Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 148 / Monday, August 3, 1998 / Notices 41235

Laux, T. E. Mr.

Leach, R. A. Mr.

Leboeuf, G. G. Mr.

Lefande, R. Dr.

Leggieri, S. R. Ms.

Lewis, R. D. Ms.

Lippert, K. W. RADM

Lockard, J. VADM+

Loftus, J. V. Ms.

Lopata, F. A. Mr.

Lowell, P. Mr.

Lynch, J. G. Mr.

Maltbie, W. Mr.

Mangels, K. H. Mr.

Marquis, S. L. Ms.

Martin, R. J. Mr.

Masciarelli, J. R. Mr.

Mattheis, W. G. Mr.

McEleny, J. F. Mr.

McKissock, G. S. MAJGEN

McManus, C. J. Mr.

McNair, J. W. Mr.

McNair, S. M. Ms.

Meadows, L. J. Ms.

Merritt, M. M. Mr.

Messerole, M. Mr.

Miller, A. Dr.

Miller, K. E. Mr.

Mohler, M. Mr.

Molzahn, W. Mr.

Montgomery Jr., H. E. Mr.

Moore, S. B. Mr.

Moy, G. W. Dr.

Munsell, E. L. Ms.

Murphy, P. M. Mr.

Muth, C. M. Ms.

Mutter, C. A. LTGEN

Nanos, G. P. RADM

Nehman, J. Mr.

Nemfakos, C. P. Mr.

Newton, L. Ms.

Newsome, L. D. RADM

Nickell, J. R. Mr.

Nussbaum, D. A. Mr.

O’Driscoll, M. J. Mr.

Olsen, M. A. Ms.

Paige, K. K. RADM

Panek, R. L. Mr.

Paulk, R. D. Ms.

Payne, T. Mr.

Pennisi, R. A. Mr.

Phelps, F. A. Mr.

Pirie Jr., R. B. HON.

Pflueger, M. P. Mr.

Poe, L. Mr.

Porter, D. E. Mr.

Powers, B. F. Mr.

Ramberg, S. Dr.

Rath, B. Dr.

Rhodes, J. E. LTGEN

Riegel, K. W. Dr.

Roark, J. E. Mr.

Robey, C. Ms.

Roderick, B. A. Mr.

Rostker, B. HON.

Ryzewic, W. H. Mr.

Saalfeld, F. Dr.

Sargent Jr., D. P. RADM

Saul, E. L. Mr.

Savitsky, W. D. Mr.

Schaefer, W. J. Mr.

Schneider, P. A. Mr.

Schuster Jr., J. G. Mr.

Sentner, R. P. Mr.

Shaffer, R. L. Mr.

Shea, R. BGEN

Sheck, E. E. Mr.

Shephard, M. R. Ms.

Shipway, J. F. RADM

Shoup, F. E. Dr.

Simmen, C. R. Mr.

Sirmalis, J. E. Dr.

Slaght, K. D. RADM

Somoroff, A. R. Dr.

Steidle, C. RADM

Stewart, J. D. MAJGEN

Storey, R. C. Mr.

Strong, B. D. RADM

Stussie, W. A. Mr.

Sullivan, M. P. RADM

Szemborski, S. R. RADM

Thornett, R. Mr.

Thomas, R. O. Mr.

Thompson, R. C. Mr.

Throckmorton, E. L. Mr.

Tisone, A. A. Mr.

Tompkins, C. L. Mr.

Townsend, D. Ms.

Trammell, R. K. Mr.

Tullar, E. W. Mr.

Turnquist, C. J. Mr.

Uhler, D. G. Dr.

Vanderlinden, G. BGEN

Verkoski, J. E. Mr.

Welch, B. S. Ms.

Weller, P. B. Mr.

Wessel, P. R. Mr.

Whiton, H. W. RADM

Williams, G. P. Mr.

Williams, M. J. MAJGEN

Young, S. D. Ms.

Yount, G. R. RADM

Zanfagna, P. E. Mr.

Zeman, A. R. Dr.

Zimet, E. Dr.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Cora Graves, Director, Executive

Personnel and Leadership Development

Division, Office of the Assistant

Secretary (Manpower and Reserve

Affairs), 1000 Navy Pentagon,

Washington, DC 20350–1000, telephone

(703) 696–5165.

Dated: July 24, 1998.

Saundra K. Melancon,

Paralegal Specialist, Office of the Judge

Advocate General, Alternate Federal Register

Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 98–20623 Filed 7–31–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3810–FK–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Energy Information Administration

Agency information collection

activities: proposed collection;

comment request

AGENCY: Energy Information

Administration, DOE.

ACTION: Agency information collection

activities: Proposed collection; comment

request.

SUMMARY: The Energy Information

Administration (EIA) is soliciting

comments concerning proposed

revisions to the Form EIA–846A/C,

‘‘Manufacturing Energy Consumption

Survey.’’

DATES: Written comments must be

submitted on or before October 2, 1998.

If you anticipate that you will be

submitting comments, but find it

difficult to do so within the period of

time allowed by this notice, you should

advise the contact listed below of your

intention to do so as soon as possible.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to Mr.

Robert K. Adler, Energy Consumption

Division, EI–63, Forrestal Building, U.S.

Department of Energy, Washington, DC

20585–0660. Mr. Adler’s telephone

number is (202) 586–1134, FAX number

(202) 586–0018. His Internet address is:

robert.adler@eia.doe.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Requests for additional information or

copies of the form and instructions

should be directed to Robert K. Adler at

the address listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

II. Current Actions

III. Request for Comments

I. Background

In order to fulfill its responsibilities

under the Federal Energy

Administration Act of 1974 (Pub. L. 93–

275) and the Department of Energy

Organization Act (Pub. L. 95–91), the

Energy Information Administration

(EIA) is obliged to carry out a central,

comprehensive, and unified energy data

and information program. As part of this

program, EIA collects, evaluates,

assembles, analyzes, and disseminates

data and information related to energy

resource reserves, production, demand,

and technology, and related economic

and statistical information relevant to

the adequacy of energy resources to

meet demands in the near and longer

term future for the Nation’s economic

and social needs.

The EIA, as part of its continuing

effort to reduce paperwork and

respondent burden (required by the
41236 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 148 / Monday, August 3, 1998 / Notices

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub.

L. 104–13)), conducts a presurvey

consultation program to provide the

general public and other Federal

agencies with an opportunity to

comment on proposed and/or

continuing reporting forms. This

program helps to prepare data requests

in the desired format, minimize

reporting burden, develop clearly

understandable reporting forms, and

assess the impact of collection

requirements on respondents. Also, EIA

will later seek approval by the Office of

Management and Budget (OMB) for the

collections under Section 3507(h) of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub.

L. 104–13, Title 44, U.S.C. Chapter 35).

The Manufacturing Energy

Consumption Survey (MECS) is a mail

survey designed to collect energy

consumption and expenditures data

from establishments in the

manufacturing sector (Standard

Industrial Classification (SIC) 20

through 39). There are 3 MECS data

collection forms, depending on the

establishment’s SIC. Form EIA–846A

collects information for SIC’s 20 through

39 except for SIC’s 24, 26, 28, 29, 3312,

3321, 3331, and 3339. Form EIA–846B

is for establishments operating primarily

in the petroleum refining industry (SIC

2911). Form EIA–846C is for

establishments in SIC’s 24, 26, 28, 29

(excluding 2911), 3312, 3321, 3331, and

3339.

For the 1998 MECS, it is proposed to

collect the following data from each

MECS establishment: (1) For each

energy source consumed—consumption

(total, fuel and nonfuel uses) and the

expenditures for each energy source,

energy storage (as applicable), and

energy produced onsite; (2) energy end

uses; (3) energy-saving technologies; (4)

energy management activities; and (5)

square footage and number of buildings

in the establishment.

The MECS has been conducted four

times previously, covering the years

1985, 1988, 1991, and 1994. In all four

survey years, the MECS has collected

baseline data on manufacturers’ energy

consumption and fuel-switching

capabilities. In the 1991 and 1994

surveys, the MECS also collected data

on end-uses, energy management

technologies, building square footage,

and energy-saving technologies. The

MECS forms the basis for a major

publication on energy consumption,

Manufacturing Consumption of Energy,

1994. Additionally, the MECS data and

tables form the basis for an Internet site

(http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mecs) in

which are found numerous data tables,

past publications, and articles. The 1998

MECS will also be used to update the

changes in energy intensity data series.

The proposed 1998 MECS uses

experience gained from the

administration and processing of the

four previous surveys and past

consultations with respondents, trade

association representatives, and data

users. EIA is continuing to pursue many

avenues to obtain advice and needs for

data from customers concerning

manufacturing energy data. On the EIA

site is a survey of user needs (found at

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mecs/

webque98.html). Past MECS customers

from trade associations, government,

private industry, academia, and other

sectors have been contacted through the

mail directly to give them an

opportunity to express their needs. A

few manufacturing establishments have

participated in onsite cognitive

interviews to test respondents’ ability to

answer certain proposed sections of the

MECS. This notice serves as another

opportunity for customers to express

their needs for manufacturing energy

data.

II. Current Actions

EIA proposes making several changes

to the 1998 MECS. Decreases in survey

funding have necessitated certain

actions to adjust to the reduced level of

funding while still maintaining the

usefulness of the core program. For that

reason, the MECS cycle has changed

from once every three years to once

every four years. A second consequence

of the reduced budget is that the

designed sample size of the MECS must

be reduced from approximately 23,000

to approximately 17,000 cases (a cut of

26 percent). The cut in sample size

means that the finest geographic

breakdown of the data available will be

at the four Census Regions level, rather

than at the nine Census Divisions level

that were available from the 1994

survey. Finally, again for budgetary

reasons, EIA is proposing to no collect

fuel-switching data. Although minor

changes have been discernable, data

from the previous surveys has shown

that the relationship between

switchability and consumption has been

relatively stable over the years covered

by the MECS.

The 1998 MECS will have a

substantially altered appearance. It will

take advantage of recent forms design

research in order to make it easier for

respondents to understand and respond

to the survey. Prime among the changes

is the replacing of the matrix or tabular

format with a format that is sequential

by energy source. Most of the necessary

instructions are built into the

questionnaire itself, rather than relying

on separate instruction sheets. The

questionnaire will be reformatted to fit

a standard page (8.5 by 11 inches). The

resulting questionnaire will contain

more pages, but should be much easier

for the respondent to complete.

EIA, in conjunction with the Bureau

of the Census, is exploring ways to have

data presented in terms of the new

North American Industry Classification

System (NAICS) and the Standard

Industrial Classification (SIC) system. In

MECS cycles after 1998, all data will be

presented in terms of NAICS.

Other than the removal of fuelswitching, much of the content of the

1994 MECS data collection will remain

for the 1998 MECS, with the following

exceptions:

1. The 1998 MECS will not contain

questions relating to lists or other

records of motors present at the

establishment. This deletion is in

keeping with the agreement EIA had

with industry during the 1994

questionnaire design process that this

data collection would be a one-time

effort.

2. Due to the importance of

understanding the ongoing changes in

the natural gas industry, the 1998 MECS

will have some additional questions

relating to the type of purchase made.

Specifically, EIA is considering asking

about purchases from the local utility

and nonutility purchases; the type of

rate schedule the purchaser uses; and,

for some nonutility purchasers, the

breakdown of costs associated with

purchasing and transporting the gas

from the point-of-purchase to the

establishment.

3. The list of energy-saving

technologies will be updated. The DOE

Office of Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy has already reviewed

the list and provided input to EIA.

4. EIA is exploring ways to adapt the

electricity section to fit the new

deregulated environment. Because very

few manufacturing establishments

would be eligible to purchase electricity

from other than their local utilities in

1998, the expectation is that any

changes in the electricity section would

be minor.

5. The questions concerning

participation in energy management

activities will be changed: electric

utility participation will no longer be

asked about.

III. Request for Comments

Prospective respondents and other

interested parties should comment on

the actions discussed in item II. The

following guidelines are provided to

assist in the preparation of responses.
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 148 / Monday, August 3, 1998 / Notices 41237

1See, 20 FERC ¶ 62,416 (1982).

General Issues

A. Is the proposed collection of

information necessary for the proper

performance of the functions of the

agency and does the information have

practical utility? Practical utility is

defined as the actual usefulness of

information to or for an agency, taking

into account its accuracy, adequacy,

reliability, timeliness, and the agency’s

ability to process the information it

collects.

B. What enhancements can EIA make

to the quality, utility, and clarity of the

information to be collected?

As a Potential Respondent

A. Are the instructions and

definitions clear and sufficient? If not,

which instructions require clarification?

B. Can data be submitted by the due

date?

C. Public reporting burden for this

collection is estimated to average 9

hours per response. Burden includes the

total time, effort, or financial resources

expended to generate, maintain, retain,

or disclose or provide the information.

Please comment on (1) the accuracy of

our estimate and (2) how the agency

could minimize the burden of the

collection of information, including the

use of information technology.

D. EIA estimates that respondents will

incur no additional costs for reporting

other than the hours required to

complete the collection. What is the

estimated: (1) total dollar amount

annualized for capital and start-up

costs, and (2) recurring annual costs of

operation and maintenance, and

purchase of services associated with this

data collection?

E. Do you know of any other Federal,

State, or local agency that collects

similar data? If you do, specify the

agency, the data element(s), and the

methods of collection.

As a Potential User

A. Can you use data at the levels of

detail indicated on the form?

B. For what purpose would you use

the data? Be specific.

C. Are there alternate sources of data

and do you use them? If so, what are

their deficiencies and/or strengths?

D. Are there additional energy-savings

technologies not already included on

the MECS for which data on their

penetration would be useful?

Comments submitted in response to

this notice will be summarized and/or

included in the request for OMB

approval of the form. They also will

become a matter of public record.

Statutory Authority: Section 3506 (c)(2)(A)

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

(Pub. L. No. 104–13).

Issued in Washington, DC, July 24, 1998.

Jay H. Casselberry,

Agency Clearance Officer, Statistics and

Methods Group, Energy Information

Administration.

[FR Doc. 98–20625 Filed 7–31–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP98–680–000]

Koch Gateway Pipeline Company;

Notice of Request Under Blanket

Authorization

July 28, 1998.

Take notice that on July 21, 1998,

Koch Gateway Pipeline Company

(Koch), P.O. Box 1478, Houston, Texas

77251–1478, filed in Docket No. CP98–

680–000 a request pursuant to Sections

157.205 and 157.211 of the

Commission’s Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act for authorization to

operate as a jurisdictional facility in

interstate commerce a 2-inch tap and

meter station previously installed,

operated and placed in service under

Section 311(a) of the Natural Gas Policy

Act (NGPA) and Section 284.3(c) of the

Commission’s regulations. Koch make

this request, all as more fully set forth

in the request for authorization on file

with the Commission and open for

public inspection, under its blanket

certificate issued in Docket No. CP92–

430–000.1

Koch states that the proposed

certification of facilities will enable

Koch to provide transportation services

under its blanket transportation

certificate through the tap and meter

which connects Koch facilities to

Integrated Services Inc. (ISI), an

intrastate pipeline company, in Shelby

County, Texas.

Koch further states it will operate the

proposed facilities in compliance with

18 CFR Part 157, Subpart F, and that the

proposed activities will not affect

Koch’s ability to serve its other existing

customer.

Any person or the Commission’s staff

may, within 45 days after issuance of

the instant notice by the Commission’s

Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a

motion to intervene or notice of

intervention and pursuant to Section

157.205 of the Regulations under the

Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a

protest to the request. If no protest is

filed within the time allowed therefor,

the proposed activity shall be deemed to

be authorized effective the day after the

time allowed for filing a protest. If a

protest is filed and not withdrawn

within 30 days after the time allowed

for filing a protest, the instant request

shall be treated as an application for

authorization pursuant to Section 7 of

the Natural Gas Act.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 98–20566 Filed 7–31–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory

Commission

[Docket No. CP98–673–000]

Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice

of Request Under Blanket

Authorization

July 28, 1998.

Take notice that on July 16, 1998,

Northern Natural Gas Company,

(Applicant), P.O. Box 3330, Omaha,

Nebraska, 68103–0330, filed in Docket

No. CP98–673–000 a request pursuant to

Sections 157.205, 157.212, and 157.216

of the Commission’s Regulations under

the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205,

157.212, 157.216) for approval to

upgrade three existing delivery points

located in Wright, Carver, and Stearns

Counties, Minnesota, to accommodate

natural gas deliveries to Minnegasco, a

division of NorAm Energy Corporation,

(Minnegasco), under Applicant’s

blanket certificate issued in Docket Nos.

CP82–401–000, pursuant to Section 7(c)

of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), all as

more fully set forth in the request which

is on file with the Commission and open

to public inspection.

Applicant proposes to upgrade these

delivery points to accommodate natural

gas deliveries to Minnegasco under

currently effective throughput service

agreements. Applicant asserts that

Minnegasco has requested the upgrade

of the existing delivery points to

provide increased natural gas service to

the Dayton, Waconia, and Cold Springs

town border stations to meet peak day

requirements. Applicant further states

that the estimated incremental volumes

proposed to be delivered to Minnegasco

at these delivery points are 5,110

MMBtu on a peak day and 600,114

MMBtu on an annual basis. It is also

indicated that the estimated cost to

upgrade the delivery points is $228,000.

Any person or the Commission’s Staff

may, within 45 days of the issuance of

the instant notice by the Commission,

file pursuant to Rule 214 of the

Commission’s Rules of Practice and