Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byRaymond Casey Modified over 9 years ago
1
PMO Update to PRS Troy Anderson Program Management Office February 22, 2007
2
2 PMO Update Agenda Recent Project Developments Project Funding Changes NPRR Review Status CBA Review Team
3
3 PMO Update Recent Project Developments EDW Go-Live Project — EDW EMMS Extracts (PR-50005) Scope: Transitioned PUCT, Market and Public EMMS extracts from the legacy Data Archive to the ODS (Operational Data Store) environment utilizing the EIS (Enterprise Information System) Data Delivery Model Deliverables: 4 extracts for Market Participants and 12 extracts for the general public Timeline: January 2005 – January 2007 Go-live was 1/15/2007 Cost: $315k Estimate in mid-2005 was $327k Transfer of funds from Texas SET 3.0 to TCC2 Finish-out and Annex Construction (see next slides)
4
4 Managing Project Funding Changes Process for Managing Changes in Project Funding Individual CARTs have authority to make project budget changes <$100k They must still manage within their allocated CART budget Project budget changes >=$100k go to the ERCOT Strategic Review Team (directors) for review and approval CARTs bring forward proposals for reallocation of funds (including the CART which was releasing the funds in question) Project budget changes >=$500k go to the ERCOT Executive Committee for review and approval Executives act on the SRT recommendation (affirm/change) Project budget changes >=$1M go to the ERCOT Board of Directors for review and approval Final ERCOT recommendation goes before the BoD
5
5 Important Considerations Every effort is made to NOT negatively impact PUCT and market projects Projects expected by the market in the current year Projects just below the cutline are considered for funding Critical projects emerge between yearly prioritization cycles that need to be addressed on a near-term basis Market input is derived from project ranking on PPLs and input from appropriate CARTs Reallocating funds between CARTs is preferred over requesting additional project funding from the BoD This is especially the case early in the calendar year Communication of decisions occurs through usual channels Market Subcommittee reports (PRS, RMS, etc.) TAC and Board reports Managing Project Funding Changes
6
6 Texas SET 3.0 Funding Transfer Texas SET 3.0 was estimated at $1.63M going into Execution PPL budget was $3.75M $2.1M variance was reported to SRT by RO CART Reasons: Project consolidation, reduced external labor, hardware not needed RO presented a proposal to use some of the funds within RO CO presented a proposal to use the funds for facilities needs Build out unfinished TCC2 space, reconfigure cubicles to increase cube count, construct 12,000 sq. ft. annex/warehouse The SRT and Executive Committee decided the best course of action was to reallocate the funds to CO No impact to planned RO market projects to be started in 2007; possible, but small, impact to delivery in 2007 These decisions occurred very quickly due to timing constraints relating to the February Board of Directors meeting Reported to RMS on 2/14 Board to review proposal on 2/20 Managing Project Funding Changes
7
7 PMO Update NPRR Review Status Next 3 slides taken from February 2 TPTF update They chronicle the assessment of 65 changes with potential impact: — NPRRs (approved, pending, and draft) — Other Potential Change Sources White papers Requirements changes IDA punch list EMS comments Commitment made to return to TPTF with conclusions and recommendations
8
8 Change Impact Tabulation Through February 2nd Change Impact Categories: Class 1 = Core Functionality: Code & Internal Processes, All Algorithms, Emergency & Safety Class 2 = Procedural: Business process, Procedures, Display Presentation Class 3 = Minimal: Documentation Only Class 4 = None Type EMSMMSOS MOTE SOTE OTS Total Class 16185130 Class 2 331 18 Class 32 2 Class 445345255186 TBD8108834 65 260
9
9 Change Impact Tabulation Through February 2nd Core Functionality: Code & Internal Processes, All Algorithms, Emergency & Safety Procedural: Business Process, Procedures, Display Presentation Still Under Analysis
10
10 Change Impact Tabulation Through February 2nd Minimal: Documentation Only None
11
11 PMO Update CBA Review Board (CRB) Market Participants — Manny Munoz, Hal Hughes, Debbie McKeever, Kenan Ogelman, generator market participant to be named ERCOT Participants — PMO: Troy Anderson, Pat Moast, Elizabeth Mansour — Other ERCOT Teams: Adam Martinez, Paula Feuerbacher, Margaret Sachnik Meeting Schedule Monthly teleconference — February (2/15) — March (TBD)
12
12 PMO Update CRB Status Report CBA Review — PRR697 – Posting Requirement Changes Made some changes/improvements CBA Process Improvements — CBA Process Flow Discussed a draft process flow Program Administration will incorporate suggested changes for review at March meeting — CBA Form Discussed a number of potential enhancements Discussed merit of suggested changes Program Administration will develop a prototype for review at March meeting — Other Investigating a CRB area on ERCOT.com
13
13 PMO Update March 2007 Report Items Recent Project Developments NPRR Review Status CBA Review Board Report
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.