Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 201 / Wednesday, October 19, 2005 / Notices

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 201 / Wednesday, October 19, 2005 / Notices

60819

897TH—MEETING, REGULAR MEETING, OCTOBER 20, 2005, 10 A.M.—Continued

Item No.

Docket No.

C–6 ...........................

C–7 ...........................

CP04–365–001 .....................................

CP04–34–001 .......................................

Magalie R. Salas,

Secretary.

The Capitol Connection offers the

opportunity for remote listening and

viewing of the meeting. It is available

for a fee, live over the Internet, via CBand Satellite. Persons interested in

receiving the broadcast, or who need

information on making arrangements

should contact David Reininger or Julia

Morelli at the Capitol Connection (703–

993–3100) as soon as possible or visit

the Capitol Connection Web site at

http://www.capitolconnection.gmu.edu

and click on ‘‘FERC’’

Immediately following the conclusion

of the Commission Meeting, a press

briefing will be held in Hearing Room

2. Members of the public may view this

briefing in the Commission Meeting

overflow room. This statement is

intended to notify the public that the

press briefings that follow Commission

meetings may now be viewed remotely

at Commission headquarters, but will

not be telecast through the Capitol

Connection service.

[FR Doc. 05–21013 Filed 10–17–05; 2:05 pm]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Project No. 12533–001]

Christopher James Phil; Notice of

Surrender of Preliminary Permit

October 12, 2005.

Take notice that Christopher James

Phil, permittee for the proposed May

Creek Project, has requested that its

preliminary permit be terminated. The

permit was issued on March 8, 2005,

and would have expired on February 29,

2008.1 The project would have been

located on May Creek and Lake Isabel in

Snohomish County, Washington.

The permittee filed the request on

September 26, 2005, and the

preliminary permit for Project No.

12533 shall remain in effect through the

thirtieth day after issuance of this notice

unless that day is a Saturday, Sunday,

part-day holiday that affects the

Commission, or legal holiday as

described in section 18 CFR 385.2007,

1 110 FERC ¶ 62,227 (2005).

VerDate Aug<31>2005

14:50 Oct 18, 2005

Jkt 208001

Company

Dominion Transmission, Inc.

Columbia Gas Transmission Corporation.

in which case the effective date is the

first business day following that day.

New applications involving this project

site, to the extent provided for under 18

CFR Part 4, may be filed on the next

business day.

Magalie R. Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. E5–5763 Filed 10–18–05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. AD05–17–000]

Electric Energy Market Competition

Task Force; Notice Requesting

Comments on Wholesale and Retail

Electricity Competition

October 13, 2005.

Overview

Section 1815 of the Energy Policy Act

of 2005 requires the Electric Energy

Market Competition Task Force to

conduct a study of competition in

wholesale and retail markets for electric

energy in the United States. Over the

past several years, wholesale

competition has developed unevenly in

many regions of the country. Moreover,

fewer than 20 States have adopted retail

choice programs that allow some

electricity consumers to choose their

retail electric generation supplier. The

purpose of this study is to analyze and

report to Congress on the critical

elements for effective wholesale and

retail competition, the status of each

element, impediments to realizing each

element, and suggestions for

overcoming these impediments.

In recent years, some states and the

Federal government have taken steps to

encourage competition in the electric

power industry. In the Energy Policy

Act of 2005, Congress established an

inter-agency task force, known as the

‘‘Electric Energy Market Competition

Task Force’’ (the Task Force), to conduct

a study and analysis of competition

within the wholesale markets and retail

markets for electric energy in the United

States. The Task Force consists of 5

members:

PO 00000

Frm 00036

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

(1) 1 employee of the Department of

Justice, appointed by the Attorney

General of the United States—J. Bruce

McDonald, Deputy Assistant Attorney

General, Antitrust Division; (202) 514–

1157, bruce.mcdonald@usdoj.gov.

(2) 1 employee of the Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, appointed by

the Chairperson of that Commission—

Michael Bardee, Associate General

Counsel, Office of the General CounselMarkets, Tariffs, and Rates; (202) 502–

8068, michael.bardee@ferc.gov.

(3) 1 employee of the Federal Trade

Commission, appointed by the

Chairperson of that Commission—

Michael Wroblewski, Assistant General

Counsel for Policy Studies; (202) 326–

2166, mwroblewski@ftc.gov.

