60-day notice (Published)

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices
FERC conferences are accessible
under section 508 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973. For accessibility
accommodations please send an email
to accessibility@ferc.gov or call toll free
(866) 208–3372 (voice) or (202) 502–
8659 (TTY), or send a fax to (202) 208–
2106 with the required
accommodations.
For further information about this
workshop, please contact:
Michael G. Henry (Technical
Information). Office of Energy Policy
and Innovation, 202–502–8583,
Michael.Henry@ferc.gov
Lewis Taylor (Legal Information), Office
of General Counsel, 202–502–8624,
Lewis.Taylor@ferc.gov
Dated: June 27, 2024.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024–14675 Filed 7–2–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Docket Nos. RD24–5–000; RD24–1–000]

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

North American Electric Reliability
Corporation; Order Approving Extreme
Cold Weather Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2 and Directing Modification
1. On February 16, 2024, the North
American Electric Reliability
Corporation (NERC), the Commissioncertified Electric Reliability
Organization (ERO), submitted a
petition seeking approval of proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2
(Extreme Cold Weather Preparedness
and Operations). As discussed in this
order, we approve proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2, its associated
violation risk factors and violation
severity levels, NERC’s proposed
implementation plan, the newly defined
terms Fixed Fuel Supply Component
and Generator Cold Weather Constraint,
the revised defined terms Generator
Cold Weather Critical Component and
Generator Cold Weather Reliability
Event, and the retirement of Reliability
Standard EOP–012–1 immediately prior
to the effective date of proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2.1 We
also approve NERC’s proposed
implementation date for Reliability
Standard EOP–011–4 and the proposed
retirement of Reliability Standards
EOP–011–2 and EOP–011–3
immediately prior to the effective date
1 16

U.S.C. 824o(d)(2).

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

of proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2.2
2. It is essential to the reliable
operation of the Bulk-Power System to
‘‘ensure enough generating units will be
available during the next cold weather
event.’’ 3 When extreme cold weather
events such as Winter Storms Uri or
Elliott occur, the Bulk-Power System
cannot operate reliably without
adequate generation. Proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2
improves upon the approved, but not
yet effective, Reliability Standard EOP–
012–1 by clarifying the requirements for
generator cold weather preparedness
and by making other improvements
consistent with the Commission’s
directives in its February 2023 Order to
help ensure that more generation is
available during extreme cold weather.4
Accordingly, we find that proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2 is just,
reasonable, not unduly discriminatory
or preferential, and in the public
interest.
3. Nevertheless, we find that proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2
requires improvement to address certain
concerns, as discussed further below.
Therefore, pursuant to section 215(d)(5)
of the Federal Power Act (FPA),5 we
direct NERC to:
(1) develop and submit modifications
to proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 to address concerns related to the
ambiguity of the newly defined term
Generator Cold Weather Constraint to
ensure that the Generator Cold Weather
Constraint declaration criteria included
within the proposed Standard are
objective and sufficiently detailed so
that applicable entities understand what
is required of them and to remove all
references to ‘‘reasonable cost,’’
‘‘unreasonable cost,’’ ‘‘cost,’’ and ‘‘good
business practices’’ and replace them
with objective, unambiguous, and
auditable terms;
(2) develop and submit modifications
to proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 for NERC to receive, review,
evaluate, and confirm the validity of
each Generator Cold Weather Constraint
invoked by a generator owner, in a
timely fashion, to ensure that such
declaration cannot be used to avoid
2 Id.
3 FERC, NERC, and Regional Entity Staff, The
February 2021 Cold Weather Outages in Texas and
the South Central United States, at 189 (Nov. 16,
2021), https://www.ferc.gov/media/february-2021cold-weather-outages-texas-and-south-centralunited-states-ferc-nerc-and (November 2021
Report).
4 See, e.g., N. Am. Elec. Reliability Corp., 182
FERC ¶ 61,094, PP 3–11 (2023) (February 2023
Order); reh’g denied, 183 FERC ¶ 62,034, order on
reh’g, 183 FERC ¶ 61,222 (2023).
5 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(5).

PO 00000

Frm 00024

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

55239

mandatory compliance with the
proposed Reliability Standard or
obligations in a corrective action plan;
(3) develop and submit modifications
to proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 to shorten and clarify the
corrective action plan implementation
timelines and deadlines in Requirement
R7, as further directed below;
(4) develop and submit modifications
to Requirement R7 of proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2 to
ensure that any extension of a corrective
action plan implementation deadline
beyond the maximum implementation
timeframe required by the Standard is
pre-approved by NERC and to ensure
that the generator owner informs
relevant registered entities of operating
limitations in extreme cold weather
during the period of the extension; and
(5) develop and submit modifications
to Requirement R8, part 8.1 of proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2 to
implement more frequent reviews of
Generator Cold Weather Constraint
declarations to verify that the constraint
declaration remains valid.
4. The Commission has repeatedly
expressed an urgency in completing
cold weather Reliability Standards and
having them implemented in a timely
manner to address the risks presented
by cold weather events on the reliability
of the Bulk-Power System.6 Further, we
note that NERC submitted the current
filing in response to Commission
directives to improve the cold weather
Reliability Standards, and the five core
directives to NERC in this order are not
new issues, but rather targeted
modifications necessary to fully address
issues identified in the Commission’s
prior February 2023 Order. Accordingly,
we direct NERC to make the above
modifications and submit the revised
Reliability Standard within nine months
of the date of issuance of this order.7
I. Background
A. Section 215 and Mandatory
Reliability Standards
5. Section 215 of the FPA provides
that the Commission may certify an
ERO, the purpose of which is to develop
mandatory and enforceable Reliability
Standards, subject to Commission
review and approval.8 Reliability
6 See e.g., N. Am. Elec. Reliability Corp., 183
FERC ¶ 62,034 at P 10 (emphasizing that industry
has been aware of and alerted to the need to prepare
generating units for cold weather since at least 2011
and that in considering an appropriate
implementation period for Reliability Standard
EOP–012–1, NERC should consider how much time
industry has already had to implement freeze
protection measures).
7 18 CFR 39.6(g) (2023).
8 16 U.S.C. 824o(c).

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1

55240

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices

Standards may be enforced by the ERO,
subject to Commission oversight, or by
the Commission independently.9
Pursuant to section 215 of the FPA, the
Commission established a process to
select and certify an ERO,10 and
subsequently certified NERC.11
B. The February 2021 Cold Weather
Reliability Event
6. On February 16, 2021, Commission,
NERC, and Regional Entity staff
initiated a joint inquiry into the
circumstances surrounding a February
2021 cold weather reliability event then
affecting Texas and the South-Central
United States. In November 2021,
Commission staff issued a report
regarding the event, which found that
the event was the largest controlled firm
load shed event in U.S. history; over 4.5
million people lost power and at least
210 people lost their lives during the
event.12 The November 2021 Report
made 28 recommendations including,
inter alia, enhancements to the
Reliability Standards to improve
extreme cold weather operations,
preparedness, and coordination.13
7. After the February 2021 cold
weather reliability event, but before the
November 2021 Report was issued,
NERC filed a petition for approval of
cold weather Reliability Standards
addressing recommendations from a
report regarding a 2018 cold weather
event.14 In August 2021, the
Commission approved NERC’s
modifications to Reliability Standards
EOP–011–2 (Emergency Preparedness
and Operations), IRO–010–4 (Reliability
Coordinator Data Specification and
Collection), and TOP–003–5
(Operational Reliability Data).15
Reliability Standards IRO–010–4 and
TOP–003–5 require that reliability
coordinators, transmission operators,
and balancing authorities develop,
maintain, and share generator cold
9 Id.

sec. 824o(e).
Concerning Certification of the Elec.
Reliability Org.; & Procs. for the Establishment,
Approval, & Enforcement of Elec. Reliability
Standards, Order No. 672, 114 FERC ¶ 61,104, order
on reh’g, Order No. 672–A, 114 FERC ¶ 61,328
(2006); see also 18 CFR 39.4(b) (2023).
11 N. Am. Elec. 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).
12 See November 2021 Report at 9.
13 Id. at 184–212 (sub-recommendations 1a
through 1j).
14 FERC and NERC Staff, The South Central
United States Cold Weather Bulk Electric System
Event of January 17, 2018, at 89 (Jul. 2019), https://
www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/2020-07/
SouthCentralUnitedStatesCold
WeatherBulkElectricSystemEventofJanuary172018.pdf.
15 See generally N. Am. Elec. Reliability Corp.,
176 FERC ¶ 61,119 (2021).

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

10 Rules

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

weather data.16 Reliability Standard
EOP–011–2 requires generator owners to
have generating unit cold weather
preparedness plans.17
8. On October 28, 2022, NERC filed a
petition seeking approval of Reliability
Standards EOP–011–3 (Emergency
Operations) and EOP–012–1 (Extreme
Cold Weather Preparedness and
Operations), their associated violation
risk factors and violation severity levels,
three newly-defined terms (Extreme
Cold Weather Temperature, Generator
Cold Weather Critical Component, and
Generator Cold Weather Reliability
Event), NERC’s proposed
implementation plan, and the
retirement of Reliability Standard EOP–
011–2.18 On February 16, 2023, the
Commission approved Reliability
Standards EOP–011–3 and EOP–012–1,
directed NERC to develop and submit
modifications to Reliability Standard
EOP–012–1 and to submit a plan on
how NERC will collect and assess data
surrounding the implementation of
Reliability Standard EOP–012–1, and
deferred the retirement of Reliability
Standard EOP–011–2.19
9. On October 30, 2023, NERC filed a
petition seeking approval of Reliability
Standards EOP–011–4 (Emergency
Operations) and TOP–002–5
(Operations Planning), their associated
violation risk factors and violation
severity levels, NERC’s proposed
implementation plan, and the
retirement of Reliability Standards
EOP–011–2 and TOP–002–4. On
February 15, 2024, the Commission
approved Reliability Standards EOP–
011–3 and TOP–002–5 and again
deferred the retirement of Reliability
Standard EOP–011–2.20
C. NERC’s Petition and Proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2
10. On February 16, 2024, in response
to the Commission’s February 2023
Order, NERC filed a petition seeking
approval of proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2,21 its associated
violation risk factors and violation
severity levels, two newly defined terms
(Fixed Fuel Supply Component and
Generator Cold Weather Constraint),
two revised terms (Generator Cold
Weather Critical Component and
16 Id.
17 Id.

2022 Petition at 1–2.
February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at
PP 3–11.
20 See id. PP 1–2.
21 The proposed Reliability Standard EOP–012–2
is not attached to this order. The proposed
Reliability Standard is available on the
Commission’s eLibrary document retrieval system
in Docket No. RD24–5–000 and on the NERC
website, www.nerc.com.

PO 00000

18 NERC
19 See

Frm 00025

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

Generator Cold Weather Reliability
Event), NERC’s proposed
implementation plan, and the
retirement of currently approved
Reliability Standard EOP–012–1.22
NERC explains that proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 improves upon
the approved, but not yet effective,
generator cold weather preparation
Reliability Standard EOP–012–1 and is
consistent with the Commission’s
directives from the February 2023
Order.23 NERC states that proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2
clarifies applicability of the Standard’s
requirements for generator cold weather
preparedness, would further define the
circumstances under which a generator
owner may declare that constraints
preclude it from implementing one or
more corrective actions to address
freezing issues, and shortens the
implementation timeline so that cold
weather reliability risks would be
addressed sooner.24
11. NERC states that the purpose of
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 is unchanged from that of
approved Reliability Standard EOP–
012–1, which is to ensure that each
generator owner develops and
implements plans to alleviate the
reliability impacts of extreme cold
weather on its generating units.25 NERC
also notes that proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 completes NERC’s
two-part plan to address
recommendations from the November
2021 Report by including revisions to
address parts of Key Recommendations
1a, 1b, 1c, and 1d.26 NERC states that
the proposed Reliability Standard
contains new and revised requirements
to advance the reliability of the BulkPower System by requiring generator
owners to (1) review their generator cold
weather data periodically, (2) include
any identified start up issues in their
generator cold weather data provided to
reliability entities, and (3) consider the
impacts of freezing precipitation and
wind speed in identifying generator
cold weather data.27
12. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2 has eight requirements,
seven of which have been carried over
and modified from approved Reliability
Standard EOP–012–1 (Requirements
R1–R7) and one of which is new
(Requirement R8). Proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 applies to
22 NERC
23 Id.

Petition at 1–4.
at 2.

24 Id.
25 Id.

at 29.
id. at 25–26, 35, 49–50 (citing the
November 2021 Report at 184–86).
27 Id. at 23.
26 See

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices
generator owners and generator
operators that own or operate bulk
electric system generating units.28
13. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirement R1 modifies
the Requirements for each generator
owner to calculate the Extreme Cold
Weather Temperature for each of its
applicable generating units and to recalculate that temperature at least once
every five calendar years.29 Where a
periodic re-calculation results in a lower
Extreme Cold Weather Temperature for
the generating unit, the generator owner
must update its cold weather
preparedness plan within six months
and, if necessary, develop a corrective
action plan to implement measures at
the applicable unit to provide the
capability to operate at that new, lower
temperature. Proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2, Requirement R1,
Part 1.2, also maintains Requirement
R3.1 to identify generating unit cold
weather data, including operating
limitations in cold weather and
minimum operating temperatures, from
approved Reliability Standard EOP–
012–1, Requirement R3, Part 3.5.30
14. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirements R2 and R3
clarify the cold weather operational
capability requirements for new and
existing bulk electric system generating
units.31 Under proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2, Requirement R2,
generator owners would be required to
implement freeze protection measures at
applicable bulk electric system
generating units to provide the
capability to operate at the Extreme
Cold Weather Temperature with
sustained, concurrent 20 mph wind
speed for the unit.32 Specifically,
Requirement R2 requires generating
units with a commercial operation date
on or after October 1, 2027, to be
capable of operating at the unit’s
Extreme Cold Weather Temperature for
a continuous 12-hour period or at the
maximum operational duration for
intermittent energy resources if less
than 12 continuous hours. If a
generating unit is unable to do either
then it must develop a corrective action
plan to add new or modify existing or
previously planned freeze protection
28 NERC

Petition at 22–23.
R1 under proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 modifies existing
Requirement R3, Part 3.1 and Requirement R4
under currently approved but not yet effective
Reliability Standard EOP–012–1.
30 NERC Petition at 33–37.
31 Requirements R2 and R3 under proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2 were originally
Requirements R1 and R2, respectively, under
currently approved but not yet effective Reliability
Standard EOP–012–1.
32 NERC Petition at 37.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

29 Requirement

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

measures to provide the capability to
operate at the unit’s Extreme Cold
Weather Temperature with a sustained,
concurrent 20 mph wind speed.33
15. Similar to Requirement R2, but
without the wind and duration criteria,
Requirement R3 requires either that
existing generating units, (i.e., those in
commercial operation prior to October
1, 2027) be capable of operating at the
unit’s Extreme Cold Weather
Temperature or that the generator owner
develops a corrective action plan to
address the unit’s inability to
continuously operate successfully.34
Requirements R2 and R3 exempt
generating units that do not self-commit
or are not required to operate at or
below a temperature of 32 degrees
Fahrenheit, including those that may be
called upon to operate to assist in
mitigating emergencies during periods
at or below 32 degrees Fahrenheit.35
16. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirement R4,36
modifies the requirement for generator
owners to implement and maintain cold
weather preparedness plans.37 Under
Requirement R4, generator owners
would include in their cold weather
preparedness plans the information
determined in accordance with
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2, Requirement R1. Requirement R4
also clarifies that the cold weather
preparedness plans shall reflect the
lowest calculated Extreme Cold Weather
Temperature for the unit, even if
subsequent re-calculations indicate
warming temperatures.38
17. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirement R5 is
substantively unchanged from the prior
version of the Standard. Requirement R5
states that generator owners must train
their personnel annually on the unit’s
cold weather preparedness plans.39
18. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirement R6 modifies
the requirement that generator owners
that self-commit or are required to
operate at or below a temperature of 32
at 38.
at 38–39.
35 Proposed Reliability Standard EOP–012–2,
Requirement R2, n.1 and Requirement R3, n.2; see
also NERC Petition at 41–42.
36 Proposed Reliability Standard EOP–012–2,
Requirement R4 was originally Requirement R3 in
currently approved but not yet effective Reliability
Standard EOP–012–1.
37 NERC Petition at 45.
38 Id. at 46 (citing proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirement R4, n.3, which states that
generator owners shall include the lowest
calculated Extreme Cold Weather Temperature for
the unit, even where subsequent periodic recalculations under Requirement R1, Part 1.1 cause
an increase in the Extreme Cold Weather
Temperature).
39 Id. at 47.

PO 00000

55241

degrees Fahrenheit and experience an
outage, failure to start, or derate due to
freezing at or above their Extreme Cold
Weather Temperature must develop a
corrective action plan to address the
identified causes. Requirement R6
exempts generating units that do not
self-commit or are not required to
operate at or below a temperature of 32
degrees Fahrenheit, including those that
may be called upon to operate to assist
in mitigating emergencies during
periods at or below 32 degrees
Fahrenheit.40
19. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirement R7 modifies
the requirement for implementing
corrective action plans. Requirement R7
includes new implementation deadlines
for implementing corrective action
plans and clarifies the types of
constraints that may preclude the
implementation of one or more
corrective actions.41 Specifically,
Requirement R7 requires that for each
corrective action plan developed
pursuant to Requirements R1, R2, R3, or
R6, generator owners shall include a
timetable for implementing the
corrective actions and complete the
corrective actions in accordance with
the timetables outlined in the proposed
Standard.42 Under Requirement R7,
generator owners are permitted to
update the corrective action plan
timetables, with justifications, if
corrective actions change or the
timetable exceeds the timelines in
Requirement R7, Part 7.1. This
requirement also states that the
generator owner must document, in a
declaration with justification, any
Generator Cold Weather Constraint that
precludes the generator owner from
implementing the selected actions
contained within the corrective action
plan.43
20. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirement R8 is a new
requirement that would apply to
generator owners that have declared a
Generator Cold Weather Constraint
under Requirement R7. Specifically, this

33 Id.
34 Id.

Frm 00026

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

40 Id. at 48 (citing Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirement R6, n.4).
41 Id. at 50.
42 Id. at 50–51 (noting that generator owners must
list the actions that address existing equipment or
freeze protection measures to be completed within
24 calendar months of completing development of
the corrective action plan, list the actions that
require new equipment or freeze protection
measures, if any, to be completed within 48
calendar months of completing development of the
corrective action plan, and list the updates to the
cold weather preparedness plan requirement under
Requirement R4 to identify the updates or additions
to the Generator Cold Weather Critical Components
and their freeze protection measures) (emphasis
added).
43 NERC Petition at 51–60.

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1

55242

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

requirement states that each generator
owner that creates a Generator Cold
Weather Constraint declaration shall
review the Generator Cold Weather
Constraint declaration at least every five
calendar years or as needed when a
change of status to the Generator Cold
Weather Constraint occurs and update
the operating limitations associated
with capability and availability under
Requirement R1, Part 1.2, if
applicable.44
21. NERC requests that the
Commission approve the violation risk
factors and violation severity levels for
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2.45 Further, NERC proposes an
effective date for Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2 (with the exception of
Requirement R3, which would become
mandatory and enforceable 12-months
following the proposed Standard’s
effective date) of October 1, 2024 or the
first day of the first calendar quarter that
is three months following regulatory
approval, whichever is later.46
22. Finally, NERC requests that the
Commission approve proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2 in an
expedited manner. NERC explains that,
among other things, expedited approval
would provide regulatory certainty to
entities seeking to comply with the
proposed Reliability Standard ahead of
the mandatory and enforceable date.47
II. Notice of Filing and Responsive
Pleadings
23. Notice of NERC’s February 16,
2024, Petition was published in the
Federal Register, 89 FR 14,479 (2024),
with comments, protests, and motions
to intervene due on or before March 21,
2024.
24. The Commission received one
protest, one set of comments, and five
sets of out of time answers. The Electric
Power Supply Association (EPSA); the
New England Power Generators
Association, Inc. (NEPGA); Dominion
Energy Services, Inc. (Dominion),
Constellation Energy Generation, LLC
(Constellation), and the Independent
System Operators and Regional
Transmission Organizations Council
(the ISO/RTO Council) filed timely
motions to intervene. The Transmission
Access Policy Study Group (TAPS);
Avangrid Renewables, LLC; and the
Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission
filed out of time motions to intervene.
NEPGA filed timely comments. The
ISO/RTO Council filed a timely protest.
EPSA, TAPS, NERC, and the ISO/RTO

Council filed motions for leave to
answer along with answers.48
25. Commenters and protesters raised
concerns and requests for clarifications
for proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2. The commenters range in their
support for proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 from requesting
that the Commission approve the
proposed Standard as filed 49 or approve
the proposed Standard as filed with
minor clarifications,50 to requesting that
the Commission remand the proposed
Standard to NERC with directives.51
The comments on specific matters are
summarized and addressed in the
determinations below.
III. Determination
A. Procedural Matters
26. Pursuant to Rule 214 of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214 (2023), the
timely, unopposed motions to intervene
serve to make the entities that filed
them parties to this proceeding.
27. Rule 213(a)(2) of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure, 18 CFR 385.213(a)(2) (2023),
prohibits an answer to a protest or
answer unless otherwise ordered by the
decisional authority. Pursuant to Rule
214(d) of the Commission’s Rules of
Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR
385.214(d), we grant TAPS, Avangrid
Renewables, LLC, and the Pennsylvania
Public Utility Commission’s motions for
leave to file out of time motions to
intervene given their interest in the
proceeding and the absence of undue
prejudice or delay.
B. Substantive Matters
28. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of
the FPA, we approve proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2 as just,
reasonable, not unduly discriminatory
or preferential, and in the public
interest. Absent the reforms adopted in
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2, the unexpected failure of
generating units during extreme cold
weather conditions could negatively
impact the reliability of the Bulk-Power
System.
29. We find that proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 represents an
improvement over approved Reliability
Standard EOP–012–1 as the proposed
Standard enhances the reliable
operation of the Bulk-Power System.
Specifically, the proposed Reliability
Standard will improve reliability by
48 TAPS

filed two answers.
Answer at 1–3; 29.
50 See NEPGA Comments 1–5; EPSA Answer 1–
5; TAPS Answer at 1–2.
51 See ISO/RTO Council Protest at 1–3.

44 Id.

at 62.
45 Id. at 2–3.
46 Id. at 66.
47 Id. at 70–71.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

49 NERC

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

PO 00000

Frm 00027

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

requiring generator owners to
implement freeze protection measures,
develop detailed cold weather
preparedness plans, implement annual
trainings, draft and implement
corrective action plans to address
freezing issues, and provide certain cold
weather operating parameters to
reliability coordinators, transmission
operators, and balancing authorities for
use in their analyses and planning. We
believe that these measures will help
address many of the issues identified as
contributing to generating unit failures
during extreme cold weather conditions,
as noted in the November 2021
Report.52
30. Nevertheless, while we find that
NERC’s petition is an improvement to
the currently approved Reliability
Standard, we also find that there are
some elements of proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 that are not fully
responsive to the Commission’s
February 2023 Order.53 Accordingly, as
discussed further below, we direct
NERC pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of
the FPA to address these issues.
31. Although we find that the
Reliability Standard needs additional
improvement, we are not persuaded that
there is sufficient cause to remand
proposed Standard EOP–012–2, as
requested by the ISO/RTO Council.54
Proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 represents an improvement over
approved Reliability Standard EOP–
012–1, and remanding the proposed
Standard would allow currently
approved Reliability Standard EOP–
012–1 to go into effect on October 1,
2024, despite its ambiguities and other
identified issues.55
32. Below we address the following
elements of proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2: (1) Generator
Cold Weather Constraint declaration
criteria; (2) the entity to receive, review,
evaluate, and confirm for validity the
Generator Cold Weather Constraint
declarations; (3) the length of the
corrective action plan implementation
deadlines; (4) the corrective action plan
52 See

November 2021 Report at 184–210.
NERC Petition at 27–28; see also February
2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP 1, 3, 6, 9–10,
66, 77–79, 88.
54 See ISO/RTO Council Protest at 4.
55 See, e.g., Mandatory Reliability Standards for
the Bulk-Power Sys., Order No. 693, 118 FERC
¶ 61,218, at P 10; order on reh’g, Order No. 693–
A, 120 FERC ¶ 61,053 (2007) (noting that ‘‘[w]here
a Reliability Standard requires significant
improvement, but is otherwise enforceable, the
Commission approves the Reliability Standard’’ and
‘‘directs the ERO to modify’’ such Standards to
address identified issues or concerns); Version 5
Critical Infrastructure Prot. Reliability Standards,
Order No. 791, 145 FERC¶ 61,160, at PP 1–4 (2013);
order on clarification and reh’g, Order No. 791–A,
146 FERC ¶ 61,188 (2014).
53 See

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices
implementation timelines for existing
versus new generating units; (5) the
generating unit freeze measure
applicability exemptions within
proposed Requirements R2, R3, and R6;
(6) the winterization criteria for new
versus existing generating units; (7) the
annual inspections and maintenance of
a generating unit’s freeze protection
measures; (8) the five-year review
period for declared Generator Cold
Weather Constraints; and (9) cost
recovery mechanisms.
1. Generator Cold Weather Constraint
Declaration Criteria

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

a. The Commission’s Directive in the
February 2023 Order
33. Under Reliability Standard EOP–
012–1, a generator owner could explain
in a declaration any ‘‘technical,
commercial, or operational constraints’’
that preclude its ability to either
implement freeze protection measures
or implement corrective action plans.
However, Reliability Standard EOP–
012–1 does not define ‘‘technical,
commercial, or operational constraints,’’
leaving those terms open to
interpretation by each generator owner.
In the February 2023 Order, the
Commission approved Reliability
Standard EOP–012–1 but expressed
concern with the uncertainties,
ambiguities, and vagueness of the
Standard’s descriptions of constraints,
noting that, without criteria to guide the
generator owners or guardrails on what
constitutes a legitimate constraint,
generator owners may avoid the purpose
of the Standard altogether or have
declarations without auditable
elements. Thus, the Commission
directed NERC to address the ambiguity
of generator owner-defined declarations
by including auditable criteria to ensure
that declarations cannot be used to
avoid mandatory compliance with the
Reliability Standard or obligations in a
corrective action plan.56
b. NERC’s Petition
34. In proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, NERC proposes to replace
the undefined ‘‘technical, commercial,
or operational constraints’’ with the
newly defined Glossary term ‘‘Generator
Cold Weather Constraint.’’ The term
explains that constraints are conditions
precluding generator owners from
implementing freeze protection
measures based on one or more criteria.
NERC states that:
Criteria used to determine a constraint
includes practices, methods, or
technologies which, given the exercise
56 February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP
6, 66.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

of reasonable judgment in light of the
facts known at the time the decision to
declare the constraint was made:
• Were not broadly implemented at
generating units for comparable unit
types in regions that experience similar
winter climate conditions to provide
reasonable assurance of efficacy;
• Could not have been expected to
accomplish the desired result; or
• Could not have been implemented
at a reasonable cost consistent with
good business practices, reliability, or
safety. A cost may be deemed
‘‘unreasonable’’ when implementation
of selected freeze protection measure(s)
are uneconomical to the extent that they
would require prohibitively expensive
modifications or significant
expenditures on equipment with
minimal remaining life.57
35. During the development of
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2, NERC’s Standard Drafting Team
explained that using a reasonableness
standard as a benchmark for evaluating
constraint declarations is appropriate
given the wide range of facts and
circumstances that will be relevant
under the definition.58 The Standard
Drafting Team added that the
‘‘reasonableness standard is typically an
objective test that looks at the average
decision maker’s conduct under the
particular facts and circumstances
present if they exercised average care,
skill, and judgement.’’ 59 NERC’s
Standard Drafting Team considered
adding specific criteria but was of the
opinion that the proposed Reliability
Standard must be adaptable as facts and
circumstances change and new
solutions are identified and become
commercially available.60 NERC’s
petition states that the language used in
the Generator Cold Weather Constraint
definition is modeled after the concept
of ‘‘good utility practice’’ and is
intended to convey that the proposed
Reliability Standard ‘‘would not require
the best solutions, which would result
in more constraints being declared, but
rather acceptable solutions.’’ 61 NERC
states that the term ‘‘unreasonable
costs’’ is intended to refer to costprohibitive modifications or significant
expenditures that could lead to
premature retirement of equipment.62
Petition at 28.
Ex. F, at 50–51.
59 See id., Ex. F at 1,772.
60 See id.
61 See NERC Petition at 57 (citing to the
Commission’s pro forma Open Access Transmission
Tariff, section 1.15).
62 Id.

PO 00000

57 NERC
58 Id.,

Frm 00028

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

55243

c. Comments
36. The ISO/RTO Council argues that
the discussion of freeze protection
measures in the newly defined
Generator Cold Weather Constraint term
creates ambiguity that provides far too
much discretion to the entities required
to comply with proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2.63 The ISO/RTO
Council believes that the proposed
Standard provides insufficient guidance
concerning a generator owner’s exercise
of discretion to interpret whether freeze
protection measures are available for its
equipment when determining whether a
basis exists to declare a constraint. As
such, the ISO/RTO Council
recommends that the Commission direct
NERC to revise the constraint
declaration language so that it is clear
that freeze protection measures are
intended to include practices, methods,
or technologies that would reasonably
be expected to result in effective facility
performance while operating at the
Extreme Cold Weather Temperature.64
37. NERC, in its answer, states that its
Standard Drafting Team determined that
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 should not require entities to
implement technologies or solutions
that had not been proven to be effective
in similar climate conditions.65 TAPS
members, while initially expressing
concern during the development of
proposed Standard2, now believe that
NERC guidance will help ensure
consistent application of the Generator
Cold Weather Constraint declaration
criteria.66 TAPS asserts that the new
definition is auditable and greatly
improves upon NERC’s approach in
approved Reliability Standard EOP–
012–1.67
38. The ISO/RTO Council also states
that the inclusion of ‘‘reasonable cost’’
in the definition of what qualifies as a
potential Generator Cold Weather
Constraint is subjective, unclear, and
un-auditable.68 The ISO/RTO Council is
concerned that this would allow
generator owners to declare a constraint
simply by asserting that implementing a
given freeze protection measure would
constitute a ‘‘ ‘prohibitively expensive
modification[ ]’ or a ‘significant
expenditure[ ]’ and that the affected
facility has a ‘minimal remaining
63 ISO/RTO

Council Protest at 13.
at 15.
65 NERC Answer at 14 (noting that the
Commission is only required to find that the
proposed Reliability Standard, as written, is just
and reasonable rather than the ‘‘best’’ option and
requesting that the Commission give due weight to
the expertise of the Standard Drafting Team).
66 TAPS Answer at 2–3.
67 Id.
68 ISO/RTO Council Protest at 6.
64 Id.

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1

55244

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

life.’ ’’ 69 They state that this exception
effectively injects NERC and the
Regional Entities into the process of
judging the reasonableness of costs and
a particular generator owner’s financial
situation.70 As such, the ISO/RTO
Council recommends that the
Commission direct NERC to remove the
cost-based constraints from proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2.71 They
state that the Commission faces a policy
choice of whether to adopt exceptions to
compliance based on generator owners’
assertions of excessive costs or whether
to apply its FPA section 205 and 206
authority to provide avenues for
generator owners to recover costs.72
39. In contrast, TAPS argues that the
definition of an economic constraint is
quite narrow and does not permit a
balancing of costs against benefits.73
TAPS does not agree with the ISO/RTO
Council that cost-based constraints
should be removed from the Generator
Cold Weather Constraint definition
entirely since that would make the
proposed Reliability Standard
unreasonable and contrary to the
requirements of FPA section 215(d)(2).74
TAPS argues that such removal would
mandate winterization at any cost, no
matter how unjustifiable.75
40. In its answer, NERC states that the
proposed definition of Generator Cold
Weather Constraint accounts for
concerns that the requirements to
operate in cold weather could ‘‘lead to
fewer generators choosing to operate in
cold weather due to prohibitive costs or
technical inability to meet the
operational capability requirements’’ of
the proposed Reliability Standard.76
NERC asserts that the ISO/RTO Council
is not taking into account the reliability
impacts that may occur if the cost of
compliance is prohibitively high and
generators choose not to operate.77 On
the auditability issue, NERC states that
the proposed definition is auditable and
that the ISO/RTO Council is conflating
69 Id. at 7 (quoting NERC’s proposed definition of
the Generator Cold Weather Constraint).; see also
NERC Petition, Ex. A, at 3.
70 ISO/RTO Council Protest at 7.
71 Id. at 7–8, 12 (stating that cost should be
addressed by the Commission through its obligation
to ensure just and reasonable rates and by the
appropriate state, local, and regulatory authorities
rather than being ‘‘shoehorned’’ into a Reliability
Standard).
72 ISO/RTO Council Answer at 4–8.
73 TAPS Answer at 4; TAPS Second Answer at 3.
74 TAPS Answer at 5 (citing to 16 U.S.C.
824o(d)(2), which provides that ‘‘[t]he Commission
may approve . . . a proposed reliability standard
. . . if it determines that the standard is just,
reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or
preferential, and in the public interest’’).
75 Id.
76 NERC Answer at 8.
77 Id. at 9.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

‘‘auditability’’ and ‘‘flexibility.’’ They
state that NERC and the Regional
Entities ‘‘understand that they will be
assessing the reasonableness of the
process entities use to declare
constraints’’ and will continue to
monitor implementation of the
proposed Reliability Standard closely.78
d. Commission Determination
41. Although NERC’s proposal to
replace the existing ‘‘technical,
commercial, and operational’’
constraints with the newly defined
Generator Cold Weather Constraint term
and associated criteria meets the
Commission’s directive to develop
criteria for constraint declarations, it
does not meet the Commission’s
directives to develop criteria that are
objective, unambiguous, and
auditable.79 In Reliability Standard
EOP–012–1, the use of ‘‘technical,
commercial and operational
constraints’’ was a stand-alone phrase,
and did not include any definitions or
further explanation of the conditions
under which such declarations could be
made, causing the ambiguity concerns
raised in the February 2023 Order.80
Moreover, Reliability Standard EOP–
012–1 left it up to the generator owner
to interpret what it meant to have a
technical, commercial, or operational
constraint. By adding some criteria for
the constraint declarations, we find that
NERC’s proposed Generator Cold
Weather Constraint declaration criteria
improves upon the status quo.
42. Nevertheless, we share the ISO/
RTO Council’s concerns that the
proposed Generator Cold Weather
Constraint declaration criteria are also
ambiguous, which may lead to
inconsistent application and
uncertainty. For example, the proposed
definition does not provide sufficient
guidance on how widely a freeze
protection technology must be deployed
before it will be considered a ‘‘generally
implemented’’ technology. We agree
with the ISO/RTO Council’s concern
that this focus on general industry
practice, without any way to ensure
consistency in the application of that
language, leaves the Commission
without an objective standard that can
be effectively audited.
43. In response to the ISO/RTO
Council’s concern, NERC states that its
Standard Drafting Team determined that
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 should not require the
implementation of unproven
78 Id.

at 10–11.
2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP

79 February

6, 66.
80 See id. PP 6, 64–66.

PO 00000

Frm 00029

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

technologies.81 We agree. However, in
its effort to provide flexibility, the
proposed Reliability Standard falls short
of the Commission’s directive to
develop criteria that are objective,
unambiguous, and auditable, as
discussed further below.82 The
Commission has previously expressed
similar concerns regarding the
vagueness and enforceability of a
Reliability Standard’s language. For
example, in Order No. 693 the
Commission approved Reliability
Standards while also expressing
concern that the term ‘‘sabotage’’ was
too ambiguous.83 Similarly, in Order
No. 791 (approving Version 5 of the
Critical Infrastructure Protection
Reliability Standards), the Commission
raised concerns with vague language
that required entities to ‘‘identify,
assess, and correct’’ deficiencies.84 The
Commission determined that the
ambiguities resulted in an
‘‘unacceptable amount of uncertainty’’
and directed NERC to remove the
ambiguous language and develop
appropriate modifications.85 In both
Order Nos. 693 and 791, the
Commission approved NERC’s proposed
Reliability Standards as an
improvement to reliability, while
directing NERC to submit modifications
to the Reliability Standards addressing
the Commission’s concern regarding the
vagueness of particular language. We
conclude that a similar approach is
appropriate in the instant proceeding,
given the improvements offered by
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 in addressing Bulk-Power System
reliability during extreme cold weather
events.
44. We also find that the inclusion of
the clause ‘‘reasonable cost consistent
with good business practices’’ in the
third criterion of the Generator Cold
Weather Constraint definition does not
meet the Commission’s directive to
create criteria that are objective,
unambiguous, and auditable.86 In its
answer, NERC explains that its Standard
Drafting Team was concerned about the
reliability impacts that may follow from
a mandate to retrofit a generating unit at
any cost when many generator owners
have significant discretion regarding
whether and when they will participate
81 NERC

Answer at 13–14.
2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP

82 February

6, 66.
83 See Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218 at PP 1,
461.
84 See Order No. 791, 145 FERC ¶ 61,160 at PP
49–53, 67, 69.
85 See id.; see also Order No. 693, 118 FERC
¶ 61,218 at PP 1, 461.
86 February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP
6, 66.

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

in the market. While we agree there may
be a need to account for certain cases in
which the cost of retrofitting may be
unnecessarily burdensome, the
mechanism in proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 to address such
cases provides a recipe for inconsistent
outcomes. Although NERC argues that
the use of ‘‘reasonable cost consistent
with good business practices’’ is akin to
the Commission’s use of ‘‘good utility
practice,’’ we find such comparisons
unavailing. Neither the proposed
Reliability Standard itself nor the NERC
Glossary of Terms defines what
constitutes a ‘‘reasonable cost’’ or ‘‘good
business practices.’’ Even if it did,
NERC, as the ERO, is not well
positioned to assess the reasonableness
of a registered entity’s economic
choices. Additionally, while ‘‘good
utility practice’’ has been widely used
in Commission-jurisdictional contracts
and tariffs,87 it has not been used in the
FPA section 215 context.88
45. The Commission has previously
rejected similar attempts to include
vaguely defined cost considerations in
Reliability Standards. Specifically, in
Order No. 706, the Commission directed
NERC to remove references to
reasonable business judgment in its
Reliability Standard.89 The Commission
largely based its finding on the fact that
NERC’s Glossary of Terms did not
define the term ‘‘reasonable business
judgment’’ and the Reliability Standard
itself did not suggest how the term
should be interpreted.90
46. We acknowledge that there may be
certain instances in which the cost of
retrofitting may be unduly burdensome.
To address such instances, NERC
should clearly define such exceptions
and present them for Commission
review. For example, one approach
could be for NERC to provide a limited
set of clearly defined circumstances that
could serve as constraints, such as an
attestation 91 from a generator owner or
generator operator that: (1) the
generating unit is scheduled to retire
within the next two years; (2)
implementing freeze protection
measures in accordance with the
Reliability Standard would cause the
generating unit to retire within two
87 See e.g., Midcontinent Indep. Sys. Operator,
Inc., 165 FERC ¶ 61,016, P 49 (2018).
88 16 U.S.C. 824o.
89 See Mandatory Reliability Standards for
Critical Infrastructure Protection, Order No. 706,
122 FERC ¶ 61,040, PP 137–38 (2008); order on
clarification, 126 FERC ¶ 61,229; order denying
clarification, 127 FERC ¶ 61,273 (2009).
90 See id. P 109.
91 As noted below, NERC shall receive, review,
evaluate, and confirm for validity any Generator
Cold Weather Constraint declaration in a timely
manner. Infra at P 54.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

years; or (3) they would cancel a newly
scheduled generating unit that has not
yet achieved commercial operation if
required to comply with the freeze
protection requirements of a Standard.92
Including discrete circumstances
regarding what constitutes an acceptable
economic constraint could provide
clarity to generator owners considering
constraint declarations and allow for an
objective and straightforward evaluation
of the constraint declaration criteria
during compliance monitoring
activities.
47. Accordingly, we direct NERC,
pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the
FPA, to develop and submit to the
Commission for approval modifications
to proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 that address concerns related to
the ambiguity of the newly defined
Generator Cold Weather Constraint term
and criteria. Specifically, we direct
NERC to ensure that the Generator Cold
Weather Constraint declaration criteria
included within the proposed
Reliability Standard are objective and
sufficiently detailed so that applicable
entities understand what is required of
them. One approach to satisfy this
directive could be to incorporate into
the proposed Reliability Standard a
limited and discrete list of
circumstances that would qualify as
acceptable constraints. We note that
NERC’s technical rationale document,93
created by NERC’s Standard Drafting
Team and included in NERC’s filing,
includes a list of technical constraints
that could serve as a starting point for
a list of circumstances that would
qualify as acceptable constraints. To the
extent that NERC continues to believe
that the extent of industry adoption for
winterization technologies should be a
criterion for declaring a constraint,
NERC should clearly explain in its filing
how it will assess the extent of such
adoption in a way that provides for
consistent compliance and enforcement
outcomes. Alternatively, NERC could
establish a pre-approval process for all
Generator Cold Weather Constraint
declarations. While a clearly defined list
may be preferable, a pre-approval
process could be established to ensure
entities’ declared Generator Cold
this example, generator owners or generator
operators should seek cost recovery through the
available cost recovery mechanisms prior to making
attestations about retirement.
93 See NERC, Drafting Team Reference Manual—
Version 5, at 8 (Jan. 2024), https://www.nerc.com/
pa/Stand/Resources/Documents/
Drafting%20Team%20Reference%20Manual%20_
clean_January%202024.pdf; see also NERC,
Technical Rationale for Reliability Standards FAQ,
at 1 (Mar. 2018), https://www.nerc.com/pa/Stand/
TechnicalRationale/
Technical%20Rationale%20FAQs_March2018.pdf.

PO 00000

92 For

Frm 00030

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

55245

Weather Constraints are appropriate and
can be supported and defended.
Further, as part of the directive to
develop and submit modifications to the
Generator Cold Weather Constraint
definition of proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2, we direct NERC,
pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the
FPA, to remove the references to ‘‘cost,’’
‘‘reasonable cost,’’ ‘‘unreasonable cost,’’
and ‘‘good business practices’’ and
replace them with criteria that are
objective, unambiguous, and auditable.
NERC may propose to develop
modifications that address the
Commission’s concerns in an equally
efficient and effective manner, however,
NERC must explain how its proposal
addresses the Commission’s concerns.94
2. Entity To Receive, Review, Evaluate,
and Confirm for Validity the Generator
Cold Weather Constraint Declarations
a. The Commission’s Directive in the
February 2023 Order
48. In the February 2023 Order, the
Commission directed NERC to identify
the entity that would receive and review
the generator owners’ constraint
declarations pursuant to Reliability
Standard EOP–012–1, Requirements R1
and R7, and to describe how that entity
would confirm that the generator
owners complied with the objective
criteria.95
b. NERC Petition
49. In response to the Commission’s
directive, NERC proposes new
Requirement R8, Part 8.2. NERC
proposes to require that any generating
unit cold weather operating limitations
due to declared constraints be provided
to the balancing authority, transmission
operator, or reliability coordinator via
data specifications to the generator
owners through other Reliability
Standard requirements.96 In its petition,
NERC states that its Standard Drafting
Team determined that having the
generator owner communicate the
practical impacts of declaring a
constraint to the entities that are
responsible for grid planning and
94 See

Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218 at P 186.
2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP

95 February

6, 66.
96 See NERC Petition at 63. The transmission
operators and balancing authorities, in accordance
with Reliability Standard TOP–003–5 (Operational
Reliability Data), must obtain the generating unit(s)
minimum design temperature, the historical
operating temperature, or the current cold weather
performance temperature determined by an
engineering analysis. See Reliability Standard TOP–
003–5, Requirement R1, Part 1.3.2. and
Requirement R2, Parts 2.3.2.1, 2.3.2.2., and 2.3.2.3.
Likewise, reliability coordinators must obtain this
information per Reliability Standard IRO–010–4
(Reliability Coordinator Data Specification).

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1

55246

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices

reliability would be the best way to
address the reliability concerns
contained in the Commission’s
directive.97
50. NERC explains that it and the
Regional Entities would be responsible
for assessing entity compliance with the
Generator Cold Weather Constraint
declaration provisions via an audit or
other compliance monitoring method.98
NERC also states that it and the Regional
Entities are preparing a ‘‘strategy for
performing robust compliance
monitoring and enforcement of the
currently effective and approved
generator cold weather Reliability
Standards.’’ 99 Further, NERC points to
the annual data request and analysis
that it asserts would allow the
Commission to understand the efficacy
of, and monitor the ongoing risk posed
by, technical, commercial, or
operational constraint provisions.100
51. NERC states that it and the
Regional Entities understand that they
will be assessing the reasonableness of
the process generator owners use to
declare Generator Cold Weather
Constraints.101 NERC notes that it will
take steps to ensure that its reviews are
‘‘conducted in a consistent manner
across the ERO Enterprise.’’ 102

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

c. Commission Determination
52. We find that proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 does not identify
an entity to receive the Generator Cold
Weather Constraint declarations, the
entity responsible for timely review of
the generator owners’ constraint
declarations, or the entity responsible
for ensuring that the declarations meet
the objective criteria of the proposed
Standard. Although we agree with
NERC that declared constraints can be
provided to the balancing authority,
transmission operator, or reliability
coordinator via data specifications
under existing Reliability Standards,
this does not address the Commission’s
directive that an entity review and
confirm that generator owners complied
with the constraint criteria.
53. NERC states that a review of the
Generator Cold Weather Constraint
declarations will occur during
compliance activities, and that it and
the Regional Entities are developing a
compliance monitoring strategy for the
cold weather Reliability Standards.103
We conclude, however, that NERC’s
97 See NERC Petition at 63 (citing February 2023
Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at P 66).
98 Id. at 63–64.
99 Id. at 69.
100 Id.
101 Id. at 10–11.
102 Id.
103 See id. at 63–64.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

proposal is not an equally efficient and
effective means to address the
Commission’s directive and underlying
concern. First, the NERC Rules of
Procedure contain no obligation to
periodically audit generator owners.
Only a handful of generator owners are
audited each year, and those audits do
not assess all Reliability Standards and
all requirements. Moreover, given the
significant reliability risk evidenced by
the failure of generating units during
recent extreme winter weather events,
we continue to believe that an enhanced
level of oversight remains necessary to
ensure that Generator Cold Weather
Constraints are only declared when
warranted. While generator owners’
responses to NERC’s annual data request
regarding the Generator Cold Weather
Constraint declarations are useful for a
wide-area event analysis or in
forecasting future trends,104 NERC’s
annual data request will only provide a
limited insight into the specific facts
and circumstances around a Generator
Cold Weather Constraint declaration.
For example, while the annual data
request is expected to indicate whether
the generator owner has declared a
constraint for a generating unit along
with the associated rationale(s) for each
declaration, it does not collect any
supporting documentation necessary to
justify the generator owners’ declared
constraints. As a result, we are not
persuaded that NERC’s annual data
request constitutes an adequate
substitute for an appropriate entity
contemporaneously reviewing and
confirming whether a generator owner
has complied with the objective
constraint criteria set out in proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2.105
54. Accordingly, we again direct
NERC, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of
the FPA, to modify proposed Reliability
Standard so that NERC receives,
reviews, evaluates, and confirms for
validity the Generator Cold Weather
Constraint declarations in a timely
manner. We also direct NERC to include
in its compliance filing, a plan to timely
review such declarations to verify
compliance with proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 and its successors
or obligations in a corrective action plan
and take corrective action where
necessary. For example, modifying
Standard to require the generator
owners to provide declarations (or
changes to the declarations) to NERC
within 45 days. It is up to NERC
104 See generally N. Am. Elec. Reliability Corp.,
Compliance Filing, Docket No. RD23–1–000 (Feb.
16, 2024).
105 February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP
6.

PO 00000

Frm 00031

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

whether it would like to delegate this
task to the relevant Regional Entities.
NERC may propose to develop
modifications that address the
Commission’s concerns in an equally
efficient and effective manner, however,
NERC must explain how its proposal
addresses the Commission’s
concerns.106
3. The Length of Corrective Action Plan
Implementation Deadlines
a. The Commission’s Directives in the
February 2023 Order
55. The Commission directed NERC to
develop three modifications pertaining
to the corrective action plan deadlines
set forth in Reliability Standard EOP–
012–1. First, the Commission directed
NERC to shorten the 60-month
timeframe for developing corrective
action plans for existing units.107 While
the Commission gave NERC discretion
to determine what the effective date
should be shortened to, it also
emphasized that ‘‘industry has been
aware of and alerted to the need to
prepare their generating units for cold
weather since at least 2011’’ and that
NERC should consider the ‘‘amount of
time that industry has already had to
implement freeze protection
measures.’’ 108 Second, the Commission
directed NERC to revise Reliability
Standard EOP–012–1 to include
deadlines for completing the corrective
actions in the plans.109 Specifically, the
Commission was concerned that the
lack of a deadline or maximum duration
for completing the corrective actions
could allow identified issues to remain
unresolved for an indefinite period.110
Third, the Commission directed NERC
to modify the Reliability Standard EOP–
012–1, Requirement R2, implementation
plan for generating units with a
commercial operation date prior to
October 1, 2027 to require a staggered
implementation of freeze protection
measures for existing units in a
generator owner’s fleet with an effective
date of less than 60 months from
regulatory approval.111
b. NERC’s Petition
56. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2 requires generator owners to
106 See

Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218 at P

186.
107 See

February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094
at PP 10, 24. Sixty months was determined based
on approved Reliability Standard EOP–012–1
becoming effective 18 months after the effective
date of applicable regulatory approvals combined
with the 42-month compliance date for Reliability
Standard EOP–012–1 Requirement R2.
108 Id. P 10.
109 Id. PP 9–10, 79, 88.
110 Id. PP 9–10, 77–79.
111 Id. PP 10, 38.

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices
develop, within 12-months after the
effective date of the Reliability
Standard, a corrective action plan for
their existing units to add new, or
modify existing, freeze protection
measures.112
57. NERC states that proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2 does
not include the staggered timeline for
the development of corrective action
plans that are required for existing
units.113 NERC shortened the timeline
to develop the corrective action plan for
all existing units to 12-months.
According to NERC’s proposal, the
generator owners are then allowed an
additional 24 months to implement the
corrective actions to modify existing
equipment or existing freeze protection
measures (Requirement R7.1.1) and 48
months for implementing corrective
actions requiring new equipment or new
freeze protection measures
(Requirement R7.1.2) listed in the
developed corrective action plans under
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2.114
58. In its petition, NERC explains that
it considered the Commission’s
directive to stagger implementation
across a fleet of generating units, but
determined that it would address
reliability risks quicker by establishing
a shorter period for full implementation
of proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 combined with ‘‘aggressive
timeframes’’ for implementing
corrective action plan measures.115
NERC also states that it is likely that
some natural staggering would occur as
entities seek to implement measures
across a fleet of generating units.
NERC’s Standard Drafting Team
determined that leaving entities with
flexibility in meeting timetables for
implementing corrective actions would
be ‘‘appropriate in the interest of
advancing cold weather reliability more
quickly and more efficiently.’’ 116
59. NERC also added a provision
permitting a generator owner to update
a corrective action plan implementation
timetable, with justification, if it
exceeds the 24- and 48-month
timeframes in Requirement R7 of the
proposed Reliability Standard.
60. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirement R2 allows
generator owners to have corrective
action plans for new generating units
that are similar to corrective actions
plans allowed for existing generating
112 See NERC Petition at 38–39; see also id. at Ex.
B at 3.
113 See id. at 67.
114 Id. at 50–51.
115 Id. at 67.
116 Id. at 68.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

units. NERC’s petition states that ‘‘[t]his
revision would drive ongoing reliability
improvements, through Corrective
Action Plans, if a new generator does
not have sufficient freeze protection
measures’’ at the time of commercial
operation, in accordance with proposed
Requirement R2.117
61. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirement R7 would
require generator owners to ‘‘include
timetables for implementing corrective
actions that are within specified
timeframes and to implement corrective
actions in accordance with those
timetables.’’ 118 The timetables would
require the completion of corrective
actions within 48 months of the
development of corrective action plans
for new equipment or freeze protection
measures.119 Proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2, Requirement R2
also establishes a compliance date of
October 1, 2027.120
c. Comments
62. The ISO/RTO Council is
concerned that even NERC’s shorter 24month period of implementation is still
too long and ‘‘do[es] not appropriately
reflect the urgency of winterizing
generating units.’’ 121 According to the
ISO/RTO Council, this is especially true
for those generating units that
experience a Generator Cold Weather
Reliability Event versus the like units
that are identified for corresponding
corrective action plans, which may be at
different geographic locations with
different weather/climate patterns and
will have different levels of risk of
experiencing future freeze related
issues. The ISO/RTO Council also
believes that proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 does not
sufficiently incentivize generator
owners to use best efforts to promptly
implement all immediate and near-term
winterization actions before the
upcoming winter season.122 The ISO/
RTO Council recommends that the
Commission direct NERC to revise
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 to include a requirement that
each generator owner document its best
efforts to promptly implement all
immediate and near-term actions prior
to the next upcoming winter season to
117 Id. at 43 (giving the example of a new
generating unit being too far along in its design
process to meet the more stringent requirements of
proposed Requirement R3 [R2] when it begins
commercial operation on or soon after October 1,
2027).
118 NERC Petition at 51.
119 Id.
120 Id. at 39–40.
121 ISO/RTO Council Protest at 19.
122 Id. at 25; see also ISO/RTO Council Answer
at 9–10.

PO 00000

Frm 00032

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

55247

winterize each generating unit to
operate at its calculated Extreme Cold
Weather Temperature.123
63. NERC replied to the ISO/RTO
Council’s concern by stating that the
Standard Drafting Team balanced the
need for prompt implementation of
freeze protection measures with ‘‘factors
influencing the ability to implement
those measures, particularly across a
fleet of units.’’ 124 In doing so, NERC
notes that its Standard Drafting Team
decided on an approach that would
allow generator owners less time to
implement protections with existing
equipment or freeze protection
measures and more time to implement
protections requiring new equipment or
freeze protection measures.125
64. Additionally, the ISO/RTO
Council objects to the extension
provision, believing that NERC and the
Regional Entities will only evaluate
timeline exceedance for appropriateness
and proper documentation after the fact,
either as part of ongoing data collections
or during compliance efforts.126 The
ISO/RTO Council recommends that the
Commission direct NERC to revise
Requirement R7, Part 7.3, to require
generator owners to apply for and
receive NERC or Regional Entity
approval to extend corrective action
plan implementation timeframes
beyond the timeframes established by
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2.127 In response, NERC disagrees
and states that it ‘‘has identified no
reliability need that would justify the
administrative burdens of such a
process in this case.’’ 128
d. Commission Determination
65. The Commission directed NERC to
shorten the 60-month deadline of
Requirement R2 of approved Reliability
Standard EOP–012–1 to develop
corrective action plans for existing
units.129 By giving generator owners 12months after the effective date of
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 to develop corrective action plans
to meet their Extreme Cold Weather
Temperature to add new or modify
existing freeze protection measures to
their existing units, we find that NERC
has met this directive through modified
Requirements R3 and R7 of proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2.
123 ISO/RTO Council Protest at 26; see also ISO/
RTO Council Answer at 10.
124 NERC Answer at 19–20.
125 Id. at 20.
126 ISO/RTO Council Protest at 20–22.
127 Id. at 22.
128 NERC Answer at 20–21.
129 February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at P
88.

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

55248

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices

66. Additionally, we are persuaded
that NERC’s proposed deadlines for
implementing corrective action plans
under Requirement R7 of proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2 meet
the Commission’s directive aimed at
establishing corrective action plan
implementation deadlines and will
provide a significant level of risk
reduction compared to the status quo.
NERC met the Commission’s directive
by incorporating different corrective
action plan completion timelines for
existing and new generating units (24and 48-months following corrective
action plan development, as noted in
Requirement R7 of the proposed
Reliability Standard) which will result
in staggered corrective action plan
implementation in stages. We find that
this equates to a staggered or phased
approach.
67. Nevertheless, we are concerned
that the length of NERC’s proposed 24and 48-month deadlines for
implementing corrective actions after a
generating unit’s failure is too long 130
and do not meet the Commission’s
directive, which sought to substantially
accelerate reliability risk mitigation.
Specifically, under NERC’s proposal,
resources that are impacted by a
Generator Cold Weather Reliability
Event (e.g., freezing issue resulting in a
forced outage or derate) are allowed
approximately 30 or 54 months to
mitigate the cause of the cold weather
failure, depending on whether existing
or new equipment or freeze protection
measures are needed to remedy the
freezing issue. Both Winter Storms Uri
and Elliott demonstrated that
unplanned cold weather-related
generation outages jeopardize BulkPower System reliability. As was seen
during those events, a generating unit
forced outage or derate caused by a
freezing issue is a known reliability risk.
For those generating units that fail to
operate during an extreme cold weather
reliability event, their risks must be
mitigated quicker than NERC proposes
regardless of whether existing or new
freeze protection measures are needed
on the units that experience failure.
68. Accordingly, we direct NERC,
pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the
FPA, to develop and submit
modifications to Requirement R7 of
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 to require shorter deadlines to
implement corrective actions for
existing or new equipment or the freeze
protection measures for those generating
units that experience a Generator Cold
Weather Reliability Event. Based on
130 Requirement R7 of proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

compliance with Requirements R2 and
R3, those generating units should have
already had appropriate freeze
protection measures implemented to be
capable of operating at the generating
units’ respective Extreme Cold Weather
Temperature. Therefore, we find that a
shorter timeframe to implement
corrective actions that address existing
or new equipment or freeze protection
measures is appropriate. For example, to
satisfy this directive, NERC could
require generator owners to implement
corrective actions prior to the next
winter season for generating units that
experience a Cold Weather Reliability
Event and to complete freeze protection
measures on similar equipment on all of
its fleet within 24 months of becoming
aware of the freeze issue. For corrective
action plans that involve larger and
more complicated implementations,
NERC could incorporate a staggered 48month corrective action plan
implementation deadline.131
69. In addition, we agree with the
ISO/RTO Council that without the
appropriate oversight of generator
owner’s proposed updates to the
corrective action plan implementation
deadlines, the established maximum
implementation deadlines in proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2,
Requirement R7 have less meaning and
allow a known reliability risk to remain
on the Bulk-Power System for a longer
time. In light of this reliability risk, we
find that any updates to corrective
action plan timeframes beyond the
maximum implementation timeframes
under Requirement R7 must be
reviewed and approved by NERC.
70. Therefore, we direct NERC,
pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the
FPA, to develop and submit
modifications to Requirement R7 of
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 to ensure that any extension of a
corrective action plan implementation
deadline beyond the maximum
implementation timeframe required by
the proposed Reliability Standard is preapproved by NERC. This approach is
consistent with prior Commission
action in Order No. 851 where the
Commission directed NERC to require
pre-approval for extensions beyond the
timelines required in the Reliability
Standard.132 In Order No. 851, the
131 NERC may propose modifications that address
the Commission’s concerns in an equally efficient
and effective manner; however, NERC must explain
how its proposal addresses the Commission’s
concerns. See Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218 at
P 186.
132 See, e.g., Geomagnetic Disturbance Reliability
Standard; Reliability Standard for Transmission
Sys, Planned Performance for Geomagnetic
Disturbance Events, Order No. 851, 165 FERC

PO 00000

Frm 00033

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

Commission explained that although
case-by-case extension determinations
may be more uncertain or have
associated burdens, the more
compelling imperative is that automatic
extensions have the potential for abuse
by unduly delaying mitigation, and
would lead to delayed visibility for
NERC.133
71. NERC asserts that, during the first
three years that proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 is mandatory and
effective, generator owners that are well
into their construction phase should
have additional time (compared to a
project at a lesser stage of construction)
to complete corrective action plans for
elements already designed.134 NERC
explains that extra time is needed
because NERC, in its technical rational,
states that ‘‘there needs to be allowances
made for units that are in the
development process, and for which the
design phase may have already
commenced.’’ 135 We are persuaded by
NERC’s rationale that in this scenario
the generator owner may need
additional time. However, we are
concerned that the proposed Reliability
Standard, as currently written, does not
make a clear demarcation between
projects well into their construction
phase and those at a lesser phase of
construction; therefore, it could
inadvertently be interpreted to allow a
generator owner to have 48-months
beyond its commercial operation date to
implement Requirement R2 corrective
action plans, even if the generator
owner has not yet begun to construct its
generating unit.
72. We thus find that generators that
are commercially operational after
October 1, 2027, should have freeze
protection measures either designed
into their generating systems, or, if a
corrective action plan is needed, then it
should be completed by the time that
such generating units go into
commercial operation. Accordingly, we
direct NERC, pursuant to section
215(d)(5) of the FPA, to develop and
submit modifications to Requirement R7
of proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
¶ 61,124, at P 54 (2018) (directing NERC to revise
Reliability Standard TPL–007–2 (Transmission
System Planned Performance for Geomagnetic
Disturbance Events) to include a process through
which corrective action plan extensions are
considered on a case-by-case basis. NERC later
revised Reliability Standard TPL–007–2,
Requirement R7.4; N. Am. Elec. Reliability Corp.,
Docket No. RD20–3–000, at 1 (Mar. 19, 2020) (a
delegated order approving Reliability Standard
TPL–007–4, which requires entities to seek
approval from the ERO of any extensions of time
for the completion of corrective action plan items).
133 Order No. 851, 165 FERC ¶ 61,124 at P 55.
134 NERC Petition, Ex. C, at 9.
135 Id.

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices
012–2 to clarify that any Requirement
R2 corrective action plans must be
completed prior to the generating unit’s
commercial operation date.
4. Corrective Action Plan
Implementation Timeline Ambiguities
a. NERC Petition
73. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirement R7 states that
a 24-month timeline applies to
corrective actions that address existing
equipment or freeze protection
measures and a 48-month timeline
applies to corrective actions that require
new equipment or freeze protection
measures.136 NERC’s Standard Drafting
Team stated that generator owners
would be able to use ‘‘appropriate
judgment’’ to determine the appropriate
timeline for corrective action in
accordance with Requirement R7 of
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2.137
b. Comments

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

74. The ISO/RTO Council requests
clarification on which corrective action
implementation timeline applies to
which corrective actions under
Requirement R7 of proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2.138 The ISO/RTO
Council argues that some corrective
actions might involve the application of
new freeze protection measures on
existing equipment or the extension of
existing freeze protection measures to
newly installed equipment, thereby
implicating both timelines. Thus, it is
unclear to them which timeline applies
in such situations.139 The ISO/RTO
Council recommends that the
Commission direct NERC to revise
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 to apply the shorter of the two
timelines to corrective actions that do
not require the installation of new
equipment.140
75. The ISO/RTO Council states that
while the use of professional judgment
is a common method for navigating
ambiguities, the fact that professional
judgment exists is not a valid basis for
approving an ambiguous Reliability
Standard.141 In response, NERC states
that the Commission should not direct
NERC to clarify the periods allotted for
the implementation of freeze protection
measures because its strategy is
consistent with Order No. 672.142
136 Id.,

Ex. A at 8 (emphasis added).
Ex. F at 190.
138 ISO/RTO Council Protest at 23.
139 Id. at 22–23.
140 Id.
141 Id. at 24.
142 NERC Answer at 5 (citing to discussion in
Order No. 672 that requires the Commission, when
137 Id.,

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

c. Commission Determination
76. We believe that proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2,
Requirement R7’s corrective action plan
implementation deadlines have
remaining ambiguities that need to be
addressed. As noted above, the
Commission has previously expressed
similar concerns regarding the
vagueness and enforceability of
Reliability Standards language.143
Specifically, we agree with the concerns
raised by the ISO/RTO Council that
Requirement R7 of proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 does not provide
clear direction as to the required
corrective action plan implementation
timeline that applies to certain generator
owners. For example, it is unclear how
the corrective action plan
implementation timeline would apply if
a generator owner had combinations of
both existing and new equipment for
freeze protection measures.
Accordingly, we direct NERC, pursuant
to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, to
develop and submit modifications to
Requirement R7 of proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 to address these
ambiguities by expanding on
Requirement R7.1.1 and 7.1.2 to make it
clear which corrective action plan
implementation deadline applies to
which generator owner.
5. Proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2, Requirements R2, R3, and R6,
Footnotes 1, 2, and 4
a. NERC’s Petition
77. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirements R2, R3, and
R6 contain new and identical footnotes
1, 2, and 4, respectively.144 These
footnotes indicate that generating units
that do not self-commit or are not
required to operate at or below a
temperature of 32 degrees Fahrenheit
but ‘‘may be called upon to operate in
order to assist in the mitigation of [bulk
electric system] Emergencies, Capacity
Emergencies, or Energy Emergencies
determining whether a proposed Standard is just
and reasonable, to consider the timetable for the
implementation of new requirements, including the
urgency of the need for implementation with the
reasonableness of time for entities that must
comply); Order No. 672, 114 FERC ¶ 61,104 at P
328.
143 As further discussed above, in both Order No.
693 and Order No. 791, the Commission approved
NERC’s proposed Reliability Standards as an
improvement to the reliable operation of the BulkPower System, while also directing NERC to submit
modifications to the Reliability Standards to
address the Commission’s concern regarding the
ambiguities contained in particular language. See
Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218 at PP 1, 461; see
also Order No. 791, 145 FERC¶ 61,160 at PP 49–53,
67, 69.
144 See NERC Petition at 38–39, 48.

PO 00000

Frm 00034

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

55249

during periods at or below a
temperature of 32 degrees Fahrenheit
(zero degrees Celsius) are exempt’’ from
Requirements R2, R3, and R6.145
b. Comments
78. The ISO/RTO Council raises
concerns regarding the limitations on
applicability created by footnotes 1, 2,
and 4 in Requirements R2, R3, and R6
of proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2.146 The ISO/RTO Council
believes that this exemption should be
limited to truly seasonal generating
units that will not be called upon to
operate during freezing conditions, even
during bulk electric system
emergencies.147 Thus, the ISO/RTO
Council recommends that the
Commission direct NERC to either
remove the footnotes 1, 2, and 4 or
revise Requirements R2, R3, and R6 by
replacing the phrase ‘‘self-commits or is
required to operate’’ with ‘‘that may be
committed to operate.’’ 148
79. In response, NERC states that ‘‘the
appropriateness of this limited
exemption is a settled matter.’’ 149 NERC
notes that this exemption was included
in Reliability Standard EOP–012–1 and
the Commission already approved that
Reliability Standard with this
delineation.150 NERC reiterates that the
exemptions, as written, are intended to
incentivize generating units that do not
normally operate in freezing conditions
to participate in mitigating a bulk
electric system emergency.151
80. TAPS agrees with NERC and states
that these exemptions are appropriate
and that NERC’s applicability section
modifications are in line with the
Commission’s February 2023 Order.152
TAPS states that, under NERC’s
proposed modifications to Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2, the system
operator should have already requested
and received operational limitation data
from each bulk electric system
generating unit in its footprint; thus,
there is no additional step for an ISO or
RTO to take to identify which
145 Id.
146 ISO/RTO

Council Protest at 15–17.
at 16–17.
148 Id. at 18 (stating that this would allow truly
seasonal generating units that are ineligible to be
committed to operate during freezing conditions to
be exempt from Requirements R2, R3, and R6 of
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–012–2).
149 NERC Answer at 16–17 (stating that the ISO/
RTO Council’s concern is an ‘‘untimely attack on
an issue that was previously decided by the
Commission’’ when it approved EOP–012–1); see
also February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at P
60.
150 NERC Answer at 16.
151 Id.
152 TAPS Answer at 9–12 (citing to the February
2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at P 58).
147 Id.

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1

55250

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices

generating units can operate under
particular conditions.153
c. Commission Determination
81. While we appreciate the ISO/RTO
Council’s concern, we agree with NERC
and TAPS that the exemptions set forth
in Requirements R2, R3, and R6,
footnotes 1, 2, and 4, respectively, are
appropriate and that NERC’s
applicability section modifications are
in line with the Commission’s February
2023 Order. We agree with NERC’s aim
of exempting generating units that do
not self-commit or are not required to
operate at or below a temperature of 32
degrees Fahrenheit and are not
persuaded that a directive is warranted
at this time to further narrow this
exemption. We expect that, as part of its
compliance monitoring activities, NERC
will continue to monitor the application
of the exemption to ensure its
application is consistent with the
generating units’ actual obligations
pursuant to relevant tariffs, contracts,
regulations, or other binding
requirements.
6. Different Winterization Criteria for
New and Existing Generating Units
a. NERC’s Petition
82. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirements R2 and R3
carry forward the cold weather
operational capability requirements for
new and existing bulk electric system
units from approved Reliability
Standard EOP–012–1, Requirements R1
and R2, respectively.154 Proposed
Requirement R2 applies to generating
units that are in commercial operation
on or after October 1, 2027, and requires
them to implement freeze protection
measures to protect Generator Cold
Weather Critical Components that
provide the capability to operate at the
unit’s Extreme Cold Weather
Temperature with sustained concurrent
20 mph wind speed for a period of not
less than 12 continuous hours or the
maximum operational duration for
intermittent energy resources if less
than 12 continuous hours.155 Proposed
Requirement R3 applies to generating
units that are in commercial operation
prior to October 1, 2027, and requires
them to implement freeze protection

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

153 Id.

at 11–12.
Petition at 37.
155 Id. at 38 (noting that if they are unable to do
so, then the generator owner must develop a
corrective action plan to add new or modify
existing or previously planned freeze protection
measures to provide the capability to operate at the
unit’s Extreme Cold Weather Temperature with
sustained concurrent 20 mph wind speed for a
period of not less than 12 continuous hours or the
maximum operational duration for intermittent
energy resources if less than 12 continuous hours).
154 NERC

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

measures to protect Generator Cold
Weather Critical Components that
provide the capability to operate at the
unit’s Extreme Cold Weather
Temperature.156 During the drafting
process, NERC’s Standard Drafting
Team responded to comments by stating
that having separate requirements for
new and existing units is appropriate
given that some generating units would
be difficult to retrofit and that existing
units can provide reliable performance
at temperatures above their Extreme
Cold Weather Temperature.157
b. Comments
83. The ISO/RTO Council objects to
having different winterization criteria
for new and existing generating units,
noting that new units have to meet more
stringent requirements. The ISO/RTO
Council states that, while some older
generating units may not be able to
perform at Requirement R2’s more
stringent standard, many generating
units that enter commercial operation
before October 1, 2027, should be able
to do so.158
84. The ISO/RTO Council believes
that while some generating units would
be difficult to retrofit in some cases, the
Winter Storms Uri and Elliott Inquiry
reports cautioned against setting a lower
winterization standard for an entire
category of generating units.159 The ISO/
RTO Council recommends that the
Commission direct NERC to remove
Requirement R3 and revise Requirement
R2 to apply to all generating units,
regardless of when they achieved
commercial operation.160
85. In its answer, NERC asserts that
the ISO/RTO Council’s argument on
grandfathering provisions is an
untimely attack on a Commissionapproved issue.161
c. Commission’s Determination
86. We agree with NERC that it is
appropriate to have separate
requirements for new and existing
generating units within proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2,
Requirements R2 and R3,
respectively.162 NERC’s Standard
Drafting Team discussed applying the
same requirements to existing units and
new units but determined that these
156 Id. at 39 (stating that if they are unable to do
so, then the generator owner must develop a
corrective action plan to add new or modify
existing freeze protection measures to provide the
capability to operate at the unit’s Extreme Cold
Weather Temperature).
157 Id., Ex. F at 103, 291.
158 ISO/RTO Council Protest at 26–27.
159 Id. at 27–28.
160 Id. at 28.
161 See NERC Answer at 23.
162 See NERC Petition, Ex. F at 450, 452.

PO 00000

Frm 00035

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

requirements would be difficult to
retrofit and may not be justified
‘‘provided that existing units can prove
reliable performance at temperatures
above their’’ Extreme Cold Weather
Temperature.163 We also note that the
Commission approved NERC’s proposal
to have different winterization criteria
for new and existing generating units in
the February 2023 Order and no
concerns with having different
winterization criteria were raised in that
proceeding.164 Nevertheless, we
strongly encourage existing generating
units that are capable of implementing
the more detailed freeze protection
measures and corrective actions in line
with proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirement R2 to do so.
7. Annual Inspection and Maintenance
of Generating Units Freeze Protection
Measures
a. NERC’s Petition
87. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirement R4, Part 4.5
requires the annual inspection and
maintenance of generating unit freeze
protection measures.165
b. Comments
88. The ISO/RTO Council expresses
concern that without any reference to
timing other than a requirement for
‘‘annual’’ inspections and maintenance,
this provision will not result in timely
preparations for upcoming cold weather
operations.166 The ISO/RTO Council
recommends that the Commission direct
NERC to revise proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 to require
inspections and maintenance of all
generating units to occur on at least an
annual basis and always within three
months of the upcoming winter
season.167
89. NERC agrees that it is a good
practice to inspect and maintain freeze
protection measures before an upcoming
winter season.168 NERC disagrees,
however, that the proposed Reliability
Standard needs to require ‘‘in detail the
timing of the required annual
inspections for it to be a just and
reasonable standard.’’ Moreover, NERC
states, the Commission approved
163 Id.
164 See February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094
at PP 1–2, 47.
165 See NERC Petition at 45; see also NERC
Petition, Ex. A at 7.
166 ISO/RTO Council Protest at 31; see also ISO/
RTO Council Answer at 11.
167 ISO/RTO Council Protest at 31–32; see also
ISO/RTO Council Answer at 11.
168 NERC Answer at 26.

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices
b. Comments

Reliability Standard EOP–012–1
without such specificity.169
c. Commission Determination
90. We find that it is premature to
address the ISO/RTO Council’s
recommendation that the Commission
direct NERC to revise the proposed
Reliability Standard to require
inspections and maintenance of all
generating units to occur on at least an
annual basis and always within three
months of the upcoming winter
season.170 We believe that requiring the
annual inspection and maintenance of
generating unit freeze protection
measures is adequate at this time. By
requiring the annual inspection and
maintenance of generator freeze
protection measures, proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2 (and its
predecessor, approved Reliability
Standard EOP–012–1) represent a
significant improvement upon the
previously effective set of Reliability
Standards, which did not include such
requirements. Although we agree with
both the ISO/RTO Council and NERC
that it is a good practice to inspect and
maintain freeze protection measures
before an upcoming winter season, we
are not persuaded that such additional
specificity is necessary at this time.
NERC has committed to monitoring the
implementation of this new Standard
and, in doing so, can determine whether
there are outage patterns or other data
that suggest the need for additional
specificity.171
8. The Five-Year Review Period for
Declared Generator Cold Weather
Constraints
a. NERC’s Petition

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

91. Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirement R8.1 states
that each generator owner that declares
a Generator Cold Weather Constraint
shall review the declaration at least
every five calendar years or as needed
when a change of status to the Generator
Cold Weather Constraint occurs.172
169 Id. (stating that it could consider the ISO/RTO
Council’s proposal at a later date if the
implementation of proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, Requirement R4 suggests that more
specificity would advance reliability).
170 ISO/RTO Council Protest at 31–32; see also
ISO/RTO Council Answer at 11.
171 See, e.g., FERC, NERC, and Regional Entity
Staff, Inquiry into Bulk-Power System Operations
During December 2022 Winter Storm Elliott, at 132
(Oct. 2023), https://www.ferc.gov/news-events/
news/ferc-nerc-release-final-report-lessons-winterstorm-elliott (October 2023 Report)
(recommendation 1(b)).
172 NERC’s Petition at 62.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

92. The ISO/RTO Council expresses
concern that once a generator owner
declares a Generator Cold Weather
Constraint, proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 only requires the
generator owner to review that
constraint every five years,173 which
lowers the bar for bulk electric system
winterization and reliability by delaying
the identification and adoption of new
freeze protection technologies.174 The
ISO/RTO Council states that a five-year
review period tips the scales in favor of
slow installation and application of new
technologies and ‘‘would result in years
elapsing’’ between a new freeze
protection technology becoming viable
and a generator owner evaluating that
technology as part of its routine review
of a constraint.175 As such, the ISO/RTO
Council recommends that the
Commission direct NERC to revise
proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 to require that constraint
declaration reviews be performed
annually instead of every five years.
93. NERC disagrees with the ISO/RTO
Council’s arguments and states that
many commenters in the standard
development process expressed concern
that annual reviews would be ‘‘an
administrative burden [with] no
reliability benefit.’’ 176 NERC also states
that five-year reviews were selected
because the technology and price of
freeze protections are unlikely to change
significantly over the course of a
year.177
c. Commission Determination
94. We agree with the ISO/RTO
Council that the proposed five-year
review period for the declared Generator
Cold Weather Constraints in
Requirement R8.1 could delay the
identification and adoption of new
freeze protection measures and does not
represent the current pace of
technological advancements. We
acknowledge that a more frequent
review does impose some additional
administrative burden to the generator
owner to review the technological
advancements that hindered its ability
to winterize; nonetheless, a lengthy
period between a Generator Cold
Weather Constraint declaration review
by the generator owner offers little
incentive to timely adopt new freeze
ISO/RTO Council Protest at 29; see also
NERC Petition, Ex. A at 9.
174 ISO/RTO Council Protest at 29.
175 Id. at 30.
176 NERC Answer at 25 (referencing the
development history of the proposed Standard and
citing commenter concerns).
177 Id.

PO 00000

173 See

Frm 00036

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

55251

protection technologies. Accordingly,
we direct NERC, pursuant to section
215(d)(5) of the FPA, to develop and
submit modifications to Requirement
R8, Part 8.1 of proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2 to implement
more frequent reviews of Generator Cold
Weather Constraint declarations to
verify that the declaration remains
valid. NERC may propose to develop
modifications that address the
Commission’s concerns in an equally
efficient and effective manner, however,
NERC must explain how its proposal
addresses the Commission’s
concerns.178
9. Cost Recovery Mechanisms
a. Comments
95. While NEPGA recognizes that the
Commission found cost recovery to be
outside the scope in connection with its
February 2023 Order, it asks the
Commission to recognize the near-term
need for ISO–NE, generator owners, and
other stakeholders to work together to
ensure that cost recovery opportunities
exit under the ISO–NE tariff.179 NEPGA
argues that the ISO–NE tariff provisions
do not appear to allow an existing
capacity resource to reflect capital costs,
such as those that may be incurred to
modify or add freeze protection
equipment.180 EPSA’s Answer supports
NEPGA’s comments about cost recovery
and asks the Commission to assess all
markets within its jurisdiction to
determine whether there are sufficient
vehicles for recovery of winterization
costs.181
96. The ISO/RTO Council
acknowledges that cost recovery is
‘‘critically important’’ but argues that
costs should not be included as part of
a Reliability Standard. Instead, the ISO/
RTO Council contends that cost
recovery should be addressed through a
rate proceeding overseen by the
Commission or another applicable
regulatory authority (e.g., state or
provincial).182 The ISO/RTO Council
requests that the Commission ‘‘indicate
its intention to allow for cost recovery’’
for the extreme cold weather Reliability
Standards and direct its Office of Energy
Market Regulation to survey those
markets within its jurisdiction to
determine whether there are sufficient
178 See

Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218 at P

186.
179 NEPGA Comments at 2 (citing February 2023
Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at P 83).
180 Id. (citing Cogentrix Energy Power Mgmt., LLC
v. FERC, 24 F.4th 677, 683–4 (D.C. Cir. 2022) to
express concern that costs incurred prior to the
effective date of an associated rate recovery
mechanism would be unrecoverable).
181 EPSA Answer at 3–5.
182 ISO/RTO Council Answer at 4–7.

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1

55252

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices
section 3507(d) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995.188 OMB’s
regulations require approval of certain
information collection requirements
imposed by agency rules.189 Upon
approval of a collection of information,
OMB will assign an OMB control
number and expiration date. Comments
on the collection of information are due
within 60 days of the date this order is
published in the Federal Register.
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.
100. The Commission solicits
comments on the Commission’s need for
this information, whether the
information will have practical utility,
the accuracy of the burden estimates,
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be collected
or retained, and any suggested methods
for minimizing respondents’ burden,
including the use of automated
information techniques.
101. The EOP Standards are currently
located in the FERC–725S (OMB Control
No. 1902–0270) collection.190 In Docket
No. RD24–5–000, the Commission
proposes to replace the current OMB
approved Reliability Standard EOP–
012–1 with proposed Reliability

vehicles for cost recovery of
winterization measures.183
97. NERC asserts that while it would
support market-related actions that
advance the goal of generator reliability,
it has no opinion with respect to the
specific cost recovery declaration and
survey proposed by the ISO/RTO
Council.184 NERC states that it defers to
the Commission’s expertise on cost
recovery.
b. Commission Determination
98. We find the question of whether
existing market mechanisms provide an
opportunity to recover the prudently
incurred costs of compliance with the
proposed Reliability Standard to be
outside the scope of the instant
proceeding, consistent with our finding
in the February 2023 Order.185 To the
extent that there are concerns about
whether existing rates or tariffs allow for
the recovery of all prudently incurred
costs necessary to comply with
mandatory Reliability Standards as
required by FPA section 219,186 such
questions are more appropriately
addressed in proceedings pursuant to
FPA sections 205 or 206.187
IV. Information Collection Statement
99. The information collection
requirements contained in this Order
are subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under

Standard EOP–012–2 (Table 1).
Proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 has eight requirements, seven of
which have been carried over and
modified from the already approved
Reliability Standard EOP–012–1
(Requirements R1–R7) and one of which
is new (Requirement R8).
102. The estimates in the tables below
are based, in combination, on one-time
(years 1 and 2) and ongoing execution
(year 3) obligations to follow the revised
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2.
103. The number of respondents
below are based on an estimate of the
NERC compliance registry for generator
owners and generator operators.
Proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 applies to generator owners and
generator operators. The Commission
based its paperwork burden estimates
on the NERC compliance registry as of
April 16, 2024. According to the registry
for US unique entities, there are 1,210
generator owners. The estimates in the
tables below are based on the change in
burden from the Reliability Standards
approved in this order.191 The
Commission based the burden estimates
in the tables below on staff experience,
knowledge, and expertise.
Public Reporting Burden: The
estimated costs and burden for the
revisions in Docket No. RD24–5–000 are
shown in the table below.

