Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 25, 2009 / Proposed Rules 12739 

1 16 U.S.C. 791a, et seq. 

2Standards for Business Practices and 

Communication Protocols for Public Utilities, Order 

No. 676, 71 FR 26,199 (May 4, 2006), FERC Stats. 

& Regs., Regulations Preambles ¶ 31,216 (Apr. 25, 

2006), reh’g denied, Order No. 676–A, 116 FERC 

¶ 61,255 (2006), Order No. 676–B, 72 FR 21,095 

(Apr. 30, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations 

Preambles ¶ 31,246 (Apr. 19, 2007), Order No. 676– 

C, 73 FR 43,848 (July 29, 2008), FERC Stats. & Regs., 

Regulations Preambles ¶ 31,274 (July 21, 2008), 

Order No. 676–D, granting clarification and denying 

reh’g, 124 FERC ¶ 61,317 (2008); Standards for 

Business Practices for Interstate Natural Gas 

Pipelines, Order No. 698, 72 FR 38,757 (July 16, 

2007), FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 

¶ 31,251 (June 25, 2007), order on clarification and 

reh’g, Order No. 698–A, 121 FERC ¶ 61,264 (2007). 

3Preventing Undue Discrimination and 

Preference in Transmission Service, Order No. 890, 

72 FR 12,266 (March 15 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs., 

Regulations Preambles ¶ 31,241 (2007) (Order No. 

890); order on reh’g, Order No. 890–A, 73 FR 2984 

(Jan. 16, 2008), FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations 

Preambles ¶ 31,261 (2007) (Order No. 890–A); order 

on reh’g and clarification, Order No. 890–B, 123 

FERC ¶ 61,299 (2008). 

4See Standards for Business Practices and 

Communication Protocols for Public Utilities, 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 72 FR 8318 (Feb. 

27, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs., Proposed Regs. 

¶ 32,612 at P 3 (Feb. 20, 2007). 

5 Id. 

any airplane to which the AMOC applies, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector 

(PI) in the FAA Flight Standards District 

Office (FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local 

FSDO. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer or other source, use these 

actions if they are FAA-approved. Corrective 

actions are considered FAA-approved if they 

are approved by the State of Design Authority 

(or their delegated agent). You are required 

to assure the product is airworthy before it 

is returned to service. 

(3) Reporting Requirements: For any 

reporting requirement in this AD, under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act 

(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has 

approved the information collection 

requirements and has assigned OMB Control 

Number 2120–0056. 

Related Information 

(h) Refer to MCAI EASA AD No.: 2009– 

0031, dated February 18, 2009; and RUAG 

Aerospace Defence Technology Dornier 228 

Alert Service Bulletin ASB–228–279, dated 

December 19, 2008, for related information. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on March 

19, 2009. 

John R. Colomy, 

Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. E9–6558 Filed 3–24–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 38 

[Docket No. RM05–5–013] 

Standards for Business Practices and 

Communication Protocols for Public 

Utilities 

March 19, 2009. 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (Commission) 

proposes to incorporate by reference in 

its regulations the latest version 

(Version 002.1) of certain business 

practice standards adopted by the 

Wholesale Electric Quadrant of the 

North American Energy Standards 

Board (NAESB). NAESB’s Version 002.1 

Standards mainly modify NAESB’s 

Version 001 Standards in response to 

Order Nos. 890, 890–A, and 890–B. 

DATES: Comments on the proposed rule 

are due April 24, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by Docket No. RM05–5–013, 

by one of the following methods: 

• Agency Web Site: http://ferc.gov. 

Follow the instructions for submitting 

comments via the eFiling link found in 

the Comment Procedures Section of the 

preamble. 

• Mail: Commenters unable to file 

comments electronically must mail or 

hand deliver an original and 14 copies 

of their comments to the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426. Please refer to 

the Comment Procedures Section of the 

preamble for additional information on 

how to file paper comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ryan M. Irwin (technical issues), Office 

of Energy Market Regulation, Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 

First Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20426, (202) 502–6454. 

Valerie Roth (technical issues), Office of 

Energy Market Regulation, Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 

First Street, NE., Washington, DC 

20426, (202) 502–8538. 

Gary D. Cohen (legal issues), Office of 

the General Counsel, Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, 888 First 

Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, 

(202) 502–8321. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

1. In this Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking (NOPR), the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission (Commission) 

proposes to amend its regulations at 18 

CFR 38.2 under the Federal Power Act 1

to incorporate by reference the latest 

version (Version 002.1) of certain 

business practice standards adopted by 

the Wholesale Electric Quadrant (WEQ) 

of the North American Energy Standards 

Board (NAESB). These revised 

standards update earlier versions that 

the Commission previously 

incorporated by reference into its 

regulations at 18 CFR 38.2 in Order Nos. 

676, 676–B, 698, and 676–C,2 as well as 

the Version 002.0 standards that NAESB 

filed with the Commission on 

September 2, 2008. The new and revised 

standards that NAESB adopted in its 

Version 002.0 and 002.1 standards 

implement requirements of Order Nos. 

890, 890–A, and 890–B.3 In addition, 

NAESB developed standards to support 

the Commission’s eTariff program, 

modified the Commercial Timing Table 

(WEQ–004 Appendix D) and 

Transmission Loading Relief Standards 

(WEQ–008) to provide clarity and align 

NAESB’s business practice standards 

with the reliability standards adopted 

by the North American Electric 

Reliability Corporation (NERC), revised 

the Manual Time Error Correction 

Standards (WEQ–006) to maintain 

consistency with revised NERC 

Standard BAL–004, and amended 

certain ancillary services definitions 

appearing in the Open Access SameTime Information Systems (OASIS) 

Standards (WEQ–001) relating to the 

inclusion of demand resources as part of 

ancillary services. 

I. Background 

2. NAESB is a non-profit standards 

development organization established in 

January 2002 that serves as an industry 

forum for the development of business 

practice standards. These standards 

promote a seamless marketplace for 

wholesale and retail natural gas and 

electricity.4 Since 1995, NAESB and its 

predecessor, the Gas Industry Standards 

Board, have been accredited members of 

the American National Standards 

Institute (ANSI), complying with ANSI’s 

requirements that its standards reflect a 

consensus of the affected industries.5

3. NAESB’s standards include 

business practices that streamline the 

transactional processes of the natural 

gas and electric industries, as well as 

communication protocols and related 

standards designed to improve the 

efficiency of communication within 

each industry. NAESB supports all four 

quadrants of the gas and electric 

industries—wholesale gas, wholesale 

electric, retail gas, and retail electric. All 

participants in the gas and electric 

industries are eligible to join NAESB 


PWALKER on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
12740 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 25, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

6 Id. P 4. 

7 Id. P 5. 

8Standards for Business Practices and 

Communication Protocols for Public Utilities, 

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 70 FR 28,222 ((May 

17, 2005), FERC Stats. & Regs., Proposed Regs. ¶ 

32,582, P 13 (May 9, 2005). 

9See n.2 supra. 

10See NAESB supplemental report dated Nov. 14, 

2008. 

11The Commission addresses the associated 

reliability standards proposed by NERC in a 

companion Notice of Proposed Rulemaking being 

issued in Docket No. RM08–19–000. 

12On March 12, 2009, NAESB submitted a report 

to the Commission documenting its ratification of 

the Version 002.1 standards. 

13We do not propose to incorporate by reference 

in the Commission’s regulations the following 

standards: Standards of Conduct for Electric 

Transmission Providers (WEQ–009); Contracts 

Related Standards (WEQ–010); and WEQ/WGQ 

eTariff Related Standards (WEQ–014). We do not 

propose to incorporate WEQ–009 into the 

Commission’s regulations because it contains no 

substantive standards and merely serves as a 

placeholder for future standards. We do not propose 

to incorporate WEQ–010 because this standard 

contains an optional NAESB contract regarding 

funds transfers and the Commission does not 

require utilities to use such contracts. In addition, 

we do not propose to incorporate WEQ–014, eTariff 

Related Standards, because the Commission already 

has adopted standards and protocols for electronic 

tariff filing based on the NAESB standards. See 

Electronic Tariff Filings, 73 FR 57,515 (Oct. 3, 

2008), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,276 (Sept. 19, 2008). 

Also, we do not propose to incorporate NAESB’s 

interpretation of its standards on Gas/Electric 

Coordination (WEQ–011) by reference in the 

regulations. While interpretations may provide 

useful guidance, they are not determinative and we 

will not require utilities to comply with 

interpretations. Lastly, as discussed more 

and participate in standards 

development.6

4. NAESB develops its standards 

under a consensus process so that the 

standards draw support from a wide 

range of industry members. NAESB’s 

procedures are designed to ensure that 

all industry members can have input 

into the development of a standard, 

whether or not they are members of 

NAESB.7 Furthermore, each standard 

the WEQ adopts is supported by a 

consensus of the six industry segments: 

transmission, generation, marketer/ 

brokers, distribution/load serving 

entities, end users, and independent 

grid operators/planners. Under the WEQ 

process, for a standard to be approved, 

it must receive a super-majority vote of 

67 percent of the members of the WEQ’s 

Executive Committee with support from 

at least 40 percent of each of the six 

industry segments. For final approval, 

67 percent of the WEQ’s general 

membership must ratify the standards.8

5. In a series of Orders,9 the 

Commission has incorporated certain of 

NAESB’s standards into its regulations. 

These standards include standards for 

business practices as well as standards 

and protocols for electronic 

communication, and business practice 

standards related to reliability standards 

promulgated by NERC and approved by 

the Commission. In Order No. 698, the 

Commission also incorporated by 

reference into its regulations the NAESB 

Gas/Electric Coordination Standards 

(WEQ–011). These standards 

established communication protocols 

between interstate natural gas pipelines 

and electric power plant operators 

designed to enhance reliability by 

improving communication between the 

gas and electric industries relating to the 

scheduling of gas-fired generators. 

6. On September 2, 2008, NAESB 

reported to the Commission that its 

WEQ Executive Committee had 

approved Version 002.0 of its business 

practice standards.10 The standards 

were published on September 30, 2008. 

NAESB states that its leadership 

responded to Order Nos. 890, 890–A, 

and 890–B, by requesting that its 

Electronic Scheduling Subcommittee/ 

Information Technology Subcommittee 

(ESS/ITS) and its Business Practice 

Subcommittee (BPS) coordinate efforts 

to address the issues raised by those 

orders. NAESB also states that, in 

formulating its work schedule, it 

distinguished between the findings in 

Order No. 890 that called for a specific 

completion date and other tasks that 

were less time sensitive and developed 

a work schedule to allow completion of 

the more time-sensitive items earlier in 

the process. As part of this process, 

NAESB states that the ESS/ITS and BPS 

worked in close coordination with the 

pertinent NERC committees to draft 

business practice standards on Order 

No. 890 issues that complement NERC’s 

reliability standards related to these 

issues, so that the standards for both 

organizations will be consistent.11

7. While the majority of the revisions 

made in NAESB’s Version 002.0 

Standards were adopted in response to 

Order Nos. 890, 890–A, and 890–B, the 

Version 002.0 Standards also include: 

(1) The eTariff related standards 

developed by NAESB in coordination 

with Commission staff and the electric, 

gas, and oil industries; (2) modifications 

to WEQ’s existing interconnection time 

monitor standards in the Manual Time 

Error Corrections Standards (WEQ–006) 

to ensure the NAESB standards remain 

consistent with NERC’s BAL–004 

standard; and (3) the explicit inclusion 

of demand resources in the definitions 

of certain ancillary services. 

8. On February 19, 2009, NAESB 

notified the Commission that the WEQ 

Executive Committee had approved its 

Version 002.1 standards, which include 

both new standards and modifications 

to existing Version 002.0 standards.12

The Version 002.1 standards include 

new standards related to capacity 

benefit margin and rollover rights, and 

were developed in response to Order 

Nos. 890, 890–A, and 676. Additional 

modifications included in the Version 

002.1 standards include: (1) 

Modifications to existing standards 

pertaining to rollover rights; (2) 

modifications to the Coordinate 

Interchange Timing Tables contained in 

Appendix D of the Coordinate 

Interchange Standards (WEQ–004) to 

clarify the differences in timing 

requirements for the Western Electricity 

Coordinating Council and all other 

interconnections, complementary to the 

NERC reliability standards; and (3) 

modifications to the Transmission 

Loading Relief—Eastern Interconnection 

Standards (WEQ–008) to add clarity and 

ensure that the business practice 

standards are consistent with NERC 

reliability standard IRO–006. 

9. In total, NAESB’s WEQ Version 

002.1 business practice standards 

include the following standards: 

• Open Access Same-Time 

Information Systems (OASIS), Version 

1.5 (WEQ–001); 

• Open Access Same-Time 

Information Systems (OASIS) Standards 

& Communications Protocols, Version 

1.5 (WEQ–002); 

• Open Access Same-Time 

Information Systems (OASIS) Data 

Dictionary, Version 1.5 (WEQ–003); 

• Coordinate Interchange (WEQ–004); 

• Area Control Error (ACE) Equation 

Special Cases (WEQ–005); 

• Manual Time Error Correction 

(WEQ–006); 

• Inadvertent Interchange Payback 

(WEQ–007); 

• Transmission Loading Relief— 

Eastern Interconnection (WEQ–008); 

• Standards of Conduct for Electric 

Transmission Providers (WEQ–009); 

• Contracts Related Standards (WEQ– 

010); 

• Gas/Electric Coordination (WEQ– 

011); 

• Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) 

(WEQ–012); 

• Open Access Same-Time 

Information Systems (OASIS) 

Implementation Guide, Version 1.5 

(WEQ–013); and 

• WEQ/WGQ eTariff Related 

Standards (WEQ–014). 

II. Discussion 

10. We propose to incorporate by 

reference into the Commission’s 

regulations the NAESB WEQ Version 

002.1 standards, with certain 

exceptions.13 The Version 002.1 


PWALKER on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 25, 2009 / Proposed Rules 12741 

specifically in note 18, infra, we do not propose to 

incorporate by reference certain portions of WEQ– 

001. 

14 In this NOPR, the Commission is proposing to 

incorporate by reference into the Commission’s 

regulations Version 002.1 of NAESB’s business 

practice standards. These standards have been 

updated to include all revisions to the standards 

since Version 001. Thus, some of the revisions 

included in Version 002.1 were made from the 

Version 002.0 standards and others were made from 

the Version 001 standards. Given that NAESB’s 

Version 002.1 Standards represent the most up-todate version of NAESB’s business practice 

standards, we believe it is more productive for this 

NOPR to address this set of standards, rather than 

the Version 002.0 standards. Given our proposals in 

this NOPR, we do not see the need to propose any 

separate action addressing NAESB’s Version 002.0 

standards. Therefore, the proceeding in Docket No. 

RM05–5–007 is moot. 

15See P 4 supra. 

16Pub L. No. 104–113, 12(d), 110 Stat. 775 (1996), 

15 U.S.C. 272 note (1997). 

17See Order No. 676, P 100. 

18Consistent with the Commission’s 

determination in Order Nos. 676 and 676–C, we are 

not proposing to incorporate by reference Standards 

001–0.1, 001–0.9 through 001–0.13, and 001–1.0 

through 001–1.8 because these standards merely 

restate Commission regulations and Standard 001– 

9.7 because it is not consistent with the 

Commission’s policy on redirects. Order No. 676, P 

51 & n.40. 

19Standards of Conduct for Transmission 

Providers, Order No. 717, 73 FR 63,796 (Oct. 27, 

2008), FERC Stats. & Regs ¶ 31,280 (2008), reh’g 

pending. 

20Order No. 890, P 1043–47. 

standards will update the Version 001 

standards currently incorporated by 

reference into the Commission’s 

regulations.14

11. NAESB adopted the majority of 

the changes in the Version 002.1 

standards to support Order Nos. 890, 

890–A, and 890–B, in which the 

Commission addressed and remedied 

opportunities for undue discrimination 

under the pro forma open access 

transmission tariff (OATT). While many 

of the Version 002.1 standards simply 

revise or update existing standards, 

some of these standards prescribe new 

business practices to accommodate the 

reforms adopted in Order No. 890. For 

example, NAESB has developed 

business practice and technical 

standards to support conditional firm 

service. Additionally, NAESB 

developed standards for the posting of 

narratives explaining changes in 

available transfer capability and total 

transfer capability, underlying load 

forecast assumptions for available 

transfer capability calculations and 

actual peak load, as well as metrics 

relating to the provision of transmission 

service and the completion of planning 

studies. Specific additions and revisions 

included in the NAESB WEQ Version 

002.1 standards are discussed below. 

12. NAESB approved the Version 

002.1 standards under its consensus 

procedures.15 Adoption of consensus 

standards is appropriate because the 

consensus process helps to ensure the 

reasonableness of the standards by 

requiring that the standards draw 

support from a broad spectrum of all 

segments of the industry. Moreover, 

since the industry itself has to conduct 

business under these standards, the 

Commission’s regulations should reflect 

those standards that have the widest 

possible support. In section12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (NTT&AA), 

Congress affirmatively requires federal 

agencies to use technical standards 

developed by voluntary consensus 

standards organizations, like NAESB, as 

a means to carry out policy objectives or 

activities determined by the agencies 

unless use of such standards would be 

inconsistent with applicable law or 

otherwise impractical.16

13. We propose that, once the 

Commission incorporates these 

standards by reference into its 

regulations, public utilities must 

implement these standards even before 

they have updated their tariffs to 

incorporate these changes. The 

Commission is also proposing, 

consistent with our regulation at 18 CFR 

35.28(c)(1)(vii), to require each public 

utility to revise its OATT to include the 

Version 002.1 WEQ standards that we 

are proposing to incorporate by 

reference herein. For standards that do 

not require implementing tariff 

provisions, the Commission is 

proposing to permit the public utility to 

incorporate the WEQ standard by 

reference in its OATT. We are not, 

however, proposing to require a separate 

tariff filing to accomplish this change. 

Consistent with our prior practice, we 

are proposing to give public utilities the 

option of including these changes as 

part of an unrelated tariff filing.17

A. OASIS Standards 

14. In the NAESB WEQ Version 002.1 

standards, NAESB has developed new 

standards and revised existing standards 

relating to OASIS to ensure consistency 

with certain policies articulated by the 

Commission in Order Nos. 890, 890–A 

and 890–B. A number of standards that 

the Commission directed transmission 

providers to develop have been 

included by WEQ in the Version 002.1 

OASIS Standards, which include: (1) 

Open Access Same-Time Information 

Systems (OASIS), Version 1.5 (WEQ– 

001); (2) Open Access Same-Time 

Information Systems (OASIS) Standards 

& Communication Protocols, Version 1.5 

(WEQ–002); (3) Open Access SameTime Information Systems (OASIS) Data 

Dictionary, Version 1.5 (WEQ–003); and 

(4) Open Access Same-Time Information 

Systems (OASIS) Implementation 

Guide, Version 1.5 (WEQ–013). In 

addition, NAESB’s WEQ Version 002.1 

standards include various minor 

revisions to the OASIS Standards. 

15. In this NOPR, we propose to 

incorporate by reference into the 

Commission’s regulations the Version 

002.1 OASIS Standards (i.e., WEQ–001, 

WEQ–002, WEQ–003, and WEQ–013), 

with certain exceptions.18

16. We note that Standard 001–13.1.2, 

which requires the posting of Standards 

of Conduct-related information, 

contains references to various 

Commission regulations that were 

subsequently revised in Order No. 

717.19 Thus, these references are no 

longer accurate and the information 

required to be posted by this standard 

does not conform, in some instances, to 

the Commission’s current requirements. 

We understand that NAESB is working 

on making a revision to this standard. 

Because the standard contains posting 

requirements that are still applicable, 

we propose to incorporate this standard 

by reference. However, we clarify that, 

until we adopt a revised standard, we 

do not propose to require public utilities 

to comply with any portion of the 

standard that requires information to be 

posted in a manner inconsistent with 

Order No. 717. 

1. Conditional Firm Service 

17. In the OASIS Standards, NAESB 

has included a number of standards that 

support conditional firm service as 

envisioned by the Commission in Order 

Nos. 890 and 890–A. NAESB has 

developed business practice standards 

to facilitate the implementation of 

conditional firm service, relying on the 

Commission’s description of the 

attributes of that service in Order No. 

890.20 Specifically, NAESB developed 

Standards 001–21 through 001–21.5.5 

on the Conditional Curtailment Option, 

the term that NAESB uses to describe 

conditional firm service. These 

standards address: (1) The limitations 

and conditions under which the 

Conditional Curtailment Option is 

offered; (2) the posting requirements for 

information concerning a Conditional 

Curtailment Option reservation and its 

curtailment criteria; (3) the process for 

performing the biennial reassessment; 

(4) the curtailment of a Conditional 

Curtailment Option reservation; and (5) 

the redirect, transfer, and resale of a 

Conditional Curtailment Option 

reservation. 


PWALKER on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
12742 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 25, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

21Order No. 890, P 1078; Order No. 890–A, P 592. 

22Order No. 890, P 369 and 371. 

23 Id. P 371. 

24 Id. P 369. 

25Order No. 890, P 348. 

26 Id. P 413. 

27 Id. P 212. 

28 Id. P 243. 

29The Commission reasoned that the potential for 

discrimination does not lie primarily in the choice 

of an available transfer capability calculation 

methodology, but rather in the consistent 

application of its components. Id. P 208. 

30Order No. 890, P 207. 

