zilongwang/ReadingBank huggingface dataset:
authentication endpoint security liability research revealed voip security big data enterprise defense linear cryptanalysis risk management vpn biometrics enterprise security management managed security services secure ecommerce vulnerability assessment ciphers ethics messaging security secure file transfer wan security botnets exploit of vulnerability metrics security analytics war stories business of security fault_analysis mobile applications security architecture web 2.0 case studies federated identity mobile device security security awareness web server security cloud computing financial services mobile security security consulting web services security cloud security firewalls mock security education wireless security compliance forensics network protocol security security intelligence zero day vulnerability content filtering fraud network security security jobs consumerization governance oem appliance security operations controls government regulations online security security services critical infrastructure governance risk & compliance outsourcing security trends cryptographic protocols government standards password management sha3 cryptography research hackers & threats patch management side channel attacks cybercrime hacking pci siem cyberterrorism hacktivism penetration testing soa cyber warfare hashing functions phishing social engineering data security healthcare physical security social networking database security hypervisors pii software code vulnerability analysis denial of service identity management pki spam
authentication DevOps insider threats policy management software code vulnerability analysis behavioral analytics digital rights management Internet of Things practitioner perspectives software defined networking big data e-discovery intrusion detection privacy SSO biometrics encryption strategy & trends key management professional development & workforce standards blockchain & distributed ledger endpoint security law Quantum computing supply chain botnets ethics legislation Ransomware threat intelligence sharing business continuity & disaster recovery exploit of vulnerability machine learning research threat management BYOD firewalls malware risk management trusted computing security forensics managed security services secure coding virtualization, containerization & segmentation consumerization fraud metrics security analytics visualization critical infrastructure GDPR mobile security security architecture vulnerability assessment cryptography governance risk & compliance network security security awareness web services security cyber warfare & cyber weapons government regulations operational technology security consulting zero day vulnerability PROPOSED FACILITATOR Add a Facilitator NOTE: Only one facilitator is allowed per Peer2Peer session. In addition, no support or guest passes are available given the very limited seating. A Peer2Peer session facilitator is an expert in a security topic area who has the ability to moderate discussions. * = required input: Salutation * Dr./Mr./Mrs./Ms./Miss/Other First Name * Middle Initial Last Name * Suffix Preferred Name Company * Job Title * Address 1*
Other The list of questions above is not all inclusive of evidence required to show compliance with the Reliability Standard. Provide additional information here, as necessary that demonstrates compliance with this Reliability Standard. Standard: Revision History Date Reviewers Revision Description March 2014 WECC Compliance Staff Initial version for revised BAL-001-1, Regional Variance January 2014 Nickole B. Radabaugh Reviewed for consistency and content. December 2014 WECC Compliance Updated formatting for 2015 February 2015 WECC Compliance Removed Audit Id line from cover page
A Balancing Authority that participates in a registered Reserve Sharing and has experienced a disturbance greater than 80% of its individual most severe single contingency (or a threshold as published by the region) but does not call for reserve activation from other members of the registered Reserve Sharing Group, shall report as a single Balancing Authority as required in BAL0020, R.5. The Balancing Authority must provide evidence of compliance with BAL0020, R.1, R.3, R.4, and R.6 for the Reportable Disturbance Event(s) for which the Balancing Authority did not call for reserve activation from the other members of the Reserve Sharing Group. Revision History Version Date Reviewers Revision Description 1 September 2011 QRSAW WG Original Document 1 October 14, 2011 NERC Updated Excerpts from FERC Orders from March 31, 2009, through and including October 14, 2011.
