Retirement of Requirements in Reliability Standards, 73424-73434 [2013-28516]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
73424
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
that the NOR for the hand-held infant
carrier standard will not have a
significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
To ease the transition to new third
party testing requirements for hand-held
infant carriers subject to the standard
and to avoid a ‘‘bottlenecking’’ of
products at laboratories at or near the
effective date of required third party
testing for hand-held infant carriers, the
Commission, under certain
circumstances, will accept certifications
based on testing that occurred before the
effective date for third party testing.
The Commission will accept
retrospective testing for 16 CFR part
1225, safety standard for hand-held
infant carriers, if the following
conditions are met:
• The children’s product was tested
by a third party conformity assessment
body accredited to ISO/IEC
17025:2005(E) by a signatory to the
ILAC–MRA at the time of the test. The
scope of the third party conformity body
accreditation must include testing in
accordance with 16 CFR part 1225. For
firewalled third party conformity
assessment bodies, the firewalled third
party conformity assessment body must
be one that the Commission, by order,
has accredited on or before the time that
the children’s product was tested, even
if the order did not include the tests
contained in the safety standard for
hand-held infant carriers at the time of
initial Commission acceptance. For
governmental third party conformity
assessment bodies, accreditation of the
body must be accepted by the
Commission, even if the scope of
accreditation did not include the tests
contained in the safety standard for
hand-held infant carriers at the time of
initial CPSC acceptance.
• The test results show compliance
with 16 CFR part 1225.
• The hand-held infant carrier was
tested on or after the date of publication
in the Federal Register of the final rule
for 16 CFR part 1225 and before June 6,
2014.
• The laboratory’s accreditation
remains in effect through June 6, 2014.
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
List of Subjects
16 CFR Part 1112
Administrative practice and
procedure, Audit, Consumer protection,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Third party conformity
assessment body.
16 CFR Part 1225
Consumer protection, Imports,
Incorporation by reference, Infants and
children, Labeling, Law enforcement,
and Toys.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Dec 05, 2013
Jkt 232001
Therefore, the Commission amends
Title 16 of the Code of Federal
Regulations by amending part 1112 and
adding a new part 1225 to read as
follows:
PART 1112—REQUIREMENTS
PERTAINING TO THIRD PARTY
CONFORMITY ASSESSMENT BODIES
1. The authority citation for part 1112
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Pub. L. 110–314, section 3, 122
Stat. 3016, 3017 (2008); 15 U.S.C. 2063.
2. Amend § 1112.15 by adding
paragraph (b)(34) to read as follows:
■
§ 1112.15 When can a third party
conformity assessment body apply for
CPSC acceptance for a particular CPSC rule
and/or test method?
*
*
*
*
(b)
(34) 16 CFR part 1225, Safety
Standard for Hand-Held Infant Carriers.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Add part 1225 to read as follows:
federal_register/code_of_federal
regulations/ibr_locations.html.
(b) Instead of complying with section
3.1.3 of ASTM F2050–13a, comply with
the following:
(1) 3.1.3 hand-held infant carrier, n—
a freestanding, rigid- or semirigid-sided
product intended to carry an occupant
whose torso is completely supported by
the product to facilitate transportation
by a caregiver by means of hand-holds
or handles.
(2) [Reserved]
Dated: December 2, 2013.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary, Consumer Product Safety
Commission.
[FR Doc. 2013–29061 Filed 12–5–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6355–01–P
*
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
18 CFR Part 40
PART 1225—SAFETY STANDARD FOR
HAND-HELD INFANT CARRIERS
[Docket No. RM13–8–000; Order No. 788]
Sec.
1225.1 Scope.
1225.2 Requirements for hand-held infant
carriers.
Retirement of Requirements in
Reliability Standards
Authority: Pub. L. 110–314, sec. 104, 122
Stat. 3016 (August 14, 2008).
§ 1225.1
§ 1225.2 Requirements for hand-held
infant carriers.
(a) Except as provided in paragraph
(b) of this section, each hand-held infant
carrier must comply with all applicable
provisions of ASTM F 2050–13a,
Standard Consumer Safety Specification
for Hand-Held Infant Carriers, approved
on September 1, 2013. The Director of
the Federal Register approves this
incorporation by reference in
accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1
CFR part 51. You may obtain a copy
from ASTM International, 100 Bar
Harbor Drive, P.O. Box 0700, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428; https://
www.astm.org. You may inspect a copy
at the Office of the Secretary, U.S.
Consumer Product Safety Commission,
Room 820, 4330 East West Highway,
Bethesda, MD 20814, telephone 301–
504–7923, or at the National Archives
and Records Administration (NARA).
For information on the availability of
this material at NARA, call 202–741–
6030, or go to: https://www.archives.gov/
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Pursuant to section 215 of the
Federal Power Act, the Commission
approves the retirement of 34
requirements within 19 Reliability
Standards identified by the North
American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC), the Commissioncertified Electric Reliability
Organization. The requirements
approved for retirement either: Provide
little protection for Bulk-Power System
reliability; or are redundant with other
aspects of the Reliability Standards. In
addition, the Commission withdraws 41
Commission directives that NERC
develop modifications to Reliability
Standards. This rule is part of the
Commission’s ongoing effort to review
its requirements and reduce
unnecessary burdens by eliminating
requirements that are not necessary to
the performance of the Commission’s
regulatory responsibilities.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule will
become effective January 21, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kevin Ryan (Legal Information), Office
of the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426, Telephone: (202) 502–6840
SUMMARY:
Scope.
This part establishes a consumer
product safety standard for hand-held
infant carriers.
PO 00000
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, DOE.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Michael Gandolfo (Technical
Information), Office of Electric
Reliability, Division of Reliability
Standards and Security, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission 888
First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426, Telephone: (202) 502–6817.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
145 FERC ¶ 61,147
Before Commissioners: Jon Wellinghoff,
Chairman; Philip D. Moeller, John R.
Norris, Cheryl A. LaFleur, and Tony
Clark.
Final Rule
(Issued November 21, 2013)
1. Pursuant to section 215(d) of the
Federal Power Act (FPA),1 the
Commission approves the retirement of
34 requirements within 19 Reliability
Standards identified by the North
American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC), the Commissioncertified Electric Reliability
Organization (ERO). The retirement of
these provisions meet the benchmarks
set forth in the Commission’s March 15,
2012 order that requirements proposed
for retirement either: (1) Provide little
protection for Bulk-Power System
reliability or (2) are redundant with
other aspects of the Reliability
Standards.2 Consistent with the
Commission’s proposal in the March
2012 Order, we conclude that the
requirements approved for retirement
can ‘‘be removed from the Reliability
Standards with little effect on reliability
and an increase in efficiency of the ERO
compliance program.’’ 3
2. In addition, in this Final Rule, we
withdraw 41 directives that NERC
develop modifications to Reliability
Standards.4 In Order No. 693 and
subsequent final rules, the Commission
has identified various issues and
directed NERC to develop modifications
to the Reliability Standards or take other
action to address those issues.5 While
1 16
U.S.C. 824o(d) (2006).
North American Electric Reliability Corp.,
138 FERC ¶ 61,193, at P 81 (March 2012 Order),
order on reh’g and clarification, 139 FERC ¶ 61,168
(2012).
3 Id. P 81.
4 The 41 withdrawn directives are listed in
Attachment A to this Final Rule.
5 Mandatory Reliability Standards for the BulkPower System, Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs.
¶ 31,242, order on reh’g, Order No. 693–A, 120
FERC ¶ 61,053 (2007). See also 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 (2010), order on
reh’g and reconsideration, Order No. 729–B, 132
FERC ¶ 61,027 (2010).
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
2 See
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Dec 05, 2013
Jkt 232001
NERC has addressed many of these
directives, over 150 directives remain
outstanding. The withdrawal of these
directives will enhance the efficiency of
the Reliability Standards development
process, with little or no impact on
Bulk-Power System reliability.
3. Pursuant to Executive Order 13579,
the Commission issued a plan to
identify regulations that warrant repeal
or modification, or strengthening,
complementing, or modernizing where
necessary or appropriate.6 In the Plan,
the Commission also stated that it
voluntarily and routinely, albeit
informally, reviews its regulations to
ensure that they achieve their intended
purpose and do not impose undue
burdens on regulated entities or
unnecessary costs on those entities or
their customers. The action in this Final
Rule is a part of the Commission’s
ongoing effort to review its requirements
and reduce unnecessary burdens by
eliminating requirements that are not
necessary to the performance of the
Commission’s regulatory
responsibilities.
I. Background
A. Section 215 of the FPA
4. Section 215 of the FPA requires the
Commission-certified ERO to develop
mandatory and enforceable Reliability
Standards, subject to Commission
review and approval. Once approved,
the Reliability Standards may be
enforced in the United States by the
ERO subject to Commission oversight or
by the Commission independently.7
Pursuant to the requirements of FPA
section 215, the Commission established
a process to select and certify an ERO 8
and, subsequently, certified NERC as the
ERO.9
73425
NERC’s ‘‘Find, Fix, Track and Report’’
(FFT) initiative. The FFT process, inter
alia, provides NERC and the Regional
Entities the flexibility to address lowerrisk possible violations through an FFT
informational filing as opposed to
issuing and filing a Notice of Penalty. In
addition, the Commission raised the
prospect of revising or removing
requirements of Reliability Standards
that ‘‘provide little protection for BulkPower System reliability or may be
redundant.’’ 10 Specifically, the
Commission stated:
. . . NERC’s FFT initiative is predicated on
the view that many violations of
requirements currently included in
Reliability Standards pose lesser risk to the
Bulk-Power System. If so, some current
requirements likely provide little protection
for Bulk-Power System reliability or may be
redundant. The Commission is interested in
obtaining views on whether such
requirements could be removed from the
Reliability Standards with little effect on
reliability and an increase in efficiency of the
ERO compliance program. If NERC believes
that specific Reliability Standards or specific
requirements within certain Standards
should be revised or removed, we invite
NERC to make specific proposals to the
Commission identifying the Standards or
requirements and setting forth in detail the
technical basis for its belief. In addition, or
in the alternative, we invite NERC, the
Regional Entities and other interested entities
to propose appropriate mechanisms to
identify and remove from the Commissionapproved Reliability Standards unnecessary
or redundant requirements.11
In response, NERC initiated a review,
referred to as the ‘‘P 81 project,’’ to
identify requirements that could be
removed from Reliability Standards
without impacting the reliability of the
Bulk-Power System.
B. March 2012 Order
C. NERC Petition
5. In the March 2012 Order, the
Commission accepted, with conditions,
6. In a February 28, 2013 petition,
NERC requested Commission approval
of the retirement of 34 requirements
within 19 Reliability Standards.
According to NERC, the 34 requirements
proposed for retirement ‘‘are redundant
or otherwise unnecessary’’ and that
‘‘violations of these requirements . . .
pose a lesser risk to the reliability of the
Bulk-Power System.’’ 12 NERC stated
that the proposed retirement of the 34
requirements ‘‘will allow industry
stakeholders to focus their resources
appropriately on reliability risks and
will increase the efficiency of the ERO
compliance program.’’ 13
6 Plan for Retrospective Analysis of Existing
Rules, Docket No. AD12–6–000 (Nov. 8, 2011).
Executive Order 13579 requests that independent
agencies issue public plans for periodic
retrospective analysis of their existing ‘‘significant
regulations.’’ Retrospective analysis should identify
‘‘significant regulations’’ that may be outmoded,
ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome,
and to modify, streamline, expand, or repeal them
in order to achieve the agency’s regulatory
objective.
7 See 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(3).
8 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).
9 North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116
FERC ¶ 61,062, order on reh’g and compliance, 117
FERC ¶ 61,126 (2006), aff’d sub nom. Alcoa Inc. v.
FERC, 564 F.3d 1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10 March
2012 Order, 138 FERC ¶ 61,193 at P 81.
11 Id.
12 Petition
at 2.
13 Id.
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
73426
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
7. NERC explained that the ‘‘P 81
Team’’ developed three criteria for its
review:
(1) Criterion A: An overarching
criteria designed to determine that there
is no reliability gap created by the
proposed retirement; (2) Criterion B:
Consists of seven separate identifying
criteria designed to recognize
requirements appropriate for retirement
(administrative; data collection/data
retention; documentation; reporting;
periodic updates; commercial or
business practice; and redundant); and
(3) Criterion C: Consists of seven
separate questions designed to assist the
P 81 Team in making an informed
decision regarding whether
requirements are appropriate to propose
for retirement.14
8. NERC explained that the project
team focused on the identification of
‘‘lower-level facilitating requirements
that are either redundant with other
requirements or where evidence
retention is burdensome and the
requirement is unnecessary’’ because
the reliability goal is achieved through
other standards or mechanisms.15
According to NERC, the proposed
retirement of documentation
requirements will not create a gap in
reliability because ‘‘NERC and the
Regional Entities can enforce reporting
obligations pursuant to section 400 of
NERC’s Rules of Procedure and
Appendix 4C to ensure that necessary
data continues to be submitted for
compliance and enforcement
purposes.’’ 16 NERC asserts that,
although the P 81 project proposes to
retire requirements associated with data
retention or documentation, ‘‘the simple
fact that a requirement includes a data
retention or documentation element
does not signify that it should be
considered for retirement or is
otherwise inappropriately designated as
a requirement.’’ 17
9. Based on this approach, NERC
identified the following 34 requirements
within 19 Reliability Standards for
potential retirement:
• BAL–005–0.2b, Requirement R2—
Automatic Generation Control
• CIP–003–3, –4, Requirement R1.2—
Cyber Security—Security
Management Controls 18
14 Id. at 4. See also id. n. 8 (setting forth the seven
questions of Criterion C).
15 Id. at 7.
16 Id. at 8 (citing North American Electric
Reliability Corp., 141 FERC ¶ 61,241, at P 82 (2012)
(approving proposed revisions to NERC’s Rules of
Procedure)).
17 Id. at 9 (emphasis in original).
18 NERC explains that although only eight
requirements in the Critical Infrastructure
Protection (CIP) body of Reliability Standards are
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Dec 05, 2013
Jkt 232001
• CIP–003–3, –4, Requirements R3,
R3.1, R3.2, and R3.3—Cyber
Security—Security Management
Controls
• CIP–003–3, –4, Requirement R4.2—
Cyber Security—Security
Management Controls
• CIP–005–3a, –4a, Requirement R2.6—
Cyber Security—Electronic Security
Perimeter(s)
• CIP–007–3, –4, Requirement R7.3—
Cyber Security—Systems Security
Management
• EOP–005–2, Requirement R3.1—
System Restoration From Blackstart
Services
• FAC–002–1, Requirement R2—
Coordination of Plans for New
Facilities
• FAC–008–3, Requirements R4 and
R5—Facility Ratings
• FAC–010–2.1, Requirement R5—
System Operating Limits
Methodology for the Planning
Horizon
• FAC–011–2.1, Requirement R5—
System Operating Limits
Methodology for the Operations
Horizon
• FAC–013–2, Requirement R3—
Assessment of Transfer Capability for
the Near-term Transmission Planning
Horizon
• INT–007–1, Requirement R1.2—
Interchange Confirmation
• IRO–016–1, Requirement R2—
Coordination of Real-Time Activities
Between Reliability Coordinators
• NUC–001–2, Requirements R9.1,
R9.1.1, R9.1.2, R9.1.3, and R1.9.4—
Nuclear Plant Interface Coordination
• PRC–010–0, Requirement R2—
Assessment of the Design and
Effectiveness of UVLS Programs
• PRC–022–1, Requirement R2—UnderVoltage Load Shedding Program
Performance
• VAR–001–2, Requirement R5—
Voltage and Reactive Control
10. NERC also requested that the
Commission approve the
implementation plan, provided as
Exhibit C to NERC’s petition, which
provided that the identified
requirements will be retired
immediately upon Commission
approval.
11. NERC stated that it will apply the
‘‘concepts’’ from the P 81 project to
improve the drafting of Reliability
Standards going forward. Specifically,
NERC explained that Reliability
Standards development projects ‘‘will
involve stronger examination for
proposed for retirement, NERC proposes the
retirement of those eight requirements in both CIP
versions 3 and 4. Therefore, the total number of CIP
requirements proposed for retirement is sixteen.
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
duplication of requirements across the
NERC body of Reliability Standards and
the technical basis and necessity for
each and every requirement will
continue to be evaluated.’’ 19 According
to NERC, requirements that were
proposed and ultimately not included in
the immediate filing will be mapped for
consideration in future standards
projects.
D. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
12. On June 20, 2013, the Commission
issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NOPR) proposing to approve the
retirement of the 34 requirements
within 19 Reliability Standards,
consistent with NERC’s petition.20 In
addition, the Commission proposed to
withdraw 41 outstanding Commission
directives that NERC develop
modifications to Reliability Standards.
13. Comments on the NOPR were due
by August 27, 2013. Seven entities filed
comments, identified in Attachment B
to the Final Rule.
II. Discussion
A. Retirement of Requirements
NOPR Proposal
14. In the NOPR, the Commission
proposed to approve the retirement of
the 34 requirements within 19
Reliability Standards identified by
NERC. In the NOPR, for each of the 34
requirements, the Commission provided
NERC’s rationale supporting retirement,
and the Commission’s explanation for
proposing to approve the retirement.21
Comments
15. Commenters unanimously support
approval of the NOPR proposal. Trade
Associations, CEA and ITC concur that
the retirement of the 34 requirements
will have little to no effect on reliability.
NRECA, ISO/RTO Council, CEA and
ITC support continuance of the ‘‘P 81’’
process as a high priority going forward
and the identification of additional
candidate requirements for retirement or
streamlining.
16. ISO/RTO Council comments that,
while the criteria used by NERC to
identify candidate requirements for
retirement are appropriate, additional
criteria would ensure that streamlining
of the Reliability Standards will
continue.
19 Petition
at 9.
Reliability Organization Proposal To
Retire Requirements in Reliability Standards,
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 78 FR 38,851 (June
28, 2013), 143 FERC ¶ 61,251 (2013) (NOPR), errata,
78 FR 41,339 (July 10, 2013).
21 See NOPR, 143 FERC ¶ 61,251 at PP 17–83.
20 Electric
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Commission Determination
17. Pursuant to section 215 of the
FPA, we approve the retirement of the
34 requirements within 19 Reliability
Standards identified by NERC as just,
reasonable, not unduly discriminatory
or preferential, and in the public
interest. Likewise, we approve the
implementation plan and effective date
set forth in NERC’s petition.
18. In the March 2012 Order, the
Commission explained that ‘‘some
current requirements likely provide
little protection for Bulk-Power System
reliability or may be redundant. The
Commission is interested in obtaining
views on whether such requirements
could be removed from the Reliability
Standards with little effect on reliability
and an increase in efficiency of the ERO
compliance program.’’ 22 In general, we
conclude that the requirements
identified by NERC for retirement
satisfy the expectations set forth in the
March 2012 Order; namely, the
requirements proposed for retirement
either: (1) Provide little protection for
Bulk-Power System reliability or (2) are
redundant with other aspects of the
Reliability Standards.23
19. We agree with NERC that the
elimination of certain requirements that
pertain to information collection or
documentation will not result in a
reliability gap. No commenter disputes
NERC’s rationale. Section 400 and
Appendix 4C (Uniform Compliance
Monitoring and Enforcement Program)
of the NERC Rules of Procedure provide
NERC and the Regional Entities the
authority to enforce reporting
obligations necessary to support
reliability.24 This authority, used in the
appropriate manner, justifies retiring
certain documentation-related
requirements that provide limited, if
any, support for reliability. The
retirement of such requirements should
enhance the efficiency of the ERO
compliance program, as well as the
efficiency of individual registered entity
compliance programs.
20. We agree with commenters that
NERC should continue the process of
identifying additional Reliability
Standards and requirements as
candidates for retirement or
streamlining. We support NERC’s
continuing efforts in this regard.
Efficiencies can be gained from further
consolidation or retirement of some
requirements or components of
22 March
2012 Order, 138 FERC ¶ 61,193 at P 81.
we adopt the rationale for the
retirement of each requirement as set forth in the
NOPR, 143 FERC ¶ 61,251 at PP 17–83.
24 See North American Electric Reliability Corp.,
141 FERC ¶ 61,241 at P 82.
23 Further,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Dec 05, 2013
Jkt 232001
requirements that are justified based on
technical analysis of either existing
requirements, new proposed
requirements or modifications. Such
analyses would take into account the
interrelationship between standards and
among categories of standards, in order
to determine that when retirements or
consolidations are made the reliability
benefits of the currently effective
requirements would be preserved.
21. With regard to ISO/RTO Council’s
comment, we will not direct NERC to
develop additional criteria for
identifying candidate requirements for
retirement. ISO/RTO Council does not
identify any specific concern or defect
regarding the criteria applied by
NERC.25 ISO/RTO Council may raise its
proposal directly with NERC if it so
chooses.
B. Outstanding Directives
NOPR Proposal
22. In the NOPR, the Commission
proposed to withdraw 41 outstanding
Commission directives that NERC
develop modifications to Reliability
Standards. Attachment A of the NOPR
identified the 41 Commission directives,
the source (i.e., Final Rule) of the
directive, and a justification for the
proposed withdrawal.26 The
Commission explained that it applied
the following three criteria in
identifying outstanding directives for
withdrawal: (1) The reliability concern
underlying the outstanding directive has
been addressed in some manner,
rendering the directive stale; (2) the
outstanding directive provides general
guidance for standards development
rather than a specific directive; and (3)
the outstanding directive is redundant
with another directive.27 The
Commission stated that each of the 41
outstanding directives identified in
Attachment A of the NOPR satisfies one
or more of the criteria.
Comments
23. NERC and all other commenters
support the withdrawal of the 41
outstanding Commission directives.
24. Trade Associations recommend
that the Commission consider
alternative criteria for the withdrawal of
25 Moreover, while NERC provided the criteria in
the February 2013 petition, NERC also made clear
that the criteria were provided only for
informational purposes. See NERC Petition at 4.
26 The same table is provided as Attachment A to
the Final Rule. Each directive identified in
Attachment A includes a ‘‘NERC Reference
Number.’’ Commission staff and NERC staff have
developed a common approach to identifying and
tracking outstanding Commission directives. The
NERC Reference Numbers reflect this joint tracking
process.
27 NOPR, 143 FERC ¶ 61,251 at P 86.
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
73427
outstanding directives to more closely
align the criteria with those developed
by NERC for retirement of Reliability
Standard requirements. According to
Trade Associations, ‘‘simple logic
suggests that the basis for retirement of
requirements and withdrawal of
Commission reliability directives
should be consistent, if not uniform.’’ 28
Commission Determination
25. We find that it is appropriate to
withdraw the 41 directives requiring
that NERC develop modifications to
Reliability Standards. As explained in
the NOPR, the withdrawal of the
identified directives should result in
more efficient use of NERC’s and the
Commission’s resources and reduce
unnecessary burdens, without
impacting the reliable operation of the
Bulk-Power System.29 All commenters
agree with the withdrawal of the 41
directives and the resulting efficiencies.
Accordingly, we withdraw the 41
directives requiring that NERC develop
modifications to Reliability Standards,
identified in Attachment A of the Final
Rule.
26. We are not persuaded by Trade
Associations’ comments that there is a
need to more closely align the criteria
applied by the Commission in
determining whether to withdraw an
outstanding reliability directive with
those criteria developed by NERC for
retirement of Reliability Standard
requirements. Unlike the NERC review
of Reliability Standard requirements,
without precluding possible future
Commission action, we have no plans
for ongoing review of outstanding
Commission reliability directives. We
have reviewed the catalogue of
outstanding reliability directives and
have taken appropriate action in this
proceeding. Further, while Trade
Associations assert that such
convergence of criteria is ‘‘logical,’’ we
do not believe that the retirement of
Reliability Standards requirements and
withdrawal of a Commission directive is
an apples-to-apples comparison that
necessitates the suggested ‘‘alignment.’’
III. Information Collection Statement
27. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) regulations require that
OMB approve certain reporting and
recordkeeping (collections of
information) imposed by an agency.30
Upon approval of a collection(s) of
information, OMB will assign an OMB
control number and expiration date.
Respondents subject to the filing
28 Trade
Associations Comments at 7.
NOPR, 143 FERC ¶ 61,251 at PP 85–87.
30 5 CFR 1320.11.
29 See
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
73428
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
requirements of this rule will not be
penalized for failing to respond to these
collection(s) of information unless the
collections of information display a
valid OMB control number.
28. The Commission is submitting
these revisions to the reporting and
recordkeeping requirements to OMB for
its review and approval under section
3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995.31 The Commission solicited
comments on the need for and the
purpose of the information contained in
NERC’s February 2013 petition and the
corresponding burdens to implement
NERC’s proposed retirement of 34
requirements within 19 Reliability
Standards. The Commission received
comments generally supporting the
efficiency gains and reductions in
burden resulting from the retirement of
specific requirements, which we
address in the Final Rule. However, the
Commission did not receive comments
on the reporting estimates. The Final
Rule approves the retirement of the 34
requirements within 19 Reliability
Standards and, in addition, the
withdrawal of 41 Commission directives
that NERC develop modifications to
Reliability Standards.
29. Public Reporting Burden: The
estimate below for the number of
respondents is based on the NERC
Compliance Registry as of April 30,
2013.32 According to the registry, there
are 132 balancing authorities (BA), 544
distribution providers (DP), 898
generator owners (GO), 859 generator
operators (GOP), 56 interchange
authorities (IA), 515 load serving
entities (LSE), 80 planning authorities/
planning coordinators (PA or PC), 677
purchasing selling entities (PSE), 21
reliability coordinators (RC), 346
transmission owners (TO), 185
transmission operators (TOP), 185
transmission planners (TP), and 93
transmission service providers (TSP).
30. The Commission estimates that
the burden will be reduced for each
requirement as detailed in the chart
below, for a total estimated annual
reduction in burden cost of $518,220.
The Commission based the burden
reduction estimates on staff experience,
knowledge, and expertise.
EOP–005–2, R3.1 (FERC–725A) .....
FAC–008–3, R4 (FERC–725A) ........
FAC–008–3, R5 (FERC–725A) ........
FAC–010–2.1, R5 (FERC–725D) .....
FAC–011–2, R5 (FERC–725D) ........
FAC–013–2, R3 (FERC–725A) ........
INT–007–1, R1.2 (FERC–725A) .......
IRO–016–1, R2 (FERC–725A) .........
CIP–003–3, –4, R1.2 (FERC–725B)
CIP–003–3, –4, R3, R3.1, R3.2,
R3.3 (FERC–725B).
CIP–005–3, –4, R2.6 (FERC–725B)
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Total ...........................................
Type of respondents
Estimated total
annual
reduction in
cost
[B]
[A × B]
[A × B × $60/
hour 34]
185
1,151
1,151
80
21
80
56
21
325
1
1
1
20
20
8
20
20
1
185
1,151
1,151
1,600
420
640
1,120
420
325
$11,100
69,060
69,060
96,000
25,200
38,400
67,200
25,200
19,500
325
1
325
19,500
325
4
1300
78,000
...........................................................
........................
........................
8,637
518,220
31 44
U.S.C. 3507(d).
estimates for the retired CIP requirements
are based on February 28, 2013 registry data in
order to provide consistency with burden estimates
provided in the Commission’s recent CIP version 5
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in Docket No.
RM13–5–000.
32 The
16:51 Dec 05, 2013
Estimated total
annual
reduction in
burden (in
hours)
TOP ..................................................
TO, GO .............................................
TO, GO .............................................
PA .....................................................
RC ....................................................
PC ....................................................
IA ......................................................
RC ....................................................
RC, BA, IA, TSP, TO, TOP, GO,
GOP,LSE.
RC, BA, IA, TSP, TO, TOP, GO,
GOP,LSE.
RC, BA, IA, TSP, TO, TOP, GO,
GOP,LSE.
31. The above chart does not include
BAL–005–0.2b, Requirement R2; CIP–
003–3, –4, Requirement R4.2; CIP–007–
3, –4, Requirement R7.3; FAC–002–1,
Requirement R2; PRC–010–0,
Requirement R2; PRC–022–1,
Requirement R2; and VAR–001–2,
Requirement R5 because those
requirements were found redundant
with other requirements.35 Since the
action required within them is required
elsewhere, there is no change in the
overall burden in retiring these
requirements. Likewise, NUC–001–2,
Requirement R9.1; NUC–001–2,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Number of
respondents 33
[A]
Standard, requirement number, and
FERC Collection Number
Estimated
average
reduction
in burden
hours per
respondent
per year
Jkt 232001
Requirement R9.1.1; NUC–001–2,
Requirement R9.1.2; NUC–001–2,
Requirement R9.1.3; and NUC–001–2,
Requirement R9.1.4 are not included
because these requirements require that
the applicable entities include ‘‘boiler
plate’’ language into their agreements
that is normally included in all legal
contracts.36 Since this action will be
taken regardless if it is required by a
Reliability Standard, there is no
reduction in burden.
Titles: FERC–725A, Mandatory
Reliability Standards for the Bulk Power
System; FERC–725B, Mandatory
Reliability Standards for Critical
Infrastructure Protection; FERC–725D,
Facilities, Design, Connections, and
Maintenance Reliability Standards; and
FERC–725F, Mandatory Reliability
Standards for Nuclear Plant Interface
Coordination.
Action: Revisions to Collections of
Information.
OMB Control Nos: 1902–0244, 1902–
0248, 1902–0247, and 1902–0249.
Respondents: Business or other forprofit, and not-for-profit institutions.
Frequency of Responses: On occasion.
33 This number was calculated by adding all the
applicable entities while removing double counting
caused by entities registered under multiple
functions.
34 The estimated hourly loaded cost (salary plus
benefits) for an engineer is assumed to be $60/hour,
based on salaries as reported by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS) (https://bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_
22.htm). Loaded costs are BLS rates divided by
0.703 and rounded to the nearest dollar (https://
www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm).
35 The reporting requirements in these standards
are part of the FERC–725A information collection.
36 The reporting requirements in this standard are
part of the FERC–725F information collection.
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Necessity of the Information: This
proceeding approves the retirement of
the 34 requirements within 19
Reliability Standards identified by
NERC. The retirements either: (1)
Provide little protection for Bulk-Power
System reliability or (2) are redundant
with other aspects of the Reliability
Standards. In addition, we withdraw the
41 Commission directives listed in
Attachment A in the interest of
enhancing the efficiency of the ERO
standard development and compliance
programs, as well as the efficiency of
individual registered entity compliance
programs.
Internal review: The Commission has
reviewed NERC’s proposal and
determined that the action is necessary
to implement section 215 of the FPA.
The Commission has assured itself, by
means of its internal review, that there
is specific, objective support for the
burden reduction estimates associated
with the retired information
requirements.
32. Interested persons may obtain
information on the reporting
requirements by contacting the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, Office
of the Executive Director, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426
[Attention: Ellen Brown, email:
DataClearance@ferc.gov, phone: (202)
502–8663, fax: (202) 273–0873].
33. Comments concerning the
information collections and the
associated burden estimates should be
sent to the Commission in this docket
and to the Office of Management and
Budget, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs [Attention: Desk
Officer for the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission]. For security
reasons, comments should be sent by
email to OMB at: oira_submission@
omb.eop.gov. Please indicate the OMB
Control Numbers and Docket No.
RM13–8–000 in your submittal.
IV. Environmental Analysis
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
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.37 The Commission has
categorically excluded certain actions
from this requirement as not having a
significant effect on the human
37 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).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Dec 05, 2013
Jkt 232001
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.38 The
actions proposed here fall within this
categorical exclusion in the
Commission’s regulations.
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act
35. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980 (RFA) 39 generally requires a
description and analysis of final rules
that will have significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The RFA mandates
consideration of regulatory alternatives
that accomplish the stated objectives of
a proposed rule and that minimize any
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
The Small Business Administration’s
Office of Size Standards develops the
numerical definition of a small
business.40 The Small Business
Administration has established a size
standard for electric utilities, stating
that a firm is small if, including its
affiliates, it is primarily engaged in the
transmission, generation and/or
distribution of electric energy for sale
and its total electric output for the
preceding twelve months did not exceed
four million megawatt hours.41
36. The Commission estimates the
total reduction in burden for all small
entities to be $32,460. The Commission
estimates that small planning
authorities/planning coordinators will
see a reduction of $1,680 per entity per
year, greater than for other types of
affected small entities.42 The
Commission does not consider a
reduction of $1,680 per year to be a
significant economic impact. The
Commission believes that, in addition to
the estimated economic impact, the
proposed retirement of the 34
requirements of mandatory Reliability
Standards will provide small entities
with relief from having to track
compliance with these provisions and
preparing to show compliance in
38 18
CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii) (2013).
U.S.C. 601–612.
40 13 CFR 121.101.
41 13 CFR 121.201, Sector 22, Utilities & n.1.
42 The burden reduction for planning authorities/
planning coordinators is based on the retirement of
FAC–010–2.1, Requirement R5 and FAC–013–2,
Requirement R3. Based on the NERC Compliance
Registry and Energy Information Administration
Form EIA–861 data, the Commission estimates that
5 out of the 80 planning authorities/planning
coordinators meet the definition of a small entity.
39 5
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
73429
response to a potential compliance audit
by a Regional Entity or other regulator.
37. Based on the above, the
Commission certifies that the changes to
the Reliability Standards will not have
a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Accordingly,
no regulatory flexibility analysis is
required.
VI. Document Availability
38. In addition to publishing the full
text of this document in the Federal
Register, the Commission provides all
interested persons an opportunity to
view and/or print the contents of this
document via the Internet through
FERC’s Home Page (https://
www.ferc.gov) and in FERC’s Public
Reference Room during normal business
hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern
time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A,
Washington DC 20426.
39. From FERC’s Home Page on the
Internet, this information is available on
eLibrary. The full text of this document
is available on eLibrary in PDF and
Microsoft Word format for viewing,
printing, and/or downloading. To access
this document in eLibrary, type the
docket number excluding the last three
digits of this document in the docket
number field.
40. User assistance is available for
eLibrary and the FERC’s Web site during
normal business hours from FERC
Online Support at (202) 502–6652 (toll
free at 1–866–208–3676) or email at
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the
Public Reference Room at (202) 502–
8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. Email the
Public Reference Room at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
VII. Effective Date and Congressional
Notification
41. These regulations are effective
January 21, 2014. The Commission has
determined that, with the concurrence
of the Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB, 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.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
Note: Attachment A will not appear in the
Code of Federal Regulations.
Attachment A
Withdrawn Commission Directives
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
73430
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
No.
Standard
Order No.
Para
Directive
Justification
Group A—The reliability concern underlying the outstanding directive has been addressed in some manner, rendering the directive stale
BAL–006 ....................
693
P 428
2 ........
EOP–001 ...................
693
P 565
3 ........
INT–004 .....................
693
P 843
4 ........
INT–005 .....................
693
P 848
‘‘Consider adding levels of non-compliance to the standard.’’ (NERC Reference No. 10135).
5 ........
MOD–010 through
MOD–025.
693
P 1147
6 ........
MOD–010 ..................
693
P 1152
‘‘Direct the ERO to use its authority pursuant to § 39.2(d) of our regulations to
require users, owners and operators to
provide to the Regional Entity the information related to data gathering, data
maintenance, reliability assessments
and other process-type functions.’’
(NERC Reference No. 10266).
‘‘Address critical energy infrastructure
confidentiality issues as part of the
standard
development
process.’’
(NERC Reference No. 10268).
7 ........
MOD–010 ..................
693
P 1163
‘‘Direct the ERO to develop a Work Plan
that will facilitate ongoing collection of
the steady-state modeling and simulation data specified in MOD–011–0.’’
