RM16-13 Fed Reg

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 28, 2016 / Proposed Rules
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
For the reasons discussed above, I
certify this proposed regulation:
(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ under Executive Order 12866,
(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under
the DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26,
1979),
(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation
in Alaska, and
(4) Will not have a significant
economic impact, positive or negative,
on a substantial number of small entities
under the criteria of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation
safety, Incorporation by reference,
Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, under the authority
delegated to me by the Administrator,
the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part
39 as follows:
PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS
DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39
continues to read as follows:

■

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.
§ 39.13

[Amended]

2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new airworthiness
directive (AD):

■

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA–
2016–9116; Directorate Identifier 2016–
NM–068–AD.
(a) Comments Due Date
We must receive comments by November
14, 2016.
(b) Affected ADs
None.

sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS

(c) Applicability
This AD applies to The Boeing Company
Model 767–200, –300, and –400ER series
airplanes, certificated in any category, as
identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin
767–53A0264, Revision 1, dated April 25,
2016.
(d) Subject
Air Transport Association (ATA) of
America Code 53, Fuselage.
(e) Unsafe Condition
This AD was prompted by an evaluation by
the design approval holder (DAH) indicating
that the fuselage skin lap splices are subject
to widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are
issuing this AD to detect and correct cracks
at the fuselage skin lap splice, which can
rapidly link up, possibly resulting in rapid

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:27 Sep 27, 2016

Jkt 238001

decompression and loss of structural
integrity of the airplane.
(f) Compliance
Comply with this AD within the
compliance times specified, unless already
done.
(g) Repetitive Inspections and Corrective
Actions
Except as specified by paragraph (h) of this
AD, at the applicable times specified in
paragraph 1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing
Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0264,
Revision 1, dated April 25, 2016: Do external
surface high frequency eddy current (HFEC),
internal surface HFEC, and external surface
low frequency eddy current (LFEC)
inspections, as applicable, to detect cracks in
the fuselage skin lap splices, in accordance
with the Accomplishment Instructions of
Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–53A0264,
Revision 1, dated April 25, 2016. If any crack
is found during any inspection required by
this AD, before further flight, repair in
accordance with Part 8 of the
Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 767–53A0264, Revision 1,
dated April 25, 2016. Repeat the inspections
thereafter at the times specified in paragraph
1.E., ‘‘Compliance,’’ of Boeing Alert Service
Bulletin 767–53A0264, Revision 1, dated
April 25, 2016, as applicable.
(h) Service Information Exception
Where Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767–
53A0264, Revision 1, dated April 25, 2016,
specifies a compliance time ‘‘after the
original issue date of this service bulletin,’’
this AD requires compliance within the
specified compliance time after the effective
date of this AD.
(i) Credit for Previous Actions
This paragraph provides credit for the
actions required by paragraph (g) of this AD,
if those actions were performed before the
effective date of this AD using Boeing Alert
Service Bulletin 767–53A0264, dated May
12, 2015.
(j) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs)
(1) The Manager, Seattle Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the
authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if
requested using the procedures found in 14
CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19,
send your request to your principal inspector
or local Flight Standards District Office, as
appropriate. If sending information directly
to the manager of the ACO, send it to the
attention of the person identified in
paragraph (k)(1) of this AD. Information may
be emailed to: [email protected].
(2) Before using any approved AMOC,
notify your appropriate principal inspector,
or lacking a principal inspector, the manager
of the local flight standards district office/
certificate holding district office.
(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable
level of safety may be used for any repair,
modification, or alteration required by this
AD if it is approved by the Boeing
Commercial Airplanes Organization
Designation Authorization (ODA) that has

PO 00000

Frm 00011

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

66555

been authorized by the Manager, Seattle
ACO, to make those findings. To be
approved, the repair method, modification
deviation, or alteration deviation must meet
the certification basis of the airplane, and the
approval must specifically refer to this AD.
(4) For service information that contains
steps that are labeled as Required for
Compliance (RC), the provisions of
paragraphs (j)(4)(i) and (j)(4)(ii) of this AD
apply.
(i) The steps labeled as RC, including
substeps under an RC step and any figures
identified in an RC step, must be done to
comply with the AD. An AMOC is required
for any deviations to RC steps, including
substeps and identified figures.
(ii) Steps not labeled as RC may be
deviated from using accepted methods in
accordance with the operator’s maintenance
or inspection program without obtaining
approval of an AMOC, provided the RC steps,
including substeps and identified figures, can
still be done as specified, and the airplane
can be put back in an airworthy condition.
(k) Related Information
(1) For more information about this AD,
contact Wayne Lockett, Aerospace Engineer,
Airframe Branch, ANM–120S, FAA, Seattle
ACO, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA
98057–3356; phone: 425–917–6447; fax: 425–
917–6590; email: [email protected].
(2) For service information identified in
this AD, contact Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services
Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65,
Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone: 206–
544–5000, extension 1; fax: 206–766–5680;
Internet: https://www.myboeingfleet.com.
You may view this referenced service
information at the FAA, Transport Airplane
Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton,
WA. For information on the availability of
this material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on
September 16, 2016.
Suzanne Masterson,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–23082 Filed 9–27–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
18 CFR Part 40
[Docket No. RM16–13–000]

Balancing Authority Control,
Inadvertent Interchange, and Facility
Interconnection Reliability Standards
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:

The Commission proposes to
approve Reliability Standards BAL–
005–1 (Balancing Authority Control)

SUMMARY:

E:\FR\FM\28SEP1.SGM

28SEP1

sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS

66556

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 28, 2016 / Proposed Rules

and FAC–001–3 (Facility
Interconnection Requirements)
submitted by the North American
Electric Reliability Corporation.
DATES: Comments are due November 28,
2016.
ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by
docket number, may be filed in the
following ways:
• Electronic Filing through http://
www.ferc.gov. Documents created
electronically using word processing
software should be filed in native
applications or print-to-PDF format and
not in a scanned format.
• Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable
to file electronically may mail or handdeliver comments to: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the
Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
Instructions: For detailed instructions
on submitting comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process,
see the Comment Procedures Section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Syed Ahmad (Technical Information),
Office of Electric Reliability, Division of
Reliability Standards, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street
NE., Washington, DC 20426, Telephone:
(202) 502–8718, [email protected].
Julie Greenisen (Legal Information),
Office of the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426,
Telephone: (202) 502–6362,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Under section 215 of the Federal
Power Act (FPA),1 the Commission
proposes to approve Reliability
Standards BAL–005–1 (Balancing
Authority Control) and FAC–001–3
(Facility Interconnection Requirements),
submitted by the North American
Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC),
and to retire Reliability Standards BAL–
005–0.2b (Automatic Generation
Control), FAC–001–2 (Facility
Interconnection Requirements), and
BAL–006–2 (Inadvertent Interchange).
The Commission also proposes to
approve the associated implementation
plans, violation risk factors, and
violation severity levels for Reliability
Standards BAL–005–1 and FAC–001–3.
Finally, the Commission proposes to
approve three revised definitions for the
glossary of terms used in NERC
Reliability Standards (NERC Glossary).
2. Proposed Reliability Standards
BAL–005–1 and FAC–001–3 will
enhance the reliability of the BulkPower System, as compared to
1 16

U.S.C. 824(o).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:27 Sep 27, 2016

Jkt 238001

currently-effective Reliability Standards
BAL–005–0.2b and FAC–001–2, by
clarifying and consolidating existing
requirements related to frequency
control. The proposed Reliability
Standards support more accurate and
comprehensive calculation of Reporting
Area Control Error (ACE) by requiring
timely reporting of an inability to
calculate Reporting ACE and by
requiring balancing authorities to
maintain minimum levels of annual
availability of 99.5% for each balancing
authority’s system for calculating
Reporting ACE.2
3. As discussed below, we have
questions regarding the proposed
retirement of Requirement R15 of
Reliability Standard BAL–005–0.2b,
which requires responsible entities to
maintain and periodically test backup
power supplies at primary control
centers and other critical locations.
Depending on the explanation received
in comments, the Commission may
issue a directive in the final rule to
restore the substance of Requirement
R15 in the Reliability Standards.
Separately, we propose to approve
NERC’s request to retire Reliability
Standard BAL–006–2 upon the latter of
the effective date of proposed Reliability
Standard BAL–005–1 and the NERC
Operating Committee’s approval of an
Inadvertent Interchange Guideline
document.
I. Background
A. Mandatory Reliability Standards and
Order No. 693 Directive
4. Section 215 of the FPA requires a
Commission-certified Electric
Reliability Organization (ERO) to
develop mandatory and enforceable
Reliability Standards that are subject to
Commission review and approval.
Specifically, the Commission may
approve, by rule or order, a proposed
Reliability Standard or modification to a
Reliability Standard if it determines that
the Standard is just, reasonable, not
unduly discriminatory or preferential
and in the public interest.3 Once
approved, the Reliability Standards may
be enforced by NERC, subject to
Commission oversight, or by the
Commission independently.4
2 NERC states that Reporting ACE ‘‘represents a
Balancing Authority Area’s [] Area Control Error []
measured in megawatts [] as the difference between
the [Balancing Authority Area’s] Actual and
Scheduled Net Interchange, plus its Frequency Bias
Setting obligation and meter error corrections.
Reporting ACE helps Responsible Entities provide
reliable frequency control by indicating the current
state of the entity’s contribution to Reliability.’’
NERC Petition at 3.
3 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2).
4 Id. 824o(e).

PO 00000

Frm 00012

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

5. Pursuant to section 215 of the FPA,
the Commission established a process to
select and certify an ERO,5 and
subsequently certified NERC as the
ERO.6 On March 16, 2007, the
Commission issued Order No. 693,
approving 83 of the 107 Reliability
Standards filed by NERC, including
Reliability Standards BAL–005–0
(Automatic Generation Control), FAC–
001–0 (Facility Interconnection
Requirements), and BAL–006–1
(Inadvertent Interchange).7 However, in
approving Reliability Standards BAL–
005–0 and BAL–006–1, the Commission
directed NERC to develop modifications
to those Reliability Standards through
the standards development process.
6. With respect to Reliability Standard
BAL–005–0, the Commission directed
NERC to develop a modification that:
(1) Develops a process to calculate the
minimum regulating reserve a balancing
authority must have at any given time taking
into account expected load and generation
variation and transactions being ramped into
or out of the balancing authority; (2) changes
the title of the Reliability Standard to be
neutral as to the source of regulating reserves
and to allow the inclusion of technically
qualified DSM and direct control load
management; (3) clarifies Requirement R5 of
this Reliability Standard to specify the
required type of transmission or backup
plans when receiving regulation from outside
the balancing authority when using non-firm
service; and (4) includes Levels of NonCompliance and a Measure that provides for
a verification process over the minimum
required automatic generation control or
regulating reserves a balancing authority
must maintain.8

Since then, the Commission has
approved one interpretation of
Reliability Standard BAL–005–0 and
accepted two errata filings.9 The
currently-effective version of the
Reliability Standard is BAL–005–0.2b.
5 Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric
Reliability Organization; and Procedures for the
Establishment, Approval, and Enforcement of
Electric Reliability Standards, Order No. 672, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,204, order on reh’g, Order No.
672–A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,212 (2006).
6 North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116
FERC ¶ 61,062, order on reh’g and compliance, 117
FERC ¶ 61,126 (2006), aff’d sub nom. Alcoa, Inc. v.
FERC, 564 F.3d 1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
7 Mandatory Reliability Standards for the BulkPower System, Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs.
¶ 31,242 at PP 420, 439, and 680, order on reh’g,
Order No. 693–A, 120 FERC ¶ 61,053 (2007).
8 Id. P 420.
9 See Modification of Interchange and
Transmission Loading Relief Reliability Standards;
and Electric Reliability Organization Interpretation
of Specific Requirements of Four Reliability
Standards, Order No. 713, 124 FERC ¶ 61,071
(2008); North American Electric Reliability Corp.,
Docket No. RD09–2–000 (May 13, 2009) (delegated
letter order); North American Electric Reliability
Corp., Docket No. RD12–4–000 (Sept. 13, 2012)
(delegated letter order).

