[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 237 (Tuesday, December 12, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58462-58465]
[FR Doc No: 2017-26688]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-82226; File No. SR-NYSEARCA-2017-134]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of Filing
and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To Amend the NYSE
Arca Options Fees and Charges and the NYSE Arca Equities Fees and
Charges To Modify the Fees Related to Four Bundles of Co-Location
Services in Connection With the Exchange's Co-Location Services

December 6, 2017.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) \1\ of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') \2\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\3\ notice is hereby given
that, on November 22, 2017, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared by the self-regulatory
organization. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 15 U.S.C. 78a.
    \3\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange proposes to amend the NYSE Arca Options Fees and
Charges (the ``Options Fee Schedule'') and the NYSE Arca Equities Fees
and Charges (the ``Equities Fee Schedule'' and, together with the
Options Fee Schedule, the ``Fee Schedules'') to modify the fees related
to four bundles of co-location services (``Partial Cabinet Solution
bundles'') in connection with the Exchange's co-location services. The
Exchange proposes to implement the fee changes effective January 1,
2018. The proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's website
at www.nyse.com, at the principal office of the Exchange, and at the
Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the self-regulatory organization
included statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the
proposed rule change and discussed any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of those statements may be examined at
the places specified in Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B, and C below, of the most
significant parts of such statements.

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and the
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange proposes to amend the Exchange's Fee Schedules to
modify the fees related to Partial Cabinet Solution bundles in
connection with the Exchange's co-location services.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The Exchange initially filed rule changes relating to its
co-location services with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') in 2010. See Securities Exchange Act Release No.
63275 (November 8, 2010), 75 FR 70048 (November 16, 2010) (SR-
NYSEArca-2010-100) (the ``Original Co-location Filing''). The
Exchange operates a data center in Mahwah, New Jersey (the ``data
center'') from which it provides co-location services to Users.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange offers the four Partial Cabinet Solution bundles in
order to attract smaller Users, including those with minimal power or
cabinet space demands or those for which the costs attendant with
having a dedicated cabinet or greater network connection bandwidth are
too burdensome.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 77070 (Feb. 5,
2016), 81 FR 7401 (Feb. 11, 2016) (SR-NYSEArca-2015-102).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Currently, the Exchange offers Users \6\ that purchase a Partial
Cabinet Solution bundle on or before December 31, 2017 a 50% reduction
in the monthly recurring charges (``MRC'') for the first 12 months.\7\
The Exchange now proposes to:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ For purposes of the Exchange's co-location services, a
``User'' means any market participant that requests to receive co-
location services directly from the Exchange. See Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 76010 (September 29, 2015), 80 FR 60197
(October 5, 2015) (SR-NYSEArca-2015-82). As specified in the Fee
Schedules, a User that incurs co-location fees for a particular co-
location service pursuant thereto would not be subject to co-
location fees for the same co-location service charged by the
Exchange's affiliates New York Stock Exchange LLC (``NYSE LLC'') and
NYSE MKT LLC (``NYSE MKT'' and, together with NYSE LLC, the
``Affiliate SROs''). See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 70173
(August 13, 2013), 78 FR 50459 (August 19, 2013) (SR-NYSEArca-2013-
80).
    \7\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79716 (Dec. 30,
2016), 82 FR 1774 (Jan. 6, 2017) (SR-NYSEArca-2016-168).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Extend the 50% reduction to those Users that purchase a
Partial Cabinet Solution bundle on or before December 31, 2018; and
     increase the duration of the reduction from 12 months to
24 months.
    The Exchange also proposes that Users that already purchased a
Partial Cabinet Solution bundle have the

duration of their 50% reduction increased from 12 months to 24 months
as well.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For each User that is currently benefitting from the 50%
reduction, the additional 12 month period with the reduced price
would begin when its current 12-month period ended. For each User
whose 12-month period with the reduced price has ended, the
additional 12-month period would begin upon the implementation of
the proposed fee changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange proposes to implement the fee changes effective
January 1, 2018.
    Specifically, the Exchange proposes to modify its Fee Schedules so
that they read as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Type of service             Description        Amount of charge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Partial Cabinet Solution      Option A:...........  $7,500 initial
 bundles.                     1 kW partial           charge per bundle
Note: A User and its           cabinet, 1 LCN        plus monthly charge
 Affiliates are limited to     connection (1 Gb),    per bundle as
 one Partial Cabinet           1 IP network          follows:
 Solution bundle at a time.    connection (1 Gb),    For Users
 A User and its Affiliates     2 fiber cross         that order on or
 must have an Aggregate        connections and       before December 31,
 Cabinet Footprint of 2 kW     either the Network    2018: $3,000
 or less to qualify for a      Time Protocol Feed    monthly for first
 Partial Cabinet Solution      or Precision Timing   24 months of
 bundle. See Note 2 under      Protocol.             service, and $6,000
 ``General Notes.''.                                 monthly thereafter.
                                                     For Users
                                                     that order after
                                                     December 31, 2018:
                                                     $6,000 monthly.
                              Option B:...........  $7,500 initial
                              2 kW partial           charge per bundle
                               cabinet, 1 LCN        plus monthly charge
                               connection (1 Gb),    per bundle as
                               1 IP network          follows:
                               connection (1 Gb),    For Users
                               2 fiber cross         that order on or
                               connections and       before December 31,
                               either the Network    2018: $3,500
                               Time Protocol Feed    monthly for first
                               or Precision Timing   24 months of
                               Protocol.             service, and $7,000
                                                     monthly thereafter.
                                                     For Users
                                                     that order after
                                                     December 31, 2018:
                                                     $7,000 monthly.
                              Option C:...........  $10,000 initial
                              1 kW partial           charge per bundle
                               cabinet, 1 LCN        plus monthly charge
                               connection (10 Gb),   per bundle as
                               1 IP network          follows:
                               connection (10 Gb),   For Users
                               2 fiber cross         that order on or
                               connections and       before December 31,
                               either the Network    2018: $7,000
                               Time Protocol Feed    monthly for first
                               or Precision Timing   24 months of
                               Protocol.             service, and
                                                     $14,000 monthly
                                                     thereafter.
                                                     For Users
                                                     that order after
                                                     December 31, 2018:
                                                     $14,000 monthly.
                              Option D:...........  $10,000 initial
                              2 kW partial           charge per bundle
                               cabinet, 1 LCN        plus monthly charge
                               connection (10 Gb),   per bundle as
                               1 IP network          follows:
                               connection (10 Gb),   For Users
                               2 fiber cross         that order on or
                               connections and       before December 31,
                               either the Network    2018: $7,500
                               Time Protocol Feed    monthly for first
                               or Precision Timing   24 months of
                               Protocol.             service, and
                                                     $15,000 monthly
                                                     thereafter.
                                                     For Users
                                                     that order after
                                                     December 31, 2018:
                                                     $15,000 monthly.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange is not proposing any other changes to the Partial
Cabinet Solution bundles.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The Commission notes that previous filings stated that Users
that purchase a Partial Cabinet Solution bundle would be subject to
a 90-day minimum commitment, after which period they are subject to
a 60-day rolling time period. The Exchange has represented to
Commission staff that these provisions have not changed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As is the case with all Exchange co-location arrangements, (i)
neither a User nor any of the User's customers would be permitted to
submit orders directly to the Exchange unless such User or customer is
a member organization, a Sponsored Participant or an agent thereof
(e.g., a service bureau providing order entry services); (ii) use of
the co-location services proposed herein would be completely voluntary
and available to all Users on a non-discriminatory basis; \10\ and
(iii) a User would only incur one charge for the particular co-location
service described herein, regardless of whether the User connects only
to the Exchange or to the Exchange and one or both of its
affiliates.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ As is currently the case, Users that receive co-location
services from the Exchange will not receive any means of access to
the Exchange's trading and execution systems that is separate from,
or superior to, that of other Users. In this regard, all orders sent
to the Exchange enter the Exchange's trading and execution systems
through the same order gateway, regardless of whether the sender is
co-located in the data center or not. In addition, co-located Users
do not receive any market data or data service product that is not
available to all Users, although Users that receive co-location
services normally would expect reduced latencies in sending orders
to, and receiving market data from, the Exchange.
    \11\ See SR-NYSEArca-2013-80, supra note 6, at 50459. The
Exchange's affiliates have also submitted substantially the same
proposed rule change to propose the changes described herein. See
SR-NYSE-2017-62 and SR-NYSEAMER-2017-35.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes are consistent
with Section 6(b) of the Act,\12\ in general, and furthers the
objectives of Sections 6(b)(5) of the Act,\13\ in particular, because
it is designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and
practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and
perfect the mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market
system and, in general, to protect investors and the public interest
and because it is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b).
    \13\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that the proposed rule changes provide for
the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and other charges
among its members, issuers and other persons using its facilities, and
are not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers, because the Exchange proposes to offer
the 50% reduction in the MRC, and the increase in the duration of the
reduction from 12 months to 24 months, to all Users equally. As is
currently the case, the purchase of any co-location service (including
Partial Cabinet Solution

bundles) is completely voluntary. All Users that order a bundle on or
before December 31, 2018 would have their MRC reduced by 50% for the
first 24 months.
    The Exchange believes that extending the 50% reduction in the MRC
for Partial Cabinet Solution bundles, and increasing the duration of
the reduction, is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between
customers, issuers, brokers, or dealers because the Partial Cabinet
Solution bundles would continue to offer four different Partial Cabinet
Solution bundles with options with respect to cabinet footprint and
network connections. Users that require other sizes or combinations of
cabinets, network connections and cross connects could still request
them.
    In addition, the Exchange believes that its proposal would remove
impediments to, and perfects the mechanisms of, a free and open market
and a national market system and, in general, protects investors and
the public interest because the proposed extension of the 50% reduction
in MRC and the proposed increase in the duration of the reduction would
continue to make it more cost effective for Users to utilize co-
location by creating a convenient way to create a co-location
environment, through four Partial Cabinet Solution bundles with options
with respect to cabinet footprint and network connections. The Exchange
expects that such Users would include those with minimal power or
cabinet space demands and Users for which the costs attendant with
having a dedicated cabinet or greater network connection bandwidth are
too burdensome.
    The Exchange believes that the proposed change to have Users that
already purchased a Partial Cabinet Solution bundle have the duration
of their 50% reduction increased from 12 months to 24 months is
designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of trade, to foster cooperation
and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing,
settling, processing information with respect to, and facilitating
transactions in securities, to remove impediments to, and perfect the
mechanisms of, a free and open market and a national market system and,
in general, to protect investors and the public interest and because it
is not designed to permit unfair discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers, because it would ensure that all Users
that purchase a Partial Cabinet Solution bundle prior to December 31,
2018 benefit from the 50% reduction for a total of 24 months.
    The Exchange also believes that the proposed rule changes are
consistent with Section 6(b)(4) of the Act,\14\ in particular, because
it provides for the equitable allocation of reasonable dues, fees, and
other charges among its members, issuers and other persons using its
facilities and does not unfairly discriminate between customers,
issuers, brokers or dealers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that it is reasonable that Users that order a
Partial Cabinet Solution bundle on or before December 31, 2018 would
have their MRC reduced by 50% for the first 24 months because it is
reasonable to continue to offer such reduction as an incentive to Users
to utilize the service, including both new and past Users of bundles.
As noted above, the Exchange anticipates that Users of the Partial
Cabinet Solution bundles would include those with minimum power or
cabinet space demands and Users for which the costs attendant with
having a dedicated cabinet or greater network connection bandwidth are
too burdensome.
    For the reasons above, the proposed changes do not unfairly
discriminate between or among market participants that are otherwise
capable of satisfying any applicable co-location fees, requirements,
terms and conditions established from time to time by the Exchange.
    Finally, the Exchange believes that it is subject to significant
competitive forces, as described below in the Exchange's statement
regarding the burden on competition.
    For these reasons, the Exchange believes that the proposal is
consistent with the Act.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    In accordance with Section 6(b)(8) of the Act,\15\ the Exchange
believes that the proposed rule changes will not impose any burden on
competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the
purposes of the Act because, in addition to the proposed services being
completely voluntary, they are available to all Users on an equal basis
(i.e. the same products and services are available to all Users, and
the extension of the 50% reduction for the MRC for the Partial Cabinet
Solution bundles, and the increased duration of the reduction, would
apply to all Users).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(8).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange believes that extending the 50% reduction in the MRC
and increasing the duration of the reduction will not impose any burden
on competition that is not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of
the purposes of the Act because such access will continue to satisfy
User demand for cost effective options for smaller Users that choose to
utilize co-location. All Users that order a bundle on or before
December 31, 2018 would have their MRC reduced by 50% for the first 24
months. The Exchange believes that the proposed change to have Users
that already purchased a Partial Cabinet Solution bundle have the
duration of their 50% reduction increased from 12 months to 24 months
would ensure that all Users that purchase a Partial Cabinet Solution
bundle prior to December 31, 2018 benefit from the 50% reduction for a
total of 24 months.
    The proposed changes will also enhance competition by making it
more cost effective for Users that purchase a Partial Cabinet Solution
bundle to utilize co-location by creating a convenient way to create a
co-location environment, through Partial Cabinet Solution bundles with
options with respect to cabinet footprint and network connections at a
reduced MRC for the first 24 months. Such Users may choose to pass on
such cost savings to their customers.
    The Exchange operates in a highly competitive market in which
exchanges offer co-location services as a means to facilitate the
trading and other market activities of those market participants who
believe that co-location enhances the efficiency of their operations.
Accordingly, fees charged for co-location services are constrained by
the active competition for the order flow of, and other business from,
such market participants. If a particular exchange charges excessive
fees for co-location services, affected market participants will opt to
terminate their co-location arrangements with that exchange, and adopt
a possible range of alternative strategies, including placing their
servers in a physically proximate location outside the exchange's data
center (which could be a competing exchange), or pursuing strategies
less dependent upon the lower exchange-to-participant latency
associated with co-location. Accordingly, the exchange charging
excessive fees would stand to lose not only co-location revenues but
also the liquidity of the formerly co-located trading firms, which
could have additional follow-on effects on the market share and revenue
of the affected exchange. In such an environment, the Exchange must
continually review, and consider adjusting, its services and related
fees and credits to remain competitive with other exchanges.
    For the reasons described above, the Exchange believes that the
proposed

rule changes reflect this competitive environment.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    No written comments were solicited or received with respect to the
proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    The foregoing rule change has become effective pursuant to Section
19(b)(3)(A) \16\ of the Act and subparagraph (f)(2) of Rule 19b-4 \17\
thereunder. At any time within 60 days of the filing of such proposed
rule change, the Commission summarily may temporarily suspend such rule
change if it appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or
appropriate in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or
otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. If the Commission
takes such action, the Commission shall institute proceedings under
Section 19(b)(2)(B) \18\ of the Act to determine whether the proposed
rule change should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \17\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(2).
    \18\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to [email protected]. Please include
File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2017-134 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2017-134. This
file number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To
help the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's internet website (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml).
Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written
statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with
the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed
rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those
that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions
of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for website viewing and printing in
the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE, Washington, DC
20549 on official business days between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and
3:00 p.m. Copies of the filing also will be available for inspection
and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All comments
received will be posted without change. Persons submitting comments are
cautioned that we do not redact or edit personal identifying
information from comment submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR-NYSEARCA-2017-134 and should be
submitted on or before January 2, 2018.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-26688 Filed 12-11-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 148 (Tuesday, August 2, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Page 50759]
[FR Doc No: 2016-18203]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-78425; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2016-84]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Notice of
Designation of a Longer Period for Commission Action on a Proposed Rule
Change to List and Trade Shares of the Global Currency Gold Fund Under
NYSE Arca Equities Rule 8.201

July 27, 2016.
    On June 1, 2016, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``NYSE Arca'' or ``Exchange'')
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''),
pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to
list and trade shares of the Global Currency Gold Fund under NYSE Arca
Equities Rule 8.201. The proposed rule change was published for comment
in the Federal Register on June 21, 2016.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78075 (June 15,
2016), 81 FR 40381.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 19(b)(2) of the Act \4\ provides that, within 45 days of
the publication of notice of the filing of a proposed rule change, or
within such longer period up to 90 days as the Commission may designate
if it finds such longer period to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or as to which the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission shall either approve the proposed rule change,
disapprove the proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to
determine whether the proposed rule change should be disapproved. The
Commission is extending this 45-day time period. The Commission finds
that it is appropriate to designate a longer period within which to
take action on the proposed rule change so that it has sufficient time
to consider the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Accordingly, the Commission, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\5\ designates September 19, 2016, as the date by which the
Commission shall either approve or disapprove or institute proceedings
to determine whether to disapprove the proposed rule change (File
Number SR-NYSEArca-2016-84).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(31).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Robert W. Errett,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016-18203 Filed 8-1-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 211 (Friday, October 30, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 68809-68816]
[FR Doc No: 2020-23297]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 40

[Docket No. RM19-20-000]

WECC Regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-3 (Contingency
Reserve)

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) proposes
to approve regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-3 (Contingency
Reserve) submitted jointly by the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC), the Commission-certified Electric Reliability
Organization, and the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC).
In addition, the Commission proposes to direct NERC and WECC to submit
an informational filing.

DATES: Comments are due December 29, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by docket number RM19-20, 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 via United States Postal Service
(USPS) 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:
Susan Morris (Technical Information), Office of Electric Reliability,
Division of Operations and Planning Standards, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426,
Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Mark Bennett (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    1. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of the Federal Power Act (FPA),
the Commission proposes to approve regional Reliability Standard BAL-
002-WECC-3 (Contingency Reserve). The North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Commission-certified Electric
Reliability Organization (ERO), and Western Electricity Coordinating
Council (WECC) jointly submitted the proposed regional Reliability
Standard to the Commission for approval.
    2. Proposed regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-3 applies to
balancing authorities and reserve sharing groups in the WECC Region,
and it specifies the quantity and types of contingency reserve required
to ensure reliability under normal and abnormal conditions.\1\ The
principal difference between the currently-effective regional
Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-2a and the proposed version is the
elimination of Requirement R2 from the currently-effective version. As
discussed in the joint petition, Requirement R2 is redundant in the
light of the implementation of the continent-wide Reliability Standard
BAL-003-1.1 (Frequency Response and Frequency Bias Setting). Given the
requirements of the continent-wide Reliability Standard BAL-003-1.1 and
the results of field tests conducted by NERC and WECC assessing the
potential impacts of the retirement of Reliability Standard BAL-002-
WECC-2a Requirement R2 on contingency reserves in the Western
Interconnection, the Commission proposes to approve regional
Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-3 and retire the currently-effective
version of the regional Reliability Standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Reserve sharing group is defined in the Glossary of Terms
Used in NERC Reliability Standards (NERC Glossary) as, ``[a] group
whose members consist of two or more Balancing Authorities that
collectively maintain, allocate, and supply operating reserves
required for each Balancing Authority's use in recovering from
contingencies within the group. . . .''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. In addition, although the Commission proposes to approve
regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-3, the Commission believes
it appropriate in this case to monitor the potential impacts of
retiring Requirement R2 on the adequacy of contingency reserves in the
Western Interconnection. Therefore, the Commission proposes to direct
NERC and WECC to submit an informational filing 27 months following
implementation of regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-3 that
addresses the adequacy of contingency reserves in the Western
Interconnection.

I. Background

A. Section 215 and Regional Reliability Standards

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

    \2\ 16 U.S.C. 824o.
    \3\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. A Regional Entity may develop a regional Reliability Standard
for Commission approval to be effective in that region only.\4\ In
Order No. 672, the Commission stated that:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(4). A Regional Entity is an entity that
has been approved by the Commission to enforce Reliability Standards
under delegated authority from the ERO. See 16 U.S.C. 824o(a)(7) and
(e)(4). On April 19, 2007, the Commission accepted delegation
agreements between NERC and eight Regional Entities, including WECC.
North American Electric Reliability Council., 119 FERC ] 61,060,
order on reh'g, 120 FERC ] 61,260 (2007).

    As a general matter, we will accept the following two types of
regional differences, provided they are otherwise just, reasonable,
not unduly discriminatory or preferential and in the public
interest, as required under the statute: (1) A regional difference
that is more stringent than the continent-wide Reliability Standard,
including a regional difference that addresses matters that the
continent-wide Reliability Standard does not; and (2) a regional
Reliability Standard that is necessitated by a physical difference
in the Bulk-Power System.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric Reliability
Organization; and Procedures for the Establishment, Approval and
Enforcement of Electric Reliability Standards, Order No. 672, 114
FERC ] 61,104, at P 291, order on reh'g, Order No. 672-A, 114 FERC ]
61,328 (2006).

