The U.S. federal government regulates the reliability of bulk power systems, while the reliability of power distribution systems is regulated at a state level. In this article, we review the history of regulating electric service reliability and study the existing reliability metrics, indices, and standards for power transmission and distribution networks. We assess the foundations of the reliability standards and metrics, discuss how they are applied to outages caused by large exogenous disturbances such as natural disasters, and investigate whether the standards adequately internalize the impacts of these events. Our reflections shed light on how existing standards conceptualize reliability, question the basis for treating large‐scale hazard‐induced outages differently from normal daily outages, and discuss whether this conceptualization maps well onto customer expectations. We show that the risk indices for transmission systems used in regulating power system reliability do not adequately capture the risks that transmission systems are prone to, particularly when it comes to low‐probability high‐impact events. We also point out several shortcomings associated with the way in which regulators require utilities to calculate and report distribution system reliability indices. We offer several recommendations for improving the conceptualization of reliability metrics and standards. We conclude that while the approaches taken in reliability standards have made considerable advances in enhancing the reliability of power systems and may be logical from a utility perspective during normal operation, existing standards do not provide a sufficient incentive structure for the utilities to adequately ensure high levels of reliability for end‐users, particularly during large‐scale events.