TEXAS NODAL Market Design Structure and Process August 19, 2003.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
MAIN COMMITTEE OFFICERS DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
Advertisements

MAIN COMMITTEE OFFICERS DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.
Catholic School Councils A summary of 19 page document listed on school website.
W. Shannon Black Manager, Standards Processes New Chair Orientation.
IDESG Online Plenary Meeting Wednesday, September 18 2:00 – 4:00pm ET Led by Plenary Chair Bob Blakley Welcome to the Online Plenary.
Economic Criteria for Transmission Planning in the ERCOT Region Public Utility Law Seminar DeAnn Walker August 3, 2012.
April 11, 2007 Prepared by the North American Energy Standards Board 1 North American Energy Standards Board Standards Development Process.
TAC July 2, 2003 Market Design Implementation Process Recommendation.
Role of Account Management at ERCOT PRR 672 Collaborative Analysis Presentation to RMS November 8, 2006 DRAFT ONLY.
Market Meeting Support Susan Munson ERCOT Retail Market Liaison Commercial Operations Subcommittee (COPS) June 10, 2008.
Texas Nodal Development Process Committee Structure.
Retail Market Subcommittee Update to TAC Kathy Scott April 24,
Prepared by Opinion Dynamics Corporation May 2004.
Governance and Legal Issues Margaret Uhlig Pemberton General Counsel and Corporate Secretary Media Day Austin, Texas September 13, 2001.
Texas Regional Entity Update Sam Jones Interim CEO and President Board of Directors July 18, 2006.
Atlanta Board of Education AdvancED/SACS “Required Actions” February 14, 2011.
May 13, 2008 COPS Commercial Operations Subcommittee (COPS) Procedures Review ERCOT Market Rules.
May 16, 2007 Board of Directors Texas Regional Entity Division Update Sam R. Jones ERCOT President & CEO.
Northamptonshire Pension Fund Governance Update Jo Walton.
Institutional Arrangements for Adaptation Achala Chandani Researcher International Institute for Environment and Development european capacity building.
Profiling Working Group August 2, PWG Update Report By Ernie Podraza of Reliant Energy ERCOT PWG Chair for COPS Meeting August 22, 2006.
TEXAS NODAL Board Review and Approval August 19, 2003.
SPS policy – Information Presentation Presentation to ROS June 16, 2004.
Item 5d Texas RE 2011 Budget Assumptions April 19, Texas RE Preliminary Budget Assumptions Board of Directors and Advisory Committee April 19,
TEXAS NODAL Board of Directors Austin, Texas July 15, 2003.
Retail Market Subcommittee Update to COPS Kathy Scott July 16,
MODULE B - PROCESS SUBMODULES B1.Organizational Structure B2.Standards Development: Roles and Responsibilities B3.Conformity Assessment: Roles and Responsibilities.
RMS Update to TAC January 8, Voting Items From RMS meeting on 12/10/2008  RMGRR069: Texas SET Retail Market Guide Clean-up – Section 7: Historical.
A Strawman for Discussion by Dottie Stockstill & Greg Ramon Special ERCOT Board Meeting June 24, 2003.
Prepared by Opinion Dynamics Corporation May 2004.
ERCOT Strategic Plan H.B. “Trip” Doggett President and Chief Executive Officer Technical Advisory Committee ERCOT Public December 3, 2013.
March 19, 2008 WMS WMS Procedures Review Nieves López ERCOT Market Rules.
TEXAS NODAL Proposed Structure August 6,  TAC/ERCOT Staff converged approach is close to final  straw vote on six issues  selection of Independent.
