[Federal Register: December 9, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 236)]
[Notices]
[Page 73313]
[DOCID:fr09de05-129]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Filings and Information Services, Washington, DC
20549.

Extension: Rule 11a1-1(T); SEC File No. 270-428; OMB Control No.
3235-0478.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.

Rule 11a1-1(T)--Transactions Yielding Priority, Parity, and Precedence

    On January 27, 1976, the Commission adopted Rule 11a1-1(T) under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Exchange Act'') to certain
exempt transactions of exchange members for their own accounts that
would otherwise be prohibited under Section 11(a) of the Exchange Act.
The rule provides that a member's proprietary order may be executed on
the exchange of which the trader is a member, if, among other things:
(1) The member discloses that a bid or offer for its account is for its
account to any member with whom such bid or offer is placed or to whom
it is communicated; (2) any such member through whom that bid or offer
is communicated discloses to others participating in effecting the
order that it is for account of a member; and (3) immediately before
executing the order, a member (other than a specialist in such
security) presenting any order for the account of a member on the
exchange clearly announces or otherwise indicates to the specialist and
to other members then present that he is presenting an order for the
account of a member.
    Without these requirements, it would not be possible for the
Commission to monitor its mandate under the Exchange Act to promote
fair and orderly markets and ensure that exchange members have, as the
principle purpose of their exchange memberships, the conduct of a
public securities business.
    There are approximately 1,000 respondents that require an aggregate
total of 333 hours to comply with this rule. Each of these
approximately 1,000 respondents makes an estimated 20 annual responses,
for an aggregate of 20,000 responses per year. Each response takes
approximately 1 minute to complete. Thus, the total compliance burden
per year is 333 hours (20,000 minutes/60 minutes per hour = 333 hours).
The approximate cost per hour is $100, resulting in a total cost of
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the agency, including whether the information shall
have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the agency's estimates of
the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c) ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    Please direct your written comments to R. Corey Booth, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Office of Information Technology, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549.

    Dated: December 1, 2005.
Jonathan G. Katz,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E5-7099 Filed 12-8-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register: April 13, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 71)]
[Notices]
[Page 19221-19222]
[DOCID:fr13ap06-126]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-53607; File No. SR-BSE-2006-05]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Boston Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Modify the Boston Options
Exchange's Fee Schedule To Impose Surcharge Fees for Transactions in
Options on ETFs on a Retroactive Basis

April 6, 2006.
    Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given
that on March 15, 2006, the Boston Stock Exchange, Inc. (``BSE'' or
``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II,
and III below, which Items have been prepared by the BSE. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The BSE is proposing to retroactively establish certain Boston
Options Exchange (``BOX'') licensing fee surcharges applicable to
broker-dealer proprietary accounts and market maker accounts for trades
in options on certain exchange traded funds (``ETFs''). The Exchange is
proposing to apply these surcharge fees retroactively for each product
as of the Effective Dates listed in Table 1, below, through January 3,
2006. On January 4, 2006, the Exchange filed an identical amendment to
the BOX Fee Schedule,\3\ which became immediately effective under
section 19(b)(3)(A) of the Act.\4\ Because the Exchange seeks to apply
the surcharge fees listed in the BOX Fee Schedule on a retroactive
basis, the Exchange is submitting this proposal to the Commission
pursuant to section 19b(2) of the Act \5\ to be published for notice
and comment. The current BOX Fee Schedule is available on the BOX Web
site at http://www.bostonoptions.com. The text of the proposed rule

change is available on the BOX's Web site, at the principal office of
BOX, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 53454 (March 8,
2006), 71 FR 13439 (March 15, 2006) (SR-BSE-2006-01).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \5\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the BSE included statements
concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The BSE has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A,
B, and C below, of the most significant aspects of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to amend BOX's Fee Schedule to
retroactively establish, from the Effective Dates listed in Table 1
below through January 3, 2006, a surcharge fee for certain transactions
in ETF options on BOX that are affected by market makers and broker-
dealer proprietary accounts.\6\ The respective surcharge fees became
effective on January 4, 2006 pursuant to a previous proposed rule
change submitted by the Exchange.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The surcharge fee for trading in the options listed in
Section 2(c) of the BOX Fee Schedule is equal to the cost charged to
BOX by the licensor in the associated licensing agreement. BSE
represents these fees are only charged to BOX Participants.
    \7\ See supra note 3.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Effective
             Name                    Symbol          Fee         date
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Depository    SPY.............      $0.10      1/10/05
 Receipts.
iShares Russell 2000 Index      IWM.............       0.10       5/2/05
 Fund.
S&P Energy Select Sector SPDR   XLE.............       0.09       6/6/05
 Fund.
iShares Russell 2000 Growth     IWO.............       0.10      6/27/05
 Index Fund.
iShares Nasdaq Biotechnology    IBB.............       0.10      6/27/05
 Index Fund.
S&P Financial Select Sector     XLF.............       0.09      6/27/05
 SPDR Fund.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The BOX Fee Schedule that was in effect when these products started
trading (i.e., on the Effective Dates specified in Table 1 above),
stated in section 2(c) that applicable surcharges applied for options
on ETFs that are passed-through by BOX.\8\ However, in an
administrative oversight, the BSE did not update the list of ETF
products that

BOX added and the amount of the pass-through licensing surcharges BOX
was charging for each product in conjunction with the licensing
agreements. While the BSE should have specifically listed each
individual ETF option product and the associated surcharge fee on the
BOX Fee Schedule, the BSE also believes that, nevertheless, its
Participants were (1) aware that surcharges were applicable for options
on ETFs pursuant to the language in Section 2(c) of the BOX Fee
Schedule; and (2) aware of the specific pass-through licensing
surcharges for each product via their monthly billing statement. The
BSE believes it was open and transparent with its Participants
regarding the applicable surcharges in the above-mentioned products,
notwithstanding the fact that the specific information was not updated
on the BOX Fee Schedule. The Exchange now proposes to extend this
surcharge fee retroactively to all applicable transactions occurring
since, and as of, the Effective Dates listed in Table 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Section 2(c) of the BOX Fee Schedule then stated, as it
currently does: ``Plus, where applicable, any surcharge for options
on ETFs that are passed through by BOX.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the Exchange proposes to amend the BOX Fee Schedule to
clarify the meaning of the current text in section 4(b) (``InterMarket
Linkage'') of the BOX Fee Schedule, which includes an explicit
reference to the surcharge with respect to Inbound P and PA orders that
are billed per contract.\9\ The BSE also proposes that the title of
section 4(b) of the BOX Fee Schedule be changed from ``Per contract,
billed to away market'' to ``Per contract, billed to clearing firm of
away market Member'' to provide more clarity as to which party is
billed. The BSE believes that the new text is not a substantive change
to the BOX Fee Schedule, does not impose any new fees on Linkage
Orders, and is consistent with the Linkage Fee pilot program. The
Exchange notes that Linkage Orders have always been assessed this
surcharge and have been invoiced as such. The Exchange is proposing
these changes to section 4 to clarify the BOX Fee Schedule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Specifically, the Exchange proposes to replace the sentence
``Same as if were BOX Participant'' with ``This charge is the same
as that which is applicable to a BOX Participant under section 2.
These orders are also subject to any additional pass-through
surcharge fees specified in section 2(c), as applicable.'' Telephone
conversation between Bill Meehan, General Counsel, BOX, and Richard
Holley, Special Counsel, Division of Market Regulation, Commission,
on March 28, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposal is consistent with the
requirements of section 6(b) of the Act,\10\ in general, and section
6(b)(4) of the Act,\11\ in particular, in that it is designed to
provide for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its members and issuers and other persons using its
facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \11\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purposes of the Act.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others

