Demand Response – ERCOT discussion items

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Market True-Up Discussion RMS Meeting 03/13/02 Draft Only for Discussion Purposes.
Advertisements

1.  An inadvertent issue begins upon the discovery of an Inadvertent Gain or Move-In transaction submission. Upon identification of an Inadvertent Gain.
Demand Response Task Force February 2008 Update. Bridge Solution Short Term Only: Use as “bridge” to long term solution Standardize Energy Impacts: Utilize.
Role of Account Management at ERCOT PRR 672 Collaborative Analysis Presentation to RMS November 8, 2006 DRAFT ONLY.
1 Update to RMS December 8, Texas SET 4.0 Change Controls
1 AMS Data Workshop ERCOT Overview of AMS Data Processes June 27, 2014 ERCOT June 27, 2014.
SCR 740 Implementation of Web Services for ESIID level data Jackie Ashbaugh EAA Data Management.
814_20 – Substation ID updates Background and Proposed Action Plan TX SET – 10/25/07.
1 Transaction or Issue Clean Up. 2 Linked-Address Issue Multiple ESI IDs Linked to a Single Service Address Record Background Counts Matrix Completed.
TX SET Update to RMS Wednesday, October 10, 2007.
RMSUpdate November 4, 2004 Retail Market Subcommittee Update to TAC.
Profiling Working Group August 2, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for COPS Meeting August 22, 2006.
Market Impact Assessment TF Final Report to RMS June 11, 2008.
Retail Market Subcommittee Update to TAC Kathy Scott February 27,
Update to RMS September 1 st, RMGRR129 – Revision to Customer Rescission Completion Timeline Timely execution of a customer rescission after completion.
June 22 and 23,  The information and/or flow processes contained in this Power Point presentation: ◦ Were created to allow interested parties to.
09/15/10 RMS RMS Market Reports – Recommendations Karen Farley Manager, Retail Customer Choice.
10/13/10 RMS RMS Market Reports – Recommendations Karen Farley Manager, Retail Customer Choice.
1 PWG Update Report By Ed Echols Of Oncor ERCOT PWG Chair Jim Lee of Direct Energy ERCOT PWG Vice Chair for COPS Meeting Sept 10, 2014.
ESI IDs Retired in Error! RMS – August 10, 2005 Discussion.
Demand Response Status Report Calvin Opheim October 9, 2007.
RMS Update to TAC April 7, RMS Voting Items  RMGRR032- Transaction Timing Matrix Corrections Includes updates to Appendix D to correct examples.
1 Processing Large Volumes 814_20s Issues / Discussion / Ideas.
1 ESI ID SERVICE HISTORY AND USAGE DATA EXTRACT SYSTEM CHANGE REQUEST (SCR 727) February 24, 2003.
1 MVI/MVO Workshop June 3 – 12, 2002 Workshop Results.
October 14, 2015 LRIS v2 / Self-scheduled Third party DR Provider Data Submission Proposal Carl L Raish.
SPP Presentation Stakeholder Meeting April 16, 2008 Austin, Texas UPDATE: Retail Open Access for ETI within SPP.
Retail Market Subcommittee Update to COPS Kathy Scott March 17,
MARS 867_03F ROR vs. Settlement vs. 810 Scenarios ERCOT September 2008.
MARS Advanced Metering – ERCOT Market Facing Changes Jackie Ashbaugh Manager Data Integrity and Administration 3/9/2009.
1 Transaction or Issue Clean Up. 2 Linked-Address Issue Multiple ESI IDs Linked to a Single Service Address Record Background Counts Matrix Completed.
1 Linked-Service Address Discussion Thursday - April 8, 2004 (Updated 4/12/04 to include meeting results) Airport Hilton - Austin.
1 Transaction or Issue Clean Up. 2 Customer Protection and 814_08 Issue (Phase 2 – Potentially Late 08s) Background Completed Items Next Steps.
814_20 – Substation ID updates Background and Proposed Action Plan RMS – 11/07/07.
1 Supporting materials for RMS Provided by Retail Customer Choice (RCC) team.
Distributed Renewable Generation Profile Implementation Plan.
TX SET Update to RMS Wednesday, November 7, 2007.
1 RMS Update By Don Bender January 9, RMS Approved Resolution Upon TAC approval, suspend further True-up settlements for True-up resettlement.
Issue 2007-I071 Modify Cancellation Window to Accept Cancels Closer to SMRD.
Demand Response Task Force. 2 2 Outline  Overview of ERCOT’s role in the CCET Pilot  Overview of Stakeholder Process – What’s been done to date?  Questions.
February 19, 2009 ERCOT Follow up on questions from 2/11 discussion on proposed Expedited Switch rulemaking changes…
December 9, 2015 Retail Market Subcommittee Update to COPS Kathy Scott January 13,
1 TX SET Mass Transition Project RMS Update March 15, 2006.
October 13, 2009 NOIE DRG Settlements TF update to COPS Settlement Discussion for ALL DG < or = 1 MW Don Tucker on behalf of the NOIE DRG Settlements Task.
1DRAFT for DISCUSSION Transition From Non-IDR to IDR Load Profile and LSE 15-minute Data for AMS Market Advanced Readings and Settlements Taskforce 10/9/09.
RMS Update to TAC October 2, RMS Update to TAC TAC Confirmation Vote Request Kyle Patrick of Reliant Energy and Independent Power Marketer segment.
MIMO Stacking Document and the current RMG are inconsistent with current logic and should be updated.
Proposed Timeline for Extract, Variances, True-Ups Extracts 10/1/03 Clear all “old” extracts from Portal 9/26/03 Post last “old” daily extract 10/6/03.
Oil and Gas Profile Implementation Plan. 2 BUSOGFLT Background ERCOT received Oil and Gas Profile Segment request ERCOT completed.
February 25, 2009 ERCOT Follow up on questions from 2/18 meeting on proposed Expedited Switch rulemaking changes…
1 Customer Objections in Complete Status (CCO Clean-up Phase 3) Background Next Steps.
SCR786 Retail Market Test (Sandbox) Environment January 2016.
Mass Transition—Timelines & Volume Limitation RMGRR116—Acquisition Transfer Non-standard Metering Future Meetings 1.
Demand Response Options Review Carl Raish November 27, 2007.
PWG Demand Response Follow Up Jackie Ashbaugh October 23, 2007.
MarkeTrak Issue Resolution Tool Retail Market Participant Workshop.
Profile Working Group & TX SET Conference Call Thursday, October 11, 2007.
1.  What is the purpose of DEVs? Data Extract Variances (DEVs) are used to synchronize the data among all Market Participants (MP)  What is a DEV? It's.
1 Market Participant Default Joint Taskforce Update and Report on Recent Customer Transition Activity Report to WMS August 17, 2005.
Multiple ESI IDs Linked to a Single Service Address Record Linked-Address Action Items.
1 Supporting materials for RMS Provided by Retail Customer Choice (RCC) team.
1 Transaction or Issue Clean Up. 2 Customer Protection and 814_08 Issue (Phase 2 – Potentially Late 08s) Background Completed Items Next Steps.
Settlement Timeline Workshop
MARS Taskforce RMS Update December 9, 2009.
Pro-Active Transaction Resolution Measures
Pro-Active Transaction Resolution Measures
Usage Billing Issues.
Stacking Implementation Plan
TDTMS MarkeTrak Subtype Stats September 20, 2017.
Move-in/Move-out Transaction Analysis
Presentation transcript:

