Newsroom  •  Site Map  •  Contact NERC

  
Advanced Search
 
About NERC Standards Compliance Assessments Events Analysis Programs  
 



Ballot Results
Ballot Name: Project 2007-03 Successive Ballot TOP-003-2 Jan 2012_in
Ballot Period: 1/3/2012 - 1/12/2012
Ballot Type: Initial
Total # Votes: 306
Total Ballot Pool: 373
Quorum: 82.04 %  The Quorum has been reached
Weighted Segment Vote:

78.95 %

Ballot Results: The ballot has closed
Summary of Ballot Results
Segment Ballot
Pool
Segment
Weight
Affirmative Negative No
Vote
# Votes Fraction # Votes Fraction Negative Vote
without a Comment
Abstain
          
1 - Segment 1103 1 59 0.766 18 0.234 0521
2 - Segment 211 0.9 7 0.7 2 0.2 011
3 - Segment 382 1 51 0.797 13 0.203 0216
4 - Segment 427 1 16 0.727 6 0.273 023
5 - Segment 582 1 48 0.814 11 0.186 0518
6 - Segment 647 1 31 0.838 6 0.162 046
7 - Segment 70 0 0 0 0 0 000
8 - Segment 88 0.4 3 0.3 1 0.1 022
9 - Segment 94 0.4 3 0.3 1 0.1 000
10 - Segment 109 0.7 6 0.6 1 0.1 020
Totals3737.42245.842591.55802367
Individual Ballot Pool Results
Segment Organization Member Ballot NERC Notes
     
1Ameren ServicesKirit Shah Negative
1American Electric PowerPaul B. Johnson Affirmative
1American Transmission Company, LLCAndrew Z Pusztai Negative Comments submitted.
1Arizona Public Service Co.Robert Smith
1Associated Electric Cooperative, Inc.John Bussman Affirmative see comments on form
1Avista Corp.Scott J Kinney Abstain
1Balancing Authority of Northern CaliforniaKevin Smith Affirmative
1Baltimore Gas & Electric CompanyGregory S Miller Affirmative BGE is voting affirmatively because we support the improvements achieved by the drafting team work so far. However, we raised remaining concerns with the standard proposal on the comment form we submitted. We expect the drafting team to continue to make clarifying changes until the end of this stakeholder process. The greater the clarity in the final product, the less risk of contradictory perspectives on compliance.
1BC Hydro and Power AuthorityPatricia Robertson Affirmative
1Beaches Energy ServicesJoseph S Stonecipher Affirmative
1Black Hills CorpEric Egge
1Bonneville Power AdministrationDonald S. Watkins Affirmative
1Brazos Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.Tony Kroskey
1CenterPoint Energy Houston ElectricDale Bodden
1Central Maine Power CompanyKevin L Howes
1City of Tacoma, Department of Public Utilities, Light Division, dba Tacoma PowerChang G Choi Affirmative If a Transmission Operator or a Balancing Authority is requesting data from another entity, they must demonstrate a reliability impact validating the need for the requested data.
1City of Vero BeachRandall McCamish Affirmative
1Clark Public UtilitiesJack Stamper Affirmative
1Cleco Power LLCDanny McDaniel Negative
1Colorado Springs UtilitiesPaul Morland Negative
1Consolidated Edison Co. of New YorkChristopher L de Graffenried Affirmative
1Dairyland Power Coop.Robert W. Roddy Affirmative
1Dayton Power & Light Co.Hertzel Shamash
1Dominion Virginia PowerMichael S Crowley
1Duke Energy CarolinaDouglas E. Hils Affirmative
1East Kentucky Power Coop.George S. Carruba Abstain
1Empire District Electric Co.Ralph F Meyer Negative EDE agrees with the comments provided by SPP RTO.
1Entergy Services, Inc.Edward J Davis Negative Comments submitted – see SERC OC Standards Review Group comments.
1FirstEnergy Energy DeliveryRobert Martinko
1Florida Keys Electric Cooperative Assoc.Dennis Minton Affirmative
1Gainesville Regional UtilitiesLuther E. Fair Affirmative
1Georgia Transmission CorporationHarold Taylor Negative M4 is misreferencing R2 and R4 and should be corrected as follows: ….”receiving a data specification in Requirement R3 or R4 shall make available evidence that it has satisfied the obligations of the documented specifications for data in accordance with Requirement R5.” Demonstrating providing all data specifications for real time operations horizon in R5 is very prescriptive in nature and could have unanticipated “compliance documentation” consequences when data or the transfer method is unavailable (e.g., when an RTU goes down).
1Grand River Dam AuthorityJames M Stafford Abstain
1Great River EnergyGordon Pietsch Affirmative Comments submitted with the MRO NSRF
1Hoosier Energy Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc.Bob Solomon Affirmative
1Hydro One Networks, Inc.Ajay Garg Affirmative
1Hydro-Quebec TransEnergieBernard Pelletier
1Idaho Power CompanyRonald D. Schellberg Affirmative
1Imperial Irrigation DistrictTino Zaragoza Affirmative
1International Transmission Company Holdings CorpMichael Moltane Affirmative
1JEATed Hobson Affirmative
1Kansas City Power & Light Co.Michael Gammon Negative See comments submitted regarding concerns and issues.
1Keys Energy ServicesStanley T Rzad
1Lake Worth UtilitiesWalt J Gill Affirmative
1Lakeland ElectricLarry E Watt
1Lee County Electric CooperativeJohn W Delucca Affirmative
1Lincoln Electric SystemDoug Bantam Negative
1Lone Star Transmission, LLCJulius Horvath
1Long Island Power AuthorityRobert Ganley Affirmative
1Los Angeles Department of Water & PowerLy M Le
1Lower Colorado River AuthorityMartyn Turner Affirmative oBased on Quality Review feedback, the Purpose of the standard has been modified to more fully align with the requirements of the revised standard. oThe bullets under Requirement R1, Part 1.1 have been deleted. oAdded new Requirement R2 to separate out the responsibilities of Balancing Authorities from Requirement R1. oIn response to Quality Review feedback, modified the language in Requirements R3 and R4 to clarify which data the Transmission Operator and Balancing Authority are to distribute. oMade conforming changes to Measures to reflect changes to the Requirements. oBased on Quality Review feedback, modified the Data Retention section to reflect the current NERC Rules of Procedure and Drafting Team Guidelines for evidence retention. oMade conforming changes to VSLs to reflect changes to Requirements.
1Manitoba Hydro Joe D Petaski Affirmative Please see comments submitted through electronic commenting form.
1MEAG PowerDanny Dees Affirmative MEAG Power supports the comments of Austin Energy.
1MidAmerican Energy Co.Terry Harbour Negative There is the possibility of “double jeopardy” when R3 and R4 have in part the statement of “…in meeting its NERC-mandatory reliability requirements.” So, an Entity could be found non-compliant with R1 or R2 and also not fulfill R3 or R4. Or if an entity was found non compliant with any of the unknown “…in meeting its NERC-mandatory reliability requirements” then they would be found non compliant with this Standard. It is not clear why this Standard is being written with the statement of: “…in meeting its NERC-mandatory reliability requirements”.
1Minnkota Power Coop. Inc.Richard Burt Negative Please see comments submitted by the MRO NSRF.
1Muscatine Power & WaterTim Reed Negative
1National GridSaurabh Saksena Affirmative Please see NPCC comments submitted through the electronic comments process
1New Brunswick Power Transmission CorporationRandy MacDonald Affirmative
1New York Power AuthorityArnold J. Schuff Affirmative
1New York State Electric & Gas Corp.Raymond P Kinney
1Northeast UtilitiesDavid Boguslawski Affirmative
1Northern Indiana Public Service Co.Kevin M Largura Affirmative
1NorthWestern EnergyJohn Canavan Abstain
1Ohio Valley Electric Corp.Robert Mattey Affirmative
1Oklahoma Gas and Electric Co.Marvin E VanBebber Negative
1Omaha Public Power DistrictDoug Peterchuck Negative OPPD has formally submitted comments
1Oncor Electric DeliveryBrenda Pulis Affirmative
1Pacific Gas and Electric CompanyBangalore Vijayraghavan
1PacifiCorpColt Norrish
1PECO EnergyRonald Schloendorn Affirmative
1Platte River Power AuthorityJohn C. Collins Affirmative
1Portland General Electric Co.Frank F. Afranji Affirmative PGE agrees with the WECC Position paper on Real-Time Operations.
1Potomac Electric Power Co.David Thorne Affirmative
1PowerSouth Energy CooperativeLarry D Avery Negative
1PPL Electric Utilities Corp.Brenda L Truhe Affirmative
1Progress Energy CarolinasSammy Roberts
1Public Service Company of New MexicoLaurie Williams Affirmative
1Public Service Electric and Gas Co.Kenneth D. Brown Affirmative
1Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan CountyChad Bowman
1Public Utility District No. 1 of Okanogan CountyDale Dunckel Affirmative
1Puget Sound Energy, Inc.Denise M Lietz Affirmative
1Raj RanaRajendrasinh D Rana Abstain
1Rochester Gas and Electric Corp.John C. Allen Affirmative
1Sacramento Municipal Utility DistrictTim Kelley Affirmative
1Salt River ProjectRobert Kondziolka Affirmative
1Santee CooperTerry L Blackwell Affirmative
1SCE&GHenry Delk, Jr. Affirmative
1Seattle City LightPawel Krupa Affirmative
1Sierra Pacific Power Co.Rich Salgo Affirmative Comments submitted via electronic survey form.
1South Texas Electric CooperativeRichard McLeon Negative
1Southern California Edison Co.Dana Cabbell
1Southern Company Services, Inc.Robert Schaffeld Affirmative See comments submitted in the electronic comments form by Antonio Grayson.
1Southern Illinois Power Coop.William Hutchison Affirmative
1Southwest Transmission Cooperative, Inc.James Jones Affirmative We believe that purpose statement should clearly state that the standard is limited to the Bulk Electric System (BES). NERC compliance staff has interpreted standards as applying to the Bulk Power System (BPS) if they are not specifically limited to the BES. More specifically in response to comments that CAN-0016 impermissibly extended the standard to the BPS, NERC responded that Section 39 of the EPAct of 2005 requires standards to apply to the BPS unless the standard restricts itself. Because the BPS can be interpreted to be broader than the BES and there is no need for the standard to apply broader than the BES, we would like to see BES inserted back into the purpose statement. Because of the difficulties experienced by some entities in receiving the RC data specification in IRO-010-1a, we recommend that the implementation of TOP-003-2 Requirement R5 occur a couple of months after the implementation in TOP-003-2 Requirements R1-R4. IRO-010-1a is a parallel standard to TOP-003-2 and the effective date of the distribution of the RC data specification was simultaneous to the effective date of the requirement for the recipients to comply with the data specification. This meant that the RC could provide the data specification on the same date that the recipients had to meet the data specification. Unfortunately, there were some entities expecting to receive the data specification that did not and were concerned about a potential non-compliance. What if an auditor determined the RC should have provided the data specification? Would the entity that expected to receive the data specification be held responsible? By staggering the effective date of Requirement R5, this confusion can be avoided.
1Sunflower Electric Power CorporationNoman Lee Williams
1Tampa Electric Co.Beth Young Affirmative
1Tennessee Valley AuthorityLarry Akens Affirmative
1Tri-State G & T Association, Inc.Tracy Sliman Affirmative
1Tucson Electric Power Co.John Tolo
1United Illuminating Co.Jonathan Appelbaum Negative see comment form
1Westar EnergyAllen Klassen Negative
1Western Area Power AdministrationBrandy A Dunn Affirmative
1Xcel Energy, Inc.Gregory L Pieper Affirmative
2Alberta Electric System OperatorMark B Thompson Abstain
2BC HydroVenkataramakrishnan Vinnakota Affirmative
2California ISORich Vine Affirmative The words “and Operational Planning Analyses” should be added to the end of the first sentence in R2 (the Operational Planning Analysis is included in R1). A similar addition should be made to R4.
2Electric Reliability Council of Texas, Inc.Charles B Manning
2Independent Electricity System OperatorKim Warren Affirmative
2ISO New England, Inc.Kathleen Goodman Negative See comments submitted.
2Midwest ISO, Inc.Marie Knox Affirmative Please See SRC Comments Submitted
2New Brunswick System OperatorAlden Briggs Affirmative Please see comments submitted by the NPCC Reliability Standards Committee and IRC/SRC
2New York Independent System OperatorGregory Campoli Negative
2PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.Tom Bowe Affirmative
2Southwest Power Pool, Inc.Charles Yeung Affirmative
3Alabama Power CompanyRichard J. Mandes Affirmative See comments submitted in the electronic comments form by Antonio Grayson.
3Ameren ServicesMark Peters Negative
3APSSteven Norris Abstain
3Atlantic City Electric CompanyNICOLE BUCKMAN Affirmative
3Avista Corp.Robert Lafferty
3BC Hydro and Power AuthorityPat G. Harrington Affirmative
3Bonneville Power AdministrationRebecca Berdahl Affirmative Please see BPA's submitted comments.
3Central Lincoln PUDSteve Alexanderson Affirmative
3City of Austin dba Austin EnergyAndrew Gallo Affirmative Please see Austin Energy’s comments provided as part of Project 2007-03.
3City of FarmingtonLinda R Jacobson Affirmative
3City of GarlandRonnie C Hoeinghaus Affirmative
3City of Green Cove SpringsGregg R Griffin Negative
3City of ReddingBill Hughes Affirmative no comments
3City Water, Light & Power of SpringfieldRoger Powers Negative
3Clatskanie People's Utility DistrictBrian Fawcett
3Cleco CorporationMichelle A Corley Negative
3Colorado Springs UtilitiesLisa Cleary
3ComEdBruce Krawczyk Affirmative
3Consolidated Edison Co. of New YorkPeter T Yost Affirmative
3Constellation EnergyCJ Ingersoll Affirmative
3Consumers Energy David A. Lapinski Affirmative
3Cowlitz County PUDRussell A Noble Affirmative
3CPS EnergyJose Escamilla Affirmative
3Delmarva Power & Light Co.Michael R. Mayer Affirmative
3Detroit Edison CompanyKent Kujala Affirmative
3Dominion Resources ServicesMichael F. Gildea Affirmative
3Duke Energy CarolinaHenry Ernst-Jr Affirmative comments submitted
3East Kentucky Power Coop.Sally Witt
3EntergyJoel T Plessinger Negative • Comments submitted – see SERC OC Standards Review Group comments.
3FirstEnergy SolutionsKevin Querry
3Florida Power and Light / NextEra EnergyChantel Haswell
3Florida Power CorporationLee Schuster Affirmative Comments Submitted
3Gainesville Regional UtilitiesKenneth Simmons Affirmative
3Georgia Power CompanyAnthony L Wilson Affirmative
3Georgia Systems Operations CorporationWilliam N. Phinney Negative See GSOC's comments
3Grays Harbor PUDWesley W Gray Affirmative
3Great River EnergySam Kokkinen Affirmative Comments submitted with the MRO NSRF
3Gulf Power CompanyPaul C Caldwell Affirmative See comments submitted in the electronic comments form by Antonio Grayson.
3Hydro One Networks, Inc.David Kiguel Affirmative
3Imperial Irrigation DistrictJesus S. Alcaraz Affirmative
3JEAGarry Baker Affirmative
3Kansas City Power & Light Co.Charles Locke Negative See comments submitted regarding concerns and issues.
3Kissimmee Utility AuthorityGregory D Woessner Affirmative
3Lakeland ElectricMace D Hunter
3Lincoln Electric SystemBruce Merrill
3Louisville Gas and Electric Co.Charles A. Freibert Affirmative Comments have been filed on the comment form separately.
3Manitoba Hydro Greg C. Parent Affirmative Please see comments submitted by Joe Petaski (Manitoba Hydro)
3MidAmerican Energy Co.Thomas C. Mielnik Negative There is the possibility of “double jeopardy” when R3 and R4 have in part the statement of “…in meeting its NERC-mandatory reliability requirements.” So, an Entity could be found non-compliant with R1 or R2 and also not fulfill R3 or R4. Or if an entity was found non compliant with any of the unknown “…in meeting its NERC-mandatory reliability requirements” then they would be found non compliant with this Standard. It is not clear why this Standard is being written with the statement of: “…in meeting its NERC-mandatory reliability requirements”.
3Mississippi PowerDon Horsley
3Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia Steven M. Jackson Affirmative MEAG Power supports the comments of Austin Energy.
3Muscatine Power & WaterJohn S Bos Negative There is a great possibility of double jeopardy when R3 and R4 have in part the statement of “…in meeting its NERC-mandatory reliability requirements.” So, an Entity could be found non-compliant with R1 or R2 and also not fulfill R3 or R4. Or if an entity was found non compliant with any of the unknown “…in meeting its NERC-mandatory reliability requirements,” then they would be found non-compliant with this Standard. It is not clear why this Standard is being written with the statement of “…in meeting its NERC-mandatory reliability requirements.”
3Nebraska Public Power DistrictTony Eddleman Negative Please refer to comments submitted to NERC by Nebraska Public Power District on 01-12-2012.
3New York Power AuthorityMarilyn Brown Affirmative
3Niagara Mohawk (National Grid Company)Michael Schiavone Affirmative
3Northern Indiana Public Service Co.William SeDoris Affirmative
3Omaha Public Power DistrictBlaine R. Dinwiddie
3Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc.David Burke Affirmative
3Orlando Utilities CommissionBallard K Mutters Affirmative
3Owensboro Municipal UtilitiesThomas T Lyons Negative Please refer to SERC Operating Committee Comments.
3Pacific Gas and Electric CompanyJohn H Hagen Affirmative
3PacifiCorpJohn Apperson
3Platte River Power AuthorityTerry L Baker Affirmative
3Potomac Electric Power Co.Robert Reuter
3Progress Energy CarolinasSam Waters Affirmative
3Public Service Electric and Gas Co.Jeffrey Mueller Affirmative
3Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan CountyKenneth R. Johnson
3Public Utility District No. 2 of Grant CountyGreg Lange
3Puget Sound Energy, Inc.Erin Apperson Affirmative
3Rutherford EMCThomas M Haire Abstain
3Sacramento Municipal Utility DistrictJames Leigh-Kendall Affirmative
3Salt River ProjectJohn T. Underhill Affirmative
3Santee CooperJames M Poston Affirmative
3Seattle City LightDana Wheelock Affirmative
3Seminole Electric Cooperative, Inc.James R Frauen Affirmative
3South Carolina Electric & Gas Co.Hubert C Young Negative
3Southern California Edison Co.David Schiada
3Tacoma Public UtilitiesTravis Metcalfe Affirmative If a Transmission Operator or a Balancing Authority is requesting data from another entity, they must demonstrate a reliability impact validating the need for the requested data.
3Tampa Electric Co.Ronald L Donahey Affirmative
3Tennessee Valley AuthorityIan S Grant
3Tri-State G & T Association, Inc.Janelle Marriott Affirmative
3Wisconsin Electric Power MarketingJames R Keller Negative Comments submitted separately.
3Xcel Energy, Inc.Michael Ibold Affirmative
4Alliant Energy Corp. Services, Inc.Kenneth Goldsmith Negative
4American Municipal PowerKevin Koloini Affirmative
4Blue Ridge Power AgencyDuane S Dahlquist Affirmative
4Central Lincoln PUDShamus J Gamache Affirmative
4City of New Smyrna Beach Utilities CommissionTim Beyrle
4City of ReddingNicholas Zettel Affirmative no comments
4City Utilities of Springfield, MissouriJohn Allen Negative City Utilities of Springfield, Missouri supports the comments of SPP.
4Consumers Energy David Frank Ronk Affirmative
4Cowlitz County PUDRick Syring Affirmative
4Detroit Edison CompanyDaniel Herring Affirmative
4Florida Municipal Power AgencyFrank Gaffney Affirmative
4Fort Pierce Utilities AuthorityThomas W. Richards Negative Please see the joint comments submitted by Florida Municipal Power Agency (FMPA) filed through the formal comment process.
4Georgia System Operations CorporationGuy Andrews Negative see GSOC formal comments
4Illinois Municipal Electric AgencyBob C. Thomas Negative Illinois Municipal Electric Agency submitted comments on official Comment Form.
4Imperial Irrigation DistrictDiana U Torres Affirmative
4LaGenRichard Comeaux Abstain
4Madison Gas and Electric Co.Joseph DePoorter Abstain
4Ohio Edison CompanyDouglas Hohlbaugh Affirmative
4Oklahoma Municipal Power AuthorityTerri Pyle
4Public Utility District No. 1 of Douglas CountyHenry E. LuBean Affirmative
4Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish CountyJohn D Martinsen Affirmative
4Sacramento Municipal Utility DistrictMike Ramirez Affirmative
4Seattle City LightHao Li Affirmative
4Seminole Electric Cooperative, Inc.Steven R Wallace Affirmative
4South Mississippi Electric Power AssociationSteven McElhaney Affirmative
4Tacoma Public UtilitiesKeith Morisette
4Wisconsin Energy Corp.Anthony Jankowski Negative Comments submitted separately by We Energies
5AEP Service Corp.Brock Ondayko Affirmative Comments are being submitted via electronic form by Thad Ness on behalf of American Electric Power.
5AES CorporationLeo Bernier Affirmative
5AmerenueSam Dwyer Negative
5Arizona Public Service Co.Edward Cambridge
5Avista Corp.Edward F. Groce
5BC Hydro and Power AuthorityClement Ma Affirmative
5Black Hills CorpGeorge Tatar Affirmative
5Boise-Kuna Irrigation District/dba Lucky peak power plant projectMike D Kukla Affirmative
5Bonneville Power AdministrationFrancis J. Halpin
5BrightSource Energy, Inc.Chifong Thomas
5Chelan County Public Utility District #1John Yale Affirmative
5City of Austin dba Austin EnergyJeanie Doty Affirmative
5City of Grand IslandJeff Mead Abstain
5City of ReddingPaul A Cummings Affirmative no comments
5City of Tacoma, Department of Public Utilities, Light Division, dba Tacoma PowerMax Emrick Affirmative If a Transmission Operator or a Balancing Authority is requesting data from another entity, they must demonstrate a reliability impact validating the need for the requested data.
5City of TallahasseeBrian Horton Affirmative While it specifies that the examples are only possibilities for evidence, the inclusion of “with acknowledgement” to “web postings” in M2 & M3 for TOP-003-2 will become onerous. It requires another entity to respond in order to have evidence we were compliant.
5Cleco PowerStephanie Huffman Negative
5Colorado Springs UtilitiesJennifer Eckels Affirmative
5Consolidated Edison Co. of New YorkWilket (Jack) Ng Affirmative
5Consumers Energy James B Lewis
5Cowlitz County PUDBob Essex Affirmative
5Detroit Edison CompanyChristy Wicke Affirmative
5Dominion Resources, Inc.Mike Garton Affirmative
5Duke Energy Dale Q Goodwine Affirmative Comments Submitted.
5Dynegy Inc.Dan Roethemeyer Affirmative
5E.ON Climate & Renewables North America, LLCDana Showalter Negative See comment form.
5East Kentucky Power Coop.Stephen Ricker Abstain
5Exelon NuclearMichael Korchynsky Affirmative
5ExxonMobil Research and EngineeringMartin Kaufman Negative
5FirstEnergy SolutionsKenneth Dresner Affirmative
5Florida Municipal Power AgencyDavid Schumann Affirmative
5Great River EnergyPreston L Walsh Affirmative Comments submitted with the MRO NSRF
5Green Country EnergyGreg Froehling Affirmative
5I do not represent an EntityBruce Paggeot
5Indeck Energy Services, Inc.Rex A Roehl
5JEAJohn J Babik Affirmative
5Kansas City Power & Light Co.Scott Heidtbrink
5Kissimmee Utility AuthorityMike Blough Affirmative
5Lakeland ElectricJames M Howard Affirmative
5Liberty Electric Power LLCDaniel Duff
5Lincoln Electric SystemDennis Florom Negative Please refer to comments submitted by LES on the comment form.
5Los Angeles Department of Water & PowerKenneth Silver Affirmative
5Lower Colorado River AuthorityTom Foreman Affirmative
5Luminant Generation Company LLCMike Laney Negative Comments provided.
5Manitoba Hydro S N Fernando Affirmative Please see comments submitted by Joe Petaski (Manitoba Hydro)
5Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric CompanyDavid Gordon Abstain
5MEAG PowerSteven Grego Affirmative MEAG Power supports the comments of Austin Energy.
5MidAmerican Energy Co.Christopher Schneider Negative There is the possibility of “double jeopardy” when R3 and R4 have in part the statement of “…in meeting its NERC-mandatory reliability requirements.” So, an Entity could be found non-compliant with R1 or R2 and also not fulfill R3 or R4. Or if an entity was found non compliant with any of the unknown “…in meeting its NERC-mandatory reliability requirements” then they would be found non compliant with this Standard. It is not clear why this Standard is being written with the statement of: “…in meeting its NERC-mandatory reliability requirements”.
5Muscatine Power & WaterMike Avesing Negative First and foremost is the Requirement in TOP-002-3 for having a process for performing an "Operational Planning Analysis." That term, "Operational Planning Analysis," does not have a FERC-approved definition. The definition floating around at NERC implies some sort of simulation (with or without a tool) being perform next-day to determine exceedence of facility ratings or stability limits.
5Nebraska Public Power DistrictDon Schmit Negative Please refer to comments submitted to NERC by Nebraska Public Power District on 01-12-2012.
5New Harquahala Generating Co. LLCNathaniel Larson
5New York Power AuthorityGerald Mannarino Affirmative
5Northern Indiana Public Service Co.William O. Thompson Affirmative See NIPSCO's comments.
5Occidental ChemicalMichelle R DAntuono Affirmative
5Omaha Public Power DistrictMahmood Z. Safi Negative Please see OPPD's comments submitted by Mahmood Safi.
5Orlando Utilities CommissionRichard Kinas
5Pacific Gas and Electric CompanyRichard J. Padilla
5PacifiCorpSandra L. Shaffer Affirmative
5Platte River Power AuthorityPete Ungerman
5PowerSouth Energy CooperativeTim Hattaway Affirmative
5PPL Generation LLCAnnette M Bannon
5Progress Energy CarolinasWayne Lewis Affirmative Comments Submitted
5PSEG Fossil LLCMikhail Falkovich Affirmative
5Puget Sound Energy, Inc.Tom Flynn Affirmative
5Reedy Creek Energy ServicesBernie Budnik Affirmative
5Sacramento Municipal Utility DistrictBethany Hunter Affirmative
5Salt River ProjectGlen Reeves
5Santee CooperLewis P Pierce Affirmative
5Seattle City LightMichael J. Haynes Affirmative
5Seminole Electric Cooperative, Inc.Brenda K. Atkins Affirmative
5Snohomish County PUD No. 1Sam Nietfeld Affirmative
5Southern California Edison Co.Denise Yaffe Abstain
5Southern Company GenerationWilliam D Shultz Affirmative Please see comments submitted by Antonio Grayson on behalf of Southern Company.
5Tampa Electric Co.RJames Rocha Affirmative
5Tenaska, Inc.Scott M Helyer Abstain
5Tennessee Valley AuthorityDavid Thompson Affirmative
5Tri-State G & T Association, Inc.Barry Ingold Affirmative
5U.S. Army Corps of EngineersMelissa Kurtz
5U.S. Bureau of ReclamationMartin Bauer
5Wisconsin Electric Power Co.Linda Horn Negative Comments submitted separately.
5Wisconsin Public Service Corp.Leonard Rentmeester
5Xcel Energy, Inc.Liam Noailles Affirmative
6AEP MarketingEdward P. Cox Affirmative Comments are being submitted via electronic form by Thad Ness on behalf of American Electric Power
6Arizona Public Service Co.Justin Thompson
6Bonneville Power AdministrationBrenda S. Anderson Affirmative
6City of ReddingMarvin Briggs Affirmative no comments
6Cleco Power LLCRobert Hirchak Negative
6Colorado Springs UtilitiesLisa C Rosintoski
6Consolidated Edison Co. of New YorkNickesha P Carrol Affirmative
6Constellation Energy Commodities GroupBrenda Powell Affirmative We are voting affirmatively because we support the improvements achieved by the drafting team work so far. However, we raised remaining concerns with the standard proposal on the comment form submitted on behalf of CCG, CECD and CPG. We expect the drafting team to continue to make clarifying changes until the end of this stakeholder process. The greater the clarity in the final product, the less risk of contradictory perspectives on compliance.
6Dominion Resources, Inc.Louis S. Slade Affirmative
6Duke Energy CarolinaWalter Yeager Affirmative
6Entergy Services, Inc.Terri F Benoit Negative • Comments submitted – see SERC OC Standards Review Group comments.
6Eugene Water & Electric BoardDaniel Mark Bedbury Affirmative
6Exelon Power TeamPulin Shah Affirmative
6FirstEnergy SolutionsMark S Travaglianti Affirmative
6Florida Municipal Power AgencyRichard L. Montgomery Affirmative
6Florida Municipal Power PoolThomas Washburn Affirmative Implementation comments submitted.
6Florida Power & Light Co.Silvia P. Mitchell Abstain
6Imperial Irrigation DistrictCathy Bretz Affirmative
6Kansas City Power & Light Co.Jessica L Klinghoffer Negative See comments submitted regarding concerns and issues.
6Lakeland ElectricPaul Shipps
6Lincoln Electric SystemEric Ruskamp Negative Please refer to comments submitted by LES.
6Los Angeles Department of Water & PowerBrad Packer Affirmative
6Luminant EnergyBrad Jones Abstain TOP-003-2 as currently written does not provide any recourse for the entity receiving a data request if that entity feels the data request is unreasonable either in content or timing or if the entity does not have the data available to submit. As such I would recommend modify R5 as follows: R5. Each……shall satisfy the obligations of the documented specification for data. R5.1. If the entity receiving the data request cannot provide the requested data either in content or timing then the entity receiving the data request shall notify the requesting entity and provide a reason for not providing the data. ----------------------------------------------------------- In addition, I inadvertently included the wrong set of comments on the non-binding poll for the VRF, VSL, and Time Horizons. The comments below are in reference to the VSL for TOP-003-2 R5: The VSL for TOP-003-2 R5 places a more stringent severity level on the entities receiving the data requests than it places on the entities that are responsible for creating the data requests. As such, I would suggest changing the VSL for TOP-003-2 R5 to the following: Lower: The responsible entity receiving a data specification in Requirement R3 or R4 did not satisfy one of the obligations of the documented specification for data. Moderate: The responsible entity receiving a data specification in Requirement R3 or R4 did not satisfy two of the obligations of the documented specification for data. High: The responsible entity receiving a data specification in Requirement R3 or R4 did not satisfy three of the obligations of the documented specification for data. Severe: The responsible entity receiving a data specification in Requirement R3 or R4 did not satisfy four or more of the obligations of the documented specifications for data.
6Manitoba Hydro Daniel Prowse Affirmative Please see comments submitted by Joe Petaski (Manitoba Hydro)
6MidAmerican Energy Co.Dennis Kimm Negative
6Northern Indiana Public Service Co.Joseph O'Brien Affirmative
6NRG Energy, Inc.Alan Johnson Abstain
6Omaha Public Power DistrictDavid Ried Negative OPPD has submitted formal comments.
6Orlando Utilities CommissionClaston Augustus Sunanon
6PacifiCorpScott L Smith Affirmative
6Platte River Power AuthorityCarol Ballantine Affirmative
6PPL EnergyPlus LLCMark A Heimbach Affirmative
6Progress EnergyJohn T Sturgeon Affirmative “Comments Submitted”
6PSEG Energy Resources & Trade LLCPeter Dolan Affirmative
6Public Utility District No. 1 of Chelan CountyHugh A. Owen Abstain
6Sacramento Municipal Utility DistrictClaire Warshaw Affirmative
6Salt River ProjectSteven J Hulet Affirmative
6Santee CooperSuzanne Ritter
6Seattle City LightDennis Sismaet Affirmative
6Seminole Electric Cooperative, Inc.Trudy S. Novak Affirmative
6Shell Energy North America (US), L.P.Paul Kerr Affirmative
6South California Edison CompanyLujuanna Medina Affirmative
6Tacoma Public UtilitiesMichael C Hill Affirmative
6Tampa Electric Co.Benjamin F Smith II Affirmative
6Tennessee Valley AuthorityMarjorie S. Parsons Affirmative
6Western Area Power Administration - UGP MarketingPeter H Kinney
6Xcel Energy, Inc.David F. Lemmons Affirmative
8 James A Maenner
8 Roger C Zaklukiewicz Affirmative
8 Merle Ashton
8 Edward C Stein Affirmative
8INTELLIBINDKevin Conway Abstain
8JDRJC AssociatesJim Cyrulewski Affirmative
8Utility Services, Inc.Brian Evans-Mongeon Abstain
8Volkmann Consulting, Inc.Terry Volkmann Negative TOP-003-2 R5 does not adequately replace PRC-001 R2. TOP-003-2 R5 does not require notifying the RC and drops the requirement of GOP to analyze equipment and relay failures, TOP-003-2 R5 states GOP obligations as specified in R3 and R4, however R3 and R4 are not applicable to GOP.
9California Energy CommissionWilliam M Chamberlain Affirmative
9Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Public UtilitiesDonald Nelson Negative
9National Association of Regulatory Utility CommissionersDiane J Barney Affirmative
9Utah Public Service CommissionRic Campbell Affirmative
10Florida Reliability Coordinating CouncilLinda Campbell Abstain
10Midwest Reliability OrganizationJames D Burley Affirmative
10New York State Reliability CouncilAlan Adamson Affirmative
10Northeast Power Coordinating CouncilGuy V. Zito Affirmative
10ReliabilityFirst CorporationAnthony E Jablonski Abstain See submitted comments.
10SERC Reliability CorporationCarter B. Edge Affirmative
10Southwest Power Pool REStacy Dochoda Affirmative
10Texas Reliability Entity, Inc.Larry D. Grimm Negative
10Western Electricity Coordinating CouncilSteven L. Rueckert Affirmative