[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 143 (Thursday, July 25, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 44900-44909]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17682]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Parts 38 and 284

[Docket No. RM13-17-000]

Communication of Operational Information Between Natural Gas
Pipelines and Electric Transmission Operators

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is
proposing to revise Parts 38 and 284 of the Commission's regulations to
provide explicit authority to interstate natural gas pipelines and
public utilities that own, operate, or control facilities used for the
transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce to share non-
public, operational information with

each other for the purpose of promoting reliable service or operational
planning on either the public utility's or pipeline's system.

DATES: Comments are due August 26, 2013.

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:
Caroline Daly (Technical Information), Office of Energy Policy &
Innovation, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Anna Fernandez (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, 888
First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    1. In this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission is
proposing to revise Parts 38 and 284 of the Commission's regulations to
provide explicit authority to interstate natural gas pipelines and
public utilities that own, operate, or control facilities used for the
transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce to share non-
public, operational information with each other for the purpose of
promoting reliable service or operational planning on either the public
utility's or pipeline's system.\1\ This proposal will help ensure the
reliability of pipeline and public utility transmission service by
permitting transmission operators to share the information that they
deem necessary to promote the reliability and integrity of their
systems with each other. However, recipients of that non-public,
operational information would be subject to a No-Conduit Rule that
prohibits subsequent disclosure of that information to an affiliate or
third party.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ For ease of reference, we will refer to these parties
collectively as ``transmission operators.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background

    2. In recent years, reliance on natural gas as a fuel for electric
generation has steadily increased.\2\ This trend is expected to
continue into the future, resulting in greater interdependence between
the natural gas and electric industries.\3\ Several events over the
last few years, such as the Southwest Cold Weather Event,\4\ show the
crucial interconnection between natural gas pipelines and electric
transmission operators and the need for robust communication between
these industry sectors to ensure that both systems operate safely and
effectively for the benefit of their customers. While entities from
both industries have already begun efforts to improve coordination,
further sharing of non-public, operational information between
transmission operators could enhance system reliability and contingency
planning in both industries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See, e.g., Energy Information Administration, Fuel
Competition in Power Generation and Elasticities of Substitution
(June 2012); Richard Smead, All Industry Segments Working for
Success in Growing Gas-Fired Generation (Nov. 15, 2012), available
at http://www.navigant.com/insights/library/energy/2012/gas_fired_generation/; ISO-NE, Addressing Gas Dependence at 3 (July 2012)
(reliance on natural gas-fired electricity in the region increased
from five percent in 1990 to 51 percent in 2011), available at
http://www.iso-ne.com/committees/comm_wkgrps/strategic_planning_discussion/materials/natural-gas-white-paper-draft-july-2012.pdf.
    \3\ See, e.g., North American Electric Reliability Corporation,
2013 Special Reliability Assessment: Accommodating an Increased
Dependence on Natural Gas for Electric Power; Phase II: A
Vulnerability and Scenario Assessment for the North American Bulk
Power System at 1 (May 2013) (``Over the past decade, natural gas-
fired generation rose significantly from 17 percent to 25 percent of
U.S. power generation and is now the largest fuel source for
generation capacity. Gas use is expected to continue to increase in
the future, both in absolute terms and as a share of total power
generation and capacity.''), available at http://www.nerc.com/pa/RAPA/ra/Reliability%20Assessments%20DL/NERC_PhaseII_FINAL.pdf;
Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2013 Early
Release Overview (2013) (showing electric generation from natural
gas rising from 13 percent in 1993 to 30 percent in 2040), available
at http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/er/early_elecgen.cfm; The New
England State Committee on Electricity, Natural Gas Infrastructure
and Electric Generation: A Review of Issues Facing New England (Dec.
14, 2012), available at http://www.nescoe.com/uploads/Phase_I_Report_12-17-2012_Final.pdf.
    \4\ See FERC/NERC, Report on Outages and Curtailments During the
Southwest Cold Weather Event of February 1-5, 2011 (2011), available
at http://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/08-16-11-report.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. On February 15, 2012, the Commission issued a notice in Docket
No. AD12-12-000 requesting comments on various aspects of gas-electric
interdependence and coordination in response to questions posed by
members of the Commission.\5\ In order to better understand the
interface between the electric and natural gas pipeline industries and
identify areas for improved coordination, the questions covered a
variety of topics including market structure and rules, scheduling,
communications, infrastructure and reliability. In response to the
notice, the Commission received comments from 79 entities, with some
raising concerns that current laws, regulations, or tariffs may hinder
the sharing of such information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Coordination Between Natural Gas and Electricity Markets,
Docket No. AD12-12-000 (Feb. 15, 2012) (Notice Assigning Docket No.
and Requesting Comments) (available at http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/common/opennat.asp?fileID=12893828). See also Commissioner
Philip D. Moeller, Request for Comments of Commissioner Moeller on
Coordination between the Natural Gas and Electricity Markets (Feb.
3, 2012), available at http://www.ferc.gov/about/com-mem/moeller/moellergaselectricletter.pdf; Commissioner Cheryl A. LaFleur,
Statement regarding Standards for Business Practices for Interstate
Natural Gas Pipelines (Feb. 16, 2012), available at http://www.ferc.gov/media/statements-speeches/lafleur/2012/02-16-12-lafleur-G-1.asp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. During August 2012, the Commission convened five regional
conferences for the purpose of exploring these issues and obtaining
further information from the electric and natural gas industries
regarding coordination between the industries. Representatives from a
cross-section of both industries attended the regional conferences,
with total attendance exceeding 1,200 registrants. Among the topics
discussed at the conferences were communications, coordination, and
information-sharing. Participants at multiple conferences again
expressed concern that Commission rules and policies could be impeding
further efforts to improve communication between the industries.\6\
Some natural gas pipelines and Regional Transmission Organizations and
Independent System Operators (RTOs/ISOs) also noted that, although they
make significant amounts of operational information publicly available,
there is reluctance to share information on a more granular level
because of concerns about violating statutory prohibitions against
undue preference for any customer or customer class.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See FERC Staff Report on Gas-Electric Coordination Technical
Conferences (Nov. 2012), available at http://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/11-15-12-coordination.pdf (November 15 Staff Report).
    \7\ November 15 Staff Report at 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. On November 15, 2012, the Commission issued an order directing
further technical conferences and

reports.\8\ In the November 15 Order, the Commission acknowledged the
concerns regarding communications between the two industries, but found
that there was little specific discussion of potential clarifications
or potential changes to the Commission's regulations.\9\ The
Commission, therefore, directed Commission staff to convene a technical
conference to identify areas in which additional Commission guidance or
potential regulatory changes could be considered.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Coordination Between Natural Gas and Electricity Markets,
141 FERC ] 61,125 (2012) (November 15 Order).
    \9\ Id. P 5.
    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. Pursuant to the November 15 Order, on December 7, 2012, a Notice
of Request for Comments and Technical Conference to be held on February
13, 2013 was issued on information sharing and communication issues
between the natural gas and electricity industries.\11\ Interested
parties were asked to file comments prior to the technical conference
on three questions related to communications and information sharing.
Twenty-seven comments were filed in response to the Notice of Request
for Comments and Technical Conference,\12\ and more than 350 persons,
representing a cross-section of industry, registered for the technical
conference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Coordination between Natural Gas and Electricity Markets,
Docket No. AD12-12-000 (Dec. 7, 2012) (Notice Of Request for
Comments and Technical Conference) (http://www.ferc.gov/EventCalendar/Files/20121207134434-AD12-12-000TC1.pdf); 77 Fed. Reg.
74180 (Dec. 13, 2012) (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-12-13/pdf/2012-30063.pdf).
    \12\ A list of commenters with the abbreviations used to
identify them is attached as an Appendix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. In response to the Notice of Request for Comments and Technical
Conference, and at the February 13 technical conference itself, natural
gas and electric industry participants described a variety of actions
that are currently being taken to improve communications and
information sharing between the two industries. However, several
entities acknowledged that system reliability and contingency planning
could be further enhanced by the sharing of non-public, operational
information directly between transmission operators.\13\ Several
transmission operators pointed out that there is general reluctance to
share such information because of concerns that doing so could be a
violation of current laws, regulations or tariffs.\14\ For example,
INGAA stated that there is some risk that a pipeline could be subject
to an allegation of undue discrimination in violation of section 4 of
the Natural Gas Act (NGA) if it provides an electric transmission
operator with non-public transmission information with respect to any
transportation or sale of natural gas without contemporaneously
disclosing that information to all other shippers or potential
shippers.\15\ MidAmerican and AGA also expressed concerns that the
Standards of Conduct \16\ or the Commission's prohibition on ``undue
discrimination'' may present a real or perceived barrier to effective
participation in certain table-top reliability exercises or emergency
or system planning exercises among regional stakeholders.\17\
Accordingly, INGAA and several others requested that, in order to
facilitate the exchange of information between transmission operators,
the Commission should more clearly identify the types of operational
information that may be shared between transmission operators and
clarify that the sharing of such information does not violate the
prohibition against undue discrimination.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See, e.g., MISO Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 3
(filed Jan. 7, 2013), 6; ISO-NE Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at
4 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); SPP Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); PJM Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 3
(filed Jan. 11, 2013); MidAmerican Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000,
at 9-10 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); BPA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000,
at 6 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); NYTOs Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000,
at 4 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); AGA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at
4 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); National Grid Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-
000, at 8 (filed Jan. 7, 2013).
    \14\ See, e.g., Spectra Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 3-5
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); MISO Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); INGAA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 9-
11 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); ISO-NE Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at
4 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); PJM Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 4
(filed Jan. 11, 2013).
    \15\ INGAA Comments, AD12-12-000, at 11 (filed Jan. 7, 2013).
    \16\ 18 CFR Part 358 (2012).
    \17\ MidAmerican Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 8 (filed
Jan. 7, 2013); AGA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 8 (filed
Jan. 7, 2013).
    \18\ INGAA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 11 (filed Jan.
7, 2013). See also NYTOs, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 4, 9 (filed
Jan. 7, 2013); MidAmerican Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 10
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); AGA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 4
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); Spectra Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5
(filed Jan. 7, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. While electric generators generally did not oppose the sharing
of such information, they, together with other entities, expressed
concern about the communication of generator-specific information
between an electric transmission operator and a pipeline operator
without the generator's knowledge. For example, We Energies asserted
that excluding the generator operator from discussions between RTOs/
ISOs and natural gas pipelines regarding the status of a generator's
fuel supplies will increase the risk that generator capability will be
misrepresented.\19\ We Energies also stated that a generating unit's-
specific market sensitive information, such as run times and dispatch
levels provided to a pipeline by the RTO prior to the generator having
arranged for any needed incremental gas transportation requirements,
could provide the pipeline with a competitive advantage over the
generator in pricing its transportation services to that generator.\20\
National Grid stated that commercially sensitive information from
individual generators should not be shared with natural gas pipeline
representatives or affiliates that sell or buy wholesale electric power
or market natural gas.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ We Energies Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 3 (filed
Jan. 7, 2013).
    \20\ We Energies Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5 (filed
Jan. 7, 2013).
    \21\ National Grid Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 8-9
(filed Jan. 7, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    9. Some commenters expressed concern regarding the potential harm
to industry participants or the potential for improper use of material
resulting from increased communications.\22\ For example, MidAmerican
stated that customer specific information is commercially sensitive and
must be subject to strict limitations, including appropriate protocols
ensuring that generator unit-specific gas usage and transportation
information is not publicly posted or disclosed to non-directly
connected pipelines. AF&PA stated that generally information that is
potentially commercially sensitive should only be disseminated when
there is an articulable and rational reason to expect such exchanges
would further improve reliability or efficiency on either or both
systems.\23\ In addition, APGA argued that transportation information
provides the potential for gaming, market manipulation, and other
violations of the NGA and Federal Power Act (FPA). EPSA asserted that,
when system operators share information with natural gas pipelines,
pipelines should have appropriate limitations on who has access to this
information. EPSA stated that specific

guidelines are needed when the same person at a pipeline who sells and
schedules capacity could have access to shared information.\24\ NYTOs
noted that, since generators and fuel managers in New York are merchant
entities, there is potential for misuse of confidential information
(for example, whether a generator is critical to maintain reliability)
to the extent it is shared as part of these communications.\25\ NYTOs
stated that they would not support disclosure of market-sensitive
information unless strong measures were in place to prevent and punish
market abuses.

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

    \22\ See, e.g., MidAmerican Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at
10 (filed Jan. 7, 2013); APGA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); AEP Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 7
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); AF&PA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 2
(filed Jan. 7, 2013); EPSA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 7
(filed Jan. 7, 2013).
    \23\ AF&PA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 5 (filed Jan. 7,
2013).
    \24\ EPSA Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 7 (filed Jan. 7,
2013).
    \25\ NYTOs Comments, Docket No. AD12-12-000, at 7 (filed Jan. 7,
2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion

    10. Communications occur today in the normal course of business
between transmission operators and those communications serve a
valuable and necessary purpose to help ensure reliability. In an effort
to provide certainty to the industry and remove barriers--real or
perceived--to the sharing of non-public, operational information, the
Commission proposes to revise its regulations to authorize expressly
the exchange of non-public, operational information between electric
transmission operators and interstate natural gas pipelines. The
Commission intends to remove any barriers to the sharing of non-public,
operational information, not just during emergencies, but also for day-
to-day operations, planned outages, and scheduled maintenance. However,
in consideration of the concerns regarding the exchange of non-public
operational information, the Commission also proposes to adopt a No-
Conduit Rule which prohibits recipients of the non-public, operational
information from subsequently disclosing or being a conduit for
subsequently disclosing that information to any other entity.\26\
Moreover, to the extent that an electric transmission operator or
pipeline has a tariff provision which precludes a communication that
would otherwise be authorized under the proposed regulations, it would
have to make a filing under the FPA or NGA to revise that provision to
permit such exchanges of information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Conduct and Affiliate Restrictions. See 18 CFR 358.6 and 18
CFR 35.39(g). Moreover, the Commission determined in Order No. 717
that the No-Conduit Rule was a critical component of the regulatory
scheme of the Standards of Conduct. See Standards of Conduct for
Transmission Providers, Order No. 717, 73 FR 63796 (Oct. 27, 2008),
FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,280, at P 198 (2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    11. The Commission has structured the proposed regulations to
provide significant flexibility to individual transmission operators--
who have the most insight and knowledge of their systems--to determine
what non-public operational information, if any, would promote reliable
service on their systems, without fear of violating the Commission's
prohibitions on undue discrimination and undue preference or such an
exchange being considered an unjust or unreasonable practice. Notably,
the Commission is proposing a permissive approach to the sharing of
non-public information. To the extent this voluntary approach proves
inadequate to promote reliable service or operational planning on
natural gas pipelines and electric transmission systems, the Commission
may revisit the need to require certain communications or information
sharing between transmission operators in the future.

A. Undue Discrimination or Preference

    12. To provide context for the proposed regulations discussed
below, the Commission first reviews the existing statutory and
regulatory requirements applicable to communications between the gas
and electric industries. Both the FPA and the comparable provisions of
the NGA prohibit undue discrimination or preference.\27\ Specifically,
section 205(b) of the FPA provides that no public utility:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ 16 U.S.C. 824d(b) (2006); 15 U.S.C. 717c(b) (2006).

    shall, with respect to any transmission or sale subject to the
jurisdiction of the Commission, (1) make or grant any undue
preference or advantage to any person or subject any person to any
undue prejudice or disadvantage, or (2) maintain any unreasonable
difference in rates, charges, service, facilities, or in any other
respect, either as between localities or as between classes of
service.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ The language of the NGA is virtually identical. 15 U.S.C.
717c(b) (2006).

    13. FPA section 205(b) and NGA section 4(b) do not forbid
preferences, advantages and prejudices per se.\29\ Rather, FPA section
205(b) and NGA section 4(b) prohibit ``undue'' preferences, advantages
and prejudices.\30\ A difference in treatment is not unduly
discriminatory when the difference is justified.\31\ In interpreting
FPA section 205(b) and NGA section 4(b), the courts have held that
transmission providers cannot treat similarly situated customers
differently \32\ and that the disparate treatment of two customer
classes does not in and of itself result in an undue preference or
advantage or in an unreasonable difference in service if the customer
classes are not similarly situated.\33\ Whether a preference is
``undue'' depends on the specific facts of the behavior and the
circumstances to determine whether disparities exist and whether those
disparities are rationally justified.\34\ The Commission's Standards of
Conduct seek to deter undue discrimination by prohibiting the exchanges
of information between transmission providers and their marketing
functions in certain situations.\35\ The comments in the proceeding in
Docket No. AD12-12-000 focus on the applicability of both the statutory
prohibitions on undue discrimination and the Standards of Conduct.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ See, e.g., Cities of Bethany v FERC, 727 F.2d 1131, 1139 (
Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 917, 105 S.Ct. 293, 83 L.Ed.2d 229
(1984).
    \30\ See, e.g., Boroughs of Chambersburg v. FERC, 580 F.2d 573,
577 (D.C. Cir. 1978).
    \31\ See Metropolitan Edison Co. v. FERC, 595 F.2d 851, 857
(D.C. Cir. 1979). See also Transmission Agency of N. California v.
FERC, 628 F.3d 538, 549 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (citing Ark. Elec. Energy
Consumers v. FERC, 290 F.3d 362, 367 (D.C. Cir. 2002) and Elec.
Consumers Res. Council v. FERC, 747 F.2d 1511, 1515 (D.C. Cir.
1984)).
    \32\ See Transmission Agency of N. California v. FERC, 628 F.3d
at 549 (citing Sacramento Mun. Util. Dist. v. FERC, 474 F.3d 797,
802 (D.C. Cir. 2007)).
    \33\ See, e.g., Sw. Elec. Coop., Inc. v. FERC, 347 F.3d 975, 981
(D.C. Cir. 2003). See also Michigan Consolidated Gas Co. v. FPC, 203
F.2d 895, 901 (3d Cir. 1953) and Complex Consol. Edison Co. of New
York, Inc. v. FERC, 165 F.3d 992, 1012 (D.C. Cir. 1999).
    \34\ See St. Michaels Utilities Comm'n v. Fed. Power Comm'n, 377
F.2d 912, 915 (4th Cir. 1967).
    \35\ Order No. 717, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,280 at P 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    14. The first issue is whether the statutory restrictions in the
FPA and NGA regarding undue discrimination or unjust and unreasonable
acts and practices prevent the exchange of information between
operators of pipeline transportation systems and electric transmission
operators. The Commission believes that the sharing of non-public,
operational information between public utilities and natural gas
pipelines for the purpose of promoting reliable service or operational
planning is reasonable and not unduly discriminatory or preferential.
The undue discrimination provisions apply to ensure that similarly
situated customers are not subject to disparate rates or terms and
conditions of service. As discussed below, transmission operators are
not similarly situated to other customers because they require

access to non-public scheduling and other types of information from a
variety of sources to help them ensure the reliability and integrity of
the transportation and transmission systems. In addition, natural gas
pipelines are generally not customers of electric transmission
operators. Likewise, in the case of RTOs/ISOs, they are not shippers on
pipelines. We recognize that some vertically integrated transmission
owners may have marketing function employees or affiliates, such as
generators or local distribution companies who handle gas transactions.
However, putting in place the proposed No-Conduit rule will serve as a
safeguard to ensure that the transmission owners comply with the
prohibitions against undue discrimination or preference with respect to
their marketing function or affiliated entities.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ The Standards of Conduct at 18 CFR 358.6 and 358.7 govern
the preferential sharing of transmission function information from a
transmission provider to its marketing function employees as defined
in 18 CFR 358.3(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    15. In order to operate natural gas pipelines and electric
transmission systems effectively, transmission operators historically
and necessarily have shared non-public information with other parties
operating transportation or transmission facilities. For example,
pipeline operators routinely exchange nomination and scheduling
information with other pipeline operators and with upstream and
downstream entities (that may be shippers on the pipeline) to confirm
transportation nomination requests and to coordinate flows between the
parties.\37\ Transmitting electric utilities similarly coordinate the
sharing of non-public interchange schedule information on a routine
basis through mechanisms such as, for example, e-Tags.\38\ This
coordination helps ensure the safe and reliable transmission of
electric power across a region.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ The nomination process initiates the flow of gas with the
natural gas transportation service provider. The natural gas
transportation service provider then confirms the flow of natural
gas with the corresponding upstream and downstream entities. Once
the natural gas quantities are confirmed, the natural gas
transportation service provider sends the scheduled quantities
information to the shipper.
    \38\ e-Tags are used by applicable Balancing Authorities,
Reliability Coordinators, Interchange Authorities, Transmission
Service Providers, Purchasing-Selling Entities, Generator-Providing
Entities, and Load-Serving Entities to coordinate interchange
schedules. See, e.g., NAESB Wholesale Electric Quadrant (WEQ)
Business Practice Standards (Coordinate Interchange) requirement
004-2 (``Until other means are adopted by NAESB, the primary method
of submitting the RFI [Request for Interchange] shall be an e-Tag
communicated to and managed by the Sink BA's [Balancing Authority]
registered e-Tag authority service using protocols compliant with
the Version 1.8.1 Electronic Tagging Functional Specification.'')
and applicability section (``The Coordinate Interchange Business
Practice Standards apply to BA [Balancing Authority], RC
[Reliability Coordinator], IA [Interchange Authority], Transmission
Service Provider, PSE [Purchasing-Selling Entity], GPE [Generator-
Providing Entity], Load-Serving Entity [LSE], and any TPSE [a PSE
whose transmission approval rights are cited].'') NAESB WEQ Business
Practice Standards (Version 003), published July 31, 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    16. Likewise, in Order No. 698, the Commission authorized the
exchange of operational information between the industries.\39\ There,
the Commission incorporated North American Energy Standards Board
(NAESB) Wholesale Gas Quadrant (WGQ) Standard 0.3.12 into its
regulations. This standard requires a generator and its directly
connected natural gas pipeline(s) to ``establish procedures to
communicate material changes in circumstances that may impact hourly
flow rates.'' \40\ In addition, this standard ensures that natural gas
pipelines have relevant planning information to assist in maintaining
the operational integrity and reliability of pipeline service, as well
as to provide gas-fired power plant operators with information as to
whether hourly flow deviations can be honored. NAESB Wholesale Electric
Quadrant (WEQ) Standard 011-1.6, also incorporated in the Commission's
regulations,\41\ requires that ISOs, RTOs, and other independent system
operators establish written operational communication procedures with
the appropriate pipeline to be implemented when an extreme condition
occurs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ Standards for Business Practices for Interstate Natural Gas
Pipelines; Standards for Business Practices for Public Utilities,
Order No. 698, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,251 (2007),order on
clarification and reh'g, Order No. 698-A, 121 FERC ] 61,264 (2007).
In Order No. 698, the Commission incorporated by reference standards
adopted by NAESB.
    \40\ NAESB WGQ Version 2.0 Business Practice Standard 0.3.12.
See also Standards for Business Practices for Interstate Natural Gas
Pipelines, Order No. 587-V, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,332 (cross-
referenced at 140 FERC ] 61,036) (2012), (incorporating by reference
the Version 2.0 WGQ Business Practice Standards) (to be codified at
18 CFR 284.12).
    \41\ 18 CFR Part 38 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    17. Sharing of operational information between natural gas
pipelines and electric transmission operators is akin to the sharing of
operational information among interconnected parties. Both the natural
gas pipelines and the electric transmission operators need to know
whether scheduled transactions on their respective systems will be
honored by the other. This sharing of information is crucial to the
effective operations of both systems and is not the type of private
sharing of information with select customers at which the undue
discrimination provisions of the respective statutes were targeted.
    18. There are already several safeguards in place to protect
against undue discrimination. For example, while non-public operational
information may be useful for planning, transmission operators cannot
deviate from the terms of their tariffs, and cannot operate in an
unduly discriminatory manner.\42\ Interstate natural gas pipelines and
electric transmission operators are also subject to the same
limitations on sharing information with their marketing function
employees as provided under the Standards of Conduct.\43\ Moreover, we
are proposing additional safeguards as discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See ISO New England Inc., 142 FERC ] 61,058, at P 23 (2013)
(available capacity must be dispatched ``consistent with the
pipeline's tariff'' and ``[t]he pipelines are required to allocate
available capacity on a not unduly discriminatory basis among the
various requestors of capacity'').
    \43\ 18 CFR 358.6 and 358.7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    19. Based on the critical need for such exchanges of information to
promote the reliability and the operational integrity of industries the
Commission regulates, and the protections against undue discrimination,
we find that the exchange of non-public, operational information
between transmission operators does not violate the statutory
prohibitions on undue discrimination or preference as discussed herein.

B. Clarification Regarding Table-Top Exercises

    20. Several comments requested clarification of the applicability
of the Standards of Conduct and statutory prohibition against undue
discrimination to exchanges of information with regard to table-top
exercises involving marketing affiliates of transmission providers and
inter-industry participants. The Standards of Conduct govern, among
other things, communications between interstate natural gas pipelines
and their employees and affiliates that engage in marketing functions,
and public utilities that own or operate electric transmission
facilities and their employees and affiliates that engage in marketing
functions.\44\ As the Commission has previously stated, the Standards
of Conduct apply to communications only within the same organization
(in other words, between the affiliated entities of a single corporate
family) and therefore, do not limit communications between

unaffiliated pipelines and electric transmission providers.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ 18 CFR 358.1(a) and (b) (2012).
    \45\ November 15 Order, 141 FERC ] 61,125 at P 6. See also 18
CFR 358.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    21. Under the Standards of Conduct, marketing function employees
may participate in table-top exercises that include a wide range of
industry participants who will have equal access to non-public
transmission information. However, as the Commission has explained,
non-public transmission information cannot be provided during private
table-top exercises involving only the transmission provider and
marketing function employees since they would receive preferential
access to non-public transmission information or preferential access to
transmission facilities.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See Ameren Services Co., et al., 86 FERC ] 61,079, at
61,290 (1999). See also South Carolina Electric and Gas Co., 111
FERC ] 61,217 (2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Revisions to Regulations

    22. Consistent with the foregoing discussion of existing statutes
and regulations, to provide additional certainty to transmission
operators regarding the permissibility of sharing of non-public,
operational information, the Commission is proposing to revise its
regulations to authorize expressly the exchange of non-public,
operational information between electric transmission operators and
interstate natural gas pipelines.\47\ Proposed section 38.3 applies to
any public utility that owns, operates, or controls facilities used for
the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce subject to a
No-Conduit Rule. Similar changes are proposed in section 284.12(b),
which applies to any interstate pipeline.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ The proposed regulations also recognize the existing
exchanges of information among pipelines and among electric
transmission operators that promote reliable service or operational
planning.
    \48\ While the Commission also regulates interstate service
provided by intrastate pipelines, Hinshaw pipelines, and local
distribution companies, the companies themselves are subject to
state regulation and may exchange information subject to whatever
state regulations govern their operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Permissible Disclosure of Non-Public, Operational Information
    23. Proposed sections 38.3(a) and 284.12(b)(4) authorize public
utilities providing transmission service and natural gas pipelines to
share non-public, operational information when such information is for
the purpose of promoting reliable service or operational planning. The
term ``non-public, operational information'' is information that is not
publicly posted, yet helps transmission operators to operate and
maintain either a reliable pipeline system or a reliable electric
transmission system on a day-to-day basis, as well as during emergency
conditions or for operational planning. Non-public, operational
information may also include generator, pipeline, or transmission-
specific information. In using the term ``non-public, operational
information,'' the Commission intends that transmission operators would
be permitted to share information dealing with actual, anticipated, or
potential effects on the ability to provide electric and gas service
based on the respective operator's experience and understanding of the
operational capability and customer demands on their respective
systems. Examples of such information include, but are not limited to,
the following types of information:
     Real-time and anticipated system conditions that have or
are anticipated to impact natural gas transportation by changing near
term gas flows;
     actual and anticipated electric service interruptions to
gas compressor locations;
     verification that there is sufficient pipeline operational
capability available at a specific delivery point to change the
quantity of natural gas delivered to the generator as identified by the
electric transmission operator;
     actual and projected gas transportation restrictions to
electric generators;
     real-time actual flow and point operational capacity data
at all receipt and delivery points; real-time pipeline pressure at all
receipt and delivery points;
     nominated and scheduled quantities of shippers who are or
who supply gas-fired generators; and,
     scheduled dates and duration of generator, pipeline, and
transmission maintenance and planned outages.
    24. The Commission is not proposing a specific list of non-public,
operational information that can be shared in order to provide
flexibility to individual operators--who have the most insight and
knowledge of their systems--to determine what operational information,
if any, would promote reliable service or operational planning on their
systems. The Commission seeks comment on the scope of the non-public,
operational information transmission operators may share under the
proposed regulations, including the specific categories of information
identified above.
    25. The Commission recognizes that the provisions of this proposal
apply only to communications between pipelines and electric
transmission operators and that natural gas-fired generators may have
relevant information regarding their capabilities to acquire natural
gas not available to a pipeline. Therefore, the Commission seeks
comment on whether additional regulations are needed to require a
generator to share necessary information with its electric transmission
operator to inform it of the possibility that the generator's natural
gas service may be disrupted. For example, the Commission seeks comment
on whether a generator should be required, at the request of the
electric transmission operator, to provide its electric transmission
operator with information pertaining to any communications received
from a natural gas pipeline regarding potential failures by the
generator to conform to flow rates or nominations. In addition, the
Commission seeks comment on whether the proposed rule should require
that, to the extent the non-public, operational information exchanged
between transmission operators involves customer-specific information
(such as information about individual generators), the transmission
operators must seek to include the customer as part of a three-way
communication.\49\ If so, the Commission seeks comment on how such a
requirement could be implemented.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ The Commission notes that communications between
transmission operators and generators are not covered by this
proposed rule; transmission operators may always discuss generator-
specific information with the relevant generator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Limitations on Disclosure
    26. The Commission is proposing several protections, in addition to
the existing protections described above, to ensure that any non-
public, operational information shared under these proposed regulations
remains confidential, and to ensure that information is shared among
transmission owners in a manner that is consistent with the prohibition
on undue discrimination. Proposed sections 38.3(b) and 284.12(b)(4)(ii)
adopt a No-Conduit Rule that prohibits all public utilities and natural
gas pipelines, as well as their employees, contractors, consultants, or
agents, from disclosing, or using anyone as a conduit for the
disclosure of, non-public, operational information they receive under
this proposed rule to a third party.\50\ Sections 38.3(b) and

284.12.(b)(4)(ii) similarly prohibits the disclosure of such non-
public, operational information to marketing function employees, as
that term is defined in Sec.  358.3 of the Commission's
regulations.\51\ Proposed sections 38.3(b) and 284.12(b)(4)(ii) do not
prohibit communications between transmission operators covered by this
rule. As discussed previously, together with the requirements that
natural gas pipelines and transmission owners abide by their tariffs,
these additional disclosure limitations should adequately protect
against the harmful disclosure of non-public information and undue
discrimination.\52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ The Commission does not believe the existing No-Conduit
Rule under the Standards of Conduct will sufficiently limit the
disclosure of the information received under this proposed rule. The
proposed No-Conduit Rule has a broader prohibition on disclosure,
since it applies to all third parties, not just marketing function
employees. Furthermore, the Standards of Conduct, and thus the No-
Conduit Rule under the Standards of Conduct, do not apply to RTOs/
ISOs. Therefore, the Commission is proposing a No-Conduit Rule in
this part of the regulations that is tailored to the entities and
information covered by the proposed rule, and extends the disclosure
prohibition to non-affiliates.
    \51\ Since RTOs/ISOs do not have marketing function employees as
defined in the Standards of Conduct, this provision would not apply
to them.
    \52\ Unauthorized disclosure of any non-public, operational
information may subject the entity or individual making the
prohibited disclosure to the enforcement provisions of the FPA and
NGA, including potential civil penalties. See section 22 of the NGA,
15 U.S.C. 717t2-1 (2006), and section 316A of the FPA, 16 U.S.C.
825o-1 (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    27. We Energies and EPSA expressed concerns that generator-specific
non-public information provided to a pipeline by an electric
transmission operator prior to the generator having arranged for any
needed incremental gas transportation requirements could provide the
pipeline with a competitive advantage over the generator in pricing
transportation services. We see no need to propose additional
protections regarding pipeline transportation at this time. Interstate
pipelines are required to allocate service, on a not unduly
discriminatory basis, based on their tariffs, at a rate not exceeding
the just and reasonable rate on file. Pipelines are not required to
discount services, and if they choose to discount, are permitted to
obtain information from any source to demonstrate that the shipper
requesting the discount has competitive alternatives.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \53\ See Associated Gas Distributors v. FERC, 824 F.2d 981 (D.C.
Cir. 1987) (permitting selective discounting only when justified by
competitive alternatives and elastic demand conditions); Williston
Basin Interstate Pipeline Co., 85 FERC ] 61,247 (1998). Consistent
with that policy, in the next rate case after providing discounts,
the Commission only permits pipelines to reduce their rate design
volumes to reflect discounting upon a showing that the discounts
they offered were required by competition. See, e.g., Panhandle
Eastern Pipe Line Co., Opinion No. 395, 71 FERC ] 61,228, at 61,867
(1995) (requiring documentation from its customers justifying their
need for any discounts that they request); Panhandle Eastern Pipe
Line Co., Opinion No. 404, 74 FERC ] 61,109, at 61,405 (1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Information Collection Statement

    28. The following collection of information contained in the
Proposed Rule is subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (PRA).\54\ OMB's regulations require that OMB approve certain
reporting and recordkeeping requirements (collections of
information).\55\ Upon approval of a collection of information, OMB
will assign an OMB control number and expiration date. Respondents
subject to the information collection requirements of this 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d) (2006).
    \55\ 5 CFR 1320.11 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    29. The Commission will submit the information collection
requirements to OMB for its review and approval under section 3507(d)
of the PRA. The communications permitted under this proposed rule are
not mandatory. The proposed rule would clarify that the requirements of
the FPA and NGA do not prohibit certain voluntary communications
between transmission providers.\56\ Comments are solicited on the need
for this information, whether the information will have practical
utility, the accuracy of the provided burden estimate, ways to enhance
the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected,
and any suggested methods for minimizing the respondent's burden,
including the use of automated information techniques.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ The OMB regulations, 5 CFR 1320.3, provide that
``voluntary'' collections of information must be reported to OMB.
The regulations do not define what is meant by voluntary, but it
appears that the term was included to ensure review of agency's
issuing voluntary surveys to the public. See J. Lubbers, Paperwork
Redux: The (Stronger) Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 49 Admin, L.
Rev. 111,119 (1997). While this justification for the requirement
does not appear to apply to an interpretation of a statutory
requirement, we nonetheless are submitting this NOPR to OMB as a
collection of information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    30. Public Reporting Burden: The proposed communications and
information sharing are voluntary, take place between various industry
entities (and are not submitted to the Commission), and are intended to
promote reliable service or operational planning. While the extent of
such communications likely will vary significantly across the country,
the following estimates represent an expected average. The annual
estimates reflect burden for operational contacts and emergencies.

 FERC-923, Communication of Operational Information Between Natural Gas Pipelines and Electricity Transmission Operators, as Proposed in NOPR in Docket
                                                                    No. RM13-17 \57\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Number of
                                                           Number of     responses per  Average burden    Total annual burden
                    Type of entity                        respondents     respondent       hours per             hours            Total annual cost \59\
                                                                             \58\          response
(1)                                                                (2)             (3)             (4)        (2)*(3)*(4) = (5)   (5)*($60.41/hr.) = (6)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Public Utility Transmission Provider..................        \60\ 132              12            0.50                      792                  $47,845
Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines......................        \61\ 137              12            0.50                      822                   49,657
                                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.............................................             269              12            0.50                    1,614                   97,502
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Title: Communication of Operational Information between Natural Gas
Pipelines and Electricity Transmission Operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ Columns 5 and 6 are rounded.
    \58\ The Commission estimates an annual average per entity of 12
responses (including electricity and gas emergency and/or
operational contacts).
    \59\ The hourly costs (for salary plus benefits) are based on
the Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2012-
2013 edition (at http://www.bls.gov/ooh/). The estimated costs are
$125,647 annually or $60.41 hourly.
    \60\ Of the 132 public utility transmission providers, 5 are
considered ``small'' using the SBA definition.
    \61\ The 2012 filings of the Forms 2 and 2A indicated that there
are 137 interstate natural gas pipelines. Of those pipelines, eight
(8) are considered small using the definition of the Small Business
Administration (at 13 CFR 121.301), including the affiliate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Action: Proposed FERC-923.

    OMB Control No.: To be determined (1902-TBD).
    Respondents: Public electricity transmission providers; interstate
natural gas pipelines.
    Frequency of Responses: As needed.
    Necessity of the Information: In this NOPR, the Commission is
seeking comment on a proposal to revise Parts 38 and 284 of the
Commission's regulations to authorize electric transmission providers
and interstate natural gas pipelines to share non-public, operational
information for the purpose of promoting reliable service and
operational planning.
    31. This proposal is intended to address industry concerns and
thereby remove any barriers, real or perceived, to electric
transmission operators and natural gas pipelines sharing necessary
information. The Commission is not requiring that data be submitted to
the Commission or to third parties. Rather, the Commission is removing
actual or perceived barriers to voluntary communications and
information sharing that might otherwise have been part of the normal
business process.
    32. Internal Review: The Commission will submit the information
collection requirements to OMB for its review and approval under
section 3507(d) of the PRA. Comments are solicited on the need and
utility for this information, and the accuracy of the provided burden
estimate.
    33. 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>].
Please send comments concerning the collection of information and the
associated burden estimates 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:<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>]. For
security reasons, comments to OMB should be submitted by email to:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments submitted to OMB should include
Docket Number RM13-17, FERC-923, and OMB Control Number 1902-TBD.

IV. Environmental Analysis

    34. 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.\62\ The
Commission concludes that neither an Environmental Assessment nor an
Environmental Impact Statement is required for this Final Rule under
section 380.4(a)(2)(ii) of the Commission's regulations, which provides
a categorical exemption for proposals for legislation and promulgation
of rules that are clarifying, corrective, or procedural, or that do not
substantively change the effect of legislation or regulations being
amended.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, Order No. 486, 52 FR 47,897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC
Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 1986-1990 ] 30,783 (1987).
    \63\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii) (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    35. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \64\ generally
requires a description and analysis of proposed 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's) Office of Size
Standards develops the numerical definition of a small business.\65\
The SBA has established a size standard, for electric utilities,
electric power distribution, and electric bulk power transmission and
control, 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 fiscal year did not exceed four million megawatt
hours.\66\ For pipeline transportation of natural gas, the SBA defines
a small entity as having a maximum annual receipt of $25.5 million
dollars.\67\ The Commission estimates a total of 13 ``small'' entities
\68\ (or 5% out of the total 269 entities) affected by the NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612 (2006).
    \65\ 13 CFR 121.101 (2012).
    \66\ 13 CFR 121.201, Sector 22, Subsector 221, Utilities & n.1.
    \67\ Based on 13 CFR 121.201, Sectors 48-49, Subsector 486,
Pipeline Transportation, the annual receipts indicate the maximum
allowed for a concern and its affiliates to be considered ``small.''
    \68\ Based on the SBA definitions and including affiliates, the
number of ``small'' entities is estimated to be:
     for public utility transmission providers, 5 small
public utilities; and
     for natural gas pipelines, 8 small interstate natural
gas pipelines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    36. To address industry concerns, the Commission is removing actual
or perceived barriers to communications and information sharing (that
might otherwise have been part of the normal business process). This
proposal will enable entities of all sizes to communicate voluntarily
and to share non-public, operational information for the purpose of
promoting reliable service or operational planning, thereby easing and
improving the normal business process. The estimated annual cost of the
proposal for each respondent, large or small, is $362.46.\69\
Accordingly, the Commission certifies that the revised requirements set
forth in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, and no
regulatory flexibility analysis is required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \69\ The estimated annual cost per respondent is $362.46 (12
annual responses x 0.50 hour/response x $60.41/hour).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Comment Procedures

    37. 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 August 26, 2013. Comments must refer to
Docket No. RM13-17, and must include the commenter's name, the
organization they represent, if applicable, and their address in their
comments.
    38. 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.
    39. 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.
    40. All comments will be placed in the Commission's public files
and may be viewed, printed, or downloaded remotely as described in the
Document Availability section below. Commenters on this proposal are
not required to serve copies of their comments on other commenters.

VII. Document Availability

    41. 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.
    42. 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.
    43. 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>
List of Subjects

18 CFR Part 38

    Conflict of interests, Electric power plants, Electric utilities,
Incorporation by reference, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

 18 CFR Part 284

    Incorporation by reference, Natural gas, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.

    By direction of the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission proposes to amend
Part 38 and Part 284, Chapter I, Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations,
as follows:

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

0
1. The authority citation for Part 38 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  16 U.S.C. 791-825r, 2601-2645; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42
U.S.C. 7101-7352.

0
2. The heading of Part 38 is revised to read as follows:

PART 38--STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC UTILITY BUSINESS OPERATIONS AND
COMMUNICATIONS

Sec.  38.1  [Removed]

0
3. Remove Sec.  38.1.

Sec.  38.2  [Redesignated as Sec.  38.1]

0
4. Redesignate Sec.  38.2 as Sec.  38.1.
0
5. In newly redesignated Sec.  38.1, paragraph (a) is revised to read
as follows:

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

    (a) Any public utility that owns, operates, or controls facilities
used for the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce or
for the sale of electric energy at wholesale in interstate commerce and
any non-public utility that seeks voluntary compliance with
jurisdictional transmission tariff reciprocity conditions must comply
with the following business practice and electronic communication
standards promulgated by the North American Energy Standards Board
Wholesale Electric Quadrant, which are incorporated herein by
reference:
* * * * *
0
6. New Sec.  38.2 is added to read as follows:

Sec.  38.2  Communication and information sharing among public
utilities and pipelines.

    (a) Any public utility that owns, operates, or controls facilities
used for the transmission of electric energy in interstate commerce is
authorized to share non-public, operational information with a
pipeline, as defined in Sec.  284.12(b)(4), or another public utility
covered by this section for the purpose of promoting reliable service
or operational planning.
    (b) Except as permitted in paragraph (a), a public utility, as
defined in Sec.  38.2, and its employees, contractors, consultants, and
agents are prohibited from disclosing, or using anyone as a conduit for
the disclosure of, non-public, operational information received from a
pipeline pursuant to Sec.  284.12(b)(4) to a third party or to its
marketing function employees as that term is defined in Sec.  358.3(d).

PART 284--CERTAIN SALES AND TRANSPORTATION OF NATURAL GAS UNDER THE
NATURAL GAS POLICY ACT OF 1978 AND RELATED AUTHORITIES

0
7. The authority citation for Part 284 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717-717z, 3301-3432; 42 U.S.C. 7101-7352;
43 U.S.C. 1331-1356.

0
8. In Sec.  284.12, paragraph (b)(4) is added to read as follows:

Sec.  284.12  Standards for pipeline business operations and
communications.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (4) Communication and Information Sharing Among Pipelines and
Public Utilities.
    (i) A pipeline is authorized to share non-public, operational
information with a public utility, as defined in Sec.  38.2(a) or
another pipeline covered by this section, for the purpose of promoting
reliable service or operational planning.
    (ii) Except as permitted in paragraph (i), a pipeline and its
employees, contractors, consultants, and agents are prohibited from
disclosing, or using anyone as a conduit for the disclosure of, non-
public, operational information received from a public utility pursuant
to Sec.  38.2 to a third party or to its marketing function employees
as that term is defined in Sec.  358.3(d).

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

Appendix

                  List of Commenters and Abbreviations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Abbreviation                             Name
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AEP.................................  American Electric Power Service
                                       Corporation.
AF&PA...............................  American Forest & Paper
                                       Association.
AGA.................................  American Gas Association.
APGA................................  American Public Gas Association.
BPA.................................  Bonneville Power Administration.
CAISO...............................  California Independent System
                                       Operator Corporation.
EPSA................................  Electric Power Supply Association.
ERCOT...............................  Electric Reliability Council of
                                       Texas, Inc.
FES.................................  First Energy Solutions.
INGAA...............................  Interstate Natural Gas Association
                                       of America.
ISO-NE..............................  ISO New England, Inc.
MidAmerican.........................  MidAmerican Energy Holdings
                                       Company.
MISO \70\...........................  Midwest Independent Transmission
                                       System Operator, Inc.
MMWEC...............................  Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale
                                       Electric Company.
National Grid.......................  National Grid USA, Inc.
NE LDCs.............................  New England Local Distribution
                                       Companies.
NERC................................  North American Electric
                                       Reliability Corporation.
NYISO...............................  New York Independent System
                                       Operator.
NYTOs...............................  New York Transmission Owners.

NIPSCO..............................  Northern Indiana Public Service
                                       Company.
PG&E................................  Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
PJM.................................  PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
Texas PUC...........................  Public Utility Commission of
                                       Texas.
SCE.................................  Southern California Edison
                                       Company.
Spectra.............................  Spectra Energy Transmission, LLC.
SPP.................................  Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
We Energies.........................  Wisconsin Electric Power Company
                                       and Wisconsin Gas LLC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    \70\ Effective April 26, 2013, MISO changed its name from
``Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc.'' to
``Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2013-17682 Filed 7-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 177 (Wednesday, September 12, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46156-46157]
[FR Doc No: 2018-19812]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 14872-000]

Peterson Machinery Sales; Notice of Preliminary Permit
Application Accepted for Filing and Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Competing Applications

    On March 19, 2018, Peterson Machinery Sales filed an application
for a preliminary permit, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power
Act, proposing to study the feasibility of the Hubbardston
Hydroelectric Project (project) to be located on the Fish Creek, near
Hubbardston, in Ionia County, Michigan. The sole purpose of a
preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority
to file a license application during the permit term. A preliminary
permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-
disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by
others without the owners' express permission.
    The proposed project would be located at the site of an existing,
non-operational hydroelectric project previously operated by Hope
Renewable Energy, LLC without a Commission license. The proposed run-
of-river project will involve rehabilitation and upgrade of the
following existing facilities: (1) A 60-acre, 600-acre-foot reservoir
with normal surface elevation of 850 feet mean sea level; (2) a 350-
foot-long, 25 to 30-foot-high combination dam and spillway
incorporating a 80-foot-long, 12-foot-wide intake channel; (3) a 30-
foot-long, 20-foot-wide, 25-foot-high powerhouse containing two Francis
turbines and

associated generators with a combined installed capacity of 400
kilowatts; (4) a 600-foot-long tailrace; and (5) appurtenant
facilities. The estimated average annual generation of the project
would be 3,500 megawatt-hours that would be conveyed from the
powerhouse to the grid via a transmission line owned by Consumers
Energy.
    Applicant Contact: Charles R. Peterson, 804 Gila Bend Highway, Casa
Grande, Arizona 85122, phone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    FERC Contact: Sergiu Serban,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Deadline for filing comments, applications (without notices of
intent), or notices of intent to file competing applications: 60 days
from the issuance of this notice. Competing applications and notices of
intent must meet the requirements of 18 CFR 4.36.
    The Commission strongly encourages electronic filing. Please file
comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing
applications using the Commission's eFiling system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. Commenters can submit brief
comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the
eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You
must include your name and contact information at the end of your
comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support at
[email protected],<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free), or (202) 502-
8659 (TTY). In lieu of electronic filing, please send a paper copy to:
Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. The first page of any filing should include
docket number P-14872-000.
    More information about this project, including a copy of the
application, can be viewed or printed on the ``eLibrary'' link of
Commission's website at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibary.asp.
Enter the docket number (P-14872) in the docket number field to access
the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

    Dated: September 6, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-19812 Filed 9-11-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 84 (Friday, May 1, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24916-24917]
[FR Doc No: 2015-10243]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9927-07-Region-10]

Proposed Issuance of NPDES General Permit for Tribal Marine Net
Pen Enhancement Facilities in Washington State (Permit Number
WAG132000)

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of proposed issuance of NPDES General Permit and request
for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Region 10 proposes
to issue a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
General Permit for Tribal Marine Net Pen Enhancement Facilities in
Washington State (General Permit). As proposed, the General Permit
authorizes discharges to Waters of the U.S. within the State of
Washington. The draft General Permit contains effluent limitations,
along with administrative reporting and monitoring requirements, as
well as standard conditions, prohibitions, and management practices. A
fact sheet is available that explains the draft General Permit in
detail. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1341, requires
EPA to seek a certification from the State of Washington that the
conditions of the general permit are stringent enough to comply with
State water quality standards. The Washington Department of Ecology
(Ecology) has provided a draft certification that the draft General
Permit complies with the State of Washington Water Quality Standards.
EPA intends to seek a final certification from Ecology prior to issuing
the General Permit. This is also notice of the draft Sec.  401
certification provided by Ecology. Persons wishing to comment on the
draft State certification should send written comments to Mr. Bill
Moore; Water Quality Program, Washington Department of Ecology, P.O.
Box 47696, Olympia, Washington 98504-7696 or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
DATES: The public comment period for the draft General Permit will be
from the date of publication of this Notice until June 30, 2015.
Comments must be received or postmarked by no later than midnight
Pacific Standard Time on June 30, 2015. All comments related to the
draft General Permit and Fact Sheet received by EPA Region 10 by the
comment deadline will be considered prior to issuing the General
Permit.
    Submitting Comments: You may submit comments by any of the

following methods. All comments must include the name, address, and
telephone number of the commenter.
    Mail: Send paper comments to Ms. Catherine Gockel, Office of Water
and Watersheds; USEPA Region 10; 1200 6th Ave., Suite 900, OWW-191;
Seattle, Washington 98101.
    Email: Send electronic comments to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Make
sure to write ``Comments on the Draft Tribal Marine Net Pen Enhancement
Facilities General Permit'' in the subject line.
    Fax: Fax comments to the attention of Catherine Gockel at (206)
553-0325.
    Hand Delivery/Courier: Deliver comments to Catherine Gockel, EPA
Region 10, Office of Water and Watersheds, Mail Stop OWW-191, 1200 6th
Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101-3140. Call<PHONE_NUMBER> before
delivery to verify business hours.
    Viewing and/or Obtaining Copies of Documents. A copy of the draft
General Permit and the Fact Sheet, which explains the proposal in
detail, may be obtained by contacting EPA at 1<PHONE_NUMBER>. Copies
of the documents are also available for viewing and downloading at:
www.epa.gov/r10earth/waterpermits.htm.
    Requests may also be made to Audrey Washington at<PHONE_NUMBER> or
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    Public Hearing: Persons wishing to request a public hearing should
submit their written request by June 30, 2015 stating the nature of the
issues to be raised as well as the requester's name, address, and
telephone number to Catherine Gockel at the address above. If a public
hearing is scheduled, notice will be published in the Federal Register.
Notice will also be posted on the Region 10 Web site, and will be
mailed to all interested persons receiving letters of the availability
of the Draft General Permit.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Additional information can be obtained
by contacting Catherine Gockel, Office of Water and Watersheds, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10. Contact information is
included above in the ``Submitting Comments'' Section.

Other Legal Requirements

    Endangered Species Act [16 U.S.C. 1531 et al.]. Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires Federal agencies to consult with
NOAA Fisheries (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
(the Services) if their actions have the potential to either
beneficially or adversely affect any threatened or endangered species.
EPA has analyzed the discharges proposed to be authorized by the draft
General Permit, and their potential to adversely affect any of the
threatened or endangered species or their designated critical habitat
areas in the vicinity of the discharges. Based on this analysis, EPA
has determined that the issuance of this permit will have no effect to
any threatened or endangered species in the vicinity of the discharge.
Therefore, ESA consultation is not required.
    National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) [42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.]
and Other Federal Requirements. Regulations at 40 CFR 122.49, list the
federal laws that may apply to the issuance of permits i.e., ESA,
National Historic Preservation Act, the Coastal Zone Act
Reauthorization Amendments (CZARA), NEPA, and Executive Orders, among
others. The NEPA compliance program requires analysis of information
regarding potential impacts, development and analysis of options to
avoid or minimize impacts; and development and analysis of measures to
mitigate adverse impacts. EPA determined that no Environmental
Assessments (EAs) or Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) are
required under NEPA. EPA also determined that CZARA does not apply.
    Essential Fish Habitat (EFH). The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Management and Conservation Act requires EPA to consult with NOAA-NMFS
when a proposed discharge has the potential to adversely affect a
designated EFH. The EFH regulations define an adverse effect as ``any
impact which reduces quality and/or quantity of EFH . . . [and] may
include direct (e.g. contamination or physical disruption), indirect
(e.g. loss of prey, reduction in species' fecundity), site-specific or
habitat-wide impacts, including individual, cumulative, or synergistic
consequences of actions.'' NMFS may recommend measures for attachment
to the federal action to protect EFH; however, such recommendations are
advisory, and not prescriptive in nature. EPA has evaluated the Draft
General Permit and has made the determination that issuance of the
General Permit will have no effect on EFH.
    Executive Order 12866: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
exempts this action from the review requirements of Executive Order
12866 pursuant to Section 6 of that order.
    Economic Impact [Executive Order 12291]: The EPA has reviewed the
effect of Executive Order 12291 on this Draft General Permit and has
determined that it is not a major rule pursuant to that Order.
    Paperwork Reduction Act [44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.] The EPA has
reviewed the requirements imposed on regulated facilities in the Draft
General Permit and finds them consistent with the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1980, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
    Regulatory Flexibility Act [5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.] The Regulatory
Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that EPA prepare an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis for rules subject to the requirements of the
Administrative Procedures Act [APA, 5 U.S.C. 553] that have a
significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. However,
EPA has concluded that NPDES General Permits are not rulemakings under
the APA, and thus not subject to APA rulemaking requirements or the
RFA.
    Unfunded Mandates Reform Act: Section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (UMRA), Public Law 104-4, generally requires Federal
agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions (defined to
be the same as rules subject to the RFA) on tribal, state, and local
governments, and the private sector. However, General NPDES Permits are
not rules subject to the requirements of the APA, and are, therefore,
not subject to the UMRA.

    Authority: This action is taken under the authority of Section
402 of the Clean Water Act as amended, 42 U.S.C. 1342. I hereby
provide public notice of the Draft General Permit for Tribal Marine
Net Pen Enhancement Facilities in Washington State in accordance
with 40 CFR 124.10.

    Dated: April 23, 2015.
Daniel D. Opalski,
Director, Office of Water and Watersheds, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2015-10243 Filed 4-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P