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 · 2008-03-11 · National Ocean Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Department of Commerce · Notices

Notices. Notice of availability; request for comments

41,142 words·~187 min read·/register/2008/03/11/08-1005

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

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Notice of Availability for Public Comment on the Draft Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology Interagency Working Group on Ocean Observation Integrated Ocean Observing System Strategic Plan AGENCY: National Ocean Service (NOS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), U.S. Department of Commerce. ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments. SUMMARY: The NOAA Integrated Ocean Observing System Program
(IOOS)Program publishes this notice on behalf of the Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology—Interagency Working Group on Ocean Observation's (JSOST-IWGOO) to announce a 30-day public comment period for the five-year IOOS Strategic Plan. This five-year vision for IOOS will be used by the IWGOO to build an implementation plan that will describe in more detail the roles and responsibilities that will be undertaken by the interagency members. DATES: Written, faxed or emailed comments must be received no later than 5 p.m. eastern standard time on April 4, 2008. ADDRESSES: The JSOST-IWGOO IOOS Strategic Plan is available for review from Ocean.US Web site URL: *http://www.ocean.us/IWGOO/SPcomments* . For the public unable to access the internet, printed copies can be requested by contacting the IWGOO Executive Secretariat at the address below. The public is encouraged to submit comments electronically to *strategic_comments@IWGOO.net* . If you are unable to access the internet, comments may be submitted via fax or regular mail. Faxed comments should be sent to 301-427-2073. Comments may be submitted in writing to the NOAA IOOS Program Office, *Attention* : IWGOO Executive Secretariat, 1100 Wayne Avenue, Suite 1225, Silver Spring, Maryland 20910. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information about this notice, please contact the IWGOO Executive Secretariat, *telephone:* 301-427-2439; E-mail: *strategic_comments@IWGOO.net* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Ocean Action Plan (2004), in response to strong recommendations of the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy
(2004)and building on and complementing the work of past and current interagency efforts to build IOOS, establishes a comprehensive mechanism in the executive branch for coordinating ocean policy at the federal level. The Committee on Ocean Policy
(COP)was established by Executive Order 13366 to function as this coordinating mechanism. To support its efforts, the COP established the Interagency Committee on Ocean Science and Resource Management Integration (ICOSRMI) to facilitate and coordinate, recommend, and identify opportunities on a broad array of ocean science issues. In April 2007, ICOSRMI and the National Ocean Research Leadership Council (NORLC) established by the National Ocean Partnership Program (10 U.S.C. 7981-7983) jointly agreed that future actions taken by ICOSRMI related to the NOPP would be deemed actions of the NORLC for the purpose of maintaining interagency progress. This relationship combines the executive-legislative set of mechanisms to provide the essential organizational structures including coordination of IOOS issues at all levels of the federal government. The IWGOO, established under JSOST to lead the interagency planning and coordination of ocean observing activities including IOOS, is represented by seventeen federal agencies, which NOAA was identified as the lead federal agency by the Administration. As defined in the charter, the purpose of the IWGOO is to advise and assist JSOST on matters relating to all aspects of ocean observations within the scope of an end-to-end concept of ocean observations. The IWGOO IOOS Strategic Plan is a five-year vision for the IOOS that builds on the IOOS development plan, addendum, and its predecessor documents for the U.S. IOOS that characterizes the areas of highest priority for the U.S. contribution to the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS). John H. Dunnigan, Chair, Interagency Working Group on Ocean Observations; Assistant Administrator, National Ocean Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. [FR Doc. E8-4693 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3510-22-P DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE Department of the Army Record of Decision
(ROD)for the Final Environmental Impact Statement
(FEIS)for the Renewal of the Special Use Permit
(SUP)for Military Activities on the De Soto National Forest and Implementation of Installation Mission Support Activities at Camp Shelby, MI AGENCY: National Guard Bureau (NGB), Department of the Army, DoD. ACTION: Notice of Availability. SUMMARY: The NGB has decided to proceed with the proposed action to renew the SUP for a 20-year period and construct, operate, and maintain the projects listed in the final EIS including the reconfiguration of the Combined Arms Area. ADDRESSES: To request a copy of the ROD please contact Mr. Tim Powell, Public Affairs Officer, Joint Forces Headquarters, Mississippi National Guard, P.O. Box 5027, Jackson, Mississippi, 39296-5027. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Tim Powell at
(601)313-6349. The alternate point of contact for this action is Major Robert A. Lemire, at
(601)313-6228. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Consistent with the decision to renew the SUP and proceed with the proposed action and analyses described in the FEIS, the NGB shall:
(1)Commit personnel and resources to implement the “Preferred Alternative,”
(2)commit personnel and resources to support operations and training at Camp Shelby,
(3)maintain operations, training and facilities at Camp Shelby, and
(4)implement and program funds for the appropriate monitoring and mitigation measures associated with the approved activities as discussed in the FEIS. The development and implementation of the SUP Operating Plan; identification and implementation of appropriate best management practices and mitigation measures; and continued monitoring of key environmental resources will be accomplished. The present monitoring and mitigation procedures that are employed at Camp Shelby and will continue to be employed to address potential adverse effects from construction, operation, and maintenance of the proposed new projects include a wide range of environmental resource areas, but primarily focus on protection and conservation of proposed, endangered, threatened, and sensitive
(PETS)species (particularly the gopher tortoise due to its prevalence on Camp Shelby), protection of soil, minimization of erosion/sedimentation, and protection of wetlands. For this SUP renewal proposal, the Mississippi National Guard
(MSNG)has revised and updated the mitigation and monitoring program set forth in the 1994 SUP EIS and ROD. The MSNG's commitment to monitor is intended to ensure that the impacts from military training are periodically assessed and that adverse impacts are addressed/mitigated once identified. Since 1994, the MSNG has conducted this monitoring in cooperation with the Forest Service on all lands within the boundaries of Camp Shelby. As part of the development of the proposed renewed SUP, the continuation of this monitoring is required to ensure that the lands used by Camp Shelby meet the federal requirement for multiple use and that the lands are managed to ensure that they are protected from irreversible harm for future generations. Monitoring will be conducted on 13 program areas: noise, PETS species, biodiversity, wildlife, streams, wetlands, soil loss, timber, vegetation, invasive species, wildfire, road closure for military training, and cultural resources. Information included for these monitoring program areas include delineation of the data requirements, sample information, frequency of collection and reporting, responsible party, basis for action, and actions required if the impact threshold occurs. The ROD can be found at: *http://www.ngms.state.ms.us/env/Natural%20Resources/nat_resources_06. htm.* Dated: February 28, 2008. Addison D. Davis, IV, Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health). [FR Doc. E8-4535 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3710-08-M DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Notice of Proposed Information Collection Requests AGENCY: Department of Education. SUMMARY: The Department requests a one-year extension of the deadline established by OMB for the 2008-2009 Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). OMB established the current deadline, June 30, 2008, following the approval of an Emergency Clearance of the 2008-2009 FAFSA. (For chronology of events, see below). This request does not include any changes to the functionality or format of the 2008-2009 FAFSA. The public is welcome to comment on this request, but it should be noted that the 2008-2009 FAFSA is currently approved and NO CHANGES are proposed herein. Subsequent to the approval of this “Extension of a Currently Approval Collection”, the Department will issue a full collection clearance package for the 2009-2010 FAFSA. Unlike this request, the Department anticipates that the 2009-2010 FAFSA will include substantive changes and the public is encouraged to read and comment, as desired, on that package when it is issued in the summer of 2008. FAFSA Clearance Chronology
(1)*Change Worksheet:* *Reason for Submission:* No material change was anticipated for the 2008-2009 FAFSA at the time of filing. Request for “No Material or Nonsubstantive Change to a Currently Approved Collection”—6/22/07. *OMB Approval:* 7/06/07. *Expiration date established by OMB:* 9/30/09.
(2)*Emergency Clearance:* *Reason for Submission:* Addition of TEACH grant question to the 2008-2009 FAFSA on the Web. Request for “Revision of a Currently Approved Collection”—12/20/07 *OMB Approval:* 12/27/07. *Expiration date established by OMB:* 6/30/08. Because the Emergency Clearance expires on 6/30/08, the Department is submitting a full clearance packet for the 2008-2009 FAFSA to OMB and requesting an extension of approval through 6/30/09.
(3)*Extension of a Currently Approved Collection:* *Reason for Submission:* The Emergency Clearance expires in six months. Request for “Regular Review.” *OMB Approval:* TBD. *Expiration date established by OMB:* TBD. The Secretary of Education requests comments on the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) that the Secretary proposes to use for the 2008-2009 award year. The FAFSA is completed by students and their families and the information submitted on the form is used to determine the students' eligibility and financial need for financial aid under the student financial assistance programs authorized under Title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (Title IV, HEA Programs). DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before May 12, 2008. ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted electronically through e-mail to *FAFSA_Comments@ed.gov* . Requests for copies of the proposed information collection requests may be accessed from *http://edicsweb.ed.gov* by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 3585. 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., LBJ, Washington, DC 20202-4537. In addition, interested persons can access this document on the Internet:
(1)Go to IFAP at *http://ifap.ed.gov* .
(2)Scroll down to “Publications.”
(3)Click on “FAFSAs and Renewal FAFSAs.”
(4)Click on “By 2007-2008 Award Year.”
(5)Click on “Draft FAFSA Form/Instructions.” Please note that the free Adobe Acrobat Reader software, version 4.0 or greater, is necessary to view this file. This software can be downloaded for free from Adobe's Web site: *http://www.adobe.com* . FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD)may call the Federal Information Relay Service
(FIRS)at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. Eastern time, Monday through Friday. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Secretary is publishing this request for comment under the Provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* Under that Act, ED must obtain the review and approval of the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB)before it may use a form to collect information. However, under procedure for obtaining approval from OMB, ED must first obtain public comment of the proposed form, and to obtain that comment, ED must publish this notice in the **Federal Register** . In addition to comments requested above, to accommodate the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Secretary is interested in receiving comments with regard to the following matters:
(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: March 5, 2008. Angela C. Arrington, IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management. Federal Student Aid *Type of Review:* Revision. *Title:* Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). *Frequency:* Annually. *Affected Public:* Individuals. *Annual Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden:* *Responses:* 16,787,640. *Burden Hours:* 8,054,467. *Abstract:* Section 483 of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA), requires the Secretary, “in cooperation with agencies and organizations involved in providing student financial assistance,” to “produce, distribute and process free of charge a common financial reporting form to be used to determine the need and eligibility of a student for financial assistance...” under the title IV, HEA Programs. This form is the FAFSA. In addition, section 483 authorizes the Secretary to include non-financial data items that assist States in awarding State student financial assistance. 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 3585. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., LBJ, Washington, DC 20202-4537. Requests may also be electronically mailed to *ICDocketMgr@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 directed to the e-mail address *ICDocketMgr@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 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern time, Monday through Friday. [FR Doc. E8-4778 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-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 Management 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 April 10, 2008. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Education Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Room 10222, Washington, DC 20503. Commenters are encouraged to submit responses electronically by e-mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or via fax to
(202)395-6974. Commenters should include the following subject line in their response “Comment: [insert OMB number], [insert abbreviated collection name, e.g., “Upward Bound Evaluation”]. Persons submitting comments electronically should not submit paper copies. 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 Management, 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: March 5, 2008. Angela C. Arrington, IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management. Federal Student Aid *Type of Review:* Revision. *Title:* Federal Family Education Loan Program and William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program Unpaid Refund Loan Discharge Application. *Frequency:* On Occasion. *Affected Public:* Individuals or household. *Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden:* *Responses:* 400. *Burden Hours:* 200. *Abstract:* This form serves as the means by which eligible borrowers in the Federal Family Education Loan Program and William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program apply for discharge of the portion of a loan that a school failed to return to the loan holder in accordance with federal regulations. 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 3546. 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., LBJ, Washington, DC 20202-4537. Requests may also be electronically mailed to *ICDocketMgr@ed.gov* or faxed to 202-401-0920. 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 *ICDocketMgr@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. E8-4779 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [OE Docket No. EA-336] Application to Export Electric Energy; ConocoPhillips Company AGENCY: Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, DOE. ACTION: Notice of Application. SUMMARY: ConocoPhillips Company
(CoP)has applied for authority to transmit electric energy from the United States to Mexico pursuant to section 202(e) of the Federal Power Act (FPA). DATES: Comments, protests, or requests to intervene must be submitted on or before April 10, 2008. ADDRESSES: Comments, protests, or requests to intervene should be addressed as follows: Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, Mail Code: OE-20, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0350 (FAX 202-586-5860). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Russell (Program Office) 202-586-9624 or Michael Skinker (Program Attorney) 202-586-2793. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Exports of electricity from the United States to a foreign country are regulated by the Department of Energy
(DOE)pursuant to sections 301(b) and 402(f) of the DOE Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7151(b), 7172(f)) and require authorization under section 202(e) of the FPA (16 U.S.C.824a(e)). On January 23, 2008, DOE received an application from CoP for authority to transmit electric energy from the United States to Mexico as a power marketer. CoP has requested an electricity export authorization with a 5-year term. CoP does not own any electric transmission facilities nor does it hold a franchised service area. CoP and certain of its affiliates own electric generating facilities, primarily cogeneration facilities located at CoP-owned refinery facilities. The electric energy which CoP proposes to export to Mexico would be surplus energy purchased from electric utilities, Federal power marketing agencies, and other entities within the United States. In its application, CoP notified DOE that it had been exporting electric energy to Mexico since September 2004 without authorization under section 202(e) of the FPA. CoP asserts that during the time it was making these exports, it was unaware of the requirement to obtain prior authorization from DOE. CoP claims that it first became aware of this requirement in connection with an internal review of its reporting and filing obligations in January 2008. CoP ceased all further electricity exports as of January 16, 2008, and commits to not engage in any further electricity exports pending approval of the application in this proceeding. In connection with its application, CoP submitted a notarized affidavit from its Vice President attesting to these facts and commitment. CoP will arrange for the delivery of exports to Mexico over the international transmission facilities owned by AEP Texas Central, El Paso Electric Company, Central Power & Light Company, San Diego Gas & Electric Company, Sharyland Utilities, and Comision Federal de Electricidad, the national electric utility of Mexico. The construction, operation, maintenance, and connection of each of the international transmission facilities to be utilized by CoP was previously authorized by a Presidential permit issued pursuant to Executive Order 10485, as amended. DOE expects exporters of electric energy to obtain the necessary authorization from DOE to export electricity and to abide by the terms and conditions established for such export in the Orders issued by DOE, including any term limit for the authorization and the requirement to create and preserve full and complete records and file quarterly reports. Failure to first obtain an Order authorizing the export of electricity, or continuing to export after the expiration of such an Order, may result in a denial of authorization to export in the future and subject the exporter to sanctions and penalties under the FPA. DOE also expects transmitting utilities owning border facilities and entities charged with the operational control of those border facilities, such as Independent System Operators or Regional Transmission Organizations, to verify that companies seeking to schedule an electricity export have the requisite authority from DOE to export such power. DOE notes that CoP shall have no authority to export electricity to Mexico unless and until DOE grants such authorization at the conclusion of this proceeding. *Procedural Matters:* Any person desiring to become a party to these proceedings or to be heard by filing comments or protests to this application should file a petition to intervene, comment, or protest at the address provided above in accordance with §§ 385.211 or 385.214 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedures (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Fifteen copies of each comment, petition, and protest should be filed with DOE on or before the dates listed above. All filings in this proceeding should be clearly marked with Docket No. EA-336. Additional copies are to be filed directly with Michael Passaretti, Manager, Regulatory Monitoring & Reporting, ConocoPhillips Company, 600 North Dairy Ashford, Houston, TX 77079 *AND* Daniel E. Frank, Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP, 1275 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004. A final decision will be made on this application after the environmental impacts have been evaluated pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and a determination is made by DOE that the proposed action will not adversely impact on the reliability of the U.S. electric power supply system. Copies of this application will be made available, upon request, for public inspection and copying at the address provided above, by accessing the program Web site at *http://oe.energy.gov/permits.htm,* or by e-mailing Odessa Hopkins at *Odessa.hopkins@hq.doe.gov.* Issued in Washington, DC, on March 5, 2008. Anthony J. Como, Director, Permitting and Siting, Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. [FR Doc. E8-4842 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY International Energy Agency Meetings AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of Meetings. SUMMARY: The Industry Advisory Board
(IAB)to the International Energy Agency
(IEA)will meet on March 18, 2008, at the headquarters of the IEA in Paris, France, in connection with a joint meeting of the IEA's Standing Group on Emergency Questions
(SEQ)and the IEA's Standing Group on the Oil Market on March 18, and a meeting of SEQ on March 18-19. DATES: Meeting Dates: March 18-19, 2008. ADDRESSES: 9, rue de la Fédération, Paris, France. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Diana D. Clark, Assistant General for International and National Security Programs, Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, 202-586-3417. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with section 252(c)(1)(A)(i) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6272(c)(1)(A)(i)) (EPCA), the following notice of meeting is provided: Meetings of the Industry Advisory Board
(IAB)to the International Energy Agency
(IEA)will be held at the headquarters of the IEA, 9, rue de la Fédération, Paris, France, on March 18, 2008, beginning at 9 a.m. and continuing at 3:45 p.m. and on March 19 at 9 a.m. The purpose of this notice is to permit attendance by representatives of U.S. company members of the IAB at a joint meeting of the IEA's Standing Group on Emergency Questions
(SEQ)and the IEA's Standing Group on the Oil Market
(SOM)on March 18, and a meeting of the SEQ on March 18-19. The IAB will also hold a preparatory meeting among company representatives at the same location from 8:15 a.m. to 9 a.m. on March 19. The agenda for this preparatory meeting is a review of the agenda of the SEQ meeting. The agenda of the joint SEQ/SOM meeting on March 18 is under the control of the SEQ and the SOM. It is expected that the SEQ and the SOM will adopt the following agenda: 1. Adoption of the Agenda. 2. Minutes of Previous Meeting. 3. Oil Market Update. 4. World Energy Outlook 2008: Topics about the Oil Market. 5. Report on the IEA/Mexico Oil and Gas Seminar. 6. Natural Market Update. 7. Developments in Member Countries. 8. Report on Workshop on Speculation. 9. The Need for Weekly Stock Data. 10. Middle East Supply. 11. Information about Upcoming 11th IEF Meeting. 12. Nigeria. 13. Any Other Business. The agenda of the SEQ meeting on March 18 and 19, 2008, is under the control of the SEQ. It is expected that the SEQ will adopt the following agenda: 1. Adoption of the Agenda. 2. Approval of the Summary Record of the 121st Meeting. 3. Status of Compliance with IEP Stockholding Commitments. 4. Program of Work 2009-2010. 5. Emergency Response Review Program. —Coordination of IDR and ERR —Draft Questionnaire New ERR Cycle 6. Policy and Other Developments in Member Countries. —Turkey —Poland 7. Emergency Response Exercise 4. —Recapitulation of country responses Exercise in Capitals —Country shares in the ICRP —Conversion factors —Data report
(QuE)—Design Group—Presentation of the next Disruption Simulation Exercise —Schedule for June 2008 Activities 8. Report on Current Activities of the IAB. 9. Other Emergency Response Activities. —Biofuels 10. Activities with International Organizations and Non-Member Countries. —NATO —EU —China —India —Thailand 11. Other Business. —Tentative Dates of Next SEQ Meetings —June 23-25, 2008 12. Documents for Information. —Emergency Reserve Situation of IEA Member Countries on October 1, 2007 —Base Period Final Consumption: 4Q 2006-3Q 2007 —Monthly Oil Statistics: December 2007 —Update of Emergency Contacts List —Emergency Reserve Situation of IEA Member Countries on January 1, 2008 —Emergency Reserve Situation of IEA Candidate Countries on January 1, 2008 —Base Period Final Consumption: 1Q 2007-4Q 2007 As provided in section 252(c)(1)(A)(ii) of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6272(c)(1)(A)(ii)), the meetings of the IAB are open to representatives of members of the IAB and their counsel; representatives of members of the IEA's Standing Group on Emergency Questions and the IEA's Standing Group on the Oil Markets; representatives of the Departments of Energy, Justice, and State, the Federal Trade Commission, the General Accounting Office, Committees of Congress, the IEA, and the European Commission; and invitees of the IAB, the SEQ, the SOM, or the IEA. Issued in Washington, DC, March 5, 2008. Diana D. Clark, Assistant General Counsel for International and National Security Programs. [FR Doc. E8-4831 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY [Docket No. 2007-OE-01, Mid-Atlantic Area National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor; Docket No. 2007-OE-02, Southwest Area National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor] National Electric Transmission Congestion Report; Order Denying Rehearing AGENCY: Department of Energy. ACTION: Order Denying Rehearing. SUMMARY: On October 5, 2007, the Department of Energy (Department or DOE) published in the **Federal Register** a National Electric Transmission Congestion Report and Order (Report and Order) in the above dockets in which it designated the Mid-Atlantic Area and the Southwest Area National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (National Corridors) (72 FR 56992). Numerous parties in each of the above named dockets filed timely applications for rehearing of DOE's Report and Order. Some parties also requested that the National Corridor designations be stayed. On December 3, 2007, in order to afford additional time for consideration of all of the matters raised in the timely-filed rehearing applications, the Department granted rehearing of DOE's Report and Order in both of the dockets for the limited purpose of further consideration (72 FR 69202, December 7, 2007). As discussed in greater detail in this Order Denying Rehearing (Order), the Department has completed its consideration of the issues raised in the rehearing applications, as well as in the requests for stay, and has concluded that they are without merit. Therefore, the rehearing applications and requests for stay in both dockets are denied. DATES: This Order denying rehearing applications and requests for stay is effective March 11, 2008. The National Corridor designations were effective October 5, 2007, and will remain in effect until October 7, 2019, unless the Department rescinds or renews the designations after notice and opportunity for comment. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical information, David Meyer, DOE Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability,