E:\FR\FM\28SEP1.SGM

28SEP1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 28, 2016 / Proposed Rules
7. With respect to Reliability Standard
BAL–006–1, the Commission directed
NERC to develop a modification ‘‘that
adds Measures concerning the
accumulation of large inadvertent
imbalances and Levels of NonCompliance.’’ 10 The Commission
explained the need for such a
modification as follows:
While we agree that inadvertent
imbalances do not normally affect the realtime operations of the Bulk-Power System
and pose no immediate threat to reliability,
we are concerned that large imbalances
represent dependence by some balancing
authorities on their neighbors and are an
indication of less than desirable balancing of
generation with load. The Commission also
notes that the stated purpose of this
Reliability Standard is to define a process for
monitoring balancing authorities to ensure
that, over the long term, balancing authorities
do not excessively depend on other balancing
authorities in the Interconnection for meeting
their demand or interchange obligations.11

sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS

Since then, the Commission has
approved one revision to Reliability
Standard BAL–006–1 to remove the
regional waiver of certain requirements
for the Midwest ISO, following the
Midwest ISO’s transition to a single
balancing authority model.12 The
currently-effective version of the
Reliability Standard is BAL–006–2.
B. NERC Petition
8. On April 20, 2016, NERC filed a
petition seeking approval of proposed
Reliability Standards BAL–005–1
(Balancing Authority Control) and FAC–
001–3 (Facility Interconnection
Requirements), nine new or revised
definitions associated with the proposed
Reliability Standards, and retirement of
currently-effective Reliability Standards
BAL–005–0.2b (Automatic Generation
Control), FAC–001–2 (Facility
Interconnection Requirements), and
BAL–006–2 (Inadvertent Interchange).
9. NERC requests that the two revised
Reliability Standards and the revised
definitions of Automatic Generation
Control, Pseudo-Tie, and Balancing
Authority become effective on the first
day of the first calendar quarter twelve
months from the effective date of the
applicable governmental authority’s
approval of NERC’s petition. NERC also
requests that the retirement of
Reliability Standard BAL–006–2 become
effective upon the latter of the effective
date of proposed Reliability Standard
BAL–005–1 and the NERC Operating
Committee’s approval of the Inadvertent
10 Order No. 693, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,242 at
P 428.
11 Id.
12 See North American Electric Reliability Corp.,
134 FERC ¶ 61,007 (2011).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:27 Sep 27, 2016

Jkt 238001

Interchange Guideline document. For
the six remaining definitions (Reporting
ACE and its component definitions—
Actual Frequency, Actual Net
Interchange, Scheduled Net Interchange,
Interchange Meter Error, and Automatic
Time Error Correction), NERC requests
an effective date of July 1, 2016, to
coincide with the effective date for
BAL–001–2.
10. NERC subsequently withdrew its
request for approval of the six Reporting
ACE-related definitions from the instant
docket, and filed for expedited approval
of the six definitions in a separate
docket. The six definitions were
approved by delegated letter order on
June 23, 2016, and are no longer at issue
in the instant proceeding.13
11. NERC explains in its petition that
proposed Reliability Standards BAL–
005–1 and FAC–001–3 and the
proposed retirement of Reliability
Standard BAL–006–2 came about as part
of the second phase of NERC’s project
to ‘‘clarify, consolidate, streamline, and
enhance the Reliability Standards
addressing frequency control.’’ 14 NERC
indicates in its petition that the
standard drafting team developed the
proposed revisions after reviewing
applicable Commission directives,
‘‘Paragraph 81’’ criteria, and the
recommendations of the periodic review
team that examined Reliability
Standards BAL–005–0.2b and BAL–
006–2.15
12. NERC describes the revisions to
Reliability Standard BAL–005–0.2b as
clarifying and refining the current
requirements ‘‘for accurate, consistent,
and complete’’ Reporting ACE, which is
a key frequency control and reliability
indicator.16 These revisions include
relocating some of the current
requirements of Reliability Standard
BAL–005–0.2b, which relate to
confirming that facilities are within a
balancing authority’s metered boundary,
into the proposed Facility
Interconnection Requirements
Reliability Standard, FAC–001–3. In
addition, NERC proposes to relocate
13 North American Electric Reliability Corp.,
Docket No. RD16–7–000 (June 23, 2016) (delegated
letter order).
14 NERC Petition at 2 (referencing Project 2010–
14.2.1 Phase 2 of Balancing Authority Reliabilitybased Controls).
15 Id. at 3 (citing North American Elec. Reliability
Corp., 138 FERC ¶ 61,193 at P 81, order on reh’g
and clarification, 139 FERC ¶ 61,168 (2012);
Petition of the North American Electric Reliability
Corporation for Approval of Retirement of
Requirements in Reliability Standards, Docket No.
RM13–8–000, at Exhibit A (‘‘Paragraph 81 Criteria’’)
(filed Feb. 28, 2013); Electric Reliability
Organization Proposed to Retire Requirements in
Reliability Standards, Order No. 788, 145 FERC
¶ 61,147 (2013)).
16 Id.

PO 00000

Frm 00013

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

66557

Requirement R3 of currently-effective
Reliability Standard BAL–006–2 into
proposed Reliability Standard BAL–
005–1, explaining that the requirement
relates to ensuring that balancing
authorities use consistent data sources
to calculate Reporting ACE, and
therefore more properly belongs in
Reliability Standard BAL–005.
13. NERC explains that the proposed
Reliability Standards ‘‘represent
substantial improvements over existing
Reliability Standards by helping to
support more accurate and
comprehensive calculation of Reporting
ACE and satisfying all remaining
Commission directives for Reliability
Standards BAL–005 and BAL–006.’’ 17
Further, NERC maintains that proposed
Reliability Standard BAL–005–1 is an
improvement over the currentlyeffective version, BAL–005–0.2b,
because it ‘‘consolidates unnecessary or
repetitive Requirements and moves
certain metrics for calculating Reporting
ACE to the revised, proposed definition
of Reporting ACE.’’ 18 Among other
things, NERC proposes to move
requirements applicable to generator
operators and transmission operators in
currently-effective Reliability Standard
BAL–005–0.2b, into a more appropriate
standard, explaining that ‘‘[a]s the
purpose of FAC–001–3 is more
commensurate with interconnection
responsibilities, interconnection
procedures contained in currently
effective BAL–005–0.2b should be
included in proposed Reliability
Standard FAC–001–3.’’ 19
14. In addition, NERC asserts that
proposed Reliability Standard BAL–
005–1 improves on the currentlyeffective version of the Reliability
Standard because proposed
Requirement R2 clarifies the
performance expectations for
notification to reliability coordinators
when a balancing authority is unable to
calculate Reporting ACE for 30 minutes
or more,20 and Requirement R5
‘‘introduces a new obligation . . . to
assure the availability of a BA’s system
used to calculate Reporting ACE,’’
requiring a minimum availability of
99.5% in each calendar year.21
15. NERC states that the proposed
package of revisions reflected in its
petition address the outstanding
directives related to Reliability
Standards BAL–005 and BAL–006 from
Order No. 693. Specifically, NERC states
that the title of Reliability Standard
17 Id.

at 12.
at 13.
19 Id. at 23.
20 Id. at 16.
21 Id. at 19.
18 Id.

E:\FR\FM\28SEP1.SGM

28SEP1

66558

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 28, 2016 / Proposed Rules

sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS

BAL–005–1 has been modified from
Automatic Generation Control to
Balancing Authority Control ‘‘to reflect
the connection to Reporting ACE and
resource-neutral requirements.’’ 22 In
addition, NERC indicates that it has
revised the definition of Automatic
Generation Control to ensure a resourceneutral process for controlling demand
and resources.23
16. NERC states that the requirements
of proposed Reliability Standard BAL–
005–1 all have a ‘‘medium’’ violation
risk factor, thereby addressing the
Commission’s directive to revise the
violation risk factor for Reliability
Standard BAL–005–0, Requirement R17
to ‘‘medium.’’ 24 Similarly, NERC asserts
that it has met the directive to consider
Xcel and FirstEnergy’s comments about
the scope of Requirement R17, which
set minimum accuracy requirements for
time error and frequency devices, by
retiring part of the currently-effective
requirement and moving the minimum
accuracy requirements into Requirement
R3 of Reliability Standard BAL–005–1.
NERC maintains that this has
‘‘streamlined obligations to use specific
frequency metering equipment that is
necessary for operation of [automatic
generation control (AGC)] and accurate
calculation of Reporting ACE, as this
ensures that costs associated with
implementation are commensurate with
reliability benefit.’’ 25
17. NERC proposes to move
Requirement R3 from currently-effective
Reliability BAL–006–2 into proposed
Reliability Standard BAL–005–1, but
proposes to retire the rest of the
requirements of Reliability Standard
BAL–006–2 (Requirements R1, R2, R4,
and R5). NERC states that the standard
drafting team determined that, aside
from Requirement R3, each of the
requirements in Reliability Standard
BAL–006–2 are ‘‘energy accounting
standards’’ and/or are ‘‘administrative’’
in nature, and should accordingly be
retired.26
18. While NERC acknowledges that
the Commission previously directed it
to develop measures concerning the
accumulation of large inadvertent
imbalances, based on the Commission’s
concern that large imbalances may
indicate an underlying problem, NERC
22 Id. at 13 (referencing Order No. 693, FERC
Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,242 at P 404, and noting that
the Commission’s directive related to resourceneutrality for regulating reserves is now moot, as
Requirement R2 of Reliability Standard BAL–005–
0.2b, which required entities to maintain regulating
reserves, has been retired).
23 Id. at n.39.
24 Id. at 17; see also North American Elec.
Reliability Corp., 121 FERC P 61,179 at P 58 (2007).
25 Id. at 18.
26 Id. at 25–26.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:27 Sep 27, 2016

Jkt 238001

explains that the requirements of
Reliability Standard BAL–001–2, which
require balancing authorities to
maintain clock-minute ACE within the
Balancing Authority ACE Limit, as well
as the requirements of Reliability
Standard BAL–003–1 and proposed
Reliability Standard BAL–002–2, which
require entities to restore Reporting ACE
within predefined bounds, prevent any
excessive dependency on other entities.
As NERC explains in its petition:
Because entities are supporting frequency
through this coordinated suite of reliability
standards, entities will not excessively
depend on other entities in the
Interconnection such that the purely
economic issue that was addressed by BAL–
006–2 becomes a reliability issue for a NERC
Reliability Standard.27

19. In order to address ‘‘any
remaining or potential concerns with
retirement of BAL–006–2,’’ NERC
proposes that the retirement become
effective only upon the Operating
Committee’s approval of an Inadvertent
Interchange Guideline document.28
NERC states that the Inadvertent
Interchange Guideline document was
based on a white paper developed by
the standard drafting team for
Reliability Standards BAL–005 and
BAL–006, and maintains that it provides
an in-depth justification for why a
NERC Reliability Standard is not
necessary for inadvertent interchange.
20. With respect to the three proposed
definitions that remain at issue in this
proceeding, NERC explains that (1)
‘‘Automatic Generation Control’’ has
been revised to set forth a resourceneutral process for controlling demand
and resources; (2) ‘‘Pseudo-Tie’’ has
been updated to reflect the use of the
term ‘‘Reporting ACE’’; and (3)
‘‘Balancing Authority’’ has been revised
to more accurately describe a balancing
authority’s resource demand function.
C. NERC Supplemental Filing
21. On June 14, 2016, NERC
submitted supplemental information in
support of its April 20, 2016 petition
(Supplemental Filing), to provide
additional explanation and support for
the retirement of Requirement R15 in
currently-effective Reliability Standard
BAL–005–0.2b.29 In its Supplemental
27 Id.

at 27.
Inadvertent Interchange Guideline
document is expected to be presented to the NERC
Operating Committee in mid-September 2016, and
will be posted for a 45-day comment period.
29 As NERC notes in its Supplemental Filing,
NERC stated in its initial petition that
‘‘Requirements R2, R7 and R15 . . . are redundant,
ineffective, and should be retired based on
Commission-approved Paragraph 81 Criteria.’’
NERC Supplemental Filing at 1 (quoting April 20
Petition at 15).
28 The

PO 00000

Frm 00014

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

Filing, NERC maintains that
Requirement R15 should be retired
because the objectives of that
requirement (i.e., to ensure the
continued operation of AGC and certain
data recording equipment during the
loss of normal power supply) are being
addressed through other Reliability
Standards and requirements.
Specifically, NERC maintains that
Reliability Standard EOP–008–1
requires a balancing authority to have a
backup control center facility and an
operating plan that allows it to meet its
functional obligations with regard to the
reliable operation of the bulk electric
system in the event that its primary
control center functionality is lost.30
22. In addition, NERC maintains that
the proposed performance requirements
of Requirement R3 of Reliability BAL–
005–1, which would require balancing
authorities to ‘‘use frequency metering
equipment for the calculation of
Reporting ACE that is available a
minimum of 99.95% of each calendar
year,’’ will help to ensure that balancing
authorities can continuously operate the
equipment necessary for the calculation
of Reporting ACE, effectively
eliminating the need for Requirement
R15.31
II. Discussion
23. Pursuant to FPA section 215(d)(2),
we propose to approve Reliability
Standards BAL–005–1 and FAC–001–3
as just, reasonable, not unduly
discriminatory or preferential, and in
the public interest. Proposed Reliability
Standard BAL–005–1 and FAC–001–3
will enhance reliability as compared to
currently-effective Reliability Standards
BAL–005–0.2b and FAC–001–2, because
the proposed Reliability Standards
clarify and consolidate existing
requirements related to frequency
control. In addition, proposed
Reliability Standard BAL–005–1
supports more accurate and
comprehensive calculation of Reporting
ACE by requiring timely reporting of an
inability to calculate Reporting ACE
(Requirement R2) and by requiring
minimum levels of availability and
accuracy for each balancing authority’s
system for calculating Reporting ACE
(Requirement R5).
24. We also propose to approve the
violation risk factors and violation
severity levels associated with
Reliability Standards BAL–005–1 and
FAC–001–3; the proposed revisions to
the definitions of Automatic Generation
Control, Pseudo-Tie, and Balancing
Authority; the proposed retirement of
30 NERC
31 Id.

E:\FR\FM\28SEP1.SGM

Supplemental Filing at 2.
at 4.

28SEP1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 28, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Reliability Standards BAL–005–0.2b,
FAC–001–2, and BAL–006–2 in
accordance with NERC’s
implementation plan; and NERC’s
implementation plans for proposed
Reliability Standards BAL–005–1 and
FAC–001–3.
25. As discussed below, the
Commission seeks comment from NERC
and other interested entities regarding
the retirement of Requirement R15 of
Reliability Standard BAL–005–0.2b,
which requires responsible entities to
maintain and periodically test backup
power supplies at primary control
centers and other critical locations.
Depending on the explanation received
in the comments, the Commission may
issue a directive in the final rule
requiring NERC to restore this
requirement through the standards
development process.
A. Retirement of Reliability Standard
BAL–005–0.2b, Requirement R15
26. Proposed Reliability Standard
BAL–005–1 would eliminate currentlyeffective Requirement R15 from the
standard, which states as follows:

sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS

The Balancing Authority shall provide
adequate and reliable backup power supplies
and shall periodically test these supplies at
the Balancing Authority’s control center and
other critical locations to ensure continuous
operation of AGC and vital data recording
equipment during loss of the normal power
supply.

27. NERC contends that Requirement
R15 should be retired because it is
‘‘redundant’’ and ‘‘ineffective,’’ and
points to a number of other Reliability
Standards and requirements that, NERC
maintains, achieve the same objective as
Requirement R15. Specifically, NERC
explains that requirements in Reliability
Standard EOP–008–1 (Loss of Control
Center Functionality) and the
performance requirements of
Requirement R3 in proposed Reliability
Standard BAL–005–1 address the same
objectives as existing Requirement R15
(i.e., to ensure the continued operations
of AGC and certain data recording
equipment during the loss of normal
power supply).32
28. NERC contends that Reliability
Standard EOP–008–1 requires a
balancing authority to have a backup
control center facility and an operating
plan that allows it to meet its functional
obligations with regard to the reliable
operation of the bulk electric system in
the event that its primary control center
functionality is lost. NERC asserts that
these requirements effectively address
the same reliability objective as
Reliability Standard BAL–005–0.2b

Requirement R15 because a balancing
authority’s ‘‘functional obligations
regarding reliable operations’’ 33 include
the continuous operation of AGC and
the data recording equipment necessary
to balance generation and load. Further,
NERC contends that Requirement R7 of
Reliability Standard EOP–008–1
requires balancing authorities to test
their operating plans annually to
demonstrate the viability of their
backup functionality.
29. NERC maintains that the proposed
performance requirements in
Requirement R3 of Reliability Standard
BAL–005–1, which require balancing
authorities to ‘‘use frequency metering
equipment for the calculation of
Reporting ACE that is available a
minimum of 99.95% of each calendar
year,’’ will help ensure that balancing
authorities can continuously operate the
equipment necessary for the calculation
of Reporting ACE. NERC notes that if a
balancing authority ‘‘fails[s] to have
adequate and reliable backup power
supplies at its control center to ensure
continuous operation of its AGC and
vital data recording equipment, the
Balancing Authority risks violation of
the performance obligation in proposed
Reliability Standard BAL–005–1,
Requirement R3 if its normal power
supply is lost.’’ 34
Commission Request for Comments
30. We recognize that the approach
taken in revised Reliability Standard
BAL–005–1, combined with the
requirements of Reliability Standard
EOP–008–1, represents a more
performance-based approach to
maintaining functionality for reliable
operation of the interconnected bulk
electric system, including ensuring the
continued operation of AGC and certain
data recording equipment during the
loss of normal power supply, compared
to the more specific approach of
Requirement R15 in Reliability Standard
BAL–005–0.2b. Moreover, balancing
authorities currently appear to be the
only type of functional entity explicitly
required to have and to test adequate
and reliable backup supply at critical
locations. For example, there is no
provision parallel to Requirement R15
that reliability coordinators or
transmission operators provide
‘‘adequate and reliable backup power
supplies’’ at their primary control
centers and ‘‘other critical locations.’’
31. Nonetheless, after considering
NERC’s Petition and Supplemental
Filing addressing the matter, we
continue to have questions as to
33 Id.

32 Id.

at 2–4.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

34 Id.

17:27 Sep 27, 2016

Jkt 238001

PO 00000

at 3.
at 4–5.

Frm 00015

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

66559

whether the objectives of Requirement
R15 are met, as NERC contends, by
other requirements in Reliability
Standard EOP–008–1 and proposed
Reliability Standard BAL–005–1. In
particular, Requirement R15 of
currently-effective Reliability Standard
BAL–005–0.2b helps to ensure
continued operability of balancing
authorities’ primary control centers,
despite the loss of normal power
supply, without evacuation to or
activation of backup control centers.
Thus, this provision appears to provide
additional robustness in the primary
control center and mitigates the risk of
problems occurring in the transition to
a secondary control center. We also note
that NERC’s Independent Expert Review
Project (IERP) report did not include
Requirement R15 among the
requirements recommended for
retirement when it reviewed Reliability
Standard BAL–005–0.2b in 2013.35
While the IERP report explicitly
recommended retiring other provisions
of Reliability Standard BAL–005–0.2b, it
recommended retaining Requirement
R15 as part of the Future Enforceable
Set of requirements.36
32. Accordingly, we are not
persuaded based on the current record
that it is appropriate to eliminate
balancing authorities’ existing
obligation to have and periodically test
backup power supply at a primary
control center. We, therefore, seek
additional justification for the
retirement of Requirement R15 of
Reliability Standard BAL–005–0.2b.
Specifically, the Commission seeks
comment on the benefits and potential
burden of retaining Requirement R15.
We also seek an explanation as to why,
historically, there is no parallel to
Requirement R15 for reliability
coordinators and transmission
operators, and whether any reason
exists to distinguish between balancing
authorities and other entities, such as
reliability coordinators and
transmission operators, that may operate
a control center or critical facility with
respect to the need for backup power
supply and testing at such locations.
33. The Commission further seeks
comment on the following questions:
1. If Requirement R15 of Reliability
Standard BAL–005–0.2b is retired, can
balancing authorities comply with Reliability
Standard EOP–008–1 by having a primary
control center and ‘‘backup functionality’’
without a backup power supply at the
primary control center or without a backup
35 Standards Independent Experts Review Project
at 26, http://www.nerc.com/pa/Stand/Resources/
Documents/Standards_Independent_Experts_
Review_Project_Report.pdf.
36 Id. at 1.

E:\FR\FM\28SEP1.SGM

28SEP1

66560

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 28, 2016 / Proposed Rules

sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS

power supply at the location providing
backup functionality? Are reliability
coordinators and transmission operators
compliant with Reliability Standard EOP–
008–1 by having a primary control center and
‘‘backup functionality’’ without a backup
power supply at the primary control center
or without a backup power supply at the
location providing backup functionality?
2. Explain the benefits and potential
burdens for the reliable operation of the bulk
electric system in having a backup power
supply at the primary control center. Is it
more appropriate to have backup power
supply sited at a location providing backup
functionality? Does the potential impact to
reliability change if the entity is a reliability
coordinator or transmission operator?
3. Describe current practices with respect
to the availability of backup power supplies
at primary control centers and other critical
locations. In particular, do any reliability
coordinators, transmission operators, or
balancing authorities currently have a
primary control center without a backup
power supply?
4. What does the reference in Reliability
Standard BAL–005–0.2b Requirement R15 to
‘‘other critical locations’’ include? Does it
include facilities beyond primary control
centers and locations providing backup
functionality?
5. Does the use of frequency metering
equipment to calculate Reporting ACE that is
available a minimum of 99.95% of each
calendar year, as proposed in Reliability
Standard BAL–005–1, Requirement R3,
ensure ‘‘continuous operation of AGC and
vital data recording equipment during loss of
the normal power supply,’’ per Reliability
Standard BAL–005–0.2b, Requirement R15?
What other functions would be included as
part of the metering equipment and data
collection of Reliability Standard BAL–005–
1, Requirement R3? What functions currently
part of Reliability Standard BAL–005–0.2b,
Requirement R15 would be omitted?
6. Do the requirements in Reliability
Standard EOP–008–1 for backup
functionality ensure the ‘‘continuous
operation of AGC and vital data recording
equipment,’’ and the ability to collect data to
calculate Reporting ACE, in the case of the
unavailability of such equipment for a period
within the bounds of proposed Reliability
Standard BAL–005–1, Requirement R3?

III. Information Collection Statement
34. The Paperwork Reduction Act
(PRA) 37 requires each federal agency to
seek and obtain Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) approval before
undertaking a collection of information
directed to ten or more persons, or
contained in a rule of general
applicability. The OMB regulations
require that OMB approve certain
reporting and recordkeeping (collections
of information) imposed by an agency.38
Upon approval of a collection(s) of
information, OMB will assign an OMB
control number and expiration date.
37 44
38 5

U.S.C. 3501–3520.
CFR 1320.11.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:28 Sep 27, 2016

Jkt 238001

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.
35. 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 the
provided burden estimate, ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information to be collected, and
any suggested methods for minimizing
the respondent’s burden, including the
use of automated information
techniques.
36. This Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NOPR) proposes to
approve revisions to Reliability
Standards BAL–005, associated with
FERC–725R and FAC–001, associated
with FERC–725D. These proposed
revisions streamline and clarify the
current requirements related to the
calculation of Reporting ACE—a key
frequency control and reliability
indicator factor—including
consolidating the seventeen
requirements of currently-effective
BAL–005–0.2b, associated with FERC–
725R, into seven requirements in BAL–
005–1, relocation of certain
requirements related to interconnection
requirements for transmission owners
and generation owners into FAC–001–3,
relocation of Requirement R3 in
currently-effective BAL–006–2 into
proposed BAL–005–1, and relocation of
certain metrics and calculations
required for calculating Reporting ACE
into the NERC definition of Reporting
ACE and its component definitions.
37. NERC’s proposed revisions to
Reliability Standards BAL–005 and
FAC–001will not result in an increase in
the record-keeping and reporting
requirements imposed on balancing
authorities, other than the one-time cost
of administering the change to the
revised standard. All other
recordkeeping and reporting obligations
imposed on balancing authorities under
the revised requirements essentially
track those that already exist under
currently-effective Reliability Standards
BAL–005–0.2b and FAC–001–2. The
proposed revisions to FAC–001–3 will
result in a limited increase in the
record-keeping and reporting
requirements imposed on those
transmission owners and generator
owners that are not also transmission
operators and generator operators (about
198 entities in the United States), as