TEXAS NODAL: THE BASICS Presentation to ERCOT Technical Advisory Committee Workgroup June 25, 2003.
1 Texas Nodal Presentation Board of Director’s Meeting September 20, 2005.
August 28, 2014 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Update to RMS Kathy Scott September 9, 2014 TAC Update to RMS 1.
Reconfiguring Nodal Stakeholder Participation Presentation to the ERCOT Technical Advisory Committee Texas Nodal Transition Planning Task Force February.
Protocol Revision Subcommittee Presentation to the ERCOT Technical Advisory Committee April 9, 2009.
Texas Nodal Market Implementation Metric Sub Group Readiness Advisor January 30, 2006.
School Site Council (SSC) Essentials in brief An overview of SSC roles and responsibilities Prepared and Presented by Wanda Chang Shironaka San Juan Unified.
ERCOT MARKET EDUCATION Retail 101. Legal Disclaimers and Admonitions PROTOCOL DISCLAIMER This presentation provides a general overview of the Texas Nodal.
Greater Essex County District School Board Regulation: School Councils Reference NO: R-AD-03 Principal Chris Mills.
TDTWG Update to RMS Wednesday January 14. TDTWG Update to RMS Scope Texas Data Transport Working Group (TDTWG) is responsible for creating and maintaining.
1 TAC Report to the ERCOT Board February 16, 2005.
October 3, 2013 Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Update to RMS Kathy Scott October 16, 2013TAC Update to RMS 1.
November 3, 2015 RMS Review of RMS Member Responsibilities and Voting Structure Suzy Clifton.
Electric Reliability Organization and Issues in Texas Technical Advisory Committee January 4, 2006 Jess Totten Director, Electric Industry Oversight Division.
Long Term Move-In Move-Out Development Strategy August 19, 2002 DRAFT.
Handling Appeals of PRRs and other Contested Issues ERCOT Board Retreat February 21, 2007.
RMS Update to TAC November 1, RMS Activity Summary RMGRR057, Competitive Metering Working Group Name Change (VOTE) Update on RMS Working Group and.
Role of Account Management at ERCOT 2006 TAC Subcommittee Review ERCOT Board February 21, 2006.
1 TAC Report to the ERCOT Board November 14, 2006.
Current Stakeholder Timelines for Emergency Issues May 6, 2008 TPTF.
Sept. 2, 2010 Technical Advisory Committee RTWG Report Mark Bruce.
1 Summary of TAC Procedures – RMS, ROS, WMS May 9, 2005.
1 Summary of TAC Procedures for COPS & PRS May 17, 2005.
Network Operations Model Go-Live Decision Kenneth Ragsdale TAC July 1, 2010.
1 Summary of TAC Procedures May 5, Revision of TAC Procedures Project began in October 2004 to incorporate the Commercial Operations Subcommittee.
1 TAC Report to the ERCOT Board July 18, TAC Summary 4 PRRs for approval (3 unanimous) 4 PRRs for approval (3 unanimous) 5 Nodal PRRs for approval.
Texas Nodal Market Implementation Transition Planning Task Force Metric Framework Review Readiness Advisor January 24, 2006.
1 Summary of TAC Procedures – RMS, ROS, WMS May 11, 2005 After RMS Review.
1 Commercial Operations Working Group Update to TAC April 7, 2005.
COMET Working Group Progress Report 11/13/03
TEXAS NODAL (ERCOT REVISIONS)
Current Stakeholder Timelines for Issues Needing a Rapid Response
Commercial Operations Sub-Committee Update to TAC
Standards Development: An Overview
Procedural Policy August 1st, 2017
Greater Essex County District School Board
W. Shannon Black Manager, Standards Processes
Presentation transcript:

TEXAS NODAL Market Design Structure and Process August 19, 2003

 Process  Facilitator & Coordinators  Roles and Responsibilities Overview of Proposal

Stakeholders Process Overview Board of Directors Timely Compliance with PUCT Order PUCT Oversight, Direction & Protocol Approval Implement Board Directives Stakeholder vetting Member voting MOD Advice / Updates Independent Facilitator Independent Coordinator ERCOT Coordinator ERCOT Staff Support MOD Guidance CBA Consultants TAC Unresolved Positions Request Approval Request Approval Remand Unresolved Positions Economic Experts

Roles and Responsibilities Public Utility Commission: - Resolve appeals from the Board - Resolve disputes arising from Board decisions - Monitor progress and provide feedback - Final approval of protocols Market Oversight Division: - Actively participate in all Facilitation Team activities - Advise PUCT on Design and Protocol Development phase developments - Ensure compliance with PUCT rules and orders

Roles and Responsibilities ERCOT Board: - Approve design and protocols - Approve facilitators/experts as needed - Rule on disputes and appeals - Provide guidance to MPs and ERCOT staff on financial parameters

Roles and Responsibilities Independent Facilitator: - Chair “RUG – like” group facilitation process - Ensure and administer Design and Protocol Development phase voting on all issues - Consolidate and present recommendations to Board - Report monthly status to Board and TAC - Report status to PUCT as requested Market Participants: - Development of straw dogs - Participate actively - Right to appeal minority position(s) through TAC

Roles and Responsibilities Independent and ERCOT Coordinators: - Establish agendas and provide notice of meetings - Coordinate development of work plans and schedules - Organize flow of issues consideration and discussion - Plan/coordinate stakeholder education activities about nodal markets - Ensure communications with stakeholders, e.g., website, webex, etc. - Gather white papers, diagrams or other materials as necessary - Track and follow up on schedules, issues, and assignments - Coordinate presentation and as needed development of straw dogs - Assigns presenters for recommendations in the “RUG-like” group facilitation process - Request engagement of economic experts and CBA consultants

Roles and Responsibilities Technical Advisory Committee: - Co-Sponsor (with ERCOT) Facilitation and Coordination - Review unresolved positions - Present briefing materials for ERCOT Board on unresolved positions - Advise ERCOT staff during implementation phases Standing TAC Subcommittees: - Primary focus on on-going market operations - Provide advice as necessary during Design and Protocol Development - Coordinate with ERCOT staff during the implementation phases

Roles and Responsibilities ERCOT Staff: - Co-Sponsor (with TAC) Coordination Group process - Continue to operate and fine tune existing market systems - Maintain website with agendas, straw dogs, minutes, issue resolutions, etc. - Provide program logistical and staff support - Provide technical advice as necessary during design, protocol and cost benefit analysis phases - Develop cost estimates of proposed alternatives - Prepare design and protocols filings for PUCT consideration - Lead responsibility for implementation phases

Design and Protocol Development Phase Voting Structure 1.All persons attending the “RUG-like” group meetings may participate, but may vote only if representing an ERCOT member (“Member”). 2.For each “RUG-like” group meeting, each Member must designate a representative to vote each of their fractional votes on their behalf. 3.A representative may only represent multiple fractional votes that belong to up to “n” Members in one ERCOT segment as defined below. 4.Members will be grouped into the same seven segments as those that will apply to the ERCOT Board of Directors in December Corporate members must vote in their segment. Other members must designate a segment. This designation shall be in force throughout the “RUG-like” group meetings. 5.Each segment shall have one vote. Members in each segment shall have fractional votes adding up to one per segment. 6.Except for the Consumer segment, the fractional vote for each Member shall be equal to one divided by the number of Members present and voting in their segment. For example, if a segment has ten Members present and voting, then each Member would have a fractional vote equal to one-tenth. 7.The Consumer segment will be grouped into three sub-segments – Residential, Commercial and Industrial. Members in each sub-segment shall have fractional votes adding up to one divided by the number of sub-segments present and voting. The fractional vote for each Member shall be based on the number of Members present and voting in their sub-segment. For example, if all three sub- segments are present and voting and if a sub-segment has three Members present and voting, then each Member would have a fractional vote equal to one-ninth.

Design and Protocol Development Phase Voting Structure Cont. 8.Abstentions. For purposes of voting, representatives who abstain from voting shall not have their votes included in the total number of votes from which the requisite percentage of affirmative votes is required for action. In the event of such abstentions, however, there must be an affirmative vote of (I) the requisite percentage of the remaining non-abstaining votes and (ii) at least 50% of the total members. 9.Representation from four of seven segments is required for a quorum. 10.If 67% or more of the sum of all fractional votes are in favor of a motion, then the motion will pass. 11.If a motion fails to get a 67% vote, then the Independent Facilitator shall determine if further efforts to get a 67% vote appear achievable within a reasonable time frame. If it is determined that further efforts are not reasonable, then the motion will fail. The Independent Facilitator shall either (i) remand the failed motion to the Independent Coordinator for further stakeholder work or modification, or (ii) report the failed motion to the Board and TAC as an unresolved position, or (iii) request urgent resolution by TAC, Board or the Commission.