Loveland Area Projects-Western Area Colorado Missouri Balancing Authority-Rate Order No. WAPA-118, 28684-28692 [E6-7494]
Download as PDF
28684
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 17, 2006 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Western Area Power Administration
Loveland Area Projects—Western Area
Colorado Missouri Balancing
Authority-Rate Order No. WAPA–118
Western Area Power
Administration, DOE.
ACTION: Notice of rate order.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Deputy Secretary of
Energy confirmed and approved Rate
Order No. WAPA–118 and Rate
Schedule L–AS3, placing the rate for
Regulation and Frequency Response
Service (Regulation Service) for the
Loveland Area Projects (LAP)—Western
Area Colorado Missouri Balancing
Authority (Balancing Authority) of the
Western Area Power Administration
(Western) into effect on an interim basis.
This provisional rate will be in effect
until the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission) confirms,
approves, and places it into effect on a
final basis or until it is replaced by
another rate. The provisional rate will
provide sufficient revenue to pay all
annual costs, including interest
expense, and repay power investment,
within the allowable periods.
DATES: Rate Schedule L–AS3 will be
placed into effect on an interim basis on
the first day of the first full billing
period beginning on or after June 1,
2006, and will be in effect until the
Commission confirms, approves, and
places the rate schedule in effect on a
final basis through May 31, 2011, or
until the rate schedule is superseded.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Edward F. Hulls, Operations Manager,
Rocky Mountain Customer Service
Region, Western Area Power
Administration, P.O. Box 3700,
Loveland, CO 80539–3003, (970) 461–
7566, e-mail hulls@wapa.gov, or Mr.
Daniel Payton, Rates Manager, Rocky
Mountain Customer Service Region,
Western Area Power Administration,
P.O. Box 3700, Loveland, CO 80539–
3003, (970) 461–7442, e-mail
dpayton@wapa.gov.
The
Deputy Secretary of Energy approved
existing Rate Schedule L–AS3 for
Regulation Service, as part of Rate Order
No. WAPA–106 (69 FR 1723) on
December 30, 2003, placing those
formula rates into effect on an interim
basis effective March 1, 2004. The
Commission confirmed and approved
the rate schedules on January 31, 2005,
under FERC Docket No. EF04–5182–000
(110 FERC 62,084) for service through
February 28, 2009.
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 May 16, 2006
Jkt 208001
This provisional rate is to supersede
the current Rate Schedule L–AS3 only.
Under the existing Rate Schedule L–
AS3, the cost for Regulation Service is
only applied against entities’ auxiliary
loads.
The revised rate remains unchanged
for the most part; however, provisions
have been made for the application of
the load-based rate to all intermittent
resources within the Balancing
Authority. Intermittent generators
serving load outside the Balancing
Authority will also pay a pass-through
cost for Regulating Reserves.
Additionally, Western has further
defined the measurement for selfprovision of Regulation Service.
Although self-provision was permitted
under the previously approved rate
schedule, the terms and conditions have
now been specifically defined.
Since June 2003 Western
representatives have attended and
participated in various technical
conferences and workshops with parties
interested in the development of this
revised rate for Regulation Service,
including the Utility Wind Interest
Group, Oak Ridge National Laboratory,
the National Wind Coordinating
Committee, the National Renewable
Energy Laboratory, Public Service
Company of New Mexico, the Rocky
Mountain Electrical League, and the
Commission.
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 DOE procedures
for public participation in power rate
adjustments (10 CFR part 903) were
published on September 18, 1985.
Under Delegation Order Nos. 00–
037.00 and 00–001.00B, and pursuant to
10 CFR part 903 and 18 CFR part 300,
I hereby confirm, approve, and place
Rate Order No. WAPA–118, the
proposed Regulation and Frequency
Response Service rate, into effect on an
interim basis. The new Rate Schedule
L–AS3 will be promptly submitted to
the Commission for confirmation and
approval on a final basis.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: May 9, 2006.
Clay Sell,
Deputy Secretary.
Deputy Secretary; Order Confirming,
Approving, and Placing the Loveland
Area Projects—Western Area Colorado
Missouri Balancing Authority
Regulation and Frequency Response
Service Rate Into Effect on an Interim
Basis
This rate was established in
accordance with section 302 of the
Department of Energy (DOE)
Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7152). This
Act transferred to and vested in the
Secretary of Energy the power marketing
functions of the Secretary of the
Department of the Interior and the
Bureau of Reclamation under 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 project
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 DOE procedures
for public participation in power rate
adjustments (10 CFR part 903) were
published on September 18, 1985.
Acronyms and Definitions
As used in this Rate Order, the
following acronyms and definitions
apply:
ACE: Area Control Error. The
instantaneous difference between a
Balancing Authority’s net actual and
scheduled interchange, taking into
account the effects of Frequency Bias
and correction for meter error and
automatic time-error correction.
AGC: Automatic Generator Control.
Equipment that automatically adjusts
generation in a Balancing Authority
from a central location, to maintain the
Balancing Authority’s interchange
schedule plus Frequency Bias. AGC may
also accommodate automatic
inadvertent payback and time-error
correction.
Auxiliary Load: An entity’s metered
load, less its Federal allocation.
Balancing Authority: The responsible
entity that integrates resource plans
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 17, 2006 / Notices
ahead of time, maintains loadinterchange-generation balance within a
Balancing Authority area, and supports
interconnection frequency in real time.
Capacity: The electric capability of a
generator, transformer, transmission
circuit or other equipment. It is
expressed in kW.
Capacity Rate: The rate which sets
forth the charges for capacity. It is
expressed in dollars per kilowatt-month.
Commission: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission.
CPS2: NERC’s Control Performance
Standard 2 which requires that the
average ACE for at least 90 percent of
clock 10-minute periods (6 nonoverlapping periods per hour) during a
calendar month must be within a
specific limit, referred to as L10 or ‘‘L
sub 10’’.
CRSP: Colorado River Storage Project.
FERC: The Commission (to be used
when referencing Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission Orders).
FERC Order No. 888: FERC’s order
promoting open access transmission.
Frequency Bias: A value, usually
expressed in megawatts per 0.1 Hertz
(MW/0.1 Hz) associated with a
Balancing Authority that approximates
the Balancing Authority’s response to
interconnection frequency error.
Fry-Ark: Fryingpan-Arkansas Project.
Intermittent Resource: For purposes of
this rate order, an electric generator that
is not dispatchable and cannot store its
fuel source and therefore, cannot
respond to changes in system demand
or respond to transmission security
constraints.
kW: Kilowatt; a unit of power equal to
1,000 watts.
LAP: Loveland Area Projects.
MW: Megawatt; a unit of power equal
to 1,000 kilowatts.
NERC: North American Electric
Reliability Council.
P–SMBP: Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin
Program.
Provisional Rate: A rate which has
been confirmed, approved and placed
into effect on an interim basis by the
Deputy Secretary.
Reclamation Law: A series of Federal
laws. Viewed as a whole, these laws
create the originating framework under
which Western markets power.
Regulating Reserve: An amount of
reserve responsive to automatic
generation control, which is sufficient to
provide normal regulating margin.
Regulating Reserve Charge:
Component of the provisional rate that
would charge for the consumption of
Regulating Reserves.
Regulation Service: Regulation and
Frequency Response Service—An
ancillary service necessary to provide
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 May 16, 2006
Jkt 208001
for the continuous balancing of
resources, generation, and interchange,
with load to maintain scheduled
interconnection frequency at 60 cycles
per second (60 Hz). Regulation Service
is accomplished by committing on-line
generation through the use of automatic
generating control equipment to follow
moment-by-moment changes in load.
SBA: Sub-Balancing Authority—An
entity serving load inside the Balancing
Authority, with sufficient metering and
AGC to accommodate minute-to-minute
changes between its metered load and
generation.
Tariff: Western’s Open Access
Transmission Tariff.
WACM: Western Area Colorado
Missouri Balancing Authority, formerly
known as the Western Area Colorado
Missouri Control Area.
WALC: Western Area Lower Colorado
Balancing Authority.
WECC: Western Electricity
Coordinating Council.
Western: United States Department of
Energy, Western Area Power
Administration.
Effective Date
The provisional rate will take effect
on the first day of the first full billing
period beginning on or after June 1,
2006, and will remain in effect until
May 31, 2011, pending approval by the
Commission on a final basis.
Public Notice and Comment
Western followed the Procedures for
Public Participation in Power and
Transmission Rate Adjustments and
Extensions, 10 CFR part 903, in
developing these rates. Western
involved interested parties in the rate
process in the following manner:
1. Western proposed a rate adjustment
for Regulation Service under Rate Order
No. WAPA–106, dated June 13, 2003,
and subsequently withdrew it on
January 12, 2004, to allow more time for
public input on intermittent resources
and the self-provision of Regulation
Service.
2. On March 18, 2004, Western hosted
a Technical Information Meeting on
Regulation Service in Denver, Colorado.
At this meeting, Western presented its
findings regarding the withdrawal of the
proposed rate. Interested parties gave
detailed presentations from their
respective viewpoints about Regulation
Service.
3. Between May 2004 and May 2005,
Western representatives met with
officials from Platte River Power
Authority, the National Renewable
Energy Laboratory, Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, and the Center for Resource
Solutions to solicit input on and discuss
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
28685
the impacts of the proposed Regulation
Service rate.
4. On September 27, 2004, Western
held a second Technical Information
Meeting on Regulation Service in
Denver, Colorado, to discuss the results
of the technical work completed since
the March 18, 2004, Technical
Information Meeting.
5. On June 20, 2005, Western
published a Notice of Proposed Rate for
Regulation Service in the Federal
Register (70 FR 35424). Publication of
this notice began the formal public
process.
6. On July 27, 2005, Western held
public information and public comment
forums for the proposed Regulation
Service rate adjustment in Denver,
Colorado.
7. The Consultation and Comment
Period for the public process closed on
September 19, 2005.
8. Western received two comment
letters during the Consultation and
Comment Period which were
considered in preparing this rate order.
One comment letter received on
September 27, 2005, while not
specifically addressed in this rate order,
reiterated the comments of the other two
commenters, and therefore, was
addressed.
Comments
Written comments were received from
the following: Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and
the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory, Golden, Colorado
(submitted jointly) Colorado Springs
Utilities, Colorado Springs, Colorado.
Representatives of the following
organizations made oral comments: Oak
Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge,
Tennessee Colorado Springs Utilities,
Colorado Springs, Colorado Platte River
Power Authority, Fort Collins, Colorado.
Project Description
A. Federal Projects Providing Regulation
Service
LAP is comprised of two power
projects that provide Regulation Service
for the WACM Balancing Authority, the
Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program—
Western Division (P–SMBP–WD) and
the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project (FryArk). The two projects were
operationally and financially integrated
for marketing purposes in 1989.
WACM also receives supplemental
Regulation Service through a dynamic
signal from CRSP generating resources
located within the WALC Balancing
Authority.
Within WACM, LAP provides service
to customers in a three-state area
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
28686
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 17, 2006 / Notices
(Colorado, Wyoming, and Nebraska)
over a transmission system of
approximately 3,356 miles (5,401 circuit
kilometers), and CRSP provides service
to customers over a transmission system
of approximately 1,422 miles (2,288
circuit kilometers).
Loveland Area Projects
Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program—
Western Division
The initial stages of the Missouri
River Basin Project, under construction
since 1944, were authorized by section
9 of the Flood Control Act of December
22, 1944 (58 Stat. 877, Public Law 534,
78th Congress, 2nd session). It was later
renamed the Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin
Program (P–SMBP) to honor its two
principal authors. The P–SMBP
encompasses a comprehensive program,
with the following authorized functions:
flood control, navigation improvement,
irrigation, municipal and industrial
water development, and hydroelectric
production for the entire Missouri River
Basin. Multipurpose projects have been
developed on the Missouri River and its
tributaries in Colorado, Montana,
Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota,
and Wyoming.
The Colorado-Big Thompson (C–BT),
Kendrick, Riverton, and Shoshone
Projects were administratively
combined with P–SMBP in 1954,
followed by the North Platte Project in
1959. These projects are known as the
‘‘Integrated Projects’’ of the P–SMBP.
The Riverton Project was reauthorized
as a unit of the P–SMBP in 1970.
The P–SMBP–WD and the Integrated
Projects consist of 19 powerplants: 6 in
the C–BT, 6 in the P–SMBP–WD, 2 in
the Kendrick Project, 4 in the Shoshone
Project, and 1 in the North Platte
Project.
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Fryingpan-Arkansas Project
Fry-Ark is a transmountain diversion
project in central and southeastern
Colorado authorized by the Act of
August 16, 1962 (Pub. L. 87–590, 76
Stat. 399, as amended by Title XI of the
Act of October 27, 1974, Pub. L. 93–493,
88 Stat. 1487). The Fryingpan and
Roaring Fork rivers are part of the
Colorado River Basin, on the West Slope
of the Rocky Mountains. Fry-Ark diverts
water from the Fryingpan River and
other tributaries of the Roaring Fork
River to the Arkansas River on the East
Slope of the Rocky Mountains. The
water diverted from the West Slope,
together with regulated Arkansas River
water, provides supplemental irrigation,
municipal and industrial water
supplies, and hydroelectric power
production. Flood control, fish and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 May 16, 2006
Jkt 208001
wildlife enhancement, and recreation
are other important purposes of Fry-Ark.
Fry-Ark features five dams and
reservoirs, one located on the West
Slope of the Rocky Mountains, and four
located on the East Slope of the Rocky
Mountains.
Fry-Ark’s electrical features consist of
the Mount Elbert 206–MW PumpedStorage Power Plant, the Mount Elbert
Switchyard, and the Mount Elbert-Malta
230-kV Transmission Line.
Colorado River Storage Project
CRSP was authorized by the Act of
April 11, 1956. It consists of four major
storage units: Glen Canyon on the
Colorado River in Arizona near the Utah
border, Flaming Gorge on the Green
River in Utah near the Wyoming border,
Navajo on the San Juan River in
northwestern New Mexico near the
Colorado border, and the Wayne N.
Aspinall unit (formerly known as
Curecanti) on the Gunnison River in
west-central Colorado.
Six Federal powerplants with 16 units
are associated with the project. The
operating capacity of CRSP’s 16
generating units was approximately
1,727,000 kW in fiscal year (FY) 2005.
CRSP operates its transmission system
within two balancing authorities,
WACM and WALC.
B. Balancing Authority Characteristics
WACM is operated by Western and
has Federal hydroelectric resources
from the P–SMBP—WD and Fry-Ark
Project. Large non-Federal thermal
generators also operate within WACM,
but are not under the direct control of
Western; e.g., Laramie River Station
operated by Basin Electric Power
Cooperative, Inc., and Craig Power Plant
operated by Tri-State Generation and
Transmission Association, Inc.
The thermal generation within
WACM represents the larger portion of
the Balancing Authority’s resource
portfolio. However, thermal resources
are much slower to respond to
Regulation Service requirements, are
generally operated near or at maximum
generating capacity, and are typically
not part of the AGC configuration.
Generally, the thermal generation
within WACM, as configured, is not
considered capable of providing
significant Regulation Service.
In FY 2005, the peak load within
WACM was measured at about 3,300
MW with approximately 5,300 MW of
generation installed. Federal generation
capacity is 830 MW or about 15 percent
of the total available resource.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Balancing Authority Regulating
Constraints
The only units within WACM capable
of providing Regulation Service are
those with the ability to adjust their
output on a moment-to-moment basis.
These units are located at Yellowtail,
Seminoe, Kortes, Fremont Canyon,
Alcova, Estes, Flatiron, and Mount
Elbert powerplants. The amount of
Regulating Reserve available from LAP
powerplants is limited by how many
units are available and the prescheduled
loading of the units at a given time.
Factors influencing unit regulating
availability include water schedules,
individual generator rough zone
constraints, and various environmental
constraints. These limitations exist at
most LAP powerplants including
Yellowtail and Mount Elbert, the two
primary powerplants providing
Regulation Service.
The relatively small size of some
forebays and afterbays also limits the
amount of Regulating Reserve available
to the system. Additionally, water
delivery has priority over generation
needs, further restricting the amount of
water that can be moved through the
generators to provide Regulation
Service.
C. Regulation Service Rate Discussion
In April 1998 Western implemented a
load-based rate for Regulation Service.
This rate has been applied to auxiliary
loads within the Balancing Authority
since that time. The existing formula
rate for Regulation Service is based on
an analysis that shows WACM requires
75 MW of Regulating Reserve. As LAP
has limited hydroelectric generation
available for Regulation Service, it must
rely on purchases from others to
supplement its own resources. This is
important as the Balancing Authority
could be the default provider of
Regulation Service for 653.5 MW of
intermittent resources currently in its
interconnection queue. Recognizing its
resource limitations, in this rate
adjustment Western has included rates
designed to properly allocate costs to all
users of Regulation Service, including
intermittent resources.
The rate for Regulation Service is
derived by dividing the revenue
requirement by the load plus the
installed intermittent generation, if any,
within the WACM Balancing Authority
requiring Regulation Service. The
revenue requirement for Regulation
Service consists of: (1) The annualized
cost of LAP powerplants providing
Regulation Service within the WACM
Balancing Authority, (2) the revenue
requirement for CRSP powerplants
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 17, 2006 / Notices
providing supplemental Regulation
Service to the WACM Balancing
Authority, and (3) the cost of purchases
to support Regulation Service. The load
taking Regulation Service within
WACM is derived by measurement of
the load coincident with the LAP
transmission system peak on a rolling
12-month average, plus the nameplate
capacity of the intermittent resources
located within the Balancing Authority.
The provisional Regulation Service
rate was developed based on the
analysis of data relevant to the WACM
Balancing Authority, and an extensive
record was compiled during the process.
Each Balancing Authority has unique
operating characteristics and constraints
when providing ancillary services. This
rate is specifically designed for WACM’s
unique operating characteristics.
Basis for Rate Development
The existing rate for Regulation
Service in Rate Schedule L–AS3 expires
on February 28, 2009.
The provisional rate will provide
sufficient revenue to pay all annual
costs, including interest expense and
repayment of power investment, and
will ensure that revenues are collected
from the appropriate entities. The
provisional rate will take effect on June
1, 2006, and will remain in effect
through May 31, 2011.
D. Rate Adjustment Background/Rates
History
analysis, Western has revised its June
20, 2005, proposed rate to reflect the
final provisional rate outlined in this
rate order.
Description of Existing Rate
Western’s existing rate for Regulation
Service is a load-based rate which is
applied to entities’ auxiliary loads
within WACM. The existing rate
provides for entities to be credited when
providing WACM with Regulation
Service, and waives charges if the load/
resource is dynamically metered out of
WACM. Western’s existing rate contains
no provision for application of passthrough costs. Following is a
description of the changes made from
the proposed rate to the provisional rate:
Load-Based Assessment Changes
The June 2005 proposed rate
maintained the existing rate’s loadbased rate for application to auxiliary
loads, but limited the application of that
load-based rate for intermittent
resources equal to or less than 10
percent of an entity’s auxiliary load. The
proposed rate also provided for an
assessment to any load or resource
deemed to be non-conforming.
The provisional rate eliminates the
10-percent limit, and applies the loadbased rate to both the auxiliary loads
and the total installed intermittent
resources within the Balancing
Authority.
Existing, Proposed, and Provisional
Rates
Changes in the Pass-Through
Assessment
The June 2005 proposed rate included
provisions for periodic evaluations of all
generators’ performance within the
Balancing Authority, and for those
identified as non-conforming, provided
for a pass-through cost. In the proposed
rate, pass-through costs would also be
applied to entities’ intermittent
resources exceeding 10 percent of their
auxiliary load.
The provisional rate eliminates the
generator performance evaluation, as
well as the 10-percent measurement and
the non-conforming load/resource
analysis. In the provisional rate, only
intermittent resources that are exported
are charged a pass-through cost for
Regulating Reserves.
Western received comments during
the Consultation and Comment Period
that ended September 19, 2005. Based
on comments received and further
Changes in Self-Provision or Cost
Waiver Assessment
The June 2005 proposed rate
maintained the cost waiver if a load or
Background
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Western published a Notice of
Proposed Rate for Regulation Service in
the Federal Register on June 13, 2003
(68 FR 35398). One component of that
proposed rate specifically addressed
Regulation Service needs for
intermittent resources. However, that
component was withdrawn from the
Final Notice of Rate Order published in
the Federal Register on January 12,
2004 (69 FR 1723), to allow further
study and input from interested parties.
This provisional rate for Regulation
Service is the culmination of that
continued study and input from various
interested parties.
28687
resource was dynamically metered out
of the Balancing Authority. If an entity
claimed to be self-providing Regulation
Service, the proposed rate gave the
option of fully or partially selfproviding (no different than the existing
rate). The measurement of partial selfprovision would be accomplished by
measuring the first derivative of the
average 1-minute change in the entity’s
ACE. An entity claiming to fully selfprovide Regulation Service would have
a choice of responding to WACM’s
dynamic ACE proportional to the
entity’s load, allowing WACM direct
access to pulse the entity’s regulating
units, or some other mutually agreed-to
process.
The provisional rate no longer
provides the option for an entity to
respond to a proportional share of
WACM’s ACE. The provisional rate
retains the option for an entity to allow
WACM to directly pulse the entity’s
regulating units. It has also been
adjusted slightly to measure partial selfprovision by offering the customer the
option of measuring either the entity’s
first derivative of the average 1-minute
change in its ACE, or its averaged 1minute ACE.
Summary of the Provisional Rate
Effective June 1, 2006
The provisional rate maintains the
load-based assessment for auxiliary
loads and the allowance for selfprovision of the service, but allows the
following choices for measuring that
self-provision: (1) The first derivative of
the averaged 1-minute change in the
entity’s ACE, or (2) the entity’s average
1-minute ACE.
The provisional rate eliminates the
10-percent limitation for intermittent
resources to receive the load-based rate
and instead applies the load-based rate
to the total installed capacity of the
intermittent resource.
The provisional rate also eliminates
the conforming versus non-conforming
load/resource analysis. However, any
intermittent resource exporting from
WACM via a schedule would still be
charged a pass-through cost based on
the average hourly mismatch between
forecast and actual generation.
Existing and Provisional Rates
A comparison of the existing,
proposed, and provisional rates is as
follows:
Existing Rate Schedule L–AS3
Effective March 1, 2004
Proposed Rate Schedule L–AS3
Proposed June 20, 2005
Provisional Rate Schedule L–AS3
Effective June 1, 2006
Load-Based Rate
Load-Based Rate
Load-Based Rate
Applied to:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Applied to:
15:08 May 16, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Applied to:
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
28688
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 17, 2006 / Notices
Existing Rate Schedule L–AS3
Effective March 1, 2004
Proposed Rate Schedule L–AS3
Proposed June 20, 2005
Provisional Rate Schedule L–AS3
Effective June 1, 2006
Load-Based Rate
Load-Based Rate
Load-Based Rate
(1) Entity’s auxiliary loads ..................................
