Meeting Summary - 05/28/2025 TAC Meeting

▶️1 - Antitrust Admonition

▶️ 2 - Approval of TAC Meeting Minutes (Vote)

• Motion to approve the April 23, 2025 meeting minutes as submitted added to the combo ballot.
• No changes or corrections were reported for the meeting minutes.

▶️ 3 - Meeting Updates

▶️ 3.1 - PUCT Open Meetings

• Approval of all revision requests recommended by the ERCOT board at the April meeting by the Commission at the May 15th PUC Open Meeting.

▶️ 4 - Review of Revision Request Summary/ERCOT Market Impact Statement/Opinions

Revision-Request-Summary-052825_Rev2.pdf

• 10 revision requests were reviewed, excluding NOGRR264 which remains tabled.
• 2 requests align with strategic objective number two.
• 7 requests relate to general system process improvements.
• 1 request falls under the regulatory requirement category.
• Budget impacts noted: NPRR1226 and NPRR1267 ($100K to $150K each), NPRR1238 ($700K to $1,000,000).
• Credit finance subgroup found no credit implications for the NPRRs reviewed.
• ERCOT supports approval of all revision requests, except for NPRR1238 and NOGRR265 due to inconsistency with SB6.
• IMM has no opinion on most requests except for opposition to PRS recommendation on NPRR1282, supporting 5/13 IMM comments.
• Further discussion is planned under the PRS report.
• No theme for the meeting was noted, and it should be recorded that there was no theme.

▶️ 5 - PRS Report (Vote)

5-PRS-Presentation-to-TAC-052825.pdf

▶️ 5.1 - NPRR1226, Estimated Demand Response Data

• Motion to recommend approval of NPRR1226 as recommended by PRS in the 5/14/25 PRS Report as revised by TAC added to the combo ballot.
• NPRR1226 originated from ERCOT Steel mills.
• Unanimous vote on February 12 to recommend approval with amendments based on February 11 ERCOT comments.
• On May 14, there was a unanimous vote to endorse and forward to TAC the March 12 PRS report, revised by PRS.
• Endorsement also included the May 5 IA with the specified cost and priority rank.

▶️ 5.1 - NPRR1226 Desktop Edits

• Cory Phillips mentioned the language on NPRR1226 was refined by PRS but required adjustments to the cover page to standardize format.
• The cover page description was updated to clearly state what NPRR1226 entails for better understanding.
• The red line sections from the protocol were moved to the description for clarity on the NPRR1226 functionalities.
• Participants aimed to seek approval for NPRR1226 and other related policies in the 05/14 PRS report.
• Agreed to place NPRR1226, NPRR1267, and NPRR1276 on the combo ballot for approval.
• Decision to split upcoming NPRRs among participants for efficient review and approval process.

▶️ 5.2 - NPRR1238, Registration of Loads with Curtailable Load Capabilities

• First motion to table NPRR1238 and NOGRR265 failed with 17 yes votes, 9 no votes, and 3 abstentions.
• A second motion was made to table the items after input from commission staff and discussion on the timing surrounding the legislative session. 
• The second motion to table NPRR1238 and NOGRR265 passed unanimously with no abstentions.

Recommendation and Opposition

• The NPRR1238 was recommended for approval with amendments on March 12.
• There was opposition from the Independent REPs segment and an abstention from the consumer market segment.

Demands for Review

• New impact assessment with high budget implications was highlighted.
• ERCOT comments on the proposal await consideration.

Legislative Concerns

• Nathan Bigbee of ERCOT emphasized the need to table the NPRR pending legislative deliberations on Senate Bill 6.
• The bill has undergone several amendments, with possibilities for further changes.

ERCOT's Position

• ERCOT generally supports the NPRR solution as it addresses issues for various stakeholders.
• There are concerns regarding potential legislative conflicts, specifically surrounding large load curtailments before EEA.

Stakeholder Discussions

• Concerns were raised about mandating loads to register as curtailable, particularly affecting traditional industrial loads.
• The NPRR does not intend to cover all large loads but focuses on flexible loads sensitive to high prices.

Coordination with Legislative Outcomes

• The need to synchronize with the ongoing legislative process and potential impacts on NPRR decisions was emphasized by numerous parties.

