Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults and Specific Training for Personnel Reliability Standards, 56186-56192 [2017-25586]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
56186
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules
DOE also requests feedback on how to
assess pilot program results. In
particular, how could DOE identify the
counterfactual or control group for
comparison with the existing mandatory
ECS program? How could DOE best
conduct a retroactive assessment of
costs and benefits to manufacturers
under the existing ECS program and the
market-based pilot? How could DOE
identify distributional impacts across
manufacturers? How could DOE
determine if a broader or narrower
scope of trading, if allowed, would have
been more beneficial? DOE also requests
input on what data it would need to
collect to properly assess pilot program
results.
III. Public Participation
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
DOE invites all interested parties to
submit in writing by February 26, 2018,
comments and information on matters
addressed in this RFI and on other
matters relevant to DOE’s evaluation of
the potential advantages and
disadvantages of additional compliance
flexibilities in energy conservation
standards, such as tradable average
standards, feebates or other marketbased approaches. DOE requests
feedback on program design, possible
economic efficiency gains, impacts on
consumer and manufacturer costs and
on energy savings, and potential
challenges associated with designing
and implementing such a program,
including suggestions for a pilot and/or
phase-in of a revised ECS.
DOE considers public participation to
be a very important part of the process
for developing new and/or amended
energy conservation standards. DOE
actively encourages the participation
and interaction of the public during the
comment period. Interactions with and
between members of the public provide
a balanced discussion of the issues and
assist DOE. Anyone who wishes to be
added to the DOE mailing list to receive
future notices and information about
this RFI should contact Appliance and
Equipment Standards Program staff at
(202) 287–1445 or via email at
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
Issued in Washington, DC, on November
21, 2017.
Daniel R Simmons,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy.
[FR Doc. 2017–25663 Filed 11–27–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:25 Nov 27, 2017
Jkt 244001
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
18 CFR Part 40
[Docket No. RM16–22–000]
Coordination of Protection Systems for
Performance During Faults and
Specific Training for Personnel
Reliability Standards
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (Commission)
proposes to approve Reliability
Standards PRC–027–1 (Coordination of
Protection Systems for Performance
During Faults) and PER–006–1 (Specific
Training for Personnel) submitted by the
North American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC). The purpose of
proposed Reliability Standard PRC–
027–1 is to maintain the coordination of
protection systems installed to detect
and isolate faults on bulk electric
system elements, such that those
protection systems operate in the
intended sequence during faults. The
purpose of proposed Reliability
Standard PER–006–1 is to ensure that
personnel are trained on specific topics
essential to reliability to perform or
support real-time operations of the bulk
electric system. In addition, the
Commission proposes to direct NERC to
develop certain modifications to
proposed Reliability Standard PRC–
027–1.
DATES: Comments are due January 29,
2018.
SUMMARY:
Comments, identified by
docket number, may be filed in the
following ways:
• Electronic Filing through https://
www.ferc.gov. Documents created
electronically using word processing
software should be filed in native
applications or print-to-PDF format and
not in a scanned format.
• Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable
to file electronically may mail or handdeliver comments to: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the
Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
Instructions: For detailed instructions
on submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the Comment Procedures Section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Juan Villar (Technical Information),
Office of Electric Reliability, Division
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
of Reliability Standards and Security,
888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426, Telephone: (772) 678–6496,
Juan.Villar@ferc.gov.
Alan Rukin (Legal Information), Office
of the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426, Telephone: (202) 502–8502,
Alan.Rukin@ferc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Pursuant to section 215 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), the
Commission proposes to approve
proposed Reliability Standards PRC–
027–1 (Coordination of Protection
Systems for Performance During Faults)
and PER–006–1 (Specific Training for
Personnel), which were submitted for
approval by the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC), the
Commission-certified Electric
Reliability Organization (ERO).1 As
discussed below, however, the
Commission also proposes to direct
NERC to modify proposed Reliability
Standard PRC–027–1 to require an
initial protection system coordination
study to ensure that applicable entities
will perform (or have performed), as a
baseline, a study demonstrating proper
coordination of its protection systems.
We propose to direct NERC to submit
the modified Reliability Standard for
Commission approval within 12 months
following the effective date of a final
rule in this proceeding.
2. The Commission also proposes to
approve the associated violation risk
factors, violation severity levels,
implementation plans, and effective
dates proposed by NERC for Reliability
Standards PRC–027–1 and PER–006–1.
The Commission further proposes to
approve the retirement of currentlyeffective Reliability Standard PRC–001–
1.1(ii) (System Protection
Coordination).2
3. In addition, the Commission
proposes to approve new and revised
definitions submitted by NERC for
incorporation in the NERC Glossary of
Terms Used in NERC Reliability
Standards (‘‘NERC Glossary’’) for the
following terms: (1) ‘‘protection system
coordination study;’’ (2) ‘‘operational
planning analysis;’’ and (3) ‘‘real-time
assessment.’’
1 16
U.S.C. 824o.
Commission approved Reliability Standard
PRC–001–1.1(ii) on May 29, 2015. North American
Electric Reliability Corporation, 151 FERC ¶ 61,186
(2015).
2 The
E:\FR\FM\28NOP1.SGM
28NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules
I. Background
A. Section 215 and Mandatory
Reliability Standards
4. Section 215 of the FPA requires a
Commission-certified ERO to develop
mandatory and enforceable Reliability
Standards, subject to Commission
review and approval.3 Once approved,
the Reliability Standards may be
enforced by the ERO subject to
Commission oversight or by the
Commission independently.4 In 2006,
the Commission certified NERC as the
ERO pursuant to section 215 of the
FPA.5
B. Order No. 693
5. On March 16, 2007, the
Commission issued Order No. 693,
approving 83 of the 107 Reliability
Standards filed by NERC, including
Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.6 In
addition, the Commission directed
NERC to develop modifications to
Reliability Standard PRC–001–1 that:
(1) Correct the references for Requirements,
and [sic] (2) include a requirement that upon
the detection of failures in relays or
protection system elements on the BulkPower System that threaten reliable
operation, relevant transmission operators
must be informed promptly, but within a
specified period of time that is developed in
the Reliability Standards development
process, whereas generator operators must
also promptly inform their transmission
operators; and (3) clarifies that, after being
informed of failures in relays or protection
system elements that threaten reliability of
the Bulk-Power System, transmission
operators must carry out corrective control
actions, i.e., return a system to a stable state
that respects system requirements as soon as
possible and no longer than 30 minutes after
they receive notice of the failure.7
C. NERC Petition and Proposed
Reliability Standards PRC–027–1 and
PER–006–1
6. On September 2, 2016, NERC
submitted a petition seeking
Commission approval of proposed
Reliability Standards PRC–027–1 and
PER–006–1.8 NERC states that the
3 Id.
824o(c), (d).
824o(e).
5 North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116
FERC ¶ 61,062, order on reh’g and compliance, 117
FERC ¶ 61,126 (2006), order on compliance, 118
FERC ¶ 61,190, order on reh’g, 119 FERC ¶ 61,046
(2007), aff’d sub nom. Alcoa Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d
1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
6 Mandatory Reliability Standards for the BulkPower System, Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs.
¶ 31,242, at PP 1433–1449, order on reh’g, Order
No. 693–A, 120 FERC ¶ 61,053 (2007).
7 Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,242 at
P 1449.
8 Proposed Reliability Standards PRC–027–1 and
PER–006–1 are not attached to this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking. The proposed Reliability
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
4 Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:25 Nov 27, 2017
Jkt 244001
proposed Reliability Standards, new
and revised NERC Glossary terms, and
the retirement of Reliability Standard
PRC–001–1.1(ii) satisfy the
Commission’s criteria in Order No. 672
and are just, reasonable, not unduly
discriminatory or preferential, and in
the public interest.9 NERC explains that
the intent of the proposed Reliability
Standards and changes to the NERC
Glossary are to maintain the
coordination of protection systems
installed to detect and isolate faults on
bulk electric system elements and
require registered entities to provide
training to their relevant personnel on
protection systems and remedial action
schemes. NERC asserts that the
proposed Reliability Standards are an
improvement over currently-effective
Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii)
and will ensure that appropriate
personnel are trained on protection
systems and that protection systems are
appropriately studied, coordinated, and
monitored.
1. Proposed Reliability Standard PER–
006–1
7. NERC states that proposed
Reliability Standard PER–006–1
requires generator operators to use a
systematic approach to develop and
implement training for dispatch
personnel at centrally-located dispatch
centers.10 NERC explains that proposed
Reliability Standard PER–006–1 will
also cover plant personnel who are
responsible for real-time control of a
generator. NERC maintains that it is
appropriate to train plant personnel [in]
the functionality of protection systems
and remedial action schemes. NERC
observes that proposed Reliability
Standard PER–006–1 replaces the
phrase ‘‘purpose and limitations’’ used
in currently-effective Reliability
Standard PRC–001–1(ii) with the phrase
‘‘operational functionality’’ to clearly
identify the objective of the training.11
NERC also observes that proposed
Reliability Standard PER–006–1
replaces the phrase ‘‘applied in its area’’
in Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii)
with the phrase ‘‘that affect the output
of the generating facility(ies) it
operates’’ to properly tailor the scope of
the required training. NERC notes that
proposed Reliability Standard PER–
006–1 does not specify a periodicity for
the required training.
