1. NT Assignment
Update: 9/17/13

2. NT Assignment Update Resources: Company Resources BPA
Rebecca Berdahl, Milos Bosanac,
Ann Shintani, Bob Zerfing
Clark
Brenna Moore
EWEB
Megan Capper, Alex Swerzbin
Seattle City Light
Robin Cross
SPP
Ken Quimby (NF Assignment)

3. NT Assignment Update Review Scope Key Issues
Comparison of NITS to PTP in Preemption and Competition
Review of Motions and Parking Lot

4. NT Assignment Update Scope Goals in Assignment Document:
Review NITS and provide a clear list of how any standards there will impact our current thinking/motions of how NT competes in the ST market.
Develop a matrix of motion revisions or new motions with columns for Pros and Cons from an NT perspective and a PTP perspective.
Identify conflicts with motions for NITS and propose new wording for any motions NT would like changed.
Proposed Scope:
Focus on Tier 1 and Tier 3 bumping of lower priority tiers. OATT section 2.2 is out of scope.
Develop a comparison between key P&C requirements for NITS vs PTP
Review parking lot & motions and identify any conflicts with respect to administration of Tier 1 & Tier 3 bumping
Prepare recommendations for bumping by Tier 1 & Tier 3
Provide drafts for new motions to facilitate Tier 1 & Tier 3 bumping
Change name to Tiers 1 & 3 Assignment so that it includes Tier 1 LT Firm & Native Load bumping.

5. Tiers 1 & 3 Assignment Update
Key Issues
The following issues have been identified for further review. Other issues may be identified.
Should NITS challengers be required to have a flat profile?
Should bumping be initiated when only partial service is available to the challenger?
Should there be any new or modified rules with respect to a Tier 1 or Tier 3 customer bumping its own lower priority reservation?
Should there be any different rules with respect to selecting defenders?
For example, what rules should apply to timing of bumping (e.g., should NITS be permitted to bump a lower priority reservation that has passed its start date)?
Review WEQ language in the first sentence to see if it needs to be revised to allow Tier 1 to processing priority over Tier 2.

6. Tiers 1 & 3 Assignment Update
Comparison of NITS to PTP in Preemption and Competition (example)
ISSUE
NITS (excluding OATT 2.2)
PTP
ROFR
N/A
Only within Tier 2 vs Tier 2 or Tier 4 vs Tier 4. Matches evaluated on Duration, Price, and Queue (submission) time
Bumping
(Non-ROFR)
Tier 1 vs lower priority tiers,
Tier 3 vs lower priority tiers
Tier 1 vs lower priority tiers, Tier 2 vs Tier 2 requests and/or lower priority tiers, Tier 4 vs Tier 4 requests and/or lower priority tiers
Duration
Only used for response timing table & based on interval between start and stop (See Table 105-A). There are no specified SERVICE_INCREMENTS (e.g., daily, weekly, monthly). Not applicable in NITS bumping.
Based on SERVICE_INCREMENT and interval between start and stop. SERVICE_INCREMENT defined as hourly, daily, weekly, monthly and yearly. Only applicable in Tier 2 vs Tier 2 or Tier 4 vs Tier 4.
Profiled requests
Included in the NITS standards.
Permitted at Transmission Provider option.

7. Tiers 1 & 3 Assignment Update
Review of Motions and Parking Lot
Motions and Parking Lot items will be reviewed to identify Tier 1 & Tier 3 related concerns:
Items which are specific to ROFR do not apply.
Items which are identified as Short-Term Firm will be reviewed to see if they should be limited to Tier 2 vs Tier 2 competitions.
Open items that are assigned to the NT Assignment will be addressed.
New motions may be prepared.
New parking lot items may be presented.

8. Tiers 1 & 3 Assignment Update
Timeline
October OASIS Subcommittee meeting
Complete review of assigned Motions and Parking Lot items
Prepare comparison chart of NITS vs PTP
May have some motions
OASIS Subcommittee guidance on outstanding issues
Finalize assignment at November OASIS Subcommittee meeting
Final Tier 1 & Tier 3 Assignment recommendation
Draft motions
Review of P&C Recommendation text