Document ID: FERC-2014-1212-0001
Agency: ferc
Document Type: Rule
Title: Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols for Public Utilities
Posted Date: 2014-09-24T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 185 (Wednesday, September 24, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 56939-56955]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-22601]

 ========================================================================
 Rules and Regulations
                                                 Federal Register
 ________________________________________________________________________
 
 This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents 
 having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed 
 to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published 
 under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
 
 The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents. 
 Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each 
 week.
 
 ========================================================================
 

  Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 185 / Wednesday, September 24, 2014 / 
Rules and Regulations  

[[Page 56939]]

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Parts 2 and 38

[Docket No. RM05-5-022; Order No. 676-H]

Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols for 
Public Utilities

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is 
revising its regulations to incorporate by reference, with certain 
enumerated exceptions, the latest version (Version 003) of the 
Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols for Public 
Utilities adopted by the Wholesale Electric Quadrant (WEQ) of the North 
American Energy Standards Board (NAESB) as mandatory enforceable 
requirements. These standards update NAESB's WEQ Version 002 and 
Version 002.1 Standards to reflect policy determinations made by the 
Commission in the Order Nos. 890 series of orders and other orders. In 
addition, the Commission is listing informationally, as guidance, 
NAESB's Smart Grid Standards (WEQ-016 through WEQ-020) in Part 2 of the 
Commission's regulations.

DATES: This rule will become effective October 24, 2014. Dates for 
implementation are provided in the Final Rule. The incorporation by 
reference of certain publications listed in this rule is approved by 
the Director of the Federal Register as of October 24, 2014.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Tony Dobbins (Technical Issues), Office of Energy Policy and 
Innovation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-6630.
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:

Table of Contents

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Paragraph No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Background.........................................                4.
II. Discussion........................................               18.
    A. Overview.......................................               18.
    B. Issues Raised by Commenters....................               22.
        1. Five-Day Required Posting (Standards WEQ-                 23.
         001-14.1.3 and WEQ-001-15.1.2)...............
        2. Redirects (Standards WEQ-001-9.1.3.1, WEQ-                31.
         001-9.5, WEQ-001.9.7 and WEQ-001-10.3.1).....
        3. Network Integration Transmission Service                  50.
         (NITS).......................................
        4. Service Across Multiple Transmission                      60.
         Systems (SAMTS)..............................
        5. Conflicts Between Standards and Approved                  70.
         Tariffs......................................
    C. Smart Grid Standards...........................               74.
        1. Should Smart Grid Standards Be Incorporated               74.
         by Reference Into Commission's Regulations as
         Mandatory Requirements?......................
        2. Appropriate Version of WEQ-019 to be Listed               79.
         Informationally as Guidance..................
III. Compliance and Implementation Issues.............               83.
    A. Applicability of NITS Standards to ISOs and                   83.
     RTOs.............................................
        1. Comments...................................               83.
        2. Commission Determination...................               84.
    B. Waiver Requests................................               86.
    C. Implementation Schedule for NITS OASIS Template               91.
     Interactions and for Other Requirements in This
     Final Rule.......................................
        1. NOPR Proposal..............................               91.
        2. Comments...................................               92.
        3. Commission Determination...................               93.
IV. Notice of Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards....               96.
V. Information Collection Statement...................               97.
VI. Environmental Analysis............................              107.
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act.......................              108.
VIII. Document Availability...........................              110.
IX. Effective Date and Congressional Notification.....              113.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is 
amending its regulations under the Federal Power Act (FPA) \1\ to 
incorporate by reference into its regulations as mandatory enforceable 
requirements, with certain enumerated exceptions, the latest version 
(Version 003) of the Standards for Business Practices and Communication 
Protocols for Public Utilities adopted by the Wholesale

[[Page 56940]]

Electric Quadrant (WEQ) of the North American Energy Standards Board 
(NAESB) and filed with the Commission as a package on September 18, 
2012 (September 18 Filing), as modified in a report filed with the 
Commission on January 30, 2013. In addition, the Commission is listing 
informationally, as guidance, NAESB's Smart Grid Standards (Standards 
WEQ-016, WEQ-017, WEQ-018, WEQ-019 and WEQ-020) in Part 2 of the 
Commission's Regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    2. These revised standards update earlier versions of these 
standards that the Commission previously incorporated by reference into 
its regulations at 18 CFR 38.2. These new and revised standards include 
modifications to support Order Nos. 890, 890-A, 890-B and 890-C,\2\ 
including the standards to support Network Integration Transmission 
Service on an Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS), Service 
Across Multiple Transmission Systems (SAMTS), standards to support the 
Commission's policy regarding rollover rights for redirects on a firm 
basis, standards that incorporate the functionality for Transmission 
Providers to credit redirect requests with the capacity of the parent 
reservation and standards modifications to support consistency across 
the OASIS-related standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Preventing Undue Discrimination and Preference in 
Transmission Service, Order No. 890, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,241 
(2007), order on reh'g, Order No. 890-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 
31,261 (2007), order on reh'g, Order No. 890-B, 123 FERC ] 61,299 
(2008), order on reh'g and clarification, Order No. 890-C, 126 FERC 
] 61,228 (2009) (Order No. 890-C). The Version 002 standards also 
included revisions made in response to Order No. 890.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. The Version 003 Standards also include modifications to the 
OASIS-related standards that NAESB states support Order Nos. 676, 676-
A, 676-E and 717 and add consistency.\3\ In addition, NAESB states that 
it made modifications to the Coordinate Interchange standards to 
complement the updates to the e-Tag specifications,\4\ modifications to 
the Gas/Electric Coordination standards to provide consistency between 
the two markets \5\ and re-organized and revised definitions to create 
a standard set of terms, definitions and acronyms applicable to all 
NAESB WEQ standards.\6\ NAESB states that the Version 003 Standards 
also include standards related to Demand Side Management and Energy 
Efficiency,\7\ which the Commission incorporated by reference in Docket 
No. RM05-5-020 \8\ after NAESB filed its Version 003 report, and Smart 
Grid-related standards that NAESB previously filed with the Commission 
in Docket No. RM05-5-021.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols 
for Public Utilities, Order No. 676, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,216, 
(2006), reh'g denied, Order No. 676-A, 116 FERC ] 61,255 (2006), 
Final Rule, Order No. 676-B, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,246 (2007), 
Final Rule, Order No. 676-C, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,274 (2008), 
order granting clarification and denying reh'g, Order No. 676-D, 124 
FERC ] 61,317 (2008), Final Rule, Order No. 676-E, FERC Stats. & 
Regs. ] 31,299 (2009) (Order No. 676-E); Standards of Conduct for 
Transmission Providers, Order No. 717, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,280 
(2008) (Order No. 717).
    \4\ September 18 Filing, transmittal at 2 (citing NAESB WEQ 
Electronic Tagging--Functional Specifications, Version 1.8.1).
    \5\ Id.
    \6\ Id.
    \7\ Id.
    \8\ Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols 
for Public Utilities, Order No. 676-G, 78 FR 14654 (Mar. 7, 2013), 
FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,343 (2013). In this rule, the Commission 
incorporated by reference into its regulations updated business 
practice standards adopted by NAESB's WEQ to categorize various 
products and services for demand response and energy efficiency and 
to support the measurement and verification of these products and 
services in organized wholesale electric markets. These same 
standards are included without revision in the Version 003 
standards.
    \9\ These standards were originally cited in a NAESB July 2011 
report filed with the Commission and were resubmitted as part of WEQ 
Version 003. See Report of the North American Energy Standards Board 
on Smart Grid Related Standards, Docket No. RM05-5-021 (filed July 
7, 2011); NAESB September 18 Filing at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background

    4. NAESB is a non-profit standards development organization 
established in January 2002 that serves as an industry forum for the 
development and promotion of business practice standards that promote a 
seamless marketplace for wholesale and retail natural gas and 
electricity. 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. 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 and participate in standards development.
    6. 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, and each standard NAESB adopts is supported by a 
consensus of the relevant industry segments. Standards that fail to 
gain consensus support are not adopted.
    7. In Order No. 676, the Commission not only adopted business 
practice standards and communication protocols for the wholesale 
electric industry, it also established a formal ongoing process for 
reviewing and upgrading the Commission's OASIS standards and other 
wholesale electric industry business practice standards. In later 
orders in this series, the Commission incorporated by reference: (1) 
The Version 001 Business Practice Standards; \10\ (2) the Version 002.1 
Business Practice Standards; \11\ (3) business practice standards 
categorizing various demand response products and services; \12\ and 
(4) OASIS-related Business Practice Standards related to Demand Side 
Management and Energy Efficiency.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Standards for Business Practices and Communication 
Protocols for Public Utilities, Order No. 676-C, FERC Stats. & Regs. 
] 31,274, reh'g denied, Order No. 676-D, 124 FERC ] 61,317 (2008).
    \11\ Standards for Business Practices and Communication 
Protocols for Public Utilities, Order No. 676-E, FERC Stats. & Regs. 
] 31,299 (2009). This order also incorporated revisions made in 
response to Order Nos. 890, 890-A, and 890-B.
    \12\ Standards for Business Practices and Communication 
Protocols for Public Utilities, Order No. 676-F, FERC Stats. & Regs. 
] 31,309 (2010).
    \13\ Order No. 676-G, see supra n.8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. In Order No. 890, the Commission revisited the pro forma Open 
Access Transmission Tariff (OATT) first established in Order No. 888 
\14\ and adopted a revised pro forma OATT designed to better achieve 
the objectives of preventing undue discrimination and providing greater 
specificity and transparency. In later orders in this series, the 
Commission affirmed, with clarifications, the basic findings that it 
made in Order No. 890.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Promoting Wholesale Competition Through Open Access Non-
Discriminatory Transmission Services by Public Utilities; Recovery 
of Stranded Costs by Public Utilities and Transmitting Utilities, 
Order No. 888, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,036 (1996), order on reh'g, 
Order No. 888-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,048 (1997), order on 
reh'g, Order No. 888-B, 81 FERC ] 61,248 (1997), order on reh'g, 
Order No. 888-C, 82 FERC ] 61,046 (1998), aff'd in relevant part sub 
nom. Transmission Access Policy Study Group v. FERC, 225 F.3d 667 
(D.C. Cir. 2000), aff'd sub nom. New York v. FERC, 535 U.S. 1 
(2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    9. A number of the findings made by the Commission in the Order No. 
890 series of orders necessitated revisions to

