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

2020 Periodic Review Standing Review Team - Standards Grading

Description:

Start Date: 03/22/2021
End Date: 05/05/2021

Associated Ballots:

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

Filter:

Q:

1. For COM-001-3 (R12 and R13 only), do you agree with the scoring and findings of the SRT? If not, please comment on which tool question(s) the comment applies to and provide a supporting explanation.

Hot Answers

Jamie Johnson, On Behalf of: Jamie Johnson, , Segments 2

- 0 - 0

Cain Braveheart, On Behalf of: Bonneville Power Administration, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Other Answers

Did the SRT consider (in response to Q13 in the Resources tab) the benefits vs. administrative costs with having a specific requirement for such a basic piece of business infrastructure given this capability has to exist to meet many other requirements in the IRO and TOP standards. For example, various requirements related to issuing/receiving and complying with Operating Instructions. The IRO-002 R1 and TOP-001 R19 requirements were retired in the SER Project 2018-03 using similar justifications.

John Allen, On Behalf of: John Allen, , Segments 1, 3, 4

- 0 - 0

Q1.  These requirements are redundant to R1, R2, R3 and R4 and can be combined or eliminated.

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

- 0 - 0

SPP Standards Review Group (SSRG) offers that R12 is specific to internal Interpersonal communication capabilities, for example Control Center to Control Center within an entities primary and back-up.

Southwest Power Pool Standards Review Group (SSRG), Segment(s) 2, 9/4/2019

- 0 - 0

Maryanne Darling-Reich, On Behalf of: Black Hills Corporation, MRO, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Scott McGough, On Behalf of: Georgia System Operations Corporation, , Segments 3, 4

- 0 - 0

Did the SRT consider the benefits vs. administrative costs with having a specific requirement for such a basic piece of business infrastructure given this capability has to exist to meet many other requirements in the IRO and TOP standards. For example, various requirements related to issuing/receiving and complying with Operating Instructions. The IRO-002 R1 and TOP-001 R19 requirements were retired in the SER Project 2018-03 using similar justifications. This relates to Q13 in the Resources tab.

MRO NSRF, Segment(s) 2, 4, 1, 6, 3, 5, 3/31/2021

- 0 - 0

LaTroy Brumfield, On Behalf of: American Transmission Company, LLC, , Segments 1

- 0 - 0

NPCC Regional Standards Committee, Segment(s) 10, 2, 4, 7, 3, 1, 5, 6, 5/5/2021

- 0 - 0

In reference to Q1 of the Standards Grading Tool: Requirements R12 and R13 could be consolidated within Requirements R1, R3, R5, R7, and R8 as appropriate.

BC Hydro, Segment(s) 3, 5, 1, 12/18/2018

- 0 - 0

Q:

2. For IRO-001-4, do you agree with the scoring and findings of the SRT? If not, please comment on which tool question(s) the comment applies to and provide a supporting explanation.

Hot Answers

Jamie Johnson, On Behalf of: Jamie Johnson, , Segments 2

- 0 - 0

Cain Braveheart, On Behalf of: Bonneville Power Administration, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Other Answers

I agree with members of the SRT that R1 is not clear and therefore difficult to measure. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. This requirement should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining a clear measureable reliabilty objective. 

John Allen, On Behalf of: John Allen, , Segments 1, 3, 4

- 0 - 0

C4/Q11: "shall act" in requirement is vague and does not have a clear action the RC is supporting.

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

- 0 - 0

The SPP Standards Review Group (SSRG) recommends defining and/or providing clarity around “shall act” and “direct actions” specific to the RC.

Southwest Power Pool Standards Review Group (SSRG), Segment(s) 2, 9/4/2019

- 0 - 0

Maryanne Darling-Reich, On Behalf of: Black Hills Corporation, MRO, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Relative to R2, C4, comments noting the ambiguity of timing are not supported as the time frame for complying with an Operating Instruction is contained in the issued Operating Instruction.

Scott McGough, On Behalf of: Georgia System Operations Corporation, , Segments 3, 4

- 0 - 0

The NSRF agrees with members of the SRT that R1 is not clear and therefore difficult to measure. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. This requirement should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining a clear measureable reliabilty objective. 

MRO NSRF, Segment(s) 2, 4, 1, 6, 3, 5, 3/31/2021

- 0 - 0

LaTroy Brumfield, On Behalf of: American Transmission Company, LLC, , Segments 1

- 0 - 0

NPCC Regional Standards Committee, Segment(s) 10, 2, 4, 7, 3, 1, 5, 6, 5/5/2021

- 0 - 0

BC Hydro, Segment(s) 3, 5, 1, 12/18/2018

- 0 - 0

Q:

3. For IRO-002-6, do you agree with the scoring and findings of the SRT? If not, please comment on which tool question(s) the comment applies to and provide a supporting explanation.

Hot Answers

“Q4: Is it clear when the action needs to be taken within the standard” – For R3, CAISO would grade this as “No”. Required testing every 90 days implies quarterly but in order to be compliant, 5 tests per year are required.

Jamie Johnson, On Behalf of: Jamie Johnson, , Segments 2

- 0 - 0

Cain Braveheart, On Behalf of: Bonneville Power Administration, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Other Answers

I agree with members of the SRT that R2 is unclear on what is needed for reliability. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. This requirement should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining a clear measureable reliabilty objective.

John Allen, On Behalf of: John Allen, , Segments 1, 3, 4

- 0 - 0

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

- 0 - 0

Southwest Power Pool Standards Review Group (SSRG), Segment(s) 2, 9/4/2019

- 0 - 0

Maryanne Darling-Reich, On Behalf of: Black Hills Corporation, MRO, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Scott McGough, On Behalf of: Georgia System Operations Corporation, , Segments 3, 4

- 0 - 0

The NSRF agrees with members of the SRT that R2 is unclear on what is needed for reliability. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. This requirement should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining a clear measureable reliabilty objective

MRO NSRF, Segment(s) 2, 4, 1, 6, 3, 5, 3/31/2021

- 0 - 0

LaTroy Brumfield, On Behalf of: American Transmission Company, LLC, , Segments 1

- 0 - 0

NPCC Regional Standards Committee, Segment(s) 10, 2, 4, 7, 3, 1, 5, 6, 5/5/2021

- 0 - 0

For Requirements R2-R4, in reference to Q5: Based on the Purpose statement of IRO-002-6, the Requirements could be moved to other standards, as follows:

- R2 and R3 could be consolidated to IRO-018 to establish the requirements for Real-time monitoring and analysis capabilities

- R4 could be consolidated in IRO-001 as part of establishing the Reliability Coordinators responsibilities.

For Requirements R5 and R6 in reference to Q1, Q11: These Requirements could be consolidated under IRO-018, in support of the establishment of Real-time Monitoring and Real-time Assessment capabilities in accordance with the purpose statement of the standard.

BC Hydro, Segment(s) 3, 5, 1, 12/18/2018

- 0 - 0

Q:

4. For IRO-008-2, do you agree with the scoring and findings of the SRT? If not, please comment on which tool question(s) the comment applies to and provide a supporting explanation.

Hot Answers

“Q8: Can it be practically implemented and Q11: Is the requirement language clear and unambiguous” – For R6 CAISO would grade this as  “No” since the definition of “impacted entities” related to notification requirements once SOLs have been mitigated is unclear and this type of requirement can not be practically implemented.

Jamie Johnson, On Behalf of: Jamie Johnson, , Segments 2

- 0 - 0

Cain Braveheart, On Behalf of: Bonneville Power Administration, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Other Answers

I agree with members of the SRT that several requirements in IRO-008 are unclear on what is actually needed for reliability. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. These requirements should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining a clear measureable set of reliabilty objectives. The clarfications for OPA, RTA and RTM should be addressed by the Operational Data Exchange Simplification SAR from the SER Phase 2 team that is currently on the list of upcoming projects.

John Allen, On Behalf of: John Allen, , Segments 1, 3, 4

- 0 - 0

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

- 0 - 0

Southwest Power Pool Standards Review Group (SSRG), Segment(s) 2, 9/4/2019

- 0 - 0

Maryanne Darling-Reich, On Behalf of: Black Hills Corporation, MRO, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Scott McGough, On Behalf of: Georgia System Operations Corporation, , Segments 3, 4

- 0 - 0

The NSRF agrees with members of the SRT that several requirements in IRO-008 are unclear on what is actually needed for reliability. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. These requirements should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining a clear measureable set of reliabilty objectives. The clarfications for OPA, RTA and RTM should be addressed by the Operational Data Exchange Simplification SAR from the SER Phase 2 team that is currently on the list of upcoming projects.

MRO NSRF, Segment(s) 2, 4, 1, 6, 3, 5, 3/31/2021

- 0 - 0

LaTroy Brumfield, On Behalf of: American Transmission Company, LLC, , Segments 1

- 0 - 0

NPCC Regional Standards Committee, Segment(s) 10, 2, 4, 7, 3, 1, 5, 6, 5/5/2021

- 0 - 0

For Requirement R5, in reference to C4, Q8: The requirement implies that the RC will (immediately) notify the TOP if an expected condition results in an SOL exceedance. This is possible but not practical as a violation may appear in RTCA for only one assessment cycle and then clear (due to numerical solution convergence issues, switching, generation redispatch, etc.).

BC Hydro, Segment(s) 3, 5, 1, 12/18/2018

- 0 - 0

Q:

5. For IRO-010-2, do you agree with the scoring and findings of the SRT? If not, please comment on which tool question(s) the comment applies to and provide a supporting explanation.

Hot Answers

Jamie Johnson, On Behalf of: Jamie Johnson, , Segments 2

- 0 - 0

Cain Braveheart, On Behalf of: Bonneville Power Administration, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Other Answers

I agree with the OC member of the SRT on the need for clarity in R1 regarding RTM. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. This should be addressed by the Operational Data Exchange Simplification SAR from the SER Phase 2 team that is currently on the list of upcoming projects. 

John Allen, On Behalf of: John Allen, , Segments 1, 3, 4

- 0 - 0

Q11: Real time monitoring is ambigious and should be defined.

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

- 0 - 0

Southwest Power Pool Standards Review Group (SSRG), Segment(s) 2, 9/4/2019

- 0 - 0

Maryanne Darling-Reich, On Behalf of: Black Hills Corporation, MRO, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Scott McGough, On Behalf of: Georgia System Operations Corporation, , Segments 3, 4

- 0 - 0

The NSRF agrees with the OC member of the SRT on the need for clarity in R1 regarding RTM. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. This should be addressed by the Operational Data Exchange Simplification SAR from the SER Phase 2 team that is currently on the list of upcoming projects. 

MRO NSRF, Segment(s) 2, 4, 1, 6, 3, 5, 3/31/2021

- 0 - 0

LaTroy Brumfield, On Behalf of: American Transmission Company, LLC, , Segments 1

- 0 - 0

NPCC Regional Standards Committee, Segment(s) 10, 2, 4, 7, 3, 1, 5, 6, 5/5/2021

- 0 - 0

BC Hydro, Segment(s) 3, 5, 1, 12/18/2018

- 0 - 0

Q:

6. For IRO-014-3, do you agree with the scoring and findings of the SRT? If not, please comment on which tool question(s) the comment applies to and provide a supporting explanation.

Hot Answers

Jamie Johnson, On Behalf of: Jamie Johnson, , Segments 2

- 0 - 0

Cain Braveheart, On Behalf of: Bonneville Power Administration, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Other Answers

I agree with members of the SRT that R7 is unclear on what is actually needed for reliability. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. This requirement should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining a clear measureable reliabilty objective.

John Allen, On Behalf of: John Allen, , Segments 1, 3, 4

- 0 - 0

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

- 0 - 0

Southwest Power Pool Standards Review Group (SSRG), Segment(s) 2, 9/4/2019

- 0 - 0

Maryanne Darling-Reich, On Behalf of: Black Hills Corporation, MRO, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Scott McGough, On Behalf of: Georgia System Operations Corporation, , Segments 3, 4

- 0 - 0

The NSRF agrees with members of the SRT that R7 is unclear on what is actually needed for reliability. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. This requirement should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining a clear measureable reliabilty objective.

MRO NSRF, Segment(s) 2, 4, 1, 6, 3, 5, 3/31/2021

- 0 - 0

LaTroy Brumfield, On Behalf of: American Transmission Company, LLC, , Segments 1

- 0 - 0

NPCC Regional Standards Committee, Segment(s) 10, 2, 4, 7, 3, 1, 5, 6, 5/5/2021

- 0 - 0

BC Hydro, Segment(s) 3, 5, 1, 12/18/2018

- 0 - 0

Q:

7. For IRO-017-1, do you agree with the scoring and findings of the SRT? If not, please comment on which tool question(s) the comment applies to and provide a supporting explanation.

Hot Answers

Jamie Johnson, On Behalf of: Jamie Johnson, , Segments 2

- 0 - 0

Cain Braveheart, On Behalf of: Bonneville Power Administration, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Other Answers

I agree with members of the SRT that R3 and R4 are unclear on what is actually needed for reliability. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. These requirements should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining clear measureable reliabilty objectives. I also believe R3 and R4 should be moved to the TPL-001 standards to considate activities associated with the annual Planning Assessment.

John Allen, On Behalf of: John Allen, , Segments 1, 3, 4

- 0 - 0

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

- 0 - 0

Southwest Power Pool Standards Review Group (SSRG), Segment(s) 2, 9/4/2019

- 0 - 0

Maryanne Darling-Reich, On Behalf of: Black Hills Corporation, MRO, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Scott McGough, On Behalf of: Georgia System Operations Corporation, , Segments 3, 4

- 0 - 0

The NSRF agrees with members of the SRT that R3 and R4 are unclear on what is actually needed for reliability. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. These requirements should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining clear measureable reliabilty objectives. I also believe R3 and R4 should be moved to the TPL-001 standards to considate activities associated with the annual Planning Assessment.

MRO NSRF, Segment(s) 2, 4, 1, 6, 3, 5, 3/31/2021

- 0 - 0

LaTroy Brumfield, On Behalf of: American Transmission Company, LLC, , Segments 1

- 0 - 0

NPCC Regional Standards Committee, Segment(s) 10, 2, 4, 7, 3, 1, 5, 6, 5/5/2021

- 0 - 0

For Requirement R3, in reference to Q1: This requirement should exist in the TPL Standards. The Guideline and Technical Basis section of IRO-017-1 states that such coordination should take place in the TPL standards and to support that position, the SDT has created an item in a draft SAR for TPL-001-4 that would revise Requirement R8 to make the Reliability Coordinator an explicit party in the review process described there.

For Requirement R4, in reference to Q1: TOP(s) should also be part of discussion to jointly develop solutions.

BC Hydro, Segment(s) 3, 5, 1, 12/18/2018

- 0 - 0

Q:

8. For IRO-018-1(i), do you agree with the scoring and findings of the SRT? If not, please comment on which tool question(s) the comment applies to and provide a supporting explanation.

Hot Answers

Jamie Johnson, On Behalf of: Jamie Johnson, , Segments 2

- 0 - 0

Cain Braveheart, On Behalf of: Bonneville Power Administration, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Other Answers

I agree with the RE member on the SRT on the need for clarity in R1 and R3 regarding RTM. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. This should be addressed by the Operational Data Exchange Simplification SAR from the SER Phase 2 team that is currently on the list of upcoming projects.

