63566 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 198 / Thursday, October 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

1022, Revision 3, that are underlined are 

new and not found in Revision 2, and 

items that have a strikethrough are being 

deleted from Revision 2. Although the 

underlines and strikethroughs are 

included in the draft document, the 

staff’s intention is to remove them upon 

final publication of NUREG–1022, 

Revision 3. Any changes in the draft 

that are not discussed in the 

‘‘Discussion of Changes’’ document are 

to be considered editorial in nature and 

should not be construed to have any 

regulatory or technical significance. 

Backfit Analysis 

The NRC has determined that the 

Backfit Rule, 10 CFR 50.109, 

‘‘Backfitting,’’ does not apply to the 

issuance of the revised guidance in 

NUREG–1022, Revision 3. The revised 

guidance in NUREG–1022, Revision 3, 

addresses compliance with the 

information collection and reporting 

requirements in 10 CFR 50.72 and 10 

CFR 50.73. The Backfit Rule does not 

apply to information collection and 

reporting requirements. Therefore, the 

NRC has not prepared a backfit analysis 

for the issuance of Revision 3 to 

NUREG–1022. 

In addition, the NRC has determined 

that issuance of the revised guidance in 

NUREG–1022, Revision 3, is not 

inconsistent with any of the issue 

finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52, 

‘‘Licenses, certifications, and approvals 

for nuclear power plants.’’ Those issue 

finality provisions do not apply to 

information collection and reporting 

obligations imposed on operators of 

nuclear power plants. In addition, the 

issue finality provisions in 10 CFR part 

52 do not apply to prospective 

applicants. As of the issuance of this 

revised guidance, there are no holders of 

combined licenses under 10 CFR part 

52. Hence, there are no entities 

currently protected by 10 CFR part 52 

issue finality provisions relevant to 

operation (i.e., the period after the 

Commission has made the finding under 

10 CFR 52.103(g)). Therefore, the NRC is 

not precluded from issuing NUREG– 

1022, Revision 3, by any of the 10 CFR 

Part 52 issue finality provisions. 

Regulatory Analysis 

The NRC performs regulatory analyses 

to support many NRC actions that affect 

nuclear power reactor and nonpower 

reactor licensees. The regulatory 

analysis process is intended to be an 

integral part of the NRC’s 

decisionmaking that systematically 

provides complete disclosure of the 

relevant information supporting a 

regulatory decision. The NUREG/BR– 

0058, Revision 4, ‘‘Regulatory Analysis 

Guidelines of the U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission,’’ issued 

September 2004 (ADAMS Accession No. 

ML042820192) sets forth the NRC’s 

policy for the preparation and the 

contents of regulatory analyses. As 

discussed in Section 2.2 of NUREG/BR– 

0058, Revision 4, mechanisms used by 

the NRC staff to establish or 

communicate generic requirements, 

guidance, requests, or staff positions 

that would affect a change in the use of 

resources by its licensees should 

include an accompanying regulatory 

analysis. The changes found in Draft 

NUREG–1022, Revision 3, can be 

construed as offering new positions or 

possibly affecting licensee resources. As 

a result, the staff determined that it 

should perform a regulatory analysis in 

order to provide complete disclosure of 

the relevant information supporting 

decisions associated with changes found 

in Draft NUREG–1022, Revision 3. The 

regulatory analysis can be found in 

ADAMS under Accession No. 

ML11116A168. 

Public Comments 

This document requests comments 

from interested members of the public 

by December 12, 2011. After evaluating 

the comments received, the staff will 

either reconsider the proposed change 

or announce the availability of the 

change in a subsequent document 

published in the Federal Register 

(perhaps with some changes as a result 

of public comments). 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day 

of September 2011. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Timothy Kobetz, 

Branch Chief, Reactor Inspection Branch, 

Division of Inspections and Regional Support, 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2011–26419 Filed 10–12–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 431 

RIN 1904–AC62 

Efficiency and Renewables Advisory 

Committee, Appliance Standards 

Subcommittee, Negotiated Rulemaking 

Subcommittee/Working Group for 

Liquid-Immersed and Medium- and 

Low-Voltage Dry-Type Distribution 

Transformers 

AGENCY: Department of Energy, Office of 

Energy Efficiency and Renewable 

Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of open meeting. 

SUMMARY: This document announces an 

open meeting of two Negotiated 

Rulemaking Working Groups; one 

concerning Liquid Immersed and 

Medium-Voltage Dry-Type and the 

second addressing Low-Voltage DryType Distribution Transformers. The 

Liquid Immersed and Medium-Voltage 

Dry-Type Group (MV Group) and the 

Low-Voltage Dry-Type Group (LV 

Group) are working groups within the 

Appliance Standards Subcommittee of 

the Efficiency and Renewables Advisory 

Committee (ERAC). The purpose of the 

MV and LV Groups is to discuss and, if 

possible, reach consensus on a proposed 

rule for regulating the energy efficiency 

of distribution transformers, as 

authorized by the Energy Policy 

Conservation Act (EPCA) of 1975, as 

amended, 42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(6)(C) and 

6317(a). 

DATES: Tuesday, November 8, 2011; 

9 a.m.–6 p.m., Wednesday, November 9, 

2011; 9 a.m.–6 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: The meeting on November 

8, 2011, will be held at the Edison 

Electric Institute, 701 Pennsylvania 

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004– 

2696. 

The meeting on November 9, 2011, 

will be held at the U.S. Department of 

Energy, 950 L’Enfant Plaza, Room 6097– 

6098, Washington, DC 20024. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Cymbalsky, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Office of Building Technologies (EE–2J), 

1000 Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–0121. 

Telephone: (202) 287–1692. E-mail: 

John.Cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background: DOE has decided to use 

the negotiated rulemaking process to 

develop proposed energy efficiency 

standards for distribution transformers. 

The primary reasons for using the 

negotiated rulemaking process for 

developing a proposed Federal standard 

is that stakeholders strongly support a 

consensual rulemaking effort and DOE 

believes such a regulatory negotiation 

process will be less adversarial and 

better suited to resolving the complex 

technical issues raised by this 

rulemaking. An important virtue of 

negotiated rulemaking is that it allows 

expert dialog that is much better than 

traditional techniques at getting the 

facts and issues right and will result in 

a proposed rule that will effectively 

reflect Congressional intent. 

A regulatory negotiation will enable 

DOE to engage in direct and sustained 

dialog with informed, interested, and 

affected parties when drafting the 

proposed regulation that is then 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 198 / Thursday, October 13, 2011 / Proposed Rules 63567 

1 Documents related to Commission rulemakings 

are available at http://www.fec.gov/fosers. 

presented to the public for comment. 

Gaining this early understanding of all 

parties’ perspectives allows DOE to 

address key issues at an earlier stage of 

the process, thereby allowing more time 

for an iterative process to resolve issues. 

A rule drafted by negotiation with 

informed and affected parties is more 

likely to maximize benefits while 

minimizing unnecessary costs than one 

conceived or drafted without the 

opportunity for sustained dialog among 

interested and expert parties. DOE 

anticipates that there will be a need for 

fewer substantive changes to a proposed 

rule developed under a regulatory 

negotiation process prior to the 

publication of a final rule. 

To the maximum extent possible, 

consistent with the legal obligations of 

the Department, DOE will use the 

consensus of the advisory committee or 

subcommittee as the basis for the rule 

the Department proposes for public 

notice and comment. 

Purpose of the Meeting: To continue 

the process of seeking consensus on a 

proposed rule for setting standards for 

the energy efficiency of liquid immersed 

and medium- and low-voltage dry type 

distribution transformers, as authorized 

by the Energy Policy Conservation Act 

(EPCA) of 1975, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 

6313(a)(6)(C) and 6317(a). 

Tentative Agenda: The MV Group 

will meet at 9:00 a.m. and will conclude 

at 6 p.m. on Tuesday, November 8, 

2011. The LV Group will meet at 9 a.m. 

through 6 p.m. on Wednesday, 

November 9, 2011. The tentative agenda 

for the meetings includes continued 

discussion regarding the analyses of 

alternate standard levels and negotiation 

efforts to address the perceived issues. 

Public Participation: Members of the 

public are welcome to observe the 

business of the meetings and to make 

comments related to the issues being 

discussed at appropriate points, when 

called on by the moderator. The 

facilitator will make every effort to hear 

the views of all interested parties within 

limits required for the orderly conduct 

of business. To attend the meeting and/ 

or to make oral statements regarding any 

of the items on the agenda, e-mail 

erac@ee.doe.gov. Please include ‘‘MV 

and LV Work Group 110811’’ in the 

subject line of the message. Please be 

sure to specify which working group 

discussion you will be attending. In the 

e-mail, please provide your name, 

organization, citizenship and contact 

information. Space is limited. 

Participation in the meeting is not a 

prerequisite for submission of written 

comments. ERAC invites written 

comments from all interested parties. If 

you would like to file a written 

statement with the committee, you may 

do so either by submitting a hard or 

electronic copy before or after the 

meeting. Electronic copy of written 

statements should be e-mailed to 

erac@ee.doe.gov. 

Minutes: The minutes of the meeting 

will be available for public review at 

http://www.erac.energy.gov. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 5, 

2011. 

LaTanya R. Butler, 

Acting Deputy Committee Management 

Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2011–26479 Filed 10–12–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

11 CFR Part 110 

[Notice 2011–14] 

Internet Communication Disclaimers 

AGENCY: Federal Election Commission. 

ACTION: Advance Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Election 

Commission requests comments on 

whether to begin a rulemaking to revise 

its regulations concerning disclaimers 

on certain Internet communications 

and, if so, what changes should be made 

to those rules. The Commission intends 

to review the comments received as it 

decides what revisions, if any, it will 

propose making to these rules. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 14, 2011. The 

Commission will determine at a later 

date whether to hold a public hearing 

on this Notice. If a hearing is to be held, 

the Commission will publish a notice in 

the Federal Register announcing the 

date and time of the hearing. 

ADDRESSES: All comments must be in 

writing. Comments may be submitted 

electronically via the Commission’s 

Web site at http://www.fec.gov/fosers. 

Commenters are encouraged to submit 

comments electronically to ensure 

timely receipt and consideration. 

Alternatively, comments may be 

submitted in paper form. Paper 

comments must be sent to the Federal 

Election Commission, Attn.: Amy L. 

Rothstein, Assistant General Counsel, 

999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20463. All comments must include the 

full name and postal service address of 

the commenter, and of each commenter 

if filed jointly, or they will not be 

considered. The Commission will post 

comments on its Web site at the 

conclusion of the comment period. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. 

Amy L. Rothstein, Assistant General 

Counsel, or Ms. Jessica Selinkoff, 

Attorney, 999 E Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20463, (202) 694–1650 

or (800) 424–9530. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Federal Election Commission is 

publishing this Advance Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking seeking 

comments on whether and how the 

Commission should revise its rules at 11 

CFR 110.11 regarding disclaimers on 

Internet communications. Specifically, 

the Commission is considering whether 

to modify the disclaimer requirements 

for certain Internet communications, or 

to provide exceptions thereto, consistent 

with the Federal Election Campaign Act, 

2 U.S.C. 431 et seq., as amended (‘‘the 

Act’’). In the event the Commission 

adopts a final rule on this issue, given 

the timeframe of the current election 

cycle, the Commission does not 

anticipate the rule would become 

effective for the 2011–2012 election 

cycle. 

1. Current Statutory and Regulatory 

Framework 

Under the Act and Commission 

regulations, a ‘‘disclaimer’’ is a 

statement that must appear on certain 

communications to identify who paid 

for them and, where applicable, whether 

the communications were authorized by 

a candidate. 2 U.S.C. 441d(a); 11 CFR 

110.11. See also Explanation and 

Justification for Final Rules on 

Disclaimers, Fraudulent Solicitations, 

Civil Penalties, and Personal Use of 

Campaign Funds, 67 FR 76962, 76962 

(Dec. 13, 2002) (‘‘2002 Disclaimer 

E&J’’).1 With some exceptions, the Act 

and Commission regulations require 

disclaimers for public communications: 

(1) Made by a political committee; (2) 

that expressly advocate the election or 

defeat of a clearly identified Federal 

candidate; or (3) that solicit a 

contribution. 2 U.S.C. 441d(a); 11 CFR 

110.11(a). In addition to public 

communications by political 

committees, ‘‘electronic mail of more 

than 500 substantially similar 

communications when sent by a 

political committee * * * and all 

Internet Web sites of political 

committees available to the general 

public’’ also must have disclaimers. 11 

CFR 110.11(a). 

While the term ‘‘public 

communication’’ generally does not 

include Internet communications, it 

does include ‘‘communications placed 

for a fee on another person’s Web site.’’ 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1