PRR704

Title:	Emergency Interruptible Load Service (EILS)
Next Group:
Next Step:
Status:	Rejected on 02/22/2007

Date	Gov Body	Next Steps
02/22/2007	PRS	Rejected
01/22/2007	PRS		Response to PRS request by ROS, WMS and ERCOT Staff
01/22/2007	PRS

Date	Gov Body	Motion	Result	Against	Abstentions
02/22/2007	PRS	To reject PRR704.	Passed	2 Consumers	2 IOU and IREP
01/22/2007	PRS	That PRS concurs with ERCOT that curtailing voluntary firm Load in emergency conditions is preferable to shedding firm Load on an involuntary basis. However, PRS is not yet convinced that such a program is appropriate for two reasons: 1. The market has changed since April 17, 2006; 2. Whether it can be implemented for a cost commensurate with the value of lost load (VOLL) associated with rotating outages during emergency conditions. Therefore, at this time, PRS declines to recommend approval or rejection of any PRRs related to EILS until questions related to the need and efficacy of such a service are more firmly established. PRS therefore tables PRR702, PRR703, PRR704, and PRR705 until the February 22, 2007 PRS meeting. PRS requests that the Reliability Operations Subcommittee (ROS) address the following questions and report back to PRS on February 22, 2007: 1. What is the statistical likelihood, given ERCOT Operator flexibility in the EECP process, that EILS will be utilized as envisioned prior to firm Load shedding? 2. Rate the impact of each of the EILS PRRs on ERCOT’s loss of Load probability (LOLP). 3. Evaluate the EILS PRRs procurement methodology. What is the appropriate amount of EILS to procure, if any? 4. Evaluate the EILS PRRs deployment methodology. Address any concerns that arise from deployment and recall: i.e., should EILS be deployed as a single block; is geographic concentration of EILS providers an issue during EECP; what are the effects of transmission system limitations; etc.? 5. What other alternatives to EILS, such as procuring additional existing Ancillary Services, could be utilized to achieve similar results? PRS requests that ERCOT Staff address the following questions and report to PRS on February 22, 2007: 1. What is the statistical likelihood, given ERCOT Operator flexibility in the EECP process, that EILS will be utilized as envisioned prior to firm Load shedding? 2. Rate the impact of each of the EILS PRRs on ERCOT’s LOLP. 3. What alternatives to EILS were examined by ERCOT, if any, and why was EILS pursued instead of those other options? Has the VOLL been determined for the April 17, 2006 Load shedding event? If so, please share the methodology and results of that study. If not, why not? PRS requests that WMS define the following and report to PRS on February 22, 2007: 1) The benefit. 2) The cost based on the EILS PRRs. 3) Changes in Market since April 17, 2007.	Passed	0	2 Consumers

Vote tallies here reflect individual votes, not the weight of the votes by market segment. Affirmative votes are not recorded in these vote tallies. For additional details on the voting record, please consult the Recommendation or Action Report, or the official vote tally if available, as posted in the key documents.

Status:	Rejected
Date Posted:	01/10/2007
Sponsor:	Chaparral Steel and Nucor Steel
Urgent:	Yes
Sections:	Section 2, Definitions and Acronyms; Section 4.1.3, Month Ahead Scheduling Process (New); Section 4.2, Scheduling-Related Duties of ERCOT Section; 4.8, Temporary Deviations from Scheduling Procedures; Section 4.11, Month Ahead Scheduling Process (New); Section 5.6.7, EECP STEPS; Section 5.6.7.1, Restoration of Market Operations; Section 6.1.13, Emergency Interruptible Load Service (New); Section 6.2.2, Ancillary Services Provided in Part by ERCOT and in part by Qualified Scheduling Entities; Section 6.3.1, ERCOT Responsibilities; Section 6.4.2 Determination of ERCOT Control Area Requirements; Section 6.5, Technical Requirements for Providers of Ancillary Services; Section 6.5.1.1, Requirement for Operating Period Data for System Reliability and Ancillary Service Provision; Section 6.5.1.2, Requirement for Operating Period Data for Emergency Interruptible Load Service Provision (New); Section 6.5.12, Emergency Interruptible Load Service (New); Section 6.6.1, Qualified Scheduling Entity Rights and Obligations to Self-Arrange Ancillary Service Resources; Section 6.6.2, Competitive Procurement of Ancillary Service Resources by ERCOT; Section 6.6.8, ERCOT Month-Ahead Ancillary Service Procurement Process (New); Section 6.8.6, Capacity Payments for Emergency Interruptible Load Service (New); Section 6.8.6.1, Payments for Emergency Interruptible Load Service Capacity (New); Section 6.8.6.2, Emergency Interruptible Load Service Payment to QSE (New); Section 6.9.9, Settlement for ERCOT Emergency Interruptible Load Service Procured for the Operating Month (New); Section 6.9.9.1, Emergency Interruptible Load Service Charge (New); Section 6.10.2, General Capacity Testing Requirements; Section 6.11, Emergency Interruptible Load Service Qualification, Testing and Performance Standards (New); Section 9.2.2, Settlement Statement Data; Section 16, Registration and Qualification of Market Participants; Section 16.5, Registration of Generation Resources, Loads Acting as a Resource, and Emergency Interruptible Load Resources
Description:	This PRR changes the Zonal Protocols sections noted above and upon approval institutes an Emergency Interruptible Load Service (EILS) as a load interruption emergency backstop during Emergency Electric Curtialment Plan (EECP) Step 3. EILS would provide ERCOT with a pool of loads that have voluntarily offered to interrupt at an offer price and would be dispatched to interrupt in the EECP step just prior to the Independent System Operator’s (ISO) dispatch order to Transmission and Distribution Service Provider/Distribution Service Providers (TDSP/DSPs) to shed firm load in order to preserve the system’s frequency.
Reason:	On September 15, 2006 ERCOT presented the need for another tool in the EECP toolbox to avoid the type of firm load shed event that occurred on April 17, 2006.