Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 50 / Thursday, March 15, 2007 / Notices 12173 

representative of the applicant specified 

in the particular application. 

Philis J. Posey, 

Acting Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E7–4717 Filed 3–14–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

[Docket No. AD07–8–000] 

Review of Market Monitoring Policies; 

Second Notice of Technical 

Conference 

March 9, 2007. 

On January 25, 2007, the Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission 

(Commission) announced that a 

conference will be held to review the 

Commission’s general policies regarding 

market monitoring, on April 5, 2007, at 

the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426 in the 

Commission Meeting Room. The 

Commission had announced its intent to 

hold this conference in PJM 

Interconnection, LLC., order on reh’g, 

117 FERC ¶ 61,263 (2006). 

The Commission is making one 

change in the schedule with this notice, 

viz., to change the beginning of the 

conference from 9:30 a.m. to 9 a.m. 

(EDT). 

All interested persons are invited to 

attend. There is no registration fee to 

attend. 

Proactive oversight of the activities of 

regulated entities is a relatively recent 

development in the history of the 

Commission’s utility regulation, one 

largely driven by the Commission’s 

efforts to make greater use of market 

forces to discipline the activities of 

regulated entities. A significant aspect 

of this oversight effort has been the 

development of market monitoring units 

(MMUs) in the Commission-regulated 

Independent System Operators (ISOs) 

and Regional Transmission 

Organizations (RTOs), along with the 

establishment of independent market 

monitors (IMMs) of certain vertically 

integrated utilities as a condition of 

approving those utilities’ mergers or 

acquisition of assets. In addition, almost 

five years ago, the Commission 

dedicated staff members, now located in 

the Office of Enforcement’s Division of 

Energy Market Oversight (DEMO), to 

monitor natural gas and electricity 

markets. In that capacity, DEMO staff 

works closely with the MMUs and 

IMMs. 

In the technical conference, the 

Commission would like to explore the 

effectiveness of MMUs and IMMs both 

in performing market oversight and in 

serving a variety of interested 

stakeholders. The Commission does not 

intend to evaluate any individual MMU 

or IMM or to discuss issues in any 

pending proceeding. Rather, the 

Commission would like to focus on the 

concepts and principles involved in 

market monitoring and the relationship 

between the market monitors and the 

Commission market monitoring staff, 

informed by the experience of the 

industry since the inception of market 

monitoring. Of course, the Commission 

does not go into this conference with a 

blank slate. To the contrary, the 

Commission has spoken on many 

occasions on the role of market monitors 

in generic and case-specific 

proceedings. The Commission also 

issued a policy statement in May 2005. 

See Policy Statement on Market 

Monitoring Unit, 111 FERC ¶ 61,267 

(2005) (and citations therein). 

Accordingly, rather than hearing about 

what it has done, the Commission 

would like to hear about what it should 

do to improve its market monitoring 

program. 

With these thoughts in mind, the 

technical conference will be made up of 

two panels, each examining the role and 

effectiveness of market monitors from 

their respective perspectives, especially 

as that relates to market monitoring in 

the RTOs and ISOs. The panelists may 

discuss the IMMs as well as the MMUs. 

After time reserved for initial 

statements by the Members of the 

Commission starting at 9 a.m., the first 

panel (9:30 a.m. until 10:30 a.m.) will 

consist of individuals who have 

participated in, written about, or are 

otherwise informed about the 

development of the concept and 

function of market monitoring. Members 

of this panel will be asked to answer the 

following questions: 

1. What is the Commission’s market 

monitoring role in the context of 

ensuring the competitiveness of 

wholesale electricity markets? 

2. How do MMUs (as a concept or 

function) generally serve or facilitate 

that role? 

3. What changes, if any, in the current 

structure of MMUs could enhance their 

ability to assist the Commission in its 

market monitoring role? 

4. Are there other industries that are 

subject to comparable monitoring 

activities, and, if so, how are these 

activities structured? 

The next panel will be held in three 

parts (10:45 a.m. to 11:45 a.m., 12 noon 

to 1 p.m., and 2 p.m. to 3 p.m.) and will 

consist of representatives from the 

MMUs, the ISOs or RTOs, and the 

various Stakeholders (including market 

participants, state regulators, and 

consumers), respectively. Members of 

these panels will be asked to answer the 

following questions: 

1. MMUs’ Role With Respect to FERC: 

• What are the key functions of the 

role that MMUs have performed? 

• Should these functions be changed 

or improved? 

• What changes, if any, in the current 

structure of MMUs would allow them to 

more effectively assist the Commission 

in performing its market oversight 

activities? 

2. MMUs’ Role with Respect to ISOs/ 

RTOs: 

• What are the key functions of the 

role that MMUs have performed with 

respect to the operations of the ISOs/ 

RTOs, including the operation of the 

transmission grid and Day 1 or Day 2 

energy markets? 

• Should these functions be changed 

or improved? 

• What changes, if any, in the current 

structure of MMUs would allow them to 

more effectively assist ISOs/RTOs? 

3. MMUs’ Role with Respect to the 

various Stakeholders: 

• What are the key functions of the 

role that MMUs have performed with 

respect to stakeholders? 

• Should these functions be changed 

or improved? 

• What changes, if any, in the current 

structure of MMUs would allow them to 

more effectively assist stakeholders? 

Anyone interested in serving on one 

of these panels should contact Saida 

Shaalan at 202–502–8278 or by e-mail at 

Saida.Shaalan@ferc.gov on or before 

March 22, 2007. Please be advised, 

however, that the Commission may not 

be able to accommodate everyone who 

asks to be a panelist. Persons interested 

in serving on panels are therefore 

encouraged to coordinate their positions 

and choose a single panel 

representative. The Commission will 

issue a subsequent notice naming the 

panelists and providing further 

guidance on the format for 

presentations, which will be limited in 

time (probably five minutes) to provide 

sufficient opportunity for discussion. 

As stated in the first notice issued 

January 25, 2007, a free webcast of this 

event will be available through 

www.ferc.gov. Anyone with Internet 

access who desires to view this event 

can do so by accessing www.ferc.gov’s 

Calendar of Events and locating this 

event in the Calendar. The event will 

contain a link to its webcast. The 

Capitol Connection provides technical 

support for the Web casts and offers 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES
12174 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 50 / Thursday, March 15, 2007 / Notices 

access to the meeting via phone bridge 

for a fee. If you have any questions, visit 

http://www.CapitolConnection.org or 

contact Danelle Perkowski or David 

Reininger at 703–993–3100. 

Transcripts of the meeting will be 

available immediately for a fee from Ace 

Reporting Company (202–347–3700 or 

1–800–336–6646). They will be 

available for free on the Commission’s 

eLibrary system and on the events 

calendar approximately one week after 

the meeting. 

FERC conferences and meetings are 

accessible under section 508 of the 

Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For 

accessibility accommodations please 

send an e-mail to accessibility@ferc.gov 

or call toll free (866) 208–3372 (voice) 

or 202–502–8659 (TTY), or send a fax to 

202–208–2106 with the required 

accommodations. 

Philis J. Posey, 

Acting Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E7–4713 Filed 3–14–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Notice of Membership of Performance 

Review Board for Senior Executives 

(PRB) 

March 9, 2007. 

The Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission hereby provides notice of 

the membership of its Performance 

Review Board (PRB) for the 

Commission’s Senior Executive Service 

(SES) members. The function of this 

board is to make recommendations 

relating to the performance of senior 

executives in the Commission. This 

action is undertaken in accordance with 

Title 5, U.S.C. 4314(c)(4). The 

Commission’s PRB will remove the 

following member: Daniel L. Larcamp. 

Philis J. Posey, 

Acting Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E7–4715 Filed 3–14–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–8288–2] 

Proposed Consent Decree Clean Air 

Act Citizen Suit 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of proposed consent 

decree; request for public comment. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with section 

113(g) of the Clean Air Act, as amended 

(‘‘Act’’), 42 U.S.C. 7413(g), notice is 

hereby given of a proposed consent 

decree, to address a lawsuit filed by the 

Sierra Club: Sierra Club v. The United 

States Environmental Protection 

Agency, No. CV 06–00663 BB(LFG) 

(District of New Mexico). On or about 

July 26, 2006, Sierra Club filed a 

complaint alleging that EPA had failed 

to perform a non-discretionary duty and 

had unreasonably delayed publication 

of a final rule, known as a Federal 

Implementation Plan (‘‘FIP’’), regulating 

air emissions from the Four Corners 

Power Plant (‘‘FCPP’’). Under the terms 

of the proposed consent decree, a 

deadline of April 30, 2007, is 

established for EPA to take final action 

on the FIP proposed by EPA on 

September 12, 2006. 

DATES: Written comments on the 

proposed consent decree must be 

received by April 16, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID number EPA–

HQ7–OGC–2007–0194, online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov (EPA’s preferred 

method); by e-mail to 

oei.docket@epa.gov; mailed to EPA 

Docket Center, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Mailcode: 2822T, 

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 

Washington, DC 20460–0001; or by 

hand delivery or courier to EPA Docket 

Center, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 

Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC, between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. 

Monday through Friday, excluding legal 

holidays. Comments on a disk or CD–

ROM should be formatted in Word or 

ASCII file, avoiding the use of special 

characters and any form of encryption, 

and may be mailed to the mailing 

address above. Please provide a separate 

copy of your comments to the person 

identified in the For Further 

Information Contact section of this 

notice. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard H. Vetter, c/o Cheryl Graham 

Air and Radiation Law Office (2344A), 

Office of General Counsel, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington, 

DC 20460; telephone: (919) 541–2127; 

fax number (919) 541–4991; email 

address: vetter.rick@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Additional Information About the 

Proposed Consent Decree 

The proposed consent decree would 

resolve the suit filed by Sierra Club 

alleging that EPA had a nondiscretionary duty and had 

unreasonably delayed finalizing a FIP 

regulating air emissions from FCPP. 

The background to Sierra Club’s 

Complaint is that EPA had proposed a 

FIP in 1999 for FCPP, see 64 FR 48731 

(September 8, 1999), but by 2006 had 

not taken final action on the 1999 

proposed FIP. Shortly after 1999, FCPP 

began negotiations with EPA, Navajo 

Nation EPA, the National Park Service 

and several environmental groups (not 

including Sierra Club). Between 2003 

and 2005, FCPP tested changes to its 

SO2 control devices that increased the 

overall control efficiency of these 

control devices. 

EPA proposed a new FIP for FCPP on 

September 12, 2006 that, among other 

things, reflected the increase in 

efficiency of the SO2 control devices at 

the facility. 71 FR 53631. The proposed 

consent decree provides that on or 

before April 30, 2007, EPA will take 

final action on the FIP we proposed on 

September 12, 2006. 

On December 14, 2006, the parties 

filed with the Court a notice of lodging 

of the proposed consent decree. The 

notice informed the Court of the decree 

but noted that the decree was not ready 

for entry as it is subject to the 

requirements of section 113(g) of the 

Clean Air Act. 

For a period of thirty (30) days 

following the date of publication of this 

notice, the Agency will receive written 

comments relating to the proposed 

consent decree from persons who were 

not named as parties to the litigation in 

question. EPA or the Department of 

Justice may withdraw or withhold 

consent to the proposed consent decree 

if the comments disclose facts or 

considerations that indicate that such 

consent is inappropriate, improper, 

inadequate, or inconsistent with the 

requirements of the Act. Unless EPA or 

the Department of Justice determines, 

based on any comment which may be 

submitted, that consent to the consent 

decree should be withdrawn, the terms 

of the decree will be affirmed. 

II. Additional Information About 

Commenting on the Proposed Consent 

Decree 

A. How Can I Get a Copy of the Consent 

Decree? 

The official public docket for this 

action (identified by Docket ID No. 

EPA7–HQ–OGC–2007–0194) contains a 

copy of the proposed consent decree. 

The official public docket is available 

for public viewing at the Office of 

Environmental Information (OEI) Docket 

in the EPA Docket Center, EPA West, 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with NOTICES