Comments on Draft 7 SERC UFLS Standard_PRC-006-SERC-01_ ...
Comments on Draft 7 SERC UFLS Standard_PRC-006-SERC-01_ ...
Comments on Draft 7 SERC UFLS Standard_PRC-006-SERC-01_ ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
22008. <strong>Draft</strong> 2 incorporated revisi<strong>on</strong>s to address industry comments and to include themeasures and compliance elements. <strong>Draft</strong> 2 of the standard and a draft implementati<strong>on</strong> planwere posted for comments from November 21, 2008 through December 22, 2008. <strong>Draft</strong> 3 ofthe standard was developed to address industry comments. It was posted for informati<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong>February 9, 2009. <strong>Draft</strong> 3a <strong>SERC</strong> <strong>UFLS</strong> <strong>Standard</strong> was designed to meet the applicabilityand performance characteristics specified in the then latest NERC draft <strong>UFLS</strong> <strong>Standard</strong>. Itwas posted for comments from September 15, 2009 through October 15, 2009. <strong>Draft</strong> 4 ofthe standard was developed to address industry comments and was posted for ballot fromNovember 13-23, 2009. <strong>Draft</strong> 4 was not approved.<strong>Draft</strong> 5 of the standard was developed to address industry comments listed <strong>on</strong> the <strong>Draft</strong> 4ballots. The requirement for generators that do not coordinate with the underfrequencyperformance curves to provide compensatory load shedding was removed. To address theindustry comments <strong>on</strong> timing, additi<strong>on</strong>al work <strong>on</strong> the <strong>SERC</strong> standard was delayed until theinitial ballot <strong>on</strong> the NERC c<strong>on</strong>tinent-wide <strong>UFLS</strong> standard was scheduled. <strong>Draft</strong> 5 was alsore-formatted to be c<strong>on</strong>sistent with the Results-based Reliability <strong>Standard</strong>s template. <strong>Draft</strong> 5was posted for comment. <strong>Draft</strong> 6 was developed in resp<strong>on</strong>se to comments received andwas posted for ballot from December 9-20, 2<strong>01</strong>1. <strong>Draft</strong> 6 was not approved. <strong>Draft</strong> 7 hasbeen developed in resp<strong>on</strong>se to comments received <strong>on</strong> the ballot.The <strong>SERC</strong> <strong>UFLS</strong> <strong>Standard</strong> <strong>Draft</strong>ing Team (SDT) is requesting your comments <strong>on</strong> <strong>Draft</strong> 7 ofthe <strong>SERC</strong> <strong>UFLS</strong> standard.Please enter all comments in simple text format.Insert a “check’ mark in the appropriate boxes by clicking the gray areas.1. Requirement R1 has been modified to allow the PC to adjust island boundaries to differ fromsubregi<strong>on</strong>al boundaries where necessary for the sole purpose of producing a c<strong>on</strong>tiguoussubregi<strong>on</strong>al island more suitable for simulati<strong>on</strong>. Do you agree with Requirement R1, itsmeasures, and its VSLs?YesNo<str<strong>on</strong>g>Comments</str<strong>on</strong>g>:2. Requirement R2 has been modified for additi<strong>on</strong>al clarity. Do you agree with RequirementR2, its measures, and its VSLs?YesNo<str<strong>on</strong>g>Comments</str<strong>on</strong>g>:
Change language