Revisions to Modeling, Data, and Analysis Reliability Standard, 45447-45451 [2013-17813]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
1435.602
CCC.
1435.603
1435.604
1435.605
1435.606
1435.607
Eligible sugar to be purchased by
General statement.
(a) The provisions of this subpart will
be applied when CCC determines that
buying sugar is necessary to avoid
forfeitures of sugar pledged as collateral
for CCC sugar loans.
(b) This subpart will be applicable to:
(1) Any sugar seller who contracts
with CCC to sell sugar, and
(2) Any bioenergy producer who
contracts with CCC to purchase sugar
for the production of bioenergy.
§ 1435.601 Sugar surplus determination
and public announcement.
(a) CCC will estimate by September 1
the quantity of sugar that will be made
available for purchase and sale under
FFP for the following crop year.
(b) Not later than January 1, April 1,
and July 1 of the fiscal year, CCC will
re-estimate the quantity of sugar that
will be made available for purchase and
sale under the FFP for the crop year.
(c) CCC will announce by press
release the estimates in paragraphs (a)
and (b) of this section, which will reflect
CCC’s forecast of sugar likely to be
forfeited to CCC and any uncertainty
surrounding that forecast.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 1435.602
by CCC.
Eligible sugar to be purchased
(a) CCC will only purchase raw sugar,
refined sugar, or in-process sugar for
FFP that is eligible to be used as
collateral under the CCC Sugar Loan
Program, as specified in § 1435.102.
(b) Raw sugar, refined sugar, or inprocess sugar purchased directly from
any domestic sugar beet or sugarcane
processor that made the raw sugar,
refined sugar, or in-process sugar will be
credited against the processor’s sugar
marketing allocation. (The definition for
‘‘marketing’’ in § 1435.2 applies to this
subpart.)
(c) CCC will only purchase sugar
located in the United States.
(d) CCC will evaluate an offer to sell
sugar to CCC based upon CCC’s estimate
of the reduction in refined sugar supply
available for human consumption due to
the purchase. For example, if processing
thick juice (an in-process sugar) would
yield 70 percent sugar for human
consumption, then CCC will only
consider 70 percent of the volume of the
thick juice in evaluating the per unit
sales price.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:11 Jul 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
18 CFR Part 40
Eligible sugar seller.
(a) To be considered an eligible sugar
seller, the sugar seller must be located
in the United States.
(b) [Reserved]
Subpart G—Feedstock Flexibility
Program
§ 1435.600
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
§ 1435.603
Eligible sugar seller.
Eligible sugar buyer.
Competitive procedures.
Miscellaneous.
Appeals.
(e) CCC will only purchase the sugar
if such purchase would reduce the
likelihood of forfeitures of CCC sugar
loans, as determined by CCC.
45447
§ 1435.604
Eligible sugar buyer.
(a) To be considered an eligible sugar
buyer, the bioenergy producer must
produce bioenergy products, including
fuel grade ethanol or other biofuels.
(b) [Reserved]
§ 1435.605
Competitive procedures.
(a) CCC will generally issue tenders
for bids, before entering into contracts
with any eligible sugar seller or buyer,
with the intent of selecting the bid(s)
that represents the least cost to CCC of
removing sugar from the market.
(b) CCC may, at times, negotiate
contracts directly with sellers or buyers,
if CCC determines that such negotiation
will result in either reduced likelihood
of forfeited sugar under the CCC sugar
loan program or reduced costs of
removing sugar from the market, which
will reduce the likelihood of forfeitures
of sugar to CCC.
§ 1435.606
Miscellaneous.
(a) As a sugar buyer, a bioenergy
producer must take possession of the
sugar no more than 30 days from the
date of CCC’s purchase.
(b) CCC, to the maximum extent
practicable, will not pay storage fees for
the sugar purchased under this program.
A bioenergy producer must assume any
storage costs accrued from date of
contract to date of taking possession of
the sugar.
(c) Each bioenergy producer that
purchases sugar through FFP must
provide proof as specified by CCC that
the sugar has been used in the bioenergy
factory for the production of bioenergy
and permit access for USDA to verify
compliance.
§ 1435.607
Appeals.
(a) The administrative appeal
regulations of parts 11 and 780 of this
title apply to this part.
(b) [Reserved]
Signed on July 24, 2013.
Juan M. Garcia,
Administrator, Farm Service Agency, and
Executive Vice President, Commodity Credit
Corporation.
[FR Doc. 2013–18160 Filed 7–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–05–P
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket No. RM12–19–000; Order No. 782]
Revisions to Modeling, Data, and
Analysis Reliability Standard
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
In this Final Rule, pursuant to
section 215 of the Federal Power Act,
the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission) approves
Modeling, Data, and Analysis (MOD)
Reliability Standard MOD–028–2,
submitted to the Commission for
approval by the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC), the
Commission-certified Electric
Reliability Organization. The
Commission finds that the proposed
Reliability Standard represents an
improvement over the currentlyeffective standard, MOD–028–1 because
the proposed Reliability Standard
clarifies the timing and frequency of
Total Transfer Capability calculations
needed for Available Transfer Capability
calculations. The Commission also
approves NERC’s proposed
implementation plan and retirement of
the currently-effective standard.
DATES: This rule is effective September
27, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rachel Bryant (Legal Information),
Office of General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426, (202) 502–6155,
rachel.bryant@ferc.gov.
Syed Ahmad (Technical Information),
Office of Electric Reliability, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426, (202) 502–8718,
syed.ahmad@ferc.gov.
Christopher Young (Technical
Information), Office of Energy of
Energy Policy and Innovation, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426, (202) 502–6403,
christopher.young@ferc.gov.
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
144 FERC ¶ 61,027
United States Of America
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Before Commissioners: Jon Wellinghoff,
Chairman; Philip D. Moeller, John R.
Norris, Cheryl A. LaFleur, and Tony Clark.
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
45448
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Final Rule
Issued July 18, 2013.
1. Pursuant to section 215 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA),1 the
Commission approves Modeling, Data,
and Analysis (MOD) Reliability
Standard MOD–028–2 submitted to the
Commission by the North American
Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC),
the Commission-certified Electric
Reliability Organization (ERO). NERC
submitted one modification to the
currently-effective Reliability Standard
MOD–028–1, pertaining to the
information a transmission service
provider 2 must include when
calculating Total Transfer Capability
(TTC) using the area interchange
methodology for the on-peak and offpeak intra-day and next day time
periods. The Commission also approves
NERC’s proposed implementation plan
and retirement of the currently-effective
Reliability Standard MOD–028–1.
I. Background
A. Mandatory Reliability Standards
2. Section 215 of the FPA requires a
Commission-certified ERO to develop
mandatory and enforceable Reliability
Standards, subject to Commission
review and approval. Specifically, the
Commission may approve, by rule or
order, a proposed Reliability Standard
or modification to a Reliability Standard
if it determines that the Standard is just,
reasonable, not unduly discriminatory
or preferential, and in the public
interest.3 Once approved, the Reliability
Standards may be enforced by the ERO,
subject to Commission oversight, or by
the Commission independently.4
Pursuant to section 215 of the FPA, the
Commission established a process to
1 16
U.S.C. 824o (2006).
defines ‘‘transmission service provider’’
as ‘‘[t]he entity that administers the transmission
tariff and provides Transmission Service to
Transmission Customers under applicable
transmission service agreements.’’ NERC, Glossary
of Terms Used in NERC Reliability Standards 64
(2011), https://www.nerc.com/files/
Glossary_of_Terms.pdf. We also use the term
‘‘transmission operator’’ in this final rule, which is
defined by NERC as ‘‘[t]he entity responsible for the
reliability of its ‘‘local’’ transmission system, and
that operates or directs the operations of the
transmission facilities.’’ Id. These terms indicate
distinct NERC functional entities, to which different
requirements within the same Reliability Standard
may apply. Accordingly, in the context of
describing the requirement of a Reliability
Standard, we necessarily use either or both terms
where appropriate.
3 Id. 824o(d)(2).
4 Id. 824o(e)(3).
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
2 NERC
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:11 Jul 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
select and certify an ERO,5 and
subsequently certified NERC.6
3. In March 2007, the Commission
issued Order No. 693, evaluating 107
Reliability Standards, including 23
MOD standards pertaining to
methodologies for calculating Available
Transfer Capability (ATC) and Available
Flowgate Capability (AFC).7 The
Commission approved one out of the 23
MOD standards unconditionally,
approved nine with direction for
modification and left the remaining 13
pending with direction for
modification.8
4. On November 24, 2009, the
Commission issued Order No. 729,9
which approved Available Transmission
System Capability Reliability Standard
MOD–001–1 as part of a set of
Reliability Standards that pertain to
methodologies for the consistent and
transparent calculation of ATC and
AFC. These Reliability Standards were
designed to ensure, among other things,
that transmission service providers
maintain awareness of available system
capability and future flows on their own
systems, as well as those of their
neighbors, and to reduce transmission
service provider discretion and enhance
transparency in the calculation of
ATC.10 Requirement R1 of MOD–001–1
required a transmission operator to
select one of three methodologies for
calculation of ATC or AFC for each
available ATC path for each time frame
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, order on reh’g, Order No.
672–A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,212 (2006).
6 North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116
FERC ¶ 61,062, order on reh’g & compliance, 117
FERC ¶ 61,126 (2006), aff’d sub nom. Alcoa, Inc.
v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
7 Mandatory Reliability Standards for the BulkPower System, Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs.
¶ 31,242, at P 1046, order on reh’g, Order No. 693–
A, 120 FERC ¶ 61,053 (2007). See also Preventing
Undue Discrimination and Preference in
Transmission Service, Order No. 890, FERC Stats.
& Regs. ¶ 31,241, order on reh’g, Order No. 890–A,
FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,261 (2007), order on reh’g,
Order No. 890–B, 123 FERC ¶ 61,299 (2008), order
on reh’g, Order No. 890–C, 126 FERC ¶ 61,228
(2009) (directing public utilities to develop
Reliability Standards and business practices to
improve the consistency and transparency of ATC
calculations).
8 Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,242 at
P 1010.
9 Mandatory Reliability Standards for the
Calculation of Available Transfer Capability,
Capacity Benefit Margins, Transmission Reliability
Margins, Total Transfer Capability, and Existing
Transmission Commitments and Mandatory
Reliability Standards for the Bulk Power System,
Order No. 729, 129 FERC ¶ 61,155 (2009), order on
clarification, Order No. 729–A, 131 FERC ¶ 61,109,
order on reh’g and reconsideration, Order No. 729–
B, 132 FERC ¶ 61,027 (2010).
