UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

18 CFR Part 40

[Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000]

Electric Reliability Organization Proposal to Retire

Requirements in Reliability Standards Under the NERC Standards Efficiency Review

(January 23, 2020)

AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) proposes to 

approve the retirement of 74 Reliability Standard requirements. The North American 

Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), the Commission-certified Electric Reliability 

Organization, submitted the proposed retirements for Commission approval. The 

Commission also proposes to remand one requirement submitted for retirement by NERC

and seeks additional information from NERC on two requirements submitted for 

retirement.

DATES: Comments are due [INSERT DATE 60 days after date of publication in the

FEDERAL REGISTER].

ADDRESSES: Comments, identified by docket number, may be filed in the following 

ways: 

• Electronic Filing through http://www.ferc.gov. Documents created electronically 

using word processing software should be filed in native applications or print-toPDF format and not a scanned format.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 2 -

• Mail/Hand Delivery: Those unable to file electronically may mail or hand-deliver 

comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426.

Instructions: For detailed instructions on submitting comments and additional 

information on the rulemaking process, see the Comment Procedures Section of this 

document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Andres Lopez (Technical Information)

Office of Electric Reliability, Division of Reliability Standards and Security

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

888 First Street, NE 

Washington, DC 20426 

Telephone: (202) 502-6128

Mark Bennett (Legal Information)

Office of the General Counsel

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

888 First Street, NE 

Washington, DC 20426

Telephone: (202) 502-8524

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
170 FERC ¶ 61,032

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Electric Reliability Organization Proposal to Retire

Requirements in Reliability Standards Under the NERC 

Standards Efficiency Review

Docket Nos. RM19-16-000

RM19-17-000

NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING

(January 23, 2020)

1. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of the Federal Power Act (FPA),1 the Commission 

proposes to approve to retire 74 of the 77 Reliability Standard requirements requested for 

retirement by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation’s (NERC).

2

 As 

explained in NERC’s two petitions, the 74 requirements we propose to approve: 

(1) provide little or no reliability benefit; (2) are administrative in nature or relate 

expressly to commercial or business practices; or (3) are redundant with other Reliability 

Standards. NERC’s justifications for retiring the 74 requirements are largely consistent 

with the Commission-approved bases for retiring Reliability Standard requirements 

articulated in prior proceedings.3

 The Commission also proposes to approve the 

 1 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2).

2 The proposed retirements will result in the elimination of 10 Reliability 

Standards and the creation of modified versions of another seven Reliability Standards. 

3 North American Electric Reliability Corp., 138 FERC ¶ 61,193, at P 81 

(March 2012 Order), order on reh’g and clarification, 139 FERC ¶ 61,168 (2012); 

Electric Reliability Organization Proposal to Retire Requirements in Reliability 

Standards, Order No. 788, 145 FERC ¶ 61,147, at P 1 (2013). 
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 2 -

associated violation risk factors, violation severity levels, implementation plan, and 

effective dates proposed by NERC.

2. The Commission believes that the proposed retirements will further the efficiency 

of the Reliability Standards program by reducing duplicative or otherwise unnecessary 

regulatory burden. Further, we agree with NERC that the retirement of the Reliability 

Standard provisions will benefit overall reliability by allowing registered entities to focus 

their resources on complying with those Reliability Standard requirements that more 

effectively promote the reliable operation and planning of the nation’s bulk-power 

system.4

3. With respect to other requirements that NERC seeks to retire, the Commission 

seeks more information regarding NERC’s justification for retiring Reliability Standard 

FAC-008-3, Requirements R7 and R8. As discussed below, NERC’s petition avers that 

the two requirements are redundant of other Reliability Standards, but NERC does not 

explain how certain elements of these requirements are redundant. The Commission’s 

final determination on the retirement of these two requirements will be based on the 

comments received from NERC and others. 

4. In addition, pursuant to section 215(d)(4) of the FPA, the Commission proposes 

to remand Reliability Standard VAR-001-6.

5

 The new version of the Reliability 

Standard would eliminate Requirement R2 from currently-effective Reliability 

 4 See NERC, Docket No. RM19-17-000, Petition at 7.

5 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(4).
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 3 -

Standard VAR-001-5, which requires transmission operators to schedule sufficient 

reactive resources to regulate voltage levels under normal and contingency conditions. 

As discussed below, we disagree with NERC’s justification for retirement that 

Requirement R2 is redundant or not necessary for reliability. Accordingly, we propose to 

remand Reliability Standard VAR-001-6 in order to retain this requirement.

I. Background

A. Section 215 of the FPA

5. Section 215 of the FPA requires the Commission-certified Electric Reliability 

Organization (ERO) to develop mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, subject 

to Commission review and approval. Once approved, the Reliability Standards may be 

enforced in the United States by the ERO subject to Commission oversight, or by the 

Commission independently.6

 Pursuant to the requirements of FPA section 215, the 

Commission established a process to select and certify an ERO7 and, subsequently, 

certified NERC as the ERO.8

 6 Id. 824o(e)(3). 

7 Rules Concerning Certification of the Electric Reliability Organization; and 

Procedures for the Establishment, Approval, and Enforcement of Electric Reliability 

Standards, Order No. 672, 114 FERC ¶ 61,104, order on reh’g, Order No. 672-A, 

114 FERC ¶ 61,328 (2006). 

8 North American Electric Reliability Corp., 116 FERC ¶ 61,062, order on 

reh’g and compliance, 117 FERC ¶ 61,126 (2006), aff’d sub nom. Alcoa Inc. v. FERC, 

564 F.3d 1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 4 -

B. Prior Retirements of Reliability Standard Requirements

6. In the March 2012 Order, the Commission observed that NERC’s compliance 

program could be made more efficient by removing existing requirements deemed 

unnecessary for reliability.9

 The Commission explained that if NERC believes certain 

Reliability Standards or requirements should be revised or removed, “we invite NERC to 

make specific proposals to the Commission identifying the Standards or requirements and 

setting forth in detail the technical basis for its belief.”10 Further, the Commission 

encouraged NERC “to propose appropriate mechanisms to identify and remove from the 

Commission-approved Reliability Standards unnecessary or redundant requirements.”11

7. In response, in February 2013, NERC proposed to retire 34 requirements within 

19 Reliability Standards based on the justification that the requirements “are redundant or 

otherwise unnecessary” and that “violations of these requirements . . . pose a lesser risk to 

the reliability of the Bulk-Power System.”12 NERC explained that the proposed 

retirements were based upon three major criteria: (1) whether a proposed retirement 

would create a reliability gap; (2) whether the requirement in question is administrative; 

involves data collection, retention, documentation, periodic updates or reporting; is a 

commercial or business practice; or is redundant; and (3) consideration of responses to 

 9 March 2012 Order, 138 FERC ¶ 61,193 at P 81.

10 Id.

11 Id.

12 NERC, Petition, Docket No. RM13-8-000, at 2 (filed Feb. 28, 2013).
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 5 -

seven questions regarding the proposed retirement, including whether the requirement 

was part of a “find, fix and track” filing, the requirement’s violation risk factor level, and 

whether the requirement is part of on-going standards development project.

13

8. On November 21, 2013, the Commission approved the retirements that NERC 

proposed, and determined that the retirements “meet the benchmarks” set forth in the 

March 2012 Order that “requirements proposed for retirement either: (1) provide little 

protection for Bulk-Power System reliability; or (2) are redundant with other aspects of 

the Reliability Standards.”14 

C. NERC Petitions

1. NERC Standards Efficiency Review Project

9. NERC states that the proposed retirements are the product of its Standards 

Efficiency Review (SER) Project. NERC explains that the SER Project began in 2017 

“to achieve [NERC’s] long-term strategic goal of establishing risk-based controls to 

minimize [Bulk-Power System] reliability risk while also driving operational efficiencies 

and effectiveness.”15 NERC states that in Phase 1 of the SER Project, teams of industry 

experts conducted a risk-based analysis of non-CIP Reliability Standards.

16 The purpose 

 13 Id. at 4.

14 Electric Reliability Organization Proposal to Retire Requirements in Reliability 

Standards, Order No. 788, 145 FERC ¶ 61,147 (2013). 

15 Docket No. RM19-16-000 Petition at 3; Docket No. RM19-17-000 Petition at 4.

16 NERC states that Phase 2 of the SER Project will “consider recommendations 

for Reliability Standard revisions that would further improve the efficiency of the body of 

NERC Reliability Standards, such as through consolidation of Reliability Standard 

requirements . . . [and will] consider recommendations for standards-based improvements 
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 6 -

of this review, according to NERC, was “to identify Reliability Standard requirements 

that provide little or no benefit to reliability and should be retired.”17 NERC maintains 

that, unlike the periodic reviews18 of Reliability Standards performed by NERC pursuant 

to the NERC Rules of Procedure, the SER Project involved “exploring the relationships 

between the different Reliability Standards in a deeper way than would be feasible during 

a targeted periodic review . . . [and] allowed NERC to identify requirements that are not 

necessary for reliability or that are redundant to other requirements.”19

10. NERC contends that the SER Project “was conducted in an open and transparent 

manner, with broad industry participation.”20 NERC states that it initiated the standards 

development process to consider the retirement recommendations generated by the SER 

Project.

 

that would further reduce inefficiencies and promote effectiveness.” Docket No. RM19-

16-000 Petition at 6-7; Docket No. RM19-17-000 Petition at 7.

17 Docket No. RM19-16-000 Petition at 5; Docket No. RM19-17-000 Petition at 6.

18 The NERC Rules of Procedure require a periodic review of each Reliability 

Standard; and they provide for a five-year cyclical review of Reliability Standards 

approved by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and ten-year cyclical 

review for Reliability Standards not approved by ANSI. See NERC Rules of Procedure, 

Section 317 and Appendix 3A (Standards Process Manual), section 13.0.

19 Docket No. RM19-16-000 Petition at 5; Docket No. RM19-17-000 Petition at 6.

20 Docket No. RM19-16-000 Petition at 5-6; Docket No. RM19-17-000 Petition 

at 7.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 7 -

2. IRO, TOP and VAR Petition (Docket No. RM19-16-000)

11. On June 7, 2019, in Docket No. RM19-16-000, NERC submitted for Commission 

approval new versions of three Reliability Standards: IRO-002-7 (Reliability 

Coordination—Monitoring and Analysis), TOP-001-5 (Transmission Operations), and 

VAR-001-6 (Voltage and Reactive Control). NERC explains that approval of the new 

versions would result in the retirement of four requirements from the currently-effective 

versions of the Reliability Standards.

21 Three of the existing requirements in Reliability 

Standards IRO-002 and TOP-001 require the reliability coordinator, transmission 

operator, and balancing authority to have data exchange capabilities with entities having 

data needed to perform operational planning analyses and to develop operating plans for 

next-day operations. The fourth requirement, in Reliability Standard VAR-001, requires 

the transmission operator to schedule the reactive resources needed to regulate voltage 

levels under normal and contingency conditions. NERC contends that these four 

requirements are redundant and not necessary “because the performance required by 

these requirements is inherent to the performance of other Reliability Standard 

requirements.”22 

 21 The proposed revised versions of the IRO, TOP and VAR Reliability Standards 

are not attached to the NOPR. The complete text of the Reliability Standards is available 

on the Commission’s eLibrary document retrieval system in Docket No. RM19-16-000 

and is posted on the ERO’s website, http://www.nerc.com.