    The Exchange has neither solicited nor received comments on the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    Within 35 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period (i) as the Commission may
designate up to 90 days of such date if it finds such longer period to
be appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which BSE consents, the Commission shall:
    (A) By order approve such proposed rule change, or
    (B) Institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml.
); or     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include

File No. SR-BSE-2006-05 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, Station Place, 100 F
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
    All submissions should refer to File Number SR-BSE-2006-05. This
file number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used.
To help the Commission process and review your comments more
efficiently, please use only one method. The Commission will post all
comments on the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml
). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments,

all written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that
are filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating
to the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person,
other than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance
with the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for inspection
and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such
filing also will be available for inspection and copying at the
principal office of the BOX. All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All submissions should refer to
File Number SR-BSE-2006-05 and should be submitted on or before May 4,
2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\12\
J. Lynn Taylor,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-5482 Filed 4-12-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 174 (Thursday, September 8, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62120-62121]
[FR Doc No: 2016-21563]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. OR16-24-000]

Caliber Bear Den Interconnect LLC; Notice of Petition for
Declaratory Order

    Take notice that on August 31, 2016, pursuant to Rule 207(a)(2) of
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.207(a)(2) (2015), Caliber Bear Den
Interconnect LLC (``Caliber''), filed a petition for a declaratory
order concerning Caliber's proposed new interstate crude petroleum
pipeline project, the Caliber Bear Den Interconnection Pipeline.
Caliber request that the Commission declare that the elements of the
proposed project are lawful, all as more fully explained in the
petition.
    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 Petitioner.
    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 5 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 email
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For
assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on September 30, 2016.

    Dated: September 1, 2016.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-21563 Filed 9-7-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 232 (Tuesday, December 3, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66214-66215]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26107]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

[Docket No. USCG-2019-0748]

Collection of Information Under Review by Office of Management
and Budget; OMB Control Number: 1625-0028

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Thirty-day notice requesting comments.

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

SUMMARY: In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 the
U.S. Coast Guard is forwarding an Information Collection Request (ICR),
abstracted below, 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: 1625-028,
Course Approval and Records for Merchant Marine Training Schools;
without change. Our ICR describe the information we seek to collect
from the public. Review and comments by OIRA ensure we only impose
paperwork burdens commensurate with our performance of duties.

DATES: Comments must reach the Coast Guard and OIRA on or before
January 2, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by Coast Guard docket
number [USCG-2019-0748] to the Coast Guard using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. Alternatively, you
may submit comments to OIRA using one of the following means:
    (1) Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    (2) Mail: OIRA, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503, attention
Desk Officer for the Coast Guard.
    (3) Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>. To ensure your comments are received in a
timely manner, mark the fax, attention Desk Officer for the Coast
Guard.
    A copy of the ICR is available through the docket on the internet
at https://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: 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. Consistent with
the requirements of Executive Order 13771, Reducing Regulation and
Controlling Regulatory Costs, and Executive Order 13777, Enforcing the
Regulatory Reform Agenda, the Coast Guard is also requesting comments
on the extent to which this request for information could be modified
to reduce the burden on respondents. These comments will help OIRA
determine whether to approve the ICR referred to in this Notice.
    We encourage you to respond to this request by submitting comments
and related materials. Comments to Coast Guard or OIRA must contain the
OMB Control Number of the ICR. They must also contain the docket number
of this request, [USCG-2019-0748], and must be received by January 2,
2020.

Submitting Comments

    We encourage you to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking
Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. If your material cannot be
submitted using https://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 https://www.regulations.gov and
can be viewed by following that website'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 https://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).
    OIRA posts its decisions on ICRs online at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain after the comment period for each ICR. An OMB Notice
of Action on each ICR will become available via a hyperlink in the OMB
Control Number: 1625-0028.

Previous Request for Comments

    This request provides a 30-day comment period required by OIRA. The
Coast Guard has published the 60-day notice (84 FR 48360, September 13,
2019) required by 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2). That Notice elicited no
comments. Accordingly, no changes have been made to the Collections.

Information Collection Request

    Title: Course Approval and Records for Merchant Marine Training
Schools.
    OMB Control Number: 1625-0028.
    Summary: The information is needed to ensure that merchant marine
training schools meet minimal statutory requirements. The information
is used to approve the curriculum, facility and faculty for these
school.
    Need: Section 7315 of 46 U.S.C. authorizes an applicant for a
license or document to substitute the completion of an approved course
for a portion of the required sea service. Section 10.402 of 46 CFR
contains the Coast Guard regulations for course approval.
    Forms: None.
    Respondents: Merchant marine training schools.
    Frequency: Five years for reporting; one year for recordkeeping.
    Hour Burden Estimate: The estimated burden has increased from
139,807 hours to 145,917 hours a year, due to an increase in the
estimated annual number of responses.

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

    Dated: November 27, 2019.
James D. Roppel,
 Chief, U.S. Coast Guard, Office of Information Management.
[FR Doc. 2019-26107 Filed 12-2-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 62 (Monday, April 3, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16185-16186]
[FR Doc No: 2017-06423]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CD17-10-000]

Hurricane Creek Irrigating Ditch Company; Notice of Preliminary
Determination of a Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility and
Soliciting Comments and Motions To Intervene

    On March 21, 2017, the Hurricane Creek Irrigating Ditch Company,
filed a notice of intent to construct a qualifying conduit hydropower
facility, pursuant to section 30 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), as
amended by section 4 of the Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act of
2013 (HREA). The proposed Hurricane Hydro Station #2 & #4 Project would
have a combined installed capacity of 104 kilowatts (kW), and would be
located along two sections of

an existing irrigation pipeline. The project would be located near the
Town of Joseph in Wallowa County, Oregon.
    Applicant Contact: Kyle Petrocine, 401 NE 1st St., Suite A,
Enterprise, OR 97828 Phone No.<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Robert Bell, Phone No.<PHONE_NUMBER>, email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility Description: The proposed
project would consist of the following two developments:

Hydro Station #2 Development

    A new powerhouse containing one turbine/generating unit with an
installed capacity of 61 kW in the existing 30-inch diameter irrigation
pipeline; and (2) appurtenant facilities. The project will also include
a bypass section through a pressure reducing valve. The proposed
project would have an estimated annual generating capacity of 115,846
kilowatt-hours.

Hydro Station #4 Development

    A new powerhouse containing one turbine/generating unit with an
installed capacity of 43 kW in the existing 20-inch diameter pipeline;
and (2) appurtenant facilities. The project will also include a bypass
section through a pressure reducing valve. The proposed project would
have an estimated annual generating capacity of 98,500 kilowatt-hours.
    A qualifying conduit hydropower facility is one that is determined
or deemed to meet all of the criteria shown in the table below.

      Table 1--Criteria for Qualifying Conduit Hydropower Facility
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Satisfies (Y/
       Statutory provision               Description             N)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FPA 30(a)(3)(A), as amended by    The conduit the facility            Y
 HREA.                             uses is a tunnel,
                                   canal, pipeline,
                                   aqueduct, flume, ditch,
                                   or similar manmade
                                   water conveyance that
                                   is operated for the
                                   distribution of water
                                   for agricultural,
                                   municipal, or
                                   industrial consumption
                                   and not primarily for
                                   the generation of
                                   electricity.
FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(i), as amended    The facility is                     Y
 by HREA.                          constructed, operated,
                                   or maintained for the
                                   generation of electric
                                   power and uses for such
                                   generation only the
                                   hydroelectric potential
                                   of a non-federally
                                   owned conduit.
FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(ii), as amended   The facility has an                 Y
 by HREA.                          installed capacity that
                                   does not exceed 5
                                   megawatts.
FPA 30(a)(3)(C)(iii), as amended  On or before August 9,              Y
 by HREA.                          2013, the facility is
                                   not licensed, or
                                   exempted from the
                                   licensing requirements
                                   of Part I of the FPA.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Preliminary Determination: The proposed addition of the
hydroelectric project along the existing irrigation pipeline will not
alter its primary purpose. Therefore, based upon the above criteria,
Commission staff preliminarily determines that the proposal satisfies
the requirements for a qualifying conduit hydropower facility, which is
not required to be licensed or exempted from licensing.
    Comments and Motions to Intervene: Deadline for filing comments
contesting whether the facility meets the qualifying criteria is 45
days from the issuance date of this notice.
    Deadline for filing motions to intervene is 30 days from the
issuance date of this notice.
    Anyone may submit comments or a motion to intervene in accordance
with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR
385.210 and 385.214. Any motions to intervene must be received on or
before the specified deadline date for the particular proceeding.
    Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: All filings must (1)
bear in all capital letters the ``COMMENTS CONTESTING QUALIFICATION FOR
A CONDUIT HYDROPOWER FACILITY'' or ``MOTION TO INTERVENE,'' as
applicable; (2) state in the heading the name of the applicant and the
project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3)
state the name, address, and telephone number of the person filing; and
(4) otherwise comply with the requirements of sections 385.2001 through
385.2005 of the Commission's regulations.\1\ All comments contesting
Commission staff's preliminary determination that the facility meets
the qualifying criteria must set forth their evidentiary basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 18 CFR 385.2001-2005 (2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
motions to intervene and comments using the Commission's eFiling system
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>(866) 208-3676 (toll free), or
(202) 502-8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper
copy to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. A copy of all other filings in
reference to this application 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.
    Locations of Notice of Intent: Copies of the notice of intent can
be obtained directly from the applicant or such copies can be viewed
and reproduced at the Commission in its Public Reference Room, Room 2A,
888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filing may also be
viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number (i.e., CD17-10) in the
docket number field to access the document. For assistance, call toll-
free 1-866-208-3676 or email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For TTY, call
(202) 502-8659.

    Dated: March 27, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-06423 Filed 3-31-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 5, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 215)]
[Notices]
[Page 65891-65892]
[DOCID:fr05no08-98]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy,
Washington, DC 20549-0213.

Extension:
    Rule 15c2-7; OMB Control No. 3235-0479; SEC File No. 270-420.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the collection of
information summarized below. The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget for extension and approval.
    Rule 15c2-7 (17 CFR 240.15c2-7) places disclosure requirements on
broker-dealers who have correspondent relationships, or agreements
identified in the rule, with other broker-dealers. Whenever any such
broker-dealer enters a quotation for a security through an inter-dealer
quotation system, Rule 15c2-7 requires the broker-dealer to disclose
these relationships and agreements in the manner required by the rule.
The inter-dealer quotation system must also be able to make these
disclosures public in association with the quotation the broker-dealer
is making.
    When rule 15c2-7 was adopted in 1964, the information it requires
was necessary for execution of the Commission's mandate under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to prevent fraudulent, manipulative and
deceptive acts by broker-dealers. In the absence of the information
collection required under Rule 15c2-7, investors and broker-dealers
would have been unable to accurately determine the market depth of, and
demand for, securities in an inter-dealer quotation system.
    There are approximately 5,808 broker-dealers registered with the
Commission. Any of these broker-dealers could be potential respondents
for Rule 15c2-7, so the Commission is using that figure to represent
the number of respondents. Rule 15c2-7 applies only to quotations
entered into an inter-dealer quotation system, such as the OTC Bulletin
Board (``OTCBB''), or Pink Sheets, operated by Pink OTC Markets, Inc.
According to representatives of both Pink Sheets and the OTCBB, neither
entity has recently received, or anticipates receiving any

Rule 15c2-7 notices. However, because such notices could be made, the
Commission estimates that one filing is made annually pursuant to Rule
15c2-7.
    Based on prior industry reports, the Commission estimates that the
average time required to enter a disclosure pursuant to the rule is .75
minutes, or 45 seconds. The Commission sees no reason to change this
estimate. We estimate that impacted respondents spend a total of .0125
hours per year to comply with the requirements of Rule 15c2-7 (1 notice
(x) 45 seconds/notice). The Commission estimates that a typical
employee of a broker-dealer charged to ensure compliance with
Commission regulations receives annual compensation of $128,960. This
compensation is the equivalent of $62.00 per hour ($128,960 divided by
2,080 payroll hours per year). Thus, the Commission estimates that the
annual cost burden for compliance with Rule 15c2-7 is $0.78 ($62.00/
hour multiplied by 0.0125 hours).
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a current
and valid control number. Written comments are invited regarding: (a)
Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the
proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether
the information will have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the
agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information
collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of collecting
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    Please direct your comments to Lewis W. Welker, Acting Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o
Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312 or send
an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
Florence E. Harmon,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-26389 Filed 11-4-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 164 (Friday, August 25, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40618-40619]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18010]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Agency Information Collection Activities: Requests for Comments;
Clearance of Renewed Approval of Information Collection: Noise
Certification Standards for Subsonic Jet Airplanes and Subsonic
Transport Category Large Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice and request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, FAA
invites public comments about our intention to request the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) approval to renew a previously approved
information collection. The information collected is needed for
applicants' noise certification compliance reports in order to
demonstrate compliance.

DATES: Written comments should be submitted by September 25, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit written comments on
the proposed information collection to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget. Comments should be
addressed to the attention of the Desk Officer, Department of
Transportation/FAA, and sent via electronic mail to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or faxed to<PHONE_NUMBER>, or mailed to
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management
and Budget, Docket Library, Room 10102, 725 17th Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20503.
    Public Comments Invited: You are asked to comment on any aspect of
this information collection, including (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for FAA's performance; (b) the
accuracy of the estimated burden; (c) ways for FAA to enhance the
quality, utility and clarity of the information collection; and (d)
ways that the burden could be minimized without reducing the quality of
the collected information. The agency will summarize and/or include
your comments in the request for OMB's clearance of this information
collection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Hall at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    OMB Control Number: 2120-0659.
    Title: Noise Certification Standards for Subsonic Jet Airplanes and
Subsonic Transport Category Large Airplanes.

    Form Numbers: There are no FAA forms associated with this
collection.
    Type of Review: Renewal of an information collection.
    Background: The Federal Register Notice with a 60-day comment
period soliciting comments on the following collection of information
was published on June 19, 2017 (82 FR 27946). There were no comments.
The information collected is needed for applicants' noise certification
compliance reports in order to demonstrate compliance with 14 CFR part
36, which is implemented under the Aircraft Noise Abatement Act of
1968. An applicant's collected information is incorporated into a noise
compliance report that is provided to and approved by the FAA. The
noise compliance report is used by the FAA in making a finding that the
airplane is in compliance with regulations.
    Respondents: Approximately 10 applicants annually.
    Frequency: On occasion.
    Estimated Average Burden per Response: 135 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden: 1,350 hours.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on August 21, 2017.
Ronda L. Thompson,
FAA Information Collection Clearance Officer, Performance, Policy &
Records Management Branch, ASP-110.
[FR Doc. 2017-18010 Filed 8-24-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 119 (Monday, June 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35690-35691]
[FR Doc No: 2015-15173]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

Upon Written Request, Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of FOIA Services, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC
20549-2736.

