System Personnel Training Reliability Standards, 35689-35700 [2010-15148]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules
CRA rules. Are the existing standards
adequate? Should the regulations
require the agencies to consider
violations of additional consumer laws,
such as the Truth in Savings Act, the
Electronic Fund Transfer Act, and the
Fair Credit Reporting Act? Should the
regulations be revised to more
specifically address how evidence of
unsafe and unsound lending practices
adversely affects CRA ratings?
CRA disclosures and Performance
Evaluations. Should the agencies
consider changes to data collection,
reporting, and disclosure requirements,
for example, on community
development loans and investments?
What changes to public Performance
Evaluations would streamline the
reports, simplify compliance, improve
consistency and enhance clarity?
Should the agencies consider changes to
how Performance Evaluations
incorporate information from
community contacts or public
comments?
Dated: June 16, 2010.
John C. Dugan,
Comptroller of the Currency.
By order of the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, acting through the
Secretary of the Board under delegated
authority, June 15, 2010.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Secretary of the Board.
Dated at Washington, DC, June 16, 2010.
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary.
Dated: May 26, 2010.
By the Office of Thrift Supervision.
John E. Bowman,
Acting Director.
[FR Doc. 2010–15114 Filed 6–22–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210–01–P, 6720–01–P, 6714–01–P,
4810–33–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
18 CFR Part 40
[Docket No. RM09–25–000]
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
System Personnel Training Reliability
Standards
June 17, 2010.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 215 of the
Federal Power Act, the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission (Commission)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jun 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
proposes to approve Reliability
Standards PER–005–1 (System
Personnel Training) and PER–004–2
(Reliability Coordination—Staffing)
submitted to the Commission for
approval by the North American Electric
Reliability Corporation, the Electric
Reliability Organization (ERO) certified
by the Commission. In addition,
pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the
FPA, and section 39.5(f) of the
Commission’s regulations the
Commission proposes to direct the ERO
to develop modifications to proposed
Reliability Standard PER–005–1 to
address certain issues identified by the
Commission. The proposed Reliability
Standards require reliability
coordinators, balancing authorities, and
transmission operators to establish a
training program for their system
operators, verify each of their system
operator’s capability to perform tasks,
and provide emergency operations
training to every system operator.
DATES: Comments are due August 23,
2010.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons may
submit comments, identified by Docket
No. RM09–25–000, by any of the
following methods:
• Agency Web Site: https://
www.ferc.gov. Documents created
electronically using word processing
software should be filed in native
applications or print-to-PDF format and
not in a scanned format.
• Mail/Hand Delivery. Commenters
unable to file comments electronically
must mail or hand deliver an original
and 14 copies of their comments to:
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
Secretary of the Commission, 888 First
Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karin L. Larson (Legal Information),
Office of the General Counsel, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC
20426. (202) 502–8236.
Kenneth U. Hubona (Technical
Information), Office of Electric
Reliability, Division of Reliability
Standards, Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, 13511 Label Lane, Suite
203, Hagerstown, MD 21740. (301)
665–1608.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Pursuant to section 215 of the
Federal Power Act (FPA),1 the
Commission proposes to approve
Reliability Standards PER–005–1
(System Personnel Training) and PER–
004–2 (Reliability Coordination—
Staffing), developed by the North
American Electric Reliability
1 16
PO 00000
U.S.C. 824o (2006).
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35689
Corporation (NERC), the Commissioncertified Electric Reliability
Organization (ERO). The Commission
proposes to direct the ERO to develop
modifications to proposed Reliability
Standard PER–005–1 to address certain
issues identified by the Commission.
The proposed Reliability Standards
require reliability coordinators,
balancing authorities, and transmission
operators to establish a training program
for their system operators, verify each of
their system operator’s capability to
perform tasks, and provide emergency
operations training to each system
operator. The Commission also proposes
to approve the retirement of the
currently effective Reliability Standards
PER–002–0 (Operating Personnel
Training) and PER–004–1 (Reliability
Coordination), which are superseded by
the proposed Reliability Standards PER–
005–1 and PER–004–2.
I. Background
A. System Personnel Training and the
August 14, 2003 Blackout
2. On August 14, 2003, a blackout that
began in Ohio affected significant
portions of the Midwest and Northeast
United States, and Ontario, Canada
(August 14 Blackout). This blackout
affected an area with an estimated 50
million people and 61,800 megawatts of
electric load.2 The subsequent
investigation and report completed by
the U.S.-Canada Power System Outage
Task Force (Task Force) reviewed
several previous major North American
outages and concluded that ‘‘inadequate
training of operating personnel’’ was
among the factors that the August 14
Blackout had in common with previous
outages.3
3. Specifically, the Task Force
summarized that previous outage
analyses recommended ‘‘enhanced
procedures and training for operating
personnel.’’ 4 This included:
• Thorough programs and schedules
for operator training and retraining
should be vigorously administered.
• A full-scale simulator should be
made available to provide operating
personnel with ‘‘hands-on’’ experience
in dealing with possible emergency or
other system conditions.
• Procedures and training programs
for system operators should include
anticipation, recognition, and definition
of emergency situations.
2 U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task Force,
Final Report on the August 14, 2003 Blackout in the
United States and Canada: Causes and
Recommendations, (April 2004) (Blackout Report),
available at https://www.ferc.gov/industries/electric/
indus-act/blackout.asp.
3 See Blackout Report at 107.
4 Id. at 110.
E:\FR\FM\23JNP1.SGM
23JNP1
35690
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules
• Written procedures and training
materials should include criteria that
system operators can use to recognize
signs of system stress and mitigating
measures to be taken before conditions
degrade into emergencies * * *.5
4. The Blackout Report stated that
some reliability coordinators and
control area operators, i.e., balancing
authorities, did not receive adequate
training in recognizing and responding
to system emergencies and this ‘‘training
deficiency contributed to the lack of
situational awareness and failure to
declare an emergency on August 14
while operator intervention was still
possible (before events began to occur at
a speed beyond human control).’’ 6 The
Blackout Report recommended
‘‘[i]mprov[ing] near-term and long-term
training and certification requirements
for operators, reliability coordinators,
and operator support staff.’’ 7 The Task
Force suggested that NERC require
training for planning staff at control
areas and reliability coordinators
concerning power system characteristics
and load, VAR, and voltage limits to
enable them to develop rules for
operating staff to follow.8 In addition,
the Task Force urged NERC to ‘‘require
control areas and reliability
coordinators to train grid operators, IT
support personnel, and their supervisors
to recognize and respond to abnormal
automation system activity.’’ 9
B. Section 215 of the FPA and
Mandatory Reliability Standards
1. Section 215 of the FPA
5. Section 215 of the FPA requires a
Commission-certified ERO to develop
mandatory and enforceable Reliability
Standards, which are subject to
Commission review and approval. If
approved, the Reliability Standards are
enforced by the ERO, subject to
Commission oversight, or by the
Commission independently.
6. In July 2006, the Commission
certified NERC as the ERO.10
Concurrent with its 2006 ERO
Application, NERC submitted to the
Commission a petition seeking approval
of 107 proposed Reliability Standards,
including four Personnel Performance,
Training and Qualifications (PER)
Reliability Standards. The PER group of
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
5 Id.
6 Id.
at 157.
7 Id. at 156, Task Force Recommendation 19.
8 Id. at 156–157, Task Force Recommendation
19.A.
9 Id. at 157, Task Force Recommendation 19.B.
10 North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116
FERC ¶ 61,062 (ERO Certification Order), order on
reh’g & compliance, 117 FERC ¶ 61,126 (2006), aff’d
sub nom., Alcoa, Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d 1342 (DC
Cir. 2009).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jun 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
Reliability Standards is intended to
ensure the safe and reliable operation of
the interconnected grid through the
retention of suitably trained and
qualified personnel in positions that can
impact the reliable operation of the
Bulk-Power System.
7. On March 16, 2007, the
Commission issued Order No. 693,
approving 83 of the 107 Reliability
Standards filed by NERC,11 including
the four PER Reliability Standards:
PER–001–0, PER–002–0, PER–003–0,
and PER–004–1.12 In addition, under
section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, the
Commission directed NERC to develop
modifications to the PER Reliability
Standards to address certain issues
identified by the Commission. At issue
in the immediate proceeding are two
new PER standards that would replace
the currently effective Reliability
Standards PER–002–0 (Operating
Personnel Training) and PER–004–1
(Reliability Coordination—Staffing).
2. Reliability Standard PER–002–0
8. Currently effective Reliability
Standard PER–002–0 requires each
transmission operator and balancing
authority to be staffed with adequately
trained operating personnel.13
Specifically, PER–002–0: (1) Directs
each transmission operator and
balancing authority to have a training
program for all operating personnel who
occupy positions that either have
primary responsibility, directly or
through communication with others, for
the real-time operation of the BulkPower System or who are directly
responsible for complying with the
NERC Reliability Standards; (2) lists
criteria that must be met by the training
program; and (3) requires that operating
personnel receive at least five days of
training in emergency operations each
year using realistic simulations.14
9. In Order No. 693, the Commission
directed NERC, pursuant to section
215(d)(5) of the FPA, to develop the
following modifications to PER–002–0:
(1) Identify the expectations of the
training for each job function; (2)
develop training programs tailored to
each job function with consideration of
the individual training needs of the
personnel; (3) expand the applicability
of the training requirements to include:
reliability coordinators, local
transmission control center operator
11 Mandatory Reliability Standards for the BulkPower System, Order No. 693, Federal Register 72
FR 16,416 (Apr. 4, 2007), FERC Stats. & Regs.
¶ 31,242, order on reh’g, Order No. 693–A, 120
FERC ¶ 61,053 (2007).
12 Order No. 693 at P 1330–1417.
13 Id. P 1331.
14 Reliability Standard PER–002–0.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
personnel, generator operators centrallylocated at a generation control center
with a direct impact on the reliable
operation of the Bulk-Power System,
and operations planning and operations
support staff who carry out outage
planning and assessments and those
who develop system operating limits
(SOLs), interconnection reliability
operating limits (IROLs), or operating
nomograms for real-time operations; (4)
use a Systematic Approach to Training
methodology for developing new
training programs; and (5) include the
use of simulators by reliability
coordinators, transmission operators,
and balancing authorities that have
operational control over a significant
portion of load and generation.15
10. In Order No. 693, the Commission
also directed the ERO to determine
whether it is feasible to develop
meaningful performance metrics
associated with the effectiveness of a
training program required by currently
effective Reliability Standard PER–002–
0 and to consider whether personnel
that support Energy Management
System (EMS) applications should be
included in mandatory training
pursuant to the Reliability Standard.16
3. Reliability Standard PER–004–1
11. In Order No. 693, the Commission
also approved Reliability Standard PER–
004–1.17 This Reliability Standard
requires each reliability coordinator to
be staffed with adequately trained,
NERC-certified operators, 24 hours a
day, seven days a week. Further, PER–
004–1 requires reliability coordinator
operating personnel to have a
comprehensive understanding of the
area of the Bulk-Power System for
which they are responsible.
12. Under section 215(d)(5) of the
FPA, the Commission directed NERC to
develop modifications to currently
effective Reliability Standard PER–004–
1 through the Reliability Standards
development process to: (1) Include
formal training requirements for
reliability coordinators similar to those
addressed under the personnel training
Reliability Standard PER–002–0 and (2)
include requirements pertaining to
personnel credentials for reliability
coordinators similar to those in PER–
003–0.18
15 Order
No. 693 at P 1393.
P 1394.
17 Id. P 1417.
18 Id. P 1415, 1417. Currently effective Reliability
Standard PER–003–0 requires transmission
operators, balancing authorities and reliability
coordinators to have NERC-certified staff for all
operating positions that have a primary
responsibility for real-time operations or are
directly responsible for complying with the
Reliability Standards. Id. at 1395.
16 Id.
E:\FR\FM\23JNP1.SGM
23JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules
II. NERC Petition for Proposed
Reliability Standards PER–005–1 and
PER–004–2
13. In a September 30, 2009 filing
(NERC Petition),19 NERC requests
Commission approval of proposed
Reliability Standards PER–005–1
(System Personnel Training) and PER–
004–2 (Reliability Coordination—
Staffing), which were developed in
response to the Commission’s directives
in Order No. 693 regarding currently
effective Reliability Standard PER–002–
0.20 NERC seeks to concurrently retire
currently effective Reliability Standards
PER–002–0 and PER–004–1 upon the
effective date PER–004–2 and PER–005–
1.
14. NERC states that the proposed
Reliability Standards ‘‘are a significant
improvement over the existing
Reliability Standards’’ and recommends
Commission approval of the standards
as a ‘‘significant step in strengthening
the quality of operator training programs
as necessary for the reliability of the
[B]ulk-[P]ower [S]ystem.’’ 21
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
A. Reliability Standard PER–005–1
15. Proposed Reliability Standard
PER–005–1 has the stated purpose of
ensuring that system operators
performing real-time, reliability-related
tasks on the North American bulk
electric system are competent to
perform those reliability-related tasks.22
The proposed Reliability Standard
applies to reliability coordinators,
balancing authorities and transmission
operators. Reliability Standard PER–
005–1 contains three requirements,
which NERC describes as follows:
• Requirement R1 mandates the use
of a systematic approach to training for
both new and existing training
programs. The requirement further
requires applicable entities to create a
company-specific, reliability-related
task list relevant to Bulk-Power System
operation and to design and develop
learning objectives and training
materials based on the task list
performed by its System Operators each
calendar year. Finally, the requirement
mandates the training be delivered and
the training program be evaluated on at
least an annual basis to assess its
effectiveness.
19 North American Electric Reliability Corp., Sept.
30, 2009 Petition for Approval of Proposed
Reliability Standards Regarding System Personnel
Training (NERC Petition).
20 NERC’s Petition addresses only the directives
in Order No. 693 related to existing Reliability
Standard PER–002–0, not the directives related to
PER–004–1. See NERC Petition at 27.
21 NERC Petition at 5.
22 Reliability Standard PER–005–1, Section A.3
(Purpose).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jun 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
• Requirement R2 requires the
verification of a System Operator’s
ability to perform the tasks identified in
Requirement R1. The requirement also
mandates re-verification of a System
Operator’s ability to perform the tasks
within a specified time period when
program content is modified.
• Requirement R3 identifies the
number of hours of emergency
operations training (at least 32 hours)
that a System Operator is required to
obtain every twelve months. The
requirement further identifies those
entities required to use simulation
technology such as a simulator, virtual
technology, or other technology in their
emergency operations training
programs.23
NERC states that PER–005–1 is a new
Reliability Standard that supersedes all
of currently effective Reliability
Standard PER–002–0 and supersedes
Requirements R2, R3, and R4 of
currently effective Reliability Standard
PER–004–1.
16. According to NERC, proposed
Reliability Standard PER–005–1 ‘‘marks
a significant milestone toward achieving
FERC priorities as articulated in Order
No. 693,’’ but acknowledges that it does
not satisfy all of the directives set forth
in Order No. 693.24 Specifically, NERC
recognizes that proposed Reliability
Standard PER–005–1 does not establish
training obligations for generator
operators and various operations
support personnel as required by Order
No. 693, stating that ‘‘these will be
addressed in a subsequent development
effort as described in the Reliability
Standards Development Plan: 2009–
2011.’’ 25
B. Reliability Standard PER–004–2
17. Proposed Reliability Standard
PER–004–2 modifies PER–004–1 by
deleting Requirements R2, R3, and R4.
According to NERC, more detailed and
less ambiguous requirements addressing
the same issues set forth in currently
effective Reliability Standard PER–004–
1 Requirements R2, R3, and R4 are now
included in proposed PER–005–1.
Proposed Reliability Standard PER–
004–2 simply carries forward,
unchanged, the remaining requirements
from currently effective PER–004–1,
including the associated violation risk
factor and violation severity level
assignments. NERC states that
Requirement R2 of currently effective
PER–004–1, which requires reliability
coordinator operating personnel to
complete a minimum of five days per
23 NERC
24 Id.
Petition at 8–9.
at 7.
25 Id.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
year of training and drills using realistic
simulations of system emergencies, is
now addressed in proposed Reliability
Standards PER–005–1, Requirement R3.
According to NERC, Requirements R3
and R4 of currently effective PER–004–
1, which mandate reliability coordinator
operating personnel to have an
extensive understanding of its reliability
coordinator area and other operators
within that area, are now addressed in
proposed Reliability Standard PER–
005–1, Requirements R1 and R2.
III. Discussion
18. We agree with NERC that the
proposed Reliability Standards PER–
005–1 and PER–004–2 comply with
many of the requirements in Order No.
693 and represent an improvement in
training requirements. Accordingly,
pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of the
FPA, the Commission proposes to
approve Reliability Standards PER–005–
1 and PER–004–2, as just, reasonable,
not unduly discriminatory or
preferential, and in the public interest.
In addition, pursuant to section
215(d)(5) of the FPA, the Commission
proposes to direct the ERO to develop
modifications to proposed Reliability
Standard PER–005–1 to address certain
issues identified by the Commission.
19. It appears that the proposed
Reliability Standards adequately
address a number of the directed
modifications set forth in Order No. 693
regarding the PER Reliability Standards.
For example, it appears that proposed
Reliability Standard PER–005–1
adequately addresses the following
Order No. 693 directives: (1) Identify the
expectations of the training for each job
function; (2) develop training programs
tailored to each job function with
consideration of the individual training
needs of the personnel; (3) expand the
applicability section to include
reliability coordinators; (4) incorporate a
Systematic Approach to Training
methodology in the development of
training programs; and (5) incorporate
simulator training into the standard.
20. Personnel training is important to
ensuring the reliability of the BulkPower System, as recognized in Order
No. 693 and the Blackout Report.26 The
ERO has proposed changes to the
training standard on many issues,
including: (1) The Systematic Approach
to Training, (2) tailoring training for
each job function, and (3) simulation
training. In several of these areas, the
Commission is seeking clarification
from the ERO or industry comment on
specific matters and proposes
improvements that can be made to
26 Blackout
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35691
E:\FR\FM\23JNP1.SGM
Report at 156.
23JNP1
35692
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
further enhance operator training.
Further, we propose to direct the ERO
to modify PER–005–1 to explicitly
address training for local control center
personnel, as required by Order No. 693.
Each of these matters is discussed
below.
21. The Commission also seeks
comment on the feasibility of the
proposed effective dates and retirement
dates proposed by NERC. Additionally,
the Commission proposes to defer
review of the violation risk factor and
violation severity level assignments for
proposed Reliability Standards PER–
005–1 and PER–004–2.
22. Finally, as acknowledged by
NERC, certain of the directives from
Order No. 693 related to the currently
effective Reliability Standard PER–002–
0 are not addressed in proposed
Reliability Standard PER–005–1. Thus,
the Commission seeks comment on the
timeframe for the ERO to modify PER–
005–1 to fully respond to the
Commission’s directives in Order No.
693 regarding expanding the
applicability of the training
requirements.
A. Systematic Approach to Training
23. In Order No. 693, the Commission
directed NERC to develop modifications
to currently effective Reliability
Standard PER–002–0 to use a
Systematic Approach to Training
methodology for developing new
training programs.27 A Systematic
Approach to Training is a widelyaccepted methodology that ensures
training is efficiently and effectively
conducted and is directly related to the
needs of the position in question. To
achieve training results, Systematic
Approach to Training objectives
include: management and
administration of training and
qualification programs; development
and qualification of training staff;
trainee entry-level requirements;
determination of training program
content; design and development of
training programs; conduct of training;
trainee examinations and evaluations;
and training program evaluation.
24. NERC states that proposed
Reliability Standard PER–005–1,
Requirement R1 satisfies this directive
as it requires each reliability
coordinator, balancing authority, and
transmission operator to use a
Systematic Approach to Training to
establish company-specific, reliabilityrelated tasks performed by its system
operators. Specifically, Requirement R1
provides that ‘‘each Reliability
Coordinator, Balancing Authority and
Transmission Operator shall use a
systematic approach to training to
establish a training program* * *.’’ 28
Commission Proposal
25. Based on the Commission’s
understanding of Systematic Approach
to Training, we agree with NERC that
proposed Reliability Standard PER–
005–1, Requirement R1 meets the
Commission’s directive to ‘‘develop a
modification to PER–002–2 (or a new
Reliability Standard) that uses the SAT
methodology.’’ 29 Requirement R1 and
the corresponding sub-requirements
mandate that each reliability
coordinator, balancing authority, and
transmission operator use a Systematic
Approach to Training to establish its
training program. Thus, NERC appears
to have complied with the Order No.
693 directive to adopt a Systematic
Approach to Training.
26. However, the generic reference to
Systematic Approach to Training
contained in proposed PER–005–1,
Requirement R1 raises the question
whether certain Order No. 693
directives and whether certain specific
training requirements that are explicitly
set forth in the currently effective
Reliability Standards PER–002–0 and
PER–004–1, which are to be retired, are
fully and adequately captured under the
Systematic Approach to Training
umbrella. The Commission questions
whether the following three, currently
effective training requirements are
incorporated in proposed Reliability
Standard PER–005–1: (i) Understanding
of reliability coordinator area, (ii)
continual training, and (iii) training staff
identity and competency. As discussed
in detail below, we seek comment on
our understanding of the carryover of
these three currently enforceable
compliance obligations.
1. Understanding of Reliability
Coordinator Area
27. Requirements R3 and R4 of
currently effective PER–004–1 provide
that reliability coordinator operating
personnel ‘‘shall have a comprehensive
understanding of the Reliability
Coordinator Area and interactions with
neighboring Reliability Coordinator
areas’’ and ‘‘shall have an extensive
understanding of the Balancing
Authorities, Transmission Operators,
and Generation Operators within the
Reliability Coordinator Area, including
the operating staff, operating practices
28 See
NERC Petition at Exhibit A, PER–005–1,
R1.
27 Order
No. 693 at P 1382.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jun 22, 2010
29 See
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Order No. 693 at P 1380.
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and procedures * * *.’’ 30 NERC states
that these two requirements are
supplanted by and are addressed more
fully in proposed Reliability Standard
PER–005–1, Requirements R1 and R2.31
Requirements R1 and R2 of proposed
Reliability Standard PER–005–1 state:
R1. Each Reliability Coordinator, Balancing
Authority and Transmission Operator shall
use a systematic approach to training to
establish a training program for the BES
company-specific reliability-related tasks
performed by its System Operators and shall
implement the program.
R1.1. Each Reliability Coordinator,
Balancing Authority and Transmission
Operator shall create a list of BES companyspecific reliability-related tasks performed by
its System Operators.
R1.1.1. Each Reliability Coordinator,
Balancing Authority and Transmission
Operator shall update its list of BES
company-specific reliability-related tasks
performed by its System Operators each
calendar year to identify new or modified
tasks for inclusion in training.
R1.2. Each Reliability Coordinator,
Balancing Authority and Transmission
Operator shall design and develop learning
objectives and training materials based on the
task list created in R1.1.
R1.3. Each Reliability Coordinator,
Balancing Authority and Transmission
Operator shall deliver the training
established in R1.2.
R1.4. Each Reliability Coordinator,
Balancing Authority and Transmission
Operator shall conduct an annual evaluation
of the training program established in R1, to
identify any needed changes to the training
program and shall implement the changes
identified.
R2. Each Reliability Coordinator, Balancing
Authority and Transmission Operator shall
verify each of its System Operator’s
capabilities to perform each assigned task
identified in R1.1 at least one time.
28. The text from currently effective
Reliability Standard PER–004–1,
Requirements R3 and R4 requiring
reliability coordinator operating
personnel to have a comprehensive
understanding of the reliability
coordinator area, is not explicitly
restated in proposed PER–005–1,
Requirements R1 and R2. NERC states
that Requirements R3 and R4 of
currently effective Reliability Standard
PER–004–1 are removed ‘‘because they
are more fully addressed by
Requirements R1 and R2 of PER–005–
1.’’ 32 NERC’s statement implies that
Requirements R1 and R2 of proposed
Reliability Standard PER–005–1 retain
30 Currently effective Reliability Standard PER–
004–1, available at https://www.nerc.com/files/PER004-1.pdf.
31 NERC Petition at 26 (stating that PER–004–001,
Requirements R3 and R4 are removed because they
are more fully addressed by Requirements R1 and
R2 of PER–005–1).
32 Id.
E:\FR\FM\23JNP1.SGM
23JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules
an obligation for reliability coordinator
operating personnel to have a
comprehensive understanding of the
reliability coordinator area and
interactions with neighboring reliability
coordinator areas, and entities that fail
to do so could be subject to an
enforcement action. However, this is not
clear from either the proposed
Reliability Standard or from NERC’s
petition. Thus, the Commission seeks an
explanation from NERC, and comment
from the general public, whether ‘‘a
comprehensive understanding of the
reliability coordinator area’’ is an
enforceable requirement under
proposed Reliability Standard PER–
005–1 and whether this requirement is
clear or should be more explicit.
2. Continual Training
29. The currently effective Reliability
Standard PER–002–0, Requirement R3.2
explicitly mandates that ‘‘the training
program must include a plan for the
initial and continuing training of
Transmission Operators and Balancing
Authorities operating personnel.’’ NERC
states that the requirements of PER–
002–0 ‘‘have been completely replaced
and supplanted by the specific
provision of proposed new Reliability
Standard PER–005–1.’’ 33 NERC’s
statement implies that the Systematic
Approach to Training requirements set
forth in proposed PER–005–1 retains an
obligation of continuing training, and
entities that fail to do so could be
subject to an enforcement action. The
Commission seeks an explanation from
NERC, and comment from the general
public, whether continuing training is
an enforceable requirement under
proposed Reliability Standard PER–
005–1 and whether this requirement is
clear or should be more explicit.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
3. Training Staff Identity and
Competency
30. Similarly, currently effective
Reliability Standard PER–002–0,
Requirement R3.4 requires a training
program in which ‘‘[t]raining staff must
be identified, and the staff must be
competent in both knowledge of system
operations and instructional
capabilities.’’ Since this requirement is
not explicitly provided in PER–005–1,
we seek clarification as to how and
whether the Systematic Approach to
Training requires training staff to be
identified, and, if not, the mechanism
by which training staff will be identified
and its competency ensured. The
Commission also seeks comment
whether this should be made explicit so
33 Id.
at 27.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jun 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
that entities clearly understand their
compliance obligations.
B. Training Expectations for Each Job
Function/Tailored Training
31. In Order No. 693, the Commission
directed NERC to develop a
modification to currently effective
Reliability Standard PER–002–0 that
identifies the expectations of the
training for each job function and
develops training programs tailored to
each job function with consideration of
the individual training needs of the
personnel. Proposed Reliability
Standard PER–005–1, Requirement R1.2
mandates applicable entities to ‘‘design
and develop learning objectives and
training materials based on the task list
created in R1.1.’’ 34
Commission Proposal
32. The Commission believes that
NERC has complied with our directive
to require entities to identify the
expectations of the training for each job
function and develop training programs
tailored to each job function with
consideration of the individual training
needs of the personnel. Based on our
review of the Systematic Approach to
Training methodology used by the
Department of Energy, we understand
that a Systematic Approach to Training
would assess factors such as
educational, technical, experience, and
medical requirements that candidates
must possess before entering a given
training program.35 With the above
understanding, we believe that the
Systematic Approach to Training
methodology, as proposed in Reliability
Standard PER–005–1, satisfies the
Commission directive to develop a
modification that identifies the
expectations of the training for each job
function and develops training
programs tailored to each job function
with consideration of the individual
training needs of the personnel. We also
understand that Requirement R1.2 of
proposed Reliability Standard PER–
005–1 requires that the learning
objectives and training materials be
developed with consideration of the
individual needs of each operator. We
seek comment on this understanding.
C. Simulation Training
33. In Order No. 693, the Commission
directed NERC to develop a requirement
34 Id. at 27 (quoting proposed Reliability Standard
PER–005–1, Requirement R1.2).
35 U.S. Department of Energy’s Standard, DOE–
STD–1070, Guidelines for Evaluation of Nuclear
Facility Training Programs at Appendix—
Objectives and Criteria, Objective 3 (June 1994),
available at https://www.hss.energy.gov/
nuclearsafety/ns/techstds/standard/std1070/
std1070.html.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35693
mandating simulator training for
reliability coordinators, transmission
operators and balancing authorities that
have operational control over a
significant portion of load and
generation.36 The Commission
acknowledged concerns regarding the
high cost to develop and maintain fullscale simulators, and took them into
consideration. We stated that we did not
require that entities must develop and
maintain full-scale simulators, but
rather they should have access to
training on simulators. Further, because
the cost is likely to outweigh the
reliability benefits for small entities, the
Commission stated that small entities
should continue to use training aids
such as generic operator training
simulators and realistic table-top
exercises. Therefore, the Commission
directed the ERO to develop a
requirement for the use of simulators
dependent on an entity’s role and size.
