Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 2014 / Proposed Rules 70483 

1 16 U.S.C. 824(o) (2012). 

2NERC defines ‘‘Inadvertent Interchange’’ in the 

NERC Glossary of Terms Used in Reliability 

Standards (Glossary) as ‘‘[t]he difference between 

the Balancing Authority’s Net Actual Interchange 

and Net Scheduled Interchange. (IA ¥ IS)’’ 

3 ‘‘Unscheduled power flows’’ generally refers to 

the 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. 4 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2). 

5 16 U.S.C. 824o(e). 

6Rules 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). 

7North 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). 

8 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). The Commission approved 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–1 in an unpublished 

letter order, October 16, 2013 in Docket No. RD13– 

11–000. 

9 Id. P 355. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

■ 2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.9Y, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated August 6, 2014 and 

effective September 15, 2014, is 

amended as follows: 

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas 

Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More 

Above the Surface of the Earth. 

* * * * * 

ASW TX E5 Sonora, TX [New] 

JL Bar Ranch Airport, TX 

(Lat. 30°34′06′′ N., long. 100°26′39′′ W.) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 6.5-mile 

radius of JL Bar Ranch Airport. 

Issued in Fort Worth, TX, on November 13, 

2014. 

Robert W. Beck, 

Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO 

Central Service Center. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27973 Filed 11–25–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4901–14–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

18 CFR Part 40 

[Docket No. RM14–10–000] 

Real Power Balancing Control 

Performance Reliability Standard 

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission, DOE. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission proposes to 

approve Reliability Standard BAL–001– 

2 (Real Power Balancing Control 

Performance) and proposed new 

definitions submitted by the North 

American Electric Reliability 

Corporation (NERC). The proposed 

Reliability Standard is designed to 

ensure that applicable entities maintain 

system frequency within narrow bounds 

around a scheduled value. In addition, 

the Commission proposes that NERC 

submit an informational filing that 

would address the impact of the 

proposed Reliability Standard on 

inadvertent interchange and 

unscheduled power flows. 

DATES: Comments are due January 26, 

2015. 

ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by 

docket number, may be filed in the 

following ways: 

• Electronic Filing through http://

www.ferc.gov. Documents created 

electronically using word processing 

software should be filed in native 

applications or print-to-PDF format and 

not in a scanned format. 

• Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable 

to file electronically may mail or handdeliver comments to: Federal Energy 

Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the 

Commission, 888 First Street NE., 

Washington, DC 20426. 

Instructions: For detailed instructions 

on submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, 

see the Comment Procedures Section of 

this document. 

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: 

1. Under section 215 of the Federal 

Power Act (FPA),1 the Commission 

proposes to approve Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 (Real Power 

Balancing Control Performance) that the 

North American Electric Reliability 

Corporation (NERC), the Commissioncertified Electric Reliability 

Organization (ERO), submitted for 

approval. The proposed Reliability 

Standard applies to balancing 

authorities and regulation reserve 

sharing groups, and is designed to 

maintain Interconnection frequency 

within predefined frequency limits. The 

Commission also proposes to approve 

the retirement of currently-effective 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–1 

immediately prior to the effective date 

of BAL–001–2. 

2. Further, the Commission proposes 

to approve NERC’s four proposed 

definitions, associated violation risk 

factors and violation severity levels, 

implementation plan, and effective 

dates. The Commission also proposes 

that NERC submit an informational 

filing that would address the impact of 

the proposed Reliability Standard on 

inadvertent interchange 2 and 

unscheduled power flows.3

I. Background 

A. Mandatory Reliability Standards and 

Order No. 693 Directive 

3. Section 215 of the FPA requires a 

Commission-certified Electric 

Reliability Organization (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 

Reliability Standard or modification to a 

Reliability Standard if it determines that 

the Standard is just, reasonable, not 

unduly discriminatory or preferential 

and in the public interest.4 Once 

approved, the Reliability Standards may 

be enforced by NERC, subject to 

Commission oversight, or by the 

Commission independently.5

4. Pursuant to section 215 of the FPA, 

the Commission established a process to 

select and certify an ERO,6 and 

subsequently certified NERC.7 On 

March 16, 2007, the Commission issued 

Order No. 693, approving 83 of the 107 

Reliability Standards filed by NERC, 

including BAL–001–0 and a companion 

standard BAL–002–0.8 When approving 

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.’’ 9

B. Proposed Reliability Standard 

BAL–001–2 

5. On April 2, 2014, NERC filed a 

petition (Petition) seeking approval of 

proposed Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2, four new definitions to be added 

to the Glossary of Terms used in NERC 

Reliability Standards (NERC Glossary of 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

70484 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

10Proposed Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 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. 

