Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols for Public Utilities, 14654-14664 [2013-04433]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
14654
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 45 / Thursday, March 7, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
not expected to cause any potentially
significant environmental impacts, and
no extraordinary circumstances exist
that warrant preparation of an
environmental assessment.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71
Airspace, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (Air).
Sault Ste Marie Airport extending from the
5-mile radius of the airport to 9.6 miles
southeast of the airport.
Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on February
12, 2013.
David P. Medina,
Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO
Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2013–05220 Filed 3–6–13; 8:45 am]
Adoption of the Amendment
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A,
B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND
REPORTING POINTS
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR
part 71 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113,
40120; E. O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959–
1963 Comp., p. 389.
§ 71.1
Paragraph 6004: Class E airspace
designated as an extension to a Class D or
Class E surface area
*
*
*
AGL ON E4 Sault Ste Marie, ON
[Amended]
Sault Ste Marie Airport, ON, Canada
(Lat. 46°29′06″ N., long. 84°30′34″ W.)
That airspace in the United States
extending upward from the surface within
1.6 miles each side of the 118° bearing from
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
[Docket No. RM05–5–020; Order No. 676–
G]
Standards for Business Practices and
Communication Protocols for Public
Utilities
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
2. The incorporation by reference in
14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal Aviation
Administration Order 7400.9W,
Airspace Designations and Reporting
Points, dated August 8, 2012, and
effective September 15, 2012, is
amended as follows:
*
18 CFR Part 38
AGENCY:
[Amended]
■
*
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
SUMMARY: The Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (Commission) is
amending its regulations which
establish standards for business
practices and electronic
communications for public utilities to
incorporate by reference updated
business practice standards adopted by
the Wholesale Electric Quadrant of the
North American Energy Standards
Board to categorize various products
and services for demand response and
energy efficiency and to support the
measurement and verification of these
products and services in organized
wholesale electric markets. These
standards provide common definitions
and processes regarding demand
response and energy efficiency products
in organized wholesale electric markets
where such products are offered. The
standards also require each regional
transmission organization (RTO) and
independent system operator (ISO) to
address in the RTO or ISO’s governing
documents the performance evaluation
methods to be used for demand
response and energy efficiency
products. The standards thereby
facilitate the ability of demand response
and energy efficiency providers to
participate in organized wholesale
electric markets, reducing transaction
costs and providing an opportunity for
more customers to participate in these
programs, especially for customers that
operate in more than one organized
market.
This rule will become effective
May 6, 2013. Dates for implementation
of the standards are provided in the
Final Rule. This incorporation by
reference of certain publications in the
rule is approved by the Director of the
Federal Register as of May 6, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Kathan (technical issues), Office
of Energy Policy and Innovation,
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–
6404.
Mindi Sauter (legal issues), Office of the
General Counsel, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,
(202) 502–6830.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DATES:
Order No. 676–G
Table of Contents
I. Background .....................................................................................................................................................................................
II. Discussion ......................................................................................................................................................................................
A. Overview ................................................................................................................................................................................
B. NAESB Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards ...........................................................................................................
1. Comments ........................................................................................................................................................................
a. Adoption of Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards .....................................................................................
b. Level of Detail, Standardization, and Best Practices .............................................................................................
c. Other Matters ............................................................................................................................................................
2. Commission Determination ............................................................................................................................................
C. NAESB Energy Efficiency M&V Standards ..........................................................................................................................
1. Comments ........................................................................................................................................................................
a. Adoption of Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V Standards ..................................................................................
b. Other Matters ............................................................................................................................................................
2. Commission Determination ............................................................................................................................................
D. Incorporation by Reference/Copyrighted Standards ............................................................................................................
III. Implementation Dates and Procedures .......................................................................................................................................
IV. Notice of Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards .....................................................................................................................
V. Information Collection Statement ................................................................................................................................................
VI. Environmental Analysis ..............................................................................................................................................................
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act ..........................................................................................................................................................
VIII. Document Availability ..............................................................................................................................................................
IX. Effective Date and Congressional Notification ...........................................................................................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:39 Mar 06, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM
07MRR1
2.
11.
11.
14.
15.
15.
19.
26.
33.
40.
41.
41.
45.
47.
52.
54.
58.
59.
67.
68.
71.
74.
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 45 / Thursday, March 7, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Before Commissioners: Jon Wellinghoff,
Chairman; Philip D. Moeller, John R.
Norris, Cheryl A. LaFleur, and Tony
T. Clark.
Order No. 676–G
Final Rule
Issued February 21, 2013.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
1. The Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission) is amending
its regulations at 18 CFR 38.2(a) (which
establish standards for business
practices and electronic
communications for public utilities) 1 to
incorporate by reference 2 updated
business practice standards adopted by
the Wholesale Electric Quadrant (WEQ)
of the North American Energy Standards
Board (NAESB) to categorize various
products and services for demand
response and energy efficiency and to
support the measurement and
verification (M&V) of these products
and services in organized wholesale
electric markets. These standards
provide common definitions and
processes regarding demand response
and energy efficiency products in
organized wholesale electric markets
where such products are offered. The
standards also require each regional
transmission organization (RTO) and
independent system operator (ISO) to
address in the RTO’s or ISO’s governing
documents the performance evaluation
methods to be used for demand
response and energy efficiency
products. The standards thereby
facilitate the ability of demand response
and energy efficiency providers to
participate in organized wholesale
electric markets, reducing transaction
costs and providing an opportunity for
more customers to participate in these
programs, especially for customers that
operate in more than one organized
market.
I. Background
2. NAESB is a private consensus
standards developer that divides its
activities among four quadrants, each of
which is composed of members from all
segments of its respective industry.3
NAESB is an accredited standards
organization under the auspices of the
American National Standards Institute
(ANSI). NAESB’s procedures are
designed to ensure that all industry
participants can have input into the
1 18
CFR 38.2(a) (2012).
by reference makes compliance
with these standards mandatory for public utilities
subject to Part 38 of the Commission’s regulations.
3 The four quadrants are the wholesale and retail
electric quadrants and the wholesale and retail
natural gas quadrants.
2 Incorporation
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:39 Mar 06, 2013
Jkt 229001
development of a standard, whether or
not they are members of NAESB, and
each wholesale electric standard that
NAESB’s WEQ adopts is supported by a
consensus of the seven industry
segments: End Users, Distribution/Load
Serving Entities, Transmission,
Generation, Marketers/Brokers,
Independent Grid Operators/Planners,
and Technology/Services. The WEQ
process requires a super-majority vote of
67 percent of the members of the WEQ’s
Executive Committee, with support
from at least 40 percent of each of the
seven industry segments, to approve a
business practice standard.4 For final
approval, 67 percent of the WEQ’s
general membership must ratify the
standards,5 at which point compliance
with NAESB’s standards would be
voluntary.
3. In 2006, the Commission adopted
Order No. 676, a Final Rule that
incorporated by reference business
practice standards adopted by NAESB
applicable to public utilities.6 Since
2006, the NAESB consensus industry
stakeholder process has reviewed the
NAESB business practice standards for
public utilities with a view to creating
a more efficient marketplace and it has
adopted revisions. In a number of
instances, the Commission has
incorporated the standards by reference
into the Commission’s regulations,
making them mandatory for the entities
identified in the standards.7
4. NAESB began work on developing
business practice standards pertaining
to the measurement and verification of
demand response 8 products and
services in July 2007, when the NAESB
WEQ Demand Side Management
(DSM)—Energy Efficiency (EE)
subcommittee began work on this issue.
Key to obtaining consensus on the
4 Under NAESB’s procedures, interested persons
may attend and participate in NAESB committee
meetings, and phone conferences, even if they are
not NAESB members.
5 See Standards for Business Practices and
Communication Protocols for Public Utilities, Order
No. 676, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,216, n.5 (2006),
reh’g denied, Order No. 676–A, 116 FERC ¶ 61,255
(2006).
6 Id.
7 Standards for Business Practices and
Communication Protocols for Public Utilities, Final
Rule, Order No. 676–F, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,309
(2010); Final Rule, Order No. 676–E, FERC Stats. &
Regs. ¶ 31,299 (2009); order granting clarification
and denying reh’g, Order No. 676–D, 124 FERC
¶ 61,317 (2008), Final Rule, Order No. 676–C, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,274 (2008), Final Rule, Order No.
676–B, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,246 (2007).
8 Demand response means a reduction in the
consumption of electric energy by customers from
their expected consumption in response to an
increase in the price of electric energy or to
incentive payments designed to induce lower
consumption of electric energy. 18 CFR 35.28(b)(4)
(2012).
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
14655
initial set of demand response
measurement and verification standards
was the agreement to proceed with
further work on more detailed technical
standards for the measurement and
verification of demand response
resources. This effort led to the adoption
and ratification by NAESB of
measurement and verification standards
early in 2009.
5. On April 17, 2009, NAESB filed a
report informing the Commission that it
had adopted an initial set of business
practice standards to categorize various
demand response products and services
and to support the measurement and
verification of these products and
services in organized wholesale electric
markets (Phase I Demand Response
M&V Standards).9 As mentioned above,
the NAESB report recognized that
adoption of these standards would need
to be followed by the development of
more detailed technical standards for
the measurement and verification of
demand response products and services
in RTO and ISO areas.
6. On April 15, 2010, the Commission
issued Order No. 676–F, incorporating
by reference the Phase I Demand
Response M&V Standards that
categorize various demand response
products and services and support the
measurement and verification of these
products and services in organized
wholesale electric markets.10 The
Commission stated that ‘‘[w]hile
NAESB’s Phase I [Demand Response]
M&V Standards represent a good first
step, additional substantive standards
would appear beneficial in creating
transparent and consistent measurement
and verification of demand response
products and services in wholesale
electric markets.’’11 The Commission
also stated that ‘‘we expect Phase II will
address issues related to baseline
development * * * .’’12 The
Commission anticipated that the
measurement and verification standards
needed to accomplish this goal would
be a focus of NAESB’s Phase II
measurement and verification standards
development efforts.13
9 Report, North American Energy Standards
Board, Measurement and Verification of Demand
Response Products, Docket No. RM05–5–017, at 2
(filed Apr. 17, 2009) (April 2009 Report).
10 Standards for Business Practices and
Communication Protocols for Public Utilities, Order
No. 676–F, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,309 (2010).
11 Order No. 676–F, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,309
at P 32.
12 Id. P 37. The NAESB Phase I Demand Response
M&V Standards defines ‘‘baseline’’ as ‘‘an estimate
of the electricity that would have been consumed
by a Demand Resource in the absence of a Demand
Response Event.’’
13 Id. P 32.
E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM
07MRR1
14656
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 45 / Thursday, March 7, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
7. NAESB subsequently initiated
specific plans to improve and adopt
additional technical standards and filed
a report14 with the Commission on May
3, 2011 informing the Commission that
NAESB had adopted a revised set of
standards covering measurement and
verification (Phase II Demand Response
M&V Standards) and a new set of
standards covering energy efficiency15
(Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V
Standards), and explaining its efforts to
develop these standards.
8. After a review of NAESB’s May
2011 Report, the Commission issued a
notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR)
on April 19, 2012 proposing to amend
the Commission’s regulations at 18 CFR
38.2 to incorporate by reference specific
enumerated business practice
standards16 and seeking comment on
14 Report, North American Energy Standards
Board, Measurement and Verification of Demand
Response Products, Docket No. RM05–5–020 (filed
May 3, 2011) (May 2011 Report).
15 Energy efficiency, Electricity:
[r]efers to programs that are aimed at reducing the
energy used by specific end-use devices and
systems, typically without affecting the services
provided. These programs reduce overall electricity
consumption (reported in megawatthours), often
without explicit consideration for the timing of
program-induced savings. Such savings are
generally achieved by substituting technologically
more advanced equipment to produce the same
level of end-use services (e.g. lighting, heating,
motor drive) with less electricity. Examples include
high-efficiency appliances, efficient lighting
programs, high-efficiency heating, ventilating and
air conditioning (HVAC) systems or control
modifications, efficient building design, advanced
electric motor drives, and heat recovery systems.
U.S. Energy Information Administration Glossary,
https://www.eia.gov/tools/glossary/index.cfm?id=E
(last visited Feb. 6, 2013).
16 NAESB Phase II Demand Response M&V
Standards collectively identified by NAESB as 2010
Wholesale Electric Quadrant Annual Plan Item 4(a)
and 4(b): General—Section 015–1.0; Telemetry—
Section 015–1.1; After-the-Fact Metering—Section
015–1.2; Performance Evaluation—Section 015–1.3;
General—Section 015–1.4; Telemetry—Section
015–1.5; After-the-Fact Metering—Section 015–1.6;
Performance Evaluation—Section 015–1.7;
General—Section 015–1.8; Telemetry—Section
015–1.9; After-the-Fact Metering—Section 015–
1.10; Performance Evaluation—Section 015–1.11;
General—Section 015–1.12; Telemetry—Section
015–1.13; After-the-Fact Metering—Section 015–
1.14; Performance Evaluation—Section 015–1.15;
Baseline Information—Section 015–1.16; Event
Information—Section 015–1.17; Special
Processing—Section 015–1.18; Baseline
Information—Section 015–1.19; Event
Information—Section 015–1.20; Special
Processing—Section 015–1.21; Baseline
Information—Section 015–1.22; Event
Information—Section 015–1.23; Special
Processing—Section 015–1.24; Baseline
Information—Section 015–1.25; Event
Information—Section 015–1.26; Special
Processing—Section 015–1.27; Baseline
Information—Section 015–1.28; Event
Information—Section 015–1.29; and Special
Processing—Section 015–1.30. NAESB Energy
Efficiency M&V Standards collectively identified by
NAESB as 2010 Wholesale Electric Quadrant
Annual Plan Item 4(d): Energy Efficiency Resource
Use Criteria in Wholesale Markets—Section 021–
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:39 Mar 06, 2013
Jkt 229001
both the proposed Energy Efficiency and
Phase II Demand Response M&V
Standards.17 In light of the
Commission’s statements in Order No.
676–F regarding the importance of
consistency and specificity as discussed
above, the Commission requested
comments in the NOPR as to whether
the Phase II Demand Response M&V
Standards were sufficiently detailed to
provide transparent measurement and
verification among regions, and whether
greater detail or prescriptiveness would
be appropriate. The Commission also
requested comments on the degree to
which encouraging greater consistency
among markets and regions would
reduce costs for customers and market
participants or otherwise facilitate
participation by end users in multiple
markets.
9. To the extent that commenters
recommended greater detail in the
standards, the Commission requested
additional comment as to whether
market participants have attained
sufficient experience in demand
response to allow them to identify best
practices in the area of measurement
and verification, particularly for
performance evaluation-type areas such
as baseline calculations, to help inform
any guidance that the Commission may
provide. Similarly, the Commission
requested comment regarding particular
areas where enhancing such detail or
consistency would be most useful. The
Commission also requested comment on
whether further development of more
substantive measurement and
verification standards broadly
applicable to RTOs and ISOs is
necessary and, if so, whether a NAESB
or a Commission-led, or other process
should carry out the task. Further, the
Commission requested that, if
commenters prefer the NAESB process,
they comment on the best relationship
between NAESB and the RTO and ISO
stakeholder process to facilitate the
formulation of standards.
10. In response to the NAESB Energy
Efficiency and Phase II M&V NOPR, 21
3.1; General Measurement and Verification Plan
Requirements—Section 021–3.2; Post Installation
M&V Report Components—Section 021–3.3;
Performance Reporting—Section 021–3.4; M&V
Supporting Documents—Section 021–3.5; M&V
Methodologies—Section 021–3.6; Energy Efficiency
Baseline Conditions—Section 021–3.7; Statistical
Significance—Section 021–3.8; Nominated Energy
Efficiency Value Calculations/Demand Reduction
Value Calculations—Section 021–3.9; Measurement
and Monitoring—Section 021–3.10; Measurement
Equipment Specifications—Section 021–3.11; and
Data Validation—Section 021–3.12.
17 Standards for Business Practices and
Communication Protocols for Public Utilities,
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 77 FR 24427 (Apr.
24, 2012), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 32,688 (2012)
(Energy Efficiency and Phase II M&V NOPR).
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
entities filed comments.18 On July 17,
2012, NAESB filed a report with the
Commission stating it made a
modification to the Energy Efficiency
M&V Standards by deleting reference to
the International Performance
Measurement and Verification Protocol
(IPMVP).19 Using NAESB operating
procedures for minor clarifications and
corrections to standards, the WEQ
Executive Committee approved the
correction on June 15, 2012.
II. Discussion
A. Overview
11. In this Final Rule, the Commission
is revising its regulations at 18 CFR 38.2
to incorporate by reference the Phase II
Demand Response M&V Standards and
the Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V
Standards. The Commission concludes
that the Phase II Demand Response
M&V Standards represent an
incremental improvement to the
business practices for measuring and
verifying demand resource products and
services in the organized wholesale
electric markets. This phase of demand
response standard development builds
upon the work that already has been
accomplished to provide demand
response resources with opportunities
to participate in organized wholesale
electric markets, including accurate
measurement and verification of
demand response resources’
performance. Similarly, the Commission
concludes that the Wholesale Energy
Efficiency M&V Standards facilitate
energy efficiency providers’ ability to
participate in electricity markets by
providing standardized measurement
requirements and reducing transaction
costs, and assure more effective
evaluation of the performance of energy
efficiency products and services.
12. The Phase II Demand Response
M&V Standards and Wholesale Energy
Efficiency Standards were approved by
the WEQ and ratified by the NAESB
membership under NAESB’s consensus
procedures.20 As the Commission found
in Order No. 587,21 adoption of
consensus business practice standards is
appropriate because the consensus
process helps ensure the reasonableness
of the standards by requiring that the
18 The names of entities that filed comments are
listed in the Appendix to this Final Rule.
19 Errata Report, North American Energy
Standards Board, Measurement and Verification of
Demand Response Products, Docket No. RM05–5–
000, RM05–5–020 (filed July 17, 2012).
20 As noted earlier, 67 percent of the WEQ’s
general membership voting is required for
ratification of a business practice standard.
21 Standards for Business Practices of Interstate
Natural Gas Pipelines, Order No. 587, 61 FR 39053
(July 26, 1996), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,038 (1996).
E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM
07MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 45 / Thursday, March 7, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
standards draw support from a broad
spectrum of industry participants
representing all segments of the
industry. Moreover, since the industry
itself has to conduct business under
these standards, the Commission’s
regulations should reflect those business
practice standards that have the widest
possible support.
13. The specific NAESB standards
that the Commission is incorporating by
reference in this Final Rule are the
Phase II Demand Response M&V
Standards and associated terms, and the
Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V
Standards and associated terms.22
B. NAESB Phase II Demand Response
M&V Standards
14. In the NOPR, the Commission
proposed to incorporate by reference the
NAESB Phase II Demand Response M&V
standards, which include three sections:
the first section (Introduction and
Definition of Terms) contains an
overview of the standards and
definitions, the second section
(Standards 015–1.0 through 015–1.15)
contains standards on Provision of
Wholesale Electric Demand Response
Energy, Capacity, Reserve and
Regulation Products, and the third
section (Standards 015–1.16 through
015–1.30) contains standards on the five
performance evaluation methodologies:
(1) Maximum Base Load; (2) Meter
Before/Meter After; (3) Baseline Type-I
(Interval Meter); (4) Baseline Type-II
(Non-Interval Meter); and (5) Metering
Generator Output.
1. Comments
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
a. Adoption of Phase II Demand
Response M&V Standards
15. The Commission sought
comments on whether it should
incorporate by reference NAESB’s
proposed Phase II Demand Response
M&V Standards. Commenters
supporting incorporation of the
proposed NAESB Phase II Demand
Response M&V business practice
standards into the Commission’s
regulations include the IRC, EPSA, AEP,
Indicated New York Transmission
Owners, DR Supporters, IECA, Hess,
PSEG, and WEM. DR Supporters, IECA,
Hess and PSEG also recommend further
standardization, as discussed in detail
below.
16. Viridity generally supports the
incorporation of the Phase II Demand
Response M&V Standards, but also
requests that the Commission include in
22 The specific standards are enumerated in n.16
supra.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:39 Mar 06, 2013
Jkt 229001
the final rule a requirement for RTOs
and ISOs to adopt performance
evaluation methods that provide a
reasonably accurate, reasonably
unbiased, and reasonably consistent
baseline for a customer’s highly-variable
load.23
17. EEI and Southern also generally
support incorporation of the Phase II
Demand Response M&V Standards, but
request that, to avoid inadvertent
ambiguity, the Commission clarify in
the Final Rule and in revisions to 18
CFR 38.2 that the NAESB standards and
associated terms for the Phase II
Demand Response M&V and the
Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V apply
only in markets administered by RTOs
and ISOs. EEI and Southern further
request that the Commission incorporate
by reference those provisions of the
NAESB standards that limit their
applicability to RTO and ISO markets.
18. NAPP and the PJM IMM
recommend against adopting the Phase
II Demand Response M&V Standards. As
discussed below, the PJM IMM states
that the proposed standards do not
reference the Peak Load Contribution
recently adopted in PJM, that they do
not adequately define ‘‘Capacity
Service,’’ and that they inappropriately
allow the same five approaches for
capacity as for energy products. It states
that adopting the standards as
applicable to capacity creates the
potential to ‘‘reopen and confuse the
issue of double counting in PJM that
was only recently resolved.’’ 24 The PJM
IMM also notes the difficulty of trying
to apply common measurement and
verification standards across all RTOs
and ISOs.
b. Level of Detail, Standardization, and
Best Practices
19. The Commission sought
comments on whether the proposed
NAESB Phase II Demand Response M&V
Standards were sufficiently detailed and
whether greater detail would be
appropriate. The IRC believes that the
five performance evaluation
methodologies in the NAESB Phase II
Demand Response M&V standards
provide RTOs and ISOs with the
necessary flexibility to enable accurate
M&V. EPSA agrees and believes it is
appropriate to defer to the RTO and ISO
for an assessment of whether greater
23 Viridity notes that NAESB defines ‘‘highlyvariable load’’ as a customer that has a ‘‘fluctuating
or unpredictable electricity usage pattern.’’ Viridity
states that these customers’ ‘‘business-as-usual’’
loads may have little or no relation to the weather;
thus predicting their loads is based on factors
specific to the customer instead of more universal
factors such as the weather.
24 See PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., 138 FERC ¶
61,138 (2012).
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
14657
detail is needed for a particular region,
and to establish the best next steps for
refining demand response M&V
mechanisms.
20. On the other hand, IECA states
there has been minimal forward
movement in developing greater
standardization and ‘‘best practices’’ for
demand response M&V, and argues that
the status quo is unjust, unreasonable or
unduly discriminatory and that the
NAESB process discriminates against
manufacturers. DR Supporters indicate
that the proposed standards do not
include specific and detailed
characteristics of performance
evaluation methodologies and that,
because the NAESB standards defer to
the RTO and ISO governing documents,
the Phase II standards do little to bring
consistency or standardization to the
manner in which demand response is
measured. The DR Supporters argue that
greater detail or prescriptiveness is
appropriate with respect to the
measurement and verification of energy.
However, DR Supporters state that
efforts to impose consistent M&V
approaches across RTO and ISO
capacity markets would be misspent
given that M&V in those markets is so
intertwined with the details of the
specific capacity markets themselves.
21. PSEG suggests that additional
standards be developed that define the
testing and auditing requirements for
demand response resources to ensure
that they have the capability to reduce
demand during their time commitment.
PSEG also argues that the requirement
to provide real-time telemetry data for
all four products (i.e., energy, capacity,
reserve, and regulation) should be
mandatory, and requests that the
language in the standards be revised in
the future to require specific language in
this regard. PSEG also requests that
additional standards be developed that
require providers to measure demand
response delivered via behind-the-meter
generation, noting that it is important
for system reliability planners to
evaluate the impact of environmental
regulations that affect those types of
facilities.
22. The Commission also sought
comments on whether encouraging
greater consistency would reduce costs
and facilitate participation. The IRC
contends that further efforts at
developing a standardized M&V
performance evaluation methodology
will not be productive at this time, and
could reduce the accuracy of demand
response M&V and exclude
participation by resources with load
shapes that do not conform to the
standard. The IRC believes that a
flexible, regional approach to demand
E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM
07MRR1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
14658
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 45 / Thursday, March 7, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
response M&V is crucial to ensuring the
growth of demand response resources in
wholesale electric markets. Hess
recommends that the Commission
pursue simplicity and consistency over
time (i.e., stability), as opposed to
simply consistency across all RTOs and
ISOs. Hess urges the Commission to be
mindful that confusion and loss of
customer confidence due to frequent
rule changes might outweigh marginal
benefits of rule improvements.
23. However, DR Supporters indicate
that encouraging greater consistency
among RTO and ISO energy markets and
regions would reduce costs and
facilitate participation. DR Supporters
argue that differences in baseline
designs require demand response
providers that are active across the
country to pay for and/or develop,
maintain and adapt diverse systems in
order to settle energy payments for
demand response customers in order to
accommodate each market’s differences,
and that this can result in customer
dissatisfaction related to increased costs
and confusion.
24. The Commission also sought
comments on whether the demand
response industry has had sufficient
experience to enable it to identify best
practices. DR Supporters believe the
industry has had sufficient experience,
and that this experience should be used
to develop a common energy baseline
methodology for use across all RTOs
and ISOs, which would be available as
an alternative to the approach a
particular RTO and ISO already has
implemented. Hess agrees that there is
sufficient experience to identify best
practices, and suggests that the
standards proposed for incorporation do
not draw upon available market
experience to provide the details
necessary to allow for true
standardization.
25. The Commission also asked
commenters to identify particular areas
in which enhancing detail or
consistency would be useful. Viridity
indicates that the proposed M&V
standards give RTOs and ISOs complete
discretion as to whether a region utilizes
any baseline methodology that is
suitable for highly-variable loads,25
leaving these resources without a
reasonable baseline against which their
performance can be measured. EPSA
asserts that a lack of specific
comparability between demand
resources and other resources that
participate in the wholesale market risks
artificially skewing incentives towards
potentially less reliable resources,
discouraging needed investments and
25 See
supra note 23.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:39 Mar 06, 2013
compromising the reliability of the
system.
c. Other Matters
26. The Commission requested
comments on whether, if further
development of more substantive
measurement and verification standards
broadly applicable to RTOs and ISOs is
required, a NAESB, Commission-led, or
other process should carry out the
task.26 Several commenters, including
EVO, Hess, IECA, DR Supporters, PSEG,
and NYTOs prefer a Commission-led
process, with some suggesting that the
Department of Energy and NAESB also
should participate. IECA, NYTOs, and
DR Supporters variously ask the
Commission to undertake technical
conferences to review the M&V methods
used by the different RTOs and ISOs in
order to fully understand their
differences, develop a set of consistent,
detailed demand response M&V
standards to enable demand response
resources to participate in multiple
jurisdictions without incurring costs of
complying with different standards,
determine the M&V floor required to
provide demand response
compensation, and establish a single
Baseline Type I measurement and
verification approach for energy that
any curtailment service provider would
be permitted to use in any Commissionjurisdictional market.
27. IRC states that in some cases,
Commission action has provided critical
guidance that can be more effective in
providing direction than can be
achieved in trying to reach consensus;
therefore, future Commission guidance
potentially can avoid significant hours
of debate among NAESB participants on
additional contentious M&V issues.
28. IRC further states that
stakeholders have expressed only
limited support for launching an
additional NAESB process. IRC urges
the Commission not to press for
additional standardization at this time;
however, should the Commission
decide to do so, IRC suggests that the
NAESB process is preferable to creating
a new institutional process and requests
that the Commission provide detailed
guidance on the nature of further efforts.
EPSA supports using existing NAESB
processes in order to avoid establishing
competing processes for developing
demand response M&V baselines. EPSA
believes the Phase II standards serve as
a benchmark for RTO and ISO governing
documents, establishing parameters that
regional standards must either meet or
surpass.
26 NOPR,
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 32,688 at P 19.
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29. NAPP supports an industry-led
standard development process, because
it believes the NAESB process has little
participation from demand response
providers, energy efficiency providers
and end use customers.
30. The PJM IMM also recommends
that if the Commission decides to
incorporate NAESB standards into its
rules, the Commission should clarify
that ‘‘Capacity Service’’ necessarily
means achieving a reduction to a level
at or below a resource’s peak load
contribution in order to prevent
confusion in the industry and to avoid
inefficient market rules. Additionally,
the PJM IMM considers the NAESB
standards to be flawed because they do
not differentiate metrics appropriate to
energy demand from metrics
appropriate for capacity demand.
31. EPSA requests that the
Commission confirm EPSA’s
understanding of the NOPR’s
explanation regarding conflicts between
the RTO’s or ISO’s governing documents
and the NAESB business standards.
Specifically, EPSA requests that the
Commission clarify that, if a conflict
arises between a system operator’s
governing documents and the NAESB
business standards, the system
operator’s governing documents would
have precedence over the NAESB
business standards with respect to
things such as consistency of terms or
definitions, but that such conflicts
should not refer to use of or reliance on
less rigorous regional demand response
M&V techniques. EPSA believes this
provision should allow for regional
variation while protecting against a
region adopting measures and protocols
that are inferior to those prescribed in
the Phase II proposal.
32. Mr. Lynch states that he opposes
the proposed standard for power plants
regulating carbon dioxide emissions
from new coal-based power plants,
arguing that such a regulation would
effectively outlaw coal as a fuel source
for the next generation of power plants,
causing energy costs to rise.
2. Commission Determination
33. The Commission is revising its
regulations at 18 CFR 38.2 to
incorporate by reference the revised
NAESB Phase II Demand Response M&V
Standards, as they represent an
incremental improvement to the
existing standards that we incorporated
by reference in Order No. 676–F. This
phase of the demand response standard
development builds upon the work that
allows demand response to participate
in organized wholesale electric markets,
including accurate measurement and
E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM
07MRR1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 45 / Thursday, March 7, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
monitoring of demand response
resources’ performance.
34. The Phase II Demand Response
M&V Standards provide common
definitions and processes regarding
demand response products in organized
wholesale electric markets where such
products are offered. The standards
address the applicability of performance
evaluation, metering, and processes to
each of the organized wholesale electric
markets. The changes included in the
Phase II Demand Response M&V
Standards add greater specificity on
items such as meter data reporting
deadlines. The standards also require
each RTO and ISO to address in the
RTO’s or ISO’s governing documents the
performance evaluation methods to be
used for demand response products.
The performance evaluation standards
define each of the individual methods
and their use during demand response
events. The changes to the performance
evaluation standards included in the
Phase II Demand Response M&V
Standards add greater specificity on the
use of the individual performance
evaluation methods.
35. The Commission concludes that
the Phase II Demand Response M&V
Standards facilitate the ability of
demand response providers to
participate in organized wholesale
electric markets, reducing transaction
costs and providing an opportunity for
more customers to participate in these
programs, especially for customers that
operate in more than one organized
market. The improvements to the
uniform set of definitions and
applicability requirements in the Phase
II Demand Response M&V Standards
should further reduce differences in
performance evaluation methods
between regions. Incorporating by
reference these measurement and
verification standards also will improve
the methods and procedures for
accurately measuring the performance
of demand response resources and assist
in monitoring demand response services
for potential market manipulation.
36. The Commission appreciates the
thoughtful comments and proposals
related to increasing the detail of the
Phase II Demand Response M&V
Standards, as well as the proposals to
establish a common M&V approach that
would supplement each RTO’s and
ISO’s approved methods. As the
Commission has explained in prior
orders, in choosing to take advantage of
the efficiency of the NAESB process to
establish technical standards for
business practices and communication
protocols for the gas and electric
industries, we follow the standard
regulatory process by which standards
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:39 Mar 06, 2013
Jkt 229001
are incorporated by reference.27 These
rules appropriately balance the interests
of the standards organization and the
expediency of governmental use of
privately developed standards. We find
that, on balance, the objections raised to
adopting the standards do not warrant
rejecting them. While additional efforts
to increase consistency across regions
could benefit end users and demand
response providers, as presented the
Phase II Demand Response M&V
Standards nonetheless represent an
incremental improvement to the
standards incorporated by reference in
Order No. 676–F. The Commission
therefore will incorporate by reference
the standards without modification.
While the Commission will not require
any additional process to further refine
or develop demand response
measurement and verification standards
at this time, we will monitor efforts at
RTOs and ISOs and NAESB to address
the issues raised in this proceeding and
otherwise made known to us, and take
action in the future in a separate docket
as necessary.
37. We agree with EEI and Southern
that the particular standards we are
incorporating by reference in this Final
Rule apply only in organized wholesale
electric markets administered by RTOs
or ISOs. NAESB made this clear in the
applicability section of its standards,
and we do not see any need to further
amend 18 CFR 38.2. With respect to
questions regarding whether the
relevant RTO or ISO governing
documents take precedence over the
standards that we are incorporating by
reference, we find that the standards
adopted are sufficiently clear. To the
extent that the Phase II Demand
Response M&V Standards refer to
‘‘Governing Documents,’’ in the event of
a conflict with the otherwise applicable
NAESB standard, the governing
documents will take precedence. If such
a conflict arises and is of concern to
affected parties, they may bring that
concern to the Commission for
consideration.
38. We also find merit in the
suggestions to develop baselines that are
more accurate for highly-variable load,
to consider whether further work is
needed to reflect in the standards the
distinct functions provided by capacity
and energy products, and to consider
further development of appropriate
rules for demand response supported by
behind-the-meter generation. We
encourage stakeholders to pursue these
27 See, e.g., Standards for Business Practices and
Communication Protocols for Public Utilities, Order
No. 676–E, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,299, at P 118
(2009).
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
14659
issues as they consider potential
enhancements to the NAESB standards.
39. Mr. Lynch’s comments are not
related to the issues in this proceeding
and, therefore, we will not address them
here.
C. NAESB Energy Efficiency M&V
Standards
40. In the NOPR, the Commission
proposed to incorporate by reference the
NAESB Wholesale Energy Efficiency
M&V Standards, which include the
following new standards—Energy
Efficiency Resource Use Criteria in
Wholesale Markets—Section 021–3.1;
General Measurement and Verification
Plan Requirements—Section 021–3.2;
Post Installation M&V Report
Components—Section 021–3.3;
Performance Reporting—Section 021–
3.4; M&V Supporting Documents—
Section 021–3.5; M&V Methodologies—
Section 021–3.6; Energy Efficiency
Baseline Conditions—Section 021–3.7;
Statistical Significance—Section 021–
3.8; Nominated Energy Efficiency Value
Calculations/Demand Reduction Value
Calculations—Section 021–3.9;
Measurement and Monitoring—Section
021–3.10; Measurement Equipment
Specifications—Section 021–3.11; and
Data Validation—Section 021–3.12. We
address below the issues raised by the
commenters.
1. Comments
a. Adoption of Wholesale Energy
Efficiency M&V Standards
41. The Commission sought
comments on whether it should
incorporate by reference NAESB’s
proposed Energy Efficiency M&V
Standards. Several commenters,
including EEI, AEP, and IRC support
incorporating the NAESB Energy
Efficiency M&V business practice
standards into the Commission’s
regulations.
42. Several other parties offer
qualified support, including the DR
Supporters, IECA, and PSEG. While
generally supporting the incorporation
of the energy efficiency business
standards into the Commission rules,
these commenters recommend several
changes. The DR Supporters and IECA
recommend that ‘‘streamlined, costeffective application of coincidence
factors for simple conversion of energy
use to peak demand reduction’’ be
included in the NAESB Energy
Efficiency M&V standards, particularly
for capacity markets. In its comments,
PSEG recommends several specific
modifications to the proposed Energy
Efficiency M&V standards including
wording changes, changes in report
E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM
07MRR1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
14660
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 45 / Thursday, March 7, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
timing, and deletion of Standard 021–
3.11.1.9, which addresses the precision
of measurement or monitoring
equipment for proxy variables that do
not directly measure electrical demand.
IRC states that the Commission also
should adopt and incorporate into its
regulations the Introduction and
Principles and Applicability sections
identified in the Annual Plan item 4(d)
as WEQ–021–1 and WE1–021–2,
respectively. IRC argues that the
Introduction and Principles frame the
context of the standards and that the
Applicability section: limits the
applicability of the standard to RTOs
and ISOs; establishes that RTO and ISO
governing documents take precedence
over the standard where there is a
conflict; clarifies that the standard does
not establish requirements related to
compensation, design, operation, or use
of energy efficiency products and
services, and does not require system
operators to offer energy efficiency
products and services; and states that
the standard includes the requirements
on energy efficiency resource providers
for M&V of energy efficiency products
and services offered into wholesale
electric markets.
43. NEEP, NAPP, WEM, Alliance to
Save Energy, and EVO recommend
against adopting the NAESB Energy
Efficiency M&V Standards. NEEP and
EVO share PSEG’s objections to the
required precision of measurement of
monitoring equipment in Standard 021–
3.11.1.9. NAPP, NEEP, Alliance to Save
Energy, and EVO object to removing
references to the International
Performance Measurement and
Verification Protocol (IPMVP). These
commenters are concerned that deleting
references to the IPMVP in the body of
the Energy Efficiency M&V Standards
removes the connection of the NAESB
energy efficiency standards to the
leading industry-accepted energy
efficiency M&V guidance document.
They argue that removing the references
to IPMVP could cause confusion in the
field and impede credible and
consistent energy efficiency M&V, and
will make it much more difficult for the
Commission to be assured of
consistency and transparency. NAPP
argues that the NAESB process resulting
in removing references to the IPMVP
did not involve broad industry
participation.
44. DNV KEMA and NEEP
recommend several modifications to the
Energy Efficiency M&V standards that
address statistical significance and
accuracy of the measurement of proxy
variables. NEEP proposes modifications
stating that the plus or minus two
percent accuracy requirement on
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:39 Mar 06, 2013
Jkt 229001
equipment required in WEQ.021.3.11.9
is redundant with the overall accuracy
level required in Section WEQ.021.3.8.
NEEP argues that this requirement could
lead to a departure from standard
practice in evaluating energy efficiency
resources, and may compromise the
overall accuracy of the M&V results
while imposing higher evaluation costs.
NEEP contends the prescribed level of
accuracy for measurement for
monitoring equipment extends beyond
the hardware-specific scope of Section
WEQ.021.3.11.
b. Other Matters
45. Several comments request that the
Commission initiate a process to
examine specific energy efficiency
standards or to convene a technical
conference to discuss the proposed
energy efficiency standards in general in
order to resolve areas of concern. IECA
requests that the Commission add a
process to create streamlined, costeffective application of factors for
simple conversion of energy use to peak
reduction. EVO, NECPUC, and NEEP
ask the Commission to convene a
technical conference to address energy
efficiency issues identified by
commenters in this rulemaking process
and to resolve areas of concern. EVO,
supported by NEEP, also asks the
Commission to convene a technical
conference to address the removal of
references to IPMVP from the energy
efficiency standards, arguing that the
removal constitutes a material change to
the substance of the Wholesale Energy
Efficiency M&V Standards.
46. NECPUC states its understanding
that there is a significant divergence in
views amongst the NAESB board with
respect to the equipment accuracy
requirement in WEQ.021.3.11.9, and
NEEP states that its comments on
statistical precision (discussed above)
were not sufficiently considered or
understood within the NAESB process.
2. Commission Determination
47. The Commission is revising its
regulations at 18 CFR 38.2 to
incorporate by reference the NAESB
Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V
Standards. The new standards define
terms and definitions that can be used
to facilitate communications and
provide standards for measurement and
verification methodologies for energy
efficiency in organized wholesale
electric markets. These standards will
reduce transaction costs and provide an
additional opportunity and increased
incentive for energy efficiency resources
to participate in the wholesale markets
established in RTO and ISO regions.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
48. As with the Phase II Demand
Response M&V Standards discussed
above, the Wholesale Energy Efficiency
M&V Standards were developed through
the consensus-based NAESB process.
Most of the modifications commenters
suggest in response to the NOPR have
already been considered through the
NAESB process; consequently, the
Commission declines to require that
such modifications be included here.
We find the standard requiring a plus or
minus two percent accuracy for
measuring equipment, to be reasonable;
thus we incorporate it here, noting that
its applicability is limited to measuring
equipment only. These standards on
measuring equipment accuracy reflect
industry consensus, arrived at through
the NAESB standards development
process, on the specific statistical
precision requirements associated with
the reliable operation of organized
wholesale electric markets.
Additionally, while some express
concern with NAESB’s use of the minor
clarifications and correction procedures
to remove the IPMVP requirement, this
procedure is permitted by NAESB’s
rules, and the NAESB Executive
Committee reached a consensus on the
removal of references to IPMVP from the
energy efficiency M&V standards. Since
the standards before us do not include
the IPMVP references, we will not
address the comments in that regard. As
previously stated, NAESB followed its
processes to remove these references.
We find that standards as presented are
incremental improvements and
incorporation by reference does not
foreclose stakeholders from pursuing
these enhancements and their concerns
through RTO and ISO or NAESB
processes. The Commission, therefore,
incorporates the standards.28
49. Additionally, a few commenters
suggested modifications that were not
considered during the consensus-based
NAESB process, and the Commission
declines to require that those additional
modifications here. Specifically, we will
not include provisions requiring RTOs
to carefully consider acceptance of
industry developed coincidence factors
when evaluating Energy Efficiency M&V
plans, and thus the Commission will not
undertake a Commission-led process to
develop such coincidence factors. We
encourage stakeholders to pursue these
issues as they consider potential
enhancements to the NAESB standards.
50. We will not incorporate into our
regulations the Introduction and
Principles and Applicability sections
28 See n.21 supra; see also OMB Circular A–119
Revised, February 10, 1998, available at https://
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_a119.
E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM
07MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 45 / Thursday, March 7, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
III. Implementation Dates and
Procedures
54. The Commission is requiring,
consistent with our regulations at 18
CFR 35.28(c)(vi), each RTO and ISO to
revise its OATT to include the NAESB
Energy Efficiency and Phase II Demand
Response M&V Standards we are
incorporating by reference herein. For
standards that do not require
implementing tariff provisions, the
Commission will allow the RTO or ISO
to incorporate the WEQ standard by
reference in its OATT. Compliance with
the standards incorporated in this Final
Rule will be required beginning on the
same date that the rule becomes
effective (i.e., sixty days after
publication in the Federal Register),
even if this precedes the filing of a
revised OATT reflecting these new
D. Incorporation by Reference/
requirements.
Copyrighted Standards
55. However, as we directed in the
Phase I Demand Response M&V Final
52. EVO and WEM object to the
Rule, to lighten the burden associated
incorporation by reference of the
with an immediate, stand-alone filing of
NAESB standards, maintaining they
a revised tariff reflecting the standards
should not have to pay to obtain copies
of the copyrighted standards. Similarly, incorporated by reference in this Final
Rule, we are giving RTOs and ISOs the
WEM expresses concern that NAESB
option of including these changes as
was utilized to develop the standards
part of an unrelated tariff filing, even
and contends that the fee NAESB
though compliance with the revised
charges for access to its standards will
standards is required beginning on the
be onerous for some entities, noting that
effective date of this Final Rule.32 If the
it experienced complications in getting
RTO or ISO makes no unrelated tariff
free access to the standards from NAESB
filing by December 31, 2013, it must
during the NOPR comment period. The
make a separate tariff filing
PJM IMM also recommends that the
incorporating these standards by that
Commission ensure that any standards
date.
incorporated into its rules are published
56. If adoption of these standards does
in full in the Federal Register.
not require any changes or revisions to
53. We addressed this issue at length
existing OATT provisions, RTOs and
in Order No. 676–E 29 in November of
ISOs may comply with this rule by
2009, concluding that the NAESB
adding a provision to their OATTs that
process is an efficient and cost-effective incorporates the standards adopted in
method of developing these standards,
this rule by reference, including the
incorporation by reference is the
standard number used to identify the
appropriate method for the Commission standard. To incorporate this standard
to adopt the regulations, and the
into their OATTs, RTOs and ISOs must
Commission is required to observe
use the following language in their
NAESB’s copyright.30 As we pointed out OATTs: Measurement and Verification
of Wholesale Electricity Efficiency
in that order, obtaining these standards
(WEQ–021 2010 Annual Plan Item 4(d),
is not cost prohibitive. NAESB, in fact,
July 16, 2012; and Measurement and
makes the standards available free for a
limited period of time to those that want Verification of Wholesale Electricity
Demand Response (WEQ–015, 2010
to view the standards during comment
Annual Plan Items 4(a) and 4(b), March
periods related to Commission
21, 2011).
proposals to incorporate standards by
57. If a RTO or ISO requests waiver
reference.31 For non-members seeking to
of a standard, it will not be required to
purchase a copy, an email copy of any
comply with the standard until the
final action (e.g., the Demand Response
Commission acts on its waiver request.
Phase II standards) is available for $50,
Therefore, if a RTO or ISO has obtained
which is not prohibitive.
a waiver or has a pending request for a
waiver, its proposed revision to its
29 Order No. 676–E, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,299
OATT should not include the standard
at PP 115–121.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
identified in the Annual Plan item 4(d)
as WEQ–021–1 and WE1–021–2,
respectively, as we find that standards
that we are incorporating by reference
are sufficiently clear that the standards
apply to organized wholesale electric
markets administered by RTOs or ISOs.
51. The Commission also declines to
convene a process or conduct technical
conferences to discuss potential changes
to the Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V
Standards. We conclude that it is
appropriate to allow industry to gain
additional experience with these new
standards prior to considering
additional enhancements. If the
Commission determines that further
efforts are warranted at a later time, it
will take appropriate steps in a separate
docket.
30 Id.
31 See https://www.naesb.org/misc/
NAESB_Nonmember_Evaluation_LockLizard.pdf.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:39 Mar 06, 2013
Jkt 229001
32 See Order No. 676–F, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶
31,309 at P 44.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
14661
number associated with the standard for
which it has obtained or seeks a waiver.
Instead, the RTO’s or ISO’s OATT
should specify those standards for
which the RTO or ISO has obtained a
waiver or has pending a request for
waiver. If and when a waiver request is
denied, the RTO or ISO will be required
to include in its OATT the standard(s)
for which waiver was denied.
IV. Notice of Use of Voluntary
Consensus Standards
58. In section 12(d) of NTT&AA,33
Congress affirmatively requires federal
agencies to use technical standards
developed by voluntary consensus
standards organizations, like NAESB, as
the means to carry out policy objectives
or activities determined by the agencies
unless use of such standards would be
inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical.34 NAESB
approved the standards under its
consensus procedures. Office of
Management and Budget Circular A–119
(§ 11) (February 10, 1998) provides that
federal agencies should publish a
request for comment in a NOPR when
the agency is seeking to issue or revise
a regulation proposing to adopt a
voluntary consensus standard or a
government-unique standard. The
Commission published a request for
comment in the Energy Efficiency and
Phase II Demand Response M&V NOPR.
V. Information Collection Statement
59. The Office of Management and
Budget’s (OMB) regulations require
approval of certain information
collection requirements imposed by
agency rules.35 Upon approval of a
collection of information, OMB will
assign an OMB control number and an
expiration date. Respondents subject to
the filing requirements of a rule will not
be penalized for failing to respond to
these collections of information unless
the collections of information display a
valid OMB control number. The OMB
Control Numbers will not be displayed
in the NAESB standards; an explanation
will be included in the clearance
package submitted to OMB.
60. This Final Rule upgrades the
Commission’s current business practice
and communication standards to
include NAESB’s Energy Efficiency
M&V Standards and Phase II Demand
Response M&V Standards. The
implementation of these standards is
necessary to increase the efficiency of
demand response and energy efficiency
33 National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995.
34 Id.
35 5 CFR 1320.11.
E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM
07MRR1
14662
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 45 / Thursday, March 7, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
in organized wholesale electric markets.
In addition, requiring such information
ensures a common means of
communication and ensures common
business practices that provide
participants engaged in transactions
with demand response programs with
timely information and consistent
business procedures across multiple
markets. The implementation of these
data requirements will help the
Commission carry out its
responsibilities under the Federal Power
Act.
61. The Commission sought
comments on its burden estimates
associated with adoption of the NOPR
proposals. In response to the NOPR, no
comments were filed that addressed the
reporting burden imposed by these
requirements. Therefore the
Commission will use these same
estimates in this Final Rule.
No. of
respondents
Demand Response Standards ...................................
Energy Efficiency Standards ......................................
No. of
responses per
respondent
Hours per
response
Total No. of
hours
(A)
FERC collection
number
(B)
(C)
(A) × (B) × (C)
FERC–516 36 ...........
FERC–71737 ...........
FERC–516 ..............
FERC–717 ..............
6
6
6
6
1
1
1
1
4
9
6
12
24
54
36
72
Total for FERC–516 ...................................................
60
Total for FERC–717 ...................................................
126
Total One-Time Burden .............................................
186
annualized cost for all respondents to be
the following: 38
FERC–717: 126 hours*59/hour = $7,434
($1,239 per respondent).
FERC–516: 60 hours*$59/hour = $3,540
($590 per respondent).
Total Annual Hours for Collection:
(Reporting and Recordkeeping, (if
appropriate)) = 186 hours.
Information Collection Costs: The
Commission projects the average
The following table breaks out the
cost by standard:
FERC–516
(tariff filing)
Demand Response Standards Capital/Startup Costs .................................................................................
Demand Response Standards Annualized Costs (Operations & Maintenance) ........................................
Energy Efficiency Standards Capital/Startup Costs ....................................................................................
Energy Efficiency Standards Annualized Costs (Operations & Maintenance) ...........................................
......................................................................................................................................................................
Demand Response Standards Total Costs .................................................................................................
Energy Efficiency Standards Total Costs ....................................................................................................
All Standards Total Costs ............................................................................................................................
FERC–717
(standards
implementation)
$1,416
N/A
2,124
N/A
..............................
1,416
2,124
3,540
$3,186
N/A
4,248
N/A
..............................
3,186 39
4,248 40
7,434
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
62. These new information collection
requirements are mandatory.
Title: Standards for Business Practices
and Communication Protocols for
Public Utilities (FERC–717); Electric
Rate Schedule Filings (FERC–516).
Action: Information collection.
OMB Control No.: 1902–0096 (FERC–
516); 1902–0173 (FERC–717).
Respondents: RTO and ISOs.
Frequency of Responses: One-time
implementation.
63. Necessity of Information: The
Commission’s regulations adopted in
this rule upgrade the Commission’s
current business practices and
communication standards by
standardizing the definitions used by
RTOs and ISOs to identify their various
energy efficiency and demand response
products and to measure and verify the
results obtained by these products.
Moreover, the implementation of these
data requirements will help ensure
consistency among the RTOs/ISOs with
respect to the measurement and
verification of energy efficiency and
demand response performance in their
organized wholesale electric markets.
64. Internal Review: The Commission
has reviewed the information collection
requirements and has determined, as
discussed above, that its action in this
proceeding is necessary because this
rule increases access to standardized
information for participants in
wholesale energy markets that
administer demand response and energy
efficiency products and services. This
rule also facilitates the ability of
demand response and energy efficiency
providers to participate in electricity
markets, reducing transaction costs and
providing an opportunity for more
36 ‘‘FERC–516’’ is the Commission’s identifier
that corresponds to OMB control no. 1902–0096
which identifies the information collection
associated with Electric Rate Schedules and Tariff
Filings.
37 ‘‘FERC–717’’ is the Commission’s identifier
that corresponds to OMB control no. 1902–0173,
which identifies the information collection
associated with Standards for Business Practices
and Communication Protocols for Public Utilities.
38 The Total Annual Cost for information
collection is $10,974. This number is reached by
multiplying the total hours to prepare responses
(186) by an hourly wage estimate of $59 (a
composite estimate of wages plus benefits that
includes legal, technical and support staff rates.
Based on data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics
at https://bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_221000.htm
and https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm).
(78 hours for demand response standards + 108
hours for energy efficiency standards) × $59/hour =
$10,974.
39 We note that 24 hours at $59/hour = $1,416 and
54 hours at $59/hour = $3,186.
40 We note that 36 hours at $59/hour = $2,124 and
72 hours at $59/hour = $4,248.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:39 Mar 06, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM
07MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 45 / Thursday, March 7, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
customers to participate in these
programs.
65. Interested persons may obtain
information on the reporting
requirements by contacting the
following: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426 [Attn: Ellen
Brown, Office of the Executive Director,
email: DataClearance@ferc.gov, phone:
(202) 502–8663, fax: (202) 273–0873],
66. For submitting comments
concerning the collection of information
and the associated burden estimate,
please send your comments to the Office
of Management and Budget, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Washington, DC 20503 [Attention: Desk
Officer for the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, phone: (202)
395–4718, fax: (202) 395–7285]. For
security reasons, comments to OMB
should be submitted by email to: oira
submission@omb.eop.gov. Comments
submitted to OMB should reference the
appropriate OMB Control Number(s)
and collection number(s) (OMB Control
No. 1902–0096 for FERC–516, and/or
OMB Control No. 1902–0173 for FERC–
717).
VI. Environmental Analysis
67. 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.41 The Commission has
categorically excluded certain actions
from these requirements as not having a
significant effect on the human
environment.42 The actions adopted
here fall within categorical exclusions
in the Commission’s regulations for
rules that are clarifying, corrective, or
procedural, for information gathering
analysis, and dissemination, and for
sales, exchange, and transportation of
natural gas and electric power that
requires no construction of facilities.
Therefore, an environmental assessment
is unnecessary and has not been
prepared in this Final Rule.
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act
68. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980 (RFA) 43 generally requires a
description and analysis of final rules
that will have significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The Small Business
41 Regulations
Implementing National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Order No. 486,
52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. & Regs.,
Regulations Preambles 1986–1990 ¶ 30,783 (1987).
42 18 CFR 380.4.
43 5 U.S.C. 601–612.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:39 Mar 06, 2013
Jkt 229001
14663
Administration’s (SBA) Office of Size
Standards develops the numerical
definition of a small business.44 The
SBA has established a size standard for
electric utilities, stating that 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.45
69. The regulations we are
incorporating by reference in this Final
Rule impose filing requirements only on
RTOs and ISOs, none of which is a
small business. Moreover, these
requirements are designed to benefit all
customers, including small businesses.
As noted above, adoption of consensus
standards helps ensure the
reasonableness of the standards by
requiring that the standards draw
support from a broad spectrum of
industry participants representing all
segments of the industry. Because of
that representation and the fact that
industry conducts business under these
standards, the Commission’s regulations
should reflect those standards that have
the widest possible support.
70. Accordingly, pursuant to section
605(b) of the RFA, the Commission
hereby certifies that the regulations
incorporated by reference herein will
not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the
Public Reference Room at (202) 502–
8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. Email the
Public Reference Room at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
VIII. Document Availability
71. 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 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First
Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426.
72. 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.
73. 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 email at
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 791–825r, 2601–
2645; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 7101–7352.
44 13
CFR 121.101.
45 13 CFR 121.201, Sector 22, Utilities & n.1.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
IX. Effective Date and Congressional
Notification
74. These regulations are effective
May 6, 2013. 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 38
Conflict of interests, Electric power
plants, Electric utilities, Incorporation
by reference, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
By the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Commission amends part 38, Chapter I,
Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as
follows.
PART 38—BUSINESS PRACTICE
STANDARDS AND COMMUNICATION
PROTOCOLS FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES
1. The authority citation for part 38
continues to read as follows:
■
2. Section 38.2 is amended by revising
paragraph (a)(12) and adding paragraph
(a)(13) to read as follows:
■
§ 38.2 Incorporation by reference of North
American Energy Standards Board
Wholesale Electric Quadrant standards.
(a) * * *
(12) Business Practices for
Measurement and Verification of
Wholesale Electricity Demand Response
(WEQ–015, 2010 Annual Plan Items 4(a)
and 4(b), March 21, 2011).
(13) Business Practice Standards for
Measurement and Verification of Energy
Efficiency Products (WEQ–021, 2010
Annual Plan Item 4(d), May 13, 2011).
*
*
*
*
*
Note: The following appendix will not be
published in the Code of Federal Regulations.
Appendix
List of Commenters46
Alliance to Save Energy (Alliance)
46 The abbreviations used to identify these
commenters in this Final Rule are shown
parenthetically.
E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM
07MRR1
14664
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 45 / Thursday, March 7, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
American Electric Power Service Corporation
(AEP)
DNV KEMA
DR Supporters 47
Edison Electric Institute (EEI)
Efficiency Evaluation Organization (EVO)
Electricity Consumers Resource Council
(ELCON)
Electric Power Supply Association (EPSA)
Hess Corporation (HESS)
Independent Market Monitor for PJM (PJM
IMM)
Industrial Energy Consumers of America
(IECA)
ISO/RTO Council (IRC)
John Lynch (Mr. Lynch)
North America Power Partners (NAPP)
New England Conference of Public Utilities
Commissioners (NECPUC)
New York Transmission Owners (NYTOs) 48
Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships,
Inc. (NEEP)
PSEG Companies (PSEG) 49
Southern Company Services, Inc. (Southern)
Viridity Energy, Inc.; EnergyConnect, Inc.;
and PJM Industrial Customer Coalition
(Viridity)
Women’s Energy Matters (WEM)
[FR Doc. 2013–04433 Filed 3–6–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Parts 73, 172, 173, 176, 177,
178, 184, and 189
[Docket No. FDA–2012–N–0010]
Food and Color Additives; Technical
Amendments
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
Final rule; technical
amendments.
ACTION:
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY: The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) is amending
certain regulations regarding food and
color additives to correct minor errors
(such as misspelled chemical names)
and to update office names and
addresses. This action is editorial in
nature and is intended to improve the
accuracy of the Agency’s regulations.
47 DR Supporters include Comverge, Inc., Energy
Connect, Inc., Energy Curtailment Specialists, Inc.,
EnerNOC, Inc., and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
48 New York Transmission Owners includes
Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation,
Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.,
Long Island Power Authority, New York Power
Authority, New York State Electric & Gas
Corporation, Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc.,
and Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation.
49 The PSEG Companies are: Public Service
Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G), PSEG Power
LLC (PSEG Power) and PSEG Energy Resources &
Trade LLC (PSEG ER&T).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:39 Mar 06, 2013
Jkt 229001
DATES:
This rule is effective March 7,
21 CFR Part 173
2013.
Food additives.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ellen M. Waldron, Center for Food
Safety and Applied Nutrition (HFS–
206), Food and Drug Administration,
5100 Paint Branch Pkwy., College Park,
MD 20740–3835, 240–402–1200.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are
making technical amendments to our
regulations under 21 CFR parts 73, 172,
173, 176, 177, 178, 184, and 189. In
brief, these amendments are as follows:
• Correct misspelled chemical names
in §§ 73.3129, 176.180, and 177.1210.
For example, we are revising § 73.3129
to replace ‘‘Disodium 1-amino-4-[[4-[(2bromo-1-oxoallyl)amino]-2sulphonatophenyl]amino]-9, 10dihydro-9,10-dioxoanthracene-2sulphonate’’ with ‘‘Disodium 1-amino-4[[4-[(2-bromo-1-oxoallyl)amino]-2sulfonatophenyl]amino]-9,10-dihydro9.10-dioxoanthracene-2-sulfonate’’;
• Correct a table entry in § 177.1500
regarding the melting point of certain
nylon 12T resins; and
• Amend §§ 172.712, 172.723,
172.809, 172.831, 172.833, 172.886,
173.25, 173.45, 173.325, 173.368,
177.1350, 177.1360, 177.1637, 177.2440,
177.2600, 178.1010, 178.3297, 184.1012,
184.1024, 184.1034, 184.1063, 184.1259,
184.1316, 184.1415, 184.1583, 184.1595,
184.1866, 184.1914, 184.1985, 189.110,
and 189.180 to remove archaic or
obsolete office names and replace them
with the current Office name ‘‘Office of
Food Additive Safety.’’ Where
appropriate, we also are updating the
street address to reflect our present
location at 5100 Paint Branch Parkway,
College Park, MD 20740, and contact
information to reflect our new telephone
number, 240–402–1200. The final rule
contains no collection of information.
Therefore, clearance by the Office of
Management and Budget under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 is not
required. Publication of this document
constitutes final action of these changes
under the Administrative Procedure Act
(5 U.S.C. 553). These amendments are
merely correcting nonsubstantive errors.
FDA, therefore, for good cause, finds
under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) and (d)(3)
that notice and public comment are
unnecessary.
Color additives, Cosmetics, Drugs,
Medical devices.
21 CFR Part 172
Food additives, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Fmt 4700
21 CFR Part 184
Food additives, Substances generally
recognized as safe.
21 CFR Part 189
Food additives, Food packaging,
Substances prohibited from use in
human food.
Therefore, under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act and under
authority delegated to the Commissioner
of Food and Drugs and redelegated to
the Director, Center for Food Safety and
Applied Nutrition, 21 CFR parts 73, 172,
173, 176, 177, 178, 184, and 189 are
amended as follows:
PART 73—LISTING OF COLOR
ADDITIVES EXEMPT FROM
CERTIFICATION
1. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 73 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 341, 342, 343,
348, 351, 352, 355, 361, 362, 371, 379e.
2. Amend § 73.3129 as follows:
a. Revise the section heading to read
as set forth below.
■ b. In paragraph (a), remove ‘‘disodium
1-amino-4-[[4-[(2-bromo-1oxoallyl)amino]-2sulphonatophenyl]amino]-9,10-dihydro9,10-dioxoanthracene-2-sulphonate’’
and in its place add ‘‘disodium 1-amino4-[[4-[(2-bromo-1-oxoallyl)amino]-2sulfonatophenyl]amino]-9,10-dihydro9,10-dioxoanthracene-2-sulfonate’’.
■
■
§ 73.3129 Disodium 1-amino-4-[[4-[(2bromo-1-oxoallyl)amino]-2sulfonatophenyl]amino]-9,10-dihydro-9,10dioxoanthracene-2-sulfonate.
*
*
*
Sfmt 4700
*
*
PART 172—FOOD ADDITIVES
PERMITTED FOR DIRECT ADDITION
TO FOOD FOR HUMAN
CONSUMPTION
3. The authority citation for 21 CFR
part 172 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 21 U.S.C. 321, 341, 342, 348,
371, 379e.
[Amended]
4. In § 172.712, in paragraph (b),
remove ‘‘the Office of Premarket
Approval, Center for Food Safety and
Applied Nutrition, 5100 Paint Branch
Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740’’ and in
its place add ‘‘the Office of Food
Additive Safety (HFS–200), Center for
Food Safety and Applied Nutrition,
■
21 CFR Part 73
Frm 00030
Food additives, Food packaging.
§ 172.712
List of Subjects
PO 00000
21 CFR Parts 176, 177, and 178
E:\FR\FM\07MRR1.SGM
07MRR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 45 (Thursday, March 7, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 14654-14664]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04433]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
18 CFR Part 38
[Docket No. RM05-5-020; Order No. 676-G]
Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols for
Public Utilities
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is
amending its regulations which establish standards for business
practices and electronic communications for public utilities to
incorporate by reference updated business practice standards adopted by
the Wholesale Electric Quadrant of the North American Energy Standards
Board to categorize various products and services for demand response
and energy efficiency and to support the measurement and verification
of these products and services in organized wholesale electric markets.
These standards provide common definitions and processes regarding
demand response and energy efficiency products in organized wholesale
electric markets where such products are offered. The standards also
require each regional transmission organization (RTO) and independent
system operator (ISO) to address in the RTO or ISO's governing
documents the performance evaluation methods to be used for demand
response and energy efficiency products. The standards thereby
facilitate the ability of demand response and energy efficiency
providers to participate in organized wholesale electric markets,
reducing transaction costs and providing an opportunity for more
customers to participate in these programs, especially for customers
that operate in more than one organized market.
DATES: This rule will become effective May 6, 2013. Dates for
implementation of the standards are provided in the Final Rule. This
incorporation by reference of certain publications in the rule is
approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of May 6, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Kathan (technical issues), Office of Energy Policy and
Innovation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-6404.
Mindi Sauter (legal issues), Office of the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426, (202) 502-6830.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Order No. 676-G
Table of Contents
I. Background............................ 2.
II. Discussion........................... 11.
A. Overview.......................... 11.
B. NAESB Phase II Demand Response M&V 14.
Standards.
1. Comments...................... 15.
a. Adoption of Phase II 15.
Demand Response M&V
Standards.
b. Level of Detail, 19.
Standardization, and Best
Practices.
c. Other Matters............. 26.
2. Commission Determination...... 33.
C. NAESB Energy Efficiency M&V 40.
Standards.
1. Comments...................... 41.
a. Adoption of Wholesale 41.
Energy Efficiency M&V
Standards.
b. Other Matters............. 45.
2. Commission Determination...... 47.
D. Incorporation by Reference/ 52.
Copyrighted Standards.
III. Implementation Dates and Procedures. 54.
IV. Notice of Use of Voluntary Consensus 58.
Standards.
V. Information Collection Statement...... 59.
VI. Environmental Analysis............... 67.
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act.......... 68.
VIII. Document Availability.............. 71.
IX. Effective Date and Congressional 74.
Notification.
[[Page 14655]]
Before Commissioners: Jon Wellinghoff, Chairman; Philip D. Moeller,
John R. Norris, Cheryl A. LaFleur, and Tony T. Clark.
Order No. 676-G
Final Rule
Issued February 21, 2013.
1. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is
amending its regulations at 18 CFR 38.2(a) (which establish standards
for business practices and electronic communications for public
utilities) \1\ to incorporate by reference \2\ updated business
practice standards adopted by the Wholesale Electric Quadrant (WEQ) of
the North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB) to categorize various
products and services for demand response and energy efficiency and to
support the measurement and verification (M&V) of these products and
services in organized wholesale electric markets. These standards
provide common definitions and processes regarding demand response and
energy efficiency products in organized wholesale electric markets
where such products are offered. The standards also require each
regional transmission organization (RTO) and independent system
operator (ISO) to address in the RTO's or ISO's governing documents the
performance evaluation methods to be used for demand response and
energy efficiency products. The standards thereby facilitate the
ability of demand response and energy efficiency providers to
participate in organized wholesale electric markets, reducing
transaction costs and providing an opportunity for more customers to
participate in these programs, especially for customers that operate in
more than one organized market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 18 CFR 38.2(a) (2012).
\2\ Incorporation by reference makes compliance with these
standards mandatory for public utilities subject to Part 38 of the
Commission's regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Background
2. NAESB is a private consensus standards developer that divides
its activities among four quadrants, each of which is composed of
members from all segments of its respective industry.\3\ NAESB is an
accredited standards organization under the auspices of the American
National Standards Institute (ANSI). NAESB's procedures are designed to
ensure that all industry participants can have input into the
development of a standard, whether or not they are members of NAESB,
and each wholesale electric standard that NAESB's WEQ adopts is
supported by a consensus of the seven industry segments: End Users,
Distribution/Load Serving Entities, Transmission, Generation,
Marketers/Brokers, Independent Grid Operators/Planners, and Technology/
Services. The WEQ process requires a super-majority vote of 67 percent
of the members of the WEQ's Executive Committee, with support from at
least 40 percent of each of the seven industry segments, to approve a
business practice standard.\4\ For final approval, 67 percent of the
WEQ's general membership must ratify the standards,\5\ at which point
compliance with NAESB's standards would be voluntary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The four quadrants are the wholesale and retail electric
quadrants and the wholesale and retail natural gas quadrants.
\4\ Under NAESB's procedures, interested persons may attend and
participate in NAESB committee meetings, and phone conferences, even
if they are not NAESB members.
\5\ See Standards for Business Practices and Communication
Protocols for Public Utilities, Order No. 676, FERC Stats. & Regs. ]
31,216, n.5 (2006), reh'g denied, Order No. 676-A, 116 FERC ] 61,255
(2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. In 2006, the Commission adopted Order No. 676, a Final Rule that
incorporated by reference business practice standards adopted by NAESB
applicable to public utilities.\6\ Since 2006, the NAESB consensus
industry stakeholder process has reviewed the NAESB business practice
standards for public utilities with a view to creating a more efficient
marketplace and it has adopted revisions. In a number of instances, the
Commission has incorporated the standards by reference into the
Commission's regulations, making them mandatory for the entities
identified in the standards.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Id.
\7\ Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols
for Public Utilities, Final Rule, Order No. 676-F, FERC Stats. &
Regs. ] 31,309 (2010); Final Rule, Order No. 676-E, FERC Stats. &
Regs. ] 31,299 (2009); order granting clarification and denying
reh'g, Order No. 676-D, 124 FERC ] 61,317 (2008), Final Rule, Order
No. 676-C, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,274 (2008), Final Rule, Order
No. 676-B, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,246 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. NAESB began work on developing business practice standards
pertaining to the measurement and verification of demand response \8\
products and services in July 2007, when the NAESB WEQ Demand Side
Management (DSM)--Energy Efficiency (EE) subcommittee began work on
this issue. Key to obtaining consensus on the initial set of demand
response measurement and verification standards was the agreement to
proceed with further work on more detailed technical standards for the
measurement and verification of demand response resources. This effort
led to the adoption and ratification by NAESB of measurement and
verification standards early in 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Demand response means a reduction in the consumption of
electric energy by customers from their expected consumption in
response to an increase in the price of electric energy or to
incentive payments designed to induce lower consumption of electric
energy. 18 CFR 35.28(b)(4) (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. On April 17, 2009, NAESB filed a report informing the Commission
that it had adopted an initial set of business practice standards to
categorize various demand response products and services and to support
the measurement and verification of these products and services in
organized wholesale electric markets (Phase I Demand Response M&V
Standards).\9\ As mentioned above, the NAESB report recognized that
adoption of these standards would need to be followed by the
development of more detailed technical standards for the measurement
and verification of demand response products and services in RTO and
ISO areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Report, North American Energy Standards Board, Measurement
and Verification of Demand Response Products, Docket No. RM05-5-017,
at 2 (filed Apr. 17, 2009) (April 2009 Report).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. On April 15, 2010, the Commission issued Order No. 676-F,
incorporating by reference the Phase I Demand Response M&V Standards
that categorize various demand response products and services and
support the measurement and verification of these products and services
in organized wholesale electric markets.\10\ The Commission stated that
``[w]hile NAESB's Phase I [Demand Response] M&V Standards represent a
good first step, additional substantive standards would appear
beneficial in creating transparent and consistent measurement and
verification of demand response products and services in wholesale
electric markets.''\11\ The Commission also stated that ``we expect
Phase II will address issues related to baseline development * * *
.''\12\ The Commission anticipated that the measurement and
verification standards needed to accomplish this goal would be a focus
of NAESB's Phase II measurement and verification standards development
efforts.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Standards for Business Practices and Communication
Protocols for Public Utilities, Order No. 676-F, FERC Stats. & Regs.
] 31,309 (2010).
\11\ Order No. 676-F, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,309 at P 32.
\12\ Id. P 37. The NAESB Phase I Demand Response M&V Standards
defines ``baseline'' as ``an estimate of the electricity that would
have been consumed by a Demand Resource in the absence of a Demand
Response Event.''
\13\ Id. P 32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 14656]]
7. NAESB subsequently initiated specific plans to improve and adopt
additional technical standards and filed a report\14\ with the
Commission on May 3, 2011 informing the Commission that NAESB had
adopted a revised set of standards covering measurement and
verification (Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards) and a new set of
standards covering energy efficiency\15\ (Wholesale Energy Efficiency
M&V Standards), and explaining its efforts to develop these standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Report, North American Energy Standards Board, Measurement
and Verification of Demand Response Products, Docket No. RM05-5-020
(filed May 3, 2011) (May 2011 Report).
\15\ Energy efficiency, Electricity:
[r]efers to programs that are aimed at reducing the energy used
by specific end-use devices and systems, typically without affecting
the services provided. These programs reduce overall electricity
consumption (reported in megawatthours), often without explicit
consideration for the timing of program-induced savings. Such
savings are generally achieved by substituting technologically more
advanced equipment to produce the same level of end-use services
(e.g. lighting, heating, motor drive) with less electricity.
Examples include high-efficiency appliances, efficient lighting
programs, high-efficiency heating, ventilating and air conditioning
(HVAC) systems or control modifications, efficient building design,
advanced electric motor drives, and heat recovery systems.
U.S. Energy Information Administration Glossary, https://www.eia.gov/tools/glossary/index.cfm?id=E (last visited Feb. 6,
2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. After a review of NAESB's May 2011 Report, the Commission issued
a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) on April 19, 2012 proposing to
amend the Commission's regulations at 18 CFR 38.2 to incorporate by
reference specific enumerated business practice standards\16\ and
seeking comment on both the proposed Energy Efficiency and Phase II
Demand Response M&V Standards.\17\ In light of the Commission's
statements in Order No. 676-F regarding the importance of consistency
and specificity as discussed above, the Commission requested comments
in the NOPR as to whether the Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards
were sufficiently detailed to provide transparent measurement and
verification among regions, and whether greater detail or
prescriptiveness would be appropriate. The Commission also requested
comments on the degree to which encouraging greater consistency among
markets and regions would reduce costs for customers and market
participants or otherwise facilitate participation by end users in
multiple markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ NAESB Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards collectively
identified by NAESB as 2010 Wholesale Electric Quadrant Annual Plan
Item 4(a) and 4(b): General--Section 015-1.0; Telemetry--Section
015-1.1; After-the-Fact Metering--Section 015-1.2; Performance
Evaluation--Section 015-1.3; General--Section 015-1.4; Telemetry--
Section 015-1.5; After-the-Fact Metering--Section 015-1.6;
Performance Evaluation--Section 015-1.7; General--Section 015-1.8;
Telemetry--Section 015-1.9; After-the-Fact Metering--Section 015-
1.10; Performance Evaluation--Section 015-1.11; General--Section
015-1.12; Telemetry--Section 015-1.13; After-the-Fact Metering--
Section 015-1.14; Performance Evaluation--Section 015-1.15; Baseline
Information--Section 015-1.16; Event Information--Section 015-1.17;
Special Processing--Section 015-1.18; Baseline Information--Section
015-1.19; Event Information--Section 015-1.20; Special Processing--
Section 015-1.21; Baseline Information--Section 015-1.22; Event
Information--Section 015-1.23; Special Processing--Section 015-1.24;
Baseline Information--Section 015-1.25; Event Information--Section
015-1.26; Special Processing--Section 015-1.27; Baseline
Information--Section 015-1.28; Event Information--Section 015-1.29;
and Special Processing--Section 015-1.30. NAESB Energy Efficiency
M&V Standards collectively identified by NAESB as 2010 Wholesale
Electric Quadrant Annual Plan Item 4(d): Energy Efficiency Resource
Use Criteria in Wholesale Markets--Section 021-3.1; General
Measurement and Verification Plan Requirements--Section 021-3.2;
Post Installation M&V Report Components--Section 021-3.3;
Performance Reporting--Section 021-3.4; M&V Supporting Documents--
Section 021-3.5; M&V Methodologies--Section 021-3.6; Energy
Efficiency Baseline Conditions--Section 021-3.7; Statistical
Significance--Section 021-3.8; Nominated Energy Efficiency Value
Calculations/Demand Reduction Value Calculations--Section 021-3.9;
Measurement and Monitoring--Section 021-3.10; Measurement Equipment
Specifications--Section 021-3.11; and Data Validation--Section 021-
3.12.
\17\ Standards for Business Practices and Communication
Protocols for Public Utilities, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 77 FR
24427 (Apr. 24, 2012), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,688 (2012) (Energy
Efficiency and Phase II M&V NOPR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. To the extent that commenters recommended greater detail in the
standards, the Commission requested additional comment as to whether
market participants have attained sufficient experience in demand
response to allow them to identify best practices in the area of
measurement and verification, particularly for performance evaluation-
type areas such as baseline calculations, to help inform any guidance
that the Commission may provide. Similarly, the Commission requested
comment regarding particular areas where enhancing such detail or
consistency would be most useful. The Commission also requested comment
on whether further development of more substantive measurement and
verification standards broadly applicable to RTOs and ISOs is necessary
and, if so, whether a NAESB or a Commission-led, or other process
should carry out the task. Further, the Commission requested that, if
commenters prefer the NAESB process, they comment on the best
relationship between NAESB and the RTO and ISO stakeholder process to
facilitate the formulation of standards.
10. In response to the NAESB Energy Efficiency and Phase II M&V
NOPR, 21 entities filed comments.\18\ On July 17, 2012, NAESB filed a
report with the Commission stating it made a modification to the Energy
Efficiency M&V Standards by deleting reference to the International
Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP).\19\ Using
NAESB operating procedures for minor clarifications and corrections to
standards, the WEQ Executive Committee approved the correction on June
15, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ The names of entities that filed comments are listed in the
Appendix to this Final Rule.
\19\ Errata Report, North American Energy Standards Board,
Measurement and Verification of Demand Response Products, Docket No.
RM05-5-000, RM05-5-020 (filed July 17, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Discussion
A. Overview
11. In this Final Rule, the Commission is revising its regulations
at 18 CFR 38.2 to incorporate by reference the Phase II Demand Response
M&V Standards and the Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V Standards. The
Commission concludes that the Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards
represent an incremental improvement to the business practices for
measuring and verifying demand resource products and services in the
organized wholesale electric markets. This phase of demand response
standard development builds upon the work that already has been
accomplished to provide demand response resources with opportunities to
participate in organized wholesale electric markets, including accurate
measurement and verification of demand response resources' performance.
Similarly, the Commission concludes that the Wholesale Energy
Efficiency M&V Standards facilitate energy efficiency providers'
ability to participate in electricity markets by providing standardized
measurement requirements and reducing transaction costs, and assure
more effective evaluation of the performance of energy efficiency
products and services.
12. The Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards and Wholesale Energy
Efficiency Standards were approved by the WEQ and ratified by the NAESB
membership under NAESB's consensus procedures.\20\ As the Commission
found in Order No. 587,\21\ adoption of consensus business practice
standards is appropriate because the consensus process helps ensure the
reasonableness of the standards by requiring that the
[[Page 14657]]
standards draw support from a broad spectrum of industry participants
representing all segments of the industry. Moreover, since the industry
itself has to conduct business under these standards, the Commission's
regulations should reflect those business practice standards that have
the widest possible support.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ As noted earlier, 67 percent of the WEQ's general
membership voting is required for ratification of a business
practice standard.
\21\ Standards for Business Practices of Interstate Natural Gas
Pipelines, Order No. 587, 61 FR 39053 (July 26, 1996), FERC Stats. &
Regs. ] 31,038 (1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. The specific NAESB standards that the Commission is
incorporating by reference in this Final Rule are the Phase II Demand
Response M&V Standards and associated terms, and the Wholesale Energy
Efficiency M&V Standards and associated terms.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ The specific standards are enumerated in n.16 supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. NAESB Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards
14. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to incorporate by
reference the NAESB Phase II Demand Response M&V standards, which
include three sections: the first section (Introduction and Definition
of Terms) contains an overview of the standards and definitions, the
second section (Standards 015-1.0 through 015-1.15) contains standards
on Provision of Wholesale Electric Demand Response Energy, Capacity,
Reserve and Regulation Products, and the third section (Standards 015-
1.16 through 015-1.30) contains standards on the five performance
evaluation methodologies: (1) Maximum Base Load; (2) Meter Before/Meter
After; (3) Baseline Type-I (Interval Meter); (4) Baseline Type-II (Non-
Interval Meter); and (5) Metering Generator Output.
1. Comments
a. Adoption of Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards
15. The Commission sought comments on whether it should incorporate
by reference NAESB's proposed Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards.
Commenters supporting incorporation of the proposed NAESB Phase II
Demand Response M&V business practice standards into the Commission's
regulations include the IRC, EPSA, AEP, Indicated New York Transmission
Owners, DR Supporters, IECA, Hess, PSEG, and WEM. DR Supporters, IECA,
Hess and PSEG also recommend further standardization, as discussed in
detail below.
16. Viridity generally supports the incorporation of the Phase II
Demand Response M&V Standards, but also requests that the Commission
include in the final rule a requirement for RTOs and ISOs to adopt
performance evaluation methods that provide a reasonably accurate,
reasonably unbiased, and reasonably consistent baseline for a
customer's highly-variable load.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Viridity notes that NAESB defines ``highly-variable load''
as a customer that has a ``fluctuating or unpredictable electricity
usage pattern.'' Viridity states that these customers' ``business-
as-usual'' loads may have little or no relation to the weather; thus
predicting their loads is based on factors specific to the customer
instead of more universal factors such as the weather.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. EEI and Southern also generally support incorporation of the
Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards, but request that, to avoid
inadvertent ambiguity, the Commission clarify in the Final Rule and in
revisions to 18 CFR 38.2 that the NAESB standards and associated terms
for the Phase II Demand Response M&V and the Wholesale Energy
Efficiency M&V apply only in markets administered by RTOs and ISOs. EEI
and Southern further request that the Commission incorporate by
reference those provisions of the NAESB standards that limit their
applicability to RTO and ISO markets.
18. NAPP and the PJM IMM recommend against adopting the Phase II
Demand Response M&V Standards. As discussed below, the PJM IMM states
that the proposed standards do not reference the Peak Load Contribution
recently adopted in PJM, that they do not adequately define ``Capacity
Service,'' and that they inappropriately allow the same five approaches
for capacity as for energy products. It states that adopting the
standards as applicable to capacity creates the potential to ``reopen
and confuse the issue of double counting in PJM that was only recently
resolved.'' \24\ The PJM IMM also notes the difficulty of trying to
apply common measurement and verification standards across all RTOs and
ISOs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., 138 FERC ] 61,138 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Level of Detail, Standardization, and Best Practices
19. The Commission sought comments on whether the proposed NAESB
Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards were sufficiently detailed and
whether greater detail would be appropriate. The IRC believes that the
five performance evaluation methodologies in the NAESB Phase II Demand
Response M&V standards provide RTOs and ISOs with the necessary
flexibility to enable accurate M&V. EPSA agrees and believes it is
appropriate to defer to the RTO and ISO for an assessment of whether
greater detail is needed for a particular region, and to establish the
best next steps for refining demand response M&V mechanisms.
20. On the other hand, IECA states there has been minimal forward
movement in developing greater standardization and ``best practices''
for demand response M&V, and argues that the status quo is unjust,
unreasonable or unduly discriminatory and that the NAESB process
discriminates against manufacturers. DR Supporters indicate that the
proposed standards do not include specific and detailed characteristics
of performance evaluation methodologies and that, because the NAESB
standards defer to the RTO and ISO governing documents, the Phase II
standards do little to bring consistency or standardization to the
manner in which demand response is measured. The DR Supporters argue
that greater detail or prescriptiveness is appropriate with respect to
the measurement and verification of energy. However, DR Supporters
state that efforts to impose consistent M&V approaches across RTO and
ISO capacity markets would be misspent given that M&V in those markets
is so intertwined with the details of the specific capacity markets
themselves.
21. PSEG suggests that additional standards be developed that
define the testing and auditing requirements for demand response
resources to ensure that they have the capability to reduce demand
during their time commitment. PSEG also argues that the requirement to
provide real-time telemetry data for all four products (i.e., energy,
capacity, reserve, and regulation) should be mandatory, and requests
that the language in the standards be revised in the future to require
specific language in this regard. PSEG also requests that additional
standards be developed that require providers to measure demand
response delivered via behind-the-meter generation, noting that it is
important for system reliability planners to evaluate the impact of
environmental regulations that affect those types of facilities.
22. The Commission also sought comments on whether encouraging
greater consistency would reduce costs and facilitate participation.
The IRC contends that further efforts at developing a standardized M&V
performance evaluation methodology will not be productive at this time,
and could reduce the accuracy of demand response M&V and exclude
participation by resources with load shapes that do not conform to the
standard. The IRC believes that a flexible, regional approach to demand
[[Page 14658]]
response M&V is crucial to ensuring the growth of demand response
resources in wholesale electric markets. Hess recommends that the
Commission pursue simplicity and consistency over time (i.e.,
stability), as opposed to simply consistency across all RTOs and ISOs.
Hess urges the Commission to be mindful that confusion and loss of
customer confidence due to frequent rule changes might outweigh
marginal benefits of rule improvements.
23. However, DR Supporters indicate that encouraging greater
consistency among RTO and ISO energy markets and regions would reduce
costs and facilitate participation. DR Supporters argue that
differences in baseline designs require demand response providers that
are active across the country to pay for and/or develop, maintain and
adapt diverse systems in order to settle energy payments for demand
response customers in order to accommodate each market's differences,
and that this can result in customer dissatisfaction related to
increased costs and confusion.
24. The Commission also sought comments on whether the demand
response industry has had sufficient experience to enable it to
identify best practices. DR Supporters believe the industry has had
sufficient experience, and that this experience should be used to
develop a common energy baseline methodology for use across all RTOs
and ISOs, which would be available as an alternative to the approach a
particular RTO and ISO already has implemented. Hess agrees that there
is sufficient experience to identify best practices, and suggests that
the standards proposed for incorporation do not draw upon available
market experience to provide the details necessary to allow for true
standardization.
25. The Commission also asked commenters to identify particular
areas in which enhancing detail or consistency would be useful.
Viridity indicates that the proposed M&V standards give RTOs and ISOs
complete discretion as to whether a region utilizes any baseline
methodology that is suitable for highly-variable loads,\25\ leaving
these resources without a reasonable baseline against which their
performance can be measured. EPSA asserts that a lack of specific
comparability between demand resources and other resources that
participate in the wholesale market risks artificially skewing
incentives towards potentially less reliable resources, discouraging
needed investments and compromising the reliability of the system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See supra note 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Other Matters
26. The Commission requested comments on whether, if further
development of more substantive measurement and verification standards
broadly applicable to RTOs and ISOs is required, a NAESB, Commission-
led, or other process should carry out the task.\26\ Several
commenters, including EVO, Hess, IECA, DR Supporters, PSEG, and NYTOs
prefer a Commission-led process, with some suggesting that the
Department of Energy and NAESB also should participate. IECA, NYTOs,
and DR Supporters variously ask the Commission to undertake technical
conferences to review the M&V methods used by the different RTOs and
ISOs in order to fully understand their differences, develop a set of
consistent, detailed demand response M&V standards to enable demand
response resources to participate in multiple jurisdictions without
incurring costs of complying with different standards, determine the
M&V floor required to provide demand response compensation, and
establish a single Baseline Type I measurement and verification
approach for energy that any curtailment service provider would be
permitted to use in any Commission-jurisdictional market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ NOPR, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,688 at P 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
27. IRC states that in some cases, Commission action has provided
critical guidance that can be more effective in providing direction
than can be achieved in trying to reach consensus; therefore, future
Commission guidance potentially can avoid significant hours of debate
among NAESB participants on additional contentious M&V issues.
28. IRC further states that stakeholders have expressed only
limited support for launching an additional NAESB process. IRC urges
the Commission not to press for additional standardization at this
time; however, should the Commission decide to do so, IRC suggests that
the NAESB process is preferable to creating a new institutional process
and requests that the Commission provide detailed guidance on the
nature of further efforts. EPSA supports using existing NAESB processes
in order to avoid establishing competing processes for developing
demand response M&V baselines. EPSA believes the Phase II standards
serve as a benchmark for RTO and ISO governing documents, establishing
parameters that regional standards must either meet or surpass.
29. NAPP supports an industry-led standard development process,
because it believes the NAESB process has little participation from
demand response providers, energy efficiency providers and end use
customers.
30. The PJM IMM also recommends that if the Commission decides to
incorporate NAESB standards into its rules, the Commission should
clarify that ``Capacity Service'' necessarily means achieving a
reduction to a level at or below a resource's peak load contribution in
order to prevent confusion in the industry and to avoid inefficient
market rules. Additionally, the PJM IMM considers the NAESB standards
to be flawed because they do not differentiate metrics appropriate to
energy demand from metrics appropriate for capacity demand.
31. EPSA requests that the Commission confirm EPSA's understanding
of the NOPR's explanation regarding conflicts between the RTO's or
ISO's governing documents and the NAESB business standards.
Specifically, EPSA requests that the Commission clarify that, if a
conflict arises between a system operator's governing documents and the
NAESB business standards, the system operator's governing documents
would have precedence over the NAESB business standards with respect to
things such as consistency of terms or definitions, but that such
conflicts should not refer to use of or reliance on less rigorous
regional demand response M&V techniques. EPSA believes this provision
should allow for regional variation while protecting against a region
adopting measures and protocols that are inferior to those prescribed
in the Phase II proposal.
32. Mr. Lynch states that he opposes the proposed standard for
power plants regulating carbon dioxide emissions from new coal-based
power plants, arguing that such a regulation would effectively outlaw
coal as a fuel source for the next generation of power plants, causing
energy costs to rise.
2. Commission Determination
33. The Commission is revising its regulations at 18 CFR 38.2 to
incorporate by reference the revised NAESB Phase II Demand Response M&V
Standards, as they represent an incremental improvement to the existing
standards that we incorporated by reference in Order No. 676-F. This
phase of the demand response standard development builds upon the work
that allows demand response to participate in organized wholesale
electric markets, including accurate measurement and
[[Page 14659]]
monitoring of demand response resources' performance.
34. The Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards provide common
definitions and processes regarding demand response products in
organized wholesale electric markets where such products are offered.
The standards address the applicability of performance evaluation,
metering, and processes to each of the organized wholesale electric
markets. The changes included in the Phase II Demand Response M&V
Standards add greater specificity on items such as meter data reporting
deadlines. The standards also require each RTO and ISO to address in
the RTO's or ISO's governing documents the performance evaluation
methods to be used for demand response products. The performance
evaluation standards define each of the individual methods and their
use during demand response events. The changes to the performance
evaluation standards included in the Phase II Demand Response M&V
Standards add greater specificity on the use of the individual
performance evaluation methods.
35. The Commission concludes that the Phase II Demand Response M&V
Standards facilitate the ability of demand response providers to
participate in organized wholesale electric markets, reducing
transaction costs and providing an opportunity for more customers to
participate in these programs, especially for customers that operate in
more than one organized market. The improvements to the uniform set of
definitions and applicability requirements in the Phase II Demand
Response M&V Standards should further reduce differences in performance
evaluation methods between regions. Incorporating by reference these
measurement and verification standards also will improve the methods
and procedures for accurately measuring the performance of demand
response resources and assist in monitoring demand response services
for potential market manipulation.
36. The Commission appreciates the thoughtful comments and
proposals related to increasing the detail of the Phase II Demand
Response M&V Standards, as well as the proposals to establish a common
M&V approach that would supplement each RTO's and ISO's approved
methods. As the Commission has explained in prior orders, in choosing
to take advantage of the efficiency of the NAESB process to establish
technical standards for business practices and communication protocols
for the gas and electric industries, we follow the standard regulatory
process by which standards are incorporated by reference.\27\ These
rules appropriately balance the interests of the standards organization
and the expediency of governmental use of privately developed
standards. We find that, on balance, the objections raised to adopting
the standards do not warrant rejecting them. While additional efforts
to increase consistency across regions could benefit end users and
demand response providers, as presented the Phase II Demand Response
M&V Standards nonetheless represent an incremental improvement to the
standards incorporated by reference in Order No. 676-F. The Commission
therefore will incorporate by reference the standards without
modification. While the Commission will not require any additional
process to further refine or develop demand response measurement and
verification standards at this time, we will monitor efforts at RTOs
and ISOs and NAESB to address the issues raised in this proceeding and
otherwise made known to us, and take action in the future in a separate
docket as necessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See, e.g., Standards for Business Practices and
Communication Protocols for Public Utilities, Order No. 676-E, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,299, at P 118 (2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
37. We agree with EEI and Southern that the particular standards we
are incorporating by reference in this Final Rule apply only in
organized wholesale electric markets administered by RTOs or ISOs.
NAESB made this clear in the applicability section of its standards,
and we do not see any need to further amend 18 CFR 38.2. With respect
to questions regarding whether the relevant RTO or ISO governing
documents take precedence over the standards that we are incorporating
by reference, we find that the standards adopted are sufficiently
clear. To the extent that the Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards
refer to ``Governing Documents,'' in the event of a conflict with the
otherwise applicable NAESB standard, the governing documents will take
precedence. If such a conflict arises and is of concern to affected
parties, they may bring that concern to the Commission for
consideration.
38. We also find merit in the suggestions to develop baselines that
are more accurate for highly-variable load, to consider whether further
work is needed to reflect in the standards the distinct functions
provided by capacity and energy products, and to consider further
development of appropriate rules for demand response supported by
behind-the-meter generation. We encourage stakeholders to pursue these
issues as they consider potential enhancements to the NAESB standards.
39. Mr. Lynch's comments are not related to the issues in this
proceeding and, therefore, we will not address them here.
C. NAESB Energy Efficiency M&V Standards
40. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to incorporate by
reference the NAESB Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V Standards, which
include the following new standards--Energy Efficiency Resource Use
Criteria in Wholesale Markets--Section 021-3.1; General Measurement and
Verification Plan Requirements--Section 021-3.2; Post Installation M&V
Report Components--Section 021-3.3; Performance Reporting--Section 021-
3.4; M&V Supporting Documents--Section 021-3.5; M&V Methodologies--
Section 021-3.6; Energy Efficiency Baseline Conditions--Section 021-
3.7; Statistical Significance--Section 021-3.8; Nominated Energy
Efficiency Value Calculations/Demand Reduction Value Calculations--
Section 021-3.9; Measurement and Monitoring--Section 021-3.10;
Measurement Equipment Specifications--Section 021-3.11; and Data
Validation--Section 021-3.12. We address below the issues raised by the
commenters.
1. Comments
a. Adoption of Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V Standards
41. The Commission sought comments on whether it should incorporate
by reference NAESB's proposed Energy Efficiency M&V Standards. Several
commenters, including EEI, AEP, and IRC support incorporating the NAESB
Energy Efficiency M&V business practice standards into the Commission's
regulations.
42. Several other parties offer qualified support, including the DR
Supporters, IECA, and PSEG. While generally supporting the
incorporation of the energy efficiency business standards into the
Commission rules, these commenters recommend several changes. The DR
Supporters and IECA recommend that ``streamlined, cost-effective
application of coincidence factors for simple conversion of energy use
to peak demand reduction'' be included in the NAESB Energy Efficiency
M&V standards, particularly for capacity markets. In its comments, PSEG
recommends several specific modifications to the proposed Energy
Efficiency M&V standards including wording changes, changes in report
[[Page 14660]]
timing, and deletion of Standard 021-3.11.1.9, which addresses the
precision of measurement or monitoring equipment for proxy variables
that do not directly measure electrical demand. IRC states that the
Commission also should adopt and incorporate into its regulations the
Introduction and Principles and Applicability sections identified in
the Annual Plan item 4(d) as WEQ-021-1 and WE1-021-2, respectively. IRC
argues that the Introduction and Principles frame the context of the
standards and that the Applicability section: limits the applicability
of the standard to RTOs and ISOs; establishes that RTO and ISO
governing documents take precedence over the standard where there is a
conflict; clarifies that the standard does not establish requirements
related to compensation, design, operation, or use of energy efficiency
products and services, and does not require system operators to offer
energy efficiency products and services; and states that the standard
includes the requirements on energy efficiency resource providers for
M&V of energy efficiency products and services offered into wholesale
electric markets.
43. NEEP, NAPP, WEM, Alliance to Save Energy, and EVO recommend
against adopting the NAESB Energy Efficiency M&V Standards. NEEP and
EVO share PSEG's objections to the required precision of measurement of
monitoring equipment in Standard 021-3.11.1.9. NAPP, NEEP, Alliance to
Save Energy, and EVO object to removing references to the International
Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP). These
commenters are concerned that deleting references to the IPMVP in the
body of the Energy Efficiency M&V Standards removes the connection of
the NAESB energy efficiency standards to the leading industry-accepted
energy efficiency M&V guidance document. They argue that removing the
references to IPMVP could cause confusion in the field and impede
credible and consistent energy efficiency M&V, and will make it much
more difficult for the Commission to be assured of consistency and
transparency. NAPP argues that the NAESB process resulting in removing
references to the IPMVP did not involve broad industry participation.
44. DNV KEMA and NEEP recommend several modifications to the Energy
Efficiency M&V standards that address statistical significance and
accuracy of the measurement of proxy variables. NEEP proposes
modifications stating that the plus or minus two percent accuracy
requirement on equipment required in WEQ.021.3.11.9 is redundant with
the overall accuracy level required in Section WEQ.021.3.8. NEEP argues
that this requirement could lead to a departure from standard practice
in evaluating energy efficiency resources, and may compromise the
overall accuracy of the M&V results while imposing higher evaluation
costs. NEEP contends the prescribed level of accuracy for measurement
for monitoring equipment extends beyond the hardware-specific scope of
Section WEQ.021.3.11.
b. Other Matters
45. Several comments request that the Commission initiate a process
to examine specific energy efficiency standards or to convene a
technical conference to discuss the proposed energy efficiency
standards in general in order to resolve areas of concern. IECA
requests that the Commission add a process to create streamlined, cost-
effective application of factors for simple conversion of energy use to
peak reduction. EVO, NECPUC, and NEEP ask the Commission to convene a
technical conference to address energy efficiency issues identified by
commenters in this rulemaking process and to resolve areas of concern.
EVO, supported by NEEP, also asks the Commission to convene a technical
conference to address the removal of references to IPMVP from the
energy efficiency standards, arguing that the removal constitutes a
material change to the substance of the Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V
Standards.
46. NECPUC states its understanding that there is a significant
divergence in views amongst the NAESB board with respect to the
equipment accuracy requirement in WEQ.021.3.11.9, and NEEP states that
its comments on statistical precision (discussed above) were not
sufficiently considered or understood within the NAESB process.
2. Commission Determination
47. The Commission is revising its regulations at 18 CFR 38.2 to
incorporate by reference the NAESB Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V
Standards. The new standards define terms and definitions that can be
used to facilitate communications and provide standards for measurement
and verification methodologies for energy efficiency in organized
wholesale electric markets. These standards will reduce transaction
costs and provide an additional opportunity and increased incentive for
energy efficiency resources to participate in the wholesale markets
established in RTO and ISO regions.
48. As with the Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards discussed
above, the Wholesale Energy Efficiency M&V Standards were developed
through the consensus-based NAESB process. Most of the modifications
commenters suggest in response to the NOPR have already been considered
through the NAESB process; consequently, the Commission declines to
require that such modifications be included here. We find the standard
requiring a plus or minus two percent accuracy for measuring equipment,
to be reasonable; thus we incorporate it here, noting that its
applicability is limited to measuring equipment only. These standards
on measuring equipment accuracy reflect industry consensus, arrived at
through the NAESB standards development process, on the specific
statistical precision requirements associated with the reliable
operation of organized wholesale electric markets. Additionally, while
some express concern with NAESB's use of the minor clarifications and
correction procedures to remove the IPMVP requirement, this procedure
is permitted by NAESB's rules, and the NAESB Executive Committee
reached a consensus on the removal of references to IPMVP from the
energy efficiency M&V standards. Since the standards before us do not
include the IPMVP references, we will not address the comments in that
regard. As previously stated, NAESB followed its processes to remove
these references. We find that standards as presented are incremental
improvements and incorporation by reference does not foreclose
stakeholders from pursuing these enhancements and their concerns
through RTO and ISO or NAESB processes. The Commission, therefore,
incorporates the standards.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See n.21 supra; see also OMB Circular A-119 Revised,
February 10, 1998, available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_a119.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
49. Additionally, a few commenters suggested modifications that
were not considered during the consensus-based NAESB process, and the
Commission declines to require that those additional modifications
here. Specifically, we will not include provisions requiring RTOs to
carefully consider acceptance of industry developed coincidence factors
when evaluating Energy Efficiency M&V plans, and thus the Commission
will not undertake a Commission-led process to develop such coincidence
factors. We encourage stakeholders to pursue these issues as they
consider potential enhancements to the NAESB standards.
50. We will not incorporate into our regulations the Introduction
and Principles and Applicability sections
[[Page 14661]]
identified in the Annual Plan item 4(d) as WEQ-021-1 and WE1-021-2,
respectively, as we find that standards that we are incorporating by
reference are sufficiently clear that the standards apply to organized
wholesale electric markets administered by RTOs or ISOs.
51. The Commission also declines to convene a process or conduct
technical conferences to discuss potential changes to the Wholesale
Energy Efficiency M&V Standards. We conclude that it is appropriate to
allow industry to gain additional experience with these new standards
prior to considering additional enhancements. If the Commission
determines that further efforts are warranted at a later time, it will
take appropriate steps in a separate docket.
D. Incorporation by Reference/Copyrighted Standards
52. EVO and WEM object to the incorporation by reference of the
NAESB standards, maintaining they should not have to pay to obtain
copies of the copyrighted standards. Similarly, WEM expresses concern
that NAESB was utilized to develop the standards and contends that the
fee NAESB charges for access to its standards will be onerous for some
entities, noting that it experienced complications in getting free
access to the standards from NAESB during the NOPR comment period. The
PJM IMM also recommends that the Commission ensure that any standards
incorporated into its rules are published in full in the Federal
Register.
53. We addressed this issue at length in Order No. 676-E \29\ in
November of 2009, concluding that the NAESB process is an efficient and
cost-effective method of developing these standards, incorporation by
reference is the appropriate method for the Commission to adopt the
regulations, and the Commission is required to observe NAESB's
copyright.\30\ As we pointed out in that order, obtaining these
standards is not cost prohibitive. NAESB, in fact, makes the standards
available free for a limited period of time to those that want to view
the standards during comment periods related to Commission proposals to
incorporate standards by reference.\31\ For non-members seeking to
purchase a copy, an email copy of any final action (e.g., the Demand
Response Phase II standards) is available for $50, which is not
prohibitive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Order No. 676-E, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,299 at PP 115-
121.
\30\ Id.
\31\ See https://www.naesb.org/misc/NAESB_Nonmember_Evaluation_LockLizard.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Implementation Dates and Procedures
54. The Commission is requiring, consistent with our regulations at
18 CFR 35.28(c)(vi), each RTO and ISO to revise its OATT to include the
NAESB Energy Efficiency and Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards we
are incorporating by reference herein. For standards that do not
require implementing tariff provisions, the Commission will allow the
RTO or ISO to incorporate the WEQ standard by reference in its OATT.
Compliance with the standards incorporated in this Final Rule will be
required beginning on the same date that the rule becomes effective
(i.e., sixty days after publication in the Federal Register), even if
this precedes the filing of a revised OATT reflecting these new
requirements.
55. However, as we directed in the Phase I Demand Response M&V
Final Rule, to lighten the burden associated with an immediate, stand-
alone filing of a revised tariff reflecting the standards incorporated
by reference in this Final Rule, we are giving RTOs and ISOs the option
of including these changes as part of an unrelated tariff filing, even
though compliance with the revised standards is required beginning on
the effective date of this Final Rule.\32\ If the RTO or ISO makes no
unrelated tariff filing by December 31, 2013, it must make a separate
tariff filing incorporating these standards by that date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ See Order No. 676-F, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,309 at P 44.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
56. If adoption of these standards does not require any changes or
revisions to existing OATT provisions, RTOs and ISOs may comply with
this rule by adding a provision to their OATTs that incorporates the
standards adopted in this rule by reference, including the standard
number used to identify the standard. To incorporate this standard into
their OATTs, RTOs and ISOs must use the following language in their
OATTs: Measurement and Verification of Wholesale Electricity Efficiency
(WEQ-021 2010 Annual Plan Item 4(d), July 16, 2012; and Measurement and
Verification of Wholesale Electricity Demand Response (WEQ-015, 2010
Annual Plan Items 4(a) and 4(b), March 21, 2011).
57. If a RTO or ISO requests waiver of a standard, it will not be
required to comply with the standard until the Commission acts on its
waiver request. Therefore, if a RTO or ISO has obtained a waiver or has
a pending request for a waiver, its proposed revision to its OATT
should not include the standard number associated with the standard for
which it has obtained or seeks a waiver. Instead, the RTO's or ISO's
OATT should specify those standards for which the RTO or ISO has
obtained a waiver or has pending a request for waiver. If and when a
waiver request is denied, the RTO or ISO will be required to include in
its OATT the standard(s) for which waiver was denied.
IV. Notice of Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards
58. In section 12(d) of NTT&AA,\33\ Congress affirmatively requires
federal agencies to use technical standards developed by voluntary
consensus standards organizations, like NAESB, as the means to carry
out policy objectives or activities determined by the agencies unless
use of such standards would be inconsistent with applicable law or
otherwise impractical.\34\ NAESB approved the standards under its
consensus procedures. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-119
(Sec. 11) (February 10, 1998) provides that federal agencies should
publish a request for comment in a NOPR when the agency is seeking to
issue or revise a regulation proposing to adopt a voluntary consensus
standard or a government-unique standard. The Commission published a
request for comment in the Energy Efficiency and Phase II Demand
Response M&V NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995.
\34\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Information Collection Statement
59. The Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) regulations require
approval of certain information collection requirements imposed by
agency rules.\35\ Upon approval of a collection of information, OMB
will assign an OMB control number and an expiration date. Respondents
subject to the filing requirements of a rule will not be penalized for
failing to respond to these collections of information unless the
collections of information display a valid OMB control number. The OMB
Control Numbers will not be displayed in the NAESB standards; an
explanation will be included in the clearance package submitted to OMB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ 5 CFR 1320.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
60. This Final Rule upgrades the Commission's current business
practice and communication standards to include NAESB's Energy
Efficiency M&V Standards and Phase II Demand Response M&V Standards.
The implementation of these standards is necessary to increase the
efficiency of demand response and energy efficiency
[[Page 14662]]
in organized wholesale electric markets. In addition, requiring such
information ensures a common means of communication and ensures common
business practices that provide participants engaged in transactions
with demand response programs with timely information and consistent
business procedures across multiple markets. The implementation of
these data requirements will help the Commission carry out its
responsibilities under the Federal Power Act.
61. The Commission sought comments on its burden estimates
associated with adoption of the NOPR proposals. In response to the
NOPR, no comments were filed that addressed the reporting burden
imposed by these requirements. Therefore the Commission will use these
same estimates in this Final Rule.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. of
FERC collection No. of responses per Hours per Total No. of
number respondents respondent response hours
................ (A) (B) (C) (A) x (B) x
(C)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Demand Response Standards..... FERC-516 \36\... 6 1 4 24
FERC-717\37\.... 6 1 9 54
Energy Efficiency Standards... FERC-516........ 6 1 6 36
FERC-717........ 6 1 12 72
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total for FERC-516............ 60
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total for FERC-717............ 126
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total One-Time Burden......... 186
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Annual Hours for Collection: (Reporting and Recordkeeping,
(if appropriate)) = 186 hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ ``FERC-516'' is the Commission's identifier that
corresponds to OMB control no. 1902-0096 which identifies the
information collection associated with Electric Rate Schedules and
Tariff Filings.
\37\ ``FERC-717'' is the Commission's identifier that
corresponds to OMB control no. 1902-0173, which identifies the
information collection associated with Standards for Business
Practices and Communication Protocols for Public Utilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information Collection Costs: The Commission projects the average
annualized cost for all respondents to be the following: \38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ The Total Annual Cost for information collection is
$10,974. This number is reached by multiplying the total hours to
prepare responses (186) by an hourly wage estimate of $59 (a
composite estimate of wages plus benefits that includes legal,
technical and support staff rates. Based on data from the Bureau of
Labor Statistics at https://bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_221000.htm
and https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm). (78 hours for
demand response standards + 108 hours for energy efficiency
standards) x $59/hour = $10,974.
FERC-516: 60 hours*$59/hour = $3,540 ($590 per respondent).
FERC-717: 126 hours*59/hour = $7,434 ($1,239 per respondent).
The following table breaks out the cost by standard:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERC-717
FERC-516 (tariff (standards
filing) implementation)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Demand Response Standards Capital/ $1,416 $3,186
Startup Costs....................
Demand Response Standards N/A N/A
Annualized Costs (Operations &
Maintenance).....................
Energy Efficiency Standards 2,124 4,248
Capital/Startup Costs............
Energy Efficiency Standards N/A N/A
Annualized Costs (Operations &
Maintenance).....................
................. .................
Demand Response Standards Total 1,416 3,186 \39\
Costs............................
Energy Efficiency Standards Total 2,124 4,248 \40\
Costs............................
All Standards Total Costs......... 3,540 7,434
------------------------------------------------------------------------
62. These new information collection requirements are mandatory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ We note that 24 hours at $59/hour = $1,416 and 54 hours at
$59/hour = $3,186.
\40\ We note that 36 hours at $59/hour = $2,124 and 72 hours at
$59/hour = $4,248.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title: Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols
for Public Utilities (FERC-717); Electric Rate Schedule Filings (FERC-
516).
Action: Information collection.
OMB Control No.: 1902-0096 (FERC-516); 1902-0173 (FERC-717).
Respondents: RTO and ISOs.
Frequency of Responses: One-time implementation.
63. Necessity of Information: The Commission's regulations adopted
in this rule upgrade the Commission's current business practices and
communication standards by standardizing the definitions used by RTOs
and ISOs to identify their various energy efficiency and demand
response products and to measure and verify the results obtained by
these products. Moreover, the implementation of these data requirements
will help ensure consistency among the RTOs/ISOs with respect to the
measurement and verification of energy efficiency and demand response
performance in their organized wholesale electric markets.
64. Internal Review: The Commission has reviewed the information
collection requirements and has determined, as discussed above, that
its action in this proceeding is necessary because this rule increases
access to standardized information for participants in wholesale energy
markets that administer demand response and energy efficiency products
and services. This rule also facilitates the ability of demand response
and energy efficiency providers to participate in electricity markets,
reducing transaction costs and providing an opportunity for more
[[Page 14663]]
customers to participate in these programs.
65. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting
requirements by contacting the following: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426 [Attn: Ellen
Brown, Office of the Executive Director, email: DataClearance@ferc.gov,
phone: (202) 502-8663, fax: (202) 273-0873],
66. For submitting comments concerning the collection of
information and the associated burden estimate, please send your
comments to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20503 [Attention: Desk Officer
for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, phone: (202) 395-4718,
fax: (202) 395-7285]. For security reasons, comments to OMB should be
submitted by email to: oira submission@omb.eop.gov. Comments submitted
to OMB should reference the appropriate OMB Control Number(s) and
collection number(s) (OMB Control No. 1902-0096 for FERC-516, and/or
OMB Control No. 1902-0173 for FERC-717).
VI. Environmental Analysis
67. 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.\41\ The
Commission has categorically excluded certain actions from these
requirements as not having a significant effect on the human
environment.\42\ The actions adopted here fall within categorical
exclusions in the Commission's regulations for rules that are
clarifying, corrective, or procedural, for information gathering
analysis, and dissemination, and for sales, exchange, and
transportation of natural gas and electric power that requires no
construction of facilities. Therefore, an environmental assessment is
unnecessary and has not been prepared in this Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ Regulations Implementing National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969, Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. &
Regs., Regulations Preambles 1986-1990 ] 30,783 (1987).
\42\ 18 CFR 380.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act
68. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \43\ generally
requires a description and analysis of final rules that will have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The Small Business Administration's (SBA) Office of Size Standards
develops the numerical definition of a small business.\44\ The SBA has
established a size standard for electric utilities, stating that 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.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
\44\ 13 CFR 121.101.
\45\ 13 CFR 121.201, Sector 22, Utilities & n.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
69. The regulations we are incorporating by reference in this Final
Rule impose filing requirements only on RTOs and ISOs, none of which is
a small business. Moreover, these requirements are designed to benefit
all customers, including small businesses. As noted above, adoption of
consensus standards helps ensure the reasonableness of the standards by
requiring that the standards draw support from a broad spectrum of
industry participants representing all segments of the industry.
Because of that representation and the fact that industry conducts
business under these standards, the Commission's regulations should
reflect those standards that have the widest possible support.
70. Accordingly, pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, the
Commission hereby certifies that the regulations incorporated by
reference herein will not have a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
VIII. Document Availability
71. 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 5:00
p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426.
72. 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.
73. 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 email at
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY (202) 502-8659. Email the Public Reference Room at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
IX. Effective Date and Congressional Notification
74. These regulations are effective May 6, 2013. 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 38
Conflict of interests, Electric power plants, Electric utilities,
Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
By the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends part 38,
Chapter I, Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows.
PART 38--BUSINESS PRACTICE STANDARDS AND COMMUNICATION PROTOCOLS
FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES
0
1. The authority citation for part 38 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 791-825r, 2601-2645; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42
U.S.C. 7101-7352.
0
2. Section 38.2 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(12) and adding
paragraph (a)(13) to read as follows:
Sec. 38.2 Incorporation by reference of North American Energy
Standards Board Wholesale Electric Quadrant standards.
(a) * * *
(12) Business Practices for Measurement and Verification of
Wholesale Electricity Demand Response (WEQ-015, 2010 Annual Plan Items
4(a) and 4(b), March 21, 2011).
(13) Business Practice Standards for Measurement and Verification
of Energy Efficiency Products (WEQ-021, 2010 Annual Plan Item 4(d), May
13, 2011).
* * * * *
Note: The following appendix will not be published in the Code
of Federal Regulations.
Appendix
List of Commenters\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ The abbreviations used to identify these commenters in this
Final Rule are shown parenthetically.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alliance to Save Energy (Alliance)
[[Page 14664]]
American Electric Power Service Corporation (AEP)
DNV KEMA
DR Supporters \47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ DR Supporters include Comverge, Inc., Energy Connect, Inc.,
Energy Curtailment Specialists, Inc., EnerNOC, Inc., and Wal-Mart
Stores, Inc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Edison Electric Institute (EEI)
Efficiency Evaluation Organization (EVO)
Electricity Consumers Resource Council (ELCON)
Electric Power Supply Association (EPSA)
Hess Corporation (HESS)
Independent Market Monitor for PJM (PJM IMM)
Industrial Energy Consumers of America (IECA)
ISO/RTO Council (IRC)
John Lynch (Mr. Lynch)
North America Power Partners (NAPP)
New England Conference of Public Utilities Commissioners (NECPUC)
New York Transmission Owners (NYTOs) \48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ New York Transmission Owners includes Central Hudson Gas &
Electric Corporation, Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc.,
Long Island Power Authority, New York Power Authority, New York
State Electric & Gas Corporation, Orange and Rockland Utilities,
Inc., and Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships, Inc. (NEEP)
PSEG Companies (PSEG) \49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ The PSEG Companies are: Public Service Electric and Gas
Company (PSE&G), PSEG Power LLC (PSEG Power) and PSEG Energy
Resources & Trade LLC (PSEG ER&T).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Southern Company Services, Inc. (Southern)
Viridity Energy, Inc.; EnergyConnect, Inc.; and PJM Industrial
Customer Coalition (Viridity)
Women's Energy Matters (WEM)
[FR Doc. 2013-04433 Filed 3-6-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
