121 FERC ¶ 61,171 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 

18 CFR Parts 375 and 385 

[Docket No. RM07-16-000; Order No. 703] 

Filing Via the Internet 

(Issued November 15, 2007) 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Final Rule 

SUMMARY: The Commission is revising its regulations to provide that all documents 

will be eligible for filing by means of the Commission’s eFiling system, with exceptions 

to be posted by the Secretary of the Commission on the Commissions website. 

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

publication in the FEDERAL REGISTER]. Changes made by this rule to the 

Commission’s eFiling system will be implemented at a later date, to be announced by the 

Secretary of the Commission. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Wilbur Miller 

Office of General Counsel 

888 First Street, NE 

Washington, DC 20426 

(202) 502-8953 

wilbur.miller@ferc.gov 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
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. 

Filing Via the Internet Docket No. RM07-16-000 

FINAL RULE 

ORDER NO. 703 

(Issued November 15, 2007) 

I. Background

1. On July 23, 2007, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(NOPR) seeking comments on proposed revisions to its regulations that will enable the 

implementation of the next version of its system for filing documents via the Internet, 

eFiling 7.0. Filing Via the Internet, 72 Fed. Reg. 42330 (July 23, 2007), FERC Stats. & 

Regs. ¶ 32,621 (2007). The NOPR proposed to allow the option of filing all documents 

in Commission proceedings through the eFiling interface except for specified exceptions. 

The NOPR also sought comments on the possibility of shifting its deadline for filings 

through the eFiling system from close of business to midnight, and of utilizing online 

forms to allow “documentless” interventions in all filings and quick comments in P 

(Hydropower Project), PF (Pre-Filing NEPA activities for proposed gas pipelines), and 

CP (Certificates for Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines) proceedings. Finally, the NOPR 

asked for input on a number of technical issues that will be covered in the instructions for 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 2 - 

eFiling that will be issued by the Secretary of the Commission. These issues also were 

the subject of a technical conference that took place on August 22, 2007. 

2. This Final Rule adopts the NOPR’s proposal to amend the Commission’s 

regulations1

 to provide that all documents filed with the Commission may be submitted 

through the eFiling interface except for documents specified by the Secretary. This 

reverses the existing presumption, as the current regulations allow eFiling only of 

documents specified by the Secretary. The changes we are implementing in this Final 

Rule mean that categories such as oversized documents and most confidential documents 

will be accepted via eFiling. At this time, the principal exceptions, as noted in the 

NOPR, will be tariffs, tariff revisions and rate change applications; some forms;2

 and 

documents that are subject to protective orders. As stated in the NOPR, for the time 

being, the Secretary’s instructions will specify that submitters file paper copies of 

oversized and some other documents3

 in addition to the electronic documents. 

 1

 Rule 2003(c) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 

385.2003(c). 

2

 The following will continue to be submitted through eForms: FERC Form No.1, 

FERC Form No. 2, FERC Form No. 2-A, FERC Form No. 3-Q, FERC Form No. 6, 

FERC Form No. 6-Q, Form 60, Form 714, and Electric Quarterly Reports. FERC Form 

1-F is currently not included in eForms, so it may be efiled. Open Access Transmission 

Tariff (OATT) filings may also be efiled. 

3

 A list of examples of documents for which the Commission will require paper 

copies is contained in the Appendix to the NOPR. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 3 - 

3. This rulemaking will become effective 30 days after publication in the Federal 

Register, but implementation of eFiling 7.0 will occur at a later date. The Secretary will 

announce the implementation of the upgrade in advance and will also at that time post 

filing instructions, as discussed below. 

4. This Final Rule implements the proposals, discussed in the NOPR, to institute 

online forms that would permit optional “documentless” intervention in all proceedings 

and “quick comments” in P (Hydropower Project), PF (Pre-Filing NEPA activities for 

proposed gas pipelines), and CP (Certificates for Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines) 

proceedings. It should be noted that the quick comment and documentless intervention 

features will not require revisions to the Commission’s regulations. We are not at this 

time implementing the proposal to move the filing deadline to midnight. 

5. Prior to the release of eFiling 7.0, the Secretary will issue instructions specifying 

formats and other technical parameters, as well as instances in which paper copies will be 

required. As noted in the NOPR, the Commission has already issued instructions 

specifying acceptable file formats for filings submitted on CD-ROM, DVD and other 

electronic media. These can be found at http://www.ferc.gov/help/submissionguide/electronic-media.asp. In addition, in some cases Commission staff has issued 

instructions applying to specific types of filings. Where there are no specifications for a 

particular type of filing, users must follow the Secretary’s instructions. The Commission 

received useful input on formatting issues both in the comments on the NOPR and in the 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 4 - 

technical conference. Users of eFiling should bear in mind that changes will inevitably 

take place as staff implements improvements and technology changes. Staff also receives 

feedback from users on an informal basis, which it uses to continue improving the 

system. 

6. At this time, the eFiling system will accept documents in their native formats. 

This will include both text or word processing documents, and other more specialized 

documents such as spreadsheets and maps. It will also accept text documents in 

searchable formats, including scanned documents that have been saved in searchable 

form. As noted above, the Secretary has issued a list of acceptable formats for CD-ROM, 

DVD and other electronic media, available at http://www.ferc.gov/help/submissionguide/electronic-media.asp. This same list will serve as the list of acceptable formats for 

eFiling 7.0. Submitters will be able to choose a suitable format from that list unless they 

are instructed otherwise in specific instances by regulation or by direction from 

Commission staff. Audio and video files will be accepted only in waveform audio format 

(.wav) for audio content and either audio-video interleave (.avi) or quicktime (.mov) files 

for video content, except where submitters are specifically instructed otherwise. 

7. The NOPR requested comments on the possibility of discontinuing the practice of 

posting PDF versions of filings in eLibrary that are created by Commission staff. For the 

time being, we will continue this practice. As discussed in the NOPR, however, users 

should note that PDF conversions are not always accurate or complete and should not be 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 5 - 

considered authoritative. Some documents are not susceptible to conversion at all. The 

PDF versions will be provided on a “best efforts” basis, so in some cases no PDF version 

may appear in eLibrary, or there may only be a placeholder file indicating that a PDF 

version could not be generated. 

8. Finally, the NOPR requested comments on whether the Secretary should require 

documents created electronically by the filer using word processing software be filed in 

native applications or print-to-PDF format rather than an unsearchable, scanned format. 

The Secretary’s instructions will adopt this proposal. Scanned, non-searchable formats 

may be used only for documents that cannot, as a practical matter, be put into searchable 

formats. 

II. Discussion

A. Expansion of eFiling

9. As stated above, upon implementation of eFiling 7.0 the Commission will accept 

the electronic filing of all documents through the eFiling interface except for tariff filings, 

some forms4

 and documents submitted under protective orders. The comments received 

by the Commission on the expansion of eFiling were uniformly favorable. Some 

commenters urged us to continue to expand the range of submissions acceptable through 

 4

 See Note 2 infra. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 6 - 

eFiling. In some cases, commenters5

 urged us to accept tariff filings through the eFiling 

gateway, either on a permanent basis or on a temporary basis pending the institution of 

eTariff, which is the subject of a separate proceeding.6

10. We intend, as far as practicable, to continue decreasing our reliance on paper 

documents and to continue to upgrade eFiling capabilities in furtherance of the 

Commission’s responsibilities under the Government Paperwork Elimination Act.7

 At 

this time, however, the Commission will not accept tariff filings through the eFiling 

system. The eTariff rulemaking will remain the forum for addressing the electronic 

submission of tariff filings with tariff material. However, eFiling may be used to file 

material in tariff proceedings provided the filing does not contain tariff material. 

Examples include testimony filed as part of the hearing, Schedules G-1 through G-6,8

 and 

updated statements such as required by section 154.311 of the Commission’s 

 5

 Edison Electric Institute (EEI), pp. 4-6; Arizona Public Service Company 

(APSC), p. 3; Nevada Power Company & Sierra Pacific Power Company 

(Nevada/Sierra), p. 3. 

6

 Electronic Tariff Filings, Docket No. RM01-5-000, FERC Stats. and Regs. 

¶ 35,551 (2005). 

7

 Pub. L. No. 105-277, § 1704, 112 Stat. 2681, 2681-750 (1998). 

8

 18 CFR 154.313(j)(2) (2007). 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 7 - 

regulations.9

 Also, Natural Gas Act Section 7 certificate filings with pro forma tariff 

sheets may be filed under this version of eFiling 7.0.10

11. Some commenters11 expressed caution about the submission of confidential 

documents, including a desire for more detail about that function. There was some 

concern about the ability to alter a document’s security designation after it is filed.12 

Some commenters also requested clarification on the procedures for filing protected 

documents,13 including the procedures for documents submitted together with requests 

for protective orders.14

 9

 18 CFR 154.311 (2007). 

10 Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA), Appendix A, pp. 2 and 

3, requests clarification of which part of certificate and tariff filings would be filed 

utilizing eFiling 7.0, and which part would be filed under the eTariff procedures. The 

eTariff requirements are not complete, thus it is premature to speculate as to what the 

electronic filing process for filings with tariffs will be. At this time, however, tariff 

filings cannot be split between electronic and paper filings. No part of a tariff filing will 

be accepted through eFiling 7.0. 

11 EEI, pp. 6-7; Enbridge Energy Partners, L.P. and Enbridge, Inc. (Enbridge), 

pp. 3-5; Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. (MISO), pp. 2-3; 

Southern California Edison Company (SoCal), pp. 2-3; Williston Basin Interstate 

Pipeline Company (Williston Basin), p. 6. 

12 American Rivers, pp. 1-2. 

13 INGAA, p. 3; MISO, pp. 2-3; Williston Basin, pp. 6-7. 

14 EEI, pp. 6-7. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 8 - 

12. The anticipated procedure for the submission of confidential documents is as 

follows: When a user accesses the File Upload screen, the user will see tabs for three 

submission categories: Public, CEII and Privileged. The files uploaded to each of these 

tabs will automatically receive an accession number and be marked as Public, CEII or 

Privileged. The entire eFiling session will be secured so the documents during 

transmission will be encrypted. The following system checks will be performed during 

the eFiling process: 

• The file size will be checked to ensure the size is not greater than 50MB. 

• The file format will be checked to ensure it is a format that FERC can support. 

The acceptable file format list can be found at the following location: 

http://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide/electronic-media.asp. 

• Files will be checked for viruses. 

• The file name will be checked to ensure it is less than 60 characters including the 

period, spaces, and file extension (.doc, .xls, .pps, etc.). 

If for any reason, the files that have been uploaded fail to pass any one of the checks 

above, a message will be displayed identifying the issue and the user will not be 

permitted to proceed with the filing process. 

13. It will not be possible for a user, through eFiling, to change the designation of a 

file as public, privileged, or CEII after submission of the document. This will only be 

possible before submission, in case the user changes her mind or finds a mistake. Any 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 9 - 

subsequent redesignation request will have to be made by calling FERC Online Support 

or the eFiling Help Line. Users should continue to follow the Commission’s regulations 

governing submission of confidential documents.15 If a user needs to submit both a 

redacted and a privileged form of a document, the latter should be submitted as privileged 

and the former as public. 

14. In some instances, a document may contain portions that are privileged and other 

portions that constitute CEII. In such an instance, the CEII portions would be filed as 

CEII and the privileged portions would be filed separately and designated as privileged. 

If a portion of a document was both privileged and CEII, it would be filed as privileged 

because that is the higher security classification. 

15. Some parties request the ability to file privileged or CEII material in paper-only 

format. The Commission notes that this Final Rule only provides filers the option to use 

eFiling to make filings with the Commission. Filers who do not wish to use eFiling need 

not do so. To the extent that these commenters are requesting that the Commission 

permit filers to split their filings into an electronic component and a paper component, the 

Commission rejects this request. The Commission does not want to assume the 

responsibility of finding the paper and electronic components of a single filing and 

 15 18 CFR 388.112. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 10 - 

reassembling those components for uploading into eLibrary or internal distribution and 

analysis. Dual format filings create significant potential for errors and delays.16

16. To clarify, materials subject to protective orders should not be eFiled because the 

Secretary’s office does not put protected material into eLibrary, as opposed to material 

filed pursuant to Section 388.112 of the Commission’s regulations. The same restriction 

applies to confidential materials filed with a request for a protective order. 

B. Paper Copies

17. The NOPR proposed to continue to require paper copies of filings submitted 

electronically through eFiling 7.0, for instance, oversized documents such as maps, 

diagrams and drawings. The NOPR explained that due to the size of standard monitors 

and other hardware and software limitations, it was impractical at this time for the 

Commission to review certain documents in electronic form. The NOPR also raised the 

possibility of requiring paper copies for documents over a certain length, such as 500 

pages. Some commenters requested that “oversized documents” or “large documents” be 

defined as those documents larger than 8.5” x 11”,17 8.5” x 14”,18 or 8.5” x 17”.19 Others 

 16 The Commission notes that filers can make separate, free-standing, paper-only 

and electronic only filings in the same proceeding. 

17 Williston Basin, p. 7. 

18 Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E), p. 4. 

19 INGAA, p. 5. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 11 - 

asked for further clarifications, such as whether the paper requirement applies only to the 

oversized portions of documents that also have standard dimensions.20 Commenters were 

not in favor of requiring paper copies of long documents.21

18. The Secretary’s instructions will require paper copies in a specified number of 

documents larger than 11” x 17”. This is a standard dimension for “oversized” 

documents. If a document contains both oversized and standard dimensions, only the 

former need be filed on paper. Paper copies of long documents, i.e., documents longer 

than a specified number of pages, will not be required. Further specifics will be 

contained in the instructions to be issued by the Secretary. Over time, as we upgrade our 

capabilities, we expect to be able to reduce the necessity of filing paper copies.22

19. In response to the comments about the timing of submission of paper copies, we 

wish to state clearly the roles played by the paper and electronic copies. The revisions 

made in this Final Rule, in 18 C.F.R. 385.2003(c)(1), will provide that “filing via the 

Internet is in lieu of other methods of filing.” Thus, the electronic copy will be the 

 20 MISO, p. 3. PG&E, p. 3, asked for clarification of the timeframe and 

dimensions, while INGAA, pp. 4-5, asked that the paper copies be due after an accession 

number is assigned. SoCal, p. 3-4, urged that eFiling not be required where paper copies 

are submitted. This will necessarily be the case, because the Commission is not at this 

time making eFiling mandatory. 

21 INGAA, pp. 5-6; SoCal, p. 3; Nevada/Sierra, p. 5; PG&E, pp. 4-5; Williston 

Basin, pp. 7-8. 

22 See comments of Nevada/Sierra, p. 4. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 12 - 

“filed” copy. This will be the copy to which the Commission looks for matters such as 

determining timeliness. Paper copies will be required in some instances because they are 

currently necessary for FERC staff to carry out its functions. The Secretary’s instructions 

will specify the time by which the paper copies must be submitted. 

C. File Formats

20. The NOPR raised the possibility of discontinuing our practice of creating PDF 

versions of documents in eLibrary.23 In conjunction with this possibility, the NOPR 

requested comments on several alternative requirements for file formats of documents 

submitted through eFiling. The three alternatives noted were: requiring that all word 

processing filings be made in open file formats, such as text, html, rtf, or possibly PDF; 

permitting filings in open file formats as well as in certain Microsoft Office formats; and 

requiring that documents created with proprietary software be filed in the proprietary 

software along with an open source format. The NOPR also discussed the possibility of 

prohibiting the practice of filing non-searchable, scanned versions of documents created 

in native formats. 

 23 Some commenters referred to FERC-created Text documents as well as PDF 

documents. Users should note that FERC creates Text versions only of Commission 

issuances. It does not create such versions of documents submitted through eFiling. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 13 - 

21. Generally speaking, commenters opposed any requirement that documents be filed 

in more than one format.24 Some commenters favored retention of FERC-created PDFs25

or otherwise expressed a preference for some sort of open file format to maximize 

accessibility of documents to the public.26 Preferences between native and converted 

formats varied. Some commenters favored prohibiting the practice of scanning 

documents and filing them in non-searchable formats.27 Some noted that data-oriented 

documents such as spreadsheets lose much of their utility if not filed in their native 

formats.28 Others expressed a preference for filing scanned, non-searchable documents, 

in PDF format, in some cases out of concern that the documents could be manipulated. 29

22. Based on the comments received, we will continue to create PDF versions of 

submitted documents in eLibrary on a “best efforts” basis. This practice assures that 

 24 American Gas Association (AGA), p. 1 (word processing documents); EEI, pp. 

7-8; FirstEnergy Companies (FirstEnergy), p. 6-7; Nevada/Sierra, pp. 6-7; SoCal, p. 4; 

Williston Basin, pp. 8-9; INGAA, p. 8; Enbridge, pp. 7-8. 

25 AGA, pp. 5-6; EEI, p. 7-9; Bonneville Power Administration (Bonneville), p. 2; 

PG&E, pp. 5-6; American Rivers, pp. 2-3; U.S. Department of the Interior (Interior), p. 1; 

INGAA, p. 7; Nevada/Sierra, p. 6. 

26 American Rivers, pp. 3-4. 

27 AGA, p. 5; American Rivers, p. 4; Nevada/Sierra, p. 7; MISO, p. 4; SoCal, p. 4; 

EEI, p. 8. 

28 American Rivers, pp. 3-4. 

29 PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM), p. 2; MISO, p. 4; Interior, p. 1. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 14 - 

users who may lack specific proprietary software will be able to access documents most 

of the time. As noted above, however, some documents cannot be converted to PDF 

successfully and thus some conversions will not be entirely accurate or complete. The 

FERC-created PDFs should not be considered authoritative. Persons submitting 

documents through eFiling will have the option of filing in any format listed as 

acceptable by the Secretary. 

23. The Secretary’s instructions will require PDF files that are submitted to be 

produced in a manner that retains the ability to search the document (“print-to-PDF”), 

except in cases where it is impracticable for the filer to do otherwise. This is often the 

case with exhibits, for example. The search feature provides the Commission and the 

public access to tools that permit faster searches, increased accuracy, and enhanced 

analytical and processing capabilities that modern software technology provides.30

24. Submission of text documents will be permissible in native or in searchable 

format. We will not require submission of text documents in both native and open 

formats. In most cases, submission of text documents in their native formats is the 

simplest option. Not all users possess the same degree of technical knowledge. 

Requiring conversion of documents to open formats might serve as a barrier to the use of 

 30 The Commission notes that PG&E’s PDF posting is an excellent example of 

such a document: http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/doc_info.asp?document_id=13543136. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 15 - 

the eFiling system for some users, a possibility that runs counter to the underlying 

purpose of the system. 

25. Submission of spreadsheets in native format will be required. Some commenters 

expressed concern that spreadsheets in native format may contain formulas and other data 

that are confidential.31 One commenter argues further that formula and data may contain 

proprietary information, and that a native format requirement may contravene the 

Interstate Commerce Act prohibition against disclosing individual shipper information. 

That commenter believes the requirement to provide formulas may lead to less publicly 

available data.32 

26. The Commission addressed these issues before. In Order No. 582, the 

Commission required pipelines filing rate cases pursuant to Part 154 of the Commission’s 

regulations to file data and allocation and rate design formulas in electronic formats. The 

Commission found that formulas facilitate an understanding of the applicant’s positions 

and reduce the requirement for subsequent data requests. The Commission went on to 

note that the requirement was not to submit the whole rate case in spreadsheet format.33 

The same will be true here. The Commission is simply providing a different means by 

 31 MISO, p. 4; PJM Interconnection, p. 3; Enbridge, p. 8. 

32 Enbridge, p. 8. 

33Filing and Reporting Requirements for Interstate Natural, Gas Company Rate 

Schedules and Tariffs, Order No. 582, FERC Stats. and Regs., ¶ 31,025, p. 31,435 

(1995). 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 16 - 

which data requirements may be submitted, not changing the requirements themselves. A 

filer still may request confidential treatment. In such cases, the data sets and spreadsheets 

should be submitted in both privileged, unredacted form and in public, redacted form, 

pursuant to 18 C.F.R. 388.112.34 Depending on the application and the information being 

redacted, a redaction might be accomplished by filing a print to PDF or a scanned, 

searchable document, by converting a spreadsheet to values-only form, or by some other 

means. It would be up to the filer to choose an appropriate means of protecting its 

information in requesting confidential treatment under the Commission’s regulations. 

27. We do not agree with the concerns that documents may be altered. There is no 

reason to believe that users will be able to compromise the Commission’s system and 

alter files in eLibrary. Furthermore, if a user downloads a document from eLibrary and 

alters it for the user’s own purposes, the authoritative document will remain in eLibrary 

to refute the alteration. We also do not believe that the desire to include a scanned 

signature is sufficient to outweigh the greater usefulness of searchable documents. As 

stated in the NOPR, the Commission’s regulations provide for electronic signatures, so an 

image of a signature is not necessary for purposes of verification. For submitters who 

still see a need for an image of a handwritten signature, we note that it is possible to 

insert an image into a Word document. Moreover, filers that previously scanned 

 34 See Order No. 582 at pp. 31,412-413, 31,435. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 17 - 

documents into PDF format can produce a print-to-PDF searchable document and attach 

a single scanned signature page. 

D. Quick Comment and Documentless Intervention

28. The NOPR’s proposal to implement online forms that would allow users to 

intervene in Commission proceedings without filing separate documents and to submit 

comments easily in P (Hydropower Project), PF (Pre-Filing NEPA activities for proposed 

gas pipelines), and CP (Certificates for Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines) proceedings 

drew support from some commenters35 and opposition from a smaller number. Some 

commenters objected to these features as unneeded.36 Some commenters expressed 

concern that there should be some provision for prompt service of interventions and 

comments submitted through the proposed online forms.37 One commenter requested 

that users submitting quick comments be required to provide mailing addresses and other 

information.38 Another suggested that the quick comment feature be extended to include 

electric matters and rulemakings.39

 35 AGA, p. 4; American Rivers, pp. 4-5; Enbridge, p. 11; PG&E, pp. 7-8; Spectra 

Energy Transmission, LLC (Spectra) (quick comment only), p. 3; INGAA, pp. 9-10. 

36 FirstEnergy (quick comment only), pp. 3-5; Nevada/Sierra, pp. 7-8; EEI, pp. 14-

16. 

37 EEI, p. 15; Enbridge, p. 11; SoCal, p. 5. 

38 INGAA, p. 10. 

39 PG&E, p. 7. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 18 - 

29. Both features are sufficiently useful to justify their implementation. Documentless 

intervention, which will be available for all proceedings, will provide a simple method of 

intervening. The filer and text for all documentless interventions will be placed on 

eLibrary to permit challenges to intervention. We believe that the quick comment feature 

will make it easier for individuals who are not intimately familiar with Commission 

procedures to submit comments. This added convenience should primarily impact 

proceedings in which landowners may wish to comment, which is the reason we will 

restrict this feature to the proceedings listed in the preceding paragraph. We will 

consider expanding the availability of the feature in the future. We will not require quick 

comment submitters to include mailing addresses, a potential invasion of privacy that is 

not warranted. With respect to service of interventions and comments, these features will 

not involve changes to the Commission’s regulations. Any regulations governing service 

will continue to apply. Furthermore, the use of eSubscription should suffice to ensure 

that interested persons receive prompt notice of these submissions. 

E. Midnight Filing

30. Comments were mixed on whether to regard documents submitted through eFiling 

as having been filed on a specific day as long as the document is received on or before 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 19 - 

midnight Eastern Standard Time of that day. While some commenters favored the 

change,40 a larger number either favored it only under specified conditions or opposed it 

altogether.41 The objections included the personal hardship of late-hour filing, unfairness 

to paper filers, and the possibility that some filers would use the opportunity to file 

improper reply comments in response to comments filed earlier in the day. Some 

commenters suggested that if we moved the deadline, we should ensure that comments 

would not be visible to the public in eLibrary until the next day. Others were concerned 

that the eFiling system could be unavailable to a user facing a deadline after it was too 

late to make a paper filing. We also received suggestions that move the deadline to an 

intermediate hour, 42 such as 8 p.m. Eastern Time, as an accommodation to users in 

Western time zones. 

31. Based on the concerns raised in the comments, we will not at this time alter the 

filing deadline. It will remain at close of business, i.e., 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time. 

 40 APSC, p. 3; Bonneville, p. 2; Spectra, p. 4. 

41 AGA, pp. 6-8; INGAA, pp. 11-12; FirstEnergy, pp. 2-3; Mill, Balis & O’Neil, 

P.C., pp. 1-4; Phillip Marston, p. 1; PJM Interconnection, p. 3-4; PJM Transmission 

Owners, pp. 2-6; Nevada/Sierra, p. 8; MISO, p. 5; Williston Basin, pp. 9-12; Enbridge, 

pp. 11-13; EEI, pp. 16-17. 

42 PJM Transmission Owners, p. 6; SoCal, pp. 5-6. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 20 - 

F. Miscellaneous Comments

32. On August 22, 2007, the Commission hosted a technical conference that discussed 

the proposed changes to electronic filing and electronic file and document format 

instructions that are associated with this proceeding. The conference was conducted in 

two sessions. Session 1 presented an overview of the electronic filing submission 

instructions that will apply universally. Session 2 was divided into sections that 

discussed information that is specific to each industry. 

33. We received some comments on various technical aspects of documents submitted 

through eFiling, many of which were discussed during the technical conference.43 These 

comments will be taken into account by Commission staff44 in developing and revising 

the filing instructions that the Secretary will issue. The instructions for eFiling are an 

ongoing process, as staff often receives feedback on the system from users, including 

comments received informally during outreach efforts that give users an introduction to 

various aspects of FERC Online.45 The delegated authority the Commission is giving the 

Secretary to make changes to the various requirements to make an electronic filing 

 43 PG&E, pp. 6-7; PJM, p. 3; EEI, pp. 11-14. 

44 The Appendix contains the comments on the draft document manual that was 

discussed at the technical conference, as well as the Commission’s responses. 

45 One commenter, Enbridge, pp. 10-11, expressed concern about file naming 

conventions. Users should be aware that naming conventions will change with eFiling 

7.0, a change that will be spelled out in the Secretary’s instructions. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 21 - 

through the notice process will permit these instructions to be updated in a timely manner 

in response to user needs and changes in FERC’s technological capabilities.46

34. INGAA proposes that the pipeline’s Index of Customers report, already an 

electronic-only filing, be made through eFiling 7.0.47 The Commission agrees. 

35. INGAA and PG&E48 request that the Commission hold additional technical 

conferences to review both the proposed instructions applicable to electronic documents 

in general and existing electronic document instructions, and software techniques that 

may assist filers in creating documents that satisfy the filers’ objectives. Further 

conferences should not be necessary. The Secretary engages in outreach with the public 

to review new or existing electronic document or submission instructions. This outreach 

often generates feedback that Commission staff takes into account in managing the 

system. 

36. Some commenters made suggestions for improvements in the Commission’s 

online systems. These included requests that we take steps to ensure that each entity in 

the eRegistration system has only one registration49 and that we institute an automated 

 46 Williston, p. 5 

47 INGAA, App. A, p. 5. 

48 INGAA, pp. 2-3, App. A, pp. 4-8; PG&E, pp. 6-7. 

49 Enbridge, pp. 6-7. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 22 - 

service feature for service among participants.50 The problem of multiple registrations, 

specifically with entities being registered more than once under slightly different names, 

is an issue that we hope to address in the future. Similarly, an automated service feature 

would add value for users and we hope to be able to institute such a feature as we 

upgrade the system. 

III. Information Collection Statement

37. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations require OMB to approve 

certain information collection requirements imposed by agency rule.51 This Final Rule 

does not contain any information collection requirements and compliance with the OMB 

regulations is thus not required. 

IV. Environmental Analysis

38. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental Assessment or an 

Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may have a significant adverse effect 

on the human environment.52 Issuance of this Final Rule does not represent a major 

federal action having a significant adverse effect on the quality of the human 

environment under the Commission's regulations implementing the National 

 50 EEI, pp. 10-11. 

51 5 CFR 1320.12. 

52 Order No. 486, Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy

Act, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. & Regs. Preambles 1986-1990 ¶ 30,783 

(1987). 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 23 - 

Environmental Policy Act. Part 380 of the Commission's regulations lists exemptions to 

the requirement to draft an Environmental Analysis or Environmental Impact Statement. 

Included is an exemption for procedural, ministerial or internal administrative actions.53 

This rulemaking is exempt under that provision. 

V. Regulatory Flexibility Act

39. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA)54 generally requires a description 

and analysis of final rules that will have significant economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. This Final Rule concerns procedural matters and is expected to 

increase the ease and convenience of filing. The Commission certifies that it will not 

have a significant economic impact upon participants in Commission proceedings. An 

analysis under the RFA is not required. 

VI. Document Availability

40. 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 the Commission's Home Page 

(http://www.ferc.gov) and in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal 

business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street, N.E., Room 2A, 

Washington D.C. 20426. 

 53 18 CFR 380.4(1) and (5). 

54 5 U.S.C. 601-612. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 24 - 

41. From the Commission'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. 

42. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission’s website during 

normal business hours from FERC Online Support at 202-502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-

208-3676) or email 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. 

VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification

43. These revisions are effective [insert date 30 days from publication in the 

FEDERAL REGISTER]. Changes made by this Final Rule to the Commission’s 

eFiling system will be implemented at a later date to be announced by the Secretary. 

44. The provisions of 5 U.S.C. § 801 regarding Congressional review of Final Rules 

do not apply to this Final Rule because the rule concerns agency procedure and practice 

and will not substantially affect the rights of non-agency parties. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 25 - 

List of subjects 

18 C.F.R. Part 375

Authority delegations (Government agencies), Seals and insignia, Sunshine Act. 

18 C.F.R. Part 385

Administrative practice and procedure, Electric utilities, Penalties, Pipelines, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

By direction of the Commission. 

( S E A L ) 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 26 - 

 In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends Parts 375 and 385, 

Chapter I, Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows. 

PART 375—THE COMMISSION

1. The authority citation for Part 375 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. §§ 551-557; 15 U.S.C. §§ 717-717w, 3301-3432; 16 U.S.C. 

§§ 791-825r, 2601-2645; 42 U.S.C. §§ 7101-7352, 16451-16463. 

2. Section 375.302 is amended by revising paragraph (z) as follows: 

§ 375.302 Delegations to the Secretary.

* * * * * 

 (z) Issue instructions pertaining to allowable electronic file and document 

formats, the filing of complex documents, whether paper copies are required, and 

procedural guidelines for submissions via the Internet, on electronic media or via other 

electronic means. 

PART 385—RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

3. The authority citation for Part 385 continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. §§ 551–557; 15 U.S.C. §§ 717–717z, 3301–3432; 16 

U.S.C. §§ 791a–825v, 2601–2645; 28 U.S.C. § 2461; 31 U.S.C. §§ 3701, 9701; 42 

U.S.C. §§ 7101–7352, 16441, 16451-16463; 49 U.S.C. § 60502; 49 App. U.S.C. §§ 1–85 

(1988). 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 27 - 

4. Section 385.2001 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1)(iii) to read as follows: 

§ 385.2001 Filings (Rule 2001).

 (a) Filings with the Commission. (1) * * * 

* * * * * 

 (iii) By filing via the Internet pursuant to Rule 2003 through the links provided 

at http://www.ferc.gov. 

* * * * * 

5. Section 385.2003 is amended by revising paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) to read as 

follows: 

§ 385.2003 Specifications (Rule 2003).

* * * * * 

 (c) Filing via the Internet. (1) All documents filed under this Chapter may be 

filed via the Internet except those listed by the Secretary. Except as otherwise 

specifically provided in this Chapter, filing via the Internet is in lieu of other methods of 

filing. Internet filings must be made in accordance with instructions issued by the 

Secretary and made available online at http://www.ferc.gov. Provisions of this chapter or 

directions from the Commission containing requirements as to the content and format of 

specific types of filings remain applicable. 

 (2) The Secretary will make available on the Commission's web site a list of 

document types that may not be filed via the Internet, as well as instructions pertaining to 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 28 - 

allowable electronic file and document formats, the filing of complex documents, 

whether paper copies are required, and procedural guidelines. 

* * * * *
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 29 - 

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

Appendix

Comments on Document Manual

No. Commenter Manual ¶ Comment Response 

1 EEI, p. 12 

INGAA, 

App. A, p. 5 

4.B and 

4.E.c 

Consistent with Staff’s 

comments at the technical 

conference, the 

instructions should be read 

as not requiring, but only 

encouraging, the use of 

automatic table of contents 

and booking marking 

functions, and that not 

using these features will 

not result in rejection of 

the filing. 

The Commission agrees 

with regard to the general 

instructions. However, to 

the extent that there are 

regulations that require 

table of contents in a 

document, then these 

software features should 

be used. 

2 EEI, p. 12 4.C EEI requests clarification 

that spreadsheets do not 

need to be submitted in 

native file format if no 

formulas are included. 

The Commission clarifies 

that the instruction is 

written broadly. EEI’s 

proposal could be 

implemented in a manner 

that could inhibit the 

ability to view and analyze 

the data. The Commission 

will permit such 

submissions, but will 

monitor the manner in 

which filers use this 

flexibility. 

3 EEI, p. 12 4.D This instruction should be 

corrected to include both 

spreadsheets and text files 

in the list of exceptions, as 

they are covered by other 

instructions. 

EEI is correct. 

4 INGAA, 

App. A, p. 6 

4.E Clarify that it is acceptable 

to use the “Insert” feature 

The Adobe 

“Document/Insert” 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 30 - 

No. Commenter Manual ¶ Comment Response 

of PDF applications during 

the creation of an 

electronic file. 

function is acceptable. 

5 EEI, p. 13 5 There is no need to include 

a transmittal letter and, 

indeed, it should be 

discouraged, when a single 

document filing is made. 

Further, the Commission 

should encourage the use 

of a single electronic 

document file and require 

the use of the label 

“Transmittal Letter” only 

when multiple and 

separate electronic 

documents are filed. 

The Commission clarifies 

that the term “Transmittal 

Letter” as used in the 

instructions is solely for 

the purpose of the eFiling 

software to identify the 

requisite lead public 

document for filings 

consisting of several 

documents. It does not 

have the same definition 

as used in several sections 

of the Commission 

regulations. The contents 

of the “Transmittal Letter” 

electronic file can go 

beyond the content 

requirements of a 

transmittal letter as 

provided for in the 

regulations. 

6 Enbridge, 

pp. 10-11 

5-10 The Commission should 

clarify the effect that the 

file naming conventions 

will have on existing file 

naming conventions. 

The example provided by 

Enbridge is related to the 

Index of Customers. 

Consistent with finding 

that the Index of 

Customers may be eFiled, 

the Secretary will modify 

the acceptable electronic 

file list. 

7 EEI, p. 13 6 The word “tariff” should 

be removed from the 

instruction. 

It will be corrected. 

8 Enbridge, p. 

10; INGAA, 

App. A, p. 6 

6 The proposed 60 character 

limit needs to be reflected 

in other eFiling 

The Secretary will update 

other eFiling 

documentation to reflect 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 31 - 

No. Commenter Manual ¶ Comment Response 

documents, and the 

Commission should clarify 

whether characters other 

than alpha-numeric are 

permitted in file names. 

this and other changes. 

9 EEI, p. 13 6 and 8 The DOS file name 

character limit should be 

followed only by persons 

using DOS. Otherwise, 

more user-friendly names 

should be used. 

No change is necessary. 

10 EEI, p. 13 11 and 14 The instructions should be 

modified to reflect the 

format requirements of § 

385.2003. If the intent is 

to relax these regulations, 

then the regulations should 

be rewritten. If there are 

any documents to which § 

385.2003 does not apply, 

the instructions should 

note them. 

There are hundreds of 

different types of 

documents filed with the 

Commission. The 

instructions are meant to 

be flexible and not 

prescriptive for all 

possible documents. The 

Commission will monitor 

how filers’ documents 

appear and their utility. If 

changes to either the 

instructions or regulations 

are necessary, either the 

Secretary or the 

Commission will propose 

the necessary 

modifications. 

11 EEI, p. 14 12 Instruction should note 

that it does not apply to 

text filings, nor testimony 

or exhibits where the ALJ 

typically dictates header 

format. 

The Commission clarifies 

that the required 

information should be 

shown at least once at the 

beginning of every 

document. Readers 

should not have to rely on 

the Commission’s 

eLibrary to determine the 

source of the document. 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 32 - 

No. Commenter Manual ¶ Comment Response 

ALJs may impose 

additional requirements. 

12 EEI, p. 14 12 The use of “et al.” should 

be permitted with the 

company name. 

The Commission so 

clarifies. 

13 Enbridge, p. 

10 

12 With regard to the location 

of data in the headers and 

footers, clarify that if there 

is no specific instruction 

for the data’s location, it 

may be placed in any 

location in the header. 

See item 11 above. 

14 Enbridge, p. 

10; INGAA, 

App. A, pp. 

7-8 

13 Clarify the meaning of 

“hard-keyed” headers or 

footers in tab-delimited or 

native format data files, 

and whether this 

requirement is applicable 

to headers and footers 

created by text programs 

such as Word. 

Most native format data 

files and some spreadsheet 

files should not have hardkeyed headers or footers, 

as they disrupt the analysis 

and manipulation of the 

contents. The instruction 

is not relevant for text 

files, where the word 

processor normally 

manages headers and 

footers separate from the 

text content. 

15 EEI, p. 14 

PJM, p. 3 

17 EEI notes that the last 

sentence is in error and 

should be deleted; whereas 

PJM is concerned about 

the implications this 

instruction may have with 

regard to access to its 

internal data. 

EEI is correct, the last 

sentence should be struck. 

This moots PJM’s 

concern. 

16 EEI, p. 14 

INGAA, 

App. A, p. 

5-6 

28.d Clarify the use and 

appearance of hyperlinks 

in an electronic document, 

and whether their use will 

result in a rejection of the 

filing. 

The Commission clarifies 

that parties may not use 

hyperlinks as a means to 

include items as part of 

the record they intend to 

rely upon. Hyperlinks 
Docket No. RM07-16-000 - 33 - 

No. Commenter Manual ¶ Comment Response 

may be used as part of 

citations, and word 

processor conversions into 

hyperlinks were not the 

focus of this instruction. 

17 INGAA, 

App. A, p. 3 

passim INGAA notes that the 

Commission’s Part 154 

electronic document 

instructions date from 

1977[sic]. INGAA 

requests that those 

instructions be updated to 

reflect some of the 

flexibility offered by the 

new general instructions 

for electronic documents. 

While beyond the scope of 

this proceeding, INGAA 

should contact the 

Secretary with a list of 

suggested changes and 

procedures.