Posts

NY Times article: The Private-Sector Life of a Government Lab

/0 Comments/in , /by

RECOMMENDED READING — On the front page of (8/23) Saturday’s NY Times business section, there was an extensive article on the relationships between DOE National Labs and private industry.

————————————————————–
August 23, 1997 The Private-Sector Life of a Government Lab By CLAUDIA H. DEUTSCH

[G] oodyear Tire and Rubber Co. wanted to predict, without weeks of test drives, how its tires would perform under various conditions. So it went to the Energy Department’s Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, N.M., for help. “Their computer models show how a nuclear weapon will react to different conditions, so why shouldn’t they show how a tire will react?” said William Sharp, president of Goodyear’s global support operations.

A federal weapons laboratory might seem an unlikely partner for a tire maker, but with the Cold War over and military spending shrinking, Sandia is putting out the welcome mat to private industry. And U.S. corporations, which have emerged in this era after downsizing as far more willing to turn to outside sources, are lining up to tap into its technology storehouse.

They are using Sandia to develop new manufacturing processes, to run what-if simulations on new products, to solve environmental problems. In the process, they are helping Sandia move beyond its once single-minded focus on the arms race.

For example, a consortium of 17 casting and forging companies, recognizing that few young engineers were joining their industry, asked Sandia to help it simplify software so that employees who were not engineers could create and test new casting equipment. “None of us have the time or money to do this ourselves,” said Robert Kervick, chief executive of Komtek, a casting company in Worcester, Mass.

And Motorola asked Sandia to run reliability tests on computer chips without using the standard chemical cleaning agents — the chlorofluorocarbons that destroy the atmosphere’s ozone layer. “Customers feel more comfortable buying a product whose reliability is verified by a government lab,” said James Landers, a manager in Motorola’s Space and Systems Technology Group.

For Sandia, the money pouring in from its corporate partners helps keep many of its 7,642 employees — about 800 fewer than two years ago — gainfully employed. But the real winner, Sandia insists, is the U.S. economy. “National security starts with economic security, and that means helping our industries compete,” said Paul Robinson, Sandia’s president.

Sandia (pronounced san-DEE-uh) is not the only Energy Department lab sounding that theme. Although documents emerged last week indicating that some of the labs, including Sandia, are still hard at work on new or modified designs for nuclear arms, private-sector projects are nonetheless occupying an ever-larger share of their time.

Los Alamos, Oak Ridge, Lawrence Livermore — the heart, lung and brain of the Manhattan Project’s atomic bomb and its progeny — all have been accelerating their industrial endeavors since 1989. That was when Congress removed many of the legal impediments that had kept them from transferring intellectual property or licensing technologies to private industry.

Brookhaven National Laboratory on Long Island, N.Y., which is grappling with environmental problems caused by the leak of radioactive tritium from a research reactor’s storage tank, is looking to commercialize its medical and environmental technologies.

In the last eight years the labs have written more than 3,000 Cradas — the acronym for cooperative research and development agreements — that spell out who pays for what, and how the results can be used. Some call for companies to foot the entire bill in return for proprietary rights to anything that is developed.

But more typically, the labs chip in some cash, retain the rights to the resulting technology and give the corporations that contributed several years of free, exclusive use.

The federal labs, even when shrouded in secrecy, have always intermingled with industry. Many of them have been managed by private corporations — under contract to the Energy Department and its predecessors — for several decades. Sandia, for one, was run by AT&T for nearly 44 years and is now managed by Lockheed Martin.

But while all of the labs are devoting more time and resources to projects in the private sector, the effort seems most crucial at Sandia. Unlike Oak Ridge, which has always been a multipurpose energy lab, Sandia’s raison d’etre has always been the arms race.

And Sandia, which designs the non-nuclear components of nuclear weapons, also is responsible for stockpiling spare parts and for maintaining the existing supply of nuclear weapons. So, unlike Lawrence Livermore and Los Alamos, which design and develop nuclear warheads, its duties have not lessened much with the end of the Cold War.

Even so, Sandia’s operating budget is slowly being whittled away. It was down almost $50 million this year, to about $1.28 billion, and Sandia expects it will drop to $1.1 billion in 1999. And a lot of those cuts have come out of the money available for use as matching funds for industrial projects.

In 1995, Sandia got about $100 million from the government for those purposes; it received $56 million last year and $20 million this year. Warren Siemens, Sandia’s director of technology partnerships, doubts it will rise above that again. “Apparently Congress has said, ‘Oops, this is corporate welfare,”‘ Siemens said.

So, while most of the laboratories are looking for ways to apply their existing technologies to corporate use, Sandia is the most willing to develop new processes for industry, with the hope that the companies will kick in most of the costs.

Right now, for example, Sandia is working with a consortium of electronics companies on a project to miniaturize certain types of semiconductor chips to handle 30 times more functions than they typically do now. It is collaborating with numerous manufacturers on ways to cast tools directly from powdered metals.

And it is encouraging industry to tap into its supercomputer — a machine that Sandia says is 300 times more powerful than Deep Blue, IBM’s chess-playing champion — not only to answer questions about products and processes but also to suggest what questions should be asked.

“We hold the record for speed of computing,” Siemens said. “We have great strength in microelectronics, and these are exactly the areas companies look to for help in making products more reliable.”

Progress in convincing industry to chip in has been slow. Five years ago, about $9 million of Sandia’s funds came from industry. Last year corporations provided $27 million. But Siemens thinks private funding will hit $35 million this year, and soar to $100 million by 2000.

And Sandia wants more from industry than simply money. Since it can no longer afford to hire many new researchers, it must rely on industry to keep abreast of new technologies.

Moreover, industrial projects often have implications for the military. “It’s a lot cheaper to maintain an Air Force whose planes need less rebuilding or repairing,” said Gernant Maurer, vice president of technology for Special Metals Corp., a maker of nickel-based superalloys that is part of a consortium working with Sandia to develop defect-free alloys for engine aircraft.

Similarly, weapons and satellites are loaded with semiconductor chips. “Our nation’s defense systems rely on semiconductors, and it would not be great if they had to buy all those chips from overseas,” said Chris Daverse, manager of national resources for Sematech Inc., a nonprofit research consortium of semiconductor makers and equipment suppliers, which has signed on for numerous projects to develop lower-cost production methods and contamination-free chips.

Sandia’s new reliance on industry comes at an opportune time. Companies have grown more comfortable with the idea of outsourcing all kinds of tasks, so letting outsiders work on their research is not as radical as it would have been in the do-it-yourself ’80s. Moreover, many have formed strategic alliances with suppliers and competitors, which has made them less averse to sharing their technologies with others.

“The thinking is, it is better to get half the rights to a product that is first to market, than all the rights to one that comes in late,” said Mary Good, a former undersecretary of commerce who helped set up a project for the auto industry and several national laboratories to develop a fuel-efficient car.

