This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

14235 

Vol. 72, No. 58 

Tuesday, March 27, 2007 

1To view the interim rule, go to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, click on the ‘‘Advanced 

Search’’ tab, and select ‘‘Docket Search.’’ In the 

Docket ID field, enter APHIS–2006–0171, then click 

‘‘Submit.’’ Clicking on the Docket ID link in the 

search results page will produce a list of all 

documents in the docket. 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service 

7 CFR Part 301 

[Docket No. APHIS–2006–0171] 

Gypsy Moth Generally Infested Areas; 

Addition of Areas in Virginia 

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Affirmation of interim rule as 

final rule. 

SUMMARY: We are adopting as a final 

rule, without change, an interim rule 

that amended the regulations by adding 

the Cities of Roanoke and Salem and the 

Counties of Craig, Giles, and Roanoke in 

Virginia to the list of generally infested 

areas based on the detection of 

infestations of gypsy moth in those 

areas. As a result of the interim rule, the 

interstate movement of regulated 

articles from those areas is restricted. 

The interim rule was necessary to 

prevent the spread of gypsy moth to 

noninfested areas of the United States. 

DATES: Effective on March 27, 2007, we 

are adopting as a final rule the interim 

rule published at 71 FR 66829–66830 on 

November 17, 2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 

Weyman Fussell, Program Manager, Pest 

Detection and Management Programs, 

PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road Unit 134, 

Riverdale, MD 20737–1231; (301) 734– 

5705. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

The gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar 

(Linnaeus), is a destructive pest of forest 

and shade trees. The gypsy moth 

regulations (contained in 7 CFR 301.45 

through 301.45–12 and referred to 

below as the regulations) restrict the 

interstate movement of regulated 

articles from generally infested areas to 

prevent the artificial spread of the gypsy 

moth. 

In an interim rule 1 effective and 

published in the Federal Register on 

November 17, 2006 (71 FR 66829– 

66830, Docket No. APHIS–2006–0171), 

we amended the regulations by adding 

the Cities of Roanoke and Salem and the 

Counties of Craig, Giles, and Roanoke in 

Virginia to the list of generally infested 

areas in § 301.45–3. 

Comments on the interim rule were 

required to be received on or before 

January 16, 2007. We did not receive 

any comments. Therefore, for the 

reasons given in the interim rule, we are 

adopting the interim rule as a final rule. 

This action also affirms the 

information contained in the interim 

rule concerning Executive Order 12866 

and the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 

Executive Orders 12372 and 12988, and 

the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

Further, for this action, the Office of 

Management and Budget has waived its 

review under Executive Order 12866. 

List of Subjects in 7 CFR Part 301 

Agricultural commodities, Plant 

diseases and pests, Quarantine, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Transportation. 

PART 301—DOMESTIC QUARANTINE 

NOTICES 

■ Accordingly, we are adopting as a 

final rule, without change, the interim 

rule that amended 7 CFR part 301 and 

that was published at 71 FR 66829– 

66830 on November 17, 2006. 

Done in Washington, DC, this 21st day of 

March 2007. 

Kevin Shea, 

Acting Administrator, Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service. 

[FR Doc. E7–5568 Filed 3–26–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 358 

[Docket No. RM07–6–001; Order No. 690– 

A] 

Order on Clarification and Rehearing 

Issued March 21, 2007. 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This order responds to four 

requests for clarification or, in the 

alternative, rehearing of the interim rule 

which the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission issued on January 9, 2007. 

The Commission issued the interim rule 

in response to the decision of the United 

States Court of Appeals for the District 

of Columbia vacating and remanding the 

standards of conduct rule, Order No. 

2004, as applicable to interstate natural 

gas pipelines, in National Fuel Gas 

Supply Corporation v. FERC, 468 F.3d 

831 (D.C. Cir. 2006). 