Extension:
    Rule 17f-1(b), SEC File No. 270-28, OMB Control No. 3235-0032.

    Notice is hereby given that pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) (``PRA''), the Securities and Exchange
Commission (``Commission'') is soliciting comments on the existing
collection of information provided for in Rule 17f-1(b) (17 CFR
240.17f-1(b)) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78a
et seq.) (``Exchange Act''). The Commission plans to submit this
existing collection of information to the Office of Management and
Budget (``OMB'') for extension and approval.
    Rule 17f-1(b) under the Exchange Act requires approximately 15,517
entities in the securities industry to register in the Lost and Stolen
Securities Program (``Program''). Registration fulfills a statutory
requirement that entities report and inquire about missing, lost,
counterfeit, or stolen securities. Registration also allows entities in
the securities industry to gain access to a confidential database that
stores information for the Program.
    The Commission staff estimates that 10 new entities will register
in the Program each year. The staff estimates that the average number
of hours necessary to comply with Rule 17f-1(b)

is one-half hour. Accordingly, the staff estimates that total annual
burden for all participants is 5 hours (10 x one-half hour). The
Commission staff estimates that compliance staff work at subject
entities results in an internal cost of compliance, at an estimated
hourly wage of $283, of $141.50 per year per entity (.5 hours x $283
per hour = $141.50 per year). Therefore, the aggregate annual internal
cost of compliance is approximately $1,415 ($141.50 x 10= $1,415).
    Written comments are invited on: (a) Whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of
the functions of the Commission, including whether the information
shall have practical utility; (b) the accuracy of the Commission's
estimates of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (c)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and (d) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of
information on respondents, including through the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
Consideration will be given to comments and suggestions submitted in
writing within 60 days of this publication.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required
to respond to, a collection of information under the PRA unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control number.
    Please direct your written comments to: Pamela Dyson, Director/
Chief Information Officer, Securities and Exchange Commission, c/o Remi
Pavlik-Simon, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549, or send an email
to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
    Dated: June 16, 2015.
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-15173 Filed 6-19-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


40732 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 114 / Thursday, June 13, 2002 / Notices TABLE 1.— REGISTRATIONS WITH REQUESTS FOR AMENDMENTS TO DELETE USES IN CERTAIN PESTICIDE REGISTRATIONS— Continued Registration no. Product Chemical Name Delete From Label 067760– 00044 Dimethoate 4 E Dimethoate Residential and housefly uses 068156– 00004 Dintec HFP Trifluralin Trifluralin Rapeseed EPA company numbers 000264, 002217, 040083, 042750 and 067760 have requested a 30– day comment period for registrations listed.

Users of these products who desire continued use on crops or sites being deleted should contact the applicable registrant listed in Table 2 below before December 10, 2002, to discuss withdrawal of the application for amendment. This 180– day period will also permit interested members of the public to intercede with registrants prior to the Agency's approval of the deletion. Table 2 includes the names and addresses of record for all registrants of the products in Table 1, in sequence by EPA company number.

TABLE 2.— REGISTRANTS REQUESTING VOLUNTARY CANCELLATION EPA Company no. Company Name and Address 000264 Aventis Cropscience USA LP, 2 T. W. Alexander Drive Box 12014, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.

001386 Universal Cooperatives Inc., 1300 Corporate Center Curve, Eagan, MN 55121.

002217 PBI/ Gordon Corp., Attn: Craig Martens, Box 014090, Kansas City, MO 64101.

008660 Earth Care, Division of United Industries Corporatio, Box 142642, St. Louis, MO 63114.

010163 Gowan Co., Box 5569, Yuma, AZ 85366.

040083 Inquinosa Internacional, S. A., Paseo De La Castellance, 123, 9 B, 28046 Mardr, .

042750 Pyxis Regulatory Consulting, Agent For: Albaugh Inc., 11324 17th Ave. Ct. NW, Gig Harbor, WA 98332.

062719 Dow AgroSciences LLC, 9330 Zionsville Rd 308/ 2E225, Indianapolis, IN 46268.

067760 Cheminova Inc., Oak Hill Park 1700 Route 23  Ste 210, Wayne, NJ 07470.

068156 Dintec Agrichemicals, 9330 Zionsville Rd, Indianapolis, IN 46268.

III. What is the Agency Authority for Taking This Action?

Section 6( f)( 1) of FIFRA provides that a registrant of a pesticide product may at any time request that any of its pesticide registrations be amended to delete one or more uses. The Act further provides that, before acting on the request, EPA must publish a notice of receipt of any such request in the Federal Register. Thereafter, the Administrator may approve such a request.

IV. Procedures for Withdrawal of Request Registrants who choose to withdraw a request for use deletion must submit such withdrawal in writing to James A. Hollins, at the address under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, postmarked on or before December 10, 2002.

V. Provisions for Disposition of Existing Stocks The Agency has authorized the registrants to sell or distribute product under the previously approved labeling for a period of 18 months after approval of the revision, unless other restrictions have been imposed, as in special review actions.

List of Subjects Environmental protection, Pesticides and pests.

Dated: May 29, 2002. Linda Vlier Moos, Acting Director, Information Resources and Services Division. [FR Doc. 02– 14997 Filed 6– 12– 02; 8: 45 a. m.]

BILLING CODE 6560– 50– S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [OPP– 2002– 0069; FRL– 7177– 9]

Methodology for Lower Toxicity Pesticide Chemicals; Notice of Availability AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: EPA is soliciting comments on a document entitled `` Methodology for Determining the Data Needed and the Types of Assessments Necessary to Make FFDCA Section 408 Safety Determinations for Lower Toxicity Pesticide Chemicals. '' Interested parties may request a copy of the Agency's proposed guidance document as set forth in Unit IB of this Notice.

DATES: Comments, identified by docket ID number OPP– 2002– 0069, must be received on or before September 11, 2002.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by mail, electronically, or in person. Please follow the detailed instructions for each method as provided in Unit I. of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you identify docket ID number OPP– 2002– 0069 in the subject line on the first page of your response.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathryn Boyle, Registration Division (7505C), Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 VerDate jun< 06> 2002 18: 18 Jun 12, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 13JNN1. SGM pfrm15 PsN: 13JNN1 40733 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 114 / Thursday, June 13, 2002 / Notices Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 703– 305– 6304; fax number: 703– 305– 0599; e mail address: boyle. kathryn@ epa. gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information A. Does this Action Apply to Me? This action is directed to the public in general. This action may, however, be of interest to those persons who are or may be required to conduct testing of chemical substances  under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), or the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). Since other entities may also be interested, the Agency has not attempted to describe all the specific entities that may be affected by this action. If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. How Can I Get Additional Information, Including Copies of this Document and Other Related Documents?

1. Electronically. You may obtain electronic copies of this document, and certain other related documents that might be available electronically, from the EPA Internet Home Page at http:// www. epa. gov/. To access this document, on the Home Page select `` Laws and Regulations, '' `` Regulations and Proposed Rules, '' and then look up the entry for this document under the `` Federal Register''— Environmental Documents. You can also go directly to the Federal Register listings at http:// www. epa. gov/ fedrgstr/. 2. In person. The Agency has established an official record for this action under docket ID number OPP– 2002– 0069. The official record consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, any public comments received during an applicable comment period, and other information related to this action, including any information claimed as Confidential Business Information (CBI). This official record includes the documents that are physically located in the docket, as well as the documents that are referenced in those documents. The public version of the official record does not include any information claimed as CBI. The public version of the official record, which includes printed, paper versions of any electronic comments submitted during an applicable comment period, is available for inspection in the Public Information and Records Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA, from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The PIRIB telephone number is (703) 305– 5805.

