Billing Code 6717-01-P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket Nos. RD24-5-000; RD24-1-000]
North American Electric Reliability Corporation; Order Approving Extreme Cold
Weather Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 and Directing Modification
1.

On February 16, 2024, the North American Electric Reliability Corporation

(NERC), the Commission-certified Electric Reliability Organization (ERO), submitted a
petition seeking approval of proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 (Extreme Cold
Weather Preparedness and Operations). As discussed in this order, we approve proposed
Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, its associated violation risk factors and violation
severity levels, NERC’s proposed implementation plan, the newly defined terms Fixed
Fuel Supply Component and Generator Cold Weather Constraint, the revised defined
terms Generator Cold Weather Critical Component and Generator Cold Weather
Reliability Event, and the retirement of Reliability Standard EOP-012-1 immediately
prior to the effective date of proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2.1 We also approve
NERC’s proposed implementation date for Reliability Standard EOP-011-4 and the
proposed retirement of Reliability Standards EOP-011-2 and EOP-011-3 immediately
prior to the effective date of proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2.2
2.

It is essential to the reliable operation of the Bulk-Power System to “ensure

enough generating units will be available during the next cold weather event.”3 When

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

Id.

FERC, NERC, and Regional Entity Staff, The February 2021 Cold Weather

extreme cold weather events such as Winter Storms Uri or Elliott occur, the Bulk-Power
System cannot operate reliably without adequate generation. Proposed Reliability
Standard EOP-012-2 improves upon the approved, but not yet effective, Reliability
Standard EOP-012-1 by clarifying the requirements for generator cold weather
preparedness and by making other improvements consistent with the Commission’s
directives in its February 2023 Order to help ensure that more generation is available
during extreme cold weather.4 Accordingly, we find that proposed Reliability Standard
EOP-012-2 is just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the public
interest.
3.

Nevertheless, we find that proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 requires

improvement to address certain concerns, as discussed further below. Therefore,
pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the Federal Power Act (FPA),5 we direct NERC to:
(1) develop and submit modifications to proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2
to address concerns related to the ambiguity of the newly defined term Generator
Cold Weather Constraint to ensure that the Generator Cold Weather Constraint
declaration criteria included within the proposed Standard are objective and
sufficiently detailed so that applicable entities understand what is required of them
and to remove all references to “reasonable cost,” “unreasonable cost,” “cost,” and

Outages in Texas and the South Central United States, at 189 (Nov. 16, 2021),
https://www.ferc.gov/media/february-2021-cold-weather-outages-texas-and-southcentral-united-states-ferc-nerc-and (November 2021 Report).
See, e.g., N. Am. Elec. Reliability Corp., 182 FERC ¶ 61,094, PP 3-11 (2023)
(February 2023 Order); reh’g denied, 183 FERC ¶ 62,034, order on reh’g, 183 FERC
¶ 61,222 (2023).
5

16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(5).

“good business practices” and replace them with objective, unambiguous, and
auditable terms;
(2) develop and submit modifications to proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2
for NERC to receive, review, evaluate, and confirm the validity of each Generator
Cold Weather Constraint invoked by a generator owner, in a timely fashion, to
ensure that such declaration cannot be used to avoid mandatory compliance with
the proposed Reliability Standard or obligations in a corrective action plan;
(3) develop and submit modifications to proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2
to shorten and clarify the corrective action plan implementation timelines and
deadlines in Requirement R7, as further directed below;
(4) develop and submit modifications to Requirement R7 of proposed Reliability
Standard EOP-012-2 to ensure that any extension of a corrective action plan
implementation deadline beyond the maximum implementation timeframe
required by the Standard is pre-approved by NERC and to ensure that the
generator owner informs relevant registered entities of operating limitations in
extreme cold weather during the period of the extension; and
(5) develop and submit modifications to Requirement R8, part 8.1 of proposed
Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 to implement more frequent reviews of Generator
Cold Weather Constraint declarations to verify that the constraint declaration
remains valid.
4.

The Commission has repeatedly expressed an urgency in completing cold weather

Reliability Standards and having them implemented in a timely manner to address the
risks presented by cold weather events on the reliability of the Bulk-Power System.6
See e.g., N. Am. Elec. Reliability Corp., 183 FERC ¶ 62,034 at P 10

Further, we note that NERC submitted the current filing in response to Commission
directives to improve the cold weather Reliability Standards, and the five core directives
to NERC in this order are not new issues, but rather targeted modifications necessary to
fully address issues identified in the Commission’s prior February 2023 Order.
Accordingly, we direct NERC to make the above modifications and submit the revised
Reliability Standard within nine months of the date of issuance of this order.7
I.

Background
A.

5.

Section 215 and Mandatory Reliability Standards

Section 215 of the FPA provides that the Commission may certify an ERO, the

purpose of which is to develop mandatory and enforceable Reliability Standards, subject
to Commission review and approval.8 Reliability Standards may be enforced by the
ERO, subject to Commission oversight, or by the Commission independently.9 Pursuant
to section 215 of the FPA, the Commission established a process to select and certify an
ERO,10 and subsequently certified NERC.11

(emphasizing that industry has been aware of and alerted to the need to prepare
generating units for cold weather since at least 2011 and that in considering an
appropriate implementation period for Reliability Standard EOP-012-1, NERC should
consider how much time industry has already had to implement freeze protection
measures).
18 C.F.R 39.6(g) (2023).

16 U.S.C. 824o(c).

Id. sec. 824o(e).

Rules Concerning Certification of the Elec. Reliability Org.; & Procs. for the
Establishment, Approval, & Enforcement of Elec. Reliability Standards, Order No. 672,
114 FERC ¶ 61,104, order on reh’g, Order No. 672-A, 114 FERC ¶ 61,328 (2006); see
also 18 CFR 39.4(b) (2023).
N. Am. Elec. 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
B.
6.

The February 2021 Cold Weather Reliability Event

On February 16, 2021, Commission, NERC, and Regional Entity staff initiated a

joint inquiry into the circumstances surrounding a February 2021 cold weather reliability
event then affecting Texas and the South-Central United States. In November 2021,
Commission staff issued a report regarding the event, which found that the event was the
largest controlled firm load shed event in U.S. history; over 4.5 million people lost power
and at least 210 people lost their lives during the event.12 The November 2021 Report
made 28 recommendations including, inter alia, enhancements to the Reliability
Standards to improve extreme cold weather operations, preparedness, and coordination.13
7.

After the February 2021 cold weather reliability event, but before the November

2021 Report was issued, NERC filed a petition for approval of cold weather Reliability
Standards addressing recommendations from a report regarding a 2018 cold weather
event.14 In August 2021, the Commission approved NERC’s modifications to Reliability
Standards EOP-011-2 (Emergency Preparedness and Operations), IRO-010-4 (Reliability
Coordinator Data Specification and Collection), and TOP-003-5 (Operational Reliability
Data).15 Reliability Standards IRO-010-4 and TOP-003-5 require that reliability

1342 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
See November 2021 Report at 9.

Id. at 184-212 (sub-recommendations 1a through 1j).

FERC and NERC Staff, The South Central United States Cold Weather Bulk
Electric System Event of January 17, 2018, at 89 (Jul. 2019),
https://www.ferc.gov/sites/default/files/202007/SouthCentralUnitedStatesColdWeatherBulkElectricSystemEventofJanuary172018.pdf.
15

See generally N. Am. Elec. Reliability Corp., 176 FERC ¶ 61,119 (2021).

coordinators, transmission operators, and balancing authorities develop, maintain, and
share generator cold weather data.16 Reliability Standard EOP-011-2 requires generator
owners to have generating unit cold weather preparedness plans.17
8.

On October 28, 2022, NERC filed a petition seeking approval of Reliability

Standards EOP-011-3 (Emergency Operations) and EOP-012-1 (Extreme Cold Weather
Preparedness and Operations), their associated violation risk factors and violation
severity levels, three newly-defined terms (Extreme Cold Weather Temperature,
Generator Cold Weather Critical Component, and Generator Cold Weather Reliability
Event), NERC’s proposed implementation plan, and the retirement of Reliability
Standard EOP-011-2.18 On February 16, 2023, the Commission approved Reliability
Standards EOP-011-3 and EOP-012-1, directed NERC to develop and submit
modifications to Reliability Standard EOP-012-1 and to submit a plan on how NERC will
collect and assess data surrounding the implementation of Reliability Standard
EOP-012-1, and deferred the retirement of Reliability Standard EOP-011-2.19
9.

On October 30, 2023, NERC filed a petition seeking approval of Reliability

Standards EOP-011-4 (Emergency Operations) and TOP-002-5 (Operations Planning),
their associated violation risk factors and violation severity levels, NERC’s proposed
implementation plan, and the retirement of Reliability Standards EOP-011-2 and
TOP-002-4. On February 15, 2024, the Commission approved Reliability Standards

Id.

Id.

NERC 2022 Petition at 1-2.

See February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP 3-11.

EOP-011-3 and TOP-002-5 and again deferred the retirement of Reliability Standard
EOP-011-2.20
C.
10.

NERC’s Petition and Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2

On February 16, 2024, in response to the Commission’s February 2023 Order,

NERC filed a petition seeking approval of proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2,21 its
associated violation risk factors and violation severity levels, two newly defined terms
(Fixed Fuel Supply Component and Generator Cold Weather Constraint), two revised
terms (Generator Cold Weather Critical Component and Generator Cold Weather
Reliability Event), NERC’s proposed implementation plan, and the retirement of
currently approved Reliability Standard EOP-012-1.22 NERC explains that proposed
Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 improves upon the approved, but not yet effective,
generator cold weather preparation Reliability Standard EOP-012-1 and is consistent with
the Commission’s directives from the February 2023 Order.23 NERC states that proposed
Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 clarifies applicability of the Standard’s requirements for
generator cold weather preparedness, would further define the circumstances under which
a generator owner may declare that constraints preclude it from implementing one or

See id. PP 1-2.

The proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 is not attached to this order. The
proposed Reliability Standard is available on the Commission’s eLibrary document
retrieval system in Docket No. RD24-5-000 and on the NERC website, www.nerc.com.
22

NERC Petition at 1-4.

Id. at 2.

more corrective actions to address freezing issues, and shortens the implementation
timeline so that cold weather reliability risks would be addressed sooner.24
11.

NERC states that the purpose of proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 is

unchanged from that of approved Reliability Standard EOP-012-1, which is to ensure that
each generator owner develops and implements plans to alleviate the reliability impacts
of extreme cold weather on its generating units.25 NERC also notes that proposed
Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 completes NERC’s two-part plan to address
recommendations from the November 2021 Report by including revisions to address
parts of Key Recommendations 1a, 1b, 1c, and 1d.26 NERC states that the proposed
Reliability Standard contains new and revised requirements to advance the reliability of
the Bulk-Power System by requiring generator owners to (1) review their generator cold
weather data periodically, (2) include any identified start up issues in their generator
cold weather data provided to reliability entities, and (3) consider the impacts of freezing
precipitation and wind speed in identifying generator cold weather data.27
12.

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 has eight requirements, seven of which

have been carried over and modified from approved Reliability Standard EOP-012-1
(Requirements R1-R7) and one of which is new (Requirement R8). Proposed Reliability

Id.

Id. at 29.

See id. at 25-26, 35, 49-50 (citing the November 2021 Report at 184-86).

Id. at 23.

Standard EOP-012-2 applies to generator owners and generator operators that own or
operate bulk electric system generating units.28
13.

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R1 modifies the

Requirements for each generator owner to calculate the Extreme Cold Weather
Temperature for each of its applicable generating units and to re-calculate that
temperature at least once every five calendar years.29 Where a periodic re-calculation
results in a lower Extreme Cold Weather Temperature for the generating unit, the
generator owner must update its cold weather preparedness plan within six months and, if
necessary, develop a corrective action plan to implement measures at the applicable unit
to provide the capability to operate at that new, lower temperature. Proposed Reliability
Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R1, Part 1.2, also maintains Requirement R3.1 to
identify generating unit cold weather data, including operating limitations in cold weather
and minimum operating temperatures, from approved Reliability Standard EOP-012-1,
Requirement R3, Part 3.5.30
14.

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirements R2 and R3 clarify the

cold weather operational capability requirements for new and existing bulk electric
system generating units.31 Under proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2,

NERC Petition at 22-23.

Requirement R1 under proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 modifies
existing Requirement R3, Part 3.1 and Requirement R4 under currently approved but not
yet effective Reliability Standard EOP-012-1.
30

NERC Petition at 33-37.

Requirements R2 and R3 under proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 were
originally Requirements R1 and R2, respectively, under currently approved but not yet
effective Reliability Standard EOP-012-1.
Requirement R2, generator owners would be required to implement freeze protection
measures at applicable bulk electric system generating units to provide the capability to
operate at the Extreme Cold Weather Temperature with sustained, concurrent 20 mph
wind speed for the unit.32 Specifically, Requirement R2 requires generating units with a
commercial operation date on or after October 1, 2027, to be capable of operating at the
unit’s Extreme Cold Weather Temperature for a continuous 12-hour period or at the
maximum operational duration for intermittent energy resources if less than 12
continuous hours. If a generating unit is unable to do either then it must develop a
corrective action plan to add new or modify existing or previously planned freeze
protection measures to provide the capability to operate at the unit’s Extreme Cold
Weather Temperature with a sustained, concurrent 20 mph wind speed.33
15.

Similar to Requirement R2, but without the wind and duration criteria,

Requirement R3 requires either that existing generating units, (i.e., those in commercial
operation prior to October 1, 2027) be capable of operating at the unit’s Extreme Cold
Weather Temperature or that the generator owner develops a corrective action plan to
address the unit’s inability to continuously operate successfully.34 Requirements R2 and
R3 exempt generating units that do not self-commit or are not required to operate at or
below a temperature of 32 degrees Fahrenheit, including those that may be called upon to
operate to assist in mitigating emergencies during periods at or below 32 degrees
Fahrenheit.35

NERC Petition at 37.

Id. at 38.

Id. at 38-39.

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R2, n.1 and

16.

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R4,36 modifies the

requirement for generator owners to implement and maintain cold weather preparedness
plans.37 Under Requirement R4, generator owners would include in their cold weather
preparedness plans the information determined in accordance with proposed Reliability
Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R1. Requirement R4 also clarifies that the cold
weather preparedness plans shall reflect the lowest calculated Extreme Cold Weather
Temperature for the unit, even if subsequent re-calculations indicate warming
temperatures.38
17.

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R5 is substantively

unchanged from the prior version of the Standard. Requirement R5 states that generator
owners must train their personnel annually on the unit’s cold weather preparedness
plans.39
18.

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R6 modifies the

requirement that generator owners that self-commit or are required to operate at or below
a temperature of 32 degrees Fahrenheit and experience an outage, failure to start, or
derate due to freezing at or above their Extreme Cold Weather Temperature must develop

Requirement R3, n.2; see also NERC Petition at 41-42.
Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R4 was originally
Requirement R3 in currently approved but not yet effective Reliability Standard
EOP-012-1.
37

NERC Petition at 45.

Id. at 46 (citing proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R4, n.3,
which states that generator owners shall include the lowest calculated Extreme Cold
Weather Temperature for the unit, even where subsequent periodic re-calculations under
Requirement R1, Part 1.1 cause an increase in the Extreme Cold Weather Temperature).
39

Id. at 47.

a corrective action plan to address the identified causes. Requirement R6 exempts
generating units that do not self-commit or are not required to operate at or below a
temperature of 32 degrees Fahrenheit, including those that may be called upon to operate
to assist in mitigating emergencies during periods at or below 32 degrees Fahrenheit.40
19.

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R7 modifies the

requirement for implementing corrective action plans. Requirement R7 includes new
implementation deadlines for implementing corrective action plans and clarifies the types
of constraints that may preclude the implementation of one or more corrective actions.41
Specifically, Requirement R7 requires that for each corrective action plan developed
pursuant to Requirements R1, R2, R3, or R6, generator owners shall include a timetable
for implementing the corrective actions and complete the corrective actions in accordance
with the timetables outlined in the proposed Standard.42 Under Requirement R7,
generator owners are permitted to update the corrective action plan timetables, with
justifications, if corrective actions change or the timetable exceeds the timelines in
Requirement R7, Part 7.1. This requirement also states that the generator owner must
document, in a declaration with justification, any Generator Cold Weather Constraint that

Id. at 48 (citing Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R6,

Id. at 50.

n.4).

Id. at 50-51 (noting that generator owners must list the actions that address
existing equipment or freeze protection measures to be completed within 24 calendar
months of completing development of the corrective action plan, list the actions that
require new equipment or freeze protection measures, if any, to be completed within 48
calendar months of completing development of the corrective action plan, and list the
updates to the cold weather preparedness plan requirement under Requirement R4 to
identify the updates or additions to the Generator Cold Weather Critical Components and
their freeze protection measures) (emphasis added).
precludes the generator owner from implementing the selected actions contained within
the corrective action plan.43
20.

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R8 is a new requirement

that would apply to generator owners that have declared a Generator Cold Weather
Constraint under Requirement R7. Specifically, this requirement states that each
generator owner that creates a Generator Cold Weather Constraint declaration shall
review the Generator Cold Weather Constraint declaration at least every five calendar
years or as needed when a change of status to the Generator Cold Weather Constraint
occurs and update the operating limitations associated with capability and availability
under Requirement R1, Part 1.2, if applicable.44
21.

NERC requests that the Commission approve the violation risk factors and

violation severity levels for proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2.45 Further, NERC
proposes an effective date for Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 (with the exception of
Requirement R3, which would become mandatory and enforceable 12-months following
the proposed Standard’s effective date) of October 1, 2024 or the first day of the first
calendar quarter that is three months following regulatory approval, whichever is later.46
22.

Finally, NERC requests that the Commission approve proposed Reliability

Standard EOP-012-2 in an expedited manner. NERC explains that, among other things,

NERC Petition at 51-60.

Id. at 62.

Id. at 2-3.

Id. at 66.

expedited approval would provide regulatory certainty to entities seeking to comply with
the proposed Reliability Standard ahead of the mandatory and enforceable date.47
II.

Notice of Filing and Responsive Pleadings

23.

Notice of NERC’s February 16, 2024, Petition was published in the Federal

Register, 89 Fed. Reg. 14,479 (2024), with comments, protests, and motions to intervene
due on or before March 21, 2024.
24.

The Commission received one protest, one set of comments, and five sets of out of

time answers. The Electric Power Supply Association (EPSA); the New England Power
Generators Association, Inc. (NEPGA); Dominion Energy Services, Inc. (Dominion),
Constellation Energy Generation, LLC (Constellation), and the Independent System
Operators and Regional Transmission Organizations Council (the ISO/RTO Council)
filed timely motions to intervene. The Transmission Access Policy Study Group (TAPS);
Avangrid Renewables, LLC; and the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission filed out of
time motions to intervene. NEPGA filed timely comments. The ISO/RTO Council filed
a timely protest. EPSA, TAPS, NERC, and the ISO/RTO Council filed motions for leave
to answer along with answers.48
25.

Commenters and protesters raised concerns and requests for clarifications for

proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2. The commenters range in their support for
proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 from requesting that the Commission approve
the proposed Standard as filed49 or approve the proposed Standard as filed with minor

Id. at 70-71.

TAPS filed two answers.

NERC Answer at 1-3; 29.

clarifications,50 to requesting that the Commission remand the proposed Standard to
NERC with directives.51 The comments on specific matters are summarized and
addressed in the determinations below.
III.

Determination
A.

26.

Procedural Matters

Pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure,

18 CFR 385.214 (2023), the timely, unopposed motions to intervene serve to make the
entities that filed them parties to this proceeding.
27.

Rule 213(a)(2) of the Commission’s Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18

CFR 385.213(a)(2) (2023), prohibits an answer to a protest or answer unless otherwise
ordered by the decisional authority. Pursuant to Rule 214(d) of the Commission’s Rules
of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.214(d), we grant TAPS, Avangrid Renewables,
LLC, and the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission’s motions for leave to file out of
time motions to intervene given their interest in the proceeding and the absence of undue
prejudice or delay.
B.
28.

Substantive Matters

Pursuant to section 215(d)(2) of the FPA, we approve proposed Reliability

Standard EOP-012-2 as just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in
the public interest. Absent the reforms adopted in proposed Reliability Standard
EOP-012-2, the unexpected failure of generating units during extreme cold weather
conditions could negatively impact the reliability of the Bulk-Power System.

See NEPGA Comments 1-5; EPSA Answer 1-5; TAPS Answer at 1-2.

See ISO/RTO Council Protest at 1-3.

29.

We find that proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 represents an improvement

over approved Reliability Standard EOP-012-1 as the proposed Standard enhances the
reliable operation of the Bulk-Power System. Specifically, the proposed Reliability
Standard will improve reliability by requiring generator owners to implement freeze
protection measures, develop detailed cold weather preparedness plans, implement
annual trainings, draft and implement corrective action plans to address freezing issues,
and provide certain cold weather operating parameters to reliability coordinators,
transmission operators, and balancing authorities for use in their analyses and planning.
We believe that these measures will help address many of the issues identified as
contributing to generating unit failures during extreme cold weather conditions, as noted
in the November 2021 Report.52
30.

Nevertheless, while we find that NERC’s petition is an improvement to the

currently approved Reliability Standard, we also find that there are some elements of
proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 that are not fully responsive to the
Commission’s February 2023 Order.53 Accordingly, as discussed further below, we
direct NERC pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA to address these issues.
31.

Although we find that the Reliability Standard needs additional improvement, we

are not persuaded that there is sufficient cause to remand proposed Standard EOP-012-2,
as requested by the ISO/RTO Council.54 Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2
represents an improvement over approved Reliability Standard EOP-012-1, and

See November 2021 Report at 184-210.

See NERC Petition at 27-28; see also February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094
at PP 1, 3, 6, 9-10, 66, 77-79, 88.
54

See ISO/RTO Council Protest at 4.

remanding the proposed Standard would allow currently approved Reliability Standard
EOP-012-1 to go into effect on October 1, 2024, despite its ambiguities and other
identified issues.55
32.

Below we address the following elements of proposed Reliability Standard

EOP-012-2: (1) Generator Cold Weather Constraint declaration criteria; (2) the entity to
receive, review, evaluate, and confirm for validity the Generator Cold Weather Constraint
declarations; (3) the length of the corrective action plan implementation deadlines; (4) the
corrective action plan implementation timelines for existing versus new generating units;
(5) the generating unit freeze measure applicability exemptions within proposed
Requirements R2, R3, and R6; (6) the winterization criteria for new versus existing
generating units; (7) the annual inspections and maintenance of a generating unit’s freeze
protection measures; (8) the five-year review period for declared Generator Cold Weather
Constraints; and (9) cost recovery mechanisms.
1.

Generator Cold Weather Constraint Declaration Criteria
a.

33.

The Commission’s Directive in the February 2023 Order

Under Reliability Standard EOP-012-1, a generator owner could explain in a

declaration any “technical, commercial, or operational constraints” that preclude its
ability to either implement freeze protection measures or implement corrective action
plans. However, Reliability Standard EOP-012-1 does not define “technical, commercial,

See, e.g., Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power Sys., Order No.
693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218, at P 10; order on reh’g, Order No. 693-A, 120 FERC ¶ 61,053
(2007) (noting that “[w]here a Reliability Standard requires significant improvement, but
is otherwise enforceable, the Commission approves the Reliability Standard” and “directs
the ERO to modify” such Standards to address identified issues or concerns); Version 5
Critical Infrastructure Prot. Reliability Standards, Order No. 791, 145 FERC ¶ 61,160, at
PP 1-4 (2013); order on clarification and reh’g, Order No. 791-A, 146 FERC ¶ 61,188
(2014).
or operational constraints,” leaving those terms open to interpretation by each generator
owner. In the February 2023 Order, the Commission approved Reliability Standard
EOP-012-1 but expressed concern with the uncertainties, ambiguities, and vagueness of
the Standard’s descriptions of constraints, noting that, without criteria to guide the
generator owners or guardrails on what constitutes a legitimate constraint, generator
owners may avoid the purpose of the Standard altogether or have declarations without
auditable elements. Thus, the Commission directed NERC to address the ambiguity of
generator owner-defined declarations by including auditable criteria to ensure that
declarations cannot be used to avoid mandatory compliance with the Reliability Standard
or obligations in a corrective action plan.56
b.
34.

NERC’s Petition

In proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, NERC proposes to replace the

undefined “technical, commercial, or operational constraints” with the newly defined
Glossary term “Generator Cold Weather Constraint.” The term explains that constraints
are conditions precluding generator owners from implementing freeze protection
measures based on one or more criteria. NERC states that:
Criteria used to determine a constraint includes practices,
methods, or technologies which, given the exercise of
reasonable judgment in light of the facts known at the time the
decision to declare the constraint was made:
• Were not broadly implemented at generating units for
comparable unit types in regions that experience similar

February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP 6, 66.

winter climate conditions to provide reasonable assurance
of efficacy;
• Could not have been expected to accomplish the desired
result; or
• Could not have been implemented at a reasonable cost
consistent with good business practices, reliability, or
safety.

A cost may be deemed “unreasonable” when

implementation of selected freeze protection measure(s)
are uneconomical to the extent that they would require
prohibitively expensive modifications or significant
expenditures on equipment with minimal remaining life.57
35.

During the development of proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, NERC’s

Standard Drafting Team explained that using a reasonableness standard as a benchmark
for evaluating constraint declarations is appropriate given the wide range of facts and
circumstances that will be relevant under the definition.58 The Standard Drafting Team
added that the “reasonableness standard is typically an objective test that looks at the
average decision maker’s conduct under the particular facts and circumstances present if
they exercised average care, skill, and judgement.”59 NERC’s Standard Drafting Team
considered adding specific criteria but was of the opinion that the proposed Reliability
Standard must be adaptable as facts and circumstances change and new solutions are

NERC Petition at 28.

Id., Ex. F, at 50-51.

See id., Ex. F at 1,772.

identified and become commercially available.60 NERC’s petition states that the
language used in the Generator Cold Weather Constraint definition is modeled after the
concept of “good utility practice” and is intended to convey that the proposed Reliability
Standard “would not require the best solutions, which would result in more constraints
being declared, but rather acceptable solutions.”61 NERC states that the term
“unreasonable costs” is intended to refer to cost-prohibitive modifications or significant
expenditures that could lead to premature retirement of equipment.62
c.
36.

Comments

The ISO/RTO Council argues that the discussion of freeze protection measures in

the newly defined Generator Cold Weather Constraint term creates ambiguity that
provides far too much discretion to the entities required to comply with proposed
Reliability Standard EOP-012-2.63 The ISO/RTO Council believes that the proposed
Standard provides insufficient guidance concerning a generator owner’s exercise of
discretion to interpret whether freeze protection measures are available for its equipment
when determining whether a basis exists to declare a constraint. As such, the ISO/RTO
Council recommends that the Commission direct NERC to revise the constraint
declaration language so that it is clear that freeze protection measures are intended to
include practices, methods, or technologies that would reasonably be expected to result in

See id.

See NERC Petition at 57 (citing to the Commission’s pro forma Open Access
Transmission Tariff, section 1.15).
62

Id.

ISO/RTO Council Protest at 13.

effective facility performance while operating at the Extreme Cold Weather
Temperature.64
37.

NERC, in its answer, states that its Standard Drafting Team determined that

proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 should not require entities to implement
technologies or solutions that had not been proven to be effective in similar climate
conditions.65 TAPS members, while initially expressing concern during the development
of proposed Standard2, now believe that NERC guidance will help ensure consistent
application of the Generator Cold Weather Constraint declaration criteria.66 TAPS
asserts that the new definition is auditable and greatly improves upon NERC’s approach
in approved Reliability Standard EOP-012-1.67
38.

The ISO/RTO Council also states that the inclusion of “reasonable cost” in the

definition of what qualifies as a potential Generator Cold Weather Constraint is
subjective, unclear, and un-auditable.68 The ISO/RTO Council is concerned that this
would allow generator owners to declare a constraint simply by asserting that
implementing a given freeze protection measure would constitute a “‘prohibitively
expensive modification[]’ or a ‘significant expenditure[]’ and that the affected facility has

Id. at 15.

NERC Answer at 14 (noting that the Commission is only required to find that
the proposed Reliability Standard, as written, is just and reasonable rather than the “best”
option and requesting that the Commission give due weight to the expertise of the
Standard Drafting Team).
66

TAPS Answer at 2-3.

Id.

ISO/RTO Council Protest at 6.

a ‘minimal remaining life.’”69 They state that this exception effectively injects NERC
and the Regional Entities into the process of judging the reasonableness of costs and a
particular generator owner’s financial situation.70 As such, the ISO/RTO Council
recommends that the Commission direct NERC to remove the cost-based constraints
from proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2.71 They state that the Commission faces
a policy choice of whether to adopt exceptions to compliance based on generator owners’
assertions of excessive costs or whether to apply its FPA section 205 and 206 authority to
provide avenues for generator owners to recover costs.72
39.

In contrast, TAPS argues that the definition of an economic constraint is quite

narrow and does not permit a balancing of costs against benefits.73 TAPS does not agree
with the ISO/RTO Council that cost-based constraints should be removed from the
Generator Cold Weather Constraint definition entirely since that would make the
proposed Reliability Standard unreasonable and contrary to the requirements of FPA

Id. at 7 (quoting NERC’s proposed definition of the Generator Cold Weather
Constraint).; see also NERC Petition, Ex. A, at 3.
70

ISO/RTO Council Protest at 7.

Id. at 7-8, 12 (stating that cost should be addressed by the Commission through
its obligation to ensure just and reasonable rates and by the appropriate state, local, and
regulatory authorities rather than being “shoehorned” into a Reliability Standard).
72

ISO/RTO Council Answer at 4-8.

TAPS Answer at 4; TAPS Second Answer at 3.

section 215(d)(2).74 TAPS argues that such removal would mandate winterization at any
cost, no matter how unjustifiable.75
40.

In its answer, NERC states that the proposed definition of Generator Cold Weather

Constraint accounts for concerns that the requirements to operate in cold weather could
“lead to fewer generators choosing to operate in cold weather due to prohibitive costs or
technical inability to meet the operational capability requirements” of the proposed
Reliability Standard.76 NERC asserts that the ISO/RTO Council is not taking into
account the reliability impacts that may occur if the cost of compliance is prohibitively
high and generators choose not to operate.77 On the auditability issue, NERC states that
the proposed definition is auditable and that the ISO/RTO Council is conflating
“auditability” and “flexibility.” They state that NERC and the Regional Entities
“understand that they will be assessing the reasonableness of the process entities use to
declare constraints” and will continue to monitor implementation of the proposed
Reliability Standard closely.78
d.
41.

Commission Determination

Although NERC’s proposal to replace the existing “technical, commercial, and

operational” constraints with the newly defined Generator Cold Weather Constraint term

TAPS Answer at 5 (citing to 16 U.S.C. 824o(d)(2), which provides that “[t]he
Commission may approve … a proposed reliability standard … if it determines that the
standard is just, reasonable, not unduly discriminatory or preferential, and in the public
interest”).
75

Id.

NERC Answer at 8.

Id. at 9.

Id. at 10-11.

and associated criteria meets the Commission’s directive to develop criteria for constraint
declarations, it does not meet the Commission’s directives to develop criteria that are
objective, unambiguous, and auditable.79 In Reliability Standard EOP-012-1, the use of
“technical, commercial and operational constraints” was a stand-alone phrase, and did not
include any definitions or further explanation of the conditions under which such
declarations could be made, causing the ambiguity concerns raised in the February 2023
Order.80 Moreover, Reliability Standard EOP-012-1 left it up to the generator owner to
interpret what it meant to have a technical, commercial, or operational constraint. By
adding some criteria for the constraint declarations, we find that NERC’s proposed
Generator Cold Weather Constraint declaration criteria improves upon the status quo.
42.

Nevertheless, we share the ISO/RTO Council’s concerns that the proposed

Generator Cold Weather Constraint declaration criteria are also ambiguous, which may
lead to inconsistent application and uncertainty. For example, the proposed definition
does not provide sufficient guidance on how widely a freeze protection technology must
be deployed before it will be considered a “generally implemented” technology. We
agree with the ISO/RTO Council’s concern that this focus on general industry practice,
without any way to ensure consistency in the application of that language, leaves the
Commission without an objective standard that can be effectively audited.
43.

In response to the ISO/RTO Council’s concern, NERC states that its Standard

Drafting Team determined that proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 should not

February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP 6, 66.

See id. PP 6, 64-66.

require the implementation of unproven technologies.81 We agree. However, in its effort
to provide flexibility, the proposed Reliability Standard falls short of the Commission’s
directive to develop criteria that are objective, unambiguous, and auditable, as discussed
further below.82 The Commission has previously expressed similar concerns regarding
the vagueness and enforceability of a Reliability Standard’s language. For example, in
Order No. 693 the Commission approved Reliability Standards while also expressing
concern that the term “sabotage” was too ambiguous.83 Similarly, in Order No. 791
(approving Version 5 of the Critical Infrastructure Protection Reliability Standards),
the Commission raised concerns with vague language that required entities to “identify,
assess, and correct” deficiencies.84 The Commission determined that the ambiguities
resulted in an “unacceptable amount of uncertainty” and directed NERC to remove the
ambiguous language and develop appropriate modifications.85 In both Order Nos. 693
and 791, the Commission approved NERC’s proposed Reliability Standards as an
improvement to reliability, while directing NERC to submit modifications to the
Reliability Standards addressing the Commission’s concern regarding the vagueness of
particular language. We conclude that a similar approach is appropriate in the instant
proceeding, given the improvements offered by proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2
in addressing Bulk-Power System reliability during extreme cold weather events.

NERC Answer at 13-14.

February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP 6, 66.

See Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218 at PP 1, 461.

See Order No. 791, 145 FERC ¶ 61,160 at PP 49-53, 67, 69.

See id.; see also Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218 at PP 1, 461.

44.

We also find that the inclusion of the clause “reasonable cost consistent with good

business practices” in the third criterion of the Generator Cold Weather Constraint
definition does not meet the Commission’s directive to create criteria that are objective,
unambiguous, and auditable.86 In its answer, NERC explains that its Standard Drafting
Team was concerned about the reliability impacts that may follow from a mandate to
retrofit a generating unit at any cost when many generator owners have significant
discretion regarding whether and when they will participate in the market. While we
agree there may be a need to account for certain cases in which the cost of retrofitting
may be unnecessarily burdensome, the mechanism in proposed Reliability Standard
EOP-012-2 to address such cases provides a recipe for inconsistent outcomes. Although
NERC argues that the use of “reasonable cost consistent with good business practices” is
akin to the Commission’s use of “good utility practice,” we find such comparisons
unavailing. Neither the proposed Reliability Standard itself nor the NERC Glossary of
Terms defines what constitutes a “reasonable cost” or “good business practices.” Even if
it did, NERC, as the ERO, is not well positioned to assess the reasonableness of a
registered entity’s economic choices. Additionally, while “good utility practice” has
been widely used in Commission-jurisdictional contracts and tariffs,87 it has not been
used in the FPA section 215 context.88
45.

The Commission has previously rejected similar attempts to include vaguely

defined cost considerations in Reliability Standards. Specifically, in Order No. 706, the

February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP 6, 66.

See e.g., Midcontinent Indep. Sys. Operator, Inc., 165 FERC ¶ 61,016, P 49

(2018).
16 U.S.C. 824o.

Commission directed NERC to remove references to reasonable business judgment in its
Reliability Standard.89 The Commission largely based its finding on the fact that
NERC’s Glossary of Terms did not define the term “reasonable business judgment” and
the Reliability Standard itself did not suggest how the term should be interpreted.90
46.

We acknowledge that there may be certain instances in which the cost of

retrofitting may be unduly burdensome. To address such instances, NERC should clearly
define such exceptions and present them for Commission review. For example, one
approach could be for NERC to provide a limited set of clearly defined circumstances
that could serve as constraints, such as an attestation91 from a generator owner or
generator operator that: (1) the generating unit is scheduled to retire within the next two
years; (2) implementing freeze protection measures in accordance with the Reliability
Standard would cause the generating unit to retire within two years; or (3) they would
cancel a newly scheduled generating unit that has not yet achieved commercial operation
if required to comply with the freeze protection requirements of a Standard.92 Including
discrete circumstances regarding what constitutes an acceptable economic constraint
could provide clarity to generator owners considering constraint declarations and allow

See Mandatory Reliability Standards for Critical Infrastructure Protection,
Order No. 706, 122 FERC ¶ 61,040, PP 137-38 (2008); order on clarification, 126 FERC
¶ 61,229; order denying clarification, 127 FERC ¶ 61,273 (2009).
90

See id. P 109.

As noted below, NERC shall receive, review, evaluate, and confirm for validity
any Generator Cold Weather Constraint declaration in a timely manner. Infra at P 54.
For this example, generator owners or generator operators should seek cost
recovery through the available cost recovery mechanisms prior to making attestations
about retirement.
for an objective and straightforward evaluation of the constraint declaration criteria
during compliance monitoring activities.
47.

Accordingly, we direct NERC, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, to

develop and submit to the Commission for approval modifications to proposed Reliability
Standard EOP-012-2 that address concerns related to the ambiguity of the newly defined
Generator Cold Weather Constraint term and criteria. Specifically, we direct NERC to
ensure that the Generator Cold Weather Constraint declaration criteria included within
the proposed Reliability Standard are objective and sufficiently detailed so that
applicable entities understand what is required of them. One approach to satisfy this
directive could be to incorporate into the proposed Reliability Standard a limited and
discrete list of circumstances that would qualify as acceptable constraints. We note that
NERC’s technical rationale document,93 created by NERC’s Standard Drafting Team and
included in NERC’s filing, includes a list of technical constraints that could serve as a
starting point for a list of circumstances that would qualify as acceptable constraints. To
the extent that NERC continues to believe that the extent of industry adoption for
winterization technologies should be a criterion for declaring a constraint, NERC should
clearly explain in its filing how it will assess the extent of such adoption in a way that
provides for consistent compliance and enforcement outcomes. Alternatively, NERC
could establish a pre-approval process for all Generator Cold Weather Constraint
declarations. While a clearly defined list may be preferable, a pre-approval process could

See NERC, Drafting Team Reference Manual – Version 5, at 8 (Jan. 2024),
https://www.nerc.com/pa/Stand/Resources/Documents/Drafting%20Team%20Reference
%20Manual%20_clean_January%202024.pdf; see also NERC, Technical Rationale for
Reliability Standards FAQ, at 1 (Mar. 2018),
https://www.nerc.com/pa/Stand/TechnicalRationale/Technical%20Rationale%20FAQs_
March2018.pdf.
be established to ensure entities' declared Generator Cold Weather Constraints are
appropriate and can be supported and defended. Further, as part of the directive to
develop and submit modifications to the Generator Cold Weather Constraint definition of
proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, we direct NERC, pursuant to section 215(d)(5)
of the FPA, to remove the references to “cost,” “reasonable cost,” “unreasonable cost,”
and “good business practices” and replace them with criteria that are objective,
unambiguous, and auditable. NERC may propose to develop modifications that address
the Commission’s concerns in an equally efficient and effective manner, however, NERC
must explain how its proposal addresses the Commission’s concerns.94
2.

Entity to Receive, Review, Evaluate, and Confirm for Validity
the Generator Cold Weather Constraint Declarations
a.

48.

The Commission’s Directive in the February 2023 Order

In the February 2023 Order, the Commission directed NERC to identify the entity

that would receive and review the generator owners’ constraint declarations pursuant to
Reliability Standard EOP-012-1, Requirements R1 and R7, and to describe how that
entity would confirm that the generator owners complied with the objective criteria.95
b.
49.

NERC Petition

In response to the Commission’s directive, NERC proposes new Requirement R8,

Part 8.2. NERC proposes to require that any generating unit cold weather operating
limitations due to declared constraints be provided to the balancing authority,

See Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218 at P 186.

February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP 6, 66.

transmission operator, or reliability coordinator via data specifications to the generator
owners through other Reliability Standard requirements.96 In its petition, NERC states
that its Standard Drafting Team determined that having the generator owner
communicate the practical impacts of declaring a constraint to the entities that are
responsible for grid planning and reliability would be the best way to address the
reliability concerns contained in the Commission’s directive.97
50.

NERC explains that it and the Regional Entities would be responsible for

assessing entity compliance with the Generator Cold Weather Constraint declaration
provisions via an audit or other compliance monitoring method.98 NERC also states that
it and the Regional Entities are preparing a “strategy for performing robust compliance
monitoring and enforcement of the currently effective and approved generator cold
weather Reliability Standards.”99 Further, NERC points to the annual data request and
analysis that it asserts would allow the Commission to understand the efficacy of, and

See NERC Petition at 63. The transmission operators and balancing authorities,
in accordance with Reliability Standard TOP-003-5 (Operational Reliability Data), must
obtain the generating unit(s) minimum design temperature, the historical operating
temperature, or the current cold weather performance temperature determined by an
engineering analysis. See Reliability Standard TOP-003-5, Requirement R1, Part 1.3.2.
and Requirement R2, Parts 2.3.2.1, 2.3.2.2., and 2.3.2.3. Likewise, reliability
coordinators must obtain this information per Reliability Standard IRO-010-4 (Reliability
Coordinator Data Specification).
97

See NERC Petition at 63 (citing February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at

Id. at 63-64.

Id. at 69.

P 66).

monitor the ongoing risk posed by, technical, commercial, or operational constraint
provisions.100
51.

NERC states that it and the Regional Entities understand that they will be

assessing the reasonableness of the process generator owners use to declare Generator
Cold Weather Constraints.101 NERC notes that it will take steps to ensure that its reviews
are “conducted in a consistent manner across the ERO Enterprise.”102
c.
52.

Commission Determination

We find that proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 does not identify an entity

to receive the Generator Cold Weather Constraint declarations, the entity responsible for
timely review of the generator owners’ constraint declarations, or the entity responsible
for ensuring that the declarations meet the objective criteria of the proposed Standard.
Although we agree with NERC that declared constraints can be provided to the balancing
authority, transmission operator, or reliability coordinator via data specifications under
existing Reliability Standards, this does not address the Commission’s directive that an
entity review and confirm that generator owners complied with the constraint criteria.
53.

NERC states that a review of the Generator Cold Weather Constraint declarations

will occur during compliance activities, and that it and the Regional Entities are
developing a compliance monitoring strategy for the cold weather Reliability
Standards.103 We conclude, however, that NERC’s proposal is not an equally efficient

Id.

Id. at 10-11.

Id.

See id. at 63-64.

and effective means to address the Commission’s directive and underlying concern.
First, the NERC Rules of Procedure contain no obligation to periodically audit generator
owners. Only a handful of generator owners are audited each year, and those audits do
not assess all Reliability Standards and all requirements. Moreover, given the significant
reliability risk evidenced by the failure of generating units during recent extreme winter
weather events, we continue to believe that an enhanced level of oversight remains
necessary to ensure that Generator Cold Weather Constraints are only declared when
warranted. While generator owners’ responses to NERC’s annual data request regarding
the Generator Cold Weather Constraint declarations are useful for a wide-area event
analysis or in forecasting future trends,104 NERC’s annual data request will only provide
a limited insight into the specific facts and circumstances around a Generator Cold
Weather Constraint declaration. For example, while the annual data request is expected
to indicate whether the generator owner has declared a constraint for a generating unit
along with the associated rationale(s) for each declaration, it does not collect any
supporting documentation necessary to justify the generator owners’ declared constraints.
As a result, we are not persuaded that NERC’s annual data request constitutes an
adequate substitute for an appropriate entity contemporaneously reviewing and
confirming whether a generator owner has complied with the objective constraint criteria
set out in proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2.105.
54.

Accordingly, we again direct NERC, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, to

modify proposed Reliability Standard so that NERC receives, reviews, evaluates, and

See generally N. Am. Elec. Reliability Corp., Compliance Filing, Docket No.
RD23-1-000 (Feb. 16, 2024).
105

February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP 6.

confirms for validity the Generator Cold Weather Constraint declarations in a timely
manner. We also direct NERC to include in its compliance filing, a plan to timely review
such declarations to verify compliance with proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2
and its successors or obligations in a corrective action plan and take corrective action
where necessary. For example, modifying Standard to require the generator owners to
provide declarations (or changes to the declarations) to NERC within 45 days. It is up to
NERC whether it would like to delegate this task to the relevant Regional Entities.
NERC may propose to develop modifications that address the Commission’s concerns in
an equally efficient and effective manner, however, NERC must explain how its proposal
addresses the Commission’s concerns.106
3.

The Length of Corrective Action Plan Implementation Deadlines
a.

55.

The Commission’s Directives in the February 2023 Order

The Commission directed NERC to develop three modifications pertaining to the

corrective action plan deadlines set forth in Reliability Standard EOP-012-1. First, the
Commission directed NERC to shorten the 60-month timeframe for developing corrective
action plans for existing units.107 While the Commission gave NERC discretion to
determine what the effective date should be shortened to, it also emphasized that
“industry has been aware of and alerted to the need to prepare their generating units for
cold weather since at least 2011” and that NERC should consider the “amount of time

See Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218 at P 186.

See February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP 10, 24. Sixty months was
determined based on approved Reliability Standard EOP-012-1 becoming effective 18
months after the effective date of applicable regulatory approvals combined with the
42-month compliance date for Reliability Standard EOP-012-1 Requirement R2.
that industry has already had to implement freeze protection measures.”108 Second, the
Commission directed NERC to revise Reliability Standard EOP-012-1 to include
deadlines for completing the corrective actions in the plans.109 Specifically, the
Commission was concerned that the lack of a deadline or maximum duration for
completing the corrective actions could allow identified issues to remain unresolved for
an indefinite period.110 Third, the Commission directed NERC to modify the Reliability
Standard EOP-012-1, Requirement R2, implementation plan for generating units with a
commercial operation date prior to October 1, 2027 to require a staggered
implementation of freeze protection measures for existing units in a generator owner’s
fleet with an effective date of less than 60 months from regulatory approval.111
b.
56.

NERC’s Petition

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 requires generator owners to develop,

within 12-months after the effective date of the Reliability Standard, a corrective action
plan for their existing units to add new, or modify existing, freeze protection measures.112
57.

NERC states that proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 does not include the

staggered timeline for the development of corrective action plans that are required for
existing units.113 NERC shortened the timeline to develop the corrective action plan for

Id. P 10.

Id. PP 9-10, 79, 88.

Id. PP 9-10, 77-79.

Id. PP 10, 38.

See NERC Petition at 38-39; see also id. at Ex. B at 3.

See id. at 67.

all existing units to 12-months. According to NERC’s proposal, the generator owners are
then allowed an additional 24 months to implement the corrective actions to modify
existing equipment or existing freeze protection measures (Requirement R7.1.1) and 48
months for implementing corrective actions requiring new equipment or new freeze
protection measures (Requirement R7.1.2) listed in the developed corrective action plans
under proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2.114
58.

In its petition, NERC explains that it considered the Commission’s directive to

stagger implementation across a fleet of generating units, but determined that it would
address reliability risks quicker by establishing a shorter period for full implementation of
proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 combined with “aggressive timeframes” for
implementing corrective action plan measures.115 NERC also states that it is likely that
some natural staggering would occur as entities seek to implement measures across a
fleet of generating units. NERC’s Standard Drafting Team determined that leaving
entities with flexibility in meeting timetables for implementing corrective actions would
be “appropriate in the interest of advancing cold weather reliability more quickly and
more efficiently.”116
59.

NERC also added a provision permitting a generator owner to update a corrective

action plan implementation timetable, with justification, if it exceeds the 24- and
48-month timeframes in Requirement R7 of the proposed Reliability Standard.

Id. at 50-51.

Id. at 67.

Id. at 68.

60.

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R2 allows generator

owners to have corrective action plans for new generating units that are similar to
corrective actions plans allowed for existing generating units. NERC’s petition states
that “[t]his revision would drive ongoing reliability improvements, through Corrective
Action Plans, if a new generator does not have sufficient freeze protection measures” at
the time of commercial operation, in accordance with proposed Requirement R2.117
61.

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R7 would require

generator owners to “include timetables for implementing corrective actions that are
within specified timeframes and to implement corrective actions in accordance with those
timetables.”118 The timetables would require the completion of corrective actions within
48 months of the development of corrective action plans for new equipment or freeze
protection measures.119 Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R2 also
establishes a compliance date of October 1, 2027.120
c.
62.

Comments

The ISO/RTO Council is concerned that even NERC’s shorter 24-month period of

implementation is still too long and “do[es] not appropriately reflect the urgency of
winterizing generating units.”121 According to the ISO/RTO Council, this is especially

Id. at 43 (giving the example of a new generating unit being too far along in its
design process to meet the more stringent requirements of proposed Requirement R3 [R2]
when it begins commercial operation on or soon after October 1, 2027).
118

NERC Petition at 51.

Id.

Id. at 39-40.

ISO/RTO Council Protest at 19.

true for those generating units that experience a Generator Cold Weather Reliability
Event versus the like units that are identified for corresponding corrective action plans,
which may be at different geographic locations with different weather/climate patterns
and will have different levels of risk of experiencing future freeze related issues. The
ISO/RTO Council also believes that proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 does not
sufficiently incentivize generator owners to use best efforts to promptly implement all
immediate and near-term winterization actions before the upcoming winter season.122
The ISO/RTO Council recommends that the Commission direct NERC to revise
proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 to include a requirement that each generator
owner document its best efforts to promptly implement all immediate and near-term
actions prior to the next upcoming winter season to winterize each generating unit to
operate at its calculated Extreme Cold Weather Temperature.123
63.

NERC replied to the ISO/RTO Council’s concern by stating that the Standard

Drafting Team balanced the need for prompt implementation of freeze protection
measures with “factors influencing the ability to implement those measures, particularly
across a fleet of units.”124 In doing so, NERC notes that its Standard Drafting Team
decided on an approach that would allow generator owners less time to implement
protections with existing equipment or freeze protection measures and more time to
implement protections requiring new equipment or freeze protection measures.125

Id. at 25; see also ISO/RTO Council Answer at 9-10.

ISO/RTO Council Protest at 26; see also ISO/RTO Council Answer at 10.

NERC Answer at 19-20.

Id. at 20.

64.

Additionally, the ISO/RTO Council objects to the extension provision, believing

that NERC and the Regional Entities will only evaluate timeline exceedance for
appropriateness and proper documentation after the fact, either as part of ongoing data
collections or during compliance efforts.126 The ISO/RTO Council recommends that the
Commission direct NERC to revise Requirement R7, Part 7.3, to require generator
owners to apply for and receive NERC or Regional Entity approval to extend corrective
action plan implementation timeframes beyond the timeframes established by proposed
Reliability Standard EOP-012-2.127 In response, NERC disagrees and states that it “has
identified no reliability need that would justify the administrative burdens of such a
process in this case.”128
d.
65.

Commission Determination

The Commission directed NERC to shorten the 60-month deadline of Requirement

R2 of approved Reliability Standard EOP-012-1 to develop corrective action plans for
existing units.129 By giving generator owners 12-months after the effective date of
proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 to develop corrective action plans to meet their
Extreme Cold Weather Temperature to add new or modify existing freeze protection
measures to their existing units, we find that NERC has met this directive through
modified Requirements R3 and R7 of proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2.

ISO/RTO Council Protest at 20-22.

Id. at 22.

NERC Answer at 20-21.

February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at P 88.

66.

Additionally, we are persuaded that NERC’s proposed deadlines for implementing

corrective action plans under Requirement R7 of proposed Reliability Standard
EOP-012-2 meet the Commission’s directive aimed at establishing corrective action plan
implementation deadlines and will provide a significant level of risk reduction compared
to the status quo. NERC met the Commission’s directive by incorporating different
corrective action plan completion timelines for existing and new generating units
(24- and 48-months following corrective action plan development, as noted in
Requirement R7 of the proposed Reliability Standard) which will result in staggered
corrective action plan implementation in stages. We find that this equates to a staggered
or phased approach.
67.

Nevertheless, we are concerned that the length of NERC’s proposed 24- and

48-month deadlines for implementing corrective actions after a generating unit’s failure
is too long130 and do not meet the Commission’s directive, which sought to substantially
accelerate reliability risk mitigation. Specifically, under NERC’s proposal, resources that
are impacted by a Generator Cold Weather Reliability Event (e.g., freezing issue
resulting in a forced outage or derate) are allowed approximately 30 or 54 months to
mitigate the cause of the cold weather failure, depending on whether existing or new
equipment or freeze protection measures are needed to remedy the freezing issue. Both
Winter Storms Uri and Elliott demonstrated that unplanned cold weather-related
generation outages jeopardize Bulk-Power System reliability. As was seen during those
events, a generating unit forced outage or derate caused by a freezing issue is a known
reliability risk. For those generating units that fail to operate during an extreme cold

Requirement R7 of proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2.

weather reliability event, their risks must be mitigated quicker than NERC proposes
regardless of whether existing or new freeze protection measures are needed on the units
that experience failure.
68.

Accordingly, we direct NERC, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, to

develop and submit modifications to Requirement R7 of proposed Reliability Standard
EOP-012-2 to require shorter deadlines to implement corrective actions for existing or
new equipment or the freeze protection measures for those generating units that
experience a Generator Cold Weather Reliability Event. Based on compliance with
Requirements R2 and R3, those generating units should have already had appropriate
freeze protection measures implemented to be capable of operating at the generating
units’ respective Extreme Cold Weather Temperature. Therefore, we find that a shorter
timeframe to implement corrective actions that address existing or new equipment or
freeze protection measures is appropriate. For example, to satisfy this directive, NERC
could require generator owners to implement corrective actions prior to the next winter
season for generating units that experience a Cold Weather Reliability Event and to
complete freeze protection measures on similar equipment on all of its fleet within 24
months of becoming aware of the freeze issue. For corrective action plans that involve
larger and more complicated implementations, NERC could incorporate a staggered
48-month corrective action plan implementation deadline.131
69.

In addition, we agree with the ISO/RTO Council that without the appropriate

oversight of generator owner’s proposed updates to the corrective action plan

NERC may propose modifications that address the Commission’s concerns in
an equally efficient and effective manner; however, NERC must explain how its proposal
addresses the Commission’s concerns. See Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218 at P 186.
implementation deadlines, the established maximum implementation deadlines in
proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R7 have less meaning and allow
a known reliability risk to remain on the Bulk-Power System for a longer time. In light
of this reliability risk, we find that any updates to corrective action plan timeframes
beyond the maximum implementation timeframes under Requirement R7 must be
reviewed and approved by NERC.
70.

Therefore, we direct NERC, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, to develop

and submit modifications to Requirement R7 of proposed Reliability Standard
EOP-012-2 to ensure that any extension of a corrective action plan implementation
deadline beyond the maximum implementation timeframe required by the proposed
Reliability Standard is pre-approved by NERC. This approach is consistent with prior
Commission action in Order No. 851 where the Commission directed NERC to require
pre-approval for extensions beyond the timelines required in the Reliability Standard.132
In Order No. 851, the Commission explained that although case-by-case extension
determinations may be more uncertain or have associated burdens, the more compelling
imperative is that automatic extensions have the potential for abuse by unduly delaying
mitigation, and would lead to delayed visibility for NERC.133

See, e.g., Geomagnetic Disturbance Reliability Standard; Reliability Standard
for Transmission Sys, Planned Performance for Geomagnetic Disturbance Events, Order
No. 851, 165 FERC ¶ 61,124, at P 54 (2018) (directing NERC to revise Reliability
Standard TPL-007-2 (Transmission System Planned Performance for Geomagnetic
Disturbance Events) to include a process through which corrective action plan extensions
are considered on a case-by-case basis. NERC later revised Reliability Standard
TPL-007-2, Requirement R7.4; N. Am. Elec. Reliability Corp., Docket No. RD20-3-000,
at 1 (Mar. 19, 2020) (a delegated order approving Reliability Standard TPL-007-4, which
requires entities to seek approval from the ERO of any extensions of time for the
completion of corrective action plan items).
133

Order No. 851, 165 FERC ¶ 61,124 at P 55.

71.

NERC asserts that, during the first three years that proposed Reliability Standard

EOP-012-2 is mandatory and effective, generator owners that are well into their
construction phase should have additional time (compared to a project at a lesser stage of
construction) to complete corrective action plans for elements already designed.134
NERC explains that extra time is needed because NERC, in its technical rational, states
that “there needs to be allowances made for units that are in the development process, and
for which the design phase may have already commenced.”135 We are persuaded by
NERC’s rationale that in this scenario the generator owner may need additional time.
However, we are concerned that the proposed Reliability Standard, as currently written,
does not make a clear demarcation between projects well into their construction phase
and those at a lesser phase of construction; therefore, it could inadvertently be interpreted
to allow a generator owner to have 48-months beyond its commercial operation date to
implement Requirement R2 corrective action plans, even if the generator owner has not
yet begun to construct its generating unit.
72.

We thus find that generators that are commercially operational after October 1,

2027, should have freeze protection measures either designed into their generating
systems, or, if a corrective action plan is needed, then it should be completed by the time
that such generating units go into commercial operation. Accordingly, we direct NERC,
pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, to develop and submit modifications to
Requirement R7 of proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 to clarify that any

NERC Petition, Ex. C, at 9.

Id.

Requirement R2 corrective action plans must be completed prior to the generating unit’s
commercial operation date.
4.

Corrective Action Plan Implementation Timeline Ambiguities
a.

73.

NERC Petition

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R7 states that a 24-month

timeline applies to corrective actions that address existing equipment or freeze protection
measures and a 48-month timeline applies to corrective actions that require new
equipment or freeze protection measures.136 NERC’s Standard Drafting Team stated that
generator owners would be able to use “appropriate judgment” to determine the
appropriate timeline for corrective action in accordance with Requirement R7 of
proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2.137
b.
74.

Comments

The ISO/RTO Council requests clarification on which corrective action

implementation timeline applies to which corrective actions under Requirement R7 of
proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2.138 The ISO/RTO Council argues that some
corrective actions might involve the application of new freeze protection measures on
existing equipment or the extension of existing freeze protection measures to newly
installed equipment, thereby implicating both timelines. Thus, it is unclear to them which
timeline applies in such situations.139 The ISO/RTO Council recommends that the

Id., Ex. A at 8 (emphasis added).

Id., Ex. F at 190.

ISO/RTO Council Protest at 23.

Id. at 22-23.

Commission direct NERC to revise proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 to apply
the shorter of the two timelines to corrective actions that do not require the installation of
new equipment.140
75.

The ISO/RTO Council states that while the use of professional judgment is a

common method for navigating ambiguities, the fact that professional judgment exists is
not a valid basis for approving an ambiguous Reliability Standard.141 In response, NERC
states that the Commission should not direct NERC to clarify the periods allotted for the
implementation of freeze protection measures because its strategy is consistent with
Order No. 672.142
c.
76.

Commission Determination

We believe that proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R7’s

corrective action plan implementation deadlines have remaining ambiguities that need to
be addressed. As noted above, the Commission has previously expressed similar
concerns regarding the vagueness and enforceability of Reliability Standards language.143
Specifically, we agree with the concerns raised by the ISO/RTO Council that

Id.

Id. at 24.

NERC Answer at 5 (citing to discussion in Order No. 672 that requires the
Commission, when determining whether a proposed Standard is just and reasonable, to
consider the timetable for the implementation of new requirements, including the urgency
of the need for implementation with the reasonableness of time for entities that must
comply); Order No. 672, 114 FERC ¶ 61,104 at P 328.
As further discussed above, in both Order No. 693 and Order No. 791, the
Commission approved NERC’s proposed Reliability Standards as an improvement to the
reliable operation of the Bulk-Power System, while also directing NERC to submit
modifications to the Reliability Standards to address the Commission’s concern regarding
the ambiguities contained in particular language. See Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218
at PP 1, 461; see also Order No. 791, 145 FERC ¶ 61,160 at PP 49-53, 67, 69.
Requirement R7 of proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 does not provide clear
direction as to the required corrective action plan implementation timeline that applies to
certain generator owners. For example, it is unclear how the corrective action plan
implementation timeline would apply if a generator owner had combinations of both
existing and new equipment for freeze protection measures. Accordingly, we direct
NERC, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, to develop and submit modifications to
Requirement R7 of proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 to address these
ambiguities by expanding on Requirement R7.1.1 and 7.1.2 to make it clear which
corrective action plan implementation deadline applies to which generator owner.
5.

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirements R2,
R3, and R6, Footnotes 1, 2, and 4
a.

77.

NERC’s Petition

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirements R2, R3, and R6 contain

new and identical footnotes 1, 2, and 4, respectively.144 These footnotes indicate that
generating units that do not self-commit or are not required to operate at or below a
temperature of 32 degrees Fahrenheit but “may be called upon to operate in order to
assist in the mitigation of [bulk electric system] Emergencies, Capacity Emergencies, or
Energy Emergencies during periods at or below a temperature of 32 degrees Fahrenheit
(zero degrees Celsius) are exempt” from Requirements R2, R3, and R6.145

See NERC Petition at 38-39, 48.

Id.

b.
78.

Comments

The ISO/RTO Council raises concerns regarding the limitations on applicability

created by footnotes 1, 2, and 4 in Requirements R2, R3, and R6 of proposed Reliability
Standard EOP-012-2.146 The ISO/RTO Council believes that this exemption should be
limited to truly seasonal generating units that will not be called upon to operate during
freezing conditions, even during bulk electric system emergencies.147 Thus, the
ISO/RTO Council recommends that the Commission direct NERC to either remove the
footnotes 1, 2, and 4 or revise Requirements R2, R3, and R6 by replacing the phrase
“self-commits or is required to operate” with “that may be committed to operate.”148
79.

In response, NERC states that “the appropriateness of this limited exemption is a

settled matter.”149 NERC notes that this exemption was included in Reliability Standard
EOP-012-1 and the Commission already approved that Reliability Standard with this
delineation.150 NERC reiterates that the exemptions, as written, are intended to
incentivize generating units that do not normally operate in freezing conditions to
participate in mitigating a bulk electric system emergency.151

ISO/RTO Council Protest at 15-17.

Id. at 16-17.

Id. at 18 (stating that this would allow truly seasonal generating units that are
ineligible to be committed to operate during freezing conditions to be exempt from
Requirements R2, R3, and R6 of proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2).
NERC Answer at 16-17 (stating that the ISO/RTO Council’s concern is an
“untimely attack on an issue that was previously decided by the Commission” when it
approved EOP-012-1); see also February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at P 60.
150

NERC Answer at 16.

Id.

80.

TAPS agrees with NERC and states that these exemptions are appropriate and that

NERC’s applicability section modifications are in line with the Commission’s February
2023 Order.152 TAPS states that, under NERC’s proposed modifications to Reliability
Standard EOP-012-2, the system operator should have already requested and received
operational limitation data from each bulk electric system generating unit in its footprint;
thus, there is no additional step for an ISO or RTO to take to identify which generating
units can operate under particular conditions.153
c.
81.

Commission Determination

While we appreciate the ISO/RTO Council’s concern, we agree with NERC and

TAPS that the exemptions set forth in Requirements R2, R3, and R6, footnotes 1, 2, and
4, respectively, are appropriate and that NERC’s applicability section modifications are
in line with the Commission’s February 2023 Order. We agree with NERC’s aim of
exempting generating units that do not self-commit or are not required to operate at or
below a temperature of 32 degrees Fahrenheit and are not persuaded that a directive is
warranted at this time to further narrow this exemption. We expect that, as part of its
compliance monitoring activities, NERC will continue to monitor the application of the
exemption to ensure its application is consistent with the generating units’ actual
obligations pursuant to relevant tariffs, contracts, regulations, or other binding
requirements.

TAPS Answer at 9-12 (citing to the February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094

at P 58).
Id. at 11-12.

6.

Different Winterization Criteria for New and Existing
Generating Units
a.

82.

NERC’s Petition

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirements R2 and R3 carry forward

the cold weather operational capability requirements for new and existing bulk electric
system units from approved Reliability Standard EOP-012-1, Requirements R1 and R2,
respectively.154 Proposed Requirement R2 applies to generating units that are in
commercial operation on or after October 1, 2027, and requires them to implement freeze
protection measures to protect Generator Cold Weather Critical Components that provide
the capability to operate at the unit’s Extreme Cold Weather Temperature with sustained
concurrent 20 mph wind speed for a period of not less than 12 continuous hours or the
maximum operational duration for intermittent energy resources if less than 12
continuous hours.155 Proposed Requirement R3 applies to generating units that are in
commercial operation prior to October 1, 2027, and requires them to implement freeze
protection measures to protect Generator Cold Weather Critical Components that provide
the capability to operate at the unit’s Extreme Cold Weather Temperature.156 During the

NERC Petition at 37.

Id. at 38 (noting that if they are unable to do so, then the generator owner must
develop a corrective action plan to add new or modify existing or previously planned
freeze protection measures to provide the capability to operate at the unit’s Extreme Cold
Weather Temperature with sustained concurrent 20 mph wind speed for a period of not
less than 12 continuous hours or the maximum operational duration for intermittent
energy resources if less than 12 continuous hours).
Id. at 39 (stating that if they are unable to do so, then the generator owner must
develop a corrective action plan to add new or modify existing freeze protection
measures to provide the capability to operate at the unit’s Extreme Cold Weather
Temperature).
drafting process, NERC’s Standard Drafting Team responded to comments by stating that
having separate requirements for new and existing units is appropriate given that some
generating units would be difficult to retrofit and that existing units can provide reliable
performance at temperatures above their Extreme Cold Weather Temperature.157
b.
83.

Comments

The ISO/RTO Council objects to having different winterization criteria for new

and existing generating units, noting that new units have to meet more stringent
requirements. The ISO/RTO Council states that, while some older generating units may
not be able to perform at Requirement R2’s more stringent standard, many generating
units that enter commercial operation before October 1, 2027, should be able to do so.158
84.

The ISO/RTO Council believes that while some generating units would be

difficult to retrofit in some cases, the Winter Storms Uri and Elliott Inquiry reports
cautioned against setting a lower winterization standard for an entire category of
generating units.159 The ISO/RTO Council recommends that the Commission direct
NERC to remove Requirement R3 and revise Requirement R2 to apply to all generating
units, regardless of when they achieved commercial operation.160
85.

In its answer, NERC asserts that the ISO/RTO Council’s argument on

grandfathering provisions is an untimely attack on a Commission-approved issue.161

Id., Ex. F at 103, 291.

ISO/RTO Council Protest at 26-27.

Id. at 27-28.

Id. at 28.

See NERC Answer at 23.

c.
86.

Commission’s Determination

We agree with NERC that it is appropriate to have separate requirements for new

and existing generating units within proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2,
Requirements R2 and R3, respectively.162 NERC’s Standard Drafting Team discussed
applying the same requirements to existing units and new units but determined that these
requirements would be difficult to retrofit and may not be justified “provided that
existing units can prove reliable performance at temperatures above their” Extreme Cold
Weather Temperature.163 We also note that the Commission approved NERC’s proposal
to have different winterization criteria for new and existing generating units in the
February 2023 Order and no concerns with having different winterization criteria were
raised in that proceeding.164 Nevertheless, we strongly encourage existing generating
units that are capable of implementing the more detailed freeze protection measures and
corrective actions in line with proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R2
to do so.
7.

Annual Inspection and Maintenance of Generating Units Freeze
Protection Measures
a.

87.

NERC’s Petition

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R4, Part 4.5 requires the

annual inspection and maintenance of generating unit freeze protection measures.165

See NERC Petition, Ex. F at 450, 452.

Id.

See February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at PP 1-2, 47.

See NERC Petition at 45; see also NERC Petition, Ex. A at 7.

b.
88.

Comments

The ISO/RTO Council expresses concern that without any reference to timing

other than a requirement for “annual” inspections and maintenance, this provision will
not result in timely preparations for upcoming cold weather operations.166 The ISO/RTO
Council recommends that the Commission direct NERC to revise proposed Reliability
Standard EOP-012-2 to require inspections and maintenance of all generating units to
occur on at least an annual basis and always within three months of the upcoming winter
season.167
89.

NERC agrees that it is a good practice to inspect and maintain freeze protection

measures before an upcoming winter season.168 NERC disagrees, however, that the
proposed Reliability Standard needs to require “in detail the timing of the required annual
inspections for it to be a just and reasonable standard.” Moreover, NERC states, the
Commission approved Reliability Standard EOP-012-1 without such specificity.169
c.
90.

Commission Determination

We find that it is premature to address the ISO/RTO Council’s recommendation

that the Commission direct NERC to revise the proposed Reliability Standard to require
inspections and maintenance of all generating units to occur on at least an annual basis

ISO/RTO Council Protest at 31; see also ISO/RTO Council Answer at 11.

ISO/RTO Council Protest at 31-32; see also ISO/RTO Council Answer at 11.

NERC Answer at 26.

Id. (stating that it could consider the ISO/RTO Council’s proposal at a later
date if the implementation of proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R4
suggests that more specificity would advance reliability).
and always within three months of the upcoming winter season.170 We believe that
requiring the annual inspection and maintenance of generating unit freeze protection
measures is adequate at this time. By requiring the annual inspection and maintenance of
generator freeze protection measures, proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 (and its
predecessor, approved Reliability Standard EOP-012-1) represent a significant
improvement upon the previously effective set of Reliability Standards, which did not
include such requirements. Although we agree with both the ISO/RTO Council and
NERC that it is a good practice to inspect and maintain freeze protection measures before
an upcoming winter season, we are not persuaded that such additional specificity is
necessary at this time. NERC has committed to monitoring the implementation of this
new Standard and, in doing so, can determine whether there are outage patterns or other
data that suggest the need for additional specificity.171
8.

The Five-Year Review Period for Declared Generator Cold
Weather Constraints
a.

91.

NERC’s Petition

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, Requirement R8.1 states that each

generator owner that declares a Generator Cold Weather Constraint shall review the
declaration at least every five calendar years or as needed when a change of status to the
Generator Cold Weather Constraint occurs.172

ISO/RTO Council Protest at 31-32; see also ISO/RTO Council Answer at 11.

See, e.g., FERC, NERC, and Regional Entity Staff, Inquiry into Bulk-Power
System Operations During December 2022 Winter Storm Elliott, at 132 (Oct. 2023),
https://www.ferc.gov/news-events/news/ferc-nerc-release-final-report-lessons-winterstorm-elliott (October 2023 Report) (recommendation 1(b)).
172

NERC’s Petition at 62.

b.
92.

Comments

The ISO/RTO Council expresses concern that once a generator owner declares a

Generator Cold Weather Constraint, proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 only
requires the generator owner to review that constraint every five years,173 which lowers
the bar for bulk electric system winterization and reliability by delaying the identification
and adoption of new freeze protection technologies.174 The ISO/RTO Council states that
a five-year review period tips the scales in favor of slow installation and application of
new technologies and “would result in years elapsing” between a new freeze protection
technology becoming viable and a generator owner evaluating that technology as part of
its routine review of a constraint.175 As such, the ISO/RTO Council recommends that the
Commission direct NERC to revise proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 to require
that constraint declaration reviews be performed annually instead of every five years.
93.

NERC disagrees with the ISO/RTO Council’s arguments and states that many

commenters in the standard development process expressed concern that annual reviews
would be “an administrative burden [with] no reliability benefit.”176 NERC also states
that five-year reviews were selected because the technology and price of freeze
protections are unlikely to change significantly over the course of a year.177

See ISO/RTO Council Protest at 29; see also NERC Petition, Ex. A at 9.

ISO/RTO Council Protest at 29.

Id. at 30.

NERC Answer at 25 (referencing the development history of the proposed
Standard and citing commenter concerns).
177

Id.

c.
94.

Commission Determination

We agree with the ISO/RTO Council that the proposed five-year review period for

the declared Generator Cold Weather Constraints in Requirement R8.1 could delay the
identification and adoption of new freeze protection measures and does not represent the
current pace of technological advancements. We acknowledge that a more frequent
review does impose some additional administrative burden to the generator owner to
review the technological advancements that hindered its ability to winterize; nonetheless,
a lengthy period between a Generator Cold Weather Constraint declaration review by the
generator owner offers little incentive to timely adopt new freeze protection technologies.
Accordingly, we direct NERC, pursuant to section 215(d)(5) of the FPA, to develop and
submit modifications to Requirement R8, Part 8.1 of proposed Reliability Standard
EOP-012-2 to implement more frequent reviews of Generator Cold Weather Constraint
declarations to verify that the declaration remains valid. NERC may propose to develop
modifications that address the Commission’s concerns in an equally efficient and
effective manner, however, NERC must explain how its proposal addresses the
Commission’s concerns.178
9.

Cost Recovery Mechanisms
a.

95.

Comments

While NEPGA recognizes that the Commission found cost recovery to be outside

the scope in connection with its February 2023 Order, it asks the Commission to
recognize the near-term need for ISO-NE, generator owners, and other stakeholders to
work together to ensure that cost recovery opportunities exit under the ISO-NE tariff.179

See Order No. 693, 118 FERC ¶ 61,218 at P 186.

NEPGA Comments at 2 (citing February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at

NEPGA argues that the ISO-NE tariff provisions do not appear to allow an existing
capacity resource to reflect capital costs, such as those that may be incurred to modify or
add freeze protection equipment.180 EPSA’s Answer supports NEPGA’s comments about
cost recovery and asks the Commission to assess all markets within its jurisdiction to
determine whether there are sufficient vehicles for recovery of winterization costs.181
96.

The ISO/RTO Council acknowledges that cost recovery is “critically important”

but argues that costs should not be included as part of a Reliability Standard. Instead, the
ISO/RTO Council contends that cost recovery should be addressed through a rate
proceeding overseen by the Commission or another applicable regulatory authority
(e.g., state or provincial).182 The ISO/RTO Council requests that the Commission
“indicate its intention to allow for cost recovery” for the extreme cold weather Reliability
Standards and direct its Office of Energy Market Regulation to survey those markets
within its jurisdiction to determine whether there are sufficient vehicles for cost recovery
of winterization measures.183
97.

NERC asserts that while it would support market-related actions that advance the

goal of generator reliability, it has no opinion with respect to the specific cost recovery

P 83).
Id. (citing Cogentrix Energy Power Mgmt., LLC v. FERC, 24 F.4th 677, 683-4
(D.C. Cir. 2022) to express concern that costs incurred prior to the effective date of an
associated rate recovery mechanism would be unrecoverable).
181

EPSA Answer at 3-5.

ISO/RTO Council Answer at 4-7.

Id. at 4.

declaration and survey proposed by the ISO/RTO Council.184 NERC states that it defers
to the Commission’s expertise on cost recovery.
b.
98.

Commission Determination

We find the question of whether existing market mechanisms provide an

opportunity to recover the prudently incurred costs of compliance with the proposed
Reliability Standard to be outside the scope of the instant proceeding, consistent with our
finding in the February 2023 Order.185 To the extent that there are concerns about
whether existing rates or tariffs allow for the recovery of all prudently incurred costs
necessary to comply with mandatory Reliability Standards as required by FPA section
219,186 such questions are more appropriately addressed in proceedings pursuant to FPA
sections 205 or 206.187
IV.

Information Collection Statement

99.

The information collection requirements contained in this Order are subject to

review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under section 3507(d) of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.188 OMB’s regulations require approval of certain
information collection requirements imposed by agency rules.189 Upon approval of a
collection of information, OMB will assign an OMB control number and expiration date.

NERC Answer at 12.

See February 2023 Order, 182 FERC ¶ 61,094 at P 83.

16 U.S.C. 824s(b)(4)(A).

Id. sec. 824d; see also id. sec. 824e.

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

5 CFR 1320 (2023).

Comments on the collection of information are due within 60 days of the date this order
is published in the Federal Register. Respondents subject to the filing requirements of
this rule will not be penalized for failing to respond to these collections of information
unless the collections of information display a valid OMB control number.
100.

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.
101.

The EOP Standards are currently located in the FERC-725S (OMB Control No.

1902-0270) collection.190 In Docket No. RD24-5-000, the Commission proposes to
replace the current OMB approved Reliability Standard EOP-012-1 with proposed
Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 (Table 1). Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 has
eight requirements, seven of which have been carried over and modified from the already
approved Reliability Standard EOP-012-1 (Requirements R1-R7) and one of which is
new (Requirement R8).
102.

The estimates in the tables below are based, in combination, on one-time (years 1

and 2) and ongoing execution (year 3) obligations to follow the revised Reliability
Standard EOP-012-2.
103.

The number of respondents below are based on an estimate of the NERC

compliance registry for generator owners and generator operators. Proposed Reliability

The FERC-725S collection includes the EOP family of Reliability Standards:
EOP-004-4, EOP 005-3, EOP-006-3, EOP-008-2, EOP-010-1, EOP-011-4, and
EOP-012-2.
Standard EOP-012-2 applies to generator owners and generator operators. The
Commission based its paperwork burden estimates on the NERC compliance registry as
of April 16, 2024. According to the registry for US unique entities, there are 1,210
generator owners. The estimates in the tables below are based on the change in burden
from the Reliability Standards approved in this order.191 The Commission based the
burden estimates in the tables below on staff experience, knowledge, and expertise.
Public Reporting Burden: The estimated costs and burden for the revisions in Docket
No. RD24-5-000 are shown in the table below.

Table 1: Proposed Changes Due to Final Rule in Docket No. RD24-5-000 for EOP012-2
Number

Average

of Annual

Number of

Type and

Responses Total

Burden

Reliability

Number

Per

Number of

Hours per

Standard &

of Entity

Entity

Responses

Response192 Hours

(2)

(1)*(2)=(3)

(4)

Requirement (1)

Total Burden

(3)*(4)=(5)

FERC-725S

The overall burden associated with Reliability Standard EOP-012 will be the
sum of the burden (responses) from Reliability Standard EOP-012-1 (under RD23-1-000)
and Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 (under RD24-5-000).
The estimated hourly cost (salary plus benefits) is a combination based on the
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), as of 2024, for seventy five percent of the average of
an Electrical Engineer (17-2071) - $79.31 and mechanical engineers (17-2141) - $89.86.
($79.31 + $89.86)/2 = 84.585 x .75 = 63.439 ($63.44-rounded) ($63.44/hour) and
twenty-five percent of an Information and Record Clerk (43-4199) $44.74 x .25% =
11.185 ($11.19 rounded) ($11.19/hour), for a total ($63.44+$11.19 = $74.63/hour).
One Time Estimate - Years 1 and 2 EOP-012-2
EOP-012-2

1,210

1,210

(GO)
Sub-Total

1,210

for EOP-

5 hrs.

6,050 hrs.

$373.15

$451,511.5

5 hrs.

6,050 hrs.

$373.15

$451,511.5

012-2 (onetime)
Ongoing Estimate – Year 3 ongoing EOP-012-2
EOP-012-2

1,210

1,210

(GO)
Sub-Total

1,210

for EOP-

2 hrs.193

2,420 hrs.

$ 149.26

$ 180,604.6

2 hrs.

2,420 hrs.

$ 149.26

$ 180,604.6

012-2
(ongoing)
Sub-Total of
ongoing

807 hrs.
$60,226.41

burden
averaged
over three
years

A fraction of generator owners would be required to perform the task on an
ongoing basis, and the hours represent the whole body of generator owners.
Proposed

1,614

6,857 hrs.

Total

$511,737.91

Burden
Estimate of
EOP-012-2
Changes to FERC 725S by RD24-5-000
Current

Current

FERC-725S

Inventory

Inventory

Modification

(hours)

(responses)

Total Change Due to RD24-5-000

Addition of

+6,857 hrs.
-

-

EOP-012-2

+1,614 responses

Titles: FERC-725S, Mandatory Reliability Standards for the Bulk-Power System; EOP
Reliability Standards.
Action: Revisions to Existing Collections of Information in FERC-725S.
OMB Control Nos: 1902-0270 (FERC-725S).
Respondents: Business or other for profit, and not for profit institutions.
Frequency of Responses: Annually.
Necessity of the Information: Reliability Standard EOP-012-2 (Extreme Cold Weather
Preparedness and Operations) is part of the implementation of the Congressional mandate
of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to develop mandatory and enforceable Reliability
Standards to better ensure the reliability of the nation’s Bulk-Power System.
Specifically, the revised Reliability Standard ensures that generating resources are
prepared for local cold weather events and that entities will effectively communicate the

information needed for operating the Bulk-Power System.
Internal review: The Commission has reviewed the revised Reliability Standards and
made a determination 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 the burden estimates associated with the information
requirements.
a. Description of the Revision to FERC-725S: The FERC-725S (OMB
Control No. 1902-0270) is an existing information collection that contains
the requirements for the EOP-012-1 Reliability Standard. As described in
the Docket No. RD24-1-000 above, the Reliability Standard (EOP-012-1) is
proposed to be retired and replaced by EOP-012-2.
104.

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: Jean Sonneman, email:
DataClearance@ferc.gov, phone: (202) 502-6362].
105.

Comments concerning the information collections and requirements approved for

retirement in this order and the associated burden estimates, should be sent to the
Commission (identified by Docket No. RD24-5-000), using the following methods:
Electronic filing through https://www.ferc.gov is preferred. Electronic Filing should be
filed in acceptable native applications and print-to-PDF, but not in scanned or picture
format. For those unable to file electronically, comments may be filed by USPS mail or
by hand (including courier) delivery: Mail via U.S. Postal Service Only: Addressed to:
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street,

N.E., Washington, DC 20426. Hand (including courier) delivery: Deliver to: Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 12225 Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, MD 20852.
V.

Environmental Analysis

106.

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.194 The Commission has categorically excluded certain
actions 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.195 The actions directed herein fall within this categorical exclusion in the
Commission’s regulations.
VI.

Document Availability

107.

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).
108.

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.

Reguls. Implementing the Nat’l Env’t Pol’y Act, Order No. 486, FERC Stats. &
Regs. ¶ 30,783 (1987) (cross-referenced at 41 FERC ¶ 61,284).
195

18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii) (2023).

109.

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.
The Commission orders:
(A)

Proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, the associated violation risk

factors and violation severity levels, the implementation plan, the newly defined terms
Fixed Fuel Supply Component and Generator Cold Weather Constraint, the revised
defined terms Generator Cold Weather Critical Component and Generator Cold Weather
Reliability Event, and the retirement of Reliability Standard EOP-012-1 immediately
prior to the effective date of proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2, are hereby
approved, as discussed in the body of this order.
(B)

NERC’s proposed implementation date for Reliability Standard

EOP-011-4, as well as the proposed retirement of Reliability Standards EOP-011-2 and
EOP-011-3 immediately prior to the effective date of proposed Reliability Standard
EOP-012-2, are hereby approved, as discussed in the body of this order.
(C)

NERC is hereby directed to develop and submit, within nine months of the

date of issuance of this order, modifications to proposed Reliability Standard EOP-012-2
to address the Commission’s concerns, including but not limited to, the Generator Cold
Weather Constraint criteria definition, modifying the proposed Standard so that NERC
reviews, receives, evaluates, and confirms for validity each generator owner’s constraint
declarations against the developed criteria, shortening and clarifying the corrective action
plan implementation deadlines outlined in Requirement R7 of proposed Reliability

Standard EOP-012-2, ensuring that the any extension of a corrective action plan
implementation deadline beyond the maximum implementation timeframe required by
the proposed Standard is pre-approved by NERC, and implementing a more frequent
review of the Generator Cold Weather Constraint declarations in accordance with
Requirement R8.1 of proposed Reliability Standard EOP-021-2, as discussed in the body
of this order.
By the Commission. Commissioner Rosner is not participating.
Issued: June 27, 2024.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2024-14668 Filed: 7/2/2024 8:45 am; Publication Date: 7/3/2024]