Business Meeting #23

Meeting Summary and Action Items

September 21, 2000

Nebraska State Capitol
Lincoln, Nebraska
Attachments are in PDF format.  See bottom of page for more information on view PDF files.

WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS
Facilitators: Abby Arnold and Gabe Petlin, RESOLVE

After introductions and adoption of the agenda, A. Arnold reviewed the purpose of the meeting:

Refer to Attachment A for the meeting agenda. Also note that there is a participants list from this meeting included at the end of this summary.

October 18-19, 2000 South Dakota Wind Forum, Brookings, SD
December 6, 2000 NWCC Workgroup Meetings (TBD), Seattle, WA (tentative)
December 7, 2000 NWCC Business Meeting #24, Seattle, WA

May 9, 2001 Wind Forum, Pennsylvania or New York, proposed
May 10, 2001 NWCC Business Meeting #25, Pennsylvania or New York, proposed
September 26, 2001 NWCC Business Meeting #26, Montana, proposed
December 6, 2001 NWCC Business Meeting #27, New Mexico, proposed

* Additional Expert Workshop and Transmission Workshop yet to be scheduled in 2000-2001.

Action: The NWCC will continue to communicate with Wind Powering America, NWCC members, and key parties to confirm optimal location and potential synergy opportunities associated with 2001 meetings. Final decisions on 2001 meeting dates will be made on the October 26^th 4:00 p.m. EST NWCC Steering Committee conference call. Please participate and/or send your input to Gabe Petlin at (202) 965-6209 or at gpetlin@resolv.org.

CREDIT TRADING: PRESENTATION OF DRAFT REPORT AND PRINCIPLES
Kevin Rackstraw, Remote Power Group
[Refer to Attachment B presentation slides ‘Credit Trading Project: Status Report’]

Kevin Rackstraw provided an overview of credit trading issues and gave a status report of the NWCC Credit Trading Project that includes two concurrent phases. Phase I consists of a Credit Trading Assessment Report and Phase II consists of Credit Trading Principles.

Credit Trading Overview
During the overview, Mr. Rackstraw explained credit trading terms, major credit trading arenas and issues, issues for wind in credit trading, an evaluation of the various trading arenas, and near-term opportunities. The following comments and questions were generated during the overview presentation.

• Credit trading in the context of this study can refer to a wide variety of concepts and activities, including (but not limited to) the trading of emissions allowances, emissions reductions and offsets of various kinds, green tags, green credits, renewable energy credits, Renewable Portfolio Standard tradable credits and green certificates.
• Uncertainty about terminology in the rapidly evolving green power arena makes it difficult to speak with certainty about certain products or activities that fall under the "credit trading" rubric.
• Private markets can play an important role in driving the credit trading process.
• Input standards and output standards determine how credits are allocated to an entity. A conversion formula is used with input standards and is based on fuel input, which creates problems for technologies that use no fuel. Output standards use benchmarks and measure how an entity is producing against those benchmarks.
• Audiences for credit trading issues include the environmental community, the wind community, utilities, consumer advocates, and state and federal regulators.

Credit Trading Assessment Report
A consultant team consisting of Econergy International Corporation, Remote Power Group, and John Palmisano and Associates was chosen to create a credit trading report to educate NWCC members and others, including air quality regulators, the wind industry, utilities, and the environmental community, about how credit trading may impact wind development in the U.S. A partial draft of this report is under review by the Credit Trading Workgroup.

Credit Trading Principles
Concurrently with the Credit Trading Assessment Report the credit trading consulting team is also undertaking a project for the NWCC to create a set of DRAFT NWCC Credit Trading Principles. The principles are very preliminary and were presented to the workgroup in order to obtain feedback early in the creation process. The general principles include the following issues: integrity, eligibility, unbundling, disclosure, fungibility, local benefits, information, trackability, penalties, early credit, allocation, output-based standards, and penalty and mitigation activities.

Upon review and discussion of the principles, meeting attendees offered the following comments:

• The term "principles" should not be used at this stage, since it may imply some kind of preliminary acceptance by the NWCC, which has not yet been achieved.
• The language of the "principles" should reflect that wind energy is not only a policy issue, but also a market issue.
• One of the bidders not chosen for the NWCC Credit Trading Project, Center for Resource Solutions, is also doing work in the credit trading arena. It is important to work in tandem with this organization, and others, so as not to duplicate our efforts.
• Value can be obtained by distributing and discussing these draft principles outside of the NWCC now to gather feedback before the NWCC works to refine the document further. This should be done carefully to present the principles as a draft under review by the NWCC Credit Trading Workgroup.
• One participant suggested that the draft be shared with companies who are already leaders in this area, such as TransAlta Utilities (Alberta, Canada), Suncor Energy (Alberta), IGF Insurance, and others. A systematic search was suggested to locate such companies and communicate with them as a means of establishing contact with those who are on the cutting edge in this field.

