Frame

Meeting Summary - 12/12/2024 - PRS Meeting

Grid Monitor AI
12/12/2024

<h2><img src="/storage/docs/2024/12/20241212PRSHero.png" width="857" height="646" /></h2> <h2>1 - Antitrust Admonition</h2> <h2>2 - Approval of Minutes</h2> <h3>2.1 - November 14, 2024</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Motion to approve the November 14, 2024, PRS Meeting Minutes as presented added to combo ballot.</li> </ul> <h2><a href="/sharing/?token=d544d958-2949-41f9-864a-7a503cb4cc80">▶️</a> 3 - TAC Update - Diana Coleman</h2> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Several items were sent to TAC for consideration; four were approved.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">NPRR1246 was approved by TAC but remanded by the board.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">NPRR1246 involves ESR terminology alignment for the single model era.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">ERCOT Legal identified language cleanup needed due to NPRR1188 passage.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">ERCOT will review and address the language issue in NPRR1246.</li> </ul> <h2><a href="/sharing/?token=40167d5b-2e87-47c7-8d3a-138afcd152f7">▶️</a> 4 - Project Update - Troy Anderson</h2> <a href="https://dash2.gridmonitor.com/storage/docs/2024/12/prs_december_2024_project_update.pdf">prs_december_2024_project_update.pdf</a> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">No major updates this month; next year will include updates on FTE information and post RTC revision request prioritization.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The 2026-2027 ERCOT budget is in progress, considering funding for future revision requests post-RTC go-live.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Recent project implementations include NPRR1231 tweaks and discontinuation of VDI related to NPRR1217.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Expected project completions include export functionality for SCR799 and the move for NPRR1183 reports.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">NPRR1184 and related PGRRs go live; NPRR945 target moved to January.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Slide updates show NPRR and RTC timelines without major changes, with focus on holiday month challenges.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">TWG meetings occur monthly with focus on RTC and other technical aspects.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">A question from Alex about NPRR1198 and NPRR258, both with a 2025 priority, was raised without a definite answer at the time.</li> </ul> <h2><a href="/sharing/?token=067d1ad4-5397-436b-be2c-18ed2f8593f5">▶️</a> 5 - Review PRS Reports, Impact Analyses, and Prioritization - Vote - denotes no impact - Diana Coleman</h2> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=80f7478b-9f2f-4763-8119-13b1dd0da82d">▶️</a> 5.1 - NPRR1243, Revision to Requirements for Notice and Release of Protected Information or ECEII to Certain Governmental Authorities*</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Motion to endorse and forward to TAC the 11/14/24 PRS Report and 7/24/24 Impact Analysis for NPRR1243 added to combo ballot.</li> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">This involves revisions to the requirements for notice and release of protected information.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">The focus is on information release to certain governmental authorities.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">The discussion aimed to better define what constitutes protected information.</li> </ul> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=20da1b99-8b86-4d7e-bbc6-dd11198e916c">▶️</a> 5.2 - NPRR1250, RPS Mandatory Program Termination*</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Motion to endorse and forward to TAC the 11/14/24 PRS Report and 8/27/24 Impact Analysis for NPRR1250 added to the combo ballot.</li> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">No cost associated</li> </ul> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=41a47b93-09e1-4e44-a80f-2f9d341c2a9a">▶️</a> 5.3 - NPRR1252, Pre-notice for Sharing of Some Information, Addition of Research and Innovation Partner, Clarifying Notice Requirements*</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Motion to endorse and forward to TAC the 11/14/24 PRS Report and 8/28/24 Impact Analysis for NPRR1252 add to combo ballot.</li> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">No costs associated</li> </ul> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=3a67eaae-dce4-4864-b0a6-0287ca3b613d">▶️</a> 5.4 - NPRR1253, Incorporate ESR Charging Load Information into ICCP</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Motion to table NPRR1253 added to the combo ballot.</li> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Request was made to PRS to table NPRR1253.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Decision to revisit NPRR1253 based on updates expected from Troy in January.</li> </ul> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=911a47e7-e4f9-48cd-af1a-2329b1184262">▶️</a> 5.5 - NPRR1258, TSP Performance Monitoring Update*</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Motion to endorse and forward to TAC the 11/14/24 PRS Report and 10/29/24 Impact Analysis for NPRR1258 added to combo ballot.</li> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Discussion on NPRR1258, originating from ERCOT with no associated costs.</li> </ul> </ul> <h2><a href="/sharing/?token=71a02599-a5e3-4bb8-a130-16ef51a9a104">▶️</a> 6 - Revision Requests Tabled at PRS - Possible Vote - Diana Coleman</h2> <h3>6.01 - 6.02</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Not Discussed</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=0444ec37-2389-448d-a67e-58ddae4abf71">▶️</a> 6.03 - NPRR1200, Utilization of Calculated Values for Non-WSL for ESRs</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">NPR1200 is being withdrawn.