Download:
pdf |
pdfExhibit A
Proposed Reliability Standards and Definitions
Reliability Standard IRO-001-4
Standard IRO-001-4 Reliability Coordination - Responsibilities
A. Introduction
1.
Title:
Reliability Coordination – Responsibilities
2.
Number:
IRO-001-4
3.
Purpose: To establish the responsibility of Reliability Coordinators to act or direct
other entities to act.
4.
Applicability
4.1. Reliability Coordinator
4.2. Transmission Operator
4.3. Balancing Authority
4.4. Generator Operator
4.5. Distribution Provider
5.
Effective Date:
See Implementation Plan.
6.
Background:
See the Project 2014-03 project page.
B. Requirements and Measures
R1.
Each Reliability Coordinator shall act to address the reliability of its Reliability
Coordinator Area via direct actions or by issuing Operating Instructions. [Violation
Risk Factor: High][Time Horizon: Same-Day Operations, Real-time Operations]
M1. Each Reliability Coordinator shall have and provide evidence which may include but is
not limited to dated operator logs, dated records, dated and time-stamped voice
recordings or dated transcripts of voice recordings, electronic communications, or
equivalent documentation, that will be used to determine that it acted to address the
reliability of its Reliability Coordinator Area via direct actions or by issuing Operating
Instructions.
R2.
Each Transmission Operator, Balancing Authority, Generator Operator, and
Distribution Provider shall comply with its Reliability Coordinator’s Operating
Instructions unless compliance with the Operating Instructions cannot be physically
implemented or unless such actions would violate safety, equipment, regulatory, or
statutory requirements. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Same-Day
Operations, Real-time Operations]
M2. Each Transmission Operator, Balancing Authority, Generator Operator, and
Distribution Provider shall have and provide evidence which may include but is not
limited to dated operator logs, dated records, dated and time-stamped voice
recordings or dated transcripts of voice recordings, electronic communications, or
Page 1 of 7
Standard IRO-001-4 Reliability Coordination - Responsibilities
equivalent documentation, that will be used to determine that it complied with its
Reliability Coordinator's Operating Instructions, unless the instruction could not be
physically implemented, or such actions would have violated safety, equipment,
regulatory or statutory requirements. In such cases, the Transmission Operator,
Balancing Authority, Generator Operator, or Distribution Provider shall have and
provide copies of the safety, equipment, regulatory, or statutory requirements as
evidence for not complying with the Reliability Coordinator’s Operating Instructions.
If such a situation has not occurred, the Transmission Operator, Balancing Authority,
Generator Operator, or Distribution Provider may provide an attestation.
R3.
Each Transmission Operator, Balancing Authority, Generator Operator, and
Distribution Provider shall inform its Reliability Coordinator of its inability to perform
the Operating Instruction issued by its Reliability Coordinator in Requirement R1.
[Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Same-Day Operations, Real-time
Operations]
M3. Each Transmission Operator, Balancing Authority, Generator Operator, and
Distribution Provider shall have and provide evidence which may include but is not
limited to dated operator logs, dated records, dated and time-stamped voice
recordings or dated transcripts of voice recordings, electronic communications, or
equivalent documentation, that will be used to determine that it informed its
Reliability Coordinator of its inability to perform an Operating Instruction issued by its
Reliability Coordinator in Requirement R1.
C. Compliance
1.
Compliance Monitoring Process
1.1. Compliance Enforcement Authority
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Enforcement Authority”
(CEA) means NERC or the Regional Entity in their respective roles of monitoring
and enforcing compliance with the NERC Reliability Standards.
1.2. Compliance Monitoring and Assessment Processes:
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Monitoring and
Assessment Processes” refers to the identification of the processes that will be
used to evaluate data or information for the purpose of assessing performance
or outcomes with the associated reliability standard.
1.3. Data Retention
The following evidence retention periods identify the period of time an entity is
required to retain specific evidence to demonstrate compliance. For instances
where the evidence retention period specified below is shorter than the time
since the last audit, the Compliance Enforcement Authority may ask an entity to
Page 2 of 7
Standard IRO-001-4 Reliability Coordination - Responsibilities
provide other evidence to show that it was compliant for the full time period
since the last audit.
The Reliability Coordinator, Transmission Operator, Balancing Authority,
Generator Operator, and Distribution 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 longer period of time as
part of an investigation:
•
The Reliability Coordinator for Requirement R1, Measure M1 shall retain
voice recordings for the most recent 90-calendar days and documentation
for the most recent 12-calendar months.
•
The Transmission Operator, Balancing Authority, Generator Operator, and
Distribution Provider for Requirements R2 and R3, Measures M2 and M3
shall retain voice recordings for the most recent 90-calendar days and
documentation for the most recent 12-calendar months.
If a Reliability Coordinator, Transmission Operator, Balancing Authority,
Generator Operator, or Distribution Provider is found non-compliant, it shall
keep information related to the non-compliance until mitigation is complete and
approved or for the time specified above, whichever is longer.
The Compliance Enforcement Authority shall keep the last audit records and all
requested and submitted subsequent audit records.
1.4. Additional Compliance Information
None.
Page 3 of 7
Standard IRO-001-4 Reliability Coordination - Responsibilities
Table of Compliance Elements
R#
Time
Horizon
VRF
Violation Severity Levels
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
R1
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Reliability Coordinator
failed to act to address the
reliability of its Reliability
Coordinator Area via direct
actions or by issuing Operating
Instructions.
R2
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The responsible entity did not
comply with the Reliability
Coordinator’s Operating
Instructions, and compliance
with the Operating
Instructions could have been
physically implemented and
such actions would not have
violated safety, equipment,
regulatory, or statutory
requirements.
R3
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The responsible entity failed to
inform its Reliability
Coordinator upon recognition
of its inability to perform an
Operating Instruction issued
by its Reliability Coordinator in
Requirement R1 .
Page 4 of 7
Standard IRO-001-4 Reliability Coordination - Responsibilities
D. Regional Variances
None.
E. Interpretations
None.
F. Associated Documents
None.
Version History
Version
Date
Action
Change Tracking
0
April 1, 2005
Effective Date
New
0
August 8, 2005
Removed “Proposed” from Effective
Date
Errata
1
November 1, 2006
Adopted by Board of Trustees
Revised
1
November 19, 2006
Changes “Distribution Provider” to
“Transmission Service provider”
Errata
1
April 4, 2007
Approved by FERC – Effective Date
New
October 29, 2008
Removed “proposed” from effective
date
Errata
1.1
BOT adopted errata changes: updated
version number to “1.1”
1.1
May 13, 2009
FERC Approval
Revised
1
May 19, 2011
Replaced Levels of Noncompliance with
FERC-approved VSLs
VSL Order
2
July 25, 2011
Revisions under Project 2006-06 to
remove Requirement R7 to avoid
duplication with IRO-014-2
Revised
2
August 4, 2011
Adopted by Board of Trustees
3
July 6, 2012
Revised in accordance with SAR for
Project 2006-06, Reliability
Coordination (RC SDT). Revised the
standard and retired six requirements
(R1, R2, R4, R5, R6, and R9).
Revised
Page 5 of 7
Standard IRO-001-4 Reliability Coordination - Responsibilities
Requirement R3 becomes the new R1
and R8 becomes the new R2 and R3.
3
August 16, 2012
Adopted by Board of Trustees
Revised
4
November 13, 2014
Adopted by Board of Trustees
Revisions under
Project 2014-03
Page 6 of 7
Standard IRO-001-4 Guidelines and Technical Basis
Guidelines and Technical Basis
Rationale:
During development of this standard, text boxes were embedded within the standard to explain
the rationale for various parts of the standard. Upon BOT approval, the text from the rationale
text boxes was moved to this section.
Rationale for Applicability:
Purchasing-Selling Entity and Load-Serving Entity have been deleted from the approved IRO001-1.1 as they are not listed as entities that the Reliability Coordinator directs in Functional
Model v5.
Rationale for Change from Reliability Directive to Operating Instruction:
The change from Reliability Directive to Operating Instruction throughout the standard is in
response to NOPR paragraph 64 (…”We believe that directives from a reliability coordinator or
transmission operator should be mandatory at all times, and not just during emergencies
(unless contrary to safety, equipment, regulatory or statutory requirements). For example,
mandatory compliance with directives in non-emergency situations is important when a decision
is made to alter or maintain the state of an element on the interconnected transmission
network…”) This change is also consistent with the proposed COM-002-4.
Rationale for Requirements R2 and R3:
The Transmission Service Provider has been removed from Requirements R2 and R3 as the
Transmission Service Provider is not listed in the Functional Model as a recipient of corrective
actions issued by the Reliability Coordinator. This allows for the retirement of IRO-004-2.
Page 7 of 7
Reliability Standard IRO-002-4
Standard IRO-002-4 — Reliability Coordination — Monitoring and Analysis
A. Introduction
1.
Title:
Reliability Coordination – Monitoring and Analysis
2.
Number:
IRO-002-4
3.
Purpose:
Provide System Operators with the capabilities necessary to monitor
and analyze data needed to perform their reliability functions.
4.
Applicability
4.1. Reliability Coordinator
5.
Effective Date:
See Implementation Plan.
6.
Background:
See the Project 2014-03 project page.
B. Requirements and Measures
R1.
Each Reliability Coordinator shall have data exchange capabilities with its Balancing
Authorities and Transmission Operators, and with other entities it deems necessary,
for it to perform its Operational Planning Analyses, Real-time monitoring, and Realtime Assessments. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning,
Same-Day Operations, Real-time Operations]
M1. Each Reliability Coordinator shall have and provide upon request, evidence that could
include but is not limited to a document that lists its data exchange capabilities with
its Balancing Authorities and Transmission Operators, and with other entities it deems
necessary, for it to perform its operational Planning Analyses, Real-time monitoring,
and Real-time Assessments.
R2. Each Reliability Coordinator shall provide its System Operators with the authority to
approve planned outages and maintenance of its telecommunication, monitoring and
analysis capabilities. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning,
Same-Day Operations, Real-time Operations]
M2. Each Reliability Coordinator shall have and provide upon request evidence that could
include but is not limited to a documented procedure or equivalent evidence that will
be used to confirm that the Reliability Coordinator has provided its System Operators
with the authority to approve planned outages and maintenance of its
telecommunication, monitoring and analysis capabilities.
R3. Each Reliability Coordinator shall monitor Facilities, the status of Special Protection
Systems, and non-BES facilities identified as necessary by the Reliability Coordinator,
within its Reliability Coordinator Area and neighboring Reliability Coordinator Areas to
identify any System Operating Limit exceedances and to determine any
Page 1 of 8
Standard IRO-002-4 — Reliability Coordination — Monitoring and Analysis
Interconnection Reliability Operating Limit exceedances within its Reliability
Coordinator Area. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Real-Time Operations]
M3. Each Reliability Coordinator shall have, and provide upon request, evidence that could
include but is not limited to Energy Management System description documents,
computer printouts, SCADA data collection, or other equivalent evidence that will be
used to confirm that it has monitored Facilities, the status of Special Protection
Systems, and non-BES facilities identified as necessary by the Reliability Coordinator,
within its Reliability Coordinator Area and neighboring Reliability Coordinator Areas to
identify any System Operating Limit exceedances and to determine any
Interconnection Reliability Operating Limit exceedances within its Reliability
Coordinator Area.
R4.
Each Reliability Coordinator shall have monitoring systems that provide information
utilized by the Reliability Coordinator’s operating personnel, giving particular
emphasis to alarm management and awareness systems, automated data transfers,
and synchronized information systems, over a redundant infrastructure. [Violation
Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Real-time Operations]
M4. 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, SCADA data collection, or other equivalent evidence that will be
used to confirm that it has monitoring systems consistent with the requirement.
C. Compliance
1.
Compliance Monitoring Process
1.1. Compliance Enforcement Authority
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Enforcement Authority”
(CEA) means NERC or the Regional Entity in their respective roles of monitoring
and enforcing compliance with the NERC Reliability Standards.
1.2. Compliance Monitoring and Assessment Processes:
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Monitoring and
Assessment Processes” refers to the identification of the processes that will be
used to evaluate data or information for the purpose of assessing performance
or outcomes with the associated reliability standard.
1.3. Data Retention
The Reliability Coordinator shall keep data or evidence to show compliance as
identified below unless directed by its Compliance Enforcement Authority to
retain specific evidence for a longer period of time as part of an investigation:
The Reliability Coordinator shall retain its current, in force document and any
documents in force for the current year and previous calendar year for
Requirements R1, R2, and R3 and Measures M1, M2, and M3.
Page 2 of 8
Standard IRO-002-4 — Reliability Coordination — Monitoring and Analysis
The Reliability Coordinator shall keep data or evidence for Requirement R4 and
Measure M4 for the current calendar year and one previous calendar year.
If a Reliability Coordinator is found non-compliant, it shall keep information
related to the non-compliance until found compliant.
The Compliance Enforcement Authority shall keep the last audit records and all
requested and submitted subsequent audit records.
1.4. Additional Compliance Information
None.
Page 3 of 8
Standard IRO-002-4 — Reliability Coordination — Monitoring and Analysis
Table of Compliance Elements
R#
Time Horizon
VRF
Violation Severity Levels
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
R1
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
High
The Reliability
Coordinator did not
have data exchange
capabilities with
one applicable
entity, or 5% or less
of the applicable
entities, whichever
is greater.
The Reliability
Coordinator did not
have data exchange
capabilities with two
applicable entities, or
more than 5% or less
than or equal to 10% of
the applicable entities,
whichever is greater.
The Reliability
Coordinator did not
have data exchange
capabilities with three
applicable entities, or
more than 10% or less
than or equal to 15% of
the applicable entities,
whichever is greater.
The Reliability Coordinator did
not have data exchange
capabilities with four or more
applicable entities or greater
than 15% of the applicable
entities, whichever is greater.
R2
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Reliability Coordinator
failed to provide its System
Operator with the authority to
approve planned outages and
maintenance of its
telecommunication, monitoring
and analysis capabilities.
R3
Real-time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Reliability Coordinator did
not monitor Facilities, the
status of Special Protection
Systems, and non-BES facilities
identified as necessary by the
Reliability Coordinator, within
its Reliability Coordinator Area
and neighboring Reliability
Coordinator Areas to identify
any System Operating Limit
exceedances and to determine
any Interconnection Reliability
Page 4 of 8
Standard IRO-002-4 — Reliability Coordination — Monitoring and Analysis
R#
Time Horizon
VRF
Violation Severity Levels
Lower VSL
R4
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
High
N/A
Moderate VSL
N/A
High VSL
N/A
Severe VSL
Operating Limit exceedances
within its Reliability
Coordinator Area.
The Reliability Coordinator did
not have monitoring systems
that provide information
utilized by the Reliability
Coordinator’s operating
personnel, giving particular
emphasis to alarm
management and awareness
systems, automated data
transfers, and synchronized
information systems, over a
redundant infrastructure.
Page 5 of 8
Standard IRO-002-4 — Reliability Coordination — Monitoring and Analysis
D. Regional Variances
None.
E. Interpretations
None.
F. Associated Documents
None.
Version History
Version
Date
0
April 1, 2005
0
August 8, 2005
1
November 1, 2006
1
Action
Effective Date
Change Tracking
New
Removed “Proposed” from Effective Errata
Date
Adopted by Board of Trustees
Revised
April 4, 2007
Replaced Levels of Non-compliance
with the Feb 28, BOT approved
Violation Severity Levels (VSLs)
Corrected typographical errors in
BOT approved version of VSLs
Revised to add
missing measures
and compliance
elements
2
October 17, 2008
Adopted by NERC Board of Trustees
Deleted R2, M3 and
associated
compliance elements
as conforming
changes associated
with approval of IRO010-1. Revised as
part of IROL Project
2
March 17, 2011
Order issued by FERC approving
IRO-002-2 (approval effective
5/23/11)
FERC approval
2
February 24, 2014
Updated VSLs based on June 24,
2013 approval.
VSLs revised
3
July 25, 2011
Revised under Project 2006-06
Revised
Approved by Board of Trustees
Retired R1-R8 under
Project 2006-06.
3
August 4, 2011
Page 6 of 8
Standard IRO-002-4 — Reliability Coordination — Monitoring and Analysis
4
November 13, 2014 Approved by Board of Trustees
Revisions under
Project 2014-03
Page 7 of 8
Standard IRO-002-4 — Guidelines and Technical Basis
Guidelines and Technical Basis
Rationale:
During development of this standard, text boxes were embedded within the standard to explain
the rationale for various parts of the standard. Upon BOT approval, the text from the rationale
text boxes was moved to this section.
Changes made to the proposed definitions were made in order to respond to issues raised in
NOPR paragraphs 55, 73, and 74 dealing with analysis of SOLs in all time horizons, questions on
Protection Systems and Special Protection Systems in NOPR paragraph 78, and
recommendations on phase angles from the SW Outage Report (recommendation 27). The
intent of such changes is to ensure that Real-time Assessments contain sufficient details to
result in an appropriate level of situational awareness. Some examples include: 1) analyzing
phase angles which may result in the implementation of an Operating Plan to adjust generation
or curtail transactions so that a Transmission facility may be returned to service, or 2)
evaluating the impact of a modified Contingency resulting from the status change of a Special
Protection Scheme from enabled/in-service to disabled/out-of-service.
Rationale for Requirements:
The data exchange elements of Requirements R1 and R2 from approved IRO-002-2 have been
added back into proposed IRO-002-4 in order to ensure that there is no reliability gap. The SDT
found no proposed requirements in the current project that covered the issue. Voice
communication is covered in proposed COM-001-2 but data communications needs to remain
in IRO-002-4 as it is not covered in proposed COM-001-2. Staffing of communications and
facilities in corresponding requirements from IRO-002-2 is addressed in approved PER-004-2,
Requirement R1 and has been deleted from this draft.
Rationale for R2:
Requirement R2 from IRO-002-3 has been deleted because approved EOP-008-1, Requirement
R1, part 1.6.2 addresses redundancy and back-up concerns for outages of analysis tools. New
Requirement R4 has been added to address NOPR paragraphs 96 and 97: “…As we explain
above, the reliability coordinator’s obligation to monitor SOLs is important to reliability because
a SOL can evolve into an IROL during deteriorating system conditions, and for potential system
conditions such as this, the reliability coordinator’s monitoring of SOLs provides a necessary
backup function to the transmission operator….”
Rationale for R4:
Requirement R4 added back from approved IRO-002-2 as the SDT found no proposed
requirements that covered the issues.
Page 8 of 8
Reliability Standard IRO-008-2
Standard IRO-008-2 – Reliability Coordinator Operational Analyses and Real-time Assessments
A. Introduction
1.
Title:
Reliability Coordinator Operational Analyses and Real-time Assessments
2.
Number:
IRO-008-2
3.
Purpose: Perform analyses and assessments to prevent instability, uncontrolled
separation, or Cascading.
4.
Applicability
4.1. Reliability Coordinator.
5.
Proposed Effective Date:
See Implementation Plan.
6.
Background
See Project 2014-03 project page.
B. Requirements and Measures
R1.
Each Reliability Coordinator shall perform an Operational Planning Analysis that will
allow it to assess whether the planned operations for the next-day will exceed
System Operating Limits (SOLs) and Interconnection Operating Reliability Limits
(IROLs) within its Wide Area. [Violation Risk Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon:
Operations Planning]
M1. Each Reliability Coordinator shall have evidence of a completed Operational
Planning Analysis. Such evidence could include but is not limited to dated power
flow study results.
R2.
Each Reliability Coordinator shall have a coordinated Operating Plan(s) for next-day
operations to address potential System Operating Limit (SOL) and Interconnection
Reliability Operating Limit (IROL) exceedances identified as a result of its
Operational Planning Analysis as performed in Requirement R1 while considering
the Operating Plans for the next-day provided by its Transmission Operators and
Balancing Authorities. [Violation Risk Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon: Operations
Planning]
M2. Each Reliability Coordinator shall have evidence that it has a coordinated Operating
Plan for next-day operations to address potential System Operating Limit (SOL) and
Interconnection Reliability Operating Limit (IROL) exceedances identified as a result
of the Operational Planning Analysis performed in Requirement R1 while considering
the Operating Plans for the next-day provided by its Transmission Operators and
Balancing Authorities. Such evidence could include but is not limited to plans for
precluding operating in excess of each SOL and IROL that were identified as a result
of the Operational Planning Analysis.
Page 1 of 14
Standard IRO-008-2 – Reliability Coordinator Operational Analyses and Real-time Assessments
R3.
Each Reliability Coordinator shall notify impacted entities identified in its Operating
Plan(s) cited in Requirement R2 as to their role in such plan(s). [Violation Risk
Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]
M3. Each Reliability Coordinator shall have evidence that it notified impacted entities
identified in its Operating Plan(s) cited in Requirement R2 as to their role in such
plan(s). Such evidence could include but is not limited to dated operator logs, or email records.
R4.
Each Reliability Coordinator shall ensure that a Real-time Assessment is performed
at least once every 30 minutes. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Sameday Operations, Real-time Operations]
M4. Each Reliability Coordinator shall have, and make available upon request, evidence
to show it ensured that a Real-time Assessment is performed at least once every 30
minutes. This evidence could include but is not limited to dated computer logs
showing times the assessment was conducted, dated checklists, or other evidence.
R5.
Each Reliability Coordinator shall notify impacted Transmission Operators and
Balancing Authorities within its Reliability Coordinator Area, and other impacted
Reliability Coordinators as indicated in its Operating Plan, when the results of a Realtime Assessment indicate an actual or expected condition that results in, or could
result in, a System Operating Limit (SOL) or Interconnection Reliability Operating
Limit (IROL) exceedance within its Wide Area. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time
Horizon: Same-Day Operations, Real-time Operations]
M5. Each Reliability Coordinator shall make available upon request, evidence that it
informed impacted Transmission Operators and Balancing Authorities within its
Reliability Coordinator Area, and other impacted Reliability Coordinators as
indicated in its Operating Plan, of its actual or expected operations that result in, or
could result in, a System Operating Limit (SOL) or Interconnection Reliability
Operating Limit (IROL) exceedance within its Wide Area. Such evidence could
include but is not limited to dated operator logs, voice recordings or transcripts of
voice recordings, electronic communications, or other equivalent evidence. If such a
situation has not occurred, the Reliability Coordinator may provide an attestation.
R6.
Each Reliability Coordinator shall notify impacted Transmission Operators and
Balancing Authorities within its Reliability Coordinator Area, and other impacted
Reliability Coordinators as indicated in its Operating Plan, when the System
Operating Limit (SOL) or Interconnection Reliability Operating Limit (IROL)
exceedance identified in Requirement R5 has been prevented or mitigated.
[Violation Risk Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon: Same-Day Operations, Real-time
Operations]
M6. Each Reliability Coordinator shall make available upon request, evidence that it
informed impacted Transmission Operators and Balancing Authorities within its
Page 2 of 14
Standard IRO-008-2 – Reliability Coordinator Operational Analyses and Real-time Assessments
Reliability Coordinator Area, and other impacted Reliability Coordinators as
indicated in its Operating Plan, when the System Operating Limit (SOL) or
Interconnection Reliability Operating Limit (IROL) exceedance identified in
Requirement R5 has been prevented or mitigated. Such evidence could include but
is not limited to dated operator logs, voice recordings or transcripts of voice
recordings, electronic communications, or other equivalent evidence. If such a
situation has not occurred, the Reliability Coordinator may provide an attestation.
C. Compliance
1. Compliance Monitoring Process
1.1. Compliance Enforcement Authority
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Enforcement Authority”
(CEA) means NERC or the Regional Entity in their respective roles of monitoring
and enforcing compliance with the NERC Reliability Standards.
1.2. Compliance Monitoring and Assessment Processes
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Monitoring and
Assessment Processes” refers to the identification of the processes that will be
used to evaluate data or information for the purpose of assessing performance
or outcomes with the associated reliability standard.
1.3. Data Retention
The following evidence retention periods identify the period of time an entity is
required to retain specific evidence to demonstrate compliance. For instances
where the evidence retention period specified below is shorter than the time
since the last audit, the Compliance Enforcement Authority may ask an entity to
provide other evidence to show that it was compliant for the full time period
since the last audit.
Each Reliability Coordinator shall keep data or evidence to show compliance for
Requirements R1 through R3, R5, and R6 and Measures M1 through M3, M5,
and M6 for a rolling 90-calendar days period for analyses, the most recent 90calendar days for voice recordings, and 12 months for operating logs and e-mail
records unless directed by its Compliance Enforcement Authority to retain
specific evidence for a longer period of time as part of an investigation.
Each Reliability Coordinator shall each keep data or evidence for Requirement R4
and Measure M4 for a rolling 30-calendar day period, unless directed by its
Compliance Enforcement Authority to retain specific evidence for a longer
period of time as part of an investigation.
If a Reliability Coordinator is found non-compliant, it shall keep information
related to the non-compliance until found compliant or the time period specified
above, whichever is longer.
Page 3 of 14
Standard IRO-008-2 – Reliability Coordinator Operational Analyses and Real-time Assessments
The Compliance Enforcement Authority shall keep the last audit records and all
requested and submitted subsequent audit records.
1.4. Additional Compliance Information
None
Page 4 of 14
Standard IRO-008-2 – Reliability Coordinator Operational Analyses and Real-time Assessments
Table of Compliance Elements
R#
Time Horizons
VRF
Violation Severity Levels
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
R1
Operations
Planning
Medium
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Reliability Coordinator did not
perform an Operational Planning
Analysis allowing it to assess
whether its planned operations
for the next-day within its Wide
Area will exceed any of its System
Operating Limits (SOLs) and
Interconnection Operating
Reliability Limits (IROLs).
R2
Operations
Planning
Medium
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Reliability Coordinator did not
have a coordinated Operating
Plan(s) for next-day operations to
address potential System
Operating Limit (SOL) and
Interconnection Reliability
Operating Limit (IROL)
exceedances identified as a result
of its Operational Planning
Analysis as performed in
Requirement R1 while considering
the Operating Plans for the nextday provided by its Transmission
Operators and Balancing
Authorities.
Page 5 of 14
Standard IRO-008-2 – Reliability Coordinator Operational Analyses and Real-time Assessments
R#
Time Horizons
VRF
Violation Severity Levels
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
For the Requirement R3 and R5 VSLs, the intent of the SDT is to start with the Severe VSL first and then to work your way to the left until you
find the situation that fits. In this manner, the VSL will not be discriminatory by size. If a Reliability Coordinator has just one affected reliability
entity to inform, the intent is that that situation would be a Severe violation
R3
Operations
Planning
Medium
R4
Same-day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
High
The Reliability
Coordinator did
not notify one
impacted entity
or 5% or less of
the impacted
entities
whichever is
greater
identified in its
Operating
Plan(s) as to
their role in that
plan(s).
The Reliability
Coordinator did
not notify two
impacted entities
or more than 5%
and less than or
equal to 10% of
the impacted
entities
whichever is
greater,
identified in its
Operating Plan(s)
as to their role in
that plan(s).
The Reliability
Coordinator did
not notify three
impacted
entities or more
than 10% and
less than or
equal to 15% of
the impacted
entities
whichever is
greater,
identified in its
Operating
Plan(s) as to
their role in that
plan(s).
The Reliability Coordinator did not
notify four or more impacted
entities or more than 15% of the
impacted entities identified in its
Operating Plan(s) as to their role
in that plan(s).
For any sample
24-hour period
within the 30day retention
period, the
Reliability
For any sample
24-hour period
within the 30-day
retention period,
the Reliability
Coordinator’s
For any sample
24-hour period
within the 30day retention
period, the
Reliability
For any sample 24-hour period
within the 30-day retention
period, the Reliability
Coordinator’s Real-time
Assessment was not conducted for
three or more 30-minute periods
Page 6 of 14
Standard IRO-008-2 – Reliability Coordinator Operational Analyses and Real-time Assessments
R#
R5
Time Horizons
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
VRF
High
Violation Severity Levels
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
Coordinator’s
Real-time
Assessment was
not conducted
for one 30minute period
within that 24hour period.
Real-time
Assessment was
not conducted for
two 30-minute
periods within
that 24-hour
period.
Coordinator’s
Real-time
Assessment was
not conducted
for three 30minute periods
within that 24hour period.
within that 24-hour period.
The Reliability
Coordinator did
not notify one
impacted
Transmission
Operator or
Balancing
Authority within
its Reliability
Coordinator
Area or 5% or
less of the
impacted
Transmission
Operators and
Balancing
Authorities
within its
The Reliability
Coordinator did
not notify two
impacted
Transmission
Operators and
Balancing
Authorities within
its Reliability
Coordinator Area
or more than 5%
and less than or
equal to 10% of
the impacted
Transmission
Operators and
Balancing
Authorities within
The Reliability
Coordinator did
not notify three
impacted
Transmission
Operators and
Balancing
Authorities
within its
Reliability
Coordinator
Area or more
than 10% and
less than or
equal to 15% of
the impacted
Transmission
Operators and
The Reliability Coordinator did not
notify four or more impacted
Transmission Operators and
Balancing Authorities within its
Reliability Coordinator Area or
more than 15% of the impacted
Transmission Operators and
Balancing Authorities within its
Reliability Coordinator Area
identified in the Operating Plan(s)
as to their role in the plan(s).
OR
The Reliability Coordinator did not
notify the other impacted
Reliability Coordinators, as
indicated in its Operating Plan,
when the results of its Real-time
Page 7 of 14
Standard IRO-008-2 – Reliability Coordinator Operational Analyses and Real-time Assessments
R#
Time Horizons
VRF
Violation Severity Levels
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
Reliability
Coordinator
Area whichever
is greater, when
the results of its
Real-time
Assessment
indicate an
actual or
expected
condition that
results in, or
could result in, a
System
Operating Limit
(SOL) or
Interconnection
Reliability
Operating Limit
(IROL)
exceedance
within its Wide
Area.
its Reliability
Coordinator Area
whichever is
greater, when the
results of its Realtime Assessment
indicate an actual
or expected
condition that
results in, or
could result in, a
System Operating
Limit (SOL) or
Interconnection
Reliability
Operating Limit
(IROL)
exceedance
within its Wide
Area.
Balancing
Authorities
within its
Reliability
Coordinator
Area whichever
is greater, when
the results of its
Real-time
Assessment
indicate an
actual or
expected
condition that
results in, or
could result in, a
System
Operating Limit
(SOL) or
Interconnection
Reliability
Operating Limit
(IROL)
exceedance
within its Wide
Area.
Assessment indicate an actual or
expected condition that results in,
or could result in, a System
Operating Limit (SOL) or
Interconnection Reliability
Operating Limit (IROL) exceedance
within its Wide Area.
Page 8 of 14
Standard IRO-008-2 – Reliability Coordinator Operational Analyses and Real-time Assessments
R#
R6
Time Horizons
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
VRF
Medium
Violation Severity Levels
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
The Reliability
Coordinator did
not notify one
impacted
Transmission
Operator or
Balancing
Authority within
its Reliability
Coordinator
Area or 5% or
less of the
impacted
Transmission
Operators and
Balancing
Authorities
within its
Reliability
Coordinator
Area whichever
is greater, when
the System
Operating Limit
(SOL) or
Interconnection
Reliability
The Reliability
Coordinator did
not notify two
impacted
Transmission
Operators or
Balancing
Authorities within
its Reliability
Coordinator Area
or more than 5%
and less than or
equal to 10% of
the impacted
Transmission
Operators and
Balancing
Authorities within
its Reliability
Coordinator Area
whichever is
greater, when the
System Operating
Limit (SOL) or
Interconnection
Reliability
Operating Limit
The Reliability
Coordinator did
not notify three
impacted
Transmission
Operators or
Balancing
Authorities
within its
Reliability
Coordinator
Area or more
than 10% and
less than or
equal to 15% of
the impacted
Transmission
Operators and
Balancing
Authorities
within its
Reliability
Coordinator
Area whichever
is greater, when
the System
Operating Limit
The Reliability Coordinator did not
notify four or more impacted
Transmission Operators or
Balancing Authorities within its
Reliability Coordinator Area or
more than 15% of the impacted
Transmission Operators and
Balancing Authorities within its
Reliability Coordinator Area when
the System Operating Limit (SOL)
or Interconnection Reliability
Operating Limit (IROL) exceedance
identified in Requirement R5 was
prevented or mitigated.
OR
The Reliability Coordinator did not
notify four or more other
impacted Reliability Coordinators
as indicated in its Operating Plan
when the System Operating Limit
(SOL) or Interconnection
Reliability Operating Limit (IROL)
exceedance identified in
Requirement R5 was prevented or
mitigated.
Page 9 of 14
Standard IRO-008-2 – Reliability Coordinator Operational Analyses and Real-time Assessments
R#
Time Horizons
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Operating Limit
(IROL)
exceedance
identified in
Requirement R5
was prevented
or mitigated.
(IROL)
exceedance
identified in
Requirement R6
was prevented or
mitigated.
(SOL) or
Interconnection
Reliability
Operating Limit
(IROL)
exceedance
identified in
Requirement R5
was prevented
or mitigated.
OR
The Reliability
Coordinator did
not notify one
other impacted
Reliability
Coordinator as
indicated in its
Operating Plan
when the when
the System
Operating Limit
(SOL) or
Interconnection
Reliability
Operating Limit
(IROL)
exceedance
identified in
OR
The Reliability
Coordinator did
not notify two
other impacted
Reliability
Coordinators as
indicated in its
Operating Plan
when the System
Operating Limit
(SOL) or
Interconnection
Reliability
Operating Limit
(IROL)
exceedance
identified in
Requirement R5
was prevented or
Severe VSL
OR
The Reliability
Coordinator did
not notify three
other impacted
Reliability
Coordinators as
indicated in its
Operating Plan
when the
System
Operating Limit
(SOL) or
Interconnection
Reliability
Operating Limit
Page 10 of 14
Standard IRO-008-2 – Reliability Coordinator Operational Analyses and Real-time Assessments
R#
Time Horizons
VRF
Violation Severity Levels
Lower VSL
Requirement R5
was prevented
or mitigated.
Moderate VSL
mitigated.
High VSL
Severe VSL
(IROL)
exceedance
identified in
Requirement R5
was prevented
or mitigated.
Page 11 of 14
Standard IRO-008-2 – Guideline and Technical Basis
D. Regional Variances
None
E. Interpretations
None
F. Associated Documents
Operating Plan - An Operating Plan includes general Operating Processes and specific
Operating Procedures. It may be an overview document which provides a prescription for
an Operating Plan for the next-day, or it may be a specific plan to address a specific SOL or
IROL exceedance identified in the Operational Planning Analysis (OPA). Consistent with the
NERC definition, Operating Plans can be general in nature, or they can be specific plans to
address specific reliability issues. The use of the term Operating Plan in the revised
TOP/IRO standards allows room for both. An Operating Plan references processes and
procedures, including electronic data exchange, which are available to the System Operator
on a daily basis to allow the operator to reliably address conditions which may arise
throughout the day. It is valid for tomorrow, the day after, and the day after that. Operating
Plans should be augmented by temporary operating guides which outline
prevention/mitigation plans for specific situations which are identified day-to-day in an OPA
or a Real-time Assessment (RTA). As the definition in the Glossary of Terms states, a
restoration plan is an example of an Operating Plan. It contains all the overarching
principles that the System Operator needs to work his/her way through the restoration
process. It is not a specific document written for a specific blackout scenario but rather a
collection of tools consisting of processes, procedures, and automated software systems
that are available to the operator to use in restoring the system. An Operating Plan can in
turn be looked upon in a similar manner. It does not contain a prescription for the specific
set-up for tomorrow but contains a treatment of all the processes, procedures, and
automated software systems that are at the operator’s disposal. The existence of an
Operating Plan, however, does not preclude the need for creating specific action plans for
specific SOL or IROL exceedances identified in the OPA. When a Reliability Coordinator
performs an OPA, the analysis may reveal instances of possible SOL or IROL exceedances for
pre- or post-Contingency conditions. In these instances, Reliability Coordinators are
expected to ensure that there are plans in place to prevent or mitigate those SOLs or IROLs,
should those operating conditions be encountered the next day. The Operating Plan may
contain a description of the process by which specific prevention or mitigation plans for
day-to-day SOL or IROL exceedances identified in the OPA are handled and communicated.
This approach could alleviate any potential administrative burden associated with perceived
requirements for continual day-to-day updating of “the Operating Plan document” for
compliance purposes.
Page 12 of 14
Standard IRO-008-2 – Guideline and Technical Basis
Version History
Version
Date
Action
1
October 17,
2008
Adopted by NERC Board of Trustees
1
March 17,
2011
Order issued by FERC approving IRO008-1 (approval effective 5/23/11)
1
February 28,
2014
Updated VSLs and VRF’s based on June
24, 2013 approval.
2
November 13,
2014
Adopted by NERC Board of Trustees
Change Tracking
Revisions under
Project 2014-03
Page 13 of 14
Standard IRO-008-2 – Guideline and Technical Basis
Guidelines and Technical Basis
Rationale:
During development of this standard, text boxes were embedded within the standard to explain
the rationale for various parts of the standard. Upon BOT approval, the text from the rationale
text boxes was moved to this section.
Changes made to the proposed definitions were made in order to respond to issues raised in
NOPR paragraphs 55, 73, and 74 dealing with analysis of SOLs in all time horizons, questions on
Protection Systems and Special Protection Systems in NOPR paragraph 78, and
recommendations on phase angles from the SW Outage Report (recommendation 27). The
intent of such changes is to ensure that Real-time Assessments contain sufficient details to
result in an appropriate level of situational awareness. Some examples include: 1) analyzing
phase angles which may result in the implementation of an Operating Plan to adjust generation
or curtail transactions so that a Transmission facility may be returned to service, or 2)
evaluating the impact of a modified Contingency resulting from the status change of a Special
Protection Scheme from enabled/in-service to disabled/out-of-service.
Rationale for R1:
Revised in response to NOPR paragraph 96 on the obligation of Reliability Coordinators to
monitor SOLs. Measure M1 revised for consistency with TOP-003-3, Measure M1.
Rationale for R2 and R3:
Requirements added in response to IERP and SW Outage Report recommendations concerning
the coordination and review of plans.
Rationale for R5 and R6:
In Requirements R5 and R6 the use of the term ‘impacted’ and the tie to the Operating Plan
where notification protocols will be set out should minimize the volume of notifications.
Page 14 of 14
Reliability Standard IRO-010-2
Standard IRO-010-2 — Reliability Coordinator Data Specification and Collection
A. Introduction
1. Title:
Reliability Coordinator Data Specification and Collection
2. Number: IRO-010-2
3. Purpose: To prevent instability, uncontrolled separation, or Cascading outages that
adversely impact reliability, by ensuring the Reliability Coordinator has the data it needs
to monitor and assess the operation of its Reliability Coordinator Area.
4. Applicability
4.1. Reliability Coordinator.
4.2. Balancing Authority.
4.3. Generator Owner.
4.4. Generator Operator.
4.5. Load-Serving Entity.
4.6. Transmission Operator.
4.7. Transmission Owner.
4.8. Distribution Provider.
5. Proposed Effective Date:
See Implementation Plan.
6. Background
See Project 2014-03 project page.
B. Requirements
R1.
The Reliability Coordinator shall maintain a documented specification for the data
necessary for it to perform its Operational Planning Analyses, Real-time monitoring,
and Real-time Assessments. The data specification shall include but not be limited to:
(Violation Risk Factor: Low) (Time Horizon: Operations Planning)
1.1.
A list of data and information needed by the Reliability Coordinator to
support its Operational Planning Analyses, Real-time monitoring, and Realtime Assessments including non-BES data and external network data, as
deemed necessary by the Reliability Coordinator.
1.2.
Provisions for notification of current Protection System and Special Protection
System status or degradation that impacts System reliability.
1.3.
A periodicity for providing data.
1.4.
The deadline by which the respondent is to provide the indicated data.
Page 1 of 9
Standard IRO-010-2 — Reliability Coordinator Data Specification and Collection
M1. The Reliability Coordinator shall make available its dated, current, in force
documented specification for data.
R2.
The Reliability Coordinator shall distribute its data specification to entities that have
data required by the Reliability Coordinator’s Operational Planning Analyses, Realtime monitoring, and Real-time Assessments. (Violation Risk Factor: Low) (Time
Horizon: Operations Planning)
M2. The Reliability Coordinator shall make available evidence that it has distributed its
data specification to entities that have data required by the Reliability Coordinator’s
Operational Planning Analyses, Real-time monitoring, and Real-time Assessments. This
evidence could include but is not limited to web postings with an electronic notice of
the posting, dated operator logs, voice recordings, postal receipts showing the
recipient, date and contents, or e-mail records.
R3.
Each Reliability Coordinator, Balancing Authority, Generator Owner, Generator
Operator, Load-Serving Entity, Transmission Operator, Transmission Owner, and
Distribution Provider receiving a data specification in Requirement R2 shall satisfy the
obligations of the documented specifications using: (Violation Risk Factor: Medium)
(Time Horizon: Operations Planning, Same-Day Operations, Real-time Operations)
3.1 A mutually agreeable format
3.2 A mutually agreeable process for resolving data conflicts
3.3 A mutually agreeable security protocol
M3. The Reliability Coordinator, Balancing Authority, Generator Owner, Generator
Operator, Load-Serving Entity, Reliability Coordinator, Transmission Operator,
Transmission Owner, and Distribution Provider receiving a data specification in
Requirement R2 shall make available evidence that it satisfied the obligations of the
documented specification using the specified criteria. Such evidence could include
but is not limited to electronic or hard copies of data transmittals or attestations of
receiving entities.
C. Compliance
1.
Compliance Monitoring Process
1.1.
Compliance Enforcement Authority
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Enforcement Authority”
(CEA) means NERC or the Regional Entity in their respective roles of monitoring and
enforcing compliance with the NERC Reliability Standards.
1.2
Compliance Monitoring and Assessment Processes
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Monitoring and Assessment
Processes” refers to the identification of the processes that will be used to evaluate
Page 2 of 9
Standard IRO-010-2 — Reliability Coordinator Data Specification and Collection
data or information for the purpose of assessing performance or outcomes with the
associated reliability standard.
1.3.
Data Retention
The Reliability Coordinator, Balancing Authority, Generator Owner, Generator
Operator, Load-Serving Entity, Transmission Operator, Transmission Owner, and
Distribution Provider shall each keep data or evidence to show compliance as
identified below unless directed by its Compliance Enforcement Authority to retain
specific evidence for a longer period of time as part of an investigation:
The Reliability Coordinator shall retain its dated, current, in force documented
specification for the data necessary for it to perform its Operational Planning
Analyses, Real-time monitoring, and Real-time Assessments for Requirement R1,
Measure M1 as well as any documents in force since the last compliance audit.
The Reliability Coordinator shall keep evidence for three calendar years that it has
distributed its data specification to entities that have data required by the Reliability
Coordinator’s Operational Planning Analyses, Real-time monitoring, and Real-time
Assessments for Requirement R2, Measure M2.
Each Reliability Coordinator, Balancing Authority, Generator Owner, Generator
Operator, Interchange Authority, Load-Serving Entity, Transmission Operator,
Transmission Owner, and Distribution Provider receiving a data specification shall
retain evidence for the most recent 90-calendar days that it has satisfied the
obligations of the documented specifications in accordance with Requirement R3
and Measurement M3.
The Compliance Enforcement Authority shall keep the last audit records and all
requested and submitted subsequent audit records.
1.4.
Additional Compliance Information
None.
Page 3 of 9
Standard IRO-010-2 — Reliability Coordinator Data Specification and Collection
Table of Compliance Elements
R#
R1
Time
Horizon
VRF
Operations
Planning
Low
Violation Severity Levels
Lower
Moderate
High
Severe
The Reliability
Coordinator did not
include one of the
parts (Part 1.1 through
Part 1.4) of the
documented
specification for the
data necessary for it to
perform its
Operational Planning
Analyses, Real-time
monitoring, and Realtime Assessments.
The Reliability
Coordinator did not
include two of the
parts (Part 1.1
through Part 1.4) of
the documented
specification for the
data necessary for it
to perform its
Operational Planning
Analyses, Real-time
monitoring, and
Real-time
Assessments.
The Reliability
Coordinator did
not include three
of the parts (Part
1.1 through Part
1.4) of the
documented
specification for
the data necessary
for it to perform its
Operational
Planning Analyses,
Real-time
monitoring, and
Real-time
Assessments.
The Reliability
Coordinator did not
include any of the
parts (Part 1.1
through Part 1.4) of
the documented
specification for the
data necessary for
it to perform its
Operational
Planning Analyses,
Real-time
monitoring, and
Real-time
Assessments.
OR,
The Reliability
Coordinator did not
have a documented
specification for the
data necessary for
it to perform its
Operational
Planning Analyses,
Real-time
Page 4 of 9
Standard IRO-010-2 — Reliability Coordinator Data Specification and Collection
R#
Time
Horizon
VRF
Violation Severity Levels
Lower
Moderate
High
Severe
monitoring, and
Real-time
Assessments.
For the Requirement R2 VSLs only, the intent of the SDT is to start with the Severe VSL first and then to work your way to the
left until you find the situation that fits. In this manner, the VSL will not be discriminatory by size of entity. If a small entity has
just one affected reliability entity to inform, the intent is that that situation would be a Severe violation.
R2
Operations
Planning
Low
The Reliability
Coordinator did not
distribute its data
specification as
developed in
Requirement R1 to
one entity, or 5% or
less of the entities,
whichever is greater,
that have data
required by the
Reliability
Coordinator’s
Operational Planning
Analyses, Real-time
monitoring, and Realtime Assessments.
The Reliability
Coordinator did not
distribute its data
specification as
developed in
Requirement R1 to
two entities, or more
than 5% and less
than or equal to 10%
of the reliability
entities, whichever is
greater, that have
data required by the
Reliability
Coordinator’s
Operational Planning
Analyses, and Realtime monitoring, and
Real-time
The Reliability
Coordinator did
not distribute its
data specification
as developed in
Requirement R1 to
three entities, or
more than 10%
and less than or
equal to 15% of the
reliability entities,
whichever is
greater, that have
data required by
the Reliability
Coordinator’s
Operational
Planning Analyses,
Real-time
The Reliability
Coordinator did not
distribute its data
specification as
developed in
Requirement R1 to
four or more
entities, or more
than 15% of the
entities, whichever
is greater, that have
data required by
the Reliability
Coordinator’s
Operational
Planning Analyses,
Real-time
monitoring, and
Real-time
Page 5 of 9
Standard IRO-010-2 — Reliability Coordinator Data Specification and Collection
R#
R3
Time
Horizon
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
VRF
Violation Severity Levels
Lower
Medium
The responsible entity
receiving a data
specification in
Requirement R2
satisfied the
obligations of the
documented
specifications for data
but failed to follow
one of the criteria
shown in Parts 3.1 –
3.3.
Moderate
High
Severe
Assessments.
monitoring, and
Real-time
Assessments.
Assessments.
The responsible
entity receiving a
data specification in
Requirement R2
satisfied the
obligations of the
documented
specifications for
data but failed to
follow two of the
criteria shown in
Parts 3.1 – 3.3.
The responsible
entity receiving a
data specification
in Requirement R2
satisfied the
obligations of the
documented
specifications for
data but failed to
follow any of the
criteria shown in
Parts 3.1 – 3.3.
The responsible
entity receiving a
data specification in
Requirement R2 did
not satisfy the
obligations of the
documented
specifications for
data.
Page 6 of 9
Standard IRO-010-2 — Guidelines and Technical Basis
D. Regional Variances
None
E. Interpretations
None
F. Associated Documents
None
Version History
Version
Date
Action
Change Tracking
1
October 17, 2008
Adopted by Board of Trustees
New
1a
August 5, 2009
Added Appendix 1: Interpretation of
R1.2 and R3 as approved by Board of
Trustees
Addition
1a
March 17, 2011
Order issued by FERC approving IRO010-1a (approval effective 5/23/11)
1a
2
November 19, 2013 Updated VRFs based on June 24, 2013
approval
Revisions pursuant to Project 2014-03
April 2014
2
November 13, 2014
Adopted by NERC Board of Trustees
Revisions under Project
2014-03
Page 7 of 9
Standard IRO-010-2 — Guidelines and Technical Basis
Guidelines and Technical Basis
Rationale:
During development of this standard, text boxes were embedded within the standard to explain
the rationale for various parts of the standard. Upon BOT adoption, the text from the rationale
text boxes was moved to this section.
Rationale for Definitions:
Changes made to the proposed definitions were made in order to respond to issues raised in
NOPR paragraphs 55, 73, and 74 dealing with analysis of SOLs in all time horizons, questions on
Protection Systems and Special Protection Systems in NOPR paragraph 78, and
recommendations on phase angles from the SW Outage Report (recommendation 27). The
intent of such changes is to ensure that Real-time Assessments contain sufficient details to result
in an appropriate level of situational awareness. Some examples include: 1) analyzing phase
angles which may result in the implementation of an Operating Plan to adjust generation or
curtail transactions so that a Transmission facility may be returned to service, or 2) evaluating
the impact of a modified Contingency resulting from the status change of a Special Protection
Scheme from enabled/in-service to disabled/out-of-service.
Rationale for Applicability Changes:
Changes were made to applicability based on IRO FYRT recommendation to address the need for
UVLS and UFLS information in the data specification.
The Interchange Authority was removed because activities in the Coordinate Interchange
standards are performed by software systems and not a responsible entity. The software, not a
functional entity, performs the task of accepting and disseminating interchange data between
entities. The Balancing Authority is the responsible functional entity for these tasks.
The Planning Coordinator and Transmission Planner were removed from Draft 2 as those entities
would not be involved in a data specification concept as outlined in this standard.
Rationale:
Proposed Requirement R1, Part 1.1:
Is in response to issues raised in NOPR paragraph 67 on the need for obtaining non-BES and
external network data necessary for the Reliability Coordinator to fulfill its responsibilities.
Proposed Requirement R1, Part 1.2:
Is in response to NOPR paragraph 78 on relay data.
Proposed Requirement R3, Part 3.3:
Page 8 of 9
Standard IRO-010-2 — Guidelines and Technical Basis
Is in response to NOPR paragraph 92 where concerns were raised about data exchange through
secured networks.
Corresponding changes have been made to proposed TOP-003-3.
Page 9 of 9
Reliability Standard IRO-014-3
Standard IRO-014-3 — Coordination Among Reliability Coordinators
A. Introduction
1.
Title:
Coordination Among Reliability Coordinators
2.
Number:
IRO-014-3
3.
Purpose: To ensure that each Reliability Coordinator’s operations are coordinated
such that they will not adversely impact other Reliability Coordinator Areas and to
preserve the reliability benefits of interconnected operations.
4.
Applicability:
4.1. Reliability Coordinator
5.
Effective Date
See Implementation Plan.
6.
Background:
See Project 2014-03 project page.
B. Requirements and Measures
R1.
Each Reliability Coordinator shall have and implement Operating Procedures,
Operating Processes, or Operating Plans, for activities that require notification or
coordination of actions that may impact adjacent Reliability Coordinator Areas, to
support Interconnection reliability. These Operating Procedures, Operating
Processes, or Operating Plans shall include, but are not limited to, the following:
[Violation Risk Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning, Same-Day
Operations]
1.1.
Criteria and processes for notifications.
1.2.
Energy and capacity shortages.
1.3.
Control of voltage, including the coordination of reactive resources.
1.4.
Exchange of information including planned and unplanned outage
information to support its Operational Planning Analyses and Real-time
Assessments.
1.5.
Provisions for periodic communications to support reliable operations.
M1. Each Reliability Coordinator shall have available the latest approved documented
version of its Operating Procedures, Operating Processes, and Operating Plans that
require notifications, or the coordination of actions among impacted Reliability
Coordinators for conditions or activities that may impact adjacent Reliability
Coordinator Areas. This documentation shall include dated, current in force
documentation with the specified elements, and notes from periodic
communications.
R2.
Each Reliability Coordinator shall maintain its Operating Procedures, Operating
Processes, or Operating Plans identified in Requirement R1 as follows: [Violation Risk
Factor: Low] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning, Same-Day Operations]
Page 1 of 12
Standard IRO-014-3 — Coordination Among Reliability Coordinators
2.1.
2.2.
Review and update annually with no more than 15 months between reviews.
Obtain written agreement from all of the Reliability Coordinators required to
take the indicated action(s) for each update.
2.3.
Distribute to all Reliability Coordinators that are required to take the
indicated action(s) within 30 days of an update.
M2. Each Reliability Coordinator shall have dated evidence that its Operating Procedures,
Operating Processes, and Operating Plans that require one or more other Reliability
Coordinators to take action were maintained as specified. This evidence may include
but is not limited to dated documentation with confirmation of receipt, dated notice
of acceptance or agreement to take specified actions, or dated electronic
communications with confirmation of receipt and acceptance or agreement to take
specified actions.
R3.
Each Reliability Coordinator, upon identification of an expected or actual Emergency
in its Reliability Coordinator Area, shall notify other impacted Reliability Coordinators.
[Violation Risk Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning, Same Day
Operations, Real-time Operations]
M3. Each Reliability Coordinator shall have and provide evidence which may include but is
not limited to operator logs, voice recordings, or transcripts of voice recordings,
electronic communications, or equivalent dated documentation, that will be used to
determine that it, upon identification of an expected or actual Emergency in its
Reliability Coordinator Area, notified other impacted Reliability Coordinators.
R4.
Each impacted Reliability Coordinator shall operate as though the Emergency exists
during each instance where Reliability Coordinators disagree on the existence of an
Emergency. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning, SameDay Operations, Real-time Operations]
M4. Each Reliability Coordinator shall have and provide evidence which may include but is
not limited to operator logs, voice recordings or transcripts of voice recordings,
electronic communications, or equivalent documentation, that will be used to
determine that it operated as though an Emergency existed during each instance
where Reliability Coordinators disagreed on the existence of an Emergency.
R5.
Each Reliability Coordinator that Identifies an Emergency in its Reliability Coordinator
Area shall develop an action plan to resolve the Emergency during those instances
where impacted Reliability Coordinators disagree on the existence of an Emergency.
[Violation Risk Factor: High][Time Horizon: Operations Planning, Same-Day
Operations, Real-time Operations]
M5. Each Reliability Coordinator that identifies an Emergency in its Reliability Coordinator
Area shall have evidence that it developed an action plan during those instances
where impacted Reliability Coordinators disagreed on the existence of an Emergency.
This evidence may include but is not limited to operator logs, voice recordings or
Page 2 of 12
Standard IRO-014-3 — Coordination Among Reliability Coordinators
transcripts of voice recordings, electronic communications, or equivalent dated
documentation.
R6. Each impacted Reliability Coordinator shall implement the action plan developed by
the Reliability Coordinator that identifies the Emergency during those instances where
Reliability Coordinators disagree on the existence of an Emergency, unless such
actions would violate safety, equipment, regulatory, or statutory requirements.
[Violation Risk Factor: High][Time Horizon: Operations Planning, Same-Day
Operations, Real-time Operations]
M6. Each impacted Reliability Coordinator shall have and provide evidence which may
include but is not limited to operator logs, voice recordings or transcripts of voice
recordings, electronic communications, or equivalent dated documentation, that will
be used to determine that it implemented the action plan developed by the Reliability
Coordinator who identifies the Emergency when Reliability Coordinators disagree on
the existence of an Emergency unless such actions would have violated safety,
equipment, regulatory, or statutory requirements.
R7. Each Reliability Coordinator shall assist Reliability Coordinators, if requested and able,
provided that the requesting Reliability Coordinator has implemented its emergency
procedures, unless such actions cannot be physically implemented or would violate
safety, equipment, regulatory, or statutory requirements. [Violation Risk Factor: High]
[Time Horizon: Real-time Operations]
M7. Each Reliability Coordinator shall make available upon request, evidence that
requested assistance was provided, if able, to requesting Reliability Coordinators
unless such actions could not be physically implemented or would violate safety,
equipment, regulatory, or statutory requirements. Such evidence could include but is
not limited to dated operator logs, voice recordings or transcripts of voice recordings,
electronic communications, or other equivalent evidence in electronic or hard copy
format. If such a situation has not occurred, the Reliability Coordinator may provide
an attestation.
C. Compliance
1.
Compliance Monitoring Process
1.1. Compliance Enforcement Authority
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Enforcement Authority”
(CEA) means NERC or the Regional Entity in their respective roles of monitoring
and enforcing compliance with the NERC Reliability Standards.
1.2. Compliance Monitoring and Assessment Processes:
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Monitoring and
Assessment Processes” refers to the identification of the processes that will be
used to evaluate data or information for the purpose of assessing performance
or outcomes with the associated reliability standard.
Page 3 of 12
Standard IRO-014-3 — Coordination Among Reliability Coordinators
1.3. Data Retention
The Reliability Coordinator shall keep data or evidence to show compliance as
identified below unless directed by its Compliance Enforcement Authority to
retain specific evidence for a longer period of time as part of an investigation:
•
Each Reliability Coordinator shall retain its current, in force document and
any documents in force since the last compliance audit for Requirements R1
and R2 and Measures M1 and M2.
•
Each Reliability Coordinator shall retain its most recent 12 months of
evidence for Requirement R5 and Measure M5.
•
Each Reliability Coordinator shall retain 3-calendar years plus current
calendar year of evidence for Requirement R6 and Measure M6.
•
Each Reliability Coordinator shall retain evidence for 90-calendar days for
operator logs and voice recordings and for the period since the last
compliance audit for other evidence for Requirements R3, R4, and R7 and
Measures M3, M4, and M7.
If a Reliability Coordinator is found non-compliant, it shall keep information related to
the non-compliance until found compliant, or for the time period specified above,
whichever is longer.
The Compliance Enforcement Authority shall keep the last audit records and all
requested and submitted subsequent audit records.
1.4 Additional Compliance Information
None
Page 4 of 12
Standard IRO-014-3 — Coordination Among Reliability Coordinators
Table of Compliance Elements
R#
R1
Time Horizon
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations
VRF
Medium
Violation Severity Levels
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
The Reliability
Coordinator has
Operating Procedures,
Operating Processes, or
Operating Plans in place
for activities that
require notification or
coordination of actions
with impacted adjacent
Reliability Coordinators
to support
Interconnection
reliability but failed to
address one of the
topical areas identified
in Parts 1.1 through 1.5.
The Reliability
Coordinator has
Operating Procedures,
Operating Processes, or
Operating Plans in place
for activities that
require notification, or
coordination of actions
with impacted adjacent
Reliability Coordinators
to support
Interconnection
reliability but failed to
address two of the
topical areas identified
in Parts 1.1 through 1.5.
The Reliability
Coordinator has
Operating Procedures,
Operating Processes, or
Operating Plans in place
for activities that
require notification, or
coordination of actions
with impacted adjacent
Reliability Coordinators
to support
Interconnection
reliability but failed to
address three of the
topical areas identified
in Parts 1.1 through 1.5.
The Reliability
Coordinator failed to
have Operating
Procedures, Operating
Processes, or Operating
Plans in place for
activities that require
notification, or
coordination of actions
with impacted adjacent
Reliability Coordinators
to support
Interconnection
reliability.
OR,
The Reliability
Coordinator failed to
implement its Operating
Procedures, Operating
processes, or Operating
Plans when activities
required notification, or
coordination of actions
with impacted adjacent
Reliability Coordinators
to support
Page 5 of 12
Standard IRO-014-3 — Coordination Among Reliability Coordinators
R#
Time Horizon
VRF
Violation Severity Levels
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
Interconnection
reliability.
R2
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations
Lower
N/A
The Reliability
Coordinator has
Operating Procedures,
Operating Processes, or
Operating Plans
identified in
Requirement R1 but
failed to address one of
the parts specified in
Requirement R2.
The Reliability
Coordinator has
Operating Procedures,
Operating Processes, or
Operating Plans
identified in
Requirement R1 but
failed to address two of
the parts specified in
Requirement R2.
The Reliability
Coordinator has
Operating Procedures,
Operating Processes, or
Operating Plans
identified in
Requirement R1 but
failed to address all
three of the parts
specified in
Requirement R2.
For the Requirement R3 VSLs only, the intent of the SDT is to start with the Severe VSL first and then to work your way to the left until you find
the situation that fits. In this manner, the VSL will not be discriminatory by size. If a Reliability Coordinator has just one affected reliability
entity to inform, the intent is that that situation would be a Severe violation.
R3
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
Medium
The Reliability
Coordinator did not
notify one other
impacted Reliability
Coordinator upon
identification of an
expected or actual
Emergency in its
Reliability Coordinator
Area.
The Reliability
Coordinator did not
notify two other
impacted Reliability
Coordinators upon
identification of an
expected or actual
Emergency in its
Reliability Coordinator
Area.
The Reliability
Coordinator did not
notify three other
impacted Reliability
Coordinators upon
identification of an
expected or actual
Emergency in its
Reliability Coordinator
Area.
The Reliability
Coordinator did not
notify four or more
other impacted
Reliability Coordinators
upon identification of an
expected or actual
Emergency in its
Reliability Coordinator
Area.
Page 6 of 12
Standard IRO-014-3 — Coordination Among Reliability Coordinators
R#
Time Horizon
VRF
Violation Severity Levels
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
R4
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Reliability
Coordinator failed to
operate as though the
Emergency existed
during an instance
where Reliability
Coordinators disagreed
on the existence of an
Emergency.
R5
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Reliability
Coordinator that
identifies the Emergency
in its Reliability
Coordinator Area failed
to develop an action
plan to resolve the
Emergency during an
instance where
impacted Reliability
Coordinators disagreed
on the existence of
Emergency.
R6
Real-time
Operations,
Same-Day
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The impacted Reliability
Coordinator failed to
implement the action
plan developed by the
Reliability Coordinator
that identifies the
Page 7 of 12
Standard IRO-014-3 — Coordination Among Reliability Coordinators
R#
Time Horizon
VRF
Violation Severity Levels
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
Emergency during an
instance where
Reliability Coordinators
disagreed on the
existence of the
Emergency.
R7
Real-time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Reliability
Coordinator did not
provide assistance to
Reliability Coordinators,
if requested and able,
provided that the
requesting Reliability
Coordinator had
implemented its
emergency procedures,
unless such actions
could not physically be
implemented or would
have violated safety,
equipment, regulatory,
or statutory
requirements.
Page 8 of 12
Standard IRO-014-3 — Coordination Among Reliability Coordinators
D. Regional Variances
None.
E. Interpretations
None.
F. Associated Documents
Operating Plan - An Operating Plan includes general Operating Processes and specific
Operating Procedures. It may be an overview document which provides a prescription for
an Operating Plan for the next-day, or it may be a specific plan to address a specific SOL or
IROL exceedance identified in the Operational Planning Analysis (OPA). Consistent with the
NERC definition, Operating Plans can be general in nature, or they can be specific plans to
address specific reliability issues. The use of the term Operating Plan in the revised
TOP/IRO standards allows room for both. An Operating Plan references processes and
procedures, including electronic data exchange, which are available to the System Operator
on a daily basis to allow the operator to reliably address conditions which may arise
throughout the day. It is valid for tomorrow, the day after, and the day after that. Operating
Plans should be augmented by temporary operating guides which outline
prevention/mitigation plans for specific situations which are identified day-to-day in an OPA
or a Real-time Assessment (RTA). As the definition in the Glossary of Terms states, a
restoration plan is an example of an Operating Plan. It contains all the overarching
principles that the System Operator needs to work his/her way through the restoration
process. It is not a specific document written for a specific blackout scenario but rather a
collection of tools consisting of processes, procedures, and automated software systems
that are available to the operator to use in restoring the system. An Operating Plan can in
turn be looked upon in a similar manner. It does not contain a prescription for the specific
set-up for tomorrow but contains a treatment of all the processes, procedures, and
automated software systems that are at the operator’s disposal. The existence of an
Operating Plan, however, does not preclude the need for creating specific action plans for
specific SOL or IROL exceedances identified in the OPA. When a Reliability Coordinator
performs an OPA, the analysis may reveal instances of possible SOL or IROL exceedances for
pre- or post-Contingency conditions. In these instances, Reliability Coordinators are
expected to ensure that there are plans in place to prevent or mitigate those SOLs or IROLs,
should those operating conditions be encountered the next day. The Operating Plan may
contain a description of the process by which specific prevention or mitigation plans for
day-to-day SOL or IROL exceedances identified in the OPA are handled and communicated.
This approach could alleviate any potential administrative burden associated with perceived
requirements for continual day-to-day updating of “the Operating Plan document” for
compliance purposes.
Page 9 of 12
Standard IRO-014-3 — Coordination Among Reliability Coordinators
Version History
Version
Date
Action
Change Tracking
1
August 10, 2005
1. Changed incorrect use of certain
hyphens (-) to “en dash (–).”
2. Hyphenated “30-day” when used as
adjective.
3. Changed standard header to be
consistent with standard “Title.”
4. Initial capped heading “Definitions
of Terms Used in Standard.”
5. Added “periods” to items where
appropriate.
6. Changed “Timeframe” to “Time
Frame” in item D, 1.2.
7. Lower cased all words that are not
“defined” terms — drafting team,
self-certification.
8. Changed apostrophes to “smart”
symbols.
9. Added comma in all word strings
“Procedures, Processes, or Plans,”
etc.
10. Added hyphens to “Reliability
Coordinator-to-Reliability
Coordinator” where used as
adjective.
11. Removed comma in item 2.1.2.
12. Removed extra spaces between
words where appropriate.
January 20, 2006
1
February 7, 2006
Adopted by Board of Trustees
Revised
1
March 16, 2007
Approved by FERC
2
August 4, 2011
Revised per Project 2006-6; Revised
existing requirements for clarity, retired
R3 and R4 and incorporated
requirements from IRO-015-1 and IRO016-1 into this standard.
Revised
Adopted by Board of Trustees
Page 10 of 12
Standard IRO-014-3 — Coordination Among Reliability Coordinators
3
November 13, 2014 Adopted by Board of Trustees
Revisions under
Project 2014-03
Page 11 of 12
Standard IRO-014-3 — Guidelines and Technical Basis
Guidelines and Technical Basis
Rationale:
During development of this standard, text boxes were embedded within the standard to explain
the rationale for various parts of the standard. Upon BOT approval, the text from the rationale
text boxes was moved to this section.
Rationale for Terminology:
Terminology changed from Adverse Reliability Impact to Emergency for consistency amongst
standards. Emergency is a more inclusive term.
Rationale for Requirement R7:
Language added for consistency with proposed TOP-001-3, Requirement R7.
Page 12 of 12
Reliability Standard IRO-017-1
Standard IRO-017-1 — Outage Coordination
A. Introduction
1.
Title: Outage Coordination
2.
Number: IRO-017-1
3.
Purpose: To ensure that outages are properly coordinated in the Operations Planning
time horizon and Near-Term Transmission Planning Horizon.
4.
Applicability:
4.1. Reliability Coordinator
4.2. Transmission Operator
4.3. Balancing Authority
4.4. Planning Coordinator
4.5. Transmission Planner
5.
Effective Date:
See Implementation Plan.
6.
Background:
See Project 2014-03 project page.
B. Requirements and Measures
R1. Each Reliability Coordinator shall develop, implement, and maintain an outage
coordination process for generation and Transmission outages within its Reliability
Coordinator Area. The outage coordination process shall: [Violation Risk Factor:
Medium] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]
1.1.
Identify applicable roles and reporting responsibilities including:
1.1.1. Development and communication of outage schedules.
1.1.2. Assignment of coordination responsibilities for outage schedules
between Transmission Operator(s) and Balancing Authority(s).
1.2.
Specify outage submission timing requirements.
1.3.
Define the process to evaluate the impact of Transmission and generation
outages within its Wide Area.
1.4.
Define the process to coordinate the resolution of identified outage conflicts
with its Transmission Operators and Balancing Authorities, and other
Reliability Coordinators.
M1. Each Reliability Coordinator shall make available its dated, current, in force outage
coordination process for generation and Transmission outages within its Reliability
Coordinator Area.
Page 1 of 7
Standard IRO-017-1 — Outage Coordination
R2. Each Transmission Operator and Balancing Authority shall perform the functions
specified in its Reliability Coordinator’s outage coordination process. [Violation Risk
Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]
M2. Each Transmission Operator and Balancing Authority shall provide evidence upon
request that it performed the functions specified in its Reliability Coordinator’s outage
coordination process. Such evidence could include but is not limited to web postings
with an electronic notice of the posting, dated operator logs, voice recordings, postal
receipts showing the recipient, date and contents, or e-mail records.
R3. Each Planning Coordinator and Transmission Planner shall provide its Planning
Assessment to impacted Reliability Coordinators. [Violation Risk Factor: Medium]
[Time Horizon: Long-term Planning]
M3. Each Planning Coordinator and Transmission Planner shall provide evidence upon
request showing that it provided its Planning Assessment to impacted Reliability
Coordinators. Such evidence could include but is not limited to web postings with an
electronic notice of the posting, dated operator logs, voice recordings, postal receipts
showing the recipient, date and contents, or e-mail records.
R4. Each Planning Coordinator and Transmission Planner shall jointly develop solutions
with its respective Reliability Coordinator(s) for identified issues or conflicts with
planned outages in its Planning Assessment for the Near-Term Transmission Planning
Horizon. [Violation Risk Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon: Long-term Planning]
M4. Each Planning Coordinator, and Transmission Planner shall provide evidence upon
request showing that it jointly developed solutions with its respective Reliability
Coordinator(s) for identified issues or conflicts with planned outages in its Planning
Assessment for the Near-term Transmission Planning Horizon. Such evidence could
include but is not limited to web postings with an electronic notice of the posting,
dated operator logs, voice recordings, postal receipts showing the recipient, date and
contents, or e-mail records.
C. Compliance
1.
Compliance Monitoring Process
1.1. Compliance Monitoring Process
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Enforcement Authority”
(CEA) means NERC or the Regional Entity in their respective roles of monitoring
and enforcing compliance with the NERC Reliability Standards.
1.2. Compliance Monitoring and Assessment Processes
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Monitoring and
Assessment Processes” refers to the identification of the processes that will be
used to evaluate data or information for the purpose of assessing performance
or outcomes with the associated reliability standard.
Page 2 of 7
Standard IRO-017-1 — Outage Coordination
1.3. Data Retention
The following evidence retention periods identify the period of time an entity is
required to retain specific evidence to demonstrate compliance. For instances
where the evidence retention period specified below is shorter than the time
since the last audit, the Compliance Enforcement Authority may ask an entity to
provide other evidence to show that it was compliant for the full time period
since the last audit.
Each responsible entity shall keep data or evidence to show compliance as
identified below unless directed by its Compliance Enforcement Authority to
retain specific evidence for a longer period of time as part of an investigation:
Each Reliability Coordinator shall retain its dated, current, in force, outage
coordination process in accordance with Requirement R1 and Measurement M1
as well as any documents in force since the last compliance audit.
Each Transmission Operator and Balancing Authority shall retain evidence for
three calendar years that it followed its Reliability Coordinator outage
coordination process in accordance with Requirement R2 and Measurement M2.
Each Planning Coordinator and Transmission Planner shall retain evidence for
three calendar years that it has its Planning Assessment to impacted Reliability
Coordinators in accordance with Requirement R3 and Measurement M3.
Each Reliability Coordinator, Planning Coordinator, and Transmission Planner
shall retain evidence for three calendar years that it has coordinated solutions
within the Reliability Coordinator Area for identified issues or conflicts with
planned outages in the Planning Assessment in accordance with Requirement R4
and Measurement M4.
If a responsible entity is found non-compliant, it shall keep information related
to the non-compliance until mitigation is complete and approved or the time
period specified above, whichever is longer.
The Compliance Enforcement Authority shall keep the last audit records and all
requested and submitted subsequent audit records.
1.4. Additional Compliance Information
None.
Page 3 of 7
Standard IRO-017-1 — Outage Coordination
Table of Compliance Elements
R#
Time
Horizon
VRF
R1
Operations
Planning
R2
R3
Violation Severity Levels
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
Medium
The Reliability
Coordinator did
develop,
implement, and
maintain an
outage
coordination
process for
generation and
Transmission
outages within its
Reliability
Coordinator Area
but it was missing
one of the parts
specified in
Requirement R1
(Parts 1.1 – 1.4).
The Reliability
Coordinator did
develop,
implement, and
maintain an outage
coordination
process for
generation and
Transmission
outages within its
Reliability
Coordinator Area
but it was missing
two of the parts
specified in
Requirement R1
(Parts 1.1 – 1.4).
The Reliability
Coordinator did
develop,
implement, and
maintain an outage
coordination
process for
generation and
Transmission
outages within its
Reliability
Coordinator Area
but it was missing
three of the parts
specified in
Requirement R1
(Parts 1.1 – 1.4).
The Reliability Coordinator did develop,
implement, and maintain an outage
coordination process for generation and
Transmission outages within its
Reliability Coordinator Area but it was
missing all four of the parts specified in
Requirement R1 (Parts 1.1 – 1.4).
OR,
The Reliability Coordinator did not
develop, implement, and maintain an
outage coordination process for
generation and Transmission outages
within its Reliability Coordinator Area.
Operations
Planning
Medium
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Transmission Operator or Balancing
Authority did not perform the functions
specified in its Reliability Coordinator’s
outage coordination process.
Operations
Planning
Medium
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Planning Coordinator or
Transmission Planner did not provide its
Planning Assessment to impacted
Reliability Coordinators.
Page 4 of 7
Standard IRO-017-1 — Outage Coordination
R#
R4
Time
Horizon
VRF
Operations
Planning
Medium
Violation Severity Levels
Lower VSL
N/A
Moderate VSL
N/A
High VSL
N/A
Severe VSL
The Planning Coordinator or
Transmission Planner did not jointly
develop solutions with its respective
Reliability Coordinator(s) for identified
issues or conflicts with planned outages
in its Planning Assessment for the Nearterm Transmission Planning Horizon.
Page 5 of 7
Standard IRO-017-1 — Outage Coordination
D. Regional Variances
None.
E. Interpretations
None.
F. Associated Documents
Time Horizon: The official definition of the Operations Planning Time Horizon is: “operating
and resource plans from day‐ahead up to and including seasonal.” The SDT equates
‘seasonal’ as being up to one year out and that these requirements covers the period from
day-ahead to one year out.
Version History
Version
Date
Action
Change Tracking
1
April 2014
New standard developed by Project
2014-03
New
1
November 13,
2014
Adopted by NERC Board of Trustees
Revisions under
Project 2014-03
Page 6 of 7
Standard IRO-017-1 — Guideline and Technical Basis
Guidelines and Technical Basis
Rationale:
During development of this standard, text boxes were embedded within the standard to explain
the rationale for various parts of the standard. Upon BOT approval, the text from the rationale
text boxes was moved to this section.
This standard is in response to issues raised in NOPR paragraph 90 and recommendations made
by the Independent Expert Review Panel and SW Outage Report on the need for an outage
coordination standard. It allows for one cohesive standard to address all outage coordination
concerns as opposed to having multiple requirements spread throughout the various standards.
Rationale for Time Horizon:
The official definition of the Operations Planning Time Horizon is: “operating and resource plans
from day‐ahead up to and including seasonal.” The SDT equates ‘seasonal’ as being up to one
year out and that these requirements covers the period from day-ahead to one year out.
Rationale for R3:
Planning Assessment is a defined term and a document that Planning Coordinators and
Transmission Planners already have to produce for approved TPL-001-4. It is not a compilation
of load flow studies but a textual summary of what was found in those studies including
rationales and assumptions.
Rationale for R4:
The SDT has re-written Requirement R4 to show that the process starts with the Planning
Assessments created by the Planning Coordinator and Transmission Planner and then those
Planning Assessments are reviewed and reconciled as needed with the Reliability Coordinator.
This is in response to comments in paragraph 90 of the FERC NOPR about directly involving the
Reliability Coordinator in the planning process for periods beyond the present one year
outreach as well as recommendations in the IERP. The re-write should not be construed as
relieving the Reliability Coordinator of responsibilities in this area but simply as a reflection of
how the process actually starts.
In the future, the SDT believes that such coordination should take place in the TPL standards
and to support that position, the SDT has created an item in a draft SAR for TPL-001-4 that
would revise Requirement R8 to make the Reliability Coordinator an explicit party in the review
process described there.
In addition, the SDT will submit a request to the Functional Model Working Team to adjust the
roles and responsibilities of the Reliability Coordinator to this new paradigm.
Page 7 of 7
Reliability Standard TOP-001-3
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
A. Introduction
1.
Title: Transmission Operations
2.
Number: TOP-001-3
3.
Purpose: To prevent instability, uncontrolled separation, or Cascading outages that
adversely impact the reliability of the Interconnection by ensuring prompt action to
prevent or mitigate such occurrences.
4.
Applicability:
4.1. Balancing Authority
4.2. Transmission Operator
4.3. Generator Operator
4.4. Distribution Provider
5.
Effective Date:
See Implementation Plan.
6.
Background:
See Project 2014-03 project page.
B. Requirements and Measures
R1. Each Transmission Operator shall act to maintain the reliability of its Transmission
Operator Area via its own actions or by issuing Operating Instructions. [Violation Risk
Factor: High][Time Horizon: Same-Day Operations, Real-time Operations]
M1. Each Transmission Operator shall have and provide evidence which may include but is
not limited to dated operator logs, dated records, dated and time-stamped voice
recordings or dated transcripts of voice recordings, electronic communications, or
equivalent documentation, that will be used to determine that it acted to maintain
the reliability of its Transmission Operator Area via its own actions or by issuing
Operating Instructions.
R2. Each Balancing Authority shall act to maintain the reliability of its Balancing Authority
Area via its own actions or by issuing Operating Instructions. [Violation Risk Factor:
High][Time Horizon: Same-Day Operations, Real-time Operations]
M2. Each Balancing Authority shall have and provide evidence which may include but is not
limited to dated operator logs, dated records, dated and time-stamped voice
recordings or dated transcripts of voice recordings, electronic communications, or
equivalent documentation, that will be used to determine that it acted to maintain
the reliability of its Balancing Authority Area via its own actions or by issuing
Operating Instructions.
Page 1 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
R3. Each Balancing Authority, Generator Operator, and Distribution Provider shall comply
with each Operating Instruction issued by its Transmission Operator(s), unless such
action cannot be physically implemented or it would violate safety, equipment,
regulatory, or statutory requirements. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon:
Same-Day Operations, Real-Time Operations]
M3. Each Balancing Authority, Generator Operator, and Distribution Provider shall make
available upon request, evidence that it complied with each Operating Instruction
issued by the Transmission Operator(s) unless such action could not be physically
implemented or it would have violated safety, equipment, regulatory, or statutory
requirements. Such evidence could include but is not limited to dated operator logs,
voice recordings or transcripts of voice recordings, electronic communications, or
other equivalent evidence in electronic or hard copy format. In such cases, the
Balancing Authority, Generator Operator, and Distribution Provider shall have and
provide copies of the safety, equipment, regulatory, or statutory requirements as
evidence for not complying with the Transmission Operator’s Operating Instruction. If
such a situation has not occurred, the Balancing Authority, Generator Operator, or
Distribution Provider may provide an attestation.
R4.
Each Balancing Authority, Generator Operator, and Distribution Provider shall inform
its Transmission Operator of its inability to comply with an Operating Instruction
issued by its Transmission Operator. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon:
Same-Day Operations, Real-Time Operations]
M4. Each Balancing Authority, Generator Operator, and Distribution Provider shall make
available upon request, evidence which may include but is not limited to dated
operator logs, voice recordings or transcripts of voice recordings, electronic
communications, or equivalent evidence in electronic or hard copy format, that it
informed its Transmission Operator of its inability to comply with its Operating
Instruction issued. If such a situation has not occurred, the Balancing Authority,
Generator Operator, or Distribution Provider may provide an attestation.
R5. Each Transmission Operator, Generator Operator, and Distribution Provider shall
comply with each Operating Instruction issued by its Balancing Authority, unless such
action cannot be physically implemented or it would violate safety, equipment,
regulatory, or statutory requirements. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon:
Same-Day Operations, Real-Time Operations]
M5. Each Transmission Operator, Generator Operator, and Distribution Provider shall
make available upon request, evidence that it complied with each Operating
Instruction issued by its Balancing Authority unless such action could not be physically
implemented or it would have violated safety, equipment, regulatory, or statutory
requirements. Such evidence could include but is not limited to dated operator logs,
voice recordings or transcripts of voice recordings, electronic communications, or
other equivalent evidence in electronic or hard copy format. In such cases, the
Transmission Operator, Generator Operator, and Distribution Provider shall have and
Page 2 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
provide copies of the safety, equipment, regulatory, or statutory requirements as
evidence for not complying with the Balancing Authority’s Operating Instruction. If
such a situation has not occurred, the Transmission Operator, Generator Operator, or
Distribution Provider may provide an attestation.
R6. Each Transmission Operator, Generator Operator, and Distribution Provider shall
inform its Balancing Authority of its inability to comply with an Operating Instruction
issued by its Balancing Authority. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: SameDay Operations, Real-Time Operations]
M6. Each Transmission Operator, Generator Operator, and Distribution Provider shall
make available upon request, evidence which may include but is not limited to dated
operator logs, voice recordings or transcripts of voice recordings, electronic
communications, or equivalent evidence in electronic or hard copy format, that it
informed its Balancing Authority of its inability to comply with its Operating
Instruction. If such a situation has not occurred, the Transmission Operator,
Generator Operator, or Distribution Provider may provide an attestation.
R7. Each Transmission Operator shall assist other Transmission Operators within its
Reliability Coordinator Area, if requested and able, provided that the requesting
Transmission Operator has implemented its comparable Emergency procedures,
unless such assistance cannot be physically implemented or would violate safety,
equipment, regulatory, or statutory requirements. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time
Horizon: Real-Time Operations]
M7. Each Transmission Operator shall make available upon request, evidence that
comparable requested assistance, if able, was provided to other Transmission
Operators within its Reliability Coordinator Area unless such assistance could not be
physically implemented or would have violated safety, equipment, regulatory, or
statutory requirements. Such evidence could include but is not limited to dated
operator logs, voice recordings or transcripts of voice recordings, electronic
communications, or other equivalent evidence in electronic or hard copy format. If
no request for assistance was received, the Transmission Operator may provide an
attestation.
R8. Each Transmission Operator shall inform its Reliability Coordinator, known impacted
Balancing Authorities, and known impacted Transmission Operators of its actual or
expected operations that result in, or could result in, an Emergency. [Violation Risk
Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning, Same-Day Operations, Real-Time
Operations]
M8. Each Transmission Operator shall make available upon request, evidence that it
informed its Reliability Coordinator, known impacted Balancing Authorities, and
known impacted Transmission Operators of its actual or expected operations that
result in, or could result in, an Emergency. Such evidence could include but is not
limited to dated operator logs, voice recordings or transcripts of voice recordings,
Page 3 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
electronic communications, or other equivalent evidence. If no such situations have
occurred, the Transmission Operator may provide an attestation.
R9. Each Balancing Authority and Transmission Operator shall notify its Reliability
Coordinator and known impacted interconnected entities of all planned outages, and
unplanned outages of 30 minutes or more, for telemetering and control equipment,
monitoring and assessment capabilities, and associated communication channels
between the affected entities. [Violation Risk Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon:
Operations Planning, Same-Day Operations, Real-Time Operations]
M9. Each Balancing Authority and Transmission Operator shall make available upon
request, evidence that it notified its Reliability Coordinator and known impacted
interconnected entities of all planned outages, and unplanned outages of 30 minutes
or more, for telemetering and control equipment, monitoring and assessment
capabilities, and associated communication channels. Such evidence could include but
is not limited to dated operator logs, voice recordings or transcripts of voice
recordings, electronic communications, or other equivalent evidence. If such a
situation has not occurred, the Balancing Authority or Transmission Operator may
provide an attestation.
R10. Each Transmission Operator shall perform the following as necessary for determining
System Operating Limit (SOL) exceedances within its Transmission Operator Area:
[Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Real-Time Operations]
10.1. Within its Transmission Operator Area, monitor Facilities and the status of
Special Protection Systems, and
10.2. Outside its Transmission Operator Area, obtain and utilize status, voltages, and
flow data for Facilities and the status of Special Protection Systems.
M10. Each Transmission Operator shall have, and provide upon request, evidence that could
include but is not limited to Energy Management System description documents,
computer printouts, SCADA data collection, or other equivalent evidence that will be
used to confirm that it monitored or obtained and utilized status, voltages, and flow
data for Facilities and the status of Special Protection Systems as required to
determine any System Operating Limit (SOL) exceedances within its Transmission
Operator Area.
R11. Each Balancing Authority shall monitor its Balancing Authority Area, including the
status of Special Protection Systems that impact generation or Load, in order to
maintain generation-Load-interchange balance within its Balancing Authority Area and
support Interconnection frequency. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: RealTime Operations]
M11. Each Balancing Authority shall have, and provide upon request, evidence that could
include but is not limited to Energy Management System description documents,
computer printouts, SCADA data collection, or other equivalent evidence that will be
Page 4 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
used to confirm that it monitors its Balancing Authority Area, including the status of
Special Protection Systems that impact generation or Load, in order to maintain
generation-Load-interchange balance within its Balancing Authority Area and support
Interconnection frequency.
R12. Each Transmission Operator shall not operate outside any identified Interconnection
Reliability Operating Limit (IROL) for a continuous duration exceeding its associated
IROL Tv. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Real-time Operations]
M12. Each Transmission Operator shall make available evidence to show that for any
occasion in which it operated outside any identified Interconnection Reliability
Operating Limit (IROL), the continuous duration did not exceed its associated IROL Tv.
Such evidence could include but is not limited to dated computer logs or reports in
electronic or hard copy format specifying the date, time, duration, and details of the
excursion. If such a situation has not occurred, the Transmission Operator may
provide an attestation that an event has not occurred.
R13. Each Transmission Operator shall ensure that a Real-time Assessment is performed at
least once every 30 minutes. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Real-time
Operations]
M13. Each Transmission Operator shall have, and make available upon request, evidence to
show it ensured that a Real-Time Assessment was performed at least once every 30
minutes. This evidence could include but is not limited to dated computer logs
showing times the assessment was conducted, dated checklists, or other evidence.
R14. Each Transmission Operator shall initiate its Operating Plan to mitigate a SOL
exceedance identified as part of its Real-time monitoring or Real-time Assessment.
[Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Real-time Operations]
M14. Each Transmission Operator shall have evidence that it initiated its Operating Plan for
mitigating SOL exceedances identified as part of its Real-time monitoring or Real-time
Assessments. This evidence could include but is not limited to dated computer logs
showing times the Operating Plan was initiated, dated checklists, or other evidence.
R15. Each Transmission Operator shall inform its Reliability Coordinator of actions taken to
return the System to within limits when a SOL has been exceeded. [Violation Risk
Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon: Real-Time Operations]
M15. Each Transmission Operator shall make available evidence that it informed its
Reliability Coordinator of actions taken to return the System to within limits when a
SOL was exceeded. Such evidence could include but is not limited to dated operator
logs, voice recordings or transcripts of voice recordings, or dated computer printouts.
If such a situation has not occurred, the Transmission Operator may provide an
attestation.
R16. Each Transmission Operator shall provide its System Operators with the authority to
approve planned outages and maintenance of its telemetering and control
Page 5 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
equipment, monitoring and assessment capabilities, and associated communication
channels between affected entities. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon:
Operations Planning, Same-Day Operations, Real-time Operations]
M16. Each Transmission Operator shall have, and provide upon request, evidence that could
include but is not limited to a documented procedure or equivalent evidence that will
be used to confirm that the Transmission Operator has provided its System Operators
with the authority to approve planned outages and maintenance of telemetering and
control equipment, monitoring and assessment capabilities, and associated
communication channels between affected entities.
R17. Each Balancing Authority shall provide its System Operators with the authority to
approve planned outages and maintenance of its telemetering and control equipment,
monitoring and assessment capabilities, and associated communication channels
between affected entities. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Operations
Planning, Same-Day Operations, Real-time Operations]
M17. Each Balancing Authority shall have, and provide upon request, evidence that could
include but is not limited to a documented procedure or equivalent evidence that will
be used to confirm that the Balancing Authority has provided its System Operators
with the authority to approve planned outages and maintenance of its telemetering
and control equipment, monitoring and assessment capabilities, and associated
communication channels between affected entities.
R18. Each Transmission Operator shall operate to the most limiting parameter in instances
where there is a difference in SOLs. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon:
Operations Planning, Same-Day Operations, Real-time Operations]
M18. Each Transmission Operator shall have, and provide upon request, evidence that
could include but is not limited to operator logs, voice recordings, electronic
communications, or equivalent evidence that will be used to determine if it operated
to the most limiting parameter in instances where there is a difference in SOLs.
R19. Each Transmission Operator shall have data exchange capabilities with the entities
that it has identified that it needs data from in order to maintain reliability in its
Transmission Operator Area. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Operations
Planning, Same-Day Operations, Real-time Operations]
M19. Each Transmission Operator shall have, and provide upon request, evidence that
could include, but is not limited to, operator logs, system specifications, or other
evidence that it has data exchange capabilities with the entities that it has identified
that it needs data from in order to maintain reliability in its Transmission Operator
Area.
R20. Each Balancing Authority shall have data exchange capabilities with the entities that it
has identified that it needs data from in order to maintain reliability in its Balancing
Authority Area. [Violation Risk Factor: High] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning,
Same-Day Operations, Real-time Operations]
Page 6 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
M20. Each Balancing Authority shall have, and provide upon request, evidence that could
include, but is not limited to, operator logs, system specifications, or other evidence
that it has data exchange capabilities with the entities that it has identified that it
needs data from in order to maintain reliability in its Balancing Authority Area.
C. Compliance
1.
Compliance Monitoring Process
1.1. Compliance Enforcement Authority
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Enforcement Authority”
(CEA) means NERC or the Regional Entity in their respective roles of monitoring
and enforcing compliance with the NERC Reliability Standards.
1.2. Compliance Monitoring and Assessment Processes
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Monitoring and
Assessment Processes” refers to the identification of the processes that will be
used to evaluate data or information for the purpose of assessing performance
or outcomes with the associated reliability standard.
1.3. Data Retention
The following evidence retention periods identify the period of time an entity is
required to retain specific evidence to demonstrate compliance. For instances
where the evidence retention period specified below is shorter than the time
since the last audit, the Compliance Enforcement Authority may ask an entity to
provide other evidence to show that it was compliant for the full time period
since the last audit.
Each Balancing Authority, Transmission Operator, Generator Operator, and
Distribution Provider shall each keep data or evidence for each applicable
Requirement R1 through R11, and R15 through R20 and Measure M1 through
M11, and M15 through M20 for the current calendar year and one previous
calendar year, with the exception of operator logs and voice recordings which
shall be retained for a minimum of ninety calendar days, unless directed by its
Compliance Enforcement Authority to retain specific evidence for a longer
period of time as part of an investigation.
Each Transmission Operator shall retain evidence for three calendar years of any
occasion in which it has exceeded an identified IROL and its associated IROL Tv as
specified in Requirement R12 and Measure M12 and that it initiated its
Operating Plan to mitigate a SOL exceedance as specified in Requirement R14
and Measurement M14.
Each Transmission Operator shall keep data or evidence for Requirement R13
and Measure M13 for a rolling 30-day period, unless directed by its Compliance
Enforcement Authority to retain specific evidence for a longer period of time as
part of an investigation.
Page 7 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
If a Balancing Authority, Transmission Operator, Generator Operator, or
Distribution Provider is found non-compliant, it shall keep information related to
the non-compliance until mitigation is complete and approved or the time
period specified above, whichever is longer.
The Compliance Enforcement Authority shall keep the last audit records and all
requested and submitted subsequent audit records.
1.4. Additional Compliance Information
None.
Page 8 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
Table of Compliance Elements
R#
Time Horizon
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
R1
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Transmission Operator
failed to act to maintain the
reliability of its Transmission
Operator Area via its own
actions or by issuing Operating
Instructions.
R2
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Balancing Authority failed
to act to maintain the
reliability of its Balancing
Authority Area via its own
actions or by issuing Operating
Instructions.
R3
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-Time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The responsible entity did not
comply with an Operating
Instruction issued by the
Transmission Operator, and
such action could have been
physically implemented and
would not have violated
safety, equipment, regulatory,
or statutory requirements.
R4
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-Time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The responsible entity did not
inform its Transmission
Operator of its inability to
comply with an Operating
Instruction issued by its
Transmission Operator.
Page 9 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
R#
Time Horizon
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
R5
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The responsible entity did not
comply with an Operating
Instruction issued by the
Balancing Authority, and such
action could have been
physically implemented and
would not have violated
safety, equipment, regulatory,
or statutory requirements.
R6
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-Time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The responsible entity did not
inform its Balancing Authority
of its inability to comply with
an Operating Instruction
issued by its Balancing
Authority.
R7
Real-Time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Transmission Operator did
not provide comparable
assistance to other
Transmission Operators within
its Reliability Coordinator
Area, when requested and
able, and the requesting entity
had implemented its
Emergency procedures, and
such actions could have been
physically implemented and
would not have violated
safety, equipment, regulatory,
or statutory requirements.
Page 10 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
R#
Time Horizon
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
For the Requirements R8 and R9 VSLs only, the intent of the SDT is to start with the Severe VSL first and then to work your way to the left until
you find the situation that fits. In this manner, the VSL will not be discriminatory by size of entity. If a small entity has just one affected
reliability entity to inform, the intent is that that situation would be a Severe violation.
R8
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-Time
Operations
High
The Transmission
Operator did not
inform one known
impacted
Transmission
Operator or 5% or
less of the known
impacted
Transmission
Operators,
whichever is greater,
of its actual or
expected operations
that resulted in, or
could have resulted
in, an Emergency on
respective
Transmission
Operator Areas.
OR,
The Transmission
Operator did not
inform one known
impacted Balancing
Authorities or 5% or
less of the known
The Transmission
Operator did not
inform two known
impacted
Transmission
Operators or more
than 5% and less than
or equal to 10% of the
known impacted
Transmission
Operators, whichever
is greater, of its actual
or expected
operations that
resulted in, or could
have resulted in, an
Emergency on
respective
Transmission
Operator Areas.
OR,
The Transmission
Operator did not
inform two known
impacted Balancing
Authorities or more
The Transmission
Operator did not inform
three known impacted
Transmission Operators
or more than 10% and
less than or equal to
15% of the known
impacted Transmission
Operators, whichever is
greater, of its actual or
expected operations
that resulted in, or
could have resulted in,
an Emergency on
respective Transmission
Operator Areas.
OR,
The Transmission
Operator did not inform
three known impacted
Balancing Authorities or
more than 10% and less
than or equal to 15% of
the known impacted
Balancing Authorities,
whichever is greater, of
The Transmission Operator did
not inform its Reliability
Coordinator of its actual or
expected operations that
resulted in, or could have
resulted in, an Emergency on
those respective Transmission
Operator Areas.
OR
The Transmission Operator did
not inform four or more
known impacted Transmission
Operators or more than 15%
of the known impacted
Transmission Operators of its
actual or expected operations
that resulted in, or could have
resulted in, an Emergency on
those respective Transmission
Operator Areas.
OR,
The Transmission Operator did
not inform four or more
known impacted Balancing
Authorities or more than 15%
of the known impacted
Page 11 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
R#
R9
Time Horizon
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-Time
Operations
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Medium
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
impacted Balancing
Authorities,
whichever is greater,
of its actual or
expected operations
that resulted in, or
could have resulted
in, an Emergency on
respective Balancing
Authority Areas.
than 5% and less than
or equal to 10% of the
known impacted
Balancing Authorities,
whichever is greater,
of its actual or
expected operations
that resulted in, or
could have resulted
in, an Emergency on
respective Balancing
Authority Areas.
its actual or expected
operations that resulted
in, or could have
resulted in, an
Emergency on
respective Balancing
Authority Areas.
Balancing Authorities of its
actual or expected operations
that resulted in, or could have
resulted in, an Emergency on
respective Balancing Authority
Areas.
The responsible
entity did not notify
one known impacted
interconnected
entity or 5% or less
of the known
impacted entities,
whichever is greater,
of a planned outage,
or an unplanned
outage of 30 minutes
or more, for
telemetering and
control equipment,
monitoring and
assessment
capabilities, or
associated
The responsible entity
did not notify two
known impacted
interconnected
entities or more than
5% and less than or
equal to 10% of the
known impacted
entities, whichever is
greater, of a planned
outage, or an
unplanned outage of
30 minutes or more,
for telemetering and
control equipment,
monitoring and
assessment
capabilities, or
The responsible entity
did not notify three
known impacted
interconnected entities
or more than 10% and
less than or equal to
15% of the known
impacted entities,
whichever is greater, of
a planned outage, or an
unplanned outage of 30
minutes or more, for
telemetering and
control equipment,
monitoring and
assessment capabilities,
or associated
communication
The responsible entity did not
notify its Reliability
Coordinator of a planned
outage, or an unplanned
outage of 30 minutes or more,
for telemetering and control
equipment, monitoring and
assessment capabilities, and
associated communication
channels.
OR,
The responsible entity did not
notify four or more known
impacted interconnected
entities or more than 15% of
the known impacted entities,
whichever is greater, of a
planned outage, or an
Page 12 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
R#
Time Horizon
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
communication
channels between
the affected entities.
associated
communication
channels between the
affected entities.
channels between the
affected entities.
unplanned outage of 30
minutes or more, for
telemetering and control
equipment, monitoring and
assessment capabilities, or
associated communication
channels between the
affected entities.
R10
Real-Time
Operations
High
N/A
The Transmission
Operator did not
monitor one of the
items listed in
Requirement R10,
Part 10.1.
OR,
The Transmission
Operator did not
obtain and utilize one
of the items listed in
Requirement R10,
Part 10.2.
The Transmission
Operator did not
monitor one of the
items listed in
Requirement R10, Part
10.1 and did not obtain
and utilize one of the
items listed in
Requirement R10, Part
10.2.
The Transmission Operator did
not monitor Facilities and the
status of Special Protection
Systems within its
Transmission Operator Area
and did not obtain and utilize
data deemed as necessary
from outside its Transmission
Operator Area.
R11
Real-Time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
The Balancing Authority
did not monitor the
status of Special
Protection Systems that
impact generation or
Load, in order to
maintain generationLoad-interchange
The Balancing Authority did
not monitor its Balancing
Authority Area, in order to
maintain generation-Loadinterchange balance within its
Balancing Authority Area and
support Interconnection
frequency.
Page 13 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
R#
Time Horizon
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
balance within its
Balancing Authority
Area and support
Interconnection
frequency.
R12
Real-Time
Operations
High
R13
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-Time
Operations
High
R14.
Real-Time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Transmission Operator
exceeded an identified
Interconnection Reliability
Operating Limit (IROL) for a
continuous duration greater
than its associated IROL Tv.
For any sample 24hour period within
the 30-day retention
period, the
Transmission
Operator’s Real-time
Assessment was not
conducted for one
30-minute period
within that 24-hour
period.
For any sample 24hour period within the
30-day retention
period, the
Transmission
Operator’s Real-time
Assessment was not
conducted for two 30minute periods within
that 24-hour period.
For any sample 24-hour
period within the 30day retention period,
the Transmission
Operator’s Real-time
Assessment was not
conducted for three 30minute periods within
that 24-hour period.
For any sample 24-hour period
within the 30-day retention
period, the Transmission
Operator’s Real-time
Assessment was not
conducted for four or more
30-minute periods within that
24-hour period.
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Transmission Operator did
not initiate its Operating Plan
for mitigating a SOL
exceedance identified as part
of its Real-time monitoring or
Real-time Assessment
Page 14 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
R#
Time Horizon
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Lower VSL
R15.
Real-Time
Operations
Medium
R16.
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-Time
Operations
High
R17.
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-Time
Operations
High
N/A
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
N/A
N/A
The Transmission Operator did
not inform its Reliability
Coordinator of actions taken
to return the System to within
limits when a SOL had been
exceeded.
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Transmission Operator did
not provide its System
Operators with the authority
to approve planned outages
and maintenance of its
telemetering and control
equipment, monitoring and
assessment capabilities, and
associated communication
channels between affected
entities.
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Balancing Authority did
not provide its System
Operators with the authority
to approve planned outages
and maintenance of its
telemetering and control
equipment, monitoring and
assessment capabilities, and
associated communication
channels between affected
entities.
Page 15 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
R#
Time Horizon
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
R18
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
High
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Transmission Operator
failed to operate to the most
limiting parameter in
instances where there was a
difference in SOLs.
R19
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
High
The Transmission
Operator did not
have data exchange
capabilities with one
identified entity, or
5% or less of the
applicable entities,
whichever is greater.
The Transmission
Operator did not have
data exchange
capabilities with two
identified entities, or
more than 5% or less
than or equal to 10%
of the applicable
entities, whichever is
greater.
The Transmission
Operator did not have
data exchange
capabilities with three
identified entities, or
more than 10% or less
than or equal to 15% of
the applicable entities,
whichever is greater.
The Transmission Operator did
not have data exchange
capabilities with four or more
identified entities or greater
than 15% of the applicable
entities, whichever is greater.
R20
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
High
The Balancing
Authority did not
have data exchange
capabilities with one
identified entity, or
5% or less of the
applicable entities,
whichever is greater.
The Balancing
Authority did not have
data exchange
capabilities with two
identified entities, or
more than 5% or less
than or equal to 10%
of the applicable
entities, whichever is
greater.
The Balancing Authority
did not have data
exchange capabilities
with three identified
entities, or more than
10% or less than or
equal to 15% of the
applicable entities,
whichever is greater.
The Balancing Authority did
not have data exchange
capabilities with four or more
identified entities or greater
than 15% of the applicable
entities, whichever is greater.
Page 16 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
D. Regional Variances
None.
E. Interpretations
None.
F. Associated Documents
The SDT has created the SOL Exceedance White Paper as guidance on SOL issues and the
URL for that document is: http://www.nerc.com/pa/stand/Pages/TOP0013RI.aspx.
Operating Plan - An Operating Plan includes general Operating Processes and specific
Operating Procedures. It may be an overview document which provides a prescription for
an Operating Plan for the next-day, or it may be a specific plan to address a specific SOL or
IROL exceedance identified in the Operational Planning Analysis (OPA). Consistent with the
NERC definition, Operating Plans can be general in nature, or they can be specific plans to
address specific reliability issues. The use of the term Operating Plan in the revised
TOP/IRO standards allows room for both. An Operating Plan references processes and
procedures, including electronic data exchange, which are available to the System Operator
on a daily basis to allow the operator to reliably address conditions which may arise
throughout the day. It is valid for tomorrow, the day after, and the day after that. Operating
Plans should be augmented by temporary operating guides which outline
prevention/mitigation plans for specific situations which are identified day-to-day in an OPA
or a Real-time Assessment (RTA). As the definition in the Glossary of Terms states, a
restoration plan is an example of an Operating Plan. It contains all the overarching
principles that the System Operator needs to work his/her way through the restoration
process. It is not a specific document written for a specific blackout scenario but rather a
collection of tools consisting of processes, procedures, and automated software systems
that are available to the operator to use in restoring the system. An Operating Plan can in
turn be looked upon in a similar manner. It does not contain a prescription for the specific
set-up for tomorrow but contains a treatment of all the processes, procedures, and
automated software systems that are at the operator’s disposal. The existence of an
Operating Plan, however, does not preclude the need for creating specific action plans for
specific SOL or IROL exceedances identified in the OPA. When a Reliability Coordinator
performs an OPA, the analysis may reveal instances of possible SOL or IROL exceedances for
pre- or post-Contingency conditions. In these instances, Reliability Coordinators are
expected to ensure that there are plans in place to prevent or mitigate those SOLs or IROLs,
should those operating conditions be encountered the next day. The Operating Plan may
contain a description of the process by which specific prevention or mitigation plans for
day-to-day SOL or IROL exceedances identified in the OPA are handled and communicated.
This approach could alleviate any potential administrative burden associated with perceived
requirements for continual day-to-day updating of “the Operating Plan document” for
compliance purposes.
Page 17 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
Version History
Version
Date
Action
Change Tracking
0
April 1, 2005
Effective Date
New
0
August 8, 2005
Removed “Proposed” from Effective
Date
Errata
1
November 1,
2006
Adopted by Board of Trustees
Revised
1a
May 12, 2010
Added Appendix 1 – Interpretation of
R8 approved by Board of Trustees on
May 12, 2010
Interpretation
1a
September 15,
2011
FERC Order issued approved the
Interpretation of R8 (FERC Order
became effective November 21, 2011)
Interpretation
2
May 6, 2012
Revised under Project 2007-03
Revised
2
May 9, 2012
Adopted by Board of Trustees
Revised
3
February 12,
2015
Adopted by Board of Trustees
Revisions under
Project 2014-03
Rationale:
During development of this standard, text boxes were embedded within the standard to explain
the rationale for various parts of the standard. Upon BOT approval, the text from the rationale
text boxes was moved to this section.
Rationale for Requirement R3:
The phrase ‘cannot be physically implemented’ means that a Transmission Operator may
request something to be done that is not physically possible due to its lack of knowledge of the
system involved.
Rationale for Requirement R10:
New proposed Requirement R10 is derived from approved IRO-003-2, Requirement R1, adapted
to the Transmission Operator Area. This new requirement is in response to NOPR paragraph 60
concerning monitoring capabilities for the Transmission Operator. New Requirement R11
Page 18 of 19
Standard TOP-001-3 — Transmission Operations
covers the Balancing Authorities. Monitoring of external systems can be accomplished via data
links.
Rationale for Requirement R13:
The new Requirement R13 is in response to NOPR paragraphs 55 and 60 concerning Real-time
analysis responsibilities for Transmission Operators and is copied from approved IRO-008-1,
Requirement R2. The Transmission Operator’s Operating Plan will describe how to perform the
Real-time Assessment. The Operating Plan should contain instructions as to how to perform
Operational Planning Analysis and Real-time Assessment with detailed instructions and timing
requirements as to how to adapt to conditions where processes, procedures, and automated
software systems are not available (if used). This could include instructions such as an
indication that no actions may be required if system conditions have not changed significantly
and that previous Contingency analysis or Real-time Assessments may be used in such a
situation.
Rationale for Requirement R14:
The original Requirement R8 was deleted and original Requirements R9 and R11 were revised in
order to respond to NOPR paragraph 42 which raised the issue of handling all SOLs and not just
a sub-set of SOLs. The SDT has developed a white paper on SOL exceedances that explains its
intent on what needs to be contained in such an Operating Plan. These Operating Plans are
developed and documented in advance of Real-time and may be developed from Operational
Planning Assessments required per proposed TOP-002-4 or other assessments. Operating Plans
could be augmented by temporary operating guides which outline prevention/mitigation plans
for specific situations which are identified day-to-day in an Operational Planning Assessment or
a Real-time Assessment. The intent is to have a plan and philosophy that can be followed by an
operator.
Rationale for Requirements R16 and R17:
In response to IERP Report recommendation 3 on authority.
Rationale for Requirement R18:
Moved from approved IRO-005-3.1a, Requirement R10. Transmission Service Provider,
Distribution Provider, Load-Serving Entity, Generator Operator, and Purchasing-Selling Entity
are deleted as those entities will receive instructions on limits from the responsible entities
cited in the requirement. Note – Derived limits replaced by SOLs for clarity and specificity. SOLs
include voltage, Stability, and thermal limits and are thus the most limiting factor.
Rationale for Requirements R19 and R20:
Added for consistency with proposed IRO-002-4, Requirement R1. Data exchange capabilities
are required to support the data specification concept in proposed TOP-003-3.
Page 19 of 19
Reliability Standard TOP-002-4
Standard TOP-002-4 — Operations Planning
A. Introduction
1.
Title: Operations Planning
2.
Number: TOP-002-4
3.
Purpose: To ensure that Transmission Operators and Balancing Authorities have plans
for operating within specified limits.
4.
Applicability:
4.1. Transmission Operator
4.2. Balancing Authority
5.
Effective Date:
See Implementation Plan.
6.
Background:
See Project 2014-03 project page.
B. Requirements and Measures
R1. Each Transmission Operator shall have an Operational Planning Analysis that will allow
it to assess whether its planned operations for the next day within its Transmission
Operator Area will exceed any of its System Operating Limits (SOLs). [Violation Risk
Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]
M1. Each Transmission Operator shall have evidence of a completed Operational Planning
Analysis. Such evidence could include but is not limited to dated power flow study
results.
R2. Each Transmission Operator shall have an Operating Plan(s) for next-day operations to
address potential System Operating Limit (SOL) exceedances identified as a result of
its Operational Planning Analysis as required in Requirement R1. [Violation Risk
Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]
M2. Each Transmission Operator shall have evidence that it has an Operating Plan to
address potential System Operating Limits (SOLs) exceedances identified as a result of
the Operational Planning Analysis performed in Requirement R1. Such evidence could
include but it is not limited to plans for precluding operating in excess of each SOL that
was identified as a result of the Operational Planning Analysis.
R3. Each Transmission Operator shall notify entities identified in the Operating Plan(s)
cited in Requirement R2 as to their role in those plan(s). [Violation Risk Factor:
Medium] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]
M3. Each Transmission Operator shall have evidence that it notified entities identified in
the Operating Plan(s) cited in Requirement R2 as to their role in the plan(s). Such
evidence could include but is not limited to dated operator logs, or e-mail records.
Page 1 of 10
Standard TOP-002-4 — Operations Planning
R4. Each Balancing Authority shall have an Operating Plan(s) for the next-day that
addresses: [Violation Risk Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]
4.1 Expected generation resource commitment and dispatch
4.2 Interchange scheduling
4.3 Demand patterns
4.4 Capacity and energy reserve requirements, including deliverability capability
M4. Each Balancing Authority shall have evidence that it has developed a plan to operate
within the criteria identified. Such evidence could include but is not limited to dated
operator logs or e-mail records.
R5. Each Balancing Authority shall notify entities identified in the Operating Plan(s) cited in
Requirement R4 as to their role in those plan(s). [Violation Risk Factor: Medium] [Time
Horizon: Operations Planning]
M5. Each Balancing Authority shall have evidence that it notified entities identified in the
plan(s) cited in Requirement R4 as to their role in the plan(s). Such evidence could
include but is not limited to dated operator logs or e-mail records.
R6. Each Transmission Operator shall provide its Operating Plan(s) for next-day operations
identified in Requirement R2 to its Reliability Coordinator. [Violation Risk Factor:
Medium] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]
M6. Each Transmission Operator shall have evidence that it provided its Operating Plan(s)
for next-day operations identified in Requirement R2 to its Reliability Coordinator.
Such evidence could include but is not limited to dated operator logs or e-mail
records.
R7. Each Balancing Authority shall provide its Operating Plan(s) for next-day operations
identified in Requirement R4 to its Reliability Coordinator. [Violation Risk Factor:
Medium] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]
M7. Each Balancing Authority shall have evidence that it provided its Operating Plan(s) for
next-day operations identified in Requirement R4 to its Reliability Coordinator. Such
evidence could include but is not limited to dated operator logs or e-mail records.
Page 2 of 10
Standard TOP-002-4 — Operations Planning
C. Compliance
1.
Compliance Monitoring Process
1.1. Compliance Enforcement Authority
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Enforcement Authority”
(CEA) means NERC or the Regional Entity in their respective roles of monitoring
and enforcing compliance with the NERC Reliability Standards.
1.2. Compliance Monitoring and Assessment Processes
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Monitoring and
Assessment Processes” refers to the identification of the processes that will be
used to evaluate data or information for the purpose of assessing performance
or outcomes with the associated reliability standard.
1.3. Data Retention
The following evidence retention periods identify the period of time an entity is
required to retain specific evidence to demonstrate compliance. For instances
where the evidence retention period specified below is shorter than the time
since the last audit, the Compliance Enforcement Authority may ask an entity to
provide other evidence to show that it was compliant for the full time period
since the last audit.
Each Transmission Operator and Balancing Authority shall keep data or evidence
to show compliance for each applicable Requirement for a rolling 90-calendar
days period for analyses, the most recent 90-calendar days for voice recordings,
and 12 months for operating logs and e-mail records unless directed by its
Compliance Enforcement Authority to retain specific evidence for a longer
period of time as part of an investigation.
If a Transmission Operator or Balancing Authority is found non-compliant, it shall
keep information related to the non-compliance until found compliant or the
time period specified above, whichever is longer.
The Compliance Enforcement Authority shall keep the last audit records and all
requested and submitted subsequent audit records
1.4. Additional Compliance Information
None.
Page 3 of 10
Standard TOP-002-4 — Operations Planning
Table of Compliance Elements
R#
Time Horizon
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
R1
Operations
Planning
Medium
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Transmission
Operator did not
have an Operational
Planning Analysis
allowing it to assess
whether its planned
operations for the
next day within its
Transmission
Operator Area
exceeded any of its
System Operating
Limits (SOLs).
R2
Operations
Planning
Medium
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Transmission
Operator did not
have an Operating
Plan to address
potential System
Operating Limit
(SOL) exceedances
identified as a result
of the Operational
Planning Analysis
performed in
Requirement R1.
Page 4 of 10
Standard TOP-002-4 — Operations Planning
R#
Time Horizon
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
For the Requirement R3 and R5 VSLs only, the intent of the SDT is to start with the Severe VSL first and then to work your way to
the left until you find the situation that fits. In this manner, the VSL will not be discriminatory by size of entity. If a small entity
has just one affected reliability entity to inform, the intent is that that situation would be a Severe violation.
R3
Operations
Planning
Medium
The Transmission
Operator did not
notify one impacted
entity or 5% or less
of the entities,
whichever is greater
identified in the
Operating Plan(s) as
to their role in the
plan(s).
The Transmission
Operator did not
notify two entities or
more than 5% and
less than or equal to
10% of the impacted
entities, whichever
is greater, identified
in the Operating
Plan(s) as to their
role in the plan(s).
The Transmission
Operator did not
notify three
impacted entities or
more than 10% and
less than or equal to
15% of the entities,
whichever is greater,
identified in the
Operating Plan(s) as
to their role in the
plan(s).
The Transmission
Operator did not
notify four or more
entities or more than
15% of the impacted
NERC identified in the
Operating Plan(s) as
to their role in the
plan(s).
R4
Operations
Planning
Medium
The Balancing
Authority has an
Operating Plan but it
does not address
one of the criteria in
Requirement R4.
The Balancing
Authority has an
Operating Plan but it
does not address
two of the criteria in
Requirement R4.
The Balancing
Authority has an
Operating Plan but it
does not address
three of the criteria
in Requirement R4.
The Balancing
Authority did not
have an Operating
Plan.
R5
Operations
Planning
Medium
The Balancing
Authority did not
notify one impacted
entity or 5% or less
The Balancing
Authority did not
notify two entities or
more than 5% and
The Balancing
Authority did not
notify three
impacted entities or
The Balancing
Authority did not
notify four or more
entities or more than
Page 5 of 10
Standard TOP-002-4 — Operations Planning
R#
Time Horizon
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
of the entities,
whichever is greater,
identified in the
Operating Plan(s) as
to their role in the
plan(s).
less than or equal to
10% of the impacted
entities, whichever
is greater, identified
in the Operating
Plan(s) as to their
role in the plan(s).
more than 10% and
less than or equal to
15% of the entities,
whichever is greater,
identified in the
Operating Plan(s) as
to their role in the
plan(s).
15% of the impacted
entities identified in
the Operating Plan(s)
as to their role in the
plan(s).
R6
Operations
Planning
Medium
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Transmission
Operator did not
provide its Operating
Plan(s) for next-day
operations as
identified in
Requirement R2 to its
Reliability
Coordinator.
R7
Operations
Planning
Medium
N/A
N/A
N/A
The Balancing
Authority did not
provide its Operating
Plan(s) for next-day
operations as
identified in
Requirement R4 to its
Reliability
Coordinator.
Page 6 of 10
Standard TOP-002-4 — Operations Planning
D. Regional Variances
None.
E. Interpretations
None.
F. Associated Documents
Operating Plan - An Operating Plan includes general Operating Processes and specific
Operating Procedures. It may be an overview document which provides a prescription for
an Operating Plan for the next-day, or it may be a specific plan to address a specific SOL or
IROL exceedance identified in the Operational Planning Analysis (OPA). Consistent with the
NERC definition, Operating Plans can be general in nature, or they can be specific plans to
address specific reliability issues. The use of the term Operating Plan in the revised
TOP/IRO standards allows room for both. An Operating Plan references processes and
procedures which are available to the System Operator on a daily basis to allow the
operator to reliably address conditions which may arise throughout the day. It is valid for
tomorrow, the day after, and the day after that. Operating Plans should be augmented by
temporary operating guides which outline prevention/mitigation plans for specific
situations which are identified day-to-day in an OPA or a Real-time Assessment (RTA). As
the definition in the Glossary of Terms states, a restoration plan is an example of an
Operating Plan. It contains all the overarching principles that the System Operator needs to
work his/her way through the restoration process. It is not a specific document written for a
specific blackout scenario but rather a collection of tools consisting of processes,
procedures, and automated software systems that are available to the operator to use in
restoring the system. An Operating Plan can in turn be looked upon in a similar manner. It
does not contain a prescription for the specific set-up for tomorrow but contains a
treatment of all the processes, procedures, and automated software systems that are at the
operator’s disposal. The existence of an Operating Plan, however, does not preclude the
need for creating specific action plans for specific SOL or IROL exceedances identified in the
OPA. When a Reliability Coordinator performs an OPA, the analysis may reveal instances of
possible SOL or IROL exceedances for pre- or post-Contingency conditions. In these
instances, Reliability Coordinators are expected to ensure that there are plans in place to
prevent or mitigate those SOLs or IROLs, should those operating conditions be encountered
the next day. The Operating Plan may contain a description of the process by which specific
prevention or mitigation plans for day-to-day SOL or IROL exceedances identified in the OPA
are handled and communicated. This approach could alleviate any potential administrative
burden associated with perceived requirements for continual day-to-day updating of “the
Operating Plan document” for compliance purposes.
Page 7 of 10
Standard TOP-002-4 — Operations Planning
Version History
Version
Date
Action
Change Tracking
0
April 1, 2005
Effective Date
New
0
August 8, 2005
Removed “Proposed” from Effective
Date
Errata
1
August 2, 2006
Adopted by Board of Trustees
Revised
2
November 1, 2006
Adopted by Board of Trustees
Revised
2
June 14, 2007
Fixed typo in R11., (subject to …)
Errata
2a
February 10, 2009
Added Appendix 1 – Interpretation of
R11 approved by BOT on February 10,
2009
Interpretation
2a
December 2, 2009
Interpretation of R11 approved by FERC
on December 2, 2009
Same Interpretation
2b
November 4, 2010
Added Appendix 2 – Interpretation of
R10 adopted by the Board of Trustees
2b
October 20, 2011
FERC Order issued approving the
Interpretation of R10 (FERC’s Order
became effective on October 20, 2011)
2.1b
March 8, 2012
Errata adopted by Standards
Committee;
Errata
(Removed unnecessary language from
the Effective Date section. Deleted
retired sub-requirements from
Requirement R14)
2.1b
April 11, 2012
Additional errata adopted by Standards
Committee; (Deleted language from
retired sub-requirement from Measure
M7)
Errata
2.1b
September 13, 2012
FERC approved
Errata
3
May 6, 2012
Revisions under Project 2007-03
Revised
Page 8 of 10
Standard TOP-002-4 — Operations Planning
3
May 9, 2012
Adopted by Board of Trustees
Revised
4
April 2014
Revisions under Project 2014-03
Revised
4
November 13, 2014
Adopted by NERC Board of Trustees
Revisions under
Project 2014-03
Page 9 of 10
Standard TOP-002-4 — Guidelines and Technical Basis
Guidelines and Technical Basis
Rationale:
During development of this standard, text boxes were embedded within the standard to explain
the rationale for various parts of the standard. Upon BOT approval, the text from the rationale
text boxes was moved to this section.
Rationale for Definitions:
Changes made to the proposed definitions were made in order to respond to issues raised in
NOPR paragraphs 55, 73, and 74 dealing with analysis of SOLs in all time horizons, questions on
Protection Systems and Special Protection Systems in NOPR paragraph 78, and
recommendations on phase angles from the SW Outage Report (recommendation 27). The
intent of such changes is to ensure that Real-time Assessments contain sufficient details to
result in an appropriate level of situational awareness. Some examples include: 1) analyzing
phase angles which may result in the implementation of an Operating Plan to adjust generation
or curtail transactions so that a Transmission facility may be returned to service, or 2)
evaluating the impact of a modified Contingency resulting from the status change of a Special
Protection Scheme from enabled/in-service to disabled/out-of-service.
Rationale for R1:
Terms deleted in Requirement R1 as they are now contained in the revised definition of
Operational Planning Analysis
Rationale for R2:
The change to Requirement R2 is in response to NOPR paragraph 42 and in concert with
proposed changes made to proposed TOP-001-4
Rationale for R3:
Changes in response to IERP recommendation
Rationale for R4 and R5:
These Requirements were added to address IERP recommendations
Rationale for R6 and R7:
Added in response to SW Outage Report recommendation 1
Page 10 of 10
Reliability Standard TOP-003-3
Standard TOP-003-3 — Operational Reliability Data
A. Introduction
1.
Title: Operational Reliability Data
2.
Number: TOP-003-3
3.
Purpose: To ensure that the Transmission Operator and Balancing Authority have
data needed to fulfill their operational and planning responsibilities.
4.
Applicability:
4.1. Transmission Operator
4.2. Balancing Authority
4.3. Generator Owner
4.4. Generator Operator
4.5. Load-Serving Entity
4.6. Transmission Owner
4.7. Distribution Provider
5.
Effective Date:
See Implementation Plan.
6.
Background:
See Project 2014-03 project page.
B. Requirements and Measures
R1. Each Transmission Operator shall maintain a documented specification for the data
necessary for it to perform its Operational Planning Analyses, Real-time monitoring,
and Real-time Assessments. The data specification shall include, but not be limited to:
[Violation Risk Factor: Low] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]
1.1.
A list of data and information needed by the Transmission Operator to
support its Operational Planning Analyses, Real-time monitoring, and Realtime Assessments including non-BES data and external network data as
deemed necessary by the Transmission Operator.
1.2.
Provisions for notification of current Protection System and Special Protection
System status or degradation that impacts System reliability.
1.3.
A periodicity for providing data.
1.4.
The deadline by which the respondent is to provide the indicated data.
M1. Each Transmission Operator shall make available its dated, current, in force
documented specification for data.
Page 1 of 10
Standard TOP-003-3 — Operational Reliability Data
R2.
Each Balancing Authority shall maintain a documented specification for the data
necessary for it to perform its analysis functions and Real-time monitoring. The data
specification shall include, but not be limited to: [Violation Risk Factor: Low] [Time
Horizon: Operations Planning]
2.1.
A list of data and information needed by the Balancing Authority to support
its analysis functions and Real-time monitoring.
2.2.
Provisions for notification of current Protection System and Special Protection
System status or degradation that impacts System reliability.
2.3.
A periodicity for providing data.
2.4.
The deadline by which the respondent is to provide the indicated data.
M2. Each Balancing Authority shall make available its dated, current, in force documented
specification for data.
R3. Each Transmission Operator shall distribute its data specification to entities that have
data required by the Transmission Operator’s Operational Planning Analyses, Realtime monitoring, and Real-time Assessment. [Violation Risk Factor: Low] [Time
Horizon: Operations Planning]
M3. Each Transmission Operator shall make available evidence that it has distributed its
data specification to entities that have data required by the Transmission Operator’s
Operational Planning Analyses, Real-time monitoring, and Real-time Assessments.
Such evidence could include but is not limited to web postings with an electronic
notice of the posting, dated operator logs, voice recordings, postal receipts showing
the recipient, date and contents, or e-mail records.
R4. Each Balancing Authority shall distribute its data specification to entities that have
data required by the Balancing Authority’s analysis functions and Real-time
monitoring. [Violation Risk Factor: Low] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]
M4. Each Balancing Authority shall make available evidence that it has distributed its data
specification to entities that have data required by the Balancing Authority’s analysis
functions and Real-time monitoring. Such evidence could include but is not limited to
web postings with an electronic notice of the posting, dated operator logs, voice
recordings, postal receipts showing the recipient, or e-mail records.
R5. Each Transmission Operator, Balancing Authority, Generator Owner, Generator
Operator, Load-Serving Entity, Transmission Owner, and Distribution Provider
receiving a data specification in Requirement R3 or R4 shall satisfy the obligations of
the documented specifications using: [Violation Risk Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon:
Operations Planning, Same-Day Operations, Real-time Operations]
5.1. A mutually agreeable format
5.2. A mutually agreeable process for resolving data conflicts
5.3. A mutually agreeable security protocol
Page 2 of 10
Standard TOP-003-3 — Operational Reliability Data
M5. Each Transmission Operator, Balancing Authority, Generator Owner, Generator
Operator, Load-Serving Entity, Transmission Owner, and Distribution Provider
receiving a data specification in Requirement R3 or R4 shall make available evidence
that it has satisfied the obligations of the documented specifications. Such evidence
could include, but is not limited to, electronic or hard copies of data transmittals or
attestations of receiving entities.
C. Compliance
1.
Compliance Monitoring Process
1.1. Compliance Monitoring Process
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Enforcement Authority”
(CEA) means NERC or the Regional Entity in their respective roles of monitoring
and enforcing compliance with the NERC Reliability Standards.
1.2. Compliance Monitoring and Assessment Processes
As defined in the NERC Rules of Procedure, “Compliance Monitoring and
Assessment Processes” refers to the identification of the processes that will be
used to evaluate data or information for the purpose of assessing performance
or outcomes with the associated reliability standard.
1.3. Data Retention
The following evidence retention periods identify the period of time an entity is
required to retain specific evidence to demonstrate compliance. For instances
where the evidence retention period specified below is shorter than the time
since the last audit, the Compliance Enforcement Authority may ask an entity to
provide other evidence to show that it was compliant for the full time period
since the last audit.
Each responsible entity shall keep data or evidence to show compliance as
identified below unless directed by its Compliance Enforcement Authority to
retain specific evidence for a longer period of time as part of an investigation:
Each Transmission Operator shall retain its dated, current, in force, documented
specification for the data necessary for it to perform its Operational Planning
Analyses, Real-time monitoring, and Real-time Assessments in accordance with
Requirement R1 and Measurement M1 as well as any documents in force since
the last compliance audit.
Each Balancing Authority shall retain its dated, current, in force, documented
specification for the data necessary for it to perform its analysis functions and
Real-time monitoring in accordance with Requirement R2 and Measurement M2
as well as any documents in force since the last compliance audit.
Each Transmission Operator shall retain evidence for three calendar years that it
has distributed its data specification to entities that have data required by the
Page 3 of 10
Standard TOP-003-3 — Operational Reliability Data
Transmission Operator’s Operational Planning Analyses, Real-time monitoring,
and Real-time Assessments in accordance with Requirement R3 and
Measurement M3.
Each Balancing Authority shall retain evidence for three calendar years that it
has distributed its data specification to entities that have data required by the
Balancing Authority’s analysis functions and Real-time monitoring in accordance
with Requirement R4 and Measurement M4.
Each Balancing Authority, Generator Owner, Generator Operator, Load-Serving
Entity, Transmission Operator, Transmission Owner, and Distribution Provider
receiving a data specification in Requirement R3 or R4 shall retain evidence for
the most recent 90-calendar days that it has satisfied the obligations of the
documented specifications in accordance with Requirement R5 and
Measurement M5.
If a responsible entity is found non-compliant, it shall keep information related
to the non-compliance until mitigation is complete and approved or the time
period specified above, whichever is longer.
The Compliance Enforcement Authority shall keep the last audit records and all
requested and submitted subsequent audit records.
1.4. Additional Compliance Information
None.
Page 4 of 10
Standard TOP-003-3 — Operational Reliability Data
Table of Compliance Elements
R#
R1
Time Horizon
Operations
Planning
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Low
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
The Transmission
Operator did not
include one of the
parts (Part 1.1
through Part 1.4) of
the documented
specification for the
data necessary for it
to perform its
Operational Planning
Analyses, Real-time
monitoring, and Realtime Assessments.
The Transmission
Operator did not
include two of the
parts (Part 1.1
through Part 1.4) of
the documented
specification for the
data necessary for it
to perform its
Operational Planning
Analyses, Real-time
monitoring, and Realtime Assessments.
The Transmission
Operator did not
include three of the
parts (Part 1.1
through Part 1.4) of
the documented
specification for the
data necessary for it
to perform its
Operational Planning
Analyses, Real-time
monitoring, and Realtime Assessments.
The Transmission
Operator did not
include four of the
parts (Part 1.1
through Part 1.4) of
the documented
specification for the
data necessary for it
to perform its
Operational Planning
Analyses, Real-time
monitoring, and Realtime Assessments.
OR,
The Transmission
Operator did not have
a documented
specification for the
data necessary for it
to perform its
Operational Planning
Analyses, Real-time
monitoring, and Realtime Assessments.
Page 5 of 10
Standard TOP-003-3 — Operational Reliability Data
R#
R2
Time Horizon
Operations
Planning
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Low
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
The Balancing
Authority did not
include one of the
parts (Part 2.1
through Part 2.4) of
the documented
specification for the
data necessary for it
to perform its analysis
functions and Realtime monitoring.
The Balancing
Authority did not
include two of the
parts (Part 2.1
through Part 2.4) of
the documented
specification for the
data necessary for it
to perform its analysis
functions and Realtime monitoring.
The Balancing
Authority did not
include three of the
parts (Part 2.1
through Part 2.4) of
the documented
specification for the
data necessary for it
to perform its analysis
functions and Realtime monitoring.
The Balancing
Authority did not
include four of the
parts (Part 2.1
through Part 2.4) of
the documented
specification for the
data necessary for it
to perform its analysis
functions and Realtime monitoring.
OR,
The Balancing
Authority did not
have a documented
specification for the
data necessary for it
to perform its analysis
functions and Realtime monitoring.
For the Requirement R3 and R4 VSLs only, the intent of the SDT is to start with the Severe VSL first and then to work your way to
the left until you find the situation that fits. In this manner, the VSL will not be discriminatory by size of entity. If a small entity
has just one affected reliability entity to inform, the intent is that that situation would be a Severe violation.
R3
Operations
Planning
Low
The Transmission
Operator did not
distribute its data
The Transmission
Operator did not
distribute its data
The Transmission
Operator did not
distribute its data
The Transmission
Operator did not
distribute its data
Page 6 of 10
Standard TOP-003-3 — Operational Reliability Data
R#
R4
Time Horizon
Operations
Planning
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Low
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
specification to one
entity, or 5% or less of
the entities,
whichever is greater,
that have data
required by the
Transmission
Operator’s
Operational Planning
Analyses, Real-time
monitoring, and Realtime Assessments.
specification to two
entities, or more than
5% and less than or
equal to10% of the
reliability entities,
whichever is greater,
that have data
required by the
Transmission
Operator’s
Operational Planning
Analyses, Real-time
monitoring, and Realtime Assessments.
specification to three
entities, or more than
10% and less than or
equal to 15% of the
reliability entities,
whichever is greater,
that have data
required by the
Transmission
Operator’s
Operational Planning
Analyses, Real-time
monitoring, and Realtime Assessments.
specification to four
or more entities, or
more than 15% of the
entities that have
data required by the
Transmission
Operator’s
Operational Planning
Analyses, Real-time
monitoring, and Realtime Assessments.
The Balancing
Authority did not
distribute its data
specification to one
entity, or 5% or less of
the entities,
whichever is greater,
that have data
required by the
Balancing Authority’s
analysis functions and
Real-time monitoring.
The Balancing
Authority did not
distribute its data
specification to two
entities, or more than
5% and less than or
equal to 10% of the
entities, whichever is
greater, that have
data required by the
Balancing Authority’s
analysis functions and
Real-time monitoring.
The Balancing
Authority did not
distribute its data
specification to three
entities, or more than
10% and less than or
equal to 15% of the
entities, whichever is
greater, that have
data required by the
Balancing Authority’s
analysis functions and
Real-time monitoring.
The Balancing
Authority did not
distribute its data
specification to four
or more entities, or
more than 15% of the
entities that have
data required by the
Balancing Authority’s
analysis functions and
Real-time monitoring.
Page 7 of 10
Standard TOP-003-3 — Operational Reliability Data
R#
R5
Time Horizon
Operations
Planning,
Same-Day
Operations,
Real-time
Operations
Violation Severity Levels
VRF
Medium
Lower VSL
Moderate VSL
High VSL
Severe VSL
The responsible
entity receiving a data
specification in
Requirement R3 or R4
satisfied the
obligations in the data
specification but did
not meet one of the
criteria shown in
Requirement R5
(Parts 5.1 – 5.3).
The responsible entity
receiving a data
specification in
Requirement R3 or R4
satisfied the
obligations in the data
specification but did
not meet two of the
criteria shown in
Requirement R5
(Parts 5.1 – 5.3).
The responsible entity
receiving a data
specification in
Requirement R3 or R4
satisfied the
obligations in the data
specification but did
not meet three of the
criteria shown in
Requirement R5
(Parts 5.1 – 5.3).
The responsible entity
receiving a data
specification in
Requirement R3 or R4
did not satisfy the
obligations of the
documented
specifications for
data.
Page 8 of 10
Standard TOP-003-3 — Operational Reliability Data
D. Regional Variances
None.
E. Interpretations
None.
F. Associated Documents
None.
Version History
Version
Date
0
April 1, 2005
0
August 8, 2005
Action
Effective Date
Removed “Proposed” from Effective
Date
Modified R1.2
Modified M1
1
Change Tracking
New
Errata
Revised
Replaced Levels of Non-compliance
with the Feb 28, BOT approved
Violation Severity Levels (VSLs)
1
October 17, 2008
Adopted by NERC Board of Trustees
1
March 17, 2011
Order issued by FERC approving TOP003-1 (approval effective 5/23/11)
2
May 6, 2012
Revised under Project 2007-03
Revised
2
May 9, 2012
Adopted by Board of Trustees
Revised
3
April 2014
Changes pursuant to Project 2014-03
Revised
3
November 13, 2014 Adopted by Board of Trustees
Revisions under
Project 2014-03
Page 9 of 10
Standard TOP-003-3 — Guidelines and Technical Basis
Guidelines and Technical Basis
Rationale:
During development of this standard, text boxes were embedded within the standard to explain
the rationale for various parts of the standard. Upon BOT approval, the text from the rationale
text boxes was moved to this section.
Rationale for Definitions:
Changes made to the proposed definitions were made in order to respond to issues raised in
NOPR paragraphs 55, 73, and 74 dealing with analysis of SOLs in all time horizons, questions on
Protection Systems and Special Protection Systems in NOPR paragraph 78, and
recommendations on phase angles from the SW Outage Report (recommendation 27). The
intent of such changes is to ensure that Real-time Assessments contain sufficient details to
result in an appropriate level of situational awareness. Some examples include: 1) analyzing
phase angles which may result in the implementation of an Operating Plan to adjust generation
or curtail transactions so that a Transmission facility may be returned to service, or 2)
evaluating the impact of a modified Contingency resulting from the status change of a Special
Protection Scheme from enabled/in-service to disabled/out-of-service.
Rationale for R1:
Changes to proposed Requirement R1, Part 1.1 are in response to issues raised in NOPR
paragraph 67 on the need for obtaining non-BES and external network data necessary for the
Transmission Operator to fulfill its responsibilities.
Proposed Requirement R1, Part 1.2 is in response to NOPR paragraph 78 on relay data. The
language has been moved from approved PRC-001-1.
Corresponding changes have been made to Requirement R2 for the Balancing Authority and to
proposed IRO-010-2, Requirement R1 for the Reliability Coordinator.
Rationale for R5:
Proposed Requirement R5, Part 5.3 is in response to NOPR paragraph 92 where concerns were
raised about data exchange through secured networks.
Page 10 of 10
TOP/IRO Reliability Standards Definitions
Definitions
Project 2014-03 Revisions to TOP/IRO Reliability Standards
As part of the work in Project 2014-03 Revisions to TOP/IRO Reliability Standards, the SDT is proposing
changes to two existing definitions: Operational Planning Analysis and Real-time Assessment.
The currently-effective definition of Operational Planning Analysis is: “An analysis of the expected system
conditions for the next day’s operation. (That analysis may be performed either a day ahead or as much
as 12 months ahead.) Expected system conditions include things such as load forecast(s), generation
output levels, and known system constraints (transmission facility outages, generator outages, equipment
limitations, etc.).”
The proposed version of the definition of Operational Planning Analysis is: “An evaluation of projected
system conditions to assess anticipated (pre-Contingency) and potential (post-Contingency) conditions for
next-day operations. The evaluation shall reflect applicable inputs including, but not limited to, load
forecasts; generation output levels; Interchange; known Protection System and Special Protection System
status or degradation; Transmission outages; generator outages; Facility Ratings; and identified phase
angle and equipment limitations. (Operational Planning Analysis may be provided through internal
systems or through third-party services.)”
The currently-effective definition of Real-time Assessment is: “An examination of existing and expected
system conditions, conducted by collecting and reviewing immediately available data.”
The proposed version of the definition of Real-time Assessment is: “An evaluation of system conditions
using Real-time data to assess existing (pre-Contingency) and potential (post-Contingency) operating
conditions. The assessment shall reflect applicable inputs including, but not limited to: load, generation
output levels, known Protection System and Special Protection System status or degradation,
Transmission outages, generator outages, Interchange, Facility Ratings, and identified phase angle and
equipment limitations. (Real-time Assessment may be provided through internal systems or through thirdparty services.)”
The definitions were revised in response to issues raised in NOPR paragraphs 55, 73, and 74 on analysis
and monitoring of SOLs in all time horizons, NOPR paragraph 70 (updating study results in Real-time), and
NOPR paragraph 78 (Protection System coordination). The phase angle item was added in response to
SW Outage Report recommendation 27.
The two definitions are also employed in the following proposed project standards: TOP-001-3, TOP-0024, TOP-003-3, IRO-002-4, IRO-008-2, and IRO-010-2. These definitions are not used in any other
standards, either currently-effective or in development in any other project.
| File Type | application/pdf |
| Author | Courtney Baughan |
| File Modified | 2015-12-01 |
| File Created | 2015-03-18 |