81152 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 247 / Monday, December 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

27 In January 2010, FHFA revised its membership 

regulations to implement statutory amendments 

authorizing CDFIs to become Bank members. As 

part of those revisions, FHFA allowed CDFI 

applicants that could not demonstrate compliance 

with certain of the specific standards relating to 

financial condition to provide alternative 

information demonstrating that they are in sound 

financial condition. By raising the larger issue of 

the appropriate regulatory structure for the 

membership regulations FHFA does not intend to 

change its policy, as evidenced by the recent 

revisions, that CDFI applicants are to be given 

latitude in demonstrating the soundness of their 

financial condition. 

1The Working Group is a subcommittee of the 

Regional Entity Management Group which consists 

of the executive management of the eight Regional 

Entities. 

establish certain standards of 

‘‘presumptive compliance’’ and allow an 

opportunity for institutions that do not 

meet those standards to rebut the 

presumption of noncompliance, or 

should FHFA devise an alternative 

structure, such as one that incorporates 

‘‘bright line’’ tests for each of the various 

eligibility requirements and does not 

create presumptions that an institution 

would be permitted to rebut? 27

Question Sixteen: Should FHFA play 

a role in resolving close membership 

issues, or leave them to the discretion of 

the Banks? 

III. Request for Comments 

FHFA invites comments on all of the 

issue discussed above, and will consider 

all comments in developing a proposed 

rule to amend its membership 

regulations. 

Dated: December 20, 2010. 

Edward J. DeMarco, 

Acting Director, Federal Housing Finance 

Agency. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32467 Filed 12–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8070–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Bureau of Industry and Security 

15 CFR Parts 732, 738, 740, 743, 758, 

and 774 

[Docket No. 100923470–0626–02] 

RIN 0694–AF03 

Export Control Modernization: 

Strategic Trade Authorization License 

Exception 

AGENCY: Bureau of Industry and 

Security, Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: This document corrects a 

typographical error in the address for 

submitting e-mail comments that 

appeared in a proposed rule, ‘‘Export 

Control Modernization: Strategic Trade 

Authorization License Exception,’’ 

published on December 9, 2010. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

BIS no later than February 7, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Comments on this 

correction may be submitted to the 

Federal rulemaking portal (http://www.

regulations.gov). The regulations.gov ID 

for this rule is: BIS–2010–0038. 

Comments may also be submitted via email to publiccomments@bis.doc.gov or 

on paper to Regulatory Policy Division, 

Bureau of Industry and Security, Room 

2705, U.S. Department of Commerce, 

Washington, DC 20230. Please refer to 

RIN 0694–AF03 in all comments and in 

the subject line of e-mail comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

William H. Arvin, Regulatory Policy 

Division, e-mail warvin@bis.doc.gov, 

telephone 202–482–2440. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

address for submitting e-mail comments 

was incorrectly stated under the 

ADDRESSES caption of a proposed rule 

entitled ‘‘Export Control Modernization: 

Strategic Trade Authorization License 

Exception’’ (75 FR 76653, December 9, 

2010). This correction notice states the 

correct e-mail address in the ADDESSSES

caption, which is publiccomments@bis.

doc.gov. 

In proposed rule FR Doc. 2010–30968, 

beginning on page 76653 in the issue of 

December 9, 2010, make the following 

correction: On page 76654, in the 

ADDRESSES section, correct 

‘‘publiccomments.bis.doc.gov’’ to read 

‘‘publiccomments@bis.doc.gov’’. 

Bernard Kritzer, 

Director, Office of Exporter Services. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32441 Filed 12–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–33–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 40 

[Docket No. RM10–5–000] 

Interpretation of Protection System 

Reliability Standard 

December 16, 2010. 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The North American Electric 

Reliability Corporation (NERC) has 

submitted a petition (Petition) 

requesting approval of NERC’s 

interpretation of Requirement R1 of 

Commission-approved Reliability 

Standard PRC–005–1 (Transmission and 

Generation Protection System 

Maintenance and Testing). The 

Commission proposes to accept the 

NERC proposed interpretation of 

Requirement R1 of Reliability Standard 

PRC–005–1, and proposes to direct 

NERC to develop modifications to the 

PRC–005–1 Reliability Standard, as 

discussed below, through its Reliability 

Standards development process to 

address gaps in the Protection System 

maintenance and testing standard, 

highlighted by the proposed 

interpretation. 

DATES: Comments are due February 25, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number and in 

accordance with the requirements 

posted on the Commission’s Web site, 

http://www.ferc.gov. Comments may be 

submitted by any of the following 

methods: 

• Agency Web Site: Documents 

created electronically using word 

processing software should be filed in 

native applications or print-to-PDF 

format and not in a scanned format, at 

http://www.ferc.gov.doc-filing/ 

efiling.asp. 

• Mail/Hand Delivery: Commenters 

unable to file comments electronically 

must mail or hand deliver an original of 

their comments to: Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ron 

LeComte (Legal Information), Office of 

the General Counsel, 888 First Street, 

NE., Washington, DC 20426. 202–502– 

8405. Ron.lecomte@ferc.gov. 

Danny Johnson (Technical 

Information), Office of Electric 

Reliability, Division of Reliability 

Standards, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426. 202–502–8892. 

Danny.johnson@ferc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

NERC submitted the Petition 

requesting approval of NERC’s 

interpretation of Requirement R1 of 

Commission-approved Reliability 

Standard PRC–005–1 (Transmission and 

Generation Protection System 

Maintenance and Testing). NERC 

developed the interpretation in response 

to a request for interpretation submitted 

to NERC by the Regional Entities 

Compliance Monitoring Processes 

Working Group (Working Group).1 The 

Commission proposes to accept the 

NERC proposed interpretation of 

Requirement R1 of Reliability Standard 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 247 / Monday, December 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules 81153 

2 16 U.S.C. 824. 

3 Id. 824o(d)(2). 

4 Id. 824o(e)(3). 

5Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric 

Reliability Organization; and Procedures for the 

Establishment, Approval, and Enforcement of 

Electric Reliability Standards, Order No. 672, FERC 

Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,204, order on reh’g, Order No. 

672–A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,212 (2006). 

6North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 

FERC ¶ 61,062, order on reh’g & compliance, 117 

FERC ¶ 61,126 (2006), aff’d sub nom. Alcoa, Inc. v. 

FERC, 564 F.3d 1342 (DC Cir. 2009). 

7 Mandatory Reliability Standards for the BulkPower System, Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. 

¶ 31,242, order on reh’g, Order No. 693–A, 120 

FERC ¶ 61,053 (2007). 

8 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(5). 

9Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,242 at 

P 1475. 

10NERC Rules of Procedure, Appendix 3A, 

Reliability Standards Development Procedure, 

Version 6.1, at 26–27 (2007). 

11See NERC Glossary of Terms Used in 

Reliability Standards at http://www.nerc.com/docs/ 

standards/rs/Glossary_of_Terms_2010April20.pdf. 

PRC–005–1, and proposes to direct 

NERC to develop modifications to the 

PRC–005–1 Reliability Standard, as 

discussed below, through its Reliability 

Standards development process to 

address gaps in the Protection System 

maintenance and testing standard 

highlighted by the proposed 

interpretation, as discussed below. The 

Commission seeks comments on its 

proposal. 

I. Background 

2. Section 215 of the Federal Power 

Act (FPA) requires a Commissioncertified Electric Reliability 

Organization (ERO) to develop 

mandatory and enforceable Reliability 

Standards, which are subject to 

Commission review and approval.2

Specifically, the Commission may 

approve, by rule or order, a proposed 

Reliability Standard or modification to a 

Reliability Standard if it determines that 

the Standard is just, reasonable, not 

unduly discriminatory or preferential, 

and in the public interest.3 Once 

approved, the Reliability Standards may 

be enforced by the ERO, subject to 

Commission oversight, or by the 

Commission independently.4

3. Pursuant to section 215 of the FPA, 

the Commission established a process to 

select and certify an ERO,5 and 

subsequently certified NERC.6 On April 

4, 2006, NERC submitted to the 

Commission a petition seeking approval 

of 107 proposed Reliability Standards. 

On March 16, 2007, the Commission 

issued a Final Rule, Order No. 693,7

approving 83 of the 107 Reliability 

Standards, including Reliability 

Standard PRC–005–1. In addition, 

pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the 

FPA,8 the Commission directed NERC to 

develop modifications to 56 of the 83 

approved Reliability Standards, 

including PRC–005–0.9

4. NERC’s Rules of Procedure provide 

that a person that is ‘‘directly and 

materially affected’’ by Bulk-Power 

System reliability may request an 

interpretation of a Reliability 

Standard.10 In response, the ERO will 

assemble a team with relevant expertise 

to address the requested interpretation 

and also form a ballot pool. NERC’s 

Rules of Procedure provide that, within 

45 days, the team will draft an 

interpretation of the reliability standard 

and submit it to the ballot pool. If 

approved by the ballot pool and 

subsequently by the NERC Board of 

Trustees (Board), the interpretation is 

appended to the Reliability Standard 

and filed with the applicable regulatory 

authorities for approval. 

II. Reliability Standard PRC–005–1 

5. The purpose of PRC–005–1 is to 

‘‘ensure all transmission and generation 

Protection Systems affecting the 

reliability of the Bulk Electric System 

(BES) are maintained and tested.’’ In 

particular, Requirement R1, requires 

that: 

R1. Each Transmission Owner and 

any Distribution Provider that owns a 

transmission Protection System and 

each Generator Owner that owns a 

generation Protection System shall have 

a Protection System maintenance and 

testing program for Protection Systems 

that affect the reliability of the BES. The 

program shall include: 

R1.1. Maintenance and testing 

intervals and their basis. 

R1.2. Summary of maintenance and 

testing procedures. 

6. NERC defines ‘‘Protection System’’ 

as follows: ‘‘Protective relays, associated 

communication systems, voltage and 

current sensing devices, station batteries 

and DC control circuitry.’’ 11

III. NERC Proposed Interpretation 

7. In the NERC Petition, NERC 

explains that it received a request from 

the Working Group for an interpretation 

of Reliability Standard PRC–005–1, 

Requirement R1, addressing five 

specific questions. Specifically, the 

Working Group questions and NERC 

proposed interpretations include: 

Request 1: ‘‘Does R1 require a 

maintenance and testing program for the 

battery chargers for the ‘station batteries’ 

that are considered part of the 

Protection System?’’ 

Response: ‘‘While battery chargers are 

vital for ensuring ‘station batteries’ are 

available to support Protection System 

functions, they are not identified within 

the definition of ‘Protection Systems.’ 

Therefore, PRC–005–1 does not 

currently require maintenance and 

testing of battery chargers.’’ 

Request 2: ‘‘Does R1 require a 

maintenance and testing program for 

auxiliary relays and sensing devices? If 

so, what types of auxiliary relays and 

sensing devices? (i.e., transformer 

sudden pressure relays).’’ 

Response: ‘‘The existing definition of 

‘Protection System’ does not include 

auxiliary relays; therefore, maintenance 

and testing of such devices is not 

explicitly required. Maintenance and 

testing of such devices is addressed to 

the degree that an entity’s maintenance 

and testing program for DC control 

circuits involves maintenance and 

testing of imbedded auxiliary relays. 

Maintenance and testing of devices that 

respond to quantities other than 

electrical quantities (for example, 

sudden pressure relays) are not 

included within Requirement R1.’’ 

Request 3: ‘‘Does R1 require 

maintenance and testing of transmission 

line re-closing relays?’’ 

Response: ‘‘No. ‘Protective Relays’ 

refer to devices that detect and take 

action for abnormal conditions. 

Automatic restoration of transmission 

lines is not a ‘protective’ function.’’ 

Request 4: ‘‘Does R1 require a 

maintenance and testing program for the 

DC circuitry that is just the circuitry 

with relays and devices that control 

actions on breakers, etc., or does R1 

require a program for the entire circuit 

from the battery charger to the relays to 

circuit breakers and all associated 

wiring?’’ 

Response: ‘‘PRC–005–1 requires that 

entities (1) address DC control circuitry 

within their program, (2) have a basis 

for the way they address this item, and 

(3) execute the program. Specific 

additional requirements relative to the 

scope and/or methods are not 

established.’’ 

Request 5: ‘‘For R1, what are examples 

of ‘associated communications systems’ 

that are part of ‘Protection Systems’ that 

require a maintenance and testing 

program?’’ 

Response: ‘‘Associated 

communication systems’’ refer to 

communication systems used to convey 

essential Protection System tripping 

logic, sometimes referred to as pilot 

relaying or teleprotection. Examples 

include the following: 

—Communications equipment involved 

in power-line-carrier relaying; 

—Communications equipment involved 

in various types of permissive 

protection system applications; 

—Direct transfer-trip systems; 

—Digital communication systems. 

*** ’’ 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
81154 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 247 / Monday, December 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

12NERC Request for Approval of Interpretation at 

8. 13NERC Project 2007–17, Protection System 

Maintenance and Testing proposes to revise the 

definition of Protection System as ‘‘protective relays 

which respond to electrical quantities, 

communication systems necessary for correct 

operation of protective functions, voltage and 

current sensing devices providing inputs to 

protective relays, station dc supply associated with 

protective functions (including station batteries, 

battery chargers, and non-battery-based dc supply), 

and control circuitry associated with protective 

functions through the trip coils(s) of the circuit 

breakers or other interrupting devices.’’ 

14Because the term ‘‘Protection System’’ is present 

in other approved Reliability Standards, the 

interpretation affects other Reliability Standards not 

addressed within the scope of the proposed 

interpretation. 

15The Requirement R1.1 provisions in the 

development of the Version 0 definition of 

Protection System maintenance and testing program 

requirements included: 

R1.1. Transmission protection system 

identification shall include but are not limited to 

(emphasis added): 

R1.1.1. Relays. 

R1.1.2. Instrument transformers. 

R1.1.3. Communications systems, where 

appropriate. 

R1.1.4. Batteries. 

R1.2. Documentation of maintenance and testing 

intervals and their basis. 

R1.3. Summary of testing procedure. 

R1.4. Schedule for system testing. 

R1.5. Schedule for system maintenance. 

R1.6. Date last tested/maintained. 

8. In support of its request for 

approval, NERC states that it believes 

that this interpretation both fairly 

represents the language of the 

Reliability Standard and clarifies what 

components should be included in the 

maintenance and testing programs 

specified in the requirement. NERC 

states that this interpretation supports 

the reliability of the Bulk-Power System 

by providing greater clarity regarding 

the components that make up a 

Protection System as defined in the 

NERC Glossary of Terms. 

9. NERC states that an interpretation 

of a Reliability Standard requirement 

cannot expand the intent or meaning of 

the requirement.12 As such, NERC states 

that any modifications to the language 

in the requirements must be processed 

through the NERC Reliability Standards 

Development Procedure, Version 6.1. 

With this in mind, NERC further states 

that it must clarify the requirement 

language in PRC–005–1a to provide a 

complete framework for maintenance 

and testing of equipment necessary to 

ensure the reliability of the Bulk Power 

System. NERC states that this activity is 

already underway in the scope of 

Project 2007–17—Protection System 

Maintenance and Testing.13

IV. Discussion 

10. The Commission proposes to 

accept NERC’s proposed interpretation 

of Reliability Standard PRC–005–1 

Requirement R1. As discussed above, 

NERC’s Glossary defines ‘‘Protection 

System’’ as: ‘‘Protective relays, 

associated communication systems, 

voltage and current sensing devices, 

station batteries and DC control 

circuitry.’’ NERC’s proposed 

interpretation essentially identifies what 

equipment is considered to be a 

‘‘protective relay,’’ ‘‘associated 

communication system,’’ ‘‘sensing 

device,’’ or ‘‘station battery.’’ None of 

these terms or phrases within the NERC 

definition of ‘‘Protection System’’ are 

further defined any where else. NERC’s 

interpretation provides further meaning 

to these phrases, is not inconsistent 

with the language of the Reliability 

Standard and, therefore, appears 

reasonable. Further, the interpretation 

should assist in providing a consistent 

understanding of what constitutes a 

‘‘Protection System’’ for those entities 

that must comply with Reliability 

Standard PRC–005–1. Accordingly, we 

proposed to approve NERC’s 

interpretation. 

11. However, we are concerned that 

the proposed interpretation highlights a 

gap in the required Protection System 

maintenance and testing pursuant to 

Requirement R1 of PRC–005–1.14 In 

support of our concern, we note that the 

NERC Glossary includes protective 

relays within the definition of 

Protection System. As discussed below, 

we believe that all components that 

serve in some protective capacity to 

ensure reliable operation of the BulkPower System should be included 

within the definition of ‘‘Protection 

System’’ and should be maintained and 

tested accordingly—not just the limited 

subset identified in the NERC 

interpretation. We note that NERC’s 

practice prior to mandatory and 

enforceable Reliability Standards 

included such elements, and we believe 

that that understanding should be 

restored in either the definition or the 

Reliability Standard. In particular, prior 

to the Version 0 standards, NERC’s 

Compliance Template for NERC 

Planning Standard III.A.M4—System 

Protection and Control, Transmission 

Protection System, S4 (Protection 

system maintenance and testing 

programs shall be developed and 

implemented) stated that 

‘‘[t]ransmission system protection 

identification [components] shall 

include, but are not limited to; relays, 

instrument transformers, 

communication systems where 

appropriate, and batteries’’ (emphasis 

added).15 The ‘‘but are not limited to’’ 

language was not translated into the 

Version 0 Reliability Standards that 

were filed for Commission approval. In 

addition to NERC’s Glossary definition, 

the Institute of Electronics and 

Electrical Engineers (IEEE) defines 

‘‘protective relay’’ as a relay whose 

‘‘function is to detect defective lines or 

apparatus or other power system 

conditions of an abnormal or dangerous 

nature and to initiate appropriate 

control circuit action.’’ Therefore, to 

prevent a gap in reliability, any 

component that detects any quantity 

needed to take an action, or that 

initiates any control action (initial 

tripping, reclosing, lockout, etc.) 

affecting the reliability of the BulkPower System should be included as a 

component of a Protection System. 

Accordingly, to address our concern, 

pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the 

FPA, we propose to direct NERC to 

develop a modification to the Reliability 

Standard to include any component or 

device that is designed to detect 

defective lines or apparatuses or other 

power system conditions of an abnormal 

or dangerous nature and to initiate 

appropriate control circuit actions. 

A. Request 2 

12. In response to Request 2, NERC 

stated that the existing definition of 

‘‘Protection System’’ ‘‘does not include 

auxiliary relays,’’ and that auxiliary 

relays need only be maintained if an 

entity’s maintenance and testing 

program ‘‘for DC control circuits 

involves maintenance and testing of 

imbedded auxiliary relays.’’ Further, the 

interpretation excludes the maintenance 

of all devices that ‘‘respond to quantities 

other then electrical quantities’’ and, 

specifically, sudden pressure relays. We 

are concerned that these exclusions 

contradict the purpose statement of 

PRC–005–1, which provides that ‘‘all 

transmission and generation Protection 

Systems affecting the reliability of the 

BES are maintained and tested,’’ and, as 

discussed below, will result in a gap in 

the maintenance and testing of 

Protection Systems affecting the 

reliability of the Bulk-Power System. 

13. If auxiliary relays are included 

within the Protection System, in 

conjunction with other protective relays 

(e.g., as a contact multiplier or interface 

between dissimilar protective systems), 

or as part of the Protection System 

scheme (e.g., as the relay that initiates 

a protective action for Bulk-Power 

System elements), they must be 

maintained and tested to prevent a gap 

in the reliability affecting the BulkPower System. This requirement is 

consistent with NERC’s 

recommendation of Protection System 

components specified for performance 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 247 / Monday, December 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules 81155 

16See NERC Protection System Maintenance, A 

Technical Reference, September 13, 2007; NERC 

Protection System Reliability, Redundancy of 

Protection System Elements, November 2008. 

17Such auxiliary relays may include lockout 

relays, timer relays, breaker status relays, and 

transfer trip output contacts which form the 

necessary logic and decisions of the Protection 

System that ultimately result in a trip or reclose of 

a Bulk-Power System element through the trip 

coil(s) of the circuit breaker or other interrupting 

devices. 

18We further note that the operation of reclosing 

relays are also used in the derivation of 

Interconnection Reliability Operating Limits 

(IROLs) if high speed reclosing is part of the 

protection scheme associated with the transmission 

lines, which system operators use in real-time to 

maintain reliable operation of the Bulk-Power 

System. 

19High-speed reclosing is generally not used for 

certain Bulk-Power System elements, fault types, 

and conditions, e.g., transformers and underground 

cables. 

20For example, they may be needed to meet the 

performance requirement of the TPL (transmission 

planning) Reliability Standards. 

21One such outage occurred in ReliabilityFirst 

resulting in the loss of over 4,000 MW of generation 

and multiple 765 kV lines. 

tests based on NERC’s historical 

standards, and experience from system 

events.16 Components include 

protective relays, AC current and 

voltage sources, communication 

channel, DC control circuitry, auxiliary 

relay, breaker trip coil, and DC source 

as components of a Protection System. 

This requirement is also consistent with 

the Commission’s understanding of the 

term ‘‘protective relay’’ used in the 

NERC Glossary definition of Protection 

System as including all of the 

individual devices that are either 

programmed or set to respond to 

specific conditions, provide input as to 

the status of facilities, provide or receive 

signals from communication channels, 

and initiate actions as required to assure 

faults, other abnormal conditions, and 

any other automatic action associated 

with a fault or abnormal action intended 

to assure reliability. Auxiliary relays 

that are used either within the DC 

control circuitry of a Protection System 

or in conjunction with other Protective 

System components,17 such as those 

used as part of the communication 

channels to provide or receive signals to 

interface with the DC control circuitry, 

and are necessary for the correct 

operation of the Protection System, and 

the failure to maintain the auxiliary 

relay will result in a gap in the 

maintenance and testing of Protection 

System affecting the reliability of the 

Bulk-Power System. 

14. As noted previously, we also are 

concerned that the proposed 

interpretation excludes non-electrical 

sensing relays. ‘‘Protective relays’’ are 

listed as a component in the NERC 

definition of ‘‘Protection System.’’ Under 

a plain reading, the term ‘‘protective’’ 

describes a relay that serves to protect 

the Reliable Operation of the BulkPower System, and thus includes all 

relays with no stipulation or 

requirements on device inputs. Some 

protective relays that do not respond to 

electric quantities (e.g., sudden pressure 

relays) nevertheless should be 

considered as part of the Protection 

System because they can be crucial for 

ensuring reliable operation. If a 

component is designed to sense or take 

action against an abnormal system 

condition that will affect the reliable 

operation of the Bulk-Power System, 

excluding that component results in a 

gap in the maintenance and testing of 

relays affecting the reliability of the 

Bulk-Power System. Accordingly, 

pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the 

FPA, we propose that NERC propose a 

modification to the Reliability Standard 

to address our concern. Specifically, we 

propose to direct NERC to include any 

device, including auxiliary and backup 

protection devices, that is designed to 

sense or take action against any 

abnormal system condition that will 

affect reliable operation. 

B. Request 3 

15. In request 3, the Working Group 

asks whether Requirement R1 requires 

maintenance and testing of transmission 

line re-closing relays. Reclosing relays 

are typically used on the Bulk-Power 

System to address concerns with system 

stability, system security, or continuity 

of service, and must be maintained to 

ensure correct operation.18 In addition, 

because the operation of such highspeed reclosing relays is usually 

automatic and within one second of the 

tripping of the Bulk-Power System 

element,19 the operation of these relays 

must also be coordinated with the initial 

tripping of the Bulk-Power System 

element. A misoperating or 

miscoordinated reclosing relay may 

result in the reclosure of a Bulk-Power 

System element back onto a fault or that 

a misoperating or miscoordinated 

reclosing relay may fail to operate after 

a fault has been cleared, thus failing to 

restore the element to service. As a 

result, not only is damage to the BulkPower System element a concern, but 

where misoperation and 

miscoordination is an issue, the 

stability/reliability of the Bulk-Power 

System is threatened. While a reclosing 

relay is not identified as a specific 

component of the Protection System, if 

it either is used in coordination with a 

Protection System to achieve or meet 

system performance requirements 

established in other Commission— 

approved Reliability Standards,20 or can 

exacerbate fault conditions when not 

properly maintained and coordinated,21

we are concerned that excluding the 

maintenance and testing of these 

reclosing relays will result in a gap in 

the maintenance and testing of relays 

affecting the reliability of the BulkPower System. Accordingly, pursuant to 

section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, we 

propose that NERC propose a 

modification to the Reliability Standard 

to include the maintenance and testing 

of reclosing relays affecting the 

reliability of the Bulk-Power System. 

C. Request 4 

16. In Request 4, the Working Group 

asks whether maintenance and testing of 

the entire DC control circuitry is 

required under Requirement R1. As 

discussed above, we understand that 

maintenance and testing of DC control 

circuitry includes all components of DC 

control circuitry necessary for ensuring 

Reliable Operation. For a Protection 

System to operate reliably, the DC 

control circuitry must both have 

appropriate current carrying capability 

and be insulated sufficiently to maintain 

appropriate voltages within the 

protection system. We are concerned 

that not establishing the specific 

requirements relative to the scope and/ 

or methods for a maintenance and 

testing program for the DC circuitry 

results in a gap in the maintenance and 

testing of Protection System 

components affecting the reliability of 

the Bulk-Power System. Accordingly, 

pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the 

FPA, we propose to direct NERC to 

develop a modification to the Reliability 

Standard to address our concern. 

Specifically, we propose to direct NERC 

to develop a modification to the 

Reliability Standard that explicitly 

includes maintenance and testing of all 

DC control circuitry that is necessary to 

ensure proper operation of the 

Protection System, including voltage 

and continuity. 

D. Conclusion 

17. As discussed above, we propose to 

accept the proposed interpretation. 

However, we are concerned that there 

are gaps in Protection System 

maintenance and testing, as highlighted 

by the interpretation. To address our 

concerns, the Commission proposes to 

direct NERC to develop modifications to 

the PRC–005–1 Reliability Standards 

through its Reliability Standards 

development process. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
81156 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 247 / Monday, December 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

22 5 CFR 1320.11. 

23 44 U.S.C. 3507(d). 

24Regulations Implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act, Order No. 486, FERC 

Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,783 (1987). 

25 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii). 

26 5 U.S.C. 601–612. 

27 13 CFR 121.201. 

28 Id. n.1. 

29To be included in the compliance registry, the 

ERO determines whether a specific small entity has 

a material impact on the Bulk-Power System. If 

these small entities should have such an impact 

then their compliance is justifiable as necessary for 

Bulk-Power System reliability. 

V. Information Collection Statement 

18. The Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) regulations require that 

OMB approve certain reporting and 

recordkeeping (collections of 

information) imposed by an agency.22

The information contained here is also 

subject to review under section 3507(d) 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 

1995.23

19. As stated above, the Commission 

previously approved, in Order No. 693, 

the Reliability Standard that is the 

subject of the current Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR). This 

NOPR accepts an interpretation of the 

currently approved Reliability Standard 

and does not change this standard. The 

interpretation of the current Reliability 

Standard at issue in this rulemaking is 

not expected to change the reporting 

burden nor impose any additional 

information collection requirements. 

20. For the purposes of reviewing this 

interpretation, the Commission seeks 

information concerning whether the 

interim interpretation as approved will 

cause respondents to alter reporting 

frequencies and potentially impose an 

additional burden. 

21. We will submit this proposed rule 

to OMB for informational purposes. 

Title: Mandatory Reliability Standards 

for the Bulk-Power System. 

Action: Proposed Collection. 

OMB Control No.: 1902–0244. 

Respondents: Businesses or other forprofit institutions; not-for-profit 

institutions. 

Frequency of Responses: On 

Occasion. 

Necessity of the Information: This 

proposed rule would approve an 

interpretation of the specific 

requirements of a Commission-approved 

Reliability Standard. The proposed rule 

would find the interpretation just, 

reasonable, not unduly discriminatory 

or preferential, and in the public 

interest. 

22. Interested persons may obtain 

information on the reporting 

requirements by contacting the 

following: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426 [Attention: Ellen 

Brown, Office of the Executive Director, 

phone: (202) 502–8663, fax: (202) 273– 

0873, e-mail: data.clearance@ferc.gov]. 

For submitting comments concerning 

the collection(s) of information and the 

associated burden estimate(s), please 

send your comments to the contact 

listed above and to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, Washington, DC 20503 

[Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, phone 

(202) 395–7345, fax: (202) 395–7285, email: oira_submission@omb.eop.gov]. 

VI. Environmental Analysis 

23. 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.24 The Commission has 

categorically excluded certain actions 

from this requirement as not having a 

significant effect on the human 

environment. Included in the exclusion 

are rules that are clarifying, corrective, 

or procedural or that do not 

substantially change the effect of the 

regulations being amended.25 The 

actions proposed herein fall within this 

categorical exclusion in the 

Commission’s regulations. 

VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

24. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 

1980 (RFA) 26 generally requires a 

description and analysis of final rules 

that will have significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. The RFA mandates 

consideration of regulatory alternatives 

that accomplish the stated objectives of 

a proposed rule and that minimize any 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The Small Business Administration’s 

(SBA) Office of Size Standards develops 

the numerical definition of a small 

business.27 The SBA has established a 

size standard for electric utilities, 

stating that a firm is small if, including 

its affiliates, it is primarily engaged in 

the transmission, generation and/or 

distribution of electric energy for sale 

and its total electric output for the 

preceding twelve months did not exceed 

four million megawatt hours.28 The RFA 

is not implicated by this NOPR because 

the interpretation discussed herein is 

being accepted. With no changes to the 

Reliability Standard as approved, the 

proposal in this NOPR will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

25. In Order No. 693, the Commission 

adopted policies to minimize the 

burden on small entities, including 

approving the ERO compliance registry 

process to identify those entities 

responsible for complying with 

mandatory and enforceable Reliability 

Standards. The ERO registers only those 

distribution providers or load serving 

entities that have a peak load of 25 MW 

or greater and are directly connected to 

the bulk electric system or are 

designated as a responsible entity as 

part of a required under-frequency load 

shedding program or a required undervoltage load shedding program. 

Similarly, for generators, the ERO 

registers only individual units of 20 

MVA or greater that are directly 

connected to the bulk electric system, 

generating plants with an aggregate 

rating of 75 MVA or greater, any 

blackstart unit material to a restoration 

plan, or any generator that is material to 

the reliability of the Bulk-Power System. 

Further, the ERO will not register an 

entity that meets the above criteria if it 

has transferred responsibility for 

compliance with mandatory Reliability 

Standards to a joint action agency or 

other organization. The Commission 

estimated that the Reliability Standards 

approved in Order No. 693 would apply 

to approximately 682 small entities 

(excluding entities in Alaska and 

Hawaii), but also pointed out that the 

ERO’s Compliance Registry Criteria 

allow for a joint action agency, 

generation and transmission (G&T) 

cooperative or similar organization to 

accept compliance responsibility on 

behalf of its members. Once these 

organizations register with the ERO, the 

number of small entities registered with 

the ERO will diminish and, thus, 

significantly reduce the impact on small 

entities.29

26. Finally, as noted above, this NOPR 

accepts the interpretation of the PRC– 

005–0 Reliability Standard, which was 

already approved in Order No. 693, and, 

therefore, does not create an additional 

regulatory impact on small entities. 

VIII. Comment Procedures 

27. 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 February 25, 2011. 

You may submit comments, identified 

by docket number and in accordance 

with the requirements posted on the 

Commission’s Web site, http:// 

www.ferc.gov. Comments may be 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 247 / Monday, December 27, 2010 / Proposed Rules 81157 

1 16 U.S.C. 824o. 

2North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 

FERC ¶ 61,062, order on reh’g & compliance, 117 

FERC ¶ 61,126 (2006), aff’d sub nom. Alcoa, Inc. 

v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009). 

3NERC designates the version number of a 

Reliability Standard as the last digit of the 

Reliability Standard number. Therefore, original 

Reliability Standards end with ‘‘–0’’ and modified 

version one Reliability Standards end with ‘‘–1.’’ 

submitted by any of the following 

methods: 

• Agency Web Site: Documents 

created electronically using word 

processing software should be filed in 

native applications or print-to-PDF 

format and not in a scanned format, at 

http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ 

efiling.asp. 

• Mail/Hand Delivery: Commenters 

unable to file comments electronically 

must mail or hand deliver an original 

copy of their comments to: Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 

Secretary of the Commission, 888 First 

Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. 

These requirements can be found on the 

Commission’s Web site, see, e.g., the 

‘‘Quick Reference Guide for Paper 

Submissions,’’ available at http:// 

www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp, or 

via phone from FERC Online Support at 

202–502–6652 or toll-free at 1–866– 

208–3676. 

28. 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. 

IX. Document Availability 

29. 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 

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 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First 

Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 

20426. 

30. 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. 

31. User assistance is available for 

eLibrary and the FERC’s Web site during 

normal business hours from FERC 

Online Support at 202–502–6652 (toll 

free at 1–866–208–3676) or e-mail at 

ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the 

Public Reference Room at (202) 502– 

8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. E-mail the 

Public Reference Room at 

public.referenceroom@ferc.gov. 

List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 40 

Electric power; Electric utilities; 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements by direction of the 

Commission. 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2010–32356 Filed 12–23–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 40 

[Docket No. RM09–14–000] 

Version One Regional Reliability 

Standard for Transmission Operations 

December 16, 2010. 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: Under section 215 of the 

Federal Power Act (FPA), the Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission 

(Commission) proposes to approve 

TOP–007–WECC–1 (System Operating 

Limits) developed by the Western 

Electric Coordinating Council (WECC) 

and submitted to the Commission for 

approval by the North American Electric 

Reliability Corporation. The revised 

regional Reliability Standard would 

replace the approved WECC TOP–STD– 

007–0. While we propose to approve the 

regional Reliability Standard, as 

discussed in this Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, TOP–007–WECC–1 raises 

some concerns about which the 

Commission requests additional 

information. The Commission also 

proposes to direct WECC to develop 

certain limited modifications to the 

regional Reliability Standard and the 

associated violation risk factor and 

violation severity levels as discussed 

herein. 

DATES: Comments are due February 25, 

2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number and in 

accordance with the requirements 

posted on the Commission’s Web site 

http://www.ferc.gov. Comments may be 

submitted by any of the following 

methods: 

• Agency Web Site: Documents 

created electronically using word 

processing software should be filed in 

native applications or print-to-PDF 

format and not in a scanned format, at 

http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ 

efiling.asp. 

• Mail/Hand Delivery: Commenters 

unable to file comments electronically 

must mail or hand deliver an original 

copy of their comments to: Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 

Secretary of the Commission, 888 First 

Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. 

These requirements can be found on the 

Commission’s Web site, see, e.g., the 

‘‘Quick Reference Guide for Paper 

Submissions,’’ available at http:// 

www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp or 

via phone from FERC Online Support at 

202–502–6652 or toll-free at 1–866– 

208–3676. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mindi Sauter (Legal Information), Office 

of the General Counsel, Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 

First Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20426, (202) 502–6830. 

E. Nick Henery (Technical Information), 

Office of Electric Reliability, Division 

of Policy Analysis and Rulemaking, 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502– 

8636. 

Danny Johnson (Technical Information), 

Office of Electric Reliability, Division 

of Reliability Standards, Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 

First Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20426, (202) 502–8892. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

1. Under section 215 of the Federal 

Power Act (FPA),1 the Commission 

proposes to approve TOP–007–WECC–1 

(System Operating Limits) developed by 

the Western Electricity Coordinating 

Council (WECC) and submitted to the 

Commission for approval by the North 

American Electric Reliability 

Corporation (NERC), which the 

Commission has certified as the Electric 

Reliability Organization (ERO) 

responsible for developing and 

enforcing mandatory Reliability 

Standards.2 The revised regional 

Reliability Standard, designated by 

WECC as TOP–007–WECC–1,3 would 

replace WECC TOP–STD–007–0. While 

we propose to approve the regional 

Reliability Standard, we are concerned 

about certain provisions of TOP–007– 

WECC–1, about which we request 

additional information in public 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1