Modification of Interchange and Transmission Loading Relief Reliability Standards; and Electric Reliability Organization Interpretation of Specific Requirements of Four Reliability Standards, 43613-43621 [E8-17196]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 145 / Monday, July 28, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
PART 430—ENERGY CONSERVATION
PROGRAM FOR CONSUMER
PRODUCTS
1. The authority citation for part 430
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6291–6309; 28 U.S.C.
2461 note.
2. Section 430.32 is amended by
revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:
I
§ 430.32 Energy and water conservation
standards and their effective dates.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Furnaces and boilers. (1) Furnaces.
(i) The Annual Fuel Utilization
Efficiency (AFUE) of residential
furnaces manufactured before November
19, 2015, shall not be less than the
following:
AFUE 1
Product class
(percent)
(A) Furnaces (excluding classes
noted below) ...........................
(B) Mobile Home furnaces .........
78
75
(C) Small furnaces (other than
those designed solely for installation in mobile homes)
having an input rate of less
than 45,000 Btu/hr
(1) Weatherized (outdoor) .......
(2) Non-weatherized (indoor) ..
78
78
(2) Boilers. (i) The AFUE of residential
boilers manufactured before September
1, 2012, shall not be less than the
following:
Product class
AFUE 1
(percent)
(A) Boilers (excluding gas
steam) .....................................
(B) Gas steam boilers ................
80
75
1 Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency, as determined in § 430.22(n)(2) of this part.
(ii) Except as provided in paragraph
(e)(2)(iv) of this section, the AFUE of
residential boilers, manufactured on or
75 after September 1, 2012, shall not be
80 less than the following and must
comply with the design requirements as
82 follows:
80
81
Design requirements
(A) Gas-fired hot water boiler ...................
82
(B) Gas-fired steam boiler ........................
(C) Oil-fired hot water boiler .....................
80
84
(D) Oil-fired steam boiler ..........................
(E) Electric hot water boiler ......................
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
78
Fuel Utilization Efficiency, as determined in § 430.23(n)(2) of this part.
AFUE 1
(percent)
(A) Non-weatherized gas furnaces .......................................
(B) Weatherized gas furnaces ....
(C) Mobile home oil-fired furnaces .......................................
(D) Mobile home gas furnaces ...
(E) Non-weatherized oil-fired furnaces .......................................
AFUE 1
(percent)
1 Annual
(ii) The AFUE of residential furnaces
manufactured on or after November 19,
2015, shall not be less than the
following:
Product class
Product class
(F) Weatherized oil-fired furnaces .......................................
1 Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency, as determined in § 430.23(n)(2) of this part.
AFUE 1
(percent)
Product class
82
None
1 Annual
AFUE 1
(percent)
Product class
43613
Constant burning pilot not permitted.
Automatic means for adjusting water temperature required (except for boilers
equipped with tankless domestic water heating coils).
Constant burning pilot not permitted.
Automatic means for adjusting temperature required (except for boilers equipped
with tankless domestic water heating coils).
None.
Automatic means for adjusting temperature required (except for boilers equipped
with tankless domestic water heating coils).
Fuel Utilization Efficiency, as determined in § 430.22(n)(2) of this part.
(iii) Automatic means for adjusting
water temperature. (A) The automatic
means for adjusting water temperature
as required under paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of
this section must automatically adjust
the temperature of the water supplied
by the boiler to ensure that an
incremental change in inferred heat load
produces a corresponding incremental
change in the temperature of water
supplied.
(B) For boilers that fire at a single
input rate, the automatic means for
adjusting water temperature
requirement may be satisfied by
providing an automatic means that
allows the burner or heating element to
fire only when the means has
determined that the inferred heat load
cannot be met by the residual heat of the
water in the system.
(C) When there is no inferred heat
load with respect to a hot water boiler,
the automatic means described in this
paragraph shall limit the temperature of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:07 Jul 25, 2008
Jkt 214001
the water in the boiler to not more than
140 degrees Fahrenheit.
(D) A boiler for which an automatic
means for adjusting water temperature
is required shall be operable only when
the automatic means is installed.
(iv) A boiler that is manufactured to
operate without any need for electricity
or any electric connection, electric
gauges, electric pumps, electric wires, or
electric devices is not required to meet
the AFUE or design requirements
applicable to the boiler requirements of
paragraph (e)(2)(ii) of this section, but
must meet the requirements of
paragraph (e)(2)(i) of this section, as
applicable.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E8–17222 Filed 7–25–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
18 CFR Part 40
[Docket No. RM08–7–000; Order No. 713]
Modification of Interchange and
Transmission Loading Relief Reliability
Standards; and Electric Reliability
Organization Interpretation of Specific
Requirements of Four Reliability
Standards
Issued July 21, 2008.
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 215 of the
Federal Power Act, the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (Commission)
approves five of six modified Reliability
Standards submitted to the Commission
for approval by the North American
E:\FR\FM\28JYR1.SGM
28JYR1
43614
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 145 / Monday, July 28, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC).
The Commission directs NERC to
submit a filing that provides an
explanation regarding one aspect of the
sixth modified Reliability Standard
submitted by NERC. The Commission
also approves NERC’s proposed
interpretations of five specific
requirements of Commission-approved
Reliability Standards.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patrick Harwood (Technical
Information), Office of Electric
Reliability, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–
6125, patrick.harwood@ferc.gov,
Christopher Daignault (Legal
Information), Office of the General
Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–
8286, christopher.daignault@ferc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Effective Date: This rule will
become effective August 27, 2008.
DATES:
Final Rule
Table of Contents
Paragraph
Nos.
I. Background ..........................................................................................................................................................................................
A. EPAct 2005 and Mandatory Reliability Standards ...................................................................................................................
B. NERC Filings ...............................................................................................................................................................................
C. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ................................................................................................................................................
II. Discussion ..........................................................................................................................................................................................
A. NERC’s December 19, 2007 Filing: Interpretations of Reliability Standards .........................................................................
1. BAL–001–0—Real Power Balancing Control Performance and BAL–003–0—Frequency Response and Bias ..............
a. Proposed Interpretation ................................................................................................................................................
b. Comments ......................................................................................................................................................................
c. Commission Determination ..........................................................................................................................................
2. Requirement R17 of BAL–005–0—Automatic Generation Control ...................................................................................
a. Proposed Interpretation ................................................................................................................................................
b. Comments ......................................................................................................................................................................
i. Whether interpretation could decrease accuracy of frequency and time error measurements .........................
ii. What conditions would preclude requirement to calibrate devices ..................................................................
iii. Whether accuracy of devices is assured by other requirements .......................................................................
c. Commission Determination ..........................................................................................................................................
3. Requirements R1 and R2 of VAR–002–1 Generator Operation for Maintaining Network Voltage Schedules ..............
a. Proposed Interpretations ...............................................................................................................................................
b. Comments ......................................................................................................................................................................
c. Commission Determination ..........................................................................................................................................
B. NERC’s December 21, 2007 Filing: Modification of TLR Procedure .......................................................................................
1. Background ...........................................................................................................................................................................
2. ERO TLR Filing, Reliability Standard IRO–006–4 .............................................................................................................
3. NOPR ....................................................................................................................................................................................
4. Comments .............................................................................................................................................................................
5. Commission Determination .................................................................................................................................................
C. NERC’s December 26, 2007 Filing: Modification to Five ‘‘Interchange and Scheduling’’ Reliability Standards ................
1. INT–001–3—Interchange Information and INT–004–2—Dynamic Interchange Transaction Modifications .................
a. Comments ......................................................................................................................................................................
b. Commission Determination ..........................................................................................................................................
2. INT–005–2—Interchange Authority Distributes Arranged Interchange, INT–006–2—Response to Interchange Authority, and INT–008–2—Interchange Authority Distributes Status .................................................................................
a. Comments ......................................................................................................................................................................
b. Commission Determination ..........................................................................................................................................
III. Information Collection Statement ....................................................................................................................................................
IV. Environmental Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................................
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act .................................................................................................................................................................
VI. Document Availability .....................................................................................................................................................................
VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification ..............................................................................................................................
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Before Commissioners: Joseph T. Kelliher,
Chairman; Suedeen G. Kelly, Marc Spitzer,
Philip D. Moeller, and Jon Wellinghoff.
1. Pursuant to section 215 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA),1 the
Commission approves five of six
modified Reliability Standards
submitted to the Commission for review
by the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC). The five
Reliability Standards pertain to
interchange scheduling and
coordination. The Commission directs
1 16
14:08 Jul 25, 2008
I. Background
A. EPAct 2005 and Mandatory
Reliability Standards
2. Section 215 of the FPA requires a
Commission-certified Electric
U.S.C. 824o (2006).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
NERC to submit a filing that provides an
explanation regarding one aspect of the
sixth modified Reliability Standard
submitted by NERC, which pertains to
transmission loading relief (TLR)
procedures. The Final Rule also
approves interpretations of five specific
requirements of Commission-approved
Reliability Standards.
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
2
2
6
11
13
13
14
16
19
20
23
23
26
26
28
30
32
35
35
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
51
52
56
57
58
66
67
68
71
72
73
76
Reliability Organization (ERO) to
propose Reliability Standards for the
Commission’s review. Once approved
by the Commission, the Reliability
Standards may be enforced by the ERO,
subject to Commission oversight, or by
the Commission independently.2
3. Pursuant to section 215 of the FPA,
the Commission established a process to
select and certify an ERO 3 and,
2 See
FPA 215(e)(3), 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(3) (2006).
Concerning Certification of the Electric
Reliability Organization; and Procedures for the
Establishment, Approval, and Enforcement of
Electric Reliability Standards, Order No. 672, FERC
3 Rules
E:\FR\FM\28JYR1.SGM
28JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 145 / Monday, July 28, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
subsequently, certified NERC as the
ERO.4 On April 4, 2006, as modified on
August 28, 2006, NERC submitted to the
Commission a petition seeking approval
of 107 proposed Reliability Standards.
On March 16, 2007, the Commission
issued a Final Rule, Order No. 693,
approving 83 of these 107 Reliability
Standards and directing other action
related to these Reliability Standards.5
In addition, pursuant to section
215(d)(5) of the FPA, the Commission
directed NERC to develop modifications
to 56 of the 83 approved Reliability
Standards.
4. In April 2007, the Commission
approved delegation agreements
between NERC and each of the eight
Regional Entities, including the Western
Electricity Coordinating Council
(WECC).6 Pursuant to such agreements,
the ERO delegated responsibility to the
Regional Entities to carry out
compliance monitoring and
enforcement of the mandatory,
Commission-approved Reliability
Standards. In addition, the Commission
approved as part of each delegation
agreement a Regional Entity process for
developing regional Reliability
Standards.
5. NERC’s Rules of Procedure provide
that a person that is ‘‘directly and
materially affected’’ by Bulk-Power
System reliability may request an
interpretation of a Reliability Standard.7
The ERO’s ‘‘standards process manager’’
will assemble a team with relevant
expertise to address the clarification and
also form a ballot pool. NERC’s Rules
provide that, within 45 days, the team
will draft an interpretation of the
Reliability Standard, with subsequent
balloting. If approved by ballot, the
interpretation is appended to the
Reliability Standard and filed with the
applicable regulatory authority for
regulatory approval.8
Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,204, order on reh’g, Order No.
672–A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,212 (2006).
4 North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116
FERC ¶ 61,062 (ERO Certification Order), order on
reh’g & compliance, 117 FERC ¶ 61,126 (ERO
Rehearing Order) (2006), appeal docketed sub nom.
Alcoa, Inc. v. FERC, No. 06–1426 (DC Cir. Dec. 29,
2006).
5 Mandatory Reliability Standards for the BulkPower System, Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs.
¶ 31,242, order on reh’g, Order No. 693–A, 120
FERC ¶ 61,053 (2007).
6 See North American Electric Reliability Corp.,
119 FERC ¶ 61,060, order on reh’g, 120 FERC
¶ 61,260 (2007).
7 NERC Rules of Procedure, Appendix 3A
(Reliability Standards Development Procedure), at
26–27.
8 We note that the NERC board of trustees
approved the interpretations of Reliability
Standards submitted by NERC for approval in this
proceeding. However, Appendix 3A of NERC’s
Rules of Procedure is silent on NERC board of
trustees approval of interpretations before they are
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:01 Jul 25, 2008
Jkt 214001
B. NERC Filings
6. As explained in the Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR),9 this
rulemaking proceeding consolidates and
addresses three NERC filings.
7. On December 19, 2007, NERC
submitted for Commission approval five
interpretations of requirements in four
Commission-approved Reliability
Standards: BAL–001–0 (Real Power
Balancing Control Performance),
Requirement R1; BAL–003–0
(Frequency Response and Bias),
Requirement R3; BAL–005–0
(Automatic Generation Control),
Requirement R17; and VAR–002–1
(Generator Operation for Maintaining
Network Voltage Schedules),
Requirements R1 and R2.10 On April 15,
2008, NERC submitted a petition to
withdraw the earlier request for
approval of NERC’s interpretation of
BAL–003–0, Requirement R17, and
instead to approve a second
interpretation of Requirement R17
submitted by NERC in the April 15
filing.
8. On December 21, 2007, NERC
submitted for Commission approval
modifications to Reliability Standard
IRO–006–4 (Reliability Coordination—
Transmission Loading Relief) that
applies to balancing authorities,
reliability coordinators, and
transmission operators. According to
NERC, the modifications ‘‘extract’’ from
the Reliability Standard the business
practices and commercial requirements
from the current IRO–006–3 Reliability
Standard. The business practices and
commercial requirements have been
transferred to a North American Energy
Standards Board (NAESB) business
practices document. The NAESB
business practices and commercial
requirements have been included in
Version 001 of the NAESB Wholesale
Electric Quadrant (WEQ) Standards
which NAESB filed with the
Commission on the same day, December
21, 2007.11 Further, the modified
Reliability Standard includes changes
directed by the Commission in Order
No. 693 related to the appropriateness of
using the TLR procedure to mitigate
filed with the regulatory authority. The Commission
is concerned that NERC’s Rules of Procedure do not
properly reflect this approval step.
9 Modification of Interchange and Transmission
Loading Relief Reliability Standards; and Electric
Reliability Organization Interpretation of Specific
Requirements of Four Reliability Standards, Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking, 73 FR 22,856 (Apr. 28,
2008), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 32,632 (2008) (NOPR).
10 In its filing, NERC identifies the Reliability
Standards together with NERC’s proposed
interpretations as BAL–001–0a, BAL–003–0a, BAL–
005–0a, and VAR–002–1a.
11 NAESB December 21, 2007 Filing, Docket No.
RM05–5–005.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
43615
violations of interconnection reliability
operating limits (IROL).12
9. On December 26, 2007, NERC
submitted for Commission approval
modifications to five Reliability
Standards from the ‘‘Interchange
Scheduling’’ (INT) group of Reliability
Standards: INT–001–3 (Interchange
Information); INT–004–2 (Dynamic
Interchange Transaction Modifications);
INT–005–2 (Interchange Authority
Distributes Arranged Interchange); INT–
006–2 (Response to Interchange
Authority); and INT–008–2 (Interchange
Authority Distributes Status). NERC
stated that the modifications to INT–
001–3 and INT–004–2 eliminate waivers
requested in 2002 under the voluntary
Reliability Standards regime for entities
in the WECC region. According to
NERC, modifications to INT–005–2,
INT–006–2, and INT–008–2 adjust
reliability assessment time frames for
proposed transactions within WECC.13
10. Each Reliability Standard that the
ERO proposed to interpret or modify in
this proceeding was approved by the
Commission in Order No. 693.
C. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
11. On April 21, 2008, the
Commission issued a NOPR that
proposed to approve the six modified
Reliability Standards submitted to the
Commission for approval by NERC and
to approve NERC’s proposed
interpretations of five specific
requirements of Commission-approved
Reliability Standards. On May 16, 2008,
the Commission supplemented the
NOPR,14 proposing to approve NERC’s
modified interpretation of Reliability
Standard BAL–005–0, Requirement R17.
12. In response to the NOPR,
comments were filed by the following
eight interested persons: Alcoa Inc.
(Alcoa); Independent Electricity System
Operator of Ontario (IESO); ISO/RTO
Council; International Transmission
Company, Michigan Electric
Transmission Company, LLC and
Midwest LLC (collectively, ITC);
Lafayette Utilities and the Louisiana
Energy and Power Authority (Lafayette
12 An IROL is a system operating limit that, if
violated, could lead to instability, uncontrolled
separation, or cascading outages that adversely
impact the reliability of the Bulk-Power System.
13 The Reliability Standards and interpretations
addressed in this Final Rule are available on the
Commission’s eLibrary document retrieval system
in Docket No. RM08–7–000 and also on NERC’s
Web site, https://www.nerc.com.
14 Modification of Interchange and Transmission
Loading Relief Reliability Standards; and Electric
Reliability Organization Interpretation of Specific
Requirements of Four Reliability Standards,
Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 73
FR 30,326 (May 27, 2008), FERC Stats. & Regs.
¶ 32,635 (2008) (Supplemental NOPR).
E:\FR\FM\28JYR1.SGM
28JYR1
43616
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 145 / Monday, July 28, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
and LEPA); NERC; NRG Companies; 15
and Southern Company Services, Inc.
(Southern).
II. Discussion
A. NERC’s December 19, 2007 Filing:
Interpretations of Reliability Standards
13. As mentioned above, NERC
submitted for Commission approval
interpretations of five specific
requirements in four Commissionapproved Reliability Standards.
1. BAL–001–0—Real Power Balancing
Control Performance and BAL–003–0—
Frequency Response and Bias
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
14. The purpose of Reliability
Standard BAL–001–0 is to maintain
interconnection steady-state frequency
within defined limits by balancing real
power demand and supply in realtime.16 It uses two averages, covering
the one-minute and ten-minute area
control error (ACE) performance (CPS1
and CPS2, respectively), as measures for
determining compliance with its four
Requirements. Requirement R1 of BAL–
001–0 obligates each balancing
authority, on a rolling twelve-month
basis, to maintain its clock-minute
averages of ACE, modified by its
frequency bias and the interconnection
frequency, within a specific limit based
on historic performance.17
15. The purpose of Reliability
Standard BAL–003–0 is to ensure that a
balancing authority’s frequency bias
setting is accurately calculated to match
its actual frequency response.
Frequency bias may be calculated in a
number of ways provided that the
frequency bias is as close as practical to
the frequency response. Requirement R3
of BAL–003–0 requires each balancing
authority to operate its automatic
generation control on ‘‘tie line
frequency bias,’’ unless such operation
is adverse to system interconnection
reliability.18
15 NRG Companies includes Louisiana Generating
LLC, Bayou Cove Peaking Power, LLC, Big Cajun I
Peaking Power, LLC, NRG Sterlington Power, LLC,
and NRG Power Marketing, LLC.
16 See Reliability Standard BAL–001–0. Each
Reliability Standard developed by the ERO includes
a ‘‘Purpose’’ statement.
17 Frequency bias is an approximation, expressed
in megawatts per 0.1 Hertz, of the frequency
response of a balancing authority area which
estimates the net change in power from the
generators that is expected to occur with a change
in interconnection frequency from the scheduled
frequency (which is normally 60 Hertz).
18 Automatic generation control refers to an
automatic process whereby a balancing authority’s
mix and output of its generation and demand-side
management is varied to offset the extent of supply
and demand imbalances reflected in its ACE. North
American Electric Reliability Corporation, 121
FERC ¶ 61,179, at P 19 n.14 (2007). ‘‘Tie line
frequency bias’’ is defined in the NERC Glossary of
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:01 Jul 25, 2008
Jkt 214001
a. Proposed Interpretation
b. Comments
16. In its December 19, 2007 filing,
NERC explained that WECC requested
the ERO to provide a formal
interpretation whether the use of
WECC’s existing automatic time error
correction factor that is applied to the
net interchange portion of the ACE
equation violates Requirement R1 of
BAL–001–0 or Requirement R3 of BAL–
003–0.
17. In response, the ERO interpreted
BAL–001–0 Requirement R1 as follows:
• The [WECC automatic time error
correction or WATEC] procedural
documents ask Balancing Authorities to
maintain raw ACE for [control
performance standard or CPS] reporting
and to control via WATEC-adjusted
ACE.
• As long as Balancing Authorities
use raw (unadjusted for WATEC) ACE
for CPS reporting purposes, the use of
WATEC for control is not in violation of
BAL–001 Requirement 1.
The ERO interpreted BAL–003–0
Requirement R3 as follows:
• Tie-Line Frequency Bias is one of
the three foundational control modes
available in a Balancing Authority’s
energy management system. (The other
two are flat-tie and flat-frequency.)
Many Balancing Authorities layer other
control objectives on top of their basic
control mode, such as automatic
inadvertent payback, [control
performance standard] optimization,
[and] time control (in single [balancing
authority] interconnections).19
• As long as Tie-Line Frequency Bias
is the underlying control mode and
CPS1 is measured and reported on the
associated ACE equation,20 there is no
violation of BAL–003–0 Requirement 3:
ACE = (NIA¥NIS)¥10B (FA¥FS)¥IME
(NERC December 19, 2007 Filing, Ex.
A–3.)
19. NERC and IESO support the
Commission’s proposal to approve these
interpretations.
18. In the NOPR, the Commission
proposed to approve the ERO’s formal
interpretations of Requirement R1 of
BAL–001–0 and Requirement R3 of
BAL–003–0.
Terms Used in Reliability Standards as ‘‘[a] mode
of Automatic Generation Control that allows the
Balancing Authority to 1.) maintain its Interchange
Schedule and 2.) respond to Interconnection
frequency error.’’
19 The ‘‘flat frequency’’ control mode would
increase or decrease generation solely based on the
interconnection frequency. The ‘‘flat tie’’ mode
would increase or decrease generation within a
balancing authority area depending solely on that
balancing authority’s total interchange. The ‘‘tieline frequency bias’’ mode combines the flat
frequency and flat tie modes and adjusts generation
based on the balancing authority’s net interchange
and the interconnection frequency.
20 ‘‘CPS1’’ refers to Requirement R1 of BAL–001–
0.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
c. Commission Determination
20. The Commission approves the
ERO’s formal interpretations of
Requirement R1 of BAL–001–0 and
Requirement R3 of BAL–003–0. The
ERO’s interpretation of BAL–001–0,
Requirement R1, is reasonable in that it
requires all balancing authorities in
WECC to calculate CPS1 and CPS2 as
defined in the Requirements. Thus, the
interpretation upholds the reliability
goal to minimize the frequency
deviation of the interconnection by
constantly balancing supply and
demand.
21. The ERO’s interpretation of BAL–
003–0, Requirement R3 is appropriate
because it maintains the goal of
Requirement R3 by obligating a
balancing authority to operate automatic
generation control on tie-line frequency
bias as its underlying control mode,
unless to do so is adverse to system or
interconnection reliability. Further, the
interpretation fosters the purpose of
Requirement R3, as it allows that a
balancing authority may go beyond
Requirement R3 and ‘‘layer other
control objectives on top of their basic
control modes, such as automatic
inadvertent payback, [control
performance standard] optimization,
[and] time control (in single [balancing
authority] interconnections),’’ 21
although such layering is not required
by the Reliability Standard.
22. For the reasons stated above, the
Commission finds that the ERO’s
interpretations of Requirement R1 of
BAL–001–0 and Requirement R3 of
BAL–003–0 are just, reasonable, not
unduly discriminatory or preferential,
and in the public interest. Accordingly,
the Commission approves the ERO’s
interpretations.
2. Requirement R17 of BAL–005–0—
Automatic Generation Control
a. Proposed Interpretation
23. Requirement R17 of Reliability
Standard BAL–005–0 is intended to
annually check and calibrate the time
error and frequency devices under the
control of the balancing authority that
feed data into automatic generation
control necessary to calculate ACE.
Requirement R17 mandates that the
balancing authority must adhere to an
annual calibration program for time
error and frequency devices. The
21 NERC interpretation of BAL–003–0,
Requirement R3.
E:\FR\FM\28JYR1.SGM
28JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 145 / Monday, July 28, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
requirement states that a balancing
authority must adhere to minimum
accuracies in terms of ranges specified
in Hertz, volts, amps, etc., for various
listed devices, such as digital frequency
transducers, voltage transducers, remote
terminal unit, potential transformers,
and current transformers.
24. On April 15, 2008, NERC
submitted an interpretation of
Requirement R17 regarding the type and
location of the equipment to which
Requirement R17 applies.22 The
interpretation provides that BAL–005–0,
Requirement R17
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
applies only to the time error and frequency
devices that provide, or in the case of backup equipment may provide, input into the
reporting or compliance ACE equation or
provide real-time time error or frequency
information to the system operator.
Frequency inputs from other sources that are
for reference only are excluded. The time
error and frequency measurement devices
may not necessarily be located in the system
operations control room or owned by the
Balancing Authority; however the Balancing
Authority has the responsibility for the
accuracy of the frequency and time error
devices * * *.
New or replacement equipment that
provides the same functions noted above
requires the same calibrations. Some devices
used for time error and frequency
measurement cannot be calibrated as such. In
this case, these devices should be crosschecked against other properly calibrated
equipment and replaced if the devices do not
meet the required level of accuracy.
25. In a supplemental NOPR issued
May 16, 2008, the Commission
proposed to approve NERC’s
interpretation of BAL–005–0,
Requirement R17. In addition, the
Commission noted that tie-line
megawatt metering data is an important
aspect of ensuring the accurate
calculation of ACE, and the
interpretation limits the specific
accuracy requirements of Requirement
R17 to frequency and time error
measurement devices. The Commission
asked for comment on (1) whether the
interpretation could decrease the
accuracy of frequency and time error
measurements by not requiring
calibration of tie-line megawatt metering
devices; (2) what conditions would
preclude the requirement to calibrate
these devices; and (3) whether the
accuracy of these devices is assured by
other requirements within BAL–005–0
in the absence of calibration.
22 As mentioned earlier, in April 2008, NERC
submitted a petition seeking to withdraw an earlier
interpretation of Requirement R17 and substituting
a new interpretation for Commission approval.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:01 Jul 25, 2008
Jkt 214001
b. Comments
i. Whether Interpretation Could
Decrease Accuracy of Frequency and
Time Error Measurements
26. Southern, ITC, ISO/RTO Council,
and NERC claim that the interpretation
could not decrease the accuracy of
frequency and time error measurements
by not requiring calibration of tie-line
megawatt metering devices because tieline metering data is not an input to
either time error or frequency
measurements and has no impact on the
accuracy of these devices. NERC further
suggests that the Commission may have
intended to ask whether the
interpretation adversely affects the
accuracy of the balancing authority ACE
calculation. NERC provides that it does
not, because calibration of tie-line
metering historically was included in
the guide section of NERC Operating
Policy 1 and was not intended to be
translated into a requirement. NERC
asserts that calibration of tie-line
metering remains a sound practice and
there are safeguards, checks, and
balances to ensure inadvertent flows in
the interconnection equal zero, thus
ensuring that errors in ACE are bounded
to protect the interconnections.
27. As a general comment on the
proposed interpretation of Requirement
R17, Southern suggests that the
metering specifications table in
Requirement R17 may be creating some
confusion because the NERC committee
that developed this Reliability Standard
intended to include the frequency
metering specifications from this table
but inadvertently included other
metering specifications that are not
required to fulfill Requirement R17.
Southern claims that Requirement R17
is intended to only address time error
and frequency devices, and this table
was added in error and should have
been limited to specifications for those
devices.
ii. What Conditions Would Preclude
Requirement To Calibrate Devices
28. NERC, ISO/RTO Council, and
Southern claim that there are no
conditions which would preclude the
requirement to calibrate tie-line
megawatt metering devices. NERC
suggests that, if the question relates to
a possible new requirement to calibrate
all tie-line metering equipment on a
given schedule, a new standards
authorization request should be
submitted through the Reliability
Standards Development Process. NERC
believes that the industry may not want
to divert resources away from other
important tasks unless a case can be
made that calibration of these devices
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
43617
presents a risk to reliability. Similarly,
ITC comments that, if the Commission
believes it is necessary to annually
calibrate the tie-line megawatt metering
devices, such a requirement belongs in
BAL–005–0 and not in Requirement
R17. ISO/RTO Council claims such a
requirement is unnecessary because it is
redundant, not needed for reliability,
and poses the possibility of financial
sanctions for no good reason.
29. ITC states that tie-line meters
would be precluded from calibration
requirements if they are digital devices
that the equipment vendor has indicated
do not require calibration. They claim
that there are no field calibration
procedures which can be performed by
end-users for such devices. According to
ITC, Requirement R17 of BAL–005–0
should recognize that there are modern
digital devices that do not require
calibration as analog devices do.
iii. Whether Accuracy of Devices Is
Assured by Other Requirements
30. NERC, ITC, ISO/RTO Council, and
Southern state that tie-line metering
accuracy is addressed by Requirement
R13 of BAL–005–0, which requires each
balancing authority to perform hourly
error checks using tie-line megawatthour meters with common time
synchronization to determine the
accuracy of its control equipment and
make adjustments accordingly. ITC
claims that Requirement R13 of BAL–
005–0 provides a more timely
identification of errors than a
requirement for annual calibration.
31. NERC comments that tie-line
metering accuracy is not assured by any
other requirement. According to NERC,
requirements relating to Reliability
Standards BAL–005–0 and BAL–006–1,
along with the associated NERC
processes, provide several layers of
overlapping protection to address tieline accuracy. NERC further claims that
BAL–005–0 requires balancing
authorities to operate in conformance
with common metering equipment in
comparison to that of their neighbors, so
there is no net balancing authority error
in the interconnection as a whole. In
addition, NERC claims that many
balancing authorities have secondary or
backup metering on critical tie lines and
have access to the NERC Resource
Adequacy application, which can
provide alerts to the balancing authority
of tie-line metering errors.
c. Commission Determination
32. The Commission approves the
ERO’s formal interpretation of
Requirement R17 of BAL–005–0 as set
forth in the ERO’s April 2008 filing.
Based on the comments, we find that
E:\FR\FM\28JYR1.SGM
28JYR1
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
43618
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 145 / Monday, July 28, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
this interpretation will not decrease the
accuracy of frequency and time error
measurements by not requiring
calibration of tie-line megawatt metering
devices. In addition, we are persuaded
by the commenters that the need to
calibrate tie-line megawatt metering
devices is addressed by other
requirements such as Requirement R13
that require hourly checks to ensure
continuous accuracy. The Commission
notes that the applicable requirement
for the accuracy of calibration of tie-line
megawatt metering devices is identified
in Requirement R17. While Southern
has stated that the metering
specifications table in Requirement R17
was added in error, an interpretation
cannot change the substance of a
Reliability Standard. Notwithstanding
the question of relevancy of particular
components of the metering
specifications table, the accuracy
requirements of this table remain part of
Reliability Standard BAL–005–0 as
reference for mandatory reliability
practices. The Commission encourages
further clarification of tie-line metering
device calibration requirements through
the ERO standards development
process.
33. ITC comments that digital devices
are precluded from the calibration
requirement. We note that the
interpretation provides that ‘‘[s]ome
devices used for time error and
frequency measurement cannot be
calibrated as such. In this case, these
devices should be cross-checked against
other properly calibrated equipment and
replaced if the devices do not meet the
required level of accuracy.’’ Thus, while
ITC’s comment is accurate, the ERO’s
interpretation acknowledges the
concern and provides a response, i.e.,
modern digital devices that cannot be
calibrated must be cross-checked against
other equipment and replaced if they do
not meet the required level of accuracy.
34. The ERO’s interpretation of BAL–
005–0, Requirement R17 provides that
‘‘frequency inputs from other sources
that are for reference only are
excluded.’’ The Commission notes that
this Reliability Standard establishes
requirements concerning the inputs to
the ACE equation to correctly operate
automatic generation control. Frequency
inputs used for other purposes are not
covered by this Reliability Standard.
Therefore, we understand the ERO’s
interpretation to exclude frequency
devices that do not provide input into
the reporting or compliance with the
ACE equation or provide real-time time
error or frequency information to the
system operator. Any devices that
provide reference input from which a
balancing authority calibrates other time
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:01 Jul 25, 2008
Jkt 214001
error and frequency devices, however,
do provide real-time time error and
frequency information to the system
operator and therefore must be
calibrated under this requirement.
3. Requirements R1 and R2 of VAR–
002–1 Generator Operation for
Maintaining Network Voltage Schedules
a. Proposed Interpretations
35. The stated purpose of Reliability
Standard VAR–002–1 is to ensure that
generators provide reactive and voltage
control necessary to ensure that voltage
levels, reactive flows, and reactive
resources are maintained within
applicable facility ratings to protect
equipment and the reliable operation of
the interconnection. Requirement R1
ofVAR–002–1 provides:
The Generator Operator shall operate each
generator connected to the interconnected
transmission system in the automatic voltage
control mode (automatic voltage regulator in
service and controlling voltage) unless the
Generator Operator has notified the
Transmission Operator.
Requirement R2 provides:
Unless exempted by the Transmission
Operator, each Generator Operator shall
maintain the generator voltage or Reactive
Power output (within applicable Facility
Ratings) as directed by the Transmission
Operator.
36. The ERO received a request to
provide a formal interpretation of
Requirements R1 and R2. The request
first asked whether automatic voltage
regulator operation in the constant
power factor or constant Mvar modes
complies with Requirement R1. Second,
the request asked the ERO whether
Requirement R2 gives the transmission
operator the option of directing the
generation owner to operate the
automatic voltage regulator in the
constant power factor or constant Mvar
modes rather than the constant voltage
mode.
37. NERC’s formal interpretation
provides that a generator operator that is
operating its automatic voltage regulator
in the constant power factor or constant
Mvar modes does not comply with
Requirement R1.23 The interpretation
rests on the assumptions that the
generator has the physical equipment
that will allow such operation and that
the transmission operator has not
directed the generator to run in a mode
other than constant voltage. The
interpretation also provides that
Requirement R2 gives the transmission
operator the option of directing the
generation operator to operate the
interpretation of VAR–002–1,
Requirement R1 is quoted in full in the NOPR,
FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 32,632 at P 32, n.27.
PO 00000
23 NERC’s
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
automatic voltage regulator in the
constant power factor or constant Mvar
modes rather than the constant voltage
mode.
38. In the NOPR, the Commission
proposed to approve the ERO’s
interpretation of Requirement R1 and
Requirement R2 of VAR–002–1.
b. Comments
39. NERC and IESO support the
Commission’s proposal to approve the
interpretation.
c. Commission Determination
40. The Commission concludes that
the interpretation is just, reasonable, not
unduly discriminatory or preferential,
and in the public interest. Therefore, the
Commission approves the ERO’s
interpretation of Requirements R1 and
R2 of VAR–002–1.
B. NERC’s December 21, 2007 Filing:
Modification of TLR Procedure
41. NERC submitted for Commission
approval proposed Reliability Standard
IRO–006–4, which modifies the
Commission-approved Reliability
Standard, IRO–006–3.
1. Background
42. In Order No. 693, the Commission
approved an earlier version of this
Reliability Standard, IRO–006–3. This
Reliability Standard ensures that a
reliability coordinator has a coordinated
transmission service curtailment and
reconfiguration method that can be used
along with other alternatives, such as
redispatch or demand-side management,
to avoid transmission limit violations
when the transmission system is
congested. Reliability Standard IRO–
006–3 established a detailed TLR
procedure for use in the Eastern
Interconnection to alleviate loadings on
the system by curtailing or changing
transactions based on their priorities
and the severity of the transmission
congestion. The Reliability Standard
referenced other procedures for WECC
and Electric Reliability Council of Texas
(ERCOT).24
2. ERO TLR Filing, Reliability Standard
IRO–006–4
43. In its December 2007 filing, NERC
submitted for Commission approval a
modified TLR procedure, Reliability
Standard IRO–006–4, which contains
five requirements. Requirement R1
obligates a reliability coordinator
experiencing a potential or actual
system operating limit (SOL) or IROL
24 The equivalent interconnection-wide TLR
procedures for use in WECC and ERCOT are known
as ‘‘WSCC Unscheduled Flow Mitigation Plan’’ and
section 7 of the ‘‘ERCOT Protocols,’’ respectively.
E:\FR\FM\28JYR1.SGM
28JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 145 / Monday, July 28, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
violation within its reliability
coordinator area to select one or more
procedures to provide transmission
loading relief. The requirement also
identifies the regional TLR procedures
in WECC and ERCOT.
3. NOPR
44. In the NOPR, the Commission
proposed to approve IRO–006–4 as just,
reasonable, not unduly discriminatory
or preferential, and in the public
interest.25 The Commission also
proposed to approve the Reliability
Standard based on the interpretation
that using a TLR procedure to mitigate
an IROL violation is a violation of the
Reliability Standard. The Commission
asked for comments on whether any
compromise in the reliability of the
Bulk-Power System may result from the
removal and transfer to NAESB of the
business-related issues formerly
contained in Reliability Standard IRO–
006–3. In addition, the Commission
proposed to direct the ERO to modify
the violation risk factors assigned to
Requirements R1 through R4 by raising
them to ‘‘high.’’
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
4. Comments
45. The Commission received
comments on the NOPR proposal.
Because the Final Rule does not approve
or remand the proposed Reliability
Standard and, rather, directs the ERO to
submit a filing that provides an
explanation regarding specific language
of one requirement of IRO–006–4, the
Commission will address the comments
in a future issuance in this proceeding.
5. Commission Determination
46. Because the Commission has
concern regarding the understanding of
certain language of Requirements R1
and R1.1 of IRO–006–4, the Commission
is not approving or remanding the
proposed Reliability Standard at this
time. Rather, the Commission directs
that the ERO, within 15 days of the
effective date of this Final Rule, submit
a filing that provides an explanation
regarding specific language of
Requirements R1 and R1.1 of IRO–006–
4. The Commission will then issue a
notice allowing public comment on the
ERO’s filing, and will act on the
proposed Reliability Standard in a
future issuance in this proceeding.
47. In the Final Blackout Report, an
international team of experts studying
the causes of the August 2003 blackout
in North America recommended that
NERC ‘‘[c]larify that the transmission
loading relief (TLR) process should not
be used in situations involving an actual
25 NOPR,
FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 32,632 at P 48.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:01 Jul 25, 2008
Jkt 214001
violation of an Operation Security
Limit.’’ 26 Based on the Final Blackout
Report recommendation, the
Commission, in Order No. 693, directed
NERC to develop a modification to the
TLR procedure (IRO–006–3) that ‘‘(1)
includes a clear warning that the TLR
procedure is an inappropriate and
ineffective tool to mitigate actual IROL
violations and (2) identifies in a
Requirement the available alternatives
to mitigate an IROL violation other than
use of the TLR procedure.’’ 27
48. In response to this directive,
NERC proposed in Requirement R1.1 of
IRO–006–4 that ‘‘[t]he TLR procedure
[for the Eastern Interconnection] alone
is an inappropriate and ineffective tool
to mitigate an IROL violation due to the
time required to implement the
procedure.’’ (Emphasis added.) The
Commission is concerned whether this
language is adequate to satisfy the
concern of the Final Blackout Report
and Order No. 693. Specifically, we note
that the use of the term ‘‘alone’’ seems
to imply that a TLR procedure could be
used in response to an actual violation
of an IROL whereas the Final Blackout
Report recommendation would prevent
the use of the TLR procedure in such
situations. Moreover, Requirement R1 of
IRO–006–4 further appears to contradict
the Final Blackout Report
recommendation by allowing a
reliability coordinator to implement
transmission loading relief procedures
to mitigate not only potential SOL or
IROL violations but also actual SOL or
IROL violations.28 The Commission is
concerned that Recommendation 31 of
the Final Blackout Report and the
directive in Order No. 693, both of
which state the TLR procedures should
not be used in situations involving an
actual violation of an IROL, may not be
clearly addressed in the proposed
Reliability Standard.
26 See U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task
Force, Final Report on the August 14, 2003
Blackout in the United States and Canada: Causes
and Recommendations, at 163 (April 2004) (Final
Blackout Report) (Recommendation 31).
27 See Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs.
¶ 31,242 at P 577, 964.
28 Requirement R1 provides that ‘‘[a] reliability
Coordinator experiencing a potential or actual SOL
or IROL violation within its Reliability Coordinator
Area shall, with its authority and at its discretion,
select one or more procedures to provide
transmission loading relief. This procedure can be
a ‘‘local’’ * * * transmission loading relief
procedure or one of the following Interconnectionwide procedures.* * *’’ Sub-requirement R1.1
provides that ‘‘[t]he TLR procedure alone is an
inappropriate and ineffective tool to mitigate an
IROL violation due to the time required to
implement the procedure. Other acceptable and
more effective procedures to mitigate actual IROL
violations include: Reconfiguration, redispatch, or
load shedding.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
43619
49. The Commission notes that an
entity is not prevented from using the
TLR procedure to avoid a potential
IROL violation before a violation occurs.
If, while a TLR procedure is in progress,
an IROL violation occurs, it is not
necessary for the entity to terminate the
TLR procedure. However, the
Commission believes that it is
inappropriate and ineffective to rely on
the TLR procedure, even in conjunction
with another tool, to address an actual
IROL violation.
50. Therefore, the Commission does
not approve or remand IRO–006–4.
Rather, the Commission directs the ERO
to submit a filing, within 15 days of the
effective date of this Final Rule, that
provides an explanation regarding
Requirements R1 and R1.1 of IRO–006–
4. Specifically, in light of the above
discussion, the Commission directs the
ERO to provide an explanation
regarding the phrase ‘‘[t]he TLR
procedure alone is an inappropriate and
ineffective tool to mitigate an IROL
violation * * *’’ Further, the ERO
should explain whether Requirements
R1 and R1.1 only allow the TLR
procedure to be continued when already
deployed prior to an actual IROL
violation or, alternatively, whether
Requirements R1 and R1.1 allow use of
the TLR procedure as a tool to address
actual violations after they occur. If the
latter, the ERO is directed to explain
why this application is not contrary to
both Blackout Report Recommendation
31 and the Commission’s determination
in Order No. 693. The ERO’s filing
should include an explanation of those
actions that are acceptable, and those
that are unacceptable, pursuant to
Requirement R1 and R1.1.
C. NERC’s December 26, 2007 Filing:
Modification to Five ‘‘Interchange and
Scheduling’’ Reliability Standards
51. NERC submitted for Commission
approval proposed modifications to five
Reliability Standards from the INT
group of Reliability Standards.
1. INT–001–3—Interchange Information
and INT–004–2—Dynamic Interchange
Transaction Modifications
52. The Interchange Scheduling and
Coordination or ‘‘INT’’ group of
Reliability Standards address
interchange transactions, which occur
when electricity is transmitted from a
seller to a buyer across the Bulk-Power
System. Reliability Standard INT–001
applies to purchasing-selling entities
and balancing authorities. The stated
purpose of the Reliability Standard is to
‘‘ensure that Interchange Information is
submitted to the NERC-identified
reliability analysis service.’’ Reliability
E:\FR\FM\28JYR1.SGM
28JYR1
43620
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 145 / Monday, July 28, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Standard INT–004 is intended to
‘‘ensure Dynamic Transfers are
adequately tagged to be able to
determine their reliability impacts.’’
53. In Order No. 693, the Commission
approved earlier versions of these
Reliability Standards, INT–001–2 and
INT–004–1.29 Further, when NERC
initially (in April 2006) submitted these
two Reliability Standards for
Commission approval, NERC also asked
the Commission to approve a ‘‘regional
difference’’ that would exempt WECC
from requirements related to tagging
dynamic schedules and inadvertent
payback provisions of INT–001–2 and
INT–004–1. The Commission, in Order
No. 693, stated that it did not have
sufficient information to address the
ERO’s proposed regional difference and
directed the ERO to submit a filing
either withdrawing the regional
difference or providing additional
information needed for the Commission
to make a determination on the matter.30
The effect of NERC’s December 26, 2007
filing is to withdraw the regional
difference with respect to WECC.
54. In its December 26, 2007 filing,
NERC stated that, by rescinding the etagging waivers, NERC maintains
uniformity and makes no structural
changes to the requirements in the
current Commission-approved version
of the Reliability Standards.
55. In the NOPR, the Commission
proposed to approve INT–001–3 and
INT–004–2.
a. Comments
56. NERC and the IESO support the
Commission’s proposal to approve these
Reliability Standards.
b. Commission Determination
57. Pursuant to section 215(d) of the
FPA, the Commission approves
Reliability Standards INT–001–3 and
INT–004–2 as mandatory and
enforceable.
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
2. INT–005–2—Interchange Authority
Distributes Arranged Interchange, INT–
006–2—Response to Interchange
Authority, and INT–008–2—Interchange
Authority Distributes Status
58. Reliability Standard INT–005–1
applies to the interchange authority.
The stated purpose of proposed
Reliability Standard INT–005–1 is to
‘‘ensure that the implementation of
Interchange between Source and Sink
Balancing Authorities is distributed by
29 Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,242 at
P 821, 843. In addition, the Commission directed
that the ERO develop modifications to INT–001–2
and INT–004–1 that address the Commission’s
concerns.
30 Id. P 825.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:01 Jul 25, 2008
Jkt 214001
an Interchange Authority such that
Interchange information is available for
reliability assessments.’’
59. Reliability Standard INT–006–1
applies to balancing authorities and
transmission service providers. The
stated purpose of the Reliability
Standard is to ‘‘ensure that each
Arranged Interchange is checked for
reliability before it is implemented.’’
60. Reliability Standard INT–008–1
applies to the interchange authority.
The stated purpose of the Reliability
Standard is to ‘‘ensure that the
implementation of Interchange between
Source and Sink Balancing Authorities
is coordinated by an Interchange
Authority.’’ This means that it is an
interchange authority’s responsibility to
oversee and coordinate the interchange
from one balancing authority to another.
61. In its December 26, 2007 filing,
NERC addressed a reliability need
identified by WECC in its urgent action
request. Specifically, Requirement R1.4
of INT–007–1 requires that each
balancing authority and transmission
service provider provide confirmation to
the interchange authority that it has
approved the transactions for
implementation. NERC stated that for
WECC the timeframe allotted for this
assessment is five minutes in the
original version of the Commissionapproved Reliability Standards.
62. Reliability Standards for INT–
005–2, INT–006–2, and INT–008–2
increase the timeframe for applicable
WECC entities to perform the reliability
assessment from five to ten minutes for
next hour interchange tags submitted in
the first thirty minutes of the hour
before. According to NERC, this
modification is needed because the
majority of next-hour tags in WECC are
submitted between xx and xx:30. The
existing five minute assessment window
makes it nearly impossible for balancing
authorities and transmission service
providers to review each tag before the
five minute assessment time expires.
According to NERC, when the time
expires, the tags are denied and must be
resubmitted.
63. In its December 26, 2007 filing,
NERC stated that WECC has
experienced numerous instances of
transactions being denied because one
or more applicable reliability entities
did not actively approve the tag. In
NERC’s view, the current structure
causes frustration and inefficiencies for
entities involved in this process, as
requestors are required to re-create tags
that are denied. Further, NERC stated
that there is no reliability basis for a five
minute assessment period for tags
submitted at least thirty minutes ahead
of the ramp-in period.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
64. NERC noted that, prior to January
1, 2007, when the new INT group of
Reliability Standards was implemented,
WECC had a ten-minute reliability
assessment period for next-hour tags.
NERC states that the urgent action
request restores assessment times back
to ten minutes.
65. In the NOPR, the Commission
proposed to approve INT–005–2, INT–
006–2, and INT–008–2.
a. Comments
66. NERC and IESO support the
Commission’s proposal to approve these
Reliability Standards.
b. Commission Determination
67. Pursuant to section 215(d) of the
FPA, the Commission approves
Reliability Standards INT–005–2, INT–
006–2, and INT–008–2 as mandatory
and enforceable.31
III. Information Collection Statement
68. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) regulations require that
OMB approve certain reporting and
recordkeeping (collections of
information) imposed by an agency.32
The information contained here is also
subject to review under section 3507(d)
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995.33 As stated above, the
Commission previously approved, in
Order No. 693, each of the Reliability
Standards that are the subject of the
current rulemaking. In the NOPR, the
Commission explained that the
modifications to the Reliability
Standards are minor and the
interpretations relate to existing
Reliability Standards; therefore, they do
not add to or increase entities’ reporting
burden. Thus, in the NOPR, the
Commission stated that the modified
Reliability Standards and
interpretations of Reliability Standards
do not materially affect the burden
estimates relating to the earlier version
of the Reliability Standards presented in
Order No. 693.34
69. In response to the NOPR, the
Commission received no comments
concerning its estimate for the burden
and costs and therefore uses the same
estimate here.
31 The Commission notes that NERC’s compliance
with Order No. 693, with respect to Reliability
Standard INT–006–1, is ongoing. See Order No.
693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,242 at P 866.
32 5 CFR 1320.11.
33 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
34 See Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs.
¶ 31,242 at P 1905–07. The NOPR, FERC Stats. &
Regs. ¶ 32,632 at P 76–78, provided a detailed
explanation why each modification and
interpretation has a negligible, if any, effect on the
reporting burden.
E:\FR\FM\28JYR1.SGM
28JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 145 / Monday, July 28, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Title: Modification of Interchange and
Transmission Loading Relief Reliability
Standards; and Electric Reliability
Organization Interpretation of Specific
Requirements of Four Reliability
Standards.
Action: Proposed Collection.
OMB Control No.: 1902–0244.
Respondents: Businesses or other forprofit institutions; not-for-profit
institutions.
Frequency of Responses: On
Occasion.
Necessity of the Information: This
Final Rule approves five modified
Reliability Standards that pertain to
interchange scheduling and
coordination. It directs NERC to make a
filing with the Commission regarding
one modified Reliability Standard that
pertains to transmission loading relief
procedures. In addition, the Final Rule
approves interpretations of five specific
requirements of Commission-approved
Reliability Standards. The Final Rule
finds the Reliability Standards and
interpretations just, reasonable, not
unduly discriminatory or preferential,
and in the public interest.
70. Interested persons may obtain
information on the reporting
requirements by contacting: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, Attn:
Michael Miller, Office of the Executive
Director, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, Tel: (202) 502–
8415, Fax: (202) 273–0873, E-mail:
michael.miller@ferc.gov, or by
contacting: Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Attn: Desk Officer
for the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Re: OMB Control No.
1902–0244), Washington, DC 20503,
Tel: (202) 395–4650, Fax: (202) 395–
7285, E-mail:
oira_submission@omb.eop.gov.
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
IV. Environmental Analysis
71. The Commission is required to
prepare an Environmental Assessment
or an Environmental Impact Statement
for any action that may have a
significant adverse effect on the human
environment.35 The Commission has
categorically excluded certain actions
from this requirement as not having a
significant effect on the human
environment. Included in the exclusion
are rules that are clarifying, corrective,
or procedural or that do not
substantially change the effect of the
regulations being amended.36 The
actions proposed herein fall within this
35 Regulations Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Order No. 486,
FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,783 (1987).
36 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:01 Jul 25, 2008
Jkt 214001
categorical exclusion in the
Commission’s regulations.
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act
72. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980 (RFA) 37 generally requires a
description and analysis of final rules
that will have significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The RFA mandates
consideration of regulatory alternatives
that accomplish the stated objectives of
a proposed rule and that minimize any
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The Small Business Administration’s
Office of Size Standards develops the
numerical definition of a small
business. (See 13 CFR 121.201.) For
electric utilities, a firm is small if,
including its affiliates, it is primarily
engaged in the transmission, generation
and/or distribution of electric energy for
sale and its total electric output for the
preceding twelve months did not exceed
four million megawatt hours. The RFA
is not implicated by this Final Rule
because the minor modifications and
interpretations discussed herein will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
43621
VII. Effective Date and Congressional
Notification
76. These regulations are effective
August 27, 2008. The Commission has
determined, with the concurrence of the
Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB, that this rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’
as defined in section 351 of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996.
List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 40
Electric power, Electric utilities,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
By the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8–17196 Filed 7–25–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket No. USCG–2008–0742]
VI. Document Availability
RIN 1625–AA00
73. In addition to publishing the full
text of this document in the Federal
Register , the Commission provides all
interested persons an opportunity to
view and/or print the contents of this
document via the Internet through
FERC’s Home Page (https://www.ferc.gov)
and in FERC’s Public Reference Room
during normal business hours (8:30 a.m.
to 5 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First
Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426.
74. From FERC’s Home Page on the
Internet, this information is available on
eLibrary. The full text of this document
is available on eLibrary in PDF and
Microsoft Word format for viewing,
printing, and/or downloading. To access
this document in eLibrary, type the
docket number excluding the last three
digits of this document in the docket
number field.
75. User assistance is available for
eLibrary and the FERC’s Web site during
normal business hours from FERC
Online Support at (202) 502–6652 (toll
free at 1–866–208–3676) or e-mail at
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the
Public Reference Room at (202) 502–
8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. E-mail the
Public Reference Room at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
Safety Zone; 70th Anniversary
Celebration for the Thousand Island
International Bridge, St. Lawrence
River, Alexandria Bay, NY
PO 00000
37 5
U.S.C. 601–12.
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
establishing a temporary safety zone on
the St. Lawrence River, Alexandria Bay,
NY. This zone is intended to restrict
vessels from a portion of the St.
Lawrence River during the August 16,
2008, 70th Anniversary Celebration for
the Thousand Island International
Bridge. This temporary safety zone is
necessary to protect spectators and
vessels from the hazards associated with
fireworks displays.
DATES: This rule is effective from 9 p.m.
to 10 p.m. on August 16, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Documents indicated in this
preamble as being available in the
docket are part of docket USCG–2008–
0742 and are available online at
https://www.regulations.gov. They are
also available for inspection or copying
at two locations: the Docket
Management Facility (M–30), U.S.
Department of Transportation, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140,
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
E:\FR\FM\28JYR1.SGM
28JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 145 (Monday, July 28, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43613-43621]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-17196]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
18 CFR Part 40
[Docket No. RM08-7-000; Order No. 713]
Modification of Interchange and Transmission Loading Relief
Reliability Standards; and Electric Reliability Organization
Interpretation of Specific Requirements of Four Reliability Standards
Issued July 21, 2008.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act, the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) approves five of six modified
Reliability Standards submitted to the Commission for approval by the
North American
[[Page 43614]]
Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC). The Commission directs NERC to
submit a filing that provides an explanation regarding one aspect of
the sixth modified Reliability Standard submitted by NERC. The
Commission also approves NERC's proposed interpretations of five
specific requirements of Commission-approved Reliability Standards.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule will become effective August 27, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Patrick Harwood (Technical Information), Office of Electric
Reliability, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-6125, patrick.harwood@ferc.gov,
Christopher Daignault (Legal Information), Office of the General
Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8286, christopher.daignault@ferc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Final Rule
Table of Contents
Paragraph
Nos.
I. Background.............................................. 2
A. EPAct 2005 and Mandatory Reliability Standards...... 2
B. NERC Filings........................................ 6
C. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking....................... 11
II. Discussion............................................. 13
A. NERC's December 19, 2007 Filing: Interpretations of 13
Reliability Standards.................................
1. BAL-001-0--Real Power Balancing Control 14
Performance and BAL-003-0--Frequency Response and
Bias..............................................
a. Proposed Interpretation..................... 16
b. Comments.................................... 19
c. Commission Determination.................... 20
2. Requirement R17 of BAL-005-0--Automatic 23
Generation Control................................
a. Proposed Interpretation..................... 23
b. Comments.................................... 26
i. Whether interpretation could decrease 26
accuracy of frequency and time error
measurements..............................
ii. What conditions would preclude 28
requirement to calibrate devices..........
iii. Whether accuracy of devices is assured 30
by other requirements.....................
c. Commission Determination.................... 32
3. Requirements R1 and R2 of VAR-002-1 Generator 35
Operation for Maintaining Network Voltage
Schedules.........................................
a. Proposed Interpretations.................... 35
b. Comments.................................... 39
c. Commission Determination.................... 40
B. NERC's December 21, 2007 Filing: Modification of TLR 41
Procedure.............................................
1. Background...................................... 42
2. ERO TLR Filing, Reliability Standard IRO-006-4.. 43
3. NOPR............................................ 44
4. Comments........................................ 45
5. Commission Determination........................ 46
C. NERC's December 26, 2007 Filing: Modification to 51
Five ``Interchange and Scheduling'' Reliability
Standards.............................................
1. INT-001-3--Interchange Information and INT-004- 52
2--Dynamic Interchange Transaction Modifications..
a. Comments.................................... 56
b. Commission Determination.................... 57
2. INT-005-2--Interchange Authority Distributes 58
Arranged Interchange, INT-006-2--Response to
Interchange Authority, and INT-008-2--Interchange
Authority Distributes Status......................
a. Comments.................................... 66
b. Commission Determination.................... 67
III. Information Collection Statement...................... 68
IV. Environmental Analysis................................. 71
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act.............................. 72
VI. Document Availability.................................. 73
VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification......... 76
Before Commissioners: Joseph T. Kelliher, Chairman; Suedeen G.
Kelly, Marc Spitzer, Philip D. Moeller, and Jon Wellinghoff.
1. Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA),\1\ the
Commission approves five of six modified Reliability Standards
submitted to the Commission for review by the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC). The five Reliability Standards pertain
to interchange scheduling and coordination. The Commission directs NERC
to submit a filing that provides an explanation regarding one aspect of
the sixth modified Reliability Standard submitted by NERC, which
pertains to transmission loading relief (TLR) procedures. The Final
Rule also approves interpretations of five specific requirements of
Commission-approved Reliability Standards.
I. Background
A. EPAct 2005 and Mandatory Reliability Standards
2. Section 215 of the FPA requires a Commission-certified Electric
Reliability Organization (ERO) to propose Reliability Standards for the
Commission's review. Once approved by the Commission, the Reliability
Standards may be enforced by the ERO, subject to Commission oversight,
or by the Commission independently.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 16 U.S.C. 824o (2006).
\2\ See FPA 215(e)(3), 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(3) (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Pursuant to section 215 of the FPA, the Commission established a
process to select and certify an ERO \3\ and,
[[Page 43615]]
subsequently, certified NERC as the ERO.\4\ On April 4, 2006, as
modified on August 28, 2006, NERC submitted to the Commission a
petition seeking approval of 107 proposed Reliability Standards. On
March 16, 2007, the Commission issued a Final Rule, Order No. 693,
approving 83 of these 107 Reliability Standards and directing other
action related to these Reliability Standards.\5\ In addition, pursuant
to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, the Commission directed NERC to
develop modifications to 56 of the 83 approved Reliability Standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric Reliability
Organization; and Procedures for the Establishment, Approval, and
Enforcement of Electric Reliability Standards, Order No. 672, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,204, order on reh'g, Order No. 672-A, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,212 (2006).
\4\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ] 61,062
(ERO Certification Order), order on reh'g & compliance, 117 FERC ]
61,126 (ERO Rehearing Order) (2006), appeal docketed sub nom. Alcoa,
Inc. v. FERC, No. 06-1426 (DC Cir. Dec. 29, 2006).
\5\ Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System,
Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242, order on reh'g, Order
No. 693-A, 120 FERC ] 61,053 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. In April 2007, the Commission approved delegation agreements
between NERC and each of the eight Regional Entities, including the
Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC).\6\ Pursuant to such
agreements, the ERO delegated responsibility to the Regional Entities
to carry out compliance monitoring and enforcement of the mandatory,
Commission-approved Reliability Standards. In addition, the Commission
approved as part of each delegation agreement a Regional Entity process
for developing regional Reliability Standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See North American Electric Reliability Corp., 119 FERC ]
61,060, order on reh'g, 120 FERC ] 61,260 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. NERC's Rules of Procedure provide that a person that is
``directly and materially affected'' by Bulk-Power System reliability
may request an interpretation of a Reliability Standard.\7\ The ERO's
``standards process manager'' will assemble a team with relevant
expertise to address the clarification and also form a ballot pool.
NERC's Rules provide that, within 45 days, the team will draft an
interpretation of the Reliability Standard, with subsequent balloting.
If approved by ballot, the interpretation is appended to the
Reliability Standard and filed with the applicable regulatory authority
for regulatory approval.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ NERC Rules of Procedure, Appendix 3A (Reliability Standards
Development Procedure), at 26-27.
\8\ We note that the NERC board of trustees approved the
interpretations of Reliability Standards submitted by NERC for
approval in this proceeding. However, Appendix 3A of NERC's Rules of
Procedure is silent on NERC board of trustees approval of
interpretations before they are filed with the regulatory authority.
The Commission is concerned that NERC's Rules of Procedure do not
properly reflect this approval step.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. NERC Filings
6. As explained in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR),\9\
this rulemaking proceeding consolidates and addresses three NERC
filings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Modification of Interchange and Transmission Loading Relief
Reliability Standards; and Electric Reliability Organization
Interpretation of Specific Requirements of Four Reliability
Standards, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 73 FR 22,856 (Apr. 28,
2008), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,632 (2008) (NOPR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. On December 19, 2007, NERC submitted for Commission approval
five interpretations of requirements in four Commission-approved
Reliability Standards: BAL-001-0 (Real Power Balancing Control
Performance), Requirement R1; BAL-003-0 (Frequency Response and Bias),
Requirement R3; BAL-005-0 (Automatic Generation Control), Requirement
R17; and VAR-002-1 (Generator Operation for Maintaining Network Voltage
Schedules), Requirements R1 and R2.\10\ On April 15, 2008, NERC
submitted a petition to withdraw the earlier request for approval of
NERC's interpretation of BAL-003-0, Requirement R17, and instead to
approve a second interpretation of Requirement R17 submitted by NERC in
the April 15 filing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ In its filing, NERC identifies the Reliability Standards
together with NERC's proposed interpretations as BAL-001-0a, BAL-
003-0a, BAL-005-0a, and VAR-002-1a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. On December 21, 2007, NERC submitted for Commission approval
modifications to Reliability Standard IRO-006-4 (Reliability
Coordination--Transmission Loading Relief) that applies to balancing
authorities, reliability coordinators, and transmission operators.
According to NERC, the modifications ``extract'' from the Reliability
Standard the business practices and commercial requirements from the
current IRO-006-3 Reliability Standard. The business practices and
commercial requirements have been transferred to a North American
Energy Standards Board (NAESB) business practices document. The NAESB
business practices and commercial requirements have been included in
Version 001 of the NAESB Wholesale Electric Quadrant (WEQ) Standards
which NAESB filed with the Commission on the same day, December 21,
2007.\11\ Further, the modified Reliability Standard includes changes
directed by the Commission in Order No. 693 related to the
appropriateness of using the TLR procedure to mitigate violations of
interconnection reliability operating limits (IROL).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ NAESB December 21, 2007 Filing, Docket No. RM05-5-005.
\12\ An IROL is a system operating limit that, if violated,
could lead to instability, uncontrolled separation, or cascading
outages that adversely impact the reliability of the Bulk-Power
System.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. On December 26, 2007, NERC submitted for Commission approval
modifications to five Reliability Standards from the ``Interchange
Scheduling'' (INT) group of Reliability Standards: INT-001-3
(Interchange Information); INT-004-2 (Dynamic Interchange Transaction
Modifications); INT-005-2 (Interchange Authority Distributes Arranged
Interchange); INT-006-2 (Response to Interchange Authority); and INT-
008-2 (Interchange Authority Distributes Status). NERC stated that the
modifications to INT-001-3 and INT-004-2 eliminate waivers requested in
2002 under the voluntary Reliability Standards regime for entities in
the WECC region. According to NERC, modifications to INT-005-2, INT-
006-2, and INT-008-2 adjust reliability assessment time frames for
proposed transactions within WECC.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ The Reliability Standards and interpretations addressed in
this Final Rule are available on the Commission's eLibrary document
retrieval system in Docket No. RM08-7-000 and also on NERC's Web
site, https://www.nerc.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Each Reliability Standard that the ERO proposed to interpret or
modify in this proceeding was approved by the Commission in Order No.
693.
C. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
11. On April 21, 2008, the Commission issued a NOPR that proposed
to approve the six modified Reliability Standards submitted to the
Commission for approval by NERC and to approve NERC's proposed
interpretations of five specific requirements of Commission-approved
Reliability Standards. On May 16, 2008, the Commission supplemented the
NOPR,\14\ proposing to approve NERC's modified interpretation of
Reliability Standard BAL-005-0, Requirement R17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Modification of Interchange and Transmission Loading Relief
Reliability Standards; and Electric Reliability Organization
Interpretation of Specific Requirements of Four Reliability
Standards, Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 73 FR 30,326
(May 27, 2008), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,635 (2008) (Supplemental
NOPR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. In response to the NOPR, comments were filed by the following
eight interested persons: Alcoa Inc. (Alcoa); Independent Electricity
System Operator of Ontario (IESO); ISO/RTO Council; International
Transmission Company, Michigan Electric Transmission Company, LLC and
Midwest LLC (collectively, ITC); Lafayette Utilities and the Louisiana
Energy and Power Authority (Lafayette
[[Page 43616]]
and LEPA); NERC; NRG Companies; \15\ and Southern Company Services,
Inc. (Southern).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ NRG Companies includes Louisiana Generating LLC, Bayou Cove
Peaking Power, LLC, Big Cajun I Peaking Power, LLC, NRG Sterlington
Power, LLC, and NRG Power Marketing, LLC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Discussion
A. NERC's December 19, 2007 Filing: Interpretations of Reliability
Standards
13. As mentioned above, NERC submitted for Commission approval
interpretations of five specific requirements in four Commission-
approved Reliability Standards.
1. BAL-001-0--Real Power Balancing Control Performance and BAL-003-0--
Frequency Response and Bias
14. The purpose of Reliability Standard BAL-001-0 is to maintain
interconnection steady-state frequency within defined limits by
balancing real power demand and supply in real-time.\16\ It uses two
averages, covering the one-minute and ten-minute area control error
(ACE) performance (CPS1 and CPS2, respectively), as measures for
determining compliance with its four Requirements. Requirement R1 of
BAL-001-0 obligates each balancing authority, on a rolling twelve-month
basis, to maintain its clock-minute averages of ACE, modified by its
frequency bias and the interconnection frequency, within a specific
limit based on historic performance.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See Reliability Standard BAL-001-0. Each Reliability
Standard developed by the ERO includes a ``Purpose'' statement.
\17\ Frequency bias is an approximation, expressed in megawatts
per 0.1 Hertz, of the frequency response of a balancing authority
area which estimates the net change in power from the generators
that is expected to occur with a change in interconnection frequency
from the scheduled frequency (which is normally 60 Hertz).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. The purpose of Reliability Standard BAL-003-0 is to ensure that
a balancing authority's frequency bias setting is accurately calculated
to match its actual frequency response. Frequency bias may be
calculated in a number of ways provided that the frequency bias is as
close as practical to the frequency response. Requirement R3 of BAL-
003-0 requires each balancing authority to operate its automatic
generation control on ``tie line frequency bias,'' unless such
operation is adverse to system interconnection reliability.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Automatic generation control refers to an automatic process
whereby a balancing authority's mix and output of its generation and
demand-side management is varied to offset the extent of supply and
demand imbalances reflected in its ACE. North American Electric
Reliability Corporation, 121 FERC ] 61,179, at P 19 n.14 (2007).
``Tie line frequency bias'' is defined in the NERC Glossary of Terms
Used in Reliability Standards as ``[a] mode of Automatic Generation
Control that allows the Balancing Authority to 1.) maintain its
Interchange Schedule and 2.) respond to Interconnection frequency
error.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
a. Proposed Interpretation
16. In its December 19, 2007 filing, NERC explained that WECC
requested the ERO to provide a formal interpretation whether the use of
WECC's existing automatic time error correction factor that is applied
to the net interchange portion of the ACE equation violates Requirement
R1 of BAL-001-0 or Requirement R3 of BAL-003-0.
17. In response, the ERO interpreted BAL-001-0 Requirement R1 as
follows:
The [WECC automatic time error correction or WATEC]
procedural documents ask Balancing Authorities to maintain raw ACE for
[control performance standard or CPS] reporting and to control via
WATEC-adjusted ACE.
As long as Balancing Authorities use raw (unadjusted for
WATEC) ACE for CPS reporting purposes, the use of WATEC for control is
not in violation of BAL-001 Requirement 1.
The ERO interpreted BAL-003-0 Requirement R3 as follows:
Tie-Line Frequency Bias is one of the three foundational
control modes available in a Balancing Authority's energy management
system. (The other two are flat-tie and flat-frequency.) Many Balancing
Authorities layer other control objectives on top of their basic
control mode, such as automatic inadvertent payback, [control
performance standard] optimization, [and] time control (in single
[balancing authority] interconnections).\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ The ``flat frequency'' control mode would increase or
decrease generation solely based on the interconnection frequency.
The ``flat tie'' mode would increase or decrease generation within a
balancing authority area depending solely on that balancing
authority's total interchange. The ``tie-line frequency bias'' mode
combines the flat frequency and flat tie modes and adjusts
generation based on the balancing authority's net interchange and
the interconnection frequency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As long as Tie-Line Frequency Bias is the underlying
control mode and CPS1 is measured and reported on the associated ACE
equation,\20\ there is no violation of BAL-003-0 Requirement 3:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ ``CPS1'' refers to Requirement R1 of BAL-001-0.
ACE = (NIA-NIS)-10B (FA-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FS)-IME
(NERC December 19, 2007 Filing, Ex. A-3.)
18. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to approve the ERO's
formal interpretations of Requirement R1 of BAL-001-0 and Requirement
R3 of BAL-003-0.
b. Comments
19. NERC and IESO support the Commission's proposal to approve
these interpretations.
c. Commission Determination
20. The Commission approves the ERO's formal interpretations of
Requirement R1 of BAL-001-0 and Requirement R3 of BAL-003-0. The ERO's
interpretation of BAL-001-0, Requirement R1, is reasonable in that it
requires all balancing authorities in WECC to calculate CPS1 and CPS2
as defined in the Requirements. Thus, the interpretation upholds the
reliability goal to minimize the frequency deviation of the
interconnection by constantly balancing supply and demand.
21. The ERO's interpretation of BAL-003-0, Requirement R3 is
appropriate because it maintains the goal of Requirement R3 by
obligating a balancing authority to operate automatic generation
control on tie-line frequency bias as its underlying control mode,
unless to do so is adverse to system or interconnection reliability.
Further, the interpretation fosters the purpose of Requirement R3, as
it allows that a balancing authority may go beyond Requirement R3 and
``layer other control objectives on top of their basic control modes,
such as automatic inadvertent payback, [control performance standard]
optimization, [and] time control (in single [balancing authority]
interconnections),'' \21\ although such layering is not required by the
Reliability Standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ NERC interpretation of BAL-003-0, Requirement R3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
22. For the reasons stated above, the Commission finds that the
ERO's interpretations of Requirement R1 of BAL-001-0 and Requirement R3
of BAL-003-0 are just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or
preferential, and in the public interest. Accordingly, the Commission
approves the ERO's interpretations.
2. Requirement R17 of BAL-005-0--Automatic Generation Control
a. Proposed Interpretation
23. Requirement R17 of Reliability Standard BAL-005-0 is intended
to annually check and calibrate the time error and frequency devices
under the control of the balancing authority that feed data into
automatic generation control necessary to calculate ACE. Requirement
R17 mandates that the balancing authority must adhere to an annual
calibration program for time error and frequency devices. The
[[Page 43617]]
requirement states that a balancing authority must adhere to minimum
accuracies in terms of ranges specified in Hertz, volts, amps, etc.,
for various listed devices, such as digital frequency transducers,
voltage transducers, remote terminal unit, potential transformers, and
current transformers.
24. On April 15, 2008, NERC submitted an interpretation of
Requirement R17 regarding the type and location of the equipment to
which Requirement R17 applies.\22\ The interpretation provides that
BAL-005-0, Requirement R17
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ As mentioned earlier, in April 2008, NERC submitted a
petition seeking to withdraw an earlier interpretation of
Requirement R17 and substituting a new interpretation for Commission
approval.
applies only to the time error and frequency devices that provide,
or in the case of back-up equipment may provide, input into the
reporting or compliance ACE equation or provide real-time time error
or frequency information to the system operator. Frequency inputs
from other sources that are for reference only are excluded. The
time error and frequency measurement devices may not necessarily be
located in the system operations control room or owned by the
Balancing Authority; however the Balancing Authority has the
responsibility for the accuracy of the frequency and time error
devices * * *.
New or replacement equipment that provides the same functions
noted above requires the same calibrations. Some devices used for
time error and frequency measurement cannot be calibrated as such.
In this case, these devices should be cross-checked against other
properly calibrated equipment and replaced if the devices do not
meet the required level of accuracy.
25. In a supplemental NOPR issued May 16, 2008, the Commission
proposed to approve NERC's interpretation of BAL-005-0, Requirement
R17. In addition, the Commission noted that tie-line megawatt metering
data is an important aspect of ensuring the accurate calculation of
ACE, and the interpretation limits the specific accuracy requirements
of Requirement R17 to frequency and time error measurement devices. The
Commission asked for comment on (1) whether the interpretation could
decrease the accuracy of frequency and time error measurements by not
requiring calibration of tie-line megawatt metering devices; (2) what
conditions would preclude the requirement to calibrate these devices;
and (3) whether the accuracy of these devices is assured by other
requirements within BAL-005-0 in the absence of calibration.
b. Comments
i. Whether Interpretation Could Decrease Accuracy of Frequency and Time
Error Measurements
26. Southern, ITC, ISO/RTO Council, and NERC claim that the
interpretation could not decrease the accuracy of frequency and time
error measurements by not requiring calibration of tie-line megawatt
metering devices because tie-line metering data is not an input to
either time error or frequency measurements and has no impact on the
accuracy of these devices. NERC further suggests that the Commission
may have intended to ask whether the interpretation adversely affects
the accuracy of the balancing authority ACE calculation. NERC provides
that it does not, because calibration of tie-line metering historically
was included in the guide section of NERC Operating Policy 1 and was
not intended to be translated into a requirement. NERC asserts that
calibration of tie-line metering remains a sound practice and there are
safeguards, checks, and balances to ensure inadvertent flows in the
interconnection equal zero, thus ensuring that errors in ACE are
bounded to protect the interconnections.
27. As a general comment on the proposed interpretation of
Requirement R17, Southern suggests that the metering specifications
table in Requirement R17 may be creating some confusion because the
NERC committee that developed this Reliability Standard intended to
include the frequency metering specifications from this table but
inadvertently included other metering specifications that are not
required to fulfill Requirement R17. Southern claims that Requirement
R17 is intended to only address time error and frequency devices, and
this table was added in error and should have been limited to
specifications for those devices.
ii. What Conditions Would Preclude Requirement To Calibrate Devices
28. NERC, ISO/RTO Council, and Southern claim that there are no
conditions which would preclude the requirement to calibrate tie-line
megawatt metering devices. NERC suggests that, if the question relates
to a possible new requirement to calibrate all tie-line metering
equipment on a given schedule, a new standards authorization request
should be submitted through the Reliability Standards Development
Process. NERC believes that the industry may not want to divert
resources away from other important tasks unless a case can be made
that calibration of these devices presents a risk to reliability.
Similarly, ITC comments that, if the Commission believes it is
necessary to annually calibrate the tie-line megawatt metering devices,
such a requirement belongs in BAL-005-0 and not in Requirement R17.
ISO/RTO Council claims such a requirement is unnecessary because it is
redundant, not needed for reliability, and poses the possibility of
financial sanctions for no good reason.
29. ITC states that tie-line meters would be precluded from
calibration requirements if they are digital devices that the equipment
vendor has indicated do not require calibration. They claim that there
are no field calibration procedures which can be performed by end-users
for such devices. According to ITC, Requirement R17 of BAL-005-0 should
recognize that there are modern digital devices that do not require
calibration as analog devices do.
iii. Whether Accuracy of Devices Is Assured by Other Requirements
30. NERC, ITC, ISO/RTO Council, and Southern state that tie-line
metering accuracy is addressed by Requirement R13 of BAL-005-0, which
requires each balancing authority to perform hourly error checks using
tie-line megawatt-hour meters with common time synchronization to
determine the accuracy of its control equipment and make adjustments
accordingly. ITC claims that Requirement R13 of BAL-005-0 provides a
more timely identification of errors than a requirement for annual
calibration.
31. NERC comments that tie-line metering accuracy is not assured by
any other requirement. According to NERC, requirements relating to
Reliability Standards BAL-005-0 and BAL-006-1, along with the
associated NERC processes, provide several layers of overlapping
protection to address tie-line accuracy. NERC further claims that BAL-
005-0 requires balancing authorities to operate in conformance with
common metering equipment in comparison to that of their neighbors, so
there is no net balancing authority error in the interconnection as a
whole. In addition, NERC claims that many balancing authorities have
secondary or backup metering on critical tie lines and have access to
the NERC Resource Adequacy application, which can provide alerts to the
balancing authority of tie-line metering errors.
c. Commission Determination
32. The Commission approves the ERO's formal interpretation of
Requirement R17 of BAL-005-0 as set forth in the ERO's April 2008
filing. Based on the comments, we find that
[[Page 43618]]
this interpretation will not decrease the accuracy of frequency and
time error measurements by not requiring calibration of tie-line
megawatt metering devices. In addition, we are persuaded by the
commenters that the need to calibrate tie-line megawatt metering
devices is addressed by other requirements such as Requirement R13 that
require hourly checks to ensure continuous accuracy. The Commission
notes that the applicable requirement for the accuracy of calibration
of tie-line megawatt metering devices is identified in Requirement R17.
While Southern has stated that the metering specifications table in
Requirement R17 was added in error, an interpretation cannot change the
substance of a Reliability Standard. Notwithstanding the question of
relevancy of particular components of the metering specifications
table, the accuracy requirements of this table remain part of
Reliability Standard BAL-005-0 as reference for mandatory reliability
practices. The Commission encourages further clarification of tie-line
metering device calibration requirements through the ERO standards
development process.
33. ITC comments that digital devices are precluded from the
calibration requirement. We note that the interpretation provides that
``[s]ome devices used for time error and frequency measurement cannot
be calibrated as such. In this case, these devices should be cross-
checked against other properly calibrated equipment and replaced if the
devices do not meet the required level of accuracy.'' Thus, while ITC's
comment is accurate, the ERO's interpretation acknowledges the concern
and provides a response, i.e., modern digital devices that cannot be
calibrated must be cross-checked against other equipment and replaced
if they do not meet the required level of accuracy.
34. The ERO's interpretation of BAL-005-0, Requirement R17 provides
that ``frequency inputs from other sources that are for reference only
are excluded.'' The Commission notes that this Reliability Standard
establishes requirements concerning the inputs to the ACE equation to
correctly operate automatic generation control. Frequency inputs used
for other purposes are not covered by this Reliability Standard.
Therefore, we understand the ERO's interpretation to exclude frequency
devices that do not provide input into the reporting or compliance with
the ACE equation or provide real-time time error or frequency
information to the system operator. Any devices that provide reference
input from which a balancing authority calibrates other time error and
frequency devices, however, do provide real-time time error and
frequency information to the system operator and therefore must be
calibrated under this requirement.
3. Requirements R1 and R2 of VAR-002-1 Generator Operation for
Maintaining Network Voltage Schedules
a. Proposed Interpretations
35. The stated purpose of Reliability Standard VAR-002-1 is to
ensure that generators provide reactive and voltage control necessary
to ensure that voltage levels, reactive flows, and reactive resources
are maintained within applicable facility ratings to protect equipment
and the reliable operation of the interconnection. Requirement R1
ofVAR-002-1 provides:
The Generator Operator shall operate each generator connected to
the interconnected transmission system in the automatic voltage
control mode (automatic voltage regulator in service and controlling
voltage) unless the Generator Operator has notified the Transmission
Operator.
Requirement R2 provides:
Unless exempted by the Transmission Operator, each Generator
Operator shall maintain the generator voltage or Reactive Power
output (within applicable Facility Ratings) as directed by the
Transmission Operator.
36. The ERO received a request to provide a formal interpretation
of Requirements R1 and R2. The request first asked whether automatic
voltage regulator operation in the constant power factor or constant
Mvar modes complies with Requirement R1. Second, the request asked the
ERO whether Requirement R2 gives the transmission operator the option
of directing the generation owner to operate the automatic voltage
regulator in the constant power factor or constant Mvar modes rather
than the constant voltage mode.
37. NERC's formal interpretation provides that a generator operator
that is operating its automatic voltage regulator in the constant power
factor or constant Mvar modes does not comply with Requirement R1.\23\
The interpretation rests on the assumptions that the generator has the
physical equipment that will allow such operation and that the
transmission operator has not directed the generator to run in a mode
other than constant voltage. The interpretation also provides that
Requirement R2 gives the transmission operator the option of directing
the generation operator to operate the automatic voltage regulator in
the constant power factor or constant Mvar modes rather than the
constant voltage mode.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ NERC's interpretation of VAR-002-1, Requirement R1 is
quoted in full in the NOPR, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,632 at P 32,
n.27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
38. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to approve the ERO's
interpretation of Requirement R1 and Requirement R2 of VAR-002-1.
b. Comments
39. NERC and IESO support the Commission's proposal to approve the
interpretation.
c. Commission Determination
40. The Commission concludes that the interpretation is just,
reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the
public interest. Therefore, the Commission approves the ERO's
interpretation of Requirements R1 and R2 of VAR-002-1.
B. NERC's December 21, 2007 Filing: Modification of TLR Procedure
41. NERC submitted for Commission approval proposed Reliability
Standard IRO-006-4, which modifies the Commission-approved Reliability
Standard, IRO-006-3.
1. Background
42. In Order No. 693, the Commission approved an earlier version of
this Reliability Standard, IRO-006-3. This Reliability Standard ensures
that a reliability coordinator has a coordinated transmission service
curtailment and reconfiguration method that can be used along with
other alternatives, such as redispatch or demand-side management, to
avoid transmission limit violations when the transmission system is
congested. Reliability Standard IRO-006-3 established a detailed TLR
procedure for use in the Eastern Interconnection to alleviate loadings
on the system by curtailing or changing transactions based on their
priorities and the severity of the transmission congestion. The
Reliability Standard referenced other procedures for WECC and Electric
Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT).\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ The equivalent interconnection-wide TLR procedures for use
in WECC and ERCOT are known as ``WSCC Unscheduled Flow Mitigation
Plan'' and section 7 of the ``ERCOT Protocols,'' respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. ERO TLR Filing, Reliability Standard IRO-006-4
43. In its December 2007 filing, NERC submitted for Commission
approval a modified TLR procedure, Reliability Standard IRO-006-4,
which contains five requirements. Requirement R1 obligates a
reliability coordinator experiencing a potential or actual system
operating limit (SOL) or IROL
[[Page 43619]]
violation within its reliability coordinator area to select one or more
procedures to provide transmission loading relief. The requirement also
identifies the regional TLR procedures in WECC and ERCOT.
3. NOPR
44. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to approve IRO-006-4 as
just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the
public interest.\25\ The Commission also proposed to approve the
Reliability Standard based on the interpretation that using a TLR
procedure to mitigate an IROL violation is a violation of the
Reliability Standard. The Commission asked for comments on whether any
compromise in the reliability of the Bulk-Power System may result from
the removal and transfer to NAESB of the business-related issues
formerly contained in Reliability Standard IRO-006-3. In addition, the
Commission proposed to direct the ERO to modify the violation risk
factors assigned to Requirements R1 through R4 by raising them to
``high.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ NOPR, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,632 at P 48.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Comments
45. The Commission received comments on the NOPR proposal. Because
the Final Rule does not approve or remand the proposed Reliability
Standard and, rather, directs the ERO to submit a filing that provides
an explanation regarding specific language of one requirement of IRO-
006-4, the Commission will address the comments in a future issuance in
this proceeding.
5. Commission Determination
46. Because the Commission has concern regarding the understanding
of certain language of Requirements R1 and R1.1 of IRO-006-4, the
Commission is not approving or remanding the proposed Reliability
Standard at this time. Rather, the Commission directs that the ERO,
within 15 days of the effective date of this Final Rule, submit a
filing that provides an explanation regarding specific language of
Requirements R1 and R1.1 of IRO-006-4. The Commission will then issue a
notice allowing public comment on the ERO's filing, and will act on the
proposed Reliability Standard in a future issuance in this proceeding.
47. In the Final Blackout Report, an international team of experts
studying the causes of the August 2003 blackout in North America
recommended that NERC ``[c]larify that the transmission loading relief
(TLR) process should not be used in situations involving an actual
violation of an Operation Security Limit.'' \26\ Based on the Final
Blackout Report recommendation, the Commission, in Order No. 693,
directed NERC to develop a modification to the TLR procedure (IRO-006-
3) that ``(1) includes a clear warning that the TLR procedure is an
inappropriate and ineffective tool to mitigate actual IROL violations
and (2) identifies in a Requirement the available alternatives to
mitigate an IROL violation other than use of the TLR procedure.'' \27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task Force, Final
Report on the August 14, 2003 Blackout in the United States and
Canada: Causes and Recommendations, at 163 (April 2004) (Final
Blackout Report) (Recommendation 31).
\27\ See Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242 at P 577,
964.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
48. In response to this directive, NERC proposed in Requirement
R1.1 of IRO-006-4 that ``[t]he TLR procedure [for the Eastern
Interconnection] alone is an inappropriate and ineffective tool to
mitigate an IROL violation due to the time required to implement the
procedure.'' (Emphasis added.) The Commission is concerned whether this
language is adequate to satisfy the concern of the Final Blackout
Report and Order No. 693. Specifically, we note that the use of the
term ``alone'' seems to imply that a TLR procedure could be used in
response to an actual violation of an IROL whereas the Final Blackout
Report recommendation would prevent the use of the TLR procedure in
such situations. Moreover, Requirement R1 of IRO-006-4 further appears
to contradict the Final Blackout Report recommendation by allowing a
reliability coordinator to implement transmission loading relief
procedures to mitigate not only potential SOL or IROL violations but
also actual SOL or IROL violations.\28\ The Commission is concerned
that Recommendation 31 of the Final Blackout Report and the directive
in Order No. 693, both of which state the TLR procedures should not be
used in situations involving an actual violation of an IROL, may not be
clearly addressed in the proposed Reliability Standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Requirement R1 provides that ``[a] reliability Coordinator
experiencing a potential or actual SOL or IROL violation within its
Reliability Coordinator Area shall, with its authority and at its
discretion, select one or more procedures to provide transmission
loading relief. This procedure can be a ``local'' * * * transmission
loading relief procedure or one of the following Interconnection-
wide procedures.* * *'' Sub-requirement R1.1 provides that ``[t]he
TLR procedure alone is an inappropriate and ineffective tool to
mitigate an IROL violation due to the time required to implement the
procedure. Other acceptable and more effective procedures to
mitigate actual IROL violations include: Reconfiguration,
redispatch, or load shedding.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
49. The Commission notes that an entity is not prevented from using
the TLR procedure to avoid a potential IROL violation before a
violation occurs. If, while a TLR procedure is in progress, an IROL
violation occurs, it is not necessary for the entity to terminate the
TLR procedure. However, the Commission believes that it is
inappropriate and ineffective to rely on the TLR procedure, even in
conjunction with another tool, to address an actual IROL violation.
50. Therefore, the Commission does not approve or remand IRO-006-4.
Rather, the Commission directs the ERO to submit a filing, within 15
days of the effective date of this Final Rule, that provides an
explanation regarding Requirements R1 and R1.1 of IRO-006-4.
Specifically, in light of the above discussion, the Commission directs
the ERO to provide an explanation regarding the phrase ``[t]he TLR
procedure alone is an inappropriate and ineffective tool to mitigate an
IROL violation * * *'' Further, the ERO should explain whether
Requirements R1 and R1.1 only allow the TLR procedure to be continued
when already deployed prior to an actual IROL violation or,
alternatively, whether Requirements R1 and R1.1 allow use of the TLR
procedure as a tool to address actual violations after they occur. If
the latter, the ERO is directed to explain why this application is not
contrary to both Blackout Report Recommendation 31 and the Commission's
determination in Order No. 693. The ERO's filing should include an
explanation of those actions that are acceptable, and those that are
unacceptable, pursuant to Requirement R1 and R1.1.
C. NERC's December 26, 2007 Filing: Modification to Five ``Interchange
and Scheduling'' Reliability Standards
51. NERC submitted for Commission approval proposed modifications
to five Reliability Standards from the INT group of Reliability
Standards.
1. INT-001-3--Interchange Information and INT-004-2--Dynamic
Interchange Transaction Modifications
52. The Interchange Scheduling and Coordination or ``INT'' group of
Reliability Standards address interchange transactions, which occur
when electricity is transmitted from a seller to a buyer across the
Bulk-Power System. Reliability Standard INT-001 applies to purchasing-
selling entities and balancing authorities. The stated purpose of the
Reliability Standard is to ``ensure that Interchange Information is
submitted to the NERC-identified reliability analysis service.''
Reliability
[[Page 43620]]
Standard INT-004 is intended to ``ensure Dynamic Transfers are
adequately tagged to be able to determine their reliability impacts.''
53. In Order No. 693, the Commission approved earlier versions of
these Reliability Standards, INT-001-2 and INT-004-1.\29\ Further, when
NERC initially (in April 2006) submitted these two Reliability
Standards for Commission approval, NERC also asked the Commission to
approve a ``regional difference'' that would exempt WECC from
requirements related to tagging dynamic schedules and inadvertent
payback provisions of INT-001-2 and INT-004-1. The Commission, in Order
No. 693, stated that it did not have sufficient information to address
the ERO's proposed regional difference and directed the ERO to submit a
filing either withdrawing the regional difference or providing
additional information needed for the Commission to make a
determination on the matter.\30\ The effect of NERC's December 26, 2007
filing is to withdraw the regional difference with respect to WECC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242 at P 821, 843.
In addition, the Commission directed that the ERO develop
modifications to INT-001-2 and INT-004-1 that address the
Commission's concerns.
\30\ Id. P 825.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
54. In its December 26, 2007 filing, NERC stated that, by
rescinding the e-tagging waivers, NERC maintains uniformity and makes
no structural changes to the requirements in the current Commission-
approved version of the Reliability Standards.
55. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to approve INT-001-3 and
INT-004-2.
a. Comments
56. NERC and the IESO support the Commission's proposal to approve
these Reliability Standards.
b. Commission Determination
57. Pursuant to section 215(d) of the FPA, the Commission approves
Reliability Standards INT-001-3 and INT-004-2 as mandatory and
enforceable.
2. INT-005-2--Interchange Authority Distributes Arranged Interchange,
INT-006-2--Response to Interchange Authority, and INT-008-2--
Interchange Authority Distributes Status
58. Reliability Standard INT-005-1 applies to the interchange
authority. The stated purpose of proposed Reliability Standard INT-005-
1 is to ``ensure that the implementation of Interchange between Source
and Sink Balancing Authorities is distributed by an Interchange
Authority such that Interchange information is available for
reliability assessments.''
59. Reliability Standard INT-006-1 applies to balancing authorities
and transmission service providers. The stated purpose of the
Reliability Standard is to ``ensure that each Arranged Interchange is
checked for reliability before it is implemented.''
60. Reliability Standard INT-008-1 applies to the interchange
authority. The stated purpose of the Reliability Standard is to
``ensure that the implementation of Interchange between Source and Sink
Balancing Authorities is coordinated by an Interchange Authority.''
This means that it is an interchange authority's responsibility to
oversee and coordinate the interchange from one balancing authority to
another.
61. In its December 26, 2007 filing, NERC addressed a reliability
need identified by WECC in its urgent action request. Specifically,
Requirement R1.4 of INT-007-1 requires that each balancing authority
and transmission service provider provide confirmation to the
interchange authority that it has approved the transactions for
implementation. NERC stated that for WECC the timeframe allotted for
this assessment is five minutes in the original version of the
Commission-approved Reliability Standards.
62. Reliability Standards for INT-005-2, INT-006-2, and INT-008-2
increase the timeframe for applicable WECC entities to perform the
reliability assessment from five to ten minutes for next hour
interchange tags submitted in the first thirty minutes of the hour
before. According to NERC, this modification is needed because the
majority of next-hour tags in WECC are submitted between xx and xx:30.
The existing five minute assessment window makes it nearly impossible
for balancing authorities and transmission service providers to review
each tag before the five minute assessment time expires. According to
NERC, when the time expires, the tags are denied and must be
resubmitted.
63. In its December 26, 2007 filing, NERC stated that WECC has
experienced numerous instances of transactions being denied because one
or more applicable reliability entities did not actively approve the
tag. In NERC's view, the current structure causes frustration and
inefficiencies for entities involved in this process, as requestors are
required to re-create tags that are denied. Further, NERC stated that
there is no reliability basis for a five minute assessment period for
tags submitted at least thirty minutes ahead of the ramp-in period.
64. NERC noted that, prior to January 1, 2007, when the new INT
group of Reliability Standards was implemented, WECC had a ten-minute
reliability assessment period for next-hour tags. NERC states that the
urgent action request restores assessment times back to ten minutes.
65. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to approve INT-005-2, INT-
006-2, and INT-008-2.
a. Comments
66. NERC and IESO support the Commission's proposal to approve
these Reliability Standards.
b. Commission Determination
67. Pursuant to section 215(d) of the FPA, the Commission approves
Reliability Standards INT-005-2, INT-006-2, and INT-008-2 as mandatory
and enforceable.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ The Commission notes that NERC's compliance with Order No.
693, with respect to Reliability Standard INT-006-1, is ongoing. See
Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242 at P 866.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Information Collection Statement
68. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations require
that OMB approve certain reporting and recordkeeping (collections of
information) imposed by an agency.\32\ The information contained here
is also subject to review under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995.\33\ As stated above, the Commission previously
approved, in Order No. 693, each of the Reliability Standards that are
the subject of the current rulemaking. In the NOPR, the Commission
explained that the modifications to the Reliability Standards are minor
and the interpretations relate to existing Reliability Standards;
therefore, they do not add to or increase entities' reporting burden.
Thus, in the NOPR, the Commission stated that the modified Reliability
Standards and interpretations of Reliability Standards do not
materially affect the burden estimates relating to the earlier version
of the Reliability Standards presented in Order No. 693.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ 5 CFR 1320.11.
\33\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
\34\ See Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242 at P 1905-
07. The NOPR, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,632 at P 76-78, provided a
detailed explanation why each modification and interpretation has a
negligible, if any, effect on the reporting burden.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
69. In response to the NOPR, the Commission received no comments
concerning its estimate for the burden and costs and therefore uses the
same estimate here.
[[Page 43621]]
Title: Modification of Interchange and Transmission Loading Relief
Reliability Standards; and Electric Reliability Organization
Interpretation of Specific Requirements of Four Reliability Standards.
Action: Proposed Collection.
OMB Control No.: 1902-0244.
Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit institutions; not-for-
profit institutions.
Frequency of Responses: On Occasion.
Necessity of the Information: This Final Rule approves five
modified Reliability Standards that pertain to interchange scheduling
and coordination. It directs NERC to make a filing with the Commission
regarding one modified Reliability Standard that pertains to
transmission loading relief procedures. In addition, the Final Rule
approves interpretations of five specific requirements of Commission-
approved Reliability Standards. The Final Rule finds the Reliability
Standards and interpretations just, reasonable, not unduly
discriminatory or preferential, and in the public interest.
70. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting
requirements by contacting: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Attn:
Michael Miller, Office of the Executive Director, 888 First Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20426, Tel: (202) 502-8415, Fax: (202) 273-0873, E-
mail: michael.miller@ferc.gov, or by contacting: Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (Re: OMB Control No. 1902-0244), Washington, DC
20503, Tel: (202) 395-4650, Fax: (202) 395-7285, E-mail: oira_
submission@omb.eop.gov.
IV. Environmental Analysis
71. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental
Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may
have a significant adverse effect on the human environment.\35\ The
Commission has categorically excluded certain actions from this
requirement as not having a significant effect on the human
environment. Included in the exclusion are rules that are clarifying,
corrective, or procedural or that do not substantially change the
effect of the regulations being amended.\36\ The actions proposed
herein fall within this categorical exclusion in the Commission's
regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, Order No. 486, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 30,783 (1987).
\36\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act
72. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \37\ generally
requires a description and analysis of final rules that will have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The RFA mandates consideration of regulatory alternatives that
accomplish the stated objectives of a proposed rule and that minimize
any significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The Small Business Administration's Office of Size Standards
develops the numerical definition of a small business. (See 13 CFR
121.201.) For electric utilities, a firm is small if, including its
affiliates, it is primarily engaged in the transmission, generation
and/or distribution of electric energy for sale and its total electric
output for the preceding twelve months did not exceed four million
megawatt hours. The RFA is not implicated by this Final Rule because
the minor modifications and interpretations discussed herein will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ 5 U.S.C. 601-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Document Availability
73. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register , the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
Internet through FERC's Home Page (https://www.ferc.gov) and in FERC's
Public Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Eastern time) at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426.
74. From FERC's Home Page on the Internet, this information is
available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on
eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or
downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket
number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket
number field.
75. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the FERC's Web
site during normal business hours from FERC Online Support at (202)
502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or e-mail at
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY (202) 502-8659. E-mail the Public Reference Room at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification
76. These regulations are effective August 27, 2008. The Commission
has determined, with the concurrence of the Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, that this rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined in section 351 of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996.
List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 40
Electric power, Electric utilities, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
By the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E8-17196 Filed 7-25-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P