83 FR 27505 - 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 83, Issue 114 (June 13, 2018)
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Federal Register Volume 83, Issue 114 (June 13, 2018)
| Page Range | 27505-27511 | |
| FR Document | 2018-12663 |
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 114 (Wednesday, June 13, 2018)] [Rules and Regulations] [Pages 27505-27511] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2018-12663] ======================================================================== Rules and Regulations Federal Register ________________________________________________________________________ This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510. The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. ======================================================================== Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Rules and Regulations [[Page 27505]] DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 18 CFR Part 40 [Docket No. RM16-22-000; Order No. 847] Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults and Specific Training for Personnel Reliability Standards AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Final rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) approves Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 (Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults) and PER-006-1 (Specific Training for Personnel) submitted by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC). DATES: This rule will become effective August 13, 2018. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Juan Villar (Technical Information), Office of Electric Reliability, Division of Reliability Standards and Security, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, Telephone: (772) 678-6496, Juan.Villar@ferc.gov. Alan Rukin (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, Telephone: (202) 502-8502, Alan.Rukin@ferc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Order No. 847 Final Rule (Issued June 7, 2018) 1. Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), the Commission approves Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 (Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults) and PER-006-1 (Specific Training for Personnel).\1\ The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Commission-certified Electric Reliability Organization (ERO), submitted Reliability Standards PRC- 027-1 and PER-006-1 for approval. As discussed below, we determine that Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, which is designed to maintain the coordination of protection systems installed to detect and isolate faults on bulk electric system elements, such that those protection systems operate in the intended sequence during faults, and PER-006-1, which is intended to ensure that personnel are trained on specific topics essential to reliability to perform or support real-time operations of the bulk electric system, improve upon the currently- effective Reliability Standards. In addition, based on the record before us, we do not adopt the NOPR proposal to direct NERC to modify Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 to require an initial protection system coordination study to ensure that applicable entities will perform (or have performed), as a baseline, a study demonstrating proper coordination of its protection systems. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ 16 U.S.C. 824o (2012). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. The Commission also approves the associated violation risk factors, violation severity levels, implementation plans, and effective dates proposed by NERC for Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006- 1. The Commission further approves the retirement of currently- effective Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) (System Protection Coordination) as proposed by NERC. Finally, the Commission approves new and revised definitions submitted by NERC for incorporation in the NERC Glossary for the following terms: (1) ``protection system coordination study;'' (2) ``operational planning analysis;'' and (3) ``real-time assessment.'' \2\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ NERC Glossary of Terms Used in NERC Reliability Standards (NERC Glossary). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I. Background A. Section 215 and Mandatory Reliability Standards 3. Section 215 of the FPA requires a Commission-certified ERO to develop mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, subject to Commission review and approval.\3\ Once approved, the Reliability Standards may be enforced by the ERO subject to Commission oversight or by the Commission independently.\4\ In 2006, the Commission certified NERC as the ERO pursuant to section 215 of the FPA.\5\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ Id. 824o(c), (d). \4\ Id. 824o(e). \5\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ] 61,062, order on reh'g and compliance, 117 FERC ] 61,126 (2006), order on compliance, 118 FERC ] 61,190, order on reh'g, 119 FERC ] 61,046 (2007), aff'd sub nom. Alcoa Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- B. Order No. 693 4. On March 16, 2007, the Commission issued Order No. 693, approving 83 of the 107 Reliability Standards filed by NERC, including Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.\6\ In addition, the Commission directed NERC to develop modifications to Reliability Standard PRC-001-1 that: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System, Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242 at PP 1433-1449, order on reh'g, Order No. 693-A, 120 FERC ] 61,053 (2007). (1) correct the references for Requirements, and [sic] (2) include a requirement that upon the detection of failures in relays or protection system elements on the Bulk-Power System that threaten reliable operation, relevant transmission operators must be informed promptly, but within a specified period of time that is developed in the Reliability Standards development process, whereas generator operators must also promptly inform their transmission operators; and (3) clarifies that, after being informed of failures in relays or protection system elements that threaten reliability of the Bulk-Power System, transmission operators must carry out corrective control actions, i.e., return a system to a stable state that respects system requirements as soon as possible and no longer than 30 minutes after they receive notice of the failure.\7\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242 at P 1449. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- C. NERC Petition and Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1 5. On September 2, 2016, NERC submitted a petition seeking Commission approval of Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006- 1.\8\ [[Page 27506]] NERC stated that the Reliability Standards, new and revised NERC Glossary terms, and the retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001- 1.1(ii) satisfy the Commission's criteria in Order No. 672 and are just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the public interest.\9\ NERC explained that the intent of the submitted Reliability Standards and changes to the NERC Glossary are to maintain the coordination of protection systems installed to detect and isolate faults on bulk electric system elements and require registered entities to provide training to their relevant personnel on protection systems and remedial action schemes. NERC asserted that the submitted Reliability Standards are an improvement over currently-effective Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) and will ensure that appropriate personnel are trained on protection systems and that protection systems are appropriately studied, coordinated, and monitored. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1 are not attached to this Final Rule. The Reliability Standards are available on the Commission's eLibrary document retrieval system in Docket No. RM16-22-000 and are posted on the NERC website, http://www.nerc.com. \9\ NERC Petition at 10. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Reliability Standard PER-006-1 6. NERC stated that Reliability Standard PER-006-1 requires generator operators to use a systematic approach to develop and implement training for dispatch personnel at centrally-located dispatch centers.\10\ NERC explained that Reliability Standard PER-006-1 will also cover plant personnel who are responsible for real-time control of a generator. NERC maintained that it is appropriate to train plant personnel in the functionality of protection systems and remedial action schemes. NERC observed that Reliability Standard PER-006-1 replaces the phrase ``purpose and limitations'' used in Reliability Standard PRC-001-1(ii) with the phrase ``operational functionality'' to clearly identify the objective of the training.\11\ NERC also noted that Reliability Standard PER-006-1 replaces the phrase ``applied in its area'' in Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) with the phrase ``that affect the output of the generating facility(ies) it operates'' to properly tailor the scope of the required training. NERC noted that Reliability Standard PER-006-1 does not specify a periodicity for the required training. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \10\ Id. at 13. \11\ Id. at 15. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 7. NERC asserted that Reliability Standard PRC-027-1: provides a clear set of Requirements that obligate entities to (1) implement a process for establishing and coordinating new or revised Protection System settings, and (2) periodically study Protection System settings that could be affected by incremental changes in Fault current to ensure the Protection Systems continue to operate in their intended sequence.\12\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \12\ Id. at 26. According to NERC, Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R1 mandates that each transmission owner, generator owner, and distribution provider establish a process for developing new and revised protection system settings for bulk electric system elements.\13\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \13\ Id. at 27. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8. NERC stated that Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2 mandates that every six years, applicable entities must either: (1) Perform a protection system coordination study to determine whether the protection systems continue to operate in the intended sequence during faults; (2) compare present fault current values to an established fault current baseline and, only if the comparison identifies a 15 percent or greater deviation in fault current values (either three phase or phase to ground) at a bus to which the bulk electric system is connected, perform a protection system coordination study; or (3) use a combination of Options 1 and 2.\14\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \14\ Id. at 26. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9. NERC explained that Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R3 will require applicable entities to use the process established under Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R1 for the development of any new or revised protection system settings. 3. Retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) 10. NERC stated that Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) includes six requirements that are either addressed by Reliability Standards approved by the Commission or by Reliability Standards PER-006-1and PRC-027-1. Specifically, NERC explained that Reliability Standard PRC- 001-1.1(ii), Requirement R1 has been partially replaced by Reliability Standards PER-003-1 and PER-005-2. NERC continued that Reliability Standard PER-006-1 and the revised definitions of operational planning analysis and real-time assessment will replace the remaining portions of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirement R1. NERC asserted that Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirement R2 has been addressed by Reliability Standards IRO-001-4, IRO-008-2, IRO-010-2, TOP-001-3, and TOP-003-3, which the Commission approved in Order No. 817.\15\ NERC stated that Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 will replace Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirements R3 and R4. NERC also explained that Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirement R5 has been replaced with several Reliability Standards developed after Reliability Standard PRC-001-1(ii) became effective.\16\ NERC further stated that Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirement R6 has been replaced with Reliability Standards TOP-001-3 and TOP-003-3. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \15\ Id. at 5 (citing Transmission Operations Reliability Standards and Interconnection Reliability Operations and Coordination Reliability Standards, Order No. 817, 153 FERC ] 61,178 (2015)). \16\ Id. at 6. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- D. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 11. On November 16, 2017, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposing to approve Reliability Standards PRC-027- 1 and PER-006-1.\17\ The NOPR proposed to determine that Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1 improve upon the currently-effective Reliability Standards. However, the NOPR observed that Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2, Option 2 does not appear to ensure coordination of all bulk electric system elements with protection system functions because it does not require an initial protection system coordination study. Accordingly, the NOPR also proposed to direct NERC, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, to submit modifications to Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 within 12 months of the effective date of this Final Rule to require an initial protection system coordination study to ensure that applicable entities will perform (or have performed), as a baseline, a study demonstrating proper coordination of its protection systems.\18\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \17\ Coordination of Protection Systems for Performance During Faults and Specific Training for Personnel Reliability Standards, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 82 FR 55535 (Nov. 22, 2017), 161 FERC ] 61,159, at P 12 (2017) (NOPR). The NOPR was erroneously published a second time in the Federal Register on November 28, 2017, which changed the comment date to January 29, 2018. 82 FR 56759 (Nov. 30, 2017); 82 FR 56186 (Nov. 28, 2017). \18\ NOPR, 161 FERC ] 61,159 at PP 14, 24. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12. In addition, the NOPR proposed to approve the associated violation risk factors and violation severity levels, implementation plan, and effective date proposed by NERC.\19\ The NOPR also proposed to approve the revised definitions for inclusion in the NERC [[Page 27507]] Glossary.\20\ Further, the NOPR proposed to approve the retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), as requested by NERC.\21\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \19\ Id. P 13. \20\ Id. \21\ Id. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 13. In response to the NOPR, the Commission received fifteen sets of comments. We address below the issues raised in the NOPR and comments. The Appendix to this Final Rule lists the entities that filed comments in response to the NOPR. II. Discussion 14. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of the FPA, we approve Reliability Standards PER-006-1 and PRC-027-1 as just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the public interest, as both Reliability Standards improve on currently-effective Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) in important ways.\22\ As discussed below, we do not adopt the NOPR proposal to direct NERC to modify Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 to require coordination of all bulk electric system elements with protection system functions. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \22\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 15. Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 improves on currently-effective Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) by: (1) Modifying the applicability section to include the appropriate functional entity types with the responsibilities, resources, and skill sets to conduct the studies required to coordinate protection systems, and (2) listing the protection system functions on all bulk electric system elements that require coordination. Reliability Standard PER-006-1, along with existing formal training requirements in the Personnel Performance, Training, and Qualifications (PER) group of Reliability Standards, also improves upon Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), Requirement R1 by ensuring that the necessary personnel are familiar with and understand the purpose and limitations of protection systems schemes while providing more precise and auditable requirements. 16. In addition, we approve NERC's associated violation risk factors, violation severity levels, implementation plans, and effective dates. We also approve the revised definitions for inclusion in the NERC Glossary. Further, we approve the retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii), as requested by NERC. Initial Protection System Coordination Study NOPR 17. The NOPR proposed to direct that NERC develop modifications to Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 to ensure coordination of all bulk electric system elements with protection system functions by requiring that applicable entities perform an initial protection coordination study under Requirement R2, Option 2. Comments 18. NERC does not support the proposed directive because it believes that the proposed directive is unduly burdensome and unsupported by the materials cited in the NOPR. NERC contends that while the ``proposed directive could potentially help reduce misoperations caused by coordination issues . . . [it] would also impose a significant burden on industry . . . requiring a substantial expenditure of resources.'' \23\ NERC also states that it ``expects that many entities will choose to do a full Protection System Coordination Study . . . for their more impactful [bulk electric system] Elements'' and that ``it is highly likely that the overwhelming majority of entities have already conducted coordination studies for their Protection Systems.'' \24\ While NERC agrees with the goal of reducing protection system misoperation rates on the bulk electric system, it contends that recent misoperation rates demonstrate that mis-coordination of existing protection systems ``does not present a widespread risk to [bulk electric system] reliability that would necessitate the expenditure of resources required to conduct full Protection System Coordination Studies for every [bulk electric system] element with a Protection System.'' \25\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \23\ NERC Comments at 4. \24\ Id. at 5-6. \25\ Id. at 6. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 19. In addition, NERC and other commenters contend that the materials cited in the NOPR do not support the proposal to modify Reliability Standard PRC-027-1.\26\ NERC, EEI and Tri-State contend that the Arizona Southern California September 8, 2011 Outage Report is unsupportive because it addresses mis-coordination of remedial action schemes and not protection systems.\27\ NERC and Tri-State assert that the NERC System Protection Control Task Force Report addressed issues specific to generation transmission interfaces and did not apply broadly to all bulk electric system elements with protection systems.\28\ NERC and Tri-State also contend that the 2009 letter from the NERC President to the NERC board of Trustees and stakeholders is no longer relevant because mis-coordination issues are now responsible for a smaller percentage of events and that mis-coordination has not recently caused any significant system disturbances.\29\ NERC and Tri- State claim that Reliability Standard PRC-004 now requires applicable entities to mitigate the effects of misoperations by implementing a corrective action plan that has reduced misoperations.\30\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \26\ See generally NERC Comments; EEI Comments; Tri-State Comments; Entergy Comments; ITC Comments. \27\ NERC Comments at 7; EEI Comments at 7; Tri-State Comments at 7-8. \28\ NERC Comments at 7-8; Tri-State Comments at 8-9. \29\ NERC Comments at 8; Tri-State Comments at 9-10. \30\ NERC Comments at 8; Tri-State Comments at 9. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20. Further, while NERC agrees with the 2013 Misoperations Report that reducing misoperations, including mis-coordination events, is an important priority for bulk electric system reliability, NERC contends that the report does not indicate that requiring protection system coordination studies for all applicable elements, as proposed in the NOPR, is the only or optimal way to reduce mis-coordination events.\31\ EEI also contends that the 2013 Misoperations Report shows that human error and lack of training are responsible for a significant portion of misoperations.\32\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \31\ NERC Comments at 9. \32\ EEI Comments at 7. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21. NERC, EEI, and Tri-State explain that the 2014 incident identified in the ``lessons learned'' document on ``Generation Relaying--Underfrequency Protection Coordination'' was unrelated to protection system coordination.\33\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \33\ NERC Comments at 10; EEI Comments at 8; Tri-State Comments at 10. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22. Finally, NERC states that while the 2016 State of Reliability Report highlights the continued need to reduce misoperations, the report does not indicate that there is a need to require entities to perform a protection system coordination study for every bulk electric system element with a protection system.\34\ NERC also contends that the 2017 State of Reliability Report observes a continuing decline in misoperation rates, but that misoperations are a priority for NERC.\35\ NERC states that the misoperations rate within the Texas Reliability Entity Region observed in the 2016 State of Reliability Report was mitigated by the [[Page 27508]] time NERC issued the 2017 State of Reliability Report.\36\ NERC claims that this reduction in misoperation events is evidence that requiring entities to perform protection system coordination studies is unnecessary because the entities will address the misoperation events without specific requirements in Reliability Standards.\37\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \34\ NERC Comments at 10. \35\ Id. at 9. \36\ NERC Comments at 11; see also Entergy Comments at 8. \37\ NERC Comments at 11. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23. Other commenters do not support the proposal to direct NERC to develop modifications to Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 because they generally contend that the proposed directive is not necessary and would impose a burden without a proportional reliability benefit.\38\ Hydro One estimates that it will need approximately 30,000 hours of work to perform an initial protection system coordination study.\39\ Tri-State estimates that it would take an engineer at least twenty hours to perform a protection system coordination study at each of its approximately 700 terminals.\40\ Tri-State estimates that the actual cost to all applicable entities could be more than $120 million.\41\ PG&E estimates a cost to industry ``greatly in excess of $100 million'' and asserts that the proposed directive would require PG&E to perform coordination studies for 95 percent of the PG&E bulk electric system at a cost of $3.5 million in engineering labor.\42\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \38\ APPA/TAPS Comments at 3; EEI Comments at 3; El Paso Electric Comments at 4; Entergy Comments at 4; Hydro One Comments at 1-2; ITC Comments at 3; LPPC Comments at 2; NPPD Comments at 1; NRECA/ELCON Comments at 5; Oncor Comments at 1; PG&E Comments at 2; SCE&G Comments at 1; Tri-State Comments at 4. \39\ Hydro One Comments at 1. \40\ Id. at 13. \41\ Id. \42\ PG&E Comments at 3. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24. Entergy requests that the Commission find that NERC's approach for requiring protection system coordination studies achieves the Reliability Standard's ``reliability goals effectively and efficiently.'' \43\ Entergy opines that, by adopting NERC's proposal without modification, the Commission appropriately would give ``due weight'' to the technical expertise of the ERO. Entergy asserts that NERC properly supported Requirement R2 by setting forth evidence of the frequency of coordination events over a four-year period, which shows that only 11 percent of misoperation events (17 events out of 151) and only 2.9 percent of total events (17 out of 574) involved Protection System coordination issues. Further, Entergy claims that, in proposing the Reliability Standard, NERC was aware of the possibility that some bulk electric system elements may never undergo a Protection System Coordination Study and that ``NERC does not afford this possibility the same risk as the Commission.'' \44\ According to Entergy, ``NERC has properly balanced the implementation costs and reliability benefits of the proposed PRC-027-1 Reliability Standard and determined that Option 2 is sufficient to ensure reliability'' and the Commission should defer to NERC's expertise, or otherwise provide more support to justify a deviation from NERC's proposal. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \43\ Entergy Comments at 5. \44\ Id. at 9-10. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25. In addition, some commenters expressed concern that applicable entities may not have maintained sufficient documentation to substantiate prior protection system coordination studies and, as result, entities would have to perform new protection system coordination studies purely for compliance purposes.\45\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \45\ ITC Comments at 4; Entergy Comments at 1; NPPD Comments at 1; PG&E Comments at 3. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 26. As an alternative to the proposed directive, NERC and other commenters suggest that Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 be modified so that it requires an applicable entity to conduct an initial baseline protection system coordination study on a certain subset of its bulk electric system elements (i.e., based on a higher voltage or higher risk protection systems).\46\ NERC and other commenters also request that the Commission permit NERC to allow more than 6 years to complete the initial baseline protection system coordination studies (i.e., 10 or 12 years) if the Commission directs NERC to modify Reliability Standard PRC-027-1.\47\ EEI recommends that if the Commission continues to have concerns about Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2, Option 2, as an alternative to the proposed directive, a final rule should direct NERC ``to assess the effectiveness of Option 2 after the implementation of the proposed Reliability Standard and if necessary make technical recommendations to improve the efficiency and effectiveness as appropriate.'' \48\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \46\ NERC Comments at 11-12; El Paso Electric Comments at 2; Entergy Comments at 12; NRECA/ELCON Comments at 6-7. \47\ NERC Comments at 12; El Paso Electric Comments at 2-3; Entergy Comments at 12-13; NRECA/ELCON Comments at 6-7. Separately, El Paso Electric contends that the six-year cycle proposed by NERC in Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2 is too short and directs resources away from ``other activities that have a greater likelihood of improving reliability outcomes in a demonstrable way.'' El Paso Electric Comments at 2. We disagree. NERC recognized the potential burden imposed by Requirement R2 and determined that six years ``balance[d] the resources required to perform Protection System Coordination Studies and the potential reliability impacts created by incremental changes of Fault current over time.'' NERC Petition at 40. Moreover, during the standard drafting process, some commenters indicated that six years was too long an interval. See, e.g., NERC Petition, Exhibit G (Summary of Development History and Record of Development) at 1479 of pdf (ReliabilityFirst recommending a 24-month period to conduct protection system coordination study), 2169 of pdf (Texas RE stating that six years is too long of a time period between studies of fault currents). \48\ EEI Comments at 6. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27. Idaho Power supports the proposed directive.\49\ Idaho Power supports eliminating Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2, Option 2 because it contends that Option 1 is a more robust option explaining that it is ``preferable because it is more likely to address miscoordinations.'' \50\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \49\ Idaho Power Comments at 1-2. \50\ Id. at 2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Commission Determination 28. Based on the record before us, we do not adopt the directive proposed in the NOPR. The record in this proceeding supports the NOPR's conclusion that mis-coordination of protection systems may pose a potential reliability risk and, as currently drafted, Reliability Standard PRC-027-1, Requirement R2, Option 2 permits applicable entities to forego protection system coordination studies under certain circumstances.\51\ However, we are persuaded by the statements from NERC and other commenters that applicable entities generally perform, or will choose to perform for their significant facilities, protection system coordination studies even in the absence of a Reliability Standard requirement.\52\ We also recognize the concern raised by commenters regarding the burden of compliance. Specifically, we recognize the concern that were the NOPR directive adopted, applicable entities could be required to re-run protection system coordination studies for the sole purpose of generating compliance documentation, even if such entities already performed protection [[Page 27509]] system coordination studies that remain valid but lack documentation to substantiate compliance. Accordingly, pursuant to 215(d)(2) of the FPA, we approve Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 and do not direct modifications to the Reliability Standard.\53\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \51\ See, e.g., NERC Comments at 6 (``NERC and the standard drafting team concluded that Protection System coordination did not present a prevalent enough risk to the reliable operation of the [bulk electric system] to warrant imposing the burden of requiring applicable entities to perform a full Protection System Coordination Study for every [bulk electric system] Element with a Protection System.''); Entergy Comments at 9 (``In proposing the Reliability Standard, NERC was aware of the possibility that some bulk electric system elements may never undergo a Protection System Coordination Study.''). \52\ See, e.g., NERC Comments at 5; NPPD Comments at 1; Tri- State Comments at 10; ITC Comments at 4. \53\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- III. Information Collection Statement 29. The collections of information addressed in this Final Rule are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.\54\ OMB's regulations require approval of certain information collection requirements imposed by agency rules.\55\ Upon approval of a collection(s) of information, OMB will assign an OMB control number and an expiration date. Respondents subject to the filing requirements of a rule will not be penalized for failing to respond to these collections of information unless the collections of information display a valid OMB control number. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \54\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d) (2012). \55\ 5 CFR 1320.11 (2017). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30. The Commission solicited public comments in the NOPR on the need for this information, whether the information will have practical utility, the accuracy of the burden estimates, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected or retained, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondents' burden, including the use of automated information techniques. The Commission did not receive comments regarding the burden estimates for the Reliability Standards approved herein (i.e., Reliability Standards PRC- 027-1 and PER-006-1).\56\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \56\ As discussed above, several commenters addressed the potential burden of a new version of Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 modified, pursuant to the Commission's directive, to require initial protection system coordination studies. See, e.g., Tri-State Comments at 12. However, those comments are not relevant to the burden estimates contained in this Final Rule because, herein, the Commission only approves Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER- 006-1. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 31. The information collection requirements in this Final Rule in Docket No. RM16-22-000 are associated with FERC-725A, FERC-725G, and FERC-725Y, as discussed below.\57\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \57\ In the NOPR in Docket No. RM16-22-000, some of the reporting requirements were included under FERC-725G6 (OMB Control No. 1902-0300), a temporary place holder, because FERC-725G was pending review at OMB in an unrelated action. As indicated below, those reporting requirements are now included under FERC-725G (OMB Control No. 1902-0252). When the NOPR in Docket No. RM16-22-000 was issued, another unrelated item affecting FERC-725A was pending OMB review. Burden estimates were provided in order to solicit public comments, but the burden reduction to FERC-725A was not submitted to OMB at that time. The burden reduction to FERC-725A for this Final Rule will be submitted to OMB for review. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 32. Public Reporting Burden: The number of respondents below is based on an examination of the NERC compliance registry on December 1, 2017, for transmission owners, generator owners, generator operators, and distribution providers within the United States and an estimate of how many such entities from that registry will be affected by the Reliability Standards in this Final Rule for adoption and implementation. As of December 1, 2017, 337 transmission owners, 971 generator owners, 944 generator operators, and 419 distribution providers in the United States were registered in the NERC compliance registry. However, under NERC's compliance registration program, entities may be registered for multiple functions, so these numbers incorporate some double counting. We note that many generation sites share a common generator owner or generator operator. The following table provides the estimated annual burden and cost related to information collection requirements in this Final Rule.\58\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \58\ TO = transmission owner; TOP = transmission operator; GO = generator owner; GOP = generator operator; DP = distribution provider; and BA = balancing authority. Changes Due to the Final Rule in Docket No. RM16-22-000 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Annual number of Average burden Annual burden Respondent category and Number of responses Total number of hours and cost hours and total requirement \59\ respondents per annual responses per response \60\ annual cost respondent (rounded) \61\ (1) (2) (1) * (2) = (3) (4).............. (3) * (4) = (5) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FERC-725G (Reliability Standard PRC-027-1) \62\ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- TO; Reporting Reqs. R1, R2, & 337 1 337 60 hrs.; 20,220 hrs.; R3. $3,941.40. $1,328,252. TO; Recordkeeping Reqs........ 337 1 337 40 hrs.; 13,480 hrs.; $1,565.60. $527,607. GO; Reporting Reqs. R1, R2, & 971 1 971 10 hrs.; $656.90. 9,710 hrs.; R3. $637,830. GO; Recordkeeping Reqs........ 971 1 971 10 hrs.; $391.40. 9,710 hrs.; $380,049. DP; Reporting Reqs. R1, R2, & 419 1 419 10 hrs.; $656.90. 4,190 hrs.; R3. $275,241. DP; Recordkeeping Reqs........ 419 1 419 10 hrs.; $391.40. 4,190 hrs.; $163,997. Sub-Total for Reporting Reqs. ........... ........... ................. ................. 34,120 hrs.; for FERC-725G. $2,241,323. Sub-Total for Recordkeeping ........... ........... ................. ................. 27,380 hrs.; Reqs. for FERC-725G. $1,072,653. Total Increase for FERC-725G.. ........... ........... ................. ................. 61,500 hrs.; $3,313,976. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FERC-725Y (Reliability Standard PER-006-1) \63\ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GOP; Reporting Req. R1........ 944 1 944 5 hrs.; $328.45.. 4,720 hrs.; $310,057. GOP; Recordkeeping Req........ 944 1 944 10 hrs.; $391.40. 9,440 hrs.; $369,482. Total Increase for FERC-725Y.. ........... ........... ................. ................. 14,160 hrs.; $679,539. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reductions to FERC-725A (retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1) \64\ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GOP; Reporting Req............ 944 1 944 40 hrs.; 37,760 hrs.; $2,627.60. $2,480,454. GOP; Recordkeeping Req........ 944 1 944 50 hrs.; 47,200 hrs.; $1,957.00. $1,847,408. TOP; Reporting Req............ 176 1 176 60 hrs.; 10,560 hrs.; $3,941.40. $693,686. TOP; Recordkeeping Req........ 176 1 176 70 hrs.; 12,320 hrs.; $2,739.80. $482,205. BA; Reporting Req............. 99 1 99 32 hrs.; 3,168 hrs.; $2,102.08. $208,106. BA; Recordkeeping Req......... 99 1 99 20 hrs.; $782.80. 1,980 hrs.; $77,497. Reduction Sub-Total Reporting ........... ........... ................. ................. 51,484 hrs.; Reqs. for FERC-725A. $3,382,246. Reduction Sub-Total ........... ........... ................. ................. 61,500 hrs.; Recordkeeping Reqs. for FERC- $2,407,110. 725A. Reduction Sub-Total for FERC- ........... ........... ................. ................. 112,984 hrs.; 725A. $5,789,356 (reduction). [[Page 27510]] NET TOTAL REDUCTION FOR ........... ........... ................. ................. 37,324 hrs.; CHANGES IN RM16-22-000. $1,795,841 (reduction). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Titles: FERC-725A (Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk- Power System), FERC-725G (Reliability Standards for the Bulk Power System: PRC Reliability Standards) and FERC-725Y (Mandatory Reliability Standards: Operations Personnel Training). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \59\ For each Reliability Standard, the Measure shows the acceptable evidence for the associated Reporting Requirement, and the Compliance section details the related Recordkeeping Requirement. \60\ The estimates for cost per hour are based on May 2016 wage figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS, https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm) and BLS benefits information from March 20, 2018 (for December 2017, https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm). The estimated hourly cost, for wages plus benefits, are: (a) $68.12/hour, for electrical engineer, Occupation Code 17-2071, and (b) $39.14/hour, for information and record clerk, Occupation Code 43-4199. The hourly cost for an electrical engineer is used for the reporting requirements; the hourly cost for a record clerk is used for the recordkeeping requirements. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Action: Revisions to existing collections. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \61\ For display purposes, the cost figures in column 5 have been rounded. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- OMB Control Nos.: 1902-0244 (FERC-725A); 1902-0252 (FERC-725G) and 1902-0279 (FERC-725Y). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \62\ Some of the reporting requirements are required at least every six calendar years. In this table, the Commission assumes that respondents might work on some of their elements each year; the annual burden estimate shown is one sixth of the burden associated with one complete six-year cycle. For example, for each transmission owner: (a) The annual reporting burden associated with Requirements R1, R2, and R3 is shown as 60 hours per year, and (b) the burden for the six-year cycle would be six times that, or a total of 360 hours. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Respondents: Business or other for profit, and not for profit institutions. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \63\ In order to provide improved information on the Reliability Standard and associated burden, FERC-725Y (rather than FERC-725A) will cover the burden required by PER-006-1. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Frequency of Responses: Annual recordkeeping and reporting requirements, with some reporting requirements being at least once every six years. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \64\ The estimates for average annual burden hours per response are based on figures in Order No. 693. Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242, at PP 1906-1907. The numbers of respondents and estimated hourly costs are based on current figures. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Necessity of the Information: Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1 set forth requirements for coordination of protection systems and personnel training on specific topics essential to reliability. The Commission approves Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1, which will replace Commission-approved Reliability Standard PRC-001- 1.1(ii). Reliability Standards PRC-027-1 and PER-006-1 improve upon existing Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) because the Reliability Standards assign responsibilities to entities with more appropriate resources and skill sets to conduct studies required to coordinate protection systems. The approved Reliability Standards also provide additional clarity to applicable entities. Internal review: The Commission has assured itself, by means of its internal review, that there is specific, objective support for the burden estimates associated with the information requirements. IV. Environmental Analysis 33. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may have a significant adverse effect on the human environment.