220 likes | 476 Views
Conference on the Status of OASIS II. MARCH 29 TH , 2005 FERC Offices Washington, DC. John Simonelli ISO New England Inc Manager, Tariffs, Schedules & OASIS Group. OASIS II Preamble. 1997 birth of the “The original” OASIS
E N D
Conferenceon the Status of OASIS II MARCH 29TH, 2005 FERC Offices Washington, DC John Simonelli ISO New England Inc Manager, Tariffs, Schedules & OASIS Group
OASIS II Preamble • 1997 birth of the “The original” OASIS • Industry officially moved into the electronic age with procurement of transmission services • 1999 birth of electronic E-tagging • version 1.4 implemented industry-wide • March toward “electronic services” in full swing OASIS II
OASIS II Preamble • Where were we in 1999 ? • Industry still fine-tuning OASIS • Significant post 888/889 regulatory activities • E-tagging still very immature, plenty of open issues • Industry struggling with concept of standardization • Added challenge of being ‘lost’ in the electronic wilderness • Many in the industry complained “it isn’t working” OASIS II
OASIS II Genesis • 2000 FERC rolled out the OASIS II ANOPR • FERC effort to merge/streamline Transmission Procurement, E-tagging and Scheduling • Viewed as the way to fix what was broken • Spawned the often referred to phrase “one-stop-shop” • NERC facilitated industry wide forum via the Electronic Scheduling and OASIS Standard Collaborative to address the issues OASIS II
OASIS II Genesis • 2002 FERC rolled out the SMD NOPR • Anticipated everyone would move to SMD platform • This represented a bump in the OASIS II development road • Although initial conflicting views on how SMD would be accommodated, SMD functionality was eventually added to OASIS II laundry list OASIS II
OASIS II Genesis • Result: OASIS II grew exponentially in scope and complexity in an attempt to address diverse industry needs • OASIS II became ‘Everything for Everyone’ • Effort handed off to the NAESB Electronic Scheduling and Information Technology Subcommittees OASIS II
OASIS II Genesis • Industry has not uniformly adopted the SMD platform, i.e, “Physical Markets” may remain physical for foreseeable future • The OASIS II scope never revisited to address the change in industry position on SMD OASIS II
Where are we Today ? “Necessity Is The Mother Of All Invention” • OASIS II has been in the works for years • “Financial Systems” and “Physical Systems” have been progressing to meet their specific needs without OASIS II OASIS II
Where are we Today ? • Demand for the original ‘everything to everyone’ scope of OASIS II has withered away • “Physical Systems” requiring reservations and E-tags to schedule energy have progressed by leaps and bounds over last five years • Dramatic reduction in complaints OASIS II
Where are we Today ? • “Financial Markets” could not wait for the industry to move forward • Each have established Stakeholder processes to examine market development needs • Resulted in development of extensive Market Information Systems (MIS) to allow implementation of their respective version of SMD OASIS II
Where are we Today ? • Market Information Systems (MIS) required: • thousands of hours in research and development • stakeholder involvement • millions of dollars in capital investment • MIS functionality for each market covers aspects currently in the OASIS II scope • Stakeholders are satisfied with overall MIS performance OASIS II
Where are we Today ? ISO New England Stakeholder Process • Stakeholders have a vision of the direction for the markets • Processes are in place for them to identify issues within the market and seams issues with neighboring markets • Stakeholders actively involved in prioritizing issues (internal or seams) that need to be addressed • OASIS II development may conflict with ongoing efforts to satisfy stakeholder demands OASIS II
Where are we Today ? • There is also active coordination between today's markets • Existing markets are not operating in a vacuum OASIS II
Where are we Today ? • Entities operating markets working collaboratively with EPRI and Vendors • First area addressed was security-constrained dispatch • Object to explore similarities and where possible standardize messaging amongst operational “tools of the trade” • Effort expanded to include market user to market operator interfaces OASIS II
Where are we Today ? • Other examples of market coordination: • Transaction Checkout in Northeast • NPCC and neighboring control areas coordinated to establish standard protocol for communication of Real-Time transaction checkout data • Minimal cost to implement with significant benefits to Control Room personnel • Expandable to other aspects of operational data OASIS II
Where are we Today ? • On going effort by PJM and MISO to address the seams between their two respective markets • In these examples and others not mentioned here; problems were identified, solutions developed and, those solutions are currently in various stages of deployment within the respective regions OASIS II
Conclusion • Industry must take advantage of the substantial progress made in both the “Physical” and “Financial” markets to eliminate unnecessary and/or redundant effort • Technology is continuing to evolve; processes need to be dynamic to build on the benefits that technology can provide OASIS II
Conclusion • Current practice shows the needs of “Physical” and “Financial” markets are different • Each should continue to address their respective needs but also be conscious of the potential impact on the “other side” • Where synergies exist between the two; they should be explored and developed • Communication must be continued to enable each to build off the successes of the other OASIS II
Conclusion • Physical systems should continue to look for ways to streamline and improve processes where scheduling systems are dependent on reservations and e-tags • In a sense, this returns OASIS II to it’s roots OASIS II
Conclusion • Financial systems in conjunction with the current expanded EPRI effort, should continue to actively promote common efficiencies and standardization on market systems wherever possible OASIS II
Conclusion • NERC Functional Model, Version 1 • All of these efforts need to be carefully aligned with the new reliability standards • The Interchange Authority/Coordination functionality will have a direct impact on the current practices for energy transactions and scheduling OASIS II
Thank You OASIS II