[[Page 56941]]

the Business Practice Standards for Public Utilities so that there 
would be no inconsistency between the requirements of Order No. 890 and 
the Business Practice Standards. Accordingly, NAESB set up a work 
project to review the existing business practice standards, identify 
which standards would need revision to prevent any inconsistencies with 
the Order No. 890 requirements, and develop and adopt the needed 
revised standards. Those revised standards form part of the package of 
revisions included in the WEQ Version 003 Standards. These revisions 
are in addition to the Order No. 890-related revisions incorporated by 
reference in Order No. 676-E.
    10. The Version 003 standards include five categories of standards 
not previously incorporated by reference by the Commission that were 
developed by NAESB in response to the Order No. 890 series of orders. 
These include: (1) Standards that NAESB previously submitted to support 
SAMTS; \15\ (2) part two of the standards modifications to the WEQ-001-
9.7 Business Practice Standard requested in Order No. 890-A \16\ 
related to rollover rights to requests for redirect on a firm basis; 
(3) the WEQ-001-9.1.3.1 and WEQ-001-10.3.1.1 Business Practice 
Standards that provide for Transmission Providers to process redirect 
requests in a manner that counts the available transfer capability 
encumbered by the parent reservation as available for the redirected 
request; \17\ (4) standards to support Network Integration Transmission 
Service on the OASIS; \18\ and (5) standards modifications to support 
consistency across the NAESB OASIS standards.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ See September 18 Filing at 3 & n.13 (citing submittal of 
NAESB Standards Development to Support Coordination of Requests for 
Transmission Service Across Multiple Transmission Systems (Docket 
No. RM05-5-013) on October 7, 2011, with minor corrections on 
January 25, 2012).
    \16\ See September 18 Filing at 3 (citing NAESB WEQ Business 
Practices Standards Crediting Redirect Requests with the Capacity of 
the Parent Reservation).
    \17\ Id. 3.
    \18\ Id.
    \19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    11. In Order No. 717, the Commission made several modifications 
related to the posting requirements associated with the Standards of 
Conduct. Specifically, the Commission discontinued the requirement for 
public utilities to post standards of conduct information on their 
OASIS sites.\20\ In response, WEQ's Business Practice Subcommittee 
modified the WEQ-001, WEQ-002 and WEQ-003 Business Practice Standards 
to remove reference to the standards of conduct-related obligations 
with the exception of a few template structures that may be implemented 
at the option of the Transmission Provider. WEQ's OASIS Subcommittee 
also modified standards WEQ-013-2.6.81 and WEQ-013-2.6.82 to clarify 
the listing of service types, modified standards WEQ-001-14.1.3 and 
WEQ-001-15.1.2 regarding the timing of required postings of narratives, 
and made modifications to standards WEQ-001, WEQ-002 and WEQ-003 
(concerning standards of conduct posting requirements) in response to 
Order No. 717.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Order No. 717, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,280 at PP 213-218 
and PP 235-239.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    12. The Joint Electric Scheduling Subcommittee (JESS), a standing 
joint subcommittee made up of participants from NAESB and the North 
American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), has been tasked with 
coordinating efforts to maintain and modify, as needed, the coordinate 
interchange business practice standards in WEQ-004 with their 
associated reliability standards. JESS now leads the effort to 
harmonize the Coordinate Interchange (WEQ-004) standards with the WEQ-
001, WEQ-003 and WEQ-013 Business Practice Standards in light of 
revisions made to the Electronic Tagging Functional Specification, 
previously maintained by NERC, and now maintained and updated, as 
needed, by NAESB. The WEQ adopted additional modifications to the WEQ-
004 standards to use abbreviations, acronyms, definitions and terms 
consistent with those in Standard WEQ-000 and to provide consistency 
across all WEQ standards.
    13. WEQ adopted modifications to support consistency between the 
WEQ business practice standards and the Wholesale Gas Quadrant (WGQ) 
Gas/Electric Coordination standards. In addition, WEQ made 
modifications to the business practice standards to harmonize the terms 
and definitions contained within the WEQ business practice standards 
with the definitions of those terms used in the business practice 
standards for other quadrants. These changes were also coordinated to 
be consistent with definitions and terms contained in the NERC 
Glossary.
    14. Also included in the WEQ Version 003 standards are standards 
developed to support Smart Grid applications as well as standards 
related to the measurement and verification of Demand Response (DR) and 
Energy Efficiency (EE) products. These standards have been referenced 
in earlier reports filed with the Commission before the completion of 
the WEQ Version 003 standards. The Smart Grid application standards had 
been referenced in a report filed with the Commission on July 7, 2011 
in Docket No. RM05-5-021. The DR and EE measurement and verification 
standards were referenced in a report filed with the Commission on May 
2, 2011 in Docket No. RM05-5-021 and have been the subject of 
Commission action.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Order No. 676-G, supra n.8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    15. NAESB's September 18 Filing includes an interpretation of 
standards WEQ-001-9.1 and WEQ-001-10.1 and recites the results of a 
quadrant-wide effort to provide a common location for all 
abbreviations, acronyms and definitions of terms that created the WEQ-
000 Business Practice Standards and addresses both internal 
inconsistencies and inconsistencies between the standards and terms and 
definitions in the NERC Glossary.
    16. In a notice of proposed rulemaking issued on July 18, 2013, the 
Commission proposed to amend its regulations to incorporate by 
reference, with certain enumerated exceptions, the WEQ Version 003 
Standards.\22\ In response to the WEQ Version 003 NOPR, 11 comments and 
one reply comment were filed.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Standards for Business Practices and Communication 
Protocols for Public Utilities, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 78 FR 
45,096 (July 26, 2013), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,698 (2013) (WEQ 
Version 003 NOPR).
    \23\ Commenters on the WEQ Version 003 NOPR, and the 
abbreviations used in this Final Rule to identify them, are listed 
in the Appendix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    17. Finally, on November 27, 2013 NAESB filed a report with the 
Commission stating that it made minor corrections to Standards WEQ-000, 
WEQ-001, WEQ-002, WEQ-003, WEQ-013, and WEQ-014. The Commission 
considers these corrections non-substantive and we will incorporate 
these corrections by reference to ensure the standards we adopt are as 
accurate and up-to-date as possible.

II. Discussion

A. Overview

    18. The specific NAESB standards that we are incorporating by 
reference in this Final Rule are:

 WEQ-000, Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Definition of Terms, WEQ 
Version 003, July 31, 2012 (with minor corrections applied November 26, 
2013);
 WEQ-001, Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS), 
OASIS Version 2.0, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012 (with minor 
corrections applied November 26, 2013) with the exception of Standards 
WEQ-001-9.5,

[[Page 56942]]

WEQ-001-10.5, WEQ-001-14.1.3, WEQ-001-15.1.2 and WEQ-001-106.2.5; \24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ The latest version of NAESB's OASIS Standards (Standards 
WEQ-001, WEQ-002 and WEQ-003) have been designated by NAESB as the 
Version 2.0 OASIS Standards, even though they are also part of the 
WEQ Version 003 Business Practice Standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 WEQ-002, Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS) 
Business Practice Standards and Communication Protocols (S&CP), OASIS 
Version 2.0, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012 (with minor corrections 
applied November 26, 2013);
 WEQ-003, Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS) Data 
Dictionary Business Practice Standards, OASIS Version 2.0, WEQ Version 
003, July 31, 2012 (with minor corrections applied November 26, 2013);
 WEQ-004, Coordinate Interchange, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 
2012 (as modified by NAESB final actions ratified on December 28, 
2012);
 WEQ-005, Area Control Error (ACE) Equation Special Cases, WEQ 
Version 003, July 31, 2012);
 WEQ-006, Manual Time Error Correction, WEQ Version 003, July 
31, 2012;
 WEQ-007, Inadvertent Interchange Payback, WEQ Version 003, 
July 31, 2012;
 WEQ-008, Transmission Loading Relief (TLR)--Eastern 
Interconnection, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012 (with minor corrections 
applied November 28, 2012);
 WEQ-011, Gas/Electric Coordination, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 
2012;
 WEQ-012, Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) WEQ Version 003, July 
31, 2012, as modified by NAESB final actions ratified on October 4, 
2012);
 WEQ-013, Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS) 
Implementation Guide, OASIS Version 2.0, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012 
(with minor corrections applied November 26, 2013);
 WEQ-015, Measurement and Verification of Wholesale Electricity 
Demand Response, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012; and

 WEQ-021, Measurement and Verification of Energy Efficiency 
Products, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012.

    19. In addition, in this Final Rule, we will list informationally, 
in Part 2 of our regulations, as non-mandatory guidance:

 WEQ-016, NAESB Specifications for Common Electricity Product 
and Pricing Definition, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012;
 WEQ-017, Specifications for Common Schedule Communication 
Mechanism for Energy Transactions, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012;
 WEQ-018, Specifications for Wholesale Standard Demand Response 
Signals, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012;
 WEQ-019, NAESB Customer Energy Usage Information Communication 
WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012 (as amended on March 21, 2013); and
 WEQ-020, Smart Grid Standards Data Element Table, WEQ Version 
003, July 31, 2012.

These standards define use cases, data requirements, and a common model 
to represent customer energy usage.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ In its report to the Commission, NAESB stated that the 
subcommittee working on these standards ``developed a set of use 
cases to describe price communication scenarios related to shifts in 
demand and environmental and economic changes. These use cases were 
then used to develop the price attributes and product identification 
information or data requirements necessary to communicate price. As 
a second phase, the subcommittee refined both the use cases and the 
data requirements in an effort to create a more complete robust 
standard.'' NAESB Smart Grid Report in Docket No. RM05-5-021 (July 
7, 2011) at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    20. In a change from our prior practice, we are requiring public 
utilities and those entities with reciprocity tariffs to modify their 
open access transmission tariffs (OATTs) to include the WEQ standards 
that we are incorporating by reference by making a compliance filing by 
December 1, 2014.\26\ Any waiver requests must be filed at the same 
time or in a separate FPA section 205 filing. Additionally, consistent 
with the timeline prescribed in Standard 002-5.10.3, we have 
established a separate 18-month compliance schedule for implementation 
of the Network Integration Transmission Service (NITS) OASIS templates, 
with a compliance filing due two months before that.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ To the extent a public utility's OASIS obligations are 
administered by an independent system operator or regional 
transmission operator (RTO) and are not covered in the public 
utility's OATT, the public utility will not need to modify its OATT 
to include the OASIS standards. Such a public utility will, however, 
be required to comply with these standards unless granted a waiver 
by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    21. NAESB approved the standards under its consensus 
procedures.\27\ Adoption of consensus standards is appropriate because 
the consensus process helps 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 section 12(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.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ The WEQ's procedures ensure that all industry members can 
have input into the development of a business practice standard, 
whether or not they are members of NAESB, and each standard it 
adopts is supported by a consensus of the seven industry segments: 
transmission, generation, marketer/brokers, distribution/load 
serving entities, end users, independent grid operators/planners, 
and technology services. 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 seven industry segments. For final 
approval, 67 percent of the WEQ's general membership must ratify the 
standards.
    \28\ Public Law 104-113, 12(d), 110 Stat. 775 (1996), 15 U.S.C. 
272 note (1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Issues Raised by Commenters

    22. Comments in response to the WEQ Version 003 NOPR were filed by 
eleven commenters and one reply commenter. A number of comments 
expressed general support for the Commission's proposals \29\ and no 
comments were received opposing the basic direction of the NOPR, 
although comments were received taking issue with specific details of 
the NOPR proposals. Specifically, there were concerns raised by a few 
commenters about, among other matters, the appropriate implementation 
schedule for the requirements of the rule and there was a split among 
the comments as to whether the Commission should incorporate the 
standards on redirects. We will incorporate by reference into the 
Commission's regulations without further discussion all of the WEQ 
Version 003 Business Practice Standards that we proposed for 
incorporation in the WEQ Version 003 NOPR that did not occasion comment 
and we will separately discuss each of the issues raised by commenters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ EEI, ISO/RTO Council, OATI, PJM, Tacoma Power, and TDU 
Systems. Bonneville specifically endorses the WEQ Version 003 NOPR 
proposals incorporating business practice standards on Public Key 
Infrastructure and Smart Grid. Bonneville at 6, 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Five-Day Required Posting (Standards WEQ-001-14.1.3 and WEQ-001-
15.1.2)
a. NOPR Proposal
    23. In Order No. 676-E, the Commission declined to incorporate by 
reference NAESB Standards WEQ-001-14.1.3 and WEQ-001-15.1.2 (both 
related to ATC Narrative) because these

[[Page 56943]]

standards did not meet the Commission's requirement to post the ATC 
narrative ``as soon as feasible.'' \30\ In the WEQ-003 NOPR, we 
explained that NAESB modified those two standards to correct this 
deficiency by adding language providing that Transmission Providers 
should strive to post their ATC narratives within one business day and 
are required to make this posting within five business days. We 
explained that NAESB's report does not present any reason why a 
Transmission Provider would need five business days to post an ATC 
narrative and that we remained concerned that the five-business day 
requirement does not meet the Commission's requirement to post the ATC 
narrative as soon as feasible. We invited comments on the necessity for 
taking longer than one day to post the ATC narrative.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Order No. 676-E, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,299 at P 39.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Comments
    24. PJM believes that the proposed one-day posting goal and five-
day posting requirement are reasonable.\31\ PJM believes that the 
posting timing requirements set forth in the proposed standards strikes 
an appropriate balance in encouraging postings within one business day, 
but still allowing the flexibility to post within five business 
days.\32\ It maintains that more stringent requirements simply do not 
take into account system outages and application failures that could 
prevent a Transmission Provider from meeting a strict one day posting 
requirement.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ PJM at 5.
    \32\ Id.
    \33\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    25. PJM states that, in the event that the Commission would prefer 
a strict one-day posting requirement, it could specify that an entity 
could avoid self-reports of administrative violations of the rule so 
long as the average missed postings per year does not exceed a set 
value (e.g., 75 percent of postings) and does not exceed, for example, 
three days for posting. PJM states that, with such a structure, a 
preference for one-day posting could be implemented, while avoiding the 
need for administratively burdensome self-reporting in those instances 
where, due to unforeseen circumstances, the Transmission Provider is 
unable to meet the requirement.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ PJM at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    26. In Duke Energy's view there are instances when a Transmission 
Provider will need longer than one day to post an ATC narrative.\35\ 
Thus, Duke Energy concludes that the deadlines in WEQ-001-14.1.3 and 
WEQ-001-15.1.2 are reasonable.\36\ Duke Energy explains that these 
deadlines take into account the (1) large volume of data underlying the 
ATC values, (2) complexity of the ATC calculations, (3) inability to 
utilize an automated process to produce an accurate and coherent 
narrative that meets relevant standards, (4) limited number of 
Transmission Provider subject matter experts that analyze such data and 
calculations to post the narratives, and (5) time consuming nature of 
such analytical processes.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ Duke Energy at 5.
    \36\ Id. at 5-6.
    \37\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    27. TDU Systems expressed concern with the timetable in Standard 
WEQ-001-14.1.3 and WEQ-001-15.1.2 encouraging the Transmission Provider 
to strive to post a zero ATC narrative for each Constrained Posted Path 
within one business day and the requirement to post the narrative 
within five business days and urges that Transmission Providers post 
this information as soon as feasible. In addition TDU Systems indicates 
the requirement should be for Transmission Providers to post the zero 
ATC narrative and the ATC change narrative at the same time that the 
ATC results are published.\38\ TDU Systems urges this deadline because 
it considers this information critical to allowing the transmission 
customer to audit the results and to find alternative means to acquire 
the transmission that they need. In TDU Systems' view, requiring that 
Transmission Providers ``strive'' to post the narratives within one 
business day while actually requiring posting of the narrative within 
five business days is meaningless as a standard. It argues that there 
is absolutely no incentive for Transmission Providers to do anything 
other than wait until the last possible minute, i.e., five business 
days later, to make these postings. It further argues that the burden 
on the Transmission Provider to post the ATC narrative is negligible at 
most. But TDU Systems asserts the harm to customers that are denied 
transmission service because of a lack of ATC can be substantial.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ TDU Systems at 9.
    \39\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Commission Determination
    28. As we did in Order No. 676-E, in this Final Rule the Commission 
will decline to incorporate Standards 001-14.1.3 (on the posting of 
zero ATC narratives) and 001-15.1.2 (on the posting of ATC change 
narratives) by reference, as they permit Transmission Providers to post 
an available transfer capability change narrative within five business 
days of meeting the criteria under which a narrative is required to be 
posted, which is inconsistent with the Commission's rejection in Order 
No. 890 of delays in posting data.\40\ In Order No. 890, the Commission 
stated that posting within one day appears reasonable. In light of the 
change to those standards in Version 003 requiring utilities to 
``strive'' to post that data within one day while requiring the data to 
be posted within five days, the Commission invited comments as to the 
necessity for taking longer than one day to post the ATC narrative.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Order No. 676-E, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,299 at PP 38-39 & 
n.41.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    29. The two comments challenging a one-day posting requirement for 
ATC narratives did not provide a compelling reason why longer than one 
day would be necessary to post this narrative under normal 
circumstances. Commenters' examples of times when extenuating 
circumstances would require additional time to post the narrative could 
arise, but would likely not reflect a normal circumstance. While we 
would be receptive to incorporating a revised standard that would 
create a self-reporting mechanism to deal with instances when special 
circumstances have prevented timely postings, we would not be receptive 
to a standard with an expansive exception from self-reporting, as 
suggested by PJM. Nor are we satisfied that the revised Standard 
adopted in WEQ Version 003 is adequate to ensure the timely posting of 
ATC narratives. Thus, we will decline to incorporate Standards 001-
14.1.3 and 001-15.1.2 by reference and request that NAESB revise these 
standards to provide for a one-day posting requirement.
    30. TDU Systems not only argues that the postings required by 
Standards 001-14.1.3 and 001-15.1.2 should be required to be made more 
promptly, it also argues they should be required to be made at the same 
time the Transmission Provider publishes its ATC results. We find, 
however, that TDU Systems has not demonstrated why simultaneous posting 
is necessary, nor has it informed us of any efforts it has made to 
build a consensus within NAESB for this suggested requirement. Nor has 
TDU Systems shown that the Standard, as adopted by NAESB is 
unreasonable. If TDU Systems believes that its proposal would improve 
upon the standards adopted by NAESB, we encourage it to work through 
the NAESB process to build consensus for its position and implement 
this change at the time when NAESB works on revisions to Standards 001-
14.1.3 and 001-15.1.2 to implement our policy in

[[Page 56944]]

Order No. 890 that data be posted without unreasonable delay.\41\ 
Meanwhile, consistent with our findings in Order No. 676-E, each public 
utility and each utility with a reciprocity OATT, is expected to timely 
post this information as soon as feasible and, in most cases, one day 
would appear to be a reasonable timeframe to accomplish this.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ See Order No. 890 at P 370.
    \42\ See Order No 676-E at P 39.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Redirects (Standards WEQ-001-9.1.3.1, WEQ-001-9.5, WEQ-001.9.7 and 
WEQ-001-10.3.1)
a. NOPR Proposal
    31. As we explained in the WEQ Version 003 NOPR, in the Version 003 
standards, NAESB modified WEQ-001-9.7 so that it would conform to the 
Commission's policy granting rollover rights to requests for redirect 
on a firm basis.\43\ We also explained that NAESB added standards WEQ-
001-10.3.1.1 and WEQ-001-9.1.3.1, which provide that Transmission 
Providers are to process redirect requests in a manner that considers 
the available transfer capability encumbered by the parent reservation 
as available for the redirected request. The revised standards were 
designed to avoid violation of first-come, first-served queue priority 
principles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ WEQ Version 003 NOPR, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,698 at P 25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    32. NAESB modified the WEQ-001-9 Business Practice Standards 
(Requirements for Dealing with Redirects on a Firm Basis) and modified 
the definition of Unexercised Rollover Rights and added a definition 
for Capacity Eligible for Rollover to make the NAESB standards 
consistent with the Commission's regulations. NAESB also made relevant 
modifications to standards WEQ-001, WEQ-002 and WEQ-013 and provided 
examples for the conveyance of rollover rights with a redirect on a 
firm basis provided in Appendix B of the WEQ-001 standards. Our 
discussion in the WEQ Version 003 NOPR also took note of our precedent 
in Entergy Services, Inc., 143 FERC ] 61,143, at P 25 & n.68 (2013) 
(Entergy) and in Dynegy Power Marketing, Inc., 99 FERC ] 61,054, at P 9 
(2002) (Dynegy). NAESB's standards in this area aroused considerable 
interest.
b. Comments
    33. Bonneville sees a conflict between the Commission's policy in 
Entergy and Dynegy related to rollover rights and Standards WEQ-001-
9.1.3, WEQ-001-9.5.3, WEQ-001-9.6.1, WEQ-001-9.6.2, WEQ-001-10.1.4, 
WEQ-001-11.6, 001-11.7 and WEQ-013-3.2.6.5.1 and suggests that the 
Commission not incorporate these standards until it decides the Entergy 
rehearing and directs NAESB to revise such standards in order to align 
them with applicable Commission guidance.\44\ Putting this aside, 
however, Bonneville also expresses strong support for the outcome in 
Standards WEQ-001-9.1.3.1 and WEQ-001-10.3.1.1 that allows the 
crediting of ATC to firm and non-firm redirect requests respectively 
based on the capacity encumbered by the parent reservation that is also 
needed by the redirect request.\45\ Bonneville agrees with the 
Commission that these standards do not violate first-come, first-served 
principles.\46\ OATI supports the inclusion of WEQ-001-9.7 with the 
rest of the WEQ-001-9 standards.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ Bonneville at 3-5.
    \45\ WEQ Version 003 NOPR, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,698 at P 6.
    \46\ Id.
    \47\ Id. PP 6-7. OATI notes that WEQ-001-9.7 is not impacted by 
the Entergy ruling as long-term firm point-to-point transmission 
service is not subject to a conditional time period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    34. Duke Energy argues that standard WEQ-001-9.7 does not reflect 
the guidance provided by the Commission in Entergy \48\ and notes the 
standards were drafted prior to the dissemination of the Commission's 
guidance in such case.\49\ Instead, Duke Energy maintains that the 
NAESB Version 003 standards reflect the guidance that the Commission 
provided in Dynegy \50\ and in Order No. 890 and its progeny.\51\ As a 
result, Duke Energy comments that the NAESB Version 003 standards are 
blatantly contradictory to the guidance the Commission provided in the 
Entergy case.\52\ Similarly, EEI comments that the Commission should 
not incorporate by reference Standard WEQ-001-9.7 into its regulations 
because it is inconsistent with policy announced in Entergy.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ Entergy Services, Inc., 143 FERC ] 61,143 (2013).
    \49\ Duke Energy at 8.
    \50\ Id.
    \51\ Id.
    \52\ Id.
    \53\ EEI at 6-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    35. Seattle is concerned that NAESB Version 003 standard WEQ-001-
9.7 does not align with the Commission's policy regarding when a 
customer requesting a redirect loses its rights on the parent path.\54\ 
Seattle comments that, in Entergy, the Commission affirmed an earlier 
ruling from 2002 where it held that a transmission customer receiving 
firm transmission service does not lose its rights to its original path 
until the redirect request satisfies all of the following criteria: (1) 
It is accepted by the Transmission Provider; (2) it is confirmed by the 
transmission customer; and (3) it passes the conditional reservation 
deadline under tariff section 13.2.3.\55\ Seattle comments that the 
Commission also held in Entergy that a redirect for the ``full 
remaining term'' of the parent reservation receives the reservation 
priority of the parent.\56\ Seattle believes NAESB Version 003 WEQ-001-
10.3.1.1 and WEQ-001-9.1.3.1, which provide for ATC crediting for 
redirect requests are appropriate mechanisms to apply in evaluating 
those requests.\57\ But it requests guidance from the Commission on how 
the crediting process should be implemented to follow Entergy.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ Seattle at 2.
    \55\ Id.
    \56\ Id.
    \57\ Id.
    \58\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    36. TDU Systems comment that Standard WEQ 001-9.7.11 does not fully 
conform to the Commission's policy granting rollover rights to requests 
for redirect on a firm basis.\59\ In the view of TDU Systems, this 
standard does not include the third criterion of the Commission's 
policy, i.e., that the redirect request has passed the conditional 
reservation deadline under OATT section 13.2.\60\ Additionally, TDU 
Systems seek clarification of the scope of this standard.\61\ They ask 
if standard WEQ 001-9.7 only applies to long-term firm point-to-point 
service, or whether it applies to short-term point-to-point service as 
well.\62\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ TDU Systems at 4.
    \60\ Id. at 8.
    \61\ Id.
    \62\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    37. Tacoma Power encourages the Commission to adopt recently 
proposed standards by NAESB that provide for the crediting of 
transmission capacity toward redirect requests.\63\ Tacoma Power 
strongly supports the Commission's proposed incorporation of WEQ-001-
9.1.3.1 and WEQ-001-10.3.1.1 because they enable greater and more 
efficient utilization of transmission systems without violating the 
important principle of first-come, first-served when granting requests 
for firm transmission service.\64\ Tacoma Power supports the comments 
submitted by the Bonneville Power Administration in the present docket 
that relate to the crediting of existing transmission rights to 
redirect requests.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ Tacoma Power at 2.
    \64\ Id. at 3.
    \65\ Id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    38. Clark Public Utilities comments that several standards, 
including WEQ-001-9.1.3, WEQ-001-9.1.3.1, WEQ-

[[Page 56945]]

001.9.5.3, WEQ-001-9.6.2, WEQ-001-10.1.4, WEQ-001-11.6, WEQ-001-11.7, 
and WEQ-013-2.6.5.1, also are inconsistent with the Commission's 
decision in Entergy.\66\ In Clark Public Utilities' view, Entergy 
institutes sweeping changes that are not reflected in NAESB's Version 
003 Standards.\67\ Clark Public Utilities suggests that the Commission 
should take a more critical look at the NAESB standards given that 
agreement for these standards was reached prior to issuance of 
Entergy.\68\ As a result of the numerous conflicts between the 
Commission's guidance and the draft NAESB Version 003 standards 
identified above, Clark Public Utilities respectfully requests that the 
Commission not incorporate by reference in its regulations the NAESB 
Version 003 standards that bear upon redirects until a final decision 
is reached in the Entergy case and/or NAESB is directed by the 
Commission to revise such standards in order to align them with the 
Commission's recent guidance and software is available to facilitate 
the changes.\69\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ Clark Public Utilities at 3.
    \67\ Id. at 2.
    \68\ Id. at 6.
    \69\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    39. The ISO/RTO Council requests that the Commission clarify that, 
under Standard WEQ-001-9.5, capacity on original path is released for 
resale when a Transmission Provider confirms a redirect request.\70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \70\ ISO/RTO Council at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    40. On redirects, OATI notes the inconsistency between the 
standards and the Commission's findings in Entergy and observes that in 
most, if not all OASIS implementations, the release of capacity from 
the original path occurs on confirmation of the redirect request by the 
transmission customer.\71\ OATI comments that implementation of the 
policy set forth in Entergy will require modification to a number of 
the NAESB WEQ-001-9 standards in addition to significant software and 
business process changes in OASIS.\72\ OATI further requests that any 
changes to the current NAESB WEQ-001-9 standards and associated OASIS 
implementation of those standards not be required until such later time 
as (i) a final agency decision is provided in the ongoing Entergy 
matter and (ii) the Commission directs NAESB to revise such standards 
in order to align them with applicable Commission guidance.\73\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \71\ OATI at 4.
    \72\ Id. at 4-5.
    \73\ Id. at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    41. Snohomish supports the comments that argue that the Commission 
should not incorporate standards bearing on redirects (Seattle, 
Bonneville, Duke Energy and Clark Public Utilities).\74\ Snohomish 
comments that, as suggested by other commenters in this proceeding, the 
Commission should direct NAESB to revise proposed Version 003 Standard 
WEQ-013-2.6.5.1 to align it with the Commission's policy regarding 
redirects and should hold off on incorporating these standards until 
this is done.\75\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \74\ Snohomish at 3.
    \75\ Id. at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Commission Determination
    42. The Commission has issued three separate orders incorporating 
by reference into the Commission's regulations the Business Practice 
Standards of NAESB's WEQ.\76\ In all of these final rules, the 
Commission declined to incorporate Standard WEQ-001-9.7 dealing with 
rollover rights on redirects, because it failed to match up with the 
Commission's prevailing policies as explained in Order No. 676.\77\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \76\ The Commission incorporated by reference the WEQ Version 
000 Business Practice Standards in Order No. 676 (issued in 2006), 
the Version 001 Business Practice Standards in Order No. 676-C (see 
n.12 & P 52) (issued July 2008), and the WEQ Version 002.1 Business 
Practice Standards in Order No. 676-E (issued in Nov. 2009). See 
supra n.3.
    \77\ Standards for Business Practices and Communication 
Protocols for Public Utilities, Order No. 676, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 
31,216 (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    43. In Order No. 676, the Commission rejected NAESB Standard WEQ-
001-9.7, which stated in pertinent part that, unless the transmission 
owner agrees, a request to redirect does not ``confer any renewal 
rights on the redirected path.'' The Commission explained that this 
standard (WEQ-001-9.7) did not meet the requirements of section 22.2 of 
the Commission's pro forma OATT. The Commission explained that:

    Section 22.2 provides that, while a transmission customer's 
request for new service on a firm basis is pending, the transmission 
customer retains its priority for service on its existing path, 
including rollover rights on its existing path. However, once a 
transmission customer's request for firm transmission service at new 
receipt and delivery points is accepted and confirmed, the new 
reservation governs the rights at the new receipt and delivery 
points and the transmission customer can obtain rollover rights with 
respect to the redirected capacity.\78\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \78\ Id. P 57.

    44. NAESB sought to correct this deficiency by revising Standard 
WEQ-001-9.7 to make clear that a customer can obtain rollover rights on 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
the redirected path. The revised Standard WEQ-001-9.7 states:

    A Transmission Customer holding long-term firm PTP that is 
eligible for continued rollover rights of service may convey those 
rights to an alternate path or PORs and PODs through a request to 
Redirect on a firm basis subject to the following requirements.

    45. We find that the revised Standard WEQ-001-9.7 meets the 
requirements of Order No. 676 by providing a customer with the ability 
to obtain rollover rights on a redirected path. We, therefore, will 
incorporate this standard by reference into our regulations.
    46. In the past, the Commission has incorporated by reference 
Standard WEQ-001-9.5.
    However, as reinforced in the Commission's recent order in Entergy 
Services, Inc., 137 FERC ] 61,199 (2011), order on reh'g and 
compliance, 143 FERC ] 61,143 (2013),\79\ upon further review it is 
clear that Standard WEQ-001-9.5 does not meet the standard set in 
Dynegy. In Dynegy, the Commission held that ``a transmission customer 
does not lose its rights to its original path until the redirect 
request satisfies all of the following criteria: (1) It is accepted by 
the Transmission Provider; (2) it is confirmed by the transmission 
customer; and (3) it passes the conditional reservation deadline under 
section 13.2.'' \80\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \79\ A further order on compliance and rehearing, affirming our 
policy in Dynegy, is being issued in Docket No. ER05-1065-008 
concurrently with issuance of this Final Rule.
    \80\ Dynegy, 99 FERC ] 61,054 at 61,233.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    47. In light of the comments filed and our additional evaluation of 
the standards, we will decline to incorporate by reference Standard 
WEQ-001-9.5 into the Commission's regulations. We reach this decision 
because the confirmation criteria in Standard WEQ-001-9.5 do not 
satisfy all the factors delineated in Dynegy.\81\ As currently written, 
the Capacity Available to Redirect in Standard WEQ-001-9.5 would be 
reduced before a redirect has passed the conditional reservation 
deadline, contrary to the Commission's findings in Entergy and 
Dynegy.\82\ As we found in these orders, reducing the capacity 
available to redirect prior to the passage of the

[[Page 56946]]

conditional reservation deadline could lead to a customer paying firm 
transmission charges and losing capacity on both its original path and 
its redirect path. The Dynegy policy, as reinforced in Entergy, effects 
a reasonable balancing of interests between the customer and the 
transmission owner by ensuring that the customer does not potentially 
lose rights to capacity, while at the same time still permitting the 
transmission owner to sell available capacity on a short term basis 
until the redirect becomes unconditional.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \81\ Standard WEQ-001-9.5 states: ``Upon confirmation of the 
request to Redirect on a firm basis, the Capacity Available to 
Redirect shall be reduced by the amount of the redirected capacity 
granted for the time period of that Redirect. An example is shown in 
Business Practice Standard WEQ-001-B.''
    \82\ We note that our incorporation by reference here, with 
enumerated exceptions, of the WEQ Version 003 Standards effectively 
revokes our current incorporation of the WEQ Version 002 iteration 
of the standards, so no version of Standard WEQ-001-9.5 will any 
longer be a Commission-incorporated standard once this rule becomes 
effective.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    48. Standard WEQ-001-10.5 provides that the capacity available for 
a redirect will be reduced at the time when the request for a firm 
redirect is confirmed, which precedes expiration of the conditional 
reservation deadline.\83\ Thus, this standard is also inconsistent with 
the Commission's redirect policy in Dynegy.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \83\ Standard WEQ-001-10.5 provides: ``[u]pon confirmation of 
the request to Redirect on a non-firm basis, the Capacity Available 
to Redirect shall be reduced by the amount of the redirected 
capacity granted for the time period of that Redirect. An example is 
shown in Business Practice Standard WEQ-001-B.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    49. To ensure that the NAESB standards conform to the Commission's 
Dynegy policy, we request that NAESB revise Standards WEQ-001-9.5, WEQ-
001-10.5, and any other standards affected by these standards, to 
conform to the Dynegy policy.\84\ Having NAESB revise all of its 
standards to accommodate the Commission's policy in this area will help 
avoid confusion by public utilities as to their responsibilities under 
the Commission`s policy and under the NAESB standards. Accordingly, we 
request that NAESB make this project a priority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \84\ As our policy in Dynegy and Entergy reflects our 
interpretation of the pro forma OATT, we expect transmission 
providers to adhere to this policy while NAESB develops conforming 
standards. See, e.g., Transmission Loading Relief Reliability 
Standard and Curtailment Priorities, 139 FERC ] 61,218, at P 9 
(2012) (noting that all transmission providers are required to 
comply with the Commission's pro forma OATT).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Network Integration Transmission Service (NITS)
a. NOPR Proposal
    50. As explained in the WEQ Version 003 NOPR, NITS allows a Network 
Customer to integrate and economically dispatch and regulate its 
current and planned Network Resources to serve its Network Load in a 
manner comparable to the way a Transmission Provider uses its 
Transmission System to serve its Native Load Customers. In the WEQ 
Version 003 Standards, NAESB has included new and revised standards 
related to NITS within the WEQ-000, WEQ-001, WEQ-002 and WEQ-003 
Business Practice Standards. We also explained that NAESB has proposed 
Standard WEQ-001-106.2.5, which appears to contemplate a Transmission 
Provider refusing a request to terminate a secondary network 
service.\85\ We invited comment on the purpose of this standard and on 
whether the Commission should incorporate this standard by reference. 
We further noted that, in Order No. 890-A, the Commission found that it 
was not appropriate to allow a Transmission Provider to deny requests 
to terminate network resource designations, although Order No. 890-A 
did not directly address the issue of terminating secondary network 
service.\86\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \85\ WEQ Version 003 NOPR at P 23.
    \86\ Id. P 950.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Comments
    51. Duke Energy comments that the Commission should incorporate 
Standard WEQ-001-106.2.5, so that Transmission Providers can deny 
termination of scheduled (tagged) capacity associated with a 
reservation for Secondary Network Service.\87\ This refusal is 
acceptable when the capacity requested for termination is still 
scheduled upon.\88\ When the non-firm network reservation is 
terminated, the Transmission Provider reinstates the capacity to its 
ATC offering.\89\ Based on this rationale, Duke Energy submits that the 
Commission should incorporate this standard by reference in its 
regulations.\90\ Duke Energy further encourages the Commission to 
permit Transmission Providers to deny the undesignation of tagged 
network resource designations for the same reason.\91\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \87\ Duke Energy at 4.
    \88\ Id.
    \89\ Id.
    \90\ Id.
    \91\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    52. APPA believes that Standard WEQ-001-106.2.5 as drafted may not 
accurately reflect its intended application.\92\ It argues that the 
standard should be revised to ensure that it will not inadvertently 
limit network customers' ability to modify either their secondary 
network service reservations or their actual use of the transmission 
capacity available to them under such reservations.\93\ APPA finds the 
language of Standard WEQ-001-106.2.5 confusing and comments that the 
focus of Standard WEQ-001-106.2.5 properly should be on the 
Transmission Provider's treatment of capacity that becomes available 
when a customer terminates all or part of its unscheduled capacity and 
there should be no question as to whether the transmission customer can 
reduce unscheduled capacity associated with a secondary network service 
reservation as, in APPA's view, this right is without question.\94\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \92\ APPA at 4.
    \93\ Id.
    \94\ Id. at 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    53. Thus, APPA asserts that the Commission should require NAESB to 
clarify its proposed Standard WEQ-001-106.2, and Standard WEQ-001-
106.2.5 in particular, to avoid unduly restricting network customers' 
flexibility in their use of secondary network service and should give 
the Transmission Provider the ability to restrict the release on the 
OASIS of that terminated capacity if, for some reason, it is 
subsequently unavailable, rather than allowing a Transmission Provider 
to refuse the transmission customer's request to ``terminate'' the 
unscheduled portion of an existing secondary network service 
reservation.\95\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \95\ Id. at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    54. Consistent with this change, APPA argues other sections also 
would need to be reworded.\96\ For example, proposed Standard WEQ-001-
106.2.6 should also focus on the release of transmission capacity, and 
proposed Standard WEQ-001-106.2.7 should make clear that the reduction 
in the network customer's reservation is not contingent on the 
Transmission Provider's finding that the ``capacity is available to be 
terminated.'' \97\ APPA also urges that the Commission clarify that the 
standard does not in any way restrict a network customer from revising 
its tags (within whatever timing requirements apply to tagging changes) 
to reduce its scheduled use of a secondary network service 
reservation.\98\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \96\ Id. at 8.
    \97\ Id.
    \98\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    55. EEI supports incorporation by reference of Standard WEQ-001-
106.25.\99\ EEI believes that the Commission should incorporate this 
standard by reference into its regulations, allowing Transmission 
Providers the ability to refuse a termination request under these 
specific circumstance (of customer requesting termination of more 
capacity than the customer had reserved), which may compromise the 
stability of the electric power system.\100\ EEI notes that, in that 
circumstance, the transmission customer has the option of submitting a

[[Page 56947]]

revised and accurate termination request for approval.\101\ 
Bonneville's comments also express support for the Commission's 
incorporation of the proposed standards regarding NITS on OASIS.\102\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \99\ EEI at 5.
    \100\ Id. at 6.
    \101\ Id. at 5-6.
    \102\ Bonneville at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    56. OATI comments that the intent of Standard WEQ-001-106.2.5 was 
to allow Transmission Providers to refuse requests for termination of a 
secondary network resource where the requested amount of capacity to be 
terminated is in excess of that amount of reserved capacity that has 
not been scheduled, and therefore not free to be released to available 
transfer capability as stipulated in WEQ-001-106.2.6.\103\ OATI states 
that the release of terminated capacity from a secondary network 
resource to non-firm available transfer capability that is still 
scheduled for energy delivery would likely pose a reliability concern 
for the Transmission Provider.\104\ WEQ-001-106.2.5 provides the 
condition upon which the Transmission Provider could refuse such a 
request. For these reasons, OATI supports incorporation of WEQ-001-
106.2.5 in the Commission's ruling.\105\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \103\ OATI at 3-4.
    \104\ Id. at 4.
    \105\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    57. TDU Systems suggests that the Commission should direct NAESB to 
revise the NITS Standards to eliminate the discretion of a Transmission 
Provider to refuse a request to terminate secondary network service and 
to eliminate discretion in tracking designated network resource 
scheduling rights.\106\ They also suggest directing NAESB to establish 
guidelines for processing applications including a Transmission 
Provider's discretion to determine what information is required to 
establish the queue time for the NITS application or for the response 
to the application.\107\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \106\ TDU Systems at 4-6.
    \107\ Id. at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Commission Determination
    58. Standard WEQ-001-16.2.5 as currently adopted by NAESB is 
unclear in its application and could be read to allow Transmission 
Providers discretion to deny requests to terminate service in 
situations where this might not be warranted. The differing comments on 
the application and use of this standard highlight the lack of clarity 
in this area. Therefore, the Commission declines to incorporate WEQ-
001-106.2.5 by reference at this time because, as currently drafted, it 
is not clear how and when this standard should be applied.
    59. Thus, the Commission will incorporate by reference all of the 
NITS standards proposed for incorporation in the WEQ Version 003 NOPR 
with the exception of Standard WEQ-001-106.2. We encourage NAESB to 
revise and clarify this entire standard and resubmit it to the 
Commission with changes that make clear when and how it should be 
applied.
4. Service Across Multiple Transmission Systems (SAMTS)
a. NOPR Proposal
    60. In the WEQ Version 003 NOPR, the Commission proposed SAMTS 
business practice standards to provide a process for customers to 
complete cross-regional transactions. As explained in the WEQ Version 
003 NOPR, the SAMTS standards address the coordination of point-to-
point transmission service and/or network transmission service requests 
across multiple transmission systems. The process requires each 
affected provider independently to evaluate its portion of the linked 
request with the opportunity for reconciliation by the customer once 
all the evaluations are complete. The customer then communicates 
reconciled information to each of the affected providers.
b. Comments
    61. Bonneville generally supports the proposed standards allowing 
transmission customers to link requests and reservations over multiple 
transmission systems on OASIS through coordinated groups.\108\ But 
Bonneville asks the Commission to clarify that a transmission customer 
is required to update the status of a coordinated group when a 
conditional reservation is displaced through preemption under sections 
13.2 or 14.2 of the pro forma tariff so that updates regarding the 
disposition of requests and conditional reservations included in a 
coordinated group that are preempted are treated comparably.\109\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \108\ Bonneville at 2.
    \109\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    62. PJM supports the initiative to develop a coordinated process 
for SAMTS, but PJM expresses concern that the proposed standards 
addressing SAMTS may result in it taking longer to evaluate 
Transmission Service Requests with no discernible benefit to 
customers.\110\ For example, PJM maintains that the 24 hour attestation 
period for approvals could cause delays in evaluating a request and 
subsequent requests, which could be addressed by an automated system, 
if allowed.\111\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \110\ PJM at 3.
    \111\ Id. at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    63. TDU Systems believes that the SAMTS standards are a step in the 
right direction and generally support them.\112\ However, TDU Systems 
urges the Commission to require Transmission Providers to create a 
dispute resolution mechanism for transmission customers to use in case 
there are disagreements over implementation of the SAMTS 
standards.\113\ TDU Systems asserts that, because the standards address 
practices across regions, it is not obvious that any particular 
Transmission Provider's tariff dispute resolution procedures would 
govern, and, therefore, there may be no clear avenue for resolving 
disputes. TDU Systems urges the Commission to direct NAESB to correct 
this omission in its final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \112\ TDU Systems at 3.
    \113\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    64. TDU Systems also recommends that the Commission direct NAESB to 
broaden the applicability of the SAMTS standards.\114\ TDU Systems 
believe that treatment of the Coordinated Requests as ``linked'' should 
not be limited to the purpose of procurement of service.\115\ Rather, 
these Coordinated Requests should continue to be ``linked'' after 
evaluations for application of service are complete. In particular, it 
believes these transmission services should be linked for purposes of 
long-term planning and conveying rollover rights.\116\ Finally, TDU 
Systems argues the Commission should require Transmission Providers 
that deny a request under the new SAMTS process to post information 
including an explanation of why the service was denied and the expected 
duration of the constraint.\117\ Such a requirement, it argues, would 
be consistent with section 37.6(e)(2) of the Commission's OASIS 
regulations and the transparency requirements of Order No. 890.\118\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \114\ Id.
    \115\ Id.
    \116\ Id.
    \117\ Id. at 4.
    \118\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Commission Determination
    65. After consideration of the SAMTS Standards and the comments, 
the Commission will incorporate by reference NAESB's SAMTS standards. 
We note, however, that we find reasonable Bonneville's request to treat 
a conditional point-to-point reservation included in a coordinated 
group displaced through preemption comparably to a reservation that is 
superseded as a result of preemption. Thus, we request that NAESB 
consider

[[Page 56948]]

this suggestion as part of its ongoing standards development process so 
that both actions are updated similarly. This can be reported in the 
next relevant WEQ standards update report filed by NAESB with the 
Commission.
    66. PJM has raised a concern that this standard may significantly 
expand the time that will be required to evaluate Transmission Service 
Requests without any benefit to customers. We note that, consistent 
with Commission precedent, PJM may request a waiver and attest that its 
policies are ``consistent with or superior'' to specific newly 
incorporated NAESB standards. In such a proceeding, PJM would have the 
opportunity to substantiate its claim that these regulations would 
adversely affect its timeframe to evaluate Transmission Service 
Requests, with no discernable benefit to customers. Waivers are 
evaluated on a case by case basis and any waiver request from PJM will 
be evaluated on its individual merits. We make no determination here as 
to the outcome of such a request.
    67. We will deny TDU Systems' request to require Transmission 
Providers to create a dispute resolution mechanism for transmission 
customers to use in case there are disagreements over implementation of 
the SAMTS, as we find no necessity to make this change at this time. 
Thus, we will adopt the standards as adopted by NAESB, which reflects 
the industry consensus and we will not at this time request that NAESB 
make the modifications to the standard recommended by TDU Systems. We 
reach this decision because we find the standard as adopted by NAESB to 
be reasonable and see no evidence that this process will not be 
successful in addressing and resolving disputes between transmission 
customers and Transmission Providers. Under the SAMTS Standards 
included in WEQ Version 003, a customer will have access to each 
transmission owner's dispute resolution process and also will be able 
to file a complaint with the Commission if the dispute resolution 
process does not resolve the problems presented. We find it premature 
to modify the newly adopted SAMTS standard without any evidence that it 
will not be successful as is. Moreover, there has been an industry 
consensus for the standard as adopted by NAESB. TDU Systems may raise 
this issue at NAESB in the future if it finds that a sufficient number 
of complaints warrant seeking a consensus for revisions to this 
standard within NAESB. As a general matter, we encourage participation 
in the NAESB process in the first instance. Those advocating changes to 
NAESB standards would be well advised to first participate in the NAESB 
process and seek consensus support for their positions within the NAESB 
process.
    68. TDU Systems also requests that we broaden the applicability of 
the SAMTS standards and that these Coordinated Requests should continue 
to be ``linked'' after evaluations for application of service are 
complete. TDU Systems provides no justification for extending linkage 
beyond the procurement of service and a consensus of the industry saw 
no need for such a change. Thus, we find the consensus standard 
reasonable without such an expansion. Adoption of such a modification 
should not be implemented until NAESB has had an opportunity to 
consider whether an industry consensus supports the standard. Once 
again, we encourage TDU Systems to seek support for its positions 
within the NAESB process.
    69. As noted by TDU Systems, 18 CFR 37.6(e)(2) already requires 
that ``[w]hen a request for service is denied, the Responsible Party 
must provide the reason for that denial as part of any response to the 
request. . . .'' We see no need for a further change to the standards 
as, at this point, the standards are not inconsistent with the 
Commission's regulation and parties are required to comply with the 
Commission's regulations.
5. Conflicts Between Standards and Approved Tariffs
a. Comments
    70. PJM requests clarification that, if there is a conflict between 
terms of a Commission-approved tariff and NAESB Business Practice 
Standards, the tariff takes precedence and that an ISO/RTO following 
the terms of its Commission-approved tariff need not seek waiver of 
specific NAESB standards to avoid being deemed in violation of the 
standards.\119\ PJM notes that specific NAESB language contemplates the 
precedence of Commission-approved tariffs over NAESB standards in the 
event of conflict. PJM requests the Commission ``recognize'' this 
interaction between the NAESB Business Practice Standards and RTO/ISO 
tariffs. PJM goes on to request that the Commission clarify that ISO/
RTO Transmission Providers do not need to seek specific waivers of 
those NAESB rules that are inconsistent with Commission-approved tariff 
rules or market designs. Alternatively, PJM requests that the 
Commission grant waivers if a tariff is consistent with or superior to 
the requirements of the standards.\120\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \119\ PJM at 2. PJM cites to ``WEQ-001-C Appendix C, relating to 
OASIS Business Practice Standards Exemptions. `In the event of 
conflict between NAESB Business Practice Standards and an individual 
Commission approved tariff or Commission approved market design, the 
tariff or market design shall prevail.' ''
    \120\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Commission Determination
    71. As discussed earlier, the Commission previously permitted a 
public utility to defer making its compliance filing until it makes an 
unrelated filing with the Commission to reduce the burden on filers of 
a stand-alone filing.\121\ As PJM's comments indicate, this policy may 
result in confusion as to whether the tariff or the standards apply to 
the extent they are inconsistent.\122\ For this reason, we are revising 
our policy to follow our practice with respect to the standards for 
natural gas pipelines, and will require compliance filings on the 
requirements not related to Standard WEQ-002-5.10.3 to be made by 
December 1, 2014. We will, however, allow public utilities that want to 
incorporate the complete set of NAESB standards into their tariffs 
without modification to specify in their compliance filing that they 
are incorporating into their tariff all the standards incorporated by 
reference by the Commission as specified in Part 38 of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure as updated and revised. This will mean 
that those public utilities may not need to make compliance filings in 
future years to incorporate the standards so long as they continue to 
abide by all the newly incorporated standards. It would also obviate 
the need for a compliance filing related to Standard WEQ-002-5.10.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \121\ See, e.g., Order No. 676-E, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,299 
at P 128.
    \122\ PJM at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    72. Public utilities may seek waiver of the standards for newly 
developed or newly revised standards and for the renewal of existing 
waivers. Our policy on when these waivers will be granted or denied is 
not being changed in this Final Rule. All requests for waiver and 
requests for renewals of prior granted waiver requests must be 
submitted by December 1, 2014, the same date on which the compliance 
filing is due.
    73. Furthermore, consistent with previous practice, the Commission 
does not automatically extend existing waivers without Commission 
review and approval. When the Commission adopts new requirements, it is 
incumbent on a public utility that wishes to maintain a previously 
granted waiver applicable to the previous

[[Page 56949]]

version of the standard to make a showing to the Commission that, based 
on the particular facts presented, the waiver should continue. The 
determination of whether a waiver from a prior requirement should apply 
to a revised requirement is one that needs to be made on a case-by-case 
basis.\123\ If PJM believes that its circumstances warrant a waiver of 
any particular NAESB Business Practice Standards that the Commission is 
incorporating by reference into its regulations in this Final Rule, it 
may file a request for a waiver wherein it can detail the circumstances 
that it believes warrant a waiver. The Commission will decide on any 
such waiver request on a case-by-case basis and we decline to prejudge 
those circumstances in the context of this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \123\ Order No. 676-E, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,299 at P 107.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Smart Grid Standards

1. Should smart Grid Standards be incorporated by reference into 
Commission's regulations as mandatory requirements?
a. NOPR Proposal
    74. In the WEQ Version 003 NOPR, the Commission proposed to 
incorporate by reference five Smart Grid standards (WEQ-016, WEQ-017, 
WEQ-018, WEQ-019 and WEQ-020) into the Commission's regulations. The 
Commission also invited comment on what version of Standard WEQ-019 
should be incorporated (discussed below).
b. Comments
    75. Bonneville supports the Commission's incorporation of the 
proposed standards regarding Smart Grid.\124\ By contrast, while EEI 
and its members fully support the development of Smart Grid 
technologies, EEI believes that adoption of these standards (standards 
WEQ-016, WEQ-017, WEQ-018, WEQ-019 and WEQ-020) by the Commission would 
be contrary to Commission precedent and to the express terms of the 
standards themselves, and would chill future Smart Grid Standards 
development.\125\ EEI comments that, if the Commission does adopt any 
WEQ Smart Grid Standards, it should expressly clarify that their use is 
optional and that incorporation by reference of any of the WEQ Smart 
Grid Standards into utility tariffs would not negate or limit the 
optionality or informative nature of the WEQ Smart Grid Standards.\126\ 
EEI also asserts that in no event should the Commission adopt WEQ-019 
because that standard only applies to end-use customers and, 
accordingly, is outside the Commission's jurisdiction.\127\ Further, 
EEI maintains that, if the Commission adopts any of the Smart Grid 
Standards, the Commission should clarify that some of the standards 
only apply in certain markets due to their nature.\128\ Finally, EEI 
argues that, in no event should these NAESB smart grid standards be 
incorporated by reference into the Commission's regulations in the Code 
of Federal Regulations, claiming that to do so would, at a minimum, 
create ambiguity and confusion, or worse, could impose the 
inappropriate mandatory application of these standards.\129\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \124\ Bonneville at 7.
    \125\ EEI at 7-9.
    \126\ Id. 12.
    \127\ Id. 13.
    \128\ Id. For example, EEI states that WEQ-017 and WEQ-018 
should only apply, if at all, in markets with wholesale demand 
response and WEQ-019 should not apply to utilities that haven't 
adopted the optional ``Green Button.''
    \129\ Id. at 14. EEI notes that ``18 CFR section 38.2(a) 
provides that `[a]ll entities to which section 38.1 is applicable 
must comply with the following business practice . . . standards . . 
.' (emphasis added).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    76. The ISO/RTO Council suggests that the Commission could confirm 
that the NAESB smart grid standards would not impose enforceable 
compliance mandates, particularly on ISOs and RTOs.\130\ Specifically, 
with respect to Standard WEQ-019, the ISO-RTO Council suggests that the 
standard ``is meant to define a set of business processes that would 
serve as an input into the development of a broader smart grid 
information model.'' \131\ The ISO/RTO Council claims that enforceable 
requirements would be unworkable at the present time.\132\ The ISO/RTO 
Council also asserts, however, that ``NAESB's proposed Smart Grid-
related standards have value and are likely to promote the development 
of future standards.''\133\ In support of its arguments that these 
Smart Grid Standards should not be enforceable, the ISO/RTO Council 
quotes from the Commission's statement in Order No. 693 that for a 
standard to be enforceable, the standard must ``be sufficiently clear 
so that an entity is aware of what it must do to comply.'' \134\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \130\ ISO/RTO Council at 2, 5.
    \131\ Id. at 7.
    \132\ Id.
    \133\ Id. at 9.
    \134\ Id. at 9, n.12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Commission Determination
    77. The Commission agrees with Bonneville and the ISO/RTO Council 
that the NAESB Smart Grid Standards have value and that their use by 
public utilities should be encouraged by the Commission. At the same 
time, however, we also find merit in EEI's arguments against 
incorporating these standards by reference into the Commission's 
regulations and in ISO/RTO Council's arguments against making these 
standards enforceable and mandatory. Thus, rather than incorporating 
these standards by reference as mandatory enforceable standards (as 
proposed in the WEQ Version 003 NOPR), the Commission instead will list 
these standards informationally in Part 2 of our regulations as non-
mandatory guidance.\135\ The NAESB Smart Grid Standards will thus be 
available for use, but we are not requiring them to be used by public 
utilities, and declining to use the standards will not be considered a 
violation of Commission regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \135\ In 18 CFR part 2, the Commission has set out various 
statements of general policy and interpretations. We will house the 
guidance we are listing informationally on Smart Grid issues within 
a separate undesignated heading within Part 2 of our regulations. In 
the next section of this preamble, we will separately address the 
question of which version of Standard WEQ-019 (i.e, the version 
contained in the WEQ Version 003 Standards or the version ratified 
by NAESB on March 21, 2013) should be the one listed informationally 
as guidance in Part 2 of the Commission's regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    78. We are listing informationally the five Smart Grid Standards, 
as non-mandatory guidance, rather than incorporating them by reference 
into our regulations as mandatory requirements, because we agree with 
commenters that the five standards at issue were meant to provide 
encouragement for the development of new technologies and to foster 
Smart Grid interoperability by defining a set of business processes 
that would serve as an input into the development of a broader Smart 
Grid information model. In addition, we agree with the ISO/RTO Council 
that these NAESB standards ``are building blocks that support ongoing 
efforts to develop future smart grid standards.'' \136\ Thus, for all 
these reasons, we are not mandating compliance with these standards; 
but nonetheless are informationally listing these standards as non-
mandatory guidance. Our action here is intended to encourage further 
developments in interoperability, technological innovation and 
standardization in this area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \136\ ISO/RTO Council at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Appropriate Version of WEQ-019 To Be Listed Informationally as 
Guidance
a. NOPR Proposal
    79. In the WEQ Version 003 NOPR, the Commission noted that NAESB 
had ratified changes to Standard WEQ-019 on March 21, 2013 that were 
provided

[[Page 56950]]

for energy usage information consistent with the Green Button 
Initiative, promoted by the White House Office of Science and 
Technology Policy. The Commission then invited comment on whether the 
Commission should incorporate by reference the version of Standard WEQ-
019 ratified by NAESB membership on March 21, 2013, rather than the 
version contained in Version 003.
b. Comments
    80. Bonneville supports the Commission's incorporation of the 
version of the Standards ratified by NAESB on March 21, 2013.\137\ By 
contrast, Duke Energy comments that it disagrees with some details of 
the Green Button Initiative to allow customers access to their energy 
usage information because it believes this would burden Transmission 
Providers without necessarily providing useful information to 
transmission customers.\138\ For this reason, Duke Energy requests that 
the Commission incorporate by reference the version of Standard WEQ-019 
ratified by NAESB membership in Version 003, without the revisions 
ratified on March 21, 2013.\139\ In addition, for these same reasons it 
opposes incorporation by reference of Standard WEQ-019 as a mandatory 
standard.\140\ However, it would not oppose incorporation of this 
standard as an optional business practice.\141\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \137\ Bonneville at 7.
    \138\ Duke Energy at 6.
    \139\ Id. at 7.
    \140\ Id.
    \141\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    81. The ISO/RTO Council takes no position on which version of WEQ-
019 be used.\142\ EEI opposes any form of incorporation by reference or 
adoption of WEQ-019 and thus does not state a preference for either 
version of the standard.\143\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \142\ ISO/RTO Council at 6.
    \143\ EEI at 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Commission Determination
    82. All of the concerns raised about our incorporation by reference 
of the version of Standard WEQ-019 ratified by NAESB on March 21, 2013 
hinge on the concern that we might incorporate this standard as a 
mandatory enforceable standard. Given our decision to only list these 
standards informationally, as guidance, there is no remaining reason 
not to go with the most up-to-date version (i.e., the version ratified 
by NAESB on March 21, 2013) and that is the version we are listing 
informationally, as guidance, in this Final Rule.