\65\ The action here falls within the categorical exclusion in the Commission's regulations for rules that are clarifying, corrective or procedural, for information gathering, analysis, and dissemination.\66\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \65\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Order No. 486, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 30,783 (1987) (cross-referenced at 41 FERC ] 61,284). \66\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii) (2017). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- V. Regulatory Flexibility Act 34. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) generally requires a description and analysis of final rules that will have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.\67\ The Small Business Administration (SBA) defines which utilities are small businesses based on the number of employees that a utility and its affiliates employ.\68\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \67\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612 (2012). \68\ 13 CFR 121.201, Subsector 221 (2017). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 35. Reliability Standard PRC-027-1 (included in FERC-725G) will apply to approximately 1,727 entities (337 transmission owners, 971 generator owners, and 419 distribution providers) in the United States.\69\ Pursuant to SBA regulations, the small business threshold for Electric Bulk Power Transmission and Control is 500 employees. For generator owners, the small generator threshold ranges from 250 to 750 employees (depending on the fuel source). For Electric Power Distribution, the small business threshold is 1,000 employees. We estimate that the annual cost for each entity will be $1,048 for each generator owner and distribution provider and $5,507 for each transmission owner. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \69\ Many respondents serve multiple roles in the NERC compliance registry, so there is likely double counting in the estimates. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 36. Reliability Standard PER-006-1 (included in FERC-725Y) will apply to approximately 944 generator operators in the United States. Pursuant to SBA regulations the small business threshold for generator operators ranges from 250 to 750 employees (depending on the fuel source). We estimate that the annual cost for each generator operator will be $719. 37. The retirement of Reliability Standard PRC-001-1.1(ii) (included in FERC-725A) will decrease the annual estimated cost for 944 generator operators by $4,585 each, for 176 transmission operators by $6,681 each, and for 99 balancing authorities by $2,885 each. For the generator operators affected by this retirement and approval of Reliability Standard PER-006-1, the net annual effect would be a decrease of $3,866 each. 38. We estimate the net annual cost of this Final Rule would vary, by type of entity, from an annual decrease of $6,681 (for each transmission operator) to an annual increase of $5,507 (for each transmission owner). We view this as a minimal economic impact for each entity. Accordingly, we certify that this Final Rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. VI. Document Availability 39. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the Federal [[Page 27511]] Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the internet through FERC's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and in FERC's Public Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE, Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426. 40. From FERC's Home Page on the internet, this information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket number field. 41. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the FERC's website during normal business hours from FERC Online Support at 202- 502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the Public Reference Room at 202-502- 8371, TTY 202-502-8659. Email the Public Reference Room at public.referenceroom@ferc.gov. VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification 42. The Final Rule is effective August 13, 2018. The Commission has determined, with the concurrence of the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, that this rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined in section 351 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This Final Rule is being submitted to the Senate, House, and Government Accountability Office. By the Commission. Issued: June 7, 2018. Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., Deputy Secretary. Note: The following appendix will not appear in the Code of Federal Regulations. Appendix List of Commenters ------------------------------------------------------------------------ American Public Power Association and APPA/TAPS Transmission Access Policy Study Group ------------------------------------------------------------------------ EEI.............................. Edison Electric Institute. El Paso Electric................. El Paso Electric Company. Entergy.......................... Entergy Services, Inc. Hydro One........................ Hydro One Networks Inc. Idaho Power...................... Idaho Power Company. ITC.............................. International Transmission Company d/ b/a ITC Transmission, Michigan Electric Transmission Company, LLC, ITC Midwest LLC and ITC Great Plains, LLC. LPPC............................. Large Public Power Council. NPPD............................. Nebraska Public Power District. NERC............................. North American Electric Reliability Corporation. NRECA/ELCON...................... National Rural Electric Cooperative Association and the Electricity Consumers Resource Council. Oncor............................ Oncor Electric Delivery. PG&E............................. Pacific Gas and Electric Company. SCE&G............................ South Carolina Electric and Gas Company. Tri-State........................ Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [FR Doc. 2018-12663 Filed 6-12-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
![27505
Rules and Regulations Federal Register
Vol. 83, No. 114
Wednesday, June 13, 2018
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER During Faults) and PER–006–1 (Specific review and approval.3 Once approved,
contains regulatory documents having general Training for Personnel).1 The North the Reliability Standards may be
applicability and legal effect, most of which American Electric Reliability enforced by the ERO subject to
are keyed to and codified in the Code of Corporation (NERC), the Commission- Commission oversight or by the
Federal Regulations, which is published under certified Electric Reliability Commission independently.4 In 2006,
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
Organization (ERO), submitted the Commission certified NERC as the
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by Reliability Standards PRC–027–1 and ERO pursuant to section 215 of the
the Superintendent of Documents. PER–006–1 for approval. As discussed FPA.5
below, we determine that Reliability
B. Order No. 693
Standard PRC–027–1, which is designed
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY to maintain the coordination of 4. On March 16, 2007, the
protection systems installed to detect Commission issued Order No. 693,
Federal Energy Regulatory and isolate faults on bulk electric approving 83 of the 107 Reliability
Commission system elements, such that those Standards filed by NERC, including
protection systems operate in the Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.6 In
18 CFR Part 40 intended sequence during faults, and addition, the Commission directed
[Docket No. RM16–22–000; Order No. 847] PER–006–1, which is intended to ensure NERC to develop modifications to
that personnel are trained on specific Reliability Standard PRC–001–1 that:
Coordination of Protection Systems for topics essential to reliability to perform (1) correct the references for Requirements,
Performance During Faults and or support real-time operations of the and [sic]
Specific Training for Personnel bulk electric system, improve upon the (2) include a requirement that upon the
Reliability Standards currently-effective Reliability Standards. detection of failures in relays or protection
In addition, based on the record before system elements on the Bulk-Power System
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory us, we do not adopt the NOPR proposal that threaten reliable operation, relevant
Commission. to direct NERC to modify Reliability transmission operators must be informed
ACTION: Final rule. promptly, but within a specified period of
Standard PRC–027–1 to require an
time that is developed in the Reliability
initial protection system coordination Standards development process, whereas
SUMMARY: The Federal Energy
study to ensure that applicable entities generator operators must also promptly
Regulatory Commission (Commission)
will perform (or have performed), as a inform their transmission operators; and (3)
approves Reliability Standards PRC–
baseline, a study demonstrating proper clarifies that, after being informed of failures
027–1 (Coordination of Protection
coordination of its protection systems. in relays or protection system elements that
Systems for Performance During Faults) threaten reliability of the Bulk-Power System,
and PER–006–1 (Specific Training for 2. The Commission also approves the transmission operators must carry out
Personnel) submitted by the North associated violation risk factors, corrective control actions, i.e., return a
American Electric Reliability violation severity levels, system to a stable state that respects system
Corporation (NERC). implementation plans, and effective requirements as soon as possible and no
DATES: This rule will become effective
dates proposed by NERC for Reliability longer than 30 minutes after they receive
August 13, 2018. Standards PRC–027–1 and PER–006–1. notice of the failure.7
The Commission further approves the C. NERC Petition and Reliability
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
retirement of currently-effective Standards PRC–027–1 and PER–006–1
Juan Villar (Technical Information), Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii)
Office of Electric Reliability, Division (System Protection Coordination) as 5. On September 2, 2016, NERC
of Reliability Standards and Security, proposed by NERC. Finally, the submitted a petition seeking
888 First Street NE, Washington, DC Commission approves new and revised Commission approval of Reliability
20426, Telephone: (772) 678–6496, definitions submitted by NERC for Standards PRC–027–1 and PER–006–1.8
Juan.Villar@ferc.gov. incorporation in the NERC Glossary for
Alan Rukin (Legal Information), Office the following terms: (1) ‘‘protection 3 Id.824o(c), (d).
of the General Counsel, Federal system coordination study;’’ (2) 4 Id.824o(e).
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 ‘‘operational planning analysis;’’ and (3) 5 North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116
First Street NE, Washington, DC ‘‘real-time assessment.’’ 2 FERC ¶ 61,062, order on reh’g and compliance, 117
20426, Telephone: (202) 502–8502, FERC ¶ 61,126 (2006), order on compliance, 118
FERC ¶ 61,190, order on reh’g, 119 FERC ¶ 61,046
Alan.Rukin@ferc.gov. I. Background (2007), aff’d sub nom. Alcoa Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
A. Section 215 and Mandatory 6 Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-
Order No. 847 Reliability Standards Power System, Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs.
¶ 31,242 at PP 1433–1449, order on reh’g, Order No.
Final Rule 3. Section 215 of the FPA requires a 693–A, 120 FERC ¶ 61,053 (2007).
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
(Issued June 7, 2018) Commission-certified ERO to develop 7 Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,242 at
mandatory and enforceable Reliability P 1449.
1. Pursuant to section 215 of the Standards, subject to Commission 8 Reliability Standards PRC–027–1 and PER–006–
Federal Power Act (FPA), the 1 are not attached to this Final Rule. The Reliability
Standards are available on the Commission’s
Commission approves Reliability 1 16U.S.C. 824o (2012). eLibrary document retrieval system in Docket No.
Standards PRC–027–1 (Coordination of 2 NERC Glossary of Terms Used in NERC RM16–22–000 and are posted on the NERC website,
Protection Systems for Performance Reliability Standards (NERC Glossary). http://www.nerc.com.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:38 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM 13JNR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_27619/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 27507
Glossary.20 Further, the NOPR proposed Initial Protection System Coordination issues specific to generation
to approve the retirement of Reliability Study transmission interfaces and did not
Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii), as requested apply broadly to all bulk electric system
NOPR
by NERC.21 elements with protection systems.28
17. The NOPR proposed to direct that NERC and Tri-State also contend that
13. In response to the NOPR, the NERC develop modifications to the 2009 letter from the NERC President
Commission received fifteen sets of Reliability Standard PRC–027–1 to to the NERC board of Trustees and
comments. We address below the issues ensure coordination of all bulk electric stakeholders is no longer relevant
raised in the NOPR and comments. The system elements with protection system because mis-coordination issues are
Appendix to this Final Rule lists the functions by requiring that applicable now responsible for a smaller
entities that filed comments in response entities perform an initial protection percentage of events and that mis-
to the NOPR. coordination study under Requirement coordination has not recently caused
R2, Option 2. any significant system disturbances.29
II. Discussion
Comments NERC and Tri-State claim that
14. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of Reliability Standard PRC–004 now
18. NERC does not support the requires applicable entities to mitigate
the FPA, we approve Reliability
proposed directive because it believes the effects of misoperations by
Standards PER–006–1 and PRC–027–1 that the proposed directive is unduly
as just, reasonable, not unduly implementing a corrective action plan
burdensome and unsupported by the that has reduced misoperations.30
discriminatory or preferential, and in materials cited in the NOPR. NERC
the public interest, as both Reliability 20. Further, while NERC agrees with
contends that while the ‘‘proposed the 2013 Misoperations Report that
Standards improve on currently- directive could potentially help reduce reducing misoperations, including mis-
effective Reliability Standard PRC–001– misoperations caused by coordination coordination events, is an important
1.1(ii) in important ways.22 As issues . . . [it] would also impose a priority for bulk electric system
discussed below, we do not adopt the significant burden on industry . . . reliability, NERC contends that the
NOPR proposal to direct NERC to requiring a substantial expenditure of report does not indicate that requiring
modify Reliability Standard PRC–027–1 resources.’’ 23 NERC also states that it protection system coordination studies
to require coordination of all bulk ‘‘expects that many entities will choose for all applicable elements, as proposed
electric system elements with protection to do a full Protection System in the NOPR, is the only or optimal way
system functions. Coordination Study . . . for their more to reduce mis-coordination events.31 EEI
impactful [bulk electric system] also contends that the 2013
15. Reliability Standard PRC–027–1
Elements’’ and that ‘‘it is highly likely Misoperations Report shows that human
improves on currently-effective that the overwhelming majority of
Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii) by: error and lack of training are responsible
entities have already conducted for a significant portion of
(1) Modifying the applicability section coordination studies for their Protection
to include the appropriate functional misoperations.32
Systems.’’ 24 While NERC agrees with 21. NERC, EEI, and Tri-State explain
entity types with the responsibilities, the goal of reducing protection system that the 2014 incident identified in the
resources, and skill sets to conduct the misoperation rates on the bulk electric ‘‘lessons learned’’ document on
studies required to coordinate system, it contends that recent ‘‘Generation Relaying—Underfrequency
protection systems, and (2) listing the misoperation rates demonstrate that Protection Coordination’’ was unrelated
protection system functions on all bulk mis-coordination of existing protection to protection system coordination.33
electric system elements that require systems ‘‘does not present a widespread 22. Finally, NERC states that while
coordination. Reliability Standard PER– risk to [bulk electric system] reliability the 2016 State of Reliability Report
006–1, along with existing formal that would necessitate the expenditure highlights the continued need to reduce
training requirements in the Personnel of resources required to conduct full misoperations, the report does not
Performance, Training, and Protection System Coordination Studies indicate that there is a need to require
Qualifications (PER) group of Reliability for every [bulk electric system] element entities to perform a protection system
Standards, also improves upon with a Protection System.’’ 25 coordination study for every bulk
Reliability Standard PRC–001–1.1(ii), 19. In addition, NERC and other electric system element with a
Requirement R1 by ensuring that the commenters contend that the materials protection system.34 NERC also
necessary personnel are familiar with cited in the NOPR do not support the contends that the 2017 State of
and understand the purpose and proposal to modify Reliability Standard Reliability Report observes a continuing
limitations of protection systems PRC–027–1.26 NERC, EEI and Tri-State decline in misoperation rates, but that
contend that the Arizona Southern misoperations are a priority for NERC.35
schemes while providing more precise
California September 8, 2011 Outage NERC states that the misoperations rate
and auditable requirements.
