[Federal Register: November 29, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 228)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 72952-72954]
[DOCID:fr29no10-8]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2010-0979]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; 1000-yard radius from position 29[deg]48.77' N
091[deg]33.02' W, Charenton Drainage and Navigation Canal, St. Mary
Parish, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone
extending to a 1000-yard radius from position 29[deg]48.77' N
091[deg]33.02' W, Charenton Drainage and Navigation Canal, St. Mary
Parish, LA. This Safety Zone is needed to protect the general public,
vessels and tows from destruction, loss or injury due to a sunken
vessel and associated hazards.

DATES: This rule is effective in the CFR on November 29, 2010 through
December 31, 2010. This rule is effective with actual notice for
purposes of enforcement on October 20, 2010. This rule will remain in
effect until December 31, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this preamble as being available in
the docket are part of docket USCG-2010-0979 and are available online
by going to http://www.regulations.gov, inserting USCG-2010-0979 in the
``Keyword'' box, and then clicking ``Search.'' They are also available
for inspection or copying at the Docket Management Facility (M-30),
U.S. Department of Transportation, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590, between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this
temporary rule, call or e-mail Lieutenant (LT) Russel Pickering, Coast
Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>If
you have questions on viewing the docket, call Renee V. Wright, Program
Manager, Docket Operations, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory Information

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary final rule without prior
notice and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section
4(a) of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule because publishing an NPRM would be
impracticable, as immediate action is needed to protect the general
public, vessel and tows from a sunken vessel and associated hazards in
position 29[deg]48.77' N 091[deg]33.02' W, in the Charenton Drainage
and Navigation Canal.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. Publishing an NPRM and delaying
its effective date would be contrary to public interest since immediate
action is needed to protect the general public, vessel and tows from
destruction, loss or injury due to sunken vessel and associated hazards
in position 29[deg]48.77' N 091[deg]33.02' W.

Background and Purpose

    A Mobile Inshore Drilling Rig (Hercules Rig 61) scheduled for scrap
sank in the Charenton Navigation and Drainage Canal. The Charenton
Navigation and Drainage Canal will be closed to all marine traffic
within a 1000-yard radius of position 29[deg]48.77' N 091[deg]33, from
20 OCT, 2010 through 31 DEC, 2010. This Safety Zone is needed to
protect the general public, vessels and tows from destruction, loss or
injury from a sunken vessel and associated hazards.

Discussion of Rule

    The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary Safety Zone in a 1000-
yard radius of position 29[deg]48.77' N 091[deg]33.02' W within the
Charenton Drainage and Navigation Canal. The temporary Safety Zone will
continue from October 20, 2010 through December 31, 2010. Vessels and
tows may not enter this zone unless authorized by the Captain of the
Port Morgan City.

Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on 13 of these statutes or executive orders.

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f)
of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and does not
require an assessment of potential costs and benefits under section
6(a)(3) of that Order. The Office of Management and Budget has not
reviewed it under that Order.
    This rule will only be in effect for a short period of time and
notifications to the marine community will be made through broadcast
notice to mariners and Local Notice to Mariners. The impacts on routine
navigation are expected to be minimal.

Small Entities

    Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612), we have
considered whether this rule would have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities. The term ``small entities''
comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations that are
independently

owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, and
governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than 50,000.
    The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
    This rule will affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: The owners or operators of vessels intending to transit
through the Safety Zone from October 20, 2010 through December 31,
2010. This Safety Zone will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities because this rule will be in
effect for only a short period of time.
    If you are a small business entity and are significantly affected
by this regulation, please contact LT Russel Pickering, Marine Safety
Unit Morgan City, at<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Assistance for Small Entities

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we offer to assist small
entities in understanding the rule so that they can better evaluate its
effects on them and participate in the rulemaking process.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

Collection of Information

    This rule calls for no new collection of information under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

Federalism

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on State or local
governments and would either preempt State law or impose a substantial
direct cost of compliance on them. We have analyzed this rule under
that Order and have determined that it does not have implications for
federalism

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 or more
(adjusted for inflation) in any one year. Though this rule will not
result in such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.

