E-Tagging Issue Work Group

1. E-Tagging Issue Work Group Raymond R. Vojdani, P.E.

2. E-Tagging Issues Work Group • History: Ad Hoc Work Group • Known as BMW Club • Metamorphism

3. E-Tagging Issues Work Group ==== E-Tagging Issues Work Group BMW Club

4. E-Tagging Issues Work Group • Goal: To research and facilitate resolution to identified tagging problems, if possible.

5. E-Tagging Issues Work Group • Start with an E-Tagging Issue Referred to the WG • Research the issue, collect data, and gather necessary information. • Research existing policies and guidelines relating to the issue. • Provide direction for a solution of the problem based on existing policies. • If no policies exist for the problem, determine extent of problem and refer to appropriate work group (i.e. Real Time or Business Practice workgroups).

6. E-Tagging Issues Work Group • Log all issues discussed and track the resolution presented. • Present the Issues to the ISAS members at their next meeting for Lesson Learned and Best Practices. • Develop and Maintain the WECC ISAS E-tag template Database.

7. E-Tagging Issues Work Group • Work Group Members: • Kathee Downey (PACW – Reliability) • John Dake (WALC – Reliability) • Al Gulutzan (AESO, Reliability) • Raymond Vojdani (WACM, Reliability) • Kathy Crane (WAPA, Merchant) • Demetrios Fotiou (PWX, Merchant) • Jim Thomas (PNM, Merchant) • Ryan Cline (Xcel, Merchant)

8. E-Tagging Issues Work Group ISSUES

9. E-Tagging Issue Work Group • Sink Control Area Approval Override • Eastern Interconnections E-Tag Upload Issue • Late Tag Approval • Verbal Coordination of Curtailment • Transactions Starting Mid-Hour • E-Tagging Templates

10. E-Tagging Issues Work Group • Issue 1: • Sink Control Area A used their e-tagging over-ride capability and approved a tag on behalf of another approving authority (TP and CA). • Each approval entity needs to approve their section of the tag. Each sink control area has the capability to approve for other approval entities should those approval entities run into communication problems. The key is the Sink CA needs to be asked.

11. E-Tagging Issues Work Group • Control Area A’s (Sink Control Area) explanation for Using Approval Override? • The tag in question was a replacement of another tag • B. The time was running out before the tag dies • Resolution Status: Control Area A acknowledged that they should not have done that even if their intentions were pure.

12. E-Tagging Issues Work Group • Issue 2: • Control Area A is located in the Western Interconnection. They curtailed tag XYZ due to transmission constraints. A Reliability Coordinator in the Eastern Interconnection Reloaded this tag. It has been identified that it is an “automated” process with the IDC in the Eastern Interconnection and continues to cause concern for WECC members.

13. Resolution Status: TheNERC IDC Work Group was contacted and made aware of the problem. The IDC WG has scheduled a software fix for this problem in Dec. 2004, with completion date of Jan. 2005. E-Tagging Issues Work Group

14. E-Tagging Issues Work Group • Issue 3: • Control Area A Denies a Tag because the tag did not pass OASIS validation. • The PSE contacts the Control Area A, and identify the problem. • The Control Area A acknowledges the error and blames the OASIS software for behaving badly. • PSE is asked to submit a new tag and Control Area A commits to coordinate it with the intermediary Control Areas (B). • By now, the new tag is very late (12 minutes past the hour). • The Intermediary Control Area denies the tag for being late. • PSE feels cheated and submits a complaint to our work group.

15. E-Tagging Issues Work Group • Who do you think is at fault here? PSE, Control Area A, Control Area B? • Nobody is at fault, this is an unfortunate situation • Resolution Status: One positive outcome was the control area B stated their position that they would have let the tag flowed had it been identified as Emergency or Reliability Issue

16. E-Tagging Issues Work Group • Issue 4: • Control Area A (source CA) Curtail a couple of tags due to transmission constraints • According to B.P. #13, the Source Control Area Needs to Coordinate the Curtailment with the Sink Control Area. • The Curtailments are implemented by all involved entities. Thus, Control Area A does not see a need for Verbal Communications • Control Area B feels that they should have been notified by phone and file a complaint to the Work Group • Resolution Status: Control Area A, acknowledged their Error and will follow the B.P. #13, until such a time when E-tagging becomes a primary mode of notification

17. E-Tagging Issues Work Group • Issue 5: • XYZ PSE asks Control Area A to allow Mid-Hour Schedule • Control Area A will not allow Mid-Hour Scheduling due to all the complications it causes. • What are some of the complications: • Large CAs with many neighbors, already having difficulties checking out once an hour. • Tags with partial hour do not show Integrated MWh. This causes problems for systems who are tag driven • Ramping issues and limitation of AGC • Distraction form doing what needs to be done for next hour • XYZ PSE states that some CAs do accommodate Mid-Hour scheduling

18. E-Tagging Issues Work Group • Resolution Status: The Work Group acknowledges the challenges of Mid-Hour Scheduling. There is no mandate to force CAs to accommodate Mid-Hour Scheduling. Until such a time, when the tools gets better, we are stuck with the our current systems and it limitations. Perhaps, implementation of WIT will take care of this issue.

19. E-Tagging Issues Work Group • E-Tagging Templates: • Issues & Driving Force Behind it • There will be Grouped into 4 Regions • Rocky Mountain • Desert Southwest • Northwest • California • Where Would these Template Reside • WECC ISAS Website • Common Western OASIS (webttrans.net) • Future Use: WIT

20. E-Tagging Issues Work Group • Send your issues to Raymond Vojdani Please CC Bob Schwermann • E-mail address: avojdani@wapa.gov BSchwer@smud.org • Phone Number (970) 461-7379

21. E-Tagging Issues Work Group Questions?