QMWG Update to WMS

1. QMWG Update to WMS S. Looney February 13, 2013

2. General Update • QMWG met on February 12, 2013 • Confirmed Chair and Vice Chair for 2013 – Sherry Looney and Marguerite Wagner • Discussion of New Resource Interconnect Process Document – Plan to have an afternoon session at a future meeting for more in depth work. • Requested ERCOT to set up a workshop for Reactive Testing • Wind Coalition continues to work on GREDP issues, no update

3. NPRR486 and SCR773 • NPRR486 has been tabled at PRS since October, 2012 with a request for further discussion at PDCWG and QMWG • PDCWG determined that changing the GTBD is an appropriate next step and PDCWG has submitted SCR773 • Up for consideration at February PRS, PDCWG requested Urgent status. • SCR773 proposes to add the deployed regulation times a tuning factor to the GTBD • Impact Analysis has not yet been posted

4. Issue is Regulation Bias in SCED • Issue is not an LFC issue • Issue is the calculation of Generation to be Dispatched • GTBD contributes to the bias that then causes increased reliance on Regulation • Luminant has done some analysis which provides a range of the financial impact to the market of reducing the regulation bias. Provides a starting point for the Cost Benefit Analysis. • Presented this analysis to QMWG, backcast indicates could be significant increase in Real Time Price. Plan to work with ERCOT to improve the estimate.

5. Concern over SCR773 • SCR773 provides for a feedback of regulation in the calculation of Generation to be Dispatched • Better feedback might be System Control Error. • Need an adequate way of determining the impact of any regulation bias over time. • Need to add a requirement for the evaluation of the efficacy of SCR773 • Consider evaluation of regulation deployment quantities or estimate of price impact of addition of regulation deployed to the SCED bid stack • Request WMS support of SCR773 at PRS

6. NPRR491, Updated Distributed Generation and Demand Response Information for ERCOT • Referred to WMS by PRS • Need to establish Protocol requirement for reporting of DG, ERS Generators, ERS Resources, Estimate of TDU Demand Response • Working with ERCOT to coordinate with other reporting • Adds a definition of Demand Response • Recommendation, continue to table for further work

7. NPRR495, Changes to Ancillary Services Capacity Monitor • Tabled at January PRS and referred for discussion of business case • IA showed cost of $105K-$125K • QMWG consensus – this is a valuable report for efficient Resource commitment and increased Operator situational awareness • ERCOT is evaluating if the project could be phased. Will report revised IA to PRS.

8. 2013 AS Methodology • Discussed the bias for additional NSRS due to net Load over-forecast • Concern that lower NSRS could result in more RUC • Calculation of the load forecast bias is more granular than a RUC • NSRS is a market solution, however, RUC does not require the purchase of an AS based on LRS every day • Recommendation – No consensus was reached, WMS to take a vote. Gather data for possibly revising the net Load forecast bias to use the MTLF closer to Real Time instead of midnight Day Ahead.

9. Summary and Procedural History of NPRR219 • NPRR219 submitted by ERCOT was approved by the ERCOT Board on 10/19/10 and placed on the Parking Deck. • Implementation of system changes that enable Resource Entities to enter Outages for their Transmission Facilities in the Outage Scheduler • An Impact Analysis and CBA were posted on 1/31/11 for Impact Assessment consideration • Impact Analysis, $565K-$750K • The Impact Assessment was approved by TAC on 3/3/11. The ERCOT Board did not take action on the Impact Assessment. • The TAC Chair presented NPRR219/NOGRR050 to the Board where they were informed that there was not a positive benefit to cost ratio for implementation • NPRR219/NOGRR050 has remained on the Parking Deck. • Currently not on the ERCOT Project schedule

10. Summaryand Procedural History of NOGRR050 • NOGRR050 was approved by the ERCOT Board of Directors on October 19, 2010 to align the Operating Guide requirements with NPRR219 and placed on the Parking Deck • An Impact Analysis was posted on 2/10/11 for Impact Assessment consideration • Costs for implementation NOGRR050 are included in the Impact Analysis for NPRR219. • The Impact Assessment was approved by TAC on 3/3/11. The ERCOT Board did not take action on the Impact Assessment. • The TAC Chair presented NPRR219/NOGRR050 to the Board where they were informed that there was not a positive benefit to cost ratio for implementation • NPRR219/NOGRR050 has remained on the Parking Deck. • Outage reporting requirements in NOGRR050 (Grey-boxed) • ERCOT shall post a monthly report of Outages considered on the MIS Secure Area including: • (a) Number of Outage requests submitted in the ERCOT Outage Scheduler greater than 335 days (11 months) in advance; • (b) Number of Outage requests submitted in the ERCOT Outage Scheduler between 90 and 334 days in advance of the desired Outage date; • (c) Number of Outage requests submitted in the ERCOT Outage Scheduler between eight and 89 days in advance of the desired Outage date; • (d) Number of Outage requests submitted in the ERCOT Outage Scheduler between three and seven days in advance of the desired Outage date; • (e) Number of Outage requests submitted less than three days in advance; • (f) Number of Outages by Outage type; and • (g) Total Number of Outages that were requested, accepted, approved, cancelled, and withdrawn. • If NPRR503 is approved, the reporting requirement for ERCOT to provide statistics on Planned Vs. Actual TSP Outages will be deleted; however, the reporting requirement in the Operating Guides will remain.

11. Summary and Procedural History of NPRR503 • On 11/8/12, ROS voted to direct the NDSWG to submit an NPRR to remove grey-boxes associated with reporting of TSP outages • NPRR503 removes the following grey-box language from Section 3.1.1.1 • (2) ERCOT shall report statistics on how TSP Planned Outages compare with actual TSP Outages, post those statistics to the MIS Secure Area, and report those statistics to ERCOT subcommittees twice per year. However, to the extent Outages are required to repair or improve telemetry accuracy or failures, or to provide near-term solutions to Planning Criteria violations as described in Section 3.11.2, Planning Criteria, the Outage must not be counted against the TSP in its performance of planning Outages, because such Outages cannot reasonably be forecasted 12 months in advance. • On 12/13/12, PRS voted to refer to WMS to review the value of receiving the TSP outage schedule statistics supplied in the report • QMWG discussed the value of the Report, was generally supported. Recommendation at QMWG, take a vote at WMS regarding the value of the information. PRS can then consider the IA and Business Case.

12. SCR770, Revision to Outage Scheduler Entry for Resource Maintenance Outage Level Designation • Currently the ERCOT Outage Scheduler determines the Resource Maintenance Outage category from the outage requested start time • Not always accurate • SCR770 adds a field for MT Outage Level separate from the start date • ERCOT is working on the Project Plan and will report back next month