MOD-030-02: Flowgate Methodology

Purpose
To increase consistency and reliability inthe development and documentation of transfer capability calculations for short-term use performed by entities using the Flowgate Methodology to support analysis and system operations.

Applicability

• Each Transmission Operator that uses the Flowgate Methodology to support the calculation of Available Flowgate Capabilities (AFCs) on Flowgates.
• Each Transmission Service Provider that uses the Flowgate Methodology to calculate AFCs on Flowgates.

Proposed Effective Date
The date upon which MOD-030-01 is currently scheduled to become effective.

Requirements
R1. The Transmission Service Provider shall include in its “Available Transfer Capability Implementation Document” (ATCID): [Violation Risk Factor: To Be Determined] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]

R1.1. The criteria used by the Transmission Operator to identify sets of Transmission Facilities as Flowgates that are to be considered in Available Flowgate Capability (AFC) calculations.

R1.2. The following information on how source and sink for transmission service is accounted for in AFC calculations including:

R1.2.1. Define if the source used for AFC calculations is obtained from the source field or the Point of Receipt (POR) field of the transmission reservation.

R1.2.2. Define if the sink used for AFC calculations is obtained from the sink field or the Point of Delivery (POD) field of the transmission reservation.

R1.2.3. The source/sink or POR/POD identification and mapping to the model.

R1.2.4. If the Transmission Service Provider’s AFC calculation process involves a grouping of generators, the ATCID must identify how these generators participate in the group.

R2. The Transmission Operator shall perform the following: [Violation Risk Factor: To Be Determined] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]

R2.1. Include Flowgates used in the AFC process based, at a minimum, on the following criteria:

R2.1.1. Results of a first Contingency transfer analysis for ATC Paths internal to a Transmission Operator’s system up to the path capability such that at a minimum the first three limiting Elements and their worst associated Contingency combinations with an OTDF of at least 5% and within the Transmission Operator’s system are included as Flowgates.

R2.1.1.1. Use first Contingency criteria consistent with those first Contingency criteria used in planning of operations for the applicable time periods, including use of Special Protection Systems.

R2.1.1.2. Only the most limiting element in a series configuration needs to be included as a Flowgate.

R2.1.1.3. If any limiting element is kept within its limit for its associated worst Contingency by operating within the limits of another Flowgate, then no new Flowgate needs to be established for such limiting elements or Contingencies.

R2.1.2. Results of a first Contingency transfer analysis from all adjacent Balancing Authority source and sink (as defined in the ATCID) combinations up to the path capability such that at a minimum the first three limiting Elements and their worst associated Contingency combinations with an Outage Transfer Distribution Factor (OTDF) of at least 5% and within the Transmission Operator’s system are included as Flowgates unless the interface between such adjacent Balancing Authorities is accounted for using another ATC methodology.

R2.1.2.1. Use first Contingency criteria consistent with those first Contingency criteria used in planning of operations for the applicable time periods, including use of Special Protection Systems.

R2.1.2.2. Only the most limiting element in a series configuration needs to be included as a Flowgate.

R2.1.2.3. If any limiting element is kept within its limit for its associated worst Contingency by operating within the limits of another Flowgate, then no new Flowgate needs to be established for such limiting elements or Contingencies.

R2.1.3. Any limiting Element/Contingency combination at least within its Reliability Coordinator’s Area that has been subjected to an Interconnection-wide congestion management procedure within the last 12 months, unless the limiting Element/Contingency combination is accounted for using another ATC methodology or was created to address temporary operating conditions.

R2.1.4. Any limiting Element/Contingency combination within the Transmission model that has been requested to be included by any other Transmission Service Provider using the FlowgateMethodology or Area Interchange Methodology, where:

R2.1.4.1. The coordination of the limiting Element/Contingency combination is not already addressed through a different methodology, and

• Any generator within the Transmission Service Provider’s area has at least a 5% Power Transfer Distribution Factor (PTDF) or Outage Transfer Distribution Factor (OTDF) impact on the Flowgate when delivered to the aggregate load of its own area, or
• A transfer from any Balancing Area within the Transmission Service Provider’s area to a Balancing Area adjacent has at least a 5% PTDF or OTDF impact on the Flowgate.
• The Transmission Operator may utilize distribution factors less than 5% if desired.

R2.1.4.2. The limiting Element/Contingency combination is included in the requesting Transmission Service Provider’s methodology.

R2.2. At a minimum, establish a list of Flowgates by creating, modifying, or deleting Flowgate definitions at least once per calendar year.

R2.3. At a minimum, establish a list of Flowgates by creating, modifying, or deleting Flowgates that have been requested as part of R2.1.4 within thirty calendar days from the request.

R2.4. Establish the TFC of each of the defined Flowgates as equal to:

• For thermal limits, the System Operating Limit (SOL) of the Flowgate.
• For voltage or stability limits, the flow that will respect the SOL of the Flowgate.

R2.5. At a minimum, establish the TFC once per calendar year.

R2.5.1. If notified of a change in the Rating by the Transmission Owner that would affect the TFC of a flowgate used inthe AFC process, the TFC should be updated within seven calendar days of the notification.

R2.6. Provide the Transmission Service Provider with the TFCs within seven calendar days of their establishment.

R3. The Transmission Operator shall make available to the Transmission Service Provider a Transmission model to determine Available Flowgate Capability (AFC) that meets the following criteria: [Violation Risk Factor: To Be Determined] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]

R3.1. Contains generation Facility Ratings, such as generation maximum and minimum output levels, specified by the Generator Owners of the Facilities within the model.

R3.2. Updated at least once per day for AFC calculations for intra-day, next day, and days two through 30.

R3.3. Updated at least once per month for AFC calculations for months two through 13.

R3.4. Contains modeling data and system topology for the Facilities within its Reliability Coordinator’s Area. Equivalent representation of radial lines and Facilities161kV or below is allowed.

R3.5. Contains modeling data and system topology (or equivalent representation) for immediately adjacent and beyond Reliability Coordination Areas.

R4. When calculating AFCs, the Transmission Service Provider shall represent the impact of Transmission Service as follows: [Violation Risk Factor: To Be Determined] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]

• If the source, as specified in the ATCID, has been identified in the reservation and it is discretely modeled in the Transmission Service Provider’s Transmission model, use the discretely modeled point as the source.
• If the source, as specified in the ATCID, has been identified in the reservation and the point can be mapped to an “equivalence”or “aggregate” representation in the Transmission Service Provider’s Transmission model, use the modeled equivalence or aggregate as the source.
• If the source, as specified in the ATCID, has been identified in the reservation and the point cannot be mapped to a discretely modeled point or an “equivalence” representation in the Transmission Service Provider’s Transmission model, use the immediately adjacent Balancing Authority associated with the Transmission Service Provider from which the power is to be received as the source.
• If the source, as specified in the ATCID, has not been identified in the reservation use the immediately adjacent Balancing Authority associated with the Transmission Service Provider from which the power is to be received as the source.
• If the sink, as specified in the ATCID, has been identified in the reservation and it is discretely modeled in the Transmission Service Provider’s Transmission model, use the discretely modeled point as the sink.
• If the sink, as specified in the ATCID, has been identified in the reservation and the point can be mapped to an “equivalence”or “aggregate” representation in the Transmission Service Provider’s Transmission model, use the modeled equivalence or aggregate as the sink.
• If the sink, as specified in the ATCID, has been identified in the reservation and the point cannot be mapped to a discretely modeled point or an “equivalence” representation in the Transmission Service Provider’s Transmission model, use the immediately adjacent Balancing Authority associated with the Transmission Service Provider receiving the power as the sink.
• If the sink, as specified in the ATCID, has notbeen identified in the reservation use the immediately adjacent Balancing Authority associated with the Transmission Service Provider receiving the power as the sink.

R5. When calculating AFCs, the Transmission Service Provider shall: [Violation Risk Factor: To Be Determined] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]

R5.1. Use the models provided by the Transmission Operator.

R5.2. Include in the transmission model expected generation and Transmission outages, additions, and retirements within the scopeof the model as specified in the ATCID and in effect during the applicable period of the AFC calculation for the Transmission Service Provider’s area, all adjacent Transmission Service Providers, and any Transmission Service Providers with which coordination agreements have been executed.

R5.3. For external Flowgates, identified in R2.1.4, use the AFC provided by the Transmission Service Provider that calculates AFC for that Flowgate.

R6. When calculating the impact of ETC for firm commitments (ETCFi) for all time periods for a Flowgate, the Transmission Service Provider shall sum the following: [Violation Risk Factor: To Be Determined] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]

R6.1. The impact of firm Network Integration Transmission Service, including the impacts of generation to load, in the model referenced in R5.2 for the Transmission Service Provider’s area, based on:

R6.1.1. Load forecast for the time period being calculated, including Native Load and Network Service load R6.1.2. Unit commitment and Dispatch Order, to include all designated network resources and other resources that are committed or have the legal obligation to run as specified in the Transmission Service Provider’s ATCID.

R6.2. The impact of any firm Network Integration Transmission Service, including the impacts of generation to load in the model referenced in R5.2 and has a distribution factor equal to or greater than the percentage¹ used to curtail in the Interconnectionwide congestion management procedure usedby the Transmission Service Provider, for all adjacent Transmission Service Providers and any other Transmission Service Providers with which coordination agreements have been executed based on:

R6.2.1. Load forecast for the time period being calculated, including Native Load and Network Service load

R6.2.2. Unit commitment and Dispatch Order, to include all designated network resources and other resources that are committed or have the legal obligation to run as specified in the Transmission Service Provider’s ATCID.

R6.3. The impact of all confirmed firm Point-to-Point Transmission Service expected to be scheduled, including roll-over rights for FirmTransmission Service contracts, for the Transmission Service Provider’s area.

R6.4. The impact of any confirmed firm Point-to-Point Transmission Service expected to be scheduled, filtered to reduce or eliminate duplicate impacts from transactions using Transmission service from multiple Transmission Service Providers, including roll-over rights for Firm Transmission Service contracts having a distribution factor equal to or greater than the percentage² used to curtail in the Interconnection-wide congestion management procedure used by the Transmission Service Provider, for all adjacent Transmission Service Providers and any other Transmission Service Providers with which coordination agreements have been executed.

R6.5. The impact of any Grandfathered firm obligations expected to be scheduled or expected to flow for the Transmission Service Provider’s area.

R6.6. The impact of any Grandfathered firm obligations expected to be scheduled or expected to flow that have a distribution factor equal to or greater than the percentage³ used to curtail in the Interconnection-wide congestion management procedure used by the Transmission Service Provider, for all adjacent Transmission Service Providers and any other Transmission Service Providers with which coordination agreements have been executed.

R6.7. The impact of other firm services determined by the Transmission Service Provider.

R7. When calculating the impact of ETC for non-firm commitments (ETCNFi) for all time periods for a Flowgate the Transmission Service Provider shall sum: [Violation Risk Factor: To Be Determined] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]

R7.1. The impact of all confirmed non-firm Point-to-Point Transmission Service expected to be scheduled for the Transmission Service Provider’s area.

R7.2. The impact of any confirmed non-firm Point-to-Point Transmission Service expected to be scheduled, filtered to reduce or eliminate duplicate impacts from transactions using Transmission service from multiple Transmission Service Providers, that have a distribution factor equal to or greater than the percentage⁴ used to curtail in the Interconnection-wide congestion managementprocedure used by the Transmission Service Provider, for all adjacent Transmission Service Providers and any other Transmission Service Providers with which coordination agreements have been executed.

R7.3. The impact of any Grandfathered non-firm obligations expected to be scheduled or expected to flow for the Transmission Service Provider’s area.

R7.4. The impact of any Grandfathered non-firm obligations expected to be scheduled or expected to flow that have a distribution factor equal to or greater than the percentage⁵ used to curtail in the Interconnection-wide congestion management procedure used by the Transmission Service Provider, for all adjacent Transmission Service Providers and any other Transmission Service Providers with which coordination agreements have been executed.

R7.5. The impact of non-firm Network Integration Transmission Service serving Load within the Transmission Service Provider’s area (i.e., secondary service), to include load growth, and losses not otherwise included in Transmission Reliability Margin or Capacity Benefit Margin.

R7.6. The impact of any non-firm Network Integration Transmission Service (secondary service) with a distribution factor equal to or greater than the percentage⁶ used to curtail in the Interconnection-wide congestion management procedure used by the Transmission Service Provider, filtered to reduce or eliminate duplicate impacts from transactions using Transmission service from multiple Transmission Service Providers, for all adjacent Transmission Service Providers and any other Transmission Service Providers with which coordination agreements have been executed.

R7.7. The impact of other non-firm services determined by the Transmission Service Provider.

R8. When calculating firm AFC for a Flowgate for a specified period, the Transmission Service Provider shall use the following algorithm (subject to allocation processes described in the ATCID): [Violation Risk Factor: To Be Determined] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]

AFC_F= TFC – ETC_Fi– CBM_i– TRM_i+ Postbacks_Fi+ counterflows_Fi

Where

AFC_F is the firm Available Flowgate Capability for the Flowgate for that period.

TFC is the Total Flowgate Capability of the Flowgate.

ETC_Fi is the sum of the impacts of existing firm Transmission commitments for the Flowgate during that period.

CBM_i is the impact of the Capacity Benefit Margin on the Flowgate during that period.

TRM_i is the impact of the Transmission Reliability Margin on the Flowgate during that period.

Postbacks_Fi are changes to firm AFC due to a change in the use of Transmission Service for that period, as defined in Business Practices.

counterflows_Fi are adjustments to firm AFC as determined by the Transmission Service Provider and specified in their ATCID.

R9. When calculating non-firm AFC for a Flowgate for a specified period, the Transmission Service Provider shall use the following algorithm (subject to allocation processes described in the ATCID): [Violation Risk Factor: To Be Determined] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]

AFC_NF= TFC – ETC_Fi– ETC_NFi– CBM_Si– TRM_Ui+ Postbacks_NFi+ counterflows

Where

AFC_NF is the non-firm Available Flowgate Capability for the Flowgate for that period.

TFC is the Total Flowgate Capability of the Flowgate.

ETC_Fi is the sum of the impacts of existing firm Transmission commitments for the Flowgate during that period.

ETC_NFi is the sum of the impacts of existing non-firm Transmission commitments for the Flowgate during that period.

CBM_Si is the impact of any schedules during that period using Capacity Benefit Margin.

TRM_Ui is the impact on the Flowgate of the Transmission Reliability Margin that has not been released (unreleased) for sale as non-firm capacity by the Transmission Service Provider during that period.

Postbacks_NFi are changes to non-firm Available Flowgate Capability due to a change in the use of Transmission Service for that period, as defined in Business Practices.

counterflowsNF are adjustments to non-firm AFC as determined by the Transmission Service Provider and specified in their ATCID.

R10. Each Transmission Service Provider shall recalculate AFC, utilizing the updated models described in R3.2, R3.3, and R5, at a minimum on the following frequency, unless none of the calculated values identified in the AFC equation have changed: [Violation Risk Factor: To Be Determined] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]

R10.1. For hourly AFC, once per hour. Transmission Service Providers are allowed up to 175 hours per calendar year during which calculations are not required to be performed, despite a change in a calculated value identified in the AFC equation.

R10.2. For daily AFC, once per day.

R10.3. For monthly AFC, once per week.

R11. When converting Flowgate AFCs to ATCs for ATC Paths, the Transmission Service Provider shall convert those values based on the following algorithm: [Violation Risk Factor: To Be Determined] [Time Horizon: Operations Planning]

Where

ATC is the Available Transfer Capability.

P is the set of partial Available Transfer Capabilities for all “impacted” Flowgates honored by the Transmission Service Provider; a Flowgate is considered “impacted” by a path if the Distribution Factor for that path is greater than the percentage⁷ used to curtail in the Interconnection-wide congestion management procedure used by the Transmission Service Provider on an OTDF Flowgate or PTDF Flowgate.

PATC_n is the partial Available Transfer Capability for a path relative to a Flowgate n.

AFC_n is the Available Flowgate Capability of a Flowgate n.

DF_np is the distribution factor for Flowgate nrelative to path p.

Measures

M1. Each Transmission Service Provider shall provide its ATCID and other evidence (such as written documentation) to show that its ATCID contains the criteria used by the Transmission Operator to identify sets of Transmission Facilities as Flowgates and information on how sources and sinks are accounted for in AFC calculations. (R1)

M2. The Transmission Operator shall provide evidence (such as studies and working papers) that all Flowgates that meet the criteria described in R2.1 are considered in its AFC calculations. (R2.1)

M3. The Transmission Operator shall provide evidence (such as logs) that it updated its list of Flowgates at least once per calendar year. (R2.2)

M4. The Transmission Operator shall provide evidence (such as logs and dated requests) that it updated the list of Flowgates within thirty calendar days from a request. (R2.3)

M5. The Transmission Operator shall provide evidence (such as data or models) that it determined the TFC for each Flowgate as defined in R2.4. (R2.4)

M6. The Transmission Operator shall provide evidence (such as logs) that it established the TFCs for each Flowgate in accordance with the timing defined in R2.5. (R2.5)

M7. The Transmission Operator shall provide evidence (such as logs and electronic communication) that it provided the Transmission Service Provider with updated TFCs within seven calendar days of their determination. (R2.6)

M8. The Transmission Operator shall provide evidence (such as written documentation, logs, models, and data) that the Transmission model used to determine AFCs contains the information specified in R3. (R3)

M9. The Transmission Service Provider shall provide evidence (such as written documentation and data) that the modeling of point-to-point reservations was based on the rules described in R4. (R4)

M10. The Transmission Service Provider shall provide evidence including the models received from Transmission Operators and other evidence (such as documentation and data) to show that it used the Transmission Operator’s models in calculating AFC. (R5.1)

M11. The Transmission Service Provider shall provide evidence (such as written documentation, electronic communications, and data) that all expected generation and Transmission outages, additions, and retirements were included in the AFC calculation as specified in the ATCID. (R5.2)

M12. The Transmission Service Provider shall provide evidence (such as logs, electronic communications, and data) that AFCs provided bythird parties on external Flowgates were used instead of those calculated bythe Transmission Operator. (R5.3)

M13. The Transmission Service Provider shall demonstrate compliance with R6 by recalculating firm ETC for any specific time period as described in (MOD-001 R2), using the requirements defined in R6 and with data used to calculate the specified value for the designated time period. The data used must meet the requirements specified in this standard and the ATCID. To account for differences that may occur when recalculating the value (due to mixing automated and manual processes), any recalculated value that is within +/- 15% or 15 MW, whichever is greater, of the originally calculated value, is evidence that the Transmission Service Provider used the requirements defined in R6 to calculate its firm ETC. (R6)

M14. The Transmission Service Provider shall demonstrate compliance with R7 by recalculating non-firm ETC for any specific time period as described in (MOD-001 R2), using the requirements defined in R7 and with data used to calculate the specified value for the designated time period. The data used must meet the requirements specified in the standard and the ATCID. To account for differences that may occur when recalculating the value (due to mixing automated and manual processes), any recalculated value that is within +/- 15% or 15 MW, whichever is greater, of the originally calculated value, is evidence that the Transmission Service Provider used the requirements in R7 to calculate its non-firm ETC. (R7)

M15. Each Transmission Service Provider shall produce the supporting documentation for the processes used to implement the algorithm that calculates firm AFCs, as required in R8. Such documentation must show that only the variables allowed in R8 were used to calculate firm AFCs, and that the processes use the currentvalues for the variables as determined in the requirements or definitions. Note that any variable may legitimately be zero if the value is not applicable or calculated to be zero (such as counterflows, TRM, CBM, etc…). The supporting documentation may be provided in the same form and format as stored by the Transmission Service Provider. (R8)

M16. Each Transmission Service Provider shall produce the supporting documentation for the processes used to implement the algorithm that calculates non-firm AFCs, as required in R9. Such documentation must show that only the variables allowed in R9 were used to calculate non-firm AFCs, and that the processes use the current values for the variables as determined in the requirements or definitions. Note thatany variable may legitimately be zero if the value is not applicable or calculated to be zero (such as counterflows, TRM, CBM, etc…). The supporting documentation may be provided in the same form and format as stored by the Transmission Service Provider. (R9)

M17. The Transmission Service Provider shall provide evidence (such as documentation, dated logs, and data) that it calculated AFC on the frequency defined in R10. (R10)

M18. The Transmission Service Provider shall provide evidence (such as documentation and data) when converting Flowgate AFCs to ATCs for ATC Paths, it follows the procedure described in R11. (R11)