44890 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 146 / Friday, July 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

1 74 FR 66598 (Dec. 16, 2009). 

2For purposes of this release, a comment letter is 

referenced by: (i) Its author, (ii) its file number (as 

shown in the comment file associated with the 

Notice on the Commission’s Web site), and (iii) the 

page (if applicable). The comment file associated 

with the Notice is available at http://www.cftc.gov/ 

LawRegulation/FederalRegister/CommentFiles/09- 

034.html. 

3Albert Togut of Togut, Segal & Segal LLP 

(Trustee for Refco, LLC) (‘‘Refco Trustee’’) (CL01). 

4The Futures Industry Association (representing 

the commodity futures and options industry) 

(‘‘FIA’’) (CL02). 

PART 736—[AMENDED] 

■ 4. The authority citation for Part 736 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 

U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 2151 note; E.O. 

12938, 59 FR 59099, 3 CFR, 1994 Comp., p. 

950; E.O. 13020, 61 FR 54079, 3 CFR, 1996 

Comp., p. 219; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 

CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 

44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; E.O. 

13338, 69 FR 26751, May 13, 2004; Notice of 

August 13, 2009, 74 FR 41325 (August 14, 

2009); Notice of November 6, 2009, 74 FR 

58187 (November 10, 2009). 

■ 5. Section 736.2 is amended by 

revising paragraph (b)(3)(i), to read as 

follows: 

§ 736.2 General prohibitions and 

determination of applicability. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(3) * * * 

(i) Country scope of prohibition. You 

may not, without a license or license 

exception, reexport any item subject to 

the scope of this General Prohibition 

Three to a destination in Country Group 

D:1 or E:1 (See Supplement No. 1 to part 

740 of the EAR). 

* * * * * 

PART 740—[AMENDED] 

■ 6. The authority citation for Part 740 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 

U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 

E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp., 

p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 

Comp., p. 783; Notice of August 13, 2009, 74 

FR 41325 (August 14, 2009). 

§ 740.6 [Amended] 

■ 7. Section 740.6 is amended by 

removing the reference to ‘‘E:2’’ and 

adding in its place ‘‘E:1’’ in paragraphs 

(a)(1)(i), (a)(1)(ii), (a)(1)(iii), (a)(2)(i) and 

(a)(2)(ii). 

PART 748—[AMENDED] 

■ 8. The authority citation for Part 748 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 

U.S.C. 1701 et seq.; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 

3 CFR, 1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 

FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice 

of August 13, 2009, 74 FR 41325 (August 14, 

2009). 

■ 9. Supplement No. 2 to Part 748 is 

amended by removing the reference to 

‘‘E:2’’ and adding in its place ‘‘E:1’’ in 

paragraph (i)(2)(x) and twice in 

paragraph (o)(3)(i). 

Dated: July 23, 2010. 

Kevin J. Wolf, 

Assistant Secretary for Export 

Administration. 

[FR Doc. 2010–18733 Filed 7–29–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION 

17 CFR Part 190 

RIN 3038–AC90 

Operation, in the Ordinary Course, of 

a Commodity Broker in Bankruptcy 

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission (the 

‘‘Commission’’) is amending its 

regulations regarding the operation of a 

commodity broker in bankruptcy, in 

order to permit the trustee in such 

bankruptcy to operate, with the written 

permission of the Commission, the 

business of such commodity broker in 

the ordinary course, including the 

purchase or sale of new commodity 

contracts on behalf of the customers of 

such commodity broker, under 

appropriate circumstances, as 

determined by the Commission. 

DATES: Effective Date: The final rules are 

effective as of August 30, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert B. Wasserman, Associate 

Director, Division of Clearing and 

Intermediary Oversight, 202–418–5092, 

rwasserman@cftc.gov; or Alicia L. 

