[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 147 (Monday, August 1, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50290-50298]
[FR Doc No: 2016-17843]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 35

[Docket No. RM16-8-000; Order No. 828]

Requirements for Frequency and Voltage Ride Through Capability of
Small Generating Facilities

AGENCY:  Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy.

ACTION:  Final rule.

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

SUMMARY:  The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is
modifying the pro forma Small Generator Interconnection Agreement
(SGIA). The pro forma SGIA establishes the terms and conditions under
which public utilities must provide interconnection service to small
generating facilities of no larger than 20 megawatts. The Commission is
modifying the pro forma SGIA to require newly interconnecting small
generating facilities to ride through abnormal frequency and voltage
events and not disconnect during such events. The specific ride through
settings must be consistent with Good Utility Practice and any
standards and guidelines applied by the transmission provider to other
generating facilities on a comparable basis. The Commission already
requires generators interconnecting under the Large Generator
Interconnection Agreement to meet such requirements, and it would be
unduly discriminatory not to also impose these requirements on small
generating facilities. The Commission concludes that newly
interconnecting small generating facilities should have ride through
requirements comparable to large generating facilities.

DATES:  This final rule will become effective October 5, 2016.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Monica Taba (Technical Information), Office of Electric Reliability,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC

20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Alan Rukin (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Order No. 828

Final Rule

    1. In this Final Rule, the Commission modifies the pro forma Small
Generator Interconnection Agreement (SGIA) originally set forth in
Order No. 2006 \1\ and revised in Order No. 792 \2\ to require small
generating facilities interconnecting through the SGIA to ride through
abnormal frequency and voltage events and not disconnect during such
events.\3\ Pursuant to section 206 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), the
Commission finds that, given the changes to conditions since the
Commission last evaluated whether to impose ride through requirements
on small generating facilities, the revisions to the pro forma SGIA are
necessary to remedy undue discrimination by ensuring that small
generating facilities have ride through requirements comparable to
large generating facilities.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Standardization of Small Generator Interconnection
Agreements and Procedures, Order No. 2006, FERC Stats. & Regs. ]
31,180, order on reh'g, Order No. 2006-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ]
31,196 (2005), order granting clarification, Order No. 2006-B, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,221 (2006) (Order No. 2006).
    \2\ Small Generator Interconnection Agreements and Procedures,
Order No. 792, 145 FERC ] 61,159 (2013), clarified, Order No. 792-A,
146 FERC ] 61,214 (2014) (Order No. 792).
    \3\ In Order No. 2003, the Commission defined ``ride through''
to mean a generating facility staying connected to and synchronized
with the transmission system during system disturbances within a
range of over- and under-frequency conditions, in accordance with
Good Utility Practice. Standardization of Generator Interconnection
Agreements and Procedures, Order No. 2003, FERC Stats. & Regs. ]
31,146, at P 562 n.88 (2003), order on reh'g, Order No. 2003-A, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,160, order on reh'g, Order No. 2003-B, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,171 (2004), order on reh'g, Order No. 2003-C,
FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,190 (2005), aff'd sub nom. Nat'l Ass'n of
Regulatory Util. Comm'rs v. FERC, 475 F.3d 1277 (D.C. Cir. 2007),
cert. denied, 552 U.S. 1230 (2008) (Order No. 2003). Reliability
Standard PRC-024-1 requires bulk electric system generation to ride
through over- and under-voltage conditions.
    \4\ 16 U.S.C. 824e.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. As a result of this Final Rule, small generating facilities are
required to not disconnect automatically or instantaneously from the
system or equipment of the transmission provider and any affected
systems for an under-frequency or over-frequency condition, or an
under-voltage or over-voltage condition. Furthermore, the transmission
provider must coordinate the small generating facility's protective
equipment settings with any automatic load shedding program (e.g.,
under-frequency load shedding, under-voltage load shedding). The
specific ride through settings must be consistent with Good Utility
Practice and any standards and guidelines applied by the transmission
provider to other generating facilities on a comparable basis. These
requirements will apply to new interconnection customers that execute
or request the unexecuted filing of an SGIA on or after the effective
date of this Final Rule. These requirements will also apply to existing
interconnection customers that, pursuant to a new interconnection
request, execute or request the unexecuted filing of a new or modified
SGIA on or after the effective date of this Final Rule.

I. Background

    3. The pro forma SGIA establishes the terms and conditions under
which public utilities must provide interconnection service to small
generating facilities of no larger than 20 megawatts (MW). Currently,
the pro forma SGIA does not mandate that small generating facilities
have the capability to ride through voltage or frequency disturbances.
    4. In Order No. 2006, the Commission explored whether voltage ride
through requirements proposed for large wind generating facilities
should apply to small generating facilities.\5\ A commenter during that
proceeding asked the Commission to implement ride through standards for
small generating facilities similar to those proposed for large
generating facilities. However, other commenters responded that special
capabilities, such as low voltage ride through, were not needed for any
small generating facility, whether wind-powered or not. The Commission
concluded that wind generating facilities interconnecting under Order
No. 2006 would be small and would have minimal impact on the
transmission provider's electric system and, therefore, need not be
subject to ride through requirements.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Order No. 2006, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,180 at P 24.
    \6\ Id. The penetration of small generating facilities has
increased since the Commission analyzed the impact of small
generating facilities in Order No. 2006. See infra P 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. More recently, the Commission again addressed these requirements
with regard to small generating facilities in Order No. 792.\7\ In that
proceeding, the Commission proposed to revise section 1.5.4 of the pro
forma SGIA to address the reliability concern related to automatic
disconnection of small generating facilities during over- and under-
frequency events, which could become a greater concern at high
penetrations of distributed energy resources.\8\ The proposed revisions
to section 1.5.4 would have required the interconnection customer to
design, install, maintain, and operate its small generating facility,
in accordance with the latest version of the applicable standards to
prevent automatic disconnection during over- and under-frequency
events.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Order No. 792, 145 FERC ] 61,159.
    \8\ Small Generator Interconnection Agreements and Procedures,
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 142 FERC ] 61,049, at P 46 (2013)
(Order No. 792 NOPR). NERC defines distributed energy resources to
mean resources that are distributed geographically and not
centralized like traditional generation resources. NERC, Essential
Reliability Services Task Force Measures Report, (Nov. 2015), http://www.nerc.com/comm/Other/essntlrlbltysrvcstskfrcDL/ERSTF%20Framework%20Report%20-%20Final.pdf.
    \9\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. The Commission declined to adopt this proposed revision in Order
No. 792.\10\ Instead, the Commission recognized that the Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) was, at the time, in the
process of amending IEEE Standard 1547, which is an interconnection
standard for interconnecting distributed resources with electric power
systems that is referenced in the Small Generator Interconnection
Procedures.\11\ The Commission also noted that IEEE was about to begin
a full IEEE Standard 1547 revision process in 2014, where frequency and
voltage ride through requirements in the standard were to be evaluated.
The Commission concluded that it would continue to monitor the IEEE
Standard 1547 revision process and could revise the pro forma SGIA as
it relates to IEEE Standard 1547 in the future, if necessary.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Order No. 792, 145 FERC ] 61,159 at P 220.
    \11\ Id.
    \12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. Since the Commission issued Order No. 792, IEEE has completed a
partial revision of IEEE Standard 1547, which is IEEE Standard 1547a.
IEEE is now in the process of fully revising IEEE Standard 1547. The
partially revised standard, IEEE Standard 1547a, permits generating
facilities to have wider trip settings compared with IEEE Standard
1547. These wider trip settings allow generating facilities to stay
connected to the grid for greater frequency or voltage excursions
facilitating their ability to ride through such excursions. IEEE
Standard 1547a also permits--but does

not mandate--ride through requirements.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ IEEE Standard 1547a contains ``must trip'' requirements; it
does not have ``must ride through'' requirements. By widening the
trip settings, IEEE Standard 1547a permits generating facilities to
trip at a later time. This change effectively allows generating
facilities to ride through disturbances, but they are not required
to do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. Following the Commission's evaluation of the need for ride
through requirements for small generating facilities in the Order Nos.
2006 and 792 rulemaking proceedings, the impact of small generating
facilities on the grid has changed, and the amount has increased. For
example, as the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC)
has noted in multiple reports, the mix of generation resources is
changing and the high penetration of distributed energy resources will
impact the reliability of the electric grid if sufficient care is not
taken to mitigate potential adverse impacts.\14\ NERC also has found
that a lack of coordination between small generating facilities and
Reliability Standards can lead to events where system load imbalance
may increase during frequency excursions or voltage deviations due to
the disconnection of distributed energy resources, which may exacerbate
a disturbance on the Bulk-Power System.\15\ In addition, the Commission
has observed the growth in grid-connected solar photovoltaic generation
since the issuance of Order No. 2006 and the growth in small generator
interconnection requests driven by state renewable portfolio standards,
reductions in cost for solar panels, and deployment of new
technologies.\16\ Moreover, technology now available to newly
interconnecting small generating facilities, such as smart inverters,
permits the capability to ride through frequency and voltage
disturbances.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See NERC Special Report, Potential Bulk System Reliability
Impacts of Distributed Resources (Aug. 2011), http://www.nerc.com/docs/pc/ivgtf/IVGTF_TF-1-8_Reliability-Impact-Distributed-Resources_Final-Draft_2011.pdf; see also NERC Integration of
Variable Generation Task Force Draft Report, Performance of
Distributed Energy Resources During and After System Disturbance
(Dec. 2013), http://www.nerc.com/comm/PC/Integration%20of%20Variable%20Generation%20Task%20Force%2011/IVGTF17_PC_FinalDraft_December_clean.pdf.
    \15\ NERC Essential Reliability Services Report at 21.
    \16\ See, e.g., Order No. 792, 145 FERC ] 61,159 at P 15; Solar
Energy Indus. Ass'n, Solar Industry Data, http://www.seia.org/research-resources/solar-industry-data (last visited Jul. 5, 2016).
    \17\ See Electric Power Research Institute, Recommended Settings
for Voltage and Frequency Ride Through of Distributed Energy
Resources, 28-29 (May 2015), http://www.epri.com/abstracts/Pages/ProductAbstract.aspx?ProductId=000000003002006203.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    9. On March 23, 2016, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking that proposed to add new section 1.5.7 to the pro forma
SGIA,\18\ which would require small generating facilities to ride
through defined frequency and voltage disturbances.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Requirements for Frequency and Voltage Ride Through
Capability of Small Generating Facilities, 154 FERC ] 61,222 (2016)
(NOPR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. In response to the NOPR, eleven entities submitted substantive
comments, which generally support the Commission's proposal.\19\ These
comments have informed our determinations in this Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Appendix A lists the entities that submitted comments and
the shortened names used throughout this Final Rule to describe
those entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Discussion

    11. For the reasons discussed below, we adopt the NOPR proposal and
require small generating facilities to ride through abnormal frequency
and voltage events comparable to large generating facilities. We find
that, given the changes to conditions since the Commission last
evaluated whether to impose ride through requirements on small
generating facilities, the revisions to the pro forma SGIA are
necessary to remedy undue discrimination by ensuring that small
generating facilities have ride through requirements comparable to
large generating facilities.\20\ Specifically, since the Commission's
last consideration of this issue, IEEE has revised its standards, and
IEEE Standard 1547a now provides wider trip settings that allow small
generating facilities more leeway to ride through disturbances. In
addition, distributed energy resources have had an increasing presence
and impact on the electric system. The absence of ride through
requirements for small generating facilities increases the risk that an
initial voltage or frequency disturbance may cause a significant number
of small generating facilities to trip across a particular area or
Interconnection, further exacerbating the initial disturbance. Large
generating facilities are already subject to ride through requirements
to avoid these types of occurrences.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 16 U.S.C. 824e. The Commission routinely evaluates the
effectiveness of its regulations and policies in light of changing
industry conditions to determine if changes in these conditions and
policies are necessary. See, e.g., Integration of Variable Energy
Resources, Order No. 764, FERC Stats. & Regs, ] 31,331 (2012).
    \21\ See Order No. 2003, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,146 at P 562
n.88.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    12. The Commission acknowledges that some areas have a greater
penetration of distributed resources than others at this time.
Nevertheless, the Commission believes that the proposed reforms to the
pro forma SGIA are appropriate on an industry-wide basis now. The
Commission continues to affirm that this Final Rule is not intended to
interfere with state interconnection procedures or agreements in any
way. The pro forma SGIA applies only to interconnections made subject
to a jurisdictional open access transmission tariff (OATT) for the
purposes of jurisdictional wholesale sales. Similar to the approach in
Order Nos. 2006 and 792, the Commission hopes that the changes to the
pro forma SGIA resulting from this Final Rule will be helpful to states
when updating their own interconnection rules, but the states are under
no obligation to adopt the provisions of the Commission's proposal.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Order No. 792, 145 FERC ] 61,159 at P 27; Order No. 2006,
FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,180 at P 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Revision of the Pro Forma SGIA

1. NOPR Proposal
    13. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to revise the pro forma
SGIA to include proposed section 1.5.7, which would require
interconnection customers to ensure the frequency ride through
capability and the voltage ride through capability of small generating
facilities that execute or request the unexecuted filing of
interconnection agreements following the effective date of the proposed
section 1.5.7. Proposed section 1.5.7 would also require a small
generating facility not to disconnect automatically or instantaneously
from the system or equipment of the transmission provider and any
affected systems for an under-frequency or over-frequency condition, or
an under-voltage or over-voltage condition. In addition, the
transmission provider must coordinate the small generating facility's
protective equipment settings with any automatic load shedding program.
2. Comments
    14. The substantive comments filed in response to the NOPR
generally support the proposal to modify the pro forma SGIA.\23\
Commenters agree with the need for fair and equitable treatment between
small and large generating

facilities, the need for effective protections for system operation
while also avoiding increased costs, and the potential to improve
system stability and reliability over the coming years by adopting the
proposed modifications to the pro forma SGIA.\24\ Commenters
acknowledge the proposal's benefits, stating it will simplify
operational conditions, especially considering the rising small
generator penetration levels on the distribution system.\25\ NERC
states that revising the pro forma SGIA to impose ride through
requirements would be consistent with the results of a number of NERC's
reliability assessments.\26\ Trade Associations and PNM agree that the
absence of ride through requirements for small generating facilities
increases the risk that an initial voltage or frequency disturbance may
cause a significant number of small generating facilities to trip
offline, exacerbating the initial disturbance.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Peak Reliability Comments at 3; Idaho Power Comments at 2;
PNM Comments at 1; SoCal Edison Comments at 2; ISO/RTO Council
Comments at 6; Trade Associations Comments at 4; Bonneville Comments
at 1; EPRI Comments at 7; NERC Comments at 2; PG&E Comments at 2.
    \24\ SoCal Edison Comments at 2; Peak Reliability Comments at 3;
EPRI Comments at 7.
    \25\ PNM Comments at 2; Trade Associations Comments at 7.
    \26\ NERC Comments at 4.
    \27\ PNM Comments at 2; Trade Associations Comments at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    15. Idaho Power claims that if more small generation facilities
connect to its system, without the proposed changes to the pro forma
SGIA, it would become increasingly difficult for it to comply with
Reliability Standards PRC-006-2 (Automatic Underfrequency Load
Shedding) and BAL-003-1.1 (Frequency Response and Frequency Bias
Setting).\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Idaho Power Comments at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    16. The ISO/RTO Council recommends that the proposed required
characteristics for small generating facilities should be demonstrated
``as tested,'' and that this should be specified in the pro forma SGIA
section 1.5.7. The ISO/RTO Council notes that demonstrating
characteristics ``as tested'' is already required under section 24 of
the large generator interconnection agreement (LGIA). The ISO/RTO
Council further explains that, while the pro forma SGIA does not
presently have such language, the ``as tested'' requirement applies to
small generating facilities pursuant to the directives in Order No.
2006.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ ISO/RTO Council Comments at 7 (citing Order No. 2006, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,180 at P 59).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    17. Some commenters request that the Commission delay
implementation of the Final Rule. While EPRI does not believe that
additional action is required for other existing interconnected small
generating facilities, EPRI comments that additional reliability
studies may be required if aggregate penetration levels increase
sufficiently before the modifications to the pro forma SGIA and revised
IEEE Standard 1547 become effective.\30\ EPRI notes the need for timely
revision and balloting of IEEE Standard 1547, as well as prompt
adoption of the standard.\31\ Trade Associations suggest waiting until
after key industry standards are approved and the safety and
effectiveness of smart inverter technology is validated. \32\ Trade
Associations request time to allow entities to resolve outstanding
concerns such as personnel and asset safety, as well as the ability to
effectively coordinate protections systems between the local utility
and interconnecting resources.\33\ EPRI and IEEE assert that relevant
stakeholders, including transmission owners and transmission operators,
should engage with the IEEE Standard 1547 revision process to ensure
that the final framework and requirements for ride through can be
consistently applied to meet individual system needs.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ EPRI Comments at 7.
    \31\ Id. at 7-8.
    \32\ Trade Associations Comments at 7-8; EPRI Comments at 7-8.
    \33\ Trade Associations Comments at 7-8.
    \34\ EPRI Comments at 7-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. Trade Associations claim that the new ride through capability
requirements are only possible through smart inverter technology, but
point out that key associated specifications contained in the reference
standards remain unapproved. Trade Associations explain that
distribution feeders are often designed as radial feeders that depend
on remote generation to quickly disconnect when the utility source is
disconnected. According to Trade Associations, failure to do so may
result in unintentional islands which create safety hazards for
personnel and customers, as well as liability concerns. Trade
Associations caution that directing small generation facilities to ride
through disturbances may create islanding conditions and relaxed
response to fault conditions.
    19. Further, Trade Associations claim that more industry discussion
is needed to ensure that small generators' interconnections meet the
unique regional utility safety and reliability concerns before the
proposed revisions to section 1.5.7 of the pro forma SGIA are adopted.
Trade Associations suggest that the Commission include the issues in
this proceeding in the three regional technical conferences recommended
by Edison Electric Institute in Docket No. RM16-6-000.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ Trade Associations Comments at 13-14. In Docket No. RM16-6-
000, the Commission issued a Notice of Inquiry seeking comment on
the need for reforms to its rules and regulations regarding the
provision and compensation of primary frequency response.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    20. Trade Associations also suggest that the Commission explore how
changes made to the pro forma SGIA often influence state regulations.
Trade Associations note that distribution level interconnections are
broadly supported by industry standards and company interconnection
rules; and alignment to pro forma SGIA may be inappropriate for some
state regulations.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Trade Associations Comments at 14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Commission Determination
    21. As discussed above, we find the revisions to the pro forma SGIA
adopted herein are necessary to remedy treatment that is unjust,
unreasonable, and unduly discriminatory and preferential because there
is no technical or economic basis to require small and large generating
facilities to follow different requirements in regards to voltage and
frequency ride through. Our revisions will place similar requirements
on large generating facilities and small generating facilities for ride
through capabilities. As discussed above, the NOPR proposal received
widespread support from commenters. Further, the absence of ride
through requirements for small generating facilities may have adverse
impacts on the reliability of the electric grid. We find that the lack
of ride through requirements for small generating facilities is unduly
discriminatory. This is due to the increased presence and impact of
small generating facilities, including distributed energy resources, on
the electric system, that could create reliability issues if they do
not have the capability to ride through voltage or frequency
disturbances. Further, improvements in technology, such as smart
inverters, make it economically feasible for small generating
facilities to ride through voltage and frequency disturbances. We
acknowledge that some areas have a greater penetration of distributed
resources than others at this time. Nevertheless, we believe that the
proposed reforms to the pro forma SGIA are appropriate on an industry-
wide basis now and that deferred action would not be appropriate.
    22. We recognize the work of the IEEE 1547 Working Group, but we
determine that there is a pressing need to establish ride through
capability requirements at this time because we expect a continuing
increase in penetration of small generating facilities. The revisions
to the pro forma SGIA that we now approve will require the small

generating facility to implement ride through settings based on a
technical standard established by the transmission provider.
    23. While Trade Associations point out that IEEE is revising IEEE
Standard 1547, the standard does not currently require ride through
capability. We are acting now to ensure that all affected
jurisdictional small generating facilities will have the ride through
capability, as allowed by IEEE Standard 1547a.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ As we also explained in the NOPR, the Commission's proposal
was not intended to impede the ongoing efforts of the IEEE 1547
Working Group, and we reiterate that point here. NOPR, 154 FERC ]
61,222 at P 8 n.19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    24. We are persuaded by the ISO/RTO Council's recommendation to add
the ``as tested'' language to section 1.5.7 of the pro forma SGIA to
harmonize the requirements between the pro forma SGIA and the pro forma
LGIA. Pursuant to this ``as tested'' language, the interconnection
customer must provide the successfully completed test results to the
transmission provider in a similar manner as in section 24.4 of the pro
forma LGIA. We believe that the addition of ``as tested'' language does
not create an extra burden on either party to an interconnection
agreement because the pro forma SGIA already includes testing
requirements in section 2.1.\38\ The ``as tested'' language assures the
transmission provider that the required ride through capability can
actually be performed by the small generating facility.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ Pro forma SGIA, Section 2.1 ``Equipment Test and
Inspection.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    25. We hereby adopt new section 1.5.7 of the pro forma SGIA showing
the changes made to the Commission's proposal in the NOPR as follows:

    1.5.7 The Interconnection Customer shall ensure ``frequency ride
through'' capability and ``voltage ride through'' capability of its
Small Generating Facility. The Interconnection Customer shall enable
these capabilities such that its Small Generating Facility shall not
disconnect automatically or instantaneously from the system or
equipment of the Transmission Provider and any Affected Systems for
a defined under-frequency or over-frequency condition, or an under-
voltage or over-voltage condition, as tested pursuant to section 2.1
of this agreement. The defined conditions shall be in accordance
with Good Utility Practice and consistent with any standards and
guidelines that are applied to other generating facilities in the
Balancing Authority Area on a comparable basis. . . .

    26. We recognize the Trade Associations' concern about potential
tension between ride through requirements and anti-islanding
protection. Ensuring the safety of utility lineworkers is critically
important, and an issue the Commission takes seriously. Based on our
consideration of the record, we believe that the ride through
requirements adopted herein are technically and safely achievable. In
particular, we note that this Final Rule provides significant
flexibility for transmission providers to account for potential safety
and islanding concerns. For example, the transmission provider can
determine specific ride through settings needed to address those
concerns so long as those settings are consistent with Good Utility
Practice and any standards and guidelines applied to other generating
facilities on a comparable basis.
    27. Furthermore, we note that islanding and personnel safety are
not new issues resulting from this Final Rule; to the contrary, they
will continue to be important concerns regardless of the reforms
adopted in this Final Rule. Accordingly, we emphasize the importance of
implementing ride through requirements through careful coordination
between the interconnection customer and the transmission provider, as
well as the utilization of appropriate safety procedures for utility
personnel, particularly effective and thorough communication for
lineworkers in the field, when performing remedial actions following a
system disturbance. We support the continued efforts by industry to
explore innovative ways to detect island conditions in order to
mitigate the risk of unintentional islands.
    28. In light of our goal to prevent undue discrimination, we seek
to provide guidelines that will be applied to generating facilities on
a comparable basis, while allowing for justified differences on a case
by case basis. For example, if a transmission provider believes a
particular facility has a higher risk of unintentional islanding due to
specific conditions on that facility, the revisions to the pro forma
SGIA will permit the transmission provider to coordinate with the small
generating facility to set ride through settings appropriate for those
conditions, in accordance with Good Utility Practice and the
appropriate technical standards. For facilities with a lower risk of
forming an unintentional island, the transmission provider can
implement a longer ride through requirement, in accordance with Good
Utility Practice and the appropriate technical standards. We believe
that the flexibility provided by section 1.5.7 allows for appropriate
ride through requirements while recognizing the need to address any
safety concerns.

B. Referencing Specific Technical Standards

1. NOPR Proposal
    29. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to avoid prescriptive
frequency and voltage ride through requirements to allow for the
development of appropriate system- specific standards, noting that the
standards can be based on work developed by recognized standards
settings bodies, such as IEEE.
2. Comments
    30. Commenters request that the proposed rule contain explicit
references to standards such as the Reliability Standards and IEEE and
UL standards.\39\ The ISO/RTO Council states that Reliability Standards
already provide requirements for coordination of automatic under-
frequency generator tripping with automatic under-frequency load
shedding programs that should be incorporated in the new ride through
requirements. The ISO/RTO Council suggests that the pro forma SGIA
explicitly reference Reliability Standard PRC-024 (Generator Frequency
and Voltage Protective Relay Settings) and applicable regional
Reliability Standards as part of the definition of ``Good Utility
Practice'' and for the coordination of automatic generator tripping
with automatic load shedding.\40\ The ISO/RTO Council also recommends
that the pro forma SGIA refer to the Reliability Standards and regional
Reliability Standards for coordination of automatic generator tripping
with automatic load shedding, and as appropriate, permit individual
transmission providers to also reference their automatic load-shed
program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ ISO/RTO Council Comments at 7.
    \40\ Id. at 6-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    31. Commenters assert that specifying certain technical standards
would be beneficial for consistent enforceability; specifically, some
commenters suggest that the pro forma SGIA reference IEEE and UL 1741
standards to describe ``Good Utility Practice.'' \41\ EPRI and IEEE
comment that failure to harmonize ride through requirements with the
proposed draft IEEE 1547 requirements may introduce confusion and
ultimately delay testing and compliance, exposing the electric system
to an increased reliability risk.\42\ PNM recognizes that there are
challenges to developing specific settings applicable to all small
generating facilities.\43\ However, PNM states that the Commission
should still

consider documenting some ride through expectation similar to those
outlined in the LGIA requirements. PNM requests that the pro forma SGIA
revisions consider a minimum ride through duration based on fault
clearing times and a minimum voltage. PNM also requests that the
Commission specify the location where the frequency and voltage
measurements are taken to comply with the requirements, such as the
point of interconnection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ PNM Comments at 3; EPRI Comments at 13; IEEE Comments at 2.
    \42\ EPRI Comments at 13; IEEE Comments at 2.
    \43\ PNM Comments at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    32. SoCal Edison observes that the California Public Utilities
Commission (CPUC) has established, through its retail Rule 21 tariff,
smart inverter requirements for small generators interconnecting to the
distribution systems of California's investor owned utilities, and low/
high voltage ride through and low/high frequency ride through are part
of the new required capabilities for small generators.\44\ SoCal Edison
explains that the CPUC ordered all investor owned utilities ``to seek
approval as may be needed for conforming changes to harmonize their
federal wholesale Tariffs interconnection specifications with the
revisions to Electric Tariff Rule 21.'' \45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ SoCal Edison Comments at 3.
    \45\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Commission Determination
    33. We are not persuaded by commenters' arguments for the need to
reference specific technical standards and decline to incorporate by
reference any specific standard into the pro forma SGIA or to specify
ride through duration and voltage and frequency levels. We therefore
decline to modify the NOPR proposal in this regard.
    34. To accommodate the differences in voltage and frequency ride
through capabilities inherent in the different generation technologies,
we believe that requiring basic performance expectations without
explicitly specifying the duration or voltage and frequency levels
allows the flexibility to apply appropriate ride through settings with
coordination and approval of the transmission operator. As EPRI and
IEEE note, the ride through requirement framework in the draft IEEE
Standard 1547 is being structured along ``performance categories'' that
take into account the technological differences of various types of
small generating facilities. Once finalized, IEEE Standard 1547 may be
used as a technical guide to meet the requirements adopted herein.
Until revisions to IEEE Standard 1547 are finalized, however,
transmission providers and affected interconnection customers must
coordinate appropriate alternative frequency and voltage ride through
settings.
    35. Furthermore, as a pragmatic matter, by setting minimum ride
through capability requirements that are not tied to a specific
standard, the requirements in section 1.5.7 of the pro forma SGIA would
remain applicable following any updates from IEEE Standard 1547 or
other applicable standards, without having to modify the pro forma SGIA
each time any such standard is updated.
    36. In response to PNM's clarification request, we clarify that the
point of interconnection is the appropriate place to measure frequency
and voltage to comply with the ride through requirements.

C. Regional Differences

1. NOPR Proposal
    37. The Commission proposed to permit RTOs and ISOs to seek
``independent entity variations'' from the proposed revisions to the
pro forma SGIA.
2. Comments
    38. Multiple commenters support the Commission's proposal to permit
RTOs and ISOs to seek ``independent entity variations'' from the
proposed revisions to the pro forma SGIA.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ Trade Associations Comments at 12-13; SoCal Edison Comments
at 4; ISO/RTO Council Comments at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    39. Trade Associations request that the Commission also affirm the
ability of transmission providers that are not members of RTOs or ISOs
to seek variations from the pro forma SGIA to ensure consistency with
regional reliability requirements. Trade Associations explain that
differences in resource penetration and configuration (such as state
renewable portfolio standards or wind generation in remote locations)
have led to regional reliability requirements. Trade Associations note
that the Commission recognized in Order No. 2003 that such regional
reliability requirements might justify variations to pro forma
interconnection agreements and procedures.\47\ SoCal Edison believes
that, to the extent that some regions may need additional time to
implement the proposed ride through requirements on small generating
facilities, the Commission should grant such time.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ Trade Associations Comments at 12-13.
    \48\ SoCal Edison Comments at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Commission Determination
    40. We adopt the NOPR proposal and permit ISOs and RTOs to seek
``independent entity variations'' from revisions to the pro forma
SGIA.\49\ Also, as proposed in the NOPR, if a transmission provider
seeks a deviation from section 1.5.7 of the pro forma SGIA, it must
demonstrate that the deviation is consistent with or superior to the
principles set forth in this Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ See Order No. 792, 145 FERC ] 61,159 at P 274 (citing Order
No. 2003, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,146 at PP 822-827).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    41. In addition, we clarify that we will also consider requests for
``regional reliability variations,'' provided that such requests are
supported by references to regional Reliability Standards, explain why
these regional Reliability Standards support the requested variation,
and include the text of the referenced Reliability Standards.\50\ While
some regions currently have greater penetration of small generation
facilities than others, we are acting now to set a national minimum
ride through capability before future increases in deployment of small
generation facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ See id. P 273 (citing Order No. 2006, FERC Stats. & Regs. ]
31,180 at P 546).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Compliance and Implementation

    42. Section 35.28(f)(1) of the Commission's regulations requires
every public utility with a non-discriminatory open access transmission
tariff OATT on file to also have an SGIA on file with the
Commission.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ 18 CFR 35.28(f)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    43. We reiterate that the requirements of this Final Rule apply to
all newly interconnecting small generating facilities that execute or
request the unexecuted filing of an SGIA on or after the effective date
of this Final Rule as well as existing interconnection customers that,
pursuant to a new interconnection request, execute or request the
unexecuted filing of a new or modified SGIA on or after the effective
date.
    44. We require each public utility transmission provider that has
an SGIA within its OATT to submit a compliance filing within 65 days
following publication in the Federal Register.\52\ The compliance
filing must demonstrate that it meets the requirements set forth in
this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ For purposes of this Final Rule, a public utility is a
utility that owns, controls, or operates facilities used for
transmitting electric energy in interstate commerce, as defined by
the FPA. See 16 U.S.C. 824(e). A non-public utility that seeks
voluntary compliance with the reciprocity condition of an OATT may
satisfy that condition by filing an OATT, which includes an SGIA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    45. The Commission recently issued Order No. 827, a final rule in
Docket No. RM16-1-000, directing transmission providers to submit SGIA
revisions

related to reactive power requirements to the Commission.\53\ Those
compliance filings are due to the Commission on September 21, 2016. To
facilitate administrative efficiency, we will require the compliance
filings for this Final Rule and Order No. 827 to be filed in one
combined filing. Once this Final Rule is published in the Federal
Register, the Commission will provide a short extension to the
compliance dates in both proceedings such that the compliance dates are
the same.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ Reactive Power Requirements for Non-Synchronous Generation,
Order No. 827, 81 FR 40,793 (Jun. 23, 2016), 155 FERC ] 61,277
(2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    46. As discussed above, we are not requiring changes to
interconnection agreements that were executed prior to the effective
date of this Final Rule. Instead, the requirements of this Final Rule
apply to newly interconnecting small generating facilities that execute
or request the unexecuted filing of an interconnection agreement on or
after the effective date. The requirements of this Final Rule also
apply to existing small generating facilities that, pursuant to a new
interconnection request, require new or modified interconnection
agreements that are executed or requested to be filed unexecuted on or
after the effective date.
    47. Some public utility transmission providers may have provisions
in their existing SGIAs or other document(s) subject to the
Commission's jurisdiction that the Commission has deemed to be
consistent with or superior to the pro forma SGIA or are permissible
under the independent entity variation standard or regional reliability
standard.\54\ Where these provisions would be modified by this Final
Rule, public utility transmission providers must either comply with
this Final Rule or demonstrate that these previously-approved
variations continue to be consistent with or superior to the pro forma
SGIA as modified by this Final Rule or continue to be permissible under
the independent entity variation standard or regional reliability
standard.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ See Order No. 792, 145 FERC ] 61,159 at P 270.
    \55\ See 18 CFR 35.28(f)(1)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    48. We find that transmission providers that are not public
utilities must adopt the requirements of this Final Rule as a condition
of maintaining the status of their safe harbor tariff or otherwise
satisfying the reciprocity requirement of Order No. 888.\56\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ 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, at 31,760-63 (1996),
order on reh'g, Order No. 888-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,048, 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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Information Collection Statement

    49. The following collection of information contained in this Final
Rule is subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
regulations under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995.\57\ OMB's regulations require approval of certain information
collection requirements imposed by agency rules.\58\ Upon approval of a
collection of information, OMB will assign an OMB control number and
expiration date. Respondents subject to the filing requirements of this
Final Rule will not be penalized for failing to respond to this
collection of information unless the collection of information displays
a valid OMB control number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
    \58\ 5 CFR 1320.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    50. The reforms adopted in this Final Rule revise the Commission's
pro forma SGIA in accordance with section 35.28(f)(1) of the
Commission's regulations.\59\ This Final Rule applies to all newly
interconnecting small generating facilities that execute or request the
unexecuted filing of an SGIA on or after the effective date of this
Final Rule as well as existing interconnection customers that, pursuant
to a new interconnection request, execute or request the unexecuted
filing of a new or modified SGIA on or after the effective date, to
ensure frequency ride through capability and voltage ride through
capability in accordance with good utility practice and consistent with
any standards and guidelines that are applied to other generating
facilities in the balancing authority area on a comparable basis. The
reforms adopted in this Final Rule would require filings of SGIAs with
the Commission. The Commission anticipates the revisions required by
this Final Rule, once implemented, will not significantly change
existing burdens on an ongoing basis. With regard to those public
utility transmission providers that believe that they already comply
with the revisions adopted in this Final Rule, they can demonstrate
their compliance in the filing required 65 days after the effective
date of this Final Rule. The Commission will submit the proposed
reporting requirements to OMB for its review and approval under section
3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ 18 CFR 35.28(f)(1).
    \60\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    51. While the Commission expects the revisions adopted in this
Final Rule will provide significant benefits, the Commission
understands that implementation would entail some costs. The Commission
solicited comments on the accuracy of provided burden and cost
estimates and any suggested methods for minimizing the respondents'
burdens. The Commission did not receive any comments concerning its
burden or cost estimates. As explained above, we will require the
compliance filings for this Final Rule and Order No. 827 to be filed in
one combined filing. We expect that this will reduce the burden on
public utility transmission providers at the time the Commission gives
notice of the extension of the compliance date and requirement to
combine compliance filings.
    Burden Estimate: The Commission believes that the burden estimates
below are representative of the average burden on respondents. The
estimated burden and cost for the requirements adopted in this Final
Rule follow.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ Commission staff estimates that industry is similarly
situated in terms of hourly cost (wages plus benefits). Based on the
Commission 2016 average cost (wages plus benefits), $74.50/hour is
used.

                                          FERC 516A Revisions in RM16-8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Annual  number                                      Total annual
                                  Number of     of  responses   Total number    Average burden    burden hrs. &
                                 respondents         per        of responses     (hrs.) & cost     total annual
                                    \62\         respondent                    ($) per response      cost ($)
                                          (1)             (2)     (1)*(2)=(3)  (4).............  (3)*(4)=(5)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conforming SGIA changes to                118               1             118  7.5 hrs.;         885 hrs.;
 incorporate revisions.                                                         $558.75.          $65,932.50
                              ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total....................  ..............  ..............             118  7.5 hrs.;         885 hrs.;
                                                                                $558.75.          $65,932.50
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Cost to Comply: The Commission has projected the additional cost of
compliance as follows: \63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ Number of Applicable Registered Entities.
    \63\ The costs for Year 1 would consist of filing proposed
changes to the pro forma SGIA with the Commission within 65 days of
the effective date of the final revision plus initial
implementation. The Commission does not expect any ongoing costs
beyond the initial compliance in Year 1.

 Year 1: $65,932.50 for all affected entities ($558.75/utility)
 Year 2 and subsequent years: $0

After implementation in Year 1, the reforms proposed in this Final Rule
would be complete.
    Title: FERC-516A, Standardization of Small Generator
Interconnection Agreements and Procedures.
    Action: Revision of currently approved collection of information.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0203.
    Respondents for This Rulemaking: Businesses or other for profit
and/or not-for-profit institutions.
    Frequency of Information: One-time during Year 1.
    Necessity of Information: The Commission adopts changes to the pro
forma SGIA in order to more efficiently and cost-effectively
interconnect generating facilities no larger than 20 MW (small
generating facilities) to Commission-jurisdictional transmission
systems. The purpose of this Final Rule is to revise the pro forma SGIA
so small generating facilities can be reliably and efficiently
integrated into the electric grid and to ensure that Commission-
jurisdictional services are provided at rates, terms and conditions
that are just and reasonable and not unduly discriminatory or
preferential. This Final Rule seeks to achieve this goal by amending
the pro forma SGIA to include new section 1.5.7.
    Internal Review: The Commission has reviewed the changes and has
determined that the changes are necessary. These requirements conform
to the Commission's need for efficient information collection,
communication, and management within the energy industry. The
Commission has assured itself, by means of internal review, that there
is specific, objective support for the burden estimates associated with
the information collection requirements.
    52. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting
requirements by contacting the following: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426 [Attention:
Ellen Brown, Office of the Executive Director], email:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    53. Comments on the collection of information and the associated
burden estimate in the Final Rule should be sent to the Commission in
this docket and may also be sent to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street
NW., Washington, DC 20503 [Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission], at the following email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please reference OMB Control No. 1902-0203
and the docket number of this rulemaking in your submission.

VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    54. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \64\ generally
requires a description and analysis of rules that will have significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The RFA does
not mandate any particular outcome in a rulemaking. It only requires
consideration of alternatives that are less burdensome to small
entities and an agency explanation of why alternatives were rejected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    55. The Small Business Administration (SBA) revised its size
standards (effective January 22, 2014) for electric utilities from a
standard based on megawatt hours to a standard based on the number of
employees, including affiliates. Under SBA's standards, some
transmission owners will fall under the following category and
associated size threshold: Electric bulk power transmission and
control, at 500 employees.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ 13 CFR 121.201, Sector 22 (Utilities), NAICS code 221121
(Electric Bulk Power Transmission and Control).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    56. The Commission estimates that the total number of public
utility transmission providers that would have to modify the SGIAs
within their currently effective OATTs is 118. Of these, the Commission
estimates that approximately 43% are small entities. The Commission
estimates the average cost to each of these entities will be minimal,
requiring on average 7.5 hours or $558.75. According to SBA guidance,
the determination of significance of impact ``should be seen as
relative to the size of the business, the size of the competitor's
business, and the impact the regulation has on larger competitors.''
\66\ The Commission does not consider the estimated burden to be a
significant economic impact. As a result, the Commission certifies that
the reforms adopted in this Final Rule would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ U.S. Small Business Administration, A Guide for Government
Agencies How to Comply with the Regulatory Flexibility Act, at 18
(May 2012), https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/rfaguide_0512_0.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Environmental Analysis

    57. 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.\67\ As we
stated in the NOPR, the Commission concludes that neither an
Environmental Assessment nor an Environmental Impact Statement is
required for the revisions adopted in this Final Rule under section
380.4(a)(15) of the Commission's regulations, which provides a
categorical exemption for approval of actions under sections 205 and
206 of the FPA relating to the filing of schedules containing all rates
and

charges for the transmission or sale of electric energy subject to the
Commission's jurisdiction, plus the classification, practices,
contracts and regulations that affect rates, charges, classifications,
and services.\68\ The revisions adopted in this Final Rule would update
and clarify the application of the Commission's standard
interconnection requirements to small generating facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ Regulations Implementing National Environmental Policy Act,
Order No. 486, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 30,783 (1987).
    \68\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(15).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    58. Therefore, this Final Rule falls within the categorical
exemptions provided in the Commission's regulations, and as a result
neither an Environmental Impact Statement nor an Environmental
Assessment is required.

VIII. Document Availability

    59. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
Internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and
in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal business hours
(8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A,
Washington, DC 20426.
    60. 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 of this document, excluding the last three digits, in
the docket number field.
    61. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's
Web site during normal business hours from the Commission's Online
Support at<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email the Public Reference Room at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
IX. Effective Date and Congressional Notification

    62. The Final Rule is effective October 5, 2016. However, as noted
above, the requirements of this Final Rule will apply only to all newly
interconnecting small generating facilities that execute or request the
unexecuted filing of an SGIA on or after the effective date of this
Final Rule as well as existing interconnection customers that, pursuant
to a new interconnection request, execute or request the unexecuted
filing of a new or modified SGIA on or after the effective date. The
Commission has determined, with the concurrence of the Administrator of
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, that this
Final Rule is not a ``major rule'' as defined in section 351 of the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This Final
Rule is being submitted to the Senate, House, Government Accountability
Office, and Small Business Administration.

    By the Commission.

    Issued: July 21, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.

    Note:  The following Attachment will not appear in the Code of
Federal Regulations.

Appendix A--List of Substantive Commenters (RM16-8-000)

Bonneville Bonneville Power Administration
Trade Associations Edison Electric Institute/American Public Power
Association/Large Public Power Council/National Rural Electric
Cooperative Association
EPRI Electric Power Research Institute
Idaho Power Idaho Power Company
IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
ISO/RTO Council ISO/RTO Council
NERC North American Electric Reliability Corporation
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Peak Reliability Peak Reliability
PNM Public Service Company of New Mexico
SoCal Edison Southern California Edison Company

    In addition, Entergy Services, Inc. submitted non-substantive
comments.

[FR Doc. 2016-17843 Filed 7-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register: November 9, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 216)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 68686-68688]
[DOCID:fr09no10-4]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA-2010-0705; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-206-AD;
Amendment 39-16499; AD 2010-23-10]
RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; McDonnell Douglas Corporation Model DC-
9-14, DC-9-15, and DC-9-15F Airplanes; and Model DC-9-20, DC-9-30, DC-
9-40, and DC-9-50 Series Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: We are superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD)
for the products listed above. That AD currently requires repetitive
high frequency eddy current inspections to detect cracking in the
vertical radius (also known as the ``vertical leg'') of the upper cap
of the center wing rear spar, and repair if necessary. This new AD
expands the area to be inspected by including inspections to detect
cracking of the horizontal flange of the upper cap of the left and
right center wing rear spar, and repair if necessary. This new AD also
adds certain airplanes to the applicability. This AD was prompted by
reports of cracking in the vertical radius of the upper cap of the
center wing rear spar, and the horizontal flange on the inboard side of
the of the rear spar upper cap, which resulted from stress corrosion.
We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking in the vertical
leg or the horizontal flange of the upper cap of the left or right
center wing rear spar, which could cause a possible fuel leak, damage
to the wing skin, and structural failure of the upper cap, and result
in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.

DATES: This AD is effective December 14, 2010.
    The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by
reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of December 14,
2010.

ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
3855 Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800-0019, Long Beach, California 90846-
0001; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 2; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. You may
review copies of the referenced service information at the FAA,
Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington. For information on the availability of this material at the
FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Examining the AD Docket

    You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation,
any comments received, and other information. The address for the
Docket Office (phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>) is Document Management Facility,
U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M-30, West
Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Wahib Mina, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, FAA, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification
Office, 3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137;
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Discussion

    We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR
part 39 to supersede airworthiness

directive (AD) 2004-23-11, Amendment 39-13866 (69 FR 65522, November
15, 2004). That AD applies to the specified products. The NPRM was
published in the Federal Register on August 5, 2010 (75 FR 47242). That
NPRM proposed to continue to require repetitive high frequency eddy
current inspections to detect cracks in the vertical radius (also known
as the ``vertical leg'') of the upper cap of the center wing rear spar,
and repair if necessary. That NPRM also proposed to expand the area to
be inspected by including inspections to detect cracking of the
horizontal flange of the upper cap of the left and right center wing
rear spar, and repair if necessary. In addition, that NPRM proposed to
add certain airplanes to the applicability.

Comments

    We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing
this AD. We received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of
the cost to the public.

Conclusion

    We reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety and
the public interest require adopting the AD as proposed, except for
minor editorial changes. We have determined that these minor changes:
     Are consistent with the intent that was proposed in the
NPRM for correcting the unsafe condition; and
     Do not add any additional burden upon the public than was
already proposed in the NPRM.

Costs of Compliance

    There are approximately 510 airplanes of the affected design in the
worldwide fleet. We estimate that 322 airplanes of U.S. registry will
be affected by this AD. The following table provides the estimated
costs for U.S. operators to comply with this AD.

                                                                     Estimated Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Number of U.S.-
         Action            Work hours     Average labor       Parts      Cost per airplane     registered                    Fleet cost
                                          rate per hour                                        airplanes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inspection.............              3             $85              $0   $255 per                     322   $82,110 per inspection cycle.
                                                                          inspection cycle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Authority for This Rulemaking

    Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to
issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, Section 106, describes the
authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs,
describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.
    We are issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
requirements.'' Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator
finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within
the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition
that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this
rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

    We have determined that this AD will not have federalism
implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a
substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
    For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:
    (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive
Order 12866,
    (2) Is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979),
    (3) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and
    (4) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or
negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

    Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by
reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

0
Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

0
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec.  39.13  [Amended]

0
2. The FAA amends Sec.  39.13 by removing airworthiness directive (AD)
2004-23-11, Amendment 39-13866 (69 FR 65522, November 15, 2004), and
adding the following new AD:

2010-23-10 McDonnell Douglas Corporation: Amendment 39-16499; Docket
No. FAA-2010-0705; Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-206-AD.

Effective Date

    (a) This airworthiness directive (AD) is effective December 14,
2010.

Affected ADs

    (b) This AD supersedes AD 2004-23-11, Amendment 39-13866.

Applicability

    (c) This AD applies to McDonnell Douglas Corporation Model DC-9-
14, DC-9-15, DC-9-15F, DC-9-21, DC-9-31, DC-9-32, DC-9-32 (VC-9C),
DC-9-32F, DC-9-33F, DC-9-34, DC-9-34F, DC-9-32F (C-9A, C-9B), DC-9-
41, and DC-9-51 airplanes; certificated in any category; as
identified in Boeing Service Bulletin DC9-57-223, Revision 1, dated
August 13, 2009.

Subject

    (d) Air Transport Association (ATA) of America Code 57: Wings.

Unsafe Condition

    (e) This AD results from reports of cracking in the vertical
radius (also known as the ``vertical leg'') of the upper cap of the
center wing rear spar, and the horizontal flange on the inboard side
of the rear spar upper cap, which resulted from stress corrosion.
The Federal Aviation Administration is issuing this AD to detect and
correct cracking in the vertical leg or the horizontal flange of the
upper cap of the left or right center wing rear spar, which could
cause a possible fuel leak, damage to the wing skin, and structural
failure of the upper cap, and result in reduced structural integrity
of the airplane.

Compliance

    (f) You are responsible for having the actions required by this
AD performed within the compliance times specified, unless the
actions have already been done.

Restatement of Requirements of AD 2004-23-11, With Revised Service
Information

Inspection

    (g) For all airplanes except Model DC-9-15F airplanes, at the
later of the times specified in paragraphs (g)(1) and (g)(2) of this
AD: Do a high frequency eddy current inspection to detect cracks in
the vertical radius of the upper cap of the center wing rear spar,
in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service
Bulletin DC9-57-223, dated July 21, 2003; or Revision 1, dated
August 13, 2009. After the effective date of this AD, only Revision
1 may be used.
    (1) Before the accumulation of 25,000 total flight cycles.
    (2) Within 15,000 flight cycles or 5 years after December 20,
2004 (the effective date of AD 2004-23-11), whichever occurs first.

Corrective Action

    (h)(1) If no crack is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, then repeat the inspection thereafter at
intervals not to exceed 15,000 flight cycles or 5 years, whichever
occurs first, until the initial inspection required by paragraph (i)
of this AD is done.
    (2) If any crack is found during the inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, before further flight, repair per a method
approved by the Manager, Los Angeles Aircraft Certification Office
(ACO), FAA. For a repair method to be approved by the Manager, Los
Angeles ACO, as required by this paragraph, the Manager's approval
letter must specifically refer to this AD.

New Requirements of This AD

Inspection

    (i) At the later of the times specified in paragraphs (i)(1) and
(i)(2) of this AD: Do a high frequency eddy current inspection to
detect cracking in the vertical leg (also known as the ``vertical
radius'') and horizontal flange of the left and right rear spar
upper cap, inboard and outboard sides, at the bulkhead at wing
station Xcw=58.500, in accordance with the Accomplishment
Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletin DC9-57-223, Revision 1,
dated August 13, 2009. If no cracking is found, repeat the
inspection thereafter at intervals not to exceed 15,000 flight
cycles or 5 years, whichever occurs first. Accomplishment of the
initial inspection required by paragraph (i) of this AD terminates
the requirements of paragraphs (g) and (h)(1) of this AD.
    (1) Before the accumulation of 25,000 total flight cycles.
    (2) Within 15,000 flight cycles or 5 years after accomplishing
the most recent high frequency eddy current inspection required by
paragraph (g) of this AD, whichever occurs first.

Corrective Action

    (j) If any cracking is found during any inspection required by
paragraph (i) of this AD, before further flight, repair the cracking
using a method approved in accordance with the procedures specified
in paragraph (k) of this AD.

Alternative Methods of Compliance (AMOCs)

    (k)(1) The Manager, Los Angeles ACO, FAA, has the authority to
approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the procedures found
in 14 CFR 39.19. Send information to ATTN: Wahib Mina, Aerospace
Engineer, Airframe Branch, ANM-120L, Los Angeles ACO, FAA, 3960
Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, California 90712-4137; telephone
(562) 627-5324; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (2) To request a different method of compliance or a different
compliance time for this AD, follow the procedures in 14 CFR 39.19.
Before using any approved AMOC on any airplane to which the AMOC
applies, notify your principal maintenance inspector (PMI) or
principal avionics inspector (PAI), as appropriate, or lacking a
principal inspector, your local Flight Standards District Office.
The AMOC approval letter must specifically refer to this AD.
    (3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used for any repair required by this AD if it is approved by the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization Designation Authorization
(ODA) that has been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles ACO, to
make those findings. For a repair method to be approved, the repair
must meet the certification basis of the airplane, and the approval
must specifically refer to this AD.
    (4) AMOCs approved previously in accordance with AD 2004-23-11,
Amendment 39-13866, are approved as AMOCs for the corresponding
provisions of paragraph (h)(2) of this AD.

Material Incorporated by Reference

    (l) You must use Boeing Service Bulletin DC9-57-223, Revision 1,
dated August 13, 2009, to do the actions required by this AD, unless
the AD specifies otherwise.
    (1) The Director of the Federal Register approved the
incorporation by reference of this service information under 5
U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51.
    (2) For service information identified in this AD, contact
Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management,
3855 Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800-0019, Long Beach, California 90846-
0001; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, extension 2; fax<PHONE_NUMBER>; e-mail
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
    (3) You may review copies of the service information at the FAA,
1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (4) You may also review copies of the service information that
is incorporated by reference at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA). For information on the availability of this
material at an NARA facility, call<PHONE_NUMBER>, or go to http://
www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/
ibr_locations.html.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on October 21, 2010.
Michael Kaszycki,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-28084 Filed 11-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P