[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 149 (Thursday, August 2, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37773-37774]
[FR Doc No: 2018-16489]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2017-0349; Airspace Docket No. 17-AAL-5]
RIN-2120-AA66

Proposed Modification of Class E Airspace for the Following
Alaska Towns; St. Michael, AK; Shaktoolik, AK; and Tatitlek, AK

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

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

SUMMARY: This action proposes to modify Class E airspace extending
upward from 1,200 feet above the surface at St. Michael Airport, AK;
Shaktoolik Airport, AK; and Tatitlek Airport, AK. This proposal would
add exclusionary language to the legal descriptions of these airports
to exclude Class E airspace extending beyond 12 miles from the
shoreline, and would ensure the safety and management of aircraft
within the National Airspace System.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before September 17, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Send comments on this proposal to the U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590; telephone:
1-800-647-5527, or<PHONE_NUMBER>. You must identify FAA Docket No.
FAA-2017-0349; Airspace Docket No. 17-AAL-5, at the beginning of your
comments. You may also submit comments through the internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
    FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, and
subsequent amendments can be viewed online at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/. For further information, you can contact the
Airspace Policy Group, Federal Aviation Administration, 800
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591; telephone: (202) 267-
8783. The Order is also available for inspection at the National
Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For information on the
availability of FAA Order 7400.11A at NARA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go
to https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.
    FAA Order 7400.11, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, is
published yearly and effective on September 15.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Roberts, Federal Aviation
Administration, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 2200
S. 216th St., Des Moines, WA, 98198-6547; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Authority for This Rulemaking

    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106
describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII,
Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's
authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described
in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it would amend Class E airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet
above the surface at St. Michael Airport, AK; Shaktoolik Airport, AK;
and Tatitlek Airport, AK to support IFR operations in standard
instrument approach and departure procedures at these airports.

Comments Invited

    Interested parties are invited to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting such written data, views, or arguments, as
they may desire. Comments that provide the factual basis supporting the
views and suggestions presented are particularly helpful in developing
reasoned regulatory decisions on the proposal. Comments are
specifically invited on the overall regulatory, aeronautical, economic,
environmental, and energy-related aspects of the proposal.
Communications should identify both docket numbers and be submitted in
triplicate to the address listed above. Persons wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments on this notice must submit with
those comments a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. FAA-2017-0349/
Airspace Docket No. 17-AAL-5''. The postcard will be date/time stamped
and returned to the commenter.
    All communications received before the specified closing date for
comments will be considered before taking action on the proposed rule.
The proposal contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. A report summarizing each substantive public contact
with FAA personnel concerned with this rulemaking will be filed in the
docket.

Availability of NPRMs

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded through the
internet at http://www.regulations.gov. Recently published rulemaking
documents can also be accessed through the FAA's web page at http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/airspace_amendments/.
    You may review the public docket containing the proposal, any
comments received, and any final disposition in person in the Dockets
Office (see the ADDRESSES section for the address and phone number)
between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except federal
holidays. An informal docket may also be examined during normal
business hours at the Northwest Mountain Regional Office of the Federal
Aviation Administration, Air Traffic Organization, Western Service
Center, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center, 2200 S 216th
St., Des Moines, WA 98198-6547.

Availability and Summary of Documents for Incorporation by Reference

    This document proposes to amend FAA Order 7400.11B, Airspace
Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3, 2017, and effective
September 15, 2017. FAA Order 7400.11B is publicly available as listed
in the ADDRESSES section of this document. FAA Order 7400.11B lists
Class A, B, C, D, and E airspace areas, air traffic service routes, and
reporting points.

The Proposal

    The FAA is proposing an amendment to Title 14 Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) part 71 by modifying Class E airspace extending
upward from 1,200 feet above the surface at St. Michael Airport, AK;
Shaktoolik Airport, AK; and Tatitlek Airport, AK. This action would add
language to the legal descriptions of these airports that reads
``excluding that airspace that extends beyond 12 miles from the
shoreline''.
    Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of
FAA Order 7400.11B, dated August 3, 2017, and effective September 15,
2017, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 71.1. The Class E
airspace designations listed in this document will be published
subsequently in the Order.

