130 FERC ¶ 61,202 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 

18 CFR Part 40 

[Docket No. RM09-15-000] 

Version One Regional Reliability Standard for Resource and Demand Balancing 

(March 18, 2010) 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act, the Commission 

proposes to remand a revised regional Reliability Standard developed by the Western 

Electricity Coordinating Council and approved by the North American Electric 

Reliability Corporation, which the Commission has certified as the Electric Reliability 

Organization responsible for developing and enforcing mandatory Reliability Standards. 

The revised regional Reliability Standard, designated by WECC as BAL-002-WECC-1, 

would set revised Contingency Reserve requirements meant to maintain scheduled 

frequency and avoid loss of firm load following transmission or generation contingencies. 

DATES: Comments are due [insert date that is 60 days after publication in the 

FEDERAL REGISTER]. 

ADDRESSES: Comments and reply comments may be filed electronically via the 

eFiling link on the Commission's web site at www.ferc.gov. Documents created 

electronically using word processing software should be filed in the native application or 

print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned format. This will enhance document retrieval 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 2 - 

for both the Commission and the public. The Commission accepts most standard word 

processing formats and commenters may attach additional files with supporting 

information in certain other file formats. Attachments that exist only in paper form may 

be scanned. Commenters filing electronically should not make a paper filing. Service of 

rulemaking comments is not required. Commenters that are not able to file electronically 

must send an original and 14 copies of their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, Office of the Secretary, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Cory Lankford (Legal Information) 

Office of General Counsel 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

888 First Street, NE 

Washington, DC 20426 

(202) 502-6711 

Nick Henery (Technical Information) 

Office of Electric Reliability 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

888 First Street, NE 

Washington, DC 20426 

(202) 502-8636 

Scott Sells (Technical Information) 

Office of Electric Reliability 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

888 First Street, NE 

Washington, DC 20426 

(202) 502-6664 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
130 FERC ¶ 61,202 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION 

Version One Regional Reliability Standard for Resource 

and Demand Balancing 

Docket No. RM09-15-000 

NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING 

(March 18, 2010) 

1. Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA),1

 the Commission 

proposes to remand a revised regional Reliability Standard developed by the Western 

Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) and approved 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 BAL-002-WECC-1 (Contingency Reserves),3

 is meant to ensure that adequate 

generating capacity is available at all times to maintain scheduled frequency, and avoid 

loss of firm load following transmission or generation contingencies. As discussed 

 

1

 16 U.S.C. 824o (2006). 

2 North 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). 

3

 NERC 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.” 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 2 - 

 

below, the Commission believes that the proposed regional Reliability Standard does not 

meet the statutory criteria for approval that it be just, reasonable, not unduly 

discriminatory or preferential, and in the public interest.4

2. The Commission proposes to remand the proposed regional Reliability Standard 

based on concerns that it not only fails to support the adoption of less stringent 

requirements than those in the currently effective WECC regional standard that it would 

replace, but may also in some respects be less stringent than the corresponding NERC 

continent-wide Reliability Standard pertaining to contingency reserves. Of particular 

concern with respect to whether the proposed standard is less stringent than the continentwide Reliability Standard is the provision of proposed BAL-002-WECC-1 that would 

permit a balancing authority, when an emergency is declared, to count “Load, other than 

Interruptible Load” as contingency reserve. This provision allows a balancing authority 

to activate load shedding when a single contingency occurs instead of procuring and 

utilizing generating or demand response resources held in reserve for contingencies to 

balance the Bulk-Power System. We believe that such operation, which is not permitted 

in either the current regional Reliability Standard or the NERC continent-wide Reliability 

Standard, is detrimental to reliability. 

3. Further, we are concerned that proposed BAL-002-WECC-1, Requirement R1, 

reformulates the minimum contingency reserve requirement without providing adequate 

4

 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2). 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 3 - 

support that the new requirement is sufficiently stringent to meet the requirements of 

NERC’s continent-wide Disturbance Control Standard, BAL-002-0. While NERC in its 

transmittal letter provides several justifications for the proposed modification to the 

minimum contingency reserve requirement, it also states that WECC relied on just eight 

hours of operating data in its analysis to support its proposal to make a modest reduction 

in the amount of contingency reserve under the proposed Reliability Standard. We 

believe that NERC and WECC should provide additional data and analysis to support the 

proposed reformulation. Accordingly, we propose to remand WECC regional Reliability 

Standard BAL-002-WECC-1. 

I. Background

A. Mandatory Reliability Standards

4. Section 215 of the FPA requires a Commission-certified ERO to develop 

mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, which are subject to Commission 

review and approval. Once approved, the Reliability Standards may be enforced by the 

ERO, subject to Commission oversight, or by the Commission independently.5

 

5. Reliability Standards that the ERO proposes to the Commission may include 

Reliability Standards that are proposed to the ERO by a Regional Entity.6

 A Regional 

Entity is an entity that has been approved by the Commission to enforce Reliability 

 5

 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(3). 

6

 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(4). 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 4 - 

 

Standards under delegated authority from the ERO.7

 When the ERO reviews a regional 

Reliability Standard that would be applicable on an interconnection-wide basis and that 

has been proposed by a Regional Entity organized on an interconnection-wide basis, the 

ERO must rebuttably presume that the regional Reliability Standard is just, reasonable, 

not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the public interest.8

 In turn, the 

Commission must give “due weight” to the technical expertise of the ERO and of a 

Regional Entity organized on an interconnection-wide basis.9

6. In Order No. 672, the Commission urged uniformity of Reliability Standards, but 

recognized a potential need for regional differences.10 Accordingly, the Commission 

stated that: 

As a general matter, we will accept the following two types of regional 

differences, provided they are otherwise just, reasonable, not unduly 

discriminatory or preferential and in the public interest, as required under 

the statute: (1) a regional difference that is more stringent than the 

continent-wide Reliability Standard, including a regional difference that 

7

 16 U.S.C. 824o(a)(7) and (e)(4). 

8

 18 CFR § 39.5 (2009). 

9

 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2). 

