1 / 12

Proposal on Ancillary Service Deliverability Requirements

Proposal on Ancillary Service Deliverability Requirements. QMWG January 6, 2012. Objectives. Objectives: The purpose of this presentation is to discuss how current Nodal Protocols might be updated to: Clarify the QSE/Resource obligation to deliver AS in Real Time

kelsie-chambers
Download Presentation

Proposal on Ancillary Service Deliverability Requirements

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Proposal on Ancillary Service Deliverability Requirements QMWG January 6, 2012

  2. Objectives Objectives: • The purpose of this presentation is to discuss how current Nodal Protocols might be updated to: • Clarify the QSE/Resource obligation to deliver AS in Real Time • Incorporate ramping concepts from AS Business Practice • Tighten Section 8 Requirements: • Add AS performance monitoring for Failure to Provide • Add AS compliance criteria around Failure to Provide • Tighten GREDP percentage criteria • Introduce reporting for Regulation Performance • Introduce metrics for Regulation Performance

  3. 1. Clarify QSE/Resource obligation to deliver AS in Real Time Discussion: • The AS responsibilities reported in the Current Operating Plan (COP) at the end of the Adjustment Period are physically binding commitments during the corresponding Operating Hour (NP 3.9.2(3)) • Recommend updating Nodal Protocol (NP) Section 4.4.7.4, Ancillary Service Supply Responsibility, to state that QSEs are obligated to deliver their AS if called upon during the Operating Hour *: • “During the Operating Hour, a QSE is obligated to physically deliver all Ancillary Service that it has self-arranged or sold to ERCOT from its designated Resources when that Ancillary Service is deployed by ERCOT” • “This obligation begins at the top of each Operating Hour and ends at the top of the next Operating Hour and is continuous throughout the Operating Hour” * * this language was previously proposed in NPRR349

  4. 2. Incorporate ramping concepts from AS Business Practice Discussion: • As noted in the AS Business Practice: • DAM and SASM do not consider Resource ramp rates when clearing AS offers • It is the QSE’s responsibility to recognize the limitations on Resource-specific AS Offers and self-arranged AS assignments related to Generation Resource ramp rates • The maximum amount of AS that may be offered/carried by a Generation Resource is subject to that Resource’s ramp-rate constraints

  5. 2. Incorporate ramping concepts from AS Business Practice Discussion: • As noted in the AS Business Practice(continued): • Recommend updating Nodal Protocols to incorporate this guidance from the AS Business Practice.

  6. 3.a Add AS performance monitoring for Failure to Provide Discussion: • ERCOT currently posts an MIS report “Monthly Summary of AS Supply Responsibility Failures” to report QSE compliance in keeping Current Operating Plans (COPs) current with Ancillary Service Responsibilities (NP Section 3.9.1, 3.9.2) • This report is hinged off the MMS AS Consistency Check • ERCOT is not currently required to post an MIS report on occurrences of failure to provide AS • Recommend adding an additional requirement to Section 8.1 for failure to provide (next slide)

  7. 3.a Add AS performance monitoring for Failure to Provide Discussion: • Recommend adding the additional requirement language to Section 8.1, QSE and Resource Performance Monitoring,* to indicate that ERCOT shall monitor/report QSE/Resource performance for failure to provide, applicable to events when: • The AS capacity is replaced, in whole or in part, in a SASM • The AS capacity is not replaced, in whole or in part * * this language was previously proposed in NPRR349

  8. 3.b Add AS compliance criteria around Failure to Provide Discussion: • Protocols allow QSEs the option to replace undeliverable AS capacity; otherwise ERCOT is authorized to use a SASM to replace the AS capacity (NP 6.4.8.1.3) • Recommend adding a requirement to Section 8.1.1.3 indicating ERCOT’s prerogative to revoke AS qualifications due to performance issues related to failure to provide (next slide)

  9. 3.b Add AS compliance criteria around Failure to Provide Discussion: • Recommend adding a requirement to Section 8.1.1.3 indicating ERCOT’s prerogative to revoke AS qualifications due to performance issues related to failure to provide, subject to the following*: • ERCOT may revoke qualification(s) for any QSE experiencing more than three occurrences of failure to provide in a month * • Depending on the Resources and AS involved, ERCOT may revoke qualification for a particular Resource, a particular AS type, or some combination as needed to address performance issues * • If a qualification is revoked, the QSE may elect to re-qualify to provide AS per the Section 8 Protocol Provisions * * this language was previously proposed in NPRR349

  10. 3.c Tighten GREDP percentage criteria Discussion: • The current approved GREDP performance criteria variables indicate that a non-IRR Generation Resource must have a monthly GREDP score less than MAX(8 %, 8 MW) for 85% of the scored intervals • These performance criteria variables are the same for all Generation Resources, whether or not they are providing Regulation Service • Recommend tightening the performance criteria variables to < 8% for all Resources: • Tighter criteria should result in reduced Regulation deployments due to Generation output following SCED dispatch more closely • Such tightening of GREDP criteria could be applied specifically to hours of the Operating Day where ramping is characteristically high, such that these hours are scored at < 8%, while the remainder continue to be scored at 8%

  11. 3.d Introduce additional reporting for Reg Performance Discussion: • ERCOT currently reports GREDP statistics for Resources providing Regulation, including: • GREDP < 2.5% / 2.5 MW • 2.5% / 2.5 MW >= GREDP <= 5% / 5 MW • GREDP > 5% / 5 MW • Recommend considering additional GREDP statistics, if any, for Regulation that should be included in the reporting section of the monthly GREDP report • Recommend considering whether any such statistical reporting should be transformed into a stand-alone performance requirement for Resources providing Regulation Service

  12. 3.e Introduce metrics for Regulation Performance Discussion: • There are currently no compliance metrics beyond the GREDP that measure performance for Generation Resources providing Regulation Service • Recommend considering updating Protocols to require specific performance measurements for Generation Resources providing Regulation Service • Such a measurements might include delivery aspects such as: • RST = ONTEST when Regulation Responsibility > 0 • RST <> ONREG when Regulation Responsibility > 0 • MW amount of constrained Regulation Service when all Regulation Service has been deployed • Other

More Related