State Policies and Wholesale Markets Operated by ISO New England Inc., New York Independent System Operator, Inc., and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice Inviting Post-Technical Conference Comments, 24966-24967 [2017-11199]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
24966
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 31, 2017 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket No. RD16–9–000]
Commission Information Collection
Activities (FERC–725v); Comment
Request; Revision
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of revised information
collection and request for comments.
AGENCY:
The Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (Commission or
FERC) on December 1, 2016 issued a 60day Notice in the Federal Register
requesting public comments on FERC–
725V (Mandatory Reliability Standards:
COM Reliability Standards) which will
be submitted to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) for a
review of the information collection
requirements. The Commission received
no comments on the FERC–725V and is
making this notation in its submittal to
OMB.
In compliance with the requirements
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
the Commission is submitting the
FERC–725V 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.
DATES: Comments on the FERC–725V
are due by June 30, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Comments filed with OMB,
identified by the OMB Control No.
1902–0277 (FERC–725V), 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.
A copy of the comments should also
be sent to the Commission, in Docket
No. RD16–9–000, by either of the
following methods:
• eFiling at Commission’s Web site:
https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/
efiling.asp
• 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/submissionguide.asp. For user assistance contact
FERC Online Support by email at
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or by phone
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:54 May 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
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: Ellen Brown
may be reached by email at
DataClearance@FERC.gov, telephone at
(202) 502–8663, and fax at (202) 273–
0873.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: FERC–725V, Mandatory
Reliability Standards: COM Reliability
Standards.
OMB Control No.: 1902–0277.
Type of Request: Extension of the
FERC–725V information collection
requirements.
Abstract: On August 15, 2016, the
North American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC) filed a petition for
Commission approval, pursuant to
section 215(d)(1) of the Federal Power
Act (‘‘FPA’’) 1 and Section 39.5 2 of the
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission’s regulations, for approval
of proposed Reliability Standard COM–
001–3 (Communications), the associated
Implementation Plan, retirement of
currently-effective Reliability Standard
COM–001–2.1, and Violation Risk
Factors (‘‘VRFs’’) and Violation Severity
Levels (‘‘VSLs’’) associated with new
Requirements R12 and R13 proposed in
Reliability Standard COM–001–3.
Proposed Reliability Standard COM–
001–3 reflects revisions developed
under Project 2015–07 Internal
Communications Capabilities, in
compliance with the Commission’s
directive in Order No. 888 that NERC
‘‘develop modifications to COM–001–2,
or develop a new standard, to address
[the Commission’s] concerns regarding
ensuring the adequacy of internal
communications capability whenever
internal communications could directly
affect the reliability operations of the
Bulk-Power System.
On October 28, 2016, NERC’s
uncontested petition was approved
pursuant to the relevant authority
delegated to the Director, Office of
Electric Reliability under 18 CFR
375.303(2016), effective as of July 1,
2016.3
Type of Respondents: Public utilities.
Estimate of Annual Burden 4: With
respect to the proposed revisions to
1 16
U.S.C. 824o (2012).
2 18 CFR 39.5 (2011).
3 https://elibrary-backup.ferc.gov/IDMWS/
common/opennat.asp?fileID=14386228
4 Burden is defined as the total time, effort, or
financial resources expended by persons to
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Reliability Standard COM–001–3 and
the retirement of the currently-effective
Reliability Standard COM–001–2.1, the
Commission estimates that there will be
no material change in industry
information collection obligations
because the Requirements R12 and R13
(which are additions to COM–001–3) do
not impact the paperwork burden of
impacted registered entities.
Comments: Comments are invited on:
(1) Whether the collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
Commission, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) the accuracy of the agency’s estimate
of the burden and cost of the collection
of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) ways to enhance the quality, utility
and clarity of the information collection;
and (4) ways to minimize the burden of
the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including the use
of automated collection techniques or
other forms of information technology.
Dated: May 24, 2017 .
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017–11198 Filed 5–30–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket No. AD17–11–000]
State Policies and Wholesale Markets
Operated by ISO New England Inc.,
New York Independent System
Operator, Inc., and PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice Inviting
Post-Technical Conference Comments
On May 1 and May 2, 2017, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission) staff convened a technical
conference to discuss the interplay
between state policy goals and the
wholesale markets 1 operated by ISO
New England Inc., New York
Independent System Operator, Inc., and
PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Eastern
RTOs/ISOs).
All interested persons are invited to
file initial and reply post-technical
conference comments on the topics
discussed during the technical
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, refer to 5 Code of Federal
Regulations 1320.3.
1 Unless otherwise indicated, all references herein
to wholesale markets refer to the capacity, energy,
and ancillary services markets.
E:\FR\FM\31MYN1.SGM
31MYN1
nlaroche on DSK30NT082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 31, 2017 / Notices
conference, including the questions
listed in the Supplemental Notice
issued in this proceeding on April 28,
2017.
In order to provide structure to the
technical conference discussion, staff
identified the following potential paths
forward with respect to the interplay
between state policy goals and the
wholesale markets:
• Path 1—Limited or No Minimum
Offer Price Rule: An approach that
would either not apply the minimum
offer price rule to state-supported
resources, or limit application of the
minimum offer price rule to only statesupported resources where federal law
preempts the state action providing that
support.
• Path 2—Accommodation of State
Actions: An approach that would
accommodate state policies that provide
out-of-market support with the
operation of the wholesale markets by
allowing state-supported resources to
participate in those markets and, when
relevant, obtain capacity supply
obligations, subject to adjustments
necessary to maintain certain wholesale
market prices consistent with the
market results that would have been
produced had those resources not been
state-supported.
• Path 3—Status Quo: An approach
that would rely on existing tariff
provisions applying the minimum offer
price rule to some state-supported
resources, and continuing case-by-case
litigation over the specific line to be
drawn between categories of state
actions that may, or may not, result in
a state-supported resource being subject
to the minimum offer price rule.
• Path 4—Pricing State Policy
Choices: An approach in which state
policies, to the extent possible, would
value the attributes (e.g., resilience) or
externalities (e.g., carbon emissions)
that states are targeting in a manner that
can be readily integrated into the
wholesale markets in a resource-neutral
way. For those state policies that cannot
be readily valued and integrated into the
wholesale markets, Path 4 would also
require consideration of what, if
anything, the Commission should do to
address the market impacts of these
state policies. For instance, other
approaches for these state policies may
include accommodation, application of
the minimum offer price rule, or an
exemption from the minimum offer
price rule.
• Path 5—Expanded Minimum Offer
Price Rule: An approach that would
minimize the impact of state-supported
resources on wholesale market prices by
expanding the existing scope of the
minimum offer price rule to apply to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:54 May 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
both new and existing capacity
resources that participate in the capacity
market and receive state support.
Commenters are invited to address
these paths, to describe alternative
potential paths forward in the wholesale
markets, or to describe individual
solutions. Commenters are encouraged
to discuss the following with regard to
any approach: (1) Any centralized
wholesale market changes (at a
conceptual level) that would need to
accompany implementation of a
particular approach; (2) the feasibility of
implementation; (3) the implications for
market participants’ ability to make
long-term decisions; and (4) the nearterm and long-term sustainability.
In addition, Commission staff is
interested in comments on the following
topics:
1. The principles and objectives that
should guide the selection of a path
forward, as well as the principles and
objectives that should guide rule
changes that would be required by their
suggested approach.
2. The degree of urgency for
reconciling wholesale markets and state
policies and if that urgency necessitates
both a near-term (e.g., next one to three
years) approach and a different longterm approach. To the extent
commenters advocate for different nearterm and long-term solutions, please
explain what type of transition is
needed and why, and how the suggested
near-term approach will facilitate
achievement of the suggested long-term
approach.
3. Long-term expectations regarding
the relative roles of wholesale energy
and capacity markets and state policies
in the Eastern RTOs/ISOs in shaping the
quantity and composition of resources
needed to cost-effectively meet future
reliability and operational needs.
4. What procedural steps the
Commission should take, if any, to
reconcile the competitive market
framework with the increasing interest
by states to support particular resources
and resource attributes that might
facilitate such reconciliation.
Commenters may reference material
previously filed in this docket,
including the technical conference
transcript, but are encouraged to avoid
repetition or replication of previous
material. Initial and reply comments
must be submitted on or before 30 days
and 45 days, respectively, from the date
of this notice. Initial comments should
not exceed 15 pages and reply
comments should not exceed 10 pages.
For further information please contact
individuals identified for each topic:
Technical Information: Amr Ibrahim,
Office of Energy Policy and Innovation,
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
24967
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426, (202) 502–6746, amr.ibrahim@
ferc.gov.
Legal Information: Gretchen Kershaw,
Office of the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,
(202) 502–8213, gretchen.kershaw@
ferc.gov.
Dated: May 23, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017–11199 Filed 5–30–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE
UNITED STATES
[Public Notice: 2017–6002]
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Comment Request
Export-Import Bank of the
United States.
ACTION: Submission for OMB review and
comments request.
AGENCY:
The Export-Import Bank of
the United States (Ex-Im Bank), as part
of its continuing effort to reduce
paperwork and respondent burden,
invites the general public and other
Federal Agencies to comment on the
proposed information collection, as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995.
By neutralizing the effect of export
credit support offered by foreign
governments and by absorbing credit
risks that the private sector will not
accept, Ex-Im Bank enables U.S.
exporters to compete fairly in foreign
markets on the basis of price and
product. Under the Working Capital
Guarantee Program, Ex-Im Bank
provides repayment guarantees to
lenders on secured, short-term working
capital loans made to qualified
exporters. The guarantee may be
approved for a single loan or a revolving
line of credit. In the event that a
borrower defaults on a transaction
guaranteed by Ex-Im Bank the
guaranteed lender may seek payment by
the submission of a claim.
