Approved SEC Teleconference Minutes

19 May 2010

Attendees:

David Law

Elliot Sloan

Wael Diab

Yatin Trivedi

Jennifer McClain

Peter Wiesner

Chris Vigil

Mary Lynee

Markus Plessel

Samantha Bradley

Patricia Gerdon

Susan Tatiner

Approved Agenda:

  1. Call to Order (Law)
  2. Introductions
  3. Approval of Agenda (Law)
  4. Approval of draft minutes from 22 March 2010 (Law)
  5. Smart Grid Workshops (Peter Wiesner)
  6. Standards Education Opportunities in India (Mary Lynne Nielsen and Christine Vigil)
  7. Don Purcell Survey (Tatiner)
  8. INCITS Ad Hoc on Academic Involvement (Law)
  9. One-day pilot seminar/workshop aimed at students and educators (Law)
  10. Workshop in Chicago
  1. Update on Workshops (Law)
  2. a. MELECON 2010 and IEEE Region 8 meeting
  1. Review and Approval of Final Student Application Papers (Law)
  2. a. Spreadsheet with SEC comments **added on 18 May
  1. New Business
  2. Next meeting: Wednesday, 30 June 2010, 11:00 AM EST to 1:00 PM
  3. Adjourn

------

  1. David Law, Chair, called the meeting to order at 11:04 AM EST.
  2. All attendees were introduced.
  3. Motion to approve the draft agenda was made by Wael Diab and seconded by Yatin Trivedi. Agenda was approved by unanimous consent.
  4. Motion to approve the draft minutes from 22 March 2010 teleconference was moved by Wael and seconded by Yatin. Minutes were approved by unanimous consent.
  5. Peter Wiesner, Future Directions Senior Manager, IEEE Technical Activities, presented a proposal for a Smart Grid Workshop that would include a standards education track.
  6. Proposing a new kind of conference that is applications oriented focusing on the needs of practitioners and even non-technical people.
  7. This is an opportunity for EA, SA and Technical Activities collaboration.
  8. Universities in the New York City area are interested in working with the IEEE.
  9. Smart Grid Workshop would focus on NYC (smart city): what’s the deployment of smart grid in a city like NYC?
  10. We would partner with the university on the logistics, such as a facility, faculty participation, etc. Peter and Susan have already met with faculty from New York University (NYU) to gauge interest level.
  11. Two faculty members in the Engineering Dept are IEEE memberswould drive it along with another person in their public policy area. Sufficient core of people from their end and we need people from our area. It is an IEEE event at NYU.
  12. Per Susan,they were receptive to the idea of adding a standards track. NYU is working on plans for an agenda, but having a little trouble with determining how standards would fit. We will see what they come back with and then figure out how to work standards into the program.
  13. Peter reported that the IEEE is providing 25K in seed money for this workshop
  14. Targeting May 2011.
  15. 1-1/2 day format
  16. $300.00 or so per person, estimating 300-400 attendees
  17. Focusing on local participation
  18. Hold plenary with a few tracks/breakouts
  19. NYU is a concrete opportunity and there are a number of new possibilities in the future depending on local participation and universities. Not confined to the USA.
  20. We could also do something with the Univ of Colorado in Bolder. Peter has met with people there. Just an idea and not formulated.
  21. PG&E in San Francisco another possibility. Stanford, Cal Poly, San Jose State have an interest in standards education .
  22. Could do something in India, but would need corporate or government and universities interest, as well as a strong IEEE presence.
  23. Peter indicated that he wants to experiment with streaming media. There are opportunities to develop Expert Now modules. Action: Jennifer speak with Steve Welch.
  24. New ad-hoc was established to help determine the scope for the conference. NYU will shape the conference and we will help them develop the standards element. Ad-hoc members: Susan, Wael, Yatin, Peter, Jennifer. Action: Jennifer to set up ad-hoc call.
  1. Susan, Mary Lynne and Chris reported on Standards Education Opportunities in India.
  1. Two professors are developinga new course to introduce standards and their importance. They need some IEEE support for guidance in introducing and developing the course.
  2. Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) is the big organization in India. They develop standards and the SA is working on an MOU with them.
  3. Asked what IEEE has available in the area of standards education.
  4. Wanted to understand how IEEE has worked with other national bodies to improve local standards education.
  5. SA staff to share standards education information with them.
  6. The SEC has an ad-hoc to determine the IEEE Standards Education Strategy for India: Steve Mills, Matt Loeb, Moshe Kam, Elliot Sloane, Doug Gorham, Bilel Jamoussi, Yatin Trivedi, Jennie, Jennifer, Susan, Mary Lynne, Samantha. ACTION: Jennifer to initiate the ad-hoc first call.
  7. Susan will work with Chris Vigil to collect information requested by the Bureau of Indian Standards.
  • Low cost access for students
  • Finding mentors for the professors
  • Mini-projects and case studies

7) Susan reported that Don Purcell’s2010 Survey from Catholic University is out for comment. Sherecommended that we continue to participate. Group agreed that Susan should complete the survey and then distribute to the group for comment.

  • Action: Susan to complete a draft of the survey and distribute to the SEC for comment.

8) David reported that he and Jennifer held a call with Steve Elliott, Chair of INCITS Ad-hoc on academic involvement, to discuss various overlaps and ways to work together. One item discussed was holding a joint Standards Education session at ASEE in 2011. Jennifer will take the lead in this effort. Susan will follow up with Steve Elliott on the Speakers Bureau.

9) David reported that Amin, Jennifer and Ed Barret from the IEEE Chicago Section discussed holding a standards education workshop. Amin had put together a draft agenda. Group had no objections to progressing, but felt that we need to better define the target audience and flesh out the agenda. Report back to SEC with additional details.

10) David reported on MELECON 2010 and IEEE Region 8 activities. David has created “Demystifying 802 standards” presentation which was given at MELECON. He hasrequests to repeat this at AFRICON in October 2010, EUROCON in 2011, and at a Nordic region workshop. At the Student Branch Congress in August 2010 there will be a table for SEC materials and David will hold ahalf-day session touching on wireless areas, how to get involved, and relevance to industry. This will not be part of the Speakers Bureau. David has budget from Region 8 to cover costs. David will work with staff on 2011 goals for AFRICON. For ENERGYCON, Wael volunteered as a speaker. Jennie Steinhagen is lead on this activity.

11) Final Student Application Papers:

a)Wael moved approve #8, 14, 24. Seconded by Malcolm. Approved by unanimous consent.

  • For number #14, Jennifer to tell them the proper way to cite the 802.22 standards vs draft.

b)Student paper #4: SEC voted no to acceptthe final paper and post it.

c)Student paper #16: SEC voted no to accept the final paper and post it.

d)Student paper #36: SEC voted no to accept the final paper and post it.

  • Wael moved to not accept the final student application papers for #4, #16, and #36 for publication/posting. Seconded by Elliot Sloan. No discussion. Motion was approved by unanimous consent.

15)Group discussed how to communicate back to the students and advisors. The $500 grant is paid to the students when the application is approved. The $300 faculty grant is paid upon acceptance of the final paper and posting of the final paper.

  • Elliot suggested that when we start these, we should send a copy of the standards involved. We want a successful rewrite quickly.
  • David and Jennifer to draft response back to the students and faculty.
  • Ask if they have a copy of the standard.
  • We need to make our expectations clearer in our documentation.
  • Add the question: “do you have access to the standards?”Must attest that they have access to the standard.
  • Should also include information on how standards should be designated.
  • Must be clearer to the faculty advisor will ensure that the paper meets the goals.Change the language on the faculty endorsement.

a)David indicated that we may need to limit the number of applications we approve in the future.

b)New Ad-hoc formed to improve the documentation: Jennifer, David, Malcolm.

c)David proposed using a process similar to RevCom, where the deadline is 4 times per year, soSEC members will know that there is a particular time when everyone needs to focus.

d)Ad-hoc will look at the time table for reviews and responses for the SEC. Develop a more fixed schedule.

16) New Business: No new business was suggested.

17) Next meeting is 30 June 2010, 11:00 AM EDT to 1:00 PM.

18) Meeting is adjourned 1:00 PM.

New ad-hocs:

1. Smart Grid Workshop: Susan Tatiner, Wael Diab, Yatin Trivedi, Peter Wiesner, Jennifer McClain

2. Improve Mini-Grant application documentation: David, Malcolm, Jennifer