(202)586-1411, *david.meyer@hq.doe.gov* . For legal information, Warren Belmar, DOE Office of the General Counsel,
(202)586-6758, *warren.belmar@hq.doe.gov* , or Lot Cooke, DOE Office of the General Counsel,
(202)586-0503, *lot.cooke@hq.doe.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background A detailed discussion of the statutory framework and procedural background underlying the Department's authority to designate National Corridors and its rationale for doing so is contained in the Report and Order. Most of the issues raised in the rehearing applications were raised earlier, prior to the issuance of the Report and Order, in comments filed in response to:
(1)DOE's August 8, 2006, National Electric Transmission Congestion Study (the Congestion Study); and
(2)DOE's May 7, 2007, **Federal Register** notice (May 7 notice) which presented and solicited comment on the draft designations of the Mid-Atlantic Area and the Southwest Area National Corridors (72 FR 25838). The Department addressed these issues in either or both the May 7 notice and the Report and Order, and those two documents, as well as the Congestion Study, are incorporated by reference in this Order. While DOE has considered all of the arguments advanced in the timely filed rehearing applications, this Order will briefly address only some of these issues again, it will not readdress at length determinations the Department made in the Report and Order for which no new or substantive argument has been advanced in rehearing. The Department's decisions on the designation of the two National Corridors are based on the totality of the record in these proceedings, including the Congestion Study, the May 7 notice, all public comments submitted to DOE, the Report and Order, and this Order. A. Statutory Framework Section 1221(a) of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct) (Pub. L. 109-58) added a new section 216 to the Federal Power Act
(FPA)(16 U.S.C. 824p). FPA section 216(a) requires the Secretary of Energy (Secretary) 1 to conduct a national study of electric transmission congestion within one year from the date of enactment of EPAct (i.e., by August 2006) and every three years thereafter. FPA section 216(a)(2) provides “interested parties” with an opportunity to offer “alternatives and recommendations.” 16 U.S.C. 824p(a)(2). Following consideration of such alternatives and recommendations, the Secretary is required to issue a report, based on the study, “which may designate any geographic area experiencing electric energy transmission capacity constraints or congestion that adversely affects consumers as a national interest electric transmission corridor.” FPA section 216(a)(2),16 U.S.C. 824p(a)(2). 1 This Order uses the terms “Secretary,” “Department,” and “DOE” interchangeably. FPA section 216(a) assigns to the Department the role of identifying transmission congestion and constraints, and the geographic areas in which these problems exist. FPA section 216(a) does not, however, shift to the Department the roles exercised by electric system planners or siting authorities in evaluating solutions to congestion and constraint problems. A National Corridor designation is not a determination that transmission must, or even should, be built, nor is it a determination that any particular transmission facility is needed or where any such facility should be located. Transmission expansion is but one possible solution to a congestion or constraint problem, and other potential solutions include increased demand response, improved energy efficiency, deployment of advanced energy technologies, and siting of additional generation, including distributed generation, close to load centers. B. Procedural Background In accordance with the requirement in FPA section 216(a)(1), the Department issued the Congestion Study on August 8, 2006 and requested comments. The Congestion Study gathered historical congestion data obtained from existing studies prepared by the regional reliability councils, RTOs and ISOs, and regional planning groups. The Congestion Study also modeled future congestion: the years 2008 and 2011 for the Eastern Interconnection, and the years 2008 and 2015 for the Western Interconnection. Based on the historical data and the modeling results, the Congestion Study identified and classified the most significant congestion areas in the country. Two “Critical Congestion Areas” (i.e., areas where the current and/or projected effects of congestion are especially broad and severe) were identified: the Atlantic coastal area from metropolitan New York through northern Virginia (the Mid-Atlantic Critical Congestion Area); and southern California (the Southern California Critical Congestion Area). In the May 7 notice, the Department noted that the term “constraints or congestion that adversely affects consumers” as used in FPA section 216(a)(2) is ambiguous and interpreted the phrase to include congestion that is persistent. Thus, the Department stated that FPA section 216(a) gives the Secretary the discretion to designate a National Corridor upon a showing of persistent congestion because persistent congestion has adverse effects on consumers. Further, the Department stated that it would use a source-and-sink approach to delineate the boundaries of the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor and the Southwest Area National Corridor. 2 2 “Source” refers to an area of existing or potential future generation, and “sink” refers to an area of consumer demand or “load.” With regard to the Mid-Atlantic Critical Congestion Area, the Department noted that the Congestion Study had identified this area based on evidence of historical, persistent congestion caused by numerous well-known constraints that are projected to continue and worsen unless addressed through remedial measures. The Department determined that if action is not taken to address congestion, consumers in the Baltimore-Washington-Northern Virginia area, the northern New Jersey area, and southeastern New York face threats to the reliability of their electricity supply. The Department also documented that congestion exacerbates the degree to which consumers in the eastern portion of the PJM Interconnection and in southeastern New York rely on generation fueled by natural gas and oil. Finally, the Department described the importance of the Mid-Atlantic Critical Congestion Area to the security and economic health of the Nation as a whole. Thus, the Department stated its belief that economic development, reliability, supply diversity and energy independence, and national defense and homeland security considerations warrant exercise of the Secretary's discretion to designate a National Corridor for the Mid-Atlantic Critical Congestion Area. 3 3 Section VIII.C of the May 7 notice, 72 FR 25884-25896. With regard to the Southern California Critical Congestion Area, in the May 7 notice the Department noted that the Congestion Study had identified evidence of historical, persistent congestion caused by numerous well-known constraints that are projected to continue and worsen unless addressed through remedial measures. The Department determined that if action is not taken to address congestion, consumers in the Southern California Critical Congestion Area face threats to the reliability of their electricity supply. The Department also described the importance of the Southern California Critical Congestion Area to the security and economic health of the Nation as a whole. Thus, the Department stated its belief that reliability, supply diversity, and national defense and homeland security considerations warrant exercise of the Secretary's discretion to designate a National Corridor for the Southern California Critical Congestion Area. To delineate the boundaries of both the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor and the Southwest Area National Corridor, the Department identified source areas that would enable a range of generation options and then identified the counties linking the identified source areas with the respective sink areas, *i.e.* , the Mid-Atlantic Critical Congestion Area and the Southern California Critical Congestion Area. The Department stated that both the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor and the Southwest Area National Corridor would have 12-year terms, and explained why that was an appropriate length of time for a designation. 4 4 Section VI of the May 7 notice, 72 FR 25851. The Department provided a sixty day period to intervene and file comments on the draft National Corridor designations announced in the May 7 notice. In addition, DOE held a series of public meetings on the draft designations during the public comment period. 5 All timely filed comments, as well as written comments submitted at the public meetings and transcripts of those public meetings, were posted on the Department's website in order to facilitate public review. In addition, the Department consulted with each of the States within the two draft National Corridors 6 , as well as with the Regional Entities (as provided in FPA section 216(a)(3)) that have authority within the draft National Corridors. 7 5 Arlington, VA, May 15, 2007; San Diego, CA, May 17, 2007; New York City, NY, May 23, 2007; Rochester, NY, June 12, 2007; Pittsburgh, PA, June 13, 2007; Las Vegas, NV, June 20, 2007; and Phoenix, AZ, June 21, 2007. 6 *See* 72 FR 56996, footnote 18. 7 Id., footnote 19. II. Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor (Docket No. 2007-OE-01) Rehearing Issues A. Procedural Matters 1. Rehearing Applications and Requests for Stays The May 7 notice provided instructions on how to provide comments and how to become a party to the proceeding in this docket. Consistent with those instructions, the Department granted party status in this docket to all persons who either:
(1)Filed comments electronically at *http://nietc.anl.gov* on or before July 6, 2007;
(2)mailed written comments marked “Attn: Docket No. 2007-OE-01” to the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, OE-20, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585, that were received on or before July 6, 2007; or
(3)hand-delivered written comments marked “Attn: Docket No. 2007-OE-01” at one of the public meetings. Ordering Paragraph E of the Report and Order provided instructions on how to apply for rehearing. Consistent with those instructions, the Department received numerous applications for rehearing from parties in this docket. 8 In addition, DOE received filings which did not meet the requirements of FPA section 313 (16 U.S.C. 825I) to seek rehearing, either because they were filed by non-parties or were filed late. 9 The Department has reviewed and considered all of the submissions, treating as comments the submissions from filers who do not qualify as applicants for rehearing. However, those commenters will not be able to seek review of the Report and Order and this Order in a United States Court of Appeal. *See* , FPA section 313. For convenience, when referring to a filing in this Order, the term “rehearing application” will be used whether the filing is an actual application for rehearing or a comment. 8 Listed in Appendix A of this order. 9 Those filings and their status are listed in Appendix B of this order. On November 5, 2007, the State of New York (New York) submitted a timely application for rehearing; however, it had not filed comments on the May 7 notice and therefore was not a party to the proceeding. New York asserted that “to the extent New York has previously commented on the Designation Order through its political subdivisions including, but not limited to, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) and the New York State Public Service Commission (NYSPSC), the State has the right to petition for rehearing.” 10 In the alternative, New York moved to intervene late. In addition, on January 31, 2008, New York made another submission, which it styled as a supplement to its November 5 filing, in which it raised issues concerning CRA International, Inc. (CRA), a contractor used by the Department to assist in the preparation of the Congestion Study. 10 New York Motion for Intervention at 1. A person seeking to intervene in a proceeding out of time, particularly after the Department has issued a final order, must provide good justification for being permitted to do so. In this instance, given New York's stated interest in the designation of the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor, the fact that subordinate state agencies already are parties in the proceeding, and the fact that New York's initial petition raises no issues that were not previously raised by New York state agencies, DOE believes there is good cause to grant New York's motion and that other parties will not be prejudiced thereby. Therefore, DOE grants New York's late-filed petition to intervene and will accept for filing New York's November 5, 2007 request for rehearing. However, FPA section 313 requires that applications for rehearing shall be made within thirty days after the issuance of an order. The Report and Order was issued on October 5, 2007, and rehearing requests therefore must have been filed by November 5, 2007. Moreover, the Report and Order specified that DOE would not accept responses to requests for rehearing. Therefore, New York's January 31, 2008, supplemental filing is rejected. 11 11 The January 31, 2008, submittal also inquired about a Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA)request made to DOE by New York. That FOIA request will be addressed by the Department separately outside of this proceeding. DOE received requests that the Department stay the designation of the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor from the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PaPUC), in a joint filing from the Wilderness Society, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Forest Guardians, Western Resource Advocates, and the California Wilderness Coalition (Wilderness Society *et al.* ), and New York. 12 The Department has decided to deny the applications for rehearing as discussed in this Order and affirm the determination to designate the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor. Therefore, the Department also denies the requests for a stay, which would delay the effectiveness of the designation, on the grounds that they fail to satisfy the burden necessary for DOE to grant such relief. 12 New York's request for a stay was made in its untimely January 31, 2008, submission 2. Authority For, and Fairness of, the Designation Process Summary of Rehearing Arguments As in the comments filed in response to the May 7 notice, many rehearing applications argued that the Department had failed to provide adequate opportunity for the public to review and comment on the National Corridors. 13 For example, Greg Bandel stated that the Department “did not include adequate input from affected states, counties, local governments, communities, and affected home owners.” 14 Communities Against Regional Interconnection
(CARI)contended that the designation of the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor is a “rule” subject to the notice and comment rulemaking requirements in the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA)(5 U.S.C. 553) and that DOE failed to follow rulemaking procedures. 15 New York contended that FPA section 216(a) does not authorize DOE to issue either an adjudicatory order or a rule that is binding on the affected States. 16 It further argued that neither FPA section 309 (16 U.S.C. 824h) nor the APA authorizes DOE to issue a designation order. Moreover, New York argued that in issuing the Report and Order, DOE failed to follow the APA's adjudicatory hearing requirements in 5 U.S.C. 554, 556-557, as well as DOE's adjudicatory hearing regulations. New York also stated that if the Report and Order is viewed as a rule, DOE did not comply with the procedural requirements for rulemaking in the APA (5 U.S.C. 553). Finally, New York asserted that DOE improperly relied on a report prepared by CRA and failed to consider certain relevant economic factors in issuing the Report and Order. Various other rehearing applications asserted that the Department did not conduct a wholly independent study of congestion, improperly relying on data and analyses from utilities or others with a vested interest in transmission expansion. 17 13 *See, e.g.* , the applications for rehearing of Faith Bjalobok, New York, and the Commonwealth of Virginia. 14 Application for rehearing of Greg Bandel at 1. 15 CARI rehearing application, at 4-6. 16 New York rehearing application, at 6-9. 17 *See, e.g.* , rehearing applications of Jeffery Brown, Rick Layton, and CARI. DOE Response In the Report and Order, the Department concluded that its process has been fair, open, and transparent, and that it has provided ample opportunity for public comment. 18 In addition, DOE stated that the designation of National Corridors constitutes informal adjudication under the APA, and concluded that it “employed procedures that satisfy all applicable procedural requirements.” 19 Nothing in the requests for rehearing persuades the Department that its conclusions and decisions on these issues, and discussed in the Report and Order, were incorrect. 18 72 FR 57001. 19 *Id* . Although some issues regarding the Department's authority and choice of procedures were raised in comments on the draft designations in the May 7 notice and were addressed in the Report and Order, other issues were raised for the first time in rehearing applications. The Department addresses these issues here. As stated in the Report and Order, the Department does not agree that its designation of a National Corridor is a “rule” subject to the APA's informal rulemaking provisions (5 U.S.C. 553) . 20 Instead, the designation of National Corridors is properly viewed as informal adjudication under the APA. The term “informal adjudication” is used to describe the residual category of agency actions that are not rulemakings and that need not be conducted through formal adjudication. 21 FPA section 216(a) does not require DOE to issue a rule in order to designate a National Corridor. It also does not require a decision on the record after opportunity for an agency hearing, which would make the APA's formal adjudication provisions applicable. 22 The fact that designation orders under FPA section 216(a) have future effect, as noted by CARI, does not preclude DOE from treating this action as informal adjudication. The APA defines “adjudication” as “an agency process for the formulation of an order.” 23 An order is “the whole or a part of a final disposition, whether affirmative, negative, injunctive, or declaratory in form, of an agency in a matter other than rule making but including licensing.” 24 The Department's Report and Order designating National Corridors is the final disposition in declaratory form of how DOE chooses to address the results of the study it must conduct under FPA section 216(a) and, therefore, is properly characterized as an informal adjudication. The Supreme Court has long held that absent a statutory or other legal requirement providing otherwise, whether to use rulemaking or adjudication in a particular matter is the administrative agency's decision to make. 25 20 * Id.* 21 *See* A Guide to Federal Agency Adjudication 146 (Michael Asimow, ed., 2003) (co-authored book published by the American Bar Association's Section on Administrative Law & Regulatory Policy) 22 5 U.S.C. 554(a). 23 5 U.S.C. 551(7). 24 5 U.S.C. 551(6) (emphasis added). 25 NLRB v. Bell Aerospace Co., 416 U.S. 267 (1974), affirming the principle enunciated in SEC v. Chenery Corp., 332 U.S. 194 (1947). The Department rejects New York's argument that FPA section 216(a) does not authorize issuance of either an adjudicatory order or a rule that has binding effect on the affected States. New York is correct that the statute unambiguously requires DOE to conduct a study of electric transmission congestion and issue a report based on the study. 26 FPA section 216(a)(2) provides that after conducting the study required by FPA section 216(a)(1), and after considering alternatives and recommendations from interested parties, including affected States, the Secretary “shall issue a report, based on the study, which may designate any geographic area experiencing electric energy transmission capacity constraints or congestion that adversely affects consumers as a national interest electric transmission corridor.” 27 Thus, while not mandating that the Secretary designate National Corridors, the statute clearly authorizes the Secretary to designate such corridors. Designation of National Corridors may occur in the statutorily-required report, and designation may affect the procedural rights of potential applicants for transmission line siting within the corridor and of citizens in the affected States. 26 New York rehearing application at 6. 27 16 U.S.C. 824p(a)(2) (emphasis added). Under the APA, agency actions are either rules or orders. 28 As previously explained, the designation of National Corridors is properly characterized as informal adjudication, and issuance of the Report and Order designating the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor clearly is authorized by FPA section 216(a). While FPA section 216(a) provides ample authority for issuance of the designation order, FPA section 309 provides additional authority. FPA section 309 provides that the Federal Power Commission, whose powers (in relevant part here) were transferred to DOE in the Department of Energy Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7151(b)), “shall have the power to perform any and all acts, and to prescribe, issue, make, amend, and rescind such orders, rules, and regulations as it may find necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of this Act.” 29 28 Attorney General's Manual on the Administrative Procedure Act at 15 (1947). 29 16 U.S.C. 825h. New York acknowledges that the Department has latitude and discretion in performing its regulatory functions pursuant to FPA section 309. However, New York argues that neither such latitude nor discretion apply to the designation of National Corridors because “[t]he APA, 5 U.S.C. 554, 556 and 557, does not authorize DOE's issuance of the Designation Order, nor the ‘informal’ process DOE followed in issuing it.” 30 As explained previously, the Department concludes there is ample authority for issuance of the Report and Order, and FPA section 216(a) does not require use of formal adjudication for the designation of corridors. 30 New York rehearing application at 7. The APA does not prescribe procedures that agencies must follow when engaging in informal adjudication. Subject to any constraints imposed by due process, or by particular statutes or regulations, agencies are free to establish procedures for informal adjudication. 31 The Department has provided ample opportunities for public comment, both written and oral, in carrying out its responsibilities under FPA section 216(a). The Department solicited comments on the Congestion Study through a notice of availability and request for comments published in the **Federal Register** on August 8, 2006. (71 FR 45047). The Department allowed 60 days for submission of public comments on the Congestion Study. After considering the comments received on the Congestion Study, the Department published the May 7 notice in the **Federal Register** and provided a 60-day public comment opportunity on the draft National Corridor designations. The May 7 notice stated that public comments would be considered prior to DOE issuing the report required by FPA section 216(a)(2). The Department provided this comment opportunity even though FPA section 216(a) does not require DOE to solicit comments on the report or on any proposed or draft National Corridor designations. Section 216(a) only requires that DOE solicit comments on the study, upon which the report and any designation of National Corridors are based. 31 See *Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp* . v. *LTV Corp* ., 496 U.S. 633, 655-56 (1990); *see also* A Guide to Federal Agency Adjudication, *supra* footnote 19 at 147-48. The May 7 notice announced the locations of three public meetings, which were held in Arlington, Virginia, New York, New York, and San Diego, California. Thus, two hearings were initially held in areas that would be affected by the draft Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor and one in an area that would be affected by the draft Southwest Area National Corridor. On June 7, 2007, the Department announced four additional public meetings, two in the area of the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor (in Rochester, New York, and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) and two in the area of the Southwest Area National Corridor (in Las Vegas, Nevada, and Phoenix, Arizona). 72 FR 31571. Thus, a total of seven public meetings on the draft National Corridors were held in the areas that potentially would be affected by the draft National Corridors in order to obtain public views, data and arguments. Additional information about the Department's process for receiving comments on the Congestion Study and the National Corridors is contained in the Report and Order. The Report and Order sets forth the Department's detailed responses to written and oral comments received from members of the public and an explanation of the bases for the National Corridor designations. Finally, DOE disagrees with New York's comments that DOE improperly relied on a report prepared for the Department by its contractor CRA, and failed to consider certain relevant economic factors in designating the National Corridors. 32 CRA produced its report under contract to and with the supervision of the Department, and as such the CRA report is a Departmental document. For that reason and because the document was properly a part of the record for this proceeding, DOE could properly rely on it in producing the Congestion Study. Moreover, as stated in the Report and Order: 32 In a related matter, New York filed a FOIA request for a Cambridge Energy Research Associates