Procedural Considerations

• Discussion on potential procedural pathways, including tabling motions until after legislative outcomes are clarified.
• Considered options for special meetings and email votes to address timing constraints relative to TAC and board meetings.

Outcome

• After extended discussion, the motion to table NPRR1238 and concurrent NOGRR265 was approved by TAC.
• A potential follow-up TAC meeting (WebEx) was proposed for the week of June 9th to reevaluate based on new legislative insights.

▶️ 5.3 - NPRR1267, Large Load Interconnection Status Report

• Motion to recommend approval of NPRR1267 as recommended by PRS in the 5/14/25 PRS Report added to the combo ballot.
• NPRR1267 is presented by joint sponsors.
• Unanimous approval recommendation on April 9, with amendments from February 8 or 28 Reliant Comments.
• Unanimous endorsement and forwarding to TAC on May 14 of the April 9 PRS report and May 13 IA.
• Priority and rank, along with cost, were displayed on the screen.

▶️ 5.4 - NPRR1276, Move OBD to Section 22 – Emergency Response Service Procurement Methodology

• Motion to recommend approval of NPRR1276 as recommended by PRS in the 5/14/25 PRS Report added to the combo ballot.
• NPRR1276 was introduced by ERCOT in April.
• PRS voted unanimously to recommend approval of NPRR1276 as submitted.
• On May 14, there was a unanimous vote to endorse and forward the PRS report from April 9 and the March 10 IA.
• Inquiry was made about desktop edits to NPRR1226, seeking someone from ERCOT to review those.

▶️ 5.5 - NPRR1282, Ancillary Service Duration under Real-Time Co-Optimization – URGENT

• The NPRR1282 is sponsored by ERCOT and has been granted urgent status by PRS on May 14.
• 9 opposing votes and 2 abstentions were noted during the recommendation for approval.
• Two presentations and one new set of comments were scheduled for review.
• A companion NOGRR277 is linked to this agenda item.
• Eric Goff has delegated his proxy to Naba for representing Texas Solar and Storage Association.
• Sequence of presentations was planned: starting with Andrew Reimers from IMM followed by ERCOT.
• Bob Helton proposed a motion to recommend approval of NPRR1282 with IMM comments amending the PRS report from May 13.
• Motion passed, with discussions planned before voting.

▶️ 5.5 NPRR1282 - IMM Presentation

IMM-NPRR-1282-TAC-052825.pdf

• The IMM recommends setting the Non-Spin duration constraint to 1 hour over 4 hours.
• A 4-hour constraint incentivizes batteries to provide energy rather than reserves, which depletes their state of charge.
• Batteries providing energy run out of state of charge faster, hampering their ability to provide reserves later.
• The current SCED setup makes Non-Spin from batteries appear expensive due to duration constraints.
• The IMM used a simplified SCED tool to demonstrate how batteries are awarded more energy as their state of charge depletes.
• The interaction between battery duration and energy offer prices is crucial in determining dispatch outcomes.
• When forecast errors occur, batteries might deplete faster due to energy awards, potentially impacting the availability of reserves.
• The difference in Non-Spin prices due to duration requirement affects the price spread between different ancillary services.
• Reducing the duration requirement can make batteries more willing to provide reserves versus providing energy.
• Concerns are raised about how Non-Spin reserves with one-hour products might be exhausted quicker than four-hour products.
• IMM and ERCOT have differing views on the necessity and scale of Non-Spin plan duration requirements.
• RTC impacts on dispatching decisions and Non-Spin duration are debated.

▶️ 5.5 NPRR1282 - ERCOT Presentation

RTCTF_Duration_Requirements_Response_1282.pdf

• Motion to recommend approval of NPRR1282 as recommended by PRS in the 5/14/25 PRS Report passed with 93% in favor, two opposed, and one abstention.
• Discussion on NPRR1282 centered on the evolving reliability needs and AS products required for grid stability.
• ERCOT emphasized the need for longer duration ancillary services to manage variability and uncertainty on the grid.
• A primary point was the recommendation to increase duration for regulation and RRS due to historical events like SCED failure.
• ERCOT suggested maintaining a four-hour duration for Non-Spin Reserve to ensure grid reliability under forecast errors or outages.
• There was significant debate on the appropriate duration for Non-Spin and ECRS, with differing views between ERCOT, IMM, and stakeholders.
• ERCOT stated that Non-Spin with a four-hour duration is necessary based on operational experience and historical deployment events.
• Stakeholders expressed concerns about market certainty, investment impacts, and the practicality of new duration requirements.
• Several stakeholders argued for a one-hour product for Non-Spin in real-time to optimize flexibility and efficiency.
• A motion was proposed but failed to pass, recommending a compromise that maintained four-hour qualifications but suggested one-hour procurement in real-time.
• Another motion passed to approve NPRR1282 as recommended by PRS, with the understanding of potential revisits post-RTC go live.

▶️ 6 - Revision Requests Tabled at TAC (Possible Vote)

▶️ 6.1 - NOGRR264, Related to NPRR1235, Dispatchable Reliability Reserve Service as a Stand-Alone Ancillary Service

• NOGRR264 remains tabled with no action required this month.
• The item is waiting on the companion NPRR.

▶️ 7 - RMS Report (Vote)

2025-05-28-RMS-update-to-TAC-v1.pdf

• RMS had two voting items at the last meeting, both items were passed unanimously.

▶️ 7.1 - RMS Strategic Objectives

2025-RMS-Strategic-Objectives-Approved.pdf

• Motion to approve the RMS Strategic Objectives as presented added to the combo ballot.
• 2025 RMS strategic objectives approved and consolidated into 6 easy-to-understand goals that align with the RMS scope.
• RMS Working Group and task force are progressing with key activities including the annual validation and an in-depth review of the load profiling guide.
• Upcoming retail market training sessions: Retail 101 on June 18 and Texas SET 5.0 on June 25. Hosted by Vistra in Irving with some seats still available.
• Texas data transport MarkeTrak system continues analysis for inadvertent gains, showing progress due to automation improvements in Texas SET 5.0.
• Ongoing work on MarkeTrak application, quarterly reports, and retail system service level compliance.
• In-depth review of Texas market test plan is underway, expected to take several meetings.
• Next RMS meeting scheduled for Thursday, June 12 at 09:30am
• Two voting items proposed for approval: RMS strategic objectives and recommendations related to OBDRR054 and the RMS report.

▶️ 7.2 - OBDRR054, TDSP(s) Pre-Production Verification Testing

• Motion to recommend approval of OBDRR054 as recommended by RMS in the 5/13/25 RMS Report added to the combo ballot.
• The request is for revising the Texas market test plan to include pre-production testing requirements for market participants.
• Currently, there's no requirement for market participants to complete pre-production testing if they were qualified on past versions.
• Historical incidents occurred with Oncor, CenterPoint, and another case 16 years ago due to outdated qualifications.
• An example was given of a market participant who was certified 16 years ago but faced issues when entering production as they used past versions of Texas SET transactions and NAESB EDM.
• There was a lack of awareness about system changes required for the new versions among market participants.
• Clarification was provided stating that all market participants must undergo qualification testing with any changes or when new Texas SET versions are released.
• The current issue highlights the need for a language update in the Texas market test plan to prevent similar incidents.
• Connectivity testing and billing/payment processes are part of these requirements, with retesting required if any system changes occur after initial qualification.

▶️ 8 - ROS Report (Vote)

ROS_Update_to_TAC-52825.pdf

• The first two items discussed were already covered under the PRS report for voting.
• Both items received unanimous approval, indicating readiness for a combined ballot for TAC.
• The DWG procedural manual was reviewed, with a separate ballot conducted due to generator segment extensions preferring to delay approval for advanced grid support testing.
• Approval is contingent upon the passage of a protocol that would necessitate such testing.
• Considerations were made regarding the potential for confusion with the current proceedings.

▶️ 8.1 - NOGRR265, Related to NPRR1238, Registration of Loads with Curtailable Load Capabilities

• Completed work on NPRR1238 and NOGRR265.
• Proposal to remove NPRR1238 and NOGRR265 from the TAC assignment, pending any confusion.
• No objections were raised regarding the removal from the ROS action item list.
• NPRR1238 and NOGRR265 will still remain on the TAC action item list for future meetings.
• