Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Notices 59335 

intervene again in a subdocket related to 

a compliance filing if you have 

previously intervened in the same 

docket. Protests will be considered by 

the Commission in determining the 

appropriate action to be taken, but will 

not serve to make protestants parties to 

the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion 

to intervene or protest must serve a copy 

of that document on the Applicant. In 

reference to filings initiating a new 

proceeding, interventions or protests 

submitted on or before the comment 

deadline need not be served on persons 

other and the Applicant. 

The Commission encourages 

electronic submission of protests and 

interventions in lieu of paper, using the 

FERC Online links at http:// 

www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic 

service, persons with Internet access 

who will eFile a document and/or be 

listed as a contact for an intervenor 

must create and validate an 

eRegistration account using the 

eRegistration link. Select the eFiling 

link to log on and submit the 

intervention or protests. 

Persons unable to file electronically 

should submit an original and 14 copies 

of the intervention or protest to the 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 

888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 

20426. 

The filings in the above proceedings 

are accessible in the Commission’s 

eLibrary system by clicking on the 

appropriate link in the above list. They 

are also available for review in the 

Commission’s Public Reference Room in 

Washington, DC. There is an 

eSubscription link on the web site that 

enables subscribers to receive email 

notification when a document is added 

to a subscribed dockets(s). For 

assistance with any FERC Online 

service, please e-mail 

FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov. or call 

(866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call 

(202) 502–8659. 

Magalie R. Salas, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. E5–5573 Filed 10–11–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Western Area Power Administration 

Desert Southwest Customer Service 

Region-Rate Order No. WAPA–127 

AGENCY: Western Area Power 

Administration, DOE. 

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Network 

Integration Transmission and Ancillary 

Services Rates. 

SUMMARY: The Western Area Power 

Administration (Western) is proposing 

revised rate methodologies for network 

integration transmission service 

(network service) for the Parker-Davis 

Project (PDP), and the Pacific 

Northwest-Pacific Southwest Intertie 

Project (Intertie) and for ancillary 

services from the PDP, Boulder Canyon 

Project (BCP), and part of the Colorado 

River Storage Project (CRSP) located in 

the Desert Southwest Customer Service 

Region’s (DSWR) Balancing Authority 

and Transmission Operations Area 

(BATO). Current rates, under Rate 

Schedules DSW–SD1, DSW–RS1, DSW–

FR1, DSW–EI1, DSW–SPR1, DSW–

SUR1, PD–NTS1, and INT–NTS1, 

extend through March 31, 2006. The 

proposed rates will provide sufficient 

revenue to pay all annual costs, 

including interest expense and 

repayment of required investment 

within the allowable period. Western 

will prepare a brochure that provides 

detailed information on the rates. The 

proposed rates, under Rate Schedules 

DSW–SD2, DSW–RS2, DSW–FR2, 

DSW–EI2, DSW–SPR2, DSW–SUR2, 

PD–NTS2, INT–NTS2, WS–NTS1, are 

scheduled to go into effect on April 1, 

2006, and will remain in effect through 

March 31, 2011. Publication of this 

Federal Register notice begins the 

formal process for the proposed rates. 

DATES: The consultation and comment 

period begins today and will end 

January 10, 2006. Western will present 

a detailed explanation of the proposed 

rates at a public information forum to be 

held on November 2, 2005, 1 p.m. MST, 

Phoenix, AZ. Western will accept oral 

and written comments at the public 

comment forum. The public comment 

forum will be held on November 29, 

2005, 1 p.m. MST, Phoenix, AZ. 

Western will accept written comments 

any time during the consultation and 

comment period. 

ADDRESSES: Send written comments to 

Mr. J. Tyler Carlson, Regional Manager, 

Desert Southwest Customer Service 

Region, Western Area Power 

Administration, P.O. Box 6457, 

Phoenix, AZ 85005–6457, e-mail 

carlson@wapa.gov. Western will post 

information about the rate process on its 

external Web site at http:// 

www.wapa.gov/dsw/dsw.htm. Western 

will post official comments received via 

letter and e-mail to its Web site after the 

close of the comment period. Western 

must receive written comments by the 

end of the consultation and comment 

period to ensure they are considered in 

Western’s decision process. The 

location for the Public Information and 

Public Comment Forums is Desert 

Southwest Regional Office, 615 South 

43rd Avenue, Phoenix, AZ. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Jack Murray, Rates Team Lead, Desert 

Southwest Customer Service Region, 

Western Area Power Administration, 

P.O. Box 6457, Phoenix, AZ 85005–

6457; telephone (602) 605–2442, e-mail 

jmurray@wapa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

proposed rates for DSWR network 

service for the PDP and the Intertie and 

ancillary services for the Western Area 

Lower Colorado (WALC) BATO are 

designed to recover an annual revenue 

requirement that includes investment 

repayment, interest, operation and 

maintenance expense, and other 

expenses. The ancillary services apply 

to specified transmission service in the 

WALC BATO including firm point-topoint, non-firm and network services on 

the PDP, the Intertie, the Central 

Arizona Project (CAP), and the portions 

of the CRSP in WALC. All firm pointto-point and non-firm transmission 

service and network service on the CAP 

and CRSP are defined under existing 

Rate Orders and are not a part of the 

proposed rates. 

The Deputy Secretary of Energy 

approved Rate Schedules DSW–SD1, 

DSW–RS1, DSW–FR1, DSW–EI1, DSW–

SPR1, DSW–SUR1, PD–NTS1, and INT–

NTS1 for the DSWR network service for 

PDP and Intertie and ancillary services 

for the WALC BATO on May 3, 1999 

(Rate Order No. WAPA–84, 64 FR 

25323, May 11, 1999), and the Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission 

(Commission) confirmed and approved 

the rate schedules on January 20, 2000, 

under FERC Docket No EF99–5041–000, 

(90 FERC 62,032). Approval for Rate 

Schedules DSW–SD1, DSW–RS1, DSW–

FR1, DSW–EI1, DSW–SPR1, DSW–

SUR1, PD–NTS1, and INT–NTS1 

covered 5 years beginning on April 1, 

1999, and ending on March 31, 2004. 

These rate schedules were extended by 

a series of Rate Orders through March 

31, 2006, with the most recent Rate 

Order being Rate Order No. WAPA–121 

(70 FR 15622, March 28, 2005). The rate 

schedules were extended to 

accommodate the DSWR Multi-System 

Transmission Rate (MSTR) process. An 

MSTR has not been approved. However, 

Rate Schedule WS–NTS1 is structured 

to allow multi-system network service 

on the DSWR System if and when an 

MSTR is approved. 

Under Rate Schedules PD–NTS2, 

INT–NTS2, and WS–NTS1, the 

methodology for calculating the 

customer’s monthly charge is the 

product of the transmission customer’s 

load-ratio share times one-twelfth of the 

59336 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Notices 

annual transmission revenue 

requirement. The customer’s load-ratio 

share is equal to the network 

transmission customer’s coincidental 

peak (CP), which is the load coincident 

with the appropriate Project’s monthly 

transmission system peak averaged with 

the previous 11 months (12 CP) divided 

by the resultant value of the appropriate 

Project’s average monthly transmission 

system load at the hour of the system 

peak in each month. 

The monthly hour of the system peak 

is determined as the hour that the sum 

of the network customers’ metered loads 

is the greatest. The system load at the 

peak hour is determined by adding the 

point-to-point firm transmission 

reservations to the sum of the network 

customer’s metered loads. The point-topoint firm transmission reservations can 

include the Open Access Transmission 

Tariff (OATT) firm point-to-point 

reservations, the PDP Firm Electric 

Service (FES) contract rates of delivery 

(CROD), the pre-OATT Firm 

Transmission Service (FTS) and the Salt 

Lake City Area Integrated Project FES 

with delivery points on the PDP. 

The methodology to determine the 

network service charges is the same for 

the single system (PDP–NTS2 and INT–

NTS2) and the whole system (WS–

NTS1) services. One complication is 

that under WS–NTS1, the determinants 

(system load, peak hour, and revenue 

requirement) apply to the combined 

PDP, Intertie and CAP system (CRSP is 

excluded from this calculation). 

Under Rate Schedule DSW–SD2, 

Scheduling, Dispatch, and System 

Control Ancillary Service, the rate is 

calculated as an annual cost of all 

personnel, capital costs (such as the 

dispatch center building), and other 

expenses incurred in providing the 

service for DSWR customers. These 

costs are recovered through a rate 

applied on a per tag basis. That rate is 

determined in two major steps: First, the 

yearly costs associated with capital 

improvements are determined and 

divided by the number of tags issued 

during the year; second, the average 

labor cost per tag is determined and 

added to the capital cost per tag. This 

rate design differs from the previous 

methodology in two ways: (1) The 

proposed rates are based on tags rather 

than schedules, and (2) the proposed 

methodology does not differentiate as to 

new vs. existing tags or as to whether or 

not a tag involves an intra-bus transfer. 

Under Schedule DSW–RS2, Reactive 

Supply and Voltage Control Service (Var 

Support) from generation sources, the 

rate is determined by dividing the 

revenue requirement for the service by 

the reservations requiring the service. 

The revenue requirement for the service 

is one minus the power factor (1–PF) 

times the combined generation revenue 

requirement of the PDP, BCP and CRSP. 

The previous methodology used the 

factor (1–PF2) to determine the Var 

Support revenue requirement for BCP 

and PDP, and used an amount for the 

CRSP Var Support revenue requirement 

supplied by the CRSP Management 

Center. 

Under Schedule DSW–FR2, 

Regulation and Frequency Response 

Service (Regulation), the rate is 

determined using the revenue 

requirement for the service divided by 

the load in the WALC requiring the 

service. The revenue requirement for the 

service is the product of the generation 

capacity that is used for regulation and 

the capacity rate of the Project, plus any 

regulation purchases the transmission 

provider must make. This total is 

multiplied by a use factor, which takes 

into consideration the customer load in 

the WALC BATO. The denominator in 

the equation and the load in the BATO 

requiring the service includes a portion 

of the CRSP load and the DSWR load. 

Regulation is not available from 

DSWR resources on a long-term basis. 

However, if necessary, DSWR will 

purchase regulation on the open market 

for a charge that covers the cost of 

procuring and supplying the service. 

Regulation will be supplied from DSWR 

resources only on a short-term basis, if 

such resources are available. Under Rate 

Schedule DSW–FR1, Western also 

indicated that this service would only 

be supplied under short-term sales, but 

set the charge equal to the capacity rate 

of the Project supplying the service 

rather than basing the charge on a 

formula as with the proposed rate 

methodology. 

Non-standard load refers to large, 

volatile loads (such as those associated 

with certain smelters and arc furnaces), 

which can require a BATO to acquire 

significant amounts of generation 

capacity for regulation. Such nonstandard loads require separate metering 

of their moment-to-moment load values 

to accurately calculate their effects on 

the system, and will not be covered 

under the proposed regulation rate. 

For this rate order, DSWR is defining 

a non-standard load as either a single 

plant or site: (1) With a regulation 

capacity requirement of 5 megawatts 

(MW) or greater on a recurring basis, 

and (2) whose capacity requirement is 

equal to 10 percent or greater of their 

average load. Regulation for nonstandard loads, as determined by 

Western, must be delineated in a service 

agreement, which recognizes the 

additional burden required to supply 

this service. 

Rate Schedule DSW–EI2, Energy 

Imbalance Service, proposes a different 

bandwidth for on-peak and for off-peak, 

because Western’s ability to supply this 

service is different for these two 

scenarios, especially during periods of 

low water. The bandwidth for on-peak 

is proposed to be plus or minus 1.5 

percent of the customer’s load with a 

minimum of 5 MW of either over- or 

under-delivery. The off-peak bandwidth 

is 1.5 percent to a negative 3 percent of 

a customer’s load with a minimum of 2 

MW of over-delivery and 5 MW of 

under-delivery. 

The settlement with the customer will 

be different for excursions within the 

bandwidth than for excursions outside 

the bandwidth. However, in all cases it 

is at Western’s discretion whether to 

require a scheduled return of energy or 

a financial settlement. If the customer’s 

Imbalance Energy is within the 

bandwidth for either on-peak or offpeak, the customer will be either 

charged or credited 100 percent of a 

weighted index price chosen by Western 

or a scheduled return of an equal 

amount of energy. 

For energy outside the bandwidth 

during the on-peak hours, the 

methodology proposes 110 percent of a 

weighted index price for underdeliveries and 90 percent of the 

weighted index price for over-deliveries. 

For energy outside the bandwidth 

during the off-peak hours, the 

methodology proposes 110 percent of a 

weighted index price for underdeliveries. However, for over-deliveries 

in the off-peak hours, the methodology 

proposes the lesser of 60-percent of a 

weighted index price, or a WALC 

weighted sales price. In lieu of a 

financial settlement for energy outside 

the bandwidth, an amount of energy 

equivalent to the financial settlement 

will be scheduled. 

The proposed rate methodology 

differs from the previous methodology 

in that previously DSWR used the FERC 

pro-forma methodology to define the 

service. Better metering and data sorting 

capabilities and the drought, which 

persists in the southwest, have shown 

that Western is disadvantaged when 

using the FERC pro-forma methodology. 

Under the previous methodology, a 3- 

percent bandwidth with a 2 MW 

deviation was used, and underdeliveries were assessed 100 mills per 

kilowatthour penalty and overdeliveries were credited at 50 percent of 

market value. 

Under Schedule DSW–SPR2, 

Operating Reserves-Spinning Reserve 

Service is not available from DSWR 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Notices 59337 

resources on a long-term firm basis. If a 

customer cannot self-supply or purchase 

this service from another provider, 

Western may obtain the reserves on the 

open market for a charge that covers the 

cost of procuring the service. The 

transmission customer will be 

responsible for the transmission service 

to get these reserves to their destination. 

Under Schedule DSW–SUR2, 

Operating Reserves-Supplemental 

Reserve Service is not available from 

DSWR resources on a long-term firm 

basis. If a customer cannot self-supply 

or purchase this service from another 

provider, at the customer’s request, 

Western may obtain the reserves on the 

open market for a charge that covers the 

cost of procuring the service. The 

transmission customer will be 

responsible for the transmission service 

to get these reserves to their destination. 

Spinning and Supplemental Reserve 

Services were handled in the same way 

in the previous rate methodology as in 

this proposal. 

Legal Authority 

Since the proposed rates constitute a 

major rate adjustment as defined by 10 

CFR part 903, Western will hold both a 

public information forum and a public 

comment forum. After review of public 

comments, and possible amendments or 

adjustments, Western will recommend 

the Deputy Secretary of Energy approve 

the proposed rates on an interim basis. 

Western is establishing network 

service for the PDP and the Intertie and 

ancillary services for the PDP, Intertie, 

CAP, and the part of the CRSP located 

in the WALC BATO under the 

Department of Energy Organization Act 

(42 U.S.C. 7152); the Reclamation Act of 

1902 (ch. 1093, 32 Stat. 388), as 

amended and supplemented by 

subsequent laws, particularly section 

9(c) of the Reclamation Project Act of 

1939 (43 U.S.C. 485h(c)); and other acts 

that specifically apply to the projects 

involved. 

By Delegation Order No. 00–037.00, 

effective December 6, 2001, the 

Secretary of Energy delegated: (1) The 

authority to develop power and 

transmission rates to Western’s 

Administrator; (2) the authority to 

confirm, approve, and place such rates 

into effect on an interim basis to the 

Deputy Secretary of Energy; and (3) the 

authority to confirm, approve, and place 

into effect on a final basis, to remand, 

or to disapprove such rates to the 

Commission. Existing Department of 

Energy (DOE) procedures for public 

participation in power rate adjustments 

(10 CFR part 903) were published on 

September 18, 1985. 

Availability of Information 

All brochures, studies, comments, 

letters, memorandums, or other 

documents that Western initiates or uses 

to develop the proposed rates are 

available for inspection and copying at 

the Desert Southwest Regional Office, 

615 South 43rd Avenue, Phoenix, 

Arizona. Many of these documents and 

supporting information are also 

available on DSWR’s external Web site 

http://www.wapa.gov/dsw/dsw.htm. 

Regulatory Procedure Requirements 

Regulatory Flexibility Analysis 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.) requires Federal 

agencies to perform a regulatory 

flexibility analysis if a final rule is likely 

to have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities, and there is a legal requirement 

to issue a general notice of proposed 

rulemaking. This action does not require 

a regulatory flexibility analysis since it 

is a rulemaking of particular 

applicability involving rates or services 

applicable to public property. 

Environmental Compliance 

In compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.); 

Council on Environmental Quality 

Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500–1508); 

and DOE NEPA Regulations (10 CFR 

part 1021), Western has determined this 

action is categorically excluded from 

preparing an environmental assessment 

or an environmental impact statement. 

Determination Under Executive Order 

12866 

Western has an exemption from 

centralized regulatory review under 

Executive Order 12866; accordingly, no 

clearance of this notice by the Office of 

Management and Budget is required. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

Western has determined that this rule 

is exempt from congressional 

notification requirements under 5 U.S.C. 

801 because the action is a rulemaking 

of particular applicability relating to 

rates or services and involves matters of 

procedure. 

Dated: September 30, 2005. 

Michael S. Hacskaylo, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 05–20433 Filed 10–11–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[Petition IV–2002–1; FRL–7982–7] 

Clean Air Act Operating Permit 

Program; Petition for Objection to 

State Operating Permit for Oglethorpe 

Power Company—Wansley Combined 

Cycle Energy Facility; Roopville (Heard 

County), GA 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of final order denying 

petition to object to a state operating 

permit in response to remand. 

SUMMARY: On September 15, 2005, the 

Administrator issued an Order 

Responding to Remand denying a 

petition to object to a state operating 

permit issued to Oglethorpe Power 

Company (Oglethorpe)—Wansley 

Combined Cycle Energy Facility (Block 

8) located in Roopville, Heard County, 

Georgia, pursuant to title V of the Clean 

Air Act (the Act), 42 U.S.C. 7661–7661f. 

On February 4, 2002, Sierra Club had 

filed a petition seeking EPA’s objection 

to the title V operating permit for Block 

8 issued by the Georgia Environmental 

Protection Division (EPD). The 

Administrator denied the petition in an 

Order dated November 15, 2002. 

Pursuant to Section 502(b) of the Act, 

Sierra Club appealed to the U.S. Court 

of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (the 

Court), arguing that Oglethorpe was not 

entitled to a permit for Block 8 (in 

accordance with Georgia’s Statewide 

Compliance Rule) because it owns part 

of another major stationary source that 

has been cited for non-compliance with 

the Act. On May 5, 2004, the Court 

granted Sierra Club’s petition for 

review, vacated the November 12, 2002, 

Order, and remanded to EPA for further 

explanation of the manner in which the 

Georgia rule should be applied in cases 

of partial ownership. After considering 

the issues raised by the Court, the Order 

Responding to Remand reaches the 

same conclusion as EPA’s original 

Order, but provides a more detailed 

explanation. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of the Order 

Responding to Remand, the petition, 

and all pertinent information relating 

thereto are on file at the following 

location: EPA Region 4, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, 61 

Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 

30303–8960. The remanded final order 

is also available electronically at the 

following address: http://www.epa.gov/ 

region7/programs/artd/air/title5/ 

petitiondb/petitions/