[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 107 (Wednesday, June 4, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32272-32273]
[FR Doc No: 2014-12869]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP14-125-000]

American Midstream, LLC; Notice of Intent To Prepare an
Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Midla Pipelines Abandonment
Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues

    The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or
Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment (EA) that will
discuss the environmental impacts of the Midla Pipelines Gas
Abandonment Project involving the abandonment of facilities by American
Midstream, LLC (Midla) in Ouachita and East Baton Rouge Parishes,
Louisiana. The Commission will use this EA in its decision-making
process to determine whether the project is in the public convenience
and necessity.
    This notice announces the opening of the scoping process the
Commission will use to gather input from the public and interested
agencies on the project. Your input will help the Commission staff
determine what issues they need to evaluate in the EA. Please note that
the scoping period will close on June 23, 2014.
    Further details on how to submit written comments are in the Public
Participation section of this notice.
    This notice is being sent to the Commission's current environmental
mailing list for this project. State and local government
representatives should notify their constituents of this proposed
project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern.
    Midla provided landowners with a fact sheet prepared by the FERC
entitled ``An Interstate Natural Gas Facility On My Land? What Do I
Need To Know?'' This fact sheet addresses a number of typically-asked
questions, including the use of eminent domain and how to participate
in the Commission's proceedings. It is also available for viewing on
the FERC Web site (www.ferc.gov).

Summary of the Proposed Project

    Midla proposes to abandon in place approximately 355 miles of 16-
inch and 22-inch-diameter pipeline and various small-diameter connected
laterals. Midla would also abandon by removal 3 compressor stations
(two of which are inactive and from which the compressor units have
already been removed), 40 above ground meter stations, and 57 valve
sites. The facilities are in East Baton Rouge, Ouachita, Richland,
Caldwell, Franklin, Catahoula, Tensas, Concordia, De Soto, East and
West Feliciana, and Cameron Parishes, Louisiana and Adams County,
Mississippi. According to Midla, the pipelines were constructed in the
1920s and suffer from chronic and serious integrity problems, including
internal and external corrosion.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On the same date, Midla also filed a prior notice
application under Docket No. CP14-126-000 for the abandonment by
sale to Mid Louisiana Gas Transmission, LLC, its affiliate, two
portions of its pipeline system in Ouachita and East Baton Rouge
Parishes, Louisiana.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The general location of the project facilities is shown in appendix
1.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The appendices referenced in this notice will not appear in
the Federal Register. Copies of appendices were sent to all those
receiving this notice in the mail and are available at www.ferc.gov
using the link called ``eLibrary'' or from the Commission's Public
Reference Room, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, or call
(202) 502-8371. For instructions on connecting to eLibrary, refer to
the last page of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Land Requirements for Abandonment Activities

    Abandonment activities associated with the proposed project would
disturb about 4.41 acres of land. Following abandonment activities,
disturbed areas would be restored and revert to former uses.

The EA Process

    The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires the
Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could
result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us
\3\ to discover and address concerns the public may have about
proposals. This process is referred to as ``scoping.'' The main goal of
the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important
environmental issues. By this notice, the Commission requests public
comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA. We will
consider all filed comments during the preparation of the EA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``We,'' ``us,'' and ``our'' refer to the environmental staff
of the Commission's Office of Energy Projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the EA we will discuss impacts that could occur as a result of
the abandonment activities of the proposed project under these general
headings:

 Geology and soils;
 Land use;
 Water resources, fisheries, and wetlands;
 Cultural resources;
 Vegetation and wildlife;
 Air quality and noise;
 Endangered and threatened species; and
 Public safety.

    We will also evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed
project or portions of the project, and make recommendations on how to
lessen or avoid impacts on the various resource areas.
    The EA will present our independent analysis of the issues. The EA
will be available in the public record through eLibrary. Depending on
the comments received during the scoping process, we may also publish
and distribute the EA to the public for an allotted comment period. We
will consider all comments on the EA before making our recommendations
to the Commission. To ensure we have the opportunity to consider and
address your comments, please carefully follow the instructions in the
Public Participation section beginning on page 4.
    With this notice, we are asking agencies with jurisdiction by law
and/or special expertise with respect to the environmental issues of
this project to formally cooperate with us in the preparation of the
EA.\4\ Agencies that would like to request cooperating agency status
should follow the instructions for filing comments provided under the
Public Participation section of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Council on Environmental Quality regulations addressing
cooperating agency responsibilities are at Title 40, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 1501.6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consultations Under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation
Act

