Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults and Specific Training for Personnel Reliability Standards, 27505-27511 [2018-12663]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
27505
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 83, No. 114
Wednesday, June 13, 2018
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents.
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
18 CFR Part 40
[Docket No. RM16–22–000; Order No. 847]
Coordination of Protection Systems for
Performance During Faults and
Specific Training for Personnel
Reliability Standards
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (Commission)
approves 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).
DATES: This rule will become effective
August 13, 2018.
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:
SUMMARY:
Order No. 847
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
Final Rule
(Issued June 7, 2018)
1. Pursuant to section 215 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), the
Commission approves Reliability
Standards PRC–027–1 (Coordination of
Protection Systems for Performance
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:38 Jun 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
During Faults) and PER–006–1 (Specific
Training for Personnel).1 The North
American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC), the Commissioncertified Electric Reliability
Organization (ERO), submitted
Reliability Standards PRC–027–1 and
PER–006–1 for approval. As discussed
below, we determine that Reliability
Standard PRC–027–1, which is designed
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, and
PER–006–1, which is intended to ensure
that personnel are trained on specific
topics essential to reliability to perform
or support real-time operations of the
bulk electric system, improve upon the
currently-effective Reliability Standards.
In addition, based on the record before
us, we do not adopt the NOPR proposal
to direct NERC to modify 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.
2. The Commission also approves 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 approves the
retirement of currently-effective
Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii)
(System Protection Coordination) as
proposed by NERC. Finally, the
Commission approves new and revised
definitions submitted by NERC for
incorporation in the NERC Glossary for
the following terms: (1) ‘‘protection
system coordination study;’’ (2)
‘‘operational planning analysis;’’ and (3)
‘‘real-time assessment.’’ 2
I. Background
A. Section 215 and Mandatory
Reliability Standards
3. Section 215 of the FPA requires a
Commission-certified ERO to develop
mandatory and enforceable Reliability
Standards, subject to Commission
1 16
U.S.C. 824o (2012).
Glossary of Terms Used in NERC
Reliability Standards (NERC Glossary).
2 NERC
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
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
4. 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 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
C. NERC Petition and Reliability
Standards PRC–027–1 and PER–006–1
5. On September 2, 2016, NERC
submitted a petition seeking
Commission approval of Reliability
Standards PRC–027–1 and PER–006–1.8
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 Reliability Standards PRC–027–1 and PER–006–
1 are not attached to this Final Rule. The Reliability
Standards are available on the Commission’s
eLibrary document retrieval system in Docket No.
RM16–22–000 and are posted on the NERC website,
https://www.nerc.com.
4 Id.
E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM
13JNR1
27506
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
NERC stated that the 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 explained that the intent of the
submitted 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 asserted
that the submitted Reliability Standards
are an improvement over currentlyeffective 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. Reliability Standard PER–006–1
6. NERC stated that 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 explained that
Reliability Standard PER–006–1 will
also cover plant personnel who are
responsible for real-time control of a
generator. NERC maintained that it is
appropriate to train plant personnel in
the functionality of protection systems
and remedial action schemes. NERC
observed that Reliability Standard PER–
006–1 replaces the phrase ‘‘purpose and
limitations’’ used in Reliability
Standard PRC–001–1(ii) with the phrase
‘‘operational functionality’’ to clearly
identify the objective of the training.11
NERC also noted that 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 noted that
Reliability Standard PER–006–1 does
not specify a periodicity for the required
training.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
2. Reliability Standard PRC–027–1
7. NERC asserted that 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
Petition at 10.
at 13.
11 Id. at 15.
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, 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
8. NERC stated that 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
9. NERC explained that Reliability
Standard PRC–027–1, Requirement R3
will require applicable entities to use
the process established under Reliability
Standard PRC–027–1, Requirement R1
for the development of any new or
revised protection system settings.
3. Retirement of Reliability Standard
PRC–001–1.1(ii)
10. NERC stated that Reliability
Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii) includes six
requirements that are either addressed
by Reliability Standards approved by
the Commission or by Reliability
Standards PER–006–1and PRC–027–1.
Specifically, NERC explained that
Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii),
Requirement R1 has been partially
replaced by Reliability Standards PER–
003–1 and PER–005–2. NERC continued
that Reliability Standard PER–006–1
and the revised definitions of
operational planning analysis and realtime assessment will replace the
remaining portions of Reliability
Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii), Requirement
R1. NERC asserted 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,
9 NERC
12 Id.
10 Id.
13 Id.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:38 Jun 12, 2018
at 26.
at 27.
14 Id. at 26.
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
which the Commission approved in
Order No. 817.15 NERC stated that
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1 will
replace Reliability Standard PRC–001–
1.1(ii), Requirements R3 and R4. NERC
also explained 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 stated that
Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii),
Requirement R6 has been replaced with
Reliability Standards TOP–001–3 and
TOP–003–3.
D. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
11. On November 16, 2017, the
Commission issued a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking proposing to
approve Reliability Standards PRC–027–
1 and PER–006–1.17 The NOPR
proposed to determine that Reliability
Standards PRC–027–1 and PER–006–1
improve upon the currently-effective
Reliability Standards. However, the
NOPR observed that 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 because it does not require an
initial protection system coordination
study. Accordingly, the NOPR also
proposed to direct NERC, pursuant to
section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, to submit
modifications to Reliability Standard
PRC–027–1 within 12 months of the
effective date of this Final Rule 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.18
12. In addition, the NOPR proposed to
approve the associated violation risk
factors and violation severity levels,
implementation plan, and effective date
proposed by NERC.19 The NOPR also
proposed to approve the revised
definitions for inclusion in the NERC
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 Coordination of Protection Systems for
Performance During Faults and Specific Training
for Personnel Reliability Standards, Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, 82 FR 55535 (Nov. 22, 2017),
161 FERC ¶ 61,159, at P 12 (2017) (NOPR). The
NOPR was erroneously published a second time in
the Federal Register on November 28, 2017, which
changed the comment date to January 29, 2018. 82
FR 56759 (Nov. 30, 2017); 82 FR 56186 (Nov. 28,
2017).
18 NOPR, 161 FERC ¶ 61,159 at PP 14, 24.
19 Id. P 13.
E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM
13JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Glossary.20 Further, the NOPR proposed
to approve the retirement of Reliability
Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii), as requested
by NERC.21
13. In response to the NOPR, the
Commission received fifteen sets of
comments. We address below the issues
raised in the NOPR and comments. The
Appendix to this Final Rule lists the
entities that filed comments in response
to the NOPR.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
II. Discussion
14. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of
the FPA, we approve Reliability
Standards PER–006–1 and PRC–027–1
as just, reasonable, not unduly
discriminatory or preferential, and in
the public interest, as both Reliability
Standards improve on currentlyeffective Reliability Standard PRC–001–
1.1(ii) in important ways.22 As
discussed below, we do not adopt the
NOPR proposal to direct NERC to
modify Reliability Standard PRC–027–1
to require coordination of all bulk
electric system elements with protection
system functions.
15. Reliability Standard PRC–027–1
improves on currently-effective
Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii) 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. Reliability Standard PER–
006–1, along with existing formal
training requirements in the Personnel
Performance, Training, and
Qualifications (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.
16. In addition, we approve NERC’s
associated violation risk factors,
violation severity levels,
implementation plans, and effective
dates. We also approve the revised
definitions for inclusion in the NERC
Glossary. Further, we approve the
retirement of Reliability Standard PRC–
001–1.1(ii), as requested by NERC.
20 Id.
21 Id.
22 16
U.S.C. 824o(d)(2).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:53 Jun 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
Initial Protection System Coordination
Study
NOPR
17. The NOPR proposed to direct that
NERC develop modifications to
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1 to
ensure coordination of all bulk electric
system elements with protection system
functions by requiring that applicable
entities perform an initial protection
coordination study under Requirement
R2, Option 2.
Comments
18. NERC does not support the
proposed directive because it believes
that the proposed directive is unduly
burdensome and unsupported by the
materials cited in the NOPR. NERC
contends that while the ‘‘proposed
directive could potentially help reduce
misoperations caused by coordination
issues . . . [it] would also impose a
significant burden on industry . . .
requiring a substantial expenditure of
resources.’’ 23 NERC also states that it
‘‘expects that many entities will choose
to do a full Protection System
Coordination Study . . . for their more
impactful [bulk electric system]
Elements’’ and that ‘‘it is highly likely
that the overwhelming majority of
entities have already conducted
coordination studies for their Protection
Systems.’’ 24 While NERC agrees with
the goal of reducing protection system
misoperation rates on the bulk electric
system, it contends that recent
misoperation rates demonstrate that
mis-coordination of existing protection
systems ‘‘does not present a widespread
risk to [bulk electric system] reliability
that would necessitate the expenditure
of resources required to conduct full
Protection System Coordination Studies
for every [bulk electric system] element
with a Protection System.’’ 25
19. In addition, NERC and other
commenters contend that the materials
cited in the NOPR do not support the
proposal to modify Reliability Standard
PRC–027–1.26 NERC, EEI and Tri-State
contend that the Arizona Southern
California September 8, 2011 Outage
Report is unsupportive because it
addresses mis-coordination of remedial
action schemes and not protection
systems.27 NERC and Tri-State assert
that the NERC System Protection
Control Task Force Report addressed
23 NERC
Comments at 4.
24 Id. at 5–6.
25 Id. at 6.
26 See generally NERC Comments; EEI Comments;
Tri-State Comments; Entergy Comments; ITC
Comments.
27 NERC Comments at 7; EEI Comments at 7; TriState Comments at 7–8.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
27507
issues specific to generation
transmission interfaces and did not
apply broadly to all bulk electric system
elements with protection systems.28
NERC and Tri-State also contend that
the 2009 letter from the NERC President
to the NERC board of Trustees and
stakeholders is no longer relevant
because mis-coordination issues are
now responsible for a smaller
percentage of events and that miscoordination has not recently caused
any significant system disturbances.29
NERC and Tri-State claim that
Reliability Standard PRC–004 now
requires applicable entities to mitigate
the effects of misoperations by
implementing a corrective action plan
that has reduced misoperations.30
20. Further, while NERC agrees with
the 2013 Misoperations Report that
reducing misoperations, including miscoordination events, is an important
priority for bulk electric system
reliability, NERC contends that the
report does not indicate that requiring
protection system coordination studies
for all applicable elements, as proposed
in the NOPR, is the only or optimal way
to reduce mis-coordination events.31 EEI
also contends that the 2013
Misoperations Report shows that human
error and lack of training are responsible
for a significant portion of
misoperations.32
21. NERC, EEI, and Tri-State explain
that the 2014 incident identified in the
‘‘lessons learned’’ document on
‘‘Generation Relaying—Underfrequency
Protection Coordination’’ was unrelated
to protection system coordination.33
22. Finally, NERC states that while
the 2016 State of Reliability Report
highlights the continued need to reduce
misoperations, the report does not
indicate that there is a need to require
entities to perform a protection system
coordination study for every bulk
electric system element with a
protection system.34 NERC also
contends that the 2017 State of
Reliability Report observes a continuing
decline in misoperation rates, but that
misoperations are a priority for NERC.35
NERC states that the misoperations rate
within the Texas Reliability Entity
Region observed in the 2016 State of
Reliability Report was mitigated by the
28 NERC
Comments at 7–8; Tri-State Comments at
8–9.
29 NERC Comments at 8; Tri-State Comments at
9–10.
30 NERC Comments at 8; Tri-State Comments at 9.
31 NERC Comments at 9.
32 EEI Comments at 7.
33 NERC Comments at 10; EEI Comments at 8; TriState Comments at 10.
34 NERC Comments at 10.
35 Id. at 9.
E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM
13JNR1
27508
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
time NERC issued the 2017 State of
Reliability Report.36 NERC claims that
this reduction in misoperation events is
evidence that requiring entities to
perform protection system coordination
studies is unnecessary because the
entities will address the misoperation
events without specific requirements in
Reliability Standards.37
23. Other commenters do not support
the proposal to direct NERC to develop
modifications to Reliability Standard
PRC–027–1 because they generally
contend that the proposed directive is
not necessary and would impose a
burden without a proportional
reliability benefit.38 Hydro One
estimates that it will need
approximately 30,000 hours of work to
perform an initial protection system
coordination study.39 Tri-State
estimates that it would take an engineer
at least twenty hours to perform a
protection system coordination study at
each of its approximately 700
terminals.40 Tri-State estimates that the
actual cost to all applicable entities
could be more than $120 million.41
PG&E estimates a cost to industry
‘‘greatly in excess of $100 million’’ and
asserts that the proposed directive
would require PG&E to perform
coordination studies for 95 percent of
the PG&E bulk electric system at a cost
of $3.5 million in engineering labor.42
24. Entergy requests that the
Commission find that NERC’s approach
for requiring protection system
coordination studies achieves the
Reliability Standard’s ‘‘reliability goals
effectively and efficiently.’’ 43 Entergy
opines that, by adopting NERC’s
proposal without modification, the
Commission appropriately would give
‘‘due weight’’ to the technical expertise
of the ERO. Entergy asserts that NERC
properly supported Requirement R2 by
setting forth evidence of the frequency
of coordination events over a four-year
period, which shows that only 11
percent of misoperation events (17
events out of 151) and only 2.9 percent
of total events (17 out of 574) involved
Protection System coordination issues.
Further, Entergy claims that, in
36 NERC Comments at 11; see also Entergy
Comments at 8.
37 NERC Comments at 11.
38 APPA/TAPS Comments at 3; EEI Comments at
3; El Paso Electric Comments at 4; Entergy
Comments at 4; Hydro One Comments at 1–2; ITC
Comments at 3; LPPC Comments at 2; NPPD
Comments at 1; NRECA/ELCON Comments at 5;
Oncor Comments at 1; PG&E Comments at 2;
SCE&G Comments at 1; Tri-State Comments at 4.
39 Hydro One Comments at 1.
40 Id. at 13.
41 Id.
42 PG&E Comments at 3.
43 Entergy Comments at 5.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:53 Jun 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
proposing the Reliability Standard,
NERC was aware of the possibility that
some bulk electric system elements may
never undergo a Protection System
Coordination Study and that ‘‘NERC
does not afford this possibility the same
risk as the Commission.’’ 44 According
to Entergy, ‘‘NERC has properly
balanced the implementation costs and
reliability benefits of the proposed PRC–
027–1 Reliability Standard and
determined that Option 2 is sufficient to
ensure reliability’’ and the Commission
should defer to NERC’s expertise, or
otherwise provide more support to
justify a deviation from NERC’s
proposal.
25. In addition, some commenters
expressed concern that applicable
entities may not have maintained
sufficient documentation to substantiate
prior protection system coordination
studies and, as result, entities would
have to perform new protection system
coordination studies purely for
compliance purposes.45
26. As an alternative to the proposed
directive, NERC and other commenters
suggest that Reliability Standard PRC–
027–1 be modified so that it requires an
applicable entity to conduct an initial
baseline protection system coordination
study on a certain subset of its bulk
electric system elements (i.e., based on
a higher voltage or higher risk
protection systems).46 NERC and other
commenters also request that the
Commission permit NERC to allow more
than 6 years to complete the initial
baseline protection system coordination
studies (i.e., 10 or 12 years) if the
Commission directs NERC to modify
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1.47 EEI
44 Id.
at 9–10.
Comments at 4; Entergy Comments at 1;
NPPD Comments at 1; PG&E Comments at 3.
46 NERC Comments at 11–12; El Paso Electric
Comments at 2; Entergy Comments at 12; NRECA/
ELCON Comments at 6–7.
47 NERC Comments at 12; El Paso Electric
Comments at 2–3; Entergy Comments at 12–13;
NRECA/ELCON Comments at 6–7. Separately, El
Paso Electric contends that the six-year cycle
proposed by NERC in Reliability Standard PRC–
027–1, Requirement R2 is too short and directs
resources away from ‘‘other activities that have a
greater likelihood of improving reliability outcomes
in a demonstrable way.’’ El Paso Electric Comments
at 2. We disagree. NERC recognized the potential
burden imposed by Requirement R2 and
determined that six years ‘‘balance[d] the resources
required to perform Protection System Coordination
Studies and the potential reliability impacts created
by incremental changes of Fault current over time.’’
NERC Petition at 40. Moreover, during the standard
drafting process, some commenters indicated that
six years was too long an interval. See, e.g., NERC
Petition, Exhibit G (Summary of Development
History and Record of Development) at 1479 of pdf
(ReliabilityFirst recommending a 24-month period
to conduct protection system coordination study),
2169 of pdf (Texas RE stating that six years is too
long of a time period between studies of fault
currents).
45 ITC
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
recommends that if the Commission
continues to have concerns about
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1,
Requirement R2, Option 2, as an
alternative to the proposed directive, a
final rule should direct NERC ‘‘to assess
the effectiveness of Option 2 after the
implementation of the proposed
Reliability Standard and if necessary
make technical recommendations to
improve the efficiency and effectiveness
as appropriate.’’ 48
27. Idaho Power supports the
proposed directive.49 Idaho Power
supports eliminating Reliability
Standard PRC–027–1, Requirement R2,
Option 2 because it contends that
Option 1 is a more robust option
explaining that it is ‘‘preferable because
it is more likely to address
miscoordinations.’’ 50
Commission Determination
28. Based on the record before us, we
do not adopt the directive proposed in
the NOPR. The record in this
proceeding supports the NOPR’s
conclusion that mis-coordination of
protection systems may pose a potential
reliability risk and, as currently drafted,
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1,
Requirement R2, Option 2 permits
applicable entities to forego protection
system coordination studies under
certain circumstances.51 However, we
are persuaded by the statements from
NERC and other commenters that
applicable entities generally perform, or
will choose to perform for their
significant facilities, protection system
coordination studies even in the
absence of a Reliability Standard
requirement.52 We also recognize the
concern raised by commenters regarding
the burden of compliance. Specifically,
we recognize the concern that were the
NOPR directive adopted, applicable
entities could be required to re-run
protection system coordination studies
for the sole purpose of generating
compliance documentation, even if such
entities already performed protection
48 EEI
Comments at 6.
Power Comments at 1–2.
50 Id. at 2.
51 See, e.g., NERC Comments at 6 (‘‘NERC and the
standard drafting team concluded that Protection
System coordination did not present a prevalent
enough risk to the reliable operation of the [bulk
electric system] to warrant imposing the burden of
requiring applicable entities to perform a full
Protection System Coordination Study for every
[bulk electric system] Element with a Protection
System.’’); Entergy Comments at 9 (‘‘In proposing
the Reliability Standard, NERC was aware of the
possibility that some bulk electric system elements
may never undergo a Protection System
Coordination Study.’’).
52 See, e.g., NERC Comments at 5; NPPD
Comments at 1; Tri-State Comments at 10; ITC
Comments at 4.
49 Idaho
E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM
13JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
system coordination studies that remain
valid but lack documentation to
substantiate compliance. Accordingly,
pursuant to 215(d)(2) of the FPA, we
approve Reliability Standard PRC–027–
1 and do not direct modifications to the
Reliability Standard.53
III. Information Collection Statement
29. The collections of information
addressed in this Final Rule are subject
to review by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) under section
3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995.54 OMB’s regulations require
approval of certain information
collection requirements imposed by
agency rules.55 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.
30. The Commission solicited public
comments in the NOPR 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. The
Commission did not receive comments
regarding the burden estimates for the
Reliability Standards approved herein
(i.e., Reliability Standards PRC–027–1
and PER–006–1).56
31. The information collection
requirements in this Final Rule in
Docket No. RM16–22–000 are associated
with FERC–725A, FERC–725G, and
FERC–725Y, as discussed below.57
32. Public Reporting Burden: The
number of respondents below is based
on an examination of the NERC
27509
compliance registry on December 1,
2017, for transmission owners, generator
owners, generator operators, and
distribution providers within the United
States and an estimate of how many
such entities from that registry will be
affected by the Reliability Standards in
this Final Rule for adoption and
implementation. As of December 1,
2017, 337 transmission owners, 971
generator owners, 944 generator
operators, and 419 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 annual burden and cost
related to information collection
requirements in this Final Rule.58
CHANGES DUE TO THE FINAL RULE IN DOCKET NO. RM16–22–000
Annual
number of
responses
per
respondent
Total
number of
annual
responses
Average burden hours and
cost per response 60
Annual burden hours and
total annual cost
(rounded) 61
(1)
Respondent category and
Number of
respondents
requirement 59
(2)
(1) * (2) = (3)
(4)
(3) * (4) = (5)
FERC–725G (Reliability Standard PRC–027–1) 62
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 ..............................................
Sub-Total for Reporting Reqs. for FERC–725G ...........
Sub-Total for Recordkeeping Reqs. for FERC–725G ..
Total Increase for FERC–725G ....................................
337
337
971
971
419
419
....................
....................
....................
1
1
1
1
1
1
....................
....................
....................
337
337
971
971
419
419
..............................
..............................
..............................
60 hrs.; $3,941.40 ...............
40 hrs.; $1,565.60 ...............
10 hrs.; $656.90 ..................
10 hrs.; $391.40 ..................
10 hrs.; $656.90 ..................
10 hrs.; $391.40 ..................
..............................................
..............................................
..............................................
20,220 hrs.; $1,328,252.
13,480 hrs.; $527,607.
9,710 hrs.; $637,830.
9,710 hrs.; $380,049.
4,190 hrs.; $275,241.
4,190 hrs.; $163,997.
34,120 hrs.; $2,241,323.
27,380 hrs.; $1,072,653.
61,500 hrs.; $3,313,976.
FERC–725Y (Reliability Standard PER–006–1) 63
GOP; Reporting Req. R1 ..............................................
GOP; Recordkeeping Req ............................................
Total Increase for FERC–725Y .....................................
944
944
....................
1
1
....................
944
944
..............................
5 hrs.; $328.45 ....................
10 hrs.; $391.40 ..................
..............................................
4,720 hrs.; $310,057.
9,440 hrs.; $369,482.
14,160 hrs.; $679,539.
Reductions to FERC–725A (retirement of Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1) 64
GOP; Reporting Req .....................................................
GOP; Recordkeeping Req ............................................
TOP; Reporting Req ......................................................
TOP; Recordkeeping Req .............................................
BA; Reporting Req ........................................................
BA; Recordkeeping Req ................................................
Reduction Sub-Total Reporting Reqs. for FERC–725A
Reduction Sub-Total Recordkeeping Reqs. for FERC–
725A.
Reduction Sub-Total for FERC–725A ...........................
53 16
U.S.C. 824o(d)(2).
U.S.C. 3507(d) (2012).
55 5 CFR 1320.11 (2017).
56 As discussed above, several commenters
addressed the potential burden of a new version of
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1 modified, pursuant
to the Commission’s directive, to require initial
protection system coordination studies. See, e.g.,
Tri-State Comments at 12. However, those
comments are not relevant to the burden estimates
contained in this Final Rule because, herein, the
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
54 44
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:53 Jun 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
944
944
176
176
99
99
....................
....................
1
1
1
1
1
1
....................
....................
944
944
176
176
99
99
..............................
..............................
40 hrs.; $2,627.60 ...............
50 hrs.; $1,957.00 ...............
60 hrs.; $3,941.40 ...............
70 hrs.; $2,739.80 ...............
32 hrs.; $2,102.08 ...............
20 hrs.; $782.80 ..................
..............................................
..............................................
37,760 hrs.; $2,480,454.
47,200 hrs.; $1,847,408.
10,560 hrs.; $693,686.
12,320 hrs.; $482,205.
3,168 hrs.; $208,106.
1,980 hrs.; $77,497.
51,484 hrs.; $3,382,246.
61,500 hrs.; $2,407,110.
....................
....................
..............................
..............................................
112,984 hrs.; $5,789,356
(reduction).
Commission only approves Reliability Standards
PRC–027–1 and PER–006–1.
57 In the NOPR in Docket No. RM16–22–000,
some of the reporting requirements were included
under FERC–725G6 (OMB Control No. 1902–0300),
a temporary place holder, because FERC–725G was
pending review at OMB in an unrelated action. As
indicated below, those reporting requirements are
now included under FERC–725G (OMB Control No.
1902–0252). When the NOPR in Docket No. RM16–
22–000 was issued, another unrelated item affecting
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
FERC–725A was pending OMB review. Burden
estimates were provided in order to solicit public
comments, but the burden reduction to FERC–725A
was not submitted to OMB at that time. The burden
reduction to FERC–725A for this Final Rule will be
submitted to OMB for review.
58 TO = transmission owner; TOP = transmission
operator; GO = generator owner; GOP = generator
operator; DP = distribution provider; and BA =
balancing authority.
E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM
13JNR1
27510
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
CHANGES DUE TO THE FINAL RULE IN DOCKET NO. RM16–22–000—Continued
Number of
respondents
NET TOTAL REDUCTION FOR CHANGES IN RM16–
22–000.
Titles: FERC–725A (Mandatory
Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power
System), FERC–725G (Reliability
Standards for the Bulk Power System:
PRC Reliability Standards) and FERC–
725Y (Mandatory Reliability Standards:
Operations Personnel Training).
Action: Revisions to existing
collections.
OMB Control Nos.: 1902–0244 (FERC–
725A); 1902–0252 (FERC–725G) 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
requirements being at least once every
six years.
Necessity of the Information:
Reliability Standards PRC–027–1 and
PER–006–1 set forth requirements for
coordination of protection systems and
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
59 For
each Reliability Standard, the Measure
shows the acceptable evidence for the associated
Reporting Requirement, and the Compliance section
details the related Recordkeeping Requirement.
60 The estimates for cost per hour are based on
May 2016 wage figures from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS, https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/
naics2_22.htm) and BLS benefits information from
March 20, 2018 (for December 2017, https://
www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm). The
estimated hourly cost, for wages plus benefits, are:
(a) $68.12/hour, for electrical engineer, Occupation
Code 17–2071, and (b) $39.14/hour, for information
and record clerk, Occupation Code 43–4199.
The hourly cost for an electrical engineer is used
for the reporting requirements; the hourly cost for
a record clerk is used for the recordkeeping
requirements.
61 For display purposes, the cost figures in
column 5 have been rounded.
62 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.
63 In order to provide improved information on
the Reliability Standard and associated burden,
FERC–725Y (rather than FERC–725A) will cover the
burden required by PER–006–1.
64 The estimates for average annual burden hours
per response are based on figures in Order No. 693.
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.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:53 Jun 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
Annual
number of
responses
per
respondent
Total
number of
annual
responses
Average burden hours and
cost per response 60
Annual burden hours and
total annual cost
(rounded) 61
(1)
Respondent category and requirement 59
(2)
(1) * (2) = (3)
(4)
(3) * (4) = (5)
....................
....................
..............................
..............................................
personnel training on specific topics
essential to reliability. The Commission
approves Reliability Standards PRC–
027–1 and PER–006–1, which will
replace Commission-approved
Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii).
Reliability Standards PRC–027–1 and
PER–006–1 improve upon existing
Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii)
because the Reliability Standards assign
responsibilities to entities with more
appropriate resources and skill sets to
conduct studies required to coordinate
protection systems. The approved
Reliability Standards also provide
additional clarity to 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.
IV. Environmental Analysis
33. 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.65 The action 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.66
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act
34. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980 (RFA) generally requires a
description and analysis of final rules
that will have significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.67 The Small Business
Administration (SBA) defines which
utilities are small businesses based on
the number of employees that a utility
and its affiliates employ.68
35. Reliability Standard PRC–027–1
(included in FERC–725G) will apply to
approximately 1,727 entities (337
37,324 hrs.; $1,795,841
(reduction).
transmission owners, 971 generator
owners, and 419 distribution providers)
in the United States.69 Pursuant to SBA
regulations, the small business
threshold for Electric Bulk Power
Transmission and Control is 500
employees. For generator owners, the
small generator threshold ranges from
250 to 750 employees (depending on the
fuel source). For Electric Power
Distribution, the small business
threshold 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.
36. Reliability Standard PER–006–1
(included in FERC–725Y) will apply to
approximately 944 generator operators
in the United States. Pursuant to SBA
regulations the small business threshold
for generator operators ranges from 250
to 750 employees (depending on the
fuel source). We estimate that the
annual cost for each generator operator
will be $719.
37. The retirement of Reliability
Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii) (included in
FERC–725A) will decrease the annual
estimated cost for 944 generator
operators by $4,585 each, for 176
transmission operators by $6,681 each,
and for 99 balancing authorities by
$2,885 each. For the generator operators
affected by this retirement and approval
of Reliability Standard PER–006–1, the
net annual effect would be a decrease of
$3,866 each.
38. We estimate the net annual cost of
this Final Rule 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 this
Final Rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities.
VI. Document Availability
65 Regulations
Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Order No. 486,
FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,783 (1987) (crossreferenced at 41 FERC ¶ 61,284).
66 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii) (2017).
67 5 U.S.C. 601–612 (2012).
68 13 CFR 121.201, Subsector 221 (2017).
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
39. In addition to publishing the full
text of this document in the Federal
69 Many respondents serve multiple roles in the
NERC compliance registry, so there is likely double
counting in the estimates.
E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM
13JNR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Register, the Commission provides all
interested persons an opportunity to
view and/or print the contents of this
document via the internet through
FERC’s Home Page (https://
www.ferc.gov) and in FERC’s Public
Reference Room during normal business
hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern
time) at 888 First Street NE, Room 2A,
Washington, DC 20426.
40. From FERC’s Home Page on the
internet, this information is available on
eLibrary. The full text of this document
is available on eLibrary in PDF and
Microsoft Word format for viewing,
printing, and/or downloading. To access
this document in eLibrary, type the
docket number excluding the last three
digits of this document in the docket
number field.
41. User assistance is available for
eLibrary and the FERC’s website during
normal business hours from FERC
Online Support at 202–502–6652 (toll
free at 1–866–208–3676) or email at
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the
Public Reference Room at 202–502–
8371, TTY 202–502–8659. Email the
Public Reference Room at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
APPA/TAPS
ITC ...............
LPPC ............
NPPD ...........
NERC ...........
NRECA/
ELCON.
Oncor ...........
PG&E ...........
SCE&G .........
Tri-State .......
American Public Power
Association and Transmission
Access Policy Study Group
International Transmission
Company d/b/a ITC Transmission, Michigan Electric
Transmission Company,
LLC, ITC Midwest LLC and
ITC Great Plains, LLC.
Large Public Power Council.
Nebraska Public Power District.
North American Electric Reliability Corporation.
National Rural Electric Cooperative Association and the
Electricity Consumers Resource Council.
Oncor Electric Delivery.
Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
South Carolina Electric and
Gas Company.
Tri-State Generation and
Transmission Association,
Inc.
[FR Doc. 2018–12663 Filed 6–12–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
VII. Effective Date and Congressional
Notification
Coast Guard
42. The Final Rule is effective August
13, 2018. The Commission has
determined, with the concurrence of the
Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
OMB, that this rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’
as defined in section 351 of the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996. This Final Rule is
being submitted to the Senate, House,
and Government Accountability Office.
33 CFR Part 165
By the Commission.
Issued: June 7, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
Note: The following appendix will not
appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.
Appendix
List of Commenters
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
APPA/TAPS
EEI ...............
El Paso Electric.
Entergy .........
Hydro One ....
Idaho Power
VerDate Sep<11>2014
American Public Power
Association and Transmission
Access Policy Study Group
Edison Electric Institute.
El Paso Electric Company.
Entergy Services, Inc.
Hydro One Networks Inc.
Idaho Power Company.
15:53 Jun 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
[Docket No. USCG–2018–0445]
Safety Zone; Wendell Family Fourth of
July Fireworks Display, Rockport, TX
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of enforcement of
regulation.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard will enforce
the safety zone for the Wendell Family
Fourth of July Fireworks Display on July
4, 2018, to provide for the safety of life
on navigable waterways during this
event. Our regulation for marine events
within the Eighth Coast Guard District
identifies the regulated area for this
event in Rockport, TX. During the
enforcement periods, entry into these
zones is prohibited unless authorized by
the Captain of the Port Sector Corpus
Christi (COTP) or a designated
representative.
SUMMARY:
The regulations in 33 CFR
165.801, Table 4, Line 7 will be
enforced from 8 p.m. through 9:30 p.m.
on July 4, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions about this notice of
enforcement, call or email Petty Officer
Kevin Kyles, Sector Corpus Christi
Waterways Management Division, U.S.
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
27511
Coast Guard; telephone 361–939–5125,
email Kevin.L.Kyles@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast
Guard will enforce the safety zone in 33
CFR 165.801, Table 4, Line 7, for the
Wendell Family Fourth of July
Fireworks Display regulated area from 8
p.m. through 9:30 p.m. on July 4, 2018.
This action is being taken to provide for
the safety of life on navigable waterways
during this event. Our regulation for
marine events within the Eighth Coast
Guard District, § 165.801, specifies the
location of the regulated area for the
Wendell Family Fourth of July
Fireworks which encompasses portions
of Little Bay and Rockport Beach Park.
As reflected in §§ 165.23 and 165.801(a),
if you are the operator of a vessel in the
regulated area you must comply with
directions from the Captain of the Port
Sector Corpus Christi (COTP) or a
designated representative. Persons or
vessels desiring to enter the zones must
request permission from the COTP or a
designated representative. They can be
reached on VHF FM channel 16 or by
telephone at (361) 939–0450. If
permission is granted, all persons and
vessels shall comply with the
instructions of the COTP or designated
representative. In addition to this notice
of enforcement in the Federal Register,
the COTP or a designated representative
will inform the public through
Broadcast Notice to Mariners (BNM),
Local Notices to Mariners (LNM),
Marine Safety Information Broadcasts
(MSIBs), and/or through other means of
public notice as appropriate at least 24
hours in advance of each enforcement.
Dated: June 6, 2018.
E.J. Gaynor,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Sector Corpus Christi.
[FR Doc. 2018–12645 Filed 6–12–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 165
[Docket Number USCG–2018–0535]
RIN 1625–AA00
Safety Zone; Lewis River, Ridgefield,
WA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Temporary final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard is
establishing a temporary safety zone for
navigable waters of the Lewis River near
Ridgefield, WA. This action is necessary
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM
13JNR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 13, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27505-27511]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12663]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 27505]]
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
18 CFR Part 40
[Docket No. RM16-22-000; Order No. 847]
Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults
and Specific Training for Personnel Reliability Standards
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) approves
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).
DATES: This rule will become effective August 13, 2018.
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, [email protected].
Alan Rukin (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC
20426, Telephone: (202) 502-8502, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Order No. 847
Final Rule
(Issued June 7, 2018)
1. Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), the
Commission approves Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 (Coordination of
Protection Systems for Performance During Faults) and PER-006-1
(Specific Training for Personnel).\1\ The North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Commission-certified Electric
Reliability Organization (ERO), submitted Reliability Standards PRC-
027-1 and PER-006-1 for approval. As discussed below, we determine that
Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, which is designed 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, and PER-006-1,
which is intended to ensure that personnel are trained on specific
topics essential to reliability to perform or support real-time
operations of the bulk electric system, improve upon the currently-
effective Reliability Standards. In addition, based on the record
before us, we do not adopt the NOPR proposal to direct NERC to modify
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 16 U.S.C. 824o (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. The Commission also approves 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 approves the retirement of currently-
effective Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) (System Protection
Coordination) as proposed by NERC. Finally, the Commission approves new
and revised definitions submitted by NERC for incorporation in the NERC
Glossary for the following terms: (1) ``protection system coordination
study;'' (2) ``operational planning analysis;'' and (3) ``real-time
assessment.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ NERC Glossary of Terms Used in NERC Reliability Standards
(NERC Glossary).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Background
A. Section 215 and Mandatory Reliability Standards
3. 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
4. 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 Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1
5. On September 2, 2016, NERC submitted a petition seeking
Commission approval of Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-
1.\8\
[[Page 27506]]
NERC stated that the 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 explained that the intent of the submitted
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 asserted that the submitted
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\ Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1 are not
attached to this Final Rule. The Reliability Standards are available
on the Commission's eLibrary document retrieval system in Docket No.
RM16-22-000 and are posted on the NERC website, https://www.nerc.com.
\9\ NERC Petition at 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Reliability Standard PER-006-1
6. NERC stated that 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 explained that Reliability Standard PER-006-1 will
also cover plant personnel who are responsible for real-time control of
a generator. NERC maintained that it is appropriate to train plant
personnel in the functionality of protection systems and remedial
action schemes. NERC observed that Reliability Standard PER-006-1
replaces the phrase ``purpose and limitations'' used in Reliability
Standard PRC-001-1(ii) with the phrase ``operational functionality'' to
clearly identify the objective of the training.\11\ NERC also noted
that 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 noted that
Reliability Standard PER-006-1 does not specify a periodicity for the
required training.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Id. at 13.
\11\ Id. at 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Reliability Standard PRC-027-1
7. NERC asserted that 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, 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. NERC stated that 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. NERC explained that Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement
R3 will require applicable entities to use the process established
under Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R1 for the
development of any new or revised protection system settings.
3. Retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii)
10. NERC stated that Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) includes
six requirements that are either addressed by Reliability Standards
approved by the Commission or by Reliability Standards PER-006-1and
PRC-027-1. Specifically, NERC explained that Reliability Standard PRC-
001-1.1(ii), Requirement R1 has been partially replaced by Reliability
Standards PER-003-1 and PER-005-2. NERC continued that Reliability
Standard PER-006-1 and the revised definitions of operational planning
analysis and real-time assessment will replace the remaining portions
of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirement R1. NERC asserted
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 stated that Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 will replace
Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirements R3 and R4. NERC also
explained 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
stated 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
11. On November 16, 2017, the Commission issued a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking proposing to approve Reliability Standards PRC-027-
1 and PER-006-1.\17\ The NOPR proposed to determine that Reliability
Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1 improve upon the currently-effective
Reliability Standards. However, the NOPR observed that 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 because it does not require an initial protection
system coordination study. Accordingly, the NOPR also proposed to
direct NERC, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, to submit
modifications to Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 within 12 months of the
effective date of this Final Rule 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.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During
Faults and Specific Training for Personnel Reliability Standards,
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 82 FR 55535 (Nov. 22, 2017), 161 FERC
] 61,159, at P 12 (2017) (NOPR). The NOPR was erroneously published
a second time in the Federal Register on November 28, 2017, which
changed the comment date to January 29, 2018. 82 FR 56759 (Nov. 30,
2017); 82 FR 56186 (Nov. 28, 2017).
\18\ NOPR, 161 FERC ] 61,159 at PP 14, 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. In addition, the NOPR proposed to approve the associated
violation risk factors and violation severity levels, implementation
plan, and effective date proposed by NERC.\19\ The NOPR also proposed
to approve the revised definitions for inclusion in the NERC
[[Page 27507]]
Glossary.\20\ Further, the NOPR proposed to approve the retirement of
Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), as requested by NERC.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Id. P 13.
\20\ Id.
\21\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. In response to the NOPR, the Commission received fifteen sets
of comments. We address below the issues raised in the NOPR and
comments. The Appendix to this Final Rule lists the entities that filed
comments in response to the NOPR.
II. Discussion
14. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of the FPA, we approve
Reliability Standards PER-006-1 and PRC-027-1 as just, reasonable, not
unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the public interest, as
both Reliability Standards improve on currently-effective Reliability
Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) in important ways.\22\ As discussed below, we
do not adopt the NOPR proposal to direct NERC to modify Reliability
Standard PRC-027-1 to require coordination of all bulk electric system
elements with protection system functions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 improves on currently-effective
Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) 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. Reliability Standard PER-006-1, along with
existing formal training requirements in the Personnel Performance,
Training, and Qualifications (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.
16. In addition, we approve NERC's associated violation risk
factors, violation severity levels, implementation plans, and effective
dates. We also approve the revised definitions for inclusion in the
NERC Glossary. Further, we approve the retirement of Reliability
Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), as requested by NERC.
Initial Protection System Coordination Study
NOPR
17. The NOPR proposed to direct that NERC develop modifications to
Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 to ensure coordination of all bulk
electric system elements with protection system functions by requiring
that applicable entities perform an initial protection coordination
study under Requirement R2, Option 2.
Comments
18. NERC does not support the proposed directive because it
believes that the proposed directive is unduly burdensome and
unsupported by the materials cited in the NOPR. NERC contends that
while the ``proposed directive could potentially help reduce
misoperations caused by coordination issues . . . [it] would also
impose a significant burden on industry . . . requiring a substantial
expenditure of resources.'' \23\ NERC also states that it ``expects
that many entities will choose to do a full Protection System
Coordination Study . . . for their more impactful [bulk electric
system] Elements'' and that ``it is highly likely that the overwhelming
majority of entities have already conducted coordination studies for
their Protection Systems.'' \24\ While NERC agrees with the goal of
reducing protection system misoperation rates on the bulk electric
system, it contends that recent misoperation rates demonstrate that
mis-coordination of existing protection systems ``does not present a
widespread risk to [bulk electric system] reliability that would
necessitate the expenditure of resources required to conduct full
Protection System Coordination Studies for every [bulk electric system]
element with a Protection System.'' \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ NERC Comments at 4.
\24\ Id. at 5-6.
\25\ Id. at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. In addition, NERC and other commenters contend that the
materials cited in the NOPR do not support the proposal to modify
Reliability Standard PRC-027-1.\26\ NERC, EEI and Tri-State contend
that the Arizona Southern California September 8, 2011 Outage Report is
unsupportive because it addresses mis-coordination of remedial action
schemes and not protection systems.\27\ NERC and Tri-State assert that
the NERC System Protection Control Task Force Report addressed issues
specific to generation transmission interfaces and did not apply
broadly to all bulk electric system elements with protection
systems.\28\ NERC and Tri-State also contend that the 2009 letter from
the NERC President to the NERC board of Trustees and stakeholders is no
longer relevant because mis-coordination issues are now responsible for
a smaller percentage of events and that mis-coordination has not
recently caused any significant system disturbances.\29\ NERC and Tri-
State claim that Reliability Standard PRC-004 now requires applicable
entities to mitigate the effects of misoperations by implementing a
corrective action plan that has reduced misoperations.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See generally NERC Comments; EEI Comments; Tri-State
Comments; Entergy Comments; ITC Comments.
\27\ NERC Comments at 7; EEI Comments at 7; Tri-State Comments
at 7-8.
\28\ NERC Comments at 7-8; Tri-State Comments at 8-9.
\29\ NERC Comments at 8; Tri-State Comments at 9-10.
\30\ NERC Comments at 8; Tri-State Comments at 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. Further, while NERC agrees with the 2013 Misoperations Report
that reducing misoperations, including mis-coordination events, is an
important priority for bulk electric system reliability, NERC contends
that the report does not indicate that requiring protection system
coordination studies for all applicable elements, as proposed in the
NOPR, is the only or optimal way to reduce mis-coordination events.\31\
EEI also contends that the 2013 Misoperations Report shows that human
error and lack of training are responsible for a significant portion of
misoperations.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ NERC Comments at 9.
\32\ EEI Comments at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
21. NERC, EEI, and Tri-State explain that the 2014 incident
identified in the ``lessons learned'' document on ``Generation
Relaying--Underfrequency Protection Coordination'' was unrelated to
protection system coordination.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ NERC Comments at 10; EEI Comments at 8; Tri-State Comments
at 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
22. Finally, NERC states that while the 2016 State of Reliability
Report highlights the continued need to reduce misoperations, the
report does not indicate that there is a need to require entities to
perform a protection system coordination study for every bulk electric
system element with a protection system.\34\ NERC also contends that
the 2017 State of Reliability Report observes a continuing decline in
misoperation rates, but that misoperations are a priority for NERC.\35\
NERC states that the misoperations rate within the Texas Reliability
Entity Region observed in the 2016 State of Reliability Report was
mitigated by the
[[Page 27508]]
time NERC issued the 2017 State of Reliability Report.\36\ NERC claims
that this reduction in misoperation events is evidence that requiring
entities to perform protection system coordination studies is
unnecessary because the entities will address the misoperation events
without specific requirements in Reliability Standards.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ NERC Comments at 10.
\35\ Id. at 9.
\36\ NERC Comments at 11; see also Entergy Comments at 8.
\37\ NERC Comments at 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
23. Other commenters do not support the proposal to direct NERC to
develop modifications to Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 because they
generally contend that the proposed directive is not necessary and
would impose a burden without a proportional reliability benefit.\38\
Hydro One estimates that it will need approximately 30,000 hours of
work to perform an initial protection system coordination study.\39\
Tri-State estimates that it would take an engineer at least twenty
hours to perform a protection system coordination study at each of its
approximately 700 terminals.\40\ Tri-State estimates that the actual
cost to all applicable entities could be more than $120 million.\41\
PG&E estimates a cost to industry ``greatly in excess of $100 million''
and asserts that the proposed directive would require PG&E to perform
coordination studies for 95 percent of the PG&E bulk electric system at
a cost of $3.5 million in engineering labor.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ APPA/TAPS Comments at 3; EEI Comments at 3; El Paso
Electric Comments at 4; Entergy Comments at 4; Hydro One Comments at
1-2; ITC Comments at 3; LPPC Comments at 2; NPPD Comments at 1;
NRECA/ELCON Comments at 5; Oncor Comments at 1; PG&E Comments at 2;
SCE&G Comments at 1; Tri-State Comments at 4.
\39\ Hydro One Comments at 1.
\40\ Id. at 13.
\41\ Id.
\42\ PG&E Comments at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
24. Entergy requests that the Commission find that NERC's approach
for requiring protection system coordination studies achieves the
Reliability Standard's ``reliability goals effectively and
efficiently.'' \43\ Entergy opines that, by adopting NERC's proposal
without modification, the Commission appropriately would give ``due
weight'' to the technical expertise of the ERO. Entergy asserts that
NERC properly supported Requirement R2 by setting forth evidence of the
frequency of coordination events over a four-year period, which shows
that only 11 percent of misoperation events (17 events out of 151) and
only 2.9 percent of total events (17 out of 574) involved Protection
System coordination issues. Further, Entergy claims that, in proposing
the Reliability Standard, NERC was aware of the possibility that some
bulk electric system elements may never undergo a Protection System
Coordination Study and that ``NERC does not afford this possibility the
same risk as the Commission.'' \44\ According to Entergy, ``NERC has
properly balanced the implementation costs and reliability benefits of
the proposed PRC-027-1 Reliability Standard and determined that Option
2 is sufficient to ensure reliability'' and the Commission should defer
to NERC's expertise, or otherwise provide more support to justify a
deviation from NERC's proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ Entergy Comments at 5.
\44\ Id. at 9-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
25. In addition, some commenters expressed concern that applicable
entities may not have maintained sufficient documentation to
substantiate prior protection system coordination studies and, as
result, entities would have to perform new protection system
coordination studies purely for compliance purposes.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ ITC Comments at 4; Entergy Comments at 1; NPPD Comments at
1; PG&E Comments at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
26. As an alternative to the proposed directive, NERC and other
commenters suggest that Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 be modified so
that it requires an applicable entity to conduct an initial baseline
protection system coordination study on a certain subset of its bulk
electric system elements (i.e., based on a higher voltage or higher
risk protection systems).\46\ NERC and other commenters also request
that the Commission permit NERC to allow more than 6 years to complete
the initial baseline protection system coordination studies (i.e., 10
or 12 years) if the Commission directs NERC to modify Reliability
Standard PRC-027-1.\47\ EEI recommends that if the Commission continues
to have concerns about Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2,
Option 2, as an alternative to the proposed directive, a final rule
should direct NERC ``to assess the effectiveness of Option 2 after the
implementation of the proposed Reliability Standard and if necessary
make technical recommendations to improve the efficiency and
effectiveness as appropriate.'' \48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ NERC Comments at 11-12; El Paso Electric Comments at 2;
Entergy Comments at 12; NRECA/ELCON Comments at 6-7.
\47\ NERC Comments at 12; El Paso Electric Comments at 2-3;
Entergy Comments at 12-13; NRECA/ELCON Comments at 6-7. Separately,
El Paso Electric contends that the six-year cycle proposed by NERC
in Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2 is too short and
directs resources away from ``other activities that have a greater
likelihood of improving reliability outcomes in a demonstrable
way.'' El Paso Electric Comments at 2. We disagree. NERC recognized
the potential burden imposed by Requirement R2 and determined that
six years ``balance[d] the resources required to perform Protection
System Coordination Studies and the potential reliability impacts
created by incremental changes of Fault current over time.'' NERC
Petition at 40. Moreover, during the standard drafting process, some
commenters indicated that six years was too long an interval. See,
e.g., NERC Petition, Exhibit G (Summary of Development History and
Record of Development) at 1479 of pdf (ReliabilityFirst recommending
a 24-month period to conduct protection system coordination study),
2169 of pdf (Texas RE stating that six years is too long of a time
period between studies of fault currents).
\48\ EEI Comments at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
27. Idaho Power supports the proposed directive.\49\ Idaho Power
supports eliminating Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2,
Option 2 because it contends that Option 1 is a more robust option
explaining that it is ``preferable because it is more likely to address
miscoordinations.'' \50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ Idaho Power Comments at 1-2.
\50\ Id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commission Determination
28. Based on the record before us, we do not adopt the directive
proposed in the NOPR. The record in this proceeding supports the NOPR's
conclusion that mis-coordination of protection systems may pose a
potential reliability risk and, as currently drafted, Reliability
Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2, Option 2 permits applicable
entities to forego protection system coordination studies under certain
circumstances.\51\ However, we are persuaded by the statements from
NERC and other commenters that applicable entities generally perform,
or will choose to perform for their significant facilities, protection
system coordination studies even in the absence of a Reliability
Standard requirement.\52\ We also recognize the concern raised by
commenters regarding the burden of compliance. Specifically, we
recognize the concern that were the NOPR directive adopted, applicable
entities could be required to re-run protection system coordination
studies for the sole purpose of generating compliance documentation,
even if such entities already performed protection
[[Page 27509]]
system coordination studies that remain valid but lack documentation to
substantiate compliance. Accordingly, pursuant to 215(d)(2) of the FPA,
we approve Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 and do not direct
modifications to the Reliability Standard.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ See, e.g., NERC Comments at 6 (``NERC and the standard
drafting team concluded that Protection System coordination did not
present a prevalent enough risk to the reliable operation of the
[bulk electric system] to warrant imposing the burden of requiring
applicable entities to perform a full Protection System Coordination
Study for every [bulk electric system] Element with a Protection
System.''); Entergy Comments at 9 (``In proposing the Reliability
Standard, NERC was aware of the possibility that some bulk electric
system elements may never undergo a Protection System Coordination
Study.'').
\52\ See, e.g., NERC Comments at 5; NPPD Comments at 1; Tri-
State Comments at 10; ITC Comments at 4.
\53\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Information Collection Statement
29. The collections of information addressed in this Final Rule are
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under
section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.\54\ OMB's
regulations require approval of certain information collection
requirements imposed by agency rules.\55\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d) (2012).
\55\ 5 CFR 1320.11 (2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
30. The Commission solicited public comments in the NOPR 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. The Commission
did not receive comments regarding the burden estimates for the
Reliability Standards approved herein (i.e., Reliability Standards PRC-
027-1 and PER-006-1).\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ As discussed above, several commenters addressed the
potential burden of a new version of Reliability Standard PRC-027-1
modified, pursuant to the Commission's directive, to require initial
protection system coordination studies. See, e.g., Tri-State
Comments at 12. However, those comments are not relevant to the
burden estimates contained in this Final Rule because, herein, the
Commission only approves Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-
006-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
31. The information collection requirements in this Final Rule in
Docket No. RM16-22-000 are associated with FERC-725A, FERC-725G, and
FERC-725Y, as discussed below.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ In the NOPR in Docket No. RM16-22-000, some of the
reporting requirements were included under FERC-725G6 (OMB Control
No. 1902-0300), a temporary place holder, because FERC-725G was
pending review at OMB in an unrelated action. As indicated below,
those reporting requirements are now included under FERC-725G (OMB
Control No. 1902-0252). When the NOPR in Docket No. RM16-22-000 was
issued, another unrelated item affecting FERC-725A was pending OMB
review. Burden estimates were provided in order to solicit public
comments, but the burden reduction to FERC-725A was not submitted to
OMB at that time. The burden reduction to FERC-725A for this Final
Rule will be submitted to OMB for review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
32. Public Reporting Burden: The number of respondents below is
based on an examination of the NERC compliance registry on December 1,
2017, for transmission owners, generator owners, generator operators,
and distribution providers within the United States and an estimate of
how many such entities from that registry will be affected by the
Reliability Standards in this Final Rule for adoption and
implementation. As of December 1, 2017, 337 transmission owners, 971
generator owners, 944 generator operators, and 419 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 annual burden and cost related to
information collection requirements in this Final Rule.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ TO = transmission owner; TOP = transmission operator; GO =
generator owner; GOP = generator operator; DP = distribution
provider; and BA = balancing authority.
Changes Due to the Final Rule in Docket No. RM16-22-000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual
number of Average burden Annual burden
Respondent category and Number of responses Total number of hours and cost hours and total
requirement \59\ respondents per annual responses per response \60\ annual cost
respondent (rounded) \61\
(1) (2) (1) * (2) = (3) (4).............. (3) * (4) = (5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERC-725G (Reliability Standard PRC-027-1) \62\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO; Reporting Reqs. R1, R2, & 337 1 337 60 hrs.; 20,220 hrs.;
R3. $3,941.40. $1,328,252.
TO; Recordkeeping Reqs........ 337 1 337 40 hrs.; 13,480 hrs.;
$1,565.60. $527,607.
GO; Reporting Reqs. R1, R2, & 971 1 971 10 hrs.; $656.90. 9,710 hrs.;
R3. $637,830.
GO; Recordkeeping Reqs........ 971 1 971 10 hrs.; $391.40. 9,710 hrs.;
$380,049.
DP; Reporting Reqs. R1, R2, & 419 1 419 10 hrs.; $656.90. 4,190 hrs.;
R3. $275,241.
DP; Recordkeeping Reqs........ 419 1 419 10 hrs.; $391.40. 4,190 hrs.;
$163,997.
Sub-Total for Reporting Reqs. ........... ........... ................. ................. 34,120 hrs.;
for FERC-725G. $2,241,323.
Sub-Total for Recordkeeping ........... ........... ................. ................. 27,380 hrs.;
Reqs. for FERC-725G. $1,072,653.
Total Increase for FERC-725G.. ........... ........... ................. ................. 61,500 hrs.;
$3,313,976.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERC-725Y (Reliability Standard PER-006-1) \63\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GOP; Reporting Req. R1........ 944 1 944 5 hrs.; $328.45.. 4,720 hrs.;
$310,057.
GOP; Recordkeeping Req........ 944 1 944 10 hrs.; $391.40. 9,440 hrs.;
$369,482.
Total Increase for FERC-725Y.. ........... ........... ................. ................. 14,160 hrs.;
$679,539.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reductions to FERC-725A (retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1) \64\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GOP; Reporting Req............ 944 1 944 40 hrs.; 37,760 hrs.;
$2,627.60. $2,480,454.
GOP; Recordkeeping Req........ 944 1 944 50 hrs.; 47,200 hrs.;
$1,957.00. $1,847,408.
TOP; Reporting Req............ 176 1 176 60 hrs.; 10,560 hrs.;
$3,941.40. $693,686.
TOP; Recordkeeping Req........ 176 1 176 70 hrs.; 12,320 hrs.;
$2,739.80. $482,205.
BA; Reporting Req............. 99 1 99 32 hrs.; 3,168 hrs.;
$2,102.08. $208,106.
BA; Recordkeeping Req......... 99 1 99 20 hrs.; $782.80. 1,980 hrs.;
$77,497.
Reduction Sub-Total Reporting ........... ........... ................. ................. 51,484 hrs.;
Reqs. for FERC-725A. $3,382,246.
Reduction Sub-Total ........... ........... ................. ................. 61,500 hrs.;
Recordkeeping Reqs. for FERC- $2,407,110.
725A.
Reduction Sub-Total for FERC- ........... ........... ................. ................. 112,984 hrs.;
725A. $5,789,356
(reduction).
[[Page 27510]]
NET TOTAL REDUCTION FOR ........... ........... ................. ................. 37,324 hrs.;
CHANGES IN RM16-22-000. $1,795,841
(reduction).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Titles: FERC-725A (Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-
Power System), FERC-725G (Reliability Standards for the Bulk Power
System: PRC Reliability Standards) and FERC-725Y (Mandatory Reliability
Standards: Operations Personnel Training).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ For each Reliability Standard, the Measure shows the
acceptable evidence for the associated Reporting Requirement, and
the Compliance section details the related Recordkeeping
Requirement.
\60\ The estimates for cost per hour are based on May 2016 wage
figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS, https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm) and BLS benefits information
from March 20, 2018 (for December 2017, https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm). The estimated hourly cost, for wages
plus benefits, are: (a) $68.12/hour, for electrical engineer,
Occupation Code 17-2071, and (b) $39.14/hour, for information and
record clerk, Occupation Code 43-4199.
The hourly cost for an electrical engineer is used for the
reporting requirements; the hourly cost for a record clerk is used
for the recordkeeping requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Action: Revisions to existing collections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ For display purposes, the cost figures in column 5 have
been rounded.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMB Control Nos.: 1902-0244 (FERC-725A); 1902-0252 (FERC-725G) and
1902-0279 (FERC-725Y).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Respondents: Business or other for profit, and not for profit
institutions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\63\ In order to provide improved information on the Reliability
Standard and associated burden, FERC-725Y (rather than FERC-725A)
will cover the burden required by PER-006-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Frequency of Responses: Annual recordkeeping and reporting
requirements, with some reporting requirements being at least once
every six years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ The estimates for average annual burden hours per response
are based on figures in Order No. 693. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Necessity of the Information: 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 approves Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1,
which will replace Commission-approved Reliability Standard PRC-001-
1.1(ii). Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1 improve upon
existing Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) because the Reliability
Standards assign responsibilities to entities with more appropriate
resources and skill sets to conduct studies required to coordinate
protection systems. The approved Reliability Standards also provide
additional clarity to 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.
IV. Environmental Analysis
33. 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.\65\ The
action 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.\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ 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).
\66\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii) (2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act
34. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) generally requires
a description and analysis of final rules that will have significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.\67\ The
Small Business Administration (SBA) defines which utilities are small
businesses based on the number of employees that a utility and its
affiliates employ.\68\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\67\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612 (2012).
\68\ 13 CFR 121.201, Subsector 221 (2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
35. Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 (included in FERC-725G) will
apply to approximately 1,727 entities (337 transmission owners, 971
generator owners, and 419 distribution providers) in the United
States.\69\ Pursuant to SBA regulations, the small business threshold
for Electric Bulk Power Transmission and Control is 500 employees. For
generator owners, the small generator threshold ranges from 250 to 750
employees (depending on the fuel source). For Electric Power
Distribution, the small business threshold 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\69\ Many respondents serve multiple roles in the NERC
compliance registry, so there is likely double counting in the
estimates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
36. Reliability Standard PER-006-1 (included in FERC-725Y) will
apply to approximately 944 generator operators in the United States.
Pursuant to SBA regulations the small business threshold for generator
operators ranges from 250 to 750 employees (depending on the fuel
source). We estimate that the annual cost for each generator operator
will be $719.
37. The retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii)
(included in FERC-725A) will decrease the annual estimated cost for 944
generator operators by $4,585 each, for 176 transmission operators by
$6,681 each, and for 99 balancing authorities by $2,885 each. For the
generator operators affected by this retirement and approval of
Reliability Standard PER-006-1, the net annual effect would be a
decrease of $3,866 each.
38. We estimate the net annual cost of this Final Rule 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 this Final Rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
VI. Document Availability
39. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal
[[Page 27511]]
Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity
to view and/or print the contents of this document via the internet
through FERC's Home Page (https://www.ferc.gov) and in FERC's Public
Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE, Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426.
40. From FERC's Home Page on the internet, this information is
available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on
eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or
downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket
number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket
number field.
41. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the FERC's
website during normal business hours from FERC Online Support at 202-
502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
[email protected], or the Public Reference Room at 202-502-
8371, TTY 202-502-8659. Email the Public Reference Room at
[email protected].
VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification
42. The Final Rule is effective August 13, 2018. The Commission has
determined, with the concurrence of the Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, that this rule is not a
``major rule'' as defined in section 351 of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This Final Rule is being
submitted to the Senate, House, and Government Accountability Office.
By the Commission.
Issued: June 7, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
Note: The following appendix will not appear in the Code of
Federal Regulations.
Appendix
List of Commenters
------------------------------------------------------------------------
American Public Power Association and
APPA/TAPS Transmission Access Policy Study
Group
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EEI.............................. Edison Electric Institute.
El Paso Electric................. El Paso Electric Company.
Entergy.......................... Entergy Services, Inc.
Hydro One........................ Hydro One Networks Inc.
Idaho Power...................... Idaho Power Company.
ITC.............................. International Transmission Company d/
b/a ITC Transmission, Michigan
Electric Transmission Company, LLC,
ITC Midwest LLC and ITC Great
Plains, LLC.
LPPC............................. Large Public Power Council.
NPPD............................. Nebraska Public Power District.
NERC............................. North American Electric Reliability
Corporation.
NRECA/ELCON...................... National Rural Electric Cooperative
Association and the Electricity
Consumers Resource Council.
Oncor............................ Oncor Electric Delivery.
PG&E............................. Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
SCE&G............................ South Carolina Electric and Gas
Company.
Tri-State........................ Tri-State Generation and Transmission
Association, Inc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2018-12663 Filed 6-12-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
