[Federal Register: May 28, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 101)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 25422-25429]
[DOCID:fr28my09-13]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 40

[Docket No. RM08-12-000; Order No.723]

Western Electricity Coordinating Council Regional Reliability
Standard Regarding Automatic Time Error Correction

Issued May 21, 2009.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) approves regional
Reliability Standard BAL-004-WECC-01 (Automatic Time Error Correction),
as submitted by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation. As
a separate action, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, the
Commission directs the Western Electricity Coordinating Council to
develop several modifications to the regional Reliability Standard. The
regional Reliability Standard requires balancing authorities within the
Western Interconnection to maintain interconnection frequency within a
predefined frequency profile and ensure that time error corrections are
effectively conducted in a manner that does not adversely affect the
reliability of the Interconnection.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will become effective June 29, 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jonathan First (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Katherine Waldbauer (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>Nick Henery (Technical Information), Office of Electric Reliability,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Order No. 723

Table of Contents

                                                               Paragraph
                                                                 Nos.

I. Background...............................................          4.
    A. Mandatory Reliability Standards......................          4.
    B. Procedural Background................................         11.
    C. Reliability Standard BAL-004-WECC-01.................         14.
II. Discussion..............................................         22.
    A. Requirement R1.2.....................................         27.
    B. Explanation of 24-Hour Exemption Period of                    31.
     Requirement R2.........................................
    C. New Glossary Definitions.............................         35.
    D. Consistency With NERC Reliability Standards..........         41.
    E. Violation Risk Factors...............................         49.
    F. Violation Severity Levels............................         52.
III. Information Collection Statement.......................         55.
IV. Environmental Analysis..................................         60.
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act...............................         61.
VI. Document Availability...................................         64.
VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification..........         67.

    Before Commissioners: Jon Wellinghoff, Chairman; Suedeen G. Kelly,
Marc Spitzer, and Philip D. Moeller.

Order No. 723

Final Rule

Issued May 21, 2009

    1. Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA),\1\ the
Commission approves regional Reliability Standard BAL-004-WECC-01
(Automatic Time Error Correction), submitted to the Commission for
approval by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC).
As a separate action, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, the
Commission directs the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC)
to develop several modifications to the regional Reliability Standard.
The regional Reliability Standard requires balancing authorities within
the WECC region to implement an automatic time error correction
procedure for the purpose of maintaining Interconnection frequency
within a predefined frequency profile and ensuring that time error
corrections are effectively conducted in a manner that does not
adversely affect reliability.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 16 U.S.C. 824o (2006).
    \2\ The proposed regional Reliability Standard will be in effect
within the Western Interconnection-wide WECC Regional Entity. In
this proceeding, the Commission proposes to take action to make
mandatory the regional Reliability Standard as it applies within the
U.S. portion of the Western Interconnection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. The Reliability Standard benefits the reliable operation of the
Bulk-Power System by creating an operating environment that encourages
system operators to balance their generation and interchange with their
load and losses, thereby minimizing the difference between the net
actual and net scheduled interchanges. This process will result in
reducing the number of manual time error corrections required by the
Western Interconnection Time Monitor, and minimize accumulated
inadvertent interchange energy between Western Interconnection
balancing authorities.\3\ The Commission also accepts three related
definitions that are included in the regional Reliability Standard. The
Commission further approves the violation risk factors for the regional
Reliability Standard, and directs the Electric Reliability Organization
(ERO) and WECC to submit revised violation risk factors in a filing
within 60 days of the effective date of this Final Rule. The Commission
also directs the ERO and WECC to submit violation severity levels for
each Requirement and sub-Requirement that has been assigned a violation
risk factor within 120 days of the effective date of this Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Mismatches between generation and interchange and load and
losses result in the Balancing Area operating at frequencies other
than 60 Hertz, which causes both time error and inadvertent
interchange.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. As discussed below, the Commission finds that the regional
Reliability Standard proposed by WECC satisfies the statutory criteria,
and is more stringent than the applicable continent-wide NERC
Reliability Standard.

I. Background

A. Mandatory Reliability Standards

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

    \4\ See FPA 215(e)(3), 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. In February 2006, the Commission issued Order No. 672,\5\
implementing section 215 of the FPA. Pursuant to Order No. 672, the
Commission certified one organization, NERC, as the ERO.\6\ Reliability
Standards that the ERO proposes to the Commission may include
Reliability Standards that are proposed to the ERO by a Regional
Entity.\7\ When the ERO reviews a regional Reliability Standard that
would be applicable on an Interconnection-wide basis and that has been
proposed by a Regional Entity organized on an Interconnection-wide
basis, the ERO

must rebuttably presume that the regional Reliability Standard is just,
reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the
public interest.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric Reliability
Organization; and Procedures for the Establishment, Approval, and
Enforcement of Electric Reliability Standards, Order No. 672, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,204 (2006), order on reh'g, Order No. 672-A,
FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,212 (2006).
    \6\ See North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ]
61,062, order on reh'g and compliance, 117 FERC ] 61,126 (2006).
    \7\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(4).
    \8\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(3); 18 CFR 39.5(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. In reviewing the ERO's submission, the Commission will give due
weight to the ERO's technical expertise, except concerning the effect
of a proposed Reliability Standard on competition.\9\ The Commission
will also give due weight to the technical expertise of a Regional
Entity organized on an Interconnection-wide basis with respect to a
proposed Reliability Standard to be applicable within that
Interconnection.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2).
    \10\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. The Commission may approve a proposed Reliability Standard if
the Commission finds it is just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory
or preferential, and in the public interest.\11\ In addition, the
Commission explained in Order No. 672 that ``uniformity of Reliability
Standards should be the goal and the practice, the rule rather than the
exception.'' \12\ Yet, the Commission recognized that ``the goal of
greater uniformity does not, however, mean that regional differences
cannot exist.'' \13\ The Commission then provided the following
guidance:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Id.
    \12\ Order No. 672, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,204 at P 290.
    \13\ Id. P 291.

    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 by 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.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Id.

    8. On March 16, 2007, the Commission issued Order No. 693,
approving 83 of the 107 Reliability Standards originally proposed by
NERC.\15\ In addition, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, the
Commission directed NERC to develop modifications to 56 of the 83
approved Reliability Standards.\16\ Relevant to the immediate
proceeding, the Commission approved continent-wide Reliability Standard
BAL-004-0 (Time Error Correction), but noted that WECC's regional
approach appears to serve as a more effective means of accomplishing
time error corrections.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System,
Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242, order on reh'g, Order
No. 693-A, 120 FERC ] 61,053 (2007).
    \16\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(5). Section 215(d)(5) provides, ``The
Commission * * * may order the Electric Reliability Organization to
submit to the Commission a proposed reliability standard or a
modification to a reliability standard that addresses a specific
matter if the Commission considers such a new or modified
reliability standard appropriate to carry out this section.''
    \17\ Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242 at P 377, 382.
The Commission also directed NERC to develop a modification to BAL-
004-0 to include Levels of Non-Compliance and additional Measures
for Requirement R3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    9. On April 19, 2007, the Commission approved delegation agreements
between NERC and each of the eight Regional Entities, including
WECC.\18\ Pursuant to such agreements, the ERO delegated responsibility
to the Regional Entities to enforce the mandatory, Commission-approved
Reliability Standards. In addition, the Commission approved, as part of
each delegation agreement, a Regional Entity process for developing
regional Reliability Standards. In the Delegation Agreement Order, the
Commission accepted WECC as a Regional Entity organized on an
Interconnection-wide basis and accepted WECC's Standards Development
Manual, which sets forth the process for development of WECC's
Reliability Standards.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ See North American Electric Reliability Corp., 119 FERC ]
61,060, order on reh'g, 120 FERC ] 61,260 (2007) (Delegation
Agreement Order).
    \19\ Id. P 469-470.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. In a June 2007 order, the Commission approved eight regional
Reliability Standards that apply in the WECC region.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 119 FERC ]
61,260 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Procedural Background

    11. On July 29, 2008, NERC submitted for Commission approval, in
accordance with section 215(d)(1) of the FPA,\21\ regional Reliability
Standard BAL-004-WECC-01, which would apply to balancing authorities
within the Western Interconnection. NERC stated that the primary
purpose of the regional Reliability Standard is to reduce the number of
time error corrections imposed on the Western Interconnection by
requiring balancing authorities that operate synchronously in the
Western Interconnection to automatically correct for their contribution
to time error. According to NERC, BAL-004-WECC-01 provides the added
benefit of a superior approach over the current NERC manual time error
correction (BAL-004-0) for assigning costs and providing for the
equitable payback of inadvertent interchange.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(1) (2006).
    \22\ The NERC glossary defines ``interchange'' as the energy
transfers that cross balancing authority boundaries, and defines
``inadvertent interchange'' as the difference between the balancing
authority's net actual interchange and its net scheduled
interchange. Within a synchronous Interconnection, during real-time
operations, a balancing authority may engage in ``inadvertent
interchange'' if it experiences an operational problem that prevents
its net actual interchange of energy from matching its net scheduled
interchange with other balancing authorities within the
Interconnection. This discrepancy will indicate what is referred to
as a ``time error''--i.e., because the Interconnection will operate
at a frequency (number of cycles per second) that is different from
the Interconnection's scheduled frequency of 60 Hz (60 cycles per
second). Time error also serves as a means to measure of how much
and which balancing authority within the Interconnection is out of
balance. To correct the time error using the Automatic Time Error
Correction (ATEC) method, it is necessary for the balancing
authority that was out of balance to adjust the Interconnection's
frequency so that it equalizes its prior inadvertent energy exchange
with the Interconnection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    12. On November 20, 2008, the Commission issued a Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) that proposed to approve BAL-004-WECC-
01.\23\ In response, four interested persons filed comments: NERC,
WECC, Consumers Energy Company (Consumers) and Xcel Energy Services Inc
(Xcel).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Western Electricity Coordinating Council Regional
Reliability Standard Regarding Automatic Time Error Correction,
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 73 FR 71977 (Nov. 26, 2008), FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 32,638 (2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    13. In its July 2008 filing, NERC stated that Automatic Time Error
Correction or ATEC has been a regional reliability practice in WECC,
effectively reducing manual time error corrections, reducing the number
of hours of manual time error correction for the Western
Interconnection, and reducing the accumulated inadvertent interchange
in the Western Interconnection since 2003. NERC asserted that the
proposed WECC regional Reliability Standard is more stringent or covers
matters not addressed by NERC's continent-wide Reliability Standards,
BAL-004-0 and BAL-006-1 (Inadvertent Interchange).

C. Reliability Standard BAL-004-WECC-01

    14. Regional Reliability Standard BAL-004-WECC-01 contains four
requirements, summarized as follows:
    15. Requirement R1. Requires that all balancing authorities must
continuously participate in Automatic Time Error Correction through
their automatic generation control systems. The sub-requirement (R1.1)
limits the payback amount to minimize any operating metric violations,
while R1.2 addresses actions for cases when invalidated implementation
of the ATEC

methodology occurs and requires adjustments.
    16. Requirement R2. Requires a balancing authority that operates in
any automatic generation control operating mode other than ATEC to
notify all other balancing authorities of its operating mode. This
requirement is necessary to ensure the reliable operations of the
Western Interconnection by creating an operating environment that
encourages the Balancing Authorities to minimize the difference between
the net actual and net scheduled interchanges. To avoid large
accumulation of inadvertent interchanges, Requirement R2 limits a
balancing authority's use of operating modes other than ATEC to a
maximum of 24 hours per calendar quarter.
    17. Requirement R3. Requires balancing authorities to have the
capability to switch between different automatic generation control
operating modes as necessary to operate reliably during various system
conditions.
    18. Requirement R4. Requires each balancing authority to calculate
and record its hourly ``Primary Inadvertent Interchange'' when hourly
checkout is complete.
    19. The WECC regional Reliability Standard also introduces the
following three new definitions:
    Automatic Time Error Correction: A frequency control automatic
action that a Balancing Authority uses to offset its frequency
contribution to support the Interconnection's scheduled frequency.
    Primary Inadvertent Interchange: The component of area (n)
inadvertent interchange caused by the regulating deficiencies of area
(n) itself.
    Secondary Inadvertent Interchange: The component of area (n)
inadvertent interchange caused by the regulating deficiencies of area
(i).
    20. In its July 2008 filing, NERC asserted that the ATEC procedure
provided in the proposed regional Reliability Standard has been
effective in mitigating three problems relating to correction of time
errors in the Western Interconnection. First, the ATEC procedure has
reduced the need for the WECC Time Monitor to conduct manual time error
corrections from 216 manual time error corrections in 2003 to 106
manual time error corrections in 2007. Second, since time error is
directly related to inadvertent interchange, the ATEC procedure reduces
both time error and accumulated inadvertent interchange. Third,
according to NERC, the ATEC procedure better identifies the balancing
authorities responsible for inadvertent interchange and provides a more
equitable and immediate payback of the inadvertent interchange to the
balancing authorities that should receive it (i.e., the balancing
authorities that did not cause the inadvertent interchange but
supported the interconnection's scheduled frequency) than the current
NERC time error correction process in BAL-004-0.
    21. NERC also stated that the proposed regional Reliability
Standard satisfies the factors provided in Order No. 672 that the
Commission considers when determining whether a proposed Reliability
Standard is just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential
and in the public interest.\24\ According to NERC, BAL-004-WECC-01 is
clear and unambiguous regarding what is required and who is required to
comply (balancing authorities). NERC also stated that the proposed
regional Reliability Standard has clear and objective measures for
compliance and achieves a reliability goal (namely, creating an
operating environment that encourages system operators to minimize the
difference between the net actual and net scheduled interchanges, and
to better control frequency) effectively and efficiently.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Order No. 672, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,204 at P 323-337.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion

    22. Pursuant to section 215(d) of the FPA, the Commission approves
regional Reliability Standard BAL-004-WECC-01 as mandatory and
enforceable.
    23. Pursuant to the continent-wide NERC Reliability Standard BAL-
004-1, when accumulated time error increases to a predetermined level,
the Interconnection's Time Monitor instructs all balancing authorities
in the Interconnection to manually change the scheduled
Interconnection's frequency until the Interconnection's accumulated
time error has been reduced to a set level. However, the requirements
of BAL-004-1 do not require each balancing authority to determine what
portion of the Interconnection's time error that it alone caused.
    24. Under the WECC ATEC methodology, each balancing authority in
the Western Interconnection is required to calculate its ``primary
inadvertent interchange'' \25\ and enter its ``primary inadvertent
interchange'' into its Area Control Error (ACE) \26\ equation. When all
balancing authorities input their portion of ``primary inadvertent
interchange'' into their ACE equation, they continuously correct for
their own ``primary time error'' and, in turn, reduce the Western
Interconnection's total time error.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ The balancing authority causing the frequency error is said
to have created ``primary time error'' and caused ``primary
inadvertent interchange.'' The other balancing authorities in the
Interconnection responding to correct system frequency are said to
have created ``secondary time error'' and caused ``secondary
inadvertent interchange.''
    \26\ ACE is the instantaneous difference between a Balancing
Authority's net actual and scheduled interchange, taking into
account the effects of Frequency Bias and correction for meter error
(NERC glossary of terms used in reliability standards, http://
www.nerc.com/docs/standards/rs/Glossary_2009April20.pdf, at 1).
More specifically: ACE = (NIA - NIS)-
10[beta]i(FA - FS)-T0b +
IME (Requirement R1 of Commission Approved Standard BAL-
001-0.1a, see http://www.nerc.com/docs/standards/sar/
Interpretation_WECC_ATEC_BAL-001and003_BOT-Approved_
23Oct07.pdf).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    25. This process differs from the methodology used in NERC's BAL-
004-1, in that ATEC is designed to place the responsibility to correct
primary time error on the balancing authority that causes it. Further,
the regional Reliability Standard is more stringent and covers matters
not addressed by the related continent-wide NERC Reliability Standards
BAL-004-0 and BAL-006-1. The regional Reliability Standard provides for
automatic correction of time error, using a more refined primary
inadvertent interchange term than that included in the continent-wide
NERC Reliability Standards for manual correction of time error.\27\
Accordingly, the Commission finds that the regional Reliability
Standard proposed by WECC is more stringent than the continent-wide
NERC Reliability Standard, because it provides for continuous capture
of inadvertent interchange, and thereby (1) contributes to better
operation of balancing authorities by operators, and (2) ensures that
discrepancies between a balancing area's net scheduled interchange and
its net actual interchange are adjusted more quickly and accurately.
Pursuant to section 215(d) of the FPA, the Commission approves BAL-004-
WECC-01 as just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential
and in the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ NERC filing at 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    26. As a separate matter, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA,
the Commission directs WECC to develop, pursuant to its regional
Reliability Standards Development Procedure, modifications to BAL-004-
WECC-01 to address the Commission's specific concerns, as discussed
below. Further, the Commission approves some of the proposed violation
risk factors and violation severity levels, and directs the ERO to
submit a filing within 60 days of the effective date of this Final Rule
revising other specified violation risk factors and another filing
within 120 days of the effective date of this Final Rule providing
violation severity levels

for each Requirement and sub-Requirement that has been assigned a
violation risk factor.

A. Requirement R1.2

    27. Requirement R1.2 of BAL-004-WECC-01 provides in part, ``[l]arge
accumulations of primary inadvertent [energy] point to an invalid
implementation of ATEC, loose control, metering or accounting errors. A
[balancing authority] in such a situation should identify the source of
the error(s) and make the corrections.'' In the NOPR, the Commission
noted that the phrases ``large accumulation'' and ``in such a
situation'' are not defined and, while likely obvious in many
circumstances, leaves to individual interpretation when a ``large''
amount of primary inadvertent has accumulated.\28\ The Commission
proposed to direct WECC to develop revisions to the provision so that a
balancing authority will know with specificity the circumstances that
trigger the actions required by Requirement R1.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ NOPR at P 36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Comments
    28. WECC acknowledges the Commission's concern that the undefined
phrases ``large accumulation'' and ``in such a situation'' in
Requirement R1.2 could lead to uncertainty among Balancing Authorities
as to when they are required to take action. WECC comments that, while
these terms have a general industry understanding within the Western
Interconnection, clarifying these terms would remove the potential for
controversy over compliance requirements. WECC suggests either defining
the terms within the regional Reliability Standard or modifying the
standard language to better identify specific parameters that would
trigger actions required under this standard.
    29. NERC agrees that further clarity of the identified phrases in
Requirement R1.2 is appropriate and believes WECC's proposal in its
comments is responsive.
2. Commission Determination
    30. As we explained in the NOPR, the Commission is concerned that
the phrases ``large accumulation'' and ``in such a situation'' as used
in Requirement R1.2 leave to individual interpretation when a ``large''
amount of primary inadvertent has accumulated. The ERO and WECC agree
that the provision could benefit from further clarity. Accordingly, the
Commission adopts its NOPR proposal and directs WECC to develop
revisions to the provision so that a balancing authority will know with
specificity the circumstances that trigger the actions required by
Requirement R1.2.

B. Explanation of 24-Hour Exemption Period of Requirement R2

    31. Requirement R2 of BAL-004-WECC-01 provides that ``[e]ach
[balancing authority] while synchronously connected to the Western
Interconnection will be allowed to have ATEC out of service for a
maximum of 24 hours per calendar quarter, for reasons including
maintenance and testing.'' In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to
direct WECC to develop a modification that clarifies whether the
``maximum of 24 hours per calendar quarter'' refers to a single
occurrence of up to 24 hours in the calendar quarter, or whether
several occurrences are permitted as long as they add up to 24 hours or
less within a calendar quarter.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ NOPR at P 37.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Comments
    32. WECC comments that it intended the 24-hour per calendar quarter
limit to permit an accumulated total of up to 24 hours, whether
resulting from one extended occurrence or multiple occurrences.
Likewise, NERC understands that WECC intended the provision to permit
an accumulated total of up to 24 hours from one or more occurrences.
    33. WECC and NERC agree the proposed NOPR modifications will leave
the regional Reliability Standard more definite and can be addressed
through WECC's stakeholder process.
2. Commission Determination
    34. Consistent with the NOPR, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the
FPA, the Commission directs WECC to develop a modification to the
regional Reliability Standard consistent with WECC's and NERC's
explanation that the limit set forth in Requirement 2 of ``24 hours per
calendar quarter'' is an accumulated total for the period, resulting
from either a singular event or a cumulative time limit from a number
of events.

C. New Glossary Definitions

    35. As mentioned above, the WECC regional Reliability Standard
includes three new definitions: Automatic Time Error Correction,
Primary Inadvertent Interchange and Secondary Inadvertent Interchange.
In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to approve the three new
terms.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ NOPR at P 26. While the Commission discussed the proposed
definitions in several places in the NOPR, in one instance the
Commission stated that it proposed to ``accept three related
definitions for inclusion in the NERC Reliability Standards Glossary
(NERC glossary).'' Id. P 2. In other instances, the Commission
simply stated that it proposed to approve the definitions. Id. P 26,
34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Comments
    36. Consumers expresses concern regarding the incorporation of
three newly defined terms (Automatic Time Error Correction, Primary
Inadvertent Interchange and Secondary Inadvertent Interchange) into the
NERC glossary. Consumers states that it is appropriate for the three
new definitions to apply to WECC regional Reliability Standards.
However, according to Consumers, the definitions have not been vetted
through NERC's full development process for their inclusion in the NERC
glossary, applicable to NERC Reliability Standards that apply on a
continent-wide basis. Specifically, Consumers points out that NERC's
Rules of Procedure provide that all definitions must be approved in
accordance with the standards process.\31\ Consumers recommends that
the Commission either clearly designate the proposed definitions as
being applicable only to WECC regional Reliability Standards or direct
NERC to submit the proposed definitions for stakeholder review as part
of the NERC Reliability Standards development process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Consumers Comments at 4, citing NERC Rules of Procedure,
section 300 and Appendix 3A (NERC Reliability Standards Development
Procedure) at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Commission Determination
    37. The Commission agrees with Consumers that the three new
definitions have not been vetted through the ERO's full development
process for their inclusion in the NERC glossary; and that the three
new definitions approved in this Final Rule apply only to WECC regional
Reliability Standards. NERC should designate them accordingly.
Therefore, to ensure that all approved definitions, NERC and regional,
are maintained in a single location, NERC should add or append the
three new regional definitions to the NERC Glossary of Terms in such a
way as to designate that they apply only in the Western
Interconnection.
    38. The Commission, however, has a general concern regarding the
development of definitions that apply only to regional Reliability
Standards. The Commission understands that, prior to NERC's development
of the ``Version 0'' Reliability Standards, there were multiple
regional standards and protocols, with each region having its own
definitions of terms. In some instances, the same or similar terms were
defined differently within different

regions. The Version 0 process included developing the NERC glossary,
which eliminated many inconsistencies in terminology across regions and
created a single source for defining terms used in Reliability
Standards.
    39. We are concerned about a potential re-proliferation of regional
terminology, and consequently, the need to prevent possible
inconsistent use of terminology among regions. While NERC has only
submitted WECC regional Reliability Standards to the Commission at this
time, other regions are in the process of developing regional
standards. Similar to our policy set forth in Order No. 672 that favors
the development of uniform Reliability Standards,\32\ the Commission
believes NERC, as a rule, should develop definitions that apply
uniformly across the different interconnections. As a general goal,
NERC should work to minimize the use of regional definitions and
terminology and, assure that proposed regional definitions and
terminology are as well defined as, do not conflict and are not
redundant with nor redefine, NERC glossary definitions. We therefore
direct NERC to develop in its Rules of Procedure, a methodology for
organizing and managing regional definitions and terminology consistent
with the principles discussed above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Order No. 672, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,204 at P 290 (``The
Commission believes that uniformity of Reliability Standards should
be the goal and the practice, the rule rather than the exception.
Greater uniformity will encourage best practices, thereby enhancing
reliability and benefiting consumers and the economy'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    40. Further, NERC should be vigilant to assure that a regional
definition is consistent with both NERC definitions and the approved
terms used in other regions. The Commission considers an inconsistency
or conflict in terms to be reasonable grounds to remand a regional
definition and, if appropriate, the regional Reliability Standard that
employs that definition.

D. Consistency With NERC Reliability Standards

1. Comments
    41. Xcel comments that, while it generally supports the adoption of
BAL-004-WECC-01, it is concerned that the regional Reliability Standard
creates a potential conflict with two NERC Reliability Standards, BAL-
001-0a (Real Power Balancing Control Performance) and BAL-002-0
(Disturbance Control Performance). Xcel requests that the Commission
establish priority for compliance in the event that WECC regional
Reliability Standards conflict with those of NERC. Xcel's concern
involves the difference in the ACE equation between the regional and
the NERC Reliability Standards and the compliance elements regarding
this equation.
    42. Xcel states that BAL-001-0a requires that ACE be kept within
specific parameters, while BAL-004-WECC-01 requires a measurement of
ACE that is outside those parameters to be maintained at all times.
According to Xcel, BAL-004-WECC-01 requires ATEC operation at all times
except up to 24 hours per calendar quarter, but is not clear if this
period covers times when complying with BAL-001-0a requires non-
compliance with BAL-004-WECC-01. Xcel notes that Requirement R3 of BAL-
004-WECC-01 requires the ACE used for NERC reports to be the same as
the ACE used in the current AGC operating mode. According to Xcel, this
requires the use of the ACEATEC set forth in BAL-004-WECC-01
rather than the BAL-001-0a ACE equation in most situations.
    43. Xcel claims that BAL-004-WECC-01 may also conflict with BAL-
002-0 Requirement R4.2, which requires that the balancing authority
restore ACE to specified parameters within a defined timeframe. Xcel
posits that in most situations it will be impossible for an entity
attempting to recover from a disturbance to operate at an ACE
calculated in accordance with the NERC standard and ACEATEC
simultaneously. According to Xcel, the use of the BAL-004-WECC-01,
Requirement R2 exception, allowing ATEC to be out of service for 24
hours per calendar quarter, should be acceptable for alleviating this
circumstance. Xcel contends that, where the 24-hour maximum is exceeded
for the purpose of ACE complying with BAL-002-0, the balancing
authority should be given express authority to deviate from the
requirements of BAL-004-WECC-01.
2. Commission Determination
    44. We are not persuaded by Xcel's comments on this matter. We
believe that our approval, in Order No. 713,\33\ of an ERO
interpretation addresses Xcel's concern. Specifically, WECC requested
that the ERO provide a formal interpretation whether the use of WECC's
automatic time error correction factor that is applied to the net
interchange portion of the ACE equation violates Requirement R1 of NERC
Reliability Standard BAL-001-0a. In response, the ERO interpreted BAL-
001-0 Requirement R1 as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ Modification of Interchange and Transmission Loading Relief
Reliability Standards; and electric Reliability Organization
Interpretation of specific Requirements of Four Reliability
Standards, Order No. 713, 73 FR 43613, 124 FERC ] 61,071 (July 21,
2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     The [WECC automatic time error correction or WATEC]
procedural documents ask Balancing Authorities to maintain raw ACE for
[control performance standard or CPS1 \34\] reporting and to control
via WATEC-adjusted ACE.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ The Control Performance Standard (CPS) is defined in the
NERC Glossary as ``[t]he reliability standard that sets the limits
of a Balancing Authority's Area Control Error over a specified time
period.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     As long as Balancing Authorities use raw (unadjusted for
WATEC) ACE for CPS reporting purposes, the use of WATEC for control is
not in violation of BAL-001 Requirement 1.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ Order No. 713, 124 FERC ] 61,071 at P 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    45. The Commission-approved interpretation makes clear that a
balancing authority is in compliance with BAL-001-1a provided that it
uses the equation identified in R1 for reporting CPS1 and achieves the
performance required by CPS1. The balancing authority's ability to use
the ACE calculation also to assist in time error correction and
inadvertent interchange payback is not precluded.
    46. Further, the Commission is not persuaded by Xcel's claims that
BAL-004-WECC-01 may also conflict with BAL-002-0, Requirement R4.2,
which requires that the balancing authority restore ACE to specified
parameters within a defined timeframe. Requirements R2 and R3 of
Standard BAL-004-WECC-0 direct that ATEC will be the primary operating
mode used by all balancing authorities in the WECC region. However,
balancing authorities may modify their ACE operating mode to account
for various operating situations, including the need to respond to
meeting the Disturbance Recovery Criterion within the Disturbance
Recovery Period in Requirement R4.2 of BAL-002-0.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ R4.2 provides that ``[t]he default Disturbance Recovery
Period is 15 minutes after the start of a Reportable Disturbance,''
but further states that ``[t]his period may be adjusted to better
suit the needs of an Interconnection based on analysis approved by
the NERC Operating Committee.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    47. Nor does the Commission agree with Xcel's concern about the 24-
hour per quarter ATEC operating mode exception period. Giving due
consideration to the Western Interconnection's participants, the
Commission finds that a 24-hour per quarter ATEC operating mode
exception period encourages the Western Interconnection's balancing
authorities to maintain a high standard of operations to support the
reliability of the Western Interconnection.

    48. Consequently, the Commission is not persuaded by Xcel's
comments. As discussed above, the ERO and the Commission have
previously addressed the issue raised by Xcel, and the Commission does
not believe that remand or further clarification is warranted.

E. Violation Risk Factors

    49. In the NOPR, the Commission proposed to direct that the
violation risk factors assigned to BAL-004-WECC-01, Requirements R1,
R2, R3, and R4 be modified from ``lower'' to ``medium.'' \37\ The
Commission explained that the participation in an interconnection's
time error correction is critical and can directly affect the state of
the Bulk-Power System.\38\ Further, the Commission explained that the
assignment of a ``medium'' violation risk factor to the Requirements of
the WECC regional Reliability Standard would make it consistent with
the assignment of ``medium'' violation risk factors to NERC Reliability
Standard BAL-004-0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ NOPR at P 44-47.
    \38\ Id. P 46.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Comments
    50. WECC comments that, while it is unlikely that a violation of
the regional Reliability Standard would lead to Bulk-Power System
instability, it acknowledges that ATEC is not administrative in nature
and could affect the electrical status of the Bulk-Power System making
a `Medium' VRF more appropriate. Thus, WECC comments that ``it does not
disagree'' with the Commission's proposal to change the violation risk
factors from low to medium. NERC also agrees that the Commission's
proposal would promote consistency.
2. Commission Determination
    51. We adopt our NOPR proposal and direct that the violation risk
factors assigned to BAL-004-WECC-01, Requirements R1, R2, R3, and R4 be
modified from ``lower'' to ``medium.'' The ERO and WECC must submit a
filing within 60 days of the effective date of this Final Rule that
includes the directed modifications.

F. Violation Severity Levels

    52. The ERO's July 2008 filing of the WECC regional Reliability
Standard included proposed violation severity levels that apply
generally to all violations of the Requirements of BAL-004-WECC-01 and
not to any one specific Requirement. In the NOPR, the Commission
proposed to direct the submission of new violation severity levels for
each Requirement and sub-Requirement that has been assigned a violation
risk factor.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ NOPR at P 49. We note that, in Version Two Facilities
Design, Connections and Maintenance Reliability Standards, Order No.
722, 126 FERC ] 61,255 at P 45 (2009), the ERO proposed to develop
violation severity levels for Requirements but not sub-Requirements.
The Commission denied the proposal as ``premature'' and, instead,
encouraged the ERO to ``develop a new and comprehensive approach
that would better facilitate the assignment of violation severity
levels and violation risk factors.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Comments
    53. WECC comments that the Commission's and NERC's guidance on the
development of violation severity levels has evolved since the drafting
of the violation severity levels for BAL-004-WECC-1. WECC indicates
that it will develop violation severity levels for each Requirement and
sub-Requirement of the regional Reliability Standard, and requests that
the Commission allow sufficient time to address the issue through the
WECC stakeholder process.
2. Commission Determination
    54. The Commission adopts its NOPR proposal and directs the ERO and
WECC to submit violation severity levels for each Requirement and sub-
Requirement that has been assigned a violation risk factor. To allow
adequate time for the development of the violation severity levels, the
ERO and WECC must submit a filing within 120 days of the effective date
of this Final Rule that includes the directed violation severity
levels.

III. Information Collection Statement

    55. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations require
that OMB approve certain reporting and recordkeeping (collections of
information) imposed by agency rules.\40\ The information contained
here is also subject to review under section 3507(d) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995.\41\ 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 an agency rule
will not be penalized for failing to respond to these collections of
information unless the collections of information display a valid OMB
control number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ 5 CFR 1320.11.
    \41\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    56. This Final Rule approves and requires modifications of one
regional Reliability Standard that was submitted by NERC as the ERO.
Section 215 of the FPA authorizes the ERO to submit Reliability
Standards to provide for the reliable operation of the Bulk-Power
System. Pursuant to the statute, the ERO must submit each Reliability
Standard that it proposes to be made effective to the Commission for
approval.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ See 16 U.S.C. 824(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    57. The regional Reliability Standard, which applies to
approximately 35 balancing authorities in the U.S. portion of the
Western Interconnection, does not require balancing authorities to file
information with the Commission. It does require balancing authorities
to develop and maintain certain information for a specified period of
time, subject to inspection by WECC. However, the Commission does not
believe that approval of the WECC regional Reliability Standard will
result in an increase in reporting burdens as compared to current
practices in WECC. As NERC indicates, since 2003, WECC has used the
automatic time error correction practice set forth in BAL-004-WECC-01.
Thus, the Commission finds that the requirement to develop and maintain
information in the regional Reliability Standard mirrors customary and
usual business practice in the area in which the Standard will apply
and, therefore, imposes a minimal burden on applicable balancing
authorities and eliminates any possible confusion between current
industry practice and the standard. The Commission also finds that the
modifications to the current Reliability Standard effected by this
Final Rule will not increase the reporting burden nor impose any
additional information collection requirements.
    58. In response to the NOPR, the Commission received no comments
concerning its determination with respect to the burden and costs and
therefore uses the same affirmation here.
    Title: Western Electricity Coordinating Council Regional
Reliability Standard Regarding Automatic Time Error Correction.
    Action: Final Rule.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0244.
    Respondents: Businesses or other for-profit institutions; not-for-
profit institutions.
    Frequency of Responses: On occasion.
    Necessity of the Information: This Final Rule approves and requires
modification to one regional Reliability Standard that pertains to
automatic time error correction in the Western Interconnection. The
Final Rule finds the Reliability Standard to be just, reasonable, not
unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the public interest.
    59. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting
requirements by contacting: Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission, Attn: Michael Miller, Office of the
Executive Director, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, Tel:
(202) 502-8415, Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>, E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
or by contacting: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn:
Desk Officer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Re: OMB
Control No. 1902-0244), Washington, DC 20503, Tel:<PHONE_NUMBER>, Fax:
(202) 395-7285, E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
IV. Environmental Analysis

    60. 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.\43\ 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.\44\ The actions proposed
herein fall within this categorical exclusion in the Commission's
regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act, Order No. 486, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 30,783 (1987).
    \44\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    61. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \45\ generally
requires a description and analysis of Final Rules that will have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The RFA mandates consideration of regulatory alternatives that
accomplish the stated objectives of a proposed rule and that minimize
any significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The Small Business Administration's Office of Size Standards
develops the numerical definition of a small business. (See 13 CFR
121.201.) For electric utilities, a firm is small if, including its
affiliates, it is primarily engaged in the transmission, generation
and/or distribution of electric energy for sale and its total electric
output for the preceding twelve months did not exceed four million
megawatt hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ 5 U.S.C. 601-12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    62. As noted above, the regional reliability standard would apply
to about 35 balancing areas in the Western Interconnection. The
Commission estimates that of these balancing areas, approximately two
to four qualify as small entities, because the total electric output of
each of these entities for the preceding twelve months did not exceed
four million megawatt hours. Thus, few small entities are impacted by
the proposed rule.
    63. Based on this understanding, the Commission certifies that this
Final Rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Accordingly, no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required.

VI. Document Availability

    64. 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 FERC's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and in FERC's
Public Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Eastern time) at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426.
    65. From FERC'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.
    66. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the FERC's Web
site during normal business hours from FERC Online Support at (202)
502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or e-mail at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>. E-mail the Public Reference Room at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification

    67. The Reliability Standard approved in this Final Rule is
effective June 29, 2009. The Commission has determined, with the
concurrence of the Administrator of the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs of OMB, that this rule is not a ``major rule'' as
defined in section 351 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996.

List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 40

    Electric power, Electric utilities, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.

    By the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E9-12351 Filed 5-27-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 25 (Tuesday, February 7, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8032-8033]
[FR Doc No: 2023-02478]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Notice of Intent To Rule on a Land Release Request To Sell On-
Airport Property Conveyed by the United States of America Through a
Surplus Property Act and Remove It From Airport Dedicated Use at the
New Castle Airport (ILG), New Castle, DE

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of release request to sell on-airport property conveyed
through a Surplus Property Act and remove it from dedicated use.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is requesting public comment on the Delaware River and
Bay Authority's proposed land release and sale of 2.94 acres of airport
property at the New Castle County Airport in Wilmington, Delaware. The
subject property was conveyed by the United States of America through a
Surplus Property Act instrument of transfer in 1949. In accordance with
Federal regulations, this notice is required to be published in the
Federal Register 30 days before the FAA can approve the sale of this
property.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 2, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Comments on this application may be emailed or delivered to
the following address:

Greg Suchanoff, Senior Project Engineer III, New Castle County Airport,
2162 New Castle Ave., New Castle, DE 19720,<PHONE_NUMBER>

and at the FAA Harrisburg Airports District Office:
Rick Harner, Manager, Harrisburg Airports District Office, 3905
Hartzdale Dr., Suite 508, Camp Hill, PA 17011,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Higgins, Project Manager,
Harrisburg Airports District Office,<PHONE_NUMBER>, location listed
above. The request to release airport property may be reviewed in
person at this same location.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Delaware River and Bay Authority,
operating consistent with the operating agreement with New Castle
County (owner of property) is proposing the land release and sale of
2.94 acres of airport property at the New Castle County Airport in
Wilmington, Delaware. The 2.94 acre subject parcel includes a 26,783
square foot office building, and approximately 4,800 square yards of
vehicle parking, with the remaining area comprised primarily of mowed
lawn. The parcel is not currently required or anticipated to be
required for aeronautical use. The subject parcel is bounded as
follows:
    All that certain tract, piece or parcel of land situate 12 Penn's
Way, New Castle Hundred, New Castle County, Delaware and shown on a
plan prepared by VanDemark & Lynch, Inc., Engineers, Planners and
Surveyors, Wilmington, Delaware, dated January 6, 2020, entitled
``Exhibit Plan, 12 Penn's Way'', File No. 23599.35-EXHIB-01 and being
more particularly bounded and described as follows, to wit:
    Beginning at an iron pin found, a southerly corner for land now or
formerly of the Delaware River & Bay

Authority (Deed Record 2090, Page 252) on the northeasterly side of
Penn's Way (a 60 foot wide public road), said point being measured
along the northeasterly and easterly sides of said Penn's Way, the
three (3) following described courses and distances from the
southwesterly end of a corner cut-off joining the southerly side of
Commons Boulevard (a 110 foot wide public road) with said easterly side
of Penn's Way:
    1. South 06[deg]04'44'' East, 108.30 feet to a point of curvature;
    2. Southeasterly, by a curve to the left having a radius of 242.84
feet, an arc length of 192.59 feet to a point of tangency, said point
being distant by a chord of South 28[deg]47'56'' East, 187.58 feet from
the last described point; and
    3. South 51[deg]31'08'' East, 484.38 feet to the Point of
Beginning;
    Thence, from the said point of Beginning, along southeasterly,
southwesterly and northwesterly lines for said land now or formerly of
the Delaware River & Bay Authority (Deed Record 2090, Page 252), the
three (3) following described courses and distances:
    1. North 38[deg]23'27'' East, 373.10 feet to a point;
    2. South 51[deg]36'33'' East, 345.90 feet to a bent iron pin found;
and
    3. South 38[deg]23'27'' West, 347.43 feet to a bent iron pin found
on said northeasterly side of Penn's Way;
    Thence along said northeasterly side of Penn's Way, the three (3)
following described courses and distances:
    Northwesterly, by a curve to the right having a radius of 242.83
feet, an arc length of 113.87 feet to a point of tangency, said point
being distant by a chord of North 64[deg]57'10'' West, 112.83 feet from
the last described point; and
    North 51[deg]31'08'' West, 236.11 feet to the point and place of
Beginning. Containing within said metes and bounds, 2.94 acres of land,
being the same, more or less.
    The proposed action consists of the land release for sale of Tax
Parcel ID #10-018.00-006 (the PARCEL) from Wilmington/New Castle County
Airport (ILG) ownership. The existing office space on the parcel is
currently vacant. The interested buyer intends to use existing office
building and parking area as a pandemic response center for the
Delaware Air National Guard which would be considered a non-
aeronautical use. No exterior physical alternations to the subject
parcel are currently proposed. The parcel is located on the on the
northwest portion of ILG. Any person may inspect the request by
appointment at the FAA office address listed above. Interested persons
are invited to comment on the proposed release. All comments will be
considered by the FAA to the extent practicable.

    Issued in Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, January 31, 2023.
Rick Harner,
Manager, Harrisburg Airports District Office.
[FR Doc. 2023-02478 Filed 2-6-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: January 23, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 14)]
[Notices]
[Page 3549]
[DOCID:fr23ja06-96]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[File No. 1-11535]

Issuer Delisting; Notice of Application of Burlington Northern
Santa Fe Corporation To Withdraw its Common Stock, $.01 par value, From
Listing and Registration on the Chicago Stock Exchange, Inc.

January 13, 2006.
    On January 11, 2006, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation, a
Delaware corporation (``Issuer''), filed an application with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 12(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and
Rule 12d2-2(d) thereunder,\2\ to withdraw its common stock, $.01 par
value (``Security''), from listing and registration on the Chicago
Stock Exchange, Inc. (``CHX'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78l(d).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.12d2-2(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Board of Directors (``Board'') of the Issuer approved
resolutions on December 8, 2005 to withdraw the Security from CHX. The
Issuer stated that the Board decided to withdraw the Security from CHX
because the benefits of continued listing on CHX do not outweigh the
incremental cost of the listing fees and the administrative burden
associated with listing on CHX. The Issuer stated that the Security is
listed on the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (``NYSE'') and will
continue to list on NYSE.
    The Issuer stated in its application that it has complied with
applicable rules of CHX by complying with all applicable laws in the
State of Delaware, the state in which the Issuer is incorporated, and
by providing CHX with the required documents governing the withdrawal
of securities from listing and registration on CHX. The Issuer's
application relates solely to the withdrawal of the Security from
listing on CHX and shall not affect its continued listing on NYSE or
its obligation to be registered under Section 12(b) of the Act.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ 15 U.S.C. 78l(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any interested person may, on or before February 9, 2006, comment
on the facts bearing upon whether the application has been made in
accordance with the rules of CHX, and what terms, if any, should be
imposed by the Commission for the protection of investors. All comment
letters may be submitted by either of the following methods.

Electronic Comments

     Send an e-mail to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
the File Number 1-11535 or;

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20549-9303.
    All submissions should refer to File Number 1-11535. This file
number should be included on the subject line if e-mail is used. To
help us process and review your comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will post all comments on the
Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/delist.shtml).

Comments are also available for public inspection and copying in the
Commission's Public Reference Room. All comments received will be
posted without change; we do not edit personal identifying information
from submissions. You should submit only information that you wish to
make available publicly.
    The Commission, based on the information submitted to it, will
issue an order granting the application after the date mentioned above,
unless the Commission determines to order a hearing on the matter.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation,
pursuant to delegated authority.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nancy M. Morris,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-677 Filed 1-20-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 164 (Monday, August 24, 2020)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52189-52190]
[FR Doc No: 2020-18530]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Railroad Administration

[Docket Number FRA-2010-0093]

Petition for Waiver of Compliance

    Under part 211 of title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), this

document provides the public notice that on August 9, 2020, Virginia &
Truckee Railroad Company (VTRR) petitioned the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA) for a waiver of compliance from certain provisions
of the Federal railroad safety regulations contained at 49 CFR part
215, Railroad Freight Car Safety Standards. FRA assigned the petition
Docket Number FRA-2010-0093.
    Specifically, VTRR seeks to extend its previous special approval
under 49 CFR 215.203, Restricted cars, and relief from 49 CFR 215.303,
Stenciling of restricted cars, for three overage freight cars: Caboose
V&T 50, open air car V&T 55, and boxcar V&T 54. It also requests to add
one car, caboose V&T 25, to the current docket. All cars are owned by
VTRR and are not interchanged in regular freight operations with other
railroads.
    VTRR explains it conducts annual comprehensive shop inspections and
detailed center plate inspections and maintains and services the cars
in compliance with all applicable regulations with the exception of the
relief granted.
    A copy of the petition, as well as any written communications
concerning the petition, is available for review online at
www.regulations.gov.
    Interested parties are invited to participate in these proceedings
by submitting written views, data, or comments. FRA does not anticipate
scheduling a public hearing in connection with these proceedings since
the facts do not appear to warrant a hearing. If any interested parties
desire an opportunity for oral comment and a public hearing, they
should notify FRA, in writing, before the end of the comment period and
specify the basis for their request.
    All communications concerning these proceedings should identify the
appropriate docket number and may be submitted by any of the following
methods:
     Website: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
     Fax:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
     Mail: Docket Operations Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, W12-140, Washington, DC
20590.
     Hand Delivery: 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal Holidays.
    Communications received by October 8, 2020 will be considered by
FRA before final action is taken. Comments received after that date
will be considered if practicable.
    Anyone can search the electronic form of any written communications
and comments received into any of our dockets by the name of the
individual submitting the comment (or signing the document, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
Under 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the public to better
inform its processes. DOT posts these comments, without edit, including
any personal information the commenter provides, to
www.regulations.gov, as described in the system of records notice (DOT/
ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.transportation.gov/privacy. See also https://www.regulations.gov/privacyNotice for the
privacy notice of regulations.gov.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
John Karl Alexy,
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety, Chief Safety Officer.
[FR Doc. 2020-18530 Filed 8-21-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P


[Federal Register: May 25, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 101)]
[Notices]
[Page 30124-30125]
[DOCID:fr25my06-41]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. CP97-168-006]

Alliance Pipeline L.P.; Notice of Application

May 19, 2006.
    Take notice that on May 9, 2006, Alliance Pipeline L.P. (Alliance),
6385 Old Shady Oak Road, Suite 150, Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344,
filed, in Docket No. CP97-168-006, an application pursuant to section 7
of the Natural Gas Act and Part 157 of the Commission's regulations
requesting amended certificate authority to increase the maximum
allowable operating pressure of its pipeline system, located in North
Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, and Illinois, without significantly increasing
the capacity of the system, all as more fully set forth in the
application which is on file with the Commission and open for public
inspection. These filings are available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
at http://www.ferc.gov using the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket

number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to
access the document. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support
at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at<PHONE_NUMBER>, or for
TTY, contact<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Any questions regarding this application should be directed to
Michael L. McGonagill, Vice President-U.S. Operations, Alliance
Pipeline L.P., 6385 Old Shady Oak Road, Suite 150, Eden Prairie,
Minnesota, at Phone:<PHONE_NUMBER>, or FAX:<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of
this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by
becoming a party

to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the below
listed comment date, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to
intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules
of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the
Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party
status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary
of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the
applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 14 copies of
filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant
and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the
proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the
proceeding.
    However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have
comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with
the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and
two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project.
The Commission will consider these comments in determining the
appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will
not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's
rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project
provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly
involved in the protest.
    Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of
this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments
to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commenters will be
placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive
copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings
associated with the Commission's environmental review process.
Environmental commenters will not be required to serve copies of filed
documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commenters will
not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by
the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents
issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court
review of the Commission's final order.
    Motions to intervene, protests and comments may be filed
electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper; see, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
under the ``e-Filing'' link. The Commission strongly encourages
electronic filings.
    Comment Date: June 9, 2006.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-8021 Filed 5-24-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P