    In accordance with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's
implementing regulations for Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act, we are using this notice to initiate consultation
with the applicable State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and to
solicit their views and those of other government agencies, interested
Indian tribes, and the public on the project's potential effects on
historic properties.\5\ We will define the project-specific Area of
Potential Effects (APE) in consultation with the SHPO as the project
develops. On natural gas facility projects, the APE at a minimum
encompasses all areas subject to ground disturbance (examples include
construction right-of-way, contractor/pipe storage yards, compressor
stations, and access roads). Our EA for this project will document our
findings on the impacts on historic properties and

summarize the status of consultations under Section 106.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's regulations
are at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 800. Those
regulations define historic properties as any prehistoric or
historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in
or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic
Places.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Participation

    You can make a difference by providing us with your specific
comments or concerns about the project. Your comments should focus on
the potential environmental effects, reasonable alternatives, and
measures to avoid or lessen environmental impacts. The more specific
your comments, the more useful they will be. To ensure that your
comments are timely and properly recorded, please send your comments so
that the Commission receives them in Washington, DC on or before June
23, 2014.
    For your convenience, there are three methods which you can use to
submit your comments to the Commission. In all instances please
reference the project docket number (CP14-125-000) with your
submission. The Commission encourages electronic filing of comments and
has expert staff available to assist you at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (1) You can file your comments electronically using the eComment
feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. This is an easy method for interested persons to
submit brief, text-only comments on a project;
    (2) You can file your comments electronically using the eFiling
feature on the Commission's Web site (www.ferc.gov) under the link to
Documents and Filings. With eFiling, you can provide comments in a
variety of formats by attaching them as a file with your submission.
New eFiling users must first create an account by clicking on
``eRegister.'' You must select the type of filing you are making. If
you are filing a comment on a particular project, please select
``Comment on a Filing''; or
    (3) You can file a paper copy of your comments by mailing them to
the following address: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC
20426.

Environmental Mailing List

    The environmental mailing list includes federal, state, and local
government representatives and agencies; elected officials;
environmental and public interest groups; Native American Tribes; other
interested parties; and local libraries and newspapers. This list also
includes all affected landowners (as defined in the Commission's
regulations) who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property
may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within
certain distances of aboveground facilities, and anyone who submits
comments on the project. We will update the environmental mailing list
as the analysis proceeds to ensure that we send the information related
to this environmental review to all individuals, organizations, and
government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the
proposed project.
    If we publish and distribute the EA, copies will be sent to the
environmental mailing list for public review and comment. If you would
prefer to receive a paper copy of the document instead of the CD
version or would like to remove your name from the mailing list, please
return the attached Information Request (appendix 2).

Becoming an Intervenor

    In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want
to become an ``intervenor'' which is an official party to the
Commission's proceeding. Intervenors play a more formal role in the
process and are able to file briefs, appear at hearings, and be heard
by the courts if they choose to appeal the Commission's final ruling.
An intervenor formally participates in the proceeding by filing a
request to intervene. Instructions for becoming an intervenor are in
the User's Guide under the ``e-filing'' link on the Commission's Web
site.

Additional Information

    Additional information about the project is available from the
Commission's Office of External Affairs, at (866) 208-FERC, or on the
FERC Web site at www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Click on the
eLibrary link, click on ``General Search'' and enter the docket number,
excluding the last three digits in the Docket Number field (i.e., CP14-
125). Be sure you have selected an appropriate date range. For
assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for TTY,
contact<PHONE_NUMBER>. The eLibrary link also provides access to the
texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders,
notices, and rulemakings.
    In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called
eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances
and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time
you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with
notification of these filings, document summaries, and direct links to
the documents. Go to www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.
    Finally, public meetings or site visits will be posted on the
Commission's calendar located at www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventsList.aspx along with other related information.

    Dated: May 22, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-12869 Filed 6-3-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 38 (Monday, February 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8253-8255]
[FR Doc No: 2018-03821]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 10808-058]

Boyce Hydro Power, LLC; Order Proposing Revocation of License

    1. Boyce Hydro Power, LLC (Boyce Hydro or licensee) is in violation
of numerous provisions of its license for the Edenville Hydroelectric
Project No. 10808 (Edenville Project), the Federal Power Act (FPA), and
multiple Commission regulations and orders, including a Compliance
Order issued pursuant to section 31(a) of the Federal Power Act.\1\ As
discussed below, the Commission proposes to revoke the license pursuant
to section 31(b) of the FPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Boyce Hydro Power, LLC, 159 FERC 62,292 (2017) (Compliance
Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background

    2. On October 16, 1998, the Commission issued a license for the
Edenville Project, a 4.8-megawatt (MW) hydroelectric project located in
Gladwin and Midland counties, Michigan.\2\ The Edenville Project
consists of earthen embankments, known as the Edenville dam, totaling
about 6,600 feet in length and having a maximum height of 54.5 feet. It
spans both the Tittabawassee and Tobacco Rivers, creating a 2,600-acre
reservoir known as Wixom Lake with a gross storage capacity of about
40,000 acre-feet and a 49-mile-long shoreline at full pool. There is a
50-foot-long intake leading to the powerhouse located at the dam on the
eastern side of the project. The powerhouse contains two 2.4-MW
Francis-type turbine generator units for a total installed capacity of
4.8 MW. The project creates a 0.4-mile-long bypassed reach on the
Tobacco River that extends from the dam to the point where the Tobacco
River meets the Tittabawassee River. The project also includes two
reinforced concrete multiple arch spillways. The 69-foot-wide, 39-foot-
high Tittabawassee spillway (also referred to as the Edenville
spillway) is located on the eastern side of the project and contains
three Tainter gates and two low-level sluice gates. The Tobacco
spillway is about 72 feet long and 72 feet wide with a crest height of
about 40 feet, and contains three steel Tainter gates located on the
western side of the project.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Wolverine Power Corporation, 85 FERC 61,063 (1998). The
license was transferred from Wolverine Power Corporation to Synex
Michigan, LLC on June 23, 2004. See Wolverine Power Corporation and
Synex Michigan, LLC, 107 FERC 62,266 (2004). Synex Michigan, LLC
changed its name to Boyce Hydro Power, LLC, and filed a statement
with the Commission on July 12, 2007, to this effect. See Notice of
Change in Licensee's Name (filed July 12, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Boyce Hydro's license includes terms and conditions concerning
dam safety, property rights, water quality, public recreation and
safety, and other areas of public concern. Boyce Hydro has a long
history of non-compliance with those terms and conditions and with
related provisions in the FPA and Commission regulations and orders.
The Compliance Order, which was issued pursuant to section 31 of the
FPA on June 15, 2017, detailed this history and staff's multi-year
effort to bring Boyce Hydro into compliance.\3\ In particular, the
Compliance Order explained that Boyce Hydro: (1) Failed to increase the
capacity of spillways to enable them to pass the probable maximum flood
(PMF) as required by Regional Engineer directives, license Article 4,
and Part 12 of the Commission's regulations; \4\ (2) performed
unauthorized dam repairs in violation of Regional Engineer directives
and Part 12 of the Commission's regulations; \5\ (3) performed
unauthorized earth-moving activities in violation of Standard Articles
19-21 of the license; \6\ (4) failed to file an adequate Public Safety
Plan in violation of Regional Engineer directives and Part 12 of the
Commission's regulations; \7\ (5) unduly restricted public access to
project facilities and failed to construct approved recreation
facilities in violation of Standard Article 18 and Article 410 of the
license and the Commission's Orders Modifying and Approving Recreation
Plan; \8\ (6) failed to acquire and document all necessary project
property rights in violation of Standard Article 5 of the license; \9\
and (7) failed to comply with the Commission's 1999 Order approving
Boyce Hydro's Water Quality Monitoring Plan in violation of that order
and Article 402 of the license.\10\ The Commission's primary concern
has been the licensee's longstanding failure to address the project's
inadequate spillway capacity, which currently is designed to pass only
approximately 50 percent of the PMF. Failure of the Edenville dam could
result in the loss of human life and the destruction of property and
infrastructure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Boyce Hydro Power, LLC, 159 FERC 62,292 (2017) (Compliance
Order).
    \4\ See Compliance Order, at PP 5-26.
    \5\ See id. PP 35-46.
    \6\ See id. PP 54-76.
    \7\ See id. PP 84-86.
    \8\ See id. PP 92-107 (identifying, among others, violations of
Wolverine Power Corporation, 96 FERC 62,055 (2001) and Synex
Michigan, LLC, (Dec. 5, 2006) (unpublished order)).
    \9\ See id. PP 116-124.
    \10\ See id. PP 134-141.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. Ordering Paragraphs (A) through (M) of the Compliance Order
required Boyce Hydro to provide specific plans, specifications, reports
and other information to address the violations identified in that
order and to come into compliance with the Commission's regulations and
the terms of its license. On July 14, 2017, and July 27, 2017, the
licensee filed two requests for more time to comply with certain
requirements in the Compliance Order. By orders issued July 25, 2017,
and August 15, 2017, the extensions that the licensee requested were
granted, with the exception of one portion of the second requested
extension, which the order determined could be completed in the time
provided in the first extension without the need for a second.\11\
Those extensions were granted based on representations made by the
licensee and its counsel regarding steps that the licensee was taking
to satisfy the requirements of the Compliance Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ The first order granted an additional 30 days to comply
with the requirements in ordering paragraphs (B), (C), (D), (E),
(F), and (G) of the Compliance Order. The second order granted more
time to comply with ordering paragraphs (B), (G), and (D), but
denied more time for complying with ordering paragraph (F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. Boyce Hydro failed to comply with obligations set out in each of
the ordering paragraphs in the Compliance Order, except for the
obligations to acquire and document certain property rights (although
the lack of designs for the new and revised spillways makes it
difficult to determine if it has acquired all necessary property
rights) \12\ and to implement certain requirements in the project's
approved Water Quality Monitoring Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ In filings made with the Commission on July 26, 2017,
August 22, 2017, and January 22, 2018, Boyce Hydro states that it
possesses the necessary property rights over the land within the
project boundary and that it has acquired rights to land (and has
ability to acquire rights to additional land) that may be necessary
to complete construction of the Tobacco River Auxiliary Spillway.
However, because the licensee has not provided plans and
specifications for the Tittabawassee Auxiliary Spillway or provided
other documentation specific to where the Tittabawassee Auxiliary
Spillway will be constructed, Commission staff is still uncertain if
the licensee has, in fact, obtained rights to all land necessary for
the construction of the Tittabawassee Auxiliary Spillway, as
required by the Compliance Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. Boyce Hydro violated the following ordering paragraphs in the
Compliance Order and associated orders extending time:
     Ordering paragraph (B) directed: For the Tobacco River
Auxiliary Spillway: By July 15, 2017 (extended to September 18, 2017),
the licensee was required to file a complete design

package with the Commission's Division of Dam Safety and Inspection,
Chicago Regional Engineer (Regional Engineer) for a Tobacco River
Auxiliary Spillway. The design package must fully address all items
noted in the Regional Engineer's letter to the licensee dated June 6,
2016.
     Ordering paragraph (D) directed: For the Tittabawassee
River Auxiliary Spillway: By August 14, 2017 (extended to November 14,
2017), the licensee was required to file with the Regional Engineer,
plans, specifications, and a schedule to construct a Tittabawassee
River Auxiliary Spillway.
     Ordering paragraph (F) directed: By October 13, 2017
(extended to November 14, 2017), the licensee was required to file with
the Regional Engineer, a plan and schedule for additional modifications
to the project to meet the full (100%) Probable Maximum Flood.
     Ordering paragraph (G) directed: By July 30, 2017
(extended to September 30, 2017), the licensee was required to file
with the Regional Engineer, complete plans and specifications for
permanent repairs to both left and right Tobacco River abutment
spillway walls, a complete work schedule, detailed drawings, a water
management plan, an erosion control plan, a Temporary Construction
Emergency Action Plan, and a Quality Control Inspection Program as
originally specified in the Regional Engineer's letter to the licensee
issued December 8, 2016.
     Ordering paragraph (J) directed: By September 13, 2017,
the licensee was required to provide reasonable access to project lands
and waters for the public and to file documentation that such access
has been provided. The licensee's documentation must include
photographs showing that gates restricting access to parking and
fishing areas are open, that fencing blocking access to recreation
features has been removed, and that reasonable access to the water is
allowed. The licensee's documentation must also include a statement
from the licensee affirming its compliance with the access provisions
of Article 18.
     Ordering paragraph (K) directed: By September 13, 2017,
the licensee was required to file with the Regional Engineer, a
complete design package for construction of all recreation facilities
required by the project's approved Recreation Plan. The approved
recreation facilities for the Tittabawassee side include: A parking lot
for 15 cars off of State Highway 30, a parking lot with two handicapped
spaces, a barrier-free restroom, a railed handicapped-accessible
fishing pier next to the powerhouse, two canoe portages, access paths,
and signs that identify the recreation facilities. The approved
recreation facilities for the Tobacco side include: A parking lot for
15 cars off of State Highway 30, an access path, stairs to a railed
fishing pier, and signs that identify the recreation facilities. Within
90 days of completing this work, the licensee must file documentation
including as-built drawings and photographs demonstrating that the
recreation facilities in the approved Recreation Plan have been
constructed.
    7. Boyce Hydro failed to make the filings required by ordering
paragraphs (B), (D), (F), (G), (J), and (K) of the Compliance Order. It
claims to have started the process of preparing the design package for
the Tobacco River Auxiliary Spillway that was required by Ordering
Paragraph (B), but it requested an additional four to five-month
extension to complete that design package.\13\ And that is only the
design of the Tobacco River Auxiliary Spillway--Boyce Hydro claims that
it lacks the funds to actually construct the spillway and will need to
save money over some unspecified period of time (and resolve
outstanding state permitting issues) before it can start
construction.\14\ Of course, this addresses just one of the two
auxiliary spillways it must design and construct and does not include
the other modifications that it will need to make to satisfy PMF
requirements and/or to satisfy its obligations under the Compliance
Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See, e.g., Boyce Hydro Power, LLC, Docket Nos. P-10808-047
& -053, at 8-9 (Dec. 1, 2017).
    \14\ See id. at 9-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. Boyce Hydro did not seek rehearing of the Compliance Order, and
it has admitted that it failed to meet the obligations imposed by that
order.\15\ It remains in violation of its license, the FPA, and
Commission regulations and orders.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See id. at 8-15 (admitting, among other things, Boyce
Hydro's failure to comply with Ordering Paragraphs (B), (D), (F),
(G), (J), and (K) of the Compliance Order and requesting further
extensions and/or a stay of those obligations).
    \16\ On November 20, 2017, Commission staff issued an order
requiring Boyce Hydro to cease generating at the Edenville Project,
and Boyce Hydro filed a timely request for rehearing of that order.
Concurrent with this Order Proposing Revocation, we are issuing an
order denying rehearing of the Cease Generation Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion

    9. Under section 31(b) of the FPA,\17\ after providing notice and
an opportunity for an evidentiary hearing, we may issue an order
revoking a license if we find that the licensee knowingly violated a
final compliance order and was given a reasonable time to comply with
that order before the revocation proceeding was commenced.\18\ In
addition, section 31(b) provides that the Compliance Order shall be
subject to de novo review and that the Commission shall consider the
nature and seriousness of the violation and the licensee's efforts to
remedy the violation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See 16 U.S.C. 823b(b) (2012). Section 31(b) provides that
after notice and an opportunity for an evidentiary hearing, the
Commission may issue an order revoking a license, where the licensee
is found by the Commission to have knowingly violated a final order
and has been given reasonable time to comply fully with that order.
    \18\ See e.g. Eastern Hydroelectric Corp., 149 FERC 61,036
(2014), reh'g denied, 150 FERC 61,099 (2015) (revoking license for
failure to construct a required fish passage); Virginia
Hydrogeneration and Historical Society, L.C., 104 FERC 61,282 (2003)
(proposing revocation of license for failure to comply with
environmental conditions); Energy Alternatives of North America,
Inc., 68 FERC ] 61,196 (1994) (proposing revocation of the license
for failure to comply with public safety requirements).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. This order provides notice that we propose to revoke the
license for the Edenville Project No. 10808 under section 31(b). As
explained in the Compliance Order, Boyce Hydro has failed for many
years to comply with significant license and safety requirements,
notwithstanding having been given opportunities to come into
compliance. The Compliance Order set out specific parameters for Boyce
Hydro to achieve compliance with its license. The licensee failed to
meet nearly all the obligations in the Compliance Order, even after
Commission staff granted multiple extensions.\19\ Thus, based on the
record, there is no reason to believe that the licensee intends to come
into compliance. We conclude that it has been given a reasonable time
to comply with the Compliance Order and considering the serious dam
safety issues \20\ and lack of demonstrated effort

by Boyce Hydro to comply with the Compliance Order, we propose
revocation of the project license.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Boyce Hydro's offer to place 50 percent of gross revenues
from the Edenville Project into escrow until it has saved enough
money to construct the Tobacco River Auxiliary Spillway does not
convince us that it will satisfy its obligations under the
Compliance Order if we grant another extension. Boyce Hydro has not
provided any estimate of when it will complete construction of that
spillway, let alone when it can complete and submit the designs for
the other auxiliary spillway and satisfy the other obligations set
out in the Compliance Order.
    \20\ Public safety would not be affected by revoking the
license. Should the Commission ultimately revoke Boyce Hydro's
license, the Commission's jurisdiction will end, and authority over
the site will pass to the State of Michigan's dam regulatory
authorities. See Mich. Comp. Laws 324.31506 (giving the Michigan
Department of Environmental Quality regulatory authority over dams
and impoundments in the state); see also Eastern Hydroelectric
Corp., 149 FERC 61,036 at P 35 (noting that upon revocation the
authority to regulate dam safety and other issues related to the dam
and impoundment would transfer to the state).
    \21\ Revocation of the Edenville Project license does not
mandate removal or any modification of the dam. While, the
Commission has broad authority to fashion appropriate remedies to
further the goals of the FPA in a manner that is necessary and
appropriate to carry out the revocation of this license, as a
general rule, we do not condition the effectiveness of a license
revocation by imposing additional requirements on a licensee that
has shown its unwillingness to comply with other Commission orders.
Eastern Hydroelectric Corp., 149 FERC 61,036 at P 33 (declining
request to order removal of all project facilities including the dam
and instead only requiring licensee to disable all of the project's
generating equipment to prevent operation of the project).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    11. The licensee may request an evidentiary hearing before an
Administrative Law Judge within 30 days of this issuance date of this
order.\22\ If, within 30 days, the licensee requests a hearing, the
Commission will set the matter for hearing. If the licensee does not
request a hearing, the Commission will decide this matter based on the
written record. Any interested person may file a motion to intervene in
accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214). A person does not have to intervene in
order to have comments considered. Any person may file with the
Secretary of the Commission, comments in support of or in opposition to
the proposed revocation. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See 16 U.S.C. 823b(b) (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Commission Orders

    (A) Pursuant to section 31(b) of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. 823b(b) (2012),
the Commission proposes to revoke the license for the Edenville Project
No. 10808.
    (B) Boyce Hydro may request an evidentiary hearing within 30 days
of the issuance date of this order.

    By the Commission.

     Issued February 15, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-03821 Filed 2-23-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: January 27, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 16)]
[Notices]
[Page 4790-4792]
[DOCID:fr27ja09-70]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-59265; File No. SR-BSE-2008-36]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to Delisting Standards

January 16, 2009.

I. Introduction

    On November 3, 2008, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (``BSE'' or
the ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the ``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to adopt new criteria permitting the delisting of
a security when the Exchange has terminated its program for listing and
trading cash equities (``Listing Program'') in connection with the
discontinuation of trading in all securities listed on its market. The
proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register
on November 28, 2008.\3\ The Commission received no comments on the
proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58990 (November 20,
2008), 73 FR 72534 (``Notice''). In order for a company to
voluntarily delist from the Exchange, it would have to follow the
procedures set forth in Rule 12d2-2 under the Act, which includes
the filing of a Form 25 with the Commission. See Rule 12d2-2 under
the Act, 17 CFR 240.12d2-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change

    On September 5, 2007, the Exchange announced the discontinuation of
the operations of the Boston Equities Exchange. In addition to that
announcement, in October 2007, all issuers were given additional notice
that the BSE had terminated its Listing Program. While trading in all
securities on the BSE ceased on September 5, 2007, not all companies
have delisted their securities from the Exchange by filing a Form 25
with the Commission.\4\ As a result, the Exchange proposes to adopt new
rules that would give it the authority to delist, under certain
conditions, the remaining BSE-listed companies, because there is no
basis to involuntarily delist these companies under BSE's existing
rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ As of the date of the Notice, twenty-nine issuers currently
have listings with the Exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under the proposal, the Exchange may determine to delist a security
when the Exchange has terminated its Listing Program in connection with
the discontinuation of trading in all securities listed on its market.
The proposed new rule will provide that at least 15 days before issuing
such delisting determination, the Board of Directors or its designee
must give notice of the delisting to the company. As soon as
practicable after the issuance of the delisting determination, notice
will be provided to the company and the Commission of such delisting
determination. Notice to the company of the delisting determination
shall inform the company of the opportunity to appeal, applying the
same appeal rights that exist under BSE rules for any company
involuntarily delisted by the Exchange when the BSE was operational.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See infra note 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange represents that it would use this authority to delist
on the grounds that BSE is not currently operating a listing program
and, therefore, it is in the public interest that the Exchange not
maintain any appearance of having any listings on the Exchange as long
as programs for listing and trading cash equities and related activity
have ceased. In addition, prior to implementing any involuntary
delistings, the Exchange represented that it will contact each company
and suggest that it file a Form 25 to effect a voluntary delisting
before the Exchange issues any delisting determination. Thereafter, the
Exchange will move to delist those companies that do not act

in accordance with that suggestion. Companies that are involuntarily
delisted under the rule being adopted in this filing will have the
appeal right provided for by new Section 2(c)(3) of Chapter XXVII of
the Rules of the Exchange.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Commission notes that the appeals procedures proposed in
new Section 2(c)(3) of Chapter XXVII are identical to the appeals
procedures set forth in the current BSE Rules. See Chapter XXVII,
Section 2(b)(2) of the BSE Rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its filing, BSE noted that the NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc. (``NASDAQ
OMX'') has acquired the Exchange. According to BSE, NASDAQ OMX expects
that the Exchange will resume a program for listing and trading cash
equities. Accordingly, the Exchange believes it is appropriate to leave
all of its listing rules, as amended, in place pending rule changes to
its listing rules.\7\ Upon the resumption of a listing business by the
Exchange, delisted companies may be eligible for relisting if their
securities meet the applicable standards of the Exchange.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Any future proposal to resume trading on a BSE market and
amend listing standards would be required to be submitted as a
proposed rule change to the Commission under Section 19(b) of the
Act and Rule 19b-4 thereunder. See 15 U.S.C. 78s(b), 17 CFR 240.19b-
4.
    \8\ Any company that seeks listing on the Exchange would be
required to apply and meet the Exchange's initial listing standards.
Delisted companies may also apply to list on another national
securities exchange if they meet that exchange's initial listing
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion and Commission Findings

    After careful consideration, the Commission finds that the proposed
rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder applicable to a national securities
exchange \9\ and, in particular, the requirements of Section 6 of the
Act.\10\ Specifically, the Commission finds that the proposed rule
change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\11\ which
requires, among other things, that the rules of a national securities
exchange be designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest
and are not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers or dealers. The Commission also finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(7) of the Act,\12\
which requires, among other things, that the rules of the exchange
provide a fair procedure for the prohibition or limitation by the
exchange of any person with respect to access to services offered by
the exchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ In approving this proposed rule change the Commission has
considered the proposed rule's impact on efficiency, competition,
and capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f.
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The BSE proposes to adopt new criteria permitting the delisting of
securities that are no longer being traded in connection with the
discontinuation of trading in all securities listed on its market. The
Commission notes that the new delisting standard can only be utilized
in rare and unusual circumstances and emphasizes that it can only be
used to involuntarily delist companies when the Exchange has
discontinued trading in all listed securities in its marketplace, as
BSE has done. Specifically, the Exchange announced in September 2007
that it was terminating its Listings Program, and in October 2007, all
issuers were given additional notice that the Listings Program had
ceased. However, not all issuers have voluntarily delisted their
securities in accordance with the requirements in Rule 12d2-2 under the
Act \13\ and BSE rules. The proposed rule change should also make the
delisting process more efficient for both the Exchange and listed
companies in light of the cessation of trading on the BSE market. The
new delisting standard should provide the Exchange with an additional
means of ensuring the quality of and public confidence in BSE as a
national securities exchange during its reorganization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.12d2-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The proposed rule change further serves to protect the public from
being mislead into believing that these securities retain the
imprimatur of an exchange listing on an active trading market. In this
regard, the Commission notes that companies listed on a national
securities exchange retain certain benefits and privileges. If an
exchange has ceased all trading in all securities due to
discontinuation of its marketplace, companies generally should not be
able to retain their exchange listing and corresponding privileges, as
they are no longer providing liquidity via the market. Moreover, these
companies would no longer be monitored for compliance with maintenance
listing criteria, and thus investors and the public would not have
necessary information regarding these companies' viability. The
Commission thus believes that the proposed new delisting standard is
consistent with the protection of investors under Section 6(b)(5) of
the Act.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission also believes the proposal provides sufficient
notice to companies facing delisting pursuant to the new criteria
consistent with the Act. First, notice will be given to the company at
least 15 days before the Exchange issues its delisting determination.
The Commission believes that the proposed rule affords sufficient time
for interested parties to submit to the Exchange and/or Commission any
comments they have on the anticipated delisting, or to take any other
action as permitted under state and federal law including commencing a
voluntary delisting in accordance with Rule 12d2-2 under the Act.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 240.12d2-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, notice will be given to the company (and the Commission)
after the issuance of the delisting determination, and the notice shall
inform the company of the opportunity to appeal. The appeals procedures
proposed in new Section 2(c)(3) of Chapter XXVII, which are identical
to the appeals procedures currently set forth in Section 2(b)(2) of
Chapter XXVII, provide for notice to the issuer of the Exchange's
decision to delist its securities; an opportunity for appeal to the
Exchange's board of directors, or to a designee of the board, with a
$3000 fee; and public notice, no fewer than 10 days before the
delisting becomes effective, of the Exchange's final determination to
delist the security. The Commission believes that the proposed rule
requiring notice to the issuer of the Exchange's delisting decision and
establishing appeal procedures provides issuers with adequate notice
and opportunity to appeal the delisting as required by Rule 12d2-2
under the Act.\16\ The Commission notes that the appeal procedures
being adopted by the Exchange set forth an adequate structure to meet
the requirements of Section 6(b)(7) of the Act \17\ and for BSE to
review on appeal any involuntary delistings commenced under the new
rule being adopted herein.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 17 CFR 240.12d2-2.
    \17\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(7).
    \18\ The Commission has made similar findings in approving the
original delisting appeal procedures of the BSE. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 53700 (April 21, 2006), 71 FR 25257 (April
28, 2006) (SR-BSE-2005-46).

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

    Finally, the proposed rule change requires that public notice of
the final delisting determination by the Exchange be provided no fewer
than 10 days before the delisting becomes effective, in accordance with
Rule 12d2-2 under the Act.\19\ The Commission believes that public
notice of the Exchange's final determination should ensure that
investors have adequate notice of an exchange delisting and is
consistent with the protection of investors under Section 6(b)(5) of
the Act.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 240.12d2-2.
    \20\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Conclusion

    On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act and
in particular Section 6 of the Act and the rules and regulations
thereunder.
    It is therefore ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,
that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-BSE-2008-36) is approved.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-1673 Filed 1-26-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Revisions to the General Conformity Regulations Summary of Results of Option Selection Meeting On January 28, 2005 an Options Selection Meeting was held for the Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation. Mr. Robert Brenner, the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation represented Assistant Administrator Jeff Holmstead. The purpose of the meeting was to consider options developed by the EPA workgroup for the revision to EPA's General Conformity Regulations. The workgroup met on December 15, 2004 to review input from stakeholders and alternatives for addressing 21 proposed changes to the Regulation in 4 different categories. A full meeting summary including all options considered and selected is attached.

All the changes proposed by the workgroup to the General Conformity Regulation were accepted and approved by Mr. Brenner with the following conditions.

1. Emission Budgets   The revisions should not include a provision for EPA to make adequacy determinations of the emission budgets. The OGC staff expressed concern because of current litigation over adequacy determinations in the Transportation Conformity program.   Regions 9 and 2 cited that military installations in their regions were already using this approach ( but not with a presumption of conformity). These examples should be cited in the revised regulations.

2. Inter Precursor Offsets for Ozone Areas   Region 9 expressed concerns that adequate guidance is lacking for technical evaluations of inter precursor trading for a variety of programs not using these types of offsets. A parallel process should be initiated to develop better technical guidance for inter precursor trading.   Work with OPEI to on the language for this provision.

3. Mitigation Timing   The revised regulation should be explicit that states still must meet all SIP obligations even if they chose to negotiate alternative schedules for implementing mitigation measures with a federal facility, but states don't necessarily need to offset emission in the current year. Work with OPEI to on the language for this provision.   Provide Region 2 additional time to comment on this provision.

4. Grandfathering Provision in the Existing Regulation   Consult with the OGC's office to include language to clarify that revisions to these provisions does not exempt federal agencies from previous general conformity requirements.

5. Wildland Fire Policy   Provide OPEI a briefing on the existing policy 6. Revise Emergency Episode to Include Military Readiness   Work with OGC and ensure language is consistent with other regulations and statements.   This issue should be flagged in the final action memo.

7. Coverage of Construction Emission   Proposed regulation should take comment on exemptions from short term projects ( e. g., < 1 2 years)   The regulations should highlight that federal agencies have several options were construction emissions do not have to be included in the analysis, such as: o When they are included in a facility wide emission budget o When they are included in a presumed to conform list o When a state issues construction permits that cover these emissions in the SIP ( similar to minor NSR exemptions).   This issue should be flagged in the final action memo.

8. Offsite Mobile Source Emission   Guidance on this General Conformity issue should be coordinated with Transportation Conformity guidance issued by OTAQ.

Also in attendance was:   Mr. David Stonefield, the workgroup leader from the Office of Air Quality and Standards ( OAQPS),   Mr. Thomas Coda, OAQPS, and   Ms. Sara Shneeberg from the Office of General Council ( OGC).

Participating by phone was:   Mr. Gregory Green, Deputy Director, OAQPS   Ms. Lydia Wegman, Director AQSSD, OAQPS   Ms. Annie Nikbakht, OAQPS   Mr. Mark Corrales, OPEI   Mr. David Wampler, Region 9   Mr. Mike Moltzen, Region 2   Ms. Patricia Morris, Region 5


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 20 (Wednesday, January 30, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6313-6314]
[FR Doc No: 2013-01915]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 96-042]

Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Notice of Application Accepted
for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Types of Application: Amendment of License.
    b. Project No.: 96-042.
    c. Date Filed: November 27, 2012.
    d. Applicant: Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
    e. Name of Project: Kerckhoff Hydroelectric Project.
    f. Location: on the San Joaquin River in Fresno and Madera
Counties, California, and affects lands of the United States.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 791a-825r.
    h. Applicant Contact: Alvin Thoma, Director Hydro Licensing,
Pacific Gas and Electric Company, P.O. Box 770000,

San Francisco, CA 94177-0001, Telephone No.<PHONE_NUMBER>, Email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or Annette Faraglia, Esq., Law Department, Pacific Gas and
Electric Company, P.O. Box 7442, San Francisco, CA, Telephone No. (415)
973-7145, Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Mrs. Anumzziatta Purchiaroni,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests: February 19, 2013.
    All documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See, 18
CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web
site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can
submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior
registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information
at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online
Support at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676,
or for TTY,<PHONE_NUMBER>. Although the Commission strongly encourages
electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file,
mail an original and seven copies to: Secretary, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
Please include the project number (P-96-042) 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.
    k. Description of proposed amendment: The licensee is requesting
approval to delete from the license and permanently retire from service
one of the three units (Unit 2) at the Kerckhoff 1 Powerhouse. The unit
is inoperable and unfeasible to repair given the cost of the repairs
and the number of years remaining in the license term (ten years). The
proposed modification would decrease the installed capacity of
Kerckhoff 1 Powerhouse from 34,080 to 22,720 kW and the total hydraulic
capacity from 1,775 to 1,200 cfs. The licensee is not proposing any
changes to Kerckhoff 2 Powerhouse or existing project operation.
    l. Locations of the 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<PHONE_NUMBER>. 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 (P-96) to access the document. You
may also register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filings and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-
208-3676 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
Bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis. Any filing made by an intervenor must be accompanied
by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared
by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b)
and 385.2010.

    Dated: January 17, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-01915 Filed 1-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P