(NERC Reference No. 10270).
8 ........
PRC–017 ...................
693
P 1546
‘‘Require documentation identified in Requirement R2 be routinely provided to
NERC or the regional entity that includes a requirement that documentation identified in Requirement R2 shall
be routinely provided to the ERO.’’
(NERC Reference No. 10363).
9 ........
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
1 ........
Glossary ....................
693
P 1895
‘‘Modification to the glossary that enhances the definition of ‘‘generator operator’’ to reflect concerns of the commenters [‘‘to include aspects unique to
ISOs, RTOs and pooled resource organizations’’].’’ (NERC Reference No.
10005).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Dec 05, 2013
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
‘‘Add measures concerning the accumulation of large inadvertent interchange
balances and levels of non-compliance.’’ (NERC Reference No. 10036).
‘‘The Commission agrees with ISO–NE
that the Reliability Standard should be
clarified to indicate that the actual
emergency plan elements, and not the
‘‘for consideration’’ elements of Attachment 1, should be the basis for compliance. However, all of the elements
should be considered when the emergency plan is put together.’’ (NERC
Reference No. 10065).
‘‘Consider adding levels of non-compliance to the standard.’’ (NERC Reference No. 10134).
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
NERC replaced levels of non-compliance
with violation severity levels (VSLs).
NERC has designated VSLs for BAL–
006.
The VSLs listed in EOP–001–2.1b and
the Reliability Standard Audit Worksheet for EOP–001 require evidence of
this consideration.
NERC replaced levels of non-compliance
with VSLs. VSLs for INT–004 have
been developed and approved by the
Commission.
NERC replaced levels of non-compliance
with VSLs. VSLs for INT–005 have
been developed and approved by the
Commission.
The concern underlying the directive has
been addressed through section 1600
(Requests for Data or Information) of
NERC’s Rules of Procedure. The Commission approved Section 1600 of
NERC’s Rules on February 21, 2008.
This directive is no longer necessary in
light of section 1500 (Confidential Information) of NERC’s Rules of Procedure
addressing treatment of confidential information.
The concern underlying the directive has
been addressed through NERC’s Reliability Standards Development Plan:
2013–2015. This plan was provided to
the Commission in an informational filing on December 31, 2012. It contains
an action plan to merge, upgrade, and
expand existing requirements in the
modeling data (MOD–010 through
MOD-015) and demand data (MOD–
016 through MOD–021) Reliability
Standards.
Requirement R2 of PRC–017 already requires affected entities to provide documentation of the special protection
system program and its implementation
to the appropriate Regional Reliability
Organization and NERC within 30 calendar days of a request. If either the
Regional Entity or NERC determine
that they need and will use the information on a regular schedule, they
have the authority to establish a
schedule under the current requirement.
The concern underlying the directive has
been addressed through the NERC
registration process. See Order No.
693 at P 145.
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
No.
Standard
10 ......
Order No.
Glossary ....................
693
73431
Para
Directive
Justification
P 1895
‘‘Modification to the glossary that enhances the definition of ‘‘transmission
operator’’ to reflect concerns of the
commenters [‘‘to include aspects
unique to ISOs, RTOs and pooled resource organizations’’].’’ (NERC Reference No. 10006).
The concern underlying the directive has
been addressed through the NERC
registration process. See Order No.
693 at P 145.
Group B—The outstanding directive provides general guidance for standards development rather than a specific directive
BAL–005 ....................
693
P 406
12 ......
BAL–006 ....................
693
P 438
13 ......
COM–001 ..................
693
P 507
14 ......
MOD–001 ..................
729
P 20
15 ......
MOD –001, –004,
–008, –028, –029,
–030.
729
P 160
16 ......
MOD–001 ..................
729
P 179
17 ......
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
11 ......
MOD–028 ..................
729
P 231
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Dec 05, 2013
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
‘‘The Commission understands that it
may be technically possible for DSM to
meet equivalent requirements as conventional generators and expects the
Reliability
Standards
development
process to provide the qualifications
they must meet to participate.’’ (NERC
Reference No. 10033).
‘‘Examine the WECC time error correction procedure as a possible guide
. . . the Commission asks the ERO,
when filing the new Reliability Standard, to explain how the new Reliability
Standard satisfies the Commission’s
concerns.’’ (NERC Reference No.
10037).
‘‘Although we direct that the regional reliability organization should not be the
compliance monitor for NERCNet, we
leave it to the ERO to determine
whether it is the appropriate compliance monitor or if compliance should
be monitored by the Regional Entities
for NERCNet User Organizations.’’
(NERC Reference No. 10051).
‘‘We encourage the ERO to consider
Midwest ISO’s and Entegra’s comments when developing other modifications to the MOD Reliability Standards
pursuant to the EROs Reliability Standards development procedure.’’ [See
also P 198–199] (NERC Reference No.
10216).
‘‘In developing the modifications to the
MOD Reliability Standards directed in
this Final Rule, the ERO should consider generator nameplate ratings and
transmission line ratings including the
comments raised by Entegra and ISO/
RTO Council.’’ [Also see P 154]
(NERC Reference No. 10207).
‘‘The Commission directs the ERO to
consider Entegra’s request regarding
more frequent updates for constrained
facilities through its Reliability Standards development process.’’ (see
Order No. 729 at P 177 for Entegra’s
comments). (NERC Reference No.
10211).
‘‘The Commission directs the ERO to develop a modification sub-requirement
R2.2 pursuant to its Reliability Standards development process to clarify the
phrase ‘adjacent and beyond Reliability
Coordination areas.’’’ (NERC Reference No. 10219).
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This paragraph is not a directive to
change or modify a standard.
This paragraph is not a directive to
change or modify a standard.
This paragraph is not a directive to
change or modify a standard.
This paragraph is not a directive to
change or modify a standard.
This paragraph is not a directive to
change or modify a standard.
This paragraph is not a directive to
change or modify a standard.
This paragraph clarifies the Commission’s understanding of the phrase
‘‘adjacent and beyond Reliability Coordination area.’’ Since the Commission’s understanding of the language is
clearly expressed, and the matter has
little impact on reliability, there is no
reason to go forward with the directive.
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
73432
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
No.
Standard
Order No.
Para
18 ......
MOD–028 ..................
729
P 234
19 ......
MOD–029 ..................
729
P 246
20 ......
MOD–030 ..................
729
P 269
21 ......
MOD–024 ..................
693
P 1310
22 ......
PER–002 ...................
693
P 1375
23 ......
VAR–001 ...................
693
P 1863
24 ......
VAR–001 ...................
693
P 1869
25 ......
TPL and FAC series ..
705
P 49
Directive
Justification
‘‘The Commission agrees that a graduated time frame for reposting could
be reasonable in some situations. Accordingly, the ERO should consider
this suggestion when making future
modifications to the Reliability Standards.’’ (NERC Reference No. 10220).
‘‘The ERO should consider Puget
Sound’s concerns on this issue when
making future modifications to the Reliability Standards.’’ [See also P 245]
(NERC Reference No. 10222).
‘‘The Commission also directs the ERO
to make explicit such [effective date]
detail in any future version of this or
any other Reliability Standard.’’ (NERC
Reference No. 10223).
‘‘Similarly, we respond to Constellation
that any modification of the Levels of
Non-Compliance in this Reliability
Standard should be reviewed in the
ERO Reliability Standards development process.’’ (NERC Reference No.
10318).
‘‘Training programs for operations planning and operations support staff must
be tailored to the needs of the function,
the tasks performed and personnel involved.’’ (NERC Reference No. 10329).
‘‘The Commission expects that the appropriate power factor range developed
for the interface between the bulk electric system and the load-serving entity
from VAR–001–1 would be used as an
input to the transmission and operations planning Reliability Standards.’’
(NERC Reference No. 10441).
‘‘We recognize that our proposed modification does not identify what definitive
requirements the Reliability Standard
should use for established limits and
sufficient reactive resources.’’ (NERC
Reference No. 10434).
‘‘Direct that any revised TPL Reliability
Standards must reflect consistency in
the lists of contingencies.’’ (NERC Reference No. 10601).
This paragraph is not a directive to
change or modify a standard.
This paragraph is not a directive to
change or modify a standard.
This paragraph is not a directive to
change or modify a standard.
This paragraph is not a directive to
change or modify a standard.
This paragraph is not a directive to
change or modify a standard.
This paragraph is not a directive to
change or modify a standard.
This paragraph is not a directive to
change or modify a standard.
This paragraph provides guidance on an
ongoing implementation issue and is
not a directive to change or modify a
standard.
Group C—The outstanding directive is redundant with another directive
MOD–012 ..................
693
P 1177
27 ......
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
26 ......
MOD–012 ..................
693
P 1177
28 ......
MOD–012 ..................
693
P 1181
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Dec 05, 2013
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
‘‘Direct the ERO to use its authority pursuant to § 39.2(d) of our regulations to
require users, owners, and operators
to provide to the Regional Entities the
information related to data gathering,
data maintenance, reliability assessments and other process type functions.’’ (NERC Reference No. 10275).
‘‘Develop a Work Plan and submit a
compliance filing that will facilitate ongoing collection of the dynamics system modeling and simulation data.’’
(NERC Reference No. 10279).
‘‘Direct the ERO to address confidentiality issues and modify the standard
as necessary through its Reliability
Standards
development
process.’’
(NERC Reference No. 10277).
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1147, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1163, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1152, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Standard
29 ......
MOD–013 ..................
30 ......
Para
Directive
Justification
693
P 1200
MOD–014 ..................
693
P 1212
MOD–014 ..................
693
P 1212
32 ......
MOD–015 ..................
693
P 1221
33 ......
MOD–015 ..................
693
P 1221
34 ......
MOD–017 ..................
693
P 1247
35 ......
MOD–018 ..................
693
P 1264
36 ......
MOD–019 ..................
693
P 1275
37 ......
MOD–021 ..................
693
1297
38 ......
MOD–021 ..................
693
P 1297
‘‘Direct the ERO to develop a Work Plan
that will facilitate ongoing collection of
the dynamics system modeling and
simulation data specified in MOD–013–
1, and submit a compliance filing containing this Work Plan to the Commission.’’ (NERC Reference No. 10283).
‘‘Direct the ERO to use its authority pursuant to § 39.2(d) of our regulations to
require users, owners and operators to
provide the validated models to regional reliability organizations.’’ (NERC
Reference No. 10288).
‘‘Direct the ERO to develop a Work Plan
that will facilitate ongoing validation of
steady-state models and submit a
compliance filing containing the Work
Plan with the Commission.’’ (NERC
Reference No. 10289).
‘‘Direct the ERO to use its authority pursuant to § 39.2(d) of our regulations to
require users, owners and operators to
provide to the Regional Entity the validated dynamics system models while
MOD–015–0 is being modified.’’
(NERC Reference No. 10291).
‘‘Require the ERO to develop a Work
Plan that will enable continual validation of dynamics system models and
submit a compliance filing with the
Commission.’’ (NERC Reference No.
10292).
‘‘Provide a Work Plan and compliance filing regarding the collection of information specified under standards that are
deferred, in this instance, data on the
accuracy, error and bias of the forecast.’’ (NERC Reference No.10299).
‘‘Require the ERO to provide a Work
Plan and compliance filing regarding
collection of information specified
under standards that are deferred, and
believe there should be no difficulties
complying with this Reliability Standard.’’ (NERC Reference No. 10303).
‘‘Direct the ERO to use its authority pursuant to § 39.2(d) of our regulations to
require users, owners and operators to
provide to the Regional Entity information related to forecasts of interruptible
demands and direct control load management.’’ (NERC Reference No.
10305).
‘‘Direct the ERO to provide a Work Plan
and compliance filing regarding collection of information specified under related standards that are deferred, and
believe there should be no difficulty
complying with this Reliability Standard.’’ (NERC Reference No. 10309).
‘‘Direct the ERO to use its authority pursuant to § 39.2(d) of our regulations to
require users, owners and operators to
provide to the Regional Entity the information required by this Reliability
Standard.’’ (NERC Reference No.
10313).
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1163, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
31 ......
