Notice Inviting Post-Technical Conference Comments: Managing Transmission Line Ratings, 53717-53718 [2019-21969]

Download as PDF jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 8, 2019 / Notices Docket Numbers: ER20–21–000. Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, Inc. Description: Notice of Cancellation of Generator Interconnection Agreement of Southwest Power Pool, Inc. Filed Date: 10/2/19. Accession Number: 20191002–5076. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/19. Docket Numbers: ER20–22–000. Applicants: Harbor Cogeneration Company, LLC. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: Normal filing 2019 to be effective 10/3/ 2019. Filed Date: 10/2/19. Accession Number: 20191002–5111. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/19. Docket Numbers: ER20–23–000. Applicants: DTE Atlantic, LLC. Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: DTE Atlantic LLC. MBR Tariff Application to be effective 10/3/2019. Filed Date: 10/2/19. Accession Number: 20191002–5118. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/19. Docket Numbers: ER20–24–000. Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., Otter Tail Power Company. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2019–10–02_SA 3358 OTP–OTP FSA (G359R) Hankinson-Ellendale & Big Stone-Blair to be effective 12/2/2019. Filed Date: 10/2/19. Accession Number: 20191002–5133. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/19. Docket Numbers: ER20–25–000. Applicants: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc., Otter Tail Power Company. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 2019–10–02_SA 3357 OTP-Dakota Range III FSA (J488) HankinsonEllendale to be effective 12/2/2019. Filed Date: 10/2/19. Accession Number: 20191002–5153. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/19. Docket Numbers: ER20–26–000. Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, Northern States Power Company, a Wisconsin corporation. Description: § 205(d) Rate Filing: 20191002_IA_ROE_Update to be effective 1/1/2020. Filed Date: 10/2/19. Accession Number: 20191002–5175. Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 10/23/19. The filings are accessible in the Commission’s eLibrary system by clicking on the links or querying the docket number. Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission’s VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:50 Oct 07, 2019 Jkt 250001 Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the proceeding. eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at: https://www.ferc.gov/ docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208–3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502–8659. Dated: October 2, 2019. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. 2019–21974 Filed 10–7–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. AD19–15–000] Notice Inviting Post-Technical Conference Comments: Managing Transmission Line Ratings On September 10 and September 11, 2019, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) staff convened a technical conference to discuss what transmission line ratings and related practices might constitute best practices, and what, if any, Commission action in these areas might be appropriate. All interested persons are invited to file initial and reply post-technical workshop comments on any or all of the questions listed in the attachment to this Notice. Commenters may also respond to the questions outlined in the September 4, 2019 supplemental notice of technical conference.1 Commenters need not answer all of the questions. Commenters should organize responses consistent with the structure of the attached questions. Commenters are also invited to reference material previously filed in this docket, including technical workshop transcripts, but are encouraged to avoid repetition or replication of previous material. Initial comments must be submitted on or before 30 days from the date of this notice. Reply comments must be submitted on or before 15 days after the deadline to submit initial comments. For more information about this Notice, please contact: 1 Available at https://www.ferc.gov/ CalendarFiles/20190904173327-AD19-15000supplTC.pdf. PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 53717 Dillon Kolkmann (Technical Information), Office of Energy Policy and Information, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–8650, dillon.kolkmann@ ferc.gov. Kevin Ryan (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–6840, kevin.ryan@ ferc.gov. Dated: October 2, 2019. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. Post-Technical Conference Questions for Comment Commenters may respond to the questions outlined in the September 4, 2019 supplemental notice of technical conference.2 In addition, based on discussions during the Managing Transmission Line Ratings technical conference, Staff developed the following questions to better understand whether Commission action might be appropriate. To guide discussion, ambient-adjusted ratings (AAR) are defined as ratings that are adjusted daily, hourly, or more frequently and account for ambient air temperatures. Dynamic line ratings (DLRs) are defined as line ratings that are adjusted hourly or more frequently and account for local weather conditions (e.g., ambient temperature, wind, precipitation, solar irradiation) and/or account for conductor parameters (conductor temperature, tension, sag, clearance), typically as measured by local sensors. 1. Discussion of a Possible Requirement for Transmission Owners To Implement AARs a. Should transmission owners be required to implement AARs? If so, to which lines would the requirement apply? What criteria (e.g., congestion, facility age) and process would be used to determine to which lines the requirement would apply? What would be the benefits or drawbacks to such a requirement? b. If AARs are required, should they be required for modeling in both the day-ahead and real-time markets? c. What type of forecasting (e.g., how frequently, how granularly, and of what variables) is needed to incorporate AARs and DLRs into both real-time and day-ahead markets? If forecasts submitted in day-ahead markets differ from the real-time rating, how should 2 Available at https://www.ferc.gov/ CalendarFiles/20190904173327-AD19-15000supplTC.pdf. E:\FR\FM\08OCN1.SGM 08OCN1 53718 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 195 / Tuesday, October 8, 2019 / Notices the difference be treated by the transmission system operator? Who is liable if forecasted ratings are wrong? d. Aside from ambient air temperature, are there other ambient conditions that can be forecasted or calculated without need for local sensors that should be considered in AARs? Should maximum possible solar irradiance intensity (conservatively calculated or forecast assuming no cloud cover) be included in calculation of any required AARs? Are there any instances where wind can be conservatively forecast without local sensors, such that wind should be considered in AARs for such lines? 2. Reducing Barriers to DLRs a. Can RTOs/ISOs currently accept and use a DLR data stream from a transmission owner in both real-time and day-ahead markets? Can transmission owners outside of RTO/ ISOs currently automatically implement a DLR data stream in operations? Are there limits on what type and amount of data can be received and incorporated into dispatch? Would a transmission owner’s or RTO/ISO’s implementation of AARs be sufficient to also implement DLRs? If not, what additional changes would be necessary and how feasible are such changes? b. Would a requirement for transmission owners or other entities (e.g., RTOs/ISOs) to study the cost effectiveness of DLRs on their most congested lines be appropriate? If so, what metrics for congestion (e.g., congestion cost, hours of congestion) would be appropriate for determining the most congested lines? jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with NOTICES 3. AARs/DLRs in Available Transmission Capacity (ATC) Calculations a. In the non-RTO/ISO regions, a transmission owner’s use of AARs could affect ATC for transmission customers. ATC could also be affected at RTO/ISO seams. Given the importance of ATC calculations, should AARs/DLRs be incorporated into the determination of ATC? Specifically: i. At what times in advance of transmission reservation and/or scheduling deadlines should ATC made possible through AARs/DLRs be made available to point-to-point and network customers? ii. Should AARs/DLRs affect when network customers (and the transmission provider’s own resources) are subjected to redispatch, load shedding, and/or curtailments under sections 30.5 and 33 of the pro forma open access transmission tariff (OATT)? VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:50 Oct 07, 2019 Jkt 250001 iii. Would any revisions be needed to section 30.5, section 33, or Attachment C of the pro forma OATT to accommodate a requirement to implement AARs or voluntary implementation of DLRs? Are there any other sections of the pro forma OATT that would be relevant to or affected by AAR/DLR implementation? 4. Discussion of Transparency of Transmission Line Rating Methodologies Currently, some transmission line rating methodology information is made available through certain transmission expansion processes or voluntarily on certain transmission owners’ websites. Transmission line rating methodologies are also sometimes provided in annual FERC Form 715 part 4 filings. Lastly, some RTO/ISOs post actual facility ratings on their open access same-time information system (OASIS) pages. However, there appear to be concerns about the inaccessibility of transmission line rating methodologies and resulting ratings. a. Should transmission owners’ transmission line rating methodology be made more transparent? If so, how and how much additional transparency? Should underlying assumptions be made available? Should transmission line ratings be made more transparent? If so, how? For both transmission line rating methodologies and resulting ratings, who should have access to such information? b. Should transmission owners or other entities (e.g., NERC regional entities or RTOs/ISOs) be required to develop a database to document each transmission facility’s most limiting element? Should limiting elements consider first and second contingency operating conditions? Please describe the burden associated with reporting and maintaining such a database. Who should have access to such a database and what levels of confidentiality protections would need to exist for such a limiting elements database? c. If a transmission system operator contacts a transmission owner to request an ad hoc increase in transmission line ratings above static or seasonal ratings, should information about the request be publicly posted? If so, where, when, and how often should such information be posted? 5. Review and Audit Procedures for Transmission Line Rating Practices a. Are the current review and audit procedures for transmission line ratings sufficient to ensure that such transmission line ratings are consistent PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 with the methodology set forth by the transmission owner under FAC–008? b. What entities currently review or audit transmission line rating methodologies, assumptions, and values? What standards or criteria do these entities use in their reviews? c. What changes, if any, should be made to the review and audit procedures for transmission line ratings? d. What, if any, changes to information and document retention with respect to transmission line ratings might be needed? e. Where should any non-reliability criteria (e.g., economic) for transmission line ratings be established (e.g., regulations, tariff, policy statement)? What should these criteria be, and how would the Commission ensure that such criteria for transmission line ratings are consistent with reliability criteria? f. In implementing DLR, is there any data verification necessary from devices that measure DLR by the transmission system operators or transmission owners? If so, what data and why? 6. NERC Reliability Standards a. Are there security concerns associated with implementing AARs and DLRs with respect to communicating line ratings and field measurements? [FR Doc. 2019–21969 Filed 10–7–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717–01–P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. ER19–2901–000] Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization: Bronco Plains Wind, LLC This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced Bronco Plains Wind, LLC’s application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to E:\FR\FM\08OCN1.SGM 08OCN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 195 (Tuesday, October 8, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53717-53718]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-21969]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. AD19-15-000]


Notice Inviting Post-Technical Conference Comments: Managing 
Transmission Line Ratings

    On September 10 and September 11, 2019, Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission (Commission) staff convened a technical conference to 
discuss what transmission line ratings and related practices might 
constitute best practices, and what, if any, Commission action in these 
areas might be appropriate.
    All interested persons are invited to file initial and reply post-
technical workshop comments on any or all of the questions listed in 
the attachment to this Notice. Commenters may also respond to the 
questions outlined in the September 4, 2019 supplemental notice of 
technical conference.\1\ Commenters need not answer all of the 
questions. Commenters should organize responses consistent with the 
structure of the attached questions. Commenters are also invited to 
reference material previously filed in this docket, including technical 
workshop transcripts, but are encouraged to avoid repetition or 
replication of previous material. Initial comments must be submitted on 
or before 30 days from the date of this notice. Reply comments must be 
submitted on or before 15 days after the deadline to submit initial 
comments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Available at https://www.ferc.gov/CalendarFiles/20190904173327-AD19-15-000supplTC.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For more information about this Notice, please contact:

Dillon Kolkmann (Technical Information), Office of Energy Policy and 
Information, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, 
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8650, [email protected].
Kevin Ryan (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 
20426, (202) 502-6840, [email protected].

    Dated: October 2, 2019.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.

Post-Technical Conference Questions for Comment

    Commenters may respond to the questions outlined in the September 
4, 2019 supplemental notice of technical conference.\2\ In addition, 
based on discussions during the Managing Transmission Line Ratings 
technical conference, Staff developed the following questions to better 
understand whether Commission action might be appropriate. To guide 
discussion, ambient-adjusted ratings (AAR) are defined as ratings that 
are adjusted daily, hourly, or more frequently and account for ambient 
air temperatures. Dynamic line ratings (DLRs) are defined as line 
ratings that are adjusted hourly or more frequently and account for 
local weather conditions (e.g., ambient temperature, wind, 
precipitation, solar irradiation) and/or account for conductor 
parameters (conductor temperature, tension, sag, clearance), typically 
as measured by local sensors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Available at https://www.ferc.gov/CalendarFiles/20190904173327-AD19-15-000supplTC.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Discussion of a Possible Requirement for Transmission Owners To 
Implement AARs

    a. Should transmission owners be required to implement AARs? If so, 
to which lines would the requirement apply? What criteria (e.g., 
congestion, facility age) and process would be used to determine to 
which lines the requirement would apply? What would be the benefits or 
drawbacks to such a requirement?
    b. If AARs are required, should they be required for modeling in 
both the day-ahead and real-time markets?
    c. What type of forecasting (e.g., how frequently, how granularly, 
and of what variables) is needed to incorporate AARs and DLRs into both 
real-time and day-ahead markets? If forecasts submitted in day-ahead 
markets differ from the real-time rating, how should

[[Page 53718]]

the difference be treated by the transmission system operator? Who is 
liable if forecasted ratings are wrong?
    d. Aside from ambient air temperature, are there other ambient 
conditions that can be forecasted or calculated without need for local 
sensors that should be considered in AARs? Should maximum possible 
solar irradiance intensity (conservatively calculated or forecast 
assuming no cloud cover) be included in calculation of any required 
AARs? Are there any instances where wind can be conservatively forecast 
without local sensors, such that wind should be considered in AARs for 
such lines?

2. Reducing Barriers to DLRs

    a. Can RTOs/ISOs currently accept and use a DLR data stream from a 
transmission owner in both real-time and day-ahead markets? Can 
transmission owners outside of RTO/ISOs currently automatically 
implement a DLR data stream in operations? Are there limits on what 
type and amount of data can be received and incorporated into dispatch? 
Would a transmission owner's or RTO/ISO's implementation of AARs be 
sufficient to also implement DLRs? If not, what additional changes 
would be necessary and how feasible are such changes?
    b. Would a requirement for transmission owners or other entities 
(e.g., RTOs/ISOs) to study the cost effectiveness of DLRs on their most 
congested lines be appropriate? If so, what metrics for congestion 
(e.g., congestion cost, hours of congestion) would be appropriate for 
determining the most congested lines?

3. AARs/DLRs in Available Transmission Capacity (ATC) Calculations

    a. In the non-RTO/ISO regions, a transmission owner's use of AARs 
could affect ATC for transmission customers. ATC could also be affected 
at RTO/ISO seams. Given the importance of ATC calculations, should 
AARs/DLRs be incorporated into the determination of ATC? Specifically:
    i. At what times in advance of transmission reservation and/or 
scheduling deadlines should ATC made possible through AARs/DLRs be made 
available to point-to-point and network customers?
    ii. Should AARs/DLRs affect when network customers (and the 
transmission provider's own resources) are subjected to redispatch, 
load shedding, and/or curtailments under sections 30.5 and 33 of the 
pro forma open access transmission tariff (OATT)?
    iii. Would any revisions be needed to section 30.5, section 33, or 
Attachment C of the pro forma OATT to accommodate a requirement to 
implement AARs or voluntary implementation of DLRs? Are there any other 
sections of the pro forma OATT that would be relevant to or affected by 
AAR/DLR implementation?

4. Discussion of Transparency of Transmission Line Rating Methodologies

    Currently, some transmission line rating methodology information is 
made available through certain transmission expansion processes or 
voluntarily on certain transmission owners' websites. Transmission line 
rating methodologies are also sometimes provided in annual FERC Form 
715 part 4 filings. Lastly, some RTO/ISOs post actual facility ratings 
on their open access same-time information system (OASIS) pages. 
However, there appear to be concerns about the inaccessibility of 
transmission line rating methodologies and resulting ratings.
    a. Should transmission owners' transmission line rating methodology 
be made more transparent? If so, how and how much additional 
transparency? Should underlying assumptions be made available? Should 
transmission line ratings be made more transparent? If so, how? For 
both transmission line rating methodologies and resulting ratings, who 
should have access to such information?
    b. Should transmission owners or other entities (e.g., NERC 
regional entities or RTOs/ISOs) be required to develop a database to 
document each transmission facility's most limiting element? Should 
limiting elements consider first and second contingency operating 
conditions? Please describe the burden associated with reporting and 
maintaining such a database. Who should have access to such a database 
and what levels of confidentiality protections would need to exist for 
such a limiting elements database?
    c. If a transmission system operator contacts a transmission owner 
to request an ad hoc increase in transmission line ratings above static 
or seasonal ratings, should information about the request be publicly 
posted? If so, where, when, and how often should such information be 
posted?

5. Review and Audit Procedures for Transmission Line Rating Practices

    a. Are the current review and audit procedures for transmission 
line ratings sufficient to ensure that such transmission line ratings 
are consistent with the methodology set forth by the transmission owner 
under FAC-008?
    b. What entities currently review or audit transmission line rating 
methodologies, assumptions, and values? What standards or criteria do 
these entities use in their reviews?
    c. What changes, if any, should be made to the review and audit 
procedures for transmission line ratings?
    d. What, if any, changes to information and document retention with 
respect to transmission line ratings might be needed?
    e. Where should any non-reliability criteria (e.g., economic) for 
transmission line ratings be established (e.g., regulations, tariff, 
policy statement)? What should these criteria be, and how would the 
Commission ensure that such criteria for transmission line ratings are 
consistent with reliability criteria?
    f. In implementing DLR, is there any data verification necessary 
from devices that measure DLR by the transmission system operators or 
transmission owners? If so, what data and why?

6. NERC Reliability Standards

    a. Are there security concerns associated with implementing AARs 
and DLRs with respect to communicating line ratings and field 
measurements?

[FR Doc. 2019-21969 Filed 10-7-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.