|
A Cryptome DVD is offered by Cryptome. Donate $25 for a DVD of the Cryptome 11.5-years archives of 43,000 files from June 1996 to January 2008 (~4.5 GB). Click Paypal or mail check/MO made out to John Young, 251 West 89th Street, New York, NY 10024. Archives include all files of cryptome.org, jya.com, cartome.org, eyeball-series.org and iraq-kill-maim.org. Cryptome offers with the Cryptome DVD an INSCOM DVD of about 18,000 pages of counter-intelligence dossiers declassified by the US Army Information and Security Command, dating from 1945 to 1985. No additional contribution required -- $25 for both. The DVDs will be sent anywhere worldwide without extra cost. |
28 March 2008
[Federal Register: March 28, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 61)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 16586-16604]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28mr08-18]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
18 CFR Part 40
[Docket No. RM08-3-000]
Mandatory Reliability Standard for Nuclear Plant Interface
Coordination
March 20, 2008.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act, the
Commission proposes to approve the Nuclear Plant Interface Coordination
Reliability Standard developed by the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation (NERC). The proposed Reliability Standard
requires a nuclear power plant operator and its suppliers of back-up
power and related transmission and distribution services to coordinate
concerning nuclear licensing requirements for safe nuclear plant
operation and shutdown and system operating limits. The Commission also
proposes to accept four related definitions for addition to the NERC
Glossary of Terms and to direct various changes to proposed violation
risk factors, which measure the potential impact of violations of the
Reliability Standard on the reliability of the Bulk-Power System. The
proposed rule would benefit the Reliable Operation of the Bulk-Power
System by facilitating the provision of off-site power to ensure
reliable and safe nuclear power plant operation and shutdown.
DATES: Comments are due April 28, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons may submit comments, identified by Docket
No. RM08-3-000, by any of the following methods:
eFiling: Comments may be filed electronically via the
eFiling link on the Commission's Web site at: http://www.ferc.gov.
Documents created electronically using word processing software should
be filed in the native application or print-to-PDF format and not in a
scanned format. This will enhance document retrieval for both the
Commission and the public. The Commission accepts most standard word
processing formats and commenters may attach additional files with
supporting information in certain other file formats. Attachments that
exist only in paper form may be scanned. Commenters filing
electronically should not make a paper filing. Service of rulemaking
comments is not required.
Mail/Hand Delivery: Commenters that are not able to file
electronically must mail or hand deliver an original and 14 copies of
their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of
the Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and
additional information on the rulemaking process,
[[Page 16587]]
see the Comment Procedures Section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
:
Richard M. Wartchow (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8744.
Christy Walsh (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-6523.
Robert Snow (Technical Information), Office of Electric Reliability,
Division of Reliability Standards, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-
6716.
Kevin Thundiyil (Technical Information), Office of Electric
Reliability, Division of Reliability Standards, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426,
(202) 502-6490.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
Paragraph
numbers
I. Background.............................................. 2
A. EPAct 2005 and Mandatory Reliability Standards...... 2
1. NERC's Proposed Nuclear Reliability Standard.... 4
2. Proposed NERC Glossary Definitions.............. 10
3. Nuclear Reliability Standard Requirements....... 11
4. Nuclear Reliability Standard Development........ 15
II. Discussion............................................. 17
A. Applicability....................................... 18
1. Notification of Parties to Interface Agreements. 20
2. Transmission Entities........................... 22
3. Agreement on NPIRs.............................. 31
B. Scope of Agreements................................. 38
1. Generally....................................... 39
2. Revisions to Interface Agreements To Reflect 40
Interim Changes...................................
C. Coordination........................................ 43
D. Proposed Terms for Addition to the NERC Glossary.... 46
E. Violation Risk Factors.............................. 48
F. Violation Severity Levels........................... 60
III. Information Collection Statement...................... 63
IV. Environmental Analysis................................. 73
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis..................... 74
VI. Comment Procedures..................................... 77
VII. Document Availability................................. 81
1. Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA), the
Commission proposes to approve the Nuclear Plant Interface Coordination
Reliability Standard (NUC-001-1) developed by the North American
Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC). The proposed Reliability
Standard requires a nuclear power plant operator and its suppliers of
back-up power and transmission and distribution services \1\ to
coordinate concerning nuclear licensing requirements for safe nuclear
plant operation and shutdown and system operating limits (SOLs). The
Commission also proposes to accept four related definitions for
addition to the NERC Glossary of Terms \2\ and to direct various
changes to proposed violation risk factors, which measure the potential
impact of violations of the Reliability Standard on the reliability of
the Bulk-Power System. The proposed rule would benefit the Reliable
Operation of the Bulk-Power System by facilitating the provision of
off-site power to ensure reliable and safe nuclear power plant
operation and shutdown.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Reliability Standard defines those suppliers who provide
such generation, transmission and distribution services pursuant to
agreements under the Nuclear Reliability Standard as ``transmission
entities,'' as discussed below.
\2\ See the NERC Glossary of Terms Used in Reliability Standards
(as revised) (Glossary), originally filed in Mandatory Reliability
Standards for the Bulk-Power System, NERC Request for Approval of
Reliability Standards, Docket No. RM06-16-000 (Apr. 4, 2006), and
affirmed by Order No. 693, 72 FR 16416 (Apr. 4, 2007), FERC Stats.
and Regs. ] 31,242 (2007), order on reh'g, Order No. 693-A, 72 FR
40717 (July 25, 2007), 120 FERC ] 61,053 (2007).
\3\ The Commission is not proposing any new or modified text to
its regulations. Rather, as set forth in 18 CFR part 40, a proposed
Reliability Standard will not become effective until approved by the
Commission, and the Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) must
post on its Web site each effective Reliability Standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Background
A. EPAct 2005 and Mandatory Reliability Standards
2. On August 8, 2005, the Electricity Modernization Act of 2005 was
enacted as Title XII, Subtitle A, of the Energy Policy Act of 2005
(EPAct 2005).\4\ EPAct 2005 added section 215 to the FPA, requiring the
Commission-certified Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) to develop
mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, 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.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Energy Policy Act of 2005, (Pub. L. 109-58), Title XII,
Subtitle A, 119 Stat. 594, 941 (2005), 16 U.S.C. 824o (2000 & Supp.
V 2005).
\5\ 16 U.S.C. 824o(e)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. On February 3, 2006, the Commission issued Order No. 672,
implementing section 215.\6\ Pursuant to Order No. 672, the Commission
certified NERC as the ERO.\7\ The ERO is required to develop
Reliability Standards, subject
[[Page 16588]]
to Commission review and approval, applicable to users, owners and
operators of the Bulk-Power System, as set forth in each Reliability
Standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric Reliability
Organization; and Procedures for the Establishment, Approval, and
Enforcement of Electric Reliability Standards, Order No. 672, 71 FR
8662 (Feb. 17, 2006), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,204, order on reh'g,
Order No. 672-A, 71 FR 19814 (Apr. 18, 2006), FERC Stats. & Regs. ]
31,212 (2006).
\7\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ]
61,062, order on reh'g & compliance, 117 FERC ] 61,126 (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. NERC's Proposed Nuclear Reliability Standard
4. On November 19, 2007, NERC filed its petition for Commission
approval of the Nuclear Plant Interface Coordination Reliability
Standard, designated NUC-001-1 (November 19, 2007 Petition). NERC
supplemented the filing on December 11, 2007 (December 11, 2007
Supplement) to propose four related NERC Glossary terms: ``Nuclear
Plant Generator Operator,'' ``Nuclear Plant Off-site Power Supply (Off-
site Power),'' ``Nuclear Plant Licensing Requirements (NPLRs),'' and
``Nuclear Plant Interface Requirements (NPIRs).'' The November 19, 2007
Petition states that the proposed Reliability Standard addresses the
coordination of interface requirements for two domains: (i) Bulk-Power
System planning and operations; and (ii) nuclear power plant licensing
requirements for off-site power necessary to enable safe nuclear plant
operation and shutdown.
5. The Nuclear Reliability Standard applies to nuclear plant
generator operators (generally nuclear power plant owners and
operators, including licensees) and ``transmission entities,'' defined
in the Reliability Standard as including a nuclear plant's suppliers of
off-site power and related transmission and distribution services. To
account for the variations in nuclear plant design and grid
interconnection characteristics, the Reliability Standard defines
transmission entities as ``all entities that are responsible for
providing services related to Nuclear Plant Interface Requirements
(NPIRs),'' and lists eleven types of functional entities that could
provide services related to NPIRs.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The list of functional entities consists of transmission
operators, transmission owners, transmission planners, transmission
service providers, balancing authorities, reliability coordinators,
planning authorities, distribution providers, load-serving entities,
generator owners and generator operators. Additional applicability
issues are discussed in a separate section below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. According to NERC, nuclear plant generator operators and
transmission entities operate according to separate, established
reliability and safety procedures. NERC states that the proposed
Reliability Standard requires a nuclear plant generator operator to
coordinate operations and planning with its transmission entities by
developing procedures that reflect nuclear plant licensing requirements
and SOLs,\9\ including interconnection reliability operating limits
(IROLs), affecting nuclear plant operations.\10\ The proposed Nuclear
Reliability Standard requires nuclear plant generator operators and
transmission entities, including off-site power suppliers, to develop
expectations and procedures for coordinating operations to meet the
nuclear plant licensing requirements, SOLs and IROLs and to execute
agreements, called interface agreements, reflecting those expectations
and procedures. The resulting operations and planning requirements
developed in the agreements to address the nuclear plant licensing
requirements, SOLs and IROLs are called NPIRs.\11\ NERC states that
Requirements R3 through R8, which state that the interface agreement
parties will address the NPIRs in planning, operations and facility
upgrade and outage coordination, provide additional specificity on
these expectations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The NERC glossary defines system operating limit or SOL as
``the value * * * that satisfies the most limiting of the prescribed
operating criteria for a specified system configuration to ensure
operation within acceptable reliability criteria * * *'' 18 CFR part
40, Facilities Design, Connections and Maintenance Mandatory
Reliability Standards, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 72 FR 46413
(Aug. 20, 2007), FERC Stats. and Regs. ] 32,622, at P 19 (2007)
(Aug. 13, 2007).
\10\ The NERC glossary defines IROL as a ``system operating
limit that, if violated, could lead to instability, uncontrolled
separation, or Cascading Outages that adversely impact the
reliability of the bulk electric system.'' 18 CFR part 40,
Facilities Design, Connections and Maintenance Mandatory Reliability
Standards, Order No. 705, 73 FR 1770 (Jan. 9, 2008), 121 FERC ]
61,296, at P 118 (2007) (Dec. 27, 2007).
\11\ See NUC-001-1, Requirement R2 and the proposed NERC
Glossary term, Nuclear Plant Interface Requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. NERC's November 19, 2007 Petition notes that nuclear plant
generator operators must already fulfill nuclear licensing requirements
for off-site power.\12\ NERC states that, while various forms of
agreements exist to meet the nuclear power plant general design
criterion for off-site power, NUC-001-1 places a new, mandatory and
enforceable obligation under section 215 of the FPA on both nuclear
plant generator operators and transmission entities. NUC-001-1 requires
these entities to inform one another of limits and requirements on
their systems and to enter into agreements to coordinate and operate
their systems to address nuclear plant licensing requirements and
related system limits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See also the U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task Force,
Final Report on the August 14, 2003 Blackout in the United States
and Canada: Causes and Recommendations, at 112 (April 2004)
(Blackout Report), for a description of Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) oversight; available at: http://www.ferc.gov/
industries/electric/indus-act/blackout.asp:
The NRC, which regulates U.S. commercial nuclear power plants,
has regulatory requirements for offsite power systems. These
requirements address the number of offsite power sources and the
ability to withstand certain transients. Offsite power is the normal
source of alternating current (AC) power to the safety systems in
the plants when the plant main generator is not in operation. The
requirements also are designed to protect safety systems from
potentially damaging variations (in voltage and frequency) in the
supplied power. For loss of offsite power events, the NRC requires
emergency generation (typically emergency diesel generators) to
provide AC power to safety systems. In addition, the NRC provides
oversight of the safety aspects of offsite power issues through its
inspection program, by monitoring operating experience, and by
performing technical studies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. The nuclear plant licensing requirements addressed in the
proposed Reliability Standard include requirements for off-site power
to enable safe operation and shutdown during an electric system or
plant event, and requirements for avoiding nuclear safety issues as a
result of changes in electric system conditions during a disturbance,
transient or normal conditions. NERC cites general design criterion 17
for nuclear power plants, which requires nuclear plant generator
operators to obtain off-site electric power that will provide
sufficient capacity to permit safety systems to function, assure that
reactor coolant design limits are not exceeded, prevent core cooling,
and maintain containment integrity and other vital functions.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ NERC November 19, 2007 Petition at 22-23, citing the NRC
regulations, 10 CFR part 50, Appendix A--General Design Criteria for
Nuclear Power Plants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. NERC states that NUC-001-1, in combination with the nuclear
license general design criteria requirements, achieves the vital public
interest of assuring safe nuclear power generation. According to NERC,
the Reliability Standard is beneficial to nuclear plant generator
operators because it will assist them in meeting nuclear plant
licensing requirements to safely produce nuclear power. It is also
beneficial to Bulk-Power System users, due to the significant support
that nuclear plants provide to the Reliable Operation of the Bulk-Power
System. This Reliability Standard was assigned to a new rulemaking
proceeding, Docket No. RM08-3-000, and is the subject of the current
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR).\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ The Nuclear Reliability Standard is attached in Appendix A
to this NOPR and is available on the Commission's eLibrary document
retrieval system in Docket No. RM08-3-000 and also on NERC's Web
site, http://www.nerc.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Proposed NERC Glossary Definitions
10. NERC proposes in its December 11, 2007 Supplement to add the
[[Page 16589]]
following four terms to the NERC Glossary: \15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ The Commission reviews and approves revisions to the NERC
Glossary, directing modifications where necessary. See, e.g., Order
No. 693 at P 1893-98.
Nuclear Plant Generator Operator: Any Generator Operator or
Generator Owner that is a [n]uclear [p]lant [l]icensee responsible
for operation of a nuclear facility licensed to produce commercial
power.
Nuclear Plant Off-site Power Supply or Off-site Power: The
electric power supply provided from the electric system to the
nuclear power plant distribution system as required per the nuclear
power plant license.
Nuclear Plant Licensing Requirements (NPLRs): Requirements
included in the design basis of the nuclear plant and statutorily
mandated for the operation of the plant, including nuclear power
plant licensing requirements for: (1) Off-site power supply to
enable safe shutdown of the plant during an electric system or plant
event; and (2) Avoiding preventable challenges to nuclear safety as
a result of an electric system disturbance, transient, or
condition.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ The proposed Reliability Standard incorporates a regional
difference that provides an alternative definition of nuclear plant
licensing requirements that applies to units located in Canada.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nuclear Plant Interface Requirements (NPIRs): The requirements,
based on NPLRs and Bulk Electric System requirements, that have been
mutually agreed to by the Nuclear Plant Generator Operator and the
applicable [t]ransmission [e]ntities.
3. Nuclear Reliability Standard Requirements
11. NERC's November 19, 2007 Petition summarizes the Nuclear
Reliability Standard's nine compliance Requirements. Requirement R1
states that a nuclear plant generator operator shall provide proposed
NPIRs to its transmission entities. Requirement R2 states that a
nuclear plant generator operator and its transmission entities shall
execute one or more agreements ``that include mutually agreed to
NPIRs'' and document how the nuclear plant generator operator and the
applicable transmission entities shall address and implement these
NPIRs as further described in Requirement R9.
12. Requirements R3 through R8 dictate various operating and
planning obligations that the nuclear plant generator operator and
transmission entities shall meet per the interface agreements.
Requirement R3 states that the transmission entities shall incorporate
NPIR information into planning analyses and communicate the study
results to the nuclear plant generator operator. Requirement R4 directs
transmission entities to incorporate the NPIRs into operating analyses
and meet the resulting operating targets or inform the nuclear plant
generator operator when the transmission entity loses the ability to
assess its performance. Requirement R5 places an obligation on the
nuclear plant generator operator to operate its facilities in
accordance with the interface agreements. Requirement R6 provides that
a nuclear plant generator operator and its transmission entities shall
coordinate outages and maintenance activities that affect the NPIRs
(additional details concerning operations and maintenance coordination
are set forth in Requirement R9.3). Requirements R7 and R8 oblige a
nuclear plant generator operator and its transmission entities,
respectively, to inform each other under their interface agreement of
actual or proposed facility changes affecting the NPIRs.
13. Requirement R9, including sub-Requirements R9.1.1 through
R9.4.4, outline certain administrative, technical, operations and
maintenance, and communications and training provisions that must be
included in an interface agreement. Provisions concerning technical
requirements and analysis direct the interface agreement parties to:
(1) Identify limits, configurations and operating scenarios included in
the NPIRs (Requirement R9.2.1); (2) identify essential facilities,
components and configuration restrictions (Requirement R9.2.2); and (3)
describe planning and operational analyses, including scope and timing,
to support the NPIRs (Requirement R9.2.3).
14. The operations and maintenance coordination provisions mandate
that the interface agreements provide for coordination of operations
and maintenance of electrical facilities at the interface between the
electrical system and the nuclear plant and power supply systems,
including off-site power (Requirements R9.3.1-.3). Further, an
interface agreement must coordinate responses to unusual conditions on
the grid such as loss of ability to monitor grid performance, loss of
off-site power, use of special protection systems, and underfrequency
and undervoltage load shedding programs (Requirements R9.3.4, R9.3.5,
and R9.3.7). Requirement R9.3.6 requires coordination of physical and
cyber security systems. The interface agreements also must adopt terms
and protocols for communications between the nuclear plant generator
operator and transmission entities, coordination and communication
during atypical operating conditions or emergency events, investigation
and resolution of the causes of unplanned events, compliance with
regulatory information requirements, and personnel training relating to
NPIRs (Requirements R9.4.1-.5) and dispute resolution procedures
(Requirement R9.1.3).
4. Nuclear Reliability Standard Development
15. NERC reports that in October 2004 it received a Standard
Authorization Request (SAR) for NUC-001-1 from the Nuclear Energy
Institute Grid Reliability Task Force. The NERC Standards Committee
approved the SAR in May 2005 and authorized development of the
Reliability Standard. After more than 50 stakeholders, including
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff, provided comments on the
draft, the NERC Nuclear Reliability Standard drafting team finalized
the proposed Reliability Standard and set it for vote. NERC reports
that, while the first ballot in March 2007 indicated approval by 77
percent of the weighted segment votes, negative ballots with comments
triggered a recirculation ballot. NERC describes the negative comments
as being largely concerned with two issues: (1) Whether the term
``transmission entities'' is too ambiguous to be enforceable; and (2)
whether the proposed Reliability Standard makes SOL determinations and
Bulk-Power System integrity procedures subservient to nuclear plant
licensing requirements. NERC reports the drafting team's responses to
these comments on ``nsmission entities'' and SOL coordination. The
drafting team supported its proposal for identifying transmission
entities by stating that the proposed generic treatment was appropriate
because it reflected the variety of potential interactions between a
given nuclear plant generator operator and grid operators with nuclear
plant interconnections. According to NERC, the drafting team indicated
that the specific entities covered by the proposed Reliability Standard
would be determined through the NUC-001-1 implementation plan. NERC
states that the drafting team responded to criticisms that SOL
coordination was not adequately supported by pointing out that the
nuclear plant generator operators and transmission entities will
develop NPIRs under NUC-001-1 through a collaborative process that
permits both groups to identify and address both nuclear requirements
and Bulk-Power System limits in the resulting agreements.
16. With these responses, the proposed Reliability Standard passed
in a recirculation ballot with an 80 percent weighted segment approval
and a 96 percent quorum. The NERC Board of Trustees adopted the
proposed Reliability Standard on May 2, 2007. To
[[Page 16590]]
provide time for nuclear plant generator operators and transmission
entities to identify NPIRs and negotiate and execute interface
agreements, NERC proposes that NUC-001-1 become effective in the United
States on the first day of the calendar quarter falling 15 months after
Commission approval.
II. Discussion
17. The Commission proposes to approve the Reliability Standard,
NUC-001-1, effective as proposed by NERC, but seeks comment on several
specific issues concerning the applicability of the Reliability
Standard, coordination among transmission entities, and the scope of
nuclear plant interface agreements. The Commission is not taking any
action on the regional difference, because it applies outside of the
United States and is not applicable to any facilities within the
Commission's jurisdiction.\17\ Further, the Commission proposes to
order several modifications to the violation risk factors for the
Reliability Standard and approve the proposed violation severity levels
until they are superseded in an upcoming proceeding, as discussed
below. The Commission also proposes to approve the proposed Glossary
terms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ NERC proposes to adopt as a regional difference for Canada
a separate definition of Nuclear Plant Licensing Requirements that
does not reference regulatory requirements for off-site power supply
for safe plant shutdown because Canada does not have regulatory
standards for off-site power comparable to those established by the
NRC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Applicability
18. Reliability Standard NUC-001-1 applies to nuclear plant
generator operators and transmission entities, including off-site power
suppliers and entities that provide distribution and transmission
services that affect plant operations. NERC states that the Reliability
Standard meets the criteria that it apply to users, owners and
operators of the Bulk-Power System because NUC-001-1 will apply to
transmission entities that are responsible for providing services
relating to NPIRs. According to NERC, these transmission entities can
affect the safety and reliability of the nuclear plant and Bulk-Power
System, for instance in the case of a distribution service provider
that supplies off-site power from a low-voltage, local distribution
system. Therefore, these entities are subject to the Reliability
Standard Requirements and may be registered under the NERC compliance
registry process.
19. While the Commission does not at this time propose to modify
the Reliability Standard, this NOPR seeks comment on several issues
concerning: (1) A nuclear plant generator operator's role in notifying
applicable transmission entities that they may be responsible for
NPIRs, (2) when NUC-001-1 becomes applicable to transmission entities;
and (3) the applicability of NERC's compliance procedures when
potential parties to interface agreements fail to reach agreement. The
Commission presents its understanding of these applicability issues and
seeks comment as discussed below.
1. Notification of Parties to Interface Agreements
20. Requirement R1 provides: ``The Nuclear Plant Generator Operator
shall provide the proposed NPIRs in writing to the applicable
transmission entities and shall verify receipt.'' Thus, it is the
responsibility of a nuclear plant generator operator to notify its
appropriate transmission entities that they are responsible for meeting
the provisions of NUC-001-1. In response, a nuclear plant generator
operator and its transmission entities are expected to negotiate and
execute interface agreements ``that include mutually agreed to NPIRs.''
Commission Proposal
21. The Commission understands Requirement R1 to provide that, if a
nuclear plant generator operator fails to provide all appropriate NPIRs
to an applicable transmission entity, the nuclear plant generator
operator will not be in compliance with the Reliability Standard.
However, the Commission also understands that the impact of such an
implication is limited, because a nuclear plant generator operator will
know, as a result of the NRC licensing approval and review processes,
which applicable entities to contact and what services are needed to
meet NRC licensing requirements. Thus, it is unlikely that a nuclear
plant generator operator would fail to obtain appropriate services and
contact the necessary off-site power suppliers and transmission
entities. With this understanding, the Commission preliminarily finds
that the Requirement R1 obligation on a nuclear plant generator
operator to contact transmission entities that will be subject to NUC-
001-1 is appropriate.
2. Transmission Entities
22. The proposed Reliability Standard includes the term
``transmission entities,'' defined in the Applicability section of NUC-
001-1 as ``all entities that are responsible for providing services
related to Nuclear Plant Interface Requirements (NPIRs).'' NERC
explains that each of the functional entities listed as transmission
entities is defined as a user, owner, or operator of the Bulk-Power
System. NERC notes that entities defined as transmission entities, such
as distribution providers, are transmission entities by virtue of their
involvement with a nuclear plant, by agreeing to meet an NPIR.\18\ NERC
states that a distribution provider that supplies backup power to a
nuclear plant from a local, lower voltage distribution system to meet
the plant's licensing requirements for offsite power will be considered
a transmission entity, because the distribution provider can impact the
safety and reliability of the nuclear plant and the Bulk-Power
System.\19\ In particular, the November 19, 2007 Petition states:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See NERC November 19, 2007 Petition at 12.
\19\ Id.
Because the relationship of each nuclear plant generator
operator with its provider of transmission-related services is
unique, it will be important and necessary for the registration
process to identify on a plant-by-plant basis the specific
transmission entities required to identify NPIRs and develop the
requisite agreement. Once the agreement becomes final, all
applicable nuclear plant generator operator and transmission
entities for each agreement will be identified by name and specific
function. The respective Regional Entity will then be responsible
for ensuring that each nuclear plant generator operator and
transmission entities identified in the agreement(s) is registered
on the NERC Compliance Registry for the applicable function(s). NERC
will work with the Regional Entities to ensure that all nuclear
plant generator operators and transmission entities included in the
agreements that result from the NPIRs are listed in the Compliance
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Registry for this specific reliability standard.\20\
\20\ NERC November 19, 2007 Petition at 12-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
23. NERC explains that the term ``transmission entities'' is used
to refer to all the entities that may provide services to meet NPIRs
for the 104 various nuclear plants subject to NUC-001-1 Requirements.
NERC adopted this approach to applicability because, due to the unique
characteristics of the interconnection of each nuclear facility with
its transmission grid, it is not possible to specify in advance and on
a generic basis which functional entities operating near a given
nuclear plant would be responsible for meeting the Requirements of NUC-
001-1.
24. NERC indicates that the particular transmission entities
subject to the Reliability Standard will be determined as they are
identified by the nuclear plant generator operator as providing
services related to NPIRs, pursuant to Requirement R1. According to
NERC,
[[Page 16591]]
once a nuclear plant generator operator and its applicable transmission
entities execute one or more interface agreements, a Regional Entity
shall ensure that the transmission entities that are parties to the
interface agreement are listed in the compliance registry and add to it
any interface agreement parties that are subject to NUC-001-1 but that
were not previously identified in the NERC compliance registry
process.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See Order No. 693 at P 92-96 (approving NERC compliance
registry process) and NERC, ``Statement of Compliance Registry
Criteria (Revision 3),'' filed with its Supplemental Information
Filing, Docket No. RM06-16-000 (Feb. 6, 2007) (describing NERC
procedures to identify and register owners, operators and users of
the Bulk-Power System, including organizations performing functions
listed in the definition of transmission entities, generators that
are material to the Reliable Operation of the Bulk-Power System, and
organizations that ``should be subject to the Reliability
Standards'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commission Proposal
25. The Commission proposes to accept the identification and
registration process set forth in the November 19, 2007 Petition to
determine applicability for NUC-001-1. This proposed acceptance comes
with the Commission's understanding that NERC will use its authority
under the compliance registry process to register all users, owners and
operators of the Bulk-Power System that provide transmission or
generating services relating to off-site power supply or delivery.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See NERC November 19, 2007 Petition at 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
26. Certain auxiliary power suppliers and transmission service
providers may serve nuclear power plants through facilities that fall
outside of the current Regional Entity definitions of bulk electric
system that NERC uses to establish the applicability of the Reliability
Standards. For instance, some nuclear power plants may obtain auxiliary
power through lower voltage facilities that are not included in the
Regional Entity's definition of bulk electric system. Other nuclear
power plants may retain alternate sources of auxiliary power provided
through lower voltage facilities operated by a small utility or
cooperative that is not included in a Regional Entity's definition of
bulk electric system. The Commission understands that NERC and the
Regional Entities will register these and other service providers that
provide interconnection and/or auxiliary power facilities vital to
nuclear plant operation through NERC's authority to register an owner
or operator of an otherwise exempt facility that is needed for Bulk-
Power System reliability, on a facility-by-facility basis.\23\ Once
registered, the transmission entity providing such services to a
nuclear generating plant may be subject to other Reliability Standards
applicable to the functional class within the NERC functional model for
which the transmission entity has been registered, as deemed
appropriate through the registration process. With this understanding,
the Commission proposes to accept the scope of the definition of
transmission entities as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See Order No. 693 at P 101; NERC Statement of Compliance
Registry, Revision 3.1 at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
27. In addition, the Commission seeks clarification from the ERO,
and public comment, on several concerns regarding the implementation of
the Reliability Standard and the registration of transmission entities.
28. First, the Commission asks NERC to clarify its statement in the
November 19, 2007 Petition that the registry process will identify on a
plant-by-plant basis the specific transmission entities that provide
services relating to NPIRs. Specifically, does NERC intend, for
entities that are not otherwise registered, to limit registration to
those facilities that provide such services? How does this relate to
the definition of bulk electric system? For example, when identifying
``on a plant-by-plant basis the specific transmission entities required
to identify NPIRs and develop the requisite agreement,'' \24\ would the
``plant'' be identified as a critical facility that is included in the
bulk electric system? \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ November 19, 2007 Petition at 12.
\25\ See Order No. 693 at P 101 (holding generally, in the
context of a specific Reliability Standard that identifies a
threshold, that ``despite the existence of a voltage or demand
threshold for a particular Reliability Standard, the ERO or Regional
Entity should be permitted to include an otherwise exempt facility
on a facility-by-facility basis if it determines that the facility
is needed for Bulk-Power System reliability'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
29. Second, the Commission understands the Nuclear Reliability
Standard is not enforceable against an entity, other than a nuclear
plant generator operator, until it executes an interface agreement.
Upon execution, such an entity becomes a ``transmission entity''
subject to the Nuclear Reliability Standard and other Reliability
Standards as noted above. The Commission requests comment on this
understanding.
30. Third, the Commission has concerns regarding the implementation
of NUC-001-1 in the context of a single entity that both operates a
nuclear plant and is responsible to provide services related to NPIRs,
as may be the case with an integrated utility. In that situation, a
single entity would be both the nuclear plant generator operator and
the transmission entity. The Commission seeks clarification from the
ERO, and public comment, on whether an agreement or arrangement would
be required in a situation where one entity both operates the nuclear
plant and provide services related to NPIRs. If an agreement or
arrangement is required, who would execute it, e.g., different
functional units or divisions within the same entity? Would such an
agreement or arrangement be accessible during a compliance audit? If an
agreement is not required in this situation, will there be reasonable
assurance of adequate coordination between the nuclear plant operator
and other units within the entity that are responsible to provide
services related NPIRs?
3. Agreement on NPIRs
31. Other than Requirement R1, NUC-001-1 utilizes a consensus
approach, in that the NPIRs contained in an interface agreement must be
``mutually agreed to.'' The proposed NERC Glossary term NPIR is
defined, ``The requirements, based on NPLRs [nuclear plant licensing
requirements] and Bulk-Electric System requirements, that have been
mutually agreed to by the nuclear plant generator operator and the
applicable Transmission Entities'' [emphasis added]. This emphasis on
agreement is reflected in Requirement R2, which states that the
interface agreements shall include ``mutually agreed to NPIRs.''
Requirement R2 also provides that the interface agreements shall
document how the interface agreement parties will address and implement
the NPIRs, and states that the resulting interface agreement ``may
include mutually agreed upon procedures or protocols.''
32. According to NERC, the proposed Reliability Standard was
initially drafted such that the nuclear power generator operators might
unilaterally identify or change the NPIRs as then defined without
mutual collaboration and agreement with the transmission entity. NERC
states that this approach could have created limitations on the Bulk-
Power System solely as a result of the NPIR declaration and resultant
obligation of the transmission entity to operate the Bulk-Power System
in accordance with these modified NPIRs. The standard drafting team
responded to these initial comments and created the term ``Nuclear
Plant Licensing Requirements'' for subsequent drafts. The term NPIR was
also modified to reflect the requirements based on Nuclear Plant
Licensing Requirements and Bulk-Power System requirements that have
been mutually agreed to by the nuclear plant generator operator and the
[[Page 16592]]
applicable transmission entity. According to NERC, these changes
ensured that the transmission entities actively participated in the
establishment of NPIRs and mitigated the potential for transmission
limitations caused by unilateral decisions by the nuclear plant
generator operators.\26\ Additionally, in defining NPIRs and
documenting them in the required agreements per Requirement R2, the
transmission entities can safeguard against the acceptance of NPIRs not
expressly tied to licensing requirements that could impose a constraint
to grid operation and limit available transmission capability.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ November 19, 2007 Petition at 27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
33. Also, NERC reports that the drafting team replied to comments
that the proposed Reliability Standard subordinates SOLs and Bulk-Power
System integrity to nuclear licensing requirements by noting that the
NPIRs are to be developed through mutual collaboration. Therefore, the
consensus approach provides parties to an interface agreement with the
obligation and expectation to identify NPIRs and develop responses.
Commission Proposal
34. The Commission proposes to find this consensus approach an
acceptable and appropriate means to resolve concerns with the differing
operational requirements faced by nuclear plant generator operators and
transmission entities, as well as the variety of issues that could
arise among them. However, the Commission seeks clarification of what
compliance options are available under the Reliability Standard when
nuclear plant generator operators and transmission entities fail to
reach agreement.
35. The Commission notes that NPIRs are comprised of two distinct
types of operational limits: (1) Nuclear plant licensing requirements
representing nuclear plant system limits, and (2) SOLs and IROLs
representing transmission system limits. Each of these types of
operational limits is determined through processes outside of NUC-001-
1. Nuclear plant licensing requirements are developed through the NRC
licensing procedures, and SOLs and IROLs are determined in accordance
with methodologies required by the Facilities Design, Connection and
Maintenance Reliability Standards.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Consequently, although the NPIRs are ``mutually agreed
to,'' the Commission understands that the parties to the interface
agreement may not alter by agreement the specific determinations of
the limits contained in the nuclear plant licensing requirements,
SOLs and IROLs that are established elsewhere.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
36. The Commission is concerned with the possibility that nuclear
plant generator operators and transmission entities may fail to come to
agreement while attempting to draft an interface agreement. The
Commission therefore asks NERC to clarify what compliance options are
available when a nuclear plant generator operator and a designated
transmission entity fail to come to agreement over a proposed NPIR or a
suitable approach to resolve any failure to agree.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Requirement R9.1.4 states that an interface agreement must
include a dispute resolution mechanism, which would apply to
disagreements after the agreement is signed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
37. It appears that, prior to executing an interface agreement, no
compliance registry process would be triggered and no agreed-to NPIRs
would exist to support the remaining Requirements of the Reliability
Standard. The Commission seeks clarification from NERC, and public
comment, on a circumstance involving an off-site power supplier or
other potential transmission entity that disagrees with the nuclear
plant generator operator that it should execute an interface agreement.
In such circumstance, how would NERC resolve the impasse? Also, would
NERC proceed to register such an entity (if not previously registered)
without an executed interface agreement?
B. Scope of Agreements
38. Although the Requirements of NUC-001-1 dictate that interface
agreements contain various contractual terms and provide for various
studies and procedures, the Reliability Standard does not describe
specific substantive terms to be included in the agreements. NERC
states that the Nuclear Reliability Standard drafting team adopted this
consensus approach to coordinating nuclear plant and transmission grid
operations to provide a platform for coordination at the interface that
allows both nuclear plant generator operators and transmission entities
to respect their main system drivers. NERC explains that the time and
effort needed to coordinate nuclear and transmission system
requirements in advance and on a generic basis was deemed to be
prohibitive and the results of such an exercise deemed questionable.
Therefore, according to NERC, the Nuclear Reliability Standard drafting
team decided to focus on the interface agreement as the historical
model for coordination. The interface agreement model, by its nature,
places the obligation on nuclear plant generator operators and
transmission entities to coordinate differing operational requirements
by consensus.
1. Generally
39. Based on the existence of workable interface agreements that
are already in place to meet existing nuclear licensing requirements,
the Commission understands that the studies, analysis and plant
requirements are developed in the licensing process, prior to the NRC's
grant of a license or authority for continued operations. Thus, the
required studies and licensing requirements to be addressed are
typically established prior to the development of the interface
agreements. In light of this process, the Commission proposes to find
that the level of detail provided in the proposed Reliability Standard
Requirements to define substantive provisions of the interface
agreements is appropriate. However, the Commission has concerns about
the interpretation of particular Requirements of NUC-001-1 on the
development of the interface agreements, as described below.
2. Revisions to Interface Agreements To Reflect Interim Changes
40. Several of the Requirements direct the parties to interface
agreements to include provisions to address changes to the nuclear
plant or transmission grid characteristics. For example, Requirements
R8 and R9 require nuclear plant generator operators and transmission
entities to incorporate provisions in the interface agreements to
inform one another of actual and proposed changes to their facilities
that may impact their ability to meet the NPIRs. Furthermore, the
Reliability Standard obligates the parties to interface agreements to
incorporate provisions to review and update the agreement ``at least
every three years'' under Requirement R9.1.3 and to address mitigation
actions needed to avoid violating NPIRs under Requirement R9.3.4.
Commission Proposal
41. The Commission is concerned that an interface agreement may not
be updated for significant system changes outside of the three-year
review process. However, the Commission does not at this time expect
revisions to the Reliability Standard to be necessary to address its
concern. The Commission, therefore, proposes to find acceptable the
provisions for revision to interface agreements, but seeks comment on
whether NUC-001-1 adequately provides for revisions to reflect interim
changes.
[[Page 16593]]
42. The Commission notes that the Requirements of NUC-001-1
describe a minimum set of elements that must be included in an
interface agreement. The Commission understands that the NRC requires a
nuclear plant generator operator to have operationally feasible
solutions in place prior to authorizing plant start up or continued
operation following licensing review procedures. As operating solutions
are worked out in advance, the Commission would prefer that the updated
operational procedures be reflected in the interface agreements prior
to being implemented upon plant start up or reauthorization, or shortly
thereafter. The Commission therefore seeks comment whether it is
feasible for the nuclear plant interface agreements to provide for
negotiation and amendments to address emerging transmission and
generating system limits and revised nuclear plant licensing
requirements prior to, or contemporaneously with, implementing
operations solutions. At this time, the Commission anticipates that
such an approach would not require revision to the Reliability Standard
itself, and that such provision could be made to implement the standard
contractual practice requiring negotiation and revision whenever
external circumstances represent a material change to the original
assumptions that forms the basis of the agreement. The Commission views
such a provision as being consistent with Requirement R9.1.3, providing
for review and update of an agreement ``at least every three years,''
and Requirement R9.3.4, providing for review and updates to address
mitigation actions needed to avoid violating NPIRs.
C. Coordination
43. Requirements R7 and R8 require communication between nuclear
plant generator operators and transmission entities regarding
significant changes in design, configuration, operation or limits of
their facilities:
Requirement R7: Per the Agreements developed in accordance with
this standard, the Nuclear Plant Generator Operator shall inform the
applicable Transmission Entities of actual or proposed changes to
nuclear plant design, configuration, operations, limits, protection
systems, or capabilities that may impact the ability of the electric
system to meet the NPIRs.
Requirement R8: Per the Agreements developed in accordance with
this standard, the applicable Transmission Entities shall inform the
Nuclear Plant Generator Operator of actual or proposed changes to
electric system design, configuration, operations, limits,
protection systems, or capabilities that may impact the ability of
the electric system to meet the NPIRs.
44. Furthermore, Requirement R6 obligates interface agreement
parties to coordinate outages and maintenance activities; Requirement
R9.3.6 requires coordination of physical and cyber-security
protections; and Requirement R9.3.7 requires coordination of special
protection systems and load shedding. Thus, these Requirements provide
for communication between a nuclear plant generator operator and its
individual transmission entities, as well as the reverse for
communication from the transmission entities to the nuclear plant
generator operator. However, these Requirements do not explicitly
provide for communication and coordination among the various
transmission entities that is necessary to facilitate the provision of
generation and transmission services to support the nuclear power plant
operations.
Commission Proposal
45. The NUC-001-1 Requirements cited above explicitly provide for
bilateral coordination between the nuclear plant generator operator and
each individual transmission entity. However, the Reliability Standard
does not explicitly require communication and coordination among the
transmission entities necessary to meet the NPIRs. The Commission
understands that the historical practice is for the interface agreement
to provide for all necessary coordination, typically by obligating
control area operators to communicate with neighboring entities,
including Regional Transmission Organization-type grid operators and
other interconnected utilities and load serving entities, when
necessary. The Commission anticipates that, pursuant to the
Requirements of the proposed Reliability Standard, the parties to
nuclear plant interface agreements will continue to provide for
coordination among transmission entities, in order to comply with NUC-
001-1 Requirement R9.3.1 obligations to provide for coordination of
interface facilities. Interface agreement parties may continue to
designate former integrated control area operators when appropriate or
may revise their approach, reflecting changes under restructuring to
grid operations when necessary, consistent with coordination
responsibilities provided for in existing Reliability Standards.
Consistent with this understanding, the Commission proposes to accept
the coordination provisions as requiring all appropriate coordination
among transmission entities.
D. Proposed Terms for Addition to the NERC Glossary
46. In its November 19, 2007 Petition, NERC submitted and requested
approval of additional terms that relate to the Nuclear Reliability
Standard to be added to the NERC Glossary. The NERC Glossary initially
became effective on April 1, 2005 and is updated whenever a new or
revised Reliability Standard is approved that includes a new term or
definition.
Commission Proposal
47. Earlier in this NOPR,\29\ the Commission sought comment on
implications of the phrase ``mutually agreed to'' in the NPIR
definition. The Commission does not propose any revisions to the
Glossary terms at this time, however, it is possible that comments
received in response to this NOPR may raise unforeseen issues. With
this understanding, the Commission proposes to approve the additional
terms for the NERC Glossary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See section II(A)(3), above, discussing ``Agreement on
NPIRs.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Violation Risk Factors
48. As part of its compliance and enforcement program, NERC plans
to assign a lower, medium or high violation risk factor to each
Requirement of each mandatory Reliability Standard to associate a
violation of the Requirement with its potential impact on the
reliability of the Bulk-Power System. Violation risk factors are
defined as follows:
High Risk Requirement: (a) Is a requirement that, if violated,
could directly cause or contribute to Bulk-Power System instability,
separation, or a cascading sequence of failures, or could place the
Bulk-Power System at an unacceptable risk of instability,
separation, or cascading failures; or (b) is a requirement in a
planning time frame that, if violated, could, under emergency,
abnormal, or restorative conditions anticipated by the preparations,
directly cause or contribute to Bulk-Power System instability,
separation, or a cascading sequence of failures, or could place the
Bulk-Power System at an unacceptable risk of instability,
separation, or cascading failures, or could hinder restoration to a
normal condition.
Medium Risk Requirement: (a) Is a requirement that, if violated,
could directly affect the electrical state or the capability of the
Bulk-Power System, or the ability to effectively monitor and control
the Bulk-Power System, but is unlikely to lead to Bulk-Power System
instability, separation, or cascading failures; or (b) is a
requirement in a planning time frame that, if violated, could, under
emergency, abnormal, or restorative conditions anticipated by the
preparations, directly affect the electrical state or capability
[[Page 16594]]
of the Bulk-Power System, or the ability to effectively monitor,
control, or restore the Bulk-Power System, but is unlikely, under
emergency, abnormal, or restoration conditions anticipated by the
preparations, to lead to Bulk-Power System instability, separation,
or cascading failures, nor to hinder restoration to a normal
condition.
Lower Risk Requirement: Is administrative in nature and (a) is a
requirement that, if violated, would not be expected to affect the
electrical state or capability of the Bulk-Power System, or the
ability to effectively monitor and control the Bulk-Power System; or
(b) is a requirement in a planning time frame that, if violated,
would not, under the emergency, abnormal, or restorative conditions
anticipated by the preparations, be expected to affect the
electrical state or capability of the Bulk-Power System, or the
ability to effectively monitor, control, or restore the Bulk-Power
System.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 119 FERC ]
61,145, at P 9 (2007) (Violation Risk Factor Order).
49. In its November 19, 2007 Petition, NERC identifies violation
risk factors for each Requirement of proposed Reliability Standard NUC-
001-1. NERC proposes either a lower or medium violation risk factor for
each Requirement of NUC-001-1.\31\ NERC requests that the Commission
approve the violation risk factors when it takes action on the Nuclear
Reliability Standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ NERC proposes a lower violation risk factor for
Requirements R1, R2, and R9 and a medium violation risk factor for
Requirements R3 through R8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
50. In the Violation Risk Factor Order, the Commission addressed
violation risk factors filed by NERC for Version 0 and Version 1
Reliability Standards. In that order, the Commission used five
guidelines for evaluating the validity of each violation risk factor
assignment: (1) Consistency with the conclusions of the Blackout
Report, (2) consistency within a Reliability Standard, (3) consistency
among Reliability Standards with similar Requirements, (4) consistency
with NERC's proposed definition of the violation risk factor level, and
(5) assignment of violation risk factor levels to those Requirements in
certain Reliability Standards that co-mingle a higher risk reliability
objective and a lower risk reliability objective.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ For a complete discussion of each factor, see the Violation
Risk Factor Order at: P 19-36.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commission Proposal
51. The Commission proposes to direct NERC to raise violation risk
factors for several Requirements, as discussed below. The Commission
generally views a Reliability Standard that ensures safe and reliable
nuclear power plant operation and shutdown as meriting violation risk
factors of medium or high, rather than lower, due to the reliability
benefits of nuclear power and the impact of separating a plant from the
grid. While it is true that many of the Requirements are administrative
in nature, these same Requirements provide for the development of
procedures to ensure the safe and reliable operation of the grid, and
responses to potential emergency conditions. If the Requirements are
not met, the procedures will not be in place to address changing or
emergency conditions or provide for safe operation and shutdown of a
nuclear power plant. In short, the Requirements co-mingle the
administrative tasks with the more critical reliability objective of
ensuring safe nuclear power plant operation and shutdown. The
Commission understands that NERC will apply the violation risk factor
for the main Requirement to any violation of a sub-Requirement, unless
separate violation risk factors are assigned to the Requirement and the
sub-Requirement. The Commission discusses individual Requirements of
NUC-001-1 and proposes changes, below.
a. Requirement R2
52. The Commission proposes to direct NERC to raise the violation
risk factor for Requirement R2 from lower to medium and seeks comment
on this proposal. Requirement R2 places an obligation on a nuclear
plant generator operator and transmission entities that agree to
provide services relating to NPIRs to have an interface agreement in
place to document how nuclear licensing requirements and transmission
system limits will be addressed. Thus, the Requirement co-mingles the
administrative element of having an executed agreement in place with
the operational element of determining how the parties to the interface
agreement will address nuclear plant licensing requirements and SOLs in
order to provide for safe nuclear plant operation and shutdown. The
operational requirements established in the interface agreements
include requirements for off-site power to enable safe operation and
shutdown during an electric system or plant event and requirements for
avoiding nuclear safety issues as a result of changes in electric
system conditions during a disturbance, transient or normal conditions.
Therefore, because a violation of Requirement R2 ``could, under
emergency, abnormal, or restorative conditions anticipated by the
preparations, directly affect the electrical state or capability of the
Bulk-Power System,'' a medium violation risk factor is appropriate for
this Requirement.
b. Requirement R4
53. The Commission proposes to direct NERC to raise the violation
risk factors for sub-Requirements R4.2 and R4.3 to high, and seeks
comment on its proposal. NERC proposes a medium violation risk factor
for sub-Requirement R4.1, R4.2, and R4.3, which state that transmission
entities shall incorporate the NPIRs into operating analyses, operate
to meet the NPIRs and inform the nuclear plant generator operator when
it loses the ability to assess its performance to meet the NPIRs.
54. Requirement R4.2 states that transmission entities shall
operate their electric systems to meet the NPIRs established in the
interface agreements. According to NERC, the NPIRs form the basis under
which nuclear plant generator operators and transmission entities will
``coordinate planning, assessment, analysis, and operation of the bulk
power system to ensure safe nuclear plant operations and shutdowns.''
Therefore, under emergency, abnormal, or restorative conditions a
violation of Requirement R4.2 could directly cause or contribute to
Bulk-Power System instability, separation, or a cascading sequence of
failures, or could place the Bulk-Power System at an unacceptable risk
of instability, separation, or cascading failures.\33\ For these
reasons, the Commission believes that a high violation risk factor is
appropriate for Requirement R4.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ See also the NERC November 19, 2007 Petition at 20: ``The
proposed reliability standard also acknowledges that the obligation
to public safety relative to nuclear plant operation establishes a
unique set of requirements that other generating facilities are not
subjected to. In order to protect the common good, the applicable
transmission entities must respect these unique requirements that
maintain and/or restore offsite power adequate to supply minimum
nuclear safety requirements.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
55. Under Requirement R4.3, when the transmission entities have
lost the ability to monitor the system to ensure that NPIRs are met,
they must inform the nuclear plant generator operators. The Commission
believes that, if a nuclear plant generator operator is unaware of the
fact that a transmission entity can no longer guarantee that NPIRs are
met, the nuclear plant generator operator's ability to respond to, or
anticipate, emergencies and changing system conditions will be
impaired. Such an event could increase the likelihood that the plant is
separated from the transmission system, causing significant degradation
in Bulk-Power System reliability, characterized by instability,
uncontrolled islanding and
[[Page 16595]]
cascading. Therefore, the Commission proposes to direct NERC to raise
the violation risk factor for Requirements R4.2 and R4.3 from medium to
high, and requests comment on this proposal.
c. Requirement R5
56. The Commission proposes to direct NERC to raise the violation
risk factor for Requirement R5 from medium to high, and seeks comment
on its proposal. Requirement R5 states that a nuclear plant generator
operator shall operate its system consistent with the interface
agreement developed under NUC-001-1. Due to the size of nuclear power
plants, the separation of a nuclear power plant from the grid may
significantly affect grid operations. Not all nuclear power plant
service interruptions are initiated by incidents occurring off the
nuclear power plant system. For instance, if a nuclear power plant
breaker opens, separating a turbine from the grid, the resulting lack
of power could cause degraded voltage near the plant. As a result, the
transmission system may be unable to deliver off-site power to the
plant, causing the entire plant to separate from the grid.\34\ Due to
the possibility for a violation of Requirement R5 to directly affect
the reliability of the system, the Commission proposes to direct NERC
to raise the violation risk factor for this Requirement from medium to
high.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ Nuclear power plants are large, typically consisting of two
large turbines on the order of 1,000 MW or more, so disruptions
within the nuclear plant system can have significant reciprocal
impacts on the interconnected system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
d. Requirements R7 and R8
57. The Commission proposes to direct NERC to raise the violation
risk factors for Requirements R7 and R8 from medium to high, and seeks
comment on its proposal. Requirements R7 and R8 state that a nuclear
plant generator operator and its transmission entities must inform each
other of actual or proposed changes to their facilities that affect
their ability to meet NPIRs. The information to be exchanged, such as
``limits'' and ``protection systems,'' is relevant for a transmission
entity to determine its system capability and configuration, which
affect the ability of a plant to remain connected to the Bulk-Power
System. Due to the safety implications of nuclear generation, a
transmission entity must plan and operate to meet a nuclear power
plant's operating requirements, which are more stringent than for other
generators. To permit the necessary planning and system operations, a
nuclear plant generator operator and its applicable transmission
entities must exchange information relating to proposed and actual
system changes. If transmission entities and nuclear plant generator
operators do not provide information concerning system changes to each
other, their planning and operating analyses may not be based on
accurate data. As a result, unanticipated events could result in the
nuclear plant disconnecting from the Bulk-Power System, placing the
Bulk-Power System at risk for cascading outages.
58. The Blackout Report highlighted the importance of coordinated
planning and operations between the Bulk-Power System and nuclear power
plants, stating ``[a]s the design and operation of the electricity grid
is taken into account when evaluating the safety analysis of nuclear
power plants, changes to the electricity grid must be evaluated for the
impact on plant safety.'' \35\ To account for the potential impact on
safety and the integrity of the transmission system, the Commission
proposes to direct NERC to raise the violation risk factors for
Requirements R7 and R8 from medium to high.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ Blackout Report at 129.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
e. Requirement R9
59. The Commission proposes to direct NERC to raise the violation
risk factor for Requirement R9 from lower to medium, and seeks comment
on its proposal. According to NERC, Requirement R9 sets forth the
specific administrative, technical, operations, maintenance,
coordination, communications, and training elements that a nuclear
plant generator operator and its transmission entities must include in
their interface agreement. Thus, similar to Requirement R2, Requirement
R9 co-mingles the administrative element of incorporating the various
elements into the interface agreement with the operational element of
determining how the parties to the interface agreement will address the
administrative, technical, operations, maintenance, coordination,
communications, and training issues in order to provide for safe
nuclear plant operation and shutdown. A violation of Requirement R9 may
mean that the necessary operational or emergency planning elements are
not in place, resulting in an inability to resolve system conditions in
an emergency. Therefore, a violation of Requirement R9 ``could, under
emergency, abnormal, or restorative conditions anticipated by the
preparations, directly affect the electrical state or capability of the
Bulk-Power System.'' Consequently, the Commission proposes to find that
a medium violation risk factor is appropriate for Requirement R9.
Should NERC wish to assign a lower violation risk factor to any of the
purely administrative sub-Requirements of Requirement R9, it may
propose appropriate differentiation in its comments.
F. Violation Severity Levels
60. For each Requirement of a Reliability Standard, NERC states
that it will also define up to four violation severity levels--lower,
moderate, high and severe--as measurements of the degree to which the
Requirement was violated. For a specific violation of a particular
Requirement, NERC or the Regional Entity will establish the initial
value range for the base penalty amount by finding the intersection of
the applicable violation risk factor and violation severity level in
the Base Penalty Amount Table in Appendix A of the Sanction
Guidelines.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ See North American Electric Reliability Corp., 119 FERC ]
61,248, at P 74 (2007) (directing NERC to develop up to four
violation severity levels (lower, moderate, high, and severe) as
measurements of the degree of a violation for each requirement and
sub-requirement of a Reliability Standard and submit a compliance
filing by March 1, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
61. In its November 19, 2007 Petition, NERC proposes violation
severity levels that apply generally to all violations of the
Requirements of NUC-001-1, rather than to specific Requirements and
sub-Requirements. However, NERC submitted proposed violation severity
levels for each Requirement and sub-Requirement of NUC-001-1 that
supersede those from the November 19, 2007 Petition pursuant to its
March 3, 2008 compliance filing in Docket No. RR08-4-000.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ The updated NUC-001-1 violation severity levels are
provided in NERC's March 4, 2008 filing of revised Exhibit A in
Docket No. RR08-4-000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commission Proposal
62. Because NERC has recently filed new Requirement and sub-
Requirement-specific violation severity levels in Docket No. RR08-4-
000, the Commission intends to address all issues relating to NUC-001-1
violation severity levels in that proceeding. In the interim, should
the review process in Docket No. RR08-4-000 not approve revised
violation risk factors before the NUC-001-1 effective date, the
Commission proposes to approve the interim violation severity levels
proposed in this proceeding, until acceptance of the superseding
violation severity levels. The Commission notes that the proposed
violation severity levels for NUC-001-1 resemble the levels of non-
compliance that will also be replaced by NERC's compliance
[[Page 16596]]
filing in Docket No. RR08-4-000 because they describe violation
severity levels for groups of Requirements in the Reliability Standard
rather than on a per-Requirement and sub-Requirement basis. Because
NERC's proposed violation severity levels do not specifically refer to
each Requirement and sub-Requirement in NUC-001-1, the Commission is
concerned that, if the new violation risk factors are not approved by
the time NUC-001-1 takes effect, Regional Entities may have difficulty
using NERC's Base Penalty Amount Table to compute penalties for
violations of all Requirements and sub-Requirements.\38\ While the
Commission believes that the proposed effective date for NUC-001-1
provides ample time to address the violation severity levels filed in
Docket No. RR08-4-000, the Commission proposes to treat the proposed,
undifferentiated violation severity levels for NUC-001-1 consistent
with the treatment adopted for levels of non-compliance, until
Requirement and sub-Requirement-specific violation severity levels are
in place.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ See North American Electric Reliability Corp., 119 FERC ]
61,248 at P 78-80.
\39\ See id. P 79.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Information Collection Statement
63. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) regulations require
approval of certain information collection requirements imposed by
agency rules.\40\ 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 this rule will not be penalized
for failing to respond to these collections of information unless the
collections of information display a valid OMB control number. The
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) \41\ requires each federal agency to seek
and obtain OMB approval before undertaking a collection of information
directed to ten or more persons, or continuing a collection for which
OMB approval and validity of the control number are about to
expire.\42\ The PRA defines the phrase ``collection of information'' to
be the ``obtaining, causing to be obtained, soliciting, or requiring
the disclosure to third parties or the public, of facts or opinions by
or for an agency, regardless of form or format, calling for either--
\40\ 5 CFR 1320.11.
\41\ 44 U.S.C. 3501-20.
\42\ 44 U.S.C. 3502(3)(A)(i), 44 U.S.C. 3507(a)(3).
(i) Answers to identical questions posed to, or identical
reporting or recordkeeping requirements imposed on ten or more
persons, other than agencies, instrumentalities, or employees of the
United States; or (ii) answers to questions posed to agencies,
instrumentalities, or employees of the United States which are to be
used for general statistical purposes.'' \43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ 44 U.S.C. 3502(3)(A).
64. This NOPR proposes to approve the new Reliability Standard
developed by NERC as the ERO. Section 215 of the FPA authorizes the ERO
to develop and enforce Reliability Standards that provide for an
adequate level of reliability 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.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ See 16 U.S.C. 824o(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
65. Proposed Reliability Standard NUC-001-1 does not require
responsible entities to file information with the Commission. Nor, with
the exception of a three year self-certification of compliance, does
the Reliability Standard require responsible entities to file
information with the ERO or Regional Entities. However, the Reliability
Standard does require responsible entities to develop and maintain
certain information for a specified period of time, subject to
inspection by the ERO or Regional Entities.
66. Reliability Standard NUC-001-1 requires nuclear plant generator
operators and entities that provide generation, transmission and
distribution services relating to off-site power (these entities are
defined as ``transmission entities'') to enter into interface
agreements with nuclear plant generator operators that will govern
certain communication, training, operational and planning elements for
use in addressing generation and transmission system limits and nuclear
licensing requirements. The Commission understands that most entities
subject to this Reliability Standard already have such agreements in
place. The responsible entities are also required to retain evidence
that they executed such an agreement and incorporated its terms into
systems planning and operations. Further, each nuclear plant generator
operator and transmission entity must self-certify its compliance to
the compliance monitor once every three years.
67. The Commission is submitting these reporting and recordkeeping
requirements to OMB for its review and approval under section 3507(d)
of the PRA. Comments are solicited on the Commission's need for this
information, whether the information will have practical utility, the
accuracy of provided burden estimates, ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected, and any
suggested methods for minimizing the respondent's burden, including the
use of automated information techniques.
68. Our estimate below regarding the number of respondents is based
on the NERC compliance registry as of April 2007 and NERC's November
19, 2007 Petition that is the subject of this proceeding. In its
Petition, NERC states that 104 nuclear power plants are subject to the
proposed Reliability Standard. These plants are run by approximately 30
different utilities and are located on 65 different sites. Each plant
must contract with transmission entities to obtain off-site power, and
coordinate distribution and transmission services for such power.
