1. Business Practices Subcommittee
NAESB BPS UPDATE TO
Executive Committee
February 19, 2013 BY
NARINDER K SAINI
Ed Skiba
Bps-Co-chairs

2. OVERVIEW Business Practices Subcommittee (BPS) Status
Parallel Flow Visualization (PFV) Status
Background
Objectives
NAESB Responsibility
IDC Input
Proposed Solution
Concerns/Dependencies
Next Steps

3. BPS Status Meetings since last report Results:
Subcommittee – 3 two-day meetings
Recommendation Sub-team – 5 three-hour conference calls
IDC/SDX Users Manuals Sub-team
(8) 1-hour conference calls
(2) review sessions with IDC Workings Group
Results:
Draft standards/recommendation
Redlined IDC Users Manual and SDX Users Manual
NERC Support Document

4. BPS Status Draft Standards include
Changes to the Transmission Loading Relief Process (WEQ-008)
Postings on OASIS
ATC Information Link (WEQ-001)
ScheduleDetail Template (WEQ-002, WEQ-003, WEQ-013)
Glossary Updates (WEQ-000 and conforming changes)

5. BPS Status Draft Standards Address Annual Plan Items:
1.a Parallel Flow Visualization/Mitigation for Reliability Coordinators in the Eastern Interconnection – Permanent Solution
1.b Perform consistency review of WEQ-008 Transmission Loading Relief Business Practice Standards and develop recommendation
1.d Revise TLR level 5 to be treated similarly to TLR Level 3 in terms of treating the next hour allocation separately from that of current hour. (R11020)

6. PFV Background: IRO-006 IRO-006 Transmission Loading Relief
Each Reliability Coordinator and Balancing Authority that receives a request pursuant to an Interconnection-wide transmission loading relief procedure (such as Eastern Interconnection TLR, WECC Unscheduled Flow Mitigation, or congestion management procedures from the ERCOT Protocols) from any Reliability Coordinator, Balancing Authority, or Transmission Operator in another Interconnection to curtail an Interchange Transaction that crosses an Interconnection boundary shall comply with the request, unless it provides a reliability reason to the requestor why it cannot comply with the request.

7. PFV Background: Interconnections
IRO-006-EAST Transmission Loading Relief Procedures for the Eastern Interconnection
WEQ-008 Transmission Loading Relief (TLR) – Eastern Interconnection
Tools – (IDC)Interchange
Distribution Calculator
(SDX )System Data
eXchange
IRO-006-WECC Qualified Transfer Path Unscheduled Flow Relief (WECC)
IRO-006-TRE IROL & SOL Mitigation in the ERCOT Region

8. PFV Background: Primary Players
IDC
SDX

9. PFV Objectives
Generation to load (GTL) impacts reported to the IDC on a real-time basis
More accurate assignment of relief obligations to entities causing congestion
Near real-time data using generator output provided by RC
Include impacts of intra-BA generation-to-load and point-to-point transactions
Differentiate between intra-BA firm and non-firm transmission service
IDC has better data to perform calculations for TLR Levels 3 and 5

10. PFV: NAESB RESPONSIBILITY
NAESB will establish methodology for assigning the generation to load flows into the appropriate buckets.

11. NAESB Parallel Flow Visualization
PFV: IDC Input
Inter-BA
Network
Interchange
Current IDC
Inter-BA
Point-to-Point
Interchange
Current IDC
Intra-BA
Network
NAESB Parallel Flow Visualization
Intra-BA
Point-to-Point
NERC S‐ Ref 10132* *

12. PFV Proposed Solution Coordination Arrangements
Two-Tier Firm Curtailment
Two Methods*
Tag Secondary Network Transmission Service, or
Generator Prioritization
Additional Key Concepts
*Assumes that all point-to-point transactions are tagged under NERC standards

13. PFV Coordination Arrangements
Coordination Arrangements Types
Coordination Agreements
An agreement between two or more Transmission Service Providers for coordination of: a) granting Transmission Service by honoring a set of Flowgate limits and b) managing real-time congestion through congestion management process.
Unilateral Declarations allowed if Transmission Service Providers cannot agree
Reciprocity
A commitment by two Transmission Service Providers to provide Last-to-Curtail treatment of parallel flows on one another’s system without having a direct Coordination Agreement.
Two-Tier Firm Curtailments – encourages Coordination Arrangements

14. PFV: Two-Tier Firm Curtailment
First-to-Curtail
The Firm Transmission Service curtailment priority assigned by the IDC to parallel flows due to a lack of Coordination Agreement, Reciprocity, or unilateral declaration.
Last-to-Curtail
The Firm Transmission Service curtailment priority assigned by the IDC to: a) on-path flows and b) parallel flows when a Coordination Agreement, Reciprocity, or unilateral declaration exists between the Transmission Service Provider experiencing congestion and (at least one of) the Transmission Service Provider(s) on the path of the transaction whose Transmission Service is contributing to the congestion.

15. PFV: First-to Curtail/Last-to-Curtail
TSP with Coordination Arrangements
Last to Curtail TSPs
SOCO
TVA
DUK
PJM
MISO
SPP
EES
CONGESTION X
Congested TSP: TVA Last to Curtail if tag has TVA, PJM, MISO or SPP on path
Congested TSP: PJM Last to Curtail if tag has TVA, DUK, PJM or MISO on path
Congested TSP: SPP Last to Curtail if tag has TVA, MISO, SPP or EES on path

16. PFV: Methods for Intra-BA Transactions
Tag Secondary Network Transmission Service Method
A method used to submit to the IDC Transmission Service curtailment priority of the Secondary Network Transmission Service using e-Tags.
Generator Prioritization Method
A method used to submit to the IDC Transmission Service curtailment priority of the generator output.
Difference between what is reported and the real-time generator output is firm

17. PFV Additional Key Concepts
Balancing Authority to choose either one but not both Methods
Balancing Authority can switch
Six month notice
LSE (or entity acting on their behalf) enters
Tags for Tag Secondary Network Transmission Service Method
Generator Priority Schedules for Generator Prioritization Method
Transactions or generation-to-load impacting 5% or greater considered for assigning relief obligations

18. PFV Additional Key Concepts
Credit for Redispatch
IDC Processing
Sub-priorities for TLR Level 5a
Reloads of Curtailed Transactions
Reallocations for TLR Level 5b
Pseudo-Ties (generator physically in one BA but electrically located in another)
OASIS ScheduleDetail template modified to identify firm tagged curtailments as First-to-Curtail or Last-to-Curtail.

19. PFV Concerns/Dependencies
NERC
INT standards modified to require tagging on all intra-BA Point-to- Point transactions (Project )
IRO-006-EAST modified to allow a Reliability Coordinator to request curtailments on intra-BAA Point-to-Point tags (Project )
IDC Association
NAESB/Association coordination
Visibility into changes in the IDC
Access to data during parallel test/full staffing (NAESB formal request)
Parallel Flow Visualization priority

20. Next Steps Informal Comment Period (February 15 – March 15)
Recommendation (WEQ-000, 001, 002, 003, 008, 013)
IDC User’s Manual
SDX User’s Manual
NERC supporting document
Industry overview of Parallel Flow Visualization (February 27)
Address informal comments (March – June)
Post for formal comments by end of second quarter

21. Next Steps Meetings March 20-21 – Little Rock, AR (hosted by SPP)
April – Carmel, IN (hosted by MISO)
May – Valley Forge, PA (hosted by PJM)
June – Minneapolis, MN (hosted by OATI)

22. QUESTIONS ?