Topic:"Compliance Legislation" in M03324

violations that have been identified since reliability standards became mandatory and enforceable in June 2007. The addition of an independent trustee would assist the BOTCC in handling its workload. Further, during the next few years, the...

AI summary The text discusses proposed bylaw amendments to add an independent trustee to the BOTCC to manage increased workload from NERC's performance assessments and enforceable reliability standards since 2007. The Board of Trustees Nominating Committee recommended the change to address workload concerns and ensure qualified candidates remain available for trustee roles.

da and Mexico to establish and enforce reliability standards for the bulk power systems of the respective countries. "Member" means a member of the Corporation pursuant to Article II of these Bylaws. "Net Energy for Load (NEL)" means net g...

AI summary The text defines key terms related to reliability standards for bulk power systems, including 'Net Energy for Load (NEL)', 'Reliability standard', and 'Reliable operation'. It outlines enforcement authority, operational requirements, and excludes certain infrastructure expansions from reliability standards. Definitions align with regulatory frameworks from NERC, FERC, and international standards.

ii. Other Modifications In conjunction with this year's effort to prepare the 2010 Development Plan, NERC staff incorporated pending items and issues in what is termed the "NERC Standards Issues Database" ("Issues Database"). The Issues Da...

AI summary NERC updated its 2010 Development Plan by incorporating issues from its 'NERC Standards Issues Database,' enhancing reliability standards through compliance monitoring, event analysis, and initiatives like Project 2010-05 System Protection. These efforts aim to address system protection and control issues critical to bulk power system reliability.

independence are assured through reasonable and appropriate recusal procedures. (Revised pro forma Delegation Agreement, §6(h).) - The revised pro forma Delegation Agreement contains an expanded description of the delegation-related activi...

AI summary The revised Delegation Agreement enhances recusal procedures and expands Regional Entities' responsibilities in reliability assessments, training, and infrastructure security. It also clarifies the CMEP's exclusion of NERC's shortened hearing procedures, with WECC's deviation noted. References to §6(h), §7, and Exhibit D, §1.0 are included.

rds. In §5(a)(ii), a reference to a section of the NERC ROP has been changed to be consistent with the revised ROP. Other revisions have been made to §5 to use defined terms and for greater clarity. Section 6, Enforcement of Compliance wit...

AI summary Revisions to sections 5 and 6 of the Base Delegation Agreement align terminology with the revised NERC ROP, clarify enforcement processes for reliability standards, and specify FERC and NERC roles in reviewing violations, penalties, and CMEP changes. Defined terms like 'Possible Violation' and 'Confirmed Violation' are emphasized for consistency and transparency.

C. Northeast Power Coordinating Council Delegation Agreement This §III.C describes the revised Delegation Agreements between NERC and NPCC, focusing on those respects in which an individual Delegation Agreement differs from the revised pro...

AI summary This section outlines revised Delegation Agreements between NERC and NPCC, highlighting deviations from the pro forma template. It notes that differences arise from unique Regional Entity circumstances, such as geographic boundaries and RSDP specifics, and references attachments with clean and redlined versions of the agreement.

IV. AMENDMENTS TO THE NERC RULES OF PROCEDURE

AI summary The document outlines proposed amendments to the NERC Rules of Procedure, emphasizing updates to align with current reliability practices. Key entities involved include NERC, FERC, and the BOTCC, with the CMEP process referenced as part of the regulatory framework.

A. Process for Development of Proposed Amendments NERC and the Regional Entities developed a set of proposed amendments to the NERC ROP in conjunction with their development of the revised pro forma Delegation Agreement. The origin of the...

AI summary NERC and Regional Entities developed proposed amendments to the NERC ROP, driven by issues in the Three-Year ERO Assessment Report. Revisions target compliance enforcement, certification, and monitoring processes. Stakeholder feedback was solicited, leading to revisions approved by the NERC Board of Trustees on May 12, 2010.

2. Amendments to Section 400 – Compliance Enforcement Two recurring reasons for amendments in §400 are: (1) to adopt new or revised terminology adopted in amended Appendix 4C, such as the terms "possible violation," "alleged 12 Article XI,...

AI summary Amendments to Section 400 focus on aligning terminology with Appendix 4C (e.g., 'possible violation,' 'confirmed violation') and removing redundant text to avoid confusion. This follows NERC Bylaws requiring public comment on ROP amendments before approval by the NERC Board of Trustees.

nce Registry Criteria , in §501. Following these deleted subsections, the text of §501.1.2 continues with the text concerning Joint Registration Organizations that was formerly numbered as §501.1.2.7. Section 501.3, Delegation and Oversigh...

AI summary Amendments to Section 500 focus on clarifying NERC's role in overseeing regional entity registration programs, ensuring compliance with NERC requirements, and updating audit participation criteria to involve industry subject matter experts rather than volunteers. Revisions aim to standardize procedures across regional entities.

egional Entity's financial records is established by the Delegation Agreement ( see §8 of Exhibit E to the revised pro forma Delegation Agreement), and therefore §1104.3 was deemed to be unnecessary. Section 1105, Submittal of NERC and Reg...

AI summary Amendments to Section 1105 remove the requirement to include previous year's audited financial statements in NERC and Regional Entity budget filings, aligning with FERC's 2009 order to delay such filings until May 30. Section 1106 now requires alternative funding allocation methods to be approved by NERC, FERC, and other ERO authorities.

approved by NERC and by FERC and any other applicable ERO governmental authority. As amended, this section provides for a broader availability of alternative treatment to the general rule for application of penalty payments, but requires a...

AI summary The amended section allows alternative treatment of penalty payments with approval from NERC and FERC, including spreading large penalties over multiple years. Section 1108 now permits amended budgets and special assessments for NERC or Regional Entities, aligning with updated Delegation Agreement provisions.

-delegated to another regional entity. Regional entities may share resources with one another so long as such arrangements do not result in cross-subsidization or in any sub-delegation of authorities. Section 1207, Regional Entity Audits....

AI summary Amendments to Section 1207 extend NERC audits of Regional Entities from every three to five years, aligning with five-year Delegation Agreements and reducing redundant audits. Audits must follow U.S. and international standards, avoiding duplication with existing compliance audits.

C. Amendments to Appendix 4A to the NERC Rules of Procedure Appendix 4A, Audit of Regional Entity Compliance Programs , has been amended to establish more detailed provisions for NERC's audits of Regional Entity compliance monitoring and e...

AI summary Appendix 4A to the NERC Rules of Procedure has been amended to detail audits of Regional Entity compliance programs. The amendments clarify audit purposes, define terms, and specify scope elements including the CMEP, ROP, and annual implementation plans. Clean and redlined versions are provided in Attachments 4A and 4B.

D. Amendments to Appendix 4B to the NERC Rules of Procedure The amendments to Appendix 4B, Sanction Guidelines of the North American Electric Reliability Corporation , are largely for the purpose of consistency with other provisions of the...

AI summary Amendments to Appendix 4B of the NERC Rules of Procedure aim to align terminology and cross-references with other NERC documents, ensuring consistency without altering penalty determination methods. Key changes include updating terms like 'possible violation' and removing references to regional entity-specific procedures in favor of NERC's uniform CMEP.

E. Amendments to Appendix 4C to the NERC Rules of Procedure Appendix 4C, Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Program , has been extensively revised. In addition to the changes to the text described in the section-by-section discussion be...

AI summary Appendix 4C of the NERC Rules of Procedure, governing the Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Program, has been revised to remove process flow charts due to maintenance challenges and risk of inconsistency with textual content. Updates include standardized terminology, reorganized sections, and revised cross-references. Clean and redlined versions are provided in Attachments 6A and 6B.

onitoring processes, has been changed to "Compliance Investigation." (§1.1.8) The defined term "End Date" has been added, as the last date of the period to be covered by a Compliance Audit. (§1.1.10) The definition of Exception Reporting h...

AI summary The text outlines definitional updates to compliance processes, including renaming 'monitoring processes' to 'Compliance Investigation,' adding 'End Date' for audit periods, revising 'Exception Reporting' to include violation disclosures, and aligning 'NERC Compliance Registry' with Appendix 4C. Changes aim to clarify terms like 'Mitigation Plan' and 'Remedial Action Directive' while removing outdated references to 'Regional Compliance Registry.'

2. Section 2.0 – Identification of Organizations Responsible for Complying with Reliability Standards The revisions to the first five paragraphs of §2.0 reflect the revised roles of NERC and the Regional Entities in registering entities an...

AI summary Revisions to Section 2.0 clarify NERC's expanded role in maintaining a consolidated Compliance Registry for the Bulk Power System, replacing regional registries. Regional Entities now provide data for registration decisions, and Registered Entities must notify NERC of changes. NERC will also list applicable Reliability Standards and report to FERC monthly.

a. Section 3.1 – Compliance Audits Section 3.1.1, Compliance Audit Process Steps. In the process step listed in §3.1.1, a reference to "the member" has been changed to "the new audit team member(s)" for greater clarity. The fifth and sixth...

AI summary Revisions to compliance audit processes include clearer terminology, moving a step to the end, correcting a grammar error, and updating the scope to reference current year NERC and Regional Implementation Plans, affecting the data retention periods and audit coverage.

b. Section 3.2 – Self-Certification Section 3.2 has been revised, consistent with the new progression of steps in the compliance enforcement process in amended Appendix 4C, to specify that "If the Compliance Enforcement Authority concludes...

AI summary Section 3.2 was revised to align with updated compliance enforcement steps in Appendix 4C, requiring the Compliance Enforcement Authority to issue a Notice of Possible Violation after Preliminary Screens. A redundant provision about Regional Entities notifying NERC was deleted, as Section 8.0 already covers reporting requirements.

c. Section 3.3 – Spot Checking Throughout §3.3, revisions have been made for greater clarity, to effect grammatical corrections, and to correctly reflect "Spot Checking" as a defined term. In addition, the final process step for Spot Check...

AI summary Revisions to Section 3.3 enhance clarity, correct grammar, and align with amended Appendix 4C, specifying that a Notice of Possible Violation must be issued after a Preliminary Screen. A redundant provision requiring Regional Entities to notify NERC of Alleged Violations was removed, as reporting requirements are covered in §8.0.

e. Section 3.5 – Self Reporting The final process step for Self-Reporting in §3.5.1 has been revised, consistent with the new progression of steps in the compliance enforcement process in amended Appendix 4C, to specify that "If the Compli...

AI summary Section 3.5's self-reporting process was revised to align with amended Appendix 4C, specifying that a Notice of Possible Violation must be issued after a Preliminary Screen. A redundant step requiring Regional Entities to notify NERC of Alleged Violations was removed, as §8.0 already covers reporting requirements.

5. Section 5.0 – Enforcement Actions 17 Section 5.0 has been extensively revised to present the revised, standardized progression of steps for processing evidence of a potential noncompliance discovered by the Compliance Enforcement Author...

AI summary Section 5.0 outlines revised standardized steps for processing potential noncompliance evidence by the Compliance Enforcement Authority (NERC or Regional Entities). The process includes a Preliminary Screen and issuing a Notice of Possible Violation, aiming to ensure consistent terminology and clear procedures for Registered Entities.

b. Section 6.2 – Contents of Mitigation Plans Section 6.2 has been revised to incorporate use of the terms "Possible Violation," "Alleged Violation," and "Confirmed Violation, and to use other defined terms. In addition, a provision has be...

AI summary Section 6.2 has been revised to define terms like 'Possible Violation,' 'Alleged Violation,' and 'Confirmed Violation,' and mandates that mitigation plans include action plans to address both the causes and the violations themselves.

d. Section 6.4 – Submission of Mitigation Plans Section 6.4 has been revised to specify that a Registered Entity may submit a Mitigation Plan in response to a Notice of Possible Violation, without being deemed to have admitted the violatio...

AI summary Section 6.4 was revised to permit Registered Entities to submit Mitigation Plans in response to a Notice of Possible Violation (NOPV) without admitting the violation or penalty. The section was also updated to ensure proper use of defined terms.

ular, those for which Regional Entities have declined days/48 hours). Upon the Regional Entity entering the item into the compliance reporting and tracking system, NERC will have received the report. 28 The Regional Entity's additional rev...

AI summary The text outlines the compliance enforcement process for Regional Entities, detailing how Possible Violations are reported to NERC and may be dismissed after review. It emphasizes the Commission's reliance on timely information from NERC and Regional Entities, and explains conditions under which a Possible Violation might not be issued, such as non-applicability of Reliability Standards.

COMPLIANCE MONITORING AND ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM

AI summary The document outlines the Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Program (CMEP), detailing its role in ensuring adherence to reliability standards by electric reliability organizations (EROs) and regulatory bodies. It references key entities involved in compliance oversight and enforcement mechanisms.

III. REVISIONS TO SECTION 500 OF THE NERC RULES OF PROCEDURE Amendments have been made throughout Section 500 to change references to the Organization Registration and Organization Certification Manual from Appendix 5 to Appendix 5A. Secti...

AI summary Revisions to Section 500 of the NERC Rules of Procedure include moving references to the Organization Registration Manual to Appendix 5A, deleting a list of Registered Entity categories, and updating obligations for bulk power system owners. Section 501.1.2 now incorporates the Statement of Compliance Registry Criteria as Appendix 5B, replacing previously listed factors.

AMENDED SECTION 500 OF THE NERC RULES OF PROCEDURE

AI summary This document outlines amendments to Section 500 of the NERC Rules of Procedure, involving regulatory oversight by FERC and other entities, focusing on compliance and procedural updates.

SECTION 500 AS APPROVED BY FERC ON JUNE 10, 2010 (Available on the NERC website at http://www.nerc.com/fileUploads/File/Filings/Attachments_to_Supplement_the_RDA_Filing.pdf

AI summary Section 500, approved by FERC on June 10, 2010, references a filing available on the NERC website. The document pertains to regulatory compliance and reliability standards, with a link to a supplemental filing related to the Reliability and Dispute Resolution (RDA) process.

III. STATEMENT OF BASIS AND PURPOSE OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS A. Proposed Amendments to Section 500 – Organization Registration and Certification and Appendix 5A: Organization Registration and Organization Certification Manual The proposed ch...

AI summary Proposed amendments to NERC Rules of Procedure aim to modernize registration and certification processes by eliminating transitional certification, introducing Provisional Certification, and establishing Coordinated Functional Registration. New hearing procedures are proposed for the Compliance and Certification Committee to address compliance violations and audit challenges, aligning with NERC's enforcement guidelines.

f each Regional Entity, (iii) the budget for Section 215(j) activities requested by WIRAB, and (iv) the aggregate ERO funding requirement of NERC, the Regional Entities and WIRAB, allocated to Canada. Attachment 2 contains NERC's detailed...

AI summary The document outlines attachments related to NERC and Regional Entities' 2010 budgets, compliance programs, financial statements, and FERC orders. Attachments detail business plans, budget allocations, audit reports, and adjustments to NERC assessments, including a reference to FERC's Order in Docket No. RR07-16-003.

21 The arrangements, including the compensation mechanisms and amounts, by which compliance monitoring and enforcement services will be provided for the reliability functions for which FRCC and SPP RE are the registered entities, have not...

AI summary NERC discusses uncertainty in 2010 budget requirements for compliance monitoring of FRCC and SPP RE reliability functions, contingent on agreements with SERC. If no agreement is reached, NERC may need to allocate additional resources, referencing FERC orders and prior compliance processes with WECC.

siness Plans and Budgets, NERC afforded the proposed Regional Entity Business Plans and Budgets no presumption of reasonableness due to having been approved by the Regional Entities' governing bodies. allocation of responsibility for recei...

AI summary NERC initially proposed handling TFEs (Technical Feasibility Exceptions) itself, but stakeholders argued Regional Entities should have primary responsibility. NERC issued Compliance Process #2009-006 to address CIP standards related to TFEs pending a permanent program. Regional Entities' budgets lacked resources for TFE processing, contrasting with NERC's plans.

D. Overall Funding Requirement and Allocations by Country, Region and LSE The total ERO assessment funding requirement for 2010 (net of other NERC and Regional Entity income sources) is $138,169,469, consisting of $37,063,569 for funding o...

AI summary The total ERO assessment funding requirement for 2010 is $138.17 million, allocated to NERC programs, Regional Entity statutory activities, and WIRAB. NERC distributes its $37.06 million share based on NEL, with exceptions: IDC costs are allocated by usage in the Eastern Interconnection, and adjustments credit IESO and Québec for compliance activities outside the U.S.

The CMEP budget 57 The current inflow of newly-identified alleged violations averages 85 per month after dismissals of possible violations that are determined not to be alleged violations. also includes NERC's expenses for performing the c...

AI summary The 2010 CMEP budget increased by $2.03 million from 2009, with 45.75 FTEs allocated to compliance monitoring and enforcement. NERC will be reimbursed by Regional Entities for reliability functions, and $1.1 million is budgeted for consultants. Additional FTEs support backlog reduction, mitigation plan approvals, and compliance investigations.

e General Counsel, four other attorneys, one paralegal and one administrative assistant). The Legal and Regulatory budget also includes the expense for NERC's retained Canadian affairs representative. IT – NERC's IT program supports employ...

AI summary The text outlines NERC's 2010 IT program budget, including a $2.5 million allocation with a 7.75 FTE workforce. Key initiatives involve deploying secure file systems for compliance and CIP programs, and implementing a SharePoint-based knowledge management system. The budget reflects increased capital expenditures for IT infrastructure and software.

2. MRO MRO's total statutory budget for 2010 is $7,366,117, an increase of $960,393 over its 2009 Budget. 76 MRO plans total staffing for statutory and administrative programs of 29.0 FTEs, an increase of 2.5 FTEs over its 2009 Budget. MRO...

AI summary The MRO's 2010 statutory budget increased by $960,393 to $7,366,117, with staffing rising to 29.0 FTEs. Key programs like CMEP and Organization Registration and Certification saw significant budget and FTE increases. A Working Capital Reserve target of $286,972 was set, requiring a $212,628 budget increment. Footnotes reference a 2009 supplemental budget request and a table in Attachment 4.

3. NPCC NPCC's statutory budget for 2010 is $11,354,085, an increase of $1,345,200 over its 2009 Budget. NPCC plans total staffing for statutory and administrative programs of 27.41 FTEs, an increase of 4.01 FTEs over its 2009 Budget. 78 N...

AI summary NPCC's 2010 statutory budget increased by $1.35M (12.8%) to $11.35M, reflecting a 14.7% rise in FTEs (from 23.4 to 27.41) to support expanded compliance activities, including CIP standard audits, compliance violation investigations, and registry maintenance. Consultant/contract resources for compliance programs also increased significantly.

4. Reliability First Reliability First has a total statutory budget for 2010 of $14,184,713, an increase of $2,750,512 over its 2009 Budget. However, Reliability First 's requested assessments, which were significantly reduced in its 2009...

AI summary Reliability First seeks a 2010 statutory budget increase of $2.75M over 2009, driven by higher assessments and staffing needs. Budget reflects $14.3M in requested assessments, increased FTEs for compliance programs, and a target Working Capital Reserve of $1.4M. Non-statutory activities are excluded.

5. SERC SERC's total statutory budget for 2010 is $10,701,683, an increase of $606,137 over its 2009 Budget. SERC plans total staffing for statutory and administrative programs of 45.5 FTEs, an increase of 2.5 FTEs over its 2009 Budget. SE...

AI summary SERC's 2010 budget increased by $606,137, with major allocations to infrastructure security and administrative services. Staffing rose to 45.5 FTEs, and the Working Capital Reserve target is $1,009,555. SERC will handle TFE processing with existing resources and may request supplemental funding if needed. No non-statutory activities are planned.

6. SPP RE SPP RE's total 2010 statutory budget is $8,138,783, an increase of $1,657,747 over its 2009 Budget. SPP RE plans total staffing for statutory and administrative programs of 24.3 FTEs, an increase of 7.1 FTEs over its 2009 Budget....

AI summary SPP RE's 2010 statutory budget increased by $1.66M, with 7.1 additional FTEs, focusing on CMEP and compliance programs. Budget highlights include a 156% rise in direct expenses for CMEP, reduced indirect expense rates, and a $1.38M reduction in the requested 2010 assessment due to projected working capital reserves. FERC's 2009 order on budget procedures is referenced.

7. Texas RE Texas RE's total 2010 statutory budget is $6,920,641, an increase of $753,615 over its 2009 Budget. Texas RE plans total staffing for statutory and administrative programs of 34 FTEs, an increase of 7.05 FTEs over its 2009 Budg...

AI summary Texas RE's 2010 statutory budget increased by $753,615 to $6,920,641, with 34 FTEs allocated for statutory programs. Key increases include CMEP funding ($1,837,055) and 7.59 additional FTEs for compliance activities, including TFE database management. Professional services costs rose by $428,660 due to external legal expenses.

8. WECC WECC's 2010 total statutory budget is $39,508,558, an increase of $1,816,790 over its 2009 Budget. WECC plans total staffing for statutory and administrative programs of 172.5 FTEs, an increase of 32.5 FTEs over its 2009 Budget. Of...

AI summary WECC's 2010 budget increased by $1.8 million, with 32.5 additional FTEs, focusing on compliance programs like CMEP and Organization Registration. Resources for TFE processing rely on existing staff and reserves, with potential supplemental funding needed later in 2010.

VIII. ENHANCEMENTS TO NERC'S DATA COLLECTION AND CHECKING PROCESSES FOR RELIABILITY ASSESSMENTS In the July 16 , 2009 Budget Compliance Order , FERC stated: With respect to the Reliability Assessment and Performance Analysis Program, the C...

AI summary FERC accepted NERC's proposal to enhance data collection processes for reliability assessments but required a status report in the 2010 business plan. NERC has implemented initiatives described in its 2009 Summer Reliability Assessment and Three-Year ERO Performance Assessment Report.

IX. UPDATE ON RELIABILITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAMS In the 2009 Budget Order , FERC stated: The Commission understands that many aspects of the implementation of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 are still in a state of evolution and that, because...

AI summary FERC acknowledged NERC's 2008 reliability enhancement filing but emphasized the need for more developed programs and funding in NERC's 2010 Business Plan. The 2009 Budget Order highlighted ongoing obligations to address cybersecurity standards and resource adequacy, requiring staged development with measurable goals.

ll identify actions that NERC and the Regional Entities plan to take to improve NERC's and the Regional Entities' operations and to continue to enhance the reliable operation of the bulk power system. This performance assessment includes a...

AI summary The text outlines NERC's performance assessment and collaboration with eight Regional Entities to improve bulk power system reliability. It details the review of NERC's programs across North America, the preparation of draft statements by Regional Entities, and stakeholder engagement processes. The Commission's 2007 approval of delegation agreements is cited as a legal reference.

and interconnection characteristics and the time horizon of the violation), and (ii) aggravating and/or mitigating factors, such as whether the violation was self-reported and the speed and quality of the registered entity's corrective act...

AI summary The text outlines NERC's process for determining penalties for reliability standard violations, including factors like violation severity, corrective actions, and compliance history. Penalties are reviewed by NERC and FERC, with registered entities able to contest findings. As of June 2009, 64 penalty notices covering 171 violations had been filed, totaling $833,000 in penalties.

Issues Identified by Stakeholders Concerning the Compliance Program Despite how much has been accomplished in starting up the NERC and Regional Entity Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Programs, it remains an incomplete effort. At one...

AI summary Stakeholders note the NERC and Regional Entity Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Programs are incomplete, with limited public compliance actions and few decided cases. This lack of transparency creates uncertainty for registered entities, necessitating greater visibility of standards violations and penalties to foster a culture of compliance.

NERC responsible for the overall Situational Awareness Program and is a recognized CIP expert. Additionally, NERC has created and staffed the position of Manager of Critical Infrastructure Protection. NERC's CIP activities include facilita...

AI summary NERC leads critical infrastructure protection (CIP) through standard development, compliance oversight, and training. Eight CIP standards (CIP-002 to CIP-009) were approved by FERC in Order No. 706, requiring phased compliance by registered entities. Regional Entities conduct audits, and self-certification is mandated every six months starting 2008.

Issues Identified by Stakeholders Concerning Critical Infrastructure Protection Stakeholders identified a number of issues and recommendations concerning NERC's CIP activities, including the following: - Direction for implementation of CIP...

AI summary Stakeholders highlighted issues with NERC's CIP activities, including the need for centralized direction, timely guidance, a fast-track process for interpretation requests, and more targeted cybersecurity advisories. NERC's role in infrastructure security via ES-ISAC is noted, with detailed discussion in Attachment 2.

and NPCC compliance program costs to Ontario and Québec. See North American Electric Reliability Corporation, Order on Compliance Filing , 128 FERC ¶ 61,025 (2009) (July 16, 2009 Order), at PP 32-42. fair and impartial procedures for the e...

AI summary The text discusses the enforcement of reliability standards by NERC, including fair procedures for compliance monitoring, conflict of interest avoidance, and due process for hearings and appeals related to compliance issues.

A. NERC Has Established and Maintained an Appropriate and Effective Independent Governance Structure As required by §215(c)(2)(B)(i) of the FPA and §39(b)(2)(i) of FERC's regulations, NERC has established and maintained a governance struct...

AI summary NERC's governance structure, established under FPA and FERC regulations, ensures independence from bulk power system stakeholders. Trustees are selected via a transparent process involving the MRC and meet rigorous qualifications, including diverse professional backgrounds. The board composition reflects technical, legal, and regional expertise, with long-term service enhancing institutional knowledge.

head) function of NERC and each Regional Entity. The business planning and budgeting processes include opportunities for review and input by the members of NERC and the Regional Entities. 54 NERC and the Regional Entities have found the de...

