Tap any paragraph to write a margin note. Your notes collect in the Desk below the text and file under cases with @. The side-by-side margin rail opens on a larger screen.

§
Marginalia
Code · REGISTER · 2006-01-10 · National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce · Notices

Notices. Notice; modification of scientific research permit

21,250 words·~97 min read·/register/2006/01/10/06-176

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

BILLING CODE 3510-22-S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [I.D. 123005E] Endangered Species; Permit No. 1227 AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce. ACTION: Notice; modification of scientific research permit. SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a request for modification of scientific research Permit No. 1227 submitted by the National Marine Fisheries Service, Southwest Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC) has been granted.
ADDRESSES: The modification and related documents are available for review upon written request or by appointment in the following office(s): Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone (301)713-2289, fax (301)427-2521; and Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213; phone (562)980-4001; fax (562)980-4018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patrick Opay or Kate Swails, (301)713-2289. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The requested amendment has been granted under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 *et seq.* ) and the provisions of 50 CFR 222.306 of the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened fish and wildlife (50 CFR 222-226). The modification extends the expiration date of the permit from December 31, 2005, to December 31, 2006, for takes of leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea) sea turtles.
The permit allows the SWFSC to conduct sea turtle research in the Pacific Ocean. The purpose of the research is to identify critical forage habitats, genetic stock structure, migratory corridors, and potential fishery impacts on this species in the Pacific Issuance of this modification, as required by the ESA, was based on a finding that such permit:
(1)was applied for in good faith;
(2)will not operate to the disadvantage of any threatened and endangered species; and
(3)is consistent with the purposes and policies set forth in section 2 of the ESA. Dated: January 5, 2006. Steve Leathery, Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service. [FR Doc. E6-128 Filed 1-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-S CORPORATION FOR NATIONAL AND COMMUNITY SERVICE NCCC Advisory Board Meeting The Corporation for National and Community Service gives notice under Public Law 92-463 (Federal Advisory Committee Act) that it will hold a meeting of the AmeriCorps National Civilian Community Corps
(NCCC)Advisory Board. The Board advises the Director of the NCCC concerning the administration of the program and assists in the development and administration of the Corps: *Date and Time:* Thursday, January 19, 2006, 9 a.m.-2 p.m. *Place:* Corporation for National and Community Service, 1201 New York Avenue, NW., 8th Floor, Room 8312, Washington, DC 20525. *Status:* Open. *Matters to be Considered:* The Board will discuss a proposal that establishes two new committees of the Advisory Board, which should result in the Board being in a position to better support and advance the overall goals and objectives of the NCCC. These two committees will be concerned primarily with Board development and strategic initiatives, respectively. *Accommodations:* Upon request, meeting notices will be made available in alternative formats to accommodate visual and hearing impairments. Anyone who needs an interpreter or other accommodation should notify the Corporation's contact person by 5 p.m. Friday, January 13, 2006. *For Further Information Contact:* Ms. Erma Hodge, Executive Assistant, NCCC, Corporation for National and Community Service, 10th Floor, 202-606-6696. E-mail: *ehodge@cns.gov.* Dated: January 4, 2006. Merlene Mazyck, Director, National Civilian Community Corps. [FR Doc. E6-92 Filed 1-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6050-$$-P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Department of Education. SUMMARY: The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of the Chief Information Officer invites comments on the submission for OMB review as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before February 9, 2006. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Rachel Potter, Desk Officer, Department of Education, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Room 10222, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503 or faxed to
(202)395-6974. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)provide interested Federal agencies and the public an early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. OMB may amend or waive the requirement for public consultation to the extent that public participation in the approval process would defeat the purpose of the information collection, violate State or Federal law, or substantially interfere with any agency's ability to perform its statutory obligations. The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of the Chief Information Officer, publishes that notice containing proposed information collection requests prior to submission of these requests to OMB. Each proposed information collection, grouped by office, contains the following:
(1)Type of review requested, e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or reinstatement;
(2)Title;
(3)Summary of the collection;
(4)Description of the need for, and proposed use of, the information;
(5)Respondents and frequency of collection; and
(6)Reporting and/or Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites public comment. Dated: January 3, 2006. Angela C. Arrington, IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of the Chief Information Officer. Office of Elementary and Secondary Education *Type of Review:* Extension. *Title:* Local-Flex Application. *Frequency:* One time. *Affected Public:* State, Local, or Tribal Gov't, SEAs or LEAs. *Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden:* Responses: 80. Burden Hours: 6,400. *Abstract:* Application for local educational agencies
(LEAs)seeking to enter into local flexibility demonstration agreements (“Local-Flex” agreements). By statute, the Department can select 80 LEAs through a competitive process with which to enter into Local-Flex agreements. These agreements give LEAs the flexibility to consolidate certain Federal education funds and to use those funds for any educational purpose permitted under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act
(ESEA)in order to meet the State's definition of adequate yearly progress (AYP). Requests for copies of the information collection submission for OMB review may be accessed from *http://edicsweb.ed.gov,* by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 2914. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments” to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Potomac Center, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20202-4700. Requests may also be electronically mailed to *IC_DocketMgr@ed.gov* or faxed to 202-245-6623. Please specify the complete title of the information collection when making your request. Comments regarding burden and/or the collection activity requirements should be electronically mailed to the e-mail address *IC_DocketMgr@ed.gov.* Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD)may call the Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS)at 1-800-877-8339. [FR Doc. E6-79 Filed 1-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Notice of Proposed Information Collection Requests AGENCY: Department of Education. SUMMARY: The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of the Chief Information Officer, invites comments on the proposed information collection requests as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before March 13, 2006. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)provide interested Federal agencies and the public an early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. OMB may amend or waive the requirement for public consultation to the extent that public participation in the approval process would defeat the purpose of the information collection, violate State or Federal law, or substantially interfere with any agency's ability to perform its statutory obligations. The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of the Chief Information Officer, publishes that notice containing proposed information collection requests prior to submission of these requests to OMB. Each proposed information collection, grouped by office, contains the following:
(1)Type of review requested, e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or reinstatement;
(2)Title;
(3)Summary of the collection;
(4)Description of the need for, and proposed use of, the information;
(5)Respondents and frequency of collection; and
(6)Reporting and/or Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites public comment. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues:
(1)Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department;
(2)will this information be processed and used in a timely manner;
(3)is the estimate of burden accurate;
(4)how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(5)how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Dated: January 3, 2006. Angela C. Arrington, IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of the Chief Information Officer. Federal Student Aid *Type of Review:* Revision. *Title:* Teacher Cancellation Low Income Directory. *Frequency:* Annually. *Affected Public:* Individuals or household; State, Local, or Tribal Gov't, SEAs or LEAs. *Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden:* Responses: 57. Burden Hours: 6,983. *Abstract:* There are 57 State Agencies that contribute to the development of a directory of elementary and secondary schools which qualify for the teacher cancellation benefit. The directory allows post-secondary institutions to determine whether or not a teacher who received a Federal Perkins Loan, Direct loan, or Federal Family Education Loan at their school is eligible to receive a loan cancellation as provided under Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Requests for copies of the proposed information collection request may be accessed from *http://edicsweb.ed.gov,* by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 2964. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments” to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Potomac Center, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20202-4700. Requests may also be electronically mailed to *IC_DocketMgr@ed.gov* or faxed to 202-245-6623. Please specify the complete title of the information collection when making your request. Comments regarding burden and/or the collection activity requirements should be electronically mailed to *IC_DocketMgr@ed.gov.* Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD)may call the Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS)at 1-800-877-8339. [FR Doc. E6-80 Filed 1-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Notice of Proposed Information Collection Requests AGENCY: Department of Education. SUMMARY: The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of the Chief Information Officer, invites comments on the proposed information collection requests as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before March 13, 2006. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)provide interested Federal agencies and the public an early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. OMB may amend or waive the requirement for public consultation to the extent that public participation in the approval process would defeat the purpose of the information collection, violate State or Federal law, or substantially interfere with any agency's ability to perform its statutory obligations. The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of the Chief Information Officer, publishes that notice containing proposed information collection requests prior to submission of these requests to OMB. Each proposed information collection, grouped by office, contains the following:
(1)Type of review requested, e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or reinstatement;
(2)Title;
(3)Summary of the collection;
(4)Description of the need for, and proposed use of, the information;
(5)Respondents and frequency of collection; and
(6)Reporting and/or Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites public comment. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues:
(1)Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department;
(2)will this information be processed and used in a timely manner;
(3)is the estimate of burden accurate;
(4)how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(5)how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Dated: January 3, 2006. Angela C. Arrington, IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of the Chief Information Officer. Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services *Type of Review:* New. *Title:* Annual Performance Reporting
(APR)Forms for NIDRR Grantees (RERCs, RRTCS, FIPs, ARRTs, DBTACs, DRRPs, D&Us, SBIRs, Research Fellowships, and Model Systems). *Frequency:* Annually. *Affected Public:* Not-for-profit institutions; businesses or other for-profit. *Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden:* Responses: 340. Burden Hours: 5,440. *Abstract:* Information collection to obtain annual performance data from NIDRR grantees. The Department of Education will use the information for monitoring of grantees, program planning, budget development and Government Performance and Results Act
(GPRA)and Program Assessment Rating Tool
(PART)reporting. Requests for copies of the proposed information collection request may be accessed from *http://edicsweb.ed.gov,* by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 2963. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments” to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Potomac Center, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20202-4700. Requests may also be electronically mailed to *IC_DocketMgr@ed.gov* or faxed to 202-245-6623. Please specify the complete title of the information collection when making your request. Comments regarding burden and/or the collection activity requirements should be electronically mailed to the e-mail address *IC_DocketMgr@ed.gov.* Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD)may call the Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS)at 1-800-877-8339. [FR Doc. E6-81 Filed 1-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services; Overview Information; National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR)—Small Business Innovative Research Program (SBIR); Notice Inviting Applications for New Awards for Fiscal Year
(FY)2006 *Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
(CFDA)Number:* 84.133S-1. *Dates: Applications Available:* January 10, 2006. *Deadline for Transmittal of Applications:* March 13, 2006. *Eligible Applicants:* Entities that are, at the time of award, small business concerns as defined by the Small Business Administration (SBA). This definition is included in the application package. All technology, science, or engineering firms with strong research capabilities in any of the priority areas listed in this notice are encouraged to participate. Consultative or other arrangements between these firms and universities or other non-profit organizations are permitted, but the small business concern must serve as the grantee. If it appears that an applicant organization does not meet the eligibility requirements, we will request an evaluation by the SBA. Under circumstances in which eligibility is unclear, we will not make a SBIR award until the SBA makes a determination. *Estimated Available Funds:* The Administration has requested $5,000,000 for the SBIR program for FY 2006, of which we intend to use an estimated $1,125,000 for new Phase I awards. The actual level of funding, if any, depends on final congressional action. However, we are inviting applications to allow enough time to complete the grant process if Congress appropriates funds for this program. Note: The estimated amount of funds available for new Phase I awards is based upon the estimated threshold SBIR allocation for the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), minus prior commitments for Phase II continuation awards. *Estimated Average Size of Awards:* $75,000. *Maximum Award:* We will reject any application that proposes a budget exceeding $75,000 for a single budget period of six months. The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services may change the maximum amount through a notice published in the **Federal Register** . Note: Maximum award amount includes direct and indirect costs and fees. *Estimated Number of Awards:* 15. *Estimated Range of Awards:* $60,000-$75,000. Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice. *Project Period:* Up to six months for Phase I. Full Text of Announcement. I. Funding Opportunity Description *Purpose of Program:* The purpose of this program is to stimulate technological innovation in the private sector, strengthen the role of small business in meeting Federal research or research and development (R/R&D) needs, increase the commercial application of Department of Education
(ED)supported research results, and improve the return on investment from Federally funded research for economic and social benefits to the Nation. Note: NIDRR supports the goals of President Bush's New Freedom Initiative (NFI). The NFI can be accessed on the Internet at the following site: *http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/freedominitiative/freedominitiative.html.* The goals of the SBIR program are in concert with NIDRR's proposed Long-Range Plan
(Plan)published in the **Federal Register** on July 27, 2005 (70 FR 43521). The Plan is comprehensive and integrates many issues relating to disability and rehabilitation research topics. The Plan can be accessed on the Internet at the following site: *http://www.ed.gov/legislation/FedRegister/other/2005-3/072705d.html.* Through the implementation of the NFI and the Plan, NIDRR seeks to—(1) Improve the quality and utility of disability and rehabilitation research;
(2)Foster an exchange of expertise, information, and training to facilitate the advancement of knowledge and understanding of the unique needs of traditionally underserved populations;
(3)Determine best strategies and programs to improve rehabilitation outcomes for underserved populations;
(4)Identify research gaps;
(5)Identify mechanisms of integrating research and practice; and
(6)Disseminate findings. Executive Order 13329—Manufacturing-Related Innovation Executive Order 13329 states that continued technological innovation is critical to a strong manufacturing sector of the United States economy and directs Federal agencies to assist the private sector in its manufacturing innovation efforts. ED's SBIR Program encourages innovative R&D projects that are manufacturing related, as defined by the Executive Order. Manufacturing-related R&D encompasses improvements in existing methods or processes, or wholly new processes, machines or systems. Broadly speaking, ED's SBIR program encourages R&D in manufacturing through systems-level technologies, such as artificial intelligence and other information technology devices, software, systems, and product design. For more information on Executive Order 13329, please visit the following Web site: *http://www.sba.gov/sbir/execorder.html* or contact Carol Cohen at: *Carol.Cohen@ed.gov* . Background The Small Business Reauthorization Act of 2000
(Act)was enacted on December 21, 2000. The Act requires certain agencies, including ED, to establish SBIR programs by reserving a statutory percentage of their extramural research and development budgets to be awarded to small business concerns through a uniform, highly competitive three-phase process. The three phases of the SBIR program are: *Phase I:* Phase I projects determine, insofar as possible, the scientific or technical merit and feasibility of ideas submitted under the SBIR program. The application should concentrate on research that will significantly contribute to proving the scientific or technical feasibility of the approach or concept and that would be a prerequisite to further ED support in Phase II. *Phase II:* Phase II projects expand on the results of and further pursue the development of Phase I projects. Phase II is the principal R/R&D effort. It requires a more comprehensive application, outlining the effort in detail including the commercial potential. Phase II applicants must be Phase I awardees with approaches that appear sufficiently promising as a result of Phase I. Awards are for periods of up to two years in amounts up to $500,000. *Phase III:* In Phase III, the small business must use non-SBIR capital to pursue commercial applications of the R/R&D. Also, under Phase III, Federal agencies may award non-SBIR follow-on funding for products or processes that meet the needs of those agencies. All SBIR projects funded by NIDRR must address the needs of individuals with disabilities and their families. 29 U.S.C. 762. Activities may include exploring the uses of technology to ensure equal access to education, employment, community environments, and information for individuals with disabilities and improving the quality and utility of disability and rehabilitation research. *Priorities:* Under this competition we are particularly interested in applications that address one of the following priorities. *Invitational Priorities:* For FY 2006 these priorities are invitational priorities. Under 34 CFR 75.105(c)(1) we do not give an application that meets one of these invitational priorities a competitive or absolute preference over other applications. The invitational priorities relate to innovative research utilizing new technologies to address the needs of individuals with disabilities and their families. These priorities are:
(1)Development of technology to support access, promote integration, or foster independence of individuals with disabilities in the workplace, recreational activities, or educational settings.
(2)Development of technology to enhance sensory or motor function of individuals with disabilities.
(3)Development of technology to support access to employment, promote sustained employment, and promote employment advancement for individuals with disabilities.
(4)Development of accessible information technology including Web access technology, software, and other systems and devices that promote access to information in educational, employment, and community settings, and voting technology that improves access for individuals with disabilities.
(5)Development of technology to support independent access to health care services in the community for individuals with disabilities. Applicants should describe the approaches they expect to use to collect empirical evidence that demonstrates the effectiveness of the technology they are proposing in an effort to assess the efficacy and usefulness of the technology. Note: NIDRR encourages applicants to adhere to universal design principles and guidelines for more access0ble designs. Universal design is defined as “the design of products and environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design” (The Center for Universal Design, 1997, n.p.). Accessible design of consumer products minimizes or alleviates barriers that reduce the ability of individuals with disabilities to effectively or safely use standard consumer products. (For more information see— *http://www.trace.wisc.edu/docs/consumer_product_guidelines/consumer.pcs/disabil.htm.* ) *Reference:* The Principles of Universal Design, Version 2.0. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University. Web: *http://www.design.ncsu.edu* ). *Program Authority:* The Small Business Reauthorization Act of 2000, Pub. L. 106-554 (15 U.S.C. 631 and 638) and title II of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 760 *et seq.* ). *Applicable Regulations:* The Education Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR) in 34 CFR parts 75, 77, 81, 82, 84, 85, 97, 98, and 99. II. Award Information *Type of Award:* Discretionary grants. *Estimated Available Funds:* The Administration has requested $5,000,000 for the SBIR program for FY 2006, of which we intend to use an estimated $1,125,000 for new Phase I awards. The actual level of funding, if any, depends on final congressional action. However, we are inviting applications to allow enough time to complete the grant process if Congress appropriates funds for this program. Note: The estimated amount of funds available for new Phase I awards is based upon the estimated threshold SBIR allocation for OSERS, minus prior commitments for Phase II continuation awards. *Estimated Average Size of Awards:* $75,000. *Estimated Range of Awards:* $60,000-$75,000. *Maximum Award:* We will reject any application that proposes a budget exceeding $75,000 for a single budget period of six months. The Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services may change the maximum amount through a notice published in the **Federal Register** . Note: Maximum award amount includes direct and indirect costs and fee. *Estimated Number of Awards:* 15. Note: The Department is not bound by any estimates in this notice. *Project Period:* Up to six months for Phase I. III. Eligibility Information 1. *Eligible Applicants:* Entities that are, at the time of award, small business concerns as defined by the SBA. This definition is included in the application package. All technology, science, or engineering firms with strong research capabilities in any of the priority areas listed in this notice are encouraged to participate. Consultative or other arrangements between these firms and universities or other non-profit organizations are permitted, but the small business concern must serve as the grantee. If it appears that an applicant organization does not meet the eligibility requirements, we will request an evaluation by the SBA. Under circumstances in which eligibility is unclear, we will not make an SBIR award until the SBA makes a determination. 2. *Cost Sharing or Matching:* This program does not involve cost sharing or matching. IV. Application and Submission Information 1. *Address to Request Application Package:* You may obtain an application package via Internet or from the ED Publications Center (ED Pubs). To obtain a copy via Internet use the following address: *http://www.ed.gov/fund/grant/apply/grantapps/index.html* . To obtain a copy of the application package from ED Pubs, write or call the following: ED Pubs, P.O. Box 1398, Jessup, MD 20794-1398. Telephone (toll free): 1-877-433-7827. Fax:
(301)470-1244. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call (toll free): 1-877-576-7734. You may also contact ED Pubs at its Web site: *http://www.ed.gov/pubs/edpubs.html* or you may contact ED Pubs at its e-mail address: *edpubs@inet.ed.gov* . If you request an application from ED Pubs, be sure to identify this competition as follows: CFDA number 84.133S-1. Individuals with disabilities may obtain a copy of the application package in an alternative format ( *e.g.* , Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) by contacting the program contact person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT in section VII of this notice. 2. *Content and Form of Application Submission:* Requirements concerning the content of an application, together with the forms you must submit, are in the application package for this competition. *Page Limit:* The application narrative (Part III of the application) is where you, the applicant, address the selection criteria that reviewers use to evaluate your application. You must limit Part III to the equivalent of no more than 25 pages, excluding any documentation of prior multiple Phase II and III awards, if applicable, and required forms, using the following standards: • A “page” is 8.5″ x 11″, on one side only, with 1″ margins at the top, bottom, and both sides. • Single space all text in the application narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, and graphs. • Use a font that is either 12-point or larger or no smaller that 10 pitch (characters per inch). • Draw all graphs, diagrams, tables, and charts in black ink. Do not include glossy photographs or materials that cannot be photocopied in the body of the application. The page limit does not apply to Part II, the budget section, including the narrative budget justification; the one-page abstract; the resumes; the bibliography; the letters of support; certifications; statements; related application(s) or award(s); or documentation of multiple Phase II awards, if applicable. We will reject your application if— • You apply these standards and exceed the page limit; or • You apply other standards and exceed the equivalent of the page limit. 3. *Content Restrictions:* If an applicant chooses to respond to more than one invitational priority, it must submit a separate application for each priority. There is no limitation on the number of different applications that an applicant may submit under this competition. An applicant may submit separate applications on different priorities, or different applications on the same priority. However, an applicant may address only one priority in an application. 4. *Submission Dates and Times: Applications Available:* January 10, 2006. *Deadline for Transmittal of Applications:* March 13, 2006. Applications for grants under this competition may be submitted electronically using the *Grants.gov* Apply site ( *http://www.Grants.gov* ), or in paper format by mail or hand delivery. For information (including dates and times) about how to submit your application electronically, or by mail or hand delivery, please refer to section IV. 7. *Other Submission Requirements* in this notice. We do not consider an application that does not comply with the deadline requirements. 5. *Intergovernmental Review:* This program is not subject to Executive Order 12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR part 79. 6. *Funding Restrictions:* We reference regulations outlining funding restrictions in the *Applicable Regulations* section of this notice. 7. *Other Submission Requirements:* Applications for grants under this program may be submitted electronically or in paper format by mail or hand delivery. a. *Electronic Submission of Applications.* We have been accepting applications electronically through the Department's e-Application system since FY 2000. In order to expand on those efforts and comply with the President's Management Agenda, we are continuing to participate as a partner in the new government wide Grants.gov Apply site in FY 2006. The Small Business Innovative Research Program—CFDA Number 84.133S-1 is one of the programs included in this project. We request your participation in Grants.gov. If you choose to submit your application electronically, you must use the *Grants.gov* Apply site *http://www.Grants.gov* . Through this site, you will be able to download a copy of the application package, complete it offline, and then upload and submit your application. You may not e-mail an electronic copy of a grant application to us. You may access the electronic grant application for the Small Business Innovative Research Program—CFDA Number 84.133S-1 at: *http://www.grants.gov.* You must search for the downloadable application package for this program by the CFDA number. Do not include the CFDA number's alpha suffix in your search. Please note the following: • Your participation in *Grants.gov* is voluntary. • When you enter the *Grants.gov* site, you will find information about submitting an application electronically through the site, as well as the hours of operation. • Applications received by *Grants.gov* are time and date stamped. Your application must be fully uploaded and submitted, and must be date/time stamped by the *Grants.gov.* system no later than 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. Except as otherwise noted in this section, we will not consider your application if it is date/time stamped by the *Grants.gov* system later than 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. When we retrieve your application from *Grants.gov,* we will notify you if we are rejecting your application because it was date/time stamped by the *Grants.gov* system after 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. • The amount of time it can take to upload an application will vary depending on a variety of factors including the size of the application and the speed of your Internet connection. Therefore, we strongly recommend that you do not wait until the application deadline date to begin the application process through *Grants.gov.* • You should review and follow the Education Submission Procedures for submitting an application through *Grants.gov* that are included in the application package for this competition to ensure that you submit your application in a timely manner to the *Grants.gov* system. You can also find the Education Submission Procedures pertaining to *Grants.gov* at *http://e-Grants.ed.gov/help/GrantsgovSubmissionProcedures.pdf* . • To submit your application via *Grants.gov* , you must complete all of the steps in the *Grants.gov* registration process (see *http://www.Grants.gov/GetStarted* ). These steps include
(1)registering your organization,
(2)registering yourself as an Authorized Organization Representative (AOR), and
(3)getting authorized as an AOR by your organization. Details on these steps are outlined in the *Grants.gov* 3-Step Registration Guide (see *http://www.grants.gov/assets/GrantsgovCoBrandBrochure8X11.pdf* ). You also must provide on your application the same D-U-N-S Number used with this registration. Please note that the registration process may take five or more business days to complete, and you must have completed all registration steps to allow you to successfully submit an application via *Grants.gov.* • You will not receive additional point value because you submit your application in electronic format, nor will we penalize you if you submit your application in paper format. • You may submit all documents electronically, including all information typically included on the Application for Federal Education Assistance (ED 424), Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs (ED 524), and all necessary assurances and certifications. If you choose to submit your application electronically, you must attach any narrative sections of your application as files in a .DOC (document), .RTF (rich text), or .PDF (Portable Document) format. If you upload a file type other than the three file types specified above or submit a password protected file, we will not review that material. • Your electronic application must comply with any page limit requirements described in this notice. • After you electronically submit your application, you will receive an automatic acknowledgment from *Grants.gov* that contains a *Grants.gov* tracking number. The Department will retrieve your application from *Grants.gov* and send you a second confirmation by e-mail that will include a PR/Award number (an ED-specified identifying number unique to your application). • We may request that you provide us original signatures on forms at a later date. Application Deadline Date Extension in Case of System Unavailability If you are prevented from electronically submitting your application on the application deadline date because of technical problems with the *Grants.gov* system, we will grant you an extension until 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, the following business day to enable you to transmit your application electronically, or by hand delivery. You also may mail your application by following the mailing instructions as described elsewhere in this notice. If you submit an application after 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the deadline date, please contact the person listed elsewhere in this notice under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT , and provide an explanation of the technical problem you experienced with *Grants.gov,* along with the *Grants.gov* Support Desk Case Number (if available). We will accept your application if we can confirm that a technical problem occurred with the *Grants.gov* system and that that problem affected your ability to submit your application by 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, on the application deadline date. The Department will contact you after a determination is made on whether your application will be accepted. Note: Extensions referred to in this section apply only to the unavailability of or technical problems with the *Grants.gov* system. We will not grant you an extension if you failed to fully register to submit your application to *Grants.gov* before the deadline date and time or if the technical problem you experienced is unrelated to the *Grants.gov* system. b. *Submission of Paper Applications by Mail.* If you submit your application in paper format by mail (through the U.S. Postal Service or a commercial carrier), you must mail the original and two copies of your application, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the applicable following address: *By mail through the U.S. Postal Service:* U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.133S-1), 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20202-4260; or *By mail through a commercial carrier:* U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center—Stop 4260, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.133S-1), 7100 Old Landover Road, Landover, MD 20785-1506. Regardless of which address you use, you must show proof of mailing consisting of one of the following:
(1)A legibly dated U.S. Postal Service postmark,
(2)A legible mail receipt with the date of mailing stamped by the U.S. Postal Service,
(3)A dated shipping label, invoice, or receipt from a commercial carrier, or
(4)Any other proof of mailing acceptable to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education. If you mail your application through the U.S. Postal Service, we do not accept either of the following as proof of mailing:
(1)A private metered postmark, or
(2)A mail receipt that is not dated by the U.S. Postal Service. If your application is postmarked after the application deadline date, we will not consider your application. Note: The U.S. Postal Service does not uniformly provide a dated postmark. Before relying on this method, you should check with your local post office. c. *Submission of Paper Applications by Hand Delivery.* If you submit your application in paper format by hand delivery, you (or a courier service) must deliver the original and two copies of your application by hand, on or before the application deadline date, to the Department at the following address: U.S. Department of Education, Application Control Center, Attention: (CFDA Number 84.133S-1), 550 12th Street, SW., Room 7041, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-4260. The Application Control Center accepts hand deliveries daily between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Washington, DC time, except Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal holidays. Note for Mail or Hand Delivery of Paper Applications: If you mail or hand deliver your application to the Department:
(1)You must indicate on the envelope and—if not provided by the Department—in Item 4 of the Application for Federal Education Assistance (ED 424) the CFDA number—and suffix letter, if any—of the competition under which you are submitting your application.
(2)The Application Control Center will mail a grant application receipt acknowledgment to you. If you do not receive the grant application receipt acknowledgment within 15 business days from the application deadline date, you should call the U.S. Department of Education Application Control Center at
(202)245-6288. V. Application Review Information *Selection Criteria:* The selection criteria for this competition are from 35 CFR 75.210 of EDGAR and are listed in the application package. VI. Award Administration Information 1. *Award Notices:* If your application is successful, we notify your U.S. Representative and U.S. Senators and send you a Grant Award Notification (GAN). We may also notify you informally. If your application is not evaluated or not selected for funding, we notify you. 2. *Administrative and National Policy Requirements:* We identify administrative and national policy requirements in the application package and reference these and other requirements in the *Applicable Regulations* section of this notice. We reference the regulations outlining the terms and conditions of an award in the *Applicable Regulations* section of this notice and include these and other specific conditions in the GAN. The GAN also incorporates your approved application as part of your binding commitments under the grant. 3. *Reporting:* At the end of your project period, you must submit a final performance report, including financial information, as directed by the Secretary. If you receive a multi-year award, you must submit an annual performance report that provides the most current performance and financial expenditure information as specified by the Secretary in 34 CFR 75.118. Note: NIDRR will provide information by letter to grantees on how and when to submit the report. 4. *Performance Measures:* To evaluate the overall success of its research program, NIDRR assesses the quality of its funded projects through review of grantee performance and products. Each year, NIDRR examines, through expert peer review, a portion of its grantees to determine: • The degree to which the grantees are conducting high-quality research, as reflected in the appropriateness of study designs, the rigor with which accepted standards of scientific and engineering methods are applied, and the degree to which the research builds on and contributes to the level of knowledge in the field; and • The number of new or improved assistive and universally designed technologies, products, and devices developed by grantees that are deemed to improve rehabilitation services and outcomes, enhance opportunities for participation by individuals with disabilities and are successfully transferred to industry or other private entities for potential commercialization. VII. Agency Contact *For Further Information Contact:* Carol G. Cohen, U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., room 6035, Potomac Center Plaza, Washington, DC 20202-2700. Telephone:
(202)245-7303 or e-mail: *Carol.cohen@ed.gov.* If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), you may call the TDD number at
(202)205-4475 or the Federal Relay Service
(FRS)at 1-800-877-8339. Individuals with disabilities may obtain this document in an alternative format ( *e.g.,* Braille, large print, audiotape, or computer diskette) on request to the program contact person listed in this section. VIII. Other Information *Electronic Access to This Document:* You may view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in the **Federal Register,** in text or Adobe Portable Document Format
(PDF)on the Internet at the following site: *http://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister.* To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free, at 1-888-293-6498; or in the Washington, DC, area at
(202)512-1530. Note: The official version of this document is the document published in the **Federal Register** . Free Internet access to the official edition of the **Federal Register** and the Code of Federal Regulations is available on GPO Access at: *http://www.gpoaccess.gov/nara/index.html.* Dated: January 4, 2006. John H. Hager, Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. [FR Doc. E6-126 Filed 1-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL06-30-000] California Electricity Oversight Board; People of the State of California, ex rel., Bill Lockyer, Attorney General of the State of California, and California Department of Water Resources v. Calpine Energy Services, L.P.; Calpine Corporation; Power Contract Financing, and Gilroy Energy Center, L.L.C.; Order Providing Interim Guidance Issued January 3, 2006. Before Commissioners: Joseph T. Kelliher, Chairman; Nora Mead Brownell, and Suedeen G. Kelly. 1. On December 19, 2005, the California Electricity Oversight Board, the California Attorney General, and the California Department of Water Resources (California State Parties) filed a Petition for Emergency Declaratory Order Requiring Continuing Performance of Jurisdictional Power Purchase Agreement and Complaint Requesting Fast Track Processing (Petition). The Petition seeks a Commission order requiring Calpine Energy Services, LP, and Calpine Corporation (Calpine) to continue to supply power, and otherwise perform, under a Master Power Purchase and Sale Agreement (Calpine 2 Contract). As explained in more detail below, because of a recently issued Ex Parte Temporary Restraining Order
(TRO)against the Commission, we cannot grant the relief requested. However, in the event the Commission participates in the bankruptcy proceedings, we hereby provide interim guidance to the parties regarding the standard to be applied in this case, and require certain additional filings. Background 2. The California State Parties state in their Petition that they expect Calpine to file for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code and, when it does, to request that the Bankruptcy Court reject the Calpine 2 Contract. The California State Parties state that, if the Commission does not act to require performance of the Calpine 2 Contract, the Bankruptcy Court may enjoin the Commission from so acting. The Petition states that a similar result occurred when Mirant Corporation filed for bankruptcy and the Bankruptcy Court enjoined the Commission from taking certain actions with respect to Mirant. 3. The California State Parties argue that the Commission should grant the relief requested because “rejection of the Calpine 2 Contract would:
(1)Force California consumers to bear significantly higher costs;
(2)undermine the parties' 2002 global settlement entered in order to resolve the State's claims arising in its 2000-01 energy crises;
(3)jeopardize the State's efforts to put in place protections to ensure that the health, safety and welfare of California ratepayers are not adversely affected by a similar crisis in the future; and
(4)threaten the stability of California electricity markets and potentially undermine the reliability of the California electricity grid, particularly during summer 2006.” Petition at 6. The California State Parties state that an order granting this relief would be consistent with the Commission's action in *Blumenthal* v. *NRG Power Marketing, Inc.,* 103 FERC ¶ 61,188 (2003), *reh'g denied,* 104 FERC ¶ 61,211
(2003)(orders requiring performance), and *Blumenthal* v. *NRG Power Marketing, Inc.,* 104 FERC ¶ 61,210
(2003)(order upholding contract) ( *NRG* ). 4. On December 21, 2005, Calpine filed for bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of New York. The Bankruptcy Court immediately issued an *Ex Parte* Temporary Restraining Order Against Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(TRO)that prohibits the Commission from taking any action “to require or coerce the Debtors to continue performing under the executory contracts identified in Schedule 1.” One of the contracts identified in Schedule 1 of the TRO is the Calpine 2 Contract. Authority To Act 5. Although the Bankruptcy Code provides that the filing of a bankruptcy petition automatically stays certain actions against the debtor, 1 the Code also provides an exception from this automatic stay for: 1 11 U.S.C. 362(a)(1). An action or proceeding by a governmental unit * * * to enforce such governmental unit's or organization's police and regulatory powers, including the enforcement of a judgment other than a money judgment, obtained in an action or proceeding by the governmental unit to enforce such governmental unit's or organization's police or regulatory power.[ 2 ] 2 11 U.S.C. 362(b)(4). 6. As noted earlier, the TRO entered on December 21, 2005 by the Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of New York precludes the Commission from granting the relief requested. However the TRO does not preclude the Commission from issuing this Interim Guidance Order. Accordingly, this order provides guidance to the parties regarding the standards that will be applied in this case. It does not “require or coerce” Calpine to continue performing its executory contracts. Discussion 7. In *NRG,* the Commission addressed “an issue of first impression: Whether a bankruptcy court's approval of a public utility seller's request to reject a contract between it and a buyer precludes the Commission from making an independent determination, pursuant to the Federal Power Act (FPA), as to whether that seller must continue [to] fulfill its contractual obligations to provide service to the buyer.” 3 In answering that question, “[t]he Commission found that, even if a public utility files for bankruptcy, the utility still must meet its obligations under the FPA.” 4 The Commission then proceeded to address in a paper hearing whether NRG could meet the *Mobile Sierra* standard applicable to a request to terminate the contract under section 205 of the FPA. The Commission held that NRG could not do so and therefore ordered it to perform under the contract. 5 3 104 FERC ¶ 61,210 at P1. 4 *Id.* 5 *NRG,* 104 FERC ¶ 61,210. 8. Subsequently to our decision in *NRG,* the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit decided *Mirant Corp.* v. *Potomac Electric Power Co.* ( *In re Mirant* ). 6 In *Mirant,* the 5th Circuit addressed the same fundamental issue decided in *NRG,* namely whether a Bankruptcy Court has the authority to reject a Commission-jurisdictional contract without the seller first obtaining approval from the Commission to terminate that contract under section 205. The court held, in pertinent part, as follows: 6 378 F.3d 511 (5th Cir. 2004) ( *Mirant* ). It is clear that FERC has the exclusive authority to determine wholesale rates, *see Mississippi Power & Light, 487 U.S. at 371,* and Mirant does not contest that it would need FERC approval to either modify the rates in the Back-to-Back Agreement or to completely abrogate that agreement. *Cf. 11 U.S.C. 362(b)(4)* (creating exception from automatic stay for agencies acting to enforce their regulatory power). Under the Bankruptcy Code, however, Mirant's *rejection* of the Back-to-Back Agreement is a *breach* of that contract. *See 11 U.S.C. 365(g)* (“The rejection of an executory contract * * * constitutes a breach of such contract * * *.”); *see also In re Continental Airlines, 981 F.2d 1450, 1459 (5th Cir. 1993) (“[section] 365(g)(1)* speaks only in terms of ‘breach.’ The statute does not invalidate the contract, or treat the contract as if it did not exist.”). Thus, whether the FPA preempts a district court's jurisdiction over a bankruptcy rejection necessarily depends upon whether the FPA generally preempts a district court's jurisdiction over claims of breach related to executory power contracts. Outside of the bankruptcy context, the FPA does not provide FERC with exclusive jurisdiction over the breach of a FERC approved contract. While the FPA does preempt breach of contract claims that challenge a filed rate, district courts are permitted to grant relief in situations where the breach of contract claim is based upon another rationale. We conclude that the FPA does not preempt Mirant's rejection of the Back-to-Back Agreement because it would only have an indirect effect upon the filed rate. When an executory contract is rejected in bankruptcy, the non-breaching party receives an unsecured claim against the bankruptcy estate for an amount equal to its damages from the breach. *See 11 U.S.C. 365(g)(1), 502(g).* If Mirant's rejection of the Back-to-Back Agreement was approved, then PEPCO's unsecured claim against the bankruptcy estate would be based upon the amount of electricity it would have otherwise sold to Mirant under that agreement *at the filed rate.* The FPA does not preempt a district court's jurisdiction to authorize the rejection of an executory contract subject to FERC regulation as part of a bankruptcy proceeding. A motion to reject an executory power contract is not a collateral attack upon that contract's filed rate because that rate is given full effect when determining the breach of contract damages resulting from the rejection. Further, there is nothing within the Bankruptcy Code itself that limits a public utility's ability to choose to reject an executory contract subject to FERC regulation as part of its reorganization process. 378 F.3d at 519-522 (emphasis in original). 9. Moreover, as the *Mirant* court recognized, the Commission has a number of regulatory responsibilities under the Federal Power Act that continue while a bankruptcy case is pending, that do not necessarily impact a debtor's ability to reject a contract. 7 7 *See also Louisiana Pub. Serv. Comm'n* v. *Mabey (In re Cajun Elec. Power Coop., Inc.),* 185 F.3d 446, 453 (5th Cir. 1999) (noting that Bankruptcy Code “ ‘indirectly suggests continued governmental regulatory jurisdiction’ during the pendency of the bankruptcy proceeding”) (citation omitted), *cited in Mirant,* 378 F.3d at 523; *FCC* v. *Nextwave Personal Communications Inc.,* 537 U.S. 293, 307 n.5
(2003)(on review of FCC's regulatory decisionmaking, in case involving both Bankruptcy Code and Communications Act, Court noted that Second Circuit had, on appeal from bankruptcy court, denied subject matter jurisdiction to decide whether FCC's regulatory decision was proper exercise of its discretion, and that D.C. Circuit, on petition for review of FCC decision, had “recognized and seemingly approved that distinction [between regulatory and bankruptcy matters]”). 10. The 5th Circuit also provided guidance on the standard to be applied in determining whether rejection of an FPA-jurisdictional contract by a bankruptcy court is appropriate. The court noted that the standard ordinarily applicable is the “business judgment rule,” but it found that the Supreme Court had given greater protection to certain contracts affected with the public interest, such as collective bargaining agreements. *NLRB* v. *Bildisco & Bildisco, 465 U.S. 513* (1984). The 5th Circuit therefore held that a higher standard may be appropriate for FPA-jurisdictional contracts, reasoning as follows: The nature of a contract for the interstate sale of electricity at wholesale is also unique. Additionally, Congress found when it passed the FPA that the public has an interest in the transmission and sale of electricity. *16 U.S.C. 824(a).* This includes an interest in the continuity of electrical service to the customers of public utilities. *16 U.S.C. 824a(g)* * * *. Clearly the business judgment standard normally applicable to rejection motions is more deferential than the public interest standard applicable in FERC proceedings to alter the terms of a contract within its jurisdiction. Use of the business judgment standard would be inappropriate in this case because it would not account for the public interest inherent in the transmission and sale of electricity. Therefore, upon remand, the district court should consider applying a more rigorous standard to the rejection of the Back-to-Back Agreement. If the district court decides that a more rigorous standard is required, then it might adopt a standard by which it would authorize rejection of an executory power contract only if the debtor can show that it “burdens the estate, [] that, after careful scrutiny, the equities balance in favor of rejecting” that power contract, and that rejection of the contract would further the Chapter 11 goal of permitting the successful rehabilitation of debtors. *See Bildisco, 465 U.S. at 526-27.* When considering these issues, the courts should carefully scrutinize the impact of rejection upon the public interest and should, *inter alia,* ensure that rejection does not cause any disruption in the supply of electricity to other public utilities or to consumers. *Cf. Id. at 527* (requiring the bankruptcy court to balance the interests of the debtor, the creditors and the employees when determining what constitutes a successful rehabilitation). The bankruptcy court has already indicated that it would include FERC as a party in interest for all purposes in this case under *11 U.S.C. 1109(b)* and *Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2018.* We presume that the district court would also welcome FERC's participation, if this case is not referred back to the bankruptcy court. Therefore, FERC will be able to assist the court in balancing these equities. 378 F.3d at 525 (footnote omitted). 8 8 On remand, the district cout denied the rejection motion on other grounds, and responded to the 5th Circuit by articulating a heightened standard for rejection, under which the court would have to determine whether rejection would compromise the public interest (with input from the Commission, after affording it “an opportunity to engage in appropriate inquiry to enable it to evaluate the effect * * * on the public interest”). *In re Mirant Corp.,* 318 B.R. 100, 108 (N.D. Tex. 2004). An appeal from that order is pending before the 5th Circuit. *See Official Comm. of Unsecured Creditors* v. *Potomac Elec. Power Co., et al.* ( * In re Mirant Corp.* ), Case No. 05-10033 (5th Cir). 11. Although the Commission reached a different result in *NRG,* a federal court of appeals has now spoken to the issue addressed in *NRG* and we intend to follow that authority. Under that authority, the Commission is precluded from taking action under the FPA that impacts a debtor's ability to reject an executory contract. A Bankruptcy Court cannot reject a FERC-jurisdictional contract under the business judgment rule “because it would not account for the public interest inherent in the transmission and sale of electricity.” *Id.* Rather, such a court must “carefully scrutinize the impact of rejection upon the public interest and * * * ensure that rejection does not cause any disruption in the supply of electricity to other public utilities or to consumers.” *Id.* 12. The Commission seeks comment on whether rejection of the Calpine 2 Contract would impact the public interest, 9 including whether rejection of the Calpine 2 Contract would cause “any disruption in the supply of electricity to other public utilities or to consumers.” *Id.* 10 By seeking comment on this issue, the Commission does not intend to supplant the role of the Bankruptcy Court in considering whether to reject the Calpine 2 Contract. Rather, the purpose of our inquiry is to develop a record on which the Commission can, as necessary, make a determination, and then inform the Bankruptcy Court, of its views regarding potential rejection of the Calpine 2 Contract by the Bankruptcy Court. In the *Mirant* case, the 5th Circuit “presume[d] that the district court would * * * welcome FERC's participation” and that “FERC will be able to assist the court in balancing the equities.” 11 In order to provide such assistance, we need to develop an appropriate record to render a decision. 9 To the extent any party believes it should seek leave of the Bankruptcy Court to submit further pleadings in this case, it should do so. 10 In Calpine's Memorandum of Law in Support of Debtors' Motion for Declaratory Judgment, *Ex Parte* Temporary Restraining Order, and Preliminary Injunction Against the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at p. 5, Calpine asserts: If the Court permits the rejection of the energy contracts, there will be no disruption in the supply of power. For its part, Calpine will continue to produce all the energy that it may profitably do so, and CDWR and the other counter-parties to the contracts could readily obtain power from the national grid or from Calpine, albeit at the market rates. *See also* Complaint for Declaratory Judgment, *Ex Parte* Temporary Restraining Order, and Preliminary and Permanent Injunction Against the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at P 15 (“If the Court permits the rejection of the energy contracts, there will be no disruption in the supply of power. Calpine will continue to supply electricity to CDWR and the other counter-parties to the contracts, albeit at the market rates.”). 11 *In re Mirant Corp., supra* note 6. 13. In addressing the effect of rejection on the public interest, the parties should not confine their arguments to the factors normally considered in a *Mobile-Sierra* context. As the court in *Mirant* held, rejection of an executory contract constitutes a *breach* of contract, not approval to terminate it under section 205 of the FPA. *See* 378 F.3d at 519 (“ *rejection* of the Back-to-Back Agreement is a *breach* of that contract” for which damages lie) (emphasis in original). In a section 205 proceeding, the issue is whether a party can terminate its obligations and *thereafter have no liability to its counterparty.* To obtain such approval, a party with a *Mobile Sierra* clause must meet a very high burden under the public interest test. In this case, however, there is no request by Calpine to terminate its obligations and thereafter be free of liability to the California State Parties. Rather, the issue is how the public interest bears on the Bankruptcy Court's determination of whether to permit Calpine to breach its obligations and, if so, to pay damages for such breach as determined by the Bankruptcy Court. 14. We therefore direct the California State Parties to amend their filing within fifteen
(15)days to address the standard adopted in *Mirant.* Intervenors shall have fifteen
(15)days from the date of that filing to file responses. Because we are also concerned whether rejection of the Calpine 2 Contract may pose reliability concerns, we also direct the California Independent System Operator Corporation (California ISO) to address this issue in response to the California State Parties' amended filing within 15 days of their amended filing. The Commission will then be in a position to inform the Bankruptcy Court, as necessary, of the impact on the public interest of a potential rejection of the Calpine 2 Contract, or take such other action as may be appropriate under the circumstances. 12 12 In the *Mirant* case, the 5th Circuit “presume[d] that the district court would * * * welcome FERC's participation” and that “FERC will be able to assist the court in balancing the equities.” *Id.* 15. Finally, consistent with the due date established above for intervenors to submit responses to the California State Parties' amended filing, interventions shall be due on or before 15 days after the California State Parties submit their amended filing. 13 13 On December 22, 2005, the Commission issued a notice of the California State Parties' filing, with interventions and protests due on or before January 19, 2006. However, the January 19 comment date established by that notice is superseded by the comment procedures established in this order. *The Commission orders:*
(A)The California State Parties are hereby directed to amend their December 19, 2005 filing within 15 days of the date of this order, as discussed in the body of this order.
(B)Interventions and responses to the California State Parties' amended filing will be due within 15 days after the California State Parties submit their amended filing, as discussed in the body of this order.
(C)The California ISO is hereby directed to file a response to the California State Parties' amended filing within 15 days after the California State Parties submit their amended filing, as discussed in the body of this order.
(D)The December 22, 2005 notice of filing in Docket No. EL06-30-000 is hereby superseded by the comment procedures established in Ordering Paragraphs (A)-(C).
(E)The Secretary shall promptly publish this order in the **Federal Register.** By the Commission. Magalie R. Salas, Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-87 Filed 1-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Southwestern Power Administration Robert D. Willis Hydropower Rate Schedules AGENCY: Southwestern Power Administration, DOE. ACTION: Notice of rate order. SUMMARY: Pursuant to Delegation Order Nos. 00-037.00, effective December 6, 2001, and 00-001.00B, effective July 28, 2005, the Deputy Secretary has approved and placed into effect on an interim basis Rate Order No. SWPA-55, which increases the power rate for the Robert Douglas Willis Hydropower Project (Willis) pursuant to the following Willis Rate Schedule: Rate Schedule RDW-05, Wholesale Rates for Hydro Power and Energy Sold to Sam Rayburn Municipal Power Agency (Contract No. DE-PM75-85SW00117). The effective period for the rate schedule specified in Rate Order No. SWPA-55 is January 1, 2006, through September 30, 2009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Forrest E. Reeves, Assistant Administrator, Office of Corporate Operations, Southwestern Power Administration, Department of Energy, One West Third Street, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103,
(918)595-6696, *gene.reeves@swpa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The existing hydroelectric power rate for the Robert D. Willis project is $452,952 per year. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved this rate on a final basis on June 24, 2004, for the period November 1, 2003, through September 30, 2007. The 2005 Willis Power Repayment Studies indicate the need for an increase in the annual rate by $195,144 or 43.1 percent beginning January 1, 2006. The Administrator, Southwestern Power Administration (Southwestern) has followed Title 10, Part 903 Subpart A, of the Code of Federal Regulations, “Procedures for Public Participation in Power and Transmission Rate Adjustments and Extensions” (Part 903) in connection with the proposed rate schedule. On August 29, 2005, Southwestern published notice in the **Federal Register** (70 FR 51033), of a 60-day comment period, together with a Public Information Forum and a Public Comment Forum, to provide an opportunity for customers and other interested members of the public to review and comment on a proposed rate increase for the Willis project. Both public forums were canceled when no one expressed an intention to participate. Written comments were accepted through October 28, 2005. One comment was received from Gillis & Angley, Counsellors at Law, on behalf of Sam Rayburn Municipal Power Agency and the Vinton Public Power Authority, which stated that they had no objection to the proposed rate adjustment. Information regarding this rate proposal, including studies and other supporting material, is available for public review and comment in the offices of Southwestern Power Administration, One West Third Street, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103. Following review of Southwestern's proposal within the Department of Energy, I approved Rate Order No. SWPA-55, on an interim basis, which increases the existing Robert D. Willis rate to $648,096, per year, for the period January 1, 2006, through September 30, 2009. Dated: December 23, 2005. Clay Sell, Deputy Secretary. In the Matter of Southwestern Power Administration Robert D. Willis Hydropower Project Rate; Order Confirming, Approving and Placing Increased Power Rate Schedule in Effect on an Interim Basis Pursuant to sections 302(a) and 301(b) of the Department of Energy Organization Act, Public Law 95-91, the functions of the Secretary of the Interior and the Federal Power Commission under Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944, 16 U.S.C. 825s, relating to the Southwestern Power Administration (Southwestern) were transferred to and vested in the Secretary of Energy. By Delegation Order No. 0204-108, effective December 14, 1983, the Secretary of Energy delegated to the Administrator of Southwestern the authority to develop power and transmission rates, delegated to the Deputy Secretary of the Department of Energy the authority to confirm, approve, and place in effect such rates on an interim basis and delegated to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC)the authority to confirm and approve on a final basis or to disapprove rates developed by the Administrator under the delegation. Delegation Order No. 0204-108, as amended, was rescinded and subsequently replaced by Delegation Orders 00-037.00 (December 6, 2001) and 00-001-00B (July 28, 2005). The Deputy Secretary issued this rate order pursuant to said delegations. Background Dam B (Town Bluff Dam), located on the Neches River in eastern Texas downstream from the Sam Rayburn Dam, was originally constructed in 1951 by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) and provides streamflow regulation of releases from the Sam Rayburn Dam. The Lower Neches Valley Authority contributed funds toward construction of both projects and makes established annual payments for the right to withdraw up to 2000 cubic feet of water per second from Town Bluff Dam for its own use. Power was legislatively authorized at the project, but installation of hydroelectric facilities was deferred until justified by economic conditions. A determination of feasibility was made in a 1982 Corps study. In 1983, the Sam Rayburn Municipal Power Agency (SRMPA) proposed to sponsor and finance the development at Town Bluff Dam in return for the output of the project to be delivered to its member municipalities and participating member cooperatives of the Sam Rayburn Dam Electric Cooperative. Since the hydroelectric facilities at the Town Bluff Dam have been completed, the facilities have been renamed the Robert Douglas Willis Hydropower Project (Willis). The Willis rate is unique in that it excludes the costs associated with the hydropower design and construction performed by the Corps, because all funds for these costs were provided by SRMPA. Under the Southwestern/SRMPA power sales Contract No. DE-PM75-85SW00117, SRMPA will continue to pay all annual operating and marketing costs, as well as expected capital replacement costs, through the rate paid to Southwestern, and will receive all power and energy produced at the project for a period of 50 years. In the FERC Docket No. EF04-4081-000, issued June 24, 2004, for the period November 1, 2003, through September 30, 2007, the FERC confirmed and approved the current annual Willis rate of $452,952. Discussion Southwestern's 2005 Current Power Repayment Study
(PRS)indicates that the existing annual power rate of $452,952 does not represent the lowest possible rate needed to meet cost recovery criteria. The increased revenue requirement is due to an increase in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) projected future replacement investment and future operations and maintenance expense estimates. The Revised PRS indicates that an increase in annual revenues of $195,144 beginning January 1, 2006, is sufficient to accomplish repayment of the Federal investment in the required number of years. Accordingly, Southwestern developed a proposed rate schedule based on that increased revenue requirement. Title 10, Part 903, Subpart A of the Code of Federal Regulations, “Procedures for Public Participation in Power and Transmission Rate Adjustment,” has been followed in connection with the proposed rate adjustment. More specifically, opportunities for public review and comment during a 60-day period on the proposed Willis power rate were announced by a **Federal Register** (70 FR 51033) notice published on August 29, 2005. A Public Information Forum was scheduled to be held September 13, 2005, and a Public Comment Forum was scheduled for October 13, 2005, both in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Both forums were canceled as no one expressed an intent to participate. Written comments were due by October 28, 2005. Southwestern provided the **Federal Register** notice, together with requested supporting data, to the customer and interested parties for review and comment during the formal period of public participation. In addition, prior to the formal 60-day public participation process, Southwestern discussed with the customer representatives the preliminary information on the proposed rate adjustment. Only one formal comment was received during the public process. That comment, on behalf of SRMPA and the Vinton Public Power Authority, expressed no objection to the final proposed rate. Upon conclusion of the comment period in October 2005, Southwestern finalized the PRS and rate schedule for the proposed annual rate of $648,096 which is the lowest possible rate needed to satisfy repayment criteria. This rate represents an annual increase of 43.1 percent. Availability of Information Information regarding this rate increase, including studies and other supporting material, is available for public review and comment in the offices of Southwestern Power Administration, One West Third Street, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103. Comments and Responses Southwestern received one written comment in which the customer representative expressed no objection to the proposed rate adjustment. Other Issues There were no other issues raised during the informal meeting or during the formal public participation period. Administrator's Certification The 2005 Revised Willis PRS indicates that the annual power rate of $648,096 will repay all costs of the project, including amortization of the power investment consistent with provisions of the Department of Energy
