ieee scc21 p1547 working group meeting minutes, october...

Minutes—P1547 Meeting, October 25‐26, 2017, Oak Brook, IL

IEEE SCC21 P1547 Working Group Meeting Minutes, October 25‐26, 2016, Oak Brook, IL

“P1547 Draft Standard for Interconnection and Interoperability of Distributed Energy Resources with Associated Electric Power Systems Interfaces”

Chair: David Narang

Vice Chairs: John Berdner, Jim Daley, Babak Enayati, Mark Siira and Bob Fox

Secretary/Treasurer: Charlie Vartanian The ninth meeting of the P1547 Working Group (WG) was held in Oak Brook, IL, on October 25‐26, 2016, at Commonwealth Edison. The targeted outcomes for the meeting were to review the latest D5 edits, to be used for for creation of P1547 D6 following this meeting. After the P1547 October 26 meeting adjournment, the P1547.1 WG held its meeting on October 27. Summary highlights. Each subgroup presented redline edits to D5, and/or major discussion points, resulting from comments received from the WG for revision D5. The consolidated comments list for D5, and a copy of IEEE 1547 Draft 5 Rev 5.1 were sent to meeting registrants in advance of the meeting. The overall goal was to present the pending edits to Draft 5, for creation of Draft 6 following this live WG meeting. November 9, 2016 is the due date for meeting attendees to provide any additional D5 inputs to the WG Secretary. December 2, 2016 (later updated to December 9) is the due date for Folder Vice Chairs to submit their final redline edits showing changes from D5, for consolidation into D6. December 16, 2016 is the due date for the Secretary to post D6 Pre‐Ballot Draft to iMeet. Coincident with posting D6, the Secretary will send the D6 Comment Form to the WG. The D6 Comment Form will include a new row with a request to vote “yes” or “no” as to whether D6 content is ready for submitting to IEEE‐SA for formal balloting to begin. Folder 4 (Interoperability, B. Fox) and Folder 6 (Testing, M. Siira)) subgroups that have content still being finalized will continue to hold their respective regular‐recurring subgroup teleconferences. All other Folder subgroups have completed creation of content, and are now resolving comments. These other Folder subgroups will convene WEBEX’s as needed to complete comment resolution for creation of D6 redline edits. Folder 1 (Overall Document, D. Narang) and the P1547 Officers will continue to have regular teleconferences to track overall progress. The WG confirmed the dates for the next meeting, a 1 ½ day meeting February 28 – March 1 (1/2 day), 2017 for the next P1547 WG meeting, and March 1(1/2 day) – March 2 for the P1547.1 WG meeting, both in Atlanta GA, with facilities sponsored by NERC. TUESDAY, October 25, 2016, Day 1 MEETING CALLED TO ORDER, INTRO, and ADMIN ITEMS The meeting was called to order at 8:15am. Attendees (Attachment A) were welcomed by David Narang, Chair of IEEE P1547. In lieu of voice roll call, the registration list was sent prior to the meeting for information on attendees and affiliation. Meeting participants were asked to be sure and give their name and affiliation when they asked questions or made comments during the meeting. The Secretary emphasized the need to initial the meeting sign‐in sheets each day, since this is the means used to


determine Working Group Member status qualification. Additionally, enabling access requires the person to request Member status, upon qualifying with attendance of two in‐person WG meetings.

David thanked Commonwealth Edison for sponsoring the meeting facilities. Manuel Avendano, Manager, Smart Grid & Technology, Commonwealth Edison, welcomed the attendees and provided meeting room and building logistics information. Shay Bahramirad, Director, Distribution Planning and Smart Grid, Commonwealth Edison, provided an executive overview of the company and its DER and Smart Grid related activities.

David then presented the agenda for the meeting (Attachment B), reviewed planned activity for the next several days, and had the P1547 Officers introduce themselves. David presented the introductory slides and made a call for potentially essential patents. No potentially essential patent claims were declared, and no holders of potentially essential patents were identified. Mike Kipness provided further clarification on essential patents and reiterated the prompt to identify any. C ACTION – Secretary to send the list of all the potential essential patents to Mike identified so far, for IEEE’s review and guidance as to any follow‐up needed, e.g. obtaining any permissions.

REVIEW OF LATEST CONTENT & EDITS, FOLDER 2 VAR CAPABILITY & VOLTAGE REGULATION Folder 2 subgroup Facilitator Aminul Huque read through the latest content, updated per comments to Draft 5. Vice Chair Babak Enayati took detailed notes for Folder 2 consideration and followup for creation of Draft 6.

The latest language reviewed by Aminul is posted on the P1547 iMeet site, “Voltage Regulation subgrouyp input for Draft 4.1 7‐8‐16‐ docx”. After Aminul reviewed the latest proposed content, the floor was opened for questions and comments from the WG. Babak took detailed notes, and stated there will be Folder 2 meetings following this WG meeting to resolve open items. WG feedback provided at the meeting included:

10 second response time is cited in D5. DER can respond much faster – suggestion to make this 10s or less Suggestion made that default communication response time should be designated as required at the DER Suggestion made that other open loop response times be allowed (10s or less is fine, but we don't specify who decides – is that acceptable?) Question as to whether modes one at a time/sequential, or can they be coincident? Suggestion to harmonize use of term “normal operating range”. This may be addressed by F1. Question and discussion on what the VAR requirement is, or should be, at 20% active power limit – what should we expect if DER is below 20%


Need to separate communication from DER response – make sure this is consistent across all sections.

Folder 2 Vice Chair and Facilitators to incorporate WG Meeting feedback for preparation of Draft 6. Vice Chair indicated Folder‐level meetings will be needed to complete resolution of comments to create Draft 6 input. REVIEW OF LATEST CONTENT & EDITS, FOLDER 7 POWER QUALITY Folder 7 subgroup Vice Chair Babak Enayati reviewed the latest proposed content for Power Quality sections. The latest language reviewed is posted on the P1547 iMeet site, “1547 4_3 Power quality 2016‐08‐26.docx”. After Babak reviewed the latest proposed content, the floor was opened for questions and comments from the WG.

WG feedback provided at the meeting included:

Suggestion to clarify cumulative duration Question as to what's the time interval over which we accumulate these excursions? Questions and discussion on Section 4.3.4, regarding language with DER causing issues on "any portion" of the EPS Concern expressed on section 4.3.2.1‐ there could be a problem with interpretation here. – should exclude transformer energization or quantify it similar to GC76 (National grid europe) Suggestion made that this PQ section) should be focused on the DER itself, not the facility (need clarification from subgroup leads on scope of this issue & appropriate narrative)

Folder 7‐Power Quality Vice Chair and Facilitators to incorporate WG Meeting feedback for preparation of Draft 6. REVIEW OF LATEST CONTENT & EDITS, FOLDER 5 ISLANDING Before review of Folder 5 Islanding material, the floor was given to Brian Lydic to share information. Brian Lydic invited interested people to join a newly formed industry stakeholder group working on islanding detection and other topics. If interested, please contact Brian at, [email protected] Folder 5 Islanding topic co‐facilitator Mike Ropp presented this subgroup’s latest edits developed since the last WG meeting. The presentation that Mike used for his discussion is posted on the P1547 iMeet site, “Folder5_Pres_Chicago_10242016.pptx.”


Suggestion to add a word at end of clause title unintentional islanding mitigation Question on "cease to engergize" – why add "and trip"?

Response ‐ We did it to make it more clear


Suggestion to put in correct footnote number 54, per Draft 5 comments Suggestion to remove footnote 52 Suggestion to coordinate between this (islanding: intentional (4.4.1) & unintentional (4.4.2)) section and related sections (regarding recloser coordination) Objection expressed to putting in reverse power relay into body

Response: agreed‐ options are in informative footnotes Suggestion that this content needs to be reviewed in context of ride‐through, (4.3.3.7) – need to make sure you don't create any net power change by disconnecting Suggestion to add an informative footnote on 4.2.1 in response to comment 139 either add another trip layer or make it clear that extending the time of previous OF could make a problem with this.

Suggestion to make sure to coordinate definition of microgrid with IEEE 2030

Folder 5‐Islanding Facilitators to incorporate WG Meeting feedback for preparation of input to Draft 6. REVIEW OF LATEST CONTENT & EDITS, FOLDER 7 MICROGRIDS Folder 7 subgroup Vice Chair Babak Enayati presented this subgroup’s latest edits developed since the last WG meeting. After Babak reviewed the latest proposed content, the floor was opened for questions and comments from the WG.


Suggestion that mandatory voltage drooping needs to be coordinated with another subgroup Suggestion that Frequency droop needs coordination with another subgroup Question ‐ do we need a clearer link between the exceptions that will be using UPS systems to ride through disturbances? (hospitals, critical loads, etc.) – facility microgrids are specifically excluded

WG feedback noted that there were some major comments received in response to Draft 5, such as should we even have microgrids in this section. Recap of discussion points:

Response from Babak – scope of 1547 and challenges utilities are facing – this needs to be included now Prompted further pro/con discussion with WG: Comment‐ If this is all under control of Area EPS, then this is out of scope – some of these clauses don't fit into the scope Comment ‐ if you need much more than this, take out a PAR and go for it but take it out of here. Comment ‐ NERC: do not delay 1547 to work on this – we have serious problems because we don't have sufficient ride through so need to finish this so we can migrate this to NERC


Response from Babak ‐ Babak – we are not pushing for this, may want to move to annex or move it based on what the WG says

Question‐ what is the difference in 4.4.2.8 and the one just before that paragraph (categories of DERs)

Suggestion to clarify lines 44, 45, 46 – don’t use "shall" in the first standard and then say it may in the next sentence

Question – how do these requirements work with ride‐through?

Question ‐ if this becomes a normative section, and the normative is the ability to change settings, should the interoperability requirements be identified – i.e. should we have different curves?

Response from Babak – only need to let DER know that you're in microgrid mode and send it whatever settings the DER needs to follow for operation and protection ( thinks they are in pretty good shape with existing interoperability hooks)

Suggestion to make sure the parameters are not changed until AFTER the microgrid is formed Suggestion that we've used "cease to energize" and disconnect – we need to use these terms consistently

Folder 7‐Microgrids Vice Chair and Facilitators to incorporate WG Meeting feedback for preparation of input to Draft 6. REVIEW OF LATEST CONTENT & EDITS, FOLDER 5 ENERGY STORAGE Richard Bravo reviewed the several Draft 5 Comments that were ascribed to the F5 Energy Storage team for review and response. The floor was opened for comments.

Comment cautioned on loads being exposed to falling under requirements on 1547, with addition of any Energy Storage requirements.

Richard verified that the Draft 5 comments did not trigger need to update the ES content in Draft 5. The ES related content in Draft 5 will move forward to Draft 6 unchanged.

REVIEW OF LATEST CONTENT & EDITS, FOLDER 5 NETWORKS Dan Mungovan reported that the Draft 5 comments received did not trigger need to update the Networks content in Draft 5. However, the F5 Networks Team does plan reconvene before Draft 6 is completed, and may make additional redline edits for inclusion in Draft 6. Dan then opened the floor for questions and comments from the WG. Folder 5‐Networks Facilitators to incorporate WG Meeting feedback for preparation of input to Draft 6.


DAY 1 MEETING RECAP Charlie announced that there would be a 2 week window following the WG meeting for meeting attendees to send in written comments. He re‐affirmed that the basis for comments and proposed changes is Draft 5. Charlie briefly previewed the agenda for tomorrow, meeting Day 2.

IEEE ICAP

Paul invited IEEE 1547 meeting participants to remain for an informational briefing following today’s WG meeting, and also invited participants following tomorrow’s P1547 adjournment, to observe an ICAP Members meeting.

David recessed the meeting at 5:00pm. The meeting is to resume tomorrow.

------------------------------------------------- Day 1 concluded. -----------------------------------------

WEDNESDAY, October 26, 2016, DAY 2

MEETING CALLED TO ORDER AND INTRO David called the meeting to order at 8:15am. Gary Smullin announced that he had PDH forms for both P1547 and P1547.1 meetings. And, anyone who needed these forms should get the forms from him before end of the meetings. Reigh asked if there is a plan to initiate a PAR to begin the next revision, after we complete this active revision? Answer is no. Additional discussion included:

Anyone can initiate a PAR to add or revise a “.X”. One “.X” that is a candidate for update as soon as the revised 1547 is finalized is IEEE 1547.2 Application Guide. SCC21 plans to provide oversight and coordination for the PAR process to add and revise 1547 related standard documents.

Further discussion included a question on any information on the German standards revision process worth considering. That was a portion of the material F3 team had as part of their agenda session for today’s meeting.

REVIEW OF LATEST CONTENTS & EDITS, FOLDER 3 ABNORMAL CONDITIONS Folder 3 Vice Chair John Berdner and Folder 3 Facilitator Jens Boemer and Reigh Whaling presented this subgroup’s proposed updated content since the last WG meeting. The proposed latest language is posted on the P1547 iMeet site, “P1547‐D5‐Clean_20160822‐CLEAN_rev1_REDLINE FOLDER 3 ABNORMAL_Jens‐v1.docx” . After the F3 team reviewed the latest proposed content, the floor was opened for questions and comments from the WG. WG feedback included:

Suggestion that discussion and coordination needed between anti-islanding group and the ride-through group


Comment that anti‐islanding vs protection & issues at the transmission level need consideration Suggestion for coordination between field adjustable parameters and interoperability

a. Default range of adjustability b. Default settings

i. This will be tricky to understand – range of adjustability and capabilities (some are open to change, capabilities are not – they are fixed)

ii. Comment – trip settings are not good enough now – the equipment keeps tripping per comment from Hawaiian Island utility stakeholder

1. Answer: the new standard will ensure ride‐through that should be good enough to ride through some significant disturbances

2. Look at blue and red arrows – they show the range of adjustability for these trip settings

Comment that there is interplay between power quality (washout function) and the dynamic voltage support operation Discussion on whether the dynamic voltage support operation should be mandatory or optional

Suggestion to coordinate 4.8.2 ramp of 30% with ramp up in other section that's 20%

Folder 3 ‐Vice Chair and Facilitators to incorporate WG Meeting feedback for preparation of input to Draft 6. REVIEW OF LATEST CONTENTS & EDITS, FOLDER 4 INTEROPERABILITY Folder 4 Vice Chair Bob Fox and Facilitators Frances Cleveland and Brian Seal presented this subgroup’s material developed since the last WG meeting. The latest Interoperability content is posted on iMeet, “P1547‐D5‐Clean_20160822‐CLEAN_rev1_f4_updated.docx”. Bob and his Facilitators led the discussion using the presentation posted on , “IEEE‐1547‐F4‐Interoperability Overview.pdf”.

The floor was then opened for questions and comments from the WG. Feedback from the WG included:

Suggestion to coordinate on nomenclature (unitary DER ….DER unit) Suggestion to put in a heads‐up that there are considerations like latency that are not addressed in the standard but should be reviewed

a. topic leads agree this may be a good topic for the informative annex Folder 4 ‐Vice Chair and Facilitators to incorporate WG Meeting feedback for preparation of input to Draft 6. This is one of the Folder subgroups that will be continuing with regular‐recurring meetings following this WG meeting. REVIEW OF LATEST CONTENTS & EDITS, FOLDER 6 TESTING Folder 6 Vice Chair Mark Siira and Facilitator Wayne Stec presented this subgroup’s proposed updated content since the last WG meeting. The proposed latest language is posted on the P1547 iMeet site, “Folder 6 Recommendation for Normative Text (Clause 5) docx” .


This session began with a review of the Requirements Matrix spreadsheet by Jen’s Boemer. The content was reviewed and feedback taken for update. The version discussed at the meeting was file “IEEE P1547‐F6‐Test Responsibility Matrix based on Draft 5.0_ For WG Meet.xlsx” Folder 6 Vice Chair Mark Siira reviewed the clauses That were Removed from Original 1547 Test Requirements Clause. The following clauses highlighted in were recommended to be moved from clause 5 to clause 4, and stated as technical requirements. The following clauses wer recommende to be deleted from the draft 5, as the material is covered as indicated in red text for other parts of the document.


It was noted in the discussion that the clauses 5.1.9 and 5.1.10 were from IEEE 1547.1 and not 1547‐2003, therefore these should be removed. After the F6team reviewed the latest proposed content, the floor was opened for questions and comments from the WG. WG feedback included:

Suggestion to cross-connect type tests, commissioning test with interoperability

Comment provided- Andy(?) may need another table to define requirements for small category 3 der (this is needed to make sure the small scale and large scale each have appropriate tests)

Suggestion to clarify Table with type tests, production tests DER eval, F/NR/P

Several comments noted that some of these requirements will be problematic for delta-connected systems, especially with areas where state legislatures that want P1547 but don't allow additional investigation (beyond 1547). John B suggested that's why we have the clause for partial compliance – that's why we need to do additional testing. Reigh commented this is a gap. Jens asked for a show of hands and over 10 people raised their hand that this was an issue – the group will take this back and deliberate more.

Folder 6 ‐Vice Chair and Facilitators to incorporate WG Meeting feedback for preparation of input to Draft 6. This is one of the Folder subgroups that will be continuing with regular‐recurring meetings following this WG meeting.

REVIEW OF LATEST CONTENT & EDITS, FOLDER 6 MODELING & SIMULATION Folder 6 M&S Facilitators Michael Ropp and Jeanie Piekarz discussed the latest M&S draft content and took feedback from the working group.


The floor was opened for comments from the WG: Numerous questions on the type of models for which requirements are being set.

Response – mostly data requirements, associated with steady state (e.g. load flow) models

Folder 6 M&S Facilitators to incorporate WG Meeting feedback for preparation of input to Draft 6. REVIEW OF LATEST CONTENT & EDITS, FOLDER 1 OVERALL DOCUMENT Folder 1 Chair Tom Basso introduced the session, and then Facilitators covered specific active topics. Recap of their discussion follows:

Secondary Networks (Jens) Where to put secondary networks – Dan comment – wants to make sure this section does not

get wrapped up in distracting sections like 500kW discussion

Figure 1 (Wayne) Suggestion to update the figure to show aggregated DER nameplate rating of 500kW

Suggestion to add the verbiage "in agreement with the Area EPS" when it comes to the 500kW rating decision for PoC vs PCC

o Response: Mark Siira – there is language based on one of the minutes from past meetings – Mark will send out

Suggestion to harmonize the use of kVA and kW

Suggestion to fix figure 1 – don't use dotted line to designate a line continuation

Figure 2(Wayne) Suggestion to revise figure 2 to cover interconnection as well as DER. To avoid any implication

that the interconnection system box only covers the interconnection.

Suggestion to coordinate with F4 Interop/Brian Seal on interoperability implications of Figure 2.

Suggestion to coordinate with Folder 4, interoperability on nomenclature.

Suggestion to have a clear definition of area EPS.

Open loop response (Karl Schoeder) Suggestion to be more specific on the limits where the "open loop response" is applicable

Suggestion to clarify when we talk about 90% ‐ and how long it takes to get there – need to coordinate with interoperability

Suggestion to address any overshoot (2nd order response) – need to refine language

Suggestion to revisit system time constant – need to revise language for open loop response

Cease to Energize (Reigh) Question ‐ should we be referring to Local EPS rather than Area EPS

o Reigh suggestion – use PCC rather than Area EPS

Question ‐ what if the facility is supplying VAR support to a feeder section that has a synchronous generator that's supplying watts?

Jens asked for show of hands around the definition – over 10 people indicated they have a problem.


NEXT STEPS, ADJOURN Charlie reviewed plans for the next Working Group meeting. The timeframe is the week of Feb 27, and the location will be NERC headquartes in Altanta GA. Charlie then asked for a vote on starting on Tuesday Feb 28th, and if 1 ½ days would be adequate duration. The feedback was yes, by majority show of hands. The next meeting is planned for Tues Feb 28 and ½ day Wed Mar 1. The 1547.1 WG meeting will follow, starting PM on Mar 1 and continuing on. Charlie highlighted key milestones and dates: Additional post‐meeting comments on Draft 5 due in approximately 2 weeks, Nov 9.

Then the updated consolidated comments for Draft 5 will be incorporated for creation of D6. DG will be sent to the WG in December with a Comment Form, and a request for “Yes” or “No” vote on the Draft’s content readiness to move to Ballot. Any “no” should include the reason why and a recommended edit. The next D6.X “Pre Ballot” Draft will be sent to the WG prior to the February meeting. The goal is to have WG approval of D6 or D6.X content before, or no later than at, the February WG meeting.

The floor was opened for any final comments or questions:

Mark Smith said he still can’t connect to the Folder WEBEX’s. Charlie commented that he was able to schedule time with other people’s IT to see if they could connect and help debug any setting changes needed. That could be one option – however, each Folder team sets up their own WEBEX, so there isn’t one single fix.

Jens asked when a PAR could be submitted for the next Revision. Answer from M. Kipmess was yes, however, some consideration should be given to volunteer fatigue, in terms of planning the PAR’s and various WG’s to be formed related to IEEE 1547 revision and the additional work needed after 1547 and 1547.1 Standards are revised, e.g. 1547.2. Further discussion asked how long the revision is good for. Answer from Mike: 10 years. If not reaffirmed or revised after 10 years, it will go to “inactive” status

Group had questions on the Balloting process.

ACTION – Secretary to coordinate with Mike Kipness, and set up a WEBEX for Mike to outline the Balloting process.

Paul Heitman reminded the WG that observers are welcome to join the IEEE CASCADE meeting. The meeting is scheduled to begin at 5:15pm.

Meeting adjourned at 4:45pm, Wednesday October 26 2016. Respectfully submitted, Charlie Vartanian P1547 Secretary for P1547 Chair, David Narang. ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Attachment A – Attendees Attachment B – Selected introductory slides, including meeting agenda & WG activities schedules updated during and after the meeting ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐


Attachment A – Attendees: P1547 Working Group Meeting October 25‐26, 2016

First Name Last Name Affiliation

1 Marcelo Algrain CAT

2 Jay Anderson ComEd ‐ Exelon Corp.

3 Daniel Arjona Idaho Power

4 Dillon Ashton Nextronex Energy Systems

5 Manuel Avendaño ComEd

6 Jessie Bauer Exelon Corporation

7 John Berdner Enphase Energy

8 Matthew Bermingham SMA

9 George Berntsen FuelCell Energy

10 jason bobruk Solar Edge Technologies

11 Jens Boemer EPRI

12 Richard Bravo Southern California Edison

13 Mike Brigandi Eversource Energy

14 Edwin Briggs CenterPoint Energy

15 Paul Brucke Cypress Creek Renewables

16 Ken Brunkenhoefer Oncor Electric Delivery Company

17 Jason Byerly American Electric Power

18 Sean Carr ComEd

19 Sudipta Chakraborty NREL

20 Ke (Kevin) Chen Duke Energy

21 Frances Cleveland Xanthus Consulting International

22 Nancy Connelly Duke Energy

23 Robert Cummings NERC

24 Patrick Dalton Xcel Energy

25 Mamadou Diong Dominion Virginia Power

26 Stanley Doe ISO New England

27 Tony Eason Duke Energy

28 Roberto Favela SELF

29 Terry Fix Dominion Virginia Power

30 Bob Fox SunSpec Alliance

31 John Gajda Duke Energy

32 Hailegebriel (Gabriel) Gashaw Georgia Power Company (Southern Company)

33 Sigifredo Gonzalez Sandia National Laboratories

34 Tilak Gopalarathnam LG Electronics

35 Jason Gunawardena Salt River Project

36 Thomas Gwinn NRECA

37 Joshua Hambrick GE Energy Consulting

38 Keith Harley Georgia Power Company

39 Robert Harris NRECA

40 Paul Heitmann Businovation, LLC


41 Michael Higginson S&C Electric Company

42 Anderson Hoke NREL

43 soonwook hong Yaskawa, Solectria Solar

44 Fred Horton Apparent Inc

45 Keith Houser Dominion

46 Aminul Huque EPRI

47 Robert Jordan Alabama Power Company

48 Scott Karpiel SMA America

49 Robert Kazimier Basler Electric

50 Greg Kern SunPower

51 Paul Krell Unitil Service Corp.

52 Kandice Kubojiri Hawaii Electric Light Co.

53 Anthony Landi ASCO Power Technologies

54 Haiwen (Howard) Liu Intertek ETL

55 Tony Locatelli ComEd (an Exelon Company)

56 Brian Lydic Fronius USA

57 BRUCE MAGRUDER Coronal Development Systems

58 FUMIO MASUDA JET

59 James Mater QualityLogic, Inc

60 Jonathan Meyer Idaho Power Company

61 McPharlen Mgunda SMA America

62 Lyman Morikawa Morikawa & Associates, LLC

63 Dan Mungovan National Grid

64 Rohit Nair PacifiCorp

65 Amir Najafzadeh NERC

66 David Narang National Renewable Energy Laboratory

67 Eithar Nashawati Oncor Electric Delivery

68 Jeff Newmiller DNV GL

69 Catherine O'Brien Salt River Project

70 Justin Odom ComEd

71 Marty Page Georgia Power Company

72 Jeannie Piekarz National Grid

73 PRASAD PMSVVSV Bloom Energy

74 Michael Ropp Sandia National Laboratories

75 John Ruddock Deep Sea Electronics PLC

76 Miles Russell Solectria

77 Janette Sandberg Portland General Electric

78 Karl Schoder FREEDM

79 Rich Scroggins Cummins Power Generation

80 Brian Seal EPRI

81 Masoud Sharifi Siemens

82 Ron Shipman Oncor Electric Delivery


83 Mark Siira ComRent International

84 Mark Smith American Electric Power

85 Gary Smullin Smullin Engineering, Inc.

86 Wayne Stec Distregen LLC

87 Chase Sun PG&E

88 Charlie Vartanian Mitsubishi Electric Power Products, Inc.

89 Reigh Walling EPRI

90 Robert White ABB Product Group Solar

91 Kevin Whitener Portland General Electric

92 Li Yu Quanta Technology

93 Timothy Zgonena UL LLC

94 ALESSANDRO ZUCCATO CREI VEN SCARL


Attachment B– Selected introductory slides, including meeting agenda & WG activities schedules updated during the meeting

ieee scc21 p1547 working group meeting minutes, october...

Documents