Profiling Working Group May 15, 20031 PWG Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for WMS Meeting June 18, 2003.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Profiling Working Group March 13, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for COPS Meeting March 13, 2007.
Advertisements

ERCOT Staff Comments Regarding the Proposed Suspension of Residential 2005 Annual Validation RMS Presentation August 10, 2005.
ERCOT Billing, Settlement Disputes & Data Extracts
October 28, 2014 Update to RMS 1. * Reviewed and Discussed: * ERCOT Protocols and Retail Market Guide Requirements * TDSPs’ Data Processes for IDR vs.
Profiling Working Group January 11, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for RMS Meeting January 11, 2006.
COPS Update to TAC January 6, Voting Items Three voting items: COPMGRR015, Creating Section 8, ERCOT Settlement and Invoice Process 2. 2.
Retail Market Update June 5, New meter is requested for a specific customer’s location. 2.Application is filed by customer and/or the customer’s.
1 Profiling Working Group Update to COPS April 15, 2015 Jim Lee (AEP) – Chair Sheri Wiegand (TXU) – Vice Chair.
Profiling Working Group July 17, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for RMS Meeting July 17, 2003.
Profiling Working Group January xx, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for RMS Meeting January ??, 2006.
1 Update from ERCOT Retail Market Services to RMS Additional Material February 12, 2004.
1 RMS TAC Update March 6, Texas Test Plan Chair; Bill Bell Centerpoint Energy Vice Chair; Leanne Hayden Centrica COMET Chair; Terry Bates TXU.
Profiling Working Group January 11, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for RMS Meeting January 11, 2006.
Profiling Working Group June 12, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for RMS Meeting June 12, 2003.
Profiling Working Group August 2, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for COPS Meeting August 22, 2006.
1 Presented to ERCOT Retail Market Subcommittee January 9, 2002 Profiling Working Group Darryl Nelson, Chair Load Profiling Operating Guides (LPOG)
Distributed Energy Resources Concept Document Discussion ERCOT Staff DREAM Task Force Aug. 25,
1 RMS Update - ERCOT June 10, Supporting Reports Section.
Advanced Meter Settlement Background and NPRR. Overview PUC Rule (wholesale settlement) Project – Wholesale Settlement Project Filed Deployment.
Distributed Generation Task Force November 29, 2007 TAC Report.
Profiling Working Group December 11, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for RMS Meeting December 11, 2003.
Profiling Working Group 1 PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Direct Energy ERCOT PWG Chair Ed Echols Of Oncor ERCOT PWG Vice Chair for COPS Meeting.
Profiling Working Group March 14, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for COPS Meeting March 14, 2006.
UFE 2005 Analysis 1 UFE 2005 ANALYSIS Compiled by Load Profiling ERCOT Energy Analysis & Aggregation.
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.
1 RMS Update - ERCOT May 14, Supporting Reports Section.
1 UFE Workshop Sponsored by COPS October 19, 2004.
Retail Metering Working Group Progress Report 04/15/09.
1 MVI/MVO Workshop June 3 – 12, 2002 Workshop Results.
1 History of UFE (shortened version of presentation provided at UFE Taskforce Workshop on 9/14/2004) UFE Taskforce Meeting February 21, 2006.
Load Profiling Working Group RMS Presentation 8/01/2002 by Ernie Podraza Reliant Energy Retail Group Chair PWG.
MARS 867_03F ROR vs. Settlement vs. 810 Scenarios ERCOT September 2008.
RMS/COPS Workshop VI 1 October 06, Antitrust Admonition ERCOT strictly prohibits Market Participants and their employees who are participating in.
Profiling Working Group October 16, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for RMS Meeting October 16, 2003.
AMS Indicator ERCOT Recommendations
ERCOT MARKET EDUCATION Retail 101. Smart Meter Technology.
Tuesday, October 6, 2015 (following RMS) COPS-RMS-WORKSHOPShttp://
01/17/ CP Discussion October 16,2002 Retail Market Subcommittee Austin, Texas.
Advanced Metering Rule Christine Wright Public Utility Commission of Texas June 6, 2007 Retail Market Workshop COMET WG Meeting.
DRG Slides for PWG Update to COPS. 2 Highlights from the DGTF Recommendation - 3 Small DRG applies to generation less than 50 kW –Profiling is applicable.
1 Critical Retail Issues RMS Update RMS Meeting Results 2/01 RMS Formed 3/01 RMS Identified “pent-up” issues Tx Set transaction development Service Order.
Profiling Working Group June 15, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for RMS Meeting June 15, 2005.
Profiling Working Group August 14, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for RMS Meeting August 14, 2003.
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.
ERCOT MARKET EDUCATION Retail 101. Advanced Meter Technology.
Profiling Working Group April 14, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for RMS Meeting April 14, 2004.
Profiling Working Group March 18, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for RMS Meeting March 18, 2004.
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.
February 2, 2016 RMS Meeting 1. * Reasons: * Per the ERCOT Board Report dated 8/5/14 there were 6.6M Advanced Metering System (AMS) Electric Service Identifiers.
Tuesday, October 6, 2015 (following RMS) COPS-RMS-WORKSHOPShttp://
COMET Working Group Progress Report. Contents of Report Provide COMET Recommendations, with May 6 revisions (Vote) –Competitive Meter Approval Process.
COPS DECEMBER 2013 UPDATE TO RMS 12/18/2013 Harika Basaran, Chair Jim Lee, Vice Chair.
1 Commercial Operations Sub-Committee Update to RMS November 10, 2005.
Profiling Working Group 1 PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Direct Energy ERCOT PWG Chair Ed Echols Of Oncor ERCOT PWG Vice Chair for COPS Meeting.
Profiling Working Group January 14, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for RMS Meeting January 14, 2004.
1 PRR479 IDR Optional Removal Threshold (ERCOT Project PR40055)
Profiling Working Group 1 PWG Update Report By Brad Boles of Cirro Energy ERCOT PWG Vice-Chair for COPS Meeting December 3, 2007.
Mass Transition—Timelines & Volume Limitation RMGRR116—Acquisition Transfer Non-standard Metering Future Meetings 1.
PWG Long Term Strategy How do we maximize scarce resources?
Customer Proprietary Information RMS Presentation November 13, 2003.
PWG Profiling Working Group December 18, RMS Presentation by Ernie Podraza, PWG Chair Annual Validation 2002 DLC Implementation.
Profiling Working Group September 26, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for RMS Meeting September 26, 2003.
Commercial Operations Subcommittee (COPS) 4/15/2015 Update to RMS 5/5/2015.
1 RMS Update to RMWG June 6, Market Process for Solar & Wind Devices Retail customers are purchasing and installing wind and solar equipment on.
Distributed Generation Task Force
Nodal COMS Additional Items Update
Settlement Timeline Workshop
Profiling Working Group
PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza for RMS Meeting June 12, 2003
Presentation transcript:

Profiling Working Group May 15, PWG Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for WMS Meeting June 18, 2003

Profiling Working Group May 15, Can a meter owner (non-TDSP) have an IDR meter installed but request that the billing/settlement be based on non-IDR data? (Voting Issue) SITUATION: With the approval of meter ownership by a non-TDSP per the competitive metering rules, a customer/CR could have an IDR meter installed to perhaps use the data for non- settlement reasons, and yet be settled on a non-IDR basis.

Profiling Working Group May 15, Can a meter owner (non-TDSP) have an IDR meter installed but request that the billing/settlement be based on non-IDR data? CLARIFICATION/ASSUMPTIONS: 1.Non-ERCOT approved IDR meters for settlement could not be used as the metering device for the non-IDR settlement readings. That is one meter used for this purpose would have to be up to revenue meter standards. 2.This situation is for the revenue meters for settlement only. 3.TDSPs are using one meter, called RUG (recorder under glass type IDR) which is used to collect load research data and the dial reading is used for non-IDR settlement readings. 4.Could install the IDR meter in parallel with the Scalar meter. 5.Could install the IDR directly behind the scalar meter. 6.ERCOT Protocols or guidelines do not dictate what the customer may install behind the revenue meter. 7.Once the IDR meter interval data is used for settlement then the premise stays an IDR metered premise for settlements as stated in Protocols What is not addressed is if this is limited to only customer owned meters. That is, can a customer request a TDSP owned IDR meter but request that the billing/settlement be based on non-IDR data? 9.If accepted and encourages more IDR data for settlement, then the current static profiles will need to be more frequently calibrated from load research sampling or will need changing methodology to lagged dynamic sampling.

Profiling Working Group May 15, Can a meter owner (non-TDSP) have an IDR meter installed but request that the billing/settlement be based on non-IDR data? PROs: 1.Gives price options to the customer and CR. 2.Encourages the use of IDR meters. 3.Customer has choices. 4.Customer wants the interval data but does not want to pay the TDSP charges for IDR meters. 5.Protocols (2) does not explicitly forbid the customer from installing an IDR that is not used for settlement. 6.The TDSP can read the IDR meter for the monthly read only for settlement and yet the customer can collect the interval data for other reasons. This means one meter can be used for both purposes which is a savings over having two meters, one for settlement and one for other reasons. 7.Encourages the collection of data for use of load research to develop load profiles or assist the customer for other reasons. 8.Encourages the customer to study their load more closely and then make an informed decision on IDR metering for settlement. 9.If the customer does not have to pay the TDSP recurring charges then the IDR meter ownership may be cheaper than charges for a pulse.

Profiling Working Group May 15, Can a meter owner (non-TDSP) have an IDR meter installed but request that the billing/settlement be based on non-IDR data? CONs: 1.Protocols Section is clear that if an IDR is installed (without regard to who owns the meter) its interval data must be used for settlement, excluding the exceptions listed in (4). This Protocol requirement is designed to reduce the opportunity of gaming the market by switching meters. 2.The IDR meter is more accurate for settlement that the non-IDR meter settlement process because the energy measured in the 15-minute periods is used in settlement without the use of non-IDR profiles. That is, the more accurate the metered data in the settlement interval the less UFE, Unaccounted For Energy, and the more accurate is the settlement process. 3.Possible, extra burden on TDSP systems and processes to read additional meters. 4.Possible, extra burden on ERCOT systems if both data streams are sent to ERCOT. 5.Increases the incremental IDR meter reading services by the TDSP, if any, to the customer. 6.Where there is IDR data then the actual consumption interval data for settlement should be encouraged. 7.Customer can ask for a pulse so as to get interval data for non-settlement purpose, while still having a non-IDR settlement meter.

Profiling Working Group May 15, Can a meter owner (non-TDSP) have an IDR meter installed but request that the billing/settlement be based on non-IDR data? Should the question include TDSP owned meters as well? Yes: 4, No: 5, Needs further discussion: 2, ERCOT opinion is Yes. Situation is for the revenue meters for settlement limited to only competitively owned meters only. 1.Can a meter owner (non-TDSP) have an IDR meter installed but request that the billing/settlement be based on non-IDR data? Yes: 3, No: 1, Needs further discussion: 7, ERCOT opinion is needs further discussion. 2.Can a meter owner (non-TDSP) have an IDR meter installed but request that the billing/settlement be based on non-IDR data but limited to a market defined time period to be determined and then if the IDR is still installed then the IDR data would be used for settlement? Yes: 1, No: 5, Needs further discussion: 5, ERCOT opinion is needs further discussion. 3.Can a meter owner (non-TDSP) have an IDR meter installed but request that the billing/settlement be based on non-IDR data but limited to a premise where the demand is below a market determined threshold (less than 1000 kW/kVA)? Yes: 2, No: 3, Needs further discussion: 6, ERCOT opinion is needs further discussion.

Profiling Working Group May 15, RMS Motion: Can a meter owner (non-TDSP) have an IDR meter installed but request that the billing/settlement be based on non-IDR data? Yes or No?