Regulatory Notices and Analyses

    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current,
and is non-controversial and unlikely to result in adverse or negative
comments. It, therefore: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action''
under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under
DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, would not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Environmental Review

    This proposal would be subject to an environmental analysis in
accordance with FAA Order 1050.1F, ``Environmental Impacts: Policies
and Procedures'' prior to any FAA final regulatory action.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

The Proposed Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the Federal
Aviation Administration proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
 1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

     Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O.
10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
 2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order
7400.11B, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 3,
2017, and effective September 15, 2017, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas Extending Upward From 1,200
Feet or More Above the Surface of the Earth.

* * * * *

AAL AK E5 Shaktoolik, AK [Amended]

Shaktoolik Airport, AK
    (Lat. 64[deg]22'16'' N, long. 161[deg]13'26'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of Shaktoolik Airport; and that airspace
extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within a 73-mile
radius of Shaktoolik Airport, AK, excluding that airspace that
extends beyond 12 miles of the shoreline.
* * * * *

AAL AK E5 St. Michael, AK [Amended]

St. Michael Airport, AK
    (Lat. 63[deg]29'24'' N, long. 162[deg]06'37'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within an 8.4-mile radius of St. Michael Airport; and that airspace
extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within a 73-mile
radius of the St. Michael Airport, excluding that airspace that
extends beyond 12 miles of the shoreline.
* * * * *

AAL AK E5 Tatitlek, AK [Amended]

Tatitlek Airport, AK
    (Lat. 60[deg]52'21'' N, long. 146[deg]41'28'' W)

    That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface
within a 6.4-mile radius of Tatitlek Airport, and within 2 miles
southwest and 3.4 miles northeast of the 149[deg] radial from
Tatitlek Airport extending from the 6.4-mile radius to 11.8 miles
southeast of the airport; and that airspace extending upward from
1,200 feet above the surface within a 60-mile radius of the Tatitlek
Airport, excluding that airspace that extends beyond 12 miles of the
shoreline.

    Issued in Seattle, Washington, on July 25, 2018.
Shawn M. Kozica,
Group Manager, Operations Support Group, Western Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2018-16489 Filed 8-1-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 27, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 95159-95160]
[FR Doc No: 2016-31200]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2016-1001]

Information Collection Request to Office of Management and
Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-0100

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Sixty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the
U.S. Coast Guard intends to submit an Information Collection Request
(ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), requesting an extension of
its approval for the following collection of information: 1625-0100,
Advance Notice of Vessel Arrival without change. Our ICR describes the
information we seek to collect from the public. Before submitting this
ICR to OIRA, the Coast Guard is inviting comments as described below.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard on or before February 27,
2017.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2016-1001] to the Coast Guard using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. See the ``Public
participation and request for comments'' portion of the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for further instructions on submitting comments.
    A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the Internet
at http://www.regulations.gov. Additionally, copies are available from:
Commandant (CG-612), Attn: Paperwork Reduction Act Manager, U.S. Coast
Guard, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE., Stop 7710, Washington, DC
20593-7710.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Contact Mr. Anthony Smith, Office of
Information Management, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, or fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
for questions on these documents.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Participation and Request for Comments

    This Notice relies on the authority of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995; 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35, as amended. An ICR is an application to
OIRA seeking the approval, extension, or renewal of a Coast Guard
collection of information (Collection). The ICR contains information
describing the Collection's purpose, the Collection's likely burden on
the affected public, an explanation of the necessity of the Collection,
and other important information describing the Collection. There is one
ICR for each Collection.
    The Coast Guard invites comments on whether this ICR should be
granted based on the Collection being necessary for the proper
performance of Departmental functions. In particular, the Coast Guard
would appreciate comments addressing: (1) The practical utility of the
Collection; (2) the accuracy of the estimated burden of the Collection;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information
subject to the Collection; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
Collection on respondents, including the use of automated collection
techniques or other forms of information technology. In response to
your comments, we may revise this ICR or decide not to seek an
extension of approval for the Collection. We will consider all comments
and material received during the comment period.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments must contain the OMB Control Number of
the ICR and the docket number of this request, [USCG-2016-1001], and
must be received by February 27, 2017.