(DOE)Order No. RA 6120.2. In accordance with Delegation Order Nos. 00-037.00 (December 6, 2001) and 00-001.00A (September 17, 2002), and Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944, the Administrator has determined that the proposed Willis power rate is consistent with applicable law and the lowest possible rate consistent with sound business principles. Environment The environmental impact of the rate increase proposal was evaluated in consideration of DOE's guidelines for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, 10 CFR part 1021, and was determined to fall within the class of actions that are categorically excluded from the requirements of preparing either an Environmental Impact Statement or an Environmental Assessment. Order In view of the foregoing and pursuant to the authority delegated to me, I hereby confirm, approve and place in effect on an interim basis, for the period January 1, 2006, through September 30, 2009, the annual Robert D. Willis Rate of $648,096 for the sale of power and energy from Robert D. Willis project to the Sam Rayburn Municipal Power Agency, under Contract No. DE-PM75-85SW00117, as amended. This rate shall remain in effect on an interim basis through September 30, 2009, or until the FERC confirms and approves the rate on a final basis. Dated: December 23, 2005. Clay Sell, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-123 Filed 1-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Southwestern Power Administration Sam Rayburn Dam Power Rate Schedule AGENCY: Southwestern Power Administration, DOE. ACTION: Notice of Rate Order. SUMMARY: Pursuant to Delegation Order Nos. 00-037.00, effective December 6, 2001, and 00-001.00B, effective July 28, 2005, the Deputy Secretary has approved and placed into effect on an interim basis Rate Order No. SWPA-54, which increases the power rate for the Sam Rayburn Dam Project (Rayburn) pursuant to the following Sam Rayburn Dam Rate Schedule: Rate Schedule SRD-05, Wholesale Rates for Hydropower and Energy Sold to Sam Rayburn Dam Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Contract No. DE-PM75-92SW00215) The effective period for the rate schedule specified in Rate Order No. SWPA-54 is January 1, 2006, through September 30, 2009. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Forrest E. Reeves, Assistant Administrator, Office of Corporate Operations, Southwestern Power Administration, Department of Energy, One West Third Street, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103,
(918)595-6696, *gene.reeves@swpa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The existing hydroelectric power rate for the Rayburn is $2,513,700 per year. The Deputy Secretary of Energy confirmed, approved and placed in effect on an interim basis this rate on November 16, 2004, for the period January 1, 2005, through September 30, 2008. This rate has not yet been approved on a final basis by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The 2005 Rayburn Power Repayment Studies indicates the need for an increase in the annual rate by $300,364 or 12 percent beginning January 1, 2006. The Administrator, Southwestern Power Administration (Southwestern) has followed Title 10, Part 903 Subpart A, of the Code of Federal Regulations, “Procedures for Public Participation in Power and Transmission Rate Adjustments and Extensions” (Part 903) in connection with the proposed rate schedule. On August 29, 2005, Southwestern published notice in the **Federal Register** (70 FR 51034), of a 90-day comment period, together with a Public Information Forum and a Public Comment Forum, to provide an opportunity for customers and other interested members of the public to review and comment on a proposed rate increase for the Willis project. Both public forums were canceled when no one expressed an intention to participate. Written comments were accepted through November 28, 2005. One comment was received from Gillis & Angley, Counsellors at Law, on behalf of Sam Rayburn Municipal Power Authority (an entity of Sam Rayburn Dam Electric Cooperative), which stated that they had no objection to the proposed rate adjustment. Information regarding this rate proposal, including studies and other supporting material, is available for public review and comment in the offices of Southwestern Power Administration, One West Third Street, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103. Following review of Southwestern's proposal within the Department of Energy, I approved Rate Order No. SWPA-54, on an interim basis, which increases the existing Sam Rayburn rate to $2,816,064, per year, for the period January 1, 2006, through September 30, 2009. Dated: December 23, 2005. Clay Sell, Deputy Secretary. In the Matter of: Southwestern Power Administration, Sam Rayburn Dam Project Rate; Order Confirming, Approving and Placing Increased Power Rate Schedule in Effect on an Interim Basis Pursuant to Sections 302(a) and 301(b) of the Department of Energy Organization Act, Public Law 95-91, the functions of the Secretary of the Interior and the Federal Power Commission under Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944, 16 U.S.C. 825s, relating to the Southwestern Power Administration (Southwestern) were transferred to and vested in the Secretary of Energy. By Delegation Order No. 0204-108, effective December 14, 1983, the Secretary of Energy delegated to the Administrator of Southwestern the authority to develop power and transmission rates, delegated to the Deputy Secretary of the Department of Energy the authority to confirm, approve, and place in effect such rates on an interim basis and delegated to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC)the authority to confirm and approve on a final basis or to disapprove rates developed by the Administrator under the delegation. Delegation Order No. 0204-108, as amended, was rescinded and subsequently replaced by Delegation Orders 00-037.00 (December 6, 2001) and 00-001-00B (July 28, 2005). The Deputy Secretary issued this rate order pursuant to said delegations. Background The Sam Rayburn Dam Project (Rayburn) is located on the Angelina River in the State of Texas in the Neches River Basin. Since the beginning of its operation in 1965, it has been marketed as an isolated project, under contract with Sam Rayburn Dam Electric Cooperative, Inc. (SRDEC) (Contract No. DE-PM75-92SW00215). SRDEC is comprised of two separate entities, the Sam Rayburn G&T, and the Sam Rayburn Municipal Power Agency. This rate supersedes the annual rate of $2,513,700 which was confirmed, approved and placed in effect on an interim basis by the Deputy Secretary of Energy on November 16, 2004, for the period January 1, 2005, through September 30, 2008. This rate has not yet been approved on a final basis by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Discussion Southwestern's 2005 Current Power Repayment Study
(PRS)indicates that the existing annual power rate of $2,513,700 does not represent the lowest possible rate needed to meet cost recovery criteria. The increased revenue requirement is due to an increase in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) projected future replacement investment and future operations and maintenance expense estimates. The Revised PRS indicates that an increase in annual revenues of $302,364 beginning January 1, 2006, is sufficient to accomplish repayment of the Federal investment in the required number of years. Accordingly, Southwestern developed a proposed rate schedule based on that increased revenue requirement. Title 10, Part 903, Subpart A of the Code of Federal Regulations, “Procedures for Public Participation in Power and Transmission Rate Adjustment,” has been followed in connection with the proposed rate adjustment. More specifically, opportunities for public review and comment during a 90-day period on the proposed Rayburn power rate were announced by a **Federal Register** (70 FR 51034) notice published on August 29, 2005. A Public Information Forum was scheduled to be held September 13, 2005, and a Public Comment Forum was scheduled for October 13, 2005, both in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Both forums were canceled as no one expressed an intent to participate. Written comments were due by November 28, 2005. Southwestern provided the **Federal Register** notice, together with requested supporting data, to the customer and interested parties for review and comment during the formal period of public participation. In addition, prior to the formal 90-day public participation process, Southwestern discussed with the customer representatives the preliminary information on the proposed rate adjustment. Only one formal comment was received from Gillis & Angley, Counsellors at Law, on behalf of Sam Rayburn Municipal Power Agency (an entity of Sam Rayburn Dam Electric Cooperative, Inc.), which stated that they had no objection to the proposed rate adjustment. Upon conclusion of the comment period in November 2005, Southwestern finalized the PRS and rate schedule for the proposed annual rate of $2,816,064, which is the lowest possible rate needed to satisfy repayment criteria. This rate represents an annual increase of 12 percent. Availability of Information Information regarding this rate increase, including studies and other supporting material, is available for public review and comment in the offices of Southwestern Power Administration, One West Third Street, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103. Comments and Responses Southwestern received one written comment in which the customer representative expressed no objection to the proposed rate adjustment. Other Issues There were no other issues raised during the informal period or during the formal public participation period. Administrator's Certification The 2005 Revised Rayburn PRS indicates that the annual power rate of $2,816,064 will repay all costs of the project, including amortization of the power investment consistent with provisions of the Department of Energy
(DOE)Order No. RA 6120.2. In accordance with Delegation Order Nos. 00-037.00 (December 6, 2001) and 00-001.00B (July 28, 2005), and Section 5 of the Flood Control Act of 1944, the Administrator has determined that the proposed Rayburn power rate is consistent with applicable law and the lowest possible rate consistent with sound business principles. Environment The environmental impact of the rate increase proposal was evaluated in consideration of DOE's guidelines for implementing the procedural provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act, 10 CFR 1021, and was determined to fall within the class of actions that are categorically excluded from the requirements of preparing either an Environmental Impact Statement or an Environmental Assessment. Order In view of the foregoing and pursuant to the authority delegated to me, I hereby confirm, approve and place in effect on an interim basis, for the period January 1, 2006, through September 30, 2009, the annual Sam Rayburn Dam Rate of $2,816,064 for the sale of power and energy from Sam Rayburn Dam to the Sam Rayburn Electric Cooperative, Inc., under Contract No. DE-PM75-92SW00215, dated October 7, 1992. This rate shall remain in effect on an interim basis through September 30, 2009, or until the FERC confirms and approves the rate on a final basis. Dated: December 23, 2005. Clay Sell, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E6-108 Filed 1-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Western Area Power Administration Central Arizona Project—Rate Order No. WAPA-124 AGENCY: Western Area Power Administration, DOE. ACTION: Notice of order concerning transmission service rates. SUMMARY: The Deputy Secretary of Energy confirmed and approved Rate Order No. WAPA-124 and Rate Schedules CAP-FT2, CAP-NFT2, and CAP-NITS2, placing transmission rates from the Central Arizona Project
(CAP)of the Western Area Power Administration (Western) into effect on an interim basis. The provisional rates will be in effect until the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) confirms, approves, and places them into effect on a final basis or until they are replaced by other rates. The provisional rates will provide sufficient revenue to pay all annual costs, including interest expense, and repayment of power investment, within the allowable periods. DATES: Rate Schedules CAP-FT2, CAP-NFT2, and CAP-NITS2 will be placed into effect on an interim basis on the first day of the first full billing period beginning on or after January 1, 2006, and will be in effect until the Commission confirms, approves, and places the rate schedules in effect on a final basis through December 31, 2010, or until the rate schedules are superseded. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. J. Tyler Carlson, Regional Manager, Desert Southwest Customer Service Region, Western Area Power Administration, P.O. Box 6457, Phoenix, AZ 85005-6457,
(602)605-7348, e-mail *carlson@wapa.gov,* or Mr. Jack D. Murray, Rates Team Lead, Desert Southwest Customer Service Region, Western Area Power Administration, P.O. Box 6457, Phoenix, AZ 85005-6457,
(602)605-2442, e-mail *jmurray@wapa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Deputy Secretary of Energy approved Rate Schedules CAP-FT1, CAP-NFT1, and CAP-NITS1 for transmission service on December 11, 2000 (Rate Order No. WAPA-88, 65 FR 77368, December 11, 2000). The Commission confirmed and approved the rate schedules on July 31, 2001, in FERC Docket No. EF01-5111-000. The existing rate schedules CAP-FT1, CAP-NFT1, and CAP-NITS1 are effective from January 1, 2001, through December 31, 2005. The existing rate schedules are being superseded by rate schedules CAP-FT2, CAP-NFT2, and CAP-NITS2. The provisional formula rates for point-to-point transmission service and Network Integration Transmission Service
(NITS)on the CAP 115kV and 230-kV transmission lines are based on the calculation of a revenue requirement that recovers the CAP 115kV and 230-kV transmission lines costs for facilities associated with providing transmission service and the non-facilities costs allocated to transmission service. These rate formulas include costs for scheduling, system control, and dispatch service. The provisional rates for point-to-point transmission service on the CAP 115-kV/230-kV transmission system are determined by combining the average annual amortization costs with the average annual operations and maintenance costs, and dividing them by the average annual contract rate of delivery for the 5-year period FY 2006-FY 2010. The revised formula rates reflect a 2.87-percent decrease for 2006 when compared to the existing CAP transmission rates, which expire December 31, 2005. The decrease in the firm point-to-point rate is the result of increased transmission reservations combined with relatively stable expenses since the approval of Rate Order WAPA-88. Implementation of the revised formula rates will result in a firm transmission service rate of $9.55 per kilowattyear for 2006. NITS allows a transmission customer to integrate, plan, economically dispatch, and regulate its network resources to serve its native load in a way comparable to how a transmission provider uses its own transmission system to service its native load customers. The monthly charge methodology for NITS on the CAP 115-kV and 230-kV transmission lines is the product of the transmission customer's load-ratio share times one-twelfth of the annual transmission revenue requirement. The customer's load-ratio share is calculated on a rolling 12-month basis. The customer's load-ratio share is equal to that customer's hourly load coincident with the CAP 115-kV and 230-kV transmission lines monthly transmission system peak divided by the resultant value of the CAP 115-kV and 230-kV transmission lines monthly transmission system peak minus the CAP 115-kV and 230-kV transmission lines coincident peak for all firm point-to-point transmission service plus the CAP 115-kV and 230-kV transmission lines firm point-to-point transmission service reservations. By Delegation Order No. 00-037.00, effective December 6, 2001, the Secretary of Energy delegated:
(1)The authority to develop power and transmission rates to Western's Administrator,
(2)the authority to confirm, approve, and place such rates into effect on an interim basis to the Deputy Secretary of Energy, and
(3)the authority to confirm, approve, and place into effect on a final basis, to remand or to disapprove such rates to the Commission. Existing DOE procedures for public participation in power rate adjustments (10 CFR part 903) were published on September 18, 1985. Under Delegation Order Nos. 00-037.00 and 00-001.00B, and in compliance with 10 CFR part 903, and 18 CFR part 300, I hereby confirm, approve, and place Rate Order No. WAPA-124, the proposed formula rate for CAP transmission, into effect on an interim basis. The new Rate Schedules CAP-FT2, CAP-NFT2, and CAP-NITS2, will be promptly submitted to the Commission for confirmation and approval on a final basis. Dated: December 23, 2005. Clay Sell, Deputy Secretary. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Deputy Secretary [Rate Order No. WAPA-124] In the Matter of: Western Area Power Administration Rate Adjustment for the Central Arizona Project. Order Confirming, Approving, and Placing the Central Arizona Project Transmission Service Rates Into Effect on an Interim Basis This rate was established in accordance with section 302 of the Department of Energy