If repeat business is a sign of satisfaction, the corporations that have tried it clearly believe they have gotten their money’s worth. Goodyear, which has completed four cooperative projects in which it used computer modeling to predict how different tread designs and materials would perform, just signed on for its fifth Sandia project. It is aimed at analyzing and improving rubber processing technology.

A deal between Delphi Saginaw Steering Systems, an arm of General Motors Corp., and Sandia to develop better finishing processes for auto parts has metamorphosed into a Detroit-wide project to develop electronic controls for industrial heating and hardening processes.

“We’ll save tens of millions just by eliminating destructive testing,” said James Farago, Delphi’s supervisor of controls engineering. “And we’re going to get better insights into the materials we use.”
Copyright 1997 The New York Times Company

Battery Market Studies from Sandia

/0 Comments/in , /by

Battery Market Studies from Sandia
Aug 14, 1997

Sandia has issued two new reports on markets for batteries:

——————-
“Photovoltaic Battery and Charge Controller Market and Applications Survey”, Hammond, Turpin, et.al, SAND96-2900, December 1996

Surveys were conducted with PV system integrators, battery makers, and PV charge controller makers, to a) quantify the market for batteries shipped (in 1995), b) quantify market segments by type and application, c) characterize controllers used in PV systems, d) characterize operating environments for storage components in PV systems, and e) estimate the market in the year 2000.

In 1995, worldwide shipments for PV batteries totalled $300 million, with a U.S. accounting for just over 10%. In either case, system integrators account for no more than 14% of batteries sold for PV.

——————-
“Battery Energy Storage Market Feasibility Study”, Akhil and Kraft, SAND97-1275/1 and SAND97-1275/2, July 1997. (The first, 1275/1, is a short version of 25 pages. The second, 1275/2, is the long version, with about 200 pages, which will be available sometime in September.)

The purpose of this study was to quantify the energy storage market for utility applications by surveys of electricity providers, battery storage system vendors, and others. Specifically, goals were a) to gather perceptions in the battery energy storage (BES) and utility industries on desired features and comparison with other storage options; b) to estimate BES markets through the year 2010; and c) to provide Sandia and DOE with inputs to the Energy Storage System Program effort.

——————-
Reports can be obtained through NTIS or directly from Sandia. Send requests to Imelda Francis, 505-844-7362, fax 505-844-6972, or: igfranc@sandia.gov.

Distributed Generation–Recent Developments

/0 Comments/in , /by

Subject: UFTO Note – Distributed Generation–Recent Developments
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 09:44:38 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth

————————————————————–
| ** UFTO ** Edward Beardsworth ** Consultant
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675
| http://www.ufto.com edbeards@ufto.com
————————————————————–

Distributed Generation–Recent Developments
————————–

Several new developments of note in the Distributed Generation (or Resources, Power, Utilities — whichever term you prefer). The field seems to be warming up considerably, and several key events scheduled in September.

** CADER – Calif. Alliance for Distributed Energy Resources
Conference Sept 15-17, San Diego

** DPCA – Distributed Power Coalition of America
Annual Meeting, Sept 10-11, Washington DC

** Distributed Generation Forum (GRI)
Second Forum Meeting, Sept. 30

** EPRI Web site

** “N Amer. Distrib. Gen. System Markets”, Frost & Sullivan

** Distributed Utility Associates

———————————————————-

** CADER – California Alliance for Distributed Energy Resources

CADER is an alliance of public and private organizations formed in 1996 to identify and develop specific solutions to the deployment of Distributed Resources. Initially set up with the help of the California Energy Commission, it is a self-managed organization.

Mission Statement: A consortium of manufacturers, users, energy service companies, engineering firms, utilities, power providers, research organizations, regulators, financial institutions, and others committed to facilitating the successful entry of clean, energy efficient Distributed Resources into a competitive electricity energy market.

CADER CONFERENCE SEPT 15-17, 1997, San Diego CA

CADER will host a three day conference to explore economically and environmentally viable alternatives to grid-based power systems. Key energy industry experts from across the country will assemble at this first-of-its-kind meeting to debate how distributed resources figure into the rapidly changing electricity marketplace.

The conference, entitled “Distributed Resources: Addressing the Challenges”, will take place September 15 through 17, 1997 at the Catamaran Resort Hotel, 3999 Mission Blvd., San Diego, California 92109. Hotel reservations are available by calling the hotel directly at 619-488-1081 or 800-288-0770.

The San Diego conference will highlight the latest technology developments such as photovoltaic solar systems, fuel cells, storage technologies such as flywheels and batteries, and advanced gas turbines. In addition to site visits and technical sessions, conference participants will discuss an array of environmental, regulatory and market-related issues.

Speakers invited to the CADER Conference include: Governor Pete Wilson; Congressman Dan Schaefer; California Senator Steve Peace; Amory Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute; Federico F. Peña, Secretary, U.S. Department of Energy; and David Freeman, Trustee, ISO/PX.

Conference technical sessions will focus on the following areas:

Energy policy
Incentives and market rules
Legal, institutional and regulatory issues
Siting and environmental regulatory streamlining
Land use planning and computer tools
Manufacturer/technology issues

The conference builds on the success of CADER’s pioneering efforts to ensure the economic competitiveness of Distributed Resources and will focus on how distributed generation systems can provide local distribution utilities, end-users, independent power providers and energy service providers with another generation choice, improved power quality and more reliable service.

Contact Connie Bruins, California Energy Commission
(916) 654-4545 cbruins@energy.state.ca.us

Complete details and extensive documentation, and details about the conference, are available on the website

http://www.energy.ca.gov/CADER/

———————————————————-

** DPCA Distributed Power Coalition of America

DPCA is a new advocacy group whose mission is to remove regulatory impediments that block distributed power or tilt the rules against its optimal use, through direct mail, testimony to Congress and regulators, and building a grassroots network. It will be technology and fuel neutral.

Its founding was initiated by Solar Turbine and 3 utilities, PECO, NIPSCo, and SCE, and is being incubated at the INGAA, a gas pipeline industry organization (see below). Other members include PSE&G, Allison, Capstone, Stone & Webster, Columbia Gas, and Pan Energy-Duke. A kickoff meeting was held on May 12.

The first Annual Meeting is scheduled for September 10-11, Washington DC. The purpose is to begin a dialogue between the distributed power industry and government decision makers from DOE, FERC and Congress. Speakers include A.J. Bennett Johnson, former US Senator; Anthony Prophet, President Allied Signal Power systems; Christopher D Maloney, VP and General Manager, Unicom Resources; Henry Linden; David Rohy, CEC; and others.

For agenda and registration information,
call Ms. Cris Richards, 202-626-3226 fax 202-626-3241

Contact:
R. Skip Horvath, Executive Director, DPCA
555 13th St. N.W., # 300 W
Washington, D.C. 20004
202- 626-3225 fax 202-626-3241
shorvath@ingaa.org

——-
INGAA –Helping Companies Today Build for Tomorrow
http://www.ingaa.org

The Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA) is a trade organization that advocates regulatory, legislative and individual positions of importance to the natural gas pipeline industry. INGAA’s membership includes virtually all of the interstate natural gas transmission companies operating in the United States, as well as comparable companies in Canada, Mexico, Europe, Asia and South America.

