Ontario's Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) has been found fully compliant with 38 key electricity reliability standards and 168 reliability requirements monitored by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC).
A regularly scheduled audit was conducted earlier this year by a team comprising observers from NERC and representatives from the Northeast Power Coordinating Council Inc. (NPCC), which has delegated authority for auditing compliance with NERC reliability standards in the northeast United States and Canada.
The audit team evaluated the IESO's compliance with reliability standards pertaining to a broad range of areas, including emergency preparedness; resource and demand balancing; interconnection reliability operations and coordination; and communications, among others.
Auditors performed a comprehensive review of the IESO's operations and found the company to be fully compliant with all applicable standards.
"There is a strong correlation between standards and reliable system performance, and our employees work tirelessly to ensure our operations are consistent with industry rules and regulations," said Paul Murphy, President and CEO of the IESO.
The NERC and the NPCC praised the IESO's cooperation and support during the audit, highlighting the IESO team's positive attitude and willingness to provide information.
California Rooftop Solar Rate Reforms propose shifting net metering to fixed access fees, peak-demand charges, and time-of-use pricing, aligning grid costs, distributed generation incentives, and retail rates for efficient, least-cost electricity and fair cost recovery.
Key Points
Policies replacing net metering with fixed fees, demand charges, and time-of-use rates to align costs and incentives.
✅ Large fixed access charge funds grid infrastructure
✅ Peak-demand pricing reflects capacity costs at system peak
✅ Time-varying rates align marginal costs and emissions
The California Public Service Commission has proposed revamping electricity rates for residential customers who produce electricity through their rooftop solar panels. In a recent New York Times op‐ed, former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger argued the changes pose an existential threat to residential rooftop solar. Interest groups favoring rooftop solar portray the current pricing system, often called net metering, in populist terms: “Net metering is the one opportunity for the little guy to get relief, and they want to put the kibosh on it.” And conventional news coverage suggests that because rooftop solar is an obvious good development and nefarious interests, incumbent utilities and their unionized employees, support the reform, well‐meaning people should oppose it. A more thoughtful analysis would inquire about the characteristics and prices of a system that supplies electricity at least cost.
Currently, under net metering customers are billed for their net electricity use plus a minimum fixed charge each month. When their consumption exceeds their home production, they are billed for their net use from the electricity distribution system (the grid) at retail rates. When their production exceeds their consumption and the excess is supplied to the grid, residential consumers also are reimbursed at retail rates. During a billing period, if a consumer’s production equaled their consumption their electric bill would only be the monthly fixed charge.
Net metering would be fine if all the fixed costs of the electric distribution and transmission systems were included in the fixed monthly charge, but they are not. Between 66 and 77 percent of the expenses of California private utilities do not change when a customer increases or decreases consumption, but those expenses are recovered largely through charges per kWh of use rather than a large monthly fixed charge. Said differently, for every kWh that a PG&E solar household exported into the grid in 2019, it saved more than 26 cents, on average, while the utility’s costs only declined by about 8 cents or less including an estimate of the pollution costs of the system’s fossil fuel generators. The 18‐cent difference pays for costs that don’t change with variation in a household’s consumptions, like much of the transmission and distribution system, energy efficiency programs, subsidies for low‐income customers, and other fixed costs. Rooftop solar is so popular in California because its installation under a net metering system avoids the 18 cents, creating a solar cost shift onto non-solar customers. Rooftop solar is not the answer to all our environmental needs. It is simply a form of arbitrage around paying for the grid’s fixed costs.
What should electricity tariffs look like? This article in Regulation argues that efficient charges for electricity would consist of three components: a large fixed charge for the distribution and transmission lines, meter reading, vegetation trimming, etc.; a peak‐demand charge related to your demand when the system’s peak demand occurs to pay for fixed capacity costs associated with peak use; and a charge for electricity use that reflects the time‐ and location‐varying cost of additional electricity supply.
Actual utility tariffs do not reflect this ideal because of political concerns about the effects of large fixed monthly charges on low‐income customers and the optics of explaining to customers that they must pay 50 or 60 dollars a month for access even if their use is zero. Instead, the current pricing system “taxes” electricity use to pay for fixed costs. And solar net metering is simply a way to avoid the tax. The proposed California rate reforms would explicitly impose a fixed monthly charge on rooftop solar systems that are also connected to the grid, a change that could bring major changes to your electric bill statewide, and would thus end the fixed‐cost avoidance. Any distributional concerns that arise because of the effect of much larger fixed charges on lower‐income customers could be managed through explicit tax deductions that are proportional to income.
The current rooftop solar subsidies in California also should end because they have perverse incentive effects on fossil fuel generators, even as the state exports its energy policies to neighbors. Solar output has increased so much in California that when it ends with every sunset, natural gas generated electricity has to increase very rapidly. But the natural gas generators whose output can be increased rapidly have more pollution and higher marginal costs than those natural gas plants (so called combined cycle plants) whose output is steadier. The rapid increase in California solar capacity has had the perverse effect of changing the composition of natural gas generators toward more costly and polluting units.
The reforms would not end the role of solar power. They would just shift production from high‐cost rooftop to lower‐cost centralized solar production, a transition cited in analyses of why electricity prices are soaring in California, whose average costs are comparable with electricity production in natural gas generators. And they would end the excessive subsidies to solar that have negatively altered the composition of natural gas generators.
Getting prices right does not generate citizen interest as much as the misguided notion that rooftop solar will save the world, and recent efforts to overturn income-based utility charges show how politicized the debate remains. But getting prices right would allow the decentralized choices of consumers and investors to achieve their goals at least cost.
Puerto Rico Tesla Solar Power enables resilient microgrids using batteries, renewable energy, and energy storage to rebuild the hurricane-damaged grid, reduce fossil fuels, cut costs, and accelerate recovery with scalable solar-plus-storage solutions.
Key Points
A solar-plus-storage plan using Tesla microgrids and batteries to restore Puerto Rico's cleaner, resilient power.
✅ Microgrids cut diesel reliance and harden critical facilities.
✅ Batteries stabilize the grid and shave peak demand costs.
✅ Scalable solar enables faster, modular disaster recovery.
Puerto Rico’s governor Ricardo Rossello has said that he will speak to Elon Musk after the Tesla inventor said his innovative solar and battery systems could be used to restore electricity on the island.
Mr Musk was mentioned in a tweet, referencing an article discussing ways to restore Puerto Rico’s power grid, which was knocked out by Hurricane Maria on September 20.
Restoring the ageing and already-weakened network has proved slow: as of Friday 90 per cent of the island remained without power. The island’s electricity company was declared bankrupt in July.
Mr Musk was asked: “Could @ElonMusk go in and rebuild #PuertoRico’s electricity system with independent solar & battery systems?”
The South African entrepreneur replied: “The Tesla team has done this for many smaller islands around the world, but there is no scalability limit, so it can be done for Puerto Rico too.
“Such a decision would be in the hands of the PR govt, PUC, any commercial stakeholders and, most importantly, the people of PR.”
His suggestion was seized upon by Mr Rossello, who then tweeted: “@ElonMusk Let's talk. Do you want to show the world the power and scalability of your #TeslaTechnologies?
“PR could be that flagship project.”
Mr Musk replied that he was happy to talk.
Restoring power to the battered island is a priority for the government, and improving grid resilience remains critical, with hospitals still running on generators and the 3.5 million people struggling with a lack of refrigeration or air conditioning.
Radios broadcast messages advising people how to keep their insulin cool, and doctors are concerned about people not being able to access dialysis.
And, with its power grid wiped out, the Caribbean island could totally rethink the way it meets its energy needs, drawing on examples like a resilient school microgrid built locally.
“This is an opportunity to completely transform the way electricity is generated in Puerto Rico and the federal government should support this,” said Judith Enck, the former administrator for the region with the environmental protection agency.
“They need a clean energy renewables plan and not spending hurricane money propping up the old fossil fuel infrastructure.”
Forty-seven per cent of Puerto Rico’s power needs were met by burning oil last year - a very expensive and outdated method of electricity generation. For the US as a whole, petroleum accounted for just 0.3 per cent of all electricity generated in 2016 even as the grid isn’t yet running on 100% renewable energy nationwide.
The majority of the rest of Puerto Rico’s energy came courtesy of coal and natural gas, with renewables, which later faced pandemic-related setbacks, accounting for only two per cent of electricity generation.
“In that time of extreme petroleum prices, the utility was borrowing money and buying oil in order to keep those plants operating,” said Luis Martinez, a lawyer at natural resources defense council and former special aide to the president of Puerto Rico’s environmental quality board.
“That precipitated the bankruptcy that followed. It was in pretty poor shape before the storm. Once the storm got there, it finished the job.”
But Mr Martinez told the website Earther that it might be difficult to secure the financing for rebuilding Puerto Rico with renewables from FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) funds.
“A lot of distribution lines were on wood poles,” he said.
“Concrete would make them more resistant to winds, but that would potentially not be authorized under the use of FEMA funds.
"We’re looking into if some of those requirements can be waived so rebuilding can be more resilient.”
Bruce Power Life-Extension Programme advances Ontario nuclear capacity through CANDU Major Component Replacement, reliable operation milestones, supply chain retooling for COVID-19 recovery, PPE production, ventilator projects, and medical isotope supply security.
Key Points
A program to refurbish CANDU reactors, extend asset life, and mobilize Ontario nuclear supply chain and isotopes.
✅ Extends CANDU units via Major Component Replacement
✅ Supports COVID-19 recovery with PPE and ventilator projects
✅ Boosts Ontario energy reliability and medical isotopes
Canada’s Bruce Power said on 1 May that unit 1 at the Bruce nuclear power plant had set a record of 624 consecutive days of reliable operation – the longest since it was returned to service in 2012.
It exceeded Bruce 8’s run of 623 consecutive days between May 2016 and February 2018. Bruce 1, a Candu reactor, was put into service in 1977. It was shut down and mothballed by the former Ontario Hydro in 1997, and was refurbished and returned to service in 2012 by Bruce Power.
Bruce units 3 and 4 were restarted in 2003 and 2004. They are part of Bruce Power’s Life-Extension Programme, and future planning such as Bruce C project exploration continues across the fleet, with units 3 and 4 to undergo Major Component Replacement (MCR) Projects from 2023-28, adding about 30 years of life to the reactors.
The refurbishment of Bruce 6 has begun and will be followed by MCR Unit 3 which is scheduled to begin in 2023. Nuclear power accounts for more than 60% of Ontario’s supply, with Bruce Power providing more than 30% of the province’s electricity.
Set up of Covid recovery council On 30 April, Bruce Power announced the establishment of the Bruce Power Retooling and Economic Recovery Council to leverage the province’s nuclear supply chain to support Ontario’s fight against Covid-19 and to help aid economic recovery.
Bruce Power’s life extension programme is Canada’s second largest infrastructure project and largest private sector infrastructure programme. It is creating 22,000 direct and indirect jobs, delivering economic benefits that are expected to contribute $4 billion to Ontario’s GDP and $8-$11 billion to Canada’s gross domestic product (GDP), Bruce Power said.
“With 90% of the investment in manufactured goods and services coming from 480 companies in Ontario and other provinces, including recent manufacturing contracts with key suppliers, we can harness these capabilities in the fight against Covid-19, and help drive our economic recovery,” the company said.
“An innovative and dynamic nuclear supply chain is more important than ever in meeting this new challenge while successfully implementing our mission of providing clean, reliable, flexible, low-cost nuclear energy and a global supply of medical isotopes,” said Bruce Power president and CEO Mike Rencheck. “We are mobilising a great team with our extended supply chain, which spans the province, to assist in the fight against Covid-19 and to help drive our economic recovery in the future.”
Greg Rickford, the Minister of Energy, Mines, Northern Development, and Minister of Indigenous Affairs, said the launch of the council is consistent with Ontario’s focus to fight Covid-19 as a top priority and a look ahead to economic recovery, and initiatives like Pickering life extensions supporting long-term system reliability.
The creation of the Council was announced during a live event on Bruce Power's Facebook page, in which Rencheck was joined by Associate Minister of Energy Bill Walker and Rocco Rossi, the president and CEO of the Ontario Chamber of Commerce.
Walker reiterated the Government of Ontario’s commitment to nuclear power over the long term and to the life extension programme, including the Pickering B refurbishment as part of this strategy.
The Council, which will be formed for the duration of the pandemic and will include of all of Bruce Power’s Ontario-based suppliers, will focus on the continued retooling of the supply chain to meet front-line Covid-19 needs to contribute to the province’s economy recovery in the short, medium and long term.
New uses for nuclear medical applications will be explored, including isotopes for the sterilisation of medical equipment and long-term supply security.
The supply chain will be leveraged to support the health care sector through the rapid production of medical Personal Protection Equipment for front line-workers and large-scale PPE donations to communities as well as participation in pilot projects to make ventilators within the Bruce Power supply chain or help identify technology to better utilise existing ventilators;
“Buy Local” tools and approaches will be emphasised to ensure small businesses are utilised fully in communities where nuclear suppliers are located.
The production of hand sanitiser and other cleaning products will be facilitated for distribution to communities.
Nighttime Thermoelectric Generator converts radiative cooling into renewable energy, leveraging outer space cold; a Stanford-UCLA prototype complements solar, serving off-grid loads with low-power output during peak evening demand, using simple materials on a rooftop.
Key Points
A device converting nighttime radiative cooling into electricity, complementing solar for low-power evening needs.
✅ Uses thermocouples to convert temperature gradients to voltage.
✅ Exploits radiative cooling to outer space for night power.
✅ Complements solar; low-cost parts suit off-grid applications.
Two years ago, one freezing December night on a California rooftop, a tiny light shone weakly with a little help from the freezing night air. It wasn't a very bright glow. But it was enough to demonstrate the possibility of generating renewable power after the Sun goes down.
Working with Stanford University engineers Wei Li and Shanhui Fan, University of California Los Angeles materials scientist Aaswath Raman put together a device that produces a voltage by channelling the day's residual warmth into cooling air, effectively generating electricity from thin air with passive heat exchange.
"Our work highlights the many remaining opportunities for energy by taking advantage of the cold of outer space as a renewable energy resource," says Raman.
"We think this forms the basis of a complementary technology to solar. While the power output will always be substantially lower, it can operate at hours when solar cells cannot."
For all the merits of solar energy, it's just not a 24-7 source of power, although research into nighttime solar cells suggests new possibilities for after-dark generation. Sure, we can store it in a giant battery or use it to pump water up into a reservoir for later, but until we have more economical solutions, nighttime is going to be a quiet time for renewable solar power.
Most of us return home from work as the Sun is setting, and that's when energy demands spike to meet our needs for heating, cooking, entertaining, and lighting.
Unfortunately, we often turn to fossil fuels to make up the shortfall. For those living off the grid, it could require limiting options and going without a few luxuries.
Shanhui Fan understands the need for a night time renewable power source well. He's worked on a number of similar devices, including carbon nanotube generators that scavenge ambient energy, and a recent piece of technology that flipped photovoltaics on its head by squeezing electricity from the glow of heat radiating out of the planet's Sun-warmed surface.
While that clever item relied on the optical qualities of a warm object, this alternative device makes use of the good old thermoelectric effect, similar to thin-film waste-heat harvesting approaches now explored.
Using a material called a thermocouple, engineers can convert a change in temperature into a difference in voltage, effectively turning thermal energy into electricity with a measurable voltage. This demands something relatively toasty on one side and a place for that heat energy to escape to on the other.
The theory is the easy part – the real challenge is in arranging the right thermoelectric materials in such a way that they'll generate a voltage from our cooling surrounds that makes it worthwhile.
To keep costs down, the team used simple, off-the-shelf items that pretty much any of us could easily get our hands on.
They put together a cheap thermoelectric generator and linked it with a black aluminium disk to shed heat in the night air as it faced the sky. The generator was placed inside a polystyrene enclosure sealed with a window transparent to infrared light, and linked to a single tiny LED.
For six hours one evening, the box was left to cool on a roof-top in Stanford as the temperature fell just below freezing. As the heat flowed from the ground into the sky, the small generator produced just enough current to make the light flicker to life.
At its best, the device generated around 0.8 milliwatts of power, corresponding to 25 milliwatts of power per square metre.
That might just be enough to keep a hearing aid working. String several together and you might just be able to keep your cat amused with a simple laser pointer. So we're not talking massive amounts of power.
But as far as prototypes go, it's a fantastic starting point. The team suggests that with the right tweaks and the right conditions, 500 milliwatts per square metre isn't out of the question.
"Beyond lighting, we believe this could be a broadly enabling approach to power generation suitable for remote locations, and anywhere where power generation at night is needed," says Raman.
While we search for big, bright ideas to drive the revolution for renewables, it's important to make sure we don't let the smaller, simpler solutions like these slip away quietly into the night.
Western Canada Hydropower Drought strains British Columbia and Manitoba as reservoirs hit historic lows, cutting hydroelectric output and prompting power imports, natural gas peaking, and grid resilience planning amid climate change risks this winter.
Key Points
Climate-driven reservoir lows cut hydro in B.C. and Manitoba, prompting imports and backup gas to maintain reliability.
✅ Reservoirs at multi-year lows cut hydro generation capacity
✅ BC Hydro and Manitoba Hydro import electricity for reliability
✅ Natural gas turbines used; climate change elevates drought risk
Severe drought conditions in Western Canada are compelling two hydroelectricity-dependent provinces, British Columbia and Manitoba, to import power from other regions. These provinces, known for their reliance on hydroelectric power, are facing reduced electricity production due to low water levels in reservoirs this autumn and winter as energy-intensive customers encounter temporary connection limits.
While there is no immediate threat of power outages in either province, experts indicate that climate change is leading to more frequent and severe droughts. This trend places increasing pressure on hydroelectric power producers in the future, spurring interest in upgrading existing dams as part of adaptation strategies.
In British Columbia, several regions are experiencing "extreme" drought conditions as classified by the federal government. BC Hydro spokesperson Kyle Donaldson referred to these conditions as "historic," and a first call for power highlights the strain, noting that the corporation's large reservoirs in the north and southeast are at their lowest levels in many years.
To mitigate this, BC Hydro has been conserving water by utilizing less affected reservoirs and importing additional power from Alberta and various western U.S. states. Donaldson confirmed that these measures would persist in the upcoming months.
Manitoba is also facing challenges with below-normal levels in reservoirs and rivers. Since October, Manitoba Hydro has occasionally relied on its natural gas turbines to supplement hydroelectric production as electrical demand could double over the next two decades, a measure usually reserved for peak winter demand.
Bruce Owen, a spokesperson for Manitoba Hydro, reassured that there is no imminent risk of a power shortage. The corporation can import electricity from other regions, similar to how it exports clean energy in high-water years.
However, the cost implications are significant. Manitoba Hydro anticipates a financial loss for the current fiscal year, with more red ink tied to emerging generation needs, the second in a decade, with the previous one in 2021. That year, drought conditions led to a significant reduction in the company's power production capabilities, resulting in a $248-million loss.
The 2021 drought also affected hydropower production in the United States. The U.S. Department of Energy reported a 16% reduction in overall generation, with notable decreases at major facilities like Nevada's Hoover Dam, where production dropped by 25%.
Drought has long been a major concern for hydroelectricity producers, and they plan their operations with this risk in mind. Manitoba's record drought in 1940-41, for example, is a benchmark for Manitoba Hydro's operational planning to ensure sufficient electricity supply even in extreme low-water conditions.
Climate change, however, is increasing the frequency of such rare events, highlighting the need for more robust backup systems such as new turbine investments to enhance reliability. Blake Shaffer, an associate professor of economics at the University of Calgary specializing in electricity markets, emphasized the importance of hydroelectric systems incorporating the worsening drought forecasts due to climate change into their energy production planning.
Ontario Wind Power Policy Shift signals renewed investment in renewable energy, wind farms, and grid resilience, aligning with climate goals, lower electricity costs, job creation, and turbine technology for cleaner, diversified power.
Key Points
A provincial pivot to expand wind energy, meet climate goals, lower costs, and boost jobs across Ontario’s power system.
✅ Diversifies Ontario's grid with scalable renewable capacity.
✅ Targets emissions cuts while stabilizing electricity prices.
✅ Spurs rural investment, supply chains, and skilled jobs.
Ontario’s energy landscape is undergoing a significant transformation as Premier Doug Ford makes a notable shift in his approach to wind power. This change represents a strategic pivot in the province’s energy policy, potentially altering the future of Ontario’s power generation, environmental goals, and economic prospects.
The Backdrop: Ford’s Initial Stance on Wind Power
When Doug Ford first assumed the role of Premier in 2018, his administration was marked by a strong stance against renewable energy projects, including wind power, with Ford later saying he was proud of tearing up contracts as part of this shift. Ford’s government inherited a legacy of ambitious renewable energy commitments from the previous Liberal administration under Kathleen Wynne, which had invested heavily in wind and solar energy. The Ford government, however, was critical of these initiatives, arguing that they resulted in high energy costs and a surplus of power that was not always needed.
In 2019, Ford’s government began rolling back several renewable energy projects, including wind farms, and was soon tested by the Cornwall wind farm ruling that scrutinized a cancellation. This move was driven by a promise to reduce electricity bills and cut what was perceived as wasteful spending on green energy. The cancellation of several wind projects led to frustration among environmental advocates and the renewable energy sector, who viewed the decision as a setback for Ontario’s climate goals.
The Shift: Embracing Wind Power
Fast forward to 2024, and Premier Ford’s administration is taking a markedly different approach. The recent policy shift, which moves to reintroduce renewable projects, indicates a newfound openness to wind power, reflecting a broader acknowledgment of the changing dynamics in energy needs and environmental priorities.
Several factors appear to have influenced this shift:
Rising Energy Demands and Climate Goals: Ontario’s growing energy demands, coupled with the pressing need to address climate change, have necessitated a reevaluation of the province’s energy strategy. As Canada commits to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and transitioning to cleaner energy sources, wind power is increasingly seen as a crucial component of this strategy. Ford’s change in direction aligns with these national and global goals.
Economic Considerations: The economic landscape has also evolved since Ford’s initial opposition to wind power. The cost of wind energy has decreased significantly over the past few years, making it a more competitive and viable option compared to traditional energy sources, as competitive wind power gains momentum in markets worldwide. Additionally, the wind energy sector promises substantial job creation and economic benefits, which are appealing in the context of post-pandemic recovery and economic growth.
Public Opinion and Pressure: Public opinion and advocacy groups have played a role in shaping policy. There has been a growing demand from Ontarians for more sustainable and environmentally friendly energy solutions. The Ford administration has been responsive to these concerns, recognizing the importance of addressing public and environmental pressures.
Technological Advancements: Advances in wind turbine technology have improved efficiency and reduced the impact on wildlife and local communities. Modern wind farms are less intrusive and more effective, addressing some of the concerns that were previously associated with wind power.
Implications of the Policy Shift
The implications of Ford’s shift towards wind power are far-reaching. Here are some key areas affected by this change:
Energy Portfolio Diversification: By reembracing wind power, Ontario will diversify its energy portfolio, reducing its reliance on fossil fuels and increasing the proportion of renewable energy in the mix. This shift will contribute to a more resilient and sustainable energy system.
Environmental Impact: Increased investment in wind power will contribute to Ontario’s efforts to combat climate change. Wind energy is a clean, renewable source that produces no greenhouse gas emissions during operation. This aligns with broader environmental goals and helps mitigate the impact of climate change.
Economic Growth and Job Creation: The wind power sector has the potential to drive significant economic growth and create jobs. Investments in wind farms and associated infrastructure can stimulate local economies, particularly in rural areas where many wind farms are located.
Energy Prices: While the initial shift away from wind power was partly motivated by concerns about high energy costs, including exposure to costly cancellation fees in some cases, the decreasing cost of wind energy could help stabilize or even lower electricity prices in the long term. As wind power becomes a larger component of Ontario’s energy supply, it could contribute to a more stable and affordable energy market.
Moving Forward: Challenges and Opportunities
Despite the positive aspects of this policy shift, there are challenges to consider, and other provinces have faced setbacks such as the Alberta wind farm scrapped by TransAlta that illustrate potential hurdles. Integrating wind power into the existing grid requires careful planning and investment in grid infrastructure. Additionally, addressing local concerns about wind farms, such as their impact on landscapes and wildlife, will be crucial to gaining broader acceptance.
Overall, Doug Ford’s shift towards wind power represents a significant and strategic change in Ontario’s energy policy. It reflects a broader understanding of the evolving energy landscape and the need for a sustainable and economically viable energy future. As the province navigates this new direction, the success of this policy will depend on effective implementation, ongoing stakeholder engagement, and a commitment to balancing environmental, economic, and social considerations, even as the electricity future debate continues among party leaders.
Whether you would prefer Live Online or In-Person
instruction, our electrical training courses can be
tailored to meet your company's specific requirements
and delivered to your employees in one location or at
various locations.
