Page - 1
WESTERN ELECTRICITY COORDINATING COUNCIL
RELIABILITY SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING
Day 1 February 5, 2014: 1:30 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. Mountain Time
Day 2: February 6, 2014: 8:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m.
WECC Office
155 North 400 West, Suite 200
Salt Lake City, UT 84103
Meeting Minutes
I.
Introductions, arrangements, and changes to the agenda – Marv Landauer
Attendees in person: Vishal Patel (second day), Chuck Matthews, Milorad Papic, Ken Wilson,
Maggie Peacock (first day), Baj Agrawal, Dave Hagen, Tait Willis, Marco Rios
Attendees via phone: Leonard York, Marv Landauer
Two guess speakers will come by the meeting on Thursday; agenda may need to be
reshuffled to accommodate the speakers as well as flight schedules.
II. Approve August 21-22, 2013 Meeting Notes – Marco Rios
Meeting notes were reviewed. There was discussion among the group to clarify the action
item from the May 14-15 meeting notes regarding NERC TADS and whether the RS agree
that data submittal is not mandatory i.e. lower than 200 kV is not required to be submitted.
There was not consensus among the team and agreed that further clarification of the NERC
reporting requirements is required. RS assigned this item to RPEWG.
Action item to RPEWG – Clarify what NERC’s reporting requirements are and what is
required for WECC and for what purposes is the additional inventory data needed for.
RPEWG should provide an update at next meeting.
Milorad and Maggie will provide information to RS members to close out this action
item.
Briefly mentioned that RS will need to review the confidentiality agreement next time
Chuck, motioned to approve the meeting notes, Milorad, seconds, all approve unanimously.
III. WECC Standard/Criteria Activities Update – Kenneth Wilson
a. Project WECC-0101 – Generator Validation Policy Conversion
W E S T E R N E L E C T R I C I T Y C O O R D I N A T I N G C O U N C I L • W W W . W E C C . B I Z
155 NORTH 400 WEST • SUITE 200 • SALT LAKE CITY • UTAH • 84103 -1114 • PH 801.582.0353 • FX 801.582.3918
Page - 2
Ken – effort is undergoing. Many individuals seem to support the WECC’s more stringent
policy.
IV. NERC Standards Activities Update – Kenneth Wilson
a. Bulk Electric System Definition Guidance Document
b. MOD A, B, and C
i. MOD-001-2
ii. MOD-031-1 – re-posted for balloting
iii. MOD-032-1 – already approved
iv. MOD-033-1 – today (2/5/14) is final day of balloting
V. RPEWG Report (TRD/TADS) – Milorad Papic
Milorad provided an update on NERC TADS activities.
TADSWG meeting in Atlanta January 28-30, 2014

Information presented to TADSWG indicates that the proportion of outages with
“Unknown” cause is declining. Also TADSWG recommended that NERC staff, along with
Regional Entities identify and targets event with high concentration of “Unknown” causes.

Review and discussion on the ‘sunset provision” for collecting data, but will continue
through 2014 and plan to finalize a decision by the August 2014 meeting.

TADSWG discussed various controls presently in place to address the quality of TADS
data being collected. NERC staff will review past Change Orders submitted and consult
with OATI (WedTADS vendor) to confirm implementation status. NERC staff wants to
know if TADS training has been effective in possibly reducing the quality issues.

NERC AC Substation Equipment Task Force (ACSETF) – AC substation was the second
largest to the transmission severity, specifically, circuit breaker are the main drivers.
NERC SOR 2014 Report
Risk issue identification – statistical study based on 5-yr TADS data duration.
Update on 2013 WECC SCOTI
Work is underway on the 2013 state of interconnection report. The target for completing the
report is July 2014. This year the report will be publically published.
W E S T E R N E L E C T R I C I T Y C O O R D I N A T I N G C O U N C I L • W W W . W E C C . B I Z
155 NORTH 400 WEST • SUITE 200 • SALT LAKE CITY • UTAH • 84103 -1114 • PH 801.582.0353 • FX 801.582.3918
Page - 3
Discussion Regarding LRS and RPEWG – combining the two groups
Both groups are highly intensive data collection groups. LRS supports NERC and FERC load
and resources reporting requirements. LRS does not have a Chair. Looking for a logical
place to continue and raise visibility to the group. PCC is looking for concurrence of the
concept of combining the two groups together RPEWG – both would remain under RS for two
years until the set-up is evaluated with bi-furcation. Long term it could go back as a
subcommittee under PCC.
No one present in this RS meeting had any objections with the concept of merging
both groups. The idea still has to be presented to LRS and possibly have to be
approved by PCC.
VI. Inclusion of non-BES elements as part of the BES – Kenneth Wilson
a. Establishment of guidelines, criteria, and process
b. Examples of non-BES systems that should or should not be included
c. Recommendation 17 of the Arizona-Southern California Outages
Ken – This is an assignment was given to the Reliability Subcommittee at the October
2013 PCC Steering Committee meeting. The assignment is to develop criteria or
procedures where consideration is given for inclusion of non-BES elements as part of the
BES in response to Recommendation 17 of the Arizona-Southern California Outages on
September 8, 2011. Ken’s assignment is to complete this guideline by July 1.
How should RS approach this assignment? Ideally would want for the industry to get
consensus. The RS would need to identify what material or guidelines would need to be
published to industry so they use it as they develop their transmission plan.
VII. Project WECC-0100 System Performance Update – Chuck Mathews
a. Voltage Dip Guideline – Voltage Sensitivity of Loads – John Kueck
Ken will put John’s presentation on the website.
One of the highlights from the presentation is the fact that the major cause of loss of
motor load is control logic – the drop out of the contactor or control relay. Also, the icecube A has been identified as the common culprit with this issue. – More information on
this topic can be found on the presentation on the website.
W E S T E R N E L E C T R I C I T Y C O O R D I N A T I N G C O U N C I L • W W W . W E C C . B I Z
155 NORTH 400 WEST • SUITE 200 • SALT LAKE CITY • UTAH • 84103 -1114 • PH 801.582.0353 • FX 801.582.3918
Page - 4
Group commentary: TPL system performance point of view is that the loss of load due to
voltage dip is considered a consequential load loss and that as long as that event does
not create a system collapse, then it is not a TPL criteria violation.
b. Drafting SAR to remove and/or modify WECC Regional Variance for FAC-010 and
FAC-011
c. Creation of Voltage Dip Guideline
d. Effective Date of new TPL and retirement of WECC RBP
Chuck – Project WECC-100 drafting team identified two alternatives: guideline or
standard. At this point it appears that developing a guideline is more feasible. Also,
ultimately the goal is to have consistence across WECC
Chuck also presented an update on this effort:
He reviewed the TPL-001-4 implementation dates,
Reviewed the Project WECC-0100 Scope,
And, the WECC board approved retirement of WR1, WR2, WR4, and WR5 upon effective
date of NERC TPL-001-4.
 In regards to voltage instability criteria – the alternatives being discussed are:
Existing criteria but there are some concerns that it is not truly a VS margin study. The
alternative criteria would be to demonstrate actual margins (real and reactive).
 In regards to transient voltage performance – the alternatives being discussed are:
Applying extrinsic documents by reference – Apply PRC-024 generator LVRT to gen
buses to ensure resources stay connected for planning contingencies. This would apply
to both gen and load busses to demonstrate acceptable performance.
Baj – suggests being specific that no other criteria are needed as it relates to load buses.
The drafting team concerns are that if PRC-024 changes then WECC-0100 would also
probably need to change, in other words, WECC loses control of administration of these
criteria.
There are also operational concerns with this alternative – the concerns raised about
expected ride thru of loads (that is NCLL), expectations of ride thru of loads for 3-phase
faults, and also FIDVR considerations.
 Steady state voltage and voltage deviations – alternatives being discussed: Steady
state and voltage deviation. Steady state voltage limits are individual system dependent.
Voltage deviation may be covered by transient voltage response if a voltage ride-through
type curve is utilized.
W E S T E R N E L E C T R I C I T Y C O O R D I N A T I N G C O U N C I L • W W W . W E C C . B I Z
155 NORTH 400 WEST • SUITE 200 • SALT LAKE CITY • UTAH • 84103 -1114 • PH 801.582.0353 • FX 801.582.3918
Page - 5
Instability for cascading and uncontrolled islanding – cascading and uncontrolled islanding
not allowed for planning contingencies. Alternatives being discussed: point to existing
NERC glossary definitions and creating a “criteria or methodology” (R6) to identify/detect
the potential for its occurrence.
Discussion: Any proposed voltage recovery curve must take into account a variety of
factors such as UVLS and NERC generator requirements, consideration may also be
given to other PQ requirements. Should also account for what the composite load model
will ultimately show.
SDT members will be requested to obtain their respective companies UVLS program
settings. Also plans to request MVWG for worst case studies on FIDVR effect.
ACTION ITEM – Vishal to talk to Bob about having MVWG do technical studies on
worst case FIDVR assumptions to inform the development of the new guideline
Ken – as a reminder, RS members need to send a response to Shannon that you are
interested in joining the drafting committee as a participant or just to be notified. If no
response you will be dropped.
VIII. PCC Updates – Vishal Patel
a. Board approved the revised Seven Step Process for Performance Category Upgrade
Request (PCUR Process) – December 5-6, 2013
Last meeting took place in Anaheim in October 2013.
Relatively straight forward meeting for RS, no major issues were raised. Main issue was
WECC-0100 and PCUR process.
Question is when we planned to initiate a SAR to remove FAC-010 and FAC-011 regional
variances and how RS would deal with the finger diagram.
ACTION ITEM – Chuck volunteered to take on preparing the SAR and submit it on
behalf of RS. Previous (2012 and 2013) work will be used as background
information for the SAR.
IX. Future of RS
RS discussion – It is expected that by the end of 2015 there will be a plan in place to how
committees should look like. This includes evaluation of RS and what it brings to the
interconnection now and in the future. To that end, RS members are being asked to submit
W E S T E R N E L E C T R I C I T Y C O O R D I N A T I N G C O U N C I L • W W W . W E C C . B I Z
155 NORTH 400 WEST • SUITE 200 • SALT LAKE CITY • UTAH • 84103 -1114 • PH 801.582.0353 • FX 801.582.3918
Page - 6
ideas of what RS should look like or specific tasks RS should focus on. Ideas and proposals
should be sent to Ken and Vishal as they are already engaging in discussions about the
future of RS.
X. Probabilistic Volatility in the Western Interconnection –
Matthew Elkins gave a presentation on Probabilistic Volatility in the Western Interconnection.
Material will be posted in website.
XI. Administrative Items
The group reviewed the list of RS members and identified active members. The group is
looking at options to re-engage those not active. The group recommended that those not
intending to attend should be removed from the official list.
XII. Next Meetings
a. April 10, 2014 (one day meeting to discuss BES)
b. May 14-15, 2014 – Location to be determined
c. September 10-11, 2014
d. Web-conferences?
XIII. Adjourn
W E S T E R N E L E C T R I C I T Y C O O R D I N A T I N G C O U N C I L • W W W . W E C C . B I Z
155 NORTH 400 WEST • SUITE 200 • SALT LAKE CITY • UTAH • 84103 -1114 • PH 801.582.0353 • FX 801.582.3918