[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 152 (Friday, August 7, 1998)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42296-42300]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-21016]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 37

[Docket No. RM98-3-000]


Open Access Same-Time Information System

July 29, 1998.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) proposes 
to: amend its regulations to extend the retention period and 
availability of information on curtailments and interruptions and 
require this information to include other uses of the congested path at 
the time of such incidents; amend its regulations to clarify that OASIS 
nodes must have the capability to allow OASIS users to make file 
transfers and automated computer-to-computer file transfers and 
queries; amend its regulations to clarify that Responsible Parties are 
required to provide access to their OASIS sites for OASIS users making 
automated queries or extensive requests for data; and add a provision 
to its regulations that would allow Responsible Parties, under certain 
circumstances, to limit a user's access to the node if that user's 
grossly inefficient method of accessing an OASIS node or obtaining 
information from the node degrades the performance of the node.

DATES: Comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking are due on or 
before September 21, 1998.

ADDRESSES: File comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking with the 
Office of the Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 
First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426. Comments should reference 
Docket No. RM98-3-000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marvin Rosenberg (Technical Information), Office of Economic Policy, 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, (202) 208-1283
William C. Booth (Technical Information), Office of Electric Power 
Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, 
N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, (202) 208-0849
Gary D. Cohen (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, (202) 208-0321

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In addition to publishing the full text of 
this document in the Federal Register, the Commission also provides all 
interested persons an opportunity to inspect or copy the contents of 
this document during normal business hours in the Public Reference Room 
at 888 First Street, N.E., Room 2A, Washington, D.C. 20426.
    The Commission Issuance Posting System (CIPS) provides access to 
the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission. CIPS can be 
accessed via Internet through FERC's Homepage (http://www.ferc.fed.us) 
using the CIPS Link or the Energy Information Online icon. The full 
text of this document will be available on CIPS in ASCII and 
WordPerfect 6.1 format. CIPS is also available through the Commission's 
electronic bulletin board service at no charge to the user and may be 
accessed using a personal computer with a modem by dialing 202-208-
1397, if dialing locally, or 1-800-856-3920, if dialing long distance. 
To access CIPS, set your communications software to 19200, 14400, 
12000, 9600, 7200, 4800, 2400, or 1200 bps, full duplex, no parity, 8 
data bits and 1 stop bit. User assistance is available at 202-208-2474 
or by E-mail to [email protected].
    This document is also available through the Commission's Records 
and Information Management System (RIMS), an electronic storage and 
retrieval system of documents submitted to and issued by the Commission 
after November 16, 1981. Documents from November 1995 to the present 
can be viewed and printed. RIMS is available in the Public Reference 
Room or remotely via Internet through FERC's Homepage using the RIMS 
link or the Energy Information Online icon. User assistance is 
available at 202-208-2222, or by E-mail to [email protected].
    Finally, the complete text on diskette in WordPerfect format may be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, La Dorn Systems 
Corporation. La Dorn Systems Corporation is located in the Public 
Reference Room at 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426.

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

I. Introduction

    The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC) is 
proposing to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) that proposes 
to: (1) amend 18 CFR 37.6(e)(3)(ii) to extend the retention period and 
availability of information on curtailments and interruptions and 
require this information to include other uses of the congested path at 
the time of such incidents; (2) amend 18 CFR 37.6 to clarify that OASIS 
nodes must have the capability to allow OASIS users to make file 
transfers and automated computer-to-computer file transfers and 
queries; (3) amend 18 CFR 37.5 to clarify that Responsible Parties are 
required to provide access to their OASIS sites for OASIS users making 
automated queries or extensive requests for data; and (4) add 18 CFR 
37.5(d) to allow Responsible Parties, under certain circumstances, to 
limit a user's access to the node if that user's grossly inefficient 
method of accessing an OASIS node or obtaining information from the 
node degrades the performance of the node.
    Item 1 is designed to help the Commission better monitor whether 
curtailments and interruptions involve

[[Page 42297]]

instances of undue discrimination. Items 2 through 4 go together. In 
the discussion below, we clarify that OASIS nodes must have the 
capability to allow OASIS users to make file transfers and automated 
computer-to-computer file transfers and queries, and that legitimate 
users may not have their access to the node restricted or cut off based 
on their making automated queries or extensive requests for data. We 
also clarify that extensive requests for data by legitimate users does 
not constitute an ``excessive use of resources'' eligible for 
unilateral disconnection by a Responsible Party under section 5.1(j) of 
the S&CP Document. We nevertheless are also proposing to revise 18 CFR 
37.5(d) to allow Responsible Parties, under certain circumstances, to 
limit a user's access to the node if that user's grossly inefficient 
method of accessing an OASIS node or obtaining information from the 
node degrades the performance of the node. Commission approval is 
needed for disconnection under these circumstances.

II. Discussion

A. Access To, and Retention Of, Supporting Information on Curtailments 
and Interruptions

    The Commission's regulations at 18 CFR 37.6(e)(3)(ii) require that 
Transmission Providers make available supporting information about 
curtailments and interruptions, for up to 60 days after the curtailment 
or interruption, upon request by the affected customers. Since Order 
No. 889 1 became effective, issues concerning curtailments 
and interruptions have been the subject of a number of informal 
complaints to the FERC Enforcement Hotline. The Commission is concerned 
that the current regulations do not allow the Commission's staff and 
the public access to the supporting information required under 18 CFR 
37.6(e)(3)(ii) and that the information is not retained long enough. 
Lack of access to the supporting information limits significantly the 
Commission's ability to audit the circumstances under which a 
curtailment or interruption occurs, as well as the Commission's ability 
to identify compliance problems and resolve complaints. Therefore, we 
propose to make changes to our regulations to require that Transmission 
Providers retain supporting information about curtailments and 
interruptions for three years and make this information available on 
request, not only to affected customers, but also to the Commission's 
staff and the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Open Access Same-Time Information System and Standards of 
Conduct, Order No. 889, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,035 (1996); 
order on reh'g, Order No. 889-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,049 
(1997); and order on reh'g, Order No. 889-B, 81 FERC para. 61,253 
(1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, our review of this regulation persuades us to propose 
one additional change. In order to assess properly whether a 
curtailment or interruption has been imposed on an unduly 
discriminatory basis, it would be helpful to know whether the 
curtailment or interruption was imposed on other users of the congested 
path. We, therefore, are proposing that the information to be made 
available upon request under 18 CFR 37.6(e)(3)(ii) should include 
information on any other uses of the congested path at the time of the 
curtailment or interruption. This information would be very 
informative, and should not be burdensome to assemble, because the 
person(s) posting the notice of curtailment or interruption under 18 
CFR 37.6(e)(3)(i) should already have this information at hand.
    The Commission will provide interested persons with an opportunity 
to file comments on these proposed changes within 45 days of the date 
of publication of this NOPR in the Federal Register. Parties filing 
comments should address, among other issues: (1) whether the 
information will increase market participants' knowledge of system 
operations and thereby improve the functioning of the electricity 
markets; (2) whether the additional information will help market 
participants detect discrimination or other abusive transmission 
practices and, when necessary, enable them to file well-specified, 
well-documented complaints with the Commission (which will help the 
Commission process complaints more efficiently); and (3) whether the 
need for this information outweighs its commercial sensitivity.

B. File Transfers, Automated Queries, and Extensive Requests for Data

1. Overview
    The FERC Enforcement Hotline also received calls showing that some 
misunderstandings have arisen about the use of file transfers and 
automated queries. To correct these misunderstandings, we propose to 
revise 18 CFR 37.5 and 37.6 to clarify that OASIS nodes must have the 
capability to allow OASIS users to make file transfers and automated 
computer-to-computer file transfers and queries, and that Responsible 
Parties are required to provide OASIS users with access for automated 
querying of the system.2 This is true even when a large 
volume of requests are made. We also propose to add a provision, at 18 
CFR 37.5(d), that would permit Responsible Parties, under certain 
circumstances, to restrict access to users whose grossly inefficient 
use of the system is degrading the performance of the node and who are 
unwilling to use less burdensome methods that would give them the same 
information just as quickly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For the purposes of this discussion, by ``Responsible 
Party'', we also intend to include a ``Transmission Provider'' that 
operates its own OASIS node. We note that in Order No. 889 we stated 
that a Transmission Provider ultimately is responsible for the acts 
or omissions conducting on its behalf by a Responsible Party. See 
FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,035 at 31,603-04.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Background
    In Order No. 888, the Commission stated that:

in order to remedy undue discrimination in the provision of 
transmission services it is necessary to have non-discriminatory 
access to transmission information * * * [3]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Promoting Wholesale Competition Through Open Access Non-
Discriminatory Transmission Services by Public Utilities; Recovery 
of Stranded Costs by Public Utilities and Transmitting Utilities, 
Order No. 888, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,036 at 31,722 (1996); 
order on reh'g, Order No. 888-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,048 
(1997); order on reh'g, Order No. 888-B, 81 FERC para. 61,248 
(1997); and order on reh'g, Order No. 888-C, 82 FERC para. 61,046 
(1998).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Likewise, in Order No. 889, we stated that,

under 18 CFR 37.5, the OASIS must give access to relevant 
standardized information pertaining to the status of the 
transmission system as well as to the types and prices of 
services.[4]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Order No. 889, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,035 at 31,603.

Consistent with these findings, the Commission's regulations at 18 CFR 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
37.5(b) require each Responsible Party to:

provide access to an OASIS providing standardized information . . . 
pertaining to the transmission system for which it is 
responsible.[5]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Section 37.5(b)(2) of the OASIS regulations, 18 CFR 
37.5(b)(2) (1998), also requires each Responsible Party to operate 
its OASIS node in compliance with the standardized procedures 
specified in the OASIS Standards and Communications Protocols 
document (referred to herein as the ``S&CP Document'').

    In the period since Order Nos. 888 and 889 have become effective, 
some OASIS providers have been limiting the access of certain parties 
using automated queries.
3. Discussion
    Access to OASIS data by automated query is an integral part of the 
transmission data sharing we envisioned and required in Order Nos. 888 
and 889. As we observed in Order

[[Page 42298]]

No. 889-A, uploading and downloading are computer-to-computer 
transactions.6 In addition, computer-to-computer queries are 
an integral part of OASIS as specified in the S&CP 
Document.7 However, to avoid any possible contrary 
interpretations, we propose to add language to 18 CFR 37.5 and 18 CFR 
37.6 making this point explicitly.8 These proposals are 
consistent with the current language in section 4.3.1 of the S&CP 
Document (which specifies the information requirements and templates 
for uploading the information to, and downloading it from, OASIS nodes) 
and in section 37.5(b) of the Commission's regulations (which 
contemplates OASIS access by computer-to-computer queries). The 
proposals are intended to make absolutely clear that each Responsible 
Party must provide OASIS users with non-discriminatory access without 
curfews, restrictions, or limitations of any kind, whether access is 
sought by automated or graphical user interface means.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Order No. 889-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,049, at 
30,574.
    \7\ See, e.g., Secs. 4.2.4, 4.2.4.1, and 4.4 of the S&CP 
Document.
    \8\ The Commission also provided for computer-to-computer 
communications related to natural gas transportation information. In 
Order No. 587-B, Standards for Business Practices of Interstate 
Natural Gas Pipelines, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,046 at 30,169 
(1997), we explained that computer-to-computer communications appear 
to be needed to conduct natural gas transportation transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This also is consistent with the current language in section 5.1(j) 
of the S&CP Document, which allows a Responsible Party to disconnect or 
restrict users in only very limited circumstances. Section 5.1(j) of 
the S&CP Document reads as follows:

    Disconnection: [Transmission System Information Providers] shall 
be allowed to disconnect any User who is degrading the performance 
of the OASIS Node through the excessive use of resources, beyond 
what is permitted in the Service Level Agreement.

This provision authorizes the disconnection of a user only when the 
user is degrading the performance of the OASIS node, through excessive 
use beyond what is allowed in the Service Level Agreement (SLA). Thus, 
under section 5.1(j), disconnection is only authorized when: (1) the 
use exceeds what is allowed in the SLA; and (2) the excessive use is 
degrading the performance of the OASIS node.9 Thus, a 
particular user's heavy use of an OASIS node, even if it would require 
the node to be upgraded, would not, by itself, be a basis for 
disconnection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ The excessive use of resources includes any unauthorized use 
of an OASIS node. This clarification is not intended to prevent a 
Responsible Party from disconnecting any unauthorized user, any user 
who circumvents system security, any user who causes, or attempts to 
cause, the node to cease functioning, or who otherwise disrupts, or 
attempts to disrupt, the normal functioning of the node.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The basic (default) SLA applicable to all OASIS users allows large 
volume, computer-to-computer usage of the OASIS. Thus, Responsible 
Parties may not use section 5.1(j) or, as explained below, section 3.2 
of the S&CP Document to deny access to large volume users of the OASIS.
    Section 3.2 of the S&CP Document authorizes Responsible Parties to 
enter into SLAs.10 Section 3.2 reads as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ SLAs are also referenced in section 5.1(j) of the S&CP 
Document, quoted in the text above.

    Service Level Agreements: It is recognized that Users will have 
different requirements for frequency of access, performance, etc., 
based on their unique business needs. To accommodate these differing 
requirements, [Transmission System Information Providers] shall be 
required to establish [an SLA] with each User which specifies the 
terms and conditions for access to the information posted by the 
Providers. The default [SLA] shall be Internet access with the OASIS 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Node meeting all minimum performance requirements.

Section 3.2 of the S&CP Document directs Responsible Parties to 
establish an SLA with each user, specifying the terms and conditions 
for access to the information posted on the OASIS. The service to be 
provided under these SLAs is to meet all minimum performance 
requirements (i.e., the requirements of Order No. 889, the Commission's 
regulations, and the S&CP Document).
    Although not explicitly stated in section 3.2 of the S&CP Document, 
our proposal clarifies that when a user registers on an OASIS node to 
receive basic OASIS service, this registration, by default, constitutes 
a basic SLA (including computer-to-computer access as discussed above). 
A negotiated SLA, approved by the Commission, may be necessary to 
define value added services beyond those provided by the Commission's 
regulations and the S&CP document.11 However, a negotiated 
SLA is neither necessary nor appropriate as a condition for a user to 
receive basic service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ Commission approval would not be necessary where the 
Transmission Provider is nonjurisdictional and operates its OASIS 
node (or assigns this to a Responsible Party) under Order No. 888's 
reciprocity requirement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thus, under both sections 5.1(j) and 3.2 of the S&CP Document, if a 
legitimate user's usage creates a problem regarding the system's 
capabilities, the problem may not be ``corrected'' by disconnecting the 
user or by limiting that user's use of the system. To avoid any 
contrary interpretation, we are proposing revisions to 18 CFR 37.5 and 
37.6 to make this explicit.
    Consistent with this proposal, it follows that large volume usage 
and automated computer-to-computer file transfers and queries do not 
constitute the kind of ``excessive use of resources'' eligible for 
unilateral disconnection by the Responsible Party under section 5.1(j) 
of the S&CP Document. We are concerned, nevertheless, that a user's 
grossly inefficient access and use of the system may degrade the 
performance of the OASIS node. We, therefore, are proposing to revise 
18 CFR Sec. 37.5(d) to allow Responsible Parties that are public 
utilities to seek Commission approval to limit a user's access to the 
node if that user's grossly inefficient method of accessing an OASIS 
node or obtaining information from the node degrades the performance of 
the node.\12\ For example, a user may seek data in a resource-intensive 
wasteful way even though the same data could be obtained as quickly in 
a far less resource-consuming manner. It also would be grossly 
inefficient for a customer to seek updates more frequently than 
information is updated. In such a circumstance, an OASIS provider 
should instruct the user on how to obtain the information in a less 
resource-intensive way, and may seek Commission approval to limit 
access to that user if the OASIS provider can show that: (1) the means 
of access is grossly inefficient; (2) the node is sufficiently sized to 
accommodate usage that is not grossly inefficient; and (3) the user was 
unresponsive to the OASIS provider's attempts to resolve the matter 
informally.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ By ``grossly inefficient'', we intend to address situations 
where a user fails to adopt more efficient methods of accessing a 
node or obtaining information in favor of very inefficient methods 
that may needlessly degrade or damage the node. This is consistent 
with Sec. 3.6.a of the S&CP Document, which states that a 
Responsible Party may restrict its responses to overly broad queries 
that, if answered expansively, would degrade the performance of the 
node.
    It would be impracticable to attempt to delineate all instancs 
of ``gross inefficiency'' in advance. Accordingly, questions as to 
whether a particular user's access or use of the node is ``grossly 
inefficient'' will be resolved on a case-by-case basis whn a 
Responsible Party seeks Commission approval to restrict a user's 
access to the node.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We earlier stated that large volume usage and automated computer-
to-computer file transfers and queries do not constitute the kind of 
``excessive use of resources'' eligible for unilateral disconnection by 
the Responsible Party under section 5.1(j) of the S&CP Document. This 
being the case, we believe we need to establish a mechanism to govern 
those situations.

[[Page 42299]]

We, therefore, are proposing (as discussed above) to revise 18 CFR 
37.5(d) to allow Responsible Parties to limit a user's access to the 
node, with the approval of the Commission, if that user's grossly 
inefficient method of accessing an OASIS node or obtaining information 
from the node degrades the performance of the node.
    We are proposing that the Commission's approval be needed for 
disconnection under these circumstances because we: (1) want to avoid 
unwarranted disconnections or limitations on access; (2) seek to 
encourage Responsible Parties and OASIS users to resolve these disputes 
informally, if possible; (3) wish to assure OASIS users that they will 
not be disconnected without good cause; and (4) hope that, merely by 
making these clarifications, we will avert or minimize instances of 
grossly inefficient usage degrading the performance of a node.
    Comments by interested persons should address the advantages and 
disadvantages of the Commission's proposal on the foregoing issue, 
including the requirement for prior Commission approval of 
disconnections. Commenters may suggest alternative procedures, with or 
without prior Commission approval of disconnections, and should explain 
the relative advantages and disadvantages of their proposals. For 
example, if an OASIS node is not meeting legitimate customer needs, 
should Responsible Parties be required to increase the capacity of the 
node, including adopting the best available technology, and, having 
done so, then be allowed to disconnect grossly inefficient users 
without prior Commission approval?

III. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)\13\ requires any proposed or 
final rule issued by the Commission to contain a description and 
analysis of the impact that the proposed or final rule would have on 
small entities or to contain a certification that the rule, if 
promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities. Order No. 889 contained a 
certification under Sec. 605(b) of the RFA that the OASIS Final Rule 
would not have a significant economic impact on small entities within 
the meaning of the RFA.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 5 U.S.C. Secs. 601-612.
    \14\ See Order No. 889, FERC Stats. & Regs. at 31,628.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed above, this proposal would make three minor revisions 
to 18 CFR 37.6(e)(3)(ii). Given that we do not expect these minor 
revisions to have any economic impact and given that we have granted 
waivers from the requirements of the OASIS Final Rule to small entities 
where appropriate, and will continue to do so, we hereby certify that 
the proposed changes in 18 CFR Part 37 would not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities and that no 
regulatory flexibility analysis is required pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 
Sec. 603. In addition, we have proposed revisions to 18 CFR 37.5 and 
37.6 that would clarify that a Responsible Party may not deny or 
restrict access to an OASIS user merely because that user is a large 
volume, computer-to-computer user of the system. For the reasons cited 
above, and in Order No. 889, these clarifications will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

IV. Environmental Statement

    As explained in Order Nos. 888-A and 889-A, Order Nos. 888 and 889 
were the joint subjects of the Final Environmental Impact Statement 
issued in Docket Nos. RM95-8-000 and RM94-7-001 on April 12, 1996. 
Given that this proposal makes only minor changes in the regulations, 
none of which would have any environmental impact, no separate 
environmental assessment or environmental impact statement is being 
prepared for this proposed rule.

V. Public Reporting Burden

    As discussed previously, this NOPR proposes three minor revisions 
to 18 CFR 37.6(e)(3)(ii). First, given that information on other uses 
of congested paths already would be known and available to the 
person(s) reporting a curtailment/interruption incident, we believe 
that the proposed requirement to make this information available would 
have only a minimal, inconsequential impact on the reporting burden 
under 18 CFR 37.6(e)(3)(ii) and that the changes do not substantially 
or materially modify the collection of information previously approved 
by OMB. Second, we do not believe that extending the retention period 
or extending the category of persons who may request the information 
will measurably increase the public reporting burden. Third, the NOPR 
does not add any additional reporting requirements under 18 CFR 
37.6(e)(3)(i) or require information to be made available under 18 CFR 
37.6(e)(3)(ii) about any events or incidents not already covered under 
the existing regulation.
    Nor do we believe our proposal to amend 18 CFR 37.5 and 37.6 to 
clarify the required minimum access that Responsible Parties must 
provide to OASIS users, or to allow (under certain circumstances) 
limitations on access by grossly inefficient users, will increase the 
public reporting burden.
    Consequently, the public reporting burden associated with issuance 
of this NOPR is unchanged from our estimation in Order Nos. 889, 889-A, 
and 889-B. \15\ The Commission has conducted an internal review of this 
conclusion and thereby has assured itself that there is specific, 
objective support for this information burden estimate. Moreover, the 
Commission has reviewed the collection of information required by Order 
Nos. 889, 889-A, and 889-B, and has determined that the collection of 
information is necessary and conforms to the Commission's plan, as 
described in those prior orders, for the collection, efficient 
management, and use of the required information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Order No. 889, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,035 at 31,587-
88, Order No. 889-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,049 at 30,549-50, 
Order No. 889-B, 81 FERC para. 61,253 at 62,171.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Information Collection Statement

    As explained in Order Nos. 889-A and 889-B, Order No. 889 contained 
an information collection statement for which the Commission obtained 
approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).\16\ Given that 
the proposed changes on curtailments and interruptions make only minor 
revisions to the regulation, only one of which would have any possible 
impact on the previously approved information collection statement (the 
addition of other uses of the congested path to the information already 
required to be collected), and given that we expect that this 
information would already be known to the person assembling information 
about the curtailment or interruption, we do not believe that these 
proposed changes would require any revision to the information 
collection statement approved by OMB for Order No. 889. Nor do we 
believe that our proposed revisions to 18 CFR 37.5 and 37.6, to clarify 
the required minimum access Responsible Parties must provide to OASIS 
users, or to allow (under certain circumstances) limitations on access 
by grossly inefficient users, would require any revision to the 
information collection statement approved by OMB for Order No. 889. 
Accordingly, we conclude that OMB approval for this NOPR will not be 
necessary. However, the Commission will send a copy of this NOPR to 
OMB, for informational purposes only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ OMB Control No. 1902-0173.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting

[[Page 42300]]

requirements and associated burden estimates by contacting the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 
20426 [Attention: Michael Miller, Office of the Chief Information 
Officer, (202) 208-1415], and the Office of Management and Budget 
[Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
(202) 395-3087 (telephone), 202-395-7285 (facsimile)]. In addition, 
interested persons may file written comments on the collections of 
information required by this NOPR and associated burden estimates by 
sending written comments to the Desk Officer for FERC at: Office of 
Management and Budget, Room 10202 NEOB, Washington, D.C. 20503, within 
30 days of publication of this document in the Federal Register. Three 
copies of any comments filed with the Office of Management and Budget 
also should be sent to the following address: Secretary, Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, Room 1A, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, 
D.C. 20426.

VII. Public Comment Procedure

    Prior to taking final action on this proposed rulemaking, we are 
inviting written comments from interested persons. All comments in 
response to this notice should be submitted to the Office of Secretary, 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, and should refer to Docket No. RM98-3-000. An 
original and fourteen (14) copies of such comments should be filed with 
the Commission on or before September 21, 1998. Additionally, a copy of 
the comments also should be submitted to the Commission on computer 
diskette in WordPerfect 6.1 or ASCII format.
    All written submissions to this NOPR will be placed in the public 
file and will be available for public inspection in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
during regular business hours.

List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 37

    Electric utilities.

    By direction of the Commission.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission proposes to amend 
Part 37 in Chapter I, Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as set 
forth below.

PART 37--OPEN ACCESS SAME-TIME INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND STANDARDS OF 
CONDUCT FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES

    1. The authority citation for Part 37 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 791-825r, 2601-2645; 31 U.S.C. 9701; 42 
U.S.C. 7101-7352.

    2. Section 37.5 is amended by redesignating paragraph (c) as 
paragraph (e), and by adding paragraphs (c) and (d), to read as 
follows:


Sec. 37.5  Obligations of Transmission Providers and Responsible 
Parties.

* * * * *
    (c) A Responsible Party may not deny or restrict access to an OASIS 
user merely because that user makes automated computer-to-computer file 
transfers or queries, or extensive requests for data.
    (d) In the event that an OASIS user's grossly inefficient method of 
accessing an OASIS node or obtaining information from the node degrades 
the performance of the node, the Responsible Party should instruct the 
user on how to obtain the information in a less resource-intensive 
manner, and may seek Commission approval to limit that user's OASIS 
access if the matter cannot be resolved informally.
* * * * *
    3. Section 37.6 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) intoductory 
text, (a)(4), (a)(5), and (e)(3)(ii), and by adding paragraph (a)(6) to 
read as follows:


Sec. 37.6  Information to be posted on an OASIS.

    (a) The information posted on the OASIS must be in such detail and 
the OASIS must have such capabilities as to allow Transmission 
Customers to:
* * * * *
    (4) Clearly identify the degree to which their transmission service 
requests or schedules were denied or interrupted;
    (5) Obtain access, in electronic format, to information to support 
available transmission capability calculations and historical 
transmission service requests and schedules for various audit purposes; 
and
    (6) Make file transfers and automated computer-to-computer file 
transfers and queries.
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) * * *
    (ii) Information to support any such curtailment or interruption, 
including the operating status of the facilities involved in the 
constraint or interruption and any other uses of the congested path at 
the time of the curtailment or interruption, must be maintained for 
three years and provided, upon request, to the curtailed or interrupted 
customer, the Commission's Staff, and any other person who requests it.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 98-21016 Filed 8-6-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P