Frame

Meeting Summary - 04/14/2025 CMWG Meeting

Grid Monitor AI
04/14/2025

<div class="news-image-container"><img src="/storage/docs/2025/04/4-14-CMWG-Hero.png" width="819" height="614" /></div> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=bb6666a7-70e9-45ca-bd99-81a306c31e17">▶️</a>1 - Antitrust Admonition</h3> <h3>2 - Agenda Review</h3> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=dac8dde2-495b-4ec9-a948-490fad421b6a">▶️</a>3 - CRR LTAS Performance Update</h3> <a href="/storage/docs/2025/04/CRR-CMWG_04142025.pdf">CRR-CMWG_04142025.pdf</a> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Samantha Findley from ERCOT CRR market operations provided an update on transaction performance.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Updates were given on LTAS transactions, solution times, and proposed changes to the CRR auction limits table.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The recently added 2027 2nd6 Seq6 auction showed 123,000 total transactions, taking 203 hours (about 8.5 days) to complete.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">This duration is significantly higher compared to the previous Seq6 auction last fall with fewer transactions but took 157 hours to complete.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=c89c0562-96b0-4b92-93c2-0d9139733a7f">▶️</a>4 - NPRR1261 Transaction Table Update</h3> <a href="/storage/docs/2025/04/NPRR1261%20Transaction%20Table-CMWG_04142025.pdf">NPRR1261 Transaction Table-CMWG_04142025.pdf</a> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Proposal to reduce the total transaction limit to 315k, per-TOU limit to 110k, and per account holder limit from 2,700 to 2,500 due to long runtime of the recent auction.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">First LTAS to use the new transaction limit table will be the 2025 2nd6 Seq1 auction.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The proposed reductions are based on data gathered from monthly LTAS evaluations and are not permanent.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Root causes of long run times are being examined with the vendor, and improvements will allow for adjusted numbers.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Discussion on the independent operation of each Time of Use (TOU) and linkage only between months, not between time of uses.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Quantity of option submissions are believed to contribute to long run times.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Hardware optimizations and potential cloud solutions are being explored to address performance issues, although there are internal cybersecurity constraints.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">ERCOT is considering the removal of multi-month bidding functionality and the introduction of an option pricing report.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Changes such as linking time of uses and de-linking months were discussed but would require significant code changes.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The possibility of hardware upgrades, such as from DDR3 to DDR4 RAM, is being pursued.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=3f6f4af2-ac97-4330-8696-bab5181976a4">▶️</a>5 - High LMPs observed on 2/19 discussion</h3> <a href="/storage/docs/2025/04/CMWG-Feb19-Issue-04142025-V2.pdf">CMWG-Feb19-Issue-04142025-V2.pdf</a> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Stakeholders requested further information regarding the high LMPs observed on February 19, during a winter storm.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">An electrical bus associated with the Settlement Point RHESS2_ES1 with a very large helping shift factor on multiple constraints that were violated (at max shadow price), resulted in a very high LMP of over $28,000.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The LMP calculation (System Lambda – sum(SF*Shadow Price)) was explained, past discussion has focused on system conditions and operational questions.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Freddy Garcia explained in detail the control room's conditions during the winter storm and the multiple constraints faced, including planned outages in certain areas.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Freddy mentioned that on February 19, ERCOT's operators dealt with a significant number of constraints, with many exceeding emergency ratings that required additional studies to avoid cascading failures.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Blake Holt from LCRA inquired about possible solutions to minimize LMP impacts, suggesting the need for shared constraints to prevent excessive pricing.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Multiple stakeholders discussed optimization and pricing issues, noting similar challenges faced by other ISOs and RTOs.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Freddy Garcia and others highlighted the need for improved tools and procedures to better manage constraints without overloading operators.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Some stakeholders suggested reevaluating price and shadow price caps to prevent excessive LMPs or considering additional operational tools.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">For future discussions, further analysis on theoretical pricing, constraints handling, and potential procedural updates was suggested.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=3335530c-bbe7-4512-9584-943cb0943685">▶️</a>6 - Day Ahead Market (DAM) PTP Activity Update</h3> <a href="/storage/docs/2025/04/CMWG-PTP-and-PTPLO-Submissions-in-DAM.pdf">CMWG-PTP-and-PTPLO-Submissions-in-DAM.pdf</a> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">PTP and PTPLO interval records have been identified as difficult for the DAM optimization engine to solve.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">High PTP interval record volumes have increased execution time.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Past measures to optimize DAM performance include limiting PTP submissions through SCR814, process changes, and hardware updates.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Ongoing studies focus on the PTP impact on DAM performance, with a proposal for submission fees.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Performance concerns are reemerging, with late solution postings and DAM reports becoming more likely.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Current submission limits include a maximum of 10,000 PTP interval submissions per counterparty.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">There are diminishing returns on process and hardware improvements without further volume management.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">A reevaluation of the correlation between unawarded PTPs and execution time is planned.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The issue of high PTP submissions could lead to operational inefficiencies that impact gas procurement and DAM operations.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=db40f7dd-894a-4b41-936e-da4663d390c6">▶️</a>7 - Granular Product type for Congestion Revenue Rights Time of Use (CRRTOU)</h3> <a href="/storage/docs/2025/04/Vistra-CRR-Solar-vs-Non-solar-TOU-Proposal.pdf">Vistra-CRR-Solar-vs-Non-solar-TOU-Proposal.pdf</a> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">ERCOT presented a study on implementing more granular CRR TOU blocks to better align with market dynamics influenced by increased renewable energy, particularly solar.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The main reasons for this proposal include adapting to market changes and reducing auction processing time and computational costs.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Proposal to split current blocks into solar and non-solar hours based on seasonality, providing a more targeted product.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Observed increased variability in solar and non-solar hours impacts generation outputs and prices, presenting challenges in hedging positions.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">The introduction of a metric called the Obligation Capture Rate (OCR) to assess the congestion variability.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Encouragement for market participants to consider obligation instead of option during auctions to improve efficiency.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Discussion on the feasibility of maintaining current 5x16 blocks while introducing new granular segments.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Feedback suggests ERCOT ISO products need to reflect the newer generation profiles without hindering traditional generators.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Clarification that changing from 5x16 to two separate products would not require system changes for years not yet auctioned but would remove existing TOUs.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Exploration of seasonal variation in TOU hours to accommodate different daylight patterns without complicating the system.</li> </ul> <h4>Questions Raised:</h4> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Clarification on whether the current 5x16 would be kept or replaced.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Consideration of solar hour variability across different seasons and its impact on TOU.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Potential for keeping 5x16 blocks and adding more granular options.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Questions around the practicality of tracking variable TOU hours by season or daylight changes.</li> </ul> <h4>Next Steps:</h4> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Considering a study on different TOU hours across seasons with possible NPRR submission.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">ERCOT to evaluate impacts and run an internal IA for changes after NPRR submission to PRS.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Collaboration between ERCOT and stakeholders on NPRR development.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=5fad7dae-07c6-47ea-bfce-536c59f487a9">▶️</a>8 - CMWG Approval of Changes to the CRR schedule</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Discussion on whether changes to the CRR schedule need WMS approval or if ERCOT could adjust and update with a market notice.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Consideration of whether the current process delays the schedule or if adjustment is needed.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Conversation on the stability of the CRR activity calendar and whether WMS's approval is necessary.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Clarification that updates to the calendar might still be handled through market notices.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Proposal to potentially shift to a biannual approval process extending the calendar further out to reduce administrative burden.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Consensus that the current process mostly works without issues, serving as a formality.</li> </ul> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Agreement that the current CRR calendar approval process is not overly complicated.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Consideration of extending the calendar approval to a biannual process for efficiency.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Recognition that current practices don't result in significant feedback or changes requiring alterations.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=46eef2cf-a158-459b-98ef-61f2a64054ea">▶️</a>9 - RENA Update (Questions Only)</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">No Questions were raised.</li> </ul> <h3><a href="/sharing/?token=a0e824ea-8703-473b-96fc-979706890ecd">▶️</a>10 - Other Business</h3> <ul> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Two action items were identified: NPRR1188 and issues with large LMP from February, both to be detailed in future meetings.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Discussion on the additional time of use for CRR auction with Vistra and ERCOT to analyze further steps.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Concerns raised about the running time issues with CRR and day-ahead markets in light of anticipated grid growth and increased demand.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Responsibilities for CRR time of use and market growth issues to be led by Vistra, with ERCOT providing support.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Potential introduction of PTP fees in CRR and day-ahead markets to handle runtime and market growth challenges.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Emphasis on keeping the market updated about CRR developments and ongoing discussions on handling market growth.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Past issues with day-ahead market delays linked to PTP transactions highlighted, indicating ongoing challenges.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Commitment to transparency in considering PTP fees for CRR and day-ahead markets.</li> <li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">Future studies and detailed feedback on time of use to be presented by stakeholders.</li> </ul>