III. Compliance and Implementation Issues

A. Applicability of NITS Standards to ISOs and RTOs

1. Comments
    83. PJM asks the Commission to continue to acknowledge in its final 
rule in this matter that NAESB's business practice standards associated 
with NITS do not apply to PJM's market construct as the NITS Standards 
and Order No. 890 requirements were developed to eliminate undue 
discrimination in the provision of transmission service and were not 
designed to address the more stringent requirements that necessarily 
apply to resources designated under a capacity construct, such as 
PJM's.\144\ In addition, ISO/RTO Council asks the Commission to confirm 
that it will give substantial weight to NAESB statements regarding the 
applicability of business practice standards when considering future 
ISO/RTO exemption requests.\145\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \144\ PJM at 5.
    \145\ ISO/RTO Council at 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Commission Determination
    84. Once again, if PJM believes that its circumstances warrant a 
continued waiver of the regulations, it may file a request for a waiver 
wherein it can detail the circumstances that it believes warrant a 
waiver. The Commission will decide on any such waiver request on a 
case-by-case basis and we decline to prejudge those circumstances in 
the context of this rulemaking. Absent a Commission-approved waiver, 
compliance with the standards is required by all public utilities.
    85. The ISO/RTO Council requests ``the Commission attach 
substantial weight to applicability and scope provisions included in 
the WEQ standards when it considers individual ISO/RTO waiver 
requests.'' \146\ The Commission reviews waiver requests on a case-by-
case basis, considering the specific circumstances presented in each 
individual waiver justification, as appropriate, and we will not 
prejudge any such circumstances in the context of this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \146\ ISO/RTO Council at 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Waiver Requests

    86. Any public utility seeking a waiver of these requirements must 
still comply with the requirement to file a revised tariff 
acknowledging its obligation to comply with the newly incorporated by 
reference Business Practice Standards. While it may additionally file a 
written request for waiver, such waiver request will not excuse 
compliance with the standards until such time as its waiver request is 
approved by the Commission. Thus, waiver requests should be filed by 
December 1, 2014, which is early enough to allow for Commission review 
prior to the compliance date. Waiver requests should identify the 
specific requirements from which waiver is sought and should state the 
reasons why a waiver is warranted. Requests for waiver related to 
Standard WEQ-002-5.10.3 must be filed by February 24, 2016.
    87. In the past, the Commission has allowed a public utility to 
defer the filing of a revised tariff acknowledging its obligation to 
comply with the newly incorporated by reference Business Practice 
Standards until it makes an unrelated tariff filing. In this Final 
Rule, we have reconsidered that policy and find that, given the broader 
coverage of the NAESB standards, as well as the waiver requests 
received, the deferral policy may lead to confusion over the standards 
applicable to particular public utilities. Moreover, deferral of the 
filings may lead to NAESB standards being included in FPA section 205 
filings, making review of the standards and waiver requests more 
difficult to process. We have concluded, therefore, that, as we do with 
respect to incorporation of the NAESB standards for natural gas, all 
public utilities will need to make a compliance filing that will permit 
uniform review of the filings and all requests for waiver. For those 
public utilities that want to incorporate the complete set of NAESB 
standards into their tariffs without modification, we will permit their 
initial compliance filing to specify that they are incorporating into 
their tariff all the standards as specified in Part 38 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure as updated and 
revised.\147\ This will mean that those public utilities will not need 
to make compliance filings in future years to incorporate the standards 
so long as they continue to abide by all of the NAESB WEQ Business 
Practice Standards and Communication Protocols for Public Utilities 
that the Commission has incorporated by reference into its regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \147\ Public utilities adopting this option should include the 
following language in their tariff: ``The current versions of the 
NAESB WEQ Business Practice Standards incorporated by reference into 
the Commission's regulations as specified in Part 38 of the 
Commission's regulations (18 CFR Part 38) are incorporated by 
reference into this tariff.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    88. Consistent with this determination, we are requiring each 
public utility to make the required tariff filing acknowledging its 
obligation to comply with the newly incorporated by

[[Page 56951]]

reference Business Practice Standards. It may, however, if it wishes, 
also file a request for a waiver that identifies the specific 
provisions from which waiver is sought, along with its reasons 
supporting the request. Waiver requests should be filed by December 1, 
2014 to allow time for a Commission decision on the waiver request 
before the compliance date. To be in compliance with their tariffs, 
public utilities submitting a late-filed waiver request must comply 
with the newly incorporated standards until such time as their requests 
are acted on.
    89. Those public utilities that choose not to revise their tariffs 
to include the statement referenced above acknowledging their 
obligation to comply with the latest version of the Business Practice 
Standards incorporated by reference by the Commission must use the 
following language in their OATTs:

 WEQ-000, Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Definition of Terms, WEQ 
Version 003, July 31, 2012 (with minor corrections applied Nov. 26, 
2013);
 WEQ-001, Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS), 
OASIS Version 2.0, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012 (with minor 
corrections applied November 26, 2013) excluding Standards WEQ-001-9.5, 
WEQ-001-10.5, WEQ-001-14.1.3, WEQ-001-15.1.2 and WEQ-001-106.2.5;
 WEQ-002, Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS) 
Business Practice Standards and Communication Protocols (S&CP), OASIS 
Version 2.0, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012 (with minor corrections 
applied November 26, 2013);
 WEQ-003, Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS) Data 
Dictionary Business Practice Standards, OASIS Version 2.0, WEQ Version 
003, July 31, 2012 (with minor corrections applied November 26, 2013);
 WEQ-004, Coordinate Interchange, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 
2012 (with Final Action ratified on December 28, 2012);
 WEQ-005, Area Control Error (ACE) Equation Special Cases, WEQ 
Version 003, July 31, 2012;
 WEQ-006, Manual Time Error Correction, WEQ Version 003, July 
31, 2012;
 WEQ-007, Inadvertent Interchange Payback, WEQ Version 003, 
July 31, 2012;
 WEQ-008, Transmission Loading Relief (TLR)--Eastern 
Interconnection, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012 (with minor corrections 
applied November 28, 2012);
 WEQ-011, Gas/Electric Coordination, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 
2012;
 WEQ-012, Public Key Infrastructure (PKI), WEQ Version 003, 
July 31, 2012, as modified by NAESB final actions ratified on Oct. 4, 
2012);
 WEQ-013, Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS) 
Implementation Guide, OASIS Version 2.0, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012 
(with minor corrections applied November 26, 2013);
 WEQ-015, Measurement and Verification of Wholesale Electricity 
Demand Response, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012; and
 WEQ-021, Measurement and Verification of Energy Efficiency 
Products, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012.

    90. Public utilities should not incorporate the Smart Grid 
Standards (WEQ-016, WEQ-017, WEQ-018, WEQ-019 and WEQ-020) by 
reference, as the Commission is not incorporating these standards by 
reference as mandatory requirements.

C. Implementation Schedule for NITS OASIS Template Interactions and for 
Other Requirements in This Final Rule

1. NOPR Proposal
    91. In Standard WEQ-002-5.10, NAESB proposed an implementation 
schedule for NITS OASIS template interactions that would allow public 
utilities 18 months after the effective date of this Final Rule to 
transition to posting transmission customers' NITS service arrangements 
on the Version 2.0 NITS OASIS templates. In the WEQ Version 003 NOPR, 
while we discussed the details of the standards adopted by NAESB, we 
did not specifically address its proposed implementation schedule for 
NITS OASIS templates. We did, however, propose, consistent with past 
Commission practice, to allow public utilities the option of including 
these changes as part of an unrelated tariff filing in order to reduce 
the filing burden.\148\ Several comments were filed on the appropriate 
implementation schedule to be allowed by the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \148\ WEQ Version 003 NOPR, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,698 at P 
44. As discussed in greater detail in section II.B.6 above, the 
Commission is no longer allowing public utilities to defer the 
filing of a revised tariff acknowledging their obligation to comply 
with the Business Practice Standards incorporated by reference in 
this Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Comments
    92. Duke Energy supports an 18-month development plan, plus 6 
months for testing, as the implementation timeline for business 
practice standards associated with service across multiple transmission 
systems (SAMTS) and network integration transmission service 
(NITS).\149\ ISO/RTO Council requests that the Commission clarify that 
Transmission Providers will have 24 months to come into compliance with 
the new standards on redirects and Public Key Infrastructure.\150\ 
Likewise, EEI seeks clarification that implementation will not be 
required until at least 18 months after a new standard is adopted as a 
regulation, as proposed by NAESB in Standard WEQ-002-5.10.\151\ OATI 
finds NAESB's 18-month implementation plan aggressive, but attainable, 
citing the complexity and significant efforts involved to design and 
implement the needed software and business process revisions.\152\ 
Thus, OATI requests an additional 6 months (beyond the original 18 
months) for testing and system updates (for a total of 24 months before 
implementation is required).\153\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \149\ Duke Energy at 3.
    \150\ ISO/RTO Council at 5.
    \151\ EEI at 4.
    \152\ OATI at 2.
    \153\ Id. at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Commission Determination
    93. Consistent with Order No. 676-E,\154\ the Commission notes that 
Standard WEQ-002-5.10 is applicable only to the actual implementation 
of updated templates and not to the additional required OASIS 
functionalities proposed in the WEQ Version 003 Standards, which may 
require modification to, or development of, supporting software 
applications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \154\ Order No. 676-E, Stats. & Regs. ] 32,299 at P 99.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    94. However, an 18-month implementation period appears sufficient 
to implement the NAESB standards incorporated by reference related to 
the NITS OASIS templates and commenters have not provided compelling 
evidence as to why additional time would be necessary. The timeline 
laid out in Standard WEQ-002-5.10.3 was a product of NAESB's consensus 
process that has been designed to require support from a wide range of 
industry members. As noted above, 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, and each standard 
NAESB adopts is supported by a consensus of the relevant industry 
segments. Standards that fail to gain consensus support are

[[Page 56952]]

not adopted. Therefore, we will adopt as the implementation schedule 
for all standards relating to the transition to the NITS OASIS 
template, the schedule included in Standard WEQ-002-5.10.3, which we 
are incorporating by reference in this Final Rule and decline the 
requests to add an additional six months for testing and implementation 
to the compliance schedule. Compliance filings for Standard WEQ-002-
5.10.3 must be filed by January 24, 2016. This will allow two months 
between the compliance filing and the compliance date for this 
requirement. As mentioned above, a separate compliance filing on this 
requirement will not be needed if the filer uses the language 
prescribed in n.145 in its tariff.
    95. As to the other requirements of this Final Rule, we will 
require compliance with the requirements of this rule that are not 
related to the transition to the NITS OASIS template beginning on 
February 2, 2015. Compliance filings and all waiver requests, including 
renewal of waiver requests, must be filed by December 1, 2014. Those 
utilities that want to incorporate the complete set of NAESB standards 
into their tariffs without modification, may submit a compliance filing 
using the following language: ``The current versions of the NAESB WEQ 
Business Practice Standards incorporated by reference into the 
Commission's regulations as specified in Part 38 of the Commission's 
regulations (18 CFR Part 38) are incorporated by reference into this 
tariff.'' This will mean that those public utilities that add this 
provision to their tariffs will not need to make subsequent compliance 
filings in future years to incorporate the standards incorporated by 
reference by the Commission in future rulemakings so long as they 
continue to abide by all the newly incorporated standards. Nor will 
they need to make a separate tariff filing related to Standard WEQ-
002.10.5.3.

IV. Notice of Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards

    96. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-119 (section 11) 
(Feb. 10, 1998) provides that when a federal agency issues or revises a 
regulation containing a standard, the agency should publish a statement 
in the Final Rule stating whether the adopted standard is a voluntary 
consensus standard or a government-unique standard. In this rulemaking, 
the Commission is incorporating by reference voluntary consensus 
standards developed by the NAESB's WEQ.

V. Information Collection Statement

    97. The following collections of information contained within this 
Final Rule are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) under Section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. 
OMB's regulations require approval of certain information collection 
requirements imposed by agency rules.
    98. The Commission solicits comments from the public on the 
Commission's need for this information, whether the information will 
have practical utility, the accuracy of the burden estimates, ways to 
enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information collected 
or retained, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondents' 
burden, including the use of automated information techniques. 
Specifically, the Commission asks that any revised burden or cost 
estimates submitted by commenters be supported by sufficient detail to 
understand how the estimates are generated.
    99. Comments concerning the information collection promulgated in 
this Final Rule and the associated burden estimates should be sent to 
the Commission in this docket and may also be sent to the Office of 
Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs 
[Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission]. 
For security reasons, comments should be sent by email to OMB at the 
following email address: oirasubmission@omb.eop.gov. Please 
reference FERC-516 (OMB Control No. 1902-0096) and FERC-717 (OMB 
Control No. 1902-0173) and the docket number of this Final Rule (Docket 
No. RM05-5-022) in your submission.
    100. This Final Rule will affect the following existing data 
collections: Standards for Business Practices and Communication 
Protocols for Public Utilities (FERC-717) and Electric Rate Schedule 
Filings (FERC-516). 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 38.1 and to implement the new standards adopted 
by NAESB that we are incorporating by reference in this Final Rule.

                                                                       RM05-5-022
                                   [Standards for business practices and communication protocols for public utilities]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                           Total annual
                                                             Number of     Annual number   Total number   Average burden  burden hours &   Average cost
                                                            respondents    of  responses   of responses     & cost per     total annual   per respondent
                                                                          per respondent                     response          cost             ($)
                                                                     (1)             (2)     (1)*(2)=(3)             (4)     (3)*(4)=(5)         (5)/(1)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERC-516 (one-time).....................................             132               1             132               6             792            $436
                                                                                                                    $436         $57,552
FERC-717 (one-time).....................................             132               1             132              10           1,320             727
                                                                                                                    $727         $95,964
                                                         -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total...............................................  ..............  ..............             264  ..............           2,112           1,165
                                                                                                                          \155\ $153,516
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 56953]]

    101. The Commission sought comments on the burden of complying with 
the requirements imposed by these requirements. No comments were filed 
addressing the reporting burden.\156\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \155\ The total annualized costs for the information collection 
is $153,516. This number is reached by multiplying the total hours 
to prepare responses (2,112) by an average hourly wage estimate of 
$72.67 (a composite estimate that includes legal, technical and 
support staff rates, $128.39 + $60.70 + $28.93 = $218.02 / 3 = 
$72.67), 2,112 hours x $72.67/hour = $153,516.
    \156\ We note, however, that two comments argued that it would 
be too costly for small entities to obtain copies of the NAESB 
Standards from NAESB. We addressed these comments in the preamble of 
this Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    102. The Commission's regulations adopted in this rule are 
necessary to establish a more efficient and integrated wholesale 
electric power grid. Requiring such information ensures both a common 
means of communication and common business practices that provide 
entities engaged in the wholesale transmission of electric power with 
timely information and uniform business procedures across multiple 
Transmission Providers. These requirements conform to the Commission's 
goal for efficient information collection, communication, and 
management within the electric power industry. The Commission has 
assured itself, by means of its internal review, that there is 
specific, objective support for the burden estimates associated with 
the information requirements.
    103. OMB regulations \157\ require OMB to approve certain 
information collection requirements imposed by agency rule. The 
Commission is submitting notification of this Final Rule to OMB. These 
information collections are mandatory requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \157\ 5 CFR 1320.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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: Final rule.
    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 rule will upgrade the 
Commission's current business practice and communication standards. 
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, 
transmission loading relief and public key infrastructure. The 
standards will assist in providing greater security for business 
transactions over the Internet, identify the business practices to be 
used to relieve potential or actual loading on a constrained facility 
and facilitate the transfer of electric energy between entities 
responsible for balancing load and generation. 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 non-discriminatory basis and will assist the 
Commission in maintaining a safe and reliable infrastructure and also 
will assure the reliability of the interstate transmission grid. The 
implementation of these standards and regulations is necessary to 
increase the efficiency of the wholesale electric power grid. This 
Final Rule also informationally lists NAESB's Smart Grid Standards as 
non-mandatory guidance. This guidance will promote the development of 
new technologies and standards.
    104. The information collection requirements of this Final Rule are 
based on the transition from transactions being made under the 
Commission's existing business practice standards to conducting such 
transactions under the standards incorporated by reference in this 
Final Rule and to account for the burden associated with the new 
standard(s) being incorporated by reference here (e.g., WEQ-000).
    105. Internal Review: The Commission has reviewed the revised 
business practice standards and has made a determination that the 
revisions adopted in this Final Rule 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.
    106. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting 
requirements by contacting the following: Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, [Attn: Ellen 
Brown, Office of the Executive Director, email: DataClearance@ferc.gov, 
phone: (202) 502-8663, fax: (202) 273-0873.

VI. Environmental Analysis

    107. 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.\158\ The 
Commission has categorically excluded certain actions from these 
requirements as not having a significant effect on the human 
environment.\159\ The actions adopted 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 natural gas and electric power that requires no 
construction of facilities. Therefore, an environmental assessment is 
unnecessary and has not been prepared in this Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \158\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy 
Act of 1969, Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. 
& Regs., Regulations Preambles 1986-1990 ] 30,783 (1987).
    \159\ 18 CFR 380.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    108. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \160\ generally 
requires a description and analysis of final rules that will have 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
As shown in the information collection section, this Final Rule applies 
to 132 entities. More specifically, this Final Rule imposes the latest 
version (Version 003) of the Standards for Business Practices and 
Communication Protocols for Public Utilities adopted by the WEQ and the 
associated financial burden upon these entities. Comparison of the 
applicable entities with the Commission's small business data indicates 
that approximately 26 are small entities \161\ or 19.5 percent of the 
respondents affected by this Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \160\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
    \161\ The Small Business Administration sets the threshold for 
what constitutes a small business. Public utilities may fall under 
one of several different categories, each with a size threshold 
based on the company's number of employees, including affiliates, 
the parent company, and subsidiaries. For the analysis in this Final 
Rule, we are using a 500 employee threshold for each affected 
entity. Each entity is classified as Electric Bulk Power 
Transmission and Control (NAICS code 221121).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    109. The Commission estimates that each of the small entities to 
whom the Final Rule applies will incur one-time costs of $1,163.\162\ 
The Commission does not consider the estimated costs per small entity 
to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. Accordingly, the Commission certifies that this Final Rule 
will not have a significant

[[Page 56954]]

economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \162\ $153,516 (total annual cost) / 132 (number of small 
entities) = $1,163/small entity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VIII. Document Availability

    110. 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 5:00 
p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 
20426.
    111. From FERC's Home Page on the Internet, this information is 
available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on 
eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or 
downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket 
number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket 
number field.
    112. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the FERC's Web 
site during normal business hours from FERC Online Support at 202-502-
6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at 
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY (202) 502-8659. Email the Public Reference Room at 
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.

IX. Effective Date and Congressional Notification

    113. These regulations are effective October 24, 2014. The 
Commission has determined, with the concurrence of the Administrator of 
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, that this rule 
is not a ``major rule'' as defined in section 351 of the Small Business 
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996.

List of Subjects

18 CFR Part 2

    Electric utilities, Guidance and policy statments.

18 CFR Part 38

    Business practice standards, Electric utilities, Incorporation by 
reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    By the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
    In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends Parts 2 
and 38, Chapter I, Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

PART 2--GENERAL POLICY AND INTERPRETATIONS

0
1. The authority citation for Part 2 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  5 U.S. C. 601; 15 U.S.C. 717-717z, 3301-3432, 16 
U.S.C. 792-828c, 2601-2645; 42 U.S.C. 4321-4370h, 7101-7352.

0
2. An undesignated center heading is added after Sec.  2.26 to read as 
follows:

Non-Mandatory Guidance on Smart Grid Standards

0
3. Section 2.27 is added to read as follows:

Sec.  2.27  Availability of North American Energy Standards Board 
(NAESB) Smart Grid Standards as non-mandatory guidance.

    The Commission informationally lists the following NAESB Business 
Practices Standards as non-mandatory guidance:
    (a) WEQ-016, Specifications for Common Electricity Product and 
Pricing Definition, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012;
    (b) WEQ-017, Specifications for Common Schedule Communication 
Mechanism for Energy Transactions, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012;
    (c) WEQ-018, Specifications for Wholesale Standard Demand Response 
Signals, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012;
    (d) WEQ-019, Customer Energy Usage Information Communication, WEQ 
Version 003, July 31, 2012, as amended on March 21, 2013; and
    (e) WEQ-020, Smart Grid Standards Data Element Table, WEQ Version 
003, July 31, 2012.
    (f) Copies of these standards may be obtained from the North 
American Energy Standards Board, 801 Travis Street, Suite 1675, 
Houston, TX 77002, Tel: (713) 356-0060. NAESB's Web site is at http://www.naesb.org/. Copies may be inspected at the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, Public Reference and Files Maintenance Branch, 
888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, Tel: (202) 502-8371, http://www.ferc.gov.

PART 38--BUSINESS PRACTICE STANDARDS AND COMMUNICATION PROTOCOLS 
FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES

0
4. 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.

0
5. Revise Sec.  38.1 to read as follows:

Sec.  38.1  Incorporation by reference of North American Energy 
Standards Board Wholesale Electric Quadrant standards.

    (a) Any public utility that owns, operates, or controls facilities 
used for the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce or 
for the sale of electric energy at wholesale in interstate commerce and 
any non-public utility that seeks voluntary compliance with 
jurisdictional transmission tariff reciprocity conditions must comply 
with the business practice and electronic communication standards 
promulgated by the North American Energy Standards Board Wholesale 
Electric Quadrant that are incorporated by reference in paragraph (b) 
of this section. The material incorporated by reference in this section 
was approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 
5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies of these standards may be 
obtained from the North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB), 801 
Travis Street, Suite 1675, Houston, TX 77002, Tel: (713) 356-0060. 
NAESB's Web site is at http://www.naesb.org/. Copies of these standards 
may be inspected at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Public 
Reference and Files Maintenance Branch, 888 First Street NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, Tel: (202) 02-8371, http://www.ferc.gov, or at 
the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For 
information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-
6030, or go to: http://www.archives.gov/federalregister/
codeoffederalregulations/
ibrlocations.html.
    (b) The business practice and electronic communication standards 
the Commission incorporates by reference are as follows:

(1) WEQ-000, Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Definition of Terms, WEQ 
Version 003, July 31, 2012 (with minor corrections applied November 26, 
2013);
(2) WEQ-001, Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS), OASIS 
Version 2.0, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012 (with minor corrections 
applied November 26, 2013) excluding Standards 001-9.5, 001-10.5, 001-
14.1.3, 001-15.1.2 and 001-106.2.5;
(3) WEQ-002, Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS) Business 
Practice Standards and Communication Protocols (S&CP), OASIS Version 
2.0, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012 (with minor corrections applied 
November 26, 2013);
(4) WEQ-003, Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS) Data 
Dictionary Business Practice Standards, OASIS Version 2.0, WEQ Version 
003, July 31, 2012 (with minor corrections applied November 26, 2013);

[[Page 56955]]

(5) WEQ-004, Coordinate Interchange, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012 
(with Final Action ratified December 28, 2012);
(6) WEQ-005, Area Control Error (ACE) Equation Special Cases, WEQ 
Version 003, July 31, 2012;
(7) WEQ-006, Manual Time Error Correction, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 
2012;
(8) WEQ-007, Inadvertent Interchange Payback WEQ Version 003, July 31, 
2012;
(9) WEQ-008, Transmission Loading Relief (TLR)--Eastern 
Interconnection, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012 (with minor corrections 
applied November 28, 2012);
(10) WEQ-011, Gas/Electric Coordination, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 
2012;
(11) WEQ-012, Public Key Infrastructure (PKI), WEQ Version 003, July 
31, 2012 (with Final Actions ratified on October 4, 2012);
(12) WEQ-013, Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS) 
Implementation Guide, OASIS Version 2.0, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012 
(with minor corrections applied November 26, 2013);
(13) WEQ-015, Measurement and Verification of Wholesale Electricity 
Demand Response, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012; and
(14) WEQ-021, Measurement and Verification of Energy Efficiency 
Products, WEQ Version 003, July 31, 2012.

    Note:  The following appendix will not be published in the Code 
of Federal Regulations.

List of Entities Filing Comments on WEQ Version 003 NOPR in Docket No. 
RM05-5-022, and the Abbreviations Used To Identify Them

 Bonneville Power Administration (Bonneville)
 Clark Public Utilities (Clark Public Utilities)
 Duke Energy Corporation (Duke Energy)
 Edison Electric Institute (EEI)
 ISO/RTO Council
 American Public Power Association, together with Florida 
Municipal Power Agency (APPA)
 Open Access Technology International (OATI)
 PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM)
 City of Seattle, City Light Department (Seattle)
 Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County (Snohomish) 
(reply comments)
 City of Tacoma, Department of Public Utilities, Light Division 
(Washington), dba Tacoma Power (Tacoma Power)
 Transmission Dependent Utility Systems (TDU Systems) \163\

    \163\ These comments were submitted on behalf of four rural 
electric generation and transmission cooperatives (Arkansas Electric 
Cooperative Corporation; Kansas Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.; 
North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation; and Seminole 
Electric Cooperative, Inc.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2014-22601 Filed 9-23-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P