Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 38 / Monday, February 27, 2012 / Notices 11517 

Issued at Washington, DC, on February 21, 

2012. 

LaTanya R. Butler, 

Acting Deputy Committee Management 

Officer. 

[FR Doc. 2012–4461 Filed 2–24–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

[OE Docket No. RRTT–IR–001] 

Rapid Response Team for 

Transmission 

AGENCY: Office of Electricity Delivery 

and Energy Reliability, Department of 

Energy, DoE. 

ACTION: Request for information. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy’s 

Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy 

Reliability is seeking information on the 

questions related to permitting of 

transmission lines. In responding to this 

RFI, please specify the role of your 

company or agency in the electric 

sector. 

DATES: Comments must be submitted on 

or before March 28, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Comments should be 

addressed to: Lamont Jackson, Office of 

Electricity Delivery and Energy 

Reliability, Mail Code: OE–20, U.S. 

Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585. Because of 

delays in handling conventional mail, it 

is recommended that documents be 

transmitted by overnight mail, by 

electronic mail to Lamont.Jackson@hq.

doe.gov, or by facsimile to 202–586– 

8008. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lamont Jackson (Program Office) at 

202–586–0808, or by email to Lamont.

Jackson@hq.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Infrastructure projects—such as high 

voltage, long distance, electric 

transmission facilities—often involve 

multiple Federal, State, local and Tribal 

authorizations and are subject to a wide 

array of processes and procedural 

requirements in order to obtain all 

necessary permits and other 

authorizations. Delays in securing 

required statutory reviews, permits, and 

consultations can threaten the 

completion projects of national and 

regional significance. 

As our nation moves towards cleaner, 

more diverse fuel sources and responds 

to state renewable energy standards, a 

number of developers are looking to 

build electric generators where the fuel 

is most abundant, which is often far 

from electric customers, thereby 

requiring long transmission lines. At 

least three problems may arise when 

trying to develop this type of 

infrastructure: (1) Non-synchronous 

evaluations by all governmental entities 

with jurisdiction; (2) uncertainty about 

whether all necessary permits and 

approvals will be received; and (3) 

significantly different development 

times for generation and transmission. 

This Request for Information is focused 

on making the development times for 

generation and transmission to be more 

commensurate with one another. 

While most types of electric 

generators can be developed within a 

few years, developing the transmission 

necessary for that generation may take 

much longer. The differential in 

development times between generation 

and transmission creates a Catch-22 that 

inhibits the development of both. (Of 

course if a load serving entity is 

developing both the generation and 

transmission for its own customers, then 

no such Catch-22 exists.) While 

generation developers need assurance 

that transmission will be built before 

they will commit to building the 

generation, the transmission developers 

need a commitment that the generation 

will be built. As the differential in 

development times increases, the Catch22 deepens, thereby hampering the 

building the infrastructure this Nation 

needs. 

Presidential Memorandum—Speeding 

Infrastructure Development Through 

More Efficient and Effective Permitting 

and Environmental Review 

On August 31, 2011, the President 

issued a memorandum to the heads of 

Executive Departments and Agencies. 

That Memorandum states: 

in the current economic climate it is critical 

that agencies take steps to expedite 

permitting and review, through such 

strategies as integrating planning and 

environmental reviews; coordinating multiagency or multi-governmental reviews and 

approvals to run concurrently; setting clear 

schedules for completing steps in the 

environmental review and permitting 

process; and utilizing information 

technologies to inform the public about the 

progress of environmental reviews as well as 

the progress of Federal permitting and review 

processes. 

It further states that agencies should 

‘‘ensure that their processes for 

reviewing infrastructure proposals work 

efficiently to protect our environment, 

provide for public participation and 

certainty of process, ensure safety, and 

support vital economic growth.’’ 

Rapid Response Team for Transmission 

Recognizing the need for Federal 

agencies to coordinate their efforts on 

transmission and to quickly respond to 

challenges, nine Federal agencies have 

been closely coordinating their review 

of electric transmission on Federal lands 

under a joint Memorandum of 

Understanding (MOU) executed in 2009. 

Building on the cooperation 

developed through the MOU, and in 

response to the Presidential 

Memorandum, on October 5, 2011, the 

Administration announced the creation 

of a Rapid Response Team for 

Transmission (RRTT). 

The RRTT aims to improve the overall 

quality and timeliness of electric 

transmission infrastructure permitting, 

review, and consultation by the Federal 

government on both Federal and nonFederal lands through: 

• Coordinating statutory permitting, 

review, and consultation schedules and 

processes among involved Federal and 

state agencies, as appropriate, through 

Integrated Federal Planning; 

• Applying a uniform and consistent 

approach to consultations with Tribal 

governments; and, 

• Resolving interagency conflicts and 

ensuring that all involved agencies are 

fully engaged and meeting timelines. 

Participating Agencies include: the 

Department of Agriculture, the 

Department of Commerce, the 

Department of Defense, the Department 

of Energy, the Department of Interior, 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation, and the White 

House Council on Environmental 

Quality. 

Request for Information (RFI) 

Building upon the Presidential 

Memorandum and in support of the 

RRTT, the Department of Energy’s 

Office of Electricity is seeking 

information on the questions asked 

below. In responding to this RFI, please 

specify the role of your company or 

agency in the electric sector. 

(1). The development timelines for 

generation and attendant transmission 

are often not coordinated or run 

concurrently. Because of the lengthy 

time to obtain regulatory reviews, 

permits and approvals (collectively 

‘‘Regulatory Permits’’), major new 

transmission lines can take significantly 

longer to develop than some types of 

generation to which the transmission 

would connect. This Request for 

Information will refer to the difference 

in development times between 

generation and transmission as 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
11518 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 38 / Monday, February 27, 2012 / Notices 

1Since the Catch-22 is avoided when a loadserving entity is developing the generation and 

transmission for its own customers, for purposes of 

answering the questions, please assume that nonLSE’s are developing the generation and its 

attendant transmission. 

2While Incongruent Development Times are 

caused by a number of forces including state, local 

and Tribal decisions, the parties to the MOU are 

only Federal agencies and, therefore, this RFI 

focuses on how the federal agencies can improve 

their own processes. 

1 16 U.S.C. Section 797d (2010). 

2Public Law 99–495, 100 Stat. 1243 (1996). 

‘‘Incongruent Development Times.’’ 

Please answer the following 1: 

a. Describe the challenges created 

both by the timeline for obtaining 

Regulatory Permits for transmission and 

by the Incongruent Development Times. 

b. To what extent do the Incongruent 

Development Times hamper 

transmission and/or generation 

infrastructure development? 

c. What are the primary risks 

associated with developing transmission 

vis-a`-vis the timeline for obtaining 

Regulatory Permits as well as the 

Incongruent Development Times? 

d. How is the financing for developing 

the attendant transmission influenced 

by its lengthy development time and by 

the Dissonant Development Times? 

e. How if at all, do development 

timelines and the Incongruent 

Development Times affect the decisions 

made in utilities’ integrated resource 

planning, if applicable? 

f. How do development timelines and 

the Incongruent Development Times 

affect the ability of parties to enter into 

open seasons or power-purchase 

agreements? 

(2) Besides improving the efficiency 

of permitting and approving 

transmission, are there any other steps 

the federal government 2 could take to 

eliminate the barriers created by the 

Dissonant Development Times? 

(3) What strategies can the Federal 

government take to decrease the time 

that Federal agencies require for 

evaluating Regulatory Permits for 

transmission? What other steps can the 

Federal government take to address the 

challenges created by Incongruent 

Development Times? 

(4) One way to make the Regulatory 

Permit process and development times 

between remote generation and 

attendant transmission more 

commensurate, is to decrease the time 

for permitting transmission by some 

amount. In determining how much time 

can be saved, developing a benchmark 

may be helpful. What benchmark 

should be used? 

a. Example—power purchase 

agreements as the benchmark: how far 

in the future do load serving entities 

(LSE’s) seek to purchase energy or 

capacity from remote resources? Do 

LSE’s seek PPAs that begin delivering 

energy/capacity 3 years from the signing 

of the PPA? 7 years? 10 years? Please 

explain why PPA’s are signed at this 

time. 

b. Example—development times as 

the benchmark: How long does it take to 

design, permit and build different types 

of remote generation? 

(5) In your experience, how long does 

it take to design, permit and build 

transmission? 

(6) Assume that Federal, state, Tribal 

and local governments sought to set a 

goal for the length of time used for 

completing the Regulatory Permitting 

process for transmission projects so that 

the development times between 

generation and transmission were more 

commensurate, what goal should that 

be? As the length of the project and the 

number of governments with 

jurisdictions increase so will the time 

necessary for permitting and approvals; 

accordingly, consider providing a goal 

that could be scalable according to the 

length of the line. 

Interested parties to this RFI might 

include, but are not limited to: federal 

and state agencies, Native American 

Tribes, transmission developers, 

renewable energy developers, investors, 

manufacturers, electric utilities, 

independent power producers, nongovernmental organizations, academics, 

and other public, private, or non-profit 

entities. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on February 21, 

2012. 

Brian Mills, 

Director, Permitting and Siting, Office of 

Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability. 

[FR Doc. 2012–4464 Filed 2–24–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

[Docket No. IC12–7–000] 

Commission Information Collection 

Activities; Comment Request; 

Extension 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, DOE. 

ACTION: Notice of information collection 

and request for comments. 

SUMMARY: In compliance with the 

requirements of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 

3506(c)(2)(A), the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (Commission or 

FERC) is soliciting public comment on 

the currently approved information 

collection, FERC–587, Land Description 

(Public Land States/Non-Public Land 

States [Rectangular or Non-Rectangular 

Survey System Lands in Public Land 

States]). 

DATES: Comments on the collection of 

information are due April 27, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

(identified by Docket No. IC12–7–000) 

by either of the following methods: 

• eFiling at Commission’s Web Site: 

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

efiling.asp. 

• Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 

Secretary of the Commission, 888 First 

Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. 

Instructions: All submissions must be 

formatted and filed in accordance with 

submission guidelines at: http:// 

www.ferc.gov/help/submissionguide.asp. For user assistance contact 

FERC Online Support by email at 

ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or by phone 

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

502–8659 for TTY. 

Docket: Users interested in receiving 

automatic notification of activity in this 

docket or in viewing/downloading 

comments and issuances in this docket 

may do so at http://www.ferc.gov/docsfiling/docs-filing.asp. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ellen Brown may be reached by email 

at DataClearance@FERC.gov, telephone 

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

0873. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Title: FERC–587, Land Description 

(Public Land States/Non-Public Land 

States [Rectangular or Non-Rectangular 

Survey System Lands in Public Land 

States]). 

OMB Control No.: 1902–0145. 

Type of Request: Three-year extension 

of the FERC–587 information collection 

requirements with no changes to the 

current reporting requirements. 

Abstract: The Commission requires 

the FERC–587 information collection to 

satisfy the requirements of section 24 of 

the Federal Power Act (FPA). The 

Federal Power Act grants the 

Commission authority to issue licenses 

for the development and improvement 

of navigation and for the development, 

transmission, and utilization of power 

across, along, from or in any of the 

streams or other bodies of water over 

which Congress has jurisdiction.1 The 

Electric Consumers Protection Act 

(ECPA) amends the FPA to allow the 

Commission the responsibility of 

issuing licenses for nonfederal 

hydroelectric plants.2

Section 24 of the FPA requires that 

applicants proposing hydropower 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES