For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

Comparison of Regional Reliability Techniques

Presented to PSPC

November 22, 2004

Westborough, MA

For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

Purpose of Presentation

• Compare various planning assumptions– NPCC Regions– PJM

• Follow-up to the November 18th Meeting• Begin comprehensive discussions of ISO-NE

assumptions for 2005/06 Objective Capability• Caveats:

– Preliminary data for other areas needs further review

For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

Comparison of Regional Metrics

• “Regional Practices” review to:– Identify range of practices that are in use– Allow relative comparison among industry participants– Establish hypotheses for benefits / problems with outliers

• Several industry metrics will be reviewed:– Reserve margin percentages– Tie benefits as a percent of reserve margins – Tie benefits as a percent of regional reserves

• Impact of Emergency Operating Procedures

For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

Reserve Margins

Data Needs Further Review

Required Reserve Margin Comparison (Percent)

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

Region

Re

qu

ire

d R

es

erv

e M

arg

in

(Pe

rce

nt)

Required Reserves

For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

Tie Benefits Part of Reserves

Data Needs Further Review

Tie Benefits as a Percent of Required Reserves (Percent)

0

10

20

30

40

50

Region

Tie

Be

ne

fits

as

a P

erc

en

t o

f R

eq

uir

ed

Re

se

rve

M

arg

in

Tie Benefits as a Percent of Required Reserve Margin

Note: PJM’s 3500 MW CBM Converted to 1500 MW Firm Equivalent Tie Benefit

For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

1995 Monthly Load Profiles

2004 Projected Coincident Monthly Peak Loads - MW1995 Load Shape

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

MW

Q MT NE NY ON

For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

2002 Monthly Load Profiles

2004 Projected Coincident Monthly Peak Loads - MW2002 Load Shape

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

MW

Q MT NE NY ON

For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

NERC Region Monthly Profiles

2004 Projected Coincident Monthly Peak Loads - MW

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

MW

NPCC MAAC ECAR

For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

Weather Based LFU

Weather Based Load Forecast Uncertainty

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

0.88

0.90

0.92

0.94

0.96

0.98

1.00

1.02

1.04

1.06

1.08

1.10

1.12

1.14

Multiplier

Cu

mu

lati

ve P

rob

abil

ity

Q MT NE NY ON

For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

NPCC Operating Procedures to Mitigate Resource Shortages

Excludes Elimination of Required 10 and 30 Minute Operating Reserves

Actions Q MT NE NY ON PJM1. Curtail Load / Utility Surplus 0 0 45 0 450 0 LRP/SCR/EDRP 0 0 331 785 0 0 Manual Voltage Reduction 0 0 0 80 0 0

0.26%of load

2. No 30-min Reserves (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) (a)

4. No 10-min Reserves (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) (a)5. General Public Appeals 0 0 0 213 200 0

3. Voltage Reduction or Interruptible Loads 300 464 0580

365 1.42% of

load

500 1.59% of

load

NA

For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

Operating Procedures to Mitigate Resource Shortages (MW)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Q MT NE NY ON PJM

MW

of

Lo

ad R

elie

f

Curtail Load / Utility Surplus LRP/SCR/EDRP Manual Voltage Reduction

Voltage Reduction or General Public Appeals

Emergency Operating Procedures

NA

For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

Emergency Operating Procedures

Operating Procedures to Mitigate Resource Shortages (Percent of Peak)

0.000

0.010

0.020

0.030

0.040

0.050

0.060

0.070

0.080

0.090

Q MT NE NY ON PJM

MW

of

Lo

ad R

elie

f

Curtail Load / Utility Surplus LRP/SCR/EDRP Manual Voltage Reduction

Voltage Red or Intr Load General Public Appeals

NA

For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

Risk Profile For NPCC Regions

0

1

2

Estimated Number of

Occurrences (days/period)

NE NY ON MT HQ

Reduce 30-min Reserve Voltage Reduction Reduce 10-min Reserve Appeals Disconnect Load

With Resources Currently Available

For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

EFORd Affects PJM IRM

PJM Review of IRM vs. EFORd

0

5

10

15

20

25

1999

/200

0

2000

/200

1

2001

/200

2

2002

/200

3

2003

/200

4

2004

/200

5

2005

/200

6

Year

PJM

Rec

om

men

ded

IR

M

0.00%

2.00%

4.00%

6.00%

8.00%

10.00%

12.00%

Ave

rag

e E

FO

Rd

IRM Avg. EFORd

Source: http://www.pjm.com/committees/reliability/downloads/20040803-item4-irm-study.pdf

Note: PJM’s EFORd rate does not include two (2) assumed large units whose maintenance is shifted over the summer peak load season.

Each large unit has about 1.7 % effect on IRM

For Discussion Purposes Only DRAFT - DRAFT

Sensitivity of OC to Parameters

July Objective Capability Values

27,800

28,000

28,200

28,400

28,600

28,800

29,000

29,200

29,400

29,600

03-04 OC UpdatedLoad

Forecast

UpdatedCapacityValues*

UpdatedEFORs

July

OC

(M

W)

752 MW

227 MW

03-04 OC Value