Common use of Summary of Process Clause in Contracts

Summary of Process. In order to coordinate congestion management, a bridge must be established that provides for comparable actions between Operating Entities. Without such a bridge, it is difficult, if not impossible, to ensure reliability and system coordination in an efficient and equitable manner. To effect this coordination of congestion management activities, we propose a methodology for determining both firm and non-firm flows resulting from Market-Based Operating Entity dispatch on external parties’ Flowgates. Market Flows are defined as the calculated energy flows on a specified Flowgate as a result of dispatch of generating resources serving market load within a Market-Based Operating Entity’s market. (Note: For the purposes of the Reciprocal Coordination process discussed later, Firm Transmission Service (7F) will be combined with the untagged firm component of Market Flows in the calculation of Historic Firm Flow. The Historic Firm Flow is described later in this document). Market Flows can be divided into Firm Market Flows and Non-Firm Market Flows. Firm Market Flows are considered as firm use of the transmission system for congestion management purposes and will be curtailed on a proportional basis with other firm uses during periods of firm curtailments and are equivalent to Firm Transmission Service. Non-Firm Market Flows are considered as non-firm use of the transmission system for congestion management purposes and will be curtailed on a proportional basis with other non-firm uses during periods of non-firm curtailments and are equivalent to non-firm Transmission Service. As such, Reliability Coordinators can request Market-Based Operating Entities to provide relief under TLR based on these transmission priorities. By applying the above philosophy to the problem of coordinating congestion management, we can determine not only the impacts of a Market-Based Operating Entity’s dispatch on a particular Flowgate; we can also determine the appropriate firmness of those flows. This results in the ability to coordinate both proactive and reactive congestion management between operating entities in a way that respects the current TLR process, while still allowing for the flexibility of internal congestion management based on market prices. There are two areas that must be defined in order for this process to work effectively: • Coordinated Flowgate Definition. In order to ensure that impacts of dispatch are properly recognized, a list of Flowgates must be developed around which congestion management may be effected and coordination can be established. • Congestion Management. By coordinating congestion management efforts and enhancing the TLR process to recognize both untagged energy flows and data of finer granularity, we can ensure that when TLR is called, the appropriate non-firm flows are reduced before Firm Flows. This coordination will result in a reduction of TLR 5 events, as more relief will be available in TLR 3 to mitigate a constraint. This is accomplished through the calculation of flows due to economic dispatch, as well as by providing marginal unit information to aid in interchange transaction management. The next sections of this document discuss each of these areas in detail.

Summary of Process. In order to coordinate congestion management, a bridge must be established that provides for comparable actions between Operating Entities. Without such a bridge, it is difficult, if not impossible, to ensure reliability and system coordination in an efficient and equitable manner. To effect this coordination of congestion management activities, we propose a methodology for determining both firm and non-firm flows resulting from Market-Based Operating Entity dispatch on external parties’ Flowgates. Market GTL Flows are defined as the calculated energy flows on a specified Flowgate as a result of dispatch of generating resources serving market load within a Market-Based Operating Entity’s marketControl Area . (Note: For the purposes of the Reciprocal Coordination process discussed later, Firm Transmission Service (7F) will be combined with the untagged firm component of Market Flows in the calculation of Historic Firm Flow. The Historic Firm Flow is described later in this document). The IDC currently calculates GTL Flows for each CA in the Eastern Interconnection and used to determine each Operating Entities curtailment under a TLR. The methodology defined in this document determines how to quantify these GTL flows as Firm and non-Firm for each Market Based Operating Entity. Market Flow is a calculation similar to GTL, but is no longer used to determine relief obligations in the TLR protocol. However, Market Flow may still be used for congestion management between Market Based Operating Entities, and thus we continue to define it in this agreement for reference. GTL Flows can be divided into Firm Market Flows and Non-Firm Market FlowsFirm. Firm Market GTL Flows are considered as firm use of the transmission system for congestion management purposes and will be curtailed on a proportional basis with other firm uses during periods of firm curtailments and are equivalent to Firm Transmission Service. Non-Firm Market Flows GTL flows are considered as non-firm use of the transmission system for congestion management purposes and will be curtailed on a proportional basis with other non-firm uses during periods of non-firm curtailments and are equivalent to non-non- firm Transmission Service. As such, Reliability Coordinators can request Market-Based Operating Entities to provide relief under TLR based on these transmission priorities. By applying the above philosophy to the problem of coordinating congestion management, we can determine not only the impacts of a Market-Based Operating Entity’s dispatch on a particular Flowgate; we can also determine the appropriate firmness of those flows. This results in the ability to coordinate both proactive and reactive congestion management between operating entities in a way that respects the current TLR process, while still allowing for the flexibility of internal congestion management based on market prices. There are two areas that must be defined in order for this process to work effectively: • Coordinated Flowgate Definition. In order to ensure that impacts of dispatch are properly recognized, a list of Flowgates must be developed around which congestion management may be effected and coordination can be established. • Congestion Management. By coordinating congestion management efforts and enhancing the TLR process to recognize both untagged energy flows and data of finer granularity, we can ensure that when TLR is called, the appropriate non-firm flows are reduced before Firm Flows. This coordination will result in a reduction of TLR 5 events, as more relief will be available in TLR 3 to mitigate a constraint. This is accomplished through the calculation of flows due to economic dispatch, as well as by providing marginal unit information to aid in interchange transaction management. The next sections of this document discuss each of these areas in detail.

Summary of Process. In order to coordinate congestion management, a bridge must be established that provides for comparable actions between Operating Entities. Without such a bridge, it is difficult, if not impossible, to ensure reliability and system coordination in an efficient and equitable manner. To effect this coordination of congestion management activities, we propose this document describes a methodology for determining both firm and non-firm flows resulting from Market-Based Operating Entity dispatch on external parties’ Flowgates. Current Process Economic Dispatch (NN-6 or NH-2) Untagged (Internal CA Flows) Untagged (Internal CA Flows) Untagged (Internal CA Flows) Market Flows are defined as the calculated energy flows on a specified Flowgate as a result of dispatch of generating resources serving market load within generated from a Market-Based Operating Entity’s marketdispatch that are not tagged, and are equal to the sum of firm and non-firm flows. The firm component consists of the untagged energy flows created through serving native load in the market footprint. (Note: For the purposes of the Reciprocal Coordination process discussed later, Firm Transmission Service firm point-to-point transmission (7F) will be combined with the untagged firm component of Market Flows in the calculation of Historic Firm Flow. The Historic Firm Flow is used to establish the Firm component of untagged energy flows, as described later in this document).) The remaining Market Flows, therefore, are non-firm. Market Flows When the values of these flows are known, they can be divided into Firm Market Flows and Non-Firm Market Flows. Firm Market Flows are considered treated as firm use of the transmission system for congestion management purposes and will be curtailed on a proportional basis with other firm uses during periods of firm curtailments and are equivalent to Firm Transmission Service. Non-Firm Market Flows are considered as non-firm use of the transmission system for congestion management purposes and will be curtailed on a proportional basis with other non-firm uses during periods of non-firm curtailments and are equivalent to non-firm Transmission Servicetransmission service. As such, Reliability Coordinators can request Market-Based Operating Entities to provide relief under TLR based on these transmission priorities. Non-Market transaction priorities will remain as established in the TLR administration guidelines from NERC. By applying the above philosophy to the problem of coordinating congestion management, we the Parties can determine not only the impacts of a Market-Based Operating Entity’s dispatch on a particular Flowgate; we , but can also determine the appropriate firmness of those flows. This results in the ability to coordinate both proactive and reactive congestion management between operating entities in a way that respects the current TLR process, while still allowing for the flexibility of internal congestion management based on market prices. There are two areas that must be defined in order for this process to work effectively: • Coordinated Flowgate Definition. In order to ensure that impacts of dispatch are properly recognized, a list of Flowgates must be developed around which congestion management may be effected and coordination can be established. • Congestion Management. By coordinating congestion management efforts and enhancing the TLR process to recognize both untagged energy flows and data of finer granularity, we can ensure that when TLR is called, the appropriate non-firm flows are reduced before Firm Flowsfirm flows. This coordination will result in a reduction of TLR 5 events, as more relief will be available in TLR 3 to mitigate a constraint. This is accomplished The Parties will accomplish this through the calculation of flows due to economic dispatchEconomic Dispatch, as well as by providing marginal unit Marginal Unit information to aid in interchange Interchange transaction management. The next sections of this document discuss each of these areas in detail.

Summary of Process. In order to coordinate congestion management, a bridge must be established that provides for comparable actions between Operating Entities. Without such a bridge, it is difficult, if not impossible, to ensure reliability and system coordination in an efficient and equitable manner. To effect this coordination of congestion management activities, we propose a methodology for determining both firm and non-firm flows resulting from Market-Based Operating Entity dispatch on external parties’ Flowgates. Market Flows are defined as the calculated energy flows on a specified Flowgate as a result of dispatch of generating resources serving market load within a Market-Based Operating Entity’s market. (Note: For the purposes of the Reciprocal Coordination process discussed later, Firm Transmission Service (7F) will be combined with the untagged firm component of Market Flows in the calculation of Historic Firm Flow. The Historic Firm Flow is described later in this document). Market Flows can be divided into Firm Market Flows and Non-Firm Market Flows. Firm Market Flows are considered as firm use of the transmission system for congestion management purposes and will be curtailed on a proportional basis with other firm uses during periods of firm curtailments and are equivalent to Firm Transmission Service. Non-Firm Market Flows are considered as non-firm use of the transmission system for congestion management purposes and will be curtailed on a proportional basis with other non-firm uses during periods of non-firm curtailments and are equivalent to non-firm Transmission Service. As such, Reliability Coordinators can request Market-Based Operating Entities to provide relief under TLR based on these transmission priorities. By applying the above philosophy to the problem of coordinating congestion management, we can determine not only the impacts of a Market-Based Operating Entity’s dispatch on a particular Flowgate; we can also determine the appropriate firmness of those flows. This results in the ability to coordinate both proactive and reactive congestion management between operating entities in a way that respects the current TLR process, while still allowing for the flexibility of internal congestion management based on market prices. There are two areas that must be defined in order for this process to work effectively: • Coordinated Flowgate Definition. In order to ensure that impacts of dispatch are properly recognized, a list of Flowgates must be developed around which congestion management may be effected and coordination can be established. • Congestion Management. By coordinating congestion management efforts and enhancing the TLR process to recognize both untagged energy flows and data of finer granularity, we can ensure that when TLR is called, the appropriate non-firm flows are reduced before Firm Flows. This coordination will result in a reduction of TLR 5 events, as more relief will be available in TLR 3 to mitigate a constraint. This is accomplished through the calculation of flows due to economic dispatch, as well as by providing marginal unit information to aid in interchange transaction management. The next sections of this document discuss each of these areas in detail.