22 NERC IRO, TOP and VAR Petition at 7.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 8 -

12. In particular, NERC maintains that the data exchange capability requirement 

in Reliability Standard IRO-002-5, Requirement R1 is covered by Reliability 

Standard IRO-008-2, Requirement R1, which obligates the reliability coordinator to 

perform operational planning analyses to assess whether the planned operations for the 

next-day will exceed System Operating Limits and Interconnection Reliability Operating 

Limits within its Wide Area. NERC asserts that “to perform the required operational 

planning analyses, the Reliability Coordinator must have the data it deems necessary 

from those entities that possess it.”23

13. Additionally, regarding data exchange, NERC cites Reliability Standard 

IRO-010-2 (Reliability Coordinator Data Specification and Collection) and its stated 

purpose of preventing instability, uncontrolled separation, or cascading outages “by 

ensuring the Reliability Coordinator has the data it needs to monitor and assess the 

operation of its Reliability Coordinator Area.”24 NERC states that under Reliability 

Standard IRO-010-2, Requirements R1, R2 and R3, the reliability coordinator must 

specify the data necessary for it to perform its operational planning analyses and provide 

the specifications to the entities from which it needs data who then must comply with the 

data request using a mutually agreeable format and security protocols. 

 23 Id. at 14-15.

24 Id. at 15.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 9 -

14. NERC observes that the performance of the requirements it cites is premised on 

the existence of data exchange capabilities, “regardless of whether a separate requirement 

expressly requires the Reliability Coordinator to have data exchange capabilities in 

place.”25 NERC asserts that Reliability Standard IRO-002-5, Requirement R1 provides 

no additional reliability benefit and “is therefore unnecessary and redundant and should 

be retired.”26

15. NERC likewise states that Requirements R19 and R22 of Reliability Standard 

TOP-001-4 merely require transmission operators and balancing authorities respectively 

to have data exchange capabilities with entities from which they need data to perform 

operational planning analyses (transmission operators) and next-day Operating Plans 

(balancing authorities). NERC maintains, however, that Reliability Standard TOP-002-4 

Requirement R1, requires a transmission operator to perform an operational planning 

analyses to determine whether next-day operations within its area will exceed System 

Operating Limits. Also, NERC states that Requirement R4 requires each balancing 

authority to have a next-day Operating Plan addressing expected generation resource 

commitment and dispatch, Interchange scheduling and related matters. NERC asserts 

that to satisfy these requirements, “each Transmission Operator and Balancing Authority 

must have the data it deems necessary from those entities that possess it.”27

 25 Id. 

26 Id.

27 Id. at 16.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 10 -

16. NERC also cites to Reliability Standard TOP-003-3 (Operational Reliability Data)

whose purpose is “to ensure that the Transmission Operator and Balancing Authority 

have data needed to fulfill their operational and planning responsibilities.” NERC 

contends that the requirements in Reliability Standard TOP-003-3 largely mirror the 

requirements in Reliability Standard IRO-010-2 discussed above, and thus, as with 

Reliability Standard IRO-010-2, transmission operators and balancing authorities must 

have data exchange capabilities with its reporting entities to satisfy the requirements of 

Reliability TOP-003-3. Therefore, NERC contends that Reliability Standards 

TOP-001-4, Requirements R19 and R22 are unnecessary and redundant and should be 

retired. 

17. With respect to proposed Reliability Standard VAR-001-6, NERC maintains that 

the revised version retires existing requirement R2, which requires each transmission 

operator to schedule “sufficient reactive resources to regulate voltage levels under normal 

and Contingency conditions.” NERC contends that the reliability need for sufficient 

reactive resources is adequately addressed by existing requirements in several other 

Reliability Standards and, therefore, is unnecessary. In particular, NERC states that 

Reliability Standards TOP-001-4, Requirement R10 and TOP-002-4, Requirement R1, 

require transmission operators to determine System Operating Limits and perform an 

operational planning analyses to assess whether planned next-day operations will exceed 

those limits and plan for addressing them. NERC explains that Reliability Standard 

TOP-001-4 requires each transmission operator to perform Real-time Assessments every 

30 minutes to identify possible System Operating Limit exceedances and initiate its 
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 11 -

Operating Plan to mitigate them. NERC states that “Operating Plans address the use of 

reactive resources if needed to operate within System Operating Limits, as well as any 

other adjustments that may be needed.”28

18. NERC observes that each transmission operator uses multiple tools to regulate 

voltage levels, including reactive control and Real-time Contingency Analysis, that

“allow the Transmission Operator to quantify the use of reactive resources. As such, a 

separate requirement specifying that the Transmission Operator must schedule 

‘sufficient’ reactive resources for normal and Contingency conditions is redundant and 

unnecessary for reliability.”29 Additionally, NERC states that each planning authority 

and transmission planner must assess a broad range of conditions and probable 

contingencies, including available reactive resources, under system studies required 

under Reliability Standard TPL-001-4, and develop a Corrective Action Plan30 to address 

reactive resource shortfalls, if needed. NERC concludes that given this “comprehensive 

and interdependent framework addressing System voltage needs in the operations and 

planning horizons . . . there is no need to have a distinct requirement expressly requiring 

the Transmission Operator to ‘schedule’ sufficient resources.”31 

 28 Id. at 20.

29 Id. at 20-21.

30 NERC defines Corrective Action Plan as “A list of actions and an associated 

time table for implementation to remedy a specific problem.” Glossary of Terms Used in 

NERC Reliability Standards (August 12, 2019).

31 Id. at 21.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 12 -

19. NERC requests that the Commission approve the implementation plan, attached to 

NERC’s petition as Exhibit B, and the associated violation risk factors and violation 

severity levels described in Exhibit D. The implementation plan provides that proposed 

Reliability Standards IRO-002-7, TOP-001-5, and VAR-001-6 would become effective 

on the first day of the first calendar quarter that is three months after regulatory approval. 

The currently-effective versions of the Reliability Standards would be retired 

immediately prior to the effective date of the revised Reliability Standards. NERC 

explains that the requested timeline accounts for the time entities will need to update their 

systems and related documentation.

3. FAC, INT, MOD and PRC Petition (Docket No. RM19-17-000)

20. On June 7, 2019, in Docket No. RM19-17-000, NERC submitted for Commission 

approval the proposed retirement of ten currently-effective Reliability Standards in their 

entirety without replacement.32 Additionally, NERC’s petition includes four proposed 

revised Reliability Standards reflecting the retirement of certain requirements from the 

currently-effective versions that NERC asserts are not needed for reliability: FAC-008-4 

 32 Reliability Standards FAC-013-2 (Assessment of Transfer Capability for the 

Near-term Transmission Planning Horizon), INT-004-3.1 (Dynamic Transfers), 

INT-010-2.1 (Interchange Initiation and Modification for Reliability), MOD-001-1a 

(Available Transmission System Capability), MOD-004-1 (Capacity Benefit Margin), 

MOD-008-1 (Transmission Reliability Margin Calculation Methodology), MOD-020-0 

(Providing Interruptible Demands and Direct Control Load Management Data to System 

Operations and Reliability Coordinators), MOD-028-2 (Area Interchange Methodology), 

MOD-029-2a (Rated System Path Methodology), and MOD-030-3 (Flowgate 

Methodology).
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 13 -

(Facility Ratings), INT-006-5 (Evaluation of Interchange Transactions), INT-009-3 

(Implementation of Interchange) and PRC-004-6 (Protection System Misoperation 

Identification and Correction).

33 NERC asserts that its proposals would not adversely 

impact reliability, but rather they “would benefit reliability by allowing entities to focus 

their resources on those Reliability Standard requirements that promote the reliable 

operation and planning of the BPS [Bulk-Power System] and avoid unnecessary 

regulatory burden.”34

21. NERC contends that the full FAC, INT, MOD and PRC Reliability Standards 

proposed for retirement are not necessary and that removing them would not adversely 

affect reliability.35 NERC states that retirement of the ten full Reliability Standards is 

justified because they are primarily administrative in nature or largely related to

commercial or business practices, and therefore no longer serve a reliability purpose.36 

For example, NERC states that the transfer capability assessment required under 

 33 The proposed revised versions of the FAC, INT and PRC Reliability Standards 

are not attached to the NOPR. The complete text of the Reliability Standards is available 

on the Commission’s eLibrary document retrieval system in Docket No. RM19-17-000 

and is posted on the ERO’s website, http://www.nerc.com. 

34 Docket No. RM19-17-000 Petition at 7.

35 The MOD A Reliability Standards proposed for retirement (MOD-001-1a, 

MOD-004-1, MOD-008-1, MOD-028-2, MOD-029-2a and MOD-030-3) are expected to 

be replaced by equivalent North American Energy Standards Board (NAESB) business 

practice standards. The Commission intends to coordinate the effective dates of the 

retirement of the MOD A Reliability Standards with the successor NAESB business 

practice standards.

36 Id. at 13-24.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 14 -

Reliability Standard FAC-013-2 “serves only a market function” and “is not an indicator 

of [bulk electric system] reliability.”37 In supporting its conclusion that Reliability 

Standard INT-010-2.1 primarily relates to commercial and business practices, NERC 

notes that in 2013 the NERC Independent Experts Review Panel recommended retiring 

the previous version of the Reliability Standard “due to overlap with the NAESB 

Electronic Tagging Functional Specification.”38 

22. Similarly, regarding the MOD Reliability Standards, NERC states that “[Available 

Transfer Capability] and [Available Flowgate Methodology], as well as e-Tags, are 

commercially-focused elements facilitating interchange and balancing of interchange,” 

and that system operators maintain reliability by monitoring Real-time flows based on 

System Operating Limits and Interconnection Reliability Operating Limits.39 In 

particular, NERC explains that information on Interruptible Demands and Direct Control 

Load Management required under Reliability Standard MOD-020-0 is not useful for 

transmission operators and reliability coordinators, “who must plan and operate the 

[Bulk-Power System] within System Operating Limits and Interconnection Reliability 

Operating Limits under the TOP and IRO Reliability Standards.”40

 37 Id. at 13.

38 Id. at 16-19.

39 Id. at 21.

40 Id. at 23.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 15 -

23. Regarding NERC’s proposed revised Reliability Standards, NERC states that the

data provision obligations of currently-effective Reliability Standard FAC-008-3,

Requirements R7 and R8 are redundant with Reliability Standards MOD-032-1, 

IRO-010-2 and TOP-003-3. NERC asserts that Requirements R3.1, R4 and R5 of 

currently-effective Reliability Standard INT-006-4 “provide little, if any, benefit or 

protection to the reliability operation of the [Bulk-Power System]”41 and that the 

substance of Requirements R4 and R5 in particular relate to commercial or business 

practices and are better addressed through the balancing authority’s e-Tag Authority 

Service.42 Also, NERC states that Requirement R1 of currently-effective Reliability 

Standard INT-009-2.1 is being revised to remove the reference to Reliability Standard 

INT-010, which is also proposed for retirement, and Requirement R2 is redundant with 

Reliability Standard BAL-005-1, Requirement R7.43 Finally, NERC states that it has 

determined that rather than the “specific, recurring and inflexible timeframe” set forth in 

Requirement R4 of currently-effective Reliability Standard PRC-004-5 for identifying the 

cause of a protection system misoperation, “it would be more effective to have entities 

investigate the causes of misoperations according to their own internal control policies 

and procedures.”44

 41 Id. at 29.

42 Id. at 29-31.

43 Id. at 31-32.

44 Id. at 34.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 16 -

24. NERC requests that the Commission approve the implementation plan, attached to 

NERC’s petition as Exhibit B, and the associated violation risk factors and violation 

severity levels, attached to NERC’s petition as Exhibit D, which are generally unchanged 

from the currently-effective versions. For the Reliability Standards retired in their 

entirety, NERC proposes an effective date that is immediately upon regulatory approval 

of the retirement. NERC also seeks to retire the currently-effective Reliability Standards 

FAC-008-3, INT-006-4, INT-009-2.1, and PRC-004-5(i) immediately prior to the 

effective date of their new versions.

II. Discussion 

25. Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of the FPA, the Commission proposes to approve 

NERC’s request to retire 74 Reliability Standard requirements as just, reasonable, not 

unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the public interest. NERC’s petitions 

provide an adequate basis to conclude that the requirements proposed for retirement: 

(1) provide little or no reliability benefit; (2) are administrative in nature or relate 

expressly to commercial or business practices; or (3) are redundant with other Reliability 

Standards. NERC’s justifications for retiring the 74 requirements are largely consistent 

with the retirement standard set forth by the Commission in Order No. 788 and with the 

determination that “requirements proposed for retirement can be removed from the 

Reliability Standards with little effect on reliability and an increase in efficiency of the 

ERO compliance program.”45

 45 Order No. 788, 145 FERC ¶ 61,147 at P 1.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 17 -

26. The proposal above does not include NERC’s request to retire Reliability Standard 

FAC-008-3, Requirements R7 and R8 and Reliability Standard VAR-001-5, Requirement 

R2. While NERC asserts that Reliability Standards MOD-032-1, IRO-010-2 and 

TOP-003-3 provide a basis for retiring Reliability Standard FAC-008-3, Requirements 

R7 and R8, we seek additional information on these proposed retirements because this 

rationale does not address elements of Requirements R7 and R8 that do not appear to be 

redundant.

27. In addition, we disagree with NERC’s assertion that Reliability Standard 

VAR-001-5, Requirement R2 is redundant or not necessary for reliability because we 

construe the requirement as essential to accomplish the purpose of the Reliability 

Standard. Accordingly, pursuant to section 215(d)(4) of the FPA, we propose to remand 

Reliability Standard VAR-001-6 in order to retain Requirement R2 in currently-effective 

Reliability Standard VAR-001-5. 

28. Below, we discuss the following issues: (A) proposed retirement of Reliability 

Standard FAC-008-3, Requirements R7 and R8; and (B) proposed retirement of 

Reliability Standard VAR-001-5, Requirement R2.

A. Proposed Retirement of Reliability Standard FAC-008-3, Requirements 

R7 and R8

NERC Petition

29. Reliability Standard FAC-008-3, Requirements R7 and R8 require generator 

owners and transmission owners, respectively, to provide facility ratings and related 

information to requesting reliability coordinators, planning coordinators, transmission 
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 18 -

planners, transmission owners and transmission operators. NERC asserts that 

requirements in Reliability Standards MOD-032-1, IRO-010-2, and TOP-003-3 render 

the data provision obligations of Requirements R7 and R8 in Reliability Standard 

FAC-008-3 redundant and therefore unnecessary for reliability. 

30. To support its redundancy claim, NERC explains that under Reliability Standard 

MOD-032-1, generator owners and transmission owners must provide information on 

power capabilities and facility ratings (Requirement R2) to enable planning coordinators 

and transmission planners to “jointly develop steady-state, dynamics, and short circuit 

modeling data requirements and reporting procedures for the Planning Coordinator’s 

planning area” (Requirement R1). NERC further explains that under Reliability Standard 

IRO-010-2, reliability coordinators must maintain “a documented specification for the 

data necessary to perform its Operational Planning Analyses, Real-time monitoring, and 

Real-time Assessments. This data necessarily includes Facility Ratings as inputs to 

System Operating Limit monitoring.”46 NERC notes that under Requirement R3, the 

transmission owner and generator owner must provide such data. Finally, NERC points 

out that under Reliability Standard TOP-003-3, the transmission operator must maintain 

data specifications (Requirement R1) and the transmission owner and generation owner 

must provide the requested data (Requirement R5). Relying on this framework of data 

specification and provision, NERC concludes that Reliability Standard FAC-008-3, 

 46 Id. at 28.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 19 -

Requirements R7 and R8 “are now redundant to other more robust Reliability Standards 

and are no longer needed for reliability.”47 

Discussion

31. We agree with NERC that the cited requirements in Reliability Standards 

MOD-032-1, IRO-010-2, and TOP-003-3 provide a basis for retiring certain elements of 

Reliability Standard FAC-008-3, Requirements R7 and R8. However, NERC’s petition 

does not address other elements of Requirements R7 and R8 that do not appear to be 

redundant. In particular, Requirements R7 and R8 of the currently-effective Reliability 

Standard require generator owners and transmission owners, respectively, to provide 

facility ratings to several functional entity types, including transmission owners. While 

NERC is correct that the three Reliability Standards it cites collectively require generator 

owners and transmission owners to provide facility ratings to reliability coordinators, 

planning coordinators, transmission planners, and transmission operators, these three 

Reliability Standards do not require the provision of facility ratings to transmission 

owners. Therefore, it appears that, if approved, the retirement of Requirements R7 and 

R8 would eliminate the mandatory exchange of facility rating-related information with 

transmission owners. This could, in turn, impact reliability since these requirements 

ensure that all transmission owners have accurate facility-related information in the 

models that they use to plan and operate the bulk electric system.

 47 Id.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 20 -

32. Separately, Reliability Standards MOD-032-1, IRO-010-2, and TOP-003-3 do not 

address sub-requirement R8.1.2 of Reliability Standard FAC-008-3, relating to the 

identity of the next most limiting equipment of a requested facility. Further, these 

Reliability Standards also do not account for sub-requirement R8.2, which requires the 

identification and thermal rating of the existing next most limiting equipment of facilities 

with a thermal rating that limits the use of that facility by causing either an 

Interconnection Reliability Operating Limit, a limitation of Total Transfer Capability, an 

impediment to generator deliverability, or an impediment to service to a major load 

center as specified in FAC-008-3 (Requirement R8.2).48

33. Considering the foregoing, while there is some overlap, Reliability Standard 

FAC-008-3, Requirements R7 and R8 do not appear to be entirely redundant of the other 

Reliability Standards cited by NERC. The retirement of these requirements would, 

therefore, result in the gaps described above. These non-redundant elements of 

Requirements R7 and R8 are not addressed in the petition. Accordingly, the Commission 

seeks more information from NERC and others regarding how the elements of Reliability 

Standards MOD-032-1, IRO-010-2 and TOP-003-3 discussed above render Reliability 

Standard FAC-008-3, Requirements R7 and R8 redundant. The Commission’s final 

 48 This requirement was developed in response to Order No. 693. Mandatory 

Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System, Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218, at 

P 756, order on reh’g, Order No. 693-A, 120 FERC ¶ 61,053 (2007); see also NERC, 

Petition, Docket No. RD11-10-000, at 11-13, 20-21 (filed Jun. 15, 2011).
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 21 -

determination on the retirement of these two requirements will be based on the comments 

received from NERC and others. 

B. Proposed Retirement of Reliability Standard VAR-001-5, Requirement 

R2

NERC Petition

34. Reliability Standard VAR-001-5, Requirement R2 requires each transmission 

operator to schedule “sufficient reactive resources to regulate voltage levels under normal 

and Contingency conditions.” NERC maintains that the reliability need for sufficient

reactive resources is adequately addressed by existing requirements in several other 

Reliability Standards and, therefore, is unnecessary and should be retired.

35. In particular, NERC relies on Reliability Standard TOP-001-4, Requirement R10 

and Reliability Standard TOP-002-4, Requirement R1, that require transmission operators 

to determine System Operating Limits and perform an OPA to assess whether planned 

next-day operations will exceed those limits and plan for addressing them. Reliability 

Standard TOP-001-4 requires each transmission operator to perform Real-time 

Assessments every 30 minutes to identify possible System Operating Limit exceedances 

and initiate its Operating Plan to mitigate them. NERC states that “Operating Plans 

address the use of reactive resources if needed to operate within System Operating 

Limits, as well as any other adjustments that may be needed.”49

36. NERC explains that each transmission operator uses multiple tools to regulate 

voltage levels, including reactive control and Real-time Contingency Analysis. NERC 

 49 Docket No. RM19-16-000 Petition at 20.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 22 -

maintains that “[t]hese actions allow the Transmission Operator to quantify the use of 

reactive resources. As such, a separate requirement specifying that the Transmission 

Operator must schedule ‘sufficient’ reactive resources for normal and Contingency 

conditions is redundant and unnecessary for reliability.”50 Additionally, NERC states 

that each planning authority and transmission planner must assess a broad range of 

conditions and probable contingencies, including available reactive resources, under 

System studies required under Reliability Standard TPL-001-4, and it must develop a 

corrective action plan to address reactive resource shortfalls, if needed.51

37. NERC concludes that given this “comprehensive and interdependent framework 

addressing System voltage needs in the operations and planning horizons . . . there is no 

need to have a distinct requirement expressly requiring the Transmission Operator to 

‘schedule’ sufficient resources.”52 NERC also states “that the second sentence of

Requirement R2 constitutes guidance or a measure which does not warrant a mandatory 

requirement provision.”53

 50 Id. at 20-21.

51 Id. at 21.

52 Id. 

53 The second sentence of Requirements R2 states, “Transmission Operators can 

provide sufficient reactive resources through various means including, but not limited to, 

reactive generation scheduling, transmission line and reactive resource switching, and 

using controllable load.”
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 23 -

Discussion

38. NERC contends that Reliability Standards TOP-001-4 and TOP-002-4 require, 

among other things, transmission operators to perform an operational planning analyses

and determine System Operating Limits to assess whether planned next-day operations 

will exceed those limits and develop a plan to address those potential exceedances. 

However, the proposed retirement of Reliability Standard VAR-001-5, Requirement R2 

assumes that, even in the absence of a specific requirement, if the transmission operator 

identifies potential System Operating Limit exceedances based on this analysis, the 

transmission operator will develop and implement an Operating Plan to mitigate the 

potential exceedances. We determine that relying on such an assumption may negatively 

impact reliability given the significant role that scheduling adequate reactive resources 

plays in the overall operation of Reliability Standard VAR-001-5. We also determine 

that retiring Requirement R2 is contrary to the stated purpose of Reliability Standard 

VAR-001-5, which is to “ensure that voltage levels, reactive flows and reactive resources

are monitored, controlled and maintained within limits in Real-time to protect equipment 

and the reliable operation of the Interconnection.” Accordingly, we propose to remand 

proposed Reliability Standard VAR-001-6 in order to retain Requirement R2 because it is 

the only requirement that explicitly requires transmission operators to schedule reactive 

resources.54

 54 When seeking approval of Reliability Standard VAR-001-4, NERC addressed 

the significance of Requirement R2, stating that “the primary factor in maintaining 

voltage stability is having the appropriate amount of Reactive Power on the system. 
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 24 -

39. While Reliability Standards TOP-001-4 and TOP-002-4 address situations 

involving the possible need to schedule reactive resources, they are not adequate 

substitutes for the explicit obligation in Requirement R2 of Reliability Standard 

VAR-001-5 requiring transmission operators to schedule enough reactive resources to 

regulate voltage levels under all system conditions. Reliability Standard TOP-001-4, 

Requirement R10 only requires the transmission operator to monitor facilities within its 

area (Requirement R10.1); to monitor the status of Remedial Action Schemes within its 

area (Requirement R10.2), to monitor non-bulk electric system facilities within its area 

(Requirement R10.3); to obtain and use status, voltages, and flow data for facilities 

outside its area (Requirement R10.4); to obtain and use the status of Remedial Action 

Schemes outside its area (Requirement R10.5); and to obtain and use status, voltages, and 

flow data for non-bulk electric system facilities outside its area (Requirement R10.6). 

Therefore, we determine that a plain reading of the relevant requirements cited by NERC 

in its petition indicates that the action of scheduling any type of resources is not required 

outside of Reliability Standard VAR-001-5, Requirement R2.

 

Proposed Requirement R2 helps ensure that sufficient reactive resources are online and 

scheduled in Real-time.” NERC, Petition, Docket No. RD14-11-000, at 20 (filed June 9, 

2014). When NERC conducted a periodic review of Reliability Standard VAR-001-4.1 

in 2017, periodic review team found that the Reliability Standard met its objective and 

therefore no revisions were necessary. NERC, Periodic Review Recommendations: 

VAR-001-4.1—Voltage and Reactive Control (May 19, 2017). Further, the periodic 

review team determined that no requirements satisfied the criteria for retirement. Id. at 4. 
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 25 -

40. Additionally, Reliability Standards TOP-001-4 and TOP-002-4 do not require the 

transmission operator to implement mitigation plans: instead, the transmission operator

need only analyze and develop a plan to address a potential System Operating Limit. 

41. Accordingly, we disagree with NERC’s assertion that Reliability Standard 

VAR-001-5, Requirement R2 is duplicative of other existing Reliability Standard 

requirements, and we believe that eliminating Requirement R2 will create an 

unacceptable risk that voltage, reactive flows, and reactive resources will not be

controlled and maintained within System Operating Limits. Therefore, pursuant to 

section 215(d)(4) of the FPA, we propose to remand proposed Reliability Standard 

VAR-001-6 in order to retain Requirement R2 of currently-effective Reliability Standard

VAR-001-5. 

III. Information Collection Statement 

42. The information collection requirements contained in this Proposed Rule are 

subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under section 3507(d) 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.55 OMB’s regulations require approval of 

certain information collection requirements imposed by agency rules.56 Upon approval 

of a collection of information, OMB will assign an OMB control number and expiration 

date. Respondents subject to the filing requirements of this rule will not be penalized for 

failing to respond to these collections of information unless the collections of information 

 55 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).

56 5 CFR 1320.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 26 -

display a valid OMB control number. The Commission solicits comments on the 

Commission’s need for this information, whether the information will have practical 

utility, the accuracy of the burden estimates, ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be collected or retained, and any suggested methods for 

minimizing respondents’ burden, including the use of automated information techniques. 

43. The Commission estimates that the proposed rule, which would retire 74 

requirements of Reliability Standards without adding any new obligations on registered 

entities, would result in a total reduction in burden for industry of 151,340.2 hours. The 

Commission based the burden reduction estimates on staff experience, knowledge, and 

expertise.

Proposed Reductions Due to NOPR in Docket Nos. RM19-16 & RM19-17

Reliability 

Standard & 

Requirement

Type57 and 

Number of 

Entity

(1)

Number 

of Annual 

Responses 

Per Entity

(2)

Total 

Number of 

Responses

(1)*(2)=(3)

Average 

Number 

of 

Burden 

Hours 

per 

Response

(4)

Total 

Burden 

Hours

(3)*(4)=(5)

FERC-725A

FAC-013-2 RC (12) 8.33 100 26.67 2,667

INT-006-4 

R3.1, R4, R5, 

R5.1, R5.2, 

R5.3, R5.4, 

R5.5

BA/TSP (171) 1 171 56.3 9,627

INT-004-3.1 BA (99) 1 99 56.3 5,574

 57 RC=Reliability Coordinator; BA=Balancing Authority; TSP=Transmission 

Service Provider; TOP=Transmission Operator; TO=Transmission Owner; 

GO=Generator Owner; DP=Distribution Provider; TP=Transmission Provider; and 

RP=Resource Planner
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 27 -

INT-010-2.1 BA(99) 1 99 56.3 5,574

INT-009-2.1 

R2

BA (99) 1 99 56.3 5,574

MOD-001-1a TOP/TSP 

(240)

2 480 55.3 26,544

MOD-004-1 TOP (168) 1 168 48.9 8,215.2

MOD-008-1 TOP (168) 1 168 48.9 8,215.2

MOD-028-2 TOP/TSP 

(240)

1 240 48.9 11,736

MOD-020-0 TP/RP/DP/BA 

(780)

1 780 14.4 11,232

MOD-029-2a TOP/TSP/TP/ 

BA (533)

1 533 49.8 26,543

MOD-030-3 TOP/TSP/TP/ 

BA (533)

1 533 49.8 26,543

Sub-Total 

for FERC725A

3,142 3,470 148,044.4

FERC-725A(1C)

TOP-001-4 

R19 & R22

BA/TO/GO/DP 

(1,696)

.25 422 0.8 337.6

Sub-Total 

for FERC725A(1C)

1,696 422 337.6

FERC-725G1

PRC-004-5(i) 

R4

TO/GO/DP 

(1,597)

.41 659 4.36 2,874.6

Sub-Total 

for FERC725G1

1,597 659 2,874.6

FERC-725Z

IRO-002-6 

R1

RC (12) 1.17 14 5.97 83.6

Sub-Total 

for FERC725Z

12 14 83.6

Total 

Reductions 

Due to 

NOPR in 

RM19-16 & 

RM19-17

4,565 151,340.2
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 28 -

Titles: FERC-725A, Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk Power System;

FERC-725A(1C), Mandatory Reliability Standards for Bulk-Power System: Reliability 

Standard TOP-001-4; FERC-725G1, Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power 

System: Reliability Standard PRC-004-5(i); FERC-725Z, Mandatory Reliability 

Standards: IRO Reliability Standards.

Action: Proposed Reductions to Existing Collections of Information FERC-725A,

FERC-725A(1C), and FERC-725Z; and Proposed Elimination of Collections of 

Information, and FERC-725G1.

OMB Control Nos: 1902-0244 (FERC-725A); 1902-0298 (FERC-725A(1C));1902-0284 

(FERC-725G1); and 1902-0276 (FERC-725Z)

Respondents: Business or other for profit, and not for profit institutions.

Frequency of Responses: On occasion (and proposed for deletion). 

44. Necessity of the Information: This proceeding proposes to approve the retirement 

of ten Reliability Standards in their entirety and five revised Reliability Standards, 

reflecting a total of 74 retired requirements identified by NERC. The proposed 

retirements either: (1) provide little or no reliability benefit; (2) are administrative in 

nature or relate expressly to commercial or business practices; or (3) are redundant with 

other Reliability Standards. 

45. Internal review: The Commission has reviewed NERC’s proposal and determined

that its action is necessary to implement section 215 of the FPA. The Commission has 

assured itself, by means of its internal review, that there is specific, objective support for 
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 29 -

the burden reduction estimates associated with the information requirements proposed for 

retirement.

46. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting requirements by 

contacting the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of the Executive Director, 

888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426 [Attention: Ellen Brown, e-mail: 

DataClearance@ferc.gov, phone: (202) 502-8663, fax: (202) 273-0873].

47. Comments concerning the information collections and requirements proposed for 

retirement in this NOPR and the associated burden estimates, should be sent to the 

Commission in this docket and may also be sent to the Office of Management and 

Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs [Attention: Desk Officer for the 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission]. For security reasons, comments should be sent 

by e-mail to OMB at the following e-mail address: oira_submission@omb.eop.gov. 

Please refer to the appropriate OMB Control Number(s) and Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 

and RM19-17-000 in your submission.

IV. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification 

48. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA)58 generally requires a description 

and analysis of rulemakings that will have significant economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. The RFA mandates consideration of regulatory alternatives that 

accomplish the stated objectives of a rule and that minimize any significant economic 

 58 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 30 -

impact on a substantial number of small entities. The Small Business Administration’s 

Office of Size Standards develops the numerical definition of a small business.59 The 

Small Business Administration has established size standards, for the types of affected 

entities (noted in the table above), that range from a maximum of 250-1,000 employees

for an entity and its affiliates to be considered small.

49. The Commission seeks comment on the proposed reduction of burden and cost on 

small business entities. The Commission estimates the total industry reduction in burden 

for all entities (large and small) to be 151,340.2 hours (or approximately 33 hours 

(rounded) per response). The Commission believes that this proposal will reduce burden 

and cost for all affected entities. 

50. Based on the information above, the Commission certifies that the proposed 

reductions will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. 

Accordingly, no initial regulatory flexibility analysis is required.

V. Environmental Analysis

51. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental Assessment or an 

Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may have a significant adverse effect 

on the human environment.60 The Commission has categorically excluded certain actions 

 59 13 CFR 121.101.

60 Regulations Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 

Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897 (Dec. 17, 1987), FERC Stats. & Regs., Regulations

Preambles 1986-1990 ¶ 30,783 (1987).
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 31 -

from this requirement as not having a significant effect on the human environment. 

Included in the exclusion are rules that are clarifying, corrective, or procedural or that do 

not substantially change the effect of the regulations being amended.61 The actions 

proposed here fall within this categorical exclusion in the Commission’s regulations.

VI. Comment Procedures

52. The Commission invites interested persons to submit comments on the matters and 

issues proposed in this notice to be adopted, including any related matters or alternative 

proposals that commenters may wish to discuss. Comments are due [INSERT DATE 

60 days after date of publication in the FEDERAL REGISTER]. Comments must 

refer to Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000, and must include the commenter's 

name, the organization they represent, if applicable, and their address in their comments.

53. The Commission encourages comments to be filed electronically via the eFiling 

link on the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.gov. The Commission accepts 

most standard word processing formats. Documents created electronically using word 

processing software should be filed in native applications or print-to-PDF format and not 

in a scanned format. Commenters filing electronically do not need to make a paper 

filing.

54. Commenters that are not able to file comments electronically must send an 

original of their comments to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the 

Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426. 

 61 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 32 -

55. All comments will be placed in the Commission's public files and may be viewed, 

printed, or downloaded remotely as described in the Document Availability section 

below. Commenters on this proposal are not required to serve copies of their comments 

on other commenters.

VII. Document Availability 

56. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the Federal Register, the 

Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the 

contents of this document via the Internet through the Commission's Home Page 

(http://www.ferc.gov) and in the Commission's Public Reference Room during normal 

business hours (8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time) at 888 First Street, NE, Room 2A, 

Washington, DC 20426.

57. From the Commission's Home Page on the Internet, this information is available 

on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on eLibrary in PDF and 

Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or downloading. To access this 

document in eLibrary, type the docket number excluding the last three digits of this 

document in the docket number field.
Docket Nos. RM19-16-000 and RM19-17-000 - 33 -

58. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission’s website during 

normal business hours from the Commission’s Online Support at (202) 502-6652 (toll 

free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the Public Reference 

Room at (202) 502-8371, TTY (202) 502-8659. E-mail the Public Reference Room at 

public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.

By direction of the Commission.

( S E A L )

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.