Notice2022-03911
Implementation of Dynamic Line Ratings
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
February 24, 2022
Issuing agencies
Energy DepartmentFederal Energy Regulatory Commission
Abstract
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) seeks comment on whether and how the required use of dynamic line ratings (DLR) is needed to ensure just and reasonable wholesale rates. The Commission further seeks comment on: Whether the lack of DLR requirements renders current wholesale rates unjust and unreasonable; potential criteria for DLR requirements; the benefits, costs, and challenges of implementing DLRs; the nature of potential DLR requirements; and potential timeframes for implementing DLR requirements.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 37 (Thursday, February 24, 2022)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 37 (Thursday, February 24, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10349-10354]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2022-03911]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. AD22-5-000]
Implementation of Dynamic Line Ratings
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE.
ACTION: Notice of inquiry.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) seeks
comment on whether and how the required use of dynamic line ratings
(DLR) is needed to ensure just and reasonable wholesale rates. The
Commission further seeks comment on: Whether the lack of DLR
requirements renders current wholesale rates unjust and unreasonable;
potential criteria for DLR requirements; the benefits, costs, and
challenges of implementing DLRs; the nature of potential DLR
requirements; and potential timeframes for implementing DLR
requirements.
DATES: Initial Comments are due April 25, 2022, and Reply Comments are
due May 25, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by docket number, may be filed in the
following ways. Electronic filing through <a href="http://www.ferc.gov">http://www.ferc.gov</a> is
preferred.
<bullet> Electronic Filing through <a href="http://www.ferc.gov">http://www.ferc.gov</a>. Documents
created electronically using word processing software must be filed in
acceptable native applications or print-to-PDF format, but not in
scanned or picture format.
<bullet> Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable to file electronically
may mail comments via the U.S. Postal Service to: Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street
NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand-delivered comments or comments sent via
any other carrier should be delivered to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, MD 20852.
<bullet> Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting
comments,
[[Page 10350]]
see the Comment Procedures Section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Kheloussi (Technical
Information), Office of Energy Policy and Innovation, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, (202)
502-6391, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c185a0afa8a4adef8aa9a4adaeb4b2b2a881a7a4b3a2efa6aeb7"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="0d496c63646861234665686162787e7e644d6b687f6e236a627b">[email protected]</span></a>.
Ryan Stroschein (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, (202) 502-8099, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#32604b535c1c6146405d41515a575b5c72545740511c555d44"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="04567d656a2a5770766b77676c616d6a44626176672a636b72">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In this Notice of Inquiry (NOI), the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) seeks comment on whether and
how the required use of dynamic line ratings (DLR) \1\ is needed to
ensure just and reasonable wholesale rates. The Commission further
seeks comment on: Whether the lack of DLR requirements renders current
wholesale rates \2\ unjust and unreasonable; potential criteria for DLR
requirements; the benefits, costs, and challenges of implementing DLRs;
the nature of potential DLR requirements; and potential timeframes for
implementing DLR requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A DLR is a transmission line rating that: ``(1) applies to a
time period of not greater than one hour; and (2) reflects up-to-
date forecasts of inputs such as (but not limited to) ambient air
temperature, wind, solar heating intensity, transmission line
tension, or transmission line sag.'' Managing Transmission Line
Ratings, Order No. 881, Federal Register, 87 FR 2244 (Jan. 13,
2022), 177 FERC ] 61,179, at P 7 (2021).
\2\ Consistent with Order No. 881, by ``wholesale rates,'' we
refer to both rates for the transmission of electric energy in
interstate commerce and rates for the sale of electric energy at
wholesale in interstate commerce. Id. P 29.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Background
1. On December 16, 2021, the Commission issued Order No. 881 in
Docket No. RM20-16-000. In that order, pursuant to section 206 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA), the Commission revised the Commission's pro
forma open access transmission tariff (OATT) and the Commission's
regulations to improve the accuracy and transparency of electric
transmission line ratings.\3\ Specifically, the Commission found that
the use of only seasonal and static temperature assumptions in
developing transmission line ratings would result in transmission line
ratings that do not accurately represent the transfer capability of the
transmission system.\4\ The Commission found that inaccurate
transmission line ratings result in unjust and unreasonable Commission-
jurisdictional rates.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Id. P 1.
\4\ Id. P 3.
\5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Accordingly, the Commission required, among other things and
with limited exceptions: (1) Transmission providers \6\ to use ambient-
adjusted ratings (AARs) \7\ as the basis for evaluation of transmission
service requests that will end within 10 days of the request and as the
basis for their determination of the necessity of certain curtailment,
interruption, or redispatch of transmission service anticipated to
occur within those 10 days; (2) transmission providers to use seasonal
line ratings as the basis for evaluation of transmission service
requests ending more than 10 days from the date of the request and as
the basis for the determination of the necessity of curtailment,
interruption, or redispatch of transmission service that is anticipated
to occur more than 10 days in the future; and (3) regional transmission
organizations and independent system operators (RTOs/ISOs) to establish
and maintain the systems and procedures necessary to allow transmission
owners in their regions to electronically update transmission line
ratings on at least an hourly basis (thereby enabling the RTO/ISO to
use DLRs from transmission owners that voluntarily adopt them).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Consistent with Order No. 881, we use transmission provider
to mean any public utility that owns, operates, or controls
facilities used for the transmission of electric energy in
interstate commerce. 18 CFR 37.3 (2021). Therefore, unless otherwise
noted, ``transmission provider'' refers only to public utility
transmission providers. Furthermore, the term ``public utility'' as
found in section 201(e) of the FPA means ``any person who owns or
operates facilities subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission
under this subchapter.'' 16 U.S.C. 824(e).
\7\ An AAR is a transmission line rating that: ``(1) applies to
a time period of not greater than one hour; (2) reflects an up-to-
date forecast of ambient air temperature across the time period to
which the rating applies; (3) reflects the absence of solar heating
during nighttime periods where the local sunrise/sunset times used
to determine daytime and nighttime periods are updated at least
monthly, if not more frequently; and (4) is calculated at least each
hour, if not more frequently.'' Order No. 881, 177 FERC ] 61,179 at
P 4.
\8\ Id. PP 4-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. While acknowledging in Order No. 881 that, in certain
situations, using transmission line ratings that are based on factors
beyond forecasted ambient air temperatures and the presence or absence
of solar heating--such as DLRs--may lead to greater accuracy of
transmission line ratings, the Commission declined to mandate DLR
implementation based on the record in that proceeding.\9\ Instead, the
Commission incorporated that record on DLRs into the instant
proceeding, Docket No. AD22-5-000, which the Commission opened to
further explore DLR implementation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Id. PP 7-8, 36, 252.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. The Commission explained that, unlike AARs, DLRs are based not
only on forecasted ambient air temperatures and the presence or absence
of solar heating, but also on other weather conditions, such as wind,
cloud cover, solar heating intensity (instead of only daytime/nighttime
distinctions used in AARs), and precipitation, and/or on transmission
line conditions such as tension or sag.\10\ The Commission agreed with
commenters that highlighted the benefits to DLR implementation.\11\ For
example, the Commission agreed with the Exelon Corporation (Exelon)
that there may be applications in which DLRs can provide net benefits
to customers, such as when the limiting element for a transmission
facility experiencing significant congestion is the conductor and
conditions besides ambient air temperature have a consistent and
significant impact on the power carrying capabilities of the line. The
Commission also acknowledged that the use of DLRs generally allows for
greater power flows than would otherwise be allowed and that their use
can also detect situations where power flows should be reduced to
maintain safe and reliable operation and avoid unnecessary wear on
transmission equipment.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Id. P 7.
\11\ Id. P 253.
\12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Despite the benefits of DLR implementation, the Commission
recognized that DLR implementation also presents additional costs and
challenges not found in AAR implementation, such as costs associated
with placement of sensors, cybersecurity, and other costs.\13\ The
Commission found that the record in the Order No. 881 proceeding,
Docket No. RM20-16-000, was not sufficient for it to evaluate the
relative benefits and costs and challenges of DLR implementation.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Id. P 254.
\14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Discussion
6. We are issuing this NOI to further explore whether DLR
implementation is required to ensure just and reasonable wholesale
rates. We invite all interested persons to submit comments and reply
comments on any or all of the questions listed. Commenters need not
answer all the questions. Commenters should organize responses
consistent with the structure of the attached questions.