INGAA’s members include 30 U.S. interstate pipelines, six Canadian interprovincial pipelines and 13 international pipeline companies. Membership opportunities are extended to other segments of the natural gas industry through INGAA’s Associate, Financial Affiliate, International Affiliate and Foundation membership programs.

———————————————————-

** Distributed Generation Forum (GRI)

(from GRI press release on their website)

Representatives from 26 electric and natural gas industry organizations, power generation equipment manufacturers and the federal government have created a forum to examine the benefits of expanded use of distributed power generation in the increasingly competitive electric market.

The Distributed Generation Forum members will evaluate the potential for distributed power generation – primarily natural gas-based applications – to help energy-service providers identify cost-effective ways of meeting their customers requirements. Onsite Energy Corp., Carlsbad, Calif., and George C. Ford & Associates, Princeton, N.J., will assist the forum by analyzing the potential impact of electric industry restructuring trends on the distributed generation market and evaluating market applications, equipment performance and cost targets related to electric industry deregulation.

In simplest terms, distributed generation integrates small modular power generation units (typically 25kW to 25MW) into a utility’s power grid, or transmission and distribution system. Expanded use of gas-fueled reciprocating engines, gas turbines and fuel cells – strategically placed between central power stations, substations and energy customers – could provide power to extend a utility’s power grid.

GRI and others think there is great potential for the distributed generation concept to offer a cost-effective means of meeting growing peak demands for a utility’s existing customers while serving new commercial or industrial customers,” said Dan Kincaid, power generation business development manager for Gas Research Institute and member of a steering committee that created the forum. “Though distributed generation has seen limited applications to date, the forum will seek to fully develop the economic and operational benefits for providers and distributors of electricity and their customers.

GRI’s goal is to ensure that gas-based distributed power generation will provide attractive, cost-effective energy service for the evolving electric power market,” Kincaid said. “Such a contribution will ensure that electricity users, gas utilities, power generators and distributors will benefit as the electric power market continues to evolve.”

Other forum participants are Allison Engine Co., AlliedSignal Inc., Collaborative Advanced Gas Turbine Program-LLC, California Alliance for Distributed Energy Resources, Caterpillar Inc., Coltec Industries, The Consumers’ Gas Company Ltd., Cummins-Onan, Distributed Power Coalition of America, Duke Power Co., Electric Power Research Institute, Elliott Energy Systems Inc., Illinois Power Co., International Fuel Cells Corp., Peco Energy Co., Southern California Edison Co., Southern California Gas Co., Solar Turbines Inc., Southwest Gas Corp., Transalta Utilities Corp., Union Electric Co., U.S. Department of Energy, Westinghouse Corp., and Woodward Governor Co.
——

The forum was first offered in Nov ’96, at the suggestion of another GRI industry group, the Gas Engine Technical Advisory Committee. The first meeting was held in May ’97, and the next meeting is scheduled for September 30. The third meeting will be held in February ’98

The primary benefits of membership are the dialogue at forum meetings that results from addressing precompetitive issues affecting distributed generation, and the increased understanding of this new generating practice provided through the immediate access to the assessment results funded from member fees. This information will be available to non-members after one year.

The membership fee is $10,000 for 1997, with a 1998 fee that has not yet been established. The forum is not seeking additional members, but will accept new members that join prior to the September 30, 1997 meeting.

Questions should be addressed to:

Dan Kincaid, GRI Business Development Manager, Power Generation
773-399-8338, dkincaid@gri.org

Paul J. Bautista, GRI Program Team Leader, Distributed Generation,
773-399-5460, pbautist@gri.org

———————————————————-

**EPRI Website on Distributed Generation

Provides information about EPRI programs and links to other sites

http://www.disgen.com

———————————————————-

** “North American Distributed Generation System Markets”
Frost & Sullivan, Report: 5578-14
March 26, 1997, 331 pages, $2950

(from Frost & Sullivan website and press release)
According to recent strategic research from Frost & Sullivan, North American Distributed Generation System Markets have seen a shift occurring since the early 1990s towards on-site distributed power generation. Electronic control systems are now allowing for remote dispatching, and combustion turbine engines are smaller, more powerful and have increased energy efficiency.

The distributed generation technology market is in flux as utilities and other energy providers await federal government pronouncements concerning deregulation of the electric power industry. The best way to navigate this rocky period successfully is to understand what to expect and be prepared to act. This report’s detailed comparative energy-demand projections and unique economic methodology for calculating energy costs can equip companies for this path.

A detailed four page summary of the report is available via fax.

CONTACT: Ben Lerich, Frost & Sullivan,
415-237-6508 fax 415-961-5042
blerich@frost.com http://www.frost.com

———————————————————-

Distributed Utility Associates

DUA provides analytic, technical and policy consulting to utilities, technology developers and energy research organizations, with an emphasis on the Distributed Utility concept and electric industry restructuring. DUA also provides evaluations of prospects for and impacts from utility application of advanced renewable, efficiency and storage technologies.

Mr. Joe Iannucci, DUA’s principal, is a recognized leader in the DU field, and is an active contributor in many of the distributed generation and storage programs around the country. He did a study a couple of years ago: “Gas Industry Distributed Utility Market Analysis,” January 1996, funded by GRI, which is available from DUA.

Joe Iannucci, Principal 510-447-0604 fax 510-447-0601
Distributed Utility Assoc. dua@ix.netcom.com
Livermore CA

Reliability TF draft Interim Report

/0 Comments/in , /by

Subject: UFTO Note – Reliability TF draft Interim Report
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 1997 11:12:59 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth

— advance copy just received from contacts at DOE —

————————————————————–
| ** UFTO ** Edward Beardsworth ** Consultant
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675
| http://www.ufto.com edbeards@ufto.com
————————————————————–

—————————————-

The attached file contains a draft Interim Report that will be discussed and marked up at the July 23 – 24 meeting of the Secretary’s Electric System Reliability Task Force.

Please note that this draft has not yet been reviewed by the Task Force members.
—————————————–

DRAFT

Dr. Walter Massey
Chairman, Secretary of Energy Advisory Board
c/o Morehouse College
830 Westview Drive, SW
Atlanta, Georgia 30314

Dear Dr. Massey:

The Task Force on Electric System Reliability of the Secretary of Energy’s Advisory Board is writing to provide you interim comments on several issues important to the maintenance of reliability. Although the Task Force has not yet completed its deliberations under the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board’s Terms of Reference, its members are aware that the Department and the Administration may be making decisions on these issues and we want to be as helpful as possible.

As you know, the 24-member Task Force is a diverse group representing, for example, electricity producers, marketers, state agencies, consumers, environmental advocates, reliability organizations and academia. Not surprisingly, with such differing perspectives on changing and complex issues, it is not easy for the group to rapidly reach a consensus. Naturally, not every member agrees with every detail of this report.

