1 CRR Credit Policy Task Force Update WMS April 16, 2008.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MISO Day 2: A Transmission Users (Marketers) Perspective Leon White August 8, 2007.
Advertisements

TNT Commercial Operations Working Meeting Betty Day, Kenneth Ragsdale, BJ Flowers April 6&7, 2004.
Copyright 2003 PJM 1 PJM’s Annual FTR Auction.
Automation and Improvements to Default Uplift Methodology (summary/white paper of a draft NPRR)
Demand Response in New York State Northwest Power and Conservation Council DR workshop February 24, 2006.
CRR Shortfall – Revenue Equalization Part 2 (Continuation from 2/21/08 TPTF discussion) Bill Barnes TPTF 3/5/2008.
Duration and Yield Changes
Utility Regulation March 10, 2011 Raj Addepalli Deputy Director, Electric, Office of Electric,Gas and Water New York State Department of Public Service.
Overview of LMP Markets Features of ISOs / RTOs David Withrow Senior Market Economist Fall 2007 Meeting of the NARUC Staff Subcommittee on Accounting and.
Using Options and Swaps to Hedge Risk
The Window Strategy with Options. Overview  The volatility of agricultural commodity prices makes marketing just as important as production.  Producers.
Economic Demand Response Sheldon Fulton Executive Director, IPCAA November 4, 2008.
21 Risk Management ©2006 Thomson/South-Western. 2 Introduction This chapter describes the various motives that companies have to manage firm-specific.
1 PRR 776 in the Context of the ERCOT Market Design Eric S. Schubert Regulatory Affairs Advisor BP Energy Company.
Welcome New York Independent System Operator. (Pre-NYISO) Regulated Market Physical contracts Regulated industry Cost Based System Two Party Deals Bundled.
7/15/2013 CSWG CSWG – ERCOT Update ERCOT Matthew Tozer.
1 CRR Credit Policy Task Force Update TPTF July 21, 2008.
For discussion purposes only Financial Transmission Rights: Design options Presentation to Electricity Commission 2 September 2009.
September 2012 Proposed CRR Auction Credit Changes: Summary of Draft NPRR.
Discussion of ERCOT Market Default Alternative to Credit Insurance CWG/MCWG September 17,
Colombian Firm Energy Market: Discussion and Simulation Peter Cramton (joint with Steven Stoft and Jeffrey West) 9 August 2006.
Market Mitigation Concept Group Update Jim Galvin April 26, 2004.
WMS Subgroup – CRR Credit 3.Review of CRR margining methodology for PTP Obligations in Nodal Protocols 4.Potential credit margin alternatives Cheryl Yager.
1 NPRR 484/554 – Revisions to Congestion Revenue Rights Credit Calculations and Payments Market Call ERCOT Public July 31, 2013.
Day Ahead Market Working Group April 14, Agenda Discussion of SMD-style DAM review questions posed by the DAM WG and Coral regarding the SMD-
PRS - RPRS Task Force Status Summary - August 14, PRS RPRS Task Force Status Summary Prepared for WMS and PRS August 2006.
Texas Nodal Section 9: Invoicing ERCOT, Settlements & Billing SDAWG - August 2007.
E x p e r i e n c e C o m m i t m e n t SM ERCOT Nodal – Fuel Cost Analysis Verifiable Cost Working Group October 6, 2008.
Animal Science Industry Animal Science Industry. Common Core/Next Generation Science Standards Addressed CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH Determine the meaning.
PJM©2013www.pjm.com Economic DR participation in energy market ERCOT April 14, 2014 Pete Langbein.
Animal Science and the Industry. Common Core/Next Generation Science Standards Addressed CCSS.ELA-Literacy.RH Determine the meaning of words.
Nodal Credit Monitoring and Management – Business Requirements ERCOT CREDIT Department October 11, 2006.
Matt Tozer ERCOT Manager, Settlements & Billing 9/4/2013 ERCOT Update Management of the Balancing Account CMWG.
CRR Shortfall – Revenue Equalization Part 3 (Continuation from 3/5/08 TPTF discussion) Bill Barnes/Sharon Wang TPTF 3/21/2008.
April 2, 2008 CRR Team Update PCRRs CRR Team UpdateApril 2, 2008 Table of contents 1.What is a PCRR? 2.Which NOIEs are eligible for PCRRs? 3.What.
MCWG Update to WMS 08/14/2013. MCWG Update to WMS General Update -July 31 st Joint MCWG/CWG Meeting Review NPRRs All operational except – NPRR 552 – Additional.
October 20, 2010 WMS Credit Update. 2 Topics Nodal exposure – how much collateral CRR/TCR auctions – December 2010 Preliminary Credit Cutover Timeline.
CRR Issues Transparency provided by CRR Reports CRR EDS handbook Business process NPRR TPTF November 27, 2007.
Transmission Congestion Rights – Credit Perspective April 17, 2014.
FURTHER INFORMATION ON MISO FTR AUCTIONS For SPP RSC Discussion October 6, 2010.
1 Agribusiness Library Lesson : Options. 2 Objectives 1.Describe the process of using options on futures contracts, and define terms associated.
Congestion Management Working Group WMS update 11/7/2012.
DAM Overview: Processes & Tools in the DAM Shams Siddiqi, Ph.D. Crescent Power, Inc. (512) April 2, 2008.
Market Credit Working Group Update to WMS Wed. Sept 16, 2009.
Emergency Demand Response Concept Overview and Examples Presented to: ERCOT December 3, 2004 Presented by: Neenan Associates.
Load Resources Negative RRS Bidding in the Nodal Market Credit Working Group January 30, 2008.
Nodal Short Pay and Uplift Process CWG Meeting May 28, 2008.
ERCOT Market Credit Working Group Presentation to the Finance and Audit Committee Payment Short Pay/Default and Uplift for Congestion Revenue rights (CRRs)
Mitigation of Credit Tail Risk Exposure Donald Meek Credit Working Group January 20, 2015.
Operating Reserves and Extended Locational Marginal Pricing 1.
ERCOT CWG/MCWG April 24, 2013 DAM Credit Parameters.
Market Credit Working Group Update to WMS Wed. Nov 18, 2009.
1 WMS Report TO TAC April In Brief Two Working Group reports Two Working Group reports Two Task Force Reports Two Task Force Reports BENA presentation.
November 27, 2012 NPRR322, Real-Time PTP Option Modeling Implementation Overview.
1 Nodal Day Ahead Invoice Taskforce Update COPS, May 8, 2007.
2% Shift Factor dispatchable rule discussion and alternatives for the 2% rule Kris Dixit 1.
CMWG Update to WMS Report of CMWG Meeting of
Nodal Credit Monitoring and Management – Business Requirements ERCOT CREDIT Department September 28, 2006.
CRR Default and the Nodal Market Wholesale Market Subcommittee February 20, 2008.
Derivatives in ALM. Financial Derivatives Swaps Hedge Contracts Forward Rate Agreements Futures Options Caps, Floors and Collars.
Money Transfer Due to Real-Time Irresolvable Constraint Resmi Surendran ERCOT.
Texas Congestion Management Work Group Update For WMS Marguerite Wagner, PSEG Texas.
Report to TAC June In Brief Working Group Reports Working Group Reports CMWG CMWG MCWG MCWG QMWG QMWG VCWG VCWG Other Reports Other Reports NOGRR.
Day Ahead Market QSE’s Credit Requirements Concerns and Solutions August 14, 2008.
MCWG Update to WMS 3/9/2010. Exposure / Collateral Update Nodal Total Potential Exposure reported by ERCOT as of 1/31/11 remains less than Zonal Estimated.
CRR Deration and NPRR821 WMS 09/06/2017.
LCRA Comments regarding NPRR 821
FERC Standard Market Design Working Papers
Calculation of BGS-CIEP Hourly Energy Price Component Using PJM Hourly Data for the PSE&G Transmission Zone.
Further Information on MISO FTR Auctions
Presentation transcript:

1 CRR Credit Policy Task Force Update WMS April 16, 2008

2 Two Major Issues How a credit default would impact the Day Ahead Market The correct level of margin required for CRR Obligations

3 DAM Benefits Allows for correction of position by hour of:  Energy  Ancillary Services  Transmission congestion risk (basis) Shock absorption of RT prices Rational unit commitment Optimization of energy and ancillary services Assigning defaults to DAM places market at risk

4 Default Risk Example How would $90M default in PJM look here  Cost assigned to those owed money in DAM  $90M was over a roughly 6 mo. Period  For a year $90M – approx. $0.30/MWh on all MWhs (1 cent = $3M)  ½ year – approx. $0.60/MWh  Assuming bulk of loss occurred during a two week construction period 60% of loss over 1/13 the time – approx. $4.68/MWh The key is that this is on all MWhs

5 Dwindling Pool of Risk Takers Defaults will be applied to those owed money in DAM:  Sellers of energy  Sellers of A/S  CRR holders owed money DAM is voluntary  MPs will take action to alleviate risk if possible

6 Sellers of Energy PJM has large DAM pool due to ICAP requirements We have no such requirements After a default sellers have choice  Self schedule and add nothing  Offer in and add some unknown amount Value exists for marginal units, but default tax can eliminate and reverse value As size of those owed money diminishes – impact increases requirement Self-schedule Self Schedule Cost Day Ahead Market Cost + default tax VS Amount dwindles

7 Sellers of A/S Similar to Sellers of Energy  Sellers will be pushed to forwards markets to avoid paying voluntary tax  Most if not all A/S self scheduled  Collapses A/S market Forwards Market Cost Day Ahead Market Cost + default tax VS

8 CRR holders owed money Without energy buys/sells CRRs have zero value To redeem value, corresponding self schedules must be entered Schedules can flow up to full capability of system  Pro rata curtailment beyond? Entities may attempt to cash in on lack of basis, but pool will be small due to preallocation and lack of counterflow offers Sales are dependent on seller being on other side  However seller won’t be paid full amount  Seller would have to charge expected value + default tax premium  Buyer will not cover spread needed

9 Back to Large Default Example For market to work without perversion, default “tax” would need to be nominal risk  Buyers select suppliers based on $0.10/MWh differential  At $50/MWh this is 0.2%  For the example we’ll increase this by an order of magnitude or $1.00/MWh (2%) Back to our original example:  $90M default, 60% in first two weeks or $54M  Equates to $3.9M per day (similar in scale to TCE default)

10 What the market will pay  Market would need to be about $195M/day in size to absorb this cost without perversion (3.9M/.02)  Sellers of energy: Assume $50/MWh or $1.2M for the day  Sellers of ancillary services (1/2 of market) 1,250MW of $15/MW = $450k 600MW of RGS Up & $20/MW = $288k  CRRs: Assume 3,000MWs at $10/MWh spread for entire day = $720k  Doesn’t even cover $3.9M payment – Sellers get $0! Much smaller default could damage the market Large Default Example Cont’d. $1.2 Million - Energy $195 Million $0.738 Million – A/S $0.720 Million – CRR $2.658 Million Not even close!

11 Proposed Alternatives (possible vote) Key problem with current method is avoidability Option 1: Fund defaults from CRR Balancing Account  New step would be created after payment of CRR short pays to pay defaults  Payments continue until default is fully funded  Benefit is money is unbudgeted (unexpected)  Concern with availability of funds (may need backup) Option 2: Uplift using the same mechanism for other defaults  Benefit is smoother timeline for recovery

12 CRR Obligation Margin Concerns Current Nodal Protocols contain a $10/MW-hr adder for CRR Obligations For a nominally valued CRR this equates to a $87,600MW-yr margin requirement A 1,000MW entity wishing to hedge from Hub to Load Zone would require $87.6M in margin just to put on the hedge By comparison NYISO has adopted a $2,000/MW-yr adder for Obligations Discussion continues on “rightsizing” credit requirement

13 TCR Shadow Price Example Important Considerations  Prices shown are similar to flowgates not true hub-hub  Prices do not go negative like you would see in actual market  These paths are noted for congestion potential, many CRRs will not cross these boundaries  Prices are average of all intervals, hourly SP’s would be even more volatile

14 Margining Alternatives Historic value plus adder is current mechanism Forward looking tool may be possible for ongoing margin requirement but not feasible for auction  “Lumpy” credit requirement wouldn’t react well with MIP clearing auction  Auction is most important time to catch requirement  Auction and ongoing credit req’s should match Enhanced statistical methods may be needed

15 Questions?