1 / 15

Manual HDL/LDL Override Summary

This report provides an analysis of unique HDL/LDL overrides captured in July. It highlights the total number of overrides, reasons for manual overrides, and performance monitoring process.

meadowst
Download Presentation

Manual HDL/LDL Override Summary

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Manual HDL/LDL Override Summary QMWG

  2. Daily Summary Graph • For this analysis, we captured unique HDL/LDL overrides • An override is considered unique if that same Resource did not have an override within the last 10 minutes • There were 20 total unique overrides in July • As compared to 105 in June and 80 in May

  3. Daily Summary Table

  4. Reasons for Manual HDL/LDL Overrides • An override is considered unique if that same Resource did not have an override within the last 10 minutes • SPS Activation was the primary reason for the total number of HDL/LDL overrides during the month • 2 different Contingencies/ Constraints were given as the reason for an override

  5. July 2011 Generation Resource Energy and Regulation Deployment Performance QMWG 8/8/2011

  6. Month-to-Month NON-IRR GREDP – Energy Deployments Resources below 85% threshold - Resource 1 also failed in June and Resource 2 failed in May and June. Both Resources had similarGREDP scores and intervals scored each month.

  7. Month-to-Month NON-IRR GREDP – Regulation Deployments • Resource below 85% threshold • Resource also failed in June with a GREDP of 72%, 28 MW deviation, and was • scored 3,640 intervals.

  8. Month-to-Month IRR GREDP • Resources below 95% threshold • Best month since Nodal Go-Live. Effort to update HSL logic was a key contributor. • 23 resources failed for July. 19 of the 23 also failed in June. • 3 resources > 50 intervals • Weighted Average – 73% • Average Deviation – 12.5 MWs

  9. IRR Total Intervals Scored – Month-to-Month

  10. July GREDP by Fuel Type

  11. July GREDP Scenario Analysis

  12. Performance Monitoring Process QMWG 8/8/2011

  13. Performance Monitoring Process • Monitor Performance – Protocols Section 8 • Investigate possible non-performance • Collaborative effort with Market Participants • Mid month calls • Review Performance, issues(s), improvements • Respond to requests for information/data • Informal requests for corrective action(s) • Cause Identified, Mitigation date(s) • Monitor for improved performance • If required: • Corrective Action Plan, Protocol 8.4 (1) • Possible Disqualification, Protocol 8.4 (2)

  14. 8.4 ERCOT Response to Possible Non-Performance • ERCOT may require a Market Participant to develop and implement a corrective action plan to address its failure to meet performance criteria in this Section. The Market Participant must deliver a copy of this plan to ERCOT and must report to ERCOT periodically on the status of the implementation of the corrective action plan. • ERCOT may revoke any or all Ancillary Service qualifications of any Generation Resource or Load Resource for continued material non-performance in providing Ancillary Service capacity or energy.

  15. Performance Monitoring Expectations, August 1st • GREDP Expectations, August 1st • Nodal in its eighth month of stabilization • ERCOT has worked with QSE’s to improve performance since go-live • Improvements have been implemented • Curtailment flag (5/18) • Dynamic ramp rates (7/25) • ERCOT required to identify non-performers to the Texas RE and PUC

More Related