(4) 1 employee of the Department of

Energy, appointed by the Secretary of

Energy—David Meyer, Deputy Director,

Division of Permitting, Siting, and

Analysis, Office of Electricity Delivery

and Energy Reliability; (202) 586–1411,

David.Meyer@hq.doe.gov.

(5) 1 employee of the Rural Utilities

Service, appointed by the Secretary of

Agriculture—Karen Larsen, Office of

Assistant Administrator, Electric

Programs (202) 720–9545,

Karen.Larsen@usda.gov.

Section 1815(c) of the Energy Policy

Act of 2005 requires the Task Force to

‘‘consult with and solicit comments

from any advisory entity of the task

force, the States, representatives of the

electric power industry, and the

public.’’ This Notice begins this process.

The Task Force also will publish a draft

final report for public comment, before

submitting the final version to Congress

as required by Section 1815(b)(2)(B).

Listed below is a series of questions

for which the Task Force seeks public

comment. For both wholesale and retail

competition for electric power, we focus

on the current state of competition and

on factors that help support

competition, or that otherwise may limit

competition, among suppliers and

buyers in regional wholesale markets

and retail markets at the state level. The

questions listed below are by no means

exhaustive. The Task Force encourages

commentors to raise any other

additional factors that affect

competition in wholesale and retail

electric power markets. It is not

necessary to respond to each question.

Rather, it would be helpful for

E:\FR\FM\19OCN1.SGM

19OCN1

60820

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 201 / Wednesday, October 19, 2005 / Notices

respondents to provide, for example,

specific information about market

responses to particular governing

regulations, or to compare and contrast

the market reaction to the means

individual states have used to address

various retail competition issues (e.g.,

generation siting, provider of last resort

pricing, etc.).

Overview Questions

1. What are the critical elements or

attributes of competition in wholesale

electricity markets that the Task Force

should examine?

2. What are the critical elements or

attributes of competition in retail

electricity markets that the Task Force

should examine?

3. What benefits have occurred

because of competition in wholesale

and retail electricity markets? What

additional benefits are expected? What

benefits were forecasted and have not

occurred? Why? What harms have

occurred because of competition in

wholesale and retail electricity markets?

4. What are the major public policy

concerns that the Task Force should

examine in its review of competition in

wholesale and retail electricity markets?

5. In what significant ways do

wholesale and retail electricity markets

differ from other energy or commodity

markets? What implications do their

differences have for public policy?

Wholesale Market Questions

Commentors should answer with a

specific regional wholesale market in

mind and should be as specific as

possible.

A. Wholesale Supply Trading and

Participation

1. To what extent does wholesale

trading help result in an economic and

reliable supply of electricity in each

region? What are ways to improve the

provision of an economic and reliable

supply of electricity?

2. What share of electric power used

to serve retail (or ultimate consumer)

load is obtained through wholesale

market transactions in each state or

region? In what ways has this share

changed over the past 10 years and the

past 5 years and why?

3. What share of electric power used

to serve ultimate consumer load is

generated by a utility for its own native

load? What share of electric power used

to serve utility customer load comes

from utility affiliates? What share comes

from unaffiliated generators?

4. What opportunities exist for

generation owners to sell output in

wholesale markets?

VerDate Aug<31>2005

14:50 Oct 18, 2005

Jkt 208001

5. What opportunities exist for

wholesale power buyers to purchase

electricity in wholesale markets? Is

demand (negawatts) a product that can

be traded in the wholesale market?

6. Is there an organized regional

market or exchange serving buyers and

sellers in the region? What products

does the organized market provide?

What percentage of energy supplied is

secured through organized markets and

through bilateral trades? Are there

liquid trading points in the region?

What are the volumes traded? What is

the trend of bid/ask spreads (getting

greater or smaller)?

7. To what extent do wholesale buyers

and sellers participate in futures or

others commodity markets or

transactions to balance the financial

risks of competitive electricity markets?

How liquid are forward markets in

different regions and how far ahead can

one transact in these markets?

8. What role have credit issues played

in the ability of market participants to

participate in wholesale markets,

including forward markets?

9. Are there competitive processes by

which distribution utilities solicit

proposals for native load or default

service?

10. How can changes and trends in

wholesale market prices by region be

measured?

11. How should the performance of

wholesale markets in serving the needs

of various types of power sellers (e.g.,

marketer, generator, independent

producer, merchant, public utility,

nonpublic utility, qualified facility,

renewable power producer, cogenerator) be measured?

12. How has restructuring of

incumbent utility operations and the

introduction of competitive retail

markets in retail choice states affected

participation in regional wholesale

markets? Has the introduction of retail

markets affected the level of long-term

contracting in wholesale markets?

13. Please describe instances in which

competition has resulted in relatively

higher prices or lower reliability in a

specific regional market.

B. Generation Ownership

1. How has ownership of electric

generating plants changed over the past

10 years?

2. In the past 10 years, when

generations assets have been sold or

transferred, how much capacity was

sold or transferred to (a) Utility or utility

affiliates, (b) existing non-utility market

participants; (c) new market

participants?

3. How much existing merchant or

non-utility generation assets have been

PO 00000

Frm 00037

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

sold or transferred? What were the

reasons for these transactions?

4. How much existing capacity has

been sold or transferred to utilities and

converted to rate-based assets? Of those

how many were previously affiliated

with a utility and how many were

purchased from other entities?

C. Generation Adequacy

1. How is generation adequacy

addressed in each region or system? Is

there a specific enforceable requirement

that load serving entities or market

participants must meet? How is

planning for generation adequacy

conducted?

2. Has new generation construction

kept pace with demand growth in the

state or market region? If not, why not?

What are the most important factors that

affect whether generation will be built?

3. What role does the ability to enter

into long-term contracts play in

financing new generation projects?

4. What generation facilities have

been installed in the past five years?

What was the experience in the process?

5. What generation facilities have

been cancelled in the past five years and

why?

6. What difficulties, if any, have

developers of new generation facilities

encountered in bringing generation

supply to market? (E.g., difficulties in

financing, siting, permitting, licensing,

interconnection, transmission access,

fuel supply.) What are ways to improve

the process?

7. Are there instances in the past five

years in which a new generation facility

has been completed that caused prices

in a previously congested area to

decline?

8. How do the approaches and

responsibilities for assuring the

availability of sufficient generation

capacity to meet peak load and load

growth vary among regions and states

that have retail choice and/or tightly

organized regional markets and those

that do not?

9. What incentives do competitive

suppliers have to maintain adequate

reserve capacity?

10. What incentives or responsibilities

do load serving utilities have to

maintain adequate reserve capacity?

11. How can competitive markets

assure adequacy of generation supply?

How is reserve sharing to meet state or

regional generation adequacy standards

accomplished in competitive markets?

How can other institutions/market

processes provide an effective substitute

for reserve sharing?

E:\FR\FM\19OCN1.SGM

19OCN1

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 201 / Wednesday, October 19, 2005 / Notices

D. Transmission Investment and

Regulation

1. What are the most important factors

that affect whether transmission will be

built? What are ways to improve the

process? What difficulties have

transmission owners had in upgrading

or building new transmission facilities?

What are the prospects for merchant

transmission?

2. Over the past 10 years, what have

been the trends in investments in

transmission by utilities by state or

region? Are there any prevailing

patterns in transmission investments in

upgrades and replacement of existing

plant versus new lines,

interconnections, automation? Have

these patterns of investment shifted over

this period? Are there any projected

changes in patterns of transmission

investment over the next 5 years?

3. How are transmission needs of

merchant generators and renewable

energy projects included in regional or

utility transmission planning and

upgrades?

4. How has the establishment of

Regional Transmission Organizations

(RTOs) changed transmission

operations, transmission planning, and

investment patterns?

5. Within a region or RTO, is there a

different process for transmission

upgrades that are not required for

reliability but would increase access to

lower priced power in areas with

economic congestion?

6. In the absence of RTOs, how is

transmission planning, siting, and

construction for regional needs

coordinated among utilities, generators,

and State regulators? What challenges

do transmission owners face upgrading

or building new transmission facilities?

7. How have transmission costs

changed for transmission owners and

for transmission customers over the past

10 years? What are the reasons for any

increases or decreases?

E. Wholesale Market Transparency and

Information

1. Do purchasers and sellers view

markets as providing stable, transparent

prices? Are there differences among

products and markets?

2. Is there sufficient timely and

accurate publicly available information

to assure that market participants can

adequately assess the economics of

proposed wholesale power transactions

or assess the financial implications of

self build versus competitive

alternatives for generation supply?