Contingency Reserve Restoration Period: A period not exceeding 90 minutes following the end of the Contingency Event Recovery Period. Pre-Reporting Contingency Event ACE Value: The average value of Reporting ACE, or Reserve Sharing Group Reporting ACE when applicable, in the 16-second interval immediately prior to the start of the Contingency Event Recovery Period based on EMS scan rate data. Reserve Sharing Reporting ACE: At any given time of measurement for the applicable Reserve Sharing Group, the algebraic sum of the ACEs (or equivalent as calculated at such time of measurement) of the Balancing Authorities participating in the Reserve Sharing Group at the time of measurement. Contingency Reserve: The provision of capacity that may be deployed by the Balancing Authority to respond to a Balancing Contingency Event and other contingency requirements (such as Energy Emergency Alerts as specified in the associated EOP standard). A Balancing Authority may include in its restoration of Contingency Reserve readiness to reduce Firm Demand and include it if, and only if, the Balancing Authority: is experiencing a Reliability Coordinator declared Energy Emergency Alert level, and is utilizing its Contingency Reserve to mitigate an operating emergency in accordance with its emergency Operating Plan. Revision History for RSAW Version Date Reviewers Revision Description 1 09/08/2014 NERC Compliance, NERC Standards, RSAWTF New Document 2 02/11/2015 NERC Compliance Revised RSAW to align with revised Reliability Standard – Posting 6 January 2015 3 07/09/2015 NERC Compliance Assurance Revised RSAW to align with revised Reliability Standard – Posting 7 July 2015 4 10/02/2015 NERC Compliance Assurance, RSAWTF Revised RSAW to align with revised Reliability Standard – Posting 29 September 2015 5 10/6/2017 NERC Compliance Assurance, RSAWTF Revised RSAW to align with revised Reliability Standard 6 8/21/2018 NERC Compliance Assurance, RSAWTF Updated to BAL-002-2(i), no content change needed
Frequency Response Sharing Group (FRSG): A group, whose members consist of two or more Balancing Authorities that collectively maintain, allocate, and supply operating resources required to jointly meet the Frequency Response Obligations of its members. Revision History for RSAW Version Date Reviewers Revision Description 1 3/29/2018 NERC Compliance Assurance, RSAW Task Force New Document contains a minor revision to update to BAL-003-1.1
Reliability Standard Audit Worksheet for British Columbia CIP-002-3 — Cyber Security — Critical Cyber Asset Identification Reliability Standard Effective Date for BC: July 1, 2012 This section must be completed by the Compliance Monitor Administrator. Registered Entity: [Name & ACRO] WECC ID: WCRXXXXX Compliance Assessment Date: [Audit start date – audit end date] Compliance Monitoring Method: [Audit Type] Applicable Function(s): BA, GO, GOP, TO, TOP, LSE, TSP Names of Auditors: Findings Table:
Reliability Standard Audit Worksheet for British Columbia CIP–003-3 — Cyber Security — Security Management Controls Reliability Standard Effective Date for BC: July 1, 2012 This section must be completed by the Compliance Monitor Administrator. Registered Entity: [Name & ACRO] WECC ID: WCRXXXXX Compliance Assessment Date: [Audit start date – audit end date] Compliance Monitoring Method: [Audit Type] Applicable Function(s): BA, GO, GOP, TO, TOP, LSE, TSP Names of Auditors: Findings Table:
Req. Finding Summary & Documentation Functions Monitored R1. BA, GO, GOP, TO, TOP, LSE, TSP R2. BA, GO, GOP, TO, TOP, LSE, TSP R3. BA, GO, GOP, TO, TOP, LSE, TSP R4. BA, GO, GOP, TO, TOP, LSE, TSP R5. BA, GO, GOP, TO, TOP, LSE, TSP R6. BA, GO, GOP, TO, TOP, LSE, TSP Req. Recommendations Req. Areas of Concern Subject Matter Experts Identify subject matter expert(s) responsible for this Reliability Standard. Insert additional lines if necessary. Registered Entity Response (Required): SME Name Title Organization Requirement(s) R1 Supporting Evidence and Documentation R1. Cyber Security Policy — The Responsible Entity shall document and implement a cyber security policy that represents management’s commitment and ability to secure its Critical Cyber Assets. The Responsible Entity shall, at minimum, ensure the following: R1.1. The cyber security policy addresses the requirements in Standards CIP-002-3 through CIP-009-3, including provision for emergency situations. R1.2. The cyber security policy is readily available to all personnel who have access to, or are responsible for, Critical Cyber Assets. R1.3. Annual review and approval of the cyber security policy by the senior manager assigned pursuant to R2. Registered Entity Response (Required):
4.3 High Impact BES Cyber Systems and their associated: EACMS; and PACS Medium Impact BES Cyber Systems with External Routable Connectivity and their associated: EACMS; and PACS For electronic access, verify at least once every 15 calendar months that all user accounts, user account groups, or user role categories, and their specific, associated privileges are correct and are those that the Responsible Entity determines are necessary. An example of evidence may include, but is not limited to, documentation of the review that includes all of the following: A dated listing of all accounts/account groups or roles within the system; A summary description of privileges associated with each group or role; Accounts assigned to the group or role; and Dated evidence showing verification of the privileges for the group are authorized and appropriate to the work function performed by people assigned to each account. Registered Entity Response (Required): Compliance Narrative: Provide a explanation, in your own words, of how you comply with this Requirement. References to supplied evidence, including links to the appropriate page, are recommended. Registered Entity Evidence (Required): The following information is requested for each document submitted as evidence. Also, evidence submitted should be highlighted and bookmarked, as appropriate, to identify the exact location where evidence of compliance may be found. File Name Document Revision or Version Document Date Relevant Page(s) or Section(s) Description of Applicability of Document Audit Team Evidence Reviewed (This section to be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority):
DRAFT1v0 06/17/2014 Posted for Industry Comment New Document DRAFT2v0 09/17/2014 CIP RSAW Development Team Address comments received in response to DRAFT1v0. DRAFT3v0 12/10/2014 CIP RSAW Development Team Address comments received in response to DRAFT2v0. DRAFT4v0 02/06/2015 CIP RSAW Development Team Address comments from V5R SDT and address comments in response to DRAFT3v0. DRAFT4v1 03/06/2015 CIP RSAW Development Team Address comments from V5R SDT meeting on 3-4, 2015. FINALv1 05/08/2015 CIP RSAW Development Team Address comments from final posting; review and address comments of V5R SDT.
R1 Part 1.7 CIP-006-6 Table R1 – Physical Security Plan Part Applicable Systems Requirements Measures 1.7 Physical Access Control Systems (PACS) associated with: High Impact BES Cyber Systems, or Medium Impact BES Cyber Systems with External Routable Connectivity Issue an alarm or alert in response to detected unauthorized physical access to a Physical Access Control System to the personnel identified in the BES Cyber Security Incident response plan within 15 minutes of the detection. An example of evidence may include, but is not limited to, language in the physical security plan that describes the issuance of an alarm or alert in response to unauthorized physical access to Physical Access Control Systems and additional evidence that the alarm or alerts was issued and communicated as identified in the BES Cyber Security Incident Response Plan, such as alarm or alert logs, cell phone or pager logs, or other evidence that the alarm or alert was generated and communicated. Registered Entity Response (Required): Compliance Narrative: Provide a brief explanation, in your own words, of how you comply with this Requirement. References to supplied evidence, including links to the appropriate page, are recommended. Registered Entity Evidence (Required): The following information is requested for each document submitted as evidence. Also, evidence submitted should be highlighted and bookmarked, as appropriate, to identify the exact location where evidence of compliance may be found. File Name Document Title Revision or Version Document Date Relevant Page(s) or Section(s) Description of Applicability of Document Audit Team Evidence Reviewed (This section to be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority): Compliance Assessment Approach Specific to CIP-006-6, R1, Part 1.7 This section to be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority Verify the Responsible Entity has documented one or more physical security plans to issue an
website), or sample guidelines, provided by the Electric Reliability Organization help to establish a minimum sample set for monitoring and enforcement uses in audits of NERC Reliability Standards. Regulatory Language See FERC 706 See FERC Order 791 Revision History for RSAW Version Date Reviewers Revision Description DRAFT1v0 06/17/2014 Posted for Industry Comment New Document DRAFT2v0 09/17/2014 CIP RSAW Development Team Address comments received in response to DRAFT1v0. DRAFT3v0 12/10/2014 CIP RSAW Development Team Address comments received in response to DRAFT2v0. DRAFT4v0 02/06/2015 CIP RSAW Development Team Address comments from V5R SDT and address comments in response to DRAFT3v0. DRAFT4v1 03/09/2015 CIP RSAW Development Team Address comments from V5R SDT meeting on March 3-4, 2015. FINALv1 05/08/2015 CIP RSAW Development Team Address comments from final posting; review and address comments of V5R SDT.
CIP-009-6 Table R1 – Recovery Plan Specifications Part Applicable Systems Requirements Measures 1.3 High Impact BES Systems and their associated: EACMS; and PACS Medium Impact BES Cyber Systems and their associated: EACMS; and PACS One or more processes for the backup and storage of information required to recover BES Cyber System functionality. An example of evidence may include, but is not limited to, documentation of specific processes for the backup and storage of information required to recover BES Cyber System functionality. Registered Entity Response (Required): Compliance Narrative: Provide a explanation, in your own words, of how you comply with this Requirement. References to supplied evidence, including links to the appropriate page, are recommended. Registered Entity Evidence (Required): The following information is requested for each document submitted as evidence. Also, evidence submitted should be highlighted and bookmarked, as appropriate, to identify the exact location where evidence of compliance may be found. File Name Document Title Revision or Version Document Date Relevant Page(s) or Section(s) Description of Applicability of Document Audit Team Evidence Reviewed (This section to be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority): Compliance Assessment Approach Specific to CIP-009-6, R1 Part 1.3 This section to be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority Verify the Responsible Entity has documented one or more recovery plans which include one or more processes for the backup and storage of information required to recover BES Cyber System functionality. Auditor Notes:
The following information is requested for each document submitted as evidence. Also, evidence submitted should be highlighted and bookmarked, as appropriate, to identify the exact location where evidence of compliance may be found. File Name Document Title Revision or Version Document Date Relevant Page(s) or Section(s) Description of Applicability of Document Team Evidence Reviewed (This section to be completed by the Compliance Monitor Administrator): Compliance Assessment Approach Specific to Part 1.2 This section to be completed by the Compliance Monitor Administrator Verify the Responsible Entity documented one or more processes to authorize and document changes that deviate from the existing baseline configuration. For each Applicable System, verify the Responsible Entity authorized and documented changes that deviate from the existing baseline configuration. CIP-010-2 Table R1 – Configuration Change Management Part Applicable Systems Requirements Measures 1.3 High Impact BES Cyber Systems and their associated: EACMS; PACS; and PCA Medium Impact BES Cyber Systems and their associated: PACS; and PCA For a change that deviates from the existing baseline configuration, update the baseline configuration as necessary within 30 calendar days of completing the change. An example of evidence may include, but is not limited to, updated baseline documentation with a date that is within 30 calendar days of the date of the completion of the change. Registered Entity Response (Required): Describe, in narrative form, how you meet compliance with this requirement. Registered Entity Evidence (Required):
Evidence Requestedi: Provide the following evidence, or evidence to demonstrate compliance. A list of the entity’s Balancing Authorities. A list of the entity’s Transmission Operators. For the entity’s 1) Balancing Authorities and 2) Transmission Operators, provide evidence of Interpersonal Communication capability. Registered Entity Evidence (Required): The following information is requested for each document submitted as evidence. Also, evidence submitted should be highlighted and bookmarked, as appropriate, to identify the location where evidence of compliance may be found. File Name Document Title Revision or Version Document Date Relevant Page(s) or Section(s) Description of Applicability of Document Audit Team Evidence Reviewed (This section to be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority): Compliance Assessment Approach Specific to COM-001-3, R7 This section to be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority (R7) Verify the entity has Interpersonal Communication capability with: (Part 7.1) The entity’s Balancing Authorities. (Part 7.2) The entity’s Transmission Operators. Note to Auditor: If the entity detects a failure of its Interpersonal Communication capability in the audit period, the auditor should evaluate the response in conjunction with R11. Auditor Notes: R8 Supporting Evidence and Documentation R8. Each Generator Operator shall have Interpersonal Communication capability with the following entities (unless the Generator Operator detects a failure of its Interpersonal Communication capability in which case Requirement R11 shall apply):
Registered Entity Response (Required): Describe, in narrative form, how you meet compliance with this Requirement. Registered Entity Evidence (Required): Provide the following for all evidence submitted (Insert additional rows if necessary): File Name, File Extension, Document Title, Revision, Date, Page(s), Section(s), Section Title(s), Description Audit Team Evidence Reviewed (This section must be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority): Compliance Assessment Approach Specific to EOP-001-2.1b, R6 This section must be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority Review the evidence to verify the Registered Entity has: The Transmission Operator and Balancing Authority shall coordinate emergency plans with other Transmission Operators and Balancing Authorities to include the following: Reliable communications between interconnected systems. Interchange agreements to provide for emergency capacity or energy transfers. Transmission and generator maintenance schedules to maximize capacity or conserve the fuel in short supply. deliveries of electrical energy or fuel from remote systems through normal operating channels. Auditor Notes: Compliance Finding Summary This section must be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority Req. NF PV OEA NA Statement 1 2 3 4
Provide the following: Document Title and/or File Name, Page & Section, Date & Version Title Date Version Team: Additional Evidence Reviewed: This section must be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority Compliance Assessment Approach Specific to EOP-002-3.1 R3 ___ Determine if the Balancing Authority that experienced an operating capacity or energy emergency communicated its current and future system conditions to its Reliability Coordinator and neighboring Balancing Authorities. Detailed notes: R4. A Balancing Authority anticipating an operating capacity or energy emergency shall perform all actions necessary including bringing on all available generation, postponing equipment maintenance, scheduling interchange purchases in advance, and being prepared to reduce firm load. Describe, in narrative form, how you meet compliance with this requirement: (Registered Entity Response Required) R4 Supporting Evidence and Documentation Response: (Registered Entity Response Required) Provide the following: Document and/or File Name, Page & Section, Date & Version
Detailed notes: R9. When a Transmission Service Provider expects to elevate the transmission service priority of an Interchange Transaction from Priority 6 (Network Integration Transmission Service from Non-designated Resources) to Priority 7 (Network Integration Transmission Service from designated Network Resources) as permitted in its transmission tariff: R9.1.The deficient Load-Serving Entity shall request its Reliability Coordinator to initiate an Energy Emergency Alert in accordance with Attachment 1-EOP-002. R9.2.The Reliability Coordinator shall submit the report to NERC for posting on the NERC Website, noting the expected total MW that may have its transmission service priority changed. R9.3.The Reliability Coordinator shall use EEA 1 to forecast the change of the priority oftransmission service of an Interchange Transaction on the system from Priority 6 to Priority 7. R9.4.The Reliability Coordinator use EEA 2 to announce the change of the priority of transmission service of an Interchange Transaction on the system from Priority 6 to Priority 7. Describe, in narrative form, how you meet compliance with this requirement: (Registered Entity Response Required) R9 Supporting Evidence and Documentation Response: (Registered Entity Response Required) Provide the following: Document Title and/or File Name, Page & Section, Date & Version Title Date Version Audit Team: Additional Evidence Reviewed:
Example, STD-0XX-X becomes enforceable on January 1, XXXX. Auditor Notes: R7 Supporting Evidence and Documentation R7. The Transmission Operator shall coordinate automatic undervoltage load shedding throughout their areas with tripping of shunt capacitors, and other automatic actions that will occur under abnormal voltage, or power flow conditions. Registered Entity Response (Required): Describe, in narrative form, how you meet compliance with this Requirement. Registered Entity Evidence (Required): Provide the following for all evidence submitted (Insert additional rows if necessary): File Name, File Extension, Document Title, Revision, Date, Page(s), Section(s), Section Title(s), Description Audit Team Evidence Reviewed (This section must be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority): Compliance Assessment Approach Specific to EOP-003-2, R7 This section must be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority Review the evidence to verify the Registered Entity has: Verify the entity coordinated the implementation of automatic undervoltage load shedding throughout its area with tripping of shunt capacitors, and other automatic actions that will occur under abnormal voltage, or power flow conditions. Note to Auditor: If there are scenarios that the auditor may have to evaluate, provide the direction here. Example, STD-0XX-X becomes enforceable on January 1, XXXX. Auditor Notes:
printouts, or operator logs, that the entity monitored and coordinated restoration progress. Auditor Notes: R8 Supporting Evidence and Documentation The Reliability Coordinator shall coordinate or authorize resynchronizing islanded areas that bridge boundaries between Transmission Operators or Reliability Coordinators. If the resynchronization cannot be completed as expected the Reliability Coordinator shall utilize its restoration plan strategies to facilitate resynchronization. [Violation Risk Factor = High] [Time Horizon = Real-time Operations] Question: Has an event occurred that required coordination or authorization for resynchronization of islanded areas that bridged boundaries between Transmission Operators or Reliability Coordinators? If yes, was the resynchronization completed as expected? Registered Entity Response (Required): Registered Entity Response (Required): Describe, in narrative form, how you meet compliance with this Requirement. Registered Entity Evidence (Required): Provide the following for all evidence submitted (Insert additional rows if necessary): File Name, File Extension, Document Title, Revision, Date, Page(s), Section(s), Section Title(s), Description Audit Team Evidence Reviewed (This section must be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority): Compliance Assessment Approach Specific to EOP-006-2, R8 This section must be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority Review the evidence to: Verify the entity responded to the applicability question and provided evidence of compliance if the
Registered Entity Response (Required): Compliance Narrative: Provide a brief explanation, in your own words, of how you comply with this Requirement. References to supplied evidence, including links to the appropriate page, are recommended. Evidence Requested:i Provide the following evidence, or other evidence to demonstrate compliance. Documented Operating Plan(s). Evidence of activation, such as operator logs, voice recordings, or other communications, for times when an Emergency has occurred. Registered Entity Evidence (Required): The following information is requested for each document submitted as evidence. Also, evidence submitted should be highlighted and bookmarked, as appropriate, to identify the exact location where evidence of compliance may be found. File Name Document Revision or Version Document Date Relevant Page(s) or Section(s) Description of Applicability of Document Audit Team Evidence Reviewed (This section to be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority): Compliance Assessment Approach Specific to EOP-011-1, R2 This section to be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority (R2) Verify the Operating Plan(s) is dated and reviewed by the entity’s Reliability Coordinator. (R2) Verify the Operating Plan(s) was developed in accordance with Requirement R2 and includes processes for the following as applicable: (Part 2.1.) Roles and responsibilities for activating the Operating Plan(s); (Part 2.2) Processes to prepare for and mitigate Emergencies including: (Part 2.2.1) Notification to its Reliability Coordinator, to include current and projected conditions when experiencing a Capacity Emergency or Energy Emergency; (Part 2.2.2) Requesting an Energy Emergency Alert, per Attachment 1; (Part 2.2.3) Managing generating resources in its Balancing Authority Area to address: (Part 2.2.3.1) capability and availability; (Part 2.2.3.2) fuel supply and inventory concerns;
Compliance Assessment Approach Specific to FAC-001-1, R2 This section to be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority (R2) Verify entity published Facility connection requirements document are in accordance with R2. (R2) Verify the entity published Facility connection requirements within 45 days of an executed Agreement. Note to Auditor: Auditor Notes: R3 Supporting Evidence and Documentation R3. Each Transmission Owner and each applicable Generator Owner (in accordance with Requirement R2) shall address the following items in its Facility connection requirements: a written summary of its plans to achieve the required system performance as described in Requirements R1 or R2 throughout the planning horizon: 3.1.1. Procedures for coordinated studies of new Facilities and their impacts on the interconnected Transmission systems. 3.1.2. Procedures for notification of new or modified Facilities to others (those responsible for the reliability of the interconnected Transmission systems) as soon as feasible. 3.1.3. Voltage level and MW and MVAR capacity or demand at point of connection. 3.1.4. Breaker duty and surge protection. 3.1.5. System protection and coordination. 3.1.6. Metering and telecommunications. 3.1.7. Grounding and safety issues. 3.1.8. Insulation and insulation coordination. 3.1.9. Voltage, Reactive Power, and power factor control. 3.1.10. Power quality impacts. 3.1.11. Equipment Ratings. 3.1.12. Synchronizing of Facilities. 3.1.13. Maintenance coordination. 3.1.14. Operational issues (abnormal frequency and voltages).
[Note: A spreadsheet or other document may be used. If so, provide a document reference below.] Registered Entity Response to Question (Required): Question: Did the applicable Transmission Owner or Generator Owner have any encroachment (Types 2.1-2.4) into the MVCD of its applicable line(s) in the audit period? Yes No. If Yes, describe the encroachment(s). Registered Entity Response to Question (Required): Registered Entity Response (Required): Describe, in narrative form, how you meet compliance with this Requirement. Registered Entity Evidence Listing (Required): Provide the following for all evidence submitted (Insert additional rows if necessary): File Name, File Extension, Document Revision, Date, Page(s), Section(s), Section Title(s), Description Audit Team Evidence Reviewed This section must be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority Compliance Assessment Approach Specific to FAC-003-4, R2 This section must be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority Review the evidence to verify the Registered Entity has performed the following: Responded to the Questions and provided evidence of compliance if it owns applicable line(s). Managed vegetation to prevent encroachments into the Minimum Vegetation Clearance Distance (MVCD) as follows: No Real-time observations of any MVCD encroachments absent a Sustained Outage (type 2.1) or; No Sustained Outages associated with encroachment types 2.2 through 2.4 or; If applicable, provided documentation of circumstances resulting in an encroachment that are beyond the
R4.1. Each adjacent Planning Authority and each Planning Authority that indicated it has a need for the methodology. R4.2. Each Reliability Coordinator and Transmission Operator that operates any portion of the Planning Authority’s Planning Authority Area. R4.3. Each Transmission Planner that works in the Planning Authority’s Planning Authority Area. Describe, in narrative form, how you meet compliance with this requirement: (Registered Entity Response Required) R4 Supporting Evidence and Documentation Response: (Registered Entity Response Required) Provide the following: Document Title and/or File Name, Page & Section, Date & Version Date Version Audit Team: Additional Evidence Reviewed: This section must be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority. Compliance Assessment Approach Specific to FAC-010-2.1 R4. ___ Verify the Planning Authority issued its SOL Methodology, and any change to that methodology, to all of the following to the effectiveness of the change: ___ Each adjacent Planning Authority and each Planning Authority that indicated it has a
to that entity within 45 calendar days of receipt of the request [Violation Risk Factor: Lower] [Time Horizon: Long-term Planning] If a recipient of a documented Transfer Capability assessment requests data to support the assessment results, the Planning Coordinator shall provide such data to that entity within 45 calendar days of receipt of the request. The provision of such data shall be subject to the legal and regulatory obligations of the Planning Coordinator’s area regarding the disclosure of confidential and/or sensitive information. [Violation Risk Factor: Lower] [Time Horizon: Long-term Planning] Measures Each Planning Coordinator shall have a Transfer Capability methodology that includes the information specified in Requirement R1. Each Planning Coordinator shall have evidence such as dated e-mail or dated transmittal letters that it provided the new or revised Transfer Capability methodology in accordance with Requirement R2 Each Planning Coordinator shall have evidence, such as dated e-mail or dated transmittal letters, that the Planning Coordinator provided a written response to that commenter in accordance with Requirement R3. Each Planning Coordinator shall have evidence such as dated assessment results, that it conducted and documented a Transfer Capability assessment in accordance with Requirement R4. Each Planning Coordinator shall have evidence, such as dated copies of e-mails or transmittal letters, that it made its documented Transfer Capability assessment available to the entities in accordance with Requirement R5. Each Planning Coordinator shall have evidence, such as dated copies of e-mails or transmittal letters, that it made its documented Transfer Capability assessment data available in accordance with Requirement R6. Compliance Compliance Monitoring Process Compliance Enforcement Authority Regional Entity Data Retention The Planning 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 Planning Coordinator have its current Transfer Capability methodology and any prior versions of the Transfer Capability methodology that were in force since the last compliance audit to show compliance with Requirement R1. The Planning Coordinator retain evidence since its last compliance audit to show compliance with Requirement R2.
4 5 6 Excerpts from FERC Orders -- For Reference Purposes Only Updated Through September 1, 2010 FAC-014-2 Order 693 March 16, 2007 P 1050. … The FAC series of standards contain the Reliability Standards that form the technical and procedural basis for calculating transfer capabilities. FAC-008-1 provides the basis for determining the thermal ratings of facilities while FAC-009-1 provides the basis for communicating those ratings. FAC-010-1 and FAC-011-1 provide the system operating limits methodologies for the planning and operational horizon respectively and FAC-014 provides for the communication of those ratings. Order 705 December 20, 2007 P 83. The Commission agrees that it is appropriate in this instance to adopt NERC’s revised effective dates of July 1, 2008 for FAC-010-1, October 1, 2008 for FAC-011-1 and January 1, 2009 for FAC-014-1. Given that this Final Rule will not be effective until January 2008, it is reasonable to allow responsible entities in the adequate time to comply with these Reliability Standards. P 84. As for Ontario IESO’s concerns with the different implementation dates in and the , we agree that effective dates should be coordinated if practicable. In these circumstances, however, we foresee no problems arising from the effective dates approved here. P 164. The Commission agrees with NERC that the Requirements to follow a methodology when determining SOLs are included in FAC-014-1. However, as the Commission states FAC-010-1, Requirements establish the performance metrics of the SOL methodology used. Thus, if the planning authority’s methodology to develop SOLs does not meet the demonstrated performance metrics of these Requirements in a planning time horizon, then under emergency, abnormal, or restorative conditions, the Bulk-Power System would be at risk of instability, separation, or cascading failures. P173. The Commission agrees with NERC that FAC-014-1, Requirement R5 is not at the prevention and/or mitigation of IROLs, but rather the communication of SOL and IROL information. … a failure to notify adjacent entities of an actual or potential IROL creates a demonstrable risk because it impairs the ability of neighboring entities to effectively monitor the Bulk-Power System. In addition, the Commission believes that
Provide the following evidence, or other evidence to demonstrate compliance. Instances of receiving a Reliability Adjustment Arranged Interchange. Dated and time-stamped electronic logs, studies, or other evidence entity either approved or denied request for Reliability Adjustment Arranged Interchange within the time period defined in Attachment 1, Column B and, if applicable, communicated denial to the Reliability Coordinator no more than 10 minutes after the denial. Registered Entity Evidence (Required): The following information is requested for each document submitted as evidence. Also, evidence submitted should be highlighted and bookmarked, as appropriate, to identify the exact location where evidence of compliance may be found. File Name Document Title Revision or Version Document Date Relevant Page(s) or Section(s) Description of Applicability of Document Audit Team Evidence Reviewed (This section to be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority): Compliance Assessment Approach Specific to INT-006-4, R3 This section to be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority (R3) Select a sample of instances where entity received a Reliability Adjustment Arranged Interchange, and verify entity approved or denied the request within the time period defined in Attachment 1, Column B. (Part 3.1) For each instance in the sample of Reliability Adjustment Arranged Interchange selected by the auditor where the request was denied, verify entity communicated the denial to the Reliability Coordinator within 10 minutes. Note to Auditor: Auditor Notes: R4 Supporting Evidence and Documentation R4. Each Sink Balancing Authority shall confirm that none of the following conditions exist prior to transitioning an Arranged Interchange to Confirmed Interchange:
IRO-003-2 — Reliability Coordination — Wide-Area View Purpose: The Reliability Coordinator must have a wide-area view of its own Reliability Coordinator Area and that of neighboring Reliability Coordinators. Applicability: Reliability Coordinators NERC BOT Approval Date: 11/1/2006 FERC Approval Date: 3/16/2007 Reliability Standard Enforcement Date in the : 6/18/2007 Requirements: Each Reliability Coordinator shall monitor all Bulk Electric System facilities, which may include information, within its Reliability Coordinator Area and adjacent Reliability Coordinator Areas, as necessary to ensure that, at any time, regardless of prior planned or unplanned events, the Reliability Coordinator is able to determine any potential System Operating Limit and Interconnection Reliability Operating Limit violations within its Reliability Coordinator Area. Describe, in narrative form, how you meet compliance with this requirement: (Registered Entity Response Required) R1 Supporting Evidence and Documentation
frequently, and this RSAW may not necessarily be updated with the same frequency. Therefore, it is imperative that entities treat this RSAW as a reference document only, and not as a substitute or replacement for the Reliability Standard. It is the responsibility of the registered entity to verify its compliance with the latest approved version of the Reliability Standards, by the applicable governmental authority, relevant to its registration status. The NERC RSAW language contained within this document provides a nonexclusive list, for informational purposes only, of examples of the types of evidence a registered entity may produce or may be asked to produce to demonstrate compliance with the Reliability Standard. A registered entity’s adherence to the examples contained within this RSAW does not necessarily constitute compliance with the applicable Reliability Standard, and NERC and the Regional Entity using this RSAW reserves the right to request additional evidence from the registered entity that is not included in this RSAW. Additionally, this RSAW includes excerpts from FERC Orders and other regulatory references. The FERC Order cites are provided for ease of reference only, and this document does not necessarily include all applicable Order provisions. In the event of a discrepancy between FERC Orders, and the language included in this document, FERC Orders shall prevail. Subject Matter Experts Identify your company’s subject matter expert(s) responsible for this Reliability Standard. Include the person's title, organization, and the requirement(s) for which they are responsible. Include additional sheets if necessary. Response: (Registered Entity Response Required) SME Name Title Organization Requirement Reliability Standard Language IRO-004-2 — Reliability Coordination Operations Planning
R3 Supporting Evidence and Documentation Response: (Registered Entity Response Required) Provide the following: Document Title and/or File Name, Page & Section, Date & Version Title Date Version Audit Team: Additional Evidence Reviewed: This section must be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority. Compliance Assessment Approach Specific to MOD-001-1a R3 ____ Verify the TSP prepared and kept current an ATCID that includes, at a minimum, the following information: ____Information describing how the selected methodology (or methodologies) has been implemented, in such detail that, given the same information used by the TSP, the results of the ATC or AFC calculations can be validated. ____ A description of the manner in which the TSP will account for counterflows including: __ ____ How confirmed Transmission reservations, expected Interchange and internal counterflow are addressed in firm and non-firm ATC or AFC calculations. ____ A rationale for that accounting specified in R3.2 ____ The identity of the TOPs and TSPs from the TSP receives data for use in calculating ATC or AFC. ____ The identity of the TSPs and TOPs to which it provides data for use in calculating transfer or Flowgate capability.
When reviewing an Arranged Interchange using CBM, all Balancing Authorities and Transmission Service Providers shall waive, within the bounds of reliable operation, any Real-time timing and ramping requirements. [Violation Risk Factor: Medium] [Time Horizon: Same-day Operations] Describe, in narrative form, how you meet compliance with this requirement: (Registered Entity Response Required) R11 Supporting Evidence and Documentation Response: (Registered Entity Response Required) Provide the following: Document Title and/or File Name, Page & Section, Date & Version Title Date Version Audit Team: Additional Evidence Reviewed:
___ TSPs ___ RCs ___ Planning Coordinators ___ TPs ___ TOPs Detailed notes: Additional Evidence Reviewed: Title Date Version Each Transmission Operator that maintains TRM shall establish TRM values in accordance with the TRMID at least once every 13 months. [Violation Risk Factor: Lower] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning] Describe, in narrative form, how you meet compliance with this requirement: (Registered Entity Response Required) R4 Supporting Evidence and Documentation Response: (Registered Entity Response Required) Provide the following: Document Title and/or File Name, Page & Section, Date & Version Title Date Version
or Section(s) Audit Team Evidence Reviewed (This section to be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority): Compliance Assessment Approach Specific to MOD-025-2, R2 This section to be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority (Part 2.1) Verify new Reactive Power capability verifications were performed within the periodicity required in Attachment 1. (Part 2.1) Verify that all Reactive Power capability data fields were completed. (Part 2.2) For all or a sample of applicable Facilities, verify that the Generator Owner submitted the required verification forms for each applicable Facility to its Transmission Planner within 90 days of either the date the data is recorded for a staged test; or the date the data is selected for verification using historical operational data. Note to Auditor: The first verification for each applicable Facility under this standard must be a staged test. Auditor Notes: R3 Supporting Evidence and Documentation R3. Each Transmission Owner shall provide its Transmission Planner with verification of the Reactive Power capability of its applicable Facilities as follows: 3.1. Verify, in accordance with Attachment 1, the Reactive Power capability of its synchronous condenser units. 3.2. Submit a completed Attachment 2 (or a form containing the same information as identified in Attachment 2) to its Transmission Planner within 90 calendar days of either (i) the date the data is recorded for a staged test; or (ii) the date the data is selected for verification using historical operational data. M3. Each Transmission will have evidence that it performed the verification, such as a completed Attachment 2 or the Transmission Owner form with equivalent information or dated information collected and used to complete attachments, and will have evidence that it submitted the information within 90 days to its Transmission Planner; such as dated electronic mail messages or mail receipts in accordance with Requirement R3. Evidence Requestedi: Provide the following evidence, or other evidence to demonstrate compliance. A list of all applicable Facilities with date of the verification of capability testing. Although such a list is not required for compliance, it serves to facilitate compliance monitoring.
R1 Supporting Evidence and Documentation R1. Each Generator Owner shall provide its Transmission Planner with verification of the Real Power capability of its applicable Facilities as follows: 1.1. Verify the Real Power capability of its generating units in accordance with Attachment 1. 1.2. Submit a completed Attachment 2 (or a form containing the same information as identified in Attachment 2) to its Transmission Planner within 90 calendar days of either (i) the date the data is recorded for a staged test; or (ii) the date the data is selected for verification using historical operational data. M1. Each Generator Owner will have evidence that it performed the verification, such as a completed Attachment 2 or the Generator Owner form with the same information or dated information collected and used to complete attachments, and will have evidence that it submitted the information within 90 days to its Transmission Planner; such as dated electronic mail messages or mail receipts in accordance with Requirement R1. Evidence Requested: Provide the following evidence, or other evidence to demonstrate compliance. A list of all applicable Facilities with date of the verification of capability testing. Although such a list is not required for compliance, it serves to facilitate compliance monitoring. Dated submittal of verification to Transmission Planner. Copies of completed Attachment 2 (or a form containing same information identified in Attachment 2) for all applicable facilities with submittal dates to TP. Registered Entity Response (Required): Compliance Narrative: Provide a brief explanation, in your own words, of how you comply with this Requirement. References to supplied evidence, including links to the appropriate page, are recommended. Registered Entity Evidence (Required): The following information is requested for each document submitted as evidence. Also, evidence submitted should be highlighted and bookmarked, as appropriate, to identify the location where evidence of compliance may be found. File Name Document Title Revision or Version Document Date Relevant Page(s) or Section(s) Description of Applicability of Document Audit Team Evidence Reviewed (This section to be completed by the Compliance Enforcement Authority):