    While a Regional Entity may propose regional Reliability Standards
that address specific, unique regional conditions and circumstances,
such regional Reliability Standards can be retired if those
justifications are no longer relevant. Accordingly, the Commission may
approve retirement of a more stringent regional requirement ``if the
Regional Entity demonstrates that the continent-wide Reliability
Standard is sufficient to ensure the reliability of that region.'' \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Version One Regional Reliability Standard for Resource and
Demand Balancing, Order No. 740, 133 FERC ] 61,063, at P 30 (2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-2

    6. On November 21, 2013, the Commission approved regional
Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-2 specifying the quantity and types
of contingency reserve required to ensure reliability under normal and
abnormal conditions.\7\ Regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-2
was more stringent than the continent-wide Reliability Standard BAL-
002-1 because the regional Reliability Standard required applicable
entities to restore contingency reserve within 60 minutes following the
Disturbance Recovery Period while the continent-wide Reliability
Standard only required restoration of contingency reserve within 90
minutes.\8\ Requirement R2 of the regional Reliability Standard
provides that balancing authorities and reserve sharing groups in the
WECC Region ``shall maintain at least half of its minimum amount of
Contingency Reserve identified in Requirement R1, as Operating
Reserve--Spinning.'' In addition, the method for calculating minimum
contingency reserve in the regional Reliability Standard was more
stringent than Requirement R3.1 in Reliability Standard BAL-002-1
because it required minimum contingency reserve levels that will be at
least equal to the Reliability Standard minimum (i.e., equal to the
most severe single contingency) and more often will be greater.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-2--Contingency
Reserve, Order No. 789, 145 FERC ] 61,141 (2013). On January 24,
2017, by delegated letter order, the Commission approved regional
Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-2a, which added an interpretation
to Requirement R2. North American Electric Reliability Corporation,
Docket. No. RD17-3-000 (Jan. 24, 2017) (delegated order).
    \8\ Reliability Standard BAL-002-3, approved on September 25,
2018, is the current version of the continent-wide Reliability
Standard.
    \9\ Order No. 789, 145 FERC ] 61,141 at P 26.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. NERC Reliability Standard BAL-003-1

    7. On January 16, 2014, the Commission approved continent-wide
Reliability Standard BAL-003-1 (Frequency Response and Frequency Bias
Setting).\10\ The Commission explained that Reliability Standard BAL-
003-1 defines the amount of frequency response needed from balancing
authorities to maintain Interconnection frequency within predefined
bounds and includes requirements for the measurement and provision of
frequency response. In particular, Order No. 794 determined that
Reliability Standard BAL-003-1 ``establishes a minimum Frequency
Response Obligation for each balancing authority; provides a uniform
calculation of frequency response; establishes Frequency Bias Settings
that are closer to actual balancing authority frequency response; and
encourages coordinated automatic generation control operation.'' \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Frequency Response and Frequency Bias Setting Reliability
Standard, Order No. 794, 146 FERC ] 61,024 (2014). Reliability
Standard BAL-003-1.1 was subsequently approved by delegated letter
order on November 13, 2015 and contained non-substantive changes
over the prior version, Reliability Standard BAL-003-1. North
American Electric Reliability Corp., Docket No. RD15-6-000 (Nov. 13,
2015) (delegated order).
    \11\ Order No. 794, 146 FERC ] 61,024 at P 22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. NERC and WECC Joint Petition

    8. On September 6, 2019, NERC and WECC submitted a joint petition
seeking approval of proposed regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-
WECC-3, the associated violation risk factors and violation severity
levels, effective date, and implementation plan. The joint petition
also requests retirement of the currently-effective WECC regional
Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-2a.
    9. In the joint petition, NERC and WECC explain that principal
modification in the proposed regional Reliability Standard is the
retirement of Requirement R2 in currently-effective regional
Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-2a. NERC and WECC maintain that the
regional 50% minimum operating reserve--spinning requirement in
Requirement R2 was carried forward from the Reliability Management
System of WECC's predecessor, the Western Systems Coordinating Council.
    10. NERC and WECC contend that continent-wide Reliability Standard
BAL-003-1.1 ``helps ensure that sufficient Frequency Response is
provided to maintain Interconnection frequency in support of the
reliable operation of the Interconnection,'' and therefore renders
regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-2a, Requirement R2
``redundant and no longer needed for reliability in the Western
Interconnection.'' \12\ NERC and WECC assert that Reliability Standard
BAL-003-1.1 ``addresses the same frequency response components covered
in currently effective Regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-2a
Requirement R2 but in a results-based manner.'' \13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Joint Petition at 4.
    \13\ Id. at 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    11. In particular, NERC and WECC state that Reliability Standard
BAL-003-1.1, Requirement R1 requires that balancing authorities (or
groups of balancing authorities known as frequency response sharing
groups) ``achieve an annual Frequency Response Measure that is equal to
or more negative than its Frequency Response Obligation to ensure that
it is providing sufficient Frequency Response.'' \14\

Moreover, NERC and WECC explain that retention of the regional 50%
minimum operating reserve--spinning requirement, alongside the
continent-wide frequency response requirement, could lead to confusion
and the procurement of more spinning reserves than necessary for
entities to meet their frequency response obligation, thereby
increasing costs without providing additional reliability benefits.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Id. at 4.
    \15\ Id. at 12-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    12. NERC and WECC also state that to evaluate the potential
reliability impacts of retiring Requirement R2, WECC conducted a field
test from May 1, 2017 through April 30, 2018, obtaining data from each
balancing authority and each reserve sharing group.\16\ NERC and WECC
explain that the field test measured the effect of retiring Requirement
R2 using two metrics: Disturbance control standard (DCS) performance
and frequency response in the Western Interconnection.\17\ The first
metric measured, for each reportable DCS event,\18\ whether an entity
was unable to meet the DCS recovery period. The second metric monitored
system performance for any loss of resources greater than 700 MW and
for any adverse effects on frequency response.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Id. at 13. A report containing the results of the field
test is appended to the joint petition as Exhibit C. Joint Petition,
Exhibit C (Field Test Results, WECC-0115 BAL-002-WECC-2a Request to
Retire Requirement R2).
    \17\ Disturbance control standard is defined in the NERC
Glossary as, ``[t]he reliability standard that sets the time limit
following a Disturbance within which a Balancing Authority must
return its Area Control Error to within a specified range.'' See
also Joint Petition, Exhibit C at 5.
    \18\ We understand the reference to ``reportable DCS event'' in
the petition corresponds to the NERC Glossary term ``reportable
balancing contingency event'' that appears in Reliability Standard
BAL-002-3. The NERC Glossary defines reportable balancing
contingency event as: ``[a]ny Balancing Contingency Event occurring
within a one-minute interval of an initial sudden decline in ACE
based on EMS scan rate data that results in a loss of MW output less
than or equal to the Most Severe Single Contingency, and greater
than or equal to the lesser amount of: (i) 80% of the Most Severe
Single Contingency, or (ii) the amount listed below for the
applicable Interconnection. Prior to any given calendar quarter, the
80% threshold may be reduced by the responsible entity upon written
notification to the Regional Entity. (Eastern Interconnection--900
MW, Western Interconnection--500 MW, ERCOT--800 MW, and Quebec--500
MW).''
    \19\ Joint Petition at 13-14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    13. NERC and WECC assert that ``analysis of the data demonstrates
that all 66 DCS events occurring during the field test period had a
100% pass rate, showing no degradation to DCS performance. Entities
carried and deployed enough reserves for post disturbance Area Control
Area recovery.'' \20\ NERC and WECC also note that the 2018 NERC State
of Reliability Report indicates that frequency response performance
``did not degrade in the Western Interconnection during the field test
period.'' \21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Id. at 14.
    \21\ Id. at 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    14. Aside from eliminating Requirement R2, NERC and WECC assert
that proposed regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-3 retains the
other existing requirements because they are needed to maintain
reliability and ``continue[ ] to represent a more stringent set of
requirements for entities in the Western Interconnection than those
found in the continent-wide disturbance control standard, Reliability
Standard BAL-002-3.'' \22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Id. at 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Data Request and Response

    15. On February 18, 2020, the Director of the Office of Electric
Reliability issued a data request to NERC and WECC seeking: (1) Data
for the remainder of the field test term not provided in the joint
petition (i.e., from May 1, 2018 to September 30, 2019); and (2)
supporting data for NERC frequency response metric (Metric M-4) as it
pertains to the Western Interconnection during the field test period
(i.e., from May 1, 2017 to September 30, 2019).
    16. On May 18, 2020, NERC and WECC submitted data in response to
the February 18 data request.

II. Discussion

    17. Pursuant to FPA section 215(d)(2), the Commission proposes to
approve WECC regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-3 as just,
reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the
public interest. For applicable entities in the WECC Region, proposed
regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-3 eliminates the requirement
in the currently-effective version that at least half of the minimum
amount of contingency reserve shall be Operating Reserve--Spinning that
meets certain reserve characteristics. The justification set forth in
the joint petition taken together with the field test results support
NERC and WECC's position that the continent-wide Reliability Standard
BAL-003-1.1 renders the existing 50% Operating Reserve--Spinning
obligation redundant. Additionally, proposed regional Reliability
Standard BAL-002-WECC-3, even without Requirement R2, will continue to
provide protections beyond those contained in the continent-wide
disturbance control Reliability Standard BAL-002-3.
    18. While we propose to approve WECC regional Reliability Standard
BAL-002-WECC-3, unique aspects of contingency reserves in the Western
Interconnection raise concerns about deliverability of contingency
reserves within reserve sharing groups. Thirty-four balancing
authorities are registered with WECC of which 32 are members of one of
the two reserve sharing groups within WECC. The Southwest Reserve
Sharing Group (SRSG) geographic area covers the southwest United States
including Arizona, New Mexico, southern Nevada, parts of southern
California including the Imperial Valley, and El Paso, Texas. The
Northwest Power Pool (NWPP) reserve sharing group geographic area
covers two Canadian provinces and all the states in the Western
Interconnection except Arizona, New Mexico southern Nevada, and part of
California. Each reserve sharing group includes member balancing
authorities that have hydroelectric resources. These hydroelectric
resources represent a significant share of the reserve sharing group
contingency reserves. These resources may or may not be deliverable to
all member balancing authorities due to transmission constraints or
limits on the hydro system.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The WECC operating committee raised similar issues in a
report regarding the Northwest price spike event that occurred the
week of March 1-4, 2019. See also, https://www.wecc.org/Reliability/PricingEvent_Paper_Final.pdf at 13: ``Reserves are calculated based
on unit capacity and do not necessarily consider fuel availability.
Limits on the hydro system and wind availability . . . could reduce
actual reserve levels below the calculated and reported levels.
Fuel-limited resources may be overcounted toward reserves as the
full capacity of the unit may be counted without regard to the
availability of fuel.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    19. We believe it is important to monitor the reliability impacts
that the retirement of Requirement R2 may have on contingency reserves
in the Western Interconnection. Therefore, as detailed below, the
Commission proposes to direct that NERC and WECC submit an
informational filing 27 months following implementation of regional
Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-3. We further propose to direct that
NERC and WECC make the Commission immediately aware of any adverse
impacts resulting from the retirement of Requirement R2, if they become
apparent prior to the end of the reporting period, and any corrective
actions taken or being considered.
    20. We propose to direct that NERC and WECC submit an informational
filing 27 months following implementation of regional Reliability
Standard BAL-002-WECC-3 that addresses the adequacy of contingency

reserves in the Western Interconnection. Specifically, the report
should provide, for an additional 24 month period after implementation
of the standard, the following categories of data (similar to the data
categories identified in the February 18, 2020 data request): (1) For
any reportable DCS event, the date, time and required amount of
contingency reserves at the time of the event, the actual amount of
Operating Reserves--Spinning at the time of the event, and the actual
DCS performance; (2) for events involving a loss of 700 MW or greater,
whether it is a reportable DCS event or not, the date and time of the
event, the name of the resource(s), and the total MW; (3) the amount of
spinning reserve above or below 50% during non-event times on an hourly
basis for 24 months following implementation; and (4) supporting data
for NERC's frequency response metric (Metric M-4) as it pertains to the
Western Interconnection.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ The informational filing report can be drafted in a similar
manner as the field test report provided in the petition including
all of the requested data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    21. In addition to the data categories identified in the February
18 data request, we propose to direct that NERC and WECC provide: (1)
The DCS performance--as described in request (1) in the paragraph
above--on a balancing authority basis; and (2) the hourly amount of
contingency reserve and the fraction of that contingency reserve that
is classified as spinning for each hour by balancing authority (not
reserve sharing group). We believe that this data is necessary to
assess the amount of contingency reserves held by each balancing
authority within a reserve sharing group since the contingency reserve
data provided for a reserve sharing group are the aggregated sum of the
contingency reserves of the participating balancing authorities.

III. Information Collection Statement

    22. The FERC-725E information collection requirements contained in
this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking are subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA).\25\ OMB's regulations require approval of
certain information collection requirements imposed by agency
rules.\26\ Upon approval of a collection(s) of information, OMB will
assign an OMB control number and an expiration date. Respondents
subject to the filing requirements of a 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
    \26\ 5 CFR 1320.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    23. We solicit comments on the Commission's need for this
information, whether the information will have practical utility, the
accuracy of the burden estimates, ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information to be collected or retained, and any
suggested methods for minimizing respondents' burden, including the use
of automated information techniques. Specifically, the Commission asks
that any revised burden or cost estimates submitted by commenters be
supported by sufficient detail to understand how the estimates are
generated.
    24. Public Reporting Burden: The burden and cost estimates below
are based on the need for applicable entities to revise documentation,
already required by the current WECC regional Reliability Standard BAL-
002-WECC-2a,\27\ to reflect the retirement of Requirement R2 in the
proposed WECC regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-3. Our
estimates are based on the NERC Compliance Registry as of September 3,
2020, which indicates that 34 balancing authorities, 2 reserve sharing
groups, 2 reliability coordinators, 265 generator owners, 256 generator
operators, 78 transmission owners and 47 transmission operators are
registered within WECC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ BAL-002-WECC-2 is included in the OMB-approved inventory
for FERC-725E. On November 9, 2016, NERC and WECC submitted a joint
petition for approval of an interpretation of BAL-002-WECC-2, to be
designated BAL-002-WECC-2a. BAL-002-WECC-2a was approved by order in
Docket No. RD17-3-000 on January 24, 2017. The Order determined:
``The proposed interpretation provides clarification regarding the
types of resources that may be used to satisfy Contingency Reserve
requirements in regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-2.'' BAL-
002-WECC-2a did not trigger the Paperwork Reduction Act and did not
affect the burden estimate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    25. In addition to the changes identified in this Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, the Commission is adjusting burden estimates for
the other WECC regional Reliability Standards in the FERC-725E
information collection. These adjustments are warranted based on
updates to the number of applicable registered entities that have
changed due to normal industry fluctuations (e.g., companies merging or
splitting, going into or leaving the industry, or filling more or fewer
roles in the NERC Compliance Registry).
    26. There are several regional Reliability Standards in the WECC
region. These regional Reliability Standards generally require entities
to document compliance with substantive requirements, retain
documentation, and submit reports to WECC. The following standards will
be continuing without change.
     BAL-004-WECC-3 (Automatic Time Error Correction) requires
balancing authorities to document that time error corrections and
primary inadvertent interchange payback were conducted according to the
requirements in the standard.
     FAC-501-WECC-2 (Transmission Maintenance) requires
transmission owners with certain transmission paths to have a
transmission maintenance and inspection plan and to document
maintenance and inspection activities according to the plan.
     VAR-501-WECC-3.1 (Power System Stabilizer [PSS]) \28\
requires generator owners and operators to ensure the Western
Interconnection is operated in a coordinated manner by establishing the
performance criteria for WECC power system stabilizers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ VAR-501-WECC-3.1 was approved by order in Docket No. RD17-
7-000 on September 26, 2017. The August 18, 2017 petition requested
Commission approval of errata to mandatory and enforceable regional
Reliability VAR-501-WECC-3 (Power System Stabilizer). Because the
reporting burden for VAR-501-WECC-3.1 did not increase for entities
that operate within the Western Interconnection, FERC submitted the
order to OMB for information only. The burden related to VAR-501-
WECC-3.1 does not differ from the burden of VAR-501-WECC-3, which is
included in the OMB-approved inventory. VAR-501-WECC-3.1 is being
included in this document and the Commission's submittal to OMB as
part of FERC-725E.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    27. The associated reporting and recordkeeping requirements
included in the regional standards above are not being revised, and the
Commission will be submitting a request to OMB to extend these
requirements for three years. The Commission's request to OMB will also
reflect the following:
     Implement the regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-3
(addressed in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Docket No. RM19-20).
and
     Adjustments to the burden estimates due to changes in the
NERC Compliance Registry for regional Reliability Standards BAL-002-
WECC-3 (Contingency Reserve) and IRO-006-WECC-3 (Qualified Path
Unscheduled Flow (USF) Relief).\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ IRO-006-WECC-3 was approved by order in Docket No. RD19-4-
000 on May 10, 2019. The March 6, 2019 petition states that WECC
revised the regional Reliability Standard to clarify the purpose
statement, replace certain defined terms, account for multiple
reliability coordinators in the Western Interconnection, and conform
the regional Reliability Standard to the current drafting
conventions and template. Because the reporting burden for IRO-006-
WECC-3 did not increase for entities that operate within the Western
Interconnection, FERC submitted the order to OMB for information
only. The burden related to IRO-006-WECC-3 does not differ from the
burden of IRO-006-WECC-2, which is included in the OMB-approved
inventory. IRO-006-WECC-3 is being included in this document and the
Commission's submittal to OMB as part of FERC-725E.

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

    28. Changes Due to Docket No. RM19-20. The Commission estimates the
reduction in the annual public reporting burden for the FERC-725E (due
to the retirement of BAL-002-WECC-2a, Requirement R2) as follows:

             FERC--725E--Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Western Electric Coordinating Council, Reductions Due to Docket No. RM19-20
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Annual  number of                                                            Total annual burden
    Information collection            Number of           responses per        Total number of      Average burden hours  & cost       hours  & total
    requirements and entity          respondents           respondent             responses               \30\ per response              annual cost
                                (1).................  (2).................  (1) * (2) = (3).....  (4).............................  (3) * (4) = (5)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Balancing Authorities Years 1   0 (no change).......  0 (no change).......  0 (no change).......  0 hrs.; $0 (no change)..........  0 hrs.; $0 (no
 and 2 \31\.                                                                                change).
Balancing Authorities Year 3    34..................  1...................  34..................  1 hr.; $83.67 (reduction).......  34 hrs.; $2,844.78
 and Ongoing.                                                                                (reduction).
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sub-Total, Reduction (Due   ....................  ....................  ....................  ................................  34 hrs.; $2,844.78
     to Docket No. RM19-20) in                                                                                (reduction).
     Year 3 and Ongoing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    29. Adjustments Due to normal industry fluctuations. The Commission
estimates the changes in the annual public reporting burden for the
FERC-725E (due to the number of applicable registered entities) as
follows: \32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ The hourly cost (for salary plus benefits) uses the figures
from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for three positions
involved in the reporting and recordkeeping requirements. These
figures include salary (based on BLS data for May 2019,  http://bls.gov/oes/current/naics2_22.htm) and benefits (based on BLS data
for December 2019; issued March 19, 2020, http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm) and are Manager (Code 11-0000 $97.15/
hour), Electrical Engineer (Code 17-2071 $70.19/hour), and File
Clerk (Code 43-4071 $34.79/hour). The hourly cost for the reporting
requirements ($83.67) is an average of the cost of a manager and
engineer. The hourly cost for recordkeeping requirements uses the
cost of a file clerk.
    \31\ The reduction in burden is zero for the first two years due
to the directive in this document of Proposed Rulemaking to continue
to report hourly contingency reserve data for 24 months.
    \32\ The number of applicable entities is based on the NERC
Compliance Registry as of September 3, 2020.

       FERC--725E--Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Western Electric Coordinating Council, Adjustments Due to Normal Industry Fluctuations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Annual  number
Information collection  requirements    Number of  respondents     of  responses   Total number     Average burden hours  &    Total annual burden hours
             and entity                                           per respondent   of responses     cost \30\ per response        & total annual cost
                                      (1).......................             (2)     (1) * (2) =  (4).......................  (3) * (4) = (5)
                                                                                (3)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reliability Coordinators (IRO-006-    1 (increase)..............               1               1  1 hr.; $83.67 (increase)..  1 hr.; $83.67 (increase).
 WECC-3) Reporting Requirement.
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reliability Coordinators (IRO-006-    1 (increase)..............               1               1  1 hr.; $34.79 (increase)..  1 hr.; $34.79 (increase).
 WECC-3) Record Keeping Requirement.
Reserve Sharing Groups (BAL-002-WECC- 1 (reduction).............               1               1  1 hr.; $83.67 (reduction).  1 hr.; $83.67 (reduction).
 3) Reporting Requirement.
                                     -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sub-Total, (Net Due to            ..........................  ..............  ..............  ..........................  1 hr.; $34.79 (net
     Adjustments).                                                                                change).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    30. Estimate of Continuing Annual Burden for Renewal: \33\ The
Commission estimates the annual public reporting burden and cost as
follows for FERC-725E. (This information will be submitted to OMB for
approval.) These estimates reflect:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ The Commission is also removing 1746 one-time burden hours
associated with the requirements in Docket No. RD17-5 for regional
Reliability Standard VAR-501-WECC-3 (Power System Stabilizer [PSS]).
The one-time burden has been completed and will now be
administratively removed on submittal to OMB. Those hours are not
included in the table.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Reliability Standards in FERC-725E which continue and
remain unchanged (BAL-004-WECC-3, FAC-501-WECC-2, and VAR-002-WECC-
3.1);
     Implement the regional Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-3
(addressed in this Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Docket No. RM19-20-
000); and
     Adjustments to the burden estimates for regional
Reliability Standards BAL-002-WECC-3 (Contingency Reserve) and IRO-006-
WECC-3 (Qualified Path Unscheduled Flow (USF) Relief).

                                FERC--725E--Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Western Electric Coordinating Council
                                                [New and continuing information collection requirements]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   Number of    Annual  number                    Average burden  hrs. &
            Entity                respondents    of  responses  Annual  number    cost \30\  per response    Total annual  burden  hours     Cost per
                                     \34\       per respondent   of  responses              ($)               & total  annual cost ($)    respondent ($)
                                           (1)             (2)     (1) * (2) =  (4).......................  (3) * (4) = (5).............     (5) / (1) =
                                                                           (3)                                                                       (6)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Reporting Requirements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Balancing Authorities Years 1               34               1              34  21 hrs.; $1,757.07........  714 hrs.; $59,740.38........       $1,757.07
 and 2 (BAL-002-WECC-3; BAL-
 004-WECC-3; IRO-006-WECC-3).
Balancing Authorities Year 3                34               1              34  20 hrs.; $1,673.40........  680 hrs.; $56,895.60........       $1,673.40
 and Ongoing (BAL-002-WECC-3;
 BAL-004-WECC-3; IRO-006-WECC-
 3).
Reserve Sharing Groups (BAL-                 2               1               2  1 hr.; $83.67.............  2 hrs.; $167.34.............          $83.67
 002-WECC-3).
Reliability Coordinators (IRO-               2               1               2  1 hr.; $83.67.............  2 hrs.; $167.34.............          $83.67
 006-WECC-3).
Transmission Owners that                     5               1               5  40 hrs.; $3,346.80........  200 hrs.; $16,734.00........       $3,346.80
 operate qualified transfer
 paths (FAC-501-WECC-2).
Generator Owners and/or                    291               2             582  1 hr.; $83.67.............  582 hrs.; $48,695.94........         $167.34
 Operators (VAR-501-WECC-3.1).
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sub-Total for Reporting     ..............  ..............             625  ..........................  1,500 hrs.; $125,505.00.....  ..............
     Requirements in Years 1
     and 2.
    Sub-Total for Reporting     ..............  ..............             625  ..........................  1,466 hrs.; $122,660.22.....  ..............
     Requirements in Year 3 &
     Ongoing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Recordkeeping Requirements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Balancing Authorities (BAL-002-             34               1              34  3.1 hrs.; $107.85.........  105.4 hrs.; $3,666.87.......         $107.85
 WECC-3; BAL-004-WECC-3; IRO-
          006-WECC-3)
Reliability Coordinator (IRO-                2               1               2  1 hr.; $34.79.............  2 hrs.; $69.58..............          $34.79
 006-WECC-3).
Transmission Owner that                      5               1               5  6 hrs.; $208.74...........  30 hrs.; $1043.70...........         $208.74
 operate qualified transfer
 paths (FAC-501-WECC-2).
Generator Owners and/or                    291               2             582  0.5 hrs.; $17.40..........  291 hrs.; $10,123.89........          $34.79
 Operators (VAR-501-WECC-3.1).
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Sub-Total for               ..............  ..............             623  ..........................  428.4 hrs.; $14,904.04......  ..............
     Recordkeeping
     Requirements.
                               -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total for FERC-725E,    ..............  ..............            1248  ..........................  1,928.4 hrs.; $140,409.04...  ..............
         in Yr. 1 and Yr. 2.
        Total for FERC-725E,    ..............  ..............            1248  ..........................  1,894.4 hrs.; $137,564.26...  ..............
         in Yr. 3 & Ongoing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    31. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting
requirements by contacting Ellen Brown, Office of the Executive
Director, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426, via email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or telephone
((202) 502-8663).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ The number of respondents is derived from the NERC
Compliance Registry as of September 3, 2020.

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

    32. The Commission solicits comments on the Commission's need for
this information, whether the information will have practical utility,
the accuracy of the burden estimates, ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected or retained,
and any suggested methods for minimizing respondents' burden, including
the use of automated information techniques.
    33. Please send comments concerning the collection of information
and the associated burden estimates to: Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street
NW, Washington, DC 20503 [Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission]. Due to security concerns, comments
should be sent electronically to the following email address:
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Comments submitted to OMB should refer to
OMB Control Nos. 1902-0246.
    34. Please submit a copy of your comments on the information
collections to the Commission via the eFiling link on the Commission's
website at http://www.ferc.gov. If you are not able to file comments
electronically, please send a copy of your comments to: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street
NE, Washington, DC 20426. Comments on the information collection that
are sent to FERC should refer to RM19-20-000.
    Title: FERC-725E, Mandatory Reliability Standards-WECC (Western
Electric Coordinating Council).
    Action: Three-year approval of the FERC-725E information collection
requirements, as modified by Docket No. RM19-20-000 and due to normal
industry fluctuations.
    OMB Control No: 1902-0246 (FERC-725E).
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit, and not-for-profit
institutions.
    Frequency of Responses: One-time.
    Necessity of the Information: The proposed regional Reliability
Standard BAL-002-WECC-3, if adopted, would implement 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. Specifically, the proposal ensures that
balancing authorities and reserve sharing groups in the WECC Region
have the quantity and types of contingency reserve required to ensure
reliability under normal and abnormal conditions.
    Internal review: The Commission has reviewed the proposed regional
Reliability Standard BAL-002-WECC-3 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 estimates associated with
the information requirements.

IV. Environmental Analysis

    35. 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.\35\ 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.\36\ The actions proposed here
fall within this categorical exclusion in the Commission's regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats.
& Regs. ] 30,783 (1987) (cross-referenced at 41 FERC ] 61,284).
    \36\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    36. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \37\ generally
requires a description and analysis of proposed rules that will have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The Small Business Administration's (SBA) Office of Size Standards
develops the numerical definition of a small entity.\38\ These
standards are provided in the SBA regulations at 13 CFR 121.201.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
    \38\ 13 CFR 121.101.
    \39\ 13 CFR 121.201. See also U.S. Small Business
Administration, Table of Small Business Size Standards Matched to
North American Industry Classification System Codes (effective Feb.
26, 2016), https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    37. Under SBA's size standards,\40\ balancing authorities, reserve
sharing groups, generator operators, generator owners, transmission
owners, and transmission operators all fall under the category of
(NAICS code 221111-Hydroelectric Power Generation (500) and NAICS code
221118-Other Electric Power Generation (250)), with a total size
threshold of 750 employees (including the entity and its
associates).\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 13 CFR 121.201
    \41\ The threshold for the number of employees indicates the
maximum allowed for a concern and its affiliates to be considered
small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    38. This proposed rule, if adopted, would apply to registered
balancing authorities and reserved sharing groups in the NERC
Compliance Registry with data submitted to the Energy Information
Administration on Form EIA-861 indicating that, of the 36 entities, 34
are registered balancing authorities and two are reserve sharing
groups, two may qualify as small entities.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ The RFA definition of ``small entity'' refers to the
definition provided in the Small Business Act (SBA), which defines a
``small business concern'' as a business that is independently owned
and operated and that is not dominant in its field of operation. See
15 U.S.C. 632. According to the Small Business Administration, an
electric utility is defined as ``small'' if, including its
affiliates, the number of employees indicates the maximum allowed
for a concern and its affiliates to be considered small.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    39. Using the list from the NERC Compliance Registry (dated
September 3, 2020), we estimate that approximately 22% of those
entities are small entities.
    40. The Commission estimates that, on average, each of the two
affected small entities will have no further ongoing costs after year
three. These figures are based on information collection costs plus
additional costs for compliance.
    41. The Commission does not consider this to be a significant
economic impact for small entities because it should not represent a
significant percentage of the operating budget. Accordingly, the
Commission certifies that this proposed rulemaking will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The Commission seeks comment on this certification.

VI. Comment Procedures

    42. The Commission invites interested persons to submit comments on
the matters and issues proposed in this document to be adopted,
including any related matters or alternative proposals that commenters
may wish to discuss. Comments are due December 29, 2020. Comments must
refer to Docket No. RM19-20-000, and must include the commenter's name,
the organization they represent, if applicable, and their address in
their comments.
    43. The Commission encourages comments to be filed electronically
via the eFiling link on the Commission's website 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.
    44. 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.
    45. 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

    46. 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.
    47. 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.
    48. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's
website 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>
    By direction of the Commission.

    Issued: October 15, 2020.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2020-23297 Filed 10-29-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 155 (Monday, August 12, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48880-48882]
[FR Doc No: 2013-19394]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2013-0002]

Changes in Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Final Notice.

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

SUMMARY: New or modified Base (1% annual-chance) Flood Elevations
(BFEs), base flood depths, Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) boundaries
or zone designations, and/or the regulatory floodway (hereinafter
referred to as flood hazard determinations) as shown on the indicated
Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) for each of the communities listed in the
table below are finalized. Each LOMR revises the Flood Insurance Rate
Maps (FIRMs), and in some cases the Flood Insurance Study (FIS)
reports, currently in effect for the listed communities. The flood
hazard determinations modified by each LOMR will be used to calculate
flood insurance premium rates for new buildings and their contents.

DATES: The effective date for each LOMR is indicated in the table
below.

ADDRESSES: Each LOMR is available for inspection at both the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the table below and online
through the FEMA Map Service Center at www.msc.fema.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering
Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration,
FEMA, 500 C Street SW., Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or
(email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or visit the FEMA Map Information
eXchange (FMIX) online at www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) makes the final flood hazard determinations as shown in the
LOMRs for each community listed in the table below. Notice of these
modified flood hazard determinations has been published in newspapers
of local circulation and ninety (90) days have elapsed since that
publication. The Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation has
resolved any appeals resulting from this notification.
    The modified flood hazard determinations are made pursuant to
section 206 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4105, and are in accordance with the National Flood Insurance Act of
1968, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., and with 44 CFR part 65.
    For rating purposes, the currently effective community number is
shown and must be used for all new policies and renewals.
    The new or modified flood hazard determinations are the basis for
the floodplain management measures that the community is required
either to adopt or to show evidence of being already in effect in order
to remain qualified for participation in the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP).
    These new or modified flood hazard determinations, together with
the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the
minimum that are required. They should not be construed to mean that
the community must change any existing ordinances that are more
stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community
may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to
policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities.
    These new or modified flood hazard determinations are used to meet
the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and also are used to
calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new
buildings, and for the contents in those buildings. The changes in
flood hazard determinations are in accordance with 44 CFR 65.4.
    Interested lessees and owners of real property are encouraged to
review the final flood hazard information available at the address
cited below for each community or online through the FEMA Map Service
Center at www.msc.fema.gov.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Chief executive         Community map                                         Community
          State and county            Location and case No.   officer of community        repository        Effective date of modification       No.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Mexico:
    Bernalillo (FEMA Docket No.: B-  City of Albuquerque     The Honorable Richard  600 2nd Street         June 17, 2013...................       350002
     1317).                           (13-06-1053P).          J. Berry, Mayor,       Northwest,
                                                              City of Albuquerque,   Albuquerque, NM
                                                              P.O. Box 1293,         87102.
                                                              Albuquerque, NM
                                                              87103.
    Bernalillo (FEMA Docket No.: B-  Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Maggie   Bernalillo County,     June 17, 2013...................       350001
     1317).                           of Bernalillo County    Hart Stebbins,         2400 Broadway
                                      (13-06-1053P).          Chairman, Bernalillo   Southeast,
                                                              County Board of        Albuquerque, NM
                                                              Commissioners, 1       87102.
                                                              Civic Plaza
                                                              Northwest,
                                                              Albuquerque, NM
                                                              87102.
    San Juan (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Bloomfield (12- Mr. David Fuqua,       915 North 1st Street,  June 10, 2013...................       350066
     1313).                           06-0882P).              Manager, City of       Bloomfield, NM 87413.
                                                              Bloomfield, 915
                                                              North 1st Street,
                                                              Bloomfield, NM 87413.
    San Juan (FEMA Docket No.: B-    Unincorporated areas    Mr. Kim Carpenter,     San Juan County        June 10, 2013...................       350064
     1313).                           of San Juan County      County Executive       Floodplain
                                      (12-06-0882P).          Officer, San Juan      Management Office,
                                                              County, 100 South      209 South Oliver
                                                              Oliver Drive, Aztec,   Drive, Aztec, NM
                                                              NM 87410.              87410.
Oklahoma:
    Comanche (FEMA Docket No.: B-    City of Lawton (11-06-  The Honorable Fred L.  City Hall, 212         May 30, 2013....................       400049
     1317).                           3356P).                 Fitch, Mayor, City     Southwest 9th
                                                              of Lawton, 212         Street, Lawton, OK
                                                              Southwest 9th          73501.
                                                              Street, Lawton, OK
                                                              73501.
Texas:
    Harris (FEMA Docket No.: B-      Unincorporated areas    The Honorable Ed M.    Harris County, 10555   May 31, 2013....................       480287
     1317).                           of Harris County (12-   Emmett, Harris         Northwest Freeway,
                                      06-2602P).              County Judge, 1001     Houston, TX 77002.
                                                              Preston Street,
                                                              Suite 911, Houston,
                                                              TX 77002.
    Tarrant (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Fort Worth (12- The Honorable Betsy    Department of          May 20, 2013....................       480596
     1324).                           06-1459P).              Price, Mayor, City     Transportation and
                                                              of Fort Worth, 1000    Public Works, 1000
                                                              Throckmorton Street,   Throckmorton Street,
                                                              Fort Worth, TX 76102.  Fort Worth, TX 76102.

    Tarrant (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Fort Worth (12- The Honorable Betsy    Department of          June 14, 2013...................       480596
     1316).                           06-3052P).              Price, Mayor, City     Transportation and
                                                              of Fort Worth, 1000    Public Works, 1000
                                                              Throckmorton Street,   Throckmorton Street,
                                                              Fort Worth, TX 76102.  Fort Worth, TX 76102.
    Tarrant (FEMA Docket No.: B-     City of Westworth       The Honorable Tony     City Hall, 311 Burton  May 20, 2013....................       480616
     1324).                           Village (12-06-1459P).  Yeager, Mayor, City    Hall Road, Westworth
                                                              of Westworth           Village, TX 76114.
                                                              Village, 311 Burton
                                                              Hill Road, Westworth
                                                              Village, TX 76114.
Virginia:
    Culpeper (FEMA Docket No.: B-    Town of Culpeper (12-   Mr. Christopher D.     Town Manager's         June 10, 2013...................       510042
     1316).                           03-0844P).              Hively, Acting         Office, 400 South
                                                              Manager, Town of       Main Street, Suite
                                                              Culpeper, 400 South    101, Culpeper, VA
                                                              Main Street, Suite     22701.
                                                              101, Culpeper, VA
                                                              22701.
    Loudoun (FEMA Docket No.: B-     Town of Leesburg (13-   The Honorable Kristen  Town Hall, 25 West     June 27, 2013...................       510091
     1316).                           03-0417P).              C. Umstattd, Mayor,    Market Street,
                                                              Town of Leesburg, 25   Leesburg, VA 20176.
                                                              West Market Street,
                                                              Leesburg, VA 20176.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

    Dated: July 26, 2013.
Roy E. Wright,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Mitigation, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2013-19394 Filed 8-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P