Lewis, Attorney-Advisor, Division of 

Clearing and Intermediary Oversight, 

202–418–5862, alewis@cftc.gov; 

Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 

1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20581. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On December 16, 2009, the 

Commission published a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking, which proposed 

to amend Regulation 190.04(d) to permit 

a trustee, under appropriate 

circumstances, to operate the business 

of a commodity broker in bankruptcy in 

the ordinary course, including the 

purchase or sale of new commodity 

contracts on behalf of the customers of 

such commodity broker (the ‘‘Notice’’).1

The proposed rule stated that the 

appropriateness of a particular set of 

circumstances would be determined by 

the Commission in its discretion, and 

such operation would require the 

written permission of the Commission. 

The public comment period on the 

Notice ended on January 15, 2010. The 

Commission received two comments 2

during the comment period: (i) One 

from the trustee of a futures commission 

merchant (‘‘FCM’’) that was sold as a 

going concern in bankruptcy3 and (ii) 

one from a futures industry trade 

association.4

Collectively, the comments raise the 

following five (5) concerns with the 

Notice: 

• The Commission’s proposed rule is 

premature. 

• The Commission staff should not be 

responsible for operating the FCMrelated business of an insolvent FCM/ 

broker-dealer. 

• The Commission’s proposed rule is 

overly broad as it does not specify all 

circumstances the Commission will 

consider in authorizing a trustee to 

operate the business of an FCM and 

provide the public with an opportunity 

to comment on these circumstances. 

• The Commission should work with 

the Securities and Exchange 

Commission and the Securities Investor 

Protection Corporation to develop 

uniform procedures to guide a trustee of 

an insolvent FCM/broker-dealer in the 

absence of legislative changes. 

• The Commission should grant 

immunity to a bankruptcy trustee, who 

is to operate the business of a 

commodity broker, in the limited 

operation of the business. 

The Commission will address below 

each of the five concerns. 

II. Concern That the Commission’s 

Proposed Rule Is Premature 

FIA stated that further action on the 

proposed rule is premature as the House 

of Representatives has passed a 

financial services reform bill which 

instructs the Commission, in 

coordination with the Securities and 

Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’) and 

several bank regulatory authorities, to 

recommend, within 180 days of the 

bill’s enactment, legislative changes to 

the federal insolvency laws to, among 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 146 / Friday, July 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 44891 

5See H.R. 4173, 111th Cong. § 3006 (2009); FIA 

CL02 at 3. 

6The Commission notes that many markets are 

open for trading five (5) days a week, twenty-three 

(23) hours a day. Therefore, an FCM with worldwide operations may be open and trading 

continuously between Sunday afternoon and Friday 

evening in the United States. 

7See In re: Refco, LLC, No. 05–60134–rdd, Docket 

No. 5 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Nov. 25, 2005); see also 74 

FR 66598, 66599 (Dec. 16, 2009). 

8See S.I.P.C. v. Lehman Brothers, Inc., No. 08– 

8119, Docket No. 3 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 19, 2008); see 

also 74 FR 66598, 66600 (Dec. 16, 2009). 

9The Commission notes that the permission 

granted to the trustee to operate the business in 

bankruptcy does not compel a clearinghouse or 

clearing broker to accept and clear the commodity 

broker’s trades. 

10FIA CL02 at 4. FIA noted that 43 of the 50 

largest FCMs are also registered broker-dealers. 

Therefore, SIPC would appoint the trustee for an 

insolvent FCM/broker-dealer. 

11 74 FR 66598, 66600 (Dec. 16, 2009). 

12FIA CL02 at 5. 

13 Id. 

others, clarify and harmonize the 

insolvency law applicable to entities 

that are both FCMs and broker-dealers.5

Moreover, FIA urged the Commission 

and the other regulatory authorities to 

perform a comprehensive review of the 

relevant provisions of the Bankruptcy 

Code (‘‘Code’’) and the Commission’s 

bankruptcy rules even if the bill does 

not become law. FIA believes that it 

would be inappropriate to adopt 

amendments to the Commission’s 

bankruptcy rules when such a review 

and recommendations for 

comprehensive reform are imminent. 

While the FIA comment was relevant 

when filed, the Commission notes that 

the provision referred to is no longer 

pending. Moreover, the amendments to 

Regulation 190.04(d) are narrowly 

designed to address the manner in 

which customer accounts are handled, 

under appropriate circumstances, in a 

commodity broker bankruptcy, which 

may occur at any time. Accordingly, the 

Commission will not defer the adoption 

of the final rule based on this concern. 

The Commission notes, that currently, 

even if a qualified transferee for an 

insolvent commodity broker is 

identified prior to a bankruptcy filing by 

a commodity broker, a number of steps 

are required, as a practical matter, after 

the filing of the bankruptcy petition and 

prior to the transfer. The completion of 

these steps requires a measurable period 

of time, and may occur while the 

financial markets are open and active.6

The adoption of the rule would 

benefit customers of a commodity 

broker in bankruptcy, under appropriate 

circumstances, by permitting those 

customers to manage their accounts 

during this time. In addition to the 

flexibility given to customers, the 

adoption of the rule would also provide 

the Commission with the latitude to 

handle unanticipated events. 

United States futures customers in the 

Refco 7 and Lehman 8 bankruptcies were 

well protected: Due to the timing of the 

filing (late in the day on Friday), and, 

in Lehman, action by the District Court, 

transfers of all customer accounts took 

place without a time period during 

which the markets were open but 

customers were unable to manage their 

accounts. These circumstances will not 

necessarily be replicated in a future 

bankruptcy. As a result, the Commission 

believes that the adoption of the rule 

would provide it with the flexibility and 

discretion necessary to protect 

customers by responding promptly to 

exigent circumstances in future 

bankruptcies.9

III. Concern That Commission Staff 

Would Be Responsible for Operating 

the FCM-Related Business of an 

Insolvent FCM/Broker-Dealer 

FIA noted the trustee selected by the 

Securities Investor Protection 

Corporation (‘‘SIPC’’) to oversee an 

insolvent FCM/broker-dealer may not 

have sufficient knowledge or experience 

to operate the FCM-related business of 

a FCM/broker-dealer.10 FIA further 

noted that if the rule is adopted, the 

Commission’s Division of Clearing and 

Intermediary Oversight (‘‘DCIO’’) would 

be responsible for operating the FCMrelated portion of the FCM/brokerdealer business by default. FIA 

questioned the appropriateness of DCIO 

undertaking this responsibility and 

whether DCIO staff had the requisite 

expertise to do so. 

In the Commission’s experience, 

trustees appointed by SIPC and the U.S. 

Trustees, and their legal counsel, have 

financial services industry experience 

and have engaged in formal and 

informal discussions with Commission 

staff regarding FCMs business as such. 

The Commission expects that such 

communications will occur in future 

bankruptcies. 

The Commission also notes that, 

pursuant to the rule under 

consideration, before a trustee can 

operate the business of a commodity 

broker in bankruptcy in the ordinary 

course (including entering into new 

contracts on behalf of customers), the 

trustee must obtain the written 

permission of the Commission. 

Moreover, the Commission would have 

the opportunity to determine if the 

circumstances were appropriate to allow 

such permission. The proposed rule 

does not mandate the Commission to 

grant this permission. Therefore, the 

Commission will consider the 

circumstances in deciding whether to 

permit the trustee to operate the 

commodity broker’s business in the 

ordinary course. 

IV. Concern That the Commission’s 

Proposed Rule Is Overly Broad as It 

Does Not Specify All Circumstances the 

Commission Will Consider in 

Authorizing a Trustee To Operate the 

Business of an FCM and Provide the 

Public With an Opportunity To 

Comment on These Circumstances 

In the Notice, the Commission stated 

that it may consider the following 

factors in authorizing a trustee to 

operate the business of an FCM: ‘‘(1) 

Whether the commodity broker has 

entered into an agreement providing for 

the imminent transfer of its customer 

accounts to an entity that is ready, 

willing and able to accept such transfer 

promptly; (2) whether the commodity 

broker has sufficient capital, at the time 

it becomes subject to bankruptcy 

proceedings, to continue operating its 

business in the ordinary course pending 

the transfer; and (3) whether a 

commodity broker will have sufficient 

capital, after the sale of its assets 

(including its FCM business), to 

continue operating its business in the 

ordinary course until all of its customer 

accounts have been transferred.’’ 11 FIA 

stated that the first and second factors 

‘‘should be viewed as necessary 

conditions precedent to the exercise of 

such authority.’’ 12 FIA further stated 

that ‘‘[i]f the Commission believes there 

are other circumstances in which it may 

be appropriate to authorize a trustee to 

operate the business of the FCM, the 

public should have an opportunity to 

comment on those circumstances.’’ 13

As each bankruptcy is unique, the 

Commission notes that future 

bankruptcies of commodity brokers may 

present new factors for consideration. 

Therefore, it would be impracticable for 

the Commission to present a 

comprehensive list of factors for public 

comment. The proposed rule seeks to 

address the distinctiveness of each 

bankruptcy by providing the 

Commission and trustees with a degree 

of flexibility in dealing with 

unanticipated events with rapidlychanging circumstances. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
44892 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 146 / Friday, July 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 

14See Securities Investor Protection Act of 1970 

§ 7(b), 15 U.S.C. 78fff–1(b). 

15Refco Trustee CL01 at 4 (discussing 28 U.S.C. 

959(a)). 

16 Id. 

17 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. 

18The proposed rule may apply, in the future, to 

other commodity brokers that execute trades and 

carry accounts for clearing on behalf of customers— 

namely, commodity options dealers and leverage 

transaction merchants. Currently, no such 

commodity brokers exist. Therefore, even if such 

commodity brokers would constitute ‘‘small 

entities’’ for purposes of the RFA, the proposed rule 

can have no current impact on such commodity 

brokers. 

19 47 FR 18618 (Apr. 30, 1982). 

20 Id. at 18619. 

21 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 22 7 U.S.C. 19. 

V. Recommendation That the 

Commission Work With the Securities 

and Exchange Commission and the 

Securities Investor Protection 

Corporation To Develop Uniform 

Procedures To Guide a Trustee of an 

Insolvent FCM/Broker-Dealer in the 

Absence of Legislative Changes 

FIA recommends that the 

Commission, SIPC and the SEC work 

together to develop uniform written 

guidance for a trustee of an FCM/brokerdealer. While the Commission has 

engaged in discussions with the SEC 

and SIPC concerning FCM/broker-dealer 

bankruptcies and contingency planning, 

and Part 190 of the Commission’s 

regulations contains extensive guidance 

for the conduct of an FCM bankruptcy 

(which is also applicable to a SIPC 

trustee in a SIPA proceeding14), the 

Commission believes that the 

development of specific uniform 

procedures may be impracticable due to 

the differences between the regimes and 

to the fact that each bankruptcy has its 

own unique set of facts and 

circumstances. 

VI. Recommendation That the 

Commission Grant Immunity to a 

Bankruptcy Trustee Limited to Its 

Operation of a Commodity Broker’s 

Business in Bankruptcy 

The Refco Trustee recommends that 

Commission expand the proposed rule 

to provide the bankruptcy trustee with 

relief from personal liability and 

immunity from any suit for personal 

liability for actions or inactions taken by 

the trustee in good faith in the operation 

of the commodity broker’s business. 

Specifically, the Refco Trustee notes 

that an unintended consequence of the 

proposed rule is that, ‘‘currently, a 

trustee in bankruptcy may be sued by 

third parties for acts or omissions in 

connection with the operation of a 

debtor’s business.’’ 15 The Refco Trustee 

expressed concern that the potential for 

such liability to a trustee would deter 

qualified individuals from being willing 

to serve in that capacity. 

The Commission does not have the 

authority to grant such immunity. 

However, as the Refco Trustee noted, a 

trustee in bankruptcy could seek a court 

order which includes such immunity.16

VII. Related Matters 

A. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(‘‘RFA’’) 17 requires Federal agencies, in 

promulgating regulations, to consider 

the impact of those regulations on small 

businesses. The final rule provides a 

limited exception to Regulation 

190.04(d)(2), by permitting a trustee to 

operate, with the written permission of 

the Commission, the business of a 

commodity broker in bankruptcy in the 

ordinary course, including the purchase 

or sale of new commodity contracts on 

behalf of the customers of such 

commodity broker. The final rule does 

not impose a regulatory burden on 

either a commodity broker prebankruptcy or a trustee post-bankruptcy. 

Moreover, the final rule will affect only 

FCMs (including certain foreign futures 

commission merchants).18 The 

Commission has previously established 

certain definitions of ‘‘small entities’’ to 

be used by the Commission in 

evaluating the impact of its regulations 

on such entities in accordance with the 

RFA.19 The Commission has previously 

determined that FCMs are not small 

entities for the purpose of the RFA.20

Accordingly, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

605(b), the Chairman certifies, on behalf 

of the Commission, that the final rule 

promulgated herein will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The Paperwork Reduction Act 

(‘‘PRA’’) 21 imposes certain requirements 

on Federal agencies in connection with 

their conducting or sponsoring any 

collection of information as defined by 

the PRA. The final rule promulgated in 

the release does not require the new 

collection of information on the part of 

any entities that would be subject to the 

final rule. Accordingly, for purposes of 

the PRA, the Commission certifies that 

the final rule promulgated in this 

release would not impose any new 

reporting or recordkeeping 

requirements. 

C. Cost-Benefit Analysis 

Section 15(a) of the Act 22 requires 

that the Commission, before 

promulgating a regulation under the Act 

or issuing an order, consider the costs 

and benefits of its action. By its terms, 

Section 15(a) of the Act does not require 

the Commission to quantify the costs 

and benefits of a new regulation or to 

determine whether the benefits of the 

regulation outweigh its costs. Rather, 

Section 15(a) of the Act simply requires 

the Commission to ‘‘consider the costs 

and benefits’’ of its action. 

Section 15(a) of the Act further 

specifies that costs and benefits shall be 

evaluated in light of the following 

considerations: (1) Protection of market 

participants and the public; (2) 

efficiency, competitiveness, and 

financial integrity of futures markets; (3) 

price discovery; (4) sound risk 

management practices; and (5) other 

public interest considerations. 

Accordingly, the Commission could, in 

its discretion, give greater weight to any 

one of the five considerations and 

could, in its discretion, determine that, 

notwithstanding its costs, a particular 

regulation was necessary or appropriate 

to protect the public interest or to 

effectuate any of the provisions or to 

accomplish any of the purposes of the 

Act. 

The Commission has evaluated the 

costs and benefits of the final rule 

promulgated in this release, in light of 

(i) the comments that it has received on 

the Notice and (ii) the specific 

considerations identified in Section 

15(a) of the Act, as follows: 

1. Protection of Market Participants and 

the Public 

In the event of the bankruptcy of a 

commodity broker, the final rule 

promulgated in this release would 

benefit the customers of such 

commodity broker, by providing them 

with the opportunity, under appropriate 

circumstances, to manage their accounts 

prior to the transfer of such accounts to 

a new commodity broker. 

2. Efficiency and Competition 

The final rule promulgated in this 

release is not expected to have an effect 

on efficiency or competition. 

3. Financial Integrity of Futures Markets 

and Price Discovery 

The final rule promulgated in this 

release will promote financial integrity 

of the futures markets by providing 

customers of a commodity broker in 

bankruptcy with the opportunity, under 

appropriate circumstances, to manage 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 146 / Friday, July 30, 2010 / Rules and Regulations 44893 

1Pipeline Posting Requirements under Section 23 

of the Natural Gas Act, Order No. 720, 73 FR 73,494 

(Dec. 2, 2008), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,283 (2008) 

(Order No. 720). 

2Pipeline Posting Requirements under Section 23 

of the Natural Gas Act, Order No. 720–A, 75 FR 

5178 (Jan. 21, 2010), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,302 

(2010) (Order No. 720–A). 

their accounts prior to the transfer of 

such accounts to a new commodity 

broker. 

4. Sound Risk Management Practices 

The final rule promulgated in this 

release is not expected to have a direct 

effect on the risk management practices 

of commodity brokers. 

5. Other Public Considerations 

Recent events, such as the Refco and 

Lehman proceedings, have 

demonstrated that the final rule is 

necessary and prudent. 

Accordingly, after considering the five 

factors enumerated in the Act, the 

Commission has determined to 

promulgated the final rules as set forth 

below. 

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Part 190 

Bankruptcy, Brokers, Commodity 

Futures. 

■ For the reasons stated in the preamble, 

the Commission proposes to amend 17 

CFR part 190 as follows: 

PART 190—GENERAL REGULATIONS 

UNDER THE COMMODITY EXCHANGE 

ACT 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 190 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 7 U.S.C. 1a, 2, 4a, 6c, 6d, 6g, 7a, 

12, 19, and 24, and 11 U.S.C. 362, 546, 548, 

556, and 761–766, unless otherwise noted. 

■ 2. Add new paragraph (d)(3) to 

Section 190.04 to read as follows: 

§ 190.04 Operation of the debtor’s estate— 

general. 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(3) Exception to Liquidation Only. 

Notwithstanding paragraph (d)(2) of this 

section, the trustee may, with the 

written permission of the Commission, 

operate the business of the debtor in the 

ordinary course, including the purchase 

or sale of new commodity contracts on 

behalf of the customers of the debtor 

under appropriate circumstances, as 

determined by the Commission. 

* * * * * 

Issued in Washington, DC on July 23, 2010 

by the Commission. 

David A. Stawick, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–18790 Filed 7–29–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6351–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 284 

[Docket Nos. RM08–2–002 and RM08–2– 

000; Order No. 720–B] 

Pipeline Posting Requirements Under 

Section 23 of the Natural Gas Act 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Final rule; order on rehearing 

and clarification. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission clarifies its 

regulations requiring major noninterstate pipelines to post daily 

scheduled volume information and 

other data for certain points, as well as 

its regulations requiring interstate 

pipelines to post information regarding 

the provision of no-notice service. These 

modifications include establishing the 

compliance deadline for major noninterstate pipelines after the effective 

date of this rule and clarifying the 

requirement for interstate pipelines to 

update posted no-notice service 

volumes. 

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will 

become effective October 1, 2010. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christopher Ellsworth, Office of 

Enforcement, Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, 888 First 

Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. 

(202) 502–8228. 

Christopher.Ellsworth@ferc.gov. 

Anna Fernandez, Office of the General 

Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426. (202) 502– 

6682. Anna.Fernandez@ferc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

Paragraph 

Numbers 

I. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 

II. Background ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 

III. Discussion ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 12 

A. Definition of Major Non-Interstate Pipeline ............................................................................................................................... 12 

B. Posting Requirements for Major Non-Interstate Pipelines ......................................................................................................... 19 

1. Point Design Capacity ............................................................................................................................................................ 20 

2. Timing of Posting Where Design Capacity is Known .......................................................................................................... 27 

3. Timing of Posting Where Design Capacity is Unknown or Does Not Exist ....................................................................... 30 

C. Compliance Deadline for Future Major Non-Interstate Pipelines ............................................................................................. 33 

D. Confidentiality of Data to be Posted by Major Non-Interstate Pipelines .................................................................................. 37 

E. Interstate Pipeline Posting of No-Notice Service ........................................................................................................................ 48 

IV. Information Collection Statement ...................................................................................................................................................... 55 

V. Document Availability ........................................................................................................................................................................ 57 

VI. Effective Date and Compliance Deadlines ........................................................................................................................................ 60 

United States of America Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission 

Before Commissioners: Jon Wellinghoff, 

Chairman; Marc Spitzer, Philip D. Moeller, 

John R. Norris, and Cheryl A. LaFleur. 

Pipeline Posting Requirements under Section 

23 of the Natural Gas Act, Docket Nos. 

RM08–2–002, Order No. 720–B, Order On 

Rehearing and Clarification 

Issued July 21, 2010. 

I. Introduction 

1. On November 20, 2008, the Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission 

(Commission) issued Order No. 720 

requiring interstate and certain major 

non-interstate natural gas pipelines to 

post limited information on publicly 

accessible Internet Web sites regarding 

their operations.1 On January 21, 2010, 

the Commission issued Order No. 720– 

A in response to requests for rehearing 

and clarification of Order No. 720.2


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES