Greenhouse Gas Technical Assistance Provider and Third-Party Verifier Program, 46335-46336 [2024-11424]

Download as PDF 46335 Proposed Rules Federal Register Vol. 89, No. 104 Wednesday, May 29, 2024 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Agricultural Marketing Service 7 CFR Part 175 [Doc. No. AMS–LP–24–0012] RIN 0581–AE29 Greenhouse Gas Technical Assistance Provider and Third-Party Verifier Program Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA. ACTION: Notification; request for information. AGENCY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is seeking public input to support the preparation of proposed regulations intended to implement the Greenhouse Gas Technical Assistance Provider and Third-Party Verifier Program (the Program), particularly related to the criteria used to evaluate protocols and identification of specific protocols that should be considered for inclusion in the Program. The purpose of the Program is to facilitate farmer, rancher, and private forest landowner participation in voluntary carbon markets. This request for information provides an important step toward developing a meaningful Program consistent with the Growing Climate Solutions Act (GCSA). DATES: Comments must be received by June 28, 2024 to be assured of consideration. SUMMARY: Interested persons are invited to submit comments concerning this document by either of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and enter ‘‘AMS–LP–24–0012’’ in the Search field. Select the Documents tab, then select the ‘Comment’ button in the list of documents. Comments should reference the document number and the date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register. lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1 ADDRESSES: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:36 May 28, 2024 Jkt 262001 • Email: Please submit any email responses to Sasha.Strohm@usda.gov. All comments submitted in response to this document will be included in the record, will be made available to the public, and can be viewed at: https:// www.regulations.gov. Please be advised that the identity of the individuals or entities submitting the comments will be made available to the public on the internet at the address provided above. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sasha Strohm, Program Manager, at 202–720–5705, or via email at Sasha.Strohm@usda.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background USDA is preparing to establish the Greenhouse Gas Technical Assistance Provider and Third-Party Verifier Program (the Program), authorized under the provisions of the Growing Climate Solutions Act (GCSA), which was signed into law on December 29, 2022, as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 (Pub. L. 117–328, div. HH, title I, section 201). The purpose of the Program is to facilitate farmer, rancher, and private forest landowner participation in voluntary carbon markets. In establishing the Program, USDA will (1) publish a list of, and documents relating to, widely accepted protocols that are designed to ensure consistency, reliability, effectiveness, efficiency, and transparency of voluntary environmental credit markets; (2) publish descriptions of widely accepted qualifications possessed by covered entities that provide technical assistance to farmers, ranchers, and private forest landowners; (3) publish a list of qualified technical assistance providers and third-party verifiers; and (4) provide information to assist farmers, ranchers, and private forest landowners in accessing voluntary environmental credit markets. Prior to publication of this request for information (RFI) and as directed by the GCSA, USDA completed an analysis of voluntary carbon markets and published a report, ‘‘A General Assessment of the Role of Agriculture and Forestry in U.S. Carbon Markets’’.1 The report concluded that voluntary carbon 1 https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/ documents/USDA-General-Assessment-of-the-Roleof-Agriculture-and-Forestry-in-US-CarbonMarkets.pdf. PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 markets offer a promising tool to achieve greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions from the agricultural and forestry sectors. However, farmers, ranchers, and private forest landowners face barriers to accessing voluntary carbon markets due to market confusion, high costs, and project requirements. A full discussion on how the Program will address barriers and facilitate producer participation in voluntary carbon markets is available in the report, ‘‘USDA Intent to Establish the Greenhouse Gas Technical Assistance Provider and Third-Party Verifier Program’’.2 This RFI seeks public input on options for implementing the Program. Specifically, USDA seeks input on (1) options for interpreting and applying criteria used to evaluate protocols that are designed to ensure consistency, reliability, effectiveness, efficiency, and transparency; (2) information pertaining to specific protocols to be evaluated for inclusion in the program; (3) qualifications needed by covered entities who serve as technical assistance providers to farmers, ranchers, or private forest landowners; and (4) qualifications needed by covered entities who serve as third-parties who conduct verification of processes described in protocols for voluntary environmental credit markets. The information obtained will be considered in determining the next step, which could include a proposed rule. II. Request for Information Commenters should refer to specific question numbers in their responses. Question 1: How should USDA define the terms ‘‘consistency,’’ ‘‘reliability,’’ ‘‘effectiveness,’’ ‘‘efficiency,’’ and ‘‘transparency’’ (see 7 U.S.C. 6712(c)(1)(A)) for use in protocol evaluation? Question 2: What metrics or standards should USDA use to evaluate a protocol’s alignment with each of the five criteria to be defined in Question 1? What should USDA consider as minimum criteria for a protocol to qualify for listing under the Program? Question 3: In general, after a new protocol is published, how long does it take for a project to use the protocol and be issued credits (i.e., what is the lag 2 https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/ documents/GCSA-JustificationReport.pdf. E:\FR\FM\29MYP1.SGM 29MYP1 lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1 46336 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 29, 2024 / Proposed Rules time between protocol publication and first credit generation)? Question 4: Which protocol(s) for generating voluntary carbon credits from agriculture and forestry projects should USDA evaluate for listing through the Greenhouse Gas Technical Assistance Provider and Third-Party Verifier Program? Question 5: For any protocol(s) identified under Question 4: (a) Has the protocol resulted in the generation and sale of credits? If yes, when was the most recent year and volume of credit generation and retirement? If not, is there evidence that the protocol will generate credits (e.g., projects are under development)? (b) What is the average size (in acres, hectares, or another relevant unit) of projects using the protocol? (c) What is the average credit issuance per unit land area (acre or hectare) for projects using the protocol, inclusive of credits that are contributed to a buffer pool? (d) Does the protocol reduce the cost, paperwork, and/or reporting burden for smaller, diversified, or underserved farmers, ranchers, or private forest landowners, while maintaining reliability of offsets? If yes, how? (e) Does the protocol allow multiple entities to aggregate into a single project? If yes, what are the parameters for aggregation and is there evidence that aggregation has successfully occurred? (f) Does the registry administering the protocol use a fee structure that allows for aggregated entities to pay a single project fee, or does each entity need to pay a project fee? (g) What are the verification requirements in the protocol, including recordkeeping requirements? (h) Does the protocol require on-site verification? If yes, does the protocol require 100% on-site verification, or does the protocol specify a procedure for determining an on-site verification sample group? What is required as part of the on-site verification? Does the protocol allow remote verification methods/technologies (e.g., remote sensing)? (i) Does the protocol include a risk management approach for determining which data inputs or project sites are required for third-party verification? If yes, what does the risk management approach require? (j) Does the protocol allow for simplified measurement, monitoring, reporting, and verification (MMRV) processes? If yes, are there requirements or restrictions for using the simplified MMRV processes? VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:36 May 28, 2024 Jkt 262001 (k) What quantification methodology(ies) does the protocol require for quantification of emissions reductions and/or removals? What scientific evidence is available to support these methodologies? (l) For protocols where models are required to quantify emissions, is there a process for model review and approval prior to use by prospective projects? Can approved models be used by any project or are they specific to a project developer? (m) If models are allowed for quantification of emissions reductions, are models required to have gone through scientific review, parameterization, calibration, and validation to demonstrate performance for the practices on the relevant crops and/or species in the geography of the project? Does the protocol provide clear guidance on where eligible models can be applied? (n) What does the protocol require or allow for determining a project baseline? (o) How does the registry administering the protocol restrict the potential double counting of credits? (p) Does the protocol require projects to quantify and report uncertainty associated with greenhouse gas calculations? (q) Has the protocol generated credits which were later cancelled due to issues of credit integrity or validity? (r) For project categories where reversals (i.e., the intentional or unintentional release of sequestered carbon for which credits have been issued) are possible, does the protocol contain procedures to maintain net GHG impact? (s) Where is information about the protocol made publicly available? Question 6: How should USDA evaluate technical assistance providers (TAP)? What should be the minimum qualifications, certifications, and/or expertise for a TAP to qualify for listing under the Program? Question 7: Should the qualifications and/or registration process be different for entities and individuals that seek to register as a TAP? Questions 8: What should be the minimum qualifications and expertise for a third-party verifier to qualify for registration under the Program? (Authority: Pub. L. 117–328, div. HH, title I, section 201) Melissa Bailey, Associate Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service. [FR Doc. 2024–11424 Filed 5–28–24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2024–1470; Project Identifier MCAI–2023–01284–T] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; MHI RJ Aviation ULC (Type Certificate Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.) Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM). AGENCY: The FAA proposes to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain MHI RJ Aviation ULC Model CL–600–2C10 (Regional Jet Series 700, 701 & 702), CL–600–2D15 (Regional Jet Series 705), and CL–600–2D24 (Regional Jet Series 900) airplanes. This proposed AD was prompted by a report that the electrical harnesses in the overhead bin above the class divider may have insufficient or no separation with the class divider mounting plate. This proposed AD would require inspecting the overhead bin electrical harnesses at the class dividers, and modifying the class divider mounting plate assembly or accomplishing a temporary repair if necessary; and, eventually modifying the class divider mounting plate assembly if a modification was not done after accomplishing the inspection, as specified in a Transport Canada AD, which is proposed for incorporation by reference (IBR). The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products. DATES: The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by July 15, 2024. ADDRESSES: You may send comments, using the procedures found in 14 CFR 11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following methods: • Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. • Fax: 202–493–2251. • Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590. • Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail address above between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. AD Docket: You may examine the AD docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA–2024–1470; or in person at Docket Operations between 9 a.m. and SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\29MYP1.SGM 29MYP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 104 (Wednesday, May 29, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 46335-46336]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-11424]


========================================================================
Proposed Rules
                                                Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________

This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of 
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these 
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in 
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.

========================================================================


Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 29, 2024 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 46335]]



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Agricultural Marketing Service

7 CFR Part 175

[Doc. No. AMS-LP-24-0012]
RIN 0581-AE29


Greenhouse Gas Technical Assistance Provider and Third-Party 
Verifier Program

AGENCY: Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notification; request for information.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is seeking public 
input to support the preparation of proposed regulations intended to 
implement the Greenhouse Gas Technical Assistance Provider and Third-
Party Verifier Program (the Program), particularly related to the 
criteria used to evaluate protocols and identification of specific 
protocols that should be considered for inclusion in the Program. The 
purpose of the Program is to facilitate farmer, rancher, and private 
forest landowner participation in voluntary carbon markets. This 
request for information provides an important step toward developing a 
meaningful Program consistent with the Growing Climate Solutions Act 
(GCSA).

DATES: Comments must be received by June 28, 2024 to be assured of 
consideration.

ADDRESSES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments concerning 
this document by either of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and enter ``AMS-LP-24-0012'' in the Search field. 
Select the Documents tab, then select the `Comment' button in the list 
of documents. Comments should reference the document number and the 
date and page number of this issue of the Federal Register.
     Email: Please submit any email responses to 
[email protected].
    All comments submitted in response to this document will be 
included in the record, will be made available to the public, and can 
be viewed at: https://www.regulations.gov. Please be advised that the 
identity of the individuals or entities submitting the comments will be 
made available to the public on the internet at the address provided 
above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sasha Strohm, Program Manager, at 202-
720-5705, or via email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    USDA is preparing to establish the Greenhouse Gas Technical 
Assistance Provider and Third-Party Verifier Program (the Program), 
authorized under the provisions of the Growing Climate Solutions Act 
(GCSA), which was signed into law on December 29, 2022, as part of the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328, div. HH, 
title I, section 201). The purpose of the Program is to facilitate 
farmer, rancher, and private forest landowner participation in 
voluntary carbon markets.
    In establishing the Program, USDA will (1) publish a list of, and 
documents relating to, widely accepted protocols that are designed to 
ensure consistency, reliability, effectiveness, efficiency, and 
transparency of voluntary environmental credit markets; (2) publish 
descriptions of widely accepted qualifications possessed by covered 
entities that provide technical assistance to farmers, ranchers, and 
private forest landowners; (3) publish a list of qualified technical 
assistance providers and third-party verifiers; and (4) provide 
information to assist farmers, ranchers, and private forest landowners 
in accessing voluntary environmental credit markets.
    Prior to publication of this request for information (RFI) and as 
directed by the GCSA, USDA completed an analysis of voluntary carbon 
markets and published a report, ``A General Assessment of the Role of 
Agriculture and Forestry in U.S. Carbon Markets''.\1\ The report 
concluded that voluntary carbon markets offer a promising tool to 
achieve greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions from the agricultural and 
forestry sectors. However, farmers, ranchers, and private forest 
landowners face barriers to accessing voluntary carbon markets due to 
market confusion, high costs, and project requirements. A full 
discussion on how the Program will address barriers and facilitate 
producer participation in voluntary carbon markets is available in the 
report, ``USDA Intent to Establish the Greenhouse Gas Technical 
Assistance Provider and Third-Party Verifier Program''.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USDA-General-Assessment-of-the-Role-of-Agriculture-and-Forestry-in-US-Carbon-Markets.pdf.
    \2\ https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/GCSA-JustificationReport.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This RFI seeks public input on options for implementing the 
Program. Specifically, USDA seeks input on (1) options for interpreting 
and applying criteria used to evaluate protocols that are designed to 
ensure consistency, reliability, effectiveness, efficiency, and 
transparency; (2) information pertaining to specific protocols to be 
evaluated for inclusion in the program; (3) qualifications needed by 
covered entities who serve as technical assistance providers to 
farmers, ranchers, or private forest landowners; and (4) qualifications 
needed by covered entities who serve as third-parties who conduct 
verification of processes described in protocols for voluntary 
environmental credit markets. The information obtained will be 
considered in determining the next step, which could include a proposed 
rule.

II. Request for Information

    Commenters should refer to specific question numbers in their 
responses.
    Question 1: How should USDA define the terms ``consistency,'' 
``reliability,'' ``effectiveness,'' ``efficiency,'' and 
``transparency'' (see 7 U.S.C. 6712(c)(1)(A)) for use in protocol 
evaluation?
    Question 2: What metrics or standards should USDA use to evaluate a 
protocol's alignment with each of the five criteria to be defined in 
Question 1? What should USDA consider as minimum criteria for a 
protocol to qualify for listing under the Program?
    Question 3: In general, after a new protocol is published, how long 
does it take for a project to use the protocol and be issued credits 
(i.e., what is the lag

[[Page 46336]]

time between protocol publication and first credit generation)?
    Question 4: Which protocol(s) for generating voluntary carbon 
credits from agriculture and forestry projects should USDA evaluate for 
listing through the Greenhouse Gas Technical Assistance Provider and 
Third-Party Verifier Program?
    Question 5: For any protocol(s) identified under Question 4:
    (a) Has the protocol resulted in the generation and sale of 
credits? If yes, when was the most recent year and volume of credit 
generation and retirement? If not, is there evidence that the protocol 
will generate credits (e.g., projects are under development)?
    (b) What is the average size (in acres, hectares, or another 
relevant unit) of projects using the protocol?
    (c) What is the average credit issuance per unit land area (acre or 
hectare) for projects using the protocol, inclusive of credits that are 
contributed to a buffer pool?
    (d) Does the protocol reduce the cost, paperwork, and/or reporting 
burden for smaller, diversified, or underserved farmers, ranchers, or 
private forest landowners, while maintaining reliability of offsets? If 
yes, how?
    (e) Does the protocol allow multiple entities to aggregate into a 
single project? If yes, what are the parameters for aggregation and is 
there evidence that aggregation has successfully occurred?
    (f) Does the registry administering the protocol use a fee 
structure that allows for aggregated entities to pay a single project 
fee, or does each entity need to pay a project fee?
    (g) What are the verification requirements in the protocol, 
including recordkeeping requirements?
    (h) Does the protocol require on-site verification? If yes, does 
the protocol require 100% on-site verification, or does the protocol 
specify a procedure for determining an on-site verification sample 
group? What is required as part of the on-site verification? Does the 
protocol allow remote verification methods/technologies (e.g., remote 
sensing)?
    (i) Does the protocol include a risk management approach for 
determining which data inputs or project sites are required for third-
party verification? If yes, what does the risk management approach 
require?
    (j) Does the protocol allow for simplified measurement, monitoring, 
reporting, and verification (MMRV) processes? If yes, are there 
requirements or restrictions for using the simplified MMRV processes?
    (k) What quantification methodology(ies) does the protocol require 
for quantification of emissions reductions and/or removals? What 
scientific evidence is available to support these methodologies?
    (l) For protocols where models are required to quantify emissions, 
is there a process for model review and approval prior to use by 
prospective projects? Can approved models be used by any project or are 
they specific to a project developer?
    (m) If models are allowed for quantification of emissions 
reductions, are models required to have gone through scientific review, 
parameterization, calibration, and validation to demonstrate 
performance for the practices on the relevant crops and/or species in 
the geography of the project? Does the protocol provide clear guidance 
on where eligible models can be applied?
    (n) What does the protocol require or allow for determining a 
project baseline?
    (o) How does the registry administering the protocol restrict the 
potential double counting of credits?
    (p) Does the protocol require projects to quantify and report 
uncertainty associated with greenhouse gas calculations?
    (q) Has the protocol generated credits which were later cancelled 
due to issues of credit integrity or validity?
    (r) For project categories where reversals (i.e., the intentional 
or unintentional release of sequestered carbon for which credits have 
been issued) are possible, does the protocol contain procedures to 
maintain net GHG impact?
    (s) Where is information about the protocol made publicly 
available?
    Question 6: How should USDA evaluate technical assistance providers 
(TAP)? What should be the minimum qualifications, certifications, and/
or expertise for a TAP to qualify for listing under the Program?
    Question 7: Should the qualifications and/or registration process 
be different for entities and individuals that seek to register as a 
TAP?
    Questions 8: What should be the minimum qualifications and 
expertise for a third-party verifier to qualify for registration under 
the Program?

(Authority: Pub. L. 117-328, div. HH, title I, section 201)

Melissa Bailey,
Associate Administrator, Agricultural Marketing Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-11424 Filed 5-28-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.