NAESB BPS Yasser Bahbaz IDCWG Chair January 5 th, 2016 Provide a high level design of IDC Change Order designing implementation of WEQ -008 Standards in IDC Share Change Order Implementation time line and projected Parallel Trials date Method to Submit Intra BA Transactions * Tag Second Networks Transmission Service Transactions * Intra BA NIT and PTP Generator Priority Schedules * Dynamic Schedules* Pseudo Tie Arrangement * TLR Log Access Seams Agreements GTL Priority Overrides Real Time Visualization Credit for Re-dispatch * Gen-To-Load Reload Process Shortfall / Excess * Curtailment Process in IDC Designation in the Book of Flowgate by BA Can only be updated or set during the IDC model upload Any priority submitted in conflict with designation will be accepted but not used in Congestion Management Process Intra BA PTP Transactions Relief allocated must be given by curtailing the transaction Gen-to-Gen aggregate type TDF calculation Intra BA NITS Relief allocated to transactions may be provided via GTL Gen-To-Load TDF calculation Gen priorities must be submitted no later than 20 minutes prior to TLR to be used in congestion management process for current hour LSEs or BAs may submit priorities for generators at MW blocks for each TSP Default of Firm priority applies to those generators with no priorities submitted. Default of Zero priority applies to those generators with a partial MW priority submitted Real Time MWs associated with the Dynamic transaction may be submitted by the entity. The designated real time MWs will replace the transaction profile for Congestion Management purposes TDF calculation impact will follow that similar to all interchange transactions Gen-to-Gen impact calculation, with the Gen being as granular as the Source or Sink specify Tagging the pseudo tie MWs Designation of resource is needed If MWs of resource exceed allocation priority on the transaction, priority of Zero is assumed TDF is Gen-to-Gen Aggregate Relief allocated to the transaction may be provided from GTL of the BA Generation Prioritization of the Pseudo Tie Gen priority submitted on the pseudo tied generation is less than the output of the resource, MWs remaining default to priority of Zero. IDCWG agreed to implement two options, only one of which may be triggered at a time during testing and (maybe) Trials. Neither Options are that lined out in the white paper. IDCWGs position is methodology specified in white paper does not address reliability. Option 1- No credit for over-relief (or exceedance) and using only previous hour as basis for initials Entities may only be credited for that following hour for a MW up to relief requested amount. Option 2 Conditional Rolled-over credit for over-relief Entities may only be credited for instructed curtailment that they may provide If entity provides more relief than instructed, they are be credited for additional MWs up to any shortfall that materialized during that hour from other BAs. Shortfall / Exceedance calculation specified in the white paper and how its incorporated in the TLR process was also modified by IDCWG to ensure that this incents right behavior but also ensures reliability of the system. White paper mentioned that any exceedance or shortfall calculation as highest or lowest sample of the hour respectively, should apply to hour + 2 as credit or discredit. IDCWG proposed the following methodology in the Change Order Shortfall is calculated as the aggregate shortfall for the duration of the TLR event of all four 15-minute GTL calculation comparing GTL Actual to GTL Target Once a reload is triggered for a GTL product, BAs maybe reloaded pro-rata on GTL Actual adjusted by a term that is directly correlated by their TLR event performance. Entities with an accumulated net shortfall will see GTL reload that is adjusted down pro-rata to the shortfall accumulated Entities with no shortfall during the TLR event will see a reload towards their unconstrained system at a faster rate during that reload hour. IDCWG thinks this incents good behavior without jeopardizing system reliability. IDCWG is implementing what was specified in the standards and the white paper for the most part. Credit for Re-dispatch and Shortfall/Exceedance items were big topics at IDCWG. These two require a delicate balance between reliability and equity and if addressing one more heavily than the other may cause operations concern. IDCWG believes that it found a balance for incenting or penalizing non-performers in a way that impacts reliability and give the RCs a better handle and confidence in system control from a congestion management standpoint. September 2013 May 2015 July 2015 November 2015 November 2016 CO 283 Data Submission WEQ 008 Assessment & OATIs estimate of the project cost CO 283 Report PFV COs Draft PFV COs Development Key Assumptions: -Agreement for funding of the Change Orders required and IDC Association support of the COs development Current State: CO Evaluation in progress March 2017 June 2017 August 2017 Testing Testing Result Report Implement COs Start of Field Trial Period