3. How can any information deficits

be remedied to improve the utility of

market information? Are there any

VerDate Aug<31>2005

14:50 Oct 18, 2005

Jkt 208001

competitive risks associated with greater

transparency of prices or of other

information about market participants?

4. Are there open and transparent

processes by which load serving entities

solicit proposals for generation from

independent firms and/or from affiliated

generators?

Retail Market Questions

Commentors can answer the following

questions based on their knowledge and

experience in any state with retail

competition:

A. Retail Markets Overview

1. What factors or measures should

the Task Force examine in reviewing

state retail choice experiences? How

should these factors and measures be

evaluated?

2. How should the Task Force assess

the performance of evolving competitive

retail markets?

3. How can the performance of

competitive retail markets for retail

customers be measured in the absence

of competitive suppliers for residential

and small business customers in many

areas?

4. Why did your state implement a

retail electric choice program?

5. Why did your state decide not to

implement a retail electric choice

program?

B. State Retail Choice Experience

1. How have consumers benefited

from retail electric competition? How

have consumers been harmed by retail

electric competition?

2. How have retail customer prices

changed since the beginning of the

transition to retail choice? Have the

changes been comparable across all

classes of customers?

3. How many alternative competitive

retail suppliers are currently soliciting

or accepting new customers in each

service area? Has the number increased

or decreased since the state introduced

retail choice?

4. Does the availability of alternative

competitive suppliers differ among

service areas, customer classes, load

size, rural and urban areas, or other

geographic areas, or by credit policies?

If so, why? If not, why not?

5. Have suppliers offered new types of

products and services (e.g., time of day

pricing, interruptible contracts, green

power, etc.) in states where retail

competition has been implemented? If

so, describe the products and what

customer response has been.

6. How do retail customers obtain

information about competitive

alternatives? Do retail consumers have

enough information to readily make

PO 00000

Frm 00038

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

60821

informed choices among competing

suppliers?

7. Does the state allow groups of retail

customers to aggregate their electricity

demand? How are they structured?

What customer groups are included? Is

participation on an opt-in or an opt-out

basis? Has aggregation enabled

consumers to benefit from retail

electricity competition? If not, why not?

8. Now that many state-mandated

transition periods to phase-in retail

competition are ending, what issues do

states face to ensure competitive retail

markets?

C. Retail Supply Questions in States

With Retail Competition

1. How does the state program address

assurance of adequate generation

supplies for default service customers

(i.e., customers that: (a) Do not choose

a competitive provider, or (b) have lost

their competitive supplier for whatever

reason)?

2. How do default service obligations

affect retail power competition? Do the

transmission services allowed for

default service obligations affect retail

competition and, if so, how? What

changes, if any, would you suggest in

these transmission services?

3. How has the development of RTOs

affected the development of retail

competition in the state?

4. Did the state require that the

incumbent utility divest all or some of

its generation assets used to serve its

retail native load when retail

competition was introduced? Did

incumbent utilities voluntarily divest

generation assets as part of restructuring

to implement retail competition? Did

incumbent utilities transfer ownership

of generation assets used to serve native

load to an affiliated entity?

5. What has been the result of

generation ownership transfers serving

the state or region since the start of

retail competition? Has there been a

consolidation of generation ownership

in the state or region?

6. If a retail load serving utility no

longer owns sufficient generation assets

to meet its obligations to its retail

customers (existing customers, or as the

supplier of last resort or default service

provider) what mechanism (e.g., spot

market purchases, buy back or output

contracts, etc.) does it use to obtain

generation services to fulfill these

obligations? What share of a utility’s

load is obtained via the different

mechanisms? How are these shares

trending?

7. How do non-utility retail service

providers in the state secure access to

transmission and distribution services

E:\FR\FM\19OCN1.SGM

19OCN1

60822

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 201 / Wednesday, October 19, 2005 / Notices

needed to deliver power to their retail

customers?

8. What difficulties have retail

supplier entrants encountered in

entering the market? What conditions/

incentives attract suppliers to retail

markets?

D. Demand Side Participation

1. How do rate structures affect the

incentives of large, medium, or small

electric customers to participate in

demand side response programs? Does

this effect differ if a state has a retail

choice program?

2. What measures have states taken to

make customer demand responsive to

changes in availability and price of

electricity supply? Do these measures

differ if a state has a retail choice

program?