18. Additionally, NAESB has 

developed other standards related to 

conditional firm service in response to 

the Commission’s requests for the 

development of specific standards in 

Order Nos. 890 and 890–A.21

Specifically, NAESB has developed 

Standard 001–21.1.6, which requires 

that transmission providers offer shortterm firm service to conditional firm 

customers as capacity (that would 

alleviate the constraints associated with 

a Conditional Curtailment Option 

reservation) becomes available. In 

response to Order No. 890–A, NAESB 

has created and modified standards in 

WEQ–001, Appendix C to WEQ–001, 

WEQ–002, WEQ–003, WEQ–008 and 

WEQ–013, to provide a consistent set of 

tracking capabilities and business 

practices for tagging, as a means to 

implement conditional firm service. 

2. Available Transfer Capability 

19. NAESB developed several 

standards related to available transfer 

capability in response to Order No. 890. 

First, NAESB modified WEQ–001 to 

support the transparency reporting and 

related functions required by Order No. 

890. Second, in response to the 

available transfer capability related 

posting requirements established by the 

Commission in Order No. 890, NAESB 

has developed business practice 

standards in WEQ–001 (including 

Standards 001–14, 001–15, 001–17, 

001–18, 001–19, 001–20 and Appendix 

D), WEQ–002, WEQ–003 and WEQ–013 

(including Appendices A and B).22

20. Standard 001–14 is designed to 

meet the requirement in Order No. 890 

for transmission providers to post a 

narrative with regard to monthly or 

yearly available transfer capability 

values in instances when available 

transfer capability remains unchanged 

at a value of zero for six months or 

longer.23 Standard 001–15 is designed to 

meet the requirement in Order No. 890 

for transmission providers to post a 

brief, but specific, narrative explanation 

of the reason for a change in monthly 

and yearly available transfer capability 

values on a constrained path when a 

monthly or yearly available transfer 

capability value changes as a result of a 

10 percent change in total transfer 

capability. This standard requires the 

narrative explanation to include the 

specific events that gave rise to the 

change and the new values for available 

transfer capability on that path.24

21. Standard 001–16.1 requires 

Transmission Providers to respond to 

questions about the methodology for 

calculating available transfer capability 

and available flowgate capability. We 

interpret this standard as requiring the 

Transmission Provider to provide data 

when necessary to respond to the 

methodology questions in order to be 

consistent with the requirement in 

Order No. 890 that transmission 

providers must, upon request, ‘‘make 

available all data used to calculate 

[available transfer capability] and [total 

transfer capability] for any constrained 

paths and any system planning studies 

or specific network impact studies 

performed for customers.’’25

22. Standard 001–17 governs the 

posting of the underlying load forecast 

assumptions used by transmission 

providers to calculate available transfer 

capability and, on a daily basis, their 

actual daily peak load for the prior 

day.26

23. Another standard developed by 

NAESB in response to Order No. 890 is 

Standard 001–18, which relates to 

postbacks of capacity to available 

transfer capability. In Order No. 890, the 

Commission directed public utilities, 

working through NERC, to modify 

available transfer capability related 

standards to require transmission 

providers to account for postbacks of 

redirected services and counterflows in 

their non-firm available transfer 

capability calculations.27 In 

coordination with NERC, NAESB 

concluded that a business practice 

standard addressing counterflows was 

unnecessary because NERC had 

addressed it in the reliability standards, 

but that the postback issue necessitated 

the creation of a related business 

practice standard. Thus, NAESB 

developed Standard 001–18 and a 

related Appendix D to WEQ–001 to 

account for postbacks of capacity to 

available transfer capability. 

24. Also in response to Order No. 

890,28 NAESB has developed standards 

that establish a consistent approach for 

determining the amount of transfer 

capability that a transmission provider 

can set aside for its native load and 

other committed uses. Specifically, 

Standard 001–19 addresses 

grandfathered agreements and Standard 

001–20 addresses rollover rights. 

Furthermore, NAESB has developed 

business practice standards that 

complement NERC’s reliability 

standards for existing transmission 

commitments. These standards appear 

in WEQ–001, WEQ–003, and WEQ–013. 

25. One of the Commission’s 

objectives in Order No. 890 was to 

reduce the potential for transmission 

providers to unduly discriminate when 

they provide transmission service by 

limiting their discretion to calculate 

available transfer capability using 

unknown assumptions and 

methodologies.29 For this reason, the 

Commission found that ‘‘all [Available 

Transfer Capability] components (i.e., 

[total transfer capability], [existing 

transmission commitments], [capacity 

benefit margin], and [transmission 

reliability margin]) and certain data 

inputs, data exchange, and assumptions 

be consistent and that the number of 

industry-wide ATC calculation formulas 

be few in number, transparent and 

produce equivalent results.’’30

26. The standards establish a 

mechanism for posting available transfer 

capacity for grandfathered agreements. 

The standards, however, provide for a 

different approach to posting 

grandfathered agreements using the 

Flowgate Methodology. Under Standard 

001–19.1, transmission providers using 

the other available transfer capability 

calculation methodologies must post the 

aggregate MW value for the 

grandfathered agreements and such data 

must be posted so that it can be viewed 

and queried using the systemdata 

template. Standard 1–19.1.2 provides an 

exception for transmission providers 

using the Flowgate Methodology from 

the requirement to post an aggregate 

MW value that can be viewed and 

queried using the systemdata template. 

Instead, it requires that the transmission 

provider must post a list of 

Grandfathered Agreements with MW 

values that are expected to be scheduled 

or expected to flow. The standards, 

therefore, permit transmission providers 

using Available Transfer Capability 

(ATC) calculation methodologies other 

than the Flowgate Methodology to post 

less detailed information concerning 

grandfathered agreements than those 

using the Flowgate Methodology, but 

information concerning grandfathered 

agreements posted by those using the 

Flowgate Methodology is not accessible 

through the systemdata template. 

3. ATC Information Link 

27. The WEQ Version 002.1 standards 

establish the procedure for input of total 

transfer capability and available transfer 


PWALKER on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 25, 2009 / Proposed Rules 12743 

31These three implementation documents are 

described in the NERC reliability standards, which 

are addressed in a companion Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking being issued in Docket No. RM08–19– 

000. 

32Order No. 890, P 326. 

33See Order No. 890, P 403–04 (requiring the 

development of standard disclosure for timely 

disclosure of CEII information to those with a 

legitimate need for it). 

34Order No. 890, P 262 and Order No. 890–A, P 

68. 

35Order No. 890, P 257. See also, Order No. 890– 

A, P 68 and 83. 

36See, NAESB Version 002.1 cover letter filed on 

Feb. 19, 2009 at 69. 

37Standard 004–18.2 states that: ‘‘The 

Transmission Provider may require the 

specification of a unique Transmission Reservation 

Number in association with any request for use of 

CBM. Such requirement shall be fully documented 

in the Transmission Provider’s Business Practices 

posted on OASIS. The TSP reserves the right to 

deny any RFI requesting use of CBM if the required 

Transmission Reservation Number is not specified.’’ 

Requirement 12 of Standard MOD–004–1 requires 

transmission providers to approve, within the 

bounds of reliable operation, any arranged 

interchange using CBM that is submitted by an 

energy deficient entity under energy emergency 

alerts, if (1) CBM is available, (2) an emergency alert 

is declared within the balancing authority of the 

energy deficient entity, and (3) the energy deficient 

entity is located within the transmission provider’s 

service area. 

38Order No. 890, P 413. 

39 Id. P 1318. 

40 Id. P 1162. 

41 Id. P 1401. 

capability methodologies and values to 

be used by public utilities in calculating 

their total transfer capability and 

available transfer capability. NAESB 

developed these business practice 

standards in close coordination with the 

NERC available transfer capability 

drafting team. Furthermore, NERC and 

NAESB determined that the standards 

contained in NERC MOD–003 were 

better classified as business practice 

standards than reliability standards. As 

a result, NAESB developed Standard 

001–13.1.5, which provides for an ATC 

Information Link on OASIS. This 

standard requires that Transmission 

Providers post several links on the ATC 

Information Link, including links to 

their Available Transfer Capability 

Implementation Document (as specified 

in NERC reliability standard MOD–001– 

1), Capacity Benefit Margin 

Implementation Document (as specified 

in NERC reliability standard MOD–004– 

1), and Transmission Reserve Margin 

Implementation Document (as specified 

in NERC reliability standard MOD–008– 

1).31

28. Standard 001–13.1.5 provides that 

the posting of information on the ATC 

Information Link would be ‘‘subject to 

the Transmission Provider’s ability to 

redact certain provisions due to market, 

security or reliability sensitivity 

concerns.’’ In Order No. 890, the 

Commission acknowledged that a 

transmission provider may require 

someone seeking access to CEII 

materials or proprietary customer 

information to sign a confidentiality 

agreement.32 We expect the provision in 

NAESB Standard 001–13.1.5 for a 

transmission provider to redact 

sensitive information from postings to 

be implemented by a transmission 

provider subject to the OATT in a 

manner consistent with its obligation to 

make that information available to those 

with a legitimate need to access the 

information, subject to appropriate 

confidentiality restrictions.33

4. Capacity Benefit Margin 

29. In addition to requiring that 

transmission providers include a link to 

their Capacity Benefit Margin 

Implementation Document on the ATC 

Information Link, as discussed above, 

the Version 002.1 standards allow for 

auditing of the use of capacity benefit 

margin using OASIS. This standard was 

developed in response to Order No. 890 

and 890–A,34 and necessitated 

modifications to WEQ–001, WEQ–002, 

WEQ–003, and WEQ–013. While the 

Commission also directed that public 

utilities, working through NERC and 

NAESB, ‘‘develop clear standards for 

how the CBM value shall be 

determined, allocated across 

transmission paths, and used’’ in Order 

No. 890,35 the NAESB subcommittees 

determined that the NERC reliability 

standard MOD–004 adequately 

addressed this directive and therefore it 

was not necessary to develop any 

supporting NAESB business practice 

standards.36

30. On March 6, 2009, NERC filed 

comments with the Commission 

concerning Standard 004–18.2, 

suggesting that this Standard might be 

in conflict with Requirement 12 of 

NERC Reliability Standard MOD–004– 

1.37 After comparing the two standards, 

we do not believe that they are in 

conflict. Incorporation by reference of 

the NAESB Standard would not seem to 

relieve an entity from the independent 

obligation to comply with the NERC 

Reliability Standard. 

5. Performance Metrics 

31. In response to several posting 

requirements in Order No. 890, NAESB 

developed and adopted Standard 001– 

13.1.3, which describes the Performance 

Metrics Link that transmission 

providers must have on the OASIS. 

Under the ‘‘Transmission Service 

Requests Metrics’’ link, transmission 

providers are required to post the 

information required by the 

Commission’s regulations at 18 CFR 

37.6(i), which includes: (1) The number 

of affiliate versus non-affiliate requests 

for transmission service that have been 

rejected; and (2) the number of affiliate 

versus non-affiliate requests for 

transmission service that have been 

made. Furthermore, this posting is 

required to detail the length of service 

request (e.g., short-term or long-term) 

and the type of service requested (e.g., 

firm point-to-point, non-firm point-topoint or network service).38 Under the 

‘‘Transmission Study Metrics’’ link, 

transmission providers must post the 

information concerning performance 

metrics relating to system impact and 

facilities studies 39 required by the 

Commission’s regulations at 18 CFR 

37.6(h). Under the ‘‘Redispatch Cost’’ 

link, transmission providers must post 

information required by the 

Commission’s regulations at 18 CFR 

37.6(j)(2) regarding redispatch costs. 

This information must include each 

transmission provider’s monthly 

average cost of redispatch for each 

internal congested transmission facility 

or interface over which it provides 

redispatch service using planning 

redispatch or reliability redispatch 

under the pro forma OATT and a high 

and low redispatch cost for the month 

for each of these same transmission 

constraints.40

6. Rebid of Partial Service 

32. The WEQ Version 002.1 standards 

cover the rebid of partial service across 

a single transmission provider’s system. 

In response to Order No. 890, NAESB 

adopted business practice standards in 

its Version 002.1 standards to 

complement the OASIS Standards and 

Communication Protocol standards that 

it had already developed for the rebid of 

partial service across a single 

Transmission Provider’s system. These 

revisions appear in the OASIS 

Standards. 

7. Pre-Confirmed Transmission Service 

Requests 

33. In WEQ–001, WEQ–002 and 

WEQ–013, NAESB has developed 

business practice standards to 

complement the Commission’s policies 

regarding pre-confirmed transmission 

service requests, as articulated in Order 

No. 890. As required by Order No. 890, 

these standards ‘‘give priority only to 

pre-confirmed non-firm point-to-point 

transmission service requests and shortterm firm point-to-point transmission 

service requests’’ 41 and provide that 

‘‘longer duration requests for 

transmission service will continue to 


PWALKER on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
12744 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 25, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

42 Id. 43 Id. P 1392. 44On November 14, 2008, NAESB reported that 

these standards, among others, have been approved 

by the WEQ Executive Committee and ratified by 

the NAESB membership. 45Order No. 890, P 243. 46Although we have previously determined not 

to incorporate Standard 001–9.7 dealing with 

rollover rights and redirects, we are proposing to 

incorporate by reference Standard 001–9.5.3, which 

refers to the not-accepted Standard 001–9.7. The 

reference, however, does not affect the meaning of 

the Standard 001–9.5.3, and any redirect issues are 

governed by the Commission’s pro forma Open 

Access Transmission Tariff. 

47NAESB Version 002.1 cover letter filed on Feb. 

19, 2009 at 7. 

48NAESB reports, id., that part one of this process 

included revisions it made to the definition of 

‘‘unexercised rollover rights’’ in WEQ–001, and 

modifications to the existing standards in WEQ– 

001, WEQ–003 and WEQ–013. NAESB further 

reports, id., that in part two of this process it 

intends to revise Standard 001–9.7 as part of its 

Order No. 890 work plan, and to include this 

revision in its Version 002.2 standards. 

49Standard 001–4.7.1 states: ‘‘If the Transmission 

Provider determines there is insufficient transfer 

capability available to grant the Transmission 

Customer’s request and there is no obligation to 

provide Partial Service (or Partial Service is also not 

available in cases where the Transmission Provider 

is obligated to provide Partial Service), the 

Transmission Provider may respond by setting the 

request status to REFUSED.’’ 

50Section 15.2 of the pro forma OATT states that: 

‘‘In the event sufficient transfer capability may not 

exist to accommodate a service request, the 

Transmission Provider will respond by performing 

a System Impact Study.’’ 

51Order No. 890, P 1392. 

52NAESB Version 002.1 cover letter filed on Feb. 

19, 2009 at 8. 

53NAESB reports that this item was voted out of 

the subcommittee on June 4, 2008, passed an 

Executive Committee vote on Aug. 19, 2008, and 

the ratification process will complete on Sep. 22, 

2008. In its supplemental report dated Nov. 14, 

2008, NAESB advised that this revision was ratified 

on Sep. 22, 2008. 

54NERC filed Standard BAL–004–1 with the 

Commission for approval in Docket Nos. RM09–13– 

have priority over shorter duration 

requests for transmission service, with 

pre-confirmation serving as a tie-breaker 

for requests of equal duration.’’ 42 In 

addition, as requested by the 

Commission in Order No. 890, NAESB 

has developed a consensus solution to 

the question of whether a transmission 

customer should be prohibited from 

changing a request into a pre-confirmed 

request.43

8. Ancillary Services and Demand 

Response 

34. NAESB amended the definitions 

of certain ancillary services contained in 

WEQ–001 to reflect the definitions 

contained in the pro forma OATT as 

revised by Order No. 890. These 

definitions describe the types of 

ancillary services that are offered on 

OASIS. The revisions to the definitions 

reflect the possible role of demand 

resources in the provision of ancillary 

services by identifying non-generation 

resources capable of providing a given 

ancillary service as potential providers 

of the service. These modifications 

include revisions to Standards 001– 

2.5.2 through 001–2.5.6.44

9. Rollover Rights 

35. In the Version 002.1 standards, 

NAESB has included new standards and 

modifications to existing standards in 

WEQ–001, WEQ–003, and WEQ–013 

that relate to rollover rights. As 

discussed above, these standards were 

developed in part as a response to Order 

No. 890,45 in which the Commission 

directed public utilities, working 

through NERC and NAESB, to develop 

standards that establish a consistent 

approach for determining the amount of 

transfer capability that a transmission 

provider can set aside for its native load 

and other committed uses. However, 

these standards also include business 

practices relating to rollover rights; for 

example, Standard 001–20 describes the 

process by which Transmission 

Customers may exercise their rollover 

rights.46 The modifications to the 

standards relating to rollover rights that 

NAESB has included in its Version 

002.1 filing 47 are the result of only the 

first part of a two part process through 

which NAESB is working to develop 

standards that are consistent with the 

Commission’s policy on rollover rights 

as described in Order Nos. 676, 890, and 

890–A.48

10. Insufficient Transfer Capacity 

36. Standard 001–4.7.1 provides the 

OASIS posting procedure to be followed 

when there is insufficient transfer 

capacity to satisfy a customer’s request 

and partial service is either not required 

or is unavailable.49 While we propose to 

incorporate this standard by reference 

into our regulations, we note that it does 

not address or otherwise limit other 

obligations that might exist under the 

pro forma OATT, such as the 

requirement in section 15.2 to perform 

a System Impact Study.50

11. Miscellaneous OASIS Standards 

37. In Order No. 890, the Commission 

decided that NAESB would be the best 

entity to address the issue of making 

OASIS platforms accessible on nonWindows/Explorer computers.51

NAESB has developed standards 

concerning this issue as part of its 

OASIS Standards. Additionally, in the 

Version 002.1 standards NAESB 

modified WEQ–002, WEQ–003, and 

WEQ–013 to complement the new and 

revised standards adopted in response 

to Order No. 890. These revisions 

support annotations for available 

transfer capability, load forecast and 

actual load, rebid of partial service, preconfirmation priority, and conditional 

firm service. NAESB also added an 

Appendix C to WEQ–001 that provides 

a list of broad based OASIS exemptions 

that have been granted to specific 

groups in the electric industry by the 

Commission through its Orders and 

regulations. 

B. Business Practice Standards to 

Coordinate With Reliability Standards 

Unrelated to Order No. 890 

38. In the Version 002.1 standards for 

Coordinate Interchange, (WEQ–004), 

Area Control Error (ACE) Equation 

Special Cases (WEQ–005), Inadvertent 

Interchange Payback (WEQ–007), and 

Transmission Loading Relief—Eastern 

Interconnection (WEQ–008), NAESB has 

made minor modifications to the format 

of the standards and has revised section 

titles. 

39. In the Version 002.1 standards, 

NAESB added Standard 004–18 to the 

Coordinate Interchange Standards 

(WEQ–004), which describes the 

requirements for submitting a Request 

for Interchange that uses a Transmission 

Provider’s capacity benefit margin to 

support energy imports into a load 

balancing authority area served by the 

Transmission Provider. Additionally, 

the Version 002.1 standards include 

modifications to the timing table in 

Appendix D of the Coordinate 

Interchange Standards (WEQ–004). The 

NERC/NAESB Joint Interchange 

Scheduling Working Group modified 

previous versions of this table by 

dividing it into two separate tables, one 

that provides the timing requirements 

for the Western Electricity Coordinating 

Council and one that provides the 

timing requirements for all other 

interconnections. These tables were 

modified to reflect time changes for 

Generator-Provider Entity, Load-Serving 

Entity, and Purchase-Selling Entity 

market assessments so that they are 

concurrent with the Balancing 

Authority and Transmission Service 

Provider reliability assessments. Also, 

timeline diagrams for each table were 

added for clarification.52

40. In the Version 002.1 standards for 

Manual Time Error Correction (WEQ– 

006), NAESB has included revisions to 

maintain conformance with NERC 

Standard BAL–004.53 NAESB states that 

NERC recently revised Standard BAL– 

004 to remove inappropriate 

requirements on reliability coordinators 

that voluntarily agree to serve as 

Interconnection Time Monitors.54 In 


PWALKER on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 25, 2009 / Proposed Rules 12745 

000 and RM06–16–000 on March 12, 2009 and this 

filing is currently pending before the Commission. 

55The total annualized costs for the information 

collection is $1,172,160. This number is reached by 

multiplying the total hours to prepare responses 

(3168) by an hourly wage estimate of $370 (a 

composite estimate that includes legal, technical 

and support staff rates, $250 + $95 + $25 = $370), 

3168 hours × $370/hour = $1,172,160. 

56CFR 1320.11. 

addition, NAESB has revised a section 

title in this standard. 

41. In the Version 002.1 standards for 

Transmission Loading Relief—Eastern 

Interconnection (WEQ–008), NAESB 

made a minor modification to a 

standard to accommodate conditional 

firm service and the use of capacity 

benefit margin. Additionally, NAESB 

modified these standards to clarify the 

intended use of the nine Transmission 

Loading Relief levels addressed in the 

standards, and to ensure consistency 

between WEQ–008 and the NERC 

reliability standard IRO–006, both of 

which address transmission loading 

relief. We propose to update the 

Commission’s regulations to incorporate 

by reference Version 002.1 of these 

standards. 

C. Other Standards 

1. Gas/Electric Coordination Standards 

42. In the Version 002.1 standards for 

Gas/Electric Coordination (WEQ–011), 

NAESB made a minor correction to 

rearrange the definitions so that they 

appear in alphabetical order. We 

propose to incorporate by reference into 

the Commission’s regulations Version 

002.1 of this standard. 

2. Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) 

Standards 

43. In the Version 002.1 standards for 

Public Key Infrastructure (WEQ–012), 

NAESB made a minor revision to the 

endnote. We propose to incorporate by 

reference into the Commission’s 

regulations the updated Version 002.1 of 

this standard. 

III. Notice of Use of Voluntary 

Consensus Standards 

44. Office of Management and Budget 

Circular A–119 (section 11) (February 

10, 1998) provides that federal agencies 

should publish a request for comment in 

a NOPR when the agency is seeking to 

issue or revise a regulation proposing to 

adopt a voluntary consensus standard or 

a government-unique standard. In this 

NOPR, the Commission is proposing to 

incorporate by reference a voluntary 

consensus standard developed by the 

NAESB WEQ. 

IV. Information Collection Statement 

45. The following collections of 

information contained in this proposed 

rule have been submitted to the Office 

of Management and Budget (OMB) for 

review under section 3507(d) of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 

U.S.C. 3507(d). The Commission solicits 

comments on the Commission’s need for 

this information, whether the 

information will have practical utility, 

the accuracy of the provided burden 

estimates, ways to enhance the quality, 

utility, and clarity of the information to 

be collected, and any suggested methods 

for minimizing respondents’ burden, 

including the use of automated 

information techniques. 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 display a valid OMB 

Control number. 

46. The following burden estimate is 

based on the projected costs for the 

industry to implement revisions to the 

WEQ Standards currently incorporated 

by reference into the Commission’s 

regulations at 18 CFR 38.2 and to 

implement the new standards adopted 

by NAESB that we propose here to 

incorporate by reference. 

Data collection Number of 

respondents 

Number of 

responses per 

respondent 

Hours per 

response 

Total number 

of hours 

FERC–516 ....................................................................................................... 176 1 6 1056 

FERC–717 ....................................................................................................... 176 1 12 2112 

Totals ........................................................................................................ ........................ ........................ ........................ 3168 

Total Annual Hours for Collection: 

(Reporting and Recordkeeping, (if 

appropriate)) = 3168 hours. 

Information Collection Costs: The 

Commission seeks comments on the 

costs to comply with these 

requirements. It has projected the 

average annualized cost for all 

respondents to be the following: 55

FERC–516 FERC–717 

Annualized Capital/Startup Costs ............................................................................................................................ $390,720 $781,440 

Annualized Costs (Operations & Maintenance) ...................................................................................................... N/A 

Total Annualized Costs .................................................................................................................................... 390,720 781,440 

47. OMB regulations 56 require OMB 

to approve certain information 

collection requirements imposed by 

agency rule. The Commission is 

submitting notification of this proposed 

rule to OMB. These information 

collections are mandatory requirements. 

Title: Standards for Business Practices 

and Communication Protocols for 

Public Utilities (formerly Open Access 

Same Time Information System) (FERC– 

717); Electric Rate Schedule Filings 

(FERC–516). 

Action: Proposed collection. 

OMB Control No.: 1902–0096 (FERC– 

516); 1902–0173 (FERC–717). 

Respondents: Business or other for 

profit, (Public Utilities—Not applicable 

to small businesses). 

Frequency of Responses: One-time 

implementation (business procedures, 

capital/start-up). 

Necessity of the Information: This 

proposed rule, if implemented would 

supplement the changes the 

Commission required in Order Nos. 890, 

890–A, and 890–B to require that 

transmission services are provided on a 

basis that is just, reasonable and not 

unduly discriminatory. In addition this 

proposed rule would upgrade the 

Commission’s current business practice 

and communication standards. 


PWALKER on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
12746 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 25, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

57Regulations Implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act, Order No. 486, 52 FR 

47,897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. & Regs., 

Regulations Preambles ¶ 30,783 (1987). 

58 18 CFR 380.4. 

59See 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii), 380.4(a)(5), 

380.4(a)(27). 

60 5 U.S.C. 601–612. 

61 5 U.S.C. 605(b). 

Specifically, these standards include 

several modifications to the existing 

business practice standards as well as 

creating new standards to provide 

additional functionality for OASIS 

transactions. These practices will ensure 

that potential customers of open access 

transmission service receive access to 

information that will enable them to 

obtain transmission service on a nondiscriminatory basis and will assist the 

Commission in maintaining a safe and 

reliable infrastructure. The 

implementation of these standards and 

regulations is necessary to increase the 

efficiency of the wholesale electric 

power grid. 

48. The information collection 

requirements of this proposed rule are 

based on the transition from 

transactions being made under the 

existing business practice standards to 

conducting such transactions under the 

proposed revisions to these standards 

and to account for the burden associated 

with the new standards the Commission 

proposes to incorporate in its 

regulations. 

49. Internal Review: The Commission 

has reviewed the revised business 

practice standards and has made a 

preliminary determination that the 

proposed revisions are necessary to 

maintain consistency between the 

business practice standards and 

reliability standards on this subject. The 

Commission has assured itself, by 

means of its internal review, that there 

is specific, objective support for the 

burden estimate associated with the 

information requirements. 

50. Interested persons may obtain 

information on the reporting 

requirements by contacting the 

following: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, Attn: Michael Miller, 

Office of the Executive Director, 888 

First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, 

Tel: (202) 502–8415/Fax: (202) 273– 

0873, e-mail: michael.miller@ferc.gov. 

51. Comments concerning the 

information collections proposed in this 

NOPR and the associated burden 

estimates, should be sent to the contact 

listed above and to the Office of 

Management and Budget, Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Washington, DC 20503 [Attention: Desk 

Officer for the Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, phone: (202) 

395–7345, fax: (202) 395–7285]. 

V. 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.57 The Commission has 

categorically excluded certain actions 

from these requirements as not having a 

significant effect on the human 

environment.58 The actions proposed 

here fall within categorical exclusions 

in the Commission’s regulations for 

rules that are clarifying, corrective, or 

procedural, for information gathering, 

analysis, and dissemination, and for 

sales, exchange, and transportation of 

electric power that requires no 

construction of facilities.59 Therefore, 

an environmental assessment is 

unnecessary and has not been prepared 

in this NOPR. 

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Certification 

53. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 

1980 (RFA) 60 generally requires a 

description and analysis of final rules 

that will have significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. The regulations proposed here 

impose requirements only on public 

utilities, which generally are not small 

businesses, and, these requirements are, 

in fact, designed to benefit all 

customers, including small businesses. 

54. The Commission has followed the 

provisions of both the RFA and the 

Paperwork Reduction Act on potential 

impact on small business and other 

small entities. Specifically, the RFA 

directs agencies to consider four 

regulatory alternatives to be considered 

in a rulemaking to lessen the impact on 

small entities: tiering or establishment 

of different compliance or reporting 

requirements for small entities, 

classification, consolidation, 

clarification or simplification of 

compliance and reporting requirements, 

performance rather than design 

standards, and exemptions. As the 

Commission originally stated in Order 

No. 889, the OASIS regulations now 

known as Standards for Business 

Practices and Communication Protocols 

for Public Utilities, apply only to public 

utilities that own, operate, or control 

transmission facilities subject to the 

Commission’s jurisdiction and should a 

small entity be subject to the 

Commission’s jurisdiction, it may file 

for waiver of the requirements. This is 

consistent with the exemption 

provisions of the RFA. Accordingly, 

pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA,61

the Commission hereby certifies that the 

regulations proposed herein will not 

have a significant adverse impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

VII. Comment Procedures 

55. The Commission invites interested 

persons to submit comments on the 

matters and issues proposed in this 

notice to be adopted, including any 

related matters or alternative proposals 

that commenters may wish to discuss. 

Comments are due April 24, 2009. 

Comments must refer to Docket No. 

RM05–5–013, and must include the 

commenter’s name, the organization 

they represent, if applicable, and their 

address. Comments may be filed either 

in electronic or paper format. 

56. Comments may be filed 

electronically via the eFiling link on the 

Commission’s Web site at http:// 

www.ferc.gov. The Commission accepts 

most standard word processing formats 

and commenters may attach additional 

files with supporting information in 

certain other file formats. Commenters 

filing electronically do not need to make 

a paper filing. Commenters that are not 

able to file comments electronically 

must send an original and 14 copies of 

their comments to: Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426. 

57. All comments will be placed in 

the Commission’s public files and may 

be viewed, printed, or downloaded 

remotely as described in the Document 

Availability section below. Commenters 

on this proposal are not required to 

serve copies of their comments on other 

commenters. 

VIII. Document Availability 

58. In addition to publishing the full 

text of this document in the Federal 

Register, the Commission provides all 

interested persons an opportunity to 

view and/or print the contents of this 

document via the Internet through 

FERC’s Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) 

and in FERC’s Public Reference Room 

during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. 

to 5 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First 

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

20426. 

59. From FERC’s Home Page on the 

Internet, this information is available in 

the eLibrary. The full text of this 

document is available in the eLibrary 

both in PDF and Microsoft Word format 

for viewing, printing, and/or 

downloading. To access this document 

in eLibrary, type the docket number 


PWALKER on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 56 / Wednesday, March 25, 2009 / Proposed Rules 12747 

62NAESB’s August 29, 2008 submittal is also 

available for viewing in eLibrary. The link to this 

file is as follows: http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/ 

common/opennat.asp?fileID=11793503. 

excluding the last three digits of this 

document in the docket number field.62

60. User assistance is available for 

eLibrary and the FERC’s web site during 

our normal business hours. For 

assistance contact FERC Online Support 

at FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov or tollfree at (866) 208–3676, or for TTY, 

contact (202) 502–8659. 

List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 38 

Conflict of interests, Electric power 

plants, Electric utilities, Incorporation 

by reference, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements. 

By direction of the Commission. 

Kimberly D. Bose, 

Secretary. 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Commission proposes to amend Chapter 

I, Title 18, part 38 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations, as follows: 

PART 38—BUSINESS PRACTICE 

STANDARDS AND COMMUNICATION 

PROTOCOLS FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES 

1. The authority citation for part 38 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 791–825r, 2601–2645; 

31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 U.S.C. 7101–7352. 

2. In § 38.2, paragraphs (a)(1) through 

(11) are revised to read as follows: 

§ 38.2 Incorporation by reference of North 

American Energy Standards Board 

Wholesale Electric Quadrant standards 

(a) * * * 

(1) Open Access Same-Time 

Information Systems (OASIS), Version 

1.5 (WEQ–001, Version 002.1, March 11, 

2009) with the exception of Standards 

001–0.1, 001–0.9 through 001–0.13, 

001–1.0 through 001–1.8, and 001–9.7; 

(2) Open Access Same-Time 

Information Systems (OASIS) Standards 

& Communication Protocols, Version 1.5 

(WEQ–002, Version 002.1, March 11, 

2009); 

(3) Open Access Same-Time 

Information Systems (OASIS) Data 

Dictionary, Version 1.5 (WEQ–003, 

Version 002.1, March 11, 2009); 

(4) Coordinate Interchange (WEQ– 

004, Version 002.1, March 11, 2009); 

(5) Area Control Error (ACE) Equation 

Special Cases (WEQ–005, Version 002.1, 

March 11, 2009); 

(6) Manual Time Error Correction 

(WEQ–006, Version 002.1, March 11, 

2009); 

(7) Inadvertent Interchange Payback 

(WEQ–007, Version 002.1, March 11, 

2009); 

(8) Transmission Loading Relief— 

Eastern Interconnection (WEQ–008, 

Version 002.1, March 11, 2009); 

(9) Gas/Electric Coordination (WEQ– 

011, Version 002.1, March 11, 2009); 

(10) Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) 

(WEQ–012, Version 002.1, March 11, 

2009); and 

(11) Open Access Same-Time 

Information Systems (OASIS) 

Implementation Guide, Version 1.5 

(WEQ–013, Version 002.1, March 11, 

2009). 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. E9–6504 Filed 3–24–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 40 

[Docket Nos. RM08–19–000, RM08–19–001, 

RM09–5–000, RM06–16–005] 

Mandatory Reliability Standards for the 

Calculation of Available Transfer 

Capability, Capacity Benefit Margins, 

Transmission Reliability Margins, Total 

Transfer Capability, and Existing 

Transmission Commitments and 

Mandatory Reliability Standards for the 

Bulk-Power System 

Issued March 19, 2009. 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 215 of the 

Federal Power Act, the Commission 

proposes to approve six Modeling, Data, 

and Analysis Reliability Standards 

submitted to the Commission for 

approval by the North American Electric 

Reliability Corporation, the Electric 

Reliability Organization certified by the 

Commission. The proposed Reliability 

Standards require certain users, owners, 

and operators of the Bulk-Power System 

to develop consistent methodologies for 

the calculation of available transfer 

capability or available flowgate 

capability. 

DATES: Comments are due May 26, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number by any of 

the following methods: 

• Agency Web site: http://ferc.gov. 

Documents created electronically using 

word processing software should be 

filed in native applications or print-toPDF format and not in a scanned format. 

• Mail/Hand Delivery: Commenters 

unable to file comments electronically 

must mail or hand deliver an original 

and 14 copies of their comments to: 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 

Secretary of the Commission, 888 First 

Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mason Emnett (Legal Information), 

Office of the General Counsel, Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 

First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, 

(202) 502–6540, Cory Lankford (Legal 

Information), Office of the General 

Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 

Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–6711, 

Keith O’Neal (Technical Information), 

Office of Electric Reliability, Federal 

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 

First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, 

(202) 502–6339, Christopher Young 

(Technical Information), Office of 

Electric Reliability, Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, 888 First 

Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, 

(202) 502–6403. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

Paragraph 

numbers 

I. Background .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 

A. Order Nos. 888 and 889 ...................................................................................................................................................... 4 

B. Order Nos. 890 and 693 ...................................................................................................................................................... 8 

II. Proposed Reliability Standards ......................................................................................................................................................... 12 

A. Coordination with Business Practice Standards ............................................................................................................... 17 

B. Available Transmission System Capability, MOD–001–1 ................................................................................................ 19 

C. Capacity Benefit Margin Methodology, MOD–004–1 ........................................................................................................ 26 

D. Transmission Reliability Margin Methodology, MOD–008–1 .......................................................................................... 41 


PWALKER on PROD1PC71 with PROPOSALS