Load Review Process Sandeep Borkar and Calvin Opheim

Load Review Process Sandeep Borkar and Calvin Opheim

Load Review Process Sandeep Borkar and Calvin Opheim August 2017 RPG Meeting Agenda PUBLIC Background Process overview Schedule and timeline Next steps 2

Background PG section 3.1.7 specifies the process used for determining Load level used in start cases for RTP and Tier 1 independent review SSWG load forecast was compared to ERCOT 90th percentile forecast for all weather zones Load reviews performed for Coast and Far West weather zone for the 2017 RTP PUBLIC 3 Load Forecast Review Process RTP: Loads compared by weather zone

Tier 1 RPG review: Loads compared by TO (if necessary) PUBLIC 4 SSWG Load Level 5% Boun d SSWG Load Level ERCOT 90th percentile Forecast SSWG Load Level ERCOT 90th percentile Forecast

5% Boun d RTP Load Level ERCOT 90th percentile Forecast RTP Load Level Justified? PUBLIC 5 SSWG

SSWG Load Load Level Level ERCOT 90th percentile Forecast 5% Boun d 5% Boun d 5% Boun

d RTP Load Level SSWG Load Level ERCOT 90th percentile Forecast SSWG Load Level ERCOT 90th percentile Forecast RTP/Tier 1 Load Level RTP Load Level RTP Load Level

Experience from 2017 Load Forecast Review What evidence is accepted? Is there a MW cutoff? Confidentiality How will the new loads be handled Fast growing load area concerns? Anything TOs can do ahead of time to make this easier PUBLIC

6 Load Forecast Review Process PUBLIC 7 Load Forecast Review Process Comparison of Load Forecasts Weather Zone TSP Required documentation to support the TSPs load forecast Additional review of load delivery points Example

PUBLIC 8 Load Forecast Comparison If Weather Zone SSWG forecast is higher than ERCOT 90th percentile forecast + 5% bound TSP can provide signed financially binding agreements from customers as evidence of increased load in their territory These agreements are kept confidential by ERCOT PUBLIC 10

Load Forecast Comparison Review TSP SSWG forecast If TSP forecast looks significantly larger than the overall growth in a weather zone TSP can provide signed financially binding agreements from customers as evidence of increased load in their territory These agreements are kept confidential by ERCOT PUBLIC 11 Load Forecast Comparison Review TSP SSWG forecast High growth but not from large customers

Supporting documentation of the forecast Includes: Growth driver Forecast model PUBLIC 13 Required Documentation Signed financially binding document is required No speculative load is included If there is no signed financially binding document, the load is not included PUBLIC

14 Review New Load Additions Compare the load from the financially binding document to its actual load If its a new load delivery point, the kw listed is added to ERCOTs forecast The kw value is not reduced at this time PUBLIC 15 Review New Load Additions Some documents were dated in the past Reviewed the current load level to the load level from historically signed documents time

Revealed differences between contracted load and actual load PUBLIC 16 Review New Load Additions Example Customer signed agreement indicates 100 MW of load effective 1/1/2016 Current load level is 10 MW TSP forecast is 100 MW in 2017 PUBLIC 17

Review New Load Additions Example Customer signed agreement indicates 100 MW of load effective 1/1/2016 Current load level is 10 MW TSP forecast is 100 MW in 2017 ERCOT forecast adjustment is 10 MW PUBLIC 18 Review New Load Additions Example continued ERCOTs proposal would be to contact the customer and receive an updated load forecast Also shows the difference between contracted

load and actual ERCOT will be gathering data to quantify actual load versus contracted load PUBLIC 19 Conclusion ERCOT has developed procedures that will be used to review load forecasts The goal is to ensure that ERCOT is comfortable with the load forecasts ERCOT is appreciative of the support provided by TSPs PUBLIC

20 Schedule and Timeline for RTP loads Dec 2017 ERCOT 90th percentile available Preliminary RTP cases with bounded higher offposted Apr 2017 2018 ALDR Updated Aug 2017 TSP meetings with large load additions Oct 2017 Second update of 2018 SSWG cases Jun 2017 2018SSWG Cases created using 2018 ALDR

1/1/2017 Feb Mar Apr May Jun January 2018 TO's in flagged Weather Zones provide justification for additional loads 1/1/2018

Jul Aug Oct Feb 2018 ERCOT completes load review Feb Mar Jan 2018 - Feb 2018 ERCOT load review PUBLIC Sep

21 Nov Dec 12/31/2017 Mar 2018 RTP Loads finalized Freeze RTP load levels 4/1/2018 Tier 1 related load reviews Any loads added in addition to those included in RTP cases will require load review

Timeline for this load review will be identified in the RPG Independent Review scope PUBLIC 22 Next steps Seek feedback about proposed changes Propose that 5% threshold be used per Section 3.1.7 at the following meetings September TAC October Board PUBLIC 23

Questions Sandeep Borkar [email protected] 512-248-6642 Calvin Opheim [email protected] 512-248-3944 PUBLIC 24 Appendix PUBLIC 25

Bounded higher-of methodology (Conceptual) SSWG Loads Calculated by Weather Zone Remove selfserved loads Compare weather zone load levels WZ load from SSWG < ERCOT 90th Percentile Y Use ERCO 90th (add self-served) Y Use ERCOT 90th + X% (add selfserved and justified additions ) N ERCOT 90th percentile summer peak load forecast by Weather Zone Remove Losses and add any known differences

WZ load from SSWG > ERCOT 90th + X% N Use SSWG Loads Load share for each TO within the weather zone is determined based on that TOs share of the most recent summer peak. Loads for TOs inside this WZ, but within the X% bounds would be retained from SSWG cases. PUBLIC 26 Load review process (Conceptual) TAC/Board approves

the X% bound for RTP Load level Develop RTP start cases using the bounded higher-of load level Post preliminary RTP start cases for review Stakeholder review passed? Y RTP start case load levels finalized

N ERCOT staffto review the rationale and update RPG on any changes to load levels Stakeholder provides rationale for valid diffe rences Rationale: Historic load growth Committed load additions Forecast methodology Past forecast performance Special circumstances Other?

Preliminary RTP start cases will be shared to allow TDSPs to review the impact of load distribution on pockets within the weather zones. PUBLIC 27 Planning Guide 3.17 Reference [PGRR042: Insert Section 3.1.7 below on January 1, 2018:] 3.1.7 Steady State Transmission Planning Load Forecast (1) ERCOT shall use the following process for determining the Load level to be used in the starting base cases for the Regional Transmission Plan and in the steady-state evaluation of a Tier 1 project pursuant to Protocol Section 3.11.4, Regional Planning Group Project Review Process: (a) ERCOT will compare the ERCOT 90/10 Load forecast with the summed SSWG

bus-level Load forecast for each Weather Zone. (b) If the ERCOT 90/10 Load forecast is higher, ERCOT will use this forecast for the Weather Zone. (c) If the SSWG Load forecast is higher than or equal to the ERCOT 90/10 Load forecast, but below the ERCOT 90/10 Load forecast plus a boundary threshold determined in accordance with paragraph (f) below, ERCOT will use the SSWG Load forecast for the Weather Zone. (d) If the SSWG Load forecast is higher than or equal to the ERCOT 90/10 Load forecast plus the boundary threshold, ERCOT will use the ERCOT 90/10 Load forecast plus the boundary threshold for the Weather Zone. PUBLIC 28 Planning Guide 3.17 Reference (Cont.) (e) If a TSP(s) believes that the ERCOT 90/10 Load forecast plus the boundary threshold does not adequately represent the Weather Zone or an area within the Weather Zone, the TSP(s) may present ERCOT with additional information to justify using a higher Load forecast, including the

SSWG Load forecast, for that Weather Zone. ERCOT, in its sole discretion, may choose to use a higher Load forecast than indicated in paragraph (d) above if it reasonably determines that the Load forecast indicated in paragraph (d) above does not adequately represent the Weather Zone or an area within the Weather Zone. If ERCOT uses a Load forecast higher than the ERCOT 90/10 Load forecast plus the boundary threshold in the evaluation of a Tier 1 project, ERCOT must explain and document the basis for that choice, using aggregated information as needed to shield Protected Information, in its independent review. (f) ERCOT-proposed revisions to the boundary threshold used to implement the requirements of this section will be recommended by the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) and approved by the ERCOT Board. PUBLIC 29

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • Mastery Maths- a CPA approach (Concrete, pictorial, abstract)

    Mastery Maths- a CPA approach (Concrete, pictorial, abstract)

    Concrete, pictorial, abstract (CPA) is a highly effective approach to teaching that develops a deep and sustainable understanding of maths. ... (Informal-structured-practice progression as well as systematic and mathematical variation of examples) ... Explain using drawing/ equipment. Explain ...
  • The Significance of Genetics Across Disciplines: Genetic ...

    The Significance of Genetics Across Disciplines: Genetic ...

    For example, many disorders can lead to developmental delays or ADHD symptoms as part of the larger disorder. It can be easy to focus on just one problem, like ADHD, and neglect the fact that there may be an underlying...
  • Informational Webinar Slides

    Informational Webinar Slides

    At least one team member attends an online informational webinar. November 2017. Participate in monthly webinars. Beginning December 2017. Regularly meet as a team to implement interventions and monitor performance. December 2017 until the end of project. Complete survey assessments...
  • Participant + and EPICC - Staffordshire University

    Participant + and EPICC - Staffordshire University

    The SHaW Group are looking to explore the possibility of EPICC being included as an agenda item through one of its members who is a laity member of the ACC . Sustaining and influencing the landscape of healthcare through EPICC...
  • State of Connecticut Department of Public Health The

    State of Connecticut Department of Public Health The

    A vendor must meet established competitive pricing criteria, which involve the ranking by peer group of the price index of all vendors. The price index is calculated by using each vendor's redemptions for WIC food items. Each vendor's price index...
  • Refining Mechanized Metatheory: Subtyping for LF

    Refining Mechanized Metatheory: Subtyping for LF

    Concentrating only on canonical forms and bidirectional typing yields new insights into subtyping. secret slides Related work Refinement types Tim Freeman, Rowan Davies, Joshua Dunfield Logical frameworks Robert Harper, Furio Honsell, Gordon Plotkin Frank Pfenning Subtyping and dependent types David...
  • Greening the Workforce National Center for Construction Education

    Greening the Workforce National Center for Construction Education

    * Green Building Facts By 2009: 80% of corporate America is expected to be engaged in green at least 16% of the time 20% will be engaged 60% of the time By 2010: Value of green building construction projected to...
  • MODULO M - prof. CAPUTO

    MODULO M - prof. CAPUTO

    sezione della Tabula Peutigeriana ORBIS TERRARUM DI ORTELIUS * A seguito della scoperta dell'America, la cartografia ebbe un formidabile impulso a cui diede avvio il cartografo olandese Abramo Ortelius con la sua opera che divenne famosa, e che precedette l'analogo...