The motion to endorse the ADER Phase 3 governing document concepts as described in the Vistra/Enchanted Rock proposal was carried with a 90% majority in favor.
Kimaya Abreu of Voltus and colleague Youssef Shaker presented a proposal for Non-LSE participation in ADER, highlighting the expertise of third parties to grow ADER and bring megawatts to the market.
Criticism was directed at Vistra's option two from the last WMS, as it poses barriers to third-party participation.
Growth in ADER has been slow due to limited pathways for third-party participation, reflected in current participation limits.
The presentation showcased the benefits of the NCLR model for third-party participation, contrasting it with added complexities under proposed carve-outs.
A compromise at the task force meeting allowed third-party participation with over a 100 kW threshold, approved by a 17-4 majority vote.
Youssef Shaker highlighted concerns from Vistra's arguments, including changes in load shape, reputational risks, and potential participation by smaller customers.
The discussion involved evaluating how ADER participation impacts REPs' hedging strategies and customer energy usage variations without requiring prior consent from REPs.
Concerns included reputational risks to stakeholders from ADER and the importance of transitioning to policies that support broader incorporation of smaller customers in the future.
Recommendations included leaning towards an option that allows NCLRs to participate without changes and a compromise notice requirement in option two b to alleviate rep concerns.
The presentation emphasized that third parties are crucial for DERs to grow within ERCOT, and highlighted the potential of increased participation by removing consent requirements.
Questions from stakeholders, including the difference between LSE and REP terminology and the implications for NOIE's approval in customer participation, were addressed.
A discussion on how Voltus’s proposal is beneficial for consumers, highlighting the increased potential for residential customer participation in future ADER phases.
Eric Goff on behalf of Tesla presented proposed changes, emphasizing two main points: the inclusion of more ancillary services and concerns about program caps.
Tesla argues for the resolution of issues regarding ancillary services to enhance retailer access and participation in phase four.
There are concerns about the current cap on participation, which Tesla claims limits its customers and hinders the pilot's commercial viability.
Tesla calls for the removal of caps to facilitate broader market participation, suggesting the pilot phase might have concluded its usefulness in this area.
ERCOT representatives discussed the necessity of maintaining caps during the pilot phase to manage scope and learn from the process, with plans to potentially integrate changes into future market designs.
Stakeholders, including ERCOT and other representatives, expressed opposition to removing caps, citing the need for pilot scope control and resource management.
Suggestions were made to possibly extend discussions to reach a consensus before moving forward with proposed changes.
The governing document for phase three includes the discretion to adjust limits, addressing some of Tesla's concerns.
A vote was taken to move forward with the ADER phase three governing document concepts as proposed by VISTRA and Enchanted Rock, resulting in a 90% approval.
Outcome: The motion to endorse the ADER phase three governing document concepts as described in the VISTRA Enchanted Rock proposal was carried with a 90% majority in favor.
Presented by Magie Shanks from the ERCOT Settlements Group.
No price changes occurred after settlement statements were posted for Q1.
No resettlement due to non-price errors in Q1.
100% of disputes in Q1 resolved in a timely manner.
Noticeable spike in settlement charges due to load differences in settlement runs.
Data from 2011 to 2015 was removed to improve table visualization, retaining only the last ten years of data.
Presentation of real-time and day-ahead total charges statistics.
Details on ESI ID consumption data availability and load volume.
Net allocation to load slide showed the RMR settlement beginning in March 2025.
Securitization uplift and default charges highlighted.
Jim Galvin raised concerns about ESI ID consumption load availability impacting financials due to certain large meters (IDR meters) not being included in initial settlements.
Suggestion to analyze meter type issues in future sessions.
Magie agreed to discuss this with the data aggregation and metering group for potential inclusion in future reports.
The 2024 annual DG report totals just over 2,800 megawatts, excluding battery storage for the first time.
This exclusion practice was initially applied in quarterly reports and has now been implemented in annual reports.
Year-on-year growth in the annual report shows a 10% increase from 2023 to 2024.
There is a difference in NOIE data between annual reports (all NOIE DG capacity) and quarterly reports (only NOIE with a two-megawatt threshold are included).
The Q1 2025 quarterly report shows a DG total of slightly over 2,800 megawatts.
The quarterly report excludes DG battery storage, reflected at the table's bottom.
There was a 53-megawatt growth in the quarterly DG total from Q4 last year to Q1 this year.
No questions were raised in the meeting related to this report.
▶️7.5 - RMR Life Cycle Uplift Costs Expected Over Next Few Months
ERCOT is negotiating with Lifecycle and CPS to move 15 dual fuel combustion turbines to San Antonio from Houston.
The move requires the turbines to run on diesel fuel as they will be installed in substations.
