- Home
- Market Rules
- Issues
SCR752
Summary
| Title | Nodal: Allow QSEs to Enter Outages for All Assets |
|---|---|
| Next Group | |
| Next Step | |
| Status | Withdrawn on 01/15/2009 |
Action
| Date | Gov Body | Action Taken | Next steps |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01/15/2009 | Withdrawn | ||
| 12/11/2008 | ROS | Deferred/Tabled | ROS consideration of SCR752 |
Voting Record
| Date | Gov Body | Motion | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01/15/2009 | |||
| 12/11/2008 | ROS | To table SCR752 until the February 2009 ROS meeting. | Passed |
Background
| Status: | Withdrawn |
|---|---|
| Date Posted: | Nov 4, 2008 |
| Sponsor: | The Transition Plan Task Force (TPTF) |
| Urgent: | No |
| Sections: | Not applicable. |
| Description: | The ABB security software needs to accommodate a Qualified Scheduling Entity (QSE) security role that allows the QSE to enter Outage information for all of its Transmission Elements. To enter Outage information for Transmission Elements, the current ABB software would allow the QSE to view all transmission planning information. This is too broad and violates rules already in place. |
| Reason: | 1. The timeline to enter planned and unplanned Outages is critical. Coordination and communication is key to performing any Outage activity. If QSEs are required to coordinate with ERCOT Staff, within their own organizations and with Transmission Service Providers (TSPs), this could introduce an extra layer of complexity. As the owner, QSEs should be allowed to enter and be responsible for all updates for all of their assets. 2. The PUCT-approved Standard Generation Interconnection Agreement currently has no provision for the TSP to enter Outages for Transmission Elements operated by the QSE. This would have to be developed and a service level agreement put in place and would potentially require changes to the PUCT Rules. 3. There is currently no automatic transfer of Outage information between the QSE and TSP. To successfully have information flow, technology would be needed to allow the two or more entities to exchange data, and on an almost instantaneous basis. In some cases, the QSE may interact with several TSPs, and this would add to the complexity. There is no standard format in place for this system interface, so it would require development from the ground up. 4. As a QSE, the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) performs studies assuming the Outage will be approved; however, when we receive updates to the contrary from ERCOT, we have to re-run our studies and often resubmit data. Adding third parties to this process will cause time delays and the potential for additional errors. With the tighter nodal timelines, this will negatively impact the market. 5. Accountability should lie with Entity responsible for the asset information updates. |
Key Documents
Nov 4, 2008 - doc - 86.5 KB
Nov 4, 2008 - pdf - 104.8 KB
Nov 4, 2008 - xls - 83 KB
Dec 5, 2008 - doc - 68 KB
Dec 15, 2008 - doc - 92 KB
Dec 17, 2008 - doc - 75.5 KB
Jan 9, 2009 - doc - 72.5 KB
Jan 9, 2009 - doc - 71.5 KB
Jan 15, 2009 - doc - 36 KB
Feb 5, 2009 - xls - 112 KB
Feb 5, 2009 - xls - 112 KB