[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 24, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58449-58458]
[FR Doc No: 2013-23180]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 40

[Docket No. RM12-16-000; Order No. 785]

Generator Requirements at the Transmission Interface

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act, the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) approves modifications to
four existing Reliability Standards submitted by the North American
Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Commission certified
Electric Reliability Organization. Specifically, the Commission
approves Reliability Standards FAC-001-1 (Facility Connection
Requirements), FAC-003-3 (Transmission Vegetation Management), PRC-004-
2.1a (Analysis and Mitigation of Transmission and Generation Protection
System Misoperations), and PRC-005-1.1b (Transmission and Generation
Protection System Maintenance and Testing). The modifications improve
reliability either by extending applicability of the Reliability
Standard to certain generator interconnection facilities, or by
clarifying that the existing Reliability Standard is and remains
applicable to generator interconnection facilities. The Commission also
approves the related Violation Risk Factors and Violation Severity
Levels, as well as the implementation plan and effective dates proposed
by NERC.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will become effective November 25,
2013.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Morris (Technical Information), Office of Electric Reliability,
Division of Reliability Standards and Security, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,
(202) 502-6803<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Julie Greenisen (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington,
DC 20426<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

144 FERC ] 61,221

Order No. 785

Final Rule

Issued September 19, 2013
    1. Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA),\1\ the
Commission hereby approves modifications to four existing Reliability
Standards submitted by the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC), the Commission certified Electric Reliability
Organization. Specifically, the Commission approves Reliability
Standards FAC-001-1 (Facility Connection Requirements), FAC-003-3
(Transmission Vegetation Management), PRC-004-2.1a (Analysis and
Mitigation of Transmission and Generation Protection System
Misoperations), and PRC-005-1.1b (Transmission and Generation
Protection System Maintenance and Testing). The modifications to these
standards improve reliability either by extending their applicability
to certain generator interconnection facilities, or by clarifying that
the existing Reliability Standard is and remains applicable to
generator interconnection facilities. The Commission also approves the
related Violation Risk Factors and Violation Severity Levels, as well
as the implementation plan and effective dates proposed by NERC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 16 U.S.C. 824o (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background

A. Regulatory Background--Section 215 of the FPA

    Section 215 of the FPA requires a Commission-certified Electric
Reliability Organization (ERO) to develop mandatory and enforceable
Reliability Standards, which are subject to Commission review and
approval.\2\ Once approved, the Reliability Standards may be enforced
either by the ERO (subject to Commission oversight), or by the
Commission independently.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Id. 824o(c) and (d).
    \3\ See id. 824o(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2006, the Commission established a process to select and certify
an ERO \4\ and, subsequently, certified NERC as the ERO.\5\ In 2007, in
Order No. 693, the Commission approved 83 Reliability Standards
submitted by NERC, including initial versions of Reliability Standards
FAC-001, FAC-003, PRC-004, and PRC-005.\6\ Further, in Order No. 693,
the Commission approved NERC's compliance registry process, including
NERC's Statement of Compliance Registry Criteria (Registry Criteria),
which describes how NERC and the Regional Entities \7\ will identify
the entities that should be registered for compliance with mandatory
Reliability Standards.\8\ While that process allows a Regional Entity
to register an entity over its objection, NERC's Rules of Procedure
provide a mechanism for NERC review

of the Regional Entity's registration decision and, ultimately, for
appeal to the Commission if NERC upholds the Regional Entity's
decision.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric Reliability
Organization; and Procedures for the Establishment, Approval and
Enforcement of Electric Reliability Standards, Order No. 672, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,204, order on reh'g, Order No. 672-A, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,212 (2006).
    \5\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ]
61,062, order on reh'g and compliance, 117 FERC ] 61,126 (2006),
aff'd sub nom. Alcoa, Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
    \6\ Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System,
Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242 (2007) (Order No. 693),
order on reh'g, Order No. 693-A, 120 FERC ] 61,053 (2007).
    \7\ NERC is authorized to delegate certain authority to regional
entities as prescribed by FPA section 215(e)(4). See 16 U.S.C.
824o(e)(4).
    \8\ Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242 at PP 92-95. The
Commission has approved subsequent amendments to the Registry
Criteria. See, e.g., North American Electric Reliability Corp., 122
FERC ] 61,101 (2008).
    \9\ Rules of Procedure of the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation, Rule 5<IP_ADDRESS>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Related Commission Orders and Genesis of Project 2010-07

    4. In several fact-specific cases on appeal from a NERC
registration determination, the Commission has addressed the need to
apply Reliability Standard requirements that are generally applicable
to a registered transmission owner or transmission operator to the
owner or operator of a generator interconnection facility or tie-line.
In New Harquahala Generating Co., LLC, 123 FERC ] 61,173 (2008)
(Harquahala), the Commission upheld NERC's registration of New
Harquahala Generating Company (Harquahala) as a transmission owner and
transmission operator, agreeing that Harquahala's 26-mile, 500 kV
generator tie-line was ``material to the reliability of the bulk power
system.'' \10\ The Commission went into some detail concerning the
impact on the transmission network of an event on Harquahala's
facilities,\11\ and noted that it was affirming the Western Electricity
Coordinating Council's (WECC's) and NERC's findings ``based on the
specific facts of this case.'' \12\ Similarly, in Cedar Creek Wind
Energy, LLC, 135 FERC ] 61,241 (2011) (Cedar Creek), the Commission
upheld the registration of two wind farm owners, Milford Wind Corridor
Phase I, LLC (Milford) and Cedar Creek Wind Energy, LLC (Cedar Creek),
as transmission owners and transmission operators, again based on the
specific tie-line facilities involved.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Harquahala, 123 FERC ] 61,173 at P 44.
    \11\ See id. PP 45-55.
    \12\ Id. P 44.
    \13\ Cedar Creek Wind Energy, LLC, 135 FERC ] 61,241 (Cedar
Creek), order on reh'g and clarification, 137 FERC ] 61,141 (2011),
order on compliance filing, 139 FERC ] 61,214 (2012) (Cedar Creek
Compliance Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. In both Harquahala and Cedar Creek, the Commission found that
there would be a reliability risk if certain Reliability Standards
generally applicable to transmission owners and operators were not also
applied to Harquahala, Cedar Creek and Milford, and cited to specific
Reliability Standards and requirements that should apply to those
entities. However, the Commission recognized that it may not be
appropriate to require these entities to comply with all Reliability
Standards otherwise applicable to transmission owners and operators,
and in each case ordered NERC to negotiate with the generating company
to develop a list of transmission owner and transmission operator
Reliability Standard requirements applicable to that individual
entity.\14\ On December 21, 2011, NERC submitted its compliance filing
to the Cedar Creek order identifying which standards should apply to
the registered entities subject to that order. In accepting NERC's
filing, the Commission noted that the Cedar Creek order did not
preclude NERC from pursuing a generic approach through the standards
development process to determine which Reliability Standards should
apply to generators.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Harquahala, 123 FERC ] 61,173 at PP 56-57; Cedar Creek,
135 FERC ] 61,241 at PP 88-89.
    \15\ Cedar Creek Compliance Order, 139 FERC ] 61,214 at P 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. After the Harquahala decision, NERC announced the formation of
an Ad Hoc Group for Generator Requirements at the Transmission
Interface (Ad Hoc Group) to address concerns about perceived
reliability gaps associated with generator interconnection
facilities.\16\ The Ad Hoc Group issued a report (Ad Hoc Group Report)
suggesting a fairly broad approach to address these perceived gaps,
including proposed changes to standard applicability and requirement
language, as well as the introduction of two new terms for the Glossary
of Terms Used in NERC Reliability Standards (NERC Glossary or
Glossary).\17\ NERC initiated Project 2010-07 on January 15, 2010,
following the issuance of a standard authorization request as developed
by the Ad Hoc Group.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See NERC Petition at 11.
    \17\ Id.; see also Final Report of the Ad Hoc Group for
Generator Requirements at the Transmission Interface (Nov. 16,
2009), available at: www.nerc.com/files/GO-TO_Final_Report_Complete_2009Nov16.pdf.
    \18\ NERC Petition at 11, 28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Revised Reliability Standards and NERC Petition

    7. On July 30, 2012, NERC filed a petition (NERC Petition or
Petition) seeking Commission approval of proposed Reliability Standards
FAC-001-1, FAC-003-3, PRC-004-2.1a, and PRC-005-1.1b. The FAC-001 and
FAC-003 standards currently in effect are applicable only to
transmission owners and operators, and NERC is proposing to extend
their applicability to certain generator interconnection facilities. By
contrast, the current version of PRC-004 and PRC-005 do apply to
generator owners as well as transmission owners. Accordingly, NERC
asserted that the proposed modifications in Reliability Standards PRC-
004-2.1a and PRC-005-1.1b are designed merely to clarify that their
requirements extend not only to protection systems associated with the
generating facility or station itself, but also to any protection
systems associated with the generator interconnection facilities.
    8. In its Petition, NERC maintained that the changes proposed for
these four Reliability Standards will address the reliability gap for
generator interconnection facilities ``for the vast majority of
Generator Owners and Generator Operators.'' \19\ NERC also explained
that the proposed modifications to these standards will result in the
application of certain Reliability Standards to generator owners
without the need to register them as transmission owners or
transmission operators only as a result of the generator
interconnection facilities.\20\ NERC stated that these are the only
standards that need to be applied to generator owners and generator
operators to ensure appropriate coverage of generator interconnection
facilities ``[e]xcept as necessary on a fact-specific basis.'' \21\
NERC specifically acknowledged that some generator interconnection
facilities may require a more expansive approach:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Id. at 5.
    \20\ Id. at 12.
    \21\ Id. at 5. NERC noted in its Petition that the standard
drafting team reviewed and assessed the Reliability Standards as
identified in the Ad Hoc Group's Report, as well as the Reliability
Standards identified in Cedar Creek. According to NERC, the Project
2010-07 standard drafting team reviewed 34 Reliability Standards and
102 requirements to determine what requirements should be extended
to generator owners and generator operators that own or operate
generator interconnection facilities, many of which had also been
addressed in the Ad Hoc Group's Report. Id. at 11. However, the
Project 2010-07 standard drafting team ultimately chose a different
approach than that proposed in the Ad Hoc Group Report. The standard
drafting team elected not to include clarifying language about a
Reliability Standard's applicability to generator interconnection
facilities in most standards otherwise applicable to generator
owners or generator operators, and to instead focus on modifying
certain Reliability Standards not currently applicable to generating
entities. Id. at 11-12.

    The drafting team acknowledges that some Facilities used solely
to connect generators to the transmission system are more complex
and may therefore require individual assessment. The reliability
gaps associated with such Facilities should not be addressed simply
through application of all standards applicable to Transmission
Owners and Transmission Operators, but instead through an assessment
of the impact of such a Facility on neighboring transmission
Facilities. Such assessment should then be used to determine exactly
which Reliability Standards and requirements should apply to that
Facility and whether additional entity registration is warranted.
This assessment should, at a minimum, be based upon the output of

transmission planning and operating studies used by the Reliability
Coordinator, Transmission Operator and Transmission Planner in
complying with applicable Reliability Standards (specifically, IRO,
TOP and TPL).\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Id. at 12-13.

    9. With respect to implementation, NERC requested an effective date
of one year following the first quarter after regulatory approvals for
FAC-001-1, and for FAC-003-3 Requirement R3. For the remaining
requirements of FAC-003-3, NERC requested an effective date of two
years following the first calendar quarter after regulatory approvals.
NERC requested that PRC-004-2.1a and PRC-005-1.1b become effective upon
receiving required regulatory approvals.

D. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

    10. On April 18, 2013, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking proposing to approve Reliability Standards FAC-001-1, FAC-
003-3, PRC-004-2.1a and PRC-005-1.1b.\23\ The Commission explained that
the modifications to FAC-001 and FAC-003 would enhance reliability by
extending certain requirements to appropriate generator interconnection
facilities.\24\ In addition, the Commission found that the
clarifications proposed in PRC-004-2.1a and PRC-005-1.1b would mitigate
the possibility that the standards' requirements could be interpreted
to exclude the generator interconnection facilities.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Generator Requirements at the Transmission Interface,
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 143 FERC ] 61,049 (2013) (NOPR).
    \24\ Id. PP 19-20.
    \25\ Id. P 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    11. In addition to the proposal to approve the four revised
Reliability Standards and to accept NERC's overall approach to
registration of generator owners and operators going forward, the
Commission sought comment in the NOPR in two areas. First, the
Commission sought further comment on its understanding of the meaning
of the term ``generator interconnection facility,'' as used in the
proposed standards. The Commission indicated that it understood the
term to refer to ``generator interconnection tie-lines and their
associated facilities extending from the secondary (high) side of a
generator owner's step-up transformer(s) to the point of
interconnection with the host transmission owner.'' \26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ Id. P 22 (footnotes omitted).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    12. Second, the Commission stated that ``our proposal to approve
the revised Reliability Standards is based on the understanding that
additional Reliability Standards or individual requirements may need to
be applied to generator interconnection facilities as NERC acknowledges
in its Petition, based on `individual assessments.' '' \27\ The
Commission sought further information and comment on the particular
circumstances that could trigger an ``individual assessment'' of
generation interconnection facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Id. P 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    13. Finally, the NOPR proposed to approve the Violation Risk
Factors and Violation Severity Levels, as well as the implementation
plan and effective dates for each modified Reliability Standard as
proposed by NERC.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ Id. P 25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    14. Comments were due regarding the NOPR on June 24, 2013. In
addition to the comments filed by NERC, the Commission received twelve
sets of substantive comments (identified in the Appendix to the Final
Rule). In addition, on July 9, 2013, NERC filed reply comments in
response to certain arguments raised by other commenters.

II. Discussion

    15. Pursuant to Section 215(d) of the FPA, we approve Reliability
Standards FAC-001-1, FAC-003-3, PRC-004-2.1a and PRC-005-1.1b,
including the associated implementation plan, as just, reasonable, not
unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the public interest. As
discussed in Section A below, we believe the revised Reliability
Standards will enhance reliability by extending certain obligations to
generator owners and operators and by clarifying certain existing
obligations for protective relay systems on generator interconnection
facilities. We also discuss the following: (1) Use of the term
generator interconnection facilities; (2) criteria and process for
conducting individual assessments; and (3) sufficiency of NERC's
proposed revisions.

A. Reliability Standards To Be Applied to Generator Owners and
Generator Operators

NOPR Proposal
    16. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to approve the four
revised Reliability Standards as proposed in NERC's petition, but noted
that ``this NOPR addresses the four Reliability Standards for which
NERC seeks approval and makes no proposal about . . . other Reliability
Standards and requirements that NERC identified in its Petition for
informational purposes.'' \29\ The Commission also recognized that
``while certain facilities may be adequately addressed through a
generic evaluation, other facilities may, as NERC indicates, require
`individual assessment' to properly determine which Reliability
Standards apply to a facility.'' \30\ Accordingly, the Commission's
proposed approval of the four revised Reliability Standards was ``based
on the understanding that additional Reliability Standards or
individual requirements may need to be applied to generator
interconnection facilities . . . based on `individual assessments.' ''
\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ NOPR, 143 FERC ] 61,049 at P 23.
    \30\ Id. P 24.
    \31\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments
    17. NERC and all other entities filing comments support the
approval of the revised Reliability Standards, with many noting their
strong support for NERC's package of revisions as a whole. EPSA/ELCON
views the revised Reliability Standards and NERC's modified approach to
registration as a ``substantial improvement in addressing reliability
concerns with respect to generator interconnection Facilities.'' \32\
APPA similarly supports approval of NERC's petition, claiming that such
approval ``will ensure reliability, clarify roles and responsibilities
in the area of bulk electric system reliability for both generators and
their host transmission owner/operators, and lessen ambiguity regarding
registration questions for existing generators.'' \33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ EPSA/ELCON Comments at 8.
    \33\ APPA Comments at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. BP Wind Energy strongly supports the NOPR's proposed approval
of the revised Reliability Standards, asserting that the NOPR's
approach is ``a tailored approach that addresses perceived generator
interconnection reliability gap issues from a practical perspective
without resulting in unnecessary increased costs and burdens on
generator owners and generator operators. . . .'' \34\ Likewise, ITC
supports approval of each of the revised standards, and notes that
``[a]pplying these standards to the facilities as the NOPR proposes
will not only improve reliability, but will also level the playing
field between transmission owners and owners of facilities which are
similar in terms of operation and potential system impact.'' \35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ BP Wind Energy Comments at 5.
    \35\ ITC Comments at 5-6; see also CDWR Comments at 5
(supporting approval of the four modified Reliability Standards);
PPL Comments at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commission Determination
    19. We approve each of the four revised Reliability Standards as
proposed by NERC, as discussed further

below. We agree with NERC that the changes proposed for these four
Reliability Standards will address the reliability gap for generator
interconnection facilities for the majority of generator owners and
generator operators. Closing these gaps is an important reliability
benefit. We also confirm our understanding that additional Reliability
Standards or individual requirements may need to be applied on a case-
by-case basis to generator interconnection facilities in certain
circumstances, but that for the majority of generator owners and
operators, NERC will not pursue registration of generator owners and
operators as transmission owners or transmission operators due solely
to their ownership or operation of generator interconnection
facilities.
1. Approval of Reliability Standard FAC-001-1 NOPR Proposal
    20. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to approve changes to the
existing FAC-001 Reliability Standard, which requires transmission
owners to document, maintain, and publish facility connection
requirements that comply with NERC, regional, and individual criteria
for generation facilities, transmission facilities, and end-user
facilities. The proposed modification would extend the standard's
obligations to any generator owner that has executed an ``[a]greement
to evaluate the reliability impact of interconnecting a third party
Facility to the Generator Owner's existing Facility . . . used to
interconnect to the interconnected Transmission systems.'' \36\ The
Commission proposed to approve this modification, finding it would
enhance reliability by extending obligations to develop and make
available facility connection requirements as appropriate, i.e., in the
relatively uncommon situation where an agreement stemming from an
interconnection request has been executed.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ NOPR, 143 FERC ] 61,049 at P 9 (citing to NERC Petition at
Ex. B (Proposed FAC-001-1, Requirement R1)). The NOPR noted NERC's
characterization of the circumstances the modification was designed
to address as being the ``rare'' circumstance where a generator
owner is required by a regulatory body to interconnect a third party
generator to its tie-line. While NERC recognized that the
arrangement could result in the generator owner ultimately being
registered as a transmission owner or operator, the modification to
FAC-001-1 would provide ``appropriate reliability coverage until any
additional registration is required,'' while ensuring that ``the
standard does not impact any Generator Owner that never executes an
[a]greement as described in the standard.'' See id. P 10.
    \37\ Id. P 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments
    21. None of the commenters object to the revisions reflected in
FAC-001-1. ITC explicitly supports the revision, asserting that the
proposed changes are ``critical to avoid any potential gap in
reliability standards prior to a generator owner's registration as a
new functional entity.'' \38\ ITC further notes that the information
required under Requirement R3.1 enhances ITC's ability to maintain safe
and reliable transmission service, and will be useful in its and other
ISOs'/RTOs' transmission planning processes as it will allow them to
account for any third party interconnections and their impacts on the
overall transmission system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ ITC Comments at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    22. Similarly, AWEA supports the modifications reflected in FAC-
001-1 due to its limited application to generator owners and operators
that have executed an agreement to evaluate the impacts of
interconnection, which AWEA argues is ``appropriately balanced.'' \39\
However, AWEA expresses concern about the uncertainties as to when a
generator owner must offer interconnection or transmission service to
third parties, and therefore (1) asks NERC to ensure that FAC-001-1 is
not applied to generators that are not required to accept
interconnection requests; and (2) asks the Commission to clarify that
the standard only applies when a generator is required to accept an
interconnection request, and not merely upon receipt of such a request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ AWEA Comments at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commission Determination
    23. We approve proposed Reliability Standard FAC-001-1, as it will
enhance reliability by expanding the obligation to develop and make
available facility connection requirements to generators who have
executed an agreement to interconnect with a third party, which will
assist in the transmission planning process. With respect to AWEA's
request for clarification, we do not believe the standard itself is
unclear as to when it will apply to a generator owner or operator, but
note that a mere request for interconnection would not immediately
trigger the application of the standard to a generator owner or
operator receiving such a request. Instead, FAC-001-1 would apply as
soon as an agreement to evaluate the reliability impact of an
interconnection is executed, whether the generator owner is required to
do so by regulatory order or has entered into such an agreement without
such a regulatory mandate.
2. Approval of Reliability Standard FAC-003-3
NOPR Proposal
    24. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to approve the
modifications in Reliability Standard FAC-003-3, which would extend the
FAC-003-2 vegetation management requirements to certain generator
interconnection facilities, indicating that the proposal addresses a
potential reliability gap in the currently-effective standard.
Comments
    25. None of the commenters object to the approval of Reliability
Standard FAC-003-3, and several commenters explicitly state their
support for it. ITC states that the extension of the vegetation
management standards to generator interconnection facilities that meet
the proposed criteria ``will help avoid future vegetation-related
events,'' and notes that the types of generator interconnection
facilities that will be subject to the vegetation management
requirements under FAC-003-3 are ``functionally similar to transmission
facilities with respect to the significant impact that failure or
misoperations of such tie line facilities could potentially have on the
bulk electric system.'' \40\ AWEA supports the limitations on
applicability reflected in the proposed standard as a ``reasonable and
balanced approach,'' asserting that application of the vegetation
management requirements of FAC-003-3 to all generator interconnection
facilities would be excessive, especially for interconnection
facilities of limited length, and points out that generator owners and
operators have ``every incentive'' to maintain the facilities in order
to deliver energy.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ ITC Comments at 7.
    \41\ AWEA Comments at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commission Determination
    26. We approve Reliability Standard FAC-003-3. Consistent with the
NOPR, we find that the modifications to FAC-003 address a potential
reliability gap in the current set of Reliability Standards, since they
do not include a requirement for generator owners to perform vegetation
management on their tie-lines or to maintain minimum levels of
clearance between vegetation and significant overhead generator
interconnection facilities. Further, we conclude that the proposed
limits on applicability reflected in FAC-003-3 are reasonable, as it is
common for generator interconnection facilities of