John Allen, On Behalf of: John Allen, , Segments 1, 3, 4

- 0 - 0

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

- 0 - 0

Southwest Power Pool Standards Review Group (SSRG), Segment(s) 2, 9/4/2019

- 0 - 0

Maryanne Darling-Reich, On Behalf of: Black Hills Corporation, MRO, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Scott McGough, On Behalf of: Georgia System Operations Corporation, , Segments 3, 4

- 0 - 0

The NSRF agrees with the RE member of the SRT on the need for clarity in R1 and R3 regarding RTM. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. This should be addressed by the Operational Data Exchange Simplification SAR from the SER Phase 2 team that is currently on the list of upcoming projects.

MRO NSRF, Segment(s) 2, 4, 1, 6, 3, 5, 3/31/2021

- 0 - 0

LaTroy Brumfield, On Behalf of: American Transmission Company, LLC, , Segments 1

- 0 - 0

NPCC Regional Standards Committee, Segment(s) 10, 2, 4, 7, 3, 1, 5, 6, 5/5/2021

- 0 - 0

BC Hydro, Segment(s) 3, 5, 1, 12/18/2018

- 0 - 0

Q:

9. For TOP-001-4, do you agree with the scoring and findings of the SRT? If not, please comment on which tool question(s) the comment applies to and provide a supporting explanation.

Hot Answers

“Q4: Is it clear when the action needs to be taken within the standard” – For R21, CAISO would grade this as “No”. Required testing every 90 days implies quarterly but in order to be compliant, 5 tests per year are required.

Jamie Johnson, On Behalf of: Jamie Johnson, , Segments 2

- 0 - 0

Cain Braveheart, On Behalf of: Bonneville Power Administration, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Other Answers

I agree with members of the SRT that several requirements in TOP-001 are not clear and therefore difficult to measure. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. These requirements should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining clear measureable reliabilty objectives.

John Allen, On Behalf of: John Allen, , Segments 1, 3, 4

- 0 - 0

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

- 0 - 0

Southwest Power Pool Standards Review Group (SSRG), Segment(s) 2, 9/4/2019

- 0 - 0

Maryanne Darling-Reich, On Behalf of: Black Hills Corporation, MRO, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Relative to R21, C3, GSOC notes that TOPs must initiate corrective action soon after an unsuccessful test. Accordingly, the value of a TOP notifying the RC of an unsuccessful test of backup functionality is extremely low while the administrative and compliance burden for both parties would outweigh any, derived value.

Scott McGough, On Behalf of: Georgia System Operations Corporation, , Segments 3, 4

- 0 - 0

The NSRF agrees with members of the SRT that several requirements in TOP-001 are not clear and therefore difficult to measure. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. These requirements should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining clear measureable reliabilty objectives.

MRO NSRF, Segment(s) 2, 4, 1, 6, 3, 5, 3/31/2021

- 0 - 0

LaTroy Brumfield, On Behalf of: American Transmission Company, LLC, , Segments 1

- 0 - 0

NPCC Regional Standards Committee, Segment(s) 10, 2, 4, 7, 3, 1, 5, 6, 5/5/2021

- 0 - 0

BC Hydro, Segment(s) 3, 5, 1, 12/18/2018

- 0 - 0

Q:

10. For TOP-002-4, do you agree with the scoring and findings of the SRT? If not, please comment on which tool question(s) the comment applies to and provide a supporting explanation.

Hot Answers

Jamie Johnson, On Behalf of: Jamie Johnson, , Segments 2

- 0 - 0

Cain Braveheart, On Behalf of: Bonneville Power Administration, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Other Answers

I agree with members of the SRT that several requirements in TOP-002 are not clear and therefore difficult to measure. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. These requirements should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining clear measureable reliabilty objectives.

John Allen, On Behalf of: John Allen, , Segments 1, 3, 4

- 0 - 0

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

- 0 - 0

Southwest Power Pool Standards Review Group (SSRG), Segment(s) 2, 9/4/2019

- 0 - 0

Maryanne Darling-Reich, On Behalf of: Black Hills Corporation, MRO, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Relative to R6, C4, GSOC respectfully suggests that the time frame for providing next-day data is implied in the requirement.

Scott McGough, On Behalf of: Georgia System Operations Corporation, , Segments 3, 4

- 0 - 0

 The NSRF agrees with members of the SRT that several requirements in TOP-002 are not clear and therefore difficult to measure. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. These requirements should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining clear measureable reliabilty objectives.

MRO NSRF, Segment(s) 2, 4, 1, 6, 3, 5, 3/31/2021

- 0 - 0

LaTroy Brumfield, On Behalf of: American Transmission Company, LLC, , Segments 1

- 0 - 0

NPCC Regional Standards Committee, Segment(s) 10, 2, 4, 7, 3, 1, 5, 6, 5/5/2021

- 0 - 0

BC Hydro, Segment(s) 3, 5, 1, 12/18/2018

- 0 - 0

Q:

11. For TOP-003-3, do you agree with the scoring and findings of the SRT? If not, please comment on which tool question(s) the comment applies to and provide a supporting explanation.

Hot Answers

Jamie Johnson, On Behalf of: Jamie Johnson, , Segments 2

- 0 - 0

Cain Braveheart, On Behalf of: Bonneville Power Administration, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Other Answers

I agree with SRT members on the need for clarifying revisons in this standard. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. These requirements should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining clear measureable reliabilty objectives. This should be addressed by the Operational Data Exchange Simplification SAR from the SER Phase 2 team that is currently on the list of upcoming projects. 

John Allen, On Behalf of: John Allen, , Segments 1, 3, 4

- 0 - 0

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

- 0 - 0

Southwest Power Pool Standards Review Group (SSRG), Segment(s) 2, 9/4/2019

- 0 - 0

Maryanne Darling-Reich, On Behalf of: Black Hills Corporation, MRO, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Scott McGough, On Behalf of: Georgia System Operations Corporation, , Segments 3, 4

- 0 - 0

The NSRF agrees with SRT members on the need for clarifying revisons in this standard. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. These requirements should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining clear measureable reliabilty objectives. This should be addressed by the Operational Data Exchange Simplification SAR from the SER Phase 2 team that is currently on the list of upcoming projects. 

MRO NSRF, Segment(s) 2, 4, 1, 6, 3, 5, 3/31/2021

- 0 - 0

LaTroy Brumfield, On Behalf of: American Transmission Company, LLC, , Segments 1

- 0 - 0

NPCC Regional Standards Committee, Segment(s) 10, 2, 4, 7, 3, 1, 5, 6, 5/5/2021

- 0 - 0

BC Hydro, Segment(s) 3, 5, 1, 12/18/2018

- 0 - 0

Q:

12. For TOP-010-1(i), do you agree with the scoring and findings of the SRT? If not, please comment on which tool question(s) the comment applies to and provide a supporting explanation.

Hot Answers

Jamie Johnson, On Behalf of: Jamie Johnson, , Segments 2

- 0 - 0

Cain Braveheart, On Behalf of: Bonneville Power Administration, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Other Answers

I agree with members of the SRT that the requirements are not clear and therefore difficult to measure. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. This standard should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining clear measureable reliabilty objectives.

John Allen, On Behalf of: John Allen, , Segments 1, 3, 4

- 0 - 0

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

- 0 - 0

Southwest Power Pool Standards Review Group (SSRG), Segment(s) 2, 9/4/2019

- 0 - 0

Maryanne Darling-Reich, On Behalf of: Black Hills Corporation, MRO, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Scott McGough, On Behalf of: Georgia System Operations Corporation, , Segments 3, 4

- 0 - 0

The NSRF agrees with members of the SRT that the requirements are not clear and therefore difficult to measure. This relates to Q4, Q7, Q8 and Q11 in the Resources tab. This standard should be revised to align with the results-based framework defining clear measureable reliabilty objectives.

MRO NSRF, Segment(s) 2, 4, 1, 6, 3, 5, 3/31/2021

- 0 - 0

LaTroy Brumfield, On Behalf of: American Transmission Company, LLC, , Segments 1

- 0 - 0

NPCC Regional Standards Committee, Segment(s) 10, 2, 4, 7, 3, 1, 5, 6, 5/5/2021

- 0 - 0

BC Hydro, Segment(s) 3, 5, 1, 12/18/2018

- 0 - 0

Hot Answers

Jamie Johnson, On Behalf of: Jamie Johnson, , Segments 2

- 0 - 0

Cain Braveheart, On Behalf of: Bonneville Power Administration, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Other Answers

Many of the recommendations from the SRT point to the need for better alignment with the results-based framework in the standards. The SER Phase 2 team has provided recommendations that could assist in that effort. Therefore, the SRT should consider making a recommendation to update the standards once the standards template and drafting team reference manual have been enhanced by the Standards Committtee Process Subcommittee in response to the SER recommendations. 

John Allen, On Behalf of: John Allen, , Segments 1, 3, 4

- 0 - 0

None.

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

- 0 - 0

The SPP Standards Review Group (SSRG) suggests that because the OC and PC has been replaced by the Reliability and Security Technical Committee (RSTC), the language of the Standard Authorization Requests (SARs) in the Background Information, and the associated FAQ document, PR Template, and NERC Project Page should be modified to include the RSTC instead of the OC and the PC.

In reference to the PR Template, the SSRG offers the following comments:

Compliance Application Notices (CANs) are no longer used, but there have been SARs that have been considered and rejected by the SC that could indicate some need for clarifications.

The Reliability Issues Steering Committee (RISC) is now working with the RSTC to continuously assess and monitor how standards are addressing reliability risks. The PR Template should ask if the RISC has identified a need to update a requirement. Is there a requirement the RISC needs to be aware of that is lacking?

Finally, Q5 re: Consistency should be expanded to ask whether there is duplication or redundancy with other requirements. NERC leadership has committed to not let new or revised standards duplicate what the Standards Efficiency Review (SER) project eliminated.

Southwest Power Pool Standards Review Group (SSRG), Segment(s) 2, 9/4/2019

- 0 - 0

All grading of standards applicable to Black Hills Corporation were reviewed and approved. 

Maryanne Darling-Reich, On Behalf of: Black Hills Corporation, MRO, WECC, Segments 1, 3, 5, 6

- 0 - 0

Scott McGough, On Behalf of: Georgia System Operations Corporation, , Segments 3, 4

- 0 - 0

Many of the recommendations from the SRT point to the need for better alignment with the results-based framework in the standards. The SER Phase 2 team has provided recommendations that could assist in that effort. Therefore, the SRT should consider making a recommendation to update the standards once the standards template and drafting team reference manual have been enhanced by the Standards Committtee Process Subcommittee in response to the SER recommendations. 

MRO NSRF, Segment(s) 2, 4, 1, 6, 3, 5, 3/31/2021

- 0 - 0

LaTroy Brumfield, On Behalf of: American Transmission Company, LLC, , Segments 1

- 0 - 0

Data/Evidence retention:

Each Registered Entity shall retain its dated, current, in force, documented evidence for all Requirements and all Measurement as well as any documents in force since the last compliance audit.

NPCC Regional Standards Committee, Segment(s) 10, 2, 4, 7, 3, 1, 5, 6, 5/5/2021

- 0 - 0

BC Hydro, Segment(s) 3, 5, 1, 12/18/2018

- 0 - 0