10 Order No. 729, 129 FERC ¶ 61,155 at PP 87–89.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(hourly, daily or monthly). NERC
developed these three methodologies as
detailed in Reliability Standards MOD–
028–1 (the area interchange
methodology), MOD–029–1a (the rated
system path methodology), and MOD–
030–2 (the flowgate methodology).11
5. The MOD Reliability Standards
require certain users, owners, and
operators of the bulk power system to
develop consistent and transparent
methodologies for the calculation of
ATC or AFC.12 Three currently-effective
Reliability Standards—MOD–028–1,
MOD–029–1a, and MOD–030–2—
address three different methodologies
for calculating ATC or AFC.13 MOD–
028–1, which describes the area
interchange methodology for
determining ATC, only applies to those
transmission operators and transmission
service providers that elect to
implement this particular methodology
as part of their reliability compliance
with Reliability Standard MOD–001–1.
MOD–001–1 requires transmission
service providers to ‘‘[adhere] to a
specific documented and transparent
methodology’’ and ‘‘to select one of
three methodologies for calculating
[ATC] or [AFC] for each available
transfer capability path for each time
frame (hourly, daily or monthly) for the
facilities in its area.14
6. Requirement R3.1 of MOD–028–1
details the information a transmission
operator must include in its TTC
determination under the area
interchange methodology for the onpeak and off-peak intra-day and next
day time periods, as well as future days
two through 31 and for months two
through 13.15
B. NERC Petition
7. On August 24, 2012, NERC
submitted a Petition for Approval of
Proposed Reliability Standard (Petition),
seeking Commission approval of a
proposed Reliability Standard, MOD–
028–2, Area Interchange Methodology,
Requirement R3.1, which would revise
the currently effective ‘‘Version 1’’
standard—MOD–028–1.
8. NERC stated that Florida Power &
Light Company (FPL) requested that
NERC interpret MOD–028–1,
Requirement R3.1. Specifically, FPL
requested that NERC clarify whether
Requirement R3.1, which instructs
transmission operators to include data
11 Id.
P 51.
P 1.
13 Id. P 51.
14 Id. P 19.
15 Id. P 57 (stating that this information includes:
expected generation and transmission outages,
additions, and retirements; load forecasts; and unit
commitment and dispatch order).
12 Id.
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
45449
current standard); for months two through
13, a monthly load forecast is required
(identical to the current standard); and for
current-day and next-day, entities may use
either a daily or hourly load forecast (the
language being clarified). The new language
clarifies and is consistent with the intent of
the original requirement language, and does
not materially change the standard.17
asserted that it intended the language of
MOD–028–1 to specify that, for TTC
used in current-day and next-day ATC
calculations, the load forecast used
should be consistent with the period
being calculated. Specifically, NERC
stated:
C. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NOPR also identified possible market
implications of NERC’s proposed
modification to requirement R3.1. The
NOPR stated that, although NERC’s
statutory functions are properly focused
on the reliability of the Bulk-Power
System, the Commission has
determined that the ERO should also
attempt to develop Reliability Standards
that have no undue negative effect on
competition.19
12. The NOPR stated that NERC’s
proposed revision to requirement R3.1.2
allows a transmission operator
flexibility to choose either a daily or
hourly load forecast when forecasting
current-day and next-day TTC. The
NOPR sought comments regarding
whether a transmission operator could
potentially use a load forecast
assumption that is not applicable to the
period being calculated. As an example,
the NOPR stated that a transmission
operator using daily on-peak load
forecasts in determining off-peak TTC
for the current day could, either
purposefully or inadvertently, suppress
off-peak ATC used by generators that
make off-peak sales, or other customers
who purchase hourly service.
13. Comments in support of the NOPR
were filed by NERC and Southern
18 Revisions to Modeling, Data, and Analysis
Reliability Standard, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, 78 FR 19,152 (Mar. 29, 2013), 142
FERC ¶ 61,210 (2013).
19 Id. P 11 (citing Order No. 729, 129 FERC ¶
61,155 at PP 109, 135).
10. On March 21, 2013, the
Commission issued a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR)
proposing to approve Reliability
Standard MOD–028–2 as just,
reasonable, not unduly discriminatory
or preferential, and in the public
interest.18 The Commission proposed to
approve Reliability Standard MOD–
028–2 after determining that it clarified
requirement R3.1 of Reliability Standard
MOD–028–1 and did not present
reliability concerns.
11. While proposing to approve
Reliability Standard MOD–028–2, the
16 Petition, Exhibit E (Record of Development of
Proposed Reliability Standard).
17 Petition
at 7 (emphasis added).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:11 Jul 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
Requirement R3 of the MOD–028–1
standard is proposed to be modified to clarify
language regarding load forecasting, to
indicate that for days two through 31, a daily
load forecast is required (identical to the
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
9. NERC thus proposed Reliability
Standard MOD–028–2, which revises
MOD–028–1 as follows:
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
ER29JY13.010
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
‘‘[f]or on peak and off peak intra-day
and next day TTCs,’’ actually requires
transmission operators to provide
separate TTC numbers for different
portions of the current day. NERC
explained that, upon reviewing FPL’s
request for interpretation, the NERC
Standards Committee determined that
providing this clarification might
require a modification to the
Standard.16 In its Petition, NERC
45450
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Company Services, Inc., acting as agent
for Alabama Power Company, Georgia
Power Company, Gulf Power Company,
and Mississippi Power Company
(Southern Company Services).
II. Discussion
14. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of
the FPA, we approve Reliability
Standard MOD–028–2 as just,
reasonable, not unduly discriminatory
or preferential, and in the public
interest. The Commission also approves
NERC’s proposed implementation plan,
i.e., that the standard shall become
effective on the first day of the first
calendar quarter after Commission
approval, and retirement of the
currently-effective Reliability Standard
MOD–028–1. NERC’s clarifying revision
to Requirement R3.1.2 of MOD–028–2
allows a transmission operator the
flexibility to choose either a daily or
hourly load forecast when forecasting
current-day and next-day TTC. This
revision does not present reliability
concerns.
15. In the NOPR, the Commission
asked for comment on a potential
market-related concern regarding
whether a transmission operator using
daily on-peak load forecasts in
determining off-peak TTC for the
current day could, either purposefully
or inadvertently, suppress off-peak ATC
used by generators that make off-peak
sales, or other customers who purchase
hourly service. In response to the NOPR,
two entities submitted comments, both
supporting Commission approval of
MOD–028–2. Southern Company
Services comments that the flexibility in
Requirement R3.1 does not give rise to
the potential for undue discrimination
in ATC calculations. NERC states that
the proposed modification to Reliability
Standard MOD–028–2 clarifies the
existing language and provides
flexibility for operators to select a
methodology that best fits their needs.
NERC comments that it ‘‘expect[s] that
entities will implement proposed
Reliability Standard MOD–028–2
consistent with their existing legal
obligations, i.e., pursuant to open access
transmission tariffs, etc.’’ 20 NERC adds
that, ‘‘while it might be possible for an
entity to use a load forecast assumption
that is not applicable to the period being
calculated, the Commission can mitigate
such risks through complaints and the
Commission’s market oversight
authority.’’ 21
16. We are satisfied that the
modification to Requirement R3.1 does
not give rise to any immediate market20 NERC
21 Id.
Comments at 3–4.
at 3.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:11 Jul 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
related concerns in the instant
proceeding. No entity filed comments
raising the concern that a transmission
operator would use a load forecast
assumption that is not applicable to the
period being calculated. However, we
agree with NERC that, consistent with
Order No. 729, the risk of a transmission
service provider using parameters and
assumptions to skew its ATC values can
be mitigated through complaints and
market oversight authority.22 In
addition, as NERC also acknowledges,
transmission operators must implement
the revised Reliability Standard MOD–
028–2 in a manner consistent with their
existing legal obligations, including
their obligations under their open access
transmission tariffs.23
17. Accordingly, pursuant to FPA
section 215(d)(2), we approve Reliability
Standard MOD–028–2.
III. Information Collection Statement
18. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) regulations require that
OMB approve certain reporting and
recordkeeping (collections of
information) imposed by an agency.24
The information contained here is also
subject to review under section 3507(d)
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995.25
19. As stated above, the Commission
previously approved, in Order No. 729,
the Reliability Standard that is the
subject of the current rulemaking. This
Final Rule approves one revision to a
previously approved Reliability
Standard developed by NERC as the
ERO. The minor revision relates to an
existing Reliability Standard and does
not add to or otherwise increase entities’
current reporting burden. Thus, the
revision does not materially affect the
burden estimates relating to the
currently effective version of the
Reliability Standards presented in Order
No. 729. The MOD–028–1 Reliability
Standard that is subject of the approved
revision was approved in Order No. 729,
and the related information collection
requirements were reviewed and
approved, accordingly.26 The
Commission submitted the revised
Reliability Standard to OMB as a request
for ‘‘no material’’ or ‘‘nonsubstantive’’
change 27 at the NOPR stage. OMB
Order No. 729, 129 FERC ¶ 61,155 at P 135.
the extent a market-related issue arises as
a result of future changes to Reliability Standard
MOD–028, we can address it at that time.
24 5 CFR 1320.11 (2012).
25 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
26 See Order No. 729, 129 FERC ¶ 61,155 at PP
307–312.
27 This type of submittal means that there is no
change to the existing burden estimates and the
existing expiration date.
PO 00000
22 See
23 To
Frm 00010
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
approved the nonsubstantive change,
requiring no further Commission action
related to the information collection
requirements.
IV. Environmental Analysis
20. 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.28 The Commission has
categorically excluded certain actions
from this requirement as not having a
significant effect on the human
environment. Included in the exclusion
are rules that are clarifying, corrective,
or procedural or that do not
substantially change the effect of the
regulations being amended.29 The
actions proposed herein fall within this
categorical exclusion in the
Commission’s regulations.
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act
21. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980 (RFA) 30 generally requires a
description and analysis of final rules
that will have significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The RFA mandates
consideration of regulatory alternatives
that accomplish the stated objectives of
a final rule and that minimize any
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The Small Business Administration’s
Office of Size Standards develops the
numerical definition of a small
business.31 For electric utilities, a firm
is small if, including its affiliates, it is
primarily engaged in the transmission,
generation and/or distribution of
electric energy for sale and its total
electric output for the preceding twelve
months did not exceed four million
megawatt hours. The Commission does
not expect the revision adopted herein
to materially affect the cost for small
entities to comply with the proposed
Reliability Standard. As discussed
above, the clarifying revision allows
transmission service providers more
flexibility in calculating ATC and only
de minimis costs are associated with
implementation of the revision.
Therefore, the Commission certifies that
the Final Rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
28 Regulations Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act, Order No. 486, 52 FR
47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. & Regs.
Regulations Preambles 1986–1990 ¶ 30,783 (1987).
29 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
30 5 U.S.C. 601–612.
31 See 13 CFR 121.201.
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 145 / Monday, July 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
VI. Document Availability
22. 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.
23. 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.
24. 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.
VII. Effective Date and Congressional
Notification
25. These regulations are effective
September 27, 2013. The Commission
has determined, with the concurrence of
the Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB, that this rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’
as defined in section 351 of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996.
By the Commission.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013–17813 Filed 7–26–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
20 CFR Parts 404 and 416
[Docket No. SSA–2013–0016]
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
RIN 0960–AH58
Extension of Effective Date for
Temporary Pilot Program Setting the
Time and Place for a Hearing Before an
Administrative Law Judge
Social Security Administration.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
We are extending our pilot
program that authorizes the agency to
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:11 Jul 26, 2013
Jkt 229001
set the time and place for a hearing
before an administrative law judge
(ALJ). This final rule will extend the
pilot program for 1 year. The extension
of the pilot program continues our
commitment to improve the efficiency
of our hearing process and maintain a
hearing process that results in accurate,
high-quality decisions for claimants.
The current pilot program will expire on
August 9, 2013. In this final rule, we are
extending the effective date to August 9,
2014. We are making no other
substantive changes.
DATES: This final rule is effective July
29, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rainbow Forbes, Social Security
Administration, 5107 Leesburg Pike,
Falls Church, VA 22041–3260, 703–
605–8100 for information about this
final rule. For information on eligibility
for filing for benefits, call our national
toll-free number, 1–800–772–1213 or
TTY 1–800–325–0778, or visit our
Internet site, Social Security Online, at
https://www.socialsecurity.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Over the past several years, one of our
highest priorities has been to improve
the efficiency of our hearing process for
the Old Age, Survivors, and Disability
Insurance (OASDI) programs under title
II of the Social Security Act (Act) and
the Supplemental Security Income (SSI)
program under title XVI of the Act. We
intended the pilot program we adopted
in July 2010 (75 FR 39154), under which
the agency, rather than the ALJ, may set
the time and place of the hearing under
certain circumstances, to be part of our
efforts to improve the efficiency of the
hearing process. Since that time, we
continue to face significant challenges
in dealing with the historically large
number of hearing requests. Over the
next several years, we anticipate that
requests for hearings before ALJs will
continue to remain high. Therefore, we
must maintain programs and policies
that can provide us with the flexibility
we need to improve the efficiency of our
hearing process.
On November 10, 2008, we published
a notice of proposed rulemaking to
amend our rules to allow the agency to
set the time and place for a hearing
before an ALJ. (73 FR 66564). At that
time, we explained that we would
continue to monitor ALJ productivity
closely, and if hearings were not being
scheduled in a prompt and professional
manner, we would use all existing
authorities to correct the situation.
Although we expected limit use of the
rule, we planned to monitor the success
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45451
of the regulation to ensure that it did not
produce unintended consequences.
Following receipt of public
comments, we issued a final rule on July
8, 2010. (75 FR 39154). Under the rule,
the agency acquired the authority to set
the time and place for a hearing before
an ALJ. In the rule, we explained that
we would implement our authority to
set the time and place for a hearing
before an ALJ as a temporary pilot
program. Therefore, we included in
sections 404.936(h) and 416.1436(h) of
the final rule a provision that the pilot
program would end on August 9, 2013,
unless we decided to either terminate
the program earlier, or extend it beyond
that date by publication of a final rule
in the Federal Register.
Explanation of Extension
In establishing the final rule
establishing the pilot program in 2010,
we hoped to determine whether
providing us with the authority to set
the time and place of the hearing would
allow us to better manage the number of
hearings held and keep our hearing
process as efficient as possible. During
the 3 year pilot program, we tracked ALJ
productivity closely. In situations where
hearings were not being promptly
scheduled, we worked with ALJs to
correct these situations. To date, our
efforts to work with our ALJs to correct
situations in which we may have
otherwise had to exercise the authority
provided for in these rules has been
successful. As a result, we have not
been required to exercise our authority
to schedule hearings. Nevertheless, we
believe that we should continue the
authority for the pilot program in order
to provide us with the flexibility we
need to manage the hearing process
appropriately. We consider the pilot
program a potentially important
component in our overall effort to
reduce hearing backlogs.
By extending the pilot program an
additional year, we will continue to
monitor the productivity of ALJs and to
work with our ALJs to address any
concerns regarding our hearing process.
Accordingly, we are extending our
authority to set the time and place for
a hearing before an ALJ for another year,
until August 9, 2014. As before, we are
reserving the authority to end the
program earlier, or to extend it by
publishing a final rule in the Federal
Register.
Regulatory Procedures
Justification for Issuing Final Rule
Without Notice and Comment
We follow the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA) rulemaking
E:\FR\FM\29JYR1.SGM
29JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 145 (Monday, July 29, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45447-45451]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17813]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
18 CFR Part 40
[Docket No. RM12-19-000; Order No. 782]
Revisions to Modeling, Data, and Analysis Reliability Standard
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this Final Rule, pursuant to section 215 of the Federal
Power Act, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission)
approves Modeling, Data, and Analysis (MOD) Reliability Standard MOD-
028-2, submitted to the Commission for approval by the North American
Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Commission-certified
Electric Reliability Organization. The Commission finds that the
proposed Reliability Standard represents an improvement over the
currently-effective standard, MOD-028-1 because the proposed
Reliability Standard clarifies the timing and frequency of Total
Transfer Capability calculations needed for Available Transfer
Capability calculations. The Commission also approves NERC's proposed
implementation plan and retirement of the currently-effective standard.
DATES: This rule is effective September 27, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rachel Bryant (Legal Information), Office of General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426, (202) 502-6155, rachel.bryant@ferc.gov.
Syed Ahmad (Technical Information), Office of Electric Reliability,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8718, syed.ahmad@ferc.gov.
Christopher Young (Technical Information), Office of Energy of Energy
Policy and Innovation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-6403,
christopher.young@ferc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
144 FERC ] 61,027
United States Of America
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Before Commissioners: Jon Wellinghoff, Chairman; Philip D. Moeller,
John R. Norris, Cheryl A. LaFleur, and Tony Clark.
[[Page 45448]]
Final Rule
Issued July 18, 2013.
1. Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA),\1\ the
Commission approves Modeling, Data, and Analysis (MOD) Reliability
Standard MOD-028-2 submitted to the Commission by the North American
Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Commission-certified
Electric Reliability Organization (ERO). NERC submitted one
modification to the currently-effective Reliability Standard MOD-028-1,
pertaining to the information a transmission service provider \2\ must
include when calculating Total Transfer Capability (TTC) using the area
interchange methodology for the on-peak and off-peak intra-day and next
day time periods. The Commission also approves NERC's proposed
implementation plan and retirement of the currently-effective
Reliability Standard MOD-028-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 16 U.S.C. 824o (2006).
\2\ NERC defines ``transmission service provider'' as ``[t]he
entity that administers the transmission tariff and provides
Transmission Service to Transmission Customers under applicable
transmission service agreements.'' NERC, Glossary of Terms Used in
NERC Reliability Standards 64 (2011), https://www.nerc.com/files/Glossary_of_Terms.pdf. We also use the term ``transmission
operator'' in this final rule, which is defined by NERC as ``[t]he
entity responsible for the reliability of its ``local'' transmission
system, and that operates or directs the operations of the
transmission facilities.'' Id. These terms indicate distinct NERC
functional entities, to which different requirements within the same
Reliability Standard may apply. Accordingly, in the context of
describing the requirement of a Reliability Standard, we necessarily
use either or both terms where appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Background
A. Mandatory Reliability Standards
2. Section 215 of the FPA requires a Commission-certified ERO to
develop mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, subject to
Commission review and approval. Specifically, the Commission may
approve, by rule or order, a proposed Reliability Standard or
modification to a Reliability Standard if it determines that the
Standard is just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or
preferential, and in the public interest.\3\ Once approved, the
Reliability Standards may be enforced by the ERO, subject to Commission
oversight, or by the Commission independently.\4\ Pursuant to section
215 of the FPA, the Commission established a process to select and
certify an ERO,\5\ and subsequently certified NERC.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Id. 824o(d)(2).
\4\ Id. 824o(e)(3).
\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, order on reh'g, Order No. 672-A, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,212 (2006).
\6\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ]
61,062, order on reh'g & compliance, 117 FERC ] 61,126 (2006), aff'd
sub nom. Alcoa, Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. In March 2007, the Commission issued Order No. 693, evaluating
107 Reliability Standards, including 23 MOD standards pertaining to
methodologies for calculating Available Transfer Capability (ATC) and
Available Flowgate Capability (AFC).\7\ The Commission approved one out
of the 23 MOD standards unconditionally, approved nine with direction
for modification and left the remaining 13 pending with direction for
modification.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System,
Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242, at P 1046, order on
reh'g, Order No. 693-A, 120 FERC ] 61,053 (2007). See also
Preventing Undue Discrimination and Preference in Transmission
Service, Order No. 890, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,241, order on
reh'g, Order No. 890-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,261 (2007), order
on reh'g, Order No. 890-B, 123 FERC ] 61,299 (2008), order on reh'g,
Order No. 890-C, 126 FERC ] 61,228 (2009) (directing public
utilities to develop Reliability Standards and business practices to
improve the consistency and transparency of ATC calculations).
\8\ Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242 at P 1010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. On November 24, 2009, the Commission issued Order No. 729,\9\
which approved Available Transmission System Capability Reliability
Standard MOD-001-1 as part of a set of Reliability Standards that
pertain to methodologies for the consistent and transparent calculation
of ATC and AFC. These Reliability Standards were designed to ensure,
among other things, that transmission service providers maintain
awareness of available system capability and future flows on their own
systems, as well as those of their neighbors, and to reduce
transmission service provider discretion and enhance transparency in
the calculation of ATC.\10\ Requirement R1 of MOD-001-1 required a
transmission operator to select one of three methodologies for
calculation of ATC or AFC for each available ATC path for each time
frame (hourly, daily or monthly). NERC developed these three
methodologies as detailed in Reliability Standards MOD-028-1 (the area
interchange methodology), MOD-029-1a (the rated system path
methodology), and MOD-030-2 (the flowgate methodology).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Calculation of
Available Transfer Capability, Capacity Benefit Margins,
Transmission Reliability Margins, Total Transfer Capability, and
Existing Transmission Commitments and Mandatory Reliability
Standards for the Bulk Power System, Order No. 729, 129 FERC ]
61,155 (2009), order on clarification, Order No. 729-A, 131 FERC ]
61,109, order on reh'g and reconsideration, Order No. 729-B, 132
FERC ] 61,027 (2010).