relatively short span (i.e., less than one mile) to cross only areas
with limited or no vegetation.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See NOPR, 143 FERC ] 61,049 at P 20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    27. Further, we adopt our proposed guidance that the exemption for
overhead lines with a clear line of sight from the generator to the
point of interconnection should be ``interpreted narrowly,'' meaning
there should be ``no obstructions . . . that prevent personnel from
identifying potential reliability hazards over the full length of the
line.'' \43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Approval of Reliability Standards PRC-004-2.1a and PRC-005-1.1b
NOPR Proposal
    28. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to approve the clarifying
language NERC proposed for PRC-004 and PRC-005.
Comments
    29. None of the commenters object to the changes to Reliability
Standards PRC-004 and PRC-005, and several expressly support the
changes. AWEA states that the proposed modifications provide greater
certainty to generator owners and operators regarding their
responsibilities under the standards.\44\ Similarly, ITC believes the
changes will avoid future misunderstandings as to rights and
responsibilities.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ AWEA Comments at 6-7.
    \45\ ITC Comments at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commission Determination
    30. approve Reliability Standards PRC-004-2.1a and PRC-005-1.1b. We
agree with NERC that the changes mitigate the possibility that entities
could interpret the standards to exclude generator interconnection
facilities.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ See NOPR, 143 FERC ] 61,049 at P 21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Definition of Generator Interconnection Facility

NOPR Proposal
    31. While proposing to approve the use of the term ``generator
interconnection facility'' as proposed in the revised Reliability
Standards, the Commission indicated in the NOPR that further
clarification of that term may be warranted. The Commission stated its
understanding of the term to refer to ``generator interconnection tie-
lines and their associated facilities extending from the secondary
(high) side of a generator owner's step-up transformer(s) to the point
of interconnection with the host transmission owner.'' \47\ The
Commission sought comment on its understanding of the term, as well as
its understanding that a generator owner or operator's compliance
obligations with respect to the generator interconnection facilities
extend to the point of interconnection with the host transmission
owner.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ Id. P 22 (footnotes omitted).
    \48\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments
    32. NERC agrees with the Commission's understanding of the term
``generator interconnection facility'' as well as its understanding of
the extent of the generator owner or operator's obligations with
respect to those facilities.\49\ EPSA/ELCON also agree that the
Commission's understanding of the term is consistent with that used
during the standard development process (i.e., Project 2010-07), and
with common industry practice and understanding.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ NERC Comments at 3-4.
    \50\ EPSA/ELCON Comments at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    33. However, a number of commenters argue that the Commission's
understanding of the term generator interconnection facility requires
further refinement or modification, and several of these commenters ask
the Commission to adopt a formal definition of the term, either within
the context of the relevant Reliability Standard or as a defined
Glossary term. AWEA and E.ON Renewables ask the Commission to clarify
that a generator owner/operator's compliance obligations extend only to
the point where there is a change in ownership to another transmission
owner, ``whether those facilities are classified as interconnection, or
transmission facilities.'' \51\ E.ON Renewables states that this
proposed refinement will ensure that the obligations of the generator
owner or operator extend only to the facilities it owns or operates,
and is consistent with the concept of point of change of ownership as
commonly reflected in generator interconnection agreements.\52\ BP Wind
Energy argues for a similar clarification, but asserts that the term as
clarified should also be memorialized either in the NERC Glossary or in
each relevant standard.\53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ AWEA Comments at 9; see also E.ON Renewables at 3
(proposing that the term as clarified should include facilities ``to
the point of interconnection where there is a change in ownership
with the host transmission owner's interconnection or transmission
facilities, as applicable'').
    \52\ E.ON Renewables Comments at 3-4.
    \53\ BP Wind Energy Comments at 10-11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    34. BPA also contends that the term ``generator interconnection
facility'' should be formally defined, but seeks a more substantial
modification to the Commission's understanding of the term. BPA is
concerned that in situations where the host transmission owner owns the
tie-line and other interconnection facilities down to the high-side of
the step-up transformer, the generator owner would not own a
``generator interconnection facility'' at all as the Commission would
define the term.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ BPA Comments at 3-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    35. Alameda raises a concern with respect to the Commission's
understanding of the term ``generator interconnection facility,''
asserting that it fails to address the situation where a generator
interconnection facility is not owned by the generator owner or
operator of the facility, but by a third party. Alameda suggests that
the term should encompass generator interconnection tie-lines and
associated facilities owned by entities other than the generator owner/
operator of the relevant generating resource, and argues that these
entities, like the generator owner or generator operator, should not be
required to register as a transmission owner or operator solely because
of its interconnection facilities.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ Alameda Comments at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    36. NERC responds to the comments of AWEA and E.ON Renewables,
inter alia, by asserting that their requested modification is
unnecessary, since generator owners and operators are responsible only
for the facilities they own or operate (or for which they volunteer to
be responsible) under NERC's Reliability Standards framework.\56\ In
response to comments seeking adoption of a formal definition of the
term ``generator interconnection facility,'' NERC states that the
standard drafting team considered and rejected that approach. NERC
notes nonetheless that interested parties are free to initiate the
development of a defined term pursuant to the procedures outlined in
its standard processes manual.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ NERC Reply Comments at 4-5.
    \57\ NERC Reply Comments at 5-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commission Determination
    37. We affirm our understanding that the term ``generator
interconnection facility'' refers to ``generator interconnection tie-
lines and their associated facilities extending from the secondary
(high) side of a generator owner's step-up transformer(s) to the point
of interconnection with the host transmission owner.'' \58\ We are not
persuaded by the commenters that further refinement of this
understanding is warranted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ NOPR, 143 FERC ] 61,049 at P 22 (footnotes omitted).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    38. Further, we agree with NERC that a generator owner or operator
would not

have compliance obligations associated with facilities it does not own
or operate (unless it volunteers to undertake such obligations).\59\
While we do not agree that a modification of the term is necessary to
address AWEA and E.ON Renewables' concerns, we confirm that our intent
is to ensure that a generator owner or operator's obligations with
respect to generator interconnection facilities extend to the point of
change of ownership from the generator owner/operator to the next
interconnected registered entity, which may not occur at the point of
interconnection between the tie-line as a whole and the larger,
interconnected transmission grid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ See NERC Reply Comments at 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    39. Nor are we persuaded that BPA's suggested modification is
necessary to cover a potential reliability gap. In the situation
described by BPA, the Reliability Standards and requirements normally
applicable to generator interconnection facilities would apply due to
the owner's status as a registered transmission owner, and any
facilities below the high side of the step-up transformer should be
covered as part of the Reliability Standards and requirements generally
applicable to generator owners and operators.
    40. Finally, we reject Alameda's requested modification to the term
``generator interconnection facility'' in order to address the
circumstance where a third entity owns or operates all or a portion of
the interconnection facilities between the generating resource and the
interconnected transmission system. In such cases, we agree that it may
be more appropriate for the entity to be subject to the Reliability
Standards applicable to generator owners and operators (including the
four standards at issue here) rather than to the full panoply of
standards applicable to transmission owners and operators, but we will
not make such a blanket finding here. Rather, NERC and the Regional
Entities can consider the appropriate registry status for an entity in
this position on a case-by-case basis. Further, any categorical change
to applicability of specific Reliability Standards should be addressed
in the Reliability Standards development process.

Individual Assessments

NOPR Proposal
    41. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to accept NERC's approach
to the registration of generator owners and operators going forward,
whereby most generator owners and operators would not, solely as a
result of their interconnection facilities, be registered as
transmission owners and operators, and would only be subject to the
Reliability Standards and requirements applicable to generator owners
and operators (including the four revised standards at issue in this
proceeding). The Commission explicitly based its approval of this
approach on its ``understanding that additional Reliability Standards
or individual requirements may need to be applied to generator
interconnection facilities . . . based on `individual assessments.' ''
\60\ The Commission sought comment on several aspects of NERC's
expectations for these individual assessments, as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ NOPR, 143 FERC ] 61,049 at P 24.

    [W]e seek comment as to what circumstances could trigger such an
individual assessment. We also seek comment on how NERC envisions
the individual assessments will be performed as part of the
transmission planning and operating studies NERC mentions in the
Petition, when the individual assessments will occur, what
percentage of generator interconnection facilities are ``complex''
and thereby likely to trigger such an individual assessment
(including the number of existing generator interconnection
facilities that will be required to adhere to additional
transmission owner or transmission operator Reliability Standards),
and how the results of the individual assessments will be
coordinated among the interested parties.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments
    42. NERC comments that ``several events'' could trigger an
individual assessment, including: (1) NERC gaining new information, for
example, from NERC's analysis of an event or off-normal occurrence on
the system, which NERC would pursue through development of a new or
revised standard if of a general nature; (2) NERC gaining additional
information specific to an individual generator owner or operator,
which might lead NERC and the Regional Entity to pursue additional
registration; and (3) through review of an element as part of the bulk
electric system definition exception process.\62\ NERC adds that ``the
existing processes and roles and responsibilities of NERC and the
regions should ensure that `complex' generator interconnection
facilities will be identified and appropriately addressed on a case-
specific basis.'' \63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ NERC Comments at 5-6. PPL concurs with NERC's identified
triggering events, and supports NERC's proposed approach for
individual assessments. PPL Comments at 4-5.
    \63\ NERC Comments at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    43. With respect to the prevalence of such individual assessments
going forward, NERC states that it ``expects that widespread
registration of Generator Owner or Generator Operators as Transmission
Owners and Transmission Operators should not be necessary in the
future.'' \64\ NERC further states that, with the approval of the four
modified Reliability Standards, it ``believes it has addressed the
reliability concerns that caused NERC to pursue registration of certain
Generator Owners and Generator Operators as Transmission Owners and
Transmission Operators (thereby subjecting them to some additional
Requirements).'' \65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ Id. at 5.
    \65\ Id. at 6-7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    44. EPSA/ELCON agrees with NERC's general approach, i.e.,
identification of the set of standards and requirements that need to be
applied to generator owners and operators in general to close any
reliability gap, with the expectation that ``only a limited narrow
subset of generators could potentially be `complex' and thereby subject
to further assessment for either application of limited TO or TOP
Reliability Standards and specific limited requirements therein.'' \66\
To the extent that individual circumstances warrant additional
registration as a transmission owner or transmission operator, EPSA/
ELCON argues for development of a specific process for that assessment,
which should be used only as a last resort. EPSA/ELCON argues for the
development of a process, utilizing industry input and modeled after
the bulk electric system exception process, which will allow
independent assessment of the perceived reliability gap by a technical
review panel. Dominion and APPA support EPSA/ELCON's proposed approach
in developing a process required for individual assessment,\67\
although Dominion adds that the process ``should involve an assessment
by the entity's Balancing Authority, Reliability Coordinator,
Transmission Operator, and Transmission Provider.'' \68\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ EPSA/ELCON Comments at 5.
    \67\ Dominion Comments at 3; APPA Comments at 2-3 (commenting
that ``it is difficult to identify in advance the factors and
considerations that may come into play as part of a specific complex
generator interconnection'').
    \68\ Dominion Comments at 3-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    45. E.ON Renewables comments that NERC's description of the
circumstances that might trigger an individual assessment is vague.\69\
E.ON Renewables and AWEA argue that NERC should be required to identify
the specific criteria to be used to establish a facility as
``complex,'' with examples and an explanation of the reliability gap
associated with that example, as well an

explanation of how assessments will be performed. E.ON Renewables
argues that these criteria and processes should be identified on the
record in this or another proceeding, and be subject to industry
comment. Finally, E.ON Renewables asks the Commission to find, in this
proceeding, that (1) generator interconnection facilities that connect
to the transmission system at a single point of interconnection are not
``complex,'' and (2) the only additional requirements that can be
applied to the owner or operator of ``complex'' generator
interconnection facilities are those needed to close the identified
reliability gap, rather than ``classification as a TO or TOP and the
attendant registry and compliance associated with a TO and TOP.'' \70\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \69\ E.ON Renewables Comments at 4.
    \70\ Id. at 5-6. See also AWEA Comments at 7-8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    46. BP Wind Energy makes similar arguments regarding the need for
the establishment of ``clear and defined parameters regarding
individual assessments, set forth either in the NERC registry or other
Commission-approved rule, procedure or document.'' \71\ BP Wind Energy
asserts that generator owners and operators should be involved in the
development of the parameters and process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \71\ BP Wind Energy Comments at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    47. TDU Systems states it does not object to individual assessment
of ``truly complex generator interconnection facilities,'' but argues
that such assessments must be narrowly tailored to ensure that the vast
majority of generator owners and operators are not subject to such an
assessment.\72\ Despite TDU Systems' recognition that individual
assessments may be warranted in some cases, it asks the Commission to
``confirm'' that an entity owning or operating generator
interconnection facilities and no other transmission facilities need
not be registered as a transmission owner or transmission operator
going forward (i.e., after approval of the four Reliability Standards
at issue in this proceeding).\73\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \72\ TDU Systems at 6-7.
    \73\ Id. at 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    48. In its Response, NERC states that a process for conducting
individual assessments is unnecessary at this time because there are
existing mechanisms under the NERC Rules of Procedure to deal with any
registration changes that may be warranted.\74\ Accordingly, NERC
further maintains that the development of such a process is
premature.\75\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \74\ NERC Response at 2-3.
    \75\ NERC notes that it will be reviewing its registration
process in 2014. NERC Response at 3 & n.7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    49. In responding to the requests for further clarification or
``confirmation'' that generator owners and operators will not be
subject to registration as a transmission owner or operator based
solely on their interconnection facilities, NERC reiterates that it
``will generally no longer pursue registration of Generator Owners and
Generator Operators as Transmission Owners and Transmission
Operators.'' \76\ However, NERC asserts that it ``cannot guarantee that
it will never be necessary to register a Generator Owner or Generator
Operator as a Transmission Owner or Transmission Operator as such a
statement would be inconsistent with NERC's obligations as the Electric
Reliability Organization.'' \77\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \76\ Id. at 3 (quoting NERC Comments at 7).
    \77\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commission Determination
    50. We find NERC's proposed approach to determining whether an
individual assessment, or whether additional Reliability Standards need
to be more broadly applied, to be reasonable. Given NERC's expectation
that ``the number of such facilities is low,'' it seems unnecessary at
this time to require a new process tailored to such individual
assessments.\78\ Should greater transparency and consistency across the
regions become necessary, there are existing mechanisms under the NERC
Rules of Procedure to deal with any changes to the registration
criteria that may be warranted.\79\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \78\ NERC Comments at 6.
    \79\ See NERC Rules of Procedure Sec. Sec.  500 and 1400; see
also NERC Response at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    51. We reject E.ON Renewable's request for a finding that generator
interconnection facilities that connect to the transmission system at a
single point of interconnection are categorically not ``complex.'' We
believe it is inappropriate to make a blanket finding as to any
specific configuration, and note that we upheld NERC's registration of
Harquahala as a transmission owner although the generator
interconnection facilities in that case connected to the transmission
system at a single point.
    52. We also reject TDU Systems' and other commenters' request to
``clarify'' that generator owners and operators will no longer be asked
to register as transmission owners or operators under any
circumstances. Quite the contrary, as we stated in the NOPR, our
proposed approval of the revised Reliability Standards was ``based on
the understanding that additional Reliability Standards or individual
requirements may need to be applied to the generator interconnection
facilities . . . based on `individual assessments.' '' \80\ We leave
open the possibility that in some cases, the interconnection facilities
may be so extensive that the entity should not only be registered as a
transmission owner or operator, but should be subject to all of the
Reliability Standards and requirements applicable to such an entity. In
other cases, it may be appropriate to waive a significant portion of
the standards or requirements generally applicable to transmission
owners and operators, even if the entity is technically registered as a
transmission owner or operator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \80\ NOPR, 143 FERC ] 61,049 at P 24.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    53. However, consistent with our prior decisions in Harquahala and
Cedar Creek, we clarify that for the anticipated small number of
generator owners and operators owning facilities deemed to be
``complex'' and therefore potentially subject to additional Reliability
Standards, NERC should evaluate, in consultation with the Regional
Entity, which Reliability Standards should apply to the particular
entity based on the specific facts and circumstances. We further
clarify that the generator owner or operator should only be obligated
to comply with those Reliability Standards and requirements necessary
to close the identified reliability gap.\81\ To the extent that
disputes remain about the appropriate application of Reliability
Standards and requirements, we note that generator owners and operators
continue to have the right to bring any such dispute to the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \81\ See NERC Comments at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Impact on Current Registrations and Registration Process

NOPR Proposal
    54. In the NOPR, the Commission noted NERC's position that
acceptance of its proposed revisions would ``not have the effect of de-
registering any entity from the NERC Compliance Registry.'' \82\ The
Commission also recognized that the Petition was not intended to
overturn any previous orders, citing to Cedar Creek and Harquahala.\83\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \82\ NOPR, 143 FERC ] 61,049 at P 17.
    \83\ Id. n.37.
    \84\ TDU Systems at 5-6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments
    55. TDU Systems asks for clarification regarding the process by
which entities currently registered as a transmission owner or operator
may seek de-registration.\84\ In particular, TDU Systems seeks
clarification that a request for de-registration under NERC's

Rules of Procedure will not be treated as an appeal of an existing
registration listing, i.e., it will not be subject to the 21 day
deadline for filing an appeal from an initial registration decision. In
the alternative, TDU Systems asks the Commission to direct NERC to
explain the process that should be used for de-registration of an
entity currently registered as a transmission owner or operator. BP
Wind Energy also seeks clarification that entities are free to seek a
change in their registry status as a transmission owner or operator, or
to modify the requirements with which they are required to comply.\85\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \85\ BP Wind Energy Comments at 9-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    56. In its response, NERC reiterates that this proceeding will not
have the effect of de-registering any entity from the NERC Compliance
Registry, and states that any changes to registration will be governed
by its Rules of Procedure.\86\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \86\ NERC Response at 2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Commission Determination
    57. We confirm that this final rule does not have the effect of de-
registering any entity from the NERC Compliance Registry. However, we
grant the requested clarification that this order does not alter an
entity's right to seek a change in its registration status under NERC's
Rules of Procedure.

III. Information Collection Statement

    58. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations require
that OMB approve certain reporting and recordkeeping requirements
(collections of information) imposed by an agency.\87\ Upon approval of
a collection of information, OMB will assign an OMB control number and
expiration date. Respondents subject to the filing or recordkeeping
requirements of this rule will not be penalized for failing to respond
to these collections of information unless the collections of
information display a valid OMB control number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \87\ 5 CFR 1320.11 (2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    59. The Commission is submitting these reporting and recordkeeping
requirements to OMB for its review and approval under section 3507(d)
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA). The Commission solicited comments
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. The
Commission did not receive any comments on the reporting burden
estimate.
    60. This Final Rule approves Reliability Standards FAC-001-1, FAC-
003-3, PRC-004-2.1a, and PRC-005-1.1b, which would replace currently
effective Reliability Standards FAC-001-0, FAC-003-1,\88\ PRC-004-2a,
and PRC-005-1b. The modifications included in PRC-004-2.1a and PRC-005-
1.1b are clarifications of existing requirements, do not extend those
existing requirements to any new entity or to additional facilities,
and do not affect the existing burden related to those standards.\89\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \88\ As of the date of issuance of this Final Rule, the
currently effective standard is FAC-003-1. While a revised version
of that standard, FAC-003-2, was approved in Docket No. RM12-4-000,
it has yet to go into effect.
    The information collection requirements of Reliability Standard
FAC-003-2 were approved by the OMB on May 29, 2013, under FERC-725A
(OMB Control No. 1902-0244).
    \89\ The information collection requirements and related burden
(both unchanged in this Final Rule) of Reliability Standards PRC-
004-2a and PRC-005-1b are covered under FERC-725A(OMB Control No.
1902-0244).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    61. The modifications reflected in FAC-001-1 extend the obligation
to document, maintain, and publish interconnection requirements to any
generator owner that has an executed agreement with a third party to
evaluate the reliability impact of a requested or required
interconnection. NERC states, and we agree, that the number of affected
generator owners is likely to be extremely small.\90\ Moreover, it is
likely that any increase in an entity's recordkeeping and reporting
requirements would occur through a change in that entity's NERC
registration status in any case, i.e., NERC would likely be considering
registration of the entity as a transmission owner, with the
corresponding responsibilities. Accordingly, the Commission views the
potential increase in recordkeeping and reporting burden from revised
standard FAC-001-1 as minimal, but has provided an estimate of that
burden in the table set out below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \90\ See NERC Petition at 20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    62. The modifications reflected in FAC-003-3 extend NERC's
vegetation management requirements to certain generator interconnection
facilities, including requirements to create and maintain records
related to the generator owner's vegetation management work plan and
performance of inspections. Generator owners typically already maintain
the vegetation surrounding the right-of-way for the generator
interconnection facility that connects the generating station
switchyard to the point of interconnection with a transmission owner's
facility. However, the proposed requirements outlined in FAC-003-3 may
exceed a generator owner's current vegetation management program,
particularly with respect to recordkeeping and reporting.
    63. Public Reporting Burden: The burden and cost estimates below
are based on the increase in the reporting and recordkeeping burden
imposed by the proposed Reliability Standards. Our estimate of the
number of respondents affected is based on the NERC Compliance Registry
as of July 30, 2013. According to the Compliance Registry, NERC has
registered 881 generator owners within the United States, and we
estimate that approximately 10 percent (or 88) of these generator
owners have interconnection facilities that meet the proposed
requirements for applicability of the new standard (i.e., having
overhead lines that are greater than 200 kV or are part of an IROL or
WECC Transfer Path, and that are either longer than one mile or without
a clear sightline to the point of interconnection with the host
transmission system).
    64. The burden estimates reflect the changes in the standards and
the number of affected entities (e.g., the generator owner's one-time
burden to develop, or review and modify, an existing vegetation
management program, and the on-going, relatively minor burden of
preparing quarterly reports of relevant outages). Estimates for the
proposed additional burden imposed by the Final Rule in RM12-16
follow.\91\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \91\ The NOPR used the identifier FERC-725A (OMB Control No.
1902-0244). However, for administrative purposes and to submit the
information collection requirements to OMB timely, the requirements
were labeled FERC-725M (OMB Control No. 1902-0263) in the submittal
to OMB associated with the NOPR. We are using FERC-725M in this
Final Rule and in the associated submittal to OMB.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                         No. of          No. of      Average burden
             FERC-725M                 respondents    responses per     hours per        Total annual burden hours              Total annual cost
                                          \92\         respondent       response
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                (1)             (2)             (3)  (1 ) x (2) x (3).................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    FAC-003-3 (Transmission Vegetation Management)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strategies, documentation,                       88               1              32  2,816 (one-time).................  $146,432 one-time<EMAIL_ADDRESS> processes, & procedures (M3).
Quarterly Reporting (Compliance             \94\ 96               4            0.25  96...............................  6,720<EMAIL_ADDRESS> 1.4).
Annual Veg. Inspect. Doc. (M6);                  88               1               2  176..............................  12,320<EMAIL_ADDRESS> annual veg. work plan (M7);
 evidence of mgt. of veg. (M1 &
 M2), confirmed veg. condition (M4)
 & corrective action (M5).
Record Retention (Compliance 1.2)..              88               1               1  88...............................  2,464<EMAIL_ADDRESS>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     FAC-001-1 (Facility Connection Requirements)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility connection reqs. (R2, R3,                5               1              16  80 (one-time)....................  5,600 (one-time<EMAIL_ADDRESS> M2, & M3).
Record Retention \95\..............               5               1               1  5................................  140<EMAIL_ADDRESS>                                    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total in First Year............                                                  3,261............................  173,676
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    \92\ GO = Generator Owner; RE = Regional Entity. The respondents
are generator owners, unless otherwise indicated.
    \93\ The estimates for cost per hour are derived as follows:
     $52/hour, the average of the salary plus benefits for
an engineer and a forester, from Bureau of Labor and Statistics at
http://bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_221000.htm.
     $70/hour, the average of the salary plus benefits for a
manager and an engineer, from Bureau of Labor and Statistics at
http://bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_221000.htm.
     $28/hour, based on a Commission staff study of record
retention burden cost.
    \94\ Number of respondents includes 88 generator owners, who may
be subject to the recordkeeping and reporting burdens of FAC-003 for
the first time, and 8 Regional Entities, who may have a slight
increase in recordkeeping and reporting requirements due to the
increase in entities covered by the vegetation management standard.
    \95\ Regional Entities may have a de minimis increase in burden
due to the increase in the number of entities potentially subject to
the revised standard; that burden has been rolled into the estimated
Average Burden Hours per Response.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Title: Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System.
    Action: Proposed revisions to FERC-725M.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0263.
    Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit institutions; not-for-
profit institutions.
    Frequency of Responses: One-time, annual, and quarterly.
    Necessity of the Information: The revisions to the four Reliability
Standards noted above are part of the implementation of the
Congressional mandate of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, to develop
mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards to better ensure the
reliability of the nation's Bulk-Power System.
    Internal Review: The Commission has reviewed the revisions to the
four Reliability Standards and made a determination that its action is
necessary to implement section 215 of the FPA. The Commission has
assured itself, by means of its internal review, that there is
specific, objective support for the burden estimate associated with the
information requirements.
    65. 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>].
    66. For submitting comments concerning the collection of
information and the associated burden estimates, please send your
comments to the Commission, and to the Office of Management and Budget,
Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Washington, DC 20503
[Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
phone:<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 RM12-16, FERC-725M and OMB Control Number 1902-0263.

IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    67. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \96\ 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.\97\
The SBA has established a size standard for electric utilities, stating
that a firm is small if, including its affiliates, it is primarily
engaged in the transmission, generation and/or distribution of electric
energy for sale and its total electric output for the preceding twelve
months did not exceed four million megawatt hours.\98\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \96\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612 (2006).
    \97\ 13 CFR 121.101 (2013).
    \98\ 13 CFR 121.201, Sector 22, Utilities & n.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    68. Reliability Standards FAC-001-1, FAC-003-3, PRC-004-2.1a, and
PRC-005-1.1b will help to ensure that generator interconnection
facilities are properly maintained and operated. The number of small
business entities affected is expected to be small, because FAC-001-1
will apply only to the small subset of generator owners that have
executed an agreement to interconnect with a third party, and FAC-003-3
will only affect generator owners with overhead transmission lines
that: (1) Are operated at 200 kV or higher, or, are elements of an IROL
or of a Major WECC Transfer Path, and (2) are longer than one mile or
lacking in clear sightlines to the point of interconnection with the
host transmission system.\99\ Comparison of the NERC Compliance
Registry with data submitted to the Energy Information Administration
on Form EIA-861 indicates that, of the 881 generator owners in the
United States

registered by NERC, 49 qualify as small businesses.\100\ Of these, only
five entities (about ten percent of the small entities) are expected to
have qualifying interconnection facilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \99\ Some of the standards may also affect Regional Entities;
however, they do not qualify as small entities.
    \100\ See NERC Compliance Registry as of July 30, 2013; U.S.
Energy Information Administration Form EIA-861--Annual Electric
Power Industry Report, Preliminary Data for 2012 (released August
15, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    69. For the number of small generator owners that do have
applicable facilities, the primary cost increase is expected to be in
documentation, recordkeeping, and reporting burdens as discussed above.
In addition, we estimate that for each of the estimated five small
generator owners there will be an additional cost for the two hours to
perform the annual inspection of the lines (at $47.00 per hour,\101\ or
an additional $94.00 per owner annually). Therefore, the estimated cost
in the first year for the increased data collection and retention for
these entities is approximately $3,144.00 per entity ($3,050.00 for the
one-time and recurring reporting and record retention requirements from
the table above plus $94.00 for the annual inspection of the line). In
subsequent years, after completion of the one-time recordkeeping or
reporting requirements, the cost will be reduced. Based on the above,
the Commission does not consider the costs associated with NERC's
revisions to the four Reliability Standards to constitute a significant
economic impact for small entities, because it should not represent a
significant percentage of an affected small entity's operating budget.
Accordingly, the Commission certifies that the revised requirements set
forth in the four Reliability Standards will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, and no
regulatory flexibility analysis is required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \101\ This wage figure is taken from the Bureau of Labor and
Statistics at http://bls.gov/oes/current/naics3.221000.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Environmental Analysis

    70. 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.\102\ The
Commission has categorically excluded certain actions from this
requirement as not having a significant effect on the human
environment. Included in the exclusion are rules that are clarifying,
corrective, or procedural or that do not substantially change the
effect of the regulations being amended.\103\ The actions proposed here
fall within this categorical exclusion in the Commission's regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \102\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, Order No. 486, FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations
Preambles 1986-1990 ] 30,783 (1987).
    \103\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Document Availability

    71. 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.
    72. 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.
    73. 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>
VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification

    74. These regulations are effective November 25, 2013. The
Commission has determined, with the concurrence of the Administrator of
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs of OMB, that this rule
is not a ``major rule'' as defined in section 351 of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. The Commission will submit
this Final Rule to both houses of Congress and the Government
Accountability Office.

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

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

Appendix

Commenters

American Public Power Association (APPA)
American Wind Energy Association (AWEA)
Bonneville Power Administration (BPA)
BP Wind Energy North America, Inc. (BP Wind Energy)
City of Alameda, California (Alameda)
California Department of Water Resources State Water Project (CDWR)
Dominion Resources Services, Inc. (Dominion)
Electric Power Supply Association and Electricity Consumers Resource
Council (EPSA/ELCON)
E.ON Climate & Renewables North America, LLC (E.ON Renewables)
International Transmission Company d/b/a ITC Transmission, Michigan
Electric
Transmission Company, LLC, ITC Midwest LLC and ITC Great Plains LLC
(ITC)
Louisville Gas and Electric Company, Kentucky Utilities Corporation,
Lower Mount Bethel Energy, LLC, PPL Brunner Island, LLC, PPL
Electric Utilities Corporation, PPL EnergyPlus, LLC, PPL Holtwood,
LLC, PPL Ironwood, LLC, PPL Martins Creek, LLC, PPL Montana, LLC,
PPL Montour, LLC, and PPL Susquehanna, LLC (PPL)
North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC)
Transmission Dependent Utility Systems (TDU Systems)
[FR Doc. 2013-23180 Filed 9-23-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 56 (Friday, March 24, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15094-15095]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05888]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Opportunity for Public Comment on Disposal of 41.63
Acres of Airport Land at Igor Sikorsky Memorial Airport in Stratford,
CT

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is being given that the FAA is considering a request
from the City of Bridgeport in Bridgeport, CT, to dispose of a 33.98
acre parcel and 7.65 acre parcel of airport land that were identified
for disposal in the Runway Safety Area Project Igor Sikorsky Memorial
Airport Intergovernmental Agreement (``Intergovernmental Agreement'')
at Igor Sikorsky Memorial Airport dated November, 2012 and signed April
17, 2013 by the Town of Stratford, City of Bridgeport, Connecticut
Department of Transportation, Connecticut Office of Policy and
Management, and the Federal Aviation Administration.
    There are two subject parcels identified in the Intergovernmental
Agreement. The first property is the Long Beach Parcel that is located
to the southwest of the end of Runway 6 and is 33.98 acres. The second
property known as Parcel 16, is located to the northwest of Runway 11
and is 7.65 acres. The two parcels will be transferred to the Town of
Stratford, CT at a fair market value of $486,600. The parcels will be
transferred with easements to protect the airport. Given the location
of the two parcels, the disposal of this property will have no effect
on aviation land nor future development opportunities for the airport.
The proceeds of the disposal, per the Intergovernmental Agreement, will
be used to reduce the overall Runway Safety Area project grant amount
and fund a portion of the City's match for the Runway Safety Area
project.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 24, 2017.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments using any of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to http://www.regulations.gov, and follow the instructions on providing comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket
Operations, M-30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W 12-140, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
     Hand Delivery: Deliver to mail address above between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Interested persons may inspect the request and supporting documents
by contacting the FAA at the address listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jorge E. Panteli, Compliance and
Land Use Specialist, Federal Aviation Administration New England Region
Airports Division, 1200 District Avenue, Burlington, Massachusetts
01803. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on January 25, 2017.
Mary T. Walsh,
Manager.
[FR Doc. 2017-05888 Filed 3-23-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 54 (Wednesday, March 22, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14708-14709]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05670]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings #1

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
corporate filings:

    Docket Numbers: EC17-91-000.
    Applicants: Kingfisher Wind, LLC, Comanche Solar PV, LLC,
BlackRock, Inc.
    Description: Application for Authorization Under Section 203 of the
Federal Power Act and Request for Expedited Action of Kingfisher Wind,
LLC, et al.
    Filed Date: 3/15/17.
    Accession Number: 20170315-5188.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/17.

    Take notice that the Commission received the following electric
rate filings:

    Docket Numbers: ER10-2633-031; ER10-2570-031; ER10-2717-031; ER10-
3140-031; ER13-55-021.
    Applicants: Birchwood Power Partners, L.P., Shady Hills Power
Company, L.L.C., EFS Parlin Holdings, LLC, Inland Empire Energy Center,
LLC, Homer City Generation, L.P.
    Description: Notice of Non-Material Change in Status of the GE
Companies.
    Filed Date: 3/15/17.
    Accession Number: 20170315-5187.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER16-1036-001.
    Applicants: Wolverine Power Supply Cooperative, Inc.
    Description: Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. submits
tariff filing per 35.19a(b): Refund Report to be effective N/A.
    Filed Date: 3/14/17.
    Accession Number: 20170314-5188.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/4/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-923-001.
    Applicants: Ashley Energy LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Amendment to Application for MBR to
be effective 2/20/2017.
    Filed Date: 3/16/17.
    Accession Number: 20170316-5130.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1191-000.
    Applicants: Otter Tail Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Supplements to Rate Schedule
No. 151 to be effective 7/30/2010.
    Filed Date: 3/15/17.
    Accession Number: 20170315-5166.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1192-000.
    Applicants: Otter Tail Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Supplements to Rate Schedule
No. 168 to be effective 7/30/2010.
    Filed Date: 3/15/17.
    Accession Number: 20170315-5168.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1193-000.
    Applicants: Otter Tail Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Filing Related to CASOT
Service Agreements to be effective 7/30/2010.
    Filed Date: 3/15/17.
    Accession Number: 20170315-5169.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/5/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1194-000.
    Applicants: Puget Sound Energy, Inc.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Intel Cancellation of NITSA, NOA,
and IA to be effective 3/1/2017.
    Filed Date: 3/16/17.
    Accession Number: 20170316-5005.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1199-000.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: 2017-03-16 NSP Addendum No.
1--JPZ Agrmt--304 to be effective 1/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/16/17.
    Accession Number: 20170316-5047.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1200-000.
    Applicants: Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: NSPM Addendum No 1 to the
JPZ Agrmt 304 0.0.0 to be effective 4/16/2016.
    Filed Date: 3/16/17.
    Accession Number: 20170316-5048.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1201-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Cancellation of WMPA SA No. 3580;
Queue No. Y1-071 to be effective 5/8/2017.
    Filed Date: 3/16/17.
    Accession Number: 20170316-5049.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1204-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation of SA No.
3329; Queue No. X1-049 to be effective 5/12/2017.
    Filed Date: 3/16/17.
    Accession Number: 20170316-5072.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1205-000.
    Applicants: Norwalk Power LLC.
    Description: Tariff Cancellation: Notice of Cancellation to be
effective 3/17/2017.
    Filed Date: 3/16/17.
    Accession Number: 20170316-5073.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1213-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: ISA Service Agreement No.
4634, Queue Position AB1-135 to be effective 2/15/2017.
    Filed Date: 3/16/17.
    Accession Number: 20170316-5098.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1214-000.
    Applicants: Coso Geothermal Power Holdings, LLC.

    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: CIS & 819 Tariff Revisions
to be effective 3/17/2017.
    Filed Date: 3/16/17.
    Accession Number: 20170316-5124.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1215-000.
    Applicants: Otter Tail Power Company.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Notice of Termination of
Ainsworth CASOT Service Agreement to be effective 7/30/2010.
    Filed Date: 3/16/17.
    Accession Number: 20170316-5125.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1216-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to WMPA SA No.
3246; Queue No. W1-119 to be effective 4/30/2014.
    Filed Date: 3/16/17.
    Accession Number: 20170316-5126.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1217-000.
    Applicants: Total Gas & Power North America, Inc.
    Description: Baseline eTariff Filing: FERC MBR Application to be
effective 4/6/2017.
    Filed Date: 3/16/17.
    Accession Number: 20170316-5128.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/17.

    Docket Numbers: ER17-1218-000.
    Applicants: PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.
    Description: Sec.  205(d) Rate Filing: Amendment to WMPA SA No.
3247; Queue No. W1-120 to be effective 4/30/2014.
    Filed Date: 3/16/17.
    Accession Number: 20170316-5129.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/17.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: March 16, 2017.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-05670 Filed 3-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P