In this order, the Commission grants 

clarification that the standards of 

conduct for natural gas transmission 

providers under the interim rule apply 

only to natural gas transmission 

providers that are affiliated with a 

marketing or brokering entity that 

conducts transportation transactions on 

such natural gas transmission provider’s 

pipeline. The Commission also grants 

clarification that the definition for a 

marketing or brokering entity for a 

natural gas transmission provider is 

identical to the definition under the preOrder No. 2004 standards of conduct. 

With regards to the other issues for 

which clarification or rehearing is 

sought, the Commission will defer 

consideration of these matters in this 

proceeding and address them 

contemporaneously with the rulemaking 

proceeding in Docket No. RM07–1–000. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: This rule is effective on 

March 27, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stuart Fischer, Office of Enforcement, 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426, Telephone: 

(202) 502–8517, E-mail: 

stuart.fischer@ferc.gov. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES
14236 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 58 / Tuesday, March 27, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

1Standards of Conduct for Transmission 

Providers, Order No. 690, 72 FR 2427 (Jan. 19, 

2007); FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,327 (2007). (Interim 

Rule). The Commission issued an errata notice on 

January 22, 2007 that made corrections to paragraph 

18 and the regulatory text. 

2Standards of Conduct for Transmission 

Providers, Order No. 2004, FERC Stats. & Regs., 

Regulations Preambles ¶ 31,155 (2003), order on 

reh’g, Order No. 2004–A, III FERC Stats. & Regs. 

¶ 31,161 (2004), 107 FERC ¶ 61,032 (2004), order on 

reh’g, Order No. 2004–B, III FERC Stats. & Regs. 

¶ 31,166 (2004), 108 FERC ¶ 61,118 (2004), order on 

reh’g, Order No. 2004–C, 109 FERC ¶ 61,325 (2004), 

order on reh’g, Order No. 2004–D, 110 FERC 

¶ 61,320 (2005), vacated and remanded as it applies 

to natural gas pipelines, National Fuel Gas Supply 

Corporation v. FERC, 468 F.3d 831 (D.C. Cir. 2006) 

(National Fuel). 

3Standards of Conduct for Transmission 

Providers, 72 FR 3958 (Jan. 29, 2007), FERC Stats. 

& Regs. ¶ 32,611 (2007). 

4On March 1, 2007, the Commission issued an 

order extending the deadline for submitting initial 

comments by 15 days to March 30, 2007 and 

extending the deadline for submitting reply 

comments an additional 10 days to April 30, 2007. 

5CenterPoint incorporated by reference INGAA’s 

filing. 

6National Fuel, slip op. at 4. Order No. 2004 was 

not appealed as it applies to electric utility 

transmission providers. 

7 Id., slip op. at 25. 

8 Id., slip op. at 4. 

9 Interim Rule at P 2. 

10 Id. 

11 Id. at P 5 and 7. 

12Section 358.4(a)(6) of the Commission’s 

regulations states that ‘‘Transmission Providers are 

permitted to share risk management employees that 

are not engaged in Transmission Functions or sales 

or commodity Functions with their Marketing and 

Energy Affiliates.’’ 18 CFR 358.4(a)(6). The interim 

rule modified this provision by adding a second 

sentence that states, ‘‘This provision does not apply 

to natural gas transmission providers.’’

13Section 358.5(c)(4) of the Commission’s 

regulations states that ‘‘The Transmission Provider 

must maintain a written log, available for 

Commission audit, detailing the circumstances and 

manner in which it exercised its discretion under 

any terms of the tariff. The information contained 

in this log is to be posted on the OASIS or Internet 

web site within 24 hours of when a Transmission 

Provider exercises its discretion under any terms of 

the tariff.’’ 18 CFR 358.5(c)(4). The interim rule 

changed 18 CFR 358.5(c)(4) by renumbering it as 18 

CFR 358.5(c)(4)(i) and added a new provision in 18 

CFR 358.5(c)(4)(ii) as follows: ‘‘[N]atural gas 

Transmission Providers must maintain a written log 

of waivers that the natural gas Transmission 

Provider grants with respect to tariff provisions that 

provide for such discretionary waivers and provide 

the log to any person requesting it within 24 hours 

of the request.’’ 18 CFR 358.5(c)(4)(ii). 

Deme Anas, Office of Enforcement, 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426, Telephone: 

(202) 502–8178, E-mail: 

demetra.anas@ferc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Before 

Commissioners: Joseph T. Kelliher, 

Chairman; Suedeen G. Kelly, Marc 

Spitzer, Philip D. Moeller, and Jon 

Wellinghoff. 

Standards of Conduct for Transmission 

Providers 

I. Introduction 

1. On January 9, 2007, the 

Commission issued an interim rule 

promulgating interim standards of 

conduct regulations that govern the 

relationship between natural gas 

transmission providers and their 

marketing affiliates.1 The Commission 

issued the interim rule to respond to the 

decision of the United States Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia 

concerning the Standards of Conduct for 

Transmission Providers under Order 

No. 2004.2 The purpose of the interim 

rule was to repromulgate the standards 

of conduct not challenged in the 

National Fuel appeal in the interim 

while the Commission considered how 

to respond to the court’s decision on a 

permanent basis. Subsequently, on 

January 18, 2007, the Commission 

issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

(NOPR) in which the Commission 

proposed making the provisions of the 

interim rule permanent, as well as 

proposing other changes to the 

standards of conduct for natural gas and 

electric transmission providers.3 The 

Commission invited comments on the 

proposals in the NOPR, and comments 

are due on March 30, 2007.4

2. Four petitioners, the Interstate 

Natural Gas Association of America 

(INGAA), CenterPoint Energy Gas 

Transmission Company (CenterPoint), 

the National Fuel Companies (National 

Fuel) and Spectra Energy Transmission, 

LLC (Spectra) (petitioners or four 

petitioners), filed requests for 

clarification or, in the alternative, 

rehearing of the interim rule.5 INGAA 

and CenterPoint seek expedited 

consideration so that a decision is 

issued prior to the comment deadline 

for the NOPR. As discussed below, the 

Commission grants clarification that the 

standards of conduct for natural gas 

transmission providers under the 

interim rule apply only to natural gas 

transmission providers that are affiliated 

with a marketing or brokering entity that 

conducts transportation transactions on 

such natural gas transmission provider’s 

pipeline, and that the definition for 

‘‘marketing or brokering’’ is consistent 

with the definition of that term under 

the natural gas transmission standards 

of conduct prior to Order No. 2004. The 

Commission will amend the regulatory 

text accordingly to reflect these 

clarifications. With regards to the other 

issues for which clarification or 

rehearing is sought, the Commission 

will address those issues 

contemporaneously with the rulemaking 

proceeding in Docket No. RM07–1–000. 

II. The D.C. Circuit’s Decision in 

National Fuel 

3. In National Fuel, the court found 

that the Commission did not support the 

standards of conduct’s expansive 

definition of energy affiliates, vacated 

Order Nos. 2004, 2004–A, 2004–B, 

2004–C and 2004–D (collectively 

referred to as Order No. 2004) as applied 

to natural gas pipelines, and remanded 

the orders to the Commission.6

Specifically, the court rejected the 

Commission’s extension of the 

standards of conduct beyond pipelines’

relationships with their marketing 

affiliates to govern pipelines’

