82 FR 55535 - Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults and Specific Training for Personnel Reliability Standards
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 224 (November 22, 2017)
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 224 (November 22, 2017)
| Page Range | 55535-55541 | |
| FR Document | 2017-25329 |
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 224 (Wednesday, November 22, 2017)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 55535-55541] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2017-25329] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 18 CFR Part 40 [Docket No. RM16-22-000] Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults and Specific Training for Personnel Reliability Standards AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) proposes to approve Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 (Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance [[Page 55536]] During Faults) and PER-006-1 (Specific Training for Personnel) submitted by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC). The purpose of proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 is to maintain the coordination of protection systems installed to detect and isolate faults on bulk electric system elements, such that those protection systems operate in the intended sequence during faults. The purpose of proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1 is to ensure that personnel are trained on specific topics essential to reliability to perform or support real-time operations of the bulk electric system. In addition, the Commission proposes to direct NERC to develop certain modifications to proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1. DATES: Comments are due January 22, 2018. ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by docket number, may be filed in the following ways:Electronic Filing through http://www.ferc.gov. Documents created electronically using word processing software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned format. Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable to file electronically may mail or hand-deliver comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Comment Procedures Section of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Juan Villar (Technical Information), Office of Electric Reliability, Division of Reliability Standards and Security, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, Telephone: (772) 678-6496, [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: 1. Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), the Commission proposes to approve proposed Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 (Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults) and PER-006-1 (Specific Training for Personnel), which were submitted for approval by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Commission-certified Electric Reliability Organization (ERO).\1\ As discussed below, however, the Commission also proposes to direct NERC to modify proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 to require an initial protection system coordination study to ensure that applicable entities will perform (or have performed), as a baseline, a study demonstrating proper coordination of its protection systems. We propose to direct NERC to submit the modified Reliability Standard for Commission approval within 12 months following the effective date of a final rule in this proceeding. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ 16 U.S.C. 824o. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. The Commission also proposes to approve the associated violation risk factors, violation severity levels, implementation plans, and effective dates proposed by NERC for Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1. The Commission further proposes to approve the retirement of currently-effective Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) (System Protection Coordination).\2\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ The Commission approved Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) on May 29, 2015. North American Electric Reliability Corporation, 151 FERC ] 61,186 (2015). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. In addition, the Commission proposes to approve new and revised definitions submitted by NERC for incorporation in the NERC Glossary of Terms Used in NERC Reliability Standards (``NERC Glossary'') for the following terms: (1) ``Protection system coordination study;'' (2) ``operational planning analysis;'' and (3) ``real-time assessment.'' I. Background A. Section 215 and Mandatory Reliability Standards 4. Section 215 of the FPA requires a Commission-certified ERO to develop mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, subject to Commission review and approval.\3\ Once approved, the Reliability Standards may be enforced by the ERO subject to Commission oversight or by the Commission independently.\4\ In 2006, the Commission certified NERC as the ERO pursuant to section 215 of the FPA.\5\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ Id. 824o(c), (d). \4\ Id. 824o(e). \5\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ] 61,062, order on reh'g and compliance, 117 FERC ] 61,126 (2006), order on compliance, 118 FERC ] 61,190, order on reh'g, 119 FERC ] 61,046 (2007), aff'd sub nom. Alcoa Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- B. Order No. 693 5. On March 16, 2007, the Commission issued Order No. 693, approving 83 of the 107 Reliability Standards filed by NERC, including Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.\6\ In addition, the Commission directed NERC to develop modifications to Reliability Standard PRC-001-1 that: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System, Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242, at PP 1433-1449, order on reh'g, Order No. 693-A, 120 FERC ] 61,053 (2007). (1) Correct the references for Requirements, and [sic] (2) include a requirement that upon the detection of failures in relays or protection system elements on the Bulk-Power System that threaten reliable operation, relevant transmission operators must be informed promptly, but within a specified period of time that is developed in the Reliability Standards development process, whereas generator operators must also promptly inform their transmission operators; and (3) clarifies that, after being informed of failures in relays or protection system elements that threaten reliability of the Bulk- Power System, transmission operators must carry out corrective control actions, i.e., return a system to a stable state that respects system requirements as soon as possible and no longer than 30 minutes after they receive notice of the failure.\7\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242 at P 1449. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- C. NERC Petition and Proposed Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER- 006-1 6. On September 2, 2016, NERC submitted a petition seeking Commission approval of proposed Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1.\8\ NERC states that the proposed Reliability Standards, new and revised NERC Glossary terms, and the retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) satisfy the Commission's criteria in Order No. 672 and are just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the public interest.\9\ NERC explains that the intent of the proposed Reliability Standards and changes to the NERC Glossary are to maintain the coordination of protection systems installed to detect and isolate faults on bulk electric system elements and require registered entities to provide training to their relevant personnel on protection systems and remedial action schemes. NERC asserts that the proposed Reliability Standards are an improvement over currently-effective Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) and will ensure that appropriate personnel are trained on protection [[Page 55537]] systems and that protection systems are appropriately studied, coordinated, and monitored. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ Proposed Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1 are not attached to this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The proposed Reliability Standards are available on the Commission's eLibrary document retrieval system in Docket No. RM16-22-000 and are posted on the NERC Web site, http://www.nerc.com. \9\ NERC Petition at 10. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1 7. NERC states that proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1 requires generator operators to use a systematic approach to develop and implement training for dispatch personnel at centrally-located dispatch centers.\10\ NERC explains that proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1 will also cover plant personnel who are responsible for real- time control of a generator. NERC maintains that it is appropriate to train plant personnel [in] the functionality of protection systems and remedial action schemes. NERC observes that proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1 replaces the phrase ``purpose and limitations'' used in currently-effective Reliability Standard PRC-001-1(ii) with the phrase ``operational functionality'' to clearly identify the objective of the training.\11\ NERC also observes that proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1 replaces the phrase ``applied in its area'' in Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) with the phrase ``that affect the output of the generating facility(ies) it operates'' to properly tailor the scope of the required training. NERC notes that proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1 does not specify a periodicity for the required training. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \10\ Id. at 13. \11\ Id. at 15. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 8. NERC asserts that proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1: provides a clear set of Requirements that obligate entities to (1) implement a process for establishing and coordinating new or revised Protection System settings, and (2) periodically study Protection System settings that could be affected by incremental changes in Fault current to ensure the Protection Systems continue to operate in their intended sequence.\12\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \12\ Id. at 26. According to NERC, proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R1 mandates that each transmission owner, generator owner, and distribution provider establish a process for developing new and revised protection system settings for bulk electric system elements.\13\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \13\ Id. at 27. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9. NERC states that proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2 mandates that every six years, applicable entities must either: (1) Perform a protection system coordination study to determine whether the protection systems continue to operate in the intended sequence during faults; (2) compare present fault current values to an established fault current baseline and, only if the comparison identifies a 15 percent or greater deviation in fault current values (either three phase or phase to ground) at a bus to which the bulk electric system is connected, perform a protection system coordination study; or (3) use a combination of options 1 and 2.\14\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \14\ Id. at 26. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10. NERC explains that proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R3 will require applicable entities to use the process established under proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R1 for the development of any new or revised protection system settings. 3. Proposed Retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) 11. NERC states that Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) includes six requirements that are either addressed by Reliability Standards approved by the Commission or by the proposed Reliability Standards. Specifically, NERC explains that Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirement R1 has been partially replaced by currently-effective Reliability Standards PER-003-1 and PER-005-2. NERC continues that proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1 and the proposed revised definitions of operational planning analysis and real-time assessment will replace the remaining portions of Reliability Standard PRC-001- 1.1(ii), Requirement R1. NERC asserts that Reliability Standard PRC- 001-1.1(ii), Requirement R2 has been addressed by Reliability Standards IRO-001-4, IRO-008[hyphen]2, IRO[hyphen]010[hyphen]2, TOP[hyphen]001[hyphen]3, and TOP[hyphen]003[hyphen]3, which the Commission approved in Order No. 817.