76708 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Notices 

1The Commission voted 3–1–1 to approve this 

notice. Chairman Inez Tennenbaum, Commissioner 

Thomas Moore, and Commissioner Robert Adler 

approved the notice. Commissioner Nancy Nord 

voted to approve a different version of the notice. 

Commissioner Anne Northup abstained. 

33. If yes, how did the perceived and 

actual benefits compare to estimated 

and actual costs over the short- and 

long-run? 

34. What were the main difficulties 

that you experienced during a 

transition/implementation of new data 

standards? What could the organization 

developing and maintaining the 

standards do (or avoid) to help alleviate 

these difficulties? 

35. Would it be useful to use a 

standardized, computer readable 

description for financial derivatives 

instruments? How would it be useful? 

Would such a standard be useful for 

communicating transactions, storing 

position information, both, or other 

purposes? What would be the costs 

involved? 

36. How should regulators and 

standard setters implement description 

standards in the derivatives market? 

Making computer descriptions legally 

binding: 

37. Are there currently aspects of 

financial derivatives messaged in a 

computer readable format that have a 

legally-binding effect? 

38. What information, if any, is not 

captured that would be required to 

make the computer descriptions 

themselves, without reference to other 

materials, legally binding? 

39. What information would need to 

be captured for a legally binding 

contract that would not need to be 

captured for analyzing the contract? Is 

there a substantial cost differential 

between the processes needed to 

capture one set of information versus 

another? 

40. Would there be a benefit to 

making the computer readable 

descriptions of financial derivatives 

legally binding? Would there be 

drawbacks? What are they? 

Other: 

41. Is there other information not 

called for by these questions that we 

should consider? 

Dated: December 2, 2010. 

By the CFTC. 

David Stawick, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

By the Commission (SEC). 

Elizabeth M. Murphy, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–30905 Filed 12–8–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6351–01–8011–01–P 

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY 

COMMISSION 

[CPSC Docket No. CPSC–2010–0115] 

Extension of the Date by Which Youth 

All-Terrain Vehicles Must Be Tested 

and Certified 

AGENCY: Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of extension of date of 

testing and certification of youth allterrain vehicles. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Consumer Product 

Safety Commission (‘‘CPSC’’ or 

‘‘Commission’’) is announcing that the 

Commission has extended, by 60 days, 

the date by which manufacturers 

(including importers) of youth allterrain vehicles (ATVs) must submit 

sufficient samples of such products to a 

third party conformity assessment body 

approved by the Commission for testing 

and, based on such testing, issue a 

certificate that the products 

manufactured after the deadline comply 

with certain CPSC regulations relating 

to ATVs. The extension is granted 

because there are an insufficient number 

of third party conformity assessment 

bodies accredited by the Commission to 

permit testing and certification under 

the original schedule.1

DATES: The date after which youth ATVs 

must be tested by third party conformity 

assessment bodies accredited by the 

Commission to assess conformity with 

the CPSC regulations for all-terrain 

vehicles is extended until January 25, 

2011. 

Comments in response to this notice 

should be submitted by December 30, 

2010. Comments on this notice should 

be captioned ‘‘Third Party Testing and 

Certification of Youth All-Terrain 

Vehicles: Request for Stay of 

Enforcement and Other Relief.’’ 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by Docket No. CPSC–2010– 

0115, by any of the following methods: 

Electronic Submissions: Submit 

electronic comments in the following 

way: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

To ensure timely processing of 

comments, the Commission is no longer 

accepting comments submitted by 

electronic mail (e-mail) except through: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Written Submissions: Submit written 

submissions in the following way: 

Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for 

paper, disk, or CD–ROM submissions), 

preferably in five copies, to: Office of 

the Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product 

Safety Commission, Room 820, 4330 

East West Highway, Bethesda, MD 

20814; telephone (301) 504–7923. 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the agency name and 

docket number for this notice. All 

comments received may be posted 

without change to: http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided. Do not 

submit confidential business 

information, trade secret information, or 

other sensitive or protected information 

(such as a Social Security Number) 

electronically; if furnished at all, such 

information should be submitted in 

writing. 

Docket: For access to the docket to 

read background documents or 

comments received, go to: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard McCallion, Program Area Team 

Leader, Office of Hazard Identification 

and Reduction, U.S. Consumer Product 

Safety Commission,10901 Darnestown 

Road, Gaithersburg, MD 20878; e-mail: 

rmccallion@cpsc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

Section 14(a)(3)(B)(vi) of the CPSA, as 

added by section 102(a)(2) of the 

Consumer Product Safety Improvement 

Act of 2008 (‘‘CPSIA’’), Public Law 110– 

314, directs the CPSC to establish and 

publish a notice of requirements for 

accreditation of third party conformity 

assessment bodies to assess children’s 

products for conformity with ‘‘other 

children’s product safety rules.’’ Section 

14(f)(1) of the CPSA defines ‘‘children’s 

product safety rule’’ as ‘‘a consumer 

product safety rule under [the CPSA] or 

similar rule, regulation, standard, or ban 

under any other Act enforced by the 

Commission, including a rule declaring 

a consumer product to be a banned 

hazardous product or substance.’’ Under 

section 14(a)(3)(A) of the CPSA, 15 

U.S.C. 2063(a)(3)(A), each manufacturer 

(including an importer) or private 

labeler of products subject to those 

regulations must have products that are 

manufactured more than 90 days after 

the establishment and Federal Register 

publication of a notice of the 

requirements for accreditation tested by 

a third party conformity assessment 

body accredited to do so, and must issue 

a certificate of compliance with the 

applicable regulations based on that 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Notices 76709 

testing. Pursuant to section 14(a)(3)(F) of 

the CPSA, the Commission may extend 

the 90-day period by not more than 60 

days if the Commission determines that 

an insufficient number of third party 

conformity assessment bodies have been 

accredited to permit certification for a 

children’s product safety rule. 

Irrespective of certification, the product 

in question must comply with 

applicable CPSC requirements (see, e.g., 

section 14(h) of the CPSA, as added by 

section 102(b) of the CPSIA). 

In the Federal Register of August 27, 

2010 (75 FR 52616) (accessible at 

http://www.cpsc.gov/businfo/frnotices/ 

fr10/atv.pdf), the Commission published 

a notice of requirements that provided 

the criteria and process for Commission 

acceptance of accreditation of third 

party conformity assessment bodies for 

testing of ATVs designed or intended 

primarily for children 12 years of age or 

younger pursuant to 16 CFR part 1420, 

the CPSC regulations under the CPSA 

relating to ATVs. The notice of 

requirements stated that, for youth 

ATVs manufactured after November 26, 

2010, the manufacturer ‘‘must issue a 

certificate of compliance with 16 CFR 

part 1420 based on’’ testing performed 

by a third party conformity assessment 

body (75 FR at 52618). The notice also 

asked for comments on the notice to be 

received by September 27, 2010. 

The notice of requirements also stated 

that the Commission will accept a 

certificate of compliance with 16 CFR 

part 1420, Requirements for All Terrain 

Vehicles, based on testing performed by 

an accredited third party conformity 

assessment body (including a 

government-owned or governmentcontrolled conformity assessment body, 

or a firewalled conformity assessment 

body) prior to the Commission’s 

acceptance of its accreditation, if all the 

following conditions are met: 

• When the product was tested, the 

testing was done by a third party 

conformity assessment body, which at 

that time, was ISO/IEC 17025 accredited 

by an International Laboratory 

Accreditation Cooperation-Mutual 

Recognition Arrangement (‘‘ILAC/ 

MRA’’) signatory. For firewalled 

conformity assessment bodies, the 

Commission will not accept a certificate 

of compliance based upon testing 

performed by the third party conformity 

assessment body, unless the firewalled 

conformity assessment body was 

accredited, by order, as a firewalled 

conformity assessment body before the 

product was tested, even though the 

order would not have included the test 

methods in 16 CFR part 1420. 

• The third party conformity 

assessment body’s application for 

testing using the test methods in 16 CFR 

part 1420 is accepted by the CPSC on or 

before October 26, 2010. 

• The product was tested on or after 

November 4, 2008 (the date that 16 CFR 

part 1420 was published). 

• The accreditation scope in effect for 

the third party conformity assessment 

body at the time of testing expressly 

included testing to 16 CFR part 1420. 

• The test results show compliance 

with the applicable current standards 

and/or regulations. 

• The third party conformity 

assessment body’s accreditation, 

including 16 CFR part 1420 in its scope, 

remains in effect through the effective 

date for mandatory third party testing 

and manufacturer certification for 

conformity with 16 CFR part 1420. 

75 FR at 52619. Obviously, the date 

specified in that notice for acceptance of 

such ‘‘retrospective’’ testing, October 26, 

2010, has passed. 

II. Requests for Extension 

In response to the notice of 

requirements, the Specialty Vehicle 

Institute of America (‘‘SVIA’’) filed a 

comment that included a request that 

the Commission extend by 60 days the 

date by which manufacturers must 

begin testing and certification of youth 

ATVs. Among the reasons given for the 

extension were the complexity of 16 

CFR part 1420 and that no third party 

conformity assessment bodies have been 

accredited by an accrediting body that is 

a signatory to the ILAC/MRA, a 

prerequisite for such conformity 

assessment bodies to be accepted by the 

CPSC. 

On November 17, 2010, the SVIA filed 

a ‘‘Petition for Extension and Stay of 

Enforcement for Third Party Testing for 

Certain All-Terrain Vehicles.’’ The 

petition requested a 60-day extension of 

the date by which manufacturers must 

begin testing and certification of youth 

ATVs, stating that no third party 

conformity assessment bodies have been 

accredited by the CPSC to test for 

conformity with 16 CFR part 1420. The 

SVIA concluded that it is unlikely that 

a sufficient number of accredited third 

party conformity assessment bodies will 

exist by the end of the requested 60-day 

extension. As a result, the SVIA also 

requested that the Commission consider 

additional forms of relief, such as a 

further stay of enforcement of these 

requirements for one year (to November 

27, 2011). Hereafter, the comment and 

the petition will be referred to 

collectively as ‘‘the petition.’’ 

III. Commission Action on the Petition 

As to the request for a 60-day 

extension of the date by which 

manufacturers must begin testing and 

certification of youth ATVs, the 

Commission is not aware of any third 

party conformity assessment bodies that 

have the requisite accreditation by an 

ILAC–MRA signatory to test for 

conformity to 16 CFR part 1420. Given 

this situation, the Commission is 

granting the request for a 60-day 

extension. 

The Commission is not granting or 

denying the request for a one-year stay 

of enforcement, or other relief, at this 

time. The Commission invites comment 

on this request. Comments should be 

filed by December 30, 2010. The 

Commission particularly is interested in 

comments on: 

1. What efforts have been made by 

ATV manufacturers or others to obtain 

tests of youth ATVs by third party 

conformity assessment bodies and to 

encourage third party conformity 

assessment bodies to become accredited 

to do so? 

2. What is the status of the efforts of 

third party conformity assessment 

bodies to become accredited to test 

youth ATVs, and how long will it take 

to obtain such accreditation? 

3. What barriers currently exist to 

gaining accreditation that are 

specifically related to youth ATVs? 

4. How are ATV manufacturers 

currently demonstrating compliance 

with the ANSI/SVIA–2007–1 standard? 

What ATV manufacturers are currently 

doing in-house testing of their ATVs for 

conformance to the standard? What 

steps, if any, have these manufacturers 

taken to have their existing in-house 

testing facilities become accredited third 

party conformity assessment bodies? 

5. What third party testing facilities 

are capable of testing youth ATVs to the 

ANSI/SVIA–2007–1 standard? 

IV. Dates Affected by This Extension 

This extension is effective beginning 

on November 27, 2010. Accordingly, 

each manufacturer of a youth ATV 

subject to 16 CFR part 1420 must have 

samples of any such product, or samples 

that are identical in all material respects 

to such product, that is manufactured 

after January 25, 2011, tested by a third 

party conformity assessment body 

accredited to do so by the Commission. 

Further, for youth ATVs manufactured 

after January 25, 2011, the manufacturer 

must issue a certificate of compliance 

with 16 CFR part 1420 based on that 

testing. (Under the CPSA, the term 

‘‘manufacturer’’ includes anyone who 

manufactures or imports a product. See 

16 CFR part 1110.) 

Furthermore, the Commission is 

changing the dates it had established for 

when it would accept the results of tests 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
76710 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 236 / Thursday, December 9, 2010 / Notices 

of youth ATVs conducted by a third 

party conformity assessment body 

before that body became accredited by 

the CPSC. Accordingly, the Commission 

will accept a certificate of compliance 

with 16 CFR part 1420, Requirements 

for All Terrain Vehicles, based on 

testing performed by an accredited third 

party conformity assessment body 

(including a government-owned or 

government-controlled conformity 

assessment body, or a firewalled 

conformity assessment body) prior to 

the Commission’s acceptance of its 

accreditation, if all the following 

conditions are met: 

• When the product was tested, the 

testing was done by a third party 

conformity assessment body that at that 

time was ISO/IEC 17025 accredited by 

an ILAC–MRA signatory. For firewalled 

conformity assessment bodies, the 

Commission will not accept a certificate 

of compliance based on testing 

performed by the third party conformity 

assessment body unless the firewalled 

conformity assessment body was 

accredited by a Commission order as a 

firewalled conformity assessment body 

before the product was tested, even 

though the order will not have included 

the test methods in 16 CFR part 1420. 

• The third party conformity 

assessment body’s application for 

testing using the test methods in the 

regulations identified in this notice is 

accepted by the CPSC on or before 

December 27, 2010. 

• The product was tested on or after 

November 4, 2008 (the date that 16 CFR 

part 1420 was published). 

• The accreditation scope in effect for 

the third party conformity assessment 

body at the time of testing expressly 

included testing to 16 CFR part 1420. 

• The test results show compliance 

with the applicable current standards 

and/or regulations. 

• The third party conformity 

assessment body’s accreditation, 

including 16 CFR part 1420 in its scope, 

remains in effect through February 7, 

2011. 

