[00:00:04]
I THINK YOU'VE SUMMARIZED CORRECTLY WHAT, UH, MY RESPONSE WAS, EMILY.
NAN, DID YOU WANT US TO GO BACK TO YOU IN THE QUEUE? Y YES, PLEASE.
SO, UH, I, I THINK THE QUESTION THAT CARRIE'S POSED IS COMPLETELY, UH, LEGITIMATE.
AND, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT THE IMPACT OF A PROJECT ON R T C IS, IS VALID, UH, ISSUE TO DISCUSS.
BUT THERE IS ANOTHER, ANOTHER DYNAMIC TO THIS THAT IMPACTS R T C, WHICH IS WE NEED A SOLUTION.
ERCOT NEEDS A SOLUTION FOR INTERIM STATE OF CHARGE BETWEEN NOW AND THE DEPLOYMENT OF R T C.
IF 1186 GETS HELD UP, IT DELAYS R T C BY DOING THAT AS WELL, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A SOLUTION TO THE ISSUE OF THE INTERIM STATE OF CHARGE.
SO IT, IT GOES BOTH WAYS, IS, I GUESS THE IMPORTANT THING I WANNA SHARE.
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE MOVE FORWARD WITH A SOLUTION IF WE WANNA MOVE FORWARD WITH REAL-TIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION.
SO THAT'S ALSO A DYNAMIC AT PLAY.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? I DON'T SEE ANY CARRIER.
ANN, DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD HERE? NO, THANK YOU AND, UH, I'LL BE LISTENING INTO THE LATER DISCUSSION ON 1186 AND WE'LL CHIME IN IF, IF SOMETHING, UM, YOU KNOW, IS RELEVANT TO DO SO.
[4. PRS Report (Vote)]
ALL RIGHT.WELL, WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE P R SS REPORT.
MARTHA, ARE YOU READY TO GO? YES.
MARTHA HENSON FROM ENCORE WITH THE P R S UPDATE.
THERE ARE SEVEN RS FOR TAX CONSIDERATION TODAY.
UH, THE FIRST FOUR HERE THAT COREY'S GOT ON THE SCREEN, WERE ALL UNOPPOSED WITH NO IMPACT, AND THREE OF THESE WERE SPONSORED BY ERCOT AND ONE FROM L C R A.
SO, 1174 IS SETTING UP A PROCESS THAT WILL LET QUEASY OR C R R ACCOUNT HOLDERS RETURN SETTLEMENT FUNDS TO ERCOT IN THE EVENT THEY RECEIVE AN OVERPAYMENT FROM ERCOT 1175 IS ENHANCING ERCOT MARKET ENTRY QUALIFICATION AND CONTINUED PARTICIPATION REQUIREMENTS FOR COUNTERPARTIES.
SO IT'S ADDRESSING THINGS LIKE BACKGROUND CHECKS, ASSESSMENTS OF FINANCIAL RISK OF THE COUNTERPARTY, AND IT CREATES SOME SUSPENSION AND TERMINATION LEVERS FOR ERCOT 1185 WAS SPONSORED BY L C R A.
IT'S ESTABLISHING THAT A RESOURCE CAN RECOVER A FINANCIAL LOSS THAT COMES FROM ERCOT ISSUING A V D I TO A RESOURCE TO REDUCE ITS REAL POWER OUTPUT.
AND 1189 IS ADDRESSING LANGUAGE IN THE PROTOCOLS AROUND ANCILLARY SERVICES, TRADES, SPECIFICALLY AROUND REGULATION SERVICE TRANSFERS.
UH, THESE FOUR NPRS ON THIS SLIDE ARE ALL NO IMPACT.
CAN WE PAUSE HERE ON, ON THE SLIDE AND SEE, UM, IF ANYBODY HAS AN ISSUE WITH ADDING THESE UNOPPOSED AND NO IMPACT RS TO THE COMBO BALLOT, OR IF THERE'S ANY DISCUSSION ON THE SLIDE QUESTION ON 1175 AND COMMENT FROM NED.
A QUICK QUESTION ON 1175 ON THE BACKGROUND CHECK FEE.
IS IT PER PRINCIPLE PER MARKET PARTICIPANT, OR IS IT PER PRINCIPAL IN TOTAL IF THEY HA IF THEY'RE A PRINCIPAL OF MULTIPLE MARKET PARTICIPANTS? HI, THIS IS CATHERINE GROSS FROM ERCOT LEGAL.
HI, UM, THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION, JUST SO THAT I CAN, UM, MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTOOD IT CORRECTLY.
YOU'RE ASKING IF THE SAME PRINCIPAL, THE SAME PERSON I IS A PRINCIPAL OF MULTIPLE MARKET PARTICIPANTS IF THEY NEED TO PAY THAT FEE MULTIPLE TIMES? THAT IS CORRECT.
[00:05:02]
I'M TRYING TO THINK.I DON'T THINK THAT WE SPECIFICALLY THOUGHT OF THAT SCENARIO, BUT, UM, OFF THE CUFF, IT SEEMS TO ME REASONABLE THAT THERE COULD BE SOME KIND OF AN INDICATION, UM, ON LIKE WHEN WE'RE DOING THE BACKGROUND CHECK AND WHEN WE'RE WORKING WITH THAT MARKET PARTICIPANT FOR THEM TO NOTIFY US AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY, THAT WE, UM, REALIZE THAT WE'VE ALREADY RECENTLY DONE A, UM, BACKGROUND CHECK ON THAT SAME PERSON AND SO NOT NEEDING TO DO IT AGAIN.
UM, HOWEVER, I THINK A CAVEAT TO THAT, THAT I WILL SAY IS THAT UNDER THIS N P R R, UM, ERCOT CAN, UM, ONE OF THE TRIGGERS FOR A A BACKGROUND CHECK COULD BE IF IT'S A NEW, UH, MARKET PARTICIPANT ENTERING THE MARKET, BUT IT COULD ALSO BE IF ERCOT PERIODICALLY DETERMINES TO DO, UM, THE NEED TO DO A BACKGROUND CHECK ON EXISTING COUNTERPARTIES.
SO IF IT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, A PRINCIPAL AND IT'S BEEN SEVERAL YEARS SINCE THAT PRINCIPAL HAS HAD A BACKGROUND CHECK DONE ON THEM, THEN ERCOT, UM, MIGHT DETERMINE THAT IT NEEDS TO BE, YOU KNOW, FOR ALL OF THE PRINCIPLES OF A PARTICULAR MARKET PARTICIPANT THAT ERCOT WANTS TO REDO THAT BACKGROUND CHECK PROCESS.
WAS YOUR QUESTION TO THE NPR R 1175? UM, I HAD, UH, FIRST OF ALL CONFIRM.
YOU CAN HEAR ME? YES, I CAN HEAR YOU.
UM, I HAD ONE, WELL, THERE WERE ONE TYPO THAT I, I NOTICED, SO I JUST WANTED TO FLAG THAT, UM, JUST, IT WAS A LOSES VERSUS LOSSES, UM, TYPO THAT I THINK MAY HAVE SKIPPED PAST SPELL CHECK.
THE, THE MORE SUBSTANTIVE QUESTION THAT I HAD WAS REALLY MORE JUST ASKING FOR SOME CONFIRMATION FROM ERCOT ABOUT, UM, YOU KNOW, IN THE PROVISIONS WHERE THEY TALK ABOUT A COMPLAINT THAT'S RECEIVED, IT SEEMS LIKE THAT IT, I READ THAT AS BEING, UM, MODIFIED BY CONCERNING FINANCIAL MATTERS INITIATED BY ONE OF THE LISTED ORGANIZATIONS, AND NOT NECESSARILY INCLUDING, FOR INSTANCE, LIKE INFORMAL, UH, YOU KNOW, CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS TO A STATE COMMISSION, FOR INSTANCE, WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT WAS THE INTENDED SCOPE, UM, WAS TO HAVE IT, YOU KNOW, BE RELEVANT TO FINANCIAL QUALIFICATIONS AND NOT, NOT BROAD TO INCLUDE, YOU KNOW, A A VERY, VERY BROAD SET OF, OR BROAD INTERPRETATION OF COMPLAINTS.
UM, COREY OR SOMEBODY FROM IPA, CAN, CAN YOU CATCH THAT TYPO OR DO WE NEED TO PULL THAT UP? YEAH, LET ME PULL THAT UP JUST FOR COMPLETION SAKE AND THANK YOU NED FOR CATCHING THAT FIRST ONE WAS ON PAGE 13 OR 1621 HERE.
THESE RESULT IN LOSSES, NOT LOSES.
ANOTHER ONE DOWN HERE, THE SAME LANGUAGE YEP.
RESULTING IN LOSSES FOR UPLIFT.
AND YOU'RE, YOU'RE RIGHT, SPELLCHECKS OUR FRIEND UNTIL IT'S NOT
I'M GONNA HAVE YOU PROOFREAD ALL MY DOCUMENTS NOW.
UM, SO CAN WE GO AHEAD AND ADD THESE TO THE COMBO BALLOT OR, OR DO WE NEED A SEPARATE BALLOT FOR 4 11 75? UM, DON'T SEE ANY MORE COMMENTS, SO I'M GOING TO ASSUME WE CAN ADD THESE.
ALL, ALL THE UNOPPOSED AND NO IMPACT ARE OURS TO THE COMBO BALLOT.
I DON'T SEE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THAT.
MARTHA, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND RESUME PLEASE.
CORY, WHEN YOU'RE READY, CAN WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE? THANK YOU.
UM, SO THESE NEXT TWO HERE ARE UNOPPOSED.
UH, THEY'RE ALSO SPONSORED BY ERCOT AND SHOWED COST IMPACTS IN THE IMPACT ANALYSIS.
SO 1164 IS GONNA HAVE RESOURCE I RESOURCE ENTITIES TELL ERCOT IF THEY'RE, IF THEY'RE RESOURCES BLACK START CAPABLE,
[00:10:01]
THOSE WOULD BE FOR ONES THAT ARE NOT ACTUALLY CONTRACTED FOR BLACK START SERVICE.AND THEN RESOURCES WOULD ALSO BE TELLING ERCOT IF THEIR UNITS HAVE THE CAPABILITY FOR ICE SYNCHRONOUS CONTROL.
UM, THE N P R R ALSO REQUIRES TSPS TO IDENTIFY WHETHER THEY'RE BREAKERS AND SWITCHES HAVE EITHER SYNCHRO SCOPE OR SYNCHRONISM CHECK RELAY CAPABILITIES IN THE NETWORK OPERATIONS MODEL.
AND THIS ONE WAS 75 TO 125,000 IN COST.
1171 IS DESCRIBING THAT DISTRIBUTION CONNECTED RESOURCES THAT ARE SUBJECT TO LOAD SHEDDING ARE ALLOWED TO PROVIDE THE REG DOWN AND NONS SPIN ANCILLARY SERVICES.
AND THOSE THAT ARE NOT SUBJECT TO LOAD SHEDDING ARE ALLOWED TO PROVIDE ALL ANCILLARIES.
UH, SUBJECT TO THE MEETING, THE, THE AS QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS.
OF COURSE, UM, THE COST TO IMPLEMENT THIS ONE WAS 350 TO 550,000 AND THERE WERE SOME COMMENTS FROM ERCOT FILED LAST WEEK, I THINK ON THE 18TH, UM, TO FIX SOME BASELINE LANGUAGE THAT WAS ACCIDENTALLY LEFT OUT.
SO THAT WOULD BE THE, THE CANDIDATE FOR TAX APPROVAL TODAY ON 1171.
AND I'LL ASK YOU TO PAUSE THERE.
UM, I BELIEVE WE, WE ALSO HAVE SOME DESKTOP EDITS ON N P R R 1164 FROM
IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.
I'LL JUST SAY THAT WE ALSO NEED TO REVIEW THE BUSINESS CASE ON BOTH 1164 AND 1171 DUE TO THE BUDGETARY IMPACTS OR THE HIGH BUDGETARY IMPACT.
AND THEN COREY IS SHOWING, UM, THE REPHRASING OF A PARAGRAPH REFERENCE HERE.
DO YOU WANNA START AT THE BUSINESS CASE OR DO YOU WANNA WITH THE, SO, AND DO YOU WANNA POINT ANYTHING OUT HERE OR WE JUST WANNA GIVE EVERYBODY A COUPLE MINUTES TO, TO REVIEW THIS? YEAH, I THINK WE JUST WANNA GIVE PEOPLE A COUPLE MINUTES TO REVIEW.
USUALLY WHEN, UM, A BUDGETARY IMPACT EXCEEDS A HUNDRED K UH, THE BOARD LIKES TO KNOW THAT T DID DO ITS DUE DILIGENCE TO REVIEW, UH, THE JUSTIFICATION IN BUSINESS CASE.
OKAY, SO WE WILL ASK FOLKS, UM, ON BOTH 1164 AND 1171.
UM, WE'LL GET TO 1171 IN A MINUTE, BUT, BUT JUST MAKE SURE EVERYBODY'S REVIEWING THE BUSINESS CASE, UH, DUE TO THE, THE PRICE TAG BEING OVER A HUNDRED K, UM, SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE ANY COMMENTS OR OBJECTIONS WE HAVE, GET TO THE BOARD.
DOES ANYONE WANT TO, TO RAISE ANYTHING ON N P R R 1164 BUSINESS CASE? OKAY, COREY, DO YOU WANNA GO AHEAD AND GET TO STOP EDIT? YES, MA'AM.
SO YEAH, THE, JUST TO HEARING THE DEFINITION OF BLACK STAR CAPABLE RESOURCE, JUST CHUCKLING A CLAUSE FURTHER UP AHEAD OF THE PARAGRAPH REFERENCE JUST A STANDARDIZED LANGUAGE, THE SAME WORDS, JUST SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT ORDER, SAME MEANING, ALRIGHT, THAT'S THE ONLY OTHER, AND THERE'S NO, UH, CHANGE TO INTENT THERE, RIGHT? JUST REPHRASING THE LANGUAGE.
UM, AND SO I, I WILL SUGGEST THAT WE ADD THIS TO THE CONVO BALLOT AS WELL.
UM, UNLESS ANYBODY HAS ANY OBJECTIONS TO THAT.
HEARING NONE, COREY, I THINK WE CAN BRING UP 1171 TO REVIEW THAT BUSINESS CASE.
AND THIS, WE ARE GOING TO BRING UP THE, UM, AUGUST 18TH COMMENTS ON THIS.
[00:15:01]
MS. MARTHA NOTICED, WE DID HAVE COMMENTS COME IN ON THE 18TH FROM YEAH, CAITLIN, I, I CAN SPEAK TO THE COMMENTS BASICALLY THAT THE STRIKEOUT IN GREEN, THAT BASELINE LANGUAGE WAS OMITTED IN THE P R S REPORT, SO WE STUCK IT BACK IN AND THEN SHOWED IT AS STRUCK.AND DID WE WANNA GO BACK TO THE BUSINESS PAGE? SORRY, I, I, I DIDN'T REALIZE WE NEEDED TWO DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS.
UM, I, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE INTENTION OF THIS ONE IS, UM, JUST TO CLARIFY WHAT, WHAT SERVICES DGRS AND DSRS CAN PROVIDE, UM, IN RESPONSE TO THE PC'S REQUESTS AND WORK DONE THERE.
UM, AND SO HERE IS THAT BUSINESS CASE AGAIN, IF, IF EVERYBODY WANTS TO REVEAL IT AND PROVIDE ANY COMMENTS.
UH, AGAIN, THE IMPACT ON THIS IS THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTY FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY K, AND THEN, UH, THE NEW ER COMMENTS ARE, ARE WHAT WE ARE LOOKING TO GET APPROVED THAT THAT ER OR THE, AND OUTLINED, I WILL GIVE EVERYONE A MOMENT HERE.
I SEE A QUESTION FROM BRIAN SAND.
UH, MY QUESTION IS FOR, UM, THESE RESOURCES THAT MAY BE ON A FEEDER THAT ALSO HAS A, UM, MOBILE GENERATOR, UM, THAT MAY BE SEPARATED FROM THE TRANSMISSION SYSTEM, UM, ARE, WOULD THOSE RESOURCES BE ELIGIBLE? UM, THE SCENARIO IS THE FEEDER IS DISCONNECTED FROM THE TRANSMISSION SYSTEM BECAUSE THE MOBILE GENERATOR IS ON.
I CAN, UH, TRY, TRY TO ADDRESS THAT.
I, I THINK IN THAT SCENARIO, YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT REALLY, THAT, THAT GENERATOR WOULDN'T REALLY BE PARTICIPATING IN ANCILLARY SERVICES, RIGHT? UH, THAT'S, THAT'S CORRECT.
BUT YOU COULD HAVE RESOURCES ON THE FEEDER.
UM, THAT MIGHT BE, I MIGHT BE A MISUNDERSTANDING.
YOUR QUESTION, BRIAN, WHAT, CAN YOU RESTATE WHAT YOUR QUESTION IS? YEAH, SO, UH, SCENARIO IS YOU'VE GOT, UM, A DISTRIBUTED GENERATION RESOURCE ON SOME DISTRIBUTION CIRCUIT.
THE ENTIRE CIRCUIT IS DISCONNECTED FROM THE TRANSMISSION SYSTEM BECAUSE THE MOBILE GENERATOR HAS BEEN TURNED ON.
AND MY QUESTION IS, DOES THE DEFINITION OF LOAD SHED HERE, UH, PREVENT THOSE RESOURCES, UM, THAT MIGHT BE ON THAT CIRCUIT FROM PARTICIPATING IN SOME OF THESE ANCILLARY SERVICES? UH, GOT IT.
UM, YEAH, SO I, I'M NOT, I'M NOT ENTIRELY SURE I, I HADN'T THOUGHT THROUGH THAT SCENARIO.
UM, I, I THINK THAT WE WOULD, UM, LEAVE IT TO THE, UM, TO THE, UH, D S P TO DETERMINE WHETHER THEY THINK THAT IT QUALIFIES OR DOESN'T.
BUT I, I HAVEN'T TALKED TO ANY DSPS TO HEAR WHAT THEIR INTERPRETATION WOULD BE OF THAT.
I'M SORRY FOR BRINGING THIS ISSUE UP NOW.
I JUST THOUGHT OF IT AS WE WERE TALKING THROUGH IT, AND IT MIGHT REQUIRE A A, I GUESS A FOLLOW UP.
N P R R I SEE, UH, CLAYTON STICE IN THE QUEUE.
I DON'T KNOW IF HE CAN HELP US OUT WITH THIS ANSWER.
UM, I DON'T BELIEVE IN THIS CASE, BRIAN, THAT THE GENERATOR WOULD, SINCE IT'S DISCONNECTED FROM THE ERCOT SYSTEM, IT WOULDN'T BE DISPATCHED AT ALL FOR ANY ANCILLARY SERVICES WHATSOEVER.
[00:20:01]
AND WHETHER OR NOT THE GENERATOR WAS CONTINUING TO OPERATE OR PROVIDE POWER INTO THE SYSTEM WOULD BE UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE D S P.I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
MY QUESTION IS ABOUT RESOURCES THAT MIGHT BE ON THE SAME CIRCUIT WHERE THAT MOBILE GENERATOR IS LOCATED, RIGHT? IF THE CIRCUIT IS OUT AND BEING POWERED BY A MOBILE GENERATOR, IT'S NOT CONNECTED TO THE ERCOT SYSTEM, IT IS SIMPLY A SEPARATE ISLAND.
AND SINCE IT'S DISCONNECTED FROM THE ERCOT SYSTEM, IT WOULDN'T BE DISPATCHED AT ALL.
THAT, THAT'S HOW I'M THINKING ABOUT IT, IT TOO.
BUT MY QUESTION IS LIKE, DOES THE UH, D S P PROVIDE NOTICE TO THE, UM, THE RESOURCE THAT IT MAY NOT BE ELIGIBLE TO PROVIDE ANCILLARY SERVICES BECAUSE OF THAT POTENTIAL FUNCTIONALITY? LIKE THE CUSTOMER, YOU KNOW, DOESN'T SEE LOAD SHED BECAUSE THE MOBILE GENERATION IS ON, BUT THE ERCOT TRANSMISSION SYSTEM WOULD PERCEIVE IT TO BE AS IF LOAD SHED WAS OCCURRING BECAUSE IT'S DISCONNECTED FROM THE TRANSMISSION SYSTEM.
I, I GUESS MY POINT IS THAT MAYBE WE NEED TO THINK THROUGH THAT ISSUE IN A, IN A PERSPECTIVE IN P R AND I, I, SORRY FOR RAISING IT SO LATE.
YEAH, BRIAN, I, I THINK I AGREE.
I, I THINK, UM, I, I DON'T THINK THAT WE NEED TO MAYBE ADDRESS THAT RIGHT NOW, BUT IT'S SOMETHING TO THINK THROUGH AND, AND, UH, MAYBE TALK TO, UH, THE DSPS ABOUT, SEE HOW THEY WOULD INTERPRET THAT.
YEAH, I'M, I'M FINE WITH THAT.
SO IT'S SOMETHING WE CAN CONTINUE TO CONSIDER IN THE FUTURE.
I SEE A COUPLE OF PEOPLE IN THE QUEUE, THOUGH.
THEY MIGHT HAVE MORE TO ADD ON THIS.
UM, BRIAN, I, I APPRECIATE YOUR FLAGGING THIS AND, UM, YOU KNOW, JEFF AND CLAYTON, I, I, I THINK I AGREE WITH WHERE, UH, YOU, YOU WERE ALL KIND OF CIRCLING, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, IF, IF THE, IF THAT FEEDER IS ISLANDED THROUGH MOBILE GENERATION, IT'S NOT PROVIDING, YOU KNOW, SERVICE TO THE GRID, TO THE TRANSMISSION GRID, UM, AND IT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT CAN BE TAKEN UP OUTSIDE OF THIS N P R R.
SO IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY NEED TO HOLD THIS UP, BUT, UM, I JUST WANTED TO, TO THANK, THANK BRIAN FOR FLAGGING IT.
YOU KNOW, THE MOBILE GENERATION TOPIC IS ONE THAT I THINK IS VERY SIMPLE ON ITS FACE, BUT HAS A LOT OF, UM, COMPLICATIONS UNDER THE SURFACE.
AND THIS IS JUST, UH, THE LATEST, LATEST FLAVOR OF THAT.
SO, UM, NO, NO, I'LL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT.
AND I'LL AGREE WITH YOU ON THANKING BRIAN FOR BRINGING THAT UP.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? I CAN HEAR YOU.
UH, SO, UM, I, JUST TO GET THIS, UH, RESOLVED PROPERLY, UM, COULD WE GET IN SOME WRITTEN FORM, THE, THE ISSUE, UH, BECAUSE THERE'S SOME REFERENCES TO TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION, AND IT'S NOT INHERENTLY CLEAR TO ME WHERE THE BRAKES HAPPENING.
UM, SO I'D, I'D LIKE TO JUST GET SOMETHING IN WRITING OF THE, OF THE PROBLEM THAT'S BEING RAISED SO THAT WE CAN MAKE SURE AND DOCUMENT THAT AND, AND ADDRESS IT AND NOT SOME OTHER THING THAT WE WANT THAT WE UNDERSTAND TO BE THE ANSWER.
I SEE BRIAN VOLUNTEERING, AND, AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I WAS THINKING AS WELL.
I DON'T THINK WE NEED A NOTE ON, ON THE VOTER MOTION, BUT MAYBE IF, IF BRIAN WOULD PROVIDE THAT WRITE UP TO ERCOT, IS THAT OKAY WITH EVERYBODY? THAT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL ON MY END.
ALRIGHT, I'LL LET BRIAN HANDLE THAT.
UM, AND IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS FEEDBACK ON THAT, UH, PLEASE, PLEASE GIVE THAT TO ERICA.
I SEE A QUESTION, UM, FROM CHRIS HENDRICKS.
WOULD A MOBILE GENERATION WORKSHOP BE APPROPRIATE? UM, I, I WILL
[00:25:01]
SHOOT THAT RIGHT BACK TO YOU, KENAN, AND, AND YOU MAY WANT TO SEE THE, THE WRITEUP IN MORE INFORMATION BEFORE YOU ANSWER THAT AS WELL.CANAN OR SOMEBODY FROM ARCHIVE WANNA WEIGH IN ON A POSSIBLE MOBILE DRUG DIRECTION WORKSHOP.
I'M SORRY, WHAT'S THE DIRECTION? UM, LET, LET ME JUST GO, CHRIS, DO YOU WANT TO, TO RAISE YOUR ITEM THAT YOU PUT IN THE QUEUE? SURE.
I WAS JUST KIND OF PONDERING WHAT A WORKSHOP BE HELPFUL TO KIND OF DRESS OUT BRIAN'S ISSUE AND ANY OTHER ISSUES THAT NED HAD BROUGHT UP IN OTHERS.
I WOULD HESITATE TO DO THAT IMMEDIATELY, BUT THAT MAY BE SOMETHING WE HAVE TO DO AT, AT SOME POINT.
UM, AGAIN, UH, I I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE SHOE BECAUSE TO ME, UM, I HAD, I HAD MULTIPLE OTHER ANSWERS TO OFFER THAT I, I THINK ARE ALSO INCOMPLETE ANSWERS.
SO LET'S JUST TEE UP THE ISSUE, FIGURE OUT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, AND THEN WE CAN DECIDE IF A WORKSHOP'S APPROPRIATE GOING FORWARD.
IS THAT, IS THAT OKAY? YEAH, FAIR ENOUGH.
I JUST DIDN'T KNOW IF IT'D BE HELPFUL OR NOT.
I, I, I, IT'S KIND OF MAYBE AT THIS POINT, BUT, UH, I, I MEAN, IF Y'ALL WANT ONE, WE CAN ABSOLUTELY DO THAT.
BUT LET'S, LET'S MAKE SURE WE KIND OF HAVE TEED THIS UP, RIGHT.
KENNAN, DO YOU WANT THAT WRITE UP FROM BRIAN IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS N P R R GOING TO THE BOARD NOW? OR DO YOU THINK THAT'S SOMETHING MAYBE WE SHOULD REVISIT AS A GROUP AT A LATER TAC MEETING? UH, I, I THOUGHT EVERYBODY AGREED THAT WE COULD TAKE THIS TO ANOTHER TAC MEETING AND THAT C P R COULD MOVE FORWARD.
BUT I MAY BE MISCHARACTERIZING OTHER PEOPLE'S OPINION.
BRIAN, SAM, DOES THAT WORK FOR YOU? UM, MAYBE YOU COULD BRING THAT RIGHT UP.
YEAH, LET, LET ME TO ME AND CLIFF AND WE CAN PUT IT ON THE AGENDA FOR A FUTURE TECH MEETING.
UH, I'M HAPPY TO WRITE UP A PROBLEM STATEMENT AND CIRCULATE IT AND DISCUSS THIS AT, UM, SOME FUTURE MEETING OR MEETINGS, WHEREVER, UM, Y'ALL DEEM IS BEST.
AND I THINK, SO I WOULD GO TO CLAYTON WHO, UH, MAY MAY BE TELLING US WHY WE SHOULD NOT DO THAT, BUT GO AHEAD.
WELL, I, I, I THINK YOU HAVE TO FOCUS ON JUST THE, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENS WHENEVER THIS LOAD EXITS AND WHAT DOES IT, WHAT HAPPENS WHENEVER IT REENTERS ERCOT, BUT THERE'S A LOT OF LOADS OUT THERE THAT ARE TIED TO GENERATION THAT ARE WAITING FOR PERMANENT INTERCONNECT OR JUST OPERATING JUST BECAUSE THERE'S NO TRANSMISSION OR DISTRIBUTION AVAILABLE WHERE THEY ARE.
AND THIS, I MEAN, JUST BE CAREFUL HOW YOU CRAFT THIS SO THAT IT DOESN'T LIKE DRAW IN A BUNCH OF STUFF YOU DON'T WANT TO INCLUDE, I THINK ERCOT ONLY HAS JURISDICTION OVER WHAT'S TIED TO ERCOT.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, IF THERE'S SOME PROCEDURE THAT NEEDS TO BE MANAGED AS THIS DISCONNECTS FROM ERCOT AND THEN IS RECONNECTED FROM ERCOT, I'M GOOD WITH THAT.
BUT THE, WHAT GOES ON WHENEVER IT'S, WHENEVER LOAD IS NOT CONNECTED TO ERCOT, THAT'S NONE OF T'S BUSINESS BASICALLY.
QUESTIONS FROM OR COMMENT FROM NED? HEY CLAYTON.
UH, I JUST THOUGHT IT'D BE HELPFUL TO CLARIFY, I THINK WHAT, WHAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IS LIMITED TO THE T D U, UM, LEASED AND OPERATED MOBILE GENERATION THAT'S DEPLOYED UNDER THE, THE STATUTORY CARVE OUT THAT THEY HAVE THERE.
NOT NECESSARILY, UM, THE THE USE CASES YOU'RE, YOU'RE THINKING OF.
YEAH, AS LONG AS WE'RE LIMITED, THAT'S GOOD.
AND JUST FOR CLARITY, I THINK NED HELPED LIMIT, UM, WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT.
I'M SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT, UM, FEEDERS WHERE THERE IS T D U OWNED MOBILE GENERATION.
THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
ARE THERE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS ON N P R R 1171?
[00:30:01]
SO WE REVIEWED THE BUSINESS CASE ON THIS AND THE, UM, MOTION WOULD BE FOR EIGHT 18 OUR COMMENTS, AND THEN WE WOULD REVISIT THE, THE MOBILE GENERATION ASPECTS THAT, THAT BRANDON RAISED AT A FUTURE TECH MEETING.UM, AGAIN, IF THERE'S NO OBJECTION, I THINK WE CAN ADD TO THIS ONE, TO THE COMBO.
AND I THINK WE ARE BACK TO YOU, MARTHA.
UH, WAIT FOR COREY TO GET THE SLIDE BACK UP.
SO LAST ONE HERE FOR TODAY IS 1186.
THIS WAS DISCUSSED A LITTLE BIT EARLIER UNDER THE OPINIONS REPORT, BUT, UH, THIS IS AN ERCOT SPONSORED N P R R THAT AMONG OTHER THINGS, GIVES ERCOT MORE INFORMATION ON E S R STATE OF CHARGE.
UM, THERE'S BEEN THREE WORKSHOPS AND TWO P R SS DISCUSSIONS ON THIS OVER THE LAST THREE MONTHS.
AND AT THE AUGUST MEETING, P R S APPROVED, UH, SOME JOINT COMMENTS THAT WERE FILED BY BROADREACH AND KEY CAPTURE A COUPLE WEEKS AGO.
THOSE WERE SUBMITTED ON AUGUST 9TH.
