TARIFF OPERATIONS TASK FORCE MINUTES. Southwest Power Pool Tariff Operations Task Force. April 16, 1999

Transcription

1 SPP TARIFF OPERATIONS TASK FORCE MINUTES Southwest Power Pool Tariff Operations Task Force Dynegy Offices, Houston, Texas MEETING MINUTES AGENDA ITEM 1 INTRODUCTION, REVIEW AGENDA, APPROVE MINUTES The meeting began at 8:30 a.m. with 8 people present consisting of 5 members, 1 guest and 2 SPP Staff (Attachment 1-Attendance List). A copy of the agenda is included (Attachment 2-Agenda). The following discussion items were added after item 4 on the agenda: Attachment N, Regional Tariff Timing Requirements Ft. Smith Transformers Limit MAPP Regional Tariff Order from FERC The minutes from the March 12 and March 30 meetings were reviewed and approved. There was a short discussion on the scope of the Tariff Operations Task Force (TOTF) while reviewing the March 12 and March 30 minutes. The two outcomes from this discussion were as follows: 1. Trudy Utter will contact Nick Brown about the authority of the Task Force and its continuation as a task force or another entity beyond the work which is being done now in preparation for the 1999 summer season. 2. An understanding exists on how to treat disagreements within the Task Force after an issue has been presented. If the TOTF cannot reach unanimous consensus on an issue, the disagreement and the reason for the disagreement will be presented to the CPC. If the Staff takes a position that is different from the TOTF, the TOTF will note the difference and will seek direction from outside the TOTF, if appropriate. AGENDA ITEM 2 FEEDBACK FROM TOTF PRESENTATION TO CPC Trudy distributed the slides that were used in the TOTF presentation at the April 5-6 Commercial Practices Committee (CPC) meeting (Attachment 3). Trudy reported the CPC was receptive to the TOTF issues that were presented. AGENDA ITEM 3 - STATUS OF SCENARIO ANALYZER Tom Mallinger reported that Stage 1 of the three stage process for posting valid flowgate ATCs and having a Scenario Analyzer to interpret the flowgate ATCs into POR/POD ATCs had been completed. The next two stages require having an operational Scenario Analyzer that can evaluate the first 31 days (Stage 2) and months 2 through 13 (Stage 3). Tom said that the Scenario Analyzer program has been delivered to SPP and appears to work OK. The staff is working on several items before the Scenario Analyzer will give meaningful results. A number of SPP transmission providers have transmission service reservations posted on their OASIS pages that may not be valid. These include requests that should be withdrawn but still appear on the OASIS page, requests where only a partial path has been reserved (not the complete path) and requests where all the transmission service will never be used (i.e., a transmission provider that has requests with export capability to each of the control areas they are directly connected but will only utilize one of those requests at any one time). The set of flowgates needs to be thoroughly reviewed to make sure the list is complete and we don t have invalid flowgates (exclude flowgates with operating guides unless they continue to be a limit with the operating guide in-place), the flowgate ratings are reasonable and represent loadings where operations will take steps to unload the system, and, for flowgates supplied from other regions, we need to verify the other regions adhere to the same limits. Tom said the Staff is trying to address those items and still have Stage 2 available by May1. 1

2 SPP TARIFF OPERATIONS TASK FORCE MINUTES AGENDA ITEM 4-TARIFF IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES The TOTF assigned priorities for addressing remaining issues that were identified in the first TOTF meeting. The list of items for future discussion from Trudy s presentation to the CPC was expanded to include TLR posting, Ft. Smith transformer limit and MAPP regional tariff order from FERC. It was agreed that this meeting would discuss: TLR Posting Attachment N, Regional Tariff Timing Requirement Priority of Firm Transmission Service Not Pre-Scheduled Ft. Smith Transformer Limit The remaining items will be discussed at future meetings. TLR Posting Mark Foreman requested the staff investigate a discrepancy in the source/sink postings that were made on the SPP OASIS site April 9, The source/sink pairs that were posted did not match the source/sink pairs that were also posted on the MAIN OASIS site. When the SPP security coordinators were contacted about the discrepancy, they acknowledged there was a problem with the SPP posting. It did not contain all source/sink pairs that were being held. Several TOTF members complimented the security coordinators positive response to this problem. Tom Mallinger will investigate the problem that caused the discrepancy and report to the TOTF at their next meeting. Attachment N, Regional Tariff Timing Requirements There were two issues that were discussed involving the SPP regional tariff timing requirements. First, is the issue that has generally been described as Friday for Monday business. It involves the timing restrictions on Attachment N that allow daily non-firm transmission service to be requested no earlier than 2 days prior to the start of the service and allows daily firm transmission service to be requested no earlier than 3 days prior to the start of the service. This means daily non-firm cannot be requested on Friday for business being done on Monday and daily firm cannot be requested on Friday for business being done on Tuesday (when Monday is a holiday). Tom described how higher priority transmission service rights are being administered under the regional tariff. Because the regional tariff has a different price for each POR/POD set in the price matrix, the right of non-firm being able to preempt other non-firm by offering a higher price is limited to non-firm transmission service requests with the same POR and POD. Likewise, because the regional tariff has a different response factor for each POR/POD set, the right of firm being able to preempt non-firm and the right of longer duration firm and non-firm being able to preempt shorter duration firm and non-firm is very difficult to administer if you do not limit the preemption to transmission service requests with the same POR and POD. Because of these limitations, it is very important that transmission customers seeking higher priority transmission service always have an opportunity to make their requests before the lower priority requests can be made. With this information, the TOTF understood that advancing the no earlier than dates for daily non-firm and firm would reduce the time periods the higher priority requests have before they compete with lower priority requests for use of the same flowgates. The TOTF will decide whether having the flexibility to request daily non-firm transmission service on Friday for service starting on Monday offsets the undesirable effect of higher priority transmission service losing one day before it must compete with lower priority transmission service. Second, is the situation where a single deal spans two or more transmission providers. The transmission providers have a maximum period of time to review the request. If a transmission provider has adequate transmission capacity, they will accept the request and the transmission customer must confirm within a pre-specified period of time. If the transmission customer does not respond, they relinquish their rights to the transmission service and the next transmission customer in the queue will be offered the service. When a deal spans two or more transmission providers, each can respond at a different time, which means 2

3 SPP TARIFF OPERATIONS TASK FORCE MINUTES the transmission customer must commit to a segment of the transmission service without knowing whether they have a complete path. The TOTF agreed this was an industry issue that could not be resolved by an individual transmission provider. Trudy will direct this issue to the NERC MIC for future consideration. Priority of Firm Transmission Service Not Pre-Scheduled The TOTF unanimously agreed that if firm transmission service has not been pre-scheduled by the scheduling deadline (12 noon for SPP regional tariff), SPP can make this unscheduled transmission capacity available for non-firm use. If SPP accepts non-firm requests that utilize this capacity, the transmission customer with the firm transmission service cannot submit a late schedule and bump the non-firm requests. If SPP has not accepted non-firm requests that utilize this capacity, the transmission customer with the firm transmission service can submit a late schedule which will be implemented if there is no TLR underway and will retain its firm priority within SPP. This is the scheduling deadline policy that SPP has followed for all firm reservations and it is the policy that SPP intends to follow in the future for all non-firm reservations. The TOTF could not reach unanimous agreement on how to treat firm transmission service that has been pre-scheduled by the scheduling deadline but at an amount that is less than the full amount of the reservation. All agreed that SPP could make the unscheduled transmission capacity available for non-firm use. However, two members of the TOTF believe a revised schedule cannot be submitted after the scheduling deadline if it increases the amount originally scheduled and SPP has accepted non-firm requests that utilize this capacity. Three TOTF members believe a revised schedule can be submitted up to 20 minutes before the start of the schedule. They believe that SPP must preempt the non-firm to allow the firm schedule to be increased. Everyone agreed that if SPP has not accepted non-firm requests that utilize the unscheduled transmission capacity, a revised schedule can be submitted after the scheduling deadline that increases the amount originally scheduled. Since the TOTF could not reach unanimous agreement on this and since this is a change to how SPP currently administers the regional tariff, Tom suggested this be presented to the transmission providers who have signed the Agency Agreement for their comments. Ft. Smith Transformers Limit There were two issues that were discussed concerning the Ft. Smith transformer limit. First, how to allocate the cost of a system impact study. If a single entity requests a system impact study, the cost will be 100% allocated to the transmission customer that signed the System Impact Study Agreement. If there are multiple entities requesting a system impact study and they are not all responding to the same generation solicitation, the system impact study costs will be allocated as follows: Multiple notices will be distributed indicating the need for a system impact study. These will be sent to all transmission customers whose requests are limited by the same flowgate. These customers will have 15 days to execute the System Impact Study Agreement. The first transmission customer that responds positively to the System Impact Study Agreement is an indication that at least one customer is willing to pay for the study. SPP will initiate the study. Before releasing the results of the study, SPP must have an indication from all customers that have a place in the queue before the customer (s) that have executed the System Impact Study Agreement. The first customer in the queue that has committed to the system impact study will be provided the results and will pay 100% of the system impact study. If this customer agrees to the results of the system impact study and commits to take the transmission service under the conditions identified, an incremental study will be performed for the next customer in the queue that has executed a System Impact Study Agreement and this customer will pay 100% of the incremental study cost. If the first customer in the queue does not agree to the results of the system impact study and will not commit to the transmission service, they are still 3

4 SPP TARIFF OPERATIONS TASK FORCE MINUTES obligated to pay 100% of the system impact study cost. The results are then made available to the next customer in the queue that has executed a System Impact Study Agreement. Since the initial customer has paid for the original system impact study, there is no charge for these results unless they need an incremental study for their specific requirements. This practice will be followed until all customers who have signed System Impact Study Agreements have been addressed. Second, was a discussion on the use of counter flows. The TOTF agreed that firm transmission service cannot be sold if it is dependent on a counter-flow where there is uncertainty whether the counter-flow will be scheduled. Trudy suggested counter-flows could be considered similar to the NERC Market Redispatch pilot such that transmission service could be sold that is linked to a counter-flow. As long as there are no constraints, the two reservations are disaggregated and can be scheduled when needed. However, if TLR is called for the limiting flowgate, the transmission service that was dependent on the counter-flow must take steps this either schedule the counter-flow or curtail their service. This issue will be discussed further at the next TOTF meeting. AGENDA ITEM 5 RESERVATION PRIORITY FOR EXISTING FIRM SERVICE The draft document that was distributed prior to the meeting will be modified and distributed prior to the next meeting. The modifications will remove any reference to the need for a commitment from a new transmission customer before an existing transmission customer is asked to match the terms of the new firm service when exercising their existing firm service priority rights. AGENDA ITEM 6-SPP BUSINESS PRACTICES DOCUMENT Tom said a draft of an SPP document would be prepared for review by the TOTF before the end of the year. AGENDA ITEM 7-FUTURE MEETING ARRANGEMENTS April 27, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Kansas City Airport Hilton, Kansas City, MO May 12, 9:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Hyatt/DFW, Dallas, TX The TOTF meeting adjourned at 3:45 p.m. Tom Mallinger Tom Mallinger TOTF Secretary 4

5 Tariff Operations Task Force Meeting Dynegy Office AGENDA 1. Introduction, Review Agenda, Approve Minutes 2. Feedback from TOTF presentation to CPC 3. Status of Scenario Analyzer 4. Tariff Implementation Issues Update issues list Set Priorities for addressing issues to be ready for summer 5. Reservation priority for existing firm service 6. Development of SPP Business Practices Document 7. Future meeting arrangements 8. Other

6

7

8

9