\15\ NERC states that Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirements R3 and R4 will be replaced with proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1. NERC also explains that Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirement R5 has been replaced with several Reliability Standards developed after Reliability Standard PRC-001-1(ii) became effective.\16\ NERC further states that Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirement R6 has been replaced with Reliability Standards TOP-001-3 and TOP-003-3. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \15\ Id. at 5 (citing Transmission Operations Reliability Standards and Interconnection Reliability Operations and Coordination Reliability Standards, Order No. 817, 153 FERC ] 61,178 (2015)). \16\ Id. at 6. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- II. Discussion 12. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of the FPA, we propose to approve proposed Reliability Standards PER-006-1 and PRC-027-1 as just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the public interest, as both proposed Reliability Standards improve upon currently-effective Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) in important ways.\17\ Specifically, proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 does so by (1) modifying the applicability section to include the appropriate functional entity types with the responsibilities, resources, and skill sets to conduct the studies required to coordinate protection systems, and (2) listing the protection system functions on all bulk electric system elements that require coordination. Proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1, along with existing formal training requirements in the PER group of Reliability Standards, also improves upon Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirement R1 by ensuring that the necessary personnel are familiar with and understand the purpose and limitations of protection systems schemes while providing more precise and auditable requirements. However, proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027- 1, Requirement R2, Option 2 does not appear to ensure coordination of all bulk electric system elements with protection system functions. Accordingly, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, we propose to direct that NERC develop modifications to proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 that address our concern regarding this gap, as discussed below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \17\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13. In addition, we propose to approve NERC's associated violation risk factors, violation severity levels, implementation plans, and effective dates. We also propose to approve the revised definitions for inclusion in the NERC Glossary. Further, we propose to approve the retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), as requested by NERC. 14. Pursuant to 215(d)(5) of the FPA, we propose to direct that NERC develop modifications to proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 addressing our concern that applicable entities that choose Requirement R2, Option 2 perform (or have already performed) an initial baseline study demonstrating proper coordination of their protection systems. Any additional protection system coordination studies would be [[Page 55538]] necessary only if an applicable entity is confronted with 15 percent or greater fault current deviations from the prior baseline study amounts, as currently proposed in Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2, Option 2. We propose to direct NERC to submit the modified Reliability Standard within 12 months following the effective date of a final rule in this proceeding. 15. Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2 does not require an initial protection system coordination study if an applicable entity elects Option 2. Unlike Option 1, which requires performance of protection system coordination studies every six years, Option 2 requires applicable entities to ``[c]ompare present Fault current values to an established Fault current baseline and perform a Protection System Coordination Study when the comparison identifies a 15 percent or greater deviation.'' The proposed Reliability Standard and NERC's petition do not indicate that the ``Fault current baseline'' must be established through an initial protection system coordination study. Instead, NERC's petition states that the baseline must be established ``by the effective date of the standard based on short- circuit studies.'' \18\ The proposed Reliability Standard provides that ``the initial Fault current baseline(s) shall be established by the effective date of this Reliability Standard and updated each time a Protection System Coordination Study is performed,'' but this language does not require establishing the ``initial Fault current baseline'' through an initial protection system coordination study.\19\ NERC's petition reinforces this understanding, as noted above, by explicitly allowing the use of short-circuit studies to establish the initial Fault current baseline. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \18\ NERC Petition at 36 n.35. \19\ Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2, Option 2 n.1. Footnote 1 further states that if an ``initial baseline was not established by the effective date of this Reliability Standard because of the previous use of an alternate option or the installation of a new BES Element, the entity may establish the baseline by performing a Protection System Coordination Study'' (emphasis added). Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 16. While they are related terms, we understand there to be a difference between short-circuit studies and protection system coordination studies. NERC defines protection system coordination study as an ``analysis to determine whether Protection Systems operate in the intended sequence during Faults.'' \20\ By comparison, proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 explains that a short-circuit study is ``an analysis of an electrical network that determines the magnitude of the currents flowing in the network during an electrical fault . . . [and] are used as the basis for protection device coordination studies.'' \21\ Therefore, while short-circuit studies are inputs to protection system coordination studies, it appears that a short-circuit study differs in scope from a protection system coordination study. Based on this record, it would be incorrect to conclude that proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2, Options 1 and 2 afford the same level of protection system coordination because the former requires a protection system coordination study while the latter does not. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \20\ NERC Petition, Exhibit A-3, Proposed Definitions. This definition is consistent with the definition of coordination of protection in IEEE Std. C37.113-1999 (stating that the ``process of choosing settings or time delay characteristics of protective devices, such that operation of the devices will occur in a specified order to minimize customer service interruption and power system isolation due to a power system disturbance''). \21\ Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Supplemental Material at 8. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17. While we generally support permitting flexibility in the Reliability Standards to achieve required performance goals, the possibility that some bulk electric system elements may never undergo a protection system coordination study raises reliability concerns. In past serious Bulk-Power System events, mis-coordination was a contributing factor to misoperations and outages. For example, the Arizona Southern California September 8, 2011 Outage Report identified an instance where a transmission owner did not perform a protection system coordination study prior to the implementation of a protection system.\22\ The 2011 Outage Report stated that this omission negatively affected the reliable operation of the Bulk-Power System during the 2011 event.\23\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \22\ Arizona Southern California September 8, 2011 Outage Report at 101-103, https://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/04-27-2012-ferc-nerc-report.pdf. \23\ Id. at 100-102. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18. Over the past eleven years, several NERC reports have addressed the importance of protection system coordination to Bulk-Power System reliability. Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 addresses some of the issues raised in these reports; but without requiring an initial protection system coordination study, the proposed Reliability Standard does not address all of them. In 2006, for example, the NERC System Protection Control Task Force assessed Reliability Standard PRC- 001.\24\ The report recommended requiring the coordination of all existing protection systems.\25\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \24\ NERC SPCTF Assessment of Standard PRC-001-0--System Protection Coordination (2006), http://www.nerc.com/pa/Stand/Project200706SystemProtectionCoordinationDL/NERC_SPCTF_Assessment_of_Standard_PRC.pdf. \25\ Id. at 3-4. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19. In 2009, in a letter from the NERC President to the NERC Board of Trustees and stakeholders, NERC identified generation and transmission mis-coordination as responsible for 30 percent of the misoperations that occurred between 2005 and 2008.\26\ The 2009 letter stated that mis-coordination between generation and transmission protection systems ``has caused two significant system disturbances in the past two years, and resulted in the unnecessary loss of generation during seven additional disturbances in that timeframe.'' \27\ The letter explained that the 2009 NERC System Protection Initiative would initially focus on the area of protection system coordination.\28\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \26\ NERC Letter from Rick Sergel, NERC President, Regarding System Protection Initiative at Figure 2 (April 24, 2009). \27\ Id. at 1. \28\ Id. at 1-2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20. In 2013, NERC issued a Misoperations Report prepared by the Protection System Misoperations Task Force.\29\ The Misoperations Report identified ``ways to potentially reduce the amount of future misoperations'' and concluded that ``[m]isoperations due to setting errors can potentially be reduced.'' \30\ The identified techniques to reduce incorrect settings, included: Peer reviews, increased training, more extensive fault studies, standard templates for setting standard schemes using complex relays, and periodic review of existing settings when there is a change in system topography.\31\ In the ReliabilityFirst region, NERC identified a category of misoperations caused by ``Engineering/Design Issues,'' which specifically included setting mis-coordination.\32\ This category of misoperations was one of the three most common causes of misoperations for above 200 kV facilities within the ReliabilityFirst region.\33\ The positive impact on Bulk-Power System reliability [[Page 55539]] of reducing misoperations because of ``Incorrect setting/logic/design errors'' is found in NERC's 2015 Analysis of System Protection Misoperations: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \29\ NERC Misoperations Report (2013), http://www.nerc.com/comm/PC/Protection%20System%20Misoperations%20Task%20Force%20PSMTF%202/PSMTF_Report.pdf. \30\ Id. at 3. \31\ Id. \32\ Id. at 14-15. The 2013 Misoperations Report elaborated that the ``Engineering/Design Issues'' category included: \33\ Id. at 14. Incorrect short circuit values and coordination errors. The incorrect short circuit values included outdated or incorrect data used to calculate relay settings. The coordination errors in these cases all involved pilot protection either of insufficient carrier blocking trip delays or of improper choice of ground pickup values used in a blocking scheme. Id. at 15. The State of Reliability 2015 report found that protection system misoperations continued to be a significant contributor to automatic transmission outage severity. In general, transmission system events with protection system misoperations were more impactful than other transmission events. They were also a significant contributor to transmission outage severity, indicating that a reduction in protection system misoperations would lead to an improvement in system reliability.\34\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \34\ NERC, Analysis of System Protection Misoperations at 1 (Dec. 2015) (citations omitted), http://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/PA/Performance%20Analysis%20DL/2015_Analysis_of_System_Protection_Misoperations_Final.pdf (finding that 31 percent of all misoperations were due to ``Incorrect setting/logic/design errors''). 