C. How and to Whom Do I Submit Comments? You may submit comments through the mail, in person, or electronically. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, it is imperative that you identify docket control number OPP– 2002– 0069 in the subject line on the first page of your response. 1. By mail. Submit your comments to: PIRIB, Information Resources and Services Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460. 2. In person or by courier. Deliver your comments to: PIRIB Information Resources and Services Division (7502C), Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP), Environmental Protection Agency, Rm. 119, Crystal Mall #2, 1921 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Arlington, VA. The PIRIB is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The PIRIB telephone number is (703) 305– 5805. 3. Electronically. You may submit your comments electronically by e mail to: opp docket@ epa. gov, or you can submit a computer disk as described in this unit. Do not submit any information electronically that you consider to be CBI. Avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect 6.1/ 8.0 or ASCII file format. All comments in electronic form must be identified by docket ID number OPP– 2002– 0069. Electronic comments may also be filed online at many Federal Depository Libraries.

D. How Should I Handle CBI that I Want to Submit to the Agency? Do not submit any information electronically that you consider to be CBI. You may claim information that you submit to EPA in response to this document as CBI by marking any part or all of that information as CBI. Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public version of the official record. Information not marked confidential will be included in the public version of the official record without prior notice. If you have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?

You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your comments: 1. Explain your views as clearly as possible. 2. Describe any assumptions that you used. 3. Provide copies of any technical information and/ or data you used that support your views. 4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you arrived at the estimate that you provide. 5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns. 6. Offer alternative ways to improve the notice or collection activity. 7. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline in this notice. 8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal Register citation.

II. What Action is the Agency Taking?

The Agency is announcing the availability of a methodology for assessing the hazards and risks of lower toxicity pesticide chemicals for public comment and review. This paper describes how lower toxicity pesticide chemicals, including inert ingredients, would be evaluated for use in pesticide products. The OPP is the Office within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency) that evaluates pesticide products. OPP's responsibilities (all of which could be affected by the use of this new methodology) include: registration of new active ingredients, reregistration of older active ingredients, reassessment of both tolerances and tolerances exemptions, approval of new inert ingredients, and list reclassification of inert ingredients. Development of this methodology began as a result of OPP's need to (1) develop a new methodology for assessing inert ingredients to comply with the requirements of the Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA) of 1996 which amended both the FFDCA and the FIFRA, and (2) to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the inert review process. In many instances, a chemical can be used as an inert ingredient in some pesticide products and as an active ingredient in other VerDate May< 23> 2002 14: 07 Jun 12, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 13JNN1. SGM pfrm17 PsN: 13JNN1 40734 Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 114 / Thursday, June 13, 2002 / Notices pesticide products. Since FFDCA section 408 makes no distinction between active and inert ingredients of a pesticide product, EPA may use this tiered data screening methodology when evaluating any pesticide chemical of apparent low or low/ moderate toxicity, regardless of whether it might be characterized as an active or inert ingredient. At this time, EPA has completed review of two tolerance exemption petitions and over 200 tolerance reassessments for low or low/ moderate toxicity chemicals using essentially the process described in this paper. More reviews are underway. Based on these experiences, OPP intends to continue its chemical by chemical reviews of pesticide chemicals according to the process described herein for the foreseeable future. However, EPA remains interested in further improvements in the efficiency and reliability of its process, and therefore welcomes comments from interested persons. After evaluating several alternatives, OPP believes that a screening methodology is the most appropriate way to handle the variety of hazard and exposure issues posed by inert ingredients. This screening methodology will allow OPP to make decisions in a streamlined manner for low or low/ moderate toxicity chemical substances. By being able to quickly review and approve the use of these chemical substances, more low or low/ moderate toxicity chemical substances will be available for use in pesticide products. OPP will also be able to focus its resources on those chemical substances of potentially higher toxicity requiring in depth evaluation. OPP has incorporated elements of a tiered data approach into this methodology. For these lower toxicity chemicals, OPP would use existing information on the hazard potential (both human health and ecological) of a chemical substance as the basis for deciding if additional data are needed to support the use of the chemical. The hazard potential  the toxicity  is the driving force in determining tier placement. Chemical substances that are of low or low/ moderate toxicity may be appropriately placed in a lower tier, with fewer data needed to make the safety finding. Chemicals of higher toxicity that can not be appropriately addressed in the lower tiers would be evaluated in a manner substantially similar to that of an active ingredient. The process described in this paper has three tiers, with the first tier being subdivided into Tiers 1a and 1b. The process begins with a preliminary Tier determination that is based on widely available information on chemical families and categories which includes the hazards associated with these chemicals. Later as the Agency begins to review chemical specific or surrogate information in the open literature, the preliminary Tier determination may be revised. The methodology is intended to provide guidance to EPA personnel and decision makers, and to pesticide registrants. The policies and process described in this methodology are not binding on either EPA or pesticide registrants, and EPA may modify or disregard the process described herein where circumstances warrant and without prior notice. Likewise, pesticide registrants may assert that this process is not appropriate generally or not applicable to a specific pesticide chemical or situation.

III. Questions/ Issues for Public Comment   A significant challenge faced in developing a methodology for a comprehensive assessment program for chemicals of low or low/ moderate toxicity is determining the most appropriate procedure for evaluating such a diverse group of substances, with a very wide range of physical/ chemical characteristics. Does the screening approach as described in the methodology paper reflect a workable, logical approach?   It is likely that a large percentage of inert ingredients are not likely to be of significant toxicological concern. The Agency's expectation is that on the order of 50% of inert ingredients would be of low or low/ moderate risk. At the same time, EPA must be able to identify problematic inert ingredients and then have the resources to take appropriate action to analyze and reduce these risks. Would this methodology give the Agency the necessary flexibility while allowing for an effficient and productive process?   Several sources for credible, scientifically valid chemical information are given in the policy paper. What other possible sources of readily available credible, scientifically valid chemical information are available?   The Agency has described, as best possible at this beginning stage, the process that would be used to evaluate inert ingredients as well as the role played by a petitioner for a tolerance or tolerance exemption or those seeking to support a chemical during tolerance reassessment. What additional information would be helpful to the regulated community? List of Subjects Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure, Agricultural commodities, Pesticides and pests.

Dated: June 7, 2002. Marcia E. Mulkey, Director, Office of Pesticide Programs. [FR Doc. 02– 14996 Filed 6– 12– 02; 8: 45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560– 50– S ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [FRL– 7230– 6]

Persistent Organic Pollutants AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of availability.

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of a final technical report titled, The Foundation for Global Action on Persistent Organic Pollutants: A United States Perspective (EPA/ 600/ P– 01/ 003F, March 2002), which was prepared by the Office of Research and Development's (ORD) National Center for Environmental Assessment (NCEA). The purpose of this report is to inform decision makers, general academia, and the public on the scientific foundation and relevance to the United States of the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs).

ADDRESSES: The document is available electronically on NCEA's Web site at www. epa. gov/ ncea, under the What's New or Publications menus. The CD– ROM version and a limited number of paper copies will be available shortly from the EPA's National Service Center for Environmental Publications (NSCEP), PO Box 42419, Cincinnati, OH 45242; telephone: 1– 800– 490– 9198 or 513– 489– 8190; facsimile: 513– 489– 8695. Please provide your name and mailing address and the title and EPA number of the requested publication.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information on The Foundation for Global Action on Persistent Organic Pollutants: A United States Perspective, please contact Dr. Bruce Rodan, National Center for Environmental Assessment (8601D), U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; Telephone: 202– 564– 3329; facsimile: (202) 565– 0090; e mail: rodan. bruce@ epa. gov; or the Technical Information Staff, National Center for Environmental Assessment/ Washington Office (8623D), U. S. Environmental Protection Agency,

VerDate May< 23> 2002 14: 07 Jun 12, 2002 Jkt 197001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\ FR\ FM\ 13JNN1. SGM pfrm17 PsN: 13JNN1


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 172 (Friday, September 5, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 52958-52960]
[FR Doc No: 2014-21209]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Bureau of Industry and Security

15 CFR Parts 738, 740, 742, 744, 772, and 774

[FR Doc. 2014-18064]
RIN 0694-AD58

Implementation of Understandings Reached at the 2005, 2012, and
2013 Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) Plenary Meetings and a 2009 NSG
Intersessional Decision; Additions to the List of NSG Participating
Countries; Correction

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: The Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) published a final
rule in the Federal Register on Thursday, August 7, 2014 (79 FR 46316),
that amended the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to implement
the understandings reached at the 2005, 2012, and 2013 Nuclear
Suppliers Group (NSG) Plenary meetings. That final rule also amended
the EAR to implement a decision adopted under the NSG intersessional
silent approval procedures, in December 2009, and to reflect the status
of Croatia, Estonia, Iceland, Lithuania, Malta, Mexico, and Serbia as
participating countries in the NSG. In that final rule, the amendatory
instruction for the EAR supplement that lists ``Country Groups''
contained an error with respect to Mexico. In addition, the amendments
to Export Control Classification Number (ECCN) 6A203 in the August 7,
2014, final rule inadvertently omitted the controls that apply to
certain radiation-hardened TV cameras and lenses therefor. This
document amends the EAR to correct these errors.
    Finally, the contact information in the preamble of the August 7,
2014, NSG Plenary rule contained an incorrect telephone number and the
saving clause in the preamble omitted specific instructions concerning
certain items newly controlled under ECCN 3A225. This document amends
the preamble of the August 7, 2014, NSG Plenary rule to correct these
errors.

DATES: This rule is effective September 5, 2014, and the corrections
herein are applicable beginning August 7, 2014.

ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding this collection of information,
including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Jasmeet Seehra,
Office of Management and Budget (OMB), by email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or by fax to (202) 395-
7285; and to the Regulatory Policy Division, Bureau of Industry and
Security, Department of Commerce, 14th Street & Pennsylvania Avenue
NW., Room 2705, Washington, DC 20230.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Clagett, Director, Nuclear and
Missile Technology Controls Division, Office of Nonproliferation and
Treaty Compliance, Bureau of Industry and Security, Telephone: (202)
482-1641.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 7, 2014, the final rule titled
``Implementation of Understandings Reached at the 2005, 2012, and 2013
Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) Plenary Meetings and a 2009 NSG
Intersessional Decision; Additions to the List of NSG Participating
Countries'' was published in the Federal Register (79 FR 46316). That
final rule contained certain errors and omissions, which are described
below. This final rule amends the preamble of the August 7, 2014, final
rule and the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to correct these
errors and omissions.

Technical Amendments to the Preamble of the August 7, 2014, NSG Plenary
Rule

    Update to Contact Information.
    The preamble of the August 7, 2014, final rule contained an
incorrect telephone number under the contact information for Steven
Clagett, Director, Nuclear and Missile Technology Controls Division,
Office of Nonproliferation and Treaty Compliance, Bureau of Industry
and Security. This document correctly identifies the telephone number
as:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Extension of Saving Clause provisions for certain ECCN 3A225 items.
    The preamble of the August 7, 2014, final rule omitted from the
Saving Clause specific instructions concerning certain items that were
added to ECCN 3A225 by the rule. This document amends the Saving Clause
by adding a new paragraph, immediately following the first paragraph,
to provide specific instructions for exports and reexports of these
ECCN 3A225 items. This amendment will provide industry with additional
time in which to adjust their export control programs to the new export
licensing requirements that resulted from the removal of the ``harmonic
distortion parameter'' that was in ECCN 3A225.c prior to August 7,
2014. The removal of this parameter resulted in adding to ECCN 3A225 a
whole class of widely used and distributed industrial equipment that

was previously EAR99. Please note that all other EAR license
requirements and prohibitions affecting these items continue to apply
(e.g., the end-user/end-use based controls described in part 744 of the
EAR and the embargoes and other special controls described in part 746
of the EAR).
    As amended by this final rule, the Saving Clause for the August 7,
2014, NSG Plenary rule now reads as follows (note that the ``regulatory
action'' referred to, therein, is the August 7, 2014, NSG Plenary rule
and not this final rule).

    Except for ECCN 3A225 items (described below) that were
classified as EAR99 prior to the effective date of this rule,
shipments of items removed from eligibility for export or reexport
under a license exception or without a license (i.e., under the
designator ``NLR'') as a result of this regulatory action that were
on dock for loading, on lighter, laden aboard an exporting carrier,
or en route aboard a carrier to a port of export, on September 8,
2014, pursuant to actual orders for export or reexport to a foreign
destination, may proceed to that destination under the previously
applicable license exception or without a license (NLR) so long as
they are exported or reexported before September 22, 2014. Any such
items not actually exported or reexported before midnight, on
September 22, 2014, require a license in accordance with this
regulation.
    Shipments of those ECCN 3A255 items removed from eligibility for
export or reexport under a license exception or without a license
(i.e., under the designator ``NLR'') as a result of this regulatory
action (specifically, the removal of the ``harmonic distortion
parameter'' that was in ECCN 3A225.c prior to August 7, 2014) that
were on dock for loading, on lighter, laden aboard an exporting
carrier, or en route aboard a carrier to a port of export, on
February 9, 2015, pursuant to actual orders for export or reexport
to a foreign destination, may proceed to that destination under the
previously applicable license exception or without a license (NLR)
so long as they are exported or reexported before February 23, 2015.
Any such items not actually exported or reexported before midnight,
on February 23, 2015, require a license in accordance with the
license requirements specified in ECCN 3A225.
    ``Deemed'' exports of ``technology'' and ``source code'' removed
from eligibility for export under a license exception or without a
license (under the designator ``NLR'') as a result of this
regulatory action may continue to be made under the previously
available license exception or without a license (NLR) before
November 5, 2014. Beginning at midnight on November 5, 2014, such
``technology'' and ``source code'' may no longer be released,
without a license, to a foreign national subject to the ``deemed''
export controls in the EAR when a license would be required to the
home country of the foreign national in accordance with this
regulation.

Amendments to the EAR to Correct Errors in the August 7, 2014, NSG
Plenary Rule

    Addition of Mexico to Country Group A:4.
    The August 7, 2014, final rule contained an error in the amendatory
instruction for Supplement No. 1 to part 740 of the Export
Administration Regulations (EAR). The amendatory instruction stated
that the country, Mexico, was being added to Country Group A when, in
fact, it should have indicated that the existing Country Group A entry
for Mexico was being revised to include Mexico in Country Group A:4
(Nuclear Suppliers Group). At the time that BIS's August 7, 2014, final
rule was published, Mexico was already listed in Country Group A
(specifically, under Country Group A:3--Australia Group), as a result
of an amendment contained in a final rule that BIS published on March
26, 2014 (79 FR 16664).
    As a result of the amendment made by this final rule, Supplement
No. 1 to part 740 of the EAR now lists Mexico under both Country Group
A:3 (Australia Group) and Country Group A:4 (Nuclear Suppliers Group).
With the addition of Croatia, Estonia, Iceland, Lithuania, Malta and
Serbia to Country Group A:4 (by the August 7, 2014, final rule) and
Mexico (by this final rule), all of the countries whose governments
participate in the NSG, except the People's Republic of China, are now
listed in Country Group A:4.
    Control of Radiation-hardened TV cameras under ECCN 6A203.
    The August 7, 2014, final rule also inadvertently omitted intended
control language from the amendments to Export Control Classification
Number (ECCN) 6A203. Specifically, the August 7, 2014, final rule
inadvertently omitted from the List of Items Controlled under ECCN
6A203 certain radiation-hardened TV cameras and lenses therefor that
were controlled under ECCN 6A203.c prior to the amendments made by that
final rule. This final rule amends ECCN 6A203 to add these items under
a new paragraph .d. In addition, this rule adds a related Technical
Note immediately following ECCN 6A203.d. As a result of this amendment,
ECCN 6A203.d controls ``radiation-hardened TV cameras, or lenses
therefor, `specially designed' or rated as radiation hardened to
withstand a total radiation dose greater than 50 x 10\4\ Gy (silicon)
without operational degradation.''

Rulemaking Requirements

    1. Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive
Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    2. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is
required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty
for failure to comply with, a collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et
seq.) (PRA), unless that collection of information displays a currently
valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Control Number. This rule
contains a collection of information subject to the requirements of the
PRA. This collection has been approved by OMB under Control Number
0694-0088 (Multi-Purpose Application), which carries a burden hour
estimate of 58 minutes to prepare and submit form BIS-748. Send
comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this
collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the
burden, to Jasmeet Seehra, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and
to the Regulatory Policy Division, Bureau of Industry and Security,
Department of Commerce, as indicated in the ADDRESSES section of this
rule.
    3. This rule does not contain policies with Federalism implications
as that term is defined in Executive Order 13132.
    4. The provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C.
553) requiring notice of proposed rulemaking, the opportunity for
public participation, and a delay in effective date, are inapplicable
because this regulation involves a military and foreign affairs
function of the United States (See 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1)). The changes
contained in this rule are technical amendments of a previously
published rule that has already been exempted from notice and comment
and delay in effective date provisions, because the content of the
August 7, 2014, final rule involves a military and foreign affairs
function of the United States (5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1)). The amendments
contained in this final rule are essential to ensuring the accurate and
complete implementation of the

August 7, 2014, final rule. Therefore, this regulation is issued in
final form.
    Further, no other law requires that a notice of proposed rulemaking
and an opportunity for public comment be given for this final rule.
Because a notice of proposed rulemaking and an opportunity for public
comment are not required to be given for this rule under the
Administrative Procedure Act or by any other law, the analytical
requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
are not applicable. Therefore, no regulatory flexibility analysis is
required and none has been prepared.

List of Subjects

15 CFR Part 740

    Administrative practice and procedure, Exports, Foreign trade,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

15 CFR Part 774

    Exports, Foreign trade, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, parts 740 and 774 of the
Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR parts 730-774) are amended by
making the following correcting amendments.

PART 740--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for 15 CFR Part 740 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
22 U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR, 1996 Comp.,
p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p. 783; Notice
of August 7, 2014, 79 FR 46959 (August 11, 2014).

0
2. In Supplement No. 1 to Part 740, Country Groups, Country Group A is
amended by revising the entry for ``Mexico'' to read as follows:

                                   Supplement No. 1 to Part 740--Country Groups
                                                [Country group A]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               [A:2] Missile
              Country                 [A:1]     technology    [A:3] Australia   [A:4] Nuclear    [A:5]    [A:6]
                                              control regime       group       suppliers group
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Mexico.............................  .......  ..............               X                X   .......  .......

                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 774--[AMENDED]

0
3. The authority citation for 15 CFR Part 774 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority: 50 U.S.C. app. 2401 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.;
10 U.S.C. 7420; 10 U.S.C. 7430(e); 22 U.S.C. 287c, 22 U.S.C. 3201 et
seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6004; 30 U.S.C. 185(s), 185(u); 42 U.S.C. 2139a; 42
U.S.C. 6212; 43 U.S.C. 1354; 15 U.S.C. 1824a; 50 U.S.C. app. 5; 22
U.S.C. 7201 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 7210; E.O. 13026, 61 FR 58767, 3 CFR,
1996 Comp., p. 228; E.O. 13222, 66 FR 44025, 3 CFR, 2001 Comp., p.
783; Notice of August 7, 2014, 79 FR 46959 (August 11, 2014).

0
4. In Supplement No. 1 to Part 774 (the Commerce Control List),
Category 6 Sensors and Lasers, ECCN 6A203 is amended by adding a new
paragraph .d and a Technical Note at the end of the ``Items''
paragraph, under the List of Items Controlled section, to read as
follows:

Supplement No. 1 to Part 774--The Commerce Control List

* * * * *
6A203 High-speed cameras, imaging devices and ``components''
therefor, other than those controlled by 6A003 (see List of Items
Controlled).
* * * * *

List of Items Controlled

    Related Controls: * * *
    Related Definitions: * * *
    Items:
* * * * *
    d. Radiation-hardened TV cameras, or lenses therefor,
``specially designed'' or rated as radiation hardened to withstand a
total radiation dose greater than 50 x 10\4\ Gy (silicon) without
operational degradation.

    Technical Note: The term Gy (silicon) refers to the energy in
Joules per kilogram absorbed by an unshielded silicon sample when
exposed to ionizing radiation.

* * * * *

Kevin J. Wolf,
Assistant Secretary for Export Administration.
[FR Doc. 2014-21209 Filed 9-4-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-33-P


[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 102 (Friday, May 29, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25728-25729]
[FR Doc No: E9-12437]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AD09-7-000]

Material Changes in Facts Underlying Waiver of Order No. 889 and
Part 358 of the Commission's Regulations; Order Clarifying Requirement
To Notify Commission of Material Changes in Facts and Allowing 45-Day
Filing Period for Notifications

Issued May 21, 2009.

    Before Commissioners: Jon Wellinghoff, Chairman; Suedeen G.
Kelly, Marc Spitzer, and Philip D. Moeller

    1. In Order No. 889,\1\ the Commission directed all public
utilities that own, control or operate facilities for transmitting
energy in interstate commerce to provide certain types of information
regarding their transmission operations on an Open Access Same-time
Information System (OASIS). The Commission also established Standards
of Conduct requiring that personnel engaged in transmission system
operations function independently from personnel engaged in marketing
functions. In Order No. 889, the Commission stated that it would
entertain requests for waiver of these requirements on a case-by-case
basis, and, on a case-by-case basis has granted waivers for certain
public utilities.\2\ The Commission subsequently revised the Standards
of Conduct in various proceedings, most recently in Order No. 717, but
affirmed that public utilities may request a waiver of those
requirements.\3\ In Order No. 717, the Commission found that any entity
that has previously received a full or partial waiver of prior versions
of the Standards of Conduct may continue to rely on that waiver.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Open Access Same-Time Information System and Standards of
Conduct, Order No. 889, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,035 (1996), order
on reh'g, Order No. 889-A, FERC Stats & Regs. ] 31,049, reh'g
denied, Order No. 889-B, 81 FERC ] 61,253 (1997).
    \2\ See, e.g., Black Creek Hydro, Inc., 77 FERC ] 61,232 (1996)
(Black Creek).
    \3\ See Standards of Conduct for Transmission Providers, Order
No. 717, 73 FR 63796 (Oct. 27, 2008), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31, 280,
at P 33 (2008), reh'g pending. The Standards of Conduct are
currently codified in Part 358 of the Commission's regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. It has come to the Commission's attention that some utilities
may continue to rely on these waivers even after they no longer qualify
for them. The purpose of this order is to clarify that such reliance is
inappropriate if there is a material change in the underlying facts on
which the waiver was granted, and that the Commission must be notified
when such a change occurs.

Background

    3. In Order No. 889, the Commission acknowledged that it might be
burdensome for certain small utilities to comply with the rules
therein, and stated that utilities may seek a waiver of some or all of
the requirements.\4\ In subsequent orders outside of that rulemaking
proceeding, the Commission established criteria for granting requests
for waiver. The Commission held that waiver of Order No. 889 would be
appropriate for a public utility if it: (1) Owns, operates, or controls
only limited and discrete facilities; or (2) qualifies as a small
public utility, unless it is a member of a tight power pool, or there
are other circumstances that indicate a waiver is not justified.\5\ To
qualify as a small public utility, an applicant ``must be a public
utility that meets the Small Business Administration (SBA)

definition of a small electric utility, i.e., disposes of no more that
4 million MWh annually.'' \6\ In determining the amount of electricity
a public utility ``disposes of,'' the Commission has considered the
annual sales of the public utility in megawatt hours.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Order No. 889, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,035 at 31,594.
    \5\ Black Creek, 77 FERC at 61,941; Central Minnesota Municipal
Power Agency, 79 FERC ] 61,260, at 62,126-27 (1997) (Central
Minnesota). See also Order No. 717, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,280 at
P 23.
    \6\ Black Creek, 77 FERC at 61,941.
    \7\ The Commission, for example, identified the number of small
public utilities that would be affected by open access and OASIS
reforms by reference to sales data reported in FERC Form No. 1. See
Order No. 889, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,035 at 31,628. In Order No.
717, the Commission clarified that public utilities that have
received a full or partial waiver of the Standards of Conduct could
continue to rely on those waivers to the extent the reforms adopted
therein did not render such waivers moot. See Order No. 717, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,280 at P 33.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. The Commission articulated similar criteria for evaluating
requests for waiver of open access requirements adopted in Order No.
888.\8\ In orders granting waivers of Order No. 889, the Commission has
not explicitly stated what would happen if the facts upon which the
Commission relied when granting the waiver changed. Orders granting
waiver of Order No. 889 or Standards of Conduct requirements generally
have been silent on any obligation for the public utility to notify the
Commission of material changes in fact that might affect the waiver.\9\
Instead, those orders provide that such waivers remain effective until
the Commission takes action in response to a complaint alleging
inadequate access to transmission information or use of transmission
information to unfairly benefit a utility's sales, even if material
changes have occurred.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See Promoting Wholesale Competition Through Open Access Non-
Discriminatory Transmission Services by Public Utilities; Recovery
of Stranded Costs by Public Utilities and Transmitting Utilities,
Order No. 888, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,036, at 31,853-54 (1996),
order on reh'g, Order No. 888-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,048, order
on reh'g, Order No. 888-B, 81 FERC ] 61,248 (1997), order on reh'g,
Order No. 888-C, 82 FERC ] 61,046 (1998), aff'd in relevant part sub
nom. Transmission Access Policy Study Group v. FERC, 225 F.3d 667
(D.C. Cir. 2000), aff'd sub nom. New York v. FERC, 535 U.S. 1
(2002). In Order No. 888, the Commission noted that the disposition
of 4 million MWh a year translated, at the time, into sales in the
range of $120-180 million/year and noted that the SBA defines a
small electric utility as one that disposes of 4 million MWh per
year. Order No. 888, FERC Stats. & Regs. ]31,036 at 31,897 and
n.1072.
    \9\ See, e.g., Alcoa Power Generating, Inc., 108 FERC ] 61,243
(2004); Salmon River Electric Cooperative, Inc., 107 FERC ] 61,132
(2004); FPL Energy Oliver Wind, LLC, 123 FERC ] 61,246 (2008); but
see Wabash Valley Power Ass'n, 123 FERC ] 61,193, at P 11 (2008)
(directing applicant to notify the Commission if material
circumstances change that affect its continued qualification for
waiver); Perryville Energy Partners, L.L.C., 118 FERC ] 61,140, at P
8 (2007) (directing notification if material circumstances change);
Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols for
Public Utilities, Order No. 676, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,216, at P
115 (2006), reh'g denied, Order No. 676-A, 116 FERC ] 61,255 (2006),
amended, Order No. 676-B, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,246 (2007),
revised, Order No. 676-C, 73 Fed. Reg. 43,848 (July 29, 2008), FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,274 (2008), order on clarification and reh'g,
Order No. 676-D, 124 FERC ] 61,317 (2008) (extending to small
entities that previously were granted waiver of Order Nos. 888 and
889 waivers of the OASIS requirements adopted in the Rule, with the
condition that if material circumstances change that affect
continued qualification they must report it to the Commission).
    \10\ In contrast, for waivers of Order No. 888, the Commission
has required each utility receiving a waiver to file an Open Access
Transmission Tariff (OATT) within 60 days of receiving a request for
transmission service on its transmission system. See, e.g., Central
Minnesota, 79 FERC at 62,126-27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Guidance

    5. In order to ensure that public utilities continue to qualify for
a waiver of the requirements of Order No. 889 or the Standards of
Conduct, the Commission will require any public utility that has
received a waiver of Order No. 889 or the Standards of Conduct to
notify the Commission if there has been a material change in facts that
may affect the public utility's waiver. A material change would include
that the utility no longer meets the sales threshold applied to
determine eligibility for the waiver \11\ or if the facilities owned,
operated, or controlled by the public utility are no longer ``limited
and discrete.'' Upon receipt of the notice of the change of facts, the
Commission may reevaluate continued eligibility for the waiver.
Utilities that are granted a waiver have 30 days from the date of the
change to submit a notification. A previously granted waiver will
remain in effect until the Commission acts on such filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ As discussed in Wolverine Power Supply Cooperative, Inc.,
to be issued concurrently with this order, the Commission retains
the existing threshold for defining a small public utility.
Wolverine Power Supply Cooperative, Inc., 127 FERC ] 61,159 (2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. We recognize that the Commission has not previously required
utilities with waivers to notify the Commission of material changes in
fact that may affect the waiver. Accordingly, we will allow all public
utilities that previously have been granted a waiver 45 days from the
date of publication of this order in the Federal Register to notify the
Commission of any change in material facts upon which the Commission
relied in granting a waiver of the requirements of Order No. 889 and
the Standards of Conduct.
    The Commission orders:
    (A) Any public utility that has received a waiver of Order No. 889
or the Standards of Conduct is hereby directed to notify the Commission
if there has been a material change in facts that may affect the
waiver, within 30 days of the date of the change, as discussed in the
body of this order.
    (B) The Secretary is hereby directed to publish a copy of this
order in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-12437 Filed 5-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P