Agenda
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7, 2010 | 1–5 p.m. (EST)
December 8, 2010 | 8 a.m.–noon (EST)
Tampa Marriott Westshore
1001 N. Westshore Blvd.
Tampa, FL 33607
(813) 287-2555
1.
Administrative Matters
*a. Welcome and introductions - Tom Burgess
*b. Arrangements – John Seelke
*c. Parliamentary procedures – John Seelke
d. Announcement of quorum – John Seelke
*e. NERC Antitrust Compliance Guidelines – John Seelke
f. Approve agenda – Tom Burgess
*g. Future meetings – John Seelke
*2. Consent Agenda
*a. Approve September 14–15, 2010 draft PC meeting minutes as final minutes
*b. Approve the November 8, 2010 draft joint OC and PC Web meeting minutes as final minutes
*c. Approve changes to the PC three-year work plan
3. Chairman’s Remarks
4.
a. Report on the November 3–4, 2010 Member Representative Committee and Board of Trustees
meetings
Information Only
*a. Generator Model Validation for Dynamics Simulation – Dmitry Kosterev, Bonneville Power
Administration, on behalf of the North American SynchroPhasor Initiative
*b. Upcoming Planning Committee Special Election – John Seelke
*Background material included
116-390 Village Blvd.
Princeton, NJ 08540
609.452.8060 | www.nerc.com
5.
Committee Matters
*a. Provide feedback on the scopes of the Severe Impact Resilience Task Force (SIRTF) and the
Cyber Attack Task Force (CATF); status report of the Critical Infrastructure Strategic Initiatives
Action Plan – Mark Lauby, Director, Reliability Assessment and Performance Analysis, NERC
*b. Status report on Frequency Response Initiative – Bob Cummings, Director, System Analysis and
Reliability Initiatives, NERC
*c. Status report on System Modeling Initiative – Bob Cummings, Director, System Analysis and
Reliability Initiatives, NERC
*d. Provide feedback by January 14, 2011 on a draft report review and approval process– John
Seelke on behalf of the Planning Committee’s Executive Committee
*e. Discuss NERC strategic issues from the Planning Committee’s perspective – Tom Burgess
*f. Discuss how the technical committees, in advance of NERC alerts, can contribute to review/advise
on the content of such alerts in the future – Tom Burgess
*g. Provide feedback by December 31, 2010 on a concept document addressing technical
considerations for a common NERC-wide definition of the Bulk Electric System – Peter Heidrich,
Manager of Reliability Standards, FRCC, on behalf of an ad hoc SAR team
6. Subgroup Reports
PC Action
*a. Reliability Assessment
Subcommittee
*1. Load Forecasting Working
Group
*b. Reliability Metrics Working
Group
*c. G&T Reliability Planning
Models Task Force
*d. Integration of Variable
Generation Task Force
Provide feedback on 2011 scenario assessment proposals by
January 14, 2011.
Approve the RAS proposal for reporting market areas for
reliability assessments.
Provide feedback on proposed changes to the post-seasonal
assessments by January 8, 2011.
None – status report.
Approve RMWG scope change.
Provide feedback by January 8, 2011on refinement to the
Severity Risk Index
Approve Metric ALR6-16 – Transmission System
Unavailability.
Approve:
1. The revised the Metrics and Methodology document. The
previous version was approved at the September 2010
meeting.
2. Disbanding the G&T Reliability Models Task Force.
Approve the report Potential Reliability Impacts of Emerging
Flexible Resources by IVGTF Team 1-5.
Provide feedback by January 30, 2010 on the report Methods
to Model and Calculate Capacity Contributions of Variable
Generation for Resource Adequacy Planning by IVGTF Team
1-2.
*Background material included
Planning Committee Meeting Agenda
December 7-8, 2010
2
6.
Subgroup Reports
*e. Geomagnetic Disturbance Task
Force
*f. Resource Issues Subcommittee
*1. Loss-of-Load Expectation
Working Group
*2. Generating Availability
Data System Task Force
*g. Transmission Issues
Subcommittee
*1. Model Validation Task
Force
*h. System Protection and Control
Subcommittee
*i. Data Coordination
Subcommittee
*1. Transmission Availability
Data Systems Working
Group
*2. Demand Response Data
Task Force
*3. Data Coordination
Working Group
*4. Spare Equipment
Database Task Force
j. Reliability Fundamentals
Working Group
*k. Smart Grid Task Force
*l. Events Analysis Working Group
PC Action
None – status report.
None – status report.
None – status report.
None – status report.
None – status report.
Approve the Power System Model Validation White Paper,
including its associated work plan (Appendix C in the white
paper).
Approve:
1. Posting a reliability guideline, Transmission System Phase
Backup Protection, for industry comment.
2. A report to the Planning Committee, NERC SPCS
Technical Review of UVLS-Related Standards: PRC-010-0,
PRC-020-1, PRC-021-1, and PRC-022-1.
3. A report to the Planning Committee, Reliability
Fundamentals of System Protection
None – status report.
Approve the TADSWG recommendation to change the TADS
Event Type Number data collection beginning with calendar
year 2012 data, as detailed in the TADSWG letter to the PC
dated November 12, 2010.
None – status report.
None – status report.
Approve revised SEDTF scope.
None – the RFWG is suspended until the March 2011 meeting
when its status will be re-evaluated.
Approve revised SGTF scope.
None – status report.
*Background material included
Planning Committee Meeting Agenda
December 7-8, 2010
3
Agenda Item 1.a
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Welcome and Introductions
Action Required
None – information only
Background
Please see the following:
1. Attachment 1 – the Planning Committee’s summary roster.
2. Attachment 2 – the Planning Committee’s full roster with contact information.
3. Attachment 3 – the Planning Committee’s organizational chart showing all PC subgroups.
Agenda Item 1.g
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Future Meetings
Action Required
None – information only
Background
The future joint meetings of the Operating Committee, Planning Committee, and Critical
Infrastructure Protection Committee and the Planning Committee’s future meetings are
scheduled as follows:
Date
March1, 2011
March 8–9, 2011
Location
Joint OC/PC/CIPC Web meeting
Phoenix, AZ (confirmed)
Agenda Item 2
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Consent Agenda
Action Required
Approve each of the items on the Consent Agenda.
Background
The following items are for Planning Committee approval without discussion. However, if a
member requests discussion on any item, the chair will defer discussion on the item until later in
the meeting.
Each item has an attachment or a link to the referenced documents.
Agenda Item 2.a – Approve September 14–15, 2010 draft PC meeting minutes as final minutes
(attached as Agenda Item 2.a)
Agenda Item 2.b – Approve the November 8, 2010 draft joint OC and PC Web meeting
minutes as final minutes (attached as Agenda Item 2.b).
Agenda Item 2.c – Approve proposed PC three-year work plan changes:
1. The Resource Issues Subcommittee proposes new activity # 89 related to the coordination
of the probabilistic metric reports by MRAs and deferring activity #82 (developing a
method for defining "zones" (within an RTO or a region) and associated zonal data that will
be used for more granular analysis of reliability (such as load pockets) for NERC's various
reliability assessments) until 2012 or later when probabilistic reports are due per activity
#89.