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
No.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Dec 05, 2013
Order No.
73433
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1147, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1163, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1147, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1163, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1163, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1163, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1147, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1163, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1147, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
73434
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 235 / Friday, December 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
No.
Standard
39 ......
MOD–024 ..................
40 ......
41 ......
Order No.
Para
Directive
Justification
693
P 1308
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1147, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
MOD–024 ..................
693
P 1312
MOD–025 ..................
693
P 1320
‘‘In order to continue verifying and reporting gross and net real power generating capability needed for reliability
assessment and future plans, we direct
the ERO to develop a Work Plan and
submit a compliance filing.’’ (NERC
Reference No. 10317).
‘‘Direct the ERO to use its authority pursuant to § 39.2(d) of our regulations to
require users, owners and operators to
provide this information.’’ (NERC Reference No. 10314).
‘‘In order to continue verifying and reporting gross and net reactive power generating capability needed for reliability
assessment and future plans, we direct
the ERO to develop a Work Plan as
defined in the Common Issues section.’’ (NERC Reference No. 10321).
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Attachment B
Food and Drug Administration
Commenters on the Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
maindgalligan on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Note: Attachment B will not appear in the
Code of Federal Regulations.
21 CFR Part 172
The American Public Power
Association, Edison Electric Institute,
Electricity Consumers Resource
Council, Electric Power Supply
Association, Large Public Power
Council, and Transmission Access
Policy Group (collectively, Trade
Associations)
Canadian Electricity Association (CEA)
Dominion Resources Services, Inc., on
behalf of Virginia Electric and Power
Company, doing business as
Dominion Virginia Power; Dominion
Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.; Dominion
Energy Brayton Point, LLC; Dominion
Energy Manchester Street, Inc.;
Elwood Energy, LLC; Kincaid
Generation, LLC; and Fairless Energy,
LLC
International Transmission Company d/
b/a ITCTransmission, Michigan
Electric Transmission Company, LLC,
ITC Midwest LLC and ITC Great
Plains, LLC (ITC)
ISO/RTO Council
National Rural Electric Cooperative
Association (NRECA)
North American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC)
[Docket No. FDA–2011–F–0765]
[FR Doc. 2013–28516 Filed 12–5–13; 8:45 am]
Food Additives Permitted for Direct
Addition to Food for Human
Consumption; Acacia (Gum Arabic)
AGENCY:
Food and Drug Administration,
HHS.
ACTION:
Final rule.
The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or we) is
amending the food additive regulations
to provide for the expanded safe use of
acacia (gum arabic) in foods. This action
is in response to a petition filed by
Nexira.
SUMMARY:
This rule is effective December 6,
2013. See section IX of this document
for information on filing objections.
Submit either electronic or written
objections and requests for a hearing by
January 6, 2014. The Director of the
Office of the Federal Register approves
the incorporation by reference of a
certain publication listed in the rule as
of December 6, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit either
electronic or written objections and
requests for a hearing identified by
Docket No. FDA–2011–F–0765, by any
of the following methods:
DATES:
Electronic Submissions
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
Submit electronic objections in the
following way:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:51 Dec 05, 2013
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1147, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
This directive is redundant with the directive in paragraph 1147, which has already been addressed and is reflected
in section A above.
Written Submissions
Submit written objections in the
following ways:
• Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for
paper or CD–ROM submissions):
Division of Dockets Management (HFA–
305), Food and Drug Administration,
5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville,
MD 20852.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Agency name and
Docket No. FDA–2011–F–0765 for this
rulemaking. All objections received will
be posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on submitting
objections, see the ‘‘Objections’’ heading
of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
objections received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov and insert the
docket number, found in brackets in the
heading of this document, into the
‘‘Search’’ box and follow the prompts
and/or go to the Division of Dockets
Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm.
1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ellen Anderson, Center for Food Safety
and Applied Nutrition (HFS–265), Food
and Drug Administration, 5100 Paint
Branch Pkwy., College Park, MD 20740,
240–402–1309.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
In a notice published in the Federal
Register on December 20, 2011 (76 FR
78866), we announced that Nexira, c/o
Keller and Heckman LLP, 1001 G St.
NW., suite 500 West, Washington, DC
20001 (petitioner) had filed a food
additive petition (FAP 1A4784). The
petition proposed to amend the food
E:\FR\FM\06DER1.SGM
06DER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 235 (Friday, December 6, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 73424-73434]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-28516]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
18 CFR Part 40
[Docket No. RM13-8-000; Order No. 788]
Retirement of Requirements in Reliability Standards
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act, the
Commission approves the retirement of 34 requirements within 19
Reliability Standards identified by the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Commission-certified Electric
Reliability Organization. The requirements approved for retirement
either: Provide little protection for Bulk-Power System reliability; or
are redundant with other aspects of the Reliability Standards. In
addition, the Commission withdraws 41 Commission directives that NERC
develop modifications to Reliability Standards. This rule is part of
the Commission's ongoing effort to review its requirements and reduce
unnecessary burdens by eliminating requirements that are not necessary
to the performance of the Commission's regulatory responsibilities.
DATES: Effective Date: This rule will become effective January 21,
2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kevin Ryan (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426, Telephone: (202) 502-6840
[[Page 73425]]
Michael Gandolfo (Technical Information), Office of Electric
Reliability, Division of Reliability Standards and Security, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426, Telephone: (202) 502-6817.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
145 FERC ] 61,147
Before Commissioners: Jon Wellinghoff, Chairman; Philip D. Moeller,
John R. Norris, Cheryl A. LaFleur, and Tony Clark.
Final Rule
(Issued November 21, 2013)
1. Pursuant to section 215(d) of the Federal Power Act (FPA),\1\
the Commission approves the retirement of 34 requirements within 19
Reliability Standards identified by the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Commission-certified Electric
Reliability Organization (ERO). The retirement of these provisions meet
the benchmarks set forth in the Commission's March 15, 2012 order that
requirements proposed for retirement either: (1) Provide little
protection for Bulk-Power System reliability or (2) are redundant with
other aspects of the Reliability Standards.\2\ Consistent with the
Commission's proposal in the March 2012 Order, we conclude that the
requirements approved for retirement can ``be removed from the
Reliability Standards with little effect on reliability and an increase
in efficiency of the ERO compliance program.'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(d) (2006).
\2\ See North American Electric Reliability Corp., 138 FERC ]
61,193, at P 81 (March 2012 Order), order on reh'g and
clarification, 139 FERC ] 61,168 (2012).
\3\ Id. P 81.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. In addition, in this Final Rule, we withdraw 41 directives that
NERC develop modifications to Reliability Standards.\4\ In Order No.
693 and subsequent final rules, the Commission has identified various
issues and directed NERC to develop modifications to the Reliability
Standards or take other action to address those issues.\5\ While NERC
has addressed many of these directives, over 150 directives remain
outstanding. The withdrawal of these directives will enhance the
efficiency of the Reliability Standards development process, with
little or no impact on Bulk-Power System reliability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The 41 withdrawn directives are listed in Attachment A to
this Final Rule.
\5\ Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System,
Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242, order on reh'g, Order
No. 693-A, 120 FERC ] 61,053 (2007). See also 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 (2010), order on reh'g and reconsideration,
Order No. 729-B, 132 FERC ] 61,027 (2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Pursuant to Executive Order 13579, the Commission issued a plan
to identify regulations that warrant repeal or modification, or
strengthening, complementing, or modernizing where necessary or
appropriate.\6\ In the Plan, the Commission also stated that it
voluntarily and routinely, albeit informally, reviews its regulations
to ensure that they achieve their intended purpose and do not impose
undue burdens on regulated entities or unnecessary costs on those
entities or their customers. The action in this Final Rule is a part of
the Commission's ongoing effort to review its requirements and reduce
unnecessary burdens by eliminating requirements that are not necessary
to the performance of the Commission's regulatory responsibilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Plan for Retrospective Analysis of Existing Rules, Docket
No. AD12-6-000 (Nov. 8, 2011). Executive Order 13579 requests that
independent agencies issue public plans for periodic retrospective
analysis of their existing ``significant regulations.''
Retrospective analysis should identify ``significant regulations''
that may be outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or excessively
burdensome, and to modify, streamline, expand, or repeal them in
order to achieve the agency's regulatory objective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Background
A. Section 215 of the FPA
4. Section 215 of the FPA requires the Commission-certified ERO to
develop mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, subject to
Commission review and approval. Once approved, the Reliability
Standards may be enforced in the United States by the ERO subject to
Commission oversight or by the Commission independently.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to the requirements of FPA section 215, the Commission
established a process to select and certify an ERO \8\ and,
subsequently, certified NERC as the ERO.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ 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).
\9\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ]
61,062, order on reh'g and compliance, 117 FERC ] 61,126 (2006),
aff'd sub nom. Alcoa Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. March 2012 Order
5. In the March 2012 Order, the Commission accepted, with
conditions, NERC's ``Find, Fix, Track and Report'' (FFT) initiative.
The FFT process, inter alia, provides NERC and the Regional Entities
the flexibility to address lower-risk possible violations through an
FFT informational filing as opposed to issuing and filing a Notice of
Penalty. In addition, the Commission raised the prospect of revising or
removing requirements of Reliability Standards that ``provide little
protection for Bulk-Power System reliability or may be redundant.''
\10\ Specifically, the Commission stated:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ March 2012 Order, 138 FERC ] 61,193 at P 81.
. . . NERC's FFT initiative is predicated on the view that many
violations of requirements currently included in Reliability
Standards pose lesser risk to the Bulk-Power System. If so, some
current requirements likely provide little protection for Bulk-Power
System reliability or may be redundant. The Commission is interested
in obtaining views on whether such requirements could be removed
from the Reliability Standards with little effect on reliability and
an increase in efficiency of the ERO compliance program. If NERC
believes that specific Reliability Standards or specific
requirements within certain Standards should be revised or removed,
we invite NERC to make specific proposals to the Commission
identifying the Standards or requirements and setting forth in
detail the technical basis for its belief. In addition, or in the
alternative, we invite NERC, the Regional Entities and other
interested entities to propose appropriate mechanisms to identify
and remove from the Commission-approved Reliability Standards
unnecessary or redundant requirements.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Id.
In response, NERC initiated a review, referred to as the ``P 81
project,'' to identify requirements that could be removed from
Reliability Standards without impacting the reliability of the Bulk-
Power System.
C. NERC Petition
6. In a February 28, 2013 petition, NERC requested Commission
approval of the retirement of 34 requirements within 19 Reliability
Standards. According to NERC, the 34 requirements proposed for
retirement ``are redundant or otherwise unnecessary'' and that
``violations of these requirements . . . pose a lesser risk to the
reliability of the Bulk-Power System.'' \12\ NERC stated that the
proposed retirement of the 34 requirements ``will allow industry
stakeholders to focus their resources appropriately on reliability
risks and will increase the efficiency of the ERO compliance program.''
\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Petition at 2.
\13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73426]]
7. NERC explained that the ``P 81 Team'' developed three criteria
for its review:
(1) Criterion A: An overarching criteria designed to determine that
there is no reliability gap created by the proposed retirement; (2)
Criterion B: Consists of seven separate identifying criteria designed
to recognize requirements appropriate for retirement (administrative;
data collection/data retention; documentation; reporting; periodic
updates; commercial or business practice; and redundant); and (3)
Criterion C: Consists of seven separate questions designed to assist
the P 81 Team in making an informed decision regarding whether
requirements are appropriate to propose for retirement.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Id. at 4. See also id. n. 8 (setting forth the seven
questions of Criterion C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. NERC explained that the project team focused on the
identification of ``lower-level facilitating requirements that are
either redundant with other requirements or where evidence retention is
burdensome and the requirement is unnecessary'' because the reliability
goal is achieved through other standards or mechanisms.\15\ According
to NERC, the proposed retirement of documentation requirements will not
create a gap in reliability because ``NERC and the Regional Entities
can enforce reporting obligations pursuant to section 400 of NERC's
Rules of Procedure and Appendix 4C to ensure that necessary data
continues to be submitted for compliance and enforcement purposes.''
\16\ NERC asserts that, although the P 81 project proposes to retire
requirements associated with data retention or documentation, ``the
simple fact that a requirement includes a data retention or
documentation element does not signify that it should be considered for
retirement or is otherwise inappropriately designated as a
requirement.'' \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Id. at 7.
\16\ Id. at 8 (citing North American Electric Reliability Corp.,
141 FERC ] 61,241, at P 82 (2012) (approving proposed revisions to
NERC's Rules of Procedure)).
\17\ Id. at 9 (emphasis in original).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. Based on this approach, NERC identified the following 34
requirements within 19 Reliability Standards for potential retirement:
BAL-005-0.2b, Requirement R2--Automatic Generation Control
CIP-003-3, -4, Requirement R1.2--Cyber Security--Security
Management Controls \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ NERC explains that although only eight requirements in the
Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) body of Reliability
Standards are proposed for retirement, NERC proposes the retirement
of those eight requirements in both CIP versions 3 and 4. Therefore,
the total number of CIP requirements proposed for retirement is
sixteen.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CIP-003-3, -4, Requirements R3, R3.1, R3.2, and R3.3--Cyber
Security--Security Management Controls
CIP-003-3, -4, Requirement R4.2--Cyber Security--Security
Management Controls
CIP-005-3a, -4a, Requirement R2.6--Cyber Security--Electronic
Security Perimeter(s)
CIP-007-3, -4, Requirement R7.3--Cyber Security--Systems
Security Management
EOP-005-2, Requirement R3.1--System Restoration From
Blackstart Services
FAC-002-1, Requirement R2--Coordination of Plans for New
Facilities
FAC-008-3, Requirements R4 and R5--Facility Ratings
FAC-010-2.1, Requirement R5--System Operating Limits
Methodology for the Planning Horizon
FAC-011-2.1, Requirement R5--System Operating Limits
Methodology for the Operations Horizon
FAC-013-2, Requirement R3--Assessment of Transfer Capability
for the Near-term Transmission Planning Horizon
INT-007-1, Requirement R1.2--Interchange Confirmation
IRO-016-1, Requirement R2--Coordination of Real-Time
Activities Between Reliability Coordinators
NUC-001-2, Requirements R9.1, R9.1.1, R9.1.2, R9.1.3, and
R1.9.4--Nuclear Plant Interface Coordination
PRC-010-0, Requirement R2--Assessment of the Design and
Effectiveness of UVLS Programs
PRC-022-1, Requirement R2--Under-Voltage Load Shedding Program
Performance
VAR-001-2, Requirement R5--Voltage and Reactive Control
10. NERC also requested that the Commission approve the
implementation plan, provided as Exhibit C to NERC's petition, which
provided that the identified requirements will be retired immediately
upon Commission approval.
11. NERC stated that it will apply the ``concepts'' from the P 81
project to improve the drafting of Reliability Standards going forward.
Specifically, NERC explained that Reliability Standards development
projects ``will involve stronger examination for duplication of
requirements across the NERC body of Reliability Standards and the
technical basis and necessity for each and every requirement will
continue to be evaluated.'' \19\ According to NERC, requirements that
were proposed and ultimately not included in the immediate filing will
be mapped for consideration in future standards projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Petition at 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
12. On June 20, 2013, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NOPR) proposing to approve the retirement of the 34
requirements within 19 Reliability Standards, consistent with NERC's
petition.\20\ In addition, the Commission proposed to withdraw 41
outstanding Commission directives that NERC develop modifications to
Reliability Standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ Electric Reliability Organization Proposal To Retire
Requirements in Reliability Standards, Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, 78 FR 38,851 (June 28, 2013), 143 FERC ] 61,251 (2013)
(NOPR), errata, 78 FR 41,339 (July 10, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Comments on the NOPR were due by August 27, 2013. Seven
entities filed comments, identified in Attachment B to the Final Rule.
II. Discussion
A. Retirement of Requirements
NOPR Proposal
14. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to approve the retirement
of the 34 requirements within 19 Reliability Standards identified by
NERC. In the NOPR, for each of the 34 requirements, the Commission
provided NERC's rationale supporting retirement, and the Commission's
explanation for proposing to approve the retirement.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See NOPR, 143 FERC ] 61,251 at PP 17-83.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments
15. Commenters unanimously support approval of the NOPR proposal.
Trade Associations, CEA and ITC concur that the retirement of the 34
requirements will have little to no effect on reliability. NRECA, ISO/
RTO Council, CEA and ITC support continuance of the ``P 81'' process as
a high priority going forward and the identification of additional
candidate requirements for retirement or streamlining.
16. ISO/RTO Council comments that, while the criteria used by NERC
to identify candidate requirements for retirement are appropriate,
additional criteria would ensure that streamlining of the Reliability
Standards will continue.
[[Page 73427]]
Commission Determination
17. Pursuant to section 215 of the FPA, we approve the retirement
of the 34 requirements within 19 Reliability Standards identified by
NERC as just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential,
and in the public interest. Likewise, we approve the implementation
plan and effective date set forth in NERC's petition.
18. In the March 2012 Order, the Commission explained that ``some
current requirements likely provide little protection for Bulk-Power
System reliability or may be redundant. The Commission is interested in
obtaining views on whether such requirements could be removed from the
Reliability Standards with little effect on reliability and an increase
in efficiency of the ERO compliance program.'' \22\ In general, we
conclude that the requirements identified by NERC for retirement
satisfy the expectations set forth in the March 2012 Order; namely, the
requirements proposed for retirement either: (1) Provide little
protection for Bulk-Power System reliability or (2) are redundant with
other aspects of the Reliability Standards.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ March 2012 Order, 138 FERC ] 61,193 at P 81.
\23\ Further, we adopt the rationale for the retirement of each
requirement as set forth in the NOPR, 143 FERC ] 61,251 at PP 17-83.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. We agree with NERC that the elimination of certain requirements
that pertain to information collection or documentation will not result
in a reliability gap. No commenter disputes NERC's rationale. Section
400 and Appendix 4C (Uniform Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement
Program) of the NERC Rules of Procedure provide NERC and the Regional
Entities the authority to enforce reporting obligations necessary to
support reliability.\24\ This authority, used in the appropriate
manner, justifies retiring certain documentation-related requirements
that provide limited, if any, support for reliability. The retirement
of such requirements should enhance the efficiency of the ERO
compliance program, as well as the efficiency of individual registered
entity compliance programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ See North American Electric Reliability Corp., 141 FERC ]
61,241 at P 82.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. We agree with commenters that NERC should continue the process
of identifying additional Reliability Standards and requirements as
candidates for retirement or streamlining. We support NERC's continuing
efforts in this regard. Efficiencies can be gained from further
consolidation or retirement of some requirements or components of
requirements that are justified based on technical analysis of either
existing requirements, new proposed requirements or modifications. Such
analyses would take into account the interrelationship between
standards and among categories of standards, in order to determine that
when retirements or consolidations are made the reliability benefits of
the currently effective requirements would be preserved.
21. With regard to ISO/RTO Council's comment, we will not direct
NERC to develop additional criteria for identifying candidate
requirements for retirement. ISO/RTO Council does not identify any
specific concern or defect regarding the criteria applied by NERC.\25\
ISO/RTO Council may raise its proposal directly with NERC if it so
chooses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Moreover, while NERC provided the criteria in the February
2013 petition, NERC also made clear that the criteria were provided
only for informational purposes. See NERC Petition at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Outstanding Directives
NOPR Proposal
22. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to withdraw 41 outstanding
Commission directives that NERC develop modifications to Reliability
Standards. Attachment A of the NOPR identified the 41 Commission
directives, the source (i.e., Final Rule) of the directive, and a
justification for the proposed withdrawal.\26\ The Commission explained
that it applied the following three criteria in identifying outstanding
directives for withdrawal: (1) The reliability concern underlying the
outstanding directive has been addressed in some manner, rendering the
directive stale; (2) the outstanding directive provides general
guidance for standards development rather than a specific directive;
and (3) the outstanding directive is redundant with another
directive.\27\ The Commission stated that each of the 41 outstanding
directives identified in Attachment A of the NOPR satisfies one or more
of the criteria.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ The same table is provided as Attachment A to the Final
Rule. Each directive identified in Attachment A includes a ``NERC
Reference Number.'' Commission staff and NERC staff have developed a
common approach to identifying and tracking outstanding Commission
directives. The NERC Reference Numbers reflect this joint tracking
process.
\27\ NOPR, 143 FERC ] 61,251 at P 86.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments
23. NERC and all other commenters support the withdrawal of the 41
outstanding Commission directives.
24. Trade Associations recommend that the Commission consider
alternative criteria for the withdrawal of outstanding directives to
more closely align the criteria with those developed by NERC for
retirement of Reliability Standard requirements. According to Trade
Associations, ``simple logic suggests that the basis for retirement of
requirements and withdrawal of Commission reliability directives should
be consistent, if not uniform.'' \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Trade Associations Comments at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commission Determination
25. We find that it is appropriate to withdraw the 41 directives
requiring that NERC develop modifications to Reliability Standards. As
explained in the NOPR, the withdrawal of the identified directives
should result in more efficient use of NERC's and the Commission's
resources and reduce unnecessary burdens, without impacting the
reliable operation of the Bulk-Power System.\29\ All commenters agree
with the withdrawal of the 41 directives and the resulting
efficiencies. Accordingly, we withdraw the 41 directives requiring that
NERC develop modifications to Reliability Standards, identified in
Attachment A of the Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See NOPR, 143 FERC ] 61,251 at PP 85-87.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
26. We are not persuaded by Trade Associations' comments that there
is a need to more closely align the criteria applied by the Commission
in determining whether to withdraw an outstanding reliability directive
with those criteria developed by NERC for retirement of Reliability
Standard requirements. Unlike the NERC review of Reliability Standard
requirements, without precluding possible future Commission action, we
have no plans for ongoing review of outstanding Commission reliability
directives. We have reviewed the catalogue of outstanding reliability
directives and have taken appropriate action in this proceeding.
Further, while Trade Associations assert that such convergence of
criteria is ``logical,'' we do not believe that the retirement of
Reliability Standards requirements and withdrawal of a Commission
directive is an apples-to-apples comparison that necessitates the
suggested ``alignment.''
III. Information Collection Statement
27. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations require
that OMB approve certain reporting and recordkeeping (collections of
information) imposed by an agency.\30\ Upon approval of a collection(s)
of information, OMB will assign an OMB control number and expiration
date. Respondents subject to the filing
[[Page 73428]]
requirements of this rule will not be penalized for failing to respond
to these collection(s) of information unless the collections of
information display a valid OMB control number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ 5 CFR 1320.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
28. The Commission is submitting these revisions to the reporting
and recordkeeping requirements to OMB for its review and approval under
section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.\31\ The
Commission solicited comments on the need for and the purpose of the
information contained in NERC's February 2013 petition and the
corresponding burdens to implement NERC's proposed retirement of 34
requirements within 19 Reliability Standards. The Commission received
comments generally supporting the efficiency gains and reductions in
burden resulting from the retirement of specific requirements, which we
address in the Final Rule. However, the Commission did not receive
comments on the reporting estimates. The Final Rule approves the
retirement of the 34 requirements within 19 Reliability Standards and,
in addition, the withdrawal of 41 Commission directives that NERC
develop modifications to Reliability Standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
29. Public Reporting Burden: The estimate below for the number of
respondents is based on the NERC Compliance Registry as of April 30,
2013.\32\ According to the registry, there are 132 balancing
authorities (BA), 544 distribution providers (DP), 898 generator owners
(GO), 859 generator operators (GOP), 56 interchange authorities (IA),
515 load serving entities (LSE), 80 planning authorities/planning
coordinators (PA or PC), 677 purchasing selling entities (PSE), 21
reliability coordinators (RC), 346 transmission owners (TO), 185
transmission operators (TOP), 185 transmission planners (TP), and 93
transmission service providers (TSP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ The estimates for the retired CIP requirements are based on
February 28, 2013 registry data in order to provide consistency with
burden estimates provided in the Commission's recent CIP version 5
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in Docket No. RM13-5-000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
30. The Commission estimates that the burden will be reduced for
each requirement as detailed in the chart below, for a total estimated
annual reduction in burden cost of $518,220. The Commission based the
burden reduction estimates on staff experience, knowledge, and
expertise.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Estimated
average Estimated Estimated
Standard, requirement number, Type of Number of reduction in total annual total annual
and FERC Collection Number respondents respondents burden hours reduction in reduction in
\33\ per respondent burden (in cost
per year hours)
[A] [B] [A x B] [A x B x $60/
hour \34\]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EOP-005-2, R3.1 (FERC-725A)... TOP............. 185 1 185 $11,100
FAC-008-3, R4 (FERC-725A)..... TO, GO.......... 1,151 1 1,151 69,060
FAC-008-3, R5 (FERC-725A)..... TO, GO.......... 1,151 1 1,151 69,060
FAC-010-2.1, R5 (FERC-725D)... PA.............. 80 20 1,600 96,000
FAC-011-2, R5 (FERC-725D)..... RC.............. 21 20 420 25,200
FAC-013-2, R3 (FERC-725A)..... PC.............. 80 8 640 38,400
INT-007-1, R1.2 (FERC-725A)... IA.............. 56 20 1,120 67,200
IRO-016-1, R2 (FERC-725A)..... RC.............. 21 20 420 25,200
CIP-003-3, -4, R1.2 (FERC- RC, BA, IA, TSP, 325 1 325 19,500
725B). TO, TOP, GO,
GOP,LSE.
CIP-003-3, -4, R3, R3.1, R3.2, RC, BA, IA, TSP, 325 1 325 19,500
R3.3 (FERC-725B). TO, TOP, GO,
GOP,LSE.
CIP-005-3, -4, R2.6 (FERC- RC, BA, IA, TSP, 325 4 1300 78,000
725B). TO, TOP, GO,
GOP,LSE.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total..................... ................ .............. .............. 8,637 518,220
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
31. The above chart does not include BAL-005-0.2b, Requirement R2;
CIP-003-3, -4, Requirement R4.2; CIP-007-3, -4, Requirement R7.3; FAC-
002-1, Requirement R2; PRC-010-0, Requirement R2; PRC-022-1,
Requirement R2; and VAR-001-2, Requirement R5 because those
requirements were found redundant with other requirements.\35\ Since
the action required within them is required elsewhere, there is no
change in the overall burden in retiring these requirements. Likewise,
NUC-001-2, Requirement R9.1; NUC-001-2, Requirement R9.1.1; NUC-001-2,
Requirement R9.1.2; NUC-001-2, Requirement R9.1.3; and NUC-001-2,
Requirement R9.1.4 are not included because these requirements require
that the applicable entities include ``boiler plate'' language into
their agreements that is normally included in all legal contracts.\36\
Since this action will be taken regardless if it is required by a
Reliability Standard, there is no reduction in burden.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ This number was calculated by adding all the applicable
entities while removing double counting caused by entities
registered under multiple functions.
\34\ The estimated hourly loaded cost (salary plus benefits) for
an engineer is assumed to be $60/hour, based on salaries as reported
by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) (https://bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm). Loaded costs are BLS rates divided by 0.703 and
rounded to the nearest dollar (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm).
\35\ The reporting requirements in these standards are part of
the FERC-725A information collection.
\36\ The reporting requirements in this standard are part of the
FERC-725F information collection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Titles: FERC-725A, Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk
Power System; FERC-725B, Mandatory Reliability Standards for Critical
Infrastructure Protection; FERC-725D, Facilities, Design, Connections,
and Maintenance Reliability Standards; and FERC-725F, Mandatory
Reliability Standards for Nuclear Plant Interface Coordination.
Action: Revisions to Collections of Information.
OMB Control Nos: 1902-0244, 1902-0248, 1902-0247, and 1902-0249.
Respondents: Business or other for-profit, and not-for-profit
institutions.
Frequency of Responses: On occasion.
[[Page 73429]]
Necessity of the Information: This proceeding approves the
retirement of the 34 requirements within 19 Reliability Standards
identified by NERC. The retirements either: (1) Provide little
protection for Bulk-Power System reliability or (2) are redundant with
other aspects of the Reliability Standards. In addition, we withdraw
the 41 Commission directives listed in Attachment A in the interest of
enhancing the efficiency of the ERO standard development and compliance
programs, as well as the efficiency of individual registered entity
compliance programs.
Internal review: The Commission has reviewed NERC's proposal and
determined that the action is necessary to implement section 215 of the
FPA. The Commission has assured itself, by means of its internal
review, that there is specific, objective support for the burden
reduction estimates associated with the retired information
requirements.
32. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting
requirements by contacting the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Office of the Executive Director, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426 [Attention: Ellen Brown, email: DataClearance@ferc.gov, phone:
(202) 502-8663, fax: (202) 273-0873].
33. Comments concerning the information collections and the
associated burden estimates should be sent to the Commission in this
docket and to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs [Attention: Desk Officer for the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission]. For security reasons, comments
should be sent by email to OMB at: oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. Please
indicate the OMB Control Numbers and Docket No. RM13-8-000 in your
submittal.
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.\37\ 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.\38\ The actions proposed here
fall within this categorical exclusion in the Commission's regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ 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).
\38\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii) (2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act
35. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \39\ generally
requires a description and analysis of final rules that will have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The RFA mandates consideration of regulatory alternatives that
accomplish the stated objectives of a proposed rule and that minimize
any significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The Small Business Administration's Office of Size Standards
develops the numerical definition of a small business.\40\ The Small
Business Administration has established a size standard for electric
utilities, stating that a firm is small if, including its affiliates,
it is primarily engaged in the transmission, generation and/or
distribution of electric energy for sale and its total electric output
for the preceding twelve months did not exceed four million megawatt
hours.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
\40\ 13 CFR 121.101.
\41\ 13 CFR 121.201, Sector 22, Utilities & n.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
36. The Commission estimates the total reduction in burden for all
small entities to be $32,460. The Commission estimates that small
planning authorities/planning coordinators will see a reduction of
$1,680 per entity per year, greater than for other types of affected
small entities.\42\ The Commission does not consider a reduction of
$1,680 per year to be a significant economic impact. The Commission
believes that, in addition to the estimated economic impact, the
proposed retirement of the 34 requirements of mandatory Reliability
Standards will provide small entities with relief from having to track
compliance with these provisions and preparing to show compliance in
response to a potential compliance audit by a Regional Entity or other
regulator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ The burden reduction for planning authorities/planning
coordinators is based on the retirement of FAC-010-2.1, Requirement
R5 and FAC-013-2, Requirement R3. Based on the NERC Compliance
Registry and Energy Information Administration Form EIA-861 data,
the Commission estimates that 5 out of the 80 planning authorities/
planning coordinators meet the definition of a small entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
37. Based on the above, the Commission certifies that the changes
to the Reliability Standards will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, no regulatory
flexibility analysis is required.
VI. Document Availability
38. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
Internet through FERC's Home Page (https://www.ferc.gov) and in FERC's
Public Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00
p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington DC
20426.
39. From FERC's Home Page on the Internet, this information is
available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on
eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or
downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket
number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket
number field.
40. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the FERC's Web
site during normal business hours from FERC Online Support at (202)
502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY (202) 502-8659. Email the Public Reference Room at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification
41. These regulations are effective January 21, 2014. The
Commission has determined that, with the concurrence of the
Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB, 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.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
Note: Attachment A will not appear in the Code of Federal
Regulations.
Attachment A
Withdrawn Commission Directives
[[Page 73430]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. Standard Order No. Para Directive Justification
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group A--The reliability concern underlying the outstanding directive has been addressed in some manner,
rendering the directive stale
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1........... BAL-006....................... 693 P 428 ``Add measures NERC replaced
concerning the levels of non-
accumulation of compliance with
large inadvertent violation
interchange severity levels
balances and (VSLs). NERC has
levels of non- designated VSLs
compliance.'' for BAL-006.
(NERC Reference
No. 10036).
2........... EOP-001....................... 693 P 565 ``The Commission The VSLs listed in
agrees with ISO- EOP-001-2.1b and
NE that the the Reliability
Reliability Standard Audit
Standard should Worksheet for EOP-
be clarified to 001 require
indicate that the evidence of this
actual emergency consideration.
plan elements,
and not the ``for
consideration''
elements of
Attachment 1,
should be the
basis for
compliance.
However, all of
the elements
should be
considered when
the emergency
plan is put
together.'' (NERC
Reference No.
10065).
3........... INT-004....................... 693 P 843 ``Consider adding NERC replaced
levels of non- levels of non-
compliance to the compliance with
standard.'' (NERC VSLs. VSLs for
Reference No. INT-004 have been
10134). developed and
approved by the
Commission.
4........... INT-005....................... 693 P 848 ``Consider adding NERC replaced
levels of non- levels of non-
compliance to the compliance with
standard.'' (NERC VSLs. VSLs for
Reference No. INT-005 have been
10135). developed and
approved by the
Commission.
5........... MOD-010 through MOD-025....... 693 P 1147 ``Direct the ERO The concern
to use its underlying the
authority directive has
pursuant to Sec. been addressed
39.2(d) of our through section
regulations to 1600 (Requests
require users, for Data or
owners and Information) of
operators to NERC's Rules of
provide to the Procedure. The
Regional Entity Commission
the information approved Section
related to data 1600 of NERC's
gathering, data Rules on February
maintenance, 21, 2008.
reliability
assessments and
other process-
type functions.''
(NERC Reference
No. 10266).
6........... MOD-010....................... 693 P 1152 ``Address critical This directive is
energy no longer
infrastructure necessary in
confidentiality light of section
issues as part of 1500
the standard (Confidential
development Information) of
process.'' (NERC NERC's Rules of
Reference No. Procedure
10268). addressing
treatment of
confidential
information.
7........... MOD-010....................... 693 P 1163 ``Direct the ERO The concern
to develop a Work underlying the
Plan that will directive has
facilitate been addressed
ongoing through NERC's
collection of the Reliability
steady-state Standards
modeling and Development Plan:
simulation data 2013-2015. This
specified in MOD- plan was provided
011-0.'' (NERC to the Commission
Reference No. in an
10270). informational
filing on
December 31,
2012. It contains
an action plan to
merge, upgrade,
and expand
existing
requirements in
the modeling data
(MOD-010 through
MOD-015) and
demand data (MOD-
016 through MOD-
021) Reliability
Standards.
8........... PRC-017....................... 693 P 1546 ``Require Requirement R2 of
documentation PRC-017 already
identified in requires affected
Requirement R2 be entities to
routinely provide
provided to NERC documentation of
or the regional the special
entity that protection system
includes a program and its
requirement that implementation to
documentation the appropriate
identified in Regional
Requirement R2 Reliability
shall be Organization and
routinely NERC within 30
provided to the calendar days of
ERO.'' (NERC a request. If
Reference No. either the
10363). Regional Entity
or NERC determine
that they need
and will use the
information on a
regular schedule,
they have the
authority to
establish a
schedule under
the current
requirement.
9........... Glossary...................... 693 P 1895 ``Modification to The concern
the glossary that underlying the
enhances the directive has
definition of been addressed
``generator through the NERC
operator'' to registration
reflect concerns process. See
of the commenters Order No. 693 at
[``to include P 145.
aspects unique to
ISOs, RTOs and
pooled resource
organizations''].
'' (NERC
Reference No.
10005).
[[Page 73431]]
10.......... Glossary...................... 693 P 1895 ``Modification to The concern
the glossary that underlying the
enhances the directive has
definition of been addressed
``transmission through the NERC
operator'' to registration
reflect concerns process. See
of the commenters Order No. 693 at
[``to include P 145.
aspects unique to
ISOs, RTOs and
pooled resource
organizations''].
'' (NERC
Reference No.
10006).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group B--The outstanding directive provides general guidance for standards development rather than a specific
directive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11.......... BAL-005....................... 693 P 406 ``The Commission This paragraph is
understands that not a directive
it may be to change or
technically modify a
possible for DSM standard.
to meet
equivalent
requirements as
conventional
generators and
expects the
Reliability
Standards
development
process to
provide the
qualifications
they must meet to
participate.''
(NERC Reference
No. 10033).
12.......... BAL-006....................... 693 P 438 ``Examine the WECC This paragraph is
time error not a directive
correction to change or
procedure as a modify a
possible guide . standard.
. . the
Commission asks
the ERO, when
filing the new
Reliability
Standard, to
explain how the
new Reliability
Standard
satisfies the
Commission's
concerns.'' (NERC
Reference No.
10037).
13.......... COM-001....................... 693 P 507 ``Although we This paragraph is
direct that the not a directive
regional to change or
reliability modify a
organization standard.
should not be the
compliance
monitor for
NERCNet, we leave
it to the ERO to
determine whether
it is the
appropriate
compliance
monitor or if
compliance should
be monitored by
the Regional
Entities for
NERCNet User
Organizations.''
(NERC Reference
No. 10051).
14.......... MOD-001....................... 729 P 20 ``We encourage the This paragraph is
ERO to consider not a directive
Midwest ISO's and to change or
Entegra's modify a
comments when standard.
developing other
modifications to
the MOD
Reliability
Standards
pursuant to the
EROs Reliability
Standards
development
procedure.'' [See
also P 198-199]
(NERC Reference
No. 10216).
15.......... MOD -001, -004, -008, -028, - 729 P 160 ``In developing This paragraph is
029, -030. the modifications not a directive
to the MOD to change or
Reliability modify a
Standards standard.
directed in this
Final Rule, the
ERO should
consider
generator
nameplate ratings
and transmission
line ratings
including the
comments raised
by Entegra and
ISO/RTO
Council.'' [Also
see P 154] (NERC
Reference No.
10207).
16.......... MOD-001....................... 729 P 179 ``The Commission This paragraph is
directs the ERO not a directive
to consider to change or
Entegra's request modify a
regarding more standard.
frequent updates
for constrained
facilities
through its
Reliability
Standards
development
process.'' (see
Order No. 729 at
P 177 for
Entegra's
comments). (NERC
Reference No.
10211).
17.......... MOD-028....................... 729 P 231 ``The Commission This paragraph
directs the ERO clarifies the
to develop a Commission's
modification sub- understanding of
requirement R2.2 the phrase
pursuant to its ``adjacent and
Reliability beyond
Standards Reliability
development Coordination
process to area.'' Since the
clarify the Commission's
phrase `adjacent understanding of
and beyond the language is
Reliability clearly
Coordination expressed, and
areas.''' (NERC the matter has
Reference No. little impact on
10219). reliability,
there is no
reason to go
forward with the
directive.
[[Page 73432]]
18.......... MOD-028....................... 729 P 234 ``The Commission This paragraph is
agrees that a not a directive
graduated time to change or
frame for modify a
reposting could standard.
be reasonable in
some situations.
Accordingly, the
ERO should
consider this
suggestion when
making future
modifications to
the Reliability
Standards.''
(NERC Reference
No. 10220).
19.......... MOD-029....................... 729 P 246 ``The ERO should This paragraph is
consider Puget not a directive
Sound's concerns to change or
on this issue modify a
when making standard.
future
modifications to
the Reliability
Standards.'' [See
also P 245] (NERC
Reference No.
10222).
20.......... MOD-030....................... 729 P 269 ``The Commission This paragraph is
also directs the not a directive
ERO to make to change or
explicit such modify a
[effective date] standard.
detail in any
future version of
this or any other
Reliability
Standard.'' (NERC
Reference No.
10223).
21.......... MOD-024....................... 693 P 1310 ``Similarly, we This paragraph is
respond to not a directive
Constellation to change or
that any modify a
modification of standard.
the Levels of Non-
Compliance in
this Reliability
Standard should
be reviewed in
the ERO
Reliability
Standards
development
process.'' (NERC
Reference No.
10318).
22.......... PER-002....................... 693 P 1375 ``Training This paragraph is
programs for not a directive
operations to change or
planning and modify a
operations standard.
support staff
must be tailored
to the needs of
the function, the
tasks performed
and personnel
involved.'' (NERC
Reference No.
10329).
23.......... VAR-001....................... 693 P 1863 ``The Commission This paragraph is
expects that the not a directive
appropriate power to change or
factor range modify a
developed for the standard.
interface between
the bulk electric
system and the
load-serving
entity from VAR-
001-1 would be
used as an input
to the
transmission and
operations
planning
Reliability
Standards.''
(NERC Reference
No. 10441).
24.......... VAR-001....................... 693 P 1869 ``We recognize This paragraph is
that our proposed not a directive
modification does to change or
not identify what modify a
definitive standard.
requirements the
Reliability
Standard should
use for
established
limits and
sufficient
reactive
resources.''
(NERC Reference
No. 10434).
25.......... TPL and FAC series............ 705 P 49 ``Direct that any This paragraph
revised TPL provides guidance
Reliability on an ongoing
Standards must implementation
reflect issue and is not
consistency in a directive to
the lists of change or modify
contingencies.'' a standard.
(NERC Reference
No. 10601).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group C--The outstanding directive is redundant with another directive
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26.......... MOD-012....................... 693 P 1177 ``Direct the ERO This directive is
to use its redundant with
authority the directive in
pursuant to Sec. paragraph 1147,
39.2(d) of our which has already
regulations to been addressed
require users, and is reflected
owners, and in section A
operators to above.
provide to the
Regional Entities
the information
related to data
gathering, data
maintenance,
reliability
assessments and
other process
type functions.''
(NERC Reference
No. 10275).
27.......... MOD-012....................... 693 P 1177 ``Develop a Work This directive is
Plan and submit a redundant with
compliance filing the directive in
that will paragraph 1163,
facilitate which has already
ongoing been addressed
collection of the and is reflected
dynamics system in section A
modeling and above.
simulation
data.'' (NERC
Reference No.
10279).
28.......... MOD-012....................... 693 P 1181 ``Direct the ERO This directive is
to address redundant with
confidentiality the directive in
issues and modify paragraph 1152,
the standard as which has already
necessary through been addressed
its Reliability and is reflected
Standards in section A
development above.
process.'' (NERC
Reference No.
10277).
[[Page 73433]]
29.......... MOD-013....................... 693 P 1200 ``Direct the ERO This directive is
to develop a Work redundant with
Plan that will the directive in
facilitate paragraph 1163,
ongoing which has already
collection of the been addressed
dynamics system and is reflected
modeling and in section A
simulation data above.
specified in MOD-
013-1, and submit
a compliance
filing containing
this Work Plan to
the Commission.''
(NERC Reference
No. 10283).
30.......... MOD-014....................... 693 P 1212 ``Direct the ERO This directive is
to use its redundant with
authority the directive in
pursuant to Sec. paragraph 1147,
39.2(d) of our which has already
regulations to been addressed
require users, and is reflected
owners and in section A
operators to above.
provide the
validated models
to regional
reliability
organizations.''
(NERC Reference
No. 10288).
31.......... MOD-014....................... 693 P 1212 ``Direct the ERO This directive is
to develop a Work redundant with
Plan that will the directive in
facilitate paragraph 1163,
ongoing which has already
validation of been addressed
steady-state and is reflected
models and submit in section A
a compliance above.
filing containing
the Work Plan
with the
Commission.''
(NERC Reference
No. 10289).
32.......... MOD-015....................... 693 P 1221 ``Direct the ERO This directive is
to use its redundant with
authority the directive in
pursuant to Sec. paragraph 1147,
39.2(d) of our which has already
regulations to been addressed
require users, and is reflected
owners and in section A
operators to above.
provide to the
Regional Entity
the validated
dynamics system
models while MOD-
015-0 is being
modified.'' (NERC
Reference No.
10291).
33.......... MOD-015....................... 693 P 1221 ``Require the ERO This directive is
to develop a Work redundant with
Plan that will the directive in
enable continual paragraph 1163,
validation of which has already
dynamics system been addressed
models and submit and is reflected
a compliance in section A
filing with the above.
Commission.''
(NERC Reference
No. 10292).
34.......... MOD-017....................... 693 P 1247 ``Provide a Work This directive is
Plan and redundant with
compliance filing the directive in
regarding the paragraph 1163,
collection of which has already
information been addressed
specified under and is reflected
standards that in section A
are deferred, in above.
this instance,
data on the
accuracy, error
and bias of the
forecast.'' (NERC
Reference
No.10299).
35.......... MOD-018....................... 693 P 1264 ``Require the ERO This directive is
to provide a Work redundant with
Plan and the directive in
compliance filing paragraph 1163,
regarding which has already
collection of been addressed
information and is reflected
specified under in section A
standards that above.
are deferred, and
believe there
should be no
difficulties
complying with
this Reliability
Standard.'' (NERC
Reference No.
10303).
36.......... MOD-019....................... 693 P 1275 ``Direct the ERO This directive is
to use its redundant with
authority the directive in
pursuant to Sec. paragraph 1147,
39.2(d) of our which has already
regulations to been addressed
require users, and is reflected
owners and in section A
operators to above.
provide to the
Regional Entity
information
related to
forecasts of
interruptible
demands and
direct control
load
management.''
(NERC Reference
No. 10305).
37.......... MOD-021....................... 693 1297 ``Direct the ERO This directive is
to provide a Work redundant with
Plan and the directive in
compliance filing paragraph 1163,
regarding which has already
collection of been addressed
information and is reflected
specified under in section A
related standards above.
that are
deferred, and
believe there
should be no
difficulty
complying with
this Reliability
Standard.'' (NERC
Reference No.
10309).
38.......... MOD-021....................... 693 P 1297 ``Direct the ERO This directive is
to use its redundant with
authority the directive in
pursuant to Sec. paragraph 1147,
39.2(d) of our which has already
regulations to been addressed
require users, and is reflected
owners and in section A
operators to above.
provide to the
Regional Entity
the information
required by this
Reliability
Standard.'' (NERC
Reference No.
10313).
[[Page 73434]]
39.......... MOD-024....................... 693 P 1308 ``In order to This directive is
continue redundant with
verifying and the directive in
reporting gross paragraph 1147,
and net real which has already
power generating been addressed
capability needed and is reflected
for reliability in section A
assessment and above.
future plans, we
direct the ERO to
develop a Work
Plan and submit a
compliance
filing.'' (NERC
Reference No.
10317).
40.......... MOD-024....................... 693 P 1312 ``Direct the ERO This directive is
to use its redundant with
authority the directive in
pursuant to Sec. paragraph 1147,
39.2(d) of our which has already
regulations to been addressed
require users, and is reflected
owners and in section A
operators to above.
provide this
information.''
(NERC Reference
No. 10314).
41.......... MOD-025....................... 693 P 1320 ``In order to This directive is
continue redundant with
verifying and the directive in
reporting gross paragraph 1147,
and net reactive which has already
power generating been addressed
capability needed and is reflected
for reliability in section A
assessment and above.
future plans, we
direct the ERO to
develop a Work
Plan as defined
in the Common
Issues section.''
(NERC Reference
No. 10321).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Attachment B will not appear in the Code of Federal
Regulations.
Attachment B
Commenters on the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
The American Public Power Association, Edison Electric Institute,
Electricity Consumers Resource Council, Electric Power Supply
Association, Large Public Power Council, and Transmission Access Policy
Group (collectively, Trade Associations)
Canadian Electricity Association (CEA)
Dominion Resources Services, Inc., on behalf of Virginia Electric and
Power Company, doing business as Dominion Virginia Power; Dominion
Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.; Dominion Energy Brayton Point, LLC; Dominion
Energy Manchester Street, Inc.; Elwood Energy, LLC; Kincaid Generation,
LLC; and Fairless Energy, LLC
International Transmission Company d/b/a ITCTransmission, Michigan
Electric Transmission Company, LLC, ITC Midwest LLC and ITC Great
Plains, LLC (ITC)
ISO/RTO Council
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association (NRECA)
North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC)
[FR Doc. 2013-28516 Filed 12-5-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
