Overview Seams Coordination Process. 2 Introduction Midwest ISO Non-profit organization that manages the reliable flow of electricity across much of the.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Midwest ISO from a Transmission Owner Perspective.
Advertisements

1 Market Flow Threshold Field Test NERC ORS Meeting November 14 th and 15 th.
Parallel Flow Visualization Data Requirements Parallel Flow Visualization Data Requirements NERC ORS Meeting Toronto, Ontario September 23-24, 2009 Jim.
Business Practices Subcommittee Update April 30, 2013.
Business Practices Subcommittee Update August 20, 2013.
Parallel Flow Visualization and Flowgate Allocations Equity Concerns of Non-Market Transmission Owners Equity Concerns of Non-Market Transmission Owners.
First to Curtail – Last to Curtail Examples December 1 – 2, 2010 (Revised based on Requests/Suggestions During Review) 1.
©2005 PJM 1 Development of Wholesale Electricity Scheduling and OASIS Determining the Future Needs of the Open Access Same-time Information System Andy.
Business Practices Subcommittee Update October 23, 2012 DRAFT.
Parallel Flow Visualization/Mitigation Proposal
Business Practices Subcommittee Update August 17, 2010.
©2004 PJM 1 OASIS Phase II Approaching the Problem General Discussion on Strategy and Philosophy Andy Rodriquez - PJM Presented to the NAESB ESS and ITS.
NAESB Coordinate Interchange Version 1 Standard Revision 1, Draft 5 August, 2005.
©2005 PJM 1 Redispatch Credit NERC/NAESB TLR Task Force Feb 2-3, 2005 Houston, Texas Operations Reliability Subcommittee Feb 8-9, 2005 Scottsdale, AZ.
NAESB Coordinate Interchange
1 Credit for Redispatch Small Group Review of Unconstrained MFs NAESB BPS Meeting December 14-15, 2011.
Interchange Distribution Calculator Working Group (IDCWG) Update NAESB BPS Yasser Bahbaz – IDCWG Chair September 13 th, 2012.
White Paper on the Future of Congestion Management IDC Granularity Task Force Standing Committee Meetings July 20-22, 2004.
Business Practices Subcommittee Update February 2, 2010.
Business Practices Subcommittee Update February 1, 2011.
©2004 PJM 1 OASIS Phase II Approaching the Problem General Discussion on Strategy and Philosophy Andy Rodriquez - PJM Presented to the NAESB ESS and ITS.
Business Practices Subcommittee Update April 30, 2012.
Business Transaction Management Software for Application Coordination 1 Business Processes and Coordination.
Definition of Firm Energy and Interruptible Transmission Two Issues Causing Problems for Business in the Western Interconnection.
Briefing on California ISO Dynamic Transfers Stakeholder Process For WECC Seams Issues Subcommittee Meeting May 4, 2010 Jim Price, Lead Engineering Specialist.
Western Electricity Coordinating Council Market Interface Committee Report to the WECC Board of Directors December 6-7, 2007 Robert D. Schwermann MIC Chair.
Update on CAISO / PacifiCorp Energy Imbalance Market
FERC Order minute Scheduling.
Standard Market Design (SMD) in New England Federal Energy Regulation Commission Conference on Standard Market Design January 22, 2002 David LaPlante Vice.
1 Overview. 2 Benefits of RATC Applications Real-time corrective Hour ahead corrective and preventive Day ahead corrective Day ahead market/economic based.
AN INTRODUCTION TO THE MIDWEST ISO By Bill Malcolm Manager-State Regulatory Affairs Pierre, South Dakota June 9, 2006.
SIS Update on Eastern Seams Issues WECC SIS Meeting 2/1/12 Salt Lake City, UT.
25 seconds left…...
North American Electric Reliability Council 1 Coordinate Operations Standard Jason Shaver Standard Drafting Team Chair September 29, 2005.
Al McBride MANAGER, AREA TRANSMISSION PLANNING Existing Import Interfaces: Transmission Transfer Capabilities and The Calculation of Tie Benefits DECEMBER.
Cost Ranges for the Development and Operation of a Day One Regional Transmission Organization PL
FEBRUARY 27, 2013 BY NARINDER K SAINI ED SKIBA BPS-CO-CHAIRS Parallel Flow Visualization Overview 1.
1 The Midwest ISO At the Crossroads of America International Meeting of Very Large Power Grid Operators October 24 & 25, 2005 Beijing, China.
MISO’s Midwest Market Initiative APEX Ron McNamara October 31, 2005.
Congestion Management in a Market Environment 2 nd CIGRE / IEEE PES International Symposium San Antonio, Texas October 5, 2005 Kenneth W. Laughlin.
B O N N E V I L L E P O W E R A D M I N I S T R A T I O N 1 Network Operating Committee (NOC) June 12 th, 2014.
1 Transmission Development at Ameren and in the Midwest ISO Mid-America Regulatory Conference Maureen A. Borkowski June 8, 2010.
NERC Congestion Management Congestion Management Option 3 Vendor Meeting Julie Pierce – NERC IDCWG Chair.
Business Practices Subcommittee
Business Practices Subcommittee Update Executive Committee Meeting February 18, 2014.
OSC Meeting April 27, Transmission Cost Allocation Overview.
Flowgate Allocation Option Parallel Flow Visualization Business Practices Subcommittee Meeting June , 2010.
Parallel Flow Visualization Project NERC ORS Meeting May 4, 2011.
©2004 PJMwww.pjm.com 1 PJM's Perspective on Reliability – Summer 2004 and Beyond Karl Pfirrmann President -- PJM Western Region FERC Summer Reliability.
Transmission Congestion Management – IDC Granularity Option 3A Larry Kezele and Jeff Norman June 28, 2005 NERC/NAESB TLR Subcommittee.
NAESB WHOLESALE ELECTRIC QUADRANT BUSINESS PRACTICES SUBCOMMITTEE ACTIVITIES UPDATE TO JOINT ELECTRIC SCHEDULING SUBCOMMITTEE JANUARY 5, 2012 BY ED SKIBA.
2013 Wind Conference. Congestion Management & Communication Processes CJ Brown.
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission MISO/Alliance Companies’ RTO Status Reports Presented by: Joseph Power Tony Ingram Rahim Amerkhail Patrick Clarey.
Generator Prioritization Option Parallel Flow Visualization Business Practices Subcommittee Meeting June , 2010.
NAESB BPS Yasser Bahbaz– IDCWG Chair January 5 th, 2016.
Parking Lot Item 19. BPS Bert Bressers 10/31/2011 Firm rights of resources that have a Firm priority to what load (Sink area granularity)
WEQ Executive Committee Contract Path Task Force Additional Issues Related To Contract Path Management ( WEQ and WEQ )
NAESB BPS UPDATE TO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AUGUST 21, 2012 BY NARINDER K SAINI ED SKIBA BPS-CO-CHAIRS PARALLEL FLOW VISUALIZATION PROJECT 1.
©2003 PJM 1 Presentation to: Maryland Public Service Commission May 16, 2003.
1 Parallel Flow Visualization Goals NAESB BPS Meeting September 15-16, 2010.
IMM Report on MISO South Integration Presented by: David B. Patton, Ph.D. Independent Market Monitor Presented to: Entergy Regional State Committee April.
RELIABILITY COORDINATOR TOPICS 2006 FRCC SYSTEM OPERATOR SEMINAR.
Consolidated EIM Initiatives from 2017 Roadmap Issue Paper
Market Flow Threshold Field Test
PJM & Midwest ISO Market-to-Market Coordination (APEx Conference 2007)
Pseudo-tie business procedure
Market Flow Threshold Field Test
Two-Tier Firm Curtailment Overview
NERC Congestion Management
Pseudo-tie business procedure
Presentation transcript:

Overview Seams Coordination Process

2 Introduction Midwest ISO Non-profit organization that manages the reliable flow of electricity across much of the Midwestern United States Operational since December 15, 2001 Generation Capacity –127,000 MW (market) –156,000 MW (reliability) Peak Load (set July 31st, 2006) –109,157 MW (market) –129,647 MW (reliability ) Registered PA, TSP, MO, RC, Soon to be BA

3 Why Seams Coordination ? Ensuring reliability by managing congested path in a coordinated manner Ensuring equitable treatment for all customers and Transmission Service Providers

4 The Reliability Side –We look beyond our boundaries at external facilities –We quantify the impact of all of our flows (both tagged interchange schedules and internal dispatch) on these external facilities –We leverage our real-time systems – which use fresher and more accurate data –We redispatch our internal generators to protect these external facilities Congestion Management has been a paradigm shift: Congestion Management Process is a big part of Seams Coordination

5 Congestion Management Process Background Loop Flows and Resulting Congestion exist today as part of interconnected operations Each Control Areas dispatch has an impact on other neighboring control areas facilities One of the FERC appointed responsibilities of RTOs was to improve the management of parallel flows

6 Reduces the overselling of firm transmission service Provides a mechanism where market and non-market entities can control parallel flows in an economic manner that consistently ensures system reliability Improves response time of markets when a curtailment is called Respecting Your Neighbors Systems Congestion Management Process Benefit

7 Participation Multi-Party CMP Meeting MISO/PJM JOA CMP Structure Agreements Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4 Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q Q3Q4 Q3Q Q1Q3 Q1Q2 MISO/MAPP SOA MISO/PJM /TVA JRCA MISO/SPP JOA MISO/MH SOA MISO/PJM Mkt – Non-Mkt Implementations MISO/PJM Mkt--Mkt TVA SPP MAPPLGEE CMPCCMPWGCMPITCPWG OCTF SPP Market PJM/CPL JOA BREC EKPC

8 Participation Note: TVA agreement for CMP has been extended to include Big River Electric Cooperative, East Kentucky Power Cooperative, and Louisville Gas & Electric.

9 The Equity Side –Market Entities (such as PJM, MISO and SWPP) –Non-market Entities (such as MAPP and TVA) There are multiple transmission providers in the area Each Entities have historical rights and allocations that need to be respected

10 Three Scenarios –Non-Market to Non-Market Coordinated AFC and Allocation Calculations Congestion Management through NERC TLR process curtailing transactions based on priority –Market to Non-Market Coordinated AFC and Allocation Calculations Market Entities Redispatch for Congestion on an External Flowgate Non Market Entities Congestion Management through NERC TLR process that curtail transactions –Market to Market Coordinated External Dispatch to Address Flowgate Responsibilities Example: MISO and PJM market-to-market dispatch

11 Non-Market to Non-Market – Overview Addresses a cause of many TLRs – an oversubscribed transmission system RESPECT each others flowgate limitations during the determination of AFC/ATC and the calculation of firmness Flowgates identified upon which COORDINATION shall occur. Reciprocal Entities implement a process for SHARING or transferring unused allocation. Coordination – Wide Area View

12 Non-Market to Non-Market – Process Reciprocal Entities conduct tests on flowgates to determine which flowgates will be coordinated. Transmission service request evaluation: –Check for available AFC/ATC –Check for available Allocations –Request allocations from another Reciprocal Entity Approve/deny request Coordination – Bridges the Seams

13 Non-Market to Non-Market – Benefits Reciprocal Entities consider available allocation as well as AFC on a flowgate when selling firm- transmission service. Reduces over-selling firm transmission service. Provides entities requesting firm service higher level of confidence approved transmission service will not be curtailed. Reduces the number of TLR events

14 Market to Non-Market – Overview Processes define what portions of a BAs dispatch should be considered FIRM or Non-Firm Total Market Flow on Flowgate Non-Firm Market Flows Firm Market Flows From dispatch Note: Market flows equal generation to load flows in market areas.

15 Market to Non-Market – Process Redispatch Curtail Schedules

16 Market to Non-Market – Benefits –Greater granularity in the IDC –More granular calculation based on real-time telemetered data versus static model –More surgical solution –Redispatch is far faster than TLR –Does not require multiple requests for TLR when initial requests failed to resolve the constraint A more reliable solution than TLR for addressing congestion

17 Market to Market – Purpose Provides a mechanism whereby Market-Based Operating Entities can economically dispatch their systems, respecting transmission constraints in each others footprints. Redispatch by each Market-Based Operating Entity is based on the most economic solution for the combined system. Uses market flow calculations to proactively manage congestion. M to M Currently implemented between Midwest ISO and PJM. Process enables neighbors to help solve the others obligations

18 Market to Market – Benefits Builds on Market-to-Non-market Coordination and retains features for other Non-market Operating Entities. More effective and economic interregional control of transmission congestion Less reliance on individual transaction curtailments Provides equity through preservation of entitlements on RCFs. Maintains process for sharing or transferring of unused allocations Provides consistent price signals and incentives for market behaviors that augments reliable system operations

19 Impact of CMP – Market to Market If we coordinate dispatch on the top 10 congested flowgates we may solve 75% of the problem If we coordinate dispatch on the top 10 congested flowgates we may solve 75% of the problem Few Constraints: Big Benefits

20 Impact of CMP - TLRs MISO PJM

21 Impact of CMP – Market to Market As market to market redispatch continues there has been a trend in the reduction of MWH that are being curtailed. Midwest ISO TLR Information

22 Impact of CMP – Market to Market TLR Level 5 events have increased in some months, which were in part related to specific outage events. Midwest ISO TLR Information

23 Summary The parties have implemented methodologies that have allowed each party to identify their respective flows on external parties and respond in a proactive and reliable manner to alleviate congestion and enhance reliability.

Questions and Discussion