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)

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)

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

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

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

• 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?

Stakeholder Meeting Process

Ranking of Issues Identified for DiscussionIssue ID Sub-Issue A B C Avg. Rev.

Seq.

Flowgate Selection and Modification

1 criteria used to identify flowgates 17 5 10 10.7 11

2 info that may be provided to support flowgate selection (including TDF) 14 4 11 9.7 9

3 detailed procedure used for adding/deleting flowgates 10 1 12 7.7 5

Counterflow Development and Use

4 criteria used to develop counterflow percentages 7 6 15 9.3 7

5 info and/or assumptions that support the counterflow percentages 12 7 14 11.0 12

6 meaning of each term in the counterflow formula 16 8 13 12.3 14

Interchange Development and Use

7 interchange information used 15 10 17 14.0 18

8 detailed methodology for calculating interchange information 1 11 16 9.3 8

9 ETR’s efforts to improve information with neighboring control areas 2 9 18 9.7 10

Transparency Regarding TSR Approval and Denial

10 information provided in the “Big File” and discuss the possibility of adding sink identification and participation factor file for all models

4 14 2 6.7 3

11 Identify peak hour used in peak hour models and review options for posting more non-peak hourly power flow models (i.e. “most recent set”)

3 2 5 3.3 1

12 use of CBM in the AFC analysis 6 15 3 8.0 6

13 .CON, .MON and .TRN including their relevance to AFC analysis and value to stakeholders

18 13 6 12.3 15

14 possibility of identifying reservation holder to generator owner, reservations in effect out of a source including control areas

5 3 4 4.0 2

15 additional info available to evaluate service request denials 8 12 1 7.0 4

Second Scenario Analyzer

16 features associated with second Scenario Analyzer 9 18 7 11.3 13

17 inclusion of only confirmed reservations in second Scenario Analyzer 13 16 8 12.3 16

18 inclusion of the number of and info. on new reservations not processed

11 17 9 12.3 17

Issue #11

Identify peak hour used in peak hour models and review options for posting more non-peak hourly power flow

models

Power Flow Models Posted on OASIS

Entergy Transmission currently provides the following models on the OASIS:

Study Horizon

Time Frame Posted Models

Operatingall hours of current day

and all hours of next day after 12:00 p.m.

daily peak model

Planningend of Operating Horizon – Day 31

daily peak model

Studyend of Planning

Horizon – Month 18monthly peak

model

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

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

Issue #14

Discuss possibility of identifying reservation holder to generation owner, reservations in effect out of a source

including control area

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.

Identifying Reservation Holders on Unconfirmed Reservations

• FERC Commission requires the source and sink on a reservation to be masked until confirmation.

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

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)

Issue #12

Discuss and clarify use of CBM in the AFC analysis

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

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

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

OASIS Link Locations

AFC Flowgate Listing AFC Power Flow Models Effective ATC Posting

‘BIG’ AFC Data File

AFC Flowgate Listing AFC Power Flow Models Effective ATC Posting

‘BIG’ AFC Data File

AFC Postings Link

All flowgates currently monitored in AFCAll flowgates currently monitored in AFCAll flowgates currently monitored in AFCAll flowgates currently monitored in AFC

Effective ATC & ‘BIG’ AFC FileEffective ATC & ‘BIG’ AFC FileEffective ATC & ‘BIG’ AFC FileEffective ATC & ‘BIG’ AFC File

Study Horizon Models & Study Horizon Models & Study Horizon ‘BIG’ AFC FileStudy Horizon ‘BIG’ AFC File

Study Horizon Models & Study Horizon Models & Study Horizon ‘BIG’ AFC FileStudy Horizon ‘BIG’ AFC File

Operating and Planning Horizon ModelsOperating and Planning Horizon ModelsOperating and Planning Horizon ModelsOperating and Planning Horizon Models

Site address: https://www.entergytransmission.com/s/capability/AFC/AFC_Links.asp

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.

Sample of the ‘BIG’ File

begin= 2/1/2005 00:00 2/1/2005 01:00   2/8/2005 00:00 2/9/2005 00:00

end= 2/1/2005 01:00 2/1/2005 02:00   2/9/2005 00:00 2/10/2005 00:00

 

porpod= 9MILE/AECI          

flowgate= 9MILE_PMAX 9MILE_PMAX   9MILE_PMAX 9MILE_PMAX

sensitivity= 1 1   1 1

flowgate= TBOGRN_WEBRC TBOGRN_WEBRC   TBOGRN_WEBRC TBOGRN_WEBRC

sensitivity= 0.060561 0.0606702   0.0778449 0.0778449

flowgate= LTPLIV_RCWEB LTPLIV_RCWEB   MICFRO_MCKFR MICFRO_MCKFR

sensitivity= 0.0657025 0.065873   0.2314835 0.2314835

 

fgpath= GRIMTZ_WDN          

flow= 129 98   94 95

ttc= 206 206   206 206

fgpath= WILLVB_WEBRC          

flow= 202 206   18 18

ttc= 289 289   289 289

Time FrameTime

Frame

Hourly Daily

Sen

siti

vity

of

To

p

15 F

low

gat

es

Sen

siti

vity

of

To

p

15 F

low

gat

es

Flowgate NameFlowgate Name

Transfer PathTransfer Path

Flow at Time Point &

Flowgate Rating

Flow at Time Point &

Flowgate Rating

Flo

wg

ate

Info

rmat

ion

Flo

wg

ate

Info

rmat

ion

Second Scenario Analyzer

• Current button for analyzer

• New buttons for analyzers

Next Steps?