34. NERC explains that because ‘‘the
implementation cost of a full-fledged
system-specific simulator can be
significant * * * the use of a simulator
is only required for entities managing
facilities having a significant impact on
the bulk power system (Requirement
R3.1) * * *.’’ 37 Thus, NERC states that
proposed PER–005–1, Requirement R3.1
satisfies this directive as it requires:
Each Reliability Coordinator, Balancing
Authority and Transmission Operator that
has operational authority or control over
Facilities with established IROLs or has
established operating guides or protection
systems to mitigate IROL violations shall
provide each System Operator with
emergency operations training using
simulation technology such as a simulator,
virtual technology, or other technology that
replicates the operational behavior of the BES
during normal and emergency conditions.38
Commission Proposal
35. As required in Order No. 693,
proposed Reliability Standard PER–
005–1 requires the use of simulator
training. It appears that proposed PER–
005–1, Requirement R3.1 would
enhance the existing requirements
governing simulation training by
providing operating personnel with
hands-on simulation training experience
in dealing with possible emergencies or
other system conditions. In addition, the
proposed Reliability Standard appears
to take into account the size of the
entity, as allowed by Order No. 693, by
requiring such training only for entities
which have operational authority or
control over facilities with established
IROLs or have established operating
36 Order
No. 693 at P 1390–91.
Petition at 17.
38 Id. at 32.
37 NERC
E:\FR\FM\23JNP1.SGM
23JNP1
35694
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
guides or protection systems to mitigate
IROL violations.
36. However, we ask for clarification
from NERC concerning the simulation
requirement. The Blackout Report found
that some reliability coordinators and
control area operators had not received
adequate system emergency training,
that ‘‘[m]ost notable was the lack of
realistic simulations and drills to train
and verify the capabilities of operating
personnel,’’ and that this training
deficiency contributed to the lack of
situational awareness and failure to
declare an emergency while operator
intervention was still possible.39
Requirement R3.1 requires the
simulation technology to ‘‘replicate[] the
operational behavior of the [bulk
electric system] during normal and
emergency conditions.’’ By requiring the
technology to replicate the operational
behavior of the Bulk-Power System, it
appears that this provision requires the
use of simulators specific to an
operator’s own system. We ask NERC for
clarification on this issue. We also ask
for comments on this provision from
other interested persons.
37. The Commission believes that
system-customized simulator training
would further the Blackout Report goal
of providing ‘‘realistic simulations.’’
Because each system is topologically
unique,40 training on a simulator
specific to one’s own system (‘‘custom
simulation’’) would necessarily better
prepare an operator on that system than
generic simulation training. Custom
simulation is considered to be highly
effective because it provides trainees
with realistic and relevant contexts in
which to test and develop their
understanding, knowledge and
competence. An advantage of custom
simulation is that it trains operators on
specific control strategies for their own
system. In other words, it would allow
the system operator to better understand
how his actions and reactions will affect
the particular assets and environment in
which the operator works. In short,
simulation training that utilizes an
environment that resembles the
expected system conditions during
emergency, results in more effective
troubleshooting during emergencies as it
better prepares the operators to identify
changes and symptoms, correctly locate
the problem, and take necessary action
39 Blackout
Report at 157 (emphasis added).
properties of each system are unique,
properties such as the location and capabilities of
generator units and capacitor banks, typical
transmission line loadings, location and function of
special protection systems, if any, normal
substation configuration, and other elements. The
interaction of these elements impact an operator’s
options in an emergency.
40 The
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jun 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
to fix the problem. While a more generic
simulator can teach the skills needed for
operating a power system and
responding to emergency conditions, it
does not familiarize the operator with
the specifics of his system and how that
system responds to specific events that
give rise to emergencies. Greater
knowledge of and experience in dealing
with the specific system give the
operator a more solid grasp of the
behavior of that system and a feel for its
response to various conditions and,
therefore, better prepare the operator to
deal with emergencies on that system.
38. Some entities may currently use
vendor-provided emergency system
simulator training to provide operating
personnel with ‘‘hands-on’’ training
experience. In some instances the
emergency conditions embedded in the
vendor training programs may not be
specific to the entity’s own system and
operations. In Order No. 693, the
Commission, citing commenters’
concerns regarding the high cost to
develop and maintain full-scale
simulators, concluded that the directive
does not mean that entities subject to
the simulation training requirement
must develop and maintain full-scale
simulators but rather they should have
access to training on simulators.41 As
such, we would not expect an entity to
necessarily use a simulator that
replicates its own hardware, but we
believe that there may be other tools
that would allow an entity to input its
own system files to a vendor simulator
so the vendor simulator would run that
entity’s system’s power flows over a
range of operating conditions and test
operator response.
39. Therefore, we seek comment on
whether the Reliability Standard should
require the simulation technology to
realistically replicate an entity’s own
topology and operating conditions. If
the proposed language ‘‘replicates the
operational behavior of the [bulk
electric system],’’ contemplates use of
simulators not specific to one’s own
system, we ask whether operators
trained on simulators that replicate
systems other than their own will be
adequately trained to respond to
emergency conditions on their own
system. For example, we seek comment
on whether training on simulators that
replicate a different system provide
operating personnel emergency system
training with sufficiently realistic
simulations to enable them to act in an
actual emergency. We seek comment on
the feasibility and practicality
(including cost considerations) of
requiring use of simulation technology
that realistically replicates the entity’s
own topology and operating conditions.
D. Local Transmission Control Center
Operator Personnel
40. In Order No. 693, the Commission
directed NERC to modify currently
effective Reliability Standard PER–002–
0 to include formal training for local
transmission control center operating
personnel.42 Specifically, the
Commission concluded that ‘‘[w]hile
PER–002–0 applies to transmission
operators, it is important for reliability
that personnel involved in decision
making and implementation receive
proper training.’’ 43 Because local
transmission control center personnel
are responsible for implementing
instructions that affect the reliability of
the Bulk-Power System, we directed the
ERO to modify PER–002–0 to include
training for such personnel tailored to
the needs of the positions.
41. Proposed Reliability Standard
PER–005–1 does not explicitly include
a requirement that covers formal
training for local transmission control
center operator personnel. NERC’s
Petition states that the NERC Reliability
Functional Model accurately captures
the list of functions that a Transmission
Operator performs, and therefore
includes those performed by local
control center personnel. NERC
concludes that, if all entities are
properly registered in the NERC
Compliance Registry, the Commission’s
directive to include formal training for
local transmission control center
operator personnel ‘‘will be
appropriately addressed because the
Transmission Operator has the ultimate
responsibility to ensure that its
functional responsibilities are met, even
if through other entities.’’ 44
Commission Proposal
42. The Commission is concerned
with NERC’s conclusion that local
transmission control center personnel
will receive training because this
conclusion relies on the transmission
operator requiring training for another
entity’s personnel. Moreover, NERC’s
response to this directive reasserts the
same arguments we rejected in Order
No. 693:
The Commission disagrees with those
commenters who contend that, because
operators at local control centers take
direction from NERC-certified operators at
the ISO or RTO, they do not need to be
addressed by the training requirements of
PER–002–0. Rather, as discussed above, these
42 Id.
P 1343.
P 1342.
44 NERC Petition at 30.
43 Id.
41 Order
PO 00000
No. 693 at P 1390–91.
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\23JNP1.SGM
23JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules
operators maintain authority to act
independently to carry out tasks that require
real-time operation of the Bulk-Power System
including protecting assets, protecting
personnel safety, adhering to regulatory
requirements and establishing stable islands
during system restoration.45
Thus the Commission concluded:
Whether the RTO or the local control
center is ultimately responsible for
compliance is a separate issue * * *,
regardless of which entity registers for that
responsibility, these local control center
employees must receive formal training
consistent with their roles, responsibilities
and tasks.46
Simply put, the Commission already
rejected the concept of relying on the
transmission operator’s obligation to
train its personnel to ensure that local
transmission control center operator
personnel receive training. The
Commission’s objective, as stated in
Order No. 693, is to ensure that there are
no gaps in responsibility for providing
formal training to local transmission
control center employees. Subrequirement R1.1 of the proposed
Reliability Standard PER–005–1 states
that each ‘‘Transmission Operator shall
* * * establish a training program for
the BES company-specific * * * tasks
performed by its System Operators and
shall implement the program.’’ 47 The
language of this sub-requirement
provides that the Transmission Operator
is only required to implement a training
program for operators within its
company. It is unclear to the
Commission how the Transmission
Operator could then require a local
control center operator to receive
training, particularly if that operator is
within another entity, as suggested by
NERC. A clear statement in the
proposed Reliability Standard that
incorporates local transmission control
center operator personnel would satisfy
the Commission’s directive. We propose
to direct NERC to modify proposed
Reliability Standard PER–005–1 to
include a provision that explicitly
addresses training for local transmission
control center personnel, consistent
with the Commission’s directive in
Order No. 693.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
E. Performance Metrics
43. In Order No. 693, the Commission
directed NERC to determine ‘‘whether it
is feasible to develop meaningful
performance metrics associated with the
effectiveness of a training program
* * *, and if so, develop such
45 Order
No. 693 at P 1347.
P 1343 (emphasis added).
47 Proposed Reliability Standard PER–005–1,
Requirement R1.1 (emphasis added).
46 Id.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jun 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
performance metrics.’’ 48 In response,
NERC states that the Systematic
Approach to Training methodology, as
set forth in proposed Reliability
Standard PER–005–1, sub-requirement
R1.4, requires each reliability
coordinator, balancing authority and
transmission operator to conduct an
annual evaluation of the training
program and assess whether system
operators are receiving effective
training. NERC concludes that this
‘‘provides a meaningful assessment of
the training program’’ while ‘‘[a]n
evaluation of how System Operators
perform during infrequent, actual events
on the system would not provide useful
metrics on an ongoing basis.’’ 49 NERC
also states that proposed Reliability
Standard PER–005–1 is a training
standard, and is not intended to address
individual system operator performance
apart from the requirements associated
with the company-specific reliabilityrelated tasks identified in Requirement
R1.
Commission Proposal
44. Order No. 693 did not specifically
require NERC to provide metrics for the
training standard, but required NERC to
explore the feasibility of developing
meaningful metrics for assessing the
effectiveness of training programs. As a
part of this directive, we stated that
metrics could be used to ‘‘continually
improve an applicable entity’s
performance and the Reliability
Standard itself.’’ 50 The Commission is
encouraged that the proposed Reliability
Standard includes a requirement for
each applicable entity to annually
evaluate its training program to identify
and implement needed changes. This is
an important part of keeping each
individual training program current,
and an improvement over the currently
effective reliability standard. We agree
with NERC that this provides a
meaningful assessment of the training
program.
45. However, the Commission also
stated that ‘‘if quantifiable performance
metrics can be developed to gauge the
effectiveness of a Reliability Standard,
these performance metrics should be
developed.’’ 51 While NERC evaluated
whether metrics were needed to assess
each individual program, we are not
satisfied that NERC evaluated whether
48 Order No. 693 at P 1394. Generally,
performance metrics are a system of parameters or
means of quantitative and periodic assessment of a
process that is to be measured. See e.g., NERC Staff
White Paper, Toward Ensuring Reliability:
Reliability Performance Metrics (December 2007).
49 NERC Petition at 33–34.
50 Order No. 693 at P 1379.
51 Id. (emphasis added).
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35695
performance metrics could be devised to
evaluate the Reliability Standard. While
NERC states that ‘‘[a]n evaluation of how
System Operators perform during
infrequent, actual events on the system
would not provide useful metrics on an
ongoing basis,’’ 52 it provides no
explanation of this statement. The
Commission questions whether metrics
could be developed to establish specific
parameters and measurements that
would allow, among other things, the
monitoring of trends and the
comparison of performance across
entities. Further, the Commission
believes that meaningful performance
metrics could include a global metric
that could be used to compare the
competency of system operators to
perform reliability-related tasks from
one entity to another in order to assess
whether a particular entity’s training
program is producing adequately
trained personnel. In addition, the
results from such a metric could be used
to identify areas in which a particular
reliability requirement may need to be
improved. These objectives go beyond
the annual evaluation set forth in
proposed Reliability Standard PER–
005–1, sub-requirement R1.4, and NERC
has not provided an explanation of
whether it has evaluated whether such
metrics are feasible.
46. NERC suggests that an evaluation
of how system operators perform during
infrequent, actual events on the system
would not provide a useful metric.
While actual system disturbances that
result in significant operating events
such as IROL violations or loss of load
may not be frequent, contingencies,
frequency decline, overloaded
transmission lines and voltage
excursions, among other operating
events, occur regularly and actions to
mitigate these circumstances are what
prevent more significant disturbances.
Operator actions with regard to these
more regular events seem noteworthy
and may provide indicators of the
effectiveness of training programs.
47. We seek comment from NERC on
whether it considered metrics to
evaluate the effectiveness of the
Reliability Standard, in addition to its
consideration of metrics to evaluate the
effectiveness of an individual entity’s
training program. In addition, we seek
comment on possible performance
metrics that could be used to assess
whether proposed Reliability Standard
PER–005–1 achieves its stated purpose
‘‘[t]o ensure that System Operators
performing real-time, reliability-related
tasks on the North American Bulk
Electric System * * * are competent to
52 NERC
E:\FR\FM\23JNP1.SGM
Petition at 33–34.
23JNP1
35696
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules
perform those reliability-related tasks.’’
Accordingly, we propose to direct that
the ERO evaluate the feasibility of
developing meaningful performance
metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of
the Reliability Standard related to
operator training.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
F. Effective and Retirement Dates
48. With respect to proposed
Reliability Standard PER–005–1, NERC
proposes staggered effective dates, i.e.,
the mandatory compliance date after an
allotted implementation period, for each
of the standard’s requirements and subrequirements. Specifically, NERC
proposes: Compliance with PER–005–1,
Requirements R1 and R2 would be
mandatory on the first day of the first
calendar quarter, 24 months after
regulatory approval; compliance with
Requirement R3 would be mandatory on
the first day of the first calendar quarter
after regulatory approval; and
compliance with sub-requirement R3.1
would be mandatory on the first day of
the first calendar quarter 36 months
after regulatory approval. NERC
proposes to retire currently effective
PER–002–0 because the PER–002–0
requirements will be superseded by
proposed PER–005–1. Thus NERC states
that retirement of PER–002–0 is
necessary to avoid redundancy, conflict,
and confusion regarding the mandatory
training standards. Notwithstanding the
proposed staggered effective dates of the
requirements in PER–005–1, NERC
proposes to retire PER–002–0 upon the
‘‘effective date of PER–005–1.’’ 53
49. With respect to proposed
Reliability Standard PER–004–2, the
proposed effective date section set forth
in proposed Reliability Standard PER–
004–2 states:
Effective Date:
• Retire Requirement 2 when PER–
005–1 Requirement 3 becomes effective.
• Retire Requirements 3 and 4 when
PER–005–1 Requirements 1 and 2
become effective.
NERC’s Petition states that it seeks
Commission approval to retire existing
Reliability Standard PER–004–1 upon
the effective date of proposed Reliability
Standard PER–004–2 and PER–005–1.54
Commission Proposal
50. The Commission is concerned that
the proposed effective and retirement
dates may not be appropriate. The
Commission previously has approved
the use of staggered effective dates in
conjunction with new Reliability
Standards. However, in this case, where
the proposed Reliability Standards
53 Id.
54 Id.
at 27 and 42.
at 1 and 42.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jun 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
modify currently effective standards, we
are concerned that a staggered effective
date may create a gap in compliance and
enforceability.
51. NERC states that proposed
Reliability Standard PER–005–1 is
intended to supersede existing
Reliability Standard PER–002–0 ‘‘upon
the effective date of PER–005–1.’’ First,
it is not clear whether NERC intended
that PER–002–0 be retired when the first
requirement in PER–005–1 becomes
effective, or when all requirements in
PER–005–1 become effective. If PER–
002–0 is retired when only certain
requirements are effective in PER–005–
1, the Commission is concerned that
this may create a gap in training
requirements as NERC proposes to make
the various requirements in PER–005–1
mandatory and enforceable in three
stages over a three year period. We seek
an explanation from NERC on whether
its proposed effective date for PER–005–
1 and retirement date for PER–002–0
will create a gap in compliance and
further seek comment on alternative
approaches to avoid any such gap. If
NERC intends for PER–002–0 to be
retired after all of PER–005–1’s
requirements are in effect, the
Commission is concerned that this may
result in overlapping and potentially
conflicting requirements that could
unintentionally introduce confusion in
compliance expectations during certain
timeframes. We also request industry
comment on the length of the lead-time
before the various requirements in PER–
005–1 become mandatory and
enforceable, which, as currently
proposed, is as long as three years and,
more specifically, comment on the need
for the proposed two- and three-year
lead-times.
52. With respect to proposed
Reliability Standard PER–004–2 and the
retirement of currently effective PER–
004–1, as the Commission understands
the text in proposed Reliability
Standard PER–004–2, NERC proposes to
retire Requirements R2, R3, and R4 of
currently effective Reliability Standard
PER–004–1 concurrent with the dates
the related requirements in proposed
PER–005–1 become effective.55 In other
words, NERC proposes to stagger the
retirement of currently effective PER–
004–1. The Commission seeks comment
on the feasibility of using a staggered
retirement date as well as possible
alternative approaches.
55 The effective date language in proposed PER–
004–2 is not clear. The Commission read the
language with the assumption that the reference to
‘‘Requirement 2’’ in the text ‘‘Retire Requirement 2
upon the effective date of PER–005–1 Requirement
3’’ refers to Requirement 2 of PER–004–1.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
G. Violation Risk Factors/Violation
Severity Levels
53. To determine a base penalty
amount for a violation of a requirement
within a Reliability Standard, NERC
must first determine an initial range for
the base penalty amount. To do so,
NERC assigns a violation risk factor to
each requirement and sub-requirement
of a Reliability Standard that relates to
the expected or potential impact of a
violation of the requirement on the
reliability of the Bulk-Power System.
NERC may propose either a lower,
medium or high violation risk factor for
each mandatory Reliability Standard
requirement.56 The Commission has
established guidelines for evaluating the
validity of each violation risk factor
assignment.57
54. NERC also will assign each
requirement and sub-requirement one of
four violation severity levels—low,
moderate, high, and severe—as
measurements for the degree to which
the requirement was violated in a
specific circumstance. On June 19, 2008,
the Commission issued an order
establishing four guidelines for the
development of violation severity
levels.58
55. With respect to proposed
Reliability Standard PER–005–1, NERC
proposes to assign violation risk factors
only to the main requirements and did
not propose violation risk factors for any
of the sub-requirements.59 NERC assigns
56 The specific definitions of high, medium and
lower are provided in North American Electric
Reliability Corp., 119 FERC ¶ 61,145, at P 9 (2007),
order on reh’g, 120 FERC ¶ 61,145 (2007) (Violation
Risk Factor Rehearing Order).
57 See Violation Risk Factor Rehearing Order, 120
FERC ¶ 61,145 at P 8–13. The guidelines are: (1)
Consistency with the conclusions of the Blackout
Report; (2) consistency within a Reliability
Standard; (3) consistency among Reliability
Standards; (4) consistency with NERC’s definition
of the violation risk factor level; and (5) treatment
of requirements that co-mingle more than one
obligation.
58 North American Electric Reliability Corp., 123
FERC ¶ 61,284, at P 20–35 (2008) (Violation
Severity Level Order), order on reh’g & compliance,
125 FERC ¶ 61,212 (2008). The guidelines provide
that violation severity level assignments should: (1)
Not lower the current level of compliance; (2)
ensure uniformity and consistency in the
determination of penalties; (3) be consistent with
the corresponding requirement; and (4) be based on
a single violation.
59 We note that in Version Two Facilities Design,
Connections and Maintenance Reliability
Standards, Order No. 722, 126 FERC ¶ 61,255, at
P 45 (2009), the ERO proposed to develop violation
risk factors and violation severity levels for
Requirements but not sub-requirements. The
Commission denied the proposal as ‘‘premature’’
and, instead, encouraged the ERO to ‘‘develop a new
and comprehensive approach that would better
facilitate the assignment of violation severity levels
and violation risk factors.’’ As directed, on March
5, 2010, NERC submitted a comprehensive
approach that is currently pending with the
Commission in Docket No. RR08–4–005.
E:\FR\FM\23JNP1.SGM
23JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Requirement R1 a ‘‘medium’’ violation
risk factor, Requirement R2 a ‘‘high’’
violation risk factor, and Requirement
R3 a ‘‘medium’’ violation risk factor. The
NERC Petition proposes violation
severity levels for Requirements R1, R2,
and R3 of proposed Reliability Standard
PER–005–1. NERC did not propose
violation severity levels for any of the
sub-requirements. With respect to
proposed Reliability Standard PER–
004–2, NERC proposes to carry forward
the violation risk factors and violation
severity levels currently assigned to the
existing Reliability Standard PER–004–
1. NERC requests approval for the
proposed violation risk factors and
violation severity levels subject to the
outcome of the proceedings in Docket
Nos. RR08–4–000 and related subdockets.60
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Commission Proposal
56. In its March 5, 2010 filing in
Docket No. RR08–4–005, NERC
incorporated by reference its
informational filing submitted in
response to Version Two Facilities
Design, Connections and Maintenance
Reliability Standards, Order No. 722,
126 FERC ¶ 61,255, at P 45 (2009), in
which NERC proposed the novel
approach of assigning violation risk
factors and violation severity levels only
to a Reliability Standard’s
Requirements, but not the subrequirements. Because the violation risk
factors and violation severity levels for
both proposed Reliability Standard
PER–005–1 and PER–004–2 are
impacted by the NERC’s pending
petition, we propose to defer discussion
on the proposed violation risk factors
and violation severity levels assigned to
PER–005–1 and PER–004–2 until after
we act on the ERO’s petition in Docket
No. RR08–4–005.
H. Unaddressed Directives
57. In Order No. 693, the Commission
directed NERC to expand the
applicability of currently effective
Reliability Standard PER–002–0 to
include (i) generator operators centrallylocated at a generation control center
with a direct impact on the reliable
operation of the Bulk-Power System,
and (ii) operations planning and
operations support staff who carry out
outage planning and assessments and
those who develop SOLs, IROLs or
operating nomograms for real-time
operations.61 The Commission also
directed the ERO, in part, to consider
‘‘whether personnel that support [Energy
Management System] applications
* * * should be included in mandatory
training’’ 62 requirements set forth in
Reliability Standard PER–002–0.
58. In Order No. 693, with regard to
the directive to expand the applicability
of the training requirements in currently
effective PER–002–0 to include
generator operators, the Commission
stated, ‘‘it is essential that generator
operator personnel have appropriate
training.’’ 63 The Commission further
noted that in the event communication
is lost, the generator operator personnel
must have had sufficient training to take
appropriate action to ensure reliability
of the Bulk-Power System. Thus, we
directed the ERO to modify currently
effective Reliability Standard PER–002–
0 to apply to generator operators.64
59. With regard to the directive to
expand the applicability of the training
requirements in currently effective PER–
002–0 to include operations planning
and operations support staff, the
Commission directed the ERO to modify
currently effective Reliability Standard
PER–002–0 to apply to operations
planning and support staff personnel
who carry out outage coordination and
assessments in accordance with
Reliability Standards IRO–004–1 and
TOP–002–2, and those who determine
SOLs and IROLs or operating
nomograms in accordance with
Reliability Standards IRO–005–1 and
TOP–004–0.65
60. With regard to the directive to
consider Energy Management System
(EMS) support personnel, the
Commission noted that EMS support
personnel can also have an impact on
the reliable operation of the Bulk-Power
System. These are the personnel
responsible for ensuring that critical
EMS reliability applications, such as
state estimation, contingency analysis
and alarm processing packages, are
available, contain up-to-date system
data and produce useable results.
Because the impact of these employees
upon Reliable Operation is not as clear,
we directed the ERO to consider,
through the Reliability Standards
development process, whether
personnel that perform these additional
functions should be included in
mandatory training pursuant to PER–
002–0.66
61. In response to these Order No. 693
directives, NERC acknowledges that
proposed Reliability Standard PER–
005–1 does not establish training
obligations for generator operators and
62 Id.
63 Id.
P 1394.
P 1359.
64 Id.
60 NERC
Petition at 42.
61 Order No. 693 at P 1393.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jun 22, 2010
65 Id.
66 Id.
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
P 1372 (citations omitted).
P 1373.
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35697
operations planning and operations
support staff.67 Also, NERC recognizes
that it did not address the Order No. 693
directives related to EMS support
personnel.68
62. NERC states that it omitted
generator operators,69 operations
planning, and operations support staff
from the scope of the development of
proposed Reliability Standard PER–
005–1 because the inclusion of those
personnel would have required an
expansion of the standard drafting team
roster to ensure that those disciplines
were fairly represented on the drafting
team.70 NERC states that it instead chose
to complete the core activities it
identified in the project scope rather
than delay the completion with an
enlarged scope. Accordingly, NERC
states that it plans to address the
expansion of the training standard
(PER–005–1) in a subsequent drafting
project, Project 2010–01—Support
Personnel Training.71 Likewise, NERC
also states that it has deferred
compliance with the Commission’s
directives to consider the inclusion of
EMS support personnel into the training
standard to Project 2010–01—Support
Personnel Training.
Commission Proposal
63. NERC is continuing to work to
expand applicability of proposed
Reliability Standard PER–005–1 to
include generator operators and
operations planning and operations
support staff, as required in Order No.
693. We appreciate that NERC felt that
the inclusion of generator owners,
operations planning, and operations
support staff in the standards proposed
here would have necessitated expansion
of the Standard Drafting Team roster to
ensure these disciplines were fairly
represented and that this would have
delayed the completion of this
important set of standards.
64. With respect to operations
planning and operations support staff,
the Commission stated that PER–002–0
should apply to operations planning
and operations support staff that have a
direct impact on the reliable operation
of the Bulk-Power System.72
Recommendation 19 of the Blackout
Report identified training deficiencies
as contributing to the August 14, 2003
67 NERC
Petition at 30.
at 34.
69 NERC’s Petition actually references generator
‘‘owners’’ which appears to be a typographical error.
70 NERC Petition at 30.
71 Id. (identifying NERC Project 2010–01—
Support Personnel Training, which is part of
NERC’s Reliability Standards Development Plan:
2009–2011, to address these directives).
72 Order No. 693 at P 1372.
68 Id.
E:\FR\FM\23JNP1.SGM
23JNP1
35698
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules
blackout and states that NERC should
require training for the planning staff at
control areas and IT support
personnel.73
65. Regarding generator operator
personnel, in Order No. 693, the
Commission stated that it is essential
that generator operator personnel have
appropriate training to understand
instructions from a balancing authority,
particularly in an emergency situation
in which instructions may be succinct
and require immediate action. Further,
we noted that if communication is lost,
the generator operator personnel should
have had sufficient training to take
appropriate action to ensure reliability
of the Bulk-Power System.74 Since the
issuance of Order No. 693, System
Disturbance reports from NERC’s Web
site indicate that there have been
disturbances caused by human errors at
generating stations.75
66. For the reasons enumerated in
Order No. 693, we continue to believe
that requiring a comprehensive training
program is important, specifically one
that includes training for generator
operators and for operations planning
and operations support staff. NERC
must also consider applicability to
support personnel for EMS applications
as directed in Order No. 693.
67. NERC indicates that it intends to
address the expansion of the training
standard in Project 2010–01—Support
Personnel Training, which is slated to
be initiated in 2010.76 In the Reliability
Standards Development Plan: 2010–
2012, NERC states that the Support
Personnel Training standard ‘‘is a
priority project as it was proposed in
support of a 2003 blackout
recommendation.’’ 77 NERC previously
targeted a completion date of the fourth
quarter of 2011 for the expansion of the
training standard.78 More recently,
NERC has stated that the completion
date for this standard is ‘‘to be
73 Blackout
Report at 157.
No. 693 at P 1359.
75 See e.g., NERC System Disturbance Reports
dated May 21, 2007 and August 13, 2007, available
at https://www.nerc.com/files/disturb07.pdf.
76 NERC Petition at 30 (identifying NERC Project
2010–01—Support Personnel Training, to address
these directives). See also, NERC Standards Under
Development Anticipated Posting Schedule
(updated 3/3/2010), available at https://
www.nerc.com/docs/standards/sar/Project
Summary Calendar.xls-2010-04-07.
77 Reliability Standards Development Plan: 2010–
2012, Volume I—Overview at 9 (filed with the
Commission at North American Electric Reliability
Corporation Informational Filing of 2010
Development Plan, Docket Nos. RM05–17–000,
RM05–25–000, and RM06–16–000 (Dec. 2, 2009)).
78 Reliability Standards Development Plan: 2009–
2011, Volume II, List of Projects at 202 (dated Sept.
22, 2008).
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
74 Order
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jun 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
determined.’’ 79 Given the continuing
need to require training for generator
operators and operations support and
operations planning personnel the
Commission believes the previously
announced targeted date (i.e., fourth
quarter of 2011) is a reasonable deadline
for completion of this work. We seek
comments from NERC and other
interested persons on whether
completion of this work by the fourth
quarter of 2011 is reasonable, or
whether, for good cause, another
timeline for completion of this work
would be necessary.
68. In Order No. 693, the Commission
also directed NERC to consider in the
Reliability Standards Development
Process certain issues regarding
personnel that support EMS
applications. NERC deferred
consideration of this matter to Project
2010–1. In their comments regarding the
timeline for completing the expansion
of the personnel training standard,
NERC and other interested persons
should also discuss whether the issues
identified in Order No. 693 regarding
personnel that support EMS
applications should be addressed on the
same timeline (i.e., completed by the
fourth quarter of 2011).
I. Summary
69. We propose to approve proposed
Reliability Standards PER–005–1 and
PER–004–2 as just, reasonable, not
unduly discriminatory or preferential,
and in the public interest. Under section
215(d)(5) of the FPA, the Commission
proposes to direct the ERO to develop
modifications to proposed Reliability
Standard PER–005–1 to address certain
issues identified by the Commission.
We also seek comment from the ERO
and other interested entities regarding
the Commission’s specific concerns
discussed above. The Commission may
determine after considering such
comments that it is appropriate to direct
the ERO to develop additional
modifications to PER–005–1.
70. In addition, the Commission
proposes to defer review of the violation
risk factor and violation severity level
assignments for proposed Reliability
Standards PER–005–1 and PER–004–2
until the Commission acts on NERC’s
March 5, 2010 filing pending in Docket
No. RR08–4–005.
IV. Information Collection Statement
71. The Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) regulations require
approval of certain information
79 Reliability Standards Development Plan: 2010–
2012, Volume II, List of Projects at 136 (dated Oct.
7, 2009).
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
collection requirements imposed by
agency rules.80 Upon approval of a
collection(s) of information, OMB will
assign an OMB control number and an
expiration date. Respondents subject to
the filing requirements of this rule will
not be penalized for failing to respond
to these collections of information
unless the collections of information
display a valid OMB control number.
The Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 81
requires each Federal agency to seek
and obtain OMB approval before
undertaking a collection of information
directed to ten or more persons, or
continuing a collection for which OMB
approval and validity of the control
number are about to expire.82
72. The Commission is submitting
these reporting and recordkeeping
requirements to OMB for its review and
approval under section 3507(d) of the
PRA. Comments are solicited on the
Commission’s need for this information,
whether the information will have
practical utility, the accuracy of
provided burden estimates, ways to
enhance the quality, utility, and clarity
of the information to be collected, and
any suggested methods for minimizing
the respondent’s burden, including the
use of automated information
techniques.
73. This Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NOPR) proposes to
approve two new Reliability Standards,
PER–004–2 and PER–005–1 governing
training, which standards will replace
currently effective Reliability Standards
PER–002–0 and PER–004–1 approved
by the Commission in Order No. 693.
Rather than creating entirely new
training requirements, the proposed
Reliability Standard PER–005–1 instead
modifies and improves the existing
Reliability Standards governing
personnel training.83 Thus this
proposed rulemaking does not impose
entirely new burdens on the effected
entities. For example, the currently
effective training Reliability Standard,
PER–002–0, requires transmission
operators and balancing authorities to
create training program objectives,
develop a plan for the initial and
continued training, and maintain
training records. Similarly, proposed
training Reliability Standard, PER–005–
1, which supersedes PER–002–0,
requires transmission operators,
80 5
CFR 1320.11 (2009).
U.S.C. 3501–20 (2006).
82 44 U.S.C. 3502(3)(A)(i) (2006), 44 U.S.C.
3507(a)(3) (2006).
83 Proposed Reliability Standard PER–004–2 does
not add any new requirements, rather it restates and
carries forward the two remaining requirements
from PER–004–1 that are not superseded by
proposed Reliability Standard PER–005–1.
81 44
E:\FR\FM\23JNP1.SGM
23JNP1
35699
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules
balancing authorities and reliability
coordinators to establish a training
program (using a systematic approach to
training), verify the trainee’s capabilities
to perform task for which they receive
training, and maintain training records.
Accordingly, the recordkeeping
requirements imposed by proposed
Reliability Standard PER–005–1, are
more specific but not necessarily more
expansive than currently effective
Reliability Standard PER–002–0’s
recordkeeping requirements. However,
proposed Reliability Standard PER–
005–1 does enlarge the scope of the
affected entities to include reliability
coordinators.
74. Like the currently effective
training Reliability Standards, PER–
002–0 and PER–004–1, proposed
Reliability Standards PER–004–2 and
PER–005–1 do not require responsible
entities to file information with the
Commission. However, these Reliability
Standards do require applicable entities
to develop and maintain certain
information, subject to audit by a
Regional Entity such as documentation
to show a development and delivery of
a training program for system operators,
verification of system operator
capabilities to perform tasks, and
training records to show compliance
with requirements.
75. Public Reporting Burden: Our
estimate below regarding the number of
respondents is based on the NERC
compliance registry as of May 12, 2010.
Because under the proposed Reliability
Standards the scope of applicability is
enlarged to include reliability
coordinators, but otherwise continue to
No. of new
respondents
Data collection
PER–005–1, R1.1: RCs, TOs, and BAs must create a list of bulk electric
system reliability-related tasks performed by system operators ..................
PER–005–1, R1.2: RCs, TOs, and BAs shall design and develop learning
objectives and training materials based on its task list ...............................
PER–005–1, R2: RCs, TOs, and BAs shall verify system operators’ ability
to perform each assigned task from applicable task list .............................
PER–005–1, M1: RCs, TOs, and BAs must have available for inspection
evidence of using a systematic approach to training to establish and implement a training program ..........................................................................
PER–005–1, M1.1: RCs, TOs, and BAs must have available for inspection
its company-specific, reliability-related task list ...........................................
PER–005–1, M1.2: RCs, TOs, and BAs must have available for inspection
its learning objectives and training materials ...............................................
PER–005–1, M1.3: RCs, TOs, and BAs must have available for inspection
system operator training records .................................................................
PER–005–1, M1.4: RCs, TOs, and BAs must have available for inspection
evidence that it performed an annual training program evaluation .............
PER–005–1, M2: RCs, TOs, and BAs must have available for inspection
evidence that it verified that its system operators can perform each assigned task from the training task list ..........................................................
PER–005–1, M3: RCs, TOs, and BAs must have available for inspection
their training records evidencing that each system operator received 32
hours of emergency operations training ......................................................
PER–005–1, M3.1: RCs, TOs, and BAs must have available for inspection
training records evidencing that each system operator received emergency training using simulation technology .................................................
Total ..........................................................................................................
84 The
impose training requirements on
transmission operators and balancing
authorities, the Commission considers
the reporting burden only with respect
to reliability coordinators. According to
the NERC compliance registry, there are
sixteen entities registered as reliability
coordinators. However, under NERC’s
compliance registration program,
entities may be registered for multiple
functions. Thus, of the sixteen entities
registered as reliability coordinators,
nine are also registered as balancing
authorities and, as such, must comply
with currently effective Reliability
Standards governing system operator
training. Given these additional
parameters, the Commission estimates
that the Public Reporting burden for the
requirements contained in the NOPR is
as follows:
Recordkeeping 84
hours per
respondent
No. of
responses
Total annual
recordkeeping
hours
85 7
7
40
280
7
7
60
420
7
7
80
560
7
7
50
350
7
7
10
70
7
7
10
70
7
7
10
70
7
7
25
175
7
7
20
140
7
7
20
140
7
7
20
140
........................
........................
........................
2415
proposed Reliability Standards do not impose any reporting requirements
seven of the 16 registered reliability coordinators are not currently subject to training requirements as balancing authorities.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
85 Only
• Total Annual hours for Collection:
(Reporting + recordkeeping) = hours.
Information Collection Costs: The
Commission seeks comments on the
costs to comply with the reporting and
recordkeeping burden associated with
the proposed Reliability Standards. It
has projected the average annualized
cost to be the total annual hours.
Recordkeeping = 2415 hours @ $120/
hour = $289,800.
• Total costs = $289,800.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jun 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
• Title: Mandatory Reliability
Standards for the Bulk-Power System.
• Action: Proposed Collection of
Information.
• OMB Control No: 1902–0244.
• Respondents: Business or other for
profit, and/or not for profit institutions.
• Frequency of Responses: On
occasion.
• Necessity of the Information: This
proposed rule would approve revised
Reliability Standards that modify the
existing requirement for entities to
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
develop training programs and train
certain personnel. The proposed
Reliability Standards require entities to
maintain their training materials and
training records subject to review by the
Commission and NERC to ensure
compliance with the Reliability
Standards.
• Internal review: The Commission
has reviewed the requirements
pertaining to the proposed Reliability
Standards for the Bulk-Power System
and determined that the proposed
E:\FR\FM\23JNP1.SGM
23JNP1
35700
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules
requirements are necessary to meet the
statutory provisions of the Energy Policy
Act of 2005. These requirements
conform to the Commission’s plan for
efficient information collection,
communication and management within
the energy industry. The Commission
has assured itself, by means of internal
review, that there is specific, objective
support for the burden estimates
associated with the information
requirements.
76. Interested persons may obtain
information on the reporting
requirements by contacting: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888
First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426
[Attention: Michael Miller, Office of the
Executive Director, Phone: (202) 502–
8415, fax: (202) 273–0873, e-mail:
DataClearance@ferc.gov]. Comments on
the requirements of the proposed rule
may also be sent to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget,
Washington, DC 20503 [Attention: Desk
Officer for the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission], e-mail:
oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. Please
reference OMB Control No. 1902–0244
and the docket number of this proposed
rulemaking in your submission.
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
V. Environmental Analysis
77. The Commission is required to
prepare an Environmental Assessment
or an Environmental Impact Statement
for any action that may have a
significant adverse effect on the human
environment.86 The actions proposed
here fall within the categorical
exclusion in the Commission’s
regulations for rules that are clarifying,
corrective or procedural, for information
gathering, analysis, and
dissemination.87 Accordingly, neither
an environmental impact statement nor
environmental assessment is required.
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act Analysis
78. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of
1980 (RFA) 88 generally requires a
description and analysis of final rules
that will have significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Most of the entities, i.e.,
reliability coordinators, transmission
operators, and balancing authorities, to
which the requirements of this rule
would apply do not fall within the
definition of small entities.89 Moreover,
86 Order No. 486, Regulations Implementing the
National Environmental Policy Act, 52 FR 47897
(Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 30,783 (1987).
87 18 CFR 380.4(a)(5) (2009).
88 5 U.S.C. 601–12 (2006).
89 The RFA definition of ‘‘small entity’’ refers to
the definition provided in the Small Business Act
(SBA), which defines a ‘‘small business concern’’ as
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:05 Jun 22, 2010
Jkt 220001
the proposed Reliability Standards
reflect a continuation of existing
training requirements for transmission
operators and balancing authorities and
are ‘‘new’’ only with respect to reliability
coordinators.
79. As indicated above, based on
available information regarding NERC’s
compliance registry, approximately
seven entities will be responsible for
compliance with proposed Reliability
Standards PER–004–2 and PER–005–1
that were not already subject to the
existing Reliability Standards
comprising the same base training
requirements as contained in the new
Reliability Standards. The Commission
does not consider this a substantial
number. Further, few if any of the seven
reliability coordinators are small
entities. Based on the foregoing, the
Commission certifies that this Rule will
not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Accordingly, no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required.
VII. Comment Procedures
80. The Commission invites interested
persons to submit comments on the
matters and issues proposed in this
notice to be adopted, including any
related matters or alternative proposals
that commenters may wish to discuss.
Comments are due August 23, 2010.
Comments must refer to Docket No.
RM09–25–000, and must include the
commenter’s name, the organization
they represent, if applicable, and their
address in their comments.
81. The Commission encourages
comments to be filed electronically via
the eFiling link on the Commission’s
Web site at https://www.ferc.gov. 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 format.
Commenters filing electronically do not
need to make a paper filing.
82. Commenters that are not able to
file comments electronically must send
an original and 14 copies of their
comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, Secretary of the
Commission, 888 First Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20426.
83. All comments will be placed in
the Commission’s public files and may
be viewed, printed, or downloaded
remotely as described in the Document
a business that is independently owned and
operated and that is not dominant in its field of
operation. See 15 U.S.C. 632. According to the SBA,
a small electric utility is defined as one that has a
total electric output of less than four million MWh
in the preceding year.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Availability section below. Commenters
on this proposal are not required to
serve copies of their comments on other
commenters.
VIII. Document Availability
84. In addition to publishing the full
text of this document in the Federal
Register, the Commission provides all
interested persons an opportunity to
view and/or print the contents of this
document via the Internet through
FERC’s Home Page (https://www.ferc.gov)
and in FERC’s Public Reference Room
during normal business hours (8:30 a.m.
to 5 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First
Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC
20426.
85. From FERC’s Home Page on the
Internet, this information is 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.
86. User assistance is available for
eLibrary and the FERC’s Web site during
normal business hours from FERC
Online Support at 202–502–6652 (toll
free at 1–866–208–3676) or e-mail at
ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the
Public Reference Room at (202) 502–
8371, TTY (202)502–8659. E-mail the
Public Reference Room at
public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.
By direction of the Commission.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010–15148 Filed 6–22–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission
18 CFR Part 260
[Docket No. RM07–9–003]
Revisions to Forms, Statements, and
Reporting Requirements for Natural
Gas Pipelines
June 17, 2010.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, DOE.
ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.
SUMMARY: In this Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission proposes to
revise certain financial reporting forms
required to be filed by natural gas
companies (FERC Form Nos. 2, 2–A,
E:\FR\FM\23JNP1.SGM
23JNP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 23, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35689-35700]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-15148]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
18 CFR Part 40
[Docket No. RM09-25-000]
System Personnel Training Reliability Standards
June 17, 2010.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act, the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) proposes to approve
Reliability Standards PER-005-1 (System Personnel Training) and PER-
004-2 (Reliability Coordination--Staffing) submitted to the Commission
for approval by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation,
the Electric Reliability Organization (ERO) certified by the
Commission. In addition, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, and
section 39.5(f) of the Commission's regulations the Commission proposes
to direct the ERO to develop modifications to proposed Reliability
Standard PER-005-1 to address certain issues identified by the
Commission. The proposed Reliability Standards require reliability
coordinators, balancing authorities, and transmission operators to
establish a training program for their system operators, verify each of
their system operator's capability to perform tasks, and provide
emergency operations training to every system operator.
DATES: Comments are due August 23, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Interested persons may submit comments, identified by Docket
No. RM09-25-000, by any of the following methods:
Agency Web Site: https://www.ferc.gov. Documents created
electronically using word processing software should be filed in native
applications or print-to-PDF format and not in a scanned format.
Mail/Hand Delivery. Commenters unable to file comments
electronically must mail or hand deliver an original and 14 copies of
their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of
the Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karin L. Larson (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE.,
Washington, DC 20426. (202) 502-8236.
Kenneth U. Hubona (Technical Information), Office of Electric
Reliability, Division of Reliability Standards, Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 13511 Label Lane, Suite 203, Hagerstown, MD
21740. (301) 665-1608.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
1. Pursuant to section 215 of the Federal Power Act (FPA),\1\ the
Commission proposes to approve Reliability Standards PER-005-1 (System
Personnel Training) and PER-004-2 (Reliability Coordination--Staffing),
developed by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation
(NERC), the Commission-certified Electric Reliability Organization
(ERO). The Commission proposes to direct the ERO to develop
modifications to proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1 to address
certain issues identified by the Commission. The proposed Reliability
Standards require reliability coordinators, balancing authorities, and
transmission operators to establish a training program for their system
operators, verify each of their system operator's capability to perform
tasks, and provide emergency operations training to each system
operator. The Commission also proposes to approve the retirement of the
currently effective Reliability Standards PER-002-0 (Operating
Personnel Training) and PER-004-1 (Reliability Coordination), which are
superseded by the proposed Reliability Standards PER-005-1 and PER-004-
2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 16 U.S.C. 824o (2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Background
A. System Personnel Training and the August 14, 2003 Blackout
2. On August 14, 2003, a blackout that began in Ohio affected
significant portions of the Midwest and Northeast United States, and
Ontario, Canada (August 14 Blackout). This blackout affected an area
with an estimated 50 million people and 61,800 megawatts of electric
load.\2\ The subsequent investigation and report completed by the U.S.-
Canada Power System Outage Task Force (Task Force) reviewed several
previous major North American outages and concluded that ``inadequate
training of operating personnel'' was among the factors that the August
14 Blackout had in common with previous outages.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task Force, Final Report on
the August 14, 2003 Blackout in the United States and Canada: Causes
and Recommendations, (April 2004) (Blackout Report), available at
https://www.ferc.gov/industries/electric/indus-act/blackout.asp.
\3\ See Blackout Report at 107.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Specifically, the Task Force summarized that previous outage
analyses recommended ``enhanced procedures and training for operating
personnel.'' \4\ This included:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Id. at 110.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thorough programs and schedules for operator training and
retraining should be vigorously administered.
A full-scale simulator should be made available to provide
operating personnel with ``hands-on'' experience in dealing with
possible emergency or other system conditions.
Procedures and training programs for system operators
should include anticipation, recognition, and definition of emergency
situations.
[[Page 35690]]
Written procedures and training materials should include
criteria that system operators can use to recognize signs of system
stress and mitigating measures to be taken before conditions degrade
into emergencies * * *.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. The Blackout Report stated that some reliability coordinators
and control area operators, i.e., balancing authorities, did not
receive adequate training in recognizing and responding to system
emergencies and this ``training deficiency contributed to the lack of
situational awareness and failure to declare an emergency on August 14
while operator intervention was still possible (before events began to
occur at a speed beyond human control).'' \6\ The Blackout Report
recommended ``[i]mprov[ing] near-term and long-term training and
certification requirements for operators, reliability coordinators, and
operator support staff.'' \7\ The Task Force suggested that NERC
require training for planning staff at control areas and reliability
coordinators concerning power system characteristics and load, VAR, and
voltage limits to enable them to develop rules for operating staff to
follow.\8\ In addition, the Task Force urged NERC to ``require control
areas and reliability coordinators to train grid operators, IT support
personnel, and their supervisors to recognize and respond to abnormal
automation system activity.'' \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Id. at 157.
\7\ Id. at 156, Task Force Recommendation 19.
\8\ Id. at 156-157, Task Force Recommendation 19.A.
\9\ Id. at 157, Task Force Recommendation 19.B.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Section 215 of the FPA and Mandatory Reliability Standards
1. Section 215 of the FPA
5. Section 215 of the FPA requires a Commission-certified ERO to
develop mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, which are
subject to Commission review and approval. If approved, the Reliability
Standards are enforced by the ERO, subject to Commission oversight, or
by the Commission independently.
6. In July 2006, the Commission certified NERC as the ERO.\10\
Concurrent with its 2006 ERO Application, NERC submitted to the
Commission a petition seeking approval of 107 proposed Reliability
Standards, including four Personnel Performance, Training and
Qualifications (PER) Reliability Standards. The PER group of
Reliability Standards is intended to ensure the safe and reliable
operation of the interconnected grid through the retention of suitably
trained and qualified personnel in positions that can impact the
reliable operation of the Bulk-Power System.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ]
61,062 (ERO Certification Order), order on reh'g & compliance, 117
FERC ] 61,126 (2006), aff'd sub nom., Alcoa, Inc. v. FERC, 564 F.3d
1342 (DC Cir. 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. On March 16, 2007, the Commission issued Order No. 693,
approving 83 of the 107 Reliability Standards filed by NERC,\11\
including the four PER Reliability Standards: PER-001-0, PER-002-0,
PER-003-0, and PER-004-1.\12\ In addition, under section 215(d)(5) of
the FPA, the Commission directed NERC to develop modifications to the
PER Reliability Standards to address certain issues identified by the
Commission. At issue in the immediate proceeding are two new PER
standards that would replace the currently effective Reliability
Standards PER-002-0 (Operating Personnel Training) and PER-004-1
(Reliability Coordination--Staffing).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System,
Order No. 693, Federal Register 72 FR 16,416 (Apr. 4, 2007), FERC
Stats. & Regs. ] 31,242, order on reh'g, Order No. 693-A, 120 FERC ]
61,053 (2007).
\12\ Order No. 693 at P 1330-1417.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Reliability Standard PER-002-0
8. Currently effective Reliability Standard PER-002-0 requires each
transmission operator and balancing authority to be staffed with
adequately trained operating personnel.\13\ Specifically, PER-002-0:
(1) Directs each transmission operator and balancing authority to have
a training program for all operating personnel who occupy positions
that either have primary responsibility, directly or through
communication with others, for the real-time operation of the Bulk-
Power System or who are directly responsible for complying with the
NERC Reliability Standards; (2) lists criteria that must be met by the
training program; and (3) requires that operating personnel receive at
least five days of training in emergency operations each year using
realistic simulations.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Id. P 1331.
\14\ Reliability Standard PER-002-0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. In Order No. 693, the Commission directed NERC, pursuant to
section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, to develop the following modifications to
PER-002-0: (1) Identify the expectations of the training for each job
function; (2) develop training programs tailored to each job function
with consideration of the individual training needs of the personnel;
(3) expand the applicability of the training requirements to include:
reliability coordinators, local transmission control center operator
personnel, generator operators centrally-located at a generation
control center with a direct impact on the reliable operation of the
Bulk-Power System, and operations planning and operations support staff
who carry out outage planning and assessments and those who develop
system operating limits (SOLs), interconnection reliability operating
limits (IROLs), or operating nomograms for real-time operations; (4)
use a Systematic Approach to Training methodology for developing new
training programs; and (5) include the use of simulators by reliability
coordinators, transmission operators, and balancing authorities that
have operational control over a significant portion of load and
generation.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ Order No. 693 at P 1393.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. In Order No. 693, the Commission also directed the ERO to
determine whether it is feasible to develop meaningful performance
metrics associated with the effectiveness of a training program
required by currently effective Reliability Standard PER-002-0 and to
consider whether personnel that support Energy Management System (EMS)
applications should be included in mandatory training pursuant to the
Reliability Standard.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Id. P 1394.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Reliability Standard PER-004-1
11. In Order No. 693, the Commission also approved Reliability
Standard PER-004-1.\17\ This Reliability Standard requires each
reliability coordinator to be staffed with adequately trained, NERC-
certified operators, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Further, PER-
004-1 requires reliability coordinator operating personnel to have a
comprehensive understanding of the area of the Bulk-Power System for
which they are responsible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ Id. P 1417.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Under section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, the Commission directed
NERC to develop modifications to currently effective Reliability
Standard PER-004-1 through the Reliability Standards development
process to: (1) Include formal training requirements for reliability
coordinators similar to those addressed under the personnel training
Reliability Standard PER-002-0 and (2) include requirements pertaining
to personnel credentials for reliability coordinators similar to those
in PER-003-0.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Id. P 1415, 1417. Currently effective Reliability Standard
PER-003-0 requires transmission operators, balancing authorities and
reliability coordinators to have NERC-certified staff for all
operating positions that have a primary responsibility for real-time
operations or are directly responsible for complying with the
Reliability Standards. Id. at 1395.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 35691]]
II. NERC Petition for Proposed Reliability Standards PER-005-1 and PER-
004-2
13. In a September 30, 2009 filing (NERC Petition),\19\ NERC
requests Commission approval of proposed Reliability Standards PER-005-
1 (System Personnel Training) and PER-004-2 (Reliability Coordination--
Staffing), which were developed in response to the Commission's
directives in Order No. 693 regarding currently effective Reliability
Standard PER-002-0.\20\ NERC seeks to concurrently retire currently
effective Reliability Standards PER-002-0 and PER-004-1 upon the
effective date PER-004-2 and PER-005-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., Sept. 30, 2009
Petition for Approval of Proposed Reliability Standards Regarding
System Personnel Training (NERC Petition).
\20\ NERC's Petition addresses only the directives in Order No.
693 related to existing Reliability Standard PER-002-0, not the
directives related to PER-004-1. See NERC Petition at 27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. NERC states that the proposed Reliability Standards ``are a
significant improvement over the existing Reliability Standards'' and
recommends Commission approval of the standards as a ``significant step
in strengthening the quality of operator training programs as necessary
for the reliability of the [B]ulk-[P]ower [S]ystem.'' \21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ NERC Petition at 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Reliability Standard PER-005-1
15. Proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1 has the stated purpose
of ensuring that system operators performing real-time, reliability-
related tasks on the North American bulk electric system are competent
to perform those reliability-related tasks.\22\ The proposed
Reliability Standard applies to reliability coordinators, balancing
authorities and transmission operators. Reliability Standard PER-005-1
contains three requirements, which NERC describes as follows:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Reliability Standard PER-005-1, Section A.3 (Purpose).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Requirement R1 mandates the use of a systematic approach
to training for both new and existing training programs. The
requirement further requires applicable entities to create a company-
specific, reliability-related task list relevant to Bulk-Power System
operation and to design and develop learning objectives and training
materials based on the task list performed by its System Operators each
calendar year. Finally, the requirement mandates the training be
delivered and the training program be evaluated on at least an annual
basis to assess its effectiveness.
Requirement R2 requires the verification of a System
Operator's ability to perform the tasks identified in Requirement R1.
The requirement also mandates re-verification of a System Operator's
ability to perform the tasks within a specified time period when
program content is modified.
Requirement R3 identifies the number of hours of emergency
operations training (at least 32 hours) that a System Operator is
required to obtain every twelve months. The requirement further
identifies those entities required to use simulation technology such as
a simulator, virtual technology, or other technology in their emergency
operations training programs.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ NERC Petition at 8-9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NERC states that PER-005-1 is a new Reliability Standard that
supersedes all of currently effective Reliability Standard PER-002-0
and supersedes Requirements R2, R3, and R4 of currently effective
Reliability Standard PER-004-1.
16. According to NERC, proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1
``marks a significant milestone toward achieving FERC priorities as
articulated in Order No. 693,'' but acknowledges that it does not
satisfy all of the directives set forth in Order No. 693.\24\
Specifically, NERC recognizes that proposed Reliability Standard PER-
005-1 does not establish training obligations for generator operators
and various operations support personnel as required by Order No. 693,
stating that ``these will be addressed in a subsequent development
effort as described in the Reliability Standards Development Plan:
2009-2011.'' \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Id. at 7.
\25\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Reliability Standard PER-004-2
17. Proposed Reliability Standard PER-004-2 modifies PER-004-1 by
deleting Requirements R2, R3, and R4. According to NERC, more detailed
and less ambiguous requirements addressing the same issues set forth in
currently effective Reliability Standard PER-004-1 Requirements R2, R3,
and R4 are now included in proposed PER-005-1. Proposed Reliability
Standard PER-004-2 simply carries forward, unchanged, the remaining
requirements from currently effective PER-004-1, including the
associated violation risk factor and violation severity level
assignments. NERC states that Requirement R2 of currently effective
PER-004-1, which requires reliability coordinator operating personnel
to complete a minimum of five days per year of training and drills
using realistic simulations of system emergencies, is now addressed in
proposed Reliability Standards PER-005-1, Requirement R3. According to
NERC, Requirements R3 and R4 of currently effective PER-004-1, which
mandate reliability coordinator operating personnel to have an
extensive understanding of its reliability coordinator area and other
operators within that area, are now addressed in proposed Reliability
Standard PER-005-1, Requirements R1 and R2.
III. Discussion
18. We agree with NERC that the proposed Reliability Standards PER-
005-1 and PER-004-2 comply with many of the requirements in Order No.
693 and represent an improvement in training requirements. Accordingly,
pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of the FPA, the Commission proposes to
approve Reliability Standards PER-005-1 and PER-004-2, as just,
reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the
public interest. In addition, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA,
the Commission proposes to direct the ERO to develop modifications to
proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1 to address certain issues
identified by the Commission.
19. It appears that the proposed Reliability Standards adequately
address a number of the directed modifications set forth in Order No.
693 regarding the PER Reliability Standards. For example, it appears
that proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1 adequately addresses the
following Order No. 693 directives: (1) Identify the expectations of
the training for each job function; (2) develop training programs
tailored to each job function with consideration of the individual
training needs of the personnel; (3) expand the applicability section
to include reliability coordinators; (4) incorporate a Systematic
Approach to Training methodology in the development of training
programs; and (5) incorporate simulator training into the standard.
20. Personnel training is important to ensuring the reliability of
the Bulk-Power System, as recognized in Order No. 693 and the Blackout
Report.\26\ The ERO has proposed changes to the training standard on
many issues, including: (1) The Systematic Approach to Training, (2)
tailoring training for each job function, and (3) simulation training.
In several of these areas, the Commission is seeking clarification from
the ERO or industry comment on specific matters and proposes
improvements that can be made to
[[Page 35692]]
further enhance operator training. Further, we propose to direct the
ERO to modify PER-005-1 to explicitly address training for local
control center personnel, as required by Order No. 693. Each of these
matters is discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Blackout Report at 156.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
21. The Commission also seeks comment on the feasibility of the
proposed effective dates and retirement dates proposed by NERC.
Additionally, the Commission proposes to defer review of the violation
risk factor and violation severity level assignments for proposed
Reliability Standards PER-005-1 and PER-004-2.
22. Finally, as acknowledged by NERC, certain of the directives
from Order No. 693 related to the currently effective Reliability
Standard PER-002-0 are not addressed in proposed Reliability Standard
PER-005-1. Thus, the Commission seeks comment on the timeframe for the
ERO to modify PER-005-1 to fully respond to the Commission's directives
in Order No. 693 regarding expanding the applicability of the training
requirements.
A. Systematic Approach to Training
23. In Order No. 693, the Commission directed NERC to develop
modifications to currently effective Reliability Standard PER-002-0 to
use a Systematic Approach to Training methodology for developing new
training programs.\27\ A Systematic Approach to Training is a widely-
accepted methodology that ensures training is efficiently and
effectively conducted and is directly related to the needs of the
position in question. To achieve training results, Systematic Approach
to Training objectives include: management and administration of
training and qualification programs; development and qualification of
training staff; trainee entry-level requirements; determination of
training program content; design and development of training programs;
conduct of training; trainee examinations and evaluations; and training
program evaluation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Order No. 693 at P 1382.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
24. NERC states that proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1,
Requirement R1 satisfies this directive as it requires each reliability
coordinator, balancing authority, and transmission operator to use a
Systematic Approach to Training to establish company-specific,
reliability-related tasks performed by its system operators.
Specifically, Requirement R1 provides that ``each Reliability
Coordinator, Balancing Authority and Transmission Operator shall use a
systematic approach to training to establish a training program* * *.''
\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ See NERC Petition at Exhibit A, PER-005-1, R1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commission Proposal
25. Based on the Commission's understanding of Systematic Approach
to Training, we agree with NERC that proposed Reliability Standard PER-
005-1, Requirement R1 meets the Commission's directive to ``develop a
modification to PER-002-2 (or a new Reliability Standard) that uses the
SAT methodology.'' \29\ Requirement R1 and the corresponding sub-
requirements mandate that each reliability coordinator, balancing
authority, and transmission operator use a Systematic Approach to
Training to establish its training program. Thus, NERC appears to have
complied with the Order No. 693 directive to adopt a Systematic
Approach to Training.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ See Order No. 693 at P 1380.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
26. However, the generic reference to Systematic Approach to
Training contained in proposed PER-005-1, Requirement R1 raises the
question whether certain Order No. 693 directives and whether certain
specific training requirements that are explicitly set forth in the
currently effective Reliability Standards PER-002-0 and PER-004-1,
which are to be retired, are fully and adequately captured under the
Systematic Approach to Training umbrella. The Commission questions
whether the following three, currently effective training requirements
are incorporated in proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1: (i)
Understanding of reliability coordinator area, (ii) continual training,
and (iii) training staff identity and competency. As discussed in
detail below, we seek comment on our understanding of the carryover of
these three currently enforceable compliance obligations.
1. Understanding of Reliability Coordinator Area
27. Requirements R3 and R4 of currently effective PER-004-1 provide
that reliability coordinator operating personnel ``shall have a
comprehensive understanding of the Reliability Coordinator Area and
interactions with neighboring Reliability Coordinator areas'' and
``shall have an extensive understanding of the Balancing Authorities,
Transmission Operators, and Generation Operators within the Reliability
Coordinator Area, including the operating staff, operating practices
and procedures * * *.'' \30\ NERC states that these two requirements
are supplanted by and are addressed more fully in proposed Reliability
Standard PER-005-1, Requirements R1 and R2.\31\ Requirements R1 and R2
of proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1 state:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Currently effective Reliability Standard PER-004-1,
available at https://www.nerc.com/files/PER-004-1.pdf.
\31\ NERC Petition at 26 (stating that PER-004-001, Requirements
R3 and R4 are removed because they are more fully addressed by
Requirements R1 and R2 of PER-005-1).
R1. Each Reliability Coordinator, Balancing Authority and
Transmission Operator shall use a systematic approach to training to
establish a training program for the BES company-specific
reliability-related tasks performed by its System Operators and
shall implement the program.
R1.1. Each Reliability Coordinator, Balancing Authority and
Transmission Operator shall create a list of BES company-specific
reliability-related tasks performed by its System Operators.
R1.1.1. Each Reliability Coordinator, Balancing Authority and
Transmission Operator shall update its list of BES company-specific
reliability-related tasks performed by its System Operators each
calendar year to identify new or modified tasks for inclusion in
training.
R1.2. Each Reliability Coordinator, Balancing Authority and
Transmission Operator shall design and develop learning objectives
and training materials based on the task list created in R1.1.
R1.3. Each Reliability Coordinator, Balancing Authority and
Transmission Operator shall deliver the training established in
R1.2.
R1.4. Each Reliability Coordinator, Balancing Authority and
Transmission Operator shall conduct an annual evaluation of the
training program established in R1, to identify any needed changes
to the training program and shall implement the changes identified.
R2. Each Reliability Coordinator, Balancing Authority and
Transmission Operator shall verify each of its System Operator's
capabilities to perform each assigned task identified in R1.1 at
least one time.
28. The text from currently effective Reliability Standard PER-004-
1, Requirements R3 and R4 requiring reliability coordinator operating
personnel to have a comprehensive understanding of the reliability
coordinator area, is not explicitly restated in proposed PER-005-1,
Requirements R1 and R2. NERC states that Requirements R3 and R4 of
currently effective Reliability Standard PER-004-1 are removed
``because they are more fully addressed by Requirements R1 and R2 of
PER-005-1.'' \32\ NERC's statement implies that Requirements R1 and R2
of proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1 retain
[[Page 35693]]
an obligation for reliability coordinator operating personnel to have a
comprehensive understanding of the reliability coordinator area and
interactions with neighboring reliability coordinator areas, and
entities that fail to do so could be subject to an enforcement action.
However, this is not clear from either the proposed Reliability
Standard or from NERC's petition. Thus, the Commission seeks an
explanation from NERC, and comment from the general public, whether ``a
comprehensive understanding of the reliability coordinator area'' is an
enforceable requirement under proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1
and whether this requirement is clear or should be more explicit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Continual Training
29. The currently effective Reliability Standard PER-002-0,
Requirement R3.2 explicitly mandates that ``the training program must
include a plan for the initial and continuing training of Transmission
Operators and Balancing Authorities operating personnel.'' NERC states
that the requirements of PER-002-0 ``have been completely replaced and
supplanted by the specific provision of proposed new Reliability
Standard PER-005-1.'' \33\ NERC's statement implies that the Systematic
Approach to Training requirements set forth in proposed PER-005-1
retains an obligation of continuing training, and entities that fail to
do so could be subject to an enforcement action. The Commission seeks
an explanation from NERC, and comment from the general public, whether
continuing training is an enforceable requirement under proposed
Reliability Standard PER-005-1 and whether this requirement is clear or
should be more explicit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ Id. at 27.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Training Staff Identity and Competency
30. Similarly, currently effective Reliability Standard PER-002-0,
Requirement R3.4 requires a training program in which ``[t]raining
staff must be identified, and the staff must be competent in both
knowledge of system operations and instructional capabilities.'' Since
this requirement is not explicitly provided in PER-005-1, we seek
clarification as to how and whether the Systematic Approach to Training
requires training staff to be identified, and, if not, the mechanism by
which training staff will be identified and its competency ensured. The
Commission also seeks comment whether this should be made explicit so
that entities clearly understand their compliance obligations.
B. Training Expectations for Each Job Function/Tailored Training
31. In Order No. 693, the Commission directed NERC to develop a
modification to currently effective Reliability Standard PER-002-0 that
identifies the expectations of the training for each job function and
develops training programs tailored to each job function with
consideration of the individual training needs of the personnel.
Proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1, Requirement R1.2 mandates
applicable entities to ``design and develop learning objectives and
training materials based on the task list created in R1.1.'' \34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ Id. at 27 (quoting proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1,
Requirement R1.2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commission Proposal
32. The Commission believes that NERC has complied with our
directive to require entities to identify the expectations of the
training for each job function and develop training programs tailored
to each job function with consideration of the individual training
needs of the personnel. Based on our review of the Systematic Approach
to Training methodology used by the Department of Energy, we understand
that a Systematic Approach to Training would assess factors such as
educational, technical, experience, and medical requirements that
candidates must possess before entering a given training program.\35\
With the above understanding, we believe that the Systematic Approach
to Training methodology, as proposed in Reliability Standard PER-005-1,
satisfies the Commission directive to develop a modification that
identifies the expectations of the training for each job function and
develops training programs tailored to each job function with
consideration of the individual training needs of the personnel. We
also understand that Requirement R1.2 of proposed Reliability Standard
PER-005-1 requires that the learning objectives and training materials
be developed with consideration of the individual needs of each
operator. We seek comment on this understanding.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ U.S. Department of Energy's Standard, DOE-STD-1070,
Guidelines for Evaluation of Nuclear Facility Training Programs at
Appendix--Objectives and Criteria, Objective 3 (June 1994),
available at https://www.hss.energy.gov/nuclearsafety/ns/techstds/standard/std1070/std1070.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Simulation Training
33. In Order No. 693, the Commission directed NERC to develop a
requirement mandating simulator training for reliability coordinators,
transmission operators and balancing authorities that have operational
control over a significant portion of load and generation.\36\ The
Commission acknowledged concerns regarding the high cost to develop and
maintain full-scale simulators, and took them into consideration. We
stated that we did not require that entities must develop and maintain
full-scale simulators, but rather they should have access to training
on simulators. Further, because the cost is likely to outweigh the
reliability benefits for small entities, the Commission stated that
small entities should continue to use training aids such as generic
operator training simulators and realistic table-top exercises.
Therefore, the Commission directed the ERO to develop a requirement for
the use of simulators dependent on an entity's role and size.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ Order No. 693 at P 1390-91.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
34. NERC explains that because ``the implementation cost of a full-
fledged system-specific simulator can be significant * * * the use of a
simulator is only required for entities managing facilities having a
significant impact on the bulk power system (Requirement R3.1) * * *.''
\37\ Thus, NERC states that proposed PER-005-1, Requirement R3.1
satisfies this directive as it requires:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ NERC Petition at 17.
Each Reliability Coordinator, Balancing Authority and
Transmission Operator that has operational authority or control over
Facilities with established IROLs or has established operating
guides or protection systems to mitigate IROL violations shall
provide each System Operator with emergency operations training
using simulation technology such as a simulator, virtual technology,
or other technology that replicates the operational behavior of the
BES during normal and emergency conditions.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\ Id. at 32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commission Proposal
35. As required in Order No. 693, proposed Reliability Standard
PER-005-1 requires the use of simulator training. It appears that
proposed PER-005-1, Requirement R3.1 would enhance the existing
requirements governing simulation training by providing operating
personnel with hands-on simulation training experience in dealing with
possible emergencies or other system conditions. In addition, the
proposed Reliability Standard appears to take into account the size of
the entity, as allowed by Order No. 693, by requiring such training
only for entities which have operational authority or control over
facilities with established IROLs or have established operating
[[Page 35694]]
guides or protection systems to mitigate IROL violations.
36. However, we ask for clarification from NERC concerning the
simulation requirement. The Blackout Report found that some reliability
coordinators and control area operators had not received adequate
system emergency training, that ``[m]ost notable was the lack of
realistic simulations and drills to train and verify the capabilities
of operating personnel,'' and that this training deficiency contributed
to the lack of situational awareness and failure to declare an
emergency while operator intervention was still possible.\39\
Requirement R3.1 requires the simulation technology to ``replicate[]
the operational behavior of the [bulk electric system] during normal
and emergency conditions.'' By requiring the technology to replicate
the operational behavior of the Bulk-Power System, it appears that this
provision requires the use of simulators specific to an operator's own
system. We ask NERC for clarification on this issue. We also ask for
comments on this provision from other interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ Blackout Report at 157 (emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
37. The Commission believes that system-customized simulator
training would further the Blackout Report goal of providing
``realistic simulations.'' Because each system is topologically
unique,\40\ training on a simulator specific to one's own system
(``custom simulation'') would necessarily better prepare an operator on
that system than generic simulation training. Custom simulation is
considered to be highly effective because it provides trainees with
realistic and relevant contexts in which to test and develop their
understanding, knowledge and competence. An advantage of custom
simulation is that it trains operators on specific control strategies
for their own system. In other words, it would allow the system
operator to better understand how his actions and reactions will affect
the particular assets and environment in which the operator works. In
short, simulation training that utilizes an environment that resembles
the expected system conditions during emergency, results in more
effective troubleshooting during emergencies as it better prepares the
operators to identify changes and symptoms, correctly locate the
problem, and take necessary action to fix the problem. While a more
generic simulator can teach the skills needed for operating a power
system and responding to emergency conditions, it does not familiarize
the operator with the specifics of his system and how that system
responds to specific events that give rise to emergencies. Greater
knowledge of and experience in dealing with the specific system give
the operator a more solid grasp of the behavior of that system and a
feel for its response to various conditions and, therefore, better
prepare the operator to deal with emergencies on that system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ The properties of each system are unique, properties such
as the location and capabilities of generator units and capacitor
banks, typical transmission line loadings, location and function of
special protection systems, if any, normal substation configuration,
and other elements. The interaction of these elements impact an
operator's options in an emergency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
38. Some entities may currently use vendor-provided emergency
system simulator training to provide operating personnel with ``hands-
on'' training experience. In some instances the emergency conditions
embedded in the vendor training programs may not be specific to the
entity's own system and operations. In Order No. 693, the Commission,
citing commenters' concerns regarding the high cost to develop and
maintain full-scale simulators, concluded that the directive does not
mean that entities subject to the simulation training requirement must
develop and maintain full-scale simulators but rather they should have
access to training on simulators.\41\ As such, we would not expect an
entity to necessarily use a simulator that replicates its own hardware,
but we believe that there may be other tools that would allow an entity
to input its own system files to a vendor simulator so the vendor
simulator would run that entity's system's power flows over a range of
operating conditions and test operator response.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ Order No. 693 at P 1390-91.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
39. Therefore, we seek comment on whether the Reliability Standard
should require the simulation technology to realistically replicate an
entity's own topology and operating conditions. If the proposed
language ``replicates the operational behavior of the [bulk electric
system],'' contemplates use of simulators not specific to one's own
system, we ask whether operators trained on simulators that replicate
systems other than their own will be adequately trained to respond to
emergency conditions on their own system. For example, we seek comment
on whether training on simulators that replicate a different system
provide operating personnel emergency system training with sufficiently
realistic simulations to enable them to act in an actual emergency. We
seek comment on the feasibility and practicality (including cost
considerations) of requiring use of simulation technology that
realistically replicates the entity's own topology and operating
conditions.
D. Local Transmission Control Center Operator Personnel
40. In Order No. 693, the Commission directed NERC to modify
currently effective Reliability Standard PER-002-0 to include formal
training for local transmission control center operating personnel.\42\
Specifically, the Commission concluded that ``[w]hile PER-002-0 applies
to transmission operators, it is important for reliability that
personnel involved in decision making and implementation receive proper
training.'' \43\ Because local transmission control center personnel
are responsible for implementing instructions that affect the
reliability of the Bulk-Power System, we directed the ERO to modify
PER-002-0 to include training for such personnel tailored to the needs
of the positions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ Id. P 1343.
\43\ Id. P 1342.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
41. Proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1 does not explicitly
include a requirement that covers formal training for local
transmission control center operator personnel. NERC's Petition states
that the NERC Reliability Functional Model accurately captures the list
of functions that a Transmission Operator performs, and therefore
includes those performed by local control center personnel. NERC
concludes that, if all entities are properly registered in the NERC
Compliance Registry, the Commission's directive to include formal
training for local transmission control center operator personnel
``will be appropriately addressed because the Transmission Operator has
the ultimate responsibility to ensure that its functional
responsibilities are met, even if through other entities.'' \44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ NERC Petition at 30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commission Proposal
42. The Commission is concerned with NERC's conclusion that local
transmission control center personnel will receive training because
this conclusion relies on the transmission operator requiring training
for another entity's personnel. Moreover, NERC's response to this
directive reasserts the same arguments we rejected in Order No. 693:
The Commission disagrees with those commenters who contend that,
because operators at local control centers take direction from NERC-
certified operators at the ISO or RTO, they do not need to be
addressed by the training requirements of PER-002-0. Rather, as
discussed above, these
[[Page 35695]]
operators maintain authority to act independently to carry out tasks
that require real-time operation of the Bulk-Power System including
protecting assets, protecting personnel safety, adhering to
regulatory requirements and establishing stable islands during
system restoration.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ Order No. 693 at P 1347.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus the Commission concluded:
Whether the RTO or the local control center is ultimately
responsible for compliance is a separate issue * * *, regardless of
which entity registers for that responsibility, these local control
center employees must receive formal training consistent with their
roles, responsibilities and tasks.\46\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ Id. P 1343 (emphasis added).
Simply put, the Commission already rejected the concept of relying
on the transmission operator's obligation to train its personnel to
ensure that local transmission control center operator personnel
receive training. The Commission's objective, as stated in Order No.
693, is to ensure that there are no gaps in responsibility for
providing formal training to local transmission control center
employees. Sub-requirement R1.1 of the proposed Reliability Standard
PER-005-1 states that each ``Transmission Operator shall * * *
establish a training program for the BES company-specific * * * tasks
performed by its System Operators and shall implement the program.''
\47\ The language of this sub-requirement provides that the
Transmission Operator is only required to implement a training program
for operators within its company. It is unclear to the Commission how
the Transmission Operator could then require a local control center
operator to receive training, particularly if that operator is within
another entity, as suggested by NERC. A clear statement in the proposed
Reliability Standard that incorporates local transmission control
center operator personnel would satisfy the Commission's directive. We
propose to direct NERC to modify proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-
1 to include a provision that explicitly addresses training for local
transmission control center personnel, consistent with the Commission's
directive in Order No. 693.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\ Proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1, Requirement R1.1
(emphasis added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Performance Metrics
43. In Order No. 693, the Commission directed NERC to determine
``whether it is feasible to develop meaningful performance metrics
associated with the effectiveness of a training program * * *, and if
so, develop such performance metrics.'' \48\ In response, NERC states
that the Systematic Approach to Training methodology, as set forth in
proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1, sub-requirement R1.4, requires
each reliability coordinator, balancing authority and transmission
operator to conduct an annual evaluation of the training program and
assess whether system operators are receiving effective training. NERC
concludes that this ``provides a meaningful assessment of the training
program'' while ``[a]n evaluation of how System Operators perform
during infrequent, actual events on the system would not provide useful
metrics on an ongoing basis.'' \49\ NERC also states that proposed
Reliability Standard PER-005-1 is a training standard, and is not
intended to address individual system operator performance apart from
the requirements associated with the company-specific reliability-
related tasks identified in Requirement R1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\48\ Order No. 693 at P 1394. Generally, performance metrics are
a system of parameters or means of quantitative and periodic
assessment of a process that is to be measured. See e.g., NERC Staff
White Paper, Toward Ensuring Reliability: Reliability Performance
Metrics (December 2007).
\49\ NERC Petition at 33-34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commission Proposal
44. Order No. 693 did not specifically require NERC to provide
metrics for the training standard, but required NERC to explore the
feasibility of developing meaningful metrics for assessing the
effectiveness of training programs. As a part of this directive, we
stated that metrics could be used to ``continually improve an
applicable entity's performance and the Reliability Standard itself.''
\50\ The Commission is encouraged that the proposed Reliability
Standard includes a requirement for each applicable entity to annually
evaluate its training program to identify and implement needed changes.
This is an important part of keeping each individual training program
current, and an improvement over the currently effective reliability
standard. We agree with NERC that this provides a meaningful assessment
of the training program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ Order No. 693 at P 1379.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
45. However, the Commission also stated that ``if quantifiable
performance metrics can be developed to gauge the effectiveness of a
Reliability Standard, these performance metrics should be developed.''
\51\ While NERC evaluated whether metrics were needed to assess each
individual program, we are not satisfied that NERC evaluated whether
performance metrics could be devised to evaluate the Reliability
Standard. While NERC states that ``[a]n evaluation of how System
Operators perform during infrequent, actual events on the system would
not provide useful metrics on an ongoing basis,'' \52\ it provides no
explanation of this statement. The Commission questions whether metrics
could be developed to establish specific parameters and measurements
that would allow, among other things, the monitoring of trends and the
comparison of performance across entities. Further, the Commission
believes that meaningful performance metrics could include a global
metric that could be used to compare the competency of system operators
to perform reliability-related tasks from one entity to another in
order to assess whether a particular entity's training program is
producing adequately trained personnel. In addition, the results from
such a metric could be used to identify areas in which a particular
reliability requirement may need to be improved. These objectives go
beyond the annual evaluation set forth in proposed Reliability Standard
PER-005-1, sub-requirement R1.4, and NERC has not provided an
explanation of whether it has evaluated whether such metrics are
feasible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ Id. (emphasis added).
\52\ NERC Petition at 33-34.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
46. NERC suggests that an evaluation of how system operators
perform during infrequent, actual events on the system would not
provide a useful metric. While actual system disturbances that result
in significant operating events such as IROL violations or loss of load
may not be frequent, contingencies, frequency decline, overloaded
transmission lines and voltage excursions, among other operating
events, occur regularly and actions to mitigate these circumstances are
what prevent more significant disturbances. Operator actions with
regard to these more regular events seem noteworthy and may provide
indicators of the effectiveness of training programs.
47. We seek comment from NERC on whether it considered metrics to
evaluate the effectiveness of the Reliability Standard, in addition to
its consideration of metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of an
individual entity's training program. In addition, we seek comment on
possible performance metrics that could be used to assess whether
proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1 achieves its stated purpose
``[t]o ensure that System Operators performing real-time, reliability-
related tasks on the North American Bulk Electric System * * * are
competent to
[[Page 35696]]
perform those reliability-related tasks.'' Accordingly, we propose to
direct that the ERO evaluate the feasibility of developing meaningful
performance metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of the Reliability
Standard related to operator training.
F. Effective and Retirement Dates
48. With respect to proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1, NERC
proposes staggered effective dates, i.e., the mandatory compliance date
after an allotted implementation period, for each of the standard's
requirements and sub-requirements. Specifically, NERC proposes:
Compliance with PER-005-1, Requirements R1 and R2 would be mandatory on
the first day of the first calendar quarter, 24 months after regulatory
approval; compliance with Requirement R3 would be mandatory on the
first day of the first calendar quarter after regulatory approval; and
compliance with sub-requirement R3.1 would be mandatory on the first
day of the first calendar quarter 36 months after regulatory approval.
NERC proposes to retire currently effective PER-002-0 because the PER-
002-0 requirements will be superseded by proposed PER-005-1. Thus NERC
states that retirement of PER-002-0 is necessary to avoid redundancy,
conflict, and confusion regarding the mandatory training standards.
Notwithstanding the proposed staggered effective dates of the
requirements in PER-005-1, NERC proposes to retire PER-002-0 upon the
``effective date of PER-005-1.'' \53\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ Id. at 27 and 42.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
49. With respect to proposed Reliability Standard PER-004-2, the
proposed effective date section set forth in proposed Reliability
Standard PER-004-2 states:
Effective Date:
Retire Requirement 2 when PER-005-1 Requirement 3 becomes
effective.
Retire Requirements 3 and 4 when PER-005-1 Requirements 1
and 2 become effective.
NERC's Petition states that it seeks Commission approval to retire
existing Reliability Standard PER-004-1 upon the effective date of
proposed Reliability Standard PER-004-2 and PER-005-1.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ Id. at 1 and 42.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Commission Proposal
50. The Commission is concerned that the proposed effective and
retirement dates may not be appropriate. The Commission previously has
approved the use of staggered effective dates in conjunction with new
Reliability Standards. However, in this case, where the proposed
Reliability Standards modify currently effective standards, we are
concerned that a staggered effective date may create a gap in
compliance and enforceability.
51. NERC states that proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1 is
intended to supersede existing Reliability Standard PER-002-0 ``upon
the effective date of PER-005-1.'' First, it is not clear whether NERC
intended that PER-002-0 be retired when the first requirement in PER-
005-1 becomes effective, or when all requirements in PER-005-1 become
effective. If PER-002-0 is retired when only certain requirements are
effective in PER-005-1, the Commission is concerned that this may
create a gap in training requirements as NERC proposes to make the
various requirements in PER-005-1 mandatory and enforceable in three
stages over a three year period. We seek an explanation from NERC on
whether its proposed effective date for PER-005-1 and retirement date
for PER-002-0 will create a gap in compliance and further seek comment
on alternative approaches to avoid any such gap. If NERC intends for
PER-002-0 to be retired after all of PER-005-1's requirements are in
effect, the Commission is concerned that this may result in overlapping
and potentially conflicting requirements that could unintentionally
introduce confusion in compliance expectations during certain
timeframes. We also request industry comment on the length of the lead-
time before the various requirements in PER-005-1 become mandatory and
enforceable, which, as currently proposed, is as long as three years
and, more specifically, comment on the need for the proposed two- and
three-year lead-times.
52. With respect to proposed Reliability Standard PER-004-2 and the
retirement of currently effective PER-004-1, as the Commission
understands the text in proposed Reliability Standard PER-004-2, NERC
proposes to retire Requirements R2, R3, and R4 of currently effective
Reliability Standard PER-004-1 concurrent with the dates the related
requirements in proposed PER-005-1 become effective.\55\ In other
words, NERC proposes to stagger the retirement of currently effective
PER-004-1. The Commission seeks comment on the feasibility of using a
staggered retirement date as well as possible alternative approaches.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ The effective date language in proposed PER-004-2 is not
clear. The Commission read the language with the assumption that the
reference to ``Requirement 2'' in the text ``Retire Requirement 2
upon the effective date of PER-005-1 Requirement 3'' refers to
Requirement 2 of PER-004-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Violation Risk Factors/Violation Severity Levels
53. To determine a base penalty amount for a violation of a
requirement within a Reliability Standard, NERC must first determine an
initial range for the base penalty amount. To do so, NERC assigns a
violation risk factor to each requirement and sub-requirement of a
Reliability Standard that relates to the expected or potential impact
of a violation of the requirement on the reliability of the Bulk-Power
System. NERC may propose either a lower, medium or high violation risk
factor for each mandatory Reliability Standard requirement.\56\ The
Commission has established guidelines for evaluating the validity of
each violation risk factor assignment.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ The specific definitions of high, medium and lower are
provided in North American Electric Reliability Corp., 119 FERC ]
61,145, at P 9 (2007), order on reh'g, 120 FERC ] 61,145 (2007)
(Violation Risk Factor Rehearing Order).
\57\ See Violation Risk Factor Rehearing Order, 120 FERC ]
61,145 at P 8-13. The guidelines are: (1) Consistency with the
conclusions of the Blackout Report; (2) consistency within a
Reliability Standard; (3) consistency among Reliability Standards;
(4) consistency with NERC's definition of the violation risk factor
level; and (5) treatment of requirements that co-mingle more than
one obligation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
54. NERC also will assign each requirement and sub-requirement one
of four violation severity levels--low, moderate, high, and severe--as
measurements for the degree to which the requirement was violated in a
specific circumstance. On June 19, 2008, the Commission issued an order
establishing four guidelines for the development of violation severity
levels.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ North American Electric Reliability Corp., 123 FERC ]
61,284, at P 20-35 (2008) (Violation Severity Level Order), order on
reh'g & compliance, 125 FERC ] 61,212 (2008). The guidelines provide
that violation severity level assignments should: (1) Not lower the
current level of compliance; (2) ensure uniformity and consistency
in the determination of penalties; (3) be consistent with the
corresponding requirement; and (4) be based on a single violation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
55. With respect to proposed Reliability Standard PER-005-1, NERC
proposes to assign violation risk factors only to the main requirements
and did not propose violation risk factors for any of the sub-
requirements.\59\ NERC assigns
[[Page 35697]]
Requirement R1 a ``medium'' violation risk factor, Requirement R2 a
``high'' violation risk factor, and Requirement R3 a ``medium''
violation risk factor. The NERC Petition proposes violation severity
levels for Requirement