21. In 2014, a NERC ``lessons learned'' document on ``Generation Relaying--Underfrequency Protection Coordination'' identified a 2014 incident where underfrequency relay trip settings were installed on the system unnecessarily and were not coordinated with a generator's relay trip setting.\35\ The document explained that ``[u]nintended generator tripping during an underfrequency event can exacerbate the condition.'' \36\ The document also stated that ``generator relay protection should be coordinated with all auxiliary power system relaying with specific regard to time-delay settings'' in order to ensure reliable generator operation.\37\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \35\ NERC, Lesson Learned, Generation Relaying--Underfrequency Protection Coordination (2014), http://www.nerc.com/pa/rrm/ea/Lessons%20Learned%20Document%20Library/LL20140601_Generation_Relaying_Underfrequency_Protection_Coordination_final.pdf. \36\ Id. \37\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22. The 2016 State of Reliability Report noted that while protection system misoperations declined in 2015, misoperations showed a ``statistically significant positive correlation with transmission outage severity and show[ed] a higher relative transmission risk.'' \38\ Misoperations showed the strongest correlation of the factors considered. In addition, the 2016 State of Reliability Report identified that ``over 40 percent of the incorrect setting/logic/design misoperations were due to the miss coordination [sic] of ground overcurrent settings'' found by ERCOT.\39\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \38\ 2016 State of Reliability Report at 17, http://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/Pages/default.aspx. \39\ Id. at 166. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23. The 2017 State of Reliability Report recognized the significance of protection system misoperations to Bulk-Power System reliability by observing that ``[p]rotection system misoperations should remain an area of focus as it continues to be one of the largest contributors to the severity of transmission outages.'' \40\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \40\ 2017 State of Reliability Report at 2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24. For the reasons discussed above, we propose to direct that NERC develop modifications to proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 to address our concern by requiring that applicable entities perform an initial protection coordination study under Requirement R2, Option 2. We propose that applicable entities would have six years from the effective date of a modified Reliability Standard to complete the analysis. An applicable entity could use pre-existing protection system coordination studies to satisfy the proposed requirement provided it was reasonable (i.e., no intervening system changes that would render the earlier work obsolete). After conducting the initial protection system coordination study, subsequent protection system coordination studies would only be required when an applicable entity is confronted with 15 percent or greater fault current deviations from the prior baseline study amounts, as currently proposed in Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2, Option 2. We seek comments on this proposal. 25. Separately, we seek comment from NERC and other interested entities explaining the technical basis for employing a 15 percent deviation threshold in proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2, Option 2. We seek to better understand the basis for this threshold to ensure an adequate record in the proceeding on this matter. III. Information Collection Statement 26. The collection of information addressed in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.\41\ OMB's regulations require approval of certain information collection requirements imposed by agency rules.\42\ Upon approval of a collection(s) of information, OMB will assign an OMB control number and an expiration date. Respondents subject to the filing requirements of a rule will not be penalized for failing to respond to these collections of information unless the collections of information display a valid OMB control number. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \41\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d). \42\ 5 CFR 1320.11. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27. The Commission will submit the information collection requirement to OMB for its final review and approval. We solicit public comments on the need for this information, whether the information will have practical utility, the accuracy of the burden estimates, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected or retained, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondents' burden, including the use of automated information techniques. 28. The information collection requirements in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in Docket No. RM16-22-000 are associated with FERC- 725A,\43\ FERC-725G6,\44\ and FERC-725Y, as discussed below. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \43\ FERC-725A (OMB Control No. 1902-0244) currently includes the information collection requirements associated with Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), which is proposed for retirement. Only one item per OMB Control No. may be pending OMB review at a time, and an unrelated item affecting FERC-725A is pending OMB review. We are providing estimates of the burden reduction related to FERC-725A for review and comment. However, to submit this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking timely to OMB, the Commission is being conservative and not reducing the burden estimates associated with FERC-725A at this time. \44\ The information collection requirements related to proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 would normally be included in FERC- 725G (OMB Control No. 1902-0252). However, only one item per OMB Control No. may be pending OMB review at a time, and an unrelated item affecting FERC-725G is pending OMB review. For this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and the related submittal to OMB, we use a placeholder information collection no. of FERC-725G6. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 29. Public Reporting Burden: The number of respondents below is based on an examination of the NERC compliance registry on April 7, 2017, for transmission owners, generator owners, generator operators, and distribution providers within the United States and an estimate of how many entities from that registry will be affected by the Reliability Standards proposed for adoption and implementation. At the time of Commission review of proposed Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1, 334 transmission owners, 913 generator owners, 875 generator operators, and 365 distribution providers in the United States were registered in the NERC compliance registry. However, under NERC's compliance registration program, entities may be registered for multiple functions, so these numbers incorporate some double counting. We note that many generation sites share a common [[Page 55540]] generator owner or generator operator. The following table provides the estimated proposed annual burden and cost related to information collection requirements in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.\45\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \45\ TO=transmission owner; TOP=transmission operator; GO=generator owner; GOP=generator operator; DP=distribution provider; and BA=balancing authority. Proposed Changes in the NOPR in Docket No. RM16-22-000 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Annual number Total number Respondent category and requirement Number of of responses of annual Average burden hours & Annual burden hours & total annual cost \46\ respondents per respondent responses cost per response \47\ (rounded) \48\ (1) (2) (1) * (2) = (4).................... (3) * (4) = (5) (3) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FERC-725G6 (covering Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1) \49\ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO; Reporting Reqs. R1, R2, & R3.... 334 1 334 60 hrs.; $3,941.40..... 20,040 hrs.; $1,316,428. TO; Recordkeeping Reqs.............. 334 1 334 40 hrs.; $1,565.60..... 13,360 hrs.; $522,910. GO; Reporting Reqs. R1, R2, & R3.... 913 1 913 10 hrs.; $656.90....... 9,130 hrs.; $599,750. GO; Recordkeeping Reqs.............. 913 1 913 10 hrs.; $391.40....... 9,130 hrs.; $357,348. DP; Reporting Reqs R1, R2, & R3..... 365 1 365 10 hrs.; $656.90....... 3,650 hrs.; $239,769. DP; Recordkeeping Reqs.............. 365 1 365 10 hrs.; $391.40....... 3,650 hrs.; $142,861. Sub-Total for Reporting Reqs. for .............. .............. .............. ....................... 32,820 hrs.; $2,155,947. FERC-725G6. Sub-Total for Recordkeeping Reqs. .............. .............. .............. ....................... 26,140 hrs.; $1,023,119. for FERC-725G6. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Proposed Increase for FERC- .............. .............. .............. ....................... 58,960 hrs.; $3,179,066. 725G6. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FERC-725Y (covering Proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GOP; Reporting Req. R1.............. 875 1 875 5 hrs.; $328.45........ 4,375 hrs.; $287,394. GOP; Recordkeeping Req.............. 875 1 875 10 hrs.; $391.40....... 8,750 hrs.; $342,475. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total Proposed Increase for FERC- .............. .............. .............. ....................... 13,125 hrs.; $629,869. 725Y. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reductions to FERC-725A (covering proposed retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1) \50\ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GOP; Reporting Req.................. 875 1 875 40 hrs.; $2,627.60..... 35,000 hrs.; $2,299,150. GOP; Recordkeeping Req.............. 875 1 875 50 hrs.; $1,957.00..... 43,750 hrs.; $1,712,375. TOP; Reporting Req.................. 177 1 177 60 hrs.; $3,941.40..... 10,620 hrs.; $697,628. TOP; Recordkeeping Req.............. 177 1 177 70 hrs.; $2,739.80..... 12,390 hrs.; $484,945. BA; Reporting Req................... 99 1 99 32 hrs.; $2,102.08..... 3,168 hrs.; $208,106. BA; Recordkeeping Req............... 99 1 99 20 hrs.; $782.80....... 1,980 hrs.; $77,497. Reduction Sub-Total Reporting Reqs. .............. .............. .............. ....................... 48,788 hrs.; $3,204,884. for FERC-725A. Reduction Sub-Total Recordkeeping .............. .............. .............. ....................... 58,120 hrs.; $2,274,817. Reqs. for FERC-725A. Reduction, Sub-Total for FERC-725A.. .............. .............. .............. ....................... 106,908 hrs.; $5,479,701 (reduction). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NET TOTAL REDUCTION FOR PROPOSED .............. .............. .............. ....................... 34,823 hrs.; $1,670,766 (reduction). CHANGES IN NOPR IN RM16-22-000. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \46\ For each Reliability Standard, the Measure shows the acceptable evidence for the associated Reporting Requirement, and the Compliance section details the related Recordkeeping Requirement. \47\ Based on data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average hourly cost (wages plus benefits) is $65.69/hour for an engineer, and $39.14/hour for a record clerk. The hourly cost for an engineer is used for reporting requirements; the hourly cost for a record clerk is used for recordkeeping requirements. \48\ For display purposes, the cost figures in column 5 have been rounded. \49\ Some of the reporting requirements are required at least every six calendar years. In this table, the Commission assumes that respondents might work on some of their elements each year; the annual burden estimate shown is one sixth of the burden associated with one complete six-year cycle. For example, for each transmission owner: (a) The annual reporting burden associated with Requirements R1, R2, and R3 is shown as 60 hours per year, and (b) the burden for the six-year cycle would be six times that, or a total of 360 hours. \50\ The estimates for average annual burden hours per response are based on Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242 at PP 1906, 1907. The numbers of respondents and estimated hourly costs are based on current figures. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Titles: FERC-725G6 (Mandatory Reliability Standard PRC-027-1) and FERC-725Y (Mandatory Reliability Standards: Operations Personnel Training (PER-005-2 and PER-006-1). Action: Revision to existing collections and proposed new information collection. OMB Control Nos.: To be determined (FERC-725G6) \51\ and 1902-0279 (FERC-725Y). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \51\ OMB will assign a Control No. when it issues a decision. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Respondents: Business or other for profit, and not for profit institutions. Frequency of Responses: Annual recordkeeping and reporting requirements, with some reporting requirements being at least once every six years. Necessity of the Information: Proposed Reliability Standards PRC- 027-1 and PER-006-1 set forth requirements for coordination of protection systems and personnel training on specific topics essential to reliability. The Commission proposes to approve proposed Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1, which will replace Commission- approved Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii). The proposed Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1 improve upon the existing Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) because the proposed Reliability Standards assign responsibilities to entities with more appropriate resources and skill sets to conduct studies required to coordinate protection systems. The proposed Reliability Standards also provide additional clarity to the applicable entities. Internal review: The Commission has assured itself, by means of its internal review, that there is specific, objective support for the burden estimates associated with the information requirements. [[Page 55541]] 30. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting requirements by contacting the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of the Executive Director, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426 [Attention: Ellen Brown, email: [email protected], phone: (202) 502-8663, fax: (202) 273-0873]. 31. Comments concerning the information collection proposed in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and the associated burden estimates should be sent to the Commission in this docket and may also be sent to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs [Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission]. For security reasons, comments should be sent by email to OMB at the following email address: [email protected]. Please refer to OMB Control Nos. to be determined (FERC-725G6) and 1902-0279 (FERC-725Y) in your submittal. IV. Environmental Analysis 32. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may have a significant adverse effect on the human environment.\52\ The action proposed here falls within the categorical exclusion in the Commission's regulations for rules that are clarifying, corrective or procedural, for information gathering, analysis, and dissemination.\53\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \52\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Order No. 486, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 30,783 (1987) (cross-referenced at 41 FERC ] 61,284). \53\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- V. Regulatory Flexibility Act 33. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) generally requires a description and analysis of proposed rules that will have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.\54\ The Small Business Administration (SBA) defines which utilities are small businesses based on the number of employees that a utility and its affiliates employ.\55\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \54\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612. \55\ 13 CFR 121.201, Subsector 221. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 34. The proposed Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 (included in FERC- 725G6) will apply to approximately 1,612 entities (334 transmission owners, 913 generator owners, and 365 distribution providers) in the United States.\56\ Pursuant to SBA regulations, the employment threshold for transmission is 500 employees, for generator owners is between 250 and 750 employees (depending on the fuel source), and for distribution providers is 1,000 employees. We estimate that the annual cost for each entity will be $1,048 for each generator owner and distribution provider and $5,507 for each transmission owner. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \56\ Many respondents serve multiple roles in the NERC compliance registry, so there is likely double counting in the estimates. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 35. The proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1 (included in FERC- 725Y) will apply to approximately 875 generator operators in the United States. Pursuant to SBA regulations the employment threshold for generator operators is between 250 and 750 employees (depending on the fuel source). We estimate that the annual cost for each generator operator will be $719. 36. In addition, this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposes the retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) (included in FERC- 725A). That retirement would decrease the annual estimated cost for 875 generator operators by $4,585 each, for 177 transmission operators by $6,681 each, and for 99 balancing authorities by $2,885 each. For the generator operators affected by this retirement and the proposed Reliability Standard PER-006-1, the net annual effect would be a decrease of $3,866 each. We estimate the net annual cost of this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking would vary, by type of entity, from an annual decrease of $6,681 (for each transmission operator) to an annual increase of $5,507 (for each transmission owner). We view this as a minimal economic impact for each entity. Accordingly, we certify that the proposed Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1 and retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1 (ii) will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. VI. Comment Procedures 37. The Commission invites interested persons to submit comments on the matters and issues proposed in this notice to be adopted, including any related matters or alternative proposals that commenters may wish to discuss. Comments are due January 22, 2018. Comments must refer to Docket No. RM16-22-000, and must include the commenter's name, the organization they represent, if applicable, and their address in their comments. 38. The Commission encourages comments to be filed electronically via the eFiling link on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov. The Commission accepts most standard word processing formats. Documents created electronically using word processing software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned format. Commenters filing electronically do not need to make a paper filing. 39. Commenters that are not able to file comments electronically must send an original of their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. 40. All comments will be placed in the Commission's public files and may be viewed, printed, or downloaded remotely as described in the Document Availability section below. Commenters on this proposal are not required to serve copies of their comments on other commenters. VII. Document Availability 41. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the Internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426. 42. From the Commission's Home Page on the Internet, this information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket number of this document, excluding the last three digits, in the docket number field. 43. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's Web site during normal business hours from the Commission's Online Support at (202) 502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at [email protected], or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502- 8371, TTY (202) 502-8659. Email the Public Reference Room at [email protected]. By direction of the Commission. Issued November 16, 2017. Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary. [FR Doc. 2017-25329 Filed 11-21-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules 55535
operating within the designated area Point along the northern boundary of Cordell Bank
Latitude Longitude National Marine Sanctuary to Point 39 where
defined in appendix G of this subpart, No.
sewage and non clean graywater as it ends.
defined by section 312 of the FWPCA 4 ................ 38.26390 ¥123.18138
5 1 .............. 38.29896 ¥123.05989 Point
generated incidental to vessel use, and No. Latitude Longitude
6 1 .............. 39.00000 ¥123.75777
ammunition, pyrotechnics or other 7 ................ 39.00000 ¥124.33350
materials directly related to search and 1 ................ 38.29989 ¥123.99988
1These coordinates are not a part of the
rescue and live ammunition training 2 ................ 37.76687 ¥123.75143
activities conducted by United States boundary for the Designated Area for Certain 3 ................ 37.76716 ¥123.42758
United States Coast Guard Discharges. These 4 ................ 37.77033 ¥123.43466
Coast Guard vessels and aircraft in the coordinates are reference points used to draw
designated areas defined in appendix G line segments that intersect with the fixed off- 5 ................ 37.78109 ¥123.44694
of this subpart. Discharging or shore boundary between the United States 6 ................ 37.78383 ¥123.45466
and California. 7 ................ 37.79487 ¥123.46721
depositing, from beyond the boundary 8 ................ 37.80094 ¥123.47313
of the Sanctuary, any material or other 9 ................ 37.81026 ¥123.46897
Subpart K—Cordell Bank National
matter that subsequently enters the 10 .............. 37.81365 ¥123.47906
Marine Sanctuary
Sanctuary and injures a Sanctuary 11 .............. 37.82296 ¥123.49280
resource or quality, except for the ■ 4. Amend § 922.112 by revising 12 .............. 37.84988 ¥123.51749
material or other matter excepted in paragraphs (a)(2)(i)(D) and (E) and 13 .............. 37.86189 ¥123.52197
paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (vi) and adding paragraph (a)(2)(i)(F) to read as 14 .............. 37.87637 ¥123.52192
(a)(3) of this section. follows: 15 .............. 37.88541 ¥123.52967
16 .............. 37.90725 ¥123.53937
* * * * * 17 .............. 37.92288 ¥123.54360
§ 922.112 Prohibited or otherwise
(4) Discharging or depositing, from regulated activities. 18 .............. 37.93858 ¥123.54701
beyond the boundary of the Sanctuary, 19 .............. 37.94901 ¥123.54777
any material or other matter that (a) * * *
(2)(i) * * * 20 .............. 37.95528 ¥123.56199
subsequently enters the Sanctuary and (D) For a vessel less than 300 GRT or 21 .............. 37.96683 ¥123.57859
injures a Sanctuary resource or quality, a vessel 300 GRT or greater without
22 .............. 37.97761 ¥123.58746
except for the material or other matter 23 .............. 37.98678 ¥123.59988
sufficient holding capacity to hold 24 .............. 37.99847 ¥123.61331
excepted in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through graywater while within the Sanctuary,
(vi) and (a)(3) of this section. 25 .............. 38.01366 ¥123.62494
clean graywater as defined by section 26 .............. 38.01987 ¥123.62450
* * * * * 312 of the FWPCA; 27 .............. 38.02286 ¥123.61531
■ 3. Amend subpart H by adding (E) Vessel engine or generator 28 .............. 38.02419 ¥123.59864
appendix G to read as follows: exhaust; or 29 .............. 38.03409 ¥123.59904
(F) For a United States Coast Guard 30 .............. 38.04614 ¥123.60611
Appendix G to Subpart H of Part 922— 31 .............. 38.05308 ¥123.60549
Designated Area for Certain United vessel that is without sufficient holding
tank capacity and is without a Type I or 32 .............. 38.06188 ¥123.61546
States Coast Guard Discharges 33 .............. 38.07451 ¥123.62162
II marine sanitation device, and that is 34 .............. 38.08289 ¥123.62065
Coordinates listed in this appendix are operating within the designated area
unprojected (Geographic Coordinate System) 35 .............. 38.11256 ¥123.63344
and based on the North American Datum of
defined in appendix C of this subpart, 36 .............. 38.13219 ¥123.64265
1983 (NAD83). sewage and non clean graywater as 37 .............. 38.26390 ¥123.18138
The portion of the Greater Farallones defined by section 312 of the FWPCA 38 .............. 38.29989 ¥123.20005
National Marine Sanctuary area where the generated incidental to vessel use, and 39 .............. 38.29989 ¥123.99988
exception for discharges from United States ammunition, pyrotechnics or other
Coast Guard activities applies is defined as materials directly related to search and [FR Doc. 2017–25105 Filed 11–21–17; 8:45 am]
follows. Beginning with Point 1 identified in rescue and live ammunition training BILLING CODE 3510–NK–P
the coordinate table in this appendix, the activities conducted by United States
boundary extends from Point 1 to Point 2 in
a straight line arc, and continues from Point
Coast Guard vessels and aircraft in the
2 to Point 3 in a straight line arc, and from designated areas defined in appendix C DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Point 3 to Point 4 in a straight line arc. From of this subpart.
Point 4 the boundary extends east and north * * * * * Federal Energy Regulatory
along a straight line arc towards Point 5 until ■ 5. Amend subpart K by adding Commission
it intersects the fixed offshore boundary appendix C to read as follows:
between the United States and California 18 CFR Part 40
(approximately 3 NM seaward of the coast as Appendix C to Subpart K of Part 922—
defined in United States vs. California, 135 Designated Area for Certain United [Docket No. RM16–22–000]
S. Ct. 563 (2014)). The boundary then States Coast Guard Discharges
extends northward following the fixed Coordination of Protection Systems for
offshore boundary between the United States Coordinates listed in this appendix are Performance During Faults and
and California until it intersects the line unprojected (Geographic Coordinate System) Specific Training for Personnel
segment formed between Point 6 and Point and based on the North American Datum of Reliability Standards
7. From this intersection, the boundary 1983 (NAD83).
extends west along the northern boundary of The portion of the Cordell Bank National AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
Greater Farallones National Marine Marine Sanctuary area where the exception Commission, DOE.
Sanctuary to Point 7 where it ends. for discharges from United States Coast
Guard activities applies is defined as follows. ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
Point Beginning with Point 1, identified in the
Latitude Longitude coordinate table in this appendix, the SUMMARY: The Federal Energy
No.
boundary extends from Point 1 to Point 2 in Regulatory Commission (Commission)
1 ................ 39.00000 ¥124.33350 a straight line arc and continues in numerical proposes to approve Reliability
2 ................ 38.29989 ¥123.99988 order through each subsequent point to Point Standards PRC–027–1 (Coordination of
3 ................ 38.29989 ¥123.20005 38. From Point 38 the boundary extends west Protection Systems for Performance
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:48 Nov 21, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\22NOP1.SGM 22NOP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_55759/page/1.svg)
![55536 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules
During Faults) and PER–006–1 (Specific Commission-certified Electric approving 83 of the 107 Reliability
Training for Personnel) submitted by the Reliability Organization (ERO).1 As Standards filed by NERC, including
North American Electric Reliability discussed below, however, the Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.6 In
Corporation (NERC). The purpose of Commission also proposes to direct addition, the Commission directed
proposed Reliability Standard PRC– NERC to modify proposed Reliability NERC to develop modifications to
027–1 is to maintain the coordination of Standard PRC–027–1 to require an Reliability Standard PRC–001–1 that:
protection systems installed to detect initial protection system coordination (1) Correct the references for Requirements,
and isolate faults on bulk electric study to ensure that applicable entities and [sic] (2) include a requirement that upon
system elements, such that those will perform (or have performed), as a the detection of failures in relays or
protection systems operate in the baseline, a study demonstrating proper protection system elements on the Bulk-
intended sequence during faults. The coordination of its protection systems. Power System that threaten reliable
purpose of proposed Reliability We propose to direct NERC to submit operation, relevant transmission operators
the modified Reliability Standard for must be informed promptly, but within a
Standard PER–006–1 is to ensure that specified period of time that is developed in
personnel are trained on specific topics Commission approval within 12 months the Reliability Standards development
essential to reliability to perform or following the effective date of a final process, whereas generator operators must
support real-time operations of the bulk rule in this proceeding. also promptly inform their transmission
electric system. In addition, the 2. The Commission also proposes to operators; and (3) clarifies that, after being
Commission proposes to direct NERC to approve the associated violation risk informed of failures in relays or protection
develop certain modifications to factors, violation severity levels, system elements that threaten reliability of
implementation plans, and effective the Bulk-Power System, transmission
proposed Reliability Standard PRC– operators must carry out corrective control
027–1. dates proposed by NERC for Reliability
actions, i.e., return a system to a stable state
Standards PRC–027–1 and PER–006–1.
DATES: Comments are due January 22, that respects system requirements as soon as
The Commission further proposes to possible and no longer than 30 minutes after
2018.
approve the retirement of currently- they receive notice of the failure.7
ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by effective Reliability Standard PRC–001–
docket number, may be filed in the 1.1(ii) (System Protection C. NERC Petition and Proposed
following ways: Coordination).2 Reliability Standards PRC–027–1 and
• Electronic Filing through http:// 3. In addition, the Commission PER–006–1
www.ferc.gov. Documents created proposes to approve new and revised 6. On September 2, 2016, NERC
electronically using word processing definitions submitted by NERC for submitted a petition seeking
software should be filed in native incorporation in the NERC Glossary of Commission approval of proposed
applications or print-to-PDF format and Terms Used in NERC Reliability Reliability Standards PRC–027–1 and
not in a scanned format. Standards (‘‘NERC Glossary’’) for the PER–006–1.8 NERC states that the
• Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable following terms: (1) ‘‘Protection system proposed Reliability Standards, new
to file electronically may mail or hand- coordination study;’’ (2) ‘‘operational and revised NERC Glossary terms, and
deliver comments to: Federal Energy planning analysis;’’ and (3) ‘‘real-time the retirement of Reliability Standard
Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the assessment.’’ PRC–001–1.1(ii) satisfy the
Commission, 888 First Street NE., I. Background Commission’s criteria in Order No. 672
Washington, DC 20426. and are just, reasonable, not unduly
Instructions: For detailed instructions A. Section 215 and Mandatory discriminatory or preferential, and in
on submitting comments and additional Reliability Standards the public interest.9 NERC explains that
information on the rulemaking process, 4. Section 215 of the FPA requires a the intent of the proposed Reliability
see the Comment Procedures Section of Commission-certified ERO to develop Standards and changes to the NERC
this document. mandatory and enforceable Reliability Glossary are to maintain the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Standards, subject to Commission coordination of protection systems
Juan Villar (Technical Information), review and approval.3 Once approved, installed to detect and isolate faults on
Office of Electric Reliability, Division the Reliability Standards may be bulk electric system elements and
of Reliability Standards and Security, enforced by the ERO subject to require registered entities to provide
888 First Street NE., Washington, DC Commission oversight or by the training to their relevant personnel on
20426, Telephone: (772) 678–6496, Commission independently.4 In 2006, protection systems and remedial action
Juan.Villar@ferc.gov. the Commission certified NERC as the schemes. NERC asserts that the
Alan Rukin (Legal Information), Office ERO pursuant to section 215 of the proposed Reliability Standards are an
of the General Counsel, Federal FPA.5 improvement over currently-effective
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii)
B. Order No. 693 and will ensure that appropriate
First Street NE., Washington, DC
5. On March 16, 2007, the personnel are trained on protection
20426, Telephone: (202) 502–8502,
Commission issued Order No. 693,
Alan.Rukin@ferc.gov. 6 Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1 16 U.S.C. 824o. Power System, Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs.
1. Pursuant to section 215 of the 2 The Commission approved Reliability Standard ¶ 31,242, at PP 1433–1449, order on reh’g, Order
Federal Power Act (FPA), the PRC–001–1.1(ii) on May 29, 2015. North American No. 693–A, 120 FERC ¶ 61,053 (2007).
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
Electric Reliability Corporation, 151 FERC ¶ 61,186 7 Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,242 at
Commission proposes to approve (2015). P 1449.
proposed Reliability Standards PRC– 3 Id. 824o(c), (d). 8 Proposed Reliability Standards PRC–027–1 and
027–1 (Coordination of Protection 4 Id. 824o(e). PER–006–1 are not attached to this Notice of
Systems for Performance During Faults) 5 North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 Proposed Rulemaking. The proposed Reliability
and PER–006–1 (Specific Training for FERC ¶ 61,062, order on reh’g and compliance, 117 Standards are available on the Commission’s
FERC ¶ 61,126 (2006), order on compliance, 118 eLibrary document retrieval system in Docket No.
Personnel), which were submitted for FERC ¶ 61,190, order on reh’g, 119 FERC ¶ 61,046 RM16–22–000 and are posted on the NERC Web
approval by the North American Electric (2007), aff’d sub nom. Alcoa Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d site, http://www.nerc.com.
Reliability Corporation (NERC), the 1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009). 9 NERC Petition at 10.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:48 Nov 21, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\22NOP1.SGM 22NOP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_55759/page/2.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules 55537
systems and that protection systems are Perform a protection system Reliability Standards TOP–001–3 and
appropriately studied, coordinated, and coordination study to determine TOP–003–3.
monitored. whether the protection systems
II. Discussion
continue to operate in the intended
1. Proposed Reliability Standard PER– 12. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of
sequence during faults; (2) compare
006–1 present fault current values to an the FPA, we propose to approve
7. NERC states that proposed established fault current baseline and, proposed Reliability Standards PER–
Reliability Standard PER–006–1 only if the comparison identifies a 15 006–1 and PRC–027–1 as just,
requires generator operators to use a percent or greater deviation in fault reasonable, not unduly discriminatory
systematic approach to develop and current values (either three phase or or preferential, and in the public
implement training for dispatch phase to ground) at a bus to which the interest, as both proposed Reliability
personnel at centrally-located dispatch bulk electric system is connected, Standards improve upon currently-
centers.10 NERC explains that proposed perform a protection system effective Reliability Standard PRC–001–
Reliability Standard PER–006–1 will coordination study; or (3) use a 1.1(ii) in important ways.17 Specifically,
also cover plant personnel who are combination of options 1 and 2.14 proposed Reliability Standard PRC–
responsible for real-time control of a 10. NERC explains that proposed 027–1 does so by (1) modifying the
generator. NERC maintains that it is Reliability Standard PRC–027–1, applicability section to include the
appropriate to train plant personnel [in] Requirement R3 will require applicable appropriate functional entity types with
the functionality of protection systems entities to use the process established the responsibilities, resources, and skill
and remedial action schemes. NERC under proposed Reliability Standard sets to conduct the studies required to
observes that proposed Reliability PRC–027–1, Requirement R1 for the coordinate protection systems, and (2)
Standard PER–006–1 replaces the development of any new or revised listing the protection system functions
phrase ‘‘purpose and limitations’’ used protection system settings. on all bulk electric system elements that
in currently-effective Reliability require coordination. Proposed
3. Proposed Retirement of Reliability Reliability Standard PER–006–1, along
Standard PRC–001–1(ii) with the phrase Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii)
‘‘operational functionality’’ to clearly with existing formal training
identify the objective of the training.11 11. NERC states that Reliability requirements in the PER group of
NERC also observes that proposed Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii) includes six Reliability Standards, also improves
Reliability Standard PER–006–1 requirements that are either addressed upon Reliability Standard PRC–001–
replaces the phrase ‘‘applied in its area’’ by Reliability Standards approved by 1.1(ii), Requirement R1 by ensuring that
in Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii) the Commission or by the proposed the necessary personnel are familiar
with the phrase ‘‘that affect the output Reliability Standards. Specifically, with and understand the purpose and
of the generating facility(ies) it NERC explains that Reliability Standard limitations of protection systems
operates’’ to properly tailor the scope of PRC–001–1.1(ii), Requirement R1 has schemes while providing more precise
the required training. NERC notes that been partially replaced by currently- and auditable requirements. However,
proposed Reliability Standard PER– effective Reliability Standards PER– proposed Reliability Standard PRC–
003–1 and PER–005–2. NERC continues 027–1, Requirement R2, Option 2 does
006–1 does not specify a periodicity for
that proposed Reliability Standard PER– not appear to ensure coordination of all
the required training.
006–1 and the proposed revised bulk electric system elements with
2. Proposed Reliability Standard PRC– definitions of operational planning protection system functions.
027–1 analysis and real-time assessment will Accordingly, pursuant to section
8. NERC asserts that proposed replace the remaining portions of 215(d)(5) of the FPA, we propose to
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1: Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii), direct that NERC develop modifications
Requirement R1. NERC asserts that to proposed Reliability Standard PRC–
provides a clear set of Requirements that Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii), 027–1 that address our concern
obligate entities to (1) implement a process Requirement R2 has been addressed by
for establishing and coordinating new or
regarding this gap, as discussed below.
revised Protection System settings, and (2)
Reliability Standards IRO–001–4, IRO– 13. In addition, we propose to
periodically study Protection System settings 008-2, IRO-010-2, TOP-001-3, and approve NERC’s associated violation
that could be affected by incremental changes TOP-003-3, which the Commission risk factors, violation severity levels,
in Fault current to ensure the Protection approved in Order No. 817.15 NERC implementation plans, and effective
Systems continue to operate in their intended states that Reliability Standard PRC– dates. We also propose to approve the
sequence.12 001–1.1(ii), Requirements R3 and R4 revised definitions for inclusion in the
According to NERC, proposed will be replaced with proposed NERC Glossary. Further, we propose to
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1, Reliability Standard PRC–027–1. NERC approve the retirement of Reliability
Requirement R1 mandates that each also explains that Reliability Standard Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii), as requested
transmission owner, generator owner, PRC–001–1.1(ii), Requirement R5 has by NERC.
and distribution provider establish a been replaced with several Reliability 14. Pursuant to 215(d)(5) of the FPA,
process for developing new and revised Standards developed after Reliability we propose to direct that NERC develop
protection system settings for bulk Standard PRC–001–1(ii) became modifications to proposed Reliability
electric system elements.13 effective.16 NERC further states that Standard PRC–027–1 addressing our
9. NERC states that proposed Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii), concern that applicable entities that
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
Reliability Standard PRC–027–1, Requirement R6 has been replaced with choose Requirement R2, Option 2
Requirement R2 mandates that every six perform (or have already performed) an
years, applicable entities must either: (1)
14 Id. at 26. initial baseline study demonstrating
15 Id. at 5 (citing Transmission Operations proper coordination of their protection
Reliability Standards and Interconnection
10 Id. at 13. Reliability Operations and Coordination Reliability
systems. Any additional protection
11 Id. at 15. Standards, Order No. 817, 153 FERC ¶ 61,178 system coordination studies would be
12 Id. at 26. (2015)).
13 Id. at 27. 16 Id. at 6. 17 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2).
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:48 Nov 21, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\22NOP1.SGM 22NOP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_55759/page/3.svg)
![55538 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules
necessary only if an applicable entity is Reliability Standard PRC–027–1 Standard PRC–001.24 The report
confronted with 15 percent or greater explains that a short-circuit study is ‘‘an recommended requiring the
fault current deviations from the prior analysis of an electrical network that coordination of all existing protection
baseline study amounts, as currently determines the magnitude of the systems.25
proposed in Reliability Standard PRC– currents flowing in the network during 19. In 2009, in a letter from the NERC
027–1, Requirement R2, Option 2. We an electrical fault . . . [and] are used as President to the NERC Board of Trustees
propose to direct NERC to submit the the basis for protection device and stakeholders, NERC identified
modified Reliability Standard within 12 coordination studies.’’ 21 Therefore, generation and transmission mis-
months following the effective date of a while short-circuit studies are inputs to coordination as responsible for 30
final rule in this proceeding. protection system coordination studies, percent of the misoperations that
15. Proposed Reliability Standard it appears that a short-circuit study occurred between 2005 and 2008.26 The
PRC–027–1, Requirement R2 does not differs in scope from a protection 2009 letter stated that mis-coordination
require an initial protection system system coordination study. Based on between generation and transmission
coordination study if an applicable this record, it would be incorrect to protection systems ‘‘has caused two
entity elects Option 2. Unlike Option 1, conclude that proposed Reliability significant system disturbances in the
which requires performance of Standard PRC–027–1, Requirement R2, past two years, and resulted in the
protection system coordination studies Options 1 and 2 afford the same level of unnecessary loss of generation during
every six years, Option 2 requires protection system coordination because seven additional disturbances in that
applicable entities to ‘‘[c]ompare the former requires a protection system timeframe.’’ 27 The letter explained that
present Fault current values to an coordination study while the latter does the 2009 NERC System Protection
established Fault current baseline and Initiative would initially focus on the
not.
perform a Protection System area of protection system
Coordination Study when the 17. While we generally support
coordination.28
comparison identifies a 15 percent or permitting flexibility in the Reliability
20. In 2013, NERC issued a
greater deviation.’’ The proposed Standards to achieve required
Misoperations Report prepared by the
Reliability Standard and NERC’s performance goals, the possibility that
Protection System Misoperations Task
petition do not indicate that the ‘‘Fault some bulk electric system elements may Force.29 The Misoperations Report
current baseline’’ must be established never undergo a protection system identified ‘‘ways to potentially reduce
through an initial protection system coordination study raises reliability the amount of future misoperations’’
coordination study. Instead, NERC’s concerns. In past serious Bulk-Power and concluded that ‘‘[m]isoperations
petition states that the baseline must be System events, mis-coordination was a due to setting errors can potentially be
established ‘‘by the effective date of the contributing factor to misoperations and reduced.’’ 30 The identified techniques
standard based on short-circuit outages. For example, the Arizona to reduce incorrect settings, included:
studies.’’ 18 The proposed Reliability Southern California September 8, 2011 Peer reviews, increased training, more
Standard provides that ‘‘the initial Fault Outage Report identified an instance extensive fault studies, standard
current baseline(s) shall be established where a transmission owner did not templates for setting standard schemes
by the effective date of this Reliability perform a protection system using complex relays, and periodic
Standard and updated each time a coordination study prior to the review of existing settings when there is
Protection System Coordination Study implementation of a protection a change in system topography.31 In the
is performed,’’ but this language does system.22 The 2011 Outage Report ReliabilityFirst region, NERC identified
not require establishing the ‘‘initial stated that this omission negatively a category of misoperations caused by
Fault current baseline’’ through an affected the reliable operation of the ‘‘Engineering/Design Issues,’’ which
initial protection system coordination Bulk-Power System during the 2011 specifically included setting mis-
study.19 NERC’s petition reinforces this event.23 coordination.32 This category of
understanding, as noted above, by 18. Over the past eleven years, several misoperations was one of the three most
explicitly allowing the use of short- NERC reports have addressed the common causes of misoperations for
circuit studies to establish the initial importance of protection system above 200 kV facilities within the
Fault current baseline. coordination to Bulk-Power System ReliabilityFirst region.33 The positive
16. While they are related terms, we
reliability. Proposed Reliability impact on Bulk-Power System reliability
understand there to be a difference
Standard PRC–027–1 addresses some of
between short-circuit studies and
the issues raised in these reports; but 24 NERC SPCTF Assessment of Standard PRC–
protection system coordination studies. 001–0—System Protection Coordination (2006),
without requiring an initial protection
NERC defines protection system http://www.nerc.com/pa/Stand/
system coordination study, the Project200706SystemProtectionCoordinationDL/
coordination study as an ‘‘analysis to
proposed Reliability Standard does not NERC_SPCTF_Assessment_of_Standard_PRC.pdf.
determine whether Protection Systems
address all of them. In 2006, for 25 Id. at 3–4.
operate in the intended sequence during
example, the NERC System Protection 26 NERC Letter from Rick Sergel, NERC President,
Faults.’’ 20 By comparison, proposed Regarding System Protection Initiative at Figure 2
Control Task Force assessed Reliability
(April 24, 2009).
18 NERC Petition at 36 n.35. 27 Id. at 1.
19 Proposed Reliability Standard PRC–027–1, C37.113–1999 (stating that the ‘‘process of choosing 28 Id. at 1–2.
Requirement R2, Option 2 n.1. Footnote 1 further settings or time delay characteristics of protective 29 NERC Misoperations Report (2013), http://
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
states that if an ‘‘initial baseline was not established devices, such that operation of the devices will www.nerc.com/comm/PC/Protection%20System
by the effective date of this Reliability Standard occur in a specified order to minimize customer %20Misoperations%20Task%20Force%20PSMTF
because of the previous use of an alternate option service interruption and power system isolation due %202/PSMTF_Report.pdf.
or the installation of a new BES Element, the entity to a power system disturbance’’).
21 Proposed Reliability Standard PRC–027–1, 30 Id. at 3.
may establish the baseline by performing a
Protection System Coordination Study’’ (emphasis Supplemental Material at 8. 31 Id.
added). Id. 22 Arizona Southern California September 8, 2011 32 Id. at 14–15. The 2013 Misoperations Report
20 NERC Petition, Exhibit A–3, Proposed Outage Report at 101–103, https://www.ferc.gov/ elaborated that the ‘‘Engineering/Design Issues’’
Definitions. This definition is consistent with the legal/staff-reports/04-27-2012-ferc-nerc-report.pdf. category included:
definition of coordination of protection in IEEE Std. 23 Id. at 100–102. 33 Id. at 14.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:48 Nov 21, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\22NOP1.SGM 22NOP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_55759/page/4.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules 55539
of reducing misoperations because of the miss coordination [sic] of ground date. Respondents subject to the filing
‘‘Incorrect setting/logic/design errors’’ is overcurrent settings’’ found by requirements of a rule will not be
found in NERC’s 2015 Analysis of ERCOT.39 penalized for failing to respond to these
System Protection Misoperations: 23. The 2017 State of Reliability collections of information unless the
Incorrect short circuit values and Report recognized the significance of collections of information display a
coordination errors. The incorrect short protection system misoperations to valid OMB control number.
circuit values included outdated or incorrect Bulk-Power System reliability by 27. The Commission will submit the
data used to calculate relay settings. The observing that ‘‘[p]rotection system information collection requirement to
coordination errors in these cases all misoperations should remain an area of OMB for its final review and approval.
involved pilot protection either of focus as it continues to be one of the We solicit public comments on the need
insufficient carrier blocking trip delays or of largest contributors to the severity of for this information, whether the
improper choice of ground pickup values
transmission outages.’’ 40 information will have practical utility,
used in a blocking scheme. Id. at 15.
The State of Reliability 2015 report found 24. For the reasons discussed above, the accuracy of the burden estimates,
that protection system misoperations we propose to direct that NERC develop ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
continued to be a significant contributor to modifications to proposed Reliability clarity of the information to be collected
automatic transmission outage severity. In Standard PRC–027–1 to address our or retained, and any suggested methods
general, transmission system events with concern by requiring that applicable for minimizing respondents’ burden,
protection system misoperations were more entities perform an initial protection including the use of automated
impactful than other transmission events. coordination study under Requirement information techniques.
They were also a significant contributor to 28. The information collection
transmission outage severity, indicating that R2, Option 2. We propose that
a reduction in protection system applicable entities would have six years requirements in this Notice of Proposed
misoperations would lead to an improvement from the effective date of a modified Rulemaking in Docket No. RM16–22–
in system reliability.34 Reliability Standard to complete the 000 are associated with FERC–725A,43
analysis. An applicable entity could use FERC–725G6,44 and FERC–725Y, as
21. In 2014, a NERC ‘‘lessons learned’’
pre-existing protection system discussed below.
document on ‘‘Generation Relaying— 29. Public Reporting Burden: The
Underfrequency Protection coordination studies to satisfy the
proposed requirement provided it was number of respondents below is based
Coordination’’ identified a 2014 on an examination of the NERC
incident where underfrequency relay reasonable (i.e., no intervening system
changes that would render the earlier compliance registry on April 7, 2017, for
trip settings were installed on the transmission owners, generator owners,
system unnecessarily and were not work obsolete). After conducting the
initial protection system coordination generator operators, and distribution
coordinated with a generator’s relay trip providers within the United States and
setting.35 The document explained that study, subsequent protection system
coordination studies would only be an estimate of how many entities from
‘‘[u]nintended generator tripping during that registry will be affected by the
an underfrequency event can exacerbate required when an applicable entity is
confronted with 15 percent or greater Reliability Standards proposed for
the condition.’’ 36 The document also adoption and implementation. At the
stated that ‘‘generator relay protection fault current deviations from the prior
baseline study amounts, as currently time of Commission review of proposed
should be coordinated with all auxiliary Reliability Standards PRC–027–1 and
power system relaying with specific proposed in Reliability Standard PRC–
027–1, Requirement R2, Option 2. We PER–006–1, 334 transmission owners,
regard to time-delay settings’’ in order to 913 generator owners, 875 generator
ensure reliable generator operation.37 seek comments on this proposal.
25. Separately, we seek comment from operators, and 365 distribution
22. The 2016 State of Reliability
NERC and other interested entities providers in the United States were
Report noted that while protection
explaining the technical basis for registered in the NERC compliance
system misoperations declined in 2015,
employing a 15 percent deviation registry. However, under NERC’s
misoperations showed a ‘‘statistically
threshold in proposed Reliability compliance registration program,
significant positive correlation with
Standard PRC–027–1, Requirement R2, entities may be registered for multiple
transmission outage severity and
Option 2. We seek to better understand functions, so these numbers incorporate
show[ed] a higher relative transmission
the basis for this threshold to ensure an some double counting. We note that
risk.’’ 38 Misoperations showed the
adequate record in the proceeding on many generation sites share a common
strongest correlation of the factors
considered. In addition, the 2016 State this matter.
43 FERC–725A (OMB Control No. 1902–0244)
of Reliability Report identified that III. Information Collection Statement currently includes the information collection
‘‘over 40 percent of the incorrect setting/ requirements associated with Reliability Standard
26. The collection of information PRC–001–1.1(ii), which is proposed for retirement.
logic/design misoperations were due to
addressed in this Notice of Proposed Only one item per OMB Control No. may be
34 NERC, Analysis of System Protection
Rulemaking is subject to review by the pending OMB review at a time, and an unrelated
Office of Management and Budget item affecting FERC–725A is pending OMB review.
Misoperations at 1 (Dec. 2015) (citations omitted), We are providing estimates of the burden reduction
http://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/PA/Performance (OMB) under section 3507(d) of the related to FERC–725A for review and comment.
%20Analysis%20DL/2015_Analysis_of_System_ Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.41 However, to submit this Notice of Proposed
Protection_Misoperations_Final.pdf (finding that 31
percent of all misoperations were due to ‘‘Incorrect
OMB’s regulations require approval of Rulemaking timely to OMB, the Commission is
certain information collection being conservative and not reducing the burden
setting/logic/design errors’’). estimates associated with FERC–725A at this time.
requirements imposed by agency
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
35 NERC, Lesson Learned, Generation Relaying—
44 The information collection requirements
Underfrequency Protection Coordination (2014), rules.42 Upon approval of a collection(s) related to proposed Reliability Standard PRC–027–
http://www.nerc.com/pa/rrm/ea/Lessons of information, OMB will assign an 1 would normally be included in FERC–725G (OMB
%20Learned%20Document%20Library/ Control No. 1902–0252). However, only one item
LL20140601_Generation_Relaying_ OMB control number and an expiration
per OMB Control No. may be pending OMB review
Underfrequency_Protection_Coordination_final.pdf. at a time, and an unrelated item affecting FERC–
36 Id. 39 Id.at 166. 725G is pending OMB review. For this Notice of
37 Id. 40 2017 State of Reliability Report at 2. Proposed Rulemaking and the related submittal to
38 2016 State of Reliability Report at 17, http:// 41 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
OMB, we use a placeholder information collection
www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/Pages/default.aspx. 42 5 CFR 1320.11. no. of FERC–725G6.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:48 Nov 21, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\22NOP1.SGM 22NOP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_55759/page/5.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 224 / Wednesday, November 22, 2017 / Proposed Rules 55541
30. Interested persons may obtain employment threshold for transmission created electronically using word
information on the reporting is 500 employees, for generator owners processing software should be filed in
requirements by contacting the Federal is between 250 and 750 employees native applications or print-to-PDF
Energy Regulatory Commission, Office (depending on the fuel source), and for format and not in a scanned format.
of the Executive Director, 888 First distribution providers is 1,000 Commenters filing electronically do not
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426 employees. We estimate that the annual need to make a paper filing.
[Attention: Ellen Brown, email: cost for each entity will be $1,048 for
each generator owner and distribution 39. Commenters that are not able to
DataClearance@ferc.gov, phone: (202)
502–8663, fax: (202) 273–0873]. provider and $5,507 for each file comments electronically must send
31. Comments concerning the transmission owner. an original of their comments to:
information collection proposed in this 35. The proposed Reliability Standard Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and the PER–006–1 (included in FERC–725Y) Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
associated burden estimates should be will apply to approximately 875 Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
sent to the Commission in this docket generator operators in the United States. 40. All comments will be placed in
and may also be sent to the Office of Pursuant to SBA regulations the the Commission’s public files and may
Management and Budget, Office of employment threshold for generator be viewed, printed, or downloaded
Information and Regulatory Affairs operators is between 250 and 750 remotely as described in the Document
[Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal employees (depending on the fuel Availability section below. Commenters
Energy Regulatory Commission]. For source). We estimate that the annual
on this proposal are not required to
security reasons, comments should be cost for each generator operator will be
serve copies of their comments on other
sent by email to OMB at the following $719.
36. In addition, this Notice of commenters.
email address: oira_submission@
omb.eop.gov. Please refer to OMB Proposed Rulemaking proposes the VII. Document Availability
Control Nos. to be determined (FERC– retirement of Reliability Standard PRC–
725G6) and 1902–0279 (FERC–725Y) in 001–1.1(ii) (included in FERC–725A). 41. In addition to publishing the full
your submittal. That retirement would decrease the text of this document in the Federal
annual estimated cost for 875 generator Register, the Commission provides all
IV. Environmental Analysis operators by $4,585 each, for 177 interested persons an opportunity to
32. The Commission is required to transmission operators by $6,681 each, view and/or print the contents of this
prepare an Environmental Assessment and for 99 balancing authorities by document via the Internet through the
or an Environmental Impact Statement $2,885 each. For the generator operators Commission’s Home Page (http://
for any action that may have a affected by this retirement and the www.ferc.gov) and in the Commission’s
significant adverse effect on the human proposed Reliability Standard PER– Public Reference Room during normal
environment.52 The action proposed 006–1, the net annual effect would be a business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
here falls within the categorical decrease of $3,866 each. We estimate
Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE.,
exclusion in the Commission’s the net annual cost of this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking would vary, by Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426.
regulations for rules that are clarifying,
corrective or procedural, for information type of entity, from an annual decrease 42. From the Commission’s Home
gathering, analysis, and of $6,681 (for each transmission Page on the Internet, this information is
dissemination.53 operator) to an annual increase of available on eLibrary. The full text of
$5,507 (for each transmission owner). this document is available on eLibrary
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act We view this as a minimal economic in PDF and Microsoft Word format for
33. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of impact for each entity. Accordingly, we viewing, printing, and/or downloading.
1980 (RFA) generally requires a certify that the proposed Reliability To access this document in eLibrary,
description and analysis of proposed Standards PRC–027–1 and PER–006–1 type the docket number of this
rules that will have significant and retirement of Reliability Standard document, excluding the last three
economic impact on a substantial PRC–001–1.1 (ii) will not have a digits, in the docket number field.
number of small entities.54 The Small significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. 43. User assistance is available for
Business Administration (SBA) defines eLibrary and the Commission’s Web site
which utilities are small businesses VI. Comment Procedures during normal business hours from the
based on the number of employees that
37. The Commission invites interested Commission’s Online Support at (202)
a utility and its affiliates employ.55
34. The proposed Reliability Standard persons to submit comments on the 502–6652 (toll free at 1–866–208–3676)
PRC–027–1 (included in FERC–725G6) matters and issues proposed in this or email at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov,
will apply to approximately 1,612 notice to be adopted, including any or the Public Reference Room at (202)
entities (334 transmission owners, 913 related matters or alternative proposals 502–8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. Email
generator owners, and 365 distribution that commenters may wish to discuss. the Public Reference Room at
providers) in the United States.56 Comments are due January 22, 2018. public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
Pursuant to SBA regulations, the Comments must refer to Docket No.
By direction of the Commission.
RM16–22–000, and must include the
commenter’s name, the organization Issued November 16, 2017.
52 Regulations Implementing the National
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Order No. 486, they represent, if applicable, and their Kimberly D. Bose,
FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,783 (1987) (cross- address in their comments. Secretary.
referenced at 41 FERC ¶ 61,284). 38. The Commission encourages
53 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
[FR Doc. 2017–25329 Filed 11–21–17; 8:45 am]
54 5 U.S.C. 601–612.
comments to be filed electronically via BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
55 13 CFR 121.201, Subsector 221.
the eFiling link on the Commission’s
56 Many respondents serve multiple roles in the Web site at http://www.ferc.gov. The
NERC compliance registry, so there is likely double Commission accepts most standard
counting in the estimates. word processing formats. Documents
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:48 Nov 21, 2017 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\22NOP1.SGM 22NOP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/82_FR_55759/page/7.svg)
Document Created: 2017-11-22 00:49:00
Document Modified: 2017-11-22 00:49:00
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Notice of proposed rulemaking. | |
| Dates | Comments are due January 22, 2018. | |
| 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] | |
| FR Citation | 82 FR 55535 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR