### 15699 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 57 / Wednesday, March 25, 2015 / Proposed Rules

timber purchased through stewardship contracts. Specifically, SBA invites comments and supporting data in response to the following questions. Stewardship Contracting Questions

1. How should the FS include the saw timber volume on stewardship contracts awarded to small business in the computation of small business market share?

2. How might including stewardship saw timber volume impact future market share calculations for small business concerns that participate in stewardship contracts and/or conventional timber sales?

3. What are the potential impacts (costs and benefits) if SBA regulations at 13 CFR 121.506 were to include the saw timber volume from IRTCs and IRSCs in the calculation of small business market share?

a. What is the anticipated impact of the inclusion of saw timber volume from stewardship contracts on stumpage prices?

b. If inclusion of saw timber volume from stewardship contracts leads to lower stumpage prices, what is the impact to land management activities (paid for by stumpage prices) and retained receipts?

c. What is the anticipated impact on sale values both from an agency perspective and a treasury perspective?

4. What would be the most efficient and effective way to account for actual saw timber volume from stewardship contracts awarded to small business?

5. Would an increase in the utilization of stewardship contracts in a market area result in a lower representation of small businesses successfully bidding for timber sales in that market area? Should this lead to lowering the market share for small business set-aside sales in that market area when the FS and SBA compute small business participation?

6. Would including stewardship saw timber volume on contracts awarded to small business in the calculation result in more accurate representation of small business participation in the market area?

Unrelated to stewardship contracting, SBA is also seeking public comments on potential amendments to its current regulations at 13 CFR 121.507(a)(4)(i), which provides that on a set-aside timber sale, the small business may not resell more than 30% of the saw timber volume to a large business concern. When the FS offers any timber sale, it appraises the sale for its potential market value and sets the minimum bid that it will accept based on that appraisal. One factor in the appraisal is the haul cost that the purchaser (small or large) will absorb to bring the timber to a manufacturing facility. Currently, all appraisals are made to the nearest mill. In timber sales set aside for small businesses, large mills are ineligible to bid. In the context of a set-aside, if the nearest mill is a large mill, the appraisal will not accurately capture the haul cost to eligible bidders. As such, SBA is seeking public comment on whether the appraisal for a small business set-aside sale should be made to the nearest, small mill.
Set-aside Sale Appraisal Point Questions

1. How can the actual haul costs to eligible small business timber set-aside purchasers be better reflected in the appraisal process?

2. Should there be considerations for keeping the appraisal point to the nearest mill on a small business timber set-aside sale in those market areas that do not have mills that would qualify as ‘‘small’’ under the SBA criteria?

3. How should the prohibition against small businesses reselling more than 30% of the saw timber volume to a large business concern be taken into account when making appraisals for small business timber set-aside sales?

4. What is the financial impact to the Forest Service if the 30% rule is included in the appraisal point haul cost calculation of a small business timber set-aside sale?

5. What is the anticipated impact on trust funds ( e.g., Knutson-Vandenberg), if any, if appraisals are made to a small mill rather than the closest processer.

6. SBA is also requesting data on mill size and location.

The SBA welcomes comments and any available data to help substantiate recommendations made in response to the foregoing general questions, or other potential policy options—including status quo—that should be consideredfor the Small Business Timber Sales SetAside Program.

Dated: March 16, 2015.
Maria Contreras-Sweet,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2015–06557 Filed 3–24–15; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 8025–01–P COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING**  **COMMISSION**

**17 CFR Parts 1, 15, 17, 19, 32, 37, 38, 140, and 150** 

**RIN 3038–AD99; 3038–AD82**

**Position Limits for Derivatives and Aggregation of Positions; Correction** 

**AGENCY :**  Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

**ACTION :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking; provision of Table 11a; and reopening of comment periods; correction.

**SUMMARY :**  This is a correction to the preamble of a document published by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (‘‘Commission’’) in the Federal Register of February 25, 2015, regarding the reopening of the comment periods for proposed rulemakings to establish speculative position limits for 28 exempt and agricultural commodity futures and options contracts and the physical commodity swaps that are economically equivalent to such contracts (the ‘‘Position Limits Proposal’’) and to amend existing regulations setting out the Commission’s policy for aggregation under its position limits regime (the ‘‘Aggregation Proposal’’). This correction clarifies the closing date for the reopened comment periods, which was inadvertently set to fall on a non-business day.

**DATES :**  The comment periods for the Aggregation Proposal published November 15, 2013, at 78 FR 68946, and for the Position Limits Proposal published December 12, 2013, at 78 FR 75680, which reopened on February 26, 2015, will close on March 30, 2015.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Stephen Sherrod, Senior Economist, Division of Market Oversight, (202) 418– 5452, ssherrod@cftc.gov; or Riva Spear Adriance, Senior Special Counsel, Division of Market Oversight, (202) 418– 5494, radriance@cftc.gov; Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC 20581.

Correction

In the Federal Register of February 25, 2015, in proposed rule FR Doc. 2015–03834, on page 10023, in the first column, correct the **DATES** caption to read:

**DATES :**  The comment periods for the Aggregation Proposal published November 15, 2013, at 78 FR 68946, and for the Position Limits Proposal published December 12, 2013, at 78 FR 75680, will reopen on February 26, 2015, and will close on March 30, 2015.


### 15700 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 57 / Wednesday, March 25, 2015 / Proposed Rules

1 18 CFR 385.508. 2 44 U.S.C. 3504.

3 Electronic Filing of Documents, Order No. 619, 65 FR 57088 (Sept. 21, 2000), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶31,107 (2000).

4 44 U.S.C. 3504.

5 18 CFR 385.2001(a). 6 See Electronic Registration, Order No. 891, 67 FR 52,406 (Aug. 12, 2002), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,132 (2002); Electronic Filing of FERC Form 1, and Elimination of Certain Designated Schedules in Form Nos. 1 and 1F, Order No. 626, 67 FR 36,093 (May 23, 2002), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,130 (2002); Electronic Service of Documents, 66 FR 50,591 (Oct. 4, 2001), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 35,539 (2001); Revised Public Utility Filing Requirements, Order No. 2001, 67 FR 31,043 (May 8, 2002), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,127 (2002); Filing Via the Internet, Order No. 703, 72 FR 65,659 (Nov. 23, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,259 (2007).

7 Electronic Tariff Filings, Order No. 714, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,276 (2008). Dated: March 19, 2015. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 2015–06688 Filed 3–19–15; 04:15 pm]

**BILLING CODE 6351–01–P**

**DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY**

**Federal Energy Regulatory Commission** 

**18 CFR Part 385**

**[Docket No. RM15–5–000]**

**Revised Exhibit Submission Requirements for Commission**  **Hearings**

**AGENCY :**  Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

**ACTION :**  Notice of proposed rulemaking. **SUMMARY :**  The Commission proposes to amend Rule 508 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure to eliminate the requirement that participants in Commission trial-type evidentiary hearings must provide paper copies of all exhibits introduced as evidence. The Proposed Rule will facilitate a shift toward electronic hearing procedures which should improve the efficiency and administrative convenience of the Commission hearing process, reduce the burden and expense associated with paper exhibits, and facilitate the compilation and transmittal of the hearing record to the Commission in electronic format.

**DATES :**  Comments are due May 26, 2015.

**ADDRESSES :**  Comments, identified by docket number, may be filed in the following ways:

• Electronic Filing through http:// www.ferc.gov. Documents created electronically using word processing software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned format.

• Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unableto file electronically may mail or handdeliver comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.

Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Comment Procedures Section of this document.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Karin Herzfeld, Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, Telephone: (202) 502–8459.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :** 
Table of Contents

Paragraph numbers

I. Background .................................................................................................................. ........................................................................ 2. II. Discussion ................................................................................................................. ......................................................................... 4. III. Information Collection Statement .......................................................................................... .......................................................... 7. IV. Environmental Analysis ..................................................................................................... .............................................................. 8. V. Regulatory Flexibility Act .................................................................................................. ............................................................... 9. VI. Comment Procedures ......................................................................................................... .............................................................. 11. VII. Document Availability ..................................................................................................... ............................................................... 15.

1. The Commission is proposing to amend Rule 508 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure 1 to eliminate the requirement that participants in Commission trial-type evidentiary hearings must provide paper copies of all exhibits introduced as evidence. The Commission proposes to amend section 385.508 of the Commission’s regulations by removing paragraph (a)(2) and redesignating paragraph (a)(3) as paragraph (a)(2). While still retaining the option to provide exhibits in paper form, the proposed rule will facilitate a shift toward electronic hearing procedures which should improve the efficiency and administrative convenience of the Commission hearing process, reduce the burden and expense associated with paper exhibits, and facilitate the compilation and transmittal of the hearing record to the Commission in electronic format. I. Background

2. The Federal government has set a goal to substitute electronic means of communication and information storage for paper. For example, the Government Paperwork Elimination Act directed agencies to provide for the optional use and acceptance of electronic documentsand signatures, and electronic recordkeeping, where practical. 2 Similarly, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A–130 required agencies to use electronic information collection techniques, where such means will reduce the burden on the public, increase efficiency, reduce costs, and help provide better service.

3. On September 21, 2000, the Commission issued Order No. 619, which implemented the use of the Internet for submission of certain documents to the Commission for filing. 3 The eFiling system plays an important role in the Commission’s efforts to comply with the Government Paperwork Elimination Act’s requirement that agencies provide the option to submit information electronically, when practicable, as a substitute for paper. 4 Filing via the Internet is optional for eligible documents. 5 Since issuing Order No. 619, the Commission has greatly expanded its ability to accept electronically filed material, including interventions, protests, rehearings, complaints, and applications for certificates and licenses. 6 In 2008, the Commission further implemented a system for electronic tariff filing. 7 Consistent with these prior efforts to provide electronic filing options, the Commission is proposing to eliminate the requirement that all exhibits introduced at Commission hearings must be provided in paper form.

II. Discussion

4. Section 385.508 of the Commission’s regulations currently requires that ‘‘[a]ny participant who seeks to have an exhibit admitted into evidence must provide one copy of the