[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 63 (Friday, March 31, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 17370-17413]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-6930]



[[Page 17369]]

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

Part III





Department of Energy





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



Federal Energy Regulatory Commission



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



18 CFR Part 37



Open Access Same-Time Information System and Standards of Conduct; 
Final Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 63 / Friday, March 31, 2000 / Rules 
and Regulations  

[[Page 17370]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 37

[Docket No. RM95-9-003; Order No. 638]


Open Access Same-Time Information System and Standards of Conduct

Issued February 25, 2000.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final Rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) adopts a 
set of uniform business practices implementing the Commission's 
policies on transmission service price negotiation and on improving 
interactions between transmission providers and customers over OASIS 
nodes and amends 18 CFR 37.5 to require compliance with these 
practices. In addition, the Commission adopts a consistent naming 
convention for path names, replaces the Data Dictionary Element 
``ANC__SERVICE__TYPE'' in the OASIS Standards and Communication 
Protocols Document (Version 1.3) with the term ``AS__TYPE,'' and 
clarifies the terms ``DISPLACED,'' ``SUPERSEDED,'' and ``REFUSED'' in 
Sec. 4.2.10.2 of that same document and in the Data Dictionary Element.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This Final Rule will become effective on May 30, 2000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:   
Marvin Rosenberg (Technical Information), Office of Economic Policy, 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 208-1283
Paul Robb (Technical Information), Office of Electric Power Regulation, 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 219-2702
Gary D. Cohen (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 208-0321

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Introduction
II. Discussion
    A. Overview
    B. Background
    C. Composition of CPWG Membership
    D. Business Practices for Oasis Phase IA Transactions
    1. Recommended Voluntary Guides and Mandatory Standard
    2. Standard Terminology for Transmission and Ancillary Services
    a. Need for Standard Terminology
    b. Attribute Values Defining the Period of Service (Standards 
2.1-2.1.13)
    c. Attribute Values Defining Service Class and Type (Standards 
2.2-2.3.2)
    d. Curtailment Priorities (Standard 2.4)
    e. Other Service Attribute Values (Standards 2.5-2.5.9)
    f. Scheduling Period (Standards 2.6-2.6.2)
    3. Entity and Product Registration
    a. Maintenance of Industry-Wide OASIS Home Page
    b. Identification of Parties(Standard 3.1)
    c. Registering Non-Standard Service Attributes (Standards 3.2-
3.3)
    d. Registering Points of Receipt and Delivery (Standards 3.4-
3.6)
    4. On-Line Price Negotiation and Confirmation Process
    a. On-line Price Negotiation in Short-term Markets (Standards 
4.1-4.3)
    b. Diagram Depicting the Negotiation Process (Standards 4.4-4.5)
    c. Negotiations Without Competing Bids (Standards 4.6-4.13)
    d. Negotiations with Competing Bids for Constrained Resources 
(When Customer Has Not Yet Confirmed a Transmission Provider's 
Acceptance) (Standards 4.14-4.27)
    5. Procurement of Ancillary and Other Services
    a. Transmission Provider Requirements (Standards 5.1-5.4)
    b. Transmission Customer Requirements (Standards 5.5-5.6)
    6. Pathnaming Standards (Standards 6.1-6.4)
    7. Revisions to the S&CP Document
    8. Requests to Industry Working Groups
    9. CPWG/How Group Recommended Revisions to the Pro Forma Tariff
    a. Section 14.2--Reservation Priority
    b. Section 14.7--Curtailment or Interruption of Service
    c. Section 17.5--Response to a Completed Application
III. Regulatory Flexibility Act
IV. Environmental Statement
V. Public Reporting Burden
VI. Information Collection Statement
VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification
VIII. Document Availability
Attachment A--``BUSINESS PRACTICE STANDARDS FOR OPEN ACCESS SAME-
TIME INFORMATION SYSTEM (OASIS) TRANSACTIONS''
Attachment B--Quotes sections 13.2, 14.2, 14.7, and 17.5 of the pro 
forma tariff
Attachment C--Revised Status values in section 4.2.10.2 of the S&CP 
Document
Attachment D--Revisions to Data Element Dictionary
Attachment E--List of Commenters to UBP NOPR

    Before Commissioners: James J. Hoecker, Chairman; William L. 
Massey, Linda Breathitt, and Curt Hebert, Jr., Open Access Same-Time 
Information System and Standards of Conduct, Docket No. RM95-9-003; 
Order No. 638.

Final Rule

Issued February 25, 2000.

I. Introduction

    In this final rule, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 
(Commission) adopts a set of uniform business practices, as set out in 
the attached ``Business Practice Standards for OASIS Transactions'' 
(BPS). The BPS implements the Commission's policies on transmission 
service price negotiation and on improving interactions between 
transmission providers and customers over Open Access Same-Time 
Information System (OASIS) nodes. The Commission mandates compliance 
with these practices by adopting a revision to 18 CFR 37.5. In 
addition, the Commission adopts a consistent naming convention for path 
names, replaces the Data Dictionary Element ``ANC__SERVICE__TYPE'' in 
the OASIS Standards and Communication Protocols Document, Version 1.3 
(S&CP Document) with the term ``AS__TYPE,'' and clarifies the terms 
``DISPLACED,'' ``SUPERSEDED,'' and ``REFUSED'' in the Data Dictionary 
Element and in section 4.2.10.2 of the S&CP Document.

II. Discussion

A. Overview

    In this final rule, we adopt a set of uniform business practices 
for use by transmission providers in conjunction with OASIS 
transactions. These uniform business practices are set out in the 
attached BPS. The Commission mandates compliance with these practices 
by adopting a revision to 18 CFR 37.5 that requires responsible parties 
to follow the standards set out in the accompanying BPS.
    The uniform business practices we are here adopting are largely the 
same as those proposed in the notice of proposed rulemaking issued by 
the Commission on January 27, 1999 (UBP NOPR).\1\ These uniform 
business practices originated as a set of recommendations from two 
industry groups, the Commercial Practices Working Group and the OASIS 
How Working Group (jointly CPWG/How Group), as presented in two 1998 
filings.\2\ These industry proposals, accompanied by public comment, 
evolved into the UBP NOPR, and after

[[Page 17371]]

a review of comments on the UBP NOPR, have now further evolved into 
this final rule. However, as discussed below, we have made certain 
revisions to those proposals, to reflect Commission policy, add 
clarity,\3\ and address comments received from interested persons. In 
addition, after reviewing comments on whether all of the business 
practices we adopt in this final rule should be adopted as mandatory 
standards, rather than as voluntary best practice guides, we are 
persuaded to do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Open Access Same-Time Information System and Standards of 
Conduct, notice of proposed rulemaking, 64 FR 5206, 86 FERC para. 
61,061, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 32,539 (1999).
    \2\ The CPWG is no longer functioning. Its activities have been 
taken over by a successor industry group, the Market Interface 
Committee (MIC), also referred to in note 8 infra.
    \3\ For example, for clarity, we are revising references in the 
BPS to ``providers'' to ``transmission providers.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, we are adopting a 
consistent naming convention for path names, replacing the Data 
Dictionary Element ``ANC__SERVICE__TYPE'' in the S&CP Document with the 
term ``AS__TYPE,'' and are clarifying the terms ``DISPLACED,'' 
``SUPERSEDED,'' and ``REFUSED'' in the Data Dictionary Element and in 
section 4.2.10.2 of the S&CP Document.

B. Background

    On June 19, 1998, the CPWG/How Group \4\ filed a report entitled 
``Industry Report to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission on OASIS 
Phase IA Business Practices'' (June 19 Report) offering a set of 
uniform business practice standards and guidelines for adoption by the 
Commission. As explained in the UBP NOPR, the June 19 Report states 
that the recommended business practice standards and guides are 
intended to enable the Commission to implement its policy directives 
related to on-line price negotiation and to improve the commercial 
operation of OASIS. The UBP NOPR also explained that the June 19 Report 
states that the recommended standards and guides are intended to 
support FERC regulations, the pro forma tariff, and the S&CP Document. 
In a few instances, the June 19 Report recommended revisions to the pro 
forma tariff.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ As more fully discussed in the UBP NOPR, FERC Stats. & Regs. 
para. 32,539 at 33,606-08, and in earlier orders, see Open Access 
Same-Time Information System and Standards of Conduct, Order No. 
889, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,035 at 31,588-91 (1996), order on 
reh'g, Order No. 889-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,049 at 30,549 
(1997), order on reh'g, Order No. 889-B, 81 FERC para. 61,253 
(1997), we greatly appreciate the invaluable ongoing efforts 
contributed by industry working group participants who have strived 
for consensus on contentious OASIS-related issues and reported on 
those efforts to the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The June 19 Report argued that, because many OASIS-related business 
practice implementation details were left for transmission providers to 
determine for themselves, significant variation arose among business 
practices across OASIS nodes and influences the development of markets. 
To reduce this variation and to promote greater consistency in the 
implementation of the Commission's open access policy and OASIS policy, 
the CPWG/How Group proposed that the Commission adopt its recommended 
``Phase IA Business Practice Standards and Guides'' (Business 
Practices). In addition, on September 15, 1998, CPWG/How Group filed a 
letter with the Commission recommending standards for transmission path 
naming and requesting Commission approval coincident with the start of 
OASIS Phase IA (i.e., starting on March 1, 1999).
    After notices were published and comments were received and 
reviewed, the Commission issued the UBP NOPR, proposing the adoption of 
uniform business practice guides and standards, and standards for 
transmission path names. The UBP NOPR largely was modeled on the 
business practices recommended in the June 19 Report.
    In response to the UBP NOPR, comments were filed by 19 interested 
persons.\5\ These comments are generally supportive of the UBP NOPR and 
of issuance of the BPS, although they contain specific suggestions for 
revisions. The comments will be discussed below on an issue-by-issue 
basis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Identified in Attachment E.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Composition of CPWG Membership

    In the UBP NOPR, we reiterated the circumstances under which we 
would give weight to recommendations from industry working groups. We 
explained that consistent with Commission precedent,\6\ we would heed 
recommendations from industry working groups only to the extent that 
the views of those groups reflected an open process with input from 
diverse industry segments.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See, e.g., RIN NOPR, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 32,516 at 
33,173-74; Order No. 889, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,035 at 
31,589, n.13; Order No. 889-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,049 at 
30,549, n.7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments
    ECI \7\ argues that the Interim Market Interface Committee,\8\ a 
new industry working group under the auspices of NERC, does not meet 
the Commission's criteria for inclusiveness and diversity.\9\ In 
particular, ECI finds troublesome that MIC representatives are hand-
picked by NERC, rather than elected by the membership. ECI fears this 
might lead NERC to choose MIC members based on their support for NERC-
preferred positions, and to exclude members who oppose those views, 
even if those holding opposing views are more representative of that 
industry segment. In addition, ECI finds the current MIC requirement, 
that there be at least one representative from each of the ten NERC 
regions, lacks any built-in safeguards with respect to balancing the 
makeup of the regional representative group to assure the inclusion of 
participants from industry segments other than transmission providers. 
ECI argues that this results in a committee structure that is likely to 
remain tilted heavily in favor of transmission-owning utilities. 
Accordingly, ECI argues that MIC's membership selection process needs 
reform before the Commission should give deference to its 
recommendations for industry standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For brevity, the abbreviations used to identify the various 
commenters to the UBP NOPR are listed in Attachment E, and are not 
separately identified in the text.
    \8\ This committee is no longer interim and is now the ``Market 
Interface Committee'' (MIC) referenced in note 2.
    \9\ ECI Comments at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    As we stated in the UBP NOPR, we agree with ECI that unqualified 
deference should not be given to the recommendations of any industry 
group whose decisions are not made in an open inclusive process with 
balanced representation reflecting a broad consensus of views from all 
industry segments. Moreover, contrary to ECI's assertions, the UBP NOPR 
did not give ``unqualified deference'' to the recommendations of any 
industry group. This is shown by two facts: (1) The UBP NOPR contained 
revisions to the recommendations contained in the June 19 Report; and 
(2) we are issuing this Final Rule only after our consideration of 
comments on the UBP NOPR that we invited from any interested person.
    Moreover, we reiterate that if, in the future, the MIC (or any 
other industry group) would like the Commission to consider its 
recommendations to reflect the views of the entire industry, then it is 
incumbent on it to demonstrate to the Commission that: (1) Its 
membership is open to all industry segments through an inclusive 
process; (2) it makes its decisions in a manner that gives fair voice 
to participants with diverse viewpoints from all industry segments; and 
(3) its activities are conducted in an open inclusive manner.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See UBP NOPR at 33,609.

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

[[Page 17372]]

    On the other hand, we encourage interested persons to participate 
actively in those industry efforts at consensus, rather than remain 
silent until the Commission invites public comment. See, e.g., note 87, 
infra.

D. Business Practices for Oasis Phase IA Transactions

1. Recommended Voluntary Guides and Mandatory Standards
    The June 19 Report recommends certain business practices as 
mandatory standards and other business practices as voluntary ``best 
practice'' guides. In the UBP NOPR, we proposed to maintain the 
distinction between standards and ``best practice'' guides as 
recommended in the June 19 Report. At the same time, we recognized that 
uniform and consistent business practices are a desired result, and 
that consistency can best be achieved through mandatory standards 
rather than suggested guidelines. Accordingly, we invited comment on 
whether all or some guides should be adopted as standards.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ UBP NOPR at 33,609-10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments
    A number of commenters recommend that all guides be made mandatory 
now or in the near future.\12\ ECI argues that voluntary guides defeat 
the objective of imposing a uniform and consistent set of business 
practices and proposes that all the guides be made mandatory. In the 
alternative, ECI proposes that we set a date certain, at which time we 
would revisit the voluntary guides to determine whether they should be 
reclassified as mandatory. At a minimum, ECI argues that Guide 4.13 
(Table 4-2) \13\ and Guide 4.16 (Table-3) \14\ should be made 
standards. ECI claims that if each transmission provider is permitted 
different timing requirements and different priorities it will be very 
difficult for customers to keep up with the ``smorgasbord'' of business 
rules when trading power among different transmission providers.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Cinergy Comments at 1, Duke Comments at 3, ECI Comments at 
2, Florida Power Corp Comments at 2, TEP Comments at 1.
    \13\ Guide 4.13 specifies reservation timing requirements.
    \14\ Guide 4.16 specifies priorities for competing reservation 
requests.
    \15\ ECI Comments at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Duke argues that the guides should be mandatory and that it is not 
appropriate for transmission providers to pick and choose which guides 
to follow, and which to ignore. Duke claims that the discretionary use 
of best practice guides will cause confusion among OASIS users trying 
to learn about, and assess the importance of, differing business 
practices by various transmission providers. It argues that adopting 
the proposed standards and guides as mandatory standards would provide 
substantial and welcome uniformity.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Duke Comments at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While Cinergy supports uniform consistent business practices, it 
asserts that more experience with the guides is needed before they are 
made mandatory. Cinergy proposes that the MIC report back in 12 months 
with a study containing recommendations and evaluations of the 
effectiveness of the standards and guides. Cinergy also argues that it 
is important for the Commission to differentiate in specific detail 
whether a guideline or standard applies to requests for firm or non-
firm transmission, or both, so that incorrect assumptions are not made 
by the transmission provider and/or customer.'' \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Cinergy Comments at 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Florida Power Corp argues that, while business practices are 
evolving it is important to maintain the level of flexibility provided 
by the guides. However, Florida Power Corp argues that it may be 
desirable to convert the guides into mandatory standards, after 
business systems and processes have further developed.
    By contrast, several commenters support keeping all or some of the 
guides voluntary.\18\ AEP argues that the distinction between the 
standards and guides helped the participants in the process to reach 
agreement on the issues. BPA claims that while there is a need for 
consistent business practices, it is more important to permit some 
deviations. Southern argues that the guides are useful to facilitate 
innovation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ AEP Comments at 2, BPA Comments at 2, Southern Comments at 
2-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    Our experience with the natural gas pipeline industry \19\ has 
taught us that business practice standards, in addition to 
communication standards and protocols, are needed for the development 
of efficient markets and for the efficient use of the transmission 
grid.
    In the UBP NOPR, we proposed to keep the distinction between the 
voluntary guides and standards. However, we specifically invited 
comment on whether we should adopt all of the proposed business 
practices as mandatory standards.\20\ After a review of the comments, 
we agree with ECI and Duke that all of the business practices being 
adopted in this final rule should be adopted as mandatory standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See, e.g., Standards for Business Practices of Interstate 
Natural Gas Pipelines; Order No. 587; Final Rule, 61 FR 39,053, FERC 
Stats. & Regs. para. 31,038 at 30,058-59 (1996)
    \20\ UBP NOPR at 33,610.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We agree with ECI and Duke that it would be confusing to customers 
if each transmission provider could independently decide whether to 
follow a particular uniform business practice or practices or make up 
its own unique business practice. Removing this uncertainty will aid 
customers and make it easier to transact business and move power across 
the grid.
    Moreover, the arguments opposing mandatory standards were not 
compelling. The commenters favoring retention of voluntary guides 
failed to persuade us that any potential problems outweigh the 
advantages that we expect to achieve from the adoption of uniform 
mandatory business practice standards. We believe that the standards 
are sufficiently developed to allow their adoption as mandatory 
standards and that doing so will make it easier for customers to do 
business. Thus, we will make all the guides mandatory standards.
    As to the argument that this is a still evolving area, while we 
recognize that these are the first OASIS-related business practices 
developed by the industry and that they will need revisions and 
enhancements as the industry gains experience doing business with them, 
we do not believe that this dictates that we defer the adoption of 
mandatory standards until a later date. However, we request that the 
MIC/How Group report back to us, within 9 months of the implementation 
date of these standards, with their recommendations as to any necessary 
revisions and additions to the standards.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ As explained in section VII, infra, these regulations are 
to become effective sixty (60) days from the date of publication of 
this rule in the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Standard Terminology for Transmission and Ancillary Services
a. Need for Standard Terminology
    In the June 19 Report, the CPWG/HOW Group recommends that we 
establish a standard set of attribute values to provide clarity and 
consistency in the labeling of transmission services.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See June 19 Report at section 2.A, which recommends that 
standard attribute values be used in OASIS transactions to the 
greatest extent possible.

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

[[Page 17373]]

Comments
    AEP, Cinergy, and TEP \23\ support requiring standard terminology 
for existing and standard transmission and ancillary service products. 
Cinergy suggests that, to encourage innovation in the market, 
transmission providers should be allowed to use transmission products 
in addition to those included in the industry standards, and to 
document the attributes of these products on the OASIS.\24\ AEP 
cautions that we should not allow standardization to stifle innovation 
in the market, by imposing excess rigidity on the provision of 
transmission service.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ TEP Comments at 2.
    \24\ Cinergy Comments at 2.
    \25\ AEP Comments at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    We agree with the CPWG/How Group and commenters that standard 
attribute values should be used in OASIS transactions to the greatest 
extent possible. We disagree with concerns that this might impede 
flexibility and innovation in the marketplace, because standard 
attributes are intended to make the description of products more 
uniform, and are not intended as a limitation on what products may be 
offered. Therefore, transmission providers should use standard 
attributes to describe established products but, in addition, we 
continue to encourage transmission providers to offer additional 
innovative products (i.e., to propose innovative services that are 
consistent with or superior to the pro forma tariff). Products with 
non-standard attributes are to be registered and documented on the 
industry-wide Home Page at www.tsin.com and on the OASIS site of the 
transmission provider offering such products. If the availability of 
such products becomes widespread, we may later add them to the list of 
standard attribute values.
b. Attribute Values Defining the Period of Service (Standards 2.1-
2.1.13)
    In the UBP NOPR, the Commission explained that the Phase IA S&CP 
Document, approved in the September 29, 1998 Order, provided for the 
inclusion of ``fixed,'' ``sliding,'' and ``extended'' transmission 
service period definitions. We further explained that some proposed 
definitions were not covered by the pro forma tariff, but that there 
was no prohibition against these services being provided under 
transmission providers' individual open access tariffs. In the UBP 
NOPR, we proposed that Standards 2.1 through 2.1.13, as shown below, be 
adopted.

    Standard 2.1: A Transmission Provider shall use the values and 
definitions below for the attributes Service-Increment and Window 
for all transmission services offered on OASIS, or shall post 
alternative attribute values and associated definitions on the OASIS 
Home Page at www.tsin.com, or shall use existing attribute values 
and definitions posted by other Transmission Providers. (See Section 
3 for registration requirements.)
    Standard 2.1.1: Fixed Hourly--The service starts at the 
beginning of a clock hour and stops at the end of a clock hour.
    Standard 2.1.2: Fixed Daily--The service starts at 00:00 and 
stops at 24:00 of the same calendar date (same as 00:00 of the next 
consecutive calendar date).
    Standard 2.1.3: Fixed Weekly--The service starts at 00:00 on 
Monday and stops at 24:00 of the following Sunday (same as 00:00 of 
the following Monday).
    Standard 2.1.4: Fixed Monthly--The service starts at 00:00 on 
the first date of a calendar month and stops at 24:00 on the last 
date of the same calendar month (same as 00:00 of the first date of 
the next consecutive month).
    Standard 2.1.5: Fixed Yearly--The service starts at 00:00 on the 
first date of a calendar year and ends at 24:00 on the last date of 
the same calendar year (same as 00:00 of the first date of the next 
consecutive year).
    Standard 2.1.6: Sliding Daily--The service starts at the 
beginning of any hour of the day and stops exactly 24 hours later at 
the same time on the next day.
    Standard 2.1.7: Sliding Weekly--The service starts at 00:00 of 
any date and stops exactly 168 hours later at 00:00 on the same day 
of the next week.
    Standard 2.1.8: Sliding Monthly--The service starts at 00:00 of 
any date and stops at 00:00 on the same date of the next month (28-
31 days later). If there is no corresponding date in the following 
month, the service stops at 24:00 on the last day of the next month.
    For example: Sliding Monthly starting at 00:00 on January 30 
would stop at 24:00 on February 28 (same as 00:00 March 1).
    Standard 2.1.9: Sliding Yearly--The service starts at 00:00 of 
any date and stops at 00:00 on the same date of the following year. 
If there is no corresponding date in the following year, the service 
stops at 24:00 on the last day of the same month in the following 
year.
    For example Sliding Yearly service starting on February 29 would 
stop on February 28 of the following year.
    Standard 2.1.10: Extended Daily--The service starts at any hour 
of a day and stops more than 24 hours later and less than 48 hours 
later.
    Standard 2.1.11: Extended Weekly--The service starts at 00:00 of 
any date and stops at 00:00 more than one week later, but less than 
two weeks later.
    Standard 2.1.12: Extended Monthly--The service starts at 00:00 
of any date and stops at 00:00 more than one month later but less 
than two months later.
    Standard 2.1.13: Extended Yearly--The service starts at 00:00 of 
any date and stops at 00:00 more than one year calendar year later 
but less than two calendar years later.

Comments

    AEP, Duke, Florida Power Corp and VEPCO filed comments on these 
proposed standards. All are in support of including the products of 
``Fixed,'' ``Sliding,'' and ``Extended.'' VEPCO comments that the 
``sliding'' and ``extended'' services should not be required to be 
offered by the transmission provider, but if offered, they should 
conform to Standards 2.1.6 through 2.1.13, as proposed.\26\ AEP 
comments that the ``extended'' service should be voluntary, because 
AEP's tariff would not permit such service. AEP also suggests that we 
might use the standard definitions of ``Fixed,'' ``Sliding,'' and 
``Extended,'' without the more rigid definitions of 2.1.1 through 
2.1.13.\27\ Duke suggests changes to standards 2.1.10 through 2.1.13, 
to permit ``extended daily'' for up to less than 168 hours, ``extended 
weekly'' for up to less than four weeks, ``extended monthly'' for up to 
less than twelve months, and to limit ``extended yearly'' to increments 
of full years. According to Duke, these changes would provide 
additional marketplace flexibility, and in the case of ``extended 
yearly,'' would prohibit customers from requesting service for two peak 
summer seasons without paying for two full years of service.\28\ 
Florida Power Corp opposes the expansion of service attribute 
definitions for locational marginal pricing and megawatt-mile 
pricing.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ VEPCO Comments at 2.
    \27\ AEP Comments at 4.
    \28\ Duke Comments at 4.
    \29\ Florida Power Corp Comments at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    We will adopt Standards 2.1 through 2.1.13 as proposed in the UBP 
NOPR, except, as proposed by Duke, we will revise Standards 2.1.10 
through 2.1.13 to read as follows:
    2.1.10: EXTENDED DAILY--The service starts at any hour of a day 
and stops more than 24 hours later and less than 168 hours later.
    2.1.1 1: EXTENDED WEEKLY--The service starts at 00:00 of any 
date and stops at 00:00 more than one week later, but less than four 
weeks later.
    2.1.12: EXTENDED MONTHLY--The service starts at 00:00 of any 
date and stops at 00:00 more than one month later, but less than 
twelve months later.
    2.1.13: EXTENDED YEARLY--The service starts at 00:00 of any date 
and stops at 00:00 more than one year later, but must be requested 
in increments of full years.

    We agree with Duke that these changes will provide additional 
flexibility to transmission providers and customers. We also agree that 
the revisions to Standard 2.1.13 are

[[Page 17374]]

appropriate. Under Standard 2.1.13, as here adopted, extended yearly 
service must be purchased in yearly increments, and customers reserving 
transmission for two peak seasons would pay for two full years of 
service. However, while Standard 2.1.13 would define extended yearly 
service as being offered in yearly increments, transmission providers 
may offer more flexible service, if approved by the Commission and 
posted in compliance with Standard 2.1.
    As to the comments from VEPCO and AEP, the Commission clarifies 
that the products of ``sliding'' and ``extended'' service are not 
required to be offered. Thus, the availability of these products should 
not create conflicts with any transmission providers' existing tariffs.
    As proposed in the UBP NOPR, the definitions of ``fixed,'' 
``sliding,'' and ``extended,'' will not be expanded to include 
attributes for locational marginal pricing and megawatt-mile pricing 
since these attributes are intended to describe types of services, not 
prices or rate designs for services. Florida Power Corp, which filed 
the only comment on this issue, supported the UBP NOPR's proposal.
c. Attribute Values Defining Service Class and Type (Standards 2.2-
2.3.2)
    In the UBP NOPR, the Commission noted that the Phase IA S&CP 
Document, approved in the September 29, 1998 Order, included data 
templates that refer to service class and type, but that did not define 
these attributes. To fill this gap, the UBP NOPR, in Standards 2.2 
through 2.3.2, proposed definitions for these attributes. Based on 
comments from interested persons, the proposed definitions differed 
somewhat from those recommended in the June 19 Report. The UBP NOPR 
proposed the following definitions:

    Standard 2.2: A Transmission Provider shall use the values and 
definitions below to describe the service CLASS for transmission 
services offered on OASIS, or shall post alternative attribute 
values and associated definitions on the OASIS Home Page at 
www.tsin.com, or shall use the attribute values and definitions 
posted by other Providers. (See Section 3 for registration 
requirements.)
    Standard 2.2.1: Firm--Transmission service that always has 
priority over NON-FIRM transmission service and includes Native Load 
Customers, Network Customers, and any transmission service not 
classified as non-firm in accordance with the definitions in the pro 
forma tariff.
    Standard 2.2.2: Non-Firm--Transmission service that is reserved 
and/or scheduled on an as-available basis and is subject to 
curtailment or interruption at a lesser priority compared to Firm 
transmission service, Native Load Customers, and Network Customers 
in accordance with the definitions in the pro forma tariff.
    Standard 2.3: A Transmission Provider shall use the values and 
definitions below to describe the service TYPE for transmission 
services offered on OASIS, or shall post alternative attribute 
values and associated definitions on the OASIS Home Page at 
www.tsin.com, or shall use the attribute values and definitions 
posted by other Providers. (See Section 3 for registration 
requirements.)
    Standard 2.3.1: Point-to-point--Transmission service that is 
reserved and/or scheduled between specified Points of Receipt and 
Delivery pursuant to Part II of the pro forma tariff and in 
accordance with the definitions in the pro forma tariff.
    Standard 2.3.2: Network--Network Integration Transmission 
Service that is provided to serve a Network Customer load pursuant 
to Part III of the pro forma tariff and in accordance with the 
definitions in the pro forma tariff.

Comments
    VEPCO filed the only comments on this issue. VEPCO has no objection 
to Standards 2.2 and 2.3, provided that the disclaimer ``in accordance 
with the definitions in the pro forma tariff'' is added to each 
definition. VEPCO argues that, if we incorporated the pro forma 
definitions verbatim into Standards 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.3.1, and 2.3.2, it 
would avoid confusion.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ VEPCO Comments at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    As proposed in the UBP NOPR, we will include the disclaimer ``in 
accordance with the definitions in the pro forma tariff'' in Standards 
2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.3.1, and 2.3.2. As to VEPCO's contention that we should 
incorporate the pro forma tariff definitions verbatim into Standards 
2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.3.1, and 2.3.2, we considered and rejected this option 
when we issued the UBP NOPR and likewise will reject this option in 
this Final Rule. The definitions in Standards 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.3.1, and 
2.3.2 are consistent with those in the pro forma tariff, but define 
related, somewhat different, terms. While we have incorporated pro 
forma tariff definitions verbatim when defining identical terms, the 
terms being defined in Standards 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.3.1, and 2.3.2 are not 
precisely the same as those defined in the pro forma tariff.\31\ 
Moreover, in our view, for purposes of this rule, we need to define the 
precise terms defined in Standards 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.3.1, and 2.3.2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ For example, while Standards 2.2.1 through 2.3.1 define 
``Firm,'' ``Non-Firm,'' and ``Point-to-Point,'' respectively, the 
pro forma tariff, at sections 1.13, 1.18, and 1.27, defines ``Firm 
Point-to-Point Transmission Service,'' ``Long-Term Firm Point-to-
Point Transmission Service,'' and ``Non-Firm Point-to-Point 
Transmission Service.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, for clarity we will revise Standard 2.2.2 to reflect 
that service to Native Load Customers and Network Customers is included 
within firm service under Standard 2.2.1. We therefore will adopt a 
revised Standard 2.2.2 that provides as follows:

    Standard 2.2.2: Non-Firm--Transmission service that is reserved 
and/or scheduled on an as-available basis and is subject to 
curtailment or interruption at a lesser priority compared to Firm 
transmission service, including service to Native Load Customers and 
Network Customers, in accordance with the definitions in the pro 
forma tariff.
d. Curtailment Priorities (Standard 2.4)
    Standard 2.4, as proposed in the June 19 Report, provided as 
follows:

    Standard 2.4: A Transmission Provider shall use the curtailment 
priority definitions in NERC Policy 9 Security Coordinator 
Procedures for NERC CURTAILMENT PRIORITY (1-7) for all transmission 
services offered on OASIS, or shall post alternative attribute 
values and associated definitions on the OASIS Home Page at 
www.tsin.com, or shall use attribute values and definitions posted 
by another Provider. (See Section 3 for registration requirements.)

    In the UBP NOPR, we stated that ``[w]e have not been persuaded to 
propose the adoption of Standard 2.4 as recommended in the June 19 
Report. There is still considerable work to be accomplished in the area 
of developing procedures/definitions for establishing curtailment 
policy.'' In the UBP NOPR, we also clarified the distinction between 
establishing curtailment priorities and displaying curtailment 
priorities. We stated,

[i]n the June 18 Order, we agreed to displaying curtailment priority 
information in certain templates contained in the S&CP Document. 
However, we specifically cautioned that,

our adoption of a place on the OASIS for these data elements does 
not constitute an approval of the NERC or other curtailment 
priorities.

As we stated in Coalition Against Private Tariffs,[\32\] curtailment 
priorities are governed by the pro forma tariff.[\33\]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ 83 FERC at 62,462.
    \33\ UBP NOPR at 33,638-39.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments
    Comments on this subject were filed by Cinergy, Florida Power Corp, 
and VEPCO. Cinergy \34\ and Florida Power Corp \35\ agree with the 
Commission that NERC Policy 9 should not be included in the OASIS 
Business Practices at this time. VEPCO disagrees, however, and

[[Page 17375]]

urges the Commission to adopt the standard. VEPCO's position is that 
the NERC Curtailment Priority is a Standard Data Element defined in the 
S&CP Document, and the only means by which a Transmission Customer is 
informed on the OASIS of how the service it has requested ranks in 
relation to other services for curtailment purposes. VEPCO recommends 
that the proposed standard be adopted as a guide until such time as 
that curtailment policy becomes more fully developed.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ Cinergy Comments at 3.
    \35\ Florida Power Corp Comments at 5.
    \36\ VEPCO Comments at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    As explained in the UBP NOPR, this issue (whether to adopt Standard 
2.4) involves how curtailment priorities (as governed by the pro forma 
tariff) are to be displayed. It does not involve what curtailment 
priorities should be established.
    Standard 2.4, as recommended in the June 19 Report, would require 
those transmission providers who do not use the NERC curtailment 
priority definitions to post alternative attribute values and 
associated definitions on the industry-wide OASIS Home Page or to use 
values and definitions posted on the industry-wide OASIS Home Page by 
other transmission providers. These attributes are used in the 
NERC__CURTAILMENT__PRIORITY and OTHER__CURTAILMENT__PRIORITY fields of 
templates described in the S&CP Document. After a review of the 
comments, we are persuaded by VEPCO's suggestion that NERC's Policy 9, 
NERC TLR Procedures, should be adopted as Standard 2.4 so that OASIS 
users will better understand the information being posted about 
curtailment priorities. However, NERC TLR Procedures have not been 
adopted by all transmission providers in all of NERC's regions. Thus, 
to add clarity, we will make minor revisions to Standard 2.4 to clarify 
when the definitions in NERC TLR Procedures are to be used (when a 
transmission provider has adopted NERC TLR Procedures) and when the 
alternative attribute values and associated definitions are to be used 
(when a transmission provider has not adopted NERC TLR Procedures). We 
therefore will adopt a revised Standard 2.4 that provides as follows:

    Standard 2.4: A Transmission Provider that has adopted NERC TLR 
Procedures shall use the curtailment priority definitions contained 
in NERC TLR Procedures for NERC CURTAILMENT PRIORITY (1-7) for all 
transmission services offered on OASIS. A Transmission Provider that 
has adopted alternative curtailment procedures shall post its 
alternative attribute values and associated definitions on the OASIS 
Home Page at www.tsin.com, or shall use attribute values and 
definitions posted by another Transmission Provider. (See Section 3 
for registration requirements.)

    While we agree with Cinergy and Florida Power Corp that there is 
still considerable work to be accomplished in the area of developing 
and refining curtailment procedures,\37\ this does not negate the need 
for current postings of curtailment priorities to be as informative as 
possible. Thus, we will adopt Standard 2.4 at this time, but will 
consider appropriate revisions to this provision in the future, if the 
terminology used therein becomes outdated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ Subsequent to issuance of the UBP NOPR, in North American 
Electric Reliability Council, 88 FERC para. 61,046 (1999), the 
Commission approved a NERC compliance filing that modified NERC's 
transmission loading relief (TLR) procedures referred to in the UBP 
NOPR at 33,614-15 & n.31.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

e. Other Service Attribute Values (Standards 2.5-2.5.9)
    In the UBP NOPR,\38\ the Commission noted that Order No. 888 
included six ancillary services that must be included in an open access 
tariff. In addition, a transmission provider may file to revise its 
open access tariff to include other services.\39\ In the UBP NOPR, 
based on comments from interested persons, we deviated from 
recommendations in the June 19 Report and proposed the adoption of 
Standards 2.5 through 2.5.9, as follows:

    \38\ UBP NOPR at 33,615 & n.32.
    \39\ We note that in Order No. 888, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 
31,036 at 31,704 & n.349, our requirement that the six ancillary 
services be included in an open access transmission tariff does not 
preclude the transmission provider from voluntarily offering other 
interconnected operations services to the transmission customer 
along with its supply of basic transmission service and ancillary 
services.

    Standard 2.5: A Transmission Provider shall use the definitions 
below to describe the AS__TYPEs offered on OASIS, or shall post 
alternative attribute values and associated definitions on the OASIS 
Home Page at www.tsin.com, or shall use attribute values and 
definitions posted by another Provider. (See Section 3 for 
registration requirements.) FERC Ancillary Services Definitions
    Standard 2.5.1: Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch Service 
(SC)--is necessary to the provision of basic transmission service 
within every control area. This service can be provided only by the 
operator of the control area in which the transmission facilities 
used are located. This is because the service is to schedule the 
movement of power through, out of, within, or into the control area. 
This service also includes the dispatch of generating resources to 
maintain generation/load balance and maintain security during the 
transaction and in accordance with section 3.1 (and Schedule 1) of 
the pro forma tariff.
    Standard 2.5.2: Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from 
Generation Sources Service (RV)--is the provision of reactive power 
and voltage control by generating facilities under the control of 
the control area operator. This service is necessary to the 
provision of basic transmission service within every control area 
and in accordance with section 3.2 (and Schedule 2) of the pro forma 
tariff.
    Standard 2.5.3: Regulation and Frequency Response Service (RF)--
is provided for transmission within or into the transmission 
provider's control area to serve load in the area. Customers may be 
able to satisfy the regulation service obligation by providing 
generation with automatic generation control capabilities to the 
control area in which the load resides and in accordance with 
section 3.3 (and Schedule 3) of the pro forma tariff.
    Standard 2.5.4: Energy Imbalance Service (EI)--is the service 
for transmission within and into the transmission provider's control 
area to serve load in the area. Energy imbalance represents the 
deviation between the scheduled and actual delivery of energy to a 
load in the local control area over a single hour and in accordance 
with section 3.4 (and Schedule 4) of the pro forma tariff.
    Standard 2.5.5: Operating Reserve--Spinning Reserve Service 
(SP)--is provided by generating units that are on-line and loaded at 
less than maximum output. They are available to serve load 
immediately in an unexpected contingency, such as an unplanned 
outage of a generating unit and in accordance with section 3.5 (and 
Schedule 5) of the pro forma tariff.
    Standard 2.5.6: Operating Reserve--Supplemental Reserve Service 
(SU)--is generating capacity that can be used to respond to 
contingency situations. Supplemental reserve, is not available 
instantaneously, but rather within a short period (usually ten 
minutes). It is provided by generating units that are on-line but 
unloaded, by quick-start generation, and by customer interrupted 
load and in accordance with section 3.6 (and Schedule 6) of the pro 
forma tariff.

Other Service Definitions

    Other services may be offered to Transmission Customers through 
individual filed tariffs. Examples of other services that may be 
offered include the Interconnected Operations Services described 
below in Guides 2.5.7, 2.5.8, and 2.5.9. Ancillary service 
definitions may be offered pursuant to an individual transmission 
provider's specific tariff filings.
    Guide 2.5.7: Dynamic Transfer (DT)--is the provision of the 
real-time monitoring, telemetering, computer software, hardware, 
communications, engineering, and administration required to 
electronically move all or a portion of the real energy services 
associated with a generator or load out of its Host Control Area 
into a different Electronic Control Area.
    Guide 2.5.8: Real Power Transmission Losses (TL)--is the 
provision of capacity and energy to replace energy losses associated

[[Page 17376]]

with transmission service on the Transmission Provider's system.
    Guide 2.5.9: System Black Start Capability (BS)--is the 
provision of generating equipment that, following a system blackout, 
is able to start without an outside electrical supply. Furthermore, 
Black Start Capability is capable of being synchronized to the 
transmission system such that it can provide a startup supply source 
for other system capacity that can then be likewise synchronized to 
the transmission system to supply load as part of a process of re-
energizing the transmission system.

    In the UBP NOPR,\40\ we also stated that we would replace the 
definition of ``ANC__SERVICE__TYPE'' with the term ``AS__TYPE.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ UBP NOPR at 33,617-18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments
    VEPCO filed the only comments on this subject and raised no 
objection to the proposal in the UBP NOPR.
Discussion
    Given the absence of any opposing comments, we will adopt these 
provisions, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, with the exception that, to 
add clarity, we will modify the paragraph on other service definitions, 
preceding Guide 2.5.7, to read as follows:

Other Service Definitions

    Other services may be offered to Transmission Customers through 
Commission-approved revisions to their individual open access 
tariffs. Examples of other services that may be offered include the 
Interconnected Operations Services described below in Standards 
2.5.7, 2.5.8, and 2.5.9. Ancillary service definitions may be 
offered pursuant to an individual transmission provider's specific 
tariff filings.

    In addition, as discussed in section II.D.1, above, we will adopt 
proposed Guides 2.5.7-2.5.9 as Standards 2.5.7-2.5.9.
f. Scheduling Period (Standards 2.6-2.6.2)
    As we explained in the UBP NOPR:

    Recommended Guides 2.6, 2.6.1, and 2.6.2 refer to definitions 
established for the next-hour experiment, which begins November 1, 
1998 and terminates March 1, 1999, with a report due to the 
Commission by March 31, 1999. It is premature to propose the 
adoption of these guides at this time, pending the outcome of the 
industry experiment.[ \41\]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ UBP NOPR at 33,618.

Guides 2.6-2.6.2, as described (but not proposed) in the UBP NOPR,\42\ 
provided as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ Id.

    Guide 2.6: A Transmission Provider should use the definitions 
below to describe the scheduling period leading up to the start time 
of a transaction:
    2.6.1: Same-day is (i) after 2 p.m. of the preceding day and 
(ii) more than one hour prior to the service start time.
    2.6.2: Next-hour is one hour or less prior to the service start 
time.

Comments
    VEPCO and Florida Power Corp agree with the UBP NOPR that, pending 
the outcome of the Next-Hour Experiment, it is premature to adopt 
Guides 2.6-2.6.2.
Discussion
    On September 29, 1998, the Commission authorized a four-month 
experiment, starting November 1, 1998, to test procedures to promote 
the Next-Hour market.\43\ Subsequently, on July 28, 1999, the 
Commission reauthorized the experiment on an interim basis, until 
alternative solutions for electronic next-hour reservations on the 
OASIS are formulated and authorized.\44\ In the UBP NOPR, we proposed 
not to adopt Guide 2.6, pending the outcome of the next-hour experiment 
and the development of authorized alternative solutions for electronic 
next-hour reservations. At the time when comments on the UBP NOPR were 
due to be filed, this matter was still unresolved and, therefore, the 
commenters agreed that it still was premature to decide this matter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS) and 
Standards of Conduct, 84 FERC para. 61,324 (1998) (September 29, 
1998 Order).
    \44\ Open Access Same-Time Information System (OASIS) and 
Standards of Conduct, 88 FERC para. 61,100 (1999) (July 28, 1999 
Order).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On December 15, 1999, in North American Electric Reliability 
Council, 89 FERC para. 61,277 (1999) (Next Hour Order), the Commission 
reviewed a NERC proposal presenting the industry's suggested method for 
treating next-hour transactions. The Commission conditionally accepted 
NERC's proposal for transmission providers to have the option (but not 
the obligation) of offering a new transmission service, Next Hour 
Market Service (NHM Service). Individual transmission providers may 
file revisions to their individual open access transmission tariffs 
that would authorize them to provide NHM Service, consistent with the 
Next Hour Order, and that would specifically describe the rates, terms, 
and conditions of the NHM Service to be offered; the filings may not 
merely incorporate the NERC proposal by reference.
    Our findings in the Next Hour Order raise a number of issues not 
foreseen in the UBP NOPR. We believe it would still be useful to adopt 
definitions of the scheduling period for ``same-day'' and ``next-hour'' 
transactions as recommended in Guides 2.6-2.6.2, but we need to 
consider: (1) What is the most appropriate location within the BPS for 
inclusion of such definitions; (2) whether the BPS should include a 
definition of NHM Service; \45\ (3) whether we should revise Table 4-2 
(Reservation Timing Requirements) and Table 4-3 (Priorities for 
Competing Reservation Requests) and related provisions to reflect the 
availability of NHM Service and its priority vis-a-vis other 
transmission services; (4) whether we should adopt proposed Guides 4.2 
and 4.3 (concerning requests by telephone or facsimile); and (5) 
whether any other revisions to the BPS are needed in light of the Next 
Hour Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ For example, we could add a provision defining NHM Service 
as follows: NEXT HOUR MARKET SERVICE is non-firm transmission 
service that is reserved for one clock hour and is requested within 
sixty (60) minutes before the start of the next clock hour for 
service commencing at the start of the clock hour.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Before deciding these matters, it would be helpful to have these 
issues considered by the OASIS How Working Group and MIC. We request 
that the MIC/How Group report back to the Commission, within ninety 
(90) days of the date of publication of this order in the Federal 
Register, with their recommendations as to any necessary revisions or 
additions to the BPS to reflect the Commission's findings in the Next 
Hour Order.
3. Entity and Product Registration
a. Maintenance of Industry-Wide OASIS Home Page
    In the UBP NOPR, we proposed to allow the use of an industry-wide 
OASIS Home Page at www.tsin.com. We stated therein that the operator of 
the Home Page may only act as an agent of the transmission providers. 
We also stated that allowing the use of an industry-wide OASIS Home 
Page does not undermine the responsibilities of individual transmission 
providers to make their OASIS sites accessible to users and potential 
users, and to operate their OASIS sites in compliance with all 
applicable Commission orders and regulations. We proposed that, as long 
as transmission providers pay only reasonable fees to the third party 
for operating and maintaining the industry-wide OASIS Home Page, they 
will be able to recover these fees in their transmission rates.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ UBP NOPR at 33,619.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments
    Florida Power Corp agrees with the UBP NOPR that the operator of 
the industry-wide OASIS Home Page should only act as an agent for the

[[Page 17377]]

transmission providers, and not as an independent entity.\47\ PJM 
questions the need for an industry-wide OASIS Home Page for customer 
registration since each OASIS node must determine its own registration/
access requirements.\48\ PJM argues that transmission providers should 
be permitted to decide whether to post their own registration 
information, and service definitions, or to contract with the operator 
of www.tsin.com to do so. Cinergy supports the creation of an industry-
wide OASIS Home Page, where potential OASIS users could centrally 
register for rights to use any individual OASIS site, but seeks 
clarification of whether registration on such a Home Page would be 
mandatory or voluntary.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ While the Industry Report on OASIS Phase IA Business 
Practices did not identify the party operating the www.tsin.com 
industry-wide OASIS Home Page, we have subsequently learned that it 
is operated by NERC.
    \48\ Florida Power Corp Comments at 3, TEP Comments at 4.
    \49\ Cinergy Comments at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Florida Power Corp proposes that the costs of the OASIS 
registration process be borne by transmission providers and recovered 
in open access transmission rates.\50\ TEP argues that both customers 
and transmission providers should be assessed a fee for using the 
registration process because both would benefit from it. PJM argues 
that only OASIS users who purchase transmission service products should 
be required to register at the industry-wide site and that users who 
only want information from OASIS should be able to get it without 
charge. PJM claims that the www.tsin.com site is also used in the NERC 
tagging process and argues that it would be difficult to allocate the 
costs between OASIS activities and tagging.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ Florida Power Corp Comments at 3.
    \51\ PJM Comments at 4-5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    We expect that a single industry-wide OASIS Home Page for 
registration that keeps track of OASIS users, transmission providers, 
and transmission providers' services, would have great benefits.\52\ 
However, we are still concerned that an entity not subject to the 
Commission's jurisdiction would be setting fees for the use of the 
industry-wide OASIS Home Page. Thus, we will require transmission 
providers to: (1) Use the industry-wide OASIS Home Page at 
www.tsin.com; and (2) ensure that the third-party operator of the 
industry-wide OASIS Home Page acts as an agent on behalf of affected 
transmission providers.\53\ In our view, such an arrangement would 
create a mechanism for transmission providers to recover the reasonable 
fees they paid for the operation and maintenance of the industry-wide 
OASIS Home Page, while keeping transmission providers responsible for 
ensuring that the industry-wide OASIS Home Page is properly operated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ Registration at the industry-wide OASIS Home Page would 
replace registration at individual OASIS sites.
    \53\ UBP NOPR at 33,618-19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Identification of Parties (Standard 3.1)
    For electronic commerce to succeed, there must be unambiguous 
identification of the parties to a transaction. In the UBP NOPR, we 
proposed to adopt the following standard for identification of the 
parties:

    Standard 3.1: All entities or persons using OASIS shall register 
the identity of their organization (including DUNS number) or person 
at the OASIS Home Page at www.tsin.com. Registration shall be 
completed prior to the commencement of Phase IA and renewed annually 
and whenever changes in identification occur and thereafter. An 
entity or person not complying with this requirement may be denied 
access by a provider to that provider's OASIS node.

Comments
    Cinergy, TEP, and VEPCO largely support the Commission's proposal 
in the UBP NOPR.\54\ However, Cinergy argues that DUNS numbers do not 
provide a sufficient link between the DUNS number of the reporting 
organization and its parent entity. Cinergy argues that such a link is 
needed for financial guarantee and credit purposes. To remedy this 
problem, Cinergy proposes that the registration process be revised to 
include the FERC-registered entity of the reporting organization and 
that OASIS registrants be required to update this information, whenever 
necessary to reflect changes in registrants' corporate structures.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \54\ Cinergy Comments at 3, TEP Comments at 4, VEPCO Comments at 
3.
    \55\ Cinergy Comments 3-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    We agree with Cinergy that it is important that each OASIS 
registrant provide a link between the registering organization and its 
parent entity. In addition, Phase IA already has commenced and thus can 
no longer be used as the deadline for registration. We therefore will 
adopt a modified Standard 3.1, which provides as follows:

    Standard 3.1: All entities or persons using OASIS shall register 
the identity of their organization (including DUNS number) or person 
at the OASIS Home Page at www.tsin.com. Registration identification 
shall include the parent entity (if any) of the registrant. 
Registration shall be a prerequisite to OASIS usage and renewed 
annually and whenever changes in identification occur and 
thereafter. An entity or person not complying with this requirement 
may be denied access by a transmission provider to that transmission 
provider's OASIS node.

c. Registering Non-Standard Service Attributes (Standards 3.2-3.3)
    In the UBP NOPR, the Commission explained that the OASIS Phase IA 
S&CP Document, approved in the September 29, 1998 Order, uses 
attributes to define services. However, the S&CP Document does not 
define the attributes.\56\ While standard definitions are addressed in 
sections II.D.2-II.D.4 and II.D.6, above, the UBP NOPR also proposed 
Standard 3.2 and Guide 3.3, to deal with circumstances when 
standardized attributes and definitions are not appropriate. Standard 
3.2 and Guide 3.3, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, provide as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ See June 19 Report at section 2.

    Standard 3.2: Providers of transmission and ancillary services 
shall use only attribute values and definitions that have been 
registered on the OASIS Home Page at www.tsin.com for all 
transmission and ancillary services offered on their OASIS.
    Guide 3.3: Providers of transmission and ancillary services 
should endeavor to use on their OASIS nodes attribute values and 
definitions that have been posted by other Providers on the OASIS 
Home Page at www.tsin.com whenever possible.

    In addition, in the UBP NOPR,\57\ the Commission agreed with the 
June 19 Report that monitoring is needed to ensure that the non-
standard attribute naming process is not abused, and invited comment on 
which group would be the proper group to perform this function.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ UBP NOPR at 33,620-21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments
    Cinergy, PJM, Southern, and VEPCO filed comments on this issue. 
Cinergy \58\ and Southern \59\ suggest that the MIC, the successor to 
the Commercial Practices Working Group, is the best group to monitor 
the attribute registration process to ensure that the non-standard 
attribute naming process is not abused. PJM asserts that monitoring is 
not necessary; that parties can resolve their own disputes, and that, 
if these steps fail, parties may, as a last resort, file complaints 
with the Commission.\60\ VEPCO supports the adoption of Standard 3.2 
and Guide 3.3,

[[Page 17378]]

and recommends that any market participant be allowed to monitor the 
process for naming non-standard attributes and that complaints can be 
informally submitted to the MIC for resolution.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ Cinergy Comments at 4.
    \59\ Southern Comments at 3.
    \60\ PJM Comments at 4.
    \61\ VEPCO Comments at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    None of the commenters objected to the proposal in the UBP NOPR 
that Standard 3.2 and Guide 3.3 be included in the BPS. Thus, we will 
adopt Standard 3.2 as proposed in the UBP NOPR and, as discussed in 
section II.D.1, above, we will adopt proposed Guide 3.3 as Standard 
3.3.
    Furthermore, we find merit in the suggestion from Cinergy and 
Southern \62\ that the NERC-sponsored MIC is the appropriate group to 
monitor the non-standard attribute registration process. We also agree 
with VEPCO that any market participant may monitor the process. We 
believe, contrary to PJM's position, that there are sufficient 
differences in product attributes (i.e., the names used to identify 
different products) in the marketplace to warrant a monitoring effort. 
Furthermore, the Commission is prepared to respond to any complaint 
that might arise as a result of an unresolved dispute.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ While VEPCO did not specifically propose that monitoring 
functions be assigned to the MIC, it did suggest that informal 
complaints be submitted to that group for resolution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

d. Registering Points of Receipt and Delivery (Standards 3.4-3.6)
    Based on the principle that transmission providers should be 
encouraged to apply consistent names for connecting paths or common 
paths, the UBP NOPR proposed the adoption of Standards 3.4 and 3.5 and 
Guide 3.6. In addition, we requested comments on what would be the 
appropriate entity to monitor this process and whether this function 
should be performed in tandem with the monitoring of registration of 
non-standard attributes. Standards 3.4 and 3.5 and Guide 3.6, as 
proposed in the UBP NOPR, provide as follows:

    Standard 3.4: A Transmission Provider shall register and 
thereafter maintain on the OASIS Home Page at www.tsin.com all 
Points of Receipt and Delivery to and from which a Transmission 
Customer may reserve and schedule transmission service.
    Standard 3.5: For each reservable Path posted on their OASIS 
nodes, Transmission Providers shall indicate the available Point(s) 
of Receipt and Delivery for that Path. These Points of Receipt and 
Delivery shall be from the list registered on the OASIS Home Page at 
www.tsin.com.
    Guide 3.6: When two or more Transmission Providers share common 
Points of Receipt or Delivery, or when a Path connects Points of 
Receipt and Delivery in neighboring systems, the Transmission 
Providers owning and/or operating those facilities should apply 
consistent names for those connecting paths or common paths on the 
OASIS.

Comments
    Comments were filed by Cinergy, Florida Power Corp, and VEPCO. 
Cinergy suggests that the NERC-sponsored MIC is the best group to 
monitor the registration of points of receipt (PORs) and delivery 
(PODs).\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ Cinergy Comments at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Florida Power Corp supports a central point for all registration 
activities to streamline and bring more consistency to these 
activities. In addition, Florida Power Corp recommends that NERC would 
be the best group to monitor the registration of PORs and PODs.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ Florida Power Corp Comments at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    VEPCO recommends that any market participant be allowed to monitor 
compliance with these standards and that complaints can be informally 
submitted to the MIC for resolution. \65\ VEPCO further suggests that 
the registration process should allow a transmission provider to 
identify its neighbor's name for a common path as an alias to its own 
name for that path when they cannot agree on a single name.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ VEPCO Comments at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    We will include Standards 3.4, 3.5, and 3.6 \66\ in the BPS we are 
adopting in this Final Rule for several reasons. First, given that 
there was no objection expressed by any commenters, we see no reason to 
depart from our proposal on this subject in the UBP NOPR. Second, we 
remain persuaded that a monitoring effort is appropriate to reduce 
confusion in the market. Nothing in the comments seeks to dissuade us 
from this view. Third, the Commission agrees with the comments from 
Cinergy (as supported in part by Florida Power Corp and VEPCO) that the 
MIC is the appropriate group to monitor the POR/POD registration 
process. In fact, no alternative group seems as well positioned to 
handle this responsibility. Finally, the Commission is prepared to deal 
with any complaint that might arise as a result of an unresolved 
dispute.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ As discussed in section II.D.1, above, we are adopting as 
Standard 3.6 what was proposed as Guide 3.6 in the UBP NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. On-Line Price Negotiation and Confirmation Process
a. On-line Price Negotiation in Short-term Markets (Standards 4.1-4.3)
    In the UBP NOPR, the Commission proposed the adoption of Standard 
4.1 (proposed as a Guide in the June 19 Report) because it restates 
existing Commission policy, as follows:

    Standard 4.1: Consistent with FERC policy and regulations, all 
reservations and price negotiations should be conducted on OASIS.

The UBP NOPR did not propose the adoption of recommended Guides 4.2 and 
4.3 from the June 19 Report,\67\ because these guides are essentially 
the same as those proposed by the CPWG/How Group in a June 1998 letter 
requesting a four-month next-hour experiment.\68\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ The June 19 Report recommended adoption of Guides 4.2 and 
4.3 as follows:
    Guide 4.2: The following is considered ``on the OASIS'' during 
Phase 1-A: For a transmission service of hourly duration, requested 
within the next-hour, a Customer should have the option, subject to 
the exception allowed by Guide 4.3, of entering a reservation and 
schedule request electronically on the Provider's OASIS and 
scheduling system (if such electronic transactions are allowed on 
the Provider's scheduling system), or arranging the reservation and 
schedule verbally with the Provider. If a transmission reservation 
is confirmed verbally, the Provider should have the option of 
requiring the Customer to enter the reservation on OASIS 
electronically within one hour after the start of the reservation.
    Guide 4.3: If a Provider's OASIS and scheduling processes allow 
that a Customer's reservation and scheduling requests will be 
accepted or refused within 15 minutes of the queue time, then the 
Provider may require that reservations and schedules be entered 
electronically by the Customer prior to the established scheduling 
deadline. If in any case the Provider has not responded to the 
reservation and schedule request within 15 minutes, the Customer has 
the option of calling the Provider to verbally confirm the 
reservation and schedule.
    \68\ See discussion in section II.D.2.f above and letter dated 
October 19, 1999 from NERC in Docket No. ER00-157-000.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments
    Florida Power Corp and VEPCO agree with the proposal to adopt 
Standard 4.1.\69\ VEPCO suggests that Standard 4.1 be reworded to state 
explicitly that reservations for network service are not conducted on 
the OASIS, as follows: ``[c]onsistent with FERC policy and regulations, 
all Point-to-Point requests, associated ancillary service requests, and 
price negotiations for such requests, should be conducted on OASIS.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \69\ Florida Power Corp Comments at 5, VEPCO Comments at 3-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    As proposed in the UBP NOPR, we adopt Standard 4.1 and not Guides 
4.2 and 4.3. We reject VEPCO's suggestion that Standard 4.1 be reworded 
to state

[[Page 17379]]

that only Point-to-Point service is reserved on the OASIS. The purpose 
of Standard 4.1 is not to specify what types of transmission 
transactions are to be conducted on the OASIS, but to clarify that, 
consistent with FERC policy and regulations, reservations and price 
negotiations, and not just final transactions, are to be conducted on 
the OASIS.\70\ Moreover, the Commission's Next Hour Order \71\ makes 
Guides 4.2 and 4.3 moot for those transmission providers who file 
revisions to their individual open access transmission tariffs 
authorizing them to provide NHM Service. In section II.D.2.f, above, we 
requested that the MIC/How Group report back to us on various issues 
related to NHM Service. These issues include the question of whether 
they still recommend that we adopt proposed Guides 4.2 and 4.3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \70\ Our previous decisions defining what constitutes an on-the-
OASIS transaction during OASIS Phase IA still stand.
    \71\ This order is further discussed in section II.D.2.f above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Diagram Depicting the Negotiation Process (Standards 4.4-4.5)
    In the UBP NOPR, we noted that the Process State Diagram proposed 
in Guide 4.4 (Figure 4-1) is the same as the Diagram of Purchase 
Transactions (State Diagram) contained in Exhibit 4-1 of Version 1.3 of 
the S&CP Document. To avoid possible future conflict between the BPS 
and the S&CP Document, we proposed to incorporate by reference Exhibit 
4-1 into the BPS.\72\ Guide 4.4, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, provides 
as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \72\ UBP NOPR at 33,626.

    Guide 4.4: The state diagram appearing in Exhibit 4-1 in Section 
4.2.10.2 of the Version 1.3 of the S&CP Document constitutes a 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
recommended business practice in OASIS Phase IA.

    Exhibit 4-1 of section 4.2.10.2 of the S&CP Document is as follows:
BILLING CODE 6717-01-U

[[Page 17380]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR31MR00.001

BILLING CODE 6717-01-C

[[Page 17381]]

Similarly, we also noted in the UBP NOPR that the table of definitions 
of the process states in Guide 4.5 (Table 4-1) is similar to the 
definitions of the same terms appearing at section 4.2.10.2 (status 
values) of the S&CP Document. To avoid possible future conflict between 
the BPS and the S&CP Document we proposed to incorporate by reference 
the definitions in section 4.2.10.2 of the S&CP Document into the BPS. 
Guide 4.5, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, provides as follows:

    Guide 4.5: The definitions in Section 4.2.10.2 of the Version 
1.3 of the S&CP Document (status values) should be applied to the 
process states in OASIS Phase IA.

    In the UBP NOPR, we also proposed to improve the definition of 
``SUPERSEDED'' appearing in section 4.2.10.2 and in the Data Element 
Dictionary of the S&CP Document by substituting the word ``preempted'' 
for ``displaced.'' The section 4.2.10.2 definitions (status values), as 
proposed in the UBP NOPR, are as follows:
    The possible STATUS values are:

QUEUED = initial status assigned by TSIP on receipt of ``customer 
services purchase request.''
INVALID = assigned by TSIP or Provider indicating an invalid field 
in the request, such as improper POR, POD, source, sink, etc. (Final 
state).
RECEIVED = assigned by Provider or Seller to acknowledge QUEUED 
requests and indicate the service request is being evaluated, 
including for completing the required ancillary services.
STUDY= assigned by Provider or Seller to indicate some level of 
study is required or being performed to evaluate service request.
REFUSED = assigned by Provider or Seller to indicate service request 
has been denied due to lack of availability of transmission 
capability. SELLER__COMMENTS should be used to communicate details 
for denial of service. (Final state).
COUNTEROFFER = assigned by Provider or Seller to indicate that a new 
OFFER__PRICE is being proposed.
REBID = assigned by Customer to indicate that a new BID__PRICE is 
being proposed.
SUPERSEDED = assigned by Provider or Seller when a request which has 
not yet been confirmed is preempted by another reservation request. 
(Final state).
ACCEPTED = assigned by Provider or Seller to indicate the service 
request at the designated OFFER__PRICE has been approved/accepted. 
If the reservation request was submitted PRECONFIRMED, the OASIS 
Node shall immediately set the reservation status to CONFIRMED. 
Depending upon the type of ancillary services required, the Seller 
may or may not require all ancillary service reservations to be 
completed before accepting a request.
DECLINED = assigned by Provider or Seller to indicate that the 
BID__PRICE is unacceptable and that negotiations are terminated. 
SELLER__COMMENTS should be used to communicate reason for denial of 
service. (Final state).
CONFIRMED = assigned by Customer in response to Provider or Seller 
posting ``ACCEPTED'' status, to confirm service. Once a request has 
been ``CONFIRMED,'' a transmission service reservation exists. 
(Final state, unless overridden by DISPLACED or ANNULLED state).
WITHDRAWN = assigned by Customer at any point in request evaluation 
to withdraw the request from any further action. (Final state).
DISPLACED = assigned by Provider or Seller when a ``CONFIRMED'' 
reservation from a Customer is displaced by a longer term 
reservation and the Customer has exercised right of first refusal 
(i.e., refused to match terms of new request). (Final state).[ \73\]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \73\ As discussed in section II.D.7, below, we are revising this 
proposed definition to: (1) Insert the word ``not'' before 
``exercised;'' and (2) to insert the words ``if any'' after 
``refusal.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

ANNULLED = assigned by Provider or Seller when, by mutual agreement 
with the Customer, a confirmed reservation is to be voided. (Final 
state).
RETRACTED = assigned by Provider or Seller when the Customer fails 
to confirm or withdraw the request within the required time period. 
(Final state).

    In addition, the definition of the term ``REBID'' appearing in 
section 4.2.10.2 and in the Data Element Dictionary of the S&CP 
Document refers to price only. In the UBP NOPR, \74\ we requested 
comment on whether the use of REBID should be limited to price, or 
whether it would be feasible and/or desirable to allow REBID to 
lengthen the duration of the period of the requested service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \74\ UBP NOPR at 33,625 n.71.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments
    VEPCO supports the proposal in the UBP NOPR to incorporate by 
reference the State Diagram appearing in Exhibit 4-1 in section 
4.2.10.2 and the definitions in section 4.2.10.2 of the S&CP Document, 
as Guides 4.4 and 4.5, respectively, of the BPS. \75\ Cinergy and VEPCO 
support the proposal in the UBP NOPR to improve the definition of 
``SUPERSEDED'' by replacing the word ``displaced'' with ``preempted.'' 
\76\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \75\ VEPCO Comments at 4.
    \76\ Cinergy Comments at 9, VEPCO Comments at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    VEPCO sees an apparent conflict between the definition of REBID, 
which states that it is ``assigned by Customer to indicate that a new 
BID__PRICE is being proposed,'' and the State Diagram, which does not 
permit a customer-initiated change of status from ACCEPTED to REBID. 
\77\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \77\ VEPCO Comments at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In response to the UBP NOPR's request for comments on whether 
customers should be able to rebid duration as well as price, Duke and 
VEPCO argue that the REBID should be limited to price only. Duke argues 
that allowing customers to REBID duration could cause confusion and 
lead to gaming of the first-come-first-served process. \78\ Duke 
explains that permitting customers to rebid duration could result in 
delays if the transmission provider is forced to perform a study to 
determine if capacity is available for the expanded period. VEPCO 
argues that it is not evident that there is a need for this type of 
negotiation and that it would be very expensive to convert back-office 
systems to allow the expanded definition of REBID.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \78\ Duke Comments at 5, VEPCO Comments at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Cinergy supports rebidding of both duration and price. \79\ 
However, it argues that there is a conflict between the guides and the 
S&CP Document regarding REBID of duration. Cinergy cites Row 7 of Table 
4-3 (Guide 4.16) as permitting rebidding of duration by providing that 
a subsequent request for non-firm point-to-point of a longer duration 
entitles an earlier non-firm point-to-point request to a right-of-
first-refusal. Cinergy also cites the S&CP Document, at section 
4.2.10.2, as not permitting rebidding of duration because REBID is 
defined solely in terms of price. Cinergy argues that this is 
inconsistent and asks that we issue a clarification reconciling the two 
provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \79\ Cinergy Comments at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Cinergy also argues that Guide 4.5 needs more work before it can be 
made a standard. \80\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \80\ Cinergy Comments at 5-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    As we proposed in the UBP NOPR, we will: (1) Incorporate by 
reference Exhibit 4-1 (State Diagram) and the Status Values of section 
4.2.10.2 of the S&CP Document into the BPS; (2) revise the definition 
of ``SUPERSEDED'' by replacing the word ``displaced'' with 
``preempted'' in section 4.2.10.2 and in the Data Element Dictionary of 
the S&CP Document; and (3) revise the definition of ``REFUSED'' to 
insert the words ``lack of'' before ``availability,'' as discussed 
later in this section. \81\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \81\ In addition, in section II.D.7, below, we will order an 
additional revision to these definitions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding VEPCO's request for clarification of whether a customer 
can initiate a change of status from ACCEPTED to REBID, we agree with 
VEPCO that the State Diagram does not permit a customer to change 
ACCEPTED to REBID. We disagree, however, with VEPCO's interpretation of 
the definition

[[Page 17382]]

of REBID. While this definition allows a customer to initiate a new 
BID__PRICE, it does not state that this may be done after an offer is 
accepted. Thus, we do not see the definitions as being in conflict with 
the State Diagram, and VEPCO has not convinced us of the need to revise 
the referenced definitions.
    With regard to the issue of whether REBID should be used to rebid 
both duration and price, we need to draw a distinction between REBID 
during the negotiation process and exercising the right-of-first-
refusal. A REBID differs from exercising the right-of-first-refusal 
that occurs after a reservation request has been accepted by the 
transmission provider. The State Diagram provides that the right-of-
first-refusal be carried out through COUNTEROFFER and REBID and thus 
introduces the confusion cited by Cinergy. Cinergy finds troublesome 
the conflict between Row 7 of Guide 4.16 (Table 4-3) (permitting 
rebidding of duration when exercising the right-of-first-refusal) and 
the definition of REBID in section 4.2.10.2 of the S&CP Document (that 
only allows the rebidding of price). VEPCO proposes, in its comments on 
section 4.19, to add a ``pre-empted with right-of-first-refusal'' 
status to the State Diagram in the S&CP Document. We agree that this 
would make a clear distinction between rebidding during negotiation and 
the right-of-first-refusal.
    We request that, within ninety (90) days of the date of publication 
of this Final Rule in the Federal Register, the MIC/How Group submit 
its recommendations on any necessary changes to the State Diagram and 
definitions in the S&CP Document to accommodate: (1) A transmission 
provider notifying a customer of its right-of-first-refusal; and (2) a 
customer making use of its right-of-first-refusal.
    For the reasons discussed in section II.D.1, above, we will deny 
Cinergy's request that Guide 4.5 remain voluntary. As proposed in the 
UBP NOPR, we are revising Guide 4.4 to incorporate by reference Exhibit 
4-1 (State Diagram) of the S&CP Document and are revising Guide 4.5 to 
incorporate by reference the definitions contained in section 4.2.10.2 
of the S&CP Document. In addition, as discussed in section II.D.1, 
above, we will adopt Guides 4.4 and 4.5 as Standards 4.4 and 4.5.
    In addition, the definition of DISPLACED in section 4.2.10.2 of the 
S&CP Document erroneously states that it would apply to a customer who 
has exercised its right-of-first-refusal, when it actually is supposed 
to apply to a customer who does not exercise this right. We will take 
this opportunity to correct this error in both the Data Element 
Dictionary and in section 4.2.10.2 of the S&CP Document.
c. Negotiations Without Competing Bids (Standards 4.6-4.13)
    In Commonwealth Edison Company, 80 FERC para. 61,167 at 61,719 
(1997), we stated that we were ``reluctant to specify confirmation time 
limits without first soliciting the views of representative industry 
segments.'' We also noted that we had asked the industry to address 
this issue in its Phase II Report. \82\ After receipt of the Phase II 
Report, and consistent with Commonwealth Edison, we requested that the 
CPWG examine the development of predetermined deadlines for acceptances 
by transmission providers of transmission service requests and 
confirmations by customers of their requests. \83\ We did this because 
we received comments that convinced us that the parties to negotiations 
require decisions to be made quickly and in a known time frame. The 
CPWG/How Group responded to our request by proposing Guides 4.6 and 
4.13. \84\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \82\ See also Wisconsin Electric Power Company, 80 FERC para. 
61,299 at 62,049 (1997). The industry's Phase II Report was filed 
with the Commission on November 3, 1997.
    \83\ See Open Access Same-Time Information System and Standards 
of Conduct, Order on OASIS Related-Issues, 83 FERC para. 61,301 
(1998).
    \84\ UBP NOPR at 33,627.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the UBP NOPR, \85\ we proposed to clarify the definition of 
``REFUSED'' in the Data Element Dictionary and in section 4.2.10.2 of 
the S&CP Document (and which is referred to in Guide 4.6) by inserting 
the words ``lack of'' before the word ``availability.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \85\ UBP NOPR at 33,629 n.88.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Standard 4.6--Reservation Timing Requirements
    Guide 4.6 and 4.13 are inextricably connected. We will discuss 
Guide 4.6, and the comments relating thereto, as part of our discussion 
of Guide 4.13.
Standard 4.7--Evaluating ATC Prior to Acceptance, Counteroffer, or 
Refusal
    Guide 4.7, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, provides that a 
Transmission Provider shall determine whether the requested 
transmission capacity is available before changing the status of a 
request to ACCEPTED, COUNTEROFFER, or REFUSED. The exact language of 
Guide 4.7, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, is as follows:

    Guide 4.7: Prior to setting a request to ACCEPTED, COUNTEROFFER, 
or REFUSED a Provider shall evaluate the appropriate resources and 
ascertain that the requested transfer capability is (or is not) 
available.

Comments
    VEPCO argues that it would be irresponsible for a transmission 
provider to change the status of a request to ACCEPTED, COUNTEROFFER, 
or REFUSED unless the available transfer capability (ATC) has been 
verified. VEPCO suggests that this guide be made a standard.
Discussion
    We agree with VEPCO that ATC must be evaluated before a request is 
accepted, counteroffered, or refused. Thus, as proposed in the UBP 
NOPR, we will adopt Guide 4.7. Moreover, as discussed in section 
II.D.1, above, we will adopt this proposed guide as a standard 
(Standard 4.7).
Standard 4.8--Invalid or Refused Requests
    Guide 4.8 provides that when a request is set to the REFUSED or 
INVALID states the Transmission Provider should indicate the reason the 
request was refused or found invalid in the COMMENTS field. The exact 
language of Guide 4.8, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, is as follows:

    Guide 4.8: For any request that is REFUSED or INVALID, the 
Transmission Provider should indicate in the COMMENTS field the 
reason the request was refused or invalid.
Comments
    VEPCO requests clarification that the COMMENTS field referred to in 
Guide 4.8 is the STATUS__COMMENT field. With this clarification, VEPCO 
requests that this guide be made a standard.\86\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \86\ VEPCO Comments at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    VEPCO is correct that the COMMENTS field referred to in Guide 4.8 
is the STATUS__COMMENT field of the TRANSSTATUS template of the S&CP 
Document.\87\ We will revise Guide

[[Page 17383]]

4.8 to clarify this point. In addition, as discussed in section II.D.1, 
above, we will make this guide a standard. Further, consistent with our 
decision to adopt this provision as a standard, we will substitute the 
word ``must'' for the word ``should,'' which suggests that compliance 
is not mandatory. With these changes, we will adopt Standard 4.8, as 
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \87\ Although, in this instance, we are adopting VEPCO's 
suggested clarification, in the future, we encourage VEPCO and other 
commenters seeking revisions to the BPS to bring their suggestions 
for editorial and purely technical comments directly to the 
applicable industry working group before raising these matters with 
the Commission in comments to a NOPR. We reach this conclusion for 
three reasons. First, we believe that it is more productive for 
commenters to participate directly in the industry-led efforts to 
reach consensus on these issues, rather than to stand silent on the 
sidelines and propose last-minute changes not subject to peer review 
and debate. Second, direct participation in industry working groups 
would give the Commission greater confidence that the proposals 
would not have any unintended adverse consequences, or hidden 
ramifications. Third, to the extent that these proposals offer non-
controversial technical and editorial revisions, it should not be 
burdensome for parties to raise them before the applicable industry-
led working group in the first instance. As always, however, 
minority views expressed before industry working groups can be 
reasserted in comments to the Commission, without prejudice.

    Standard 4.8: For any request that is REFUSED or INVALID, the 
Transmission Provider must indicate in the STATUS__COMMENT field of 
the TRANSSTATUS template the reason the request was refused or 
invalid.
Standard 4.9--Withdrawn Requests
    Guide 4.9, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, would permit a customer to 
withdraw a request at any time before it is confirmed:

    Guide 4.9: The Customer may change a request to WITHDRAWN at any 
time prior to it being CONFIRMED.
Comments
    VEPCO argues that, while Guide 4.9 is correct, it could be made 
clearer by specifying the status values included. Accordingly, VEPCO 
proposes the following revision: ``The Customer may change a request 
from QUEUED, RECEIVED, STUDY, COUNTEROFFER, REBID, or ACCEPTED to 
WITHDRAWN at any time prior to CONFIRMED.'' VEPCO also suggests that 
this guide be made a standard.\88\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \88\ VEPCO Comments at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    We agree with VEPCO that it would be beneficial to define 
explicitly the circumstances when a customer could withdraw a request 
prior to confirmation. Thus, we will make the requested change so that 
a customer's choices for states that can be changed to WITHDRAWN, prior 
to confirmation, are specifically enumerated. Also, as discussed in 
section II.D.1, above, we will adopt this guide as a standard. With 
these changes, we will adopt Standard 4.9, as follows:

    Standard 4.9: The Customer may change a request from QUEUED, 
RECEIVED, STUDY, COUNTEROFFER, REBID, or ACCEPTED to WITHDRAWN at 
any time prior to CONFIRMED.
Standard 4.10--Changing Accepted or Counteroffer Status
    Guide 4.10, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, permits a customer to 
change the state of his request from ACCEPTED or COUNTEROFFER to 
CONFIRMED, WITHDRAWN, or REBID. Guide 4.10 specifies that the time 
limit to confirm an accepted request is governed by Table 4-2, and that 
the time is measured from the first time the request is ACCEPTED or 
COUNTEROFFERED. The exact language of Guide 4.10, as proposed in the 
UBP NOPR, is as follows:

    Guide 4.10: From ACCEPTED or COUNTEROFFER, a Customer may change 
the status to CONFIRMED, WITHDRAWN, or REBID. The Customer has the 
amount of time designated as ``Customer Confirmation Time Limit'' in 
Table 4-2 ``Reservation Timing Requirements'' to change the state of 
the request to CONFIRMED. The Customer time limit is measured from 
the first time the request is moved to ACCEPTED or COUNTEROFFER, and 
is not reset with subsequent iterations of negotiation.
Comments
    VEPCO argues that proposed Guide 4.10, which allows a customer to 
change the status of a request from ACCEPTED to REBID, is inconsistent 
with the S&CP Document and proposes that the guide be modified so as 
not to permit this change of status. With this modification, VEPCO 
would make Guide 4.10 a standard.
Discussion
    We agree with VEPCO that the State Diagram in the S&CP Document 
does not permit a customer to change a request from the ACCEPTED state 
to REBID. We will revise proposed Guide 4.10 to remove any confusion on 
this point. In addition, as discussed in section II.D.1, above, we will 
make this guide a standard. With these changes, we will adopt Standard 
4.10 as follows:

    Standard 4.10: From ACCEPTED or COUNTEROFFER, a Customer may 
change the status to CONFIRMED or WITHDRAWN. In addition, a Customer 
may change the status from COUNTEROFFER to REBID. The Customer has 
the amount of time designated as ``Customer Confirmation Time 
Limit'' in Table 4-2 ``Reservation Timing Requirements'' to change 
the state of the request to CONFIRMED. The Customer time limit is 
measured from the first time the request is moved to ACCEPTED or 
COUNTEROFFER, and is not reset with subsequent iterations of 
negotiation.
Standard 4.11--Moving Request to Retracted State
    Guide 4.11, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, provides that a 
transmission provider may change the state of a request to RETRACTED 
after the expiration of a customer's confirmation time limit. The exact 
language of this proposed guide is as follows:

    Guide 4.11: After expiration of the ``Customer Confirmation Time 
Limit,'' specified in Table 4-2 ``Reservation Timing Requirements'', 
the Provider has a right to move the request to the RETRACTED state.
Comments
    VEPCO filed the only comment on this issue. VEPCO recommends that 
this guide be made a standard.
Discussion
    Given the absence of any opposing comments, we will adopt this 
provision, as proposed in the UBP NOPR. As discussed in section II.D.1, 
above, we will adopt this guide as a standard (Standard 4.11).
Standard 4.12--Responses to Counteroffers
    Guide 4.12, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, permits a transmission 
provider to change the state of a customer's request from REBID to 
DECLINED, ACCEPTED, or COUNTEROFFER. The guide specifies that the time 
limit to make the change is governed by Table 4-2, and that the 
response time is measured from the customer's most recent REBID. The 
exact language of this proposed guide is as follows:

    Guide 4.12: Should the Customer elect to respond to a Provider's 
COUNTEROFFER by moving a reservation request to REBID, the Provider 
shall respond by taking the request to a DECLINED, ACCEPTED, or 
COUNTEROFFER state within the ``Provider Counter Time Limit,'' 
specified in Table 4-2 ``Reservation Timing Requirements''. The 
Provider response time is measured from the most recent REBID time.
Comments
    VEPCO, the sole commenter addressing this issue, recommends that we 
adopt Guide 4.12 as a standard, provided that we also adopt its 
recommended revisions to Guide 4.13.
Discussion
    Given the absence of any opposing comments, we will adopt this 
provision, as proposed in the UBP NOPR. As discussed in section II.D.1, 
above, we will adopt this guide as a standard (Standard 4.12).\89\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \89\ In the next section, among other matters, we address 
VEPCO's request for modifications to proposed Guide 4.13. In our 
view, VEPCO's suggested revisions to proposed Guide 4.13 offer no 
reason not to adopt proposed guide 4.12 as a standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Standards 4.6 and 4.13--Reservation Timing Requirements
    Guide 4.6 provides that, consistent with filed tariffs, 
transmission providers/sellers shall respond to customer requests 
within the time limits appearing in Table 4-2, which is contained in 
proposed Guide 4.13.

[[Page 17384]]

Proposed Table 4-2 specifies how long transmission providers may take 
to respond to a request for service and how long customers may take to 
confirm the transmission provider's acceptance. Guide 4.6, as proposed 
in the UBP NOPR, provides as follows:

    Guide 4.6: A Transmission Provider/Seller shall respond to a 
Customer's service request, consistent with filed tariffs, within 
the ``Provider Response Time Limit'' defined in Table 4-2 
``Reservation Timing Requirements.'' The time limit is measured from 
the time the request is QUEUED. A Provider may respond by setting 
the state of the reservation request to one of the following:
     INVALID
     DECLINED
     REFUSED
     COUNTEROFFER
     ACCEPTED
     STUDY (when the tariff allows), leading to REFUSED, 
COUNTEROFFER, or ACCEPTED \90\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \90\ UBP NOPR at 33,627.

    For each class of service, Guide 4.13, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, 
specifies the allowed time limit for: (1) A transmission provider to 
respond to a reservation request; (2) a customer to confirm the 
request; and (3) a transmission provider to respond to a customer's 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
rebid. The exact language of this proposed guide is as follows:

    Guide 4.13: The following timing requirements should apply to 
all reservation requests:

                                                        Table 4-2.--Reservation Timing Guidelines
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                            Customer confirmation
                                                              Time QUEUED prior to    Provider evaluation      time limit after    Provider counter time
               Class                    Service increment             start               time limit 1           ACCEPTED or        limit after REBID 3
                                                                                                                COUNTEROFFER 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Firm...........................  Hourly................  <1 hour...............  Best effort..........  5 minutes............  5 minutes.
Non-Firm...........................  Hourly................  >1 hour...............  30 minutes...........  5 minutes............  5 minutes.
Non-Firm...........................  Daily.................  N/A...................  30 minutes...........  2 hours..............  10 minutes.
Non-Firm...........................  Weekly................  N/A...................  4 hours..............  24 hours.............  4 hours.
Non-Firm...........................  Monthly...............  N/A...................  2 days...............  24 hours.............  4 hours.
Firm...............................  Daily.................  <24 hours.............  Best effort..........  2 hours..............  30 minutes.
Firm...............................  Daily.................  N/A...................  30 days 4............  24 hours.............  4 hours.
Firm...............................  Weekly................  N/A...................  30 days 4............  48 hours.............  4 hours.
Firm...............................  Monthly...............  N/A...................  30 days 4............  4 days...............  4 hours.
Firm...............................  Yearly................  N/A...................  30 days..............  15 days..............  4 hours.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes for Table 4-2:
1. Consistent with regulations and filed tariffs, measurement starts at the time the request is QUEUED.
2. Measurement starts at the time the request is first moved to either ACCEPTED or COUNTEROFFER. The time limit does not reset on subsequent changes of
  state.
3. Measurement starts at the time the Transmission Customer changes the state to REBID. The measurement resets each time the request is changed to
  REBID.
4. Subject to expedited time requirements of Section 17.1 of the pro forma tariff. Transmission Providers should make best efforts to respond within 72
  hours, or prior to the scheduling deadline, whichever is earlier, to a request for Daily Firm Service received during period 2-30 days ahead of the
  service start time.

Comments
    The commenters on Table 4-2 (Guide 4.13) raise a number of issues. 
For clarity, we will address these issues separately.
1. Time Limits for Requests for Next-Day Non-Firm Hourly Transmission 
Service
    MIC requests that we add a new line to Table 4-2 for non-firm 
hourly service requested the day before the reservation is to start. It 
proposes a 30 minute customer confirmation time and a 10 minute 
transmission provider counter time. MIC asserts that when a service 
request is made well in advance of the start time, customers can be 
given more time to confirm and transmission providers can be given more 
time to respond to a REBID. Cinergy agrees with the MIC's proposal.
Discussion
    We agree with the MIC that for non-firm hourly service, when the 
service is requested on the day previous to the start of the service, 
the customer confirmation time limit and provider time limit to counter 
a REBID should be increased. We will make the requested change to Table 
4-2, adding new time limits for day-before requests for non-firm hourly 
service (with 30 minutes for customer confirmations and 10 minutes for 
provider counteroffers).
2. Calendar Days v. Business Days
    Duke argues that the time limits in Table 4-2 that are specified in 
terms of days could be interpreted as either business days or calendar 
days. Duke claims that the distinction is important when customers try 
to arrange for transmission across multiple transmission providers and 
recommends that calendar days be used. \91\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \91\ Duke Commets at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    We agree with Duke that the term ``days'' in Table 4-2 needs to be 
more clearly defined. If transmission providers are free to define the 
time limits as either calendar days or business days, customers will 
have a difficult time arranging for transmission across multiple 
transmission systems. As Duke suggested, we will add a footnote to 
Table 4-2 defining ``days'' as ``calendar days.''
3. Other Suggestions for Revised Time Limits
    AEP asserts that the confirmation periods in Table 4-2 may be too 
long under certain circumstances. For example, in cases in which 
transmission providers have numerous competing transactions to sort out 
and customers have the right-of-first-refusal, then the confirmation 
time for weekly firm service should be shorter than the proposed 48 
hours. AEP requests that transmission providers be allowed to require 
shorter confirmation periods when these problems occur. \92\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \92\ AEP Comments at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    BPA opposes adopting the proposed reservation timing guidelines and 
instead proposes setting reservation timing deadlines based on the 
timing of the request in relation to the initial delivery day. \93\ BPA 
asserts that the proposed guidelines, which are based on duration of 
service, will permit customers to strategically request

[[Page 17385]]

transmission service and allow the confirmation window to expire in 
order to gain an advantage. Thus, if a customer requests service close 
to the time of power flow and does not confirm the deal, it leaves its 
competitors without the ability to reserve firm service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \93\ BPA Comments at 3-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the alternative, BPA argues that, if we do not adopt its 
suggested revisions to Table 4-2, we should allow

any unconfirmed firm transmission request in the queue to be 
displaced by either (1) a preconfirmed firm transmission request of 
equal or greater duration, or (2) a request which is lower in the 
queue but which is confirmed before the unconfirmed request. \94\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \94\ BPA Comments at 5.

    Consumers argues that the confirmation timing limits in Table 4-2 
need to be revised. \95\ Consumers argues that a marketer trying to put 
a deal together would be squeezed whenever multiple transmission 
providers are involved and one transmission provider replies 
immediately and another transmission provider takes a long time to 
evaluate a request. It asserts that, in these instances, the 
confirmation response time for the first reservation request could 
expire before the second transmission provider responds to the 
evaluation request. Consumers asks that this business problem be 
resolved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \95\ Consumers Comments at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Duke recommends that the customer confirmation time limit for non-
firm hourly requests, submitted when service is to commence less than 
one hour from the time of the request, be extended from 5 minutes to 15 
minutes. Duke asserts that the 5 minute time limit is too restrictive 
on customers when the next hour market is very active.\96\ Duke also 
recommends that the confirmation time limit for non-firm hourly 
requests, submitted when service is to commence more than one hour from 
the time of the request, be extended from 5 minutes to 30 minutes.\97\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \96\ Duke Comments at 6.
    \97\ NERC Comments at 7. See also Cinergy Comments at 10, Duke 
Comments at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    VEPCO recommends changing the customer confirmation time for non-
firm hourly service from 5 minutes to one hour and changing the 
transmission provider counter time limit for non-firm hourly service 
from 5 minutes to 15 minutes.\98\ VEPCO argues that the customer 
confirmation time must be significantly longer than the transmission 
provider counter time since the customer's confirmation time never 
resets and the transmission provider's counter time resets every time 
the request status is set to REBID. VEPCO argues that if the customer 
and transmission provider time limits are the same, then negotiations 
on OASIS will not be practical, since the confirmation time could 
expire before the transmission provider is required to respond to the 
first REBID. VEPCO claims that a negotiation process takes time and is 
impractical when a request is made within four hours of the start of 
service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \98\ VEPCO also recommends that, if the Commission changes the 
non-firm hourly transmission provider counter time limit to 15 
minutes, it also should change the transmission provider counter 
time limit for non-firm daily transmission from 10 minutes to 15 
minutes, in order to keep non-firm daily limit at least as long as 
the non-firm hourly time limit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    The Reservation Timing Requirements in Table 4-2, as proposed in 
the UBP NOPR, represent a balancing of the needs of all parties to 
OASIS transactions to have sufficient time to consider and respond to 
circumstances presented. All OASIS transaction participants are being 
asked to make responses on a fairly expedited basis, so that time 
remains for other market participants to make similar judgments. As to 
the various proposals to revise these reservation timing requirements, 
while we are not persuaded to adopt any of these proposals at this 
time, we are willing to reexamine this issue if problems arise in 
transacting business over the OASIS using the reservation timing 
requirements adopted in this final rule.
4. Table 4-2, Scheduling Deadlines, and Preemption Deadlines
    VEPCO argues that the Customer Confirmation Time Limits in Table 4-
2 should not be interpreted as extending a scheduling deadline or 
overriding a preemption deadline, and that a note clarifying this be 
added to Table 4-2.\99\ Likewise, Allegheny Power agrees with the need 
for predetermined reservation time deadlines for OASIS transactions, 
but seeks clarification that customer confirmation time limits do not 
provide for an extension of any reservation or scheduling deadlines 
contained in a transmission provider's Open Access Tariff.\100\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \99\ VEPCO Comments at 12.
    \100\ Allegheny Power Comments at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    We agree with Allegheny Power and VEPCO that the Customer 
Confirmation Time Limits in Table 4-2 should not be interpreted as 
extending a scheduling deadline or overriding a preemption deadline. 
Accordingly, we will add an explanatory note to Table 4-2 that makes 
this clear.
5. Time Limits for Requests for Yearly Service
    VEPCO argues that the ``Time QUEUED Prior to Start'' in Table 4-2 
for yearly firm service should be changed from ``N/A'' to ``greater 
than or equal to 60 days'' in order to make it consistent with section 
17.1 of the pro forma tariff.
Discussion
    VEPCO is correct that the pro forma tariff states that requests for 
firm point-to-point service for periods of one year or longer must be 
made at least 60 days in advance of the calendar month in which the 
service is to commence. However, the tariff also states that requests 
made less than 60 days in advance should be considered where feasible. 
We will therefore revise ``Time QUEUED Prior to Start'' in Table 4-2 
for yearly firm service, from ``N/A'' to ``greater than or equal to 60 
days'' and add the following footnote:

    Subject to Section 17.1 of the pro forma tariff, whenever 
feasible and on a non-discriminatory basis, transmission providers 
should accommodate requests made with less than 60 days notice.
6. Requests Superseded Before Confirmation
    VEPCO recommends that note 2 to Table 4-2 be modified to explain 
that ``for competitive nonfirm requests for a limited resource, a 
request could be [SUPERSEDED] prior to customer confirmation thereby 
terminating the Confirmation Time Limit.'' \101\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \101\ VEPCO Comments at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    We do not see the need for the footnote suggested by VEPCO. The 
State Diagram permits a reservation request to be superseded before it 
is confirmed. The definition of SUPERSEDED in section 4.2.10.2 of the 
S&CP Document indicates that SUPERSEDED is a final state. As such, the 
change of status to SUPERSEDED terminates the confirmation rights of 
the requester.
7. Adoption as Mandatory Standard
    Cinergy argues that there is a need for further study of the timing 
requirements and related guides before the Commission defines the 
transactional process in standards.\102\ By contrast, ECI proposes that 
this guide be made a standard. It argues that if every transmission 
provider is permitted to have different timing requirements and 
priorities for requests that the resulting

[[Page 17386]]

discrepancies in the rules would make it very difficult for market 
participants to move power across different transmission systems.\103\ 
We have carefully considered the opposing views on this issue and 
conclude that Guides 4.6 and 4.13 should be adopted as standards. In 
our June 18 Order, we recognized the need for parties to negotiations 
to be able to make decisions quickly and in a known time frame and we 
requested that the CPWG/How Group examine the development of 
predetermined deadlines for acceptances by transmission providers of 
transmission service requests and confirmation by customers of 
acceptances of their requests. The time limits proposed in the UBP 
NOPR, based on the recommendations of the CPWG/How Group in the June 19 
Report, accomplish this. Notwithstanding arguments to the contrary, we 
remain convinced that the need for uniform time limits outweighs 
arguments that these decisions be left to the discretion of individual 
transmission providers. We remain persuaded that allowing individual 
transmission providers to set their own time limits for themselves and 
their customers would inhibit the movement of power. We will, 
therefore, adopt Guides 4.6 and 4.13 \104\ as Standards 4.6 and 4.13, 
with the revisions discussed above.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \102\ Cinergy Comments at 9-10.
    \103\ ECI Comments at 2.
    \104\ Guide 4.6 is further discussed earlier in this section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

d. Negotiations with Competing Bids for Constrained Resources (When 
Customer Has Not Yet Confirmed a Transmission Provider's Acceptance) 
(Standards 4.14--4.27)
Standard 4.14--Service Request Priority Tiers
    As we stated in the UBP NOPR, Guide 4.14 divides transmission 
service into five tiers of successive priority when competing bids are 
negotiating for transmission service.\105\ Highest priority is given to 
native load, network, or long-term firm service (subsection 4.4.1). 
Second highest priority is given to short-term firm service (subsection 
4.4.2). Third highest priority is given to network service from non-
designated resources (subsection 4.4.3). Fourth highest priority is 
given to non-firm service (subsection 4.4.4). Fifth highest priority is 
given to non-firm point-to-point service over secondary receipt and 
delivery points (subsection 4.4.5).\106\ The exact language of this 
proposed guide is as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \105\ These priorities are not meant to govern curtailments.
    \106\ UBP NOPR at 33,632-33.

    Guide 4.14: Consistent with regulations and filed tariffs, the 
following are recommended relative priorities of Service Request 
Tiers.* Specific exceptions may exist in accordance with filed 
tariffs. The priorities refer only to negotiation of service and do 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
not refer to curtailment priority.

4.4.1.Service Request Tier 1: Native load, Network, or Long-term 
Firm
4.4.2. Service Request Tier 2: Short-term Firm
4.4.3. Service Request Tier 3: Network on Non-designated Resources
4.4.4. Service Request Tier 4: Non-firm
4.4.5. Service Request Tier 5: Service over secondary receipt and 
delivery points

    Note: The term ``Tier'' is introduced to avoid confusion with 
existing terms such as ``TS--CLASS.'' [\107\]

    \107\ UBP NOPR at 33,655 & n.136.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments
    The only comment received concerning Guide 4.14 was from VEPCO who 
agrees with our proposal to adopt this guide.\108\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \108\ VEPCO Comments at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    Given the absence of any opposing comments, we will adopt these 
provisions, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, with the following exceptions. 
First, for clarity, we will revise ``Network on Non-designated 
Resources'' to read ``Network Service From Non-designated Resources'' 
in the reference to Service Request Tier 3 (4.4.3) in Guide 4.14. 
Second, we will revise the references to Service Request Tier 5 (4.4.5) 
in Guide 4.14 and in Table 4-3, Row 9, to clarify that Tier 5 service 
involves non-firm point-to-point service over secondary receipt and 
delivery points. Also, as discussed in section II.D.1, above, we will 
adopt these proposed guides as Standards 4.14 and 4.4.1-4.4.5.\109\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \109\As discussed above, we have asked the MIC/How Groups to 
report to us on whether an additional provision is needed here 
covering NHM Service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Standard 4.15--First-Come-First-Served
    Guide 4.15 provides that, consistent with regulations and filed 
tariffs, recommended reservation requests should be handled on a first-
come-first-served basis based on queue time.\110\ The exact language of 
this proposed guide is as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \110\ UBP NOPR at 33,631.

    Guide 4.15: Consistent with regulations and filed tariffs, 
reservation requests should be handled in a first-come-first-served 
order based on QUEUE__TIME.
Comments
    VEPCO filed the sole comment concerning proposed Guide 4.15. VEPCO 
supports the proposal in the UBP NOPR to adopt this guide.
Discussion
    Given the absence of any opposing comments, we will adopt this 
provision, as proposed in the UBP NOPR. As discussed in section II.D.1, 
above, we will adopt this proposed guide as Standard 4.15.
Standard 4.16--Priorities for Competing Reservation Requests
    As we stated in the UBP NOPR, recommended Guide 4.16, which 
includes Table 4-3, describes the relative priorities of competing 
service requests and rules for offering a right-of-first-refusal, 
consistent with Commission regulations and filed tariffs.\111\ The 
exact language of this proposed guide is as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \111\ UBP NOPR at 33,631-33.

    Guide 4.16: Consistent with regulations and filed tariffs, Table 
4-3 describes the relative priorities of competing service requests 
and rules for offering right-of-first-refusal. While the table 
indicates the relative priorities of two competing requests, it also 
is intended to be applied in the more general case of more than two 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
competing requests.

    As we stated in the UBP NOPR, Guide 4.16 would allocate requests 
for Tier 1 services (native load, network, long-term firm) and Tier 2 
services (short-term firm) on a first-come-first-served basis.\112\ A 
request for Tier 1 service could not be preempted. A request for Tier 2 
service that is ``conditional'' could be preempted by a request for 
Tier 1 service without any right-of-first-refusal.\113\ A request for 
Tier 2 service

[[Page 17387]]

that is ``conditional'' could also be preempted by a request for longer 
term Tier 2 service but, under this circumstance, it would receive the 
right-of-first-refusal.\114\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \112\ UBP NOPR at 33,633.
    \113\ In the UBP NOPR at 33,633 n.96, we explained that the 
distinction between conditional and unconditional service, as 
related to firm point-to-point service, is discussed in Order No. 
888, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,036 at 31,746, where we stated:
    Accordingly, the Final Rule pro forma tariff provides a 
mechanism to address this concern while safeguarding the rights of 
potential customers to obtain access to unused capacity. The tariff 
provides that reservations for short-term firm point-to-point 
service (less than one year) will be conditional until one day 
before the commencement of daily service, one week before the 
commencement of weekly service, and one month before the 
commencement of monthly service. These conditional reservations may 
be displaced by competing requests for longer-term firm point-to-
point service. For example, a reservation for daily firm point-to-
point service could be displaced by a request for weekly firm point-
to-point service during an overlapping period. Before the applicable 
reservation deadline, a holder of a conditional firm point-to-point 
reservation would have the right of first refusal to match any 
longer-term firm point-to-point reservation before being displaced. 
After the deadline, the reservation becomes unconditional, and the 
service would be entitled to the same priorities as any long-term 
point-to-point or network firm service.
    Conditional reservations also are discussed in Madison Gas & 
Electric Company v. Wisconsin Power & Light Company, 80 FERC para. 
61,331 at 62,102-03 (1997), reh'g denied, 82 FERC para. 61,099 at 
61,372-73 (1998).
    \114\ The rights-of-first-refusal shown in Table 4-3 should not 
be confused with the right-of-first-refusal available to a customer 
with a pre-existing expiring contract under Order No. 888, see FERC 
Stats. & Regs. para. 31,036 at 31,745.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Tier 3 service (network service from non-designated resources) 
could be preempted by requests for either Tier 1 or Tier 2 service and 
would not receive the right-of-first-refusal. Tier 4 service (all non-
firm point-to-point) could be preempted by request for Tier 1, 2, or 3 
service and would not receive the right-of-first-refusal. A Tier 4 
request could be preempted (except in the hour before service begins) 
by a longer duration tier 4 service and would receive the right-of-
first-refusal. Until a Tier 4 request is confirmed, it could be 
preempted (except in the hour before service begins) by a preconfirmed 
Tier 4 request of equal duration and higher price. The request would 
not receive the right-of-first-refusal. The exact language of Table 4-
3, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, is as follows: \115\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \115\ As mentioned above, we have requested that the MIC/How 
Groups review whether this table needs revision in light of the Next 
Hour Order.

                         Table 4-3.\116\--Priorities for Competing Reservation Requests
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Row                       Request 1         Is preempted by Request 2    Right of first refusal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.................................  Tier 1: Long-term      N/A--Not preempted by a     N/A.
                                     Firm, Native Load,     subsequent request.
                                     and Network Firm.
2.................................  Tier 2: Short-term     Tier 1: Long-term Firm,     No.
                                     Firm.                  Native Load, and Network
                                                            Firm), while Request 1 is
                                                            conditional. Once Request
                                                            1 is unconditional, it
                                                            may not be preempted.
3.................................  Tier 2: Short-term     Tier 2: Short-term Firm of  Yes, while Request 1 is
                                     Firm.                  longer term (duration),     conditional. Once
                                                            while Request 1 is          Request 1 is
                                                            conditional. Once Request   unconditional, it may
                                                            1 is unconditional, it      not be preempted and
                                                            may not be preempted.\1\    right of first refusal
                                                                                        is not applicable.
4.................................  Tier 3: Network        Tiers 1 and 2: All Firm     No.
                                     Service From Non-      (including Network).
                                     Designated Resources.
5.................................  Tier 4: All Non-Firm   Tiers 1 and 2: All Firm     No.
                                     PTP.                   (including Network).
6.................................  Tier 4: All Non-Firm   Tier 3: Network Service     No.
                                     PTP.                   from Non-Designated
                                                            Resources.
7.................................  Tier 4: All Non-Firm   Tier 4: Non-firm PTP of a   Yes.
                                     PTP.                   longer term
                                                            (duration).\1\ Except in
                                                            the last hour prior to
                                                            start (see Standard 4.23).
8.................................  Tier 4: All Non-Firm   Tier 4: Non-firm PTP of     No.
                                     PTP.                   equal term (duration) \1\
                                                            and higher price, when
                                                            Request 1 is still
                                                            unconfirmed and Request 2
                                                            is received pre-
                                                            confirmed. A confirmed
                                                            non-firm PTP may not be
                                                            preempted for another non-
                                                            firm request of equal
                                                            duration. (See Standard
                                                            4.22 and Guide 4.25.).
9.................................  Tier 5: PTP Service    Tier 5 can be preempted by  No.
                                     over secondary         Tiers 1 through 4.
                                     receipt and delivery
                                     points.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Longer duration, in addition to being higher SERVICE__INCREMENT (i.e., WEEKLY has priority over DAILY), also
  may mean more multiples of the same SERVICE__INCREMENT (i.e., 3 Days may have priority over 2 Days).

Comments
    The commenters on Table 4-3 and Guide 4.16 raise a number of 
unrelated issues. For clarity, we will address these issues separately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \116\ For clarity, we have identified the rows in Table 4-3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Multiples of Service Increments
    Duke argues that Footnote 1 of Table 4-3 should be revised so that 
requests for Multiples of the same SERVICE__INCREMENTS would not be 
given priority during the reservation process.\117\ VEPCO argues that 
giving higher priority to multiple service increments allows 
participants to ``game'' the preemption process. For example, a 
customer who requests 2 days of daily service at 100 MW per day could 
be preempted by another customer requesting 2 days of daily service at 
100 MW per day and 1 day at 1 MW.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \117\ Duke Comments at 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    As we stated in the UBP NOPR, recommended Guide 4.16 defines the 
priorities of longer duration for non-firm point-to-point service to 
include both a higher service increment (weekly service has priority 
over daily service) and multiples of the same service increment (three 
day service has priority over two day service).\118\ We also found 
these priorities to be consistent with section 14.2 of the pro forma 
tariff.\119\ Nothing in Duke and VEPCO's arguments persuades us 
otherwise. Thus, we deny Duke's request to revise footnote 1 to Table 
4-3. Three day service is of a longer duration than one day service and 
in our view deserves a higher priority because this encourages greater 
use of the transmission system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \118\ UBP NOPR at 33,634.
    \119\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As to VEPCO's concern that granting priority to multiple service 
increments could lead to gaming by customers who increase their service 
increments with small amounts of capacity (adding a third and fourth 
day at 1 MW to a 100 MW request) we do not interpret footnote 1 to 
Table 4-3 to allow this. Nevertheless, to remove any uncertainty, we 
will revise note 1 of Table 4-3 to clarify that multiple service

[[Page 17388]]

increments must be at the same level of capacity. Requests for lesser 
amounts of capacity should be made in a separate unrelated request for 
transmission service.
2. ``Preemption'' of Unconfirmed Requests for Non-Firm Point-to-Point 
Transmission Service
    VEPCO argues that a footnote should be added to Row 7 of Table 4-3 
stating that a request that is preempted before it is confirmed does 
not have right-of-first-refusal.\120\ VEPCO also requests clarification 
that as long as a Transmission Provider's methodology for treating 
preemption and the right-of-first-refusal meets the intent of, or is 
superior to, the pro forma tariff, and is applied in a non-
discriminatory manner, then the transmission provider will be in 
compliance with this proposed standard. \121\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \120\ VEPCO Comment at 8.
    \121\ Because we are addressing preemption, we will address 
VEPCO's comment here, even though it was raised as an aside to its 
support for Standard 4.21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    Row 7 of Table 4-3 governs the priorities for competing reservation 
requests for non-firm point-to-point transmission service. It provides 
that a request may be preempted by a subsequent request of a longer 
term (duration). Where applicable, requests may be superseded before 
being confirmed, and may still be preempted after confirmation. As to 
whether superseded requests obtain a right-of-first-refusal, this 
question was already addressed in the UBP NOPR, where we stated:

    Table 4-1's definition of SUPERSEDED is silent as to why and 
when an unconfirmed request might be preempted. It neither confers 
nor denies a customer's right to match. When a request for 
transmission service has been superseded, this occurs before the 
customer's confirmation. Therefore, the customer has no right to 
match.[\122\]

    \122\ UBP NOPR at 33,626, notes omitted.

Nonetheless, to remove any uncertainty, we will add the requested 
footnote to Row 7 of Table 4-2 clarifying that the reference in Row 7 
of Table 4-3 to a right-of-first-refusal applies only to confirmed 
requests. As shown in the quoted language above, this is consistent 
with our findings on this subject in the UBP NOPR.
    As to VEPCO's request for clarification, we disagree with VEPCO's 
suggested approach. All transmission providers must implement 
preemption and the right-of-first-refusal in the same manner. This is 
not an area where transmission providers are free to devise their own 
unique procedures.
3. Right-of-First-Refusal to Match a Preconfirmed Tier 4 Request of 
Equal Duration and Higher Price
    VEPCO asserts that Row 8 of Table 4-3 is in conflict with proposed 
Guide 4.26. Specifically, VEPCO argues that Row 8 implies that a 
transmission provider need not COUNTEROFFER the price of a subsequent 
request of equal term and higher price if the first request is still 
unconfirmed. VEPCO recommends that Row 8 be eliminated for the reasons 
stated in its comments on proposed Guide 4.26, below.
Discussion
    VEPCO is correct that Row 8 of Table 4-3 conflicts with Guide 4.26. 
Table 4-3 provides, without qualification, that an unconfirmed request 
for non-firm point-to-point service preempted by a preconfirmed Tier 4 
request of equal duration and higher price is not entitled to right-of-
first-refusal.\123\ However, Guide 4.26 would permit a transmission 
provider to offer the right-of-first-refusal in this instance. We will 
correct this discrepancy by amending Row 8 of Table 4-3 to give a 
right-of-first-refusal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \123\ See UBP NOPR, Row 8, Column 3 of Table 4-3, which states 
``no'' to whether a right-of-first-refusal is provided.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Adoption as Mandatory Standard
Comments
    ECI argues that, at a minimum, Guide 4.13 (Table 4-2) specifying 
the reservation timing requirements and Guide 4.16 (Table 4-3), which 
specifies the priorities for competing reservation requests, must be 
reclassified as standards.

    If each transmission provider is granted different timing 
requirements and different priorities, it will be very difficult to 
keep up with the smorgasbord of business rules when trading power 
among different transmission providers. The resulting discrepancies 
in the rules would make it very difficult for market participants to 
synchronize transmission across the different grids.\124\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \124\ ECI Comments at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    We agree with ECI that, of all the Uniform Business Practices, the 
one where uniformity among transmission providers is most urgently 
needed, is in assigning priorities for competing reservation requests. 
We agree with ECI that the current ``smorgasbord'' of practices among 
transmission providers makes it difficult for customers to move power 
across the grid and inhibits the development of markets. If the 
priorities are left voluntary, this will remain the case. Accordingly, 
as discussed in section II.D.1, above, we will adopt proposed Guide 
4.16 as Standard 4.16.
Standard 4.17--Required Posting When a Reservation Request Is Preempted
    Guide 4.17, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, provides that when a 
reservation request is preempted, the transmission provider must post 
the assignment reference number of the reservation that preempts the 
reservation request.\125\ The exact language of this provision is as 
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \125\ UBP NOPR at 33,634.

    Guide 4.17: For a reservation request that is preempted, the 
Transmission Provider should indicate the Assignment Reference 
Number of the reservation that preempted the reservation request.
Comments
    Duke recommends that the assignment reference number of the 
preempting request be placed in the Seller Comment field of the 
preempted request. VEPCO would post the assignment reference number in 
the STATUS__COMMENTS field of the preempted request.
Discussion
    Guide 4.17 provides that transmission providers indicate the 
Assignment Reference Number of the reservation that preempted the 
reservation. However, the Guide does not specify where the number 
should appear in the TRANSSTATUS template. This information should be 
posted in a uniform location within the TRANSSTATUS template so that 
OASIS users will know where to find it. Thus, we will require that the 
Assignment Reference Number of the preempting request be placed in the 
Seller Comment field of the preempted request.
    In addition, as discussed in section II.D.1, above, we will adopt 
this guide as a standard. We therefore will adopt Standard 4.17 that 
provides as follows:

    Standard 4.17: For a reservation request that is preempted, the 
Transmission Provider must indicate the Assignment Reference Number 
of the reservation that preempted the reservation request in the 
Seller Comment field of the preempted request.
Standard 4.18--Displaced and Superseded Pending Requests for 
Transmission Service
    As we stated in the UBP NOPR, Guide 4.18 lays out the circumstances 
when a transmission provider may displace or supersede pending requests 
for service based on the priorities laid out in Table 4-3 (Guide 
4.16).\126\ The exact language of this provision is as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \126\ UBP NOPR at 33,632.

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

[[Page 17389]]

    Guide 4.18: Given competing requests for a limited resource and 
a right-of-first-refusal is not required to be offered, the Provider 
may immediately move requests in the CONFIRMED state to DISPLACED, 
or from an ACCEPTED or COUNTEROFFER state to SUPERSEDED, if the 
competing request is of higher priority, based on the rules 
represented in Table 4-3. These state changes require dynamic 
notification to the Customer if the Customer has requested dynamic 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
notification on OASIS.

    In the UBP NOPR, we clarified that a transmission provider may 
change a confirmed reservation from the CONFIRMED status to DISPLACED 
status, at the time a competing request of higher priority is 
confirmed.\127\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \127\ UBP NOPR at 33,634.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the UBP NOPR proposed that transmission providers 
decrement ATC on their internal systems upon accepting a request 
(without waiting for a customer's confirmation). At the same time, we 
invited specific comment on whether ATC should be decremented upon 
acceptance of a customer's request or upon the customer's confirmation 
of the acceptance. We also proposed that ATC postings be updated when 
the transmission service is reserved (after confirmation).\128\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \128\ The transmission provider adjusts its calculation of ATC 
internally before it is required to post a revised ATC on the OASIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We also proposed to clarify the definition of ``DISPLACED'' by 
inserting the words ``if any'' after the word ``refusal'' to make clear 
that the existence of a status value for ``DISPLACED'' in the S&CP 
Document is not meant to confer any right-of-first-refusal. In 
addition, we proposed to substitute the word ``replaced'' for 
``displaced'' in the text of the definition.
Comments
    PJM and Cinergy agree with our proposal to require that ATC be 
decremented internally when a reservation is accepted and that ATC 
postings be decremented when a reservation is confirmed.\129\ PJM 
argues that if ATC is not decremented when a reservation is accepted, a 
customer could be placed in the position of having its request 
accepted, creating a deal based on the acceptance, and, when it was 
ready to confirm, another customer could be awarded the service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \129\ PJM Comments at 5, Cinergy Comments at 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Allegheny Power, Consumers, Duke, TEP, and VEPCO disagree with the 
proposal and would decrement ATC (both internally and in postings) when 
the accepted reservation is confirmed by the customer.\130\ Allegheny 
Power cites its experience as the reason for preferring to decrement on 
confirmation. Recently, Allegheny Power accepted, without confirmation, 
as many as 50 reservations on a given path.\131\ Allegheny Power claims 
that decrementing ATC for each reservation would have artificially 
limited the east to west transmission market by reducing ATC to zero on 
many paths. Allegheny Power's ability to sell transmission service 
would have been limited without a commitment from customers. Allegheny 
Power argues that by setting confirmation time limits, requests that 
are not confirmed are removed from the queue. Allegheny Power also 
argues that the procedure avoids the possibility of a customer 
purposely locking up all ATC on a path with no intention of confirming 
the request.\132\ Duke adds that, if ATC is internally decremented upon 
acceptance, a transmission provider may find itself in the position of 
having decremented ATC and subsequently having the customer withdraw 
the request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \130\ Duke also raises this argument in connection with pre-
confirmation under proposed Guide 4.25. We will address Duke's 
comment there.
    \131\ Allegheny Power Comments at 3.
    \132\ Allegheny Power Comments at 3-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    TEP argues that decrementing ATC when a reservation is confirmed 
assures a commitment by the customer to pay for the service and allows 
ATC to be adjusted and posted in a single automated process.\133\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \133\ TEP Comments at 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Duke also requests that the Commission clarify its rules on 
transmission providers' practices with regard to the posting of ATC, to 
decrement and show capacity benefit margin (CBM) and transmission 
reserve margin (TRM) on the OASIS, in addition to showing transmission 
reservations, in order to make clear how transmission providers have 
arrived at their posted ATC.\134\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \134\ Duke Comments at 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the UBP NOPR, we explained that, unless ATC is updated 
internally on acceptance, a transmission provider could be placed in 
the awkward position of having accepted numerous requests for the same 
constrained capacity and having several customers confirm the deal at 
the same time. VEPCO argues that the solution to having customers 
confirm at the same time is for the transmission provider to displace 
the later requests.\135\ VEPCO also argues that ATC should not be 
decremented until a customer agrees to pay for it.\136\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \135\ VEPCO Comments at 10.
    \136\ But see discussion of VEPCO's comments (re: proposed Guide 
4.7) in section II.D.4.c above and later in this section (re: 
proposed Guide 4.25).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consumers' request asks us to clarify the goal of maintaining 
separate posted and non-posted ATC values, and how transmission 
providers will use non-posted ATC.\137\ Consumers' point seems to be 
that there is no value in a transmission provider maintaining non-
posted ATC values.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \137\ Consumers Comments at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    In the UBP NOPR,\138\ we proposed to revise the definition of 
``displaced'' in the Data Element Dictionary and in section 4.2.10.2 of 
the S&CP Document. In addition, as discussed in section II.D.4.b, 
above, we will correct the definition of ``displaced'' to add the word 
``not'' that was erroneously omitted. With these changes, the 
definition of ``displaced'' in section 4.2.10.2 of the S&CP Document 
will now read as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \138\ This proposal was unopposed.

    DISPLACED = assigned by Provider or Seller when a ``CONFIRMED'' 
reservation from a Customer is replaced by a longer term reservation 
and the Customer has not exercised right of first refusal, if any 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i.e., refused to match terms of new request). (Final state).

    We continue to believe that it is preferable for transmission 
providers to decrement ATC internally as reservations are accepted and 
to decrement ATC postings as reservations are confirmed. VEPCO suggests 
that rather than decrement ATC internally when reservations are made, 
transmission providers should displace customers at the end of the 
queue when confirmations are made. We believe that VEPCO's suggestion 
unfairly penalizes customers who have made deals based on acceptance of 
their reservations and whose unconfirmed reservations are subsequently 
preempted. If transmission providers decrement ATC internally as 
requests are made, then customers at the end of the queue will not have 
their reservations accepted until, and if, space becomes available. 
Consequently, fewer customers whose requests were accepted will be 
denied service.
    By contrast, VEPCO's suggestion would extend acceptances to 
customers further down the queue, who could preempt customers who had 
made their requests earlier, but who had not yet confirmed. This 
undercuts the customer confirmation time limits agreed on by the 
industry and that we are adopting in Table 4-2, and is not a desired 
outcome. In addition, VEPCO's comments here are contradicted by its 
comments supporting proposed Guide 4.7 and 4.25, where VEPCO asserted 
that all pending requests should be evaluated at the same time, prior 
to acceptance, and that subsequent requests at a higher

[[Page 17390]]

price are not to be evaluated until expiration of the customer's 
confirmation time limits.
    Regarding Consumers' requests for clarification of what we expect 
to achieve by having transmission providers maintain an internal ATC 
value and a posted ATC value, keeping track internally of how much ATC 
has been reserved allows transmission providers to know when 
reservations reach the capacity limit of a path. This offers the 
benefit of allowing transmission providers to cease accepting 
reservations until capacity becomes available (either through the 
withdrawal of a pending request or the expiration of a confirmation 
time limit).
    The foregoing discussion of Consumers' request for clarification 
explains why the Commission finds merit in having a transmission 
provider internally decrement ATC at the time it accepts a customer's 
request. This discussion should not be interpreted as revising the 
requirements for updating ATC postings established in Order No. 
889,\139\ which requires that, ``A [ATC and TTC] posting for a 
constrained path must be updated when transmission service on the path 
is reserved or service ends or when the path's TTC changes by more than 
10 percent,'' and ``[p]ostings for an unconstrained posted path must be 
updated when the ATC changes by more than 20 percent of the path's 
TTC.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \139\ Order No. 889, FERC Stats. and Regs. para. 31,035 at 
31,606 (1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As to Duke's suggestion that transmission providers decrement and 
show CBM and TRM on the OASIS, we note that, on January 31, 2000, the 
MIC and How Group jointly filed recommended revisions to the S&CP 
Document that, among other matters, propose a method for posting CBM 
and TRM on the OASIS.\140\ We will address Duke's suggestion within the 
context of our review of the recommended revisions to the S&CP 
Document. As discussed in section II.D.1, above, we will adopt this 
guide as Standard 4.18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \140\ This was filed in response to the Commission's clarifying 
order in Capacity Benefit Margin in Computing Available Transmission 
Capacity, 88 FERC para. 61,099 at 61,237 (1999), where the 
Commission directed that, for each path for which a utility already 
posts ATC, a transmission provider should also post (and update) the 
CBM figure for that path, and also should provide a narrative 
explanation of its CBM practices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Standard 4.19--Counteroffers When Right-of-First-Refusal Is Required
    In the UBP NOPR, we stated that Guide 4.19 provides that, in 
instances where the customer is entitled to a right-of-first-refusal, 
the transmission provider is to notify the customer through the use of 
a COUNTEROFFER of the opportunity to match the subsequent offer. The 
exact language of this proposal is as follows:

    Guide 4.19: In those cases where right-of-first-refusal is 
required to be offered, the Provider shall notify the Customer, 
through the use of a COUNTEROFFER, of the opportunity to match the 
subsequent offer.
Comments
    VEPCO recommends that Guide 4.19 not be adopted as written. VEPCO 
asserts that it is not possible to facilitate the exercise of a right-
of-first-refusal as envisioned by Guide 4.19. It argues that the State 
Diagram does not allow the status of a CONFIRMED request to be changed 
to COUNTEROFFER. VEPCO also argues that even if the diagram permitted 
the change, the S&CP Document does not permit the customer to modify 
the term of service of the request after the request is submitted. 
VEPCO proposes to add a new status, ``preempted with right of first 
refusal,'' to the diagram. VEPCO states that once a request attains 
this status, the customer should be permitted to modify the term of 
service to match the preempting request. VEPCO adds that, as the 
customer would be able to modify the original request, the original 
queue time would be preserved.
Discussion
    As discussed in section II.D.1, above, we will adopt proposed Guide 
4.19 as Standard 4.19. We agree with VEPCO that the State Diagram in 
the S&CP Document does not permit a COUNTEROFFER to a CONFIRMED 
reservation. In section II.D.4.b, above (discussing Guide 4.5), we 
addressed the conflict caused by the definition of REBID, in the S&CP 
Document, which does not allow rebidding of duration, and Row 7 of 
Table 4-3, which does allow rebidding of duration. We resolved this 
conflict by requesting that the MIC/How Group make the necessary 
changes to the S&CP Document. VEPCO calls our attention to an 
associated problem: the State Diagram does not have a mechanism for 
implementing the right-of-first-refusal. VEPCO proposes to add a new 
STATUS, ``preempted with right of first refusal,'' to the State 
Diagram. We are reluctant to make this change to the S&CP Document 
without the MIC and How Group considering the consequences of this 
change. We, therefore, will adopt Standard 4.19, but request that, 
within ninety (90) days of the date of publication of this Final Rule 
in the Federal Register, the MIC and How Group propose changes in the 
State Diagram, templates, and the S&CP Document needed to properly 
implement this standard.
Standard 4.20--Time Limits for Right-of-First-Refusal
    In the UBP NOPR, we proposed Guide 4.20, which provides as follows:

    Guide 4.20: A Customer who has been extended a right-of-first-
refusal should have a confirmation time limit equal to the lesser of 
a) the Customer Confirmation Time Limit in Table 4-2 or b) 24 hours.
Comments
    Duke claims that the confirmation time limits of Guide 4.20 are too 
restrictive. It speculates that, in many instances, a significant 
amount of time will have passed between the confirmation of Request One 
and the submittal of Request Two. Duke argues that in these 
circumstances, Request One will need more than 24 hours to decide 
whether to exercise the right-of-first-refusal if the original 
confirmation time limits were greater than 24 hours. Duke recommends 
that the ``or 24 hour'' limit imposed by Guide 4.20 be dropped and that 
customer Confirmation Time Limits as set forth in Table 4.2 apply to 
the right-of-first-refusal.\141\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \141\ Duke Comments at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    Duke's proposal affects the time limits for three services--firm 
weekly, firm monthly, and firm yearly. As proposed, Guide 4.20 would 
allow 24 hours to exercise the right-of-first-refusal in all three 
cases. Duke proposes to change this to 48 hours, 4 days, and 15 days, 
respectively. In our view, Duke has failed to show that the 24 hour 
time limit in Guide 4.20 is too restrictive, given that it deals with 
the second round of the negotiations. We, therefore, will reject Duke's 
proposal for a longer response time. As discussed in section II.D.1, 
above, we will adopt this guide as Standard 4.20.
Standard 4.21--Non-discriminatory Rights-of-First-Refusal
    As we stated in the UBP NOPR, recommended Standard 4.21 requires 
transmission providers to apply all rights-of-first-refusal in a non-
discriminatory and open manner.\142\ The exact language of this 
provision is as follows:

    \142\ UBP NOPR at 33,636-37.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Standard 4.21: A Transmission Provider shall apply all rights-
of-first-refusal in a non-discriminatory and open manner for all 
Customers.


[[Page 17391]]


Comments
    VEPCO filed the sole comment regarding Standard 4.21. VEPCO raises 
no objection to the adoption of this standard.\143\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \143\ VEPCO Comments at 12.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    Given the absence of any opposing comments, we will adopt this 
provision, as proposed in the UBP NOPR.
Standards 4.22 & 4.23--When Confirmed Requests May Not Be Displaced
    Standards 4.22 and 4.23 discuss when a confirmed reservation for 
non-firm point-to-point service is protected from being displaced. The 
exact language of these provisions, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, is as 
follows:

    Standard 4.22: Once a non-firm PTP request has been confirmed, 
it shall not be displaced by a subsequent non-firm PTP request of 
equal duration and higher price.
    Standard 4.23: A confirmed, non-firm PTP reservation for the 
next hour shall not be displaced within one hour of the start of the 
reservation by a subsequent non-firm PTP reservation request of 
longer duration.

Comments
    Southern seeks clarification of three issues regarding Standards 
4.22 and 4.23. First, Southern asserts that Standards 4.22 and 4.23 are 
in conflict with section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff and that if 
Standards 4.22 and 4.23 are adopted, section 14.2 of the pro forma 
tariff must be modified, as proposed by the CPWG/How Group in the June 
17 Report.\144\ Southern argues that the conflict arises because, under 
section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff, a request for non-firm point-to-
point service is to be displaced by a subsequent request for non-firm 
point-to-point service of equal duration at a higher price. Southern 
contends that the Commission has four options available to it: (1) 
Revise section 14.2 the pro forma tariff to match Standards 4.22 and 
4.23; (2) clarify that Standards 4.22 and 4.23 can be implemented 
without changes to the pro forma tariff; (3) reclassify Standards 4.22 
and 4.23 as guides, and instruct utilities who wish to implement them 
to file revisions to section 14.2 of their individual open access 
transmission tariffs; or (4) delete the proposed standards.\145\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \144\ For convenience, Attachment B quotes sections 13.2, 14.2, 
14.7, and 17.5 of the pro forma tariff.
    \145\ Southern Comments at 3-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, Southern requests clarification that Standards 4.22 and 
4.23 do not affect the requirement in section 14.2 of the pro forma 
tariff that transmission service for network customers from resources 
other than designated network resources will have a higher priority 
than any non-firm point-to-point transmission service.
    Third, Southern requests clarification that, if a conflict arises 
between the BPS and the pro forma tariff, the pro forma tariff 
controls.
    VEPCO offers an interpretation of the interplay between Standard 
4.22 and section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff that it asks the 
Commission to confirm. VEPCO reads section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff 
to require that, in the event of limited resources, competing requests 
for non-firm point-to-point service of equal duration are to be 
assigned priority based on price. At the same time, VEPCO reads 
Standard 4.22 to mean that, prior to confirmation, priority will be 
assigned as provided in section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff, while, 
after confirmation, a request for non-firm point-to-point service will 
not be displaced by a subsequent request of equal duration and higher 
price. Given that section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff is silent about 
confirmation, VEPCO argues that, if its understanding of 4.22 and 14.2 
is correct, the two provisions are not in conflict, and it agrees with 
the Commission's proposal to adopt Standard 4.22. Otherwise, VEPCO 
recommends that Standard 4.22 be revised to reflect that the price 
prioritization only pertains to competing requests that are not yet 
CONFIRMED.\146\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \146\ VEPCO Comments at 12-13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    The June 19 Report recommended a series of revisions to the pro 
forma tariff to avoid potential conflicts with its recommended guides 
and standards. Two such suggested revisions were meant to prevent any 
potential conflict with Standards 4.22 and 4.23. To rule out any 
conflict with recommended Standard 4.22, the How Group recommended that 
we revise section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff to ``prevent 
displacement of a confirmed non-firm request by a subsequent request of 
the same duration, but at a higher price.'' \147\ To rule out any 
conflict with recommended Standard 4.23, the How Group recommended that 
we revise section 14.2 to ``prevent displacement of a confirmed non-
firm request by a subsequent longer-term request if the request is made 
within one hour of the start, for the next hour.'' In the UBP NOPR, we 
proposed to adopt Standards 4.22 and 4.23 without making any changes to 
section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff. We found that the recommended 
revisions were not needed because,
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \147\ June 19 Report at A-1 of Appendix A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In evaluating competing requests for transmission service, we 
believe that section 14.2 properly directs the transmission provider 
to give priority to requests for service at a higher price or for a 
longer duration. However, section 14.2 does not address displacement 
of an accepted and confirmed request for transmission service upon 
receipt of a subsequent request for service.\148\

    \148\ UBP NOPR at 33,641.

This being the case, we proposed adoption of Standards 4.22 and 4.23, 
but found it unnecessary to revise section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff 
to accomplish this. VEPCO supports our adoption of Standards 4.22 and 
4.23, but asks us to confirm its understanding that, after 
confirmation, a request for non-firm point-to-point service will not be 
displaced by a subsequent request of equal duration and higher price. 
VEPCO's understanding is correct and is explicitly stated in Standard 
4.22.
    Regarding Southern's request for clarification, we clarify that, in 
the event of a conflict between the BPS and the pro forma tariff, the 
pro forma tariff controls. However, in our view, Standards 4.22 and 
4.23 raise no such conflicts. Accordingly, given the absence of any 
opposing comments, we will adopt Standards 4.22 and 4.23 as proposed in 
the UBP NOPR.
    In addition, as requested by Southern, we also clarify that 
Standard 4.23 does not affect the requirement in section 14.2 of the 
pro forma tariff that transmission service for network customers from 
resources other than designated resources will have a higher priority 
than non-firm point-to-point transmission service.
Standard 4.24--Requests on Unconstrained Paths
    In the UBP NOPR, we proposed Guide 4.24, as follows:

    Guide 4.24: A Transmission Provider should honor any reservation 
request submitted for an unconstrained Path if the Customer's bid 
price is equal to or greater than the Provider's posted offer price 
at the time the request was queued, even if later requests are 
submitted at a higher price. This guide applies even when the first 
request is still unconfirmed, unless the Customer Confirmation Time 
Limit has expired for the first request.
Comments
    VEPCO argues that Guide 4.24 would better track the OASIS Phase 1-A 
Standard State Definitions in the S&CP Document if the wording were 
changed to read ``[a] Transmission Provider shall ACCEPT any valid 
reservation

[[Page 17392]]

request * * *.'' VEPCO also suggests that this guide be made a standard 
because transmission customers should be able to expect that, absent 
any resource limitations, a valid request will be accepted.\149\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \149\ VEPCO Comments at 13.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    We agree with VEPCO and will revise the guide accordingly. In 
addition, as discussed in section II.D.1, above, we will make this 
guide a standard. We therefore will adopt Standard 4.24 as follows:

    Standard 4.24: A Transmission Provider should accept any 
reservation request submitted for an unconstrained Path if the 
Customer's bid price is equal to or greater than the Provider's 
posted offer price at the time the request was queued, even if later 
requests are submitted at a higher price. This standard applies even 
when the first request is still unconfirmed, unless the Customer 
Confirmation Time Limit has expired for the first request.
Standard 4.25--Pre-Confirmation and Preemption
    Section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff provides that, on constrained 
paths, requests for non-firm point-to-point transmission service of 
equal duration will be assigned priority based on price. Guide 4.25 
(which we here will adopt as Standard 4.25) would implement this 
concept for transactions on the OASIS by assigning priorities to 
requests, as follows:

    (1) Once a customer makes a request for service, the 
transmission provider has a time limit to accept or reject the 
request.\150\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \150\ The time limit is prescribed by the ``Provider Evaluation 
Time Limit'' in Table 4-2 and varies depending on the length of 
service requested.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (2) If, during this evaluation period, a second request for the 
same service and the same duration but at a higher price is 
received, the transmission provider would reject the first request.
    (3) The clock for the transmission provider's accept or reject 
decision would be reset upon receipt of a higher bid. If no 
subsequent higher bids are received, the transmission provider would 
accept the second (higher) request at the end of the time limit.
    (4) A customer whose request is accepted has a time limit to 
confirm the deal.\151\ If the customer fails to confirm within this 
time limit, its request is deemed withdrawn.\152\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \151\ The time limit is prescribed by the ``Customer 
Confirmation Time Limit after ACCEPTED or COUNTEROFFER'' in Table 4-
2 and varies depending on the length of services requrested.
    \152\ If the transmission provider elects to accept a request 
immediately, then steps 2 and 3, above, do not apply.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (5) Standard 4.25 gives competing customers an additional 
opportunity to offer a higher price. Until the customer whose 
request was accepted confirms the deal, other customers may obtain 
the service by submitting a pre-confirmed offer (for the same 
duration) at a higher price. As with all standards, transmission 
providers are required to implement Standard 4.25 in non-
discriminatory manner.

    Thus, as we stated in the UBP NOPR, proposed Guide 4.25 would 
permit Tier 4 (non-firm point-to-point) service of equal term with a 
higher bid price to preempt a request for the same term and lower bid 
price, as long as the initial lower bid request has not yet been 
confirmed and the higher bid request is preconfirmed.\153\ The exact 
language of this provision is as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \153\ UBP NOPR at 33,637.

    Guide 4.25: Once an offer to provide non-firm PTP transmission 
service at a given price is extended to a Customer by the Provider, 
and while this first request is still unconfirmed but within the 
Customer Confirmation Time Limit, the Provider should not preempt or 
otherwise alter the status of that first request on receipt of a 
subsequent request of the same Tier and equal duration at a higher 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
price, unless the subsequent request is submitted as pre-confirmed.

Comments
    The comments on this issue raise a number of separate issues. For 
clarity, we will discuss these issues separately.
1. Duke Suggestion--Multiple Acceptances with Priority Assigned to 
First Customer to Confirm
    Duke argues that a customer making a subsequent request should not 
be required to preconfirm the request. In other words, Duke's 
preference is that a transmission provider should be able to accept 
multiple competing requests, at the same time, and the first customer 
to confirm an accepted request would be entitled to the transmission 
service requested,\154\ unless subsequently displaced by a higher 
priority (higher tier) request, regardless of whether that confirmation 
is made by traditional confirmation or by pre-confirmation.\155\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \154\ Duke and Allegheny Power raise similar arguments in 
connection with the timing of decrementing ATC.
    \155\ Duke Comments at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    In contrast to Standard 4.25 (proposed as Guide 4.25), which allows 
a request to be preempted by a subsequent request only if that 
subsequent request is pre-confirmed, Duke proposes to have the 
transmission provider accept both requests and award the service to 
whichever request is confirmed first. Under this approach, 
notwithstanding the customer confirmation time limits in Table 4-2, 
customers would be in a race to confirm first in every transaction. 
Customers in a position to give prompt confirmation would have a 
tremendous advantage over customers needing to hear from other parties 
before committing themselves to making a purchase. Under Duke's 
proposal, a customer who confirms first preempts customers offering the 
same or even a higher price,\156\ because whichever acceptance was 
confirmed first, would have priority. By contrast, under Standard 4.25, 
once a customer's request is accepted by the transmission provider, it 
would only be displaced by a subsequent request that offered a pre-
confirmed higher bid. Otherwise, subsequent requests would not be 
evaluated until the first customer's confirmation time limit had 
expired.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \156\ Under Standard 4.24, however, the transmission provider 
would not be required to accept a request if the bid price is below 
the transmission provider's posted offer price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We believe this proposal constitutes a significant departure from 
the recommendations of the June 19 Report and what we proposed in the 
UBP NOPR. As proposed in the UBP NOPR, pre-confirmation would allow a 
requester making a subsequent request to obtain priority over an 
unconfirmed request of the same duration by: (1) Offering a higher 
price; and (2) pre-confirming. This is consistent with the provisions 
in section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff that give priority based on the 
highest price offered.
    Proposed Guide 4.25 is consistent with the pro forma tariff and is 
reasonable because the first customer is protected from being preempted 
by a bid at the same or a lower price, the transmission provider gets a 
higher price and a commitment to pay, and the subsequent customer 
offering the pre-confirmed higher price gets the transmission, even 
though it was not the first customer to request the service. By 
contrast, the priorities that would be established under Duke's 
proposal are not consistent with those established in the pro forma 
tariff.
2. Status of Subsequent Request That Is Not Pre-Confirmed
    VEPCO requests clarification of the proposed Guide 4.25. VEPCO 
maintains that Guide 4.25 is silent as to what would happen if the 
subsequent request is not pre-confirmed. VEPCO argues that, if the 
subsequent request is not pre-confirmed, the transmission provider can 
change the status of the earlier request only after the later request 
has been confirmed. VEPCO goes on to say that if its interpretation is 
correct, it has no objection to this guide.\157\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \157\ VEPCO Comments at 13.

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

[[Page 17393]]

Discussion
    We disagree with VEPCO's contention that Guide 4.25 is silent about 
what transmission providers may do if the subsequent request is not 
pre-confirmed. The guide specifically states that,

the [Transmission] Provider should not preempt or otherwise alter 
the status of that first request on receipt of a subsequent request 
of the same Tier and equal duration at a higher price, unless the 
subsequent request is submitted as pre-confirmed.

Thus, under Guide 4.25, a transmission provider could not preempt the 
earlier request (that it already had accepted) to, instead, accept a 
subsequent request of the same Tier and equal duration at a higher 
price that is not pre-confirmed, unless the time limit for confirmation 
of the earlier request had elapsed and the earlier request was not 
confirmed. By contrast, as further discussed in section II.D.9.a, 
below, if the subsequent request (for non-firm transmission service of 
the same duration at a higher price) is pre-confirmed, it would preempt 
the earlier request, because it has a higher bid price.
3. Priority from Time of Request v. Priority from Time of Confirmation
    VEPCO requests clarification of a statement made in the UBP NOPR 
discussion of proposed Guide 4.25 that ``the first-come-first-served 
reservation priority of section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff applies 
from the time when a request for transmission service is made, not from 
the time when a request is confirmed.'' VEPCO states that its 
understanding of section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff is that 
reservations for non-firm service are to be prioritized based on 
duration of service and, in the event of competing requests of equal 
duration for a limited resource, the requests are to be prioritized 
based on price. VEPCO argues that the best construction of section 14.2 
(and most consistent with the first-come-first-served principle) is 
that requests of equal duration and equal price must be processed in 
the order in which they are received. VEPCO argues that section 14.2 
does not confer any additional rights on a request based on the time 
when the request is made.
    VEPCO also asserts that

[t]he Commission declares that preservation of queue time is 
appropriate for firm requests since the first-come-first-served 
provision of section 13.2 of the pro forma tariff is based on the 
time that a request is made. The Commission states this fact in the 
July 17 Order and repeats it in the discussion on page 73 of the 
NOPR. On the other hand, our understanding is that non-firm requests 
do not acquire the right of first refusal until they are confirmed 
(see our request for clarification within our comments on Guide 
4.25, below). If our understanding is correct, then preserving the 
queue time for non-firm requests is not relevant to the exercise of 
a right of first refusal for a non-firm request. In fact, the time 
that a non-firm request is CONFIRMED determines the order in which 
it is considered for right of first refusal versus other CONFIRMED 
non-firm requests that are also subject to displacement by the same 
longer-term request. If our understanding is correct, then a 
Transmission Customer exercising its right of first refusal should 
have to submit a new pre-confirmed request for non-firm service in 
order to match a subsequent longer-term reservation for non-firm 
service. Once the new preconfirmed request was ACCEPTED, it would 
automatically become CONFIRMED, and the time of confirmation of the 
new request would establish the order in which it is considered for 
right of first refusal in subsequent scenarios. Pre-confirmation 
should be a requirement in order to expedite the preemption process.

Discussion
    Under section 13.2 of the pro forma tariff, long-term firm point-
to-point transmission service is to be made available on a first-come-
first-served basis and shorter term firm point-to-point transmission 
service (service for less than one year) \158\ may be preempted on the 
basis of duration, but not on the basis of price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \158\ Section 1.42 of the pro forma tariff provides that short 
term point-to-point transmission service has a term of less than one 
year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    However, under section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff, priorities for 
non-firm point-to-point transmission service are not determined based 
on first-come-first-served principles.\159\ Under section 14.2 of the 
pro forma tariff, a transmission provider evaluates all pending 
requests for non-firm point-to-point transmission service at the same 
time. If resources are constrained, the transmission provider is to 
give priority based on duration. If duration is equal, the transmission 
provider is to give priority to those requests offering the highest 
price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \159\ VEPCO's confusion may have resulted from an inadvertent 
reference in the UBP NOPR to section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff in 
responding to an argument from ECI. See UBP NOPR at 33,637.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We agree with VEPCO that this evaluation of price is to happen 
before acceptance and that subsequent requests at a higher price are 
not to be evaluated until expiration of the customer's confirmation 
time limits.\160\ However, under Guide 4.25, in the event that the 
subsequent request for non-firm point-to-point service of equal 
duration offers a higher price and is pre-confirmed, the transmission 
provider is to preempt the first request, even though the confirmation 
time limit has not yet expired.\161\ As to the right-of-first-refusal, 
we will address that immediately below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \160\ As seen in our discussion of Standard 4.18, in section 
II.D.4.d, above, this distinction becomes important in the 
consideration of when ATC is to be decremented. We also note that 
VEPCO's arguments here contradict those it raised in regard to 
Standard 4.18.
    \161\ We note that we are speaking here about preempting an 
unconfirmed request for transmission, not about displacing a 
confirmed reservation with a longer duration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Right-of-First-Refusal
    As quoted above, VEPCO asserts that ``non-firm requests do not 
acquire the right-of-first-refusal until they are confirmed.'' VEPCO 
also argues that section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff confers a right-
of-first-refusal to shorter term firm point-to-point service that 
already has been reserved, to match any longer term reservation before 
being preempted. VEPCO claims that this right is acquired at the time 
the earlier request is CONFIRMED, because a customer's confirmation is 
a commitment to pay and is what gives the customer rights to capacity.
    Based on this understanding, VEPCO argues that short-term 
unconfirmed non-firm requests could be REFUSED or SUPERSEDED outright 
when subsequent competing requests of longer duration are CONFIRMED. 
VEPCO argues that if their understanding is incorrect, then short-term 
unconfirmed non-firm requests have to be included along with confirmed 
non-firm requests in the iterative preemption process when multiple 
competing requests exist. VEPCO claims that this overly complicates the 
prioritization and preemption rules for non-firm service. Specifically, 
VEPCO states,

[a]ccording to section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff, non-firm 
service is what is available from transmission capability in excess 
of that needed for reliable service. Keeping the importance of non-
firm service in perspective relative to long-term firm service and 
short-term firm service, it would seem that non-firm service does 
not warrant the highly complicated and time consuming procedures for 
prioritization and preemption. Therefore, we request that the 
Commission clarify that short-term unconfirmed non-firm requests 
could be REFUSED or SUPERSEDED outright when subsequent competing 
requests of longer duration are CONFIRMED.''
Discussion
    Under section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff, the right-of-first-
refusal to match a subsequent request for a longer duration is given 
only when a reservation already has been made. We consider a 
reservation to be made at the point when the customer confirms its

[[Page 17394]]

acceptance. We agree with VEPCO that a right-of-first-refusal is not 
extended to a request for non-firm point-to-point transmission service 
that has been accepted, but not yet confirmed. Such a request may be 
preempted without a right-of-first-refusal.
    As to requests for short-term firm point-to-point transmission 
service, section 13.2 of the pro forma tariff provides for preemption 
before the conditional reservation deadline passes, but not after. 
Before the conditional reservation deadline passes, a reservation for 
short-term firm service is given a right-of-first-refusal to match a 
subsequent request for longer duration short-term firm service (price 
is not a factor here). As with non-firm service, we consider a 
reservation to be made at the point when the customer confirms its 
acceptance.
5. Adoption as Mandatory Standard
    As discussed in section II.D.1, above, we will adopt proposed Guide 
4.25 as Standard 4.25.
Standard 4.26--Right of Customer Making Request to Match a Subsequent 
Pre-Confirmed Request at Higher Price
    As stated in the UBP NOPR, Guide 4.25 would permit Tier 4 (non-firm 
point-to-point) service of equal term with a higher bid price to 
preempt a request for the same term and lower bid price, as long as the 
lower bid request is not confirmed and the higher bid request is 
preconfirmed.\162\ Guide 4.26 proposes to require a transmission 
provider to give the first customer the right-of-first-refusal. The 
exact language of Guide 4.26, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, is as 
follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \162\ UBP NOPR at 33,637-38.

    Guide 4.26: If during a negotiation of service (i.e., prior to 
Customer confirmation) a subsequent pre-confirmed request for 
service over the same limited resource of equal duration but higher 
price is received, the Provider must COUNTEROFFER the price of 
service on the prior COUNTEROFFER or ACCEPTED price to match the 
competing offer, in order to give the first Customer an opportunity 
to match the offer. This practice must be implemented in a non-
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
discriminatory manner.

    Guide 4.26, as recommended by the CPWG/How Group, stated that, 
``the Provider may COUNTEROFFER the price.'' In the UBP NOPR, we 
proposed to change ``may'' to ``must'' to indicate that a transmission 
provider following Guide 4.26 \163\ would be required to COUNTEROFFER 
the price to offer the first customer a right-of-first-refusal. We 
provided two reasons for the proposal: (1) Customers must know what to 
expect from a transmission provider; and (2) even though the guide 
provides that the practice be implemented in a non-discriminatory 
manner, there is too much room for discriminatory practices if 
providing the right to match is left optional.\164\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \163\ As we are here adopting Guide 4.26 as a standard (Standard 
4.26) all transmission providers will be required to comply with its 
provisions.
    \164\ UBP NOPR at 33,638.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments
    Duke agrees that ``may'' should be changed to ``must.'' In 
addition, Duke proposes that Guide 4.26 be made a standard.\165\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \165\ Duke Comments at 9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    VEPCO claims that the purpose of the pre-confirmation process is to 
expedite the transition of a request from ACCEPTED to CONFIRMED and 
requests that we clarify that a pre-confirmed request is not negotiable 
because the procedures used in negotiation defeat the purpose of pre-
confirmation.\166\ VEPCO also argues that, if Guide 4.26 applies to 
situations where the first request is unconfirmed, giving the right-of-
first-refusal to the first requester would unfairly penalize the 
submitter of a second, preconfirmed, request. VEPCO argues that, if the 
second request was submitted as unconfirmed, the first request would 
not receive the right-of-first-refusal. VEPCO states that submitting a 
request as pre-confirmed should not decrease the probability of 
receiving the requested service. VEPCO recommends that Guide 4.26 not 
be adopted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \166\ VEPCO Comments at 15.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    As proposed in the UBP NOPR, we will replace the word ``may'' with 
``must'' in Guide 4.26. Regarding Duke's request to make Guide 4.26 a 
standard, as discussed in section II.D.1, above, we will adopt this 
guide as Standard 4.26.
    As we noted above (in our discussion of proposed Guide 4.16), there 
was a conflict between Row 8 of proposed Table 4-3 and proposed Guide 
4.26. Table 4-3, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, did not permit a right-
of-first-refusal when an unconfirmed request for non-firm point-to-
point service is preempted by a pre-confirmed request of equal duration 
and higher price, while Guide 4.26 allowed transmission providers to 
offer the right-of-first-refusal under the same circumstances. As 
discussed above, we are resolving this conflict by amending Row 8 to 
give the right-of-first-refusal. With this revision, there is no longer 
a conflict between Table 4-3 and Guide 4.26.
    Regarding VEPCO's request for clarification that pre-confirmed 
requests are not negotiable, we disagree with VEPCO's interpretation. 
The current process allows a transmission provider to COUNTEROFFER the 
pending unconfirmed request and negotiations would go on as if the 
subsequent request were not pre-confirmed. VEPCO's proposal, to deny 
negotiations in response to pre-confirmed requests, would treat pre-
confirmed requests as take-it-or-leave-it offers.
    VEPCO's objection to Guide 4.26, on the grounds that by submitting 
the subsequent reservation as pre-confirmed a customer gives up rights 
he would have had if he submitted the reservation as an unconfirmed 
reservation, is misplaced. Submitting an unconfirmed request in this 
instance does not give the second customer any rights. Standard 4.25, 
as adopted in this Final Rule, clearly states that the Transmission 
Provider should not preempt or otherwise alter the status of that first 
request on receipt of a subsequent request of the same Tier and equal 
duration at a higher price, unless the subsequent request is submitted 
as pre-confirmed.

Standard 4.27--Curtailment of Non-Firm Point-to-Point Service

    Guide 4.27, as recommended in the June 19 Report and as 
described (but not proposed) in the UBP NOPR, provides that 
curtailment (as opposed to reservation) of non-firm point-to-point 
transmission service should not be based on price.\167\ The exact 
language of this provision is as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \167\ UBP NOPR at 33,638.

    Guide 4.27: Curtailment of non-firm PTP should not consider 
price. Based on the fact that curtailments are governed by the pro 
forma tariff, we decided, in the UBP NOPR, not to propose adoption 
of Guide 4.27. We invited commenters who disagreed with this view to 
address this matter in their comments to the UBP NOPR.
Comments
    Both Florida Power Corp and VEPCO agree that Guide 4.27 should not 
be adopted.\168\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \168\ Florida Power Corp Comments at 6, VEPCO Comments at 16.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    In the UBP NOPR we stated that this matter is governed by the pro 
forma tariff, however, we believe some elaboration on this point would 
be helpful. In reviewing this provision, it is important to keep in 
mind the distinction between ``curtailment'' and ``interruption.'' 
Curtailment only refers to service not being provided based on 
reliability concerns. However, under

[[Page 17395]]

section 14.7 of the pro forma tariff, non-firm point-to-point service 
may be interrupted based on economic concerns. The distinction between 
``curtailment'' and ``interruption'' is a technical distinction that 
can easily be confused. Adoption of Guide 4.27 as currently written 
might be misleading because readers might incorrectly assume that 
service could not be interrupted based on economic concerns. While we 
could rewrite the provision to incorporate the curtailment priorities 
of 14.7 of the pro forma tariff, we believe it is safer and preferable 
to leave these matters to the pro forma tariff, without paraphrase. 
Thus, we will not adopt Guide 4.27.
5. Procurement of Ancillary and Other Services
a. Transmission Provider Requirements (Standards 5.1-5.4)
    In the UBP NOPR, the Commission proposed to adopt recommended 
Standards 5.1 and 5.3 and Guides 5.2 and 5.4. The Commission recognized 
that ancillary services are an essential part of a transmission 
services contract, and that the proposed definitions improve the OASIS 
reservation process by spelling out the mandatory, required, and 
optional ancillary services related to the transmission reservation. 
The exact language of these provisions, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, is 
as follows:

    Standard 5.1: The Transmission Provider shall designate which 
ancillary services are MANDATORY, REQUIRED, or OPTIONAL for each 
offered transmission service to the extent these requirements can be 
determined in advance of the submittal of a reservation request on a 
specific Path by a Transmission Customer.
    Guide 5.2: A Transmission Provider may modify a Transmission 
Customer's service request to indicate the Transmission Provider as 
the SELLER of any ancillary service, which is MANDATORY, to be taken 
from the Transmission Provider.
    Standard 5.3: For REQUIRED and OPTIONAL services, the 
Transmission Provider shall not select a SELLER of ancillary service 
without the Transmission Customer first selecting that SELLER.
    Guide 5.4: A Transmission Provider may accept a Transmission 
Customer's request for an ancillary service, which is not MANDATORY 
or REQUIRED, but shall indicate to the Transmission Customer at the 
time of acceptance under PROVIDER COMMENTS that the service is not 
MANDATORY or REQUIRED.
Comments
    Comments were filed by Consumers \169\ and VEPCO.\170\ Both 
recommend that ancillary services be categorized on the basis of path. 
They contend that this approach is consistent with current OASIS 
technology and requirements that determine whether different ancillary 
services are required depending on whether a path is into, out of, or 
through a system. VEPCO recommends that the proposed Standard 5.1 be 
revised to read as follows:

    \169\ Consumers Comments at 3.
    \170\ VEPCO Comments at 16.

    The Transmission Provider shall designate which ancillary 
services are MANDATORY, REQUIRED, or OPTIONAL for each offered 
transmission service or each transmission path to the extent these 
requirements can be determined in advance of the submittal of a 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
reservation request on a specific Path by a Transmission Customer.

    VEPCO suggests that Guide 5.2 be modified to substitute the word 
``shall'' for ``may,'' in the event a transmission customer fails to 
indicate the SELLER on its request for MANDATORY ancillary services, 
and be adopted as a standard.
    VEPCO requests that the Commission clarify Standard 5.3 to indicate 
that the transmission provider should be permitted to modify the 
request to provide REQUIRED ancillary services. In support of this 
proposal, VEPCO provides an example illustrating the extra steps that 
would be required if the transmission customer fails to select a SELLER 
of REQUIRED ancillary services, including the submission of a new 
request in response to notification of an invalid request.
    VEPCO suggests that Guide 5.4 is unnecessary, indicating that the 
only ancillary services that are not MANDATORY or REQUIRED are those 
designated as OPTIONAL. VEPCO further argues that Standard 5.1 clearly 
designates the service as OPTIONAL, and if a transmission customer 
requests the OPTIONAL service, the transmission provider should be 
allowed to assume the transmission customer actually wants the service.
Discussion
    We find merit in the recommendation presented by Consumers and 
VEPCO to categorize ancillary services by path. It is apparent from the 
arguments presented that this can be accomplished with relative ease, 
and is consistent with the manner in which arrangements are made for 
such services, i.e., different ancillary services are required 
depending on whether a path is into, out of, or through a system. 
Accordingly, we will revise proposed Standard 5.1 to read as follows:

    Standard 5.1: The Transmission Provider shall designate which 
ancillary services are MANDATORY, REQUIRED, or OPTIONAL for each 
offered transmission service or each transmission path to the extent 
these requirements can be determined in advance of the submittal of 
a reservation request on a specific Path by a Transmission Customer.

    We also find merit in VEPCO's proposal to revise proposed Guide 5.2 
to ensure that the correct seller of mandatory ancillary services is 
shown on the OASIS. Accordingly, we will revise proposed Guide 5.2, 
which we adopt as Standard 5.2 as discussed below, to read as follows:

    Standard 5.2: A Transmission Provider shall modify a 
Transmission Customer's service request to indicate the Transmission 
Provider as the SELLER of any ancillary service, which is MANDATORY, 
to be taken from the Transmission Provider.

    As to Standard 5.3 and proposed Guide 5.4, while we agree with 
VEPCO that these provisions may create extra steps for a transmission 
provider, we believe that these extra steps are necessary to ensure 
that transmission customers are adequately informed, prior to 
confirmation, of what ancillary services they are to obtain from the 
transmission provider. Accordingly, we will adopt Standard 5.3 as 
proposed. In addition, as discussed in section II.D.1, above, we will 
adopt proposed Guides 5.2 and 5.4 as Standards 5.2 and 5.4.
b. Transmission Customer Requirements (Standards 5.5-5.6)
    In the UBP NOPR, the Commission proposed to adopt Guides 5.5 and 
5.6, as recommended in the June 19 Report. These guides propose that 
the transmission customer should inform the transmission provider, at 
the time of the reservation request, of certain arrangements for 
ancillary services. The exact language of these provisions is as 
follows:

    Guide 5.5: The Transmission Customer should indicate with the 
submittal of a transmission reservation request, the preferred 
options for provision of ancillary services, such as the desire to 
use an alternative resource.
    Guide 5.6: A Transmission Customer may, but is not required to, 
indicate a third party SELLER of ancillary services, if these 
services are arranged by the Transmission Customer off the OASIS and 
if such arrangements are permitted by the Transmission Provider's 
tariff.
Comments
    VEPCO concurs with Guide 5.5 provided that, if the transmission 
customer fails to indicate its preferred options for provision of 
ancillary services, the transmission provider is permitted to modify 
the request so that it is designated as the default SELLER

[[Page 17396]]

of the ancillary service.\171\Similarly, VEPCO concurs with Guide 5.6, 
provided that, if a transmission customer fails to indicate a third 
party SELLER of ancillary services and the transmission provider has 
not approved the arrangement between the transmission customer and any 
third party SELLER, the transmission provider may modify the request to 
designate itself as the default SELLER of the ancillary service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \171\ VEPCO Comments at 17.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    AEP asserts that the transmission customer should be required to 
identify the SELLER in sufficient detail to enable the transmission 
provider to assure that the services will be provided and it (as 
control area operator) will not be left as the default transmission 
provider of such service. AEP supports this argument, by noting that 
transmission providers are responsible for the reliability of the 
transmission system, and must have the ability to verify that adequate 
arrangements have been made for ancillary services.\172\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \172\ AEP Comments at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    We agree with the commenters that transmission providers need 
timely notice from customers as to which ancillary services they will 
be obtaining from the transmission provider, and which they will be 
obtaining from other sellers. As we stated in the UBP NOPR,

[t]he June 19 Report recommends that the transmission customer 
should make known to the transmission provider (at the time of the 
reservation request) certain options related to arrangement of 
ancillary services, including taking all the MANDATORY and REQUIRED 
ancillary services from the primary provider, taking REQUIRED 
ancillary services from a third party seller, purchasing OPTIONAL 
services, and arranging for ancillary services in the future (prior 
to scheduling).\173\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \173\ UBP NOPR at 33,639-40.

    We also agree with AEP that transmission providers are 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
responsible for the reliability of the transmission system, and that

the customer should be required to identify the seller in sufficient 
detail to enable the Transmission Provider to assure that the 
services will be provided and not be left to it as a control area 
operator to be a default provider of such service.\174\

    \174\ AEP Comments at 6.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Given these concerns, and given that the pro forma tariff allows a 
transmission provider to require that customers specify their ancillary 
service providers when they make their reservations, we will follow 
VEPCO's suggestion to have the transmission provider post itself as the 
default ancillary service provider, if a transmission customer fails to 
indicate a third party SELLER of ancillary services. However, we will 
also allow the transmission customer to make a change at a later date, 
so long as this change is made prior to the scheduling deadline. This 
change can be made without changing the reservation priority. In 
addition, as discussed in section II.D.1, above, we will adopt Guides 
5.5 and 5.6 as Standards 5.5 and 5.6. We therefore will adopt Standards 
5.5 and 5.6 that provide as follows:
    Standard 5.5: The Transmission Customer should indicate with the 
submittal of a transmission reservation request, the preferred 
options for provision of ancillary services, such as the desire to 
use an alternative resource. The Transmission Provider shall post 
itself as the default ancillary service provider, if a Transmission 
Customer fails to indicate a third party SELLER of ancillary 
services. However, the Transmission Customer may change this 
designation at a later date, so long as this change is made prior to 
the Transmission Provider's scheduling deadline.
    Standard 5.6: A Transmission Customer may, but is not required 
to, indicate a third party SELLER of ancillary services, if these 
services are arranged by the Transmission Customer off the OASIS and 
if such arrangements are permitted by the Transmission Provider's 
tariff. The Transmission Provider shall post itself as the default 
ancillary service provider, if a Transmission Customer fails to 
indicate a third party SELLER of ancillary services. However, the 
Transmission Customer may change this designation at a later date, 
so long as this change is made prior to the Transmission Provider's 
scheduling deadline.
6. Pathnaming Standards (Standards 6.1-6.4)
    In the UBP NOPR, the Commission proposed Standards 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3 
and Guide 6.4 as recommended by the CPWG/How Group. These standards and 
guide propose using previously optional fields in the S&CP Document to 
specify control area codes for PORs and PODs. The Commission concluded 
that this should provide consistency in path naming, and efficiency in 
the reservation process. The exact language of these provisions, as 
proposed in the UBP NOPR, is as follows:

    Standard 6.1: A transmission provider shall use the path naming 
convention defined in the S&CP Data Dictionary for the naming of all 
reservable paths posted on OASIS.
    Standard 6.2: A transmission provider shall use the third field 
in the path name to indicate the sending and receiving control 
areas. The control areas shall be designated using standard NERC 
codes for the control areas, separated by a hyphen. For example, the 
first three fields of the path name will be:

RR/TPTP/CAXX-CAYY/

    Standard 6.3: A transmission provider shall use the fourth field 
of the path name to indicate POR and POD separated by a hyphen. For 
example, a path with a specific POR/POD would be shown as:

RR/TPTP/CAXX-CAYY/PORPORPORPOR-PODPODPODPOD/

    If the POR and POD are designated as control areas, then the 
fourth field may be left blank (as per the example in 6.2).
    Guide 6.4: A transmission provider may designate a sub-level for 
Points of Receipt and Delivery. For example, a customer reserves a 
path to POD AAAA. The ultimate load may be indeterminate at the 
time. Later, the customer schedules energy to flow to a particular 
load that may be designated by the transmission provider as a sub-
level Point of Delivery. This option is necessary to ensure certain 
providers are not precluded from using more specific service points 
by the inclusion of the POR/POD in the path name. All sub-level PORs 
and PODs must be registered as such on www.tsin.com.

Comments
    VEPCO agrees with the adoption of Standards 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3. 
However, it seeks clarification of whether, under Guide 6.4, it is 
possible for a transmission customer to change a POR or POD after a 
request has been submitted. If so, VEPCO would not object to Guide 6.4, 
as long as it remains a guide and does not compel a transmission 
provider to allow transmission customers to change PORs and PODs after 
transmission customers have submitted requests.\175\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \175\ VEPCO Comments at 19.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    The comments raise no objection to Standards 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3. As 
to Guide 6.4, VEPCO has failed to persuade us that Guide 6.4 should not 
be adopted as a mandatory standard. VEPCO's concerns are unfounded 
because, by its terms, Standard 6.4 (even though mandatory) only 
applies to transmission providers who designate sub-levels for PORs and 
PODs. A transmission provider need not make such designations, unless 
it so chooses. In addition, as requested by VEPCO, we clarify that 
Guide 6.4 does not imply that transmission customers may change PORs 
and PODs after confirmation. Thus, we will adopt Standards 6.1, 6.2, 
and 6.3, and, as discussed in section II.D.1, above, will adopt Guide 
6.4, as Standard 6.4.
7. Revisions to the S&CP Document
    Elsewhere in this Final Rule we have directed that revisions be 
made to the S&CP Document. For convenience, we

[[Page 17397]]

will summarize all of these revisions here.
    As discussed in section II.D.2.c, above, we will revise the 
definition of ``non-firm'' in Standard 2.2.2 to clarify that the firm 
service that gets priority over non-firm service includes service to 
Native Load Customers and Network Customers. As discussed in section 
II.D.2.e, above, we will replace the Data Dictionary 
Element__ANC__SERVICE__TYPE'' in the S&CP Document with the term 
``AS__TYPE.'' As discussed in section II.D.4.b, above, will revise the 
definition of ``superseded'' in the Data Element Dictionary and in 
section 4.2.10.2 of the S&CP Document, as follows:

    SUPERSEDED = assigned by Provider or Seller when a request which 
has not yet been confirmed is preempted by another reservation 
request. (Final state).

    Also, as discussed in section II.D.4.d, above, we will revise the 
definition of ``displaced'' in the Data Element Dictionary and in 
section 4.2.10.2 of the S&CP Document, as follows:

    DISPLACED = assigned by Provider or Seller when a ``CONFIRMED'' 
reservation from a Customer is replaced by a longer term reservation 
and the Customer has not exercised right of first refusal, if any 
(i.e., refused to match terms of new request). (Final state).

    Further, as discussed in section II.D.2.e, above, we will replace 
the Data Dictionary Element ``ANC__SERVICE__TYPE'' in the S&CP Document 
with the term ``AS__TYPE.'' \176\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \176\ In addition, for consistency, we will change the ``alias'' 
appearing in the Data Element Dictionary from ``ANCTYPE'' to 
``ASTYPE.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, as discussed in section II.D.4.b, above, we will clarify 
the definition of ``REFUSED'' in the Data Element Dictionary and in 
section 4.2.10.2 of the S&CP Document, as proposed in the UBP NOPR, by 
inserting the words ``lack of'' before the word ``availability.'' 
Cinergy supports the change and no commenters oppose it. We, therefore, 
will adopt a revised definition of ``REFUSED'' in the Data Element 
Dictionary and in section 4.2.10.2 of the S&CP Document as follows:

    REFUSED = assigned by Provider or Seller to indicate service 
request has been denied due to lack of availability of transmission 
capability. SELLER__COMMENTS should be used to communicate details 
for denial of service. (Final state).

    Although we order these changes to become effective as of the 
effective date of this Final Rule, \177\ we will not issue a complete, 
revised S&CP Document at this time. It is our intention to issue a 
complete, revised S&CP Document in the near future that will include 
additional revisions that we contemplate making after receipt of 
recommendations from the MIC/How Group (see discussion below).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \177\ Sixty (60) days from the date of publication of this Final 
Rule in the Federal Register.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Requests to Industry Working Groups
    As discussed in various sections above, we are making several 
requests to the MIC/How Groups regarding revisions to the S&CP 
Document. For convenience, we will summarize all of these requests 
here.
    First, in section II.D.1, we request that the MIC/How Group report 
back to the Commission, within 9 months of the implementation date of 
these standards, with their recommendations as to any necessary 
revisions, additions, or enhancements to the BPS that the industry 
suggests based on its experience doing business under them.
    Second, in section II.D.2.f, we request that the MIC/How Group 
consider the following questions and report back, within ninety (90) 
days of the date of publication of this order in the Federal Register, 
with their recommendations as to any necessary revisions or additions 
to the BPS to reflect the Commission's findings in the Next Hour Order:

    (1) Where in the BPS should the definitions of the scheduling 
period for ``same-day'' and ``next-hour'' transactions (as 
recommended in Guides 2.6-2.6.2) be located?
    (2) Should the BPS include a definition of NHM Service?
    (3) Should the Commission revise Tables 4-2 and 4-3 and related 
provisions to reflect the availability of NHM Service and its 
priority vis a vis other transmission services?
    (4) Should the Commission adopt proposed Guides 4.2 and 4.3? 
\178\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \178\ See discussion in section II.D.4.a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (5) In light of the Next Hour Order, are any other revisions to 
the BPS needed?

    Third, consistent with our adoption, in section II.D.4.b, of 
Standards 4.4 and 4.5, we request that, within ninety (90) days of the 
date of publication of this order in the Federal Register, the MIC/How 
Group submit its recommendations on any necessary changes to the State 
Diagram and definitions in the S&CP Document to accommodate a 
transmission provider notifying a customer that he has the right-of-
first-refusal and a customer's response.
    Fourth, in section II.D.4.c, we request that the MIC, with input 
from any interested persons, consider the proposals regarding Table 4-2 
presented by AEP, BPA, Duke, and VEPCO, along with other possible 
options, and that the MIC report back to us on these matters as part of 
its nine-month report, giving the MIC's recommendations on any further 
revisions to Table 4-2 that might be needed, along with any dissenting 
views and the reasons why those views were not adopted by the group as 
a whole.
    Fifth, in section II.D.4.d, we request that the MIC and How Group 
consider VEPCO's suggestion to add a new STATUS, ``preempted with right 
of first refusal,'' to the State Diagram and to recommend, within 
ninety (90) days of the date of publication of this order in the 
Federal Register, whatever changes would be appropriate to the State 
Diagram, templates, and the S&CP Document to implement the right-of-
first-refusal, for implementation as a standard.
9. CPWG/How Group Recommended Revisions to the Pro Forma Tariff
a. Section 14.2--Reservation Priority
    In the UBP NOPR, we considered recommendations from the CPWG/How 
Working Groups (in the June 19 Report) that adoption of certain 
recommended guides and standards might require modifications to section 
14.2 of the pro forma tariff. Notwithstanding these concerns, we 
concluded, preliminarily, that adoption of the recommended Business 
Practices could be accomplished without the need to make any revisions 
to the pro forma tariff.
Comments
    VEPCO filed the sole comments on this issue. VEPCO concurs with the 
proposal in the UBP NOPR to leave section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff 
unchanged, but seeks clarification as to whether transmission providers 
need to file revisions to their individual open access tariffs in order 
to implement the pre-confirmation procedures outlined in Standards 
4.16, 4.25, and 4.26.\179\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \179\ VEPCO Comments at 18.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discussion
    In the UBP NOPR, the Commission found, preliminarily, that there 
was no compelling reason for changing section 14.2 of the pro forma 
tariff at this time. As none of the comments challenge this conclusion, 
we now adopt it as a finding of this Final Rule.
    VEPCO requests that the Commission clarify its position on whether 
transmission providers must file revisions to their individual open 
access tariffs to implement the pre-confirmation proposals proposed in 
the UBP NOPR. VEPCO asserts,

a pre-confirmation procedure simply provides a mechanism by which to 
expedite the confirmation of an accepted request. In our view, pre-
confirmation does not confer

[[Page 17398]]

any special rights to a request that it would enjoy either prior to 
or after acceptance of the request by the Transmission Provider.'' 
\180\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \180\ Id.

    The Commission's position on pre-confirmation, as applied to 
section 14.2 of the pro forma tariff, was described in our discussion 
of Standards 4.25 and 4.26, above. VEPCO's position is not totally 
accurate. Pre-confirmation has certain ramifications. For example, 
Standard 4.25 provides that subsequent pre-confirmed requests for non-
firm transmission service immediately preempt earlier lower-priced bid 
requests for the same duration service. However, we agree that there is 
some basis for VEPCO's position. This can be illustrated in the above 
example, if we assume that the subsequent request is pre-confirmed. In 
this case, the subsequent request would preempt the earlier request 
because it has a higher bid price. However, without pre-confirmation, 
the earlier request would not be preempted until the subsequent request 
was confirmed, rather than upon acceptance by the transmission provider 
as is the case with pre-confirmation.
    We stand by our earlier conclusion in the UBP NOPR that our 
policies on pre-confirmation (that we are here adopting in Standards 
4.16, 4.25, and 4.26) do not necessitate revisions to section 14.2 of 
the pro forma tariff, because, as we stated in the UBP NOPR, we do not 
view pre-confirmation to be in conflict with the pro forma tariff.
    Finally, in response to VEPCO's request for clarification, on 
further consideration, we do not believe that transmission providers 
need to file any revisions to their individual Open Access Tariffs to 
accept pre-confirmed requests for transmission service.
b. Section 14.7--Curtailment or Interruption of Service
    In the UBP NOPR, we stated that we were not persuaded to make any 
modifications to section 14.7 of the pro forma tariff at this time. 
This was discussed in the UBP NOPR and based on the consideration that 
the Uniform Business Practices recommended in the June 19 Report could 
be implemented without tariff changes.
Comments
    VEPCO concurs with the Commission's conclusion not to make changes 
to section 14.7 of the pro forma tariff.
Discussion
    The Commission maintains its conclusion proposed in the UBP NOPR 
that there is no compelling reason for changing section 14.7 of the pro 
forma tariff at this time. None of the comments suggest otherwise.\181\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \181\ We note that in section II.D.4.d, above, we found that 
Standards 4.22 and 4.23 are not in conflict with section 14.7 of the 
pro forma tariff and that adoption of Standards 4.22 and 4.23 does 
not necessitate any revision of section 14.7 of the pro forma 
tariff.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Section 17.5--Response to a Completed Application
    In the UBP NOPR, we stated that we were not persuaded to make any 
modifications to section 17.5 of the pro forma tariff at this time. 
This was discussed in the UBP NOPR and based on the consideration that 
the Uniform Business Practices recommended in the June 19 Report could 
be implemented without tariff changes.
Comments
    VEPCO agrees with the Commission's decision not to make changes to 
section 17.5 of the pro forma tariff. VEPCO filed the sole comments on 
this issue.
Discussion
    The Commission maintains its conclusion proposed in the UBP NOPR 
that there is no compelling reason for changing section 17.5 of the pro 
forma tariff at this time. None of the comments suggested otherwise.

III. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA),\182\ requires the Commission 
to describe the impact that any proposed or final rule would have on 
small entities or to certify that the rule, if promulgated, will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \182\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The mandatory standards adopted in this Final Rule are applicable 
to the same entities subject to the requirements of the OASIS Final 
Rule (i.e., public utilities).\183\ Those entities exempt from the 
requirement to conduct business on the OASIS are likewise exempt from 
the requirements of this Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \183\ In the OASIS Final Rule, we noted that the entities that 
would have to comply with the OASIS Final Rule are public utilities. 
See Order No. 899-A, FERC Stats. & Regs para. 31,049 at 30,578.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Moreover, as we explained in Order No. 889-A, under appropriate 
circumstances the Commission will grant waiver of the OASIS Final Rule 
requirements to small public utilities. We further explained that the 
Commission's waiver policy follows the SBA definition of small electric 
utility \184\ and that 34 small entities had received waivers of the 
requirement to establish and maintain an OASIS and five small entities 
had received waivers of the OASIS Standards of Conduct 
requirements.\185\ These decisions show that the Commission carefully 
evaluates the effect of the OASIS Final Rule on small electric 
utilities and is granting waivers where appropriate, thus mitigating 
the effect of that rule on small public and non-public utilities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \184\ See 5 U.S.C. 601(3), 5 U.S.C. 601(6), and 15 U.S.C. 
632(a). The RFA defines a small entity as one that is independently 
owned and not dominant in its field of operation. See 15 U.S.C. 
632(a). The Small Business Administration defines a small electric 
utility as one that disposes of 4 million MWh or less of electric 
energy in a given year. See 13 CFR 121.601 (Major Group 49--
Electric, Gas and Sanitary Services).
    In the Open Access Final Rule, we concluded that, under these 
definitions, the Open Access Final Rule and the OASIS Final Rule 
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number 
of small entities. We reaffirmed that conclusion in Order Nos. 888-A 
and 889-A.
    \185\ See Order No. 889-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,049 at 
30,578.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This Final Rule merely increases the uniformity of the business 
practices public utilities already have adopted to comply with Order 
Nos. 888 and 889 and other Commission orders. This being the case, 
under section 605(b) of RFA, the Commission hereby certifies that this 
Final Rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities within the meaning of RFA. Accordingly, no 
regulatory flexibility analysis is required pursuant to section 603 of 
RFA.

IV. Environmental Statement

    Commission regulations require that an environmental assessment or 
an environmental impact statement be prepared for a Commission action 
that may have a significant effect on the human environment.\186\ In 
the Commission's view, the environmental impact of this proposal is 
negligible. Transmission providers necessarily already follow business 
practices in conducting their OASIS transactions. This proposal merely 
adds some uniformity to the process. Accordingly, we find that this 
Final Rule does not propose any action that may have a significant 
effect on the human environment and that no environmental impact 
statement is required.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \186\ Regulations Implementing National Environmental Policy 
Act, Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987); 1986-90 Regs. 
Preambles FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 30,783 (Dec. 10, 1987) (codified 
at 18 CFR Part 380).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. Public Reporting Burden

    This final rule adopts a set of uniform business practices, as set 
out in the accompanying BPS, that requires transmission providers to 
comply with

[[Page 17399]]

the Commission's policies on transmission service price negotiation and 
that governs interactions between transmission providers and customers 
over OASIS nodes. By necessity, transmission providers already follow 
business practices in operating their OASIS nodes. This final rule 
makes these practices more uniform across the industry.
    This final rule retains the burden estimate used in the UBP NOPR. 
The UBP NOPR incorporated the Commission's burden estimate in Docket 
No. IC99-717-000 because it covered all information collected under the 
requirements of FERC-717 ``Open Access Same-Time Information System and 
Standards of Conduct'' (OMB No. 1902-173) from December 1998-December 
2001, including the implementation of OASIS Phase IA and any 
information collected under the UBP NOPR.\187\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \187\ UBP NOPR at 33,605.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    None of the 19 comments filed in response to the UBP NOPR took 
issue with the burden estimate. However, on February 5, 1999, EEI filed 
comments with OMB in Docket No. IC99-717-000 arguing that the 
Commission understated companies' overall OASIS cost-projections and 
citing instances where companies incurred higher costs than projected 
in that proceeding. On May 12, 1999, the Commission filed a response 
with OMB to EEI's comments where we acknowledged that some customers 
may have had higher costs than estimated in FERC-717 but that EEI had 
not shown that these higher costs were typical or that the Commission's 
projections were not valid on a composite basis. We also explained that 
a part of these higher costs was attributable to start-up costs (which 
are always higher) and that start-up costs had been excluded from the 
Commission's projections. After a review of these comments, OMB 
approved the Commission's OASIS burden estimate on August 18, 1999.

Internal Review

    For this final rule, we again are relying on the Commission's 
burden estimate in Docket No. IC99-717-000 as our burden estimate, as 
we did with the UBP NOPR, because the burden estimate in Docket No. 
IC99-717-000 covers all information collected under the requirements of 
FERC-717 ``Open Access Same-Time Information System and Standards of 
Conduct'' (OMB No. 1902-0173). After conducting an internal review of 
the public reporting burden imposed by this final rule, we are 
convinced, by means of our internal review, that there is specific, 
objective support for this information burden estimate. Moreover, the 
Commission has reviewed the collection of information adopted in this 
final rule and has determined that this collection of information is 
necessary and conforms to the Commission's plan, as described in this 
order, for the collection, efficient management, and use of the 
required information.\188\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \188\ See 44 U.S.C. 3506(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VI. Information Collection Statement

    Based on our experience in OASIS implementation over the past four 
years, the Commission has refined the estimate of reporting entities 
covered by OASIS regulations. Our latest estimate is that 140 
respondents are required to collect information under the OASIS 
regulations. However, as discussed above, this Final Rule does not 
impose any new information collection burdens. Collectively, the OASIS 
rulemaking information collection is covered by FERC-717 as covered by 
our December 1, 1998 proposed information collection and request for 
comments in Docket No. IC99-717-000, as follows:
    Information Collection Statement:
    Title: FERC-717, Open Access Same-time Information Systems and 
Standards of Conduct.
    Action: Proposed Collection.
    OMB Control No: 1902-0173.
    Respondents: Business or other for profit, including small 
business.
    Frequency of Responses: On Occasion.
    Necessity of the information: The Final Rule issues uniform 
business practices for OASIS Phase IA transactions and path name 
conventions, replaces the Data Dictionary Element 
``ANC__SERVICE__TYPE'' in the OASIS Standards and Communication 
Protocols Document (Version 1.3) with the term ``AS__TYPE,'' and 
clarifies the terms ``DISPLACED,'' ``SUPERSEDED,'' and ``REFUSED'' in 
the Data Dictionary Element and section 4.2.10.2 of the S&CP Document. 
These requirements are intended to support arrangements made for 
wholesale sales and purchases for third parties. Public utilities and/
or their agents will operate under more uniform business practices, 
which will improve the operation of OASIS sites.
    Regulations of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) \189\ 
require OMB to approve certain information collection requirements 
imposed by agency rule. The information collection requirements in this 
Final Rule will be reported directly to transmission users and will be 
subject to subsequent audit by the Commission. The distribution of 
these data will help the Commission carry out its responsibilities 
under Part II of the FPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \189\ 5 CFR 1320.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission is submitting notification of this Final Rule to 
OMB. Persons wishing to comment on the collections of information 
proposed by this Final Rule should direct their comments to: Desk 
Officer for FERC, OMB, Room 10202 NEOB, Washington, D.C. 20503, phone 
202-395-3087, facsimile 202-395-7285. Comments must be filed with OMB 
within 30 days of publication of this document in the Federal Register. 
Three copies of any comments filed with OMB should be sent to the 
following address: Mr. David P. Boergers, Secretary, Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, Room 1A, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 
20426. For further information on the reporting requirements, contact 
Michael Miller at (202) 208-1415.

VII. Effective Date and Congressional Notification

    This rule will take effect May 30, 2000. The Commission has 
determined, with the concurrence of the Administrator of the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and 
Budget, that this Rule is not a ``major rule'' within the meaning of 
section 351 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Act of 
1996.\190\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \190\ 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Rule will be submitted to both Houses of Congress and the 
Comptroller General prior to its publication in the Federal Register.

VIII. Document Availability

    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the 
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an 
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the 
Internet through FERC's Home Page (http://www.ferc.fed.us) and in 
FERC's Public Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 
5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street, NE, Room 2A, Washington, 
DC 20426.
    From FERC's Home Page on the Internet, this information is 
available in both the Commission Issuance Posting System (CIPS) and the 
Records and Information Management System (RIMS).

--CIPS provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the 
Commission since November 14, 1994.

[[Page 17400]]

--CIPS can be accessed using the CIPS link or the Energy Information 
Online icon. The full text of this document is available on CIPS in 
ASCII and WordPerfect 8.0 format for viewing, printing, and/or 
downloading.
--RIMS contains images 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 from FERC's Home Page using the RIMS 
link or the Energy Information Online icon. Descriptions of documents 
back to November 16, 1981, are also available from RIMS-on-the-Web; 
requests for copies of these and other older documents should be 
submitted to the Public Reference Room.

    User assistance is available for RIMS, CIPS, and the Website during 
normal business hours from our Help line at (202) 208-2222 (E-Mail to 
WebMaster@ferc. fed.us) or the Public Reference at (202) 208-1371 (E-
Mail to [email protected]).
    During normal business hours, documents can also be viewed and/or 
printed in FERC's Public Reference Room, where RIMS, CIPS, and the FERC 
Website are available. User assistance is also available.

List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 37

    Conflict of interests, Electric power plants, Electric utilities, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    By the Commission. Commissioner Hebert concurred with a separate 
statement attached.
David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
    In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission hereby adopts the 
attached ``Business Practice Standards for Open Access Same-time 
Information System (OASIS) Transactions'' and amends 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 revising paragraph (b) to read as 
follows:


Sec. 37.5  Obligations of Transmission Providers and Responsible 
Parties.

* * * * *
    (b) A Responsible Party must:
    (1) Provide access to an OASIS providing standardized information 
relevant to the availability of transmission capacity, prices, and 
other information (as described in this Part) pertaining to the 
transmission system for which it is responsible;
    (2) Operate the OASIS in compliance with the standardized 
procedures and protocols found in OASIS Standards and Communication 
Protocols, which can be obtained from the Public Reference and Files 
Maintenance Branch, Room 2A, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 
First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426; and
    (3) Operate the OASIS in compliance with the Business Practice 
Standards for Open Access Same-time Information System (OASIS) 
Transactions, which can be obtained at the same address as provided in 
paragraph (b)(2) of this section.
* * * * *

    Note: This attachment will not appear in the Code of Federal 
Regulations.

Attachment A.--Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Business 
Practice Standards for Open Access Same-Time Information System 
(OASIS) Transactions

Version 1.1 (Issued February 25, 2000)

Table of Contents

Section
Table of Contents
Section 1--Introduction
    1.1  Business Practice Standards
Section 2--Standard Terminology for Transmission and Ancillary 
Services
    2.1  Attribute Values Defining the Period of Service
    2.2  Attribute Values Defining Service Class
    2.3  Attribute Values Defining Service Types
    2.4  Curtailment Priorities
    2.5  Other Service Attribute Values
Section 3--OASIS Registration Procedures
    3.1  Entity Registration
    3.2  Process to Register Non-Standard Service Attribute Values
    3.3  Registration of Points of Receipt and Delivery
Section 4--On-line Negotiation and Confirmation Process
    4.1  On-line Price Negotiation in Short-term Markets
    4.2  Phase IA Negotiation Process State Transition Diagram
    4.3  Negotiations--Without Competing Bids
    4.4  Negotiations--With Competing Bids for Constrained Resources
Section 5--Procurement of Ancillary and Other Services
    5.1  Introduction
    5.2  Transmission Provider Requirements
    5.3  Transmission Customer Requirements
Section 6--Pathnaming Standards
    6.1  Introduction
    6.2  Transmission Provider Requirements

Section 1--Introduction

    This document contains business practice standards designed to 
implement the Commission's policy related to on-line price negotiation 
and to improve the commercial operation of the Open Access Same-Time 
Information System (OASIS).

Section 1.1  Business Practice Standards

    This document adopts OASIS business practice standards as mandatory 
requirements.

Section 2--Standard Terminology for Transmission and Ancillary 
Services

Section 2.1  Attribute Values Defining the Period of Service

    The data templates of the Phase IA Standards & Communication 
Protocols (S&CP) Document have been developed with the use of standard 
service attributes in mind. What the Phase IA S&CP Document does not 
offer are specific definitions for each attribute value. This section 
offers standards for these service attribute definitions to be used in 
conjunction with the Phase IA data templates.
    ``Fixed'' services are associated with transmission services whose 
periods align with calendar periods such as a day, week, or month. 
``Sliding'' services are fixed in duration, such as a week or month, 
but the start and stop time may slide. For example a ``sliding'' week 
could start on Tuesday and end on the following Monday. ``Extended'' 
allows for services in which the start time may ``slide'' and also the 
duration may be longer than a standard length. For example an 
``extended'' week of service could be nine consecutive days. Various 
transmission service offerings using these terms are defined in 
Standards 2.1.1 through 2.1.13 below.
    Table 1-1 identifies the definitions that are proposed as standard 
terminology in OASIS Phase IA for the attributes SERVICE__INCREMENT 
(Hourly, Daily, Weekly, Monthly, and Yearly) and WINDOW (Fixed, 
Sliding, and Extended). A definition is required for each combination 
of SERVICE__INCREMENT and WINDOW, except Hourly Sliding and Hourly 
Extended, which, at the present, are not sufficiently common in the 
market to require standard definitions.

[[Page 17401]]



 Table 1-1.--Standard Service Attribute Definitions Required in Phase IA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Fixed    Sliding    Extended
-----------------------------------------------------------------\1\----
Hourly.................................        X       N/A         N/A
Daily..................................        X         X           X
Weekly.................................        X         X           X
Monthly................................        X         X           X
Yearly.................................        X         X          X
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Included in the Phase IA S&CP Data Dictionary, Version 1.3, issued
  September 29, 1998.

    The existence of a definition in this table does not imply the 
services must be offered by a Transmission Provider. Requirements as to 
which services must be offered are defined by regulation and tariffs.
    Each definition assumes a single time zone specified by the 
Transmission Provider. It is recognized that daylight time switches 
must be accommodated in practice, but they have been omitted in the 
definitions for the purpose of simplicity.
    Standard 2.1: A Transmission Provider shall use the values and 
definitions below for the attributes Service__Increment and Window for 
all transmission services offered on OASIS, or shall post alternative 
attribute values and associated definitions on the OASIS Home Page at 
www.tsin.com, or shall use existing attribute values and definitions 
posted by other Transmission Providers. (See Section 3 for registration 
requirements.)

    Standard 2.1.1: Fixed Hourly--The service starts at the 
beginning of a clock hour and stops at the end of a clock hour.
    Standard 2.1.2: Fixed Daily--The service starts at 00:00 and 
stops at 24:00 of the same calendar date (same as 00:00 of the next 
consecutive calendar date).
    Standard 2.1.3: Fixed Weekly--The service starts at 00:00 on 
Monday and stops at 24:00 of the following Sunday (same as 00:00 of 
the following Monday).
    Standard 2.1.4: Fixed Monthly--The service starts at 00:00 on 
the first date of a calendar month and stops at 24:00 on the last 
date of the same calendar month (same as 00:00 of the first date of 
the next consecutive month).
    Standard 2.1.5: Fixed Yearly--The service starts at 00:00 on the 
first date of a calendar year and ends at 24:00 on the last date of 
the same calendar year (same as 00:00 of the first date of the next 
consecutive year).
    Standard 2.1.6: Sliding Daily--The service starts at the 
beginning of any hour of the day and stops exactly 24 hours later at 
the same time on the next day.
    Standard 2.1.7: Sliding Weekly--The service starts at 00:00 of 
any date and stops exactly 168 hours later at 00:00 on the same day 
of the next week.
    Standard 2.1.8: Sliding Monthly--The service starts at 00:00 of 
any date and stops at 00:00 on the same date of the next month (28-
31 days later). If there is no corresponding date in the following 
month, the service stops at 24:00 on the last day of the next month.
    For example: Sliding Monthly starting at 00:00 on January 30 
would stop at 24:00 on February 28 (same as 00:00 March 1).
    Standard 2.1.9: Sliding Yearly--The service starts at 00:00 of 
any date and stops at 00:00 on the same date of the following year. 
If there is no corresponding date in the following year, the service 
stops at 24:00 on the last day of the same month in the following 
year.
    For example Sliding Yearly service starting on February 29 would 
stop on February 28 of the following year.
    Standard 2.1.10: Extended Daily--The service starts at any hour 
of a day and stops more than 24 hours later and less than 168 hours 
later.
    Standard 2.1.11: Extended Weekly--The service starts at 00:00 of 
any date and stops at 00:00 more than one week later, but less than 
four weeks later.
    Standard 2.1.12: Extended Monthly--The service starts at 00:00 
of any date and stops at 00:00 more than one month later, but less 
than twelve months later.
    Standard 2.1.13: Extended Yearly--The service starts at 00:00 of 
any date and stops at 00:00 more than one year later, but must be 
requested in increments of full years.

Section 2.2  Attribute Values Defining Service Class

    Standard 2.2: A Transmission Provider shall use the values and 
definitions below to describe the service CLASS for transmission 
services offered on OASIS, or shall post alternative attribute values 
and associated definitions on the OASIS Home Page at www.tsin.com, or 
shall use the attribute values and definitions posted by other 
Transmission Providers. (See Section 3 for registration requirements.)

    Standard 2.2.1: Firm--Transmission service that always has 
priority over NON-FIRM transmission service and includes Native Load 
Customers, Network Customers, and any transmission service not 
classified as non-firm in accordance with the definitions in the pro 
forma tariff.
    Standard 2.2.2: Non-Firm--Transmission service that is reserved 
and/or scheduled on an as-available basis and is subject to 
curtailment or interruption at a lesser priority compared to Firm 
transmission service, including Native Load Customers and Network 
Customers, in accordance with the definitions in the pro forma 
tariff.

Section 2.3  Attribute Values Defining Service Types

    Standard 2.3: A Transmission Provider shall use the values and 
definitions below to describe the service TYPE for transmission 
services offered on OASIS, or shall post alternative attribute values 
and associated definitions on the OASIS Home Page at www.tsin.com, or 
shall use the attribute values and definitions posted by other 
Transmission Providers. (See Section 3 for registration requirements.)

    Standard 2.3.1: Point-to-point (PTP)--Transmission service that 
is reserved and/or scheduled between specified Points of Receipt and 
Delivery pursuant to Part II of the pro forma tariff and in 
accordance with the definitions in the pro forma tariff.
    Standard 2.3.2: Network--Network Integration Transmission 
Service that is provided to serve a Network Customer load pursuant 
to Part III of the pro forma tariff and in accordance with the 
definitions in the pro forma tariff.

Section 2.4  Curtailment Priorities

    Standard 2.4: A Transmission Provider that has adopted NERC TLR 
Procedures shall use the curtailment priority definitions contained in 
NERC TLR Procedures for NERC CURTAILMENT PRIORITY (1-7) for all 
transmission services offered on OASIS. A Transmission Provider that 
has adopted alternative curtailment procedures shall post its 
alternative attribute values and associated definitions on the OASIS 
Home Page at www.tsin.com, or shall use attribute values and 
definitions posted by another Transmission Provider. (See Section 3 for 
registration requirements.)

Section 2.5  Other Service Attribute Values

    The Commission has defined six ancillary services in Order No. 888. 
Other services may be offered pursuant to filed tariffs.
    Standard 2.5: A Transmission Provider shall use the definitions 
below to describe the AS__TYPEs offered on OASIS, or shall post 
alternative attribute values and associated definitions on the OASIS 
Home Page at www.tsin.com, or shall use attribute values and 
definitions posted by another Transmission Provider. (See Section 3 for 
registration requirements.)

FERC Ancillary Services Definitions

    Standard 2.5.1: Scheduling, System Control and Dispatch Service 
(SC)--is necessary to the provision of basic transmission service 
within every control area. This service can be provided only by the 
operator of the control area in which the transmission facilities 
used are located. This is because the service is to schedule the 
movement of power through, out of, within, or into the control area. 
This service also includes the dispatch of generating resources to 
maintain generation/load balance and maintain security during the 
transaction and in accordance with section 3.1 (and Schedule 1) of 
the pro forma tariff.
    Standard 2.5.2: Reactive Supply and Voltage Control from 
Generation Sources Service (RV)--is the provision of reactive power 
and voltage control by generating

[[Page 17402]]

facilities under the control of the control area operator. This 
service is necessary to the provision of basic transmission service 
within every control area and in accordance with section 3.2 (and 
Schedule 2) of the pro forma tariff.
    Standard 2.5.3: Regulation and Frequency Response Service (RF)--
is provided for transmission within or into the transmission 
provider's control area to serve load in the area. Customers may be 
able to satisfy the regulation service obligation by providing 
generation with automatic generation control capabilities to the 
control area in which the load resides and in accordance with 
section 3.3 (and Schedule 3) of the pro forma tariff.
    Standard 2.5.4: Energy Imbalance Service (EI)--is the service 
for transmission within and into the transmission provider's control 
area to serve load in the area. Energy imbalance represents the 
deviation between the scheduled and actual delivery of energy to a 
load in the local control area over a single hour and in accordance 
with section 3.4 (and Schedule 4) of the pro forma tariff.
    Standard 2.5.5: Operating Reserve--Spinning Reserve Service 
(SP)--is provided by generating units that are on-line and loaded at 
less than maximum output. They are available to serve load 
immediately in an unexpected contingency, such as an unplanned 
outage of a generating unit and in accordance with section 3.5 (and 
Schedule 5) of the pro forma tariff.
    Standard 2.5.6: Operating Reserve--Supplemental Reserve Service 
(SU)--is generating capacity that can be used to respond to 
contingency situations. Supplemental reserve is not available 
instantaneously, but rather within a short period (usually ten 
minutes). It is provided by generating units that are on-line but 
unloaded, by quick-start generation, and by customer interrupted 
load and in accordance with section 3.6 (and Schedule 6) of the pro 
forma tariff.

Other Service Definitions

    Other services may be offered to Transmission Customers through 
Commission-approved revisions to their individual open access 
tariffs. Examples of other services that may be offered include the 
Interconnected Operations Services described below in Standards 
2.5.7, 2.5.8, and 2.5.9. Ancillary service definitions may be 
offered pursuant to an individual transmission provider's specific 
tariff filings.
    Standard 2.5.7: Dynamic Transfer (DT)--is the provision of the 
real-time monitoring, telemetering, computer software, hardware, 
communications, engineering, and administration required to 
electronically move all or a portion of the real energy services 
associated with a generator or load out of its Host Control Area 
into a different Electronic Control Area.
    Standard 2.5.8: Real Power Transmission Losses (TL)--is the 
provision of capacity and energy to replace energy losses associated 
with transmission service on the Transmission Provider's system.
    Standard 2.5.9: System Black Start Capability (BS)--is the 
provision of generating equipment that, following a system blackout, 
is able to start without an outside electrical supply. Furthermore, 
Black Start Capability is capable of being synchronized to the 
transmission system such that it can provide a startup supply source 
for other system capacity that can then be likewise synchronized to 
the transmission system to supply load as part of a process of re-
energizing the transmission system.

Section 3--OASIS Registration Procedures

Section 3.1  Entity Registration

    Operation of OASIS requires unambiguous identification of 
parties.
    Standard 3.1: All entities or persons using OASIS shall register 
the identity of their organization (including DUNS number) or person 
at the OASIS Home Page at www.tsin.com. Registration identification 
shall include the parent entity (if any) of the registrant. 
Registration shall be a prerequisite to OASIS usage and renewed 
annually and whenever changes in identification occur and 
thereafter. An entity or person not complying with this requirement 
may be denied access by a transmission provider to that transmission 
provider's OASIS node.
    The registration requirement applies to any entity logging onto 
OASIS for the purpose of using or updating information, including 
Transmission Providers, Transmission Customers, Observers, Control 
Areas, Security Coordinators, and Independent System Operators.

Section 3.2  Process To Register Non-Standard Service Attribute Values

    Section 2 of the OASIS business practice standards addresses the 
use of standard terminology in defining services on OASIS. These 
standard definitions for service attribute values will be posted 
publicly on the OASIS Home Page at www.tsin.com and may be used by 
all Transmission Providers to offer transmission and ancillary 
services on OASIS. If the Transmission Provider determines that the 
standard definitions are not applicable, the Transmission Provider 
may register new attribute values and definitions on the OASIS Home 
Page. Any Transmission Provider may use the attribute values and 
definitions posted by another Transmission Provider.
    Standard 3.2: Providers of transmission and ancillary services 
shall use only attribute values and definitions that have been 
registered on the OASIS Home Page at www.tsin.com for all 
transmission and ancillary services offered on their OASIS.
    Standard 3.3: Providers of transmission and ancillary services 
should endeavor to use on their OASIS nodes attribute values and 
definitions that have been posted by other Transmission Providers on 
the OASIS Home Page at www.tsin.com whenever possible.

Section 3.3  Registration of Points of Receipt and Delivery

    In order to improve coordination of path naming and to enhance the 
identification of commercially available connection points between 
Transmission Providers and regions, the business practice for Phase IA 
OASIS requires that:

     Transmission Providers register at the OASIS Home Page 
at www.tsin.com, all service points (Points of Receipt and Delivery) 
for which transmission service is available over the OASIS.
     Each Transmission Provider would then indicate on its 
OASIS node, for each Path posted on its OASIS node, the Points of 
Receipt and Delivery to which each Path is connected.
    A Transmission Provider is not required to register specific 
generating stations as Points of Receipt, unless they were available 
as service points for the purposes of reserving transmission service 
on OASIS. The requirement also does not include registration of 
regional flowgates, unless they are service points for the purposes 
of reserving transmission on OASIS.
    Standard 3.4: A Transmission Provider shall register and 
thereafter maintain on the OASIS Home Page at www.tsin.com all 
Points of Receipt and Delivery to and from which a Transmission 
Customer may reserve and schedule transmission service.
    Standard 3.5: For each reservable Path posted on their OASIS 
nodes, Transmission Providers shall indicate the available Point(s) 
of Receipt and Delivery for that Path. These Points of Receipt and 
Delivery shall be from the list registered on the OASIS Home Page at 
www.tsin.com.
    Standard 3.6: When two or more Transmission Providers share 
common Points of Receipt or Delivery, or when a Path connects Points 
of Receipt and Delivery in neighboring systems, the Transmission 
Providers owning and/or operating those facilities should apply 
consistent names for those connecting paths or common paths on the 
OASIS.

Section 4--On-line Negotiation and Confirmation Process

Section 4.1  On-line Price Negotiation in Short-term Markets

    Standard 4.1: Consistent with FERC policy and regulations, all 
reservations and price negotiations should be conducted on OASIS.
    Standard 4.2: Reserved.
    Standard 4.3: Reserved.

Section 4.2  Phase IA Negotiation Process State Transition Diagram

    The Phase IA S&CP Document provides a process state diagram to 
define the Customer and Transmission Provider interactions for 
negotiating transmission service. This diagram defines allowable 
steps in the reservation request, negotiation, approval and 
confirmation.
    Standard 4.4: The state diagram appearing in Exhibit 4-1 in 
Section 4.2.10.2 of the Version 1.3 of the S&CP Document constitutes 
a recommended business practice in OASIS Phase IA.
    Standard 4.5: The definitions in Section 4.2.10.2 of the Version 
1.3 of the S&CP Document (status values) should be applied to the 
process states in OASIS Phase IA.
    Table 4-1 `` Reserved.

[[Page 17403]]

Section 4.3  Negotiations--Without Competing Bids

    The following practices are defined in order to enhance consistency 
of the reservation process across OASIS Phase IA nodes.

    Standard 4.6: A Transmission Provider/Seller shall respond to a 
Customer's service request, consistent with filed tariffs, within 
the ``Provider Response Time Limit'' defined in Table 4-2 
``Reservation Timing Requirements.'' The time limit is measured from 
the time the request is QUEUED. A Transmission Provider may respond 
by setting the state of the reservation request to one of the 
following:

 INVALID
 DECLINED
 REFUSED
 COUNTEROFFER
 ACCEPTED
 STUDY (when the tariff allows), leading to REFUSED, 
COUNTEROFFER, or ACCEPTED.

    Standard 4.7: Prior to setting a request to ACCEPTED, 
COUNTEROFFER, or REFUSED a Transmission Provider shall evaluate the 
appropriate resources and ascertain that the requested transfer 
capability is (or is not) available.
    Standard 4.8: For any request that is REFUSED or INVALID, the 
Transmission Provider must indicate in the STATUS__COMMENT field of 
the TRANSSTATUS template the reason the request was refused or 
invalid.
    Standard 4.9: The Customer may change a request from QUEUED, 
RECEIVED, STUDY, COUNTEROFFER, REBID, or ACCEPTED to WITHDRAWN at 
any time prior to CONFIRMED.
    Standard 4.10: From ACCEPTED or COUNTEROFFER, a Customer may 
change the status to CONFIRMED or WITHDRAWN. In addition, a Customer 
may change the status from COUNTEROFFER to REBID. The Customer has 
the amount of time designated as ``Customer Confirmation Time 
Limit'' in Table 4-2 ``Reservation Timing Requirements'' to change 
the state of the request to CONFIRMED. The Customer time limit is 
measured from the first time the request is moved to ACCEPTED or 
COUNTEROFFER, and is not reset with subsequent iterations of 
negotiation.
    Standard 4.11: After expiration of the ``Customer Confirmation 
Time Limit,'' specified in Table 4-2 ``Reservation Timing 
Requirements,'' the Transmission Provider has a right to move the 
request to the RETRACTED state.
    Standard 4.12: Should the Customer elect to respond to a 
Transmission Provider's COUNTEROFFER by moving a reservation request 
to REBID, the Transmission Provider shall respond by taking the 
request to a DECLINED, ACCEPTED, or COUNTEROFFER state within the 
``Provider Counter Time Limit,'' specified in Table 4-2 
``Reservation Timing Requirements.'' The Transmission Provider 
response time is measured from the most recent REBID time.
    Standard 4.13: The following timing requirements should apply to 
all reservation requests:

                                                       Table 4-2.--Reservation Timing Requirements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                           Customer
                                                                                                       confirmation time
              Class                  Service increment   Time QUEUED prior to   Provider evaluation     limit \2\ after     Provider counter time limit
                                                                 start            time limit \1\          ACCEPTED or             after REBID \4\
                                                                                                       COUNTEROFFER \3\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Firm.........................  Hourly..............  1 hour..............  Best effort.........  5 minutes...........  5 minutes.
Non-Firm.........................  Hourly..............  >1 hour.............  30 minutes..........  5 minutes...........  5 minutes.
Non-Firm.........................  Hourly..............  Day ahead...........  30 minutes..........  30 minutes..........  10 minutes.
Non-Firm.........................  Daily...............  N/A.................  30 minutes..........  2 hours.............  10 minutes.
Non-Firm.........................  Weekly..............  N/A.................  4 hours.............  24 hours............  4 hours.
Non-Firm.........................  Monthly.............  N/A.................  2 days \5\..........  24 hours............  4 hours.
Firm.............................  Daily...............  24 hours............  Best effort.........  2 hours.............  30 minutes.
Firm.............................  Daily...............  N/A.................  30 days \6\.........  24 hours............  4 hours.
Firm.............................  Weekly..............  N/A.................  30 days \6\.........  48 hours............  4 hours.
Firm.............................  Monthly.............  N/A.................  30 days \6\.........  4 days..............  4 hours.
Firm.............................  Yearly..............  60 days    30 days.............  15 days.............  4 hours.
                                                          \7\.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes for Table 4-2:
\1\ Consistent with regulations and filed tariffs, measurement starts at the time the request is QUEUED.
\2\ Confirmation time limits are not to be interpreted to extend scheduling deadlines or to override preexemption deadlines.
\3\ Measurement starts at the time the request is first moved to either ACCEPTED or COUNTEROFFER. The time limit does not reset on subsequent changes of
  state.
\4\ Measurement starts at the time the Transmission Customer changes the state to REBID. The measurement resets each time the request is changed to
  REBID.
\5\ Days are defined as calendar days.
\6\ Subject to expedited time requirements of Section 17.1 of the pro forma tariff. Transmission Providers should make best efforts to respond within 72
  hours, or prior to the scheduling deadline, whichever is earlier, to a request for Daily Firm Service received during period 2-30 days ahead of the
  service start time.
\7\ Subject to Section 17.1 of the pro forma tariff, whenever feasible and on a non-discriminatory basis, transmission providers should accommodate
  requests made with less than 60 days notice.

Section 4.4  Negotiations--With Competing Bids for Constrained 
Resources

    Competing bids exist when multiple requests cannot be accommodated 
due to a lack of available transmission capacity. One general rule is 
that OASIS requests should be evaluated and granted priority on a 
first-come-first-served basis established by OASIS QUEUED time. Thus, 
the first to request service should get it, all else being equal.
    Exceptions to this first-come-first-served basis occur when there 
are competing requests for limited resources and the requests have 
different priorities established by FERC regulations and filed tariffs. 
Prior to the introduction of price negotiations, the attribute values 
that have served as a basis for determining priority include:

     Type (Network, Point-to-point)
     Class (Firm, Non-Firm)
     Increment (Hourly, Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Yearly)
     Duration (the amount of time between the Start Date and 
the Stop Date)
     Amount (the MW amount)
    Under a negotiation model, price can also be used as an attribute 
for determining priority. The negotiation process increases the 
possibility that a Transmission Provider will be evaluating multiple 
requests that cannot all be accommodated due to limited resources. In 
this scenario, it is possible that an unconfirmed request with an 
earlier QUEUED time could be preempted (SUPERSEDED). For this to occur, 
the subsequent request would be of higher priority or of greater price.

    Standard 4.14: Consistent with regulations and filed tariffs, 
the following are recommended relative priorities of Service Request 
Tiers. Specific exceptions may exist in accordance with filed 
tariffs. The priorities

[[Page 17404]]

refer only to negotiation of service and do not refer to curtailment 
priority.

4.4.1. Service Request Tier 1: Native load, Network, or Long-term 
Firm
4.4.2. Service Request Tier 2: Short-term Firm
4.4.3. Service Request Tier 3: Network Service From Non-designated 
Resources
4.4.4. Service Request Tier 4: Non-firm
4.4.5. Service Request Tier 5: Non-firm Point-to-point Service over 
secondary receipt and delivery points

    Standard 4.15: Consistent with regulations and filed tariffs, 
reservation requests should be handled in a first-come-first-served 
order based on QUEUE__TIME.
    Standard 4.16: Consistent with regulations and filed tariffs, 
Table 4-3 describes the relative priorities of competing service 
requests and rules for offering right-of-first-refusal. While the 
table indicates the relative priorities of two competing requests, 
it also is intended to be applied in the more general case of more 
than two competing requests.

                            Table 4-3.--Priorities for Competing Reservation Requests
          [Note: The term Tier is introduced to avoid confusion with existing terms such as TS__CLASS.]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                               Right of first
           Row                   Request 1                Is preempted by request 2                refusal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1........................  Tier 1: Long-term      N/A--Not preempted by a subsequent        N/A
                            Firm, Native Load,     request.
                            and Network Firm.
2........................  Tier 2: Short-term     Tier 1: Long-term Firm, Native Load, and  No.
                            Firm.                  Network Firm, while Request 1 is
                                                   conditional. Once Request 1 is
                                                   unconditional, it may not be preempted.
3........................  Tier 2: Short-term     Tier 2: Short-term Firm of longer term    Yes, while Request 1
                            Firm.                  (duration), while Request 1 is            is conditional.
                                                   conditional. Once Request 1 is            Once Request 1 is
                                                   unconditional, it may not be preempted    unconditional, it
                                                   \1\.                                      may not be
                                                                                             preempted and right
                                                                                             of first refusal is
                                                                                             not applicable.
4........................  Tier 3: Network        Tiers 1 and 2: All Firm (including        No.
                            Service From Non-      Network).
                            Designated Resources.
5........................  Tier 4: All Non-Firm   Tiers 1 and 2: All Firm (including        No.
                            PTP.                   Network).
6........................  Tier 4: All Non-Firm   Tier 3: Network Service from Non-         No.
                            PTP.                   Designated Resources.
7........................  Tier 4: All Non-Firm   Tier 4: Non-firm PTP of a longer term     Yes.\2\
                            PTP.                   (duration).\1\ Except in the last hour
                                                   prior to start (See Standard 4.23).
8........................  Tier 4: All Non-Firm   Tier 4: Non-firm PTP of equal term        Yes.
                            PTP.                   (duration) \1\ and higher price, when
                                                   Request 1 is still unconfirmed and
                                                   Request 2 is received pre-confirmed. A
                                                   confirmed non-firm PTP may not be
                                                   preempted for another non-firm request
                                                   of equal duration. (See Standards 4.22
                                                   and 4.25.).
9........................  Tier 5: Non-firm PTP   Tier 5 can be preempted by Tiers 1        No.
                            Service over           through 4.
                            secondary receipt
                            and delivery points.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Longer duration, in addition to being higher SERVICE__INCREMENT (i.e., WEEKLY has priority over DAILY), also
  may mean more multiples of the same SERVICE__INCREMENT (i.e., 3 days may have priority over 2 days). Multiple
  service increments must be at the same level of capacity.
\2\ Right of first refusal applies only to confirmed requests.

    Standard 4.17: For a reservation request that is preempted, the 
Transmission Provider must indicate the Assignment Reference Number 
of the reservation that preempted the reservation request in the 
Seller Comment field of the preempted request.
    Standard 4.18: Given competing requests for a limited resource 
and a right-of-first-refusal is not required to be offered, the 
Transmission Provider may immediately move requests in the CONFIRMED 
state to DISPLACED, or from an ACCEPTED or COUNTEROFFER state to 
SUPERSEDED, if the competing request is of higher priority, based on 
the rules represented in Table 4-3. These state changes require 
dynamic notification to the Customer if the Customer has requested 
dynamic notification on OASIS.
    Standard 4.19: In those cases where right-of-first-refusal is 
required to be offered, the Transmission Provider shall notify the 
Customer, through the use of a COUNTEROFFER, of the opportunity to 
match the subsequent offer.
    Standard 4.20: A Customer who has been extended a right-of-
first-refusal should have a confirmation time limit equal to the 
lesser of (a) the Customer Confirmation Time Limit in Table 4-2 or 
(b) 24 hours.
    Standard 4.21: A Transmission Provider shall apply all rights-
of-first-refusal in a non-discriminatory and open manner for all 
Customers.
    Standard 4.22: Once a non-firm PTP request has been confirmed, 
it shall not be displaced by a subsequent non-firm PTP request of 
equal duration and higher price.
    Standard 4.23: A confirmed, non-firm PTP reservation for the 
next hour shall not be displaced within one hour of the start of the 
reservation by a subsequent non-firm PTP reservation request of 
longer duration.
    Standard 4.24: A Transmission Provider should accept any 
reservation request submitted for an unconstrained Path if the 
Customer's bid price is equal to or greater than the Transmission 
Provider's posted offer price at the time the request was queued, 
even if later requests are submitted at a higher price. This 
standard applies even when the first request is still unconfirmed, 
unless the Customer Confirmation Time Limit has expired for the 
first request.
    Standard 4.25: Once an offer to provide non-firm PTP 
transmission service at a given price is extended to a Customer by 
the Transmission Provider, and while this first request is still 
unconfirmed but within the Customer Confirmation Time Limit, the 
Transmission Provider should not preempt or otherwise alter the 
status of that first request on receipt of a subsequent request of 
the same Tier and equal duration at a higher price, unless the 
subsequent request is submitted as pre-confirmed.
    Standard 4.26: If during a negotiation of service (i.e., prior 
to Customer confirmation) a subsequent pre-confirmed request for 
service over the same limited resource of equal duration but higher 
price is received, the Transmission Provider must COUNTEROFFER the 
price of service on the prior COUNTEROFFER or ACCEPTED price to 
match the competing offer, in order to give the first Customer an 
opportunity to match the offer. This practice must be implemented in 
a non-discriminatory manner.

[[Page 17405]]

Section 5--Procurement of Ancillary and Other Services

Section 5.1  Introduction

    Phase IA OASIS data templates allow the coupling of ancillary 
service arrangements with the purchase of transmission service for the 
purpose of simplifying the overall process for Customers. Transmission 
Providers must indicate (consistent with filed tariffs), which services 
are MANDATORY (must be taken from the Primary Transmission Provider), 
REQUIRED (must be provided for but may be procured from alternative 
sources), or OPTIONAL (not required as a condition of transmission 
service).
    The Transmission Customer should make known to the Transmission 
Provider at the time of the reservation request certain options related 
to arrangement of ancillary services. The Transmission Customer may 
indicate:
     I will take all the MANDATORY and REQUIRED ancillary 
services from the Primary Transmission Provider.
     I will take REQUIRED ancillary services from Third Party 
Seller ``X''.
     I would like to purchase OPTIONAL services.
     I will self provide ancillary services.
     I will arrange for ancillary services in the future (prior 
to scheduling).
    While these interactions are available in the Phase IA S&CP 
Document, there is a need to clarify the associated business practices. 
The standards in Section 5 apply to services defined in filed tariffs.

Section 5.2  Transmission Provider Requirements

    Standard 5.1: The Transmission Provider shall designate which 
ancillary services are MANDATORY, REQUIRED, or OPTIONAL for each 
offered transmission service or each transmission path to the extent 
these requirements can be determined in advance of the submittal of 
a reservation request on a specific Path by a Transmission Customer.
    Standard 5.2: A Transmission Provider shall modify a 
Transmission Customer's service request to indicate the Transmission 
Provider as the SELLER of any ancillary service, which is MANDATORY, 
to be taken from the Transmission Provider.
    Standard 5.3: For REQUIRED and OPTIONAL services, the 
Transmission Provider shall not select a SELLER of ancillary service 
without the Transmission Customer first selecting that SELLER.
    Standard 5.4: A Transmission Provider may accept a Transmission 
Customer's request for an ancillary service, which is not MANDATORY 
or REQUIRED, but shall indicate to the Transmission Customer at the 
time of acceptance under PROVIDER COMMENTS that the service is not 
MANDATORY or REQUIRED.

Section 5.3  Transmission Customer Requirements

    Standard 5.5: The Transmission Customer should indicate with the 
submittal of a transmission reservation request, the preferred 
options for provision of ancillary services, such as the desire to 
use an alternative resource. The Transmission Provider shall post 
itself as the default ancillary service provider, if a Transmission 
Customer fails to indicate a third party SELLER of ancillary 
services. However, the Transmission Customer may change this 
designation at a later date, so long as this change is made prior to 
the Transmission Provider's scheduling deadline.
    Standard 5.6: A Transmission Customer may, but is not required 
to, indicate a third party SELLER of ancillary services, if these 
services are arranged by the Transmission Customer off the OASIS and 
if such arrangements are permitted by the Transmission Provider's 
tariff. The Transmission Provider shall post itself as the default 
ancillary service provider, if a Transmission Customer fails to 
indicate a third party SELLER of ancillary services. However, the 
Transmission Customer may change this designation at a later date, 
so long as this change is made prior to the Transmission Provider's 
scheduling deadline.

Section 6--Pathnaming Standards

Section 6.1  Introduction

    The Data Element Dictionary of the OASIS S&CP Document, Version 
1.3, defines a path name in terms of a 50-character alphanumeric 
string:
RR/TPTP/PATHPATHPATH/OPTIONALFROM-OPTIONALTOTO/SPR
RegionCode/TransmissionProviderCode/PathName/OptionalFrom-To(POR-POD)/
Spare
    This definition leaves it to the Transmission Providers to name the 
paths from their own perspective. The following standards provide an 
unambiguous convention for naming paths and will produce more 
consistent path names.

Section 6.2  Transmission Provider Requirements

    Standard 6.1: A transmission provider shall use the path naming 
convention defined in the S&CP Data Dictionary for the naming of all 
reservable paths posted on OASIS.
    Standard 6.2: A transmission provider shall use the third field 
in the path name to indicate the sending and receiving control 
areas. The control areas shall be designated using standard NERC 
codes for the control areas, separated by a hyphen. For example, the 
first three fields of the path name will be:

RR/TPTP/CAXX-CAYY/

    Standard 6.3: A transmission provider shall use the fourth field 
of the path name to indicate POR and POD separated by a hyphen. For 
example, a path with a specific POR/POD would be shown as:

RR/TPTP/CAXX-CAYY/PORPORPORPOR-PODPODPODPOD/

    If the POR and POD are designated as control areas, then the 
fourth field may be left blank (as per the example in 6.2).
    Standard 6.4: A transmission provider may designate a sub-level 
for Points of Receipt and Delivery. For example, a customer reserves 
a path to POD AAAA. The ultimate load may be indeterminate at the 
time. Later, the customer schedules energy to flow to a particular 
load that may be designated by the transmission provider as a sub-
level Point of Delivery. This option is necessary to ensure certain 
transmission providers are not precluded from using more specific 
service points by the inclusion of the POR/POD in the path name. All 
sub-level PORs and PODs must be registered as such on www.tsin.com.

    [Note: This attachment will not appear in the Code of Federal 
Regulations.]

    Sections 13.2, 14.2, 14.7, and 17.5 of the pro forma tariff provide 
as follows:

    13.2  Reservation Priority: Long-Term Firm Point-To-Point 
Transmission Service shall be available on a first-come, first-
served basis i.e., in the chronological sequence in which each 
Transmission Customer has reserved service. Reservations for Short-
Term Firm Point-To-Point Transmission Service will be conditional 
based upon the length of the requested transaction. If the 
Transmission System becomes oversubscribed, requests for longer term 
service may preempt requests for shorter term service up to the 
following deadlines; one day before the commencement of daily 
service, one week before the commencement of weekly service, and one 
month before the commencement of monthly service. Before the 
conditional reservation deadline, if available transmission 
capability is insufficient to satisfy all Applications, an Eligible 
Customer with a reservation for shorter term service has the right 
of first refusal to match any longer term reservation before losing 
its reservation priority. A longer term competing request for Short-
Term Firm Point-To-Point Transmission Service will be granted if the 
Eligible Customer with the right of first refusal does not agree to 
match the competing request within 24 hours (or earlier if necessary 
to comply with the scheduling deadlines provided in section 13.8) 
from being notified by the Transmission Provider of a longer-term 
competing request for Short-Term Firm Point-To-Point Transmission 
Service. After the conditional reservation deadline, service will 
commence pursuant to the terms of Part II of the Tariff. Firm Point-
To-Point Transmission Service will always have a reservation 
priority over Non-Firm Point-To-Point Transmission Service under the 
Tariff. All Long-Term Firm Point-To-Point Transmission Service will 
have equal reservation priority with Native Load Customers and 
Network Customers. Reservation priorities for existing firm service 
customers are provided in Section 2.2.
    14.2  Reservation Priority: Non-Firm Point-To-Point Transmission 
Service shall be

[[Page 17406]]

available from transmission capability in excess of that needed for 
reliable service to Native Load Customers, Network Customers and 
other Transmission Customers taking Long-Term and Short-Term Firm 
Point-To-Point Transmission Service. A higher priority will be 
assigned to reservations with a longer duration of service. In the 
event the Transmission System is constrained, competing requests of 
equal duration will be prioritized based on the highest price 
offered by the Eligible Customer for the Transmission Service. 
Eligible Customers that have already reserved shorter term service 
have the right of first refusal to match any longer term reservation 
before being preempted. A longer-term competing request for Non-Firm 
Point-To-Point Transmission Service will be granted if the Eligible 
Customer with the right of first refusal does not agree to match the 
competing request: (a) immediately for hourly Non-Firm Point-To-
Point Transmission Service after notification by the Transmission 
Provider; and, (b) within 24 hours (or earlier if necessary to 
comply with the scheduling deadlines provided in section 14.6) for 
Non-Firm Point-To-Point Transmission Service other than hourly 
transactions after notification by the Transmission Provider. 
Transmission service for Network Customers from resources other than 
designated Network Resources will have a higher priority than any 
Non-Firm Point-To-Point Transmission Service. Non-Firm Point-To-
Point Transmission Service over secondary Point(s) of Receipt and 
Point(s) of Delivery will have the lowest reservation priority under 
the Tariff.
    14.7  Curtailment or Interruption of Service: The Transmission 
Provider reserves the right to Curtail, in whole or in part, Non-
Firm Point-To-Point Transmission Service provided under the Tariff 
for reliability reasons when, an emergency or other unforeseen 
condition threatens to impair or degrade the reliability of its 
Transmission System. The Transmission Provider reserves the right to 
Interrupt, in whole or in part, Non-Firm Point-To-Point Transmission 
Service provided under the Tariff for economic reasons in order to 
accommodate (1) a request for Firm Transmission Service, (2) a 
request for Non-Firm Point-To-Point Transmission Service of greater 
duration, (3) a request for Non-Firm Point-To-Point Transmission 
Service of equal duration with a higher price, or (4) transmission 
service for Network Customers from non-designated resources. The 
Transmission Provider also will discontinue or reduce service to the 
Transmission Customer to the extent that deliveries for transmission 
are discontinued or reduced at the Point(s) of Receipt. Where 
required, Curtailments or Interruptions will be made on a non-
discriminatory basis to the transaction(s) that effectively relieve 
the constraint, however, Non-Firm Point-To-Point Transmission 
Service shall be subordinate to Firm Transmission Service. If 
multiple transactions require Curtailment or Interruption, to the 
extent practicable and consistent with Good Utility Practice, 
Curtailments or Interruptions will be made to transactions of the 
shortest term (e.g.,hourly non-firm transactions will be Curtailed 
or Interrupted before daily non-firm transactions and daily non-firm 
transactions will be Curtailed or Interrupted before weekly non-firm 
transactions). Transmission service for Network Customers from 
resources other than designated Network Resources will have a higher 
priority than any Non-Firm Point-To-Point Transmission Service under 
the Tariff. Non-Firm Point-To-Point Transmission Service over 
secondary Point(s) of Receipt and Point(s) of Delivery will have a 
lower priority than any Non-Firm Point-to-Point Transmission Service 
under the Tariff. the Transmission Provider will provide advance 
notice of Curtailment or Interruption where such notice can be 
provided consistent with Good utility Practice.
    17.5  Response to a Completed Application: Following receipt of 
a Completed Application for Firm Point-To-Point Transmission 
Service, the Transmission Provider shall make a determination of 
available transmission capability as required in Section 15.2. the 
Transmission Provider shall notify the Eligible customer as soon as 
practicable, but not later than thirty (30) days after the date of 
receipt of a Completed Application either (i) if it will be able to 
provide service without performing a System Impact Study or (ii) if 
such a study is needed to evaluate the impact of the application 
pursuant to Section 19.1. Responses by the Transmission Provider 
must be made as soon as practicable to all completed application 
(including applications by its own merchant function) and the timing 
of such responses must be made on a non-discriminatory basis.

    [Note: This attachment will not appear in the Code of Federal 
Regulations.]

Attachment C

Section 4.2.10.2 of the S&CP Document is revised to provide as follows:

4.2.10.2  Status Values

    The possible STATUS values are:
    QUEUED=initial status assigned by TSIP on receipt of ``customer 
services purchase request.''
    INVALID=assigned by TSIP or Provider indicating an invalid field 
in the request, such as improper POR, POD, source, sink, etc. (Final 
state).
    RECEIVED=assigned by Provider or Seller to acknowledge QUEUED 
requests and indicate the service request is being evaluated, 
including for completing the required ancillary services.
    STUDY=assigned by Provider or Seller to indicate some level of 
study is required or being performed to evaluate service request.
    REFUSED=assigned by Provider or Seller to indicate service 
request has been denied due to lack of availability of transmission 
capability. SELLER__COMMENTS should be used to communicate details 
for denial of service. (Final state).
    COUNTEROFFER=assigned by Provider or Seller to indicate that a 
new OFFER__PRICE is being proposed.
    REBID=assigned by Customer to indicate that a new BID__PRICE is 
being proposed.
    SUPERSEDED=assigned by Provider or Seller when a request which 
has not yet been confirmed is preempted by another reservation 
request. (Final state).
    ACCEPTED=assigned by Provider or Seller to indicate the service 
request at the designated OFFER__PRICE has been approved/accepted. 
If the reservation request was submitted PRECONFIRMED, the OASIS 
Node shall immediately set the reservation status to CONFIRMED. 
Depending upon the type of ancillary services required, the Seller 
may or may not require all ancillary service reservations to be 
completed before accepting a request.
    DECLINED=assigned by Provider or Seller to indicate that the 
BID_PRICE is unacceptable and that negotiations are terminated. 
SELLER__COMMENTS should be used to communicate reason for denial of 
service. (Final state).
    CONFIRMED=assigned by Customer in response to Provider or Seller 
posting ``ACCEPTED'' status, to confirm service. Once a request has 
been ``CONFIRMED,'' a transmission service reservation exists. 
(Final state, unless overridden by DISPLACED or ANNULLED state).
    WITHDRAWN=assigned by Customer at any point in request 
evaluation to withdraw the request from any further action. (Final 
state).
    DISPLACED=assigned by Provider or Seller when a ``CONFIRMED'' 
reservation from a Customer is replaced by a longer term reservation 
and the Customer has not exercised right of first refusal, if any 
(i.e., refused to match terms of new request). (Final state).
    ANNULLED=assigned by Provider or Seller when, by mutual 
agreement with the Customer, a confirmed reservation is to be 
voided. (Final state).
    RETRACTED=assigned by Provider or Seller when the Customer fails 
to confirm or withdraw the request within the required time period. 
(Final state).

    [Note: This attachment will not appear in the Code of Federal 
Regulations.]

Attachment D.--Data Element Dictionary

[[Page 17407]]



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Field format: minimum characters
    Data dictionary element name                      Alias                  {type of ASCII} maximum characters           Restricted values                   Definition of data element
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFFILIATE_FLAG                        AFFLAG                                {ALPHANUMERIC}3                      Valid Values                         Set to YES if customer is an affiliate of
                                                                                                                 YES                                   the provider
                                                                                                                 NO
ANC_SVC_LINK                          ANCSVCLINK                            0{ ALPHANUMERIC} 300                 Formatted string as follows:         The method for linking ancillary services
                                                                                                                  SC:(AA); RV: (AA); RF:               to a transmission service request. The
                                                                                                                  (AA[:xxx[:yyy[:nnn]]]); EI:       provider and capacity of each ancillary
                                                                                                                  (AA[:xxx[:yyy[:nnn]]]); SP:       service is identified using the formatted
                                                                                                                  (AA[:xxx[:yyy[:nnn]]]); SU:       string: SC:(AA); RV: (AA); RF:
                                                                                                                  (AA[:xxx[:yyy[:nnn]]]);           (AA[:xxx[:yyy[:nnn]]]); EI:
                                                                                                                  {Registered}: (AA[:xxx[:yyy[       (AA[:xxx[:yyy[:nnn]]]); SP:
                                                                                                                  :nnn]]])                             (AA[:xxx[:yyy[:nnn]]]); SU:
                                                                                                                                                       (AA[:xxx[:yyy[:nnn]]]);
                                                                                                                                                       {Registered}:(AA[:xxx[:yyy[:nnn]]]) where
                                                                                                                                                       AA is the appropriate
                                                                                                                                                       PRIMARY_PROVIDER_CODE, SELLER_CODE, or
                                                                                                                                                       CUSTOMER_CODE, and represents the company
                                                                                                                                                       providing the ancillary services. ``AA''
                                                                                                                                                       may be unspecified for ``xxx'' type
                                                                                                                                                       identical to ``FT'', in which case the
                                                                                                                                                       ``:'' character must be present and
                                                                                                                                                       precede the ``FT'' type.
                                                                                                                                                      If multiple ``AA'' terms are necessary,
                                                                                                                                                       then each ``AA'' grouping will be
                                                                                                                                                       enclosed within parenthesis, with the
                                                                                                                                                       overall group subordinate to the
                                                                                                                                                       ANC_SVC_TYPE specified within
                                                                                                                                                       parenthesis.
 
                                                                                                                                                      and where xxx represents either:
                                                                                                                                                        --``FT'' to indicate that the Customer
                                                                                                                                                         will determine ancillary services at a
                                                                                                                                                         future time, or
                                                                                                                                                      --``SP'' to indicate that the Customer
                                                                                                                                                       will self-provide the ancillary services,
                                                                                                                                                       or
                                                                                                                                                        --``RQ'' to indicate that the Customer
                                                                                                                                                       is asking the OASIS Node to initiate the
                                                                                                                                                       process for making an ancillary services
                                                                                                                                                       reservation with the indicated Provider
                                                                                                                                                       or Seller on behalf of the Customer. The
                                                                                                                                                       Customer must then continue the
                                                                                                                                                       reservation process with the Provider or
                                                                                                                                                       Seller. If the transmission services
                                                                                                                                                       request is for preconfirmed service, then
                                                                                                                                                       the ancillary services shall also be
                                                                                                                                                       preconfirmed, or
                                                                                                                                                        --``AR'' to indicate an assignment
                                                                                                                                                         reference number sequence follows.
                                                                                                                                                      The terms ``yyy'' and ``nnn'' are
                                                                                                                                                       subordinate to the xxx type of ``AR''.
                                                                                                                                                       yyy represents the ancillary services
                                                                                                                                                       reservation number (ASSIGNMENT_REF) and
                                                                                                                                                       nnn represents the capacity of the
                                                                                                                                                       reserved ancillary services. Square
                                                                                                                                                       brackets are used to indicated optional
                                                                                                                                                       elements and are not used in the actual
                                                                                                                                                       linkage itself. Specifically, the :yyy is
                                                                                                                                                       applicable to only the ``AR'' term and
                                                                                                                                                       the :nnn may optionally be left off if
                                                                                                                                                       the capacity of ancillary services is the
                                                                                                                                                       same as for the transmission services,
                                                                                                                                                       and optionally multiple ancillary
                                                                                                                                                       reservations may be indicated by
                                                                                                                                                       additional (xxx[:yyy[:nnn]]) enclosed
                                                                                                                                                       within parenthesis. If no capacity amount
                                                                                                                                                       is indicated, the required capacity is
                                                                                                                                                       assumed to come from the ancillary
                                                                                                                                                       reservations in the order indicated in
                                                                                                                                                       the codes, on an ``as-needed'' basis.
ANC_SVC_REQ                           ANCSVCREQ                             0{ALPHANUMERIC} 100                  EI:{M,R,O,U}; SP:{M,R,O,U};          Ancillary services required for a
                                                                                                                  SU:{M,R,O,U}; RV:{M,R,O,U};          transmission services offering. The
                                                                                                                  RF:{M,R,O,U}; SC:{M,R,O,U};          appropriate letter {M,R,O,U} will be
                                                                                                                   {registered}:{M,R,O,U}              assigned to each of the six Proforma Ferc
                                                                                                                                                       ancillary services (see AS_TYPE), where
                                                                                                                                                       the letters mean the following:
                                                                                                                                                       (M) Mandatory, which implies that
                                                                                                                                                       the Primary Provider must provide the
                                                                                                                                                       ancillary service.
                                                                                                                    (R) Required, which
                                                                                                                  implies that the ancillary service
                                                                                                                  is required, but not necessarily
                                                                                                                  from the Primary Provider.
                                                                                                                    (O) Optional, which
                                                                                                                  implies that the ancillary service
                                                                                                                  is not necessarily required, but
                                                                                                                  could be provided.
                                                                                                                    (U) Unknown, which
                                                                                                                  implies that the requirements for
                                                                                                                  the ancillary service are not
                                                                                                                  known at this time.
AS__TYPE                              ASTYPE                                1{ALPHANUMERIC}20                    Valid types                          ..........................................
                                                                                                                    EI                        EI--Energy Imbalance.
                                                                                                                    SP                        SP--Spinning Reserve.
                                                                                                                    SU                        SU--Supplemental Reserve.
                                                                                                                    RV                        RV--Reactive supply and Voltage Control.
                                                                                                                    RF                        RF--Regulation and Frequency response.
                                                                                                                    SC                        SC--Scheduling, system Control and
                                                                                                                                                       Dispatch.
                                                                                                                    {Registered}              {Registered} must be registered with
                                                                                                                                                       www.tsin.com and listed in the ANCSERV
                                                                                                                                                       template.
ASSIGNMENT__REF                       AREF                                  1{ALPHANUMERIC}12                    Unique value                         A unique reference number assigned by a
                                                                                                                                                       Transmission Information Provider to
                                                                                                                                                       provide a unique record for each
                                                                                                                                                       transmission or ancillary service
                                                                                                                                                       request. A single transmission or
                                                                                                                                                       ancillary service request will be over a
                                                                                                                                                       contiguous time period, i.e. from a
                                                                                                                                                       START_TIME to a STOP_TIME.
BID__PRICE                            BIDPR                                 1{NUMERIC}5 + ``.''  + 2{NUMERIC}2   Positive number with 2 decimals      The current bid price of a Service in
                                                                                                                                                       dollars and cents. Used by Customers to
                                                                                                                                                       designate a price being bid.

[[Page 17408]]

 
CAPACITY                              CAP                                   1{NUMERIC}12                         Non-negative number in units of MW.  Transfer capability is the measure of the
                                                                                                                                                       ability of the interconnected electric
                                                                                                                                                       system to readily move or transfer power
                                                                                                                                                       from one area to another over all
                                                                                                                                                       transmission lines (or paths) between
                                                                                                                                                       those areas under specified system
                                                                                                                                                       conditions. In this context ``area'' may
                                                                                                                                                       be an individual electric system,
                                                                                                                                                       powerpool, control area, subregion, or
                                                                                                                                                       NERC region or portion thereof.
CAPACITY_CURTAILED                    CAPCUR                                1{NUMERIC}12                         Non-negative number in units of MW   The amount of transfer capability
                                                                                                                                                       curtailed by the Primary provider for
                                                                                                                                                       emergency reasons.
CAPACITY_SCHEDULED                    CAPSCH                                0{ NUMERIC}12                        Non-negative number in units of MW   Transfer capability scheduled on each
                                                                                                                                                       path.
CATEGORY                              CAT                                   0{ALPHANUMERIC}25                    Valid name from CATEGORY in LIST     A name to be used to categorize messages.
                                                                                                                  Template                             Valid names would include: , Want-Ad,
                                                                                                                                                       Curtailment, Outage, Oasis Maint Notice.
CEILING_PRICE                         CEILPR                                1{NUMERIC}5 + ``.'' +; 2{NUMERIC}2   Positive number with 2 decimals      Ceiling price of the Service as entered by
                                                                                                                                                       the Transmission Provider.
COLUMN_HEADERS                        HEADERS                               1{ALPHANUMERIC }Limited to all the   Headers surrounded with A and        Example: COLUMN_HEADER=APATH_NAME'',''
                                                                             elements names in one Template       separated by commas. Limited to      POINT_OF_RECEIPT'',''
                                                                                                                  valid Template element names. Must   POINT_OF_DELIVERY'','' SOURCE'',''SINK''.
                                                                                                                  use full element name and not
                                                                                                                  alias
CONTINUATION_FLAG                     CONT                                  1{ALPHANUMERIC}1                     ``Y'' or ``N''                       Indicates whether or not this record is a
                                                                                                                                                       continuation from the previous record.
CONTROL_AREA                          AREA                                  1{ALPHANUMERIC}20                    Valid name of a control area         A part of the power system with metered
                                                                                                                                                       tie lines and capable of matching
                                                                                                                                                       generation and load while meeting
                                                                                                                                                       scheduled interchange. Location of
                                                                                                                                                       Ancillary Services is my CONTROL_AREA.
CURTAILMENT_OPTIONS                   CUROPT                                0{ALPHANUMERIC}80                    Free form text                       Customer options, if any, to avoid
                                                                                                                                                       curtailment.
CURTAILMENT_PROCEDURES                CURPROC                               0{ALPHANUMERIC}80                    Free form text                       Curtailment procedures to be followed in
                                                                                                                                                       the event of a curtailment.
CURTAILMENT_REASON                    CURREAS                               0{ALPHANUMERIC}80                    Free-form text                       Reason for curtailment of service.
CUSTOMER_CODE                         CUST                                  1{ALPHANUMERIC}6                     Unique value, registered on          Any entity (or its designated agent) that
                                                                                                                  TSIN.COM                             is eligible to view OASIS information, to
                                                                                                                                                       execute a service agreement, and/or to
                                                                                                                                                       receive transmission service.
CUSTOMER_COMMENTS                     CUSTCOM                               0{ALPHANUMERIC} 80                   Free-form text                       Informative text.
CUSTOMER_DUNS                         CUSTDUNS                              9{NUMERIC}9                          Unique DUNS number                   Unique DUNS number for a Customer.
CUSTOMER_EMAIL                        CUSTEMAIL                             1{ALPHANUMERIC}25                    Valid Internet E-Mail address        Internet E-Mail address of Customer
                                                                                                                                                       contact person.
CUSTOMER_FAX                          CUSTFAX                               14{ALPHANUMERIC}20                   Area code and telephone number,      FAX phone number of Customer contact
                                                                                                                  plus any extensions (aaa)-nnn-nnnn   person.
                                                                                                                  xnnnn
CUSTOMER_NAME                         CUSTNAME                              1{ALPHANUMERIC}25                    Free form text                       Name of Customer contact person.
CUSTOMER_PHONE                        CUSTPHON                              14{ ALPHANUMERIC}20                  Area code and telephone number,      Telephone of Customer contact person.
                                                                                                                  plus any extensions (aaa)-nnn-nnnn
                                                                                                                  xnnnn
DATA_ROWS                             ROWS                                  1{NUMERIC} unlimited                 Positive Number                      Number of records (rows) of data exclusive
                                                                                                                                                       of header information that are to be
                                                                                                                                                       uploaded or downloaded in a file.
DATE_TIME_EFFECTIVE                   TIMEEFCT                              16{ALPHANUMERIC}16                   Valid date and time in seconds:      Date and time a message or service offer
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh +mm+ss+tz              is in effect.
DEAL_REF                              DREF                                  0{ALPHANUMERIC}12                    Unique value, Assigned by Customer   The unique reference assigned by a
                                                                                                                                                       Customer to two or more service purchases
                                                                                                                                                       to identify each of them as related to
                                                                                                                                                       others in the same power service deal.
                                                                                                                                                       These requests may be related to each
                                                                                                                                                       other in time sequence through a single
                                                                                                                                                       Provider, or as a series of wheels
                                                                                                                                                       through multiple Providers, or a
                                                                                                                                                       combination of both time and wheels. The
                                                                                                                                                       User uses the DEAL_REF to uniquely
                                                                                                                                                       identify a combination of requests
                                                                                                                                                       relating to a particular deal.
DESCRETION_DESCRIPTION                DISCDESC                              0{ALPHANUMERIC}1000                  Free form text                       A detailed description of the discretion
                                                                                                                                                       being reported.
ELEMENT_NAME                          ELEMENT                               1{ALPHANUMERIC}40                    Valid Template element name          Template element name as indicated in data
                                                                                                                                                       dictionary.
EMPLOYEE_NAME                         EMPNAME                               1{ALPHANUMERIC}25                    Free form text                       Name of person who is transferring from
                                                                                                                                                       one position to another.
ERROR_MESSAGE                         ERROR                                 1{ALPHANUMERIC}250                   Free form text                       Error message related to a RECORD_STATUS
                                                                                                                                                       or REQUEST_STATUS.
FORMER_COMPANY                        FORMCO                                1{ALPHANUMERIC}25                     Free form text                       Former company of the person who is
                                                                                                                                                       transferring.
FORMER_DEPARTMENT                     FORMDEPT                              1{ALPHANUMERIC}25                    Free form text                       Former department of the person who is
                                                                                                                                                       transferring.
FORMER_POSITION                       FORMPOS                               1{ALPHANUMERIC}25                    Free form text                        Former position held by the person who is
                                                                                                                                                       transferring.
INTERFACE_TYPE                        INTERFACE                             0{ALPHANUMERIC}1                      I,E                                 Type of interface define by path: Internal
                                                                                                                                                       (I) to a control area or External (E) to
                                                                                                                                                       a control area.
LIST_ITEM                             ITEM                                  1{ALPHANUMERIC}50                     Free form text                       Item from LIST, such as list of SELLER,
                                                                                                                                                       list of PATH_NAME, list of
                                                                                                                                                       POINT_OF_RECEIPT, list of
                                                                                                                                                       POINT_OF_DELIVERY, list of
                                                                                                                                                       SERVICE_INCREMENT, list of TS_CLASS, list
                                                                                                                                                       of TS_TYPE, list of TS_PERIOD, list of
                                                                                                                                                       TS_WINDOW, list of TS_SUBCLASS, list of
                                                                                                                                                       AS_TYPE, list of
                                                                                                                                                       NERC_CURTAILMENT_PRIORITY, list of
                                                                                                                                                       OTHER_CURTAILMENT_PRIORITY, list of
                                                                                                                                                       CATEGORY, list of TEMPLATE, list of LIST.
LIST_ITEM_DESCRIPTION                 ITEMDESC                              0{ALPHANUMERIC}100                   Free form text                       A detailed description of the LIST_ITEM.
LIST_NAME                             LIST                                  1{ALPHANUMERIC}50                    LIST, SELLER, PATH, POR, POD,        List of valid names for each of the types
                                                                                                                  SERVICE_INCREMENT, TS_CLASS,         of lists. The minimum set of lists
                                                                                                                  TS_TYPE, TS_PERIOD, TS_SUBCLASS,     defined must be implemented.
                                                                                                                  AS_TYPE,
                                                                                                                  NERC_CURTAILMENT_PRIORITY,
                                                                                                                  OTHER_CURTAILMENT_PRIORITY,
                                                                                                                  CATEGORY, TEMPLATE
MESSAGE                               MSG                                   1{ALPHANUMERIC}200                   Free form text                       An informative text message.
NEGOTIATED_PRICE_FLAG                 NGPRIFLG                              0{ALPHANUMERIC}1                     H, L, or blank                       Set to H if OFFER_PRICE is higher than the
                                                                                                                                                       currently posted price; set to L if
                                                                                                                                                       OFFER_PRICE is lower than the currently
                                                                                                                                                       posted price.
NERC_CURTAILMENT_PRIORITY             NERCURT                               1{NUMERIC }1                         Integer 1-7                          One of the NERC seven curtailment
                                                                                                                                                       priorities, documented in LIST template.
NEW_COMPANY                           NEWCO                                 1{ALPHANUMERIC}25                    Free form text                       New company of the person who is
                                                                                                                                                       transferring.
NEW_DATA                              NEWDATA                               0{ALPHANUMERIC}200                   Any valid date element value         For audit log, the new updated value of a
                                                                                                                                                       Template data element after update.

[[Page 17409]]

 
NEW_DEPARTMENT                        NEWDEPT                               1{ALPHANUMERIC}25                    Free form text.                      New department of the person who is
                                                                                                                                                       transferring.
NEW_POSITION                          NEWPOS                                1{ALPHANUMERIC}25                    Free form text                       New position held by the person who is
                                                                                                                                                       transferring.
OFFER_PRICE                           OFFPR                                 1{NUMERIC}5 + ``.'' + 2{NUMERIC}2    Positive number with 2 decimals      The current offered price of a Service in
                                                                                                                                                       dollars and cents. Used by the Seller to
                                                                                                                                                       indicate the offering price.
OFFER_START_TIME                      OFFSTIME                              0,16{ALPHANUMERIC} 16                Valid Date and Time to seconds:      Start time of the window during which a
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh +mm+ss+tz              Customer may request a discounted offer.
                                                                                                                                                       If null, no restrictions on the start of
                                                                                                                                                       the offering time is implied (other than
                                                                                                                                                       tariff requirements).
OFFER_STOP_TIME                       OFFSPTIME                             0,16{ALPHANUMERIC} 16                Valid Date and Time to seconds:      Stop time of the window during which a
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh +mm+ss+tz              Customer may request a discounted offer.
                                                                                                                                                       (Expiration time of an offer). If null,
                                                                                                                                                       no restrictions on the end of the
                                                                                                                                                       offering time is implied (other than
                                                                                                                                                       tariff requirements).
OLD_DATA                              OLDDATA                               0{ALPHANUMERIC}200                   Any valid data element value         For audit log, the old value of a Template
                                                                                                                                                       data element prior to being updated. This
                                                                                                                                                       element is not applicable in the audit
                                                                                                                                                       log for transaction events.
OPTIONAL_CODE                         N/A                                   0{ALPHANUMERIC}25                    Unique path name within region       OPTIONAL_CODE_25 chars, unique for Path.
                                                                                                                                                       If used for directionality, then the
                                                                                                                                                       first 12 characters shall represent POR,
                                                                                                                                                       followed by >->, followed by 12
                                                                                                                                                       characters which shall represent POD.
                                                                                                                                                       Used by PATH_NAME.
OTHER_CURTAILMENT_PRIORITY            OTHCUR                                0{ALPHANUMERIC}8                     Free form tect                       Other than NERC curtailment priorities,
                                                                                                                                                       such as regional curtailment priorities.
                                                                                                                                                       Suggested format region+number, for
                                                                                                                                                       example MAPP4, WSCC7. Documented in LIST
                                                                                                                                                       template.
OUTPUT_FORMAT                         FMT                                   4{ALPHANUMERIC}4                     HTML, DATA                           Format of response: HTML=hypertext markup
                                                                                                                                                       language for presentation using a web
                                                                                                                                                       browser. DATA=text for use in a
                                                                                                                                                       downloaded file.
PATH_CODE                             N/A                                   0{ALPHANUMERIC}12                    Unique code for each path as         Unique code within a Region for each path.
                                                                                                                  defined by primary provider          Used by PATH__NAME.
PATH_NAME                             PATH                                  5{ALPHANUMERIC}50                    Unique value                         The unique name assigned to a single
                                                                                                                                                       transmission line or the set of one or
                                                                                                                                                       more parallel transmission lines whose
                                                                                                                                                       power transfer capabilities are strongly
                                                                                                                                                       interrelated and must be determined in
                                                                                                                                                       aggregate.
                                      ....................................  ...................................  ...................................  These lines are typically described as
                                                                                                                                                       being on a path, corridor or
                                                                                                                                                       interconnection in some regions, or as
                                                                                                                                                       crossing an interface or cut-plane in
                                                                                                                                                       other regions. Multiple lines may be
                                                                                                                                                       owned by different parties and require
                                                                                                                                                       prorating of capability shares.
                                      ....................................  ...................................  ...................................  The name is constructed from the following
                                                                                                                                                       codes, with each code separated by a ``/
                                                                                                                                                       ''. Trailing ``/'' may be omitted, if
                                                                                                                                                       there are no values for OPTION__CODE and
                                                                                                                                                       SPARE__CODE: REGION__CODE--2 chars,
                                                                                                                                                       unique to OASIS System
                                      ....................................  ...................................  ...................................  PRIMARY__PROVIDER__CODE--4 chars, unique
                                                                                                                                                       within Region
                                      ....................................  ...................................  ...................................  PATH__CODE__12 chars, unique for Primary
                                                                                                                                                       Provider
                                      ....................................  ...................................  ...................................  OPTIONAL__CODE__25 chars, unique for Path.
                                                                                                                                                       If used for directionality, then the
                                                                                                                                                       first 12 characters shall represent POR,
                                                                                                                                                       followed by >->, followed by 12
                                                                                                                                                       characters which shall represent POD
                                                                                                                                                       SPARE__CODE__3 chars.
POINT__OF__DELIVERY                   POD                                   1{ALPHANUMERIC}12                    Unique value within Primary          Point of Delivery is one or more point(s)
                                                                                                                  Provider                             of interconnection on the Transmission
                                                                                                                                                       Provider's transmission system where
                                                                                                                                                       capacity and/or energy transmitted by the
                                                                                                                                                       Transmission Provider will be made
                                                                                                                                                       available to the Receiving Party. This is
                                                                                                                                                       used along with Point of Receipt to
                                                                                                                                                       define a Path and direction of flow on
                                                                                                                                                       that path. For internal paths, this would
                                                                                                                                                       be a specific location(s) in the area.
                                                                                                                                                       For an external path, this may be an area-
                                                                                                                                                       to-area interface.
POINT__OF__RECEIPT                    POR                                   1{ALPHANUMERIC}12                    Unique value within Primary          Point of Receipt is one or more point(s)
                                                                                                                  Provider                             of interconnection on the Transmission
                                                                                                                                                       Provider's transmission system where
                                                                                                                                                       capacity and/or energy transmitted will
                                                                                                                                                       be made available to the Transmission
                                                                                                                                                       Provider by the Delivering Party. This is
                                                                                                                                                       used along with Point of Delivery to
                                                                                                                                                       define a Path and direction of flow on
                                                                                                                                                       that path. For internal paths, this would
                                                                                                                                                       be a specific location(s) in the area.
                                                                                                                                                       For an external path, this may be an area-
                                                                                                                                                       to-area interface.
POSTING__NAME                         POSTNAME                              1{ALPHANUMERIC}25                    Free form text                       Name of person who is posting the
                                                                                                                                                       information on the OASISNode.
POSTING__REF                          POSTREF                               1{ALPHANUMERIC}12                    Unique Value                         Assigned by TSIP when Service or Message
                                                                                                                                                       is received by TSIP. Unique number can be
                                                                                                                                                       used by the user to modify or delete the
                                                                                                                                                       posting.
PRECONFIRMED                          PRECONF                               2{ALPHA}3                            YES or NO                            Used by Customer to preconfirm sale in
                                                                                                                                                       Template transrequest or ancrequest. If
                                                                                                                                                       customer indicates sale is preconfirmed,
                                                                                                                                                       then the response is YES and the customer
                                                                                                                                                       does not need to confirm the sale.
PRICE__UNITS                          UNITS                                 0(ALPHA)20                           Free form text                       The units used for CEILING__PRICE,
                                                                                                                                                       OFFER__PRICE, and BID__PRICE. Examples: $/
                                                                                                                                                       MWhr, $/MWmonth.
PRIMARY __ PROVIDER __ COMMENTS       PPROVCOM                              0{ALPHANUMERIC}80                    Free-form text                       Informative text. Usually entered by the
                                                                                                                                                       Primary Provider through a back end
                                                                                                                                                       system.
PRIMARY __ PROVIDER __ CODE           PROVIDER                              1{ALPHANUMERIC}4                     Unique code                          Unique code for each Primary Provider.
                                                                                                                                                       Used by PATH__NAME and in URL. Registered
                                                                                                                                                       as part of URL at www.tsin.com.
PRIMARY_PROVIDER_DUNS                 PPROVDUNS                             9{NUMERIC}9                          Valid DUNS number                    Unique code for each Primary. Provided by
                                                                                                                                                       Dun and Bradstreet.
REASSIGNED_CAPACITY                   RASCAP                                1{NUMERIC}12                         Positive number, cannot exceed       The amount of transfer capability that was
                                                                                                                  previous assigned capacity           reassigned from one entity to another.
REASSIGNED_REF                        REREF                                 1{ALPHANUMERIC}12                    Unique value                         When customer makes a purchase of a
                                                                                                                                                       transmission service that was posted for
                                                                                                                                                       resale and a new ASSIGNMENT_REF number is
                                                                                                                                                       issued the previous ASSIGNMENT_REF number
                                                                                                                                                       now becomes the REASSIGNMENT_REF. Also
                                                                                                                                                       used by SELLER when posting transmission
                                                                                                                                                       or ancillary services for resale to show
                                                                                                                                                       the previous assignment reference number.
                                                                                                                                                       Also used by the customer when making a
                                                                                                                                                       request to use FIRM service as SECONDARY
                                                                                                                                                       over alternate points of delivery.
REASSIGNED_START_TIME                 RESSTIME                              16ALPHANUMERIC } 16                 Valid date and time to seconds:      Beginning date and time of the reassigned
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh+tz                     transmission service.
REASSIGNED_STOP_TIME                  RESSPTIME                             16{ALPHANUMERIC}16                   Valid date and time to hour:         Date and time of the end of the
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh+tz                     transmission service that is reassigned
                                                                                                                                                       to another User.

[[Page 17410]]

 
RECORD_STATUS                         RECSTATUS                             1{NUMERIC}3                          Error number                         Record status indicating record was
                                                                                                                                                       successful or error code if unsuccessful.
                                                                                                                                                       200=Successful.
REGION_CODE                           N/A                                   1{ALPHANUMERIC}2                     Unique within OASIS System           Defined for NERC regions, with the
                                                                                                                                                       following defined: E--ECAR, I--MAIN, S--
                                                                                                                                                       SERC, T--ERCOT, A--MAPP, P--SPP, M--MAAC,
                                                                                                                                                       N--NPCC, W--WSCC, F--FRCC. Second
                                                                                                                                                       character or digit reserved for subregion
                                                                                                                                                       id as defined by each region.
REQUEST_REF                           RREF                                  0{ALPHANUMERIC}12                    Unique value                         A reference uniquely assigned by a
                                                                                                                                                       Customer to a request for service from a
                                                                                                                                                       Provider.
REQUEST_STATUS                        RSTATUS                               1{NUMERIC}3                          Error number                         Message status indicating message was
                                                                                                                                                       successful (if all RECORD_STATUS show
                                                                                                                                                       success) or error code if any
                                                                                                                                                       RECORD_STATUS showed unsuccessful. 200 =
                                                                                                                                                       Successful.
RESPONSE_TIME_LIMIT                   RESPTL                                16{ALPHANUMERIC}16                   Valid date and time to seconds:      Date and time to seconds by when a
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh+mm+ss+tz               response must be received from a
                                                                                                                                                       Customer.
RESPONSIBLE_PARTY_NAME                PARTNAME                              1{ALPHANUMERIC}25                    Free form text                       The name of the person responsible for
                                                                                                                                                       granting the discretion.
RETURN_TZ                             TZ                                    2{ALPHANUMERIC}2                     AD, AS, PD, PS, ED, ES, MD, MS, CD,  A time zone code, indicating the base time
                                                                                                                  CS, UT                               zone, and whether daylight saving time is
                                                                                                                                                       to be used. This field may be set by a
                                                                                                                                                       Customer in a query. Returned date and
                                                                                                                                                       time data is converted to this time zone.
SALE_REF                              SREF                                  0{ALPHANUMERIC}12                    Unique value                         Identifier which is set by seller
                                                                                                                                                       (including Primary Provider) when posting
                                                                                                                                                       a service for sale.
SELLER_CODE                           SELLER                                1{ALPHANUMERIC}6                     Unique value                         Organization name of Primary Provider or
                                                                                                                                                       Reseller.
SELLER_COMMENTS                       SELCOM                                0{ALPHANUMERIC} 80                   Free-form text                       Informative text provided by the Seller.
SELLER_DUNS                           SELDUNS                               9{NUMERIC}9                          Valid DUNS number                    Unique Data Universal Numbering System
                                                                                                                                                       provided by Dun and Bradstreet. Code for
                                                                                                                                                       a Primary Provider or Seller.
SELLER_EMAIL                          SELEMAIL                              5{ALPHANUMERIC}60                    Valid network reference              E-Mail address of Seller contact person.
SELLER_FAX                            SELFAX                                14{ALPHANUMERIC} 20                  Area code and telephone number,      The fax telephone number for contact
                                                                                                                  plus any extensions Example: (aaa)-  person at Seller.
                                                                                                                  nnn-nnnn xnnnn
SELLER_NAME                           SELNAME                               1{ALPHANUMERIC} 25                   Free form text                       The name of an individual contact person
                                                                                                                                                       at the Seller.
SELLER_PHONE                          SELPHONE                              14{ALPHANUMERIC}20                   Area code and telephone number,      The telephone number of a contact person
                                                                                                                  plus any extensions (aaa)-nnn-nnnn   as a Seller.
                                                                                                                  xnnnn
SERVICE_DESCRIPTION                   SVCDESC                               0{ALPHANUMERIC} 200                  Free-form text                       Information regarding a service.
SERVICE_INCREMENT                     SRVINCR                               1{ALPHANUMERIC}8                     Valid increments                     The transmission service increments
                                                                                                                  HOURLY                       provided. Five are pre-defined, while
                                                                                                                  Daily                        additional increments can be used if they
                                                                                                                  Weekly                       are registered on TSIN.COM and shown in
                                                                                                                  Monthly                      the Provider's LIST template.
                                                                                                                  Yearly
                                                                                                                  {Registered}
SERVICE_NAME                          SVCNAME                               1{ALPHANUMERIC} 25                   Free-form text                       Name of service affected by the
                                                                                                                                                       discretionary action.
SERVICE_TYPE                          SVCTYPE                               1{ALPHANUMERIC} 25                   Free-form text                       Type of service affected by the
                                                                                                                                                       discretionary action.
SINK                                  SINK                                  0{ALPHANUMERIC}14                    Valid area name                      The area in which the SINK is located.
SOURCE                                SOURCE                                0{ALPHANUMERIC}14                    Valid area name                      The area in which the SOURCE is located.
SPARE_CODE                            N/A                                   0{ALPHANUMERIC}3                     Defined by region                    Spare code to be used at a later time.
                                                                                                                                                       Used by PATH--NAME
STANDARDS_OF_CONDUCT_ISSUES           STDISSUE                              0{ALPHANUMERIC}800                   Free-form text                       Issues that were in violation of the FERC
                                                                                                                                                       Standards of Conduct. This text may
                                                                                                                                                       include a reference pointer to a more
                                                                                                                                                       detailed description.
START_TIME                            STIME                                 16{ALPHANUMERIC}16                   Valid Date and Time to seconds:      Start date and clock time of a service.
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh +mm+ss+tz              When used as a query variable, it
                                                                                                                                                       requires the return of all items whose
                                                                                                                                                       Stop time is after the Start time. Note
                                                                                                                                                       that for some Templates when used as a
                                                                                                                                                       query variable the time may be only valid
                                                                                                                                                       up to the hour, day or month. If more
                                                                                                                                                       data is given than is valid, the hour,
                                                                                                                                                       day or month will be used to make the
                                                                                                                                                       date and time inclusive, i.e. date or
                                                                                                                                                       time will be truncated to valid hour, day
                                                                                                                                                       or month.
START_TIME_POSTED                     STIMEP                                16{ALPHANUMERIC}16                   Valid Date and Time to seconds:      Query parameter to indicate all the
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh +mm+ss+tz              records are to be retrieved that were
                                                                                                                                                       posted on or after this time.
START_TIME_QUEUED                     STIMEQ                                16{ALPHANUMERIC}16                   Valid Date and Time to seconds:      Start date and clock time of a service,
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh +mm+ss+tz              used for requesting transactions queued
                                                                                                                                                       after this time.
STATUS                                STATUS                                5{ALPHANUMERIC}25                    Valid field (QUEUED, INVALID,
                                                                                                                  RECEIVED, STUDY, REBID,
                                                                                                                  COUNTEROFFER, DECLINED,
                                                                                                                  SUPERSEDED, ACCEPTED, REFUSED,
                                                                                                                  CONFIRMED, WITHDRAWN, DISPLACED,
                                                                                                                  ANNULLED, RETRACTED)
                                                                                                                                                      QUEUED = initial status assigned by TSIP
                                                                                                                                                       on receipt of ``customer services
                                                                                                                                                       purchase request''.
                                                                                                                                                      INVALID = assigned by TSIP or Provider
                                                                                                                                                       indicating an invalid field in the
                                                                                                                                                       request, such as improper POR, POD,
                                                                                                                                                       source, sink, etc. (Final state).
                                                                                                                                                      RECEIVED= assigned by Provider or Seller
                                                                                                                                                       to acknowledge QUEUED requests and
                                                                                                                                                       indicate the service request is being
                                                                                                                                                       evaluated, including for completing the
                                                                                                                                                       required ancillary services.
                                                                                                                                                      STUDY= assigned by Provider or Seller to
                                                                                                                                                       indicate some level of study is required
                                                                                                                                                       or being performed to evaluate service
                                                                                                                                                       request.

[[Page 17411]]

 
                                                                                                                                                      REFUSED = assigned by Provider or Seller
                                                                                                                                                       to indicate service request has been
                                                                                                                                                       denied due to lack of availability of
                                                                                                                                                       transmission capability. SELLER_COMMENTS
                                                                                                                                                       should be used to communicate details for
                                                                                                                                                       denial of service. (Final state).
                                                                                                                                                      COUNTEROFFER= assigned by Provider or
                                                                                                                                                       Seller to indicate that a new OFFER_PRICE
                                                                                                                                                       is being proposed.
                                                                                                                                                      REBID = assigned by Customer to indicate
                                                                                                                                                       that a new BID_PRICE is being proposed.
                                                                                                                                                      SUPERSEDED = assigned by Provider or
                                                                                                                                                       Seller when a request which has not yet
                                                                                                                                                       been confirmed is preempted by another
                                                                                                                                                       reservation request. (Final state).
                                                                                                                                                      ACCEPTED = assigned by Provider or Seller
                                                                                                                                                       to indicate the service request at the
                                                                                                                                                       designated OFFER_PRICE has been approved/
                                                                                                                                                       accepted. If the reservation request was
                                                                                                                                                       submitted PRECONFIRMED, the OASIS Node
                                                                                                                                                       shall immediately set the reservation
                                                                                                                                                       status to CONFIRMED. Depending upon the
                                                                                                                                                       type of ancillary services required, the
                                                                                                                                                       Seller may or may not require all
                                                                                                                                                       ancillary service reservations to be
                                                                                                                                                       completed before accepting a request.
                                                                                                                                                      DECLINED = assigned by the Provider or
                                                                                                                                                       Seller to indicate that the BID_PRICE is
                                                                                                                                                       unacceptable and that negotiations are
                                                                                                                                                       terminated. SELLER_COMMENTS should be
                                                                                                                                                       used to communicate reason for denial of
                                                                                                                                                       service. (Final state).
                                                                                                                                                      CONFIRMED = assigned by Customer in
                                                                                                                                                       response to Provider or Seller posting
                                                                                                                                                       ``ACCEPTED'' status, to confirm service.
                                                                                                                                                       Once a request has been ``CONFIRMED'', a
                                                                                                                                                       transmission service reservation exits.
                                                                                                                                                       (Final state, unless overridden by
                                                                                                                                                       DISPLACED or ANNULLED state).
                                                                                                                                                      WITHDRAWN = assigned by Customer at any
                                                                                                                                                       point in request evaluation to withdraw
                                                                                                                                                       the request from any further action.
                                                                                                                                                       (Final state).
                                                                                                                                                      DISPLACED = assigned by Provider or Seller
                                                                                                                                                       when a ``CONFIRMED'' reservation from a
                                                                                                                                                       Customer is replaced by a longer term
                                                                                                                                                       reservation and the Customer has not
                                                                                                                                                       exercised right of first refusal, if any
                                                                                                                                                       (i.e. refused to match terms of new
                                                                                                                                                       request). (Final state).
                                                                                                                                                      ANNULLED = assigned by Provider or Seller
                                                                                                                                                       when, by mutual agreement with the
                                                                                                                                                       Customer, a confirmed reservation is to
                                                                                                                                                       be voided. (Final state).
                                                                                                                                                      RETRACTED = assigned by Provider or Seller
                                                                                                                                                       when the Customer fails to confirm or
                                                                                                                                                       withdraw the request within the required
                                                                                                                                                       time period. (Final state).
STATUS_COMMENTS                       STACOM                                0{ALPHANUMERIC} 80                   Free form text                       Informative text.
STATUS_NOTIFICATION                   STATNOT                               0{ALPHANUMERIC} 200                  http://URL:portnumber/direc otry/    The STATUS_NOTIFICATION data element shall
                                                                                                                  cgi script/query parameters or       contain the protocol field ``http:'',
                                                                                                                  Mailto: e-mail address>              which designates the notification method/
                                                                                                                                                       protocol to be used, followed by all
                                                                                                                                                       resource location information required;
                                                                                                                                                       the target domain name and port
                                                                                                                                                       designations shall be inserted into the
                                                                                                                                                       notification URL based on the Customer's
                                                                                                                                                       Company registration information. The
                                                                                                                                                       resource location information may include
                                                                                                                                                       directory information, cgi script
                                                                                                                                                       identifiers and URL encoded query string
                                                                                                                                                       name/value pairs as required by the
                                                                                                                                                       Customer's application. or mailto and
                                                                                                                                                       email address for the status information
                                                                                                                                                       the Customer wants to receive upon a
                                                                                                                                                       change in STATUS of transstatus, or
                                                                                                                                                       ancstatus.
STOP_TIME                             SPTIME                                16{ALPHANUMERIC}16                   Valid date and time                  Stop date and clock time. When used as a
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh+mm+ss+tz               query variable, it requires the return of
                                                                                                                                                       all items which start before the Stop
                                                                                                                                                       time. Note that for some Templates when
                                                                                                                                                       used as a query variable the time may be
                                                                                                                                                       only valid up to the hour, day or month.
                                                                                                                                                       If more data is given than is valid, the
                                                                                                                                                       hour, day or month will be used to make
                                                                                                                                                       the date and time inclusive, i.e. date or
                                                                                                                                                       time will be increased to include
                                                                                                                                                       STOP_TIME.
STOP_TIME_POSTED                      STPTIMEP                              16{ALPHANUMERIC}16                   Valid Date and Time to seconds:      Query parameter to indicate all the
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh+mm+ss+tz               records are to be retrieved that were
                                                                                                                                                       posted on or before this time.
STOP_TIME_QUEUED                      SPTIMEQ                               16{ALPHANUMERIC}16                   Valid Date and Time to seconds:      Stop date and clock time, used for
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh+mm+ss+tz               requesting transactions queued before
                                                                                                                                                       this time.
SUBJECT                               SUBJ                                  0{ALPHANUMERIC} 80                   Free form text                       Informative text used to summarize a topic
                                                                                                                                                       in a message.
TARIFF_REFERENCE                      TARIFF                                0{ALPHANUMERIC} 150                  Free form text. Name and             Tariffs approved by FERC.
                                                                                                                  description of Tariff
TEMPLATE                              TEMPL                                 1{ALPHANUMERIC}20                    Valid Name of Template from Section  The name of a logical collection of
                                                                                                                  4.3 or from LIST Template            DATA_ELEMENTS in a User's interaction
                                                                                                                                                       with an OASIS Node.
TIME_OF_LAST_UPDATE                   TLUPDATE                              16{ALPHANUMERIC}16                   Valid date and time to seconds:      Date and time to seconds that data was
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh+mm+ss+tz               last updated. May be used to search data
                                                                                                                                                       updated since a specific point in time.
TIME_POSTED                           TIMEPST                               16{ALPHANUMERIC}16                   Valid Date and Time to seconds:      Date and time a message is posted.
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh+mm+ss+tz
TIME_QUEUED                           TIMEQ                                 16{ALPHANUMERIC}16                   Valid Date and Time to seconds:      Date and time that the request was queued.
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh+mm+ss+tz
TIME_STAMP                            TSTAMP                                16{ALPHANUMERIC}16                   Valid date and Time to seconds       Time data is created.
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh+mm+ss+tz
TS_CLASS                              TSCLASS                               1{ALPHANUMERIC}20                    Valid classes:                       The transmission service classes provided.
                                                                                                                    FIRM                       Four are pre-defined, while additional
                                                                                                                    NON-FIRM                   classes can be used if they are
                                                                                                                    TTC                        registered on TSIN.COM and shown in the
                                                                                                                    SECONDARY                  Provider's LIST template page. SECONDARY
                                                                                                                    Registered}                is defined as alternate points of receipt
                                                                                                                                                       or delivery for POINT_TO_POINT, or as
                                                                                                                                                       nondesignated resources for NETWORK
                                                                                                                                                       service.

[[Page 17412]]

 
TS_PERIOD                             TSPER                                 1{ALPHANUMERIC}20                    Valid periods                        The transmission service periods provided.
                                                                                                                   ON_PEAK                             Three are pre-defined, while additional
                                                                                                                   OFF_PEAK                            periods can be used if they are
                                                                                                                   FULL_PERIOD                         registered on TSIN.COM and shown in the
                                                                                                                   {Registered}                        Provider's LIST template.
TS_SUBCLASS                           TSSUBC                                0{ALPHANUMERIC}20                    Free Form                            The transmission service subclasses
                                                                                                                                                       provided. These are freeform.
TS_TYPE                               TSTYPE                                1{ALPHANUMERIC}20                    Valid types                          The transmission service types provided.
                                                                                                                  POINT_TO_POINT               Three are pre-defined, while additional
                                                                                                                  NETWORK                      types can be used if they are registered
                                                                                                                  ATC                          on TSIN.COM and shown in the Provider's
                                                                                                                  {Registered}                 LIST template.
TS_WINDOW                             TSWIND                                1{ALPHANUMERIC}20                    Valid windows                        The transmission service windows provided.
                                                                                                                 YFIXED                        Three are pre-defined, while additional
                                                                                                                  SLIDING                      windows can be used if they are
                                                                                                                  EXTENDED                     registered on TSIN.COM and shown in the
                                                                                                                  {Registered}                 Provider's LIST template.
TZ_                                   TZ                                    2{ALPHANUMERIC}2                     Valid time zone and indication       Time zones:
                                                                                                                  whether daylight savings time is    Atlantic time=AD, AS.
                                                                                                                  to be used                          Eastern time=ED, ES.
                                                                                                                                                      Central time=CD, CS.
                                                                                                                                                      Mountain time=MD, MS.
                                                                                                                                                      Pacific time=PD, PS.
                                                                                                                                                      Universal time=UT.
VALID_FROM_TIME                       VALFTIME                              16{ALPHANUMERIC}16                   Valid date and time                  Date and time after which the message is
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh+mm+ss+tz               valid.
VALID_TO_TIME                         VALTTIME                              16{ALPHANUMERIC}16                   Valid date and time                  Date and time before which the message is
                                                                                                                  yyyy+mo+dd+hh+mm+ss+tz               valid.
VERSION                               VER1{REAL NUMBER}6                    Range of 1.0 to 9999.9               Specifies which version of the
                                                                                                                  OASIS Standards and Communication
                                                                                                                  Protocol to use when interpreting
                                                                                                                  the request.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



[[Page 17413]]

    [Note: This attachment will not appear in the Code of Federal 
Regulations.]

Attachment E--List of Commenters to UBP NOPR

------------------------------------------------------------------------
         No. and commenter name                    Abbreviation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Allegheny Power Company..............  Allegheny Power.
2. American Electric Power Company......  AEP.
3. Bonneville Power Administration......  BPA.
4. Cinergy Services.....................  Cinergy.
5. Consumers Energy Company.............  Consumers.
6. Duke Energy Corporation..............  Duke.
7. Edison Electric Institute............  EEI.
8. Electric Clearinghouse, Inc..........  ECI.
9. Electric Power Supply Association....  EPSA.
10. Electricity Consumers Resource        ELCON.
 Council.
11. Entergy Services, Inc...............  Entergy.
12. Florida Power Corporation...........  Florida Power Corp.
13. National Rural Electric Cooperative   NRECA.
 Association.
14. North American Electric Reliability   NERC.
 Council.
15. New York State Electric & Gas         NYSEG.
 Corporation.
16. PJM Interconnection, LLC............  PJM.
17. Southern Company Services, Inc......  Southern.
18. Tucson Electric Power Company.......  TEP.
19. Virginia Electric & Power Company...  VEPCO.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Open Access Same-Time Information System and Standards of 
Conduct; Docket No. RM95-9-003.
    Issued February 25, 2000.
    HEBERT, Commissioner, concurring: I write separately to explain 
my departure from my colleagues on one discrete issue. Today's 
rulemaking on uniform business practices is fine in all other 
respects.
    The electric utility industry will be well served by a package 
of uniform business practices that will provide greater certainty 
and consistency in the on-line negotiation of discounts for 
transmission service. This comprehensive package also should improve 
communications between transmission providers and transmission 
customers over OASIS sites. One need only look at the natural gas 
pipeline industry, which already has implemented similar measures, 
to understand the value of uniformity of business practices in 
developing efficient, competitive markets.
    But uniformity, while laudable in the abstract, should not be 
pursued at all costs. An equally important--if not more important--
objective is to promote and encourage Commission cooperation with 
industry-led groups established to develop standards for the 
electronic posting and dissemination of transmission information. As 
the Commission has recognized in its earlier OASIS orders, such 
standards are highly complex and technical; their development is 
best-suited for industry proposals that are representative of a 
broad coalition of industry participants. And the Commission has 
previously stated that it is willing to defer, to the extent 
possible, to industry-developed OASIS proposals that reflect input 
from diverse industry segments and broad consensus among industry 
participants.
    Here, the Commercial Practices Working Group and the OASIS How 
Working Group presented the Commission with a package of both 
mandatory business standards and voluntary ``best practices'' 
guides. The CPWG/How Group offered a number of reasons in support of 
the distinction between mandatory standards and voluntary guides. 
Chief among them, in my opinion, is the fact that this distinction 
allowed the participants in the process to develop consensus.
    In this order, the Commission, citing its earlier orders, 
continues to applaud ``the invaluable ongoing efforts contributed by 
industry working group participants who have strived for consensus 
on contentious OASIS-related issues and reported on those efforts to 
the Commission.'' Slip op. at 3 n.4. I too applaud those efforts. I 
fail to understand, however, why the Commission so cavalierly upsets 
the consensus-building efforts of the CPWG/How group in rejecting 
the distinction between mandatory standards and voluntary guides 
that was so fundamental to their proposal to the Commission.
    Among all of the commenters on this issue that are referenced in 
today's order, see slip op. at 8-10, only one (Duke) unequivocally 
favors upsetting the consensus decision to distinguish--at least for 
now--between mandatory standards and voluntary guides. All other 
commenters support either maintaining the consensus proposal 
indefinitely or revisiting the voluntary guides within a set period 
of time (say, 9 or 12 months). I agree with the latter, more 
representative, group of commenters. As the order indicates, slip 
op. at 12, the uniform business standards the Commission adopts 
today are likely to require revisions and enhancements as the 
industry gains familiarity with them. By allowing some of the 
standards to remain voluntary, at least for the time being, the 
Commission would act to promote the consensus-building process it 
previously has encouraged, while allowing industry participants 
additional time to determine whether additional uniformity is 
required.
    Therefore, I respectfully concur.

Curt L. Hebert, Jr.
Commissioner.
[FR Doc. 00-6930 Filed 3-30-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-U