2. The 2010 activity status of three Integration of Variable Generation Task Force activities
was changed to “completed”:
a. #141 – “Team 1.1: Make recommendations and identify changes needed to NERC’s
MOD Standards.”
b. #142.2 – “Team 1.4: Resource planning processes should be adjusted to ensure that the
designed system includes resources that provide the desired flexibility”; and “Produce a
set of metrics based on the functions of the tasks on resource adequacy and
transmission planning approach.”
c. #147.11 – “Team 2.1: Study variable resource-forecast tool requirements suitable for
large amounts of variable generation and identify any gaps”; and “Report outlining the
requirements of variable fuel (wind, solar, etc.) forecasting needed to maintain bulk
power system reliability. In addition, the report will investigate current state-of-the-art
forecasting tools and, thereby, identify gaps between the requirements and the current
available technology.”
3. The recently-formed Spare Equipment Database Task Force proposes to add its first activity
(#151).
4. The Generating Availability Data Systems Task Force proposes to extend the schedule on
activity #201 – “Review and recommend whether Generation Owners on the NERC
Compliance Registry should report GADS data on a mandatory basis” – to allow for further
refinement of its draft report, with PC approval aimed for the March 2011 meeting.
These were the only changes. The proposed work plan (with the proposed changes in red
font) is posted at http://www.nerc.com/filez/pcmin.html along with the December 7–8, 2010
PC meeting material.
Agenda Item 4.a
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7-8, 2010
Generator Model Validation for Dynamic Simulations
Action Required
None – information only
Background
A presentation for this item will be posted in a .zip file with other presentations on November 30
at http://www.nerc.com/filez/pcmin.html along with the December 7–8, 2010 PC meeting
material.
Agenda Item 4.b
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Upcoming Planning Committee Special Election
Action Required
None – information only
Background
PC member Dick Kafka will be retiring at the end of this year, vacating his position in the
investor-owned utility sector. A special election will be announced in late December 2010 for
the remaining term on that position, which runs through the June 2012 meeting, as well as other
committee vacancies in two sectors: electricity marketer sector (two vacancies) and large enduse customer sector (two vacancies).
Agenda Item 5.a
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Critical Infrastructure Strategic Initiatives Coordinated Action Plan Report
Action Required
Provide feedback on:
1. Severe Impact Resilience Task Force scope (Attachment 1)
2. Cyber Attack Task Force (Attachment 2)
Background
1. The purpose of the Severe Impact Resilience Task Force (SIRTF) is to contribute to efforts to
enhance the ability of the bulk power system to withstand and recover from three severeimpact events as described in the Coordinated Action Plan. The SIRTF will report to the
Operating Committee, who will approve its scope.
2. The purpose of the Cyber Attack Task Force (CATF) is to consider the impact of a
coordinated cyber attack on the reliable operation of the bulk power system, and identify
opportunities to enhance existing protection, resilience, and recovery capabilities. The
CATF will report to the Critical Infrastructure Protection Committee, who will approve its
scope.
Status Report
1. The Joint Steering Group, comprised of NERC staff and the chairs and vice chairs of the
Planning, Operating, and Critical Infrastructure Protection Committees, held three conference
calls to finalize the Coordinated Action Plan for Board of Trustees approval and provide
guidance on the work plan activities and how they should be organized.
2. On November 4, 2010, NERC’s Board of Trustees approved the Critical Infrastructure
Strategic Roadmap and the Critical Infrastructure Strategic Initiatives Coordinated Action
Plan.1
3. The Joint Steering Group is coordinating efforts to establish the required task forces to meet
the objectives of the Coordinated Action Plan, consistent with direction from the NERC
Board of Trustees. The Joint Steering Group will engage with and monitor the progress of
each task force, report progress to the Electricity Sub-Sector Coordinating Council (ESCC),
and provide further guidance as necessary.
4. The Smart Grid Task Force efforts include the development of cyber security and risk
metrics. This activity also supports the Coordinated Action Plan.
5. In the future, once these task forces are established, the Joint Steering Group will provide a
consolidated status report for all task force efforts under the Coordinated Action Plan to help
ensure that the NERC technical committees are well coordinated.
1
http://www.nerc.com/docs/ciscap/Critical_Infrastructure_Strategic_Initiatives_Coordinated_Action_Plan_BOT_Apprd_112010.pdf
6. Individual status reports for other task forces under this initiative (the Spare Equipment
Database Task Force (SEDTF), portions of the Smart Grid Task Force (SGTF), and the
Geomagnetic Disturbance Task Force (GMDTF)) are provided separately.
a. Separate work plans for the SEDTF and the SGTF are in the PC three-year work plan.
Agenda Item 5.b
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Frequency Response Initiative Status Report
Action Required
None – information only
Background
The Frequency Response Initiative has multiple objectives:








Coordinate all NERC standards development and performance analysis activities related
to frequency response and control
Identify specific frequency-related reliability factors
Identify root causes of changes in frequency response
Identify practices and methods to address root causes
Consider impacts of integration of new generation technologies (such as wind, solar, and
significant nuclear expansion)
Develop metrics and benchmarks to improve frequency response performance tracking
Share lessons learned with the industry via outreach, alerts, and Webinars
Determine if performance-based frequency response standards are warranted
Attachment 1 provides an update of activities under this initiative.
Agenda Item 5.c
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
System Modeling Initiative Status Report
Action Required
None – information only
Background
Attachment 1 contains the background material.
Agenda Item 5.d
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Planning Committee Report Review and Approval Process
Action Required
Provide feedback by January 14, 2011 on a draft report review and approval process.
Background
At the September 2010 meeting, the System Protection and Control Subcommittee (SPCS)
categorized reports into separate categories for Planning Committee approval. The discussion
widened into a discussion of PC-approved reports in general. Chair Burgess asked that the SPCS
provide any additional recommendations on this topic to Secretary John Seelke, and tasked the
PC Executive Committee to consider the SPCS’s comments as well as those of the Executive
Committee to recommend a PC process for approving and updating reports.
The Executive Committee convened a conference call on October 27 to discuss the issue. It
received no additional recommendations from the SPCS, but considered their categorization as a
starting point. Several Executive Committee members noted that the PC is asked to approve
reports that are first made available to PC members two weeks prior to the meeting. Some of
these reports are quite lengthy and technical and may require a PC member to obtain input from
subject matter experts within his/her company. Therefore, a report approval process should
provide members with adequate time to review reports prior to approval. Review time may be
shortened if the need to approve a report is dictated by a deadline set by others outside of the PC,
such as need to respond to a regulatory agency or the NERC Board of Trustee request or to assist
another NERC committee or NERC staff.
The Executive Committee developed the draft process shown on the next page for report review
and approval, and seeks comments on that draft process be provided to John Seelke
(john.seelke@nerc.net) by January 14, 2011. The Executive Committee will review those
comments and propose a final report review and approval process for approval by the PC at its
March 2011 meeting. To facilitate comments, a Word version of the draft process may be
downloaded at is posted at http://www.nerc.com/filez/pcmin.html along with the December 7–8,
2010 PC meeting material.
Draft Process for Planning Committee Approval of Reports
Report Category
1. Reliability guidelines
2.
3.
4.
5.
Review and Approval process
The review and approval process found in Appendix 4 of
the Planning Committee Charter will be followed.
Long-term and seasonal reliability
The PC will continue to separately approve the schedule
assessments
for receiving and approving these documents.
Seasonal assessments, which require approval between
committee meetings, are being handled by Web
meetings, with documents made available for review and
comment about 10 days prior to the meeting.
Reports with deadlines set outside on The PC will approve a schedule for report review and
the Planning Committee
approval that is consistent with the required deadline.
A report that accompanies a Section Section 1600 of NERC’s Rules of Procedure defines a
1600 request for data or information process for requesting data or information from
registered entities. The process requires a description of
the data to be requested and why the data is needed,
which is often documented in an initial supporting report
prepared by a subgroup. An initial supporting report
requires posting for public comment per Section 1600. A
final supporting report contains the subgroup’s response
to comments received and any modifications to the data
request. The PC must approve both reports.
All other reports developed by a PC A draft report will be submitted at one meeting, with the
subgroup which will be posted on
opportunity to provide comments both during and after
NERC’s Website when completed.
the meeting. Unless directed by the PC in its review of
This includes technical documents,
the draft report, there is no specific requirement for
white papers, special assessments,
public posting and comment since the PC agenda that
etc.
contains the draft report is publically noticed. A final
report may be considered for approval no earlier than the
next meeting. The final report will include a separate
document that describes the comments received for the
draft report and how they were addressed in the final
report.
Except for reliability guidelines, the Executive Committee recognizes the need for flexibility for in the
proposed review and approval process defined above. Therefore, it proposes that exceptions be brought
to the PC at its regular meetings for members to approve, or to the Executive Committee if the
exception cannot wait for a PC meeting.
Agenda Item 5.e
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
NERC Strategic Issues from the Planning Committee’s Perspective
Action Required
None – information only
Background
Attachment 1 contains the background material.
Agenda Item 5.f
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Potential Technical Committee Contributions to NERC Alerts
Action Required
None – information only
Background
Attachment 1 contains the background material.
Agenda Item 5.g
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Technical Considerations for a NERC-Wide Definition of “Bulk Electric System”
Action Required
Provide feedback by December 31, 2010 on a concept document addressing technical
considerations for a common NERC-wide definition of the term “Bulk Electric System” (BES).
Background
The background on this item is partially contained in three regulatory filings:
1. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NOPR) on this subject on March 18, 2010
(http://www.nerc.com/files/NOPR_Re_Revision_ERO_DefinitionBES_31510.pdf ).
2. NERC responded to the NOPR on May 10, 2010, stating that any revision to the BES
definition would need to be developed through its Reliability Standards Process
(http://www.nerc.com/files/Final_Final_BES_NOPR_Comments.pdf).
3. FERC issued a final rule (Order 743) on November 18, 2010 (http://www.ferc.gov/whatsnew/comm-meet/2010/111810/E-2.pdf). FERC’s news release (Attachment 1) and FERC
Chairman Jon Wellinghoff’s statement (Attachment 2) describe this order.
Prior to the issuance of Order 743, an ad hoc team comprised of staff from NPCC, FRCC, and
WECC was formed to develop a Standard Authorization Request (SAR) for a common BES
definition. The initial team issued a letter on October 21 to the regions, informing them of their
efforts, inviting the participation of additional regions, and describing their work plan. See
Attachment 3. The present team has expanded to include members of NERC staff and RFC
staff.
The team developed a concept paper addressing technical considerations for a common NERCwide definition of BES. A Word version of concept paper is posted at
http://www.nerc.com/filez/pcmin.html along with the December 7–8, 2010 PC meeting material.
Comments on the concept document should be sent to BESCG@wecc.biz by December 31,
2010.
Agenda Item 6.a
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Reliability Assessments Subcommittee (RAS) Report
Action Required
Provide feedback on 2011 scenario assessment proposals by January 14, 2011.
Approve the RAS proposal for reporting market areas for reliability assessments.
Provide feedback on proposed changes to the post-seasonal assessments by January 8, 2011.
Background
1. 2011 scenario assessment proposals.
The RAS has identified three potential scenario assessments to conduct for 2011. The RAS is
requesting the PC consider each of these three proposals and identify those they would like to
pursue:
i.
Changing Fuel Mix Reliability Considerations
ii.
Reliability Assessment on EPA Combined Rules, Phase II
iii.
Dependence on Natural Gas
A description of the scenarios is provided in Attachment 1. Provide feedback by January
14, 2011 to pc_plus@nerc.com.
2. RAS proposal for reporting market areas for reliability assessments.
a. One key to delivering credible and meaningful assessments of the bulk power system
reliability is the establishment of suitable capacity/load regions/subregions. To improve
NERC’s reliability assessments, RAS desired to provide increased granular data and
analysis of the capacity/load conditions, which fairly and correctly represent the current
and future conditions, regardless of regional membership boundaries. Increased
subregional granularity was recommended in the approved Reliability Assessments
Improvement Report from 2008.2
b. Capacity/load regions/subregions, for purposes of reliability assessment, should reflect
the planning process used to identify resources needed to serve demand, thereby
promoting increased granularity, clarity and accuracy. Creation of suitable capacity/load
regions/subregions does not necessarily mean they must reside within Regional Entity
boundaries.
c. Given the unique nature of ISOs/RTOs specific to organized markets and the Regional
Entity membership boundary issue, for the 2011 reliability assessments, RAS
recommends:
i.
2
ISO/RTOs should provide resource/demand projections and self-assessments to
NERC for Seasonal/Long-Term Reliability Assessments, regardless of whether
they span multiple Regional Entities, with suitable vetting and peer review by
affected Regional Entities.
http://www.nerc.com/files/Reliability%20Improvement%20Report%20RAITF%20100208.pdf
ii.
For those portions of a Regional Entity where an ISO/RTO does not exist,
capacity/demand projections and self-assessments should be provided using logical
capacity/load subareas within a Regional Entity’s boundaries.
d. The RAS requests approval of this approach in order to send applicable data requests to
the Regional Entities in December. The proposed method (Attachment 2) serves as a
guide for enhanced subregional reporting.
3. Proposed changes to the post-seasonal assessments.
a. The goal of this report is to assess planned operating/mitigation strategy implementation,
document new strategies developed during the season, document actual operational
experiences, and share lessons learned.
b. Based on feedback at the NERC Board of Trustees meeting, the RAS is proposing
changes to the structure of the post-season reports:
i.
The report will be shortened (one page per Region\Reliability Coordinator).
ii.
There will be a stronger focus on lessons learned.
iii.
Data requirements will be lessened.
c. PC feedback on proposed changes to the post-seasonal assessments is requested to be
sent to assessments@nerc.net by January 8, 2011.
Status Report
1. The RAS met on October 13–14, 2010 to discuss the aforementioned action items and
upcoming reliability assessment documents.
2. 2010/2011 Winter Reliability Assessment.
a. A peer review was performed on the Regional self-assessments.
b. Key findings were discussed and incorporated into the final report.
c. A draft version of the 2010/2011 Winter Reliability Assessment was provided to the PC
and OC on October 29 and approved on November 8.
3. A separate meeting is scheduled on November 23 to discuss the re-alignment of Regional
Operational boundaries for the purpose of developing reliability assessments and coordinate
Regional responsibilities and processes.
4. The RAS is on schedule with all three-year work-plan items.
Agenda Item 6.a.1
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Load Forecasting Working Group (LFWG) Report
Action Required
None – see status report below
Status Report
1. The LFWG reviewed the 2010 LTRA demand and energy data. In September 2010, the
updated demand and energy uncertainty bandwidths for the 2010 LTRA forecasts were
prepared and incorporated into the report.
a. As an improvement to annual uncertainty bandwidth calculations, the LFWG is using
three (summer, winter, energy) ratios instead of only summer peak ratios for data
reconstruction. The group acknowledged that the 2009 work to reconstruct the
bandwidths based on summer peak ratios by NERC staff was an important improvement,
but identified the use of three ratios for the affected Regional data as the next
improvement step for the 2010 LTRA.
2. A meeting was held in Vancouver on September 20–21.
a. Historical demand data reconstruction methods were discussed.
b. 2010 LFWG Bandwidth Report was reviewed.
3. The LFWG will hold its next meeting in Austin, TX in February 2011.
4. The vice chair position is still vacant.
5. Future activities include:
a. Identify improvements for demand forecasting to improve reliability assessments;
b. Evaluate energy forecasting techniques; and
c. Monitor the economic trends to evaluate impacts on demand of any economic recovery.
6. The LFWG is on schedule with all three-year work plan items and no material changes are
needed to the 2011 work plan.
Agenda Item 6.b
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Reliability Metrics Working Group (RMWG) Report
Action Required
Approve RMWG scope change.
Provide feedback by January 8, 2010 on refinement to the Severity Risk Index.
Approve metric ALR6-16 – Transmission System Unavailability.
Background
1. The RMWG recommends the following two scope changes (redlined version – Attachment
1 and clean version – Attachment 2):
a. Develop a methodology that will provide an integrated reliability assessment of the bulk
power system performance utilizing metric information and trends; and
b. Publish quarterly Web site updates, an annual report, yearly Webinars, and high-level
performance on bulk power system reliability metrics assessment.
The development of an integrated reliability assessment aims to inform, increase
transparency, and assess the 17 metrics that were approved. The goal is to provide the
industry meaningful trends of the bulk system performance and guidance on how they can
improve reliability through an annual report, Web site updates, yearly Webinars, and highlevel assessments.
2. The RMWG requests feedback on the refinement to the Severity Risk Index (Attachment
3).
With the OC/PC approval of risk assessment framework and concepts (available at
http://www.nerc.com/docs/pc/rmwg/Integrated_Bulk_Power_System_Risk_Assessment_Concepts_Final.pdf)
at the September meeting, RMWG applied the concepts and conducted preliminary
sensitivity studies to evaluate risk factor selections and quantify their relative rankings. The
RMWG recommends initially only considering transmission, generation and load losses to
develop severity risk curves aggregated at NERC and interconnection level. Other risk
factors (e.g., equipment damage) will be reviewed and updated periodically as a part of ongoing open improvement process. The RMWG plans to coordinate with the EAWG to
further refine the risk assessment approach. Please send feedback to Bill Adams
(WOADAMS@southernco.com) and Jessica Bian (jessica.bian@nerc.net) by January 8,
2011.
3. The RMWG recommends the reliability metric ALR6-16 – Transmission System
Unavailability (Attachment 4).
The RMWG has incorporated the comments and suggestions received at the September PC
meeting. The RMWG proposes to pilot this metric for three to five years to assess whether it
provides useful information for determining the performance of the bulk power system.
Between October and November, the RMWG had three conference calls specifically to
discuss input and needed changes; two of them were with those who commented.
Status Report
1. The RMWG held one face-to-face meeting on November 3–4, and six conference calls from
September to November 2010, completing the following work plan activities:
a. Worked with the ERO-RAPA (Reliability Assessment and Performance Assessment)
regional group to pilot the approved metric ALR6-1 Transmission Constraint
Mitigation;
b. Worked with the Reliability Coordinator Working Group (RCWG) to pilot the
approved metric ALR1-5 System Voltage Performance;
c. Worked with the System Protection and Control Subcommittee (SPCS) and the ERORAPA to make the protection system misoperation reporting consistent across the
eight Regions, including categories and cause codes (the reporting template is
expected to be finalized by December 10, 2010); and
d. Received eight sets of voluntary submittals of the ALR3-5 IROL/SOL Exceedance
from 15 Reliability Coordinators for the 2010 third quarter period.
Agenda Item 6.c
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
G&T Reliability Planning Models Task Force (GTRPMTF) Report
Action Required
Approve:
1. The revised the Metrics and Methodology document. The previous version was approved at
the September 2010 meeting.
2. Disbanding the G&T Reliability Models Task Force.
Background
1. At the September 2010 meeting, the PC approved the recommendations in the G&TRPMTF
Final Report on Methodology and Metrics, posted at
http://www.nerc.com/docs/pc/gtrpmtf/GTRPMTF%20Meth%20&%20Metrics%20Report%2
0final%20w.%20PC%20approvals,%20revisions.pdf. By its approval of the
recommendations, the PC approved the Methodology and Metrics document in Appendix 3
of that report. The PC also required the GTRPMTF to prepare a report outline for use by
individual metrics reporting areas.
The recommended report outline for use by individual metrics reporting areas has been
appended to the revised Methodology and Metrics document as Table 3. As a result of
developing the report outline, the task force recommends minor changes to the Metrics and
Methodology document that add clarity and consistency. Attachment 1 is a redline of the
previously approved Methodology and Metrics document with the report outline and
recommended changes, and Attachment 2 is a clean version. The report outline was
reviewed with the Resource Issues Subcommittee (RIS), who made minor changes that were
generally agreeable to the task force. The RIS has responsibility for coordinating most
aspects of the implementation plan described in the aforementioned report. The report
outline will first be used by areas that volunteer for the 2011 pilot reporting prior to 2012
mandatory reporting.
If the revised Methodology and Metrics document is approved, the G&TRPMTF Final
Report on Methodology and Metrics that has the previously approved document in Appendix
3 will be replaced and the report updated to reflect decisions from this PC meeting.
2. Having completed the tasks defined in its scope, the G&T Reliability Planning Models Task
Force respectively requests that the PC disband it.
Status Report
1. A conference call was held on October 22, 2010 to discuss a draft report outline and
comments received by members. Subsequently a revised report outline and redlined
Methodology and Metrics document was circulated for comment by task force members. No
comments were received. That version was provided to the RIS for their comment.
2. Chair Paul Kure, who is also a RIS member, discussed the report format and the revised
Methodology and Metrics document at the November 16, 2010 RIS meeting. RIS comments
were incorporated. RIS comments were discussed in a November 18 GTRPMTF call and
incorporated with minor modifications.
Agenda Item 6.d
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Integration of Variable Generation Task Force (IVGTF) Report
Action Required
1. Approve the report Potential Reliability Impacts of Emerging Flexible Resources (IVGTF15); and
2. Provide feedback on Methods to Model and Calculate Capacity Contributions of Variable
Generation for Resource Adequacy Planning by January 30, 2010.
