UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Version 5 Critical Infrastructure)Docket No.RM13-5-000

Protection Reliability Standards)

COMMENTS OF THE
ISO/RTO COUNCIL

The ISO/RTO Council (“IRC”) submits these comments in response to the April 18, 2013
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (the “NOPR”)1 in which the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (the “Commission”) proposes to approve Version 5 of the Critical Infrastructure
Protection (“CIP”) Reliability Standards, CIP-002-5 through CIP-011-1 (collectively, the “CIP 5
Standards”).

I.IDENTIFICATION OF FILING PARTY

The IRC is comprised of the Alberta Electric System Operator (“AESO”); California
Independent System Operator Corporation (“CAISO”); Electric Reliability Council of Texas, Inc. (“ERCOT”); the Independent Electricity System Operator (“IESO”); ISO New England Inc. (“ISO-NE”); Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (“MISO”); New York
Independent System Operator, Inc. (“NYISO”); PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (“PJM”); and
Southwest Power Pool, Inc. (“SPP”).2

II.COMMENTS

The IRC has three brief comments in response to the NOPR.

First, the IRC urges the Commission to approve the CIP 5 Standards.  The IRC agrees
with the Commission that the CIP 5 Standards represent a marked improvement over the CIP

1 Version 5 Critical Infrastructure Protection Reliability Standards, 143 FERC ¶ 61,055 (2013).

2 AESO and IESO are not FERC-jurisdictional. The AESO is not joining in these comments.

DMEAST #17008993 v3

version 3 Standards, and - given the superiority of the CIP 5 Standards to the CIP version 4 standards - concurs with the Commission that it is appropriate to retire the CIP version 4 Standards without ever going into effect.

Second, the IRC acknowledges the “identify, assess, and correct” (“IAC”)-related and
other concerns raised by the Commission in the NOPR, and urges the Commission to direct
NERC to take appropriate action to address those concerns, provided that such action is
consistent with moving forward with the CIP 5 Standards.3   Consistent with this position, the
IRC respectfully submits that the technical and substantive cyber security improvements and
benefits represented in the CIP 5 Standards (relative to both versions 3 and 4) should not be
delayed.  The benefits of prompt implementation of the CIP 5 Standards with a direction to
NERC to make supplemental filings, after an appropriate stakeholder process, to address the
Commission’s concerns clearly outweigh the cost of delaying the entirety of the CIP 5 Standards
while these matters are further clarified.  Moreover, the public interest clearly lies with the
Commission authorizing the industry to begin taking steps to implement the CIP 5 Standards
expeditiously as an improved means to address cyber security, as opposed to allowing the IAC
issues noted by the Commission to delay implementation entirely.  Thus, the Commission should
direct to NERC to take appropriate action, prospectively, to address its concerns related to the
IAC requirements while implementation of the CIP 5 Standards is underway.
Taking action consistent with the IRC request would:  (i) allow implementation of the CIP 5 Standards without unnecessary delay, achieving the relative improved technical

3 The IRC takes no position on the timing of any such action, but notes that the more timely such matters are

addressed, the less likely it is that the Commission’s IAC concerns would arise in administration of Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Program (“CMEP”) activities.

2

DMEAST #17008993 v3

substantive benefits of the CIP 5 Standards in a timely manner, and (ii) provide a path forward to address the Commission’s concerns related to the IAC requirements.

Third, the IRC recognizes that if the Commission adopts the IRC’s recommended course
of action, the CIP 5 Standards may, pending Commission action on a curative NERC filing, be in
effect for an interim period in a form that encompasses the IAC ambiguities and other elements
about which the Commission expresses concern.  To minimize the potential for these
circumstances to result in ineffective CMEP administration and enforcement related to the IAC
requirements and to ensure that the Commission’s concerns regarding the unresolved ambiguities
are promptly and appropriately mitigated, the Commission should include, in its order on the
NOPR, a directive that NERC submit a compliance filing to the Commission addressing the
Commission’s concerns regarding the IAC language contained in the CIP 5 Standards, and
detailing how it and the Regional Entities intend to monitor and enforce the IAC requirements in
the CIP 5 Standards in the interim period.

III.CONCLUSION

The IRC respectfully requests that the Commission proceed in a manner consistent with

the comments submitted herein.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Matthew Morais/s/Theodore J. Paradise

Matthew MoraisRaymond W. Hepper

Assistant General CounselVice President, General

Electric Reliability Council of Texas, Inc.Counsel, and Secretary

7620 Metro Center DriveTheodore J. Paradise

Austin, Texas 78744Assistant General Counsel - Operations and

Planning

ISO New England Inc.

One Sullivan Road

Holyoke, MA 01040-2841

3

DMEAST #17008993 v3

/s/ Stephen G. Kozey/s/ Paul Suskie

Stephen G. KozeyPaul Suskie

Vice President, General Counsel, andSr. VP - Regulatory Policy and General Counsel

SecretarySouthwest Power Pool, Inc.

Midcontinent Independent System415 North McKinley, Suite 140

Operator, Inc.Little Rock, AR 72205

P.O. Box 4202

Carmel, Indiana 46082-4202

/s/ Anna McKenna/s/ Carl F. Patka

Nancy SaracinoCarl F. Patka

General CounselAssistant General Counsel

Roger CollantonRaymond Stalter

Deputy General CounselDirector, Regulatory Affairs

Anna A. McKennaNew York Independent System Operator,

Assistant General Counsel-RegulatoryInc.

California Independent System Operator10 Krey Blvd

CorporationRensselaer, New York 12144

250 Outcropping Way

Folsom, California 95630

/s/ Craig Glazer/s/ Jessica Savage

Craig GlazerJessica Savage

Vice President - Federal Government PolicySupervisor, Regulatory Affairs

Robert EckenrodIndependent Electricity System Operator

Assistant General CounselStation A, Box 4474

PJM Interconnection, LLCToronto, Ontario  M5W 4E5

1200 G Street, N.W. Suite 600 Washington, D.C. 20005

Dated:    June 24, 2013

4

DMEAST #17008993 v3