Meeting Agenda Reliability Advisory Council (RAC)
November 18, 2020 9:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m. Central
Via Webex Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
VIDEO AND AUDIO RECORDING
Please note that Midwest Reliability Organization (MRO) may make a video and/or an audio recording of this organizational group meeting for the purposes of making this information available to board members, members, stakeholders and the general public who are unable to attend the meeting in person.
By attending this meeting, I grant MRO:
1. Permission to video and/or audio record the meeting including me; and 2. The right to edit, use, and publish the video and/or audio recording. 3. I understand that neither I nor my employer has any right to be compensated in connection with the video and/or audio recording or the granting of this consent.
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
MRO ORGANIZATIONAL GROUP GUIDING PRINCIPLES
These MRO Organizational Group Guiding Principles complement charters. When the Principles are employed by members, they will support the overall purpose of the organizational groups.
Organizational Group Members should:
1. Make every attempt to attend all meetings in person or via webinar.
2. Be responsive to requests, action items, and deadlines.
3. Be active and involved in all organizational group meetings by reviewing all pre-meeting materials and being focused and engaged during the meeting.
4. Be self-motivating, focusing on outcomes during meetings and implementing work plans to benefit MRO and MRO’s registered entities.
5. Ensure that the organizational group supports MRO strategic initiatives in current and planned tasks.
6. Be supportive of Highly Effective Reliability Organization (HEROTM) principles.
7 Be supportive of proactive initiatives that improve effectiveness and efficiency for MRO and MRO’s registered entities.
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
MEETING AGENDA
Agenda Item 1 Call to Order and Determination of Quorum Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair a. Determination of Quorum and Introductions b. Standards of Conduct and Anti-Trust Guidelines c. Robert’s Rules of Order
2 Chair’s Remarks Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair
3 SPSWG Dissolution – Recognition of Members Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair 4 Consent Agenda Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair a. Approve August 25, 2020 RAC meeting minutes
5 MRO Board of Directors OGOC Update Bryan Clark, Director, Reliability Assessment and Performance Analysis a. Leadership Selection Discussion b. HERO Award 6 RSTC Update and New Subgroups John Stephens, Reliability Advisory Council Vice Chair
7 Reliability Risk Matrix Richard Burt, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, MRO 10:00 a.m.
8 Update 2020 Work Plan Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair a. Review Action Items b. Reliability Risk Matrix c. Reliability Conference Survey Results d. 2021 Reliability Conference e. 2021 Work Plan
9 SAG Review Process Bryan Clark, Director, Reliability Assessment and Performance Analysis, MRO
10 MRO Regional Risk Assessment Update John Seidel, Principal Technical Advisor, MRO
Break – 12:00 p.m. 11 Reliability Coordinator Winter Preparedness Update a. MISO – Durgesh Manjure b. SPC – Binod Shrestha c. SPP – CJ Brown
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
Agenda Item 12 NERC Committee Representative Written Reports Bryan Clark, Director, Reliability Assessment and Performance Analysis, MRO a. NERC Electric Gas Working Group (EGWG) - Jaimin Patel b. NERC Inverter Based Resource Performance Task Force (IRPTF) - David Brauch c. NERC System Planning Impacts from DER Working Group (SPIDERWG) - Sunny Raheem d. NERC Operating Reliability Subcommittee (ORS) - Steve Sanders e. NERC System Protection and Control Subcommittee (SPCS) - Mark Gutzman 13 NERC Reliability Assessments Salva Andiappan, Principal Reliability Assessment Engineer, MRO a. LTRA - Review and Accept Planning Coordinators 2020 LTRA Report b. LTRA - Webinar December 8, 2020 c. Preview of MRO Regional Winter Assessment 14 Special Protection System Working Group (SPSWG) Update John Seidel, Principal Technical Advisor, MRO 15 Protective Relay Subgroup (PRS) Update Mike Bocovich, PRS Technical Liaison, MRO 16 Upcoming Meetings and Review 2021 meeting calendar Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair 17 RAC Member Roundtable Reliability Advisory Council Members 18 Other Business and Adjourn Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 1 Call to Order and Determination of Quorum a. Determination of Quorum and Introductions - Roster Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair
Name Role Company Term Ron Gunderson Chair Nebraska Public Power District 12/31/2020
John Stephens Vice Chair City Utilities of Springfield, Missouri 12/31/2020
Allen Klassen Member Westar Energy, an Evergy Company 12/31/2021
Antoine Lucas Member Southwest Power Pool, Inc. 12/31/2021
Binod Shrestha Member Saskatchewan Power Company 12/31/2022
CJ Brown Member Southwest Power Pool, Inc. 12/31/2020
Dallas Rowley Member Oklahoma Gas and Electric 12/31/2022
Dean Schiro Member Xcel Energy 12/31/2020
Dick Pursley Member Great River Energy 12/31/2022
Dwayne Stradford Member American Electric Power 12/31/2021
Gayle Nansel Member Western Area Power Administration 12/31/2022
Jason Weiers Member Otter Tail Power Company 12/31/2021
Durgesh Manjure Member MISO 12/31/2020
Nandaka Jayasekara Member Manitoba Hydro 12/31/2022
Nicholas Giffin Member American Transmission Company 12/31/2021
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 1 Call to Order and Introductions b. Standards of Conduct and Anti-Trust Guidelines Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair
Standards of Conduct Reminder: Standards of Conduct prohibit MRO staff, committee, subcommittee, and task force members from sharing non-public transmission sensitive information with anyone who is either an affiliate merchant or could be a conduit of information to an affiliate merchant.
Anti-trust Reminder: Participants in Midwest Reliability Organization meeting activities must refrain from the following when acting in their capacity as participants in Midwest Reliability Organization activities (i.e. meetings, conference calls, and informal discussions):
• Discussions involving pricing information; and • Discussions of a participants marketing strategies; and • Discussions regarding how customers and geographical areas are to be divided among competitors; and • Discussions concerning the exclusion of competitors from markets; and • Discussions concerning boycotting or group refusals to deal with competitors, vendors, or suppliers.
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 1 Determination of Quorum c. Robert’s Rules of Order Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair Parliamentary Procedures. Based on Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised, Tenth Edition Establishing a Quorum. In order to make efficient use of time at MRO organizational group meetings, once a quorum is established, the meeting will continue, however, no votes will be taken unless a quorum is present at the time any vote is taken. Motions. Unless noted otherwise, all procedures require a “second” to enable discussion.
When you want to… Procedure Debatable Comments Raise an issue for Move Yes The main action that begins a debate. discussion Revise a Motion Amend Yes Takes precedence over discussion of currently under main motion. Motions to amend an discussion amendment are allowed, but not any further. The amendment must be germane to the main motion, and cannot reverse the intent of the main motion. Reconsider a Motion Reconsider Yes Allowed only by member who voted already resolved on the prevailing side of the original motion. Second by anyone.
End debate Call for the Question No If the Chair senses that the committee or is ready to vote, he may say “if there End Debate are no objections, we will now vote on the Motion.” Otherwise, this motion is not debatable and subject to majority approval. Record each Request a Roll Call No Takes precedence over main motion. member’s vote on a Vote No debate allowed, but the members Motion must approve by majority.
Postpone Lay on the Table Yes Takes precedence over main motion. discussion until Used only to postpone discussion later in the meeting until later in the meeting. Postpone discussion Postpone until Yes Takes precedence over main motion. until a future date Debatable only regarding the date (and time) at which to bring the Motion back for further discussion.
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
Remove the motion Postpone indefinitely Yes Takes precedence over main motion. for any further Debate can extend to the discussion consideration of the main motion. If approved, it effectively “kills” the motion. Useful for disposing of a badly chosen motion that cannot be adopted or rejected without undesirable consequences. Request a Point of order No Second not required. The Chair or review of secretary shall review the procedure parliamentary procedure used during the discussion of the Motion.
Notes on Motions Seconds. A Motion must have a second to ensure that at least two members wish to discuss the issue. The “seconder” is not required to be recorded in the minutes. Neither are motions that do not receive a second. Announcement by the Chair. The chair should announce the Motion before debate begins. This ensures that the wording is understood by the membership. Once the Motion is announced and seconded, the Committee “owns” the motion, and must deal with it according to parliamentary procedure. Voting Voting Method When Used How Recorded in Minutes When the Chair senses that the The minutes show “by unanimous Committee is substantially in consent.” agreement, and the Motion needed little or no debate. No actual vote is taken. Vote by Voice The standard practice. The minutes show Approved or Not Approved (or Failed). Vote by To record the number of votes on The minutes show both vote totals, and Show of each side when an issue has then Approved or Not Approved (or Hands (tally) engendered substantial debate or Failed). appears to be divisive. Also used when a Voice Vote is inconclusive. (The Chair should ask for a Vote by Show of Hands when requested by a member).
Vote by Roll Call To record each member’s vote. The minutes will include the list of Each member is called upon by the members, how each voted or abstained, Secretary, and the member and the vote totals. Those members for indicates either which a “Yes,” “No,” or “Present” is not shown are considered absent for the vote. “Yes,” “No,” or “Present” if abstaining.
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
Notes on Voting. Abstentions. When a member abstains, he/she is not voting on the Motion, and his/her abstention is not counted in determining the results of the vote. The Chair should not ask for a tally of those who abstained. Determining the results. A simple majority of the votes cast is required to approve an organizational group recommendations or decision. “Unanimous Approval.” Can only be determined by a Roll Call vote because the other methods do not determine whether every member attending the meeting was actually present when the vote was taken, or whether there were abstentions. Electronic Votes – For an e-mail vote to pass, the requirement is a simple majority of the votes cast during the time-period of the vote as established by the Committee Chair. Majorities. Per Robert’s Rules, as well as MRO Policy and Procedure 3, a simple majority (one more than half) is required to pass motions.
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 2 Chair’s Remarks Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair
Action Information
Report Chair Gunderson will provide an oral report during the meeting.
.
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 3 SPSWG Dissolution – Recognition of Members Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair
Action Recognition of the SPSWG members.
Report Chair Gunderson will lead the discussion at the meeting.
MIDWEST RELIABILITY ORGANIZATION OUTSTANDING SERVICE AWARD
PRESENTED TO: Andrew Berg
In honor of outstanding service, dedication and commitment to the reliability and security of the bulk power system in MRO’s region and across North Amercia.
CELEN EX T 11/18/2020
DATE SARA PATRICK, PRESIDENT AND CEO
A T CH N IEVE M E LLOYD LINKE, CHAIR OGOC MIDWEST RELIABILITY ORGANIZATION OUTSTANDING SERVICE AWARD
PRESENTED TO: David Kempf
In honor of outstanding service, dedication and commitment to the reliability and security of the bulk power system in MRO’s region and across North Amercia.
CELEN EX T 11/18/2020
DATE SARA PATRICK, PRESIDENT AND CEO
A T CH N IEVE M E LLOYD LINKE, CHAIR OGOC MIDWEST RELIABILITY ORGANIZATION OUTSTANDING SERVICE AWARD
PRESENTED TO: Ding Lin
In honor of outstanding service, dedication and commitment to the reliability and security of the bulk power system in MRO’s region and across North Amercia.
CELEN EX T 11/18/2020
DATE SARA PATRICK, PRESIDENT AND CEO
A T CH N IEVE M E LLOYD LINKE, CHAIR OGOC MIDWEST RELIABILITY ORGANIZATION OUTSTANDING SERVICE AWARD
PRESENTED TO: Gabriel Kainz
In honor of outstanding service, dedication and commitment to the reliability and security of the bulk power system in MRO’s region and across North Amercia.
CELEN EX T 11/18/2020
DATE SARA PATRICK, PRESIDENT AND CEO
A T CH N IEVE M E LLOYD LINKE, CHAIR OGOC MIDWEST RELIABILITY ORGANIZATION OUTSTANDING SERVICE AWARD
PRESENTED TO: John Grimm
In honor of outstanding service, dedication and commitment to the reliability and security of the bulk power system in MRO’s region and across North Amercia.
CELEN EX T 11/18/2020
DATE SARA PATRICK, PRESIDENT AND CEO
A T CH N IEVE M E LLOYD LINKE, CHAIR OGOC MIDWEST RELIABILITY ORGANIZATION OUTSTANDING SERVICE AWARD
PRESENTED TO: Tyler Giles
In honor of outstanding service, dedication and commitment to the reliability and security of the bulk power system in MRO’s region and across North Amercia.
CELEN EX T 11/18/2020
DATE SARA PATRICK, PRESIDENT AND CEO
A T CH N IEVE M E LLOYD LINKE, CHAIR OGOC MIDWEST RELIABILITY ORGANIZATION OUTSTANDING SERVICE AWARD
PRESENTED TO: Wayne Guttormson
In honor of outstanding service, dedication and commitment to the reliability and security of the bulk power system in MRO’s region and across North Amercia.
CELEN EX T 11/18/2020
DATE SARA PATRICK, PRESIDENT AND CEO
A T CH N IEVE M E LLOYD LINKE, CHAIR OGOC Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 4 Consent Agenda a. Approve August 25, 2020 RAC Meeting Minutes Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair
Action Vote to approve August 25, 2020 RAC Meeting Minutes as written.
Report Chair Gunderson will ask for any changes or additions to the agenda during the meeting and approval of the August 25, 2020 RAC Meeting Minutes.
DRAFT MINUTES OF THE RELIABILITY ADVISORY COUNCIL (RAC) MEETING Via Webex August 25, 2020 9:07 a.m. – 3:02 p.m. Central
1. Call to Order, Determination of Quorum, Standards of Conduct, and Anti-Trust Guidelines Chair Gunderson called the meeting to order at 9:07 a.m. due to technical difficulties. He extended a warm welcome to all attendees, roll call was taken and introductions were made. Chair Gunderson determined that a quorum was present. A complete list of attendees is included as Exhibit A. Pursuant to Policy and Procedure 4, MRO’s Standards of Conduct, Conflict of Interest and Anti-Trust Guidelines were presented Bryan Clark provided an overview of the Standards of Conduct and Anti-Trust Guidelines.
2. Chair’s Remarks Chair Gunderson mentioned current conditions regarding the pandemic and the impacts of it. Changes in the resource mix both now and potentially going forward are opportunities for us from a reliability perspective to ensure reliability. He further noted the issues in California over the past couple weeks highlighting that what we have done may not be adequate. Chair Gunderson noted times for break.
3. Consent Agenda Chair Gunderson provided a brief overview and asked if there were any objections to the June 3, 2020 RAC meeting minutes, or the June 18, 2020 RAC LTRA meeting minutes as presented.
After a brief explanation of the changes to the Charter, the Redline version of the PRS Charter was reviewed.
Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the RAC approved the consent agenda as provided in the meeting materials.
Page 13
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
4. MRO Board of Directors OGOC Update Bryan Clark, MRO Director of Reliability Assessment and Performance Analysis mentioned the RAC charter was approved by the OGOC for 2021. He also noted there has been discussion around councils and choosing their own leadership. The CMEPAC and SAC agreed with this plan and the OGOC will vote on this in September after changes to policies and procedures. The MRO HERO Award was mentioned. The Executive team is currently reviewing the many nominations received for the award and they will determine 3 candidates for final selection, the results of which will be provided shortly after the September OGOC meeting.
5. RSTC Update Vice Chair Stephens provided an update on the NERC RSTC, noting that the committee is still working on organization. A work plan was developed and the next major step is soliciting RSTC sponsors for the subcommittees and proposed reorganization for subgroups and task forces, some of which will be combined. Once the structure is approved the RSTC membership will assign members to sponsor each subgroup and act as liaison to maintain communication.
Stephens further noted that the next meeting is the first part of September and that the RSTC subcommittee reorganization was discussed at the August NERC BOT meeting last week. He provided a link to illustrate (slide 20 [Agenda Item 6f]) the impacts to RAC sponsored subgroups. It appears that the ORS will be renamed “Real Time Operations Subcommittee”, and the System Analysis and Modeling Subcommittee is being retired.
Council Member, Nick Giffin left the meeting at 10:44 a.m.
6. Update RAC 2020 Work Plan Chair Gunderson led the discussion regarding the 2020 work plan presented. A review of action Items was performed, and discussion ensued. Highlights included Standard Application Guides (SAGs) Monitoring and best practices, and a request that MRO provide an update to the RAC, since not all documents developed through the SAG process are applicable to the RAC. The importance of the SAGS was mentioned and since they may not be entirely visible to the entities it was further noted the applicable SAGS for operations and planning should be highlighted for the RAC members’ perusal. More effort is necessary to provide the RAC with applicable SAG information via webinars or newsletters to assist the members.
Chair Gunderson mentioned the applicable SAGS that apply to a TO, TOP, RC, and BA would be applicable to the RAC. Clark mentioned that a RAC member could align with MRO staff to select a SAG to discuss at the next meeting. It was reiterated that following the SAGs do not guarantee an entity will be in compliance but following the guides will be very helpful in assisting with compliance activities.
Bryan Clark mentioned he will meet with MRO staff initially, then RAC Members Nandaka Jayasakara and Dick Pursley to determine which SAGs would be helpful to discuss with the RAC. It was noted that the SAGs are posted under compliance guidance on NERC’s website. Clark provided a brief overview of the SAGs posted on MRO’s website, noting some may not be ERO endorsed. Council member Pursley mentioned there are several proposed SAGs that are in the ERO approval process at the current time.
Page 14
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
RRA feedback has not been received by Bryan Clark at this point. Seidel asked for the group to provide any comments regarding the RRA process to MRO.
Discussions regarding outstanding newsletter articles and a webinar regarding pandemic ensued.
Reliability Risk Matrix – Bryan Clark mentioned that only small changes were made at the last quarter meeting; and the CMEPAC and SAC had some feedback which will be shared with Council Member Rowley soon. Examples were requested to show the matrix in use. There is a lot of interest in this matrix and it has the potential to grow into use by more regions. An update will be provided after the next OGOC meeting.
7. AEP (SWEPCO) Outage in Texas Category 2 Event David Ball, Managing Director of Transmission Operations presented on an AEP outage experienced on August 18, 2019 in the SWEPCO area. It was a major event with load lost which was subsequently submitted to MRO and NERC. Mr. Ball would like to make this a conversation to provide insight into how AEP handled this event to prevent others from experiencing the same. Ambient conditions preceding the event were nothing abnormal, no high temperatures, no major outages or risks, blue sky day, no high temps, no rain predicted. It was however, an abnormal year for rain, which created an enhanced vegetation growth period. The sequence of events was presented.
Ball further noted, there was nothing that would have brought this up as a contingency for a loss of either facility. He highlighted AEP and SPPs tools and training, noting how in depth they are trained to notice the potentially visible indications. The Proactive Actions Taken were also highlighted, noting the conversations, collaboration and restoration efforts happening during the outage. Highlighting again, that the training and tools provided are substantial in how the outage was handled.
Any changes in management of vegetation going forward has been a topic in many conversation. The Director of the Forestry group mentioned the difference today is they are working with TOs and TPs to identify high risk circuits to trim these vegetation growths on an ongoing basis, which is more of a risk based look versus a time based look as done in the past.
Several questions were asked and discussion ensued. Gratitude was extended to Mr. Ball for presenting on the very important topic.
The council recessed for break at 11:11 a.m. and reconvened at 11:20 a.m.
Council Member Dick Pursley left the meeting at 11:11 a.m.
8. Regional Risk Assessment Process John Seidel, Principal Technical Advisor provided an update on the RRA process noting the overhaul from last year’s process. MRO reviewed the ERO risk reports that are industry wide and used that data as a starting point, with additional risks also identified. Seidel mentioned using the risk matrix being rolled out to run through the risks identified on this report to generate our own heat report. MRO staff will review other RRAs as they are all different from each region to identify any other risks applicable to MRO. The SAC may be asked to utilize the risk matrix chart as well, noting the ongoing process. One item to note and consider in the 2021 report would be the deployment of load modifying resources to
Page 15
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
increase reliability. A summary of the three LMR BAs was also highlighted. LMR are customer choice so we need to look at resource adequacy to reflect the new resource mix in a timely fashion. Some of the resources are not dispatchable when the load is high, the generation is not. Seidel mentioned this is a good tool for the RC and more of a question for the RTOs, if they feel comfortable using the tool and is it sufficient. The resource adequacy assessments are no longer a peak hour exercise it is a 24/7 exercise as these types of events can happen any time of the year so it is incumbent on our industry to broaden how we access and monitor resource adequacy.
The council recessed for lunch at 12:00 p.m. and reconvened at 1:00 p.m.
9. Reliability Coordinator Summer Updates a. MISO – Durgesh Manjure provided an overview of operations for MISO with a partial summary for June and July. Highlights included COVID-19 restrictions, severe weather, results of warmer weather and low fuel prices. Also highlighted was a Maximum Generation Event, Conservative Operations, Hot Weather Alerts and a Transmission System Emergency. Uncertainty in both load and supply were reliably managed with normal and emergency procedures. COVID-19 Impacts to Energy Usage since March, impact on MISO load levels, and Monthly System Load and Temperature were presented. Manjure further noted that transmission emergency is a resource shortage in a particular area, and is a matter of delivering resources where needed.
b. SPC –Binod Shrestha provided an overview of the SPC operations. Summary to date nothing extraordinary to report at this time. The load in Sask Power is picking up as COVID restrictions are lightening up, and catching up to previous years’ load but still slightly lacking. In terms of operating issues, a couple events were reported. The transmission line under construction was mentioned as being operational next year.
c. SPP –CJ Brown provided an overview of the SPP operations and mentioned the peak for the summer so far was in July, which could be passed today, however, remains to be seen. SPP is seeing a little more load typically seen at the same temperature and are monitoring closely. Any forced outage trends are being looked at very closely. Generational alerts have been issued, with education and internal processes in place. Brown further noted that it is overall a good summer, not a lot of events, fortunate to maintain enough generation, and there has been good wind generation this year. The resource alert during Fourth of July week was discussed. SPP did commit forward resources to project for insufficient resources even though load didn’t fully materialize.
10. NERC Committee Representative Written Reports Bryan Clark, Director, Reliability Assessment and Performance Analysis provided an overview of the following reports provided in the Agenda packet. Discussion ensued on the need for coverage on the ORS subcommittee.
a. NERC Electric Gas Working Group (EGWG) - Jaimin Patel
b. NERC Inverter Based Resource Performance Task Force (IRPTF) - David Brauch
c. NERC System Planning Impacts from Distributed Energy Resources Working Group (SPIDERWG) - Sunny Raheem
Page 16
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
d. NERC Operations Reliability Subcommittee (ORS) - Steve Sanders
e. NERC System Analysis and Modeling Subcommittee (SAMS) - Amanda Schiro
f. NERC System Protection and Control Subcommittee (SPCS) - Mark Gutzmann
11. NERC Reliability Assessments a. Long Term Reliability Assessment.
Salva Andiappan, Principal Reliability Assessment Engineer provided an overview on the LTRA. NERC is still developing sections of the report to be shared next week, as assessment areas with reserve margins are falling below. The report will include discussions on COVID-19 impacts and DERs and battery storage and hybrid generation was highlighted. Aging infrastructure, NY area footprint shows a lot of aging and will also be discussed. MISO and SPP have a large number of battery storage in the generation interconnection queue for the upcoming years. Andiappan further noted the report should be out the week of September 14, 2020 and for review at the November RAC meeting. December 17, 2020 is the public release date scheduled as of now.
b. State of Reliability Report
John Seidel, Principal Technical Advisor provided an overview of the NERC 2020 State of Reliability report. He drew everyone’s attention to Table AR.1: State of Reliably Major Parts and commented on the included data. Key findings were highlighted noting that Misop rates were declining. Also noteworthy was the chart for count of Events by Year, the SRI chart and RISC risks. MRO will be working on a report for the RAC Q4 meeting for feedback to include.
Council Member Durgesh Manjure left the meeting at 2:00 p.m.
12. Special Protection System Working Group (SPSWG) Update a. Update
John Seidel, Principal Technical Advisor provided an update on the group, noting that the last handful of reviews are being worked on and all RCs and PCs have downloaded the database of the RASs and letters have been sent regarding the handoff. The few remaining RAS reviews were highlighted. It was noted that dynamic resources may want to look at different flow gates and explore other resources in the area that could be utilized for congestion management have a very robust and dynamic monitoring system in process. Dynamic ratings have a lot of complications with many moving parts and are more of a market or financial issue, when you have a dynamic rating the rate becomes less valuable. The EMS model will have to be pristine to have appropriate distribution factors to consider and have to track every resource to have impact on the flow gates to calculate the distribution response factors.
b. SPSWG Dissolution
Page 17
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair asked the RAC to recommend to the OGOC that the SPSWG be dissolved.
Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the RAC unanimously approved to recommend to the OGOC dissolution of the SPSWG.
13. Protective Relay Subgroup Update Mike Bocovich, PRS Technical Liaison provided an overview of the last PRS meeting, noting the misoperation rate was higher than the NERC average. Many of these were high impact misoperations. Bocovich noted the PRS held a webinar on July 21 on high impact misoperations that was well attended. A high number of blocking schemes were credited for misoperations and a survey was conducted within the group representing 90% of the transmission lines in the footprint. He further noted that some entities have a large number of blocking schemes but very few misoperations with those schemes. MIPSYCON was touched on as Mike Bocovich will be presenting there with John Grimm and also advertising the PRS at the conference. Lessons learned were also covered at the PRS meeting, one on cold weather operation was approved to send to NERC. A Lessons Learned on Lockout Relay Component Failures was published by NERC on July 30, 2020. Another Lessons Learned was also published on Mixing Relay Technologies in DCB Schemes in July.
Chair Gunderson asked for a newsletter article to be completed regarding these LLs.
14. Upcoming Meetings and Review 2020 Meeting Calendar a. Expiring Terms
Chair Gunderson noted several terms will be expiring at the end of this year, and that the RCs and PCs have a designated seat per the charter.
b. Election Process Review
Chair Gunderson provided an overview of the election process timeline.
The 2021 Proposed Council Meeting Dates was presented for review. Chair Gunderson noted that he has a conflict with the first Quarter meeting and asked to move the RAC meeting to August.
Bryan Clark offered up information for the conference tomorrow and mentioned the dry run that was held Monday, noting the quality of topics.
15. RAC Member Roundtable Chair Gunderson provided an opportunity for all RAC members to discuss anything that they wanted to discuss that was not already covered in this meeting. Discussion ensued.
16. Other Business and Adjourn Chair Gunderson asked if there was any other business to discuss. Having no further business to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 3:02 p.m.
Upon a motion duly made and seconded, the RAC unanimously agreed to adjourn the meeting.
Page 18
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
Prepared by: Dana Klem, RAPA Administrator.
Reviewed and Submitted by: Bryan Clark, Director, Reliability Assessment and Performance Analysis
EXHIBIT A – MEETING ATTENDEES
Reliability Advisory Council Members Present
Name Organization
Ron Gunderson, Chair Nebraska Public Power District
John Stephens, Vice Chair City Utilities of Springfield Missouri
Allen Klassen Evergy, Inc.
Antoine Lucas Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Binod Shrestha Saskatchewan Power Company
CJ Brown Southwest Power Pool, Inc.
Dallas Rowley Oklahoma Gas and Electric
Dean Schiro Xcel Energy
Dick Pursley Great River Energy
Durgesh Manjure MISO
Dwayne Stradford American Electric Power
Gayle Nansel Western Area Power Administration
Jason Weiers Otter Tail Power Company
Nandaka Jayasekara Manitoba Hydro
Nicholas Giffin American Transmission Company
Members Not Present
MRO Staff Present
Name Title
Bryan Clark Director of Reliability Assessment and Performance Analysis
Dana Klem RCS and RAPA Administrator
Page 19
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
Dianlong Wong Senior Power Systems Engineer
Estee Kolles Security Administrator
Jake Bernhagen Senior Systems Protection Engineer
John Seidel Principal Technical Advisor
Mike Bocovich Principal Systems Protection Engineer
Salva Andiappan Principal Reliability Assessment Engineer
Guests
Name Organization
Amanda Schiro MISO
Bryn Wilson Oklahoma Gas and Electric
CH Campbell Wood County Electric Cooperative
Constance McDaniel Wyman Public Utilities Commission Texas
David Ball American Electric Power
David Bautista Public Utilities Commission Texas
David Brauch MISO
Kevin Goolsby GDS Associates
Logan Thompson Wood County Electric Cooperative
Mary Agnes Nimis FERC
Page 20
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 5 MRO Board of Directors OGOC Update a. Leadership Selection Discussion Bryan Clark, Director, Reliability Assessment and Performance Analysis
Action Information
Report Bryan Clark will provide an oral report during the meeting.
Page 21
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 5 MRO Board of Directors OGOC Update b. HERO Award Bryan Clark, Director, Reliability Assessment and Performance Analysis
Action Information
Report Bryan Clark will provide an oral report during the meeting.
Page 22
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 6 RSTC Update and New Subgroups John Stephens, Reliability Advisory Council, Vice Chair
Action Information
Report Vice Chair Stephens will provide an oral report during the meeting.
Page 23
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 7 Reliability Risk Matrix Richard Burt, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, MRO
Action Information
Report Richard Burt will provide an oral report during the meeting.
Page 24
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 8 Update RAC 2020 Work Plan a. Review Action Items Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair
Action Discussion
Report Chair Gunderson will lead these discussions during the meeting. The 2020 RAC Work Plan can be found here.
Page 25
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 8 Update RAC 2020 Work Plan b. Reliability Risk Matrix Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair
Action Discussion
Report Chair Gunderson will lead these discussions during the meeting.
Page 26 Reliability Risk Matrix
Assessing and prioritizing reliability and security risk to the regional bulk power system
1 ERO Six-Step Framework
Risk Identification Risk Prioritization Mitigation Identification and Evaluation Mitigation Deployment Measurement of Success Monitor Residual Risk MRO Organizational Groups
MRO’s Village:
3 Risk Matrix and Ranking
4 Concept A tool to provide guidance through the decision making processes when ranking reliability risk Keep it simple. One page, if possible Risk Matrix Consequence/Impact – What could go wrong? How could it effect BPS Reliability?
Severe (C5) Impacts may have widespread effects to the BPS across North America.
Major (C4) Impacts may have widespread effects to the MRO footprint.
Moderate (C3) Impacts may have widespread effects to portions of the MRO footprint.
Minor (C2) Impacts may have effects on the local entity.
Consequence, Impacts may have small or non-existent effects in nature. Negligible (C1) Impact and Likelihood – What is the reasonable probability that consequences will occur? Likelihood Control – No NERC reliability standards in place for mitigation. Almost Certain (L5) Monitoring – Increasing trends have been identified. History – Documented events or widely publicized exploits have been recorded. Control – No NERC reliability standards in place for mitigation. Likely (L4) Monitoring – Some trends have been identified. History – Documented events or generally publicized exploits have been recorded. Control – NERC reliability standards in place for limited mitigation. Possible (L3) Monitoring – Some trends have been identified. History – No documented events or moderately publicized exploits have been recorded. Control – NERC reliability standards are in place for mitigation. Unlikely (L2) Monitoring – Some trends have been identified. History – No documented events or minimally publicized exploits have been recorded. Control – NERC reliability standards are in place for mitigation. Very Unlikely (L1) Monitoring – No known trends identified. History – No documented events or no publicized exploits have been recorded. Consequence/Impact
Consequence/Impact – What could go wrong? How could it effect BPS Reliability?
Impacts may have widespread effects to the BPS across North Severe (C5) America. Major (C4) Impacts may have widespread effects to the MRO footprint. Impacts may have widespread effects to portions of the MRO Moderate (C3) footprint. Minor (C2) Impacts may have effects on the local entity.
Negligible (C1) Impacts may have small or non-existent effects in nature. Likelihood
Likelihood – What is the reasonable probability that consequences will occur? Control – No NERC reliability standards in place for mitigation. Almost Certain (L5) Monitoring – Increasing trends have been identified. History – Documented events or widely publicized exploits have been recorded. Control – No NERC reliability standards in place for mitigation. Likely (L4) Monitoring – Some trends have been identified. History – Documented events or generally publicized exploits have been recorded. Control – NERC reliability standards in place for limited mitigation. Possible (L3) Monitoring – Some trends have been identified. History – No documented events or moderately publicized exploits have been recorded. Control – NERC reliability standards are in place for mitigation. Unlikely (L2) Monitoring – Some trends have been identified. History – No documented events or minimally publicized exploits have been recorded. Control – NERC reliability standards are in place for mitigation. Very Unlikely (L1) Monitoring – No known trends identified. History – No documented events or no publicized exploits have been recorded. Theft of Spare Equipment Extreme Weather Natural Gas Delivery Disruption Use Case Examples Risk Example 1: Theft of Spare Equipment
Example: • Drones used to identify coil of conductor in substation yard, leading to theft. • Conductor is not installed on the system. • Reports and trends of similar occurrences. • NERC Reliability Standard exists for physical perimeter of critical substations, but not all.
Consequence/Impact = Negligible (C1): • Impacts have small or non-existent effects in nature.
Likelihood = Possible (L3): • Control – NERC reliability standards in place for limited mitigation. • Monitoring – Some trends have been identified. • History – No documented events or moderately publicized exploits have been recorded. Risk Example 2: Extreme Weather
Example: • Severe weather causes numerous toppled transmission structures and outages to multiple BES facilities across the region. • Documented events have occurred annually, and are becoming more common. • No NERC Reliability Standards in place for direct mitigation. Consequence/Impact = Major (C4) • Impacts have widespread effects to the MRO footprint. Likelihood = Almost Certain (L5) • Control – No NERC Reliability Standards in place for mitigation. • Monitoring – Increasing trends identified. • History – Documented events have been recorded. Risk Example 3: Natural Gas Delivery Disruption
Example: • A large disruption to the natural gas supply in the Midwest that impacts a number of BPS Generators. • No NERC Reliability Standards in place for mitigation. • Recent history shows trends of increasing reliability impact due to gas delivery disruptions. • Similar historical events have caused reliability impacts.
Consequence/Impact = Moderate (C3) • Impacts have widespread effects to the MRO footprint.
Likelihood = Likely (L4) • Control – No NERC Reliability Standards in place for mitigation. • Monitoring – Some trends have been identified. • History – Documented events have been recorded. Next Steps
Pilot during Regional Security Risk Assessment and Regional Risk Assessment Share risk assessment results with OGOC in Q4 ERO Enterprise Collaboration
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 8 Update RAC 2020 Work Plan c. Reliability Conference Survey Results Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair
Action Discussion
Report Chair Gunderson will lead these discussions during the meeting. There were 231 attendees during the conference.
Page 27 Q1: Welcome: Bryan Clark, Director of Reliability Assessments and Performance Analysis, MRO Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q1: Welcome: Bryan Clark, Director of Reliability Assessments and Performance Analysis, MRO Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q2: Emcee: Dallas Rowley, Director of Systems Operations, Oklahoma Gas & Electric and Member of Reliability Advisory Council Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q2: Emcee: Dallas Rowley, Director of Systems Operations, Oklahoma Gas & Electric and Member of Reliability Advisory Council Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q3: Morning Keynote Speaker, Chairman Ryan Silvey, Missouri Public Service Commission Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q3: Morning Keynote Speaker, Chairman Ryan Silvey, Missouri Public Service Commission Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q4: NERC Electric Gas Working Group, Thomas Coleman, Director of Power Risk Issues and Strategic Management, NERC Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q4: NERC Electric Gas Working Group, Thomas Coleman, Director of Power Risk Issues and Strategic Management, NERC Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q5: Storage Technology, Jeffrey Plew, Director of Development, Nextera Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q5: Storage Technology, Jeffrey Plew, Director of Development, Nextera Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q6: Inverter Based Resource Performance Task Force, Richard Bauer, Associate Principal Engineer of Event Analysis, NERC Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q6: Inverter Based Resource Performance Task Force, Richard Bauer, Associate Principal Engineer of Event Analysis, NERC Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q7: Distributed Energy Resources in System Operations, Adam Guinn, PE, REES, Duke Energy Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q7: Distributed Energy Resources in System Operations, Adam Guinn, PE, REES, Duke Energy Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q8: Waupaca Area Storage Project, Randy Johanning, Senior Transmission Planning Engineer, American Transmission Company Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q8: Waupaca Area Storage Project, Randy Johanning, Senior Transmission Planning Engineer, American Transmission Company Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q9: Experience with the registration process Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q9: Experience with the registration process Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q10: Satisfaction of conference content Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q10: Satisfaction of conference content Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q11: Overall experience with a fully virtualized conference Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q11: Overall experience with a fully virtualized conference Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q12: Overall satisfaction with this conference Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q12: Overall satisfaction with this conference Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q13: How was the length of this virtual conference? Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Q13: How was the length of this virtual conference? Answered: 16 Skipped: 0 Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 8 Update RAC 2020 Work Plan d. 2021 Reliability Conference Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair
Action Discussion
Report Chair Gunderson will lead these discussions during the meeting. Currently scheduled for offsite on August 24, 2021.
Page 28 Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 8 Update RAC 2020 Work Plan e. 2021 Work Plan Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair
Action Discussion
Report Chair Gunderson will lead these discussions during the meeting. The 2020 RAC Work Plan can be found here.
Page 29
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 9 SAG Review Process Bryan Clark, Director, Reliability Assessment and Performance Analysis
Action Information
Report Bryan Clark will present on the topic during the meeting.
Page 30 MRO Standard Application Guides (SAGs)
1 Application Guidance
NERC Technical Reliability Rationale and Standard Basis
Standard Developed by Application MRO Guides Stakeholders
NERC Implementation CMEP Practice Compliance Guidance Guides Guidance Compliance Guidance
Implementation Guidance • Examples of implementing standards developed by industry CMEP Practice Guides • Developed by ERO Enterprise, posted on the NERC website for transparency
3 Process
Submit Form on MRO Website CMEPAC forms SMET SMET Develops the Guide Approval through CMEPAC Approval through ERO Enterprise
4 Recent SAGs
PRC-002-2 Disturbance Monitoring and Reporting • Clarification of Fault Recorder (FR) Trigger Setting Requirements MOD-25 Generator Real and Reactive Power Capability • Verification and Data Reporting of Generator Real and Reactive Power Capability and Synchronous Condenser Reactive Power Capability
5 SMET
6 Industry Guidance
7 Recently Published Guidance Documents TPL-007-4 Transmission Planned Performance for Geomagnetic Disturbance Events TOP-001-4 and IRO-002-5 Data Exchange Infrastructure and Testing TOP-010(i) R3 and IRO-018(i) R2 –RTA Quality of Analysis
8 RAC Involvement
Educating the RAC on the SAG process Educating a broader Audience(MRO Region) Assisting or reviewing SAGs during the process
9
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 10 MRO Regional Risk Assessment Process John Seidel, Principal Technical Advisor
Action Information
Report John Seidel will provide an oral report at the meeting.
Page 31
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 11 Reliability Coordinator Update a. MISO - Durgesh Manure
Action Information
Report Durgesh Manjure will provide an update during the meeting.
Page 32
MISO Operations Report
MRO Reliability Advisory Council Meeting November 18, 2020 Executive Summary • Reliability and market operations performed well during August and September 2020.
• MISO Operations were challenged by severe weather events, particularly by Hurricane Laura in August.
• Reliability was maintained with emergency procedures and partnerships with members and neighbors, including the first ever MISO directed load shed event.
2 Reliability, markets and operational functions performed well in September
Cooler than previous September temperatures drove lower peak load HIGHLIGHTS
PEAK LOAD ACTIONS IN THE SOUTH REGION FOLLOWING HURRICANE LAURA 115 115 Conservative Operations: September 3- 107 96 16; September 16 - October 9 2017 2018 2019 2020 (Lake Charles area only)
Decreased load and lower fuel prices impacted Capacity Advisory: September 3-14 Real-Time LMP Transmission Advisory: September 3-16 REAL-TIME LMP
$32 $34 ACTIONS IN THE SOUTH REGION $25 RELATED TO HURRICANE SALLY
$/MWh $19 Severe Weather Alert: September 14-16
2017 2018 2019 2020
3 * Western half of the West of the Atchafalaya Basin (WOTAB) load pocket MISO maintained reliability through challenging conditions in August
North/Central Region high temperatures drove peak HIGHLIGHTS load late in the month
PEAK LOAD GULF COAST HURRICANES (MISO SOUTH) MAXIMUM GENERATION EVENT, STEP 5 117 August 27 (WOTAB Load Pocket) 109 114 117 LOCAL TRANSMISSION EMERGENCY: August 28 CONSERVATIVE OPERATIONS: August 24, 2017 2018 2019 2020 August 26-31+ SEVERE WEATHER ALERT: August 24, Increase in fuel prices and impact of Hurricane Laura August 26-28 drove higher Real-Time prices this August
REAL-TIME LMP MIDWEST DERECHO (AUGUST 10) CONSERVATIVE OPERATIONS: MISO North $31 $27 $29 SEVERE WEATHER ALERT: MISO Central
$23 $/MWh HOT WEATHER ALERTS Central Region: August 24 2017 2018 2019 2020 North and Central Regions: August 27
4 WOTAB = West of the Atchafalaya Basin Maximum Generation Warning preceded Maximum Generation Step 5 on August 27 Hurricane Laura – highlights
• Hurricane Laura made landfall as the strongest storm to hit the Louisiana coast since 1856, causing extensive damage to distribution and transmission systems in Louisiana and east Texas.
• MISO declared a Max Gen Emergency Step 5 in response to impacts of Hurricane Laura and maintained reliability with emergency procedures and partnerships with members and neighbors. This was MISO’s first directed load shed event.
• Emergency procedures were active from August 24 through August 28 to effectively operate through the tight conditions – conservative operations are still in effect.
5 MISO declared a Max Gen Event Step 5 in response to impacts of Hurricane Laura; Reliability was maintained with emergency procedures and partnerships with members and neighbors
August 24; 26-28 August 27, 11 EST August 27, 11:40 – 22:54 EST
South Severe Weather Alert South Conservative Operations Max Gen Warning Max Gen Event Step 5 Central and North/Central Hot (WOTAB) (WOTAB) Weather Alert
• Two strong weather systems (Marco • Forced transmission outages impacted the and Laura) headed toward MISO South reliability of the West of the Atchafalaya Basin • Potential impacts to generation, (WOTAB) load pocket transmission and imports were • Transmission congestion and depleted assessed; Assets unable to withstand operating reserves in the load pocket, resulting hurricane impacts were pre-positioned in instructing 500 MW of load shed • Additional control room personnel • Actions were made to keep the area stable until called in, per Hurricane Readiness transmission capability was restored procedures
Normal Operating Processes Max Gen Warning Max Gen Event
Regional Dispatch Transfer flowing S-N (2,500 MW limit) during event 6 *This event was MISO’s first directed load shed Hurricane Laura caused extensive damage to distribution and transmission systems in Louisiana and East Texas
1 – 138kV tie to SPP was opened at 1203
1- 345kV tie to SPP remained in service Texas
7
1 – 500kV line tripped at 0634 7 - final “MISO” tie to the HLLP August 27, 2020 – Timeline of Hurricane Laura-related actions
8 Contact:
Durgesh Manjure [email protected] Appendix Emergency Operating Procedures guide operator actions when an event has the potential to negatively impact system reliability
• Five declarations are used to prepare operating personnel and facilities for extreme weather conditions or abnormal conditions that will, or have the potential to, impact the Bulk Electric System (BES):
Conservative Geo-Magnetic Severe Hot Weather Cold Weather System Disturbance Weather Alert Alert Alert Operations Warning
• Allows MISO and regional operators to defer or cancel transmission or generation outages to increase transfer capability and capacity • Provide instructions for returning planned outages/maintenance equipment to service, if possible, in the impacted areas • Suspend all work on critical computer systems • Prepare for the implementation of Emergency Procedures
11 MISO’s operating procedures ensure reliability during emergency or abnormal operating situations
Conservative Operations: If conditions warrant, MISO will transition from normal operating conditions to Conservative Operations to prepare local operating personnel for a potential event, and to prevent a situation or event from deteriorating
Emergency Operations: Emergency Operating Procedures (EOPs) guide system operator actions when an event occurs on the electric system that has the potential to, or actually does, negatively impact system reliability. EOPs are communicated in escalating order as alerts, warnings, and events
Cold or Hot Weather Alert Extreme temperatures forecasted
Severe Weather Alert Adverse weather conditions within the area
Conservative Operations Declarations Reliability issues may be possible Maximum Generation Alert MISO forecasts a potential capacity shortage Maximum Generation Warning Preparing for a possible event Maximum Generation Event (Step 1) / EEA*1 Taking steps to preserve operating reserves Maximum Generation Event (Steps 2, 3, 4) / EEA*2 Taking steps to preserve firm load Actual event occurring - shed firm load and/or Maximum Generation Event (Step 5) / EEA*3 perform rolling brownouts or blackouts for defined area
*NERC Emergency Energy Alert (EEA)
12 Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 11 Reliability Coordinator Update b. SPC - Binod Shrestha
Action Information
Report Binod Shrestha will provide an update during the meeting.
Page 33
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 11 Reliability Coordinator Update c. CJ - Brown, SPP
Action Information
Report CJ Brown will provide an update during the meeting.
Page 34
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 12 NERC Committee Representative Written Reports a. NERC Electric Gas Working Group (EGWG) Jaimin Patel, EGWG Representative
Action Information
Report Since the last RAC meeting, the EGWG had WebEx meeting on September 29, 2020. The meeting agenda and minutes are posted on the NERC website.
The next WebEx meeting is scheduled on December 2, 2020. The draft meeting agenda with WebEx registration link is posted on the NERC website.
Area of Focus:
1. The EGWG focuses on, • creating the 2021 work plan and, • discussion on potential metrics on the approved Reliability Guideline: Fuel Assurance and Fuel- Related Reliability Risk Analysis for the Bulk Power System 2. Recently, the Reliability Guideline: Gas and Electrical Operational Considerations was sent out for comments. The comment period is opened from October 15, 2020 to November 15, 2020. 3. The presentations on power plant-gas grid dependence and electric-gas issues in CAISO were included for the discussion in the last meeting. Both presentations are posted on the NERC website. Accomplishments:
1. Discussed briefly on developing the EGWG-2021 work plan 2. Planned for further discussion/meeting on measurement criteria on reliability guideline (included in the next meeting agenda). Challenges:
Potential measurement criteria and metrics on the approved Reliability Guideline: Fuel Assurance and Fuel-Related Reliability Risk Analysis for the Bulk Power System.
Page 35
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 12 NERC Committee Representative Written Reports b. NERC Inverter Based Resource Performance Task Force (IRPTF) David Brauch, IRPTF Representative
Action Information
Report
Areas of Focus
1. BESS and Hybrid Plant Performance, Modeling, and Studies Guideline: Final draft of the guideline has been circulated for final edits prior to moving the guideline forward to RSTC on November 16. This guideline has been the primary focus of the IRPWG over the course of the summer. 2. EMT Modeling Guideline: Once the BESS guideline has been wrapped up the EMT Modeling guideline will become IRPWG primary focus going forward. The first call is scheduled for November 20th. 3. IRPWG Scope and Conference Call: November 16 has a called schedule to update the team scope document as well provide a general discuss on the status of IRPWG’s work plan and products. Accomplishments
1. IRPWG, formerly IRPTF, is transitioning from a task force to a working group. 2. BESS and Hybrid Plant guideline is near finalization as the top item of importance from the IRPTF survey. Challenges
1. EMT modeling is the next task on IRPWG’s work plan. The big challenge will be the EMT modeling is more highly detailed than steady state and positive sequence stability modeling. This will require significant collaboration with equipment manufacturers as controls software is vital to developing an accurate EMT model. Also, there will be some barriers for certain manufacturers to be open with this level of detail as most manufacturers consider source code to be intellectual property. 2. Synchronous units have traditionally been equipped with power system stabilizers. As these resources are retired or are not committed, there will be a growing need for oscillation damping support on the system. Thoughts should be given to looking at the need and requirements for inverter based resources to provide this support. Batteries do appear to be the most advantageous to provide damping with the ability to charge and discharge.
Draft BESS and Hybrid Power Plants Reliability Guideline
Page 36 Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 12 NERC Committee Representative Written Reports c. NERC System Planning Impacts from DER Working Group (SPIDERWG) Sunny Raheem, SPIDERWG Representative
Action Information
Report Sunny Raheem will provide an update at the meeting.
Page 37
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 12 NERC Committee Representative Written Reports d. NERC Real-Time Operating Subcommittee (RTOS) f/k/a Operations Reliability Subcommittee (ORS) Steve Sanders, RTOS Representative
Action Provide MRO/RAC positions or questions/issues to be carried to the RTOS (e.g. any RAC concerns if the RCs discontinue EI frequency monitoring – see below).
Report The NERC RSTC changed the Operating Reliability Subcommittee (ORS) name to the Real-Time Operating Subcommittee (RTOS) to better reflects the role the RTOS will play for providing a resource of industry experts to NERC, developing various guidance, reliability guidelines, tools, situational awareness and best-practice products, and coordinating with other working groups within the RSTC. Two meetings Attended: November 4, 2020 and September 9, 2020 (WebEx). Upcoming RTOS Meetings will be held February 9, 2021 and May 5, 2021 (WebEx).
Areas of Focus
1. Operating Events, Operational Status. a. No major issues for most RCs, Hurricanes resulted in numerous outages, No proxy flowgate issues in MRO area, some recent EEA3s outside of MRO area, no frequency event issues reported. RTOS briefed on recent load shedding and islanding events, and additional mitigation measures proposed to address in the future. b. System Oscillations: The Synchronized Measurement Working Group (SMWG) is developing a system oscillation report template and guidelines for using reports. c. Frequency Monitoring: RTOS still discussing frequency monitoring and criteria and will likely retain and amend monitoring criteria for consistency with RS (currently being done in EI by TVA – see 5/5/20 Meeting Presentations, pg. 125). d. RTOS was briefed by RS on potential retirement of NAESB WEQ-003 standard related to ACE equation special cases, interconnection frequency response performance trends, and issues with Inadvertent Accumulation in the EI including impacts of TEC. 2. NERC Reliability Guidelines/Compliance Issues a. RTOS reviewed/updated “Gas and Electrical Operational Coordination Considerations”. b. Time Error Correction: RTOS discussed pending FERC review of NAESB Standards Ver. 3.2 (which retired WEQ-006) and NAESB BPS reconsideration (Item 8.a) of whether the TEC standards should be retained or revised. 3. NERC Tools/New Initiatives a. (On-going) PFV: PFV production implementation is awaiting NAESB WEQ-008 approval by FERC and other issue resolution. IDC Steering Committee working on pending change orders and training modules. Current expectation is that PFV will be further delayed with implementation by Q1 2022 (pending FERC review and final order).
Page 38
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
b. (On-going) SAFNR: RTOS monitoring SAFNR v3 implementation. NERC is still working to provide RCs with access, and implementation of RC models (including detail in models, input, user access, training, and updates). Oscillation detection being added. c. (On-going) GSE: RTOS received an update on the Grid Security Emergency (GSE) Communications project and provided several RTOS member volunteers to participate in the coordinating group. The key concerns raised were related to DOE contacts with the Dispatch centers, the scope of directions to RCs, and the need for communications to be with management rather than real-time dispatchers. d. GridEx VI: RTOS received an update on the upcoming GridEx VI, and the group was requested to provide feedback on the proposed Scenarios. 4. RTOS Work Plan (Current 2020 Work Plan, Upcoming 2021 Work Plan) a. RTOS review/updates to guidance documents and reference guidelines1 as necessary, preparations for delayed implementation of the Parallel Flow Visualization (PFV) tool following parallel operations, and monitoring the transition/retirement of the RCIS. b. RTOS coordination with NERC RS (and RS Frequency WG) on frequency events.
Accomplishments
1. RTOS approved updates to the RTOS Scope and the SMWG Scope. 2. RTOS endorsed the Reliability Guideline: Gas and Electrical Operational Coordination Considerations” for posting for 45 day comment period.
Challenges (On-going) RTOS coordination with EIDSN/NERC on PFV.
Reference Information November 4, 2020 and September 9, 2020 RTOS Meetings – Agendas/Minutes/Presentations: • https://www.nerc.com/comm/OC/Operating%20Reliability%20Subcommittee%20ORS%202013/ORS_Agenda_Nov_4_2020. pdf • https://www.nerc.com/comm/OC/Operating%20Reliability%20Subcommittee%20ORS%202013/ORS_Minutes_Sep_9_2020. pdf • https://www.nerc.com/comm/
Page 39
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 12 NERC Committee Representative Written Reports e. NERC System Protection and Control Subcommittee (SPCS) Mark Gutzmann, SPCS Representative
Action Information
Report The System Protection and Control Subcommittee has changed its name to the System Protection and Control Working Group (SPCWG). The SPCWG has conducted two virtual meetings on September 2nd and November 2nd. The SPCWG activity has been associated with the PRC-023 Standards Authorization Request (SAR), PRC-019 Compliance Implementation Guidance, PRC-024 Compliance Implementation Guidance Whitepaper and the IBR Impact on BPS Protection Technical Report.
Areas of Focus
1. PRC-023-4 Standard Authorization Request [Presently with the Standards Committee] Requirement R2 concerns out-of-step blocking (OOSB) elements which are utilized on some transmission line protection systems and has caused some confusion for entities leading some entities to unnecessarily disable these elements. Disabling these OOSB elements could lead to instability. Attachment A, exclusion item 2.3 is a related exclusion to Requirement R2. This proposed SAR eliminates or clarifies these two items in PRC-023-4 and directs any needed changes be applied to PRC-026-1 (Relay Performance During Stable Power Swings).
2. PRC-019 Compliance Implementation Guidance This was endorsed by the Reliability and Security Technical Committee during the September 15, 2020 meeting and submitted to the ERO Compliance Assurance Group. The endorsed guidance document was submitted to the ERO Compliance group on October 6, 2020.
3. PRC-024 Compliance Implementation Guidance Whitepaper An SPCWG subgroup has been meeting regularly and making steady progress. Steven Hataway is leading the group. Steve indicated they are on track and have gone through the main body, calculations, and updated the key terms. Will start looking at Appendix A. Looking to change undervoltage calculation and update guidance on IBR.
4. IBR Impact on BPS Protection Technical Report Several questions were raised regarding this report – are we going to identify solutions in this report? The intent of report is to identify the issues. Will this document really do anything different than the IEEE document? Document is a collaborative effort but the majority lies with SPCWG. We decided to change course a little on this document and rather than focus on each protection system type issue, we are going to discuss the IEEE Power System Relaying Committee (PSRC) work that has identified ways to mitigate issues.
Page 40
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
Accomplishments
Completed webinar on Verification of AC Quantities during Protection System Design and Commissioning Streaming Webinar Presentation
Challenges
Presently no significant challenges.
Page 41
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 13 NERC Reliability Assessments a. Long Term Reliability Assessment – Review and Accept Planning Coordinators 2020 LTRA Report Salva Andiappan, Principal Reliability Assessment Engineer
Action Information
Report Salva Andiappan will lead the discussion during the meeting.
Page 42
Planning Coordinators 2020 LTRA Report
Presented by: Salva Andiappan RAPA Department 2020 LTRA
Assessment Period 2020 through 2030 5-Year Projected Reserve Margins 2025 Peak 2025 Expected Capacity Anticipated Reference Surplus or Assessment Result Assessment Area Reserve Margin Margin Level Shortfall (MW) Through 2025 MISO 16.4% 18.0% -1,990 Marginal MRO-Manitoba 13.5% 12.0% 70 Adequate MRO-SaskPower 31.5% 11.0% 742 Adequate SPP 23.4% 15.8% 4,124 Adequate
2020 LTRA
MISO 5-year Projected Reserves 2020 LTRA
Nameplate Capacity of Solar (MW) Nameplate Capacity of Wind (MW) Assessment Area Existing Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Total Existing Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Total MISO 204 1,718 49,292 7,025 58,239 22,062 4,119 19,281 2,921 48,383 Manitoba 0 0 0 0 0 259 0 0 0 259 SaskPower 0 11 10 57 79 242 385 0 400 1,027 SPP 273 284 11,103 - 11,660 21,892 2,646 15,641 5,253 45,432 Total 477 2,013 60,405 7,082 69,977 44,455 7,150 34,922 8,574 95,101 Planned Solar and Wind Capacity for MRO Assessment Areas through 2030
8,500 MW of Utility Scale Battery Storage 2020 LTRA
Solar DER by Assessment Area by 2030 QUESTIONS MISO MISO is a not-for-profit, member-based organization administering wholesale electricity markets that provide customers with valued service; reliable, cost-effective systems and operations; dependable and transparent prices; open access to markets; and planning for long-term efficiency.
MISO manages energy, reliability, and operating reserve markets that consist of 36 local Balancing Authorities (BAs) and 394 market participants, serving approximately 42 million customers. Although parts of MISO fall in three NERC Regions, MRO is responsible for coordinating data and information submitted for NERC’s reliability assessments. Highlights • The MISO region will have adequate, but tighter, reserve margins for 2021, and continued action will be critical to ensure resource adequacy into the future. For 2021, MISO will have surplus resources to meet the regional resource requirement. In most of the MISO region, load-serving entities with oversight by the applicable state or local jurisdiction are responsible for resource adequacy. Though the 2021 peak demand forecast decreased 300 MWs from last year’s survey, the five-year regional demand growth rate is up, from 0.2% to just under 0.35% this year. On the supply side, the survey indicates that increasing resource adequacy risk can be avoided by firming up the commitments of additional potential resources. • The potential for significant generation fleet transformation has prompted MISO to evaluate how system needs will change and how MISO might adapt its planning, markets and operations to maintain reliability with aging and retiring units, higher penetration of intermittent resources, and new load consumption patterns. • As discussed, resource adequacy planning that focuses on summer peak alone will no longer suffice. Resource adequacy analysis will likely need to reflect patterns across the year in order to capture the magnitude of risks.
• Effective dialogue amongst stakeholders will be key to this transformation – identifying needs and working with MISO to develop solutions that work across the footprint. MISO will leverage the forums where discussions are already underway on transmission planning, MISO’s resource adequacy construct and pricing enhancements.
• As the MISO fleet continues to evolve ongoing comprehensive analysis is needed to detail risks and inform change in MISO's planning, markets and operations processes and iterate based on continued change in stakeholders’ plans. MISO Assessment Planning Reserve Margin
MISO projects a regional surplus for the summer of 2021 and possibly 2022, then falling near or below the Reference Margin Level (RML) in 2023-2024, which is sooner than last LTRA. These results are driven by a number of factors: an increase in load forecast, an increase in reserve requirement due to changes in load shape and fleet make-up, and a decrease in Load Modifying Resources. New resources effectively made up for retirements since 2019.
The LTRA results represent a point in time forecast, and MISO expects these figures will change significantly as future capacity plans are solidified by LSEs and States. There are enough resources in Tier 2 and 3 to mitigate any long-term resource shortfalls.
Demand
MISO does not forecast load for the Seasonal Resource Assessments. Instead, LSEs report load projections under the Resource Adequacy Requirements section (Module E-1) of the MISO Tariff. LSEs report their annual load projections on a MISO Coincident basis as well as their Non-Coincident load projections for the next 10 years, monthly for the first two years and seasonally for the remaining eight years. MISO LSEs have the best information of their load; therefore, MISO relies on them for their 50/50 load forecast information.
1 The MISO coincident Total Internal Demand peak forecast was 124,148 MW during the 2020 summer season, an 850 or so MW decrease from last year’s projection. MISO members project the summer coincident peak demand is expected to grow at an average annual rate of 0.34% over the next five-year period, up from 0.2% seen in last year’s forecasts. Drivers for an increase in the annual growth rate are unknown but are not surprising as 0.2% last year was very low and compared with historical forecast growth rates, 0.34% is still very low. Electrification of transportation, heating and other loads traditionally served by other sources are anticipated, so future growth is not unexpected. These projections were largely submitted to MISO before any observed or forecasted impacts due to COVID-19.
Demand-Side Management
MISO currently separates Demand Response resources into two categories, Direct Control Load Management and Interruptible Load. Direct Control Load Management is the magnitude of customer service (usually residential). During times of peak conditions, or when MISO otherwise forecasts the potential for maximum generation conditions, MISO surveys Local BAs to obtain the amount of their demand. For this assessment, MISO uses the registered amount of Demand Side Management that is procured and cleared through the annual Planning Resource Auction
MISO forecasts 7,557 MW of Direct Control Load Management and Interruptible Load to be available for the assessment period. MISO also forecasts at least 4,793 MW of BTM Generation (BTMG) to be available for assessment period. This year’s 2020 OMS-MISO Survey responses indicate declining DR. It is unclear the driver for this, but may be due to respondents only entering current capacity contracts and not anticipated contract renewals.
Distributed Energy Resources
MISO has not experienced any operational challenges yet due to DER or DG and will continue to monitor as programs grow and visibility increases in the future. As of right now, the main method of collecting DER information is through an Organization of MISO States (OMS) DER survey which, to-date, has just tracked current installation levels, not future forecasts. This will be the third iteration that informs responses in the LTRA and as this process matures or other efforts are undertaken to better assess DER, MISO will begin to get a better sense of future impacts to the system from DER.
Generation
Though MISO does not have any authority to direct any member to construct new generation, MISO continuously seeks to improve the generator interconnection process, enabling more seamless resource integration, and resource adequacy assessments ensuring all utilities and state regulators with the authority to direct to build new generation is aware of the state of resource adequacy in MISO and its corresponding resource zones.
MISO allows units to participate in the MISO Capacity Auction only to the level of interconnection service they have. If a unit has transmission interconnection service less than their nameplate rating, that unit is only eligible for the level of transmission service in the capacity auction. If future projects increase the level of transmission service, that unit may then qualify for up to the rated uniformed capacity (UCAP) in the capacity market.
Capacity Transfers
Interregional planning is critical to maximize the overall value of the transmission system and deliver savings for customers. Interregional studies conducted jointly with MISO’s neighboring planning regions are based on an annual review of transmission issues at the seams. Depending on the outcome of those reviews, studies are scoped out and performed.
MISO and SPP, completed their second Coordinated System Plan (CSP) study. The study identified one potential interregional project for further evaluation within each region, whereby MISO’s regional analyses determined there existed more cost-effective and efficient regional alternatives. MISO and SPP will be exploring process improvements to allow both RTOs to align more closely how each address future interregional system planning needs stemming from a dramatically changing future energy landscape expected to impact both RTOs. 2 Transmission
As a part of MISO’s annual planning process, MISO performs extreme event analysis to evaluate system performance of a large variety of extreme events developed collaboratively by MISO and the Transmission Planners within the MISO footprint.
The following analyses are performed annually as part of the MISO Transmission Expansion Plan (MTEP) reliability assessment and the results of these analyses are documented in MTEP report for future NERC compliance.
- Steady State Analysis (including the simulation of documented Remedial Action Schemes)
- Planning Horizon Transfer analysis
- Transient Stability Analysis
- Voltage Stability Analysis
Together, these analyses address the impacts to Transmission limitations, Transmission Constraints, Dynamic and steady state reactive-power limited areas, and Remedial Action Schemes.
3 MRO-Manitoba Hydro Manitoba Hydro is a Provincial Crown Corporation providing electricity to approximately 587,000 electric customers in Manitoba and approximately 285,000 natural gas customers in southern Manitoba. The service area is the province of Manitoba which is 250,946 square miles. Manitoba Hydro is winter peaking. No change in the footprint area is expected during the assessment period. Manitoba Hydro is its own Planning Coordinator and Balancing Authority. Manitoba Hydro is a coordinating member of the MISO. MISO is the Reliability Coordinator for Manitoba Hydro.
Highlights The Anticipated Reserve Margins (ARMs) does not fall below the RML of 12% in any year during the assessment period. This ARM analysis assumes that the first two units from the Keeyask hydro station will come into service for the winter of 2020-21. The Keeyask hydro station has been under construction for several years and the major concrete work for the powerhouse is now complete. The completion of all seven units at the Keeyask hydro station is anticipated in 2021 and will help ensure resource adequacy in the current assessment period. When complete, the Keeyask hydro station is a 630 MW net addition to Manitoba Hydro’s system. No Tier 2 resources have been assumed to come into service during the assessment period. No resource adequacy issues are anticipated.
Following the first units of Keeyask being placed into service, Manitoba Hydro anticipates the retirement of the 118 MW winter rating Selkirk natural gas generating station - which is considered an unconfirmed retirement for the winter 2020- 21. The Selkirk station retirement decision is based on a combination of a desire to reduce carbon emissions, high operating costs, increased transmission reliability with Bipole III, additional supply being available from the Keeyask hydro station, and additional import capability with the Manitoba to Minnesota Transmission Project (MMTP). No resource adequacy issues are anticipated as the Anticipated Reserve Margin remains above the 12% Reference Margin.
The completion of the Manitoba to Minnesota Transmission Project (MMTP), the new 500 kV interconnection which was placed into service on June 1, 2020 - will provide for alternative supply from the MISO market during drought conditions and improve the resilience of Manitoba Hydro’s system to extreme events including drought.
Manitoba is not experiencing large additions of wind and solar resources being seen in other regions - and hence emerging reliability issues from such arising from such large wind and solar resource additions are not anticipated.
MRO-Manitoba Hydro Assessment Planning Reserve Margins
The ARM does not fall below the RML of 12% in any year during the assessment period. The RML is based on both system historical adequacy performance analysis and reference to probabilistic resource adequacy studies using the index of LOLE and loss of energy expectation (LOEE).
Demand
Manitoba Hydro’s load peaks in the winter, typically in the months of January, February or December. The primary driver of energy load growth in Manitoba is population (1.2% anticipated population growth) with the secondary driver being the economy. Manitoba Hydro’s system energy / energy forecasting methodology is primarily based on three market segments: Residential, General Service Mass Market, and Top Consumers (Manitoba Hydro’s largest industrial customers) with a small amount remaining for miscellaneous groups composing of street lighting and seasonal customers. Manitoba Hydro uses econometric regression modeling by sector to determine projected energy usage.
Demand-Side Management
Manitoba Hydro does not have any demand-side management resources that are considered controllable and dispatchable demand response. Energy efficiency and conservation programming was transitioned from Manitoba Hydro to a new crown corporation, Efficiency Manitoba, effective April 1, 2020. Efficiency Manitoba has a mandate to 4 develop and support energy efficiency initiatives reducing provincial consumption of energy by 1.5% annually. All of Efficiency Manitoba’s demand side management program evaluation efforts, including measurement and verification activities, will be undertaken by an independent third-party evaluator that will be contracted by Efficiency Manitoba. Energy efficiency and conservation programming reduces overall demand in the assessment area, and the impact of the reductions are applied to the electric load forecast.
Distributed Energy Resources
There are approximately 35 MW dc of solar DERs in Manitoba as of the end of March 2020. Most of the solar distributed resources were installed in the last three years under an incentive program which has ended. Even with high growth rates, Manitoba Hydro is not anticipating the quantity of solar DERs in Manitoba would increase to a level which would cause potential operation impacts in the next five years.
Generation
The Keeyask hydro station has been under construction for several years and the major concrete work for the powerhouse is now complete. The completion of all seven units at the Keeyask hydro station is anticipated in 2021 and will help ensure resource adequacy in the current assessment period. When complete, the Keeyask hydro station is a 630 MW net addition to Manitoba Hydro’s system. The additional hydro generation will support a related 250 MW capacity transfer into the MISO region beginning in 2020 and a new 100 MW capacity transfer to SaskPower beginning in 2020.
The status of the 118 MW winter rating Selkirk natural gas generating station has been changed to an unconfirmed retirement for the winter 2020-21. Manitoba Hydro is now considering this retirement once one or more units of the 630 MW net addition Keeyask hydro station comes into service. This decision is based on a combination of a desire to reduce carbon emissions, high operating costs, increased transmission reliability with Bipole III, additional supply being available from the Keeyask hydro station, and additional import capability with the MMTP.
Capacity Transfers
The Manitoba Hydro system is winter peaking and is interconnected to the MISO Zone 1 Local Resource zone (which includes Minnesota and North Dakota), which as a whole is summer peaking. Significant capacity transfer limitations from MISO into Manitoba may have the potential to cause reliability impacts, but only if the following conditions simultaneously occur: extreme Manitoba winter loads, unusually high forced generation/transmission outages, and a simultaneous emergency in the northern MISO footprint. Additional hydro generation from Keeyask, and the related 250 MW capacity transfer into the MISO region, will tend to increase north to south flows on the Manitoba-MISO interface. A 100 MW capacity transfer from Manitoba to Saskatchewan commencing in June 2020 will tend to increase east to west flow on the Manitoba–Saskatchewan interface. A capacity transfer of 190 MW from Manitoba to Saskatchewan beginning in 2022 will also tend to increase east to west flow on the Manitoba-Saskatchewan interface; this transfer will occur following the in-service of the 230 kV Birtle to Tantallon line which is rated at 390 MVA.
All reported capacity transfers were coordinated, reviewed, and vetted by neighboring Assessment Areas.
Transmission
There are several transmission projects projected to come on-line during the assessment period. Most of the projects are dictated by the need to expand the transmission system to reliably serve growing loads, transmit power to the export market, improve safety, improve import capability, increase efficiency, and connect new generation. For example, the Manitoba to Minnesota Transmission Project, a new 500 kV interconnection from Dorsey to Iron Range (Duluth, Minnesota) came into service in 2020 which will provide transmission services and will improve the System Reliability. The addition of the new 500kV line also reduces the total interconnection losses. The addition of a new 230 kV line from Birtle to Tantallon line will come into service in 2021 which will provide improved transmission service 5 capability between Manitoba and Saskatchewan. Above average load growth in Manitoba has the triggered the need for a 230 kV line between St. Vital and DeSalaberry (ISD October 2020) and between DeSalaberry and Letellier (ISD October 2022).
6 MRO-SaskPower Saskatchewan is a province of Canada and comprises a geographic area of 651,900 square kilometers and approximately 1.12 million people. Peak demand is experienced in the winter. The Saskatchewan Power Corporation (SaskPower) is the Planning Authority and Reliability Coordinator for the province of Saskatchewan and is the principal supplier of electricity in the province. SaskPower is a provincial Crown corporation and under provincial legislation is responsible for the reliability oversight of the Saskatchewan bulk electric system and its interconnections. Highlights • The anticipated reserve margin is above the RML (11%) throughout the assessment period. • SaskPower has added a new 350 MW natural gas facility in December 2019 and is planning to add approximately 750 MW of generation under Tier 1 category within the next five years. • A new 230 kV tie-line between Manitoba and Saskatchewan is expected to be in service in Summer 2021 to facilitate 100 MW long term capacity transfer.
MRO-SaskPower Assessment Planning Reserve Margins
SaskPower uses a criterion of 11% as the RML and has assessed its planning reserve margin for the upcoming 10 years considering the summer and winter peak hour loads, available existing and anticipated generating resources, firm capacity transfers, and available demand response (DR) for each year. Saskatchewan’s anticipated reserve margin ranges from approximately 26% to 44% and does not fall below the RML.
Demand
SaskPower’s system peak forecast is contributed by econometric variables, weather normalization, and individual level forecasts for large industrial customers. Average annual summer and winter peak demand growth is expected to be approximately 0.5% with a range from -0.4 % to 1.1 % throughout the assessment period.
Generation
Saskatchewan is adding approximately 750 MW of generation under Tier 1 category within the next five years which includes two utility scale wind generation facility of combined 375 MW installed capacity and a 350 MW natural gas facility. Saskatchewan is adding firm capacity transfers from Manitoba with 100 MW starting in 2020 which includes 10 MW of seasonal firm capacity until the new tie-line is in service. Saskatchewan is also adding 190 MW of firm capacity transfer starting 2022 combining a total of 290 MW for the assessment period. Under Tier 2, over 1,000 MWs of new generation is projected in the assessment period mostly in the 5 to 10-year horizon. This includes two utility scale wind generation facility and three natural gas facilities. A total of approximately 559 MW is confirmed for retirements. This includes 278 MW of coal generation, 213 MW of natural gas, 21 MW of Heat Recovery facility, 22 MW of Wind facilities and 25 MW of hydro import contract. Unconfirmed retirements of approximately over 1,400 MW is also expected in the assessment period. This includes approximately 1,200 MW of coal generation that will be phased out by the end of 2029. Generating resources being planned as Tier 2 and Tier 3 will replace the retired units before retirements and therefore SaskPower is not expecting any long-term reliability impacts due to generation retirements.
Demand-Side Management
SaskPower’s energy efficiency and energy conservation programs include incentive-based and education programs focusing on installed measures and products that provide verifiable, measurable and permanent reductions in electrical energy (EE), and demand reductions during peak hours. Energy provided from EE and demand side management (DSM) programs are modeled as load modifiers and are netted from both the peak load and energy forecasts. A steady growth is expected on energy efficiency and conservation over the assessment period. SaskPower’s DR program has contracts in
7 place with industrial customers for interruptible load based on defined DR programs. The first of these programs provides a curtailable load, currently up to 60 MW, with a 12-minute event response time. Other programs are in place providing access to additional curtailable load requiring up to two hours notification time.
Transmission
SaskPower has recently completed construction of the three major transmission lines with a total of approximately two 270 km of 230 kV and 200 km of 138 kV transmission lines. A new 230 kV tie line with Manitoba is expected to be in service in early 2021 to enable new capacity transfers between the two areas. Approximately 20 km of 230 kV transmission line is under construction to interconnect a new wind generation facility. Approximately 80 km of 230 kV transmission line is under planning phase and several other transmission projects (approximately 400 circuit km) are under conceptual phase in the 5 to 10-year planning horizon. These projects are driven by load growth, new generation additions and reliability needs.
8 SPP Southwest Power Pool (SPP) Planning Coordinator footprint covers 546,000 square miles and encompasses all or parts of Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming. The SPP long-term assessment is reported based on the Planning Coordinator footprint, which touches parts of the Midwest Reliability Organization Regional Entity, and the WECC Regional Entity. The SPP assessment area footprint has approximately 61,000 miles of transmission lines, 756 generating plants, and 4,811 transmission-class substations, and it serves a population of more than 18 million people. Highlights • The ARMs do not fall below the RML of 12% for the entire 10-year assessment period. • There are no known impacts to the SPP assessment area’s long-term reliability related to the forecasted increase in EE and DR across the assessment area. • Study shows no certain risks have been identified in the first five year period due to high penetrations of inverter based resources. • SPP is not expecting any long-term reliability impacts resulting from generating plant retirements. SPP Assessment Planning Reserve Margins
The AML do not fall below the RML of 12% for the entire ten-year assessment period. The RML is determined by a probabilistic LOLE study. The SPP Assessment Area performs a biennial LOLE study to establish PRM. Determination of the PRM is supported by a probabilistic LOLE Study, which will analyze the ability to reliably serve the SPP Balancing Authority Area’s 50/50 forecasted Peak Demand utilizing a Security Constrained Economic Dispatch. SPP, with input from the stakeholders, develops the inputs and assumptions used for the LOLE Study. SPP will study the PRM such that the LOLE for the applicable planning year (2 and 5-year study) does not exceed 1 day in 10 years, or 0.1 day per year. At a minimum, the PRM will be determined using probabilistic methods by altering capacity through the application of generator forced outages and forecasted demand through the application of load uncertainty to ensure the LOLE does not exceed 0.1 day per year.
Demand
SPP load peaks during the summer season; the 2020 load forecast is projected to peak at 51,259 MW, a projected decrease compared to the previous year’s LTRA forecast for the 2020 summer season. The decrease is due to SPP, starting in 2020, submitting the coincident peak for the SPP Assessment Area, whereas in the past LTRA’s the non- coincident peak was submitted. SPP forecasts the coincident annual peak growth based on member submitted data over the 10-year assessment timeframe. The current annual growth rate is approximately 0.85%.
Demand-Side Management
SPP’s energy efficiency and conservation programs are incorporated into the reporting entities’ demand forecasts. There are no known impacts to the SPP assessment area’s long-term reliability related to the forecasted increase in EE and DR across the assessment area.
Distributed Energy Resources
SPP currently has approximately 250 MW of installed solar generating facilities and forecasting between 700 – 750 MWs of DER in the 5-10 year planning horizon. SPP Reliability Coordinator has not identified specific challenges at this time related to DERs. SPP Model Development, Economic Studies, and the Supply Adequacy working groups are currently developing policies and procedures around DERs. These policies are planned to become effective during 2020 and will
9 affect the SPP Resource Adequacy process. SPP resources adequacy staff is working to create a process that notifies SPP operations and the RC of new resources that are available outside of the SPP integrated marketplace mechanisms.
Generation
SPP has performed the Inverter Based Generation Integration Study (IBIS) that analyzed several aspects of high penetrations of inverter based resources. No certain risks have been identified in the first five year period. However, SPP is reviewing the need for enhanced study processes in its annual planning process and generator interconnection process. Since the 2019 LTRA, more than 800 MW of nameplate capacity has been retired in SPP. The generation that has been retired over the past year has mainly been replaced with wind resources. The impact to the resource adequacy in the SPP is being assessed in the 2019 LOLE study. Currently, SPP is not expecting any long-term reliability impacts resulting from generating plant retirements.
Capacity Transfers
The SPP Assessment Area coordinates with neighboring areas to ensure that adequate transfer capabilities will be available for capacity transfers. On an annual basis during the model build season, SPP staff coordinates the modeling of transfers between Planning Coordinator footprints. The modeled transactions are fed into the models created for the SPP planning process.
In April 2019, SPP and ERCOT executed a Coordination Plan that superseded the prior coordination agreement. The Coordination Plan addresses operational issues for coordination of the DC ties between the Texas Interconnection and Eastern Interconnection, Block Load Transfers (BLTs), and Switchable Generation Resources (SWGRs). Under the terms of the Coordination Plan, SPP has priority to recall the capacity of any SWGRs that have been committed to satisfy the resource adequacy requirements contained in Attachment AA of the SPP Open Access Transmission Tariff.
SPP and ERCOT are currently going through the process to update the Coordination Plan based on the latest discussions and business decisions
Transmission
The SPP Board of Directors approved the 2020 Integrated Transmission Plan Assessment and the 2020 SPP Transmission Expansion Plan Report. Both reports provide details for proposed transmission projects needed to maintain reliability while also providing economic benefit to the end users.
10 Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 13 NERC Reliability Assessments b. LTRA Webinar, December 8, 2020 Salva Andiappan, Principal Reliability Assessment Engineer
Action Information
Report Salva Andiappan will provide an oral report during the meeting.
Page 43
Long-Term Reliability Assessment Webinar December 8, 2020 │10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Central
Mark Olson, North American Electric Reliability Corporation Suman Thapa, Saskatchewan Power Kelly Hunter, Manitoba Hydro Stuart Hansen, Midcontinent Independent System Operator Chris Haley, Southwest Power Pool Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 13 NERC Reliability Assessments c. Preview of MRO Regional Winter Assessment Salva Andiappan, Principal Reliability Assessment Engineer
Action Information
Report Salva Andiappan will provide an oral report during the meeting.
Page 44
OVERVIEW OF MRO 2020-2021 WINTER REGIONAL ASSESSMENT
Presented by: Salva Andiappan RAPA Department Topics Purpose Data Collection and Review Process 2019 Winter Seasonal Review • Energy Emergency Alerts (EEA) • Generator Availability Data System (GADS) • Baseload Generation Capacity Factor • Transmission Availability Data System (TADS) • Misoperations Information Data Analysis System (MIDAS) • Bulk Power System Event Analysis (EA) • 2019 Winter Load Forecast versus Actual Topics
2020-2021 Winter Seasonal Forecast • Winter Resource and Peak Demand Scenarios • Distributed Energy Resources (DERs) • Wind Capacity • Focus Areas for Winter 2020-2021 Energy Emergency Alerts (EEA) EEA Level 3 Event Details Cause and Mitigation
GADS Resource Mix Average MWh Lost Common Outage Cause Type Baseload Generation Capacity Factor Baseload Generation Availability Summer and Winter Availability
TADS Winter Automatic Outages Momentary and Sustained Outages Common Outage Cause Type MIDAS Annual Misoperation Rate Fault Associated Misoperations Operations Vs. Misoperation
Bulk Power System Events Large-scale Outages and System Disturbances Lessons Learned and Recommendations MRO Event Severity Index 2020 Winter Seasonal Forecast Winter Resource and Peak Demand Scenario Distributed Energy Resources (DERs) Wind Capacity Focus Areas for Winter 2020 QUESTIONS Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 14 Protective Relay Subgroup (PRS) Update Mike Bocovich, Principal Systems Protection Engineer
Action Information
Report Mike Bocovich will provide an update during the meeting.
Page 45
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 15 Upcoming Meetings and Review 2021 Meeting Calendar Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair
Action Information
Report Chair Gunderson will lead the discussion at the meeting.
Page 46
2021 Proposed Council Meeting Dates
Board OGOC SAC CMEPAC RAC
Q1 3/25/2021 3/24/2021 2/10/2021 2/9/2021 3/24/2021
Q2 6/24/2021 6/23/2021 6/23/2021 6/2/2021 6/9/2021
Q3 9/30/2021 9/29/2021 9/23/2021 9/29/2021 8/25/2021
Q4 12/2/2021 12/1/2021 11/3/2021 11/10/2021 11/17/2021
* The Board and OGOC meeting dates are confirmed Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 16 RAC Member Roundtable Reliability Advisory Council Members
Action Information
Report Chair Gunderson will lead this discussion.
Page 47
Meeting Agenda – Reliability Advisory Council – November 18, 2020
AGENDA 17 Other Business and Adjourn Ron Gunderson, Reliability Advisory Council Chair
Page 48