1 / 34

PRR Draft on IDR Optional Removal Threshold

This update report by Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy discusses various draft proposals for new load profiles, including the use of lagged dynamic samples and the optional removal threshold for IDR. The report also covers topics such as profile change requests, annual profile validation, and default profiles.

velazco
Télécharger la présentation

PRR Draft on IDR Optional Removal Threshold

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for RMS Meeting November 13, 2003

  2. PRR/LPGRR draft for new profile being lagged dynamic. • PRR Draft on IDR Optional Removal Threshold. • Permissible effective dates in profile change requests. • Annual Profile Type and Weather Zone Validation. • Update Reports: • Protocols Section 18.6.5, Future IDRs Impact Analysis. • ERCOT Load Research – PR30014 Project Timeline. • Default Profiles • PRR471 for NIDR to IDR Default Profile. • NIDR default settlement process improvements. • PRR469 for Protocols Section 18 to PRS. • New TOU Schedule Process. • Oil and gas properties profile change request. • Gas/Convenience 24 hr Stores profile change request. • Direct Load Control (DLC) Project Status. • IDR Requirement Report. • Retail Point to Point Transaction PWG Example: Profile Ids • Next PWG Meetings 11/5, 11/19 and 12/4.

  3. PRR for Use of Lagged Dynamic Samples for New Load Profiles VOTING ITEM Motion to approve the PRR draft made by the PWG entitled, “Use of Lagged Dynamic Samples for New Load Profiles” as submitted to the RMS exploder on 10/29/03 in file named, “PRR_new profile lagged dynamic_PWG093003.doc”. LPGRR for Update of LPG Section 12 VOTING ITEM Motion to approve the LPGRR draft made by the PWG entitled, “Update of LPG Section 12” as submitted to the RMS exploder on 10/30/03 in file named, “LPGRR2003_004_Section_12.doc”.

  4. PRR Draft on IDR Optional Removal Threshold • RMS requested PWG review Sara Ferris’s IDR Removal draft PRR on 9/26/2003. • PWG on 10/01 wrote a new draft. • PWG reviewed the threshold value amount and discussed the PRR language on 10/22. • PWG Chair sent a status report to the RMS exploder on 10/27. • PWG met on 11/05 to prepare a recommendation for RMS. • PWG shall submit final recommended PRR to RMS on 11/13 with voting motions where the PWG is divided.

  5. PRR Draft on IDR Optional Removal Threshold • 8 Major Issues: • PRR language is not needed because the underlying issue is the tariff charges? • How do we define “new customer”? • Project 27084  • 25.471 definitions  • Move-in: A request for service to a premise where the customer of record changes. • Texas Register: Oct. 31 issues proposed rules. • Is it acceptable for a customer, or a CR upon a customer’s request to have the meter changed? • Changing the request period from 90 days to 120 days? • Accepting the proposed 10/16 PRR language by the PWG Chair? • Should there be two thresholds and if two what is the smaller value? • Should move-ins and existing customers be treated in the same PRR? • Do we have one PRR or two PRRs? • Note: PWG did reconcile the items in Green.

  6. PRR Draft on IDR Optional Removal Threshold PWG Proposed Language Prior to RMS meeting 11/13

  7. PRR Draft on IDR Optional Removal Threshold TDSP Tariff Charges : Range of Possible Savings to Customer -$14.00 to $1,680 Estimates based on 100 kW Secondary Service NCP and 4CP assumptions by Paul Wattles (Good Company Associates) and Malcolm Smith (Energy Data Source) Dollar calculations by Barb Penkala (Reliant Energy) Estimates are not approved by the PWG

  8. PRR Draft on IDR Optional Removal Threshold The PWG is divided: So RMS has 4 Issue Motions Plus one final Motion to cover the entire PRR with final Protocols Section 18.6.7 language

  9. PRR Draft on IDR Optional Removal Threshold PWG opinion is divided: Some attendees believe the issue relates to inequitable treatment for IDRs in TDSP tariffs (4CP meter charges), which should not be corrected with a protocol revision. Others believe this is not a tariff issue and protocol changes are appropriate and required. Motion 1: No PRR should be issued?

  10. PRR Draft on IDR Optional Removal Threshold PWG opinion is divided: Some attendees believe that having two PRRs discriminate against the group of customers whose load is existing below the present IDR installation threshold. Others prefer the one move-in case but can support both cases. Motion 2: Should there be only one PRR for the move-in case?

  11. PRR Draft on IDR Optional Removal Threshold PWG opinion is divided: Some support one threshold as defined in Protocols Section 18.6.1 (1). Others support two thresholds where Optional Removal Threshold (??? Kw) is different (lower) than the installation threshold established in Protocols Section 18.6.1 (1). Some think there should be one Optional Removal Threshold threshold (??? KW) as expressed in PWG version on 10/1. Motion 3: Should paragraph b.refer to Protocols Section 18.6.1(1)?

