Conference on the Status of OASIS II MARCH 29 TH, 2005 FERC Offices Washington, DC John Simonelli ISO New England Inc Manager, Tariffs, Schedules & OASIS Group

March 29th, 2005OASIS II2 OASIS II Preamble 1997 birth of the “The original” OASIS –Industry officially moved into the electronic age with procurement of transmission services 1999 birth of electronic E-tagging –version 1.4 implemented industry-wide March toward “electronic services” in full swing

March 29th, 2005OASIS II3 OASIS II Preamble Where were we in 1999 ? –Industry still fine-tuning OASIS –Significant post 888/889 regulatory activities –E-tagging still very immature, plenty of open issues –Industry struggling with concept of standardization –Added challenge of being ‘lost’ in the electronic wilderness –Many in the industry complained “it isn’t working”

March 29th, 2005OASIS II4 OASIS II Genesis 2000 FERC rolled out the OASIS II ANOPR –FERC effort to merge/streamline Transmission Procurement, E-tagging and Scheduling –Viewed as the way to fix what was broken –Spawned the often referred to phrase “one-stop- shop” NERC facilitated industry wide forum via the Electronic Scheduling and OASIS Standard Collaborative to address the issues

March 29th, 2005OASIS II5 OASIS II Genesis 2002 FERC rolled out the SMD NOPR –Anticipated everyone would move to SMD platform –This represented a bump in the OASIS II development road –Although initial conflicting views on how SMD would be accommodated, SMD functionality was eventually added to OASIS II laundry list

March 29th, 2005OASIS II6 OASIS II Genesis Result: OASIS II grew exponentially in scope and complexity in an attempt to address diverse industry needs OASIS II became ‘Everything for Everyone’ Effort handed off to the NAESB Electronic Scheduling and Information Technology Subcommittees

March 29th, 2005OASIS II7 OASIS II Genesis Industry has not uniformly adopted the SMD platform, i.e, “Physical Markets” may remain physical for foreseeable future The OASIS II scope never revisited to address the change in industry position on SMD

March 29th, 2005OASIS II8 Where are we Today ? “Necessity Is The Mother Of All Invention” OASIS II has been in the works for years “Financial Systems” and “Physical Systems” have been progressing to meet their specific needs without OASIS II

March 29th, 2005OASIS II9 Where are we Today ? Demand for the original ‘everything to everyone’ scope of OASIS II has withered away “Physical Systems” requiring reservations and E-tags to schedule energy have progressed by leaps and bounds over last five years Dramatic reduction in complaints

March 29th, 2005OASIS II10 Where are we Today ? “Financial Markets” could not wait for the industry to move forward –Each have established Stakeholder processes to examine market development needs –Resulted in development of extensive Market Information Systems (MIS) to allow implementation of their respective version of SMD

March 29th, 2005OASIS II11 Where are we Today ? Market Information Systems (MIS) required: –thousands of hours in research and development –stakeholder involvement –millions of dollars in capital investment MIS functionality for each market covers aspects currently in the OASIS II scope Stakeholders are satisfied with overall MIS performance

March 29th, 2005OASIS II12 Where are we Today ? ISO New England Stakeholder Process –Stakeholders have a vision of the direction for the markets –Processes are in place for them to identify issues within the market and seams issues with neighboring markets –Stakeholders actively involved in prioritizing issues (internal or seams) that need to be addressed –OASIS II development may conflict with ongoing efforts to satisfy stakeholder demands

March 29th, 2005OASIS II13 Where are we Today ? There is also active coordination between today's markets Existing markets are not operating in a vacuum

March 29th, 2005OASIS II14 Where are we Today ? Entities operating markets working collaboratively with EPRI and Vendors –First area addressed was security-constrained dispatch –Object to explore similarities and where possible standardize messaging amongst operational “tools of the trade” –Effort expanded to include market user to market operator interfaces

March 29th, 2005OASIS II15 Where are we Today ? Other examples of market coordination: –Transaction Checkout in Northeast NPCC and neighboring control areas coordinated to establish standard protocol for communication of Real- Time transaction checkout data Minimal cost to implement with significant benefits to Control Room personnel Expandable to other aspects of operational data

March 29th, 2005OASIS II16 Where are we Today ? On going effort by PJM and MISO to address the seams between their two respective markets In these examples and others not mentioned here; problems were identified, solutions developed and, those solutions are currently in various stages of deployment within the respective regions

March 29th, 2005OASIS II17 Conclusion Industry must take advantage of the substantial progress made in both the “Physical” and “Financial” markets to eliminate unnecessary and/or redundant effort Technology is continuing to evolve; processes need to be dynamic to build on the benefits that technology can provide

March 29th, 2005OASIS II18 Conclusion Current practice shows the needs of “Physical” and “Financial” markets are different –Each should continue to address their respective needs but also be conscious of the potential impact on the “other side” –Where synergies exist between the two; they should be explored and developed –Communication must be continued to enable each to build off the successes of the other

March 29th, 2005OASIS II19 Conclusion Physical systems should continue to look for ways to streamline and improve processes where scheduling systems are dependent on reservations and e-tags In a sense, this returns OASIS II to it’s roots

March 29th, 2005OASIS II20 Conclusion Financial systems in conjunction with the current expanded EPRI effort, should continue to actively promote common efficiencies and standardization on market systems wherever possible

March 29th, 2005OASIS II21 Conclusion NERC Functional Model, Version 1 –All of these efforts need to be carefully aligned with the new reliability standards –The Interchange Authority/Coordination functionality will have a direct impact on the current practices for energy transactions and scheduling

March 29th, 2005OASIS II22