11NERC Petition at 6 and Exhibit C (citing Order 

No. 672, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,204 at PP 323– 

335, 444). 

12Area 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, if operating in that mode. 

13NERC Petition at 12. 

14The ‘‘Responsible Entity’’ designated in 

proposed Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 

Requirement R1 is the balancing authority and/or 

regulation reserve sharing groups. 

15NERC Petition at 11. 

16 Id. 

17Reliability Standard BAL–001–1 available at: 

http://www.nerc.com/pa/Stand/

Reliability%20Standards/BAL-001-1.pdf. 

18NERC Supplemental Filing at 1. 

19NERC Petition at 2. 

20NERC Petition at 3. 

21NERC Supplemental Filing at 1. 

22 Id. at 2. 

23 Id. at 3. 

24The Commission notes that the currentlyeffective Reliability Standard BAL–002–1 requires 

balancing authorities to return its ACE to zero 

within 15 minutes following a reportable 

disturbance. However, the Field Trial Report does 

not provide any information whether compliance 

with Reliability Standard BAL–002–1 had any 

impact on the proposed Balancing Authority ACE 

Limits in Reliability Standard BAL–001–2. Any 

future modifications to BAL–002 should take this 

into consideration. 

25NERC Supplemental Filing at 6, noting that 47 

balancing authorities participated in the Field Trial 

Report: 16 in the Eastern Interconnection, 29 in the 

Western Interconnection, ERCOT and Quebec. 

26NERC Field Trial Report at 1. 

Terms) and the associated violation risk 

factors and violation severity levels, 

effective dates, and implementation 

plan.10 NERC states that the proposed 

Reliability Standard 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.11 Also, 

NERC asserts that proposed Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 addresses the 

Commission’s Order No. 693 directive 

pertaining to BAL–002–0. 

6. NERC proposes to revise Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 by replacing the 

Control Performance Standard 2 (CPS2) 

in currently-effective Requirement R2 

with a new term, ‘‘Balancing Authority 

ACE Limit (BAAL).’’ 12 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 clock-minute 

average ACE does not exceed its 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit for more 

than 30 consecutive clock-minutes.13

7. Proposed Reliability Standard 

BAL–001–2 has two requirements and 

two attachments containing the 

mathematical equations for calculating 

the Control Performance Standard 1 

(CPS1) in Requirement R1,14 the 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit in 

Requirement R2, and associated 

measures. NERC states that the only 

proposed change to Requirement R1 is 

to move the equation and explanation of 

the individual components of CPS1 to 

Attachment 1. NERC explains that the 

proposed revisions to Requirement R1 

‘‘are administratively efficient and 

clarify the intent of the Requirement.’’ 15

NERC states 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.’’ 16

8. Proposed Requirement R2 is new 

and replaces the existing Control 

Performance Standard 2 requirement. 

The current Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–1 Requirement R2 requires each 

balancing authority to operate such that 

for at least 90 percent of the ten-minute 

periods in a calendar month (using six 

non-overlapping periods per hour), the 

average area control error (ACE) must be 

within a specific limit, referred to as 

L10.17

9. Requirement R2 of the proposed 

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 explains that the Balancing 

Authority ACE Limits are unique for 

each balancing authority and provide 

dynamic limits for the balancing 

authority’s ACE value as a function of 

its Interconnection frequency.18 NERC 

states that the proposed Reliability 

Standard is intended to enhance the 

reliability of each Interconnection by 

maintaining frequency within 

predefined limits under all conditions. 

Furthermore, NERC states that proposed 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 and 

accompanying definitions include the 

benefits of the Automatic Time Error 

Correction (ATEC) equation in the 

WECC-specific regional variance in 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–1.19

11. NERC also proposes violation risk 

factors and violation severity levels for 

each requirement of the proposed 

Reliability Standard and an 

implementation plan and effective 

dates. NERC states that these proposals 

were developed and reviewed for 

consistency with NERC and 

Commission guidelines. 