Taking of Private Property

    This rule will not cause a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental
Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property
Rights.

Civil Justice Reform

    This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation,
eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden.

Protection of Children

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule
is not an economically significant rule and does not create an
environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may
disproportionately affect children.

Indian Tribal Governments

    This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian tribes.

Energy Effects

    We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use. We have determined that it is not a ``significant
energy action'' under that order because it is not a ``significant
regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866 and is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or use
of energy. The Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has not designated it as a significant energy
action. Therefore, it does not require a Statement of Energy Effects
under Executive Order 13211.

Technical Standards

    The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15
U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use voluntary consensus standards
in their regulatory activities unless the agency provides Congress,
through the Office of Management and Budget, with an explanation of why
using these standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical
standards (e.g., specifications of materials, performance, design, or
operation; test methods; sampling procedures; and related management
systems practices) that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus
standards bodies.
    This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus standards.

Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023-01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which
guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have concluded
this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually
or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment.
This rule is categorically excluded, under figure 2-1, paragraph
(34)(g), of the Instruction. This rule involves an emergency situation
and will be in effect for over one week, but is not expected to result
in any significant adverse environmental impact as described in NEPA.
    An environmental analysis checklist and a categorical exclusion
determination will be provided and made available at the docket as
indicated in the ADDRESSES section.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

0
For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165-- REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701; 50
U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05-1(g), 6.04-1, 6.04-6, and 160.5; Pub.
L. 107-295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security
Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T08-0979 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T08-0979  Safety Zone; 1000 yard radius from position
29[deg]48.77' N 091[deg]33.02' W, Charenton Drainage and Navigation
Canal, St. Mary Parish, LA.

    (a) Enforcement Areas. The safety zone exists in an area comprising
a 1000 yard radius from position 29[deg]48.77' N 091[deg]33.02' W,
Charenton Drainage and Navigation Canal.
    (b) Effective date. This rule is effective on October 20, 2010
through December 31, 2010.
    (c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with the general regulations in
Sec.  165.33 of this part, entry into this zone is prohibited unless
authorized by the Captain of the Port Morgan City.
    (2) Vessels requiring entry into or passage through the Safety Zone
must request permission from the Captain of the Port Morgan City, or a
designated representative. They may be contacted on VHF Channel 13 or
16, or by telephone at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (3) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of
the Captain of the Port Morgan City and designated on-scene patrol
personnel. On-scene patrol personnel include commissioned, warrant, and
petty officers of the U.S. Coast Guard.

    Dated: October 20, 2010.
Blake E. Welborn,
Commander, U.S. Coast Guard, Acting Captain of the Port Morgan City,
Louisiana.
[FR Doc. 2010-29878 Filed 11-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 173 (Tuesday, September 8, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53793-53794]
[FR Doc No: 2015-22063]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9926-05-OEI]

Cross-Media Electronic Reporting: Authorized Program Revision
Approval, State of Alabama

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice announces EPA's approval of the State of Alabama's
request to revise/modify its State Operating Permit Programs EPA-
authorized program to allow electronic reporting.

