Open Access Same-Time Information System

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 37

[Docket No. RM98-3-000]

Open Access Same-Time Information System

July 29, 1998.

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) proposes

to: amend its regulations to extend the retention period and

availability of information on curtailments and interruptions and

require this information to include other uses of the congested path at

the time of such incidents; amend its regulations to clarify that OASIS

nodes must have the capability to allow OASIS users to make file

transfers and automated computer-to-computer file transfers and

queries; amend its regulations to clarify that Responsible Parties are

required to provide access to their OASIS sites for OASIS users making

automated queries or extensive requests for data; and add a provision

to its regulations that would allow Responsible Parties, under certain

circumstances, to limit a user's access to the node if that user's

grossly inefficient method of accessing an OASIS node or obtaining

information from the node degrades the performance of the node.

DATES: Comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking are due on or

before September 21, 1998.

ADDRESSES: File comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking with the

Office of the Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888

First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426. Comments should reference

Docket No. RM98-3-000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

grades the performance of the node.

DATES: Comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking are due on or

before September 21, 1998.

ADDRESSES: File comments on the notice of proposed rulemaking with the

Office of the Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888

First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426. Comments should reference

Docket No. RM98-3-000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marvin Rosenberg (Technical Information), Office of Economic Policy,

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E.,

Washington, D.C. 20426, (202) 208-1283

William C. Booth (Technical Information), Office of Electric Power

Regulation, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street,

N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, (202) 208-0849

Gary D. Cohen (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel,

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E.,

Washington, D.C. 20426, (202) 208-0321

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In addition to publishing the full text of

this document in the Federal Register, the Commission also provides all

interested persons an opportunity to inspect or copy the contents of

this document during normal business hours in the Public Reference Room

at 888 First Street, N.E., Room 2A, Washington, D.C. 20426.

The Commission Issuance Posting System (CIPS) provides access to

the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission. CIPS can be

accessed via Internet through FERC's Homepage (http://www.ferc.fed.us)

using the CIPS Link or the Energy Information Online icon. The full

text of this document will be available on CIPS in ASCII and

WordPerfect 6.1 format. CIPS is also available through the Commission's

electronic bulletin board service at no charge to the user and may be

accessed using a personal computer with a modem by dialing 202-208-

1397, if dialing locally, or 1-800-856-3920, if dialing long distance

PS Link or the Energy Information Online icon. The full

text of this document will be available on CIPS in ASCII and

WordPerfect 6.1 format. CIPS is also available through the Commission's

electronic bulletin board service at no charge to the user and may be

accessed using a personal computer with a modem by dialing 202-208-

1397, if dialing locally, or 1-800-856-3920, if dialing long distance.

To access CIPS, set your communications software to 19200, 14400,

12000, 9600, 7200, 4800, 2400, or 1200 bps, full duplex, no parity, 8

data bits and 1 stop bit. User assistance is available at 202-208-2474

or by E-mail to [email protected].

This document is also available through the Commission's Records

and Information Management System (RIMS), an electronic storage and

retrieval system of documents submitted to and issued by the Commission

after November 16, 1981. Documents from November 1995 to the present

can be viewed and printed. RIMS is available in the Public Reference

Room or remotely via Internet through FERC's Homepage using the RIMS

link or the Energy Information Online icon. User assistance is

available at 202-208-2222, or by E-mail to [email protected].

Finally, the complete text on diskette in WordPerfect format may be

purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, La Dorn Systems

Corporation. La Dorn Systems Corporation is located in the Public

Reference Room at 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426.

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

I. Introduction

. User assistance is

available at 202-208-2222, or by E-mail to [email protected].

Finally, the complete text on diskette in WordPerfect format may be

purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, La Dorn Systems

Corporation. La Dorn Systems Corporation is located in the Public

Reference Room at 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426.

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

I. Introduction

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC) is

proposing to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) that proposes

to: (1) amend 18 CFR 37.6(e)(3)(ii) to extend the retention period and

availability of information on curtailments and interruptions and

require this information to include other uses of the congested path at

the time of such incidents; (2) amend 18 CFR 37.6 to clarify that OASIS

nodes must have the capability to allow OASIS users to make file

transfers and automated computer-to-computer file transfers and

queries; (3) amend 18 CFR 37.5 to clarify that Responsible Parties are

required to provide access to their OASIS sites for OASIS users making

automated queries or extensive requests for data; and (4) add 18 CFR

37.5(d) to allow Responsible Parties, under certain circumstances, to

limit a user's access to the node if that user's grossly inefficient

method of accessing an OASIS node or obtaining information from the

node degrades the performance of the node.

Item 1 is designed to help the Commission better monitor whether

curtailments and interruptions involve

ve requests for data; and (4) add 18 CFR

37.5(d) to allow Responsible Parties, under certain circumstances, to

limit a user's access to the node if that user's grossly inefficient

method of accessing an OASIS node or obtaining information from the

node degrades the performance of the node.

Item 1 is designed to help the Commission better monitor whether

curtailments and interruptions involve

instances of undue discrimination. Items 2 through 4 go together. In

the discussion below, we clarify that OASIS nodes must have the

capability to allow OASIS users to make file transfers and automated

computer-to-computer file transfers and queries, and that legitimate

users may not have their access to the node restricted or cut off based

on their making automated queries or extensive requests for data. We

also clarify that extensive requests for data by legitimate users does

not constitute an ``excessive use of resources'' eligible for

unilateral disconnection by a Responsible Party under section 5.1(j) of

the S&CP Document. We nevertheless are also proposing to revise 18 CFR

37.5(d) to allow Responsible Parties, under certain circumstances, to

limit a user's access to the node if that user's grossly inefficient

method of accessing an OASIS node or obtaining information from the

node degrades the performance of the node. Commission approval is

needed for disconnection under these circumstances.

II. Discussion

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

and Interruptions

s, under certain circumstances, to

limit a user's access to the node if that user's grossly inefficient

method of accessing an OASIS node or obtaining information from the

node degrades the performance of the node. Commission approval is

needed for disconnection under these circumstances.

II. Discussion

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

and Interruptions

The Commission's regulations at 18 CFR 37.6(e)(3)(ii) require that

Transmission Providers make available supporting information about

curtailments and interruptions, for up to 60 days after the curtailment

or interruption, upon request by the affected customers. Since Order

No. 889 1 became effective, issues concerning curtailments

and interruptions have been the subject of a number of informal

complaints to the FERC Enforcement Hotline. The Commission is concerned

that the current regulations do not allow the Commission's staff and

the public access to the supporting information required under 18 CFR

37.6(e)(3)(ii) and that the information is not retained long enough.

Lack of access to the supporting information limits significantly the

Commission's ability to audit the circumstances under which a

curtailment or interruption occurs, as well as the Commission's ability

to identify compliance problems and resolve complaints. Therefore, we

propose to make changes to our regulations to require that Transmission

Providers retain supporting information about curtailments and

interruptions for three years and make this information available on

request, not only to affected customers, but also to the Commission's

staff and the public.

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

\1\ Open Access Same-Time Information System and Standards of

Conduct, Order No. 889, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,035 (1996);

order on reh'g, Order No. 889-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,049

(1997); and order on reh'g, Order No. 889-B, 81 FERC para. 61,253

tomers, but also to the Commission's

staff and the public.

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

\1\ Open Access Same-Time Information System and Standards of

Conduct, Order No. 889, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,035 (1996);

order on reh'g, Order No. 889-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,049

(1997); and order on reh'g, Order No. 889-B, 81 FERC para. 61,253

(1997).

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

Additionally, our review of this regulation persuades us to propose

one additional change. In order to assess properly whether a

curtailment or interruption has been imposed on an unduly

discriminatory basis, it would be helpful to know whether the

curtailment or interruption was imposed on other users of the congested

path. We, therefore, are proposing that the information to be made

available upon request under 18 CFR 37.6(e)(3)(ii) should include

information on any other uses of the congested path at the time of the

curtailment or interruption. This information would be very

informative, and should not be burdensome to assemble, because the

person(s) posting the notice of curtailment or interruption under 18

CFR 37.6(e)(3)(i) should already have this information at hand.

The Commission will provide interested persons with an opportunity

to file comments on these proposed changes within 45 days of the date

of publication of this NOPR in the Federal Register

very

informative, and should not be burdensome to assemble, because the

person(s) posting the notice of curtailment or interruption under 18

CFR 37.6(e)(3)(i) should already have this information at hand.

The Commission will provide interested persons with an opportunity

to file comments on these proposed changes within 45 days of the date

of publication of this NOPR in the Federal Register. Parties filing

comments should address, among other issues: (1) whether the

information will increase market participants' knowledge of system

operations and thereby improve the functioning of the electricity

markets; (2) whether the additional information will help market

participants detect discrimination or other abusive transmission

practices and, when necessary, enable them to file well-specified,

well-documented complaints with the Commission (which will help the

Commission process complaints more efficiently); and (3) whether the

need for this information outweighs its commercial sensitivity.

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

1. Overview

The FERC Enforcement Hotline also received calls showing that some

misunderstandings have arisen about the use of file transfers and

automated queries. To correct these misunderstandings, we propose to

revise 18 CFR 37.5 and 37.6 to clarify that OASIS nodes must have the

capability to allow OASIS users to make file transfers and automated

computer-to-computer file transfers and queries, and that Responsible

Parties are required to provide OASIS users with access for automated

querying of the system.2 This is true even when a large

volume of requests are made. We also propose to add a provision, at 18

CFR 37.5(d), that would permit Responsible Parties, under certain

circumstances, to restrict access to users whose grossly inefficient

use of the system is degrading the performance of the node and who are

unwilling to use less burdensome methods that would give them the same

information just as quickly

even when a large

volume of requests are made. We also propose to add a provision, at 18

CFR 37.5(d), that would permit Responsible Parties, under certain

circumstances, to restrict access to users whose grossly inefficient

use of the system is degrading the performance of the node and who are

unwilling to use less burdensome methods that would give them the same

information just as quickly.

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

\2\ For the purposes of this discussion, by ``Responsible

Party'', we also intend to include a ``Transmission Provider'' that

operates its own OASIS node. We note that in Order No. 889 we stated

that a Transmission Provider ultimately is responsible for the acts

or omissions conducting on its behalf by a Responsible Party. See

FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,035 at 31,603-04.

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

2. Background

In Order No. 888, the Commission stated that:

in order to remedy undue discrimination in the provision of

transmission services it is necessary to have non-discriminatory

access to transmission information * * * [3]

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

\3\ Promoting Wholesale Competition Through Open Access Non-

Discriminatory Transmission Services by Public Utilities; Recovery

of Stranded Costs by Public Utilities and Transmitting Utilities,

Order No. 888, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,036 at 31,722 (1996);

order on reh'g, Order No. 888-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,048

(1997); order on reh'g, Order No. 888-B, 81 FERC para. 61,248

(1997); and order on reh'g, Order No. 888-C, 82 FERC para. 61,046

-

Discriminatory Transmission Services by Public Utilities; Recovery

of Stranded Costs by Public Utilities and Transmitting Utilities,

Order No. 888, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,036 at 31,722 (1996);

order on reh'g, Order No. 888-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,048

(1997); order on reh'g, Order No. 888-B, 81 FERC para. 61,248

(1997); and order on reh'g, Order No. 888-C, 82 FERC para. 61,046

(1998).

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

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

under 18 CFR 37.5, the OASIS must give access to relevant

standardized information pertaining to the status of the

transmission system as well as to the types and prices of

services.[4]

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

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

Consistent with these findings, the Commission's regulations at 18 CFR

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

37.5(b) require each Responsible Party to:

provide access to an OASIS providing standardized information . . .

pertaining to the transmission system for which it is

responsible.[5]

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

\5\ Section 37.5(b)(2) of the OASIS regulations, 18 CFR

37.5(b)(2) (1998), also requires each Responsible Party to operate

its OASIS node in compliance with the standardized procedures

specified in the OASIS Standards and Communications Protocols

document (referred to herein as the ``S&CP Document'').