TABLE 1—PROPOSED CHANGES DUE TO FINAL RULE IN DOCKET NO. RD24–5–000 FOR EOP–012–2
Number of
annual
responses
per entity

Type and
number of
entity

Reliability standard &
requirement

I

(1)

Total number
of responses

(2)

I

I (1) * (2) = (3)

Average number of
burden hours
per response 192

Total burden hours

(4)

(3) * (4) = (5)

FERC–725S
One Time Estimate—Years 1 and 2 EOP–012–2
EOP–012–2 ..............................
Sub-Total for EOP–012–2
(one-time).

1,210 (GO) .....

1

1,210

5 hrs., $373.15 ..............

6,050 hrs., $451,511.5.

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

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

1,210

5 hrs., $373.15 ..............

6,050 hrs., $451,511.5.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

Ongoing Estimate—Year 3 ongoing EOP–012–2
EOP–012–2 ..............................

1,210 (GO) .....

1

1,210

2 hrs.,193 $149.26 ..........

2,420 hrs., $180,604.6.

Sub-Total for EOP–012–2
(ongoing).
Sub-Total of ongoing burden averaged over three
years.

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

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

1,210

2 hrs., $149.26 ..............

2,420 hrs., $180,604.6.

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

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

404

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

807 hrs., $60,226.41.

183 Id.

at 4.
Answer at 12.
185 See February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094
at P 83.
186 16 U.S.C. 824s(b)(4)(A).
187 Id. sec. 824d; see also id. sec. 824e.
184 NERC

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

U.S.C. 3507(d).
CFR 1320 (2023).
190 The FERC–725S collection includes the EOP
family of Reliability Standards: EOP–004–4, EOP
005–3, EOP–006–3, EOP–008–2, EOP–010–1, EOP–
011–4, and EOP–012–2.

PO 00000

188 44
189 5

Frm 00037

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

191 The overall burden associated with Reliability
Standard EOP–012 will be the sum of the burden
(responses) from Reliability Standard EOP–012–1
(under RD23–1–000) and Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2 (under RD24–5–000).

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1

55253

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices

TABLE 1—PROPOSED CHANGES DUE TO FINAL RULE IN DOCKET NO. RD24–5–000 FOR EOP–012–2—Continued
Reliability standard &
requirement

Proposed Total Burden
Estimate of EOP–012–2.

Type and
number of
entity

Number of
annual
responses
per entity

Total number
of responses

Average number of
burden hours
per response 192

Total burden hours

(1)

(2)

(1) * (2) = (3)

(4)

(3) * (4) = (5)

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

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

1,614

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

6,857 hrs., $511,737.91.

Changes to FERC 725S by RD24–5–000
FERC–725S modification

Current
inventory
(hours)

Current
inventory
(responses)

Total change due to RD24–5–000

Addition of EOP–012–2 ...........

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

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

+6,857 hrs., +1,614 responses.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

Titles: FERC–725S, Mandatory
Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power
System; EOP Reliability Standards.
Action: Revisions to Existing
Collections of Information in FERC–
725S.
OMB Control Nos: 1902–0270 (FERC–
725S).
Respondents: Business or other for
profit, and not for profit institutions.
Frequency of Responses: Annually.
Necessity of the Information:
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2
(Extreme Cold Weather Preparedness
and Operations) is part of the
implementation of the Congressional
mandate of the Energy Policy Act of
2005 to develop mandatory and
enforceable Reliability Standards to
better ensure the reliability of the
nation’s Bulk-Power System.
Specifically, the revised Reliability
Standard ensures that generating
resources are prepared for local cold
weather events and that entities will
effectively communicate the
information needed for operating the
Bulk-Power System.
Internal Review: The Commission has
reviewed the revised 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
192 The estimated hourly cost (salary plus
benefits) is a combination based on the Bureau of
Labor Statistics (BLS), as of 2024, for seventy five
percent of the average of an Electrical Engineer (17–
2071)—$79.31 and mechanical engineers (17–
2141)—$89.86. ($79.31 + $89.86)/2 = 84.585 × .75
= 63.439 ($63.44-rounded) ($63.44/hour) and
twenty-five percent of an Information and Record
Clerk (43–4199) $44.74 × .25% = 11.185 ($11.19
rounded) ($11.19/hour), for a total ($63.44 + $11.19
= $74.63/hour).
193 A fraction of generator owners would be
required to perform the task on an ongoing basis,
and the hours represent the whole body of generator
owners.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

burden estimates associated with the
information requirements.
a. Description of the Revision to
FERC–725S: The FERC–725S (OMB
Control No. 1902–0270) is an existing
information collection that contains the
requirements for the EOP–012–1
Reliability Standard. As described in the
Docket No. RD24–1–000 above, the
Reliability Standard (EOP–012–1) is
proposed to be retired and replaced by
EOP–012–2.
104. Interested persons may obtain
information on the reporting
requirements by contacting the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, Office
of the Executive Director, 888 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20426
[Attention: Jean Sonneman, email:
DataClearance@ferc.gov, phone: (202)
502–6362].
105. Comments concerning the
information collections and
requirements approved for retirement in
this order and the associated burden
estimates, should be sent to the
Commission (identified by Docket No.
RD24–5–000), using the following
methods: Electronic filing through
https://www.ferc.gov is preferred.
Electronic Filing should be filed in
acceptable native applications and
print-to-PDF, but not in scanned or
picture format. For those unable to file
electronically, comments may be filed
by USPS mail or by hand (including
courier) delivery: Mail via U.S. Postal
Service Only: Addressed to: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission,
Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand
(including courier) delivery: Deliver to:
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, MD
20852.
V. Environmental Analysis
106. The Commission is required to
prepare an Environmental Assessment
or an Environmental Impact Statement

PO 00000

Frm 00038

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

for any action that may have a
significant adverse effect on the human
environment.194 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.195 The
actions directed herein fall within this
categorical exclusion in the
Commission’s regulations.
VI. Document Availability
107. In addition to publishing the full
text of this document in the Federal
Register, the Commission provides all
interested persons an opportunity to
view and/or print the contents of this
document via the internet through the
Commission’s Home Page (http://
www.ferc.gov).
108. 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.
109. User assistance is available for
eLibrary and the Commission’s website
during normal business hours from the
Commission’s Online Support at (202)
502–6652 (toll free at 1–866–208–3676)
or email at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov,
or the Public Reference Room at (202)
502–8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. Email
the Public Reference Room at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
The Commission orders:
194 Reguls. Implementing the Nat’l Env’t Pol’y
Act, Order No. 486, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,783
(1987) (cross-referenced at 41 FERC ¶ 61,284).
195 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii) (2023).

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1

55254

Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 128 / Wednesday, July 3, 2024 / Notices

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

(A) Proposed Reliability Standard
EOP–012–2, the associated violation
risk factors and violation severity levels,
the implementation plan, the newly
defined terms Fixed Fuel Supply
Component and Generator Cold Weather
Constraint, the revised defined terms
Generator Cold Weather Critical
Component and Generator Cold Weather
Reliability Event, and the retirement of
Reliability Standard EOP–012–1
immediately prior to the effective date
of proposed Reliability Standard EOP–
012–2, are hereby approved, as
discussed in the body of this order.
(B) NERC’s proposed implementation
date for Reliability Standard EOP–011–
4, as well as the proposed retirement of
Reliability Standards EOP–011–2 and
EOP–011–3 immediately prior to the
effective date of proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2, are hereby
approved, as discussed in the body of
this order.
(C) NERC is hereby directed to
develop and submit, within nine
months of the date of issuance of this
order, modifications to proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–012–2 to
address the Commission’s concerns,
including but not limited to, the
Generator Cold Weather Constraint
criteria definition, modifying the
proposed Standard so that NERC
reviews, receives, evaluates, and
confirms for validity each generator
owner’s constraint declarations against
the developed criteria, shortening and
clarifying the corrective action plan
implementation deadlines outlined in
Requirement R7 of proposed Reliability
Standard EOP–012–2, ensuring that the
any extension of a corrective action plan
implementation deadline beyond the
maximum implementation timeframe
required by the proposed Standard is
pre-approved by NERC, and
implementing a more frequent review of
the Generator Cold Weather Constraint
declarations in accordance with
Requirement R8.1 of proposed
Reliability Standard EOP–021–2, as
discussed in the body of this order.
By the Commission. Commissioner Rosner
is not participating.
Issued: June 27, 2024.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024–14668 Filed 7–2–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014

19:36 Jul 02, 2024

Jkt 262001

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
[Project No. 1994–008]

Heber Light & Power Company; Notice
of Intent To File License Application,
Filing of Pre-Application Document,
and Approving Use of the Traditional
Licensing Process
a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to
File License Application and Request to
Use the Traditional Licensing Process
(TLP).
b. Project No.: 1994–008.
c. Dated Filed: April 30, 2024.
d. Submitted By: Heber Light & Power
Company (Heber L&P).
e. Name of Project: Snake Creek
Hydroelectric Project.
f. Location: On Snake Creek about 2
miles northwest of Midway City, in
Wasatch County, Utah. The project
occupies 8.15 acres of Forest Service
land administered by the UintaWasatch-Cache National Forest.
g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 of the
Commission’s regulations.
h. Applicant Contact: Jason Norlen,
General Manager, Heber Light & Power
Company, 31 S 100 W, Heber City, Utah
84032; (435) 654–2913; email: jnorlen@
heberpower.com.
i. FERC Contact: Khatoon Melick at
(202) 502–8433 or email at
khatoon.melick@ferc.gov.
j. Heber L&P filed its request to use
the TLP on April 30, 2024, and provided
public notice of its request on May 22,
2024. In a letter dated June 27, 2024, the
Acting Director of the Division of
Hydropower Licensing approved Heber
L&P’s request to use the Traditional
Licensing Process.
k. With this notice, we are initiating
informal consultation with the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service under section 7 of
the Endangered Species Act and the
joint agency regulations thereunder at
50 CFR part 402; and NOAA Fisheries
under section 305(b) of the MagnusonStevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Act and implementing
regulations at 50 CFR 600.920. We are
also initiating consultation with the
Utah State Historic Preservation Officer,
as required by section 106, National
Historic Preservation Act, and the
implementing regulations of the
Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
l. Heber L&P filed a Pre-Application
Document (PAD; including a proposed
process plan and schedule) with the
Commission, pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of
the Commission’s regulations.
m. A copy of the PAD may be viewed
on the Commission’s website (http://

PO 00000

Frm 00039

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

www.ferc.gov), using the ‘‘eLibrary’’
link. Enter the docket number,
excluding the last three digits in the
docket number field to access the
document. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support at
FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov, (866)
208–3676 (toll free), or (202) 502–8659
(TTY).
You may register online at https://
ferconline.ferc.gov/FERCOnline.aspx to
be notified via email of new filings and
issuances related to this or other
pending projects. For assistance, contact
FERC Online Support.
n. The applicant states its
unequivocal intent to submit an
application for a subsequent license for
Project No. 1994. Pursuant to 18 CFR
16.20 each application for a subsequent
license and any competing license
applications must be filed with the
Commission at least 24 months prior to
the expiration of the existing license.
All applications for license for this
project must be filed by April 30, 2027.
o. The Commission’s Office of Public
Participation (OPP) supports meaningful
public engagement and participation in
Commission proceedings. OPP can help
members of the public, including
landowners, environmental justice
communities, Tribal members and
others, access publicly available
information and navigate Commission
processes. For public inquiries and
assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for
rehearing, the public is encouraged to
contact OPP at (202) 502–6595 or OPP@
ferc.gov.
Dated: June 27, 2024.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024–14670 Filed 7–2–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
Combined Notice of Filings #1
Take notice that the Commission
received the following electric rate
filings:
Docket Numbers: ER24–1869–000;
ER24–1870–000; ER24–1871–000;
ER24–1873–000; ER24–1874–000;
ER24–1875–000; ER24–1876–000.
Applicants: ORNI 36 LLC, Heber
Geothermal Company LLC, Mammoth
Three LLC, Ormesa LLC, ORNI 18 LLC,
USG Nevada LLC, VESI Pomona Energy
Storage, Inc.
Description: Supplement to 04/30/
2024, VESI Pomona Energy Storage, Inc.

E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM

03JYN1