Standards are available on the Commission’s
eLibrary document retrieval system in Docket No.
RM16–22–000 and are posted on the NERC Web
site, https://www.nerc.com.
9 NERC Petition at 10.
10 Id. at 13.
11 Id. at 15.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
56187
2. Proposed Reliability Standard PRC–
027–1
8. NERC asserts that proposed
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1:
provides a clear set of Requirements that
obligate entities to (1) implement a process
for establishing and coordinating new or
revised Protection System settings, and (2)
periodically study Protection System settings
that could be affected by incremental changes
in Fault current to ensure the Protection
Systems continue to operate in their intended
sequence.12
According to NERC, proposed
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1,
Requirement R1 mandates that each
transmission owner, generator owner,
and distribution provider establish a
process for developing new and revised
protection system settings for bulk
electric system elements.13
9. NERC states that proposed
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1,
Requirement R2 mandates that every six
years, applicable entities must either: (1)
Perform a protection system
coordination study to determine
whether the protection systems
continue to operate in the intended
sequence during faults; (2) compare
present fault current values to an
established fault current baseline and,
only if the comparison identifies a 15
percent or greater deviation in fault
current values (either three phase or
phase to ground) at a bus to which the
bulk electric system is connected,
perform a protection system
coordination study; or (3) use a
combination of options 1 and 2.14
10. NERC explains that proposed
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1,
Requirement R3 will require applicable
entities to use the process established
under proposed Reliability Standard
PRC–027–1, Requirement R1 for the
development of any new or revised
protection system settings.
3. Proposed Retirement of Reliability
Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii)
11. NERC states that Reliability
Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii) includes six
requirements that are either addressed
by Reliability Standards approved by
the Commission or by the proposed
Reliability Standards. Specifically,
NERC explains that Reliability Standard
PRC–001–1.1(ii), Requirement R1 has
been partially replaced by currentlyeffective Reliability Standards PER–
003–1 and PER–005–2. NERC continues
that proposed Reliability Standard PER–
006–1 and the proposed revised
definitions of operational planning
12 Id.
at 26.
at 27.
14 Id. at 26.
13 Id.
E:\FR\FM\28NOP1.SGM
28NOP1
56188
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
analysis and real-time assessment will
replace the remaining portions of
Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii),
Requirement R1. NERC asserts that
Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii),
Requirement R2 has been addressed by
Reliability Standards IRO–001–4, IRO–
008–2, IRO–010–2, TOP–001–3, and
TOP–003–3, which the Commission
approved in Order No. 817.15 NERC
states that Reliability Standard PRC–
001–1.1(ii), Requirements R3 and R4
will be replaced with proposed
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1. NERC
also explains that Reliability Standard
PRC–001–1.1(ii), Requirement R5 has
been replaced with several Reliability
Standards developed after Reliability
Standard PRC–001–1(ii) became
effective.16 NERC further states that
Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii),
Requirement R6 has been replaced with
Reliability Standards TOP–001–3 and
TOP–003–3.
II. Discussion
12. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of
the FPA, we propose to approve
proposed Reliability Standards PER–
006–1 and PRC–027–1 as just,
reasonable, not unduly discriminatory
or preferential, and in the public
interest, as both proposed Reliability
Standards improve upon currentlyeffective Reliability Standard PRC–001–
1.1(ii) in important ways.17 Specifically,
proposed Reliability Standard PRC–
027–1 does so by (1) modifying the
applicability section to include the
appropriate functional entity types with
the responsibilities, resources, and skill
sets to conduct the studies required to
coordinate protection systems, and (2)
listing the protection system functions
on all bulk electric system elements that
require coordination. Proposed
Reliability Standard PER–006–1, along
with existing formal training
requirements in the PER group of
Reliability Standards, also improves
upon Reliability Standard PRC–001–
1.1(ii), Requirement R1 by ensuring that
the necessary personnel are familiar
with and understand the purpose and
limitations of protection systems
schemes while providing more precise
and auditable requirements. However,
proposed Reliability Standard PRC–
027–1, Requirement R2, Option 2 does
not appear to ensure coordination of all
bulk electric system elements with
protection system functions.
15 Id. at 5 (citing Transmission Operations
Reliability Standards and Interconnection
Reliability Operations and Coordination Reliability
Standards, Order No. 817, 153 FERC ¶ 61,178
(2015)).
16 Id. at 6.
17 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:25 Nov 27, 2017
Jkt 244001
Accordingly, pursuant to section
215(d)(5) of the FPA, we propose to
direct that NERC develop modifications
to proposed Reliability Standard PRC–
027–1 that address our concern
regarding this gap, as discussed below.
13. In addition, we propose to
approve NERC’s associated violation
risk factors, violation severity levels,
implementation plans, and effective
dates. We also propose to approve the
revised definitions for inclusion in the
NERC Glossary. Further, we propose to
approve the retirement of Reliability
Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii), as requested
by NERC.
14. Pursuant to 215(d)(5) of the FPA,
we propose to direct that NERC develop
modifications to proposed Reliability
Standard PRC–027–1 addressing our
concern that applicable entities that
choose Requirement R2, Option 2
perform (or have already performed) an
initial baseline study demonstrating
proper coordination of their protection
systems. Any additional protection
system coordination studies would be
necessary only if an applicable entity is
confronted with 15 percent or greater
fault current deviations from the prior
baseline study amounts, as currently
proposed in Reliability Standard PRC–
027–1, Requirement R2, Option 2. We
propose to direct NERC to submit the
modified Reliability Standard within 12
months following the effective date of a
final rule in this proceeding.
15. Proposed Reliability Standard
PRC–027–1, Requirement R2 does not
require an initial protection system
coordination study if an applicable
entity elects Option 2. Unlike Option 1,
which requires performance of
protection system coordination studies
every six years, Option 2 requires
applicable entities to ‘‘[c]ompare
present Fault current values to an
established Fault current baseline and
perform a Protection System
Coordination Study when the
comparison identifies a 15 percent or
greater deviation.’’ The proposed
Reliability Standard and NERC’s
petition do not indicate that the ‘‘Fault
current baseline’’ must be established
through an initial protection system
coordination study. Instead, NERC’s
petition states that the baseline must be
established ‘‘by the effective date of the
standard based on short-circuit
studies.’’ 18 The proposed Reliability
Standard provides that ‘‘the initial Fault
current baseline(s) shall be established
by the effective date of this Reliability
Standard and updated each time a
Protection System Coordination Study
is performed,’’ but this language does
18 NERC
PO 00000
Petition at 36 n.35.
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
not require establishing the ‘‘initial
Fault current baseline’’ through an
initial protection system coordination
study.19 NERC’s petition reinforces this
understanding, as noted above, by
explicitly allowing the use of shortcircuit studies to establish the initial
Fault current baseline.
16. While they are related terms, we
understand there to be a difference
between short-circuit studies and
protection system coordination studies.
NERC defines protection system
coordination study as an ‘‘analysis to
determine whether Protection Systems
operate in the intended sequence during
Faults.’’ 20 By comparison, proposed
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1
explains that a short-circuit study is ‘‘an
analysis of an electrical network that
determines the magnitude of the
currents flowing in the network during
an electrical fault . . . [and] are used as
the basis for protection device
coordination studies.’’ 21 Therefore,
while short-circuit studies are inputs to
protection system coordination studies,
it appears that a short-circuit study
differs in scope from a protection
system coordination study. Based on
this record, it would be incorrect to
conclude that proposed Reliability
Standard PRC–027–1, Requirement R2,
Options 1 and 2 afford the same level of
protection system coordination because
the former requires a protection system
coordination study while the latter does
not.
17. While we generally support
permitting flexibility in the Reliability
Standards to achieve required
performance goals, the possibility that
some bulk electric system elements may
never undergo a protection system
coordination study raises reliability
concerns. In past serious Bulk-Power
System events, mis-coordination was a
contributing factor to misoperations and
outages. For example, the Arizona
Southern California September 8, 2011
Outage Report identified an instance
19 Proposed Reliability Standard PRC–027–1,
Requirement R2, Option 2 n.1. Footnote 1 further
states that if an ‘‘initial baseline was not established
by the effective date of this Reliability Standard
because of the previous use of an alternate option
or the installation of a new BES Element, the entity
may establish the baseline by performing a
Protection System Coordination Study’’ (emphasis
added). Id.
20 NERC Petition, Exhibit A–3, Proposed
Definitions. This definition is consistent with the
definition of coordination of protection in IEEE Std.
C37.113–1999 (stating that the ‘‘process of choosing
settings or time delay characteristics of protective
devices, such that operation of the devices will
occur in a specified order to minimize customer
service interruption and power system isolation due
to a power system disturbance’’).
21 Proposed Reliability Standard PRC–027–1,
Supplemental Material at 8.
