[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 146 (Tuesday, July 29, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43848-43860]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-17194]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 38

[Docket No. RM05-5-005; Order No. 676-C]


Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols for 
Public Utilities

Issued July 21, 2008.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is 
revising its regulations to incorporate by reference the latest version 
(Version 001) of certain standards adopted by the Wholesale Electric 
Quadrant (WEQ) of the North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB). 
NAESB's standards revise its Open Access Same-Time Information Systems 
(OASIS) business practice standards, revise four business practice 
standards relating to reliability issues, add new standards on 
transmission loading relief for the Eastern Interconnection, add new 
standards for public key infrastructure, and add a new OASIS 
implementation guide. Incorporating these revised standards will 
provide customers with information that will enable them to obtain 
transmission service on a non-discriminatory basis and will assist the 
Commission in supporting needed infrastructure and the reliability of 
the interstate transmission grid.

DATES: Effective Date: This Final Rule will become effective on August 
28, 2008. Dates for implementation of the standards are provided in the 
Final Rule. The Director of the Federal Register has approved the 
Incorporation by reference of the standards addressed in the Final Rule 
effective August 28, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryan M. Irwin (technical issues), 
Office of Energy Market Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-
6454.
    Kay Morice (technical issues), Office of Energy Market Regulation, 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-6507.
    Gary D. Cohen (legal issues), Office of the General Counsel, 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502-8321.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Before Commissioners: Joseph T. Kelliher, Chairman; Suedeen G. 
Kelly, Marc Spitzer, Philip D. Moeller, and Jon Wellinghoff.

                            Table of Contents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Paragraph
                                                               numbers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Background..............................................            2
II. Discussion.............................................            7
    A. Overview............................................            7
    B. Issues Raised by Commenters.........................           12
        1. Cost of Obtaining NAESB Standards...............           13
        2. Interpretation of NAESB Standards and OATT                 16
         Principles........................................
        3. Weighing Costs and Benefits of Proposed                    18
         Standards.........................................
        4. Implementation Date for WEQ-001.................           20
        5. WEQ-001-0.5.....................................           22

[[Page 43849]]

 
        6. WEQ-001-1.5(d)..................................           25
        7. WEQ-001-11 (Resales)............................           28
        8. WEQ-001-11.2.1..................................           36
        9. WEQ-001-11.3 through WEQ-001-11.3.3.............           39
        10. WEQ-001-11.5.3.................................           47
        11. Resales of Conditional Long Term Firm                     53
         Reservations......................................
        12. WEQ-004 (Coordinate Interchange) and WEQ-008              62
         (Transmission Loading Relief--Eastern
         Interconnection)..................................
        13. WEQ-012-1.5 (Public Key Infrastructure)........           73
        14. Requests for Modifications to NAESB Standards..           76
III. Implementation Dates and Procedures...................           80
IV. Notice of Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards.........           85
V. Information Collection Statement........................           86
VI. Environmental Analysis.................................           95
VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification..............           97
VIII. Document Availability................................           99
IX. Effective Date and Congressional Notification..........          102
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) is 
amending its regulations under the Federal Power Act (FPA) \1\ to 
incorporate by reference the latest version (Version 001) of certain 
business practice standards concerning the Open Access Same-Time 
Information Systems (OASIS) and gas/electric coordination and four 
business practice standards relating to reliability issues adopted by 
the Wholesale Electric Quadrant (WEQ) of the North American Energy 
Standards Board (NAESB). These revised standards update earlier 
versions of these standards that the Commission previously incorporated 
by reference into its regulations at 18 CFR 38.2 in Order Nos. 676, 
676-B, and 698.\2\ In addition, in this Final Rule, the Commission is 
amending its regulations under the FPA to incorporate by reference 
NAESB's new standards on transmission loading relief (TLR) for the 
Eastern Interconnection and on public key infrastructure (PKI) and to 
add a new OASIS implementation guide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 16 U.S.C. 791a, et seq.
    \2\ Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols 
for Public Utilities, Order No. 676, 71 FR 26,199 (May 4, 2006), 
FERC Stats. & Regs., ] 31,216 (Apr. 25, 2006), reh'g denied, Order 
No. 676-A, 116 FERC ] 61,255 (2006), Order No. 676-B, 72 FR 21,095 
(Apr. 30, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,246 (Apr. 19, 2007), 
Standards for Business Practices for Interstate Natural Gas 
Pipelines; Standards for Business Practices for Public Utilities, 
Order No. 698, 72 FR 38757 (July 16, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs., ] 
31,251 (June 25, 2007), order on clarification and reh'g, Order No. 
698-A, 121 FERC ] 61,264 (2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Background

    2. NAESB is a non-profit standards development organization 
established in January 2002 that serves as an industry forum for the 
development of business practice standards that promote a seamless 
marketplace for wholesale and retail natural gas and electricity.\3\ 
Since 1995, NAESB and its predecessor, the Gas Industry Standards 
Board, have been accredited members of the American National Standards 
Institute (ANSI), complying with ANSI's requirements that its standards 
reflect a consensus of the affected industries.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See Standards for Business Practices and Communication 
Protocols for Public Utilities, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 72 FR 
8318 (Feb. 26, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,612, at P 3 (Feb. 20, 
2007).
    \4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. NAESB's standards include business practices that streamline the 
transactional processes of the natural gas and electric industries, as 
well as communication protocols and related standards designed to 
improve the efficiency of communication within each industry. NAESB 
supports all four quadrants of the gas and electric industries--
wholesale gas, wholesale electric, retail gas, and retail electric. All 
participants in the gas and electric industries are eligible to join 
NAESB and participate in standards development.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Id. P 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. NAESB's procedures are designed to ensure that all industry 
members can have input into the development of a standard, whether or 
not they are members of NAESB, and each standard NAESB adopts is 
supported by a consensus of the relevant industry segments.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Id. P 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. On December 26, 2007, NAESB submitted a report detailing its new 
and revised Version 001 business practice standards dated October 31, 
2007 with minor corrections applied on November 16, 2007.\7\ These 
standards update the standards that we incorporated by reference into 
our regulations in Order Nos. 676, 676-B and 698, add a new OASIS 
implementation guide, and add new standards to: (1) Provide additional 
functionality for OASIS transactions; (2) provide business practice 
standards for TLR in the Eastern Interconnection; and (3) provide 
business practice standards governing PKI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The Version 001 standards do not include modifications of 
existing standards or new standards to support Order No. 890, the 
Commission's Final Rule amending the Commission's pro forma Open 
Access Transmission Tariff, Preventing Undue Discrimination and 
Preference in Transmission Service, Order No. 890, 72 FR 12,266 
(Mar. 15, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,241 (Feb. 16, 2007), order 
on reh'g, Order No. 890-A, 73 FR 2984 (Jan. 16, 2008), FERC Stats. & 
Regs. ] 31,261 (Dec. 28, 2007), reh'g pending, with the exception of 
modifications to resales and transfers to address the Commission's 
rules for resales described in Order No. 890 at P 815 and n. 496.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. On April 21, 2008, the Commission issued a Notice of Proposed 
Rulemaking, wherein we proposed to incorporate by reference into the 
Commission's regulations the WEQ Version 001 Standards (with certain 
exceptions) including NAESB's new standards on TLR, PKI, and the new 
OASIS implementation guide.\8\ In response to the WEQ Version 001 NOPR, 
ten comments were filed.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols 
for Public Utilities, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 73 FR 22,849 
(Apr. 28, 2008), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,633 (2008) (WEQ Version 
001 NOPR).
    \9\ Commenters on the WEQ Version 001 NOPR, and the 
abbreviations used in this Final Rule to identify them are listed in 
the Appendix.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Discussion

A. Overview

    7. In this Final Rule, the Commission is amending its regulations 
under the FPA to incorporate by reference the NAESB WEQ Version 001 
standards that the Commission proposed to incorporate in the WEQ 
Version 001

[[Page 43850]]

NOPR.\10\ While many of the standards simply revise or update existing 
standards, some of the standards address new business practices. For 
example, NAESB adopted new business practice standards for resales and 
transfers to standardize secondary transmission service on the OASIS. 
These standards also standardize how resales and transfers are 
conducted off the OASIS. NAESB also adopted PKI standards to create 
greater security for business transactions taking place over the 
Internet. In addition, NAESB has revised and added standards 
establishing business practices related to the North American Electric 
Reliability Corporation (NERC) reliability standards.\11\ For example, 
NAESB has adopted standards governing TLR that specify business 
practices for cutting transmission services in the event of a TLR, 
consistent with the NERC reliability standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Consistent with our proposal in the WEQ Version 001 NOPR, 
we are not revising our regulations to incorporate by reference the 
following standards: Standards of Conduct for Electric Transmission 
Providers (WEQ-009) and Contracts Related Standards (WEQ-010). In 
addition, consistent with our discussion in the WEQ Version 001 
NOPR, we are not incorporating by reference the following WEQ-001 
standards: WEQ-001-0.1, 001-0.9 through WEQ-001-0.13, WEQ-001-1.0 
through WEQ-001-1.8 and WEQ-001-9.7.
    \11\ In Docket No. RM08-7-000, the Commission is issuing a Final 
Rule (being issued simultaneously with this rule) approving six 
modified Reliability Standards submitted to the Commission for 
approval by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation 
(NERC). The rule being issued in Docket No. RM08-7-000 is also 
approving NERC's proposed interpretation of five specific 
Requirements of Commission-approved Reliability Standards. While the 
Final Rule being issued in Docket No. RM08-7-000 addresses modified 
Reliability Standards, the Final Rule being issued in the instant 
proceeding (i.e., in Docket No. RM05-5-005), is addressing, among 
other matters, the business practice standards related to these 
Reliability Standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. In the NOPR, we asked for comment on differences in definitions 
in a few of the NERC's and NAESB's TLR standards. The comments indicate 
that NERC and NAESB have formed a subcommittee to ensure that their 
definitions are complementary in the future. We are very pleased that 
NERC and NAESB have taken active steps to ensure that their respective 
definitions are harmonized so as to ensure that these standards will 
operate efficiently in the future.
    9. The specific NAESB standards that we are incorporating by 
reference in this Final Rule are:
     Business Practices for Open Access Same-Time Information 
Systems (OASIS), Version 1.4 (WEQ-001, Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, with 
minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) including Standards 001-0.2 
through 001-0.8, 001-0.14 through 001-0.20, 001-2.0 through 001-9.6.2, 
001-9.8 through 001-12.5.2, and 001-A and 001-B; \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ The WEQ Version 001 package of standards includes Version 
1.4 of the OASIS Standards. The reference to Version 1.4 is based on 
the fact that this is the fourth set of revisions to the Version 1.0 
OASIS Standards that the Commission adopted in Order No. 889. Open 
Access Same-Time Information System and Standards of Conduct, 61 FR 
21,737 (May 10, 1996), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,035 (April 24, 
1996). The Version 1.4 reference appears in Standards WEQ-001, WEQ-
002, WEQ-003, and WEQ-013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Business Practices for Open Access Same-Time Information 
Systems (OASIS) Standards & Communication Protocols, Version 1.4 (WEQ-
002, Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 
16, 2007) including Standards 002-0.1 through 002-5.10;
     Open Access Same-Time Information Systems (OASIS) Data 
Dictionary, Version 1.4 (WEQ-003, Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, with 
minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) including Standard 003-0;
     Coordinate Interchange (WEQ-004, Version 001, Oct. 31, 
2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) including 
Purpose, Applicability, and Standards 004-0.1 through 004-17.2, and 
004-A through 004-D;\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See supra note 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Area Control Error (ACE) Equation Special Cases Standards 
(WEQ-005, Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on 
Nov. 16, 2007) including Purpose, Applicability, and Standards 005-0.1 
through 005-3.1.3, and 005-A;
     Manual Time Error Correction (WEQ-006, Version 001, Oct. 
31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) including 
Purpose, Applicability, and Standards 006-0.1 through 006-12;
     Inadvertent Interchange Payback (WEQ-007, Version 001, 
Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) 
including Purpose, Applicability, and Standards 007-0.1 through 007-2, 
and 007-A;
     Transmission Loading Relief--Eastern Interconnection (WEQ-
008, Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 
16, 2007) including Purpose, Applicability, and Standards 008-0.1 
through 008-3.11.2.8, and 008-A through 008-D;\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Gas/Electric Coordination (WEQ-011, Version 001, Oct. 31, 
2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) including 
Standards 011-0.1 through 011-1.6;\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ These standards are identical to the standards the 
Commission incorporated by reference into its regulations at 18 CFR 
38.2 in Order No. 698.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) (WEQ-012, Version 001, 
Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) 
including Recommended Standard, Certification, Scope, Commitment to 
Open Standards, and Standards 012-0.1 through 012-1.26.5; and
     Business Practices for Open Access Same-Time Information 
Systems (OASIS) Implementation Guide, Version 1.4 (WEQ-013, Version 
001, Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) 
including Introduction and Standards 013-0.1 through 013-4.2.
    10. The Commission will also require public utilities to modify 
their open access transmission tariffs (OATTs) to include the WEQ 
standards that we are incorporating by reference the next time they 
make any unrelated filing to revise their OATTs.\16\ As we did in Order 
No. 676,\17\ we clarify that, to the extent a public utility's OASIS 
obligations are administered by an independent system operator or 
regional transmission operator (RTO) and are not covered in the public 
utility's OATT, the public utility will not need to modify its OATT to 
include the OASIS standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Order No. 676, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,216 at P 100. 
If the public utility makes no unrelated tariff filing by January 
31, 2009, it must make a separate tariff filing incorporating these 
standards by that date. They are to use the language specified later 
in this order, see infra P 83. We also note that, as discussed in P 
82, once the standards have become effective, utilities must abide 
by the standards even before they make their tariff filings 
incorporating the standards into their tariffs.
    \17\ Order No. 676, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,216 at P 20.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    11. NAESB approved the standards under its consensus 
procedures.\18\ Adoption of consensus standards is appropriate because 
the consensus process helps ensure the reasonableness of the standards 
by requiring that the standards draw support from a broad spectrum of 
all segments of the industry. Moreover, since the industry itself has 
to conduct business under these standards, the Commission's regulations 
should reflect those

[[Page 43851]]

standards that have the widest possible support. In section 12(d) of 
the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTT&AA), 
Congress affirmatively requires federal agencies to use technical 
standards developed by voluntary consensus standards organizations, 
like NAESB, as a means to carry out policy objectives or 
activities.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ The WEQ's procedures ensure that all industry members can 
have input into the development of a business practice standard, 
whether or not they are members of NAESB, and each standard it 
adopts is supported by a consensus of the five industry segments: 
Transmission, generation, marketer/brokers, distribution/load 
serving entities, and end users. Under the WEQ process, for a 
standard to be approved, it must receive a super-majority vote of 67 
percent of the members of the WEQ's Executive Committee with support 
from at least 40 percent of each of the five industry segments. For 
final approval, 67 percent of the WEQ's general membership must 
ratify the standards.
    \19\ Pub. L. No. 104-113, 12(d), 110 Stat. 775 (1996), 15 U.S.C. 
272 note (1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Issues Raised by Commenters

    12. Comments in response to the WEQ Version 001 NOPR were filed by 
ten commenters. While some of these comments raise concerns about 
specific standards, none of the ten comments filed raise any general 
objection to the Commission's proposal to incorporate by reference the 
WEQ standards into the Commission's regulations.
1. Cost of Obtaining NAESB Standards
a. Comments
    13. Lafayette and LEPA are concerned that the cost of obtaining the 
NAESB standards impedes dissemination and understanding of the 
applicable requirements. Lafayette and LEPA claim that incorporating by 
reference standards necessarily purchased at not insubstantial costs 
imposes a burden on small entities, particularly where issues of 
interpretation of the standards arise.
b. Commission Determination
    14. In Order No. 676, the Commission explained that standards 
organizations are permitted to charge for standards incorporated by 
reference into federal government regulations.\20\ Under the Freedom of 
Information Act, to be eligible for incorporation by reference, 
standards must be reasonably available to the class of persons affected 
by their publication.\21\ The NAESB standards are reasonably available 
to all industry members. The cost for obtaining the NAESB standards for 
non-members is $100 for the printed standards booklet and $300 for the 
CD-ROM of the standards. NAESB members can obtain the standards on-line 
at no cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Order No. 676, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,216 at P 97.
    \21\ 1 CFR 51.7(a)(2)-(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    15. The arguments raised here by Lafayette and LEPA are identical 
to those that the Commission considered and rejected in Order No. 676, 
which became a final determination when no party filed a request for 
rehearing of Order No. 676 objecting to the Commission's finding on 
this issue. None of the arguments raised here by Lafayette and LEPA 
lead us to reverse the determination that the Commission previously 
reached on this issue in Order No. 676, i.e., that the standards are 
reasonably available to all industry members. Furthermore, the 
Commission finds that the benefits to both the industry and the public 
that have resulted from the adoption of an industry-driven approach to 
standards development outweigh the cost of the fees required to obtain 
the NAESB standards. If industry participants remain concerned about 
the accessibility of the standards, these concerns should be addressed 
through the NAESB process.
2. Interpretation of NAESB Standards and OATT Principles
a. Comments
    16. LEPA requests that the Commission clarify that it will 
interpret NAESB standards in accordance with the principles underlying 
the OATT. In particular, LEPA requests that the Commission clarify that 
it is not, by incorporating the NAESB standards, intending to override 
settled matters of contract law or the Commission policies underlying 
open access transmission service.
b. Commission Determination
    17. The NAESB standards are incorporated by reference in the 
regulations and therefore must be followed to the same extent as other 
regulations and policies of the Commission. The Commission's 
regulations require compliance with both the pro forma OATT (18 CFR 
35.28) and the NAESB standards that the Commission has incorporated by 
reference (18 CFR 38.2) and that must be included in the utility's 
OATT. If LEPA is concerned that there are inconsistencies between 
specific NAESB standards and the Commission's open access transmission 
service regulations, it can seek an interpretation of the standards 
from NAESB and can make appropriate filings with the Commission.
3. Weighing Costs and Benefits of Proposed Standards
a. Comments
    18. The Midwest ISO is concerned that the cost of complying with 
and implementing some of the WEQ-001 NAESB standards (for example, 
standards WEQ-001-9.4.3 \22\ and WEQ-001-12\23\ ) will be greater than 
the benefits that will result. The Midwest ISO believes it would be 
unreasonable and unduly discriminatory to adopt a business practice 
that results in substantial compliance costs while producing only 
negligible benefits for a particular NAESB segment or a group of 
industry participants and states that the Commission has the authority 
to determine what costs are considered just and reasonable through 
rulemaking. Thus, Midwest ISO is not, at this time, requesting a waiver 
of specific standards (such as WEQ-001-9.4.3 and WEQ-001-12) but is 
asking that the Commission provide a waiver option and that NAESB be 
directed to review this entire topic. The Midwest ISO wants 
consideration to be given to the relative costs and benefits of the 
standards for entities such as the Midwest ISO or to allow affected 
entities to seek waivers.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ WEQ-001-9.4.3 provides that ``[I]f the TP determines that 
only a portion of the requested capacity can be accommodated, the TP 
shall extend to the TC that portion of the capacity (i.e. , partial 
service) that can be accommodated through a COUNTEROFFER. An example 
is shown in Appendix B.''
    \23\ WEQ-001-12 is the set of standards for transfers.
    \24\ Midwest ISO Comments at 5-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Commission Determination
    19. NAESB's stakeholder process for adopting standards ensures that 
an industry consensus is necessary before any standard is approved. 
This process helps to ensure that all approved standards are beneficial 
to the industry. However, as we explained in order No. 676, each public 
utility that wants a waiver of any standard we are incorporating by 
reference in this Final Rule may file a request for waiver, supported 
by the reasons it believes a waiver is warranted.\25\ To the extent 
that implementation of certain standards will result in substantial 
compliance costs for small industry participants, we have in the past 
considered waivers of extensions of compliance obligations where 
granting such requests would not noticeably diminish the expected 
benefits to the rest of the industry that would derive from compliance 
with the standard. Any such waiver requests should specifically detail 
the expected compliance costs and the reasons why a waiver would not 
diminish the overall expected benefits from compliance with the 
standard. Therefore, we will incorporate these standards in our 
regulations, as proposed in the WEQ Version 001 NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Order No. 676, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,216 at P 79.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Implementation Date for WEQ-001
a. Comments
    20. PJM argues that in order to implement the Resale and Transfer 
functionality required by WEQ-001,