Submitting Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at http://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using http://www.regulations.gov, contact the person in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document for alternate
instructions. Documents mentioned in this notice, and all public
comments, are in our online docket at http://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that Web site's instructions. Additionally,
if you go to the online docket and sign up for email alerts, you will
be notified when comments are posted.
    We accept anonymous comments. All comments received will be posted
without change to http://www.regulations.gov and will include any
personal information you have provided. For more about privacy and the
docket, you may review a Privacy Act notice regarding the Federal
Docket Management System in the March 24, 2005, issue of the Federal
Register (70 FR 15086).

Information Collection Request

    Title: Advance Notice of Vessel Arrival.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0100.
    Summary: The Ports and Waterways Safety Act authorizes the Coast
Guard to require pre-arrival messages from any vessel entering a port
or place in the United States.
    Need: This information is required under 33 CFR 146 and 33 CFR 160
subpart C to control vessel traffic, develop contingency plans, and
enforce regulations.
    Forms: N/A.
    Respondents: Vessel owners and operators.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has decreased from
110,983 hours to 104,515 hours a year due to a decrease in the
estimated annual number of initial Notices of Arrival.

    Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995; 44 U.S.C.
Chapter 35, as amended.

    Dated: December 18, 2016.
Thomas P. Michelli,
U.S. Coast Guard, Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016-31200 Filed 12-23-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 131 (Tuesday, July 9, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 32766]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14576]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4390-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2019-0001]

Minnesota; Amendment No. 3 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for State of Minnesota (FEMA-4390-DR), dated September 5, 2018, and
related determinations.

DATES: This change occurred on June 13, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) hereby gives notice that pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order 12148, as amended, John F. Boyle,
of FEMA is appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for
this disaster.
    This action terminates the appointment of Steven W. Johnson as
Federal Coordinating Officer for this disaster.

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and
Households in Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Pete Gaynor,
Acting Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2019-14576 Filed 7-8-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P


[Federal Register: November 2, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 211)]
[Notices]
[Page 66376]
[DOCID:fr02no05-69]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL05-60-001]

PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice of Compliance Filing

October 21, 2005.
    Take notice that on October 17, 2005, PMJ Interconnection, L.L.C.
(PJM) tendered for filing revisions to the PJM Open Access Transmission
Tariff in compliance with the Commission's September 15, 2005 Order in
the above proceeding.
    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. Such notices,
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date.
Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of
that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov.
 Persons unable to file electronically should submit an

original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the

``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription''
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For

TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on November 16, 2005.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E5-6033 Filed 11-1-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 206 (Friday, October 24, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63618-63619]
[FR Doc No: 2014-25323]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AD14-18-000]

Joint Technical Conference on New York Markets & Infrastructure;
Supplemental Notice of Technical Conference

    As announced in the Notice issued on September 17, 2014,\1\ the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission), jointly with the New
York Public Service Commission will hold a technical conference on
November 5, 2014 from 9:00 a.m. to approximately 4:00 p.m., to discuss
issues of mutual interest and concern regarding the installed capacity
market and energy infrastructure in New York and review the role of New
York's centralized capacity market in attracting investment and
ensuring resource adequacy and reliability. The conference will be held
in the New York Institute of Technology Auditorium located at 1871
Broadway, between 61st and 62nd Streets, New York, NY 10023. A
preliminary agenda for this conference is attached. Conference
panelists will be identified in a subsequent notice. This conference is
free of charge and open to the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Joint Technical Conference on New York Markets &
Infrastructure, Docket No. AD14-00018-000 (September 17, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The technical conference will be transcribed. The conference will
also be Webcast. The Webcast will allow persons to listen to the
technical conference, but not participate. Further details on the
Webcast, including the link, will be provided in a subsequent notice.
    Information on the technical conference will be posted on the Web
site http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/EventDetails.aspx?ID=7531&CalType=%20&CalendarID=116&Date=11/05/2014&View=Listview, as well as the Calendar of Events on the
Commission's Web site, http://www.ferc.gov, prior to the conference.
    Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations, please
send an email 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 the technical conference, please
contact:

Kathleen Schnorf (Technical Information), Office of Energy Market
Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Betty Watson (Technical Information), Office of Energy Policy and
Innovation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Kate Hoke (Legal Information), Office of General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sarah McKinley (Logistical Information), Office of External Affairs,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: October 10, 2014.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.

Joint FERC-NYPSC Technical Conference on New York Markets &
Infrastructure

Docket No. AD14-18-000

November 5, 2014

Preliminary Agenda

8:00 a.m.-9:00 a.m. Registration
9:00 a.m.-9:30 a.m. Opening remarks by Commissioners
9:30 a.m.-10:15 a.m. NYISO and Independent Market Monitor presentation

    NYISO and the Independent Market Monitor will report on the recent
performance of NYISO's capacity market. NYISO will also describe
current initiatives it is undertaking, and hurdles it is facing, as it
seeks to improve performance of its capacity market to attract adequate
investment in resources and infrastructure to efficiently meet New York
State's reliability/resource adequacy needs. NYISO will provide
information on recent investments made in resources and infrastructure
through NYISO's markets and transmission planning efforts, and discuss
the implementation of the new capacity zone in the Lower Hudson Valley.
NYISO will provide a brief update on preparedness for the upcoming
winter. Finally, the Independent Market Monitor will provide its
recommendations for improved performance of NYISO's capacity market.

10:15 a.m.-12:15 p.m. Panel One: Assessing the performance of NYISO's
capacity market design in attracting investment in resources and
infrastructure to meet reliability/resource adequacy needs

    This session will discuss the role of NYISO's capacity market in
attracting investment in both resources and infrastructure in order to
meet New York State's reliability and/or resource adequacy needs. In
particular, panelists should discuss the particular capacity market
design features that encourage merchant investment in resources and
infrastructure. Panelists will be asked to discuss how the capacity
market is addressing local and state-wide resource adequacy and
reliability issues at just and reasonable rates. Finally, panelists
should discuss what changes, if any, should be considered going forward
to improve the performance of NYISO's capacity market.
    Panelists should be prepared to discuss the following questions:
    a. How do particular market design features impact infrastructure
investment decisions by merchant entities? How can these market design
aspects best address the interests of both buyers and sellers? How do
buyer-side mitigation measures affect investment? Should the NYISO
capacity market provide a longer revenue certainty period (e.g., 3, 5,
or 10 years)? Does the existing NYISO capacity market appropriately
incent investment as compared with three-year forward market designs in
other capacity markets (e.g., PJM, ISO-NE)? Are long-term bilateral
contracts a feasible alternative procurement mechanism for New York
(e.g., California model)?
    b. Are changes to NYISO's capacity market necessary to better
ensure resource performance during peak demand conditions (summer or
winter)?
    c. Why are Reliability Support Services (RSS) needed? What is the
effect of RSS agreements on the ability of the NYISO capacity market to
efficiently meet the intended goal of incentivizing investment in
resources and infrastructure? Are there other market and infrastructure
impacts of the use of RSS agreements?
    d. How does NYISO coordinate its planning processes and its
capacity market? Are there possible improvements in the coordination
efforts?

    e. How is the planning of transmission, generation and other
resources coordinated between retail and wholesale markets?

12:15 p.m.-1:00 p.m. Lunch Break
1:00 p.m.-3:00 p.m. Panel Two: Role of NYISO's capacity market in
attracting investment in resources and infrastructure needed to meet
public policy objectives

    This session will focus on whether, and to what extent, NYISO's
capacity market should play a role in attracting investment in
resources and infrastructure to meet public policy objectives. There
may be a range of public policy objectives, including increasing
renewable resources; maintaining or increasing clean energy resources
to meet emission reduction goals; increasing distributed resources;
increasing energy efficiency and demand response resources; maintaining
fuel diversity; maintaining price stability for customers (wholesale,
retail, commercial and industrial); economic development; and spurring
investment in resources and infrastructure (both power lines and gas
pipelines). Panelists should address whether these objectives are
appropriately addressed through the NYISO capacity market. If so, this
session will also include a discussion of whether certain aspects of
the current NYISO capacity market design--in particular the capacity
market product definition--need to change to achieve the requisite
public policy objectives. The discussion may also explore whether some
of these objectives are complementary or in conflict with other
objectives.
    Panelists should be prepared to discuss the following questions:
    a. Are changes to the capacity market needed to account for fuel
availability/firmness of fuel, or to differentiate the value of
capacity resources based on the ``firmness'' of fuel arrangements?
    b. Should the capacity market specifically account for or otherwise
value resources that are intended to meet current or future public
policy goals (e.g., fuel diversity or emission reduction goals)? How
should there be modifications to the buyer-side mitigation rules to
help achieve those goals?
    c. What price signals and tariff changes may be needed to achieve
the objectives under discussion in the PSC's Reforming the Energy
Vision (REV) proceeding?
    d. Are there market, environmental, or other barriers to entry in
certain locations or for certain kinds of resources (e.g., repowering
assets in New York City)?
    e. Are there broader market design features outside of the capacity
market (e.g., scarcity and shortage pricing) that could be adjusted to
account for public policy objectives (e.g., increasing renewables)?

3:00 p.m.-3:15 p.m. Break
3:15 p.m.-4:00 p.m. Roundtable discussion among Commissioners/Wrap up

    Discussion of possible paths forward for identified issues and
solutions.

[FR Doc. 2014-25323 Filed 10-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


tobacco + peanut) acreage: P(T+P) < 0.05.  In the counties sampled,
P(T+P) ( 0.2 except for P(T+P) = 0.10 for Halifax County in which data
were collected for a single year.  In Virginia, cotton acreage totaled
93,000 acres in 2005, and there were no counties with large cotton
acreages for which P(T+P) < 0.05.  However, there is a narrow-necked
peninsula of two counties on the east side of the Chesapeake Bay with
3,000 acres of cotton and no tobacco or peanut acreage.  A peninsula in
North Carolina, more broadly attached to the mainland than the one in
Virginia, contained 23,000 acres of cotton and no tobacco or peanut
acreages in 2005.  The restriction of gene flow between a peninsular
population and its mainland population could significantly accelerate
the rate of development of counteradaptation.  Thus, there are
county-scale or larger areas in all three of these states that may not
have sufficient non-cotton, cultivated hosts to warrant extrapolation
from TBW host use data acquired in the counties sampled in North
Carolina.  Consequently, North Carolina should receive additional
sampling, and both South Carolina and Virginia should be sampled
directly.

In Georgia in 2005, 1,210,000 acres of cotton were grown primarily in
the southeastern two thirds of the state along with 750,000 acres of
peanut and 16,000 acres of tobacco.  There were no counties with
significant cotton acreage for which P(T+P) < 0.05.  In Florida in 2005,
cotton (102,000 acre), peanut (76,000 acre), and tobacco (4,000 acre)
were grown in the panhandle area contiguous with agriculturally similar
areas in Georgia and Alabama (see below); and P(T+P) >> 0.05 for all
counties.  Thus, significant refuges of non-cotton, cultivated hosts
appear to be present in cotton production areas of both Georgia and
Florida.  However, Florida should be sampled directly to test the
expected outcome.

	In Alabama in 2005, no tobacco was grown; and peanut (225,000 acre) was
grown in 13 counties in the extreme southern and southwestern parts of
the state only.  A total of 193,000 acres of cotton was produced in this
area, but P(T+P) >> 0.05 for all counties.  In the rest of Alabama, but
primarily in the northern half of the state, 357,000 acres of cotton
were grown.  In addition, a total of 25,300 acres of cotton was grown in
three counties on the southern border of Tennessee contiguous with the
cotton production area in Alabama.  Only 425 acres of tobacco was
produced in one of these Tennessee counties.  Thus, southern Alabama
appears to have a significant refuge of non-cotton, cultivated hosts,
but central and northern Alabama is apparently much more similar to
Mississippi.  However, both of these areas in Alabama should be sampled
directly.

Fig. A5-1.  County-level variation in proportion cultivated hosts of
tobacco budworm (TBW)  that are non-cotton with respect to locations of
Monsanto's sampling to quantify non-cotton vs. cotton  host use by TBW
in North Carolina and South Carolina in 2005.  Proportion of acreage
planted to cotton, tobacco, and peanut that was planted to tobacco or
peanut (P(T+P)) is written above the county name and the cotton acreage
harvested is written below the county name (USDA, NASS 2006).  P(T+P) <
0.05 in the counties shaded red.  Monsanto’s sampling for TBW males
for host plant analysis was performed in the counties shaded blue.

 Following this FIFRA SAP meeting, a Panel member provided additional
analysis and comments regarding the validity of extrapolating data from
areas sampled by Monsanto in North Carolina and Georgia to areas that
were not sampled.  Such comments were not considered or reviewed by the
Panel during the meeting, and are being provided as an appendix to these
meeting minutes (Appendix 5).

 Following this FIFRA SAP meeting, a Panel member provided additional
analysis and comments regarding the validity of extrapolating data from
areas sampled by Monsanto in North Carolina and Georgia to areas that
were not sampled.  Such comments were not considered or reviewed by the
Panel during the meeting, and are being provided as an appendix to these
meeting minutes (Appendix 5).

 Following this FIFRA SAP meeting, a Panel member provided additional
analysis and comments regarding the validity of extrapolating data from
areas sampled by Monsanto in North Carolina and Georgia to areas that
were not sampled.  Such comments were not considered or reviewed by the
Panel during the meeting, and are being provided as an appendix to these
meeting minutes (Appendix 5).

.

 Following this FIFRA SAP meeting, a Panel member provided additional
analysis and comments regarding the validity of extrapolating data from
areas sampled by Monsanto in North Carolina and Georgia to areas that
were not sampled.  Such comments were not considered or reviewed by the
Panel during the meeting, and are being provided as an appendix to these
meeting minutes (Appendix 5).

 PAGE

 PAGE   2

 PAGE

 PAGE

 PAGE   3

 PAGE

 PAGE

 PAGE   98

l

VELVETLEAF

COTTON

Jul

2000

1500

1000

500

0

COTTON

COTTON

2003

2002

Aug

2000

1500

1000

500

0

Oct

2000

1500

1000

50‰ഠ」ഠ഍佃呔乏ഠ愍഍佃呔乏ഠ嘍䱅䕖䱔䅅⁆ഠ䌍
呏佔⁎഍〲㔰ഠ㈍〰‴഍〲㌰ഠ㈍〰′഍〸〰‰ഠ㐍〰
〰†഍ര㠍〰〰†഍〴〰‰ഠ」഍〸〰‰ഠ㐍〰〰†഍
ര䰍牡慶⽥慨഍䕖噌呅䕌䙁†഍䕖噌呅䕌䙁†഍〸〰‰
ഠ㐍〰〰†഍ര㈍〰‴ഠ嘍䱅䕖䱔䅅⁆ഠ䴍瑯獨栯ൡ嘍
䱅䕖䱔䅅⁆ഠ

‹

,

C

S

g

v

‰

˜

¹

Î

ß

ò

ü

-

T

v

™

º

à

ý

h]6

ᄉ脈栖㙝

ᄉ脈栖㙝

h]6

ᄉ脈栖㙝

ᄉ脈栖㙝

ᄉ脈栖㙝

ᄉ脈栖㙝

ᄉ脈栖㙝

ᄉ脈栖㙝

ᄉ脈栖㙝

ᄉ脈栖㙝

ᄉ脈栖㙝

ᄉ脈栖㙝

ᄉ脈栖㙝

ᄉ脈栖㙝

ᄏ脈栕礊u栖㙝

ᄉ脈栖㙝

hcb

 hcb

hcb

@

hcb

hcb

hcb

hcb

hcb

h

h

 h

h

h

hqU

hqU

h	n

h	n

h	n

G

G

G

G

G

/	’

/	’

/	’

	㜀$␸䠀$摧灲%

ᄀ킄㜂$␸䠀$葠ː摧怡®

摧ᕏÓ

4

:

F

L

P

w

z

|

}

¬

/¬

°

萏ɶ萑ﻲ葞ɶ葠ﻲ摧䮣å

฀슄༁ᲄ㜂$␸䠀$葝ǂ葞Ȝ摧拲ú̀Ĥ␷㠀$⑈愀Ĥ摧㹝Q

T

&

&

hqU

hqU

j

h¸

h	n

  h¸

 h¸

 h¸

 h¸

*

+

=

A

|

~

摧

h

 h

 h

h

 h

 h

萑ː葠ː摧嫸øᤀ

kd

਀&䘋

਀&䘋

਀&䘋

hH

hH

hqU

B

萏Ũ葞Ũ摧㧼	㜀$␸䠀$摧埂Ð	㜀$␸䠀$摧ᲛË

hH

‘

’

hH

h	n

hH

#

5

?

u

•

½

¾

Í

Ó

Ô

è

é

ü

h	n

h	n

4

C

`

u

{

‚

’

“

ž

Ÿ

Ì

Í

á

é

ê

õ

ù

ú

D’

 hH

hH

hH

jƒ

␱㜀$␸䠀$摧ᆋ²ᰀ

h©

hqU

)

0

ž

Ÿ

¤

¥

hqU

ᤀVELVETLEAF

COTTON

v

i

v

r

u

s

e

d

i

c

i

t

c

e

s

n

I

B

0

6

0

5

0

4

0

3

0

2

0

1

0

1

8

.

0

6

.

0

4

.

0

2

.

0

0

A

l

a

v

i

v

r

u

s

e

d

i

c

i

t

c

e

s

n

I

0

8

0

6

0

4

0

2

0

1

8

.

0

6

.

0

4

.

0

1

2

.

0

0

B

0

6

0

5

0

4

0

3

0

2

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

August

July

June

MidSouth (combined)

MidSouth Flats

MidSouth Hills

East

       Proportion Natural Refuge (SEM)

Oviposition Month

0

1

0

2

.

0

5

1

.

0

1

.

0

5

0

.

0

0

e

g

u

f

e

r

n

o

i

t

r

o

p

o

r

P

0

5

1

0

0

1

0

5

0

2

.

0

5

1

.

0

1

.

0

5

0

.

0

0

e

g

u

f

e

r

n

o

i

t

r

o

p

o

r

P

A

   Proportion Natural Refuge

August

July

June

5

1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

10

1

2

20

MidSouth

East

August

July

June

Minimum Sample Size

Map prepared by William Sansing   HYPERLINK
<EMAIL_ADDRESS><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Mississippi State University

Aug. 17, 2006

TX region = E.TX, OK,

W.LA, KS, W.AR

MS region = MS, LA,

AR, W.TN, KY, MO

GA region = GA,

mid-TN, FL, AL

NC region = NC,

SC, VA

Moths/ha

Oviposition Month

GA: Decatur

NC: Lenoir

TX: Austin

AR: Mississippi

LA: Bossier

MS: Yazoo

June

July

August

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

0.05

Proportion Natural Refuge

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

0.05

GA: Decatur

NC: Lenoir

TX: Austin

AR: Mississippi

LA: Bossier

MS: Yazoo

Oviposition Month

June

July

August

Proportion Natural Refuge

0.001

0.01

0.1

1

0.05

GA: Decatur

NC: Lenoir

TX: Austin

AR: Mississippi

LA: Bossier

MS: Yazoo

Oviposition Month

June

July

August