be publicly available

90. At least one participant at the technical conference requested that the Commission 

act to protect allegedly proprietary information contained in completed Form No. 552. 

Specifically, the concern was raised by Samson Resources Company (Samson) that, by 

requiring submission of data based upon transactions at specific locations, the form 

would provide sensitive commercial information to competitors who may already know 

the point or points where the respondent transacts. Samson also claimed that the names 

of affiliates should be confidential as well. 

91. We reiterate that Form No. 552 data will be publicly available. In Order No. 704, 

the Commission addressed requests that data included on Form No. 552 be treated as 

 138 NGSA comments at 8. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 55 -

confidential or proprietary.139 We found that Congress directed the Commission to 

provide aggregate information to the public. We balanced this transparency goal with the 

asserted need for confidentiality. Among the factors we considered were: (1) data would 

be reported in the aggregate; (2) no specific pricing information would be reported; 

(3) data would be reported on a national level, not locally or regionally; and (4) data 

would not be reported until four months following the reporting year.140 We see no 

reason to modify our determination in this regard. We note, however, that our 

determination herein to eliminate the reporting of data at specific reportable locations, 

further reduces any concerns that reported data is commercially sensitive. 

We decline to modify the effective date of the rule

92. Under Order No. 704, respondents must submit Form No. 552 no later than May 1, 

2009 for data collected in calendar year 2008.141 We understand that one participant at 

the technical conference requested that the Commission delay reporting of data until 2010 

(for calendar year 2009 data). NiSource argued that it did not have the ability to 

electronically record data required by Form No. 552 and, given that the Commission had 

yet to issue an order on rehearing, it may be very difficult or impossible for some 

companies to comply with a 2009 filing date. 

 139 Order No. 704 at PP 82-84. 

140 Id. P 83. 

141 Id. P 105. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 56 -

93. The Commission declines to modify the effective date of the rule or the date by 

which Form No. 552 is first to be filed. We note that no entity raised this issue on 

rehearing or a formal request for clarification. We have confidence in respondents’ 

capabilities to report the general volume data requested on Form No. 552 by the May 1, 

2009 filing date. With the adoption of a one-year safe harbor, discussed above, concerns 

regarding the difficulty of collecting 2008 data for reporting in 2009 should be mitigated. 

We do not at this time establish additional formal procedures to address market 

participant questions regarding Form No. 552

94. NEM requests that the Commission establish ongoing procedures in which staff 

may offer informal advice to market participants regarding reporting requirements in 

Form No. 552. NEM proposes a “technical compliance forum” to include a combination 

of measures such as an additional hotline, a designated interactive webpage for industry 

questions regarding Form No. 552 (including a Frequently Asked Questions page), 

designation of specific staff members to field questions, and periodic technical 

conferences leading up to the May 2009 filing deadline.142 Additionally, AGA and 

Merrill Lynch Commodities (Merrill Lynch), during the technical conference process, 

suggested that staff complete and distribute a sample Form No. 552 based upon various 

types of transactions. AGA also requested in supplemental comments that the 

 142 NEM comments at 2. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 57 -

Commission commit to provide further guidance on the reporting obligation following 

submission of annual reports in 2009.143

95. We do not believe that additional informational or educational outreach regarding 

Form No. 552 is necessary at this time. To the extent that additional clarification is 

necessary following the issuance of this Order on Rehearing and Clarification, requests 

for further clarification and rehearing are permitted and additional technical conferences 

may be held at our discretion. Further, we note that, once entities begin to complete 

Form No. 552 with calendar year 2008 data, respondents may direct informal questions 

through appropriate means, including the new compliance help desk.144

The reach of the safe harbor provision in the Policy Statement on Natural Gas and 

Electric Price Indices

96. Referring to the 2003 Policy Statement, Order No. 704 stated, in passing, that “[a] 

market participant that does not hold blanket sales certificates is not required to comply 

with the Policy Statement processes, nor does it receive the safe harbor available in the 

Policy Statement.”145 Southern Company Services, Inc. (SCS) requests clarification of 

this statement. SCS argues that non-jurisdictional entities have engaged in price 

reporting while relying on an interpretation of the Policy Statement’s safe harbor 

 143 AGA supplemental comments at 3. 

144 See Obtaining Guidance on Regulatory Requirements, 123 FERC ¶ 61,157 

(2008). 