AI summary NERC and Regional Entities have developed robust business planning, budgeting, and financial reporting processes that go beyond FERC requirements. These processes enable rigorous resource allocation decisions, program evaluation, and management focus on effective initiatives. Quarterly financial reporting and budget tracking mechanisms ensure accountability and transparency in expenditures.

C. NERC Has Developed an Effective Set of Rules of Procedure NERC's predecessor organization had rules of procedure in place covering a number of areas of its activities. For purposes of its ERO certification application, NERC organized th...

AI summary NERC's Rules of Procedure, developed and updated post-ERO certification, cover reliability standards, compliance monitoring, and administrative processes. All amendments were submitted to and approved by FERC, ensuring alignment with FPA and FERC regulations. The rules address areas like training, infrastructure security, and information handling.

D. NERC Has Negotiated and Modified Delegation Agreements with the Regional Entities Governing their Delegated Statutory Functions NERC has negotiated and has in place a set of delegation agreements with the eight Regional Entities pursuan...

AI summary NERC has established and modified delegation agreements with eight Regional Entities, granting them authority to perform statutory functions under FPA and FERC regulations. These agreements cover standards development, governance, compliance monitoring, and financial allocations, with NERC planning to eliminate Section 700 aligning with the termination of a 2009 program.

nce. - 5.19.3 Each protection group shall be functionally tested to verify the dependability and security aspects of the design, when initially placed in service and when modifications are made. - 5.20 Analysis of Protection Performance Re...

AI summary The document outlines requirements for testing and analyzing protection systems in bulk power systems, including functional testing of protection groups, event recording capabilities, time synchronization standards, and compliance monitoring procedures. It emphasizes the need for reporting changes to the Task Force on System Protection (TFSP) and adherence to reliability criteria.

2.3 Review of Appendix A Requirements CMAS, in conjunction with the appropriate NPCC Inc. Task Forces, shall annually review the requirements included in Appendix A to assure that the effectiveness of the Reliability Compliance and Enforce...

AI summary The document outlines annual reviews of Appendix A requirements by CMAS and NPCC Task Forces to ensure the Reliability Compliance and Enforcement Program's effectiveness. Task Forces must recommend amendments to Appendix A based on NPCC Criteria Document reviews, with CMAS submitting proposals for RCC endorsement and NPCC approval.

4.0 Compliance Assessment and Enforcement Process The compliance assessment and enforcement process is described below in terms of the functional entities that will be responsible for the process. In addition, the Guidelines for the Implem...

AI summary The compliance assessment and enforcement process involves functional entities responsible for its implementation. The Guidelines for the Implementation of the NPCC Inc. Compliance Program (Document B-22) provides detailed processes and related information for the Program.

4.2 Reliability Coordinating Committee (RCC ) The RCC, a standing committee of NPCC Inc., reviews the compliance report submittals received from CMAS. Prior to a final compliance determination, the RCC may remand the report back to CMAS fo...

AI summary The Reliability Coordinating Committee (RCC), a standing committee of NPCC Inc., reviews compliance reports and sanction recommendations from CMAS. It may remand reports for clarification before final compliance determinations and forwards disputes to the Enforcement Panel (EP).

All compliance reports are to be received by NPCC Inc. on time in accordance with the due dates established by CMAS. All reports are to be provided in easily readable electronic format.

AI summary The document specifies that all compliance reports must be submitted to NPCC Inc. on time and in an easily readable electronic format, as mandated by CMAS.

Full (100%) Compliance Exceptions to Docu ment A-4 requirements are acceptable if the exceptions are completely removed within five (5) months of the end of the current reporting period. Document A-8 NPCC Inc. Reliability Compliance And En...

AI summary The document allows exceptions to Document A-4 requirements if removed within five months. It references NPCC Inc.'s Reliability Compliance and Enforcement Program from December 2007.

Responsibilities Reporting Responsibility : Control Areas Frequency of Reporting: Monthly by the end of the following month Compliance Monitoring and Assessment Responsibility: NPCC Inc. Enforcement Responsibility: NPCC Inc.

AI summary The responsibilities section outlines monthly reporting by Control Areas, with NPCC Inc. overseeing compliance monitoring, assessment, and enforcement.

Full (100%) Compliance Control Area meets the Ten-Minute Reserve requirement as described in Sections 3.1 and 3.4 of A-6, except during emergency operations resulting from a capacity deficiency.

AI summary The Control Area complies with the Ten-Minute Reserve requirement as outlined in Sections 3.1 and 3.4 of A-6, except during emergency operations caused by capacity deficiencies.

2.0 General The term Disturbance Monitoring Equipment (DME) is defined in the NERC Glossary, listed as Reference 1, and is repeated below for convenience: Disturbance Monitoring Equipment (DME) - Devices capable of monitoring and recording...

AI summary The document defines Disturbance Monitoring Equipment (DME) per NERC standards, outlining categories like SOE recorders, fault recorders, and DDRs. It mandates upgrades to existing DMEs under NERC PRC-018-1, requiring TOs and GOs to install DMEs for system analysis and compliance. RCs, TOs, and GOs must receive the document within 30 days of approval.

A. NERC Filing of All Proposed Reliability Standards NERC is filing all FERC approved Reliability Standards for approval by the NSUARB. The Reliability Standards, in the instant filing, are provided in two parts. The first part consists of...

AI summary NERC is filing FERC-approved reliability standards with the NSUARB, distinguishing between current and future effective standards. It requests approval of associated VRFs and VSLs, which determine penalties for noncompliance. NERC excludes the full developmental record due to its volume but commits to making it available upon request. It emphasizes collaboration with the NSUARB to address Canadian and provincial issues.

Applicability: - Purchase-Selling Entities - Balancing Authorities On August 22, 2007, INT-001-3 was approved by the registered ballot body by a 99.17% affirmative vote. On October 9, 2007, INT-001-3 was approved by the NERC Board of Trust...

AI summary The text outlines the approval process of INT-001-3 by NERC, FERC, and a registered ballot body, and introduces Standard INT-003-2, which mandates Balancing Authorities to confirm Interchange Schedules with adjacent authorities before applying them to Area Control Error (ACE) equations.

Version History Version Date Action Change Tracking 0 February 8, 2005 BOT Approval New 0 April 1, 2005 Effective Implementation Date New 0 August 8, 2005 Removed "Proposed" from Effective Date Errata 0 July 24, 2007 Corrected R3 to refere...

AI summary The document outlines the version history of a regulatory standard, detailing multiple revisions, corrections, and approvals by the NERC Board of Trustees and FERC. Key changes include errata corrections, effective date updates, and appendices added.

1.1. Compliance Enforcement Authority - 1.1.1 Regional Entity for Responsible Entities that do not perform delegated tasks for their Regional Entity. - 1.1.2 ERO for Regional Entity. - 1.1.3 Third-party monitor without vested interest in t...

AI summary This section outlines compliance enforcement structures, specifying roles for Regional Entities, Electric Reliability Organizations (ERO), and third-party monitors under NERC. It defines accountability for entities not delegating tasks and emphasizes oversight mechanisms for reliability standards.

1.1. Compliance Enforcement Authority - 1.1.1 Regional Entity for Responsible Entities that do not perform delegated tasks for their Regional Entity. - 1.1.2 ERO for Regional Entity. - 1.1.3 Third-party monitor without vested interest in t...

AI summary This section outlines compliance enforcement structures, specifying roles for Regional Entities, Electric Reliability Organizations (ERO), and third-party monitors under NERC. It defines accountability for entities not delegating tasks and emphasizes oversight mechanisms for reliability standards.

1.1. Compliance Enforcement Authority - 1.1.1 Regional Entity for Responsible Entities that do not perform delegated tasks for their Regional Entity. - 1.1.2 ERO for Regional Entity. - 1.1.3 Third-party monitor without vested interest in t...

AI summary This section outlines compliance enforcement structures, specifying roles for Regional Entities, Electric Reliability Organizations (ERO), and third-party monitors under NERC. It defines accountability for entities not delegating tasks and emphasizes oversight mechanisms for reliability standards.

1.5. Additional Compliance Information - 1.5.1 The Responsible Entity may not take exception in its cyber security policies to the creation of a Cyber Security Incident response plan. - 1.5.2 The Responsible Entity may not take exception i...

AI summary The Responsible Entity must comply with mandatory cyber security policies requiring a Cyber Security Incident response plan and reporting incidents to ES ISAC. Violation Severity Levels are noted as pending development.

Version History Version Date Action 2 Modifications to clarify the requirements and to bring the compliance elements into conformance with the latest guidelines for developing compliance elements of standards. Removal of reasonable busines...

AI summary This document outlines the version history of a regulatory compliance standard, including modifications to align with the latest guidelines, removal of certain provisions, and changes in responsible entities and compliance monitoring authorities.

C. Measures - M1. Each Reliability Coordinator and Balancing Authority shall have and provide upon request evidence that could include but is not limited to, job descriptions, signed agreements, authority letter signed by an appropriate of...

AI summary The measures outline evidence requirements for Reliability Coordinators, Balancing Authorities, and Transmission Service Providers to demonstrate compliance with emergency plans, operator logs, and NERC/EEA standards during capacity and energy emergencies.

1. Compliance Monitoring Process

AI summary The section outlines the Compliance Monitoring Process, though no detailed content is provided in the text. It likely involves oversight mechanisms for regulatory standards and performance metrics, given the context of utility regulation.

1. Compliance Monitoring Process

AI summary The section outlines the Compliance Monitoring Process, though no detailed content is provided in the text. It likely involves oversight mechanisms for regulatory standards and performance metrics, given the context of utility regulation.

1. Compliance Monitoring Process

AI summary The section outlines the Compliance Monitoring Process, though no detailed content is provided in the text. It likely involves oversight mechanisms for regulatory standards and performance metrics, given the context of utility regulation.

1. Compliance Monitoring Process

AI summary The section outlines the Compliance Monitoring Process, though no detailed content is provided in the text. It likely involves oversight mechanisms for regulatory standards and performance metrics, given the context of utility regulation.

B. Requirements - R1. The Generator Owner, Transmission Owner, Distribution Provider, and Load-Serving Entity seeking to integrate generation facilities, transmission facilities, and electricity end-user facilities shall each coordinate an...

AI summary The requirements mandate coordination among Generator Owners, Transmission Owners, and other entities to assess reliability impacts of new facilities, ensure compliance with NERC standards, and retain documentation for three years. Studies must evaluate system performance and be jointly coordinated.

1.3. Data Retention Five Years

AI summary The data retention period specified in the regulatory proceeding is set to five years.

2.4. Level 4: - 2.4.1. The Transmission Owner reported more than one Category 1 transmission vegetation-related outage in a calendar year, or; - 2.4.2. The TVMP was incomplete in four or more of the requirements specified in any subpart of...

AI summary Level 4 criteria include multiple vegetation-related outages or incomplete TVMP requirements, indicating non-compliance with transmission vegetation management standards.

4. Applicability - 4.1. Transmission Owner - 4.2. Generator Owner - 5. Effective Date: August 7, 2006

AI summary Section 4 outlines the applicability of regulations to Transmission Owners and Generator Owners, with an effective date of August 7, 2006. The section establishes the scope of entities required to comply with the regulatory standards.

1.2. Compliance Monitoring Period and Reset Time Frame Each Transmission Owner and Generator Owner shall self-certify its compliance to the Compliance Monitor at least once every three years. New Transmission Owners and Generator Owners sh...

AI summary Transmission and Generator Owners must self-certify compliance every three years, with new entities undergoing on-site audits within their first year. The Compliance Monitor conducts audits every nine years and investigations on complaint. The Performance-Reset Period lasts 12 months after the last noncompliance finding.

1.4. Additional Compliance Information The Transmission Owner and Generator Owner shall each make the following available for inspection during a targeted audit by the Compliance Monitor or within 15 business days of a request as part of a...

AI summary The Transmission Owner and Generator Owner must provide facility ratings methodology, facility ratings, evidence of distribution, and distribution schedules during audits or upon request. This ensures compliance with regulatory requirements related to facility ratings and transparency in their dissemination.

D. Compliance - 1. Compliance Monitoring Process - 1.1. Compliance Monitoring Responsibility Regional Reliability Organization - 1.2. Compliance Monitoring Period and Reset Timeframe The Reliability Coordinator and Planning Authority shall...

AI summary The compliance monitoring process assigns responsibility to the Reliability Coordinator and Planning Authority for annual self-certification. The Compliance Monitor may conduct annual audits and investigations on complaints. A 12-month performance-reset period follows the last noncompliance finding, effective October 7, 2006.

1.3. Data Retention The Purchasing-Selling Entity that serves load and Sink Balancing Authority shall each keep 90 days of historical data (evidence). If an entity is found non-compliant the entity shall keep information related to the non...

AI summary The document outlines data retention requirements for entities in compliance processes, including retaining historical data for 90 days, noncompliance records for up to two years, and investigation-related evidence for one year post-investigation closure. The Compliance Monitor is tasked with retaining audit reports and compliance records.

1.4. Additional Compliance Information Each Interchange Authority shall demonstrate compliance to the Compliance Monitor within the first year that this standard becomes effective or the first year the entity commences operation by self-ce...

AI summary This section outlines compliance requirements for Interchange Authorities, including self-certification, audit schedules (every three years, annual audits for noncompliant entities), spot checks, and complaint resolution processes. Compliance Monitor access to data logs and system records is mandated for verification.

1.4. Additional Compliance Information Each Balancing Authority shall demonstrate compliance to the Compliance Monitor within the first year that this standard becomes effective or the first year the entity commences operation by self-cert...

AI summary Balancing Authorities must self-certify compliance with the Compliance Monitor within the first year of operation. Subsequent compliance verification includes audits every three years, spot checks, annual audits for non-compliant entities, and complaint evaluations within 60 days. The Compliance Monitor may request data logs related to Interchange Authority communications for audits or specific complaints.

1.4. Additional Compliance Information Each Balancing Authority and Reliability Coordinator shall demonstrate compliance to the Compliance Monitor within the first year that this standard becomes effective or the first year the entity comm...

AI summary The section outlines compliance requirements for Balancing Authorities and Reliability Coordinators, including initial self-certification, periodic audits, spot checks, complaint-driven verification, and data availability for inspections. Compliance is tied to INT-010 standards, with specific data retention and access rules.

1.3. Data Retention Each Regional Reliability Organization shall have its current, in-force document for Measure 1. Each Reliability Coordinator shall have its current, in-force documents or the latest copy of a record as evidence of compl...

AI summary The section outlines data retention requirements for entities in the electricity sector, specifying periods for retaining compliance documents and evidence. Regional Reliability Organizations, Reliability Coordinators, and others must keep records for varying durations, with non-compliance data retained longer. The Compliance Monitor retains audit reports and compliance records.

3. Levels of Non-Compliance for a Reliability Coordinator: - 3.1. Level 1: Not applicable. - 3.2. Level 2: Not applicable. - 3.3. Level 3: Not applicable . - 3.4. Level 4: There shall be a separate Level 4 non-compliance for every one of t...

AI summary The document outlines non-compliance levels for Reliability Coordinators and other entities, with Level 4 detailing specific violations such as lacking authority, formal agreements, and adherence to NERC standards. Similar structures apply to Transmission Operators and Balancing Authorities.

the event shall have and provide upon request evidence that could include, but is not limited to, operator logs, voice recordings or transcripts of voice recordings, electronic communications, system

AI summary The text outlines requirements for providing evidence related to events, including operator logs, voice recordings, transcripts, electronic communications, and system data, though the context and specific regulatory implications are not fully detailed in the provided excerpt.

4. Applicability: - 4.1. Load-Serving Entity - 4.2. Transmission Planner - 4.3. Resource Planner - 5. Effective Date: April 1, 2005

AI summary Section 4 outlines applicability to Load-Serving Entities, Transmission Planners, and Resource Planners, with the regulation effective April 1, 2005. No further details or arguments are presented in this brief section.

2. Levels of Non-Compliance for a Reliability Coordinator - 2.1. Level 1: Not applicable. - 2.2. Level 2: Not applicable. - 2.3. Level 3: Not applicable. - 2.4. Level 4: There shall be a separate Level 4 non-compliance, for every one of th...

AI summary The document outlines Level 4 non-compliance criteria for Reliability Coordinators, requiring specific training, understanding of regional operations, and knowledge of Balancing Authorities and operators. These requirements were adopted by the Board of Trustees in 2006.

3. Levels of Non-Compliance for Generator Owners - 3.1. Level 1: Documentation of Misoperations is complete according to PRC-004 R2, but documentation of Corrective Action Plans is incomplete. - 3.2. Level 2: Documentation of Misoperations...

AI summary The document outlines four levels of non-compliance for generator owners, focusing on documentation of misoperations and corrective action plans under PRC-004 R2 and R3. Levels escalate from incomplete documentation to no analysis or reporting, impacting system reliability and regulatory adherence.

2. Levels of Non-Compliance - 2.1. Level 1: Analysis of UFLS program performance following an actual underfrequency event below the UFLS set point(s) was incomplete in one or more elements in Reliability Standard PRC-009-0_R1. - 2.2. Level...

AI summary The document outlines non-compliance levels with reliability standards, specifically highlighting incomplete analysis of UFLS program performance under PRC-009-0_R1 (Level 1) and absence of analysis (Level 4), indicating gaps in adherence to underfrequency load shedding requirements.

2. Levels of Non-Compliance - 2.1. Level 1: Documentation of SPS misoperations is complete but documentation of corrective actions taken for all identified SPS misoperations is incomplete. - 2.2. Level 2: Documentation of corrective action...

AI summary The document outlines four levels of non-compliance related to the documentation of Special Protection System (SPS) misoperations and corrective actions. Level 1 indicates incomplete documentation of corrective actions, while Level 4 denotes a complete absence of documentation for both misoperations and corrective actions.

D. Compliance - 1. Compliance Monitoring Process - 1.1. Compliance Monitoring Responsibility Regional Reliability Organization. 1.2. Compliance Monitoring Period and Reset Time Frame One calendar year. 1.3. Data Retention Adopted by Board...

AI summary The compliance monitoring process is managed by the Regional Reliability Organization, with a one-year compliance period. Transmission Owners and Distribution Providers must retain UVLS program data for two years, while the Compliance Monitor retains audit data for three years. The policy was adopted by the Board of Trustees on February 7, 2006, effective August 1, 2006.

1.2. Compliance Monitoring and Reset Time Frame One or more of the following methods will be used to assess compliance: - Self-certification (Conducted annually with submission according to schedule.) - Spot Check Audits (Conducted anytime...

AI summary The section outlines compliance assessment methods including self-certification, audits, and triggered investigations, with a 12-month reset period following noncompliance findings.

2. Levels of Non-Compliance - 2.1. Level 1: Each entity responsible for reporting information under Requirements R1 to R4 is providing the requesting entities with the data required, in specified time intervals and format, but there are pr...

AI summary The document outlines four levels of non-compliance related to data reporting requirements. Level 1 involves inconsistent data delivery due to issues like equipment malfunctions, while Level 4 indicates complete failure to provide required data in content, timeliness, or format. Levels 2 and 3 are not applicable.

4. Levels of Non-Compliance for Transmission Operators and Balancing Authorities: - 4.1. Level 1: Not applicable. - 4.2. Level 2: Not applicable. - 4.3. Level 3: Not applicable. - 4.4. Level 4: There shall be a separate Level 4 non-complia...

AI summary Level 4 non-compliance involves specific violations, including failure to inform Reliability Coordinators, monitor required items, track system frequency, and address operating deviations. These breaches require corrective actions and adherence to reliability standards.

1.3. Data Retention Each Transmission Operator shall keep 90 days of historical data (evidence) for Measure 1, 2 and 3. Each Transmission Operator shall have current documents as evidence of compliance to Measures 4 and 5. Adopted by Board...

AI summary Transmission Operators must retain historical data for 90 days for Measures 1-3 and current documents for Measures 4-5. Non-compliance records must be kept until compliance is achieved or for two years plus the current year. Investigated entities retain evidence for one year post-investigation closure, while the Compliance Monitor retains audit reports and compliance data.

Version History Version Date Action Change Tracking 1 May 15, 2006 Added "(R2)" to the end of levels on non compliance 2.1.2, 2.2.2, 2.3.2, and 2.4.3. July 5, 2006 1a December 19, 2007 Added Appendix 1 – Interpretation of R1 and R2 approve...

AI summary Document outlines version history of regulatory standards, including updates approved by the Board of Trustees (BOT) and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Key changes include errata corrections, appendix additions, and effective date updates between 2006 and 2009.

Table 1 Compliance Schedule for Standards CIP-002-1 through CIP-009-1 Balancing Authorities and Transmission Operators Required to Self-certify to UA Standard 1200, and Reliability Coordinators End of 2nd Qtr 2007 End of 2nd Qtr 2008 End o...

AI summary The document presents a compliance schedule for CIP-002-1 through CIP-009-1 standards, outlining the timeline for Balancing Authorities, Transmission Operators, and Reliability Coordinators to self-certify to UA Standard 1200. It includes compliance milestones from the second quarter of 2007 to 2010.

A Merger of Two or More Registered Entities where Two or More of the Predecessor Registered Entities has Identified at Least One Critical Cyber Asset This scenario is the most complicated of the three, since it applies to a merged Register...

AI summary The merger of entities with critical cyber assets requires harmonizing conflicting risk-based identification methodologies and CIP compliance programs. The merged entity must align these under a common governance structure within one year, with compliance reviewed under NERC CIP-002.

1.4. Data Retention - 1.4.1 The Responsible Entity shall keep personnel risk assessment documents in accordance with federal, state, provincial, and local laws. - 1.4.2 The Responsible Entity shall keep all other documentation required by...

AI summary The Responsible Entity must retain personnel risk assessment documents per legal requirements and maintain CIP-004-3-related documentation from the previous year unless extended by the Compliance Enforcement Authority. Audit records are to be kept by the Compliance Enforcement Authority and Registered Entity.

1.5. Additional Compliance Information - 1.5.1 The Responsible Entity may not make exceptions in its cyber security policy to the creation, documentation, or maintenance of a physical security plan. - 1.5.2 For dial-up accessible Critical...

AI summary The Responsible Entity must maintain strict cyber security policies without exceptions for physical security plans. An exception applies to dial-up accessible Critical Cyber Assets using non-routable protocols, exempting them from CIP-006-3 compliance for that specific access point.

1.4. Additional Compliance Information Each Interchange Authority shall demonstrate compliance to the Compliance Monitor within the first year that this standard becomes effective or the first year the entity commences operation by self-ce...

AI summary The section outlines compliance requirements for Interchange Authorities, including self-certification, audit schedules, spot checks, complaint procedures, and data availability for inspection. Compliance verification occurs via audits, spot checks, and complaint-driven reviews, with specific data retention and disclosure obligations.

ing f t se se p n o u ion fo he d ie d im t t tu t op er a s r s e fo f a io d ha 1 0 % l l t p er r m or e n o A T C Pa hs F low 2 t te o r g a s o r C A T Pa h F low t te or g a ( h ic he is ), bu te t n t w ve r g re a r o C ha 1 5 % f...

AI summary The text discusses violation severity levels, outlining different tiers with percentages and terms related to compliance and penalties. It references terms such as 'low 2', 'low 3', 'ATC Paths', and 'Flow', suggesting a classification system for violations.

1.4. Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Processes: The following processes may be used: - - Compliance Audits - - Self-Certifications - - Spot Checking - - Compliance Violation Investigations - - Self-Reporting

AI summary The section outlines various compliance monitoring and enforcement processes, including compliance audits, self-certifications, spot checking, compliance violation investigations, and self-reporting.

Matrix of Violation Risk Factors for Approval Standard Number Requirement Text of Requirement Violation CIP-002-2 R4. Annual Approval — The senior manager or delegate(s) shall approve annually the risk-based assessment methodology, the lis...

AI summary The document presents a matrix outlining the risk factors for approval under the CIP-002-2 and CIP-002-3 standards, focusing on annual approval requirements for risk-based assessment methodologies and the identification of critical assets. The violation risk is rated as 'LOWER' for CIP-002-2, while CIP-002-3 references a specific page in a document.

Matrix of Violation Severity Levels for Approval Standard Number Requirement Number Text of Requirement Lower VSL Moderate VSL High VSL Severe VSL

AI summary The text presents a matrix outlining violation severity levels for approval, detailing standards and requirements related to compliance and performance metrics. It includes categories such as Lower, Moderate, High, and Severe VSL, though specific requirements and violations are not fully elaborated in the provided excerpt.

2. Development and Application of NERC Reliabifitv Standards and NPCC Regional RefiabiliJv CriJeria - In accordance with NSP!'s designation as a Registered Entity, NSPI agrees to comply with NERC Reliability Standards and NPCC Regional Rel...

AI summary NSPI agrees to comply with NERC and NPCC reliability standards, which will become mandatory in Nova Scotia upon NSUARB approval. NERC and NPCC will file consolidated proposals by Q2 2010, with NSPI recommending approval or alternative actions to the NSUARB. The process involves stakeholder consultation and timeline coordination.

Compliance Acconntability 10 Nova Scotia NSPI, as a Registered Entity, will be subject to NERC's Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Program ("CMEP") as implemented by NPCC. NPCC in its determination of a NSPI violation may identify the...

AI summary NSPI is subject to NERC's Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Program via NPCC, which assesses violations, determines reliability risks, and proposes non-monetary penalties to the NSUARB. The NSUARB will oversee enforcement proceedings to determine violations and appropriate remedial actions.

Investigations NERC and NPCC, in exercising their respective authority regarding compliance, may investigate alleged violations in Nova Scotia ofReliability Standards or NPCC Regional Reliability Criteria, as appropriate. In order to promo...

AI summary NERC and NPCC collaborate to investigate violations of reliability standards in Nova Scotia, sharing information while maintaining independent outcomes. Their joint efforts aim to enforce NERC Reliability Standards and NPCC Regional Reliability Criteria effectively.

2010 Audit NPCC performed a compliance audit on NSPI in two stages in 2010. The first stage was completed from August 9 to the 13, 2010 and was an audit of 43 Reliability Standards and 349 of their requirements/sub-requirements. Based on t...

AI summary In 2010, NPCC conducted a two-stage compliance audit of NSPI. The first stage found NSPI compliant with 42 of 43 reliability standards, with 1 standard and 47 requirements not applicable. The second stage identified compliance with all eight CIP standards except for a possible violation in CIP-004 R4 related to access revocation after an employee's death. The final audit report remained unpublished.

2. CI 38182 - 2010 Backup Control Centre NERC requires all Transmission Operators and Balancing Authorities have a back-up control strategy in place by Ql of2012. NSPI's requirement for a Back-Up Control Centre (BCC) originated from a busi...

AI summary NERC requires backup control strategies by Q1 2012. NSPI's existing BCC at Scotia Square relies on RAL, a single point of failure, violating NERC standards. Two 2011 items aim to address NERC and NPCC compliance.

Compliance The parties understand that, once the Board approves a reliability :standard I compliance with the reliability ~tandard will be mandatory in Nova Scotia. The Board may enforce approved reliability standards directly. The palties...

AI summary The Board enforces reliability standards in Nova Scotia, with NERC providing compliance information. Parties collaborate on reliability risk assessments, and NERC will report on audits, evaluations, and disturbances. The Board retains authority over penalty determination.

NON-CONFIDENTIAL 1 Response IR-1: (cont'd) 10 the compliance programs. 2 3 With respect to operating costs, changes to the North American reliability framework, including 4 the increase in compliance requirements each year, have placed upw...

AI summary NSPI attributes rising operating costs to increased compliance requirements under the North American reliability framework, particularly higher membership fees and staffing needs for NERC and NPCC. These costs stem from expanded reliability programs and internal resource allocation for compliance management.

Alberta: The Alberta Transmission Regulation (Reg 288/2009 as amended) outlines the fratnework for Reliability Standards in Alberta. The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) Reliability Standards apply in Alberta to the e...

AI summary Alberta's Transmission Regulation incorporates NERC Reliability Standards, with AESO consulting stakeholders and recommending standards to the Alberta Commission. The 2007 Ministerial Order recognized NERC as ERO, and the 2009 Act formalized enforcement by the Alberta Commission and MSA, including penalties for violations.

s on which the latter two requirements are to be met, based on stakeholder approaches to the BCUC. The NERC Functional Model and NERC Glossary of Terms Used in Reliability Standards were also adopted. (MRS) Assessment Report 2. This report...

AI summary The BCUC adopts new and revised reliability standards, with WECC designated as administrator for compliance monitoring. NERC's functional model was rescinded, and legislative amendments aim to strengthen BCUC's enforcement powers. BCTC noted the Act does not envision NERC's ongoing role in enforcement.

Manitoba: Manitoba Hydro is currently required to comply with NERC Reliability Standards through its membership in the Midwest Reliability Organization (MRO) and its membership in NERC, subject to exceptions based on provincial law. Pursua...

AI summary Manitoba Hydro must comply with NERC/MRO Reliability Standards under provincial law, with the PUB authorized to enforce violations. Legislative amendments in 2009 established mandatory reliability standards, with regulations expected in 2011 to define compliance processes and fee allocations.

es as mandatory and enforceable in Ontario. Initiation of a review of a Reliability Standard by the Board does not stay its operation pending completion ofthe review unless the Board orders otherwise. Under the new legislation, the IESO ha...

AI summary Ontario's new legislation grants the Ontario Energy Board authority to review and amend NERC Reliability Standards, with the IESO empowered to appeal NERC decisions. The IESO can impose financial penalties for non-compliance, while the Board handles administrative penalties under the Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998. The IESO is NERC's sole accountable entity in Ontario for compliance matters.

Response to IR-3: The process for approving a NERC Reliability Standard in Canada is the same as the process in the United States. In summary, once a Reliability Standard or revision to a Reliability Standard is approved by the ballot pool...

AI summary NERC explains that its reliability standard approval process in Canada mirrors the U.S. process, involving Board approval followed by submission to Canadian regulators. NERC emphasizes its mission to ensure mandatory adoption of standards and effective oversight in Canada. Compliance Notices are clarified as guidance, not new requirements, with questions about their applicability in Nova Scotia and potential conflicts with UARB-approved standards.

Response to IR-5: 23 24 (a) A Compliance Application Notice (CAN) provides compliance ~UJ,","u.J,J."'''' applies broadly. The target audience for each CAN is identified in the Primary Interest Group section ofthe CAN. 27 28 29 26 (b) No. N...

AI summary NERC clarifies that its Compliance Application Notices (CANs) do not require regulatory approval, do not establish new reliability standards, and compliance is determined by NERC's existing standards. NERC Alerts require acknowledgment but not UARB approval, with UARB-approved standards taking precedence in conflicts. Compliance failures under NERC Alerts are subject to enforcement by NSUARB.

Compliance Accountability in Nova Scotia NSPI, as a Registered Entity, will be subject to NERC's Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Program ("CMEP") as implemented by NPCC. NPCC in its determination of a NSPI violation may identify the...

AI summary NSPI, as a Registered Entity, is subject to NERC's Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Program (CMEP) via NPCC. NPCC may identify NERC Reliability Standard violations and propose mitigation plans or non-monetary penalties to the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (UARB). The UARB retains authority to determine violations and enforce remedial measures, per a 2006 Memorandum of Understanding with NERC. NERC and NPCC's roles in enforcement are outlined in a 2010 MoU.

es ofthe Alberta Commission and the Market Surveillance Administrator (MSA). Specified penalties for violations ofReliability Standards were adopted by the Alberta Commission, effective November 2010. The AESO established the AESO Reliabil...

AI summary Alberta's regulatory framework for reliability standards involves the Alberta Commission, AESO, and MSA. The AESO established the ARC for stakeholder input on reliability matters, reviews NERC standards with amendments for Alberta's system, and implements a compliance monitoring program. Alberta uses a revised risk-based work plan for reliability standards, diverging from the NERC Functional Model.

BCUC must make it available to the public in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable period oftime and consider any comments it receives in response. After this period of public notice the BCUC must adopt the Reliability Standard ifit con...

AI summary BCUC must adopt Reliability Standards after public consultation, considering public interest and consistency with other jurisdictions. BC Hydro reviews standards post-NERC approval, with compliance deadlines adjusted based on stakeholder input. NERC and WECC standards were approved in 2009, with mitigation plans due by 2009.

New Brunswick: The Electricity Act in New Brunswick established the New Brunswick System Operator (NBSO) on October 1,2004. NBSO is responsible to direct the operation ofthe transmission grid, to maintain the adequacy and reliability ofthe...

AI summary The New Brunswick Electricity Act established the New Brunswick System Operator (NBSO) in 2004 to manage the transmission grid and ensure system reliability. NERC Reliability Standards are enforced via market rules, with compliance tied to licensing. The Energy and Utilities Board (EUB) succeeded the Public Utilities Board as the sector's regulator.

Nova Scotia: The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) exercises general supervision over all electric utilities operating as public utilities within the Province ofNova Scotia, pursuant to the Nova Scotia Public Utilities Act. In...

AI summary The NSUARB oversees Nova Scotia's electric utilities under the Public Utilities Act, collaborating with NERC via an MOU to enforce Reliability Standards. NSPI, as an NPCC member, adheres to NERC standards, with NSUARB ensuring compliance and determining penalties. A final approval process for standards is expected by mid-2011.

ew, renland, and revoke the application ofNERC Reliability Standards in Ontario. Only standards approved by the NERC Board of Trustees on or after May 14, 2008 are subject to provisions ofthe new law. Pursuant to the Act the IESO must post...

AI summary Ontario's new law governs the application of NERC Reliability Standards, requiring the IESO to post notices of new/amended standards within seven days. The Board may review standards for consistency with the Electricity Act or market fairness, and cancel them if necessary. Standards not stayed by the Board become enforceable via IESO's market rules.

Response to Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board Date ofResponse: February 10,2011 1 Request IR-2: 2 3 Please provide the final report on the 2010 NSPI compliance audit. 4 5 6 7 NPCC Response: 8 9 ofthe Enclosed is the public version final...

AI summary The document is a response to a request for the final report on the 2010 NSPI compliance audit. The NPCC provided the public version of the report and mentioned that the confidential version would be made available to the Board with notice to NSPI, in accordance with NERC Rules and internal NPCC policies.

Compliance Audit Report Public Version Nova Scotia Power Inc. NERC ID# NCR07178 Confidential Information (including Privileged and Critical Energy Infrastructure Information) Has Been Removed Date of Audit: October 5-8, 2010

AI summary This is the public version of a compliance audit report conducted by Nova Scotia Power Inc. in October 2010. The report includes confidential information that has been removed, and it is associated with the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC).

Objectives All Registered Entities are subject to an audit for compliance with all reliability standards applicable to the functions for which the Registered Entity is registered. 2 The audit objectives are to: - Review compliance with the...

AI summary The audit objectives focus on reviewing NSP's compliance with NERC and NPCC reliability standards, validating self-reported violations, assessing compliance programs, and evaluating mitigation plans. The process ensures adherence to actively monitored reliability standards and regional requirements.

Scope The scope ofthe compliance audit included the NERC CIP Standards from the NPCC 2010 Implementation Plan. In addition, this audit included a review ofmitigation plans or remedial action directives which have been completed or pending...

AI summary The compliance audit reviewed NERC CIP Standards under the NPCC 2010 Implementation Plan, assessing NSP's adherence during 2009-2010. It evaluated completed/pending mitigation plans and NSP's registered functions, including BA, TOP, TO, and others.

Methodology The audit team reviewed the information, data, and evidence submitted by NSP and assessed compliance with requirements ofthe applicable CIP standards. Submittal ofinformation and data was sent to NPCC as requested on or before...

AI summary The audit team reviewed NSP's compliance with CIP standards, assessed submitted data, and ensured adherence to NERC and CIP requirements. Information was submitted to NPCC, and evidence was validated, cross-checked, and stored securely. Findings were based on audit team consensus and NPCC AVP input.

II BACKGROUND [10] The Board exercises general supervision over NSPI pursuant to the Public Utilities Act, R.S.N.S. 1989, c. 380, as amended (the "Acf'). Under the Act, NSPI is required to provide reasonably safe and adequate service and f...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board oversees NSPI under the Public Utilities Act. NSPI, NERC, and NPCC established MOUs to enforce reliability standards. NSPI claims existing compliance with standards and recommends rejecting VRFs/VSLs. The Board identifies four key issues: standard approval, amendment procedures, VRF/VSL approval, and compliance monitoring.

2. Amendments or Additions [25] Regarding notification and approval of amendments and/or additions to the Standards and Criteria, the May 9, 2010 MOU suggests the following approach: The signatories anticipate that there will be ongoing am...

AI summary The text outlines a process for approving amendments to NERC Reliability Standards and NPCC Regional Reliability Criteria in Nova Scotia. NERC and NPCC must notify NSUARB and NSPI of proposed changes, with NSPI providing recommendations. The Board agrees to follow the same approval process as previous filings, with NSPI's agreement except for one unspecified exception.

ndard being considered by the BCUC, all of which have been recommended for approval by BCTC (BC Hydro). However, to date there have been no remands, rejections or alterations of standards by the BCUC. The Alberta Transmission Regulation 1...

AI summary The text discusses the approval process of reliability standards in Alberta under the Alberta Transmission Regulation, noting BCUC's recommendation of BCTC (BC Hydro) standards. It outlines NERC's recognition by Alberta's Minister of Energy, AESO's role in consulting market participants, and AUC's reliance on AESO recommendations unless intervenors challenge them.

AUC) to accept or reject them. The AUC must follow the recommendation of the AESO unless an intervenor convinces the AUC that the recommendation is technically deficient or not in the public interest. The AESO is managing a project to brin...

AI summary The Alberta Utilities Commission (AUC) must accept or reject recommendations from the Alberta Electric System Operator (AESO) on NERC and WECC standards, unless intervenors demonstrate technical deficiencies or public interest concerns. The AESO is evaluating 35 adopted (with or without modifications) and 40 non-applicable standards, prioritizing alignment with NERC while adapting to Alberta's grid and market needs. Cost considerations are not a primary focus for AESO but may be raised by affected entities.

NOVA SCOTIA UTILITY AND REVIEW BOARD IN THE MATTER OF: THE PUBLIC UTILITIES ACT - and- IN THE MATTER OF: Filings by North American Electric Reliability Corporation ("NERC") and Northeast Power Coordinating Council Inc. ("NPCC") for approva...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board requests comments on Nova Scotia Power Inc.'s letter regarding violation risk factors and compliance audit findings, while seeking approval for reliability standards submitted by NERC and NPCC. The Board also requests the final report of the 2010 NSPI compliance audit.

Index to NERC Responses to Directives and Other Actions from September 16, 2010 FERC Order on Three-Year ERO Performance Assessment P No. Directive Page 171 Directs NERC to develop communication protocols between NERC, the Commission and t...

AI summary The document outlines two directives from the FERC to NERC, focusing on the development of communication protocols between NERC, the Commission, and Regional Entities, and the clarification of the interface between event analyses and compliance activities, including CVIs.

A. Three-Year ERO Performance Assessment NERC submitted the Assessment on December 17, 2009. The Assessment consisted of the following documents: - Three-Year Electric Reliability Organization Performance Assessment Report Overview ("Asses...

AI summary NERC submitted a Three-Year ERO Performance Assessment to FERC in 2009, detailing its compliance with reliability standards, stakeholder feedback, and actions to improve operations. The assessment included evaluations of regional entities and stakeholder survey results, with FERC issuing an order in 2010 affirming NERC's role in maintaining bulk power system reliability.

2. Progress in Implementing Specific NERC Actions Identified in the Assessment Related to Each Area of Discussion Attachment 2 of the Assessment included summaries of stakeholder and Regional Entity comments and recommendations that were r...

AI summary NERC and Regional Entities collaborated to revise agreements and rules following stakeholder feedback, filing revised Delegation Agreements in 2010. Progress on implementing NERC actions across areas like reliability standards, compliance, and event analysis is detailed in Appendix A. NERC filed an informational report with FERC in 2011 and notified Canadian authorities.

NERC Response to FERC's Other Action – P 57 In connection with and following the 3-Year Assessment, NERC and the Regional Entities conducted an extensive review of the NERC Rules of Procedure. Revisions to the Rules of Procedure were filed...

AI summary Following a 3-Year Assessment, NERC revised its Rules of Procedure, including sections on compliance monitoring, sanction guidelines, and organization registration. These revisions were submitted to and approved by FERC in 2010, focusing on updates to compliance processes and standard procedures.

2. Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement In its September 16, 2010 Order, P 113, FERC expressed its general support for NERC's suggestions for program enhancements the Regional Entities should make to improve their processing of alleged vi...

AI summary FERC's 2010 Order P 113 endorsed NERC's proposals to enhance compliance monitoring and enforcement, including audit practices, penalty determinations, delegation agreements, and no-action letters. The order addresses improvements to processing violations and mitigation plans by Regional Entities.

i. Uniformity In its September 16, 2010 Order, P 118, FERC stated: "[it] strongly supports NERC's efforts to address the uniformity concerns raised by commenters and encourages NERC to continue making improvements in consistency, particula...

AI summary FERC supports NERC's efforts to improve uniformity in compliance, reporting, and data gathering. It emphasizes the need for auditors to prepare thoroughly, consider the burden on entities providing information, and recommends auditor training. FERC also highlights NERC's Regional Operations Group as a means to enhance audit consistency.

ii. Focus Audits on Actual Performance In its September 16, 2010 Order, P 121, FERC stated: "The Commission agrees that the Reliability Standard Audit Worksheets should serve as no more than guidance to the auditor and the audited entity a...

AI summary FERC's 2010 Order P 121 emphasizes that Reliability Standard Audit Worksheets (RSAWs) should guide audits without prescribing rigid compliance methods. NERC is tasked with continuously improving RSAWs through input from Regional Entities and alignment with FERC guidance. Additional compliance tools like CANs and Compliance Bulletins aid entities in understanding standards.

NERC Response to FERC's Directive – P 126 NERC acknowledges the necessity of conducting its oversight of the Regional Entities with technically proficient staff that are able to assess the capability of Regional Entities to conduct audits...

AI summary NERC responds to FERC's Directive P 126 by enhancing oversight through staff expansion, restructuring audit processes, and conducting auditor training workshops. FERC emphasized clarifying observers' roles in audits, directing NERC and Regional Entities to discuss appropriate oversight during pre-audit meetings.

NERC Response to FERC's Directive – P 127 FERC observers are always allowed and welcome. Section 403.11.4 of the NERC Rules of Procedure and section 3.1.5 of the Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Program provide for FERC staff particip...

AI summary NERC outlines FERC's role as an observer in compliance audits, citing NERC Rules of Procedure and CMEP sections. FERC staff may participate as observers but not audit team members, ensuring access to compliance evidence while clarifying their role in assessing Regional Entity performance during audits.

b. Penalty Determinations In its September 16, 2010 Order, P 133, FERC stated: "We agree with NERC that there always will be some tension between the transparency of specific NERC Sanction Guidelines and flexibility to negotiate penalties...

AI summary FERC emphasizes balancing transparency and flexibility in penalty determinations under NERC Sanction Guidelines, supports self-reporting incentives, and acknowledges NERC's efforts to streamline enforcement through new NOP templates like the disposition document. NERC aims to improve clarity in penalty factors and review Sanction Guidelines for consistency.

c. Delegation Agreements In its September 16, 2010 Order, P 138, FERC stated: "The Commission commends NERC and the Regional Entities on their efforts to resolve delegation issues. We agree that NERC should develop performance metrics that...

AI summary FERC commended NERC and Regional Entities for resolving delegation issues, urging NERC to develop performance metrics for consistent compliance enforcement and a rigorous decision-making process to ensure timely resolution of matters across regions.

e. Administrative Citation Process In the September 16, 2010 Order, P 218, FERC stated: "One method that NERC and Regional Entities advocate to process enforcement matters more efficiently is to streamline procedures for handling less seri...

AI summary FERC encourages streamlining enforcement processes for minor violations through 'parking ticket' approaches and bundled settlements, while rejecting 'warning tickets' due to concerns about inadequate recognition of compliance history. The focus is on aligning penalty procedures with violation severity and ensuring auditable compliance.

NERC Response to FERC's Other Action – PP 218-219 Since Spring 2010, NERC has been working to implement a program that establishes categories of NOPs and streamlines those NOPs in which risk to the bulk power system is minimal or moderate....

AI summary NERC has streamlined NOPs since 2010, increasing efficiency by handling more violations monthly. The administrative citation process, introduced by Mr. Cauley, allows NERC to address multiple low-risk violations via a single NOP, reducing procedural steps and documentation required under the CMEP.

NERC Response to FERC's Other Action – P 152 NERC has developed and successfully balloted Reliability Standard CIP-002-4, 29 which requires the identification and documentation of the Critical Cyber Assets associated with the Critical Asse...

AI summary NERC developed CIP-002-4 to standardize identification of critical cyber assets for the Bulk Electric System (BES), aligning with FERC's Order No. 706. FERC's Order P 153 emphasized uniformity in CIP audits and auditor qualifications, supporting NERC's efforts to enhance cybersecurity oversight.

4. Compliance Registry In its September 16, 2010 Order, P 162, FERC stated: "While NERC indicates that it will consider whether to raise the thresholds set forth in the Registry Criteria, NERC also observes that the registration process is...

AI summary FERC's 2010 Order emphasizes that NERC must justify threshold changes to the Compliance Registry from a reliability perspective. NERC acknowledges the current process works well but is refining registration requirements in alignment with Bulk Electric System definitions and the Ad Hoc Generator Owner/Transmission Owner Report. Revisions to Section 500 and Appendix 5A of the Rules of Procedure were approved by FERC.

In P 177, FERC stated: "Further, any communication between an event analysis team and a corresponding CVI team generally should be one-way only: from the event analysis team to the CVI team. This one-way information sharing will avoid the...

AI summary FERC mandates one-way communication from event analysis teams to CVI teams to prevent disclosure of confidential compliance information. It also directs NERC to clarify event analysis-compliance interfaces, report on staff reorganization impacts, and address staffing adequacy for expanded duties. NERC must detail procedures for information exchange and budget adjustments if needed.

NERC Response to FERC's Directive – P 178 Draft revisions to the events analysis process currently under consideration contemplate both Regional Entities and registered entities taking a more direct role in analysis of lower significance e...

AI summary NERC outlines revised event analysis processes involving Regional and registered entities for lower significance events, shifting NERC's focus to higher significance events and quality reviews. A Phase 2 field trial (March 2011) will assess capabilities, with results informing 2012 business plans. NERC has developed a four-stage event analysis process, including compliance evaluation and enforcement, alongside a cause analysis methodology training program.

Further, in P 195, FERC stated: "A joint strategic planning initiative also would address another major Commission concern, which is adequate monitoring of the Regional Entities' expenditures. The Commission notes that in NERC's compliance...

AI summary FERC emphasizes the need for NERC to improve oversight of Regional Entities' budgets, citing past reliance on internal estimates and the requirement for ERO to review expenditures. A joint strategic planning initiative with multi-year budgets is proposed to ensure adequate funding for Regional Entities' delegated functions.

a. Issues Concerning all Regional Entities In its September 16, 2010 Order, P 217, FERC stated: "We also agree that development of reasonable metrics for assessment of the Regional Entities' performance of their compliance functions will i...

AI summary FERC's September 2010 Order P 217 mandates NERC and Regional Entities to develop a non-public compliance data hub to improve enforcement efficiency, provide performance metrics, and coordinate public disclosure of compliance information. The hub aims to streamline processes and enhance transparency in compliance monitoring.

NERC Response to FERC's Directive – P 217 NERC initiated a multi-phase project in 2008 to design and build a system for the collection, management, and exchange of compliance-related information between NERC and the Regional Compliance Enf...

AI summary NERC initiated a multi-phase project in 2008 to develop the Compliance Reporting, Analysis, and Tracking System (CRATS) for managing compliance data with Regional Compliance Enforcement Authorities. CRATS, a modular system, includes modules like Registration, Standards, and Compliance Violations, with ongoing development of Mitigation Plans and Enforcement modules. The system replaces spreadsheet-based methods and continues evolving.

ed in the issues database where they will be integrated into the respective work plans of the related standards drafting activities. As stated in the 2011-2013 Reliability Standards Development Plan: "NERC has developed specific initiative...

AI summary The text discusses NERC's initiatives in reliability standards development, emphasizing compliance monitoring, technical committees' roles, and addressing Order No. 706's requirements to enhance bulk power system reliability and cybersecurity. It highlights integration of feedback into standards drafting and alignment with Commission directives.

a. SARs i. For narrowly focused requests, post SARs without a comment period or for a single 15-day comment period without a requirement for the requester to respond to all comments individually. 5 2011‐2013 Reliability Standards Developme...

AI summary The document outlines procedural changes to NERC's Standard Authorization Request (SAR) process, including streamlined comment periods for limited SARs, mandatory technical foundation documents for new standards, and allowing draft standards with SAR submissions. These updates aim to expedite reliability standards development while ensuring technical rigor, as detailed in the NERC Standard Processes Manual.

c. Requirements i. Reinforce with the standards drafting teams the need to fully address regulatory directives during development activities such that subsequent modifications to the standards are not necessary, thereby reducing future wor...

AI summary The text emphasizes reinforcing standards drafting teams to address regulatory directives during development to avoid future modifications, reducing workload. NERC has incorporated this into training for standard drafting teams as an ongoing initiative.

e. Process Administration i. Give the NERC Standards Committee the option to appoint a single standard drafting team that is responsible for both SAR and reliability standard drafting development. As the result of amendments submitted and...

AI summary The text discusses procedural changes to NERC's standard development process, including allowing a single drafting team for SAR and reliability standards, and aligning processes with ANSI accreditation requirements. Amendments to the NERC Standard Processes Manual were approved in 2010 following a 2009 review.

andard drafting team chair, allow NERC staff coordinator to provide a straw man draft reliability standard in advance of the first standard drafting team meeting to optimize effective team discussion. NERC staff has reached an understandin...

AI summary NERC aims to enhance reliability standard development by providing pre-meeting draft standards, engaging trade groups like APPA and NRECA to involve smaller entities, and improving stakeholder communication through subcommittees and forums. Efforts are ongoing since the 3-Year Assessment Report.

6. Provide clear measures for each standard requirement. a. Work with the compliance program to ensure that measures (1) directly correspond to each requirement of each standard describing what an entity has to do to comply, (2) include ex...

AI summary The text emphasizes aligning compliance measures with reliability standards, specifying evidence requirements, and ensuring stakeholder communication through tools like RSAWs. It references NERC's Standard Processes Manual, highlighting feedback during standard development and field testing. Compliance programs must collaborate with standards staff to ensure practical implementation.

B. Organization Registration and Certification 1. Raise threshold criteria for requiring entities to be registered. a. Review existing registration criteria with NERC technical staff for possible changes. This is an ongoing effort. The reg...

AI summary The text discusses revising registration criteria for entities under NERC's Rules of Procedure, influenced by the Commission's order on BES definition. It emphasizes simplification through a bright-line test, exemption procedures, and stakeholder coordination. The project involves NERC technical staff, committees, and industry stakeholders, with a one-year completion deadline.

C. Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement - 1. Put more emphasis on training, education, and assistance regarding what it takes to comply with, and to demonstrate compliance with, reliability standards. - a. Develop a proposed process or pr...

AI summary The section emphasizes enhancing training and education for compliance with reliability standards. NERC considered a no-action letter process but opted for Compliance Application Notices, Reports, and Case Notes instead. The need for registered entities to be aware of existing compliance guidance is highlighted.

10. Basis for penalty determinations needs to be more transparent. a. Conduct a policy-level review of the Sanction Guidelines and address improvements in the penalty determination process. In 2011, NERC is working with the Regional Entiti...

AI summary The document highlights the need for greater transparency in penalty determinations by recommending a policy review of Sanction Guidelines and enabling Regional Entities to seek early NERC involvement in developing Notices of Alleged Violation and Proposed Penalty or Sanction. NERC and Regional Entities have informally implemented the latter measure.

11. Improve system for submitting compliance information. a. Complete the development and implementation of the new database entry and query system. See item C.2.g above and the response to P 217 of the Commission's September 16, 2010 Orde...

AI summary The document outlines actions to improve compliance information systems, including developing a new database, implementing common report forms, and revising delegation agreements. It addresses conflicts between data retention requirements in reliability standards and CMEP, and emphasizes secure handling of critical energy infrastructure information. NERC and Regional Entities are tasked with updating procedures and communicating revised compliance guidelines.

D. Event Analysis and Information Exchange - 1. Backlog of final event analysis reports delays dissemination of lessons learned to the industry; consider interim reports. - a. Revise the event analysis process to include interim reports fo...

AI summary The text discusses revisions to the ERO Event Analysis Process to address backlogs, including interim reports for prolonged analyses, real-time alerts, and hiring to fill open positions. It also proposes threshold criteria for event analysis and the use of root-cause analysis experts to expedite processes.

E. Reliability Assessment - 1. Assessment reports need to avoid taking policy advocacy positions and include more support from well-researched information. - a. Investigate and validate assumptions, data, and conclusions in future reliabil...

AI summary NERC is enhancing reliability assessments by avoiding policy advocacy, validating data with Regional Entities, improving metric definitions, and expanding stakeholder feedback processes. Reorganization of LTRAs and peer review refinements aim to increase transparency and technical accuracy in reliability evaluations.

G. Critical Infrastructure Protection - 1. Centralize direction for implementation of Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) reliability standards at NERC rather than allowing Regional Entities to engage in their own efforts. - a. Develo...

AI summary The text outlines proposals to centralize CIP reliability standards under NERC, enhance auditor training, and improve guidance on critical cyber asset identification using risk-based methods. NERC is expanding training programs and collaborating with technical committees to ensure uniform implementation.

ng and Education Group. One expected activity of this group is to establish meaningful educational topics that will most benefit the industry. The first meeting of the group is planned for early 2011. - 4. Requirements for training program...

AI summary The Training, Education, and Personnel Certification Group plans its first meeting in 2011 to develop industry-beneficial educational topics. NERC released a white paper in late 2009 on accreditation criteria for training programs, receiving positive feedback but noting the need for incentives to encourage participation in compliance audits. NERC will further evaluate this proposal in 2011.

Alberta: The Alberta Transmission Regulation (Reg 288/2009 as amended) outlines the framework for Reliability Standards in Alberta. The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) Reliability Standards apply in Alberta to the ex...

AI summary Alberta's Transmission Regulation (2009) integrates NERC Reliability Standards through AESO consultation and Alberta Commission oversight. The Minister of Energy recognized NERC as the ERO in 2007, and the 2009 Electricity Statutes Amendment Act formalized enforcement by the Alberta Commission and MSA, with penalties for non-compliance.

On receipt of a report the BCUC must make it available to the public in a reasonable manner and for a reasonable period of time and consider any comments it receives in response. After this period of public notice the BCUC must adopt the R...

AI summary The BCUC must adopt Reliability Standards after public consultation, unless a hearing determines it's not in the public interest. BC Hydro reviews standards post-NERC approval to avoid rescission risks. NERC and WECC standards were approved in 2009 with compliance deadlines, though some dates have been adjusted based on stakeholder input.

Manitoba: Manitoba Hydro is currently required to comply with NERC Reliability Standards through its membership in the Midwest Reliability Organization (MRO) and its membership in NERC, subject to exceptions based on provincial law. Pursua...

AI summary Manitoba Hydro complies with NERC Reliability Standards via membership in MRO, subject to provincial exceptions. The Manitoba Hydro Act (2004) and subsequent legislative amendments establish a framework for enforceable reliability standards, with PUB authorized to enforce compliance. A 2008 agreement with NERC/MRO outlines joint responsibilities, pending new provincial legislation and regulations expected in 2011.

on date unless otherwise directed by the EUB. The EUB has authority under the Electricity Act to revoke the adoption of a Reliability Standard and remand it back to the NBSO for further consideration. NERC has MOUs with New Brunswick (Prov...

AI summary New Brunswick's Energy and Utilities Board (EUB) oversees reliability standards through the Electricity Act, with the New Brunswick System Operator (NBSO) enforcing NERC compliance. NERC and NPCC monitor adherence, while EUB retains authority to revoke standards or impose penalties. NBSO publicly discloses confirmed violations and enforces market rules.

Nova Scotia: The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) exercises general supervision over all electric utilities operating as public utilities within the Province of Nova Scotia, pursuant to the Nova Scotia Public Utilities Act. In...

AI summary The Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board (NSUARB) oversees electric utilities under the Nova Scotia Public Utilities Act, ensuring compliance with reliability standards. An MOU with NERC allows NSUARB to adopt or remand reliability standards, making compliance mandatory in Nova Scotia. NSPI, part of NPCC, adheres to NERC standards, with NSUARB proposing mandatory adoption by mid-2011.

Ontario: The Electricity Act, 1998 (Ontario) established the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO). The IESO is responsible for managing Ontario's bulk electric system and operating the wholesale electricity market. A 2004 amendme...

AI summary Ontario's Electricity Act established the IESO and Ontario Power Authority. NERC Reliability Standards are enforced via IESO market rules, with compliance tied to licenses from the Ontario Energy Board. Bill 44 (2008) allows the Board to review NERC standards post-May 2008, limiting applicability to standards approved by the NERC Board of Trustees.

bility Standards that the RC files with the Régie are NERC Reliability Standards and only apply to the registered entities in the Register of registered entities subject to NERC Reliability Standards. With respect to the adoption of Reliab...

AI summary Québec's regulatory process involves adopting NERC Reliability Standards, with the Régie overseeing compliance and sanctioning non-compliance up to $500,000/day. The CME (now CER) filed 95 standards in 2009, with public hearings in 2010 and pending decisions on registry approvals and sanction guidelines.

Saskatchewan: Prior to 2004, SaskPower generally followed accepted industry practice. In 2004, following the 2003 eastern seaboard blackout, SaskPower committed itself formally to adopt NERC Reliability Standards. SaskPower joined MRO, and...

AI summary SaskPower adopted NERC reliability standards post-2003 blackout, joined MRO, and established a reliability oversight authority under the Power Corporation Act. A 2009 MOU with MRO and NERC outlines their roles as EROs, with Saskatchewan retaining enforcement authority. No penalties are currently envisioned, but future enforcement methods may be considered.

April 21, 2011 Nancy McNeil Regulatory Affairs Officer/Clerk Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board 1601 Lower Water Street, 3 rd Floor PO Box 1692, Unit "M" Halifax, NS B3J 3S3 Re: North American Electric Reliability Corporation – Reliabili...

AI summary Nova Scotia Power (NSPI) submits its final position on the review process for reliability standards and regional criteria, shifting from an initial annual process proposal to accepting a quarterly process after reconsideration. NSPI acknowledges potential administrative burdens but supports timely approvals for new standards.

1. Standards and Criteria [20] In response to Board IR-2, NERC provided its report entitled "A Summary of Canadian Provincial Adoption of Reliability Standards Framework". A review of the report indicates widespread acceptance and adoption...

AI summary The Board approved reliability standards after NERC reported widespread Canadian adoption, NPCC noted Ontario and New Brunswick's adoption of its criteria, and NSPI confirmed compliance. No objections were raised, leading to the Board's approval.

4. Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement [34] The May 9,2010 MOU provides the following: NSPI, as a Registered Entity, will be subject to NERC's Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Program ("CMEpl ) as implemented by NPCC. NPCC in its de...

AI summary The May 9, 2010 MOU outlines NSPI's compliance with NERC standards via NPCC's CME program. NPCC may propose non-monetary penalties to the NSUARB for NSPI violations, which the Board would then assess for enforcement. The Board retains authority to determine violations and mitigation but not to impose penalties directly.

1. Compliance Monitoring Process Compliance with the DCS shall be measured on a percentage basis as set forth in the measures above. Each Balancing Authority or Reserve Sharing Group shall submit one completed copy of DCS Form, "NERC Contr...

AI summary Compliance with the Disturbance Control Standard (DCS) is measured as a percentage. Balancing Authorities and Reserve Sharing Groups must submit DCS forms to their Resources Subcommittee by the 10th day of the month following each quarter. Regional Entities must report DCS compliance to NERC by the 20th day of the following month.

2. Levels of Non-Compliance Each Balancing Authority or Reserve Sharing Group not meeting the DCS during a given calendar quarter shall increase its Contingency Reserve obligation for the calendar quarter (offset by one month) following th...

AI summary Non-compliant Balancing Authorities or Reserve Sharing Groups face proportional increases in Contingency Reserve obligations, applied three months after non-compliance, with written verification required. Penalties are non-compounded and tied to DCS performance adjustments.

B. Requirements - R1. Each Balancing Authority shall calculate and record hourly Inadvertent Interchange. ( Violation Risk Factor: Lower ) - R2. Each Balancing Authority shall include all AC tie lines that connect to its Adjacent Balancing...

AI summary The document outlines requirements for Balancing Authorities to calculate and record Inadvertent Interchange, use common meters for interconnection points, agree on Net Interchange Schedules, and resolve disputes through Regional Reliability Organizations. Compliance with these rules is emphasized, with specific procedures for data correction and dispute resolution.

1.3. Data Retention Each Reliability Coordinator, Transmission Operator, Generator Operator, Distribution Provider, and Load Serving Entity shall have current, in-force documents available as evidence of compliance as specified in each of...

AI summary The section outlines data retention requirements for entities in the electricity sector, mandating document retention for compliance evidence. Non-compliant entities must retain records until compliance is achieved or for two years plus the current year. Investigation-related evidence is kept for one year post-closure, with the Compliance Monitor retaining audit reports and compliance records.

C. Measures - M1. The Responsible Entity shall make available documentation of its cyber security policy as specified in Requirement R1. Additionally, the Responsible Entity shall demonstrate that the cyber security policy is available as...

AI summary The Responsible Entity must document and demonstrate compliance with various cybersecurity and operational requirements, including policies, leadership assignments, exceptions, information protection programs, access control, and change management as specified in multiple requirements.

Version History Version Date Action Change Tracking 2 Modifications to clarify the requirements and to bring the compliance elements into conformance with the latest guidelines for developing compliance elements of standards. Removal of re...

AI summary This section provides a version history of a document, detailing modifications and updates made to compliance elements, including changes to responsible entities, effective dates, and personnel identification requirements. Version 3 was approved by the NERC Board of Trustees on December 16, 2009.

- R3.1. The Responsible Entity shall ensure that each assessment conducted include, at least, identity verification (e.g., Social Security Number verification in the U.S.) and sevenyear criminal check. The Responsible Entity may conduct mo...

AI summary The Responsible Entity must implement personnel risk assessments with identity verification and criminal checks, update assessments every seven years, maintain access lists for Critical Cyber Assets, and revoke access promptly for terminated or no-longer-needed personnel, adhering to CIP-004-3 standards.

1.4. Data Retention - 1.4.1 The Responsible Entity shall keep personnel risk assessment documents in accordance with federal, state, provincial, and local laws. - 1.4.2 The Responsible Entity shall keep all other documentation required by...

AI summary The Responsible Entity must retain personnel risk assessment documents per applicable laws and CIP-004-3 requirements, retaining records from the prior calendar year unless extended by the Compliance Enforcement Authority. Audit records must be jointly maintained with the Compliance Enforcement Authority.

1.4. Data Retention - 1.4.1 The Responsible Entity shall keep logs for a minimum of ninety calendar days, unless: a) longer retention is required pursuant to Standard CIP-008-3, Requirement R2; b) directed by its Compliance Enforcement Aut...

AI summary The Responsible Entity must retain logs for 90 days, with exceptions under CIP-008-3 R2 or compliance investigations. Documents under CIP-005-3 from the prior year must be kept, and audit records must be retained by the Compliance Enforcement Authority and Registered Entity.

Version History Version Date Action Change Tracking 1 01/16/06 D.2.3.1 — Change "Critical Assets," to "Critical Cyber Assets" as intended. 03/24/06 2 Modifications to clarify the requirements and to bring the compliance elements into confo...

AI summary This document outlines the version history of a regulatory standard, detailing changes and updates made over time, including modifications to terminology, compliance elements, and approval by regulatory bodies such as NERC and FERC.

1.4. Data Retention - 1.4.1 The Responsible Entity shall keep documents other than those specified in Requirements R7 and R8.2 from the previous full calendar year unless directed by its Compliance Enforcement Authority to retain specific...

AI summary The Responsible Entity must retain documents from the previous calendar year unless directed otherwise by the Compliance Enforcement Authority. Audit records must be retained by both the Compliance Enforcement Authority and the Registered Entity.

1.5. Additional Compliance Information - 1.5.1 The Responsible Entity may not make exceptions in its cyber security policy to the creation, documentation, or maintenance of a physical security plan. - 1.5.2 For dial-up accessible Critical...

AI summary The Responsible Entity must maintain physical security plans without exceptions in cybersecurity policies. Exceptions apply for dial-up devices using non-routable protocols, exempting them from CIP-006-3 compliance for single access points.

2. Violation Severity Levels (Under development by the CIP VSL Drafting Team)

AI summary The CIP VSL Drafting Team is in the process of developing Violation Severity Levels (VSL) under the Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) standards, which are crucial for regulatory compliance in the energy sector.

Interpretation: Dial-up assets are Critical Cyber Assets, assuming they meet the criteria in CIP-002-1, and they must reside within an Electronic Security Perimeter. However, physical security control over a critical cyber asset is not req...

AI summary Dial-up assets are classified as Critical Cyber Assets under CIP-002-1, requiring placement within an Electronic Security Perimeter. However, non-routable protocol dial-up devices (e.g., RTUs) are exempt from Physical Security Perimeter requirements per CIP-006-1. The standard drafting team clarified that such assets do not need full 'six-wall' enclosures if they use non-routable protocols.

1.4. Data Retention 1.4.1 The Responsible Entity shall keep documentation other than that required for reportable Cyber Security Incidents as specified in Standard CIP-008-3 for the previous full calendar year unless directed by its Compli...

AI summary The Responsible Entity must retain documentation (excluding cyber security incident records) as per CIP-008-3 for the prior calendar year, with potential extensions by the Compliance Enforcement Authority. Audit records must be maintained by the Compliance Enforcement Authority and Registered Entity.

D. Compliance - 1. Compliance Monitoring Process - 1.1. Compliance Enforcement Authority Regional Entity - 1.2. Compliance Monitoring Period and Reset Timeframe - 1.3. Not Applicable. Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Process Complianc...

AI summary The document outlines compliance monitoring processes, including enforcement authority, audit mechanisms, self-certifications, spot checks, investigations, self-reporting, and complaint handling. It emphasizes structured oversight and accountability frameworks within regulatory proceedings.

1.3. Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Processes: Compliance Audits Self-Certifications Spot Checking Compliance Violation Investigations Self-Reporting Complaints

AI summary Section 1.3 outlines compliance monitoring and enforcement processes including audits, self-certifications, spot checks, violation investigations, self-reporting, and complaint handling mechanisms within the regulatory framework.

1.3. Data Retention The Reliability Coordinator, Balancing Authority, and Transmission Operator shall retain data or evidence to show compliance as identified unless directed by its Compliance Enforcement Authority to retain specific evide...

AI summary The document outlines data retention requirements for Reliability Coordinators, Balancing Authorities, and Transmission Operators to demonstrate compliance with reliability standards. Entities must retain operating plans, backup functionality evidence, and audit records for specified periods, as defined by measurements M1 through M8.

1.4. Additional Compliance Information Each Interchange Authority shall demonstrate compliance to the Compliance Monitor within the first year that this standard becomes effective or the first year the entity commences operation by self-ce...

AI summary Interchange Authorities must self-certify compliance initially, followed by periodic audits, spot checks, and complaint-driven verification. Compliance data and logs must be available for inspection, with specific requirements for audit periods and complaint-related data.

1.4. Additional Compliance Information The Balancing Authority and Transmission Service Provider shall demonstrate compliance to the Compliance Monitor within the first year that this standard becomes effective or the first year the entity...

AI summary The Balancing Authority and Transmission Service Provider must self-certify compliance initially, followed by audits and spot checks. Complaints must be addressed within 60 days, and relevant data must be available for inspection.

C. Measures - M1. The Reliability Coordinator shall have and provide upon request evidence that could include, but is not limited to, Energy Management System description documents, computer printouts, a prepared report specifically detail...

AI summary The Reliability Coordinator must provide evidence for compliance with requirements including Energy Management System (EMS) and SCADA data, historical records, and handling IROL violations. Measures outline specific documentation and communication protocols to ensure adherence to reliability standards and interconnection rules.

C. Measures - M1. The Reliability Coordinator shall have and provide upon request evidence that could include, but is not limited to, Energy Management System description documents, computer printouts, a prepared report specifically detail...

AI summary The Reliability Coordinator must provide evidence for compliance with requirements including EMS/SCADA system performance, handling insufficient reserves, GMD response planning, and information dissemination. Measures emphasize documentation of operations, communication logs, and adherence to reliability standards.

2. Violation Severity Levels Requirement Lower Moderate High Severe R1 Data specification is complete with the following exception: Missing the mutually agreeable format. (R1.2) Data specification is complete with the following exception –...

AI summary This section outlines violation severity levels for data specification requirements, categorizing them into lower, moderate, high, and severe levels based on the completeness and distribution of data specifications and the percentage of data provided.

1.3. Data Retention The Transmission Operator and Transmission Service Provider shall keep data or evidence to show compliance as identified below unless directed by its Compliance Enforcement Authority to retain specific evidence for a lo...

AI summary The Transmission Operator and Transmission Service Provider must retain specific data to demonstrate compliance with regulations (R1-R8). Noncompliance requires retaining related information until resolved. The Compliance Enforcement Authority retains audit records. Data retention periods vary by regulation and audit timelines.

D. Compliance

AI summary The Compliance section outlines regulatory requirements and standards for ensuring adherence to reliability, security, and operational protocols within the Nova Scotia electricity sector, referencing key entities and compliance frameworks.

1.4. Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Processes: The following processes may be used: - - Compliance Audits - - Self-Certifications - - Spot Checking - - Compliance Violation Investigations - - Self-Reporting - - Complaints - 1.5. Add...

AI summary Section 1.4 outlines compliance monitoring and enforcement processes including audits, self-certifications, spot checks, violation investigations, self-reporting, and complaints. No additional compliance information is provided in section 1.5.

C. Measures - M1. The Load-Serving Entity, Transmission Planner and Resource Planner forecasts clearly document how the demand and energy effects of DSM programs (such as conservation, timeof-use rates, interruptible demands, and Direct Co...

AI summary The measures outline requirements for Load-Serving Entities, Transmission Planners, and Resource Planners to document how Demand-Side Management (DSM) programs are addressed in forecasting and reporting. Compliance with Reliability Standard MOD-016-0_R1 and submission of evidence to NERC within 30 days are emphasized.

1.3. Data Retention - The Transmission Operator and Transmission Service Provider shall keep data or evidence to show compliance as identified below unless directed by its Compliance Enforcement Authority to retain specific evidence for a...

AI summary The Transmission Operator and Transmission Service Provider must retain specific data and evidence to demonstrate compliance with regulatory requirements, including models, ATCID versions, TTC study reports, and historical records. Non-compliance information must be retained until resolved, and the Compliance Enforcement Authority retains audit records.

D. Compliance

AI summary The Compliance section outlines regulatory requirements and standards for ensuring adherence to reliability, security, and operational protocols within the Nova Scotia electricity sector, referencing key entities and compliance frameworks.

1.3. Data Retention The Transmission Operator and Transmission Service Provider shall keep data or evidence to show compliance as identified below unless directed by its Compliance Enforcement Authority to retain specific evidence for a lo...

AI summary The Transmission Operator and Service Provider must retain specific compliance data for defined periods, including models, audit records, and evidence related to requirements R1-R11. Non-compliance data must be retained until resolution. The Compliance Enforcement Authority retains audit records.

Standard MOD-030-02 — Flowgate Methodology The following processes may be used: - - Compliance Audits - - Self-Certifications - - Spot Checking - - Compliance Violation Investigations - - Self-Reporting - - Complaints

AI summary The document outlines compliance processes under the Flowgate Methodology, including audits, self-certifications, spot checks, violation investigations, self-reporting, and complaints. These mechanisms ensure adherence to regulatory standards in transmission planning and grid management.

1 R No ne he i b le ity fa i le d t i de T t re sp on s en o p ro v i de ha it da d its e t t te ev nc up co mp an y i f ic l ia b i l ity lat d t k l ist to sp ec re -re e as i de i fy d i f ie d t ks h nt ne or m o as ea c w len da ( 1....

AI summary The text discusses the responsibilities of entities in providing information and compliance, including failure to provide necessary details and the implications of non-compliance. It references regulatory frameworks and procedures for addressing such failures.

D. Compliance

AI summary The Compliance section outlines regulatory requirements and standards for ensuring adherence to reliability, security, and operational protocols within the Nova Scotia electricity sector, referencing key entities and compliance frameworks.

1.1. Compliance Monitoring Responsibility Self-Certification: Entities shall annually self-certify compliance to the measures as required by its Regional Reliability Organization. Exception Reporting: Each Region shall report compliance an...

AI summary Entities must annually self-certify compliance with reliability measures to their Regional Reliability Organization (RRO), while regions report compliance and violations to NERC through its formal reporting process.

2. Violation Severity Levels: R# Lower Moderate High Severe R1 N/A N/A N/A The ISN data recipient failed to sign the NERC Confidentiality Agreement for "Electric System Reliability Data". R2 The responsible entity failed to provide any of...

AI summary The document outlines violation severity levels related to data provision failures in the Bulk Electric System (BES) under different requirements (R1, R2, R3). It specifies the consequences of not meeting data-sharing obligations with Balancing Authorities (BA) and Transmission Operators (TO).

C. Measures - M1. The Transmission Operator shall have evidence it provided a voltage or Reactive Power schedule as specified in Requirement 4 to each Generator Operator it requires to follow such a schedule. - M2. The Transmission Operato...

AI summary The Transmission Operator must maintain evidence for four measures: providing voltage/reactive power schedules to generators, notifying exempt units' owners, issuing directives for lost voltage regulators, and documenting transformer tap changes. These requirements ensure compliance with operational standards and generator coordination.

nned change in the electric system or Cyber Assets by the Responsible Entity' refers to any changes of the electric system or Cyber Assets which were planned and implemented by the Responsible Entity. For example, if a particular transmiss...

AI summary The text defines 'planned changes' to Critical Cyber Assets under NERC CIP standards, emphasizing compliance upon commissioning after automation upgrades. It clarifies that Cyber Assets at non-Critical Assets remain non-critical unless modified by external actions affecting power flows, which may reclassify the substation as Critical under CIP-002 R1.

Disaster Recovery and Restoration Activities A special case of restoration as part of a disaster recovery situation (such as storm restoration) shall follow the emergency provisions of the Responsible Entity's policy required by CIP-003 R1...

AI summary During disaster recovery, restoration must follow emergency provisions of the Responsible Entity's CIP-003 R1.1 policy to prioritize power system restoration and customer load service. Cybersecurity measures support reliability, but full CIP compliance implementation is deferred post-restoration, requiring audits or self-reports to demonstrate compliance.

A Merger of Two or More Registered Entities where Two or More of the Predecessor Registered Entities has Identified at Least One Critical Cyber Asset This scenario is the most complicated of the three, since it applies to a merged Register...

AI summary Merging entities with differing critical cyber asset identification methods and CIP compliance programs requires harmonization within one year of the merger. Disparities may arise from tools like antivirus choices or risk methodologies, necessitating governance under a common senior manager. Compliance with NERC CIP-002 is emphasized.

Matrix of Violation Risk Factors for Information S d d Nu b ta n a r m e r Re ire t q m e n u Nu b m e r Te f Re ire t o t q m e n x u V io la io R is k t n Fa to c r B A L- 0 0 1- 0. 1a R 3. O Se Ea h Ba la in A ho i i d in la Re la io ic...

AI summary The document presents a matrix outlining violation risk factors for information, with columns labeled as 'Sd...Number', 'Re...Number', 'Te...Factor', and 'Violation Risk Factor'. The content includes references to regulatory matters and potential issues related to compliance and information disclosure.