Report is unsupportive because it within the Texas Reliability Entity
16. In addition, we approve NERC’s addresses mis-coordination of remedial Region observed in the 2016 State of
associated violation risk factors, action schemes and not protection Reliability Report was mitigated by the
violation severity levels, systems.27 NERC and Tri-State assert
implementation plans, and effective that the NERC System Protection 28 NERC Comments at 7–8; Tri-State Comments at
dates. We also approve the revised Control Task Force Report addressed 8–9.
definitions for inclusion in the NERC 29 NERC Comments at 8; Tri-State Comments at
Glossary. Further, we approve the 23 NERC Comments at 4. 9–10.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
24 Id. at 5–6. 30 NERC Comments at 8; Tri-State Comments at 9.
retirement of Reliability Standard PRC– 31 NERC Comments at 9.
25 Id. at 6.
001–1.1(ii), as requested by NERC. 26 See generally NERC Comments; EEI Comments; 32 EEI Comments at 7.
33 NERC Comments at 10; EEI Comments at 8; Tri-
Tri-State Comments; Entergy Comments; ITC
20 Id. State Comments at 10.
Comments.
21 Id. 27 NERC Comments at 7; EEI Comments at 7; Tri- 34 NERC Comments at 10.
22 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2). State Comments at 7–8. 35 Id. at 9.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:53 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM 13JNR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_27619/page/3.svg)
![27508 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
time NERC issued the 2017 State of proposing the Reliability Standard, recommends that if the Commission
Reliability Report.36 NERC claims that NERC was aware of the possibility that continues to have concerns about
this reduction in misoperation events is some bulk electric system elements may Reliability Standard PRC–027–1,
evidence that requiring entities to never undergo a Protection System Requirement R2, Option 2, as an
perform protection system coordination Coordination Study and that ‘‘NERC alternative to the proposed directive, a
studies is unnecessary because the does not afford this possibility the same final rule should direct NERC ‘‘to assess
entities will address the misoperation risk as the Commission.’’ 44 According the effectiveness of Option 2 after the
events without specific requirements in to Entergy, ‘‘NERC has properly implementation of the proposed
Reliability Standards.37 balanced the implementation costs and Reliability Standard and if necessary
23. Other commenters do not support reliability benefits of the proposed PRC– make technical recommendations to
the proposal to direct NERC to develop 027–1 Reliability Standard and improve the efficiency and effectiveness
modifications to Reliability Standard determined that Option 2 is sufficient to as appropriate.’’ 48
PRC–027–1 because they generally ensure reliability’’ and the Commission 27. Idaho Power supports the
contend that the proposed directive is should defer to NERC’s expertise, or proposed directive.49 Idaho Power
not necessary and would impose a otherwise provide more support to supports eliminating Reliability
burden without a proportional justify a deviation from NERC’s Standard PRC–027–1, Requirement R2,
reliability benefit.38 Hydro One proposal. Option 2 because it contends that
estimates that it will need 25. In addition, some commenters Option 1 is a more robust option
approximately 30,000 hours of work to expressed concern that applicable explaining that it is ‘‘preferable because
perform an initial protection system entities may not have maintained it is more likely to address
coordination study.39 Tri-State sufficient documentation to substantiate miscoordinations.’’ 50
estimates that it would take an engineer prior protection system coordination
Commission Determination
at least twenty hours to perform a studies and, as result, entities would
protection system coordination study at have to perform new protection system 28. Based on the record before us, we
each of its approximately 700 coordination studies purely for do not adopt the directive proposed in
terminals.40 Tri-State estimates that the compliance purposes.45 the NOPR. The record in this
actual cost to all applicable entities 26. As an alternative to the proposed proceeding supports the NOPR’s
could be more than $120 million.41 directive, NERC and other commenters conclusion that mis-coordination of
PG&E estimates a cost to industry suggest that Reliability Standard PRC– protection systems may pose a potential
‘‘greatly in excess of $100 million’’ and 027–1 be modified so that it requires an reliability risk and, as currently drafted,
asserts that the proposed directive applicable entity to conduct an initial Reliability Standard PRC–027–1,
would require PG&E to perform baseline protection system coordination Requirement R2, Option 2 permits
coordination studies for 95 percent of study on a certain subset of its bulk applicable entities to forego protection
the PG&E bulk electric system at a cost electric system elements (i.e., based on system coordination studies under
of $3.5 million in engineering labor.42 a higher voltage or higher risk certain circumstances.51 However, we
24. Entergy requests that the protection systems).46 NERC and other are persuaded by the statements from
Commission find that NERC’s approach commenters also request that the NERC and other commenters that
for requiring protection system Commission permit NERC to allow more applicable entities generally perform, or
coordination studies achieves the than 6 years to complete the initial will choose to perform for their
Reliability Standard’s ‘‘reliability goals baseline protection system coordination significant facilities, protection system
effectively and efficiently.’’ 43 Entergy studies (i.e., 10 or 12 years) if the coordination studies even in the
opines that, by adopting NERC’s Commission directs NERC to modify absence of a Reliability Standard
proposal without modification, the Reliability Standard PRC–027–1.47 EEI requirement.52 We also recognize the
Commission appropriately would give concern raised by commenters regarding
‘‘due weight’’ to the technical expertise 44 Id.at 9–10. the burden of compliance. Specifically,
of the ERO. Entergy asserts that NERC 45 ITC Comments at 4; Entergy Comments at 1; we recognize the concern that were the
NPPD Comments at 1; PG&E Comments at 3.
properly supported Requirement R2 by 46 NERC Comments at 11–12; El Paso Electric
NOPR directive adopted, applicable
setting forth evidence of the frequency Comments at 2; Entergy Comments at 12; NRECA/ entities could be required to re-run
of coordination events over a four-year ELCON Comments at 6–7. protection system coordination studies
period, which shows that only 11 47 NERC Comments at 12; El Paso Electric
for the sole purpose of generating
percent of misoperation events (17 Comments at 2–3; Entergy Comments at 12–13; compliance documentation, even if such
NRECA/ELCON Comments at 6–7. Separately, El
events out of 151) and only 2.9 percent Paso Electric contends that the six-year cycle entities already performed protection
of total events (17 out of 574) involved proposed by NERC in Reliability Standard PRC–
Protection System coordination issues. 027–1, Requirement R2 is too short and directs 48 EEI Comments at 6.
Further, Entergy claims that, in resources away from ‘‘other activities that have a 49 Idaho Power Comments at 1–2.
greater likelihood of improving reliability outcomes 50 Id. at 2.
in a demonstrable way.’’ El Paso Electric Comments 51 See, e.g., NERC Comments at 6 (‘‘NERC and the
36 NERC Comments at 11; see also Entergy
at 2. We disagree. NERC recognized the potential
Comments at 8. burden imposed by Requirement R2 and standard drafting team concluded that Protection
37 NERC Comments at 11. determined that six years ‘‘balance[d] the resources System coordination did not present a prevalent
38 APPA/TAPS Comments at 3; EEI Comments at required to perform Protection System Coordination enough risk to the reliable operation of the [bulk
Studies and the potential reliability impacts created electric system] to warrant imposing the burden of
3; El Paso Electric Comments at 4; Entergy
by incremental changes of Fault current over time.’’ requiring applicable entities to perform a full
Comments at 4; Hydro One Comments at 1–2; ITC
NERC Petition at 40. Moreover, during the standard Protection System Coordination Study for every
Comments at 3; LPPC Comments at 2; NPPD
drafting process, some commenters indicated that [bulk electric system] Element with a Protection
Comments at 1; NRECA/ELCON Comments at 5;
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
six years was too long an interval. See, e.g., NERC System.’’); Entergy Comments at 9 (‘‘In proposing
Oncor Comments at 1; PG&E Comments at 2;
Petition, Exhibit G (Summary of Development the Reliability Standard, NERC was aware of the
SCE&G Comments at 1; Tri-State Comments at 4.
39 Hydro One Comments at 1. History and Record of Development) at 1479 of pdf possibility that some bulk electric system elements
(ReliabilityFirst recommending a 24-month period may never undergo a Protection System
40 Id. at 13.
to conduct protection system coordination study), Coordination Study.’’).
41 Id. 52 See, e.g., NERC Comments at 5; NPPD
2169 of pdf (Texas RE stating that six years is too
42 PG&E Comments at 3.
long of a time period between studies of fault Comments at 1; Tri-State Comments at 10; ITC
43 Entergy Comments at 5. currents). Comments at 4.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:53 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM 13JNR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_27619/page/4.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 114 / Wednesday, June 13, 2018 / Rules and Regulations 27511
Register, the Commission provides all American Public Power Coast Guard; telephone 361–939–5125,
interested persons an opportunity to APPA/TAPS Association and Transmission email Kevin.L.Kyles@uscg.mil.
view and/or print the contents of this Access Policy Study Group SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Coast
document via the internet through ITC ............... International Transmission
Guard will enforce the safety zone in 33
FERC’s Home Page (http:// Company d/b/a ITC Trans- CFR 165.801, Table 4, Line 7, for the
www.ferc.gov) and in FERC’s Public mission, Michigan Electric Wendell Family Fourth of July
Reference Room during normal business Transmission Company, Fireworks Display regulated area from 8
hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern LLC, ITC Midwest LLC and p.m. through 9:30 p.m. on July 4, 2018.
time) at 888 First Street NE, Room 2A, ITC Great Plains, LLC. This action is being taken to provide for
LPPC ............ Large Public Power Council. the safety of life on navigable waterways
Washington, DC 20426.
NPPD ........... Nebraska Public Power Dis- during this event. Our regulation for
40. From FERC’s Home Page on the trict. marine events within the Eighth Coast
internet, this information is available on NERC ........... North American Electric Reli-
ability Corporation.
Guard District, § 165.801, specifies the
eLibrary. The full text of this document location of the regulated area for the
is available on eLibrary in PDF and NRECA/ National Rural Electric Coop-
ELCON. erative Association and the Wendell Family Fourth of July
Microsoft Word format for viewing, Electricity Consumers Re- Fireworks which encompasses portions
printing, and/or downloading. To access source Council. of Little Bay and Rockport Beach Park.
this document in eLibrary, type the Oncor ........... Oncor Electric Delivery. As reflected in §§ 165.23 and 165.801(a),
docket number excluding the last three PG&E ........... Pacific Gas and Electric Com- if you are the operator of a vessel in the
digits of this document in the docket pany. regulated area you must comply with
number field. SCE&G ......... South Carolina Electric and directions from the Captain of the Port
Gas Company.
41. User assistance is available for Tri-State ....... Tri-State Generation and
Sector Corpus Christi (COTP) or a
eLibrary and the FERC’s website during Transmission Association, designated representative. Persons or
normal business hours from FERC Inc. vessels desiring to enter the zones must
Online Support at 202–502–6652 (toll request permission from the COTP or a
free at 1–866–208–3676) or email at [FR Doc. 2018–12663 Filed 6–12–18; 8:45 am]
designated representative. They can be
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the reached on VHF FM channel 16 or by
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
telephone at (361) 939–0450. If
Public Reference Room at 202–502–
permission is granted, all persons and
8371, TTY 202–502–8659. Email the
vessels shall comply with the
Public Reference Room at DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND instructions of the COTP or designated
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov. SECURITY representative. In addition to this notice
VII. Effective Date and Congressional of enforcement in the Federal Register,
Coast Guard
Notification the COTP or a designated representative
will inform the public through
42. The Final Rule is effective August 33 CFR Part 165
Broadcast Notice to Mariners (BNM),
13, 2018. The Commission has [Docket No. USCG–2018–0445] Local Notices to Mariners (LNM),
determined, with the concurrence of the Marine Safety Information Broadcasts
Administrator of the Office of Safety Zone; Wendell Family Fourth of (MSIBs), and/or through other means of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of July Fireworks Display, Rockport, TX public notice as appropriate at least 24
OMB, that this rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ hours in advance of each enforcement.
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
as defined in section 351 of the Small Dated: June 6, 2018.
ACTION: Notice of enforcement of
Business Regulatory Enforcement E.J. Gaynor,
regulation.
Fairness Act of 1996. This Final Rule is Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
being submitted to the Senate, House, SUMMARY: The Coast Guard will enforce Port Sector Corpus Christi.
and Government Accountability Office. the safety zone for the Wendell Family [FR Doc. 2018–12645 Filed 6–12–18; 8:45 am]
By the Commission. Fourth of July Fireworks Display on July BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
4, 2018, to provide for the safety of life
Issued: June 7, 2018.
on navigable waterways during this
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., event. Our regulation for marine events DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
Deputy Secretary. within the Eighth Coast Guard District SECURITY
Note: The following appendix will not
identifies the regulated area for this
event in Rockport, TX. During the Coast Guard
appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.
enforcement periods, entry into these
zones is prohibited unless authorized by 33 CFR Part 165
Appendix
the Captain of the Port Sector Corpus [Docket Number USCG–2018–0535]
List of Commenters Christi (COTP) or a designated
RIN 1625–AA00
representative.
American Public Power DATES: The regulations in 33 CFR Safety Zone; Lewis River, Ridgefield,
APPA/TAPS Association and Transmission 165.801, Table 4, Line 7 will be WA
Access Policy Study Group
enforced from 8 p.m. through 9:30 p.m.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.
EEI ............... Edison Electric Institute. on July 4, 2018.
ACTION: Temporary final rule.
El Paso Elec- El Paso Electric Company. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
tric. you have questions about this notice of SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is
Entergy ......... Entergy Services, Inc. enforcement, call or email Petty Officer establishing a temporary safety zone for
Hydro One .... Hydro One Networks Inc. Kevin Kyles, Sector Corpus Christi navigable waters of the Lewis River near
Idaho Power Idaho Power Company. Waterways Management Division, U.S. Ridgefield, WA. This action is necessary
VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:53 Jun 12, 2018 Jkt 244001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\13JNR1.SGM 13JNR1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/83_FR_27619/page/7.svg)
Document Created: 2018-06-12 23:59:39
Document Modified: 2018-06-12 23:59:39
| 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 | Rules and Regulations | |
| Action | Final rule. | |
| Dates | This rule will become effective August 13, 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 | 83 FR 27505 |
2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR