71678 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 24, 2010 / Notices 

1Energy Policy Act of 2005, Public Law 109–58, 

Title XII, Subtitle A, 119 Stat. 594, 941 (2005), 16 

U.S.C. 824o. 

2 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(3). 

3On March 16, 2007, the Commission approved 

83 of the 107 standards initially filed by NERC. See 

Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power 

System, Order No. 693, 72 FR, 16,416 (April 4, 

2007), 118 FERC ¶ 61,218 (2007), order on reh’g 

Order No. 693–A, 120 FERC ¶ 61,053 (2007). 

4 Version Two Facilities Design, Connections and 

Maintenance Reliability Standards, Order No. 722, 

126 FERC Stats. & Regs. 61,255 (2009). 

copies of the claim should be included 

with each submission. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Contact David Mathes at (301) 903–7222 

of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office 

of Environmental Management, Office of 

Disposal Operations. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE 

published a final rule under 10 CFR Part 

765 in the Federal Register on May 23, 

1994, (59 FR 26714) to carry out the 

requirements of Title X of the Energy 

Policy Act of 1992 (sections 1001–1004 

of Pub. L. 102–486, 42 U.S.C. 2296a et 

seq.) and to establish the procedures for 

eligible licensees to submit claims for 

reimbursement. DOE amended the final 

rule on June 3, 2003, (68 FR 32955) to 

adopt several technical and 

administrative amendments (e.g., 

statutory increases in the 

reimbursement ceilings). Title X 

requires DOE to reimburse eligible 

uranium and thorium licensees for 

certain costs of decontamination, 

decommissioning, reclamation, and 

other remedial action incurred by 

licensees at active uranium and thorium 

processing sites to remediate byproduct 

material generated as an incident of 

sales to the United States Government. 

To be reimbursable, costs of remedial 

action must be for work which is 

necessary to comply with applicable 

requirements of the Uranium Mill 

Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 

(42 U.S.C. 7901 et seq.) or, where 

appropriate, with requirements 

established by a State pursuant to a 

discontinuance agreement under section 

274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 

(42 U.S.C. 2021). Claims for 

reimbursement must be supported by 

reasonable documentation as 

determined by DOE in accordance with 

10 CFR part 765. Funds for 

reimbursement will be provided from 

the Uranium Enrichment 

Decontamination and Decommissioning 

Fund established at the Department of 

Treasury pursuant to section 1801 of the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 

2297g). Payment or obligation of funds 

shall be subject to the requirements of 

the Anti-Deficiency Act (31 U.S.C. 

1341). 

Authority: Section 1001–1004 of Pub. L. 

102–486, 106 Stat. 2776 (42 U.S.C. 2296a et 

seq.). 

Issued in Washington, DC, on this 17th of 

November 2010. 

David E. Mathes, 

Office of Disposal Operations, Office of 

Technical and Regulatory Support. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29605 Filed 11–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. IC11–725D–000; FERC–725d ] 

Commission Information Collection 

Activities; Comment Request; 

Extension 

November 17, 2010. 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed information 

collection and request for comments. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

requirements of section 3506(c)(2)(A) of 

the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 

44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A) (2006), (Pub. L. 

104–13), the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission (Commission or FERC) is 

soliciting public comment on the 

proposed information collection 

described below. 

DATES: Comments in consideration of 

the collection of information are due 

January 24, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Commenters must send an 

original of their comments to: Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 

Secretary of the Commission, 888 First 

Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. 

Comments may be filed either on paper 

or on CD/DVD, and should refer to 

Docket No. IC11–725D–000. Documents 

must be prepared in an acceptable filing 

format and in compliance with 

Commission submission guidelines at 

http://www.ferc.gov/help/submissionguide.asp. eFiling and eSubscription are 

not available for Docket No. IC11–725D– 

000, due to a system issue. 

All comments and FERC issuances 

may be viewed, printed or downloaded 

remotely through FERC’s eLibrary at 

http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ 

elibrary.asp, by searching on Docket No. 

IC11–725D. For user assistance, contact 

FERC Online Support by e-mail at 

ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or by phone 

at: (866) 208–3676 (toll-free), or (202) 

502–8659 for TTY. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ellen Brown may be reached by e-mail 

at DataClearance@FERC.gov, telephone 

at (202) 502–8663, and fax at (202) 273– 

0873. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

information collected by the FERC– 

725D, ‘‘Facilities Design, Connections 

and Maintenance Reliability Standards’’ 

(OMB Control No. 1902–0247), is 

required to implement the statutory 

provisions of section 215 of the Federal 

Power Act (FPA) (16 USC 824o). On 

August 8, 2005, the Electricity 

Modernization Act of 2005, which is 

Title XII, Subtitle A, of the Energy 

Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005), was 

enacted into law.1 EPAct 2005 added a 

new section 215 to the FPA, which 

required a Commission-certified Electric 

Reliability Organization (ERO) to 

develop mandatory and enforceable 

reliability standards, which are subject 

to Commission review and approval. 

Once approved, the reliability standards 

may be enforced by the ERO subject to 

Commission oversight, or the 

Commission can independently enforce 

reliability standards.2

On February 3, 2006, the Commission 

issued Order No. 672, implementing 

section 215 of the FPA. Pursuant to 

Order No. 672, the Commission certified 

one organization, North American 

Electric Reliability Council (NERC), as 

the ERO. The reliability standards 

developed by the ERO and approved by 

the Commission will apply to users, 

owners and operators of the Bulk-Power 

System, as set forth in each reliability 

standard. 

On November 15, 2006, NERC filed 20 

revised reliability standards and three 

new reliability standards for 

Commission approval. The Commission 

addressed the 20 revised Reliability 

Standards in Order No. 693.3 The three 

new reliability standards were approved 

by FERC on December 27, 2007 in Order 

705 and were designated by NERC as 

follows: 

• FAC–010–1 (System Operating 

Limits Methodology for the Planning 

Horizon). 

• FAC–011–1 (System Operating 

Limits Methodology for the Operations 

Horizon). 

• FAC–014–1 (Establish and 

Communicate System Operating Limits). 

These standards were subsequently 

modified by NERC in April of 2008 and 

submitted to the Commission for 

approval. On March 20, 2009 the 

Commission approved NERC’s 

modifications to the FAC standards in 

Order No. 722 and NERC now 

designates these standards as FAC–010– 

2, FAC–011–2, and FAC–014–2.4 The 

three newly approved FAC reliability 

standards require planning authorities 

and reliability coordinators to establish 

methodologies to determine system 

operating limits (SOLs) for the bulkWReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 226 / Wednesday, November 24, 2010 / Notices 71679 

5The difference between the two is that FAC–10– 

1 deals with SOL methodology for the planning 

horizon and FAC–011–1 with SOL methodology for 

the operating horizon. 

6This figure comes from NERC’s compliance 

registry matrix which was updated on 10/27/10 and 

includes all entities registered as a Planning 

Authority, Reliability Coordinator, Transmission 

Planner, or Transmission Operator functions that 

are responsible for compliance with FAC–014–2. 

7Hours are attributable to developing SOLs. 

Recordkeeping pertains to the documentation to be 

maintained for audits. 

8Estimate based on hourly costs for legal, 

technical and administrative staff. See http:// 

www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm and http:// 

www.marylandlawyerblog.com/2009/07/average_

hourly_rate_for_lawyer.html. 

9Estimate based on hourly costs for technical and 

clerical staff. See http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/ 

naics2_22.htm. 

10Estimate based on in-office square foot costs 

obtained from a Commission assessment of the 

industry performed in 2010. 

power system in the planning and 

operation horizons. 

The three reliability standards do not 

require responsible entities to file 

information with the Commission. Nor, 

with the exception of a three-year selfcertification of compliance, do the 

Reliability Standards require 

responsible entities to file information 

with the ERO or Regional Entities. 

However, the Reliability Standards do 

require responsible entities to develop 

and maintain certain information for a 

specified period of time, subject to 

inspection by the ERO or Regional 

Entities. 

Reliability standard FAC–010–2 

requires the planning authority to have 

a documented methodology for use in 

developing SOLs and must retain 

evidence that it issued its SOL 

methodology to relevant reliability 

coordinators, transmission operators 

and adjacent planning authorities. 

Likewise, the planning authority must 

respond to technical comments on the 

methodology within 45 days of receipt. 

Further, each planning authority must 

self-certify its compliance to the 

compliance monitor once every three 

years. Reliability standard FAC–011–2 

requires similar documentation by the 

reliability coordinator.5 Reliability 

standard FAC–014–2 requires the 

reliability coordinator, planning 

authority, transmission operator, and 

transmission planner to verify 

compliance through self-certification 

submitted to the compliance monitor 

annually. These entities must also 

document that they have developed 

SOLs consistent with the applicable 

SOL methodology and that they have 

provided SOLs to entities identified in 

Requirement 5 of the reliability 

standard. Further, the planning 

authority must maintain a list of 

multiple contingencies and their 

associated stability limits. 

Action: The Commission is requesting 

a three-year extension of the FERC– 

725D reporting requirements, with no 

changes. 

Burden Statement: The estimated 

annual public reporting burden follows: 

Data collection Number of 

respondents 6

Average 

number of 

responses per 

respondent 

Average burden hours 

per response 

Total annual burden 

hours 

(1) (2) (3) (1) × (2) × (3) 

FERC–725D .......................................................................... 470 1 Reporting: 7 90 

Recordkeeping: 210 

Reporting: 42,300 

Recordkeeping: 98,700 

Total ................................................................................ 470 ........................ ..................................... 141,000 

The estimated average annualized 

cost is increased from the previous 

estimate due to an increase in the 

number of entities who are registered for 

the Planning Authority, Reliability 

Coordinator, Transmission Planner, and 

Transmission Operator functions. The 

new estimated average annualized cost 

is $6,640,500 ($14,128.72 per 

respondent), as shown here: 

• Reporting: 8 42,300 hours @ $95/ 

hour = $4,018,500. 

• Recordkeeping: 9 98,700 hours @ 

$26/hour = $2,566,200. 

• Storage: 10 1,800 sq. ft. @ $31/sq. ft. 

= $55,800. 

The reporting burden includes the 

total time, effort, or financial resources 

expended to generate, maintain, retain, 

disclose, or provide the information 

including: (1) Reviewing instructions; 

(2) developing, acquiring, installing, and 

utilizing technology and systems for the 

purposes of collecting, validating, 

verifying, processing, maintaining, 

disclosing and providing information; 

(3) adjusting the existing ways to 

comply with any previously applicable 

instructions and requirements; (4) 

training personnel to respond to a 

collection of information; (5) searching 

data sources; (6) completing and 

reviewing the collection of information; 

and (7) transmitting or otherwise 

disclosing the information. 

The estimate of cost for respondents 

is based upon salaries for professional 

and clerical support, as well as direct 

and indirect overhead costs. Direct costs 

include all costs directly attributable to 

providing this information, such as 

administrative costs and the cost for 

information technology. Indirect or 

overhead costs are costs incurred by an 

organization in support of its mission. 

These costs apply to activities which 

benefit the whole organization rather 

than any one particular function or 

activity. 

Comments are invited on: (1) Whether 

the proposed collection of information 

is necessary for the proper performance 

of the functions of the Commission, 

including whether the information will 

have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of 

the agency’s estimate of the burden of 

the proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; (3) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (4) ways to minimize the 

burden of the collection of information 

on those who are to respond, including 

the use of appropriate automated, 

electronic, mechanical, or other 

technological collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology 

e.g. permitting electronic submission of 

responses. 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–29571 Filed 11–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with NOTICES