10 Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric Reliability Organization; 

Procedures for the Establishment, Approval, and Enforcement of Electric Reliability 

Standards, Order No. 672, 71 FR 8662 (Feb. 17, 2006), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,204, at 

P 290 (2006); order on reh’g, Order No. 672-A, 71 FR 19814 (Apr. 18, 2006), FERC 

Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,212 (2006). 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 5 - 

addresses matters that the continent-wide Reliability Standard does not; and 

(2) a regional Reliability Standard that is necessitated by a physical 

difference in the Bulk-Power System.11 

B. Western Electricity Coordinating Council

7. On April 19, 2007, the Commission accepted delegation agreements between 

NERC and each of eight Regional Entities.12 In its order, the Commission accepted 

WECC as a Regional Entity organized on an Interconnection-wide basis. As a Regional 

Entity, WECC oversees transmission system reliability in the Western Interconnection. 

The WECC region encompasses nearly 1.8 million square miles, including 14 western 

U.S. states, the Canadian provinces of Alberta and British Columbia, and the northern 

portion of Baja California in Mexico. 

8. In June 2007, the Commission approved eight regional Reliability Standards for 

WECC including the currently effective regional Reliability Standard for operating 

reserves, WECC-BAL-STD-002-0.13 The Commission found that the current regional 

Reliability Standard was more stringent than the corresponding NERC Reliability 

Standard, BAL-002-0, since WECC required a more stringent minimum reserve 

requirement than the continent-wide requirement.14 Moreover, the Commission found 

 11 Id. P 291. 

12 North American Electric Reliability Corp., 119 FERC ¶ 61,060, at P 432 (2007). 

13 North American Electric Reliability Corp., 119 FERC ¶ 61,260, at P 53 (2007). 

14 Id. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 6 - 

that WECC’s requirement to restore contingency reserves within 60 minutes was more 

stringent than the 90 minute restoration period as set forth in NERC’s BAL-002-0.15 

9. The Commission directed WECC to develop certain minor modifications to 

WECC-BAL-STD-002-0, as identified by NERC in its filing letter for the current 

standard.16 For example, the Commission determined that: (1) regional definitions 

should conform to definitions set forth in the NERC Glossary of Terms Used in 

Reliability Standards (NERC Glossary), unless a specific deviation has been justified; 

and, (2) documents that are referenced in the Reliability Standard should be attached to 

the Reliability Standard. The Commission also found that it is important that regional 

Reliability Standards and NERC Reliability Standards achieve a reasonable level of 

consistency in their structure so that there is a common understanding of the elements. 

The Commission also directed WECC to address stakeholder concerns regarding 

ambiguities in the terms “load responsibility” and “firm transaction.”17

II. WECC Regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-1

10. On March 25, 2009, NERC submitted a petition (NERC Petition) to the 

Commission seeking approval of BAL-002-WECC-118 and requesting the concurrent 

 15 Id.

16 Id. P 55. 

17 Id. P 56. 

18 See 18 CFR § 39.5(a) (requiring the ERO to submit regional Reliability 

Standards on behalf of a Regional Entity). 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 7 - 

 

retirement of BAL-STD-002-0.19 In that March petition, NERC states that the proposed 

regional Reliability Standard was approved by the NERC Board of Trustees at its 

October 29, 2008 meeting. NERC also requests an effective date for the proposed 

regional Reliability Standard of 90 calendar days after receipt of applicable regulatory 

approval. 

11. The proposed regional Reliability Standard contains three main provisions. 

Requirement R1 provides that each reserve sharing group20 or balancing authority must 

maintain a minimum contingency reserve that is the greater of (1) an amount of reserve 

equal to the loss of the most severe single contingency; or (2) an amount of reserve equal 

to the sum of three percent of the load and three percent of net generation. Requirement 

R2 states that each reserve sharing group or balancing authority must maintain at least 

half of the contingency reserve as spinning reserve. Requirement R3 identifies 

acceptable types of reserve to satisfy Requirement R1: 

R3.1. Spinning Reserve; 

R3.2. Interruptible Load; 

R3.3. Interchange Transactions designated by the source Balancing Authority as 

non-spinning contingency reserve; 

19 The proposed regional Reliability Standard is not attached to the NOPR. It is, 

however, available on the Commission’s eLibrary document retrieval system in Docket 

No. RM09-15-000 and is on the ERO’s web site, available at: http://www.nerc.com. 

20 A “reserve sharing group” is a group whose members consist of two or more 

balancing authorities that collectively maintain, allocate, and supply operating reserves 

required for each balancing authority’s use in recovering from contingencies within the 

group. See NERC Glossary, available at: 

http://www.nerc.com/docs/standards/rs/Glossary_2009April20.pdf. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 8 - 

R3.4. Reserve held by the other entities by agreement that is deliverable on Firm 

Transmission Service; 

R3.5. An amount of off-line generation which can be synchronized and 

generating; or 

R.3.6. Load, other than Interruptible Load, once the Reliability Coordinator has 

declared a capacity or energy emergency. 

In addition, Measure M1 provides that a reserve sharing group or balancing authority 

must have documentation that it maintained 100 percent of required contingency reserve 

levels “except within the first 105 minutes (15 minute Disturbance Recovery Period, plus 

90 minute Contingency Reserve Restoration Period) following an event requiring the 

activation of Contingency Reserves.” 

III. Discussion

12. As discussed below, proposed regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-1 

does not appear to satisfy the statutory criteria for approval. The Commission therefore 

proposes to remand BAL-002-WECC-1 to the Regional Entity with instructions for 

development of suitable modifications. The Commission also discusses additional 

concerns with the proposed regional Reliability Standard, and proposes that the Regional 

Entity address these concerns on remand. 

A. Calculation of Minimum Contingency Reserves

13. NERC’s Disturbance Control Standard, continent-wide Reliability Standard BAL002-0, requires each balancing authority or reserve sharing group, at a minimum, to 

maintain at least enough contingency reserve to cover the most severe single 

contingency. Similarly, requirement WR1(a)(ii) of WECC’s current WECC-BAL-STD002-0 requires balancing authorities to maintain a contingency reserve of spinning and 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 9 - 

nonspinning reserves (at least half of which must be spinning), sufficient to meet the 

NERC Disturbance Control Standard, BAL-002-0, equal to the greater of: (1) the loss of 

generating capacity due to forced outages of generation or transmission equipment that 

would result from the most severe single contingency; or (2) the sum of five percent of 

load responsibility served by hydro generation and seven percent of the load 

responsibility served by thermal generation. In approving the regional BAL-STD-002-0 

Reliability Standard, the Commission noted that the regional Reliability Standard is more 

stringent than the NERC Reliability Standard, BAL-002-0, because WECC requires a 

more stringent minimum reserve requirement than the continent-wide requirement. 