[[Page 43852]]

PJM will have to develop the internal business documentation, develop 
the software modifications, and test those modifications. To provide 
sufficient time to implement the necessary scheduling and settlements 
application changes, PJM requests an implementation date of January 31, 
2009 or later for WEQ-001. NYISO agrees with PJM's comment and requests 
that the Commission institute an effective date of January 31, 2009 or 
later for compliance with WEQ-001.
b. Commission Determination
    21. In order to allow adequate time to implement the new Resale and 
Transfer standards in WEQ-001, the Commission will provide for an 
implementation date for the WEQ-001 standards of January 31, 2009, as 
requested.
5. WEQ-001-0.5
    22. WEQ-001-0.5 defines identical service requests as ``those OASIS 
transmission service requests that have exactly the same values'' for 
certain OASIS template Data Elements. The standard also states, 
``Service requests where any combination of PATH, POR and/or POD 
represent exactly the same commercial transmission elements shall be 
considered as `having the exact same value.' ''
a. Comments
    23. Bonneville is concerned that no other OASIS template Data 
Elements are subject to the qualifying language ``having the exact same 
value'' included in the Data Elements of PATH, POR, and POD. Bonneville 
seeks clarification that ``identical service requests'' includes 
multiple transmission service requests that have substantially similar 
start times and stop times even if those elements are not exactly the 
same.
b. Commission Determination
    24. Bonneville's requested clarification would change the meaning 
of this standard. The standard as adopted by NAESB requires that 
``identical service requests'' must have ``exactly the same values'' 
for start time and stop time, not ``substantially similar start times 
and stop times.'' Bonneville has not provided us with sufficient 
evidence that the standard needs to be modified as it suggests. If 
Bonneville believes the standard should be modified, it should, as we 
stated in Order No. 676, seek such a change through NAESB.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ E.g., Order No. 676, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,216 at P 67.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. WEQ-001-1.5(d)
    25. WEQ-001-1.5(d) provides, in part:

    In the event that an OASIS user's grossly inefficient method of 
accessing an OASIS node or obtaining information from the node 
seriously degrades the performance of the node, a Responsible Party 
may limit a user's access to an OASIS node without prior Commission 
approval.
a. Comments
    26. Bonneville asserts that the Responsible Party should have the 
right to determine whether the inefficient access of an OASIS node 
``seriously degrades'' the performance of the node and recommends that 
WEQ-001-1.5(d) be revised.
b. Commission Determination
    27. We are not incorporating WEQ-001-1.5(d) by reference in our 
regulations, because the standard is one of several that restate the 
Commission's regulations, in this case Sec.  37.5(d) of the 
Commission's regulations. As we stated in Order No. 676, the proper 
function of the NAESB business practice standards is to provide 
business practice standards that implement the Commission's 
regulations, not merely restate them.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ E.g., id. P 72 and 74.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. WEQ-001-11 (Resales)
    28. WEQ-001-11 states:

    Any Transmission Customer (Reseller) shall have the right to 
offer for sale the scheduling rights associated with the points of 
delivery and receipt of a Firm or Non-Firm Point-To-Point 
Transmission Service reservation (i.e. Parent Reservation). Any 
Eligible Customer (Assignee) may request to purchase scheduling 
rights from the Reseller.
a. Comments
    29. Duke argues for the modification of WEQ-001-11, which 
establishes a two-party transaction on OASIS between the reseller and 
the assignee for resale transactions. Duke claims that, because the 
transmission provider is permitted to annul the transaction if the 
assignee does not execute the required service agreement, an 
inappropriate burden is placed on the transmission provider to 
intervene in a transaction to which it is not a party. Duke recommends 
that this standard be revised to provide for a three-party transaction, 
similar to the one presented in WEQ 001-12.1.2.
    30. In addition, Duke asserts that, although WEQ-001-11 provides 
for the resale of both Firm Point-to-Point and Non-Firm Point-to-Point 
scheduling rights and permits the use of a blanket service agreement, 
the form of Service Agreement for resales that appears in the pro forma 
OATT refers only to firm sales. Duke suggests that this form may 
require revision to include non-firm sales.
    31. Duke also requests guidance, in the form of examples of an 
Electric Quarterly Report (EQR) filing, of multiple resale transactions 
under a blanket agreement. Alternatively, Duke suggests that the 
Commission could rescind its requirement that the transmission provider 
report resale transactions in its EQR filings and substitute a 
requirement that summary reports showing a compilation of OASIS Resale 
reservations be posted quarterly on OASIS.
b. Commission Determination
    32. The standard Duke refers to as a model for revising the 
standards for resales to provide for a three-party transaction \28\ 
specifies that a transfer must be agreed to by the reseller, the 
assignee and the transmission provider. Transfers are distinct from 
resales because transfers result in a full conveyance of rights and 
obligations from the original transmission customer to the assignee. In 
the case of both a resale and transfer, however, the assignee must 
first execute a service agreement with the transmission provider.\29\ 
In both instances, the transmission provider therefore has an 
opportunity to ensure that the assignee meets the transmission 
provider's credit requirements and is otherwise committed to abide by 
the terms and conditions of the transmission provider's OATT governing 
the reassignment of transmission service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ WEQ-001-12.1.2 states that ``[t]he Transfer must be agreed 
to by the FOTC [Financially Obligated Transmission Customer], the 
Assignee, and the TP. The Conveyance of Transfer rights is not 
complete until the TP approves the transfer. The Transmission 
Provider shall not unduly withhold such approval.''
    \29\ See Order No. 890-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,261 at P 425.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    33. The Commission considers it reasonable for the industry to 
reach consensus through the NAESB process to require transaction-
specific approval by the transmission provider for transfers, but not 
for resales. In a resale, the original transmission customer's service 
agreement remains in place and any default by the assignee does not 
relieve the original customer of its obligation to pay for service.\30\ 
That may not be the case in a transfer \31\ and, therefore, it is 
reasonable to provide transmission providers with additional protection 
in the form of the right to review and approve the transfer. Therefore, 
we see no need to modify the standards for resales as suggested by Duke 
and will incorporate these

[[Page 43853]]

standards by reference as we proposed in the WEQ Version 001 NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ See id.
    \31\ See id. P 425, n.165.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    34. In addition, Duke's concern regarding the reference to firm 
sales in the title of the Form of Service Agreement in Attachment A-1 
of the pro forma OATT has been resolved by the Commission in Order No. 
890-A. There the Commission revised Attachment A-1 to the pro forma 
OATT to clarify that the use of a blanket service agreement for resales 
is similar to the use of a blanket service agreement for primary 
capacity.\32\ The specification sheet for long-term reassignments was 
retained, consistent with the use of a specification sheet for long-
term sales of primary capacity.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ Id. P 424.
    \33\ See id., n.164.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    35. Finally, Duke's comments on the transmission provider's EQR 
obligations are beyond the scope of this rulemaking. The Commission 
adopted the EQR reporting requirement for reassigned capacity in the 
Order No. 890 proceeding, in which Duke actively participated, and Duke 
has failed to justify here rescission of that reporting 
requirement.\34\ Should Duke or any other transmission provider have 
particular concerns regarding how to comply with its reporting 
obligation, it should bring the matter to the Commission's attention 
for resolution.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \34\ See Order No. 890, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,241 at P 817; 
Order No. 890-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,261 at P 423 and n.162; 
Order No. 890-B, 123 FERC ] 61,299 at P 84 (2008).
    \35\ The Commission recently clarified and expanded the 
opportunities for regulated entities and others to obtain guidance 
regarding compliance with the rules and regulations administered by 
the Commission. See Obtaining Guidance on Regulatory Requirements, 
123 FERC ] 61,157 (2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

8. WEQ-001-11.2.1
    36. WEQ-001-11.2.1 states:

    The Assignee shall be obligated directly to the TP for any 
usage-based charges and overuse penalties resulting from its 
subsequent use of the Resale.
a. Comments
    37. The Midwest ISO is concerned that WEQ-001-11.2.1 introduces a 
high risk of financial exposure to the transmission provider in the 
event that the assignee defaults on payment. The Midwest ISO believes 
that the RTO should not have to bear the financial risk associated with 
an assignee defaulting on usage-based market charges. Furthermore, the 
Midwest ISO is concerned that this standard does not address the 
allocation and ownership of Financial Transmission Rights/Auction 
Revenue Rights. To address these concerns, the Midwest ISO recommends 
that WEQ-001-11 be revised to include prior validation requirements, 
similar to those mandated by the Commission in Order Nos. 890 and 890-A 
in the context of service agreements. Alternatively, the Midwest ISO 
requests clarification and assurance that those standards are to be 
interpreted such that transmission providers will not be held liable in 
the event of nonperformance of a resale obligation.
b. Commission Determination
    38. The Commission does not interpret WEQ-001-11.2.1 to expose a 
transmission provider to high financial risks in an event an assignee 
defaults on usage-based charges. At least 24 hours prior to any resale 
an Assignee must execute a service agreement with the Transmission 
Provider under WEQ-001-11.1.7. The Commission has held that this 
service agreement is a requirement meant to commit the Assignee to 
abide by the terms and conditions of the Transmission Provider's OATT 
governing the reassignment of transmission service.\36\ The assignee 
therefore must comply with all creditworthiness requirements required 
for signing a service agreement. If an Assignee were to default on its 
usage-based charges or overuse penalties, it would still be subject to 
its service agreement with the Transmission Provider, and the 
Transmission Provider would have access to any collateral or other 
assurances required under its OATT. Furthermore, Midwest ISO itself 
points out the Commission's policy in Order No. 890-A that allows a 
transmission provider to take action against the Assignee as it would 
any other default under the pro forma OATT, as well as transfer to the 
reseller its legal rights to enforce the Assignee's payment 
obligations.\37\ We find that these procedural protections, coupled 
with NAESB standard WEQ-001-11.2.1.1, which grants the Transmission 
Provider the right to nullify the Resale in the event the service 
agreement is not executed, address the concerns of Midwest ISO 
regarding its comments on financial exposure and the request for prior 
validation. The Commission will therefore incorporate this standard 
into the Commission's regulations by reference as we proposed in the 
WEQ Version 001 NOPR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Order No. 890-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,261 at P 423.
    \37\ Id. n.166.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

9. WEQ-001-11.3 Through WEQ-001-11.3.3
    39. Standards WEQ-001-11.3 through WEQ-001-11.3.3 describe the 
service attributes and timing of resales. These standards read as 
follows:
    WEQ-001-11.3:

    A Resale shall retain all the same transmission service 
attributes, transmission service priority, and points of delivery 
and receipt of the Parent Reservation. For example, if one hour of a 
Monthly Firm reservation is Resold, the Resale reservation shall be 
a Monthly Firm Resale reservation lasting one hour.

    WEQ-001-11.3.1:

    The TP's OASIS shall not impose any restrictions regarding the 
timing of a Resale, either submission times or service duration, 
except that the start and stop times of the Resale must be within 
the bounds of the Parent Reservation(s) that are designated as 
supporting the Resale.

    WEQ-001-11.3.2:

    The Reseller shall have the right to aggregate multiple 
reservations into a single Resale provided that each reservation 
being aggregated is of exactly the same service attribute, priority, 
product and point of receipt/point of delivery.

    WEQ-001-11.3.3:

    A Resale must be in whole hours, beginning at the top of the 
hour, and within the start and stop time(s) of the Parent 
Reservation(s).
a. Comments
    40. Southern Companies recommends that the Commission reject the 
portions of WEQ-001-11.3 through WEQ-001-11.3.3 that seem to require 
transmission providers to provide hourly firm service to assignees. 
Southern Companies argues that these provisions are inconsistent with 
the provisions of Order No. 890, the pro forma OATT, and the 
Commission's regulations.
    41. First, Southern Companies states that, in Order No. 890, the 
Commission determined that transmission providers are not required to 
provide hourly firm service; it argues, therefore, that portions of 
WEQ-001-11.3 through WEQ-001-11.3.3 are in conflict with Order No. 890 
and therefore should be rejected. Second, Southern Companies states 
that, in the pro forma OATT, the minimum term of firm point-to-point 
transmission service that is required to be offered is one day.
    42. Lastly, Southern Companies points out that the Commission's 
regulations mandate that a reseller choosing to use OASIS to offer for 
resale transmission capacity must post relevant information on the same 
OASIS as used by the transmission provider from whom the reseller 
purchased the

[[Page 43854]]

transmission capacity and in the same manner that the transmission 
provider posts its own information. Southern Companies argues that, if 
a reseller is allowed to sell hourly firm service when the transmission 
provider does not offer it, then the reseller will be unable to comply 
with the Commission's regulations regarding the posting of relevant 
information because the transmission provider will not have display 
pages, tables, etc., that are designed for hourly firm service.
    43. Duke recommends against the adoption of WEQ-001-11.3.2 due to 
the administrative difficulties that the aggregation of multiple resale 
reservations could create. Duke argues that the value of this practice 
to its customers is nominal relative to the billing complexities that 
could be involved.
b. Commission Determination
    44. A consensus of the electric industry has found that allowing 
customers the ability to resell scheduling rights on less than daily 
basis will increase the flexibility of resales and better serve the 
needs of customers. We agree that providing such enhanced flexibility 
is desirable.
    45. We also find no inconsistency between these standards and Order 
No. 890, the pro forma OATT, or the Commission's regulations. Southern 
Companies appears to be confusing its obligation to offer transmission 
service with the resale of scheduling rights by customers that have 
previously reserved service. When a customer reserves daily 
transmission service, it is given the right to schedule the use of 
transmission capacity up to the amount reserved in every hour of that 
day (subject to OATT scheduling deadlines). The customer is not 
required to schedule use in each hour of the day and, in fact, could 
use as little as a single hour of the reserved service.
    46. The assumption of a customer's scheduling rights by an assignee 
for one or more hours does not mean the transmission provider is 
offering hourly service to the assignee. As the Commission explained in 
Order No. 890-A, the reassignment of transmission capacity simply 
results in the reseller obtaining the right to schedule the reserved 
capacity during the period of the reassignment, consistent with the 
original customer's reservation.\38\ Indeed, permitting such resales is 
consistent with the Commission's determination in Order No. 888 that 
``a public utility's tariff must explicitly permit voluntary 
reassignment of all or a part of a holder's firm transmission capacity 
rights to any eligible customer.'' \39\ We therefore find that WEQ-001-
11.3.1 and WEQ-001-11.3.3 are not inconsistent with Order Nos. 888 and 
890 and provide customers with additional flexibility to obtain 
capacity in competition with the transmission provider.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ Order No. 890-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,261 at P 425.
    \39\ Promoting Wholesale Competition Through Open Access Non-
Discriminatory Transmission Services by Public Utilities; Recovery 
of Stranded Costs by Public Utilities and Transmitting Utilities, 
Order No. 888, 61 FR 21,540 (May 10, 1996), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 
31,036 at 31,696 (1996), order on reh'g, Order No. 888-A, 62 FR 
12,274 (Mar. 14, 1997), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,048 (1997), order 
on reh'g, Order No. 888-B, 81 FERC ] 61,248 (1997), order on reh'g, 
Order No. 888-C, 82 FERC ] 61,046 (1998), aff'd in relevant part sub 
nom. Transmission Access Policy Study Group v. FERC, 225 F. 3d 667 
(D.C. Cir. 2000) (TAPS v. FERC), aff'd sub nom. New York v. FERC, 
535 U.S. 1 (2002) (emphasis in original; footnotes omitted).
    \40\ In the event of an hourly assignment of scheduling rights, 
the assignee would be subject to the same scheduling deadlines 
stated in the transmission provider's OATT as applicable to the 
reseller, e.g., 10 a.m. of the day prior to commencement of service 
if the transmission provider does not otherwise offer hourly firm 
service. Recently, in Order No. 890-B, the Commission directed 
transmission providers to include in their EQRs the rate that would 
have been charged under their OATTs had the assignee purchased 
primary service from the transmission provider for the term of the 
reassignment. See Order No. 890-B at P 84. If the transmission 
provider does not offer hourly firm service, the tariff rate that 
would be reported for an assignee receiving hourly scheduling rights 
would be the rate for daily service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