\10\ Order No. 729, 129 FERC ] 61,155 at PP 87-89.
\11\ Id. P 51.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. The MOD Reliability Standards require certain users, owners, and
operators of the bulk power system to develop consistent and
transparent methodologies for the calculation of ATC or AFC.\12\ Three
currently-effective Reliability Standards--MOD-028-1, MOD-029-1a, and
MOD-030-2--address three different methodologies for calculating ATC or
AFC.\13\ MOD-028-1, which describes the area interchange methodology
for determining ATC, only applies to those transmission operators and
transmission service providers that elect to implement this particular
methodology as part of their reliability compliance with Reliability
Standard MOD-001-1. MOD-001-1 requires transmission service providers
to ``[adhere] to a specific documented and transparent methodology''
and ``to select one of three methodologies for calculating [ATC] or
[AFC] for each available transfer capability path for each time frame
(hourly, daily or monthly) for the facilities in its area.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Id. P 1.
\13\ Id. P 51.
\14\ Id. P 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Requirement R3.1 of MOD-028-1 details the information a
transmission operator must include in its TTC determination under the
area interchange methodology for the on-peak and off-peak intra-day and
next day time periods, as well as future days two through 31 and for
months two through 13.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Id. P 57 (stating that this information includes: expected
generation and transmission outages, additions, and retirements;
load forecasts; and unit commitment and dispatch order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. NERC Petition
7. On August 24, 2012, NERC submitted a Petition for Approval of
Proposed Reliability Standard (Petition), seeking Commission approval
of a proposed Reliability Standard, MOD-028-2, Area Interchange
Methodology, Requirement R3.1, which would revise the currently
effective ``Version 1'' standard--MOD-028-1.
8. NERC stated that Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) requested
that NERC interpret MOD-028-1, Requirement R3.1. Specifically, FPL
requested that NERC clarify whether Requirement R3.1, which instructs
transmission operators to include data
[[Page 45449]]
``[f]or on peak and off peak intra-day and next day TTCs,'' actually
requires transmission operators to provide separate TTC numbers for
different portions of the current day. NERC explained that, upon
reviewing FPL's request for interpretation, the NERC Standards
Committee determined that providing this clarification might require a
modification to the Standard.\16\ In its Petition, NERC asserted that
it intended the language of MOD-028-1 to specify that, for TTC used in
current-day and next-day ATC calculations, the load forecast used
should be consistent with the period being calculated. Specifically,
NERC stated:
\16\ Petition, Exhibit E (Record of Development of Proposed
Reliability Standard).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requirement R3 of the MOD-028-1 standard is proposed to be
modified to clarify language regarding load forecasting, to indicate
that for days two through 31, a daily load forecast is required
(identical to the current standard); for months two through 13, a
monthly load forecast is required (identical to the current
standard); and for current-day and next-day, entities may use either
a daily or hourly load forecast (the language being clarified). The
new language clarifies and is consistent with the intent of the
original requirement language, and does not materially change the
standard.\17\
\17\ Petition at 7 (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. NERC thus proposed Reliability Standard MOD-028-2, which revises
MOD-028-1 as follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29JY13.010
C. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
10. On March 21, 2013, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NOPR) proposing to approve Reliability Standard MOD-028-2
as just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in
the public interest.\18\ The Commission proposed to approve Reliability
Standard MOD-028-2 after determining that it clarified requirement R3.1
of Reliability Standard MOD-028-1 and did not present reliability
concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Revisions to Modeling, Data, and Analysis Reliability
Standard, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 78 FR 19,152 (Mar. 29,
2013), 142 FERC ] 61,210 (2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. While proposing to approve Reliability Standard MOD-028-2, the
NOPR also identified possible market implications of NERC's proposed
modification to requirement R3.1. The NOPR stated that, although NERC's
statutory functions are properly focused on the reliability of the
Bulk-Power System, the Commission has determined that the ERO should
also attempt to develop Reliability Standards that have no undue
negative effect on competition.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Id. P 11 (citing Order No. 729, 129 FERC ] 61,155 at PP
109, 135).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. The NOPR stated that NERC's proposed revision to requirement
R3.1.2 allows a transmission operator flexibility to choose either a
daily or hourly load forecast when forecasting current-day and next-day
TTC. The NOPR sought comments regarding whether a transmission operator
could potentially use a load forecast assumption that is not applicable
to the period being calculated. As an example, the NOPR stated that a
transmission operator using daily on-peak load forecasts in determining
off-peak TTC for the current day could, either purposefully or
inadvertently, suppress off-peak ATC used by generators that make off-
peak sales, or other customers who purchase hourly service.
13. Comments in support of the NOPR were filed by NERC and Southern
[[Page 45450]]
Company Services, Inc., acting as agent for Alabama Power Company,
Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, and Mississippi Power
Company (Southern Company Services).