PO 00000

Frm 00016

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

shown in the chart below.39 Many of the
revisions to the Reliability Standards
reflected in this NOPR were developed
to help clarify and streamline existing
requirements related to calculation of
Reporting ACE, and are expected to
simplify these entities’ overall burden
with respect to recordkeeping,
reporting, and compliance. Moreover,
the NOPR proposes to allow the
retirement of the bulk of the
requirements in Reliability Standard
BAL–006–2, further reducing the overall
record-keeping and reporting
requirements for balancing authorities.
Accordingly, the Commission estimates
that the overall change in the recordkeeping and reporting requirements as a
result of this rulemaking will be de
minimis on a per-entity basis.
38. Public Reporting Burden: The
changes reflected in proposed
Reliability Standard BAL–005–1 are not
expected to result in an increase in the
annual record-keeping and reporting
requirements on applicable entities
(balancing authorities). However,
balancing authorities will have to
perform a one-time review of the new
standard to ensure that their compliance
practices (including record-keeping) are
consistent with the revised
requirements. The relocation of
Requirement R1 of Reliability Standard
BAL–005–0.2b into Reliability Standard
FAC–003–1 will result in an increase in
the number of entities subject to the
requirement, as the requirement will be
applicable to transmission owners and
generator owners rather than
transmission operators and generator
operators. This limited increase in
annual record-keeping and reporting
burden, along with the one-time burden
of administering the change from BAL–
005–0.2b to BAL–005–1, is however
expected to be offset to some extent by
the decrease in record-keeping and
reporting burden associated with the
retirement of Reliability Standard BAL–
006–2 (in considering the overall
record-keeping and reporting
requirements associated with the
revised Reliability Standards).
39 Proposed Reliability Standard FAC–001–3
replaces and strengthens currently effective
Reliability Standard FAC–001–2 by moving
currently effective Requirement R1 of Reliability
Standard BAL–005–0.2b to proposed Reliability
Standard FAC–001–3, requiring that transmission
owner and generator owner interconnection
requirements include procedures for confirming
that new or materially modified facilities
connecting to the bulk electric system are within a
balancing authority’s metered boundaries. NERC
explains that these interconnection requirements
should be relocated to Reliability Standard FAC–
001–3, as FAC–001–3 establishes facility
interconnection requirements.

E:\FR\FM\28SEP1.SGM

28SEP1

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 28, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Data collection
FERC 725D & 725R
(modifications in
RM16–13–000)

Number of
respondents 40

Number of responses
per respondent

Total number
of responses

Average
burden hours
& cost per
response 41

Annual
burden hours
& total annual
cost 42

(1)

(2)

(1) × (2) = (3)

(4)

(3) × (4) = (5)

BAL–005–1 (FERC–725R) ...............

BA 105 ............................

1 (one-time) .....................

105

FAC–001–3 R3 (FERC–725D) .........

GO/TO 198 43 ..................

1 (annual) ........................

198

Retirement of current standard
BAL–006–02 currently in (FERC–
725R).

BA 105 ............................

¥1 (annual) ....................

¥105

1
$95.35
1
44 $63.25
¥1
¥$31.15

105
$10,325
........................
$12,523.50
105
¥$3,270.75

Total ..........................................

..........................................

..........................................

........................

........................

$19,577.75

Title: FERC–725D, Mandatory
Reliability Standards: FAC Reliability
Standards; FERC–725R, Mandatory
Reliability Standards: BAL Reliability
Standards
Action: Proposed Revisions.
OMB Control No: 1902–0247 (FERC–
725D); 1902–0268 (FERC–725R).
Respondents: Business or other forprofit and not-for-profit institutions.
Frequency of Responses: On-going.
Necessity of the Information: The
Commission has reviewed the
requirements of Reliability Standards
BAL–005–1 and FAC–001–3 and has
made a determination that the
requirements of these Reliability
Standards are necessary to implement
section 215 of the FPA.
Internal Review: The Commission
reviewed the proposed Reliability
Standards and made a determination
that its action is necessary to implement
section 215 of the FPA. The
Commission has assured itself, by
means of its internal review, that there
is specific, objective support for the
burden estimates associated with the
information requirements.
40 The

sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS

66561

estimated number of respondents is based
on the NERC compliance registry as of August 12,
2016. According to the NERC compliance registry,
there are 70 U.S. balancing authorities (BA) in the
Eastern Interconnection, 34 balancing authorities in
the Western Interconnection and one balancing
authority in the Electric Reliability Council of Texas
(ERCOT).
41 The burden hours and cost are based on the
hourly cost for an engineer for BAL–005–1, the
average of the hourly cost for an engineer and
clerical staff for FAC–001–3, and the hourly cost for
clerical staff for changes associated with the
retirement of BAL–006–2.
42 For purposes of determining the overall annual
cost of the record-keeping and reporting changes
reflected in this NOPR, the one-time cost associated
with administering the change to BAL–005–1 is
being treated as an annual cost.
43 Per the NERC compliance registry, there are 56
generator owners (GO) that are not also generator
operators and 142 transmission owners (TO) that
are not also transmission operators, for a total of
198 new entities in the United States subject to
FAC–001–3 Requirement R3.
44 The project cost per response for recordkeeping and reporting associated with the revisions
in FAC–001–3 reflect an average of the hourly cost
for an engineer and for clerical staff.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:28 Sep 27, 2016

Jkt 238001

39. Interested persons may obtain
information on the reporting
requirements by contacting the
following: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426 [Attention: Ellen
Brown, Office of the Executive Director,
email: [email protected], phone:
(202) 502–8663, fax: (202) 273–0873].
40. For submitting comments
concerning the collection(s) of
information and the associated burden
estimate(s), please send your comments
to the Commission and to the Office of
Management and Budget, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Washington, DC 20503 [Attention: Desk
Officer for the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, phone: (202)
395–4638, fax: (202) 395–7285]. For
security reasons, comments to OMB
should be submitted by email to: oira_
[email protected]. Comments
submitted to OMB should include
FERC–725R and Docket Number RM16–
13–000.
IV. Environmental Analysis
41. 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.45 The Commission has
categorically excluded certain actions
from this requirement as not having a
significant effect on the human
environment. Included in the exclusion
are rules that are clarifying, corrective,
or procedural or that do not
substantially change the effect of the
regulations being amended.46 The
actions proposed here fall within this
categorical exclusion in the
Commission’s regulations.
45 Regulations Implementing National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, Order No. 486,
FERC Stats. & Regs., ¶ 30,783 (1987).
46 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).

PO 00000

Frm 00017

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

V. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Certification
42. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980 (RFA) 47 generally requires a
description and analysis of proposed
rules that will have significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The RFA does
not mandate any particular outcome in
a rulemaking. It only requires
consideration of alternatives that are
less burdensome to small entities and an
agency explanation of why alternatives
were rejected. The Small Business
Administration (SBA) revised its size
standard effective January 22, 2014 for
electric utilities from a standard based
on megawatt hours to a standard based
on the number of employees, including
affiliates. Under SBA’s size standards,
some balancing authorities, generation
owners, and transmission owners will
fall under the following category and
associated size threshold: Electric bulk
power transmission and control, at 500
employees.48
43. As noted above, the Commission
estimates a very limited, one-time
increase in record-keeping and reporting
burden on balancing authorities due to
the changes in the revised Reliability
Standards, with no other increase in the
cost of compliance. Approximately 24 of
the 105 balancing authorities are
expected to meet the SBA’s definition
for a small entity. In addition,
approximately 198 entities will be
subject to new record-keeping and
reporting requirements under revised
Reliability Standard FAC–001–3, with
no other increase in the cost of
compliance. Approximately 177 of these
entities are expected to meet the SBA’s
definition of a small entity.
44. Even assuming that the one-time
cost of compliance for administering the
change from Reliability Standard BAL–
005–0.2b to BAL–005–1 is an annual
47 5

U.S.C. 601–612.
CFR 121.201, Sector 22 (Utilities), NAICS
code 221121 (Electric Bulk Power Transmission and
Control).
48 13

E:\FR\FM\28SEP1.SGM

28SEP1

66562

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 188 / Wednesday, September 28, 2016 / Proposed Rules

cost, and assuming that all of the
affected entities qualify as small
entities, the total annual cost to the
industry as a whole is minimal
($19,577.75), and the average cost per
affected entity is $63.23.
45. According to SBA guidance, the
determination of significance of impact
‘‘should be seen as relative to the size
of the business, the size of the
competitor’s business, and the impact
the regulation has on larger
competitors.’’ 49 The Commission does
not consider the estimated burden to be
a significant economic impact. As a
result, the Commission certifies that the
reforms proposed in this NOPR would
not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities.

sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS

VI. Comment Procedures
46. 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 November 28, 2016.
Comments must refer to Docket No.
RM16–13–000, and must include the
commenter’s name, the organization
they represent, if applicable, and their
address in their comments.
47. 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.
48. Commenters that are not able to
file comments electronically must send
an original of their comments to:
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street NE., Washington, DC 20426.
49. 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
50. In addition to publishing the full
text of this document in the Federal
49 U.S. Small Business Administration, A Guide
for Government Agencies: How to comply with the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, at 18 (May 2012), https://
www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/rfaguide_
0512_0.pdf.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:27 Sep 27, 2016

Jkt 238001

Register, the Commission provides all
interested persons an opportunity to
view and/or print the contents of this
document via the Internet through the
Commission’s Home Page (http://
www.ferc.gov) and in the Commission’s
Public Reference Room during normal
business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
Eastern time) at 888 First Street NE.,
Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426.
51. From the Commission’s Home
Page on the Internet, this information is
available on eLibrary. The full text of
this document is available on eLibrary
in PDF and Microsoft Word format for
viewing, printing, and/or downloading.
To access this document in eLibrary,
type the docket number excluding the
last three digits of this document in the
docket number field.
52. User assistance is available for
eLibrary and the Commission’s Web site
during normal business hours from the
Commission’s Online Support at (202)
502–6652 (toll free at 1–866–208–3676)
or email at [email protected],
or the Public Reference Room at (202)
502–8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. Email
the Public Reference Room at
[email protected].
By direction of the Commission.
Issued: September 22, 2016.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2016–23442 Filed 9–27–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Food and Drug Administration
21 CFR Part 101
[Docket No. FDA–2016–D–2335]

Use of the Term ‘‘Healthy’’ in the
Labeling of Human Food Products;
Request for Information and
Comments
AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration,

HHS.
Notification; establishment of
docket; request for comments.

ACTION:

The Food and Drug
Administration (FDA or we) is
announcing the establishment of a
docket to receive information and
comments on the use of the term
‘‘healthy’’ in the labeling of human food
products. This action is consistent with
our recently released 2016–2025 Foods
and Veterinary Medicine (FVM)
Program’s strategic plan with specific
goals for nutrition and other planned
and recent activity including the

SUMMARY:

PO 00000

Frm 00018

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

issuance of final rules updating certain
of our nutrition labeling regulations. In
addition, we received a citizen petition
asking that we update, among other
things, our nutrient content claim
regulations to be consistent with current
federal dietary guidance. In particular,
the petitioners request that FDA amend
the regulation defining the nutrient
content claim ‘‘healthy’’ with respect to
total fat intake and amend the regulation
to emphasize whole foods and dietary
patterns rather than specific nutrients.
We invite public comment on the term
‘‘healthy’’, generally, and as a nutrient
content claim in the context of food
labeling and on specific questions
contained in this document.
DATES: Submit either electronic or
written comments by January 26, 2017.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
as follows:
Electronic Submissions
Submit electronic comments in the
following way:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
Comments submitted electronically,
including attachments, to http://
www.regulations.gov will be posted to
the docket unchanged. Because your
comment will be made public, you are
solely responsible for ensuring that your
comment does not include any
confidential information that you or a
third party may not wish to be posted,
such as medical information, your or
anyone else’s Social Security number, or
confidential business information, such
as a manufacturing process. Please note
that if you include your name, contact
information, or other information that
identifies you in the body of your
comments, that information will be
posted on http://www.regulations.gov.
• If you want to submit a comment
with confidential information that you
do not wish to be made available to the
public, submit the comment as a
written/paper submission and in the
manner detailed (see ‘‘Written/Paper
Submissions’’ and ‘‘Instructions’’).
Written/Paper Submissions
Submit written/paper submissions as
follows:
• Mail/Hand delivery/Courier (for
written/paper submissions): Division of
Dockets Management (HFA–305), Food
and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers
Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
• For written/paper comments
submitted to the Division of Dockets
Management, FDA will post your
comment, as well as any attachments,
except for information submitted,

E:\FR\FM\28SEP1.SGM

28SEP1