Real-Time Comments

This comment form is no longer interactive because the comment period is closed.

SERC Regional Reliability Standards Development Procedure

Description:

Start Date: 10/07/2020
End Date: 11/20/2020

Associated Ballots:

Ballot Name Project Standard Pool Open Pool Close Voting Start Voting End

Filter:

Q:

2. Do you agree the revised SERC RSDP continues to meet the “Inclusive” criteria as outlined above? If “No”, please explain in the comment area below.
Hot Answers
A: Yes

Duke Energy is uncertain whether SERC has applied the use of SERC Board of Directors and SERC Board Executive Committee consistently throughout the RSDP.  Please consider the following comments and reconcile appropriately as needed:

  • On p. 4 of the redline document, Section 3.0  Review and Re-approval Requirements: 

Should SERC Board of Directors be changed to SERC Board Executive Committee?

Also, the footer on each page of the procedure has been changed to SERC Board Executive Committee which contradicts Section 3.0.

  • On p. 5 of the redline document, Section 5.0  Process Roles:

Throughout the procedure, it appears SERC has changed SERC Board of Directors to SERC Board Executive Committee - is this appropriate?

Does SERC Board Executive Committee need to be added to Section 5.0 Process Roles?

  • On p. 21 of the redline document, Section iii.  Maintenance of the SERC Regional Reliability Standards Development Procedure:

Should SERC Board of Directors be changed to SERC Board Executive Committee? (third paragraph)

  • On p. 32 of the redline document, Interpretations:

Should this be changed back to SERC Board Executive Committee? (third paragraph)

  • On pp. 39-41 of the redline document, Appendix H  Roles and Responsibilities Chart:

Consider modifying the header from SERC Board of Directors to SERC Board Executive Committee.

Duke Energy, Segment(s) 1, 5, 6, 4/11/2019

- 0 - 0

Other Answers
No answers found.