Business Practice Manual for Reliability Requirements

1
Business Practice Manual for Reliability
Requirements

• Grant Rosenblum
• Counsel
• August 30, 2006

2
Relationship between Tariff and BPM

• Tariff provides
• Rates, Terms and Conditions
• Subject to the Rule of Reason
• Business Practice Manuals provide
• Implementation detail that does not significantly
  affect Rates, Terms and Conditions
• Other material that need not be included in
  tariff include
• Technical Information
• Examples
• Templates
• Timelines

3
Relationship between Tariff and BPM

• All information contained in the BPMs is intended
  to be consistent with the Tariff
• in the case of any inconsistency, however, the
  Tariff controls
• Any provision of a BPM that significantly affects
  rates, terms and conditions, must be included in
  the Tariff
• The CAISO will add additional language to the
  Tariff in a 205 filing in any instance where a
  provision of a BPM significantly affects rates,
  terms and conditions and the rate term or
  condition is not included in the MRTU Tariff

4
Relationship between SR Tariff and MRTU Tariff

• The SR Tariff is simplified and reorganized
  version of the pre SR Tariff
• Rates, terms and conditions set forth in
  Protocols were merged into relevant sections of
  the Tariff
• Nothing deleted from tariff except for obvious
  duplications
• Material not merged into Tariff became appendices
  to the SR Tariff
• The MRTU Tariff and Creation of BPMs
• Material that need not be included in Tariff can
  be published in the form of a BPM
• Appendices and other material can now be removed
  from Tariff in a Section 205 filing

5
Purpose and Scope of BPM for Reliability
Requirements

• This BPM provides implementation detail for
  Sections 40 42 of the CAISO MRTU tariff
• When complete, the BPM should describe the when,
  where, what and hows of complying with the
  Reliability Requirements provisions of the MRTU
  tariff.
• Information
• Forms
• Instructions
• Establish clear expectations and requirements to
  reduce administrative/implementation burdens and
  regulatory risk

6
Reliability Requirements Stakeholder
MeetingOverview

• Gary DeShazo
• Director, Regional Transmission North
• August 30, 2006

7
Overview

• Purpose of the BPM
• Provide information and process details to the
  Market Participants so that you can provide us
  the information we need to meet our tariff
• It is not about policy
• Why are we here?
• Begin an initial review of the RR BPM
• We have your questions, but . . . .
• Were working on them
• We have tried to break the content of the
  questions we have received in four main topics of
  importance
• What about questions not covered?
• We want them documented so that we can provide
  you answers
• What is the next step

8
Agenda

• Time Topic Presenter
• (min)
• 20 Overview Grant Rosenblum/
• Gary DeShazo
• 20 Supply Plan Jennie Sage
• 90 Reserve Sharing Option Mark Rothleder
• 20 Net Qualifying Capacity Gil Grotta
• 20 Deliverability/LCR Robert Sparks
• 10 Next Steps Gary DeShazo

9
Reliability Requirements BPM Stakeholder Meeting
Supply Plans

• Jennie Sage
• Lead Compliance Analyst
• August 30, 2006

10
Resource Adequacy Plans Supply Plans
Scheduling Coordinators for Resource Adequacy
Resources
Scheduling Coordinators for Load Serving Entities
WHO
Supply Plans
Resource Adequacy Plans
SUBMIT
Annually Monthly
Annually Monthly
WHEN
To confirm status of Resource Adequacy Resources
To show resources to meet Peak Load plus Planning
Reserve Margin
PURPOSE
11
Validation

• Accuracy and Timeliness
• Resource Adequacy Plans and Supply Plans must be
  received by the due date
• Resource ID must be valid
• Resource Adequacy Capacity for Physical
  Generating Units cannot exceed Net Qualifying
  Capacity
• Start and End dates must contain applicable month
• Cross-validation of Resource Adequacy Plan
  Supply Plan
• Resource Adequacy information in a Supply Plan
  confirms the data in a Resource Adequacy Plan

12
Feedback

• CPUC jurisdictional LSE Resource Adequacy Plans
• CAISO reports validation issues to the CPUC
• Non-CPUC jurisdictional LSE Resource Adequacy
  Plans
• CAISO reports validation issues to the Local
  Regulatory Authority
• Supply Plans
• CAISO reports validation issues to the Scheduling
  Coordinator

13
Reserve Sharing vs. Modified Reserve Sharing
andAvailability Obligations

• Mark Rothleder
• Principal Market Developer
• August 30, 2006

14
Reserve Sharing

• Must meet 115 of monthly forecast peak load
• Must meet Local Capacity Requirements
• All RA Capacity supporting Reserve Sharing LSE
  must make resources available recognizing
  physical / operational variations
• Forced outages do not count against compliance
  (Forced is Forced)

15
Availability Obligations(Reserve Sharing)

• While all RA resources must make themselves
  available the methods of satisfying availability
  differ depending on type of resource
• Dispatchable
• Use-Limited / Non-Dispatchable
• Hydro
• System Resources
• Firm - Liquidated Damage
• Demand Response / Participating Load
• Short-Start / Long-Start
• Partial RA resources

16
Modified Reserve Sharing

• Monthly RA plans are provided
• 115 of hourly demand forecast must be met by
  schedules or bids in the Day-Ahead market
• Provides some flexibility to shape resources on
  hourly basis
• The SC for the Modified Reserve Sharing LSE is
  responsible for scheduling or bidding

17
Availability Obligations(Modified Reserve
Sharing)

• Except Local Capacity Resources, there are no
  resource specific availability obligations for a
  Modified Reserve Sharing LSE
• Capacity surcharges 3x LAP for not meeting 115
  obligation Day-Ahead and 2x RT LAP hourly average
  price for not meeting committed energy commitment
  Real-Time after opportunity to compensate for
  forced outage in next HASP/RTM scheduling period

18
QC/NQC BPM Questions

• Gil Grotta
• Contract Modeling and Implementation
• August 30, 2006

19
Categories of BPM Questions Asked

• Describe the NQC process for 2007.
• Why does the BPM not agree with the ISOs Tariff?
  (BPM will ultimately follow the Tariff)
• What is meant by deliverability testing or
  deliverability restrictions?
• For 2008, what is the direction of the NQC
  process?
• What is the time table for establishing the 2008
  NQC process? (Including testing and
  deliverability elements)

20
What is the NQC process for 2007?

• QC data received from SCs and CPUC. CPUC
  delivered QC data for QF, Solar and Wind units.
  CEC did data reduction.
• ISO did not calculate monthly values of QC.
  (Monthly average QC accepted as presented.)
• ISO determined if the Resource ID was valid.
• ISO checked the aggregated QC value against Pmax
  for the ID of the aggregated resource. Rejected
  if above Pmax.
• ISO accepted either a monthly QC or an annual QC.
  Not both.
• ISO accepting corrections. Revisions must be
  substantiated, submitted by the 15th and reviewed
  by the appropriate agency.

21
How will the NQC process work for 2008?

• Similar to the 2007 as far as QC data gathering
  is concerned.
• Monthly QC for all resources may be desired by
  some stakeholders.
• In addition to the 2007 ISO data validation, the
  following 2008 two processes should be identified
  and developed.
• NQC QC adjusted for 1) Verification Testing and
  2) Deliverability Restrictions.
• Testing should rely on existing ISO Pmax testing.
  How do we test monthly QC values? Spot
  checking? Combustion Turbines (ambient
  temperature derate). Need substantial write up.
• Delivery Restrictions. What are they? How
  should they be implemented? Need substantial
  write up.
• Processes scope and timing need to be determined.

22
QC Reductions due to Delivery Restrictions.

• Delivery Restrictions (Determine desirability and
  establish rules for all).
• Deliverability and Interconnection Studies.
• Historical Availability affect on NQC.
• Scheduled Outages effect on NQC.
• SLIC Data for Overhaul and Planned Outages used
  to determine future monthly NQC.
• Forced and Maintenance Outages.
• Ambient Temperature seasonal NQC MW reductions
  for CTs.
• Establish with Stakeholder participation.

23
Time Table

• BPM states Verification Testing process proposed
  within 12 months of the Effective Date.
• Need to choose feasible Completion Dates to
  meet expectation. Is Testing (and/or Delivery
  Restriction) to be incorporated into the July 07
  QC submittal for 2008 implementation. Or later.
• Similar situation for the preliminary Delivery
  Restriction process.
• ISO is discussing.

24
Reliability Requirements Stakeholder Meeting
Deliverability/LCR

• Robert Sparks
• Lead Regional Transmission Engineer
• August 30, 2006

25
Deliverability

• The ISO assesses resource deliverability for RA
  purposes through three distinct assessments
• Generation Deliverability (Section 3.1.1)
• Import Deliverability (Section 3.1.2)
• Local Capacity Requirements (Section 3.2)

26
Generation Deliverability

• ISO generation deliverability assessment
  methodology was developed from PJM methodology
  and discussed within CAISO/CPUC stakeholder
  processes
• Phase I Baseline Generation Deliverability study
  applied methodology to existing generation
• Validated deliverability test methodology and
  parameters
• Demonstrated deliverability of generation for
  operating years 2006 and 2007
• Phase II Baseline study is underway

27
Generation Deliverability

• Phase II Baseline Generation Deliverability Study
• Objective To demonstrate deliverability of new
  generation projects already in the ISO Generation
  Interconnection queue
• Going Forward
• Large Generator Interconnection Procedure (LGIP)
  System Impact Studies will apply the same
  deliverability assessment methodology to new
  generation projects as they enter the queue
• Annual baseline deliverability studies will
  verify that transmission projects, load growth,
  and generation retirements have not impacted
  generation deliverability.

28
Import Deliverability

• The ISO is currently working under an interim
  import deliverability process for 2006 and 2007
  operating years.
• During the first quarter of 2007 the ISO will
  kickoff a stakeholder process to establish a
  permanent import deliverability procedure for
  2008 and beyond.