3. What mechanisms allow for the

participation of load response measures

‘‘ interruptible load, self-generation,

demand-side management, conservation

and energy efficiency measures as

alternatives in wholesale electric

markets and or load serving utility

resource portfolios? How has the

performance of these measures been

monitored?

4. Have states adopted alternatives to

average cost pricing to encourage

demand response?

5. What has been the effect on

demand and demand elasticity in light

of these measures?

6. How prevalent is the use of

distributed resources (e.g., distributed

generation and distributed energy

storage) within the state?

7. To what extent are retail customers

within the state or region increasing use

of distributed resources and what types

of resources are involved?

E. Rising Fuel Prices

1. Are changes in prices for oil,

natural gas, and coal affecting the

results of competitive wholesale

markets and viability of competitive

suppliers and if so, how?

2. How are changes in prices for oil,

natural gas, and coal affecting retail

electricity costs?

3. Are there differences in retail price

impacts between states and/or utility

systems operating under retail

competition models and those that

operate under traditional utility cost

based rate models?

How To File Comments

Any interested person may submit a

written comment that will be

considered part of the public record.

Comments may be filed electronically

via the e-Filing link on the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission’s Web

VerDate Aug<31>2005

14:50 Oct 18, 2005

Jkt 208001

site at http://www.ferc.gov for Docket

No. AD05–17–000. Most standard word

processing formats are accepted, and the

e-Filing link provides instructions for

how to Login and complete an

electronic filing. First-time users will

have to establish a user name and

password. User assistance for electronic

filing is available at 202–208–0258 or by

e-mail to efiling at ferc.gov. Comments

should not be submitted to the e-mail

address. Commentors filing

electronically do not need to make a

paper filing. Commentors that are not

able to file comments electronically

must send an original of their comments

to: Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission, Office of the Secretary,

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. For

assistance with any FERC Online

service, please e-mail

FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov, or call

(866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202) 502–8659.

Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on

November 18, 2005.

Magalie R. Salas,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 05–20896 Filed 10–18–05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5717–01–P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

[OPP–2005–0257; FRL–7741–3]

Cambridge Environmental Inc. and

Dynamac; Transfer of Data

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice announces that

pesticide related information submitted

to EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs

(OPP) pursuant to the Federal

Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide

Act (FIFRA) and the Federal Food, Drug,

and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), including

information that may have been claimed

as Confidential Business Information

(CBI) by the submitter, will be tranferred

to Cambridge Environmental Inc. and its

subcontractor, Dynamac, in accordance

with 40 CFR 2.307(h)(3) and 2.308(i)(2).

Cambridge Environmental Inc. and its

subcontractor, Dynamac, have been

awarded a contract to perform work for

OPP, and access to this information will

enable Cambridge Environmental Inc.

PO 00000

Frm 00039

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

and its subcontractor, Dynamac, to

fulfill the obligations of the contract.

DATES: Cambridge Environmental Inc.

and its subcontractor, Dynamac, will be

given access to this information on or

before October 24, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Felicia Croom, Acting Information

Security Officer, Information

Technology and Resources Management

Division (ITRMD), (7502C), Office of

Pesticide Programs, Environmental

Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–

0001; telephone number: (703) 305–

0786; e-mail address:

croom.felicia@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

A. Does this Action Apply to Me?

This action applies to the public in

general. As such, 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 Copies of this

Document and Other Related

Information?

1. Docket. EPA has established an

official public docket for this action

under docket identification (ID) number

OPP–2005–0257. The official public

docket consists of the documents

specifically referenced in this action,

any public comments received, and

other information related to this action.

Although a part of the official docket,

the public docket does not include

Confidential Business Information (CBI)

or other information whose disclosure is

restricted by statute. The official public

docket is the collection of materials that

is available for public viewing at the

Public Information and Records

Integrity Branch (PIRIB), Rm. 119,

Crystal Mall #2, 1801 S. Bell St.,

Arlington, VA. This docket facility is

open from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday

through Friday, excluding legal

holidays. The docket telephone number

is (703) 305–5805.

2. Electronic access. You may access

this Federal Register document

electronically through the EPA Internet

under the ‘‘Federal Register’’ listings at

http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/.

An electronic version of the public

docket is available through EPA’s

electronic public docket and comment

system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA

Dockets at http://www.epa.gov/edocket/

to submit or view public comments,

E:\FR\FM\19OCN1.SGM

19OCN1