1 CenterPoint Energy presentation to TAC regarding the NMMS April 7, 2006.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Building a Cradle-to-Grave Approach with Your Design Documentation and Data Denise D. Dion, EduQuest, Inc. and Gina To, Breathe Technologies, Inc.
Advertisements

EMS Development Course for Government Agencies Class 7: Communication, Document Control, Records, and Emergency Preparedness and Response Winston-Salem,
Environmental Management System (EMS)
Lead from the front Texas Nodal 1 Texas Nodal Market Implementation Overall Traceability Plan June 25, 2007.
Purpose of the Standards
ISO 9000 Certification ISO 9001 and ISO
June 6, 2007 TAC Meeting NERC Registration Issues Andrew Gallo, Assistant General Counsel, Litigation and Business Operations ERCOT Legal Dept.
Understanding (and Untangling) Verification and Validation Requirements ISO 9001 vs. CMMI-Dev 1.2.
11/08/2005 Ken Donohoo How Does NMMS meet the Nodal Protocol Requirements John Adams 3/23/2006.
Measuring What Matters November 7 th Agenda Review and update of tasks and timeline Review and update of tasks and timeline Role of RTF Role of.
April 11, 2007 Prepared by the North American Energy Standards Board 1 North American Energy Standards Board Standards Development Process.
Retail Market Update June 5, New meter is requested for a specific customer’s location. 2.Application is filed by customer and/or the customer’s.
June 12, 2008 ROS SEM Go-Live procedure Linda Clarke.
Other Binding Documents Ann Boren ERCOT TAC/TAC Subcommittee Structural and Procedural Review ERCOT Public August 27, 2014.
ITEC 3220M Using and Designing Database Systems
1 Chapter 9 Database Design. 2 2 In this chapter, you will learn: That successful database design must reflect the information system of which the database.
814_20 – Substation ID updates Background and Proposed Action Plan TX SET – 10/25/07.
ROS Feb 2006 The Model Curtis Crews Network Model Engineering Supervisor
1 Single Entry Model (SEM) Go-Live Update ROS Update July 16, 2009.
SPS policy – Information Presentation Presentation to ROS June 16, 2004.
Lead from the front Texas Nodal 1 Texas Nodal Energy Management System Requirement Documents December 5, 2006 Jay Dondeti EMS Project.
Texas Nodal 1 Nodal Operations Model Posting Confirmation TAC May 7, 2009 Matt Mereness, ERCOT.
Texas Nodal March Texas Nodal NMMS Requirements By John Adams ERCOT.
ROS Meeting – 05/15/081Texas Nodal Program - TPTF Update Texas Nodal Transition Plan Task Force ROS Meeting Stacy Bridges, ERCOT Thursday, 05/15/08.
COMPLIANCE ROLLOUT Vann Weldon Compliance Training Administrator March 23, 2005 NERC FUNCTIONAL MODEL REVIEW.
Option 2 Summary Wes Woitt CenterPoint Energy 2010 SSWG Chair.
The Fargo/Moorhead Area Interstate Operations Study Opportunities and Planned Activities Presentation for the Mn/DOT Travel Demand Modeling Coordinating.
Network Model Management System (NMMS)
OMB Memorandum M Implementation of the Government Charge Card Abuse Prevention Act of 2012 (Charge Card Act) September 2013.
NERC Project S ystem Protection Coordination - PRC-027​ Presentation to the NSRS Conference Call April 20, 2015 Sam Francis Oncor Electric Delivery.
1 TAC Report to the ERCOT Board February 21, 2006.
Outage Scheduler Transition Plan Kenneth Ragsdale NATF.
814_20 – Substation ID updates Background and Proposed Action Plan RMS – 11/07/07.
1 Single Entry Model (SEM) Go-Live Update Special TAC Meeting (Updated) August 18, 2009.
Operating Guide and Planning Guide Revision Requests Blake Williams, ROS Chair September 13, 2012.
Conclusions Nodel Modeling Forum. Proposal 1 ERCOT builds the NMMS tool to be able to include the planning data; but not propose changes to the planning.
NDSWG Report June 16, NDSWG Report Regular meeting held May 16 in Taylor Telemetry / State Estimator Update Naming Convention Electrical Bus Designation.
CMWG NATF 11/02/2010- CCT/DME update + Outages in the CRR Model follow-up Steve Reedy – Market Design and Analysis 1.
ERCOT Guideline for Interim Updates to the Network Operations Model Excerpted from the “Modeling Expectations” whitepaper D.W. Rickerson.
Texas Regional Entity ROS Presentation January 15, 2009 T EXAS RE ROS P RESENTATION J ANUARY 2009.
October 29, 2012 RARF Workshop 2 Introduction to ERCOT Modeling Process Jay Teixeira Manager, Model Administration.
February 3, 2011 TAC ERCOT Planning Go-Live Update Jay Teixeira Manager, Model Administration.
Congestion Management Work Group Update WMS I Flores, S Reedy—ERCOT M Wagner--PSEG TX.
Prepared By: Razif Razali 1 TMK 264: COMPUTER SECURITY CHAPTER SIX : ADMINISTERING SECURITY.
Scheduling and Operating Transmission Devices in the Nodal Environment.
Model load frequency Discussion John Adams January 5, 2010 Nodal Advisory Task Force.
Texas Nodal 1 Nodal Operations Model Posting NATF Sep 29, 2009 Matt Mereness, ERCOT.
Role of Account Management at ERCOT 2006 TAC Subcommittee Review ERCOT Board February 21, 2006.
External Interface Update 1 External Interface Update April 2, 2007 Daryl Shing.
PLWG Report to ROS September 4, PGRR039 PGRR requires Interconnecting Entities (IEs) to provide information for ERCOT’s resource adequacy reports,
Transition Plan Network Operations Model Change Requests 5/26/2010.
Current Nodal OS Design 1.The NMMS database will have an OWNER and an OPERATOR designation for each piece of equipment in the model. The OWNER and OPERATOR.
Network Operations Model Go-Live Decision Kenneth Ragsdale TAC July 1, 2010.
June 9 th, 2008 TPTF Texas Nodal Program: Market Readiness Metrics Update Mike Beck.
CRR Network Model One-Line Diagram Beth Garza TPTF April 22, 2008.
INGAA Quality Management Systems White Paper Supporting Pipeline Construction.
TPTF Update Trip Doggett TAC March 9, TPTF Update Meetings February 6 & 7, February 20 Attendance approximately 40 Completed review of ERCOT’s clarification.
Approval of Important Station Voltages for State Estimator Reporting Review of SE and Telemetry Standards Alex Sills Advanced Network Applications 10/13/11.
6/21/2007 TPTF: Baselines 1&2 WP and CI Baselines 1 and 2 White Papers and Change Items Diran Obadina.
1 Single Entry Model (SEM) Go-Live Update TAC Update August 6, 2009.
TAC Update Kyle Patrick. 2 Nodal ERCOT Program Update –Nodal Market Go-Live (Vote)- vote passed in which TAC certified full nodal systems for Dec 1, 2010.
Nodal Planning Go Live Austin, TX February 3, 2011
ME 3.0 to ME 5.0 ME3.0 review scheduled during the Joint NDSWG/NATF meeting in July. There were approximately 180 comments on the ME3.0 paper. Deadline.
PLWG Review 6.9 and the Interconnection process
UFLS Workshop Discussion #3
TAC Report to the ERCOT Board
ERCOT – Southern Cross Transmission ROS/WMS Working Group Assignments
Oncor Electric Delivery Company LLC
Uniform Guidance Discussion
Alignment of Part 4B with ISAE 3000
Presentation transcript:

1 CenterPoint Energy presentation to TAC regarding the NMMS April 7, 2006

2 The Primary Issue CenterPoint and other TDSPs believe that: a central data base, as described and applied in the current NMMS document, is not necessary. this NMMS approach could result in misuse of TDSP personnel efforts as well as nodal project delays and cost overruns. neither the underlying white papers nor the nodal protocols promote the single data base approach as characterized by ERCOT in its NMMS document and therefore this approach does not conform with the intent of the nodal protocols. the NMMS approach will not meet Section 3.10 (5) as that section is currently defined.

3 Relevant Nodal Protocol Sections 3-10(5)ERCOT shall use consistent information in the various models used by ERCOT Operations, ERCOT Planning, and other workgroups in a manner that yields consistent results. For operational and planning models that are intended to represent the same system state the results should be identical and the naming should be consistent. An independent audit must be performed at least annually to confirm that consistent information is used in all ERCOT Operations models. 3-10(9)ERCOT shall update the Network Operations Model under this Section and coordinate it with the Planning Models for consistency to the extent applicable (1)ERCOT shall develop models for annual planning purposes (“Annual Planning Models”) that contain, as much as practicable, information consistent with the Network Operations Model (1)ERCOT, each TSP, and each Resource Entity shall coordinate to define each Transmission Element such that the TSP’s control center operational model and ERCOT’s Network Operations Model are consistent.

(5) - ERCOT shall use consistent information in the various models used by ERCOT Operations, ERCOT Planning, and other workgroups in a manner that yields consistent results. For operational and planning models that are intended to represent the same system state the results should be identical and the naming should be consistent. An independent audit must be performed at least annually to confirm that consistent information is used in all ERCOT Operations models. The proper way to perform this check is to transfer the base data from the operational model to the planning model and compare load flow results. The results will not be identical, even with NMMS, due to the different modeling convergence tolerances and transformer modeling nuances. The requirement should be revised to “results should be consistent to a TAC-approved tolerance”

5 Remaining Sections 3-10 (9) - ERCOT shall update the Network Operations Model under this Section and coordinate it with the Planning Models for consistency to the extent applicable (1) - ERCOT shall develop models for annual planning purposes (“Annual Planning Models”) that contain, as much as practicable, information consistent with the Network Operations Model (1) - ERCOT, each TSP, and each Resource Entity shall coordinate to define each Transmission Element such that the TSP’s control center operational model and ERCOT’s Network Operations Model are consistent. These sections are intended for a system of cross checks and balances to exist between operational models and databases against planning models and databases.

6 Problems with the Single Database Approach Fails to ensure consistency between as built “operationally-oriented” planning cases and annual planning cases built separately by TDSPs and ROS working groups (i.e., regional planning groups.) Results in a database that is at least twice as large as it needs to be to satisfy the nodal protocols, which leads to project overspending and misuse of manpower. Has not been implemented at any ISO or RTO.

7 Advantages of the Dual Database Approach Yields a good cross check: build a case with a known horizon year for comparison. Incorporates sound consistency criteria between models that can be applied to all TDSP/ERCOT transmission planning models. Sizes the NMMS to the correct size today (i.e., 2 to 2.5 years vs. 5 years) and offers efficiency avenues for future (i.e., a one or a two – year CRR model may be easier to use and analyze if driven from a planning model.) Reduces implementation costs and potential timeline complexities.

8 Recommendations Modify Section 3.10(5) so that either NMMS or a modified NMMS can successfully meet this requirement. Modify the NMMS to: –Incorporate the use of separate TDSP-driven planning databases through the appropriate standardized “naming” convention and consistency criteria. –Reduce the size and project build requirements for NMMS from 5 years to 2.5 years.