relationships with numerous nonmarketing affiliates, such as producers, 

gatherers, and local distribution 

companies (non-marketing energy 

affiliates), as well as extending the 

standards of conduct to affiliates that do 

not ship on their affiliated pipelines.7 In 

light of these findings, the court found 

moot the other issues raised on appeal.8

III. The Interim Rule 

4. In the interim rule, the Commission 

repromulgated the standards of conduct 

not challenged in the National Fuel 

appeal and adopted or revised other 

provisions of the standards of conduct 

that had been the subject of the appeal, 

while the Commission considers how to 

respond to the court’s decision on a 

permanent basis.9 The Commission 

intended the interim rule to eliminate 

any uncertainty about how the 

standards of conduct apply to natural 

gas transmission providers while the 

Commission developed a final rule.10

The Commission adhered to both the 

letter and the spirit of the court’s 

decision in National Fuel by fashioning 

an interim rule under which the 

standards of conduct do not apply to the 

relationship between natural gas 

transmission providers and nonmarketing energy affiliates, which is the 

aspect of the standards of conduct that 

the court found infirm.11

5. Although the DC Circuit did not 

consider petitioners’ other issues on 

appeal, under the interim rule the 

Commission treated each of those issues 

as if the court had also overturned those 

sections. Specifically, for natural gas 

transmission providers, the interim rule: 

(1) Omitted restrictions on shared risk 

management employees 12 and (2) 

revised the requirement for logging 

waivers of tariff provisions so that it was 

identical to the Order No. 497 

requirements.13 The Commission also 

incorporated modifications consistent 

with petitioners’ appeals of two issues 

discussed in the preamble of Order No. 

2004, but not codified in regulatory text. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 58 / Tuesday, March 27, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 14237 

14Former 18 CFR 161.3(k); Interim Rule at P 22. 

15 Mid-Tex Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. FERC, 822 

F.2d 1123 (DC Cir. 1987). 

16 Interim Rule at P 3–6. 

17 Id. at P 6. 

18Order No. 497, 53 FR 22139 (June 14, 1988), 

FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 1986–

1990 ¶ 30,820 (June 1, 1988); Order No. 497–A, 

order on reh’g, 54 FR 52781 (Dec. 22, 1989), FERC 

Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 1986–1990 

¶ 30,868 (Dec. 15, 1989); Order No. 497–B, order 

extending sunset date, 55 FR 53291 (Dec. 28, 1990), 

FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 1986–

1990 ¶ 30,908 (Dec. 13, 1990); Order No. 497–C, 

order extending sunset date, 57 FR 9 (Jan. 2, 1992), 

FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 1991–

1996 ¶ 30,934 (Dec. 20, 1991), reh’g denied, 57 FR 

5815 (Feb. 18, 1992), 58 FERC ¶ 61,139 (Feb. 10, 

1992); Tenneco Gas v. FERC (affirmed in part and 

remanded in part), 969 F.2d 1187 (D.C. Cir. 1992); 

Order No. 497–D, order on remand and extending 

sunset date, 57 FR 58978 (Dec. 14, 1992), FERC 

Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 1991–1996 

¶ 30,958 (Dec. 4, 1992); Order No. 497–E, order on 

reh’g and extending sunset date, 59 FR 243 (Jan. 4, 

1994), FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 

1991–1996 ¶ 30,987 (Dec. 23, 1993); Order No. 497–

F, order denying reh’g and granting clarification, 59 

FR 15336 (Apr. 1, 1994), 66 FERC ¶ 61,347 (Mar. 

24, 1994); and Order No. 497–G, order extending 

sunset date, 59 FR 32884 (June 27, 1994), FERC 

Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 1991–1996 

¶ 30,996 (June 17, 1994). 

19 Interim Rule at P 6. 

20Former 18 CFR 161.1 stated that ‘‘This part 

applies to any interstate natural gas pipeline that 

transports gas for others pursuant to subpart A of 

part 157, and subparts B or G or part 284 and is 

affiliated in any way with a natural gas marketing 

or brokering entity and conducts transportation 

transactions with its marketing or brokering 

affiliate.’’

21Section 358.1(e) of the Commission’s 

regulations states that the standards of conduct do 

not govern the relationship between a natural gas 

transmission provider and its energy affiliate. 18 

CFR 358.1(e). 