(CERA)Study titled “Grounded in Reality: Eastern Interconnection” which is listing number 7 in Appendix I of the Congestion Study. As was noted in that Appendix I, the CERA study was reviewed by CRA in preparing its report to DOE but was not used by CRA in its report or by DOE in the preparation of the Congestion Study because it was considered confidential. Therefore, the CERA study is not in the record of this proceeding and was not used as a basis for the Department's decisions. In addition, CERA and CRA International, Inc. are separate, non-affiliated companies. The Department did not rely solely on data and information from any single source or category of sources. While conducting the Congestion Study, the Department contacted a wide range of stakeholders for publicly available and current data, and then, through the notice of inquiry and technical conference, opened the call for data to all entities. The Department then performed its own review of the information provided. All interested persons had an opportunity to comment on the May 7 notice, and the Department has considered all timely filed comments. 33 33 71 FR 57001. 3. Adequacy of State Consultation Summary of Rehearing Arguments Several rehearing applications asserted that the Department failed to consult adequately with affected States. For example, the Commonwealth of Virginia stated that “(d)espite the clear and unambiguous statutory consultation language, the DOE's August 2006 congestion study, upon which DOE's NIETC designation is based, was conducted without any consultation with the Commonwealth of Virginia.” 34 New York stated that “DOE was required to formally consult with the affected States in the proposed designated Corridor” 35 and “DOE failed to initially create a formal consultation process in which the States could pursue a dialogue about the Corridor.” 36 34 Virginia rehearing applications at 4. 35 New York rehearing application at 13. 36 Id. DOE Response The Department fully addressed these arguments in the Report and Order and the applications for rehearing raise no new issues or arguments. As stated in the Report and Order: * * * the Department believes that its consultation with States, as documented in the May 7 notice, satisfied the requirements of FPA section 216(a)(1). Moreover, in recognition of the importance of National Corridor designation to States, upon issuance of the May 7 notice, the Department engaged in additional consultation with each of the States within the draft National Corridors and the District of Columbia, as documented in Section I.C above. 37 37 72 FR 57002. The Report and Order documents the Department's extensive consultations with the affected States. The Department finds the arguments that DOE inadequately consulted with the States to be without merit. Indeed, DOE provided even more consultation and comment opportunities to the States and to the public than is called for by FPA section 216(a). B. Adequacy of Showing of Congestion That Adversely Affects Consumers Summary of Rehearing Arguments Many rehearing applications argued that the Department had failed to show the presence of congestion adversely affecting consumers. The rehearing applications took particular issue with the Department's position that it has the discretion to designate the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor upon a showing of the existence of persistent congestion, without further demonstration of adverse effects on consumers. For example, NYPSC stated that “DOE's assertion that it would be too daunting to document all adverse affects of persistent congestion does not excuse DOE's decision to adopt a definition of ‘congestion that adversely affects consumers’ that does not identify the costs such congestion imposes on consumers or the costs of relieving such congestion.” 38 Toll Bros. Inc. (Toll Bros.) asserted that, when identifying congestion, it is impermissible for DOE to consider economic factors, and the only determination DOE should make is whether the existing transmission is in compliance with applicable reliability standards. 39 38 NYPSC rehearing application at 7 (emphasis in the original). 39 Toll Bros. rehearing application at 7-8. DOE Response The Department affirms the conclusion in the Report and Order that it has sufficiently demonstrated and found the existence of congestion that adversely affects consumers in the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor. 40 In the Report and Order, referencing the Congestion Study, the Department defined “congestion” as the condition that occurs when transmission capacity is not sufficient to enable safe delivery of all scheduled or desired wholesale electricity transfers simultaneously. 41 Under this definition, any congestion prevents some users of the transmission grid from completing their preferred power transactions. In the Report and Order, the Department concluded, based on its technical expertise and policy judgment, that it is reasonable to interpret the phrase “congestion that adversely affects consumers” to include congestion that is persistent. 42 Thus, the Secretary appropriately exercised his authority and discretion to designate the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor after finding the existence of persistent congestion. 40 72 FR 57003. 41 *Id.* 42 72 FR 57004. DOE disagrees with the assertion by Toll Bros. that DOE cannot consider economic factors in identifying congestion that adversely affects consumers. Toll Bros. offers no persuasive rationale for its preferred interpretation of the term “congestion.” Instead, Toll Bros.' view—that FPA Section 216's references to transmission congestion should be understood as pertaining only to reliability—is inconsistent with industry usage. Having identified congestion in the Congestion Study, DOE can and did properly look to the FPA section 216(a)(4) considerations, including those dealing with the economic impacts of congestion, in making both its determination that the congestion adversely affects consumers and that a National Corridor should be designated. C. Boundaries of the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor Summary of Rehearing Arguments Numerous rehearing applications reiterated arguments made in response to the May 7 notice that the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor is impermissibly broad. For example, Willard R. Burns stated that “(d)esignation of an area spanning the entire Mid-Atlantic region—and 52 of 67 counties in Pennsylvania—exceeds the Secretary's authority, and renders the definition of ‘corridor' so broad as to be meaningless.” The PaPUC refers to the designation as a “Transmission Park” rather than a corridor. SELC reiterated its position that the definition employed by DOE in establishing corridors under EPAct section 368 should also apply to National Corridors designated under FPA section 216(a). New York objected to the Department's use of the source-and-sink approach, saying that that “approach is contrary to the express language of section 216(a), which directs DOE to include in the Corridor only those geographic areas found to be experiencing constraints that adversely affect consumers in the retail consumer end markets or ‘sinks' of congestion.” 43 The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PaDEP) asserted that the source-and-sink approach is inconsistent with the express language of FPA section 216 which only supports a project-based approach to designating corridors. 44 43 New York rehearing application at 11. 44 PaDEP application for rehearing at 4. DOE Response The Department's approach to defining the boundaries of the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor is consistent with EPAct and with FPA section 216(a). FPA section 216(a) does not limit the shape, proportion, or size of a National Corridor. In addition, as was stated in detail in the Report and Order, the Department concludes that the differences in the language and intent of FPA section 216(a) and EPAct section 368, underscore the appropriateness of the Department's overall approach to establishing the boundaries of the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor. As stated in the Report and Order: The Department does not think it is reasonable, as some commenters have suggested, to interpret the term “geographic area experiencing electric energy transmission capacity constraints or congestion that adversely affects consumers” as restricting a National Corridor designation to the specific confines of the load being adversely affected by congestion or the constrained transmission lines causing such congestion. FPA section 216(a)(4)(A) and
(B)both refer to the Department considering economic factors in “the corridor, or the end markets served by the corridor.” Since the end markets served by a National Corridor are the load centers where consumers are being adversely affected by congestion, this language indicates that Congress envisioned designation of National Corridors that extend beyond the location of the adversely affected consumers. 45 45 72 FR 57007. Moreover, as explained in detail in the May 7 notice and in the Report and Order, DOE believes the source-and-sink approach to designating National Corridor boundaries is a permissible and reasonable way of delineating the corridors, and that using county boundaries is a reasonable means of establishing precise and readily identifiable limits for corridors. PaDEP's assertion that the only valid approach to designating National Corridors is a project-based approach is not consistent with the statutory design of FPA section 216. That provision authorizes the Department to exercise its discretion in determining whether and where to designate a geographic area as a National Corridor, and vests in FERC the authority to issue one or more permits for the construction or modification of electric transmission facilities in a National Corridor. It would make little sense to interpret FPA section 216 as requiring DOE to designate narrowly-defined corridors that, in effect, would constitute siting decisions by DOE, since any siting authority to be exercised under FPA section 216 is plainly the responsibility of FERC, not DOE. Thus, if Congress had intended a National Corridor designation to pertain only to a specific electric transmission project, and had intended DOE to select specific routings, it seems likely that Congress would have authorized DOE to both make the National Corridor designation and issue the construction or modification permit. Congress did not do so. Finally, the inclusion of the phrase “1 or more permits” in FPA section 216(b) would be rendered largely meaningless, if, as PaDEP asserts, DOE could only designate corridors using a project-based approach. As explained at length in the Report and Order, DOE's source-and-sink approach is entirely appropriate and reflects the designation of a National Corridor in a geographic area experiencing electric energy transmission capacity constraints or congestion that adversely affects consumers. D. Consideration of Alternatives Under FPA Section 216(a)(2) Summary of Rehearing Arguments Several rehearing applications argued that the Department should evaluate non-transmission solutions to congestion before designating the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor. Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley stated that DOE failed to properly consider non-transmission solutions to congestion and constraint issues. 46 Willard R. Burns said that “the Department has not considered alternative solutions for constraints and congestion other than corridor designations and new high-voltage lines.” 47 The State of New Jersey said the designation of a National Corridor gives transmission facilities a huge competitive advantage, and therefore DOE must consider non-transmission alternatives prior to making a designation. 48 SELC stated that “energy efficiency, conservation, distributed generation, demand-side management, and other tools are alternatives not just to transmission construction, but also to corridor designation itself.” 49 46 Governor Martin O'Malley rehearing application at 1. 47 Willard Burns rehearing application at 1. 48 State of New Jersey rehearing application at 6. 49 SELC rehearing application at 33. CARI asserted that the designation of the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor was not warranted because New York already has mechanisms in place to relieve transmission congestion and that there “is no legal or institutional barrier to the licensing or construction of new or modified transmission facilities under state law.” 50 Furthermore, CARI asserted that DOE should consider the potential effects of the New York Independent System Operator's August 2006 Comprehensive Reliability Plan, New York Governor Eliot Spitzer's comprehensive plan for reducing electricity use, and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's energy plan for reducing projected demand for energy. Toll Bros. stated that DOE should have considered alternatives such as Virginia's 2007 Energy Plan prior to issuing the Congestion Study. 50 CARI rehearing application at 14. DOE Response The Department concludes that consideration of non-transmission solutions to the congestion problems facing the Mid-Atlantic Critical Congestion Area is neither required nor necessary as a precondition to designating the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor. As stated in the Report and Order: The very structure of FPA section 216 indicates that the Department's role is limited to the identification of congestion and constraint problems and the geographic areas in which these problems exist, and does not extend to the functions of electric system planners or siting authorities in evaluating solutions to congestion and constraint problems. Even the statutory requirement to consider alternatives is not couched in terms of an independent analysis of a reasonable range of alternatives, as one would expect if Congress had intended the Department to analyze and select a solution, but rather refers merely to the Department considering those alternatives and recommendations offered by interested parties. The Department believes that expanding its role to include analyzing and making findings on competing remedies for congestion could supplant, duplicate, or conflict with the traditional roles of States and other entities. 51 51 72 FR 57010. The CARI and Toll Bros. rehearing applications suggested that prior to making a determination on whether to designate a National Corridor the Department needs to examine in detail the feasibility, advantages, and disadvantages of all possible alternatives to building additional electric transmission facilities. Nothing in FPA section 216(a) requires DOE to do so. Nor is it clear why such examining would be helpful, much less necessary, for DOE when it decides whether and where there are problem transmission capacity constraints and congestion that adversely affects consumers and a National Corridor should be designated. The examination envisioned by CARI and Toll Bros. apparently would include reviewing the impacts of all regional, State and local energy plans to determine if the cumulative effects of the plans would provide alternatives to transmission that would obviate the need to designate a National Corridor. In order to make this examination, DOE presumably would need to review the underlying data, assumptions, and analyses in each plan and determine what the effects of the plans would be and whether those effects would be sufficient to eliminate the need to make a corridor designation. In other words, DOE would assume the role of electricity planning czar in all areas of the country experiencing constraints or congestion, ruling on the acceptability of the methodology and data used in the formulation of regional, State and local energy plans, and the adequacy and efficacy of each area's electricity planning, as part of DOE's National Corridor decision making process. FPA section 216(a) does not require the Department to play such a large and invasive role in electricity planning, nor does it require the Department to undertake this level of scrutiny before designation of a National Corridor. The Department has engaged in a searching review and analysis of reasonably available data and information, and has exercised its professional and technical judgment and expertise in making determinations based on that information. It is not required to explore and examine a wide range of possible future actions by many persons or organizations before issuing a designation. E. Whether DOE Should Exercise Its Discretion To Designate the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor Summary of Rehearing Arguments Many of the rehearing applications raised issues previously addressed in the Report and Order. For example, CARI and PaPUC asserted that the economic development, reliability, supply diversity, energy independence, and national defense and homeland security considerations contained in FPA section 216(a)(4) do not support designation of the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor. 52 Other rehearing applications reiterated the argument that the Department should accord more deference to existing State and regional planning and siting processes and delay any designation of a Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor unless and until it has become clear that a Federal siting forum is needed. 52 CARI rehearing application at 29. DOE Response As the Department stated in the Report and Order: The Department recognizes that FPA section 216 adopted a novel approach to addressing congestion problems, and that many commenters have grave concerns about the effects of this new approach. However, after careful consideration of these concerns, the Department concludes that designation of the draft Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor is consistent with the intent of FPA section 216(a). 53 53 72 FR 57012. This is particularly so given the limited function that FPA section 216 assigns to DOE and which a designation is to accomplish— *i.e.* , the role of identifying transmission congestion and constraints, and the geographic area in which the problems exist. The Department also reaffirms its conclusions, as the May 7 notice documented, that economic development, reliability, supply diversity, energy independence, and national defense and homeland security considerations all warrant designation of the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor. 54 54 *See* May 7 notice, Section VIII.C, 72 FR 25884 and FPA 216(a)(4), 16 U.S.C. 824p(a)(4). Finally, the Department notes that it strongly supports State and regional efforts to address collectively the congestion problems confronting the region, whether those efforts are focused on transmission solutions, non-transmission solutions, or a combination of both, and the Department does not believe that designation of the Mid-Atlantic Area National Corridor necessarily will disrupt ongoing State or regional planning processes. Further, as stated in the May 7 notice and reiterated in the Report and Order, DOE does not believe that Congress envisioned the adoption of a wait-and-see approach to National Corridor designation. National Corridor designation provides, in a defined set of circumstances, a potential mechanism for analyzing the need for transmission from a national, rather than State or local, perspective. III. Southwest Area National Corridor (Docket No. 2007-OE-02) A. Procedural Matters 1. Rehearing Applications and Requests for Stay The May 7 notice provided instructions on how to provide comments and how to become a party to the proceeding in this docket. Consistent with those instructions, the Department granted party status in this docket to all persons who either: 1) filed comments electronically at *http://nietc.anl.gov* on or before July 6, 2007; 2) mailed written comments marked “Attn: Docket No. 2007-OE-02” to the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability, OE-20, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585, that were received on or before July 6, 2007; or 3) hand-delivered written comments marked “Attn: Docket No. 2007-OE-02” at one of the public meetings. Ordering Paragraph E of the Report and Order provided instructions on how to apply for rehearing in this docket. Consistent with those instructions, the Department received, reviewed and considered all timely filed applications for rehearing from parties in this docket. 55 55 Listed in Appendix C of this order. DOE received requests that the Department stay its Report and Order designating the Southwest Area National Corridor from the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC), SELC, and the Wilderness Society *et al.* The Department has decided to deny the applications for rehearing as discussed in this Order and affirm the determination to designate the Southwest Area National Corridor. Therefore, the Department also denies the requests for a stay, which would delay the effectiveness of the designation, on the grounds that they fail to satisfy the burden necessary for DOE to grant such relief. 2. Adequacy of State Consultation ACC asserted that DOE did not meet its statutory obligation to consult with affected States in making the determination to designate the Southwest Area National Corridor. ACC stated that while it appreciates the Department's consultations with the Governors of affected states, FPA section 216 requires consultation with State siting authorities. 56 56 ACC rehearing application at 8. DOE Response FPA section 216(a)'s provision that DOE consult with affected States does not require it to consult with a particular State agency as opposed to the State's chief executive. In any case, as evidenced by its filings in this proceeding, ACC has been given the opportunity to participate in the Department's decision making process. As discussed in Section II.A.3 above, the Department's consultation with States, as documented in the May 7 notice and in the Report and Order, satisfied the requirements of FPA section 216(a)(1). B. Adequacy of Showing of Congestion That Adversely Affects Consumers Summary of Rehearing Arguments Several rehearing applications argued that the Department improperly concluded that there was congestion adversely affecting consumers, which the applications assert is a prerequisite to designation of the Southwest Area National Corridor. Essentially, the submissions take issue with the Department's position that it has the discretion to designate the Southwest Area National Corridor upon a showing of the existence of persistent congestion without a further demonstration of adverse effects on consumers. For example, ACC stated that “not all congestion, even persistent congestion, requires a remedy.” 57 The California Public Utilities Commission
(CPUC)reiterated its position that congestion and constraints do not, in and of themselves, adversely affect consumers, and that DOE must develop valid criteria for measuring congestion and transmission constraints and show how they impact consumers. 58 CPUC also questioned the Western Area Power Administration
(WAPA)data on denial of transmission service applications cited in the May 7 notice. 59 The Imperial Irrigation District
(IID)stated that DOE's designation is flawed because it failed to demonstrate that consumers are adversely affected in each of the counties included in the Southwest Area National Corridor. 60 57 ACC rehearing application at 12. 58 CPUC rehearing application at 16. 59 Id. at 15. 60 IID rehearing application at 18. DOE Response The Department has established a record and has found the existence of congestion that adversely affects consumers in the Southwest Area National Corridor. As discussed in Section II.B above, the Department concludes, based on its technical expertise and policy judgment, that it is reasonable to interpret the phrase “congestion that adversely affects consumers” to include congestion that is persistent. Thus, the Department believes that FPA section 216(a) gives the Secretary sufficient authority and discretion to designate the Southwest Area National Corridor upon a showing of the existence of persistent congestion. Whether this persistent congestion requires a “remedy”—i.e., construction of new facilities or any other action—is not a decision that FPA section 216(a) calls on DOE to make, nor does the designation of the Southwest Area National Corridor require DOE to make any such decision. In response to CPUC's questioning of the WAPA data, DOE addressed that issue in the Report and Order, saying that the WAPA data questioned by CPUC is but one category of data used in the May 7 notice to establish the presence of persistent congestion and noting that “if FERC jurisdiction under FPA section 216(b) were triggered, parties could raise any concerns they had about the contractual nature of the congestion.” 61 61 72 FR 57016. Finally, regarding IID's contention, the Department's approach to delineating the Southwest Area National Corridor was designed to connect the sink area containing consumers adversely affected by congestion with a range of source areas separated from the identified sink area by the transmission constraints causing such congestion. Given the overall framework of FPA section 216 and the physical properties of the electric grid, the Department concludes that this approach is consistent with the statutory authorization in FPA 216(a) for DOE to designate as a National Corridor a “geographic area experiencing electric energy transmission capacity constraints or congestion that adversely affects consumers.” C. Boundaries of the Southwest Area National Corridor Summary of Rehearing Arguments Some of the rehearing applications reiterated arguments made in response to the May 7 notice that the Southwest Area National Corridor is impermissibly broad. CPUC opposes designation of a Southwest Area National Corridor that would include all of southern California, but supports designation of a National Corridor that is more narrowly targeted than the corridor DOE has designated, such as a National Corridor along the Arizona section of the proposed Devers-PaloVerde 2 route. 62 CPUC also states that while the focus of FPA section 216(a) is on interstate transmission, more than 48,000 square miles of the Southwest Area National Corridor falls within California alone. 63 CPUC states that the prospect of Federal transmission siting over this in-State area effectively trumps California's ability to establish and pursue its own energy goals. 64 The ACC argues that DOE's source-and-sink approach is fundamentally flawed. 65 62 CPUC rehearing application at 20. 63 Id. at 5. 64 Id. at 29. 65 ACC rehearing application at 14. DOE Response The Department concludes that its general approach to defining the boundaries of the Southwest Area National Corridor is consistent with the statute. As discussed in Section II.C above and in the Report and Order, the language of FPA section 216(a), which refers to designation of a “geographic area,” does not dictate any particular shape, proportion, or size for a National Corridor, and the Department's approach to delineating right-of-way corridors under EPAct section 368 does not inform or constrain the delineation of National Corridors under FPA section 216(a). In addition, as explained in detail in the May 7 notice and the Report and Order, DOE continues to believe the source-and-sink approach to designating National Corridor boundaries is a permissible and reasonable way of delineating the boundaries of the corridors, and that using county boundaries is a reasonable means of providing the precise limits of National Corridors. The applications for rehearing have not persuaded DOE otherwise. D. Consideration of Alternatives Under FPA Section 216(a)(2) Summary of Rehearing Arguments IID claimed that DOE refused to consider any non-transmission solutions to congestion, did not meaningfully analyze IID's recommendation that DOE adopt a more reasonably-tailored corridor, or refrain from making a designation until FERC's new regional transmission planning requirement is given a reasonable opportunity to work. 66 66 IID rehearing application at 19. DOE Response For the reasons set forth in Section II.D above and in the Report and Order, the Department concludes that consideration of non-transmission solutions to the congestion problems facing the Southern California Critical Congestion Area is neither required nor necessary as a precondition to designating the Southwest Area National Corridor. As stated in the Report and Order: The very structure of FPA section 216 indicates that the Department's role is limited to the identification of congestion and constraint problems and the geographic areas in which these problems exist, and does not extend to the functions of electric system planners or siting authorities in evaluating solutions to congestion and constraint problems. Even the statutory requirement to consider alternatives is not couched in terms of an independent analysis of a reasonable range of alternatives, as one would expect if Congress had intended the Department to analyze and select a solution, but rather refers merely to the Department considering those alternatives and recommendations offered by interested parties. The Department believes that expanding its role to include analyzing and making findings on competing remedies for congestion could supplant, duplicate, or conflict with the traditional roles of States and other entities. 67 67 72 FR 57010. In addition, as stated in section II.E above, while the Department strongly supports State and regional efforts to address collectively the congestion problems confronting the region, nothing in FPA section 216(a) requires DOE to adopt a wait-and-see approach to National Corridor designation, or to ensure that all other possible venues for identifying and addressing transmission capacity constraints and congestion have been exhausted before DOE designates a National corridor. G. Whether DOE Should Exercise Its Discretion To Designate the Southwest Area National Corridor Summary of Rehearing Arguments ACC stated that DOE failed to consider the costs of externalities, including but not limited to, State energy, regulatory and environmental policy choices when determining to designate the Southwest Area National Corridor. 68 Further, ACC reiterated comments it made in response to the May 7 notice that differences in locational marginal prices between California and Arizona “are appropriate if they reflect non-monetized externalities.” 69 68 ACC rehearing application at 12. 69 Id. at 13. DOE Response The concerns expressed by ACC in its application for rehearing were addressed in the Report and Order. As stated there, the Department recognizes that FPA section 216 adopted a novel approach to addressing congestion problems, and that some commenters are concerned with this new approach. However, after careful consideration of these concerns, and after considering the entire record in this proceeding, the Department concluded that designation of the Southwest Area National Corridor is consistent with the intent of FPA section 216(a). 70 In addition, as stated in the Report and Order, “the Department's designation of a Southwest Area National Corridor is not motivated by price differentials between California and Arizona.” 71 As detailed in the Report and Order, the Department documented that congestion poses a threat to reliability of supply and limits supply diversity for the Southern California Critical Congestion Area consumers. 72 70 72 FR 57019. 71 72 FR 57020. 72 72 FR 57016. IV. NEPA, NHPA, and ESA Several rehearing applications in both dockets reasserted arguments previously made in this proceeding that before designating any National Corridors, the Department must conduct reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and the Endangered Species Act (ESA). 73 Most of these contentions were previously raised in comments filed in response to the May 7 notice and a detailed discussion of those comments appears in Section IV of the Report and Order. 74 As stated in Section I of this Order, DOE will not readdress at length determinations on matters it made in the Report and Order for which no new argument has been advanced in rehearing that persuades the DOE to alter its decision. However, DOE does address below those rehearing applications that raised new approaches to NEPA, NHPA, and ESA arguments, or that suggest the need for further clarification. 73 *See, e.g.* , rehearing applications of the Energy Conservation Council of PA, Mitchell S. Diamond (requesting a “comprehensive assessment of alternatives”), Jim Feeney, Michael B. Gerrard, New York, CARI, PaDEP, SELC, Toll Bros. and the Wilderness Society *et al.* 74 72 FR 57021. A. Issues Discussed in the Report and Order Summary of Rehearing Arguments Many rehearing applications included arguments contending that designation of a National Corridor requires NEPA review:
(1)Because designation is part of a continuing agency action constituting a new federal plan or program;
(2)because it permits other parties to take action;
(3)to discuss cumulative impacts from anticipated transmission development; or
(4)to examine non-transmission solutions to the congestion identified in the Congestion Study. In addition, rehearing applications reasserted that the Department should have conducted reviews under the NHPA and ESA. DOE Response These rehearing applications raised no new arguments or perspectives that require further discussion or persuade the Department to alter the determinations made in the Report and Order. As stated in the Report and Order, section 102(2)(C) of NEPA requires that all Federal agencies include an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS)for “every recommendation or report on proposals for legislation and other major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.” 42 U.S.C. 4332(2)(C). NEPA section 102(2)(C) ensures that Federal agencies provide full and fair discussion of significant environmental impacts and inform decision makers and the public of reasonable alternatives that would avoid or minimize adverse impacts or enhance the quality of the human environment. NEPA review is designed to examine the foreseeable, measurable, and predictable consequences of a proposed Federal action; it is not intended to be used to forecast hypothetical or unknowable proposals or results. As described in Section IV(B)-(D) of the Report and Order, these National Corridor designations are not a pre-condition to siting transmission lines; nor are they part of a group of concerted agency actions to implement a plan or program for executing projects, such as siting transmission lines. These two corridors are not interconnected or related to each other; each corridor designation is separate and distinct in size and location. As specified by statute, the factors that FERC will consider in any decision to permit a transmission line are different from the factors that DOE considered in designating National Corridors. As such, the two corridor designations are unique, and FERC and the Department must take distinct actions to implement Section 216. DOE's designation of National Corridors is not a part of the type of multi-agency program for which a programmatic EIS
(PEIS)is required. In addition, DOE does not know what the States' or FERC's response will be after the designation of the National Corridors at issue here, or whether energy planners and utilities will use transmission or non-transmission solutions to address transmission congestion or constraints that DOE has identified. Therefore, endeavoring to analyze hypothetical impacts from future potential transmission lines, including any cumulative impacts, is premature and speculative at this time. The designation of National Corridors only specifies geographic areas in which DOE has identified electric congestion or constraint problems; the designations have no environmental effect, and it would not serve NEPA's purposes to analyze alternatives that would also not have impacts. Therefore, the Department concludes on rehearing that the National Corridor designations do not comprise an action subject to NEPA, NHPA, or ESA review. 75 75 Nothing in this Order restricts the Department's authority or ability to prepare a NEPA document for future corridor designations, pursuant to Section 216 of the Federal Power Act; nor does this Order limit the size or form of any such future corridor designations. B. New Issues and Issues Needing Further Clarification Some rehearing applications raised new arguments with respect to NEPA, NHPA, and ESA review. These arguments do not change DOE's ultimate determination that environmental and NHPA review is not required before the Department designates the two corridors at issue here. However, because they were not previously addressed, these new arguments, described below, warrant discussion. 1. National Corridor Designation Itself Impacts the Environment Summary of Rehearing Arguments Certain rehearing applications stated that NEPA review is required because the very act of designating National Corridors impacts the environment. For example, Mitchell S. Diamond stated that the Department's designation of a National Corridor alters the likely pattern of electricity development, impacting fuel use and air quality patterns. 76 PaDEP claimed that designation promotes transmission based solutions, which in turn, have environmental impacts. 77 SELC asserted that NEPA review cannot wait until the site-specific permitting stage of a particular transmission line because the designation is causing utilities to make investments in new transmission lines now. In addition, several of the rehearing applications suggest that the designation of National Corridors will inevitably result in State or Federal permitting, and the construction, of planned or proposed transmission lines and therefore the impacts of such projects should be reviewed at this time. 76 Mitchell S. Diamond rehearing application at 1. 77 PaDEP rehearing application at 9. DOE Response The Department does not agree that the very act of designating National Corridors impacts the environment. DOE agrees that the effect of a National Corridor designation is to delineate geographic areas within which, under certain circumstances, FERC may ultimately authorize the construction or modification of electric transmission facilities. However, the designations neither permit nor preclude the construction of any transmission projects (or, for that matter, any other type of energy-related project). DOE has no authority under FPA section 216 to site and authorize the construction of transmission facilities, and FERC's authority to approve transmission projects located within National Corridors is circumscribed by FPA section 216. 78 It is only if and when FERC issues a permit for a transmission line that there may be an environmental impact. Moreover, FERC regulations require the Commission to conduct a full NEPA review as part of its consideration of any permit application it accepts. 79 Therefore, no construction permit will be issued under FPA section 216 without a full NEPA review having been conducted. 78 16 U.S.C. 824p(b). 79 See Regulations for Filing Applications for Permits to Site Interstate Electric Transmission Facilities, FERC Stats. and Regs. ¶ 31,234 The Department also does not believe that the designation of National Corridors at issue here promotes transmission based solutions to the exclusion of non-transmission based solutions, or that the designations will necessarily lead to the development of transmission lines. As described in Section 1.A. of the Report and Order, FERC's discretion to issue permits for transmission facilities within National Corridors is dependent upon several factors, including the existence of a congestion problem and whether another response, such as a non-transmission solution, has resolved the problem or appears likely to do so. Therefore, it would be highly speculative for the Department to make assumptions about whether, when, or where FERC might permit transmission facilities. Although the Department understands that applications are pending before State authorities for new transmission facilities within the two National Corridors the Department has designated, the Department does not know how the States will act upon these applications, whether the sponsors of the these proposed facilities will seek a permit from FERC under FPA section 216, whether FERC will ever have jurisdiction to address these facilities even if the sponsors seek a FERC permit, or, if FERC does assert jurisdiction, how it would act upon the permit applications. 2. State Environmental Protection Statutes Summary of Rehearing Arguments In its application for rehearing, Toll Bros. asserted that the designation of National Corridors curtails a State's ability to issue conditional permits. Toll Bros. asserted that designating National Corridors encourages States to issue permits without conditions because FERC has jurisdiction to review permit applications if a State siting authority conditioned its approval of a transmission facility permit in an area designated as a National Corridor in such a manner that construction of the line “is not economically feasible.” 80 Toll Bros. further asserted that FERC will not have authority to consider “state conservation statutes, state conservation easements, or local land use planning when approving or denying a permit application.” 81 80 Toll Bros. rehearing application at 16. 81 Id. DOE Response The Department agrees that a National Corridor designation allows FERC, in limited circumstances and if all applicable requirements are satisfied, to issue construction permits for electric transmission facilities within the geographic area of a National Corridor. However, this does not mean that the designation itself causes any physical impacts or compels FERC to make decisions that would have environmental impacts. As stated earlier, the Department cannot foresee the proposed location of particular facilities that FERC may consider permitting, or whether or not those permits would be subject to conditions. Additionally, it would be pure speculation for the Department to attempt to assess whether FERC's standards for reviewing individual permit applications and permit terms would demand more or less environmental and other analysis than State standards or State permit terms. Nor can the Department make a reasoned assessment of whether any ultimate FERC permitting decision would be more or less environmentally protective than would have been a particular State's permitting decision. Hypothetical differences between FERC and the States, which might or might not lead to environmental impacts, do not constitute foreseeable impacts from the Department's designation of National Corridors such that DOE is required to conduct a NEPA analysis is required. 4. EPAct Section 368 Summary of Rehearing Arguments Certain rehearing applications, including that of SELC, stated that DOE should have prepared a PEIS because DOE and several other agencies have prepared a PEIS for the designation of corridors on Federal lands in eleven western States under EPAct section 368. DOE Response The Department explained in detail the differences between EPAct sections 368 and 1221 in Section IV.J of the Report and Order, and will not repeat that discussion here. Subsequent to the Department issuing the Report and Order, the Department and several other agencies issued the Draft PEIS for the Section 368 energy corridors. The Section 368 Draft PEIS clarified that the relevant federal agencies proposed designating the section 368 corridors with a defined width, length and centerline that the agencies would incorporate into land use plans. The agencies noted that the corridors would represent the preferred location for future energy transportation projects and would encourage applicants to apply for permits in a narrow geographic area. Further, in determining where they propose to site the corridors, the agencies responsible for implementing Section 368 avoided areas where local land use planners from the Bureau of Land Management, the Forest Service, and the Department of Defense had identified incompatible land uses. 82 82 BLM regulations provide that BLM conduct a NEPA review prior to any amendment to its Federal land resource management plans. 43 CFR § 1610.5-5. In contrast, the designation of National Corridors under FPA section 216 has no land use component. The designation relies on no determination of how suitable particular areas of land are for future transmission lines or any other use: If FERC considers a permit application under its FPA section 216 authority, it will make that kind of land use determination at that time. In addition, unlike the text of EPAct section 368, FPA section 216 does not require the amendment of land use plans. As stated before, FPA section 216(a) merely authorizes the Department to designate as National Corridors geographic areas experiencing electricity congestion and constraints. As such, the designation has no environmental impacts. 5. DOE Should Have Invoked a Categorical Exclusion or Conducted an EA Summary of Rehearing Arguments Certain rehearing applications stated that DOE did not follow the proper NEPA process in designating National Corridors. For example, the Wilderness Society *et al.* asserted that DOE should have completed an Environmental Assessment
(EA)and then issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) before designating National Corridors. SELC stated that if DOE did not complete an EA or EIS, it was required to use a categorical exclusion. DOE Response The Department did not need to prepare an EA or invoke a categorical exclusion before designating the National Corridors at issue here because NEPA does not apply to the designations DOE has made. The Department's designation of these two National Corridors does not trigger NEPA because the designations are not major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. “Major Federal actions,” pursuant to regulations promulgated by the Council on Environmental Quality, include actions with effects that may be major and which are potentially subject to Federal control and responsibility. 40 CFR 1508.18. The designation of National Corridors itself has no environmental impacts. V. Miscellaneous To the extent other issues were raised in applications for rehearing that have not been addressed in this Order or in the other documents incorporated by reference in this Order, they have been considered by the Department and are denied. Order For the reasons set forth herein, *it is hereby ordered* that: A. In Docket No. 2007-OE-01, the applications for rehearing and stay are denied. Any party to this proceeding that submitted a timely application for rehearing and is aggrieved by the Report and Order and this Order may seek judicial review in a United States Circuit Court of Appeals pursuant to section 313(b) of the FPA (16 U.S.C. 825 *l* ). B. In Docket No. 2007-OE-02, the applications for rehearing and stay are denied. Any party to this proceeding that submitted a timely application for rehearing and is aggrieved by the Report and Order and this Order may seek judicial review in a United States Circuit Court of Appeals pursuant to section 313(b) of the FPA (16 U.S.C. 825 *l* ). Issued in Washington, DC on March 6, 2008. The Secretary of Energy has approved the publication of this Order. Kevin M. Kolevar, Assistant Secretary, Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. Appendix A—Applications for Rehearing in Docket No. 2007-OE-01 Arrington, Linda Arrington, Michael Bair, John R. Balasko, John A. Bandel, Debra Bandel, Greg Bjalobok, Faith Brogley, Arthur Brogley, Kevin Brown, Jeffrey J. California Public Utilities Commission (Chaset, Laurence) Communities Against Regional Interconnect (Murphy, Kevin C.) Cooley, Frances M. DeWeese, Bill; Pennsylvania House of Representatives Diamond, Mitchell S. Edison Electric Institute (Comer, Edward H.) Eickhoff, Jane Energy Conservation Council of Pennsylvania (Burns, Willard R.) Feeney, Jim Ferguson, Carol Gerrard, Michael B.; Arnold & Porter LLP Greene County, Pennsylvania, Department of Economic Development (Matesic, Robbie M.) Groce, Dennis Hanham, Alison Hanham, Robert Hendley, Martha Hildebrand, Thomas & Kathy Hixson, Jennifer Hollowood, John T. Kessinger, Barbara Layton, Rick Ly, Kirsten Maize, Cindy Martin, Dan Martin, Tina Maryland, Governor of (O'Malley, Martin) McCoy-O'Donnell, Kimberly Mid-Atlantic Concerned Citizens Energy Coalition (Kessinger, Barbara) Miller, Randy Keith Moran, Dennis & Margaret Morin, Philip Moyer, Ben Murphy, Wayne New Jersey Board of Public Utilities (Comes, Margaret) New York Department of Environmental Conservation (Snyder, J. Jared) New York Department of Public Service (Mullany, Sean) New York, the State of (Leary, Maureen F.) Nicholl, Laurie Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (Perry, Scott) Pennsylvania Public Utilities Commission (Levin, John A.) Piroch, Cheryl Scherer, Lisa Schlossberg-Kunkel, Elena Southern Environmental Law Center et al (Jaffe, Cale, et al) Stein, Glenn E. Stout, J. Barry; Pennsylvania State Senate Sullivan, J.R. & Becky Tishok, Paula S Toll Brothers, Inc. (Sullivan, Sean M.) Virginia Office of the Attorney General (Matsen, Maureen Riley) Wilderness Society, The, et al (Culver, Nada, et al) Wood, Donna Appendix B—Comments on Docket No. 2007-OE-01 Balasko, Mary Jane 2 Ben-Dov, Zohar 1, 2 Citizens Campaign for the Environment (Eckel-Dalrymple, Sarah) 2 Delaware, Lieutenant Governor of (Carney, John C.) 1 Pike County, Pennsylvania, Commissioners (Forbes, Harry) 2 Goroncy, George D. 1 Grese, Chuck & Lisa 2 Jacob, Frank 1 New York Adirondack Park Agency (Stiles, Curtis) 1, 2 Nicoloff, Richard P. 1 Oak Ridge Farm (Warrender, Patricia and Anthony) 1, 2 Schwartz, Allyson Y.; U.S. House of Representatives (Pennsylvania) 1 Widawski, Donna 1 1 Not a party of record in this proceeding. 2 Application for Rehearing filed late. Appendix C—Applications for Rehearing in Docket No. 2007-OE-02 Arizona Corporation Commission (Kempley, Christopher, et al) California Imperial Irrigation District (Swanstrom, Deborah A.) California Public Utilities Commission (Chaset, Laurence) Edison Electric Institute (Comer, Edward H.) Energy Conservation Council of Pennsylvania (Burns, Willard R.) Hildebrand, Thomas & Kathy Maize, Cindy Mid-Atlantic Concerned Citizens Energy Coalition (Kessinger, Barbara) Southern Environmental Law Center et al (Jaffe, Cale, et al) Wilderness Society, et al (Culver, Nada, et al) [FR Doc. E8-4811 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings # 1 March 3, 2008. Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings: *Docket Numbers:* ER01-642-010; ER07-312-002; ER01-1335-012; ER01-1011-014. *Applicants:* CottonWood Energy Company LP; Dogwood Energy LLC; Magnolia Energy LP; Redbud Energy LP. *Description:* Cottonwood Energy Co, LP *et al.* submits notice of change in status under ER01-642 *et al.* *Filed Date:* 02/12/2008 *Accession Number:* 20080214-0047. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, March 11, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER06-758-004; ER08-201-002; ER06-635-003; ER02-237-010; ER08-202-002; ER95-1007-022; ER01-2741-007; ER07-34-004; ER03-1151-006; ER00-2235-004; ER99-3320-007; ER06-759-003; ER03-922-007; ER06-634-003. *Applicants:* Chambers Cogeneration, Limited Partnership; Cogentrix Virginia Leasing Corporation; Edgecombe Genco, LLC; J. Aron & Company; James River Cogeneration Company, LLC; Logan Generating Company, LP; Plains End, LLC; Plains End II, LLC; Power Receivable Finance, LLC; Quachita Power, LLC; Rathdrum Power, LLC; Selkirk Cogen Partners, L.P.; Southaven Power, LLC; Spruance Genco, LLC. *Description:* Chambers Cogenerations, Limted Partnership submits a notice of non-material change in status. *Filed Date:* 02/28/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080229-0090. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, March 20, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER02-1695-005; ER01-2742-007; ER02-2309-004. *Applicants:* Cabazon Wind Partners, LLC; Rock River I, LLC; Whitewater Hill Wind Partners LLC. *Description:* Cabazon Wind Partners *et al.* submits a notice of non-material change in status. *Filed Date:* 02/28/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080229-0091. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, March 20, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER04-708-005. *Applicants:* Horsehead Corp. *Description:* Horsehead Corp. submits revisions to its market-based rate schedule and notice of non-material change in status in connection with the transaction approved by the Commission in Docket EC08-29. *Filed Date:* 02/28/2008 *Accession Number:* 20080229-0092. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, March 20, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-149-001. *Applicants:* Northeast Utilities Service Company. *Description:* Compliance Filing of Northeast Utilities Service Company containing supplemental information regarding deferred Regional Transmission Organization formation costs. *Filed Date:* 02/12/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080212-5039. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, March 14, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-364-001. *Applicants:* APX, Inc. *Description:* APX Inc. submits a non-material change status. *Filed Date:* 02/28/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080229-0093. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, March 20, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-514-001. *Applicants:* Arizona Public Service Company. *Description:* Withdrawal of Application of Arizona Public Service Company. *Filed Date:* 02/28/2008 *Accession Number:* 20080228-5068. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, March 20, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-558-001. *Applicants:* WSPP Inc. *Description:* Entergy Texas Inc. requests that the Commission accept an amendment to the WSPP Agreement and include ETI as a participant. *Filed Date:* 02/28/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080229-0094. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, March 20, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-611-000. *Applicants:* Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation. *Description:* Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. submits an executed Agreement for Substation Services with Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC. *Filed Date:* 02/28/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080229-0084. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, March 20, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-612-000. *Applicants:* Arizona Public Service Company. *Description:* Arizona Public Service Company submits a Notice of Cancellation of a Lease Power Agreement dated 3/1/02 with Electrical District 1 of Pinal County, AZ etc. *Filed Date:* 02/28/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080229-0085. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, March 20, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-613-000. *Applicants:* Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation. *Description:* Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. submits executed Facilities Agreement with Power Authority of the State of New York dated 7/23/01. *Filed Date:* 02/28/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080229-0086. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, March 20, 2008. *Docket Numbers:* ER08-614-000. *Applicants:* PJM Interconnection, LLC. *Description:* PJM Interconnection, LLC submits an executed interconnection service agreement with North Allegheny Wind, LLC *et al.* *Filed Date:* 02/28/2008. *Accession Number:* 20080229-0087. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, March 20, 2008. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at *http://www.ferc.gov.* To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov.* or call
(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call
(202)502-8659. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-4746 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP08-78-000] Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation; Notice of Application March 4, 2008. Take notice that on February 25, 2008, Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation (Columbia), 1700 MacCorkle Avenue, SE, Charleston, West Virginia, pursuant to section 7 of the Natural Gas Act
(NGA)and part 157 of the Commission's regulations, filed an application for a certificate of public convenience and necessity, seeking authority to extend the reservoir boundary and protective boundary of its Weaver storage field located in Ashland, Knox, and Richland Counties, Ohio, all as more fully set forth in the application, which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “e-Library” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at FERCOnlineSupport or call toll-free,
(866)208-3676, or for TTY,
(202)502-8659. Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Fredric J. George, Lead Counsel, Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation, P.O. Box 1273, Charleston, West Virginia 25325-1273 at
(304)357-2359 (phone) or
(304)357-3206 (fax). Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice the Commission staff will either: complete its environmental assessment
(EA)and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding, or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the final environmental impact statement
(FEIS)or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA. There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this Project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceeding for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding. However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest. Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order. Motions to intervene, protests and comments may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 285.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. *Comment Date:* March 25, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-4743 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 12963-000] Grays Landing Hydro, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene, Protests, and Comments March 4, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Type of Application:* Preliminary Permit. b. *Project No.:* 12963-000. c. *Date filed:* August 15, 2007. d. *Applicant:* Grays Landing Hydro, LLC. e. *Name of Project:* Grays Landing Lock and Dam Hydroelectric Project f. *Location:* Monongahela River in Greene County, Pennsylvania. It would use the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Grays Landing Lock and Dam. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* Mr. Brent L. Smith, COO, Symbiotics, LLC, P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442,
(208)745-0834. i. *FERC Contact:* Robert Bell,
(202)502-4126. j. *Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to intervene:* 60 days from the issuance date of this notice. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-12963-000) on any comments or motions filed. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. k. *Description of Project:* The proposed project using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Grays Landing Lock and Dam and operated in a run-of-river mode would consist of:
(1)A new powerhouse and switchyard;
(2)two turbine/generator units with a combined installed capacity of 15 megawatts;
(3)a new 1.4-mile-long above ground 25-kilovolt transmission line extending from the switchyard to an interconnection point with West Penn Power Company's distribution system; and
(4)appurtenant facilities. The proposed Grays Landing Lock and Dam Project would have an average annual generation of 47 gigawatt-hours. l. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail *FERCONLINESUPPORT@FERC.GOV.* For TTY, call
(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. m. *Competing Preliminary Permit* —Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. n. *Competing Development Application* —Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. o. *Notice of Intent* —A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice. p. *Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit* —A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project. q. *Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene* —Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. r. *Filing and Service of Responsive Documents* —Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION”, “COMPETING APPLICATION”, “PROTEST”, and “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. s. *Agency Comments* —Federal, State, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-4742 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 12959-000] Green River 2 Hydro, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene, Protests, and Comments March 4, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Type of Application:* Preliminary Permit. b. *Project No.:* 12959-000. c. *Date filed:* August 14, 2007. d. *Applicant:* Green River 2 Hydro, LLC. e. *Name of Project:* Green River Lock and Dam #2 Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* Green River in McLean County, Kentucky. It would use the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Green River Lock and Dam #2. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* Mr. Brent L. Smith, COO, Symbiotics, LLC, P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442,
(208)745-0834. i. *FERC Contact:* Robert Bell,
(202)502-4126. j. *Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to intervene:* 60 days from the issuance date of this notice. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-12959-000) on any comments or motions filed. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. k. *Description of Project:* The proposed project using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Green River Lock and Dam #2 and operated in a run-of-river mode would consist of:
(1)A new powerhouse and switchyard;
(2)three turbine/generator units with a combined installed capacity of 19 megawatts;
(3)a new 1.3-mile-long above ground 46-kilovolt transmission line extending from the switchyard to an interconnection point with the Kenergy Corporation's distribution system; and
(4)appurtenant facilities. The proposed Green River Lock and Dam #2 Project would have an average annual generation of 60 gigawatt-hours. l. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail *FERCONLINESUPPORT@FERC.GOV.* For TTY, call
(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. m. Competing Preliminary Permit—Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. n. Competing Development Application—Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. o. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice. p. Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project. q. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene—Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. r. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents—Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION”, “COMPETING APPLICATION”, “PROTEST”, and “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. s. Agency Comments—Federal, State, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-4739 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 12960-000] Kentucky Hydro 6, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene, Protests, and Comments March 4, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Type of Application:* Preliminary Permit. b. *Project No.:* 12960-000. c. *Date filed:* August 14, 2007. d. *Applicant:* Kentucky Hydro 6, LLC. e. *Name of Project:* Kentucky River Lock and Dam #6 Hydroelectric Project f. *Location:* Kentucky River in Woodford County, Kentucky. It would use the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Kentucky River Lock and Dam #6. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* Mr. Brent L. Smith, COO, Symbiotics, LLC, P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442,
(208)745-0834. i. *FERC Contact:* Robert Bell,
(202)502-4126. j. *Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to intervene:* 60 days from the issuance date of this notice. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-12960-000) on any comments or motions filed. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. k. *Description of Project:* The proposed project using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Kentucky River Lock and Dam #6 and operated in a run-of-river mode would consist of:
(1)A new powerhouse and switchyard;
(2)two turbine/generator units with a combined installed capacity of 10 megawatts;
(3)a new 3-mile-long above ground 25-kilovolt transmission line extending from the switchyard to an interconnection point with the local utility's distribution system; and
(4)appurtenant facilities. The proposed Kentucky River Lock and Dam #6 Project would have an average annual generation of 30 gigawatt-hours. l. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail *FERCONLINESUPPORT@FERC.GOV.* For TTY, call
(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. m. *Competing Preliminary Permit* —Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. n. *Competing Development Application* —Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. o. *Notice of Intent* —A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice. p. *Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit* —A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project. q. *Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene* —Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. r. *Filing and Service of Responsive Documents* —Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION”, “COMPETING APPLICATION”, “PROTEST”, and “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. s. *Agency Comments* —Federal, State, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-4740 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 3255-012] Lyonsdale Associates, Lyonsdale Associates, LLC; Notice of Application for Transfer of License, and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests March 3, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Application Type:* Transfer of License. b. *Project No.:* 3255-012. c. *Date Filed:* February 15, 2008. d. *Applicants:* Lyonsdale Associates (transferor) and Lyonsdale Associates, LLC (Transferee). e. *Name and Location of Project:* Lyonsdale Hydroelectric Project is located on the Moose River in Lewis County, New York. f. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r. g. *Applicant Contacts:* For the transferor: Mr. John Matt, Lyonsdale Associates, C/O Burrows Paper Corporation, 501 W. Main Street, Little Falls, NY 13365. *For the transferee:* Mr. John Matt, Lyonsdale Associates, LLC, C/O Burrows Paper Corporation, 501 W. Main Street, Little Falls, NY 13365. h. *FERC Contact:* Robert Bell at
(202)502-6062. i. *Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to intervene:* April 3, 2008. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Kimberly Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the Project Number on any comments or motions filed. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing a document with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the documents on that resource agency. j. *Description of Application:* Applicants seek Commission approval to transfer the license for the Lyonsdale Hydroelectric Project from Lyonsdale Associates, to Lyonsdale Associates, LLC. k. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number (P-3255) in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* . For TTY, call
(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the addresses in item g above. l. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission. m. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene—Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. n. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents—Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, OR “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and eight copies to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicants specified in the particular application. o. Agency Comments—Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicants. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicants' representatives. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-4729 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 12962-000] Newburgh Hydro, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene, Protests, and Comments March 4, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Type of Application:* Preliminary Permit. b. *Project No.:* 12962-000. c. *Date filed:* August 15, 2007. d. *Applicant:* Newburgh Hydro, LLC. e. *Name of Project:* Newburgh Lock and Dam Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* Ohio River in Henderson County, Kentucky and Newburgh County, Indiana. It would use the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Newburgh Lock and Dam. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* Mr. Brent L. Smith, COO, Symbiotics, LLC, P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442,
(208)745-0834. i. *FERC Contact:* Robert Bell,
(202)502-4126. j. *Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to intervene:* 60 days from the issuance date of this notice. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-12962-000) on any comments or motions filed. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. k. *Description of Project:* The proposed project using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Newburgh Lock and Dam and operated in a run-of-river mode would consist of:
(1)A new powerhouse and switchyard;
(2)two turbine/generator units with a combined installed capacity of 170 megawatts;
(3)a new 3-mile-long above ground 25-kilovolt transmission line extending from the switchyard to an interconnection point with the local utility's distribution system; and
(4)appurtenant facilities. The proposed Newburgh Lock and Dam Project would have an average annual generation of 715 gigawatt-hours. l. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail *FERCONLINESUPPORT@FERC.GOV* . For TTY, call
(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. m. *Competing Preliminary Permit* —Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. n. *Competing Development Application* —Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. o. *Notice of Intent* —A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice. p. *Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit* —A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project. q. *Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene* —Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. r. *Filing and Service of Responsive Documents* —Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION”, “COMPETING APPLICATION”, “PROTEST”, and “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. s. *Agency Comments* —Federal, State, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-4741 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 12956-000] Nolin Hydro, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene, Protests, and Comments March 4, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Type of Application:* Preliminary Permit. b. *Project No.:* 12956-000. c. *Date filed:* August 14, 2007. d. *Applicant:* Nolin Hydro, LLC. e. *Name of Project:* Nolin Lake Dam Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* Nolin River in Edmonson County, Kentucky. It would use the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Nolin Lake Dam. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* Mr. Brent L. Smith, COO, Symbiotics, LLC, P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442,
(208)745-0834. i. *FERC Contact:* Robert Bell,
(202)502-4126. j. *Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to intervene:* 60 days from the issuance date of this notice. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-12956-000) on any comments or motions filed. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. k. *Description of Project:* The proposed project using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Nolin Lake Dam and operated in a run-of-river mode would consist of:
(1)A new 100-foot-long, 84-inch diameter steel penstock;
(2)a new powerhouse and switchyard;
(3)one turbine/generator unit with an installed capacity of 3 megawatts;
(4)a new 0.1-mile-long above ground 12.5-kilovolt transmission line extending from the switchyard to an interconnection point with the local utility's distribution system; and
(5)appurtenant facilities. The proposed Nolin Lake Dam Project would have an average annual generation of 18 gigawatt-hours. l. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail *FERCONLINESUPPORT@FERC.GOV* . For TTY, call
(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. m. *Competing Preliminary Permit* —Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. n. *Competing Development Application* —Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. o. *Notice of Intent* —A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice. p. *Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit* —A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project. q. *Comments, Protests, or Motions To Intervene* —Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. r. *Filing and Service of Responsive Documents* —Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION”, “COMPETING APPLICATION”, “PROTEST”, and “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. s. *Agency Comments* —Federal, State, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-4737 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. DI08-3-000] Providence Water Supply Board; Notice of Declaration of Intention and Soliciting Comments, Protests, and/or Motions to Intervene March 3, 2008. Take notice that the following application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Application Type:* Declaration of Intention. b. *Docket No:* DI08-3-000. c. *Date Filed:* February 7, 2008. d. *Applicant:* Providence Water Supply Board. e. *Name of Project:* Providence Water Release Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* The proposed Providence Water Release Hydroelectric Project will be located on the North Branch Pawtuxet River, in Providence County near Scituate, Rhode Island. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Section 23(b)(1) of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 817(b). h. *Applicant Contact:* Paul J. Gadoury, PE, Director of Engineering, Providence Water Supply Board, 552 Academy Avenue, Providence, RI 02908; *telephone:*
(401)521-6300, ext. 7236; *fax:*
(401)464-8721; *e-mail: http://www.pgadoury@provwater.com.* i. *FERC Contact:* Any questions on this notice should be addressed to Henry Ecton,
(202)502-8768, or E-mail address: *henry.ecton@ferc.gov.* j. *Deadline for filing comments, protests, and/or motions:* April 3, 2008. *All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with:* Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and/or interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* under the “e-Filing” link. Please include the docket number (DI08-3-000) on any comments, protests, and/or motions filed. k. *Description of Project:* The proposed Providence Water Release Hydroelectric Project will include:
(1)A 20-foot-long, 12-inch-diameter pipe, carrying overflow releases from the 60-inch-diameter pipe which carries water to the Providence Water Treatment Plant;
(2)a proposed concrete facility containing two turbines with a total capacity of approximately 200 kW;
(3)a short tailrace channeling water through a blow-off structure which discharges into the North Branch, Pawtuxet River; and
(4)appurtenant facilities. The project will not be connected to the interstate grid. Power generated will be used by the water treatment plant. The proposed project will not occupy any tribal or federal lands. When a Declaration of Intention is filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Federal Power Act requires the Commission to investigate and determine if the interests of interstate or foreign commerce would be affected by the project. The Commission also determines whether or not the project:
(1)Would be located on a navigable waterway;
(2)would occupy or affect public lands or reservations of the United States;
(3)would utilize surplus water or water power from a government dam; or
(4)if applicable, has involved or would involve any construction subsequent to 1935 that may have increased or would increase the project's head or generating capacity, or have otherwise significantly modified the project's pre-1935 design or operation. l. *Locations of the Application:* Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public inspection. This filing may be viewed on the web at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Using the “eLibrary” link, select “Docket#” and follow the instructions. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll-free at
(866)208-3676, or TTY, contact
(202)502-8659. m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission. n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene—Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents—Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTESTS”, AND/OR “MOTIONS TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Docket Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. p. Agency Comments—Federal, State, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-4733 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 12958-000] Uniontown Hydro, LLC; Notice of Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Motions To Intervene, Protests, and Comments March 4, 2008. Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Type of Application:* Preliminary Permit. b. *Project No.:* 12958-000. c. *Date filed:* August 14, 2007. d. *Applicant:* Uniontown Hydro, LLC. e. *Name of Project:* Uniontown Lock and Dam Hydroelectric Project. f. *Location:* Ohio River in Union County, Kentucky. It would use the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Uniontown Lock and Dam. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r). h. *Applicant Contact:* Mr. Brent L. Smith, COO, Symbiotics, LLC, P.O. Box 535, Rigby, ID 83442,
(208)745-0834. i. *FERC Contact:* Robert Bell,
(202)502-4126. j. *Deadline for filing comments, protests, and motions to intervene:* 60 days from the issuance date of this notice. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site under the “e-Filing” link. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings. Please include the project number (P-12958-000) on any comments or motions filed. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person in the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. k. *Description of Project:* The proposed project using the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Uniontown Lock and Dam and operated in a run-of-river mode would consist of:
(1)A new powerhouse and switchyard;
(2)two turbine/generator units with a combined installed capacity of 190 megawatts;
(3)a new 3-mile-long above ground 25-kilovolt transmission line extending from the switchyard to an interconnection point with the Kenergy Corporation's distribution system; and
(4)appurtenant facilities. The proposed Uniontown Lock and Dam Project would have an average annual generation of 900 gigawatt-hours. l. This filing is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-free 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail *FERCONLINESUPPORT@FERC.GOV.* For TTY, call
(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item h above. m. Competing Preliminary Permit—Anyone desiring to file a competing application for preliminary permit for a proposed project must submit the competing application itself, or a notice of intent to file such an application, to the Commission on or before the specified comment date for the particular application (see 18 CFR 4.36). Submission of a timely notice of intent allows an interested person to file the competing preliminary permit application no later than 30 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing preliminary permit application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. n. Competing Development Application—Any qualified development applicant desiring to file a competing development application must submit to the Commission, on or before a specified comment date for the particular application, either a competing development application or a notice of intent to file such an application. Submission of a timely notice of intent to file a development application allows an interested person to file the competing application no later than 120 days after the specified comment date for the particular application. A competing license application must conform with 18 CFR 4.30 and 4.36. o. Notice of Intent—A notice of intent must specify the exact name, business address, and telephone number of the prospective applicant, and must include an unequivocal statement of intent to submit, if such an application may be filed, either a preliminary permit application or a development application (specify which type of application). A notice of intent must be served on the applicant(s) named in this public notice. p. Proposed Scope of Studies Under Permit—A preliminary permit, if issued, does not authorize construction. The term of the proposed preliminary permit would be 36 months. The work proposed under the preliminary permit would include economic analysis, preparation of preliminary engineering plans, and a study of environmental impacts. Based on the results of these studies, the Applicant would decide whether to proceed with the preparation of a development application to construct and operate the project. q. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene—Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. r. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents—Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “NOTICE OF INTENT TO FILE COMPETING APPLICATION”, “COMPETING APPLICATION”, “PROTEST”, and “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. Any of the above-named documents must be filed by providing the original and the number of copies provided by the Commission's regulations to: The Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. An additional copy must be sent to Director, Division of Hydropower Administration and Compliance, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, at the above-mentioned address. A copy of any notice of intent, competing application or motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. s. Agency Comments—Federal, State, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-4738 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Project No. 2009-113] Virginia Electric and Power Company; Notice of Application For Amendment of License and Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests March 3, 2008. Take notice that the following application has been filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection: a. *Application Type:* Non-Project Use of Project Lands and Waters. b. *Project No:* 2009-113. c. *Date filed:* February 19, 2008. d. *Applicant:* Virginia Electric and Power Company. e. *Name of Project:* Roanoke Rapids and Gaston Project. f. *Location:* The project is located on the Roanoke River in Warren County, North Carolina. The project does not occupy federal lands. g. *Filed Pursuant to:* Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791(a)-825(r) and 799 and 801. h. *Applicant Contact:* Mr. Jim Thornton, Dominion Generation, Innsbrook Technical Center, 5000 Dominion Boulevard, Glen Allen, VA 23060,
(804)273-3257. i. *FERC Contact:* Rebecca Martin at 202-502-6012, or e-mail *rebecca.martin@ferc.gov.* j. *Deadline for filing comments and or motions:* April 4, 2008. All documents (original and eight copies) should be filed with: The Secretary, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please include the project number (P-2009-113) on any comments or motions filed. The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all intervenors filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person whose name appears on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervenor files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. k. *Description of Application:* The licensee requests Commission approval to grant a permit to HQ Development, Inc. for constructing four, 16-slip, boat houses; one, 10-slip day-dock pier; and an access pathway to each of these structures. The proposed facilities and improvements would be as part of a development called “Hubquarter Landing,” and would be used by its residents. No dredging is required for this proposal. l. *Location of Application:* A copy of the application is available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling
(202)502-8371. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. You may also register online at *http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp* to be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,* for TTY, call
(202)502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h)above. m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission. n. *Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene:* Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application. o. Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, OR “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application. p. *Agency Comments:* Federal, State, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives. q. Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* under the “e-Filing” link. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-4732 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL08-43-000] TransCanada Power Marketing Ltd., Complainant v. ISO New England Inc., Respondent; Notice of Complaint March 3, 2008. Take notice that on February 26, 2008, pursuant to sections 206 of the Rules and Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206, sections 205 and 306 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824(e) and 825(e), TransCanada Power Marketing Ltd. (Complainant) filed a formal complaint against ISO New England Inc. (Respondent) requesting the Commission to order the Respondent to accept the Complainant's January 10, 2008 composite offers into the Forward Capacity Auction at the floor price that was established in the February 4-6, 2008 auction. The Complainant has requested fast track processing of the complaint. The Complainant states that a copy of the complaint has been served on the Respondent. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and protests must be served on the Complainants. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible online at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call
(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call
(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on March 17, 2008. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-4730 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP08-81-000] Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America; Notice of Request Under Blanket Authorization March 4, 2008. Take notice that on February 27, 2008, Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America (Natural), 747 East 22nd Street, Lombard, Illinois, filed in Docket No. CP08-81-000 a prior notice request pursuant to sections 157.205, 157.208 and 157.213 of the Commission's regulations under the Natural Gas Act
(NGA)and Natural's blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP82-402-000 for authorization convert 800 MMcf of cushion gas to working gas at Natural's North Lansing storage field in Harrison County, Texas, all as more fully set forth in the application, which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the web at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or call toll-free,
(886)208-3676 or TYY,
(202)502-8659. Any questions concerning this application may be directed to Russell Frame, Engineer, Gas Storage, Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America, 747 East 22nd Street, Lombard, Illinois 60148, or telephone
(630)691-3827. Any person or the Commission's Staff may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of intervention and, pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act
(NGA)(18 CFR 157.205) a protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests, and interventions via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ) under the “e-Filing” link. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-4736 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RM98-1-000] Records Governing Off-the-Record Communications; Public Notice March 4, 2008. This constitutes notice, in accordance with 18 CFR 385.2201(b), of the receipt of prohibited and exempt off-the-record communications. Order No. 607 (64 FR 51222, September 22, 1999) requires Commission decisional employees, who make or receive a prohibited or exempt off-the-record communication relevant to the merits of a contested proceeding, to deliver to the Secretary of the Commission, a copy of the communication, if written, or a summary of the substance of any oral communication. Prohibited communications are included in a public, non-decisional file associated with, but not a part of, the decisional record of the proceeding. Unless the Commission determines that the prohibited communication and any responses thereto should become a part of the decisional record, the prohibited off-the-record communication will not be considered by the Commission in reaching its decision. Parties to a proceeding may seek the opportunity to respond to any facts or contentions made in a prohibited off-the-record communication, and may request that the Commission place the prohibited communication and responses thereto in the decisional record. The Commission will grant such a request only when it determines that fairness so requires. Any person identified below as having made a prohibited off-the-record communication shall serve the document on all parties listed on the official service list for the applicable proceeding in accordance with Rule 2010, 18 CFR 385.2010. Exempt off-the-record communications are included in the decisional record of the proceeding, unless the communication was with a cooperating agency as described by 40 CFR 1501.6, made under 18 CFR 385.2201(e)(1)(v). The following is a list of off-the-record communications recently received by the Secretary of the Commission. The communications listed are grouped by docket numbers in ascending order. These filings are available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the eLibrary link. Enter the docket number, excluding the last three digits, in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC, Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll free at
(866)208-3676, or for TTY, contact
(202)502-8659. Exempt Docket number Date received Presenter or requester 1. ER08-538-000 2-8-08 Hon. Olympia J. Snowe. Hon. Susan M. Collins. 2. Project No. 2677-019 2-12-08 Brian Tungate. 3. Project No. 2677-019 2-20-08 Arie DeWaal. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-4735 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RM01-8-009] Revised Public Utility Filing Requirements for Electric Quarterly Reports Issued March 3, 2008. AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice Seeking Comments on Proposed Revisions to Electric Quarterly Report
(EQR)Data Dictionary. SUMMARY: In this notice, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) proposes to revise the EQR Data Dictionary to clarify the requirement to report all ancillary service transactions, and invites comments on this proposal. This proposal is being made to reflect the Commission's decision in Order No. 697 that information about third party sales of ancillary services at market-based rates should be reported in EQR filings, rather than being reported on a separate OASIS-like Internet site. If adopted, this proposal will make reporting this information less burdensome and more accessible. DATES: Comments on the proposal are due April 10, 2008. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments on the proposal, identified by Docket No. RM01-8-009, by one of the following methods: • *Agency Web Site: http://www.ferc.gov.* Follow the instructions for submitting comments via the eFiling link found in the Comment Procedures Section of the preamble. • *Mail:* Commenters unable to file comments electronically must mail or hand deliver an original and 14 copies of their comments to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please refer to the Comment Procedures Section of the preamble for additional information on how to file paper comments. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Veloso (Technical Information), Office of Enforcement, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426,
(202)502-8363. Gary D. Cohen (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426,
(202)502-8321. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Before Commissioners: Joseph T. Kelliher, Chairman; Suedeen G. Kelly, Marc Spitzer, Philip D. Moeller, and Jon Wellinghoff. 1. The Commission is proposing to revise the Electric Quarterly Report
(EQR)Data Dictionary to clarify the requirement to report all ancillary service transactions and invites comment on this proposal. 2. This proposal is being made to reflect the Commission's decision in Order No. 697 that information about third party sales of ancillary services at market-based rates should be reported in EQR filings, rather than being reported on a separate OASIS-like Internet site. If adopted, this proposal will make reporting this information less burdensome and more accessible. Background 3. On April 25, 2002, the Commission issued Order No. 2001, a Final Rule establishing revised public utility filing requirements. 1 This rule revised the Commission's filing requirements to require companies subject to the Commission's regulations under section 205 of the Federal Power Act 2 to file quarterly reports that:
(1)Provide data identifying the utility on whose behalf the report is being filed (ID Data);
(2)summarize pertinent data about the utility's currently effective contracts (Contract Data); and
(3)summarize data about wholesale power sales the utility made during the reporting period (Transaction Data). The requirement to file EQRs replaced the requirement to file quarterly transaction reports summarizing a utility's market-based rate transactions and sales agreements that conformed to the utility's tariff. 1 *Revised Public Utility Filing Requirements,* Order No. 2001, 67 FR 31043 (May 8, 2002), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶31,127 (Apr. 25, 2002), *reh'g denied,* Order No. 2001-A, 100 FERC ¶61,074, *reconsideration and clarification denied,* Order No. 2001-B, 100 FERC ¶61,342, *order directing filings,* Order No. 2001-C, 101 FERC ¶61,314 (2002), Order No. 2001-D, *order directing filings,* 102 FERC ¶ 61,334, Order No. 2001-E, *order refining filing requirements,* 105 FERC ¶61,352 (2003), *clarification order,* Order No.2001-F, 106 FERC ¶61,060 (2004), *order adopting EQR Data Dictionary,* Order No. 2001-G, 120 FERC ¶61,270 (2007), *order on reh'g and clarification,* Order No. 2001-H, 121 FERC ¶61,289 (2007). 2 16 U.S.C. 824d. 4. In Order No. 2001, the Commission also adopted a new section in its regulations, 18 CFR 35.10b, which requires that the EQRs are to be prepared in conformance with the Commission's software and guidance posted and available from the Commission Web site. This obviates the need to revise 18 CFR 35.10b to implement revisions to the software and guidance. Since the issuance of Order No. 2001, as need has arisen, the Commission has issued orders to resolve questions raised by EQR users and has directed Staff to issue additional guidance. 5. On September 24, 2007, the Commission issued Order No. 2001-G, adopting an EQR Data Dictionary that collected in one document the definitions of certain terms and values used in filing EQR data (previously provided in Commission orders and in guidance materials posted at the Commission's Web site) and providing formal definitions for fields that were previously undefined. On December 20, 2007, the Commission issued Order No. 2001-H, which addressed a pending request for rehearing and clarifying the information to be reported in several EQR data fields. 6. On June 21, 2007, the Commission issued Order No. 697, 3 a Final Rule that codified and, in certain respects, revised the Commission's standards for market-based rates for sales of electric energy, capacity, and ancillary services. The rule retained several of the core elements of the Commission's existing standards for granting market-based rates and revised them in certain respects. The rule also adopted a number of reforms to streamline the administration of the market-based rate program. Among other issues addressed in Order No. 697, the Commission addressed the posting and reporting requirements for third-party sellers of ancillary services at market-based rates. 3 *Market-Based Rates for Wholesale Sales of Electric Energy, Capacity and Ancillary Services by Public Utilities,* Order No. 697, 72 FR 39904 (July 20, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶31,252 (June 21, 2007), *clarifying order,* 122 FERC ¶61,260 (2007). 7. This matter had previously been addressed in *Avista Corporation,* 87 FERC ¶61,223, *order on reh'g,* 89 FERC ¶61,136
(1999)*(Avista),* among other cases. Prior to the issuance of Order No. 697, *Avista* provided a general policy stating that third-party ancillary service providers that could not perform a market power study would be allowed to sell ancillary services at market-based rates, but only in conjunction with a requirement that such third parties establish an Internet-based, OASIS-like site for providing information about and transacting ancillary services. The authorization in *Avista* extended only to the following four ancillary services: Regulation Service, Energy Imbalance Service, Spinning Reserves, and Supplemental Reserves. 8. In Order No. 697, the Commission determined that it would modify its prior approach to the posting and reporting requirements for third-party sellers of ancillary services at market-based rates as announced in *Avista.* Specifically, the Commission agreed with comments arguing that the costs and responsibilities associated with establishing and maintaining an Internet-based site may outweigh the benefits that third-party sellers could derive from the sale of the additional products. 9. The Commission concluded that the Commission's EQR filing requirement provides an adequate means to monitor ancillary services sales by third parties such that the posting and reporting requirements established in *Avista* are no longer necessary. 4 The Commission noted that, through their EQR filings, third-party providers of ancillary services provide information regarding their ancillary services transactions for each quarter, including the ancillary service or services provided, the price, and the purchaser. As a result, the Commission determined that it would no longer require third-party providers of ancillary services to establish and maintain an Internet-based OASIS-like site for providing information about their ancillary services transactions. 5 4 Order No. 697 at P 1058. 5 *Id.* 10. Additionally, in Order No. 890, the Commission adopted a new Schedule 9 for the treatment of generator imbalances. 6 In Order No. 2001-E, the Commission demonstrated its intention to match the ancillary service products included in the *pro forma* open access transmission tariff
(OATT)by defining ancillary Product Names as they were defined in the OATT. 7 6 *Preventing Undue Discrimination and Preference in Transmission Service,* Order No. 890, 72 FR 12266 (Mar. 15, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶31,241 at P 668 (Feb. 16, 2007), *order on reh'g,* Order No. 890-A, 73 FR 2984 (Jan. 16, 2008), FERC Stats. and Regs. ¶31,261 (2007). 7 The Order No. 888 OATT ancillary services were Scheduling, System Control And Dispatch (Schedule 1), Reactive Supply And Voltage Control (Schedule 2), Regulation And Frequency Response (Schedule 3), Energy Imbalance (Schedule 4), Operating Reserve—Spinning—or Spinning Reserve—(Schedule 5), Operating Reserve—Supplemental—or Supplemental Reserve—(Schedule 6). These same services are now offered under the Order No. 890 *pro forma* OATT. Discussion 11. The Commission's revised requirements for the posting and reporting requirements for third-party sellers of ancillary services at market-based rates in Order No. 697 depend on sellers reporting, in the EQRs, information previously required by *Avista* to be reported and posted on an OASIS-like Internet site. Therefore, in order to clarify the reporting requirements and to accommodate the reporting of ancillary service transactions, we propose to revise the Product Name definitions of the relevant ancillary services in Appendix A of the EQR Data Dictionary. The phrase “Reported for power sales and transmission-related transactions” will be added to the definitions for the four Product Names identified in *Avista* —Energy Imbalance, Regulation & Frequency Response, Spinning Reserve, Supplemental Reserve—to clarify that sales of these services must be reported both in the Contract and Transaction sections of the EQR. We invite comments on these proposed changes. 12. The Commission also proposes to add the Product Name “Generator Imbalance” to Appendix A of the EQR Data Dictionary to maintain consistency with the revised *pro forma* OATT. 8 At this time, we are not proposing to add Product Names for ancillary services not explicitly identified in Order No. 890. We invite comments on whether there are other ancillary services beyond those identified in Order No. 890 that should be identified explicitly in the EQR. 9 While the Commission does not intend to add defined Product Names for every kind of ancillary service offered by every company, there may be value to the public in identifying common or important offerings as such, rather than as the catchall “OTHER” in future EQRs. 8 Order No. 890, *pro forma* OATT at Schedule 9, provides that “Generator Imbalance Service is provided when a difference occurs between the output of a generator located in the Transmission Provider's Control Area and a delivery schedule from that generator to
(1)another Control Area or
(2)a load within the Transmission Provider's Control Area over a single hour.” Schedule 9 also prescribes how the charges for this service are to be developed. 9 For example, the Commission found that Dynamic Capacity and Energy Service as described in *Avista* is an ancillary service governed by *Avista* 's ancillary service tariff. *See Avista,* 89 FERC ¶61,136 at 61,392. Comment Procedures 13. The Commission invites interested persons to submit comments on the matters and issues proposed in this notice, including any related matters or alternative proposals that commenters may wish to discuss. Comments are due April 10, 2008. Comments must refer to Docket No. RM01-8-009, and must include the commenter's name, the organization they represent, if applicable, and their address. Comments may be filed either in electronic or paper format. 14. Comments may be filed electronically via the eFiling link on the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov.* The Commission accepts most standard word processing formats and commenters may attach additional files with supporting information in certain other file formats. Commenters filing electronically do not need to make a paper filing. Commenters that are not able to file comments electronically must send an original and 14 copies of their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. 15. All comments will be placed in the Commission's public files and may be viewed, printed, or downloaded remotely as described in the Document Availability section below. Commenters on this proposal are not required to serve copies of their comments on other commenters. Document Availability 16. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the **Federal Register** , the Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the Internet through the Commission's Home Page *(http://www.ferc.gov)* and in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426. 17. From the Commission's Home Page on the Internet, this information is available in the eLibrary. The full text of this document is available in the eLibrary both in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket number field. 18. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's Web site during our normal business hours. For assistance contact FERC Online Support at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll-free at
(866)208-3676, or for TTY, contact
(202)502-8659. By direction of the Commission. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. Attachment A—Proposed Revisions to Electric Quarterly Report Data Dictionary Version 1.1 (issued December 21, 2007) QR Data Dictionary—ID Data Field No. Field Required Value Definition 1 Filer Unique Identifier ✓ FR1 (Respondent)—An identifier (i.e., “FR1”) used to designate a record containing Respondent identification information in a comma-delimited
(csv)file that is imported into the EQR filing. Only one record with the FR1 identifier may be imported into an EQR for a given quarter. 1 Filer Unique Identifier ✓ FS# (where “#” is an integer) (Seller)—An identifier (e.g., “FS1”, “FS2”) used to designate a record containing Seller identification information in a comma-delimited
(csv)file that is imported into the EQR filing. One record for each seller company may be imported into an EQR for a given quarter. 1 Filer Unique Identifier ✓ FA1 (Agent)—An identifier (i.e., “FA1”) used to designate a record containing Agent identification information in a comma-delimited
(csv)file that is imported into the EQR filing. Only one record with the FA1 identifier may be imported into an EQR for a given quarter. 2 Company Name ✓ Unrestricted text (100 characters) (Respondent)—The name of the company taking responsibility for complying with the Commission's regulations related to the EQR. 2 Company Name ✓ Unrestricted text (100 characters) (Seller)—The name of the company that is authorized to make sales as indicated in the company's FERC tariff(s). This name may be the same as the Company Name of the Respondent. 2 Company Name ✓ Unrestricted text (100 characters) (Agent)—The name of the entity completing the EQR filing. The Agent's Company Name need not be the name of the company under Commission jurisdiction. 3 Company DUNS Number for Respondent and Seller Nine digit number The unique nine digit number assigned by Dun and Bradstreet to the company identified in Field Number 2. 4 Contact Name ✓ Unrestricted text (50 characters) (Respondent)—Name of the person at the Respondent's company taking responsibility for compliance with the Commission's EQR regulations. 4 Contact Name ✓ Unrestricted text (50 characters) (Seller)—The name of the contact for the company authorized to make sales as indicated in the company's FERC tariff(s). This name may be the same as the Contact Name of the Respondent. 4 Contact Name ✓ Unrestricted text (50 characters) (Agent)—Name of the contact for the Agent, usually the person who prepares the filing. 5 Contact Title ✓ Unrestricted text (50 characters) Title of contact identified in Field Number 4. 6 Contact Address ✓ Unrestricted text Street address for contact identified in Field Number 4. 7 Contact City ✓ Unrestricted text (30 characters) City for the contact identified in Field Number 4. 8 Contact State ✓ Unrestricted text (2 characters) Two character state or province abbreviations for the contact identified in Field Number 4. 9 Contact Zip ✓ Unrestricted text (10 characters) Zip code for the contact identified in Field Number 4. 10 Contact Country Name ✓ CA-Canada MX-Mexico US-United States UK-United Kingdom Country (USA, Canada, Mexico, or United Kingdom) for contact address identified in Field Number 4. 11 Contact Phone ✓ Unrestricted text (20 characters) Phone number of contact identified in Field Number 4. 12 Contact E-Mail ✓ Unrestricted text E-mail address of contact identified in Field Number 4. 13 Filing Quarter ✓ YYYYMM A six digit reference number used by the EQR software to indicate the quarter and year of the filing for the purpose of importing data from csv files. The first 4 numbers represent the year (e.g., 2007). The last 2 numbers represent the last month of the quarter (e.g., 03=1st quarter; 06=2nd quarter, 09=3rd quarter, 12=4th quarter). QR Data Dictionary—Contract Data Field No. Field Required Value Definition 14 Contract Unique ID ✓ An integer proceeded by the letter “C” (only used when importing contract data) An identifier beginning with the letter “C” and followed by a number (e.g., “C1”, “C2”) used to designate a record containing contract information in a comma-delimited
(csv)file that is imported into the EQR filing. One record for each contract product may be imported into an EQR for a given quarter. 15 Seller Company Name ✓ Unrestricted text (100 characters) The name of the company that is authorized to make sales as indicated in the company's FERC tariff(s). This name must match the name provided as a Seller's “Company Name” in Field Number 2 of the ID Data (Seller Data). 16 Customer Company Name ✓ Unrestricted text (70 characters) The name of the counterparty. 17 Customer DUNS Number ✓ Nine digit number The unique nine digit number assigned by Dun and Bradstreet to the company identified in Field Number 16. 18 Contract Affiliate ✓ Y
(Yes)N
(No)The customer is an affiliate if it controls, is controlled by or is under common control with the seller. This includes a division that operates as a functional unit. A customer of a seller who is an Exempt Wholesale Generator may be defined as an affiliate under the Public Utility Holding Company Act and the FPA. 19 FERC Tariff Reference ✓ Unrestricted text (60 characters) The FERC tariff reference cites the document that specifies the terms and conditions under which a Seller is authorized to make transmission sales, power sales or sales of related jurisdictional services at cost-based rates or at market-based rates. If the sales are market-based, the tariff that is specified in the FERC order granting the Seller Market Based Rate Authority must be listed. 20 Contract Service Agreement ID ✓ Unrestricted text (30 characters) Unique identifier given to each service agreement that can be used by the filing company to produce the agreement, if requested. The identifier may be the number assigned by FERC for those service agreements that have been filed with and accepted by the Commission, or it may be generated as part of an internal identification system. 21 Contract Execution Date ✓ YYYYMMDD The date the contract was signed. If the parties signed on different dates, use the most recent date signed. 22 Contract Commencement Date ✓ YYYYMMDD The date the terms of the contract reported in the Contract Data section of the EQR were effective. If the terms reported in the EQR became effective or if service under those terms began on multiple dates (i.e.: due to an amendment), the date to be reported as the Commencement Date is the date when service began pursuant to the most recent amendment to the terms reported in the Contract Data section of the EQR. 23 Contract Termination Date If specified in the contract YYYYMMDD The date that the contract expires. 24 Actual Termination Date Extension If contract terminated YYYYMMDD The date the contract actually terminates. 25 Provision Description ✓ Unrestricted text Description of terms that provide for the continuation of the contract. 26 Class Name ✓ See definitions of each class name below. 26 Class Name ✓ F-Firm For transmission sales, a service or product that always has priority over non-firm service. For power sales, a service or product that is not interruptible for economic reasons. 26 Class Name ✓ NF—Non-firm For transmission sales, a service that is reserved and/or scheduled on an as-available basis and is subject to curtailment or interruption at a lesser priority compared to Firm service. For an energy sale, a service or product for which delivery or receipt of the energy may be interrupted for any reason or no reason, without liability on the part of either the buyer or seller. 26 Class Name ✓ UP—Unit Power Sale Designates a dedicated sale of energy and capacity from one or more than one specified generation unit(s). 26 Class Name ✓ N/A-Not Applicable To be used only when the other available Class Names do not apply. 27 Term Name ✓ LT-Long Term ST-Short Term N/A—Not Applicable Contracts with durations of one year or greater are long-term. Contracts with shorter durations are short-term. 28 Increment Name ✓ See definitions for each increment below. 28 Increment Name ✓ H-Hourly Terms of the contract (if specifically noted in the contract) set for up to 6 consecutive hours (≤ 6 consecutive hours). 28 Increment Name ✓ D-Daily Terms of the contract (if specifically noted in the contract) set for more than 6 and up to 60 consecutive hours (>6 and ≤ 60 consecutive hours). 28 Increment Name ✓ W-Weekly Terms of the contract (if specifically noted in the contract) set for over 60 consecutive hours and up to 168 consecutive hours (>60 and ≤ 168 consecutive hours). 28 Increment Name ✓ M-Monthly Terms of the contract (if specifically noted in the contract) set for more than 168 consecutive hours up to, but not including, one year (>168 consecutive hours and < 1 year). 28 Increment Name ✓ Y-Yearly Terms of the contract (if specifically noted in the contract) set for one year or more (≥ 1 year). 28 Increment Name ✓ N/A-Not Applicable Terms of the contract do not specify an increment. 29 Increment Peaking Name ✓ See definitions for each increment peaking name below. 29 Increment Peaking Name ✓ FP-Full Period The product described may be sold during those hours designated as on-peak and off-peak in the NERC region of the point of delivery. 29 Increment Peaking Name ✓ OP-Off-Peak The product described may be sold only during those hours designated as off-peak in the NERC region of the point of delivery. 29 Increment Peaking Name ✓ P-Peak The product described may be sold only during those hours designated as on-peak in the NERC region of the point of delivery. 29 Increment Peaking Name ✓ N/A-Not Applicable To be used only when the increment peaking name is not specified in the contract. 30 Product Type Name ✓ See definitions for each product type below. 30 Product Type Name ✓ CB-Cost Based Energy or capacity sold under a FERC-approved cost-based rate tariff. 30 Product Type Name ✓ CR-Capacity Reassignment An agreement under which a transmission provider sells, assigns or transfers all or portion of its rights to an eligible customer. 30 Product Type Name ✓ MB-Market Based Energy or capacity sold under the seller's FERC-approved market-based rate tariff. 30 Product Type Name ✓ T-Transmission The product is sold under a FERC-approved transmission ariff. 30 Product Type Name ✓ Other The product cannot be characterized by the other product type names. 31 Product Name ✓ See Product Name Table, Appendix A. Description of product being offered. 32 Quantity If specified in the contract Number with up to 4 decimals Quantity for the contract product identified. 33 Units If specified in the contract See Units Table, Appendix E. Measure stated in the contract for the product sold. 34 Rate One of four rate fields (34, 35, 36, or 37) must be included Number with up to 4 decimals The charge for the product per unit as stated in the contract. 35 Rate Minimum One of four rate fields (34, 35, 36, or 37) must be included Number with up to 4 decimals Minimum rate to be charged per the contract, if a range is specified. 36 Rate Maximum One of four rate fields (34, 35, 36, or 37) must be included Number with up to 4 decimals Maximum rate to be charged per the contract, if a range is specified. 37 Rate Description One of four rate fields (34, 35, 36, or 37) must be included Unrestricted text Text description of rate. If the rate is currently available on the FERC Web site, a citation of the FERC Accession Number and the relevant FERC tariff including page number or section may be included instead of providing the entire rate algorithm. If the rate is not available on the FERC Web site, include the rate algorithm, if rate is calculated. If the algorithm would exceed the 150 character field limit, it may be provided in a descriptive summary (including bases and methods of calculations) with a detailed citation of the relevant FERC tariff including page number and section. If more than 150 characters are required, the contract product may be repeated in a subsequent line of data until the rate is adequately described. 38 Rate Units If specified in the contract See Rate Units Table, Appendix F Measure stated in the contract for the product sold. 39 Point of Receipt Balancing Authority (PORBA) If specified in the contract See Balancing Authority Table, Appendix B The registered NERC Balancing Authority (formerly called NERC Control Area) where service begins for a transmission or transmission-related jurisdictional sale. The Balancing Authority will be identified with the abbreviation used in OASIS applications. If receipt occurs at a trading hub specified in the EQR software, the term “Hub” should be used. 40 Point of Receipt Specific Location (PORSL) If specified in the contract Unrestricted text (50 characters). If “HUB” is selected for PORCA, see Hub Table, Appendix C The specific location at which the product is received if designated in the contract. If receipt occurs at a trading hub, a standardized hub name must be used. If more points of receipt are listed in the contract than can fit into the 50 character space, a description of the collection of points may be used. ‘Various,' alone, is unacceptable unless the contract itself uses that terminology. 41 Point of Delivery Balancing Authority(PODBA) If specified in the contract See Balancing Authority Table, Appendix B The registered NERC Balancing Authority (formerly called NERC Control Area) where a jurisdictional product is delivered and/or service ends for a transmission or transmission-related jurisdictional sale. The Balancing Authority will be identified with the abbreviation used in OASIS applications. If delivery occurs at the interconnection of two control areas, the control area that the product is entering should be used. If delivery occurs at a trading hub specified in the EQR software, the term “Hub” should be used. 42 Point of Delivery Specific Location (PODSL) If specified in the contract Unrestricted text (50 characters). If “HUB” is selected for PODCA, see Hub Table, Appendix C The specific location at which the product is delivered if designated in the contract. If receipt occurs at a trading hub, a standardized hub name must be used. 43 Begin Date If specified in the contract YYYYMMDDHHMM First date for the sale of the product at the rate specified. 44 End Date If specified in the contract YYYYMMDDHHMM Last date for the sale of the product at the rate specified. 45 Time Zone ✓ See Time Zone Table, Appendix D The time zone in which the sales will be made under the contract. QR Data Dictionary—Transaction Data Field No. Field Required Value Definition 46 Transaction Unique ID ✓ An integer proceeded by the letter “T” (only used when importing transaction data) An identifier beginning with the letter “T” and followed by a number (e.g., “T1”, “T2”) used to designate a record containing transaction information in a comma-delimited
(csv)file that is imported into the EQR filing. One record for each transaction record may be imported into an EQR for a given quarter. A new transaction record must be used every time a price changes in a sale. 47 Seller Company Name ✓ Unrestricted text (100 Characters) The name of the company that is authorized to make sales as indicated in the company's FERC tariff(s). This name must match the name provided as a Seller's “Company Name” in Field 2 of the ID Data (Seller Data). 48 Customer Company Name ✓ Unrestricted text (70 Characters) The name of the counterparty. 49 Customer DUNS Number ✓ Nine digit number The unique nine digit number assigned by Dun and Bradstreet to the counterparty to the contract. 50 FERC Tariff Reference ✓ Unrestricted text (60 Characters) The FERC tariff reference cites the document that specifies the terms and conditions under which a Seller is authorized to make transmission sales, power sales or sales of related jurisdictional services at cost-based rates or at market-based rates. If the sales are market-based, the tariff that is specified in the FERC order granting the Seller Market Based Rate Authority must be listed. 51 Contract Service Agreement ID ✓ Unrestricted text (30 Characters) Unique identifier given to each service agreement that can be used by the filing company to produce the agreement, if requested. The identifier may be the number assigned by FERC for those service agreements that have been filed and approved by the Commission, or it may be generated as part of an internal identification system. 52 Transaction Unique Identifier ✓ Unrestricted text (24 Characters) Unique reference number assigned by the seller for each transaction. 53 Transaction Begin Date ✓ YYYYMMDDHHMM (csv import) MMDDYYYYHHMM (manual entry) First date and time the product is sold during the quarter. 54 Transaction End Date ✓ YYYYMMDDHHMM (csv import) MMDDYYYYHHMM (manual entry) Last date and time the product is sold during the quarter. 55 Time Zone ✓ See Time Zone Table, Appendix D The time zone in which the sales will be made under the contract. 56 Point of Delivery Balancing Authority (PODBA) ✓ See Balancing Authority Table, Appendix B The registered NERC Balancing Authority (formerly called NERC Control Area) abbreviation used in OASIS applications. 57 Point of Delivery Specific Location (PODSL) ✓ Unrestricted text (50 characters). If “HUB” is selected for PODBA, see Hub Table, Appendix C The specific location at which the product is delivered. If receipt occurs at a trading hub, a standardized hub name must be used. 58 Class Name ✓ See class name definitions below. 58 Class Name ✓ F-Firm A sale, service or product that is not interruptible for economic reasons. 58 Class Name ✓ NF-Non-firm A sale for which delivery or receipt of the energy may be interrupted for any reason or no reason, without liability on the part of either the buyer or seller. 58 Class Name ✓ UP-Unit Power Sale Designates a dedicated sale of energy and capacity from one or more than one specified generation unit(s). 58 Class Name ✓ BA-Billing Adjustment Designates an incremental material change to one or more transactions due to a change in settlement results. “BA” may be used in a refiling after the next quarter's filing is due to reflect the receipt of new information. It may not be used to correct an inaccurate filing. 58 Class Name ✓ N/A-Not Applicable To be used only when the other available class names do not apply. 59 Term Name ✓ LT-Long Term ST—Short Term N/A-Not Applicable Power sales transactions with durations of one year or greater are long-term. Transactions with shorter durations are short-term. 60 Increment Name ✓ See increment name definitions below. 60 Increment Name ✓ H-Hourly Terms of the particular sale set for up to 6 consecutive hours (≤ 6 consecutive hours) Includes LMP based sales in ISO/RTO markets. 60 Increment Name ✓ D-Daily Terms of the particular sale set for more than 6 and up to 60 consecutive hours (>6 and ≤ 60 consecutive hours) Includes sales over a peak or off-peak block during a single day. 60 Increment Name ✓ W-Weekly Terms of the particular sale set for over 60 consecutive hours and up to 168 consecutive hours (>60 and ≤ 168 consecutive hours). Includes sales for a full week and sales for peak and off-peak blocks over a particular week. 60 Increment Name ✓ M-Monthly Terms of the particular sale set for set for more than 168 consecutive hours up to, but not including, one year (>168 consecutive hours and < 1 year). Includes sales for full month or multi-week sales during a given month. 60 Increment Name ✓ Y-Yearly Terms of the particular sale set for one year or more (≥ 1 year). Includes all long-term contracts with defined pricing terms (fixed-price, formula, or index). 60 Increment Name ✓ N/A-Not Applicable To be used only when other available increment names do not apply. 61 Increment Peaking Name ✓ See definitions for increment peaking below. 61 Increment Peaking Name ✓ FP-Full Period The product described was sold during Peak and Off-Peak hours. 61 Increment Peaking Name ✓ OP-Off-Peak The product described was sold only during those hours designated as off-peak in the NERC region of the point of delivery. 61 Increment Peaking Name ✓ P-Peak The product described was sold only during those hours designated as on-peak in the NERC region of the point of delivery. 61 Increment Peaking Name ✓ N/A-Not Applicable To be used only when the other available increment peaking names do not apply. 62 Product Name ✓ See Product Names Table, Appendix A Description of product being offered. 63 Transaction Quantity ✓ Number with up to 4 decimals The quantity of the product in this transaction. 64 Price ✓ Number with up to 6 decimals Actual price charged for the product per unit. The price reported cannot be averaged or otherwise aggregated. 65 Rate Units ✓ See Rate Units Table, Appendix F Measure appropriate to the price of the product sold. 66 Total Transmission Charge ✓ Number with up to 2 decimals Payments received for transmission services when explicitly identified. 67 Total Transaction Charge ✓ Number with up to 2 decimals Transaction Quantity (Field 63) times Price (Field 64) plus Total Transmission Charge (Field 66). QR Data Dictionary—Appendix A. Product Names Product name Contract product Transaction product Definition BLACK START SERVICE ✓ ✓ Service available after a system-wide blackout where a generator participates in system restoration activities without the availability of an outside electric supply (Ancillary Service). BOOKED OUT POWER ✓ Energy or capacity contractually committed bilaterally for delivery but not actually delivered due to some offsetting or countervailing trade (Transaction only). CAPACITY ✓ ✓ A quantity of demand that is charged on a $/KW or $/MW basis. CUSTOMER CHARGE ✓ ✓ Fixed contractual charges assessed on a per customer basis that could include billing service. DIRECT ASSIGNMENT FACILITIES CHARGE ✓ Charges for facilities or portions of facilities that are constructed or used for the sole use/benefit of a particular customer. EMERGENCY ENERGY ✓ Contractual provisions to supply energy or capacity to another entity during critical situations. ENERGY ✓ ✓ A quantity of electricity that is sold or transmitted over a period of time. ENERGY IMBALANCE ✓ ✓ Service provided when a difference occurs between the scheduled and the actual delivery of energy to a load obligation. Reported for power sales and transmission-related transactions. EXCHANGE ✓ ✓ Transaction whereby the receiver accepts delivery of energy for a supplier's account and returns energy at times, rates, and in amounts as mutually agreed if the receiver is not an RTO/ISO. FUEL CHARGE ✓ ✓ Charge based on the cost or amount of fuel used for generation. GENERATOR IMBALANCE ✓ ✓ Service provided when a difference occurs between the output of a generator located in the Transmission Provider's Control Area and a delivery schedule from that generator to
(1)another Control Area or
(2)a load within the Transmission Provider's Control Area over a single hour. Reported for power sales and transmission-related transactions. GRANDFATHERED BUNDLED ✓ ✓ Services provided for bundled transmission, ancillary services and energy under contracts effective prior to Order No. 888's OATTs. INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT ✓ Contract that provides the terms and conditions for a generator, distribution system owner, transmission owner, transmission provider, or transmission system to physically connect to a transmission system or distribution system. MEMBERSHIP AGREEMENT ✓ Agreement to participate and be subject to rules of a system operator. MUST RUN AGREEMENT ✓ An agreement that requires a unit to run. NEGOTIATED-RATE TRANSMISSION ✓ ✓ Transmission performed under a negotiated rate contract (applies only to merchant transmission companies). NETWORK ✓ Transmission service under contract providing network service. NETWORK OPERATING AGREEMENT ✓ An executed agreement that contains the terms and conditions under which a network customer operates its facilities and the technical and operational matters associated with the implementation of network integration transmission service. OTHER ✓ ✓ Product name not otherwise included. POINT-TO-POINT AGREEMENT ✓ Transmission service under contract between specified Points of Receipt and Delivery. REACTIVE SUPPLY & VOLTAGE CONTROL ✓ ✓ Production or absorption of reactive power to maintain voltage levels on transmission systems (Ancillary Service). REAL POWER TRANSMISSION LOSS ✓ ✓ The loss of energy, resulting from transporting power over a transmission system. REGULATION & FREQUENCY RESPONSE ✓ ✓ Service providing for continuous balancing of resources (generation and interchange) with load, and for maintaining scheduled interconnection frequency by committing on-line generation where output is raised or lowered and by other non-generation resources capable of providing this service as necessary to follow the moment-by-moment changes in load (Ancillary Service). Reported for power sales and transmission-related transactions. REQUIREMENTS SERVICE ✓ ✓ Firm, load-following power supply necessary to serve a specified share of customer's aggregate load during the term of the agreement. Requirements service may include some or all of the energy, capacity and ancillary service products. (If the components of the requirements service are priced separately, they should be reported separately in the transactions tab.) SCHEDULE SYSTEM CONTROL & DISPATCH ✓ ✓ Scheduling, confirming and implementing an interchange schedule with other Balancing Authorities, including intermediary Balancing Authorities providing transmission service, and ensuring operational security during the interchange transaction (Ancillary Service). SPINNING RESERVE ✓ ✓ Unloaded synchronized generating capacity that is immediately responsive to system frequency and that is capable of being loaded in a short time period or non-generation resources capable of providing this service (Ancillary Service). Reported for power sales and transmission-related transactions. SUPPLEMENTAL RESERVE ✓ ✓ Service needed to serve load in the event of a system contingency, available with greater delay than SPINNING RESERVE. This service may be provided by generating units that are on-line but unloaded, by quick-start generation, or by interruptible load or other non-generation resources capable of providing this service (Ancillary Service). Reported for power sales and transmission-related transactions. SYSTEM OPERATING AGREEMENTS ✓ An executed agreement that contains the terms and conditions under which a system or network customer shall operate its facilities and the technical and operational matters associated with the implementation of network. TOLLING ENERGY ✓ ✓ Energy sold from a plant whereby the buyer provides fuel to a generator (seller) and receives power in return for pre-established fees. TRANSMISSION OWNERS AGREEMENT ✓ The agreement that establishes the terms and conditions under which a transmission owner transfers operational control over designated transmission facilities. UPLIFT ✓ ✓ A make-whole payment by an RTO/ISO to a utility. QR Data Dictionary—Appendix B. Balancing Authority Balancing authority Abbreviation Outside US * AESC, LLC—Wheatland CIN AEWC Alabama Electric Cooperative, Inc AEC Alberta Electric System Operator AESO ✓ Alliant Energy Corporate Services, LLC—East ALTE Alliant Energy Corporate Services, LLC—West ALTW Ameren Transmission AMRN Ameren Transmission. Illinois AMIL Ameren Transmission. Missouri AMMO American Transmission Systems, Inc FE Aquila Networks—Kansas WPEK Aquila Networks—Missouri Public Service MPS Aquila Networks—West Plains Dispatch WPEC Arizona Public Service Company AZPS Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc AECI Avista Corp AVA Batesville Balancing Authority BBA Big Rivers Electric Corp BREC Board of Public Utilities KACY Bonneville Power Administration Transmission BPAT British Columbia Transmission Corporation BCTC ✓ California Independent System Operator CISO Carolina Power & Light Company—CPLW CPLW Carolina Power and Light Company—East CPLE Central and Southwest CSWS Central Illinois Light Co CILC Chelan County PUD CHPD Cinergy Corporation CIN City of Homestead HST City of Independence P&L Dept INDN City of Tallahassee TAL City Water Light & Power CWLP Cleco Power LLC CLEC Columbia Water & Light CWLD Comision Federal de Electricidad CFE ✓ Constellation Energy Control and Dispatch—Arkansas PUPP Constellation Energy Control and Dispatch—City of Benton, AR BUBA Constellation Energy Control and Dispatch—City of Ruston, LA DERS Constellation Energy Control and Dispatch—Conway, Arkansas CNWY Constellation Energy Control and Dispatch—Gila River GRMA Constellation Energy Control and Dispatch—Harquehala HGMA Constellation Energy Control and Dispatch—North Little Rock, AK DENL Constellation Energy Control and Dispatch—West Memphis, Arkansas WMUC Dairyland Power Cooperative DPC DECA, LLC—Arlington Valley DEAA Duke Energy Corporation DUK East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Inc EKPC El Paso Electric EPE Electric Energy, Inc EEI Empire District Electric Co., The EDE Entergy EES ERCOT ISO ERCO Florida Municipal Power Pool FMPP Florida Power & Light FPL Florida Power Corporation FPC Gainesville Regional Utilities GVL Georgia System Operations Corporation GSOC Georgia Transmission Corporation GTC Grand River Dam Authority GRDA Grant County PUD No. 2 GCPD Great River Energy GRE Great River Energy GREC Great River Energy GREN Great River Energy GRES GridAmerica GA Hoosier Energy HE Hydro-Quebec, TransEnergie HQT ✓ Idaho Power Company IPCO Illinois Power Co IP Illinois Power Co IPRV Imperial Irrigation District IID Indianapolis Power & Light Company IPL ISO New England Inc ISNE JEA JEA Kansas City Power & Light, Co KCPL Lafayette Utilities System LAFA LG&E Energy Transmission Services LGEE Lincoln Electric System LES Los Angeles Department of Water and Power LDWP Louisiana Energy & Power Authority LEPA Louisiana Generating, LLC LAGN Madison Gas and Electric Company MGE Manitoba Hydro Electric Board, Transmission Services MHEB ✓ Michigan Electric Coordinated System MECS Michigan Electric Coordinated System—CONS CONS Michigan Electric Coordinated System—DECO DECO MidAmerican Energy Company MEC Midwest ISO MISO Minnesota Power, Inc MP Montana-Dakota Utilities Co MDU Muscatine Power and Water MPW Nebraska Public Power District NPPD Nevada Power Company NEVP New Brunswick Power Corporation NBPC ✓ New Horizons Electric Cooperative NHC1 New York Independent System Operator NYIS North American Electric Reliability Council TEST Northern Indiana Public Service Company NIPS Northern States Power Company NSP NorthWestern Energy NWMT Ohio Valley Electric Corporation OVEC Oklahoma Gas and Electric OKGE Ontario—Independent Electricity Market Operator IMO ✓ OPPD CA/TP OPPD Otter Tail Power Company OTP P.U.D. No. 1 of Douglas County DOPD PacifiCorp—East PACE PacifiCorp—West PACW PJM Interconnection PJM Portland General Electric PGE Public Service Company of Colorado PSCO Public Service Company of New Mexico PNM Puget Sound Energy Transmission PSEI Reedy Creek Improvement District RC Sacramento Municipal Utility District SMUD Salt River Project SRP Santee Cooper SC SaskPower Grid Control Centre SPC ✓ Seattle City Light SCL Seminole Electric Cooperative SEC Sierra Pacific Power Co.—Transmission SPPC South Carolina Electric & Gas Company SCEG South Mississippi Electric Power Association SME South Mississippi Electric Power Association SMEE Southeastern Power Administration—Hartwell SEHA Southeastern Power Administration—Russell SERU Southeastern Power Administration—Thurmond SETH Southern Company Services, Inc SOCO Southern Illinois Power Cooperative SIPC Southern Indiana Gas & Electric Co SIGE Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency SMP Southwest Power Pool SWPP Southwestern Power Administration SPA Southwestern Public Service Company SPS Sunflower Electric Power Corporation SECI Tacoma Power TPWR Tampa Electric Company TEC Tennessee Valley Authority ESO TVA Trading Hub HUB TRANSLink Management Company TLKN Tucson Electric Power Company TEPC Turlock Irrigation District TIDC Upper Peninsula Power Co UPPC Utilities Commission, City of New Smyrna Beach NSB Westar Energy—MoPEP Cities MOWR Western Area Power Administration—Colorado-Missouri WACM Western Area Power Administration—Lower Colorado WALC Western Area Power Administration—Upper Great Plains East WAUE Western Area Power Administration—Upper Great Plains West WAUW Western Farmers Electric Cooperative WFEC Western Resources dba Westar Energy WR Wisconsin Energy Corporation WEC Wisconsin Public Service Corporation WPS Yadkin, Inc YAD * Balancing authorities outside the United States may only be used in the Contract Data section to identify specified receipt/delivery points in jurisdictional transmission contracts. QR Data Dictionary—Appendix C. Hub HUB Definition ADHUB The aggregated Locational Marginal Price (“LMP”) nodes defined by PJM Interconnection, LLC as the AEP/Dayton Hub. AEPGenHub The aggregated Locational Marginal Price (“LMP”) nodes defined by PJM Interconnection, LLC as the AEPGenHub. COB The set of delivery points along the California-Oregon commonly identified as and agreed to by the counterparties to constitute the COB Hub. Cinergy
(into)The set of delivery points commonly identified as and agreed to by the counterparties to constitute delivery into the Cinergy balancing authority. Cinergy Hub
(MISO)The aggregated Elemental Pricing nodes (“Epnodes”) defined by the Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc., as Cinergy Hub (MISO). Entergy
(into)The set of delivery points commonly identified as and agreed to by the counterparties to constitute delivery into the Entergy balancing authority. FE Hub The aggregated Elemental Pricing nodes (“Epnodes”) defined by the Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc., as FE Hub (MISO). Four Corners The set of delivery points at the Four Corners power plant commonly identified as and agreed to by the counterparties to constitute the Four Corners Hub. Illinois Hub
(MISO)The aggregated Elemental Pricing nodes (“Epnodes”) defined by the Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc., as Illinois Hub (MISO). Mead The set of delivery points at or near Hoover Dam commonly identified as and agreed to by the counterparties to constitute the Mead Hub. Michigan Hub
(MISO)The aggregated Elemental Pricing nodes (“Epnodes”) defined by the Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc., as Michigan Hub (MISO). Mid-Columbia (Mid-C) The set of delivery points along the Columbia River commonly identified as and agreed to by the counterparties to constitute the Mid-Columbia Hub. Minnesota Hub
(MISO)The aggregated Elemental Pricing nodes (“Epnodes”) defined by the Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc., as Minnesota Hub (MISO). NEPOOL (Mass Hub) The aggregated Locational Marginal Price (“LMP”) defined by ISO New England Inc., as Mass Hub. NIHUB The aggregated Locational Marginal Price (“LMP”) defined by PJM Interconnection, LLC as the Northern Illinois Hub. NOB The set of delivery points along the Nevada-Oregon border commonly identified as and agreed to by the counterparties to constitute the NOB Hub. NP15 The set of delivery points north of Path 15 on the California transmission grid commonly identified as and agreed to by the counterparties to constitute the NP15 Hub. NWMT The set of delivery points commonly identified as and agreed to by the counterparties to constitute delivery into the Northwestern Energy Montana balancing authority. PJM East Hub The aggregated Locational Marginal Price nodes (“LMP”) defined by PJM Interconnection, LLC as the PJM East Hub. PJM South Hub The aggregated Locational Marginal Price (“LMP”) defined by PJM Interconnection, LLC as the PJM South Hub. PJM West Hub The aggregated Locational Marginal Price (“LMP”) defined by PJM Interconnection, LLC as the PJM Western Hub. Palo Verde The switch yard at the Palo Verde nuclear power station west of Phoenix in Arizona. Palo Verde Hub includes the Hassayampa switchyard 2 miles south of Palo Verde. SOCO
(into)The set of delivery points commonly identified as and agreed to by the counterparties to constitute delivery into the Southern Company balancing authority. SP15 The set of delivery points south of Path 15 on the California transmission grid commonly identified as and agreed to by the counterparties to constitute the SP15 Hub. TVA
(into)The set of delivery points commonly identified as and agreed to by the counterparties to constitute delivery into the Tennessee Valley Authority balancing authority. ZP26 The set of delivery points associated with Path 26 on the California transmission grid commonly identified as and agreed to by the counterparties to constitute the ZP26 Hub. QR Data Dictionary—Appendix D. Time Zone Time zone Definition AD Atlantic Daylight. AP Atlantic Prevailing. AS Atlantic Standard. CD Central Daylight. CP Central Prevailing. CS Central Standard. ED Eastern Daylight. EP Eastern Prevailing. ES Eastern Standard. MD Mountain Daylight. MP Mountain Prevailing. MS Mountain Standard. NA Not Applicable. PD Pacific Daylight. PP Pacific Prevailing. PS Pacific Standard. UT Universal Time. QR Data Dictionary—Appendix E. Units Units Definition KV Kilovolt. KVA Kilovolt Amperes. KVR Kilovar. KW Kilowatt. KWH Kilowatt Hour. KW-DAY Kilowatt Day. KW-MO Kilowatt Month. KW-WK Kilowatt Week. KW-YR Kilowatt Year. MVAR-YR Megavar Year. MW Megawatt. MWH Megawatt Hour. MW-DAY Megawatt Day. MW-MO Megawatt Month. MW-WK Megawatt Week. MW-YR Megawatt Year. RKVA Reactive Kilovolt Amperes. FLAT RATE Flat Rate. QR Data Dictionary—Appendix F. Rate Units Rate units Definition $/KV dollars per kilovolt. $/KVA dollars per kilovolt amperes. $/KVR dollars per kilovar. $/KW dollars per kilowatt. $/KWH dollars per kilowatt hour. $/KW-DAY dollars per kilowatt day. $/KW-MO dollars per kilowatt month. $/KW-WK dollars per kilowatt week. $/KW-YR dollars per kilowatt year. $/MW dollars per megawatt. $/MWH dollars per megawatt hour. $/MW-DAY dollars per megawatt day. $/MW-MO dollars per megawatt month. $/MW-WK dollars per megawatt week. $/MW-YR dollars per megawatt year. $/MVAR-YR dollars per megavar year. $/RKVA dollars per reactive kilovar amperes. CENTS cents. CENTS/KVR cents per kilovolt amperes. CENTS/KWH cents per kilowatt hour. FLAT RATE rate not specified in any other units. [FR Doc. E8-4753 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. IN06-3-003] Energy Transfer Partners, L.P., Energy Transfer Company, ETC Marketing Ltd., Houston Pipeline Company, Oasis Pipeline, L.P., Oasis Pipeline Company Texas, L.P., ETC Texas Pipeline Ltd., Oasis Division; Supplemental Notice of Designation of Commission Staff March 3, 2008. On December 20, 2007, a notice was issued designating the staff of the Office of Enforcement as non-decisional in deliberations by the Commission in this docket, with certain limited exceptions. Exceptions to this designation are the Director of the Office of Enforcement and the Directors of the Divisions of Investigations, Energy Market Oversight, Audits, and Financial Regulation in the Office of Enforcement. This supplemental notice designates Shauna Coleman, an attorney in the Division of Investigations, Office of Enforcement, as an exception to the designation of the staff of the Office of Enforcement as non-decisional. Ms. Coleman joined the Commission after the December 27, 2007 notice was issued and did not participate in the investigation at issue in this proceeding. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. E8-4731 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0228; FRL-8540-9] Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Reporting and Recordkeeping Activities Associated With EPA's PFC Reduction/Climate Partnership for the Semiconductor Industry EPA ICR No. 1823.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0382 AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA)(44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* ), this document announces that EPA is planning to submit a request to renew an existing approved Information Collection Request
