1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |FERC Approves NERC Physical Security Standard

FERC Approves NERC Physical Security Standard

Client Alert | 2 min read | 12.16.14

In Order No. 802, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approved the Physical Security Standard proposed by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) in Reliability Standard CIP-014-01 to enhance the physical security of the most critical facilities of the bulk electric system (BES), and thereby reduce the vulnerability of the grid to physical attacks. Other administrative programs affecting critical infrastructure, such as those in the chemical and transportation industries, can help Transmission Owners (TOs) and Transmission Operators (TOPs) implement and comply with the Physical Security Standard.

The Physical Security Standard requires certain NERC-registered TOs to perform risk assessments to determine whether their transmission facilities and related control centers, if rendered inoperable or damaged, could adversely impact reliable BES operation, resulting in instability, uncontrolled separation or cascading failures. If a TO owns such a facility, it (and any associated TOP) must develop and implement a security plan to protect that facility from physical attacks based on the potential threats to and vulnerabilities of the facility from a physical attack. The risk assessments and security plans must be reviewed by an unaffiliated physical security expert.

Considerations

The Physical Security Standard was fast-tracked by FERC and NERC in response to concerns raised by Congress following the 2013 shooting incident at a California substation. The Standard is intended to apply only to the most critical BES facilities, while allowing TOs and TOPs sufficient latitude to develop and implement individual security plans that meet the Physical Security Standard.

Because the Physical Security Standard is new, TOs and TOPs face significant uncertainty as to implementation. Lessons may be taken from other NERC reliability standards and from other administrative programs affecting critical infrastructure, including the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS) and the Coast Guard Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA), which impose similar requirements on owners and operators of critical infrastructure to conduct security vulnerability assessments and develop site security plans. 

Compliance activities associated with CFATS and MTSA (as well as compliance activities associated with other NERC reliability standards) can inform an affected TO/TOP in implementing the Physical Security Standard, and provide guidance for working with counsel and technical consultants in developing vulnerability assessments and physical security plans, managing sensitive security information and developing and maintaining sufficient evidence to demonstrate compliance. Crowell & Moring attorneys have substantial experience in all of these areas. 

Contacts

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 11.21.25

A Sign of What’s to Come? Court Dismisses FCA Retaliation Complaint Based on Alleged Discriminatory Use of Federal Funding

On November 7, 2025, in Thornton v. National Academy of Sciences, No. 25-cv-2155, 2025 WL 3123732 (D.D.C. Nov. 7, 2025), the District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a False Claims Act (FCA) retaliation complaint on the basis that the plaintiff’s allegations that he was fired after blowing the whistle on purported illegally discriminatory use of federal funding was not sufficient to support his FCA claim. This case appears to be one of the first filed, and subsequently dismissed, following Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s announcement of the creation of the Civil Rights Fraud Initiative on May 19, 2025, which “strongly encourages” private individuals to file lawsuits under the FCA relating to purportedly discriminatory and illegal use of federal funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in violation of Executive Order 14173, Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity (Jan. 21, 2025). In this case, the court dismissed the FCA retaliation claim and rejected the argument that an organization could violate the FCA merely by “engaging in discriminatory conduct while conducting a federally funded study.” The analysis in Thornton could be a sign of how forthcoming arguments of retaliation based on reporting allegedly fraudulent DEI activity will be analyzed in the future....