We certainly all do agree, however, that the maintenance of system reliability must be a high priority and that the mechanisms for ensuring reliability must be changed to accommodate the changing electric market.

Since its establishment in January, 1997, the Task Force has convened in four open meetings. Thus far, we have focused primarily on issues relating to the bulk power transmission grid and in particular security issues—that is, questions about the operation and maintenance of that system–rather than the adequacy of supply or generation. We will be assessing a number of additional issues at future meetings.

The Task Force appreciates the opportunity to provide the Department with this Interim Report and respectfully submits the preliminary findings and recommendations contained therein.

Sincerely,

cc: Federico Peña
Elizabeth Moler

————————-
Secretary of Energy Advisory Board
Task Force on Electric System Reliability

Interim Report

July 24, 1997

Background

This report makes recommendations regarding the security of the Nation’s bulk power system consisting of generation, transmission, and control facilities.

Electric reliability can be divided into two areas: reliability of the distribution system and reliability of the bulk power system. Bulk power system outages affect large areas and can have significant regional and national implications. Further, the rules for assuring reliable operation of the bulk power system can have an effect on the transactions occurring on the system. Federal regulators have responsibility for economic regulation of electricity in interstate commerce, including wholesale transactions involving most of the nation’s generation and transmission facilities, within and across state borders. An issue introduced by competition in bulk power markets is the need to assure reliable system operations in a competitively neutral way. While everyone agrees that system reliability must be maintained as a feature of a competitive electric industry and must be under the direction of experienced expert operators, not everyone agrees about how to resolve reliability issues in a manner that does not discriminate for or against certain participants in competitive bulk power markets.

While states have an interest in the performance of the bulk power system, state regulation has tended to focus on distribution system outages, that generally have only localized effects and are frequently characterized as being related to end-user customer service, which is an area of state jurisdiction. States have traditionally also had regulatory responsibility for economic and planning approval for certain generation facilities and recovery of their costs and siting approval of both generation and transmission facilities within the state.

Bulk power system reliability has two components: adequacy and security. Adequacy implies that there are sufficient generation and transmission resources available to meet projected needs at all times, including peak conditions, plus reserves for contingencies. Security implies that the system will remain intact even after planned and unplanned outages or other equipment failures occur. Most view transmission adequacy and system security as “public goods” that benefit all buyers and sellers of electricity, and which exhibit monopoly characteristics. While the market will likely play a role in providing certain services that are needed for transmission adequacy and system security, these are the areas of greatest national interest from a reliability point of view and the primary focus of this report.

Bulk power system reliability has historically been the responsibility of the electricity industry, as opposed to the government which has only indirect jurisdiction primarily through economic regulation of wholesale electricity sales by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The Department of Energy and the FERC also have some limited authority under certain circumstances to order transmission, require interconnections, make reliability recommendations and collect information. The industry, through the North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC), a self-regulating organization traditionally made up of electric utilities, and the ten regional reliability councils establish reliability standards and monitor compliance. While these organizations have been effective in a world of vertically integrated electric utilities, there is concern today about the voluntary nature of their membership, their dominance by utilities, and the inability to mandate and enforce compliance among their members and other industry participants.

Further complicating reliability issues is incomplete jurisdictional authority. As mentioned above, the NERC and the regional reliability councils have jurisdiction only over their members. There are also thousands of municipal, cooperative, and power marketing utilities that are not subject to FERC or state jurisdiction.

Similarly, we recognize that the bulk power system is an international system. We recognize that the NERC, as a body that includes U.S., Canadian, and Mexican members, has a unique role in setting and monitoring international reliability standards and that close cooperation will be required between national, state, and provincial regulatory agencies that may be given authority for reliability oversight.

Reliability Institutions

The electric utility industry traditionally has been vertically integrated, fully regulated and composed of a limited number of entities. These entities were similar in makeup, in their investments in the bulk power system, and in their expectations for grid operation and use.

In this environment, three institutions evolved that are the focus of this report.

NERC – In 1968, the North American Electric Reliability Council was formed in response to the 1965 power outage that blacked out the northeastern United States and Ontario, Canada. For over two decades, NERC’s mission has been to promote electrical system reliability and thereby prevent further such occurrences. The NERC has been a voluntary, industry-constituted governing body that develops standards, guidelines and criteria for assuring system security and evaluating system adequacy. The NERC has been funded by regional reliability councils which adapt the rules to meet the needs of their regions. Through the work of its ten regional councils and one affiliate council, the NERC has largely succeeded in maintaining a high degree of transmission grid reliability throughout the country. Historically, the NERC has functioned without external enforcement powers, depending on voluntary compliance with standards and peer pressure.

System operators – Today the country is served by approximately 150 separate control areas, each with its own system operator. The operators of these systems rely on communications with each other, access to essential system information, and real time monitoring and control of certain facilities to maintain system reliability. When an emergency occurs on the system, the control area operator takes action — both through communication and direct physical action — to ensure the integrity and security of the system. These people take and direct others to take the actions necessary to “keep the lights on” and to protect against damage to the entire system in the event of emergencies.

FERC — The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is the federal agency with jurisdiction over the bulk power market, including interstate transmission systems. As part of these responsibilities, the FERC is implementing policies to assure that the owners and operators of bulk power transmission facilities under the agency’s jurisdiction provide non-discriminatory service to all power suppliers in wholesale power markets. Historically, the FERC has not had to involve itself with regulating reliability functions. Increasingly, some parties are calling upon the FERC to begin to exercise its current authorities by addressing reliability issues that intersect with the commercial needs of the industry.

At the onset, we note that the electric industry is changing and, indeed, has already changed in several respects: wholesale electric markets are opening to competition under open access transmission tariffs; several states containing more than one-third of the nation’s population have decided to permit retail consumers to choose their suppliers (nearly all of the remaining states are studying retail competition); energy companies are merging and establishing innovative joint ventures; new competitors are entering markets, and new institutions are forming (e.g., independent system operators; power exchanges; spot markets).

These trends indicate that in the future, market forces will determine when, where and what type of generation sources will be built and which energy trades will be transacted. Also, it is apparent that the nation’s transmission grid will be used by a larger number of entities for many more transactions. There are challenges regarding maintenance of traditional reliability levels in this new environment.

While the traditional reliability institutions and processes have served us well in the past, these institutions and processes need to be modified to assure that reliability occurs in a competitively neutral fashion, without favoring one or another set of market participants. To attempt to accommodate these new reliability issues that arise with competitive markets, today’s existing reliably institutions, and most notably the NERC, have undertaken a number of new initiatives including expanding their membership to include new market participants in addition to those long-standing members drawn from the electric industry. The Task Force welcomes these changes.

Task Force Findings

The Task Force has reached consensus on several key points:
1) Restructuring of the electric industry offers economic benefits to the nation and may result in a more efficient electric industry

2) While the changes brought about by restructuring are complex, the reliability of the system need not be compromised provided appropriate steps are taken. Transmission grid reliability and an open, competitive market can be compatible.

3) The viability and vigor of the commercial market must not be unnecessarily restricted. The market forces being introduced now depend on fair and open access to the transmission grid.

4) Commercial markets should develop economic practices consistent with the ingenuity and mutual interest of the participants. However, grid reliability must be maintained through disciplined technical standards and practices.

5) Reliability standards must be clear, transparent, nondiscriminatory, enforceable and enforced. Compliance must be mandatory for all entities using the bulk power system.
6) Regulatory oversight is necessary to ensure compliance with reliability policies and standards and to resolve disputes.

7) It is reasonable and practical to build on the experience and reliability standards developed by the NERC over the past 28 years. However, these standards as well as NERC’s own system of governance must be modified to accommodate the complexities of the competitive market.

8) Grid reliability depends heavily on system operators who monitor and control the transmission grid in real-time. In order to assure competitive use of the grid, system operators must be independent from owners of generation and transmission; they should have no commercial interests in electricity markets.

9) Bulk power systems are regional in nature and can and should be operated more reliability and efficiently when operators are coordinated over large areas.

10) The reasonable and necessary costs for maintaining the reliability system should be fully recoverable and equitably distributed.

11) Transmission grid reliability is a North American issue; the reliability relationships with Canada and Mexico must be preserved.

Task Force Recommendations

The Task Force recommends that:

1) The NERC expedite — to the fullest extent possible and consistent with assuring sound results — the modification of its governance structure to assure fairness and lack of domination by any single industry sector.

2) The FERC undertake a review of existing NERC policies and standards that affect the operation of an open wholesale market and undertake a review of NERC’s organizational structure and governance. This proposed role for the FERC is important in order to make reliability standards enforceable and to assure that reliability standards and practices are not misused in ways that would be discriminatory in the competitive market. Given the considerable demands currently faced by the FERC, additional resources may be required by the agency in order to undertake this role.

3) Federal legislation may be useful to clarify FERC’s authority and responsibility for overseeing and setting and enforcement of reliability standards.

Natural cooling via roof water spray

/0 Comments/in , /by

Subject: UFTO Note – Natural cooling via roof water spray
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 1997 13:19:33 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth

————————————————————–
| ** UFTO ** Edward Beardsworth ** Consultant
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675
| http://www.ufto.com edbeards@ufto.com
————————————————————–

Natural cooling via roof water spray

Roof Science Corp. has developed a system called WhiteCap which can meet 50%-100% of a commercial building cooling loads in arid or semi-arid climates, by radiating heat to the night sky to cool the roof and water which is sprayed on the roof. (Note this is radiative, not evaporative cooling.) The cooled water is collected in a storage tank to provide cooling during the next day. It thus substantially reduces both energy and peak electric demand for indoor comfort control.

In the last few months, NREL committed to completing their test case study at the Nogales Border Station, under the DOE New Technology Demonstration Program. Results will be promulgated among 2,000 federal energy managers. Also, three private developers have committed to include WhiteCap in new buildings.

The company projects profitability in 2-3 years, and is seeking investment and business partners.

Contact:
Mark Berman or Richard Bourne
Roof Science Corp., Davis Energy Group, Davis CA
916-753-1100 mjberm@davisenergy.com

————————————————-
The following is excerpted from Roof Science’s business plan:

WhiteCap was developed by the Davis Energy Group (DEG) with support from the California Energy Commission, the U.S. Department of Energy, SMUD, and PG&E. The systems use a natural cooling phenomenon to satisfy 50 to 100% of commercial building cooling loads in dry climates. The clear summer night sky is cold; 20-30° F equivalent as a receiver of radiant energy from the earth. Water sprayed at night on roofs facing the sky can often be cooled to 55° F when daytime temperatures exceed 100° F. After night-cooling on the roof, the chilled water is filtered and stored for next-day use. The three WhiteCap system types facilitate integration with most non-residential buildings. Economics are very favorable, generating zero to three year paybacks. Added fire safety, automatic roof cleaning, and utility incentives which recognize peak load reduction further enhance WhiteCap value. WhiteCap also offers substantial environmental benefits by reducing ozone depletion and global warming.

Technology Status: Seven full scale WhiteCap projects are operating as of April, 1997. The largest is a 27,000 ft2 state office building in Los Angeles. Four have monitoring systems which generate continuing performance data verifying effective cooling performance. Recent projects have shifted from “on-roof” to more marketable “off-roof” water storage. This change has required re-engineering and testing of some components. New designs promise even better performance, reduced costs, and additional patent protection. The most immediate technology goal is to demonstrate the new designs in several large (50,000 ft2+) “flagship” projects.

The Market: The primary WhiteCap market is new and retrofit low-rise buildings with low-slope roofs in the Western U. S. This is a very large market; the new construction opportunity alone is roughly 100 million square feet per year in the Western US. The highest growth rates are occurring in locations where high cooling loads offer significant opportunities for WhiteCap. Many existing buildings with central systems are WhiteCap candidates because CFC-based cooling systems must be replaced per the MontreaI Protocol. Underlying market conditions for RSC should remain positive, and electric utility deregulation should enhance WhiteCap’s prospects.

Competition: RSC has relatively strong patent protection on WhiteCap technologies and there are no direct WhiteCap competitors. Two patents have issued and two other applications are being prepared. Inertia is strong in the construction industry, and conventional systems will continue to be strong competitors in the future. Electric utility and government activities are expected to influence the industry toward WhiteCap.

The Company: RSC was formed in 1992 as an “incubator” firm in the Sacramento Technology Development Center, to move WhiteCap from R&D status to a commercialized product. After five years of part-time continuing development and demonstration, the company is now poised for success.

Marketing Strategy: RSC provides engineering services and specialty components for WhiteCap projects. Initial marketing efforts have generated a clear picture of preferred markets which are, in ranked order: (l) local new office projects; (2) Federal and State government retrofit projects; (3) “high tech” industrial facilities; (4) “green” buildings, and (5) schools. Marketing efforts will continue to focus on key Northern California projects with profit potential through 1998. RSC will use current contacts with major commercial building firms to generate new sales. Free publicity, sales agents, advertising, and licensees will be all be used to rapidly increase sales beginning in 1999.

ORNL Utility Survey

/0 Comments/in , /by

Subject: UFTO Note — ORNL Utility Survey
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 1997 11:49:03 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth

The Engineering Technology Division at Oak Ridge sent out a survey to a list of utilities recently, with a cover letter from Ed Fox, the division director. Some of you have already seen it, and I have the names of who it was sent to in your companies if you want them.

The stated purpose is to increase utility awareness of ORNL R&D, to obtain feedback on the relevance to utilities of that work, and on priorities for additional R&D. Also, they want stronger ties to utilities and potential users of ORNL work…a goal certainly congruent with UFTO!