Except for the dates that are adjusted 

by 60 days in this notice, all provisions 

of the notice of requirements published 

on August 27, 2010, 75 FR 52616, 

remain in effect. 

Dated: December 3, 2010. 

Todd A. Stevenson, 

Secretary, Consumer Product Safety 

Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2010–30981 Filed 12–8–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6355–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Combined Notice of Filings No. 1 

November 24, 2010. 

Take notice that the Commission 

received the following electric corporate 

filings: 

Docket Numbers: EC11–23–000. 

Applicants: Flat Water Wind Farm, 

LLC., Flat Water Holdings, LLC. 

Description: Application for 

Authorization of Transaction Pursuant 

to Section 203 of the Federal Power Act 

of Flat Water Wind Farm, LLC. 

Filed Date: 11/23/2010. 

Accession Number: 20101123–5111. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 

on Tuesday, December 14, 2010. 

Docket Numbers: EC11–24–000. 

Applicants: Elk Hills Power, LLC. 

Description: Application of Elk Hills 

Power, LLC. 

Filed Date: 11/23/2010. 

Accession Number: 20101123–5173. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 

on Tuesday, December 14, 2010. 

Take notice that the Commission 

received the following exempt 

wholesale generator filings: 

Docket Numbers: EG11–29–000. 

Applicants: Snowflake Power, LLC. 

Description: Self-Certification of EWG 

of Snowflake Power, LLC. 

Filed Date: 11/23/2010. 

Accession Number: 20101123–5134. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 

on Tuesday, December 14, 2010. 

Docket Numbers: EG11–30–000. 

Applicants: Evergreen Wind Power 

III, LLC. 

Description: Notice of EWG SelfCertification of Evergreen Wind Power 

III, LLC. 

Filed Date: 11/23/2010. 

Accession Number: 20101123–5135. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 

on Tuesday, December 14, 2010. 

Docket Numbers: EG11–31–000. 

Applicants: Paradise Solar Urban 

Renewal, L.L.C. 

Description: Notice of SelfCertification of Exempt Wholesale 

Generator Status of Paradise Solar 

Urban Renewal, L.L.C. 

Filed Date: 11/23/2010. 

Accession Number: 20101123–5160. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 

on Tuesday, December 14, 2010. 

Take notice that the Commission 

received the following electric rate 

filings: 

Docket Numbers: ER06–1399–009. 

Applicants: Sunbury Generation LP. 

Description: Sunbury Generation LP 

submits supplement to its notice of nonmaterial change in status pursuant to 

the Commission’s regulation at 18 CFR, 

Section 35.42. 

Filed Date: 11/18/2010. 

Accession Number: 20101118–5136. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 

on Thursday, December 09, 2010. 

Docket Numbers: ER10–1599–002. 

Applicants: Invenergy Cannon Falls 

LLC. 

Description: Invenergy Cannon Falls 

LLC. submits Supplemental Category 1 

Exemption Filing, to be effective 11/3/ 

2010. 

Filed Date: 11/23/2010. 

Accession Number: 20101123–5068. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 

on Tuesday, December 14, 2010. 

Docket Numbers: ER10–1600–002. 

Applicants: Forward Energy LLC. 

Description: Forward Energy LLC. 

submits tariff filing per 35: 

Supplemental Category 1 Exemption 

Filing to be effective 10/30/2010. 

Filed Date: 11/24/2010. 

Accession Number: 20101124–5034. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 

on Wednesday, December 15, 2010. 

Docket Numbers: ER10–1601–002. 

Applicants: Hardee Power Partners 

Limited. 

Description: Hardee Power Partners 

Limited submits tariff filing per 35: 

Supplemental Category 1 Exemption 

Filing to be effective 11/3/2010. 

Filed Date: 11/23/2010. 

Accession Number: 20101123–5087. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 

on Tuesday, December 14, 2010. 

Docket Numbers: ER10–1603–002. 

Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy LLC. 

Description: Grand Ridge Energy LLC. 

submits tariff filing per 35: 

Supplemental Category 1 Exemption 

Filing to be effective 11/3/2010. 

Filed Date: 11/24/2010. 

Accession Number: 20101124–5035. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 

on Wednesday, December 15, 2010. 

Docket Numbers: ER10–1604–002. 

Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy II 

LLC. 

Description: Grand Ridge Energy II 

LLC. submits tariff filing per 35: 

Supplemental Category 1 Exemption 

Filing to be effective 11/3/2010. 

Filed Date: 11/24/2010. 

Accession Number: 20101124–5036. 

Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time 

on Wednesday, December 15, 2010. 

Docket Numbers: ER10–1605–002. 

Applicants: Grand Ridge Energy III 

LLC. 

Description: Grand Ridge Energy III 

LLC. submits tariff filing per 35: 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES