Ann Boren provided a high-level review of current stakeholder structure and process.
Explanation of ERCOT stakeholder committee structure, including working groups, task forces, and subcommittees.
Description of subcommittees (PRS, RMS, ROS, and WMS) and their roles as voting bodies.
TAC's role in the process and its composition as laid out in the bylaws.
Details on the voting structures for TAC and subcommittees.
Explanation of the revision request process, focusing on NPRRs.
Role of PRS in the language consideration and impact analysis of NPRRs.
Review process by TAC for NPRR recommendations.
Potential for R&M to review NPRR requests if opposing votes occur in TAC.
Board receives recommendations from both TAC and R&M for final decision-making.
PUC has the final approval on revision requests.
Comments can be filed at any time during the stakeholder process.
If TAC has a different recommendation than R&M, both recommendations go to the board, with presentations from the TAC recommendation by the TAC chair and the R&M recommendation by the R&M chair.
Potential drafts or proposals discussed: modifying subcommittee voting threshold, minimum time requirements for revision requests at TAC, and encouraging formal comments.
Subcommittee voting threshold currently at 50%. Proposals include higher thresholds to encourage earlier debates and better records.
Cory Philips reported very few revision requests met the 50% but did not meet the two-thirds threshold in recent history.
Minimum time requirements between PRS and TAC suggested, potentially similar to PUC's 30-day requirement.
Encouragement for stakeholders to file formal comments to ensure transparent and early communication of positions.
Discussion on making the process more formalized for stakeholders to engage and better filtering of ideas.
Concerns raised over modifying voting thresholds which might hinder smaller participants and stifle idea flow.
Feedback on potential impacts of raising the voting threshold and delaying processes versus solving real issues.
Proposal to increase time between PRS and TAC to avoid rush decisions.
Formally recognizing conversations and compromises happening between PRS and TAC in formal comments.
Discussion on formalizing commission review processes to address discomfort and ensure due process for appeals.
Ideas on improving stakeholder process involving commissioners, board members, and general approach to complicated issues.
General agreement on importance of filing formal comments to show seriousness and level of stakeholder engagement.
Highlighting difference in roles of TAC and the board post-Senate Bill Two, and dealing with resulting procedural confusion.
Feedback from Barksdale English representing commission staff, encouraging more consensus and thoughtful discussions.
Suggestions on revisiting responsibilities and roles for better market reliability and driving consensus through the body.
Clarification that the process for making comments to the board has always existed.
Comments can be made directly to the board in written form or verbally.
Discussion on how TAC members sometimes vote no without significant follow-up.
Board has the option to ask stakeholders for follow-up questions.
ERCOT is encouraged to provide its views on certain items, such as NPRR1190.
Stakeholders and TAC members should utilize the existing process to make their points known.
Board is data-driven and looks for a complete picture from TAC, especially when no votes are present.
Discussion of potential ways TAC can provide more complete data to the board.
Mentioned the importance of more detailed comments from members on close votes or non-unanimous recommendations.
Board seeks full perspective and understanding on issues, especially when segments have different perspectives.
Suggestions on improving the communication process between TAC and the board, including capturing more detailed data on close or controversial votes.
Discussion on how the board can better engage with TAC and corporate members for a complete data-driven recommendation.
Potential process improvements suggested to enhance board understanding and decision-making.
Consideration of historical context and experience in interpreting segment voting patterns.
Comments on how to handle no votes and abstentions effectively.
Suggestions about ERCOT's potential role in providing additional comments or data in certain cases.
Stakeholders provided feedback on how to improve transparency and clarity in communications to the board.
3 - Approval of TAC Meeting Minutes Vote Caitlin Smith
Motion to approve the August 28, 2024 meeting minutes as revised by TAC added to combo ballot.
Concerns about the timeline for subsequent NOGRR filing post-PUC approval, expected in October, aiming for board submission in February.
Difference between market trial timeline and what QSEs were attesting to noted.
Support for earlier training on certain items.
Discussion on simulator functionality and tracking outcomes between real-time co-optimization engine and current ODC, especially regarding committed capacity.
Bob Helton raised concerns about separate invoices.
Discussion on issues with completing membership requests tied to weatherization report emails; ERCOT indicated this will not be an issue after this year.
Ned Bonskowksi Submitted edits to the minutes to capture high-level discussion points and member concerns.
Concerns raised about ERCOT summarizing stakeholder positions to the board
6.1 - NPRR1188, Implement Nodal Dispatch and Energy Settlement for Controllable Load Resources
Motion to recommend approval of NPRR1188 as recommended by PRS in the 9/12/24 PRS Report and to recommend approval of OBDRR046 as submitted and the 6/27/23 Impact Analysis carries unanimously.
NPRR1188 proposed by ERCOT to change dispatch and pricing for Controllable Load Resources (CLRs) in response to market design blueprint phase one.
IA: Between $1.8M and $2.5M. Priority 2026; Rank 390
PRS unanimously recommended approval as amended by July 15 Oncor comments on August 8.
PRS unanimously endorsed and forwarded the revised August 8 report and June 27, 2023 IA with a recommended 2026 priority and rank of 390 on September 12.
Motion to recommend approval of NPRR1237 as recommended by PRS in the 9/12/24 PRS Report added to the combo ballot.
The item NPRR1237 had no opposition and was described as having no impact.
NPRR1237 originates from CenterPoint.
It sets conditions for ERCOT to require all competitive retailers, both new and existing, and TDSPs to complete retail market qualification testing.
PRS unanimously approved NPRR1237 as amended by the August 6 RMS comments on August 8.
In September, there was unanimous support to endorse and forward it to TAC with the August 8 PRS report and the August 27 impact analysis.
6.3 - NPRR1244, Clarification of Controllable Load Resource Primary Frequency Response Responsibilities
Motion to recommend approval of NPRR1244 as recommended by PRS in the 9/12/24 PRS Report; and the 9/13/24 Revised Impact Analysis; with a recommended priority of 2026 and rank of 4710.
Minor IA title change and comments on priority and rank for NPRR1244 from Priority Power aligning PFR provisions to provide ECRS and PRC calculation.
August 8: PRS voted to recommend approval as submitted. September: Voted to endorse and forward to TAC the August 8 PRS report as revised by PRS with September 6 impact analysis.
ERCOT expedited review suggested moving 1244 priority to 2026 due to RTC commitments, new rank 4710.
Proposed moving NPRR1237, NPRR1188, and NPRR1244 to combo ballot. Recusal for NPRR1188 noted and separate ballots decided for NPRR1188 and OBDRR046.
Topic: Discussion on NPRR1247 Details: NPRR1247 tabled due to lack of urgency and need for ERCOT white paper clarification. Stakeholders required more information before voting.
Topic: Future Action for NPRR1247 Details: ERCOT to prioritize the document and clarify it separately from NPRR1247's proposed language.
Contributions:
Speaker: Troy Anderson Role: ERCOT Portfolio Management Contribution: Suggested moving NPRR1244 priority to post-RTC (2026) and new rank.
Speaker: Barksdale English Role: Commission Staff Contribution: Queried about NPRR1247's delay and requested clarity on urgency and language from ERCOT.
Speaker: Matt Arthur Role: ERCOT Contribution: Provided assurance on NPRR1247 urgency being separate from white paper guidance.
7 - Revision Requests Tabled at TAC Possible Vote Caitlin Smith
7.1 - OBDRR046, Related to NPRR1188, Implement Nodal Dispatch and Energy Settlement for Controllable Load Resources
See item 6.1 for ballot details.
7.2 - OBDRR052, Related to NPRR1246, Energy Storage Resource Terminology Alignment for the Single-Model Era
For energy storage resource terminology alignment for the single model era.
Decision to keep the item tabled while waiting for associated NPRR1246.
7.3 - NPRR1215, Clarifications to the Day-Ahead Market DAM Energy-Only Offer Calculation
Motion to recommend approval of NPRR1215 as recommended by TAC in the 6/24/24 TAC Report as amended by the 8/1/24 ERCOT comments as revised by TAC added to the combo ballot.
NPRR1215 was initially approved by TAC and the board but ERCOT identified issues led to the board remanding it back to TAC for edits and corrections.
ERCOT filed comments on August 1 addressing identified issues, specifically changing "credit reduction" to "credit exposure".
Further changes deemed necessary were made during subsequent reviews.
Alfredo Moreno with ERCOT confirmed that all required corrections have been addressed, and the item is ready for approval.
No additional questions or concerns raised by participants.
A recommendation to approve NPRR1215, incorporating August 1 ERCOT comments and other necessary revisions by TAC, was made.
9.1 - NOGRR263, Related to NPRR1244, Clarification of Controllable Load Resource Primary Frequency Response Responsibilities
Motion to recommend approval of NOGRR263 as recommended by ROS in the 9/9/24 ROS Report; and the 9/13/24 Revised Impact Analysis added to combo ballot.
9.2 - NOGRR264, Related to NPRR1235, Dispatchable Reliability Reserve Service as a Stand-Alone Ancillary Service
Motion to table NOGRR264 added to the combo ballot.
Approved IAs for NOGRR264 and NPRR1235, both back at TAC.
PGRR107 amended with ERCOT August comments.
NPRR1180 is at PRS, believed to be approved and will return for IA and added to ROS October agenda for potential modifications based on ERCOT comments.
AS methodology had some extensions, more details at WMS.
Two items will be voted on: Proposed changes to AS services and congestion revenue rights auction mitigation.
New feature at WMS: Monthly large load interconnection reports. Last report showing an increase of 4,439 MW since August update.
NPRR1241 tabled and referred to WMWG.
NPRR1202 remains tabled.
NPRR1229; concerns about cost recovery and policy alignment raised.
Additional comments submitted by Celtics Electric co-op regarding NPRR1229.
Discussion about whether to approve, reject, or seek policy decision from PUC on Revision Request 1229.
Eric Goff mentioned NPRR1229 should be rejected because creating payments to generators to turn off can lead to unintended consequences. The current market design already sends a lower price signal to generators when ERCOT needs less power from then.
Next WMS meeting scheduled for October 7.
11 - Proposed Changes to Ancillary Service Methodology for 2025 - Possible Vote - Luis Hinojosa
Discussed past changes to AS methodology such as NPRR1224 and NPRR1232.
Emphasized need to review and approve AS methodology through stakeholder processes and PUCO review.
Timeline and Stakeholder Process:
Started discussions in July for the AS methodology.
AS study in parallel with the legislature, PUC, IMM, and ERCOT due in September 2424.
Regulation Service Changes:
Switch to using net load forecast error instead of historical regulation deployment and net load variability.
Data now incorporates wind and solar ramping inputs, improving visibility.
Proposed methodology suggests an increase for 2025.
Responsive Reserve Service Changes:
No methodology changes.
IFRO for 2024 updated, setting RRS-PFR limit to 1365 MW.
Slight increase of 9 MW due to updated RS table.
Concerns Raised:
Reduction in regulation during winter mornings causes operational concern.
Queries on potential risks due to regulation reduction and flat RRS values.
ERCOT Changes:
Three changes proposed: adjusting sunset hour coverage, aligning frequency recovery portion with RRS methodology, and using the greater of the two capacities for ERCOT quantity.
Overall decrease in ERCOT quantities for 2025 from 2024.
Non-spin Changes:
Change to use four-hour net load forecast error for hours ending 23 to 6 instead of six-hour error to reflect available offline resources.
Slight increase from last year but would have been higher without methodology change.
Stakeholder Comments and Concerns:
Concerns regarding relying on RUC for covering net load forecast errors.
Discussions on how changes affect capacity margin and need for further analysis.
Evolution Roadmap:
Probabilistic analysis for 2026.
Dynamic calculation of ancillary services closer to operating day for 2027.
Vote on 2025 Methodology:
Motion to endorse the 2025 Ancillary Service Methodology as presented by ERCOT passed with one opposed and two abstentions.
Additional Disclosures:
Jeff McDonald (IMM) did not oppose but mentioned they'd prefer lessons from AS study incorporated.
12 - Large Flexible Load Task Force Report - Bill Blevins
Task force to go into hibernation mode, potentially canceling some upcoming meetings.
Reported growth in potential large load from 12GW in 2019 to around 54GW currently, driven by crypto mining and AI data centers.
Breakdown of the 54 GW includes ~30GW crypto, ~19GW for AI data centers, and 4-5GW potentially hydrogen-related.
Proposed rules for interconnection process moving forward, focus on loads greater than 1 GW requiring multiple connections.
Asked to ask TAC on where to update reporting large load queue: TAC, ROS, or WMS; transparency and centralization important.
Discussion on customer information and its privacy; ERCOT navigating statutory obligations while aiming for transparency.
Recognition of significant progress made by the task force, approved 15GW for future interconnections.
Feedback on the need for detailed, transparent reporting on new load development, including timelines and impacts.
Bill Barnes mentioned he will support NPRR1234 so that the collection of more granular information of large loads will be available to report on.
13 - Credit Finance Sub Group Report - Brenden Sager
Reviewed NPRRs and EAL change calculations and credit exposure updates.
Update on NPRR1205: Changes include adjusted ratings requirements and doubling credit limits, affecting bank acceptability at ERCOT effective November 1.
Performance and surety bonds changes: new credit limits and ratings adjustments.
Discussed the EAL calculation: Determines collateral requirements using max history of real-time liabilities, day-ahead factors, and forward adjustment factors.
Credit team's nearing completion of a proposal for more effective matching of obligations to invoices.
Eric Goff requested for ERCOT credit department to present a proposal at a future TAC meeting.
Continuation by Loretto (NRG): Further discussion on netting real-time and day-ahead, forward adjustment factor adjustments, and considering caps on RFAF.
Review of several NPRRs with no credit implications; all were operational.
Increase in total potential exposure from $1.81 billion to $1.88 billion from July to August 2024, due to higher real-time and day-ahead prices.
No unusual collateral call activity in August.
Breakdown and comparison of various types of credit exposure and collateral posted at ERCOT.
NPRR1205: Monthly update on collateral limits for banks, showing no over-collateralization.