10. WEQ-001-11.5.3
    47. WEQ-001-11.5.3 states:

    All resales must include the price of the Resale. Price units 
shall always be $/MW-Hour reserved.
a. Comments
    48. Southern Companies recommends that the Commission reject WEQ-
001-11.5.3. Southern Companies claims that forcing resales to be 
converted to an hourly price is meaningless, particularly when 
transmission providers are not required to provide hourly firm service. 
Furthermore, Southern Companies claims that this provision is 
inconsistent with both the pro forma OATT and the Commission's 
regulations. Reassigned service is governed by the transmission 
provider's OATT, and Southern Companies claims that in order to be 
consistent with the transmission provider's OATT, the price of a resale 
should be based upon the increments of service that are set forth in 
that OATT and agreed to by the reseller and assignee. Furthermore, 
Southern Companies cites section 23.1 of the pro forma OATT, which 
mandates that assignees receive the same services and priority of 
service as did the reseller, and that the assignee is subject to all 
the terms and conditions of the tariff. Lastly, the Commission's 
regulations state that the transmission provider must post OASIS 
information for third parties in the same way that it posts its own 
information. Southern Companies argues that the transmission provider 
would be unable to comply with this regulation if WEQ-001-11.5.3 is 
adopted and the transmission provider does not offer hourly firm 
service because the transmission provider would be required to post 
prices in units different from the units in which it reports its own 
prices if they are based on the increments of service provided. 
Southern Companies notes that they raised these concerns throughout the 
NAESB process of developing the standards.
    49. Bonneville argues that because resales may be of different 
increments of service, the pricing for the different increments must be 
permitted to vary to reflect these increments. Furthermore, Bonneville 
claims that the term ``Price units'' in proposed WEQ-001-11.5.3 is 
inconsistent with the definition of ``PRICE--UNITS'' in the OASIS Data 
Dictionary, WEQ-003-0. Bonneville recommends that WEQ-001-11.5.3 read 
as follows:

    All resales must include the price of the Resale. PRICE--UNITS 
shall be specified (e.g., $/MWhr, $/MWmonth, etc.).

    50. Duke supports the adoption of WEQ-001-11.5.3. Duke claims that 
this requirement both simplifies the calculation of bills and provides 
the Commission with a consistent price format for the comparison of 
resale transactions. If the pricing methodology prepared by NAESB is 
not acceptable, then Duke would support a requirement that the total 
resale price be included in the reservation, with the Transmission 
Provider billing the total amount to the Assignee in one bill and 
crediting the total amount to the Reseller in a single credit, 
regardless of the duration of the resale reservation.
b. Commission Determination
    51. The Commission in Order No. 890 did not address whether the 
price for resales must be stated in a particular unit of measure, such 
as $/MW-Hour. Instead, the Commission left to negotiating parties the 
determination of the price for a particular reassignment of 
transmission capacity. It is not unreasonable for the industry to have 
reached consensus that the price of resales should be stated in $/MW-
Hour. The Commission agrees with Duke that having a consistent price 
format for all

[[Page 43855]]

resale transactions will make it easier for the Commission to compare 
such transactions to each other. This requirement also will improve the 
transparency and openness of resales of transmission service, allowing 
potential reassignment customers to better understand the comparative 
value of assigned transmission service. Therefore, we will incorporate 
this standard by reference as we proposed in the WEQ Version 001 NOPR.
    52. Neither Southern Companies nor Bonneville stated a compelling 
reason as to why the Commission should not accept the proposed NAESB 
standard. It is the obligation of the parties negotiating the 
reassignment to state the price for the transaction and, pursuant to 
this standard, all such prices will be in a consistent format. We 
recognize that this may result in the posting of Resale prices that are 
not in the same unit of measure as the original reservation under which 
the Resale is accomplished. Nothing in Order No. 890 or our regulations 
prohibits this approach, which we conclude will permit customers to 
better compare prices for different transactions on the same 
transmission system, as well as transactions across transmission 
providers.
11. Resales of Conditional Long Term Firm Reservations
    53. WEQ-001-11.1.7 states that ``[t]he Assignee must execute a 
service agreement with the Transmission Provider that will govern the 
provision of reassigned service no later than twenty-four hours prior 
to the scheduling deadline applicable for the commencement of the 
reassigned service. The Transmission Provider may establish a blanket 
service agreement to include Resale transactions.''
    54. WEQ-001-11.7 states that ``[i]n the event a Transmission 
Provider requires that a higher priority, competing transmission 
service request must displace all or a portion of a confirmed lower 
priority reservation, the TP shall have the right to nullify any 
Resales that reference the displaced reservation as their Parent.''
    55. WEQ-001-11.7.1 states that ``[o]nce the conditional window on 
the Parent Reservation has closed, Resales for firm service are not 
subject to displacement in accordance with Standard WEQ-001-11.''
a. Comments
    56. Duke strongly recommends that the resale of Conditional Long 
Term Firm reservations be prohibited so that transmission providers can 
effectively manage these reservations and assure the reliable operation 
of the transmission grid. In the event that the resale of these 
reservations is permitted, Duke argues that they should only be 
permitted during periods in which the reservations are unconditionally 
firm and such resales should be restricted to the remaining portion of 
the biennial reassessment period, where applicable.
    57. Furthermore, Duke argues that although WEQ-001-11.1.7 permits 
the use of blanket service agreements, if the resale of Conditional 
Long Term Firm reservations is allowed, then the use of a blanket 
service agreement as specified in WEQ-001-11.1.7 would not be permitted 
under Order No. 890. Duke states that, pursuant to Order No. 890, 
transmission providers and assignees are to execute a non-conforming 
Service Agreement for resales that specifies either specific system 
conditions during which conditional curtailment may occur or annual 
number of curtailment hours during which conditional curtailment may 
occur.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ Duke cites Order No. 890, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,241 at P 
960.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    58. Bonneville also recommends that the Commission adopt a 
provision at WEQ-001-11.7 preventing transmission customers from 
initiating any resale during the conditional window because permitting 
this practice could allow resales initiated prematurely to impose risks 
on all parties involved in the transaction and could lead to 
inefficiencies in the resale market.
b. Commission Determination
    59. As the Commission explained in Order No. 890-A, and reiterates 
above, the reassignment of transmission capacity results in the 
reseller obtaining the right to schedule the reserved capacity during 
the period of the reassignment consistent with the original customer's 
reservation.\42\ This applies equally to long-term firm point-to-point 
service using the conditional firm option adopted in Order No. 890. We 
conclude that the NAESB standards adequately address resales of 
conditional firm transactions. WEQ-001-11.1 makes clear that 
confirmation of a resale ``shall also convey any outstanding conditions 
that may exist on the Parent Reservation (such as conditional approval 
pursuant to section 13.2(ii) of the OATT).'' WEQ-001-11.7 and WEQ-001-
11.7.1 also address the transmission provider's right to nullify resale 
transactions when a higher priority transaction displaces a lower 
priority transaction and when those rights apply to conditional firm 
transactions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ Order No. 890-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,261 at P 425.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    60. Since these standards permit resales of conditional firm 
transactions and give the transmission provider the right to nullify 
resales of displaced transactions, we find that the standards address 
the concerns of Duke and Bonneville about the effective management of 
conditional firm transactions. If Duke and Bonneville believe that 
these standards are not workable upon implementation, they may submit a 
request to NAESB to modify these standards based on their experience 
with these standards.
    61. The Commission finds no reason to reject the industry's 
decision to permit a transmission provider to develop a blanket service 
agreement for resales of conditional firm service. Order No. 890 
required only that an original conditional firm service contract would 
be nonconforming in every case, and thus, would be required to be filed 
with the Commission for approval. However, we see no reason to prohibit 
the use of a blanket service agreement for the resale of conditional 
firm service, since the resale only provides the right to schedule 
service consistent with the original transmission customer's 
reservation, which will be on file with the Commission. We agree with 
NAESB that the development of a blanket agreement for resales is 
beneficial because it will help encourage and expedite the processing 
of resales.
12. WEQ-004 (Coordinate Interchange) and WEQ-008 (Transmission Loading 
Relief--Eastern Interconnection)
    62. WEQ-004 provides the NAESB business practice standards for 
coordinate interchange. These standards are designed to facilitate the 
transfer of electric energy between entities responsible for balancing 
load and generation.
    63. WEQ-008 provides the NAESB business practice standards to 
complement the transmission loading relief procedures needed for 
curtailment and reloading of interchange transactions to relieve 
overloads on transmission facilities modeled for the eastern 
interconnection.
a. NOPR Requests for Comments
    64. In the WEQ Version 001 NOPR, the Commission raised three 
questions concerning reliability-related standards and sought comments 
in response to these questions. First, as to WEQ-004, the Commission 
asked whether passive approval (also referred to as confirmation by 
silence) is appropriate for a business practice intended to

[[Page 43856]]

complement a reliability standard.\43\ Second, the Commission also 
asked a question about e-tagging.\44\ Third, as to WEQ-008, the 
Commission asked whether the differences in NAESB and NERC definitions 
are significant and whether a single definition for reliability-related 
terms should be adopted in future standards.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ WEQ Version 001 NOPR at P 21.
    \44\ Id. P 20. No comments in response to this question were 
received.
    \45\ Id. P 28.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Comments
    65. In response to the Commission's request for comments regarding 
whether confirmation by silence is appropriate for a business practice 
intended to complement a reliability standard, NERC claims that it does 
not create a reliability impact and that the NAESB Standard does not 
alter the NERC Reliability Standards requirements, which require active 
response by the Balancing Authority and Transmission Service Provider.
    66. In response to the Commission's request for comments on whether 
the differences in the definition used by NAESB and NERC are 
significant and whether a single definition for reliability-related 
terms should be adopted in future standards, NERC asserts that the 
definitions do not affect the industry's ability to successfully 
implement the standards as written and reports that it is working with 
NAESB to develop more in-depth coordination procedures to ensure that 
definitions are consistent between both organizations. This task has 
been assigned to a newly formed Standards Committee Process 
Subcommittee.
    67. Regarding the Commission's request for comment concerning the 
differences in the reliability-related definitions used by NAESB and 
NERC, the Midwest ISO states that it will rely on an effort undertaken 
by NAESB to resolve these differences and assumes that the Commission 
will direct that NAESB and NERC use the same definitions. SPP concurs 
with and endorses the comments submitted by the Midwest ISO on whether 
the differences in reliability-related definitions are significant and 
whether single definitions should be adopted in future standards.
    68. The Midwest ISO is concerned that the inclusion of the Regional 
Difference in Appendix D of WEQ-008 Transmission Loading Relief--
Eastern Interconnection results in overlapping requirements, since the 
same Regional Difference appears as Section E in the NERC TLR Standard 
IRO-006-04--Reliability Coordination--Transmission Loading Relief. NERC 
retains responsibility for the Regional Difference Section of the NERC 
TLR Standard (section E) while a field test permitting PJM, Midwest 
ISO, and SPP market flows to use a three percent threshold is being 
conducted; however, when the field test and an evaluation of the 
results are completed and a recommendation on the proper curtailment 
threshold that will be included in the Regional Difference is approved 
based on the results, the Regional Difference will be transferred to 
NAESB and removed from the NERC TLR Standard. In Order No. 693,\46\ the 
Commission stated that it would neither approve nor remand the waiver 
of the regional difference to NERC TLR Standard IRO-006-03 while the 
field test was being conducted, and the Midwest ISO requests that the 
Commission take a similar action regarding WEQ-008 Appendix D, neither 
approving it nor remanding it while the field test is being conducted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \46\ Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System, 
72 FR 31,452 (June 7, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242, at P 989 
(Mar. 16, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

c. Commission Determination
    69. As stated above, NAESB and NERC have agreed to establish a 
subcommittee to ensure that their definitions are consistent. Since all 
industry segments indicate that any existing differences in terms used 
by NAESB and NERC will not affect reliability or the ability to 
implement these standards, we will incorporate these standards.\47\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \47\ In Docket No. RM08-7-000, the Commission has deferred 
action on the proposed NERC TLR Reliability Standards. However, 
there is no need for us to defer action on WEQ-008. Thus, we will 
proceed to incorporate WEQ-008 by reference in this Final Rule. If 
developments concerning NERC's TLR Reliability Standards necessitate 
revisions to these standards, we are relying on NAESB, in 
coordination with NERC, to adopt any needed revisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    70. While we will adopt the Regional Differences Section in 
Appendix D of the WEQ-008 TLR--Eastern Interconnection standards, we 
will not require it to be implemented until after the completion of the 
field tests within PJM, Midwest ISO, and SPP. Currently, the Regional 
Differences Section is housed in the NERC Reliability Standards and 
will remain so until the completion of the field tests.\48\ NERC states 
that, at that time, Section E of the NERC TLR Standard will be deleted 
from its Reliability Standards and transferred to the NAESB Business 
Practice Standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \48\ Pursuant to section E of the NERC TLR Standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    71. The Commission is mindful of Midwest ISO's concern regarding 
overlapping requirements, and therefore will postpone the 
implementation of Appendix D until after the field tests are over and 
NERC has transferred its responsibility to NAESB. This transfer will 
leave the responsibility for the Regional Differences Section in only 
one party's hands at a given time, and alleviate Midwest ISO's 
concerns.
    72. Regarding the Commission's request for comments concerning 
passive approval, NERC replied that it does not believe NAESB's 
standard allowing confirmation by silence creates a detrimental effect 
on reliability. In addition, NAESB's standard does not alter or 
interfere with any of the reliability requirements for the NERC 
Reliability Standard. Therefore, we will accept the NAESB standard.
13. WEQ-012-1.5 (Public Key Infrastructure) \49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ As we explained in the WEQ Version 001 NOPR, FERC Stats. & 
Regs. ] 32,633, n.23, the PKI mechanism involves the use of 
extremely long prime numbers, called keys, to provide assurance that 
communications are properly protected. Two keys are involved--a 
private key, which only the user has access to, and a public key, 
which can be accessed by anyone. The two keys work together so a 
message scrambled with the private key can only be unscrambled with 
the public key and vice versa. The more digits in these keys, the 
more secure the process. Similar to proving an identity through a 
handwritten signature offline, a digital signature is used to prove 
an identity online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    73. WEQ-012-1.5 provides that the WEQ authorized certification 
authority may impose a ``reasonable fee'' for the issuance or renewal 
of certificates and other services and may not impose a fee to revoke 
certificates, for access to the subscriber's certificate, or for access 
to an authorized certification authority's published certificate 
revocation list.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ Defined in WEQ-012-0.7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

a. Comments
    74. The Midwest ISO is concerned about the provision in WEQ-012-
1.5, stating that the provisions allowing a ``reasonable fee'' for the 
issuance or renewal of certificates and other services could lead to 
arbitrary fees and undue discrimination, because it: does not define 
what constitutes a ``reasonable fee,'' does not establish a methodology 
for determining whether or not a fee is reasonable, and does not 
establish what entity has the responsibility of deciding what 
constitutes a reasonable fee. Furthermore, the Midwest ISO is concerned 
that the standard does not identify how often certificates must be 
renewed, which results in ambiguity regarding how often fees would be 
charged. Lastly, the Midwest ISO is

[[Page 43857]]

concerned that because the standard allows for imposing ``reasonable 
fees'' for other services, additional fees may be charged. To address 
these concerns, the Midwest ISO requests that the Commission direct 
NAESB to modify WEQ-012-1.5 to remove the ambiguities and recommends 
that all fees charged by a NAESB WEQ Certification Authority be 
approved by the Commission.
b. Commission Determination
    75. The Commission will incorporate the standard. In order to 
implement PKI encryption companies are required to use a Certification 
Authority, and the company can choose among potential certifiers who 
offer electronic certificates that meet the NAESB PKI Standards.\51\ 
Competition among the Certification Authorities should ensure that fees 
are reasonable. In any event, the fees charged by a Certification 
Authority for PKI are not subject to the Commission's jurisdiction, 
because they are not fees for the transmission or sale at wholesale of 
electric energy in interstate commerce.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ Certification Authorities are no different than other 
entities which public utilities must hire to comply with Commission 
or other government regulations. For instance, the Commission 
requires companies to produce audited financial statements, and 
companies therefore must pay fees to produce such statements. 
Midwest ISO's request for the Commission to regulate Certification 
Authority fees is akin to asking the Commission to approve the fees 
certified public accountants charge for preparing financial 
statements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

14. Requests for Modifications to NAESB Standards
a. Comments
    76. In their comments, Bonneville \52\ and Duke \53\ request 
modifications to numerous NAESB standards, and suggests the addition of 
two new standards. Bonneville's comments do not object to the 
incorporation by reference of these standards, nor allege that the 
standards are inconsistent with Commission policy, but in main part 
offer editorial suggestions that in Bonneville's view will make the 
standards clearer or clarify how they will play out in specific 
situations. For example, Bonneville's Attachment A suggests a number of 
revisions that attempt to make certain standards clearer by adding 
qualifications already implicit in NAESB's adopted standards.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \52\ Specifically, Bonneville suggests revisions to WEQ-001-8.3, 
WEQ-013-2.1, WEQ-013-2.2, WEQ-013-2.4.2, WEQ-013-2.6.4, WEQ-013-
2.6.5.1, WEQ-013-2.6.5.2, WEQ-013-2.6.6, WEQ-013-2.6.7.1, and WEQ-
013-2.6.7.2. Bonneville also suggests the addition of new standards 
WEQ-001-11.5.4 and WEQ-001-12.5.3.
    \53\ Duke's suggested revisions relate only to WEQ-001-12. Duke 
suggests substituting the term ``assignment'' for ``transfer,'' and 
adding a restricted value and definition for the term ``transfer'' 
(or its replacement).
    \54\ See, e.g., WEQ-013-2.6.6 and WEQ-013-2.6.7.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

