Meeting Summary - 02/11/2025 OWG Meeting

Grid Monitor AI
02/11/2025

<div class="news-image-container"><img src="/storage/docs/2025/02/02-11-2025-OWG-Hero.png" /></div> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=3858aa05-d15e-4b6b-9e38-3caec69e50e0"><span style="font-weight: 400;">▶️</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">1 - Antitrust Admonition - R. Floyd</span></h3> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=f7eab1ce-3da5-4c1e-9889-7b15adaa186d"><span style="font-weight: 400;">▶️</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">2 - ERCOT Updates and System Operation Report - ERCOT Staff</span></h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Unofficial ERCOT peak demand for January 2025 was 77,478 megawatts, occurring on January 22.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">This demand was 871 megawatts less than the all-time January record of 78,349 megawatts set on January 16 of the previous year.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Three renewable records were set in January:</span></li> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2"><span style="font-weight: 400;">An all-time wind generation record of 28,373 megawatts on January 4.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2"><span style="font-weight: 400;">An all-time solar generation record of 22,092 megawatts on January 24.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2"><span style="font-weight: 400;">A new all-time renewable record of 39,021 megawatts on January 24.</span></li> </ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">On January 24, during the all-time renewable record, there was a corresponding penetration of 64%.</span></li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=800ea642-0152-471b-97f8-78d302f1ce8e"><span style="font-weight: 400;">▶️</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">3 - Texas Reliability Entity Report - Texas RE Staff</span></h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Discussion on the EOP-012 cold weather standards; NERC board invoked authority due to drafting team delays.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Proposed changes to EOP-012 posted for comment; finalization expected at ERCOT board meeting in March.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Joint FERC and NERC review announced for recent cold weather events in January affecting ERCOT and Eastern Interconnection.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Outreach and data requests planned for ERCOT to assess system reliability during cold weather events.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Second drafting team meeting held for SAR to modify BAL-001-TRE frequency response standard.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Discussion on incorporating frequency response for energy storage systems; updates to be provided as progress continues.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Upcoming events include GridEx planning meeting and discussion on small modular reactors on the Texas RE calendar.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Quarterly board and MRC meetings scheduled for the nineteenth of the month.</span></li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=b63d1b16-c54a-401e-b58e-0fd2f8383e98"><span style="font-weight: 400;">▶️</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">4 - NPRR1070 Planning Criteria for GTC Exit Solutions &ndash; Tabled. No updates required at this time - R. Floyd</span></h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">NPRR1070 has been tabled.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">No updates have been provided yet but they are getting close.</span></li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=7d4b5fef-41d7-43e4-830e-b24849f2da36"><span style="font-weight: 400;">▶️</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">5 - NPRR1238 Voluntary Registration of Loads with Curtailable Load Capabilities - Golden Spread &ndash; Joe Wilson</span></h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Comments for NPRR1238 and NOGRR265 were filed last Thursday.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Section 2 was revised to better align definitions, moving some content to Section 16.2.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">In Section 6.5.9.4.1, significant revisions were made for ECL deployment to rely on real-time data instead of initial proposals.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Requirement for QSE to notify Oncor of ECL failure removed due to real-time system awareness.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Section 16.20 updated to include requirements for ECL real-time telemetry data for monitoring and performance.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Potential for remote disconnection by QSE emphasized if ECL fails to comply.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Blake Holt raised a question about direct QSE disconnection in collocated scenarios.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Bob Wittmeyer inquired about differences in treatment between ECL and ERS loads.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Joe Dan Wilson supported the revisions and requested further resolution on ECL-ERS participation queries.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Discussion on routing the NPRR back to ROS for further discussion was proposed.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Martha Henson from Oncor suggested minor language amendments in Section 16.20.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Consensus achieved on current comments to move back to ROS, with possible formal comments to address language changes.</span></li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=a0173c95-3b38-4c18-a7a0-355481add5d1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">▶️</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">6 - NOGRR265 Related to NPRR1238, Voluntary Registration of Loads with Curtailable Load Capabilities - Golden Spread &ndash; Joe Wilson</span></h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">The changes in section 4.5.3.1 are designed to align with NPRR sections.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Notable changes include the removal of the requirement for a QSE load share table to allow the deployment of the ECL based on real-time available quantities.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Edits were made to clarify the exclusion of the ECL portion from the Transmission Operator's (TO) load share calculation upon ECL registration.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">If there's a change to ECL registration impacting the TO load share calculation, it will be reviewed and updated as needed.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">There were no comments or questions raised regarding the removal of the load share table or edits made by ERCOT.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">No objections were noted to report consensus to ROS on NOGRR265 based on ERCOT's comments.</span></li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">Decision to report consensus to ROS on the ERCOT comments was finalized without objections.</span></li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=5ac9a167-4c70-4d0a-857f-c63874326b0d"><span style="font-weight: 400;">▶️</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">7 - Other Business - R. Floyd</span></h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1"><span style="font-weight: 400;">No additional items were brought up for discussion.</span></li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=d01df3a4-dcc2-4e33-8ec7-8c6f6c16ab4b"><span style="font-weight: 400;">▶️</span></a><span style="font-weight: 400;">8 - Adjourn - R. Floyd</span></h3> <p><span style="font-weight: 400;">&nbsp;</span></p> <p>&nbsp;</p>