ISO New England



Minutes of the Joint NEPOOL Reliability and Transmission Committees Summer Meeting

Woodstock Inn and Resort, Woodstock, VT

August 11 – 12, 2014

|Members Present |8/11 |8/12 |Sector |Affiliation |

|D. Gates |( |( |Chair- Reliability & Transmission |ISO New England Inc. |

| | | |Committees | |

|J. Rotger |( |( |Transmission Committee Vice Chair | |

| | | |Supplier |Cross Sound Cable Company, LLC |

| | | | | |

|B. Fowler |( |( |Reliability Committee Vice Chair | |

| | | |Supplier |Sigma Consultants, Inc. representing Exelon Generation |

| | | | |Company, LLC and Granite Ridge Energy, LLC |

| | | |Generation |Equipower |

|E. Wasik-Gutierrez |( |( |Secretary- Transmission Committee |ISO New England Inc. |

|M. Lyons |( |( |Secretary- Reliability Committee |ISO New England Inc. |

| | | | | |

|E. Abend |( |( |Alternative Resource |Swift River Trading Company |

|A. Boutsioulis |( |( |Transmission |The United Illuminating Company |

|C. Bowie |( |( |Transmission |Northeast Utilities Service Company |

|D. Bradt |( |( |Transmission |United Illuminating Company |

|T. Brennan |( |( |Transmission |National Grid-USA representing New England Power Company |

|H. Copeland |( | |Transmission |Central Maine Power Company |

|D. Cavanaugh |( |( |Publicly Owned |Energy New England LLC |

|N. Chafetz |( |( |Supplier |Galt Power |

|J. Clemente |( |( |Transmission |United Illuminating Company |

|S. Conant | |( |Transmission (Provisional) |New England Independent Transmission Company |

|K. Dell Orto |( | |Generation |Millennium Power Partners, L.P. Competitive Power Ventures, |

| | | | |Inc. |

|S. Dimou |( |( |Transmission |Emera Maine |

|J. Fenn |( |( |Transmission |Emera Maine |

|P. Fuller |( | |Supplier |NRG |

|S. Garwood |( |( |Generation |New Hampshire Transmission, LLC |

| | | |Supplier |Marble River, LLC |

|G. Gellar |( | |Alternative Resource |EnerNOC, Inc. |

|T. Kaslow |( | |Generation |GDF Suez Energy Marketing NA Inc. |

|B. Kruse |( |( |Supplier |Calpine Energy Services, LP |

|B. Killgoar |( |( |Supplier |Long Island Power Authority |

|P. Krawczyk |( |( |Transmission |NSTAR Electric Company/ Northeast Utilities Service Company |

| | | | | |

| |( |( |Publicly Owned |Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Electric Company, and |

|C. Liu | | | |representing various Publicly Owned participants |

|J. Martin |( |( |Transmission |National Grid-USA representing New England Power Company |

|T. Martin |( |( |Transmission |National Grid-USA representing New England Power Company |

|P. Meek |( | |Publicly Owner |Connecticut Transmission Municipal Electric Energy |

| | | | |Cooperative |

|A. McNeally |( |( |Transmission |Emera Maine |

|F. Plett |( |( |End User |Office of the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of |

| | | | |Massachusetts |

|H. Presume |( |( |Transmission |Vermont Electric Power Company, Inc. |

|A. Scarfone |( |( |Transmission |Northeast Utilities Service Company (NUSCO) |

|P. Smith |( | |Supplier |Galt Power |

|B. Stein |( |( |Generation |Signal Hill Consulting Group representing by proxy Footprint |

| | | | |Power LLC |

| | | |Supplier |Signal Hill Consulting Group representing H.Q. Energy |

| | | | |Services (US) Inc. and by proxy PSEG Energy Resources & Trade|

| | | | |LLC |

|Guests Present | | | |Affiliation |

|C. Anderson |( |( | |Green Mountain Power |

|M. Babula |( |( | |New Hampshire Transmission |

|L. Cooper |( | | |Northeast Utilities Service Companies (NUSCO) |

|R. Coxe | |( | |Champlain VT, LLC. |

|J. Elliott |( | | |ISO New England Inc. |

|C. Fraser |( | | |Office of the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of |

