Communication of Operational Information Between Natural Gas Pipelines and Electric Transmission Operators, 44900-44909 [2013-17682]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
44900
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules
actuator fuel supply tube with a part
eligible for installation.
FAA’s Determination
We are proposing this AD because we
evaluated all the relevant information
and determined the unsafe condition
described previously is likely to exist or
develop in other products of the same
type design.
Proposed AD Requirements
This proposed AD would require
replacement of the VBV actuator fuel
supply tube, P/N 2165M22P01, with a
part eligible for installation.
Costs of Compliance
We estimate that this proposed AD
would affect about 59 engines installed
on airplanes of U.S. registry. We also
estimate that it would take about eight
hours per engine to replace the VBV
actuator fuel supply tube. The cost of
this part is about $14,310. The average
labor rate is $85 per hour. Based on
these figures, we estimate the cost of the
proposed AD on U.S. operators to be
$884,410.
Authority for This Rulemaking
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Regulatory Findings
We determined that this proposed AD
would not have federalism implications
under Executive Order 13132. This
proposed AD would not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on
the relationship between the national
Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify this proposed regulation:
13:49 Jul 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part
39 as follows:
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
Title 49 of the United States Code
specifies the FAA’s authority to issue
rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I,
section 106, describes the authority of
the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII:
Aviation Programs, describes in more
detail the scope of the Agency’s
authority.
We are issuing this rulemaking under
the authority described in Subtitle VII,
Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701:
‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that
section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in
air commerce by prescribing regulations
for practices, methods, and procedures
the Administrator finds necessary for
safety in air commerce. This regulation
is within the scope of that authority
because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on
products identified in this rulemaking
action.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under
the DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26,
1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation
in Alaska to the extent that it justifies
making a regulatory distinction, and
(4) Will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative,
on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
§ 39.13
[Amended]
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):
■
General Electric Company: Docket No. FAA–
2013–0499; Directorate Identifier 2013–
NE–20–AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by September
23, 2013.
(b) Affected ADs
None.
(c) Applicability
This AD applies to General Electric
Company (GE) GE90–110B1 and –115B
turbofan engines with variable bypass valve
(VBV) actuator fuel supply tube, part number
(P/N) 2165M22P01, installed.
(d) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by multiple events
of a leaking VBV actuator fuel supply tube.
We are issuing this AD to prevent failure of
the affected fuel supply tube, fuel leakage,
engine fire, and damage to the airplane.
(e) Compliance
(1) Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(2) At the next shop visit, after the effective
date of this AD, replace the VBV actuator fuel
supply tube, P/N 2165M22P01, with a part
eligible for installation.
(f) Definition
For the purpose of this AD, a shop visit is
the induction of an engine into the shop for
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
maintenance or overhaul. The separation of
engine flanges solely for the purposes of
transporting the engine without subsequent
engine maintenance does not constitute an
engine shop visit.
(g) Installation Prohibition
After the effective date of this AD, do not
install a VBV actuator fuel supply tube, P/N
2165M22P01, onto any engine.
(h) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
The Manager, Engine Certification Office,
FAA, may approve AMOCs for this AD. Use
the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19 to make your
request.
(i) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Jason Yang, Aerospace Engineer,
Engine Certification Office, FAA, 12 New
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA
01803; phone: 781–238–7747; fax: 781–238–
7199; email: jason.yang@faa.gov.
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact General Electric Company,
GE Aviation, Room 285, One Neumann Way,
Cincinnati, OH 45215; phone: 513–552–3272;
email: geae.aoc@ge.com.
(3) You may view this service information
at the FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate,
12 New England Executive Park, Burlington,
MA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call 781–238–7125.
Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on
July 17, 2013.
Thomas A. Boudreau,
Acting Directorate Assistant Manager, Engine
& Propeller Directorate Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–17884 Filed 7–24–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
18 CFR Parts 38 and 284
[Docket No. RM13–17–000]
Communication of Operational
Information Between Natural Gas
Pipelines and Electric Transmission
Operators
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (Commission) is
proposing to revise Parts 38 and 284 of
the Commission’s regulations to provide
explicit authority to interstate natural
gas pipelines and public utilities that
own, operate, or control facilities used
for the transmission of electric energy in
interstate commerce to share nonpublic, operational information with
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules
each other for the purpose of promoting
reliable service or operational planning
on either the public utility’s or
pipeline’s system.
DATES: Comments are due August 26,
2013.
Comments, identified by
docket number, may be filed in the
following ways:
• Electronic Filing through https://
www.ferc.gov. Documents created
electronically using word processing
software should be filed in native
applications or print-to-PDF format and
not in a scanned format.
• Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable
to file electronically may mail or handdeliver comments to: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the
Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
Instructions: For detailed instructions
on submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the Comment Procedures Section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Caroline Daly (Technical Information),
Office of Energy Policy & Innovation,
888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426, (202) 502–8931,
caroline.daly@ferc.gov.
Anna Fernandez (Legal Information),
Office of the General Counsel, 888
First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426, (202) 502–6682,
anna.fernandez@ferc.gov.
ADDRESSES:
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. In this Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, the Commission is
proposing to revise Parts 38 and 284 of
the Commission’s regulations to provide
explicit authority to interstate natural
gas pipelines and public utilities that
own, operate, or control facilities used
for the transmission of electric energy in
interstate commerce to share nonpublic, operational information with
each other for the purpose of promoting
reliable service or operational planning
on either the public utility’s or
pipeline’s system.1 This proposal will
help ensure the reliability of pipeline
and public utility transmission service
by permitting transmission operators to
share the information that they deem
necessary to promote the reliability and
integrity of their systems with each
other. However, recipients of that nonpublic, operational information would
be subject to a No-Conduit Rule that
prohibits subsequent disclosure of that
information to an affiliate or third party.
1 For ease of reference, we will refer to these
parties collectively as ‘‘transmission operators.’’
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:49 Jul 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
I. Background
2. In recent years, reliance on natural
gas as a fuel for electric generation has
steadily increased.2 This trend is
expected to continue into the future,
resulting in greater interdependence
between the natural gas and electric
industries.3 Several events over the last
few years, such as the Southwest Cold
Weather Event,4 show the crucial
interconnection between natural gas
pipelines and electric transmission
operators and the need for robust
communication between these industry
sectors to ensure that both systems
operate safely and effectively for the
benefit of their customers. While
entities from both industries have
already begun efforts to improve
coordination, further sharing of nonpublic, operational information between
transmission operators could enhance
system reliability and contingency
planning in both industries.
3. On February 15, 2012, the
Commission issued a notice in Docket
No. AD12–12–000 requesting comments
on various aspects of gas-electric
interdependence and coordination in
response to questions posed by
2 See, e.g., Energy Information Administration,
Fuel Competition in Power Generation and
Elasticities of Substitution (June 2012); Richard
Smead, All Industry Segments Working for Success
in Growing Gas-Fired Generation (Nov. 15, 2012),
available at https://www.navigant.com/insights/
library/energy/2012/gas_fired_generation/; ISO–NE,
Addressing Gas Dependence at 3 (July 2012)
(reliance on natural gas-fired electricity in the
region increased from five percent in 1990 to 51
percent in 2011), available at https://www.isone.com/committees/comm_wkgrps/
strategic_planning_discussion/materials/naturalgas-white-paper-draft-july-2012.pdf.
3 See, e.g., North American Electric Reliability
Corporation, 2013 Special Reliability Assessment:
Accommodating an Increased Dependence on
Natural Gas for Electric Power; Phase II: A
Vulnerability and Scenario Assessment for the
North American Bulk Power System at 1 (May 2013)
(‘‘Over the past decade, natural gas-fired generation
rose significantly from 17 percent to 25 percent of
U.S. power generation and is now the largest fuel
source for generation capacity. Gas use is expected
to continue to increase in the future, both in
absolute terms and as a share of total power
generation and capacity.’’), available at https://
www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/ra/
Reliability%20Assessments%20DL/
NERC_PhaseII_FINAL.pdf; Energy Information
Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2013 Early
Release Overview (2013) (showing electric
generation from natural gas rising from 13 percent
in 1993 to 30 percent in 2040), available at https://
www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/er/early_elecgen.cfm;
The New England State Committee on Electricity,
Natural Gas Infrastructure and Electric Generation:
A Review of Issues Facing New England (Dec. 14,
2012), available at https://www.nescoe.com/
uploads/Phase_I_Report_12-17-2012_Final.pdf.
4 See FERC/NERC, Report on Outages and
Curtailments During the Southwest Cold Weather
Event of February 1–5, 2011 (2011), available at
https://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/08-16-11report.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44901
members of the Commission.5 In order
to better understand the interface
between the electric and natural gas
pipeline industries and identify areas
for improved coordination, the
questions covered a variety of topics
including market structure and rules,
scheduling, communications,
infrastructure and reliability. In
response to the notice, the Commission
received comments from 79 entities,
with some raising concerns that current
laws, regulations, or tariffs may hinder
the sharing of such information.
4. During August 2012, the
Commission convened five regional
conferences for the purpose of exploring
these issues and obtaining further
information from the electric and
natural gas industries regarding
coordination between the industries.
Representatives from a cross-section of
both industries attended the regional
conferences, with total attendance
exceeding 1,200 registrants. Among the
topics discussed at the conferences were
communications, coordination, and
information-sharing. Participants at
multiple conferences again expressed
concern that Commission rules and
policies could be impeding further
efforts to improve communication
between the industries.6 Some natural
gas pipelines and Regional
Transmission Organizations and
Independent System Operators (RTOs/
ISOs) also noted that, although they
make significant amounts of operational
information publicly available, there is
reluctance to share information on a
more granular level because of concerns
about violating statutory prohibitions
against undue preference for any
customer or customer class.7
5. On November 15, 2012, the
Commission issued an order directing
further technical conferences and
5 Coordination Between Natural Gas and
Electricity Markets, Docket No. AD12–12–000 (Feb.
15, 2012) (Notice Assigning Docket No. and
Requesting Comments) (available at https://
elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/common/
opennat.asp?fileID=12893828). See also
Commissioner Philip D. Moeller, Request for
Comments of Commissioner Moeller on
Coordination between the Natural Gas and
Electricity Markets (Feb. 3, 2012), available at
https://www.ferc.gov/about/com-mem/moeller/
moellergaselectricletter.pdf; Commissioner Cheryl
A. LaFleur, Statement regarding Standards for
Business Practices for Interstate Natural Gas
Pipelines (Feb. 16, 2012), available at https://
www.ferc.gov/media/statements-speeches/lafleur/
2012/02-16-12-lafleur-G-1.asp.
6 See FERC Staff Report on Gas-Electric
Coordination Technical Conferences (Nov. 2012),
available at https://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/
11-15-12-coordination.pdf (November 15 Staff
Report).
7 November 15 Staff Report at 24.
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
44902
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules
reports.8 In the November 15 Order, the
Commission acknowledged the
concerns regarding communications
between the two industries, but found
that there was little specific discussion
of potential clarifications or potential
changes to the Commission’s
regulations.9 The Commission,
therefore, directed Commission staff to
convene a technical conference to
identify areas in which additional
Commission guidance or potential
regulatory changes could be
considered.10
6. Pursuant to the November 15
Order, on December 7, 2012, a Notice of
Request for Comments and Technical
Conference to be held on February 13,
2013 was issued on information sharing
and communication issues between the
natural gas and electricity industries.11
Interested parties were asked to file
comments prior to the technical
conference on three questions related to
communications and information
sharing. Twenty-seven comments were
filed in response to the Notice of
Request for Comments and Technical
Conference,12 and more than 350
persons, representing a cross-section of
industry, registered for the technical
conference.
7. In response to the Notice of Request
for Comments and Technical
Conference, and at the February 13
technical conference itself, natural gas
and electric industry participants
described a variety of actions that are
currently being taken to improve
communications and information
sharing between the two industries.
However, several entities acknowledged
that system reliability and contingency
planning could be further enhanced by
the sharing of non-public, operational
information directly between
transmission operators.13 Several
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
8 Coordination
Between Natural Gas and
Electricity Markets, 141 FERC ¶ 61,125 (2012)
(November 15 Order).
9 Id. P 5.
10 Id.
11 Coordination between Natural Gas and
Electricity Markets, Docket No. AD12–12–000 (Dec.
7, 2012) (Notice Of Request for Comments and
Technical Conference) (https://www.ferc.gov/
EventCalendar/Files/20121207134434-AD12-12000TC1.pdf); 77 Fed. Reg. 74180 (Dec. 13, 2012)
(https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-12-13/pdf/
2012-30063.pdf).
12 A list of commenters with the abbreviations
used to identify them is attached as an Appendix.
13 See, e.g., MISO Comments, Docket No. AD12–
12–000, at 3 (filed Jan. 7, 2013), 6; ISO–NE
Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–000, at 4 (filed
Jan. 7, 2013); SPP Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–
000, at 5 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); PJM Comments, Docket
No. AD12–12–000, at 3 (filed Jan. 11, 2013);
MidAmerican Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–
000, at 9–10 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); BPA Comments,
Docket No. AD12–12–000, at 6 (filed Jan. 7, 2013);
NYTOs Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–000, at 4
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:49 Jul 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
transmission operators pointed out that
there is general reluctance to share such
information because of concerns that
doing so could be a violation of current
laws, regulations or tariffs.14 For
example, INGAA stated that there is
some risk that a pipeline could be
subject to an allegation of undue
discrimination in violation of section 4
of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) if it
provides an electric transmission
operator with non-public transmission
information with respect to any
transportation or sale of natural gas
without contemporaneously disclosing
that information to all other shippers or
potential shippers.15 MidAmerican and
AGA also expressed concerns that the
Standards of Conduct 16 or the
Commission’s prohibition on ‘‘undue
discrimination’’ may present a real or
perceived barrier to effective
participation in certain table-top
reliability exercises or emergency or
system planning exercises among
regional stakeholders.17 Accordingly,
INGAA and several others requested
that, in order to facilitate the exchange
of information between transmission
operators, the Commission should more
clearly identify the types of operational
information that may be shared between
transmission operators and clarify that
the sharing of such information does not
violate the prohibition against undue
discrimination.18
8. While electric generators generally
did not oppose the sharing of such
information, they, together with other
entities, expressed concern about the
communication of generator-specific
information between an electric
transmission operator and a pipeline
operator without the generator’s
knowledge. For example, We Energies
asserted that excluding the generator
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); AGA Comments, Docket No.
AD12–12–000, at 4 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); National
Grid Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–000, at 8
(filed Jan. 7, 2013).
14 See, e.g., Spectra Comments, Docket No. AD12–
12–000, at 3–5 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); MISO Comments,
Docket No. AD12–12–000, at 5 (filed Jan. 7, 2013);
INGAA Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–000, at 9–
11 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); ISO–NE Comments, Docket
No. AD12–12–000, at 4 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); PJM
Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–000, at 4 (filed
Jan. 11, 2013).
15 INGAA Comments, AD12–12–000, at 11 (filed
Jan. 7, 2013).
16 18 CFR Part 358 (2012).
17 MidAmerican Comments, Docket No. AD12–
12–000, at 8 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); AGA Comments,
Docket No. AD12–12–000, at 8 (filed Jan. 7, 2013).
18 INGAA Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–000,
at 11 (filed Jan. 7, 2013). See also NYTOs, Docket
No. AD12–12–000, at 4, 9 (filed Jan. 7, 2013);
MidAmerican Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–
000, at 10 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); AGA Comments,
Docket No. AD12–12–000, at 4 (filed Jan. 7, 2013);
Spectra Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–000, at 5
(filed Jan. 7, 2013).
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
operator from discussions between
RTOs/ISOs and natural gas pipelines
regarding the status of a generator’s fuel
supplies will increase the risk that
generator capability will be
misrepresented.19 We Energies also
stated that a generating unit’s-specific
market sensitive information, such as
run times and dispatch levels provided
to a pipeline by the RTO prior to the
generator having arranged for any
needed incremental gas transportation
requirements, could provide the
pipeline with a competitive advantage
over the generator in pricing its
transportation services to that
generator.20 National Grid stated that
commercially sensitive information
from individual generators should not
be shared with natural gas pipeline
representatives or affiliates that sell or
buy wholesale electric power or market
natural gas.21
9. Some commenters expressed
concern regarding the potential harm to
industry participants or the potential for
improper use of material resulting from
increased communications.22 For
example, MidAmerican stated that
customer specific information is
commercially sensitive and must be
subject to strict limitations, including
appropriate protocols ensuring that
generator unit-specific gas usage and
transportation information is not
publicly posted or disclosed to nondirectly connected pipelines. AF&PA
stated that generally information that is
potentially commercially sensitive
should only be disseminated when there
is an articulable and rational reason to
expect such exchanges would further
improve reliability or efficiency on
either or both systems.23 In addition,
APGA argued that transportation
information provides the potential for
gaming, market manipulation, and other
violations of the NGA and Federal
Power Act (FPA). EPSA asserted that,
when system operators share
information with natural gas pipelines,
pipelines should have appropriate
limitations on who has access to this
information. EPSA stated that specific
19 We Energies Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–
000, at 3 (filed Jan. 7, 2013).
20 We Energies Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–
000, at 5 (filed Jan. 7, 2013).
21 National Grid Comments, Docket No. AD12–
12–000, at 8–9 (filed Jan. 7, 2013).
22 See, e.g., MidAmerican Comments, Docket No.
AD12–12–000, at 10 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); APGA
Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–000, at 5 (filed
Jan. 7, 2013); AEP Comments, Docket No. AD12–
12–000, at 7 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); AF&PA Comments,
Docket No. AD12–12–000, at 2 (filed Jan. 7, 2013);
EPSA Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–000, at 7
(filed Jan. 7, 2013).
23 AF&PA Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–000,
at 5 (filed Jan. 7, 2013).
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules
guidelines are needed when the same
person at a pipeline who sells and
schedules capacity could have access to
shared information.24 NYTOs noted
that, since generators and fuel managers
in New York are merchant entities, there
is potential for misuse of confidential
information (for example, whether a
generator is critical to maintain
reliability) to the extent it is shared as
part of these communications.25 NYTOs
stated that they would not support
disclosure of market-sensitive
information unless strong measures
were in place to prevent and punish
market abuses.
II. Discussion
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
10. Communications occur today in
the normal course of business between
transmission operators and those
communications serve a valuable and
necessary purpose to help ensure
reliability. In an effort to provide
certainty to the industry and remove
barriers—real or perceived—to the
sharing of non-public, operational
information, the Commission proposes
to revise its regulations to authorize
expressly the exchange of non-public,
operational information between
electric transmission operators and
interstate natural gas pipelines. The
Commission intends to remove any
barriers to the sharing of non-public,
operational information, not just during
emergencies, but also for day-to-day
operations, planned outages, and
scheduled maintenance. However, in
consideration of the concerns regarding
the exchange of non-public operational
information, the Commission also
proposes to adopt a No-Conduit Rule
which prohibits recipients of the nonpublic, operational information from
subsequently disclosing or being a
conduit for subsequently disclosing that
information to any other entity.26
Moreover, to the extent that an electric
transmission operator or pipeline has a
tariff provision which precludes a
communication that would otherwise be
authorized under the proposed
regulations, it would have to make a
filing under the FPA or NGA to revise
24 EPSA Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–000, at
7 (filed Jan. 7, 2013).
25 NYTOs Comments, Docket No. AD12–12–000,
at 7 (filed Jan. 7, 2013).
26 Conduct and Affiliate Restrictions. See 18 CFR
358.6 and 18 CFR 35.39(g). Moreover, the
Commission determined in Order No. 717 that the
No-Conduit Rule was a critical component of the
regulatory scheme of the Standards of Conduct. See
Standards of Conduct for Transmission Providers,
Order No. 717, 73 FR 63796 (Oct. 27, 2008), FERC
Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,280, at P 198 (2008).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:49 Jul 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
that provision to permit such exchanges
of information.
11. The Commission has structured
the proposed regulations to provide
significant flexibility to individual
transmission operators—who have the
most insight and knowledge of their
systems—to determine what non-public
operational information, if any, would
promote reliable service on their
systems, without fear of violating the
Commission’s prohibitions on undue
discrimination and undue preference or
such an exchange being considered an
unjust or unreasonable practice.
Notably, the Commission is proposing a
permissive approach to the sharing of
non-public information. To the extent
this voluntary approach proves
inadequate to promote reliable service
or operational planning on natural gas
pipelines and electric transmission
systems, the Commission may revisit
the need to require certain
communications or information sharing
between transmission operators in the
future.
A. Undue Discrimination or Preference
12. To provide context for the
proposed regulations discussed below,
the Commission first reviews the
existing statutory and regulatory
requirements applicable to
communications between the gas and
electric industries. Both the FPA and
the comparable provisions of the NGA
prohibit undue discrimination or
preference.27 Specifically, section
205(b) of the FPA provides that no
public utility:
shall, with respect to any transmission or
sale subject to the jurisdiction of the
Commission, (1) make or grant any undue
preference or advantage to any person or
subject any person to any undue prejudice or
disadvantage, or (2) maintain any
unreasonable difference in rates, charges,
service, facilities, or in any other respect,
either as between localities or as between
classes of service.28
13. FPA section 205(b) and NGA
section 4(b) do not forbid preferences,
advantages and prejudices per se.29
Rather, FPA section 205(b) and NGA
section 4(b) prohibit ‘‘undue’’
preferences, advantages and
prejudices.30 A difference in treatment
is not unduly discriminatory when the
27 16 U.S.C. 824d(b) (2006); 15 U.S.C. 717c(b)
(2006).
28 The language of the NGA is virtually identical.
15 U.S.C. 717c(b) (2006).
29 See, e.g., Cities of Bethany v FERC, 727 F.2d
1131, 1139 ( Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 917, 105
S.Ct. 293, 83 L.Ed.2d 229 (1984).
30 See, e.g., Boroughs of Chambersburg v. FERC,
580 F.2d 573, 577 (D.C. Cir. 1978).
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44903
difference is justified.31 In interpreting
FPA section 205(b) and NGA section
4(b), the courts have held that
transmission providers cannot treat
similarly situated customers
differently 32 and that the disparate
treatment of two customer classes does
not in and of itself result in an undue
preference or advantage or in an
unreasonable difference in service if the
customer classes are not similarly
situated.33 Whether a preference is
‘‘undue’’ depends on the specific facts
of the behavior and the circumstances to
determine whether disparities exist and
whether those disparities are rationally
justified.34 The Commission’s Standards
of Conduct seek to deter undue
discrimination by prohibiting the
exchanges of information between
transmission providers and their
marketing functions in certain
situations.35 The comments in the
proceeding in Docket No. AD12–12–000
focus on the applicability of both the
statutory prohibitions on undue
discrimination and the Standards of
Conduct.
14. The first issue is whether the
statutory restrictions in the FPA and
NGA regarding undue discrimination or
unjust and unreasonable acts and
practices prevent the exchange of
information between operators of
pipeline transportation systems and
electric transmission operators. The
Commission believes that the sharing of
non-public, operational information
between public utilities and natural gas
pipelines for the purpose of promoting
reliable service or operational planning
is reasonable and not unduly
discriminatory or preferential. The
undue discrimination provisions apply
to ensure that similarly situated
customers are not subject to disparate
rates or terms and conditions of service.
As discussed below, transmission
operators are not similarly situated to
other customers because they require
31 See Metropolitan Edison Co. v. FERC, 595 F.2d
851, 857 (D.C. Cir. 1979). See also Transmission
Agency of N. California v. FERC, 628 F.3d 538, 549
(D.C. Cir. 2010) (citing Ark. Elec. Energy Consumers
v. FERC, 290 F.3d 362, 367 (D.C. Cir. 2002) and
Elec. Consumers Res. Council v. FERC, 747 F.2d
1511, 1515 (D.C. Cir. 1984)).
32 See Transmission Agency of N. California v.
FERC, 628 F.3d at 549 (citing Sacramento Mun.
Util. Dist. v. FERC, 474 F.3d 797, 802 (D.C. Cir.
2007)).
33 See, e.g., Sw. Elec. Coop., Inc. v. FERC, 347
F.3d 975, 981 (D.C. Cir. 2003). See also Michigan
Consolidated Gas Co. v. FPC, 203 F.2d 895, 901 (3d
Cir. 1953) and Complex Consol. Edison Co. of New
York, Inc. v. FERC, 165 F.3d 992, 1012 (D.C. Cir.
1999).
34 See St. Michaels Utilities Comm’n v. Fed.
Power Comm’n, 377 F.2d 912, 915 (4th Cir. 1967).
35 Order No. 717, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,280 at
P 3.
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
44904
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
access to non-public scheduling and
other types of information from a variety
of sources to help them ensure the
reliability and integrity of the
transportation and transmission
systems. In addition, natural gas
pipelines are generally not customers of
electric transmission operators.
Likewise, in the case of RTOs/ISOs, they
are not shippers on pipelines. We
recognize that some vertically integrated
transmission owners may have
marketing function employees or
affiliates, such as generators or local
distribution companies who handle gas
transactions. However, putting in place
the proposed No-Conduit rule will serve
as a safeguard to ensure that the
transmission owners comply with the
prohibitions against undue
discrimination or preference with
respect to their marketing function or
affiliated entities.36
15. In order to operate natural gas
pipelines and electric transmission
systems effectively, transmission
operators historically and necessarily
have shared non-public information
with other parties operating
transportation or transmission facilities.
For example, pipeline operators
routinely exchange nomination and
scheduling information with other
pipeline operators and with upstream
and downstream entities (that may be
shippers on the pipeline) to confirm
transportation nomination requests and
to coordinate flows between the
parties.37 Transmitting electric utilities
similarly coordinate the sharing of nonpublic interchange schedule
information on a routine basis through
mechanisms such as, for example,
e-Tags.38 This coordination helps
36 The Standards of Conduct at 18 CFR 358.6 and
358.7 govern the preferential sharing of
transmission function information from a
transmission provider to its marketing function
employees as defined in 18 CFR 358.3(c).
37 The nomination process initiates the flow of
gas with the natural gas transportation service
provider. The natural gas transportation service
provider then confirms the flow of natural gas with
the corresponding upstream and downstream
entities. Once the natural gas quantities are
confirmed, the natural gas transportation service
provider sends the scheduled quantities
information to the shipper.
38 e-Tags are used by applicable Balancing
Authorities, Reliability Coordinators, Interchange
Authorities, Transmission Service Providers,
Purchasing-Selling Entities, Generator-Providing
Entities, and Load-Serving Entities to coordinate
interchange schedules. See, e.g., NAESB Wholesale
Electric Quadrant (WEQ) Business Practice
Standards (Coordinate Interchange) requirement
004–2 (‘‘Until other means are adopted by NAESB,
the primary method of submitting the RFI [Request
for Interchange] shall be an e-Tag communicated to
and managed by the Sink BA’s [Balancing
Authority] registered e-Tag authority service using
protocols compliant with the Version 1.8.1
Electronic Tagging Functional Specification.’’) and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:49 Jul 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
ensure the safe and reliable
transmission of electric power across a
region.
16. Likewise, in Order No. 698, the
Commission authorized the exchange of
operational information between the
industries.39 There, the Commission
incorporated North American Energy
Standards Board (NAESB) Wholesale
Gas Quadrant (WGQ) Standard 0.3.12
into its regulations. This standard
requires a generator and its directly
connected natural gas pipeline(s) to
‘‘establish procedures to communicate
material changes in circumstances that
may impact hourly flow rates.’’ 40 In
addition, this standard ensures that
natural gas pipelines have relevant
planning information to assist in
maintaining the operational integrity
and reliability of pipeline service, as
well as to provide gas-fired power plant
operators with information as to
whether hourly flow deviations can be
honored. NAESB Wholesale Electric
Quadrant (WEQ) Standard 011–1.6, also
incorporated in the Commission’s
regulations,41 requires that ISOs, RTOs,
and other independent system operators
establish written operational
communication procedures with the
appropriate pipeline to be implemented
when an extreme condition occurs.
17. Sharing of operational information
between natural gas pipelines and
electric transmission operators is akin to
the sharing of operational information
among interconnected parties. Both the
natural gas pipelines and the electric
transmission operators need to know
whether scheduled transactions on their
respective systems will be honored by
the other. This sharing of information is
crucial to the effective operations of
both systems and is not the type of
private sharing of information with
applicability section (‘‘The Coordinate Interchange
Business Practice Standards apply to BA [Balancing
Authority], RC [Reliability Coordinator], IA
[Interchange Authority], Transmission Service
Provider, PSE [Purchasing-Selling Entity], GPE
[Generator-Providing Entity], Load-Serving Entity
[LSE], and any TPSE [a PSE whose transmission
approval rights are cited].’’) NAESB WEQ Business
Practice Standards (Version 003), published July 31,
2012.
39 Standards for Business Practices for Interstate
Natural Gas Pipelines; Standards for Business
Practices for Public Utilities, Order No. 698, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,251 (2007),order on clarification
and reh’g, Order No. 698–A, 121 FERC ¶ 61,264
(2007). In Order No. 698, the Commission
incorporated by reference standards adopted by
NAESB.
40 NAESB WGQ Version 2.0 Business Practice
Standard 0.3.12. See also Standards for Business
Practices for Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines, Order
No. 587–V, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,332 (crossreferenced at 140 FERC ¶ 61,036) (2012),
(incorporating by reference the Version 2.0 WGQ
Business Practice Standards) (to be codified at 18
CFR 284.12).
41 18 CFR Part 38 (2012).
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
select customers at which the undue
discrimination provisions of the
respective statutes were targeted.
18. There are already several
safeguards in place to protect against
undue discrimination. For example,
while non-public operational
information may be useful for planning,
transmission operators cannot deviate
from the terms of their tariffs, and
cannot operate in an unduly
discriminatory manner.42 Interstate
natural gas pipelines and electric
transmission operators are also subject
to the same limitations on sharing
information with their marketing
function employees as provided under
the Standards of Conduct.43 Moreover,
we are proposing additional safeguards
as discussed below.
19. Based on the critical need for such
exchanges of information to promote the
reliability and the operational integrity
of industries the Commission regulates,
and the protections against undue
discrimination, we find that the
exchange of non-public, operational
information between transmission
operators does not violate the statutory
prohibitions on undue discrimination or
preference as discussed herein.
B. Clarification Regarding Table-Top
Exercises
20. Several comments requested
clarification of the applicability of the
Standards of Conduct and statutory
prohibition against undue
discrimination to exchanges of
information with regard to table-top
exercises involving marketing affiliates
of transmission providers and interindustry participants. The Standards of
Conduct govern, among other things,
communications between interstate
natural gas pipelines and their
employees and affiliates that engage in
marketing functions, and public utilities
that own or operate electric
transmission facilities and their
employees and affiliates that engage in
marketing functions.44 As the
Commission has previously stated, the
Standards of Conduct apply to
communications only within the same
organization (in other words, between
the affiliated entities of a single
corporate family) and therefore, do not
limit communications between
42 See ISO New England Inc., 142 FERC ¶ 61,058,
at P 23 (2013) (available capacity must be
dispatched ‘‘consistent with the pipeline’s tariff’’
and ‘‘[t]he pipelines are required to allocate
available capacity on a not unduly discriminatory
basis among the various requestors of capacity’’).
43 18 CFR 358.6 and 358.7.
44 18 CFR 358.1(a) and (b) (2012).
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules
unaffiliated pipelines and electric
transmission providers.45
21. Under the Standards of Conduct,
marketing function employees may
participate in table-top exercises that
include a wide range of industry
participants who will have equal access
to non-public transmission information.
However, as the Commission has
explained, non-public transmission
information cannot be provided during
private table-top exercises involving
only the transmission provider and
marketing function employees since
they would receive preferential access
to non-public transmission information
or preferential access to transmission
facilities.46
C. Revisions to Regulations
22. Consistent with the foregoing
discussion of existing statutes and
regulations, to provide additional
certainty to transmission operators
regarding the permissibility of sharing
of non-public, operational information,
the Commission is proposing to revise
its regulations to authorize expressly the
exchange of non-public, operational
information between electric
transmission operators and interstate
natural gas pipelines.47 Proposed
section 38.3 applies to any public utility
that owns, operates, or controls facilities
used for the transmission of electric
energy in interstate commerce subject to
a No-Conduit Rule. Similar changes are
proposed in section 284.12(b), which
applies to any interstate pipeline.48
1. Permissible Disclosure of Non-Public,
Operational Information
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
23. Proposed sections 38.3(a) and
284.12(b)(4) authorize public utilities
providing transmission service and
natural gas pipelines to share nonpublic, operational information when
such information is for the purpose of
promoting reliable service or
operational planning. The term ‘‘nonpublic, operational information’’ is
information that is not publicly posted,
yet helps transmission operators to
operate and maintain either a reliable
pipeline system or a reliable electric
45 November 15 Order, 141 FERC ¶ 61,125 at P
6. See also 18 CFR 358.1.
46 See Ameren Services Co., et al., 86 FERC
¶ 61,079, at 61,290 (1999). See also South Carolina
Electric and Gas Co., 111 FERC ¶ 61,217 (2005).
47 The proposed regulations also recognize the
existing exchanges of information among pipelines
and among electric transmission operators that
promote reliable service or operational planning.
48 While the Commission also regulates interstate
service provided by intrastate pipelines, Hinshaw
pipelines, and local distribution companies, the
companies themselves are subject to state regulation
and may exchange information subject to whatever
state regulations govern their operations.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:49 Jul 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
transmission system on a day-to-day
basis, as well as during emergency
conditions or for operational planning.
Non-public, operational information
may also include generator, pipeline, or
transmission-specific information. In
using the term ‘‘non-public, operational
information,’’ the Commission intends
that transmission operators would be
permitted to share information dealing
with actual, anticipated, or potential
effects on the ability to provide electric
and gas service based on the respective
operator’s experience and
understanding of the operational
capability and customer demands on
their respective systems. Examples of
such information include, but are not
limited to, the following types of
information:
• Real-time and anticipated system
conditions that have or are anticipated
to impact natural gas transportation by
changing near term gas flows;
• actual and anticipated electric
service interruptions to gas compressor
locations;
• verification that there is sufficient
pipeline operational capability available
at a specific delivery point to change the
quantity of natural gas delivered to the
generator as identified by the electric
transmission operator;
• actual and projected gas
transportation restrictions to electric
generators;
• real-time actual flow and point
operational capacity data at all receipt
and delivery points; real-time pipeline
pressure at all receipt and delivery
points;
• nominated and scheduled
quantities of shippers who are or who
supply gas-fired generators; and,
• scheduled dates and duration of
generator, pipeline, and transmission
maintenance and planned outages.
24. The Commission is not proposing
a specific list of non-public, operational
information that can be shared in order
to provide flexibility to individual
operators—who have the most insight
and knowledge of their systems—to
determine what operational
information, if any, would promote
reliable service or operational planning
on their systems. The Commission seeks
comment on the scope of the nonpublic, operational information
transmission operators may share under
the proposed regulations, including the
specific categories of information
identified above.
25. The Commission recognizes that
the provisions of this proposal apply
only to communications between
pipelines and electric transmission
operators and that natural gas-fired
generators may have relevant
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44905
information regarding their capabilities
to acquire natural gas not available to a
pipeline. Therefore, the Commission
seeks comment on whether additional
regulations are needed to require a
generator to share necessary information
with its electric transmission operator to
inform it of the possibility that the
generator’s natural gas service may be
disrupted. For example, the
Commission seeks comment on whether
a generator should be required, at the
request of the electric transmission
operator, to provide its electric
transmission operator with information
pertaining to any communications
received from a natural gas pipeline
regarding potential failures by the
generator to conform to flow rates or
nominations. In addition, the
Commission seeks comment on whether
the proposed rule should require that, to
the extent the non-public, operational
information exchanged between
transmission operators involves
customer-specific information (such as
information about individual
generators), the transmission operators
must seek to include the customer as
part of a three-way communication.49 If
so, the Commission seeks comment on
how such a requirement could be
implemented.
2. Limitations on Disclosure
26. The Commission is proposing
several protections, in addition to the
existing protections described above, to
ensure that any non-public, operational
information shared under these
proposed regulations remains
confidential, and to ensure that
information is shared among
transmission owners in a manner that is
consistent with the prohibition on
undue discrimination. Proposed
sections 38.3(b) and 284.12(b)(4)(ii)
adopt a No-Conduit Rule that prohibits
all public utilities and natural gas
pipelines, as well as their employees,
contractors, consultants, or agents, from
disclosing, or using anyone as a conduit
for the disclosure of, non-public,
operational information they receive
under this proposed rule to a third
party.50 Sections 38.3(b) and
49 The Commission notes that communications
between transmission operators and generators are
not covered by this proposed rule; transmission
operators may always discuss generator-specific
information with the relevant generator.
50 The Commission does not believe the existing
No-Conduit Rule under the Standards of Conduct
will sufficiently limit the disclosure of the
information received under this proposed rule. The
proposed No-Conduit Rule has a broader
prohibition on disclosure, since it applies to all
third parties, not just marketing function
employees. Furthermore, the Standards of Conduct,
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
Continued
25JYP1
44906
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules
284.12.(b)(4)(ii) similarly prohibits the
disclosure of such non-public,
operational information to marketing
function employees, as that term is
defined in § 358.3 of the Commission’s
regulations.51 Proposed sections 38.3(b)
and 284.12(b)(4)(ii) do not prohibit
communications between transmission
operators covered by this rule. As
discussed previously, together with the
requirements that natural gas pipelines
and transmission owners abide by their
tariffs, these additional disclosure
limitations should adequately protect
against the harmful disclosure of nonpublic information and undue
discrimination.52
27. We Energies and EPSA expressed
concerns that generator-specific nonpublic information provided to a
pipeline by an electric transmission
operator prior to the generator having
arranged for any needed incremental gas
transportation requirements could
provide the pipeline with a competitive
advantage over the generator in pricing
transportation services. We see no need
to propose additional protections
regarding pipeline transportation at this
time. Interstate pipelines are required to
allocate service, on a not unduly
discriminatory basis, based on their
tariffs, at a rate not exceeding the just
and reasonable rate on file. Pipelines are
not required to discount services, and if
they choose to discount, are permitted
to obtain information from any source to
demonstrate that the shipper requesting
the discount has competitive
alternatives.53
III. Information Collection Statement
28. The following collection of
information contained in the Proposed
Rule is subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB)
under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA).54 OMB’s
regulations require that OMB approve
certain reporting and recordkeeping
requirements (collections of
information).55 Upon approval of a
collection of information, OMB will
assign an OMB control number and
expiration date. Respondents subject to
the information collection requirements
of this rule will not be penalized for
failing to respond to this collection of
information unless the collection of
information displays a valid OMB
control number.
29. The Commission will submit the
information collection requirements to
OMB for its review and approval under
section 3507(d) of the PRA. The
communications permitted under this
proposed rule are not mandatory. The
proposed rule would clarify that the
requirements of the FPA and NGA do
not prohibit certain voluntary
communications between transmission
providers.56 Comments are solicited on
the need for this information, whether
the information will have practical
utility, the accuracy of the provided
burden estimate, ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected, and any
suggested methods for minimizing the
respondent’s burden, including the use
of automated information techniques.
30. Public Reporting Burden: The
proposed communications and
information sharing are voluntary, take
place between various industry entities
(and are not submitted to the
Commission), and are intended to
promote reliable service or operational
planning. While the extent of such
communications likely will vary
significantly across the country, the
following estimates represent an
expected average. The annual estimates
reflect burden for operational contacts
and emergencies.
FERC–923, COMMUNICATION OF OPERATIONAL INFORMATION BETWEEN NATURAL GAS PIPELINES AND ELECTRICITY
TRANSMISSION OPERATORS, AS PROPOSED IN NOPR IN DOCKET NO. RM13–17 57
Type of entity
Number of
respondents
Number of
responses per
respondent 58
Average
burden hours
per response
Total
annual burden hours
Total annual cost 59
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(2)*(3)*(4) = (5)
(5)*($60.41/hr.) = (6)
Public Utility Transmission Provider ....
Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines ..........
60 132
61 137
12
12
0.50
0.50
792
822
$47,845
49,657
Total ..............................................
269
12
0.50
1,614
97,502
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Title: Communication of Operational
Information between Natural Gas
Pipelines and Electricity Transmission
Operators.
and thus the No-Conduit Rule under the Standards
of Conduct, do not apply to RTOs/ISOs. Therefore,
the Commission is proposing a No-Conduit Rule in
this part of the regulations that is tailored to the
entities and information covered by the proposed
rule, and extends the disclosure prohibition to nonaffiliates.
51 Since RTOs/ISOs do not have marketing
function employees as defined in the Standards of
Conduct, this provision would not apply to them.
52 Unauthorized disclosure of any non-public,
operational information may subject the entity or
individual making the prohibited disclosure to the
enforcement provisions of the FPA and NGA,
including potential civil penalties. See section 22
of the NGA, 15 U.S.C. 717t2–1 (2006), and section
316A of the FPA, 16 U.S.C. 825o–1 (2006).
53 See Associated Gas Distributors v. FERC, 824
F.2d 981 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (permitting selective
discounting only when justified by competitive
alternatives and elastic demand conditions);
Williston Basin Interstate Pipeline Co., 85 FERC ¶
61,247 (1998). Consistent with that policy, in the
next rate case after providing discounts, the
Commission only permits pipelines to reduce their
rate design volumes to reflect discounting upon a
showing that the discounts they offered were
required by competition. See, e.g., Panhandle
Eastern Pipe Line Co., Opinion No. 395, 71 FERC
¶ 61,228, at 61,867 (1995) (requiring documentation
from its customers justifying their need for any
discounts that they request); Panhandle Eastern
Pipe Line Co., Opinion No. 404, 74 FERC ¶ 61,109,
at 61,405 (1996).
54 44 U.S.C. 3507(d) (2006).
55 5 CFR 1320.11 (2012).
56 The OMB regulations, 5 CFR 1320.3, provide
that ‘‘voluntary’’ collections of information must be
reported to OMB. The regulations do not define
what is meant by voluntary, but it appears that the
term was included to ensure review of agency’s
issuing voluntary surveys to the public. See J.
Lubbers, Paperwork Redux: The (Stronger)
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 49 Admin, L.
Rev. 111,119 (1997). While this justification for the
requirement does not appear to apply to an
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:49 Jul 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Action: Proposed FERC–923.
interpretation of a statutory requirement, we
nonetheless are submitting this NOPR to OMB as
a collection of information.
57 Columns 5 and 6 are rounded.
58 The Commission estimates an annual average
per entity of 12 responses (including electricity and
gas emergency and/or operational contacts).
59 The hourly costs (for salary plus benefits) are
based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics
Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2012–2013
edition (at https://www.bls.gov/ooh/). The estimated
costs are $125,647 annually or $60.41 hourly.
60 Of the 132 public utility transmission
providers, 5 are considered ‘‘small’’ using the SBA
definition.
61 The 2012 filings of the Forms 2 and 2A
indicated that there are 137 interstate natural gas
pipelines. Of those pipelines, eight (8) are
considered small using the definition of the Small
Business Administration (at 13 CFR 121.301),
including the affiliate.
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules
OMB Control No.: To be determined
(1902–TBD).
Respondents: Public electricity
transmission providers; interstate
natural gas pipelines.
Frequency of Responses: As needed.
Necessity of the Information: In this
NOPR, the Commission is seeking
comment on a proposal to revise Parts
38 and 284 of the Commission’s
regulations to authorize electric
transmission providers and interstate
natural gas pipelines to share nonpublic, operational information for the
purpose of promoting reliable service
and operational planning.
31. This proposal is intended to
address industry concerns and thereby
remove any barriers, real or perceived,
to electric transmission operators and
natural gas pipelines sharing necessary
information. The Commission is not
requiring that data be submitted to the
Commission or to third parties. Rather,
the Commission is removing actual or
perceived barriers to voluntary
communications and information
sharing that might otherwise have been
part of the normal business process.
32. Internal Review: The Commission
will submit the information collection
requirements to OMB for its review and
approval under section 3507(d) of the
PRA. Comments are solicited on the
need and utility for this information,
and the accuracy of the provided burden
estimate.
33. Interested persons may obtain
information on the reporting
requirements by contacting the
following: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426 [Attention: Ellen
Brown, Office of the Executive Director,
email: DataClearance@ferc.gov, phone:
(202) 502–8663, fax: (202) 273–0873].
Please send comments concerning the
collection of information and the
associated burden estimates to the
Commission, and 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)
395–4638, 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
include Docket Number RM13–17,
FERC–923, and OMB Control Number
1902–TBD.
IV. Environmental Analysis
34. The Commission is required to
prepare an Environmental Assessment
or an Environmental Impact Statement
for any action that may have a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:49 Jul 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
significant adverse effect on the human
environment.62 The Commission
concludes that neither an
Environmental Assessment nor an
Environmental Impact Statement is
required for this Final Rule under
section 380.4(a)(2)(ii) of the
Commission’s regulations, which
provides a categorical exemption for
proposals for legislation and
promulgation of rules that are clarifying,
corrective, or procedural, or that do not
substantively change the effect of
legislation or regulations being
amended.63
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Certification
35. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980 (RFA) 64 generally requires a
description and analysis of proposed
rules that will have significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The RFA
mandates consideration of regulatory
alternatives that accomplish the stated
objectives of a proposed rule and that
minimize any significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The Small Business
Administration’s (SBA’s) Office of Size
Standards develops the numerical
definition of a small business.65 The
SBA has established a size standard, for
electric utilities, electric power
distribution, and electric bulk power
transmission and control, 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 fiscal year did not exceed
four million megawatt hours.66 For
pipeline transportation of natural gas,
the SBA defines a small entity as having
a maximum annual receipt of $25.5
million dollars.67 The Commission
estimates a total of 13 ‘‘small’’ entities 68
62 Regulations Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Order No. 486,
52 FR 47,897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. & Regs.,
Regulations Preambles 1986–1990 ¶ 30,783 (1987).
63 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii) (2012).
64 5 U.S.C. 601–612 (2006).
65 13 CFR 121.101 (2012).
66 13 CFR 121.201, Sector 22, Subsector 221,
Utilities & n.1.
67 Based on 13 CFR 121.201, Sectors 48–49,
Subsector 486, Pipeline Transportation, the annual
receipts indicate the maximum allowed for a
concern and its affiliates to be considered ‘‘small.’’
68 Based on the SBA definitions and including
affiliates, the number of ‘‘small’’ entities is
estimated to be:
• for public utility transmission providers, 5
small public utilities; and
• for natural gas pipelines, 8 small interstate
natural gas pipelines.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
44907
(or 5% out of the total 269 entities)
affected by the NOPR.
36. To address industry concerns, the
Commission is removing actual or
perceived barriers to communications
and information sharing (that might
otherwise have been part of the normal
business process). This proposal will
enable entities of all sizes to
communicate voluntarily and to share
non-public, operational information for
the purpose of promoting reliable
service or operational planning, thereby
easing and improving the normal
business process. The estimated annual
cost of the proposal for each respondent,
large or small, is $362.46.69
Accordingly, the Commission certifies
that the revised requirements set forth
in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities, and no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required.
VI. Comment Procedures
37. The Commission invites interested
persons to submit comments on the
matters and issues proposed in this
notice to be adopted, including any
related matters or alternative proposals
that commenters may wish to discuss.
Comments are due August 26, 2013.
Comments must refer to Docket No.
RM13–17, and must include the
commenter’s name, the organization
they represent, if applicable, and their
address in their comments.
38. The Commission encourages
comments to be filed electronically via
the eFiling link on the Commission’s
Web site at https://www.ferc.gov. The
Commission accepts most standard
word processing formats. Documents
created electronically using word
processing software should be filed in
native applications or print-to-PDF
format and not in a scanned format.
Commenters filing electronically do not
need to make a paper filing.
39. Commenters that are not able to
file comments electronically must send
an original of their comments to:
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
40. All comments will be placed in
the Commission’s public files and may
be viewed, printed, or downloaded
remotely as described in the Document
Availability section below. Commenters
on this proposal are not required to
serve copies of their comments on other
commenters.
69 The estimated annual cost per respondent is
$362.46 (12 annual responses × 0.50 hour/response
× $60.41/hour).
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
44908
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules
VII. Document Availability
41. 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 the
Commission’s Home Page (https://
www.ferc.gov) and in the Commission’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.
42. From the Commission’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.
43. User assistance is available for
eLibrary and the Commission’s Web site
during normal business hours from the
Commission’s 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.
List of Subjects
18 CFR Part 38
Conflict of interests, Electric power
plants, Electric utilities, Incorporation
by reference, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
18 CFR Part 284
Incorporation by reference, Natural
gas, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
By direction of the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Commission proposes to amend Part 38
and Part 284, 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:
■
PART 38—STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC
UTILITY BUSINESS OPERATIONS AND
COMMUNICATIONS
§ 38.1
■
[Removed]
§ 284.12 Standards for pipeline business
operations and communications.
*
3. Remove § 38.1.
§ 38.2
8. In § 284.12, paragraph (b)(4) is
added to read as follows:
■
[Redesignated as § 38.1]
4. Redesignate § 38.2 as § 38.1.
5. In newly redesignated § 38.1,
paragraph (a) is revised to read as
follows:
■
■
§ 38.1 Incorporation by reference of North
American Energy Standards Board
Wholesale Electric Quadrant standards.
(a) Any public utility that owns,
operates, or controls facilities used for
the transmission of electric energy in
interstate commerce or for the sale of
electric energy at wholesale in interstate
commerce and any non-public utility
that seeks voluntary compliance with
jurisdictional transmission tariff
reciprocity conditions must comply
with the following business practice and
electronic communication standards
promulgated by the North American
Energy Standards Board Wholesale
Electric Quadrant, which are
incorporated herein by reference:
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. New § 38.2 is added to read as
follows:
§ 38.2 Communication and information
sharing among public utilities and
pipelines.
(a) Any public utility that owns,
operates, or controls facilities used for
the transmission of electric energy in
interstate commerce is authorized to
share non-public, operational
information with a pipeline, as defined
in § 284.12(b)(4), or another public
utility covered by this section for the
purpose of promoting reliable service or
operational planning.
(b) Except as permitted in paragraph
(a), a public utility, as defined in § 38.2,
and its employees, contractors,
consultants, and agents are prohibited
from disclosing, or using anyone as a
conduit for the disclosure of, nonpublic, operational information received
from a pipeline pursuant to
§ 284.12(b)(4) to a third party or to its
marketing function employees as that
term is defined in § 358.3(d).
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(4) Communication and Information
Sharing Among Pipelines and Public
Utilities.
(i) A pipeline is authorized to share
non-public, operational information
with a public utility, as defined in
§ 38.2(a) or another pipeline covered by
this section, for the purpose of
promoting reliable service or
operational planning.
(ii) Except as permitted in paragraph
(i), a pipeline and its employees,
contractors, consultants, and agents are
prohibited from disclosing, or using
anyone as a conduit for the disclosure
of, non-public, operational information
received from a public utility pursuant
to § 38.2 to a third party or to its
marketing function employees as that
term is defined in § 358.3(d).
Note: The following appendix will not
appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.
Appendix
LIST OF COMMENTERS AND
ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviation
Name
AEP .............
American Electric Power Service Corporation.
American Forest & Paper Association.
American Gas Association.
American Public Gas Association.
Bonneville Power Administration.
California Independent System
Operator Corporation.
Electric Power Supply Association.
Electric Reliability Council of
Texas, Inc.
First Energy Solutions.
Interstate Natural Gas Association of America.
ISO New England, Inc.
MidAmerican Energy Holdings
Company.
Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator,
Inc.
Massachusetts Municipal
Wholesale Electric Company.
National Grid USA, Inc.
New England Local Distribution Companies.
North American Electric Reliability Corporation.
New York Independent System Operator.
New York Transmission Owners.
AF&PA ........
AGA .............
APGA ..........
BPA .............
CAISO .........
EPSA ...........
ERCOT ........
FES .............
INGAA .........
ISO–NE .......
MidAmerican
MISO 70 .......
MMWEC ......
PART 284—CERTAIN SALES AND
TRANSPORTATION OF NATURAL GAS
UNDER THE NATURAL GAS POLICY
ACT OF 1978 AND RELATED
AUTHORITIES
National Grid
NE LDCs .....
NERC ..........
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 791–825r, 2601–
2645; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 7101–7352.
■
7. The authority citation for Part 284
continues to read as follows:
NYISO .........
2. The heading of Part 38 is revised to
read as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717–717z, 3301–3432;
42 U.S.C. 7101–7352; 43 U.S.C. 1331–1356.
NYTOs ........
■
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:49 Jul 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
25JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 143 / Thursday, July 25, 2013 / Proposed Rules
LIST OF COMMENTERS AND
ABBREVIATIONS—Continued
Abbreviation
Name
NIPSCO ......
Northern Indiana Public Service Company.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Public Utility Commission of
Texas.
Southern California Edison
Company.
Spectra Energy Transmission,
LLC.
Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Wisconsin Electric Power
Company and Wisconsin
Gas LLC.
PG&E ..........
PJM .............
Texas PUC ..
SCE .............
Spectra ........
SPP .............
We Energies
[FR Doc. 2013–17682 Filed 7–24–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
18 CFR Part 40
[Docket No. RM 13–13–000]
Regional Reliability Standard BAL–
002–WECC–2—Contingency Reserve
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
Under section 215 of the
Federal Power Act, the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (Commission)
proposes to approve regional Reliability
Standard BAL–002–WECC–2
(Contingency Reserve). The North
American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC) and Western
Electricity Coordinating Council
(WECC) submitted the proposed
regional Reliability Standard to the
Commission for approval. The proposed
WECC regional Reliability Standard
applies to balancing authorities and
reserve sharing groups in the WECC
Region and is meant to specify the
quantity and types of contingency
reserve required to ensure reliability
under normal and abnormal conditions.
The Commission also proposes to
approve the associated violation risk
factors and violation severity levels,
implementation plan, and effective date
proposed by NERC and WECC. The
Commission further proposes to retire
the currently-effective WECC regional
ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
SUMMARY:
70 Effective April 26, 2013, MISO changed its
name from ‘‘Midwest Independent Transmission
System Operator, Inc.’’ to ‘‘Midcontinent
Independent System Operator, Inc.’’
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:49 Jul 24, 2013
Jkt 229001
Reliability Standard BAL–STD–002–0
(Operating Reserves) and to remove two
WECC Regional Definitions, ‘‘NonSpinning Reserve’’ and ‘‘Spinning
Reserve,’’ from the NERC Glossary of
Terms. In addition, the Commission
proposes to direct NERC to submit an
informational filing after the first two
years of implementation of the regional
Reliability Standard that addresses the
adequacy of contingency reserve in the
Western Interconnection.
DATES: Comments are due September
23, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by
docket number, may be filed in the
following ways:
• Electronic Filing through https://
www.ferc.gov. Documents created
electronically using word processing
software should be filed in native
applications or print-to-PDF format and
not in a scanned format.
• Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable
to file electronically may mail or handdeliver comments to: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the
Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
Instructions: For detailed instructions
on submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the Comment Procedures Section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
´
´
Andres Lopez Esquerra (Technical
Information), Office of Electric
Reliability, Division of Reliability
Standards, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, Telephone:
(202) 502–6128,
Andres.Lopez@ferc.gov.
Matthew Vlissides (Legal Information),
Office of the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426, Telephone: (202) 502–8408,
Matthew.Vlissides@ferc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
44909
Region and is meant to specify the
quantity and types of contingency
reserve required to ensure reliability
under normal and abnormal conditions.
2. The Commission proposes to
approve the associated violation risk
factors (VRFs) and violation severity
levels (VSL), implementation plan, and
effective date proposed by NERC and
WECC. The Commission also proposes
to retire the currently-effective WECC
regional Reliability Standard BAL–STD–
002–0 (Operating Reserves) and to
remove two WECC Regional Definitions,
‘‘Non-Spinning Reserve’’ and ‘‘Spinning
Reserve,’’ from the NERC Glossary of
Terms.1 Further, the Commission
proposes to direct NERC to submit an
informational filing after the first two
years of implementation of the regional
Reliability Standard that addresses the
adequacy of contingency reserve in the
Western Interconnection.
I. Background
A. Mandatory Reliability Standards
3. Section 215 of the FPA requires a
Commission-certified Electric
Reliability Organization (ERO) to
develop mandatory and enforceable
Reliability Standards that are subject to
Commission review and approval.2
Once approved, the Reliability
Standards may be enforced by NERC,
subject to Commission oversight, or by
the Commission independently.3
4. A Regional Entity may develop a
Reliability Standard for Commission
approval to be effective in that region
only.4 In Order No. 672, the
Commission stated that:
As a general matter, we will accept the
following two types of regional differences,
provided they are otherwise just, reasonable,
not unduly discriminatory or preferential and
in the public interest, as required under the
statute: (1) A regional difference that is more
stringent than the continent-wide Reliability
Standard, including a regional difference that
addresses matters that the continent-wide
Reliability Standard does not; and (2) a
regional Reliability Standard that is
necessitated by a physical difference in the
Bulk-Power System.5
Issued July 18, 2013.
1. Under section 215 of the Federal
Power Act (FPA), the Commission
proposes to approve regional Reliability
Standard BAL–002–WECC–2
(Contingency Reserve). The North
American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC) and Western
Electricity Coordinating Council
(WECC) submitted the proposed
regional Reliability Standard to the
Commission for approval. The proposed
WECC regional Reliability Standard
applies to balancing authorities and
reserve sharing groups in the WECC
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1 North American Electric Reliability Corporation
Definitions Used in the Rules of Procedure,
Appendix 2 to the NERC Rules of Procedure
(effective March 5, 2013) (NERC Glossary of Terms).
2 16 U.S.C. 824o.
3 16 U.S.C. 824o(e).
4 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(4). A Regional Entity is an
entity that has been approved by the Commission
to enforce Reliability Standards under delegated
authority from the ERO. See 16 U.S.C. 824o(a)(7)
and (e)(4).
5 Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric
Reliability Organization; and Procedures for the
Establishment, Approval and Enforcement of
Electric Reliability Standards, Order No. 672, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,204, at P 291, order on reh’g,
E:\FR\FM\25JYP1.SGM
Continued
25JYP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 143 (Thursday, July 25, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44900-44909]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17682]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
18 CFR Parts 38 and 284
[Docket No. RM13-17-000]
Communication of Operational Information Between Natural Gas
Pipelines and Electric Transmission Operators
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is
proposing to revise Parts 38 and 284 of the Commission's regulations to
provide explicit authority to interstate natural gas pipelines and
public utilities that own, operate, or control facilities used for the
transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce to share non-
public, operational information with
[[Page 44901]]
each other for the purpose of promoting reliable service or operational
planning on either the public utility's or pipeline's system.
DATES: Comments are due August 26, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by docket number, may be filed in the
following ways:
Electronic Filing through https://www.ferc.gov. Documents
created electronically using word processing software should be filed
in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned
format.
Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable to file electronically
may mail or hand-deliver comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Comment
Procedures Section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Caroline Daly (Technical Information), Office of Energy Policy &
Innovation, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8931,
caroline.daly@ferc.gov.
Anna Fernandez (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, 888
First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-6682,
anna.fernandez@ferc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission is
proposing to revise Parts 38 and 284 of the Commission's regulations to
provide explicit authority to interstate natural gas pipelines and
public utilities that own, operate, or control facilities used for the
transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce to share non-
public, operational information with each other for the purpose of
promoting reliable service or operational planning on either the public
utility's or pipeline's system.\1\ This proposal will help ensure the
reliability of pipeline and public utility transmission service by
permitting transmission operators to share the information that they
deem necessary to promote the reliability and integrity of their
systems with each other. However, recipients of that non-public,
operational information would be subject to a No-Conduit Rule that
prohibits subsequent disclosure of that information to an affiliate or
third party.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For ease of reference, we will refer to these parties
collectively as ``transmission operators.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Background
2. In recent years, reliance on natural gas as a fuel for electric
generation has steadily increased.\2\ This trend is expected to
continue into the future, resulting in greater interdependence between
the natural gas and electric industries.\3\ Several events over the
last few years, such as the Southwest Cold Weather Event,\4\ show the
crucial interconnection between natural gas pipelines and electric
transmission operators and the need for robust communication between
these industry sectors to ensure that both systems operate safely and
effectively for the benefit of their customers. While entities from
both industries have already begun efforts to improve coordination,
further sharing of non-public, operational information between
transmission operators could enhance system reliability and contingency
planning in both industries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See, e.g., Energy Information Administration, Fuel
Competition in Power Generation and Elasticities of Substitution
(June 2012); Richard Smead, All Industry Segments Working for
Success in Growing Gas-Fired Generation (Nov. 15, 2012), available
at https://www.navigant.com/insights/library/energy/2012/gas_fired_generation/; ISO-NE, Addressing Gas Dependence at 3 (July 2012)
(reliance on natural gas-fired electricity in the region increased
from five percent in 1990 to 51 percent in 2011), available at
https://www.iso-ne.com/committees/comm_wkgrps/strategic_planning_discussion/materials/natural-gas-white-paper-draft-july-2012.pdf.
\3\ See, e.g., North American Electric Reliability Corporation,
2013 Special Reliability Assessment: Accommodating an Increased
Dependence on Natural Gas for Electric Power; Phase II: A
Vulnerability and Scenario Assessment for the North American Bulk
Power System at 1 (May 2013) (``Over the past decade, natural gas-
fired generation rose significantly from 17 percent to 25 percent of
U.S. power generation and is now the largest fuel source for
generation capacity. Gas use is expected to continue to increase in
the future, both in absolute terms and as a share of total power
generation and capacity.''), available at https://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/ra/Reliability%20Assessments%20DL/NERC_PhaseII_FINAL.pdf;
Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2013 Early
Release Overview (2013) (showing electric generation from natural
gas rising from 13 percent in 1993 to 30 percent in 2040), available
at https://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/er/early_elecgen.cfm; The New
England State Committee on Electricity, Natural Gas Infrastructure
and Electric Generation: A Review of Issues Facing New England (Dec.
14, 2012), available at https://www.nescoe.com/uploads/Phase_I_Report_12-17-2012_Final.pdf.
\4\ See FERC/NERC, Report on Outages and Curtailments During the
Southwest Cold Weather Event of February 1-5, 2011 (2011), available
at https://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/08-16-11-report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. On February 15, 2012, the Commission issued a notice in Docket
No. AD12-12-000 requesting comments on various aspects of gas-electric
interdependence and coordination in response to questions posed by
members of the Commission.\5\ In order to better understand the
interface between the electric and natural gas pipeline industries and
identify areas for improved coordination, the questions covered a
variety of topics including market structure and rules, scheduling,
communications, infrastructure and reliability. In response to the
notice, the Commission received comments from 79 entities, with some
raising concerns that current laws, regulations, or tariffs may hinder
the sharing of such information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Coordination Between Natural Gas and Electricity Markets,
Docket No. AD12-12-000 (Feb. 15, 2012) (Notice Assigning Docket No.
and Requesting Comments) (available at https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/common/opennat.asp?fileID=12893828). See also Commissioner
Philip D. Moeller, Request for Comments of Commissioner Moeller on
Coordination between the Natural Gas and Electricity Markets (Feb.
3, 2012), available at https://www.ferc.gov/about/com-mem/moeller/moellergaselectricletter.pdf; Commissioner Cheryl A. LaFleur,
Statement regarding Standards for Business Practices for Interstate
Natural Gas Pipelines (Feb. 16, 2012), available at https://www.ferc.gov/media/statements-speeches/lafleur/2012/02-16-12-lafleur-G-1.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. During August 2012, the Commission convened five regional
conferences for the purpose of exploring these issues and obtaining
further information from the electric and natural gas industries
regarding coordination between the industries. Representatives from a
cross-section of both industries attended the regional conferences,
with total attendance exceeding 1,200 registrants. Among the topics
discussed at the conferences were communications, coordination, and
information-sharing. Participants at multiple conferences again
expressed concern that Commission rules and policies could be impeding
further efforts to improve communication between the industries.\6\
Some natural gas pipelines and Regional Transmission Organizations and
Independent System Operators (RTOs/ISOs) also noted that, although they
make significant amounts of operational information publicly available,
there is reluctance to share information on a more granular level
because of concerns about violating statutory prohibitions against
undue preference for any customer or customer class.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See FERC Staff Report on Gas-Electric Coordination Technical
Conferences (Nov. 2012), available at https://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/11-15-12-coordination.pdf (November 15 Staff Report).
\7\ November 15 Staff Report at 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. On November 15, 2012, the Commission issued an order directing
further technical conferences and
[[Page 44902]]
reports.\8\ In the November 15 Order, the Commission acknowledged the
concerns regarding communications between the two industries, but found
that there was little specific discussion of potential clarifications
or potential changes to the Commission's regulations.\9\ The
Commission, therefore, directed Commission staff to convene a technical
conference to identify areas in which additional Commission guidance or
potential regulatory changes could be considered.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Coordination Between Natural Gas and Electricity Markets,
141 FERC ] 61,125 (2012) (November 15 Order).
\9\ Id. P 5.
\10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Pursuant to the November 15 Order, on December 7, 2012, a Notice
of Request for Comments and Technical Conference to be held on February
13, 2013 was issued on information sharing and communication issues
between the natural gas and electricity industries.\11\ Interested
parties were asked to file comments prior to the technical conference
on three questions related to communications and information sharing.
Twenty-seven comments were filed in response to the Notice of Request
for Comments and Technical Conference,\12\ and more than 350 persons,
representing a cross-section of industry, registered for the technical
conference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Coordination between Natural Gas and Electricity Markets,
Docket No. AD12-12-000 (Dec. 7, 2012) (Notice Of Request for
Comments and Technical Conference) (https://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/Files/20121207134434-AD12-12-000TC1.pdf); 77 Fed. Reg.
74180 (Dec. 13, 2012) (https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-12-13/pdf/2012-30063.pdf).
\12\ A list of commenters with the abbreviations used to
identify them is attached as an Appendix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. In response to the Notice of Request for Comments and Technical
Conference, and at the February 13 technical conference itself, natural
gas and electric industry participants described a variety of actions
that are currently being taken to improve communications and
information sharing between the two industries. However, several
entities acknowledged that system reliability and contingency planning
could be further enhanced by the sharing of non-public, operational
information directly between transmission operators.\13\ Several
transmission operators pointed out that there is general reluctance to
share such information because of concerns that doing so could be a
violation of current laws, regulations or tariffs.\14\ For example,
INGAA stated that there is some risk that a pipeline could be subject
to an allegation of undue discrimination in violation of section 4 of
the Natural Gas Act (NGA) if it provides an electric transmission
operator with non-public transmission information with respect to any
transportation or sale of natural gas without contemporaneously
disclosing that information to all other shippers or potential
shippers.\15\ MidAmerican and AGA also expressed concerns that the
Standards of Conduct \16\ or the Commission's prohibition on ``undue
discrimination'' may present a real or perceived barrier to effective
participation in certain table-top reliability exercises or emergency
or system planning exercises among regional stakeholders.\17\
Accordingly, INGAA and several others requested that, in order to
facilitate the exchange of information between transmission operators,
the Commission should more clearly identify the types of operational
information that may be shared between transmission operators and
clarify that the sharing of such information does not violate the
prohibition against undue discrimination.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See, e.g., MISO Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 3
(filed Jan. 7, 2013), 6; ISO-NE Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at
4 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); SPP Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); PJM Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 3
(filed Jan. 11, 2013); MidAmerican Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000,
at 9-10 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); BPA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000,
at 6 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); NYTOs Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000,
at 4 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); AGA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at
4 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); National Grid Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-
000, at 8 (filed Jan. 7, 2013).
\14\ See, e.g., Spectra Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 3-5
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); MISO Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); INGAA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 9-
11 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); ISO-NE Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at
4 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); PJM Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 4
(filed Jan. 11, 2013).
\15\ INGAA Comments, AD12-12-000, at 11 (filed Jan. 7, 2013).
\16\ 18 CFR Part 358 (2012).
\17\ MidAmerican Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 8 (filed
Jan. 7, 2013); AGA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 8 (filed
Jan. 7, 2013).
\18\ INGAA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 11 (filed Jan.
7, 2013). See also NYTOs, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 4, 9 (filed
Jan. 7, 2013); MidAmerican Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 10
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); AGA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 4
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); Spectra Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5
(filed Jan. 7, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. While electric generators generally did not oppose the sharing
of such information, they, together with other entities, expressed
concern about the communication of generator-specific information
between an electric transmission operator and a pipeline operator
without the generator's knowledge. For example, We Energies asserted
that excluding the generator operator from discussions between RTOs/
ISOs and natural gas pipelines regarding the status of a generator's
fuel supplies will increase the risk that generator capability will be
misrepresented.\19\ We Energies also stated that a generating unit's-
specific market sensitive information, such as run times and dispatch
levels provided to a pipeline by the RTO prior to the generator having
arranged for any needed incremental gas transportation requirements,
could provide the pipeline with a competitive advantage over the
generator in pricing its transportation services to that generator.\20\
National Grid stated that commercially sensitive information from
individual generators should not be shared with natural gas pipeline
representatives or affiliates that sell or buy wholesale electric power
or market natural gas.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ We Energies Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 3 (filed
Jan. 7, 2013).
\20\ We Energies Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5 (filed
Jan. 7, 2013).
\21\ National Grid Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 8-9
(filed Jan. 7, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. Some commenters expressed concern regarding the potential harm
to industry participants or the potential for improper use of material
resulting from increased communications.\22\ For example, MidAmerican
stated that customer specific information is commercially sensitive and
must be subject to strict limitations, including appropriate protocols
ensuring that generator unit-specific gas usage and transportation
information is not publicly posted or disclosed to non-directly
connected pipelines. AF&PA stated that generally information that is
potentially commercially sensitive should only be disseminated when
there is an articulable and rational reason to expect such exchanges
would further improve reliability or efficiency on either or both
systems.\23\ In addition, APGA argued that transportation information
provides the potential for gaming, market manipulation, and other
violations of the NGA and Federal Power Act (FPA). EPSA asserted that,
when system operators share information with natural gas pipelines,
pipelines should have appropriate limitations on who has access to this
information. EPSA stated that specific
[[Page 44903]]
guidelines are needed when the same person at a pipeline who sells and
schedules capacity could have access to shared information.\24\ NYTOs
noted that, since generators and fuel managers in New York are merchant
entities, there is potential for misuse of confidential information
(for example, whether a generator is critical to maintain reliability)
to the extent it is shared as part of these communications.\25\ NYTOs
stated that they would not support disclosure of market-sensitive
information unless strong measures were in place to prevent and punish
market abuses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See, e.g., MidAmerican Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at
10 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); APGA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); AEP Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 7
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); AF&PA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 2
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); EPSA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 7
(filed Jan. 7, 2013).
\23\ AF&PA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5 (filed Jan. 7,
2013).
\24\ EPSA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 7 (filed Jan. 7,
2013).
\25\ NYTOs Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 7 (filed Jan. 7,
2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Discussion
10. Communications occur today in the normal course of business
between transmission operators and those communications serve a
valuable and necessary purpose to help ensure reliability. In an effort
to provide certainty to the industry and remove barriers--real or
perceived--to the sharing of non-public, operational information, the
Commission proposes to revise its regulations to authorize expressly
the exchange of non-public, operational information between electric
transmission operators and interstate natural gas pipelines. The
Commission intends to remove any barriers to the sharing of non-public,
operational information, not just during emergencies, but also for day-
to-day operations, planned outages, and scheduled maintenance. However,
in consideration of the concerns regarding the exchange of non-public
operational information, the Commission also proposes to adopt a No-
Conduit Rule which prohibits recipients of the non-public, operational
information from subsequently disclosing or being a conduit for
subsequently disclosing that information to any other entity.\26\
Moreover, to the extent that an electric transmission operator or
pipeline has a tariff provision which precludes a communication that
would otherwise be authorized under the proposed regulations, it would
have to make a filing under the FPA or NGA to revise that provision to
permit such exchanges of information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Conduct and Affiliate Restrictions. See 18 CFR 358.6 and 18
CFR 35.39(g). Moreover, the Commission determined in Order No. 717
that the No-Conduit Rule was a critical component of the regulatory
scheme of the Standards of Conduct. See Standards of Conduct for
Transmission Providers, Order No. 717, 73 FR 63796 (Oct. 27, 2008),
FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,280, at P 198 (2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. The Commission has structured the proposed regulations to
provide significant flexibility to individual transmission operators--
who have the most insight and knowledge of their systems--to determine
what non-public operational information, if any, would promote reliable
service on their systems, without fear of violating the Commission's
prohibitions on undue discrimination and undue preference or such an
exchange being considered an unjust or unreasonable practice. Notably,
the Commission is proposing a permissive approach to the sharing of
non-public information. To the extent this voluntary approach proves
inadequate to promote reliable service or operational planning on
natural gas pipelines and electric transmission systems, the Commission
may revisit the need to require certain communications or information
sharing between transmission operators in the future.
A. Undue Discrimination or Preference
12. To provide context for the proposed regulations discussed
below, the Commission first reviews the existing statutory and
regulatory requirements applicable to communications between the gas
and electric industries. Both the FPA and the comparable provisions of
the NGA prohibit undue discrimination or preference.\27\ Specifically,
section 205(b) of the FPA provides that no public utility:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ 16 U.S.C. 824d(b) (2006); 15 U.S.C. 717c(b) (2006).
shall, with respect to any transmission or sale subject to the
jurisdiction of the Commission, (1) make or grant any undue
preference or advantage to any person or subject any person to any
undue prejudice or disadvantage, or (2) maintain any unreasonable
difference in rates, charges, service, facilities, or in any other
respect, either as between localities or as between classes of
service.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ The language of the NGA is virtually identical. 15 U.S.C.
717c(b) (2006).
13. FPA section 205(b) and NGA section 4(b) do not forbid
preferences, advantages and prejudices per se.\29\ Rather, FPA section
205(b) and NGA section 4(b) prohibit ``undue'' preferences, advantages
and prejudices.\30\ A difference in treatment is not unduly
discriminatory when the difference is justified.\31\ In interpreting
FPA section 205(b) and NGA section 4(b), the courts have held that
transmission providers cannot treat similarly situated customers
differently \32\ and that the disparate treatment of two customer
classes does not in and of itself result in an undue preference or
advantage or in an unreasonable difference in service if the customer
classes are not similarly situated.\33\ Whether a preference is
``undue'' depends on the specific facts of the behavior and the
circumstances to determine whether disparities exist and whether those
disparities are rationally justified.\34\ The Commission's Standards of
Conduct seek to deter undue discrimination by prohibiting the exchanges
of information between transmission providers and their marketing
functions in certain situations.\35\ The comments in the proceeding in
Docket No. AD12-12-000 focus on the applicability of both the statutory
prohibitions on undue discrimination and the Standards of Conduct.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See, e.g., Cities of Bethany v FERC, 727 F.2d 1131, 1139 (
Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 917, 105 S.Ct. 293, 83 L.Ed.2d 229
(1984).
\30\ See, e.g., Boroughs of Chambersburg v. FERC, 580 F.2d 573,
577 (D.C. Cir. 1978).
\31\ See Metropolitan Edison Co. v. FERC, 595 F.2d 851, 857
(D.C. Cir. 1979). See also Transmission Agency of N. California v.
FERC, 628 F.3d 538, 549 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (citing Ark. Elec. Energy
Consumers v. FERC, 290 F.3d 362, 367 (D.C. Cir. 2002) and Elec.
Consumers Res. Council v. FERC, 747 F.2d 1511, 1515 (D.C. Cir.
1984)).
\32\ See Transmission Agency of N. California v. FERC, 628 F.3d
at 549 (citing Sacramento Mun. Util. Dist. v. FERC, 474 F.3d 797,
802 (D.C. Cir. 2007)).
\33\ See, e.g., Sw. Elec. Coop., Inc. v. FERC, 347 F.3d 975, 981
(D.C. Cir. 2003). See also Michigan Consolidated Gas Co. v. FPC, 203
F.2d 895, 901 (3d Cir. 1953) and Complex Consol. Edison Co. of New
York, Inc. v. FERC, 165 F.3d 992, 1012 (D.C. Cir. 1999).
\34\ See St. Michaels Utilities Comm'n v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 377
F.2d 912, 915 (4th Cir. 1967).
\35\ Order No. 717, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,280 at P 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. The first issue is whether the statutory restrictions in the
FPA and NGA regarding undue discrimination or unjust and unreasonable
acts and practices prevent the exchange of information between
operators of pipeline transportation systems and electric transmission
operators. The Commission believes that the sharing of non-public,
operational information between public utilities and natural gas
pipelines for the purpose of promoting reliable service or operational
planning is reasonable and not unduly discriminatory or preferential.
The undue discrimination provisions apply to ensure that similarly
situated customers are not subject to disparate rates or terms and
conditions of service. As discussed below, transmission operators are
not similarly situated to other customers because they require
[[Page 44904]]
access to non-public scheduling and other types of information from a
variety of sources to help them ensure the reliability and integrity of
the transportation and transmission systems. In addition, natural gas
pipelines are generally not customers of electric transmission
operators. Likewise, in the case of RTOs/ISOs, they are not shippers on
pipelines. We recognize that some vertically integrated transmission
owners may have marketing function employees or affiliates, such as
generators or local distribution companies who handle gas transactions.
However, putting in place the proposed No-Conduit rule will serve as a
safeguard to ensure that the transmission owners comply with the
prohibitions against undue discrimination or preference with respect to
their marketing function or affiliated entities.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ The Standards of Conduct at 18 CFR 358.6 and 358.7 govern
the preferential sharing of transmission function information from a
transmission provider to its marketing function employees as defined
in 18 CFR 358.3(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. In order to operate natural gas pipelines and electric
transmission systems effectively, transmission operators historically
and necessarily have shared non-public information with other parties
operating transportation or transmission facilities. For example,
pipeline operators routinely exchange nomination and scheduling
information with other pipeline operators and with upstream and
downstream entities (that may be shippers on the pipeline) to confirm
transportation nomination requests and to coordinate flows between the
parties.\37\ Transmitting electric utilities similarly coordinate the
sharing of non-public interchange schedule information on a routine
basis through mechanisms such as, for example, e-Tags.\38\ This
coordination helps ensure the safe and reliable transmission of
electric power across a region.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ The nomination process initiates the flow of gas with the
natural gas transportation service provider. The natural gas
transportation service provider then confirms the flow of natural
gas with the corresponding upstream and downstream entities. Once
the natural gas quantities are confirmed, the natural gas
transportation service provider sends the scheduled quantities
information to the shipper.
\38\ e-Tags are used by applicable Balancing Authorities,
Reliability Coordinators, Interchange Authorities, Transmission
Service Providers, Purchasing-Selling Entities, Generator-Providing
Entities, and Load-Serving Entities to coordinate interchange
schedules. See, e.g., NAESB Wholesale Electric Quadrant (WEQ)
Business Practice Standards (Coordinate Interchange) requirement
004-2 (``Until other means are adopted by NAESB, the primary method
of submitting the RFI [Request for Interchange] shall be an e-Tag
communicated to and managed by the Sink BA's [Balancing Authority]
registered e-Tag authority service using protocols compliant with
the Version 1.8.1 Electronic Tagging Functional Specification.'')
and applicability section (``The Coordinate Interchange Business
Practice Standards apply to BA [Balancing Authority], RC
[Reliability Coordinator], IA [Interchange Authority], Transmission
Service Provider, PSE [Purchasing-Selling Entity], GPE [Generator-
Providing Entity], Load-Serving Entity [LSE], and any TPSE [a PSE
whose transmission approval rights are cited].'') NAESB WEQ Business
Practice Standards (Version 003), published July 31, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Likewise, in Order No. 698, the Commission authorized the
exchange of operational information between the industries.\39\ There,
the Commission incorporated North American Energy Standards Board
(NAESB) Wholesale Gas Quadrant (WGQ) Standard 0.3.12 into its
regulations. This standard requires a generator and its directly
connected natural gas pipeline(s) to ``establish procedures to
communicate material changes in circumstances that may impact hourly
flow rates.'' \40\ In addition, this standard ensures that natural gas
pipelines have relevant planning information to assist in maintaining
the operational integrity and reliability of pipeline service, as well
as to provide gas-fired power plant operators with information as to
whether hourly flow deviations can be honored. NAESB Wholesale Electric
Quadrant (WEQ) Standard 011-1.6, also incorporated in the Commission's
regulations,\41\ requires that ISOs, RTOs, and other independent system
operators establish written operational communication procedures with
the appropriate pipeline to be implemented when an extreme condition
occurs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ Standards for Business Practices for Interstate Natural Gas
Pipelines; Standards for Business Practices for Public Utilities,
Order No. 698, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,251 (2007),order on
clarification and reh'g, Order No. 698-A, 121 FERC ] 61,264 (2007).
In Order No. 698, the Commission incorporated by reference standards
adopted by NAESB.
\40\ NAESB WGQ Version 2.0 Business Practice Standard 0.3.12.
See also Standards for Business Practices for Interstate Natural Gas
Pipelines, Order No. 587-V, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,332 (cross-
referenced at 140 FERC ] 61,036) (2012), (incorporating by reference
the Version 2.0 WGQ Business Practice Standards) (to be codified at
18 CFR 284.12).
\41\ 18 CFR Part 38 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. Sharing of operational information between natural gas
pipelines and electric transmission operators is akin to the sharing of
operational information among interconnected parties. Both the natural
gas pipelines and the electric transmission operators need to know
whether scheduled transactions on their respective systems will be
honored by the other. This sharing of information is crucial to the
effective operations of both systems and is not the type of private
sharing of information with select customers at which the undue
discrimination provisions of the respective statutes were targeted.
18. There are already several safeguards in place to protect
against undue discrimination. For example, while non-public operational
information may be useful for planning, transmission operators cannot
deviate from the terms of their tariffs, and cannot operate in an
unduly discriminatory manner.\42\ Interstate natural gas pipelines and
electric transmission operators are also subject to the same
limitations on sharing information with their marketing function
employees as provided under the Standards of Conduct.\43\ Moreover, we
are proposing additional safeguards as discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ See ISO New England Inc., 142 FERC ] 61,058, at P 23 (2013)
(available capacity must be dispatched ``consistent with the
pipeline's tariff'' and ``[t]he pipelines are required to allocate
available capacity on a not unduly discriminatory basis among the
various requestors of capacity'').
\43\ 18 CFR 358.6 and 358.7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. Based on the critical need for such exchanges of information to
promote the reliability and the operational integrity of industries the
Commission regulates, and the protections against undue discrimination,
we find that the exchange of non-public, operational information
between transmission operators does not violate the statutory
prohibitions on undue discrimination or preference as discussed herein.
B. Clarification Regarding Table-Top Exercises
20. Several comments requested clarification of the applicability
of the Standards of Conduct and statutory prohibition against undue
discrimination to exchanges of information with regard to table-top
exercises involving marketing affiliates of transmission providers and
inter-industry participants. The Standards of Conduct govern, among
other things, communications between interstate natural gas pipelines
and their employees and affiliates that engage in marketing functions,
and public utilities that own or operate electric transmission
facilities and their employees and affiliates that engage in marketing
functions.\44\ As the Commission has previously stated, the Standards
of Conduct apply to communications only within the same organization
(in other words, between the affiliated entities of a single corporate
family) and therefore, do not limit communications between
[[Page 44905]]
unaffiliated pipelines and electric transmission providers.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ 18 CFR 358.1(a) and (b) (2012).
\45\ November 15 Order, 141 FERC ] 61,125 at P 6. See also 18
CFR 358.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
21. Under the Standards of Conduct, marketing function employees
may participate in table-top exercises that include a wide range of
industry participants who will have equal access to non-public
transmission information. However, as the Commission has explained,
non-public transmission information cannot be provided during private
table-top exercises involving only the transmission provider and
marketing function employees since they would receive preferential
access to non-public transmission information or preferential access to
transmission facilities.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ See Ameren Services Co., et al., 86 FERC ] 61,079, at
61,290 (1999). See also South Carolina Electric and Gas Co., 111
FERC ] 61,217 (2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Revisions to Regulations
22. Consistent with the foregoing discussion of existing statutes
and regulations, to provide additional certainty to transmission
operators regarding the permissibility of sharing of non-public,
operational information, the Commission is proposing to revise its
regulations to authorize expressly the exchange of non-public,
operational information between electric transmission operators and
interstate natural gas pipelines.\47\ Proposed section 38.3 applies to
any public utility that owns, operates, or controls facilities used for
the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce subject to a
No-Conduit Rule. Similar changes are proposed in section 284.12(b),
which applies to any interstate pipeline.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ The proposed regulations also recognize the existing
exchanges of information among pipelines and among electric
transmission operators that promote reliable service or operational
planning.
\48\ While the Commission also regulates interstate service
provided by intrastate pipelines, Hinshaw pipelines, and local
distribution companies, the companies themselves are subject to
state regulation and may exchange information subject to whatever
state regulations govern their operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Permissible Disclosure of Non-Public, Operational Information
23. Proposed sections 38.3(a) and 284.12(b)(4) authorize public
utilities providing transmission service and natural gas pipelines to
share non-public, operational information when such information is for
the purpose of promoting reliable service or operational planning. The
term ``non-public, operational information'' is information that is not
publicly posted, yet helps transmission operators to operate and
maintain either a reliable pipeline system or a reliable electric
transmission system on a day-to-day basis, as well as during emergency
conditions or for operational planning. Non-public, operational
information may also include generator, pipeline, or transmission-
specific information. In using the term ``non-public, operational
information,'' the Commission intends that transmission operators would
be permitted to share information dealing with actual, anticipated, or
potential effects on the ability to provide electric and gas service
based on the respective operator's experience and understanding of the
operational capability and customer demands on their respective
systems. Examples of such information include, but are not limited to,
the following types of information:
Real-time and anticipated system conditions that have or
are anticipated to impact natural gas transportation by changing near
term gas flows;
actual and anticipated electric service interruptions to
gas compressor locations;
verification that there is sufficient pipeline operational
capability available at a specific delivery point to change the
quantity of natural gas delivered to the generator as identified by the
electric transmission operator;
actual and projected gas transportation restrictions to
electric generators;
real-time actual flow and point operational capacity data
at all receipt and delivery points; real-time pipeline pressure at all
receipt and delivery points;
nominated and scheduled quantities of shippers who are or
who supply gas-fired generators; and,
scheduled dates and duration of generator, pipeline, and
transmission maintenance and planned outages.
24. The Commission is not proposing a specific list of non-public,
operational information that can be shared in order to provide
flexibility to individual operators--who have the most insight and
knowledge of their systems--to determine what operational information,
if any, would promote reliable service or operational planning on their
systems. The Commission seeks comment on the scope of the non-public,
operational information transmission operators may share under the
proposed regulations, including the specific categories of information
identified above.
25. The Commission recognizes that the provisions of this proposal
apply only to communications between pipelines and electric
transmission operators and that natural gas-fired generators may have
relevant information regarding their capabilities to acquire natural
gas not available to a pipeline. Therefore, the Commission seeks
comment on whether additional regulations are needed to require a
generator to share necessary information with its electric transmission
operator to inform it of the possibility that the generator's natural
gas service may be disrupted. For example, the Commission seeks comment
on whether a generator should be required, at the request of the
electric transmission operator, to provide its electric transmission
operator with information pertaining to any communications received
from a natural gas pipeline regarding potential failures by the
generator to conform to flow rates or nominations. In addition, the
Commission seeks comment on whether the proposed rule should require
that, to the extent the non-public, operational information exchanged
between transmission operators involves customer-specific information
(such as information about individual generators), the transmission
operators must seek to include the customer as part of a three-way
communication.\49\ If so, the Commission seeks comment on how such a
requirement could be implemented.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ The Commission notes that communications between
transmission operators and generators are not covered by this
proposed rule; transmission operators may always discuss generator-
specific information with the relevant generator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Limitations on Disclosure
26. The Commission is proposing several protections, in addition to
the existing protections described above, to ensure that any non-
public, operational information shared under these proposed regulations
remains confidential, and to ensure that information is shared among
transmission owners in a manner that is consistent with the prohibition
on undue discrimination. Proposed sections 38.3(b) and 284.12(b)(4)(ii)
adopt a No-Conduit Rule that prohibits all public utilities and natural
gas pipelines, as well as their employees, contractors, consultants, or
agents, from disclosing, or using anyone as a conduit for the
disclosure of, non-public, operational information they receive under
this proposed rule to a third party.\50\ Sections 38.3(b) and
[[Page 44906]]
284.12.(b)(4)(ii) similarly prohibits the disclosure of such non-
public, operational information to marketing function employees, as
that term is defined in Sec. 358.3 of the Commission's
regulations.\51\ Proposed sections 38.3(b) and 284.12(b)(4)(ii) do not
prohibit communications between transmission operators covered by this
rule. As discussed previously, together with the requirements that
natural gas pipelines and transmission owners abide by their tariffs,
these additional disclosure limitations should adequately protect
against the harmful disclosure of non-public information and undue
discrimination.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ The Commission does not believe the existing No-Conduit
Rule under the Standards of Conduct will sufficiently limit the
disclosure of the information received under this proposed rule. The
proposed No-Conduit Rule has a broader prohibition on disclosure,
since it applies to all third parties, not just marketing function
employees. Furthermore, the Standards of Conduct, and thus the No-
Conduit Rule under the Standards of Conduct, do not apply to RTOs/
ISOs. Therefore, the Commission is proposing a No-Conduit Rule in
this part of the regulations that is tailored to the entities and
information covered by the proposed rule, and extends the disclosure
prohibition to non-affiliates.
\51\ Since RTOs/ISOs do not have marketing function employees as
defined in the Standards of Conduct, this provision would not apply
to them.
\52\ Unauthorized disclosure of any non-public, operational
information may subject the entity or individual making the
prohibited disclosure to the enforcement provisions of the FPA and
NGA, including potential civil penalties. See section 22 of the NGA,
15 U.S.C. 717t2-1 (2006), and section 316A of the FPA, 16 U.S.C.
825o-1 (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
27. We Energies and EPSA expressed concerns that generator-specific
non-public information provided to a pipeline by an electric
transmission operator prior to the generator having arranged for any
needed incremental gas transportation requirements could provide the
pipeline with a competitive advantage over the generator in pricing
transportation services. We see no need to propose additional
protections regarding pipeline transportation at this time. Interstate
pipelines are required to allocate service, on a not unduly
discriminatory basis, based on their tariffs, at a rate not exceeding
the just and reasonable rate on file. Pipelines are not required to
discount services, and if they choose to discount, are permitted to
obtain information from any source to demonstrate that the shipper
requesting the discount has competitive alternatives.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ See Associated Gas Distributors v. FERC, 824 F.2d 981 (D.C.
Cir. 1987) (permitting selective discounting only when justified by
competitive alternatives and elastic demand conditions); Williston
Basin Interstate Pipeline Co., 85 FERC ] 61,247 (1998). Consistent
with that policy, in the next rate case after providing discounts,
the Commission only permits pipelines to reduce their rate design
volumes to reflect discounting upon a showing that the discounts
they offered were required by competition. See, e.g., Panhandle
Eastern Pipe Line Co., Opinion No. 395, 71 FERC ] 61,228, at 61,867
(1995) (requiring documentation from its customers justifying their
need for any discounts that they request); Panhandle Eastern Pipe
Line Co., Opinion No. 404, 74 FERC ] 61,109, at 61,405 (1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Information Collection Statement
28. The following collection of information contained in the
Proposed Rule is subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (PRA).\54\ OMB's regulations require that OMB approve certain
reporting and recordkeeping requirements (collections of
information).\55\ Upon approval of a collection of information, OMB
will assign an OMB control number and expiration date. Respondents
subject to the information collection requirements of this rule will
not be penalized for failing to respond to this collection of
information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB
control number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d) (2006).
\55\ 5 CFR 1320.11 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
29. The Commission will submit the information collection
requirements to OMB for its review and approval under section 3507(d)
of the PRA. The communications permitted under this proposed rule are
not mandatory. The proposed rule would clarify that the requirements of
the FPA and NGA do not prohibit certain voluntary communications
between transmission providers.\56\ Comments are solicited on the need
for this information, whether the information will have practical
utility, the accuracy of the provided burden estimate, ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected,
and any suggested methods for minimizing the respondent's burden,
including the use of automated information techniques.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ The OMB regulations, 5 CFR 1320.3, provide that
``voluntary'' collections of information must be reported to OMB.
The regulations do not define what is meant by voluntary, but it
appears that the term was included to ensure review of agency's
issuing voluntary surveys to the public. See J. Lubbers, Paperwork
Redux: The (Stronger) Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 49 Admin, L.
Rev. 111,119 (1997). While this justification for the requirement
does not appear to apply to an interpretation of a statutory
requirement, we nonetheless are submitting this NOPR to OMB as a
collection of information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
30. Public Reporting Burden: The proposed communications and
information sharing are voluntary, take place between various industry
entities (and are not submitted to the Commission), and are intended to
promote reliable service or operational planning. While the extent of
such communications likely will vary significantly across the country,
the following estimates represent an expected average. The annual
estimates reflect burden for operational contacts and emergencies.
FERC-923, Communication of Operational Information Between Natural Gas Pipelines and Electricity Transmission Operators, as Proposed in NOPR in Docket
No. RM13-17 \57\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Number of responses per Average burden Total annual burden
Type of entity respondents respondent hours per hours Total annual cost \59\
\58\ response
(1) (2) (3) (4) (2)*(3)*(4) = (5) (5)*($60.41/hr.) = (6)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Utility Transmission Provider.................. \60\ 132 12 0.50 792 $47,845
Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines...................... \61\ 137 12 0.50 822 49,657
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................. 269 12 0.50 1,614 97,502
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title: Communication of Operational Information between Natural Gas
Pipelines and Electricity Transmission Operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ Columns 5 and 6 are rounded.
\58\ The Commission estimates an annual average per entity of 12
responses (including electricity and gas emergency and/or
operational contacts).
\59\ The hourly costs (for salary plus benefits) are based on
the Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2012-
2013 edition (at https://www.bls.gov/ooh/). The estimated costs are
$125,647 annually or $60.41 hourly.
\60\ Of the 132 public utility transmission providers, 5 are
considered ``small'' using the SBA definition.
\61\ The 2012 filings of the Forms 2 and 2A indicated that there
are 137 interstate natural gas pipelines. Of those pipelines, eight
(8) are considered small using the definition of the Small Business
Administration (at 13 CFR 121.301), including the affiliate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action: Proposed FERC-923.
[[Page 44907]]
OMB Control No.: To be determined (1902-TBD).
Respondents: Public electricity transmission providers; interstate
natural gas pipelines.
Frequency of Responses: As needed.
Necessity of the Information: In this NOPR, the Commission is
seeking comment on a proposal to revise Parts 38 and 284 of the
Commission's regulations to authorize electric transmission providers
and interstate natural gas pipelines to share non-public, operational
information for the purpose of promoting reliable service and
operational planning.
31. This proposal is intended to address industry concerns and
thereby remove any barriers, real or perceived, to electric
transmission operators and natural gas pipelines sharing necessary
information. The Commission is not requiring that data be submitted to
the Commission or to third parties. Rather, the Commission is removing
actual or perceived barriers to voluntary communications and
information sharing that might otherwise have been part of the normal
business process.
32. Internal Review: The Commission will submit the information
collection requirements to OMB for its review and approval under
section 3507(d) of the PRA. Comments are solicited on the need and
utility for this information, and the accuracy of the provided burden
estimate.
33. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting
requirements by contacting the following: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426 [Attention:
Ellen Brown, Office of the Executive Director, email:
DataClearance@ferc.gov, phone: (202) 502-8663, fax: (202) 273-0873].
Please send comments concerning the collection of information and the
associated burden estimates to the Commission, and 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) 395-4638, 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 include
Docket Number RM13-17, FERC-923, and OMB Control Number 1902-TBD.
IV. Environmental Analysis
34. 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.\62\ The
Commission concludes that neither an Environmental Assessment nor an
Environmental Impact Statement is required for this Final Rule under
section 380.4(a)(2)(ii) of the Commission's regulations, which provides
a categorical exemption for proposals for legislation and promulgation
of rules that are clarifying, corrective, or procedural, or that do not
substantively change the effect of legislation or regulations being
amended.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, Order No. 486, 52 FR 47,897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC
Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 1986-1990 ] 30,783 (1987).
\63\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii) (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
35. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \64\ generally
requires a description and analysis of proposed rules that will have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The RFA mandates consideration of regulatory alternatives that
accomplish the stated objectives of a proposed rule and that minimize
any significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The Small Business Administration's (SBA's) Office of Size
Standards develops the numerical definition of a small business.\65\
The SBA has established a size standard, for electric utilities,
electric power distribution, and electric bulk power transmission and
control, 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 fiscal year did not exceed four million megawatt
hours.\66\ For pipeline transportation of natural gas, the SBA defines
a small entity as having a maximum annual receipt of $25.5 million
dollars.\67\ The Commission estimates a total of 13 ``small'' entities
\68\ (or 5% out of the total 269 entities) affected by the NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612 (2006).
\65\ 13 CFR 121.101 (2012).
\66\ 13 CFR 121.201, Sector 22, Subsector 221, Utilities & n.1.
\67\ Based on 13 CFR 121.201, Sectors 48-49, Subsector 486,
Pipeline Transportation, the annual receipts indicate the maximum
allowed for a concern and its affiliates to be considered ``small.''
\68\ Based on the SBA definitions and including affiliates, the
number of ``small'' entities is estimated to be:
for public utility transmission providers, 5 small
public utilities; and
for natural gas pipelines, 8 small interstate natural
gas pipelines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
36. To address industry concerns, the Commission is removing actual
or perceived barriers to communications and information sharing (that
might otherwise have been part of the normal business process). This
proposal will enable entities of all sizes to communicate voluntarily
and to share non-public, operational information for the purpose of
promoting reliable service or operational planning, thereby easing and
improving the normal business process. The estimated annual cost of the
proposal for each respondent, large or small, is $362.46.\69\
Accordingly, the Commission certifies that the revised requirements set
forth in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, and no
regulatory flexibility analysis is required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ The estimated annual cost per respondent is $362.46 (12
annual responses x 0.50 hour/response x $60.41/hour).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. Comment Procedures
37. The Commission invites interested persons to submit comments on
the matters and issues proposed in this notice to be adopted, including
any related matters or alternative proposals that commenters may wish
to discuss. Comments are due August 26, 2013. Comments must refer to
Docket No. RM13-17, and must include the commenter's name, the
organization they represent, if applicable, and their address in their
comments.
38. The Commission encourages comments to be filed electronically
via the eFiling link on the Commission's Web site at https://www.ferc.gov. The Commission accepts most standard word processing
formats. Documents created electronically using word processing
software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format
and not in a scanned format. Commenters filing electronically do not
need to make a paper filing.
39. Commenters that are not able to file comments electronically
must send an original of their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
40. All comments will be placed in the Commission's public files
and may be viewed, printed, or downloaded remotely as described in the
Document Availability section below. Commenters on this proposal are
not required to serve copies of their comments on other commenters.
[[Page 44908]]
VII. Document Availability
41. 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 the Commission's Home Page (https://www.ferc.gov) and
in the Commission'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.
42. From the Commission'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.
43. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's
Web site during normal business hours from the Commission's 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.
List of Subjects
18 CFR Part 38
Conflict of interests, Electric power plants, Electric utilities,
Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
18 CFR Part 284
Incorporation by reference, Natural gas, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
By direction of the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission proposes to amend
Part 38 and Part 284, 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. The heading of Part 38 is revised to read as follows:
PART 38--STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC UTILITY BUSINESS OPERATIONS AND
COMMUNICATIONS
Sec. 38.1 [Removed]
0
3. Remove Sec. 38.1.
Sec. 38.2 [Redesignated as Sec. 38.1]
0
4. Redesignate Sec. 38.2 as Sec. 38.1.
0
5. In newly redesignated Sec. 38.1, paragraph (a) is revised to read
as follows:
Sec. 38.1 Incorporation by reference of North American Energy
Standards Board Wholesale Electric Quadrant standards.
(a) Any public utility that owns, operates, or controls facilities
used for the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce or
for the sale of electric energy at wholesale in interstate commerce and
any non-public utility that seeks voluntary compliance with
jurisdictional transmission tariff reciprocity conditions must comply
with the following business practice and electronic communication
standards promulgated by the North American Energy Standards Board
Wholesale Electric Quadrant, which are incorporated herein by
reference:
* * * * *
0
6. New Sec. 38.2 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 38.2 Communication and information sharing among public
utilities and pipelines.
(a) Any public utility that owns, operates, or controls facilities
used for the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce is
authorized to share non-public, operational information with a
pipeline, as defined in Sec. 284.12(b)(4), or another public utility
covered by this section for the purpose of promoting reliable service
or operational planning.
(b) Except as permitted in paragraph (a), a public utility, as
defined in Sec. 38.2, and its employees, contractors, consultants, and
agents are prohibited from disclosing, or using anyone as a conduit for
the disclosure of, non-public, operational information received from a
pipeline pursuant to Sec. 284.12(b)(4) to a third party or to its
marketing function employees as that term is defined in Sec. 358.3(d).
PART 284--CERTAIN SALES AND TRANSPORTATION OF NATURAL GAS UNDER THE
NATURAL GAS POLICY ACT OF 1978 AND RELATED AUTHORITIES
0
7. The authority citation for Part 284 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717-717z, 3301-3432; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352;
43 U.S.C. 1331-1356.
0
8. In Sec. 284.12, paragraph (b)(4) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 284.12 Standards for pipeline business operations and
communications.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(4) Communication and Information Sharing Among Pipelines and
Public Utilities.
(i) A pipeline is authorized to share non-public, operational
information with a public utility, as defined in Sec. 38.2(a) or
another pipeline covered by this section, for the purpose of promoting
reliable service or operational planning.
(ii) Except as permitted in paragraph (i), a pipeline and its
employees, contractors, consultants, and agents are prohibited from
disclosing, or using anyone as a conduit for the disclosure of, non-
public, operational information received from a public utility pursuant
to Sec. 38.2 to a third party or to its marketing function employees
as that term is defined in Sec. 358.3(d).
Note: The following appendix will not appear in the Code of
Federal Regulations.
Appendix
List of Commenters and Abbreviations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbreviation Name
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AEP................................. American Electric Power Service
Corporation.
AF&PA............................... American Forest & Paper
Association.
AGA................................. American Gas Association.
APGA................................ American Public Gas Association.
BPA................................. Bonneville Power Administration.
CAISO............................... California Independent System
Operator Corporation.
EPSA................................ Electric Power Supply Association.
ERCOT............................... Electric Reliability Council of
Texas, Inc.
FES................................. First Energy Solutions.
INGAA............................... Interstate Natural Gas Association
of America.
ISO-NE.............................. ISO New England, Inc.
MidAmerican......................... MidAmerican Energy Holdings
Company.
MISO \70\........................... Midwest Independent Transmission
System Operator, Inc.
MMWEC............................... Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale
Electric Company.
National Grid....................... National Grid USA, Inc.
NE LDCs............................. New England Local Distribution
Companies.
NERC................................ North American Electric
Reliability Corporation.
NYISO............................... New York Independent System
Operator.
NYTOs............................... New York Transmission Owners.
[[Page 44909]]
NIPSCO.............................. Northern Indiana Public Service
Company.
PG&E................................ Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
PJM................................. PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Texas PUC........................... Public Utility Commission of
Texas.
SCE................................. Southern California Edison
Company.
Spectra............................. Spectra Energy Transmission, LLC.
SPP................................. Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
We Energies......................... Wisconsin Electric Power Company
and Wisconsin Gas LLC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\70\ Effective April 26, 2013, MISO changed its name from
``Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.'' to
``Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2013-17682 Filed 7-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