II. Discussion
14. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of the FPA, we approve
Reliability Standard MOD-028-2 as just, reasonable, not unduly
discriminatory or preferential, and in the public interest. The
Commission also approves NERC's proposed implementation plan, i.e.,
that the standard shall become effective on the first day of the first
calendar quarter after Commission approval, and retirement of the
currently-effective Reliability Standard MOD-028-1. NERC's clarifying
revision to Requirement R3.1.2 of MOD-028-2 allows a transmission
operator the flexibility to choose either a daily or hourly load
forecast when forecasting current-day and next-day TTC. This revision
does not present reliability concerns.
15. In the NOPR, the Commission asked for comment on a potential
market-related concern regarding whether a transmission operator using
daily on-peak load forecasts in determining off-peak TTC for the
current day could, either purposefully or inadvertently, suppress off-
peak ATC used by generators that make off-peak sales, or other
customers who purchase hourly service. In response to the NOPR, two
entities submitted comments, both supporting Commission approval of
MOD-028-2. Southern Company Services comments that the flexibility in
Requirement R3.1 does not give rise to the potential for undue
discrimination in ATC calculations. NERC states that the proposed
modification to Reliability Standard MOD-028-2 clarifies the existing
language and provides flexibility for operators to select a methodology
that best fits their needs. NERC comments that it ``expect[s] that
entities will implement proposed Reliability Standard MOD-028-2
consistent with their existing legal obligations, i.e., pursuant to
open access transmission tariffs, etc.'' \20\ NERC adds that, ``while
it might be possible for an entity to use a load forecast assumption
that is not applicable to the period being calculated, the Commission
can mitigate such risks through complaints and the Commission's market
oversight authority.'' \21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ NERC Comments at 3-4.
\21\ Id. at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. We are satisfied that the modification to Requirement R3.1 does
not give rise to any immediate market-related concerns in the instant
proceeding. No entity filed comments raising the concern that a
transmission operator would use a load forecast assumption that is not
applicable to the period being calculated. However, we agree with NERC
that, consistent with Order No. 729, the risk of a transmission service
provider using parameters and assumptions to skew its ATC values can be
mitigated through complaints and market oversight authority.\22\ In
addition, as NERC also acknowledges, transmission operators must
implement the revised Reliability Standard MOD-028-2 in a manner
consistent with their existing legal obligations, including their
obligations under their open access transmission tariffs.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See Order No. 729, 129 FERC ] 61,155 at P 135.
\23\ To the extent a market-related issue arises as a result of
future changes to Reliability Standard MOD-028, we can address it at
that time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. Accordingly, pursuant to FPA section 215(d)(2), we approve
Reliability Standard MOD-028-2.
III. Information Collection Statement
18. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations require
that OMB approve certain reporting and recordkeeping (collections of
information) imposed by an agency.\24\ The information contained here
is also subject to review under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ 5 CFR 1320.11 (2012).
\25\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. As stated above, the Commission previously approved, in Order
No. 729, the Reliability Standard that is the subject of the current
rulemaking. This Final Rule approves one revision to a previously
approved Reliability Standard developed by NERC as the ERO. The minor
revision relates to an existing Reliability Standard and does not add
to or otherwise increase entities' current reporting burden. Thus, the
revision does not materially affect the burden estimates relating to
the currently effective version of the Reliability Standards presented
in Order No. 729. The MOD-028-1 Reliability Standard that is subject of
the approved revision was approved in Order No. 729, and the related
information collection requirements were reviewed and approved,
accordingly.\26\ The Commission submitted the revised Reliability
Standard to OMB as a request for ``no material'' or ``nonsubstantive''
change \27\ at the NOPR stage. OMB approved the nonsubstantive change,
requiring no further Commission action related to the information
collection requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See Order No. 729, 129 FERC ] 61,155 at PP 307-312.
\27\ This type of submittal means that there is no change to the
existing burden estimates and the existing expiration date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Environmental Analysis
20. 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.\28\ The
Commission has categorically excluded certain actions from this
requirement as not having a significant effect on the human
environment. Included in the exclusion are rules that are clarifying,
corrective, or procedural or that do not substantially change the
effect of the regulations being amended.\29\ The actions proposed
herein fall within this categorical exclusion in the Commission's
regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act, Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. & Regs.
Regulations Preambles 1986-1990 ] 30,783 (1987).
\29\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act
21. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \30\ generally
requires a description and analysis of final rules that will have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The RFA mandates consideration of regulatory alternatives that
accomplish the stated objectives of a final rule and that minimize any
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The Small Business Administration's Office of Size Standards develops
the numerical definition of a small business.\31\ For electric
utilities, a firm is small if, including its affiliates, it is
primarily engaged in the transmission, generation and/or distribution
of electric energy for sale and its total electric output for the
preceding twelve months did not exceed four million megawatt hours. The
Commission does not expect the revision adopted herein to materially
affect the cost for small entities to comply with the proposed
Reliability Standard. As discussed above, the clarifying revision
allows transmission service providers more flexibility in calculating
ATC and only de minimis costs are associated with implementation of the
revision. Therefore, the Commission certifies that the Final Rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
\31\ See 13 CFR 121.201.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 45451]]
VI. Document Availability
22. 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.
23. 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.
24. 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.
VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification
25. These regulations are effective September 27, 2013. The
Commission has determined, with the concurrence of the Administrator of
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, that this rule
is not a ``major rule'' as defined in section 351 of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996.
By the Commission.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-17813 Filed 7-26-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P