(DOE)Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7152). This Act transferred to and vested in the Secretary of Energy the power marketing functions of the Secretary of the Department of the Interior and the Bureau of Reclamation under the Reclamation Act of 1902 (ch. 1093, 32 Stat. 388), as amended and supplemented by subsequent laws, particularly section 9(c) of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939 (43 U.S.C. 485h(c)), and other Acts that specifically apply to the project involved. By Delegation Order No. 00-037.00, effective December 6, 2001, the Secretary of Energy delegated:
(1)The authority to develop power and transmission rates to Western's Administrator,
(2)the authority to confirm, approve, and place such rates into effect on an interim basis to the Deputy Secretary of Energy, and
(3)the authority to confirm, approve, and place into effect on a final basis, to remand or to disapprove such rates to the Commission. Existing DOE procedures for public participation in power rate adjustments (10 CFR part 903) were published on September 18, 1985. Acronyms and Definitions As used in this rate order, the following acronyms and definitions apply: *Administrator:* The Administrator of the Western Area Power Administration (Western). *BATO:* Balancing Authority and Transmission Operations area. Formerly referred to as a Control Area. *Capacity:* The electric capability of a generator, transformer, transmission circuit, or other equipment. It is expressed in kW. *CAP:* Central Arizona Project, one of three related water development projects that make up the Colorado River Basin Project. *Commission:* Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. *CROD:* Contract rate of delivery. The maximum amount of capacity made available to a customer for a period specified under a contract or service agreement. *Customer:* An entity with a contract [BF8] or service agreement that is receiving service from Western's Desert Southwest Region. *CY:* Calendar year; January 1 through December 31. *DOE:* United States Department of Energy. *DOE Order RA 6120.2:* An order dealing with power marketing administration financial reporting and ratemaking procedures. *Energy:* Measured in terms of the work it is capable of doing over a period of time. It is expressed in kilowatthours. *FERC:* The Commission (to be used when referencing Commission Orders). *Firm:* A type of product and/or service available at the time requested by the customer. *Formula Rates:* A rate which is based upon a formula calculated yearly. *FY:* Fiscal year; October 1 to September 30. *kV:* Kilovolt—the electrical unit of measure of electric potential that equals 1,000 volts. *kW:* Kilowatt—the electrical unit of capacity that equals 1,000 watts. *kWmonth:* Kilowattmonth—the electrical unit of the monthly amount of capacity. *kWh:* Kilowatthour—the electrical unit of energy that equals 1,000 watts in 1 hour. *mill:* A monetary denomination of the United States that equals one tenth of a cent or one thousandth of a dollar. *NEPA:* National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321, *et seq.* ). *NITS:* Network Integration Transmission Service. *Non-firm:* A type of product and/or service not always available at the time requested by the customer. *O&M:* Operation and Maintenance. *Power:* Capacity and energy. *Reclamation:* United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. *Revenue Requirement:* The revenue required to recover annual expenses (such as O&M, transmission service expenses, interest, deferred expenses) and repayment of Federal investments, and other assigned costs. *SCADA:* Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition. *WALC:* Western Area Lower Colorado BATO, operated by Desert Southwest Region. *Western:* United States Department of Energy, Western Area Power Administration. Effective Date The new interim rates will take effect on the first day of the first full billing period beginning on or after January 1, 2006, and will remain in effect until December 31, 2010, pending approval by the Commission on a final basis. Public Notice and Comment Western followed the Procedures for Public Participation in Power and Transmission Rate Adjustments and Extensions, 10 CFR part 903, in developing these rates. The steps Western took to involve interested parties in the rate process were: 1. On June 22, 2005, Western mailed a notice announcing an informal meeting, which was held July 12, 2005. At this informal meeting, Western explained the rationale for the rate adjustment, presented rate designs and methodologies, and answered questions. 2. A **Federal Register** notice published on July 1, 2005 (70 FR 38130), announced the proposed rates for the Central Arizona Project, began a public consultation and comment period, and announced the public information and public comment forums. 3. On July 18, 2005, Western's Desert Southwest Region mailed letters to all the Central Arizona Project customers and interested parties transmitting the Brochure for Proposed Rates and the **Federal Register** notice published on July 1, 2005. 4. On July 21, 2005, Western mailed data to the Central Arizona Project customers and interested parties, in response to customers' data request at the informal customer meeting. 5. On July 22, 2005, beginning at 10 a.m., Western held a public information forum at the Desert Southwest Regional office in Phoenix, Arizona. Western provided detailed explanations of the proposed rates for CAP, and a list of issues that could affect the proposed rates. Western also answered questions, provided rate brochures, supporting documentation, and informational handouts. 6. On August 22, 2005, beginning at 1 p.m., Western held a comment forum to give the public an opportunity to comment for the record. There were no comments at this forum. 7. Western received one comment letter during the consultation and comment period, which ended September 29, 2005. All formally submitted comments have been considered in preparing this Rate Order. Comments Written comments were received from the following organizations: Central Arizona Water Conservation District. Project Description The CAP was authorized by passage of the Colorado River Basin Project Act (Act of September 30, 1968, Pub. L. 90-537, 82 Stat. 885) for the purposes of furnishing irrigation water and municipal water supplies to the water-deficient areas of Arizona and western New Mexico through direct diversion or exchange of water, conservation and development of fish and wildlife resources, enhancement of recreation opportunities, and for other purposes. The Secretary of the Interior was directed to construct, operate and maintain the CAP, consisting of the following principal works:
(1)A system of main conduits and canals, including a main canal and pumping plants for diverting and carrying water;
(2)water storage facilities and power-pumping plants;
(3)aqueducts and pumping plants;
(4)related canals, regulating facilities, hydroelectric power plants, and electrical transmission facilities required for the operation of said principal works;
(5)related water distribution and drainage works; and
(6)appurtenant works. The Colorado River Basin Project Act also authorized Federal participation with non-Federal interests for construction, operation, and maintenance of a thermal generating power plant (Navajo Generating Station or NGS) whereby the United States acquired the rights to plant capacity, including the delivery of power and energy over appurtenant transmission facilities to mutually agreed upon delivery points, as the Secretary of the Interior determines is required to provide pumping power for the CAP. When not required for the CAP, the NGS power and energy may be disposed of by the Secretary of the Interior for other purposes at such prices the Secretary determines, including its marketing in conjunction with the sale of power and energy from Federal power plants in the Colorado River system, so as to produce the greatest practicable amount of power and energy that can be sold at firm power and energy rates. On August 4, 1977, the Department of Energy Organization Act (Pub. L. 95-91, 91 Stat. 565; 42 U.S.C. 7101) was signed into law, establishing the DOE. Section 302(a)(3) of the Act created Western within DOE. Section 302(a)(1)(E) transferred the power marketing functions of the Bureau of Reclamation, including the construction, operation, and maintenance of transmission lines and attendant facilities to the DOE. Transmission Rate Methodology Study Western prepared a transmission rate methodology study to ensure that transmission service rates are adequate to recover the costs associated with providing transmission service on the CAP 115/230-kV transmission system. The design includes all transmission expenses and associated offsetting revenues. Western reviews the CAP rate design each year to determine if revenues will be sufficient to repay, within the required time, all costs assigned to the Central Arizona Project revenues. Repayment criteria are based on law, policies including DOE Order RA 6120.2, and authorizing legislation. The revised firm transmission rate for CAP firm transmission reflects an overall rate decrease of approximately 2.87 percent for 2006 when compared to the existing CAP firm transmission rate in Rate Schedule CAP-FT1. Comparison of Current and Provisional Firm Transmission Rate Type of service Existing rates 115/230-kV system Proposed formula rates 115/230-kV system 1/1/2006 Percent change Firm Transmission Service $9.83/kW/year $9.55/kW/year (2.87%) Nonfirm Transmission Service 1.12 mills/kWh 1.09 mills/kWh (2.87%) Western's revised rate formula will be used to calculate rates annually for all current and future CAP transmission service. The current CAP transmission rate formula became effective on January 1, 2001. The current CAP rate under WAPA Rate Order No. 88 will expire December 31, 2005. The revised transmission rate formula is expected to be effective January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2010. These rate formulas include costs for scheduling, system control, and dispatch service. The methodology is an annual formula that will divide the average annual transmission revenue requirement by the average annual transmission reservations to determine the rate for firm point-to-point transmission service. The annual transmission revenue requirement includes O&M expenses, administrative and general expenses, investment costs, and interest expense. This revenue requirement is offset by any CAP transmission system revenue credits, such as revenue from non-firm or short-term sales, to determine the net revenue requirement. Firm Point-to-Point Western seeks approval of the rate design formula to calculate the transmission rate to be applied annually. Using this formula, the provisional rate for firm CAP transmission service is $9.55 per kW-year for 2006, a 2.87-percent decrease from the existing transmission rate of $9.83 per kW-year, which became effective January 1, 2001. The decrease is due to transmission capacity reservations increasing more rapidly than increases in total annual costs. The rate formula is calculated annually, using the most recent 5-year projections of total expenses and revenues. If needed, a revised rate will become effective each January 1. The proposed rate formula would be effective January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2010. The cost/kW-year is calculated using the following two-step formula: EN10JA06.000 Where: ARR = Annual Revenue Requirement. The costs associated with facilities that support the transfer capability of the CAP transmission system, excluding generation facilities. These costs include investment costs, interest expense, administrative and general expenses, and operation and maintenance expense. The revenue requirement for CAP is based on projected average costs for the upcoming 5-year rate-setting period. TRC = Transmission Revenue Credits. The revenues generated by the CAP transmission system not related to the revenues from the sale of long-term firm transmission. NARR = Net Annual Transmission Revenue Requirement. The Annual Revenue Requirement minus Transmission Revenue Credits. TSTL = CAP Transmission System Total Load. The sum of the total average CAP transmission capacity under long-term reservation, including the total network integration loads at system peak for the upcoming 5-year rate-setting period. Nonfirm Point-to-Point The proposed rate for nonfirm point-to-point CAP transmission service is a mills/kWh rate, based upon the current firm point-to-point rate and may be discounted. This rate will remain in effect for the same period as the firm point-to-point rate and will also be reviewed annually. The provisional rate for CAP non-firm transmission service is based on the current CAP firm point-to-point transmission rate. The provisional rate is expressed in mills/kWh and is a maximum of 1.09 mills/kWh for 2006. Transmission availability will be posted on Western's OASIS. Network Integration Transmission Service The proposed rate for network transmission is a formula calculation based upon the annual transmission revenue requirement. There are no changes to the existing network integration transmission service formula under Rate Schedule CAP-NITS2. NITS allows a transmission customer to integrate, plan, economically dispatch, and regulate its network resources to serve its native load in a way comparable to how a transmission provider uses its own transmission system to service its native load customers. The monthly charge methodology for NITS on the CAP 115-kV and 230-kV transmission lines is the product of the transmission customer's load-ratio share times one-twelfth of the annual transmission revenue requirement. The customer's load-ratio share is calculated on a rolling 12-month basis. The customer's load-ratio share is equal to that customer's hourly load coincident with the CAP 115-kV and 230-kV transmission lines monthly transmission system peak divided by the resultant value of the CAP 115-kV and 230-kV transmission lines monthly transmission system peak minus the CAP 115-kV and 230-kV transmission lines coincident peak for all firm point-to-point transmission service plus the CAP 115-kV and 230-kV transmission lines firm point-to-point transmission service reservations. The proposed revenue requirement includes the costs for scheduling, system control, and dispatch service. The reactive supply and voltage control ancillary service must be purchased from the WALC BATO. The transmission customer may self-supply the four remaining ancillary services or request them from WALC. These four ancillary services are regulation and frequency response service, energy imbalance service, spinning reserve service, and supplemental reserve service. The rates for these ancillary services are set forth in Rate Schedules DSW-SD1, DSW-RS1, DSW-EI1, DSW-FR1, DSW-SPR1, and DSW-SUR1. Western is currently engaged in a public process to implement new Rates Schedules for ancillary services, which are expected to be effective April 1, 2006. Certification of Rates Western's Administrator certified that the provisional rates for CAP transmission service are the lowest possible rates consistent with sound business principles. The provisional rates were developed following administrative policies and applicable laws. Basis for Rate Development According to Reclamation Law, Western must establish transmission rates sufficient to recover operation, maintenance, purchased power and interest expenses, and repayment of investment. The existing rate for CAP firm transmission under Rate Schedule CAP-FT1 expires December 31, 2005. Effective January 1, 2006, Rate Schedule CAP-FT1 will be superseded by the new rates in Rate Schedule CAP-FT2. The provisional rate for CAP firm point-to-point transmission is $9.55 per kW per year. Statement of Revenue and Related Expenses The following table provides a summary of projected revenue and expense data for the CAP firm transmission rate through the 5-year provisional rate approval period. CAP Firm Transmission.—Comparison of 5-Year Rate Period (FY 2006-FY 2010) [Total revenues and expenses] Existing formula rate Proposed formula rate Difference Total Revenues $34,429,675 $40,103,745 $5,674,070 *Revenue Distribution* Expenses: O&M (including replacements expense) 6,417,770 10,864,596 4,446,826 Purchased Power and Wheeling 0 0 0 Interest 19,343,148 17,931,221 (1,411,927) Other 345,140 1,813,043 1,467,903 Total Expenses 26,106,058 30,608,860 4,502,802 Principal Payments: Original Project and Additions 8,323,302 9,484,969 1,161,667 Replacements 0 0 0 Total Principal Payments 8,323,302 9,484,969 1,161,667 Total Revenue Distribution 34,429,360 40,093,829 5,664,469 The cost data reflects an increase in total costs when comparing the existing rates to the proposed rates. The increases in total costs, however, are outpaced by increases in total transmission reservations, resulting in a proposed rate decrease of 2.87 percent effective January 1, 2006. Comments The comments and responses regarding the firm transmission rate, paraphrased for brevity when not affecting the meaning of the statement(s), are discussed below. Direct quotes from comment letters are used for clarification where necessary. The rate process issues discussed are,
(1)Central Arizona Water Conservation District (CAWCD) O&M costs,
(2)Western expenses to the CAP transmission system, and
(3)capital additions and replacements. 1. CAWCD O&M Costs *Comment:* The CAWCD representative strongly supports including the costs identified during the public process. However, there are other CAP transmission system O&M costs incurred by CAWCD, in addition to the McCullough O&M charge, which are not reflected in Western's rate review. *Response:* Western has committed to continue to work with CAWCD to ensure that costs appropriately attributed to the CAP 115/230-kV transmission system will be included in the rate calculation. O&M expenses incurred by CAWCD to aid in maintaining the Federal transmission system are appropriately included in the transmission rate. Costs will be reviewed annually as part of the annual review to determine adequacy of the transmission rate. 2. Western Expenses to the CAP Transmission System *Comment:* The CAWCD representative indicated the CAP transmission line miles and SCADA point values that are used to allocate costs for transmission system studies (“STUDM” costs) and costs for assets providing benefit to multiple power systems (“RENTM” costs), respectively, are too high and should be adjusted. *Response:* Western has responded to CAWCD's review of the allocation practices and stated that adjustments will be made where appropriate in FY 2006. Any resulting increase or decrease in the revenue requirement which results in an over or under collection will be accounted for in the subsequent year. 3. Capital Additions and Replacements in Rate *Comment:* The CAWCD representative indicated that Western's July 2005 rate adjustment brochure states that no capital additions or replacements are projected for FY 2006 through FY 2010. The customer believes the brochure statement to be untrue, and anticipates annual costs for capital additions or replacements in FY 2007 and beyond to average at least $500,000. Those costs should be included in the CAP transmission rate methodology. CAWCD encourages Western to modify the proposed CAP transmission rate to be charged for CY 2006 to include projections for new capital investments. *Response:* Western is working with CAWCD and the Bureau of Reclamation to ensure appropriate amortization costs for capitalized replacements or additions are included in the rate calculation. Based on reviews of available data, Western has included an estimate of $625,000 in replacements for the rate to be charged in CY 2006. In the event capitalized replacements or additions are added to plant-in-service in a given year, and the amortization costs (principal and interest) were not included in the rate calculation, they will be included in the subsequent year. Availability of Information Information about this rate adjustment, including power repayment studies, comments, letters, memorandums, and other supporting material made or kept by Western to develop the provisional rates, is available for public review in the Desert Southwest Customer Service Region, Western Area Power Administration, 615 South 43rd Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona. Regulatory Procedure Requirements Regulatory Flexibility Analysis The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601, *et seq.* ) requires Federal agencies to perform a regulatory flexibility analysis if a final rule is likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and there is a legal requirement to issue a general notice of proposed rulemaking. Western has determined that this action does not require a regulatory flexibility analysis since it is a rulemaking of particular applicability involving rates or services applicable to public property. Environmental Compliance In compliance with the NEPA of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321, *et seq.* ); Council on Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508); and DOE NEPA Regulations (10 CFR part 1021), Western has determined that this action is categorically excluded from preparing an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement. Determination Under Executive Order 12866 Western has an exemption from centralized regulatory review under Executive Order 12866; accordingly, no clearance of this notice by the Office of Management and Budget is required. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act Western has determined that this rule is exempt from congressional notification requirements under 5 U.S.C. 801 because the action is a rulemaking of particular applicability relating to rates or services and involves matters of procedure. Submission to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission The interim rates herein confirmed, approved, and placed into effect, together with supporting documents, will be submitted to the Commission for confirmation and final approval. Order In view of the foregoing and under the authority delegated to me, I confirm and approve on an interim basis, effective January 1, 2006, Rate Schedules CAP-FT2, CAP-NFT2, and CAP-NITS2 for the Central Arizona Project of the Western Area Power Administration. The rate schedules shall remain in effect on an interim basis, pending the Commission's confirmation and approval of them or substitute rates on a final basis through December 31, 2010. Dated: December 23, 2005. Clay Sell, Deputy Secretary. Rate Schedule CAP-FT2 Supersedes Rate Schedule CAP-FT1 United States Department of Energy Western Area Power Administration Central Arizona Project Schedule of Rate(s) for Firm Point-to-Point CAP 115-kv/230-kv Transmission Service *Effective:* The first day of the first full billing period beginning on or after January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2010. *Available:* In the area served by the Central Arizona Project
(CAP)115-kV/230-kV transmission system. *Applicable:* The transmission service customers shall compensate the CAP where firm capacity and energy are supplied to the CAP 115-kV/230-kV transmission system at points of interconnection with other systems and transmitted and delivered, less losses, to points of delivery on the CAP 115-kV/230-kV system specified in the contract or service agreement. The formula for the annual revenue requirement used to calculate the charges for this firm service under this schedule was promulgated and may be modified pursuant to applicable Federal laws, regulations, and policies. The Desert Southwest Region may modify the charges for firm point-to-point transmission service upon written notice to the transmission customer. Any change to the charges to the transmission customer for firm point-to-point transmission, shall be as set forth in a revision to this rate schedule promulgated pursuant to applicable Federal laws, regulations, and policies and made part of the applicable service contract or service agreement. DSW shall charge the transmission customer in accordance with the revenue requirements then in effect. *Character and Conditions of Service:* Alternating current at 60 Hertz, three-phase, delivered and metered at the voltages and points of delivery established by contract or service agreement over the CAP 115-kV/230-kV transmission system. Formula Rate for Firm Point-to-Point Transmission Service Annual Rate = 5-Year Average Annual Revenue Requirement divided by the 5-Year Average Contract Rate of Delivery, rounded to the nearest penny. Monthly Rate = Annual Rate divided by 12, rounded to the nearest penny. Calculated Rates For 2006, the annual firm rate calculates to $9.55 per kW year, and the monthly firm rate calculates to $0.80 per kW month. Based on updated financial and load data, recalculated rates will go into effect on January 1 of each year during the effective rate schedule period. Adjustments *For Reactive Power:* There shall be no entitlement to transfer of reactive kilovolt amperes at delivery points, except when such transfers may be mutually agreed upon by contractor and contracting officer or their authorized representatives. *For Losses:* Capacity and energy losses incurred in connection with the transmission and delivery of capacity and energy under this rate schedule shall be supplied by the customer in accordance with the contract or service agreement. *Billing for Unauthorized Overruns:* For each billing period in which there is a contract violation involving an unauthorized overrun of the contractual firm transmission obligations, such overrun shall be billed at 10 times the above rates. Rate Schedule CAP-NFT2 Supersede Rate Schedule CAP-NFT1 United States Department of Energy Western Area Power Administration Central Arizona Project Schedule of Rate(s) for Nonfirm Point-to-Point CAP 115-kV/230-kV Transmission Service *Effective:* The first day of the first full billing period beginning on or after January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2010. *Available:* In the marketing area served by the Central Arizona Project 115-kV/230-kV transmission system. *Applicable:* The transmission service customer shall compensate the Central Arizona Project
(CAP)for nonfirm point-to-point transmission service where capacity and energy are supplied to the CAP 115-kV/230-kV transmission system at points of interconnection with other systems, transmitted subject to the availability of the transmission capacity, and delivered less losses, to points of delivery on the CAP 115-kV/230-kV system specified in the contract or service agreement. *Character and Conditions of Service:* Alternating current at 60 Hertz, three-phase, delivered and metered at the voltages and points of delivery established by contract or service agreement over the CAP 115-kV/230-kV transmission system. Formula Rate for Nonfirm Point-to-Point Transmission Service *Nonfirm Point-To-Point Transmission Service Rate:* Each Contractor shall be billed monthly a mills per kilowatthour rate of scheduled or delivered kilowatthours at point of delivery, established by contract, payable monthly. This rate is equal to the CAP 115-kV/230-kV Firm Transmission dollar per kilowattyear rate then in effect divided by 8760, multiplied by 1,000, rounded to two decimal places. Calculated Rate For 2006, the nonfirm rate calculates to 1.09 mills/kWh. Based on updated financial and load data, a recalculated rate will go into effect on January 1 of each year during the effective rate schedule period. Adjustments *For Reactive Power:* There shall be no entitlement to transfer of reactive kilovolt amperes at delivery points, except when such transfers may be mutually agreed upon by contractor and contracting officer or their authorized representatives. *For Losses:* Capacity and energy losses incurred in connection with the transmission and delivery of capacity and energy under this rate schedule shall be supplied by the customer in accordance with the contract or service agreement. Rate Schedule CAP-NITS2 Supersedes Rate Schedule CAP-NITS1 United States Department of Energy Western Area Power Administration Central Arizona Project Schedule of Rate(s) for Network Integration Transmission Service *Effective:* The first day of the first full billing period beginning on or after January 1, 2006, through December 31, 2010. *Applicable:* The transmission customer shall compensate the CAP each month for Network Integration Transmission Service
(NITS)pursuant to the applicable Network Integration Transmission Service Agreement and annual revenue requirement referred to below. The formula for the annual revenue requirement used to calculate the charges for this service under this schedule was promulgated and may be modified pursuant to applicable Federal laws, regulations, and policies. The Desert Southwest Region
(DSW)may modify the charges for NITS upon written notice to the transmission customer. DSW shall charge the transmission customer in accordance with the revenue requirement then in effect. Formula Rate Monthly Charge = Transmission Customer's Load-Ratio Share × (Revenue Requirement/12) Calculated Rate The NITS rate is calculated using a projected annual revenue requirement. Based on updated financial and load data, a recalculated revenue requirement will go into effect on January 1 of each year during the effective rate schedule period. [FR Doc. E6-110 Filed 1-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8020-5] National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology Environmental Technology Subcommittee AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of meeting. SUMMARY: Under the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92463, EPA gives notice of a meeting of the Environmental Technology Subcommittee of the National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT). NACEPT provides advice and recommendations to the Administrator of EPA on a broad range of environmental policy, technology, and management issues. The Environmental Technology Subcommittee was formed to assist EPA in evaluating its current and potential role in the development and commercialization of environmental technologies by suggesting how to optimize existing EPA programs to facilitate the development of sustainable private sector technologies, and by suggesting alternative approaches to achieving these goals. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss the Subcommittee's recommendations on these issues. The Subcommittee will also discuss new issues that it may address in the future. A copy of the agenda for the meeting will be posted at *http://www.epa.gov/ocem/nacept/cal-nacept.htm.* DATES: The NACEPT Environmental Technology Subcommittee will hold a two day open meeting on Thursday, January 19, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. and Friday, January 20, from 8:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. Due to extenuating circumstances, contractual arrangements of the meeting space were delayed. ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Madison Hotel, 1177 15th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20005. The meeting is open to the public, with limited seating on a first-come, first-served basis. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mark Joyce, Designated Federal Officer, *joyce.mark@epa.gov,* 202-233-0068, U.S. EPA, Office of Cooperative Environmental Management (1601E), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Requests to make oral comments or provide written comments to the Subcommittee should be sent to Mark Joyce, Designated Federal Officer, at the contact information above. The public is welcome to attend all portions of the meeting. *Meeting Access:* For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Mark Joyce at 202-233-0068 or *joyce.mark@epa.gov.* To request accommodation of a disability, please contact Mark Joyce, preferably at least 10 days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request. Dated: January 4, 2006. Sonia Altieri, Designated Federal Officer. [FR Doc. E6-98 Filed 1-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OPPT-2003-0006; FRL-7746-6] TSCA Chemical Testing; Receipt of Test Data AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA's receipt of test data regarding *In Vitro* Dermal Absorption Rate Testing of Certain Chemicals of Interest to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Data were received on the following chemicals: Biphenyl (CAS No. 92-52-4); tert-butylcatechol
(TBC)(CAS No. 98-29-3); carbon disulfide (CAS No. 75-15-0); catechol (CAS No. 120-80-9); chlorobenzene (CAS No. 108-90-7); cyclohexanol (CAS No. 108-93-0); p-dichlorobenzene (CAS No. 106-46-7); dimethylacetamide
(DMAc)(CAS No. 127-19-5); ethylene dichloride (CAS No. 107-06-2); hydroquinone monomethyl ether (HQMME) (CAS No. 150-76-5); methyl formate (CAS No. 107-31-3); vinyl toluene (CAS No. 25013-15-4); and p-xylene (CAS No. 106-42-3). These data were submitted pursuant to a test rule issued by EPA under section 4 of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Colby Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator, Environmental Assistance Division (7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460-0001; telephone number:
(202)554-1404; e-mail address: *TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? This action is directed to the public in general. This action may, however, be of interest to those persons who are concerned about data on health and/or environmental effects and other characteristics of this chemical. Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . B. How Can I Get Copies of this Document and Other Related Information? 1. *Docket.* EPA has established an official public docket for this action under docket identification
(ID)number EPA-HQ-OPPT-2003-0006. The official public docket consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received, and other information related to this action. Although a part of the official docket, the public docket does not include Confidential Business Information
(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. The official public docket is the collection of materials that is available for public viewing at the EPA Docket Center, Rm. B102-Reading Room, EPA West, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The EPA Docket Center Reading Room telephone number is
(202)566-1744 and the telephone number for the OPPT Docket, which is located in EPA Docket Center, is
(202)566-0280. 2. *Electronic access* . You may access this **Federal Register** document electronically through the EPA Internet under the “ **Federal Register** ” listings at *http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/* . *Agency Website* : EPADOCKET, EPA's electronic public docket and comment system was replaced on November 25, 2005, by an enhanced federal-wide electronic docket management and comment system located at *http://www.regulations.gov/* . Follow the on-line instructions. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA Dockets at *http://www.epa.gov/edocket/* to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the official public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Although not all docket materials may be available electronically, you may still access any of the publicly available docket materials through the docket facility identified in Unit I.B.1. Once in the system, select “search,” then key in the appropriate docket ID number. II. Test Data Submissions Section 4(d) of TSCA requires EPA to publish a notice in the **Federal Register** reporting the receipt of test data submitted pursuant to test rules promulgated under section 4(a) within 15 days after these data are received by EPA. 1. Test data for biphenyl were submitted by the Biphenyl Work Group and received by EPA on June 17, 2005. The submission includes a final study report submission titled: “ *In Vitro* Dermal Absorption Rate Testing.” (See document ID No. EPA-HQ-2003-0006-0273.) The submission also includes a letter clarifying that the Biphenyl Work Group is not claiming trade secrecy or confidentiality on this report. 2. Test data for TBC were submitted by the Tertiary-Butylcatechol Consortium and received by EPA on July 20, 2005. The submission includes a final report titled: “[ 14 C] Tert-Butylcatechol (TBC): Percutaneous Penetration of [ 14 C] Tert-Butylcatechol Through Human Split-thickness Skin Membranes ( *in-vitro* ).” (See document ID No. EPA-HQ-2003-0006-0284.) 3. Test data for carbon disulfide were submitted by the Carbon Disulfide Dermal Absorption Task Group (Task Group) of the American Chemistry Council and received by EPA on August 15, 2005. The submission includes an appended final study report titled: “Carbon Disulfide: *In Vitro* Dermal Absorption Rate Testing.” (See document ID No. EPA-HQ-2003-0006-0289.) 4. Test data on catechol were submitted by the Catechol Consortium and received by EPA on August 26, 2005. The submission includes a final study report titled “[ 14 C] Catechol: Percutaneous Penetration of [ 14 C] Catechol Through Human Split-thickness Skin Membranes ( *in-vitro* ).” (See document ID No. EPA-HQ-2003-0006-0287.) 5. Test data for chlorobenzene were submitted by the Chlorobenzene Producers Association
(CPA)and received by EPA on June 6, 2005. The submission includes a final study report titled “Chlorobenzene: *In Vitro* Dermal Absorption Rate Testing.” (See document ID No. EPA-HQ-2003-0006-0255.) 6. Test data for cyclohexanol were submitted on behalf of the Cyclohexanol Dermal Absorption Testing Committee and received by EPA on August 29, 2005. The submission includes a final study report from SafePharm Laboratories titled: “The *In Vitro* Dermal Absorption of [ 14 C] Cyclohexanol through Human Skin.” (See document ID No. EPA-HQ-2003-0006-0286.) 7. Test data for p-dichlorobenzene were submitted by the Chlorobenzene Producers Association and received by EPA on June 6, 2005. The submission includes a final study report titled: “p-Dichlorobenzene: *In Vitro* Dermal Absorption Rate Testing.” (See document ID No. EPA-HQ-2003-0006-0255.) 8. Test data for DMAc were submitted by DuPont Chemical Solutions Enterprise and received by EPA on June 21, 2005. The submission includes a final study report titled: “Dimethylacetamide: *In Vitro* Dermal Absorption Rate Testing.” (See document ID No. EPA-HQ-2003-0006-0274.) 9. Test data for ethylene dichloride were submitted by the Hazardous Air Pollutant
(HAP)Task Force and received by EPA on June 24, 2005. The submission includes a final study report titled: “Ethylene Dichloride: *In Vitro* Dermal Absorption Rate Testing.” (See document ID No. EPA-HQ-2003-0006-0280.) 10. Test data for HQMME were submitted by the Hydroquinone Monomethyl Ether Dermal Absorption Task Group (Task Group) of the American Chemistry Council Hydroquinone Precursors and Derivatives Panel, and received by EPA on September 27, 2005. The submission includes an appended final study report titled: “Hydroquinone Monomethyl Ether: Measurement of the *In Vitro* Rate of Percutaneous Absorption Through Human Skin.” (See document ID No. EPA-HQ-2003-0006-0293.) 11. Test data for methyl formate were submitted by Celanese Chemicals and received by EPA on July 18, 2005. The submission includes a final study report titled: “Methyl Formate: *In Vitro* Dermal Absorption Rate Testing.” (See document ID Nos. EPA-HQ-2003-0006-0281 and EPA-HQ-2003-0006-0282.) The submission also includes a letter clarifying that Celanese is not claiming confidentiality on this report. 12. Test data for vinyl toluene were submitted on behalf of Deltech Corporation by the University of Louisiana and received by EPA on April 4, 2005. The submission includes a final study report submission titled: “Vinyl Toluene: *In Vitro* Dermal Absorption Rate Testing.” (See document ID Nos. EPA-HQ-2003-0006-0247 and EPA-HQ-2003-0006-0248.) The submission also includes two letters clarifying that the study is not claimed confidential or trade secret. 13. Test data for p-xylene were submitted by the p-Xylene Dermal Absorption Task Group of the American Chemistry Council and received by EPA on September 27, 2005. The submission includes an appended final study report titled: “p-Xylene: *In Vitro* Dermal Absorption Rate Testing.” (See document ID No. EPA-HQ-2003-0006-0291.) These chemical substances are used in a wide variety of applications as industrial solvents, which may result in exposures of a substantial number of workers as described in the support document for the Proposed Rule (64 FR 31074, June 9, 1999, Table 3 - Exposure Information for Chemical Substances). EPA has initiated its review and evaluation process for these submissions. At this time, the Agency is unable to provide any determination as to the completeness of the submissions. Authority: 15 U.S.C. 2603. List of Subjects Environmental protection, Hazardous substances. Dated: December 29, 2005. Jim Willis, Director, Chemical Control Division, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics. [FR Doc. E6-100 Filed 1-9-06; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-S FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION Granting of Request for Early Termination of the Waiting Period Under the Premerger Notification Rules Section 7A of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. 18a, as added by Title II of the Hart-Scott-Rodine Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, requires persons contemplating certain mergers or acquisitions to give the Federal Trade Commission and the Assistant Attorney General advance notice and to wait designated periods before consummation of such plans. Section 7A(b)(2) of the Act permits the agencies, in individual cases, to terminate this waiting period prior to its expiration and requires that notice of this action be published in the **Federal Register.** The following transactions were granted early termination of the waiting period provided by law and the premerger notification rules. The grants were made by the Federal Trade Commission and the Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice. Neither agency intends to take any action with respect to these proposed acquisitions during the applicable waiting period. Trans No. Acquiring Acquired Entities Transactions Granted Early Termination—12/05/2005 20060211 Novartis AG Chiron Corporation Chiron Corporation. 20060214 MVP Health Plan, Inc Preferred Care, Inc Preferred Care, Inc. 20060220 Allis-Chalmers Energy Inc Joe Van Matre Specialty Rental Tools Inc. 20060224 Josue Christiano Gomes da Silva Spring Global S.A. Springs Global S.A. 20060229 KKR European Fund II, Limited Partnership Vestar-AIV Holdings A L.P. FL Spring, S.p.A. 20060235 Roger S. Penske Stephen P. Cushman Cush A-KM, Inc., Cush Enterprises, Cush H-E, Inc., Cush J-KM, Inc., Cush M-E, Inc., M.S.M. Group, Inc. 20060237 Hanson PLC PaverModule, Inc. PaverModule, Inc. 20060240 Horizon Health Corporation P. Byron DeFoor Delaware Investment Associates, LLC, Focus Healthcare, LLC, Focus Healthcare of Delaware, LLC, Focus Health of Florida, LLC, Focus Healthcare of Georgia, LLC, Focus Healthcare of Ohio, LLC, Highpoint Investment, LLC. 20060241 Ronald B. Dana Rex V. Ecoff Liquid Transport Corp. 20060242 Francisco Partners, L.P. FrontRange Limited Cayo Communications, Inc., FrontRange Solutions Inc. 20060259 Lodge Holdco I LLC La Quinta Corporation La Quinta Corporation. 20060264 Berkshire Fund VI, L.P. PDS Associates, Inc. PDS Associates, Inc. 20060267 GUS plc PriceGrabber.com, LLC PriceGrabber.com, LLC. Transactions Granted Early Termination—12/06/2005 20060215 Aleris International, Inc. Ormet Corporation Ormet Corporation. 20060275 Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporation Spaulding and Slye Partner LLC Spaulding and Slye LLC. Transactions Granted Early Termination—12/08/2005 20060256 U.S. Bancorp Wachovia Corporation Delaware Trust Company, National Association, Wachovia Bank and Trust Company (Cayman) Ltd., Wachovia Bank, National Association, Wachovia Bank of Delaware, National Association, Wachovia Trust Company of California. 20060277 Avnet, Inc. Calence, LLC Calence, LLC. 20060279 General Atlantic Partners 82, L.P. NYMEX Holdings, Inc. NYMEX Holdings, Inc. Transactions Granted Early Termination—12/09/2005 20060253 Goense Bounds & Partners A, L.P. Frank Scardino Capital Drywall, Inc. 20060254 Goense Bounds & Partners A, L.P. James R. Gates and Angela Gates Capital Drywall, Inc. 20060282 Aetna Inc. Express Scripts, Inc. Aetna Specialty Pharmacy, LLC. 20060285 Merrill Corporation WordWave, Inc. WordWave, Inc. 20060286 Franz Haniel & Cie. GmbH George Mosher Alfax Wholesale Furniture, Inc., National Business Furniture, Inc., Officefurniture.com, Inc. 20060288 Kelso Investment Associates VII, L.P. Voting Trust 12/4/68 of v/s of Hallmark Cards, Incorporated Hallmark Entertainment, LLC. 20060303 Gores ENT Holdings, Inc. Enterasys Networks, Inc. Enterasys Networks, Inc. Transactions Granted Early Termination—12/12/2005 20060231 Agrium Inc. Royster-Clark Ltd. Royster-Clark Ltd. 20060250 Novartis AG Abbott Laboratories TAP Pharmaceutical Products Inc. 20060251 Novartis AG Takeda Pharmaceuticals Company, Ltd TAP Pharmaceutical Products, Inc. 20060255 Legg Mason Investment Trust, Inc. Syntroleum Corporation Syntroleum Corporation. 20060257 Intel Corporation Micron Technology, Inc. Micron Technology, Inc. 20060271 Deutsche Bahn AG The Brink's Company BAX Global Inc. 20060300 CSK Auto Corporation J.W. Childs Equity Partners III, L.P. Murray's Discount Auto Stores. 20060301 Macquarie Bank Limited The Mallah Organizations, Inc. TMO Parent LLC. 20060306 D.E. Shaw Composite International Fund KRG Capital Fund II, L.P. Aspen Marketing Holdings, Inc. 20060314 Tate & Lyle PLC Continental Custom Ingredients, Inc. Continental Custom Ingredients, Inc. 20060315 DC Chemical Co., Ltd. Phelps Dodge Corporation Columbia Chemical Company. Transactions Granted Early Termination—12/13/2005 20060276 Anheuser-Busch Employees' Credit Union Merian Credit Union Merian Credit Union. 20060287 Cortec Group Fund III, L.P. Linsalata Capital Partners Fund III, L.P. Snyder Acquisition Corporation. 20060294 Garda World Security Corporation SPX Corporation Vance International, Inc. Transactions Granted Early Termination—12/14/2005 20060280 The George B. Horne Voting Trust Evan J. Segal Dormont Manufacturing Company, Dormont Realty Partners LLC. 200602894 MKS Instruments, Inc. TWCP, L.P. Ion Systems, Inc. 20060295 Marathon Fund Limited Partnership V Westlake Hardware, Inc. Westlake Hardware, Inc. 20060297 SAP AG KhiMetrics, Inc. KhiMetrics, Inc. 20060305 Dycom Industries, Inc. The Berwind Company LLC Prince Telecom Holdings, Inc. Transactions Granted Early Termination—12/16/2005 20060260 Hoshizaki Electric Company, Ltd. Lancer Corporation Lancer Corporation. 20060291 Reckitt Benckiser PLC Boots Group PLC BHI Holdings
(BHI)Limited, Boots Healthcare Deutschland GmbH, The Boots Company plc. Transactions Granted Early Termination—12/19/2005 20060261 The TriZetto Group, Inc. CareKey, Inc. CareKey, Inc. 20060273 Finmeccanica S.p.A. Textron Inc. Bell/Agusta Aerospace Company LLC. 20060304 Western Forest Products Inc. Partners Limited Cascadia Forest Products Ltd. 20060316 A.B.C. Learning Centres Limited Benjamin R. Jacobson Learning Care Group, Inc. 20060317 Christopher M. Jeffries The Sports Club Company, Inc. Pontius Realty, Inc., SF Sports Club, Inc., Talla New York, Inc., Washington D.C. Sports Club, Inc. 20060319 Spring Nextel Corporation Alamosa Holdings, Inc. Alamosa Holdings, Inc. 20060323 Archer-Daniels-Midland Company Mellon Financial Corporation Mellon Financial Corp. #4. 20060325 Gray Television, Inc. University of Notre Dame du Lac Michiana Telecasting Corp. 20060336 MHM Holdings GmbH Bilakhia Holdings Private Limited Micro Inks Limited. Transactions Granted Early Termination—12/20/2005 20060308 Roche Holding Ltd. BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. BioCryst Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 20060326 Bank of America Corporation Precision Camera & Video Repair, Inc. Precision Camera & Video Repair, Inc. 20060332 Saurer AG Fairfield Manufacturing Company, Inc. Fairfield Manufacturing Company, Inc. 20060333 Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc Dean Vanech Ponderosa Pine Energy Partners, Ltd. 20060338 MarineMax, Inc. Cecil Van Tuyl Lake Port Marine, Inc., Port Arrowhead, Inc., Port Arrowhead Marine, Inc. Transactions Granted Early Termination—12/21/2005 20060327 OCM/GFI Power Opportunities Fund II, L.P. GT Equipment Technologies, Inc. GT Equipment Technologies, Inc. Transactions Granted Early Termination—12/22/2005 20060565 Sierra Pacific Resources Pinnacle West Capital Corporation GenWest, LLC. 20060263 Wyeth Trubion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Trubion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 20060346 Embridge Inc. BP P.L.C. Olympic Pipe Line Company. Transactions Granted Early Termination—12/23/2005 20060335 Richard L. Scott Secure Computing Corporations Secure Computing Corporations. 20060345 Danaher Corporation Visual Networks, Inc. Visual Networks, Inc. 20060347 Yell Group PLC James W. Clarke, Sr. Clarke Directory Publications, Inc. 20060349 PMC-Sierra, Inc. Bali Investments S.a.r.l. Avago Technologies Storage (U.S.A.) Inc. 20060356 Brown & Brown, Inc. Horace M. Johnson, Jr. Axion Intermediaries, LLC. 20060359 Sprint Nextel Corporation Velocita Holdings, LLC Velocita Wireless Holding Corp. 20060361 The Related Company, L.P. Equinox Holdings, L.P. Equinox Holdings, L.P. 20060363 OCM/GFA Power Opportunities Fund II, L.P. Equitable Resources Inc. Noresco Holdings, Inc. 20060366 Steel Dynamics, Inc. Roanoke Electric Steel Corporation Roanoke Electric Steel Corporation. 20060377 Silver Lake Partners II, L.P. Serena Software, Inc. Serena Software, Inc. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sandra M. Peay, Contact Representative or Renee Hallman, Contact Representative, Federal Trade Commission, Premerger Notification Office, Bureau of Competition, Room H-303, Washington, DC 20580,
(202)326-3100. By Direction of the Commission. Donald S. Clark, Secretary. [FR Doc. 06-176 Filed 1-09-06; 8:45 am]
Connectionstraces to 26
Traces to 26 documents
U.S. Code
16 references not yet in our index
  • 50 CFR 222.306
  • 50 CFR 222
  • Pub. L. 92-463
  • Pub. L. 106-554
  • 34 CFR 79
  • 35 CFR 75.210
  • 378 F.3d 511
  • 981 F.2d 1450
  • 185 F.3d 446
  • 537 U.S. 293
  • 465 U.S. 513
  • Pub. L. 95-91
  • 10 CFR 1021
  • 10 CFR 903
  • 18 CFR 300
  • Pub. L. 90-537
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice; modification of scientific research permit
U.S.C.§ 1531
Fed. Reg.Notices
U.S.C.§ 762
C.F.R.§ 75.105
U.S.C.§ 631
U.S.C.§ 760
Fed. Reg.Notices
C.F.R.§ 75.118
U.S.C.§ 362
F. App'x378 F.3d 511
F. App'x981 F.2d 1450
F. App'x185 F.3d 446
Cites 42 · showing 12Cited by 0 across 0 sources
★   the supreme law of the land   ★
Don't Tread on Me
E Pluribus Unum — out of many, one

"If you don't know your rights, you don't have any."

Marginalia · a citizen's law index
A research desk, not legal advice. Always read the cited source before relying on a summary.
Questions or an issue? support@self-law.org
disclaimerMarginalia is a research index, not a law firm. Nothing on this site is legal, tax, or financial advice and no attorney–client relationship is formed by using it. Statutes, regulations, and case law change; summaries, search results, AI output, and member posts may be incomplete, out of date, or wrong. Any interpretation drawn from material on this site should be validated by a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction before you act on it.