Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-922); Comment Request, 30230-30233 [2015-12701]

Download as PDF mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 30230 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 27, 2015 / Notices owned by others without the owners’ express permission. The proposed project would consist of the following: (1) A 800-foot-long, 400foot-wide intake channel; (2) a 200-footlong, 210-foot-wide powerhouse containing four generating units with a total capacity of 48 megawatts; (3) a 1,300-foot-long, 500-foot-wide tailrace; (4) a 6.9/115 kilo-Volt (kV) substation; and (5) a 5-mile-long, 115kV transmission line. The proposed project would have an estimated average annual generation of 155,000 megawatt-hours, and operate as directed by the Corps. Applicant Contact: Mr. Jonathan Oliver, Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation, One Cooperative Way, Little Rock, AR 72209; Phone: (501) 570–2488; Email: jonathan.oliver@aecc.com. FERC Contact: Christiane Casey, christiane.casey@ferc.gov, (202) 502– 8577. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file competing applications: 60 days from the issuance of this notice. Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission’s Web site https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system at https:// www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ ecomment.asp. You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or toll free at 1–866–208–3676, or for TTY, (202) 502–8659. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an original and five copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include docket number P–14663–000. More information about this project, including a copy of the application, can be viewed or printed on the ‘‘eLibrary’’ link of Commission’s Web site at https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number (P–14663) in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:45 May 26, 2015 Jkt 235001 Dated: May 20, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. 2015–12708 Filed 5–26–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. AD14–15–000] Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC–922); Comment Request Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE. ACTION: Comment request. AGENCY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D), the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC) is submitting for reinstatement a revised information collection FERC– 922, ‘‘Performance Metrics for ISOs, RTOs and Regions Outside ISOs and RTOs,’’ to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review of the information collection requirements. Any interested person may file comments directly with OMB and should address a copy of those comments to the Commission as explained below. The Commission previously issued a Notice in the Federal Register (79 FR 52313, 9/3/2014) requesting public comments. The Commission also issued an errata notice to fix an errant hyperlink in the 60-day notice (8/26/2014). The Commission received seven comments on the FERC–922. The Commission addresses these comments in this notice and in its submittal to OMB. DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due by June 26, 2015. ADDRESSES: Comments filed with OMB, identified by the OMB Control No. 1902–0262, should be sent via email to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs at: oira_submission@omb.gov. Attention: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Desk Officer. The Desk Officer may also be reached via telephone at (202) 395–4718. A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, identified by the Docket No. AD14–15–000, by either of the following methods: • eFiling at Commission’s Web site: https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ efiling.asp, or • Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in accordance with submission guidelines at: https:// www.ferc.gov/help/submissionguide.asp. Submissions must be in an acceptable file format, as described at: https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary/ accept-file-formats.asp. The numeric values corresponding to all charts and tables containing metrics must be submitted in an accompanying file, in one of the following formats: Microsoft Office 2003/2007/2010: Excel (.xls or .xlsx), or ASCII Comma Separated Value (.csv). For user assistance contact FERC Online Support by email at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or by phone at: (866) 208–3676 (toll-free), or (202) 502–8659 for TTY. Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and issuances in this docket may do so at https://www.ferc.gov/docsfiling/docs-filing.asp. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email at DataClearance@FERC.gov, by telephone at (202) 502–8663, and by fax at (202) 273–0873. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Title: FERC–922, Performance Metrics for ISOs, RTOs and Regions Outside of ISOs and RTOs. OMB Control No.: 1902–0262. Type of Request: Reinstatement and revision of an information collection. Abstract: In September 2008, the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report recommending that the Chairman of the Commission, among other actions, work with independent system operators (ISOs), regional transmission organizations (RTOs), stakeholders, and other experts to develop standardized measures that track the performance of ISO/RTO operations and markets and report the performance results to Congress and the public annually,1 while also providing interpretation of (1) what the measures and reported performance communicate about the benefits of ISOs/RTOs and, where appropriate, (2) changes that need to be made to address any performance concerns. The GAO Report also suggested that performance metrics be explored for non-ISOs/RTO regions. In response to the GAO Report, Commission Staff conducted outreach with ISOs/RTOs and other stakeholders and in October 2010 established metrics 1 The 2008 GAO Report also recognized that the extent of the Commission’s evaluation of ISO/RTO performance may vary from year to year. E:\FR\FM\27MYN1.SGM 27MYN1 30231 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 27, 2015 / Notices to measure ISO/RTO performance. In April 2011, a report was sent to Congress with an analysis of ISO/RTO performance based on these metrics and a commitment to analyze utilities in non-ISO/RTO regions. After further stakeholder outreach, in August 2014, the Commission Staff issued a ‘‘Common Metrics Report,’’ establishing 30 common metrics that measure performance for ISOs, RTOs and public utilities outside of ISOs/RTOs from 2006–2010. The Commission is continuing its efforts to collect performance metric information from ISOs, RTOs, and public utilities in non-ISO/RTO regions. This includes the submission of information relating to dispatch reliability, transmission planning, and the marginal cost of energy and resource availability. The information submitted by ISOs, RTOs, and participating public utilities in non-ISO/RTO regions is used to measure the performance of reliability and operations functions in which ISOs, RTOs, and public utilities in non-ISO/RTO regions perform identical activities. The attached list of metrics will not be published in the Federal Register but will be available as part of this notice in the Commission’s eLibrary system under Docket No. AD14–15–000. Type of Respondents: ISOs, RTOs, and public utilities. Estimate of Annual Burden: 2 For ISOs, RTOs and public utilities that have submitted performance information previously, their submittals will only include performance information for the 2010–2014 period.3 For other public utilities that have not submitted performance information previously, their submittals will also provide performance information for the 2010–2014 period.4 This information is to be filed by October 30, 2015.5 The estimate of annual burden assumes submittals occur every two years. For this reason, the annual number of responses is ‘‘0.5’’ in the table below. FERC–922 (AD14–15–000)—PERFORMANCE METRICS FOR ISOS, RTOS AND REGIONS OUTSIDE ISOS AND RTOS 6 Number of respondents Annual number of responses per respondent Total number of responses Average burden hours and cost per response 7 Total annual burden hours and total annual cost Cost per respondent per year ($) (1) Information collection component (2) (1)*(2)=(3) (4) (3)*(4)=(5) (5)÷(1) ENTITIES THAT HAVE PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED PERFORMANCE Metrics Data Collection ............................ 11 0.5 5.5 Write Performance Analysis .................... 11 0.5 5.5 Management Review ............................... 11 0.5 5.5 Subtotal ............................................. ........................ ........................ ........................ INFORMATION 8 229 $18,366 139 $11,148 33 $2,796 1,260 $101,012 765 $61,313 182 $15,377 9,183 5,574 ........................ 2,207 $177,702 16,155 1,398 ENTITIES THAT HAVE NOT PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED PERFORMANCE INFORMATION 9 Collection, writing, and review ................. 5 0.5 2.5 427 $34,403 1,068 $86,008 Total .................................................. 16 ........................ ........................ ........................ 17,202 3,275 $263,710 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Public Comments and FERC’s Responses: Comments were filed by the public in response to the FERC–922 Federal Register Notice of Information Collection and Request for Comments and the Commission’s responses to those comments are provided below. Burden Estimate Edison Electric Institute (EEI) considers the burden estimate to be significantly understated, particularly for ‘‘stand-alone utilities’’ without access to data collection and compilation activities performed by ISO and RTO staff. EEI estimates the response time for stand-alone utilities to be as high as 300–400 hours per utility. FERC Response: We address EEI’s concern by revising the burden estimate. We recognize that certain EEI members have experienced the process of collecting, summarizing, reviewing, and 2 Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. For further explanation of what is included in the information collection burden, see 5 CFR 1320.3 (2014). 3 ISOs, RTOs and public utilities who wish to file revisions to previously submitted data (i.e., from periods prior to 2010), may do so. 4 Public utilities who have not previously submitted performance information may also voluntarily submit data from the 2008–2009 period along with their 2010–2014 submittals, if they believe that such information would be important to this initiative. 5 The Commission will provide public notice prior to the due date for any subsequent collection within the approved information collection period. 6 The results in this table have been rounded for display purposes. 7 The estimates for cost per response are derived using the following formula: Average Burden Hours per Response * $XX per Hour = Average Cost per Response. The hourly cost figure for the metrics data collection and writing the performance analysis is based on the loaded average wage (salary plus benefits) of $80.20/hour for an analyst, attorney, engineer, and economist. The hourly cost figure for the management review is based on the loaded average wage (salary plus benefits) of $84.72/hour for management. Wage and benefits data are from the Bureau of Labor Statistics at https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm and https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm. 8 Assumes responses from the six RTOs and ISOs and five public utilities that previously submitted data. 9 Assumes five public utilities that have not previously submitted information will submit data. Assumes that four of these public utilities will submit data for the period covering 2010–2014, and that one public utility will voluntarily provide data for 2008–2009 in addition to 2010–2014. The weighted average wage (salary plus benefits) assumed for new respondents is $80.57 per hour, which reflects the hour-weighted average of the wages assumed for entities that have previously submitted performance information. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:45 May 26, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\27MYN1.SGM 27MYN1 30232 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 27, 2015 / Notices submitting information as part of this initiative, and therefore might be better positioned to estimate the time and resources involved. In response, we revise the burden estimate to be approximately 400 hours per respondent (401 hours for previous participants and 427 hours for new participants). We believe that the updated burden estimate accounts for the higher response times of certain participants. We also believe that the updated burden estimate accounts for any additional time associated with the instruction to submit the numeric values corresponding to charts and tables in an accompanying file.10 Ways To Minimize Information Collection Burden mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES The ISO/RTO Council (IRC) recommends that data be provided only for the 2010–2014 period. IRC notes that its members have already submitted information through 2010. Southern Company Services, Inc. (Southern) also recommends that only one data collection be required for the 2010–2014 time period. Noting that the Common Metrics Report