Member Representatives Committee Meeting

Transcription

1 Member Representatives Committee Meeting August 13, :15 p.m. 5:15 p.m. Pacific The Westin Bayshore, Vancouver 1601 Bayshore Drive Vancouver, BC V6G 2V4 Canada

2 Opening Remarks by MRC Chair

3 Consent Agenda

4 Update from Board of Trustees Nominating Committee

5 Schedule for MRC Officer and Sector Elections

6 Regular Agenda

7 Responses to the Board s Request for Policy Input

8 Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP) Version 5 Transition Steven Noess, Associate Director of Standards Development Member Representatives Committee Meeting August 13, 2014

9 Purpose of the Transition Program Transitioning entities confident in implementation Vision 2016: smooth transition to CIP Version 5 Support all entities in the timely, effective, and efficient transition to CIP Version 5 9

10 Focused Collaboration NERC, Regional Entities (REs), and industry stakeholders Address topics to support confidence in implementing Version 5 Partner with REs and stakeholders August 4-5, 2014 meeting Implementation study participants (Industry and Regional Entity) Transition guidance participants Reliability Standard Audit Worksheet (RSAW) work group (Industry and Regional Entity) Standard Drafting Team representation 10

11 Outcomes and Next Steps Outcomes Far-end relay Generation segmentation Next steps Prioritization of issues Transition Guidance finalized Implementation Study report 11

12 Transition Factors Continuous Outreach Training Compliance and Enforcement Periodic Guidance 12

13 Transition Factors Continuous outreach Conferences, workshops and training Deliberate feedback loop with focused transition group Training Auditors and Enforcement: consistent application CIP Auditor Workshop (September 2014) Address areas of industry concern and enable input into guidance/tools Reliability Assurance Initiative (RAI) Coordination with CIP Version 5 Revisions 13

14 Transition Factors Pre-Enforcement Audit Assistance Monitor/preview implementation in non-audit context Promote engagement on implementation progress Ensure meaningful dialogue on challenges and hurdles Provide input to monthly transition group Incorporate key questions and topics across regions 14

15 Recent and Near-Term Activities Transition Guidance August 2014 completion Implementation Study Field work complete June 2014 Release study report (Q3) Related activities Project : CIP Version 5 Revisions RSAW development 15

16 16

17 Risk-Based Registration Initiative Earl Shockley, Senior Director, Compliance Analysis and Certifications Member Representatives Committee Meeting August 13, 2014

18 Risk-Based Registration Vision Differentiate entities exhibiting different levels of risk: Clear thresholds Registration using consistent risk assessment methods Focused Reliability Standard requirements Align with: Bulk Electric System (BES) Definition Reliability Assurance Initiative Reliability Standard reform 18

19 Risk-Based Registration Benefits Align registration and compliance with reliability impacts Reduce registration burden while sustaining BES reliability Enhance electric reliability organization (ERO) program consistency Provide feedback to Reliability Standards development Improve use of NERC, Regional Entity and industry resources 19

20 Proposed Risk-Based Registration Design Highlights Remove from NERC Compliance Registry (NCR) Purchasing- Selling Entity (PSE), Load-Serving Entity (LSE) and Interchange Authority (IA) Enhance Distribution Provider (DP) threshold criteria Align Generator Owner (GO)/Generator Operator (GOP)/Transmission Owner (TO)/Transmission Operator (TOP) thresholds with new BES Definition Establish NERC-led review process to ensure consistency Implement a one-time attestation process Increase clarity on materiality 20

21 Phases Phase 1 Design and Implementation Plan Complete Phase 1 technical reviews Related Rules of Procedure (ROP) revisions Board approval and FERC filing targeted for November 2014 Phase 2 Starts in Q4 Sub-set lists of Reliability Standards for TO/TOP and GO/GOP Phase 2 technical reviews ongoing 21

22 Next Steps Incorporate Member Representatives Committee (MRC) policy input Solidify technical validations Post Design, Implementation Plan and ROP Changes for 45-days Recommend Board of Trustees (Board) approval in November Move forward with Implementation Plan 22

23 23

24 Additional Policy Discussion from Board Committee Meetings

25 Proposed EPA CO 2 Section 111(d) Regulations Tom Burgess, Vice President and Director, Reliability Assessment and Performance Analysis Member Representatives Committee Meeting August 13, 2014

26 Overview Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed regulations would cut CO 2 emissions on existing power plants by 2030 Implementation through state plans, with federal oversight, due in June 2016, or 2018 for regional plans Plans may include generation mix changes, use of diverse fuels, energy efficiency and demand-side management Material CO 2 reductions targeted to begin in

27 Goals of Proposed EPA Regulations for Existing Plants Cut power sector carbon emissions to 30% of 2005 levels by 2030 A co-benefit is reduced particle pollution, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide by more than 25% Provides up to $93 billion in climate and public health benefits Shrink electric bills roughly 8 percent through energy efficiency and reduced demand 27

28 NERC Perspective The proposed CO 2 regulations for existing units is very extensive NERC has not drawn reliability conclusions on potential impacts NERC remains focused on potential reliability implications of environmental rules and shifts in the resulting resource mix This focus has resulted in a wide range of technical reliability reports to inform decision makers and help position the industry The rules and their implementation impacts continue to clarify 28

29 NERC Approach: Monitor Regulations Monitor regulations and state plans as they firm up Preliminary review of EPA s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) assumptions Assess reliability impacts of potential industry strategies and adequacy of implementation periods Evaluate the cumulative impact of resource mix changes Resource adequacy Essential reliability services Seek guidance from MRC and BOT on next steps 29

30 Assessment Actions and Schedule Reliability Review of NOPR Preliminary review of assumptions and timing Framework to discuss major reliability impacts 2014 Long-Term Reliability Assessment Incorporate review of NOPR timing and assumptions Evaluation of industry 10-year plans Special Reliability Assessment: Phase I Evaluate generation and transmission adequacy; detailed assessment Begin after rule is finalized (June 2015) Special Reliability Assessment: Phase II Further assessment of emerging SIPs Begin after implementation plans firmed (June 2016) Target Dates Schedule flexibility to adapt to new information September 2014 October 2014 June 2015 June 2016 June 2017 NERC is seeking guidance on this proposal 30

31 31

32 Polar Vortex Report Update James Merlo, Director Reliability Risk Management and Training Member Representatives Committee Meeting August 13, 2014

33 Deviation from Normal 30 Deviation from Normal High (Fahrenheit) Jan-14 6-Jan-14 7-Jan-14 8-Jan Deviation from Normal Lows (Fahrenheit) 33 5-Jan-14 6-Jan-14 7-Jan-14 8-Jan-14

34 New Winter Peak Loads Previous Winter peak (% of previous peak) MISO ISO-NE NYISO PJM SPP TVA VACAR Southeastern RC 99,855 22,818 25, ,844 32,635 43,384 42,983 46,259 57,265 36,926 TRE FRCC 6-Jan ,307 (109.5%) 18,500 (81.1%) 23,197 (90.8%) 131,841 (98.5%) 36,602 (112.2%) 43,277 (99.8%) 50,659 (117.9%) 44,871 (97.0%) 56,031 (97.8%) 30,231 (81.9%) 7-Jan ,746 (104.9%) 21,300 (93.3%) 25,738 (100.8%) 141,846 (105.9%) 36,079 (110.6%) 44,285 (102.1%) 44,654 (103.9%) 48,279 (104.4%) 57,277 (100.0%) 35,638 (96.5%) 8-Jan ,154 (100.3%) 20,800 (91.2%) 24,551 (96.1%) 134,021 (100.1%) 31,944 (97.9%) 39,820 (91.8%) 43,203 (100.5%) 47,005 (101.6%) 45,281 (79.1%) 29,251 (79.2%) New all-time winter peak 34

35 Generator Performance: Common Trends Fuel natural gas interruptions: supply injection, compressor outages, and one pipeline explosion fuel oil delivery problems inability to procure gas fuel oil gelling Cold weather effects wind turbine low temperature limits hydro icing failed auxiliary equipment stress of extended run times Frozen instrumentation drum level sensors control valves flow and pressure sensors 35

36 NERC: Outages vs Temperature 36

37 TRE: Outage vs Temperature 37

38 NPCC: Outage vs Temperature 38

39 RF: Outage vs Temperature 39

40 MRO: Outage vs Temperature 40

41 SPP: Outage vs Temperature 41

42 SERC: Outage vs Temperature 42

43 FRCC: Outage vs Temperature 43

44 Capacity by Fuel Type 44

45 Outages by Fuel Type 45

46 Observations and Recommendations Polar Vortex was an extreme event that tested resiliency Gas availability challenges highlighted in forced outage rates Sustain industry winter weather preparedness Share lessons learned in both operations and maintenance 46

47 47

48 Assessing the ERO s Effectiveness Mark Lauby, Senior Vice President and Chief Reliability Officer Member Representatives Committee Meeting August 13, 2014

49 Sub Metric K Stakeholder annual satisfaction/perception survey of the ERO s effectiveness to manage risk, budget and stewardship 2014 Tasks Develop questionnaire with stakeholder input and vetting Survey complete and benchmarks established : Performance trending favorably 49

50 Major Milestones Consolidated survey across NERC s business units and the ERO Enterprise on a periodic and consistent basis Engage with an ERO Effectiveness Focus Group Annual recommendations to NERC and Regional Entity Boards 50

51 Schedule August 2014 Begin developing draft survey content October 2014 Send survey to industry with 30-day deadline December 31, 2014 Establish benchmarks February 2015 Present survey results and recommendations to NERC Board and Regional Entity Boards 51

52 52

53 Regulatory Update