| | | | |Massachusetts |

|M. Gonzalez |( |( | |ISO New England Inc. |

|M. Guerrette |( |( | |Guest |

|T. Guleksen |( | | |New England Power Company |

|M. Hall |( |( | |Northeast Utilities Service Companies (NUSCO) |

|S. Jones |( | | |ISO New England Inc. |

|B. Kay |( |( | |ISO New England Inc. |

|R. Kirby | |( | |Green Mountain Power |

|B. Koropey | |( | |NH PUC |

|R. Kowalski |( |( | |ISO New England Inc. |

|M.J. Krolewski |( | | |VT PSB |

|M. Menino |( |( | |MA DPU |

|J. Michlig |( |( | |Central Maine Power |

|B. Oberlin |( |( | |ISO New England Inc. |

|F. Radigan |( | | |Hudson River Energy Group |

|S. Rourke |( |( | |ISO New England Inc. |

|C. Ruell |( |( | |ISO New England Inc. |

|E. Runge |( |( | |Day Pitney |

|T. Paradise |( |( | |ISO New England Inc. |

|C. Sedlacek |( |( | |ISO New England Inc. |

|J. Staszowski | |( | |Northeast Utilities Service Companies (NUSCO) |

|K. Sullivan |( | | |Reading Municipal Light Department |

|J. Ullram |( | | |Northeast Utilities Service Companies (NUSCO) |

|H. Yoshimura |( | | |ISO New England Inc. |

Monday, August 11, 2014

Item 1 – Chair’s Remarks

Mr. Gates welcomed the Reliability and Transmission Committees (“RC” and “TC”, respectively; and “Committees”, collectively) to this year’s joint summer meeting and reviewed the agenda and schedule of events for the day. He noted that there is a quorum in all sectors for both Committees.

Item 2.0 – EIPC Gas/Electric System Update

Mr. Mark Babula (ISO) provided an update regarding the EIPC Gas/Electric System project work to date.

Mr. Bob Stein (HQ US) asked when the Gas/Electric portion of the study is completed will this conclude the overall EIPC study.

Mr. Babula replied that the original DOE funding will be done and that will end the study.

Mr. Al Scarfone (NU) asked if there are the choke points for the gas external to New England or internal to New England.

Mr. Babula replied that there choke points both internal and external to New England.

There were no additional questions from the committee on this topic.

Item 3.0 – Level II/III Proposed Plan Applications

Item 3.1 – Passadumkeag Wind Generation and Transmission Project – PWF-14-G01, PWF-14-T01, EM-14-T02

Mr. Jeff Fenn (Emera Maine) provided an overview of the Passadumkeag Wind Generation and Transmission Project.

Mr. Al Scarfone (NU) who did you dispatch against in your studies.

Mr. Fenn replied that we dispatched against all the wind in the area.

Mr. Jose Rotger (CSC) asked if the study used the post MPRP limits as part of the study.

Mr. Fenn replied that is correct.

Mr. Bill Fowler (Exelon) asked if you expect any outages or issues at the Graham substation as this project is under construction.

Mr. Fenn replied he does not believe there is and outage issues will occur at the graham substation.

A motion to approve the project was moved and seconded. A vote was taken by show of hands with none opposed and no abstentions. Motion Approved.

Item 4.0 – Transmission Cost Allocations

Item 4.1 – Pequonnock 115 kV Disconnect Switch and Bus Upgrade TCA – UI-14-TCA-01

Mr. Alex Boutsioulis (UI) provided an overview of the Pequonnock 115 kV Disconnect Switch and Bus Upgrade TCA.

Mr. Jack Martin (NEP) asked if there are any issues with the ground grids.

Mr. Boutsioulis replied that the ground grids were addressed as a part of a previous project. As such we expect no issues.

A motion to approve the TCA was moved and seconded. A vote was taken by show of hands with none opposed and no abstentions. Motion Approved.

Item 5.0 – Planning Procedures

Item 5.1 – Planning Procedure 4 - Procedure for Pool Supported PTF Cost Review

Mr. Mike Drzewianowski (ISO) provided an overview of the revisions to PP 4.

Jack Martin (NEP) could you link Section 1.1.2 to Appendix A for localized costs with some additional detail.

Mr. Drzewianowski agreed with that change.

Other clarifying questions were asked and responded to by Mr. Drzewianowski and Mr. Dave Forrest (ISO).

A motion to approve the PP 4 revisions was moved and seconded. A vote was taken by show of hands with none opposed and no abstentions. Motion Approved.

Item 6.0 – Price Responsive Demand Reserve Auditing

Mr. Henry Yoshimura (ISO) provided an overview of the revisions to Price Responsive Demand Reserve Auditing.

Mr. Greg Geller (EnerNoc) regarding Section III.2.7 you added dispatch zone, what price will it be dispatched against the Load zone or dispatch zone.

Mr. Yoshimura that will be considered by the MC but the dispatch will be against the dispatch zone price

Mr. Geller also asked in regards to Section III.9.5.3.3 Claimed 10/30 performance factors, a new resource could have to do two different audits. The Claimed 30 will not count against the seasonal audit. We would like to see the Claimed 30 as the Seasonal Audit value as long as it is off line for the required time

Mr. Yoshimura replied that this was addressed to the MC and that a Claimed 10/30 audit can be used as an audited demand reduction during a shortage event. We modified the section the use the Claimed 10/30 audit value in place of the seasonal audit. We will take this issue back for additional review and discussion.

Other clarifying questions were asked and responded to by Mr. Yoshimura.

A vote on this topic will be taken at a future Reliability Committee meeting.

Item 7.0 – Operating Procedures

Item 7.1 – Operating Procedure 14 - Technical Requirements for Generators, Demand Resources and Asset Related Demands

Mr. Jerry Elliott (ISO) provided an overview regarding the revisions to OP 14 pertaining to Governor Control.

Mr. Chung Liu (MMWEC) asked in regards to wind units, we are unable to change the governors and we are tuning for power factor instead of the governor. What is your stance on that?

Mr. Dean LaForest (ISO) replied that ISO will address this issue on a unit by unit basis. Please contact ISO directly for additional clarification.

Mr. Al Scarfone (NU) requested that some additional language be added to the LGIA regarding governor control requirements in addition to references pointing to the Operating Procedures.

Ms. Monica Gonzalez (ISO) replied that we can take that back for discussion.

Mr. Jose Rotger (CSC) asked what it means by “exemptions will be reported to the RC”.

Mr. LaForest replied that ISO haven’t fully defined that process yet. The intent is to make the RC aware of governor control exemptions requests as well as the results.

Mr. Bill Fowler (Exelon) asked if the document will address the governor issues for combined cycles and solar units.

Mr. LaForest replied that we will be addressing those issues at the next RC review in September.

Additional clarification questions were asked and responded to by Mr. Elliott, Mr. LaForest and Ms. Gonzalez.

A vote on this topic will be taken at a future Reliability Committee meeting.

Item 7.2 – OP 5A, 5B, 5D - Generator and Dispatchable Asset Related Demand Maintenance and Outage Scheduling Deficiency

Mr. Jerry Elliott (ISO) provided an overview regarding the revisions to OP 5A, OP 5B, & OP 5D for administrative changes as part of the annual review process.

There were no questions from the committee on this topic.

As these documents are appendices to the main body OP 5 document, notification was provided to the committee and no vote is required.

Item 7.3 – Supporting Document Revisions to Support the Winter Reliability Program

Mr. Steve Jones (ISO) provided an overview of the revisions to OP 14A, NX-12, OP 14E & NX-12E, OP 14G & NX-12G for conforming changes to the Winter Reliability Program.

Mr. Dave Cavanaugh (ENE) asked when participants will be required to update these documents.

Mr. Jones replied that ISO will pre-populate the forms and then distribute them for updates. We hope to have them completed prior to the winter period.

Other minor clarifications will be asked and responded to by Mr. Jones.

A vote on this topic will be taken at a future Reliability Committee meeting.

Item 8 - June 2014 Regional Transmission Rates and 5-year Forecast (Transmission Committee)

The following materials were provided for the day’s meeting and discussed in the following order:

- Presentation RNS Rate – Effective June 1, 2014; and

- Presentation RNS Rates: 2014 – 2018 PTF Forecast.

RNS Rate –Effective June 1, 2014

Ms. Ullram noted that pursuant to Attachment F of the Open Access Tariff (“OATT”), the PTO AC submitted to the Commission on July 31, 2014 its annual informational reflecting, among other things, the RNS rate effective June 1, 2014. Major components as it relates to the RNS rate include the PTOs’ previous calendar year data, forecasted revenue requirements for the test year plus an annual true-up of the amounts billed in the prior rate year and associated interest. Prior to reviewing the presentation, she indicated there will be a supplemental filing for any subsequent corrections to this year’s RNS rate.

Ms. Guleksen, on behalf of National Grid, indicated the company’s revenue requirement used in the calculation of the June 1, 2013 RNS rate consist of estimated costs. Similar to last year, National Grid’s FERC Form 1 data was not available in time to incorporate actual costs due to a change in the company’s financial system in 2012. The company expects to file its updated revenue requirement by January 1, 2015. Mr. Rotger inquired as to whether this will be an annual occurrence. Ms. Guleksen indicated National Grid has made a commitment to the Commission to be caught up by September of this year, so this will not be an annual event.

Mr. Garwood summarized that New Hampshire Transmission (“NHT”) was granted limited waiver by the Commission to adjust the base revenue requirement on a forward-going basis to exclude a portion of operation and maintenance (“O&M”) costs that is a one-time expense.

The PTOs then reviewed with the Committee their respective annual revenue requirements outlined in the presentation and answered clarifying questions:

- Slide 4, Summary of RNS Rate Change: In response to a question asked by Mr. Rotger, Ms. Ullram confirmed that the load impact resulted in a decrease of ($3.21) to the RNS rate due to a higher 12 CP.

- Slide 6, June 1, 2014 RNS Rates Regional Forecast Summary: Mr. Smith asked for clarification on how the $7.61 total impact value relates to the numbers represented on slide 4. Ms. Ullram explained the value on slide 6 factors in load impact.

- Slide 6, June 1, 2014 RNS Rates Regional Forecast Summary: Mr. Smith asked for clarification regarding why the load variance for the forecast is only ($0.28) when Slide 4 is showing ($3.21). Ms. Ullram indicated that the load variance on Slide 4 includes all factors of the PTF RR including the base PTF RR, the forecast and the annual true-up.

- Slide 13, National Grid 2014 Forecasted PTF Revenue Requirements: In response to a question asked by Mr. Plett, Mr. Jack Martin confirmed that the revenue requirement does not include costs related to the Greater Boston Project solution.

- Slide 14, NHT 2014 Forecasted PTF Revenue Requirements: Mr. Plett requested clarification on the nature of the O&M costs reflected in NHT’s limited waiver filing. Mr. Garwood responded that the costs are related to the development of NHT’s SeaLink proposal as an alternative to the incumbent TO’s Greater Boston Reliability Project solution, and includes study costs related to the development of the proposal.

In response to a question asked by Mr. Rourke, Mr. Garwood responded that he was not sure whether costs related to NHT’s outreach efforts to the New England States for its SeaLink proposal is included.

- Slide 16, Northeast Utilities 2014 Forecasted PTF Revenue Requirements:

In response to a question asked by Mr. Plett, Mr. Scarfone indicated he realized there were costs identified in NSTAR’s forecast slide related to the Greater Boston Project. Mr. Plett noted his concern with the inclusion of study costs for developing a Greater Boston proposal that may never come to fruition. Ms. Cooper noted Mr. Plett’s question asking for the components comprising the Greater Boston Study Project cost listed and indicated that she will research the information and provide a response to Mr. Plett at a future date.

Mr. Rourke referenced line item 4 (SEMA) and asked whether this cost is related to the completion of the SEMA/ Cape Cod Canal 345 kV line. Mr. Scarfone noted Mr. Rourke’s question and indicated a response will be provided in the near future.

- Slide 20, VT Transco LLC 2014 Forecasted PTF Revenue Requirements: Mr. Stein commented that the ISO needs to have another look at the standards related to the pole replacement program since the costs for small individual projects are not reviewed. Mr. Rourke replied that PP4 contemplates this. Mr. Presume noted his understanding that VELCO will be providing a presentation describing the program at the Reliability Committee in October.

RNS Rates: 2014 – 2018 PTF Forecast

Ms. Ullram reviewed with the Committee the presentation RNS Rates: 2013 – 2017 PTF Forecast.

Mr. Smith asked for clarification on the variance on Slide 4 between the forecast from last year and the change effective June 1, 2014. Ms. Ullram noted the question to research and indicated a response will be provided at a future date.

Referencing slide 6, 2015 – 2018 Forecast Summary, Mr. Stein suggested that it would be helpful to show the year-to-year additions to CWIP. Ms. Ullram noted Mr. Stein’s suggestion for consideration.

At the conclusion of the presentation, the Committee expressed appreciation for the information provided and transparency.

The meeting adjourned at 11:40 AM.

Tuesday, August 12, 2014

Item 1 – Chair’s Remarks

Mr. Don Gates welcomed the Committees and reviewed the day’s agenda. He noted that there is a quorum in all sectors for both Committees.

Item 2.0 – Level 0/I Proposed Plan Notifications

Item 2.1 – Borrego Federal Road Solar Project – NU-14-G12

Mr. Al Scarfone (NU) provided an overview of the Borrego Federal Road Solar Project.

There were no questions from the committee and no objections to the Level 0 classification. Project approved.

Item 2.2 – Mattapoisett Crystal Spring Road Solar Project – NU-14-G07

Mr. Al Scarfone (NU) provided an overview of the Mattapoisett Crystal Spring Road Solar Project.

There were no questions from the committee and no objections to the Level 0 classification. Project approved.

Item 2.3 – Plymouth Cedarville Phase II Solar Project – NU-14-G15

Mr. Al Scarfone (NU) provided an overview of the Plymouth Cedarville Phase II Solar Project.

There were no questions from the committee and no objections to the Level 0 classification. Project approved.

Item 2.4 – Tihonet Park East Solar Project – NU-14-G13

Mr. Al Scarfone (NU) provided an overview of the Tihonet Park East Solar Project.

There were no questions from the committee and no objections to the Level 0 classification. Project approved.

Item 2.5 – Onset Water District Solar Project – NU-14-G14

Mr. Al Scarfone (NU) provided an overview of the Onset Water District Solar Project.

There were no questions from the committee and no objections to the Level 0 classification. Project approved.

Item 2.6 - SunEdison Origination I Fall River Solar Project – NEP-14-GNF14

Mr. Jack Martin (NEP) provided an overview of the SunEdison Origination I Fall River Solar Project.

There were no questions from the committee and no objections to the Level 0 classification. Project approved.

Item 2.7 – SunEdison Origination I Grafton Solar Project – NEP-14-GNF15

Mr. Jack Martin (NEP) provided an overview of the SunEdison Origination I Grafton Solar Project.

There were no questions from the committee and no objections to the Level 0 classification. Project approved.

Item 2.8 – Bluewave Capital Palmer Solar Project – NEP-14-GNF16

Mr. Jack Martin (NEP) provided an overview of the Bluewave Capital Palmer Solar Project.

There were no questions from the committee and no objections to the Level 0 classification. Project approved.

Item 2.9 – V-148N 115 kV Line Reconductoring Project – NEP-14-T09

Mr. Jack Martin (NEP) provided an overview of the V-148N 115 kV Line Reconductoring Project.

There were no questions from the committee and no objections to the Level I classification. Project approved.

Item 2.10 – Old Town 115/13.8 kV Substation Rebuild Project – UI-14-T03

Mr. Alex Boutsioulis (UI) provided an overview of the Old Town 115/13.8 kV Substation Rebuild Project.

There were no questions from the committee and no objections to the Level I classification. Project approved.

Item 2.11 – Baird 115/13.8 kV Substation Rebuild Project – UI-14-T04

Mr. Alex Boutsioulis (UI) provided an overview of the Baird 115/13.8 kV Substation Rebuild Project.

There were no questions from the committee and no objections to the Level I classification. Project approved.

Item 2.12 – East Shore Renewable Fuel Cell Project – UI-14-G01

Mr. Alex Boutsioulis (UI) provided an overview of the East Shore Renewable Fuel Cell Project.

There were no questions from the committee and no objections to the Level 0 classification. Project approved.

Item 2.13 – Seaside Renewable Fuel Cell Project – UI-14-G02

Mr. Alex Boutsioulis (UI) provided an overview of the Seaside Renewable Fuel Cell Project.

There were no questions from the committee and no objections to the Level 0 classification. Project approved.

Item 2.14 – Somerville Substation Transformer Replacement Project – NU-14-T19

Mr. Bill Walsh (NU) and Al Scarfone (NU) provided an overview of the Somerville Substation Transformer Replacement Project.

There were no questions from the committee and no objections to the Level I classification. Project approved.

Item 2.15 – Wing Lane Substation Upgrades Project – NU-14-T20

Mr. Bill Walsh (NU) and Al Scarfone (NU) provided an overview of the Wing Lane Substation Upgrades Project.

There were no questions from the committee and no objections to the Level I classification. Project approved.

Item 3 – Elective Transmission Upgrade Improvements (Transmission Committee)

Mr. Kowalski reviewed the presentation Elective Transmission Upgrade Process Improvements Background and Project Scope.

The ISO provided responses to the following questions:

- Slide 7, fourth bullet: If a generator or an ETU wants to interconnect, is the ISO suggesting it will not manage the process? Answer: This depends on the structure of the operating agreement and nature of the line being proposed.

- Do the rules today prohibit an ETU from being designated pool-supported PTF? Answer: Alternatives to address identified needs are vetted through the PAC process. The ETU process is not intended to be an after-the-fact conversion of an ETU to pool-supported PTF. An ETU is a market solution just like generation, and can only be included in the RSP as a market response. There is a provision in the TOA that allows TOs to file with the Commission a request to have facilities regionalized for rate purposes.

- If a PTF facility needs to be reconductored to accommodate an ETU, will the developer have any priority rights over that line? Answer: All PTF is eligible for interconnection; however, there are no physical transmission rights over internal facilities in New England.

- What physical rights exist today for non-PTF? Answer: From a market standpoint, physical rights are only recognized with respect to external interfaces. The system is dispatched based on price and security needs.

- If a participant were to upgrade an existing line to increase export capability, is there a way to preserve that increase such that it does not deteriorate due to retirements or future load growth? Answer: The current trend is if transfer capability is eroding over time for the reasons stated, the ISO will not plan to sustain a particular level of export capability.

- Has the ISO given any thought to how an ETU could be used to provide additional tie benefits to New England? Answer: Tie benefit provisions reside in the Market Rules, and related discussions will take place at the appropriate technical committee(s) in the future.

- Will the ETU project involve the Markets and Reliability Committees? Answer: Both Committees will be invited to all Transmission Committee meetings for ETU discussions. It is expected that there will be conforming changes to the Market Rules to be reviewed and considered by both the Markets and Reliability Committees, as appropriate.

- Will the Tariff changes be in place in time for FCA 10 show of interest window? Answer: The ISO expects to file the changes in February with a request for a next day effective date.

Item 4.0 – Load Level Modeling

Mr. Brent Oberlin (ISO) and Mr. Osman Bileya (ISO) provided an overview of the revisions to PP 10, PP 5-6 and OP 17B regarding Load Level Modeling.

Mr. Chung Liu (MMWEC) asked if ISO will we revisit the load level values every few years.

Mr. Oberlin stated that we can capture the periodic review as part of the Planning Guides and we anticipate reviewing the values every three years or so.

Mr. Justin Michlig (CMP) asked if this standard is in compliance with the MMWG guides.

Mr. Oberlin replied that this is compliant with those standards.

Mr. Jack Martin (NEP) expressed reservations about changes to the heavy loads study.

Mr. Al Scarfone asked if the studies being performed will be grandfathered in using the existing load levels.

Mr. Oberlin replied that any studies that are ongoing will use the existing load levels. Any new studies will use the new load levels once they are approved by the PC.

A motion to approve the revisions to PP 10, PP 5-6 and OP 17B was moved and seconded. A vote was taken by show of hands with none opposed and one abstention (Transmission Sector). Motion Approved.

Item 5.0 – NERC Standards Committee Update

Mr. Fred Plett (MA AG) provided the committee an update on issues pertaining to the NERC Standards Committee.

Mr. Al Scarfone (NU) commented that he disagrees with Mr. Plett’s position that the area should shed load in the event of a severe geomagnetic disturbance

Mr. Steve Rourke (ISO) understands Mr. Plett’s position but he views shedding load as an absolute last resort in the event of severe geomagnetic activity. There are several other mitigation activities that occur prior to shedding load.

There were no additional comments from the committee on this topic.

The meeting adjourned at 11:05AM.

Respectfully submitted,

Marc Lyons, Secretary

NEPOOL Reliability Committee

Erin K. Wasik- Gutierrez, Secretary

NEPOOL Transmission Committee

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download