North American Electric Reliability Council Princeton Forrestal Village, Village Boulevard, Princeton, New Jersey

Transcription

1 North American Electric Reliability Council Princeton Forrestal Village, Village Boulevard, Princeton, New Jersey ENGINEERING COMMITTEE Harrah s Hotel Lake Tahoe, Nevada July 16 17, 1996 MINUTES OF THE MEETING Committee Chairman Raymond M. Maliszewski presided over the North American Electric Reliability Council s (NERC) Engineering Committee (EC) meeting held on Tuesday, July 16, 1996 from 2 to 5:30 p.m. and Wednesday, July 17, 1996 from 7:45 to 11:40 a.m. in Lake Tahoe, Nevada. The meeting notice, agenda, and list of attendees are attached as Exhibits A, B, and C, respectively. Introduction and Chairman s Remarks Chairman Maliszewski welcomed all attendees and introduced the following new Committee members: Yakout Mansour, Manager, Grid Operations and Interutility Affairs at B.C. Hydro, as the second Canada representative; Ken Kuyper, Senior Vice President, Engineering & System Operations at the Corn Belt Power Cooperative, as the second cooperative industry segment representative; Donna A. Newman, Vice President of Operations & Trading at the Electric Clearinghouse, Inc., as the second power marketer industry segment representative, and Thomas L. Grennan (in absentia), Vice President-Generation Services at Western Resources-KPL, as an SPP representative. Attending for ERCOT representative Richard P. Verret was Tom Sweatman, Executive Director of ERCOT, and attending for NPCC representative P. Donald Raymond, Jr. was George C. Loehr, Executive Director of NPCC. On the second day of the meeting, Michael W. McKnight from the Sierra Pacific Power Company attended for Harlow R. Peterson, the WSCC representative. New Observers introduced included: Kurt J. Conger, Director of Policy Analysis at the American Public Power Association, and Veikko J. Kammonen (in absentia), Vice President of Customer Services at the Canadian Electricity Association. Messrs. Conger and Kammonen will serve as Observers from their respective organizations to both the EC and the Operating Committee (OC). Meeting guests included: Larry Gilberston, Supervising Engineer at the Turlock Irrigation District in California; William Head, Principal Engineer at the MAPP office; I. Paul McCurley, Manager, System Planning & Operating Services at the Edison Electric Institute; J. Ken Wiley, General Manager at the Florida Electric Power Coordinating Group; and Robert W. Cummings, Manager, Transmission Services at ECAR. Self introductions of those in attendance followed.

2 Engineering Committee Meeting Minutes July 16 17, 1996 Administrative Matters Chairman Maliszewski announced that David L. Seitzinger, Director-Engineering at CRSS, Inc., resigned as an independent power producer (IPP) representative to the Committee. Because he will not be able to participate in all future EC meetings, Mr. Seitzinger believed it appropriate to withdraw his membership. During the second day of the Committee meeting, Chairman Maliszewski appointed a Nominating Task Force to develop a slate of candidates from a list of proposed IPP candidates to be provided by the Regional Councils. The Committee members are to elect a second IPP representative to the Committee prior to the December 1996 Committee meeting. The Nominating Task Force is comprised of Mr. Maliszewski as Chairman, Roberto Denis from SERC, and Richard S. Bayless from WSCC. Mr. Maliszewski also requested a volunteer from the EC to serve as the Committee s representative on the industry s Interconnected Operations Services (IOS) Working Group, replacing former SPP representative Dale E. Ward, who had served in that capacity. During the second day of the meeting, EC representative Ricky Bittle, who serves on the IOS Working Group as a cooperative industry sector representative, also volunteered to represent the EC on the Working Group. The Committee looks forward to hearing reports from time to time on the Working Group s activities. Chairman Maliszewski also reminded the Committee members to suggest candidates to serve on the Transmission Reservation and Scheduling Task Force, the scope of which was approved earlier today at the Joint EC/OC meeting. Candidate names should be submitted to the Committee s Chairman or Secretary by Wednesday, July 24, Chairman Maliszewski will coordinate with OC Chairman Gregory A. Cucchi on the staffing of this Task Force and the appointment of a Task Force Chairman. Approval of Minutes The Committee unanimously approved the minutes of the February 27 28, 1996 EC meeting as submitted. Review of Agenda During the review of the meeting agenda (Exhibit B), Chairman Maliszewski mentioned that Robert W. Cummings, Chairman of the NERC-EIA Data Coordination Task Force, would present a brief Task Force report during the second day of the Committee meeting. NERC Board of Trustees May 1966 Meeting Garey C. Rozier, Vice Chairman of the EC, reported on the highlights of the May 1996 NERC Board of Trustees meeting. The Board approved the Transmission Transfer Capability (TTC) Task Force s report on Available Transfer Capability Definitions and Determination. It also approved the Task Force s three associated follow-on recommendations in connection with the determination and implementation of available transfer capabilities. The Board did not agree to the formation of a new and separate group to ensure the timely implementation of NERC s four strategic initiatives. Rather, it agreed that the Technical Steering Committee was the appropriate group to manage the initiatives. The Board also heard briefings on open access by J. Steven Herod, Director, Office of Electric Power Regulation, and William Booth, Special Assistant to the Director, at the Federal -2-

3 Engineering Committee Meeting Minutes July 16 17, 1996 Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). They commented on FERC s view of NERC s role in making open access to the transmission systems work. The Board also elected two power marketer representatives Jeffrey K. Skilling, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Enron Capital & Trade Resources, and Paul F. Barber, Vice President, Transmission and Engineering, Citizens Lehman Power L.P. It also reelected Howard Hawks, Chief Executive Officer at Tenaska Inc., and James E. Franklin, Senior Vice President-Marketing at Cogentrix Energy, Inc., as IPP representatives to the Board for two-year terms. Technical Steering Committee May 1996 Meeting Chairman Maliszewski reported on the highlights of the May 1996 Technical Steering Committee s (TSC) meeting. Key topics were the status of the four Strategic Initiatives for NERC, the implementation of the three recommendations associated with the Available Transfer Capability Definitions and Determination report, and follow up on the recommendations in the Security Process report. The TSC drafted an Available Transfer Capability (ATC) Implementation Working Group scope, which will be addressed at this EC meeting, and a Transmission Reservation and Scheduling Task Force scope, which was approved earlier today at the Joint EC/OC meeting. The TSC, based on a survey of the TTC Task Force, agreed to form an ad hoc group to develop NERC comments on FERC s notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) on the capacity reservation open access transmission tariffs (CRT). The draft NERC comments on the CRT NOPR were briefly discussed and approved earlier at this July Joint EC/OC meeting. Based on discussions with the proposed industry s Open Access Same-time Information System (OASIS) management organization, the TSC agreed that NERC and the Electric Power Research Institute should act as facilitators of the OASIS activities over the next six months. Organizational Structure Task Force Before this item was addressed, NPCC requested some indication as to whether the Board s Task Force on the Future Role of NERC II was considering organizational changes for NERC and that perhaps the Committee should await the Board s conclusions before addressing proposed organizational changes for the EC. NERC President Michehl R. Gent indicated that he attended one of two Board Task Force meetings to date and that the Task Force was developing a white paper of issues and recommendations for review at the September 1996 Board meeting. No organizational items appeared in those draft recommendations. Mr. Gent, therefore, encouraged the Committee to continue with its organizational structure activities. Vice Chairman Rozier, Chairman of the Committee s Organizational Structure Task Force, which was formed subsequent to the February 1996 Committee meeting, presented an overview of the revised organizational structure document for the EC developed by the Task Force. This revised document is an update of NERC s January 1984 Organizational Structure of Technical Committees document from the EC s perspective. It also incorporates the Task Force s agreements reached at its June 12, 1996 meeting, including several items from the Organizational Guidelines section of the April 1993 Engineering Committee Program Review document. Key proposals include: changing the position of the immediate past Committee Chairman from a voting member to a non-voting member, a procedure for calling a special meeting of the Committee, a mail-ballot voting procedure, and a nominating task force. The concept of an Executive Committee of the EC was not included. The EC Chairman and Vice Chairman will continue, with the assistance of the Committee Secretary, to act as the coordinating group for the Committee. The need for a decision-making function of an Executive Committee is not apparent at this time. -3-

4 Engineering Committee Meeting Minutes July 16 17, 1996 After much discussion, the Committee agreed to the following modifications to the Task Force s document: the immediate past Committee Chairman should have EC Observer status, nominations from the floor for Committee officers are acceptable, reference to the normal progression from Vice Chairman to Chairman should be removed, term overlap of industry sector representatives for increased continuity of service should be encouraged to the extent possible, specifics on the time schedules for EC and Joint EC/OC meetings should be deleted, the timing of the election of Committee officers should continue on the current (May Board meeting) schedule rather than on the proposed calendar basis, and the calling of special Committee meetings should use language similar to that in the NERC Bylaws and exclude the level of interest survey. The document should also be constituted as a standalone EC document without reference to the OC s structural changes, which are currently under review. The coordination of the EC and OC organizational structure documents into a single document will be addressed by the TSC at a future date. With these changes, the Committee unanimously approved the Task Force s organizational structure document for the EC. This EC-approved version will be presented for approval at the September 1996 Board meeting. Robert W. Cummings of the ECAR staff suggested that a plan for addressing the sunset reviews of the Committee s working groups should be developed. NPCC Executive Director George C. Loehr also suggested that the Committee may wish to consider upgrading several of its working groups, such as the Multiregional Modeling Working Group, to subcommittee status. Mr. Rozier indicated that the Task Force did not attempt to reach consensus on the issue of increased Regional representation on the EC for some Regions. Rather, it recommended that this issue be addressed by the full Committee. Based on the background material prepared by the Task Force on this issue, further discussion by the Committee ensued. Many Regions are comprised of subregions that have diverse interests. Perhaps not only SERC, WSCC, and NPCC need to be considered for increased EC representation. Darrel R. Gunst, MAPP representative, indicated that the EC needs to clearly define the basis or formula for increased membership before increased membership is considered. Power marketer Stephen J. Beuning was concerned that increased representation for several Regions would dilute the voting power of the other industry segment EC representatives. It was clear from the discussion that the Committee members could not come to a consensus on this issue, and the issue was tabled by a vote of 18 to six. The Task Force also concluded it was appropriate to review and discuss the role of NERC s TSC at an EC meeting. Vice Chairman Rozier indicated the primary activity of the TSC is to function as a coordinating group for EC and OC activities. The TSC is not a decision-making body but may propose actions or initiatives for approval by the EC, OC, or the Board. That is, all of the TSC s action plans or initiatives are generally put forward for the approval of other groups. Committee members requested that the TSC extend a professional courtesy to keep the EC, OC, and the Regions informed of the TSC s upcoming action plans or proposals prior to their appearance on the Board agenda. The Committee officers agreed to make such a concerted effort, including the posting of the highlights of TSC meetings or other activities on NERC s Bulletin Board System and Home Page on the World Wide Web. Reliability Assessment Subcommittee Geoffrey P. Gaebe, Sr., Chairman of the Reliability Assessment Subcommittee (RAS), presented an overview of RAS s draft Reliability Assessment report. The theme of this year s report is Reliability -4-

5 Engineering Committee Meeting Minutes July 16 17, 1996 Assessment in a Changing Industry. The report is divided into six major topic areas, which Mr. Gaebe reviewed. His presentation overheads are included as Exhibit D. Chairman Maliszewski reminded the Committee members that this was the last opportunity for them to comment on the report in Committee session. The fact that reliability assessment was one of the five issues raised by U.S. President Bill Clinton in his concern about the WSCC July 2, 1996 electric system disturbance indicates that this 1996 Reliability Assessment report will have high visibility, especially in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). Therefore, NERC must take this opportunity to clearly define its views on reliability in a competitive electricity power market. In addition, to the extent possible, the report should include a discussion of the NERC activities either under way or planned to address those issues. David H. Meyer of DOE indicated that there was increased sensitivity about the reliability of the electric power systems from a national perspective. If this were not the case, DOE would not have to respond to a memorandum from the U.S. White House. Mr. Meyer was especially concerned about transmission system maintenance as many utilities try to reduce maintenance costs to be more competitive. However, since transmission will continue to be regulated, the potential for recovery of operating costs should not affect the incentive to maintain reliable electric systems. The Committee members comments on the 1996 Reliability Assessment report can be briefly summarized as follows: review use of the term prudent in reference to the inventory of plant sites and transmission corridors, address NERC s initiatives to deal with parallel path flow problems, indicate what NERC should do to avoid the double counting of resources or under counting of customer demand, emphasize system protection in the discussion on maintenance and coordination in light of recent system disturbances, rework the control area performance section to avoid a misinterpretation that performance standards are lacking, clarify the specific point regarding the number of control areas, consider combining the transmission subject area with the operations section, clarify that the formation of regional transmission groups or associations preceded FERC s order 888, indicate that the adequacy of generation may move to the marketplace while the adequacy of transmission will still be developed under a monopoly function, present the independent system operator section in a more positive light, stress the concept of reduced maintenance costs while maintaining reliability, and clarify that the separation of generation from the transmission network operation could present some control problems, especially in emergencies. Because of the lack of closure on some key issues, the Committee members requested RAS to develop a revised draft report incorporating their comments for review and approval prior to the report s submittal to the NERC Board. It was agreed that RAS will distribute a revised draft to the EC by August 9 for approval by August 20. The final report will be submitted to the Board on August 30 for approval at the September 1996 Board meeting. The Committee approved the Subcommittee s revised Report Approval Process (Exhibit E) and Implementation Plan and Timetable (Exhibit F) for future RAS reports. The changes to these procedures are necessary to coordinate with the Committee s change to three (rather than four) meetings per year, which began in NERC-EIA Data Coordination Task Force Robert W. Cummings, Chairman of the NERC-EIA Data Coordination Task Force, reminded the Committee that it approved at its May 1995 meeting the continuance of the Data Coordination Task Force through June 1996, at which time the Committee was to again evaluate the need for the Task Force. This Task Force is monitoring and coordinating the data collection efforts of the Regions in connection with their 1996 responses to -5-

6 Engineering Committee Meeting Minutes July 16 17, 1996 the U.S. Department of Energy s (DOE) Energy Information Administration s (EIA) EIA-411 and EIA-860 data forms. This 1996 data collection is the first such effort under the December 1995 Memorandum of Agreement between NERC and EIA. As such, many refinements and improvements are needed to the data collection and verification processes. Mr. Cummings also extended the appreciation of the Task Force to Brian M. Nolan of the NERC staff for his data coordination efforts between the Regions and DOE/EIA. The Committee approved Mr. Cummings recommendation that the NERC-EIA data efforts continue to be pursued through the Task Force until July 1997, at which time the Committee will again evaluate the need for the Task Force. ATC Implementation Working Group Chairman Maliszewski indicated that this new Available Transfer Capability (ATC) Implementation Working Group is intended to address the Transmission Transfer Capability Task Force s third recommendation approved at the May 1996 Board meeting. This recommendation proposed that a NERC ATC implementation group be formed to monitor and review the procedures developed by the Regions (or subregions) for determining ATC to ensure that these procedures are in concert with the ATC Principles in the Task Force s June 1996 Available Transfer Capability Definitions and Determination report. It was also agreed at the July 16, 1996 Joint EC/OC meeting that this new Working Group would report to both the EC and OC. With this reporting change and a slight modification to item 3, the EC approved the scope (Exhibit G) for this new group. As its first assignment, the Working Group is to recommend for approval at the December 1996 Joint EC/OC meeting appropriate changes and additions to the NERC Planning and Operating Policies based on the 1996 ATC report. In addition, this Working Group should develop for December a work plan for review and approval on how it intends to assess Regional ATC procedures for conformance to the Principles in the ATC report. The Committee also agreed that while ATC calculation procedures may be developed primarily on a subregional or Regional basis, the Working Group should also address interregional coordination to ensure that appropriate and consistent ATC values are available for interconnection lines or interfaces between Regions. The Regional and industry segment Committee members are to provide suggested candidates to serve on the Working Group to Chairman Maliszewski or the Committee Secretary by the end of July. Chairman Maliszewski will then coordinate with OC Chairman Cucchi on the staffing of the Working Group and the selection of a Working Group Chairman. Reliability Criteria Subcommittee Sam L. Daniel, Chairman of the Reliability Criteria Subcommittee (RCS), briefly summarized RCS s review of SERC s Principles and Guides for Reliability in System Planning for conformance to the NERC Planning Principles and Guides. SERC concurred with RCS s review results and plans to review its documentation of those NERC Guides recommended by RCS for appropriate clarifications. The Committee unanimously accepted RCS s review report of SERC s principles and guides as a working document for internal NERC distribution. A copy of this SERC report is included as Exhibit H. Mr. Daniel reported that all Regional reviews for conformance were complete except for NPCC, which will be reviewed in early October. RCS will present its review reports of SPP, ASCC, and NPCC for approval at the December 1996 Committee meeting. Mr. Daniel also reported that RCS is in the process of reviewing and updating the NERC Planning Principles and Guides based on the lessons learned from the Regional conformance -6-

7 Engineering Committee Meeting Minutes July 16 17, 1996 reviews. These proposed revisions will be brought to the Committee for review and approval at its December 1996 meeting. RCS will also bring to the Committee in December a schedule for the necessary re-reviews or follow-ups to the initial Regional reviews. Chairman Maliszewski also asked the Subcommittee to review its scope and submit a revised scope, as appropriate, in December based on consideration of the industry restructuring currently under way and how RCS should deal with regional transmission groups and other entities in carrying out its scope of activities. System Dynamics Database Working Group Kirit S. Shah, Chairman of the System Dynamics Database Working Group (SDDWG), presented an overview of SDDWG s activities to date. The contract between NERC and Ontario Hydro is near completion and the database and model development activities are progressing well. Dynamics data for four Regions has been successfully incorporated into the 1998 simulation database and model. Ontario Hydro expects to have a first version of the database ready for review at the Working Group s meeting later in July. A first version of a procedural manual for the system dynamics database was developed in March 1996 and is being used by data providers in developing and submitting their inputs. During 1996, the Working Group expects to complete a database for 1998 conditions and an initialized dynamics simulation model also for Mr. Shah s presentation overheads are included as Exhibit I. The EC approved a 1997 budget of $52,500 for the Working Group s activities. In 1997, the 1998 system dynamics database will be updated and two initialized dynamics simulation models will be developed for two periods yet to be specified. The selection of the time periods for the dynamics simulation models are being coordinated with the power flow base cases selected by the Multiregional Modeling Working Group and will be presented to the Committee for review and approval at a future meeting. Multiregional Modeling Working Group Bruce A. Rew, Chairman of the Multiregional Modeling Working Group (MMWG), proposed nine base power flow cases for development by the Working Group, and described MMWG s activities related to future and improved modeling systems and data handling techniques. His presentation overheads are included as Exhibit J. The Committee unanimously approved MMWG s recommended nine power flow base cases as shown in Exhibit J to be developed as the Working Group s 1997 effort. Committee members then discussed MMWG s efforts and feasibility report pertaining to the development of a chronological database for power flow base case development. A preliminary investigation by a task force of MMWG recommended further investigation of a chronological database for base case development as opposed to MMWG s current method of developing nine discrete base cases each year. Committee members who had experience with chronological databases cautioned MMWG as to some of the problems that may arise. They include: difficulty in maintaining accurate data ten years into the future, the solvability of cases from the reactive and voltage perspectives in light of the need to maintain readily available and solved power flow base cases, the need for constant Regional input and interaction, the need for generation schedules over a long period, and applicability to near-term versus longer-range cases. However, all Committee members were supportive of MMWG continuing with its investigation. To address future modeling issues, MMWG will host a Power Flow Modeling Symposium workshop August 22 23, 1996 in Dallas, Texas. Mr. Rew further indicated that any recommendations pertaining to a new database methodology will be brought to the Committee for review and approval at its March 1997 meeting. -7-

8 Engineering Committee Meeting Minutes July 16 17, 1996 Load Forecasting Working Group Thomas Moore, Chairman of the Load Forecasting Working Group (LFWG), reviewed the accuracy of the Working Group s projected bandwidths over recent years for short-term, mid-term, and longer-term periods. He also presented an overview of the 80% confidence bandwidths for NERC s aggregated projections of peak demand and annual net energy for load for the United States and Canada for the period, and a proposal to expand the scope of activities of LFWG. His presentation overheads are included as Exhibit K. The Committee unanimously approved for publication the Working Group s report on Peak Demand and Energy Projection Bandwidths: Projections for the United States and Canada. It also requested that the LFWG s accuracy analysis about the bandwidths be included in this report or as an appendix to the report. After a brief discussion, the Committee members agreed that an investigation of the impact of electric industry restructuring on NERC s aggregated projections of peak demand and net energy for load was worth pursuing. All levels of the electric utility industry, not only the Regions, but individual systems, power pools, and subregions need to investigate customer demand from the reliability of supply perspective. Customer demand is a critical driver in the commercial electricity market and will be important not only to electric utilities but to power marketers and independent power producers (IPP). Therefore, the Committee also agreed that the membership of the LFWG should be expanded to include both a power marketer representative and an IPP representative. Candidates for those respective positions are to be suggested by the EC s power marketer and IPP representatives. With minor modifications, the Committee approved the revised scope for LFWG as shown in Exhibit L. As a first step, the Committee agreed that the LFWG members should review their respective Regional procedures for reporting peak demand and annual net energy for load and how these procedures are being changed or updated in light of the competitive wholesale electricity market and industry restructuring. The Committee asked LFWG to report at the December 1996 Committee meeting or as soon thereafter as possible on this survey of Regional activities. It also asked LFWG to present an overall plan of how LFWG will evaluate or investigate the effects of industry restructuring on data collection procedures for customer demands so that the continued accuracy of NERC s projections are ensured. Engineering Committee Review of Activities for 1995 Report Committee Secretary Virginia C. Sulzberger led a discussion on the draft of the Committee s Review of Activities for 1995 report. This report is in keeping with the EC s objective of maintaining annual documentation of the activities of the Committee and its subgroups. It includes: an overview of the Committee s 1995 activities, similar to the Committee s writeup that appears in NERC s 1995 Annual Report; a summary of each subgroup s activities prepared by the respective subgroup chairmen; and an update on the Committee s activities relative to key reliability issues. Subject to the approval by the subgroup chairmen of their respective writeups, the Committee approved the publication of the EC s Review of Activities for 1995 report. This report will be distributed for inclusion in the Engineering Committee Manual along with other Manual updates prior to the December 1996 Committee meeting. Engineering Committee Program Review Regional Studies In keeping with one of the objectives in the Engineering Committee Program Review document to promote the communication of study results and new and innovative concepts among Committee members and -8-

9 Engineering Committee Meeting Minutes July 16 17, 1996 thereby enhance the reliability of the bulk electric systems, the Committee heard two presentations on Regional restructuring. Darrel R. Gunst, Manager, Transmission Services, MidAmerican Energy Company, and a MAPP representative to the Committee, presented an overview of MAPP s restructuring plan and its current status. MAPP management approved a restated MAPP agreement, which was filed with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). FERC found a deficiency with market-based rates for which MAPP supplied additional data and was awaiting the final FERC ruling. Mr. Gunst highlighted the fluidity of the MAPP boundaries in connection with the new agreement, how it will address reliability, and its use of the megawatt-mile methodology. He also pointed out that the new MAPP organization can accommodate an independent system operator (ISO) under the current organization umbrella or the organization itself can be converted to an ISO. F. John Meyer, General Manager, Engineering at Houston Lighting & Power Company, described ERCOT s reorganization in connection with a Texas Public Utility Commission (PUC) ruling (Rule 23.37). That rule indicates that within a 120 days of February 9, 1996, the utilities in ERCOT, in collaboration with other wholesale market participants, are to make a joint filing with the Commission to establish an ERCOT ISO and an integrated ERCOT electronic transmission information network (ETIN). Mr. Meyer highlighted the functions of the ERCOT ISO and the contents of the ISO and ETIN filing package. He provided a list of the participants to the ISO filing as well as an overview of the ERCOT organization, including its governance and funding. He also provided an implementation timeline covering the June 1996 to January 1998 period. ERCOT filed its ISO and ETIN package with the Texas PUC on June 10, It also asked the PUC to make a ruling on the ISO filing by September 1, Mr. Meyer s presentation overheads are included as Exhibit M. Interconnection Dynamics Working Group Chairman Maliszewski explained that the Interconnection Dynamics Working Group (IDWG) is a joint activity of the EC and OC. While IDWG was instrumental in the formation of the System Dynamics Database Working Group in late 1994 and was continuing in early 1995 with its investigative activities on the concept of a distribution system voltage reduction possibly being reclassified from an emergency procedure to one of a useful operating tool, the IDWG has been relatively inactive since mid-1995 due to the priority of activities related to open access to the transmission systems. The Committee was asked, therefore, to review the scope of IDWG and determine the continuing need for this activity from the EC s perspective. WSCC representative Richard S. Bayless asked that the discussion on this Working Group be postponed at least until the next Committee meeting. He indicated that the WSCC July 2 3, 1996 disturbances appeared to be classic voltage collapse issues and that WSCC may look for guidance to IDWG on these disturbances and related issues. Yakout Mansour from Canada also indicated that while technology on interconnection dynamics has improved, the application of such technology is still somewhat deficient. The Committee agreed to postponed the discussion on the need for this Working Group until the next meeting. However, Chairman Maliszewski asked Mr. Bayless to comment on IDWG s areas of investigation or to define investigative areas related to the WSCC incidents that might be appropriate for IDWG to pursue. Engineering Committee Program Review Reliability Issues Committee Vice Chairman Rozier indicated that the development of a list of reliability issues for action by the Committee at mid-year may not be an appropriate activity at this time. Rather, he proposed that a task force of Committee members be formed to review the reliability issues included in the EC s 1995 list of issues, the Reliability Assessment report, as well as any other Regional inputs, and develop a proposed list of select issues that -9-

10 Engineering Committee Meeting Minutes July 16 17, 1996 the Committee might address during This task force would also develop a work plan or list of activities to address the issues and present this proposal for review and approval at the December 1996 Committee meeting. Vice Chairman Rozier agreed to chair the EC s Reliability Issues Task Force. He also said he would call primarily on those Committee members to serve on the Task Force who were not currently and directly involved with other Committee or subgroup activities. The Task Force is expected to be staffed in the next few weeks so that its objective can be accomplished by the December Committee meeting. Comments by New Committee Members A brief survey of the new Committee members who were attending their first meeting indicated that they were appreciative of the opportunity to participate in the Committee s activities. Donna A. Newman, power marketer representative, suggested that questions concerning agenda items should be sent to the presenters or sponsors of the agenda item prior to the meeting so that the presenters have the benefit of the questions before the meeting to keep the meeting from getting bogged down in details. Carol Cunningham, IPP representative, indicated that it was important that the new industry segment members ensure that representatives from their respective industry segments are included on key Committee subgroups. Yakout Mansour, Canada representative, commented that NERC will have to be stronger than in the past to maintain reliability in the future, and that it was becoming more difficult to separate EC and OC activities. Ken Kuyper, cooperative representative, said it was important that the reliability assessments continue and that issues are brought forward and addressed by appropriate groups. In closing, Chairman Maliszewski indicated that he would be looking to the other industry segment representatives for presentations to share some of the ongoing processes and activities under way in their respective areas, particularly the power marketers and IPPs. Perhaps, ten to 15 minute overview presentations at the next meeting would be appropriate. Observer Comments The Observers from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) provided brief comments. Glenn H. Coplon (DOE) commented it is important that the reliability issues, which may be proposed for action in 1997 by the Committee, be included in the industry response to President Clinton s memorandum on the WSCC July 2, 1996 disturbance. Robert H. Iveson (EPRI) indicated that EPRI was in its annual solicitation phase and it was important for member electric utilities to get their particular R&D inputs back to EPRI. James K. Newton (FERC) reported that a Notice of Technical Conference scheduled for August 1 was released on July 15 and that additional information is probably available on the FERC Home Page of the World Wide Web. Mr. Newton also indicated that he was attending his last meeting as a FERC representative as he intended to retire from FERC in about two weeks. In response, the Committee members thanked Jim for his contributions to the Committee and showed their appreciation with a round of applause. -10-

11 Engineering Committee Meeting Minutes July 16 17, 1996 Future Meetings Subsequent to the July meeting, the Technical Steering Committee scheduled the next meeting of the EC from 10:15 a.m. to 5 p.m. on Tuesday, December 3 and from 8 a.m. to noon on Wednesday, December 4 in Orlando, Florida. The Joint EC/OC meeting is scheduled for 8 to 10 a.m. to on Tuesday, December 3. Please note that materials for the agenda for the December 1996 Committee meeting are due Friday, November 8 at the NERC office. Adjournment The schedule of future EC, OC, and Board of Trustees meetings is attached as Exhibit N. The EC meeting was adjourned at 11:40 a.m. on Wednesday, July 17, Respectfully submitted, Virginia C. Sulzberger Secretary and Staff Coordinator -11-

12 Exhibit A North American Electric Reliability Council Princeton Forrestal Village, Village Boulevard, Princeton, New Jersey June 28, 1996 TO: ENGINEERING COMMITTEE OPERATING COMMITTEE Dear Members: The agendas for the July 16 17, 1996 Engineering Committee (EC) and Operating Committee (OC) meetings, and the July 16, 1996 Joint EC/OC meeting at Harrah s Hotel, Lake Tahoe, Nevada are enclosed. The schedule for Committee and Committee-related meetings follows. Dress at all meetings is casual. Tuesday, July 16 Wednesday, July a.m. OC Steering Committee 7 a.m. Coffee and tea 8 10 a.m. EC Officers meeting 8 a.m. noon EC meeting 9:30 a.m. Coffee and tea (Joint EC/OC meeting) 8 a.m. noon OC meeting 10 a.m. noon Joint EC/OC meeting Noon 2:30 pm. OC Steering Committee lunch Noon 1 p.m. Joint EC/OC luncheon and meeting 1 5 p.m. EC meeting 1 5 p.m. OC meeting In reviewing the agendas, please note several items will have additional background materials that will be provided under separate cover. In addition, EC and OC members and others who will attend the Joint EC/OC meeting are invited to provide written comments on Agenda Item 3, NERC Comments on FERC CRT NOPR, by close of business July 11, Sincerely, VCS:an Enclosures Virginia C. Sulzberger Director-Engineering cc: Regional Managers Larry R. Krumland Bryan Bertacchi Penny L. Haldane L. Samuel Lindley Youssef N. Zakharia J. Ken Wiley Randy Erickson Donald E. Badley I. Paul McCurley W. Kent Palmerton Randy Harris Michael A. Trykoski Michael W. McKnight William J. Balet William J. Head Vincent J. Zodiaco Howard Illian Robert W. Cummings Larry Gilbertson James E. Evans

13 Exhibit B North American Electric Reliability Council Princeton Forrestal Village, Village Boulevard, Princeton, New Jersey ENGINEERING COMMITTEE MEETING Harrah s Hotel Lake Tahoe, Nevada July 16, p.m. July 17, a.m. noon (PLEASE BE PREPARED TO STAY FOR THE ENTIRE MEETING.) AGENDA 1. Administrative Matters a. Introduction and Chairman s remarks *b. New members and appointments c. Arrangements Virginia C. Sulzberger d. Approval of minutes of February 27 28, 1996 meeting e. Review of agenda 2. NERC Board of Trustees and Technical Steering Committee Informational Highlights of the May 1996 NERC Board of Trustees and Technical Steering Committee meetings Garey C. Rozier and Raymond M. Maliszewski *3. Organizational Structure Task Force Garey C. Rozier will lead the discussion on the following: Actions Required a. Review and approve the revisions to that portion of NERC s January 1984 Organizational Structure of Technical Committees document pertaining to the Engineering Committee. b. Review and discuss the Committee s Regional representation. c. Review and discuss the role of the Technical Steering Committee.

14 Engineering Committee Meeting Agenda July 16 17, 1996 *4. Reliability Assessment Subcommittee Geoffrey P. Gaebe, Sr. will lead the discussion on the following: Actions Required a. Discuss and approve the draft of the Reliability Assessment report. b. Review and approve the revised report review schedule for future reports. *5. ATC Implementation Working Group Action Required Review and approve the proposed scope for the ATC Implementation Working Group Raymond M. Maliszewski *6. Reliability Criteria Subcommittee Action Required Review and accept the Subcommittee s review report of SERC s Principles and Guides for Reliability in System Planning for conformance to the NERC Planning Principles and Guides Sam L. Daniel *7. System Dynamics Database Working Group Kirit S. Shah will lead the discussion on the following: Informational Status of the Working Group s activities. Action Required Review and approve the Working Group s recommended 1997 budget. *8. Multiregional Modeling Working Group Bruce A. Rew will lead the discussion on the following: Actions Required a. Discuss and comment on the Working Group s investigation of a chronological database for power flow modeling of the Eastern Interconnection in connection with the new open access transmission environment. b. Review and approve the recommended nine power flow base cases to be developed by the Working Group as its 1997 effort.

15 Engineering Committee Meeting Agenda July 16 17, 1996 *9. Load Forecasting Working Group Thomas Moore will lead the discussion on the following: Actions Required a. Review and approve for publication the Working Group s draft report on load forecast bandwidths for the projections for the United States and Canada. b. Review and approve the proposed revisions to the Working Group s scope. *10. Engineering Committee Review of Activities for 1995 Report Informational Review and approve the Committee s Review of Activities for 1995 draft report for publication as an internal NERC document Virginia C. Sulzberger *11. Engineering Committee Program Review Regional Studies Raymond M. Maliszewski will introduce the following items: Action Required Discuss and comment on the presentation results of the following activities: MAPP Restructuring Darrel R. Gunst ERCOT Restructuring F. John Meyer *12. Interconnection Dynamics Working Group Raymond M. Maliszewski will lead the discussion on the following: Action Required Discuss and determine the continuing need for the Interconnection Dynamics Working Group from the Engineering Committee s perspective Committee members *13. Engineering Committee Program Review Reliability Issues Garey C. Rozier will lead the discussion on the following: Action Required Discuss and agree on the key reliability issues to be addressed by the Engineering Committee during the remainder of 1996 Committee members 14. Comments by Regional and Other Committee Members 15. Comments by Observers *16. Future Meetings Informational Schedule of the Board of Trustees, Engineering Committee, and Operating Committee meetings is attached. The deadline for submittal of agenda material for the December 3 4, 1996 Engineering Com-

16 mittee meeting in Orlando (Buena Vista), Florida is November 8, No Reports at This Meeting NERC-EIA Data Coordination Task Force Capacity and Demand Task Force Transmission Transfer Capability Task Force *Background material included.

17 Chairman Vice Chairman Secretary and Staff Coordinator List of Attendees Engineering Committee Meeting July 16 17, 1996 Officers Raymond M. Maliszewski Garey C. Rozier Virginia C. Sulzberger Exhibit C Members ECAR Stanley F. Szwed SPP David J. Christiano John C. Procario ERCOT F. John Meyer WSCC Harlow R. Peterson* Tom Sweatman Richard S. Bayless (for Richard P. Verret) Michael McKnight (for Harlow R. Peterson) MAAC Frank J. Koza, Jr. Richard A. Wodyka Cooperative Ricky Bittle Ken Kuyper MAIN Donald R. Carlson David A. Whiteley Federal W.T. (Terry) Boston Robert K. Johnson MAPP Terry L. Bundy Darrel R. Gunst IPP Carol Cunningham NPCC David Goulding Power Stephen J. Beuning George C. Loehr Marketer Donna A. Newman (for P. Donald Raymond, Jr.) SERC Roberto Denis Verne B. Ingersoll, II Canada Regional Managers Yakout Mansour ECAR Brantley H. Eldridge NPCC See above ERCOT See above SERC James N. Maughn MAPP James W. Van Epps SPP John J. Marschewski, Jr.* WSCC Dennis E. Eyre* NERC Staff Michael R. Gent* David R. Nevius* Eugene F. Gorzelnik* *In attendance part-time.

18 List of Attendees (cont.) Engineering Committee Meeting July 16 17, 1996 Ex-Officio Members Geoffrey P. Gaebe, Sr. Sam L. Daniel Stanley E. Kopman Kirit S. Shah Bruce A. Rew Thomas Moore Chairman, Reliability Assessment Subcommittee Chairman, Reliability Criteria Subcommmittee and Chairman, Glossary of Terms Task Force Chairman, GADS Regional Advisory Working Group Chairman, System Dynamics Database Working Group Chairman, Multiregional Modeling Working Group Chairman, Load Forecasting Working Group Observers Robert H. Iveson Glenn H. Coplon James K. Newton Kurt J. Conger* Electric Power Research Institute U.S. Deparment of Energy Federal Energy Regulatory Commission American Public Power Association Guests Robert W. Cummings Chairman, NERC-EIA Data Coordination Task Force Larry Gilbertston Turlock Irrigation District (California) David H. Meyer* U.S. Department of Energy I. Paul McCurley Edison Electric Institute William Head Mid-Continent Area Power Pool Edward A. Schwerdt Northeast Power Coordinating Council J. Ken Wiley Florida Electric Power Coordinating Group Donnie R. Miller* Florida Power Corporation *In attendance part-time.

19 Exhibit D RAS Report to EC/OC Progress Report on Assessment Lake Tahoe, Nevada July 16-17, 1996 RAS Report RAS Report Chapters Reliability Assessment Global Issues Resources Transmission Operations Regional Assessments RAS Report Theme MW Demand $/MWh Supply Market Clearing Price Reliability Assessment in a Changing Industry RAS Report Assessing Reliability in a Changing Industry Challenges/Obstacles/Policies Who will be accountable for reliability? Monitoring and enforcing compliance. Quick NERC response to meet changes in the industry. Assessments of future supply reliability. Developing/Implementing rules for open access that assures reliability (FERC Rule 888/889, CRT). Ensuring that control areas can fulfill their responsibilities for the reliability of the Bulk Electric System RAS Report Assessing Reliability in a Changing Industry RAS Report Assessment It is not yet clear how generation and transmission adequacy will be assessed in a competitive marketplace. Regardless of the restructuring that takes place, NERC will need to define and enforce reliability standards to ensure that a continuous supply/demand balance is maintained and that transmission systems are operated within security limits. Bulk Electric System (as planned) will be able to meet projected demands... Peak load growth - 1.7% / yr (US), 1.6% (Can) Energy growth - 1.8% / yr (US), 1.7% (Can) Generation additions - 72,000 MW Transmission additions - 8,200 miles

20 RAS Report Resource Issues Changing role/responsibility for resource planning Ability of the Market to provide an adequate electricity supply Measurement of adequacy in the competitive environment Challenges: Demand/resource forecasting and reporting Reduced margins Deliverability of purchased resources Capacity benefit margin Fuel supply flexibility RAS Report Capacity Margins Planned margins declining, reliability indices not! higher availability of existing units, smaller size of planned units, better coordination of mtce. schedules Commitments to new resources delayed shorter lead times, uncertainties of new utility competitive market RAS Report United States Capacity Margins RAS Report Resources 25 Percent NERC and the Regions should continue their role in assessing resource adequacy and develop new approaches to assessing the overall adequacy of electricity supply RAS Report Transmission Issues RAS Report Transmission Organizational restructuring impacts on transmission planning and use of the network. Action plans resulting from FERC s open access rulings (888/889). Parallel flows and ATC Determining the amount of transmission transfer capability available for firm and non-firm use. FERC CRT NOPR The traditional transmission system planning process will need to evolve into a more comprehensive planning process that includes the needs and interests of all stakeholders...

21 RAS Report Operations Issues RAS Report Operations Increased competition and open access to the transmission system will present new challenges Increasing number and complexity of schedules Coordination and administration of unbundled services, and utilization of ATC Better security processes with appropriate information sharing and continued coordination of generation and transmission maintenance needed More standardized operating policies and definitions are essential As the electricity market develops, security coordinators and control area operators who are charged with the responsibility for security, must exercise their authority and enforce the Operating Policies. RAS Report Operations Issues May 20 Jun 14 Jun 28 Jul 17 Aug 2 Aug 16 Aug 30 Sep 16 Oct 15 -First Draft to EO/OC -EC/OC comments due -Second draft to EC/OC -EC/OC approval (Lake Tahoe) -Mail third draft to EC/OC/RAS -EC/OC/RAS comments due -Final report mailed to BOT -BOT approval (St. Louis) -Final publication

22 Exhibit E RAS Report Approval Process May BOT OPTIONAL RAS Chairman presents updated version of reliability issues to the Board of Trustees if necessary May/June EC/OC RAS Chairman presents preliminary draft report Discuss preliminary draft report and approve with consensus comments August EC/OC RAS Chairman presents first complete draft report (incorporating EC/OC May comments) Discuss first complete draft report and approve with consensus comments Before September BOT RAS distributes final draft report to BOT, EC, OC, RMs, RAS EC and OC members from each Region, in conjunction with their RAS rep and Regional Manager, consolidate their Region s comments on final draft and communicate these comments to their BOT reps and the EC/OC Chairmen September BOT RAS Chairman presents report to BOT BOT discusses report, provides comments, gives conditional approval with consensus comments, and delegates final approval authority to the BOT Executive Committee September/October RAS Incorporate all BOT consensus comments Final report to the BOT Executive Committee, with copies to TSC September/October BOT Executive Committee gives final approval Approved by the Engineering Committee: December 1, 1993 and August 21, 1995