DATES: EPA's approval is effective September 8, 2015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Karen Seeh, U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Information, Mail Stop
2823T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460, (202) 566-
1175<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 13, 2005, the final Cross-Media
Electronic Reporting Rule (CROMERR) was published in the Federal
Register (70 FR 59848) and codified as part 3 of title 40 of the CFR.
CROMERR establishes electronic reporting as an acceptable regulatory
alternative to paper reporting and establishes requirements to assure
that electronic documents are as legally dependable as their paper
counterparts. Subpart D of CROMERR requires that state, tribal or local
government agencies that receive, or wish to begin receiving,
electronic reports under their EPA-authorized programs must apply to
EPA for a revision or modification of those programs and obtain EPA
approval. Subpart D provides standards for such approvals based on
consideration of the electronic document receiving systems that the
state, tribe, or local government will use to implement the electronic
reporting. Additionally, Sec.  3.1000(b) through (e) of 40 CFR part 3,
subpart D provides special procedures for program revisions and
modifications to allow electronic reporting, to be used at the option
of the state, tribe or local government in place of procedures
available under existing program-specific authorization regulations. An
application submitted under the subpart D procedures must show that the
state, tribe or local government has sufficient legal authority to
implement the electronic reporting components of the programs covered
by the application and will use electronic document receiving systems
that meet the applicable subpart D requirements.
    On July 29, 2015, the Alabama Department of Environmental
Management (ADEM) submitted an application titled ``Air Emissions
Electronic Reporting System'' for revision/modification to its EPA-
approved operating permit program under title 40 CFR to allow new
electronic reporting. EPA reviewed ADEM's request to revise/modify its
EPA-authorized Part 70--State Operating Permit Program and, based on
this review, EPA determined that the application met the standards for
approval of authorized program revision/modification set out in 40 CFR
part 3, subpart D. In accordance with 40 CFR 3.1000(d), this notice of
EPA's decision to approve Alabama's request to revise/modify its Part
70--State Operating Permit Program to allow electronic reporting under
40 CFR part 70 is being published in the Federal Register.
    ADEM was notified of EPA's determination to approve its application
with respect to the authorized program listed above.

Matthew Leopard,
Director, Office of Information Collection.
[FR Doc. 2015-22063 Filed 9-4-15; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 221 (Friday, November 15, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68852-68853]
[FR Doc No: 2013-27362]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2013-D-0715]

Draft Guidance for Industry on Acrylamide in Foods; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing the
availability of a draft guidance entitled ``Guidance for Industry:
Acrylamide in Foods.'' The draft guidance is intended to provide
information that may help growers, manufacturers, and food service
operators reduce acrylamide in certain foods. Acrylamide is a chemical
that can form in some foods during certain types of high-temperature
cooking. The draft guidance is intended to suggest a range of possible
approaches to acrylamide reduction and not to identify specific
recommended approaches.

DATES: Although you can comment on any guidance at any time (see 21 CFR
10.115(g)(5)), to ensure that we consider your comment on the draft
guidance before we begin work on the final version of the guidance,
submit either electronic or written comments on the draft guidance by
January 14, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for single copies of the draft
guidance to the Office of Food Safety, Center for Food Safety and
Applied Nutrition (HFS-300), Food and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint
Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740. Send two self-addressed adhesive
labels to assist that office in processing your request. See the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for electronic access to the draft
guidance.
    Submit electronic comments on the draft guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments on the draft guidance to
the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren Posnick Robin, Center for Food
Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS-317), Food and Drug Administration,
5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    We are announcing the availability of a draft guidance entitled
``Guidance for Industry: Acrylamide in Foods.'' We are issuing this
draft guidance as a Level 1 draft guidance consistent with our good
guidance practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The draft guidance, when
finalized, will represent our current thinking on acrylamide in foods.
It does not create or confer any rights for or on any person and does
not operate to bind FDA or the public. An alternative approach may be
used if such approach satisfies the requirements of the applicable
statutes and regulations.
    The draft guidance is intended to provide information that may help
growers, manufacturers, and food service operators reduce acrylamide in
certain foods. Acrylamide is a chemical that can form in some foods
during certain types of high-temperature cooking, and is a concern
because it can cause cancer in laboratory animals at high doses, and is
reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen. Reducing acrylamide in
foods may mitigate potential human health risks from exposure to
acrylamide. The draft guidance is intended to suggest a range of
possible approaches to acrylamide reduction and not to identify
specific recommended approaches.
    In particular, the draft guidance is intended to give information
to manufacturers on selecting and handling raw materials, modifying
processing practices, and choosing ingredients, so as to reduce
acrylamide in potato-based foods (such as fries, sliced potato chips,
and fabricated potato chips) and cereal-based foods (such as cookies,
crackers, and breads). The draft guidance also discusses acrylamide
reduction in coffee. The draft guidance also is intended to give
information to manufacturers for placing preparation and cooking
instructions on frozen French fry packages. Lastly, the draft guidance
is intended to give information for food service operations on
preparation of potato-based and cereal-based foods.

II. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

    This draft guidance contains proposed information collection
provisions that are subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501-3520). ``Collection of information'' is defined in 44
U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or
requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records,
or provide information to a third party. Federal law at 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A) requires Federal Agencies to publish a 60-day notice in
the Federal Register for each proposed collection of information before
submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this
requirement, we will publish a 60-day notice of the proposed collection
of information in a future issue of the Federal Register.

III. Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
the draft guidance to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to
the Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only
necessary to send one set of comments. Identify comments with the
docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.
Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to
the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

IV. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the draft guidance
at either http://www.fda.gov/FoodGuidances or http://www.regulations.gov. Use the FDA Web site listed in the previous
sentence to find the most current version of the draft guidance.

    Dated: November 12, 2013.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2013-27362 Filed 11-14-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register: October 17, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 202)]
[Notices]
[Page 61854-61856]
[DOCID:fr17oc08-80]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AD08-13-000]

Transmission Barriers to Entry; Supplemental Notice of Technical
Conference

October 10, 2008.
    On October 3, 2008, the Commission issued a Supplemental Notice of
the technical conference in the above-captioned proceeding, with an
agenda attached. The technical conference will be held on October 14,
2008, from 1 p.m. to 5 p.m. (EST), in the Commission Meeting Room at
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. The conference will be open for the public to
attend and advance registration is not required. Members of the
Commission may attend the conference.
    An updated agenda for this conference is attached. In addition,
this conference will be transcribed as described below.
    Transcripts of the conference will be available immediately for a
fee from Ace Reporting Company<PHONE_NUMBER> or 1-800-336-6646). They
will be available for free on the Commission's eLibrary system and on
the Calendar of Events approximately one week after the conference.
    A free webcast of this event is available through http://
www.ferc.gov. Anyone with Internet access who desires to view this
event can do so by navigating to the Calendar of Events at http://
www.ferc.gov and locating this event in the Calendar. The event will
contain a link to its webcast. The Capitol Connection provides
technical support for the free webcasts. It also offers access to this
event via television in the Washington, DC area and via phone-bridge
for a fee. If you have any questions, visit http://
www.CapitolConnection.org or contact Danelle Springer or David
Reininger at<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    All interested persons may file written comments following the
technical conference on or before November 13, 2008.

    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations, please
send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call toll free 1-866-208-
3372 (voice) or<PHONE_NUMBER> (TTY), or send a FAX to<PHONE_NUMBER> with
the required accommodations.
    For more information about this conference, please contact: Katie
Detweiler,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Sarah McKinley,
202-502-8368<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
Attachment

