Notices. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

8,252 words·~38 min read·/register/2005/03/16/05-4947·

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. ER05-31-000, ER05-31-001, and EL05-70-000] American Electric Power Service Corporation; PJM Interconnection, LLC and Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.; Notice Instituting Section 206 Proceeding and Establishing Effective Refund Date March 10, 2005. On March 9, 2005, the Commission issued an order in the above-referenced dockets instituting a proceeding in Docket No.

EL05-70-000 under section 206 of the Federal Power Act. The refund effective date in Docket No. EL05-70-000, established pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act, will be 60 days following publication of this notice in the **Federal Register** . Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-1148 Filed 3-15-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP05-82-000] El Paso Natural Gas Company; Notice of Application March 10, 2005.

Take notice that El Paso Natural Gas Company (El Paso), Post Office Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado, 80944, filed in Docket No. CP05-82-000 on February 28, 2005, an application pursuant to section 7(b) of the Natural Gas Act

(NGA)and the Commission's Regulations, for authorization to abandon in place El Paso's Gila Compressor Station facilities, with appurtenances, located in Maricopa County, Arizona. El Paso states that this station which yields approximately 17,100 horsepower has become functionally obsolete and is no longer required in its natural gas service, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. This filing may be also viewed on the web at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call

(202)502-8659 or TTY,

(202)208-3676. Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Robert T. Tomlinson, Director, Regulatory Affairs, El Paso Natural Gas Company, P.O. Box 1087, Colorado Springs, Colorado, 80944, at

(719)520-3788 or fax

(719)520-4318. There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding. However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest. Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order. Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. *See* 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. *Comment Date:* March 31, 2005. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-1159 Filed 3-15-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP05-87-000] Kinder Morgan North Texas Pipeline, L.P.; Notice of Application for Blanket Certificate and Petition for Rate Review March 10, 2005. Take notice that on March 2, 2005, Kinder Morgan North Texas Pipeline, L.P. (KMNTP) pursuant to section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act, 15 U.S.C. 717(f)(c), and section 284.224 of the Commission's regulations, 18 CFR 284.224, KMNTP, a Texas Hinshaw pipeline company that is not subject to the jurisdiction of FERC, applies for a blanket certificate of public convenience and necessity authorizing interruptible transportation of natural gas in interstate commerce to the same extent and in the same manner that intrastate pipelines are authorized to engage in such activities, transactions and services pursuant to Subparts C and D of Part 284 of the Commission's regulations. KMNTP's corporate office is located in Houston, Texas and it is subject to the jurisdiction of the Railroad Commission of Texas. KMNTP is a Delaware partnership owned by Kinder Morgan Tejas Pipeline GP, LLC and Tejas Energy Partner, LLC. These two entities are subsidiaries of Tejas Natural Gas, LLC, which is a subsidiary of Tejas Gas, LLC. The ultimate parent of KMNTP is Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P. KMNTP currently provides services to one customer in the State of Texas. The pipeline's construction like its current operations is under the authority of the Railroad Commission of Texas. Any person desiring to participate in this rate filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* March 24, 2005. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-1147 Filed 3-15-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. CP05-83-000, CP05-84-000, CP05-85-000, and CP05-86-000] Port Arthur LNG, L.P. and Port Arthur Pipeline, L.P.; Notice of Applications March 10, 2005. Take notice that on February 28, 2005, Port Arthur LNG, L.P. (Port Arthur LNG) filed an application in Docket No. CP05-83-000 seeking authorization to site, construct and operate a liquefied natural gas

(LNG)terminal and associated facilities to import and deliver up to 1.5 Bcf per day of natural gas during Phase I, increasing to 3.0 Bcf per day during Phase II. The terminal and associated facilities will be located in the City of Port Arthur, Texas and in Jefferson County, Texas. The LNG terminal will provide LNG tanker terminal services to third party shippers who would be importing LNG from foreign sources. Port Arthur LNG made the request to site, construct and operate the LNG terminal pursuant to section 3(a) of the Natural Gas Act and Part 153 of the Commission's regulations. Also, take notice that on February 28, 2005, Port Arthur Pipeline, L.P. (Port Arthur Pipeline) filed in Docket No. CP05-84-000, an application seeking a certificate of public convenience and necessity, pursuant to section 7(c) of the NGA and Part 157, Subpart A of the Commission's regulations, to construct and operate a 70-mile pipeline leg and a 3-mile pipeline leg and related facilities to transport natural gas on an open access basis. In Docket No. CP05-85-000, Port Arthur Pipeline requests a blanket certificate under section 7(c) of the NGA and Part 157, Subpart F of the Commission's regulations to perform routine activities in connection with the future construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed pipeline. Finally, Port Arthur Pipeline requests authorization in Docket No. CP05-86-000 to provide the natural gas transportation services on a firm and interruptible basis pursuant to section 7(c) of the NGA and Part 284 of the Commission's regulations. These applications are on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. These filings are available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll free at