AND ON THAT VOTE, THERE WERE TWO ABSTENTIONS AND THREE NO VOTES ON THE N P R R.
MOST OF THOSE, UH, ABSTENTIONS AND OPPOSING VOTES CAME FROM THE INDEPENDENT GENERATOR SEGMENT.
SINCE P R S TWO WEEKS AGO, UH, PEOPLE HAVE PROBABLY SEEN SOME JOINT COMMENTS WERE SUBMITTED YESTERDAY BY E O N PLUS POWER AND JUPITER.
SO THIS ONE ALSO HAD, UH, AN IMPACT.
IT WAS 500 TO 700,000 IN COST.
AND P R S IS RECOMMENDING A 2023 PRIORITY FOR THIS N P R R CAITLIN.
I THINK THAT TAKES CARE OF ALL THE VOTING ITEMS. PERFECT.
UM, YES, AND I THINK WE WILL NEED A SEPARATE BALLOT FOR THIS ONE.
I BELIEVE ALL THE OTHER VOTING ITEMS WE HAVE NOW ADDED TO THE, THE COMBO BALLOT, UM, EVERYTHING ELSE WAS ON A POST, SOME HAD IMPACT.
AND SO I'M ACTUALLY GONNA TURN, UH, MODERATION OF THIS DISCUSSION OVER TO ANNE AS I WILL NEED TO PROBABLY TAKE MY, MY VICE CHAIR OR CHAIR HAT DURING THIS DISCUSSION OFF AND WEIGH IN AS WELL.
SO ANNE, UM, IF YOU'RE READY TO GO, GO, I WILL LET YOU MODERATE THE QUEUE ON ON THIS ONE.
WE'VE GOT KEN MCINTYRE IN THE QUEUE.
CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? WE CAN GO AHEAD.
SO, UH, FIRST OF ALL, THANKS FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK HERE AT TECH TODAY REGARDING OUR, UM, 1186 COMMENTS AND PROPOSED PROTOCOL LANGUAGE.
UH, JUST, UH, FROM, UM, INTRODUCTIONS KEN MCINTYRE, I'M HEAD OF RELIABILITY AND MARKETS FOUR PLUS POWER, UH, PLUS POWER, AS MENTIONED IS ONE OF THE JOINT COMMENTERS ALONG WITH EOLIAN ENERGY AND JUPITER POWER.
AND ON THE CALL TODAY, WE ALSO HAVE FROM EOLIAN ENERGY, UH, REPRESENTING THEM THE, UH, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER STEPHANIE SMITH.
AND FROM JUPITER POWER WE HAVE AUDREY FOGARTY, ALSO CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER.
UM, I JUST WANNA SPEND SOME TIME, UH, GOING THROUGH THIS BECAUSE IT IS COMPLICATED AND, UH, WE'VE, YOU KNOW, BEEN WORKING AT A FAST PACE ON THIS URGENT STATUS.
UH, SO JUST STARTING WITH A RECAP, I MEAN,
SO TWO MONTHS AGO, UH, WITH THE STATE OF OBJECTIVE INCREASING E S R STATE OF CHARGE AWARENESS, ACCOUNTING AND MONITORING, AND THEN REQUESTING AN URGENT STATUS, UH, TO ALLOW ELKHART TO IMPLEMENT, UH, THE N P R R AND THE CHANGE TO THOSE SYSTEMS IN A, IN A SHORT WINDOW, UH, THAT THEY HAD AVAILABLE TO THEM FOR THEIR SOFTWARE FOLKS.
SO, AND, AND ALSO, AS MENTIONED EARLIER IN THE CALL TODAY ON TECH PRIOR TO R T C AND R T C PLUS B, WHICH WE'RE ALL FOCUSED ON GIVEN THE REQUEST FOR URGENCY, UM, THE, THE N P R R HAS NOT BEEN ADVANCED THROUGH TYPICAL STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE PROCESSES.
SO INSTEAD IT'S SUPPORTED, BEEN SUPPORTED BY A FEW WORKSHOPS AND SOME FOLLOW-UP STAFF MEETINGS BETWEEN ERCOT AND STAKEHOLDERS.
BUT REALLY IT'S BEEN PROCEEDING STRAIGHT TO P R S AND NOW ON ATTACK.
SO WHILE OAKS HELD THREE WORKSHOPS ON THE N P R R, UH, THE JOINT COMMENTERS, UH, IN OUR COMMENTS, AT LEAST A CONCERN THAT QUESTIONS PAY POSED BY STAKEHOLDERS REALLY HAVEN'T
[00:35:01]
BEEN ADDRESSED AND THERE'S JUST NEEDS FURTHER DISCUSSION.BUT CONSIDERING THE MAGNITUDE OF SOME OF THESE CHANGES CONTEMPLATED FOR GRID RELIABILITY AND THE OPERATIONS OF ENERGY STORAGE RESOURCES UNDER THIS N P R R, WE'VE PROPOSED THAT CERTAIN CONCEPTS INTRODUCED BE CODED AS PARAMETERS AND
RIGHT, AND THIS WILL STILL KEEP US ON OCOS TIMELINE, THIS URGENT IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE.
I'LL BE HONEST, OUR FIRST INSTINCT WAS TO CUT SOME OF THOSE LANGUAGE THAT WE FELT WAS CONTROVERSIAL AND AND DAMAGING THE RELIABILITY, UH, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THIS COMPRESSED TIMELINE.
AND WE'RE DEALING WITH SUCH IMPACTFUL PROCESSES AND SYSTEMS THAT REALLY DO DIRECTLY IMPACT THE MARKET AND RELIABILITY.
BUT WE'VE BEEN ENCOURAGED BY WORKING WITH ERCOT LEADERSHIP AND THEIR STAFF TO FIND A WAY TO MEET THEIR TIMELINE, STILL ADDRESS IT, AND STILL ADDRESS THE ISSUES WE'VE OUTLINED IN OUR COMMONS.
SO WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO FIND A PATH FORWARD TO MAKE THIS WORK AND ACCOMMODATE THOSE URGENT NEEDS.
SO TO BE CLEAR, FROM THE JOINT COMMENTERS PROPOSAL THAT YOU HAVE, WE FEEL IT BOTH PROVIDES
AND ALTHOUGH WE DON'T FEEL LIKE IT'S WELL BAKED AND REALLY NECESSARY AT THIS TIME, UH, WE DO FEEL LIKE THE EXISTING PROTOCOLS IN PLACE TODAY ALREADY ENFORCED A DESIRED AN SORRY SERVICES PERFORMANCE.
AND IF THOSE ARE ENFORCED AS THEY'RE WRITTEN, I THINK THAT ADDRESSES A LOT OF THE ISSUES.
BUT WE WANNA MAKE SURE WE PROVIDE ERCOT WITH AN ADEQUATE LEVEL OF COMFORT THAT THEY CAN ENSURE THAT ESRS WILL MEET THEIR AS OBLIGATIONS.
NOW, JUST ON OUR PROPOSAL, IT'S REALLY A COUPLE OF MAIN AREAS, AND I JUST WANNA SUMMARIZE THOSE WITH THE TECH MEMBERS.
WE OFFER WHAT WE BELIEVE IS A STRAIGHTFORWARD PRO PROPOSAL THAT BUILDS ON THE P R S VERSION THAT WAS ENDORSED A COUPLE WEEKS AGO.
AND WE SUPPORT, UH, A LOT OF WHAT'S IN N P R 1186 WITH SOME MODIFICATIONS THAT WE THINK WOULD ADDRESS THE CONCERNS.
FIRST OF ALL, WE SUPPORT AND ALLOW FOR THE PROPOSED ADDITIONAL VISIBILITY AND SITUATIONAL AWARENESS TO E S R STATE OF CHARGE.
AND THAT IS THROUGH THE REQUESTED TELEMETRY THAT
SO THAT SITUATIONAL AWARENESS THROUGH TELEMETRY AND INFORMATION WE SUPPORT, WE'RE ALSO SUPPORTING A COMPLIANCE METRIC THAT THEY'VE OUTLINED.
WELL, SUPPORTING THAT, WE'RE JUST ASKING THAT IT BE MORE IN LINE WITH PROVEN APPROACHES THAT ARE IN SECTION EIGHT, SUCH AS GRID P, WHERE REALLY THE NON-COMPLIANCE TRIGGER IS BASED ON A MONTHLY THRESHOLD.
AND I'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT.
WE ARE ALSO SUPPORTING AND TRYING TO MEET THE URGENCY REQUEST AND ALLOW OCO TO CODE THEIR SYSTEMS. WE'RE JUST ASKING THAT THEY SET PARAMETERS AS VARIABLES SUCH THAT THEY CAN BE MORE FULLY DISCUSSED, RIGHT? UH, THROUGH THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS PROCESS AND DECIDED THROUGH FOLLOW UP NPR, SIMILAR TO THE X PARAMETER THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN HIGHLIGHTED, YOU KNOW, BY ERCOT IN THE LANGUAGE.
SO JUST ON THAT, WHAT WE'VE INCLUDED AS PART OF THE MODIFICATION IS REALLY A DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE MULTIPLY OF THAT VARIABLE, WHICH WE'VE CALLED Y IS APPLIED IN THE S O C REQUIRE EQUATION.
SO JUST LIKE THEY HAD X FOR THE END OF THE HOUR MINUTES, WE'RE OFFERING, LET'S HIGHLIGHT WITHIN THE LANGUAGE THIS Y VARIABLE, WHICH IS VERY IMPACTFUL ON HOW THE S O C REQUIREMENT EQUATION, UH, WORKS.
AND WE'RE ASKING THAT, YOU KNOW, LET'S PUT THAT IN THE PROTOCOLS AND THEN ALLOW FOLKS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THOSE SETTINGS WILL BE.
AND THEN IF THERE'S FUTURE CHANGES, LET'S MAKE SURE THAT WE GO THROUGH A STAKEHOLDER PROCESS JUST LIKE THE X THE SETTING FOR THE X VARIABLE WOULD BE, WE DO NOT BELIEVE IT WOULD DELAY R T C EFFORT BECAUSE IN DISCUSSIONS WITH ERCOT, THESE EQUATIONS ARE ALREADY PARAMETERIZED AND THEY FELT LIKE THEY COULD DO THIS.
WE'VE GOT CONFIRMATION A NUMBER OF TIMES OF STAFF WHAT THE VALUE OF Y IS, IS A DISCUSSION, AND IT'S A SUBSTAN STANDARD DISCUSSION THAT NEEDS TO HAPPEN.
BUT AS LONG AS THAT Y IS IN THE PROTOCOLS AND IT IS CONFIGURABLE, THAT S O C MULTIPLIER, THAT WOULD DEFINITELY MEET ONE OF OUR CONCERNS.
THE Y VARIABLE, AS WE SEE IT DOES TWO THINGS.
[00:40:01]
FIRST, IT SETS, IT'S THERE TO SET THE AMOUNT OF S O C, THE STATE OF CHARGE AS REQUIRED AT THE TOP OF THE HOUR BASED ON THE TYPE OF AN SERVICE THAT IS BEING AWARDED.SO WE CAN, WE SUGGESTED A STARTING VALUE FOR Y THAT WOULD ENSURE AT A MINIMUM ESRS HAVE ENOUGH CHARGE TO COVER THEIR HOURLY AWARDS AT THE TOP OF EVERY HOUR.
AND WE BELIEVE THIS WILL BE A GOOD STARTING POINT FOR AGRICUL TO ADDRESS THEIR OPERATIONAL CONCERNS.
ONCE AGAIN, THIS VARIABLE THROUGH STAKEHOLDER PROCESS CAN BE DISCUSSED ON WHAT VALUE SHOULD BE SET THERE FOR EACH ANCILLARY SERVICE.
SECOND PURPOSE, THIS WHY VARIABLE SERVES IS DURING A DEPLOYMENT OF ANCILLARY SERVICES.
WE WANNA ENSURE THAT WHEN, WHEN ESRS ARE AWARDED AN AS SERVICE FOR AN HOUR OR FOR TWO HOURS FOR THREE HOURS, THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO DELIVER THAT FULL AMOUNT AWARDED IN THOSE HOURS WHEN BEING DEPLOYED.
OUR CONCERN IS THAT WHEN, AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, 1186, WHEN WE ARE DEPLOYED, THE S O C REQUIREMENT EQUATION DOES NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT WE HAVE BEEN DEPLOYED.
AND RIGHT NOW, AS IT'S WRITTEN, IT WILL BLINDLY FORCE US TO START CHARGING AT THE END OF THE HOUR.
AND THAT'S A REAL IMPORTANT THING TO UNDERSTAND STAND IF WE HAVE A PRODUCT THAT WE'VE BEEN QUALIFIED FOR, SAY, E C R S, THAT IS A TWO HOUR PRODUCT AND WE'RE HOLDING CHARGE THAT SUCH THAT WE CAN PROVIDE IT WHEN DEPLOYED FOR CONTINUOUS TWO HOURS, HAVING US STOP BEFORE THE END OF THE FIRST HOUR GOING INTO THE SECOND AND HAVING TO THEN CHARGE AND NOT CONTINUE TO DEPLOY, DEPLOY AND SUPPORT RELIABILITY OF THE GRID, WE THINK IS DETRIMENTAL TO RELIABILITY AND ACTUALLY IS AGAINST, UH, WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO, WHICH IS FULFILL OUR OBLIGATION.
I BELIEVE IF WE CONTINUE TO TALK ABOUT THIS Y PARAMETER THAT WE'RE PROPOSING IN THE PROTOCOL LANGUAGE, WE CAN USE THAT AS A MECHANISM TO ACKNOWLEDGE WHEN DEPLOYMENT HAS OCCURRED AND HOW THE S O C REQUIREMENT DRIVES ESRS TO CHARGE.
THE SECOND AREA WE TALK ABOUT IS THE COMPLIANCE.
AS I MENTIONED, WE DO SUPPORT THE S E C COMPLIANCE WITH MINOR MODIFICATIONS.
AND AS I MENTIONED, WE REALLY WANTED TO JUST ALIGN WITH EXISTING PROVEN APPROACHES THAT ARE IN SECTION EIGHT.
UM, THIS, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING, MOVING TO A MONTHLY NON-COMPLIANCE TRIGGER OR THRESHOLD STILL ALLOWS ERCOT TO HAVE THE INSIGHTS AND MONITORING EVERY HOUR THAT THEY HAVE LISTED IN 1186.
UH, AND IT STILL ALLOWS THEM TO IDENTIFY WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR, WHICH IS EGREGIOUS VIOLATIONS OF S O C PERFORMANCE.
THE INTERVALS ARE STILL ASSESSED AT AN HOURLY LEVEL AS WRITTEN, WE'RE JUST SAYING AS IN LINE WITH GRID P OR SOME OF THOSE OTHER METRICS, UH, LET'S JUST USE PROVEN APPROACHES THAT SAYS WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS MAKE SURE ON A MONTHLY METRIC, UH, WHICH WE'RE SETTING FAIRLY HIGH AT A 98.75% PASS MARK, THAT IF SOMEONE CANNOT MEET THAT, THEN THAT SHOULD BE REPORTED AS A NON-COMPLIANCE WITH RELIABILITY MONITOR.
SO WHY ARE THESE CHANGES NEEDED THESE TWO AREAS THAT WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT? ONE IS WE'RE CONCERNED THAT WHERE YOU'VE GOT OPPORTUNITY TO PROVIDE, TO MAINTAIN CHARGE AND PROVIDE THAT WE'RE NOT GOT NEEDS AT MOST.
WE ARE HOLDING CAPACITY BACK AND WE UNDERSTAND OUR COURT'S POSITION IN BEING READY AND AVAILABLE, AND WE ARE NOT DISPUTING AN E C R S TO OUR DURATION REQUIREMENT.
WE'RE NOT DISPUTING ANNOUNCEMENT FOR OUR DURATION REQUIREMENT, BUT THERE ARE TIMES WHEN WE ARE GOING TO BE BLINDLY ASKED TO MAINTAIN THOSE LEVELS OF, UH, CHARGE TWO TIMES THE CHARGE AND FOUR TIMES THE CHARGE REGARDLESS OF FORWARD-LOOKING HOURS.
AND I JUST WANNA PAUSE ON THERE AS AN EXAMPLE FOR NONS SPIN IN THE FIRST, IF YOU THINK OVER FOUR HOURS, THE FIRST HOUR OF NON SPIN WE'RE ASKED, AND WE'VE GOT A 10 MEGAWATT OBLIGATION, WE'RE ASKED TO MAINTAIN 40 MEGAWATTS OF CHARGE IN HOUR ONE, BUT IN HOUR TWO, IF WE'RE NOT AWARDED NONS SPIN OR HOUR THREE OR FOUR CONTINUOUSLY, WE STILL HAVE TO MAINTAIN THAT AMOUNT, EVEN THOUGH IF WE WERE DEPLOYED, WE'D ONLY HAVE TO DEPLOY 10 MEGAWATTS.
BUT THESE ARE THE KIND OF NUANCES THAT WE HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO WORK THROUGH AND MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE NOT BEING ASKED TO HOLD CHARGE AND WITHHELD IT FROM SCARED
[00:45:01]
WHEN WE, WHEN WE COULD MAKE IT AVAILABLE.WHAT'S MORE CRITICAL IS WHEN WE'RE DEPLOYED, FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE THINK ABOUT LAST THURSDAY WHEN E C R S BEING A NEW SERVICE PRODUCT, AN SORRY SERVICE PRODUCT FOR, FOR ERCOT, THERE'S PROBABLY A LOT OF DATA TO ANALYZE AND FOLLOW UP ON.
BUT IF YOU THINK ABOUT WE'RE AWARDED AND HAVE TO BE AVAILABLE TO BE DEPLOYED, WE MAINTAIN A CHARGE IN THOSE HOURS THAT WE HAVE THAT OBLIGATION.
IF WE'RE DEPLOYED, SAY WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION OF 20 MEGAWATTS WHEN WE'RE DEPLOYED IN THAT FIRST HOUR, WE HAVE 20 MEGAWATTS, WE HAVE 40 MEGAWATTS OF CHARGE IN THAT HOUR, SO WE CAN PROVIDE IT FOR TWO CONTINUOUS HOURS, RIGHT? THAT'S THE, THAT'S WHAT'S WE'RE, WE'RE QUALIFIED FOR.
THAT'S WHAT THE PRODUCT IS ASKING US FOR IN THAT FIRST HOUR OF DEPLOYMENT.
AS WE GET TO THE END OF THE HOUR, THIS SS O C REQUIREMENT WILL ASK US AND REQUIRE US, 'CAUSE IT'S A SHELL TO STOP PROVIDING 20 MEGAWATTS TO THE GRID AND START CHARGING TO MEET THE TWO TIMES BACK TO THE 40 IN READY FOR THE NEXT HOUR.
AND IF YOU THINK ABOUT EXPANDING THAT TO ALL THE ESRS THAT ARE ONLINE, PROVIDING E C R SS, THAT TIME, THAT 20 COULD TURN INTO HUNDREDS OF MEGAWATTS AT THAT TIME BLINDLY, REGARDLESS OF THE FACT THAT WE COULD BE GETTING CLOSE TO AN E E A, THAT PHYSICAL RESERVE CAPACITY IS GOING DOWN TO STOP AND START CHARGING.
SO THEREFORE EXACERBATING THE CONDITION, NOW WE'RE GOING FROM POTENTIALLY HUNDREDS OF MEGAWATTS OF GENERATION TO HUNDREDS OF MEGAWATTS OF LOAD AND DEMAND.
AND THAT IS IN, THAT IS IN TOTAL DISREGARD AS TO HOW MUCH CHARGE WE HAVE.
AND WE STILL HAVE THE CAPABILITY TO FULFILL OUR TWO HOUR OBLIGATION.
SO WE THINK THERE'S A WAY FORWARD IN USING A Y VARIABLE.
I'VE HAD COUNTLESS MEETINGS WITH
IT'S NOT SIMPLE, IT IS COMPLICATED, BUT I THINK SOME WAY THAT THEY CAN ACKNOWLEDGE THAT AS WE'RE BEING DEPLOYED ALLOW US TO FULFILL OUR, FULFILL OUR TWO HOUR OR FOUR HOUR OBLIGATION.
AND THAT'S THE THING WE'RE CONCERNED ABOUT FROM THE COMPLIANCE PER PERSPECTIVE.
AND I'VE GOT FIVE MORE MINUTES, CAITLYN, THE COMPLIANCE METRICS THAT 1186 PROPOSES DOES NOT ALIGN WITH WIDER MARKET COMPLIANCE MEASURES OUTLINE SECTION EIGHT AND COULD RESULT IN OUTCOMES WHEREBY A NON-COMPLIANCE EVENT BY AN E S R MAY ARISE FROM A NUMBER OF LEGITIMATE OPERATIONAL ISSUES, INCLUDING SUCH SIMPLE THINGS LIKE THE TELEMETRY FAILURE.
NOW, A LOT OF US ARE VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE WORK THAT WENT INTO SECTION EIGHT, AND IF YOU LOOK AT SECTION EIGHT AND THE METRICS AROUND GRAD P AND C R E D P AND OTHERS, THERE'S AN EXTENSIVE AMOUNT OF LANGUAGE IN THERE TO UNDERSTAND EXACTLY THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT COULD ARISE THAT COULD CAUSE A FAILURE TO PROVIDE AT SOME PERS OR A LACK OF PERFORMANCE.
WE'RE NOT EX, WE'RE NOT SUGGESTING THAT WE NEED TO CREATE THIS EXTENSIVE LANGUAGE FOR THIS COMPLIANCE METRIC TODAY, LIKE SECTION EIGHT.
IT HAS, FOR THOSE OTHER RED P C R E D P METRICS.
WE'RE JUST OFFERING WHAT WE FEEL IS A RELATIVELY SIMPLE SOLUTION THAT IT ALIGNS WITH CURRENT PRACTICE, WHICH IS A MONTHLY NON-COMPLIANCE REPORTING THRESHOLD.
IT WOULD INCLUDE AN HOURLY MEASURE.
IN FACT, THEY SAMPLE RATE US EVERY FOUR SECONDS TO DO AN HOURLY MEASURE OF A PARCEL FAIL.
BUT YOU INCLUDE ALL THOSE HOURLY MEASURES INTO A MONTHLY REPORT AND A THRESHOLD.
AGAIN, THIS IS IN LINE WITH EXISTING AND PROVEN ENFORCEMENT APPROACHES THAT SECTION EIGHT IS USED TODAY.
SO JUST IN SUMMARY, WE ARE BUILDING ON THE P R S VERSION, N P R FROM THAT WAS ENDORSED A COUPLE WE WEEKS AGO.
AND WE WANNA FURTHER SUPPORT ALCOTT'S NEEDS, BUT WE ALSO WANNA ADDRESS OUR TWO MAIN CONCERNS.
GIVEN THE EXTREME COMPRESSED TIMEFRAME AND THE COMPLEX NATURE OF THIS TOPIC, I THINK WE FEEL WE'RE WE'RE PROVIDING AND OFFERING A REASONABLE PATH FORWARD.
IT SUPPORTS THE ADDITIONAL VISIBILITY AND INFORMATION THROUGH TELEMETRY AND OUR HEAD INFORMATION OF, I'VE MENTIONED IT SUPPORTS T'S URGENT NEED TO GO AND PUT CODE INTO THEIR SOFTWARE AND INTEGRATE THEIR SYSTEMS AND SET,
[00:50:01]
YOU KNOW, AND, AND, AND CODE IN THESE VARIABLES.WE OFFER PROTOCOL LANGUAGE THAT DESCRIBES THIS MULTIPLIER VARIABLE THAT WE'VE CALLED Y WE BELIEVE THAT AS A WAY FORWARD AND IT PROVIDES THE NECESSARY VISIBILITY THAT WE NEED AND A DUE PROCESS THROUGH NPRS THAT IF THOSE THINGS ARE CHANGED OR SET FIRST AND THEN CHANGED, AND WE REALLY WANT TO AVOID THOSE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, THE LAST THING WE WANT TO BE DOING IS HOLDING BACK ENERGY WHEN THE GRID NEEDS IT THE MOST.
AND WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE DELIVER OUR OBLIGATIONS FOR THOSE TWO OUT FOUR OUR PRODUCTS.
AND LASTLY, WE'RE SUPPORTING COMPLIANCE METRIC IN LINE WITH PROVEN ENFORCEMENT APPROACH.
SO WE'RE SAYING YES TO COMPLIANCE, WE'D JUST LIKE IT TO BE IN LINE WITH WHAT'S THERE TODAY.
UM, YOU KNOW, AND REALLY THE POINT OF OUR PROPOSAL THAT WE ARE SEEKING APPROVAL FROM TAC TODAY, IT DOES NOT HAVE TO DECIDE ON THE MERITS ABOUT WHAT THOSE VALUES SHOULD BE.
IT'S REALLY WE'RE TRYING TO ENABLE THE CODE CHANGE TO, TO HAPPEN THAT ELCOTT WANTS TO DO, WHICH IS ACTUALLY THE BASIS FOR URGENCY, WHILE ALLOWING APPROPRIATE TIME FOR RESOLUTION OF, OF THE SUBSTATIVE ISSUES IN AN OPEN AND THOUGHTFUL MANNER.
ELCOTT HAS REPEATEDLY, AND WE REALLY APPLAUD ELKHART FOR THE AMOUNT OF OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT.
AND I KNOW WE'VE BEEN TALKING AROUND THESE VERY, VERY COMPLEX SYSTEM AND SOFTWARE EQUATIONS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, AND THEY STATED THAT THEY ARE COMMITTED TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON THEM THROUGH FOLLOW UP NPRS.
SO, BUT SO REGARDLESS OF TODAY'S OUTCOME ON THIS VOTE, WE NEEDED A MINIMUM ON RECORD SOME COMMITMENT FROM ERCOT IN ADDRESSING ALL THESE SPECIFIC ISSUES.
I APPRECIATE THE EXTENSIVE WORK FOR ER, UH, FROM ERCOT AND THE STAKEHOLDERS AND REALLY THE ATTENTION ON THIS, WHAT WE BELIEVE IS AN EXTREMELY CRITICAL TOPIC, NOT ONLY TO ENSURE THE RELIABILITY OF THE GRID AND AVOID THE PUTTING IT INTO MORE RISK, BUT ALSO FOR US AS ENERGY STORAGE RESOURCES TO SUPPORT RELIABILITY AS WE'RE OBLIGATED TO UNDER THESE PRODUCTS AND WHEN IT'S MOST NEEDED.
SO, CALY, I PAUSE THERE, I JUST, UH, WE'LL THANK EVERYONE FOR THEIR TIME AND ATTENTION.
LET'S START GOING THROUGH THE QUEUE.
UH, WE HAVE TIKA JUST TO CHECK YOU'RE ABLE TO HEAR ME? YES, GO AHEAD.
SO FIRST OF ALL, REALLY THANK YOU TO ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS, UH, AND WORKING WITH US ON N P R R 1186.
UH, I REALIZED WE'VE, UH, WE'VE BEEN ON A VERY TIGHT TIMELINE, ON A VERY FAST TRACK TIMELINE.
AND, UM, REALLY APPRECIATE ALL OF THE SUPPORT WE'VE BEEN GIVEN, UH, IN BRINGING 1186 TO A PLACE WHERE IT IS TODAY.
ALSO, APPRECIATE THE, UH, KEN AND THE JOINT COMMENTERS WHO FILED COMMENTS, UH, LATE YESTERDAY, UH, AND, AND, AND PUTTING FORTH AN EFFORT TO COME UP WITH NEW IDEAS, UH, THAT COULD, UH, THAT COULD, UH, PROVIDE AN ALTERNATIVE MECHANISM FOR SETTING STATE OF CHARGE REQUIREMENTS, UH, ESPECIALLY DURING A DEPLOYMENT.
HOWEVER, WHEN LOOKING THROUGH THOSE, UH, THE SETUP AND ALSO THINKING THROUGH HOW IT WOULD PLAY OUT, UH, SINCE WE SAW THE COMMENTS YESTERDAY, AT THIS POINT WE DON'T SEE THE PROPOSED APPROACH AS WRITTEN FOR ESTABLISHING STATE OF CHARGE REQUIREMENTS IN THE COMMENTS, UH, AS WORKING UNDER ALL CONDITIONS.
IN FACT, TO US, IT MAY MAKE MATTERS WORSE.
SO AT THIS POINT, UH, WE ARE, WE DON'T SUPPORT THESE COMMENTS.
I WE DO, UH, I HAVE SAID THIS A FEW TIMES.
WE DO SUPPORT, UH, THE, THE IDEA OF PARAMETERIZING THE CURVE THAT, UH, THAT WERE APPROVED IN THE P R S VERSION OF N P R R 1186.
UH, AND THOSE WILL BE, UH, CERTAINLY PART OF THE DESIGN THAT WE, UH, THAT WE PUT IN PLACE.
HOW DOES CURVE GET MANAGED? UM, CERTAINLY NEEDS TO BE VETTED FURTHER WITH A SEPARATE N P R R, BUT WE ARE OPEN TO HAVING THOSE DISCUSSIONS.
AND IN THOSE DISCUSSIONS, IF THERE IS A WAY TO HELP WITH THE DEPLOYMENT RELATED, UH, ITEMS THAT
[00:55:01]
WERE POINTED AT, WE WILL CERTAINLY LOOK, UH, TO WORK.UH, AND THEY'LL, UH, THEY NEED, UH, TO ME THESE ARE, LIKE KEN SAID, NOT STRAIGHTFORWARD, UH, ITEMS. UH, THERE ARE SCENARIOS UNDER WHICH WE HAVE TO GO AND TEST THESE OUT.
UH, FOR THOSE WHO ARE FOLLOWING THE WORKSHOPS, YOU WILL NOTICE THE EXAMPLES THAT WE POSTED ALONG WITH THE P R S VERSION OF 1186 HAS SOME REALLY DETAILED SCENARIOS, UH, THAT WE PUT OUT, UH, SO THAT WE COULD WET THE SCENARIOS AND UNDERSTAND WHAT WOULD PLAY OUT.
WHAT 1186 DOES IS, UH, PROVIDE A, A MECHANISM FOR ALL BATTERIES WHO ARE PROVIDING ANCILLARY SERVICES TO HAVE A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF THE, UH, STATE OF CHARGE THAT REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY WILL BE, UH, UH, THAT, THAT THEY ARE SUBJECT TO.
AND, UH, AND, AND THROUGH THAT DAY, TO US AT LEAST, IT SHOULD PROMOTE, UH, TAKING, UH, THOSE, THOSE RESOURCES TAKING INTO ACCOUNT, UH, THE, UH, HOW A IS PROVIDED.