(1) Entity’s auxiliary loads; ...............................
(2) Entities’ intermittent resources ≤ 10% of
their auxiliary load within WACM, after 180
MW limit for intermittent resource installation reached; and
(3) Non-conforming type load (charged an adjusted load-based rate).
(1) Entity’s auxiliary loads; and
(2) Entities’ total installed inermittent resources’ capacity within WACM, with no installation limit.
Pass-Through Cost:
Market-Based
Pass-Through Cost:
Market-Based
Pass-Through Cost:
Market-Based
N/A ......................................................................
Applied to: ........................................................
(1) all generators without designated load in
WACM; and.
(2) entities with installed intermittent generation 10% of their auxiliary load within
WACM, after 180 MW limit for intermittent
resource installation reached, will be
charged as follows:
(a) Regulation Charge for minute-to-minute
fluctuations.
Applies to:
(1) See No. (2), in Cost Waiver section below.
(3) Eliminated.
(2) No limit on installed intermittent generation, which will be charged as outlined in a.
and b., below:
(b) Regulating Reserve Charge for hourly mismatch of capacity.
(a) Regulation Charge (load-based) will be
charged to total installed intermittent resources (see Load-Based Rate, No. (2).
(b) intermittent resources exporting from
WACM via schedule will be charged for a
Regulating Reserve Charge based on the
hourly mismatch of forecast versus actual
generation.
Cost Waiver:
Cost Waiver:
Cost Waiver:
Cost for service partially or fully waived if: ........
(1) generator or load dynamically metered out
of WACM; or
(2) an entity provides its own service (partially
or fully) and claim is accepted by WACM
Cost for service partially or fully waived if: ......
(1) generator or load dynamically metered out
of WACM; or.
(2) entities with manual AGC that are partially
self-providing (charged load-based rate),
will be measured by the first derivative of
the averaged 1-minute change in the entity’s error signal; or
(3) entities with automatic AGC, that want to
fully provide service (no charge) must:
(a) be willing/able to respond to WACM’s dynamic signal, proportional to entity’s load;
(b) allow WACM direct access to pulse entity’s regulating units;
(c) mutually agree to any other proven methodology or process; or
(d) if entity does not comply with (a), (b), or
(c), it will be subject to measurement outlined in manual AGC description in No. (2),
in this section.
Cost for service partially or fully waived if:
(1) generator or load dynamically metered out
of WACM; or
(2) entities partially self-providing (charged the
load-based rate) will be measured by either:
(a) first derivative of the averaged 1-minute
change in the entity’s ACE; or
(b) the entity’s average 1-minute ACE; or
(3) entitites wishing to fully provide service
must:
(a) no longer applicable;
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Customer Accommodation
As referenced in Western’s existing
rate schedule for Regulation Service,
entities requiring service ‘‘* * * must
either purchase this service from
WACM or make alternative comparable
arrangements to satisfy their Regulation
obligations.’’ (69 FR 1734) Western
expects that entities requiring
Regulation Service will take service
from the WACM Balancing Authority.
However, for entities unwilling to
take Regulation Service from the WACM
Balancing Authority, self-provide it, or
acquire it from a third party, Western
has an established record of assisting
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:39 May 16, 2006
Jkt 208001
and will continue to assist entities in
the dynamic metering of their loads or
resources out of the Balancing
Authority. Until such time as meter
reconfiguration is accomplished, an
entity will be responsible for Regulation
Service charges assessed by the WACM
Balancing Authority under the rate then
in effect.
Certification of Rates
Western’s Administrator certified that
the provisional rate for Regulation
Service is the lowest possible rate
consistent with sound business
principles. The provisional rate was
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
(b) allow WACM direct access to pulse entity’s regulating units;
(c) mutually agree to any other proven methodology or process; or
(d) if entity doe not comply with b. or c., it will
be subject to measurement outlined in this
section, Nos. (2)(a) or (2)(b).
developed following administrative
policies and applicable laws.
Comments
The comments and responses
regarding the Regulation Service rate,
paraphrased for brevity when not
affecting the meaning of the
statement(s), are discussed below. Direct
quotes from comment letters are used
for clarification where necessary.
The issues discussed have been
organized into three sections: (1) Rate
Design, (2) Implementation, and (3)
Miscellaneous.
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 17, 2006 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
1. Rate Design
A. Comment: Several comments
expressed concern about the difference
between Western’s interpretation and
their own regarding the true nature of
Regulation Service. The commenters
stated that Western’s methodology for
Regulation Service increases the cost of
the service as expensive regulating units
also support load-following and
ramping.
Response: The Commission requires
balancing authorities to offer
transmission customers Regulation and
Frequency Response Service. However,
there is no standard definition for loadfollowing in any Commission
document, NERC’s glossary of terms, or
WECC’s reliability criteria. Within
WACM, there is no distinction between
Regulation Service and load-following
during the hour on a real-time basis.
WACM’s Regulation Service, ramping,
and load-following are performed
simultaneously by the same units. As
typical loads require all three services,
it serves no purpose to operationally
separate the functions.
Out of the 16 customers taking
Regulation Service from Western, the 7
balancing authorities adjacent to
Western, or the 34 balancing authorities
within the Western Interconnection,
none have made requests or submitted
comments to Western regarding the
separation of these services.
B. Comment: A comment suggested
Western develop a mechanism to tap
into the ramping capability of nonFederal thermal generation within
WACM, so that the cost of Regulation
Service and load-following could be
reduced for all customers.
Response: This comment is out of the
scope of this rate action. However, the
ramping capability identified in the
comment is not owned by Western.
Such resources are fully committed or
used for the respective owners’
deliveries to load. Any use of available
ramping capability would have to be
purchased from the thermal generation’s
owner and replaced to accommodate
previous operational commitments.
C. Comment: A comment states that
the proposed rate methodology adds
unneeded complexity to the rate.
Response: Western believes that the
methodology adopted in the provisional
rate reflects a more accurate assignment
of costs and is a reasonable modification
of the existing approved rate for
Regulation Service. The methodology is
no more complex than necessary to
assign costs fairly and provide adequate
customer choice.
D. Comment: The rate adjustment fails
to assess the actual physical Regulation
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 May 16, 2006
Jkt 208001
Service burden placed on the system by
each separate customer and improperly
recovers costs from each customer in
proportion only to the Regulation
Service burden placed on the system by
each customer group.
Response: This methodology is
unchanged from the previous
Commission-approved rate and is
consistent with regional and Western
Interconnection practices. A separate
rate or system burden is not identified
for each customer, and proportional,
cost-based assessments will continue to
be made for each customer’s load share
of the system’s Regulation Service
requirements.
E. Comment: A commenter believes
that the Regulation Service rate should
be based on the Regulation Service
allocation method described in the
January 2000 report, ‘‘Customer-Specific
Metrics for the Regulation and Load
Following Ancillary Services,’’ authored
by Brendan Kirby and Eric Hirst of Oak
Ridge National Laboratory.
Response: Based upon Western’s
research, the methodology outlined in
the January 2000 report referenced by
the comment has not been adopted and
put into practice by any entity or
Balancing Authority in the electric
utility industry.
Western’s load-based rate is approved
by the Commission and has been in
effect for approximately 8 years.
Western believes that minor
adjustments to the approved rate, based
on operating experience and Balancing
Authority needs, are a reasonable
modification.
The provisional rate methodology,
specifically tailored for WACM’s unique
mix of resources, results in the lowest
cost consistent with sound business
principles and therefore, is most
appropriate for determining Regulation
Service. A complete change in
methodology is unnecessary.
F. Comment: Western received several
comments related to the analysis of
wind resources, their operating
characteristics, and impacts on
Balancing Authority performance.
Specifically, comments addressed
Western’s simulation studies to
determine wind impacts on the
Balancing Authority, the true amount of
wind capacity that could be absorbed by
WACM, and the cost of service for
intermittent resources.
Response: In its simulation studies on
Balancing Authority performance,
Western projected or scaled the output
of existing WACM wind resources to
study the impacts of additional wind
resources.
While linear scaling of a large
magnitude in the range of 10 to 20 times
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
28689
might render questionable results,
Western has demonstrated that linear
scaling of 2 to 3 times is accurate for the
purpose of this analysis.
As a benchmark of reasonability,
Western worked with a neighboring
Balancing Authority with similar
characteristics and a 204-MW wind
farm. Analyses revealed that this wind
farm had significant intra-hour
fluctuations, often up to the installed
capacity of the units. During these
times, the neighboring Balancing
Authority saw a significant degradation
in its operating performance.
Despite the fluctuations in output
from wind or other intermittent
resources, Western has determined by
reviewing additional information and
public comments that at present, there
is no need to establish a limit for the
amount of wind that may be installed
for use by loads residing within the
Balancing Authority.
For resources exported out of the
Balancing Authority, Western will
charge the load-based rate against the
nameplate of the resource plus a
Regulating Reserve Charge, measured by
the average hourly mismatch of the
forecast versus the actual generation,
and using pass-through pricing.
G. Comment: Western has effectively
double-charged customers for energy
associated with Regulation Service, by
charging them once in their Energy
Imbalance Service rate schedule and by
charging them again within the
Regulation Service rate as a Regulating
Reserve Charge.
Response: In the interest of
clarification, Western notes that its
Energy Imbalance Service credits
customers who over-deliver their
resources and charges customers who
under-deliver their resources.
Western will not double-collect by
charging for both Energy Imbalance
Service and Regulating Reserve charges.
The proposed Regulating Reserve
Charge is a separate and distinct charge
and can be viewed in the same light as
a ‘‘unit commitment’’ charge; i.e., what
Western needs to keep on-line when an
intermittent resource’s actual output
differs from its scheduled output.
Western notes that the Regulating
Reserve Charge would only apply to
entities exporting their intermittent
generation out of WACM.
H. Comment: A comment states that
Western’s metric does not work above
the 10-percent penetration rate (as
defined by Western). For wind capacity
in excess of this limit, there is no
indication of what metric will be used
to calculate the impact of wind on the
system regulation requirements.
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
28690
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 17, 2006 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Response: Western has eliminated the
limit for intermittent generation of 180
MW or 10 percent of the Balancing
Authority’s auxiliary load, primarily
due to the dynamic circumstances
surrounding the impacts of additional
intermittent resource installation. It is
highly likely that WACM would
experience degradation in its CPS2
should a single 200-MW intermittent
resource be added to the Balancing
Authority’s resource mix. Historically,
however, WACM has seen a very
gradual addition of wind generators and
has been able to adapt its system to
operate around the volatility of these
generators. Therefore, Western has
eliminated the limit in the provisional
rate.
2. Rate Implementation
A. Comment: Western has incorrectly
identified non-conforming loads and
did not adequately define how they
would be measured.
Response: Western’s proposed metric
for identifying conforming versus nonconforming load was accurate, and
properly distinguished between these
two types of loads. However, the WACM
Balancing Authority does not presently
have any non-conforming load within
its boundaries, and is not anticipating
such load in the foreseeable future. This
led to a decision to eliminate the nonconforming load assessment from the
provisional rate.
B. Comment: An SBA with AGC must
respond to an error signal from WACM
‘‘proportional to the SBA’s load within
the Balancing Authority,’’ which would
be inequitable, as allocation of
regulating burden cannot be assessed on
load. Regulating Service charges are
more properly based on the volatility of
the load, not on average demand.
Response: The option of responding
to a proportional share of WACM’s
dynamic signal was one of several
options available to customers.
However, this option was eliminated
from the provisional rate. Other
remaining alternatives include paying
the same load-based Regulation Service
rate as others or being treated as an SBA
without AGC, both of which would
resolve the comment’s concern that it
only respond to the ‘‘volatility’’ of its
own load (see Response to Comment
2.C. below).
Regarding the comment that a
proportional response of a customer’s
AGC to an error signal from the
Balancing Authority is inequitable,
Western believes that this arrangement
is equitable and necessary to prevent
WACM from being the first to respond
to a dynamic signal when an SBA
cannot. It ensures that the SBA absorbs,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 May 16, 2006
Jkt 208001
on a proportional basis, responsibility
for Regulation Service within the
Balancing Authority.
C. Comment: Under the self-provision
assessment methodology, the limits of
0.5 percent and 1.5 percent to determine
whether there are full, partial or no
charges for a period are completely
arbitrary.
Response: The bandwidths of 0.5
percent and 1.5 percent are not arbitrary
and follow calculations used by NERC
for computing allowable excursions for
each Balancing Authority. This
calculation is based on the proportional
share of generation response within a
Balancing Authority’s boundaries,
contrasted to total generation response
in the Interconnection.
D. Comment: A commenter maintains
that it is providing its own Regulation
Service, and, therefore, is not subject to
WACM’s ancillary service rate for
Regulation Service.
Response: Western’s position is that
all entities operating within the
Balancing Authority that are not NERCrecognized balancing authorities must
take Regulation Service from the host
Balancing Authority, unless they can
demonstrate that they are actually
providing their own service or are not
using the resources of the host
Balancing Authority.
An entity’s claim of full self-provision
of Regulation Service must be
demonstrated through joint study
between the entity and the Balancing
Authority, and approved by WACM.
Until such time as full self-provision is
demonstrated and approved, the entity
will be charged for Regulation Service
based on the entity’s choice of: (1) The
first derivative of the averaged 1-minute
change in the entity’s ACE; (2) the
entity’s average 1-minute ACE, as
outlined in Rate Schedule L-AS3,
Section 3.1; or (3) the load-based rate
applied against the entity’s load.
E. Comment: The rate methodology
does not credit the SBA for providing
frequency response service which could
motivate the SBA to set its Frequency
Bias to zero, resulting in governor
response being withdrawn by the AGC
system during a system disturbance.
Response: For those entities operating
generation in a tie-line bias mode,
Western will offset the calculated
Regulation Service requirement by
mutual agreement with the SBA.
Western will not provide credit for
the governor response, as it is an
involuntary action by the generating
units across the Western
Interconnection to arrest frequency from
further degradation in the aftermath of
a large contingency.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3. Miscellaneous
A. Comment: Several comments
applauded Western for its efforts to
develop a rate for Regulation Service
that recognizes the costs associated with
providing the service and attempts to
allocate those costs to the transmission
customers responsible for incurring
those costs.
Response: Western notes the
comments.
B. Comment: A comment
recommends WACM abandon the
present proposal and develop a
Regulation Service rate that uses
technically defensible metrics to
measure consumption of the service.
Response: Western acknowledges the
recommendation, but believes that its
methodology is technically defensible,
and it would not be reasonable to
abandon efforts to manage and
accurately account for the cost of
providing Regulation Service. Western
provided appropriate time and
opportunity for consultation and
comment on the proposed action in
accordance with the Procedures for
Public Participation in Power and
Transmission Rate Adjustments and
Extensions, set out in 10 CFR part 903.
C. Comment: A comment renewed an
offer to help Western develop an
appropriate
Regulation Service tariff and help
analyze the impact of wind generation.
Response: Western appreciates the
offers of assistance it received during
the course of this rate process, however,
Western cannot give favored status to
any group or groups in the design and
implementation of proposed actions.
Western did accept information and
input from all concerned parties, both
formally and informally, worked closely
with technical staff from other agencies,
and hosted panel discussions regarding
the proposed rate at many wind-related
conferences and meetings.
Western also believes that it is in the
best position to design its Regulation
Service rate, based on the unique
characteristics of WACM, the regional
Federal hydroelectric powerplants, and
Western’s mission.
Availability of Information
Information about this rate
adjustment, including comments,
letters, memorandums and other
supporting materials Western used to
develop the provisional rates, is
available for public review in the Rocky
Mountain Customer Service Region,
Western Area Power Administration,
5555 East Crossroads Boulevard,
Loveland, Colorado.
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 17, 2006 / Notices
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. Western has determined
that 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.
Commission’s confirmation and
approval of it or a substitute rate on a
final basis through May 31, 2011.
Dated: May 9, 2006.
Clay Sell,
Deputy Secretary.
Rate Schedule L–AS3, Schedule 3 to
Tariff, June 1, 2006
Rocky Mountain Region; Regulation
And Frequency Response Service
Effective
The first day of the first full billing
period beginning on or after June 1,
2006, through May 31, 2011.
Environmental Compliance
Applicable
In compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of
1969 (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 that this action
is categorically excluded from
preparation of an environmental
assessment or an environmental impact
statement.
Regulation and Frequency Response
Service (Regulation Service) is
necessary to provide for the continuous
balancing of resources, generation and
interchange with load, and for
maintaining scheduled interconnection
frequency at sixty cycles per second (60
Hz). Regulation Service is accomplished
by committing online generation whose
output is raised or lowered,
predominantly through the use of
automatic generating control equipment,
as necessary to follow the moment-bymoment changes in load. The obligation
to maintain this balance between
resources and load lies with the Western
Area Colorado Missouri (WACM)
Balancing Authority operator. The
Customers (Loveland Area Projects
(LAP) Transmission Customers and
customers on others’ transmission
systems within WACM) must purchase
this service from WACM or make
alternative comparable arrangements to
satisfy their Regulation Service
obligations. The charges for Regulation
Service are outlined below.
LAP charges for Regulation Service
may be modified upon written notice to
Customers. Any change to the
Regulation Service charges will be listed
in a revision to this rate schedule issued
under applicable Federal laws,
regulations, and policies and made part
of the applicable service agreement.
Western will charge Customers under
the rate then in effect.
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.
Submission to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission
The provisional rates herein
confirmed, approved, and placed into
effect, together with supporting
documents, will be submitted to the
Commission for confirmation and final
approval.
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
Order
In view of the foregoing and under the
authority delegated to me, I confirm and
approve on an interim basis, effective
June 1, 2006, Rate Schedule L–AS3 for
the Loveland Area Projects and the
Western Area Colorado Missouri
Balancing Authority of the Western
Area Power Administration. The rate
schedule shall remain in effect on an
interim basis, pending the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 May 16, 2006
Jkt 208001
Types
There will be three different
applications of this rate, none of which
are exclusive of the other, and all three
may be applied to the same entity where
appropriate. The three applications are:
1. Load-based Assessment: The Rate
is reflected in the Formula Rate section
and will be applied to entities who
serve load within the WACM Balancing
Authority. This load-based rate will be
assessed on an entity’s auxiliary load
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
28691
(total metered load less Federal
entitlements) and will also be applied to
the installed nameplate capacity of all
intermittent generators within WACM.
2. Exporting Intermittent Resource
Assessment: This application will apply
to entities that export the output from
intermittent resource(s). The entity will
continue to pay the load-based charge
on the nameplate capacity, as described
in No. 1 above, but will also pay an
additional Regulating Reserve charge for
mismatched capacity; i.e., the hourly
average mismatch of the resource’s
forecast versus actual generation, using
the regional market rate for capacity/
reserves as pricing.
3 Self-Provision Assessment: Western
will allow entities with automatic or
manual generation control to selfprovide for all or a portion of their
loads. Typically, entities with
generation control are known as SubBalancing Authorities (SBA) and should
meet all of the following criteria:
a. Have a well-defined boundary, with
WACM-approved revenue-quality
metering, accurate as defined by NERC,
to include MW flow data availability at
6-second or smaller intervals.
b. Have AGC capability.
c. Demonstrate Regulation Service
capability.
d. Execute a contract with the WACM
Balancing Authority to:
i. Provide all requested data to the
WACM Balancing Authority.
ii. Meet SBA Error Criteria as
described under section 3.1 below.
3.1. Self-provision will be measured
by use of the entity’s 1-minute average
ACE or the entity’s 1-minute first
derivative of ACE (at the customer’s
choice), to determine the amount of selfprovision. The assessment will be
calculated every hour and the value of
ACE or its derivative will be used to
calculate the Regulation Service charges
as follows:
a. If the entity’s 1-minute average ACE
or entity’s 1-minute first derivative of
ACE is ≤ than 0.5 percent of the entity’s
hourly average load, no Regulation
Service charges will be assessed by
WACM.
b. If the entity’s 1-minute average ACE
or the entity’s 1-minute first derivative
of ACE is ≥ 1.5 percent of the entity’s
hourly average load, WACM will assess
Regulation Service charges to the
entity’s entire load, using the load-based
rate.
c. If the entity’s 1-minute average ACE
or the entity’s 1-minute first derivative
of ACE is > 0.5 percent of the entity’s
hourly average load, but < 1.5 percent
of the entity’s hourly average load,
WACM will assess Regulation Service
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
28692
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 17, 2006 / Notices
charges based on linear interpolation of
zero charge and full charge.
Customer Accommodation
For entities unwilling to take
Regulation Service, self-provide it as
described above, or acquire the service
from a third party, Western will assist
the entity in dynamically metering its
loads/resources to another Balancing
Authority. Until such time as that meter
configuration is accomplished, the
entity will be responsible for charges
assessed by WACM under the rate in
effect.
Formula Rate
Load-Based Rate, applicable to No. 1
and No. 3 as described above and
outlined in the ‘‘Types’’ section of this
rate schedule:
WACM
Total Annual Revenue Requirement for Regulation
Regulation =
Load in the Balancing Authority Requiring Regulation
i
Rate
Plus the Nameplate of Intermittent Resources
Rates
Load-Based Rate
The rate to be in effect June 1, 2006,
through September 30, 2006, for Nos. 1,
2, and 3, as described above and
outlined in the ‘‘Types’’ section of this
rate schedule is:
Monthly: $0.219/kW-month
Weekly: $0.051/kW-week
Daily: $0.007/kW-day
Hourly: $0.000292/kWh
This rate is based on the above
formula and on fiscal year 2004
financial and load data, and will be
adjusted annually as new data become
available.
Pass-Through Rate
The rate to be in effect June 1, 2006,
through September 30, 2006, for No. 2
as described above and outlined in the
‘‘Types’’ section of this rate schedule
will be the regional market-based cost
for capacity/reserves.
[FR Doc. E6–7494 Filed 5–16–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2002–0001; FRL–8068–7]
National Pollution Prevention and
Toxics Advisory Committee (NPPTAC);
Notice of Public Meeting
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
mstockstill on PROD1PC61 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S. App.2
(Public Law 92-463), EPA gives notice of
a 2-day meeting of the National
Pollution Prevention and Toxics
Advisory Committee (NPPTAC). The
purpose of the meeting is to provide
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:08 May 16, 2006
Jkt 208001
advice and recommendations to EPA
regarding the overall policy and
operations of the programs of the Office
of Pollution Prevention and Toxics
(OPPT).
DATES: The meeting will be held on June
14, 2006 from 9 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., and
June 15, 2006 from 10:45 a.m. to 1 p.m.
Registration to attend the meeting
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2002–0001,
must be received on or before June 9,
2006. Registration will also be accepted
at the meeting.
Request to provide oral and/or written
comments at the meeting, identified as
(NPPTAC) June 2006 meeting, must be
received in writing on or before May 30,
2006.
Request to participate in the meeting,
identified by docket ID number EPA–
HQ–OPPT–2002–0001, must be received
on or before May 30, 2006.
For information on access or services
for individuals with disabilities, please
contact John Alter at (202) 564–9891 or
npptac.oppt@epa.gov. To request
accommodation of a disability, please
contact John Alter, preferably at least 10
days prior to the meeting, to give EPA
as much time as possible to process
your request.
Meetings of the Committee Work
Groups will take place as follows. The
Globally Harmonized System (GHS) of
Classification and Labeling of Chemicals
Interim Work Group will meet on June
13, 2006 from 8 a.m. to 12 p.m., to
discuss activities related to EPA’s
Program. The Government
Accountability Office (GAO) Reports
Interim Work Group will also meet on
June 13, 2006 from 8 a.m. to 12 p.m. The
Pollution Prevention (P2) Work Group
will meet on June 13, 2006 from 1:30
p.m. to 5:30 p.m., to discuss activities
related to EPA’s Pollution Prevention
Programs. The Information Integration
and Data Use Work Group will also
meet on June 13, 2006 from 1:30 p.m.
to 5:30 p.m.
ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at
the Crowne Plaza National Airport
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Hotel, located at 1480 Crystal Drive,
Arlington, VA.
Requests to participate in the meeting
may be submitted to the technical
person listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
For
general information contact: Colby
Lintner, Regulatory Coordinator,
Environmental Assistance Division
(7408M), Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics, Environmental Protection
Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20460–0001; telephone
number: (202) 554–1404; e-mail address:
TSCA-Hotline@epa.gov.
For technical information contact:
John Alter, (7408M), Office of Pollution
Prevention and Toxics, Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20460–
0001; telephone number: (202) 564–
9891; e-mail address:
npptac.oppt@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this Action Apply to Me?
This action is directed to the public
in general, and may be of particular
interest to those persons who have an
interest in or may be required to manage
pollution prevention and toxic chemical
programs, individual groups concerned
with environmental justice, children’s
health, or animal welfare, as they relate
to OPPT’s programs under the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA) and the
Pollution Prevention Act (PPA). Since
other entities may also be interested, the
Agency has not attempted to describe all
the specific entities that may be
interested in the activities of the
NPPTAC. If you have any questions
regarding the applicability of this action
to a particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM
17MYN1
EN17MY06.000
Pass-Through Costs (Market), will be
applicable only to No. 2 as described
above and outlined in the ‘‘Types’’
section of this rate schedule.
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 17, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28684-28692]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-7494]
[[Page 28684]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Western Area Power Administration
Loveland Area Projects--Western Area Colorado Missouri Balancing
Authority-Rate Order No. WAPA-118
AGENCY: Western Area Power Administration, DOE.
ACTION: Notice of rate order.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Deputy Secretary of Energy confirmed and approved Rate
Order No. WAPA-118 and Rate Schedule L-AS3, placing the rate for
Regulation and Frequency Response Service (Regulation Service) for the
Loveland Area Projects (LAP)--Western Area Colorado Missouri Balancing
Authority (Balancing Authority) of the Western Area Power
Administration (Western) into effect on an interim basis. This
provisional rate will be in effect until the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission) confirms, approves, and places it into effect
on a final basis or until it is replaced by another rate. The
provisional rate will provide sufficient revenue to pay all annual
costs, including interest expense, and repay power investment, within
the allowable periods.
DATES: Rate Schedule L-AS3 will be placed into effect on an interim
basis on the first day of the first full billing period beginning on or
after June 1, 2006, and will be in effect until the Commission
confirms, approves, and places the rate schedule in effect on a final
basis through May 31, 2011, or until the rate schedule is superseded.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Edward F. Hulls, Operations
Manager, Rocky Mountain Customer Service Region, Western Area Power
Administration, P.O. Box 3700, Loveland, CO 80539-3003, (970) 461-7566,
e-mail hulls@wapa.gov, or Mr. Daniel Payton, Rates Manager, Rocky
Mountain Customer Service Region, Western Area Power Administration,
P.O. Box 3700, Loveland, CO 80539-3003, (970) 461-7442, e-mail
dpayton@wapa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Deputy Secretary of Energy approved
existing Rate Schedule L-AS3 for Regulation Service, as part of Rate
Order No. WAPA-106 (69 FR 1723) on December 30, 2003, placing those
formula rates into effect on an interim basis effective March 1, 2004.
The Commission confirmed and approved the rate schedules on January 31,
2005, under FERC Docket No. EF04-5182-000 (110 FERC 62,084) for service
through February 28, 2009.
This provisional rate is to supersede the current Rate Schedule L-
AS3 only. Under the existing Rate Schedule L-AS3, the cost for
Regulation Service is only applied against entities' auxiliary loads.
The revised rate remains unchanged for the most part; however,
provisions have been made for the application of the load-based rate to
all intermittent resources within the Balancing Authority. Intermittent
generators serving load outside the Balancing Authority will also pay a
pass-through cost for Regulating Reserves. Additionally, Western has
further defined the measurement for self-provision of Regulation
Service. Although self-provision was permitted under the previously
approved rate schedule, the terms and conditions have now been
specifically defined.
Since June 2003 Western representatives have attended and
participated in various technical conferences and workshops with
parties interested in the development of this revised rate for
Regulation Service, including the Utility Wind Interest Group, Oak
Ridge National Laboratory, the National Wind Coordinating Committee,
the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Public Service Company of New
Mexico, the Rocky Mountain Electrical League, and the Commission.
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 DOE procedures for
public participation in power rate adjustments (10 CFR part 903) were
published on September 18, 1985.
Under Delegation Order Nos. 00-037.00 and 00-001.00B, and pursuant
to 10 CFR part 903 and 18 CFR part 300, I hereby confirm, approve, and
place Rate Order No. WAPA-118, the proposed Regulation and Frequency
Response Service rate, into effect on an interim basis. The new Rate
Schedule L-AS3 will be promptly submitted to the Commission for
confirmation and approval on a final basis.
Dated: May 9, 2006.
Clay Sell,
Deputy Secretary.
Deputy Secretary; Order Confirming, Approving, and Placing the Loveland
Area Projects--Western Area Colorado Missouri Balancing Authority
Regulation and Frequency Response Service Rate Into Effect on an
Interim Basis
This rate was established in accordance with section 302 of the
Department of Energy (DOE) Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7152). This Act
transferred to and vested in the Secretary of Energy the power
marketing functions of the Secretary of the Department of the Interior
and the Bureau of Reclamation under 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 project
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 DOE procedures for
public participation in power rate adjustments (10 CFR part 903) were
published on September 18, 1985.
Acronyms and Definitions
As used in this Rate Order, the following acronyms and definitions
apply:
ACE: Area Control Error. The instantaneous difference between a
Balancing Authority's net actual and scheduled interchange, taking into
account the effects of Frequency Bias and correction for meter error
and automatic time-error correction.
AGC: Automatic Generator Control. Equipment that automatically
adjusts generation in a Balancing Authority from a central location, to
maintain the Balancing Authority's interchange schedule plus Frequency
Bias. AGC may also accommodate automatic inadvertent payback and time-
error correction.
Auxiliary Load: An entity's metered load, less its Federal
allocation.
Balancing Authority: The responsible entity that integrates
resource plans
[[Page 28685]]
ahead of time, maintains load-interchange-generation balance within a
Balancing Authority area, and supports interconnection frequency in
real time.
Capacity: The electric capability of a generator, transformer,
transmission circuit or other equipment. It is expressed in kW.
Capacity Rate: The rate which sets forth the charges for capacity.
It is expressed in dollars per kilowatt-month.
Commission: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
CPS2: NERC's Control Performance Standard 2 which requires that the
average ACE for at least 90 percent of clock 10-minute periods (6 non-
overlapping periods per hour) during a calendar month must be within a
specific limit, referred to as L10 or ``L sub 10''.
CRSP: Colorado River Storage Project.
FERC: The Commission (to be used when referencing Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission Orders).
FERC Order No. 888: FERC's order promoting open access
transmission.
Frequency Bias: A value, usually expressed in megawatts per 0.1
Hertz (MW/0.1 Hz) associated with a Balancing Authority that
approximates the Balancing Authority's response to interconnection
frequency error.
Fry-Ark: Fryingpan-Arkansas Project.
Intermittent Resource: For purposes of this rate order, an electric
generator that is not dispatchable and cannot store its fuel source and
therefore, cannot respond to changes in system demand or respond to
transmission security constraints.
kW: Kilowatt; a unit of power equal to 1,000 watts.
LAP: Loveland Area Projects.
MW: Megawatt; a unit of power equal to 1,000 kilowatts.
NERC: North American Electric Reliability Council.
P-SMBP: Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program.
Provisional Rate: A rate which has been confirmed, approved and
placed into effect on an interim basis by the Deputy Secretary.
Reclamation Law: A series of Federal laws. Viewed as a whole, these
laws create the originating framework under which Western markets
power.
Regulating Reserve: An amount of reserve responsive to automatic
generation control, which is sufficient to provide normal regulating
margin.
Regulating Reserve Charge: Component of the provisional rate that
would charge for the consumption of Regulating Reserves.
Regulation Service: Regulation and Frequency Response Service--An
ancillary service necessary to provide for the continuous balancing of
resources, generation, and interchange, with load to maintain scheduled
interconnection frequency at 60 cycles per second (60 Hz).
Regulation Service is accomplished by committing on-line generation
through the use of automatic generating control equipment to follow
moment-by-moment changes in load.
SBA: Sub-Balancing Authority--An entity serving load inside the
Balancing Authority, with sufficient metering and AGC to accommodate
minute-to-minute changes between its metered load and generation.
Tariff: Western's Open Access Transmission Tariff.
WACM: Western Area Colorado Missouri Balancing Authority, formerly
known as the Western Area Colorado Missouri Control Area.
WALC: Western Area Lower Colorado Balancing Authority.
WECC: Western Electricity Coordinating Council.
Western: United States Department of Energy, Western Area Power
Administration.
Effective Date
The provisional rate will take effect on the first day of the first
full billing period beginning on or after June 1, 2006, and will remain
in effect until May 31, 2011, pending approval by the Commission on a
final basis.
Public Notice and Comment
Western followed the Procedures for Public Participation in Power
and Transmission Rate Adjustments and Extensions, 10 CFR part 903, in
developing these rates. Western involved interested parties in the rate
process in the following manner:
1. Western proposed a rate adjustment for Regulation Service under
Rate Order No. WAPA-106, dated June 13, 2003, and subsequently withdrew
it on January 12, 2004, to allow more time for public input on
intermittent resources and the self-provision of Regulation Service.
2. On March 18, 2004, Western hosted a Technical Information
Meeting on Regulation Service in Denver, Colorado. At this meeting,
Western presented its findings regarding the withdrawal of the proposed
rate. Interested parties gave detailed presentations from their
respective viewpoints about Regulation Service.
3. Between May 2004 and May 2005, Western representatives met with
officials from Platte River Power Authority, the National Renewable
Energy Laboratory, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and the Center for
Resource Solutions to solicit input on and discuss the impacts of the
proposed Regulation Service rate.
4. On September 27, 2004, Western held a second Technical
Information Meeting on Regulation Service in Denver, Colorado, to
discuss the results of the technical work completed since the March 18,
2004, Technical Information Meeting.
5. On June 20, 2005, Western published a Notice of Proposed Rate
for Regulation Service in the Federal Register (70 FR 35424).
Publication of this notice began the formal public process.
6. On July 27, 2005, Western held public information and public
comment forums for the proposed Regulation Service rate adjustment in
Denver, Colorado.
7. The Consultation and Comment Period for the public process
closed on September 19, 2005.
8. Western received two comment letters during the Consultation and
Comment Period which were considered in preparing this rate order. One
comment letter received on September 27, 2005, while not specifically
addressed in this rate order, reiterated the comments of the other two
commenters, and therefore, was addressed.
Comments
Written comments were received from the following: Oak Ridge
National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and the National Renewable
Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado (submitted jointly) Colorado
Springs Utilities, Colorado Springs, Colorado.
Representatives of the following organizations made oral comments:
Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee Colorado Springs
Utilities, Colorado Springs, Colorado Platte River Power Authority,
Fort Collins, Colorado.
Project Description
A. Federal Projects Providing Regulation Service
LAP is comprised of two power projects that provide Regulation
Service for the WACM Balancing Authority, the Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin
Program--Western Division (P-SMBP-WD) and the Fryingpan-Arkansas
Project (Fry-Ark). The two projects were operationally and financially
integrated for marketing purposes in 1989.
WACM also receives supplemental Regulation Service through a
dynamic signal from CRSP generating resources located within the WALC
Balancing Authority.
Within WACM, LAP provides service to customers in a three-state
area
[[Page 28686]]
(Colorado, Wyoming, and Nebraska) over a transmission system of
approximately 3,356 miles (5,401 circuit kilometers), and CRSP provides
service to customers over a transmission system of approximately 1,422
miles (2,288 circuit kilometers).
Loveland Area Projects
Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program--Western Division
The initial stages of the Missouri River Basin Project, under
construction since 1944, were authorized by section 9 of the Flood
Control Act of December 22, 1944 (58 Stat. 877, Public Law 534, 78th
Congress, 2nd session). It was later renamed the Pick-Sloan Missouri
Basin Program (P-SMBP) to honor its two principal authors. The P-SMBP
encompasses a comprehensive program, with the following authorized
functions: flood control, navigation improvement, irrigation, municipal
and industrial water development, and hydroelectric production for the
entire Missouri River Basin. Multipurpose projects have been developed
on the Missouri River and its tributaries in Colorado, Montana,
Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming.
The Colorado-Big Thompson (C-BT), Kendrick, Riverton, and Shoshone
Projects were administratively combined with P-SMBP in 1954, followed
by the North Platte Project in 1959. These projects are known as the
``Integrated Projects'' of the P-SMBP. The Riverton Project was
reauthorized as a unit of the P-SMBP in 1970.
The P-SMBP-WD and the Integrated Projects consist of 19
powerplants: 6 in the C-BT, 6 in the P-SMBP-WD, 2 in the Kendrick
Project, 4 in the Shoshone Project, and 1 in the North Platte Project.
Fryingpan-Arkansas Project
Fry-Ark is a transmountain diversion project in central and
southeastern Colorado authorized by the Act of August 16, 1962 (Pub. L.
87-590, 76 Stat. 399, as amended by Title XI of the Act of October 27,
1974, Pub. L. 93-493, 88 Stat. 1487). The Fryingpan and Roaring Fork
rivers are part of the Colorado River Basin, on the West Slope of the
Rocky Mountains. Fry-Ark diverts water from the Fryingpan River and
other tributaries of the Roaring Fork River to the Arkansas River on
the East Slope of the Rocky Mountains. The water diverted from the West
Slope, together with regulated Arkansas River water, provides
supplemental irrigation, municipal and industrial water supplies, and
hydroelectric power production. Flood control, fish and wildlife
enhancement, and recreation are other important purposes of Fry-Ark.
Fry-Ark features five dams and reservoirs, one located on the West
Slope of the Rocky Mountains, and four located on the East Slope of the
Rocky Mountains.
Fry-Ark's electrical features consist of the Mount Elbert 206-MW
Pumped-Storage Power Plant, the Mount Elbert Switchyard, and the Mount
Elbert-Malta 230-kV Transmission Line.
Colorado River Storage Project
CRSP was authorized by the Act of April 11, 1956. It consists of
four major storage units: Glen Canyon on the Colorado River in Arizona
near the Utah border, Flaming Gorge on the Green River in Utah near the
Wyoming border, Navajo on the San Juan River in northwestern New Mexico
near the Colorado border, and the Wayne N. Aspinall unit (formerly
known as Curecanti) on the Gunnison River in west-central Colorado.
Six Federal powerplants with 16 units are associated with the
project. The operating capacity of CRSP's 16 generating units was
approximately 1,727,000 kW in fiscal year (FY) 2005. CRSP operates its
transmission system within two balancing authorities, WACM and WALC.
B. Balancing Authority Characteristics
WACM is operated by Western and has Federal hydroelectric resources
from the P-SMBP--WD and Fry-Ark Project. Large non-Federal thermal
generators also operate within WACM, but are not under the direct
control of Western; e.g., Laramie River Station operated by Basin
Electric Power Cooperative, Inc., and Craig Power Plant operated by
Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
The thermal generation within WACM represents the larger portion of
the Balancing Authority's resource portfolio. However, thermal
resources are much slower to respond to Regulation Service
requirements, are generally operated near or at maximum generating
capacity, and are typically not part of the AGC configuration.
Generally, the thermal generation within WACM, as configured, is not
considered capable of providing significant Regulation Service.
In FY 2005, the peak load within WACM was measured at about 3,300
MW with approximately 5,300 MW of generation installed. Federal
generation capacity is 830 MW or about 15 percent of the total
available resource.
Balancing Authority Regulating Constraints
The only units within WACM capable of providing Regulation Service
are those with the ability to adjust their output on a moment-to-moment
basis. These units are located at Yellowtail, Seminoe, Kortes, Fremont
Canyon, Alcova, Estes, Flatiron, and Mount Elbert powerplants. The
amount of Regulating Reserve available from LAP powerplants is limited
by how many units are available and the prescheduled loading of the
units at a given time. Factors influencing unit regulating availability
include water schedules, individual generator rough zone constraints,
and various environmental constraints. These limitations exist at most
LAP powerplants including Yellowtail and Mount Elbert, the two primary
powerplants providing Regulation Service.
The relatively small size of some forebays and afterbays also
limits the amount of Regulating Reserve available to the system.
Additionally, water delivery has priority over generation needs,
further restricting the amount of water that can be moved through the
generators to provide Regulation Service.
C. Regulation Service Rate Discussion
In April 1998 Western implemented a load-based rate for Regulation
Service. This rate has been applied to auxiliary loads within the
Balancing Authority since that time. The existing formula rate for
Regulation Service is based on an analysis that shows WACM requires 75
MW of Regulating Reserve. As LAP has limited hydroelectric generation
available for Regulation Service, it must rely on purchases from others
to supplement its own resources. This is important as the Balancing
Authority could be the default provider of Regulation Service for 653.5
MW of intermittent resources currently in its interconnection queue.
Recognizing its resource limitations, in this rate adjustment Western
has included rates designed to properly allocate costs to all users of
Regulation Service, including intermittent resources.
The rate for Regulation Service is derived by dividing the revenue
requirement by the load plus the installed intermittent generation, if
any, within the WACM Balancing Authority requiring Regulation Service.
The revenue requirement for Regulation Service consists of: (1) The
annualized cost of LAP powerplants providing Regulation Service within
the WACM Balancing Authority, (2) the revenue requirement for CRSP
powerplants
[[Page 28687]]
providing supplemental Regulation Service to the WACM Balancing
Authority, and (3) the cost of purchases to support Regulation Service.
The load taking Regulation Service within WACM is derived by
measurement of the load coincident with the LAP transmission system
peak on a rolling 12-month average, plus the nameplate capacity of the
intermittent resources located within the Balancing Authority.
The provisional Regulation Service rate was developed based on the
analysis of data relevant to the WACM Balancing Authority, and an
extensive record was compiled during the process. Each Balancing
Authority has unique operating characteristics and constraints when
providing ancillary services. This rate is specifically designed for
WACM's unique operating characteristics.
Basis for Rate Development
The existing rate for Regulation Service in Rate Schedule L-AS3
expires on February 28, 2009.
The provisional rate will provide sufficient revenue to pay all
annual costs, including interest expense and repayment of power
investment, and will ensure that revenues are collected from the
appropriate entities. The provisional rate will take effect on June 1,
2006, and will remain in effect through May 31, 2011.
D. Rate Adjustment Background/Rates History
Background
Western published a Notice of Proposed Rate for Regulation Service
in the Federal Register on June 13, 2003 (68 FR 35398). One component
of that proposed rate specifically addressed Regulation Service needs
for intermittent resources. However, that component was withdrawn from
the Final Notice of Rate Order published in the Federal Register on
January 12, 2004 (69 FR 1723), to allow further study and input from
interested parties. This provisional rate for Regulation Service is the
culmination of that continued study and input from various interested
parties.
Existing, Proposed, and Provisional Rates
Western received comments during the Consultation and Comment
Period that ended September 19, 2005. Based on comments received and
further analysis, Western has revised its June 20, 2005, proposed rate
to reflect the final provisional rate outlined in this rate order.
Description of Existing Rate
Western's existing rate for Regulation Service is a load-based rate
which is applied to entities' auxiliary loads within WACM. The existing
rate provides for entities to be credited when providing WACM with
Regulation Service, and waives charges if the load/resource is
dynamically metered out of WACM. Western's existing rate contains no
provision for application of pass-through costs. Following is a
description of the changes made from the proposed rate to the
provisional rate:
Load-Based Assessment Changes
The June 2005 proposed rate maintained the existing rate's load-
based rate for application to auxiliary loads, but limited the
application of that load-based rate for intermittent resources equal to
or less than 10 percent of an entity's auxiliary load. The proposed
rate also provided for an assessment to any load or resource deemed to
be non-conforming.
The provisional rate eliminates the 10-percent limit, and applies
the load-based rate to both the auxiliary loads and the total installed
intermittent resources within the Balancing Authority.
Changes in the Pass-Through Assessment
The June 2005 proposed rate included provisions for periodic
evaluations of all generators' performance within the Balancing
Authority, and for those identified as non-conforming, provided for a
pass-through cost. In the proposed rate, pass-through costs would also
be applied to entities' intermittent resources exceeding 10 percent of
their auxiliary load.
The provisional rate eliminates the generator performance
evaluation, as well as the 10-percent measurement and the non-
conforming load/resource analysis. In the provisional rate, only
intermittent resources that are exported are charged a pass-through
cost for Regulating Reserves.
Changes in Self-Provision or Cost Waiver Assessment
The June 2005 proposed rate maintained the cost waiver if a load or
resource was dynamically metered out of the Balancing Authority. If an
entity claimed to be self-providing Regulation Service, the proposed
rate gave the option of fully or partially self-providing (no different
than the existing rate). The measurement of partial self-provision
would be accomplished by measuring the first derivative of the average
1-minute change in the entity's ACE. An entity claiming to fully self-
provide Regulation Service would have a choice of responding to WACM's
dynamic ACE proportional to the entity's load, allowing WACM direct
access to pulse the entity's regulating units, or some other mutually
agreed-to process.
The provisional rate no longer provides the option for an entity to
respond to a proportional share of WACM's ACE. The provisional rate
retains the option for an entity to allow WACM to directly pulse the
entity's regulating units. It has also been adjusted slightly to
measure partial self-provision by offering the customer the option of
measuring either the entity's first derivative of the average 1-minute
change in its ACE, or its averaged 1-minute ACE.
Summary of the Provisional Rate Effective June 1, 2006
The provisional rate maintains the load-based assessment for
auxiliary loads and the allowance for self-provision of the service,
but allows the following choices for measuring that self-provision: (1)
The first derivative of the averaged 1-minute change in the entity's
ACE, or (2) the entity's average 1-minute ACE.
The provisional rate eliminates the 10-percent limitation for
intermittent resources to receive the load-based rate and instead
applies the load-based rate to the total installed capacity of the
intermittent resource.
The provisional rate also eliminates the conforming versus non-
conforming load/resource analysis. However, any intermittent resource
exporting from WACM via a schedule would still be charged a pass-
through cost based on the average hourly mismatch between forecast and
actual generation.
Existing and Provisional Rates
A comparison of the existing, proposed, and provisional rates is as
follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Existing Rate Schedule L-AS3 Proposed Rate Provisional Rate
Effective March 1, 2004 Schedule L-AS3 Schedule L-AS3
----------------------------- Proposed June 20, Effective June 1,
2005 2006
Load-Based Rate -------------------------------------------
Load-Based Rate Load-Based Rate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applied to: Applied to: Applied to:
[[Page 28688]]
(1) Entity's auxiliary loads (1) Entity's (1) Entity's
auxiliary loads;. auxiliary loads;
and
(2) Entities' (2) Entities' total
intermittent installed
resources <= 10% of inermittent
their auxiliary resources' capacity
load within WACM, within WACM, with
after 180 MW limit no installation
for intermittent limit.
resource
installation
reached; and
(3) Non-conforming (3) Eliminated.
type load (charged
an adjusted load-
based rate).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pass-Through Cost: Market- Pass-Through Cost: Pass-Through Cost:
Based Market-Based Market-Based
------------------------------------------------------------------------
N/A......................... Applied to:......... Applies to:
(1) all generators (1) See No. (2), in
without designated Cost Waiver section
load in WACM; and. below.
(2) entities with (2) No limit on
installed installed
intermittent intermittent
generation 10% of generation, which
their auxiliary will be charged as
load within WACM, outlined in a. and
after 180 MW limit b., below:
for intermittent
resource
installation
reached, will be
charged as follows:
(a) Regulation (a) Regulation
Charge for minute- Charge (load-based)
to-minute will be charged to
fluctuations. total installed
intermittent
resources (see Load-
Based Rate, No.
(2).
(b) Regulating (b) intermittent
Reserve Charge for resources exporting
hourly mismatch of from WACM via
capacity. schedule will be
charged for a
Regulating Reserve
Charge based on the
hourly mismatch of
forecast versus
actual generation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost Waiver: Cost Waiver: Cost Waiver:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost for service partially Cost for service Cost for service
or fully waived if:. partially or fully partially or fully
waived if:. waived if:
(1) generator or load (1) generator or (1) generator or
dynamically metered out of load dynamically load dynamically
WACM; or metered out of metered out of
WACM; or. WACM; or
(2) an entity provides its (2) entities with (2) entities
own service (partially or manual AGC that are partially self-
fully) and claim is partially self- providing (charged
accepted by WACM providing (charged the load-based
load-based rate), rate) will be
will be measured by measured by either:
the first (a) first derivative
derivative of the of the averaged 1-
averaged 1-minute minute change in
change in the the entity's ACE;
entity's error or
signal; or (b) the entity's
average 1-minute
ACE; or
(3) entities with (3) entitites
automatic AGC, that wishing to fully
want to fully provide service
provide service (no must:
charge) must:
(a) be willing/able (a) no longer
to respond to applicable;
WACM's dynamic
signal,
proportional to
entity's load;
(b) allow WACM (b) allow WACM
direct access to direct access to
pulse entity's pulse entity's
regulating units; regulating units;
(c) mutually agree (c) mutually agree
to any other proven to any other proven
methodology or methodology or
process; or process; or
(d) if entity does (d) if entity doe
not comply with not comply with b.
(a), (b), or (c), or c., it will be
it will be subject subject to
to measurement measurement
outlined in manual outlined in this
AGC description in section, Nos.
No. (2), in this (2)(a) or (2)(b).
section.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Customer Accommodation
As referenced in Western's existing rate schedule for Regulation
Service, entities requiring service ``* * * must either purchase this
service from WACM or make alternative comparable arrangements to
satisfy their Regulation obligations.'' (69 FR 1734) Western expects
that entities requiring Regulation Service will take service from the
WACM Balancing Authority.
However, for entities unwilling to take Regulation Service from the
WACM Balancing Authority, self-provide it, or acquire it from a third
party, Western has an established record of assisting and will continue
to assist entities in the dynamic metering of their loads or resources
out of the Balancing Authority. Until such time as meter
reconfiguration is accomplished, an entity will be responsible for
Regulation Service charges assessed by the WACM Balancing Authority
under the rate then in effect.
Certification of Rates
Western's Administrator certified that the provisional rate for
Regulation Service is the lowest possible rate consistent with sound
business principles. The provisional rate was developed following
administrative policies and applicable laws.
Comments
The comments and responses regarding the Regulation Service rate,
paraphrased for brevity when not affecting the meaning of the
statement(s), are discussed below. Direct quotes from comment letters
are used for clarification where necessary.
The issues discussed have been organized into three sections: (1)
Rate Design, (2) Implementation, and (3) Miscellaneous.
[[Page 28689]]
1. Rate Design
A. Comment: Several comments expressed concern about the difference
between Western's interpretation and their own regarding the true
nature of Regulation Service. The commenters stated that Western's
methodology for Regulation Service increases the cost of the service as
expensive regulating units also support load-following and ramping.
Response: The Commission requires balancing authorities to offer
transmission customers Regulation and Frequency Response Service.
However, there is no standard definition for load-following in any
Commission document, NERC's glossary of terms, or WECC's reliability
criteria. Within WACM, there is no distinction between Regulation
Service and load-following during the hour on a real-time basis.
WACM's Regulation Service, ramping, and load-following are
performed simultaneously by the same units. As typical loads require
all three services, it serves no purpose to operationally separate the
functions.
Out of the 16 customers taking Regulation Service from Western, the
7 balancing authorities adjacent to Western, or the 34 balancing
authorities within the Western Interconnection, none have made requests
or submitted comments to Western regarding the separation of these
services.
B. Comment: A comment suggested Western develop a mechanism to tap
into the ramping capability of non-Federal thermal generation within
WACM, so that the cost of Regulation Service and load-following could
be reduced for all customers.
Response: This comment is out of the scope of this rate action.
However, the ramping capability identified in the comment is not owned
by Western. Such resources are fully committed or used for the
respective owners' deliveries to load. Any use of available ramping
capability would have to be purchased from the thermal generation's
owner and replaced to accommodate previous operational commitments.
C. Comment: A comment states that the proposed rate methodology
adds unneeded complexity to the rate.
Response: Western believes that the methodology adopted in the
provisional rate reflects a more accurate assignment of costs and is a
reasonable modification of the existing approved rate for Regulation
Service. The methodology is no more complex than necessary to assign
costs fairly and provide adequate customer choice.
D. Comment: The rate adjustment fails to assess the actual physical
Regulation Service burden placed on the system by each separate
customer and improperly recovers costs from each customer in proportion
only to the Regulation Service burden placed on the system by each
customer group.
Response: This methodology is unchanged from the previous
Commission-approved rate and is consistent with regional and Western
Interconnection practices. A separate rate or system burden is not
identified for each customer, and proportional, cost-based assessments
will continue to be made for each customer's load share of the system's
Regulation Service requirements.
E. Comment: A commenter believes that the Regulation Service rate
should be based on the Regulation Service allocation method described
in the January 2000 report, ``Customer-Specific Metrics for the
Regulation and Load Following Ancillary Services,'' authored by Brendan
Kirby and Eric Hirst of Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
Response: Based upon Western's research, the methodology outlined
in the January 2000 report referenced by the comment has not been
adopted and put into practice by any entity or Balancing Authority in
the electric utility industry.
Western's load-based rate is approved by the Commission and has
been in effect for approximately 8 years. Western believes that minor
adjustments to the approved rate, based on operating experience and
Balancing Authority needs, are a reasonable modification.
The provisional rate methodology, specifically tailored for WACM's
unique mix of resources, results in the lowest cost consistent with
sound business principles and therefore, is most appropriate for
determining Regulation Service. A complete change in methodology is
unnecessary.
F. Comment: Western received several comments related to the
analysis of wind resources, their operating characteristics, and
impacts on Balancing Authority performance. Specifically, comments
addressed Western's simulation studies to determine wind impacts on the
Balancing Authority, the true amount of wind capacity that could be
absorbed by WACM, and the cost of service for intermittent resources.
Response: In its simulation studies on Balancing Authority
performance, Western projected or scaled the output of existing WACM
wind resources to study the impacts of additional wind resources.
While linear scaling of a large magnitude in the range of 10 to 20
times might render questionable results, Western has demonstrated that
linear scaling of 2 to 3 times is accurate for the purpose of this
analysis.
As a benchmark of reasonability, Western worked with a neighboring
Balancing Authority with similar characteristics and a 204-MW wind
farm. Analyses revealed that this wind farm had significant intra-hour
fluctuations, often up to the installed capacity of the units. During
these times, the neighboring Balancing Authority saw a significant
degradation in its operating performance.
Despite the fluctuations in output from wind or other intermittent
resources, Western has determined by reviewing additional information
and public comments that at present, there is no need to establish a
limit for the amount of wind that may be installed for use by loads
residing within the Balancing Authority.
For resources exported out of the Balancing Authority, Western will
charge the load-based rate against the nameplate of the resource plus a
Regulating Reserve Charge, measured by the average hourly mismatch of
the forecast versus the actual generation, and using pass-through
pricing.
G. Comment: Western has effectively double-charged customers for
energy associated with Regulation Service, by charging them once in
their Energy Imbalance Service rate schedule and by charging them again
within the Regulation Service rate as a Regulating Reserve Charge.
Response: In the interest of clarification, Western notes that its
Energy Imbalance Service credits customers who over-deliver their
resources and charges customers who under-deliver their resources.
Western will not double-collect by charging for both Energy
Imbalance Service and Regulating Reserve charges. The proposed
Regulating Reserve Charge is a separate and distinct charge and can be
viewed in the same light as a ``unit commitment'' charge; i.e., what
Western needs to keep on-line when an intermittent resource's actual
output differs from its scheduled output.
Western notes that the Regulating Reserve Charge would only apply
to entities exporting their intermittent generation out of WACM.
H. Comment: A comment states that Western's metric does not work
above the 10-percent penetration rate (as defined by Western). For wind
capacity in excess of this limit, there is no indication of what metric
will be used to calculate the impact of wind on the system regulation
requirements.
[[Page 28690]]
Response: Western has eliminated the limit for intermittent
generation of 180 MW or 10 percent of the Balancing Authority's
auxiliary load, primarily due to the dynamic circumstances surrounding
the impacts of additional intermittent resource installation. It is
highly likely that WACM would experience degradation in its CPS2 should
a single 200-MW intermittent resource be added to the Balancing
Authority's resource mix. Historically, however, WACM has seen a very
gradual addition of wind generators and has been able to adapt its
system to operate around the volatility of these generators. Therefore,
Western has eliminated the limit in the provisional rate.
2. Rate Implementation
A. Comment: Western has incorrectly identified non-conforming loads
and did not adequately define how they would be measured.
Response: Western's proposed metric for identifying conforming
versus non-conforming load was accurate, and properly distinguished
between these two types of loads. However, the WACM Balancing Authority
does not presently have any non-conforming load within its boundaries,
and is not anticipating such load in the foreseeable future. This led
to a decision to eliminate the non-conforming load assessment from the
provisional rate.
B. Comment: An SBA with AGC must respond to an error signal from
WACM ``proportional to the SBA's load within the Balancing Authority,''
which would be inequitable, as allocation of regulating burden cannot
be assessed on load. Regulating Service charges are more properly based
on the volatility of the load, not on average demand.
Response: The option of responding to a proportional share of
WACM's dynamic signal was one of several options available to
customers. However, this option was eliminated from the provisional
rate. Other remaining alternatives include paying the same load-based
Regulation Service rate as others or being treated as an SBA without
AGC, both of which would resolve the comment's concern that it only
respond to the ``volatility'' of its own load (see Response to Comment
2.C. below).
Regarding the comment that a proportional response of a customer's
AGC to an error signal from the Balancing Authority is inequitable,
Western believes that this arrangement is equitable and necessary to
prevent WACM from being the first to respond to a dynamic signal when
an SBA cannot. It ensures that the SBA absorbs, on a proportional
basis, responsibility for Regulation Service within the Balancing
Authority.
C. Comment: Under the self-provision assessment methodology, the
limits of 0.5 percent and 1.5 percent to determine whether there are
full, partial or no charges for a period are completely arbitrary.
Response: The bandwidths of 0.5 percent and 1.5 percent are not
arbitrary and follow calculations used by NERC for computing allowable
excursions for each Balancing Authority. This calculation is based on
the proportional share of generation response within a Balancing
Authority's boundaries, contrasted to total generation response in the
Interconnection.
D. Comment: A commenter maintains that it is providing its own
Regulation Service, and, therefore, is not subject to WACM's ancillary
service rate for Regulation Service.
Response: Western's position is that all entities operating within
the Balancing Authority that are not NERC-recognized balancing
authorities must take Regulation Service from the host Balancing
Authority, unless they can demonstrate that they are actually providing
their own service or are not using the resources of the host Balancing
Authority.
An entity's claim of full self-provision of Regulation Service must
be demonstrated through joint study between the entity and the
Balancing Authority, and approved by WACM. Until such time as full
self-provision is demonstrated and approved, the entity will be charged
for Regulation Service based on the entity's choice of: (1) The first
derivative of the averaged 1-minute change in the entity's ACE; (2) the
entity's average 1-minute ACE, as outlined in Rate Schedule L-AS3,
Section 3.1; or (3) the load-based rate applied against the entity's
load.
E. Comment: The rate methodology does not credit the SBA for
providing frequency response service which could motivate the SBA to
set its Frequency Bias to zero, resulting in governor response being
withdrawn by the AGC system during a system disturbance.
Response: For those entities operating generation in a tie-line
bias mode, Western will offset the calculated Regulation Service
requirement by mutual agreement with the SBA.
Western will not provide credit for the governor response, as it is
an involuntary action by the generating units across the Western
Interconnection to arrest frequency from further degradation in the
aftermath of a large contingency.
3. Miscellaneous
A. Comment: Several comments applauded Western for its efforts to
develop a rate for Regulation Service that recognizes the costs
associated with providing the service and attempts to allocate those
costs to the transmission customers responsible for incurring those
costs.
Response: Western notes the comments.
B. Comment: A comment recommends WACM abandon the present proposal
and develop a Regulation Service rate that uses technically defensible
metrics to measure consumption of the service.
Response: Western acknowledges the recommendation, but believes
that its methodology is technically defensible, and it would not be
reasonable to abandon efforts to manage and accurately account for the
cost of providing Regulation Service. Western provided appropriate time
and opportunity for consultation and comment on the proposed action in
accordance with the Procedures for Public Participation in Power and
Transmission Rate Adjustments and Extensions, set out in 10 CFR part
903.
C. Comment: A comment renewed an offer to help Western develop an
appropriate
Regulation Service tariff and help analyze the impact of wind
generation.
Response: Western appreciates the offers of assistance it received
during the course of this rate process, however, Western cannot give
favored status to any group or groups in the design and implementation
of proposed actions.
Western did accept information and input from all concerned
parties, both formally and informally, worked closely with technical
staff from other agencies, and hosted panel discussions regarding the
proposed rate at many wind-related conferences and meetings.
Western also believes that it is in the best position to design its
Regulation Service rate, based on the unique characteristics of WACM,
the regional Federal hydroelectric powerplants, and Western's mission.
Availability of Information
Information about this rate adjustment, including comments,
letters, memorandums and other supporting materials Western used to
develop the provisional rates, is available for public review in the
Rocky Mountain Customer Service Region, Western Area Power
Administration, 5555 East Crossroads Boulevard, Loveland, Colorado.
[[Page 28691]]
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. Western has
determined that 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 (NEPA) of
1969 (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 that this action is categorically
excluded from preparation of 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.
Submission to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
The provisional rates herein confirmed, approved, and placed into
effect, together with supporting documents, will be submitted to the
Commission for confirmation and final approval.
Order
In view of the foregoing and under the authority delegated to me, I
confirm and approve on an interim basis, effective June 1, 2006, Rate
Schedule L-AS3 for the Loveland Area Projects and the Western Area
Colorado Missouri Balancing Authority of the Western Area Power
Administration. The rate schedule shall remain in effect on an interim
basis, pending the Commission's confirmation and approval of it or a
substitute rate on a final basis through May 31, 2011.
Dated: May 9, 2006.
Clay Sell,
Deputy Secretary.
Rate Schedule L-AS3, Schedule 3 to Tariff, June 1, 2006
Rocky Mountain Region; Regulation And Frequency Response Service
Effective
The first day of the first full billing period beginning on or
after June 1, 2006, through May 31, 2011.
Applicable
Regulation and Frequency Response Service (Regulation Service) is
necessary to provide for the continuous balancing of resources,
generation and interchange with load, and for maintaining scheduled
interconnection frequency at sixty cycles per second (60 Hz).
Regulation Service is accomplished by committing online generation
whose output is raised or lowered, predominantly through the use of
automatic generating control equipment, as necessary to follow the
moment-by-moment changes in load. The obligation to maintain this
balance between resources and load lies with the Western Area Colorado
Missouri (WACM) Balancing Authority operator. The Customers (Loveland
Area Projects (LAP) Transmission Customers and customers on others'
transmission systems within WACM) must purchase this service from WACM
or make alternative comparable arrangements to satisfy their Regulation
Service obligations. The charges for Regulation Service are outlined
below.
LAP charges for Regulation Service may be modified upon written
notice to Customers. Any change to the Regulation Service charges will
be listed in a revision to this rate schedule issued under applicable
Federal laws, regulations, and policies and made part of the applicable
service agreement. Western will charge Customers under the rate then in
effect.
Types
There will be three different applications of this rate, none of
which are exclusive of the other, and all three may be applied to the
same entity where appropriate. The three applications are:
1. Load-based Assessment: The Rate is reflected in the Formula Rate
section and will be applied to entities who serve load within the WACM
Balancing Authority. This load-based rate will be assessed on an
entity's auxiliary load (total metered load less Federal entitlements)
and will also be applied to the installed nameplate capacity of all
intermittent generators within WACM.
2. Exporting Intermittent Resource Assessment: This application
will apply to entities that export the output from intermittent
resource(s). The entity will continue to pay the load-based charge on
the nameplate capacity, as described in No. 1 above, but will also pay
an additional Regulating Reserve charge for mismatched capacity; i.e.,
the hourly average mismatch of the resource's forecast versus actual
generation, using the regional market rate for capacity/reserves as
pricing.
3 Self-Provision Assessment: Western will allow entities with
automatic or manual generation control to self-provide for all or a
portion of their loads. Typically, entities with generation control are
known as Sub-Balancing Authorities (SBA) and should meet all of the
following criteria:
a. Have a well-defined boundary, with WACM-approved revenue-quality
metering, accurate as defined by NERC, to include MW flow data
availability at 6-second or smaller intervals.
b. Have AGC capability.
c. Demonstrate Regulation Service capability.
d. Execute a contract with the WACM Balancing Authority to:
i. Provide all requested data to the WACM Balancing Authority.
ii. Meet SBA Error Criteria as described under section 3.1 below.
3.1. Self-provision will be measured by use of the entity's 1-
minute average ACE or the entity's 1-minute first derivative of ACE (at
the customer's choice), to determine the amount of self-provision. The
assessment will be calculated every hour and the value of ACE or its
derivative will be used to calculate the Regulation Service charges as
follows:
a. If the entity's 1-minute average ACE or entity's 1-minute first
derivative of ACE is <= than 0.5 percent of the entity's hourly average
load, no Regulation Service charges will be assessed by WACM.
b. If the entity's 1-minute average ACE or the entity's 1-minute
first derivative of ACE is >= 1.5 percent of the entity's hourly
average load, WACM will assess Regulation Service charges to the
entity's entire load, using the load-based rate.
c. If the entity's 1-minute average ACE or the entity's 1-minute
first derivative of ACE is > 0.5 percent of the entity's hourly average
load, but < 1.5 percent of the entity's hourly average load, WACM will
assess Regulation Service
[[Page 28692]]
charges based on linear interpolation of zero charge and full charge.
Customer Accommodation
For entities unwilling to take Regulation Service, self-provide it
as described above, or acquire the service from a third party, Western
will assist the entity in dynamically metering its loads/resources to
another Balancing Authority. Until such time as that meter
configuration is accomplished, the entity will be responsible for
charges assessed by WACM under the rate in effect.
Formula Rate
Load-Based Rate, applicable to No. 1 and No. 3 as described above
and outlined in the ``Types'' section of this rate schedule:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN17MY06.000
Pass-Through Costs (Market), will be applicable only to No. 2 as
described above and outlined in the ``Types'' section of this rate
schedule.
Rates
Load-Based Rate
The rate to be in effect June 1, 2006, through September 30, 2006,
for Nos. 1, 2, and 3, as described above and outlined in the ``Types''
section of this rate schedule is:
Monthly: $0.219/kW-month
Weekly: $0.051/kW-week
Daily: $0.007/kW-day
Hourly: $0.000292/kWh
This rate is based on the above formula and on fiscal year 2004
financial and load data, and will be adjusted annually as new data
become available.
Pass-Through Rate
The rate to be in effect June 1, 2006, through September 30, 2006,
for No. 2 as described above and outlined in the ``Types'' section of
this rate schedule will be the regional market-based cost for capacity/
reserves.
[FR Doc. E6-7494 Filed 5-16-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P