70 likes | 151 Views
NAESB Time and Inadvertent Management Business Practice Update (TIMBP). August 20, 2009 Terry Bilke. Introduction. Intended to be a very targeted business practice to address multiple concerns in Order No. 693
E N D
NAESB Time and Inadvertent Management Business Practice Update(TIMBP) August 20, 2009 Terry Bilke
Introduction • Intended to be a very targeted business practice to address multiple concerns in Order No. 693 • Originally submitted to NERC, NERC Staff and Standards Committee rejected the SAR saying Time Error Corrections (TEC) and Inadvertent Payback are NAESB’s purview • Relied on proven Time and Inadvertent management practices, comparable to the WECC automatic TEC • No ERCOT/WECC impact unless they so choose
FERC’s Order No. 693 Concerns • Address number and efficiency of TECs • Concerned with frequency excursions (nearly half of reported frequency excursions occurred during TEC even though the East is in TEC 15% of the time) • Wants NERC to reduce and penalize large Inadvertent balances • Asks NERC to investigate alternatives to present TEC practices
EI TEC Summary 2002 – 2009 Present Payback Method Old Payback Method
Old Unilateral Payback was the Cornerstone • Unilateral Payback Option 2 > Average Frequency closer to 60 Hz > Less Inadvertent passing around > Smaller Inadvertent Balances Average Frequency closer to 60 Hz > Fewer TECs> Fewer Frequency Excursions • This Payback Option was rejected by the EC
Recent Items • NERC BAC Team met with the FERC • FERC Staff appears to be open to alternatives to the Order No. 693 concerns that led to the TIMBP • This may mitigate the need for the last draft TIM business practice • TIMTF created a tracking matrix that both teams update • TIMTF is participating in BAC Team calls • As the BAC Team proposes changes to BAL-002, BAL-004, BAL-005, BAL-006; table is updated • TIMTF evaluates whether a complementary business practice is needed
Potential Issue • NERC BAC may do field tests that interface with NAESB business practices • No NAESB process for field tests • Field test may cause a deviation of NAESB business practices (that are generally part of transmission providers’ tariffs) • There will likely be other similar situations in the future, looking for EC guidance