Frame

Meeting Summary - 09/13/24 RTCBTF Meeting

Grid Monitor AI
09/18/2024

<img src="/storage/docs/2024/09/20240912RTCBTF%20Hero.png" width="869" height="654" /> <a href="/sharing/?token=cecc034c-19b0-4193-bb0e-28410b90f2a7">1</a> - Antitrust Admonition <a href="/sharing/?token=9487c96f-7f48-4529-8d3d-65e2fc72e01d">2</a> - RTCBTF <a href="https://ercot-control-docs.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/12/1_RTCBTF_Update_09132024.pptx">Update</a> and Issues - Matt Mereness <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Focus on publishing the go-live date by end of the month.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Market notice and press release will be issued for announcement.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">No changes in the sequence of market trials.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Review cycle discussed, no urgent issues currently.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Addressing 20 ongoing issues by categorizing: key policy issues for proxy offers, framework for RTC analysis, verifiable costs, and operational procedures.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Summary of updates on various issues: parameters for proxy offers, RTC state of charge discussion, and market readiness procedures.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Acknowledgement of historical operation days for simulator analysis.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Mentions opportunity to analyze max shadow price transmission constraint. </li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Predicting to have another clarifying NPRR by January</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Market readiness includes technical workshops, ICCP changes, and market submission changes.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Release of market trials plan and the importance of readiness for go-live.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Emphasis on training and readiness outline.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Discussion on NPRR1214 focusing on lack of indifference payment for RTC deficiency.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Confirmation on how market participants prepare for go-live with current protocols.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Next steps involve diving into AS proxy offer curves and setting parameters for them.</li> </ul> <a href="/sharing/?token=e8811f8f-ea82-4ac0-8784-dce95ef57d32">3</a> - Issue 1- Parameters for AS Proxy Offer Curves - ERCOT Staff <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Review of AS offer structure and proxy AS offer creation process under RTC.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Comparison with 2019 RTC Task Force meetings and approved NPRRs from 2020.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Changes in market rules over the past few years.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Utilization of current AS offer structure and full implementation of NPRR863.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Proxy AS offers will not be created for day ahead market resources, but for SCED and RUC processes.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Current setup allows for segments in online upward AS offers, regular down AS offers, offline ECRS, and non-spin AS offers.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Proxy AS offer process will determine megawatt quantities and prices for all qualified AS types.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Specific highlights on pages summarizing the proxy AS offer creation process.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Determination of prices using portal rules, including the use of proxy AS floors and highest submitted AS offer prices.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Differing price rules for RUC and non-RUC  committed resources.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Presented examples of creating different proxy AS offers.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Importance of reflecting resource capabilities in proxy pricing to avoid over-commitment.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Questions and clarifications from meeting participants regarding how these proxy offer prices are determined and managed.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Concerns about how proxy offers could potentially impact market behavior and optimization.</li> </ul> Key Decisions: <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Proxy AS offers will be created using the full capacity of the units but will be managed based on physical constraints and telemetry data.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Market participants will not be notified in real time when a proxy AS offer is created.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Exploration of different rules and considerations for RUC committed versus non-RUC committed resources.</li> </ul> Action Items: <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Further internal testing and validation of proxy AS offers by ERCOT.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Documentation and potential disclosure of these proxy offers for better market transparency and reliability.</li> </ul> <a href="/sharing/?token=297dabb7-8010-47a1-8f27-c81097d4f74e">3.1</a> - Proxy AS Offer Price Floor - Analysis and Recommendations <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Study 1: Quantified proxy energy offers and their percentage in the real-time market.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Study 2: Historical analysis of AS offers, identifying offering patterns and behaviors.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Two types of proxy: fully proxied EOC and partially proxied EOC.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Historical data showed 60%-80% of online resources were fully proxied.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Resource types and their tendency to submit three-part offers were analyzed, with storage and batteries often not submitting.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">From January 2024 to June 2024 on average: approximately 2301 MW of energy is proxied making up ~3.5% of real-time total HSL per SCED run.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Discussion on energy storage and dual models; inclusion of test-status resources in analysis.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">AS offers for non-summer months tend to be low or near zero.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">ERCOT suggests a $0/MW per hour offer floor for proxy AS offers based on analysis.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Concerns about $0 floor and suggestions to set it higher for economic signaling.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Discussions on changes and impacts on real-time market operations.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Stakeholder suggestions for price setting and further examination requested, emphasis on ensuring real-time notice and effective market operations.</li> </ul> <a href="/sharing/?token=6132678a-8707-4674-814f-3378cf839cf9">4</a> - Review RTC and ESR Clarifying Revision Requests if market questions - ERCOT Staff <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Two main differences discussed:</li> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Using HSl − LSL instead of just HSL for ESR.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Consider proxy for FFR compared to generation, as ESR can provide FFR. </li> </ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Example provided highlighting the megawatt calculation for ESR with different proxy prices and hierarchy structures.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Discussion on Controllable Load Resources (CLR), which are similar to generation in terms of AS types but use MPC.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Non-controllable Load Resource (NCLR) differences from CLR highlighted, particularly in their qualification for RRSFFR or RRSUFR/ECRs, which are mutually exclusive.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Explanation on how proxies for FFR and UFR ECRs are created for NCLR and how awards are determined based on telemetry.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Discussion on whether resources need to arm/disarm their UFRs based on awards, with specific reference to the real-time self-providing feature.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Clarification on the inclusion of non-spin in the presentation, noting a typo that was corrected.</li> </ul> <a href="/sharing/?token=7d43db6e-c844-45bf-b710-1a600b8c0ece">4.1</a> - RTC- NPRR1245 <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">NPRR1245 in good shape.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">PRS approved NPRR1245 with minor continued findings.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Additional follow-ups likely needed.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Majority of necessary issues identified and addressed.</li> </ul> <a href="/sharing/?token=6f15d3bd-2c22-474d-bec2-6aaafc532ac0">4.2</a> - ESR- NPRR1246, NOGRR268, PGRR118, OBDRR052 <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Planned comments on NPRR1246 and PGRR118 to be filed next week.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Identified internal issues in NPRR1246 related to voltage support service and sections three and eight.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Identified issues in PGRR118 regarding the phrase 'energy storage resource'.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Request for preparation for the October RTC+B task force meeting to review these items.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Suggestion for task force members to review their favorite parts of the protocols.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Discussion on how the ESR affects various systems and stakeholders.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Possible request to file task force comments indicating no issues found with these items.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Aim to have these items reviewed and up at TAC by the end of the year.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Clarified that three items were tabled at ROS without referral, and the NPRR was tabled at PRS but not referred.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Need for effective language when transitioning to the RTC+B model.</li> </ul> <a href="/sharing/?token=2eee9f50-84aa-4aa7-a271-e05ad38ecf80">5</a> - Issue 3- RTC Simulator update - Raymund Lee <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Raymond and the team have made significant improvements to the RTC simulator tool, targeting to analyze three operating days at the next meeting.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Three different days from the Vistra list will be used to bring forward applicable reports.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">First deep dive into data expected at next meeting with system-wide information.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The simulator can solve individual RTC schedule runs, but each run is independent.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The tool uses existing protocol data and historical days to show price formation.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Next steps include enhancing simulation depth, considering wind and solar impacts on prices.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">A discussion on ECRS qualification for wind and solar was initiated.</li> </ul> <a href="/sharing/?token=6550670d-685a-4451-8e92-f9c483129f54">6</a> - Review of Market Trials Plan <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Discussion about the need for a midnight cutover and synchronization challenges between day ahead market and real-time market.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Explanation that going live on the market trials hardware will be like transitioning from one system to another without overlap.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Question about IT integration and control systems involvement.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Importance of getting feedback from TWG after technical workshops.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Suggestion to record sessions for better retention of discussed material.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Positive feedback for ICCP tutorial and its standalone usefulness.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Prioritizing easy tasks and quick hits while more complex content is being prepared.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Requirement for a separate document detailing the transition to go live.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Emphasis on the need for a disciplined approach and having a single, cohesive document rather than scattered slides.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Mention of an issues calendar to better manage timelines and handbooks for market trials activities.</li> </ul> <a href="/sharing/?token=27d0813f-6b3b-4aaa-8b85-4e5e1446b10e">7</a> - Discuss approach to Training/Readiness - Matt Mereness <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Commitment to early and frequent communication regarding training readiness.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Exploring option to pre-record key presentations for training purposes.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Plan to create a 45-minute video of Maggie's deep dive on settlement determinants as a training tool.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Identifying training gaps and evaluating the effectiveness of proposed training methods.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Outlines for various training modules including:</li> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">RTC+B Executive Review</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">RTC+B Basics</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Real-time Market Details</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Day Ahead Market Details</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">WMS Operations</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="2">Settlements and Extracts</li> </ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Emphasis on creating consumable training materials with visuals and voiceovers.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Executive overview includes assessment of cost benefits like improved price scarcity, RUC & SCED operations, and integration of batteries.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Need for a standalone primer to explain RTC concepts to executives and public stakeholders.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Acknowledgement that detailed training modules (e.g. Real-time market details, RTC solver spreadsheet tutorial) will require more time to develop.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Feedback from meeting participants on the importance of prioritizing comprehensive executive overviews and basics for internal project teams.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Suggestion to include a walkthrough of the transition and cutover process as part of the training materials.</li> </ul> <a href="/sharing/?token=808455ce-bcc7-468d-932c-a33ca7ba7a68">8</a> - Issue 18- Placeholder for MPs Discussion of AS Demand Curves <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The ORDC was created to address low price signals during shortages, evolving from the real-time market in 2010.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">In 2019, ERCOT developed key principles for AS Demand Curves, later approved by the PUC and put into protocols.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Current discussions highlight two main issues: the shape of the existing ORDC and the shape of AS Demand Curves under the ORDC.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">ERCOT is preparing an ORDC biennial study, which may suggest changes needed by November 1.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">There are concerns that the AS Demand Curves may not align with current operational preferences and market outcomes.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">A simulator is expected to be available in October to study historical data and analyze potential changes to the AS Demand Curves.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Improvements to the AS Demand Curves are possible before the go-live date, without needing vendor integration changes.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Decisions to change AS Demand Curves are pending, with recognition that policymakers may see the need for adjustments.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The need for further discussion and examples regarding issues raised, like the impacts of conservative operations and subtracting system lambda, was acknowledged.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Discussions about whether the current market equilibrium reserve margin (MERM) is appropriate under new reliability standards.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Different viewpoints and concerns were shared, emphasizing the need for continuous dialogue and updates.</li> </ul> <a href="/sharing/?token=8d735413-32b0-4080-82c5-bab039036bb3">9</a> - Adjourn