E:\FR\FM\28NOP1.SGM
28NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
where a transmission owner did not
perform a protection system
coordination study prior to the
implementation of a protection
system.22 The 2011 Outage Report
stated that this omission negatively
affected the reliable operation of the
Bulk-Power System during the 2011
event.23
18. Over the past eleven years, several
NERC reports have addressed the
importance of protection system
coordination to Bulk-Power System
reliability. Proposed Reliability
Standard PRC–027–1 addresses some of
the issues raised in these reports; but
without requiring an initial protection
system coordination study, the
proposed Reliability Standard does not
address all of them. In 2006, for
example, the NERC System Protection
Control Task Force assessed Reliability
Standard PRC–001.24 The report
recommended requiring the
coordination of all existing protection
systems.25
19. In 2009, in a letter from the NERC
President to the NERC Board of Trustees
and stakeholders, NERC identified
generation and transmission miscoordination as responsible for 30
percent of the misoperations that
occurred between 2005 and 2008.26 The
2009 letter stated that mis-coordination
between generation and transmission
protection systems ‘‘has caused two
significant system disturbances in the
past two years, and resulted in the
unnecessary loss of generation during
seven additional disturbances in that
timeframe.’’ 27 The letter explained that
the 2009 NERC System Protection
Initiative would initially focus on the
area of protection system
coordination.28
20. In 2013, NERC issued a
Misoperations Report prepared by the
Protection System Misoperations Task
Force.29 The Misoperations Report
identified ‘‘ways to potentially reduce
the amount of future misoperations’’
and concluded that ‘‘[m]isoperations
22 Arizona Southern California September 8, 2011
Outage Report at 101–103, https://www.ferc.gov/
legal/staff-reports/04-27-2012-ferc-nerc-report.pdf.
23 Id. at 100–102.
24 NERC SPCTF Assessment of Standard PRC–
001–0—System Protection Coordination (2006),
https://www.nerc.com/pa/Stand/
Project200706SystemProtectionCoordinationDL/
NERC_SPCTF_Assessment_of_Standard_PRC.pdf.
25 Id. at 3–4.
26 NERC Letter from Rick Sergel, NERC President,
Regarding System Protection Initiative at Figure 2
(April 24, 2009).
27 Id. at 1.
28 Id. at 1–2.
29 NERC Misoperations Report (2013), https://
www.nerc.com/comm/PC/Protection%20
System%20Misoperations%20Task%20
Force%20PSMTF%202/PSMTF_Report.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:25 Nov 27, 2017
Jkt 244001
due to setting errors can potentially be
reduced.’’ 30 The identified techniques
to reduce incorrect settings, included:
Peer reviews, increased training, more
extensive fault studies, standard
templates for setting standard schemes
using complex relays, and periodic
review of existing settings when there is
a change in system topography.31 In the
ReliabilityFirst region, NERC identified
a category of misoperations caused by
‘‘Engineering/Design Issues,’’ which
specifically included setting miscoordination.32 This category of
misoperations was one of the three most
common causes of misoperations for
above 200 kV facilities within the
ReliabilityFirst region.33 The positive
impact on Bulk-Power System reliability
of reducing misoperations because of
‘‘Incorrect setting/logic/design errors’’ is
found in NERC’s 2015 Analysis of
System Protection Misoperations:
The State of Reliability 2015 report found
that protection system misoperations
continued to be a significant contributor to
automatic transmission outage severity. In
general, transmission system events with
protection system misoperations were more
impactful than other transmission events.
They were also a significant contributor to
transmission outage severity, indicating that
a reduction in protection system
misoperations would lead to an improvement
in system reliability.34
21. In 2014, a NERC ‘‘lessons learned’’
document on ‘‘Generation Relaying—
Underfrequency Protection
Coordination’’ identified a 2014
incident where underfrequency relay
trip settings were installed on the
system unnecessarily and were not
coordinated with a generator’s relay trip
setting.35 The document explained that
‘‘[u]nintended generator tripping during
an underfrequency event can exacerbate
30 Id.
at 3.
31 Id.
32 Id. at 14–15. The 2013 Misoperations Report
elaborated that the ‘‘Engineering/Design Issues’’
category included:
Incorrect short circuit values and coordination
errors. The incorrect short circuit values included
outdated or incorrect data used to calculate relay
settings. The coordination errors in these cases all
involved pilot protection either of insufficient
carrier blocking trip delays or of improper choice
of ground pickup values used in a blocking scheme.
Id. at 15.
33 Id. at 14.
34 NERC, Analysis of System Protection
Misoperations at 1 (Dec. 2015) (citations omitted),
https://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/PA/
Performance%20Analysis%20DL/2015_Analysis_
of_System_Protection_Misoperations_Final.pdf
(finding that 31 percent of all misoperations were
due to ‘‘Incorrect setting/logic/design errors’’).
35 NERC, Lesson Learned, Generation Relaying—
Underfrequency Protection Coordination (2014),
https://www.nerc.com/pa/rrm/ea/
Lessons%20Learned%20Document%20Library/
LL20140601_Generation_Relaying_
Underfrequency_Protection_Coordination_final.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
56189
the condition.’’ 36 The document also
stated that ‘‘generator relay protection
should be coordinated with all auxiliary
power system relaying with specific
regard to time-delay settings’’ in order to
ensure reliable generator operation.37
22. The 2016 State of Reliability
Report noted that while protection
system misoperations declined in 2015,
misoperations showed a ‘‘statistically
significant positive correlation with
transmission outage severity and
show[ed] a higher relative transmission
risk.’’ 38 Misoperations showed the
strongest correlation of the factors
considered. In addition, the 2016 State
of Reliability Report identified that
‘‘over 40 percent of the incorrect setting/
logic/design misoperations were due to
the miss coordination [sic] of ground
overcurrent settings’’ found by
ERCOT.39
23. The 2017 State of Reliability
Report recognized the significance of
protection system misoperations to
Bulk-Power System reliability by
observing that ‘‘[p]rotection system
misoperations should remain an area of
focus as it continues to be one of the
largest contributors to the severity of
transmission outages.’’ 40
24. For the reasons discussed above,
we propose to direct that NERC develop
modifications to proposed Reliability
Standard PRC–027–1 to address our
concern by requiring that applicable
entities perform an initial protection
coordination study under Requirement
R2, Option 2. We propose that
applicable entities would have six years
from the effective date of a modified
Reliability Standard to complete the
analysis. An applicable entity could use
pre-existing protection system
coordination studies to satisfy the
proposed requirement provided it was
reasonable (i.e., no intervening system
changes that would render the earlier
work obsolete). After conducting the
initial protection system coordination
study, subsequent protection system
coordination studies would only be
required when an applicable entity is
confronted with 15 percent or greater
fault current deviations from the prior
baseline study amounts, as currently
proposed in Reliability Standard PRC–
027–1, Requirement R2, Option 2. We
seek comments on this proposal.
25. Separately, we seek comment from
NERC and other interested entities
explaining the technical basis for
36 Id.
37 Id.
38 2016 State of Reliability Report at 17, https://
www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/Pages/default.aspx.
39 Id. at 166.
40 2017 State of Reliability Report at 2.
E:\FR\FM\28NOP1.SGM
28NOP1
56190
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules
employing a 15 percent deviation
threshold in proposed Reliability
Standard PRC–027–1, Requirement R2,
Option 2. We seek to better understand
the basis for this threshold to ensure an
adequate record in the proceeding on
this matter.
III. Information Collection Statement
26. The collection of information
addressed in this Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking is subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under section 3507(d) of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.41
OMB’s regulations require approval of
certain information collection
requirements imposed by agency
rules.42 Upon approval of a collection(s)
of information, OMB will assign an
OMB control number and an expiration
date. Respondents subject to the filing
requirements of a rule will not be
penalized for failing to respond to these
collections of information unless the
collections of information display a
valid OMB control number.
27. The Commission will submit the
information collection requirement to
OMB for its final review and approval.
We solicit public comments on the need
for this information, whether the
information will have practical utility,
the accuracy of the burden estimates,
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected
or retained, and any suggested methods
for minimizing respondents’ burden,
including the use of automated
information techniques.
28. The information collection
requirements in this Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking in Docket No. RM16–22–
000 are associated with FERC–725A,43
FERC–725G6,44 and FERC–725Y, as
discussed below.
29. Public Reporting Burden: The
number of respondents below is based
on an examination of the NERC
compliance registry on April 7, 2017, for
transmission owners, generator owners,
generator operators, and distribution
providers within the United States and
an estimate of how many entities from
that registry will be affected by the
Reliability Standards proposed for
adoption and implementation. At the
time of Commission review of proposed
Reliability Standards PRC–027–1 and
PER–006–1, 334 transmission owners,
913 generator owners, 875 generator
operators, and 365 distribution
providers in the United States were
registered in the NERC compliance
registry. However, under NERC’s
compliance registration program,
entities may be registered for multiple
functions, so these numbers incorporate
some double counting. We note that
many generation sites share a common
generator owner or generator operator.
The following table provides the
estimated proposed annual burden and
cost related to information collection
requirements in this Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking.45
PROPOSED CHANGES IN THE NOPR IN DOCKET NO. RM16–22–000
Number of
respondents
Total number
of annual
responses
Average burden
hours and
cost per response 47
Annual burden hours
and total annual cost
(rounded) 48
(1)
Respondent category and requirement 46
Annual
number of
responses
per
respondent
(2)
(1) * (2) = (3)
(4)
(3) * (4) = (5)
FERC–725G6 (Covering Proposed Reliability Standard PRC–027–1) 49
TO; Reporting Reqs. R1, R2, & R3 ..............
TO; Recordkeeping Reqs. .............................
GO; Reporting Reqs. R1, R2, & R3 ..............
GO; Recordkeeping Reqs. ............................
DP; Reporting Reqs R1, R2, & R3 ...............
DP; Recordkeeping Reqs. .............................
334
334
913
913
365
365
1
1
1
1
1
1
334
334
913
913
365
365
Sub-Total for Reporting Reqs. for
FERC–725G6.
Sub-Total for Recordkeeping Reqs. for
FERC–725G6.
......................
......................
......................
Total Proposed Increase for FERC–
725G6.
......................
60
40
10
10
10
10
hrs.;
hrs.;
hrs.;
hrs.;
hrs.;
hrs.;
$3,941.40 ..
$1,565.60 ..
$656.90 .....
$391.40 .....
$656.90 .....
$391.40 .....
20,040 hrs.; $1,316,428.
13,360 hrs.; $522,910.
9,130 hrs.; $599,750.
9,130 hrs.; $357,348.
3,650 hrs.; $239,769.
3,650 hrs.; $142,861.
......................
.................................
32,820 hrs.; $2,155,947.
......................
......................
.................................
26,140 hrs.; $1,023,119.
......................
......................
.................................
58,960 hrs.; $3,179,066.
FERC–725Y (Covering Proposed Reliability Standard PER–006–1)
GOP; Reporting Req. R1 ..............................
GOP; Recordkeeping Req. ............................
Total Proposed Increase for FERC–725Y ....
875
875
......................
1
1
......................
875
875
......................
5 hrs.; $328.45 .......
10 hrs.; $391.40 .....
.................................
4,375 hrs.; $287,394.
8,750 hrs.; $342,475.
13,125 hrs.; $629,869.
Reductions to FERC–725A (Covering Proposed Retirement of Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1) 50
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
GOP; Reporting Req. ....................................
GOP; Recordkeeping Req. ............................
41 44
U.S.C. 3507(d).
CFR 1320.11.
43 FERC–725A (OMB Control No. 1902–0244)
currently includes the information collection
requirements associated with Reliability Standard
PRC–001–1.1(ii), which is proposed for retirement.
Only one item per OMB Control No. may be
pending OMB review at a time, and an unrelated
item affecting FERC–725A is pending OMB review.
We are providing estimates of the burden reduction
42 5
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:25 Nov 27, 2017
Jkt 244001
875
875
1
1
875
875
40 hrs.; $2,627.60 ..
50 hrs.; $1,957.00 ..
related to FERC–725A for review and comment.
However, to submit this Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking timely to OMB, the Commission is
being conservative and not reducing the burden
estimates associated with FERC–725A at this time.
44 The information collection requirements
related to proposed Reliability Standard PRC–027–
1 would normally be included in FERC–725G (OMB
Control No. 1902–0252). However, only one item
per OMB Control No. may be pending OMB review
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35,000 hrs.; $2,299,150.
43,750 hrs.; $1,712,375.
at a time, and an unrelated item affecting FERC–
725G is pending OMB review. For this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking and the related submittal to
OMB, we use a placeholder information collection
no. of FERC–725G6.
45 TO = transmission owner; TOP = transmission
operator; GO = generator owner; GOP = generator
operator; DP = distribution provider; and BA =
balancing authority.
E:\FR\FM\28NOP1.SGM
28NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules
56191
PROPOSED CHANGES IN THE NOPR IN DOCKET NO. RM16–22–000—Continued
Number of
respondents
Annual
number of
responses
per
respondent
Total number
of annual
responses
Average burden
hours and
cost per response 47
Annual burden hours
and total annual cost
(rounded) 48
(1)
(2)
(1) * (2) = (3)
(4)
(3) * (4) = (5)
TOP; Reporting Req. .....................................
TOP; Recordkeeping Req. ............................
BA; Reporting Req. .......................................
BA; Recordkeeping Req. ...............................
Reduction Sub-Total Reporting Reqs.
for FERC–725A.
177
177
99
99
......................
1
1
1
1
......................
177
177
99
99
......................
60 hrs.; $3,941.40 ..
70 hrs.; $2,739.80 ..
32 hrs.; $2,102.08 ..
20 hrs.; $782.80 .....
.................................
10,620 hrs.; $697,628.
12,390 hrs.; $484,945.
3,168 hrs.; $208,106.
1,980 hrs.; $77,497.
48,788 hrs.; $3,204,884.
Reduction Sub-Total Recordkeeping
Reqs. for FERC–725A.
......................
......................
......................
.................................
58,120 hrs.; $2,274,817.
Reduction, Sub-Total for FERC–725A ...
......................
......................
......................
.................................
106,908 hrs.; $5,479,701
(reduction).
NET TOTAL REDUCTION FOR
PROPOSED
CHANGES
IN
NOPR IN RM16–22–000.
......................
......................
......................
.................................
34,823 hrs.; $1,670,766
(reduction).
Respondent category and requirement 46
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Titles: FERC–725G6 (Mandatory
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1) and
FERC–725Y (Mandatory Reliability
Standards: Operations Personnel
Training (PER–005–2 and PER–006–1).
Action: Revision to existing
collections and proposed new
information collection.
OMB Control Nos.: To be determined
(FERC–725G6) 51 and 1902–0279
(FERC–725Y).
Respondents: Business or other for
profit, and not for profit institutions.
Frequency of Responses: Annual
recordkeeping and reporting
requirements, with some reporting
46 For each Reliability Standard, the Measure
shows the acceptable evidence for the associated
Reporting Requirement, and the Compliance section
details the related Recordkeeping Requirement.
47 Based on data from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, the average hourly cost (wages plus
benefits) is $65.69/hour for an engineer, and
$39.14/hour for a record clerk. The hourly cost for
an engineer is used for reporting requirements; the
hourly cost for a record clerk is used for
recordkeeping requirements.
48 For display purposes, the cost figures in
column 5 have been rounded.
49 Some of the reporting requirements are
required at least every six calendar years. In this
table, the Commission assumes that respondents
might work on some of their elements each year;
the annual burden estimate shown is one sixth of
the burden associated with one complete six-year
cycle. For example, for each transmission owner: (a)
the annual reporting burden associated with
Requirements R1, R2, and R3 is shown as 60 hours
per year, and (b) the burden for the six-year cycle
would be six times that, or a total of 360 hours.
50 The estimates for average annual burden hours
per response are based on Order No. 693, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,242 at PP 1906, 1907. The
numbers of respondents and estimated hourly costs
are based on current figures.
51 OMB will assign a Control No. when it issues
a decision.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:25 Nov 27, 2017
Jkt 244001
requirements being at least once every
six years.
Necessity of the Information:
Proposed Reliability Standards PRC–
027–1 and PER–006–1 set forth
requirements for coordination of
protection systems and personnel
training on specific topics essential to
reliability. The Commission proposes to
approve proposed Reliability Standards
PRC–027–1 and PER–006–1, which will
replace Commission-approved
Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii).
The proposed Reliability Standards
PRC–027–1 and PER–006–1 improve
upon the existing Reliability Standard
PRC–001–1.1(ii) because the proposed
Reliability Standards assign
responsibilities to entities with more
appropriate resources and skill sets to
conduct studies required to coordinate
protection systems. The proposed
Reliability Standards also provide
additional clarity to the applicable
entities.
Internal review: The Commission has
assured itself, by means of its internal
review, that there is specific, objective
support for the burden estimates
associated with the information
requirements.
30. 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].
31. Comments concerning the
information collection proposed in this
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and the
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
associated burden estimates should be
sent to the Commission in this docket
and may also be sent 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 the following
email address: oira_submission@
omb.eop.gov. Please refer to OMB
Control Nos. to be determined (FERC–
725G6) and 1902–0279 (FERC–725Y) in
your submittal.
IV. Environmental Analysis
32. 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.52 The action proposed
here falls within the categorical
exclusion in the Commission’s
regulations for rules that are clarifying,
corrective or procedural, for information
gathering, analysis, and
dissemination.53
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act
33. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980 (RFA) generally requires a
description and analysis of proposed
rules that will have significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.54 The Small
Business Administration (SBA) defines
52 Regulations Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Order No. 486,
FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,783 (1987) (crossreferenced at 41 FERC ¶ 61,284).
53 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
54 5 U.S.C. 601–612.
E:\FR\FM\28NOP1.SGM
28NOP1
56192
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 227 / Tuesday, November 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules
jstallworth on DSKBBY8HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
which utilities are small businesses
based on the number of employees that
a utility and its affiliates employ.55
34. The proposed Reliability Standard
PRC–027–1 (included in FERC–725G6)
will apply to approximately 1,612
entities (334 transmission owners, 913
generator owners, and 365 distribution
providers) in the United States.56
Pursuant to SBA regulations, the
employment threshold for transmission
is 500 employees, for generator owners
is between 250 and 750 employees
(depending on the fuel source), and for
distribution providers is 1,000
employees. We estimate that the annual
cost for each entity will be $1,048 for
each generator owner and distribution
provider and $5,507 for each
transmission owner.
35. The proposed Reliability Standard
PER–006–1 (included in FERC–725Y)
will apply to approximately 875
generator operators in the United States.
Pursuant to SBA regulations the
employment threshold for generator
operators is between 250 and 750
employees (depending on the fuel
source). We estimate that the annual
cost for each generator operator will be
$719.
36. In addition, this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking proposes the
retirement of Reliability Standard PRC–
001–1.1(ii) (included in FERC–725A).
That retirement would decrease the
annual estimated cost for 875 generator
operators by $4,585 each, for 177
transmission operators by $6,681 each,
and for 99 balancing authorities by
$2,885 each. For the generator operators
affected by this retirement and the
proposed Reliability Standard PER–
006–1, the net annual effect would be a
decrease of $3,866 each. We estimate
the net annual cost of this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking would vary, by
type of entity, from an annual decrease
of $6,681 (for each transmission
operator) to an annual increase of
$5,507 (for each transmission owner).
We view this as a minimal economic
impact for each entity. Accordingly, we
certify that the proposed Reliability
Standards PRC–027–1 and PER–006–1
and retirement of Reliability Standard
PRC–001–1.1 (ii) will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
VI. Comment Procedures
37. The Commission invites interested
persons to submit comments on the
matters and issues proposed in this
55 13
CFR 121.201, Subsector 221.
respondents serve multiple roles in the
NERC compliance registry, so there is likely double
counting in the estimates.
56 Many
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:25 Nov 27, 2017
Jkt 244001
notice to be adopted, including any
related matters or alternative proposals
that commenters may wish to discuss.
Comments are due January 29, 2018.
Comments must refer to Docket No.
RM16–22–000, and must include the
commenter’s name, the organization
they represent, if applicable, and their
address in their comments.
38. The Commission encourages
comments to be filed electronically via
the eFiling link on the Commission’s
Web site at https://www.ferc.gov. The
Commission accepts most standard
word processing formats. Documents
created electronically using word
processing software should be filed in
native applications or print-to-PDF
format and not in a scanned format.
Commenters filing electronically do not
need to make a paper filing.
39. Commenters that are not able to
file comments electronically must send
an original of their comments to:
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
40. All comments will be placed in
the Commission’s public files and may
be viewed, printed, or downloaded
remotely as described in the Document
Availability section below. Commenters
on this proposal are not required to
serve copies of their comments on other
commenters.
VII. Document Availability
41. In addition to publishing the full
text of this document in the Federal
Register, the Commission provides all
interested persons an opportunity to
view and/or print the contents of this
document via the Internet through the
Commission’s Home Page (https://
www.ferc.gov) and in the Commission’s
Public Reference Room during normal
business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE.,
Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426.
42. From the Commission’s Home
Page on the Internet, this information is
available on eLibrary. The full text of
this document is available on eLibrary
in PDF and Microsoft Word format for
viewing, printing, and/or downloading.
To access this document in eLibrary,
type the docket number of this
document, excluding the last three
digits, in the docket number field.
43. User assistance is available for
eLibrary and the Commission’s Web site
during normal business hours from the
Commission’s Online Support at (202)
502–6652 (toll free at 1–866–208–3676)
or email at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov,
or the Public Reference Room at (202)
502–8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. Email
the Public Reference Room at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
By direction of the Commission.
Issued November 16, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017–25586 Filed 11–27–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army, Corps of
Engineers
33 CFR Chapter II
Report on Potential Actions To Reduce
Regulatory Burdens on Domestic
Energy Production
Army Corps of Engineers, DoD.
Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Corps) has issued a report
that examined actions it could take to
modify existing regulations that
potentially burden the development and
use of domestically produced energy
resources, such as oil, natural gas, coal,
and nuclear energy, as well as
renewable energy. The report was
required by Executive Order 13783,
Promoting Energy Independence and
Economic Growth. The report identifies
changes that could be made to several
nationwide permits that authorize
activities under section 10 of the Rivers
and Harbors Act of 1899 and section 404
the Clean Water Act that are associated
with domestic energy production and
use.
ADDRESSES: U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Attn: CECW–CO–R, 441 G
Street NW., Washington, DC 20314–
1000.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
David Olson at 202–761–4922 or access
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
Regulatory Home Page at https://
www.usace.army.mil/Missions/
CivilWorks/
RegulatoryProgramandPermits.aspx.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive
Order (E.O.) 13783, Promoting Energy
Independence and Economic Growth,
was published in the Federal Register
on March 31, 2017 (82 FR 16093). That
E.O. requires federal agencies to
immediately review existing regulations
that may burden the development or use
of domestically produced energy
resources. Section 2 of E.O. 13783
requires federal agencies to prepare and
issue reports with specific
recommendations to change their
regulations that could reduce or
eliminate burdens to domestic energy
production.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\28NOP1.SGM
28NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 227 (Tuesday, November 28, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56186-56192]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25586]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
18 CFR Part 40
[Docket No. RM16-22-000]
Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults
and Specific Training for Personnel Reliability Standards
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) proposes
to approve Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 (Coordination of Protection
Systems for Performance During Faults) and PER-006-1 (Specific Training
for Personnel) submitted by the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC). The purpose of proposed Reliability Standard PRC-
027-1 is to maintain the coordination of protection systems installed
to detect and isolate faults on bulk electric system elements, such
that those protection systems operate in the intended sequence during
faults. The purpose of proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1 is to
ensure that personnel are trained on specific topics essential to
reliability to perform or support real-time operations of the bulk
electric system. In addition, the Commission proposes to direct NERC to
develop certain modifications to proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-
1.
DATES: Comments are due January 29, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by docket number, may be filed in the
following ways:
Electronic Filing through https://www.ferc.gov. Documents
created electronically using word processing software should be filed
in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned
format.
Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable to file electronically
may mail or hand-deliver comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Comment
Procedures Section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Juan Villar (Technical Information), Office of Electric Reliability,
Division of Reliability Standards and Security, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, Telephone: (772) 678-6496, Juan.Villar@ferc.gov.
Alan Rukin (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426, Telephone: (202) 502-8502, Alan.Rukin@ferc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), the
Commission proposes to approve proposed Reliability Standards PRC-027-1
(Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults) and
PER-006-1 (Specific Training for Personnel), which were submitted for
approval by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC),
the Commission-certified Electric Reliability Organization (ERO).\1\ As
discussed below, however, the Commission also proposes to direct NERC
to modify proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 to require an initial
protection system coordination study to ensure that applicable entities
will perform (or have performed), as a baseline, a study demonstrating
proper coordination of its protection systems. We propose to direct
NERC to submit the modified Reliability Standard for Commission
approval within 12 months following the effective date of a final rule
in this proceeding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 16 U.S.C. 824o.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. The Commission also proposes to approve the associated violation
risk factors, violation severity levels, implementation plans, and
effective dates proposed by NERC for Reliability Standards PRC-027-1
and PER-006-1. The Commission further proposes to approve the
retirement of currently-effective Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii)
(System Protection Coordination).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The Commission approved Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii)
on May 29, 2015. North American Electric Reliability Corporation,
151 FERC ] 61,186 (2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. In addition, the Commission proposes to approve new and revised
definitions submitted by NERC for incorporation in the NERC Glossary of
Terms Used in NERC Reliability Standards (``NERC Glossary'') for the
following terms: (1) ``protection system coordination study;'' (2)
``operational planning analysis;'' and (3) ``real-time assessment.''
[[Page 56187]]
I. Background
A. Section 215 and Mandatory Reliability Standards
4. Section 215 of the FPA requires a Commission-certified ERO to
develop mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, subject to
Commission review and approval.\3\ Once approved, the Reliability
Standards may be enforced by the ERO subject to Commission oversight or
by the Commission independently.\4\ In 2006, the Commission certified
NERC as the ERO pursuant to section 215 of the FPA.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Id. 824o(c), (d).
\4\ Id. 824o(e).
\5\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ]
61,062, order on reh'g and compliance, 117 FERC ] 61,126 (2006),
order on compliance, 118 FERC ] 61,190, order on reh'g, 119 FERC ]
61,046 (2007), aff'd sub nom. Alcoa Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342
(D.C. Cir. 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Order No. 693
5. On March 16, 2007, the Commission issued Order No. 693,
approving 83 of the 107 Reliability Standards filed by NERC, including
Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.\6\ In addition, the Commission directed
NERC to develop modifications to Reliability Standard PRC-001-1 that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System,
Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242, at PP 1433-1449, order
on reh'g, Order No. 693-A, 120 FERC ] 61,053 (2007).
(1) Correct the references for Requirements, and [sic] (2)
include a requirement that upon the detection of failures in relays
or protection system elements on the Bulk-Power System that threaten
reliable operation, relevant transmission operators must be informed
promptly, but within a specified period of time that is developed in
the Reliability Standards development process, whereas generator
operators must also promptly inform their transmission operators;
and (3) clarifies that, after being informed of failures in relays
or protection system elements that threaten reliability of the Bulk-
Power System, transmission operators must carry out corrective
control actions, i.e., return a system to a stable state that
respects system requirements as soon as possible and no longer than
30 minutes after they receive notice of the failure.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242 at P 1449.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. NERC Petition and Proposed Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-
006-1
6. On September 2, 2016, NERC submitted a petition seeking
Commission approval of proposed Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and
PER-006-1.\8\ NERC states that the proposed Reliability Standards, new
and revised NERC Glossary terms, and the retirement of Reliability
Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) satisfy the Commission's criteria in Order No.
672 and are just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or
preferential, and in the public interest.\9\ NERC explains that the
intent of the proposed Reliability Standards and changes to the NERC
Glossary are to maintain the coordination of protection systems
installed to detect and isolate faults on bulk electric system elements
and require registered entities to provide training to their relevant
personnel on protection systems and remedial action schemes. NERC
asserts that the proposed Reliability Standards are an improvement over
currently-effective Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) and will
ensure that appropriate personnel are trained on protection systems and
that protection systems are appropriately studied, coordinated, and
monitored.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Proposed Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1 are
not attached to this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The proposed
Reliability Standards are available on the Commission's eLibrary
document retrieval system in Docket No. RM16-22-000 and are posted
on the NERC Web site, https://www.nerc.com.
\9\ NERC Petition at 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1
7. NERC states that proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1
requires generator operators to use a systematic approach to develop
and implement training for dispatch personnel at centrally-located
dispatch centers.\10\ NERC explains that proposed Reliability Standard
PER-006-1 will also cover plant personnel who are responsible for real-
time control of a generator. NERC maintains that it is appropriate to
train plant personnel [in] the functionality of protection systems and
remedial action schemes. NERC observes that proposed Reliability
Standard PER-006-1 replaces the phrase ``purpose and limitations'' used
in currently-effective Reliability Standard PRC-001-1(ii) with the
phrase ``operational functionality'' to clearly identify the objective
of the training.\11\ NERC also observes that proposed Reliability
Standard PER-006-1 replaces the phrase ``applied in its area'' in
Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) with the phrase ``that affect the
output of the generating facility(ies) it operates'' to properly tailor
the scope of the required training. NERC notes that proposed
Reliability Standard PER-006-1 does not specify a periodicity for the
required training.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Id. at 13.
\11\ Id. at 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1
8. NERC asserts that proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1:
provides a clear set of Requirements that obligate entities to (1)
implement a process for establishing and coordinating new or revised
Protection System settings, and (2) periodically study Protection
System settings that could be affected by incremental changes in
Fault current to ensure the Protection Systems continue to operate
in their intended sequence.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Id. at 26.
According to NERC, proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1,
Requirement R1 mandates that each transmission owner, generator owner,
and distribution provider establish a process for developing new and
revised protection system settings for bulk electric system
elements.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Id. at 27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. NERC states that proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1,
Requirement R2 mandates that every six years, applicable entities must
either: (1) Perform a protection system coordination study to determine
whether the protection systems continue to operate in the intended
sequence during faults; (2) compare present fault current values to an
established fault current baseline and, only if the comparison
identifies a 15 percent or greater deviation in fault current values
(either three phase or phase to ground) at a bus to which the bulk
electric system is connected, perform a protection system coordination
study; or (3) use a combination of options 1 and 2.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Id. at 26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. NERC explains that proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1,
Requirement R3 will require applicable entities to use the process
established under proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement
R1 for the development of any new or revised protection system
settings.
3. Proposed Retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii)
11. NERC states that Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) includes
six requirements that are either addressed by Reliability Standards
approved by the Commission or by the proposed Reliability Standards.
Specifically, NERC explains that Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii),
Requirement R1 has been partially replaced by currently-effective
Reliability Standards PER-003-1 and PER-005-2. NERC continues that
proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1 and the proposed revised
definitions of operational planning
[[Page 56188]]
analysis and real-time assessment will replace the remaining portions
of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirement R1. NERC asserts
that Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirement R2 has been
addressed by Reliability Standards IRO-001-4, IRO-008-2, IRO-010-2,
TOP-001-3, and TOP-003-3, which the Commission approved in Order No.
817.\15\ NERC states that Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii),
Requirements R3 and R4 will be replaced with proposed Reliability
Standard PRC-027-1. NERC also explains that Reliability Standard PRC-
001-1.1(ii), Requirement R5 has been replaced with several Reliability
Standards developed after Reliability Standard PRC-001-1(ii) became
effective.\16\ NERC further states that Reliability Standard PRC-001-
1.1(ii), Requirement R6 has been replaced with Reliability Standards
TOP-001-3 and TOP-003-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Id. at 5 (citing Transmission Operations Reliability
Standards and Interconnection Reliability Operations and
Coordination Reliability Standards, Order No. 817, 153 FERC ] 61,178
(2015)).
\16\ Id. at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Discussion
12. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of the FPA, we propose to approve
proposed Reliability Standards PER-006-1 and PRC-027-1 as just,
reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the
public interest, as both proposed Reliability Standards improve upon
currently-effective Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) in important
ways.\17\ Specifically, proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 does so
by (1) modifying the applicability section to include the appropriate
functional entity types with the responsibilities, resources, and skill
sets to conduct the studies required to coordinate protection systems,
and (2) listing the protection system functions on all bulk electric
system elements that require coordination. Proposed Reliability
Standard PER-006-1, along with existing formal training requirements in
the PER group of Reliability Standards, also improves upon Reliability
Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirement R1 by ensuring that the necessary
personnel are familiar with and understand the purpose and limitations
of protection systems schemes while providing more precise and
auditable requirements. However, proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-
1, Requirement R2, Option 2 does not appear to ensure coordination of
all bulk electric system elements with protection system functions.
Accordingly, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, we propose to
direct that NERC develop modifications to proposed Reliability Standard
PRC-027-1 that address our concern regarding this gap, as discussed
below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. In addition, we propose to approve NERC's associated violation
risk factors, violation severity levels, implementation plans, and
effective dates. We also propose to approve the revised definitions for
inclusion in the NERC Glossary. Further, we propose to approve the
retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), as requested by
NERC.
14. Pursuant to 215(d)(5) of the FPA, we propose to direct that
NERC develop modifications to proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1
addressing our concern that applicable entities that choose Requirement
R2, Option 2 perform (or have already performed) an initial baseline
study demonstrating proper coordination of their protection systems.
Any additional protection system coordination studies would be
necessary only if an applicable entity is confronted with 15 percent or
greater fault current deviations from the prior baseline study amounts,
as currently proposed in Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement
R2, Option 2. We propose to direct NERC to submit the modified
Reliability Standard within 12 months following the effective date of a
final rule in this proceeding.
15. Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2 does
not require an initial protection system coordination study if an
applicable entity elects Option 2. Unlike Option 1, which requires
performance of protection system coordination studies every six years,
Option 2 requires applicable entities to ``[c]ompare present Fault
current values to an established Fault current baseline and perform a
Protection System Coordination Study when the comparison identifies a
15 percent or greater deviation.'' The proposed Reliability Standard
and NERC's petition do not indicate that the ``Fault current baseline''
must be established through an initial protection system coordination
study. Instead, NERC's petition states that the baseline must be
established ``by the effective date of the standard based on short-
circuit studies.'' \18\ The proposed Reliability Standard provides that
``the initial Fault current baseline(s) shall be established by the
effective date of this Reliability Standard and updated each time a
Protection System Coordination Study is performed,'' but this language
does not require establishing the ``initial Fault current baseline''
through an initial protection system coordination study.\19\ NERC's
petition reinforces this understanding, as noted above, by explicitly
allowing the use of short-circuit studies to establish the initial
Fault current baseline.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ NERC Petition at 36 n.35.
\19\ Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2,
Option 2 n.1. Footnote 1 further states that if an ``initial
baseline was not established by the effective date of this
Reliability Standard because of the previous use of an alternate
option or the installation of a new BES Element, the entity may
establish the baseline by performing a Protection System
Coordination Study'' (emphasis added). Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. While they are related terms, we understand there to be a
difference between short-circuit studies and protection system
coordination studies. NERC defines protection system coordination study
as an ``analysis to determine whether Protection Systems operate in the
intended sequence during Faults.'' \20\ By comparison, proposed
Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 explains that a short-circuit study is
``an analysis of an electrical network that determines the magnitude of
the currents flowing in the network during an electrical fault . . .
[and] are used as the basis for protection device coordination
studies.'' \21\ Therefore, while short-circuit studies are inputs to
protection system coordination studies, it appears that a short-circuit
study differs in scope from a protection system coordination study.
Based on this record, it would be incorrect to conclude that proposed
Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2, Options 1 and 2 afford
the same level of protection system coordination because the former
requires a protection system coordination study while the latter does
not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ NERC Petition, Exhibit A-3, Proposed Definitions. This
definition is consistent with the definition of coordination of
protection in IEEE Std. C37.113-1999 (stating that the ``process of
choosing settings or time delay characteristics of protective
devices, such that operation of the devices will occur in a
specified order to minimize customer service interruption and power
system isolation due to a power system disturbance'').
\21\ Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Supplemental
Material at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. While we generally support permitting flexibility in the
Reliability Standards to achieve required performance goals, the
possibility that some bulk electric system elements may never undergo a
protection system coordination study raises reliability concerns. In
past serious Bulk-Power System events, mis-coordination was a
contributing factor to misoperations and outages. For example, the
Arizona Southern California September 8, 2011 Outage Report identified
an instance
[[Page 56189]]
where a transmission owner did not perform a protection system
coordination study prior to the implementation of a protection
system.\22\ The 2011 Outage Report stated that this omission negatively
affected the reliable operation of the Bulk-Power System during the
2011 event.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Arizona Southern California September 8, 2011 Outage Report
at 101-103, https://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/04-27-2012-ferc-nerc-report.pdf.
\23\ Id. at 100-102.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. Over the past eleven years, several NERC reports have addressed
the importance of protection system coordination to Bulk-Power System
reliability. Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 addresses some of
the issues raised in these reports; but without requiring an initial
protection system coordination study, the proposed Reliability Standard
does not address all of them. In 2006, for example, the NERC System
Protection Control Task Force assessed Reliability Standard PRC-
001.\24\ The report recommended requiring the coordination of all
existing protection systems.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ NERC SPCTF Assessment of Standard PRC-001-0--System
Protection Coordination (2006), https://www.nerc.com/pa/Stand/Project200706SystemProtectionCoordinationDL/NERC_SPCTF_Assessment_of_Standard_PRC.pdf.
\25\ Id. at 3-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. In 2009, in a letter from the NERC President to the NERC Board
of Trustees and stakeholders, NERC identified generation and
transmission mis-coordination as responsible for 30 percent of the
misoperations that occurred between 2005 and 2008.\26\ The 2009 letter
stated that mis-coordination between generation and transmission
protection systems ``has caused two significant system disturbances in
the past two years, and resulted in the unnecessary loss of generation
during seven additional disturbances in that timeframe.'' \27\ The
letter explained that the 2009 NERC System Protection Initiative would
initially focus on the area of protection system coordination.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ NERC Letter from Rick Sergel, NERC President, Regarding
System Protection Initiative at Figure 2 (April 24, 2009).
\27\ Id. at 1.
\28\ Id. at 1-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. In 2013, NERC issued a Misoperations Report prepared by the
Protection System Misoperations Task Force.\29\ The Misoperations
Report identified ``ways to potentially reduce the amount of future
misoperations'' and concluded that ``[m]isoperations due to setting
errors can potentially be reduced.'' \30\ The identified techniques to
reduce incorrect settings, included: Peer reviews, increased training,
more extensive fault studies, standard templates for setting standard
schemes using complex relays, and periodic review of existing settings
when there is a change in system topography.\31\ In the
ReliabilityFirst region, NERC identified a category of misoperations
caused by ``Engineering/Design Issues,'' which specifically included
setting mis-coordination.\32\ This category of misoperations was one of
the three most common causes of misoperations for above 200 kV
facilities within the ReliabilityFirst region.\33\ The positive impact
on Bulk-Power System reliability of reducing misoperations because of
``Incorrect setting/logic/design errors'' is found in NERC's 2015
Analysis of System Protection Misoperations:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ NERC Misoperations Report (2013), https://www.nerc.com/comm/PC/Protection%20System%20Misoperations%20Task%20Force%20PSMTF%202/PSMTF_Report.pdf.
\30\ Id. at 3.
\31\ Id.
\32\ Id. at 14-15. The 2013 Misoperations Report elaborated that
the ``Engineering/Design Issues'' category included:
Incorrect short circuit values and coordination errors. The
incorrect short circuit values included outdated or incorrect data
used to calculate relay settings. The coordination errors in these
cases all involved pilot protection either of insufficient carrier
blocking trip delays or of improper choice of ground pickup values
used in a blocking scheme. Id. at 15.
\33\ Id. at 14.
The State of Reliability 2015 report found that protection
system misoperations continued to be a significant contributor to
automatic transmission outage severity. In general, transmission
system events with protection system misoperations were more
impactful than other transmission events. They were also a
significant contributor to transmission outage severity, indicating
that a reduction in protection system misoperations would lead to an
improvement in system reliability.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ NERC, Analysis of System Protection Misoperations at 1
(Dec. 2015) (citations omitted), https://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/PA/Performance%20Analysis%20DL/2015_Analysis_of_System_Protection_Misoperations_Final.pdf (finding
that 31 percent of all misoperations were due to ``Incorrect
setting/logic/design errors'').
21. In 2014, a NERC ``lessons learned'' document on ``Generation
Relaying--Underfrequency Protection Coordination'' identified a 2014
incident where underfrequency relay trip settings were installed on the
system unnecessarily and were not coordinated with a generator's relay
trip setting.\35\ The document explained that ``[u]nintended generator
tripping during an underfrequency event can exacerbate the condition.''
\36\ The document also stated that ``generator relay protection should
be coordinated with all auxiliary power system relaying with specific
regard to time-delay settings'' in order to ensure reliable generator
operation.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ NERC, Lesson Learned, Generation Relaying--Underfrequency
Protection Coordination (2014), https://www.nerc.com/pa/rrm/ea/Lessons%20Learned%20Document%20Library/LL20140601_Generation_Relaying_Underfrequency_Protection_Coordination_final.pdf.
\36\ Id.
\37\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
22. The 2016 State of Reliability Report noted that while
protection system misoperations declined in 2015, misoperations showed
a ``statistically significant positive correlation with transmission
outage severity and show[ed] a higher relative transmission risk.''
\38\ Misoperations showed the strongest correlation of the factors
considered. In addition, the 2016 State of Reliability Report
identified that ``over 40 percent of the incorrect setting/logic/design
misoperations were due to the miss coordination [sic] of ground
overcurrent settings'' found by ERCOT.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ 2016 State of Reliability Report at 17, https://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/Pages/default.aspx.
\39\ Id. at 166.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
23. The 2017 State of Reliability Report recognized the
significance of protection system misoperations to Bulk-Power System
reliability by observing that ``[p]rotection system misoperations
should remain an area of focus as it continues to be one of the largest
contributors to the severity of transmission outages.'' \40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ 2017 State of Reliability Report at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
24. For the reasons discussed above, we propose to direct that NERC
develop modifications to proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 to
address our concern by requiring that applicable entities perform an
initial protection coordination study under Requirement R2, Option 2.
We propose that applicable entities would have six years from the
effective date of a modified Reliability Standard to complete the
analysis. An applicable entity could use pre-existing protection system
coordination studies to satisfy the proposed requirement provided it
was reasonable (i.e., no intervening system changes that would render
the earlier work obsolete). After conducting the initial protection
system coordination study, subsequent protection system coordination
studies would only be required when an applicable entity is confronted
with 15 percent or greater fault current deviations from the prior
baseline study amounts, as currently proposed in Reliability Standard
PRC-027-1, Requirement R2, Option 2. We seek comments on this proposal.
25. Separately, we seek comment from NERC and other interested
entities explaining the technical basis for
[[Page 56190]]
employing a 15 percent deviation threshold in proposed Reliability
Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2, Option 2. We seek to better
understand the basis for this threshold to ensure an adequate record in
the proceeding on this matter.
III. Information Collection Statement
26. The collection of information addressed in this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking is subject to review by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995.\41\ OMB's regulations require approval of certain information
collection requirements imposed by agency rules.\42\ Upon approval of a
collection(s) of information, OMB will assign an OMB control number and
an expiration date. Respondents subject to the filing requirements of a
rule will not be penalized for failing to respond to these collections
of information unless the collections of information display a valid
OMB control number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
\42\ 5 CFR 1320.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
27. The Commission will submit the information collection
requirement to OMB for its final review and approval. We solicit public
comments on the need for this information, whether the information will
have practical utility, the accuracy of the burden estimates, ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be
collected or retained, and any suggested methods for minimizing
respondents' burden, including the use of automated information
techniques.
28. The information collection requirements in this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking in Docket No. RM16-22-000 are associated with FERC-
725A,\43\ FERC-725G6,\44\ and FERC-725Y, as discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ FERC-725A (OMB Control No. 1902-0244) currently includes
the information collection requirements associated with Reliability
Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), which is proposed for retirement. Only one
item per OMB Control No. may be pending OMB review at a time, and an
unrelated item affecting FERC-725A is pending OMB review. We are
providing estimates of the burden reduction related to FERC-725A for
review and comment. However, to submit this Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking timely to OMB, the Commission is being conservative and
not reducing the burden estimates associated with FERC-725A at this
time.
\44\ The information collection requirements related to proposed
Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 would normally be included in FERC-
725G (OMB Control No. 1902-0252). However, only one item per OMB
Control No. may be pending OMB review at a time, and an unrelated
item affecting FERC-725G is pending OMB review. For this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking and the related submittal to OMB, we use a
placeholder information collection no. of FERC-725G6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
29. Public Reporting Burden: The number of respondents below is
based on an examination of the NERC compliance registry on April 7,
2017, for transmission owners, generator owners, generator operators,
and distribution providers within the United States and an estimate of
how many entities from that registry will be affected by the
Reliability Standards proposed for adoption and implementation. At the
time of Commission review of proposed Reliability Standards PRC-027-1
and PER-006-1, 334 transmission owners, 913 generator owners, 875
generator operators, and 365 distribution providers in the United
States were registered in the NERC compliance registry. However, under
NERC's compliance registration program, entities may be registered for
multiple functions, so these numbers incorporate some double counting.
We note that many generation sites share a common generator owner or
generator operator. The following table provides the estimated proposed
annual burden and cost related to information collection requirements
in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ TO = transmission owner; TOP = transmission operator; GO =
generator owner; GOP = generator operator; DP = distribution
provider; and BA = balancing authority.
Proposed Changes in the NOPR in Docket No. RM16-22-000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual
number of Total number Average burden Annual burden
Respondent category and Number of responses of annual hours and cost hours and total
requirement \46\ respondents per responses per response \47\ annual cost
respondent (rounded) \48\
(1) (2) (1) * (2) = (4)............... (3) * (4) = (5)
(3)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERC-725G6 (Covering Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1) \49\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO; Reporting Reqs. R1, R2, & 334 1 334 60 hrs.; $3,941.40 20,040 hrs.;
R3. $1,316,428.
TO; Recordkeeping Reqs......... 334 1 334 40 hrs.; $1,565.60 13,360 hrs.;
$522,910.
GO; Reporting Reqs. R1, R2, & 913 1 913 10 hrs.; $656.90.. 9,130 hrs.;
R3. $599,750.
GO; Recordkeeping Reqs......... 913 1 913 10 hrs.; $391.40.. 9,130 hrs.;
$357,348.
DP; Reporting Reqs R1, R2, & R3 365 1 365 10 hrs.; $656.90.. 3,650 hrs.;
$239,769.
DP; Recordkeeping Reqs......... 365 1 365 10 hrs.; $391.40.. 3,650 hrs.;
$142,861.
------------------
Sub-Total for Reporting ............ ............ ............ .................. 32,820 hrs.;
Reqs. for FERC-725G6. $2,155,947.
Sub-Total for Recordkeeping ............ ............ ............ .................. 26,140 hrs.;
Reqs. for FERC-725G6. $1,023,119.
------------------
Total Proposed Increase ............ ............ ............ .................. 58,960 hrs.;
for FERC-725G6. $3,179,066.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERC-725Y (Covering Proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GOP; Reporting Req. R1......... 875 1 875 5 hrs.; $328.45... 4,375 hrs.;
$287,394.
GOP; Recordkeeping Req......... 875 1 875 10 hrs.; $391.40.. 8,750 hrs.;
$342,475.
Total Proposed Increase for ............ ............ ............ .................. 13,125 hrs.;
FERC-725Y. $629,869.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reductions to FERC-725A (Covering Proposed Retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1) \50\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GOP; Reporting Req............. 875 1 875 40 hrs.; $2,627.60 35,000 hrs.;
$2,299,150.
GOP; Recordkeeping Req......... 875 1 875 50 hrs.; $1,957.00 43,750 hrs.;
$1,712,375.
[[Page 56191]]
TOP; Reporting Req............. 177 1 177 60 hrs.; $3,941.40 10,620 hrs.;
$697,628.
TOP; Recordkeeping Req......... 177 1 177 70 hrs.; $2,739.80 12,390 hrs.;
$484,945.
BA; Reporting Req.............. 99 1 99 32 hrs.; $2,102.08 3,168 hrs.;
$208,106.
BA; Recordkeeping Req.......... 99 1 99 20 hrs.; $782.80.. 1,980 hrs.;
$77,497.
Reduction Sub-Total ............ ............ ............ .................. 48,788 hrs.;
Reporting Reqs. for FERC- $3,204,884.
725A.
------------------
Reduction Sub-Total ............ ............ ............ .................. 58,120 hrs.;
Recordkeeping Reqs. for $2,274,817.
FERC-725A.
------------------
Reduction, Sub-Total for ............ ............ ............ .................. 106,908 hrs.;
FERC-725A. $5,479,701
(reduction).
------------------
NET TOTAL REDUCTION FOR ............ ............ ............ .................. 34,823 hrs.;
PROPOSED CHANGES IN $1,670,766
NOPR IN RM16-22-000. (reduction).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Titles: FERC-725G6 (Mandatory Reliability Standard PRC-027-1) and
FERC-725Y (Mandatory Reliability Standards: Operations Personnel
Training (PER-005-2 and PER-006-1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ For each Reliability Standard, the Measure shows the
acceptable evidence for the associated Reporting Requirement, and
the Compliance section details the related Recordkeeping
Requirement.
\47\ Based on data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the
average hourly cost (wages plus benefits) is $65.69/hour for an
engineer, and $39.14/hour for a record clerk. The hourly cost for an
engineer is used for reporting requirements; the hourly cost for a
record clerk is used for recordkeeping requirements.
\48\ For display purposes, the cost figures in column 5 have
been rounded.
\49\ Some of the reporting requirements are required at least
every six calendar years. In this table, the Commission assumes that
respondents might work on some of their elements each year; the
annual burden estimate shown is one sixth of the burden associated
with one complete six-year cycle. For example, for each transmission
owner: (a) the annual reporting burden associated with Requirements
R1, R2, and R3 is shown as 60 hours per year, and (b) the burden for
the six-year cycle would be six times that, or a total of 360 hours.
\50\ The estimates for average annual burden hours per response
are based on Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242 at PP 1906,
1907. The numbers of respondents and estimated hourly costs are
based on current figures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action: Revision to existing collections and proposed new
information collection.
OMB Control Nos.: To be determined (FERC-725G6) \51\ and 1902-0279
(FERC-725Y).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ OMB will assign a Control No. when it issues a decision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Respondents: Business or other for profit, and not for profit
institutions.
Frequency of Responses: Annual recordkeeping and reporting
requirements, with some reporting requirements being at least once
every six years.
Necessity of the Information: Proposed Reliability Standards PRC-
027-1 and PER-006-1 set forth requirements for coordination of
protection systems and personnel training on specific topics essential
to reliability. The Commission proposes to approve proposed Reliability
Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1, which will replace Commission-
approved Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii). The proposed Reliability
Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1 improve upon the existing Reliability
Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) because the proposed Reliability Standards
assign responsibilities to entities with more appropriate resources and
skill sets to conduct studies required to coordinate protection
systems. The proposed Reliability Standards also provide additional
clarity to the applicable entities.
Internal review: The Commission has assured itself, by means of its
internal review, that there is specific, objective support for the
burden estimates associated with the information requirements.
30. 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].
31. Comments concerning the information collection proposed in this
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and the associated burden estimates
should be sent to the Commission in this docket and may also be sent 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 the following email address:
oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. Please refer to OMB Control Nos. to be
determined (FERC-725G6) and 1902-0279 (FERC-725Y) in your submittal.
IV. Environmental Analysis
32. 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.\52\ The
action proposed here falls within the categorical exclusion in the
Commission's regulations for rules that are clarifying, corrective or
procedural, for information gathering, analysis, and dissemination.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, Order No. 486, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 30,783 (1987)
(cross-referenced at 41 FERC ] 61,284).
\53\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act
33. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) generally requires
a description and analysis of proposed rules that will have significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.\54\ The
Small Business Administration (SBA) defines
[[Page 56192]]
which utilities are small businesses based on the number of employees
that a utility and its affiliates employ.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
\55\ 13 CFR 121.201, Subsector 221.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
34. The proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 (included in FERC-
725G6) will apply to approximately 1,612 entities (334 transmission
owners, 913 generator owners, and 365 distribution providers) in the
United States.\56\ Pursuant to SBA regulations, the employment
threshold for transmission is 500 employees, for generator owners is
between 250 and 750 employees (depending on the fuel source), and for
distribution providers is 1,000 employees. We estimate that the annual
cost for each entity will be $1,048 for each generator owner and
distribution provider and $5,507 for each transmission owner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ Many respondents serve multiple roles in the NERC
compliance registry, so there is likely double counting in the
estimates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
35. The proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1 (included in FERC-
725Y) will apply to approximately 875 generator operators in the United
States. Pursuant to SBA regulations the employment threshold for
generator operators is between 250 and 750 employees (depending on the
fuel source). We estimate that the annual cost for each generator
operator will be $719.
36. In addition, this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposes the
retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) (included in FERC-
725A). That retirement would decrease the annual estimated cost for 875
generator operators by $4,585 each, for 177 transmission operators by
$6,681 each, and for 99 balancing authorities by $2,885 each. For the
generator operators affected by this retirement and the proposed
Reliability Standard PER-006-1, the net annual effect would be a
decrease of $3,866 each. We estimate the net annual cost of this Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking would vary, by type of entity, from an annual
decrease of $6,681 (for each transmission operator) to an annual
increase of $5,507 (for each transmission owner). We view this as a
minimal economic impact for each entity. Accordingly, we certify that
the proposed Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1 and
retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1 (ii) will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
VI. Comment Procedures
37. The Commission invites interested persons to submit comments on
the matters and issues proposed in this notice to be adopted, including
any related matters or alternative proposals that commenters may wish
to discuss. Comments are due January 29, 2018. Comments must refer to
Docket No. RM16-22-000, and must include the commenter's name, the
organization they represent, if applicable, and their address in their
comments.
38. The Commission encourages comments to be filed electronically
via the eFiling link on the Commission's Web site at https://www.ferc.gov. The Commission accepts most standard word processing
formats. Documents created electronically using word processing
software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format
and not in a scanned format. Commenters filing electronically do not
need to make a paper filing.
39. Commenters that are not able to file comments electronically
must send an original of their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
40. All comments will be placed in the Commission's public files
and may be viewed, printed, or downloaded remotely as described in the
Document Availability section below. Commenters on this proposal are
not required to serve copies of their comments on other commenters.
VII. Document Availability
41. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
Internet through the Commission's Home Page (https://www.ferc.gov) and
in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal business hours
(8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A,
Washington, DC 20426.
42. From the Commission's Home Page on the Internet, this
information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is
available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing,
printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type
the docket number of this document, excluding the last three digits, in
the docket number field.
43. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's
Web site during normal business hours from the Commission's Online
Support at (202) 502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY (202) 502-8659. Email the Public Reference Room at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
By direction of the Commission.
Issued November 16, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-25586 Filed 11-27-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
