Impact Calculation – BPS Issues

1. Impact Calculation – BPS Issues NAESB BPS Mtg October 11, 2011

2. Background • The current implementation of the PFV tool includes the ability to perform the GTL impact calculation based upon; • 1) GLDF within BA • 2) native/transfer for markets/BAs with multiple Local Balancing Authorities (LBAs) • These two methods were included because they are utilized today with the current congestion management (e.g. CMP)

3. Issues • Depending upon the final prioritization methodology implemented, having multiple ways to calculate impacts will likely create non-comparable treatment between entities • The need for the native/transfer implementation is unclear, depending upon the final Permanent Solution. The impact results between the standard GTL GLDF and native/transfer will be different based upon current IDC/TLR calculations. • Therefore, the curtailment responsibility assignments will be different depending upon the calculation type.

4. 1 2000 4800 Non-CMP Market BA Figure 1-a Non-CMP Market Generation-to-Load (GTL) 2 800 3 2000

5. Transfer component from Group 3 to Group 2 MN IN 2 3 5000 3000 7500 5000 4500 6000 IA Figure 2-a CMP Market GTL (Market Operation) 1

6. Recommendations • The BPS (or sub-team with OATI participating) should review and recommend the “impact calculation” once the Permanent Solution is being finalized as it has equity impacts depending upon how it is implemented. • The BPS should determine whether multiple impact calculations should be developed (or allowed), if a common prioritization method is ultimately approved. • If there are multiple impact calculation methods implemented, and selectable by entities, the BPS should set rules that outline ability to utilize the different methods.