69. The proposed Reliability Standard identifies eleven categories
of functional entities that could be a transmission entity when
providing covered services, including transmission operators,
transmission owners, transmission planners, transmission service
providers, balancing authorities, reliability coordinators, planning
authorities, distribution providers, load-serving entities, generator
owners and generator operators. NERC's compliance registry indicates
that there is a significant amount of overlap among the entities that
perform these functions. Therefore, in some instances, a single entity
may be registered under several of these functions. The November 19,
2007 Petition includes NERC drafting team comments which report, ``In
many cases, agreements are not two-party [agreements]--they are often
multi-party agreements involving RTO/ISO Protocols, transmission and
generation owners and others.'' \45\ Therefore, this analysis attempts
to account for the overlap of services to be provided by entities
responsible for the various roles identified in the Reliability
Standard, as well as the fact that certain plants may need to
coordinate with multiple entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ NERC Nuclear Reliability Standard drafting team,
``Consideration of Comments, Draft 2--SAR on Nuclear Plant Offsite
Power Reliability,'' p. 2 of 25 (May 23, 2005), filed in November
19, 2007 Petition, Exhibit B, Record of Development of Proposed
Reliability Standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
70. Under NUC-001-1, the 104 nuclear power plants must coordinate
with off-site power suppliers and related transmission and/or
distribution service providers. The Nuclear Reliability Standard
drafting team reports in its responses to SAR comments, ``Nuclear plant
generators and most nuclear offsite power supplies
[[Page 16597]]
interconnect with the bulk electric system at transmission system
voltage levels. While backup station service for some plants may be
provided via distribution lines, these cases are the exception, not the
rule.'' \46\ Assuming conservatively, that not more than half of the
nuclear power plants call for multi-party coordination and those that
do involve all the types of parties listed by the drafting team, the
Commission estimates that 52 nuclear plants will execute bi-lateral
interface agreements and 52 nuclear plants will execute multi-lateral
interface agreements with approximately four other parties. Thus, the
Commission estimates that the 104 nuclear plants will enter into
agreements with an additional 260 parties to bilateral and multi-party
agreements, providing 364 as the total number of entities required to
comply with the information ``reporting'' or development requirements
of the proposed Reliability Standard. \47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ NERC Nuclear Reliability Standard drafting team,
``Consideration of Comments on 2nd Draft of Nuclear Off-site Power
Supply Standard,'' p. 54 of 60 (Feb. 7, 2007), filed in November 19,
2007 Petition, Exhibit B, Record of Development of Proposed
Reliability Standard.
\47\ Because it is assumed that each plant operator must ensure
that appropriate agreements are in place for each plant, this
analysis assesses the workload by measuring the work for 104 plants,
rather than for the 30 nuclear plant operators.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
71. Burden Estimate: The Public Reporting burden for the
requirements contained in the NOPR is as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Number of
Data collection respondents responses Hours per respondent Total annual hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERC-725F:
Nuclear Plant Owners or 104 1 Reporting: 80........ Reporting: 8,320.
Operators.
.............. .............. Recordkeeping: 40.... Recordkeeping: 4,160.
Investor-Owned Utilities.......... 130 1 Reporting: 80........ Reporting: 10,400.
.............. .............. Recordkeeping: 40.... Recordkeeping: 5,200.
Large Municipals, Cooperatives 130 1 Reporting: 80........ Reporting: 10,400.
and other agencies.
.............. .............. Recordkeeping: 40.... Recordkeeping: 5,200.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total......................... 364 .............. ..................... 43,680.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Hours: (Reporting 29,120 hours + Recordkeeping 14,560 hours)
= 43,680 hours. (FTE=Full Time Equivalent or 2,080 hours).
Total Annual hours for Collection: Reporting + Recordkeeping =
43,680 hours.
Information Collection Costs: The Commission seeks comments on the
costs to comply with these requirements. It has projected the average
annualized cost to be the total annual hours (Reporting) 29,120 times
$120 = $3,494,400.
Recordkeeping = @ $40/hour = $582,400, with labor calculated as
file/record clerk @ $17 an hour + supervisory @ $23 an hour.
Total costs = $4,076,800.
The Commission believes that this estimate may be conservative
because most if not all of the applicable entities currently have
agreements in place to provide for coordination between a nuclear plant
generator operator and its local transmission, distribution and off-
site power suppliers. Furthermore, multiple plants are located on
certain sites, and one entity may operate multiple plants, providing
for potential economies in updating, drafting and executing the
interface agreements.
Title: FERC-725F, Mandatory Reliability Standard for Nuclear Plant
Interface Coordination.
Action: Proposed Collection of Information.
OMB Control No: [To be determined].
Respondents: Business or other for profit, and/or not for profit
institutions.
Frequency of Responses: One time to initially comply with the rule,
and then on occasion as needed to revise or modify. In addition, annual
and three-year self-certification requirements will apply.
Necessity of the Information: The Nuclear Reliability Standard, 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 proposed Reliability Standard would ensure that
system operating limits or SOLs used in the reliability planning and
operation of the Bulk-Power System are coordinated with nuclear
licensing requirements in order to ensure the safe operation and shut
down of nuclear power plants.
Internal review: The Commission has reviewed the requirements
pertaining to the proposed Reliability Standard for the Bulk-Power
System and determined that the proposed requirements are necessary to
meet the statutory provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. These
requirements conform to the Commission's plan for efficient information
collection, communication and management within the energy industry.
The Commission has assured itself, by means of internal review, that
there is specific, objective support for the burden estimates
associated with the information requirements.
72. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting
requirements by contacting: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426 [Attention: Michael Miller,
Office of the Executive Director, Phone: (202) 502-8415, fax: (202)
273-0873, e-mail: michael.miller@ferc.gov]. Comments on the
requirements of the proposed rule may also be sent to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,
Washington, DC 20503 [Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission], e-mail: oira_submission@omb.eop.gov.
[[Page 16598]]
IV. Environmental Analysis
73. 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.\48\ The
Commission has categorically excluded certain actions from this
requirement as not having a significant effect on the human
environment. The actions proposed here fall within the categorical
exclusion in the Commission's regulations for rules that are
clarifying, corrective or procedural, for information gathering,
analysis, and dissemination.\49\ Accordingly, neither an environmental
impact statement nor environmental assessment is required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ Order No. 486, Regulations Implementing the National
Environmental Policy Act, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. &
Regs. ] 30,783 (1987).
\49\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
74. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \50\ generally
requires a description and analysis of final rules that will have
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Most of the entities, i.e., planning authorities, reliability
coordinators, transmission planners and transmission operators, to
which the requirements of this rule would apply do not fall within the
definition of small entities.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ 5 U.S.C. 601-12.
\51\ The RFA definition of ``small entity'' refers to the
definition provided in the Small Business Act, 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 (2000). According to the SBA, a small electric utility
is defined as one that has a total electric output of less than four
million MWh in the preceding year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
75. As indicated above, based on available information regarding
NERC's compliance registry, approximately 364 entities, including
owners and operators of 104 nuclear power plants, will be responsible
for compliance with the new Reliability Standard. It is estimated that
one-third of the responsible entities, about 130 entities, would be
municipal and cooperative organizations. In addition to generator
owners and operators and distribution service providers, the proposed
Reliability Standard would apply to planning authorities, transmission
planners, transmission operators and reliability coordinators, which
tend to be larger entities. Thus, the Commission believes that only a
portion, approximately 30 to 40 of the municipal and cooperative
organizations to which the proposed Reliability Standard would apply,
qualify as small entities.\52\ The Commission does not consider this a
substantial number of all municipal and cooperative organizations.
Moreover, as discussed above, the proposed Reliability Standard will
not be a burden on the industry since most if not all of the applicable
entities currently coordinate operations and planning with nuclear
plant generator operators and the proposed Reliability Standard will
simply provide a common framework for agreements governing such
coordination and many of the entities already have agreements in place
to meet prior NRC requirements. Accordingly, the Commission certifies
that the proposed Reliability Standard will not have a significant
adverse impact on a substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ According to the DOE's Energy Information Administration
(EIA), there were 3,284 electric utility companies in the United
States in 2005, and 3,029 of these electric utilities qualify as
small entities under the SBA definition. Among these 3,284 electric
utility companies are: (1) 883 cooperatives of which 852 are small
entity cooperatives; (2) 1,862 municipal utilities, of which 1842
are small entity municipal utilities; (3) 127 political
subdivisions, of which 114 are small entity political subdivisions;
and (4) 219 privately owned utilities, of which 104 could be
considered small entity private utilities. See Energy Information
Administration Database, Form EIA-861, Dept. of Energy (2005),
available at http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/
eia861.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
76. Based on this understanding, the Commission certifies that this
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Accordingly, no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required.
VI. Comment Procedures
77. The Commission invites interested persons to submit comments on
the matters and issues proposed in this notice to be adopted, including
any related matters or alternative proposals that commenters may wish
to discuss. Comments are due April 28, 2008. Comments must refer to
Docket No. RM08-3-000, and must include the commenter's name, the
organization they represent, if applicable, and their address in their
comments.
78. The Commission encourages comments to be filed electronically
via the eFiling link on the Commission's Web site at: http://
www.ferc.gov. The Commission accepts most standard word processing
formats. Documents created electronically using word processing
software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format
and not in a scanned format. Commenters filing electronically do not
need to make a paper filing.
79. Commenters that are not able to file comments electronically
must send an original and 14 copies of their comments to: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
80. 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
81. 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.
82. 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.
83. 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 (866) 208-3676) or email at:
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY (202) 502-8659. E-mail the Public Reference Room at:
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 40
Electric power, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
By direction of the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
[[Page 16599]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28MR08.000
[[Page 16600]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28MR08.001
[[Page 16601]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28MR08.002
[[Page 16602]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28MR08.003
[[Page 16603]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28MR08.004
[[Page 16604]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR28MR08.005
[FR Doc. E8-6320 Filed 3-27-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-C