Specifically, the interim rule stated that: 

(1) Natural gas transmission providers 

could treat lawyers as permissibly 

shared employees; and (2) newly 

certificated natural gas pipeline 

transmission providers would not be 

required to observe the standards of 

conduct until they commence 

transmission services.14

6. The Commission issued the interim 

rule consistent with the three factors 

articulated in Mid-Tex Electric 

Cooperative, Inc. v. FERC (Mid-Tex) 15

for issuing an interim rule without prior 

notice and comment under the 

Administrative Procedure Act.16 First, 

the Commission stressed that the 

interim rule was not intended to serve 

as a permanent rule and that it was 

commencing a rulemaking proceeding 

through the issuance of a NOPR (issued 

nine days after the interim rule).17

Second, the interim rule followed the 

court’s opinion in National Fuel 

because, for natural gas pipelines, it 

eliminated the provisions of Order No. 

2004 that were subject to appeal and 

instead adopted provisions originally 

promulgated in Order No. 497, which 

was upheld in relevant part by the court 

in Tenneco Gas v. FERC.18 Third, the 

Commission issued the interim rule to 

avoid regulatory confusion. When the 

Commission adopted Order No. 2004, it 

rescinded the standards of conduct 

promulgated by Order No. 497. Because 

National Fuel vacated Order No. 2004 as 

applied to natural gas transmission 

providers, without the interim rule there 

would have been no existing regulations 

governing the relationship between 

natural gas transmission providers and 

their marketing affiliates. Such a 

situation would not have been in the 

public interest because the standards of 

conduct have for almost two decades 

played an important role in the 

Commission’s program to ensure nondiscriminatory access by pipeline 

customers to competitive natural gas 

markets.19

IV. Petitions for Clarification and 

Rehearing 

7. Petitioners filed requests for 

clarification or rehearing on five issues. 

First, the four petitioners seek 

clarification or rehearing as to whether 

the interim rule limits the application of 

the standards of conduct to natural gas 

transmission providers that are affiliated 

with a marketing or brokering entity that 

conducts transportation transactions on 

such natural gas transmission provider’s 

pipeline. The four petitioners contend 

that under Order No. 497, a natural gas 

transmission provider was not subject to 

the standards of conduct if its marketing 

affiliate did not engage in transportation 

transactions on its pipeline. INGAA 

states that if the Commission intended 

the interim rule to return to the preOrder No. 2004 standards of conduct 

requirements for natural gas pipelines, 

this condition must be included or the 

interim rule should not have been 

issued without notice or comment. All 

four petitioners request that § 358.1 of 

the interim rule be amended to include 

the language from the prior standards of 

conduct in former § 161.1, which 

limited the application of the standards 

of conduct to natural gas transmission 

providers which conduct transportation 

transactions with its marketing or 

brokering affiliates.20

8. Second, the petitioners assert that 

the Commission erred in defining 

marketing affiliate in § 358.3(k) of the 

Commission’s regulations. INGAA 

contends that the definition of 

‘‘Marketing Affiliate’’ in § 358.3(k) 

should treat natural gas pipeline 

transmission providers separately from 

electric transmission providers: for 

natural gas transmission providers, the 

definition of marketing affiliate should 

reference the definition of ‘‘marketing or 

brokering’’ in § 358.3(l). For electric 

transmission providers, the definition of 

marketing affiliate should reference the 

definition of ‘‘marketing, sales, or 

brokering’’ in § 358.3(e). This change, 

INGAA contends, would make clear that 

§ 358.3(e)’s definition of ‘‘marketing, 

sales or brokering’’ is not relevant to 

identifying the marketing affiliates of 

natural gas transmission providers. 

INGAA asserts that sales of electric 

energy were not part of the definition of 

‘‘marketing or brokering’’ under the 

former natural gas standards of conduct 

under Order No. 497, and thus should 

not apply to natural gas transmission 

providers under the interim rule. All 

four petitioners support an identical 

language change to the definition of 

marketing affiliate in § 358.3(k) to 

clarify this point. 

9. Third, the four petitioners contend 

that § 358.1(e) of the Commission’s 

regulations promulgated in the interim 

rule has the unintended consequence of 

including more entities as marketing 

affiliates than under the prior gas 

standards of conduct.21 Specifically, 

INGAA and National Fuel contend that 

an entity that falls under one of the 

exceptions to the definition of an energy 

affiliate under § 358.3(d)(6) of the 

Commission’s regulations could now be 

considered to be classified as a 

marketing affiliate of a gas pipeline. 

10. Fourth, the four petitioners 

contend that the Commission erred by 

amending § 358.4(a)(6) of the 

Commission’s regulations to remove, for 

natural gas transmission providers, the 

exception allowing transmission 

providers to share risk management 

employees with marketing and energy 

affiliates provided that the risk 

managers are not engaged in 

transmission functions or sales or 

commodity functions. INGAA contends 

it appealed this issue to the D.C. Circuit 

on the grounds that the Commission had 

imposed too many restrictions on the 

sharing of risk management personnel. 

As such, the four petitioners contend 

that the Commission should add a 

provision that expressly permits natural 

gas transmission providers to share risk 

management employees with their 

marketing affiliates. 

11. Finally, the four petitioners 

request that the Commission clarify the 

effect of restoring the language of former 

§ 161.3(k) of the Commission’s 

regulations, requiring natural gas 

transmission providers to maintain a 

waiver log, in new § 358.5(c)(4)(ii) of the 

Commission’s regulations. Specifically, 

they assert that the current provision (as 

well as the prior provision in § 161.3(k)) 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES
14238 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 58 / Tuesday, March 27, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

apply only to granting waivers under 

the tariff and does not apply to acts of 

discretion under the tariff. INGAA 

requests that the Commission clarify 

that a pipeline will be in compliance 

with the interim rule if the pipeline logs 

waivers, but not every act of discretion, 

in a situation when (1) a pipeline tariff 

expressly permits the pipeline to waive 

a specific tariff requirement; and (2) the 

pipeline waives a tariff requirement. 

V. Commission Determination 

12. As noted earlier, the 

Commission’s intent in promulgating 

the interim rule with respect to natural 

gas transmission providers was to 

restore the pre-Order No. 2004 

standards of conduct in order to avoid 

a regulatory gap once the D.C. Circuit 

issued its decision in National Fuel 

vacating Order No. 2004 as applied to 

natural gas transmission providers. The 

interim rule was intended to be a 

temporary measure while the 

Commission promulgated permanent 

regulations in light of National Fuel, a 

process the Commission started in the 

NOPR in Docket No. RM07–1–000. The 

Commission did not intend for the 

interim rule to create any new standards 

of conduct obligations or new 

exceptions for natural gas transmission 

providers that were not in place prior to 

Order No. 2004. 

13. As such, the Commission will 

grant clarification to revise the 

standards of conduct regulations under 

the interim rule to reflect the prior 

standards of conduct for natural gas 

transmission providers under Order No. 

497. Specifically, the Commission 

agrees with the requests to: (a) Revise 

§ 358.1 to include the language from 

former § 161.1 limiting the standards of 

conduct to natural gas transmission 

providers that conduct transmission 

transactions with their marketing or 

brokering affiliates; and (b) revise the 

definition of ‘‘marketing affiliate’’ in 

§ 358.3(k) to tie it to the definition of 

‘‘marketing and brokering’’ for natural 

gas transmission provider in § 358.3(l) 

(which uses the definition under Order 

No. 497). With respect to entities 

covered by the standards of conduct, 

these clarifications reflect the 

Commission’s intent that the scope of 

the interim rule track the scope of the 

standards of conduct requirements for 

natural gas transmission providers in 

Order No. 497. 

14. Accordingly, the standards of 

conduct will not govern the relationship 

of a natural gas transmission provider 

and its affiliate that engages in 

marketing or brokering activities (as 

defined in § 358.3(l)) if that affiliate 

does not conduct transportation 

transactions on that natural gas 

transmission provider’s pipeline. Also 

the standards of conduct do not govern 

the relationship between a natural gas 

transmission provider and its electric 

affiliate that engages in electric 

marketing, sales or brokering activities 

(as defined in § 358.3(e)) as long as that 

electric affiliate does not (i) Engage in 

natural gas marketing activities under 

§ 358.3(l) and (ii) conduct transportation 

transactions on the affiliated natural gas 

transmission provider’s pipeline. 

15. The Commission intends to 

address the remainder of the issues 

raised by the four petitioners 

contemporaneously with the rulemaking 

proceeding in Docket No. RM07–1–000. 

Unlike the requests for which the 

Commission is granting clarification, the 

four petitioners’ remaining requests do 

not seek to have the Commission restore 

the language of the standards of conduct 

for natural gas transmission providers as 

it existed prior to Order No. 2004. 

Instead, the four petitioners’ remaining 

requests seek rehearing by asserting that 

certain provisions in Order No. 2004 

which the court had vacated should be 

applicable to them or by seeking 

interpretations of language that the 

Commission restored from Order No. 

497. As such, the consideration of such 

issues goes beyond the scope of what 

the Commission intended in the interim 

rule, namely, to restore the rules in 

place prior to National Fuel until the 

current rulemaking proceeding is 

completed. The Commission believes 

that consideration of the remaining 

issues with the rulemaking proceeding 

in Docket No. RM07–1–000 will lead to 

a more efficient disposition of the four 

petitioners’ remaining contentions, 

because they relate to which provisions 

of Order No. 2004 should be retained 

and how they should be interpreted. 

Again, the Commission affirms that the 

clarifications made to the standards of 

conduct for natural gas transmission 

providers in the interim rule were not 

intended to create new standards of 

conduct requirements beyond the 

requirements prior to Order No. 2004. 

VI. Document Availability 

16. 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, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 

20426. 

17. 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. 

18. User assistance is available for 

eLibrary and the FERC’s Web site during 

normal business hours from our Help 

line at (202) 502–8222 or the Public 

Reference Room at (202) 502–8371 Press 

0, TTY (202) 502–8659. E-Mail the 

Public Reference Room at 

public.referenceroom@ferc.gov. 

VII. Effective Date 

19. These revisions in this order on 

clarification and rehearing are effective 

on March 27, 2007. 

List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 358 

Natural gas, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

By the Commission. 

Philis J. Posey, 

Acting Secretary. 

■ In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Commission amends part 358, Chapter I, 

Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, to 

read as follows: 

PART 358—STANDARDS OF 

CONDUCT 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 358 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717–717w, 3301–

3432; 16 U.S.C. 791–825r, 2601–2645; 31 

U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 7101–7352. 

■ 2. In § 358.1, paragraph (a) is revised 

to read as follows: 

§ 358.1 Applicability. 

(a) This part applies to any interstate 

natural gas pipeline that transports gas 

for others pursuant to subpart A of part 

157 or subparts B or G of part 284 of this 

chapter and is affiliated in any way with 

a marketing or brokering entity and 

conducts transportation transactions 

with its marketing or brokering affiliate. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. In § 358.3, paragraph (k) is revised 

to read as follows: 

§ 358.3 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

(k) Marketing Affiliate means an 

Affiliate as that term is defined in 

§ 358.3(b) or a unit that—

(1) With respect to a natural gas 

pipeline Transmission Provider, engages 

in ‘‘marketing and brokering’’ activities 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 58 / Tuesday, March 27, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 14239 

as those terms are defined at § 358.3(l); 

and 

(2) With respect to an electric 

Transmission Provider, engages in 

marketing, sales or brokering activities 

as those terms are defined at § 358.3(e). 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E7–5497 Filed 3–26–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 215, 225, and 253 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement; Technical 

Amendments 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD is making technical 

amendments to the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

(DFARS) to update references within the 

DFARS text. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 27, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Michele Peterson, Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, 

OUSD(AT&L)DPAP(DARS), IMD 3C132, 

3062 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 

20301–3062. Telephone (703) 602–0311; 

facsimile (703) 602–0350. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final 

rule amends DFARS text as follows: 

• Sections 215.404–71–3 and 

215.404–71–4. Removes obsolete crossreferences, and adds a reference to the 

TreasuryDirect Web site for interest rate 

information. 

• Section 225.7014. Updates a crossreference. 

• Section 225.7401. Updates the 

section to provide a more specific 

description of the Procedures, 

Guidance, and Information (PGI) text 

referenced in paragraph (a). 

• Part 253. Adds a reference to the 

DoD Forms Management Program Web 

site. 

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 215, 

225, and 253 

Government procurement. 

Michele P. Peterson, 

Editor, Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System. 

■ Therefore, 48 CFR parts 215, 225, and 

253 are amended as follows: 

■ 1. The authority citation for 48 CFR 

parts 215, 225, and 253 continues to 

read as follows: 

Authority: 41 U.S.C. 421 and 48 CFR 

Chapter 1. 

PART 215—CONTRACTING BY 

NEGOTIATION 

215.404–71–3 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 215.404–71–3 is amended 

in paragraph (b)(7), in the first sentence, 

by removing ‘‘(see 230.7101–1(a))’’ and 

adding in its place ‘‘(see http:// 

www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/rates/tcir/ 

tcir_opdirsemi.htm)’’. 

215.404–71–4 [Amended] 

■ 3. Section 215.404–71–4 is amended 

in paragraph (e)(2) by removing ‘‘(see 

230.7001)’’. 

PART 225—FOREIGN ACQUISITION 

225.7014 [Amended] 

■ 4. Section 225.7014 is amended by 

removing ‘‘236.274(a)’’ and adding in its 

place ‘‘236.273(a)’’. 

■ 5. Section 225.7401 is amended by 

revising the section heading and 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

225.7401 Contracts requiring performance 

or delivery in a foreign country. 

(a) If an acquisition requires 

performance of work in a foreign 

country by contractor personnel other 

than host country personnel, or delivery 

of items to a Unified Combatant 

Command designated operational area, 

follow the procedures at PGI 

225.7401(a). 

* * * * * 

PART 253—FORMS 

■ 6. Subpart 253.3 is added to read as 

follows: 

Subpart 253.3—Illustration of Forms 

253.303 Agency forms. 

DoD forms are available at http:// 

www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/infomgt/ 

forms/formsprogram.htm. 

[FR Doc. E7–5476 Filed 3–26–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–08–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Defense Acquisition Regulations 

System 

48 CFR Parts 225 and 252 

RIN 0750–AF34 

Defense Federal Acquisition 

Regulation Supplement; Prohibition on 

Acquisition from Communist Chinese 

Military Companies (DFARS Case 

2006–D007) 

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, Department of 

Defense (DoD). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD has adopted as final, 

without change, an interim rule 

amending the Defense Federal 

Acquisition Regulation Supplement 

(DFARS) to implement Section 1211 of 

the National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year 2006. Section 1211 

prohibits DoD from acquiring United 

States Munitions List items from 

Communist Chinese military 

companies. 

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 27, 2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Amy Williams, Defense Acquisition 

Regulations System, 

OUSD(AT&L)DPAP(DARS), IMD 3C132, 

3062 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 

20301–3062. Telephone (703) 602–0328; 

facsimile (703) 602–0350. Please cite 

DFARS Case 2006–D007. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

A. Background 

DoD published an interim rule at 71 

FR 53045 on September 8, 2006, to 

implement Section 1211 of the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2006 (Public Law 109–163). 

Section 1211 prohibits DoD from 

acquiring goods or services, through a 

contract or a subcontract with a 

Communist Chinese military company, 

if the goods or services being acquired 

are on the munitions list of the 

International Trafficking in Arms 

Regulations (the United States 

Munitions List (USML) at 22 CFR Part 

121). 

One source submitted comments on 

the interim rule. That source 

recommended addition of an exception 

to the policy that, before issuance of a 

solicitation, the requirements activity 

must notify the contracting officer 

whether the items to be acquired are on 

the USML. The exception would apply 

to items that include critical military 

technology, since those items are 

already subject to controls that limit 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with RULES