This collection of information is
necessary to determine if such claim
complies with the terms and conditions
of the relevant working capital
guarantee. The Notice of Claim and
Proof of Loss, Working Capital
Guarantee is used to determine
compliance with the terms of the
guarantee and the appropriateness of
paying a claim. Export-Import Bank
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\31MYN1.SGM
31MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 103 (Wednesday, May 31, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24966-24967]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-11199]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. AD17-11-000]
State Policies and Wholesale Markets Operated by ISO New England
Inc., New York Independent System Operator, Inc., and PJM
Interconnection, L.L.C.; Notice Inviting Post-Technical Conference
Comments
On May 1 and May 2, 2017, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(Commission) staff convened a technical conference to discuss the
interplay between state policy goals and the wholesale markets \1\
operated by ISO New England Inc., New York Independent System Operator,
Inc., and PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Eastern RTOs/ISOs).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Unless otherwise indicated, all references herein to
wholesale markets refer to the capacity, energy, and ancillary
services markets.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
All interested persons are invited to file initial and reply post-
technical conference comments on the topics discussed during the
technical
[[Page 24967]]
conference, including the questions listed in the Supplemental Notice
issued in this proceeding on April 28, 2017.
In order to provide structure to the technical conference
discussion, staff identified the following potential paths forward with
respect to the interplay between state policy goals and the wholesale
markets:
Path 1--Limited or No Minimum Offer Price Rule: An
approach that would either not apply the minimum offer price rule to
state-supported resources, or limit application of the minimum offer
price rule to only state-supported resources where federal law preempts
the state action providing that support.
Path 2--Accommodation of State Actions: An approach that
would accommodate state policies that provide out-of-market support
with the operation of the wholesale markets by allowing state-supported
resources to participate in those markets and, when relevant, obtain
capacity supply obligations, subject to adjustments necessary to
maintain certain wholesale market prices consistent with the market
results that would have been produced had those resources not been
state-supported.
Path 3--Status Quo: An approach that would rely on
existing tariff provisions applying the minimum offer price rule to
some state-supported resources, and continuing case-by-case litigation
over the specific line to be drawn between categories of state actions
that may, or may not, result in a state-supported resource being
subject to the minimum offer price rule.
Path 4--Pricing State Policy Choices: An approach in which
state policies, to the extent possible, would value the attributes
(e.g., resilience) or externalities (e.g., carbon emissions) that
states are targeting in a manner that can be readily integrated into
the wholesale markets in a resource-neutral way. For those state
policies that cannot be readily valued and integrated into the
wholesale markets, Path 4 would also require consideration of what, if
anything, the Commission should do to address the market impacts of
these state policies. For instance, other approaches for these state
policies may include accommodation, application of the minimum offer
price rule, or an exemption from the minimum offer price rule.
Path 5--Expanded Minimum Offer Price Rule: An approach
that would minimize the impact of state-supported resources on
wholesale market prices by expanding the existing scope of the minimum
offer price rule to apply to both new and existing capacity resources
that participate in the capacity market and receive state support.
Commenters are invited to address these paths, to describe
alternative potential paths forward in the wholesale markets, or to
describe individual solutions. Commenters are encouraged to discuss the
following with regard to any approach: (1) Any centralized wholesale
market changes (at a conceptual level) that would need to accompany
implementation of a particular approach; (2) the feasibility of
implementation; (3) the implications for market participants' ability
to make long-term decisions; and (4) the near-term and long-term
sustainability.
In addition, Commission staff is interested in comments on the
following topics:
1. The principles and objectives that should guide the selection of
a path forward, as well as the principles and objectives that should
guide rule changes that would be required by their suggested approach.
2. The degree of urgency for reconciling wholesale markets and
state policies and if that urgency necessitates both a near-term (e.g.,
next one to three years) approach and a different long-term approach.
To the extent commenters advocate for different near-term and long-term
solutions, please explain what type of transition is needed and why,
and how the suggested near-term approach will facilitate achievement of
the suggested long-term approach.
3. Long-term expectations regarding the relative roles of wholesale
energy and capacity markets and state policies in the Eastern RTOs/ISOs
in shaping the quantity and composition of resources needed to cost-
effectively meet future reliability and operational needs.
4. What procedural steps the Commission should take, if any, to
reconcile the competitive market framework with the increasing interest
by states to support particular resources and resource attributes that
might facilitate such reconciliation.
Commenters may reference material previously filed in this docket,
including the technical conference transcript, but are encouraged to
avoid repetition or replication of previous material. Initial and reply
comments must be submitted on or before 30 days and 45 days,
respectively, from the date of this notice. Initial comments should not
exceed 15 pages and reply comments should not exceed 10 pages.
For further information please contact individuals identified for
each topic:
Technical Information: Amr Ibrahim, Office of Energy Policy and
Innovation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-6746, amr.ibrahim@ferc.gov.
Legal Information: Gretchen Kershaw, Office of the General Counsel,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426, (202) 502-8213, gretchen.kershaw@ferc.gov.
Dated: May 23, 2017.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-11199 Filed 5-30-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