[[Page 10351]]
Commenters are also invited to reference material previously filed,
including in Docket Nos. RM20-16-000 and AD19-15-000, but are
encouraged to avoid repetition or replication of previous material.
Initial comments must be submitted on or before 60 days after the date
of publication of this NOI in the Federal Register. Reply comments must
be submitted on or before 90 days after the date of publication of this
NOI in the Federal Register.
A. Questions on the Need for DLR Requirements
7. In Order No. 881, the Commission found that transmission line
ratings directly affect wholesale rates because transmission line
ratings and wholesale rates are inextricably linked.\15\ It explained
that transmission line ratings represent the maximum transfer
capability on a transmission line, which, in turn, determines the
quantity of energy that can be transmitted from suppliers to load. The
Commission explained that, all else equal, as transfer capability
declines, wholesale rates increase. The Commission also observed that
inaccurate transmission line ratings can result in underutilization (or
overutilization) of existing transmission facilities, thereby sending a
signal that there is less (or more) transfer capability than is truly
available.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Id. P 30.
\16\ Id. PP 30, 34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Q1) As a threshold matter, even for transmission lines that
incorporate AARs, is there a need to further increase the accuracy
of transmission lines ratings through the implementation of DLRs to
ensure just and reasonable wholesale rates? Why or why not? If yes,
please explain whether a requirement by the Commission to adopt DLRs
is needed.
(Q2) What, if any, barriers to DLR implementation exist today?
Are potential requirements to implement DLRs necessary to address
these existing barriers? Why or why not?
B. Questions on Potential Criteria for DLR Requirements
8. Commenters in the Order No. 881 proceeding expressed a range of
opinions on whether and how the Commission should require the
implementation of DLRs. On one end of the spectrum, Southwest Power
Pool, Inc.'s Market Monitoring Unit (SPP MMU) stated that it supported
a requirement for DLR implementation on all transmission lines.\17\
Similarly, Industrial Customer Organizations and the R Street Institute
contended that DLRs should be required by default, with exceptions
given when justified by cost-benefit analyses.\18\ On the other end,
many commenters, including nearly all transmission owners that filed
comments about DLRs, either opposed a requirement to implement DLRs on
all transmission lines \19\ or opposed a DLR requirement in any
form.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ SPP MMU, Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 4 (filed Mar.
22, 2021).
\18\ R Street Institute, Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 3
(filed Mar. 22, 2021); Industrial Customer Organizations, Comments,
Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 5 (filed Mar. 22, 2021).
\19\ Arizona Public Service Company, Comments, Docket No. RM20-
16-000, at 8 (filed Mar. 22, 2021); New York Transmission Owners,
Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 2 (filed Mar. 22, 2021);
Indicated PJM Transmission Owners, Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000,
at 13 (filed Mar. 22, 2021); Pacific Gas and Electric Company,
Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 11-12 (filed Mar. 22, 2021).
\20\ American Electric Power Service Corporation, Comments,
Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 6 (filed Mar. 22, 2021); Dominion Energy
Services Inc., Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 9 (filed Mar.
22, 2021); Entergy Services LLC, Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000,
at 14 (filed Mar. 22, 2021); Bonneville Power Administration (BPA),
Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 6 (filed Mar. 22, 2021);
Exelon, Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 3 (filed Mar. 22,
2021); PacifiCorp, Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 5-6 (filed
Mar. 22, 2021); National Rural Electric Cooperative Association and
the Large Public Power Council, Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at
3 (filed Mar. 22, 2021); MISO Transmission Owners, Comments, Docket
No. RM20-16-000, at 45-46 (filed Mar. 22, 2021); ITC Holdings Corp.,
Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 14-15 (filed Mar. 22, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. Other commenters supported targeted or limited DLR
implementation. For example, the WATT Coalition (WATT) and Clean Energy
Parties proposed criteria for requiring DLR implementation and
contended that such criteria could help overcome concern about costs of
DLRs exceeding benefits.\21\ Specifically, WATT proposed that the
Commission require ``sensor-based DLRs'' on all thermally limited
transmission lines rated 69 kV or greater when: (1) Market congestion
totaling over $1 million has occurred within the past year; (2) the
transmission line is identified as being a constraint projected to have
market congestion over $1 million over the coming three years as a part
of the current RTO/ISO transmission planning cycle process, which can
be economic or reliability based; (3) thermally limited transmission
lines show up as limiting in generator interconnection system impact
studies; or (4) generation curtailed by more than 10% on average for
one year due to factors that include transmission line capacity.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ WATT, Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 10-11 (filed
Mar. 22, 2021); Clean Energy Parties, Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-
000, at 7-10 (filed Mar. 22, 2021); American Clean Power Association
and the Solar Energy Industries Association (ACPA/SEIA), Comments,
Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 9-10 (filed Mar. 22, 2021).
\22\ WATT, Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 10-11 (filed
Mar. 22, 2021).
(Q3) If the Commission were to require DLR implementation,
should it require the implementation only on certain transmission
lines, and, if so, what set of criteria should be considered to
identify transmission lines for DLR implementation? Examples of such
criteria could include congestion, curtailment levels, voltage
levels, infrastructure, and/or geography/terrain. Explain why such
criteria would identify the set of transmission lines on which DLRs
need to be implemented in order to produce just and reasonable
wholesale rates.
(Q4) How should transmission lines be evaluated for whether they
satisfy such criteria, both initially and going forward? Please
estimate the number and proportion of transmission lines that would
likely be implicated by any criteria you recommend.
(Q5) If the Commission were to require DLR implementation based
on certain criteria, should the criteria be regularly reevaluated to
ensure such criteria continue to ensure accurate transmission line
ratings, and, if so, at what interval(s)? How should such regular
reevaluations work practically?
(Q6) If such criteria included the magnitude of congestion on a
transmission line, what metrics exist that assess the magnitude of
congestion in both or either RTO/ISO and/or non-RTO/ISO regions? For
any congestion metrics suggested, what data sources are available?
(Q7) Implementation of the requirements adopted in Order No. 881
are expected to change congestion patterns. How should these
congestion pattern changes be accounted for when considering whether
a transmission line satisfies the criteria established as part of
any potential DLR requirements?
(Q8) What are the differences, if any, between RTOs/ISOs and
non-RTO/ISO transmission providers that the Commission should
account for when considering any DLR requirements?
(Q9) If the Commission were to require DLR implementation based
on certain criteria, should it require that new transmission lines
be evaluated to determine whether they must implement DLRs? Are
there any characteristics of new transmission lines that warrant
different criteria?
(Q10) If the Commission were to require DLR implementation, how
should that requirement be considered in regional transmission
planning and interconnection processes?
(Q11) If the Commission were to require DLR implementation based
on certain criteria, what transparency measures should the
Commission require? For example, should the Commission consider
requiring transmission providers to submit informational reports
that show which transmission lines meet any determined criteria for
DLR implementation? And/or should the Commission require
transmission providers to post the same on their Open Access Same-
Time Information System websites?
C. Questions on the Benefits, Costs, and Challenges of Implementing
DLRs
10. While the Commission in Order No. 881 highlighted the potential
[[Page 10352]]
benefits of DLR implementation, including potential increases in the
accuracy of transmission line ratings and potentially greater power
flows, it recognized that there are costs and challenges associated
with DLR implementation. Some commenters in the Order No. 881
proceeding provided DLR cost estimates, but there was limited detail
around those estimates and those estimates varied. For example, BPA
asserted that DLR implementation would require investment of
potentially over $1 million per transmission line in monitoring
equipment, software, and hardware to submit and host the data.\23\ MISO
Transmission Owners contended that DLR implementation could cost
between $100,000 and $200,000 per transmission line, and thus the
overall cost to implement DLRs for all transmission lines in MISO would
be approximately $1.5 billion.\24\ SPP estimated that DLR
implementation that requires an energy management system (EMS) upgrade
would cost transmission owners up to $1 million and, without upgrading
the EMS, DLR implementation would cost an additional $100,000 to
$500,000 annually in additional supervisory control and data
acquisition (SCADA) communications with the reliability coordinator's
EMS.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ BPA, Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 6 (filed Mar. 22,
2021).
\24\ MISO Transmission Owners, Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000,
at 47 (filed Mar. 22, 2021) (deriving $1.5 billion by estimating
$150,000 per line multiplied by 10,000 lines on the MISO system).
\25\ SPP, Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 12 (filed Mar.
22, 2021).
(Q12) For any DLR requirement criteria you identified in
response to question Q3 above, please explain and, if possible,
quantify the potential annual gross market benefits that would be
expected to result from such a requirement.
(a) If possible, please also provide estimated upper and lower
bounds on such gross market benefit estimations based on favorable
and unfavorable assumptions.
(b) How might these benefits change with geography/terrain,
communication infrastructure, and transmission path?
(c) To what extent might DLR implementation shift congestion to
new areas? How would these shifts in congestions patterns affect the
overall benefits of DLR implementation?
(d) Please describe the method and assumptions used to estimate
gross market benefits.
(Q13) If you have experience implementing (or evaluating the
implementation of) DLRs, please describe your experience and, if
applicable, explain your specific DLR design, installation, and
operating decisions, choice of facilities on which to implement
DLRs, the implications for reliability, and how such DLR
implementation affected transmission transfer capability.
(Q14) What are the expected costs and challenges of implementing
DLRs (separate from the costs associated with Order No. 881
implementation)?
(a) How are these costs and challenges divided between initial
implementation (e.g., sensor purchase and installation, EMS
upgrades, and communications upgrades) and ongoing operations and
maintenance (e.g., sensor maintenance, communications maintenance,
and forecasting)?
(b) How might these costs and challenges change with geography/
terrain, communication infrastructure, and transmission path?
(c) Are there any published reports or studies assessing the
costs, benefits and challenges of DLR implementation? If so, please
identify and briefly describe these studies.
(d) Please identify any factors or situations that might cause
DLR implementation to be prohibitively expensive, and please
describe alternative implementation approaches that could limit
those costs.
(e) Please describe any advantages or disadvantages related to
costs and challenges to implementing DLRs concurrently with the
requirements of Order No. 881 (as opposed to after Order No. 881 is
implemented). For example, are the EMS and communication upgrades
required to implement AARs sufficient to support the use of DLRs?
(Q15) Please describe the cybersecurity challenges of DLR
implementation. What are the potential impacts to reliable
operations if the digital devices that monitor or communicate line
conditions used for establishing DLRs are manipulated or rendered
inoperable by a cyber event? What relevant procedural or technical
cybersecurity controls exist that would mitigate such risk?
(Q16) If the Commission were to require DLR implementation,
should the Commission direct NERC to evaluate how this requirement
could introduce new risks to the reliable operation of the BES and
whether any standards require modification to address any risks?
D. Questions on the Nature of Potential DLR Requirements
11. DLRs are generally based on a combination of real-time measured
data and various forecasts that are used to compute up-to-date
transmission line ratings. The real-time measured data is typically
gathered using field located sensors.
12. In their comments in the Order No. 881 proceeding, WATT
suggested a requirement that transmission providers implement ``sensor-
based DLRs'' in certain circumstances (i.e., a requirement that
transmission line ratings incorporate real-time data from field-based
sensors on weather and/or transmission line parameters, such as sag,
tension or temperature).\26\ Alternatively, transmission line ratings
could be based on up-to-date forecasts of additional weather input and/
or transmission line parameter values.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ WATT, Comment, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 10-11 (filed Mar.
22, 2021); ACPA/SEIA, Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at 9-10
(filed Mar. 22, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. The following questions seek information regarding potential
approaches for a DLR requirement.
(Q17) If the Commission required DLRs in some circumstances,
would it be appropriate to require transmission providers to
calculate transmission line ratings based on up-to-date forecasts of
additional weather factors beyond those required in Order No. 881?
Why or why not? If so, please explain what additional factors (e.g.,
wind speed, wind direction, solar irradiance (beyond day/night))
should be considered in transmission line rating calculations.
(Q18) To what extent would it be appropriate to rely on sensor-
based measurements of line parameters \27\ such as line sag, line
tension, or conductor temperature in calculating line ratings,
either in addition to, or in lieu of, forecasted weather factors
described in Q17? In what circumstances should DLR approaches
augment any sensor-based measurements of transmission line
parameters with weather forecasts (e.g., from the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration or another weather service)? To what
extent are sensor-based measurements of line parameters useful in
determining longer-term forecasted line ratings (e.g., 2-7 days
ahead), rather than just instantaneous or very short-term
calculations of line ratings? How does the ability to forecast line
ratings compare between DLR approaches that rely primarily upon
sensor-based measurements of transmission line parameters and those
that rely upon weather data?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ See, e.g., LineVision, Comments, Docket No. RM20-16-000, at
2-3 (filed Mar. 22, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Q19) Should the Commission consider sensor-based DLR
requirements, such as those suggested by WATT? If yes, what level of
sensor coverage and performance requirements for such sensors should
be required? Please explain whether the Commission would need to
specify details like the types of sensors, how many are installed,
what they measure, and the quality of their data? Would a sensor-
focused requirement that specifies the types of technologies
potentially become stale as DLR technologies evolve? Why or why not?
(Q20) In Order No. 881, the Commission adopted exceptions from
the AAR requirements to ensure the safety and reliability of the
transmission system and for transmission lines with transmission
line ratings that are not affected by ambient air temperature or
solar heating.\28\ Please explain whether the Commission should
adopt the same or similar exceptions for DLR requirements. Are there
any different/other exceptions from the application of DLR
[[Page 10353]]
requirements that the Commission should consider? If so, what are
these exceptions?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Order No. 881, 177 FERC ] 61,179 at PP 227-228.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Q21) In Order No. 881, the Commission established requirements
for AARs to be applied to a period not greater than one hour and for
AARs to be updated hourly.\29\ Is this time resolution and
calculation frequency also appropriate for DLR requirements or
should an alternative approach be considered? Why?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Id. PP 162, 168. See also Pro Forma OATT attach. M, AAR
Definition.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Q22) How might the Commission consider potential requirements
for DLR implementation on transmission lines that are on the seam of
multiple transmission provider service territories? What additional
coordination between neighboring transmission owners and
transmission providers, if any, might be necessary?
(Q23) In Order No. 881, the Commission required AARs to be used
for near-term transmission service, defined as transmission service
that ends not more than 10 days after the transmission service
request date (i.e., within the next 10 days).\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Order No. 881, 177 FERC ] 61,179 at P 86.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Within what timeframes should the Commission require
transmission providers to calculate transmission line ratings \31\
using DLRs (on transmission lines for which DLRs are required)? Does
this depend on which DLR approach (weather-based or line parameter-
based) is used for a particular DLR implementation?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ We clarify that we use the phrasing ``require transmission
providers to calculate'' consistent with Order No. 881, in which the
Commission clarified ``that hourly (or more frequent) querying of
`look-up tables' or similar pre-calculated AAR databases will
satisfy the requirement that AARs be calculated at least each
hour.'' Id. PP 141-142.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) For which transmission services (e.g., hourly point-to-point
transmission service, daily point-to-point transmission service,
weekly point-to-point transmission service, etc.) should the
Commission require the use of DLRs?
(c) What data on the accuracy of forecasting wind speed, wind
direction, and/or other DLR variables would support the DLR
implementation timeframes and transmission services you recommend
above in (a) and (b)?
(Q24) If the Commission were to decide that a requirement to
implement DLR is appropriate:
(a) Should the Commission limit the number or proportion of
transmission elements that a transmission provider must implement
DLRs on at any one time, even if such elements otherwise met the
criteria for a DLR requirement? If so, should such a limit be based
on a number or percentage of transmission elements, and if so, what
number or percentage?
(b) Should the relevant transmission element for such a limit be
considered individual transmission lines, or individual transmission
line-miles, or some other unit? Or, if such a limit is necessary,
would some other approach be better? Explain why you recommend any
particular approach.
(c) Should such a limit be applied each time a transmission
provider is required to evaluate whether DLRs need to be implemented
on additional transmission lines (as contemplated below in Q29)?
(Q25) If changed circumstances result in a transmission line no
longer meeting the DLR criteria, should the transmission provider
continue to be required to use the DLR to calculate the rating for
that line? Please explain why or why not.
E. Questions on Potential Timeframes for Implementing DLR Requirements
14. In Order No. 881, the Commission required AARs to be
implemented no later than three years from the compliance filing due
date.\32\ The Commission explained that three years was consistent with
the implementation schedule most commonly suggested by transmission
owners for AAR implementation on priority transmission lines and that
three years would be sufficient time for transmission owners and
transmission providers to implement changes to their processes and
systems to comply with the requirements adopted in the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Id. P 361.
(Q26) What would be the appropriate amount of time, either from
your experience or by your estimation, necessary for each of the
following DLR implementation steps identified below?
(a) Transmission line identification for DLR system application.
(b) DLR System design.
i. Field sensors and/or monitoring equipment design including
specification, procurement, and installation.
ii. Communication infrastructure design, including
specification, procurement, and installation.
iii. Process coordination between DLR field data and EMS,
including any line rating database upgrades or necessary
modifications.
iv. DLR system integration and testing.
(c) Any other steps needed to implement DLR system.
(Q27) Can any of the steps identified in Q26, be completed
concurrently such that the total estimated DLR installation time
might be faster than the sum of each step? If so, which steps can be
completed concurrently? How might the implementation of Order No.
881 affect the time needed to implement DLR?
(Q28) If, after the initial implementation of DLRs, the
transmission provider identifies additional transmission lines that
meet the DLR criteria, how long would it take to implement DLRs on
those additional transmission lines?
(Q29) If the Commission required DLRs in certain situations
based on transmission line criteria, how frequently should
transmission owners consider whether additional lines might meet the
criteria for DLR implementation? That is, should the Commission
require a periodic restudy of transmission systems to determine if
additional transmission lines meet the criteria for DLR
implementation? Please explain why or why not. If, during a periodic
restudy, the transmission provider determines that additional lines
meet the criteria for DLR implementation, when should the Commission
require the transmission provider to implement DLRs on those
additional lines?
III. Comment Procedures
15. The Commission invites interested persons to submit comments on
the matters and issues proposed in this NOI, including any related
matters or alternative proposals that commenters may wish to discuss.
Comments are due April 25, 2022 and Reply Comments are due May 25,
2022. Comments must refer to Docket No. AD22-5-000 and must include the
commenter's name, the organization they represent, if applicable, and
their address.
16. The Commission encourages comments to be filed electronically
via the eFiling link on the Commission's website at <a href="http://www.ferc.gov">http://www.ferc.gov</a>. The Commission accepts most standard word-processing
formats. Documents created electronically using word-processing
software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format
and not in a scanned or picture format. Commenters filing
electronically do not need to make a paper filing.
17. Those unable to file electronically may mail comments via the
U.S. Postal Service to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary
of the Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Hand-
delivered comments or comments sent via any other carrier should be
delivered to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins
Avenue, Rockville, MD 20852.
18. All comments will be placed in the Commission's public files
and may be viewed, printed, or downloaded remotely as described in the
Document Availability section below. Commenters on this proposal are
not required to serve copies of their comments on other commenters.
IV. Document Availability
19. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (<a href="http://www.ferc.gov">http://www.ferc.gov</a>). At
this time, the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's
Public Reference Room due to the President's March 13, 2020
proclamation declaring a National Emergency concerning the Novel
Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19).
20. From the Commission's Home Page on the internet, this
information is
[[Page 10354]]
available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on
eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or
downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket
number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket
number field.
21. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's
website during normal business hours from the Commission's Online
Support at (202) 502-6652 (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#fc9a998e9f9392909592998f898c8c938e88bc9a998e9fd29b938a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="88eeedfaebe7e6e4e1e6edfbfdf8f8e7fafcc8eeedfaeba6efe7fe">[email protected]</span></a>, or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY (202) 502-8659. Email the Public Reference Room at
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ed9d988f81848ec39f888b889f88838e889f828280ad8b889f8ec38a829b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="48383d2a24212b663a2d2e2d3a2d262b2d3a272725082e2d3a2b662f273e">[email protected]</span></a>.
By direction of the Commission.
Issued: February 17, 2022.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-03911 Filed 2-23-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on February 24, 2022.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.