Document ID: FERC-2011-1624-0001
Agency: ferc
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Automatic Underfrequency Load Shedding and Load Shedding Plans Reliability Standards
Posted Date: 2011-10-26T04:00Z

[Federal Register: October 26, 2011 (Volume 76, Number 207)]
[Proposed Rules]               
[Page 66220-66229]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26oc11-22]                         

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 40

[Docket No. RM11-20-000]

 
Automatic Underfrequency Load Shedding and Load Shedding Plans 
Reliability Standards

October 20, 2011.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: Under section 215 of the Federal Power Act, the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission (Commission) proposes to approve Reliability 
Standards PRC-006-1 (Automatic Underfrequency Load Shedding) and EOP-
003-2 (Load Shedding Plans), developed and submitted to the Commission 
for approval by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation 
(NERC), the Electric Reliability Organization certified by the 
Commission. The proposed Reliability Standards establish design and 
documentation requirements for automatic underfrequency load shedding 
programs that arrest declining frequency and assist recovery of 
frequency following system events leading to frequency degradation. The 
Commission also proposes to approve the related Violation Risk Factors 
and Violation Severity Levels, implementation plan, and effective date 
proposed by NERC.

DATES: Comments are due December 27, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by docket number, may be filed in the 
following ways:
     Electronic Filing through http://www.ferc.gov. Documents 
created electronically using word processing software should be filed 
in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned 
format.
     Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable to file electronically 
may mail or hand-deliver comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426.
    Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and 
additional information on the rulemaking process, see the Comment 
Procedures Section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 
    Stephanie Schmidt (Technical Information), Office of Electric 
Reliability, Division of Reliability Standards, Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, 
(202) 502-6568, Stephanie.Schmidt@ferc.gov.
    Matthew Vlissides (Legal Information), Office of the General 
Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8408, Matthew.Vlissides@ferc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    1. Under section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA),\1\ the 
Commission proposes to approve proposed Reliability Standards PRC-006-1

[[Page 66221]]

(Automatic Underfrequency Load Shedding) and EOP-003-2 (Load Shedding 
Plans). The proposed Reliability Standards were developed and submitted 
for approval to the Commission by the North American Electric 
Reliability Corporation (NERC), which the Commission certified as the 
Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) responsible for developing and 
enforcing mandatory Reliability Standards.\2\ The proposed Reliability 
Standards establish design and documentation requirements for automatic 
underfrequency load shedding (UFLS) programs, which are meant to arrest 
declining frequency and assist recovery of frequency following 
underfrequency events and provide last resort system preservation 
measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 16 U.S.C. 824o (2006).
    \2\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ] 
61,062, order on reh'g & compliance, 117 FERC ] 61,126 (2006), aff'd 
sub nom. Alcoa, Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342 (DC Cir. 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. The Commission proposes to approve the related Violation Risk 
Factors (VRFs) and Violation Severity Levels (VSLs), implementation 
plan, and effective date proposed by NERC. The Commission also proposes 
to approve the retirement of the currently effective Reliability 
Standards PRC-007-0, PRC-009-0, and EOP-003-1, and the NERC-approved 
Reliability Standard PRC-006-0.
    3. The Commission seeks comments from NERC and other interested 
persons on specific issues concerning the proposed Reliability 
Standards.

I. Background

A. Underfrequency Load Shedding

    4. An interconnected electric power system must balance load and 
generation in order to maintain frequency within a reliable range.\3\ 
The balance between generation and load within an interconnected 
electric power system is shown in the frequency of the system.\4\ 
Underfrequency protection schemes are drastic measures employed if the 
system frequency falls below a specified value.\5\ The Blackout Report 
provides the following explanation:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Electric Power Research Institute, EPRI Power Systems 
Dynamics Tutorial, Chapter 4 at page 4-78 (2009), available at 
http://www.epri.com (EPRI Tutorial).
    \4\ Id.
    \5\ Id.

    [A]utomatic under-frequency load-shedding (UFLS) is designed for 
use in extreme conditions to stabilize the balance between 
generation and load after an electrical island has been formed, 
dropping enough load to allow frequency to stabilize within the 
island. All synchronous generators in North America are designed to 
operate at 60 cycles per second (Hertz) and frequency reflects how 
well load and generation are balanced--if there is more load than 
generation at any moment, frequency drops below 60 Hz, and it rises 
above that level if there is more generation than load. By dropping 
load to match available generation within the island, UFLS is a 
safety net that helps to prevent the complete blackout of the 
island, which allows faster system restoration afterward. UFLS is 
not effective if there is electrical instability or voltage collapse 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
within the island.\6\

    \6\ U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task Force, Final Report on 
the August 14, 2003 Blackout in the United States and Canada: Causes 
and Recommendations at 92-93 (2004) (Blackout Report).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. UFLS programs are designed for each defined area or system, and 
they are commonly implemented with devices installed on the 
distribution side of the power system.\7\ Factors considered in 
developing a UFLS program include: (1) Underfrequency set point, (2) 
minimum amount of load to shed, and (3) what load and at what locations 
to shed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ UFLS programs are designed to maintain a balance between 
resources and demand in a defined area (e.g., Interconnection, 
Regional Entity area, or planning coordinator area).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Underfrequency Set Point
    6. The underfrequency set point is the frequency at which a 
specified load will disconnect from the system in a UFLS program.\8\ 
Separately, generators have their own underfrequency set points, which 
will disconnect them from the system if the frequency drops to a 
certain value, thus protecting them from damage.\9\ Underfrequency set 
points for load shedding are set above the frequencies at which 
generators disconnect.\10\ This is done to prevent losing additional 
resources that would exacerbate the imbalance between resources and 
demand, resulting in further frequency declines. UFLS programs initiate 
at a specified point to shed the first load block, and if necessary 
additional load blocks at other lower set points, to arrest system 
frequency decline prior to the loss of additional resources.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ In Order No. 693-A, the Commission directed NERC to collect 
the frequency and magnitude of load in UFLS systems. Mandatory 
Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System, Order No. 693, FERC 
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242, order on reh'g, Order No. 693-A, 120 FERC ] 
61,053, at P 145 (2007). NERC submitted a response to this request 
on February 1, 2008 that included the underfrequency set points and 
magnitude of load shed in each Regional Entity. NERC, Response to 
FERC Supplemental Request for Information on the Status of 
Underfrequency Load Shedding, Docket No. RM06-16-000 (filed Feb. 1, 
2008).
    \9\ EPRI Tutorial at page 4-81.
    \10\ Id.
    \11\ Id. at P 4-78, 4-79.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. Once a frequency threshold \12\ is identified, the balance of 
resources and demand to be maintained to prevent the system from 
reaching that frequency threshold is determined. UFLS programs use 
validated models of the power system, which consist of mathematical 
representations of static (e.g., transformers and transmission lines) 
and dynamic (e.g., generators and motor loads) components of the power 
system aggregated to simulate how the system performs during system 
operations.\13\ Models are validated, typically, by comparing actual 
system operations against simulated system operations to ensure the 
simulated system operations are within a defined and acceptable margin 
of tolerance relative to actual system operations. Inaccurate power 
system models may result in a UFLS program that does not perform as 
desired, thus undermining the reliability objective of UFLS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ A frequency threshold is a pre-determined frequency that 
UFLS programs are designed to avoid reaching, as the system may 
become unstable at this frequency.
    \13\ See, e.g., PowerTech Labs Inc., 2010 Evaluation and 
Assessment of Southwest Power Pool (SPP) Under-Frequency Load 
Shedding Scheme, available at http://www.spp.org/publications/SPP-
2010-UFLS-Final.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. A UFLS program is designed to shed sufficient load to arrest 
system frequency decline without shedding too much load such that 
frequency increases above 60 Hz. If a UFLS program is not effective, 
either because of invalid power system models or miscoordination of the 
UFLS program with entities inside and outside of the intended island, 
it may not achieve the reliability objective of preventing cascading 
outages. This, in turn, could further undermine reliability and 
recovery of the Bulk-Power System during a system emergency.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ For example, if not enough load is shed to arrest frequency 
decline, additional resources may disconnect from the 
Interconnection to prevent damage to generators, and thus system 
frequency will continue to collapse. Conversely, if too much load is 
shed, the system frequency could exceed 60 Hz also causing resources 
to disconnect from the Interconnection to prevent damage to 
generators. EPRI Tutorial at page 4-78.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Minimum Amount of Load to Shed
    9. The amount of load to disconnect is the amount of load shed at 
each underfrequency set point, typically expressed in megawatts or 
percent of system peak load or both.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ EPRI Tutorial at page 4-78.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. What Load to Shed
    10. In addition to determining the amount of load to disconnect 
based on validated power system models, a UFLS program identifies what 
loads to shed

[[Page 66222]]

and their locations. Therefore, in deciding what specific loads to 
shed, consideration is given to whether the load is critical (e.g., 
hospitals, police stations, or fire stations). These loads would 
typically not be included in a UFLS program.

B. Mandatory Reliability Standards

    11. Section 215 of the FPA requires a Commission-certified ERO to 
develop mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, which are 
subject to Commission review and approval. Once approved, the 
Reliability Standards may be enforced by the ERO, subject to Commission 
oversight, or by the Commission independently.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See 16 U.S.C. 824o(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    12. Pursuant to section 215 of the FPA, the Commission established 
a process to select and certify an ERO \17\ and, subsequently, 
certified NERC as the ERO.\18\ On March 16, 2007, the Commission issued 
Order No. 693, approving 83 of the 107 Reliability Standards filed by 
NERC, including Reliability Standards PRC-007-0, PRC-009-0, and EOP-
003-1.\19\ The Commission neither approved nor remanded NERC-approved 
Reliability Standard PRC-006-0 in Order No. 693.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric Reliability 
Organization; and Procedures for the Establishment, Approval and 
Enforcement of Electric Reliability Standards, Order No. 672, FERC 
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,204, order on reh'g, Order No. 672-A, FERC 
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,212 (2006).
    \18\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ] 
61,062, order on reh'g & compliance, 117 FERC ] 61,126 (2006), aff'd 
sub nom., Alcoa, Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
    \19\ Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242 at P 603.
    \20\ Id. P 1479.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. NERC-Approved Reliability Standard

1. PRC-006-0
    13. NERC-approved Reliability Standard PRC-006-0 addresses the 
development of a regional UFLS program that is used as a last resort to 
preserve islanding operation following a major system event on the 
Bulk-Power System that could otherwise cause the island system 
frequency to collapse. PRC-006-0 requires regional reliability 
organizations to develop, coordinate, document and assess UFLS program 
design and effectiveness at least every five years. In Order No. 693, 
the Commission determined neither to approve nor remand this ``fill-in-
the-blank'' Reliability Standard because the regional procedures had 
not been submitted, and the Commission held that it would not propose 
to approve or remand PRC-006-0 until the ERO submitted the additional 
information.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Id. P 1477, 1479.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Currently Effective Reliability Standards

1. PRC-007-0
    14. Reliability Standard PRC-007-0 requires transmission owners, 
transmission operators, load serving entities (LSEs) and distribution 
providers to provide, and annually update, their underfrequency data to 
facilitate the regional reliability organization's maintenance of the 
UFLS program database.
2. PRC-009-0
    15. Reliability Standard PRC-009-0 requires that the performance of 
a UFLS system be analyzed and documented following an underfrequency 
event by requiring the transmission owner, transmission operator, LSE 
and distribution provider to document the deployment of their UFLS 
systems in accordance with the regional reliability organization's 
program.
3. EOP-003-1
    16. Reliability Standard EOP-003-1 addresses load shedding plans 
and requires that balancing authorities and transmission operators 
operating with insufficient transmission and/or generation capacity 
have the capability and authority to shed load rather than risk a 
failure of the system. It includes requirements to establish plans for 
automatic load shedding for underfrequency or undervoltage, manual load 
shedding to respond to real-time emergencies, and communication with 
other balancing authorities and transmission operators.

II. Proposed Reliability Standards

    17. On March 31, 2011, NERC filed a petition seeking Commission 
approval of proposed Reliability Standards PRC-006-1 and EOP-003-2 and 
requesting the concurrent retirement of the currently effective 
Reliability Standards PRC-007-0, PRC-009-0, and EOP-003-1 and NERC-
approved Reliability Standard PRC-006-0.\22\ NERC requests an effective 
date for PRC-006-1 and EOP-003-2 of one year following the first day of 
the first calendar quarter after applicable regulatory approvals with 
respect to all Requirements of the proposed Reliability Standards 
except Parts 4.1 through 4.6 of Requirement R4 of PRC-006-1. With 
respect to Parts 4.1 through 4.6 of Requirement R4 of PRC-006-1, NERC 
requests an effective date of one year following the receipt of 
generation data as would be required in draft Reliability Standard PRC-
024-1 \23\ but no sooner than one year following the first day of the 
first calendar quarter after applicable regulatory approvals of PRC-
006-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ NERC Petition at 1. The proposed new Reliability Standards 
are not attached to the NOPR. They are, however, available on the 
Commission's eLibrary document retrieval system in Docket No. RM11-
20-000 and are available on the ERO's Web site, http://www.nerc.com. 
Reliability Standards approved by the Commission are not codified in 
the CFR.
    \23\ PRC-024-1 addresses ``Generator Performance During 
Frequency and Voltage Excursions'' and is currently being developed 
in the NERC standard drafting process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. PRC-006-1

    18. Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-006-1 would apply to planning 
coordinators, ``UFLS entities,'' \24\ and transmission owners that 
``own Elements identified in the UFLS program established by the 
Planning Coordinators.'' NERC states that the primary purpose of the 
proposed Reliability Standard is the establishment of design and 
document requirements for UFLS programs that arrest declining frequency 
and assist recovery of frequency following system events leading to 
frequency degradation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ PRC-006-1 defines ``UFLS entities'' as: ``All entities that 
are responsible for the ownership, operation, or control of UFLS 
equipment as required by the UFLS program established by the 
Planning Coordinators.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    19. NERC states that PRC-006-1 satisfies the Commission's criteria, 
set forth in Order No. 672, for determining whether a proposed 
Reliability Standard is just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or 
preferential and in the public interest.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Order No. 672, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,204 at P 323-37.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    20. According to NERC, PRC-006-1 is designed to achieve a specific 
reliability goal by establishing design and documentation requirements 
for automatic UFLS programs to arrest declining frequency, assist 
recovery of frequency following underfrequency events and provide last 
resort system preservation measures. NERC contends that PRC-006-1 
contains a technically sound method to achieve its reliability goal by 
establishing a framework for developing, designing, assessing and 
coordinating UFLS programs, and that PRC-006-1 is clear and unambiguous 
regarding what is required and who is required to comply with the 
Reliability Standard.
    21. NERC states that PRC-006-1 does not reflect ``best practices'' 
without regard to implementation cost.\26\ NERC contends that it 
achieves a specific reliability goal of establishing design

[[Page 66223]]

and documentation requirements for automatic UFLS programs to arrest 
declining frequency and assist recovery following underfrequency 
events, and that UFLS programs provide last resort system preservation 
measures by shedding load during system disturbances that result in 
substantial imbalance between load and generation. NERC also maintains 
that PRC-006-1 does not aim at a ``lowest common denominator'' but 
instead establishes common performance characteristics that all UFLS 
programs must meet to effectively protect Bulk-Power System 
reliability.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ NERC Petition at 24.
    \27\ Id. at 26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    22. NERC states that PRC-006-1 does not include any differentiation 
in requirements based on entity size, though it provides the 
opportunity for planning coordinators to consider input from smaller 
entities when developing the UFLS program. NERC further explains that 
PRC-006-1 would apply throughout North America, with variances for 
entities within the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC) and 
the Quebec Interconnections.
    23. As proposed by NERC, PRC-006-1 has 14 requirements and 19 sub-
requirements, summarized as follows:
    Requirement R1: Requires each planning coordinator to develop and 
document criteria to identify portions of the bulk electric system that 
may form islands.
    Requirement R2: Requires each planning coordinator to identify the 
islands to serve as a basis for designing its UFLS program. Sub-
Requirements 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 serve as a checklist of items that the 
entity must consider when identifying islands.
    Requirement R3: Requires each planning coordinator to develop a 
UFLS program, including notification of and a schedule for 
implementation by the UFLS entities within its area, that meets the 
specific performance characteristics set forth in sub-Requirements 3.1 
through 3.3 in simulations of underfrequency conditions resulting from 
an imbalance of up to 25 percent within the identified island.
    Requirement R4: Requires each planning coordinator to conduct and 
document a UFLS design assessment at least once every five years that 
determines through dynamic simulation whether the UFLS program design 
meets the performance characteristics in Requirement R3 for each island 
identified in Requirement R2, with sub-Requirements 4.1 through 4.7 
specifying items that the simulation must model.
    Requirement R5: Requires each planning coordinator to coordinate 
its UFLS design with all other planning coordinators whose areas or 
portions of whose areas are also part of the same identified island 
through specific actions identified in Requirement R5.
    Requirement R6: Requires each planning coordinator to maintain a 
UFLS database containing data necessary to model its UFLS program for 
use in event analyses and assessments of the UFLS program at least once 
each calendar year, with no more than 15 months between maintenance 
activities.
    Requirement R7: Requires each planning coordinator to provide its 
UFLS database to other planning coordinators within its Interconnection 
within 30 calendar days of request.
    Requirement R8: Requires each UFLS entity to provide data to its 
planning coordinator(s) according to the format and schedule specified 
by the planning coordinator(s) to support maintenance of the UFLS 
database.
    Requirement R9: Requires each UFLS entity to provide automatic 
tripping of load in accordance with the UFLS program design and 
schedule for application determined by its planning coordinator(s) in 
each planning coordinator area in which it owns assets.
    Requirement R10: Requires each transmission owner to provide 
automatic switching of its existing capacitor banks, transmission 
lines, and reactors to control overvoltage as a result of 
underfrequency load shedding if required by the UFLS program and 
schedule for application determined by the planning coordinator(s) in 
each planning coordinator area in which the transmission owner owns 
transmission.
    Requirement R11: Requires each planning coordinator, in whose area 
a bulk electric system islanding event results in system frequency 
excursions below the initializing set points of the UFLS program, to 
conduct and document an assessment of the event within one year of 
event actuation that evaluates the performance of the UFLS equipment 
(sub-Requirement 11.1), and the effectiveness of the UFLS program (sub-
Requirement 11.2).
    Requirement R12: Requires each planning coordinator, in whose 
islanding event assessment (Requirement R11) UFLS program deficiencies 
are identified, to conduct and document a UFLS design assessment to 
consider the identified deficiencies within two years of event 
actuation.
    Requirement R13: Requires each planning coordinator, in whose area 
a bulk electric system islanding event occurred that also included the 
area(s) or portions of area(s) of other planning coordinator(s) in the 
same islanding event and that resulted in system frequency excursions 
below the initializing set points of the UFLS program, to coordinate 
its event assessment (in accordance with Requirement R11) with all 
other planning coordinators whose areas or portions of whose areas were 
also included in the same islanding event by either: (i) Conducting a 
joint event assessment per Requirement R11 among the planning 
coordinators whose areas or portions of whose areas were included in 
the same islanding event; or (ii) conducting an independent event 
assessment per Requirement R11 that reaches conclusions and 
recommendations consistent with those of the event assessments of the 
other planning coordinators whose areas or portions of whose areas were 
included in the same islanding event; or (iii) conducting an 
independent event assessment per Requirement R11 and where the 
assessment fails to reach conclusions and recommendations consistent 
with those of the event assessments of the other planning coordinators 
whose areas or portions of whose areas were included in the same 
islanding event, identifying differences in the assessments that likely 
resulted in the differences in the conclusions and recommendations and 
report these differences to the other planning coordinators whose areas 
or portions of whose areas were included in the same islanding event 
and to the ERO.
    Requirement R14: Requires the planning coordinator to respond to 
written comments submitted by UFLS entities and transmission owners 
within its planning coordinator area following a comment period and 
before finalizing its UFLS program, indicating in the written response 
to comments whether changes will be made or reasons why changes will 
not be made to the UFLS program, including a schedule for 
implementation (sub-Requirement 14.1) and the UFLS design assessment 
(sub-Requirement 14.2).

B. EOP-003-2

    24. Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-003-2 would apply to 
balancing authorities and transmission operators. NERC states that EOP-
003-2 makes minimal changes to EOP-003-1 by removing references to 
UFLS, which NERC describes as redundant in light of proposed 
Reliability Standard PRC-006-1, and instead focuses proposed 
Reliability Standard EOP-003-2 on undervoltage conditions.

[[Page 66224]]

III. Discussion

    25. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of the FPA, the Commission 
proposes to approve Reliability Standard PRC-006-1 and EOP-003-1 as 
just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the 
public interest. The Commission believes that the UFLS program 
addressed in the proposed Reliability Standards is important to 
arresting declining frequency and assisting recovery of frequency 
following system events that lead to system instability, which can 
result in a blackout. The Commission finds that the proposed 
Reliability Standards are necessary for reliability because UFLS is 
used in extreme conditions to stabilize the balance between generation 
and load after an electrical island has been formed, dropping enough 
load to allow frequency to stabilize within the island. Reliability 
Standard PRC-006-1, in conjunction with the conforming changes to EOP-
003-2, provides last resort Bulk-Power System preservation measures by 
establishing the first national Reliability Standard of common 
performance characteristics that all UFLS programs must meet. In 
addition, the Commission proposes to approve the related VRFs and VSLs, 
implementation plan, and effective date proposed by NERC. Finally, the 
Commission proposes to approve the retirement of the currently 
effective Reliability Standards PRC-007-0, PRC-009-0, and EOP-003-1, 
and the NERC-approved Reliability Standard PRC-006-0.
    26. The Commission addresses or seeks comments from the ERO and 
other interested persons on aspects of the proposed Reliability 
Standards. Specifically, we address or seek comments on the following 
issues: (A) Impact of resources not connected to the bulk electric 
system; (B) validation of power system models used to simulate ULFS 
programs; (C) scope of UFLS events assessments; (D) impact of generator 
owner trip settings outside of the UFLS program; (E) UFLS program 
coordination with other protection systems; (F) identification of 
island boundaries in UFLS programs; (G) automatic load shedding in PRC-
006-1 and manual load shedding in EOP-003-2; (H) elimination of 
balancing authority responsibilities in EOP-003-2; and (I) the ``Lower 
VSL'' for Requirement R8 and the ``Medium'' VRF for Requirement R5 of 
PRC-006-1. These issues also apply to the corresponding Requirements in 
the requested regional variance for WECC in PRC-006-1.

A. Impact of Resources Not Connected to Bulk Electric System Facilities

    27. As described above, UFLS programs are designed to maintain 
balance between resources and load in a defined area (e.g., an 
Interconnection, Regional Entity area, or planning coordinator area). 
When a resource is lost, load exceeds supply causing frequency to 
decrease below its scheduled value (e.g., 60 Hz in the United States). 
Conversely, a loss of load or excess supply can result in higher 
frequencies than scheduled, resulting in an overfrequency condition. As 
a last resort, UFLS programs are initiated during extreme 
underfrequency conditions to reestablish balance by shedding load at 
predetermined frequencies and times to prevent system-wide blackouts.
    28. Requirement R2 of PRC-006-1 requires planning coordinators to 
identify islands to serve as a basis for designing UFLS programs. 
Requirement R3 addresses performance characteristics for UFLS programs. 
Requirement R4 requires each planning coordinator to conduct and 
document the assessment of its UFLS design and determine if the UFLS 
program meets the performance characteristics in Requirement R3 for 
each island identified in Requirement R2.
    29. The simulations outlined in Requirement R4 all concern 
individual generating units greater than 20 MVA gross nameplate rating 
or generating plants/facilities greater then 75 MVA ``connected to the 
bulk electric system.'' However, some generation that meets the 20 MVA 
and 75 MVA criteria is not connected to bulk electric system 
facilities. Accordingly, those resources not connected to bulk electric 
system facilities would not be modeled pursuant to Requirement R4. 
However, a resource not connected to the bulk electric system may serve 
load designed to be shed in a UFLS program. The Commission is concerned 
that failure to account for resources not connected to the bulk 
electric system in a planning coordinator's UFLS program could result 
in the planning coordinator being unaware of how such resources respond 
to underfrequency conditions. If the planning coordinator is unaware of 
how these facilities have responded, it may plan to shed more load than 
is required for an area's frequency to return to normal. This could 
lead to an unintended overfrequency condition if the plan is carried 
out in the operating timeframe. These conditions, in turn, could lead 
the plan to violate the performance characteristics specified in 
Requirement R3.
    30. The performance characteristics identified in Requirement R3 
provide acceptable parameters for developing UFLS programs that are 
designed to restore balance between resources and load. However, the 
Commission is concerned that generation resources or facilities that 
are not connected to the bulk electric system may not be considered 
during the development of UFLS programs.
    31. The Commission seeks comments from the ERO and other interested 
persons as to whether and how all resources required for the reliable 
operation of the bulk electric system, including resources not 
connected to bulk electric system facilities, are considered in the 
development of UFLS programs under Requirements R3 and R4.

B. Validation of Power System Models

    32. Power systems consist of static components (e.g., transformers 
and transmission lines) and dynamic components (e.g., generators and 
motor loads). Mathematical representations of these components are 
aggregated to create an area's power system model. Power system 
planners \28\ and system operators base decisions on simulations, both 
static and dynamic, using area power system models to meet requirements 
in both Commission-approved planning and operational Reliability 
Standards.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Power system planners may include functional entities such 
as transmission planners and planning coordinators.
    \29\ See, e.g., Reliability Standards MOD-010-0, MOD-012-0 and 
TOP-002-2a, Requirement R19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    33. Requirements R4 and R11 of PRC-006-1 require applicable 
entities to use dynamic simulations to design and assess the 
effectiveness of UFLS programs. As previously discussed, UFLS programs 
are designed to provide last resort system preservation measures by: 
(1) Arresting declining frequency; and (2) assisting recovery of 
frequency following underfrequency events. Dynamic simulations that do 
not accurately represent the power system can result in an UFLS program 
that is ineffective.
    34. The Commission believes that the UFLS program design 
requirements established in Requirement R2 and the required assessments 
established in Requirements R4 and R11 of PRC-006-1 are generally 
acceptable and include improvements above the current Reliability 
Standards. Accordingly, the Commission believes that the language in 
the proposed Requirements is appropriate.

[[Page 66225]]

C. UFLS Event Assessments

1. Assessments in the Absence of Island Formation
    35. Requirement R11 of PRC-006-1 requires planning coordinators to 
conduct assessments after a ``BES islanding event results in system 
frequency excursion below the initializing set points of the UFLS 
program.'' The Commission is concerned whether the phrase ``BES 
islanding event'' could be interpreted to mean that a planning 
coordinator only has to assess an event if it meets both of the 
following requirements: (1) System frequency excursions fall below the 
initializing set point for UFLS; and (2) bulk electric system islands 
form within the Interconnection. If the frequency falls below the 
initializing UFLS set point but islands do not form (e.g., because the 
event was not severe enough to isolate portions of the Interconnection, 
or UFLS or other protection systems failed to operate properly to form 
islands), an assessment of the performance of the UFLS program for this 
event is still useful because it can determine if the UFLS program 
operated as expected.
    36. The Commission seeks clarification from the ERO regarding what 
actions must planning coordinators take under Requirement R11 if an 
event results in system frequency excursions falling below this 
initializing set point for UFLS but without the formation of a bulk 
electric system island.
2. Coordination of Assessments and Results
    37. Requirements R5 and R13 of PRC-006-1 require planning 
coordinators that share identified islands to coordinate UFLS program 
design and event assessment. The options for coordinating designs of 
UFLS programs in Requirement R5 include: (1) Developing a common 
program; (2) conducting a joint UFLS design assessment among the 
planning coordinators whose area or portions of whose areas are part of 
the same identified island; or (3) conducting an independent design 
assessment and, in the event the UFLS design assessment fails to meet 
Requirement R3, identify modifications to the UFLS program(s) to meet 
Requirement R3 and report these modifications as recommendations to the 
other planning coordinators.
    38. The options for coordinating event assessments in Requirement 
R13 include: (1) Conducting a joint event assessment per Requirement 
R11 among planning coordinators whose areas were affected; (2) 
conducting an independent event assessment per Requirement R11 that 
reaches conclusions and recommendations consistent with other planning 
coordinators whose areas were affected; or (3) conducting an 
independent event assessment per Requirement R11 and where the 
assessment fails to reach conclusions and recommendations consistent 
with those of the other planning coordinators whose areas were affected 
by the same islanding event, identify differences in the assessments 
and report these differences to the other affected planning 
coordinators. The Commission seeks comments from the ERO and other 
interested persons as to whether the differences should be subsequently 
reported to the reliability coordinator for resolution in the event 
that the process does not resolve differences in the assessments.
    39. The Commission believes that Requirements R5 and R13 provide 
flexibility in coordinating UFLS design programs and event assessments 
among planning coordinators whose areas fall within the same island or 
whose areas are affected by the same event. Accordingly, the Commission 
believes that the language in the proposed Requirements is appropriate.
3. Assessment Timeline for Completion
    40. Requirement R11 of Reliability Standard PRC-006-1 requires a 
planning coordinator to perform an island event assessment within one 
year of an event. If the planning coordinator identifies program 
deficiencies, Requirement R12 requires the planning coordinator to 
conduct and document UFLS design assessments, which are meant to 
consider the deficiencies, within two years of an event. The Commission 
is concerned that this time frame may be too long since it appears that 
island event assessments and consideration of deficiencies could 
reasonably be conducted in a much shorter time frame. Under NERC's 
proposal, deficiencies could remain within a UFLS program for two years 
from an event exposing the Bulk-Power System to instability, 
uncontrolled separation and cascading outages should a frequency event 
occur that the UFLS program mishandles. NERC provided no explanation of 
its basis for the proposed two-year time frame.
    41. The Commission asks the ERO and other interested persons what 
the basis is for proposing a two-year time frame. In addition, the 
Commission seeks clarification from the ERO as to how soon after event 
actuation would an entity need to implement corrections in response to 
any deficiencies identified in the event assessment under Requirement 
R11.

D. Generator Owner Trip Settings Outside of the UFLS Program

    42. Requirements 4.1 through 4.7 of Reliability Standard PRC-006-1 
are intended to capture the effects of generators that trip prior to 
UFLS initiation. As previously discussed, a generator trip normally 
creates an imbalance between resources and load causing system 
frequency to decline. Some generators may need to disconnect from the 
system prior to reaching underfrequency set points to protect their 
components from permanent damage. If this loss occurs during a system 
event, the generator can no longer provide a response to assist in 
arresting frequency decline. This resource loss also counteracts the 
response provided by other resources to arrest frequency decline, 
increasing the likelihood of instability, uncontrolled separation, and 
cascading outages.
    43. We agree that planning coordinators should consider generators 
that trip prior to underfrequency set points when developing their UFLS 
programs. The Commission seeks comments from the ERO and other 
interested persons on how generation losses outside of the UFLS set 
points (i.e., generators having trip settings prior to the UFLS 
underfrequency set points) should be accounted for in UFLS programs 
(e.g., generator owners who trip outside of the UFLS set points could 
procure load to shed to account for the loss in generation).

E. UFLS Program Coordination With Other Protection Systems

    44. Recommendation 21C of the Blackout Report addresses the 
coordination of protection systems.\30\ The recommendation states that 
NERC shall ``determine the goals and principles needed to establish an 
integrated approach to relay protection for generators and transmission 
lines and the use of underfrequency and undervoltage load shedding 
(UFLS and UVLS) programs. An integrated approach is needed to ensure 
that at the local and regional levels, these interactive components 
provide an appropriate balance of risks and benefits in terms of 
protecting specific assets and facilitating overall grid survival.'' 
\31\ Accordingly, an integrated approach requires coordination of all 
types of protection systems (e.g., UFLS, UVLS), internally and 
externally to an entity's

[[Page 66226]]

area, to be responsive to the Blackout Report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ Blackout Report at 159.
    \31\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    45. While PRC-006-1 requires coordination of UFLS programs among 
planning coordinators in Requirements R5, R7, and R13, it does not 
appear to capture the same level of coordination with other protection 
systems as in Requirement R1.2.8 of PRC-006-0.\32\ The Commission seeks 
comments from NERC and other interested persons on whether and how 
coordination with other protection systems is or is not achieved under 
the new requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Requirement 1.2.8 of PRC-006-0 encompasses ``[a]ny other 
schemes that are part of or impact the UFLS program.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Identification of Island Boundaries

    46. Requirement R1 of PRC-006-1 directs planning coordinators to 
develop criteria to select areas that may form islands based on 
historical events and system studies. Historical events and system 
studies provide planning coordinators with the data necessary to 
determine where islands will occur based on the physics of the system. 
Requirement R2.3 clarifies that islands identified in Requirement R1, 
which span two or more Regional Entity areas, should be broken up such 
that each Regional Entity area forms an island. Requirement R2.3 allows 
planning coordinators to ``adjust the island boundaries to differ from 
the Regional Entity area boundaries by mutual consent where necessary'' 
to preserve contiguous island boundaries that better reflect 
simulations. The Commission agrees that identifying island boundaries 
based on where they are likely to occur due to system characteristics, 
as opposed to maintaining rigid Regional Entity area boundaries, should 
result in more effective UFLS programs. Accordingly, the Commission 
encourages cooperation among entities to create UFLS programs that set 
island boundaries based on where separations are expected to occur 
during an underfrequency event.
    47. In its petition, NERC states that the Requirements allow 
planning coordinators to ``select islands including interconnected 
portions of the bulk electric system in adjacent Planning Coordinator 
areas and Regional Entity areas, without the need for coordinating this 
selection with Planning Coordinators in neighboring regions.'' \33\ 
Requirement R2.3 of PRC-006-1, however, requires ``mutual consent'' to 
adjust island boundaries from Regional Entity boundaries. The 
Commission seeks clarification from the ERO concerning the required 
degree of cooperation and/or ``mutual consent'' between planning 
coordinators under the proposed Reliability Standard in order for 
island boundaries to be set so that, while deviating from Regional 
Entity boundaries, they better approximate actual island separation 
boundaries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ NERC Petition at 75-76.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

G. Automatic Load Shedding and Manual Load Shedding

    48. Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-006-1 requires automatically 
shedding predetermined amounts of load if frequency declines to the 
UFLS set point in order to rebalance resources and demand and prevent 
frequency decline that might cause instability, uncontrolled 
separation, or cascading outages. Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-
003-2 requires manual load shedding plans, which may be employed in 
addition to the automatic load shedding in the UFLS program, or to 
mitigate other reliability issues. If load allocated to be shed 
automatically is also planned for manual load shedding, then that load 
resource would be double-counted. Once load is disconnected from the 
system, either automatically or manually, it cannot be used again to 
arrest frequency decline. In the event that a load resource is double-
counted and removed during automatic UFLS, the manual load shedding 
cannot be completed if called upon. Even if additional load is located 
and shed to compensate for this missing load, the system would be put 
into an un-studied state and could have unpredicted, negative 
responses. Accordingly, resources allocated to each type of load 
shedding (i.e., automatic and manual) should not overlap.
    49. There are no requirements in PRC-006-1 to coordinate automatic 
load shedding by UFLS and manual load shedding under EOP-003-2. The 
Commission seeks comments from the ERO and other interested persons on 
how the coordination of automatic and manual load shedding is 
considered in light of the fact that the proposed Reliability Standards 
do not explicitly require coordination.

H. Elimination of Requirements for Balancing Authorities in EOP-003-2

    50. Requirements R2, R4, and R7 of the currently-effective 
Reliability Standard EOP-003-1 apply to transmission operators and 
balancing authorities. Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-003-2 proposes 
to eliminate balancing authorities from Requirements R2, R4, and R7.
    51. Under the proposed modification, balancing authorities would no 
longer: (i) Establish plans for automatic load shedding for 
underfrequency or undervoltage conditions (Requirement R2); (ii) 
consider factors (including frequency, rate of frequency decay, voltage 
level, rate of voltage decay, or power flow levels) in designing an 
automatic undervoltage load shedding scheme (Requirement R4); and (iii) 
coordinate automatic load shedding throughout its area with 
underfrequency isolation of generating units, tripping of shunt 
capacitors, and other automatic actions that will occur under abnormal 
frequency, voltage, or power flow conditions (Requirement R7). In its 
petition, NERC explains that balancing authorities were deleted from 
Requirements R2 and R4 ``because the frequency related aspects of these 
requirements were removed, leaving only consideration of automatic 
undervoltage load shedding in these two requirements.'' \34\ NERC's 
petition, however, does not explain why balancing authorities were 
removed from Requirement R7. Moreover, given that balancing authorities 
would no longer be subject to Requirements R2, R4, and R7 of EOP-003-2 
and are not listed as applicable entities in PRC-006-1, the proposed 
Reliability Standards do not preserve these existing balancing 
authority responsibilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ NERC Petition at 42.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    52. The Commission seeks clarification from the ERO as to why these 
existing balancing authority responsibilities were not incorporated 
into Reliability Standards PRC-006-1 or EOP-003-2. The Commission also 
seeks comments from the ERO and other interested persons as to why 
balancing authorities should not be informed of UFLS program plans that 
directly impact balancing authority functions.

I. Violation Risk Factors and Violation Severity Levels

    53. NERC states that each primary requirement in PRC-006-1 and EOP-
003-2 is assigned a Violation Risk Factor (VRF) and Violation Severity 
Level (VSL) and that these elements support the determination of an 
initial value range for the Base Penalty Amount regarding violations of 
requirements in Commission-approved Reliability Standards, as defined 
in the ERO Sanction Guidelines.
    54. The Commission proposes to approve the VRFs and VSLs in PRC-
006-1 and EOP-003-2. However, the Commission seeks comments from the 
ERO and other interested persons regarding one proposed VSL and one 
proposed VRF for PRC-006-1.
    55. The ``Lower VSL'' assignment for Requirement R8 in PRC-006-1 
applies

[[Page 66227]]

when a UFLS entity fails to provide data to its planning coordinator 
for 5 to 10 calendar days following the schedule specified by the 
planning coordinator. Requirement R8 of PRC-006-1 does not include a 5-
day grace period for providing data to planning coordinators. 
Accordingly, the subject VSL assignment may be inconsistent with the 
Commission's VSL Guideline 3. The guideline states that a VSL ``should 
not appear to redefine or undermine the requirement.'' \35\ The five-
day grace period implicit in the proposed VSL appears to be 
inconsistent with this guideline. In addition, the proposed VSL creates 
a compliance issue. Specifically, it is unclear where a UFLS entity 
falls in the VRF and VSL matrices if it fails to provide data to its 
planning coordinator within 1 to 5 days of its scheduled date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 123 FERC ] 
61,284, at P 32 (2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    56. The VRF for Requirement R5, which requires planning 
coordinators to coordinate their UFLS program design with other 
planning coordinators whose area is in part of the same identified 
island, is proposed as ``Medium.'' NERC states that Requirement R5 is 
``not related to similar reliability goals in other standards.'' \36\ 
However, coordination of load shedding plans is required in a similar 
manner in Requirement R3 of currently effective Reliability Standard 
EOP-003-1,\37\ which includes a VRF of ``High.'' The lack of 
coordination of UFLS programs among planning coordinators within the 
same identified island could lead to ineffective UFLS operations and 
further cascading outages within the island when UFLS is activated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ NERC Petition at 46.
    \37\ Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-003-2 includes the same 
VRF assignment of ``High'' for Requirement R3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    57. Guideline 3 of the Commission's VRF Guidelines states that 
``[a]bsent justification to the contrary, the Commission expects the 
assignment of Violation Risk Factors corresponding to Requirements that 
address similar reliability goals in different Reliability Standards 
would be treated comparably.'' \38\ The Commission seeks clarification 
from the ERO why coordination of load shedding plans is a ``High'' VRF 
for transmission operators and balancing authorities in EOP-003-2 but 
NERC proposes a ``Medium'' VRF for planning coordinators in, PRC-006-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 119 FERC ] 
61,145, at P 25 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

J. Implementation Plan and Effective Date

    58. NERC requests an effective date for PRC-006-1 and EOP-003-2 of 
one year following the first day of the first calendar quarter after 
applicable regulatory approvals with respect to all Requirements of the 
proposed Reliability Standards except Parts 4.1 through 4.6 of 
Requirement R4 of PRC-006-1. With respect to Parts 4.1 through 4.6 of 
Requirement R4 of PRC-006-1, NERC requests an effective date of one 
year following the receipt of generation data as required in 
Reliability Standard PRC-024-1,\39\ but no sooner than one year 
following the first day of the first calendar quarter after applicable 
regulatory approvals of PRC-006-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ PRC-024-1 addresses ``Generator Performance During 
Frequency and Voltage Excursions'' and is currently being developed 
in the NERC standard drafting process under Project 2007-09 
(Generator Verification), which is one of NERC's priority projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    59. NERC contends that the proposed implementation plan is not 
excessively long and allows sufficient time for entities to transition 
and install the necessary processes to become compliant. NERC maintains 
that the one year phase-in for compliance provides planning 
coordinators sufficient time: (1) To develop, modify, or validate (to 
determine that an existing program meets required performance 
characteristics) existing UFLS programs; and (2) to establish a 
schedule for implementation, or validate a schedule for completion of 
program revisions already in progress. Moreover, NERC states that 
transmission owners and distribution providers will comply with the 
schedule determined by planning coordinators but no sooner than the 
effective date of the standard.
    60. The Commission proposes to accept the implementation plan and 
effective date proposed by the ERO for PRC-006-1 and EOP-003-2. 
However, the Commission seeks comments from the ERO and other 
interested persons about any potential reliability gaps that may occur 
during the development and implementation of PRC-024-1, such as how the 
planning coordinators will adequately determine and apply UFLS 
simulations and plans in the absence of generator trip settings.

IV. Information Collection Statement

    61. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations require 
that OMB approve certain reporting and recordkeeping (collections of 
information) imposed by an agency.\40\ Upon approval of a collection(s) 
of information, OMB will assign an OMB control number and expiration 
date. Respondents subject to the filing requirements of this rule will 
not be penalized for failing to respond to these collections of 
information unless the collections of information display a valid OMB 
control number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 5 CFR 1320.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    62. The Commission is submitting these reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements to OMB for its review and approval under section 3507(d) 
of PRA. Comments are solicited on the Commission's need for this 
information, whether the information will have practical utility, the 
accuracy of provided burden estimate, ways to enhance the quality, 
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected, and any 
suggested methods for minimizing the respondent's burden, including the 
use of automated information techniques.
    63. This Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposes to approve 
Reliability Standards PRC-006-1 and EOP-003-2, which would replace 
currently effective Reliability Standards PRC-007-0, PRC-009-0, EOP-
003-1 and NERC-approved Reliability Standard PRC-006-0.\41\ As noted 
previously, Reliability Standard PRC-006-0 was never approved by the 
Commission, and therefore has never been mandatory and enforceable. On 
the other hand, Reliability Standards PRC-007-0 and PRC-009-0 were 
approved by the Commission and are currently mandatory and enforceable. 
Because Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-006-1 incorporates the 
requirements from Reliability Standards PRC-006-0, PRC-007-0, and PRC-
009-0 some of the existing requirements will become mandatory and 
enforceable (where previously they were voluntary), while others 
continue to be so. To properly account for the burden on respondents, 
the Commission will treat the burden resulting from NERC-approved 
Reliability Standard PRC-006-0 as essentially new to the industry, even 
though it is likely that most applicable entities have already been 
complying.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ PRC-006-0 was not approved by the Commission but remained 
effective as a NERC-approved standard (but not mandatory or 
enforceable). The other three standards were approved by the 
Commission. Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power 
System, Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242, order on reh'g, 
Order No. 693-A, 120 FERC ] 61,053 (2007).
    \42\ This statement is made because currently effective 
Reliability Standards PRC-007-0 and PRC-009-0 required UFLS entities 
to follow the UFLS program implemented by Reliability Standard PRC-
006-0. Therefore, it is likely that entities have already been 
following the requirements contained in Reliability Standard PRC-
006-0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    64. The reporting requirements in proposed Reliability Standard 
EOP-

[[Page 66228]]

003-2 are virtually the same as those in currently effective 
Reliability Standard EOP-003-1. The difference is that proposed 
Reliability Standard EOP-003-2 proposes to eliminate balancing 
authorities from Requirements R2 and from Measure M1.\43\ This 
requirement and measure deal with establishing and documenting 
automatic load shedding plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ Balancing authorities are also removed from Requirements R4 
and R7, but these do not have reporting requirements associated with 
them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    65. Public Reporting Burden: Our estimate below regarding the 
number of respondents is based on the NERC compliance registry as of 7/
29/11. According to the NERC compliance registry, there are 72 planning 
coordinators and 126 balancing authorities. The individual burden 
estimates are based on the time needed to gather data, run studies, and 
analyze study results to design or update the UFLS programs. 
Additionally, documentation and the review of UFLS program results by 
supervisors and management is included in the administrative 
estimations. These are consistent with estimates for similar tasks in 
other Commission approved standards.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Number of       Number of     Average burden
   PRC-006-1 (Automatic underfrequency load       respondents    responses per      hours per      Total annual
                shedding) \44\                     annually       respondent        response       burden hours
                                                           (1)             (2)               (3)     (1)x(2)x(3)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PCs *: Design and document Automatic UFLS                                                    120           8,640
 Program......................................
-----------------------------------------------                                ---------------------------------
PCs: Management Review of Documentation.......              72               1                40           2,880
-----------------------------------------------                                ---------------------------------
PCs: Record Retention.........................                                                16           1,152
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................................  ..............  ..............  ................          12,672
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EOP-003-2 (Load Shedding Plans) \45\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Removal of BAs * from Reporting Requirements               126               1  Reporting    -10           -1260
 in R2 and M1 (Burden Reduction)..............
                                                                               ---------------------------------
                                                ..............  ..............     Record     -1            -126
                                                                                Retention
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.....................................  ..............  ..............  .........  .....          -1,386
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net Change in Burden..........................  ..............  ..............  .........  .....          11,286
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* PC = Planning Coordinator; BA = Balancing Authority.

    Total Annual Hours for Collection: (Compliance/Documentation) = 
11,286 hours.
    Total Reporting Cost for Planning Coordinators: = 11,520 hours @ 
$120/hour = $1,382,400.
    Total Record Retention Cost for Planning Coordinators: 1,152 hours 
@ $28/hour = $32,256.
    Total Reporting and Record Retention Cost Savings for Balancing 
Authorities: = (1,260 hours @ $120/hour) + (126 hours @ $28/hour) = 
$154,728.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-006-1 applies to both 
planning coordinators and to UFLS entities. However, the burden 
associated with the UFLS entities is not new because it was 
accounted for under Commission approved Reliability Standards PRC-
007-0 and PRC-009-0.
    \45\ Transmission operators also have to comply with Reliability 
Standard EOP-003-2 but since the applicable reporting requirements 
(and associated burden) have not changed from the existing standard 
to the proposed standard these entities are not included here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total Annual Cost (Reporting + Record Retention) \46\: = 
$1,414,656-$154,728 = $1,259,928.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ The hourly reporting cost is based on the cost of an 
engineer to implement the requirements of the rule. The record 
retention cost comes from Commission staff research on record 
retention requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Title: Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System.
    Action: Proposed Collection FERC-725A.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0244.
    Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit institutions; not-for-
profit institutions.
    Frequency of Responses: On occasion.
    Necessity of the Information: This proposed rule proposes to 
approve the requested modifications to Reliability Standards pertaining 
to automatic underfrequency load shedding. The proposed Reliability 
Standards help ensure the reliable operation of the bulk electric 
system by arresting declining frequency and assisting recovery of 
frequency following system events leading to frequency degradation.
    Internal Review: The Commission has reviewed the proposed 
Reliability Standards and made a determination that its action is 
necessary to implement section 215 of the FPA. These requirements, if 
accepted, should conform to the Commission's expectation for UFLS 
programs as well as procedures within the energy industry.
    66. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting 
requirements by contacting the following: Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, 888 First Street, NE. Washington, DC 20426 [Attention: 
Ellen Brown, Office of the Executive Director, e-mail: 
DataClearance@ferc.gov, phone: (202) 502-8663, fax: (202) 273-0873].
    67. For submitting comments concerning the collection(s) of 
information and the associated burden estimate(s), please send your 
comments to the Commission and to the Office of Management and Budget, 
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20503 
[Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 
phone: (202) 395-4638, fax: (202) 395-7285]. For security reasons, 
comments to OMB should be submitted by e-mail to: oira_
submission@omb.eop.gov. Comments submitted to OMB should include Docket 
Number RM11-20 and OMB Control Number 1902-0244.

V. Environmental Analysis

    68. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental 
Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement

[[Page 66229]]

for any action that may have a significant adverse effect on the human 
environment.\47\ The Commission has categorically excluded certain 
actions from this requirement as not having a significant effect on the 
human environment. Included in the exclusion are rules that are 
clarifying, corrective, or procedural or that do not substantially 
change the effect of the regulations being amended.\48\ The actions 
proposed here fall within this categorical exclusion in the 
Commission's regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ Order No. 486, Regulations Implementing the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations 
Preambles 1986-1990 ] 30,783 (1987).
    \48\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    69. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \49\ generally 
requires a description and analysis of final rules that will have 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
The RFA mandates consideration of regulatory alternatives that 
accomplish the stated objectives of a proposed rule and that minimize 
any significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. The Small Business Administration's (SBA) Office of Size 
Standards develops the numerical definition of a small business.\50\ 
The SBA has established a size standard for electric utilities, stating 
that a firm is small if, including its affiliates, it is primarily 
engaged in the transmission, generation and/or distribution of electric 
energy for sale and its total electric output for the preceding twelve 
months did not exceed four million megawatt hours.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
    \50\ 13 CFR 121.101.
    \51\ 13 CFR 121.201, Sector 22, Utilities & n.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    70. Proposed Reliability Standard PRC-006-1 proposes to establish 
design, assessment, and documentation requirements for automatic UFLS 
program. It will be applicable to planning coordinators and entities 
that are responsible for the ownership, operation, or control of UFLS 
equipment. Proposed Standard EOP-003-2 proposes to remove balancing 
authorities from having to comply with R2 and M1 of the standard. 
Comparison of the NERC compliance registry with data submitted to the 
Energy Information Administration on Form EIA-861 indicates that 
perhaps as many as 8 small entities are registered as planning 
coordinators and 18 small entities are registered as balancing 
authorities. The Commission estimates that the small planning 
coordinators to whom the proposed Reliability Standard will apply will 
incur compliance and recordkeeping costs of $157,184 ($19,648 per 
planning coordinator) associated with the Standard's requirements. The 
small balancing authorities will receive a savings of $154,728 ($8,596 
per balancing authority). Accordingly, proposed Reliability Standards 
PRC-006-1 and EOP-003-2 should not impose a significant operating cost 
increase or decrease on the affected small entities.
    71. Based on this understanding, the Commission certifies that 
these Reliability Standards will not have a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, no regulatory 
flexibility analysis is required.

VII. Comment Procedures

    72. The Commission invites interested persons to submit comments on 
the matters and issues proposed in this notice to be adopted, including 
any related matters or alternative proposals that commenters may wish 
to discuss. Comments are due December 27, 2011. Comments must refer to 
Docket No. RM11-20-000, and must include the commenter's name, the 
organization they represent, if applicable, and their address in their 
comments.
    73. The Commission encourages comments to be filed electronically 
via the eFiling link on the Commission's Web site at http://
www.ferc.gov. The Commission accepts most standard word processing 
formats. Documents created electronically using word processing 
software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format 
and not in a scanned format. Commenters filing electronically do not 
need to make a paper filing.
    74. Commenters that are not able to file comments electronically 
must send an original of their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426.
    75. All comments will be placed in the Commission's public files 
and may be viewed, printed, or downloaded remotely as described in the 
Document Availability section below. Commenters on this proposal are 
not required to serve copies of their comments on other commenters.

VIII. Document Availability

    76. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the 
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an 
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the 
Internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and 
in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal business hours 
(8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, 
Washington, DC 20426.
    77. From the Commission's Home Page on the Internet, this 
information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is 
available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, 
printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type 
the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in 
the docket number field.
    78. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's 
Web site during normal business hours from the Commission's Online 
Support at 202-502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or e-mail at 
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY (202) 502-8659. E-mail the Public Reference Room at 
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.

List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 40

    Electric power; Electric utilities; Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    By direction of the Commission. Commissioner Spitzer is not 
participating.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-27625 Filed 10-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P