1 / 26

Entergy AFC Stakeholder Meeting February 16, 2005 Houston, TX

Entergy AFC Stakeholder Meeting February 16, 2005 Houston, TX. Overview. Objectives and today’s agenda Scope of AFC issues Discussion on stakeholder ranking of issues Open discussion on issues (Transparency issues)

yardley-pittman
Download Presentation

Entergy AFC Stakeholder Meeting February 16, 2005 Houston, TX

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. 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. Stakeholder Meeting Process • 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?

  7. Ranking of Issues Identified for Discussion

  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:

  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 Effective ATC & ‘BIG’ AFC File All flowgates currently monitored in AFC Study Horizon Models & Study Horizon ‘BIG’ AFC File Operating and Planning Horizon Models Site address: https://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. Time Frame Sample of the ‘BIG’ File Daily Hourly Transfer Path Sensitivity of Top 15 Flowgates Flowgate Name Flowgate Information Flow at Time Point & Flowgate Rating

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

  26. Next Steps?

More Related