(ICR)to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). This ICR is scheduled to expire on March 31, 2008. Before submitting the ICR to OMB for review and approval, EPA is soliciting comments on specific aspects of the proposed information collection as described below. DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before May 12, 2008. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR 2004-0228 by one of the following methods: • *http://www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • *E-mail: a-and-r-Docket@epa.gov* • *Fax:* 202 566-9744 • *Mail:* Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0228. Environmental Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460 • *Hand Delivery:* EPA Docket Center, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Room 3334, Washington, DC 20460 (Attention Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0082). Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0228. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at http:// *www.regulations.gov,* including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through http:// *www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. The *http://www.regulations.gov* Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through *http://www.regulations.gov* your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at *http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.* FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Bartos, Office of Atmospheric Programs, Climate Change Division, 6207J, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202 343-9167; fax number: 202 343-2202; e-mail address: *bartos.scott@epa.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: How Can I Access the Docket and/or Submit Comments? EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0228, which is available for online viewing at *http://www.regulations.gov,* or in person viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is 202-566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket is 202-566-1742. Use *http://www.regulations.gov* to obtain a copy of the draft collection of information, submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select “search,” then key in the docket ID number identified in this document. In What Information Is EPA Particularly Interested? Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically solicits comments and information to enable it to:
(i)Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical utility;
(ii)evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;
(iii)enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and
(iv)minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses. In particular, EPA is requesting comments from very small businesses (those that employ less than 25) on examples of specific additional efforts that EPA could make to reduce the paperwork burden for very small businesses affected by this collection. What Should I Consider When I Prepare My Comments for EPA? You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments: 1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific examples. 2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used that support your views. 4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide. 5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity. 6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified under DATES . 7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and **Federal Register** citation. To What Information Collection Activity or ICR Does This Apply? [Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2004-0228] *Affected entities:* Entities potentially affected by this action are manufacturers of semiconductors and related devices. *Title:* Reporting and Recordkeeping Activities Associated with EPA's PFC Reduction/Climate Partnership for the Semiconductor Industry. *ICR numbers:* EPA ICR No. 1823.03, OMB Control No. 2060-0382. *ICR status:* This ICR is currently scheduled to expire on 3/31/2008. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information, unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations in title 40 of the CFR, after appearing in the **Federal Register** when approved, are listed in 40 CFR part 9, are displayed either by publication in the **Federal Register** or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection instrument or form, if applicable. The display of OMB control numbers in certain EPA regulations is consolidated in 40 CFR part 9. *Abstract:* The U.S. EPA's Office of Atmospheric Programs launched the PFC Reduction/Climate Partnership for the Semiconductor Industry in 1996. Perfluorinated compounds
(PFCs)are the most potent greenhouse gases known with atmospheric lifetimes of up to 50,000 years. These unique chemical compounds are required during two critical manufacturing steps; plasma etching and CVD chamber cleaning. EPA's partnership uses a pollution prevention approach to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and tracks progress by collecting annual PFC emissions estimates from voluntary participants. EPA's semiconductor industry partners share information on technically feasible emission reduction strategies and EPA recognizes companies for their success in reducing PFC emissions through certificates, awards, and assistance in communicating their achievements with the public. In 2003, EPA's semiconductor industry partners were recognized for their commitment and ongoing efforts to protect the climate as participants in the White House's Climate VISION initiative. All semiconductor manufacturers operating in the U.S. are invited to join the partnership. Participation in the program begins by completing a Memorandum of Understanding that defines a voluntary agreement between the company and EPA. By joining the partnership, a company agrees to estimate and report its annual PFC emissions to EPA. A designated third party assembles the reported data and protects any confidential or sensitive information prior to EPA review. The partner companies' annual reports will provide an estimate of total PFC emissions and a description of the estimating method. The partnership will track progress as a group using the aggregate annual PFC emissions estimate. *Burden Statement:* The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 544 hours per participant. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements which have subsequently changed; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate, which is only briefly summarized here: *Estimated total number of potential respondents:* 21. *Frequency of response:* Annual emissions reporting. *Estimated total average number of responses for each respondent:* 1. *Estimated total annual burden hours:* 11,426 hours. *Average annual burden hours per participant:* 544 hours. *Estimated total annual costs:* $1,054,780. This includes an estimated burden cost of $938,461 and an estimated cost of $116,319 for capital investment or maintenance and operational costs. Are There Changes in the Estimates From the Last Approval? There is no change in the total estimated respondent burden hours compared with that identified in the ICR currently approved by OMB. The estimated annual burden cost has increased by $98,997 reflecting updated labor compensation rates from the U.S. Department of Labor. What Is the Next Step in the Process for This ICR? EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR as appropriate. The final ICR package will then be submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will issue another **Federal Register** notice pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and the opportunity to submit additional comments to OMB. If you have any questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact the technical person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT . Dated: March 5, 2008. Dina Kruger, Director, Climate Change Division. [FR Doc. E8-4797 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8540-8] Science Advisory Board Staff Office; Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) Notification of a Public Teleconference of the Carbon Monoxide NAAQS Review Panel AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency) Science Advisory Board
(SAB)Staff Office announces a public teleconference of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) Carbon Monoxide
(CO)National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) Review Panel (CASAC Panel) to conduct a consultation on EPA's *Draft Integrated Plan for Review of the Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Carbon Monoxide (March 2008).* DATES: The CASAC Panel will meet by public telephone from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. (Eastern Time) on Tuesday, April 8, 2008. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any member of the public who wishes to obtain further information concerning this public teleconference may contact: Ms. Kyndall Barry, Designated Federal Officer (DFO), EPA Science Advisory Board (1400F), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; via telephone/voice mail:
(202)343-9868; fax:
(202)233-0643; or e-mail at: *barry.kyndall@epa.gov.* General information concerning the CASAC or the EPA SAB can be found on the EPA Web site at: *http://www.epa.gov/sab/.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Background:* The Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) was established under section 109(d)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) (42 U.S.C. 7409) as an independent scientific advisory committee. CASAC provides advice, information and recommendations on the scientific and technical aspects of air quality criteria and national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) under sections 108 and 109 of the Act. The CASAC is a Federal advisory committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended, 5 U.S.C., App. The Panel will comply with the provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural policies. Section 109(d)(1) of the CAA requires that the Agency periodically review and revise, as appropriate, the air quality criteria and the NAAQS for the six “criteria” air pollutants, including carbon monoxide. EPA is currently reviewing the primary (health-based) NAAQS for CO. The current primary NAAQS for CO was first promulgated in 1971 and retained in 1985 and 1994. The purpose of this public teleconference meeting of the CASAC CO Review Panel is to provide consultative advice on the Agency's *Draft Integrated Plan for Review of the Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Carbon Monoxide (March 2008).* Background information about the CASAC CO review activities and about the formation of the CASAC CO Panel was published in the **Federal Register** on October 12, 2007 (72 FR 58078-58080). *Availability of Meeting Materials:* The *Draft Integrated Plan for Review of the Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Carbon Monoxide (March 2008)* will be available on the EPA's Web site at: *http://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/standards/co/s_co_index.html* . For questions and information regarding the Agency's draft document, please contact Ms. Chris Trent at
(919)541-5337 or *trent.chris@epa.gov.* The agenda and other materials for this CASAC teleconference will be posted on the SAB Web site at: *http://www.epa.gov/sab/* prior to the meeting. *Procedures for Providing Public Input:* Interested members of the public may submit relevant written or oral information for consideration on the topics included in this advisory activity. *Oral Statements:* In general, individuals or groups requesting an oral presentation at a public teleconference will be limited to three minutes per speaker, with no more than a total of 30 minutes for all speakers. Interested parties should contact Ms. Barry, DFO, in writing (preferably via e-mail), by April 1, 2008, at the contact information noted above, to be placed on the list of public speakers for this meeting. *Written Statements:* Written statements should be received in the SAB Staff Office by the same date, so that the information may be made available to the CASAC Panel for its consideration prior to this teleconference. Written statements should be supplied to the DFO in the following formats: One hard copy with original signature and one electronic copy via e-mail (acceptable file formats: Adobe Acrobat PDF, MS Word, WordPerfect, MS PowerPoint, or Rich Text files in IBM-PC/Windows 98/2000/XP format). *Accessibility:* For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Ms. Barry at the phone number or e-mail address noted above, preferably at least ten days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request. Dated: March 4, 2008. Anthony F. Maciorowski, Deputy Director, EPA Science Advisory Board Staff Office. [FR Doc. E8-4825 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8540-7] Science Advisory Board Staff Office; Notification of a Public Teleconference Meeting of the EPA Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee CASAC Ozone Review Panel AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency) Science Advisory Board
(SAB)Staff Office announces a public teleconference meeting of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) Ozone Review Panel (Panel) to hold follow-on discussions concerning the Final Rule for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone. DATES: The teleconference meeting will be held on Friday, March 28, 2008, from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. (Eastern Time). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any member of the public who wishes to obtain the teleconference meeting call-in number and access code; submit a written or brief oral statement (three minutes or less); or receive further information concerning this teleconference meeting, must contact Mr. Fred Butterfield, Designated Federal Officer (DFO). Mr. Butterfield may be contacted at the EPA Science Advisory Board (1400F), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; or via telephone/voice mail: 202-343-9994; fax: 202-233-0643; or e-mail at: *butterfield.fred@epa.gov.* General information concerning the CASAC or the SAB can be found on the EPA Web site at: *http://www.epa.gov/casac* or *http://www.epa.gov/sab,* respectively. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: *Background:* The CASAC, which is comprised of seven members appointed by the EPA Administrator, was established under section 109(d)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) (42 U.S.C. 7409) as an independent scientific advisory committee. The CASAC provides advice, information and recommendations on the scientific and technical aspects of issues related to air quality criteria and NAAQS under sections 108 and 109 of the Act. The CASAC is chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended, 5 U.S.C., App. The CASAC Ozone Review Panel consists of the seven CASAC members supplemented by subject-matter-experts. The Panel provides advice and recommendations to EPA concerning ground-level ozone and related photochemical oxidants in ambient air. The Panel complies with the provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural policies. Section 109(d)(1) of the CAA requires that the Agency periodically review and revise, as appropriate, the air quality criteria and the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for the six “criteria” air pollutants, including ambient ozone. Pursuant to sections 108 and 109 of the Act, EPA is in the process of reviewing the ozone NAAQS, which the Agency most recently revised in July 1997. The CASAC Ozone Review Panel last met in March 2007 to review the Agency's Final Ozone Staff Paper and, in particular, to offer additional, unsolicited advice to EPA on the chapters in this document concerning the primary (human health-related) and secondary (welfare effects-related) Ozone NAAQS. The purpose of such advice was to advise EPA as it developed its Proposed Rule for the NAAQS for ozone. The CASAC's letter to the Administrator from that teleconference review (EPA-CASAC-07-002, dated March 26, 2007) is posted on the CASAC's Web site at: *http://www.epa.gov/casac.* On June 20, 2007, EPA released the Proposed Rule for the NAAQS for Ozone. The purpose of this teleconference meeting is for the Panel to hold follow-on discussions concerning the Final Rule for the NAAQS for ozone and, prospectively, to offer additional, unsolicited advice to the EPA Administrator on this final rule. *Technical Contact:* Any questions concerning the Agency's Final Rule for the NAAQS for ozone should be directed to Dr. David McKee, EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), at phone:
(919)541-5288, or e-mail: *mckee.dave@epa.gov.* *Availability of Meeting Materials:* EPA's Final Rule for the NAAQS for ozone will be posted on or before March 12, 2008 on the Agency's “Ground-level Ozone—Regulatory Actions” Web site at: *http://epa.gov/air/ozonepollution/actions.html.* A copy of the draft agenda and other materials for this CASAC teleconference meeting will be posted on the SAB Web site at: *http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/WebCASAC/recentadditions* prior to the teleconference meeting. *Procedures for Providing Public Input:* Interested members of the public may submit relevant written or oral information for the CASAC Ozone Review Panel to consider the topics included in this advisory activity and/or the group conducting the activity. Oral Statements: In general, individuals or groups requesting an oral presentation at a public teleconference will be limited to three minutes per speaker, with no more than a total of 30 minutes for all speakers. Interested parties should contact Mr. Butterfield, DFO, in writing (preferably via e-mail), by March 21, 2008, at the contact information noted above, to be placed on the list of public speakers for this teleconference meeting. *Written Statements:* Written statements should be received in the SAB Staff Office by March 25, 2008, so that the information may be made available to the Panel for its consideration prior to this teleconference meeting. Written statements should be supplied to the DFO electronically via e-mail (acceptable file formats: Adobe PDF, MS Word, WordPerfect, MS PowerPoint, or Rich Text files in IBM-PC/Windows 98/2000/XP format). *Accessibility:* For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Mr. Butterfield at the phone number or e-mail address noted above, preferably at least ten days prior to the teleconference meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request. Dated: March 5, 2008. Anthony F. Maciorowski, Deputy Director, EPA Science Advisory Board Staff Office. [FR Doc. E8-4826 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL-8540-6] Science Advisory Board Staff Office; Notification of a Public Teleconference and Face-to-Face Meeting of the Drinking Water Committee AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA)Science Advisory Board
(SAB)Staff Office announces two meetings of the SAB Drinking Water Committee (DWC): A public teleconference to discuss the Waterborne Diseases—Measures to Link Drinking Water Programs to Public Health Outcomes (Measures) and a face-to-face meeting to review Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List 3
(CCL3)Draft document. DATES: The SAB will hold the public teleconference on April 2, 2008. The teleconference will begin at 1 p.m. and end at 5 p.m. (Eastern Time). A face-to-face meeting will be held on April 23, 2008 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. (Eastern Time) and will continue on April 24, 2008 from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. (Eastern Time). ADDRESSES: The April 2, 2008 teleconference will be conducted by phone only. The April 23-24, 2008 face-to-face meeting will be held at the SAB Conference Center, 1025 F Street, NW., Suite 3700, Washington, DC 20004. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any member of the public wishing to obtain general information concerning this public teleconference or meeting should contact Dr. Sue Shallal, Designated Federal Officer (DFO), EPA Science Advisory Board (1400F), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; via telephone/voice mail:
(202)343-9977; fax:
(202)233-0643; or e-mail at: *shallal.suhair@epa.gov* . General information concerning the EPA Science Advisory Board can be found on the SAB Web Site at: *http://www.epa.gov/sab* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The SAB was established by 42 U.S.C. 4365 to provide independent scientific and technical advice to the Administrator on the technical basis for Agency positions and regulations. The SAB is a Federal Advisory Committee chartered under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended, 5 U.S.C., App. The SAB will comply with the provisions of FACA and all appropriate SAB Staff Office procedural policies. Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public Law 92-463, notice is hereby given that the EPA SAB Drinking Water Committee will hold a public teleconference to provide a consultation on the Waterborne Diseases—Measures to Link Drinking Water Programs to Public Health Outcomes document and a face-to-face meeting to review its Draft Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List 3 document. *Background:* EPA's Office of Water has requested that the SAB conduct a consultation for its Waterborne Diseases—Measures to Link Drinking Water Programs to Public Health Outcomes (Measures) and review its Draft Drinking Water Contaminant Candidate List 3
(CCL3)document. Measures—EPA's Office of Water
(OW)produced a draft Measure Development Plan in October, 2004. The purpose of the plan is to develop long-term measures that describe changes over time of disease due to drinking water contamination or changes in the occurrence of indicators of waterborne disease. The objective of the measures is to demonstrate the effectiveness of drinking water programs on epidemic and endemic, acute and chronic disease related to microbes or other water contaminants. The SAB is being asked to comment on the effectiveness of this plan to produce outcome measures. *CCL3* —The 1996 Safe Drinking Water Act amendments
(SDWA)require EPA to
(1)publish every five years a list of currently unregulated contaminants in drinking water that may pose risks (the Contaminant Candidate List or “CCL”), and
(2)make determinations on whether or not to regulate at least five contaminants from that list on a staggered five year cycle. SDWA requires EPA to publish a new list of contaminants that are known or anticipated to occur in public water systems every five years. The first CCL
(CCL1)was published or finalized on March 2, 1998 (63 FR 10273). CCL1 was developed based on the review by technical experts of readily available information and contained 50 chemicals and 10 microbial contaminants/groups. EPA consulted with the scientific community, including the Science Advisory Board, on a process for developing the first CCL. The second CCL
(CCL2)was published on February 24, 2005 (70 FR 9071). CCL2 carried forward the remaining 51 chemical and microbial contaminants listed on CCL1. The Agency is evaluating data and research on these chemicals and microbes to make regulatory determinations on the contaminants listed CCL2. The draft CCL3 includes 93 chemicals or chemical groups and 11 microbiological contaminants. The EPA is seeking comment from the SAB DWC on the draft CCL3, the approach used to develop the list, and other specific contaminants. *Availability of Meeting Materials:* The meeting agendas and other materials including a link to the Office of Water's draft Measures document will be posted on the SAB Web Site at: ( *http://www.epa.gov/sab* ) in advance of the meeting. The CCL3 draft can be found at: *http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-WATER/2008/February/Day-21/w3114.pdf* . For questions and information concerning the Agency's documents, please contact Ms. Valerie Blank for Measures at 202-564-1720 or *blank.valerie@epa.gov* . Please contact Mr. Thomas Carpenter for CCL3 at 202-564-4885 or *carpenter.thomas@epa.gov* . *Procedures for Providing Public Input:* Interested members of the public may submit relevant written or oral information for the Drinking Water Committee to consider throughout the advisory process. *Oral Statements:* In general, individuals or groups requesting an oral presentation at a public SAB teleconference will be limited to three minutes per speaker, with no more than a total of one-half hour for all speakers. At the face-to-face meeting, presentations will be limited to five minutes, with no more than a total of one hour for all speakers. To be placed on the public speaker list, interested parties should contact Dr. Sue Shallal, DFO, in writing (preferably via e-mail), by March 26, 2008 for the teleconference and by April 16, 2008 for the face-to-face meeting, at the contact information noted above. *Written Statements:* Written statements should be received in the SAB Staff Office by March 26, 2008, so that the information may be made available to the SAB for their consideration prior to the teleconference or by April 16, 2008 for their consideration prior to the face-to-face meeting. Written statements should be supplied to the DFO via e-mail to *shallal.suhair@epa.gov* (acceptable file format: Adobe Acrobat PDF, WordPerfect, MS Word, MS PowerPoint, or Rich Text files in IBM-PC/Windows 98/2000/XP format). *Accessibility:* For information on access or services for individuals with disabilities, please contact Dr. Sue Shallal at
(202)343-9977 or *shallal.suhair@epa.gov* . To request accommodation of a disability, please contact Dr. Shallal preferably at least ten days prior to the meeting, to give EPA as much time as possible to process your request. Dated: March 5, 2008. Anthony F. Maciorowski, Deputy Director, EPA Science Advisory Board Staff Office. [FR Doc. E8-4828 Filed 3-10-08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE UNITED STATES Sunshine Act Meeting ACTION: Notice of a partially open meeting of the Board of Directors of the Export-Import Bank of the United States. Time and Place: Thursday, March 13, 2008 at 9:30 a.m. The meeting will be held at Ex-Im Bank in Room 1143, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20571. Open Agenda Items: Item No. 1: Local Cost Policy, OECD Rule Change. Public Participation: The meeting will be open to public participation for Item No. 1 only. Further Information: For further information, contact: Office of the Secretary, 811 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20571 (Tele. No. 202-565-3957). Howard A. Schweitzer, General Counsel. [FR Doc. 08-1005 Filed 3-6-08; 4:17 pm]
Connections4 cite this · traces to 33
Traces to 33 documents
U.S. Code
15 references not yet in our index
  • 10 USC 7981-7983
  • Pub. L. 109-58
  • 16 USC 825I
  • 416 U.S. 267
  • 332 U.S. 194
  • 496 U.S. 633
  • 43 CFR 1610.5-5
  • 40 CFR 1508.18
  • 18 CFR 285.2001(a)(1)(iii)
  • 16 USC 791a-825r
  • 40 CFR 1501.6
  • 40 CFR 9
  • 5 CFR 1320.12
  • 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv)
  • Pub. L. 92-463
Citation graph
cites case law
Notices
Notice of availability; request for comments
Fed. Reg.×4
Fed. Reg.Notices
U.S.C.§ 3501
U.S.C.§ 7151
U.S.C.§ 824a
Fed. Reg.Notices
C.F.R.§ 385.211
U.S.C.§ 6272
U.S.C.§ 824p
U.S.C.§ 553
SCOTUS416 U.S. 267
SCOTUS332 U.S. 194
SCOTUS496 U.S. 633
Cites 48 · showing 12Cited by 4 across 1 source
★   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.