145 Order No. 704 at P 96. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 58 -

provision. SCS argues that the Policy Statement safe harbor applies to any “data 

provider” regardless of whether the provider is a certificate holder.146

97. SCS’s request is effectively a request to clarify the Policy Statement, not Order 

No. 704. The referenced comment was not a prerequisite to our determinations in the 

order. SCS’s request is inappropriate as a request for clarification of Order No. 704. 

III. Information Collection Statement

98. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations require that OMB 

approve certain reporting, recordkeeping, and public disclosure (collections of 

information) imposed by an agency.147 The information collection requirements for Form 

No. 552 respondents were approved under OMB Control Nos. 1902-0242. This order 

further revises these requirements in order to more clearly state the obligations imposed 

in Order No. 704, but does not substantively alter those requirements. OMB approval of 

this order is therefore unnecessary. However, the Commission will send a copy of this 

order to OMB for informational purposes only. 

IV. Environmental Analysis

99. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental Assessment or an 

Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may have a significant adverse effect 

 146 SCS comments at 2-3. 

147 5 CFR 1320. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 59 -

on the human environment.148 The actions taken here fall within categorical exclusions 

in the Commission’s regulations for information gathering, analysis, and dissemination, 

and for sales, exchange, and transportation of natural gas that requires no construction of 

facilities.149 Therefore, an environmental assessment is unnecessary and has not been 

prepared in this rulemaking. 

V. Regulatory Flexibility Act

100. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA)150 generally requires a description 

and analysis of rules that will have significant economic impact on a substantial number 

of small entities. The RFA requires consideration of regulatory alternatives that 

accomplish the stated objectives of a proposed rule and that minimize any significant 

economic impact on such entities. The RFA does not, however, mandate any particular 

outcome in a rulemaking. At a minimum, agencies are to consider the following 

alternatives: establishment of different compliance or reporting requirements for small 

entities or timetables that take into account the resources available to small entities; 

clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance and reporting requirements 

 148 Order No. 486, Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy 

Act, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. & Regs ¶ 30,783 (1987). 

149 18 CFR 380.4(a)(5) and (a)(27). 

150 5 U.S.C. 601-612. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 60 -

for small entities; use of performance rather than design standards; and exemption for 

certain or all small entities from coverage of the rule, in whole or in part. 

101. The annual reporting requirement set forth in the Order on Rehearing and 

Clarification will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 

small entities. The requirement for annual reporting of physical natural gas transactions 

will have minimal impact on small entities. By incorporating a de minimis exemption 

into the regulations, the Commission has reduced the number of small entities subject to 

the requirements: de minimis entities without blanket sales certificates will not be 

required to report. This reporting requirement will affect small entities but the burden on 

them will be minimal. For each entity, small or otherwise, that is required to comply 

with the annual reporting requirement, the Commission estimates that the compliance 

would require a one-time cost of approximately $4,000 and an annual cost thereafter of 

$400. Although some costs would increase for market participants with a greater number 

of transactions, we expect that that increase would be likely offset because such entities 

would have already compiled information regarding their transactions in the aggregate. 

This amount is not a significant burden on small entities. The de minimis exemption 

provides a regulatory alternative that will reduce the economic impact on certain small 

entities from coverage of the rule. Accordingly, the Commission certifies that the order 

will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 61 -

VI. Document Availability

102. 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 

(http://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, N.E., Room 2A, Washington 

DC 20426. 

103. From FERC's Home Page on the Internet, this information is available on 

eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft 

Word format for viewing, printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in 

eLibrary, type the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in the 

docket number field. 

104. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the FERC's Web site during normal 

business hours from FERC Online Support at 202-502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) 

or e-mail at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-

8371, TTY (202) 502-8659. E-mail the Public Reference Room at 

public.referenceroom@ferc.gov. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 - 62 -

VII. Effective Date 

105. Changes to Order No. 704 adopted in this Order on Rehearing and Clarification 

will become effective [insert date 30 days after publication in the Federal Register]. 

The Commission orders:

The requests for clarification and rehearing are granted in part and denied in part 

as discussed in the body of this order. 

List of Subjects

18 CFR Part 260

 Natural gas, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 

18 CFR Part 284

 Continental shelf; Natural gas; Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. 

By the Commission. 

( S E A L ) 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 -64-

In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends parts 260 and 284, 

Chapter I, Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations to read as follows: 

PART 260 - STATEMENTS AND REPORTS (SCHEDULES) 

1. The authority citation for part 260 continues to read as follows: 

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

2. Sec. 260.401 is revised as follows: 

 a. Paragraph (a) is amended by removing the word “reporting” between the 

words “annual” and “report.” 

 b. Paragraph (b)(1) is amended by removing the word “wholesale,” between 

the words “in” and “physical” and removing the word “As” and inserting the words, 

“However, as” at the beginning of the final sentence. 

 c. Paragraph (b)(1)(i) is amended by removing the word “and” at the end of 

the paragraph. 

 d. Paragraph (b)(1)(ii) is amended and paragraph 260.401(b)(1)(iii) is added 

to read as follows: 

§ 260.401 FERC Form No. 552, Annual Report of Natural Gas Transactions.

* * * * * 

 (b) * * * 

 (1) * * * 

 (ii) It engages in reportable physical natural gas sales that amount to less than 

2,200,000 MMBtus for the previous calendar year; and 

(iii) It engages in reportable physical natural gas purchases that amount to less 

than 2,200,000 MMBtus for the previous calendar year. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 -65-

* * * * * 

PART 284 - CERTAIN SALES AND TRANSPORTATION OF NATURAL GAS 

UNDER THE NATURAL GAS POLICY ACT OF 1978 AND RELATED 

AUTHORITIES

3. The authority citation for Part 284 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717-717w, 3301-3432; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352; 43 U.S.C. 1331-1356 

4. Sec. 284.403(a) is amended by removing the word “must” in the final sentence, 

and inserting the word “Seller” in its place. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 -66-

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

Appendix A to Order No. 704-A: 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 -67-

 Form No. 552 

 OMB No. 1902-0242 

 Expires (mm/dd/yyyy)

FERC TRANSACTION REPORT 

FERC FORM No. 552: Annual Report of 

Natural Gas Transactions 

These reports are mandatory under the Natural Gas Act, Section 23(a)(2), and 18 CFR Parts 260.401. Failure to 

report may result in criminal fines, civil penalties, and other sanctions as provided by law. The Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission does not consider these reports to be of a confidential nature. 

Exact Legal Name of Respondent (Company) Year of Report 

End of 

FERC FORM No. 552 (New) 

THIS FILING IS 

Item 1: □ An Initial (Original) Submission OR □ Resubmission No. ___ 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 -68-

INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILING THE FERC FORM NO. 552 

GENERAL INFORMATION 

I Purpose 

 FERC Form No. 552 collects transactional information from natural gas market participants. 

The filing of this information is necessary to provide information regarding the use of the natural gas 

spot markets and the use of fixed and index price transactions. This form is considered to be a nonconfidential public use form. 

II. Who Must Submit 

 Physical natural gas buyers and sellers must complete and file the form annually if they make 

use of a blanket sales certificate under § 284.402 or § 284.284, or if their reportable physical natural 

gas purchases or sales were equal to or greater than 2.2 million (2,200,000) MMBtus (i.e., 2.2 TBtu) 

in the reporting year. As explained elsewhere in Form No. 552, not all transactions involving 

physical natural gas are reportable. Potential respondents should review the instructions to 

determine whether their reportable purchases or their reportable sales meet or exceed this de 

minimis threshold. For example, purchases and sales of natural gas made at retail to a natural gas 

consumer pursuant to a state commission-approved bundled tariff rate are not reportable. 

 If a natural gas market participant is required to complete and file Form No. 552 because it 

makes use of a blanket sales certificate under § 284.402 or § 284.284, but its natural gas purchases 

and sales were each lower than 2.2 TBtus in the reporting year, then it is not required to report the 

schedule of Form No. 552 that collects volumetric information. 

III. What and Where to Submit 

(a) Submit FERC Form No. 552 electronically through the submission software at 

http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/eforms.asp#552. 

 

(b) The Corporate Officer Certification must be submitted electronically as part of the FERC 

Form No. 552 filing. 

 (c) Users may obtain additional blank copies of FERC Form No. 552 for reference free of 

charge from: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/eforms.asp#552. Copies may also be obtained 

from the Public Reference and Files Maintenance Branch, Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426 or by calling (202) 

502-8371. 

IV. When to Submit: 

 

 The FERC Form No. 552 must be filed by May 1st of the year following the reporting year (18 

CFR § 260.401). 

 V. Where to Send Comments on Public Reporting Burden. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 -69-

 The public reporting burden for the FERC Form No. 552 collection of information is 

estimated to average 4 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, 

searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data-needed, and completing 

and reviewing the collection of information. This estimate was noted in the Notice of Purposed 

Rulemaking and in the Final Rule (RM07-10-000) and addressed by commenters. 

 Filers may send additional comments regarding these burden estimates or any aspect of 

these collections of information, including suggestions for reducing burden, to the Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426 (Attention: 

Information Clearance Officer); and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of 

Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503 (Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission). No person shall be subject to any penalty if any collection of 

information does not display a valid control number (44 U.S.C. § 3512 (a)). 

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

I. All respondents must identify themselves annually by completing the first part of Form No. 552. 

II. Aggregation across affiliates (or members of a public joint action agency) is permitted, though 

not required. If a respondent is aggregating volumes across affiliates, the respondent must 

complete the “Schedule of Reporting Companies” (page 3) which lists those affiliates and a 

separate “Price Index Reporting” schedule for each affiliate. 

III. Asset managers may not report aggregated information for their customers in Form No. 552. 

Customers of asset managers are individually responsible for determining whether they must 

file Form No. 552. An asset manager may itself be required to submit Form No. 552 to the 

extent that its activities are not undertaken on behalf of an asset management client. 

IV. Report all gas quantities in Trillion British Thermal Unit (TBtu) unless the schedule specifically 

requires the reporting in another unit of measurement. 

V. For reported volumes, enter numbers to the tenth of a unit only, except where otherwise noted. 

VI. Report volumes of physical natural gas as explained in the definitions. 

VII. Complete each question fully and accurately, even if it has been answered in a previous 

report. Enter the word "None" where it truly and completely states the fact. 

VIII. Enter the month, day, and year for all dates. Use customary abbreviations. The "Date of 

Report" included in the header of each page is to be completed only for resubmissions 

(see IX. below). 

IX. For any resubmissions, submit the electronic filing using the form submission only. Please 

explain the reason for the resubmission in a footnote to the data field. 

X. Footnote and further explain as necessary. 

XI. Do not make references to reports of previous periods/years or to other reports in lieu of 

required entries, except as specifically authorized. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 -70-

XII. Regarding reportable transactions that involve deliveries that occur or may occur over multiple 

calendar years, only volumes for delivery that use, contribute to, or may contribute to the 

formation of a price index during the subject calendar year should be reported. For a multiyear contract that relies on a price index to establish a price, volumes should be reported in the 

year in which the index is referenced. 

DEFINITIONS 

 

I. Affiliate– An affiliate means a person who controls, is controlled by or is under common control with 

another person. For purposes of the completion of Form No. 552, a joint public action agency may 

submit members’ collective information as if those members were affiliates. 

II. Blanket Certificate – A blanket certificate means either (i) a blanket marketing certificate granted to a 

person that is not an interstate pipeline pursuant to 18 CFR § 284.402, or (ii) a blanket certificate for 

unbundled sales service granted to an interstate pipeline pursuant to 18 CFR § 284.284. 

III. Date of Report – The date the report is submitted to the Commission. 

IV. Fixed Price – A “Physical Natural Gas Transaction” price determined by agreement between buyer 

and seller and not benchmarked to any other source of information. For example, physical basis 

transactions that directly refer to futures prices, for the purpose of this form, are not “Fixed Price” 

transactions. 

V. Next-Day Delivery – Delivery of a transaction executed prior to NAESB nomination deadline 

(11:30am Central Prevailing Time) on one day for uniform physical delivery over the next pipeline 

day. Transactions done for Friday are usually for flow on Saturday, Sunday, and Monday inclusive. 

Trading patterns may vary in the case of holidays or the end of a month that occurs on a weekend. 

VI. Next-Month Delivery – Delivery of a transaction executed during the last five (5) business days of 

one month for uniform physical delivery over the next month. 

VII. Physical Natural Gas Transaction – A natural gas transaction that contains an obligation to deliver 

natural gas at a specified location and at a specified time, with the exception of physically-delivered 

futures contracts. It is not necessary that natural gas actually be delivered under the transactions, 

only that the delivery obligation existed in the agreement when executed. Certain Physical Natural 

Gas Transactions may not remain in existence through the time of delivery because they were 

traded away or “booked out.” For purposes of this form, these transactions should be included 

whether they went to delivery or not. Order No. 704 and 704-A discuss a variety of particular 

instances. Physical Natural Gas Transactions are only those transactions for Next-Day Delivery or 

Next-Month Delivery that refer, contribute, or could contribute to the formation of a price index 

during the calendar year. The following physical natural gas volumes should be included in 

volumetric data submitted in Form No. 552 if the relevant transactions refer to or could contribute to 

the formation of a price index: 

a. cash-out, imbalance makeup and operational volumes reported by pipelines; and 

b. volumes attributable to royalty-in-kind transactions, gas provided for processing such as plant 

thermal reduction (not including unprocessed gas), and purchases and sales related to the 

production and gathering function. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 -71-

Notwithstanding the above, the following volumes should, in all cases, be excluded in volumetric 

data submitted in Form No. 552: 

a. sales to and purchases by retail consumers of natural gas pursuant to a state commissionapproved bundled tariff, 

b. sales or purchases of volumes that originate outside of the lower 48 states of the United States 

of America and are delivered outside of the lower 48 states, 

c. volumes associated with transactions among affiliates, 

d. volumes associated with any type of financially-settled transaction, 

e. unprocessed gas volumes, 

f. volumes traded in futures contracts, even those that go to physical delivery, 

g. volumes of imported LNG traded prior to regasification and exported LNG traded after 

liquefaction, and 

h. volumes that are not Next-Day Delivery or Next-Month Delivery. 

VIII. Price Index Publisher – Companies that report price indices for U.S. wholesale natural gas markets. 

The list of companies can change over time. 

IX. Prices that Refer to (Daily or Monthly) Price Indices – Prices for Physical Natural Gas Transactions 

that reference directly a daily or monthly index price published by a “Price Index Publisher” rather 

than a “Fixed Price” or a price that refers directly to some other benchmark. 

X. Quantity – Amount of purchases or sales expressed in units of energy “British Thermal Units” (Btu). 

One million BTUs (MMBtu) are, by definition, the same as one Dekatherm (Dth). A volume of one 

billion cubic feet (Bcf) of natural gas contains approximately one trillion Btus (TBtu or million 

MMBtu) of energy depending on the exact energy content of the natural gas. The quantities to be 

reported in the ”Purchase and Sales Information” schedule should be measured in tenths of TBtus. 

XI. Reporting Company – The person, corporation, licensee, agency, authority, or other legal entity or 

instrumentality on whose behalf the report is being submitted by the “Respondent.” 

XII. Respondent – The person, corporation, licensee, agency, authority, or other legal entity or 

instrumentality that is submitting the report either on its own behalf, or on behalf of itself and/or its 

affiliates. A Respondent may choose to either report for all its affiliates collectively, or may choose 

to have each of its affiliates report separately as their own “Respondent.” If reporting collectively, 

the “Respondent” must report for each “Affiliate” in the “Schedule of Reporting Companies” and the 

“Price Index Reporting Schedule,” and collectively for all its affiliates in the “Purchase and Sales 

Information” schedule. 

XIII. Natural Gas Purchases – The volumetric “Quantity” of “Physical Natural Gas Transactions” 

purchased by the “Reporting Company” during the “Year of Report.” 

XIV. Natural Gas Sales – The volumetric “Quantity” of “Physical Natural Gas Transactions” sold by the 

“Reporting Company” during the “Year of Report.” 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 -72-

XV. Year of Report – The calendar year for which the report is being submitted. 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 -73-

ANNUAL REPORT OF NATURAL GAS TRANSACTIONS 

IDENTIFICATION OF RESPONDENT 

01 Exact Legal Name of Respondent 

 

02 Year of Report 

End of 

03 Previous Name and Date of Change (If name changed during year) 

04 Address of Principal Office at End of Year (Street, City, State, Zip Code) 

05 Name of Contact Person 06 Title of Contact Person 

07 Address of Contact Person (Street, City, State, Zip Code) 

08 Email Address of Contact Person 

09 Telephone of Contact Person, Including Area Code 10 This Report is: 

(1) □ An Original 

(2) □ A Resubmission 

11 Date of Report 

(MM,DD,YYYY) 

ANNUAL CORPORATE OFFICER CERTIFICATION 

The undersigned officer certifies that: 

I have examined this report and to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief all statements of fact contained in this report are 

accurate and complete statements of the business affairs of the respondent. 

12 Name 13 Title 

14 Signature 15 Date Signed 

Title 18, U.S.C. 1001, makes it a crime for any person knowingly and willingly to make to any Agency or Department of the United 

States any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements as to any matter within its jurisdiction. 

FERC FORM NO. 552 (NEW) Page 1 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 -74-

Name of Respondent* This Report is: 

(1) □⁫An Original 

(2)  A Resubmission 

Date of Report* 

(Mo, Da, Yr) 

 / / 

Year/Period of Report* 

End of Year/Qtr

List of Schedules 

Enter in column (d) the terms “none,” “not applicable,” or “NA” as appropriate, where no information or amounts have been reported 

for certain pages. Omit pages where the responses are “none,” “not applicable,” or “NA.” 

* An asterisk means that the previous term is explained in more detail in the definitions. 

Line 

No. 

Title of Schedule

(a) 

Reference 

Page No.

 

(b) 

Date Revised

 

(c) 

Remarks

 

(d) 

1 Schedule of Reporting Companies 3 

2 Price Index Reporting 4 

3 Purchases and Sales Information 5 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

34 

35 

36 

37 

Total 

FERC FORM NO. 552 (NEW) Page 2 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 -75-

Name of Respondent* This Report is: 

(1) □ An Original 

(2)  A Resubmission 

Date of Report* 

(Mo, Da, Yr) 

 / / 

Year/Period of Report* 

End of Year/Qtr

Schedule of Reporting Companies 

If the Respondent* is reporting collectively for multiple Affiliates*, list the exact legal name of those Affiliates* in this form. 

Respondent* should complete the next schedule, Price Index Reporting, for each of these companies separately. Respondent* should 

complete the “Purchase and Sales Information” schedule only once for these companies collectively. 

* An asterisk means that the previous term is explained in more detail in the definitions. 

 

Line 

No. 

List the Exact Legal Names of all Affiliates* Reported by Respondent* below 

(a) 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

FERC FORM NO. 552 (NEW) Page 3 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 -76-

Name of Respondent* This Report is: 

(1) □ An Original 

(2)  A Resubmission 

Date of Report* 

(Mo, Da, Yr) 

 / / 

Year/Period of Report* 

End of Year

Name of Reporting Company* Reporting Company* is: 

(1) □ Same as Respondent* 

(2)  An Affiliate* of Respondent* (other Affiliates* reported separately) 

Price Index Reporting 

Even if the Respondent* is reporting collectively for multiple Affiliates*, the Respondent* still must complete this schedule for each of 

its Affiliates* separately. 

When answering yes/ no questions, to select yes enter 1 in the yes column and 0 in the no column of the appropriate row. To select no 

enter 1 in the no column and 0 in the yes column of the appropriate row. 

* An asterisk means that the previous term is explained in more detail in the definitions. 

Line 

No. 

Question 

(a) 

Yes 

(b) 

No 

(c) 

1 At any time during the report year, did the Reporting Company* operate under a Blanket Certificate*? 

2 Did the Reporting Company* report any transaction information to Price Index Publishers* during the 

Report Year*? 

 

3 If no on either of lines 1 or 2, skip the question on line 4 and move to line 5. 

4 Did the Reporting Company’s* reporting comply with the regulations governing reporting to Price Index 

Publishers* pursuant to 18 CFR § 284.403? 

 

5 Were the Reporting Company’s* total Natural Gas Purchases* equal to or greater than 2.2 TBtu for the 

Report Year*? 

 

6 Were the Reporting Company’s* total Natural Gas Sales* equal to or greater than 2.2 TBtu delivered in the 

Report Year*? 

 

7 If no on both lines 5 and 6, Reporting Company* is not required to complete the next schedule (i.e., 

Purchases and Sales Information). If yes on either line 5 or 6, Reporting Company* is required to complete 

the next schedule, including volumes related both to Natural Gas Purchases* and Natural Gas Sales.* 

FERC FORM NO. 552 (NEW) Page 4 
Docket No. RM07-10-001 -77-

Name of Respondent* This Report is: 

(1) □ An Original 

(2)  A Resubmission 

Date of Report* 

(Mo, Da, Yr) 

 / / 

Year/Period of Report* 

End of Year

Name of Reporting Company* Reporting Company* is: 

(1) □ Same as Respondent* 

(2)  An Affiliate* of Respondent* (other Affiliates* reported separately) 

Purchase and Sales Information 

If the Respondent* is reporting collectively for multiple Affiliates,* the Respondent* should complete this schedule for all of its 

Affiliate* companies collectively. Volumes should be reported to the nearest tenth of a TBtu. 

* An asterisk means that the previous term is explained in more detail in the definitions. 

Line 

No. 

Item 

(a) 

Purchases 

(TBtu) 

(b) 

Sales 

(TBtu) 

(c) 

1 What was the total volume of Physical Natural Gas Transactions* (sales and 

purchases) engaged in by the Respondent in the prior calendar year? 

 

2 Of the amounts reported on line 1, what quantities were contracted at Fixed 

Prices* for Next-Day Delivery*? 

 

3 Of the amounts reported on line 1, what quantities were contracted at prices 

that refer to published Next-Day Delivery* gas price indices? 

 

4 Of the amounts reported on line 1, what quantities were contracted at Fixed 

Prices for Next-Month Delivery*? 

 

5 Of the amounts reported on line 1, what quantities were contracted at prices 

that refer to* published Next-Month Delivery* gas price indices? 

 

6 Of the amounts reported on line 1, what quantities were contracted under 

trigger agreements, such as NYMEX Plus contracts. 

 

7 Of the amounts reported on line 1, what quantities were contracted as physical 

basis transactions? 

 

8 If there is a difference between Respondent’s* purchases reported on line 1 and the sum of its purchases on lines 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 

and 7, please explain the difference in the space below. 

9 If there is a difference between Respondent’s* sales reported on line 1 and the sum of its sales on lines 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, 

please explain the difference in the space below. 

FERC FORM NO. 552 (NEW) Page 5