ERCOT doesn't have a final agreement with Lifecycle yet, although they are close.
CPS and Lifecycle are incurring significant costs without current means to recover payments.
Estimated cost presented was approximately $54 million with $29 million for Lifecycle and $23 million for CPS.
Payment system isn't operational yet due to absence of contract and QSE, anticipated to be CPS.
Payments will start via a miscellaneous invoice once a contract and QSE are in place.
Initially, costs will be calculated manually using spreadsheets until all resources are registered in the system.
A system payment will replace manual calculation as more resources get registered.
ERCOT plans to transition costs into the RMR settlement system eventually.
Questions and Responses
Is there a process for notifying about miscellaneous invoices?
ERCOT will issue market notices with details of weekly miscellaneous invoices.
Are miscellaneous invoices burdensome?
Yes, they are administratively burdensome for local entities like LCRA.
▶️8.1 - Related to NPRR1264: COPMGRR051, SMOGRR031, and VCMRR043
COPMGRR051, SMOGRR031, and VCMRR043 are related to NPRR1264.
Waiting on PRS recommendation for NPRR1264 and development of the Impact Analysis (IA).
No action needed at this time; items can remain tabled.
The meeting proceeded to the language review.
Language Review
▶️8.2 - VCMRR044, RTC+B – Mitigated Offer Cap for Hydro Generation Resources
Motion to recommend approval of VCMRR044 as submitted added to the combo ballot.
The item discussed was VCMRR044 regarding mitigated offer caps (MOCs) for hydro generation resources.
The VCMRR was initiated due to a key principle approved during RTC meetings years ago.
Hydro resources not operating in synchronous condenser mode should have energy offer caps equal to MOCs.
Since hydro resources in synchronous condenser mode are not dispatched by SCED, the simplest solution is to set MOCs equal to the real-time system-wide offer cap for all hydro resources.
This proposal was previously discussed in RTC+B meetings, and task force members have seen the language.
Motion to recommend approval of SMOGRR032 and SMOGRR033 as submitted added to the combo ballot.
SMOGRR032 and SMOGRR033 are administrative changes with no substantive impact.
The updates involve adding a new OBD and updating references in related sections.
Both documents have been reviewed by the meter working group.
There is support for grouping these updates as combo ballot candidates and no concerns were raised by the group.
▶️9 - NPRR1255, Introduction of Mitigation of ESRs (Possible Vote)
Motion to request PRS continue to table NPRR1255 for further discussion at CMWG added to the combo ballot.
The NPRR1255 was introduced at the CMWG in September 2023, aiming to address energy storage resources (ESRs) and market power issues.
The NPRR sets a high threshold with a light-touch in terms of mitigation framework considering ESRs' unique challenges.
Mitigation applies if an ESR shows market power and a shift factor of 20% or more, impacting less than 1% of hours in a backcast analysis.
An additional threshold considers stored energy, exempting resources with less than 25% state of charge from mitigation, defaulting to system-wide offer caps.
Concern was expressed about this approach not accounting for battery duration, particularly with two-hour batteries.
The need for stakeholder clarification on implementation and further integration with RTC was highlighted.
Risk management for ESRs in the context of the RUC capacity short and potential mitigation was discussed.
The decision was to refer this NPRR to the CMWG for further refinement, particularly concerning the 25% filter and integration examples with RTC.
▶️10.1 - NPRR1275, Expansion of Qualifying Pipeline Definition for Firm Fuel Supply Service in Phase 3
Motion to request PRS continue to table NPRR1275 added to the combo ballot.
ERCOT filed comments after the April 24 open meeting recommending to keep the item tabled.
Comments from the commission indicated interest in opening a rulemaking to address program expansion issues.
A previous request was made for a list of issues to inform commission staff, but it's recommended not to pursue that and instead let the rulemaking process guide the commission.
There was uncertainty if the commission's PUC rulemaking calendar included firm fuel supply deliberations.
Matt Arth from ERCOT confirmed that ERCOT supports keeping NPRR1275 tabled pending further commission action.
It is believed that the commission intends to open a rulemaking in the future, though it was not scheduled for the upcoming open meeting.
Concerns were expressed about pointing to the commission for rulemaking if it's not on their proposed agenda.
Discussion of NPRR1275 is set to be tabled with the possibility of future revisiting, aiming for revisions by the 2026-27 procurement period.
Brittney Albracht highlighted the procedural aspect; NPRR1275 was referred to WMS and requires a response, even if just to request further tabling.
The decision was made to put NPRR1275 on the combo ballot for tabling at the current time, awaiting further direction from TAC discussions.
▶️11 - Revision Requests Tabled at PRS and Referred to WMS (Vote)
▶️11.1 - NPRR1070, Planning Criteria for GTC Exit Solutions
