Over the past twelve months, the combination of new standalone and co-located projects, as well as several project cancellations, has increased the total queue capacity by 4439 MW.
Current Large Load Interconnection Queue broken into 4 categories
Approved to energize
Planning studies approved
Under ERCOT review
No studies submitted
Approved to energize:1570 MW approved over the past year; total of 5496 MW currently approved, with 2854 MW in load zone west and 2642 MW in other zones.
The breakdown of approved projects: 4421 MW standalone and 1075 MW co-located.
Observed non-simultaneous peak consumption is 3282 MW; simultaneous peak consumption is 2815 MW.
Discussion on whether the load is flexible or not: currently no such categorization in the process, dependent on future commission projects.
By 2028, ERCOT has effectively approved a little over 14 gigawatts for large loads.
Clarification on load ramps and submission requests: both the load ramp and potential transmission upgrades are considered.
Discussion on NPRR1238, focused on how the language might adjust load shed percentages.
Clarification on concerns and misunderstandings about NPRR1238 raised by stakeholders, especially regarding its impact on NOIE areas.
Explanation of the intent behind NPRR1238: to remove interruptible loads from load shed tables and calculate requirements based on actual firm loads.
ERCOT's ongoing efforts to develop scenarios based on NPRR1238 language and its load shed impacts.
Stakeholder concerns about sequencing NPRR1238 with NPRR1234 due to dependencies and the need to move forward collectively.
Discussion on using NPRR1238 during transmission emergencies and its limitations, with suggested clarifications in the language.
Importance of moving NPRR1238 along with NPRR1234 due to interconnect limitations and urgency emphasized by stakeholders.
ERCOT working to provide comments about timeline with NPRR 1234 and to bring a scenario for discussion to the OWG surrounding load shed percentages
Methodologies for calculating load shed percentages explained, including considerations of changing load ratios over time.
Approval of NPRR expected around Q1 of next year.
Manual nature of load shed processes and preference for system-based operations over manual management highlighted.
Stakeholders' input sought on the desired length of time for exiting the VECL program and related operational considerations.
Acknowledgment that changes in load dynamics and flexible loads over time will necessitate ongoing adjustments.
Consensus on creating a path for transitioning between different load categories, with considerations for transmission studies, interconnection agreements, and system updates.
Estimated minimum six-month timeline for implementing major changes in load registrations and categories stressed for reliability reasons.
4 - Maximum Size of Single Large Load Connection – Discussion of Revised Concept - ERCOT Staff
Key Topics Discussed:
Feedback from previous meeting and internal discussions led to a revised approach to large load connections.
Concept to simplify large load interconnection with a focus on a 1000 MW limit at a single point.
Plans to file a PGRR (Protocol Revision Requests) and update planning criteria.
Potential need for updated studies to validate the 1000 MW limit, based on Southern Cross project.
Operation challenges in maintaining grid stability with large load connections.
Major Decisions Made:
In comments to PGRR115, a new paragraph will limit large load interconnection at a single point to 1000 MW.
A separate PGRR will establish that no more than 1000 MW can be lost for any single contingency in a planning study.
ERCOT will commit to updating studies before final approval of these changes to ensure reliability.
Questions and Concerns Raised:
Clarification on the term 'single point of interconnect' there are ongoing discussions on using either POI or POIB.whether POI or another definition.
Management of faults in ring bus or breaker schemes; distinction between voltage ride-through and contingency scenarios.
Modeling requirements for stability studies and potential updates for better load model accuracy.
Possibility of grandfathering existing points of interconnection versus requiring compliance with new criteria.
Operational feasibility and potential design challenges if loads exceed the 1000 MW threshold, particularly concerning process interconnections.
Follow-up Actions Planned:
ERCOT to work on drafting and filing comments for PGRR115 and a separate PGRR for a new planning criterion.
ERCOT to conduct updated studies to validate or adjust the 1000 MW limit based on current data and scenarios.
Further discussions and engagement anticipated with stakeholders to refine and finalize these plans.
5 - Schedule of Future Meetings - Bill Blevins/Bob Wittmeyer
Participant: Bill Blevins
Discussion:
The task force hasn't met initial expectations such as developing ways for flexible loads to participate in ancillary services.
After completing NPRR134, PGRR115, and NPRR1238, it may be time to hibernate the task force.
Future issues to be presented by the legislature by next June are anticipated.
Participant: Martha Henson
Discussion:
Clarification requested on the handling of ERCOT NPRR1234.
Anticipated that future comments on NPRR1234 will be discussed at ROS.
Participant: (unknown)
Discussion:
Suggests hibernating after the current meeting unless specific issues arise, like interconnection discussions.
Participant: Clayton Stice
Discussion:
Discussion on managing transition between CLR and non CLR within markets area.
Recommendation to shift this discussion to relevant markets forums like WMS or WMWG.
Participants: Group Discussion (General)
Discussion:
Question on nodal versus non-nodal status raised, with emphasis on consistent nodal load.
Some loads seek to switch based on market conditions, suggesting consistent nodal status to prevent such shifts.
Attempts to expand nodal pricing to all large loads were discussed but lacked support.
Participant: Lee Bracher
Discussion:
Bitcoin mining and large load participation awareness in other forums suggested.
Broadly supportive for nodal pricing.
Brought up the need to address interconnection queue and PFR requirements for CLRs.
Participants: Agee Springer
Discussion:
Clarified that issues needing NPRR1188 is separate from PFR requirements for CLRs.
Discussed timelines for NPRR1188 and related actions.
Participant: Michael Jewell (Priority Power)
Discussion:
Provided updates on timelines for NPRR1244 related to NOGRR263, at PRS next week.
Discussion:
Queue updates to continue at WMS unless a more public reporting method is established.
Participants: Group Discussion on Next Steps
Discussion:
Cancellation of some scheduled LFL meetings anticipated unless specific issues arise.
Request to TAC for guidance on the best venue for queue updates.