(866)208-3676, or for TTY, contact

(202)502-8659. In Docket No. PF04-11-000, Port Arthur LNG and Port Arthur Pipeline participated in a pre-filing National Environmental Policy Act review of the proposed project to identify and resolve potential landowner and environmental problems before the applications were filed. Any initial questions regarding these applications should be directed to Georgetta J. Baker, Sempara Energy , 101 Ash Street, HQ13D, San Diego, California 92101, Phone:

(619)699-5064, Fax:

(619)699-5027 or gbaker@sempra.com or Stacy Van Goor, Sempra Energy, 101 Ash Street, HQ8, San Diego, California 92101, Phone:

(619)696-2264, Fax:

(619)696-2500 or *svangoor@sempraglobal.com* . There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding. Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project, or in support of or in opposition to this project, should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the applicant. However, the non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests, and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. *See* , 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. *Comment Date:* March 31, 2005. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-1146 Filed 3-15-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 382] Southern California Edison Company; Notice of Authorization for Continued Project Operation March 10, 2005. On February 26, 2003, Southern California Edison Company, licensee for the Borel Project No. 382, filed an application for a new or subsequent license pursuant to the Federal Power Act

(FPA)and the Commission's regulations thereunder. Project No. 382 is located on the Kern River in Kern County, California. The license for Project No. 382 was issued for a period ending February 28, 2005. Section 15(a)(1) of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. 808(a)(1), requires the Commission, at the expiration of a license term, to issue from year to year an annual license to the then licensee under the terms and conditions of the prior license until a new license is issued, or the project is otherwise disposed of as provided in section 15 or any other applicable section of the FPA. If the project's prior license waived the applicability of section 15 of the FPA, then, based on section 9(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 558(c), and as set forth at 18 CFR 16.21(a), if the licensee of such project has filed an application for a subsequent license, the licensee may continue to operate the project in accordance with the terms and conditions of the license after the minor or minor part license expires, until the Commission acts on its application. If the licensee of such a project has not filed an application for a subsequent license, then it may be required, pursuant to 18 CFR 16.21(b), to continue project operations until the Commission issues someone else a license for the project or otherwise orders disposition of the project. If the project is subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is hereby given that an annual license for Project No. 382 is issued to Southern California Edison Company for a period effective March 1, 2005 through February 28, 2006, or until the issuance of a new license for the project or other disposition under the FPA, whichever comes first. If issuance of a new license (or other disposition) does not take place on or before March 1, 2006, notice is hereby given that, pursuant to 18 CFR 16.18(c), an annual license under section 15(a)(1) of the FPA is renewed automatically without further order or notice by the Commission, unless the Commission orders otherwise. If the project is not subject to section 15 of the FPA, notice is hereby given that Southern California Edison Company is authorized to continue operation of the Borel Project No. 382 until such time as the Commission acts on its application for subsequent license. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-1152 Filed 3-15-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EG05-35-000, et al.] SeaWest WindPower, Inc., et al.; Electric Rate and Corporate Filings March 9, 2005. The following filings have been made with the Commission. The filings are listed in ascending order within each docket classification. 1. SeaWest WindPower, Inc. [Docket No. EG05-35-000] On March 4, 2005, SeaWest WindPower, Inc. (SeaWest WindPower), located at 1455 Frazee Road, Ninth Floor, San Diego, California, 92108, filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission an amended application for determination of exempt wholesale generator

(EWG)status pursuant to part 365 of the Commission's regulations. SeaWest WindPower states it will be engaged directly and exclusively in the business of operating certain eligible facilities and selling electric energy exclusively at wholesale within the meaning of section 32(a) of PUHCA. SeaWest WindPower requests that the Commission determine that it is an EWG as it is currently owned and after consummation of the sale of 100 percent of the capital stock of its parent, SeaWest Holdings, Inc., to a wholly-owned subsidiary of the AES Corporation, AES Western Wind, LLC. SeaWest WindPower states that a copy of the amended application has been served on the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the California Public Utilities Commission, the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission, the Oregon Public Utility Commission, and the Wyoming Public Service Commission. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 22, 2005. 2. California Independent System Operator Corporation [Docket Nos. ER98-997-006, ER98-1309-005, ER02-2297-005, and ER02-2298-005] Take notice that on March 2, 2005, the California Independent System Operator Corporation

(ISO)submitted a filing in compliance with the Commission's Order issued February 11, 2005, 110 FERC ¶ 61,122. The ISO states that this filing has been served on all parties on the official service lists for the above-captioned dockets. In addition, the ISO states that the filing has been posted on the ISO Home Page. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 23, 2005. 3. FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC [Docket No. ER02-1838-004] Take notice that on February 25, 2005, FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC submitted a request to increase prior authorization to sell energy, capacity and ancillary services at market-based rates. FPL Energy Seabrook LLC states that copies of the filing were served upon the Florida Public Service Commission. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 18, 2005. 4. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. [Docket No. ER04-608-003] Take notice that on February 28, 2005, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.

(PJM)submitted for filing an updated status report of PJM's stakeholder process regarding expansion of PJM's behind the meter generation program to include generation associated with municipals' and cooperatives' electric distribution systems, originally filed on January 3, 2005, in Docket No. ER04-608-002. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 21, 2005. 5. Upper Peninsula Power Company [Docket No. ER05-89-002] Take notice that on March 2, 2005, Upper Peninsula Power Company (UPPCO) tendered for filing a Supplement to market-based rate application in preparation for MISO Day-2 Market Operations FILED ON January 4, 2005 in Docket No. ER05-89-001. UPPCO states that copies of the filing were served upon the official service list, PJM, MISO and the Michigan Public Service Commission. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 14, 2005. 6. Southwest Power Pool, Inc. [Docket No. ER05-490-001] Take notice that on March 7, 2005, Southwest Power Pool, Inc.

(SPP)submitted for filing an amendment to an executed service agreement for Firm Point-To-Point Transmission Service with Southwestern Public Service Company (Southwestern) previously filed with the Commission in Docket No. ER05-490-000 on January 26, 2005. SPP seeks an effective date of January 1, 2005, for the service agreement. SPP states that Southwestern was served with a copy of this filing. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 16, 2005. 7. New England Power Company [Docket No. ER05-530-001] Take notice that on March 2, 2005, New England Power Company

(NEP)tendered for filing an amendment to its January 31, 2005, filing in Docket No. ER05-530-000. NEP states that the amendment consists of Substitute Service Agreements for Network Integration Transmission Service under NEP's FERC Electric Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 9. NEP reiterates its request for an effective data of January 1, 2005. NEP states that copies of this filing have been served on Dominion Energy and regulators in the States of Massachusetts and Rhode Island. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 23, 2005. 8. Public Service Company of New Mexico [Docket No. ER05-664-000] Take notice that on March 2, 2005, the Public Service Company of New Mexico

(PNM)submitted for filing an interim invoicing agreement with respect to invoicing for coal deliveries from San Juan Coal Company among PNM, Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP), and the other owners of interests in the San Juan Generating Station covering the period from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2005. PNM states that the interim invoicing agreement is an appendix to the San Juan Project participating agreement (PPA), and effectively modifies the PPA for that same period. On February 8, 2005, Tucson Electric Power Company filed a certificate of concurrence in connection with the 2005 interim invoicing agreement for the San Juan Generating Station. PNM requests an effective date of January 1, 2005. PNM states that copies of the filing have been sent to the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission, the New Mexico Attorney General, TEP and each of the owners of interest in the San Juan Generating Station. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 23, 2005. 9. Barrick Goldstrike Mines Inc. [Docket No. ER05-665-000] Take notice that on March 2, 2005, Barrick Goldstrike Mines Inc. submitted an application, pursuant to section 205 of the Federal Power Act, for an order accepting its proposed market-based rate tariff and granting certain blanket authorizations and waivers of the Commission's regulations. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 23, 2005. 10. Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. [Docket No. ER05-667-000] Take notice that on March 2, 2005, the Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. (Midwest ISO) submitted an unexecuted Large Generator Interconnection Agreement among Montana-Dakota Utilities Co., Dakota Wind Harvest, LLC and the Midwest ISO. Midwest ISO states that a copy of this filing was served on the parties to this Interconnection Agreement. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 23, 2005. 11. New England Power Company [Docket No. ER05-668-000] Take notice that on March 2, 2005, New England Power Company

(NEP)submitted for filing an Interconnection Agreement between NEP and Bear Swamp Power Co. LLC (Bear Swamp Power) designated as a service agreement under ISO New England Inc.'s transmission, markets and services tariff, ISO New England Inc., FERC Electric Tariff No. 3. NEP states that the Agreement concerns the interconnection of the Bear Swamp Project, a hydro-electric generating unit, to NEP's transmission system. NEP states that copies of this filing have been served on Bear Swamp Power, ISO New England, Inc. and regulators in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 23, 2005. 12. New England Power Company [Docket No. ER05-669-000] Take notice that on March 2, 2005, New England Power Company

(NEP)submitted for filing an interconnection agreement between NEP and Bear Swamp Power Co. LLC (Bear Swamp Power) under ISO New England Inc.'s transmission, markets and services tariff, ISO New England Inc., FERC Electric Tariff No. 3. NEP states that the Agreement concerns the interconnection of the Fife Brook Development, a hydro-electric generating unit, to NEP's transmission system. NEP states that copies of this filing have been served on Bear Swamp Power, ISO New England, Inc. and regulators in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 23, 2005. 13. Vermont Electric Cooperative, Inc. [Docket No. ER05-670-000] Take notice that on March 2, 2005, the Vermont Electric Cooperative, Inc.

(VEC)tendered for filing its second annual formula rate update to its open access transmission tariff (OATT), FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume No. 1 and First Revised Rate Schedule FERC Nos. 4 and 6. VEC states that the OATT charges produced by the formula rates are applicable to the new VEC-specific Local Service Schedule of the ISO New England Tariff, FERC Electric Tariff No. 3, as well as the subsequent Local Service Schedule that may be filed with the Commission in the future. VEC states that a copy of this filing is being served on each of the customers under the OATT and Rate Schedule FERC Nos. 4 and 6, the Vermont Public Service Board and the Vermont Department of Public Service. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 23, 2005. 14. FirstEnergy Service Company [Docket No. ER05-671-000] Take notice that on March 2, 2005, FirstEnergy Service Company (FirstEnergy) Tendered for filing a Notice of Cancellation of a Generator Interconnection and Operating Agreement between FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company and American Transmission Systems, Incorporated (ATSI), designated as Service Agreement No. 290 under ATSI's FERC Electric Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1. ATSI requests an effective date of January 1, 2005. FirstEnergy states that a copy of the filing was served upon the parties to the Service Agreement No. 290. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 23, 2005. 15. PacifiCorp [Docket No. ER05-674-000] Take notice that on March 2, 2005, PacifiCorp tendered for filing the February 18, 2005, Joint Operating Agreement between PacifiCorp and Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS). PacifiCorp states that copies of this filing were supplied to the Public Utility Commission of Oregon, the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission, and UAMPS. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 23, 2005. 16. Black Hills Power, Inc. [Docket No. RT01-50-001] Take notice that on March 1, 2005, Black Hills Power, Inc., pursuant to the Commission's letter order issued February 8, 2005, submitted a report on its recent and current efforts with respect to regional transmission organizations. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 22, 2005. 17. First Electric Cooperative Corporation [Docket No. RT01-59-001] Take notice that on March 1, 2005, First Electric Cooperative Corporation, pursuant to the Commission's letter order issued February 8, 2005, submitted a report on its recent and current efforts with respect to regional transmission organizations. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. eastern time on March 22, 2005. Standard Paragraph Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant and all parties to this proceeding. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Linda Mitry, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-1136 Filed 3-15-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Notice of Settlement Agreement Modification and Solicitation of Comments March 10, 2005. Please take notice that the following settlement agreement modification has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection. The filing includes a request to amend an associated decommissioning application to reflect the settlement agreement modification. a. *Type of Application:* Modification of Settlement Agreement. b. *Project No.:* P-2342-011. c. *Date filed:* February 28, 2005. d. *Applicant:* PacifiCorp. e. *Name of Project:* Condit Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* On the White Salmon River in Klickitat and Skamania Counties, Washington. g. *Applicant Contact:* Jeff Lovinger, 825 NE. Multnomah, Suite 1500, Portland, Oregon 97232;

(503)230-7120. h. *FERC Contact:* Nicholas Jayjack,

(202)502-6073; *Nicholas.Jayjack@ferc.gov.* i. *Deadline for filing comments:* March 21, 2005. Reply comments due March 31, 2005. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Magalie R. Salas, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. The Commission's Rules of Practice require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. Comments may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. *See* 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ) under the “e-Filing” link. j. On October 29, 1999, PacifiCorp filed a settlement agreement, signed by 23 Federal and State agencies and non-governmental organizations, to decommission the Condit Hydroelectric Project commencing October 1, 2006. The 1999 settlement agreement, among other things, limits PacifiCorp's commitment to fund decommissioning to $17,150,000 (1999 dollars), of which a maximum of $2,000,000 would be for permitting and mitigation costs. Anticipating that permitting and mitigation costs will exceed $2,000,000, PacifiCorp signed a memorandum of agreement with the parties that modifies the 1999 settlement agreement to:

(1)Delay the commencement of decommissioning to October 1, 2008;

(2)increase PacifiCorp's commitment to fund decommissioning to $20,450,000 (1999 dollars); and

(3)increase the maximum amount of permitting and mitigation costs to $5,300,000 (1999 dollars). By this notice, we are providing an opportunity to submit comments concerning the modified provisions of the settlement agreement. k. A copy of the memorandum of agreement modifying the settlement agreement is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,

(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. You may also register online at *http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp* to be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-1151 Filed 3-15-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RM05-7-000 and AD04-13-000] Potential New Wholesale Transmission Services; Assessing the State of Wind Energy in Wholesale Electricity Markets; Notice of Final Agenda for Technical Workshop March 10, 2005. As announced in the Notice of Technical Workshop issued on February 1, 2005, and March 2, 2005, the staffs of Bonneville Power Administration

(BPA)and the Western Electricity Coordinating Council

(WECC)will participate with the staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

(FERC)at a workshop on March 16—17, 2005. The workshop will be held at the Doubletree Hotel & Executive Meeting Center Portland-Lloyd Center, 1000 NE Multnomah, Portland, Oregon 97232. The workshop is scheduled to begin at 9 a.m. and end at approximately 5 p.m.

(PST)each day. The goal of the workshop is to work with market participants to develop clear definitions for additional wholesale electric transmission services, *e.g.* , conditional firm transmission service, develop applicable pro forma tariff language that could be included in public utilities' open access transmission tariffs and address attendant issues. Attachment A of this Notice contains the final agenda for the workshop. Attachment B contains a table prepared by Commission staff that identifies and briefly describes the new transmission services proposed by other entities. Attachment C contains a proposal for a BPA “Conditional-Firm Product.” Panelists are strongly encouraged to coordinate among themselves prior to the workshop to minimize overlap in the information presented at the workshop by using the information attached to this Notice. The Commission will solicit comments related to the workshop to be filed in the captioned dockets by April 13, 2005. The comments will be available for review in the Commission's e-Library. The public will have the opportunity to file reply comments in response to these comments by April 29, 2005. The conference workshop is open for the public to attend, and preregistration is not required; on-site attendees may simply register on the day of the event. Capitol Connection offers the opportunity for remote listening of the conference via the Internet or a Phone Bridge Connection for a fee. Interested persons should make arrangements as soon as possible by visiting the Capitol Connection Web site at *http://www.capitolconnection.gmu.edu* and clicking on “FERC.” If you have any questions contact David Reininger or Julia Morelli at the Capitol Connection (703-993-3100). For more information about the conference, please contact Jignasa Gadani at 202-502-8608, *jignasa.gadani@ferc.gov.* Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-1145 Filed 3-15-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER05-428-000] New York Independent System Operator, Inc.; Notice of Staff Technical Conference March 10, 2005. Take notice that a staff technical conference will be held on Monday, March 21, 2005, at 10 a.m. (e.s.t.) and, if necessary, on Tuesday, March 22, 2005, at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in a room to be designated. As explained in the Commission's order directing staff to convene a technical conference, 1 the purpose of the conference will be to address specific issues relating to the appropriateness of the specific parameters to be used by the New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO) in calculating the Installed Capacity

(ICAP)Demand Curves for Capability Years 2005/2006, 2006/2007, and 2007/2008. Thus, staff is particularly interested in understanding how different assumptions for these issues will affect the Annual Reference Value, and potential interdependencies between different assumptions. Staff is looking for specific and factual recommendations on the parameters that should be used and why they are appropriate. 1 New York Independent System Operator, Inc., 110 FERC ¶ 61,201 (2005). Staff has identified the following specific issues: 1. Load Shapes • Does the 2002 load shape used in the Levitan analysis represent normal weather? If not, what load shape does represent normal weather? 2. Modeling Assumptions • Is it necessary to reflect recent new capacity additions in NYCA in the modeling of future net revenues? 3. Accuracy/Appropriateness of Peaking Unit Characteristics • Are the operating characteristics of the assumed peaking units (the 7FA and LM6000) used by Levitan reasonable? If not, what are reasonable operating characteristics? • Is the ability of these units to participate in ancillary services and day-ahead markets, particularly given their environmental permits, important in determining the parameters of the demand curve? 4. Peaking Unit Costs • Are the capital cost assumptions and financing periods used in the Levitan analysis reasonable? If not, what assumptions are reasonable? 5. Scarcity Component • Should the NYISO have included an adjustment for the scarcity component in their derivation of the Annual Reference Value, and if so, what adjustment is reasonable? • What were the assumptions used to develop the scarcity component? • Are the assumptions consistent with the Levitan analysis? 6. Local Siting Costs and Constraints • Should local costs and constraints be included in development of costs for a representative peaking unit? • Are Keyspan-Ravenswood's points concerning local siting issues, such as fixed gas transportation costs and local property taxes, correct? 7. Impact on Demand Curve Parameters • How do you reflect potential interdependencies between different assumptions? 8. Should the Zero Crossing Point be changed? If so, what should be the Zero Crossing Point, and why? 9. Is it reasonable to include an adjustment reflecting winter and summer capacity levels in the Annual Reference Value for NYCA Demand Curve? Is it reasonable to not include a similar adjustment for the New York City Demand Curve? Those persons interested in speaking at the conference should send a short e-mail to *David.Kathan@FERC.gov* listing their name, title, affiliation, address, and a short (one paragraph preferred) description of the topic(s) they wish to discuss. Staff will prepare an agenda for the conference based on the responses received. Staff will determine the identity and times allotted for speakers. We encourage parties sharing the same position on an issue(s) to coordinate their efforts and designate the fewest number of speakers possible to present their positions. The conference will be transcribed. Transcripts of the conference will be immediately available from Ace Reporting Company

(202)347-3700 or 1-800-336-6646) for a fee. They will be available for the public on the Commission's e-Library seven calendar days after FERC receives the transcript. The e-Library is accessible to the public on the Internet at *http://ferc.fed.us/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.* FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please send an e-mail to *accessibility@ferc.gov* or call toll free

(866)208-3372 (voice) or

(202)208-1659 (TTY), or send a FAX to

(202)208-2106 with the required accommodations. All interested parties and staff are permitted to attend the conference. For more information about the conference, please contact David Kathan at

(202)502-6404 or e-mail *David.Kathan@FERC.gov.* Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E5-1149 Filed 3-15-05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket Nos. RM02-4-003 and PL02-1-003] Critical Energy Infrastructure Information; Notice Soliciting Public Comment March 3, 2005. 1. On August 3, 2004, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (the Commission) issued a final rule in Order No. 649 amending its regulations for gaining access to critical energy infrastructure information (CEII). 1 The Commission issued Order No. 649 in response to public comments it had solicited on the operation of its newly-implemented CEII rules. In Order No. 649, the Commission committed to continue its monitoring and review of its CEII program and to examine the effectiveness of the rules within one year. In order to facilitate this review, the Commission is issuing this notice soliciting public comment on the effectiveness of its CEII process. 1 Critical Energy Infrastructure Information, Order No. 649, 69 FR 48386 (Aug. 10, 2004). Background 2. Although the Commission's CEII process was established in Order No. 630 in March 2003, 2 its efforts began shortly after the attacks of September 11, 2001 with the issuance of a policy statement in PL02-1-000 (Policy Statement). *See* Statement of Policy on Treatment of Previously Public Documents, 66 FR 52917 (Oct. 18, 2001), 97 FERC ¶ 61,130 (2001). In its Policy Statement, the Commission explained its removal of certain previously-public records from public access through the Public Reference Room, the Commission's document retrieval system, and the Internet. The documents affected by the Policy Statement included oversized maps and other categories of records likely to detail specifications of facilities licensed or certified by the Commission. The Policy Statement advised the public to request such information in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act

(FOIA)process detailed in 5 U.S.C. 552 and in the Commission's regulations at 18 CFR 388.108 (2004). 2 Critical Energy Infrastructure Information, Order No. 630, 68 FR 9857 (Mar. 3, 2003), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,140 (2003). 3. In January 2003, the Commission issued a notice of inquiry (the NOI) that raised issues for public comment and provided guidance to those filing information that might warrant non-public treatment under the Policy Statement. *See* Notice of Inquiry and Guidance for Filings in the Interim, 67 FR 3129 (Jan. 23, 2002), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 35,542 (2002). The NOI identified information the Commission was seeking to protect as “critical energy infrastructure information,” or “CEII,” and asked for public comment on how to define the scope of the term. The NOI also invited public comment on the Commission's legal authority to protect CEII (including applicability of FOIA exemptions), requester verification and access issues, use of non-disclosure agreements, and the process for requesting CEII. 4. After reviewing the comments received in response to the NOI, the Commission issued a notice of proposed rulemaking regarding CEII (the NOPR). 67 FR 57994 (Sept. 13, 2002); FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 32,564 (2002). The NOPR expanded the proposed definition of CEII to include detailed information about proposed facilities as well as those already licensed or certificated by the Commission. In addition, it proposed a new process that would restrict general public access to CEII while at the same time permitting those with a need for the information to obtain it in a timely manner. To that end, the NOPR proposed a supplement to the FOIA request process that would enable requesters to get access to CEII that was otherwise exempt from mandatory disclosure under the FOIA. Under the proposed process, requesters would have to provide limited personal information about themselves and their need for the information. This information would be considered in determining whether or not to grant the request. In addition, release would generally be contingent upon the requester agreeing to abide by the terms of an appropriate non-disclosure agreement. 5. On February 21, 2003, the Commission issued its CEII rule in Order No. 630. The Commission defined CEII to include information about proposed facilities and to exclude information that simply identified the location of the infrastructure. In addition, the Commission's related definition of “critical infrastructure” was broad enough to cover virtually all facilities within its jurisdiction. The Commission declined to limit protection to “high risk” projects or facilities, opting instead to include virtually all facilities and components, including computer systems that control or form part of the energy infrastructure. 6. After receiving a request for rehearing on Order No. 630, the Commission issued Order No. 630-A, denying the request for rehearing, but amending the rule in several respects. 3 Specifically, the order on rehearing made several minor procedural changes and clarifications, added a reference in the regulation regarding the filing of non-Internet public

(NIP)information, a term first described in Order No. 630, and added a commitment to review the effectiveness of the new process after six months. 3 Critical Energy Infrastructure Information, Order No. 630-A, 68 FR 46456 (July 23, 2003), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,147 (2003). 7. The first CEII review was initiated with a notice soliciting public comment that was issued on February 13, 2004. 4 After reviewing the comments received, the Commission made a few additional changes to the CEII process in Order No. 649. 5 The Commission changed the treatment of boundary maps from CEII to NIP. It also agreed that federal agencies would not have to file more than one request for CEII in one docket, and that agents of owners and operators of facilities could get information on their clients' facilities outside the CEII process with written authorization from the owner/operator. As with the earlier order on rehearing, the Commission committed to re-examine the effectiveness of its CEII rules within the next year. This order is intended to facilitate that review. 4 Notice Soliciting Public Comment, 69 FR 8638 (Feb. 25, 2004). 5 Critical Energy Infrastructure Information, Order No. 649, 69 FR 48386 (Aug. 10, 2004), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,167 (2004). Experience To Date 8. Since Order No. 630 became effective on April 2, 2003, the Commission has received many filings where the submitters have requested non-public treatment of documents because they contained CEII. In addition, Commission staff has designated certain internally-generated documents as CEII as well. Despite the amount of information that has been designated as CEII, the Commission has received relatively few complaints that the rules have impaired requesters' ability to participate meaningfully in Commission proceedings. As discussed below, the Commission has taken steps to minimize the harm to requesters in such cases. The Commission has not received any requests for rehearings of CEII Coordinator decisions to date. 6 6 Commission action on CEII requests is delegated to the CEII Coordinator, whose decisions are subject to rehearing. No requester has pursued a request for rehearing of any of the CEII decisions rendered to date. 9. Once a CEII request is received, the appropriate staff members locate the document requested and provide the document to legal staff with a recommendation regarding whether or not the information qualifies as CEII. In cases where the requested document was submitted to the Commission with a request for CEII treatment, the Associate General Counsel for General Law notifies the submitter of the request and gives the submitter a period of at least five days in which to comment on both release to the particular requester and the non-public nature of the document itself, including FOIA exemptions applicable to the document. Each time a document is requested, the submitter receives a notice and opportunity to comment on release to that particular requester. Commission staff reviews each requested document to determine whether it qualifies as CEII, verifies the requester's identity and need for the information requested, and seeks to obtain an appropriate non-disclosure agreement from the requester. Where the submitter of the document provides information regarding the request or requester, the staff factors such information into its recommendation to the CEII Coordinator. When the request involves a Commission-generated document, the CEII Coordinator releases the document to the requester with the order granting the request. In cases where the document has been submitted to the Commission, the CEII Coordinator issues a decision on release, but release of the document is delayed by at least five days to give the submitter notice prior to release of the document. Because of the required notice and comment period and the notice prior to release, it usually takes staff more time to process requests for documents submitted to the Commission than those that are internally generated. 10. The Commission has been largely successfully in its goal of processing CEII requests expeditiously. However, as discussed below, there have been some instances where the sensitivity of certain requested documents required additional research, and in one instance warranted a vote of the Commission to establish the appropriate standard for release of those documents. 7 In those instances involving the Weaver's Cove application to construct a liquefied natural gas facility in CP04-36-000, the process took longer than usual. Some of those requests were denied for failure to agree to the terms of a non-disclosure agreement specified by the CEII Coordinator. 8 In other instances, portions of one document were not released because the harm from release outweighed the requesters' need for the information. 9 In order to minimize harm to requesters receiving CEII in the Weaver's Cove proceeding, the Secretary issued a notice giving such requesters additional time in which to file comments on the draft environmental impact statement. 10 The Commission believes the steps it has taken have protected the due process rights of those involved in the proceeding. 7 Alfred Lima, 110 FERC ¶ 61,002 (Jan. 5, 2005). 8 Edward M. Lambert, Jr., *et al.* , 110 FERC ¶ 62,050 (Jan. 21, 2005). 9 *See, e.g.* , Lima, 110 FERC ¶ 61,002 (Jan. 5, 2005). 10 *Weaver's Cove Energy, L.L.C.,* 70 FR 4838 (Jan. 31, 2005). 11. The Commission received 79 requests for CEII in FY 2003, 304 CEII requests in FY 2004, and as of February 18, 2005, has received 162 CEII requests for FY 2005. As of February 18, 2005, there were 109 CEII requests pending. The vast majority of those pending were either filed after January 1, 2005 or are awaiting information from the requester, such as the non-disclosure agreement. The majority of the requests that have been denied were denied for failure to agree to the terms of a non-disclosure agreement. The other denials were either because of the extreme sensitivity of the information (in the case of one Weaver's Cove document), or because the information was subject to the attorney-client, attorney work product, or deliberative process privileges, or protected by statute ( *e.g.* , cultural resource locations). The Commission generally does not intend to release privileged information, regardless of whether or not it falls within the definition of CEII. In addition to formal requests for CEII under 18 CFR 388.113, Commission staff also received numerous direct requests from owners or operators of facilities and their authorized agents for documents containing CEII relating to their own facilities. Staff generally satisfies those owner/operator requests within a few days of receipt. 12. As noted in Order No. 649, the Commission remains committed to examining the effectiveness of its CEII rules, and therefore seeks public comments regarding its CEII process. This notice invites the public to comment on its experience under the CEII procedures and to suggest ways to improve the process. While the public is free to provide comments on any aspect of the Commission's CEII rules, the Commission specifically invites comments on the following issues: i. Is the CEII designation being misused or claimed for information that does not meet the definition? ii. Is there a need for the non-Internet public designation? Is it currently too broad? Are there location maps that should be available on the Internet? iii. Does it make sense for the Commission to protect (either as CEII or NIP) information that is readily publicly available, for instance in USGS maps? iv. Are there classes of information that are not appropriate for release even when a legitimate requester agrees to the terms of an appropriate non-disclosure agreement? *The Commission orders:* Comments regarding the Commission's CEII process should be filed with the Office of the Secretary within 30 days of the issuance of this order. By direction of the Commission. Linda Mitry, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. 05-4947 Filed 3-15-05; 8:45 am]

Connectionstraces to 13

Traces to 13 documents

CFR