1 / 9

CRR Shortfall – Revenue Equalization Part 3 (Continuation from 3/5/08 TPTF discussion)

Review of mathematically possible revenue shortfalls in ERCOT's settlement process and proposed measures to ensure revenue neutrality. Detailed explanation of the balancing account process and allocation of shortfalls to Real-Time holders. Discussion on equitable treatment of all CRR Account Holders.

ariellej
Download Presentation

CRR Shortfall – Revenue Equalization Part 3 (Continuation from 3/5/08 TPTF discussion)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CRR Shortfall – Revenue EqualizationPart 3 (Continuation from 3/5/08 TPTF discussion) Bill Barnes/Sharon Wang TPTF 3/21/2008

  2. CRR Settlement Revenue – Shortfall Issue Review • Issue: Mathematically possible for ERCOT to pay out more revenue that it collects between the time DAM and RTM are invoiced. See next slide.

  3. CRR Settlement Revenue – Shortfall Issue Review

  4. CRR Settlement Revenue – Proposed Solution • Proposed Solution: Add an accounting provision to guarantee ISO revenue neutrality (or revenue positive) in DAM • Goal: Do not impact the outcome of current Nodal Protocol design • New charge added to DAM statement to deduct CRR shortfall assigned to RT • New Bill Determinant to track these charges (“I owe you”) • CRR shortfall still assigned to RT CRR AHs • Refund RT shortfall portion back to DAM CRR AHs upon CRR BA closure • See next slide

  5. CRR Settlement Revenue – Proposed Solution

  6. Appendix

  7. CRR Settlement Revenue - Overview

  8. CRR Settlement Revenue - Overview • Balancing Account Process – managing CRR revenue adequacy • Day-Ahead Congestion Rent is compared to total Day-Ahead CRR payments on an hourly basis for the Operating day. • If excess Day-Ahead Congestion Rent exists compared to Day-Ahead CRR payments for the hour, excess added to Balancing Account. • If there is not enough Day-Ahead Congestion Rent to cover Day-Ahead CRR payments for the hour, a Day-Ahead shortfall is calculated for the operating day and allocated to DA and RT CRR holders. • At the end of the month, the total shortfall accumulation for the month is compared to Balancing Account accrual. • If BA is non-zero, any CRR holders shorted during the month will be made whole up to BA amount. • Excess funds in Balancing Account after alleviating CRR shorts will be paid to QSEs based on LRS. • Balancing Account clearing process independent of DAM or RTM invoicing process.

  9. CRR Settlement Revenue - Shortfall Allocation • Why do we allocate to the Real-Time? • NP Section 4.5.1 (8) • “The directional network element flows for PTP Options declared for settlement in Real-Time must be properly accounted for in determining available transmission network capacity in the DAM.” • Translation: DAM clearing engine will make an economic decision to clear a CRR offer (settled in DAM) or reserve the capacity for Real-Time (settled in RT). • Since RT CRR capacity is reserved in the DAM, it would not be covered by DAM Congestion Rent. • Why do we allocate a shortfall of DAM Congestion Rent compared to DAM CRR payments to RT CRR Account Holders? • Equitable treatment of all CRR AHs

More Related