Ed Fox can be reached at 423-574-0355, ecf@ornl.gov

The survey is being administered by:
Scott R. Penfield, Jr., Technology Insights
P.O. Box 205, Signal Mountain, TN 37377-0205
423-842-8078 Tel 500-346-9500 Alt. Tel
423-886-3225 FAX penfield@ti-sd.com

The text of the survey is attached below, and includes a number of technologies previously reported by UFTO.
—
————————————————————–
| ** UFTO ** Edward Beardsworth ** Consultant
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675
| http://www.ufto.com edbeards@ufto.com
————————————————————–

ORNL SURVEY OF UTILITIES

Part I: Current ORNL R&D Programs

The following topics briefly summarize ongoing R&D programs at ORNL. For each, please indicate whether you were previously aware of the work and provide a rating (on a scale of 1-10) as to how relevant the work is to your current needs. (If you were not previously aware of an individual R&D item, please base your rating on the summary.) If you wish further information on any topic, please so indicate.
WWW ADDRESS FOR THE ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY DIVISION
HOME PAGE: http://www.ornl.gov/etd/etdfctsh.htm

—————————–
1.0 PLANT/EQUIPMENT DIAGNOSTICS AND CONDITION MONITORING
The following technologies provide for monitoring the condition of machinery in service, on-line diagnostics for evaluating faults, plus R&D into effects of machinery aging. The objective is to relate appropriate maintenance or replacement actions to the actual condition of the machine.

1.1 Electrical Signature Analysis (ESA)
Data characterizing electrical currents and voltage waveforms to/from motors, generators and similar devices are obtained and recorded, using non-invasive probes. ORNL-developed analysis techniques are applied to the resulting data, leading to powerful insights into the health and performance of the electrical machine and the system and/or facility in which it is installed. A typical utility application involved the evaluation of transient loads in motor operated valves at a Carolina Power & Light nuclear plant. More recent developments include improved data analysis techniques and methods for the integrated monitoring of complete systems.

Status: Early forms of ESA are being used in a range of industrial applications, including utility power plants. Licensees include B&W/Framatome and ITT Movats/Westinghouse and Public Service Electric and Gas of New Jersey. More recent developments are available for licensing and/or joint development.

Previously aware of this research: _ Yes _ No
Request additional information: _
Relevance to current needs (please circle):
(Low) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 (High)

1.2 Non-Intrusive Voltage and Power Factor Monitoring
ORNL is evaluating a series of new technologies for obtaining high voltage (>480V) waveforms and power factors, without contact and without the need for potential transformers. These technologies have significant potential in power quality monitoring applications.

Status: These technologies are in an early stage of development and evaluation. They are available for licensing and/or joint development.

1.3 Check Valve Monitoring
The function and health of check valves are evaluated, using a combination of magnetic and vibration sensors. Lack of adequate function and deterioration can be detected, without the need for removal or disassembly of the component.

Status: This technology has been licensed to several service vendors, including B&W/Fram- atome and ITT Movats/Westinghouse. Consolidated Edison is also a licensee.

1.4 Improved Eddy-Current Material Defect Detection
ORNL is developing a new technology for improved defect detection and imaging in non-magnetic materials. In laboratory tests, cracks in a perforated aluminum plate, located behind a 60 mil solid aluminum plate, are clearly imaged. In addition to aircraft inspection (the initial target for this innovation), steam generator tube inspection is a potential application of this new eddy-current based technique.

Status: This technology is in the early stages of development.

1.5 Effects of Aging in Machinery
ORNL has developed a vast database and associated reports on the effects of machinery aging. Information and expertise are available on the general principles of machinery aging as well as the specific effects of aging on individual components, machines and systems.

Status: The database was developed in support of NRC investigations into the effects of aging on nuclear power stations. It is available in the form of reports at the present time. Work is ongoing to develop methodologies to support condition based maintenance decisions.

—————————–
2.0 PLANT INSTRUMENTATION & CONTROL
ORNL’s capability for conceiving, prototyping and implementing advanced instrumentation and control (I&C) capabilities extends from the I&C support of experimental work throughout the laboratory and from supplying innovative sensor and control technologies to federal agencies, utilities and private industry. The following are examples of related utility applications.

2.1 Plug-in Compatible Instrumentation and Control Upgrades
ORNL has developed and prototyped a concept in which application-specific integrated circuits (ASIC’s) mounted on a motherboard replace corresponding analog modules originally installed in utility power plants. The simplicity of the individual ASIC’s reduces concern with common mode failures, a current issue with complex software driven systems. The resulting plug-in compatible replacement modules simplify installation and operation, because rewiring is not required and because changes to operating procedures are minimized.

Status: ORNL is supporting EPRI and the Westinghouse Owner’s Group in the advancement of this technology. A prototype safety system module has been fabricated and is currently undergoing testing.

2.2 Accurate On-Line Measurement of High Temperatures
ORNL has developed a technique for continuous in-situ calibration of resistance temperature detectors. The goal is to maintain an accuracy of 0.5% (°F) under actual operating conditions and to extend the range of useful measurement from about 900°K (1200°F), at present, to 1300°K (1800°F). A typical application would be measuring steam temperatures for on-line determination of plant efficiency.

Status: The technology has been developed to a pre-commercial form and feasibility has been established through demonstrations at the Diablo Canyon and Connecticut Yankee nuclear stations, as well as tests in the Kingston Steam Plant (EPRI I&C Facility).

2.3 Solid-State Hydrogen Sensor
ORNL and EPRI are developing a small, solid state hydrogen sensor for nuclear plant containment monitoring. Other utility applications might be in conjunction with hydrogen cooled generators, battery banks, etc.

Status: The sensor is patented and available for licensing. Tests have been conducted in air, nitrogen, argon, steam and transformer oil and for H2 concentrations of 0.5% to 30%.

2.4 Automated Measurement of EMI/RFI
ORNL has developed and used an instrument to monitor and record ambient electromagnetic interference/radio frequency interference (EMI/RFI) in power stations. The system is capable of non-obtrusive, unattended operation over several-month periods.

Status: Available now for licensing or use.

—————————–
3.0 NON-LINEAR TIME-SERIES ANALYSES
The catchy but misleading name “Chaos” has often been associated with a family of advanced non-linear time-series analysis techniques. In reality, these methods allow a degree of order to be
discerned for what otherwise appear to be a series of highly random events. Examples of practical utility applications are provided below.

3.1 Improved Combustion Control
Non-linear analysis can be used to analyze and optimize fossil power plant burners, fluidized bed combustion systems and, potentially, gas turbines for higher efficiency and improved NOx control.
Status: An early application was the characterization of fluid bed combustion systems, where an objective was to avoid unstable operating regimes (e.g., chugging). More recently, the potential of this technology for improving fossil burner control is being developed through a project involving EPRI, ORNL and B&W.

3.2 Failure Prediction
There is a further potential for applying non-linear analysis to advanced machinery diagnostics/ failure prediction (e.g., in turbine-generators). Bearings, in particular, appear to exhibit chaotic behavior in advance of certain failure modes.

Status: Non-linear analysis is being evaluated in conjunction with diagnostics and condition monitoring techniques, such as electrical signature analysis (see above). Westinghouse has expressed an interest in bearing diagnostics.

—————————–
4.0 TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION

ORNL is developing technologies for automating the control of transmission systems, increasing system capacity and providing an improved understanding of the underlying costs of ancillary services.

4.1 Real-Time System Control
ORNL, DOE and EPRI are developing the technology for real-time monitoring and control of widely distributed transmission systems. This compares with current practice in which responses to disturbances are predetermined on the basis of previously completed analyses. The real-time system will employ an array of monitors, with outputs time-synchronized by satellite clocks. Artificial intelligence techniques will be used to recognize and appropriately respond to disturbances.

Status: This work is in the early stages of development.

4.2 High Capacity Transmission
ORNL has participated in R&D for increasing the capacity of high-voltage transmission lines. Included was testing of a high phase order line, which has the potential for transmitting up to three times the power of a standard single circuit AC line.

Status: The potential of this technology has been confirmed through the operation of a 1.5 mile test section, sponsored by EPRI, DOE, NYSERDA, NYSEG and ESEERCO. Given the current transition to independent operation of transmission capacity, no follow-on work has yet been identified.

4.3 Cost of Ancillary Services
One challenge in establishing the pricing basis for open access to electrical transmission systems is placing a value on ancillary services (scheduling and dispatch, load following, system protection, VARs, energy imbalance, and real power losses). Initial estimates developed by ORNL range from $1.5-$6.8/MWh, with an average of $4.1/MWh. By contrast, the FERC pro-forma schedule includes an allocation of $1/MWh for ancillary services.

Status: An initial report, based on an analysis of 12 utilities is now available. Follow-on work is recommended to establish a consistent framework for estimates.

5.0 POWER ELECTRONICS
This area includes research in power electronics, which is finding broad applicability in power quality, energy conversion and storage, adjustable speed drives, transmission, links, etc.

5.1 Resonant Snubber Inverter
The Resonant Snubber Inverter (RSI) is a power electronics innovation that employs a special resonant circuit to reduce losses during switching. Tests at ORNL have shown efficiency to be improved by 15 percentage points at half speed and 5 percentage points at rated speed. Elimination of associated voltage spikes reduces voltage stresses (leading to higher reliability), and essentially eliminates electromagnetic interference. Potential uses include power conversion for energy storage devices (e.g., flywheels, ultracapacitors, etc.) and adjustable speed drives.

Status: The RSI is currently being developed at ORNL for a number of specific applications.. The technology is available for joint development and/or licensing.

5.2 Multilevel Converter
The Multilevel Converter is another power electronics innovation that allows synthesis of high voltage waveforms, using capacitors as voltage dividers. Potential applications include DC links, static VAR generators and high voltage variable speed drives, as well as power conversion from renewable energy sources (such as photovoltaic arrays) or battery-fed systems. The ORNL technology eliminates the need for transformers, which are a significant source of cost and energy losses in conventional systems. A problem with capacitor based systems is the tendency to develop an imbalance between voltage levels when real power is being transferred (this is not a problem in static VAR generator applications). The unique contribution of ORNL is a new approach for maintaining the desired voltage balance across the capacitors, when real power is being transferred.

Status: An 11-level (21-level phase to phase) multilevel converter, employing insulated gate bipolar transistors (IGBTs) is working in the laboratory at ORNL. This system is prototypical of a 60kV multilevel converter using gate turn-off thyristors (GTOs).

—————————–
6.0 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONS ANALYSIS
This area comprises R&D on information management and operations analysis methodologies which support the management decision process.

6.1 Integrated Operational and Economic Models
ORNL has developed an extensive capability for operations and economic modeling techniques that support the management decision process. Alternative courses of action can be evaluated on a probabilistic basis, taking into account both the likelihood of various outcomes and their technical and economic consequences. Typical examples in which utilities might apply such techniques include evaluating the business potential of a new energy storage device, or determining the likelihood that a nuclear facility would be profitable over its remaining lifetime.

Status: These modeling techniques have been extensively applied. A recent example is a probabilistic assessment (for DOE) of the economic viability of each of the nuclear plants currently operating in the U.S.

6.2 Real-Time Power Scheduling
ORNL developed a “Power Advisor” to guide the operations of the Paducah, KY uranium enrichment plant in response to real-time electric power pricing inputs. The model provides a basis for deciding whether blocks of power at a given price should be accepted or whether it is more cost effective to curtail plant operations. The model includes consideration of the technical limitations of the facility, as well as the economic impact on the product bottom line.

Status: In place and operating at Paducah, KY.

6.3 Performance Indicators
The performance indicator methodology developed by ORNL is an operations management process for filtering and organizing the vast amounts of data generated in a complex management environment. The key objective is to focus management attention on activities that have the most influence on organizational goals, such as economic return, operational efficiency, safety, etc. The process starts with the selection of key performance indicators. These individual measures of performance are subjected to additional analysis and weighting, resulting in composite indices representative of overall performance, analogous to a stock market index. Feedback mechanisms are included to optimize information flow and to respond to organizational changes over time.

Status: Currently employed by DOE for managing the DOE occupational safety and health program.

—————————–
7.0 UTILITY/CUSTOMER TECHNICAL SUPPORT
The following research areas would potentially support both utility and utility customer technology support needs.

7.1 Electric Machinery Analysis
ORNL has developed an improved motor equivalent circuit model to more accurately estimate the operating characteristics of electric motors. Input to this computer-based tool can start from name plate data and increased accuracy can be obtained with supplemental calibration measurements (e.g, speed and current). Once calibrated for a given machine, the method can be used to accurately predict loads, currents, efficiency, etc. As a result, the need for additional monitoring instrumentation may be reduced in some cases.

Status: The model is complete and available through the DOE Motor Challenge Program

7.2 High Temperature Thermography
Techniques developed by ORNL offer improved capability for accurately measuring high temperatures. Using emissions from thermographic phosphors, temperatures can be measured over a wide range (cryogenic to 1600°C [2900°F]) and without the need for physical contact.

Status: This technology has been applied to several industrial processes. Initial applications have included the first stage vanes of turbine engine gas generators and the surface of steel exiting a molten zinc bath in a galvanizing process.

7.3 Electric Machinery Test Facility
ORNL has developed a flexible and well instrumented Electric Machinery Test Facility. The current capacity is 100 hp, but is now being expanded to 700 hp. During testing, loads can be varied over a wide range. Input voltage and currents can also be varied to simulate various operating demands, as well as a range of power quality situations (e.g., voltage imbalances, harmonics, etc.)

Status: The Electric Machinery Test Facility is a National User Facility available for use by private sector entities for testing and qualification of motors, generators and related components at nominal cost.

7.4 Pump Test Facility
ORNL recently commissioned a Pump Test Facility, with a design capacity of 100 hp. The configuration of the facility is highly flexible in terms of flow configuration, installed components and provisions for instrumentation and monitoring.

Status: The Pump Test Facility is a National User Facility available for use by private sector entities for testing and qualification of pumps and related components at nominal cost.

7.5 Buildings Technology Center
ORNL is actively involved in developing technologies to improve the efficiency of buildings and installed equipment. The Buildings Technology Center (BTC), established at ORNL in 1994, includes a large scale climate simulator and a hot box for testing components (walls, windows, etc.), as well as facilities for testing equipment (e.g., heating and air conditioning).

Status: The BTC is a National User Facility available for use by private sector entities for testing and qualification of building components at nominal cost.

Part II: Priorities for Additional R&D
Please indicate below up to three areas of R&D that would most help your organization to meet its objectives.
1.
2.
3.

Part III: Contact for Liaison with ORNL

Please identify one or two individuals that could serve as a liaison with ORNL managers. We will keep them informed of new innovations at ORNL and request their input regarding utility R&D priorities in the future.
1. Name Title Organization
Address
Tel FAX E-Mail

2. Name Title Organization
Address
Tel FAX E-Mail

Next Reliability TF Meeting July 23-4

/0 Comments/in , /by

Subject: UFTO Note — Next Reliability TF Meeting July 23-4
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 1997 13:34:53 -0700
From: Ed Beardsworth

Here is an advance copy of the draft agenda for the next meeting of the DOE Task Force.

————————————————————–
| ** UFTO ** Edward Beardsworth ** Consultant
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675
| http://www.ufto.com edbeards@ufto.com
————————————————————–

[6450-01-P] DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Secretary of Energy Advisory Board; Notice of Open Meeting
AGENCY: Department of Energy
SUMMARY: Consistent with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Public Law 92-463, 86 Stat. 770), notice is hereby given of the following advisory committee meeting:
Name: Secretary of Energy Advisory Board – Electric System Reliability Task Force

DATES AND TIMES: Wednesday, July 23, 1997, 1:00 PM – 5:00 PM and Thursday, July 24, 1997, 8:30 AM – 11:30 AM
ADDRESS: Bechtel Corporation, Hoteling Suites, Second Floor, 50 Beale Street, San Francisco, California
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard C. Burrow, Secretary of Energy Advisory Board (AB-1), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585, (202) 586-1709 or (202) 586-6279 (fax).

Background
The electric power industry is in the midst of a complex transition to competition, which will induce many far-reaching changes in the structure of the industry and the institutions which regulate it. This transition raises many reliability issues, as new entities emerge in the power markets and as generation becomes less integrated with transmission.

Purpose of the Task Force
The purpose of the Electric System Reliability Task Force is to provide advice and recommendations to the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board regarding the critical institutional, technical, and policy issues that need to be addressed in order to maintain the reliability of the nation’s bulk electric system in the context of a more competitive industry.

Tentative Agenda
Wednesday, July 23
1:00 – 1:30 PM Opening Remarks & Introductions;
Philip Sharp, ESR Task Force Chairman
1:30 – 2:45 PM Working Session: Review of the Draft
ESR Task Force Interim Report
2:45 – 3:00 PM Break
3:00 – 4:30 PM Working Session: continued
4:30 – 5:00 PM Public Comment Period
5:00 PM Adjourn

Thursday, July 24
8:30 – 8:45 AM Opening Remarks & Summary of Agreements;
Philip Sharp, ESR Task Force Chairman
8:45 – 10:00 AM Working Session: continued
10:00 – 10:15 AM Break
10:15 – 11:00 AM Discussion: Next Steps — Approach to Addressing
& Resolving the Remaining Task Force Issues
11:00 – 11:30 AM Public Comment Period
11:30 AM Adjourn

This tentative agenda is subject to change. The final agenda will be available at the meeting.

Public Participation: The Chairman of the Task Force is empowered to conduct the meeting in a fashion that will, in the Chairman’s judgment, facilitate the orderly conduct of business. During its meeting in San Francisco, California the Task Force welcomes public comment. Members of the public will be heard in the order in which they sign up at the beginning of the meeting. The Task Force will make every effort to hear the views of all interested parties. Written comments may be submitted to Skila Harris, Executive Director, Secretary of Energy Advisory Board, AB-1, US Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20585. This notice is being published less than 15 days before the date of the meeting due to programmatic issues that had to be resolved prior to publication.

Minutes: Minutes and a transcript of the meeting will be available for public review and copying approximately 30 days following the meeting at the Freedom of Information Public Reading Room, 1E-190 Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC, between 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM, Monday through Friday except Federal holidays. Information on the Electric System Reliability Task Force may also be found at the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board’s web site, located at http://vm1.hqadmin.doe.gov:80/seab/.

Issued at Washington, DC, on
Rachel M. Samuel Deputy Advisory Committee Management Officer

DOE Utility Restructuring Weekly Update

/0 Comments/in , /by

Subject: UFTO Note – DOE Utility Restructuring Weekly Update
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 1997
From: Ed Beardsworth <edbeards@ufto.com>

CC: Jen_Bergman@Energetics.com, DIANE.PIRKEY@HQ.DOE.GOV

————————————————————–
| ** UFTO ** Edward Beardsworth ** Consultant
| 951 Lincoln Ave. tel 415-328-5670
| Palo Alto CA 94301-3041 fax 415-328-5675
| http://www.ufto.com edbeards@ufto.com
————————————————————–

Attached below is last week’s issue of an email summary of current events in utility industry restructuring, prepared by Energetics, Inc. for the DOE Office of Utility Technologies. The items are summaries of stories found on the internet.

Begun a year ago for DOE’s internal use, it is sent on an ad-hoc basis to an email list of interested parties. If you want to be added to this list, simply send an email note with your request to:

Jennifer Bergman, Energetics, Jen_Bergman@Energetics.com

DOE is considering the possibility of posting this material in a website, however no decision has been reached. I have a few recent back issues on file.
————————————————–

June 27, 1997

Utility Restructuring Weekly Update

This weekly information has been compiled by Energetics, Inc. for the U.S. Department of Energy. Questions or comments should be directed to either Jennifer Bergman, Energetics, Jen_Bergman@Energetics.com, or Diane Pirkey, U.S. Department of Energy, DIANE.PIRKEY@ HQ.DOE.GOV.

National/Federal:

Last week, at the Eighth Annual Energy Efficiency Forum, policy makers debated various utility deregulation issues. Senator Russell Feingold (D-WI) and Pennsylvania Governor Tom Ridge argued that deregulation is best left . . . . .
.
. (5 pages of text)
.
.

WEBSITES:
NewsPage: http://www.newspage.com
EnergyOnline: http://www.energyonline.com
Senate Energy & Natural Resources Committee:
http://www.senate.gov/~energy/competitv.htm