SGWG: Stakeholder Governance Guide Feedback Request (20230802)

see comments in attached Governance Guide; sections are highlighted with notes attached with suggested edits.

Feedback by Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSCW) Office of Regional Markets (ORM) staff to the Stakeholder Governance Working Group on the Stakeholder Governance Guide

102.2.2.2 Working Through an Issue

This section (10.2.2.2) identifies the steps of working through an issue but does not offer expectations for each step. Would it be possible to add expectations? Having a shared understanding of expectations for these steps between MISO staff and stakeholders could make for more productive collaboration, and less frustration.

On key issues, stakeholders often ask for more detailed information from MISO (i.e., the data, methods, and assumptions MISO uses to justify new proposals or decisions, along with sensitivities showing how gradual or extreme changes and changes in key variables impact results, and how or why other choices were ruled out) but are not always receiving this information, or are receiving only what can fit in a slide deck which is ostensibly not the best-suited medium for technical or detailed content.

Issues Tracking - 102.4.1

At a previous MISO meeting, MISO staff indicated that content over 3 years old is removed regularly from the MISO website. We are suggesting that MISO discuss that policy with stakeholders as not all stakeholders agree with it, and to add language about when content is removed from the website somewhere in the guide (potentially in 102.4.1).

Appendix 3 – Issue Debate Process

Could this section be updated to include an Issue Discussion Process similar to the content in the Stakeholder Meeting Q&A protocol from the Steering Committee meeting on May 10?

Also, given that at some meetings stakeholders are limited to asking one question, could a process be described for how to address unanswered stakeholder questions?

Xcel Energy provides the following potential revisions to the Stakeholder Governance Guide for clarity (bold text are additions, underline is strikethrough):

• Section 3.7.2 "…Motions not properly noticed will require a 2/3 majority of Voting Members casting a vote during such vote to be placed on the floor for email voting; :

• Section 7.2 "…securing an affirmative 2/3 vote of Voting Members casting a vote to take up the motion.

• Section 105.5.4.3.3 - "Member voting list for all other entities can be found by clicking on the Stakeholder Entities/Workshops page and then clicking 'Stakeholder Process Voting List.'"

• Section 105.5.2 - strike the use of the word "generally" in this section

• Section 105.5.2 - "….or proposed on the floor, which requires a 2/3 vote of Voting Members casting a vote to be brought to the floor.

• Section 105.5.7 "All issues that include the following relevant factors will also be automatically reported to the Advisory Committee by the MPE Chair or Vice-Chair."

WPPI has a few suggested revisions to the Stakeholder Governance Guide to clarify that an issue accepted by a Main Parent Entity belongs to the Main Parent Entity:

“4.1 Issue Administration and Oversight

4.1.3 Issue Assignment

4.1.4 Issue Acceptance

The Main Parent Entity has the following options when reviewing an Issue Submission:

• Accept the issue and place it on the Management Plan
• Accept the issue and delegate the issue to a Sub Entity
• Accept the issue and place in Inactive status
• Deny acceptance of the issue – Closed Status”

[add the following] All of the options listed above also apply to an issue assigned by the Steering Committee to a Main Parent Entity with the recommendation that it be placed in Inactive status.

“4.2 Issue Selection, Agenda Creation, and Addressing Issues

4.2.5 Main Parent Entity Review of Issues”

[add to the list of bullets, 1st] If a Main Parent Entity accepts an issue, any subsequent changes to the issue must be agreed to by the Main Parent Entity.

[add to the list of bullets, 2nd] If a Main Parent Entity accepts an issue, subsequent closure of the issue must be agreed to by the Main Parent Entity.

WEC Energy Group provides the following suggestions for the Stakeholder Governance Guide review (note – non-bolded items are non-substantive changes):

1. Page 4, replace “The approval of changes to the Stakeholder Governance Guide can only be given by the Advisory Committee (AC) and requires a majority vote to pass” with “The Advisory Committee (AC) shall approve changes to the Stakeholder Governance Guide with a majority vote”
2. Page 8 – subsections 1.4.1.1, 1.4.1.2 and 1.4.1.3 are listed under 1.4.2.  Need to move under 1.4.1.
3. Section 3.4 – need to clarify how to report a motion with a 60/40% or closer result at the MPE level.  WEC suggests language that a motion at the MPE level with a 60/40% or closer result is reported to the SC and AC.
4. Section 4.1.2 – Issue Submission Form is listed as Appendix X.  Should be Appendix 10.
5. Section 4.1.2 – Requirement that the issue submission is submitted 45 business days prior to the next regularly scheduled SC meeting is overly restrictive, especially considering that SC only has regularly scheduled meetings 6 or 7 times per year and issues can be submitted directly to MPEs in certain circumstances.  WEC suggests striking this sentence to maintain the flexibility for the SC to take up an issue at a non-regularly scheduled meeting and for submission of an issue form directly to the MPE (which retains the business days posting requirements for both MPEs and SC).
6. Section 4.1.4 – need to capitalize “main” in first paragraph
7. Section 4.1.4 – Issue Submission Form is listed as Appendix X.  Should be Appendix 10.
8. Section 4.1.4 – Presentation template for issue is listed as Appendix X.  Should be Appendix 11.
9. Section 4.2.4 – include “excluding abstentions” in the first bullet in reference to a vote closer than 60/40% for clarity and consistency with Section 3.4.1.
10. Section 9, replace “The Stakeholder Governance Guide may be amended by a majority vote of the Advisory Committee” with “The Advisory Committee (AC) shall approve changes to the Stakeholder Governance Guide with a majority vote”
11. Section 102.2.2 – Replace Appendix X with Appendix 9
12. Section 102.2.2.1 - include “excluding abstentions” in the last paragraph in reference to a vote closer than 60/40% for clarity and consistency with Section 3.4.1.
13. Section 105.5.7 - include “excluding abstentions” in the first bullet in reference to a vote closer than 60/40% for clarity and consistency with Section 3.4.1.
14. Section 106.1.1 – Add language to allow a subordinate entity of the SC (the SGWG) to undertake an annual review of the Stakeholder Governance Guide in lieu of a mandatory annual workshop.
15. The on-line Issue Submission Form is somewhat restrictive and does not support formatting of paragraphs, bullets, numbered lists, etc.  Suggest that stakeholders have the option to use a word version of Appendix 10 to submit an issue.