Technical Technical Advisory Advisory

CommitteeCommitteePresentation to the Presentation to the

ERCOT Board of DirectorsERCOT Board of DirectorsSeptember 16, 2008September 16, 2008

TAC SummaryTAC Summary

• 2 PRRs for Approval2 PRRs for Approval• 1 NPRR for Approval1 NPRR for Approval• Notice of Guide ChangesNotice of Guide Changes• Other StuffOther Stuff• 2009 CSC Recommendation and 2009 CSC Recommendation and

Appeal of FPL EnergyAppeal of FPL Energy• Update on Wind Integration IssuesUpdate on Wind Integration Issues

PRR 743PRR 743 – TCR Transition to CRR – TCR Transition to CRR

PurposePurpose(ERCOT)(ERCOT)

Details the methodology for refunding Details the methodology for refunding annual and monthly TCR auction revenues annual and monthly TCR auction revenues for the remaining days of the year post-for the remaining days of the year post-Nodal “Go-Live”; Addresses ERCOT Board Nodal “Go-Live”; Addresses ERCOT Board remand instructions to address how remand instructions to address how refunds are handled if the Nodal Market refunds are handled if the Nodal Market is not implemented 12/1/08is not implemented 12/1/08

BenefitBenefit Transparency of TCR to CRR transition Transparency of TCR to CRR transition activitiesactivities

Market ImpactMarket Impact N/AN/ASystem ChangeSystem Change NoNo N/AN/AAssumptionsAssumptions N/AN/ATAC VoteTAC Vote TAC recommended approval unanimously.TAC recommended approval unanimously.Effective DateEffective Date October 1, 2008October 1, 2008

PRR 743PRR 743 – TCR Transition to CRR – TCR Transition to CRR

Item ReviewedItem Reviewed DescriptionDescriptionNoNoImpactImpact

Credit Monitoring/Credit Monitoring/LiabilityLiability

BudgetBudget

StaffingStaffing

Computer SystemsComputer Systems

Business FunctionsBusiness Functions

Grid OperationsGrid Operations

ImpactImpact

PRR 772PRR 772– Description of MCPE – Description of MCPE Cap & Shadow Price Cap Cap & Shadow Price Cap Methodology -- Methodology -- URGENTURGENTPurposePurpose

(ERCOT)(ERCOT)Clarifies ERCOT’s authority to ensure that Clarifies ERCOT’s authority to ensure that MCPE does not exceed the PUCT’s system-MCPE does not exceed the PUCT’s system-wide offer cap; provides documentation of wide offer cap; provides documentation of methodology and notice to Market methodology and notice to Market Participants of Shadow Price Cap Participants of Shadow Price Cap changes; changes Section 6.11.1 & 6.11.2 changes; changes Section 6.11.1 & 6.11.2 titles as clarificationtitles as clarification

BenefitBenefit Clarifies Protocols by establishing a clear Clarifies Protocols by establishing a clear basis for ERCOT to make price basis for ERCOT to make price adjustmentsadjustments

Market ImpactMarket Impact N/AN/ASystem ChangeSystem Change YesYes Minor Changes to SPDMinor Changes to SPDAssumptionsAssumptions N/AN/ATAC VoteTAC Vote TAC recommended approval unanimously; TAC recommended approval unanimously;

all Market Segments were presentall Market Segments were presentEffective DateEffective Date October 1, 2008October 1, 2008

PRR 772PRR 772– Description of MCPE – Description of MCPE Cap & Shadow Price Cap Cap & Shadow Price Cap Methodology -- Methodology -- URGENTURGENT

Item ReviewedItem Reviewed DescriptionDescriptionNoNoImpactImpact

Credit Monitoring/Credit Monitoring/LiabilityLiability

BudgetBudget

StaffingStaffing

Computer SystemsComputer Systems

Business FunctionsBusiness Functions

Grid OperationsGrid Operations

ImpactImpact

Minor impact, managed in current Minor impact, managed in current O&M BudgetO&M Budget

System changes already in placeSystem changes already in place

NPRR 126NPRR 126– Section 19, – Section 19, Synchronization of Zonal Synchronization of Zonal

ProtocolsProtocolsPurposePurpose(ERCOT)(ERCOT)

Synchronizes Texas SET Section of Nodal Synchronizes Texas SET Section of Nodal ProtocolsProtocols

BenefitBenefit Completion of Nodal ProtocolsCompletion of Nodal ProtocolsMarket ImpactMarket Impact N/AN/ASystem ChangeSystem Change NoNo N/AN/AAssumptionsAssumptions N/AN/ATAC VoteTAC Vote TAC unanimously recommended approval; all TAC unanimously recommended approval; all

Market Segments were presentMarket Segments were presentEffective DateEffective Date Upon Texas Nodal implementation; no Upon Texas Nodal implementation; no

incremental impact to nodal budget or incremental impact to nodal budget or scheduleschedule

Guide RevisionsGuide Revisions• LPGRR029—Modification of Time-LPGRR029—Modification of Time-

of-Use Schedule Approval Processof-Use Schedule Approval Process• OGRR211—Deletion of References OGRR211—Deletion of References

to Back-to-Back Import Capacityto Back-to-Back Import Capacity• RMGRR063—Mass Transition RMGRR063—Mass Transition

Revisions Resulting From June Revisions Resulting From June 2008 Lessons Learned2008 Lessons Learned

• RMGRR064—Correcting Retail RMGRR064—Correcting Retail Market Guide for Leapfrong Market Guide for Leapfrong Processes to Synch up with Processes to Synch up with ERCOT’s System LogicERCOT’s System Logic

Other StuffOther Stuff• TAC Endorsement of Oncor Nacogdoches SE to TAC Endorsement of Oncor Nacogdoches SE to

Lufkin SS 345 kV ProjectLufkin SS 345 kV Project• Creation of new Wind Issues Work GroupCreation of new Wind Issues Work Group• Board follow-up on 30 day limit for maintaining Board follow-up on 30 day limit for maintaining

redundant systems.redundant systems.• Systems/operations with greater than 30 day cycle Systems/operations with greater than 30 day cycle

times?times?• TPTF and ERCOT staff reviews conclude that no TPTF and ERCOT staff reviews conclude that no

systems other than settlement systems require more systems other than settlement systems require more than 30 day maintenance.than 30 day maintenance.

• Board follow-up on NPRR045 Wind Power Board follow-up on NPRR045 Wind Power Forecasting discussion from 10/16/07.Forecasting discussion from 10/16/07.• Future reliability or settlement issues related to Future reliability or settlement issues related to

switchable Wind-Powered Generation Resources.switchable Wind-Powered Generation Resources.

NPRR 45 Follow-up: Switchable Wind-NPRR 45 Follow-up: Switchable Wind-powered Generation Resourcespowered Generation Resources

TPTF Assessment:

ERCOT currently has no switchable WGRs.Day-ahead reporting:: Status of units available to ERCOT should be updated in the Current Operating Plan (COP).Week-ahead reporting: Prorated capacity available to ERCOT should be reported in the Outage Scheduler. Annual capacity reporting (for CDR development): Annual reporting by April 1st regarding resource availability during the Peak period (July – August). If current process proves insufficient, may require adjustments.TPTF noted that switchable WGRs need to be reflected in the Resource Asset Registration Form (RARF). TPTF does not believe that further action is required at this time.

If the future number of switchable WGRs or frequent switching activity indicates the need for a more robust solution, ERCOT may need to revisit reporting and Reliability Unit Commitment (RUC) processes.

Annual CSC & Zone Annual CSC & Zone Designation Process Designation Process

(Protocols §7.2)(Protocols §7.2) November 1: Recommended CSCs, zone November 1: Recommended CSCs, zone

designations, and resulting CREs due to the designations, and resulting CREs due to the Board.Board.

Steps in development of recommendations:Steps in development of recommendations: ERCOT Staff originates the set of CSC candidates based ERCOT Staff originates the set of CSC candidates based

on:on: Steady State Working Group summer peak load flow data.Steady State Working Group summer peak load flow data. Prior year and projected congestion costs.Prior year and projected congestion costs. ““ERCOT’s operational experience.”ERCOT’s operational experience.”

ERCOT Staff develops Shift Factors and performs ERCOT Staff develops Shift Factors and performs cluster analyses for each candidate CSC.cluster analyses for each candidate CSC.

ERCOT Staff forwards candidate CSCs to the ERCOT Staff forwards candidate CSCs to the appropriate TAC subcommittee to develop a appropriate TAC subcommittee to develop a recommendation to the TAC and the Board of Directors.recommendation to the TAC and the Board of Directors.

Congestion Management Congestion Management Working Group ReviewWorking Group Review

ERCOT staff presented its 2009 CSC ERCOT staff presented its 2009 CSC Study in early July:Study in early July: Included five scenarios.Included five scenarios. Examined cases with three, four, and five Examined cases with three, four, and five

zones.zones. CMWG met four times in July and August.CMWG met four times in July and August. ERCOT examined one new scenario ERCOT examined one new scenario

arising from the CMWG discussions.arising from the CMWG discussions. CMWG—which is not a voting body—CMWG—which is not a voting body—

forwarded three scenarios to the WMS.forwarded three scenarios to the WMS.

Wholesale Market Wholesale Market Subcommittee Review and Subcommittee Review and

RecommendationRecommendation WMS considered three options, creatively WMS considered three options, creatively

named 3(b), 3(g), and 3(h).named 3(b), 3(g), and 3(h). ERCOT Staff recommended 3(b).ERCOT Staff recommended 3(b).

After discussion, a motion for option 3(b) After discussion, a motion for option 3(b) failed by a vote of 43.2% in favor to 56.8% failed by a vote of 43.2% in favor to 56.8% opposed.opposed.

A motion to approve option 3(g) failed to A motion to approve option 3(g) failed to receive a second.receive a second.

A motion to approve option 3(h) passed by A motion to approve option 3(h) passed by a vote of 61.1% in favor to 38.9% opposed.a vote of 61.1% in favor to 38.9% opposed.

Technical Advisory Technical Advisory Committee Review and Committee Review and

RecommendationRecommendation ERCOT Staff presented three scenarios ERCOT Staff presented three scenarios

forwarded from CMWG and a new scenario, 3(i).forwarded from CMWG and a new scenario, 3(i). ERCOT Staff expressed favor for scenario 3(i).ERCOT Staff expressed favor for scenario 3(i).

Following lengthy discussion, TAC approved a Following lengthy discussion, TAC approved a motion to recommend scenario 3(i), with 21 in motion to recommend scenario 3(i), with 21 in favor, 5 opposed, and 4 abstentions:favor, 5 opposed, and 4 abstentions: Opposed--IOU, Independent Generator (2), Opposed--IOU, Independent Generator (2),

Commercial Consumer (2)Commercial Consumer (2) Abstentions--Municipal, Independent Generator, Abstentions--Municipal, Independent Generator,

Industrial Consumer, and Independent Power Industrial Consumer, and Independent Power Marketer.Marketer.

CSCCSC Scenario 3bScenario 3b Scenario 3gScenario 3g Scenario 3hScenario 3h Scenario 3iScenario 3i

N_H*N_H* Singleton-Singleton-Obrien/ Obrien/ Singleton-TH Singleton-TH Wharton 345-kV Wharton 345-kV double circuitdouble circuit

Singleton-Singleton-Obrien/ Obrien/ Singleton-TH Singleton-TH Wharton 345-Wharton 345-kV double kV double circuitcircuit

Singleton-Singleton-Obrien/ Obrien/ Singleton-TH Singleton-TH Wharton 345-Wharton 345-kV double kV double circuitcircuit

Singleton-Obrien/ Singleton-Obrien/ Singleton-TH Singleton-TH Wharton 345-kV Wharton 345-kV double circuitdouble circuit

N_S & N_S & S_NS_N

Lake Creek-Lake Creek-Temple/ Temple/ Tradinghouse-Tradinghouse-Temple Pecan Temple Pecan Creek 345-kV Creek 345-kV double circuitdouble circuit

Lake Creek-Lake Creek-Temple/ Temple/ Tradinghouse-Tradinghouse-Temple Pecan Temple Pecan Creek 345-kV Creek 345-kV double circuitdouble circuit

Lake Creek-Lake Creek-Temple/ Temple/ Tradinghouse-Tradinghouse-Temple Pecan Temple Pecan Creek 345-kV Creek 345-kV double circuitdouble circuit

Lake Creek-Temple/ Lake Creek-Temple/ Tradinghouse-Tradinghouse-Temple Pecan Creek Temple Pecan Creek 345-kV double 345-kV double circuitcircuit

W_N & W_N & N_WN_W

Graham-Graham-Benbrook/ Benbrook/ Graham-Parker Graham-Parker 345-kV double 345-kV double circuitcircuit

Graham-Long Graham-Long Creek/ Graham-Creek/ Graham-Cook Field Road Cook Field Road 345-kV double 345-kV double circuitcircuit

Sweetwater-Sweetwater-Long Creek/ Long Creek/ Abilene Abilene Mulberry Creek-Mulberry Creek-Long Creek 345-Long Creek 345-kV double kV double circuitcircuit

Sweetwater-Long Sweetwater-Long Creek/ Abilene Creek/ Abilene Mulberry Creek-Long Mulberry Creek-Long Creek 345-kV double Creek 345-kV double circuit circuit

2009 CSC Alternatives

CSC 4 – West to NorthSweetwater; Abilene Mulberry Creek – Long CreekCSC 5 – North to WestLong Creek – Sweetwater; Abilene Mulberry Creek

CSC 3 – South to NorthTemple - Lake Creek & Temple Pecan - Creek Tradinghouse

CSC 2 – North to South Lake Creek – Temple & Tradinghouse – Temple Pecan Creek

CSC 1 – North to HoustonSingleton - O’Brien 5Singleton – T. H. Wharton

Recommended 2009 CSCs and Zones

Graham

Bowman

Jacksboro

Fisher Road

Benbrook

Parker

Willow Creek

650 MW gen

600 MW gen

165 MW genDecember 08

636 MW genLate 08 – 09

Comanche

Stability Limit Monitored Interface

Graham-area Transmission Network and Alternative CSCs

CSC Analysis – load moving CSC Analysis – load moving zoneszones

   Scenario 3bScenario 3bScenario Scenario

3g3gScenario Scenario

3h3hScenario Scenario

3i3i

North to SouthNorth to South 1137.391137.39 1156.41156.4 1150.381150.38 1150.381150.38South to South to

HoustonHouston 107.54107.54 53.4153.41 53.4153.41 53.4153.41

West to NorthWest to North 4.974.97 762.08762.08 780.98780.98 761.63761.63

West to SouthWest to South 3.83.8 3.83.8 3.83.8 3.83.8

North to WestNorth to West 7.637.63 00 00 00

totaltotal 1261.331261.33 1975.691975.69 1988.571988.57 1969.221969.22

CSC Analysis – generation CSC Analysis – generation moving zonesmoving zones

  Scenario Scenario

3b3bScenario Scenario

3g3gScenario Scenario

3h3hScenario Scenario

3i3i

North to SouthNorth to South 00 00 00 00

South to HoustonSouth to Houston 00 00 00 00

West to NorthWest to North 00 832832 2117.672117.67 14681468

West to SouthWest to South 00 00 00 00

North to WestNorth to West 00 00 00 00

totaltotal 00 832832 2117.672117.67 14681468