Transmission Barriers to Entry Technical Conference; October 14, 2008

Agenda

    The purpose of this conference is to hear from transmission
developers, transmission owners, and others on the issues they
encounter when trying to build transmission. In particular, the
Commission is interested in hearing from persons involved with various
forms of transmission including independent transmission, merchant
transmission, joint ownership arrangements, and long-distance
transmission projects crossing multiple corporate boundaries or that
are regional in nature regarding the barriers to transmission entry due
to the Commission's tariffs, policies, and regulations.
    In response to the nation's growing transmission needs, the
Commission not only supports more ``traditional'' forms of investment,
such as that of investor-owned utilities, but also encourages the
formation of ``alternative'' transmission models. In the June 2005
Policy Statement Regarding Evaluation of Independent Ownership and
Operation of Transmission, the Commission clarified its willingness to
accept proposals from independent transmission companies, including
those that have market participants as passive minority equity owners,
and stated its willingness to allow innovative rate treatments both to
facilitate the creation of independent transmission companies and to
stimulate investment in transmission infrastructure.\1\ Furthermore, in
recent years new entities have emerged to build transmission, such as
merchant transmission companies. There is increased interest in joint
(i.e., public-private) transmission development. As more states have
adopted renewable portfolio standards, proposals have arisen to move
remote generation long distances to load.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Policy Statement Regarding Evaluation of Independent
Ownership and Operation of Transmission, 111 FERC ] 61,473 (2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In Order No. 890, the Commission stated its belief that there are
benefits to joint ownership of transmission facilities, particularly
large backbone facilities, both in terms of increasing opportunities
for investment as well as ensuring nondiscriminatory access. Order No.
890 also required all transmission providers to submit processes for
regional planning. However, questions have been raised as to incumbent
and new entrant rights, whether merchant transmission projects should
be required to coordinate with an Order No. 890 regional planning
process and coordination across boundaries.
    Since 2005, the Commission has acted on a number of requests
regarding affiliated or independent transmission; merchant
transmission; and joint ownership. Among other things, the Commission
is interested in gaining a better understanding of the rights,
obligations, and challenges afforded these entities as compared to
traditional transmission investment and whether there are barriers to
comparable treatment of these entities in the wholesale/interstate
transmission market.
    Panel Discussions:
    While there may be common obstacles to the building of
transmission, at the same time it appears that the challenges may
differ in some respects regionally. Thus, the panels of this conference
will be divided geographically. While the basic topics of discussion
will be the same in both panels, the individual problems and solutions
identified may vary by region, e.g., Eastern and Western
Interconnection.
    The Commission hopes to learn from each panel of the experiences
parties have faced in trying to build transmission, with particular
focus on regulatory and economic issues, and discuss how they differ by
transmission business model. With regard to both problems and
solutions, the focus should also be on matters that are within the
Commission's control or ability to affect. The discussion should focus
on specific areas of the Commission's regulations and policies that may
present barriers to comparable treatment. Among the issues of interest
to the Commission are:
     The impact on transmission providers regarding rights of
first refusal to build and own transmission;
     Whether all transmission investment (e.g., upgrades,
greenfield lines) are treated comparably in the award of rights (e.g.,
financial or physical rights);
     Whether the Commission's policies regarding the provision
of ancillary services are appropriate as applied to transmission-only
entities;
     Whether there are specific processes in RTO/ISO rules and
markets that present barriers to alternative transmission business
models;
     Development opportunities for the different transmission
business models;
     The benefits of and the peculiar challenges faced by
alternative business models (e.g., merchant transmission doesn't have a
rate base from which to obtain cost recovery); and
     Whether there should be different approaches to projects
with differing scope, e.g., long-distance backbone projects with long
lead lines vs. incremental upgrades to existing facilities.

Transmission Barriers to Entry Technical Conference; October 14, 2008

Agenda

Opening Remarks
    1 p.m.-1:15 p.m.
Panel I: Western Interconnect
    1:15 p.m.-3 p.m.

Richard Hayslip, Associate General Manager, SALT RIVER PROJECT,
representing the LARGE PUBLIC POWER COUNCIL
Tom Wray, Project Manager, SUNZIA TRANSMISSION PROJECT
Robert van Beers, Chief Operating Officer, TONBRIDGE POWER INC.,
representing Montana Alberta Tie Ltd.
Paul McCoy, President, TRANS-ELECT
Marc S. Lipschultz, Member, KOHLBERG KRAVIS ROBERTS & CO.
Karl ``Fritz'' Schlopy, Managing Director, MERRILL LYNCH & CO. GLOBAL
ENERGY & POWER, representing Real Estate Investment Trusts
Roy Jones, Vice President, Transmission Development, LS POWER
DEVELOPMENT
Break
    3 p.m.-3:15 p.m.
Panel II: Eastern Interconnect
    3:15 p.m.-5 p.m.

Sharon M. Reishus, Chairman, MAINE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
Roy Thilly, President & CEO, WISCONSIN PUBLIC POWER INC., representing
the Transmission Access Policy Study Group
Susan Tomasky, President--AEP Transmission, AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER

Joseph L. Welch, Chairman, President & CEO, ITC HOLDINGS
Raymond Hepper, Vice President, General Counsel & Corporate Secretary,
ISO NEW ENGLAND INC.
Edward M. Stern, President & CEO, NEPTUNE REGIONAL TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
& CEO, HUDSON TRANSMISSION PARTNERS
Robert J. Patrylo, CEO, STRATEGIC TRANSMISSION LLC

 [FR Doc. E8-24665 Filed 10-16-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P