|
|
Enron Mail |
To add to Charles memo..
1) The Trustees were all present to listen the debate at the stakeholders c= ommittee. That was very positive. 2) The agenda order was changed to allow ample time to discuss the issues.= =20 3) Time and time again it was stated that NERC was running out of time to m= ake the required transition. If not alternatives would be pursued; example = EISB 4) Time and time it was stated that the Goulding task force Recommendations= should be taken as a package, as a necessary first step. These include: 1. Committee Representation . The Task Force recommends that the NERC Board= direct the standing committees to modify the standing committees represent= ation and voting to reflect the Task Force's attached "Initial Sectors and = Criteria Model." This Model is based on the Task Force's preference for rep= resentation by "sector," and incorporates the Task Force's general recognit= ion that an RTO sector should be included. The Task Force recognizes that s= ome work remains to be done to refine the definitions of each sector and th= e criteria for belonging, but believes that the Initial Sectors and Criteri= a Model is an appropriate next step and should be taken immediately. Assumi= ng that it may take some months to put in place the details of the new Mode= l, including the new weighted voting procedures, the Task Force recommends = that two ISO/RTO representatives be added immediately to each of the existi= ng standing committees to provide formal representation and a voting role f= or ISOs/RTOs until the Initial Sectors and Criteria Model has been implemen= ted. 2. Committee Participation and Voting . The Task Force recommends open part= icipation in each sector, subject to certain criteria and qualifications. T= he Task Force has evaluated the qualification criteria and voting procedure= s used in several Regions (ERCOT and MAAC), and has incorporated features o= f those procedures into the recommended participation and voting procedures= . Specifically, the Task Force recommends weighted voting by and within eac= h sector, similar to what is done in MAAC. 3. Due Process . The new Organization Standards Process, which will be pres= ented to the Board in October, addresses most due process issues and concer= ns. The Task Force recommends implementing this new process immediately. 4. One-Stop Shop . The Task Force favors having a single organization for d= eveloping Reliability Standards, Market Interface Practices, and Commercial= Practices. The Task Force believes that NERC has an opportunity to reinven= t itself to become this organization, and should take definitive steps in t= hat direction at its October 2001 Board and Stakeholders Committee meetings= . 5. Funding . The Task Force recommends that steps be taken immediately to d= ecouple the funding of NERC from the Regional Reliability Councils. The Fun= ding Task Group recommendations, adopted by the Board in February 2001, sho= uld be pursued. 6. MIC Role in Standards Approval . The Task Force recommends, as an immedi= ate step to address concerns with the current NERC Standards Approval Proce= ss, and to provide a "bridge" until the new Organization Standards process = is implemented, requiring the MIC to vote on all new/proposed NERC Operatin= g Policies and Planning Standards and report results to the Board, includin= g consideration of any minority positions. 5) Lots of discussion about EISB and how NERC may interface with it as a po= ssible alternative. 6) Silence on the issue of "self regulating organization" . No one advocati= ng that position. 7) Good opportunity to speak with Trustees one-on-one at dinner. Jose=20 From:=09Charles Yeung/ENRON@enronXgate on 10/15/2001 06:01 PM To:=09mbennett@epsa.org@SMTP@enronXgate, mfgildea@duke-energy.com@SMTP@enro= nXgate cc:=09James D Steffes/ENRON@enronXgate, Richard Ingersoll/ENRON@enronXgate,= Jose Bestard/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT=20 Subject:=09Stakeholder Committee Notes Here are some bullet points of what transpired at the NERC meeting in Vanco= uver this Monday. The customers met for almost 2 hours before the start of the SHC meeting. = Reps from Enron, Mirant, Dynegy, DENA, APPA and ELCON were present. All agreed that a unified voice is needed to show strong direction from the= customer side. This may mean putting aside some internal positions. Cust= omers need to show support of the Goulding Task Force recommendations which= offers a package deal to move NERC forward as a single standards setting o= rganization for both reliability and commercial issues. The Goulding Task F= orce recommendations do fall short of asking for NERC action. Agenda Item 5 - Scope of NERC over Commercial Issues To ensure unity in appearance, customers agreed to maintain discussions in = front of the Independents at a higher policy level. Many details are need= ed to get individual entities "on board" however, such details should not i= mpede on the ability for customers to show strong support on principles, i.= e.-one-stop-shop, balance of membership, etc. Therefore, all agreed to kee= p details out of the discussion, i.e.-funding, seats, charter, etc. The actual SHC discussion was constructive, and persons articulated the nee= d for a package deal to the room. The debate brough the expected concerns o= f the transmission providers to the surface. TVA (Terry Boston) was most v= ocal about keeping NERC out of the commercial side. Dominion Resources (G= lenn Ross) supported the customers' position. PJM (Phil Harris was also su= pportive). =20 Agenda Item 6 - Independence of Security Coordinators Comments made that this is a long standing stalemate at NERC and that NERC = does not have the authourity to require corporate independence. Suggestions= made to perform better and more audits. Dave Penn brought up the memo fro= m Roy Thilly. Need to ask the Board to bring this issue to FERC for resolu= tion. Good arguments made by customers on need for independence in a new c= ompetitive market structure. FRCC (Wiley) made arguments that the NERC sho= uld not revamp policies to police the few bad apples. Should deal directly= and specifically with the problem.=20 A straw poll was taken of the persons in the room over recommending actions= : 1) NERC should require corporate indepdence and ask FERC to address it. 2) NERC should focus in on the problem Security Coordinators and take speci= fic actions to safeguard independent judgement (audits) The vote was 21/24. There were strong comments that this vote was not inte= nded to be an industry representative vote, only to show how split the indu= stry is over this issue. The meeting adjourned for lunch and the Independents left after the meeting= reconvened. The SHC agreed to ask the BOT the following: ?=09Establish a goal/vision to become the one stop shop for development of = wholesale electric industry standards. =20 ?=09Add words that "we need to go forward from where we are. ?=09Take immediate action to adopt the initial recommendations contained in= new Board agenda item 22. ?=09Actively solicit cooperation collaboration and support from Canadian an= d US government entities. ?=09Facilitate - jointly with interested trade associations; federal, state= and provincial regulators, and other stakeholder organizations - an open a= nd inclusive process to achieve consensus on the definitions and attributes= of the functions necessary for the development of wholesale electric indus= try standards and practices, an on a course of action to institute such cap= abilities. ?=09Interface with state and provincial regulators to address retail operat= ion issues as they affect wholesale operations. Agenda Item 9 -Transmission Expansion Reference to "incentive rates", and "accelerated amortization", should be r= emoved, not a reliability policy need.=20 The reference to these expansion solutions are intended to be tutorial and = does not assume NERC will begin to undertake rate issues. APPA - public pe= rception will be different. Must remove this language. Glen Ross will pre= sent this report to the Independents outlining the strong opinions on both = sides.
|