Posts

IEEE 1547 Interconnection Working Group

Subject: UFTO Note – IEEE 1547 Interconnection Working Group
Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2002

IEEE SCC21 Working Group
(P1547 Draft Standard For Interconnection)
31 Jan -1 Feb 2002, Arlington, VA.

Held in conjunction with the DOE Distributed Power Program Review [covered in a separate UFTO Note]

Officially established by IEEE Standards and integrated into SCC21, the P1547 project was launched 4/99, and the Working Group (WG) has been on a fast track ever since to get a standard written and accepted by stakeholders in a wide-open consensus process. Relentlessly, meetings have been held 4-6 times a year, around the country.

Complete documentation of 1547 activities can be found at:
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/scc21/1547/archives/

An excellent overview and current status as of last Oct can be found in a paper by Dick DeBlasio in the proceedings of the IEEE T&D Expo 2001 (Atlanta). [I have the pdf.]

In the last year, Draft #7 was voted on in March, and #8 by a ‘recirculation’ ballot in October. The voting showed interesting patterns; in particular utilities were divided right down the middle. Other constituencies are clearly in favor. There were two huge flurries of email among WG members debating various points, one just before the Oct ballot, and again just before this meeting. The goal now is to complete Draft #9 and to have a successful ballot on it.

Chairman Dick DeBlasio’s introductory remarks* and charge to the group outlined a key source of the problem–a long list of issues which are most likely not appropriate to deal with in a Technical Standard are nonetheless being brought up repeatedly. People with reservations about impacts on the grid, penetration levels, contractual issues, etc etc. continue, sincerely or otherwise, to raise and debate these issues in the WG. There was also a red herring over a minimum vs. maximum standard — opponents claimed that once enacted 1547 could only be made less restrictive and not more — the truth is that IEEE standards invariably undergo revision time and again, before the ink is dry. A cynic might wonder how much of this concern is sincere, how much is due to misinformation, and how much is simply raw tactics to block DG.

Another complicating factor for the 1547 effort–it is the very first case under IEEE’s newly introduced “open balloting”. This means that any IEEE member can jump in fresh to the process and cast a vote without having been involved in previous discussions. Standards committees have long endured repeat dialogues covering ground that’s been dealt with before, but ballots with anyone able to vote is much more problemmatic.

* This agenda document has the remarks which explain the approach:
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/scc21/1547/archives/agendas/Agenda20020131Ext.pdf
* Also see the middle section of Dick’s presentation to the DPP meeting:
http://www.eren.doe.gov/distributedpower/ReviewAnnual01Pres/0102_deblasio.pdf

New Working Groups

IEEE Standard making recognizes the difference between “shall” and “should” and “may”, and produces three types of documents: Standards, Recommended Practices, and Guides, which reflect these different levels of influence. As many of the issues being piled on to 1547 are more appropriately dealt with the second or third type rather than the first, two new working groups have been established and a third has been proposed. The idea is to strip out of 1547 anything that belongs in a different document, e.g. procedures, applications guidance, safety, etc. (In sheer size, 1547 drafts began at over 500 pages; it’s been shrinking but it’s still far above a length appropriate to a IEEE Technical Standard.)

– IEEE SCC21 P1589 — Draft Standard for Conformance Tests Procedures For Equipment Interconnecting Distributed Resources With Electric Power Systems
– IEEE SCC21 P1608 — Draft Application Guide For “IEEE Draft Standard 1547 Interconnecting Distributed Resources With Electric Power Systems”
– Potential new SCC21 PAR for DR communication/control

(P1589 is also a Standard, but it separates issues of testing from the Standard itself. The numbering may be changed to 1547.1, 1547.2 and 1547.3, to reinforce the association among them.)

After DeBlasio’s opening remarks, the opening session of the WG meeting continued with presentations on the new initiatives. Each of these new working groups are recruiting members at the present time.

P1589 (1547.2) Standard on conformance testing will specify the types of tests to be done to demonstrate compliance with 1547.1, in particular at the factory producing equipment and at commissioning. (It would not deal with post-installation testing, which is a matter between business parties involved in a particular setting.) Contact Jim Daley, 973-966-2474, jdaley@asco.com

P1608 (1547.3) Guide is to facilitate use of 1547, by providing characterizations of DG technologies. The development of this document will draw on dozens of existing resources, including 1547 resource materials, the 1001 IEEE standard for storage technology done in the 80’s (and withdrawn in ’98), various state procedures, utility handbooks, and other materials from EEI and EPRI. Contact Dick Friedman, 703-356-1300, nrf@rdcnet.com

New Comm/Control (1547.3) Guide will cover equipment and systems for both remote on onsite monitoring and control of DG, supporting a wide variety of transactions among any DG stakeholders. It will include CHP and coordination with building or enterprise energy management systems. Contact Frank Goodman, 650-855-2872, fgoodman@epri.com

Back to Draft-Writing

The rest of the first session saw the start of a difficult process of reviewing Draft #8, section by section, going over suggested changes, and deciding which materials could be moved into one or the other of the new documents. It recalled the old saying about laws and sausages, with the added fun of wordsmithing by (very large) committee.

Over the next day and 1/2, significant progress was made, with lots of material removed from the Technical and Test sections and the appendices, for inclusion in 1589 and 1608. A “strawman” for Draft #9 is set for the writing committee to tackle in the next two months. (It was also announced that there will be some adds and drops to the writing committee roster.) A full WG meeting in June will, it is hoped be followed soon with the ballot.
—-
Contact: Dick DeBlasio, 303-384-6452, dick_deblasio@nrel.gov
Tom Basso, 303-384-6765, thomas_basso@nrel.gov

(For background about the start of this effort, see:
UFTO Note – IEEE Stds for DR Interconnection, 09 Jul 1999)

NY DG Interconnect Proposal

New York Staff Proposal for Distrib Gen Interconnection

The report was issued by Staff Wednesday July 21 in accordance with the 45 day SAPA (State Administration Procedures Act). The Technical and Non Technical reports and the Staff proposal report are available on the NYS DPS website in pdf format.

New York State Standardized/Interconnection Requirements For Distributed Generators 300 Kilovolt-Amperes or Less Connected In Parallel With Radial Distribution Lines

– Staff Interconnection Proposal

– Technical Report Dealing With Standard Interconnection Requirements

– Non-Technical Report Dealing with Application Process and Contract Documents

The above two reports were submitted to staff by a collaborative effort of parties including utilities and manufacturers of distributed generation technologies as well as other interested parties. These reports were submitted in response to the Chairman’s request, that staff strive to standardize and streamline existing interconnection requirements, while not impacting the safety and reliability of New York’s electric infrastructure, and not adding to ratepayer costs. Staff will prepare a proposal based on these reports, that will be available for comment via the State Administrative Procedures Act (SAPA). Staff’s proposal will also be posted to this website. After comments are receive and evaluated, staff will prepare recommendations for Commission consideration.

http://www.dps.state.ny.us/distgen.htm

Distrib Power Meeting; Interconnection Stds

The Distributed Power Coalition of America (DPCA) is holding its annual meeting this week in Washington, with a special session on Interconnection Issues.

The website is quite informative…see material below, and go to — http://www.dpc.org/events/annual98/agenda.html

In addition (as will be discussed in detail at the meeting), the IEEE standards activity in this area has become quite intense. There was a preliminary session in St. Louis last month in conjunction with the IEEE-IAS Society meeting.
**************************
“IEEE-SCC21″ Standards Development Coordinations for Fuel Cells, PV, Dispersed Generation, and Energy Storage”

Meeting is scheduled for Dec 9-11, also in Washington

Chair is Dick DeBlasio of NREL, 303-384-6452, dick_deblasio@nrel.gov

For a registration form contact: Kim Taylor Conference Coordinator, 303-275-4358, kimberly_taylor@nrel.gov

Meeting will coordinate development of consensus standards within the IEEE-SCC21 committee and its working groups. Emphasis will be placed on technology-specific standards, needs, standards project development, and establishment of working groups. Standards such as utility interconnection and testing protocols will be addressed and coordinated.

SCC-21’s role was expanded in June to merge SCC23 (dispersed storage and generation) and SCC21 (PV)

(As of this writing, I couldn’t find anything about this on the internet.)

**************************

Thursday, Nov. 12, 1998
“Preparing for the Millennium of Distributed Generation”

Industry-Wide Summit on Interconnection
Friday, Nov. 13, 1998
“Interconnection Issues for Distributed Generation”

Hilton Crystal City at National Airport Washington, DC

Opening Reception Crystal City Hilton
Wednesday, Nov. 11, 1998 6:00 – 7:30 p.m. Everyone Welcome!

The Distributed Power Coalition of America was launched in 1997 as an advocacy group to promote the use of distributed power generation in the marketplace. Small-scale units that produce electricity closer to the customer are becoming an economic reality. Compared to spot prices of $10,000/MWh this summer, distributed generation technology makes good sense–even if only used for limited periods of time!

Our annual meeting this year features a number of exciting case studies about the economic reality of these options in today’s market. These include advanced turbine systems, microturbines in real-life multiple settings, the combination of cutting edge technology to resolve reliability issues, and fuel cells for individual homes. Please check out the enclosed program brochure!

In addition, we are sponsoring a one-day industry-wide summit meeting on interconnection. This event brings together, for the first time, all of the major groups working on this issue–DOE, CADER, GRI, EPRI and IEEE–including case reports from working groups on standards for fuel cells and photovoltaics. This meeting may be the most comprehensive held to date to discuss how these new technologies will connect to the existing electricity grid. If you have a stake in this issue, you need to be there!

So sign up early, as hotel space is limited. We look forward to seeing you at what promises to be the most important networking event in distributed generation this year!

Sincerely,

Wayne Gardner DPCA Chair DPCA Executive Director
Sarah McKinleyDPCA Executive Director

Ancillary Services – new ORNL report

In a continuing series on utility industry restructuring, Oak Ridge has just released a new report on Ancillary Services:

“Creating Competitive Markets for Ancillary Services,” ORNL/CON-448,
Eric Hirst and Brendan Kirby, October 1997

FERC has recognized the importance of ancillary services for bulk-power reliability and support of commercial transactions on interconnected transmission systems, and Order 888 includes a pro forma tariff for six key ancillary services. To date most tariffs that have been filed have prices these services on the basis of traditional cost-of-service (embedded) costs. Because most of these services are provided by generating units, however, it should be possible to create competitive markets for them. Recent proposals for ISOs call for such markets, but lack the details on how these markets would be structured and operated.

This report describes a spreadsheet model that simulates markets for sevsen services: losses, regulation, spinning reserve, supplemental reserve, load following, energy imbalance, and voltage support. The work demonstrates the likely complexity of markets for energy and ancillary services, arising because the markets are highly interdependent. Costs and prices will vary considerably as functions of system load and current spot price of energy. Also, embedded cost prices bear little relationship to costs and prices that would actually occur in competitive markets. (Capital costs which figure so prominently in embedded costs would be largely irrelevant, and opportunity costs ignored in cost of service analysis can dominate the prices of some ancillary services at times.)

———————
Copies of this report and others listed below can be obtained from Ethel Schorn, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, PO Box 2008, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6206, e-mail schornem@ornl.gov, or fax 423-576-8745.
———————
Eric Hirst, who is always interested in discussing industry issues, can be reached at 423-574-6304, hirstea@ornl.gov

————————————-
ELECTRIC-INDUSTRY POLICY STUDIES
Here is a partial list of recent ORNL publications, including several earlier ones on Ancillary Services:

L. Baxter, E. Hirst, and S. Hadley 1997, Transition-Cost Issues for a Restructuring U.S. Electricity Industry, ORNL/CON-440, March.

E. Hirst, and B. Kirby 1997, Ancillary-Service Details: Dynamic Scheduling, ORNL/CON-438, January.

E. Hirst 1996, “Bulk-Power Reliability: More Than Apple Pie and Motherhood,” The Electricity Journal 9(10), December.

E. Hirst 1996, Ancillary-Service Details: Regulation, Load Following, and Generator Response, ORNL/CON-433, September.

E. Hirst, S. Hadley, and L. Baxter 1996, Factors that Affect Electric-Utility Stranded Commitments, ORNL/CON-432, July.

L. Baxter, S. Hadley, and E. Hirst 1996, Strategies to Address Transition Costs in the Electricity Industry, ORNL/CON-431, July.

B. Kirby and E. Hirst 1996, Ancillary-Service Costs for 12 U.S. Electric Utilities, ORNL/CON-427, March.

B. Tonn and M. Schweitzer 1996, Public Policy Responsibilities in a Restructured Electric Industry: Analysis of Values, Objectives, and Approaches, ORNL/CON-428, March.

S. W. Hadley 1996, ORFIN: An Electric Utility Financial and Production Simulator, ORNL/CON-430, March.

E. Hirst and B. Kirby 1996, Electric-Power Ancillary Services, ORNL/CON-426, February.