In the period since Order Nos. 888 and 889 have become effective,

some OASIS providers have been limiting the access of certain parties

using automated queries.

3. Discussion

Access to OASIS data by automated query is an integral part of the

transmission data sharing we envisioned and required in Order Nos. 888

and 889. As we observed in Order

(referred to herein as the ``S&CP Document'').

In the period since Order Nos. 888 and 889 have become effective,

some OASIS providers have been limiting the access of certain parties

using automated queries.

3. Discussion

Access to OASIS data by automated query is an integral part of the

transmission data sharing we envisioned and required in Order Nos. 888

and 889. As we observed in Order

No. 889-A, uploading and downloading are computer-to-computer

transactions.6 In addition, computer-to-computer queries are

an integral part of OASIS as specified in the S&CP

Document.7 However, to avoid any possible contrary

interpretations, we propose to add language to 18 CFR 37.5 and 18 CFR

37.6 making this point explicitly.8 These proposals are

consistent with the current language in section 4.3.1 of the S&CP

Document (which specifies the information requirements and templates

for uploading the information to, and downloading it from, OASIS nodes)

and in section 37.5(b) of the Commission's regulations (which

contemplates OASIS access by computer-to-computer queries). The

proposals are intended to make absolutely clear that each Responsible

Party must provide OASIS users with non-discriminatory access without

curfews, restrictions, or limitations of any kind, whether access is

sought by automated or graphical user interface means.

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

\6\ Order No. 889-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,049, at

30,574.

\7\ See, e.g., Secs. 4.2.4, 4.2.4.1, and 4.4 of the S&CP

Document.

\8\ The Commission also provided for computer-to-computer

communications related to natural gas transportation information. In

Order No. 587-B, Standards for Business Practices of Interstate

Natural Gas Pipelines, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,046 at 30,169

\6\ Order No. 889-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,049, at

30,574.

\7\ See, e.g., Secs. 4.2.4, 4.2.4.1, and 4.4 of the S&CP

Document.

\8\ The Commission also provided for computer-to-computer

communications related to natural gas transportation information. In

Order No. 587-B, Standards for Business Practices of Interstate

Natural Gas Pipelines, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,046 at 30,169

(1997), we explained that computer-to-computer communications appear

to be needed to conduct natural gas transportation transactions.

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

This also is consistent with the current language in section 5.1(j)

of the S&CP Document, which allows a Responsible Party to disconnect or

restrict users in only very limited circumstances. Section 5.1(j) of

the S&CP Document reads as follows:

Disconnection: [Transmission System Information Providers] shall

be allowed to disconnect any User who is degrading the performance

of the OASIS Node through the excessive use of resources, beyond

what is permitted in the Service Level Agreement.

This provision authorizes the disconnection of a user only when the

user is degrading the performance of the OASIS node, through excessive

use beyond what is allowed in the Service Level Agreement (SLA). Thus,

under section 5.1(j), disconnection is only authorized when: (1) the

use exceeds what is allowed in the SLA; and (2) the excessive use is

degrading the performance of the OASIS node.9 Thus, a

particular user's heavy use of an OASIS node, even if it would require

the node to be upgraded, would not, by itself, be a basis for

disconnection.

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

, disconnection is only authorized when: (1) the

use exceeds what is allowed in the SLA; and (2) the excessive use is

degrading the performance of the OASIS node.9 Thus, a

particular user's heavy use of an OASIS node, even if it would require

the node to be upgraded, would not, by itself, be a basis for

disconnection.

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

\9\ The excessive use of resources includes any unauthorized use

of an OASIS node. This clarification is not intended to prevent a

Responsible Party from disconnecting any unauthorized user, any user

who circumvents system security, any user who causes, or attempts to

cause, the node to cease functioning, or who otherwise disrupts, or

attempts to disrupt, the normal functioning of the node.

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

The basic (default) SLA applicable to all OASIS users allows large

volume, computer-to-computer usage of the OASIS. Thus, Responsible

Parties may not use section 5.1(j) or, as explained below, section 3.2

of the S&CP Document to deny access to large volume users of the OASIS.

Section 3.2 of the S&CP Document authorizes Responsible Parties to

enter into SLAs.10 Section 3.2 reads as follows:

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

\10\ SLAs are also referenced in section 5.1(j) of the S&CP

Document, quoted in the text above.

r, as explained below, section 3.2

of the S&CP Document to deny access to large volume users of the OASIS.

Section 3.2 of the S&CP Document authorizes Responsible Parties to

enter into SLAs.10 Section 3.2 reads as follows:

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

\10\ SLAs are also referenced in section 5.1(j) of the S&CP

Document, quoted in the text above.

Service Level Agreements: It is recognized that Users will have

different requirements for frequency of access, performance, etc.,

based on their unique business needs. To accommodate these differing

requirements, [Transmission System Information Providers] shall be

required to establish [an SLA] with each User which specifies the

terms and conditions for access to the information posted by the

Providers. The default [SLA] shall be Internet access with the OASIS

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

Node meeting all minimum performance requirements.

Section 3.2 of the S&CP Document directs Responsible Parties to

establish an SLA with each user, specifying the terms and conditions

for access to the information posted on the OASIS. The service to be

provided under these SLAs is to meet all minimum performance

requirements (i.e., the requirements of Order No. 889, the Commission's

regulations, and the S&CP Document).

Although not explicitly stated in section 3.2 of the S&CP Document,

our proposal clarifies that when a user registers on an OASIS node to

receive basic OASIS service, this registration, by default, constitutes

a basic SLA (including computer-to-computer access as discussed above).

A negotiated SLA, approved by the Commission, may be necessary to

define value added services beyond those provided by the Commission's

regulations and the S&CP document.11 However, a negotiated

SLA is neither necessary nor appropriate as a condition for a user to

receive basic service.

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

ter access as discussed above).

A negotiated SLA, approved by the Commission, may be necessary to

define value added services beyond those provided by the Commission's

regulations and the S&CP document.11 However, a negotiated

SLA is neither necessary nor appropriate as a condition for a user to

receive basic service.

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

\11\ Commission approval would not be necessary where the

Transmission Provider is nonjurisdictional and operates its OASIS

node (or assigns this to a Responsible Party) under Order No. 888's

reciprocity requirement.

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

Thus, under both sections 5.1(j) and 3.2 of the S&CP Document, if a

legitimate user's usage creates a problem regarding the system's

capabilities, the problem may not be ``corrected'' by disconnecting the

user or by limiting that user's use of the system. To avoid any

contrary interpretation, we are proposing revisions to 18 CFR 37.5 and

37.6 to make this explicit.

Consistent with this proposal, it follows that large volume usage

and automated computer-to-computer file transfers and queries do not

constitute the kind of ``excessive use of resources'' eligible for

unilateral disconnection by the Responsible Party under section 5.1(j)

of the S&CP Document. We are concerned, nevertheless, that a user's

grossly inefficient access and use of the system may degrade the

performance of the OASIS node. We, therefore, are proposing to revise

18 CFR Sec. 37.5(d) to allow Responsible Parties that are public

utilities to seek Commission approval to limit a user's access to the

node if that user's grossly inefficient method of accessing an OASIS

node or obtaining information from the node degrades the performance of

the node.\12\ For example, a user may seek data in a resource-intensive

wasteful way even though the same data could be obtained as quickly in

a far less resource-consuming manner

lic

utilities to seek Commission approval to limit a user's access to the

node if that user's grossly inefficient method of accessing an OASIS

node or obtaining information from the node degrades the performance of

the node.\12\ For example, a user may seek data in a resource-intensive

wasteful way even though the same data could be obtained as quickly in

a far less resource-consuming manner. It also would be grossly

inefficient for a customer to seek updates more frequently than

information is updated. In such a circumstance, an OASIS provider

should instruct the user on how to obtain the information in a less

resource-intensive way, and may seek Commission approval to limit

access to that user if the OASIS provider can show that: (1) the means

of access is grossly inefficient; (2) the node is sufficiently sized to

accommodate usage that is not grossly inefficient; and (3) the user was

unresponsive to the OASIS provider's attempts to resolve the matter

informally.

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

\12\ By ``grossly inefficient'', we intend to address situations

where a user fails to adopt more efficient methods of accessing a

node or obtaining information in favor of very inefficient methods

that may needlessly degrade or damage the node. This is consistent

with Sec. 3.6.a of the S&CP Document, which states that a

Responsible Party may restrict its responses to overly broad queries

that, if answered expansively, would degrade the performance of the

node.

It would be impracticable to attempt to delineate all instancs

of ``gross inefficiency'' in advance. Accordingly, questions as to

whether a particular user's access or use of the node is ``grossly

inefficient'' will be resolved on a case-by-case basis whn a

Responsible Party seeks Commission approval to restrict a user's

access to the node.

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

le to attempt to delineate all instancs

of ``gross inefficiency'' in advance. Accordingly, questions as to

whether a particular user's access or use of the node is ``grossly

inefficient'' will be resolved on a case-by-case basis whn a

Responsible Party seeks Commission approval to restrict a user's

access to the node.

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

We earlier stated that large volume usage and automated computer-

to-computer file transfers and queries do not constitute the kind of

``excessive use of resources'' eligible for unilateral disconnection by

the Responsible Party under section 5.1(j) of the S&CP Document. This

being the case, we believe we need to establish a mechanism to govern

those situations.

We, therefore, are proposing (as discussed above) to revise 18 CFR

37.5(d) to allow Responsible Parties to limit a user's access to the

node, with the approval of the Commission, if that user's grossly

inefficient method of accessing an OASIS node or obtaining information

from the node degrades the performance of the node.

We are proposing that the Commission's approval be needed for

disconnection under these circumstances because we: (1) want to avoid

unwarranted disconnections or limitations on access; (2) seek to

encourage Responsible Parties and OASIS users to resolve these disputes

informally, if possible; (3) wish to assure OASIS users that they will

not be disconnected without good cause; and (4) hope that, merely by

making these clarifications, we will avert or minimize instances of

grossly inefficient usage degrading the performance of a node.

Comments by interested persons should address the advantages and

disadvantages of the Commission's proposal on the foregoing issue,

including the requirement for prior Commission approval of

disconnections

onnected without good cause; and (4) hope that, merely by

making these clarifications, we will avert or minimize instances of

grossly inefficient usage degrading the performance of a node.

Comments by interested persons should address the advantages and

disadvantages of the Commission's proposal on the foregoing issue,

including the requirement for prior Commission approval of

disconnections. Commenters may suggest alternative procedures, with or

without prior Commission approval of disconnections, and should explain

the relative advantages and disadvantages of their proposals. For

example, if an OASIS node is not meeting legitimate customer needs,

should Responsible Parties be required to increase the capacity of the

node, including adopting the best available technology, and, having

done so, then be allowed to disconnect grossly inefficient users

without prior Commission approval?

III. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)\13\ requires any proposed or

final rule issued by the Commission to contain a description and

analysis of the impact that the proposed or final rule would have on

small entities or to contain a certification that the rule, if

promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities. Order No. 889 contained a

certification under Sec. 605(b) of the RFA that the OASIS Final Rule

would not have a significant economic impact on small entities within

the meaning of the RFA.\14\

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

\13\ 5 U.S.C. Secs. 601-612.

\14\ See Order No. 889, FERC Stats. & Regs. at 31,628.

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

ere the joint subjects of the Final Environmental Impact Statement

issued in Docket Nos. RM95-8-000 and RM94-7-001 on April 12, 1996.

Given that this proposal makes only minor changes in the regulations,

none of which would have any environmental impact, no separate

environmental assessment or environmental impact statement is being

prepared for this proposed rule.

V. Public Reporting Burden

As discussed previously, this NOPR proposes three minor revisions

to 18 CFR 37.6(e)(3)(ii). First, given that information on other uses

of congested paths already would be known and available to the

person(s) reporting a curtailment/interruption incident, we believe

that the proposed requirement to make this information available would

have only a minimal, inconsequential impact on the reporting burden

under 18 CFR 37.6(e)(3)(ii) and that the changes do not substantially

or materially modify the collection of information previously approved

by OMB. Second, we do not believe that extending the retention period

or extending the category of persons who may request the information

will measurably increase the public reporting burden. Third, the NOPR

does not add any additional reporting requirements under 18 CFR

37.6(e)(3)(i) or require information to be made available under 18 CFR

37.6(e)(3)(ii) about any events or incidents not already covered under

the existing regulation.

Nor do we believe our proposal to amend 18 CFR 37.5 and 37.6 to

clarify the required minimum access that Responsible Parties must

provide to OASIS users, or to allow (under certain circumstances)

limitations on access by grossly inefficient users, will increase the

public reporting burden.

Consequently, the public reporting burden associated with issuance

of this NOPR is unchanged from our estimation in Order Nos. 889, 889-A,

and 889-B. \15\ The Commission has conducted an internal review of this

conclusion and thereby has assured itself that there is specific,

objective support for this information burden estimate

inefficient users, will increase the

public reporting burden.

Consequently, the public reporting burden associated with issuance

of this NOPR is unchanged from our estimation in Order Nos. 889, 889-A,

and 889-B. \15\ The Commission has conducted an internal review of this

conclusion and thereby has assured itself that there is specific,

objective support for this information burden estimate. Moreover, the

Commission has reviewed the collection of information required by Order

Nos. 889, 889-A, and 889-B, and has determined that the collection of

information is necessary and conforms to the Commission's plan, as

described in those prior orders, for the collection, efficient

management, and use of the required information.

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

\15\ Order No. 889, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,035 at 31,587-

88, Order No. 889-A, FERC Stats. & Regs. para. 31,049 at 30,549-50,

Order No. 889-B, 81 FERC para. 61,253 at 62,171.

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

VI. Information Collection Statement

As explained in Order Nos. 889-A and 889-B, Order No. 889 contained

an information collection statement for which the Commission obtained

approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).\16\ Given that

the proposed changes on curtailments and interruptions make only minor

revisions to the regulation, only one of which would have any possible

impact on the previously approved information collection statement (the

addition of other uses of the congested path to the information already

required to be collected), and given that we expect that this

information would already be known to the person assembling information

about the curtailment or interruption, we do not believe that these

proposed changes would require any revision to the information

collection statement approved by OMB for Order No. 889

he

addition of other uses of the congested path to the information already

required to be collected), and given that we expect that this

information would already be known to the person assembling information

about the curtailment or interruption, we do not believe that these

proposed changes would require any revision to the information

collection statement approved by OMB for Order No. 889. Nor do we

believe that our proposed revisions to 18 CFR 37.5 and 37.6, to clarify

the required minimum access Responsible Parties must provide to OASIS

users, or to allow (under certain circumstances) limitations on access

by grossly inefficient users, would require any revision to the

information collection statement approved by OMB for Order No. 889.

Accordingly, we conclude that OMB approval for this NOPR will not be

necessary. However, the Commission will send a copy of this NOPR to

OMB, for informational purposes only.

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

\16\ OMB Control No. 1902-0173.

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

Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting

requirements and associated burden estimates by contacting the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.

20426 [Attention: Michael Miller, Office of the Chief Information

Officer, (202) 208-1415], and the Office of Management and Budget

[Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

ed persons may obtain information on the reporting

requirements and associated burden estimates by contacting the Federal

Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C.

20426 [Attention: Michael Miller, Office of the Chief Information

Officer, (202) 208-1415], and the Office of Management and Budget

[Attention: Desk Officer for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

(202) 395-3087 (telephone), 202-395-7285 (facsimile)]. In addition,

interested persons may file written comments on the collections of

information required by this NOPR and associated burden estimates by

sending written comments to the Desk Officer for FERC at: Office of

Management and Budget, Room 10202 NEOB, Washington, D.C. 20503, within

30 days of publication of this document in the Federal Register. Three

copies of any comments filed with the Office of Management and Budget

also should be sent to the following address: Secretary, Federal Energy

Regulatory Commission, Room 1A, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington,

D.C. 20426.

VII. Public Comment Procedure

Prior to taking final action on this proposed rulemaking, we are

inviting written comments from interested persons. All comments in

response to this notice should be submitted to the Office of Secretary,

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E.,

Washington, D.C. 20426, and should refer to Docket No. RM98-3-000. An

original and fourteen (14) copies of such comments should be filed with

the Commission on or before September 21, 1998. Additionally, a copy of

the comments also should be submitted to the Commission on computer

diskette in WordPerfect 6.1 or ASCII format.

All written submissions to this NOPR will be placed in the public

file and will be available for public inspection in the Commission's

Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426,

during regular business hours.

List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 37

Electric utilities.

also should be submitted to the Commission on computer

diskette in WordPerfect 6.1 or ASCII format.

All written submissions to this NOPR will be placed in the public

file and will be available for public inspection in the Commission's

Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426,

during regular business hours.

List of Subjects in 18 CFR Part 37

Electric utilities.

By direction of the Commission.

David P. Boergers,

Acting Secretary.

In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission proposes to amend

Part 37 in Chapter I, Title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as set

forth below.

PART 37--OPEN ACCESS SAME-TIME INFORMATION SYSTEMS AND STANDARDS OF

CONDUCT FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES

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

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

U.S.C. 7101-7352.

2. Section 37.5 is amended by redesignating paragraph (c) as

paragraph (e), and by adding paragraphs (c) and (d), to read as

follows:

Sec. 37.5 Obligations of Transmission Providers and Responsible

Parties.

* * * * *

(c) A Responsible Party may not deny or restrict access to an OASIS

user merely because that user makes automated computer-to-computer file

transfers or queries, or extensive requests for data.

(d) In the event that an OASIS user's grossly inefficient method of

accessing an OASIS node or obtaining information from the node degrades

the performance of the node, the Responsible Party should instruct the

user on how to obtain the information in a less resource-intensive

manner, and may seek Commission approval to limit that user's OASIS

access if the matter cannot be resolved informally.

* * * * *

3. Section 37.6 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) intoductory

text, (a)(4), (a)(5), and (e)(3)(ii), and by adding paragraph (a)(6) to

read as follows:

Sec. 37.6 Information to be posted on an OASIS.

on how to obtain the information in a less resource-intensive

manner, and may seek Commission approval to limit that user's OASIS

access if the matter cannot be resolved informally.

* * * * *

3. Section 37.6 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) intoductory

text, (a)(4), (a)(5), and (e)(3)(ii), and by adding paragraph (a)(6) to

read as follows:

Sec. 37.6 Information to be posted on an OASIS.

(a) The information posted on the OASIS must be in such detail and

the OASIS must have such capabilities as to allow Transmission

Customers to:

* * * * *

(4) Clearly identify the degree to which their transmission service

requests or schedules were denied or interrupted;

(5) Obtain access, in electronic format, to information to support

available transmission capability calculations and historical

transmission service requests and schedules for various audit purposes;

and

(6) Make file transfers and automated computer-to-computer file

transfers and queries.

* * * * *

(e) * * *

(3) * * *

(ii) Information to support any such curtailment or interruption,

including the operating status of the facilities involved in the

constraint or interruption and any other uses of the congested path at

the time of the curtailment or interruption, must be maintained for

three years and provided, upon request, to the curtailed or interrupted

customer, the Commission's Staff, and any other person who requests it.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 98-21016 Filed 8-6-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P