WECC and NERC Proposal 

14. As proposed, Requirement R1 of BAL-002-WECC-1 would require each reserve 

sharing group or balancing authority that is not a member of a reserve sharing group to 

maintain a minimum contingency reserve. NERC contends that the proposed minimum 

contingency reserve amount is more stringent than that required by the continent-wide 

Reliability Standard.21 NERC explains that, whereas Requirement R3.1 of BAL-002-0 

requires that each balancing authority or reserve sharing group carry, at a minimum, at 

least enough contingency reserve to cover the most severe single contingency, proposed 

Requirement R1.1 of BAL-002-WECC-1 requires that each balancing authority or 

reserve sharing group maintain, as a minimum, contingency reserves equal to the loss of 

 21 NERC Petition at 9. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 10 - 

 

the most severe single contingency or an amount of reserve equal to the sum of three 

percent of the load (generation minus station service minus net actual interchange) and 

three percent of net generation (generation minus station service).22 

15. NERC states that the proposed requirements for minimum contingency reserves 

provide a comparable level of contingency reserves to those contained in the currently 

approved regional Reliability Standard. NERC explains that, based on operational 

experience, the requirements have been revised to remove what it considers to be 

ambiguous terms, such as “load responsibility,” and separate market transactions from 

the determination of required reserves that exist using the methodology in the current 

Reliability Standard.23 In support of the revised minimum contingency reserve 

calculations, NERC states that, based on technical studies covering a total eight hours 

from the four operating seasons (summer, fall, winter and spring, both on and off-peak), 

the drafting team determined that the sum of 3 percent of load and 3 percent of net 

generation level was appropriate to approximate the same level of contingency reserves 

as the existing approved standard provides throughout the year. 

16. NERC contends, however, that, due to ambiguities that exist using the current 

methodology, historical information necessary to calculate the required contingency 

reserve levels under the proposed methodology is not readily available from collected 

22 Id. at 14. 

23 Id. at 16. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 11 - 

 

data. NERC explains that this situation exists because the calculations are based on the 

term “load responsibility” as it is used in the current regional Reliability Standard and not 

on load itself. Thus, NERC comments, WECC does not have additional data available in 

order to compare the contingency reserve levels required under the existing methodology 

with the prospective reserve levels under the proposed methodology. NERC states that 

requiring an additional survey of the applicable entities would place an undue burden on 

those entities to compile and submit the data, and on the drafting team to evaluate and 

verify the data, considering the amount of time that has passed since the proposed 

regional Reliability Standard was approved by the WECC Board of Directors. 

17. NERC acknowledges that even the data collected illustrates that the proposed 

methodology for calculating minimum contingency reserves results in a slight reduction 

in required total reserves in the interconnection for each of the eight hours assessed as 

compared to the total reserves required under the current methodology.24 In fact, the 

eight hours of data shows an overall decrease in required reserves under the proposed 

methodology of approximately 350 MWs (from approximately 10,850 MWs to 10,500 

MWs) on high load days. NERC argues, however, that, under the currently effective 

regional Reliability Standard, the potential exists for the total reserves required in the 

Western Interconnection to be reduced if firm transactions are purchased from balancing 

24 Id. at 15. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 12 - 

xplains that: 

 

authorities or from reserve sharing groups whose reserve requirements are determined by 

the most severe single contingency.25 

18. NERC also contends that industry will benefit from the improved clarity in the 

proposed regional Reliability Standard.26 NERC states that the ambiguity associated 

with the term “load responsibility,” as it is used in the current regional Reliability 

Standard, results in confusion regarding the location and amount of the reserves being 

carried in the interconnection. NERC e

[t]he identification of the entities responsible for providing reserves may be 

lost as purchases are bundled and remarketed. With regard to the ability to 

audit applicable entities for compliance to the existing BAL-STD-002-0 

relative to the proposed BAL-002-WECC-1 standard, WECC has been able 

to audit the current standard with a reasonable level of consistency; 

however, the industry would benefit from greater clarity. The interpretation 

of the term “load responsibility,” which is used to determine the amount of 

reserves required has been problematic for WECC, particularly because 

FERC Order No. 888 expanded the types of commercial products traded in 

the electric power industry. The influence of routine commercial 

transactions and terms in the existing regional Reliability Standard has 

introduced the possibility of varying interpretations for the term “load 

responsibility” and a degree of uncertainty as to the responsibility for 

reserves, resulting in challenges when evaluating compliance.27 

25 Id.

26 Id. at 15-16. In its order approving the current regional Reliability Standard, the 

Commission directed WECC, in preparing a revised regional Reliability Standard, to 

resolve concerns raised by stakeholders that certain terms, including “load 

responsibility,” were ambiguous. North American Electric Reliability Corp., 119 FERC 

¶ 61,260 at P 56. 

27 NERC Petition at 16. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 13 - 

19. In addition, NERC states that the existing regional Reliability Standard considers 

load served by hydro and thermal generation but does not explicitly require contingency 

reserves for other types of generation such as wind, solar or other renewable resources. 

NERC concludes that the proposed regional Reliability Standard adds clarity by 

explicitly requiring reserves for renewable resources.28 NERC argues further that even 

though the use of the proposed method for calculating minimum contingency reserves 

results in a reduction in total reserves required in the interconnection, such impact is 

negligible when compared to the uncertainty in the actual amount of reserves being 

carried in the interconnection under the existing regional Reliability Standard and the 

potential shortfall in reserves existing as a result of new technologies not currently 

addressed in the existing regional Reliability Standard. 

NOPR Proposal

20. The Commission proposes to find that the eight hours of data provided by WECC 

is insufficient to demonstrate that the proposed minimum contingency reserve 

requirements are sufficiently stringent to ensure that entities within the Western 

Interconnection will meet the requirements of NERC’s continent-wide Disturbance 

Control Standard, BAL-002-0. In the regional Reliability Standard development process, 

several commenters raised similar concerns about the lack of technical justification for 

 28NERC Petition at 16. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 14 - 

 

the proposed method for calculating minimum contingency reserve levels.29 The 

Commission believes that NERC did not adequately respond to these concerns. 

21. In its March 2007 petition proposing the currently effective regional Reliability 

Standard, NERC explained that WECC-BAL-STD-002-0 and the other seven regional 

Reliability Standards were WECC’s translation of existing WECC criteria that the 

WECC Operating Committee and Western Interconnection Regional Advisory Body both 

concluded to be critical to maintaining reliability within the Western Interconnection.30 

NERC stated that all of these regional Reliability Standards were “well vetted, approved, 

tested, and proven effective in monitoring and enforcing critical reliability elements in 

the Western Interconnection”31 and were developed in response to the 1996 blackouts. 

NERC also stated that, in developing WECC-BAL-STD-002-0 and the other seven 

regional Reliability Standards, the “WECC Operating Committee undertook a 

comprehensive review of all WECC criteria, policies, and guidelines in an effort to 

29 See, e.g., NERC, Petition at Exhibit C (Record of Development of Proposed 

Reliability Standard), Avista, October 30, 2007 Comments at 21; Alberta Electric System 

Operator, October 30, 2007 Comments at 23; Bonneville Power Administration, 

October 30, 2007 Comments at 28; Grant County PUD, October 30, 2007 Comments at 

16-17; PacifiCorp Commercial and Trading, October 30, 2007 Comments at 33-34; 

NorthWestern Energy, October 30, 2007 Comments at 36; Northwest Power Pool 

Reserve Sharing Group, October 30, 2007 Comments at 8; PacifiCorp, October 30, 2007 

Comments at 34; Pacific Gas & Electric, January 2, 2008 Comments at 4; Portland 

General Electric Merchant, October 30, 2007 Comments at 25. 

30 NERC, March 26, 2007 Petition Proposing Current Regional Reliability 

Standard, Docket No. RR07-11-000, at 4 

31 Id.
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 15 - 

 

identify all unique ... criteria it believed critical to the reliability of the Western 

Interconnection”32 and concluded that these eight regional Reliability Standards were of 

the “highest priority.”33 These statements indicate that these eight regional Reliability 

Standards were necessary to maintain reliability in the Western Interconnection. Our 

review of the provisions relating to the calculation of minimum contingency reserve 

requirements in the proposed Reliability Standard indicates that they may be less 

stringent than the currently-effective regional Reliability Standard, WECC-BAL-STD002-0, and may also be less stringent than the currently-effective continent-wide 

Reliability Standard. NERC and WECC have not provided an adequate explanation or 

supporting studies to resolve these concerns. 

22. NERC admits that the eight hours of data illustrates that the proposed 

methodology for calculating contingency reserves results in a reduction of total reserves 

required in the Western Interconnection for each of the eight hours assessed when 

compared with the methodology in the current regional Reliability Standard. Neither 

NERC nor WECC has provided sufficient evidence that the proposed regional Reliability 

Standard provides adequate requirements to ensure that entities within WECC will 

continue to satisfy the continent-wide disturbance control standard and will not cause 

frequency-related instability, uncontrolled separation or cascading outages. Moreover, 

32 Id.

33 Id.
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 16 - 

the evidence provided is insufficient to demonstrate that the proposed regional Reliability 

Standard is more stringent than the corresponding NERC Reliability Standard. 

23. Although the proposed Reliability Standard offers some added clarity by 

eliminating reference to the term “load responsibility” and including renewables in the 

calculation of contingency reserves, the Commission proposes to find that NERC and 

WECC have not provided sufficient technical justification to support the proposed 

revised method for calculating contingency reserves. Thus, we propose to remand BAL002-WECC-1 so that WECC can develop additional support and make modifications as 

appropriate for a future proposal, consistent with the above discussion. In preparing its 

response, NERC could provide a variety of technical justifications. For example, NERC 

could provide statistically significant data, supported by a sampling representative of all 

balancing authorities and expected operating conditions (such as each season, peak 

periods, off-peak periods and reportable disturbances), to cover the range of operating 

conditions that must be addressed to ensure that the proposed amount of contingency 

reserve that are on-line and deliverable will exceed the performance under the NERC 

Reliability Standards, taking into account the specific electrical characteristics and 

topology of the Western Interconnection. Alternatively, NERC could provide model 

simulations demonstrating that the proposed amount of contingency reserves are on-line 

and deliverable for all expected operating conditions and will exceed the performance 

required under the NERC Reliability Standards, taking into account the specific electrical 

characteristics and topology of the Western Interconnection. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 17 - 

 

24. The Commission recognizes that NERC has suggested that confusion exists with 

regard to the term “load responsibility.” However, the Commission believes that any 

confusion concerning the term “load responsibility” has been addressed by WECC and 

therefore does not have a reliability impact. WECC has defined the term “load 

responsibility”, although not in its regional Reliability Standard.34 Under WECC’s 

definition for "load responsibility", a balancing authority's “load responsibility”, for 

maintaining adequate contingency reserves, is determined by a balancing authority's firm 

load (net generation minus net actual interchange); minus loads contractually 

interruptible within 10 minutes; minus imports where the source balancing authority is 

responsible for contingency reserves; plus exports where the exporting balancing 

authority is responsible for contingency reserves. WECC's procedures for load 

responsibility require that the entities (purchasing selling entity or load serving entity) 

that are party to the import or export are required to identify the transaction to the 

balancing authority using the e-tagging prescheduling tool and identify the associated 

contingency reserves. 

34 WECC’s interpretation of “Load Responsibility,” which was approved by the 

WECC Board of Directors September 7, 2007, places the responsibility on the balancing 

authorities to determine the amount of and assure that adequate contingency reserves are 

provided. See WECC Interpretation of Load Responsibility (Sept. 7, 2007), available at: 

http://www.wecc.biz/Standards/Interpretations/Interpretation%20of%20Load%20Respon

sibility.pdf. Likewise, the current regional Reliability Standard places the responsibility 

on the balancing authorities to determine the amount of and assure that adequate 

contingency reserves are provided. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 18 - 

B. Use of Firm Load to Meet Contingency Reserve Requirement

25. Requirement R1 of NERC’s continent-wide Reliability Standard BAL-002-0, 

allows balancing authorities to supply their contingency reserves from generation, 

controllable load resources, or coordinated adjustments to interchange schedules.35 

Similarly, WECC’s current WECC-BAL-STD-002-0 identifies acceptable types of nonspinning reserve and, among those identified, “interruptible load.”36 

WECC Proposal

26. Requirement R3 of BAL-002-WECC-1 requires that each reserve sharing group or 

balancing authority use certain types of reserves that must be fully deployable within ten 

minutes of notification to meet their contingency reserve requirement. Requirement R3.2 

allows these entities to count “Interruptible Load” as contingency reserves.37 In addition, 

Requirement R3.6 allows entities to use “Load, other than Interruptible Load, once the 

Reliability Coordinator has declared a capacity or energy emergency.”38

27. NERC contends that the changes made by the proposed regional Reliability 

Standard related to the treatment of firm load have reduced the number of occasions 

 35 Reliability Standard BAL-002-0, Requirement R1. 

36 WECC-BAL-STD-002-0, Requirement WR1(b). 

37 BAL-002-WECC-1, Requirement R3.2. 

38 BAL-002-WECC-1, Requirement R3.6. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 19 - 

when an entity may use firm load as contingency reserves.39 NERC explains that, under 

the proposed regional Reliability Standard, balancing authorities or reserve sharing 

groups may only use firm load as contingency reserves once the reliability coordinator 

has declared a capacity or energy emergency. NERC also states that the proposed 

regional Reliability Standard continues to require that reserves must be deliverable to be 

included in the minimum calculations of contingency reserves. 

NOPR Proposal

28. The Commission does not agree with NERC that the proposed regional Reliability 

Standard reduces the occasions when an entity may use firm load as contingency 

reserves. The Commission proposes to find that Requirement R3.6 is not technically 

sound because it permits balancing authorities and reserve sharing groups within WECC 

to use firm load to meet their minimum contingency reserve requirement “once the 

Reliability Coordinator has declared a capacity or energy emergency,” thus creating the 

possibility that firm load could be shed due to the loss of a single element on the 

system.40 

29. Although NERC states in its petition that the proposed regional Reliability 

Standard “reduce[s] the number of occasions when an entity may use firm load as 

 39 NERC Petition at 19. 

40 Order No. 672, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,204, at P 324 (identifying guidelines 

for what constitutes a just and reasonable Reliability Standard including the “proposed 

Reliability Standard must be designed to achieve a specified reliability goal and must 

contain a technically sound means to achieve this goal”). 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 20 - 

 

contingency reserves,” the currently effective regional Reliability Standard does not 

allow the use of firm load to meet minimum contingency reserve levels. In fact, the 

current regional Reliability Standard does not mention “firm load” as an acceptable type 

of reserve. 

30. In the 2007 proceeding in which the Commission approved the currently effective 

WECC-BAL-STD-002-0, one commenter argued that the definition of “interruptible” is 

unclear and that firm transactions are potentially curtailable and thus interruptible under a 

“very narrow interpretation.”41 The Commission rejected the protest on this issue stating 

that “the meaning of the term ‘interruptible’ is generally well understood in the industry, 

i.e., transmission or generation subject to interruption at the provider’s discretion.”42 

Thus, if entities within WECC have interpreted the term “interruptible load” to include 

firm load, this is a mistake. 

31. The Commission does not support a regional practice by balancing authorities or 

reserve sharing groups to count firm load towards their minimum contingency reserve 

requirements. Neither the corresponding NERC continent-wide Reliability Standard, 

BAL-002-0, nor the currently effective WECC regional Reliability Standard permit a 

balancing authority to consider firm load when satisfying minimum contingency reserve 

41 North American Electric Reliability Corp., 119 FERC ¶ 61,260 at P 50. 

42 Id. P 59. The NERC Glossary defines Interruptible Load as interruptible 

demand or the demand that the end-use customer makes available to its load-serving 

entity via contract or agreement for curtailment. See NERC Glossary, available at: 

http://www.nerc.com/docs/standards/rs/Glossary_2009April20.pdf 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 21 - 

requirements. Accordingly, the Commission proposes to find that the proposed regional 

Reliability Standard is less stringent than the continent-wide Reliability Standard because 

it would allow entities to count firm load towards their minimum contingency reserve 

requirements. 

32. Moreover, we are concerned that the provision of the proposed WECC regional 

Reliability Standard that would allow a balancing authority to include firm load as 

contingency reserve when an emergency is declared is inappropriate because there are 

provisions of NERC continent-wide Reliability Standards that specifically address the 

actions entities must take in emergency situations. The proposed WECC regional 

Reliability Standard appears to be incongruent with these other provisions. Specifically, 

the requirements of Reliability Standard EOP-002-2.1 ensure that entities are prepared to 

handle capacity and energy emergency situations, and include minimum remedies 

required for mitigating capacity and energy emergencies to meet the Disturbance Control 

Standard and resolve the emergency conditions. Attachment 1 of EOP-002-2.1, Energy 

Emergency Alerts, describes three emergency alert levels, in order of severity. A 

reliability coordinator (either by its own initiative or at the request of a balancing 

authority or load serving entity) may initiate a level one energy emergency alert if a loadserving entity is, or expects to be, unable to provide customers’ energy requirements or 

the load-serving entity cannot schedule resources due to, for example, available transfer 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 22 - 

 

capability or transmission loading relief limitations.43 A level two alert is more severe, 

addressing situations when an entity can no longer provide its customers’ energy 

requirements. A level three alert is called when a firm load interruption is imminent or in 

progress. 

33. As mentioned above, Requirement R3.6 of proposed BAL-002-WECC-1, would 

allow an entity to include firm load to satisfy contingency reserve requirements once the 

reliability coordinator “has declared a capacity or energy emergency” and applies when 

any level alert is initiated without qualification. This is of concern to the Commission 

because, if an entity initiated energy emergency alert level 1, under BAL-002-WECC-1, 

that entity could count firm load as contingency reserve instead of taking other actions to 

remedy the situation as set forth in NERC Reliability Standard EOP-002-2.1 (e.g., public 

appeals, voltage reduction, firm or non-firm imports, emergency assistance from 

neighboring entities, and demand-side management). This practice is not allowed under 

the corresponding continent-wide Reliability Standard, BAL-002-0. Since the proposed 

regional Reliability Standard includes requirements that are less stringent than BAL-002-

0, the Commission proposes to remand BAL-002-WECC-1 and direct WECC to modify 

the regional Reliability Standard to ensure consistency with the continent-wide 

Reliability Standards. 

43 An energy emergency level 1 can be declared either if an entity foresees or is 

experiencing in real-time, conditions where all available resources are committed to firm 

load, firm transactions, and reserve commitments are being met, but the entity is 

concerned about sustaining its required operating reserve. Reliability Standard EOP-002-

2.1, Attachment 1. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 23 - 

C. Contingency Reserve Restoration Period

34. NERC Reliability Standard BAL-002-0 provides that a balancing authority or 

reserve sharing group responding to a disturbance must fully restore its contingency 

reserves within 90 minutes following the disturbance recovery period, which is set at 

15 minutes.44 Thus, under BAL-002-0, if there is a disturbance, a balancing authority or 

reserve sharing group has 105 minutes to fully restore its contingency reserves. The 

current WECC regional BAL Reliability Standard requires reserve sharing groups and 

balancing authorities to maintain 100 percent of required operating reserve levels except 

within the first 60 minutes following an event requiring the activation of operating 

reserves.45 Thus, currently, applicable entities in WECC have 60 minutes to restore their 

operating reserves to 100 percent. In the March 2007 petition asking the Commission to 

approve the currently effective WECC-BAL-STD-002-0, NERC explained that the 

increased stringency was meant to address concerns arising out of the 1996 blackouts in 

California and that, according to WECC, the regional requirements were critical to the 

reliability of the Western Interconnection.46

 44 Reliability Standard BAL-002-0, Requirements R4 and R6. 

45 WECC regional Reliability Standard WECC-BAL-STD-002-0, Measure of 

Compliance WM1. 

46 NERC, March 26, 2007 Petition Proposing Current Regional Reliability 

Standard, Docket No. RR07-11-000, at 5. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 24 - 

35. In approving WECC-BAL-STD-002-0, the Commission found that WECC’s 

requirement to restore contingency reserves within 60 minutes was more stringent than 

the 90 minute restoration period set forth in NERC’s BAL-002-0.47 

WECC Proposal

36. WECC proposes to replace the current 60 minute restoration period requirement 

with a new provision that would require the restoration of contingency reserves within 

90 minutes from the end of the disturbance recovery period (15 minutes). NERC states 

that the 60 minute restoration period required by the current regional Reliability Standard 

was developed and used under a manual interchange transaction structure among 

vertically integrated utilities. NERC states that, due to a substantial increase in the 

number of market participants and interchange transactions in the Western 

Interconnection, entities within the Western Interconnection have implemented an 

electronic tagging system (e-tagging). NERC states that the adoption of the e-tagging 

system accommodates multiple market participants and the corresponding increased 

number of interchange transactions makes the current mid-hour reserve restoration period 

more cumbersome and makes the inappropriate rejection of reserve restoration 

transactions more likely because such transactions are outside the e-tagging cycle. Thus, 

NERC contends that eliminating the 60 minute reserve restoration requirement and 

adopting the proposed new requirements, which provide the same reserve restoration 

 47 North American Electric Reliability Corp., 119 FERC ¶ 61,260 at P 53. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 25 - 

period as NERC’s BAL-002-0, results in more efficient communication among balancing 

authorities because it aligns the restoration of contingency reserves with the e-tagging 

system approval cycle. 

NOPR Proposal

37. The Commission proposes to remand the regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-

WECC-1 based on the lack of any technical justification or analysis of the potential 

increased risk to the Western Interconnection resulting from the increase in the 

contingency reserve restoration period. Without sufficient data, the Commission is 

unable to determine whether the increase in contingency reserve restoration period is 

sufficient to maintain the reliable operation of the Bulk-Power System in the Western 

Interconnection. A requirement to restore contingency reserves following a disturbance 

improves reliability by ensuring an entity will be in position to respond to the next 

disturbance, thus preventing adverse reliability impacts. When a contingency has 

occurred and operating reserves, generation or interruptible load, have been deployed, the 

system typically has insufficient reserves to respond to another contingency until such 

reserves are replenished. During this time, the system is in a vulnerable position, an 

emergency state, in which the next contingency could lead to cascading outages. 

Exposure in such a state should be limited to the extent possible. The Commission notes 

that in the Western Interconnection a significant number of transmission paths are voltage 

or frequency stability limited, in contrast to other regions of the Bulk-Power System 

where transmission paths more often are thermally limited. Disturbances that result in a 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 26 - 

“stability limited” transmission path overload, generally, must be responded to in a 

shorter time frame than a disturbance that results in a “thermally limited” transmission 

path overload. The Commission understands that this physical difference is one of the 

reasons for the need for certain provisions of regional Reliability Standards in the 

Western Interconnection. 

38. Proposed BAL-002-WECC-1 does not include a requirement that an entity restore 

either contingency reserves or operating reserves. Instead, proposed compliance measure 

M1 provides that an entity should have documentation to prove it maintained the required 

contingency reserve level except during the 105 minutes following a disturbance, which 

represents a 45 minute increase over the current requirement. As an initial matter, a 

Reliability Standard should set forth substantive compliance obligations in the 

“Requirements” section of the Reliability Standard, and not in the “Compliance 

Measures” section. Moreover, we believe that there is no need for a provision of regional 

Reliability Standard that simply restates the requirement of a corresponding continentwide Reliability Standard. This is unnecessary, duplicative, and potentially confusing if 

the regional Reliability Standard is intended to create the same obligation as the 

continent-wide Reliability Standard. Instead, the regional Reliability Standard should 

remain silent with regard to any such requirements, and possibly cross-reference the 

corresponding continent-wide Reliability Standard as appropriate. 

39. The only justification offered by NERC for the extension of the reserve restoration 

period to match the continent-wide Reliability Standard is the adoption of the e-tagging 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 27 - 

system by entities in the Western Interconnection. The e-tagging system is an efficient 

tool used for day-ahead and hour-ahead market accounting and as input for day-ahead 

and hour-ahead transfer capability analysis of scheduled interchange transactions and 

development of day-ahead and hour-ahead capacity and energy resource schedules. 

Proposing to adapt reliability requirements to resolve problems extending from software 

to the extent it is intended to better enable economic transactions is not a technical 

justification since it does not address any change in the need for the reliability 

requirement. Extending the contingency reserve restoration period from 60 minutes to 

105 minutes increases exposure to unstable operating conditions. Although adoption of 

the e-tagging system may result in more efficient communication among transmission 

operators and balancing authorities for day-ahead and hour-ahead scheduling, this fact 

alone does not appear sufficient to justify the extension of the reserve restoration period. 

40. Although NERC BAL-002-0 provides for a 90 minute contingency restoration 

period, WECC explained in 2007 that it needed a shortened contingency restoration 

period to ensure the reliability of the Bulk-Power System in the Western Interconnection. 

In its March 2007 petition for approval of the currently effective WECC regional 

Reliability Standard, NERC presented arguments from WECC that its experience in the 

1996 blackouts led to an analysis of essential criteria to ensure the reliability of the BulkPower System in the Western Interconnection and, as a result, WECC developed more 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 28 - 

 

stringent requirements as it relates to this issue for the region.48 The proposal in the 

immediate proceeding, however, offers marketing or administrative reasons for 

increasing the contingency reserve restoration period. NERC does not provide a 

technical justification regarding how this proposed modification adequately ensures the 

reliability of the Bulk-Power System in the Western Interconnection. We encourage 

Regional Entities periodically to reevaluate their need for regional Reliability Standards. 

However, when a Regional Entity proposes to modify a regional Reliability Standard it 

previously claimed was necessary to maintain reliability in that region by adopting less 

stringent requirements, the Regional Entity must demonstrate that the modified 

requirements are sufficient to maintain reliability in the region. 

41. It appears to the Commission that the proposed modification set forth in Measure 

M1 may weaken the reliability of the Bulk-Power System in the Western Interconnection. 

Accordingly, the Commission proposes to remand BAL-002-WECC-1 and to direct 

WECC to either: (1) retain the current 60 minute rule; or (2) provide technical 

justification and supporting data demonstrating how WECC will maintain adequate 

reliability with the proposed 105 minute reserve restoration period. The regional entity 

could provide a variety of technical justifications to support this modification. For 

example, WECC could perform a statistically significant analysis of the level of risk 

associated with the conditions using the 60 minute reserve restoration period as compared 

48 NERC, March 26, 2007 Petition Proposing Current Regional Reliability 

Standard, Docket No. RR07-11-000, at 4-5. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 29 - 

to the projected level of risk associated with the proposed 90 minute restoration period. 

The analysis must demonstrate that the proposed revisions do not expose entities within 

the Western Interconnection to a level of risk that is greater than the level of risk accepted 

by entities operating under the requirements of the continent-wide NERC Reliability 

Standard, taking into account the specific electrical characteristics and topology of the 

Western Interconnection. Alternatively, WECC could perform model simulations, 

representative of all operating conditions, showing how the system would deploy 

contingency reserves after a first contingency (n-1) and, prior to restoration of the 

reserves, apply a second contingency (n-1-1) to determine if the system will stabilize. 

Based on comments made by the Reliability Standards drafting team, submitted as part of 

the development record in Exhibit C to the NERC petition, the Commission believes that 

NERC should be able to provide this information without any undue burden.49

D. Including Demand-Side Management as a Resource

42. In Order No. 693, the Commission directed the ERO to submit a modification to 

continent-wide Reliability Standard BAL-002-0 that includes a Requirement that 

explicitly allows that demand-side management be used as a resource for contingency 

reserves, and clarifies that demand-side management should be treated on a comparable 

basis and must meet similar technical requirements as other resources providing this 

 49 NERC Petition, Exhibit C at p. 24 (stating that “the WECC Performance Work 

Group performed studies in 2005 that show little if any increase in risk to the system by 

changing the restoration period to the NERC time”). The referenced studies, however, 

are not part of the record in this proceeding. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 30 - 

service.50 The Commission directed the ERO to list the types of resources that can be 

used to meet contingency reserves to provide users, owners and operators of the BulkPower System a set of options to meet contingency reserves.51 The Commission clarified 

that the purpose of this directive was to ensure comparable treatment of demand-side 

management with conventional generation or any other technology and to allow demandside management to be considered as a resource for contingency reserves on this basis 

without requiring the use of any particular contingency reserve option.52 The 

Commission further clarified that in order for demand-side management to participate, it 

must be technically capable of providing contingency reserve service, with the ERO 

determining the technical requirements.53

1. BAL-002-WECC-1

WECC Proposal

43. The proposed regional Reliability Standard does not explicitly address the use of 

demand side management as a resource for contingency reserves. NERC states that it 

raised this concern with WECC, and WECC responded that the drafting team wrote the 

 50 Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System, Order No. 693, 

72 FR 16416 (Apr. 4, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,242, at P 330 (2007), order on 

reh’g, Order No. 693-A, 120 FERC ¶ 61,053 (2007). 

51 Id. P 331, 335. 

52 Id. P 333. 

53 Id. P 334. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 31 - 

regional Reliability Standard “to permit load, Demand-Side Management, generation, or 

another resource technology that qualifies as Spinning Reserve or Contingency Reserve 

to be used as such.” WECC further explained that demand-side management that is 

deployable within ten minutes is a subset of interruptible load, which is an acceptable 

type of reserve set forth in proposed Requirement R3.2.54 

NOPR Proposal

44. While WECC indicates that the phrase “interruptible load” is intended to include 

demand-side management as contingency reserve, we believe that the regional Reliability 

Standard should state this explicitly, consistent with Order No. 693. Accordingly, 

pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, we propose to direct WECC to develop a 

modification to BAL-002-WECC-1 that explicitly provides that demand-side 

management, that is technically capable of providing this service, may be used as a 

resource for contingency reserves. Consistent with the Commission’s directive in Order 

No. 693, the modification should list the types of resources, including demand-side 

management, which can be used to meet contingency reserves. The modification should 

also ensure comparable treatment of demand-side management with conventional 

generation or any other technology and allow demand-side management to be considered 

as a resource for contingency reserves on this basis without requiring the use of any 

particular contingency reserve option. 

 54 NERC Petition at 40. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 32 - 

 

45. In addition, there appears to be a conflict related to the definition of Spinning 

Reserve as it is used in the proposed regional Reliability Standard. Requirement R3.1 

provides that Spinning Reserves may be used to meet the minimum contingency reserve 

requirement. The NERC Glossary defines Spinning Reserves as “[u]nloaded generation 

that is synchronized and ready to serve additional demand.” This definition omits the use 

of demand-side management or other technologies that could be used as a resource 

because it limits acceptable Spinning Reserve resources to generation resources. An 

alternative definition of spinning reserves exists in the NERC Glossary as Operating 

Reserve – Spinning, which includes as part of the definition of Operating Reserve, “load 

fully removable from the system within the Disturbance Recovery Period following the 

contingency event.” Thus, this second definition would capture the use of demand-side 

management as a resource in the calculation of spinning reserve because it allows entities 

to include reductions in load as spinning reserve resources. Furthermore, the definition 

of Operating Reserve-Spinning is consistent with our instruction on the continent-wide 

Reliability Standard as discussed in Order No. 693.55 Accordingly, we propose to direct 

the Regional Entity to develop a modification to the regional Reliability Standard that 

55 Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,242 at P 333 (indicating that NERC’s 

continent-wide Reliability Standard should provide for the inclusion of other technologies 

that may be able to provide contingency reserves, including demand-side management). 

The Commission understands that NERC is currently developing modifications to BAL002-0 that will, inter alia, address relevant directives set forth in Order No. 693. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 33 - 

references this broader definition of spinning reserve to include demand-side 

management. 

2. NERC Glossary

46. As discussed above, the NERC Glossary offers two definitions of spinning 

reserve: Spinning Reserve and Operating Reserve-Spinning. The definition of Spinning 

Reserve does not include demand-side management as a resource, whereas the definition 

of Operating Reserve-Spinning does. Considering that the term Spinning Reserve is not 

used in any approved Reliability Standard other than the current regional Reliability 

Standard, WECC-BAL-STD-002-0, the Commission proposes to direct NERC to remove 

this term from the NERC Glossary upon retirement of the current regional Reliability 

Standard. 

47. Although the definitions of Operating Reserve-Spinning and Operating ReserveSupplemental both include “[l]oad fully removable from the system within the 

Disturbance Recovery Period following the contingency event,” which is broad enough to 

include demand-side management, demand-side management should still be explicitly 

included. Consistent with Order No. 693, the proposed directive to remove the term 

Spinning Reserve from the NERC Glossary would promote comparable treatment of 

demand-side management with conventional generation or any other technology and to 

allow demand-side management to be considered as a resource for operating reserves on 

this basis without requiring the use of any particular operating reserve option.56 

 56 See id.
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 34 - 

Moreover, in order for demand-side management or any other technology to be used as a 

spinning reserve resource, it must be technically capable of providing operating reserve 

service.57 Accordingly, the Commission proposes to direct the ERO to develop 

modifications to the definitions of Operating Reserve-Spinning and Operating ReserveSupplemental to provide for the inclusion of other technologies that could reliably 

contribute to operating reserves, including demand-side management.58 

IV. Information Collection Statement

48. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations require that OMB 

approve certain reporting and recordkeeping (collections of information) imposed by an 

agency.59 The information contained here is also subject to review under section 3507(d) 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.60 By remanding the proposed Reliability 

Standard the Commission is maintaining the status quo until future revisions to the 

Reliability Standard are approved by the Commission. Thus, the Commission’s proposed 

action does not add to or increase entities’ reporting burden. 

 57 See id. P 334. 

58 The Commission recognizes that there may be regional limitations on the 

amount of demand-side management, or other technically capable resources, that can be 

reliably employed. Any modifications proposed to the Commission must allow regional 

discretion to make this determination based on the technical issues inherent to those 

regions. 

59 5 CFR 1320.11. 

60 44 U.S.C. 3507(d). 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 35 - 

V. Environmental Analysis

49. 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.61 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.62 The actions proposed herein fall within this categorical exclusion in the 

Commission’s regulations. 

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

50. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) generally requires a descriptio

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 

accomplish the stated objectives of a proposed rule and that minimize any signifi

economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Small Business 

Administration’s Office of Size Standards develops the numerical definition of a sma

63 n 

that 

cant 

ll 

 61 Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 

Order N gs. ¶ 30,783 (1987). 

(ii). 

o. 486, FERC Stats. & Re

62 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)

63 5 U.S.C. 601-612. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 36 - 

 and 

ing 

o until 

y Standard are approved by the Commission. 

business. For electric utilities, a firm is small if, including affiliates, it is primarily 

engaged in the transmission, generation and/or distribution of electric energy for sale

its total electric output for the preceding twelve months did not exceed four million 

megawatt hours. The RFA is not implicated by this proposed rule because by remand

the proposed Reliability Standard the Commission is maintaining the status qu

64

future revisions to the Reliabilit

VII. Comment Procedures

51. The Commission invites interested persons to submit comments on the matters an

issues proposed in this notice to be adopted, including any related matters or alternative 

proposals that commenters may wish to discuss. Comments are due [insert date that is 60 

days from publication in the FEDERAL REGISTER]. Comments must refer to D

No. RM09-15-000, and must include the commenter's name, 

d 

ocket 

the organization they 

g 

 not 

nned format. Commenters filing electronically do not need to make a paper 

 

represent, if applicable, and their address in their comments. 

52. The Commission encourages comments to be filed electronically via the eFilin

link on the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.gov. The Commission accepts 

most standard word processing formats. Documents created electronically using word 

processing software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format and

in a sca

filing. 

64 See 13 CFR 121.201. 
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 37 - 

, 

ill be placed in the Commission's public files and may be viewed, 

 as described in the Document Availability section 

53. Commenters that are not able to file comments electronically must send an 

original and 14 copies of their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Office of the Secretary, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. 

54. All comments w

printed, or downloaded remotely

below. Commenters on this proposal are not required to serve copies of their comments 

on other commenters. 

VIII. Document Availability

55. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the Federal Register, t

Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the 

contents of this document

he 

 via the Internet through FERC's Home Page 

ess 

t of this document is available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft 

ocket number field. 

. 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) 

(http://www.ferc.gov) and in FERC's Public Reference Room during normal busin

hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street, NE, Room 2A, 

Washington, DC 20426. 

56. From FERC's Home Page on the Internet, this information is available on 

eLibrary. The full tex

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 

d

57
Docket No. RM09-15-000 - 38 - 

om at (202) 502-

il the Public Reference Room at 

ublic.referenceroom@ferc.gov. 

y direction of the Commission. 

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., 

Deputy Secretary. 

 

or email at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the Public Reference Ro

8371, TTY (202)502-8659. E-ma

p

B