  12. PRR Draft on IDR Optional Removal Threshold PWG opinion is divided: Most attendees at the 11/5 PWG meeting support that ??? kW is 200 kW. OPUC supports a single 1000 kW threshold. AEP can support either value. Motion 4: Should ??? kW equal 200 kW?

  13. PRR Draft on IDR Optional Removal Threshold Possible PRR RMS Approved Language

  14. PRR Draft on IDR Optional Removal Threshold Motion: To accept the PRR draft by the PWG on IDR Optional Removal Threshold as submitted to RMS on Nov. 7, 2003, contained in file name, “PRR_IDR_Removal_20031105E.doc” and amended by RMS per the language changes on the prior slide during the Nov. 13, 2003 RMS meeting.

  15. Permissible effective dates in profile change requests • RMS requested on 9/26/2003 PWG to review and report back to RMS on 11/13. • PWG Chair is working with RRI staff to define the issue to present to PWG. • When the ZIP Code changes, back charges for taxes may incur. RMS Vice Chair Comments:

  16. Annual Profile Type and Weather Zone Validation.

  17. Annual Profile Type and Weather Zone Validation. • CNP expressed to the PWG Chair concern for the manpower needed for annual validation of profile ID assignments and concern for residential migration based on winter ratio of 1.5. Chair shall propose that the PWG reexamine the annual validation and profile id assignment process. • RMS to add to week market call meeting per RMS meeting 9/26/03. • PWG has discussed feasibility of ERCOT coding the Profile ID instead of TDSPs. • CNP Residential algorithm is complete. Business algorithm is being checked with target date of 11/11 completion. • Major Causes of Migration of Profile ID Assignments. • Use of a new usage month methodology. • Significant portion of BusNoDem moving to a BusxxxLF profile. • 1.5 winter ratio factor may need a dead band and/or reevaluation.

  18. Update Reports • Protocols Section 18.6.5, Future IDRs Impact Analysis. • ERCOT Load Research – PR30014 Project Timeline. • Default Profiles • PRR471 for NIDR to IDR Default Profile. • NIDR default settlement process improvements. • PRR469 for Protocols Section 18 to PRS. • New TOU Schedule Process. • Oil and gas properties profile change request. • Gas/Convenience 24 hr Stores profile change request. • Direct Load Control (DLC) Project Status. • IDR Requirement Report. • Retail Point to Point Transaction PWG Example: Profile Ids • Next PWG Meetings 11/19, 12/4, and 1/07.

  19. Protocols Section 18.6.5, Future IDRs Impact Analysis. • Per 8/19/03 PWG meeting discussions began on compliance to Section 18.6.5. • 18.6.5    Future Requirements for IDRs • ERCOT and the appropriate ERCOT TAC subcommittee shall evaluate the impact of the IDR Requirement as defined in this Section for possible revision prior to the introduction of competitive metering services to the market on January 1, 2004. • ERCOT staff is working on comparing current IDR premises below 1000 KW verses if the premise had been on a NIDR profile as the basis of the impact study. • At 10/22 and 11/05 PWG meetings, part of the impact report was be presented comparing current IDRs below 1000 kW to if they had been NIDR. Remaining analysis is on schedule.

  20. ERCOT Load Research – PR30014 Project Updated Timeline October -- November 10/23/03 Meeting #1 with TDSPs (complete) 10/08/03 Administer TDSP survey (complete) 11/06/03 Meeting #2 with TDSPs (Complete) 11/17/03 TDSP IDR format agreement. 11/21/03 TDSP testing Schedule 10/16/03 Present timeline to RMS (complete) 11/20/03 Target for Design and select TDSP samples 11/14/03 Administer CR survey December 2003 12/1/03 TDSP validate samples and send installation schedule 12/4/03 PWG meeting 12/10/03 TDSPs starts ordering IDRs 12/1/03-12/12/2003 TDSP test/verify IDR transport 12/5/03 Target for finalized sample selection 12/19/03 Finalized TDSP IDR installation schedule 12/05/03 Meeting with CRs & TDSP - CR survey results January-May 2004 01/19/04 Install SAS 01/12/04 Install Load Research Software 02/28/04 Start receiving sample IDR data from TDSPs 04/01/04 Sample IDR data posted for CRs Target IDR Installation Complete 6 months after finalized sample set 02/1/04—2/15/2004 Market test validation for IDR files – TDSP and CR

  21. ERCOT Load Research – PR30014 Project Updated Timeline • Timeline Notes • Target Design and select TDSP samples date (currently 11/20/2003) might slip due to sample design creation issues. • Time period from initial TDSP design sample to finalized sample selection will be used to review sample selection data, review viability for IDRs in the field, and iterations between ERCOT and TDSPs on sample selection. • Each TDSP will provide an installation schedule for IDR meters (12/19/2003), and each TDSP will be tracked individually. • Target IDR installation complete date might slip due to TDSP installation dependencies and finalized sample design.

  22. Default Profiles Three Types • IDR, NIDR and NIDR moving to IDR • PWG reviewed 7/30/03. • Requested ERCOT staff examine PWG suggestions if a new module can be added to the settlement software to allow ways of scaling the default profiles when both the IDR data is missing and/or a NIDR premise changes to IDR. • PWG and ERCOT staff to further discuss at the 8/19 PWG meeting. • PRR471 gained consensus approved at 9/11/03 PWG meeting on NIDR to IDR scaling. • PRR352 for IDR proxy day routine change for 8 weeks to 12 month is Completed. Effective on trade day Oct. 6, 2003. • NIDR default profile settlement routine was discussed at the 9/30 and 10/22 PWG meetings. ERCOT to review possible options with the current software.

  23. PRR471 for NIDR to IDR Default Profile • RMS approved 9/26/2003. • PRS issued to market 10/09/2003 requesting a vote on urgency, comments due 10/22. • PRS to review 10/23.

  24. PRR469 for Protocols Section 18 to PRS. • On 9/15/03 the PWG submitted a draft PRR entitled, “Compliance for Competitive Metering and 25516 Rulings to Load Profiling” to update Protocols Section 18 per the PUCT Rulings on Project 25516 Load Research and Load Profiling and Project 26359 on Competitive Metering. • RMS Chair approved the PWG going directly to PRS to assist in the timeline for the PRR approval by year end before competitive metering becomes effective on 1/1/04. • PRS comments due 10/17. • PRS to review 10/23. • Additional PRR is drafted by PRS for PWG review to ensure where the use of REP, CR and LSE is appropriate. • PRS Remanded the PRR to PWG for review of changes to language. At the 11/05 PWG meeting the PWG approved the PRS suggested changes. • Reference to the Load Profiling Guides removed. • Examples of Load Profile Types removed. • Specific URL and Substantive Rules references removed.

  25. New TOU Schedule Process • PWG reviewed a first draft of a document to assist in how a CR would go about requesting and getting approval of a new TOU Schedule.

  26. Oil and gas properties profile change request • Submitted to ERCOT 3/6/03 by Pioneer Natural Resources, Priority Power Management, and Energy Data Source . • ERCOT to post to WEB. • Argument is that the aggregate profile is a very high load factor profile, close to flat. • ERCOT is to evaluate and submit recommendation to PWG. • May test the new PUCT Rule 25516 for reimbursement. • ERCOT shall post the methodology request to the Market Information System (MIS) and respond to the request within sixty (60) days of the posted date of the request. This period does not include the time to analyze and render the complete assessment of the request. • “ERCOT withholds a decision on making a recommendation on whether to adopt or to deny adoption of the suggested profile change; instead ERCOT finds the request, as submitted, is incomplete and deficient. The requestors are invited to address the incompleteness and deficiencies listed below and re-submit the request for further review.” • Per 6/19 PWG meeting, a straw-man in development for changes to the profile change request process and to allow lagged dynamic samples. PRR drafts to be reviewed at the 9/30 and 10/1 PWG meetings. • ERCOT staff has submitted a load research sample design to the requestor for approval. • PWG submits to RMS on 11/13, PRR and LPGRR for added validation of profile change requests and lagged dynamic samples (slide 3). • Requestor has concerns there are little CR interest in the profile.

  27. Gas/Convenience 24 hr Stores Profile Change Request • Submitted to ERCOT by Coral Energy. • ERCOT staff is discussing a load research sample design with the requestor.

  28. Direct Load Control (DLC) Project Status • PRR 385 Section 18 is complete with Board Approval 5/20/03. • LPGRR2003-001 is attached to PRR385, approved by TAC 7/02, reviewed by Board, and the LPG is updated). • ERCOT Schedule is pending, Project Manager assigned. • ERCOT and some Market Participants question priority going forward. • Memo, on Project 26359 on Competitive Metering, May 8, 2003, by Commissioner Perlman suggests that wires companies need to develop a rate structure that provides strong incentives for demand responsiveness by charging different rates during high load periods. • PRR388 and PRR400 does not completely cover DLC issues. • PRR Section 6 Language for DLC is being written for a PRR.

  29. IDR Requirement Report • 07/03/03, ERCOT issues IDR_threshold_analysis_20030627.xls. • July 30, 2003, ERCOT issues a Market Notification for IDR Requirement File on Portal. • PWG discussed on 7/30/03. Background: • The report was issued in the spring of 2002 and manually sent to MP contacts. • The report was again issued in the spring of 2003 and manually sent to MP contacts. • The report was automated on monthly basis on 5/2, 6/2, and 7/2/03.

  30. Retail Point to Point PWG Example • Direct Market Participant Transactions (DMPT) suggested name from PRS instead of point to point. • Protocols Section 1.1 may need to give permission for Protocols to hold these DMPTs. • Protocols Section 9 deals with settlement disputes instead of other disputes. • New section of Protocols has been suggested for the DMPTs. • The PWG is discussing if FasTrak is the forum to dispute a profile id assignment, or direct filing to TDSPs with or without a standard format. • PWG example has been submitted to RMS.

More Related