1 / 12

MAC Input on Section 4.9 Review

This document outlines the requirements and process for conducting a thorough assessment of the Western Electricity Coordinating Council's (WECC) structure and governance. The assessment will consider the fairness, timeliness, and effectiveness of WECC's standards, obligations, processes, and decisions. Recommendations for changes will be made based on the assessment. Input from the Member Advisory Committee (MAC) and the Western Interconnection Regional Advisory Body (WIRAB) is sought.

heist
Download Presentation

MAC Input on Section 4.9 Review

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. MAC Input on Section 4.9 Review May 22, 2019 Brian Theaker Class 3 Member Advisory Committee Representative

  2. Bylaws Section 4.9 4.9 WECC Structure and Governance Review At least each five (5) years, the Board of Directors, in collaboration with the Member Advisory Committee and the Western Interconnection Regional Advisory Body, will conduct a thorough assessment of whether WECC fulfill its purposes in a manner that is consistent with its mission and vision, and the provisions of Section 2.2 of these Bylaws. As part of this assessment, the Board will consider whether the standards, obligations, processes and decisions WECC imposes on its Members are timely, fair, effective, and reasonable in view of the commercial, legal, regulatory, and economic needs and objectives of the affected Members. The assessment required by this Section 4.9 will be accompanied by recommendations for any changes the Board determines are warranted by the assessment. If any recommendations require Member approval prior to implementation, the assessment and recommendations prepared by the Board in accordance with this Section 4.9 will be submitted in writing to the Members at the first Annual Meeting held after the review is completed.

  3. GC Request for MAC Input • March 13, 2019 Letter from GC Chair Ric Campbell to MAC and WIRAB • Letter shared an expectation that the upcoming 4.9 review will not be as comprehensive as the prior review (the first since bifurcation) • Requested input by June 1, 2019

  4. MAC Process • April 30: Letter to MAC members requesting input by May 17, 2019 • Invitation to May 2, 2019 WIRAB call • Review at May 22, 2019 MAC meeting

  5. MAC Input Class 2: • WECC has four major services: (1) CMEP/functions in Delegation Agreement; (2) reliability assessments, (3) evaluation (e.g., events, policy impacts), and (4) communicating results  • Communications Plan: WECC conducts assessments regarding risks related to multiple delegated activities (events analysis, RAPA, etc); review the communications plan and responsibilities to communicate the results of assessments, evaluations and lessons learned • Re-evaluate the relationship with MAC, members, and staff, and develop/strengthen relationships and ensure all are informed and able to engage • Evaluate ERO approach and how WECC can/should influence NERC to reduce potential impacts on the Western Interconnection 

  6. MAC Input (2) Class 2 (continued): • Re-evaluate the Responsibility and Accountability Matrix* (RAM) from the past 4.9 process to: • Tie to the reliability and risk-based process to inform stakeholders, MAC, Board and staff • Assess the role and functions of the MAC to effectively establish its role and represent its members • Review alignment of the Delegation Agreement with the organizational characteristics in the Bylaws and the risk-based, reliability-informed transformation • Consider establishing a new “Security” Committee or Subcommittee to focus on the physical and cyber security of the assets that control the BPS. The current Committee structure is focused on reliability and standards; there appears to be a gap for focusing on security.  * Included as an attachment to this presentation.

  7. MAC Input (3) Class 3: • Seeking greater consistency in standards, policies and processes across RE footprints

  8. MAC Input (4) • WIRAB shared with the MAC member collecting thoughts on the 4.9 review its thoughtful and thorough comments that will be presented to the Board at the Board’s June meeting • A (non-thunder-stealing) high-level overview: • WIRAB offered that a comprehensive review of WECC is not needed at this time • WIRAB categorized 14 potential 4.9 review issues in terms of effort and impact and suggests the Board: • Focus on low effort/high impact items in 4.9 review • Consider high impact/effort and low impact/effort items

  9. MAC Input (5) • WIRAB’s proposed focus areas: • WECC’s role after the Reliability Coordinator transition • Oversight of WECC work products • Opportunities to seek policy stakeholder input • Communication and outreach of important work products • Tracking and disseminating industry performance metrics

  10. ? Brian Theaker brian.theaker@nrg.com

  11. Attachments Responsibility and Accountability Matrix – Attachment 1 from the December 2, 2015 Section 4.9 Review Work Group Report to the WECC Board of Directors

  12. Attachments Responsibility and Accountability Matrix – Attachment 1 from the December 2, 2015 Section 4.9 Review Work Group Report to the WECC Board of Directors

More Related