b. Commission Determination
    77. The Commission will not modify the various NAESB standards as 
requested by Bonneville and Duke. The task before the Commission in 
this Final Rule is to review the standards recently adopted by NAESB, 
and to decide whether to incorporate those standards by reference into 
the Commission's regulations as mandatory standards that must be 
complied with by public utilities. Our task is not to rewrite NAESB's 
standards to make editorial revisions and enhancements, even if 
commenters correctly observe and point out some improvement that could 
be added to the standards. If the Commission finds NAESB's standards 
inadequate or finds that they conflict with the Commission's policies 
or regulations, we will decline to incorporate that standard by 
reference into our regulations and on occasion we may provide NAESB 
with guidance as to revisions NAESB might make to that standard to make 
it acceptable to the Commission.
    78. While it is appropriate for commenters who object to the 
Commission's incorporation by reference of a standard to raise those 
arguments with the Commission, Bonneville should direct any proposed 
modifications or additions to NAESB's standards to NAESB for 
consideration. Following this procedure, Bonneville's proposed changes 
can receive proper consideration from all industry segments before they 
are acted on.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \55\ As to Bonneville's request that we clarify the reference to 
``deferral requests posted by the Primary Provider,'' see Bonneville 
Comments at 7, this matter may also be brought up with NAESB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    79. Duke also suggests that WEQ-001-12 be modified so as to revise 
the procedure established in Order No. 890-A for the pricing of 
reassigned transmission. But, as Duke concedes, WEQ-001-12 does not 
address the issue of pricing reassigned transmission. Duke is 
attempting to use the adoption of WEQ-001-12 as a pretext to 
collaterally attack an issue already determined by Order No. 890-A.

III. Implementation Dates and Procedures

    80. The standards incorporated by reference in this Final Rule must 
be implemented by October 1, 2008, with the following exceptions:

    (1) The reliability related standards (WEQ-004 Coordinate 
Interchange, WEQ-005 Area Control Error (ACE) Equation Special 
Cases, WEQ-006 Manual Time Error, WEQ-007 Inadvertent Interchange 
Payback, and WEQ-008 Transmission Loading Relief--Eastern 
Interconnection) are required to be implemented by the later of the 
effective date of the Final Rule in RM08-7-000 or the effective date 
of this Final Rule;
    (2) WEQ-001 OASIS Standards are required to be implemented by 
January 31, 2009; and
    (3) Appendix D to the WEQ-008 Transmission Loading Relief--
Eastern Interconnection standards need not be implemented until NERC 
completes the field testing.

    81. To reduce the burden on filers, as we did in Order No. 676, 
although public utilities must fully comply with the requirements of 
this Final Rule in accordance with the implementation schedule above, 
we are not requiring public utilities immediately to file revised OATTs 
incorporating these changes.
    82. The Commission is also requiring, consistent with our 
regulation at 18 CFR 35.28(c)(vi), each electric utility to revise its 
OATT to include the Version 001 WEQ standards we are incorporating by 
reference herein. For standards that do not require implementing tariff 
provisions, the Commission will allow the utility to incorporate the 
WEQ standard by reference in its OATT. We are not, however, requiring a 
separate tariff filing to accomplish this change. Consistent with our 
prior practice, we will allow public utilities the option of including 
these changes as part of an unrelated tariff filing.\56\ However, 
consistent with our prior practice, as of the implementation dates 
above, public utilities must abide by these standards even before they 
update their tariffs to incorporate these changes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ See Order No. 676, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,216 at P 100. 
If the public utility makes no unrelated tariff filing by January 
31, 2009, it must make a separate tariff filing incorporating these 
standards by that date. They are to use the language specified later 
in this order, see infra P 83.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    83. If adoption of these standards does not require any changes or 
revisions to existing OATT provisions, public utilities may comply with 
this rule by adding a provision to their OATTs that incorporates the 
standards adopted in this rule by reference, including the standard 
number and Version 001 to identify the standard. To incorporate these 
standards into their OATTs, public utilities must use the following 
language in their OATTs:
     Business Practices for Open Access Same-Time Information 
Systems (OASIS), Version 1.4 (WEQ-001, Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, with 
minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007)

[[Page 43858]]

including Standards 001-0.2 through 001-0.8, 001-0.14 through 001-0.20, 
001-2.0 through 001-9.6.2, 001-9.8 through 001-12.5.2, and 001-A and 
001-B;
     Business Practices for Open Access Same-Time Information 
Systems (OASIS) Standards & Communication Protocols, Version 1.4 (WEQ-
002, Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 
16, 2007) including Standards 002-0.1 through 002-5.10;
     Open Access Same-Time Information Systems (OASIS) Data 
Dictionary, Version 1.4 (WEQ-003, Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, with 
minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) including Standard 003-0;
     Coordinate Interchange (WEQ-004, Version 001, October 31, 
2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) including 
Purpose, Applicability, and Standards 004-0.1 through 004-17.2, and 
004-A through 004-D;
     Area Control Error (ACE) Equation Special Cases Standards 
(WEQ-005, Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on 
Nov. 16, 2007) including Purpose, Applicability, and Standards 005-0.1 
through 005-3.1.3, and 005-A;
     Manual Time Error Correction (WEQ-006, Version 001, Oct. 
31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) including 
Purpose, Applicability, and Standards 006-0.1 through 006-12;
     Inadvertent Interchange Payback (WEQ-007, Version 001, 
Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) 
including Purpose, Applicability, and Standards 007-0.1 through 007-2, 
and 007-A;
     Transmission Loading Relief--Eastern Interconnection (WEQ-
008, Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 
16, 2007) including Purpose, Applicability, and Standards 008-0.1 
through 008-3.11.2.8, and 008-A through 008-D;
     Gas/Electric Coordination (WEQ-011, Version 001, Oct. 31, 
2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) including 
Standards 011-0.1 through 011-1.6;
     Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) (WEQ-012, Version 001, 
Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) 
including Recommended Standard, Certification, Scope, Commitment to 
Open Standards, and Standards 012-0.1 through 012-1.26.5; and
     Business Practices for Open Access Same-Time Information 
Systems (OASIS) Implementation Guide, Version 1.4 (WEQ-013, Version 
001, Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) 
including Introduction and Standards 013-0.1 through 013-4.2.
    84. If a public utility requests waiver of a standard, it will not 
be required to comply with the standard until the Commission acts on 
its waiver request. Therefore, if a public utility has obtained a 
waiver or has a pending request for a waiver, its proposed revision to 
its OATT should not include the standard number associated with the 
standard for which it has obtained or seeks a waiver. Instead, the 
public utility's OATT should specify those standards for which the 
public utility has obtained a waiver or has pending a request for 
waiver. Once a waiver request is denied, the public utility will be 
required to include in its OATT the standard(s) for which waiver was 
denied.

IV. Notice of Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards

    85. Office of Management and Budget Circular A-119 (section 11) 
(February 10, 1998) provides that when a federal agency issues or 
revises a regulation containing a standard, the agency should publish a 
statement in the Final Rule stating whether the adopted standard is a 
voluntary consensus standard or a government-unique standard. In this 
rulemaking, the Commission is incorporating by reference voluntary 
consensus standards developed by the WEQ.

V. Information Collection Statement

    86. OMB's regulations in 5 CFR 1320.11 (2005) require that it 
approve certain reporting and recordkeeping requirements (collections 
of information) imposed by an agency. Upon approval of a collection of 
information, OMB assigns an OMB control number and an expiration date. 
Respondents subject to the filing requirements of this Final Rule will 
not be penalized for failing to respond to this collection of 
information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB 
control number.
    87. This Final Rule will affect the following existing data 
collections: Standards for Business Practices and Communication 
Protocols for Public Utilities (FERC-717) and Electric Rate Schedule 
Filings (FERC-516).
    88. The following burden estimate is based on the projected costs 
for the industry to implement revisions to the WEQ Standards currently 
incorporated by reference into the Commission's regulations at 18 CFR 
38.2 and to implement the new standards adopted by NAESB that we are 
incorporating by reference in this Final Rule.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Number of
                 Data collection                     Number of     responses per     Hours per     Total number
                                                    respondents     respondent       response        of hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FERC-516........................................             176               1               6           1,056
FERC-717........................................             176               1              10           1,760
                                                 ---------------------------------------------------------------
    Totals......................................  ..............  ..............  ..............           2,816
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Total Annual Hours for Collection: (Reporting and Recordkeeping, 
(if appropriate)) = 2816 hours.
    Information Collection Costs: The Commission seeks comments on the 
costs to comply with these requirements. It has projected the average 
annualized cost for all respondents to be the following: \57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ The total annualized costs for the information collection 
is $901,120. This number is reached by multiplying the total hours 
to prepare responses (2816) by an hourly wage estimate of $320 (a 
composite estimate that includes legal, technical and support staff 
rates, $200+$95+$25=$320), 2816 hours x $320/hour= $901,120.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             FERC-516        FERC-717
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized Capital/Startup Costs........        $337,920        $563,200
Annualized Costs (Operations &                       N/A  ..............
 Maintenance)...........................
                                         -------------------------------
    Total Annualized Costs..............         337,920         563,200
------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 43859]]

    89. The Commission sought comments on the burden of complying with 
the requirements imposed by these requirements. No comments were filed 
addressing the reporting burden.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ We note, however, that two comments argued that it would be 
too costly for small entities to obtain copies of the NAESB 
Standards from NAESB. We addressed these comments in the preamble of 
this Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    90. The Commission's regulations adopted in this rule are necessary 
to establish a more efficient and integrated wholesale electric power 
grid. Requiring such information ensures both a common means of 
communication and common business practices that provide entities 
engaged in the wholesale transmission of electric power with timely 
information and uniform business procedures across multiple 
transmission providers. These requirements conform to the Commission's 
goal for efficient information collection, communication, and 
management within the electric power industry. The Commission has 
assured itself, by means of its internal review, that there is 
specific, objective support for the burden estimates associated with 
the information requirements.
    91. OMB regulations \59\ require OMB to approve certain information 
collection requirements imposed by agency rule. The Commission is 
submitting notification of this proposed rule to OMB. These information 
collections are mandatory requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ 5 CFR 1320.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Title: Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols 
for Public Utilities (formerly Open Access Same Time Information 
System) (FERC-717); Electric Rate Schedule Filings (FERC-516).
    Action: Proposed collection.
    OMB Control No.: 1902-0096 (FERC-516); 1902-0173 (FERC-717).
    Respondents: Business or other for profit, (Public Utilities--Not 
applicable to small businesses).
    Frequency of Responses: One-time implementation (business 
procedures, capital/start-up).
    Necessity of the Information: This rule, will upgrade the 
Commission's current business practice and communication standards. 
Specifically, these standards include several modifications to the 
existing business practice standards as well as creating new standards 
to provide additional functionality for OASIS transactions, 
transmission loading relief and public key infrastructure. The 
standards will assist in providing greater security for business 
transactions over the Internet, identify the business practices to be 
used to relieve potential or actual loading on a constrained facility 
and facilitate the transfer of electric energy between entities 
responsible for balancing load and generation. These practices will 
ensure that potential customers of open access transmission service 
receive access to information that will enable them to obtain 
transmission service on a non-discriminatory basis and will assist the 
Commission in maintaining a safe and reliable infrastructure and also 
will assure the reliability of the interstate transmission grid. The 
implementation of these standards and regulations is necessary to 
increase the efficiency of the wholesale electric power grid.
    92. The information collection requirements of this Final Rule are 
based on the transition from transactions being made under the 
Commission's existing business practice standards to conducting such 
transactions under the proposed revisions to these standards and to 
account for the burden associated with the new standard(s) being 
proposed here (i.e., WEQ-008 and WEQ-012).
    93. Internal Review: The Commission has reviewed the revised 
business practice standards and has made a determination that the 
revisions adopted in this Final Rule are necessary to maintain 
consistency between the business practice standards and reliability 
standards on this subject. The Commission has assured itself, by means 
of its internal review, that there is specific, objective support for 
the burden estimate associated with the information requirements.
    94. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting 
requirements by contacting the following: Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, Attn: Michael Miller, Office of the Executive Director, 888 
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, Tel: (202) 502-8415/Fax: (202) 
273-0873, E-mail: [email protected].

VI. Environmental Analysis

    95. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental 
Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may 
have a significant adverse effect on the human environment.\60\ The 
Commission has categorically excluded certain actions from these 
requirements as not having a significant effect on the human 
environment.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ Order No. 486, Regulations Implementing the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 52 FR 47,897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC 
Stats. & Regs., Regulations Preambles 1986-1990 ] 30,783 (1987).
    \61\ 18 CFR 380.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    96. The actions required by this Final Rule fall within categorical 
exclusions in the Commission's regulations for rules that are 
clarifying, corrective, or procedural, for information gathering, 
analysis, and dissemination, and for sales, exchange, and 
transportation of electric power that requires no construction of 
facilities.\62\ Therefore, an environmental assessment is unnecessary 
and has not been prepared in this Final Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ See 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii), 380.4(a)(5), 380.4(a)(27).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VII. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    97. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \63\ generally 
requires a description and analysis of final rules that will have 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
The regulations adopted here impose requirements only on public 
utilities, which are not small businesses, and, these requirements are, 
in fact, designed to benefit all customers, including small businesses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \63\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    98. The Commission has followed the provisions of both the RFA and 
the Paperwork Reduction Act on potential impact on small business and 
other small entities. Specifically, the RFA directs agencies to 
consider four regulatory alternatives to be considered in a rulemaking 
to lessen the impact on small entities: tiering or establishment of 
different compliance or reporting requirements for small entities, 
classification, consolidation, clarification or simplification of 
compliance and reporting requirements, performance rather than design 
standards, and exemptions. As the Commission originally stated in Order 
No. 889, the OASIS regulations now known as Standards for Business 
Practices and Communication Protocols for Public Utilities, apply only 
to public utilities that own, operate, or control transmission 
facilities subject to the Commission's jurisdiction and should a

[[Page 43860]]

small entity be subject to the Commission's jurisdiction, it may file 
for waiver of the requirements.\64\ This is consistent with the 
exemption provisions of the RFA. Accordingly, pursuant to section 
605(b) of the RFA,\65\ the Commission hereby certifies that the 
regulations proposed herein will not have a significant adverse impact 
on a substantial number of small entities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ We also have provided for requests of waiver in instances 
where compliance would be very burdensome and a waiver would not 
diminish the overall benefits of the standards. See supra P 19.
    \65\ 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

VIII. Document Availability

    99. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the 
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an 
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the 
Internet through FERC's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) and in FERC's 
Public Reference Room during normal business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. 
Eastern time) at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426.
    100. From FERC's Home Page on the Internet, this information is 
available in the eLibrary. The full text of this document is available 
in the eLibrary both in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, 
printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type 
the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in 
the docket number field.\66\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ NAESB's Dec. 26, 2007 submittal is also available for 
viewing in eLibrary. The link to this file is as follows: http://elibrary.ferc.gov:0/idmws/doc_info.asp?document_id=13566661.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    101. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the FERC's Web 
site during our normal business hours. For assistance contact FERC 
Online Support at [email protected] or toll-free at (866) 208-
3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659.

IX. Effective Date and Congressional Notification

    102. This Final Rule will become effective August 28, 2008. The 
Commission has determined with the concurrence of the Administrator of 
the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management 
and Budget, that this rule is not a major rule within the meaning of 
section 251 of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
of 1996.\67\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ See 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Subjects in 18 CFR part 38

    Electric utilities, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Incorporation by reference.

    By the Commission.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.

0
In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends Chapter I, 
Title 18, part 38 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as follows:

PART 38--BUSINESS PRACTICE STANDARDS AND COMMUNICATION PROTOCOLS 
FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES

0
1. The authority citation for part 38 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.


0
2. In Sec.  38.2, paragraphs (a)(1) through (8) are revised, and 
paragraphs (a)(9) through (11) are added to read as follows:


Sec.  38.2  Incorporation by reference of North American Energy 
Standards Board Wholesale Electric Quadrant standards.

    (a) * * *
    (1) Business Practices for Open Access Same-Time Information 
Systems (OASIS), Version 1.4 (WEQ-001, Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, with 
minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007) with the exception of 
Standards 001-0.1, 001-0.9 through 001-0.13, 001-1.0 through 001-1.8, 
and 001-9.7;
    (2) Business Practices for Open Access Same-Time Information 
Systems (OASIS) Standards & Communication Protocols, Version 1.4 (WEQ-
002, Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 
16, 2007);
    (3) Open Access Same-Time Information Systems (OASIS) Data 
Dictionary, Version 1.4 (WEQ-003, Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, with 
minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007);
    (4) Coordinate Interchange (WEQ-004, Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, 
with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007);
    (5) Area Control Error (ACE) Equation Special Cases (WEQ-005, 
Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 
2007);
    (6) Manual Time Error Correction (WEQ-006, Version 001, Oct. 31, 
2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007);
    (7) Inadvertent Interchange Payback (WEQ-007, Version 001, Oct. 31, 
2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007);
    (8) Transmission Loading Relief--Eastern Interconnection (WEQ-008, 
Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 
2007);
    (9) Gas/Electric Coordination (WEQ-011, Version 001, Oct. 31, 2007, 
with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007);
    (10) Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) (WEQ-012, Version 001, Oct. 
31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007); and
    (11) Business Practices for Open Access Same-Time Information 
Systems (OASIS) Implementation Guide, Version 1.4 (WEQ-013, Version 
001, Oct. 31, 2007, with minor corrections applied on Nov. 16, 2007).
* * * * *

    Note: The following appendix will not be published in the Code 
of Federal Regulations.

List of Entities Filing Comments on NOPR in Docket No. RM05-5-005, and 
the Abbreviations Used To Identify Them

    Bonneville Power Administration (Bonneville).
    Duke Energy Corporation (Duke).
    Lafayette Utilities System (Lafayette).
    Louisiana Energy and Power Authority (LEPA).
    Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. (Midwest 
ISO).
    New York Independent System Operator, Inc. (NYISO).
    North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC).
    PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM).
    Southern Company Services, Inc. (Southern Companies).
    Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (SPP).

 [FR Doc. E8-17194 Filed 7-28-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P