issued by the Commission in August 2014 provides information for the 2006–2010 period, Southern considers information collection on the 2008–2012 period to be an additional burden and argues that it should be eliminated. Noting that utilities outside of ISOs/RTOs will have to devote considerable resources and expenses to provide data, EEI recommends that the Commission retain the voluntary approach for these utilities and that data collection for ISO and RTO regions only occur when data is readily available and the data collection process can be streamlined. New York Transmission Owners (NYTOs) 11 support continued data collection. NYTOs consider this information to be helpful for analyzing ISO and RTO performance and that the benefits of the information to the Commission and affected parties outweigh any related burdens on respondents. International Transmission Company (ITC) supports the proposed data collection as necessary and not overly burdensome. American Public Power Association (APPA) and American Wind Energy Association 10 The purpose of the additional instruction is to reduce the potential for error in compiling reports on the information submitted. 11 NYTOs are Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation, Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., Power Supply Long Island, New York Power Authority, New York State Electric & Gas Corporation, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation d/b/a National Grid, Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc., and Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:45 May 26, 2015 Jkt 235001 (AWEA) also support continued data collection. FERC Response: We note concerns raised by IRC and Southern over the potential redundancy and additional burden for providing information for the 2008–2012 period. Additionally, we note EEI’s concerns with streamlining the collection process. In designing the information collection process, we aim to balance the goal of creating comparable data series across entities with the goals of wide participation and practical submission criteria. Accordingly, all participating entities may submit a single report with information on the 2010–2014 period rather than submitting two reports for the 2008–2012 and 2010–2014 periods. This includes ISOs, RTOs, and public utilities in non-ISO/RTO regions that have submitted performance information previously, and public utilities in non-ISO/RTO regions that have not submitted performance information previously. The reports may be submitted by October 30, 2015. Going forward, Commission Staff will continue to consult with ISOs, RTOs and participating public utilities in the voluntary and collaborative data collection process to address ways to minimize the burden of data collection. Necessity and Practical Utility of Information Collection Southern states that developing metrics for bilateral markets is not necessary for the Commission to develop proper standardized measures that track the performance of ISO and RTO operations and markets, which is the goal set for the Commission’s performance metrics efforts in a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report.12 EEI does not consider further data collection to be necessary for the Commission to properly perform its functions. EEI suggests that if the Commission believes data collection is necessary, then the Commission should explain the importance of this data to the Commission’s functions and the Commission’s intentions for using the data. Southern and EEI also consider the practical usefulness of the information to be limited due to the differences in market structures between utilities outside ISO and RTO markets and ISO and RTO market operators. Southern and EEI state that the usefulness of the information is diminished by errors in the Common Metrics Report, arguing 12 See U.S. Government Accountability Office, Report to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate, Electricity Restructuring: FERC Could Take Additional Steps to Analyze Regional Transmission Organizations’ Benefits and Performance (Sept. 2008). PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 that such errors could have been avoided with review and feedback by participating utilities. Southern and EEI also dispute a statement in the Common Metrics Report that utilities outside of ISOs and RTOs have an incentive to discriminate, and EEI stresses that data voluntarily provided to the Commission should not be used to indicate misconduct or used as record evidence in contested proceedings or in enforcement proceedings against entities providing such data. However, EEI states that utilities will continue to provide data voluntarily to assist the Commission in identifying trends or to highlight areas that could be improved through Commission policy. Similarly, Southern notes its intention to continue to coordinate and work with Commission Staff should the Commission continue with this initiative. FERC Response: The Commission considers it important to compare the performance of ISOs and RTOs with non-ISO and -RTO regions because large portions of the country, notably the Pacific Northwest and the Southeast, have not engaged in restructuring and remain outside of ISOs/RTOs. GAO and other experts were concerned that the benefits of ISOs and RTOs cannot be assessed in isolation, but are best considered in comparison with nonrestructured regions.13 Furthermore, as the metrics developed by Commission Staff seek to glean information across various categories, the Commission aims to assess whether certain particular features of ISOs and RTOs demonstrate superior performance and/or certain (other) features of non-ISO/RTO regions demonstrate superior performance, with a goal of improving the performance of each type of electricity market. The practical usefulness of the information is not limited by the differences in market structures between utilities outside ISO and RTO regions and between each ISO and RTO market operator. The metrics common to ISOs and RTOs and public utilities in nonISO/RTO regions measure the performance of reliability and operations functions in which ISOs and RTOs and public utilities in non-ISO/ RTO regions perform identical activities, and therefore the common performance metrics provide useful and meaningful information. The errors and misstatements cited by Southern and EEI do not diminish the practical usefulness of the information submitted because the public record in Docket Nos. AD12–8–000 and AD14– 15–000 includes all the correct 13 Id. at 56–57. E:\FR\FM\27MYN1.SGM 27MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 101 / Wednesday, May 27, 2015 / Notices information submitted by Southern. The Common Metrics Report of concern to Southern was intended to evaluate whether the common metrics are measuring the same activities and have the same meaning across the industry.14 Accordingly, the purpose of the report was not intended to be the primary data source. Nor did the mentioned errors and misstatements,15 have any impact on the common metrics evaluation. As for the statement in the Common Metrics Report regarding a utility’s incentive to discriminate among users of transmission services, this statement has no bearing on the usefulness or quality of the information collected. Southern’s and EEI’s comments on the potential use of data in enforcement proceedings are also beyond the scope of this data collection notice and are not reflective of the intention of this data collection which is to measure the performance of reliability and operations functions in which ISOs and RTOs and public utilities outside ISO and RTO markets perform identical activities. Additional Data Collection APPA, AWEA, and ITC recommend that additional data be collected and reported in order to further improve the usefulness of the performance metrics. ITC does not consider information on transmission facilities approved for construction for reliability purposes to be meaningful without proper context. Southern and EEI state that the proposed common wholesale price metric for ISOs and RTOs and utilities in non-ISO/RTO regions 16 would not provide relevant or useful information since ISO and RTO markets differ significantly from the bilateral markets in non-ISO/RTO regions. FERC Response: Commission Staff will discuss additional data collection and metrics of interest to commenters, as well as ways to make the metrics more meaningful, in the ongoing voluntary and collaborative process with ISOs, RTOs, participating utilities in non-ISO/RTO regions, and stakeholders. Dated: May 20, 2015. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. 2015–12701 Filed 5–26–15; 8:45 am] mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 14 Common Metrics Report at 4. an inaccurate listing of Southern’s transmission loading relief data as ‘‘No Data’’ instead of zero and a mischaracterization of Southern’s transmission planning process as a SERC planning process instead of a Southeastern Regional Transmission Planning Process (SERTP) planning process. 16 See Common Metrics Report at 80. 15 I.e., VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:45 May 26, 2015 Jkt 235001 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1 Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings: Docket Numbers: ER10–1946–008; ER11–3864–011; ER10–3231–001; ER10–3233–001. Applicants: Broad River Energy LLC, EquiPower Resources Management, LLC, Wheelabrator Ridge Energy Inc., Wheelabrator South Broward Inc. Description: Supplement to December 31, 2014 Triennial Market Power Analysis of the ECP MBR Sellers. Filed Date: 5/19/15. Accession Number: 20150519–5180. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/9/15. Docket Numbers: ER14–1464–002. Applicants: Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC. Description: Tariff Amendment per 35.17(b): Amendment to EUEMC NITSA SA No. 366 to be effective 5/1/2015. Filed Date: 5/19/15. Accession Number: 20150519–5168. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/9/15. Docket Numbers: ER15–1185–001. Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Description: Compliance filing per 35: 2015–05–20_SA 766 ATC–WPSC Bill of Sale Compliance to be effective N/A. Filed Date: 5/20/15. Accession Number: 20150520–5057. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/10/15. Docket Numbers: ER15–1188–001. Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. Description: Compliance filing per 35: 2015–05–20_SA 2756 ATC–WPSC CFA Compliance to be effective N/A. Filed Date: 5/20/15. Accession Number: 20150520–5056. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/10/15. Docket Numbers: ER15–1538–000. Applicants: Safe Harbor Water Power Corporation. Description: Amendment to April 20, 2015 Safe Harbor Water Power Corporation tariff filing to be effective 4/ 21/2015. Filed Date: 5/19/15. Accession Number: 20150519–5185. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/9/15. Docket Numbers: ER15–1750–000. Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. Description: § 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 3026 Steele Flats GIA; Cancellation of 2893SO to be effective 4/23/2015. Filed Date: 5/20/15. PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 9990 30233 Accession Number: 20150520–5044. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/10/15. Docket Numbers: ER15–1751–000. Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. Description: § 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 2573R1 Buckeye Wind Energy LLC GIA to be effective 4/29/ 2015. Filed Date: 5/20/15. Accession Number: 20150520–5051. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/10/15. Docket Numbers: ER15–1752–000. Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. Description: § 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 1166R24 Oklahoma Municipal Power Authority NITSA and NOA to be effective 6/1/2015. Filed Date: 5/20/15. Accession Number: 20150520–5093. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/10/15. Docket Numbers: ER15–1753–000. Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. Description: § 205(d) rate filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii): 1313R9 Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company NITSA and NOA to be effective 6/1/2015. Filed Date: 5/20/15. Accession Number: 20150520–5095. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/10/15. Docket Numbers: ER15–1754–000. Applicants: Alpaca Energy LLC. Description: Initial rate filing per 35.12 FERC Electric MBR Tariff Application to be effective 7/17/2015. Filed Date: 5/20/15. Accession Number: 20150520–5100. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 6/10/15. The filings are accessible in the Commission’s eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number. Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission’s Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding. eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: https://www.ferc.gov/ docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. Dated: May 20, 2015. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. 2015–12696 Filed 5–26–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P E:\FR\FM\27MYN1.SGM 27MYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 101 (Wednesday, May 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30230-30233]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12701]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AD14-15-000]

Commission Information Collection Activities (FERC-922); Comment
Request

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Comment request.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(1)(D), the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (Commission or FERC) is submitting for reinstatement a
revised information collection FERC-922, ``Performance Metrics for
ISOs, RTOs and Regions Outside ISOs and RTOs,'' to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for review of the information collection
requirements. Any interested person may file comments directly with OMB
and should address a copy of those comments to the Commission as
explained below. The Commission previously issued a Notice in the
Federal Register (79 FR 52313, 9/3/2014) requesting public comments.
The Commission also issued an errata notice to fix an errant hyperlink
in the 60-day notice (8/26/2014). The Commission received seven
comments on the FERC-922. The Commission addresses these comments in
this notice and in its submittal to OMB.

DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due by June 26,
2015.

ADDRESSES: Comments filed with OMB, identified by the OMB Control No.
1902-0262, should be sent via email to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs at: oira_submission@omb.gov. Attention: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission Desk Officer. The Desk Officer may also be
reached via telephone at (202) 395-4718.
A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, identified by the Docket No. AD14-15-000, by
either of the following methods:
eFiling at Commission's Web site: https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp, or
Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
Instructions: All submissions must be formatted and filed in
accordance with submission guidelines at: https://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp. Submissions must be in an acceptable file format,
as described at: https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary/accept-file-formats.asp. The numeric values corresponding to all charts and tables
containing metrics must be submitted in an accompanying file, in one of
the following formats: Microsoft Office 2003/2007/2010: Excel (.xls or
.xlsx), or ASCII Comma Separated Value (.csv). For user assistance
contact FERC Online Support by email at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or
by phone at: (866) 208-3676 (toll-free), or (202) 502-8659 for TTY.
Docket: Users interested in receiving automatic notification of
activity in this docket or in viewing/downloading comments and
issuances in this docket may do so at https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/docs-filing.asp.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Brown may be reached by email
at DataClearance@FERC.gov, by telephone at (202) 502-8663, and by fax
at (202) 273-0873.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: FERC-922, Performance Metrics for ISOs, RTOs and Regions
Outside of ISOs and RTOs.
OMB Control No.: 1902-0262.
Type of Request: Reinstatement and revision of an information
collection.
Abstract: In September 2008, the United States Government
Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report recommending that the
Chairman of the Commission, among other actions, work with independent
system operators (ISOs), regional transmission organizations (RTOs),
stakeholders, and other experts to develop standardized measures that
track the performance of ISO/RTO operations and markets and report the
performance results to Congress and the public annually,\1\ while also
providing interpretation of (1) what the measures and reported
performance communicate about the benefits of ISOs/RTOs and, where
appropriate, (2) changes that need to be made to address any
performance concerns. The GAO Report also suggested that performance
metrics be explored for non-ISOs/RTO regions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ The 2008 GAO Report also recognized that the extent of the
Commission's evaluation of ISO/RTO performance may vary from year to
year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In response to the GAO Report, Commission Staff conducted outreach
with ISOs/RTOs and other stakeholders and in October 2010 established
metrics

[[Page 30231]]

to measure ISO/RTO performance. In April 2011, a report was sent to
Congress with an analysis of ISO/RTO performance based on these metrics
and a commitment to analyze utilities in non-ISO/RTO regions. After
further stakeholder outreach, in August 2014, the Commission Staff
issued a ``Common Metrics Report,'' establishing 30 common metrics that
measure performance for ISOs, RTOs and public utilities outside of
ISOs/RTOs from 2006-2010.
The Commission is continuing its efforts to collect performance
metric information from ISOs, RTOs, and public utilities in non-ISO/RTO
regions. This includes the submission of information relating to
dispatch reliability, transmission planning, and the marginal cost of
energy and resource availability. The information submitted by ISOs,
RTOs, and participating public utilities in non-ISO/RTO regions is used
to measure the performance of reliability and operations functions in
which ISOs, RTOs, and public utilities in non-ISO/RTO regions perform
identical activities.
The attached list of metrics will not be published in the Federal
Register but will be available as part of this notice in the
Commission's eLibrary system under Docket No. AD14-15-000.
Type of Respondents: ISOs, RTOs, and public utilities.
Estimate of Annual Burden: \2\ For ISOs, RTOs and public utilities
that have submitted performance information previously, their
submittals will only include performance information for the 2010-2014
period.\3\ For other public utilities that have not submitted
performance information previously, their submittals will also provide
performance information for the 2010-2014 period.\4\ This information
is to be filed by October 30, 2015.\5\ The estimate of annual burden
assumes submittals occur every two years. For this reason, the annual
number of responses is ``0.5'' in the table below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or financial
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. For
further explanation of what is included in the information
collection burden, see 5 CFR 1320.3 (2014).
\3\ ISOs, RTOs and public utilities who wish to file revisions
to previously submitted data (i.e., from periods prior to 2010), may
do so.
\4\ Public utilities who have not previously submitted
performance information may also voluntarily submit data from the
2008-2009 period along with their 2010-2014 submittals, if they
believe that such information would be important to this initiative.
\5\ The Commission will provide public notice prior to the due
date for any subsequent collection within the approved information
collection period.
\6\ The results in this table have been rounded for display
purposes.
\7\ The estimates for cost per response are derived using the
following formula: Average Burden Hours per Response * $XX per Hour
= Average Cost per Response. The hourly cost figure for the metrics
data collection and writing the performance analysis is based on the
loaded average wage (salary plus benefits) of $80.20/hour for an
analyst, attorney, engineer, and economist. The hourly cost figure
for the management review is based on the loaded average wage
(salary plus benefits) of $84.72/hour for management. Wage and
benefits data are from the Bureau of Labor Statistics at https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm and https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm.
\8\ Assumes responses from the six RTOs and ISOs and five public
utilities that previously submitted data.
\9\ Assumes five public utilities that have not previously
submitted information will submit data. Assumes that four of these
public utilities will submit data for the period covering 2010-2014,
and that one public utility will voluntarily provide data for 2008-
2009 in addition to 2010-2014. The weighted average wage (salary
plus benefits) assumed for new respondents is $80.57 per hour, which
reflects the hour-weighted average of the wages assumed for entities
that have previously submitted performance information.

FERC-922 (AD14-15-000)--Performance Metrics for ISOs, RTOs and Regions Outside ISOs and RTOs \6\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average burden Total annual
Number of Annual number Total number hours and cost burden hours Cost per
Information collection component respondents of responses of responses per response and total respondent per
per respondent \7\ annual cost year ($)
(1) (2) (1)*(2)=(3) (4) (3)*(4)=(5) (5)/(1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENTITIES THAT HAVE PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED PERFORMANCE INFORMATION \8\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Metrics Data Collection................................. 11 0.5 5.5 229 1,260 9,183
$18,366 $101,012
Write Performance Analysis.............................. 11 0.5 5.5 139 765 5,574
$11,148 $61,313
Management Review....................................... 11 0.5 5.5 33 182 1,398
$2,796 $15,377
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal............................................ .............. .............. .............. .............. 2,207 16,155
$177,702
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ENTITIES THAT HAVE NOT PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED PERFORMANCE INFORMATION \9\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Collection, writing, and review......................... 5 0.5 2.5 427 1,068 17,202
$34,403 $86,008
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................... 16 .............. .............. .............. 3,275
$263,710
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public Comments and FERC's Responses: Comments were filed by the
public in response to the FERC-922 Federal Register Notice of
Information Collection and Request for Comments and the Commission's
responses to those comments are provided below.

Burden Estimate

Edison Electric Institute (EEI) considers the burden estimate to be
significantly understated, particularly for ``stand-alone utilities''
without access to data collection and compilation activities performed
by ISO and RTO staff. EEI estimates the response time for stand-alone
utilities to be as high as 300-400 hours per utility.
FERC Response: We address EEI's concern by revising the burden
estimate. We recognize that certain EEI members have experienced the
process of collecting, summarizing, reviewing, and

[[Page 30232]]

submitting information as part of this initiative, and therefore might
be better positioned to estimate the time and resources involved. In
response, we revise the burden estimate to be approximately 400 hours
per respondent (401 hours for previous participants and 427 hours for
new participants). We believe that the updated burden estimate accounts
for the higher response times of certain participants. We also believe
that the updated burden estimate accounts for any additional time
associated with the instruction to submit the numeric values
corresponding to charts and tables in an accompanying file.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\10\ The purpose of the additional instruction is to reduce the
potential for error in compiling reports on the information
submitted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ways To Minimize Information Collection Burden

The ISO/RTO Council (IRC) recommends that data be provided only for
the 2010-2014 period. IRC notes that its members have already submitted
information through 2010. Southern Company Services, Inc. (Southern)
also recommends that only one data collection be required for the 2010-
2014 time period. Noting that the Common Metrics Report issued by the
Commission in August 2014 provides information for the 2006-2010
period, Southern considers information collection on the 2008-2012
period to be an additional burden and argues that it should be
eliminated. Noting that utilities outside of ISOs/RTOs will have to
devote considerable resources and expenses to provide data, EEI
recommends that the Commission retain the voluntary approach for these
utilities and that data collection for ISO and RTO regions only occur
when data is readily available and the data collection process can be
streamlined. New York Transmission Owners (NYTOs) \11\ support
continued data collection. NYTOs consider this information to be
helpful for analyzing ISO and RTO performance and that the benefits of
the information to the Commission and affected parties outweigh any
related burdens on respondents. International Transmission Company
(ITC) supports the proposed data collection as necessary and not overly
burdensome. American Public Power Association (APPA) and American Wind
Energy Association (AWEA) also support continued data collection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\11\ NYTOs are Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation,
Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., Power Supply Long
Island, New York Power Authority, New York State Electric & Gas
Corporation, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation d/b/a National Grid,
Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc., and Rochester Gas and Electric
Corporation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FERC Response: We note concerns raised by IRC and Southern over the
potential redundancy and additional burden for providing information
for the 2008-2012 period. Additionally, we note EEI's concerns with
streamlining the collection process. In designing the information
collection process, we aim to balance the goal of creating comparable
data series across entities with the goals of wide participation and
practical submission criteria. Accordingly, all participating entities
may submit a single report with information on the 2010-2014 period
rather than submitting two reports for the 2008-2012 and 2010-2014
periods. This includes ISOs, RTOs, and public utilities in non-ISO/RTO
regions that have submitted performance information previously, and
public utilities in non-ISO/RTO regions that have not submitted
performance information previously. The reports may be submitted by
October 30, 2015. Going forward, Commission Staff will continue to
consult with ISOs, RTOs and participating public utilities in the
voluntary and collaborative data collection process to address ways to
minimize the burden of data collection.

Necessity and Practical Utility of Information Collection

Southern states that developing metrics for bilateral markets is
not necessary for the Commission to develop proper standardized
measures that track the performance of ISO and RTO operations and
markets, which is the goal set for the Commission's performance metrics
efforts in a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report.\12\ EEI
does not consider further data collection to be necessary for the
Commission to properly perform its functions. EEI suggests that if the
Commission believes data collection is necessary, then the Commission
should explain the importance of this data to the Commission's
functions and the Commission's intentions for using the data. Southern
and EEI also consider the practical usefulness of the information to be
limited due to the differences in market structures between utilities
outside ISO and RTO markets and ISO and RTO market operators. Southern
and EEI state that the usefulness of the information is diminished by
errors in the Common Metrics Report, arguing that such errors could
have been avoided with review and feedback by participating utilities.
Southern and EEI also dispute a statement in the Common Metrics Report
that utilities outside of ISOs and RTOs have an incentive to
discriminate, and EEI stresses that data voluntarily provided to the
Commission should not be used to indicate misconduct or used as record
evidence in contested proceedings or in enforcement proceedings against
entities providing such data. However, EEI states that utilities will
continue to provide data voluntarily to assist the Commission in
identifying trends or to highlight areas that could be improved through
Commission policy. Similarly, Southern notes its intention to continue
to coordinate and work with Commission Staff should the Commission
continue with this initiative.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\12\ See U.S. Government Accountability Office, Report to the
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S.
Senate, Electricity Restructuring: FERC Could Take Additional Steps
to Analyze Regional Transmission Organizations' Benefits and
Performance (Sept. 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FERC Response: The Commission considers it important to compare the
performance of ISOs and RTOs with non-ISO and -RTO regions because
large portions of the country, notably the Pacific Northwest and the
Southeast, have not engaged in restructuring and remain outside of
ISOs/RTOs. GAO and other experts were concerned that the benefits of
ISOs and RTOs cannot be assessed in isolation, but are best considered
in comparison with non-restructured regions.\13\ Furthermore, as the
metrics developed by Commission Staff seek to glean information across
various categories, the Commission aims to assess whether certain
particular features of ISOs and RTOs demonstrate superior performance
and/or certain (other) features of non-ISO/RTO regions demonstrate
superior performance, with a goal of improving the performance of each
type of electricity market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\13\ Id. at 56-57.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The practical usefulness of the information is not limited by the
differences in market structures between utilities outside ISO and RTO
regions and between each ISO and RTO market operator. The metrics
common to ISOs and RTOs and public utilities in non-ISO/RTO regions
measure the performance of reliability and operations functions in
which ISOs and RTOs and public utilities in non-ISO/RTO regions perform
identical activities, and therefore the common performance metrics
provide useful and meaningful information.
The errors and misstatements cited by Southern and EEI do not
diminish the practical usefulness of the information submitted because
the public record in Docket Nos. AD12-8-000 and AD14-15-000 includes
all the correct

[[Page 30233]]

information submitted by Southern. The Common Metrics Report of concern
to Southern was intended to evaluate whether the common metrics are
measuring the same activities and have the same meaning across the
industry.\14\ Accordingly, the purpose of the report was not intended
to be the primary data source. Nor did the mentioned errors and
misstatements,\15\ have any impact on the common metrics evaluation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\14\ Common Metrics Report at 4.
\15\ I.e., an inaccurate listing of Southern's transmission
loading relief data as ``No Data'' instead of zero and a
mischaracterization of Southern's transmission planning process as a
SERC planning process instead of a Southeastern Regional
Transmission Planning Process (SERTP) planning process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for the statement in the Common Metrics Report regarding a
utility's incentive to discriminate among users of transmission
services, this statement has no bearing on the usefulness or quality of
the information collected. Southern's and EEI's comments on the
potential use of data in enforcement proceedings are also beyond the
scope of this data collection notice and are not reflective of the
intention of this data collection which is to measure the performance
of reliability and operations functions in which ISOs and RTOs and
public utilities outside ISO and RTO markets perform identical
activities.

Additional Data Collection

APPA, AWEA, and ITC recommend that additional data be collected and
reported in order to further improve the usefulness of the performance
metrics. ITC does not consider information on transmission facilities
approved for construction for reliability purposes to be meaningful
without proper context. Southern and EEI state that the proposed common
wholesale price metric for ISOs and RTOs and utilities in non-ISO/RTO
regions \16\ would not provide relevant or useful information since ISO
and RTO markets differ significantly from the bilateral markets in non-
ISO/RTO regions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\16\ See Common Metrics Report at 80.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FERC Response: Commission Staff will discuss additional data
collection and metrics of interest to commenters, as well as ways to
make the metrics more meaningful, in the ongoing voluntary and
collaborative process with ISOs, RTOs, participating utilities in non-
ISO/RTO regions, and stakeholders.

Dated: May 20, 2015.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-12701 Filed 5-26-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.