Demand Response – ERCOT discussion items Demand Response Taskforce – 12/18/07

Short term options – what do folks have to bring to the table? Options – Short Term Short term options – what do folks have to bring to the table? TXU ES Others?

Discussion – Short term options DRAFT Process for ERCOT based upon TXU ES’s proposal for short term Capacity alert event occurs. REP would provide a list of ESI IDs and the global DR program they were signed up for When another event occurs, REP provides a new list. Suggested cap – 10,000 ESI IDs ERCOT wide (approx 10 MW) Allows the market to step into the process. As the market steps into the program, could report back to TAC? On the volumes to understand when the market will need to implement the long term solutions. May end up going into allocation / lotto . ERCOT compares the list to Lodestar and Siebel and communicates back to the REP any ESI IDs for which they are not the current Rep of Record (ROR). ESI IDs that are not currently setup to be settled on the global DR program. Example – REP sends a list of 20 ESI IDs, ERCOT checks Lodestar– they are the ROR for 15 –those should be shown by Initial settlement. ERCOT checks Siebel for in-flight service orders (SWI / MVI / MVO), and checks currently filed DEV and IAS issues. 3 ESI IDs have orders in flight – should be shown by Final settlement if the REP becomes the ROR. 2 ESI IDs do not have orders in flight – ERCOT would communicate back to REP. REP may want to file DEV – following market timelines – should be shown by True Up settlement if the REP becomes the ROR. Data Aggregation process would reflect the load reduction based upon the ESI ID list and the global DR program assignment. Market continues to work on long term options – this is the bridge

Long term options / what needs to be looked at? Market continue working on automated/transactional ‘flip’ process Make DR profile ID private – when volumes are larger? Other options? Questions Who owns the responsibility to change the profile? Old or New CR requests from TDSP (using MarkeTrak)? TSDP changes based on order completion? ERCOT requests from TDSP (using MarkeTrak)? Assumptions DR Profile ID is public TDSP maintaining and providing profile on existing TX SET transactions in the profile ID segment. Profile should not revert until order effectuates so that if the order is cancelled, the DR profile remains.

Draft flow -- Registering a DR Program Questions: What are the program characteristics? What are the validations of the program at ERCOT?

Draft flow -- Registering an ESI ID to a DR Program Questions: 1. To what extent does ERCOT need to validate the ESIID/CR/DR assignment and program specific characteristics ( i.e. Commercial/Residential; demand thresholds; zip codes) prior to the profile code changing? ESIID affiliated to CR? CR affiliated to DR program? 2. Should validations be limited to only the components of the Profile Code? 3. How is effective date for the Profile code change determined? 4. What happens to ESIIDs that have a DR profile and there is a backdated MVI/MVO, Switch, or Inadvertent Gain? Assumptions 1. For DR profile, ESIIDs that are not included in settlements due to REP-DR profile validation, it is the responsibility of the REP to request the profile update. 2. Based on current system design, 814_20s would be forwarded to ALL pending REPs and the current REP. 3. This is not the flow for the ‘flip’ process.

Draft flow – What happens when Switch/MVI effectuates? Assumptions: This represents how ESI IDs are transitioned back to default profile when ROR changes. Based on current systems. TDSP maintaining and providing profile on existing TX SET transactions in the profile ID segment. Profile should not revert until order effectuates so that if the order is cancelled, the demand profile remains. Questions: Who owns the responsibility to request the change to the profile? New CR requests from TDSP (using MarkeTrak)? TSDP changes based on order completion? ERCOT requests from TDSP (using MarkeTrak)? Is there a need to have a transactional trigger to switch the profile? If MVI CR = Current CR – what happens to the current profile assignment?

Draft flow – What happens with a MVO to CSA effectuates? Assumptions: This represents how ESI IDs are transitioned back to default profile when ROR changes. Based on current systems. TDSP maintaining and providing profile on existing TX SET transactions in the profile ID segment. Profile should not revert until order effectuates so that if the order is cancelled, the demand profile remains. Questions: Who owns the responsibility to request the change to the profile? CSA CR requests from TDSP (Using MarkeTrak)? TSDP changes based on order completion? ERCOT requests from TDSP (using MarkeTrak)? Is there a need to have a transactional trigger to switch the profile? If CSA CR = Current CR – what happens to the current profile assignment?

Draft flow – What happens when a MVO effectuates? Assumptions: This represents how ESI IDs are transitioned back to default profile when ROR changes. Based on current systems. TDSP maintaining and providing profile on existing TX SET transactions in the profile ID segment. Profile should not revert until order effectuates so that if the order is cancelled, the demand profile remains. Questions: Who owns the responsibility to request the change to the profile? Old CR requests from TDSP (using MarkeTrak)? TSDP changes based on order completion? ERCOT requests from TDSP (using MarkeTrak)? If default profile not reverted to, when a new CR submits a MVI, they will be settled on the demand profile. Is there a need to have a transactional trigger to switch the profile?

Questions?