For Energy Companies, Tagging Regulations Require a New Approach

Energy corporations will soon begin reporting quarterly and annual monetary and operational knowledge in XBRL format to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The XBRL format isn’t new for public companies which have been submitting reports with XBRL tags to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for years, however the taxonomy for tagging FERC types will be completely different.
In many respects, the burden ought to be lighter for FERC filers than SEC filers. Both will rely on the XBRL 2.1 Specification (which defines the fundamental constructing blocks of XBRL implementation in enterprise reporting) and the Arelle open-source XBRL validation engine. And a “fact” in each reports is represented by a worth (numeric or non-numeric), parts, date, unit, and accuracy.
But, as we element below, you’ll discover fairly a few variations with FERC’s XBRL requirements.
Standard schedules permit for extremely prescriptive tag assignments. That means no extra tagging from scratch. For example, the Workiva resolution for FERC reporting provides customers with pre-tagged varieties. These standardized pre-tagged varieties not only scale back preparation efforts considerably, additionally they reduce tagging inconsistencies—you can achieve greater data quality with much less effort.
Also, you are not required to tag every number. Notes to monetary statements require block tags solely. For instance, if disclosure notes are pasted into FERC Form 1 from the 10-K you file with the SEC, those can be tagged with a single textual content block for FERC. A bonus for customers of the Workiva answer for SEC reporting and the Workiva answer for FERC reporting: You will have the ability to hyperlink data in your 10-K to your pre-tagged Form 1 for consistency and effectivity.
If no applicable XBRL concept is available, the information is not to be tagged. However, if an applicable concept exists, FERC requires the data to be tagged (both numeric and nonnumeric). Note that some required info may be reported within footnotes for schedules.
Additionally, no extensions are allowed. Besides concepts, axes and members are additionally for use as offered. So, how do you report company-specific info, similar to officer names? In order to support reporting of company-specific data, FERC makes use of the typed dimension.
The bonus for Workiva users? Although FERC uses a unique technical specification, you will notice the Workiva FERC reporting solution offers the same look and feel as axis/member application within the Workiva solution for SEC reporting.
For FERC reporting, no customized labels or label roles are needed. Labels are auto-assigned by the official FERC renderer primarily based on type locations. Also, there are not any calculation to outline. In fact, customized calculations aren’t permitted. Validation rules will handle consistency checks.
Since FERC taxonomy assigns specific hypercube to each schedule, there isn’t a define construction to build. For customers of Workiva for FERC reporting, this is routinely managed by the Workiva platform.
Plus, fact ordering isn’t managed by the define and isn’t required. FERC makes use of a numeric component “OrderNumber” to control sequencing of company-specific info. Users of the Workiva answer for FERC reporting can simply assign row numbers in the type schedules as “OrderNumber” within the Workiva platform. Lastly, there are not any custom dates as you’re restricted to a small list of allowable values.
Going ahead, there isn’t any digital form to submit. Machine-readable data is the necessary thing focus. Although not in iXBRL format, FERC’s official type renderer will present standardized viewing for the submitted XBRL data.
Since most submitting knowledge to the SEC is public record, the SEC doesn’t offer this, but FERC does. Whether FERC will really approve a request for confidential data is another question! If you have an XBRL vendor for SEC reporting, ensure your vendor additionally helps FERC compliance, for the rationale that FERC taxonomy won’t be the identical as the SEC reporting taxonomy.
Whether you outsource XBRL tagging, choose an XBRL software program vendor, or invest the time and money to construct and keep an in-house answer for FERC compliance, understanding the similarities and differences between XBRL filings for FERC and for the SEC will be essential when evaluating your choices.
Percy Hung is director of structured knowledge initiatives and Peter Larison is supervisor of structured knowledge initiatives at Workiva. Workiva, Inc. is a worldwide software-as-a-service company. It offers a cloud-based connected and reporting compliance platform that allows the use of related data and automation of reporting throughout finance, accounting, threat, and compliance. For more information, visit

Leave a Comment