Action: Ron Lehr, on September 26^th, will seek input on the DRAFT credit trading principles in St. Louis when he attends a meeting of environmental leaders, state and local air quality regulators, and NARUC. Members expressed concern regarding distribution of the principles in their current form. Therefore, the version to be circulated will not contain the introductory paragraphs, but rather only the principles that comprise the bulk of the document. In addition, this document will be clearly marked as DRAFT for review by a work group to the NWCC (not a NWCC document).

Schedule
The following schedule has been set up to receive comments and finalize the report and principles.

October 20 - 1st Complete Draft Report and Principles sent to workgroup (a workgroup conference call will be scheduled for discussion of comments.)
November 3 - workgroup comments due on 1st draft
November 22 - 2nd Draft Report and Principles sent to full NWCC Membership (if workgroup agrees)
December 6 - Tentative one-day workgroup meeting in Seattle to resolve issues in the report and reach initial consensus among the NWCC members and work group members present on the Credit Trading Principles
December 7 - NWCC Business Meeting in Seattle, WA. Present draft consensus principles from day before.
December 15 - NWCC comments due on 2nd draft.
January 10 - 3rd and Final Draft Report and Principles sent to full NWCC for "can live with it" consensus.

NWCC Transmission Action Plan
Charlie Smith, UWIG/Electrotek Concepts, Inc.
[Refer to Attachment C presentation slides titled ‘Why Transmission is important to Wind’ and Attachment D ‘DRAFT NWCC RTO Activity Plan’]

Charlie Smith reviewed the NWCC’s Transmission activities by providing an overview on 1) why transmission is important to wind, 2) the NWCC RTO Activity Plan, 3) the NWCC role in the RTO process, and 4) the near-term, mid-term, and long-term activities for the NWCC.

DRAFT California ISO Case Study
Ed DeMeo, Renewable Energy Consulting Services, Inc.
[Refer to Attachment E presentation slides titled ‘California Independent System Operator (CAISO): Status and Plans’]

Ed DeMeo presented highlights of a DRAFT Case Study on the California ISO prepared by NWCC consultant CSG Services. Mr. DeMeo explained that the original objective of this project was to ‘examine and understand how wind power has fared under the operation of the CAISO.’ He noted that the consultant went beyond this scope and included additional information on the history of wind development in California. He described the background of the project, the California wind situation, the CAISO market features, and the project status. Mr. DeMeo noted that wind is not yet playing into competitive markets and that there are no interactions yet with the CAISO. In short, the key finding was that the CAISO has had virtually no impact on wind energy to date. They study does include projections of how new wind might engage in CAISO markets.

Next Step: The work group will complete its review process for the CAISO Case Study in October seeking additional input from expert California observers. The work group is leaning towards not recommending the report go through the NWCC consensus process, but instead be used as a resource document in accordance with the other three NWCC Transmission Case Studies.

Wind-relevant Issues in RTO Development Regions
Charlie Smith, Electrotek Concepts, Inc.
[Refer again to Attachment C presentation slides titled ‘Why Transmission is important to Wind’]

Charlie Smith discussed current wind-relevant issues pending in the Midwest ISO (MISO) and RTO-West. He also reviewed transmission activities previously suggested for the NWCC.

Meeting attendees had the following comments and suggestions:

• It is important to coordinate with Doug Larson at Western Interstate Energy Board as they have recently received a grant from DOE to work on transmission issues.
• The NWCC Transmission Work Group has been focused on principles and case studies for several months. The work group will now evaluate possible next steps. The work group would like to target the November Steering committee call for making a recommendation.
• AWEA is also active in transmission issues; the NWCC needs to be aware of AWEA’s activities so as to coordinate with them.
• Chuck Linderman emphasized the importance of transmission additions.

DISCUSSION WITH NEBRASKA GUESTS
Kate Allen, Staff, Senator Don Preister, Nebraska Unicameral Legislature

Ms. Allen reiterated the questions posed by Nebraska Governor Mike Johanns at the Nebraska Wind Forum on September 20^th. The questions highlight some of the concerns of the Nebraska citizens:

• What are the barriers and incentives for the development of wind generated electricity? For example, is the $1 million cost of each turbine a barrier that can be overcome?
• Who are the essential partners needed to develop the industry?
• Should public power agencies and state government do more to foster the growth of electricity exports? For example, do this summer’s power shortages on the coasts represent an opportunity for us?
• Is there a sufficient market in other states for slightly higher priced, clean wind energy?
• As long-time power exporters, should the state’s major public utilities take a leadership role in wind resources development?
• Is the state of wind technology sufficient to allow for the profitable production of electricity?

The NE Forum Planning Committee, made up of Nebraska stakeholders, NWCC members, and RESOLVE staff, held a follow up meeting to the Forum on the evening of September 20^th. Ms. Allen outlined the highlights of that meeting:

• The group agreed the forum was a productive step towards additional wind energy development in Nebraska.
• Senator Preister’s office will continue to support Nebraska’s effort to promote wind energy.
• The planning committee will remain intact and will be ‘inclusive’ of new members as necessary.
• NWCC/RESOLVE will continue to be a resource, but Nebraskans will carry this effort forward.
• At the Governor’s request, the planning committee will work with wind energy experts to create an action plan and report the group’s recommendations on harnessing the state’s wind resources.
• It is possible Nebraska will receive some funding from DOE for this effort.
• NWCC/RESOLVE has been invited to help facilitate this effort, subject to available funding which has not yet been confirmed.

UPDATES ON NWCC PROJECTS

Status of Non-Residential Green Power Demand Study
Ed Holt, Ed Holt and Associates, Inc.
[Refer to Attachment F presentation slides ‘Understanding Non-Residential Demand for Green Power’]

Ed Holt described the background, gave an overview, and provided a status of the non-residential green power demand study. The committee then discussed possible next steps to finalize the project.

• The draft report ‘Understanding Non-residential Demand for Green Power’ has just been completed and sent to the Green Power Marketing Work Group for review.

• Mr. Holt undertook this study due to the lack of information on the motivation of and barriers for non-residential customers to buy green power.
• The project consists of three elements:
  • Survey of 1800 non-residential customers who are known to buy green power
  • Survey of businesses who are not buying green power, but who might be inclined to do so
  • Series of telephone interviews with high profile companies purchasing green power, for a more in-depth understanding of their experience and perspectives
• The DRAFT report is 80 pages long.
• AWEA and NWCC are funding this paper. It is intended to be released as a NWCC consensus document. Due to the study’s length this could prove difficult.

• Public relations benefits became more important as the non-residential customer increased in size.

Action: The work group will send its comments to Ed Holt by October 13^th and hold a conference call to discuss further steps in the review process.

• The economic development work group is considering upcoming future economic development work products from the NWCC; the work group plans to make recommendations to the NWCC Steering Committee for consideration by the October 26^th Steering Committee conference call.

• The NWCC received three proposals in response to the RFP issued for writing a white paper on "Comparison of Bird Collisions with Wind Turbines to Bird Collisions With Other Human-Made Structures."
• A sub-group of the NWCC Avian work group consisting of Tom Gray, Dick Anderson, Karin Sinclair, Ed DeMeo, and Steve Ugoretz met via conference call to review the proposals and recommend a contractor to the Steering Committee. The proposals were evaluated against the criteria listed in the RFP.
• Following the business meeting, the subgroup recommended hiring WEST, Inc. to complete this project and the Steering Committee approved the recommendation.
• The completion date goal is December 31, 2000.

• The NWCC has a completed DRAFT of the ‘Distributed Wind Power Assessment: Summary Report.’
• The paper is undergoing final review for consistency by Ron Lehr, Brain Parsons, and Ed DeMeo.
• One NWCC member would still like to comment on the report.
• One member would like to see a sense of urgency in completing this project.

Letter from Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PA PUC)
[Refer to Attachment G Letter from Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission dated September 13, 2000]

• On September 13, 2000 RESOLVE and the NWCC received a letter from the PA PUC that expressed concern with the consensus processes used by the NWCC.
• Specifically, the PA PUC is not comfortable with the "negative option" decision making where a member must express disagreement with a consensus document by a decision deadline or the member will be deemed to consent to the document under review.
• The committee agreed to maintain the status quo of the NWCC consensus process until the concerns of the PA PUC are better understood.
• A suggestion was made to encourage a commissioner of the PUC to become a member of the NWCC to facilitate PA PUC’s decision making in the NWCC.

Action: Bob Anderson, Roger Hamilton, and Ron Lehr will talk to Annunciata Marino and Pennsylvania Commissioners to try to better understand the concerns of the PA PUC. After that they will recommend how the NWCC should respond to PA PUC’s concerns.

NWCC Program Strategy Review
Abby Arnold, RESOLVE and Committee Members
[Refer to Attachment H ‘NWCC Program Strategy, Management, and Coordination Meeting Draft Agenda’ and Attachment I Memorandum dated September 18, 2000 regarding Draft Recommendations from the 9/11/00 NWCC Program Strategy, Management, and Coordination Meeting]

Ms. Arnold provided a report on the NWCC Program Strategy Management and Coordination meeting held in Washington, DC on September 11, 2000 and facilitated discussion regarding follow-up to the Strategy Review Meeting.

Report on NWCC Program Strategy Management and Coordination Meeting
The goals were to:

• Enhance coordination and communication among the NWCC, WPA, AWEA, and UWIG project managers
• Ensure that the policy and outreach needs for promoting sustainable wind power are being met
• Ensure that current projects/initiatives are well grounded and appropriate for NWCC
• Review NWCC resource requirements and availability and address any imbalances identified
• Review and identify any gaps in NWCC leadership or membership and ensure strong process leadership from RESOLVE

NWCC program recommendations were discussed and fall under the following sections:

1. NWCC-Specific Program Recommendations
2. NWCC Management Recommendations
3. Enhancing Coordination among the Wind Programs
4. General Needs of the Wind Community

Discussion
Upon review of the specific recommendations in the September 18^th draft memorandum, members had the following comments:

• It was suggested that in some areas of the country, regional meetings might be appropriate rather than forums conducted on a state by state basis. (E.g. combine NY and PA)
• Long range planning is important – it can take six months to put on a successful meeting.
• Although there was some initial reservation about combining the green marketing and credit trading work group, members agreed that there are not enough activities in each work group to maintain them separately.
• As national wind programs experience growth and an increasing number of forums take place across the country, there will be an increasing demand on the already limited wind expertise human resources.
• It is important for NWCC and WPA to work together to determine forum locations and content in order to avoid overlap as well as to make the most efficient use of limited human resources.
• Jim Dehlsen, founder of Zond, started a foundation called American Wind Power Foundation that conducts information dissemination and works to build the demand for wind. It was suggested that this group be added to the ones being coordinated amongst.

Next Steps: No objections were raised to recommendations in the draft memo. However, to enable greater input from the NWCC, the recommendations will be considered for formal adoption by the NWCC at the October 26^th Steering Committee conference call.

• Attachment A Meeting Agenda
• Attachment B Presentation slides ‘Credit Trading Project: Status Report’
• Attachment C Presentation slides titled ‘Why Transmission is important to Wind’ and Attachment D ‘DRAFT NWCC RTO Activity Plan’
• Attachment E Presentation slides titled ‘California Independent System Operator (CAISO): Status and Plans’
• Attachment F Presentation slides ‘Understanding Non-Residential Demand for Green Power’
• Attachment G * Letter from Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission dated September 13, 2000
• Attachment H ‘NWCC Program Strategy, Management, and Coordination Meeting Draft Agenda’
• Attachment I Memorandum dated September 18, 2000 regarding Recommendations from the 9/11/00 NWCC Program Strategy, Management, and Coordination Meeting

* Denotes attachments that are not available electronically on the NWCC website (www.nationalwind.org). A copy of these hard copy attachments can be obtained by contacting NWCC Staff at RESOLVE at (202) 965-6218 or nwcc@resolv.org.

September 21, 2000
Participants List

• Kate Allen, Staff, Senator Don Preister, Nebraska Unicameral Legislature
• *Bob Anderson, Montana Public Service Commission
• Stan Calvert, US Department of Energy
• *Steve Clemmer, Union of Concerned Scientists
• *Lisa Daniels, Windustry
• *Ed DeMeo, Renewable Energy Consulting Services, Inc.
• John Dunlop, American Wind Energy Association
• *Les Evans, Western Resources
• Tom Factor, Iowa Wind Energy Institute
• Jeff Graef, Nebraska Energy Office
• *Ed Holt, Ed Holt & Associates, Inc.
• Karen Lane, Utility Wind Interest Group, Inc.
• *Ron Lehr, National Association of Regulatory Commissioners
• *Chuck Linderman, Alliance of Energy Suppliers
• *John Nunley, Composite Technology Corporation
• Steve Palomo, US Department of Energy
• Brain Parsons, National Renewable Energy Laboratory
• Kevin Porter, National Renewable Energy Laboratory
• Kevin Rackstraw, Remote Power Group
• John Saintcross, NYSERDA
• *Charlie Smith, Electrotek Concepts Inc. / UWIG
• Jennifer States, Community Action of Nebraska
• Brad Stevens, Energy & Environmental Research Center
• Kurt Stradley, Lincoln Electric System
• *Gary Thompson, NE Public Power District
• Eric Wesselman, Union of Concerned Scientists
• Tom Wind, Wind Utility Consulting

RESOLVE Staff
Abby Arnold
Gabe Petlin
Lori Riggs