Background
1. The report Potential Reliability Impacts of Emerging Flexible Resources addresses the
integration of large amounts of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, storage, and demand
response programs that may provide additional resource flexibility and influence bulk power
system reliability and should be considered in planning studies. The report is available at
http://www.nerc.com/docs/pc/ivgtf/IVGTF_Task_1_5_Final.pdf .
2.
The report Methods to Model and Calculate Capacity Contributions of Variable Generation
for Resource Adequacy Planning contributes to the overall reliability by providing current
methods and practices of calculating capacity contributions derived from analysis of
methods from different regions. The report recommended continued analysis of related
metrics on resource adequacy, alternative approach from other forms of variable generation,
and future coordination with other groups in developing transparency on the topics of
resource adequacy. The report is available at http://www.nerc.com/docs/pc/ivgtf/IVGTF12_DRAFT_11.22.pdf. Provide feedback by January 30, 2010 to
michael_milligan@nrel.gov (IVGTF1-2).
Status Report
1. IVGTF1-5: Team lead Daniel Brooks (EPRI) submitted and completed the PC review in
September 2010. The report incorporates all comments received from the IVGTF leadership
and NERC staffs.
2. IVGTF1-2: Team lead Michael Milligan conducted biweekly meetings and coordinated
discussions with industry experts on adequacy. The report will be presented to the members
of the Resource Issue Subcommittee (RIS) for additional comment. The IVGTF1-2 consists
of 13 members representing the regions ERCOT, PJM, Ontario IESO, CAISO, and WECC.
This report incorporates the feedback received from the IVGTF chairs and team leads.
3. All remaining subgroups are now developing and preparing their reports and
recommendations.
4. The work plan has been enhanced to reflect changes to schedules.
Agenda Item 6.e
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Geomagnetic Disturbance Task Force (GMDTF) Report
Action Required
None - see status report
Status Report
1. The GMDTF does not have a chair or vice chair and urges industry support.
Agenda Item 6.f
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Resource Issues Subcommittee (RIS) Report
Action Required
None – see status report below
Status Report
The RIS held a meeting in Baltimore, MD on November 16, 2010. The major topics and
conclusions/actions are described below:
1. The RIS conducted a survey of the metrics reporting areas (MRAs) as defined the G&T
Reliability Planning Models Task Force’s (GTRPMTF’s) Methodology and Metrics
document to determine their readiness to perform probabilistic resource adequacy metrics
calculations that incorporate transmission constraints. The RIS was assigned the
coordination of this effort at the September 2010 PC meeting. Attachment 1 is Table 1
from that document and it defines the MRAs. A blank survey and the survey results are
available at http://www.nerc.com/filez/ris.html. The survey was sent to 57 entities and 34
responded. Although WECC will be doing the analysis for its eight MRAs, it asked that the
survey be sent to the individual entities. SERC, who will also be performing the analysis for
the all of its four reporting MRAs, provided one response. The readiness status of each MRA
is provided in the table below. Overall, most MRAs appear ready to develop the requested
probabilistic metrics defined by the GTRPMTF.
Region
Multi-region RTOs
ERCOT
FRCC
MRO
NPCC
RFC
Readiness Status
Each of these MRAs (PJM, MISO, and SPP RTO) is prepared to
develop the required analysis metrics.
Although ERCOT (MRA #4) did not respond, we believe ERCOT is
prepared to do this analysis based upon previous discussions, but
need to confirm.
FRCC (MRA#5) is prepared to do the analysis. Their present
modeling approach does not include transmission constraints because
they are not deemed significant.
MRA # 6 (MRO (US) less MISO and SPP RTO areas in MRO (US))
is the Mid-Continent Area Power Pool. They ceased doing this type
of analysis in 2009; however, they will be discussing this with their
members. We need to ensure that they do not include any members
that are included in MISO.
MRA #7 (MRO (Canada)) included Manitoba Hydro and SaskPower.
Manitoba Hydro is prepared but prefers to be its own MRA and not
be combined with SaskPower. SaskPower did not respond.
NPCC will perform the analysis for its five MRAs since it now
produces the requested metrics in the NPCC long-range resource
adequacy overview.
RFC will have no reporting MRAs since they are included within
MISO or RFC.
Region
SERC
SPP
WECC
Readiness Status
SERC will be performing the analysis for it four reporting MRAs.
The Gateway MRA in SERC will not be reporting since it is included
in MISO.
The SPP RTO will include MRA #20 (entities in the SPP RE that are
not in the SPP RTO) in their analysis and break out their metrics
separately.
WECC will be performing the analysis for all eight of its MRAs.
2. The RIS discussed the draft MRA report outline prepared by the GTRPMTF and made
several comments on that document as well as the Methodology and Metrics document for
consideration by the GTRPMTF.
3. The RIS reviewed a draft GADSTF report with several NERC staff members who had
participated in its development. The draft report recommended mandatory GADS reporting
using Section 1600. While the RIS is generally supportive of mandatory GADS reporting, it
felt that the case for mandatory reporting had not been adequately made. Follow-up
activities are described in the GADSTF report.
4. The RIS reviewed the status of the metric, Expected Reserve Margin, which had been
submitted to the Reliability Metrics Working Group in April 2010. Attachment 2 has a
description of the metric. The RIS discussed including this metric in reliability assessments
since the only missing data to do the calculation of expected capacity on forced outage at
time of system peak – that could be easily developed by reporting areas since they will need
to use unit forced outage rates in calculating probabilistic resource adequacy metrics. RIS
will be following up with the Reliability Assessment Subgroup on including this metric in the
2012 LTRA. There was considerable debate on the name of the metric. This may require
changing before implementation.
5. On its work plan, the RIS added activity # 89 related to the coordination of the probabilistic
metric reports by MRAs and deferred activity #82 (developing a method for defining "zones"
(within an RTO or a region) and associated zonal data that will be used for more granular
analysis of reliability (such as load pockets) for NERC's various reliability assessments) until
2012 or later when probabilistic reports are due per activity #89.
Agenda Item 6.f.1
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Loss-of-Load Expectation Working Group (LOLEWG) Report
Action Required
None – see status report below
Status Report
1. The LOLEWG had no meetings or conference calls.
2. A meeting is being planned for January 20–21, 2011 in Atlanta, and a call for presenters on
topics of interest identified from the last meeting has been sent to members and observers.
3. The capability for LOLEWG members to have a private Web location is being implemented
by NERC staff to post such items as draft documents before public posting.
Agenda Item 6.f.2
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Generating Availability Data System Task Force (GADSTF) Report
Action Required
None – see status report below
Status Report
On June 16, 2010, the NERC Planning Committee approved the creation of the Generating
Availability Data System Task Force (GADSTF). The GADSTF was asked to review and
recommend whether Generation Owners on the NERC Compliance Registry should report
GADS data on a mandatory basis. See the task force scope.
(http://www.nerc.com/docs/pc/gadstf/GADSTF_Scope_Approved_061610.pdf)
The following activities have occurred since the September 2010 PC meeting:
1. Forty-nine GADSTF members have been involved in the discussions and subgroup reports to
the general GADSTF body (one chair, 20 appointed by the Regions, 24 observers, and four
NERC staff).
2. The GADSTF was divided into four subgroups for review of GADS major parts: design,
event, performance and renewable unit records. Each subgroup conducted a series of
conference calls to assess whether GADS (generally) should become mandatory and what
parts of their assigned area should be required/voluntary reporting.
3. The subgroups conducted 18 conference calls and one face-to-face meeting. More than 600
hours have been dedicated to discussions and writing reports.
4. Leaders, assistant leaders, and secretaries for each of the four subgroups presided over the
calls and subgroup breakout sessions at the face-to-face meeting.
5. Each subgroup reported on their activities and posted their recommendations on the NERC
Web site at http://www.nerc.com/filez/gadstf.html.
6. From the subgroup recommendation reports, NERC staff compiled data and drafted a report
for review and approval by the Resource Issues Subcommittee (RIS).
7. After review, the RIS felt the GADSTF report needed more justifications for several of the
recommendations. NERC staff is now reviewing and revising the GADSTF report, to be
resubmitted to the RIS. The next RIS review will be in mid-January 2010, after the next PC
meeting.
8. The three-year work plan has been updated.
Agenda Item 6.g
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Transmission Issues Subcommittee (TIS) Report
Action Required
None – see status report below
Status Report
See Attachment 1.
Agenda Item 6.g.1
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Model Validation Task Force (MVTF) Report
Action Required
Approve the Power System Model Validation White Paper, including its associated work plan
(Appendix C in the white paper).
Background
The MVTF presented a similar draft white paper at the June 2010 PC meeting. At the meeting,
the committee agreed to acknowledge the situational assessment content of the white paper;
approved proceeding with recommendation 53 consistent with the standards development plan;
and directed the MVTF to come back with an updated whitepaper in September 2010 for PC
approval with refined recommendations (e.g., more specificity, what is short-term and long-term,
who should undertake, etc.) and an associated implementation plan.
The PC’s directives are addressed in this new draft, which is posted at
http://www.nerc.com/filez/pcmin.html along with other December 7–8, 2010 PC meeting
material.
Status Report
1. The inaugural meeting was held on November 11, 2010 at ERCOT facilities in Taylor,
Texas. The group began work on Task 1.1 (Development of a procedure for power system
powerflow model validation) and Task 1.2 (Development of a procedure for power system
dynamics model validation). An outline was constructed for each procedure.
2. A second meeting will be hosted by FRCC on December 6, 2010 in Tampa, FL
Recommendation 5 stated “The Planning Committee should assign the TIS or MVTF to develop a list of suggested
improvements for a Standard Authorization Request (SAR).”
3
Agenda Item 6.h
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
System Protection and Control Subcommittee (SPCS) Report
Action Required
Approve:
1. Posting a reliability guideline, Transmission System Phase Backup Protection, for industry
comment.
2. A report to the Planning Committee, NERC SPCS Technical Review of UVLS-Related
Standards: PRC-010-0, PRC-020-1, PRC-021-1, and PRC-022-1.
3. A report to the Planning Committee, Reliability Fundamentals of System Protection
These documents are posted at http://www.nerc.com/filez/pcmin.html along with other
December 7–8, 2010 PC meeting material.
Background
1. The SPCS has developed a reliability guideline, Transmission System Phase Distance
Backup Protection, in response to a number significant system disturbance reports since the
2003 Northeast Blackout that have recommended evaluating specific applications of adding
backup and/or redundant protection The most significant of these is the FRCC report from
the February 26, 2008 system disturbance which recommends that “NERC should assign the
System Protection and Control Task Force to produce a technical paper describing the issue
and application of backup protection for autotransformers.” The SPCS has classified its
report as a Reliability Guideline because it includes a recommendation to industry regarding
application of backup protection on large autotransformers. In accordance with Appendix 4
of the Planning Committee charter, the SPCS requests Planning Committee approval to post
the document for industry comment.
2. The SPCS has developed a report to the Planning Committee on its assessment of the
existing standards relating to developing, documenting, and evaluating performance of
UVLS programs. The report recommends a number of modifications to these standards
including consolidation into one standard. The report also recommends development of a
Transmission Issues Subcommittee (TIS) paper on coordination of certain Protection
Systems through assessments of system performance. The second recommendation has been
coordinated with the TIS.
a. The SPCS recommends that the SAR for Project 2008-02 – Undervoltage Load
Shedding, should be modified to include addressing the recommendations presented
in this report. Project 2008-02 is not one of the 17 High Priority Projects Under
Development (it is on the list of Additional Projects to be Initiated in Order of
Priority). Since work on this project has not commenced, there is adequate time to
amend the SAR for this project.
b. The SPCS recommends that the NERC Transmission Issues Subcommittee, with
support from the SPCS and other groups as necessary, develop a paper on the subject
of coordinating the design and operation of UVLS programs with transmission
system protection, generator protection and control, UFLS programs, and other
UVLS programs. The SPCS notes that the issue of coordinating Protection Systems
that respond to different quantities such as voltage, frequency, apparent impedance,
and excitation, is not traditional relay-to-relay coordination. Coordination must be
addressed in assessments of system performance to compare the response of
protections responding to different quantities, and to account for time-based and
location-based variations in these quantities. This paper can be used to support the
Project 2008-02 Standard Drafting Team and should include consideration of
modifications to the Modeling (MOD) Reliability Standards to ensure that data is
provided and proper modeling is included as necessary to support coordination
through assessments of system performance.
3. The SPCS was charged with developing a section for the Reliability Fundamentals Working
Group (RFWG) Reliability Concepts document, addressing reliability fundamentals
associated with system protection. Although work on expanding the Reliability Concepts
document has ceased, the SPCS believes there is value in publishing this work as a standalone report describing basic fundamental reliability concepts associated with system
protection in basic terms. Should work resume on the NERC Reliability Concepts document
in the future, this information could easily be reformatted and incorporated into the
document.
Status Report
1. Backup Protection Technical Reference Document
a. Assignment: The PC has authorized the SPCS to develop a backup document based on
the Florida Event team recommendations regarding autotransformer backup protection,
and further to the work on the development of the redundancy white paper.
b. Status: The SPCS sub-team has completed this document and the full SPCS has reviewed
and approved submitting the document for Planning Committee approval to post the
document for industry comment as a Reliability Guideline.
2. Reliability Fundamentals
a. Assignment: Develop a Protection Chapter for the NERC Reliability Concepts document.
b. Status: The SPCS sub-team has completed this document and the full SPCS has reviewed
and approved submitting the document for Planning Committee approval.
3. Assessment of Existing PRC Standards
a. Project: 2008-2 Undervoltage Load Shedding
The SPCS sub-team has completed this document and the full SPCS has reviewed and
approved submitting the document for Planning Committee approval.
4. SPCS/TIS Document on Response of Protective Relays to Power Swings
a. Assignment: Develop a white paper, with support from TIS, on the subject of the
response of protective relays to power swings. This paper will support development of a
standard on this subject, as directed in FERC Order No. 733.
b. Status: The SPCS has completed a first draft of its sections of the document. The SPCS
has met with the TIS-team supporting this effort to discuss methods for assessing
performance in system studies. The present schedule calls for submitting a document to
the Planning Committee for consideration at its March 2011 meeting.
5. Power Plant Controls Coordination
Work on this project has been deferred. A draft scope will be considered by the SPCS at its
February 2011 meeting. Once completed, a sub-team including industry experts on power
plant controls will commence developing the technical reference document.
6. AURORA Industry Alert
The SPCS discussed this Alert and provided feedback on potential solutions to NERC Staff.
7. Status of SPCS-Related Standards Activities
a. PRC-001 – Protection System Coordination: The Standard Drafting Team will be
submitting a revised draft for posting. A supplemental Standards Authorization Request
(SAR) has been submitted to extend applicability to protection systems within an entity’s
footprint in addition to those located at interfaces between entities.
b. PRC-002 – Disturbance Monitoring Equipment: The Standard Drafting Team will be
submitting a revised draft for posting. The draft will contain Requirements only;
development of Measures and compliance elements will occur for the subsequent posting.
Posting the documents for comment will be dependent on availability of NERC staff to
perform a Quality Review.
c. PRC-005 – Protection System Maintenance and Testing: The revised definition of
Protection System was approved by industry and has been submitted for NERC Board of
Trustees approval at its November 19 meeting. The revised standard has been posted
through December 17 for another 30-day formal comment period with a successive ballot
to be conducted during the final 10 days of the comment period.
d. PRC-006 – Automatic Underfrequency Load Shedding. This standard was approved by
the NERC Board of Trustees on November 4, 2010. NERC Staff is working on the
filing.
e. PRC-023 – Transmission Relay Loadability: The standard has been revised to address
FERC directives in Order No. 733. The revised standard was posted for a 30-day
informal comment period and has been revised based on industry comments. The revised
standard has been posted through December 16 for a 45-day formal comment period with
an initial ballot to be conducted during the final 10 days of the comment period.
The Standards Committee has approved formation of a drafting team for Phase II of this
project to develop the FERC directed standard on generator relay loadability.
f. PRC-024 – Generator Performance during Frequency and Voltage Excursions: The
Standard Drafting Team is working on a revised draft for a second posting.
g. Interpretation of PRC-004 and PRC-005 for Y-W Electric and Tri-State G&T: The SPCS
has drafted responses to comments submitted during the most recent ballot and decided
not to make any changes to the draft interpretation. The interpretation has been posted
for a recirculation ballot through December 3.
8. Alerts and Disturbances
SPCS continues to provide protection and control support for studied disturbances.
9. Meeting Schedule. The SPCS has scheduled the following meetings in 2011.
February 1–3
Ft. Worth, TX (Oncor
hosted)
Tues Full Day
Wed Full Day
Thurs Half Day
April 26–28
Charlotte, NC (SERC
hosted)
Tues Full Day
Wed Full Day
Thurs Half Day
June 28–30
San Francisco, CA
(PG&E hosted)
Tues Full Day
Wed Full Day
Thurs Half Day
September 28–30
Minneapolis, MN
(Xcel hosted)
Tues Full Day
Wed Full Day
Thurs Half Day
November 8–10
Location TBD
Tues Full Day
Wed Full Day
Thurs Half Day
Agenda Item 6.i
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Data Coordination Subcommittee (DCS) Report
Action Required
None – status report only
Status Report
1. The DCS held a Web meeting on November 1, 2010, to address the issue of system modeling
below 100 kV. The material for this meeting is posted at
http://www.nerc.com/docs/pc/dcs/System%20Modeling%20Below%20100%20kV%2011.01
.10%20with%20notes.pdf. The registered attendance totaled 88 participants.
2. There was not a consensus that all network facilities, a term defined in the presentation for
discussion purposes only, need to be modeled explicitly for steady-state and dynamic models.
Several participants noted that distribution voltage level facilities may be networked with the
bulk power system, and that network equivalents could be used instead of explicit modeling,
depending upon the issue being analyzed. The use of equivalents made a wide-area analysis
easier to solve from a computer perspective. But for a small-area analysis that is focused on
local alternatives, explicit modeling is probably appropriate. Another participant stated that
the need for data below 100 kV should be left to the discretion of the Transmission Planner.
3. The DCS will be meeting on December 7 prior to the PC meeting to continue the discussion
of this and other issues.
Agenda Item 6.i.1
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Transmission Availability Data Systems Working Group (TADSWG)
Report
Action Required
Approve the TADSWG recommendation to change the TADS Event Type Number data
collection beginning with calendar year 2012 data, as detailed in the TADSWG letter to the PC
dated November 12, 2010 and which is posted at http://www.nerc.com/filez/pcmin.html along
with other December 7–8, 2010 PC meeting material.
Background
As stated in the original TADS Phase I report “…we believe that the greatest use of TADS data
will be for outage cause analysis and outage event analysis.” If we delay changing the proposed
Event Type Numbers for several more years, approximately one-quarter of the TADS event
characteristics will continue to be unidentified on a NERC-wide basis. The proposed Event
Type Number categories will aid in the determination of credible contingencies and will result in
a better understanding of the “Other” events. The increased granularity of the data will increase
the understanding of actual NERC-wide events that could allow for improved system analysis by
bridging gaps between the operating environment and planning assumptions, and may therefore
influence the development of future NERC planning and operating standards.
The recommendation followed the NERC Rules of Procedure Section 1600, including advance
notice to FERC, NERC posting of the proposed changes for a 45-day public comment period
ending August 23, 2010, and evaluation of the comments by the TADSWG for final
recommendation. The TADSWG recommendation was reviewed and approved by the Data
Coordination Subcommittee. After the above NERC PC action is taken, NERC will send the
recommendation to the NERC Board of Trustees for final approval.
Status Report
1. EIA notified NERC that “… on October 5, 2010, the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) notified the U.S. Energy Information Administration of its approval of the Electricity
2011 forms, including Form EIA-411, Coordinated Bulk Power Supply Program Report. We
greatly appreciate the extensive contributions made by NERC and the electric industry
representatives on the Data Coordination Working Group and the Transmission Availability
Data System Working Group to enhance the EIA-411 survey. We also look forward to
continued cooperation between NERC and EIA.” This latest version of Schedule 7 has a
three-year effective date from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2013, and would affect
reporting of calendar year data for 2010 to 2012. Future versions of Schedule 7 could have a
two-year effective date, thus accelerating any NERC efforts required by the revised forms.
As noted in September’s status update to the PC, the TADSWG is continuing its evaluation
of EIA’s intention to”…migrate the 411 form towards a 100 kV lower limit for all
transmission data.” This is an issue since TADS reporting currently begins at ≥200 kV for
all reported Elements. If this is required in the next version of Schedule 7, it would affect
how the 2013 calendar year data is collected.
2. Issuance of the TADS data validation questionnaire as detailed in the June and September
2010 status reports to the PC has been delayed as NERC staff and the TADSWG review
effective detailed processes, yet to be determined, for coordinating this review effort through
the Regional Entities.
3. The TADSWG is making good progress on the format changes for the 2010 calendar year
reports. These reports will be the first to include both Automatic and Non-Automatic Outage
data and are targeted for completion by June 2011. The TADSWG has begun developing the
report content; however, the newly expanded report may require additional data validation,
preparation, and publication time which may cause a delay to the third quarter.
4. NERC staff, with the assistance of Open Access Technologies International, Inc. (OATI), has
conducted four Webinar training sessions on how/why/when TADS data is reported to the
webTADS program operated by OATI. The sessions train those new to TADS/webTADS
and provide updated training for existing reporters/users. Remaining training for 2010
includes: an OATI webTADS software class on December 9 and a Data Instruction class on
December 14.
5. The TADSWG is working with the RMWG in revising metric ALR6-16 to better align with
TADS since it was not approved by the PC as originally proposed.
6. Beginning December 1, 2010, Transmission Owners (TOs) may begin registering to
participate in the calendar-year 2011 reporting to webTADS. Following registration,
participants may begin to upload contact and inventory information. Early registration and
entry of contact and inventory information is recommended by the TADSWG to ensure all
registered TOs are ready for the new calendar year.
Agenda Item 6.i.2
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Demand Response Data Task Force (DRDTF) Report
Action Required
None – see status report below
Status Report
1. On May 17, 2010, the NERC Board of Trustees unanimously approved the Rules of
Procedure: Section 1600-Request for Information or Data: Mandatory Collection of DADS
Phase II Data included in the report entitled Demand Response Availability Data System
(DADS): Phase I & II Final Report. The report and data collection forms (including
definitions, instructions, and data submittal procedures) can be found at:
http://www.nerc.com/filez/drdtf.html.
2. Based on recommendations from industry, the DRDTF will no longer be collecting quarterly
data. Semi-annual data collection periods will be implemented for the future of DADS. The
two annual collection periods will be centered around summer and winter peaks.
3. The group has not met since the last PC meeting.
4. NERC staff is currently in negotiations with a vendor for a Web application to support the
mandatory data reporting requirements of DADS Phase II.
5. Future actions include:
a. The DRDTF will process and disseminate data received during data collection process.
b. Mandatory reporting is scheduled for December 2011.
6. The DRDTF chair position is currently open. NERC staff is soliciting recommendations for a
new chair of the DRDTF.
7. The three-year work plan activities are on schedule
Agenda Item 6.i.3
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Data Coordination Working Group (DCWG) Report
Action Required
None– see status report below
Status Report
1. A DCWG meeting was held on October 20 to discuss the data collection for the 2010/2011
Winter Reliability Assessment and enhancements to the 2011 data collection.
2. The DCWG submitted the final 2010 Long-Term Reliability Assessment data to the Energy
Information Agency (EIA) on behalf of the electric industry as part of the Form EIA-411
filing.
3. Individual unit/plant data was collected for the first time as part of the 2010 Long-Term
Reliability Assessment. The DCWG will continue to develop improved methods for
gathering and submitting this data with a common and consistent approach.
4. The DCWG will be developing data collection methods for future post-seasonal reliability
assessments based on the results and feedback from the 2009/2010 Post-Winter Reliability
Assessment.
5. The DCWG continues to work with EIA to support future data needs and resolve data
collection issues for the new version of the Form EIA-411. EIA has indicated that they are
proposing shortening the EIA form development cycle from a three-year cycle to a two-year
cycle. This most notably affects DCWG as a new Form EIA-411 may be implemented by
2013. The DCWG does not expect this to cause any issues.
6. A meeting has not been held since the last PC meeting.
7. Future activities include:
a. DCWG will meet with EIA in the fall 2010 to discuss the current status of EIA-411
changes and future coordination.
b. DCWG will begin development of the data collection forms for the 2011 Summer
Reliability Assessment and the 2011 Long-Term Reliability Assessment during the fall of
2010.
c. DCWG will incorporate the recommendations from the recently approved RIS report,
Recommendations for the Treatment of Controllable Capacity Demand Response
Programs in Reserve Margin Calculations. Changes must be incorporated in 2011 and
future data collections forms in order to fulfill these recommendations.
8. The three-year work plan activities for the DCWG are on schedule.
Agenda Item 6.i.4
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Spare Equipment Database Task Force (SEDTF) Report
Action Required
Approve a revised SEDTF scope.
Background
The initial SEDTF scope was approved at the PC meeting in September 2010 and is included as
Attachment 1. The scope was later reviewed and suggestions were offered from the PC, OC
and CIPC as well as SEDTF leadership to improve upon the scope. A clean version of this
revised scope is included as Attachment 2 and a redline comparing the two scopes is included
as Attachment 3. The following high-level enhancements were made:

A greater emphasis on reviewing processes for identification of spare equipment to
respond to HILF situations has been added;

Activities and milestones have been expanded; and

The task force will now report to the PC.
Status Report
1. PC members Dale Burmester of ATC and Mark Westendorf of MISO are the SEDTF chair
and vice chair, respectively. Thus far, the request for nominees resulted in 19 members and
ten observers. Additionally, seven members from NERC will be kept advised of the work for
its possible effects on other NERC programs. Several regional membership slots remain
open and nominees for these slots are welcomed. A table showing the membership slots and
the number of members and observers on SEDTF is noted below:
SEDTF Scope
Officers
FRCC (2)
MRO (2)
NPCC (2)
RFC (2)
SERC (2)
SPP (2)
TRE (2)
WECC (2)
Canada (2)
Industry Experts
Industry Associations
Government Agencies
NERC Staff
Member
2 (chair, vice chair)
─
2
3
6
4
─
2
1
(1 see MRO)
1
1
─
─
Observer
─
─
─
─
─
─
─
─
─
─
2
4
6
7
2. The SEDTF held its initial Web meeting on November 9 to review the scope, discuss the
deliverables and proposed time schedule, and to divide the work among the two focus
subgroups. One subgroup will review potential SED long-lead time equipment and its design
criteria. The second subgroup will review the operational, software and management issues
associated with collecting, storing, distributing, and essentially managing SED data.
Collectively, the SEDTF will review the SED policies and procedures and how they might
complement existing industry spares programs and interact with the other NERC efforts.
3. Face-to face and Web meetings are being scheduled. A face-to-face meeting will be held in
Tampa immediately following the PC meeting. To accomplish the activities identified for
the next year, the SEDTF will schedule quarterly face-to-face meetings and hold Web
meetings on the first and third Tuesday of each month beginning in January 2011.
Agenda Item 6.k
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Smart Grid Task Force (SGTF) Report
Action Required
Approve a revised SGTF scope – see Attachment 1 (redline) and Attachment 2 (clean).
Background
The PC approved the Reliability Considerations from the Integration of Smart Grid report at its
September 2010 meeting. Four tasks were identified in the work plan outlined in the report,
which are now incorporated into the revised scope:
1. Integration of smart grid devices/systems requires development of new planning/operating
tools, models and analysis techniques.
2. Integration of smart grid devices/systems will change the character of the distribution system,
potentially affecting bulk power system reliability.
3. Engage Standard Development Organizations in the U.S. and Canada to increase
coordination and harmonization in standard development.
4. Develop risk metrics that measure current and future system physical and cyber
vulnerabilities from smart grid integration.
Status Report
1. The report was sent to NERC’s Board of Trustees for their review and approval, which is
slated for November 19, 2010.
2. Work plan status: No change until the Planning Committee approves the new task force
scope.
Agenda Item 6.l
Planning Committee Meeting
December 7–8, 2010
Event Analysis Working Group (EAWG) Report
Action Required
None– see status report below
Status Report
Attachment 1, which describes the status of the ongoing event analysis field trial, is excerpted from the
Joint OC/PC/CIPC November 30 presentation of Mr. Tom Galloway, senior vice president and chief
reliability officer.