By Rich Heidorn Jr.

Not everyone is sold on NERC’s proposal to merge three technical committees into a single Reliability and Security Council (RSC).

The merger of the Planning, Operating and Critical Infrastructure Protection committees, announced in June, will reduce the committee membership from a combined 100-plus to 33 voting members and five non-voting members. (See Three NERC Committees Likely to Merge.)

The draft proposal by the Stakeholder Engagement Team (SET) is intended to improve efficiency in recognition of the increasing overlap among the committees’ work. NERC officials said the Member Representatives Committee (MRC) and the NERC board had received complaints that too much manpower was being spent in supporting the technical committees.

NERC’s Stephen Crutchfield told the Resources Subcommittee during a briefing July 24 the new committee will use a “hybrid” of the regional representation used by the CIPC, the sector-based membership of the PC and OC and the at-large membership of the MRC and Reliability Issues Steering Committee (RISC).

The RSC will include one voting member from each sector (except for the regional entities), 20 at-large members, a chair and vice chair. The non-voting members will include the NERC secretary, two U.S. federal government representatives, one Canadian federal representative and one Canadian provincial member, “straight out of what the OC and PC do today,” Crutchfield said.

Members will be selected based on interconnection diversity, subject matter expertise and a mix of small and large entities, he said.

“It is my opinion this whole revision in this manner is going to reduce stakeholder participation,” said Gerry Beckerle, of Ameren. “It’s going to reduce the effectiveness and will reduce the [level] of expertise we have at this level … I think this is a near-sighted effort.”

Beckerle questioned how the new organization would affect participation by non-members. “There won’t be enough room anymore in the meeting [space] correct?”

“Well, I don’t know,” Crutchfield responded. “I’ve heard people say we could have up to 300 people at the first meeting of this thing, so plan accordingly.”

“The new NERC offices meeting space is going to be capable of handling that large of a group?” Beckerle asked.

“I don’t think so,” Crutchfield said.

“I thought one of the reasons [for the change] was so they could hold these meetings at the NERC offices,” Beckerle continued.

“This team has not discussed specifically about how the meetings are going to be run,” Crutchfield said.

He added initial plans to allow nonmembers to listen via WebEx have “been kind of panned. It could be logistically a nightmare.”

The current schedule calls for seeking MRC endorsement on Aug. 14 and delivering a final proposal to the board Nov. 6.

Assuming board approval, nominations for the RSC would be opened in November with appointments in January or February and the first meeting in March.

Resources Subcommittee Chair Tom Pruitt, of Duke Energy, expressed concerns over the schedule. “It seems to be a pretty aggressive timeline, personally,” he said. “I’m not sure if you go this quickly you’re going to be able to work out all of the kinks and all of the details.”

Expertise Needed

Crutchfield said “the RISC is going to be more of a forward-looking group, whereas the Reliability and Security Council will be [implementing policy]. And they both report to the board [of trustees].”

He said the proposal to have 20 at-large members is recognition that combining the OC, PC and CIPC will require members with broader expertise. “Having that at-large [membership] allows you to find the right set of people who can cover all the aspects you’re looking for — the technical, the leadership, the project management kind of oversight people … Whereas with the sector-based [membership], you may have somebody who’s just completely operations-focused. So now you’ve got to find somebody else to fill that planning role or somebody else to fill that CIP role.”

Pruitt noted the proposed merger borrowed changes some of the regional entities, such as the Midwest Reliability Organization, have adopted.

But Beckerle said the regions’ committee structure is not applicable.

“Since NERC develops continent-wide policy, I think it makes sense we have a group such as the OC, PC and CIPC to provide detailed stakeholder technical direction to NERC,” Beckerle said. The regions “have a much different role in things than they used to back when there were quite a few regional standards, procedures and policies. I think trying to compare and duplicate what’s been successful at the region level is probably not fully appropriate at the NERC level.”

MRC Questions

The reorganization also was discussed at the MRC informational session July 19.

Mark Lauby, senior vice president and chief reliability officer, said he was not concerned about a loss of stakeholder engagement.

“Where the real work is going on is in the task forces, subcommittees and working groups … [The RSC] will enable us to make all three aspects — planning, operating and cyber — a focus and address those problems together as one chunk of work rather than fragmented. And I think it will create a lot more effective solutions,” Lauby said. “I don’t think we’re going to be losing that much when it comes to engagement at that project management level.”

Board of Trustees member Robert Manning praised the Stakeholder Engagement Team for its “innovation and creativity.”

“It’s sometimes challenging to move to a new structure when we know the structure we have is very effective,” he said. “I think you guys have tried to make sure we preserve the best of what we have and open the door to efficiencies going forward.”

He added: “The nominating process [for RSC members] is going to be very, very important.”

Board of Trustees Member David Goulding agreed. “It still seems to me there’s a fair bit of criteria work [that] needs to be done [on nominating RSC members], particularly if — being an optimist — we have a lot of people wanting to actually be members. … The criteria [are] going to be … interesting … to put together.”

Membership criteria will be defined in the participation model presented to the board in November.

A webinar on the proposal is set for Aug. 8. MRC members can provide feedback via the committee through Aug. 6. Industry comments to the board will be accepted through Aug. 15.