Discussion about Development of DRRS as an ancillary service to address operational uncertainty needs.
Development of design concept through NPRR1235 to align with statutory language in PURA § 39.159(d).
Emphasis on DRRS attributes satisfying operational uncertainty but recognizing broader sector conversations about its role in other areas.
Feedback from discussions at the PUC's ancillary services study was considered in focus towards developing DRRS.
Conversations with Supply Analysis Working Group to delve deeply into questions around real-time price formation and interaction that would be seen in NPRR1235.
Presented potential design concepts; acknowledgment of additional concepts from others.
Today's focus is on real-time issues, foundational to addressing statutory language related to DRRS.
Feedback solicited over winter break pointing to a need for deeper understanding of mechanics in day-ahead and real-time operations.
The current workshop aims to ensure appropriate real-time outcomes while addressing the statutory language, independent of specific design proposals.
Future workshops will allow for returning to design concept proposals to drive stakeholder alignment into NPRR language.
It's highlighted that this service is designed to comply with approved laws when being put together.
A specific statutory requirement discussed was the need to reduce reliability unit commitments by the amount of dispatchable reliability reserve services procured.
This requirement is identified as a unique challenge for the DRRS service compared to other ancillary services.
The purpose of reliability unit commitment (RUC) is to ensure enough resource capacity is committed to reliably serve the forecasted load and meet ancillary service capability needs.
RUC processes start in the day-ahead time frame and run hourly up to 60 minutes before the operating hour.
Off-Line Demand Response Resource Services (DRRS) deployment decisions must align with other RUC determinations.
There are ramp eligibility constraints; DRRS must be able to come online within two hours of being called.
Future design discussions might include considerations of ramp requirements which could impact the DRRS capacity pool.
Operators cannot ignore the commitment of additional capacity if deemed necessary, serving as a reliability backstop.
RUC optimization is not designed to procure DRRS, and DRRS procured will be used over RUC instructions.
The two-hour ramp requirement establishes a last applicable HRUC, which is three hours ahead of a given operating hour.
Questions were raised about the operators' abilities to make and defer commitments based on RUC results.
DRRS should be procured on both a day-ahead and real-time basis to address market uncertainties.
Discussion centered around DRRS payments and the necessity for offline resources to be committed in the Day-Ahead Market (DAM) to receive real-time payments.
Concerns were raised about the requirement of DRRS deployment needing to reduce RUC commitments.
The offline resources have to be committed in the DAM to receive payment, while online resources have more flexibility.
Different ideas and interpretations were discussed regarding real-time procurement and the statutory obligations for DRRS.
The idea of multi-interval markets and their implementation challenges were discussed.
Concerns were expressed about RUC processes, their timing, and how they integrate with DRRS.
Design proposals should meet set criteria and must include considerations for DAM procurement, RUC offset, and real-time procurement.
Settlement considerations include charging based on DAM obligations minus self-arranged capacities and possible DRRS imbalance calculations.
Performance monitoring was mentioned as a potential issue if resources consistently fail to meet deployment instructions.
There was debate over the potential inclusion of virtual offers in the DAM for DRRS.
Qualification requirements consist of ramp and duration parameters but may adapt to seasonal requirements.
