1. Entergy AFC Stakeholder Meeting February 16, 2005 Houston, TX

2. Overview  Objectives and today’s agenda  Scope of AFC issues  Discussion on stakeholder ranking of issues  Open discussion on issues (Transparency issues) Issue #11:Peak hour model & posting of additional non- peak hourly models Issue #14:Reveal reservation holder to source owner, list reservations by source including control areas Issue #15:Additional information to understand transmission service denials (include issue#13 on.con,.mon, &.trn)

3. Overview  Open discussion on issues continued (Transparency issues) Issue #12: Discuss and clarify use of CBM in AFC Issue #10:Discuss approach for reviewing what is provided in the “Big File” and how this file can possibly be modified to provide more helpful information (Breakout group?)  Update/discussion on second scenario analyzer  Next Steps

4. Objectives Improve the AFC process through stakeholder input Draw from stakeholder experience in other regions Ensure there is a consistent understanding of the AFC process by all participating stakeholders Make changes to the AFC process to improve the overall quality and transmission customer satisfaction where possible

5. Ground Rules Ongoing dockets at FERC will prevent the discussion of certain information and issues –Initially limited to those issues outlined in FERC’s AFC Order –Issues discussed can be expanded if FERC agrees to Entergy’s proposal to conduct an audit of the AFC process as opposed to conducting a hearing The overall set of recommendations will be synthesized to determine which changes can be implemented as well as the overall implementation costs, and the time required to make the changes. The final set of recommendations chosen for implementation will be reviewed with stakeholders including the timeline for implementation and the projected cost to implement, as well as any required regulatory approvals

6. Should each issue be discussed in an open forum with all stakeholders?, or Should certain issues be identified for discussion by small breakout groups who will report back to the larger group? Should specific time limits be placed on each issue discussion or speakers to ensure that a single issue or speaker does not monopolize the meeting schedule? Others? Stakeholder Meeting Process

7. Ranking of Issues Identified for Discussion IssueIDSub-IssueABCAvg.Rev. Seq. Flowgate Selection and Modification 1criteria used to identify flowgates1751010.711 2info that may be provided to support flowgate selection (including TDF)144119.79 3detailed procedure used for adding/deleting flowgates101127.75 Counterflow Development and Use 4criteria used to develop counterflow percentages76159.37 5info and/or assumptions that support the counterflow percentages1271411.012 6meaning of each term in the counterflow formula1681312.314 Interchange Development and Use 7interchange information used15101714.018 8detailed methodology for calculating interchange information111169.38 9ETR’s efforts to improve information with neighboring control areas29189.710 Transparency Regarding TSR Approval and Denial 10information provided in the “Big File” and discuss the possibility of adding sink identification and participation factor file for all models 41426.73 11Identify peak hour used in peak hour models and review options for posting more non-peak hourly power flow models (i.e. “most recent set”) 3253.31 12use of CBM in the AFC analysis61538.06 13.CON,.MON and.TRN including their relevance to AFC analysis and value to stakeholders 1813612.315 14possibility of identifying reservation holder to generator owner, reservations in effect out of a source including control areas 5344.02 15additional info available to evaluate service request denials81217.04 Second Scenario Analyzer 16features associated with second Scenario Analyzer918711.313 17inclusion of only confirmed reservations in second Scenario Analyzer1316812.316 18inclusion of the number of and info. on new reservations not processed1117912.317

8. Issue #11 Identify peak hour used in peak hour models and review options for posting more non-peak hourly power flow models

9. Power Flow Models Posted on OASIS Entergy Transmission currently provides the following models on the OASIS: Study Horizon Time FramePosted Models Operating all hours of current day and all hours of next day after 12:00 p.m. daily peak model Planning end of Operating Horizon – Day 31 daily peak model Study end of Planning Horizon – Month 18 monthly peak model

10. AFC Power Flow Model Information Peak Projected Hour  Currently evaluating the feasibility of indicating the peak projected hour for all posted operating and planning horizon model  Recommendation: Change PSSE_16Feb2005.raw to PSSE_16Feb2005_1600.raw

11. AFC Power Flow Model Information Off Peak Power Flow Models  Currently infeasible to provide all hourly models in the operating and planning horizons  Discussion on limitations  Discussion on what is useful to Stakeholders  Stakeholder recommendations

12. Issue #14 Discuss possibility of identifying reservation holder to generation owner, reservations in effect out of a source including control area

13. Identifying Reservation Holders on Confirmed Reservations FERC S&CP The Standards and Communications Protocols for OASIS. Currently the “transstatus” query (Query Requests link on OASIS) does not have a input variable for a source or sink. Input variables do allow the ability to query all request for specific PORs/PODs, but to determine the specific source is time consuming.

14. Identifying Reservation Holders on Unconfirmed Reservations FERC Commission requires the source and sink on a reservation to be masked until confirmation.

15. Identifying Reservation Holders on Reservations NAESB committees dealing with OASIS issues Electronic Scheduling Subcommittee. OASIS Phase 1A task force ESS OASIS II task force Comments / Suggestions from Stakeholders What information is needed? Stakeholder recommendations

16. Issue #15 Review and discuss what, if any, additional information is available or necessary to evaluate service request denials including discussion of issue #13 (.con,.mon, and.trn files and their relevance to the AFC analysis and value to stakeholders)

17. Issue #12 Discuss and clarify use of CBM in the AFC analysis

18. CBM Use in AFC Calculation NERC Capacity Benefit Margin (CBM) Definition – “that amount of transmission transfer capability reserved by load serving entities to ensure access to generation from interconnected systems to meet generation reliability requirements” Although Entergy is entitled to set aside transmission capacity for CBM under the AFC process, Entergy is not currently including a CBM reservation in the AFC models

19. Issue #10 Review and discuss the information provided in the “big file” and discuss possibility of adding sink identification and participation factor file for all models

20. Useful OASIS Links Entergy Transmission maintains several data files on the OASIS site. The following links on the OASIS site contain information related to the AFC Process: Transmission Outage Information (updated near real-time) Transmission Limitations Summary (updated every minute) AFC Power Flow Models (Operating Horizon models updated every hour Planning Horizon models updated every six hours Study Horizon models updated every week) AFC Flowgate Listing (updated as needed) Effective ATC Posting ‘BIG’ AFC Data File

21. OASIS Link Locations AFC Flowgate Listing AFC Power Flow Models Effective ATC Posting ‘BIG’ AFC Data File

22. AFC Postings Link All flowgates currently monitored in AFC Effective ATC & ‘BIG’ AFC File Study Horizon Models & Study Horizon ‘BIG’ AFC File Operating and Planning Horizon Models Site address: https://www.entergytransmission.com/s/capability/AFC/AFC_Links.asphttps://www.entergytransmission.com/s/capability/AFC/AFC_Links.asp

23. The ‘BIG’ AFC File What is in the ‘BIG’ File? Response factors for the top 15 flowgates for about ~3,000 transfer paths Base flow and ratings for all flowgates What timeframe is the data provided for? Data is provided for the Operating and Planning Horizons: hourly values for day 1 to 7 and daily values for days 8 to 31; Study Horizon data is stored in a separate file How often is the file updated? The file is refreshed every hour for the current day. After 12:00 p.m., the file is refreshed every hour for the next day. The remaining data is refreshed every six hours.

24. Sample of the ‘BIG’ File begin= 2/1/2005 00:002/1/2005 01:00 2/8/2005 00:002/9/2005 00:00 end= 2/1/2005 01:002/1/2005 02:00 2/9/2005 00:002/10/2005 00:00 porpod=9MILE/AECI flowgate=9MILE_PMAX sensitivity=11 11 flowgate=TBOGRN_WEBRC sensitivity=0.0605610.0606702 0.0778449 flowgate=LTPLIV_RCWEB MICFRO_MCKFR sensitivity=0.06570250.065873 0.2314835 fgpath=GRIMTZ_WDN flow=12998 9495 ttc=206 fgpath=WILLVB_WEBRC flow=202206 18 ttc=289 Time Frame Hourly Daily Sensitivity of Top 15 Flowgates Flowgate Name Transfer Path Flow at Time Point & Flowgate Rating Flowgate Information

25. Second Scenario Analyzer Current button for analyzer New buttons for analyzers

26. Next Steps?