Profiling Working Group Update to COPS February 7, 2018 Sheri Wiegand (TXU) – Chair

1. Profiling Working Group Update to COPS February 7, 2018 Sheri Wiegand (TXU) – Chair Sam Pak (Oncor) – Vice-Chair

2. 2017 Accomplishments

3. 2017 Accomplishments, cont.

4. 2018 PWG Goals

5. Annual Validation – Investigative Process Annual Validation Study – Process Review - SUMMARY • Is the current residential process effective to: • accurately define the consumption pattern of the ESI • determination if the premise responds to cold temperatures likely indicating electric heating • Addressed the questions • Are the process algorithms working? YES • Are there flip-flops of ESIs from RESHI to RESLO and vice versa? NO • What drives the changes in load profiles? Severity of Weather • Next Question: • What would the impacts be if additional data points were considered – review of four or five years historical consumption?

6. Annual Validation - Study Details • The 2017 residential AMS validation used the previous three years of “winter” data as specified in the Profile Decision Tree • Winter is defined as January and February so the 2017 study used 6 months of data from 2015-2017 • After discussing the large numbers of changes, the PWG requested ERCOT that study extending the historical period to 4 and 5 years • CenterPoint and ONCOR data were used because these TDSP’s have sufficient AMS residential meters to support the 4 and 5 year study December 2017 PWG Meeting

7. RESHI to RESLO If the existing assignment is HIWR (or a DG variation such as HIPV) then if the required data were not available to calculate R-square values for any of the 6-10 months then do not change assignment; else if NYears = 3 AND all 6 R-square values are <= 0.4 then assign LOWR; else if NYears = 4 AND all 8 R-square values are <= 0.4 then assign LOWR; else if NYears = 5 AND all 10 R-square values are <= 0.4 then assign LOWR; else do not change assignment. December 2017 PWG Meeting

8. RESLO to RESHI If the existing assignment is LOWR (or a DG variation such as LOPV) then if the required data were not available to calculate R-square values for any of the 6-10 months then do not change assignment; else if NYears = 3 AND any 3 of the 6 R-square value is >= 0.6 then assign HIWR; else if NYears = 4 AND any 5 of the 8 R-square values is >= 0.6 then assign HIWR; else if NYears = 5 AND any 7 of the 10 R-square values is >= 0.6 then assign HIWR; else do not change assignment. December 2017 PWG Meeting

9. RES Change Counts Using 3-5 Historical Years December 2017 PWG Meeting

10. Annual Validation – Conclusion • AV on a new ESI does not occur until the number of data points is achieved – increasing to 4 or 5 years prolongs any analysis • Prior to AMS meters, the number of profile changes was significantly higher – current volumes are manageable • the current distribution of HI to LO by TDSP territory appears reasonable Note: These percentages are based on the Profile Counts of March 2017

11. Weather Sensitivity Report

12. Next PWG meeting date: April 25th, 2017WebEx only 9:30 am AGENDA • Annual Validation Update http://www.ercot.com/committees/board/tac/cops/pwg/