Final Power Allocation Procedures of the Post-2000 Resource PoolPick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program, Eastern Division

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Western Area Power Administration

Final Power Allocation Procedures of the Post-2000 Resource

Pool--Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program, Eastern Division

AGENCY: Western Area Power Administration, DOE.

ACTION: Notice of final procedures.

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

SUMMARY: Western Area Power Administration (Western), a Federal power

marketing agency of the Department of Energy, hereby announces its Post

2000 Resource Pool Allocation Procedures to fulfill the requirements of

Subpart C--Power Marketing Initiative of the Energy Planning and

Management Program Final Rule, 10 CFR 905, published at 60 FR 54151.

The Post 2000 Resource Pool Allocation Procedures are Western's

implementation of Subpart C--Power Marketing Initiative of the Energy

Planning and Management Program Final Rule. Western's proposed

procedures were published in the Federal Register at 61 FR 2817,

January 29, 1996 and revised and clarified in the Federal Register at

61 FR 28574, June 5, 1996. Responses to public comments received

pertaining to the proposed procedures are included in this notice.

DATES: The Post 2000 Resource Pool Allocation Procedures will become

effective 30 days from the date of publication of this notice, and will

remain in effect until December 31, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Information regarding the Post 2000 Resource Pool Allocation

Procedures, including comments, letters, and other supporting documents

made or kept by Western for the purpose of developing the final

procedures, are available for public inspection and copying at the

Upper Great Plains Customer Service Region, Western Area Power

Administration, located at 2900 4th Avenue North, P.O. Box 35800,

Billings, MT 59107-5800.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Western published a notice of proposed

procedures on January 29, 1996, to implement Subpart C--Power Marketing

Initiative of the Energy Planning and Management Program Final Rule, 10

CFR 905, published at 60 FR 54151 in the Federal Register. The Energy

Planning and Management Program (Program), which was developed in part

to implement section 114 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992, became

effective on November 20, 1995. Subpart C of the Program provides for

the establishment of project-specific resource pools and the allocation

of power from these pools to new preference customers. Those proposed

procedures, in conjunction with the Eastern Division, Pick-Sloan

Missouri Basin Program Final Post-1985 Marketing Plan (Post-1985

Marketing Plan) (45 FR 71860) will establish the framework for

allocating power from the resource pool to be established for the Pick-

Sloan Missouri Basin Program--Eastern Division (P-SMBP-ED).

Western held public information and comment forums on the proposed

procedures on February 14, 15, and 16, 1996, to accept oral and written

comments on the proposed procedures and call for applications. The

initial formal comment period ended March 4, 1996. On March 8, 1996,

Western published a notice to extend the time that written comments and

applicant profile data could be submitted until April 8, 1996. On June

5, 1996, in the Federal Register at 61 FR 28574, Western published a

30-day notice to respond to comments regarding Section III, General

Allocation Criteria, Paragraph E, to clarify the Post 2000 Resource

Pool Allocation Procedures in order to fulfill the intent of the

Program and called for additional applications.

The Post 2000 Resource Pool Allocation Procedures set forth in this

Federal Register notice will explain in detail how Western intends to

implement Subpart C of the Power Marketing Initiative of the Energy

Planning and Management Program Final Rule in the P-SMBP-ED.

Response to Customer Comments Regarding Post 2000 Resource Pool

Allocation Procedures

I. Amount of Pool Resources

Western proposed to allocate 4 percent of the P-SMBP-ED long-term

firm hydroelectric resource available as of January 1, 2001, as firm

power as provided for by the Program.

Comment: We received several comments from Native American tribes

expressing great disappointment in the size (4 percent) of the resource

pool. It is their belief that the pool is not large enough to serve 100

percent of their current and future electrical needs. One comment

suggested that the amount of power available in the resource pool will

not be sufficient to meet Native American demand on January 1, 2001.

Response: The 4 percent resource pool was derived from the Program,

and therefore the size of the pool is outside this process. Two future

1 percent resource pools were also identified as part of the Program

and allocations from these future resource pools will be dealt with in

future public processes.

[[Page 41143]]

II. General Eligibility Criteria

Western proposes to apply general eligibility criteria to

applicants seeking an allocation of firm power under the proposed Post-

2000 Resource Pool Allocation Procedures.

Comment: Western received several comments suggesting that if a

Native American tribe establishes a utility and applies for an

allocation from Western, they should be considered under utility

applicant status, not as a Native American tribe applicant.

Response: If a Native American tribe makes application under this

process as a utility applicant, Western would consider the application

under utility applicant criteria.

Comment: Western received comments regarding the date for setting

up utility status. One comment suggested that section II.E. should be

written as follows: ``qualified utility and Native American applicants

must have achieved operating utility status by December 31, 1995.''

Other comments suggested the deadline for achieving utility status be

extended to June 1, 1997 or possibly later.

Response: The date for achieving utility status was determined by

the Program. To be eligible to apply for power available from the

resource pool, those entities that desire to purchase Western power for

resale to consumers, must have attained utility status by December 31,

1996. Section 905.35, Paragraph (c) of Subpart C, Power Marketing

Initiative, of 60 FR 54151 states that: All potential new customers,

except Native American tribes, must be ready, willing, and able to

receive and distribute or use power from Western. Ready, willing, and

able means that (1) the potential customer has the facilities needed

for the receipt of power or has made the necessary arrangements for

transmission and/or distribution service, (2) the potential customer's

power supply contract with third parties permit the delivery of

Western's power, and (3) metering, scheduling, and billing arrangements

are in place.

Comment: Several comments expressed support for the use of the

Indian Self-Determination Act (Act) to determine eligibility of Native

American tribe applicants.

Response: The allocation procedures use the Act to determine

whether or not an applicant is a qualified Native American applicant.

Use of the Act to make these decisions was first used in the Program

final rule. Because these allocation procedures will be used in

allocating the resource pool created by those regulations, Western used

the same definition in this process.

III. General Allocation Criteria

Western proposes to apply general allocation criteria to applicants

seeking an allocation of firm power under the proposed Post 2000

Resource Pool Allocation Procedures.

Comment: One comment suggested that the 5,000 kW limitation on new

allocations should apply to all applicants, one comment suggested that

the limitation should not apply to Native American tribes and another

comment suggested the maximum amount be increased to 6,000 kW.

Response: The Post 1985 Marketing Criteria established the 5,000 kW

limitation referenced in the allocation criteria. This limitation does

not apply to Native American tribe applicants. The 5,000 kW limit was

placed in the Post 1985 Marketing Plan to ensure that the sale of P-

SMBP-ED power would benefit a wide class of users which is consistent

with Federal Reclamation Law.

Comment: A comment was made that Native American tribes should have

priority status in any allocations that are being made.

Response: The preference clause only provides that public entities

be given preference over private entities in the marketing of power

from Federal reclamation projects. There are no preference entities

which have greater privileges than another. Western has always

considered Native American tribes to be preference customers, and in

response to comments received during the Program public process,

Western has changed its policy of requiring that Native American tribes

achieve utility status prior to receiving an allocation.

Comment: Western received many comments on how Native American

loads should be determined. Many stated that Western should develop a

standard method for determining Native American loads and apply that

method to all Native American tribe applicants. Others advocated using

actual tribal loads on the reservation.

Response: A variety of methods of load estimation were submitted by

Native American tribes. Western accepted load estimates developed by

the Native American tribes. Inconsistent estimates will be adjusted by

Western. The proposed allocations developed from these load estimates

will be published in a subsequent Federal Register notice.

Comment: Western received comments on the issue of off-reservation

use of Native American tribe allocations. The majority of the comments

supported use of allocations by qualified Native American tribe

applicants on the reservation only. Others supported off-reservation

use under certain circumstances. In particular, several comments

advocated off-reservation use for the Turtle Mountain Tribe.

Response: Off-reservation use of Native American tribe allocations

under certain circumstances as determined by Western was allowed for in

60 FR 54151. The circumstances under which off-reservation use of a

Native American tribe allocation will be allowed will be determined by

Western on a case-by-case basis after final allocations are made.

Comment: Western received comments that Native American tribes are

already receiving benefits of Federal hydropower through the

cooperatives that serve them and these benefits need to be considered

when Western makes allocations to Native American tribes so they do not

receive more than 100 percent of their current electrical requirements.

Response: Western understands that some Native American tribes are

already receiving the benefits of Federal hydropower through the

cooperatives that serve them. However, the methodology for determining

Native American tribal allocations will be set forth in a subsequent

future Federal Register notice. Therefore, this comment will be

addressed in that notice.

Comment: Western received many comments on the proposal to adjust

utility and nonutility applicants' loads using Mid-Continent Area Power

Pool data trends. Some comments stated that actual 1979-80 data should

be used. Others stated that unadjusted 1994-95 data should be used. One

comment suggested basing allocations on load data from November 1994

through October 1995.

Response: As revised and clarified in the Federal Register at 61 FR

28574, June 5, 1996, Western will use actual unadjusted load data from

May 1994 through April 1995 to determine utility applicants'

allocations. Western agrees with the numerous comments that using Mid-

Continent Area Power Pool data trends to adjust utility applicants'

loads would unfairly penalize those applicants who had little or no

load growth between 1979 and 1995.

Comment: Western received a comment to consider a reallocation

based on a percentage to all customers should there be over 5 MW of

firm power not under contract subsequent to the closing date for

executing firm power contracts.

Response: As stated in the Final Post 2000 Resource Pool Allocation

[[Page 41144]]

Procedures section III.H below, Western, at its discretion, reserves

the right to determine usage of firm power not under contract.

Comment: Western received comments that support Western's proposal

to dissolve the resource pool as long as it is not rate impacting.

Response: Western is in agreement with this comment and will

consider the best available options should this power not allocated in

these procedures be available.

Comment: Western received comment that the entire 4 percent

resource pool should be allocated to qualified applicants.

Response: Western plans to make allocations from the 4 percent

resource pool to qualified utility and nonutility applicants based upon

Post-1985 Marketing Plan Criteria and to Native American tribe

applicants based upon serving a fair share of their load. Based upon

these criteria, the total allocations from the resource pool may be

less than the resource pool.

Comment: It was suggested that a Native American tribe would have

to demonstrate the existence of an agreement with a viable utility

system for delivery of the allocation to the end user.

Response: Western has determined that placing an additional

requirement on Native American tribes would be unduly burdensome and is

not consistent with the intent of the Program at 60 FR 54151. If an

agreement with a utility responsible for delivery is not attainable,

Western has reserved the right to provide the economic benefits of its

resources directly to Native American tribes.

Comment: Where is the funding going to come from for making credits

to tribal members?

Response: Should this program require funding, Western will use net

bill or bill credit methods. If these methods are not sufficient,

additional appropriations from Congress may have to be made to provide

economic benefit.

Comment: The formula for calculating the amount of credit must

recognize the specific situation of the local utility, because their

costs vary significantly from Western customer to Western customer.

Response: Western is in agreement with the comment. Should any

crediting formula be required, Western will recognize the specific

local utility situation as needed.

Comment: Western's customers have already given up a portion of

their allocations; they cannot also be asked to fund additional payment

to tribal members. It appears they may have increased rates on the

remainder of their allocation.

Response: Western has no intent to increase P-SMBP-ED rates.

Comment: Western received comment that the suggested method of

delivering the benefits of Federal hydropower to the Native American

tribes would be a bill crediting arrangement.

Response: Western agrees that a bill crediting arrangement is a

viable method of delivering the benefits of Federal hydropower to

Native American tribes. However, flexibility must be retained in the

delivery of such benefits in order to fit a diverse group of Native

American tribes and power suppliers. The method for delivering the

benefits of Federal hydropower to the tribes will be determined

following the allocation process.

Comment: Western received comment that if Federal hydropower

benefits are delivered to Native American tribes in the form of

monetary payments, those payments should be contractually obligated to

go toward energy use.

Response: Western views direct monetary payments in lieu of

delivery of Western power and energy as a last resort to be used only

if unanticipated obstacles to the delivery of Federal hydropower

benefits arise. Should this situation arise, Western will consider

contractual stipulations on how those monetary payments are to be used

by Native American tribes. Such stipulations are beyond the scope of

this public process.

Comment: Western received comment that if tribal members' bills are

credited, the portion of the resource pool associated with these

credits should be retained by all existing customers at cost-based

rates.

Response: Western will not increase existing customers' allocations

for the amount associated with any tribal energy credits. Energy

crediting may not always be the means by which some Native American

tribes receive the benefits of Federal hydropower. In the event that at

a later time a Native American tribe changes the method by which they

receive the benefits of Federal hydropower, Western will not allocate

the energy associated with bill credits to existing customers.

IV. General Contract Principles

Western proposes to apply general contract principles to all

applicants receiving an allocation of firm power under the proposed

Post 2000 Resource Pool Allocation Procedures.

Comment: A comment was offered which suggested that contracts with

utility applicants should explicitly require cooperation on the part of

those utilities in the transmission of firm power to the Native

American tribes as a condition of that sale.

Response: To date, Western has received cooperation from P-SMBP-ED

cooperatives on the issue of delivery of hydropower benefits to Native

American tribes. Even if unanticipated obstacles to the delivery of

these benefits arise, Western has retained the right to provide the

economic benefits of its resource directly to Native Americans. Because

of the options available, Western sees no reason to address this issue

contractually. Western has already executed the contract extensions for

the P-SMBP-ED resource which will exist after the 4 percent resource

pool is created. In addition, there may be utilities which Western does

not contract with for a firm power allocation which would be

responsible for transmission of Native American tribe allocation.

Comment: Receipt of a Federal power allocation by a Native American

tribe must allow the current power supplier the ability to negotiate

delivery charges which prevent the negative financial effect of

creating the need to raise rates.

Response: Delivery arrangements are the responsibility of the new

customers.

Comment: The proposed rule should include assisting the Native

American tribes in obtaining a suitable third-party distribution system

retail wheeling agreement.

Response: The P-SMBP-ED cooperatives have been supportive of the

delivery of the benefits of power allocations to Native American

tribes. Western shall assist the allottee in obtaining third-party

transmission arrangements for delivery of firm power allocated under

these proposed procedures to new customers; nonetheless, each allottee

is ultimately responsible for obtaining its own delivery arrangements.

Comment: A comment suggested that it would be appropriate to

include the utility ultimately responsible for delivery of the

allocation to Native American tribes in the contract process, and that

Western should be an advocate in favor of the tribes in that process.

Response: Western will assist the allottee in obtaining third-party

transmission arrangements for delivery of firm power. To the extent

that utilities are involved in these arrangements, Western will work

with those entities. However, it is the ultimate responsibility of the

allottee to obtain its own delivery arrangements.

Comment: All new customers, utility, nonutility, and Native

American tribes alike, should have the same contractual provisions in

their contracts as

[[Page 41145]]

Western's present customers. Specifically, all contracts should

continue to have the provision preventing the sale of Federal power to

customers other than retail customers.

Response: Western is in agreement with this comment. The contract

with all new customers will contain Western's existing general contract

principles.

Comment: If Western experiences additional costs under the proposed

pool allocation, all program participants should participate in these

costs, not just the existing Western utilities.

Response: Our interpretation of this comment was that all firm

power customers of Western, inclusive of the new customers brought in

with the allocation of the 4 percent resource pool, will all be

impacted if there are additional costs to Western under the proposed

pool allocations. Western agrees that all firm power customers,

inclusive of the new customers, would be impacted through their rates

if there is a cost change due to the allocation of the 4 percent

resource pool.

Comment: We received several comments requesting that Native

American tribes not be required to comply with the Integrated Resource

Planning (IRP) requirements of the Program, unless the Native American

tribe applies as a utility.

Response: Title II of the 1992 Energy Policy Act requires all

Western customers to comply with the IRP criteria. This requirement was

also brought forward and restated in the Program language. Therefore,

IRP requirements are required of all customers including Native

American tribes.

Responses to Comments Regarding Other Issues

Comment: We received a comment from a cooperative expressing their

disappointment at the establishment of the 4 percent resource pool

because it means a rate impact for members.

Response: Western understands the concern for customers who may be

adversely impacted with the reduction of their Federal power

allocations. However, this reduction was provided for in the Program

and is beyond the scope of this public process.

Comment: We received a comment from a cooperative expressing

disappointment that Native American tribes will be allocated power from

the 4 percent resource pool, because it comes as an expense to Western

customers in the region.

Response: Western understands the concern of customers who may be

adversely impacted with the reduction of their Federal power

allocations. However, this reduction was provided for in the Program

and is beyond the scope of this public process.

Comment: We received a comment requesting Western's Upper Great

Plains Customer Service Region to establish a ``Native American Desk''

(Desk) to handle Native American issues.

Response: We are a diverse agency with many different functions. It

is our belief that issues with Native Americans are handled effectively

and efficiently by dealing directly with the divisions involved in each

issue. The establishment of a Desk is not part of this public process

and will be considered if it would result in increased responsiveness

to Western's Native American customers.

Comment: Federal facilities, such as the Bureau of Indian Affairs

or other Federal agencies, should not be eligible to receive any new

resources.

Response: Federal facilities are eligible for allocations of

Federal power as the preference clause has been defined through Federal

Reclamation Law.

Comment: One comment suggested that any allocation to a Native

American tribe should be made jointly to both the tribe and the utility

that will transfer the resource.

Response: The intent of the Program at 60 FR 54151 was to provide

the benefits of Federal hydropower allocations directly to individual

tribes. This principal is consistent with how Western treats existing

customers. Western does not feel that the goal of the Program would be

served by jointly allocating Native American allocations to utilities

and tribes.

Comment: Several comments were received expressing a concern that

the allocation procedures would somehow imply or require tribal

jurisdiction over the entity which will supply the Native American

load.

Response: The issue of tribal jurisdiction is beyond the scope of

this public process. Western is not the proper authority to decide that

issue, as it is outside of our mission. However, Western has not

intended to expand the scope of tribal jurisdiction with these

allocation procedures.

Comment: One comment expressed appreciation for Western's Federal

American Indian policy.

Response: Western appreciates the positive response with respect to

the attempts it has made to address Native American issues. Western

supports the Department of Energy's American Indian policy which

stresses the need for a government-to-government, trust-based

relationship.

Comment: Western received several requests for extending the

deadline for submittal of the Applicant Profile Data (APD).

Response: 61 FR 9449 published March 8, 1996, extended the deadline

for submittal of APD and comments until April 8, 1996. Also, 61 FR

28574 published June 5, 1996, clarifying the terms of Post 2000

Resource Pool Allocation Procedures, reopened the deadline for

submittal of APD until July 5, 1996.

Comment: Negotiations should begin as soon as possible.

Response: Western agrees with this comment. Western interprets this

comment as to when will Western negotiate contracts with new customers

for firm electric service. Western intends to begin negotiating new

contracts as soon as possible.

Comment: One comment suggested that Greenfield, Iowa, should be

eligible for a minimum allocation of 100 kW.

Response: Only that portion of the Greenfield load within the P-

SMBP-ED marketing area is eligible for an allocation as part of this

process. All criteria are applicable to that portion of Greenfield's

load.

Comment: We received comments about all customers, including Native

American tribes, being included in future withdrawals for the creation

of resource pools.

Response: This was determined in Subpart C, Power Marketing

Initiative, Paragraph 905.32 (d) of 60 FR 54151. The additional

resource pool increments shall be established from the then existing

customers.

Comment: Western received a comment that allocations from the 4

percent resource pool is not the only responsibility or obligation the

Federal government has to Native American tribes.

Response: This comment is beyond the scope of this public process.

The 4 percent resource pool was established by the Program. This

process is designed to allocate the 4 percent as set forth by the

Program.

Comment: Western received a comment that the qualifications for

qualified applicants should be changed if necessary, such that the

Bureau of Reclamation, as sponsor for the Mni Wiconi Project, meets the

definition for qualified applicant.

Response: Western intends to determine the Bureau of Reclamation

eligibility based on the Final Post 2000 Resource Pool Allocation

Procedures outlined below.

[[Page 41146]]

Final Post 2000 Resource Pool Allocation Procedures

I. Amount of Pool Resources

Western will allocate up to 4 percent of the P-SMBP-ED long-term

firm hydroelectric resource available as of January 1, 2001, as firm

power (firm power) as provided for by the Program. Firm power means

capacity and associated energy allocated by Western and subject to the

terms and conditions specified in the Western electric service

contract.

II. General Eligibility Criteria

Western will apply the following general eligibility criteria to

applicants seeking an allocation of firm power under the Post 2000

Resource Pool Allocation Procedures.

A. All qualified applicants must be preference entities in

accordance with section 9c of the Reclamation Project Act of 1939, 43

U.S.C. 485h(c), as amended and supplemented.

B. All qualified applicants must be located within the currently

established P-SMBP-ED marketing area.

C. All qualified applicants must not be currently receiving

benefits, directly or indirectly, from a current P-SMBP-ED firm power

allocation. Qualified Native American applicants are not subject to

this requirement.

D. Qualified utility and nonutility applicants must be able to use

the firm power directly or be able to sell it directly to retail

customers.

E. Qualified utility applicants that desire to purchase power from

Western for resale to consumers, including municipalities,

cooperatives, public utility districts, and public power districts must

have utility status by December 31, 1996. Utility status means the

entity has responsibility to meet load growth, has a distribution

system, and is ready, willing, and able to purchase Federal power from

Western on a wholesale basis.

F. Qualified Native American applicants must be a Native American

tribe as defined in the Indian Self Determination Act of 1975, 25

U.S.C. Sec. 450b, as amended.

III. General Allocation Criteria

Western will apply the following general allocation criteria to

applicants seeking an allocation of firm power under the Post 2000

Resource Pool Allocation Procedures.

A. Allocations of firm power will be made in amounts as determined

solely by Western in exercise of its discretion under the Federal

Reclamation Law.

B. An allottee will have the right to purchase such firm power only

upon the execution of an electric service contract between Western and

the allottee, and satisfaction of all conditions in that contract.

C. Firm power allocated under these procedures will be available

only to new preference customers in the existing P-SMBP-ED marketing

area. This marketing area includes Montana (east of the Continental

Divide), North Dakota, South Dakota, and specific areas in western

Iowa, western Minnesota and eastern Nebraska. The marketing area of the

P-SMBP-ED is Montana east of the Continental Divide, all of North and

South Dakota, Nebraska east of the 101 deg. meridian, Iowa west of the

94\1/2\ deg. meridian, and Minnesota west of a line on the 94\1/2\ deg.

meridian from the southern boundary of the state to the 46 deg.

parallel and thence northwesterly to the northern boundary of the state

at the 96\1/2\ deg. meridian.

D. Allocations made to Native American tribes will be based on

estimated load developed by the Native American tribes. Inconsistent

estimates will be adjusted by Western during the allocation process.

E. Allocations made to qualified utility and nonutility applicants

will be based on the loads experienced in the 1994 summer season and

the 1994-95 winter season. Western will apply the Post-1985 Marketing

Plan criteria to these loads.

F. Energy provided with firm power will be based upon the

customers monthly system load factor.

G. Any electric service contract offered to a new customer shall be

executed by the customer within six months of a contract offer by

Western, unless otherwise agreed to in writing by Western.

H. The initial resource pool will be dissolved subsequent to the

closing date for executing firm power contracts. Firm power not under

contract will be used as determined by Western.

I. The minimum allocation shall be 100 kilowatts (kW).

J. The maximum allocation for qualified utility and nonutility

applicants shall be 5,000 kW.

K. Contract rates of delivery shall be subject to adjustment in the

future as provided for in the Program.

L. If unanticipated obstacles to the delivery of hydropower

benefits to Native American tribes arise, Western retains the right to

provide the economic benefits of its resources directly to the tribes.

IV. General Contract Principles

Western will apply the following general contract principles to all

applicants receiving an allocation of firm power under the Post 2000

Resource Pool Allocation Procedures.

A. Western shall reserve the right to reduce a customers summer

season contract rate of delivery by up to 5 percent for new project

pumping requirements, by giving a minimum of 5 years written notice in

advance of such action.

B. Western, at its discretion and sole determination, shall reserve

the right to adjust the contract rate of delivery on 5 years notice in

response to changes in hydrology and river operations. Any such

adjustments shall only take place after a public process.

C. Western shall assist the allottee in obtaining third-party

transmission arrangements for delivery of firm power allocated under

these procedures to new customers; nonetheless, each allottee is

ultimately responsible for obtaining its own delivery arrangements.

D. Contracts entered into under the Post 2000 Resource Pool

Allocation Procedures shall provide for Western to furnish firm

electric service effective from January 1, 2001, through December 31,

2020.

E. The contracts entered into as a result of the procedures shall

incorporate Western's standard provisions for power sales contracts,

integrated resource planning, and the general power contract

provisions.

VI. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. (Act),

requires Federal agencies to perform a regulatory flexibility analysis

if a proposed regulation is likely to have a significant economic

impact on a substantial number of small entities. Western has

determined that this rulemaking relates to services offered by Western,

and, therefore, is not a rule within the purview of the Act.

VII. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C.

3501-3520, Western has received approval from the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) for the collection of customer information in this

rule, under control number 1910-1200.

VIII. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act

Western requested input regarding the identification of any

additional environmental issues both in the Federal Register at 61 FR

2817, January 29, 1996, and at the public meetings. No environmental

comments were received. Therefore, Western has determined that

[[Page 41147]]

the analysis in the Program Environmental Impact Statement is

sufficient for this action and current DOE regulations indicate that no

further National Environmental Policy Act documentation is required.

IX. Determination Under Executive Order 12866

DOE has determined this is not a significant regulatory action

because it does not meet the criteria of Executive Order 12866, 58 FR

51735. Western has an exemption from centralized regulatory review

under Executive Order 12866; accordingly, no clearance of this notice

by OMB is required.

Issued at Washington, D. C. on July 30, 1996.

Joel K. Bladow,

Assistant Administrator.

[FR Doc. 96-20078 Filed 8-6-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450-01-P