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=84b67836-dd83-4502-abe0-f980d1023e69">▶️</a> 6.04 - NPRR1202, Refundable Deposits for Large Load Interconnection Studies</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Engie filed comments in support of NPRR1202.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The issue is still under discussion at WMS and WMWG.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">There is strong stakeholder support for NPRR1202, with recent comments filed by Engie.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">ERCOT staff have concerns but support advancing NPRR1234.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Bill Barne’s suggestion to move fee concepts from NPRR1202 to NPRR1234 to advance the entire package.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Doug Fawn from ERCOT Legal has convened internally and plans to discuss fee concept with stakeholders soon.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Participation in upcoming discussions expected from stakeholders with interest in transitioning NPRR1202 fees to NPRR1234.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=f4e12a0b-22ae-41a0-9eff-40c4fa7e9c7e">▶️</a> 6.05 - NPRR1214, Reliability Deployment Price Adder Fix to Provide Locational Price Signals, Reduce Uplift and Risk</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">NPRR1214 was discussed at the CMWG and WMS meetings earlier this month.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Conversations ongoing.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=4ef6eaab-160e-41d7-b681-6a8570183b7d">▶️</a> 6.06 - NPRR1226, Demand Response Monitor</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Ongoing meetings with Mark Patterson and Floyd Trefny regarding NPRR1226.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Potential to integrate NPRR1226 into another revision request.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">ERCOT's legal team was unavailable for comment review before the meeting.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Plan to revisit NPRR1226 at the January PRS meeting to assess further developments.</li> </ul> <h3>6.07 </h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Not Discussed</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=f16a89d4-3430-4b21-9ff2-6567781fe4ed">▶️</a> 6.08 - NPRR1234, Interconnection Requirements for Large Loads and Modeling Standards for Loads 25 MW or Greater</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">PLWG will discuss NPRR1234’s related PGRR next week.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Ongoing discussions are happening at various working groups regarding NPRR1234.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=8144c748-811b-4fa2-9e6e-5d040b421a17">▶️</a> 6.09 - NPRR1235, Dispatchable Reliability Reserve Service as a Stand-Alone Ancillary Service</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">NPRR1235 is still under active discussion</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">IMM filed comments at the end of November, with further discussion expected in the January PRS meeting.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Current focus is on understanding potential compliance implications from IMM comments.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Clarification provided that IMM should discuss their comments during the SAWG meetings as the main discussions are happening there.</li> </ul> <h3>6.10</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Not Discussed</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=62256c74-c09b-4edb-8353-ad7415ce65bf">▶️</a> 6.11 - NPRR1241, Firm Fuel Supply Service - FFSS - Availability and Hourly Standby Fee</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">WMWG reached consensus this week on NPRR1241.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">They will report to WMS on their endorsement with 12/03 Luminant comment.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Potential update expected in January.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=e7bc90dc-0522-4b29-a4d2-b01642239355">▶️</a> 6.12 - NPRR1251, Updated FFSS Fuel Replacement Costs Recovery Process</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Motion to recommend approval of NPRR1251 as amended by the 12/5/24 WMS comments carried unanimously with 1 abstention from the Consumer segment.</li> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Melissa raised a question about the necessity of the fuel oil index price.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Eno explained that the fuel oil index price is used when resources utilize existing fuel inventories rather than purchasing new fuel.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">The price is capped using the fuel oil index to address difficulties in verifying past purchase costs.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Resource entities can choose to replace utilized fuel or recover costs based on past purchases, but reimbursement for past purchases is capped.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Discussion clarified that new fuel purchases are reimbursed at actual costs, whereas past fuel amounts are limited to the fuel oil index price.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">No further questions or concerns were raised about NPRR1251.</li> </ul> </ul> <img src="/storage/docs/2024/12/20241212NPRR1251Ballot.png" width="874" height="726" /> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=d404f6f0-d6db-4309-8afc-7d88124e4e7f">▶️</a> 6.13 - NPRR1255, Introduction of Mitigation of ESRs</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Caitlin Smith requested that NPRR1255 be tabled again this month. ERCOT and stakeholders have been having productive offline discussions regarding NPRR1255.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The NPRR deals with the mitigation of ESRs, and stakeholders are generally comfortable with the framework.</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"> Discussions include:</li> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Addressing commitment to ancillary services and the state of charge preservation.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Exploring options like setting a floor on offers for mitigation to consider opportunity costs.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Considering whether there should be a state of charge threshold where mitigation would not apply. </li> </ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Jupiter might file comments by January based on progress in discussions. No action is required currently, and the item remains tabled for flexibility in further discussions.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=54d03cb8-369d-4344-8fe4-0671634161d2">▶️</a> 6.14 - NPRR1256, Settlement of MRA of ESRs</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">WMS requested to continue tabling NPRR1256 to allow WMWG further review.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">WMWG will revisit NPRR1256 in January.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=c913b562-bb49-479e-93d8-0341e6e8e927">▶️</a> 6.15 - NPRR1257, Limit on Amount of RRS a Resource can Provide Using Primary Frequency Response</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Motion to recommend approval of NPRR1257 as submitted added to the combo ballot.</li> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">ROS unanimously approved NPRR1257 earlier in the month.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">The item might be ready for further actions or decisions.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Consideration for adding NPRR1257 to a combination or agenda list.</li> </ul> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=5a232db5-ad9a-4c80-a38e-b9baab604628">▶️</a> 6.16 - NPRR1259, Update Section 15 Level Response Language</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Motion to recommend approval of NPRR1259 as amended by the 12/10/24 RMS comments added to the combo ballot.</li> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">NPRR1259 was unanimously endorsed by RMS.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">A retail system outage approved by a tax subcommittee was included in the endorsement.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">The motion on the combo ballot is to recommend approval of NPRR1259 as amended by the December 10 RMS comments.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">No action has been taken on either system change request.</li> </ul> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=3801b671-0c54-470d-bb26-abafe79b678c">▶️</a> 6.17 - SCR826, ERCOT.com Enhancements</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">No update.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=634e15d7-ca5a-4aed-acef-b2ebedbe35d7">▶️</a> 6.18 - SCR827, Grid Conditions Graph Addition for Operating Reserve Demand Curve - ORDC - Level</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">No update.</li> </ul> <h2><a href="/sharing/?token=c798adba-100d-45da-a1e7-f23f1547e921">▶️</a> 7 - Review of Revision Request Language - Vote - Diana Coleman</h2> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Discussion on NPRR1260 initiated by ERCOT to reinstate language inadvertently removed when NPRR863 was approved.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=ed5bf4ec-1ae8-49d7-a39d-5a16c8f2f87e">▶️</a> 7.1 - NPRR1260, Corrections for CLR Requirements Inadvertently Removed</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Motion to recommend approval of NPRR1260 as submitted added to the combo ballot.</li> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">There were no objections or concerns raised about NPRR1260.</li> </ul> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=a47aadf0-77b9-4063-9920-bef1e843cf21">▶️</a> 7.2 - NPRR1261, Operational Flexibility for CRR Auction Transaction Limits</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Motion to recommend approval of NPRR1261 as submitted added to the combo ballot.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The purpose of NPRR1261 is to provide more operational flexibility by modifying CRR transaction limits.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Samantha Finley from ERCOT explained the need for differentiating transaction limits among auction types to accommodate varying network capacities.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The new transaction limits are intended to prevent issues with hitting limitations and to solve auction processes more efficiently.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Bill Barnes expressed curiosity about the extent of the benefits but supported moving the NPRR forward.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">There was consensus among the members about the positive impact and readiness to proceed with NPRR1261.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">CMWG and WMS have extensively discussed the issue, leading to a positive perception of the increased transparency and flexibility.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">DC Energy filed comments in support of NPRR1261, particularly appreciating ERCOT's engagement with CMWG.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=1cdc88e4-ff85-4cc4-bb3f-c7b4dd09d633">▶️</a> 7.3 - NPRR1262, Ancillary Service Opt Out Clarification</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Motion to table NPRR1262 added to the combo ballot.</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">NPRR1262 is aimed at providing clarity to address litigation concerns related to a patent claim involving Bitcoin mining and CLRs by Lancium.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Lancium has raised objections, preferring ongoing negotiations outside ERCOT's public process due to potential litigation risks.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Matt Arth from ERCOT Regulatory Council supports tabling further discussions to understand implications and consider different stakeholder perspectives.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Bill Barnes expressed concerns about the impact on CLR market participation and requested more details on Lancium's patent claims.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">ERCOT has engaged in discussions with Lancium, Cholla, and the Blockchain Council to explore implications of the patent claim and potential licensing without committing to agreements.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Suggestions include delaying the issue's table until the first quarter, allowing a thorough understanding to be developed by involved parties.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">There are concerns about whether protocol clarifications could inadvertently involve intellectual property issues outside of ERCOT's purview.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Clayton Greer emphasized that NPRR is a clarification for transparency, not a policy change, aimed at preventing market participation hesitance.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Tabling NPRR1262 will provide more time to address legal interpretations and clarify ERCOT's stance without impacting reliability or stakeholder responsibilities.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=ffd48d8b-e84e-406d-8d7e-865949b2ef57">▶️</a> 7.4 - SCR828, Increase the Number of Resource Certificates Permitted for an Email Domain in RIOO</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Motion to recommend approval of SCR828 as submitted added to the combo ballot.</li> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Request from NextEra Energy to increase the number of resource certificates for an email domain in the RIOO system.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Current limit of 23 certificates poses challenges for larger market participants.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Proposal from Zach Reich, ERCOT, to increase the limit to at least 50 certificates, with suggestions to increase to 100.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Discussion of system limitations and costs associated with increasing the certificate limit.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Agreement on the need for an IA before deciding on the exact number.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Acknowledgment of similar past requests and the need for a practical and economically viable solution.</li> </ul> </ul> <h2><a href="/sharing/?token=9bb0f66c-2425-4b5f-8d52-95f85e795fe4">▶️</a> 8 - Notice of Withdrawal - Diana Coleman</h2> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=f75051ab-eb9d-4832-a7b5-79b9c6accb05">▶️</a> 8.1 - NPRR1242, Related to VCMRR042, SO2 and NOx Emission Index Prices Used in Verifiable Cost Calculations</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">NPRR1242 was withdrawn and PRS does not need to vote on it.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The sponsors are free to withdraw as PRS never recommended approval.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Notification was given to prevent any confusion about its removal from the tabled items list.</li> </ul> <h2><a href="/sharing/?token=5c6c43b3-4584-4966-b7b6-1d9b35e8af08">▶️</a> 9 - Other Business - Diana Coleman</h2> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=81aefa21-bb59-4346-80b6-cb06ff262182">▶️</a> 9.1 - ERCOT Dashboard Roadmap - Amy Lofton</h3> <a href="https://dash2.gridmonitor.com/storage/docs/2024/12/mp-guide-for-dashboard-roadmap.pdf">mp-guide-for-dashboard-roadmap.pdf</a> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">ERCOT is developing a roadmap for dashboard implementation, with a target for completion in 2025.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The purpose of the roadmap is to capture recommendations from various stakeholders and establish a formal process for introducing new dashboards and making changes to existing ones.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">A form likely hosted on ServiceNow will allow stakeholders to submit requests, which will then be evaluated for broad stakeholder value, data availability, duplication of effort, and long-term viability.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The process includes impact analysis and project prioritization to assess costs, resource availability, and potential conflicts with ongoing projects.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The process will involve transparency and the ability for stakeholders to track the progress of their requests.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Concerns were raised about potential frequent changes to the dashboards and the need for a formal approval process involving stakeholders.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">It was suggested that stakeholder feedback should be incorporated into the process, possibly via public forums or direct input opportunities.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Additional dialogue suggested an existing protocol revision request process could be used to incorporate stakeholders’ opinions, but ERCOT maintains dashboards are courtesy postings not formally required.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Stakeholders expressed a desire for more transparency and input, specifically regarding rejected requests and the overall decision-making process.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">ERCOT confirmed intentions for transparency and stakeholder notification during implementation phases, but specifics of stakeholder appeal or feedback integration were not fully defined.</li> </ul> <h2><a href="/sharing/?token=21c4c04e-fe97-4484-b910-91dddc3acafd">▶️</a> 10 - Combo Ballot - Vote - Diana Coleman</h2> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Motion to approve the combined ballot as presented carries unanimously with no abstensions.</li> </ul> <img src="/storage/docs/2024/12/20241212PRSCombodetails.png" width="881" height="241" /> <img src="/storage/docs/2024/12/20241212PRSCombo.png" width="863" height="717" />   <h2><a href="/sharing/?token=1f30d4bf-6c95-4e57-ba2a-5bf11e84583c">▶️</a> 11 - Adjourn - Diana Coleman</h2>