AS FAR AS THE MONTHLY, THE COMPLIANCE METRIC RELATED POINTS OF CONCERN, WE READ THE COMMENTS, WE SAW THE EXAMPLE.
I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE POINT THAT IS BEING RAISED AROUND, UH, HOW A POTENTIAL, UH, TELEMETRY PROBLEM, UH, COULD, UH, COULD PICK UP AN HOUR TO BE FLAGGED FOR A COMPLIANCE VIOLATION.
UH, UH, UH, UH, TWO THINGS WILL HAPPEN.
I, I, IN THE P R S PROPOSED VERSION, THERE IS A THREE MONTH, UH, UH, TRANS TRANSITION PERIOD, POST 1186 IMPLEMENTATION BEFORE THE ENFORCEMENT LANGUAGE IS, UH, PUT, PUT IN PLACE.
TO ME, THOSE, THAT PERIOD SERVES SEVERAL PURPOSES.
IT LETS US WET THAT, UH, THE, THE, EVEN THE PARAMETERS THAT WERE PUT IN, THE THRESHOLDS THAT WERE ESTABLISHED AND LET'S US CONTINUE TO HAVE A DISCUSSION.
UH, ONCE WE SEE, UH, POST CHANGE SYSTEM CHANGES BEING MADE, HOW WILL THOSE PLAY OUT? SECOND, UH, AS HAPPEN AS IT HAPPENS WITH ANY OTHER SECTION EIGHT, UH, PROTOCOL COMPLIANCE RELATED, UH, WORK IF TELEMETRY FAILURE OR A MISSED TELEMETRY IS THE REASON FOR, UH, AND OUR GETTING FLAGGED THAT OUR END RESOURCES CERTAINLY HAVE THE FULL OPPORTUNITY TO USE THEIR OWN, TO SHARE THEIR OWN PLANT LEVEL DATA, UH, WITH US, UH, AND, AND USE THOSE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT COMPLIANCE WAS MET.
SO I WOULD CERTAINLY EXPECT, UH, THAT SAME APPROACH TO BE USED.
LASTLY, KAN POINTED THIS, AND I'LL POINT THIS OUT ONCE AGAIN TO US.
REALLY, WE ARE, UH, UH, UH, THERE ARE THINGS WE NEED TO DO IN THE INTERIM, BUT WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO THE, UH, WORKING ON R T C BECAUSE TO US THAT, UH, REALLY THROUGH R T C AND, AND THE ADDITIONAL THINGS THAT COME WITH R T C, WE WILL BE ABLE TO MITIGATE SOME OF THE RISKS WE SEE, UH, TODAY, OR SOME OF THE LACK OF TOOLS THAT THE CONTROL ROOM HAS TODAY WHEN IT COMES TO MONITORING BATTERIES.
1186 ALSO IN THAT REGARDS, DOESN'T GO FAR ENOUGH.
UH, AS FAR AS THAT IS CONCERNED, IT'S REALLY R T C.
I, I, WE AT THIS POINT SEE WE ARE VERY CONCERNED WITH THE, UH, UH, COMMENTS THAT WERE FILED AND THE LANGUAGE THAT IS IN THERE, BUT ARE COMMITTED TO CONTINUE TO WORK, UH, WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS, UH, TO FIND SOLUTIONS WHERE WE CAN FIND THEM.
ALRIGHT, BOB HILTON? YEAH, JUST, JUST REAL QUICKLY, UH, FIRST OF ALL, I, I'LL START OUT WITH 1186.
I VOTED FOR P R S 'CAUSE I BELIEVE IT'S, IT'S, IT'S BETTER THAN WHERE WE ARE.
IT IS A FIRST STEP, AND I MEAN THAT BY A FIRST STEP AND NOWHERE NEAR THE END PHASE.
I, I SUPPORTED WHAT CAME OUT IN THESE COMMENTS TO TRY TO CLARIFY THAT.
'CAUSE I DO BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE Y VALUE AND WHAT'S ACTUALLY REQUIRED FOR, AT THE TOP OF THE HOUR, NOT THE DURATION REQUIREMENT.
UH, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT HAS SOME ISSUES WITH THAT.
UH, THE COMPLIANCE ISSUE IS REAL IMPORTANT.
UH, I, I HATE IT WHENEVER WE DO DIFFERENT COMPLIANCE IN DIFFERENT WAYS.
UH, YOU HAVE UNINTENDED, UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES AND WE'RE USED TO USING IT THAT WAY.
SO I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR IKA, AND THEN I'VE GOT ANOTHER COMMENT IS, IS THERE, WHAT'S BEING ASKED HERE IS TO BASICALLY GRAY BOX, UH, THE LANGUAGE THAT'S IN FOR THE, UH, THE, THE COMPLIANCE.
WE COULD KEEP THE OTHER COMPLIANCE IN PLACE THAT'S IN 1186 FROM P R S.
PUT THIS IN A GRAY BOX TO FIGURE OUT
[01:00:01]
HOW WE WOULD DO THAT TO MARRY THOSE UP IN THE END.AND I'M CURIOUS TO SEE IF ERCOT HAS AN ISSUE WITH THAT.
AND, UH, THE SAME WITH THE Y, WE COULD CODE THAT IN AND THEN WE COULD FIGURE OUT AND GRAY BOX THAT AND FIGURE OUT WHAT YOU NEED TO DO TO GET THAT TO WORK APPROPRIATELY TO GIVE US THE RIGHT ANSWER.
SO IF, IF, IF NICK COULD ANSWER THOSE TWO, AND THEN I HAVE ANOTHER COMMENT AFTER THAT.
CAN WE START WITH THE Y VALUE? YES, SURE.
I AM VERY HESITANT TO PUT SOMETHING INTO THE LANGUAGE THAT P R S HAS APPROVED TODAY.
I WILL SUPPORT WRITING PARAMETERS.
AND MAYBE WHAT WE CAN DO IS COME BACK WITH A SEPARATE N P R S WHERE WE CAN VET OUT WHAT'S THE RIGHT WAY TO EVEN BRING THE CONCEPT OF WHY, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE CAN WRITE THAT ON FLY.
I DON'T WANT TO WRITE THAT ON FLY.
UH, AND CERTAINLY WHAT'S WRITTEN IN THESE COMMENTS, I DON'T THINK WE CAN PICK UP VERBATIM THEM.
NOW, UH, ON THE MONTHLY METRIC, BOB, I, I'M SORRY, I I HAVE TO ASK.
THERE IS A GRAY BOX TODAY THAT WE'VE CONTEMPLATED WHICH, UH, WHICH WHICH GO GOES INTO EFFECT THREE MONTHS AFTER 1186.
UH, AND THAT'S AROUND ENFORCEMENT.
WHAT ADDITIONAL GRAY BOX WERE YOU THINKING? UH, THE, THE, THE, WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IS IMPLEMENT WHAT WE'VE GOT IN 1186 AS WE MOVE FORWARD, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW.
AND THEN YOU WOULD HAVE THE MONTHLY, UH, PUT INTO AN ADDITIONAL GRAY BOX THAT WOULD COME INTO PLAY, WHATEVER WE FIGURED OUT.
'CAUSE I THINK THAT'S GONNA BE, UH, IMPLEMENTATION THAT'S GONNA BE KIND OF, UH, COMPLICATED.
SO YEAH, WE WOULD GIVE US TIME, BUT UNTIL THEN, WE WOULD HAVE, INSTEAD OF NO, UH, UH, COMPLIANCE, WE WOULD HAVE THE COMPLIANCE THAT WE PUT IN TO THE P R S VERSION.
YOU SEE WHAT I'M SAYING THERE? MM-HMM.
I, I SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THERE, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, I'LL TELL YOU THIS, IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT BUILDING SOMETHING ON TOP OF 1186, THEN WHY DON'T WE BUILD IT THAT WAY? WE CAN FILE SOME, UH, ANOTHER N P R R, WHICH SOLELY FOCUSES ON HOW DO YOU ROLL UP OR HOW DO YOU ROLL UP THE, UH, THE HOURLY METRIC THAT AND, AND THE HOURLY THRESHOLDS THAT WE'VE PUT OUT.
I AM, I'M NOT CERTAIN MONTHLY IS THE WAY TO GO, BUT, UH, I MEAN, AT LEAST TO ME, IF THAT'S THE ISSUE WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT, MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE LET'S NOT, UH, UH, LET'S, LET'S LEAVE 1186 THE WAY IT SAYS AND AGREE TO PUT A SECOND N P R R, WHICH IS SOLELY TARGETING THAT LANGUAGE.
NOW, NOW, THE, THE, THE NEXT PIECE IS I WANNA TALK ABOUT THE ELEPHANT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE WEBEX.
UH, AND THAT IS OF COURSE, THE DURATION ISSUE.
UH, THAT IS IN MY MIND, I SET A P R S THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL HERE.
AND 'CAUSE NO ONE REALLY HAS A PROBLEM WITH 1186, IF IT WERE NOT FOR THE DURATION AND THE DURATION REQUIREMENTS THAT CAUSED THE STRANDED OF THESE MEGAWATTS, UH, WHETHER YOU HAVE AN OBLIGATION IN THE NEXT HOUR OR NOT.
AND SOMEWHERE, UH, AND I WAS A LITTLE DISAPPOINTED TO SEE SOME OF THE, THE EXCLUSIONS THAT ARE, WE'RE GONNA TALK LATER ABOUT STORAGE CONVERSATIONS IN THE, UH, RTC PLUS B OR B PLUS, WHICHEVER WAY THAT IS, UH, WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT.
I NEED TO UNDERSTAND, I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND WHY IT WAS PUT IN IN THE FIRST PLACE.
I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS ERCOT HAS.
I, I REALLY THOUGHT IT WAS THE WRONG TOOL TO USE, BUT IT'S THERE.
WHAT I NEED TO UNDERSTAND, AND WHAT I THINK WE NEED TO COME TO TERMS IS WHY WE'RE GOING TO NEED ANY KIND OF A DURATION IN A FIVE MINUTE CO OPTIMIZED REALTIME MARKET.
I UNDERSTAND IN THE ONE HOUR AND THE REASONS IT'S THERE AND YOUR CONCERNS, BUT I NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHY THAT WOULD BE IN REALTIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION.
AND THAT NEEDS TO BE DECIDED BEFORE WE GET THERE, UH, NOT AFTER WE GET THERE.
SO THAT'S, AND, AND MY CONCERN IS, I DON'T WANT THIS TO GO BY THE WAYSIDE.
WE NEED TO PUT THIS SOMEWHERE FOR THIS X AND Y.
I MEAN, THE Y VALUE, THE, THE ISSUE WITH, UH, THE, THE COMPLIANCE AND OVERRIDING, WHICH RULES US ALL IS THE DURATION REQUIREMENT ACTUALLY EVEN REQUIRED FROM A RELIABILITY STANDPOINT IN A FIVE MINUTE CO OPTIMIZED MARKET.
SO IF IT'S NOT IN HERE, I, I THINK THAT TAC NEEDS TO GET IT SOMEWHERE IN A, AN OFFICIAL MANNER TO BE LOOKED AT BETWEEN NOW AND REAL TIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION.
UH, MOVING ON TO BOB WHITMEYER.
[01:05:01]
QUICKLY, UH, TO ME, WHAT IAN AND GROUP COMMENTS DO IS THEY TAKE A STEP FORWARD FOR THE BATTERIES.I THINK ALL THE BATTERY GUYS WOULD APPRECIATE THE ABILITY TO DO WHAT IAN'S GOING, ASKING TO DO HERE.
THAT SAID, THE P R S VERSION IS KIND OF HALF A STEP FORWARD.
UM, I PERSONALLY THINK WE TAKE THE HALF STEP, WE WILL WIND UP PRETTY CLOSE TO EONS BY THE TIME WE GET TO R T C.
WE'LL HAVE MORE EXPERIENCE IN THAT.
BUT THAT'S KIND OF THE DIFFERENCE, IS IAN IS A FULL STEP FORWARD.
WHAT P R S DID IS A HALF STEP.
UH, RANDY JONES? YES, GOOD MORNING.
I APPRECIATE, UH, BOB'S COMMENTS.
UM, I THINK HE'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT.
I'M HAPPY TO SEE THE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE EFFORT TO COMPROMISE.
I THINK THAT THAT HAS BEEN IMPORTANT ALL ALONG THE WAY.
AND, UH, I THINK ERCOT HAS MADE A, A REALLY, UH, CONTINUOUS EFFORT TO TRY AND, UH, HELP STAKEHOLDERS UNDERSTAND WHAT THEIR GOALS ARE, UH, ON THE ISSUE OF, UH, PUTTING PLACEHOLDERS IN, UH, FOR THOSE VARIABLES.
I THINK THAT IS ABSOLUTELY THE RIGHT WAY TO GO.
AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE DONE HISTORICALLY NUMEROUS TIMES.
IF YOU LOOK AT, UH, THE HISTORY OF GRAY BOXED, UH, TEXT AND THE PROTOCOLS, YOU'LL FIND THAT THERE HAVE BEEN PLENTY OF INS UH, INCIDENTS WHERE WE, UH, WE PUT IN, UH, JUST PLACEHOLDERS FOR VARIABLES BECAUSE WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE OUTCOME WAS GONNA BE IN AN, IN AN EFFORT TO AVOID UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
UM, WE TREATED SOME OF THOSE NPR R AS, UH, ALMOST LIKE, UM, OH, UH, JUST A TEST TO SEE, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE OUTCOMES WOULD BE AND THEN WE COULD ADJUST THE VARIABLES ACCORDINGLY.
AND SO I, I THINK THAT'S, UM, THAT'S A SMART THING TO DO.
I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT, UH, HOURLY PRODUCTS SHOULD HAVE THEIR DESIGN BUILT AROUND AN HOUR.
NOT, UH, THE, THE IDEA THAT SOMEBODY COULD BE STRUCK FOR NONS SPIN AND HAVE TO STRAND 75% OF THAT UNIT'S CAPABILITY, UH, DURING THE HOUR AND NOT BE ABLE TO USE FOR ANYTHING ELSE.
UM, THAT'S AN ADMINISTRATIVE D RATE ON A, UH, INSTALLATION THAT'S ALREADY THERE.
AND, UH, I DON'T KNOW OF ANY OTHER RESOURCE THAT GETS THAT KIND OF TREATMENT.
AND I THINK THAT GOES TO BOB'S COMMENTS ABOUT THE DURATION.
UM, I JUST THINK THAT'S, UM, IT'S UNFAIR, IT'S DISCRIMINATORY, AND IT'S CERTAINLY WITH 6,000 MORE MEGAWATTS OF BATTERY CAPACITY COMING ONTO THE SYSTEM, YOU'RE GONNA STRAND EVEN MORE AND MORE OF THAT CAPABILITY IN HOUR.
THAT TO ME, DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A MOVE TOWARD RELIABILITY.
IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE HAMSTRINGING THE SYSTEM.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE, AND I DON'T THINK IT'S, UH, SMART.
AND, AND LAST OF ALL, I, I'M CONFIRM, UH, I'M A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED AS TIME GOES ON, I'M SEEING MORE AND MORE, UH, THINGS, UH, THAT REMIND ME OF ABSOLUTELY TWO CONSERVATIVE OPERATIONS AND, AND PLANNING I THIS, THIS IDEA THAT YOU'RE GONNA STRAND CAPACITY, SO IT'LL BE AVAILABLE FOR FOUR HOURS, IS, UH, IS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT.
AND I THINK IT'S TIME FOR STAKEHOLDERS AND ERCOT STAFF TO WORK TOGETHER TO, UM, QUIT THINKING ABOUT MARKET DESIGN IN THE CONTEXT OF WINTER STORM URI.
OKAY, THAT WAS A, UH, ONE IN A THOUSAND TYPE EVENT.
AND, UH, I THINK THE DURATION, UH, ASPECT OF, UH, 10 96 IS, IS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT KIND OF THINKING.
I THINK WE NEED TO, UH, MOVE AWAY FROM THAT.
AND A ONE HOUR PRODUCT IS A ONE HOUR PRODUCT, AND IF, IF I OFFER IN TO NONS SPEND, YOU DON'T HAVE A RIGHT.
[01:10:01]
DON'T HAVE A FREE CALL OPTION ON 75% OF MY CAPABILITY, THAT'S JUST PATENTLY UNFAIR.AND I THINK 10 96 WAS JUST REALLY BAD MARKET DESIGN.
ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON TO ERIC GOFF.
HI, UH, UH, ON THIS ISSUE SPEAKING FOR TESLA, UH, AS IS NOT THE TOP OF THE MEETING, UM, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR TIKA ABOUT THE DIRECT COMMENTERS THAT WERE FILED LAST NIGHT.
UM, THE NEW Y VARIABLE, UM, THAT'S PROPOSED IN THERE.
I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S ACTUALLY NEW OR NOT.
UM, BECAUSE YOU'VE, YOU'VE SPOKEN AT LENGTH ABOUT HOW EVERYTHING IS PARAMETERIZED, SO IT'S BEEN MY ASSUMPTION THAT THIS Y IS ALSO A PARAMETER THAT YOU INTEND TO BUILD INTO YOUR SYSTEM.
IS THAT RIGHT? IT'S JUST A QUESTION OF WHAT SET.
THERE WILL BE A BY, I I'M, COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? SO, SORRY, I WAS CHECKING, I WAS UNMUTED.
SORRY, I WAS CHECKING IF I WAS UNMUTED OR NOT.
SO THAT, THAT WILL BE A PARAMETER THAT WILL CONTROL, UH, HOW MUCH, UH, STATE OF CHARGE, UH, UH, YOU NEED TO THE BA UH, YOU NEED TO COME IN WITH FOR, UH, UH, EVERY AS.
UH, AND THEN THERE'LL BE ANOTHER PARAMETER THAT SETS HOW MUCH YOU, YOU SHOULD, UH, HAVE AT THE END OF THE HOUR.
UH, SO THAT, SO THROUGH THAT LENS, THERE IS CERTAINLY A PARAMETER THAT CONTROLS, UH, UH, UH, CONTROLS THE SLOPE OF THE LINE.
AND WHY, LIKE PARAMETER, MY HESITATION IS IN THE COMMENTS, UH, THE COMMENTS GIVE ADVICE ON HOW, WHY VALUE SHOULD BE SET, UH, IF THEY ASK FOR DEPLOYMENTS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.
UH, AND, AND ALL OF THAT, A ADDS COMPLEXITY IS, IS ANOTHER LAYER OF COMPLEXITY, UH, THAT'S ADDED ON TOP OF WHAT WE COMMITTED TO FIRST TO PUT A, A PARAMETER.
SO IS THE, SO THE ISSUE IS THAT THE Y VALUE MIGHT CHANGE IS THAT, IS THAT YOUR POINT? RIGHT, AT THIS POINT AT LEAST, YES.
THE WAY THE COMMENTS ARE PROPOSING TO CHANGE VALUES BASED OFF OF SOME TRIGGERS.
KEN, I WONDER IF YOU CAN, YOU KNOW, TO SHIFT MY QUESTION TO YOU, KEN, CAN YOU, YOU KNOW, ADDRESS IF, IF THAT'S THE ISSUE IS, IS THERE SOME POINT OF DISCUSSION THAT CAN BE HAD ABOUT THAT SPECIFIC LEVEL OF COMPLEXITY? OR, OR IS THAT IT'S WHAT IT IS, JUST, JUST TRYING TO TEASE OUT IF THERE'S, I MEAN, COMMUNICATION AND THAT, AND THAT'S TO KEN.
SO WE KNOW THERE'S PARAMETERS, WE DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY ARE.
SO IN ALL, UH, HONESTY BASED ON THE FEW WORKSHOPS AND SOME OF THE, UH, ILLUSTRATIVE, ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES AND AN EXCEL SPREADSHEET, WE'RE KIND OF GUESSING.
AND I THINK IF WE CAN BRING THOSE CRITICAL PARAMETERS TO THE FOREFRONT AND UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY DO, AND WHEN THEY'RE SET, I THINK THAT OFFERS A BETTER DISCUSSION AROUND WHY THEY HAVE SET A CERTAIN WAY AND WHAT THE RIGHT VALUE SHOULD BE BASED ON HISTORICAL PERFORMANCE, HISTORICAL RELIABILITY EVENTS, HOW, HOW THE PERFORMANCE OF CERTAIN RESOURCES ARE, ARE DOING.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.
I DO WANT TO THEN STIPULATE WHAT NIKA SAID IS THEY DID NOT ACCOUNT FOR THAT FACTOR AS WE'RE DESCRIBING IT, TO ALSO ADDRESS WHEN DEPLOYMENTS OCCURRED.
SO IT MIGHT BE A Z FACTOR OR A Z PARAMETER.
THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS GONNA SAY.
I WAS GONNA USE THE EXACT SAME VARIABLE AGAIN.
IT, IT, IT SEEMS LIKE IT'S POSSIBLE MAYBE THAT YOU HAVE A Y FACTOR THAT IS WHAT IS DESCRIBED BY THE DIRECT KILOMETERS AND A Z FACTOR THAT IS A MULTIPLIER ON THE Y FACTOR THAT COMES IN FOR DEPLOYMENT.
AND, AND THAT MIGHT CHANGE THE NEED TO MODIFY THE Y FACTOR IN REAL TIME.
I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CODE, UH, IN REAL TIME, BUT THIS ISSUE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS AN ACCELERATED IN P R R.
AND SO WE'RE UNFORTUNATELY STUCK TALKING ABOUT X, Y, AND Z ATTACK.
AND I APOLOGIZE TO PEOPLE, BUT NETIKA, I WONDER ABOUT THAT Z VALUE IDEA OF MAYBE A WAY TO REDUCE THE COMPLEXITY AND, AND AT LEAST BE ABLE TO, TO, YOU KNOW, RECOGNIZE THE POTENTIAL FOR CHANGING THESE AS THE JOINT COMMENTERS HAVE SUGGESTED, EITHER THEY'RE NOW OR AT A
[01:15:01]
FUTURE POINT.SO, SO, SO TO BE CLEAR, SINCE THAT WAS MAYBE A RAMBLE, IF THE Z FACTOR WAS A MULTIPLIER OF THE Y FACTOR THAT COULD COME INTO EFFECT AS A RESULT OF DEPLOYMENT.
YEAH, I, UH, I SEE, I, I DON'T KNOW THAT I, I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW TO PUSH BACK RIGHT NOW.
SEE, KEN KEEPS SAYING HE DOESN'T UNDERSTAND THE FORMULA.
THE FORMULA IS WRITTEN RIGHT HERE, AND THE FORMULA IS TELLING YOU EXACTLY HOW THE STATE OF CHARGE REQUIREMENT IS BEING CALCULATED.
IT SOUNDS LIKE, UH, UH, UH, EARLY THE, SO MAYBE TO ME, IF I LOOK AT THE CRUX OF WHERE WHY IS WRITTEN IN THESE COMMENTS, UH, THEY LOOK TO BE REPLACING THE WORD DURATION OF EACH ANCILLARY SERVICE.
SO IF YOU WANT TO CALL DURATION OF EACH ANCILLARY SERVICES, WHY, UH, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE PROPOSING, ERIC, THAT'S FINE.
BUT IF YOU GO IN FURTHER AND, AND, AND, AND I CAN TELL YOU WHY FOR E C R S, IT'S TWO, WHY FOR NONS SPEND IS FOUR, RIGHT? IF YOU GO BEYOND THAT.
BUT IF YOU GO BEYOND THAT AND SAY, NOW THERE IS, UH, NOW Y ALSO NEEDS TO CHANGE WHEN THERE IS A DEPLOYMENT.
I DON'T THINK WHAT IS WRITTEN HERE WORKS.
AND THAT'S THE PIECE THAT I WOULD, I'M VERY HESITANT TO WORK UP ON THE FLY TODAY.
UH, I, I WILL TELL YOU I WILL, BECAUSE THERE IS, I WILL, I ASKED THIS QUESTION YESTERDAY TO KEN AS WELL.
WHAT IS A DEPLOYMENT FOR AN ONLINE NON SPEN PROVIDING BATTERY? I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION.
SO THAT'S WHY THERE IS MORE WORK TO BE DONE.
WE CAN PROBABLY SIT DOWN AND THINK ABOUT WHAT TO DO DIFFERENTLY DURING DEPLOYMENT, BUT THESE COMMENTS ARE NOT READY.
THEY'RE NOT READY TO ADDRESS THOSE AND THEY'LL MISGUIDE US.
SO I, I, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD POINT YOU RAISED, UH, UNFORTUNATELY ABOUT THE NONS SPEND ONLINE DEPLOYMENT.
WHAT IS THAT? UM, BUT, UM, I GUESS MY HOPE IS THAT AS YOU, AND, AND YOU'VE COMMITTED TO THIS IN OTHER FORUMS, AND SO HOPEFULLY THIS WILL BE MORE EASY THAN THE LAST QUESTION, BUT, YOU KNOW, IF THIS IS AS, AS FLEXIBLE AS POSSIBLE, SO WE CAN TALK THROUGH THESE ISSUES.
WE'VE HAD TO RUSH THIS FOR THE SYSTEM CHANGES AND WORK THROUGH THAT.
UM, BUT I, I THINK THERE MIGHT BE, UM, SOME DISCUSSION TO BE HAD AROUND, YOU KNOW, THIS, UH, ISSUE OF HAVING TO, UM, CHARGE AFTER YOU, YOU DISCHARGE IN THE SAME HOUR AS, AS KEN IS, IS TALKING ABOUT.
AND IT'D BE, I THINK IT'D BE HELPFUL, THOSE PARAMETERS TO BE PUBLISHED OR DISCUSSED OR, OR IN SOME WAY DOCUMENTED IN A WAY THAT, UM, CORRECT.
WE CAN UNDERSTAND, WE CAN, UH, SO TO THAT END, UNDERSTOOD, UNDERSTOOD.
I'VE COMMITTED THAT WE WILL MAKE IT, UH, VERY FLEXIBLE AND I'VE ALSO COMMITTED TO CONTINUING TO TALK ON IT.
I THINK LATER ON IN THE, UH, UH, IN THE AGENDA, MATT WILL BE HERE AS WELL, LAYING OUT SHARING SOME OF THE IDEAS THAT WE HAVE.
SO ABSOLUTELY, UH, OPEN TO CONTINUING TO SEE WHAT ELSE WE CAN DO, UH, TO, UH, TO, UH, MAKE, UH, UH, 1186 BETTER, UH, GIVEN EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WE NEED TO ACCOMPLISH.
BUT WE'LL CERTAINLY LOOK TO, UH, TO ME, MY REQUEST CONTINUES TO BE, PLEASE, UH, CONSIDER, UH, VOTING ON THE LANGUAGE THAT WAS APPROVED BY P R S.
WE, UH, IF WE NEED TO COME BACK AND ADD SOME WORK, UH, LANGUAGE, LET'S DO IT AS A SEPARATE AND P R R.
THAT GIVES US TIME, UH, BOTH SIDES OF US TIME TO THINK THROUGH AND SET THEM UP, SET THAT LANGUAGE UP APPROPRIATELY.
ALRIGHT, BILL BARNES, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN.
SO, IKA, YOU JUST ANSWERED ONE OF MY QUESTIONS, WHICH WAS PART OF THIS DISCUSSION MADE ME WONDER IF ERCOT CHANGED SUPPORT FOR THE P R S VERSION OF 1186.
SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S, THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
ERCOT STILL SUPPORTS, UH, THAT VERSION, CORRECT? YES.
WE SUPPORT THE VERSION THAT WAS APPROVED BY P R S AND I THINK WE UNDERSTAND THIS IS A TEMPORARY SOLUTION, BUT THE PART OF, UH, KEN'S LAYOUT AND THEN JOINT COMMENTS THAT BOB HILTON HIT ON, HE TOUCHED ON, WHICH I AGREE WITH AND WHERE MOST OF MY CONCERN IS, UH, IS THAT
[01:20:02]
THE DURATION LIMITS, RIGHT? THE TWO AND FAR DURATION LIMITS AND THE DISINCENTIVE RIGHT TO INSTALL AND EXPAND LONGERSO AT THAT, THAT POINT REALLY KIND OF, UM, AND BOB KIND OF TOUCHED AROUND THIS BOB HILTON, BUT I DON'T THINK YOU EVER ANSWERED IT.
UM, YOU JUST CLARIFY THAT ONCE R T C PLUS B IS IMPLEMENTED, THAT THAT TWO AND FOUR HOUR DURATION LEVEL WILL BE COMPLETELY REMOVED, IT'LL BE REVISITED OR SHORTENED SIGNIFICANTLY.
CAN YOU JUST ELABORATE ON THAT POINT? HEY, UM, IS COMING RIGHT AFTER? YES, THERE WE GO.
IS IT OKAY IF I ANSWER THAT BILL? YEP, PLEASE DO.
AM AM I UP THEN? UM, I THINK I'M AFTER BILL.
CAN YOU ALL HEAR ME? WE CAN OFF.
UM, I THINK THE, THE SHORT ANSWER IS THAT EVEN UNDER REALTIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION, AND THIS KIND OF ALSO GOES TO SOME OF THE THINGS RANDY SAID, WHICH, UM, PROBABLY SPEND A LITTLE BIT MORE.
BUT, UM, THERE ARE, EVEN IF YOU HAVE REALTIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION, THERE ARE INSTANCES WHERE YOU HAVE, UH, EXHAUSTED YOUR STATE OF CHARGE IN OTHERWISE, IN OTHER WORDS, YOU NEED DURATION, UM, AND, AND YOU DON'T HAVE IT.
AND THAT CAN LEAD TO, TO CASCADING OUTAGES.
SO I THINK THE, HOW WE DEAL WITH, UH, DURATION UNDER R T C IS SOMETHING WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT SOME MORE.
SO, FOR EXAMPLE, IN CALIFORNIA, THEY IDENTIFY SPECIFIC INTERVALS IN ADVANCE WHERE DURATION IS AN ISSUE AND MOVE OFF OF A PURE FIVE MINUTE CO-OP OPTIMIZATION OF ANCILLARY SERVICES.
UM, SO I THINK THAT'S AN OPEN QUESTION.
YOU SHOULD NEED DURATION, UH, LIMITS FAR LESS OFTEN UNDER REAL-TIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION THAN YOU DO NOW.
UM, I THINK THAT THERE IS AN EFFICIENCY GAIN ON THAT FRONT.
UM, SO THAT, THAT IS STILL KIND OF, WE'RE STILL TRYING TO WORK THROUGH WHAT THE BEST WAY TO TO DO THAT IS.
SO I'M TAKING A TO-DO, TO EXPLAIN TO EVERYBODY, UM, WHY THERE COULD BE DURATION ISSUES UNDER REAL-TIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION.
SO, AND, AND LET'S REMEMBER HOW WE SET UP OUR ANCILLARY SERVICES.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF EQUITY AND BAD MARKET DESIGN ARGUMENTS MADE EARLIER, BUT REMEMBER WHEN WE DESIGNED OUR ANCILLARY SERVICES AND AWARDED THEM ON AN HOURLY BASIS, DURATION WAS NOT AN ISSUE AS LONG AS THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THESE UNITS BY AND LARGE COULD RUN, UH, FOR, UH, SEVERAL, MANY HOURS.
UM, AND, UH, AND THAT ALLOWED FOR KIND OF AN HOURLY PROCUREMENT WITHOUT WORRY FOR DURATION IN THE PARADIGM THAT WE FACE NOW.
UM, THERE IS AN ISSUE WITH, UM, NOT HAVING SUFFICIENT ANCILLARY SERVICES TO COVER THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH THEY WERE BUILT AND THE MARKET DESIGN, THAT IS THE PATH THAT WE'RE GOING DOWN HERE ISN'T BAD MARKET DESIGN.
IT'S THAT THE, THE MARKET DESIGN WHERE WE JUST MADE IT HOURLY AWARDS WITHOUT INTEREST IN DURATION, IS NO LONGER THE CORRECT PARADIGM WHEN YOU HAVE LIMITED DURATION RESOURCES ON THE SYSTEM AND YOU HAVE GOALS THAT YOU WANT THESE ANCILLARY SERVICES TO ACHIEVE.
SO THERE IS A RETHINK THAT THAT HAS TO HAPPEN AS PART OF THIS.
AND, UM, IT'S GONNA APPLY ACROSS THE BOARD.
BUT, UH, AND, AND I THINK, UH, IT WAS DESCRIBED THAT YURI IS, YOU KNOW, NOT WHAT WE SHOULD PLAN TO OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THAT IS ABSOLUTELY NOT WHAT WE'RE HEARING FROM, YOU KNOW, THE LEGISLATURE AND, UM, AND FROM PUBLIC POLICY FOLKS.
BUT THE OTHER THING IS IT DOESN'T NEED TO BE A JURY.
UM, A FOUR HOUR DURATION EVENT IS GONNA BE A CHALLENGE FOR US TO MANAGE
[01:25:01]
SIX HOURS.SO FEBRUARY, 2020, 2011 IS A MUCH SHORTER EVENT, BUT STILL DURATION WOULD'VE MATTERED DURING THAT EVENT.
SO I, I, I THINK SOME OF THE, OH, I DESIGNED THIS, UH, WITHOUT BATTERIES ON THE SYSTEM 20 YEARS AGO, AND IT STILL APPLIES AND THERE SHOULD BE NO CHANGES, UH, OR IT'S BAD MARKET DESIGN ARGUMENTS ARE, ARE FALSE.
UM, THERE'S THAT WE BUY THESE SERVICES TO MAINTAIN RELIABILITY AND WE NEED TO, IN A MARKET-BASED WAY GET THE RELIABILITY THAT WE INTEND AND ARE REQUIRED TO PROCURE.
NOW, UH, I THINK THERE'S LOTS OF IMPROVED EFFICIENT WAYS TO DO THAT AND, AND WE CAN WORK ON THAT.
BUT I THINK TO POINT BACK TO AGAIN, UH, A 10 YEAR OLD, UH, THING AND SAY, I'M GONNA APPLY THIS TO NOW WHEN THE RESOURCE MIXES CHANGED, IT'S KIND OF A FALSE NARRATIVE.
CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? YES, WE CAN.
I JUST WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON NIUS COMMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, THE JOINT COMMENTERS APPROACH WON'T WORK UNDER ALL CONDITIONS, OR IT'S NOT READY.
I MEAN, THAT IN A NUTSHELL IS A BIG PART OF OUR CONCERN WITH THE CURRENT VERSION OF 1186.
'CAUSE IN THE CURRENT VERSION, THE P R S APPROVED VERSION, ERCOT IS TAKING A HARD CODED APPROACH TO WHAT S O C REQUIREMENTS SHOULD BE, RIGHT? AS ERIC POINTED OUT, THE CONCEPT OF AN OF AN S O C MULTIPLIER IS ALREADY IN THE EXISTING 1186 LANGUAGE.
THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT ERCOT IS HARD CODING THESE MULTIPLIERS WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE TYPICAL STAKEHOLDER PROCESS TO DETERMINE WHAT THE APPROPRIATE LEVELS SHOULD BE.
AND, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE CLEAR EXAMPLES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN, UM, HIGHLIGHTED WHERE THE HARD CODING IS DETRIMENTAL.
SO IF I'M HOLDING AN E C R S AWARD FOR 50 MEGAWATTS AN HOUR, 20 AND A 10 MEGAWATT, 10 MEGAWATT AWARD FOR HOUR ENDING 21, AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, 1186, WOULD REQUIRE ME TO HOLD A HUNDRED MEGAWATT HOURS TO MEET MY 50 MEGAWATT AWARD IN OUR END IN 20, EVEN THOUGH I DON'T NEED A HUNDRED MEGAWATT HOURS TO MEET HOURS 20 AND HOURS 21, BECAUSE I'VE ONLY BEEN AWARDED 50 MEGAWATTS, FOLLOWED BY 10 MEGAWATTS.
SO ERCOT IS FORCING AN E S R TO HOLD BACK, IN THIS CASE, 40 MEGAWATT HOURS THAT COULD REALLY BE VALUABLE TO THE GRID IN OUR, IN OUR END, IN 20.
AND SO WE THINK THAT THIS WITHHOLDING OF CAPACITY IS AN EXAMPLE OF, YOU KNOW, A REALLY CONCERNING CONSEQUENCE OF THE WAY THE N P R IS CURRENTLY DRAFTED.
AND AS SUCH, YOU KNOW, IS, IS NOT READY.
YOU KNOW, TODAY WE ARE USING MULTIPLE TOOLS AT OUR DISPOSAL TO MANAGE OUR S O C TO MEET AWARD AND AMOUNTS AND TO MANAGE DEPLOYMENTS.
AND ALL WE'RE SAYING IS THAT ERCOT SHOULD NOT BE ADMINISTRATIVELY SETTING A FIXED VALUE ON HOW WE DO THIS, SO THAT DURING A DEPLOYMENT, WE DON'T HAVE TO BE RESPONDING IN A WAY THAT, YOU KNOW, IS REQUIRED TO MEET SOME REGULATED SS O C LEVEL FOR THE NEXT AWARDED HOUR AND CAUSING US TO START CHARGING WHEN WE DON'T ACTUALLY NEED TO.
AND THE SYSTEM REALLY MIGHT NOT WANT US TO JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE TO MEET SOME, AGAIN, ADMINISTRATIVELY IMPOSED S O C LEVEL.
SO I THINK WHAT WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE ALL OF OUR STORAGE TANKS ENERGY AT OUR DISPOSAL TO MANAGE DEPLOYMENTS AND TO MANAGE PLANNING AROUND FUTURE OBLIGATION.
YOU KNOW, BY HARD CODING VALUES, THOUGH, THAT WE HAVE TO MEET THAT ASSET MANAGEMENT, RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CAPABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY HAS BEEN TAKEN AWAY FROM THE, FROM THE OPERATOR AS CURRENTLY DRAFTED.
AND SO WE WOULD TAKE THE POSITION THAT 1186 AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN IS ALSO JUST NOT READY.
AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, I THINK, IS TO TRY AND ALLOW IT TO BECOME MORE READY BY ALLOWING FOR SOME FLEXIBILITY IN ITS SETTINGS, GIVE THE THE STAKEHOLDER PROCESS TIME TO DELIBERATE ON WHAT THOSE SETTINGS SHOULD BE, BUT STILL ALLOW THE IMPLEMENTATION AND CO OR STILL ALLOW THE CODING TO HAPPEN.
BUT WE JUST DON'T THINK WE SHOULD SEND, SEND SOMETHING THROUGH THAT WE KNOW HAS SHORTCOMINGS.
UH, JUST HERE AGAIN, JUST TO FOCUS AGAIN, ALL THE COMMENTS AND EVERYTHING THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HAS GO, GOES DIRECTLY BACK TO DURATION.
AND I WANNA PUSH BACK JUST A LITTLE BIT.
KENAN, UH, EVERY HOUR ON THE HOUR,
[01:30:01]
ERCOT HAS PURCHASED THE REQUIRED AMOUNT TO MEET THE GOALS OF THE ANCILLARY SERVICE THAT THEY HAVE.I HAVE AN OBLIGATION THIS HOUR, UH, AND I PERFORMED THE WAY I'M SUPPOSED TO.
I DON'T HAVE AN OBLIGATION NEXT HOUR BECAUSE I WASN'T THE LOWEST BIDDER, OR IT DIDN'T PUT IT IN, AND SOMEONE ELSE HAS TAKEN THAT OVER THROUGH THE MARKET.
AND THAT'S THE WAY EACH HOUR ON THE HOUR IS SET.
IT'S MY RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE SURE THAT MY OBLIGATION IS MET.
AND, AND I'M HAVING A LITTLE CONFUSION ON WHETHER YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DEPLOYMENT OF ANCILLARY SERVICES AFTER MY OBLIGATED PERIOD CONTINUING.
THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY REASON TO ME TO HAVE A DURATION REQUIREMENT ON IT IF YOU WERE PLANNING ON THAT.
AND THAT'S ANOTHER CONVERSATION.
SO, UH, THAT'S MY PUSHBACK ON THAT.
AND WHEN YOU GET TO FIVE MINUTES, I THINK THAT EVEN GIVES YOU THE ABILITY TO TRANSFER THAT CAPABILITY TO OTHER ENTITIES BY EITHER NOT OFFERING IN, IN THAT, THAT FIVE MINUTE PERIOD OR CHANGING YOUR OFFERED WHERE YOU'RE NOT STRUCK.
SO WHEN YOU'RE OUTTA STATE OF CHARGE, YOU TURN THAT TO SOMEONE ELSE INSTEAD OF WILEY, YOU'RE DOING IT EVERY FIVE MINUTES.
SO I THINK THAT THIS NEEDS FURTHER CONVERSATION.
I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IT IS DONE AND, UH, IT EITHER GETS PUT INTO THE EC, UH, THE R T C, UH, CHARTER OR, UH, THE JOINT COMMENTERS, TURN THIS PARTICULAR COMMENTS INTO AN N P R R LIKE SOON, AND POTENTIALLY ADD IN THE DURATION REQUIREMENTS OF GETTING RID OF THAT SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A STRUCTURED CONVERSATION RATHER THAN JUST A MEETING PLACE AFTER R T C FOR STAKEHOLDERS TO GET TOGETHER TO HAVE A DISCUSSION.
I THINK THIS NEEDS TO BE MORE FORMAL THAN THAT, BUT I AM OKAY WITH 1186 AS A FIRST STEP FOR NOW WITH THE REST OF THIS BEING LOOKED AT IN A SERIOUS MANNER.
REMI, CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES, WE CAN.
UM, I HAVE A QUESTION, UH, CLARIFYING QUESTION TO IKA.
SO, UH, I HEAR A LOT OF THINGS ARE, UM, BEING PROMISED TO BE OKAY TO BE DISCUSSED AT A LATER STAGE, AND THAT'S, UH, THE Y OR Z OR THOSE, UM, WHAT IS THE POSITION ON THE COMPLIANCE PART? OR IS
SO WILL I REPLY? SO, HEY, RASHMI, RIGHT NOW, OUR POSITION WAS, UH, ANCILLARY SERVICES ARE CLEARLY ON AN HOURLY BASIS, SO HOURLY IS WHAT WE WANTED TO EVALUATE THE PERFORMANCE ACT, BUT I, I AM, UH, ALL, UH, I THINK WHAT I COMMITTED TO DOING WAS LIKE CONTINUING TO THINK THROUGH WHAT A ROLL UP COULD BE AND HANDLE IT IN A SEPARATE N P R R.
SO THAT'S ALSO AN ADDITIONAL ITEM THAT GETS PARKED IN THE, TO BE DISCUSSED AND, UH, SUBMITTED AS A SEPARATE N P R R.
AND, UH, FOR THE Y I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN WITH THE ANNOUNCEMENT, UH, JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
SO, UH, THE, THIS WIFI I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, IS ONLY CHANGING DURING THE DEPLOYMENT TIME ONLY THE STATE OF CHARGE REQUIREMENT DURING THE DEPLOYMENT TIME.
SO IN YOUR OPINION, IS IT WORKING OR WILL IT WORK FOR THE E C R S THEN? I WAS TRYING TO UNDERSTAND.
SO RIGHT NOW, WHY, AS WRITTEN SAYS E EVEN, UH, FOR AN E C R S DEPLOYMENT, STATE OF CHARGE REQUIREMENT GOES TO ZERO MM-HMM.
UH, SO THAT SAYS THERE IS REALLY NO REQUIREMENT, BUT, SO I, LIKE I SAID, I'M HAPPY TO PUT THE PARAMETER AND I'M NOT, UH, UH, AGREEING TO PUT LOGIC, UH, THAT AUTOMATICALLY SETS IT RIGHT NOW.
UH, CAN, THERE WAS ONE MORE THING.
I, SORRY, RANDY, MR. JUMP AHEAD.
I DIDN'T, UH, UH, CAN I ALSO POINT RESPOND BACK, IF YOU DON'T MIND TO BOB, BEFORE I DROP OFF? GO AHEAD.
[01:35:02]
YOU MADE COMMENTS AROUND DURATION NEEDS TO BE REVISITED FOR R T C.I THINK WE ABSOLUTELY AGREE IT, I MEAN, IT, IT, WHAT 1186 IS DOING IS SOLELY LOOKING TO PUT FORTH CHANGES WE SEE NEEDING TODAY PRIOR TO R T C.
AND THAT SECONDARY FORUM THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IS REALLY TO ADDRESS WHAT IMPROVEMENTS CAN BE MADE FURTHER BEYOND 1186 TO TODAY'S SYSTEMS. SO THAT'S NOT THE FORUM FOR R T C DURATION DISCUSSION, BUT R RTC IN ITSELF DOES NEED TO TALK ABOUT STATE OF CHARGE, UH, UH, HOW TO ACCOUNT FOR STATE OF CHARGE AND WHAT IS THE APPROPRIATE DURATION.
SO THERE IS, UH, WE ARE CERTAINLY GETTING READY TO TEE UP THAT CONVERSATION.
YEAH, JUST REAL QUICKLY IN RESPONSE TO, UH, SOME OF THE THINGS THAT KENAN WENT ON ABOUT, I, I THINK THAT MOST PEOPLE IN THE ROOM WOULD, WOULD AGREE THAT STRANDING CAPACITY, UH, FROM RESOURCES, UH, PURPOSEFULLY IS NEVER A GOOD MARKET DESIGN.
AND, UM, I BELIEVE AND HAVE ALWAYS BELIEVED THAT, UH, COMPETITION ALWAYS WORKS BEST WHEN RESOURCE OWNERS ARE ALLOWED TO MANAGE THEIR OWN CAPACITY AND DON'T HAVE ARTIFICIAL CONSTRAINTS PUT ON THEIR DECISION MAKING.
AND THAT'S HOW THIS, THIS MARKET HAS, HAS WORKED SINCE 2000.
AND I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT, THAT YOU, UH, PROVE A SET OF RULES THAT ALLOWS THE OWNERS TO CONTINUE TO MANAGE THEIR OPERATIONS AND THEIR RISK WITHOUT ARTIFICIAL CONSTRAINTS.
UH, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE, UH, I EXPRESSED AGREEMENT WITH BOB THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS THIS ISSUE.
UM, I THINK 90 PLUS PERCENT OF THE INTERVALS, UM, WILL BE DEALT WITH EXACTLY AS BOB ENVISIONS, BUT THERE NEEDS TO BE A CONVERSATION, AND I DON'T WANNA HIDE THAT.
UM, AND I'M HAPPY TO, UH, TALK THROUGH THAT ISSUE, UM, WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS AROUND R T C.
SO I, I THINK THAT'S THE MAIN, UH, MAIN POINT I WANNA MAKE.
UM, I THINK, UH, SECONDARILY, UH, WE ARE LOOKING AT A NEW WAY OF, OF, UH, MEETING ALL OF OUR NEEDS.
SO, UH, NO, I, I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME, UH, PERSPECTIVE ON, ON WHAT'S ON THE SYSTEM NOW VERSUS WHAT WAS ON THE SYSTEM 10 YEARS AGO AS WE WORKED THROUGH MARKETS.
YEAH, UH, THANKS KENAN FOR CLARIFYING THAT.
UM, IT'S PRETTY APPARENT TO ME THAT, UH, THERE'S A LOT OF WORK THAT STILL NEEDS TO BE DONE.
SMALL ONE, YET, IT IS A FIRST STEP, AND I KNOW WE NEED TO MOVE SOMETHING TO GET THE R T C GOING.
FIRST QUESTION I HAVE, DOES ANYONE ON TAC HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH PLACING ON THE TAC ACTION ITEMS, LIST THE ISSUES RELATED TO THE Y COMPLIANCE AND, UH, AND DURATION REQUIREMENTS AT, UH, R T C FOR R T C? DOES ANYONE HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT? I DON'T HEAR ANY.
SO, KAILYN, IS IT POSSIBLE THAT WE WOULD GET THAT IN OUR LIST, UH, FOR OUR ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN IN THE FUTURE? YES.
I, I THINK, I THINK WE CAN DO THAT, AND I'LL, I'LL BE BACK MODERATING THAT DISCUSSION WHEN GET TO THE RTC TOPIC.
IT CAN GO ONE OF THE TWO PLACES, BUT I WANT TO AT LEAST MAKE SURE THAT IT'S THERE AND THEN IT'D BE UP TO, UH, THE JOINT COMMENTERS OR MYSELF OR WHOMEVER TO, UH, PUT A, UH, UH, A P R R OUT THERE, WHICH ACTUALLY WOULD FORCE THAT CONVERSATION.
[01:40:02]
I, I'LL GO AHEAD AND IS ON OUR CURRENT ACTION ITEMS. I KNOWI, AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR.
SO MAYBE MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE RTC AS WELL.
UH, SO YEAH, I JUST, YEAH, I, I MISSED THAT.
BUT I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THIS KEEPS GOING AND WE DON'T STOP HERE.
UH, AND BEFORE I DO MY NEXT THING, KEN WANTED TO COMMENT ON ME, CAN HE DO THAT? AND THEN ME
I'M SORRY, ANN, YOU'RE MODERATING THIS, BUT
IS, IS IT IN RESPONSE? KEN, IS YOURS IN RESPONSE TO SOMETHING THAT BOB SAID? YES.
YES, IT'S NOT, IT'S, IT'S NOT DIRECTLY A COMMENT ON BOB HELTON.
I'M SURE I'VE GOT SOME OF THOSE.
YEAH, I'M SURE THERE'S A LOT OF THOSE OUT THERE.
UH, I AGREE, UH, WITH THAT, WE NEED THAT SPECIFIED AND COMMITMENT.
'CAUSE WE DO NEED AN N P R STRAIGHT AWAY.
WE WANT THAT URGENTLY PUT OUT THERE TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES.
BUT WHAT I WOULD ASK IS, UH, IF I COULD OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THE LIST TO ALSO INCLUDE DEPLOYMENT.
SO YOU HAD YOUR LIST OF, UH, DURATION, RIGHT? THE Y FACTOR, BUT I JUST THINK WE NEED TO CALL OUT DURING DEPLOYMENT.
IT IS A, A DIFFERENT, UH, UH, DISCUSSION AND COMPLEXITIES AS ITA AND WE'VE ALL BEEN WORKING ON, IF THAT'S OPEN HERE, OPEN TO THAT.
THAT, THAT, THAT, THAT MAKES SENSE.
UH, WITH THAT, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT, UH, TAC APPROVE 1186 AS PRESENTED BY P R S.
UH, AND I SEE A SECOND BY BILL BARNES IN THE QUEUE.
CAITLYN, DO YOU HAVE, UH, SEE YOU'RE NEXT IN THE QUEUE.
DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING ADDITIONAL? YEAH, I, I DO HAVE A COMMENT ON THE MOTION.
UM, AND THEN I HAVE A, A QUESTION FOR ERCOT.
MY, MY COMMENT ON THE, ON THE MOTION IS, YOU KNOW, AS A, A BATTERY OWNER, I, AN OPERATOR, UM, AND, AND BEEN OPERATING THROUGH TIGHT CONDITIONS THIS SUMMER, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE SEE 1186 AS, AS HALF BY P R S IS A HALF STOP, HALF STEP, OR A COMPROMISE, I THINK FOR THE HALF STOPS.
IT MAKES IT, IT DOES SOME NEGATIVE CHANGES THAT WE DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW, MAKES IT A HALF STOP STEP.
IT'S ENOUGH NEGATIVE THAT, THAT WE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IT, UM, IN TAKING AWAY OUR ABILITY TO MANAGE OUR OWN ASSET, WHICH WE THINK IS HUGELY DETRIMENTAL IN, IN A TIGHT SUMMER THAT WE'RE HAVING RIGHT NOW.
UM, I ALSO HAD A QUESTION FROM, FOR ERCOT.
WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT Z MULTIPLIER FOR Y OR, YOU KNOW, THEY SEEM TO AGREE WITH THE CONCEPT OF WHY, BUT, BUT WE WOULD NEED AN N P R R FOR A PARAMETER OF VALUE.
IS THERE A WAY THAT WE COULD HAVE AN N P R R, YOU KNOW, THAT THE JOINT COMMENTERS ARE, ARE WILLING TO, WILLING TO DO THE HOMEWORK ON, BUT IS IT POSSIBLE TO, TO HAVE THAT CONSTRUCTED IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT DOESN'T REQUIRE SYSTEM CHANGES AND IT CAN BE IMPLEMENTED WITH THIS N P R R AT THE SAME TIME? OR WOULD WE BE WAITING ON, YOU KNOW, R T C AND, AND YEARS OF WORK BEFORE WE COULD GET ANY OF THOSE CHANGES IMPLEMENTED? LIN, THERE YOU GO.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE ANSWER IS NOT A SIMPLE ONE.
IT, IT ALMOST AS, IT DEPENDS, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT, UH, WHAT WHERE WE LAND.
BUT WHAT I, I MEAN, THERE ARE TWO PIECES.
THE WAY THE FORMULA IS WRITTEN APPROVED VERSION OF 1186, I, I DON'T KNOW WHERE I CAN READILY PUT A Z.
SO THAT'S PARTLY WHY I DON'T WANT TO DO THIS TODAY.
BUT MAYBE WE CAN, AT LEAST THE THING WE CAN DO IS SIT BACK WITH THE JOINT COMMENTERS AND DESCRIBE, UH, THE, THE FORMULA IN A WAY THAT THE Z AND THE Y ARE CLEARLY PULLED OUT AS, AS, UH, AS Y'ALL HAVE BEEN USING.
RIGHT? THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING WE CAN DO AND FILE AS A CLARIFICATION, UH, UH, FILE N P R R SO THAT CLEAN UP THE LANGUAGE, THE, I I THINK NOW FROM THERE, PRIOR TO I T C, THE CONVERSATIONS WE HAVE AROUND WHAT ADDITIONAL THINGS WE CAN DO AND, AND WHAT SOLUTIONS WE CRAFT, THOSE WOULD HAVE TO BE VETTED THROUGH THE IA PROCESS FOR US TO UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH WORK IT IS.
[01:45:01]
THAT CONVERSATION IS ALMOST SEPARATE.SO THAT'S WHY TWO, UH, FOR THOSE FLAVOR OF CHANGES, IF THEY GO BEYOND JUST TWEAKING THE PARAMETER, SORRY, THAT MAY BE CLEAR, TWEAKING WHAT WE SET AS THE PARAMETERS FOR Z N Y.
UH, IF, IF WE GO BEYOND, UH, THAT IN THE, THIS NPI IN THE CONVERSATIONS AND THE SOLUTIONS WE IDENTIFIED, AND THOSE WOULD NEED TO BE VETTED THROUGH THE IA PROCESS.
SO, UH, I'M, UM, YOU KNOW, TALKING ON BEHALF OF, UH, HUNTER ENERGY TODAY, SO ON THIS N P R, UM, AND, YOU KNOW, WE SUBMITTED COMMENTS THAT ADDRESS ALL THESE ISSUES THAT PEOPLE ARE DISCUSSING.
UH, WE PROVIDED SOLUTIONS FOR THEM.
WE, FIRST OF ALL, WE SUPPORT THE N P R BEING APPROVED TODAY AS IT IS THE P R S VERSION, BUT WE THINK WE NEED TO IMMEDIATELY FOLLOW IT UP WITH ANOTHER URGENT N P R R.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, OUR, OUR SET OF COMMENTS CAN FIND THE BASIS FOR THAT.
BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, WE ADDRESS EACH OF THESE ISSUES THAT PEOPLE ARE DISCUSSING, AND I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME EDUCATION ON THE DURATION, BECAUSE I THINK THE WAY ERCOT IS THINKING ABOUT IT IS WRONG.
UM, YOU KNOW, LIKE THE FOUR HOUR DURATION OR TWO HOUR DURATION, IT'S GREAT FOR QUALIFYING ESRS ON HOW MUCH THEY CAN PROVIDE, LIKE A 10 10 MEGAWATT YEAH.
E SR WITH A 10 MEGAWATT HOUR CHARGE CAN ONLY PROVIDE TWO AND A HALF MEGAWATTS.
SO THAT'S WHERE IT COMES IN AS TO HOW MUCH YOU CAN PROVIDE IN MEGAWATTS.
BUT WHEN YOU IMPOSE AN S O C BASED ON THAT DURATION, THE WAY IT'S PROPOSED IN 1186, UM, THE, ALL THE COMMENTERS ARE EXACTLY RIGHT.
YOU'RE STRANDING MEGAWATT HOURS.
YOU DON'T HAVE ALL OPTION ON THOSE.
BUT WORSE THAN THAT IS YOU'RE NOT GETTING WHAT CANAN SORT OF DESCRIBED, OKAY, I'M GETTING FOUR HOURS OF CONTINUOUS, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, ENERGY.
YOU ARE ACTUALLY FORCING THAT RESOURCE AT THE END OF THE FIRST HOUR TO CHARGE, THEY HAVE TO CHARGE TO MAINTAIN THAT S O C COMPLIANCE.
SO ERCOT IS NOT EVEN GETTING WHAT THEY'RE, UH, WHAT THEY'RE THINKING THEY'RE GETTING.
AND INSTEAD OF MAKING THIS Y AND Z VERY COMPLICATED, BASED ON PAST DEPLOYMENT, PAST HOURS DEPLOYMENT, ALL THE S O MEAN S O C CURVES NEED TO LOOK EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE REG UP AND R R S.
IT GOES FROM A HUNDRED PERCENT TO ZERO.
IF YOU IMPOSE THAT, THAT MEANS YOU CAN PROVIDE THAT SERVICE FOR THAT HOUR.
AND IN THE NEXT HOUR, JUST LIKE IF YOU HAD CODE'S, CURRENT PROPOSAL HAS, IF YOU RUN OUT OF JUICE, YOU'RE GONNA PROVIDE IT AS A C L R INSTEAD OF FORCING THEM TO PROVIDE IT AS A C L R.
IF YOU DO IT THIS WAY, YOU KNOW, IF THEY DO HAVE FOUR HOURS WORTH OF CHARGE, THEY WILL KEEP PROVIDING FOUR HOURS WORTH OF CHARGE FOR FOUR CONTINUOUS HOURS OF DEPLOYMENT.
WHEREAS ER CODE'S VERSION CURRENT N P R, YOU KNOW, FORCES YOU TO CHARGE FOR AT THE START OF EVERY HOUR.
UM, SO I THINK WE JUST NEED TO HAVE MORE DISCUSSION, EDUCATION, UM, ON THIS AND NOT, WE ARE NOT CHALLENGING THE, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH YOU'RE ABLE TO PROVIDE AS ANCILLARIES TWO AND A HALF MEGAWATTS AND STUFF, BUT THE SS O C REQUIREMENT ACTUALLY GOES AGAINST RELIABILITY AND AGAINST, UH, YOU KNOW, GOOD MARKET DESIGN.
SO WE HOPE TO FOLLOW THIS UP WITH THE URGENT N P R R THAT SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED, UH, AND ACTUALLY TAKES OUT A LOT OF STUFF THAT'S N P R IN THE CURRENT N P R R.
SO IT SHOULD BE EASY TO IMPLEMENT.
AND, UM, AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN HAVE THAT DISCUSSION VERY QUICK AND NOT WAIT MONTHS TO START UP A TASK FORCE AND, AND DO THAT.
UM, I'VE, THIS HAS BEEN, UH, YOU KNOW, INTERESTING DISCUSSION TO, TO LISTEN TO.
AND, YOU KNOW, FRANKLY, JUST FRAMING IT MORE BROADLY, IT SEEMS KIND OF LIKE A GREEK TRAGEDY WHERE YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, ERCOT HAS IDENTIFIED A, YOU KNOW, A, A VALID CONCERN, AND I WANT TO GIVE ERCOT CREDIT FOR HAVING, YOU KNOW, PUT A LOT OF TIME INTO HOLDING WORKSHOPS AND TRYING TO GET AS MUCH STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT AS POSSIBLE.
IT'S STILL A VERY ACCELERATED TIMEFRAME, AND I THINK SOME OF THE JOINT COMMONERS HAVE, HAVE RAISED, YOU KNOW, SOME, SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THERE BEING, UH, UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES THAT IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE NOT GONNA SOLVE TODAY, BUT THERE'S MAYBE A PATH FORWARD TO ADDRESSING THEM IN THE NEAR FUTURE.
AND I THINK THAT'S, THAT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, PERHAPS A FAIR OUTCOME.
UH, AND WITHOUT WANTING TO WADE TOO DEEP INTO THE STATE OF CHARGE DISCUSSION, ONE THING THAT JUST STANDS OUT TO ME IS, YOU KNOW, IF, CAN THAT CONCERN NOT BE ADDRESSED BY SIMPLY MOVING, YOU KNOW, THE, THE FUTURE ANCILLARY SERVICE OBLIGATION TO A DIFFERENT RESOURCE? YOU KNOW, WE'VE TALKED, I THINK SOME COMMENTERS HAVE, HAVE NOTED THAT CORRECTLY, YOU CAN, YOU SHOULD PROBABLY BE LOOKING AT THIS FROM A PORTFOLIO STANDPOINT
[01:50:01]
ANYHOW, NOT, UM, YOU KNOW, NOT NECESSARILY JUST FROM A, A SPECIFIC RESOURCE, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE THAT STATE OF CHARGE GUIDELINE WOULD SERVE AS A STICK TO INCENTIVIZE, UH, YOU KNOW, QUEASY TO MOVE OBLIGATIONS AROUND IN ORDER TO AVOID HAVING TO CHARGE BACK UP IN THE MIDDLE OF A DEPLOYMENT.SO I BELIEVE THAT QUESTION, ANYONE HAS AN ANSWER.
I CAN, I CAN TAKE A SHOT AT THAT.
UM, UH, I, I THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD RIGHT NOW.
UM, THE ABILITY TO DO THE MOVEMENT MOVING AROUND IS ACHIEVED FAR MORE EFFECTIVELY UNDER REAL TIME CO-OP OPTIMIZATION.
UM, I THINK THE CHALLENGE IS, UM, WHAT YOUR PORTFOLIO WITHIN THE Q SS C LOOKS LIKE IN TERMS OF MOVING THAT OBLIGATION AROUND.
UM, I THINK CERTAIN RESOURCES MIGHT HAVE A BROAD ENOUGH PORTFOLIO TO DO SO AND OTHERS NOT.
UM, ALSO, UH, IT JUST DEPENDS ON WHAT THE REST OF YOUR PORTFOLIO LOOKS LIKE AS WELL.
BUT, UM, I THINK THERE ARE SOME CHALLENGES TO MAKING THAT HAPPEN AS, UM, EVERYTHING STANDS RIGHT NOW, RIGHT? LETS SAY WE HAVE KEN.
SO, UH, FIRST ONE IS, UH, ON NED'S QUESTION.
UH, THE ANSWER IS YES, UH, YOU CAN MOVE TODAY, YOUR OBLIGATIONS AROUND.
SO ONCE AGAIN, GOING BACK TO COMMENTS TODAY, THE RULES TO ALLOW YOU TO DO THESE, THE FLEXIBILITY'S THERE, THE OWNERSHIP OF ENSURING THAT YOU MEET YOUR OBLIGATIONS AND YOU CAN IN THE FUTURE HOURS IS ON THE RESOURCE AND ON THE Q S C TO MANAGE THAT, THAT'S DONE TODAY.
WE REALLY DON'T NEED A STICK, RIGHT? TO FORCE US TO TURN AROUND AND START CHARGING WHEN WE CAN MOVE IT OFF, RIGHT? SO I THINK THE ANSWER IS YES, THOSE TOOLS ARE THERE TODAY.
THE PROTOCOLS ALLOW FOR IT TODAY, UH, AS THESE RESOURCES COME ONLINE, THEY SHOULD PLAN AND HAVE THE RIGHT CONTINGENCY PLANS AND CONTRACTS IN PLACE THAT ALLOW THAT TO HAPPEN.
AND IF THEY DON'T, THEY'RE GONNA LEARN REAL QUICKLY.
'CAUSE THEY'LL BE A, THEY'LL BE STRUCK WITH A FAILURE TO PROVIDE ANSWER SERVICE THAT RULES IN TODAY.
SO I, I JUST WANNA SAY YES, I JUST DUNNO IF WE NEED, UM, THIS STICK TO DRIVE THAT, WHICH ALSO DRIVES AS OTHERS HAVE TALKED ABOUT THESE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
THE, UH, SECOND THING I'VE GOT, UH, IS, UM, BOB HILTON'S MOTION, UM, WITH THAT MOTION, ARE WE ABLE TO, UH, ENSURE OR RECOMMEND OR HAVE OR COMMIT TO RAISING AN N P R R TO ADDRESS THESE SPECIFIC ISSUES? AND IS THAT SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE PART OF THE MOTION TO ENSURE THAT THAT OCCURS AND THAT THAT'S A QUESTION FOR BOB? OR IS THAT A QUESTION FOR? YEAH, KEN, THIS IS ANN BORON.
SO WE DON'T USUALLY DON'T TAG ON, UM, CAVEATS TO MOTIONS, UM, BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY CAPTURE IT IN THE DISCUSSION IN THE TAC REPORT THAT WILL GO TO THE BOARD.
ALRIGHT, WE HAVE CHRIS HENDRICKS NEXT.
I JUST HEARING EVERYBODY'S COMMENTS AND KIND OF READING ALL THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR THIS ONE SEEMS I HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS WITH TAC APPROVING, UH, N P R, THAT KNOWINGLY, WE KNOW IT'S A HALF MEASURE AND IT NEEDS ANOTHER FOLLOWING ON N P R R TO, TO KIND OF ADDRESS IT IN THE FUTURE.
AND HOPEFULLY THAT N P R WILL GET DONE BEFORE IT'S ALL IMPLEMENTED, BUT NO GUARANTEES THERE.
SO JUST KIND OF WANNA RAISE THAT TO THE OTHER TYPE MEMBERS AND KIND OF THINK HARD ABOUT IT AND HOW YOU BLED ON THIS ISSUE.
ALRIGHT, AUDREY? YEAH, ACTUALLY ANN, UH, MY FELLOW JOINT COMMENTARY, KEN, UM, HE, HE ADDRESSED THE COMMENT I WAS GOING TO MAKE IN RESPONSE TO NED ABOUT MOVING IT TO A Q S E, WHICH, YES, THAT, THAT IS A WAY TO MANAGE THE CITY CHARGE REQUIREMENT.
UH, AND JUST TO, TO REITERATE THAT UNDER 1186, EVEN IF YOUR WORDS DO THAT, WHICH IS A TOOL THAT CAN BE USED TODAY,
[01:55:01]
IT'D STILL BE REQUIRED TO SHOW THAT YOU HAD MORE S O C THAN YOU MIGHT ACTUALLY NEED TO COVER YOUR REWARD.SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT THAT YOU'RE GETTING HIT WITH THE STICK ONCE, YOU'RE GETTING HIT WITH THE TWICE OR FOUR TIMES IN THE CASE OF NON SPAY.
ALRIGHT, LOOKS LIKE THE QUEUE IS EMPTY AND WE DO HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE.
UM, IF WE CAN REVIEW THAT MOTION, I KNOW THAT WE MIGHT HAVE TO SPECIFY AN EFFECTIVE DATE THAT I BELIEVE WAS THE INTENT, UM, OF WHEN P R S APPROVED IT.
SO IT'S A RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF 1186 AS RECOMMENDED BY P R SS IN THE AUGUST P R S REPORT AND THEN THE RECOMMENDED EFFECTIVE DATE.
AGAIN, I BELIEVE THIS WAS THE INTENT OF P R S WHEN THEY APPROVED IT WAS UPON SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION FOR ALL SECTIONS EXCEPT FOR THAT GRAY BOX IN SECTION FOUR, WHICH WILL BE IMPLEMENTED NO EARLIER THAN THREE MONTHS AFTER THE SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION OF 1186.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THE MOTION? ALL RIGHT.
AND JUST QUICKLY SO WE CAN DO OUR DUE DILIGENCE, SINCE THERE IS A 500 TO 700 K IMPACT ON THIS, UM, IF WE COULD JUST TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT THAT BUSINESS CASE.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THE BUSINESS CASE? THEN I WILL TURN IT OVER TO CORY TO RUN THE BALLOT.
ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU ANN AND SUSIE, KEEP ME HONEST ON MY PROXIES.
WE WILL BEGIN UP WITH THE CONSUMER SEGMENT WITH MARK.
AND THEN, UH, NAGE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL CONSUMERS? YES.
MOVING ON TO OUR CO-OPS, MIKE.
UH, CHRISTIAN, ARE YOU STILL WITH US? I AM COREY, YES.
ONTO OUR INDEPENDENT GENERATORS.
UH, NED? YES, THANK YOU, CORY.
MOVING ON TO OUR IPMS, JEREMY.
I SAW YOU COME OFF MUTE, KEVIN, BUT I DIDN'T HEAR YOU.
RICHARD ROSS STILL WITH US OR ARE WE MOVING ON TO HIS PROXY? YES, BLAKE.
YOU OH, RICHARD, STILL THERE? OKAY.
[02:00:01]
ALICIA.MOTION CARRIES 88%, FOUR, 12% AGAINST FIVE ABSTENTIONS.
UM, WE ARE QUITE A BIT BEHIND SCHEDULE NOW, UM, AND, AND I KNOW THAT WAS A LONG DISCUSSION.
UH, I THINK I NEED A BREAK AND ERCOT NEEDS A BREAK.
AND SO WE WE'RE HOPING TO, UH, BREAK FROM NOW UNTIL NOON AND THEN RESUME WITH THE, THE REVISION REQUEST AFTER THAT.
UH, CAN, CAN SOMEONE CONFIRM THAT THEY CAN HEAR ME? YES, MA'AM.
AND SO WE WRAPPED UP DISCUSSION.
UM, I, I THINK WE'RE PREVIOUSLY TABLED AT
[5. Revision Requests Tabled at TAC (Possible Vote)]
TAX.THE FIRST ONE THAT WE HAVE UP IS O B D R R 46.
UM, I BELIEVE THIS CAN REMAIN TABLED, PENDING N P R R 1188.
UM, AND I, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S A REASON TO, TO PULL THIS UP OR DISCUSS UNLESS ERCOT OR SOMEBODY ELSE WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT AT THIS TIME.
YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? UM, SO WE CAN MOVE ON TO 11.
UH, 73 N P R 1173 CHANGES CONSISTENT WITH THE OPTIONS AVAILABLE TO AN M O U AND EC ENTERING RETAIL COMPETITION IN THE
UM, THIS WAS TABLED BY TECH IN JUNE AND REMAINED TABLED LAST MONTH.
WE ARE LOOKING FOR, UM, A VOTE TO, TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THIS N P R R AS RECOMMENDED BY P R S AT THE, UH, JUNE 14TH P R S, AND WE CAN PUT THAT ON THE COMBO BALLOT IF NOBODY HAS ANY OBJECTIONS.
I'M NOT SEEING ANY OF THERE EITHER.
AND I WILL NOTE, UM, YOU KNOW, WE GOT A LITTLE BIT BEHIND SCHEDULE OR A LOT BEHIND SCHEDULE.
UM, I DO HAVE A, A HARD STOP AT ONE 30.
UM, AND SO I, I THINK WE CAN GET THROUGH THIS.
UM, BUT, BUT WE WILL REASSESS IF IT'S TAKING A BIT LONGER, BUT, BUT I BELIEVE WE CAN GET THROUGH A LOT OF THIS AGENDA FAIRLY QUICKLY.
[6. Other Binding Document Revision Requests (OBDRRs) (Vote)]
SIX, WHICH IS OTHER BINDING DOCUMENT REVISION REQUESTS.KENNAN, I BELIEVE YOU ARE GONNA WALK US THROUGH THIS ONE.
YES, CAN YOU HEAR ME? I CAN HEAR YOU.
UM, SO THIS IS, UM, UH, O B A D R R THAT IMPLEMENTS THE COMMISSION INSTRUCTION AROUND O R D C THAT CAME OUT AT THE, I BELIEVE, MOST RECENT OPEN MEETING.
IT ALSO IS, UH, ALIGNED WITH THE BRIDGE SOLUTION THAT THE BOARD RECOMMENDED TO, UH, TO, UH, THE COMMISSION AS PART OF THE INSTRUCTIONS THE COMMISSION HAD GIVEN IN TERMS OF EXAMINING A BRIDGE SOLUTION.
IN SHORT, WHAT IT DOES IS IT ADDS TWO PRICE FLOORS TO THE OPERATING RESERVE DEMAND CURVE.
UM, AND THEY KINDA LOOK LIKE STEPS.
SO FROM 3000 MEGAWATTS TO 6,500 MEGAWATTS, THERE'S THIS FLOOR AT $20, THEN IT STEPS DOWN FROM, UH, 6,501, UH, TECHNICALLY SPEAKING TO 7,000 AT $10.
UM, ESSENTIALLY THE, UH, OUTCOME OF THIS IS TO, UM, CREATE
[02:05:01]
A, A INTERIM SOLUTION FROM A RESOURCE ADEQUACY, UH, STANDPOINT, UM, AND B UH, CREATE AN INCENTIVE TO COMMIT OR A GREATER INCENTIVE TO COMMIT TO HELP WITH RUCK ISSUES.UM, I, I THINK THAT COVERS MOST OF THE MECHANICS.
I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
ALRIGHT, I AM NOT SEEING ANY, UH, I, OKAY, I DO SEE SOME COMMENTS.
IT TOOK EVERYBODY A COUPLE MINUTES.
UM, AND SO THE FIRST COMMENT I BELIEVE IS MARK DREYFUSS.
UM, I JUST WANNA NOTE THAT WE HAD A LENGTHY DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS BACK IN APRIL, I BELIEVE, BEFORE THE BOARD MEETING AND THEN, UH, COMMENTS AT THE BOARD AND CONSUMERS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED IT AT THAT TIME, AND I PLAN TO VOTE AGAINST TODAY FOR THE SAME REASONS, WHICH I THINK ARE, ARE JUST AS REASONABLE AND MAYBE EVEN MORE SO, UH, TODAY FOR OPPOSING THE, THE PROPOSAL.
AND I THINK YOU, YOU MISSPOKE, YOU SAID CONSUMERS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED IT AT THAT TIME, AND, AND I THINK THEY OPPOSED IT AT THAT TIME.
AND, AND YOU'RE
UM, WE WILL GO TO JOHN HUBBARD.
CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? I CAN HEAR YOU.
UH, T I C A AS MARK SAID, T I C STILL OPPOSE THE O D C FLOORS AND HAS FILED A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS ON AUGUST 18TH.
UM, OUR CONCERN IS THAT THE CHANGE THE O R D C O R D C ARE DESIGNED TO GUARANTEE REVENUES AND IN A WAY THAT'S MEANT TO KEEP CUSTOMERS FROM RESPONDING.
I SEE ERIC GOFF NEXT, UH, SIMILAR SENTIMENT, ALTHOUGH I HAVEN'T FILED ANYTHING WITH THE THIRD QUARTER OF APPEALS RECENTLY.
UM, BUT, UM, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR KAN.
YOU MENTIONED THAT, UM, YOU HOPE THIS WILL HELP WITH, UM, COMMITMENTS TO AVOID R HOW WILL YOU, UM, TRACK THAT, UM, WILL IT ULTIMATELY SORT OF CHANGED, UM, REPORTING OR ANALYSIS? UM, AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER RIGHT NOW, I'D APPRECIATE A FOLLOW UP.
CER CERTAINLY ANN, UH, I I CAN TAKE A PRELIMINARY ANSWER, BUT IT, IT MAY REQUIRE ADDITIONAL FOLLOW-UP WITH YOU AS WELL.
UM, SO, UH, WE DO DO ANALYSIS ANNUALLY ON LIABILITY UNIT COMMITMENT, BUT THE, UH, ULTIMATE ANALYSIS BEHIND THAT STATEMENT OR IS MORE INCENTIVE BASED.
SO, UM, AND AS WE DEMONSTRATED, THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL INCENTIVE TO COMMIT AND BE, UH, ONLINE BECAUSE THE ADDERS ONLY GO TO ONLINE RESOURCES.
UM, AND THAT WOULD, IF THERE IS ADDITIONAL COMMITMENT THAT WOULD REDUCE OR ERCOT HAVING TO COMMIT THE RESOURCES, I'M HAPPY TO FOLLOW UP WITH YOU ON OTHER ANALYSIS, BUT THE PROBLEM WILL BE, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO
I, YOU KNOW, I THINK I SAID THAT THE LAST TIME, I DON'T NEED TO REITERATE IT, BUT I'M NOT CONVINCED THAT THIS WILL ADDRESS THE, THOSE ISSUES, ALTHOUGH IT WOULD BE GREAT IF IT DID.
UM, BUT I, I THINK THERE'S INTEREST IN THAT PARTICULAR TOPIC FOR THIS PARTICULAR ITEM, AND SO I THINK IT WOULD BE WORTH SOME ATTENTION FROM STAKEHOLDERS AND TAX ABOUT HOW EXACTLY TO MEASURE THAT.
I BELIEVE, UH, DAVID KEY IS NEXT IN THE QUEUE, BUT FIRST WE GOT A NOTE KAN THAT YOUR MICROPHONE KEEPS GOING IN AND OUT, AND I THINK I'M HEARING THAT AS WELL.
I'M GONNA SWITCH TO MY PHONE THEN.
UM, NOT SPEAKING TO ANYTHING ON THE MERITS, JUST QUICK QUESTION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS.
UM, I, I KNOW IT'S A BIG UNCERTAINTY RIGHT NOW, BUT, UH, DO WE HAVE A IDEA OF IF IT FOLLOWS THE TIMELINE THAT WE THINK IT'S GONNA BE ON, UH, WHEN CAN WE EXPECT THIS TO GO LIVE? OR DO WE HAVE A, YOU KNOW, ESTIMATED HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE, UM, UPON BOARD AND P
[02:10:01]
D C APPROVAL TIMELINE? THANKS.UH, I, I THINK THAT'S FOR ME, AND I'M STILL IN THE PROCESS OF SWITCHING OVER, BUT WE BELIEVE WE CAN, UM, MEET OR EXCEED THE DE DECEMBER DELIVERY DEADLINE THAT'S OUT THERE.
UM, WE BELIEVE THAT, UH, WE COULD DELIVER THIS AS EARLY AS, UM, UH, NOVEMBER OR, UH, OUTSIDE CHANCE OCTOBER.
BUT THE KEY THING IS THAT WE GET THE APPROVALS THAT WE NEED BOTH FROM THE BOARD AND THE COMMISSION.
AND I CANNOT FORECAST EXACTLY WHEN THAT WOULD HAPPEN.
CAN I MAKE A COMMENT ON THAT? THIS IS ANN BORIN.
UM, AS FAR AS TIMELINE GOES, DAVID, I THINK THAT YOU WERE ASKING IF TAC DOES APPROVE THIS TODAY, IT WOULD GO TO THE AUGUST BOARD AND THEN THE SEPTEMBER P C MEETING, AND THEN IT WOULD HAVE AN EFFECTIVE DATE OF OCTOBER 1ST, ACCORDING TO THIS IMPACT ANALYSIS THAT'S OUT THERE.
YEAH, I THINK THAT'S ALL HELPFUL.
I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THIS WERE TO MOVE FORWARD, WHEN CAN WE EXPECT, UM, THE PRICES, THE PRICE CHANGES OR THE CURVE CHANGES TO BE, UH, IMPLEMENTED IN, IN LIVE IN SOFTWARE? SO THAT'S ALL HELPFUL.
I SEE, UH, ETH COCHRAN ON THE QUEUE.
THE QUESTION, I HAD THE SAME QUESTIONS.
I, I HAD THE SAME QUESTIONS AS DAVID, SO YOU CAN REMOVE ME.
IF IT'S NOT CLEAR, UH, NED, DID YOU CATCH ANY MORE TYPOS OR, OR THIS IS A
UH, I JUST WANTED TO, UH, MAKE THE GENERAL COMMENT.
I, YOU KNOW, I LOOKED AT THIS, IT SEEMED PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD AND, AND WORKED AS IN, UM, AS I THINK WE HAD ALL DISCUSSED AND ANTICIPATED PREVIOUSLY.
SO, I MEAN, THIS SEEMS LIKE A STRAIGHTFORWARD, UM, A STRAIGHTFORWARD PROPOSAL.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW IF FOLKS WANT MORE TIME TO REVIEW.
I KNOW SOME FOLKS HAVE ALREADY INDICATED THAT THEY, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL PROBABLY VOTE AGAINST NO MATTER WHAT.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, IN THE INTEREST OF, UH, YOU KNOW, MOVING THINGS FORWARD, I'D BE WILLING TO PUT A MOTION TO, UH, TO ENDORSE.
I SEE A SECOND FROM BOB HILTON.
UM, WAS THERE ANY COMMENTS ON THE MOTION? NAN, ARE YOU, ARE YOU WRAPPED UP ON YOUR COMMENTARY ON THE DOCUMENT? I KNOW HE WAS SWITCHING TO HIS PHONE.
ALRIGHT, IF THERE ARE NO, UH, COMMENTS TO THE MOTION, THEN, THEN CO I SEE YOU HAVE THE BALLOT PULLED UP.
AND CAITLYN, I AM, I AM FINISHED UNLESS THERE'S OTHER QUESTIONS.
AND THEN THERE'S THE, THE ANSWER TO THE GO LIVE WAS OCTOBER 1ST, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT.
I, I FORGOT THAT THAT WAS IN THE, UM, UM, IN, IN THE DOCUMENT.
ON THE MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF O B D R 48 AS SUBMITTED, AND ALONG WITH ITS AUGUST 11TH IMPACTS ANALYSIS, WE WILL START UP WITH THE CONSUMERS, WITH MARK.
THANK YOU, UH, ERIC FOR CHRISTIAN.
AND JOHN FOR CLIFF? YES, THANK YOU.
ONTO OUR INDEPENDENT GENERATOR, BRIAN? YES, THANK YOU, CAITLIN.
ONTO OUR IPMS. JEREMY? YES, THANK YOU,
[02:15:01]
REMI.ONTO OUR IRAS STILL? YES, THANK YOU, CHRIS.
YES, THANK YOU, UH, BLAKE FOR RICHARD.
MOTION CARRIES 76%, FOUR 24% AGAINST ONE EXTENSION.
CORY, THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT, WE ARE MOVING FORWARD
[7. RMS Report (Vote)]
TO THE R M S REPORT.DEBBIE, ARE YOU ON AND READY? I CERTAINLY AM.
R M S HAS ONE, UM, VOTING ITEM.
WE REQUEST TAC APPROVAL AND IT'S R M G R R 1 74.
AND IT IS RELATED TO, IT'S THE, IT'S THE SUPPORT TO N P R R 1 1 73, WHICH WAS TABLED AND IS, UM, COMING OFF OF THE TABLE LIST AND I BELIEVE IT WENT TO THE COMBO BALLOT ALREADY.
SO WE'RE ASKING FOR APPROVAL OF RMG R 1 74.
ALRIGHT, I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WE CAN ADD TO THE, THE CON BALLOT, UNLESS THERE ARE ANY OBJECTIONS.
ALRIGHT, LAST, AT THE LAST TECH MEETING, WE DISCUSSED ANNUAL VALIDATION.
AND I WANTED TO BRING THIS FORWARD.
THIS IS REALLY, I'LL DO THIS QUICKLY.
WE, UM, THERE WAS A REASON, THERE ARE MANY REASONS WHY WE DO ANNUAL VALIDATION AND WE DON'T WANNA STOP DOING THAT.
AND, UM, THIS IS KIND OF LIKE A LEAD INTO TO SOME OF THAT, THOSE ASPECTS.
SO, AMS DATA, AS WE TALKED LAST TIME, IS THE BEST DATA IS ACTUAL DATA.
IT IS THE LOWEST LEVEL OF DATA AVAILABLE.
UM, A M SS DATA IS AVAILABLE IN THE SMART METER TEXAS PORTAL, BUT ONLY TO THE REP OF RECORD UNLESS AN L O A LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION HAS BEEN OBTAINED.
SO THAT'S PROBLEMATIC TO REPS THAT ARE TRYING TO MARKET TO CUSTOMERS.
MY NEXT POINT IS A M S DATA IS RARELY USED BY NON RE OF RECORD.
AND, UM, THE REASON IS BECAUSE OF THESE STRICT, UH, L O A REQUIREMENTS AND NOT THAT LOAS AREN'T IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE USAGE DOES BELONG TO THE CUSTOMER, BUT IT, THE L O A PROCESS INVOLVES MANY THINGS IN THE VALIDATION OF MANY THINGS.
AND IT CAN TAKE, UM, ONE, TWO, UP TO THREE DAYS, AND THOSE ARE BUSINESS DAYS.
SO WHAT WE ARE LOOKING TO DO IS MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN GIVE SOME SORT OF USAGE DATA OR A REPLICA OF THAT, UM, TO THE REPS TO EXPEDITE THE DEVELOPMENT OF PRICING.
THESE ARE WHY WE THINK ANNUAL VALIDATION IS NEEDED TODAY AND THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE.
IF WE CAN'T GET A M S DATA IN TIME, UH, TO DEVELOP PRICING PROFILES, THEN LOAD PROFILES MAY BE USED.
UM, LOAD FORECASTING IS ANOTHER REASON.
UM, THE ACCURATE PROFILE SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT OF ACCURATE LOAD FORECASTS FOR NEW CUSTOMERS AND FOR ACCURATE AGGREGATION AND GROUPING CLASSES OF CUSTOMERS IN PROCUREMENT ALLOWS FOR AGGREGATION, FOR AGGREGATE HEDGING AND PROVIDES A CHECKPOINT TO COMPARE A M S M S DATA.
SO THAT'S REALLY, UM, THAT'S REALLY AN IMPORTANT POINT TO CONSIDER THE VALIDATION OF SUBSTATIONS.
THIS CAME ABOUT WHEN WE ASKED THIS QUESTION AND, UM, THE SUBSTATION ASSIGNMENTS ARE VALIDATED THROUGH, YOU KNOW, VALIDATION AND THE SUBSTATION ASSIGNMENTS.
THEY NEED TO BE ACCURATE AND, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE, UM, ERRORS ARE FOUND DURING ANNUAL VALIDATION, BUT THEY ARE CRITICAL TO DETERMINING THE, UM, CONGESTION ZONE.
SO, UM, SOME OF THE OTHER USERS ARE USES, UM, NON I D R, EASY
[02:20:01]
IDS, THE LOAD PROFILES OR USE FOR SETTLEMENT PROCESSES.AND, UM, THIS WAS STATED BY MULTIPLE, UH, RETAIL ELECTRIC PROVIDERS THAT THEY USE THEM IN THEIR MARKETING E EFFORTS AND ALSO IN THEIR MATERIALS, UM, WHEN THEY MARKET TO MARKET TO CUSTOMERS.
SO LOAD PROFILES ARE IMPROVED WITH THE USE OF ANNUAL VALIDATION, AND THAT'S GONNA BE THE MOST ACCURATE LOAD PROFILE YOU CAN GET.
SO CURRENTLY WE HAVE OUR, OUR TIMING IS BUSINESS IS EVERYTHING.
THE EVERY YEAR AND RESIDENTIAL IS EVERY THIRD YEAR.
SO, UM, THIS CAME ABOUT WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT SUSPENDING ANNUAL VALIDATION FOR 2024, WHICH T HAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.
UM, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS? OKAY, NEXT SLIDE.
SO DEBBIE, BILL BARNES, I'M JUST GONNA THANK YOU.
UM, JUST 'CAUSE MY POINT WAS ON YOUR, UH, THE SLIDE THAT'S UP RIGHT NOW.
SO JUST, I KNOW R M S HAS TAKEN A HARD LOOK AT THE ANNUAL VALIDATION PROCESS, UM, AND AS YOU'VE ALREADY STATED, KIND OF REDUCED, UH, THE FFR THE FREQUENCY WITH WHICH YOU RUN IT.
SO I THINK RESIDENTIAL IS LIKE ONCE EVERY THREE YEARS NOW.
SO TRYING TO REDUCE SOME OF THE COSTS THAT, THAT GO ALONG WITH THAT PROCESS.
UM, BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME, SOME SUGGESTION THAT WE JUST COMPLETELY ELIMINATE THE ANNUAL VALIDATION PROCESS AND WE, WE FUNDAMENTALLY DISAGREE WITH THAT.
UM, PROFILES ARE STILL USED BY RETAIL ELECTRIC PROVIDERS FOR PRICING, UM, AND FORECASTING IN MANY OF THE OTHER REASONS THAT YOU MENTIONED ON HERE.
SO THEY, THEY STILL SERVE A VERY IMPORTANT ROLE IN THE RETAIL MARKET AND THE ANNUAL VALIDATION ENSURES THAT THOSE PROFILES ARE ACCURATE.
AND WE, EVERY TIME WE RUN THIS PROCESS THAT WE FIND THINGS THAT NEED TO GET UPDATED AND FIXED AND CHANGED.
SO JUST APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS HERE, W ONE TO SUPPORT, UH, WHAT YOU HAD SAID THAT WE NEED TO RETAIN THIS PROCESS.
IT IS, UM, MUCH MORE BENEFICIAL THAN I HAD THOUGHT.
UM, AND SO WE JUST VALIDATED THAT BY GOING THROUGH, UH, THIS LITTLE EXERCISE OF SEEING WHY IT'S NEEDED TODAY AND, AND, UM, FOR HOW LONG, ALRIGHT.
WAS THERE, UM, SOMEONE ELSE? YEAH, YEAH, YOU HAVE A LARGE QUEUE, SO I, I APPRECIATE Y'ALL DID THIS, UH, WORK BASED ON MY COMMENTS AT TACK LAST TIME.
UM, I, I THINK IT'S STILL WORTH A HARD LOOK AT WHAT GOES INTO THIS PROCESS AND WHAT IS TRULY NECESSARY TO DO HERE, UM, BECAUSE IT DOES CREATE A LOT OF WORK AND TO THE EXTENT THAT WE'RE, YOU KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, PAYING FOR MARKETING EFFORTS THROUGH THE ERCOT ADMIN FEE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S APPROPRIATE.
UM, THAT SAID, UM, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS MAYBE A COMPLEX ISSUE, UM, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE CONSIDERING FILING AN N P R R TO ELIMINATE, UM, PARTS OF THIS, UM, PROCESS.
AND, YOU KNOW, IF, IF YOU HAVE THOUGHTS ON, ON WHAT YOU'RE COMFORTABLE ELIMINATING, NOT YOU ON THE SPOT RIGHT NOW, DEBBIE, BUT PEOPLE IN GENERAL, UM, YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE THAT FEEDBACK BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, AT, AT SOME POINT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD A M S FOR HOW MANY YEARS NOW AND, AND THAT DATA IS AVAILABLE.
UM, YOU KNOW, THINGS LIKE SUBSTATION NEED TO BE VALIDATED.
AND I WOULDN'T WANT TO STRIP THAT OUT.
THAT WAS A POINT THAT WAS MADE BY ERCOT.
THE, UM, OBVIOUSLY THE, THE REPS WOULD, WHO WOULDN'T WANNA USE REAL DATA, REAL A M S DATA, BUT THE THING IS THAT THE L O A PROCESS IS SOMEWHAT PROHIBITIVE TO THAT.
AND I THINK THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE SOMETHING ADDRESSED IN ORDER TO MOVE AWAY FROM ANNUAL VALIDATION.
SO THAT, THAT WOULD BE MY THOUGHT, BUT I CAN DEFINITELY, UM, GET WITH YOU OFFLINE AND WE CAN COME UP WITH MAYBE, UH, TO DO FOR, UM, P W G OR ANYTHING.
UH, TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT COULD BE DONE TO LIMIT THE STEPS AND DEFINITELY FOR ERCOT AND IT'S POSSIBLE ERCOT HASS ALREADY DONE THAT.
UM, AT ENCORE WE HAVE OUR, OUR PROCESS IN PLACE.
SO IT WORKS LIKE, LIKE A DREAM.
AND WE REALLY, I DON'T THINK WE WOULD EVER THINK ABOUT CHANGING IT, UM, JUST TO ELIMINATE A COUPLE OF STEPS UNLESS THAT BENEFITED OR CAUGHT.
[02:25:01]
IDEA IS A, A GOOD ONE.AND, YOU KNOW, MAKING IT EASY FOR CONSUMERS TO CHOOSE HERE TO WHO THEY SHARE THEIR OWN DATA WITH IS APPROPRIATE.
I REMEMBER YEARS AGO, IT INVOLVES FAX MACHINES.
SO SAYING THAT IT'S COMPLICATED NOW IS, UH, IT IS WHAT IT'S, UM, RIGHT, RIGHT.
BUT THAT, THAT, THAT SAID, YOU KNOW, UM, I, I DON'T KNOW, WE'RE TRYING TO RUSH THROUGH THE REST OF THIS DAY.
I DON'T WANNA
I, I APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK AND, AND THE RESPONSE.
AND WE HAVE DONE A LOT OF ANALYSIS ON THIS AND IT WAS HARD TO JUST PUT IT IN ONE OR TWO SLIDES.
AND THERE WERE SOME FOLKS THAT REALLY, TRULY, THEY COULD HAVE SPENT A DAY ON EXPLAINING WHAT THEY DO WITH IT, WHAT THEY DO WITH THE PROFILES THEY WANT ACCURATE PROFILES, THE BEST.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, AND LIKE I SAID, IT JUST WENT THROUGH A SLIDE, SO YES, SURE.
ALRIGHT, IT WAS THERE ANYONE ELSE? YEP, YOU HAVE NED AND THEN BILL BARNES AGAIN.
HEY, DEBBIE AND I, I, THIS IS PROBABLY NOT SO MUCH A QUESTION FOR YOU AS, YOU KNOW, RESPONSE TO ERIC AND, AND TO BILL, UM, AND, AND TO THE POINTS YOU'RE MAKING AS WELL, THAT, YOU KNOW, I THINK THESE, THE VALUE OF THESE LOAD PROFILES AND HAVING THEM BE REASONABLY ACCURATE IS MORE THAN JUST, YOU KNOW, ERIC, AS YOU PUT IT UP, YOU KNOW, A MARKETING EFFORT.
THERE ARE A LOT OF IMPORTANT FUNCTIONS THAT HELP TO, YOU KNOW, ENSURE THAT WE CAN, YOU KNOW, IT'S A, IT'S FOR ONE, IT IS A SAFETY NET FOR SETTLEMENT PURPOSES.
UM, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE TIMES WHEN A M S DATA IS NOT, YOU KNOW, IS NOT AS TIMELY AVAILABLE.
AND SO IT, IT, IT CAN BE A FALLBACK.
UM, YOU KNOW, IT DOES GET USED FOR LOAD FORECASTING, WHICH HELPS TO KEEP, YOU KNOW, IF YOU CAN HAVE MORE ACCURATE LOAD FORECASTING IN THE ABSENCE OF SPECIFIC EASY IDS THAN, OR SPECIFIC EASY ID, UM, A M S DATA THAT DOES HELP TO REDUCE ERROR AND THEREFORE REDUCE COST AND HELP KEEP COSTS DOWN FOR CONSUMERS.
SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE WOULD HAVE, UH, SOME COMMON INTEREST THERE.
UM, AND SO IT'S, IT'S BROADER THAN, THAN JUST MARKETING AND I DIDN'T WANNA PUSH BACK ON THAT POINT SPECIFICALLY.
UM, SO OBVIOUSLY WE'RE IN FAVOR OF KEEPING IT, BUT, YOU KNOW, ALSO OPEN TO FINDING EFFICIENCIES.
YEAH, I GUESS ERIC, I, I GUESS I WANTED TO CHALLENGE YOU A LITTLE BIT.
I'M, I'M SCRATCHING MY HEAD AS TO WHY THIS IS A CONCERN FOR YOU.
'CAUSE, UM, THIS REALLY ENABLES THE COMPETITIVE RETAIL MARKET, RIGHT? UM, THERE'S A LOT OF CUSTOMERS OUT THERE THAT DON'T WANT THEIR DATA DISCLOSED.
UM, AND THIS IS HOW WE FORM ACCURATE PRICES FOR RETAIL PLANS FOR CUSTOMERS.
UM, IT PLAYS A PRETTY CRUCIAL ROLE.
UM, WITHOUT THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE, YOU'RE PROBABLY GONNA GET MUCH HIGHER RETAIL RATES 'CAUSE WE HAVE TO GUESS.
SO THIS AT LEAST GIVES US SOME GUARDRAILS TO BE ABLE TO REALLY TUNE AND HONE IN ON RETAIL OFFERS.
SO IT, IT, IT DOES REALLY SERVE A PRETTY IMPORTANT PURPOSE FOR THE RETAIL MARKET.
AND I THINK, I THINK R M S TOOK A LOOK AND IT, WITH THE CHANGES MADE TO THE PROCESS TO DO IT LESS FREQUENTLY, IT DIDN'T SEEM LIKE IT WAS THAT BURDENSOME.
SO I WAS JUST KIND OF CURIOUS WHAT YOUR CONCERNS ARE.
I MEAN, AT, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THIS IS, UM, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THIS WORK IS, WAS DESIGNED FROM BEFORE WE HAD SMART METERS AND WE'VE HAD THEM FOR LONGER THAN SOME PEOPLE HAVE BEEN IN THIS INDUSTRY NOW.
UM, AND I, I THINK IT'S WORTH TAKING A LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, WHAT PART OF THIS PROCESS CAN, CAN BE RETIRED.
I, UM, I, I THINK THERE'S LOTS OF SOURCES FOR THIS DATA.
UM, AND, YOU KNOW, WHILE OBVIOUSLY WE WANT RETAIL CHOICE AND THAT'S GOOD FOR CONSUMERS, UM, I WONDER HOW MANY OF THOSE PROCESSES ARE JUST THE SAME BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN DOING THAT WAY SINCE BEFORE WE HAD SMART METERS.
UM, SO ANYWAY, THIS IS NOT OBVIOUSLY AN URGENT PRIORITY, BUT IT'S, IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT, UH, LOOKING AT AND, AND TRYING TO MINIMIZE THE WORK THAT GOES INTO THIS, UM, WHOLE PROCESS.
ALRIGHT, BILL, JUST GO AHEAD, DEBBIE.
YEAH, IT SOUNDS LIKE JUST ERIC'S GOT SOME GENERAL EFFICIENCY CONCERNS AND NOTING THAT THIS HAS BEEN AROUND FOREVER, WHICH IS IT HAS, AND WHETHER THERE'RE ADDITIONAL CHANGES TO BE MADE IN THE PROCESS TO
I THINK WE'VE DONE, UH, ALSO, I, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT THE OA PROCESS MAKES SENSE TOO.
THAT'S ONE THING WE'VE, WE'VE PUT UNDER THE MICROSCOPE A FEW TIMES, BUT IT DOESN'T HURT TO TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT IT AND SEE IF THERE'S ANY WAYS WE CAN MAKE THAT MORE, UH, STREAMLINED AS WELL.
I'LL CERTAINLY, UH, PUT THAT ON A TO-DO
[02:30:01]
LIST AND, UM, GET SOME EXPERTS WITH ME AND WE'LL SEE WHAT WE CAN COME UP WITH.ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS SLIDE? THIS TOPIC? ALL RIGHT.
THANKS TO THOSE OF YOU THAT, UM, LOOK THROUGH IT AHEAD OF TIME AND REALLY, UH, FOCUSED ON THE CONTENT AND, UM, CHIMED IN.
THE LUBBOCK POWER AND LIGHT TRANSITION TO RETAIL COMPETITION.
UNFORTUNATELY, THEIR SOCIAL AND WORKSHOP ARE TODAY AND TOMORROW.
SO, UM, THAT KIND OF ELIMINATED THOSE OF US THAT SUPPORT TECH AND ATTENDING, UH, RETAIL TESTING.
THEY RECEIVED THEIR CERTIFICATION TO ACTUALLY PROCESS RETAIL TRANSACTIONS IN THE APRIL FLIGHT.
THEY'LL BE PARTICIPATING IN THE MARKET TEST FLIGHT THAT'S COMING UP, AND THAT IS OPEN TO NEW UNCERTIFIED CRS.
WE DID NOT THINK THAT WAS GONNA HAPPEN, BUT IT IS.
ALL RIGHT, SO WHAT THEY WERE WORKING ON IS THE ACCESS AGREEMENT, AND THAT'S SIMILAR TO DELIVERY SERVICE AGREEMENTS IN THE I O U TERRITORIES AND THE A M S DATA PRACTICES MATRIX AND THOSE, THAT MATRIX IS POSTED ON THE R M S HOMEPAGE IF YOU'RE EVER INTERESTED.
AND THEN REP REGISTRATION, THE FLOW PROCESS.
SO THEIR NEXT MEETING IS SEPTEMBER.
ALL RIGHT, RETAIL MARKET TRAINING TASK FORCE.
UM, WE'VE GOT SOME TRAINING COMING UP AT CENTERPOINT IN HOUSTON.
WE DO THREE FACE-TO-FACE, OR WHAT WE'RE DOING IS THREE FACE-TO-FACE TEXAS SET TRAINING CLASSES A YEAR.
AND THE OTHER TRAINING CLASSES THAT ARE FACILITATED BY R M T T F ARE, UH, MARKET TRACK, PART ONE AND PART TWO.
AND THEN WE ALSO SUPPORT ERCOT ON RETAIL 1 0 1.
SO FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE MARKETING TRACK AND RETAIL 1 0 1 INSTRUCTOR LED CLASSES WILL BE HELD VIA WEBEX ONLY.
TEXAS SET WILL CONTINUE TO BE HELD IN PERSON ONLY.
AND THE REASON WE'RE DOING THAT IS BECAUSE THE TEXAS SET TRAINING IS VERY INTERACTIVE AND, UM, AT THIS POINT WE DO NOT HAVE IT SET SUCH THAT WE COULD DO THAT VIA WEBEX.
AND AS ALWAYS, WE HAVE THESE RETAIL ONLINE MODULES AVAILABLE.
AND THESE ARE SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS THAT'S GOING ON WITH THE RETAIL WORKING GROUPS AND TASK FORCES.
WE TALKED ABOUT P W G, UM, THEY'RE TAKEN ON THE STATUS OF 2023 ANNUAL VALIDATION PURPOSE AND NEEDS FOR ANNUAL VALIDATION.
THEY HELD A MEETING JUST, UH, SPECIFICALLY TO DISCUSS WHAT WE WERE, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT JUST A FEW MINUTES AGO.
AND THEN THE I D R A M S BUSINESS, LARGE UPDATES FROM THE T D S P TEXAS SET AND THE MARKET COORDINATION TEAM.
THEY'RE, UH, WORKING ON THE DETAILS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXAS SET 5.0.
AND THEY'VE GOT RED LINES FOR SEVERAL OF THE IMPLEMENTATION GUIDES, INCLUDING THOSE THAT GO THROUGH FOR TRANSACTIONS THAT GO THROUGH ERCOT AND THOSE THAT GO POINT TO POINT.
AND THE TEXAS DATA TRANSPORT MARKET TRACK SYSTEM, UM, THEY'RE WORKING ON THE SS C R EIGHT 17 THAT WAS APPROVED LAST YEAR BY, UH, BY TECH.
AND, UM, THEY'RE WORKING ON THE STATS FOR THE MARKET TRACK ISSUE TYPES WITH A BIG FOCUS ON INADVERTENT GAINS.
ANY QUESTIONS? YEAH, I DID SEE A QUESTION IN THE QUEUE FROM KATHY SCOTT.
UM, GOING BACK TO NED'S POINT ABOUT, UM, ANNUAL VALIDATION AND LOAD PROFILES OR SETTLEMENTS, UH, IF, UH, T CHIME IN ON THIS, THEY CAN, BUT ERCOT NO LONGER USES LOW PROFILES FOR, FOR, UM, FOR THEIR ESTIMATION ROUTINE.
THEY USE A PROXY DAY OR PROCESS OR SAME DAY OR, UM, COMPARISON FOR ESTIMATION, THEY HAVEN'T USED LOW PROFILE SINCE THAT WAS PROBABLY ABOUT 97, 90 6% OF THE SATURATION OF A M S DATA WAS AVAILABLE TO THEM.
SO THEY'RE USING A M S DATA, DAILY DATA TO PROVIDE A, A MORE REALISTIC ESTIMATION ROUTINE FOR A PREMISE FOR AN ADDRESS.
UH, THEY'RE NO LONGER USING LOW PROFILES, AND IF THEY WANNA CONTRADICT THAT, I'M, I'M QUITE SURE ERCOT CAN SPEAK TO THAT.
THE OTHER POINT, UH, ABOUT SOMEONE WAS SAYING ABOUT ACCURACY OF THE DATA, UH, FOR LOW PROFILES, UM, I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT IS ACCOMPLISHED WHEN THE LOW PROFILES ARE DEVELOPED BASED OFF THE LAST THREE YEARS OF DATA THAT ERCOT LOOKS AT.
SO THAT, SAY FOR INSTANCE, IN 2024, WE WOULD'VE BEEN LOOKING AT, UH, 20 21, 20 22, AND 2023
[02:35:02]
DATA FOR THOSE PREMISES, BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS EASY IDS.AND WE ALL KNOW WHAT HAPPENED IN 2021 WHEN THE WORLD WAS UPSIDE DOWN WHEN YOU WERE USING, WHEN MOST PEOPLE WERE USING THEIR, THEIR RESIDENCES FOR BUSINESSES IN ORDER TO WORK FROM HOME AND, AND NOT TRAVELING.
AND BUSINESSES WERE CLOSED UP INSTEAD OF BEING OPEN 24 7 LIKE THEY WOULD NORMALLY BE.
SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE WORD ACCURACY COMES FROM WHEN IT'S COMING FROM A LOW PROFILE ASSIGNMENT BASED OFF THREE YEARS OF DATA.
WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT A CUSTOMER THAT JUST RECENTLY MOVED INTO AN ADDRESS, THEIR ADDRESS, UM, MAY BE BASED OFF A LOW PROFILE, BUT THEY MAY BE A, A, A CUSTOMER THAT'S ON, UH, SOME KIND OF CRYPTOCURRENCY.
THEY MAY BE USING THEIR HOUSE FOR CRYPTOCURRENCY MINING.
SO THAT, HOW DO YOU COMPARE THAT TO WHAT HAPPENED LAST THREE YEARS AGO TO WHAT'S GOING ON CURRENTLY AT THAT ADDRESS? I, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU COME UP WITH A GOOD, UM, ESTIMATE FOR THE AMOUNT OF LOAD THAT'S GONNA UTILIZE AT THAT ADDRESS IF THAT CUSTOMER IS NO LONGER THERE FOR THAT, FOR THAT TO, TO EVEN HAVE A RECORD FOR THAT, THAT CONSUMPTION.
SO, UH, I DO AGREE THAT IT NEEDS TO BE REEVALUATED TO SEE WHAT THE VALUE OF, IS IT FOR THE, FOR THE NEXT 10 OR 15 YEARS IF THAT'S GONNA BE THE CASE, BECAUSE WHAT'S GOING ON, RIGHT? WHAT'S BEING UTILIZED RIGHT NOW HAS NO BEARING ON WHAT THE CUSTOMER'S GONNA BE UTILIZING IF THEY'RE MOVING INTO A PREMISE TODAY.
IF YOU'RE BASING YOUR, YOUR CONSUMPTION OFF OF THAT LOW PROFILE BASED OFF THREE YEARS OF DATA.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ALRIGHT, THANK YOU KATHY.
WE WILL CHECK ON, UH, THE COMMENT ABOUT ERCOT, WHEN DO THEY USE THE LOW PROFILE FOR SETTLEMENT, UM, AND, AND SEE WHERE WE CAN GO FROM THERE.
WERE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? OKAY, THANK YOU.
[8. ROS Report (Vote)]
THE ROUGH REPORT, UH, WITH CHASE.ARE YOU WITH US AND READY? YES, I AM.
CAITLYN, CAN YOU CONFIRM? YOU CAN HEAR ME? I CAN HEAR YOU.
AND, UM, I'M GONNA GIVE YOU THE HEADS UP THAT I FAILED TO GIVE MARTHA.
I THINK I'LL TAKE THE SAME APPROACH AND AFTER EACH, UM, YOU KNOW, KIND OF GROUP, GROUP OF, UM, NPRS THAT WE CAN APPROVE PRETTY EASILY THE UNANIMOUS ONES, MAYBE WE'LL TAKE UP FIRST, UM, AND THEN SAVE SOMETHING LIKE NORE TWO 15 FOR, FOR DISCUSSION IF THAT NEEDS SEPARATE DISCUSSIONS.
UM, BEFORE I GET STARTED, I, I SEE THERE'S A COMMENT FROM AUSTIN ROSE.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S ON THE PRIOR TOPIC BECAUSE I HAVE NOT STARTED WITH THE R O S UPDATE.
YEAH, SORRY, I WAS JUMPING IN, UH, BASED ON THE, UH, QUESTIONS ABOUT PROFILES AND UM, I ACTUALLY HAVE RANDY ROBERTS CONNECTING IF THERE WAS SOME MORE DETAIL QUESTIONS.
SO, SORRY, WE'RE A LITTLE SLOW ON THE, ON THE TRIGGER THERE, BUT, UM, FOR NON INTERVAL DATA RECORDERS, WE USE PROFILES IF WE DON'T HAVE DATA, BUT FOR I D R METERS WE USE THIS THE PROXY DAY THAT KATHY MENTIONED.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THAT HELPS WITH WHAT KATHY ASK US TO, TO CHIME IN ON, UM, OR IF THAT JUST SPURS MORE QUESTIONS.
BUT KATHY, I'M SORRY, GO AHEAD.
AND HE'S RIGHT, I D R IS ALSO A AMX METERS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE IDR R DATA.
UM, I'LL GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED.
THIS IS, THIS IS CHASE SMITH, R O S CHAIR.
UM, I'LL TRY AND GO AS QUICKLY AS AS POSSIBLE THROUGH THE R O S REPORT.
WE'VE GOT FIVE REVISION REQUESTS, UM, BRINGING TO TAC TODAY FOR CONSIDERATION AND THE POSSIBLE VOTE.
UM, FIRST UP IS NOGO TWO 15 LIMIT, USE THE REVEAL ACTION SCHEMES.
THIS IS A NOVA THAT WAS FILED BY ERCOT BACK IN 2020 AND IT PROPOSED TO ALLOW NEW, NEW RAS TO, UM, ONLY IN SITUATIONS TO ADDRESS AN ACTUAL OR ANTICIPATED VIOLATION OF TRANSMISSION SECURITY WHEN MARKET TOOLS WERE INSUFFICIENT.
UM, ERCOT HAS EXPRESSED THAT THERE WERE A NUMBER OF BOTH THE NUMBER OF PROPOSED RAS AND THE COMPLEXITY OF THEM WERE INCREASING AND THAT COMPLEXITY, MANAGING RA'S POSED RELIABILITY RISKS TO THE SYSTEM.
UM, THERE WAS A LOT OF DEBATE AND DISCUSSION OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS WITH, WITH
[02:40:01]
SOME TIME, UM, FOR THE REVISION REQUEST TO BE TABLED, UH, FOR FURTHER FURTHER WORK AND, AND DELIBERATION TO BE DONE.UM, STAKEHOLDERS DID EXPRESS CONCERN ABOUT REMOVING RAS AS A TOOL, UM, THAT COULD BE USED TO SUPPORT, UM, OPERATIONS AND PROVIDE, UM, KIND OF ECONOMIC CONGESTION BENEFITS DURING A WINDOW BEFORE TRANSMISSION PROJECT, UH, COULD BE IMPLEMENTED.
AND ULTIMATELY, R O SS APPROVED A VERSION, UM, THAT I THINK WAS, UH, A COMPROMISE BETWEEN, UH, BETWEEN THE TWO POSITIONS.
AND ULTIMATELY THAT WAS, UM, THE, THE, THE COMPROMISE INCLUDED ALLOWING RAZ IS TO, UM, ALLOW THE FULL CAPABILITY TO BE DELIVERED OF DISPATCHABLE GENERATION RESOURCES AS DESCRIBED IN, UM, THE, THE, THE RESOURCES AS DESCRIBED IN PLANNING GUIDE SECTION 4.1, 0.7, UH, AND THERE THERE WAS A FEW OTHER CHANGES INCLUDING, UH, CLARIFYING THAT A, UM, A RAZ PROPOSAL ALSO HAD TO INCLUDE AN EXIT STRATEGY AND AN APPROVED TRANSMISSION PROJECT TO REPLACE THE RAZ.
UM, THERE IS A, A LARGE IMPACT WITH THE I THE IA FOR NO TWO 15.
IT HAS AN EXPECTED COST BETWEEN ONE TO $1.5 MILLION AND, UM, THE, THE VERSION THAT WAS APPROVED BY R O S DOES INCLUDE SOME PORTIONS THAT SOME, UM, SOME LANGUAGE THAT COULD BE IMPLEMENTED, UH, MORE IMMEDIATELY UPON P U C APPROVAL AND OTHERS THAT WILL BE GRAY BOXED AND WILL BE BECOME EFFECTIVE DEPENDING ON, UM, P U C APPROVAL AND PRIORITIZATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF SYSTEM CHANGES.
UM, SO THE, THE, THE REASON I THINK FOR THE, THE LARGER IMPACT IS, UH, ERCOT WILL NEED TO MAKE SOME SYSTEM CHANGES AND DEVOTE ADDITIONAL, UM, STAFF HOURS TO DOING STABILITY ANALYSIS AND THEN ANALYZING PROPOSED RAAS AND ALSO, UH, THINKING TO IMPROVE THEIR, UM, REALTIME OPERATIONAL AWARENESS OF RAAS ON THE SYSTEM.
CA, CAITLYN, DO YOU WANT ME TO GO AHEAD AND GO, YOU STILL ME TO GO THROUGH THE WHOLE LIST FIRST AND WE'LL, WE'LL CIRCLE BACK? YEAH, I WAS THINKING WE COULD GO QUICKLY THROUGH THE WHOLE LIST.
UH, THE, THE OTHER RRS I KNOW, UM, ARE NO IMPACT.
SO I WAS THINKING WE COULD GO QUICKLY THROUGH THOSE, UM, YOU KNOW, SEE IF THERE'S ANY COMMENTS, MAYBE ADD THOSE TO THE COMBO BALLOT AND THEN CIRCLE BACK TO, UM, NO TWO 15 AND CASE THAT MAKES SENSE, SENSE FOR A SEPARATE BALLOT.
OKAY, LET, LET ME CONFIRM WITH NED IS YOUR QUESTION ON, UH, COMMENTS ON TWO 15 AND CAN WE CIRCLE BACK TO THAT? YEAH, WE CAN CIRCLE BACK.
ALRIGHT, KATE, SO YOU'RE RIGHT, THE RE THE REST OF THE REVISION REQUESTS ON THE SCREEN ARE ALL NO IMPACT.
UH, NOGA 2 49, UH, SPECIFIED METHODS FOR, UH, TOS TO RECEIVE ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION OF SYSTEM OPERATING LIMIT EXCEEDANCES FROM ERCOT.
UH, R O S VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL, UM, ACTUALLY FOR THE REMAINING REVISION REQUESTS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL AND OR NO IMPACT, IAS NOGA TWO 50 IS RELATED TO N P R 1171 AND PROPOSES, UM, CHANGES TO ALIGN THE NODAL OPERATING GUIDES IN, IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE CHANGES PROPOSED AT N P R 1171.
SAME, SAME WITH THE RIGOR, 35 TO THE, UM, TO THE RESOURCE REGISTRATION GLOSSARY.
UM, AND THEN, UH, RIGOR 33 PROPOSES CHANGES TO REQUIRED DATA TO THE, UH, REGISTRATION GLOSSARY, UH, THAT'S REQUIRED PURSUANT TO N P R 1164.
SO I'LL STOP THERE, CAITLIN, I AND, UM, GET BACK TO YOU FOR MOVING FORWARD WITH, UH, ASKING FOR TACK APPROVAL ON THESE ITEMS. THANK YOU CHASE.
AND I AM NOT SEEING ANY, UH, NEW QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS IN THE QUEUE BESIDES THE, THE ONE ON TWO 15 FROM NED.
UM, IS EVERYBODY OKAY WITH US ADDING, UH, THE, THESE FOUR R THE TWO NOS AND THE TWO ERS TO THE COMBO BALLOT? THEY'RE ALL, UH, I BELIEVE THEY WERE ALL UNANIMOUS AND NO IMPACT AS CHASE SAID.
ALRIGHT, I DO NOT SEE ANY OPPOSITION.
UM, I, I WILL GO BACK TO YOU, CHASE, I THINK YOU COVERED TWO 15 AND I, I THINK I MISSPOKE IT.
IT WAS UNANIMOUS I BELIEVE, BUT THERE IS THAT HIGH IA ASSOCIATED, UM, THAT YOU TOUCHED ON.
SO I WILL LET YOU WRAP UP ANY ADDITIONAL SUMMARY.
UM, AND THEN WE CAN GO TO NED.
SO THERE, THERE WERE, R WEST DID RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF NUMBER TWO 15.
THERE, THERE WERE, IT WAS NOT UNANIMOUS.
THERE WERE TWO OPPOSING VOTES AND SEVEN ABSTENTIONS.
AND I, I ALSO WANT TO ADD THAT, UM, WE'VE IDENTIFIED THERE NEEDS TO BE A COUPLE DESKTOP EDITS IF TAX,
[02:45:01]
UM, ALLEGED TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF NUMBER TWO 15 TODAY.UM, THERE ARE A FEW REFERENCES TO THE WORD DELIVERY WHEN THEY, THAT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED TO DELIVERABILITY AND, UM, WE CAN POINT TO THOSE, THOSE FEW INSTANCES REAL, REAL QUICK TO MAKE SURE THAT'S CLEAR FOR TAC.
UM, I THINK THE FIRST IS SECTION 11.1, PARAGRAPH THREE, THERE'S A GRAY BOX.
YEAH, SO ON THE SCREEN HERE, THERE'S, THERE'S A REFERENCE TO PLANNING GUIDE SECTION 4.1 0.7, AND, UH, THAT, THAT IS TITLED THE MINIMUM, MINIMUM DELIVERABILITY CRITERIA.
AND THERE WERE A COUPLE OF, UM, ERRORS IN, IN REFERENCE THAT SAID DELIVERY CRITERIA.
SO THAT'S, THAT WOULD BE THE DESKTOP CHANGE IN A, IN A FEW, I THINK THERE'S ONLY THREE INSTANCES WHERE THAT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED AND THAT SUMMARIZES, UH, MY REPORT ON NEGATIVE TWO 15 KAITLYN.
AND, UH, GOOD CATCHES THERE, CHASE ON THE, THE DESKTOP EDITS NEEDED.
UM, YOU KNOW, I JUST WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, FIRST OF ALL GIVE ERCOT, UH, SOME, YOU KNOW, CREDIT FOR THEIR, UM, YOU KNOW, THEIR WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH MARKET PARTICIPANTS ON FINDING A, YOU KNOW, A, A GOOD BALANCE OR, YOU KNOW, A BETTER BALANCE, UH, FOR NORE TWO 15 FROM THE, THE WHERE IT STARTED.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN, UM, YOU KNOW, DISCUSSED QUITE A BIT.
I THINK THE, THE, UM, THE L C R A COMMENTS WERE, UM, YOU KNOW, A GOOD STEP FORWARD IN OUR CUT AND TOOK THOSE AND, AND, AND RAN WITH THEM IN A GOOD DIRECTION.
AND, UH, I ALSO REALLY APPRECIATE OUR CUT'S WILLINGNESS TO, YOU KNOW, TRY TO MOVE UP THE IMPLEMENTATION, UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S SOME RESOURCE CONSTRAINTS WITH MOVING R T C FORWARD AND, UM, YOU KNOW, SO THEY HAVE TO, UM, YOU KNOW, HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, BALANCE THOSE.
UM, BUT APPRECIATE THEIR, YOU KNOW, THEIR RECOGNITION OF THE, THE NEED TO FIND A SOLUTION, ESPECIALLY TO, UH, BE ABLE TO HELP KEEP DISPATCHABLE RESOURCES, UM, YOU KNOW, ON THE SYSTEM AND, AND AVAILABLE.
UM, YOU KNOW, YOU MENTIONED THE I IA, UM, ESTIMATE, YOU KNOW, IF YOU THINK ABOUT HOW A MILLION DOLLARS OR SO WORKS OUT, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF CONGESTION, UH, REDUCTION OR, UH, YOU KNOW, RE-DISPATCH, I THINK SOME OF THE EFFICIENCIES YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET FROM, UH, FROM THIS, UH, FROM THIS NOER, YOU KNOW, WE WILL HELP PAY FOR THAT AND, AND, YOU KNOW, EASILY AND IN SHORT ORDER.
SO IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE IT LOOKS LARGE ON COMPARED TO SOME OTHER CHANGES, BUT CAN HAVE A, YOU KNOW, A VERY POSITIVE IMPACT THAT EASILY OUTWEIGHS THE, UH, THE COST.
UM, THERE IS ONE ITEM THAT I JUST WANNA PUT OUT THERE FOR, UM, YOU KNOW, FOR FOLKS TO BE AWARE OF AND, AND THINKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THERE IS A RELIABILITY, UM, WE CALL IT CATCH IN HERE, WHERE ERCOT CAN STILL APPROVE NEW, UH, NEW GRASSES FOR IN ORDER TO ADDRESS, UH, TRANSMISSION SECURITY, UH, CONCERNS.
AND, YOU KNOW, THAT IS, I THINK, A GOOD, UH, OFF RAMP FOR OR SAFETY VALVE FOR THEM TO HAVE.
UM, YOU KNOW, IN THE INTERIM THOUGH, BETWEEN NOW AND WHEN THIS NOER CAN BE IMPLEMENTED, UH, THERE IS STILL THE POSSIBILITY THAT YOU MIGHT RUN INTO THERMAL OR, UH, OTHER DISPATCHABLE RESOURCES THAT, UH, DO FACE, UM, YOU KNOW, CONGESTION ISSUES THAT PREVENT THEM FROM BEING ABLE TO OPERATE IN THE MARKET THAT COULD, UM, YOU KNOW, COULD ULTIMATELY DRIVE LARGE, BROADER RELIABILITY IMPACTS.
AND SO I THINK WE SHOULD BE THINKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHEN AND IF AND, AND HOW WE MIGHT ADDRESS THAT IN THE FUTURE.
UM, RECOGNIZE THERE'S NOT CRITERIA IN, UM, YOU KNOW, IN THE OPERATING GUARD RIGHT NOW TO TIE TO, BUT AS WE THINK ABOUT THINGS LIKE, UH, RELIABILITY STANDARD, THERE MAY BE SOMETHING OBJECTIVE THAT WE CAN, UH, COME BACK AND LOOK TO AND HAVE A SIMILAR APPROACH.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO, TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS NOER.
UM, I SEE EMILY'S IN THE QUEUE, SO I WOULD, SO I'LL, UH, I'LL PAUSE BEFORE, UH, GO ANYTHING FURTHER AND FURTHER AND SEE IF SHE HAS SOMETHING SHE WANTS TO ADD.
I'M JUST WAITING TO BE RECOGNIZED BY THE CHAIR
UM, AND SINCE I'M SAYING THANK YOU, UM, I HAVE TO THANK FREDDY GARCIA WITH ERCOT, UM, FOR ALL THE WORK THAT SHE'S PUT INTO THIS AND ALL OF THE MEETINGS AND HOURS
[02:50:01]
AND HOURS OF DISCUSSION WE'VE HAD ON THIS NOVA.UM, CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, ERCOT IDENTIFIED AN ISSUE AND, UM, INVITED STAKEHOLDERS TO CONSIDER ALTERNATIVES TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT THEY HAD INITIALLY PROPOSED, AND ULTIMATELY WE'RE OPEN TO ALTERNATIVES AND WE'RE GRATEFUL FOR THAT.
UM, AND I DO THINK THAT WE'RE ENDING UP IN A BETTER PLACE, UM, AS A RESULT OF THE COMPROMISE, UM, UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE IS A PRICE TAG WITH THAT.
UM, ONE THING I DO WANNA EMPHASIZE THOUGH IS THAT THERE ARE A LOT OF LEGISLATIVE CHANGES THAT WE SAW COME OUT OF THIS SESSION THAT VERY WELL COULD, YOU KNOW, RESULT IN NEW DISPATCHABLE RESOURCES BEING BUILT IN ERCOT, RIGHT? CREATING SOME FINANCIAL INCENTIVES AROUND THAT.
AND, AND WITH THAT, WE'LL, WE'LL LIKELY COME SOME CITING CONSTRAINTS, SOME CONSIDERATIONS THAT THIS, UM, NO, WE THINK WILL HELP ADDRESS, UM, IN TERMS OF ALLOWING FOR THE DISPATCH OF THOSE RESOURCES THAT WILL BE VERY NEEDED AS WELL AS EXISTING RESOURCES AND THE INTERACTION OF THOSE EXISTING RESOURCES AND NEW BUILD.
UM, AND SO WE'RE, WE'RE GRATEFUL THAT THIS IS WHERE WE THINK THE, YOU KNOW, ERCOT AND STAKEHOLDER COMPROMISES ENDED UP WE'RE SUPPORTIVE OF THIS MOVING FORWARD.
UM, UNDERSTANDING THAT, YOU KNOW, RELIABILITY DOES COME WITH A COST, UM, BUT THIS IS IN OUR VIEW, UH, AN IMPORTANT AND KEY BRIDGE TO IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MINIMUM DELIVERABILITY CRITERIA.
UM, WHICH, YOU KNOW, THE ERCOT BOARD AND THE P D C HAVE ALREADY ENDORSED.
UM, IT'S GONNA TAKE A WHILE, RIGHT? TO BUILD OUT THAT TRANSMISSION.
UM, SO WE THINK THIS IS A REASONABLE INTERMEDIATE STEP, UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE'S SOME IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES, UM, AS WELL ON ERCOT SIDE.
UM, BUT ANYTHING THAT WE AS A STAKEHOLDER COMMUNITY CAN DO, AND CERTAINLY AS A TRANSMISSION OPERATOR IN ERCOT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE ENGAGING IN THAT RIGOROUS STUDY AS WELL, UM, BECAUSE WE WANT TO, UM, ENSURE THAT THE SYSTEM IS OPERATED, YOU KNOW, RELIABILITY RELIABLY, AND, AND WE'RE MAINTAINING STABILITY.
SO WE'RE ALL PARTNERS IN THAT, AND I, I'M GRATEFUL TO ERCOT FOR THEIR WORK ON THIS FREDDY IN PARTICULAR.
AND, UM, IF, IF THAT WAS A MOTION, NED, THEN YOU HAVE MY SECOND.
I WAS, I WAS ABOUT TO GET TO THAT, BUT DIDN'T WANNA TO JUMP IN FRONT OF YOU.
UM, I, YEAH, I WILL, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE.
AND, AND ALSO, UH, SECOND THE SPECIFIC, UH, THANKS TO FREDDY FOR, FOR HIS WORK ON THIS.
UM, DO WE NEED A, A SEPARATE BALLOT ON THIS ONE? UM, I KNOW IT WARRANTED SOME DISCUSSION DUE TO THE IA AND THE KIND OF BROADER IMPACT, BUT I BELIEVE IT WAS UNANIMOUS.
SO MAYBE WE CAN FLOAT WHETHER THIS CAN GO ONTO THE CON BALLOT.
ARE THERE ANY OBJECTIONS TO THAT? OKAY.
IS THAT, IS THAT SUITABLE? NED AND EMILY? I, I ASSUME? YEP, WE'RE COMBO.
OKAY, SO WE HAVE, UM, ALL FIVE OF THOSE VOTING ITEMS FROM ROTH TO THE COMBO BALLOT CASE.
DO YOU WANNA PICK YOUR REPORT BACK UP? YES.
UM, SO RECENTLY R O S ENDORSED, UM, NEW LEADERSHIP AT THE ASSISTANT PROTECTION WORKING GROUP, AND YOU CAN SEE THE, UH, THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR FOR THAT GROUP ON THE SLIDE HERE.
WE'VE GOT A LIST HERE OF THE, THE PENDING REVISION REQUESTS UNDER R O S REVIEW.
I DO NOT PLAN TO, UH, PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THESE ITEMS, BUT I WANTED TO HAVE THEM IN ONE PLACE FOR, FOR TAC TWO AND, AND STAKEHOLDERS TO GO AND LOOK AT AND REVIEW, JUST TO BE AWARE OF THE ONGOING REVISION REQUEST AT R OSS.
AND ONE RECENT DISCUSSION ITEM I DIDN'T WANNA BRING UP, UH, TO TAX ATTENTION, UM, RELATES TO NOGA 2 45, WHICH SETS NEW FREQUENCY AND VOLTAGE RIDE THROUGH REQUIREMENTS FOR TER BASED RESOURCES.
UM, I WANTED TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE TODAY BECAUSE, UM, THIS IS, WAS ORIGINALLY FILED BY ERCOT AT THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR AND HAS BEEN DISCUSSED AT R O S AND, AND SOME OF ITS WORKING GROUPS THROUGH THE BALANCE OF THE YEAR SO FAR.
AND, UH, WE ARE EXPECTING FOR R O SS TO TAKE SOME ACTION UP ON THIS ITEM NEXT MONTH.
THIS SE IT'S SEPTEMBER MEETING AND THUS IT WOULD BE COMING TO TACK, UH, RELATIVELY SOON, BUT AT THE MOMENT, IT REMAINS TABLED AT R OS.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, AT A HIGH LEVEL, ERCOT HAS COMMUNICATED THE NEED TO IMPROVE, UM, INVERTER BASED RESOURCE PERFORMANCE, RIGHT? RIDE THROUGH PERFORMANCE DURING GRID FAULT EVENTS.
UM, AND THIS REALLY IS STEMMING FROM
[02:55:01]
SOME OF THE DIFFERENT GRID FAULT EVENTS WE'VE SEEN BOTH IN TEXAS AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY.UM, RELATED TO, TO FREQUENCY AND VOLTAGE RIDE THROUGH, YOU KNOW, SPECIFICALLY IN TEXAS, WE'VE SEEN THE, BOTH THE, THE ODESSA AND ODESSA TWO EVENTS, UM, HAVE BEEN, HAVE BEEN IMPORTANT ITEMS THAT ERCOT HAS DONE.
A LOT OF STAFF HAS DONE A LOT OF GOOD WORK, UH, DIVING INTO AND PROVIDING A DEEPER ANALYSIS ON WHAT HAPPENED IN THOSE EVENTS AND, AND WAYS TO IMPROVE, UH, I B R PERFORMANCE TO HELP MITIGATE THAT RISK.
AT THE SAME TIME, THERE'S BEEN SOME STAKEHOLDERS WHO HAVE EXPRESSED CONCERN, UH, WITH CERTAIN PARTS OF THE PROPOSAL.
AND I THINK BIG PICTURE THAT'S, UM, THE, THE BIGGEST, THE BIGGEST CONCERN I HAVE HEARD EXPRESSED IS THE RETROACTIVE RETROACTIVE APPLICATION, UM, OF THIS NEW PROPOSED POLICY AND HOW IT WOULD APPLY TO LEGACY AND VOTER BASED RESOURCES.
UM, ERCOT, AT THE TIME THAT I WROTE THESE, THESE SLIDES SAID ERCOT PLANS TO FILE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
THEY, THEY ACTUALLY DID FILE COMMENTS LAST FRIDAY.
UH, A COUPLE OTHER STAKEHOLDERS HAVE, AT LEAST AT THE R O S D LAST EARLIER THIS MONTH COMMUNICATED THAT THEY WERE PLANNING TO FILE COMMENTS.
UH, SO THERE, WE'LL SEE IF THERE'S MORE COMMENTS AHEAD OF THE SEPTEMBER R O S MEETING.
UM, SO R O S DOES PLAN TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AT ITS SEPTEMBER 7TH MEETING, UH, TO SUPPORT ERCOT REQUEST THAT THE NORE BE CONSIDERED AT THE OCTOBER BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING.
UM, IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THAT TIMELINE, UH, R O S IS GONNA HAVE TO CONSIDER, UM, AN EMERGENCY VOTE NEXT MONTH, OR, UH, WE MAY END UP SCHEDULING AN ADDITIONAL R O S MEETING IN SEPTEMBER IF THAT'S NECESSARY.
AND THAT CONCLUDES MY, MY UPDATE, CAITLYN, OUR NEXT R O S MEETING IS SEPTEMBER 7TH.
SO HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF THERE ARE ANY.
THANK YOU, CHASE, I DON'T SEE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS IN THE QUEUE.
UM, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING ELSE FOR CHASE? ALL RIGHT, NEXT
[9. WMS Report]
WE HAVE THE, UH, W M S REPORT.ERIC, ARE YOU READY? I AM READY.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? I CAN HEAR YOU.
M UH, THIS IS ERIC BLAKEY, UH, W M SS CHAIR, UH, WITH PERELLIS CO-OP.
UH, I HAVE A FEW ITEMS I WAS GOING TO UPDATE THE GROUP ON.
WE HAD A VERY, UH, BRIEF MEETING, UH, AT W M S IN AUGUST.
UH, WE'LL REPORT ON SOME OF THOSE ITEMS. AND THEN I WAS GOING TO PROVIDE A QUICK UPDATE ON E C R S AND, UH, A WORKSHOP WE HAD LAST WEEK ON RUCK AND VERIFIABLE COST.
SO I HAVE LINKS HERE TO SOME OF THE ERCOT UPDATES THAT WE RECEIVED ON SETTLEMENT STABILITY REPORT, UNREGISTERED DG REPORT, AND E M S UPGRADE PROJECT.
AND YOU CAN SEE THOSE LINKS THERE AND, AND, UH, SEE THOSE PRESENTATIONS.
WE HAD ONE P R S REFERRAL, WHICH WAS N P R 1170, CAPTURING NATURAL GAS DELIVERY INFORMATION FOR NATURAL GAS GENERATION RESOURCES, AND WE HAVE REFERRED THAT TO THE WHOLESALE MARKET WORKING GROUP.
AND, UM, AND THEN JUST A NOTE FOR OUR NEXT MEETING IN SEPTEMBER, UH, WE WILL BE HAVING THE I M M PRESENT AND ANSWER QUESTIONS ON THE 2022 STATE OF MARKET REPORT.
NEXT ITEM, THIS IS A, JUST A HIGH LEVEL OVERVIEW OF THE REQUEST THAT HAVE BEEN TABLED, UH, AND THAT ARE UNDER CONSIDERATION.
THE ONE I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT IS 1162 SINGLE AGENT DESIGNATION FOR A QUEASY, AND ITS SUBIES FOR VOICE COMMUNICATION OVER ERCOT WAN THAT HAS, THAT HAS, UH, BEEN REFERRED TO R W M W G GROUP.
BUT I ALSO WANTED TO MENTION, UH, TENAS HAS BEEN WORKING ON THIS ISSUE WITH ERCOT, AND I BELIEVE THEY FILED SS C R A 25 AS RELATED TO THIS.
SO, UH, BUT WE CONTINUE TO WORK ON ON THAT AND OTHERS.
AND THIS PROVIDES YOU A QUICK OVERVIEW.
JUST WANTED TO MENTION, WE ARE CONTINUING TO DISCUSS AND, AND WATCH E C R S AND, AND THAT IS BEING, UH, FURTHER DISCUSSED AT OUR W N W G WORKING GROUP.
[03:00:01]
UH, A COUPLE OF DATES THAT HAVE BEEN, UM, HIGHLIGHTED SO FAR.JUNE 20TH, UH, THERE WAS AN INITIAL UPDATE TO AN INITIAL ANALYSIS TO CORRECT AN UNDERESTIMATION OF UTILIZED E C R S MEGAWATTS.
AND THEN IN ON JULY 10TH DEPLOYMENT, THERE WAS E C R S AND NONS SPIND DEPLOYED TO INCREASE DISPATCHABLE CAPACITY AVAILABLE TO SC.
UH, IN, IN SUMMARY, ERCOT DEPLOYED E C R SS AND NONS SPIND TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT CAPACITY THAT COULD BE USED RELIABLY TO SERVE SYSTEM DEMAND WITHOUT CAUSING A POTENTIAL TRANSMISSION SYSTEM CASCADING EVENT AND THE DEPLOYMENT WITH SUCCESSFUL IN KEEPING THE TRANSMISSION SYSTEM SECURE.
WE WILL CONTINUE TO, TO HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS AT
WANTED TO, TO JUST GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF THE RUG VERIFIABLE COST WORKSHOP.
THIS WAS COORDINATED BY OUR W M W G AND R C W G, AND I JUST WANNA FIRST SAY VERY, UH, FIRST OFF, THANK YOU TO, TO THE LEADERSHIP JOHN RICH, UH, IN PARTICULAR WHO, WHO KEPT, KEPT EVERYTHING, UH, GOING AND COORDINATED FOR THIS MEETING.
AND, AND I THOUGHT IT WENT REALLY WELL.
UM, YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE ITEMS FROM THE, FROM THE AGENDA THAT, THAT WERE DISCUSSED, UH, USE OF RUCK ON OLDER UNITS AND CONCERNS ABOUT EARLY RETIREMENT HISTORY OF CONSERVATIVE OPERATIONS INCLUDE, INCLUDING CONSERVATIVE FORECASTING.
UH, AND NOW ERCOT HAS BEEN REALLY CHANGING QUICKLY OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS WITH BATTERIES, E C R S, HIGH LOAD CONSERVATIVE OPERATIONS, UH, INCENTIVES AND, AND OTHER, OTHER ITEMS. SO, NEXT SLIDE.
THESE ARE SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT WE DISCUSSED AS FAR AS SHORT TERM CONSIDERATIONS AND LONG TERM MARKET INCENTIVES.
UH, BUT THESE WERE SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT WERE DISCUSSED.
UM, NEXT STEP IS, UM, SUMMARY OF IMPROVEMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS THAT WERE IDENTIFIED ARE BEING DOCUMENTED AND CIRCULATED FOR WORKING GROUP REVIEW.
AND IT WILL BE POSTED TO THE NEXT SCHEDULED R C W G AND M W M W G MEETING PAGES AND TO THE WORKSHOP PAGE.
UM, AGAIN, JUST WANNA SAY THANK YOU TO EVERYONE, UH, THAT, THAT WAS INVOLVED IN THIS AND THOSE THAT MADE PRESENTATIONS.
UM, THEY HAD A PRETTY HIGH BAR.
THEY SET, THEY WERE GOING, I HEARD SOMEONE, I THINK ERIC GOFF SAID THEY WERE GOING TO HAVE A HOLISTIC, UH, CHANGE AND REVIEW OF, OF ALL THE RUCK ISSUES AND, AND VERIFIABLE COSTS.
AND, UM, BUT THERE IS, THERE WAS A LOT OF REALLY GOOD DISCUSSION AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET SOME GOOD, UM, IMPROVEMENTS RESULTING FROM THIS.
I SAID IT'S AT THE WORKSHOP, UM, BUT JUST IF PEOPLE WEREN'T THERE, UM, THE CONSUMER N P R R RELATED TO R ISSUES AND NOW ESPECIALLY ABOUT CLAWBACK, UM, I THINK IT'S NOW, UM, WRIGHT WILL BE FILING COMMENTS TO UPDATED TO REMOVE THE THINGS THAT, UH, TAC ALREADY AGREED TO AND OTHER NPRS THAT WE ADDED TO THOSE.
UM, BUT, UM, JUST WANTED TO GIVE PEOPLE A HEADS UP.
SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT IT, YOU KNOW, PLEASE REACH OUT TO ME OFFLINE.
I BELIEVE THAT WAS MY LAST SLIDE.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE W M S REPORT? I SEE A COMMENT FROM JENNIFER.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THE CONVERSATIONS HAPPENING AT W M S.
I THINK WITH THE SUSTAINED HEAT, UM, PARTICULARLY IN AUGUST, WE'VE SEEN THE WHOLESALE MARKET RESPOND, UM, WITH SCARCITY.
UM, AND I GUESS I'D LIKE TO SEE IF W M S COULD TAKE BACK SOME QUESTIONS AROUND E C R S DRIVING PERHAPS, UM, INTENDED OR UNINTENDED ELEVATION IN THE WHOLESALE MARKET IN TERMS OF WHEN SCARCITY PRICING IS HAPPENING.
UM, AND SO I'D BE CURIOUS IF THAT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD WANT W M S TO TAKE AWAY FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION.
[03:05:02]
ERIC, DO YOU WANNA FOLLOW UP ON THAT? YEAH, I, WE ARE, WE ARE DEFINITELY, UH, HAPPY TO TAKE THAT, UH, AND TAKE THE, THE QUESTIONS, UM, THAT, THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.AND, UH, WE CAN, WE CAN DISCUSS THOSE AT OUR NEXT W M S MEETING.
IS ERIC GOFF ON THAT, THE ADDITIONAL ERIC? YEP.
WHAT, WHO THAT ERIC GOFF REPRESENTING.
I THINK I JUMPED A GUN AND CALLED HIM OUT BEFORE BRADY HAD A CHANCE TO PUT HIM IN THE QUEUE.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE QUEUE JUST FOR CLARITY? I THINK WE'RE CLEAR.
I THINK WE ARE STILL CLOSE, UH, TO, TO HITTING OUR, OUR ONE 30 TIME.
UM, I BELIEVE THAT THE ONLY VOTING ITEM LEFT IS THE R T C ITEM THAT MATT MARINAS HAS LATER.
SO MAYBE IF WE COULD GET THROUGH THESE OTHER ITEMS PRETTY QUICKLY.
[10. Credit Finance Sub Group (CFSG) Report]
BRENDAN SAGER IS NEXT WITH THE CREDIT FINANCE SUBGROUP REPORT.THIS IS FROM OUR 16TH MEETING JUST ON THE SLIDE BRIEFLY.
N P R 1112 WILL BE IMPLEMENTED IN OCTOBER.
THAT MEANS THAT'S WHEN EVERYBODY LOSES ALL THEIR UNSECURED CREDIT.
SO JUST AS A REMINDER, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.
UH, 1186 WAS OPERATIONAL AND WE TALK ABOUT THAT HERE.
UH, WE, THE, UH, AUSTIN AND THE, AND THE, UH, SETTLEMENTS TEAM ARE LOOKING AT, UH, PUBLISHING A INVOICE REPORT.
UH, THERE, IT'S IN DEVELOPMENT STAGE.
IT'S GONNA INCLUDE BASICALLY EVERY DAY'S T MINUS ONE INVOICE ACTIVITY.
SO EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT'S OUTSTANDING AS OF A PARTICULAR DAY WON'T BE CUMULATIVE, BUT IT'S A DATA POINT THAT, UM, THE MARKET, UH, WOULD, WOULD BE USEFUL JUST 'CAUSE ERCOT DID HAVE SOME UNPAID, UH, JUAN INVOICES.
AND, UM, SO THIS WOULD HOPEFULLY ADDRESS THAT.
SO WE CAN POSSIBLY LOOK FOR AN N P R FROM EITHER ERCOT STAFF OR N R G.
UH, DC ENERGY WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE, UH, ESTIMATE AGGREGATE LIABILITY.
THIS IS BASICALLY THE CALCULATION THAT RESULTS IN COUNTERPARTIES HAVING TO POST COLLATERAL TO ERCOT.
UH, THERE ARE CASES OF OVERCOLLATERALIZATION AND UNDER COLLATERALIZATION THAT IT'S AN ALGORITHM THAT, YOU KNOW, APPLIES A SCALER BASED ON FORWARD, UH, PRICE ACTIVITY RELATIVE TO HISTORIC PRICE ACTIVITY ON, UM, UH, UH, REAL TIME MARKETS, UM, BUILD AND UNBUILD ACTIVITY.
SO THERE'S, WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING TO TWEAK THIS TO MAKE SURE THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE RISKS ARE ALIGNED WITH THE, UH, FINANCIAL OBLIGATION.
THE, UM, AGAIN, WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING AT, UH, TWO KEY THINGS DAY AHEAD IN REAL TIME ARE NOT CONSIDERED TOGETHER IN THIS FORMULA.
AND ONE OF DC'S PROPOSALS WAS TO COMBINE THEM.
AND THEN IN ADDITION, THEY, UH, ALSO WANT THE COUNTERPARTY TO BASICALLY, UH, IF, IF THEY PERCEIVE THAT THERE'S A, UH, A HIGH RISK TRADING PERIOD AND THEY WANT TO BACK OUT, UM, AND, AND NOT TRADE, UH, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO, UH, TO, TO NOT FACE THIS OBLIGATION OR, OR, OR THE ONGOING OBLIGATIONS NOT, UH, WHEN THE, WHEN THE, UH, OBLIGATION CONCLUDES.
SO, ERCOT IS LOOKING AT THIS, THIS IS A HIGH LEVEL VIEW OF THE CALCULATION THAT TAKES PLACE.
SO THERE'S A LOOKBACK PERIOD THAT, UH, IS 40 DAYS, WHICH, UH, UM, IS CONTEMPLATES A MASS TRANSITION OF EVENT AGAINST THE FORWARD ADJUSTMENT FACTOR AGAINST THE, UM, REAL-TIME LIABILITY DURING THAT 40 DAY PERIOD.
LOOKS AT THE, UH, THERE'S A SEPARATE SCALER APPLIED TO DAY AHEAD ACTIVITY.
THESE ARE ADDED TOGETHER, AND THEN IT LOOKS AT, UM, BUILD AND UNBUILD, UH, ACTIVITY WITHIN THE RECENT DAYS, PLUS ANY OTHER OUTSTANDING INVOICES.
SO ERCOT PROPOSED, UH, CHANGING, UM, THIS, UH, ALGORITHM TO, IN SCENARIO ONE, APPLYING FOR ADJUSTMENT FACTORS AGAINST COMPLETED NOT SETTLED ACTIVITY.
INSTEAD OF THE 40 DAY LOOKBACK OF REALTIME SCENARIO TWO, APPLYING THE R A F AGAINST ALL REALTIME,
[03:10:01]
UH, ACTIVITY IN THE LOOKBACK PERIOD RATHER THAN A SCALER APPLYING AGAINST A MAX IN A 40 DAY LOOKBACK.UM, ADJUSTING THE REALTIME FORMULA TO REFLECT, UH, EACH MARKET PARTICIPANT'S, UH, UNIQUE SITUATION AND SCENARIO FOUR NETTING OF R T M AND DAM.
SO THAT FOURTH SCENARIO VERY MUCH ALIGNS WITH, UH, WHAT DC ENERGY PROPOSED.
AND, UM, WE ARE CONTINUING TO DEVELOP THIS AND OUR CO STAFF'S LOOKING AT IT.
DC TIES A WHILE AGO, SHAMS, UH, BROUGHT UP DOUBLE COUNTING OF DC TIES IN THE, UM, IN THE ERCOT COLLATERAL OBLIGATION ALGORITHM.
UM, SO THESE ARE INCLUDED, THE DC TIE EXPORTS ARE INCLUDED IN THE ERCOT LOAD ESTIMATES AND ESTIMATED LOAD RATIO SHARES THAT USE, UH, REAL-TIME COMPLETED, NOT SETTLE LOAD VOLUME, AND DC TIE NET ENERGY SALES VOLUME OF COMPLETED, NOT SETTLED COMPONENT OF Q SS E.
UH, THEY LOOKED AT A TECHNICAL SOLUTION, WHICH IS TO EXCLUDE THE DC TIE EXPORTS FROM ERCOT LOAD ESTIMATES AND LOAD RATIO SHARES.
UH, IT COULD BE IMPLEMENTED IN THE 2024 R TWO RELEASE, UH, EXPECTED IN APRIL.
THE MONTHLY HIGHLIGHTS, UH, OBVIOUSLY IT'S BEEN HOT.
UH, SO EVERYTHING WENT UP FROM 1.6 BILLION TO 2.6.
UM, THE DISCRETIONARY COLLATERAL WENT FROM 3.6 TO 4.43 BETWEEN JUNE AND JULY, THERE WERE NO UNUSUAL COLLATERAL CALLS.
SO JUST LOOKING AT WHAT I SAID IN TERMS OF A GRAPH, YOU CAN SEE HOW THE POTENTIAL EXPOSURE HAS MOVED UP, UH, AS WE WOULD EXPECT WHEN IT GETS HOT, UH, YOU CAN SEE THE PURPLE LINE REFLECTS THE, THE PURPLE BLOCKS ARE, UH, LETTERS OF CREDIT.
SO EVERYBODY IS, UH, PRETTY MUCH PART POSTING LETTERS OF CREDIT AND CASH.
JUST A REMINDER, THE GREEN BLOCKS ARE UNSECURED CREDIT, AND THAT IS GOING AWAY IN OCTOBER.
AND THIS IS, UH, AGAIN, ANOTHER VIEW OF DISCRETIONARY COLLATERAL.
THIS IS, UH, PRETTY MUCH FOLKS, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU NEED IT TO HAVE ACCESS TO DAM, SO IT INCREASES IN THESE PERIODS, BUT IT, IT TRACKS WITH EXPOSURE AND THAT'S IT.
YEAH, I HAVE A, UH, A QUESTION, ACTUALLY, YOU, YEAH.
UM, SO, UM, I, I RAISED THIS ON THE LAST, UM, N P R R THAT WAS WITHDRAWN, UM, BY RAINBOW ABOUT THE ISSUE THAT YOU BROUGHT UP AGAIN TODAY, UM, ABOUT THE ABILITY FOR A TRADING COUNTERPARTY TO SAY THEY'RE GONNA STOP TRADING IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE CREDIT EXPOSURE.
I REMAIN CONCERNED ABOUT THAT ISSUE, UM, BECAUSE EVEN IF THEY STOP TRADING WITH ERCOT, UH, THAT ONLY WORKS IF ERCOT KNOWS THEY DON'T HAVE ANY, UM, THIRD PARTY, UM, ISSUES THAT COULD LEAD TO A DEFAULT ON, UH, ANOTHER MARKET OR A RELATED MARKET.
AND SO I, I THINK THAT NEEDS SOME CAREFUL CONSIDERATION, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY TRULY HAVE ELIMINATED ANY EXPOSURE TO, UM, TO ERCOT WHEN THAT OCCURS.
UM, SO, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK THE, THE CREDIT FORMULAS MIGHT PARTIALLY COVER THAT.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THEY DO BEFORE WE HANDLE THAT OR, OR ERCOT MIGHT NEED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
AND THEN SECONDLY, GO AHEAD, GO AHEAD.
OH, I WAS JUST GONNA SAY, WELL, ERCOT DID LOOK AT THIS AND THEY OFFERED SOME SOLUTIONS AND THAT WAS NOT ONE OF THEM.
SO
UM, AND THEN SECONDLY, UM, ON THE ISSUE OF BALANCING RISK AND LOOKING AT THIS, I, I, I'M CERTAINLY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE OPEN TO THAT, UM, IN, IN TERMS OF RE REVI THE CREDIT FORMULAS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ADEQUATELY CAPTURE RISK.
UH, HOWEVER, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THAT LOOK WOULD BE A THOROUGH LOOK.
UM, SO FOR EXAMPLE, I'M NOT SURE THAT WE HAVE COVERED, UM, SINCE WHEN IT WAS FROM URI, THE RISK OF FORCED OUTAGES, UM, THAT, YOU KNOW, LED TO A SIGNIFICANT MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR CREDIT EXPOSURE THAT SEEMED TO BE COVERED IN THE CREDIT FORMULAS.
AND, YOU KNOW, UH, THAT'S A COMPLICATED TOPIC.
I DON'T THINK THERE'S AN EASY ANSWER TO THAT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE IT CAN ALSO HAVE POTENTIAL SIGNIFICANT COST CREDIT THAT WE NEED TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT.
BUT IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THOSE CREDIT FORMULAS, I THINK WE NEED TO TRY TO CONSIDER A WAY TO ACCOUNT FOR THAT ISSUE AS WELL.
THAT'S PRETTY MUCH ALL WE DO IS LOOK
[03:15:01]
AT THAT FORMULA ALL THE TIME.UM, YEAH, SO I, I, BUT I SPECIFICALLY NOT JUST LOOK AT THE FORMULA, BUT TO THE EXTENT WE MAKE CHANGES, UM, I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE ALSO CONSIDER THE FORCED OUT RISK.
YEAH, I, I'VE THOUGHT ABOUT WHAT ERIC IS SAYING, UH, WITH FORCED DODGE RISK, AND I THINK PART OF THE PROBLEM WITH IT IS, IS WHEN YOU TRY TO THINK OF IT IS HOW DO YOU CAPTURE THAT? BECAUSE SO MUCH HAS CHANGED SINCE YOU SUCH AS WINTERIZATION, UM, UM, AND, AND, UH, THE PAST WOULD BE A, A GOOD INDICATOR.
UM, BUT I, YOU KNOW, I COULD APPRECIATE WHAT HE'S SAYING.
IT'S ALSO NOT CLEAR IF PEOPLE HAVE LIKE THIRD PARTY CALL OPTIONS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, UH, THAT THEY COULD CALL ON AN EVENT OF IT.
I AGREE, OF COURSE, STATUS, I THINK CALL OPTIONS ARE A GREAT THING FOR US TO THINK ABOUT IN THAT CONTEXT.
SO THE, THE THING HERE IS THAT THE R F A F, UH, CONCEPTS THAT WERE BEING LAID OUT BY VARIOUS MARKET PARTICIPANTS, INCLUDING DC ENERGY, THEY'RE REALLY MORE ALONG THE LINES OF CORRECTING.
WE, WE BACKTESTED, UM, THE PERFORMANCE OF SOME OF THE CHANGES, UH, AGAINST THE YURI, UH, EXAMPLE AND THE PROPOSAL AT LEAST THAT, THAT WE'RE OFFERING WOULDN'T REDUCE THE CREDIT DURING YURI, UH, BUT WOOD AND THE POST YEARY, UM, DAYS INTO MARCH, ACTUALLY, UH, WHERE THE STICKINESS OF THE CREDIT REQUIREMENTS AND HOW IT INTERACTED WITH THE R F A F, THE FORD ADJUSTMENT FACTOR FOR REAL TIME WASN'T REALLY BEHAVING CORRECTLY.
AND YOU HAD THIS DOUBLE HUMP, UM, OF, OF E A L CREDIT AND THE, THE SECOND HUMP THAT HAPPENED IN, IN MARCH THAT WAS RELATED TO URI, BUT YET SHOULDN'T HAVE REALLY BEEN THERE.
UH, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE TRUE RISK AND EXPOSURE, UH, SHOULDN'T HAVE REALLY BEEN THERE.
SO WE'RE, WE'RE SEEKING TO CORRECT THAT.
UM, AND IT'S PROBABLY HARD TO GO OVER IT ALL WITHOUT, UH, LOOKING AT OUR, OUR BACK TEST AND OUR PRESENTATION, UH, RIGHT NOW DURING THIS MEETING.
BUT, UM, THEY'RE REALLY MORE ALONG THE LINES OF A CORRECTION.
SO I, I JUST WANTED TO PAUSE THAT FOR THE GROUP.
AND, UM, I JUST ADD, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THE THING FALLS BELOW ONE THE R F AND THAT KIND OF DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
UH, I THINK THAT'S AN ARTIFACT OF THE NOISE AND THE DATA RATHER THAN ACTUAL, WELL, IT, IT CAN MAKE SENSE TO THE STANDPOINT THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO NORMALIZE THE R F A F TO, TO THE CURRENT, UH, POWER PRICES THAT ARE BEING USED IN THE R T L E.
SO I, I'M NOT, I THINK THAT DOES MAKE SENSE, UH, TO THE STANDPOINT THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO NORMALIZE YOUR CREDIT BASE TO WHERE THE ICE MARK IS.
UH, BUT THERE'S SOME PROBLEMS WITH WAY IT'S CURRENTLY BEHAVING, UH, WHERE YOU'RE RIGHT, IT CAN DIP TOO FAR ON THE, UH, LESS THAN ONE SIDE OF THINGS, UH, WHERE THAT IS THE CASE WHERE YOU'RE NOT REQUIRING ENOUGH COLLATERAL.
AND IT CAN ALSO GO WAY TOO HIGH ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN WHERE YOU'RE REQUIRING WAY TOO MUCH COLLATERAL.
UH, BUT THE IDEA THAT IT COULD, UH, GO BELOW ONE, I DON'T THINK IS A PROBLEM IN AND OF ITSELF, BUT THE WAY THAT IT'S CURRENTLY BEHAVING, UH, IS, IS THE PROBLEM ON BOTH SIDES OF THE COIN.
YEAH, WE'LL TALK ABOUT IT SOME MORE.
UM, I DON'T SEE ANYONE IN THE QUEUE.
[11. Large Flexible Load Task Force (LFLTF) Report]
MOVE ON TO THE, UH, LARGE FLEXIBLE LOAD TEST FORCE REPORT.ARE WE READY ON THIS ONE? YEAH, THIS IS, UH, AJI SPRINGER FROM ERCOT.
UH, I'M SPEAKING ON BILL'S BEHALF SINCE HE'S OUTTA THE OFFICE THIS WEEK.
UM, I DON'T HAVE ANY SLIDES, SO APOLOGIES.
I'LL TRY AND GIVE A QUICK VERBAL UPDATE.
UM, SO, UH, FROM THE TASK FORCE, UH, ERCOT POSTED A PACKAGE OF REVISION REQUESTS RELATED TO LARGE LOAD, UH, TOPICS ON AUGUST 1ST.
UM, THAT'S N P R R 1191, PIGGER ONE 11, NORE 2 56, AND RIGOR 36.
UM, MURCOTT ALSO HELD A WORKSHOP ON THESE REVISION REQUESTS ON AUGUST 16TH.
UM, ERCOT IS EXPECTING, UH, THAT THESE REVISION REQUESTS WILL BE TABLED AT THE APPROPRIATE SUBCOMMITTEES, UM, TO ALLOW FOR DISCUSSION AT THE TASK FORCE.
[03:20:01]
ME.UM, AND, UH, TO THAT END THERE, THERE ARE TWO L F L T F MEETINGS AND SCHEDULED FOR SEPTEMBER.
UH, THE FIRST WILL BE ON SEPTEMBER 6TH AFTER W M S, UM, AND LIKELY FOCUSING ON, UH, MARKET IMPACT TOPICS.
UM, AND THEN AN ADDITIONAL MEETING IS ON, ON THE CALENDAR FOR SEPTEMBER 25TH.
UM, THE, THE TASK FORCE LEADERSHIP HAS ASKED FOR, UM, EITHER HIGH LEVEL OR FORMAL COMMENTS, UM, THAT, UH, WOULD LIKE, YOU KNOW, FOR ANYONE WHO WOULD LIKE THOSE COMMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE DISCUSSION AT THE SEPTEMBER 6TH MEETING.
UM, WE'RE ASKING FOR THOSE TO BE SUBMITTED BY AUGUST 28TH IN ORDER TO GIVE EVERYONE TIME TO REVIEW THEM.
UM, THESE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED TO BE FORMAL COMMENTS.
UH, UH, YOU'RE WELCOME TO SUBMIT, UH, TO EITHER, UH, TO MYSELF OR TO BOB WHIT, BOB WHITMEYER, THE VICE CHAIR, UH, VIA EMAIL, AND WE'LL POST THEM ALL TO THE SEPTEMBER 6TH, UH, MEETING PAGE, UM, SO THAT EVERYONE WILL HAVE, UH, VISIBILITY IN THEM.
UM, AGAIN, UH, YOU KNOW, ANYONE WISHING TO SUBMIT FORMAL COMMENTS MAY DO SO AT ANY TIME.
UM, AND, UH, WE WILL BE SENDING OUT, UH, A SUMMARY OF THIS INFORMATION TO THE, THE P R S W M S AND AND ROSS DISTRIBUTION LISTS.
UM, SO THAT'S, THAT'S MY UPDATE.
UH, HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT.
WE DO HAVE, UH, A COMMENT IN THE QUEUE, UH, CLAYTON GRE.
YEAH, UH, I BELIEVE THE LARGE FLEXIBLE LOAD TASK FORCE HAS A CHARTER AND, UM, I BELIEVE THAT WHAT WE'RE HAVING NOW ARE MEETINGS ON LARGE LOAD, NOT LARGE FLEXIBLE LOAD.
'CAUSE WE ARE DISCUSSING THESE NPRS, WHICH ARE BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THE L F L T F, UM, THEY IMPACT LARGE LOADS.
SO I THINK WE PROBABLY NEED TO START ADVERTISING THESE MEETINGS TO A BROADER GROUP THAN MAYBE IS EXPECTING IT.
I KNOW WE HAD A LOT OF THE INDUSTRIALS THERE, SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE, I THINK WE HAD MOST OF THE LARGE LOADS ON THE PHONE, BUT, UM, I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY SOME POTENTIAL SURPRISES WITH THE GENERATORS AS WELL.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS WITH ERCO IN A, A CHARTER CHANGE OR, OR GROUP STRUCTURE CHANGE OR, WELL, FOR DISCUSSION MAYBE WITHIN THE GROUP? YEAH, I THINK THAT, UH, BILL'S FEELING WAS THAT THIS WAS UNDER THE, THE LARGE LOAD EFFORT WAS UNDER TECH AS WELL.
SO, UM, I THINK THAT YOU'RE PROBABLY RIGHT.
IF WE DID PURSUE THIS, WE PROBABLY NEED TO BROADEN THE SCOPE OF THE GROUP OR CHANGE AN, OR ADD A NEW GROUP OR SOMETHING TO DO IT CORRECTLY.
IS THAT SOMETHING MAYBE, UM, THE LS L T F CAN TAKE UP WITH, WITH WITHIN THEMSELVES THAT THEN BRING TO
I'M GONNA DEFER FOR A MOMENT TO KAN.
CAN YOU HEAR ME? JUST MAKING SURE.
I, FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO GO ON THE RECORD AS OF AGREEING WITH CLAYTON.
UM, I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE MARKED.
AND, UM, THE SECOND THING IS I, UM, THINK TACK NEEDS TO EXERT LEADERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE AND NOT DEFER IT TO THE LARGE FLEXIBLE LOAD TASK FORCE.
UM, I THINK THERE ARE PEOPLE THERE THAT WANNA, UM, MOVE THINGS, YOU KNOW, UH, KEEP, KEEP ISSUES THAT ARE NOT LARGE FLEXIBLE LOAD ISSUES IN THAT GROUP.
AND I'M NOT SURE THAT'S THE BEST APPROACH.
SO I WOULD SAY TAX SHOULD, UM, SAY, YOU KNOW, WE'LL TAKE THESE ISSUES UP AND THEY RESIDE IN PLACE X OR Y WHATEVER, THAT'S WHATEVER YOU FIND APPROPRIATE.
I'LL, I'LL SEE WHAT BOB, WHAT MEYER HAS TO SAY.
YEAH, CLAYTON, THAT WAS THE REASON WE HAD THE SEPARATE WORKSHOP THAT WAS NOT PART OF THE L F L.
UM, I, I GUESS MAKES SENSE TO ME.
MAYBE WE, WE MODIFY THE SCOPE.
I, I DON'T SEE ISSUES THAT AREN'T LARGE LOAD, THAT AREN'T ALSO LARGE FLEXIBLE LOADS.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT HAVING TWO SEPARATE GROUPS MAKES ANY, MAKES ANY SENSE.
BUT WE'D CERTAINLY DEAL WITH BOTH OF 'EM IN THE SAME ONE.
UH, I THINK THAT'S PROBABLY THE MOST EFFICIENT.
I THINK IF WE GO THE OTHER ROUTE THEN WE WOULD END UP WITH TWO COMMITTEES
[03:25:01]
THAT HAVE, UM, BILL AND BOB AS THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR WITH THE, PRETTY MUCH THE SAME PEOPLE IN THEM.BROADER, I THINK BOTH THE VOLUNTEER AND I'M PRETTY SURE HE IS GOT A HE'LL PASS ON THAT OPPORTUNITY.
I HEAR YOU KAAN ON TRACK TAKING SOME LEADERSHIP.
UM, I THINK I WILL WANT THE EXPERTISE, UM, FROM BOB AND, YOU KNOW, THE, THE ERCOT EMPLOYEES WHO WORK ON THAT TASK FORCE.
IT SOUNDS LIKE MAYBE WE ARE LOOKING AT A, A SCOPE OR CHARTER CHANGE TO THE CURRENT L F L T F FOURTH, OR AT LEAST AN EVALUATION OF WHETHER WE NEED A CHANGE TO INCLUDE ALL LOAD ISSUES.
UM, SO I WILL WANT INPUT ON THAT FROM, FROM THE PEOPLE WHO ARE BETTER VERSED IN IT, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY TAKE THAT ON AS A KIND OF TECH ACTION ITEM.
A CAITLIN LARGE LOAD ISSUES, NOT ALL LOAD ISSUES.
IT, IT IMPACTS LOADS 20 M V A AND ABOVE AND THEN SOME GENERATION.
WELL WHY DON'T WE KEEP THAT AS A TECH ITEM TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT CHARTER OR SCOPE AND IF IT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED.
ALRIGHT, I, I HAVE JUST ONE MORE COMMENT.
UM, AGAIN, I'M NOT SURE I HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THE APPROACH YOU'RE TAKING, HOWEVER, THERE IS, UM, I I THINK CERTAIN LARGE FLEXIBLE LOAD ISSUES, SO THIS IS THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT KIND OF BOB'S SAYING MAYBE, UH, L F L IS A SUBSET OF LSS, BUT THERE ARE L F L SPECIFIC ISSUES THAT HAVE KIND OF SOME PRIORITY RESOLUTION.
SO IF YOU'RE GONNA KEEP IT IN THE SAME GROUP, I THINK THE ERCOT STAFF THAT WOULD SUPPORT THAT WOULD START LOOKING DIFFERENT.
AND IF YOU KEEP THE NAME, IT WOULD IMPLY THAT YOU HAVEN'T ADDRESSED ALL THE L F L ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED ORIGINALLY.
SO AGAIN, IT, I DON'T THINK YOUR APPROACH IS, IS PROBLEMATIC.
IT JUST NEEDS TO MAKE SURE IT TITLES AND, AND UH, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT NEED TO BE RECOGNIZED AND THE NEXT STEPS NEED TO BE IDENTIFIED ABOUT BEING LARGE LOAD ISSUES.
SO WHAT I'M HEARING I THINK IS A COUPLE OF THINGS, BUT ONE IS MAKING SURE YOU KNOW, THAT THE PRIORITIES FOR WHY THE GROUP OF FIRST FORM RE REMAIN THE PRIORITIES.
AND THEN SECOND, UM, IF, IF WE ADD OTHER ISSUES, MAKING SURE THAT THE APPROPRIATE
UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, TOTALLY UNDERSTAND WANTING OR TECH TO TAKE LEADERSHIP ON THIS, BUT I THINK IT DOES WARRANT SOME DISCUSSION PROBABLY AT THAT GROUP AND WITH, WITH
CLAYTON, DID YOU WANNA ADD TO THAT? NO, I THINK YOU SUMMED IT UP REALLY WELL.
IT'S, IT'S LIKE ALSO LIKE ALL SQUARES ARE RECTANGLES, BUT NOT ALL RECTANGLES ARE SQUARES.
UM, SO I THINK WE CAN, ARE WE GOOD ON THE L S L T F? THAT'S THE HARDEST ACRONYM TO SAY.
ARE WE GOOD ON ON THOSE UPDATES? ARE THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT.
[12. Formation of RTC+B Task Force (Vote)]
WE CAN GO TO, UM, OUR LAST VOTING ITEM BESIDES APPROVING THE COMBO BALLOT TO TAKE UP, AND THAT IS THE FORMATION OF THE RTC PLUS B TASK FORCE.UM, I BELIEVE MATT HAS THE, THE CHARTER AND THE, THE VOTE, THE VOTING ITEM IS GONNA BE FORMING THE TASK FORCE AND APPROVING THE CHARTER.
UM, AND THEN WE WOULD BE LOOKING TO HAVE THAT GROUP WORK ON LEADERSHIP AND WE WOULD APPROVE THAT LEADERSHIP, I BELIEVE AT OUR NEXT MEETING.
UM, BUT I'LL LET YOU TAKE IT AWAY, MATT.
SO THE IDEA IS WE'VE FORKLIFTED THE, UH, 2019 R T C T F CHARTER AND, YOU KNOW, FORKLIFTED IT, PLACED IT IN HERE AND SAID, WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE TO REMOVE IMPLEMENTATION RISK? AND SO STRUCTURALLY EVERYTHING IS THE SAME.
AND SO WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY RED LINES FROM ANY MARKET PARTICIPANTS.
UH, YOU'LL NOTE THAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT BEING A WORKING
[03:30:01]
GROUP.IT'S NOW A TASK FORCE, UH, BASED ON MARKET FEEDBACK.
UH, THE FIRST SET OF BULLETS IS IDENTIFYING THE SCOPE, WHICH IS IN THE CHARTER, JUST THE IDEA OF COORDINATING TIMELINES, REQUIREMENTS, UH, EVALUATING POLICY DECISIONS.
SOME OF THOSE ARE IN THE APPENDIX THAT WERE LEFTOVERS, UH, SUCH AS THE AS PROXY CURVE VALUES, YOU KNOW, KIND OF PARAMETERS THAT WE NEED VALUES FOR BEFORE GO LIVE.
SO THERE'S A LOT OF ACTIVITY THAT'S NEEDED AND WE'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO EAT IT ALL AT ONCE.
WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WE NEED TO ATTACK FIRST.
SO I'VE GONE AHEAD AND WE'VE RESERVED THE CALENDAR.
SO IF THE CHARTER IS APPROVED TODAY, WE CAN BEGIN OUR MONTHLY MEETINGS.
THEY WOULD BE HYBRID MEETINGS IN PERSON AND, UM, VIA WEBEX.
THE FIRST MEETING CAN BE ON FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 8TH.
I'D HAVE THE FOLLOWING AGENDA, WHICH WOULD BE A TRAINING OVERVIEW, WHICH IS PROBABLY TWO OR THREE HOURS JUST TO RECON, CONSUME, YOU KNOW, THE KEY PRINCIPLES, WHAT ALL THE DESIGN ELEMENTS ARE FOR R T C.
THAT'LL HELP SET THE STAGE FOR BULLET TWO, WHICH IS WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE TO SEQUENCE THE MOST CRITICAL ACTIVITIES IN THE COMING MONTHS.
UH, SOLICIT NOMINATIONS FOR VICE CHAIR FOR TACTIC CONSIDER IN SEPTEMBER.
AND THEN REALLY TO START TO OPEN UP THE DISCUSSION ON THE R T C STATE OF CHARGE.
AND SO THE IDEA IS, UM, ERCOT HAS SOME DRAFT, UH, CONCEPTS AND LANGUAGE TO PUT INTO PLAY.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS KINDA A LEFTOVER THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED NOW.
AND OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF LESSONS HAVE BEEN LEARNED OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS.
UH, THERE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSIONS ABOUT BATTERY ISSUES SHOULD ALL GO TO THIS GROUP.
AS I WENT THROUGH THE CHARTER, WE REALIZED THAT THIS IS A PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION CHARTER.
AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WORKING WITH NITKA AND TALKING IT AROUND, ERCOT IS HAPPY TO SUPPORT A FORM OF SOME SORT TO SAY LET'S HAVE THESE TASK FORCE MEETINGS, BUT BATTERY ISSUES OUTSIDE OF R T C AS A PROGRAM, UH, COULD BE IN A MEETING WHERE WE ADJOURN THE MEETING, KEEP THE WEBEX OPEN AND CONTINUE ON OTHER BATTERY DISCUSSIONS THAT'S NEEDED THROUGH THE END OF THE YEAR.
UH, SO THAT WAS KIND OF THE THOUGHT ON HOW TO MAKE THE MOST OF THE GROUP BUT NOT HOLD ONE DOWN WITH THE OTHER IN TERMS OF PROGRESS.
AND SO UPON APPROVAL, ERCOT WOULD SET UP THE TASK FORCE PAGE, UM, MAILBOX DISTRIBUTION TO HAVE THE FIRST MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 8TH.
SO THAT'LL OPEN UP FOR FEEDBACK AND QUESTIONS.
I AM NOT SEEING ANYBODY IN THE QUEUE RIGHT NOW, BUT I HAVE GOT TO ASSUME WE MIGHT HAVE SOME COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS.
AND I, I KNOW THAT BOB HILTON EARLIER RAISED, UM, SOME ITEMS HE WANTED AT THIS TEST COURSE.
I BELIEVE THAT, YOU KNOW, SPECIFIC ITEMS ARE NOT SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE IN THE CHARTER IS DRAFTED DRAFT.
UM, SO I THINK WE ARE GOOD ON THAT UNLESS THERE ARE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS THERE.
AND I SEE YOU'RE PULLING UP THE CHARTER NOW, SO MAYBE THIS IS WHERE WE WILL GET, GET MORE COMMENTS.
WELL, I WOULD JUST OFFER THAT I THINK IT'S BROAD ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO TACKLE ANY OF THESE ISSUES WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF IT.
YEAH, I, I YOU HAVE THE EXAMPLE OF THE ANCILLARY SERVICE PROXY OFFER CURVES, BUT IT, IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A INCLUSIVE LIST OF EVERYTHING WE WILL COVER.
UM, AND IT KIND OF OVERLAPS WITH THE DISCUSSION WE JUST HAD ON, UM, THE L F L T F.
AND SO MAYBE WE DON'T WANT TO PRESCRIBE CERTAIN THINGS.
I I DO SEE ERIC OFF FROM THE Q AND L, SO I WOULD CALL ON ERIC.
UH, YOU KNOW, FIRST OF ALL, I APPRECIATE YOU ALL EXPLICITLY CALLING OUR OPEC HERE IN THE CHARTER.
AND I, WE DIDN'T THINK WE NEEDED TO COMMENT ON THIS SPECIFICALLY, BUT WHILE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ATTACK, UM, WE DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE GET R T C DONE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE GIVEN THAT IT'S PLANNED TO SAVE, UM, ENORMOUS AMOUNTS OF MONEY, UH, FOR THE MARKET WHEN IT'S IMPLEMENTED.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE AT THIS UH, WORKING GROUP, WE WANNA IDENTIFY ANY RISKS FOR THE PROJECT DELIVERY AND, AND PUT THEM OFF IF POSSIBLE FOR A FUTURE IMPLEMENTATION.
AND SO I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF STATE THAT AND, UM, AND SAY THAT OUR HOPE IS THAT WE GET THIS DONE AS, AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN.
I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS AT THIS TIME.
MATT, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING MORE ON THIS? NO, JUST, UH, UH, TO YOUR POINT ON IT DID SAY IN THE SENTENCE ABOVE THAT UM, INCLUDES BUT NOT LIMITED TO TYPE LANGUAGE WITH REGARDS TO THIS.
UH, THE IDEA IS OUR VENDOR'S GONNA START DEVELOPING IN 2024 IN JANUARY AND WE ARE LOOKING TO HAVE THE STATE OF CHARGE, UH, FOR R T C TO OUR TARGET IS BOARD APPROVAL IN DECEMBER.
AND SO THIS WILL BE A FAST TRACK AND WE WILL HAVE AS MEET MANY MEETINGS AS WE NEED TO HAVE TO GET THAT THING KNOCKED OUT.
BUT THAT WOULD BE HERE AND NOT IN ADDITIONAL WORKSHOPS IN THE
[03:35:01]
AFTERNOON, LIKE YOU JUST DISCUSSED, CORRECT? CORRECT.THAT WOULD BE STATE OF CHARGE FOR R T C.
WE ARE ALL IN ON THAT DESIGN AND SPENDING AS MUCH TIME AS WE NEED ON IT.
AND SO I BELIEVE WE ARE LOOKING, UM, TO, TO VOTE ON THE FORMATION OF THIS GROUP AS WELL AS APPROVING THE CHARTER.
UM, I WOULD AGAIN RECOMMEND THAT WE ADD THIS TO THE CONGO BALLOT UNLESS ANYBODY HAS OBJECTIONS TO THAT.
[13. ERCOT Reports]
ON.UM, YOU
I, ALL I REALLY WANTED TO DO WAS, UH, PUT A P S A OUT, UH, THERE, UH, TO EVERYONE THAT WE ARE LOOKING TO KICK OFF THE, OUR ANNUAL DISCUSSION AROUND THE, AN ANCILLARY SERVICE METHODOLOGY BEGINNING THE SEPTEMBER 20TH P D C W G, UH, MEETING.
AND WE'LL GO TO BOTH P D C AND W M W G IN SEPTEMBER AND IN OCTOBER TO TALK ABOUT THE PROPOSED METHODOLOGY.
UH, REALLY, UH, THIS TIME AROUND BASED OFF OF THE FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED, UH, LA UH, LAST YEAR, WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE THE PROCESS MORE EFFICIENT AND IF, UH, WE WANT TO DO OUR BEST TO GET YOU ALL RELEVANT DETAILS AROUND THE PROPOSED METHODOLOGY IN THAT OCTOBER, SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER MEETING DISCUSSION.
SO THAT BY THE TIME WE REACH NOVEMBER, ALL WE DO IS PROVIDE A SUMMARY, UH, AND NOT TO HAVE, NOT HAVE TO BELABOR, UH, EVERYBODY THROUGH A, A VERY LONG AND ELABORATE SLIDE DECK, UH, AGAIN AND AGAIN.
WE'LL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH EVERYONE ON IT.
UH, ANY INTERESTED STAKEHOLDERS, WE PLEASE REQUEST YOU ALL TO START ATTENDING THE, OR AT LEAST PLAN TO ATTEND THE SEPTEMBER AND MAYBE THE OCTOBER P D C OR W M W G MEETING, UH, TO PROVIDE ANY FEEDBACK ON AS METHODOLOGY.
AND THAT'S ALL THE TIMELINE THAT WE ARE TARGETING IS ALSO ON THIS SCREEN.
UM, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING DISCUSSION ON THIS TOPIC BEGINNING SEPTEMBER.
ALRIGHT, THANK YOU NETIKA, I SEE A QUESTION FROM CARRIE BIVINS.
CARRIE, I CAN, YOUR QUESTION IS ABOUT HOW FAR IN ADVANCE, UM, WE'LL TRY TO GET SOME DATA OUT THERE, UH, WITHIN A SEVEN DAY TIMELINE, UH, AS MUCH AS I CAN.
UH, FOR OCTOBER WE'LL BE MORE, UH, FAR MORE POINTED IN SEPTEMBER.
WE ARE STILL CHASING ANALYSIS AT OUR END, SO WE'LL DO OUR BEST TO GET IT OUT THERE SEVEN DAYS IN ADVANCE.
UM, I I WOULD ALSO MAKE A REQUEST.
I I REALLY APPRECIATE THE, THE TIMELINE YOU'VE LAID OUT, UM, AND YOUR REQUEST FOR STAKEHOLDERS TO ATTEND THOSE WORKING GROUP MEETINGS.
I KNOW PARTICULARLY FOR THIS TOPIC, IT'S KIND OF A RECURRING ISSUE THAT WE GET TO THE, THE SUBCOMMITTEE OR COMMITTEE LEVEL AND WE'RE HAVING TO REITERATE DISCUSSIONS WE'VE HAD FOR FOLKS THAT HAVE MISSED THAT.
CAN WE MAYBE HAVE
UH, SO YOU ARE LOOKING FOR US TO SEND OUT A EMAIL TO THE ROSS AND W M S EXPLORE LIST? YEAH, I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE THINKING? I THINK SO.
ANY MORE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR NETIKA? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.
UM, I'M NOT AWARE OF ANYTHING, ANYONE ASIDE FROM ME, BUT IS THERE ANY OTHER BUSINESS THAT ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO BRING UP? ALL RIGHT, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING THERE.
[15. Combo Ballot (Vote)]
UM, BEFORE WE GET TO THE COMBO BALLOT, I KNOW ANN HAD A COUPLE OF COMMENTS ON, ON CHANGES TO MOTIONS AND AMENDMENTS.[03:40:01]
MAKE SURE, SINCE WE HAD SOME DIFFERENT TYPES OF MOTIONS THIS MONTH THAT EVERYBODY WAS AWARE.UM, SO JUST TO REVIEW REALLY QUICK, UM, 1164 IS AS REVISED BY T UM, IT, REPHRASE THAT DEFINITION.
1171 WAS AS AMENDED BY THE ERCOT COMMENTS TO CORRECT THE BASELINE.
1175 WAS AS REVISED BY TAC TO CORRECT LOSES TO LOSSES AND THE TWO 15 WAS REVISED BY TAC FOR THE SECTION REFERENCE.
AND THEN ALSO THERE WAS THE BIFURCATED EFFECTIVE DATE FOR TWO 15 THAT CHASE DID TOUCH UPON.
UM, IT WOULD BE TEN ONE FOR ALL SECTIONS EXCEPT FOR THE GRAY BOX LANGUAGE AND 11.1 AND 11.2, WHICH WILL BE EFFECTIVE UPON SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION.
OKAY, THAT'S MUCH APPRECIATED.
DID, DID ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON, ON THAT SPECIFIC, THE SPECIFICS AND THE CON BALLOT? ALRIGHT, COREY, I THINK WE ARE GOOD TO GO ON THE CON BALLOT.
COULD WE GET A BRAVE TO MAKE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CON BALLOT? THAT WOULD BE GOOD, WOULDN'T IT? UM, CAN WE GET A MOTION MOTION FROM DAVID KEITH A COUPLE SECONDS? COME IN, UM, SECOND FROM KEVIN HANSON.
SO WE WILL START UP AGAIN AT OUR CONSUMERS WITH MARK.
GARRETT? YES, THANK YOU, BILL.
THANK YOU, UH, ERIC FOR CHRISTIAN.
UH, JOHN FOR CLIFF? YES, THANK YOU.
ONTO OUR INDEPENDENT GENERATORS.
I KNOW BOB HAD TO DROP, UM, HE, HE SAID HE WAS GONNA LEAVE THE PROXY TO ME.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WENT THROUGH TO, TO YOU GUYS IN MARKET ROLES OR NOT.
UH, I'LL, I'LL PAUSE FOR A SECOND FOR, UH, SUSIE TO DOUBLE CHECK ME TO SEE IF, IF SHE'S GOT WHAT, IF SUSIE'S HAPPY, I'M HAPPY, BUT I'LL, I'LL GIVE HER A SECOND TO CONFIRM.
AND RUSSELL? YES, THANK YOU COREY.
AND AS TO THE BOB HILTON PROXY.
SUSIE, ARE WE, ARE WE OKAY TO LET CAITLIN VOTE OR SHOULD I JUST FLAG HIM AS NOT HERE? I, I'M SORRY, COREY, I DO NOT HAVE ANYTHING FROM BOB HILTON.
NO, IT DOESN'T SPOIL THE OUTCOME.
OKAY, WELL THANK YOU EVERYBODY FOR STICKING WITH US.
UM, AND IF NOBODY HAS ANYTHING ELSE, I THINK WE CAN ADJOURN FOR AUGUST.
[03:45:02]
THANK YOU.