12. NERC proposes an effective date 

for the proposed Reliability Standard 

that is the first day of the first calendar 

quarter that is twelve months after the 

date of Commission approval. NERC 

states that its proposed implementation 

date will allow entities to make any 

software adjustment that may be 

required to perform the Balancing 

Authority ACE Limit calculations.20

13. On May 9, 2014, NERC submitted 

a supplemental filing (Supplemental 

Filing) to address the status of the 

Commission directive in Order No. 693 

pertaining to Reliability Standard BAL– 

002–0 and update the Commission 

regarding the status of a field trial 

undertaken for proposed Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2.21 In its 

Supplemental Filing, NERC reiterates 

the importance of the proposed revision 

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.’’ 22 Further, 

NERC states that proposed Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 addresses the 

Commission’s directive related to BAL– 

002–0 ‘‘in an equally efficient and 

effective manner’’ 23 NERC adds that 

revisions to Reliability Standard BAL– 

002–1 are currently being developed 

and will complement proposed 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 that is 

the subject of the immediate 

proceeding.24 Regarding the ongoing 

field trial, NERC stated that ‘‘the 

widespread participation of Balancing 

Authorities has provided insight into 

how the changes in proposed Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 will impact 

reliability.’’ 25

14. On July 31, 2014, NERC submitted 

an informational filing (Informational 

Filing) of its Preliminary Field Trial 

Report (Field Trial Report) evaluating 

the effects of proposed Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2. NERC states that 

the Field Trial Report results to date 

demonstrate that the correlation 

between Requirements R1 and R2 of 

proposed Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2 drive corrective actions to 

support Interconnection frequency and 

reliability.26 NERC also states that the 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit, in 

conjunction with currently-effective 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 2014 / Proposed Rules 70485 

27 Id. at 14. 

28NERC proposes four definitions for inclusion in 

the Glossary of Terms Used in NERC Reliability 

Standards: Regulation Reserve Sharing Group, 

Reserve Sharing Group Reporting ACE, Reporting 

ACE, and Interconnection. As stated in Exhibit G, 

Consideration of Comments at 13, ‘‘Regulation 

Reserve Sharing Group’’ would be added to the 

NERC Compliance Registry prior to implementation 

of the proposed standard. 

29NERC Petition Exhibit B at 4. 

30NERC Field Trial Report at 23. 

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

P 355. 

32NERC Field Trial Report at 4. 

33 Id. at 7. 

34 Id. at 27. 

35NERC Supplemental Filing at 3. 

36 Id. at 3. 

37NERC Petition, Exhibit G, Consideration of 

Comments April 2013, at 43. 

38 Id. at 77. 

39NERC Field Trial Report at 20. 

40A comparison between the existing Control 

Performance Standard 1 curves and the Balancing 

Authority ACE Limit curves shown in NERC’s Field 

Trial Report indicates that there are large ACE 

deviations at the boundaries of 60 +/- 0.02 Hz. Id. 

Figure 5 at 24. 

Reliability Standard BAL–003–1 

(Frequency Response and Frequency 

Bias Setting), satisfies the directive.27

II. Discussion 

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

we propose to approve Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 as just, 

reasonable, not unduly discriminatory 

or preferential, and in the public 

interest. We propose to approve NERC’s 

four proposed definitions, violation risk 

factor and violation severity level 

assignments, and the retirement of 

currently-effective BAL–001–1.28

Likewise, we propose to 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.29

16. The purpose of proposed 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 is to 

control Interconnection frequency 

within defined limits. Proposed 

Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 

includes both long and short term 

performance measures for 

Interconnection frequency control by 

providing dynamic (i.e., real-time) 

limits that are specific for each 

balancing authority and 

Interconnection. By basing Balancing 

Authority ACE Limits on pre-defined 

frequency trigger limits for each 

Interconnection, we believe the realtime measurements established in 

proposed Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2 will help ensure the 

Interconnection frequency returns to a 

reliable state should a balancing 

authority’s ACE, or the 

Interconnection’s frequency, exceed 

acceptable bounds. 

17. We agree with NERC’s assertion 

that the Balancing Authority ACE Limit 

is a real-time measure of a balancing 

authority’s required performance and 

encourages operation in support of the 

Interconnection frequency and drives 

corrective action back within predefined 

ACE limits when helpful for adjusting 

Interconnection frequency.30

18. Further, we believe that the NERC 

proposal satisfies the directive set forth 

in Order No. 693 that NERC modify 

Reliability Standard BAL–002 ‘‘. . . to 

define a significant deviation and a 

reportable event, taking account all 

events that have an impact on 

frequency, e.g., loss of supply, loss of 

load and significant scheduling 

problems. . . .’’ 31 In particular, we 

believe that NERC’s statement that the 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit, in 

conjunction with currently-effective 

Reliability Standard BAL–003–1, 

satisfies the directive.32 We also believe 

that Reliability Standard BAL–003–1 

addresses the Commission’s Order No. 

693 directive with regard to events that 

have an impact on frequency due to the 

loss of supply and proposed Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 addresses aspects 

of the same directive with regard to loss 

of load. Further, we accept NERC’s 

explanation that proposed Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 addresses the 

Commission’s Order No. 693 directive 

with regard to the need to more broadly 

define reportable events and that the 

proposed standard sets a variable joint 

megawatt limit (i.e., real-time) that is 

dependent on concurrent 

Interconnection frequency. With regard 

to the aspect of the Order No. 693 

directive requiring that reportable 

events account for loss of load, we agree 

with NERC’s statement that loss of load 

can cause a mismatch in supply and 

demand that results in a positive change 

in frequency.33 We accept NERC’s 

explanation that the Balancing 

Authority ACE Limit has been shown to 

be effective in limiting the duration that 

the Interconnection frequency is 

impacted by loss of supply, loss of load 

or any other conditions causing a 

balancing authority to exceed its 

Balancing Authority ACE Limit.34

19. In sum, we believe the statements 

in NERC’s Petition, Supplemental 

Filing, and Informational Filing provide 

sufficient technical support that NERC 

has addressed the Commission’s Order 

No. 693 directive in an equally and 

effective manner.35 While we propose to 

approve Reliability Standard BAL–001– 

2, we also propose that NERC submit an 

informational filing—discussed 

immediately below—regarding the 

potential of proposed Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 to contribute to 

unscheduled power flows and 

inadvertent interchange. 

A. Potential for Proposed Reliability 

Standard BAL–001–2 To Contribute to 

Unscheduled Power Flows and 

Inadvertent Interchange 

20. NERC states that, as a proof of 

concept for the Balancing Authority 

ACE Limit requirement, a field trial was 

endorsed by the NERC Operating 

committee and subsequently approved 

by the NERC Standards Committee in 

June 2005.36 During the development of 

the proposed Reliability Standard, some 

stakeholders that participated in the 

field trial commented to the NERC 

standard drafting team that the 

proposed Balancing Authority ACE 

Limit established in Requirement R2 of 

BAL–001–2 has caused increased 

system operating limit violations, 

particularly in the Western 

Interconnection. For example, one large 

transmission operator commented that 

the proposed Balancing Authority ACE 

Limit could increase the number of 

system operating limit violations, and 

could possibly cause large unscheduled 

power flows resulting in an increased 

ACE.37 Another NERC stakeholder 

commented that the proposed 

Reliability Standard could provide 

opportunities for entities to create 

unscheduled power flows within the 

standard’s boundaries, without regard to 

the impacts and which could lead to 

system operating limit violations due to 

large ACEs.38 The same stakeholder 

commented that the Western Electricity 

Coordinating Council has decided to 

apply a limit of four times a balancing 

authority’s L10 to limit ACE deviations 

from balancing authority flows that 

negatively impact the transmission 

system. 

21. In addition, in the Field Trial 

Report, NERC asserts that there is no 

relationship between the Balancing 

Authority ACE Limit field trial and 

accumulated inadvertent interchange in 

either the Eastern or Western 

Interconnections.39 However, due to a 

large allowance in ACE deviations in 

real-time while still complying with the 

proposed Balancing Authority ACE 

Limit, an increase in the amount of 

inadvertent interchange on the bulk 

electric system of all Interconnections 

may result.40 In other words, proposed 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

70486 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

41The 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. Id. at 

14. 42 5 CFR 1320.11. 

43NERC Petition at 12. 

44 Id. at 2. 

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. 

22. The Commission is concerned that 

the Balancing Authority ACE Limit in 

proposed Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2 may have an unintended 

consequence of (i) allowing significant 

amounts of unscheduled power flows, 

creating an undue burden for 

transmission operators and reliability 

coordinators to address power flows 

approaching or exceeding system 

operating limits or interconnection 

reliability operating limits, and (ii) the 

significant increase in inadvertent 

interchange could result in an adverse 

reliability impact between real-time 

operations and day and/or hour-ahead 

analysis performed by reliability 

coordinators and transmission 

operators. 

23. Based on the concerns discussed 

above, the Commission proposes to 

direct that NERC submit an 

informational filing following 

implementation of the proposed 

Reliability Standard to monitor 

unscheduled power flows and 

inadvertent interchange in the Western 

and Eastern Interconnections. 

Specifically, for the two-year period 

following implementation (i.e., the 

effective date) of the standard, the 

Commission proposes to direct NERC to 

provide the number of SOL/IROL 

violations, the date and time, location, 

the duration and magnitude, due to 

unscheduled power flows and 

inadvertent interchange within Western 

and the Eastern Interconnections. This 

information will provide NERC, the 

Commission, and other interested 

entities with the material to evaluate the 

effect of Reliability Standard BAL–001– 

2 on unscheduled power flows and 

inadvertent interchange and the 

resulting consequences on the BulkPower System. Accordingly, the 

Commission proposes to direct that 

NERC provide data on unscheduled 

power flows and inadvertent 

interchange for a two-year period 

following implementation of the 

proposed Reliability Standard. 

24. The Commission proposes to 

direct NERC to submit the informational 

filing 90 days after the end of the twoyear period following implementation. 

Should the data indicate reliability 

issues due to increases in unscheduled 

power flows and inadvertent 

interchange under the new Balancing 

Authority ACE Limit at any time during 

the two-year period of study, the 

Commission expects that NERC will 

immediately propose and implement 

adequate remedies. The Commission 

seeks comments from NERC, and other 

interested entities on the proposed 

informational filing. The Commission 

also seeks comment whether any 

additional data would support the 

analysis and, thus, should be provided 

with the informational filing. 

Furthermore, the Commission also seeks 

comment on whether a regional 

variance would be necessary for those 

regions that experienced adverse 

impacts during the field trial due to 

inadvertent interchange.41

III. Information Collection Statement 

25. The Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) regulations require that 

OMB approve certain reporting and 

recordkeeping (collections of 

information) imposed by an agency.42

Upon approval of a collection(s) 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 display a 

valid OMB control number. 

26. The Commission is submitting 

these reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements to OMB for its review and 

approval under section 3507(d) of the 

PRA. Comments are solicited 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. 

27. This Notice of Proposed 

Rulemaking proposes to approve 

revisions to Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2. NERC states in its petition that 

the proposed Reliability Standard 

defines a new concept: 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.43 NERC 

states that the proposed 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 proposed 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 proposed 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– 

001–1.44 The proposed Reliability 

Standard and related reporting 

requirements are applicable to balancing 

authorities and regulation reserve 

sharing groups. 

28. Public Reporting Burden: Our 

estimate below regarding the number of 

respondents is based on the NERC 

Compliance Registry as of October17, 

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 are 

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 Notice 

of Proposed Rulemaking in Docket No. 

RM14–10–000. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 2014 / Proposed Rules 70487 

45Proposed Reliability Standard BAL–001–2 

applies to balancing authorities and regulation 

reserve sharing groups. However, the burden 

associated with the BA complying with 

Requirement R1 is not included within this table 

because the Commission accounted for it under 

Commission-approved Reliability Standards BAL– 

001–1. 

46The estimated hourly costs (salary plus 

benefits) are based on Bureau of Labor Statistics 

(BLS) information (available at http://www.bls.gov/ 

oes/current/naics2_22.htm) for an electrical 

engineer ($60.87/hour) and a lawyer ($128.76). 

47BA=Balancing Authority; RRSG=Regulation 

Reserve Sharing Group. 

48 $28/hour, based on a Commission staff study of 

record retention burden cost. 

49Regulations Implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Order No. 486, 

FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 1986– 

1990 ¶ 30,783 (1987). 

50 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii). 

51 5 U.S.C. 601–612. 

52 21.4 percent of the total number of affected 

entities. 

RM14–10–000 FINAL RULE

[BAL–001–2: Real Power Balancing Control Performance] 45

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 46

Cost per 

respondent 

($) 

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

BA/RRSG: 47 Update and 

Maintain Energy Management Systems.

106 1 106 8 hours per response.

$1030 (8 × 

$128.76).

848 (106*8) 

$109,180 (1030*106) 

$1030 

BA: Record Retention 48 ..... 106 1 106 4 ..........................

$112 ....................

424 

$11,872 

112 

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

$121,052 

1,142 

Title: Mandatory Reliability Standards 

for BAL–001–2. 

Action: Proposed Collection FERC– 

725R. 

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 

proposed rule proposes to approve the 

Reliability Standard 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. The 

proposed Reliability Standard 

Requirement R2 provides each 

balancing authority a dynamic ACE 

limit that is a function of 

Interconnection frequency. The 

proposed Reliability Standard 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 

reviewed the proposed Reliability 

Standard and made a determination that 

its action is necessary to implement 

section 215 of the FPA. These 

requirements, if accepted, 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. 

29. 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]. 

30. For submitting comments 

concerning the collection(s) of 

information and the associated burden 

estimate(s), please send your comments 

to the Commission 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) 

395–4638, 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. 

IV. Environmental Analysis 

31. 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.49 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.50 The 

actions proposed here fall within this 

categorical exclusion in the 

Commission’s regulations. 

V. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

Certification 

32. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 

1980 (RFA) 51 generally requires a 

description and analysis of proposed 

rules that will have significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. As shown in 

the information collection section, the 

proposed Reliability Standard applies to 

106 entities. Comparison of the 

applicable entities with the 

Commission’s small business data 

indicates that approximately 23 52 are 

small business entities. Of these, the 

Commission estimates that 

approximately five percent, or one of 

these small entities, will be affected by 

the new requirements of the proposed 

Reliability Standard. 

33. The Commission estimates that 

the small entities that will be affected by 

proposed Reliability Standard BAL– 

001–2 will incur one-time 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. These costs represent an 

estimate of the costs a small entity could 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

70488 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 228 / Wednesday, November 26, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

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. Accordingly, 

the Commission certifies that this NOPR 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. 

VI. Comment Procedures 

34. 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 January 26, 2015. 

Comments must refer to Docket No. 

RM14–10–000, and must include the 

commenter’s name, the organization 

they represent, if applicable, and their 

address in their comments. 

35. The Commission encourages 

comments to 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. Documents 

created electronically using word 

processing software should be filed in 

native applications or print-to-PDF 

format and not in a scanned format. 

Commenters filing electronically do not 

need to make a paper filing. 

36. Commenters that are not able to 

file comments electronically must send 

an original of their comments to: 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 

Secretary of the Commission, 888 First 

Street NE., Washington, DC 20426. 

37. 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. 

VII. Document Availability 

38. 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. 

39. 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. 

40. 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. 

By direction of the Commission. 

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr., 

Deputy Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27949 Filed 11–25–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6717–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 100 

[Docket Number USCG–2014–0905] 

RIN 1625–AA08 

Special Local Regulation; Bradenton 

Area Riverwalk Regatta; Manatee 

River, Bradenton, FL 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing 

to establish a special local regulation on 

the waters of the Manatee River in 

Bradenton, Florida during the 

Bradenton Area Riverwalk Regatta. The 

race is scheduled to take place annually 

from 11:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. on the first 

Saturday of February. The proposed 

special local regulation is necessary to 

protect the safety of race participants, 

participant vessels, spectators, and the 

general public on the navigable waters 

of the United States during the event. 

The special local regulation would 

restrict vessel traffic in the waters of the 

Manatee River in the vicinity of 

Bradenton, Florida. It would establish 

the following two areas: Enforcement 

areas #1 and #2, where all persons and 

vessels, except those persons and 

vessels participating in the high speed 

boat races and those vessels enforcing 

the areas, are prohibited from entering, 

transiting through, anchoring in, or 

remaining within. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before December 26, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number using any 

one of the following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

(2) Fax: (202) 493–2251. 

(3) Mail or Delivery: Docket 

Management Facility (M–30), U.S. 

Department of Transportation, West 

Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 

1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590–0001. Deliveries 

accepted between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except federal 

holidays. The telephone number is (202) 

366–9329. 

See the ‘‘Public Participation and 

Request for Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below for further instructions on 

submitting comments. To avoid 

duplication, please use only one of 

these three methods. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this rule, call or 

email Marine Science Technician First 

Class Hector I. Fuentes, Sector St. 

Petersburg Prevention Department, 

Coast Guard; telephone (813) 228–2191, 

email D07-SMB-Tampa-WWM@

uscg.mil. If you have questions on 

viewing or submitting material to the 

docket, call Cheryl Collins, Program 

Manager, Docket Operations, telephone 

(202) 366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Acronyms 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

FR Federal Register 

NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

A. Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related materials. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http://

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. 

1. Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking, indicate the specific section 

of this document to which each 

comment applies, and provide a reason 

for each suggestion or recommendation. 

You may submit your comments and 

material online at http://

www.regulations.gov, or by fax, mail, or 

hand delivery, but please use only one 

of these means. If you submit a 

comment online, it will be considered 

received by the Coast Guard when you 

successfully transmit the comment. If 

you fax, hand deliver, or mail your 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS