Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 77 / Wednesday, April 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 22395 

85See 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 1 16 U.S.C. 824(o). 

2NERC defines Regulation Reserve Sharing Group 

as ‘‘[a]group whose members consist of two or more 

Balancing Authorities that collectively maintain, 

allocate, and supply the Regulating Reserve 

required for all member Balancing Authorities to 

use in meeting applicable regulating standards.’’ 

NERC Petition at 7. 

3 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). 

4 Inadvertent interchange is ‘‘[t]he difference 

between the Balancing Authority’s Net Actual 

Interchange and Net Scheduled Interchange. (IA– 

IS).’’ NERC Glossary of Terms Used in Reliability 

Standards (NERC Glossary) at 42. 

5Unscheduled power flows generally refers to 

power flows that result from the law of physics that 

causes power from a given source to flow over all 

possible paths to its destination. 

categorical exclusion in the 

Commission’s regulations. 

VI. Document Availability 

63. In addition to publishing the full 

text of this document in the Federal 

Register, the Commission provides all 

interested persons an opportunity to 

view and/or print the contents of this 

document via the Internet through the 

Commission’s Home Page (http://

www.ferc.gov) and in the Commission’s 

Public Reference Room during normal 

business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 

Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., 

Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426. 

64. From the Commission’s Home 

Page on the Internet, this information is 

available on eLibrary. The full text of 

this document is available on eLibrary 

in PDF and Microsoft Word format for 

viewing, printing, and/or downloading. 

To access this document in eLibrary, 

type the docket number excluding the 

last three digits of this document in the 

docket number field. 

65. User assistance is available for 

eLibrary and the Commission’s Web site 

during normal business hours from the 

Commission’s Online Support at 202– 

502–6652 (toll free at 1–866–208–3676) 

or email at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, 

or the Public Reference Room at (202) 

502–8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. Email 

the Public Reference Room at 

public.referenceroom@ferc.gov. 

VII. Effective Date and Congressional 

Notification 

66. This Final Rule is effective June 

22, 2015. 

67. The Commission has determined, 

with the concurrence of the 

Administrator of the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs of 

OMB, that this rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ 

as defined in section 351 of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996.85 The Commission 

will submit the Final Rule to both 

houses of Congress and to the General 

Accountability Office. 

68. In addition to publishing the full 

text of this document in the Federal 

Register, the Commission provides all 

interested persons an opportunity to 

view and/or print the contents of this 

document via the Internet through the 

Commission’s Home Page (http://

www.ferc.gov) and in the Commission’s 

Public Reference Room during normal 

business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 

Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., 

Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426. 

By direction of the Commission. 

Issued: April 16, 2015. 

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2015–09225 Filed 4–21–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 40 

[Docket No. RM14–10–000; Order No. 810] 

Real Power Balancing Control 

Performance Reliability Standard 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, Energy. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (Commission) 

approves Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2 (Real Power Balancing Control 

Performance) and four new definitions 

submitted by the North American 

Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), 

the Commission-certified Electric 

Reliability Organization. Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 is designed to 

ensure that applicable entities maintain 

system frequency within narrow bounds 

around a scheduled value, and improves 

reliability by adding a frequency 

component to the measurement of a 

Balancing Authority’s Area Control 

Error. In addition, the Commission 

directs NERC to submit an informational 

filing pertaining to the potential impact 

of the Reliability Standard, and also 

directs NERC to revise one definition. 

DATES: This rule is effective June 22, 

2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Enakpodia Agbedia (Technical 

Information), Office of Electric 

Reliability, Division of Reliability 

Standards, Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street NE., 

Washington, DC 20426, Telephone: 

(202) 502–6750, Enakpodia.Agbedia@

ferc.gov. 

Mark Bennett (Legal Information), 

Office of the General Counsel, Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 

First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, 

Telephone: (202) 502–8524, 

Mark.Bennett@ferc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Order No. 810 

Final Rule 

1. Pursuant to section 215 of the 

Federal Power Act (FPA),1 the 

Commission approves Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 (Real Power 

Balancing Control Performance) 

submitted by the North American 

Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), 

the Commission-certified Electric 

Reliability Organization (ERO). 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 applies 

to balancing authorities and Regulation 

Reserve Sharing Groups,2 and is 

intended to ensure that Interconnection 

frequency is maintained within 

predefined frequency limits. The 

Commission also finds that Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 addresses the 

Commission’s directive set forth in 

Order No. 693 pertaining to BAL–002– 

0.3 The Commission approves the 

retirement of currently-effective 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–1 

immediately prior to the effective date 

of Reliability Standard BAL–001–2. 

2. Further, the Commission approves 

NERC’s four proposed definitions, 

associated violation risk factors and 

violation severity levels, 

implementation plan, and effective date. 

The Commission also directs NERC to 

submit an informational filing 90 days 

after the end of the two-year period 

following implementation that includes 

an analysis of data on whether 

experience with the Balancing 

Authority ACE Limit in the first two 

years after approval has seen ACE 

swings and inadvertent interchange 4

and unscheduled power flows 5 that 

could cause system operating limit 

(SOL) and interconnection reliability 

operating limit (IROL) exceedances, and 

further directs NERC to revise one 

definition. 

I. Background 

3. Section 215 of the FPA requires a 

Commission-certified ERO to develop 

mandatory and enforceable Reliability 

Standards that are subject to 

Commission review and approval. 

Specifically, the Commission may 

approve, by rule or order, a proposed 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

22396 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 77 / Wednesday, April 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

6 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2). 

7 Id. 824o(e). 

8Rules 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). 

9North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 

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

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

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

10North American Electric Reliability 

Corporation, Docket No. RD13–11–000 (Oct. 16, 

2013) (delegated letter order). 

11Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,242 at 

P 355. 

12Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 not attached 

to this Final Rule. The standard is available on the 

Commission’s eLibrary document retrieval system 

in Docket No. RM14–10–000 and on the NERC Web 

site, www.nerc.com. 

13NERC Petition at 2. 

14 Id. at 6 and Exhibit C (Order No. 672 Criteria) 

(citing Order No. 672, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,204 

at PP 323–335, 444). 

15Area Control Error (ACE) is the ‘‘instantaneous 

difference between a Balancing Authority’s net 

actual and scheduled interchange, taking into 

accounts the effects of Frequency Bias, correction 

for meter error, and Automatic Time Error 

Correction (ATEC), if operating in the ATEC mode. 

ATEC is only applicable to Balancing Authorities in 

the Western Interconnection.’’ NERC Glossary at 7. 

16NERC Petition at 12. 

17NERC Petition at 11. 

18 Id. 

19 Id. at 12. 

20 Id. at 2. 

21 Id. at 3. 

Reliability Standard or modification to a 

Reliability Standard if it determines that 

the Reliability Standard is just, 

reasonable, not unduly discriminatory 

or preferential and in the public 

interest.6 Once approved, the Reliability 

Standards may be enforced by NERC, 

subject to Commission oversight, or by 

the Commission independently.7

4. Pursuant to section 215 of the FPA, 

the Commission established a process to 

select and certify an ERO,8 and 

subsequently certified NERC as the 

ERO.9 Subsequent to the Commission’s 

issuance of Order No. 693, approving 83 

of the 107 Reliability Standards filed by 

NERC, the Commission approved 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–0 and 

companion Reliability Standard BAL– 

002–0.10 While approving Reliability 

Standard BAL–002–0, the Commission 

directed NERC ‘‘to modify this 

Reliability Standard to define a 

significant deviation and a reportable 

event, taking into account all events that 

have an impact on frequency, e.g., loss 

of supply, loss of load and significant 

scheduling problems, which can cause 

frequency disturbances and to address 

how balancing authorities should 

respond.’’ 11

II. NERC Petition and Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 

5. On April 2, 2014, NERC filed a 

petition seeking approval of Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2, four new 

definitions to be added to the NERC 

Glossary and the associated violation 

risk factors and violation severity levels, 

effective date, and implementation 

plan.12 In its petition, NERC explained 

that balancing generation and load is 

necessary to ensure that system 

frequency is maintained within narrow 

bounds based on a scheduled value. 

NERC stated that the purpose of 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 is to 

maintain Interconnection frequency 

within predefined frequency limits and 

that the Reliability Standard ‘‘improves 

reliability by adding a frequency 

component to the measurement of a 

Balancing Authority’s Area Control 

Error (ACE) and allows for the formation 

of Regulation Reserve Sharing 

Groups.’’ 13 NERC further stated that 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 is just, 

reasonable, not unduly discriminatory 

or preferential, and in the public 

interest because it satisfies the factors 

set forth in Order No. 672, which the 

Commission applies when reviewing a 

proposed Reliability Standard.14 Also, 

NERC asserted that Reliability Standard 

BAL–001–2 addresses the Commission’s 

Order No. 693 directive pertaining to 

Reliability Standard BAL–002–0. 

6. Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 

replaces the Control Performance 

Standard 2 (CPS2) in currently-effective 

Requirement R2 with a new term: 

‘‘Balancing Authority ACE Limit.’’ 15

The Balancing Authority ACE Limit, 

unique for each balancing authority, 

contains dynamic limits as a function of 

Interconnection frequency and provides 

the basis for a balancing authority’s 

obligation to balance its resources and 

demand in real-time so that its clockminute average ACE does not exceed its 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit for more 

than 30 consecutive clock-minutes.16

7. Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 

has two requirements and two 

attachments that contain the 

mathematical equations for calculating 

the Control Performance Standard 1 

(CPS1) in Requirement R1, the 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit in 

Requirement R2, and associated 

measures. NERC stated that the only 

change to Requirement R1 is to move 

the equation and explanation of the 

individual components of CPS1 to 

Attachment 1. NERC explained that the 

revisions to Requirement R1 ‘‘are 

administratively efficient and clarify the 

intent of the Requirement.’’ 17 NERC 

further stated that the ‘‘underlying 

performance aspect’’ of Requirement R1 

remains the same: ‘‘to measure how well 

a Balancing Authority is able to control 

its generation and load management 

programs, as measured by its ACE, to 

support its Interconnection’s frequency 

over a rolling one-year period.’’ 18

8. Requirement R2 is new and 

replaces the existing Control 

Performance Standard 2 requirement. 

Currently-effective Reliability Standard 

BAL–001–1, Requirement R2 requires 

each balancing authority to operate such 

that for at least 90 percent of the tenminute periods in a calendar month 

(using six non-overlapping periods per 

hour), the average ACE must be within 

a specific limit, referred to as L10. 

9. Requirement R2 of Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 states: 

Balancing Authority shall operate such that 

its clock-minute average of Reporting ACE 

does not exceed its clock-minute Balancing 

Authority ACE Limit (BAAL) for more than 

30 consecutive clock-minutes, calculated in 

accordance with Attachment 2, for the 

applicable Interconnection in which the 

Balancing Authority operates. 

10. NERC explained that the 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit is 

unique for each balancing authority and 

provides dynamic limits for the 

balancing authority’s ACE value as a 

function of its Interconnection 

frequency.19 NERC stated that 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 is 

intended to enhance the reliability of 

each Interconnection by maintaining 

frequency within predefined limits 

under all conditions. Furthermore, 

NERC stated that Reliability Standard 

BAL–001–2 and accompanying 

definitions include the benefits of the 

ATEC equation in the Western 

Electricity Coordinating Council’s 

(WECC) regional variance in Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–1.20

11. In its petition, NERC proposed 

violation risk factors and violation 

severity levels for each requirement of 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2, an 

implementation plan and an effective 

date. NERC stated that these proposals 

were developed and reviewed for 

consistency with NERC and 

Commission guidelines. 

12. NERC proposed an effective date 

for Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 that 

is the first day of the first calendar 

quarter that is twelve months after the 

date of Commission approval. NERC 

stated that this implementation date 

will allow entities to make any software 

adjustment that may be required to 

perform the Balancing Authority ACE 

Limit calculations.21

13. On May 9, 2014, NERC submitted 

a supplemental filing to address the 

status of the Commission directive in 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 77 / Wednesday, April 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 22397 

22NERC May 9, 2014 Supplemental Filing at 3– 

5 (citing Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 

31,242 at P 355). 23 Id. at 2. 

24 Id. at 3. 

25NERC Supplemental Filing at 6 (stating that 47 

balancing authorities participated in the field trial: 

16 in the Eastern Interconnection, 29 in the Western 

Interconnection, ERCOT and Que ́bec). 

26NERC July 31, 2014 Informational Filing (Field 

Trial Report). 

27NERC Field Trial Report at 1. 

28 Id. at 14. 

29Real Power Balancing Control Performance 

Reliability Standard, Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking, 79 FR 70,483 (November 26, 2014), 

149 FERC ¶ 61,139 (2014). 

30The four proposed definitions for inclusion in 

the NERC Glossary are: Regulation Reserve Sharing 

Group, Reserve Sharing Group Reporting ACE, 

Reporting ACE, and Interconnection. NERC Petition 

at 7–10. The standard drafting team explained that 

Regulation Reserve Sharing Group will be added to 

the NERC Compliance Registry prior to 

implementation of the Reliability Standard. NERC 

Petition, Exhibit G (Summary of Development 

History and Complete Record of Development), 

Consideration of Comments, April 2013 at 13. 

31NERC Supplemental Filing at 2. 

32NOPR, 149 FERC ¶ 61,139 at PP 18–19. 

33NERC Petition, Ex. B (Implementation Plan for 

Proposed Reliability Standard BAL–001–2) at 4. 

Order No. 693 that NERC ‘‘define a 

significant deviation and a reportable 

event, taking into account all events that 

have an impact on frequency, e.g., loss 

of supply, loss of load and significant 

scheduling problems. . . .’’ 22 Further, 

NERC provided an update regarding the 

status of the field trial undertaken for 

BAL–001–2. In the supplemental filing, 

NERC reiterated the importance of 

establishing dynamic limits for a 

balancing authority’s ACE as a function 

of the Interconnection frequency, stating 

that ‘‘[o]ne of the reliability benefits of 

the proposed Reliability Standard is that 

it allows Balancing Authorities to 

calculate their position within these 

boundaries on a real-time basis and take 

action to support reliability.’’ 23 Further, 

NERC stated that Reliability Standard 

BAL–001–2 addresses the Commission’s 

directive related to BAL–002–0 ‘‘in an 

equally efficient and effective 

manner.’’ 24 NERC added that revisions 

to Reliability Standard BAL–002–1 are 

currently being developed and will 

complement Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2. Regarding the ongoing field trial, 

discussed below, NERC stated that ‘‘the 

widespread participation of Balancing 

Authorities has provided insight into 

how the changes in Reliability Standard 

BAL–001–2 will impact reliability.’’ 25

14. On July 31, 2014, NERC submitted 

an informational filing of its Preliminary 

Field Trial Report evaluating the effects 

of Reliability Standard BAL–001–2.26

NERC stated that the Field Trial Report 

results to date demonstrate that the 

correlation between Requirements R1 

and R2 of Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2 drive corrective actions to 

support Interconnection frequency and 

reliability.27 NERC also stated that the 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit, in 

conjunction with currently-effective 

Reliability Standard BAL–003–1 

(Frequency Response and Frequency 

Bias Setting), satisfies the directive in 

Order No. 693 pertaining to Reliability 

Standard BAL–002–0.28

III. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

15. On November 20, 2014, the 

Commission issued a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) 

proposing to approve Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 as just, 

reasonable, not unduly discriminatory 

or preferential and in the public 

interest.29 The Commission also 

proposed to approve NERC’s four 

proposed definitions, violation risk 

factor and violation severity level 

assignments, and the retirement of 

currently-effective Reliability Standard 

BAL–001–1.30 The NOPR stated that the 

new Balancing Authority ACE Limit in 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 

encourages operation in support of 

Interconnection frequency and drives 

corrective action back within predefined 

ACE limits when needed to adjust 

Interconnection frequency. 

16. While the Commission proposed 

to approve Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2, the Commission raised concerns 

regarding the potential of the Reliability 

Standard to contribute to unscheduled 

power flows and inadvertent 

interchange. Based on that concern, the 

Commission proposed to direct NERC to 

monitor unscheduled power flows and 

inadvertent interchange in the Western 

and Eastern Interconnections and 

submit an informational filing following 

implementation of the Reliability 

Standard providing the number of SOL/ 

IROL violations, the date, time, location, 

duration and magnitude due to 

unscheduled power flows and 

inadvertent interchange. In the NOPR, 

the Commission sought comments on 

the following issues: (1) The need for an 

informational filing and whether NERC 

should include additional data 

pertaining to unscheduled power flows 

and inadvertent interchange in its 

informational filing; and (2) whether a 

regional variance would be necessary 

for a region experiencing adverse 

impacts from the Reliability Standard 

due to inadvertent interchange. 

17. In response to the NOPR, the 

Commission received comments from: 

NERC, Tri-State Generation and 

Transmission Association, (Tri-State), 

Arizona Public Service Company (APS), 

Edison Electric Institute (EEI), 

NaturEner USA (NaturEner), Regional 

Transmission Organizations— 

Midcontinent Independent System 

Operator, ISO New England, and PJM 

Interconnection (collectively ‘‘Indicated 

RTOs’’), The Steel Manufacturers 

Association (SMA), Duke Energy 

Corporation (Duke), Western Area 

Power Administration (WAPA), 

Powerex Corp (Powerex), New York 

Independent System Operator (NYISO), 

and Bonneville Power Administration 

(BPA). 

IV. Discussion 

18. Pursuant to FPA section 215(d)(2), 

we approve Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2 as just, reasonable, not unduly 

discriminatory or preferential, and in 

the public interest. The purpose of 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 is to 

control Interconnection frequency 

within defined limits. The Commission 

determines that the Reliability Standard 

will help ensure that Interconnection 

frequency is maintained through both 

long and short term performance 

measures for Interconnection frequency 

control and dynamic (i.e., real-time) 

limits that are specific for each 

balancing authority and 

Interconnection.31 We find that, by 

basing Balancing Authority ACE Limits 

on predefined frequency trigger limits 

for each Interconnection, the real-time 

measurements established in the 

Reliability Standard will help ensure 

that the Interconnection frequency 

returns to a reliable state should a 

balancing authority’s ACE, or the 

Interconnection’s frequency, exceed 

acceptable bounds. 

19. We also determine that the 

Reliability Standard satisfies the 

outstanding directive concerning 

Reliability Standard BAL–002 set forth 

in Order No. 693, as explained in the 

NOPR,32 and approve NERC’s four 

definitions, violation risk factor and 

violation severity level assignments, and 

the retirement of currently-effective 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–1. 

Further, we approve NERC’s 

implementation plan, in which NERC 

proposes an effective date of the first 

day of the first calendar quarter, twelve 

months after the date of Commission 

approval.33

20. While approving Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2, as discussed 

below, we direct NERC to submit an 

informational filing to assess the 

potential impact of the Reliability 

Standard as described herein and to 

revise the definition of the term 

Reporting ACE in the NERC Glossary. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

22398 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 77 / Wednesday, April 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

34NOPR, 149 FERC ¶ 61,139 at P 20 (citing NERC 

Petition, Ex. G (Summary of Development History 

and Complete Record of Development), 

Consideration of Comments, April 2013 at 43). 

35 Id., Ex. G, Consideration of Comments, at 77. 

36NOPR, 149 FERC ¶ 61,139 at P 21. 

37 Id. P 22. 

38 Id. P 23. 

39NERC Comments at 6. 

40 Id. at 8. 

41 Id. 

42 Id. at 8–9. 

43EEI Comments at 3–4. 

44 Indicated RTOs Comments at 5–6. 

21. We discuss below the following 

issues raised in the NOPR and 

addressed in the comments: (A) The 

proposed informational filing and NOPR 

comments regarding the need to revise 

the definition of the term Reporting 

ACE; and (B) whether a regional 

variance is necessary to address possible 

adverse impacts from the 

implementation of Reliability Standard 

BAL–001–2. 

A. Informational Filing and Definition 

of Reporting ACE NOPR 

22. In the NOPR, the Commission 

noted that feedback from some 

stakeholders who participated in the 

field trial indicated that the Balancing 

Authority ACE Limit established in 

Requirement R2 of Reliability Standard 

BAL–001–2 could increase unscheduled 

power flows, possibly resulting in 

approaching or exceeding SOL/IROL 

violations. The NOPR observed that, in 

comments submitted to NERC’s 

standard drafting team, one large 

transmission operator stated that the 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit could 

increase the number of system operating 

limit violations, and could cause large 

unscheduled power flows resulting in 

an increased ACE.34 Another 

stakeholder commented that the 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit could 

provide opportunities for entities to 

create unscheduled power flows within 

the boundaries established by the 

Reliability Standard.35

23. The NOPR stated that, while 

NERC asserted that there was no 

relationship between the Balancing 

Authority ACE Limit field trial and 

accumulated inadvertent interchange, a 

large allowance of ACE deviations could 

increase the amount of inadvertent 

interchange on the bulk electric system. 

The NOPR explained that Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 could allow 

balancing authorities to have a very 

large deviation from an ACE of zero and 

still be compliant with the dynamic 

values of the Balancing Authority ACE 

Limits in the proposed Reliability 

Standard.36

24. Based on this information, in the 

NOPR, the Commission expressed 

concern that Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2 may have the ‘‘unintended 

consequence’’ of (i) creating large 

unscheduled power flows that could 

unduly burden transmission operators 

and reliability coordinators in 

addressing power flows that approach 

or exceed system operating limits or 

interconnection reliability operating 

limits, and (ii) causing significant 

increases in inadvertent interchange 

resulting in an adverse reliability impact 

between real-time operations and day 

and/or hour-ahead analysis performed 

by reliability coordinators and 

transmission operators.37

25. In order to evaluate the effect of 

the Reliability Standard on unscheduled 

power flows and inadvertent 

interchange and the potential impact on 

the Bulk-Power System, the NOPR 

proposed to direct NERC to submit an 

informational filing to monitor 

unscheduled flows and inadvertent 

interchange in the Western and Eastern 

Interconnections 90 days after the end 

of the two-year period following 

implementation. Specifically, the NOPR 

proposed that NERC’s informational 

filing provide ‘‘the number of SOL/IROL 

violations, the date, time, location, the 

duration and magnitude, due to 

unscheduled power flows and 

inadvertent interchange within [the] 

Western and Eastern 

Interconnections.’’ 38 Further, the NOPR 

stated that the Commission expects 

NERC will immediately propose and 

implement adequate remedies should 

there be increases in unscheduled flow 

and inadvertent interchange causing 

reliability issues under the new 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit during 

the two-year period covered by the 

informational filing. 

Comments 

26. NERC states that it does not 

support the Commission’s proposed 

directive to submit an informational 

filing with the data described in the 

NOPR, because it ‘‘will not conclusively 

demonstrate that large ACE swings are 

correlated with unscheduled power 

flow and Inadvertent Interchange 

causing SOL/IROL exceedances.’’ 39

NERC asserts that the proposed 

directive ‘‘is based on the speculative 

opinions of commenters, supported by 

no documented evidence that the 

proposed Reliability Standard 

contributes to unscheduled power flows 

and Inadvertent Interchange,’’ and 

would not be an effective use of NERC 

or industry resources.40

27. NERC states that the field trial has 

not produced any ‘‘positive evidence’’ 

establishing that implementing the 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit causes 

high ACE swings negatively affecting 

frequency, or relates to unscheduled 

power flows or inadvertent interchange 

causing SOL/IROL exceedances. 

Further, NERC asserts that ‘‘high ACE 

swings are not necessarily determinative 

of overloading transmission or SOL/

IROL exceedances because SOL/IROL 

exceedances can still occur when ACE 

is zero.’’ 41

28. While disagreeing with the 

directive as proposed in the NOPR, 

NERC states that as a ‘‘first step’’ to 

addressing the Commission’s concerns, 

and to ‘‘investigate a possible 

correlation between [the] Balancing 

Authority ACE Limit and SOL/IROL 

exceedances as attributed to Inadvertent 

Interchange and unscheduled power 

flows,’’ NERC will provide the 

Commission with a ‘‘set of baseline 

data’’ including ‘‘tracking the number of 

SOL/IROL exceedances occurring in 

each interconnection where a Balancing 

Authority’s ACE was within BAAL.’’ 42

NERC states that it would include this 

data in an informational filing, with the 

commitment to work with Commission 

staff to analyze the data. 

29. EEI, Indicated RTOs, NYISO, 

WAPA, APS, Duke, Tri-State, Powerex 

and BPA support the Commission’s 

proposed informational filing. While 

supporting the proposed informational 

filing, EEI believes that the Reliability 

Standard ‘‘will support stronger 

management of interconnection 

frequency.’’ 43 Indicated RTOs assert 

that ‘‘the trend in manual Time Error 

Correction is a better indicator of 

unscheduled flows. Operating limit 

violations resulting from unscheduled 

power flows and the trend in Time Error 

Correction will enable the Commission 

to evaluate the severity of any issues, 

and NERC and/or its operating 

committees routinely collect that 

information.’’ 44

30. NYISO, Tri-State, BPA and 

Powerex, while supporting the 

Commission’s proposal, urge that the 

Commission require NERC to provide 

more data in the informational filing 

than described in the NOPR. NYISO 

states that NERC should provide ACE 

and Balancing Authority ACE Limit 

values for the SOL/IROL violations 

associated with unscheduled power 

flows or inadvertent interchange. BPA 

asserts that NERC should examine all 

unscheduled power flows resulting from 

the implementation of the Balancing 

Authority ACE Limit, not just those 

related to SOL/IROL violations. BPA 

further states that NERC should be 

required to conduct an analysis every 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 77 / Wednesday, April 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 22399 

45BPA Comments at 7. 

46Powerex Comments at 7. 

47 Id. at 8. 

48 Id. at 9. 

49 Id. at 22. 50Powerex Comments at 24–29. 51 Indicated RTOs Comments at 5. 52EEI Comments at 4 (citing Field Trial Report at 

13). 53 Duke Comments at 4 (citing Field Trial Report 

at 13). 

54NaturEner Comments at 1. 

55 Id. at 2–3. 

56NYISO supports the inclusion of the Eastern 

Interconnection within the scope of the information 

filing. NYISO described the fundamental concern 

that ‘‘BAL–001–2 will allow balancing authorities 

to have a very large deviation from an Area Control 

Error (‘‘ACE’’)—and potentially negatively affect 

reliability—yet still be compliant with the dynamic 

values of the [Balancing Authority ACE Limits 

calculated pursuant to the proposed Reliability 

Standard.’’ NYISO Comments at 1. 

57EEI Comments at 1–2. 

58Twenty-seven balancing authorities 

participated in the Western Interconnection field 

trial and eleven in the Eastern Interconnection. 

Field Trial Report at 11, 14. 

59NERC Comments at 8. 

six months for the initial two year 

implementation period, including an 

examination of loss of supply events 

and their impact on frequency 

recovery.45

31. BPA states that the proposed 

definition of ‘‘Reporting ACE’’ should 

be revised to include the ATEC upper 

payback limit term ‘‘Lmax’’ and the 

bounds of that upper payback limit for 

IATEC. BPA notes that, while 

incorporating the WECC regional 

variance contained in currently effective 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–1 may 

have been NERC’s intent, this cannot be 

accomplished without including the 

‘‘Lmax’’ upper payback limit and the 

bounds of that upper payback limit in 

the NERC Glossary. BPA asserts that 

without this language in the definition, 

the ATEC payback does not have an 

upper bound, which could cause some 

significant unscheduled flows in the 

interconnection, because a balancing 

authority with a large primary 

inadvertent accumulation could pay 

most of it off within a three hour period. 

32. While supporting the objective of 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2, 

Powerex expresses concern that ‘‘the 

‘inadvertent interchange’ permitted by 

the modified standard will have a 

material, adverse impact on the western 

transmission markets subject to the 

Commission’s jurisdiction . . . [and] 

Powerex believes that features of the 

proposed standard could be used to 

harm competition to the detriment of 

both transmission customers and system 

reliability.’’ 46 Powerex argues that the 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit ‘‘creates 

opportunities for commerciallyinterested [balancing authorities] to 

deliberately reduce their control of 

imbalances, effectively leaning on the 

grid to balance their systems. Such 

activity creates unscheduled flows on 

adjacent systems that can inequitably 

and inefficiently curtail the 

transmission capacity available to the 

transmission customers that have paid 

to use the transmission system.’’ 47

33. Powerex urges the Commission to 

‘‘take additional steps to ensure that 

implementation of the BAAL 

requirement does not thwart the 

provision of open access transmission 

service in accordance with Commission 

policies.’’ 48 Specifically, Powerex states 

that the Commission should ‘‘direct 

NERC to supplement its petition with 

information regarding any rules or 

requirements that may be in place to 

protect against potential curtailments of 

transmission customers due to 

unscheduled flows associated with 

BAAL ACEs.’’ 49 Additionally, Powerex 

asserts that NERC’s informational filing 

should describe instances in which 

unscheduled flows associated with the 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit required 

curtailment of transmission customers 

or other mitigation measures, and that 

this information should be provided 

every six months during the initial two 

year implementation period. Powerex 

also asks the Commission to ‘‘provide 

guidance concerning the creation of 

deliberate [balancing authority] 

imbalances,’’ require balancing 

authorities to disclose ACE and 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit 

information, and direct NERC to 

implement safeguards to ensure that 

balancing authorities reduce their ACEs 

before the curtailment of transmission 

customers.50 Tri-State agrees with 

Powerex’s comments. 

34. EEI, Indicated RTOs and Duke 

suggest limiting the informational filing 

to the Western Interconnection. 

Indicated RTOs state that ‘‘there has 

been a decline in the number of time 

error corrections in the Eastern 

Interconnection during the course of the 

field trial. These outcomes suggest that 

BAL–001–2 works as intended, and 

does not trigger issue with respect to 

inadvertent interchange, at least in the 

Eastern Interconnection.’’ 51 EEI asserts 

that unscheduled power flows and 

inadvertent interchange ‘‘have not been 

an issue within the Eastern 

Interconnection Field Trial, which has 

been in place now for nearly ten years. 

During this trial, approximately twothirds of the Eastern Interconnection 

operated under the BAAL measure 

without issue. Therefore, EEI does not 

envision problems arising.’’ 52 Similarly, 

Duke notes that the Field Trial Report 

specifically states that unscheduled 

power flows were not cited as problems 

within the Eastern Interconnection.53

35. NaturEner addresses the time 

component of the Balancing Authority 

ACE Limit, an issue not raised in the 

NOPR. NaturEner states that the 30 

consecutive clock-minute limitation on 

the time during which a balancing 

authority’s Reporting ACE can exceed 

its Balancing Authority ACE Limit 

should be extended to 60 consecutive 

clock-minutes. NaturEner asserts that 

the 30 minute time period provides 

insufficient time for a balancing 

authority to use market mechanisms to 

resolve imbalance events.54 Further, 

NaturEner states that if Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 is approved in its 

current form, the Commission should 

‘‘include severe loss of wind events as 

qualifying events under BAL–002, 

thereby qualifying such events as 

allowable contingency reserve events 

under which contingency reserves may 

be called upon.’’ 55

Commission Determination 

36. The Commission adopts the NOPR 

proposal regarding NERC’s submission 

of an informational filing. We determine 

that the field trial NERC conducted for 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 raised 

sufficient concerns regarding 

unscheduled power flows and 

inadvertent interchange to warrant 

NERC’s continued monitoring and 

submission of an informational filing 90 

days after the end of the two-year period 

following implementation, as proposed 

in the NOPR. Further, we find that the 

informational filing should encompass 

both the Western and Eastern 

Interconnections, as there were 

concerns about possible increases of 

SOL/IROL exceedances in both 

Interconnections.56 EEI supports 

limiting the informational filing to the 

Western Interconnection, stating that 

the Balancing Authority ACE Limit has 

‘‘been extensively used [in the Eastern 

Interconnection] for many years without 

issue.’’ 57 However, the Commission 

believes that including both 

Interconnections is reasonable, because 

less than 20 percent of balancing 

authorities in the Eastern 

Interconnection were in the field trial.58

37. We are not persuaded by NERC’s 

objection to the informational filing, 

that the field trial ‘‘produced no 

conclusive results that large ACE swings 

are correlated with unscheduled power 

flow and Inadvertent Interchange 

causing SOL/IROL exceedances.’’ 59

While the field trial may not have been 

‘‘conclusive,’’ the information in the 

report indicates the possibility of a 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

22400 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 77 / Wednesday, April 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

60Tri-State Comments at 5, APS Comments at 3, 

EEI Comments at 4, Duke Energy Comments at 3– 

4, WAPA Comments at 3–4, Powerex Comments at 

7, NYISO Comments at 1–2 and BPA Comments at 

7–8. 

61NERC Field Trial Report at 16–17, 20. 

62We leave it to NERC’s discretion whether to 

include in the informational filing time error 

correction data, as suggested by the Indicated RTOs. 

(See Indicated RTOs Comments at 5–6.) 

63Powerex Comments at 7. 

64 Id. at 8. 

65NERC May 9, 2014 Supplemental Filing at 5, 

n.8 (citing Reliability-based Control Field Trial 

Report presented at January 2013 WECC Board of 

Directors meeting at 32) (available at: https://

www.wecc.biz/Administrative/

Board%20Packet%20January%2023%202013.pdf.) 

66Powerex Comments at 17. 

67 Id. at 20. 

68Field Trial Report at 1. 

69Powerex Comments at 9. 

70Field Trial Report at 19. 

71 Id. The Commission notes that in accordance 

with Reliability Standard IRO–009–1 Requirement 

R2 and the definition for Interconnection Reliability 

Operating Limit Tv in the NERC Glossary, the 30 

minute period is provided for operators to assess 

and implement options for mitigation of an IROL. 

correlation between large ACE swings 

and unscheduled power flows that 

warrant further study and analysis. 

Thus, we agree with the commenters 

who observed that the field trial 

demonstrated clear potential for the 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit to cause 

unscheduled power flows and 

inadvertent interchange that could lead 

to SOL/IROL problems.60 While the 

Field Trial Report suggests that 

unscheduled flow events in the Western 

Interconnection may have occurred due 

to a number of factors, the Report does 

not eliminate large ACE swings as the 

cause.61 Accordingly, we conclude that 

the matter warrants further study and 

analysis, as directed. 

38. We acknowledge NERC’s 

commitment to take a ‘‘first step’’ to 

address the Commission’s concerns by 

providing baseline data, including SOL/ 

IROL exceedances where a balancing 

authority’s ACE was within its 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit. 

However, we agree with those 

commenters who urge the Commission 

to require NERC to provide more data 

than described in the NOPR. Therefore, 

we direct NERC to make an 

informational filing 90 days after the 

end of the two-year period following 

implementation that includes an 

analysis of data (all relevant events or a 

representative sample) on whether 

experience with the Balancing 

Authority ACE Limit in the first two 

years after approval has seen ACE 

swings and unscheduled power flows or 

inadvertent interchange that could 

cause SOL/IROL exceedances. However, 

if it is evident that during this two-year 

period the issues discussed above are 

creating SOL/IROL exceedances NERC 

should provide that information to the 

Commission, together with appropriate 

recommendations for mitigation, as this 

information becomes available. Further, 

NERC should also make the underlying 

data available to Commission staff upon 

request. Regarding BPA’s concerns 

about the interplay of Reliability 

Standards BAL–001–2 and BAL–002–1, 

the Commission believes those concerns 

are best addressed if and when NERC 

files with the Commission proposed 

changes to Reliability Standard BAL– 

002–1. However, we expect NERC to 

retain the data pursuant to the analysis 

directed above so that it will be 

available, if needed, to examine the 

effect of Reliability Standard BAL–002– 

1 in relation to the Balancing Authority 

ACE Limit in the future.62

39. Based on the record before us, the 

Commission is not persuaded by 

Powerex’s assertion that Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 allows inadvertent 

interchange that ‘‘will have a material, 

adverse impact on the western 

transmission markets.’’ 63 Further, there 

is no support in the record for 

Powerex’s claim that there is evidence 

that during the field trial market 

participants seized ‘‘opportunities . . . 

to deliberately reduce their control of 

imbalances, effectively leaning on their 

systems . . . resulting in an increase in 

unscheduled flows and degradation of 

transmission service in the region.’’ 64

Powerex’s broad assertions lack factual 

support in the record of this proceeding 

and are largely speculative. 

40. We also note that Powerex 

presented an analysis of the impact of 

the Balancing Authority ACE Limit on 

unscheduled flow on the California 

Oregon Intertie to WECC’s Unscheduled 

Flow Administrative Subcommittee. 

The WECC staff assessment of 

Powerex’s analysis concluded that 

‘‘[t]he results of the Powerex analysis 

are valid only within the assumptions 

they have made, but based upon actual 

path flow data we believe the 

assumptions are incorrect and lead to 

large overestimations of the RBC 

(Balancing Authority ACE Limit) impact 

on Unscheduled Flow.’’ 65 Powerex’s 

reliance on the increase in e-tag 

curtailments across Path 36 (‘‘TOT3’’ in 

eastern Wyoming and Colorado) noted 

in the WECC Performance Work Group’s 

December 2011 Quarterly Report on the 

RBC Field Trial as demonstrating that 

its concerns are ‘‘neither speculative or 

theoretical’’ is similarly unpersuasive.66

The existence of e-tag curtailments 

during the field trial does not establish 

a causal connection with the Balancing 

Authority ACE Limit, because other 

factors, such as outages at the San 

Onofre Nuclear Generating Station unit 

in California; poor hydro conditions in 

Northern California; and other outages 

impacting energy import to California 

may have contributed to the 

curtailments. However, this uncertainty 

reinforces the need for the informational 

filing and additional study directed 

herein. 

41. We determine that Powerex’s 

concerns about the possible adverse 

impacts from Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2 on reliability, as well as 

competition and transmission markets, 

are unpersuasive. While expressing 

concern about the reliability risks 

associated with implementing 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2, 

Powerex acknowledges that the extent 

to which the reliability risks it describes 

‘‘will materialize remains to be seen.’’ 67

Instead, we agree with NERC that ‘‘[t]he 

field trial report finds that the results to 

date demonstrate that the correlation 

between Requirements R1 and R2 of 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 drive 

corrective actions to support 

Interconnection frequency and 

reliability.’’ 68 With respect to Powerex’s 

concerns about the possibility that 

‘‘gaps’’ in Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2 could be ‘‘exploited to the 

detriment of transmission customers,’’ 

we encourage Powerex to engage in the 

ongoing monitoring effort and bring any 

specific instances of deliberate 

misconduct to the Commission’s 

attention if they occur.69

42. We do not adopt NaturEner’s 

proposal that the 30 consecutive clockminute time component should be 

extended to no less than 60 consecutive 

clock-minutes to allow the use of market 

mechanisms to address imbalance 

events. We note that in the Technical 

Conclusion section of the Field Trial 

Report the standard drafting team 

concluded that ‘‘[t]he selection of 30 

consecutive clock minutes is 

appropriate and actually improves 

reliability.’’ 70 This conclusion is 

supported in the Field Trial Report by 

an adequate justification for the 30 

consecutive clock-minute time period: 

[S]imilar to the approach taken to address 

an IROL where operators are provided 30 

minutes to assess options for mitigation, the 

team chose to use the more conservative limit 

of 30 minute, well within the risk-based 

criteria of the next resource loss, while also 

providing appropriate time for the operator to 

assess the current situation and take 

corrective actions as needed. Actual 

experience operating under the proposed 

standards has met with the support of all 

participating Real-time system operators.71

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 77 / Wednesday, April 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 22401 

72Regarding NaturEner’s comment that the 

Commission should require that ‘‘severe loss of 

wind events’’ be considered Qualifying Events 

under BAL–002, we decline to do so in this 

rulemaking. NaturEner Comments at 9. NaturEner 

may raise its concern in NERC’s current project to 

revise Reliability Standard BAL–002. 

73BPA Comments at 8. BPA states that NERC will 

need to retain the definition of L10 after currentlyeffective Reliability Standard BAL–001–1 is retired. 

Id. 

74NERC Comments at 9. 

75 5 CFR 1320.11. 

76NERC Petition at 12. 

77 Id. at 2. 

In light of this justification and our 

directive to NERC to monitor the 

implementation of Reliability Standard 

BAL–001–2 and submit an 

informational filing, we believe that 

NaturEner’s request for annual reviews 

of the 30 consecutive clock-minute time 

component is unnecessary.72

43. The Commission is persuaded by 

BPA’s comments that a revision to the 

definition of Reporting ACE is 

warranted. In its petition, NERC states 

that currently-effective Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–1 includes a WECC 

regional variance which has been 

incorporated into the continent-wide 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 

through the definition of Reporting 

ACE. However the definition of 

Reporting ACE does not include the 

‘‘Lmax’’ upper payback limit and the 

bounds of that upper payback limit in 

the definition. Accordingly, the 

Commission directs NERC to revise the 

definition of Reporting ACE to include 

the ‘‘Lmax’’ upper payback limit and the 

bounds of that upper payback limit 

prior to the effective date of Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–1. 

B. Need for a Regional Variance 

NOPR 

44. In the NOPR, the Commission 

sought comment on whether a regional 

variance would be necessary for those 

regions that experienced adverse 

impacts from inadvertent interchange 

during the field trial. The NOPR 

observed that the Western 

Interconnection applies a limit of four 

times a balancing authority’s L10 to limit 

ACE deviations from balancing 

authority flows that negatively impact 

the transmission system. 

Comments 

45. WAPA and BPA state that the 

Commission should direct NERC to 

include a regional variance to establish 

limits to the Balancing Authority ACE 

Limits for balancing authorities in the 

WECC before BAL–001–2 is 

implemented in the Western 

Interconnection. BPA states that 

currently in the Western 

Interconnection a limit of 4 times L10 is 

used, due to concerns with unscheduled 

flow. BPA states that WECC should 

continue to use this limit until a new 

limit is established.73 Rather than a 

regional variance, Indicated RTOs state 

that a regional standard, or adjustments 

allowed by Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2 to address inadvertent 

interchange, would be preferable. 

Commission Determination 

46. The Commission is not persuaded 

that there is a need for a regional 

variance for Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2 for use in the Western 

Interconnection. NERC stated in its 

NOPR comments that NERC will 

develop a regional variance, or a 

modification to Reliability Standard 

BAL–001–2, should NERC’s analysis 

following the implementation of the 

Reliability Standard confirm the need 

for either measure.74 We determine that 

NERC has described a sound approach 

for addressing this issue. 

V. Information Collection Statement 

47. The Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) regulations require that 

OMB approve certain reporting and 

recordkeeping (collections of 

information) imposed by an agency.75

Upon approval of a collection of 

information, OMB will assign an OMB 

control number and expiration date. 

Respondents subject to the filing 

requirements of this rule will not be 

penalized for failing to respond to these 

collections of information unless the 

collections of information displays a 

valid OMB control number. 

48. The Commission is submitting 

these reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements to OMB for its review and 

approval under section 3507(d) of the 

Paper work Reduction Act. The NOPR 

solicited comments on the 

Commission’s need for this information, 

whether the information will have 

practical utility, the accuracy of the 

provided burden estimate, ways to 

enhance the quality, utility, and clarity 

of the information to be collected, and 

any suggested methods for minimizing 

the respondent’s burden, including the 

use of automated information 

techniques. No comments were 

received. 

49. This final rule approves revisions 

to Reliability Standard BAL–001–2. 

NERC states in its petition that the 

Reliability Standard defines a new term: 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit, which 

is unique for each balancing authority 

and provides dynamic limits for a 

balancing authority’s ACE value as a 

function of the Interconnection 

frequency.76 NERC states that the 

Reliability Standard improves reliability 

by adding a frequency component to the 

measurement of a balancing authority’s 

ACE, and allows for the formation of 

‘‘Regulation Reserve Sharing Groups.’’ 

NERC’s Reliability Standard requires a 

balancing authority to balance its 

resources and demand in real-time so 

that the clock-minute average of its ACE 

does not exceed its Balancing Authority 

ACE Limit for more than 30 consecutive 

clock-minutes. Furthermore, NERC 

states that Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2 and accompanying definitions 

include the benefits of the Automatic 

Time Error Correction equation in the 

WECC-specific regional variance in 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–1.77 The 

Reliability Standard and related 

reporting requirements are applicable to 

balancing authorities and regulation 

reserve sharing groups. 

50. Public Reporting Burden: Our 

estimate below regarding the number of 

respondents is based on the NERC 

Compliance Registry as of October 17, 

2014. According to the NERC 

Compliance Registry, there are 71 

balancing authorities in the Eastern 

Interconnection, 34 balancing 

authorities in the Western 

Interconnection and one balancing 

authority in the Electric Reliability 

Council of Texas (ERCOT). The 

Commission bases individual burden 

estimates on the time needed for 

balancing authorities to develop tools 

needed to facilitate reporting that is 

required in the Reliability Standard. 

These burden estimates are consistent 

with estimates for similar tasks in other 

Commission-approved Reliability 

Standards. The following estimates 

relate to the requirements for this final 

rule in Docket No. RM14–10–000. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

22402 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 77 / Wednesday, April 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

78Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 applies to 

balancing authorities and regulation reserve sharing 

groups. However, the burden associated with the 

balancing authority complying with Requirement 

R1 is not included within this table because the 

Commission accounted for it under Commissionapproved Reliability Standards BAL–001–1. 

79The estimated hourly cost (salary plus benefits) 

of $98.17 is based on Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(BLS) information of May 2013 (and available at: 

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm) and 

is the average for an electrical engineer (NAICS 17– 

2071; $65.34/hour) and a lawyer (NAICS 23–1011; 

$128.76). 

80BA = Balancing Authority; RRSG = Regulation 

Reserve Sharing Group. 

81The $29.52/hour estimate for salary plus 

benefits is based on the BLS data of May 2013 for 

a file clerk (NAICS 43–4071). 

82Regulations Implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Order No. 486, 

FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 1986– 

1990 ¶ 30,783 (1987). 

83 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii). 

84 5 U.S.C. 601–612. 

85This figure constitutes 21.4 percent of the total 

number of affected entities. 

FERC–725R, MODIFICATIONS IN FINAL RULE IN RM14–10–000 FINAL RULE 78

Number of 

respondents 

Annual 

number of 

responses per 

respondent 

Total number 

of responses 

Average burden & 

cost per 

response 

Total annual 

burden hours & 

total annual 

cost 79

Cost per 

respondent 

($) 

(1) (2) (1)*(2) = (3) (4) (3)*(4) = (5) (5) ÷ (1) 

BA/RRSG: 80 Update and Maintain Energy Management Systems.106 1 106 8 hours per response. 

$522 (8 × $65.34). 

848 

$55,332 

$522 

BA: Record Retention 81 ....................... 106 1 106 4 ............................

$118 ......................

424 

$12,508 

$118 

Total .............................................. .................... ........................ 212 640 ........................ 1,272 

$67,840 

$640 

Title: FERC–725R Mandatory 

Reliability Standards: Resource and 

Demand Balancing (BAL) Reliability 

Standards. 

Action: Proposed revision. 

OMB Control No.: 1902–0268. 

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

institutions. 

Frequency of Responses: On 

Occasion. 

Necessity of the Information: This 

Final Rule approves Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 pertaining to 

requiring balancing authorities to 

operate such that its clock-minute 

average reporting ACE does not exceed 

its clock-minute Balancing Authority 

ACE Limits for more than 30 

consecutive clock-minutes. Requirement 

R2 provides each balancing authority a 

dynamic ACE limit that is a function of 

Interconnection frequency. Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 will provide 

dynamic limits that are balancing 

authority and Interconnection-specific. 

In addition, these ACE limits are based 

on identified Interconnection frequency 

limits to ensure the Interconnection 

returns to a reliable state when an 

individual balancing authority’s ACE or 

Interconnection frequency deviation 

contributes undue risk to the 

Interconnection. 

Internal Review: The Commission has 

reviewed Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2 and has determined that it is 

necessary to implement section 215 of 

the FPA. The requirements of Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 should conform to 

the Commission’s expectation for 

generation and demand balance 

throughout the Eastern and Western 

Interconnections as well as within the 

ERCOT Region. 

51. 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, 

email: DataClearance@ferc.gov, phone: 

(202) 502–8663, fax: (202) 273–0873]. 

Comments on the requirements of this 

rule may also be sent to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget, 

Washington, DC 20503 [Attention: Desk 

Officer for the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, phone: (202) 

395–4638, fax: (202) 395–7285]. For 

security reasons, comments to OMB 

should be submitted by email to: oira_

submission@omb.eop.gov. Comments 

submitted to OMB should include 

FERC–725R and Docket Number RM14– 

10–000. 

VI. Environmental Analysis 

52. 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.82 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.83 The 

actions here fall within this categorical 

exclusion in the Commission’s 

regulations. 

VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Certification 

53. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 

1980 (RFA) 84 generally requires a 

description and analysis of proposed 

rules that will have significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The NOPR 

stated that, as shown in the information 

collection section, Reliability Standard 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 applies 

to 106 entities. Comparison of the 

applicable entities with the 

Commission’s small business data 

indicates that approximately 23 are 

small business entities.85 Of these, the 

Commission estimates that 

approximately five percent, or one of 

these small entities, will be affected by 

the new requirements of Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2. 

54. In the NOPR, the Commission 

estimated that the small entities that 

will be affected by proposed Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 will incur onetime compliance cost up to $109,180 

(i.e., the cost of updating and 

maintaining energy management 

systems), resulting in cost of 

approximately $1,030 per balancing 

authority and/or Regulation Reserve 

Sharing Groups. The Commission has 

revised the cost for small entities that 

will be affected by Reliability Standard 

BAL–001–2 and estimates that small 

entities will incur a one-time 

compliance cost up to $55,332 (i.e., the 

cost of updating and maintaining energy 

management systems), resulting in cost 

of approximately $522 per balancing 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 77 / Wednesday, April 22, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 22403 

86See 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

authority and/or Regulation Reserve 

Sharing Group. These costs represent an 

estimate of the costs a small entity could 

incur if the entity is identified as an 

applicable entity. The Commission does 

not consider the estimated cost per 

small entity to have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The 

Commission did not receive any 

comments regarding this aspect of the 

NOPR. Based on the above, the 

Commission certifies that this Final 

Rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Accordingly, 

no regulatory flexibility analysis is 

required. 

VIII. Document Availability 

55. In addition to publishing the full 

text of this document in the Federal 

Register, the Commission provides all 

interested persons an opportunity to 

view and/or print the contents of this 

document via the Internet through the 

Commission’s Home Page (http://

www.ferc.gov) and in the Commission’s 

Public Reference Room during normal 

business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 

Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., 

Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426. 

56. From the Commission’s Home 

Page on the Internet, this information is 

available on eLibrary. The full text of 

this document is available on eLibrary 

in PDF and Microsoft Word format for 

viewing, printing, and/or downloading. 

To access this document in eLibrary, 

type the docket number excluding the 

last three digits of this document in the 

docket number field. 

57. User assistance is available for 

eLibrary and the Commission’s Web site 

during normal business hours from the 

Commission’s Online Support at (202) 

502–6652 (toll free at 1–866–208–3676) 

or email at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, 

or the Public Reference Room at (202) 

502–8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. Email 

the Public Reference Room at 

public.referenceroom@ferc.gov. 

IX. Effective Date and Congressional 

Notification 

58. This Final Rule is effective June 

22, 2015. The Commission has 

determined, with the concurrence of the 

Administrator of the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs of 

OMB, that this rule is not a ‘‘major rule’’ 

as defined in section 351 of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996.86 The Commission 

will submit the final rule to both houses 

of Congress and to the General 

Accountability Office. 

By the Commission. 

Issued: April 16, 2015. 

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2015–09227 Filed 4–21–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Food and Drug Administration 

21 CFR Parts 1 and 16 

[Docket No. FDA–2013–N–0365] 

Administrative Detention of Drugs 

Intended for Human or Animal Use; 

Correction 

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, 

HHS. 

ACTION: Final rule; correction. 

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug 

Administration (FDA) is correcting a 

final rule entitled ‘‘Administrative 

Detention of Drugs Intended for Human 

or Animal Use’’ that appeared in the 

Federal Register of May 29, 2014 (79 FR 

30716). The rule sets forth the 

procedures for detention of drugs 

believed to be adulterated or 

misbranded and amends the scope of 

FDA’s part 16 regulatory hearing 

procedures to include the 

administrative detention of drugs. The 

rule published with incorrect statements 

regarding the impact of the final rule on 

small entities. This document corrects 

those errors. 

DATES: Effective April 22, 2015 and 

applicable beginning June 30, 2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Emily Leongini, Office of Regulatory 

Affairs, Food and Drug Administration, 

10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 32, 

Rm. 4339, Silver Spring, MD 20993– 

0002, 301–796–5300, 

FDASIAImplementationORA@

fda.hhs.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Federal Register of May 29, 2014, in FR 

Doc. 2014–12458, the following 

corrections are made: 

1. On page 30718, in the third 

column, under ‘‘Analysis of Impacts 

(Summary of the Regulatory Impact 

Analysis),’’ the last sentence of the 

second paragraph is corrected to read: 

‘‘FDA certifies that this final rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities.’’ 

2. On page 30719, in the first column, 

the third sentence of the last full 

paragraph is corrected to read: ‘‘We 

certify that this final rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities.’’ 

Dated: April 16, 2015. 

Leslie Kux, 

Associate Commissioner for Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2015–09301 Filed 4–21–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4164–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Part 263 

RIN 1810–AB19 

[Docket ID ED–2014–OESE–0050] 

Indian Education Discretionary Grants 

Program; Professional Development 

Program and Demonstration Grants for 

Indian Children Program 

AGENCY: Office of Elementary and 

Secondary Education, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Final regulations. 

SUMMARY: The Secretary amends the 

regulations that govern the Professional 

Development program and the 

Demonstration Grants for Indian 

Children program (Demonstration 

Grants program), authorized under title 

VII of the Elementary and Secondary 

Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA). The 

regulations govern the grant application 

process for new awards for each 

program for the next fiscal year in 

which competitions are conducted for 

that program and subsequent years. For 

the Professional Development program, 

the regulations enhance the project 

design and quality of services to meet 

the objectives of the program; establish 

post-award requirements; and govern 

the payback process for grants in 

existence on the date these regulations 

become effective. For the Demonstration 

Grants program, the regulations add 

new priorities, including a priority for 

native youth community projects 

(NYCPs), and new application 

requirements. 

DATES: These regulations are effective 

May 22, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Cheek, U.S. Department of Education, 

400 Maryland Avenue SW., Room 

3W207, Washington, DC 20202–6135. 

Telephone: (202) 401–0274 or by email: 

john.cheek@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 

telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay 

Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877– 

8339. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES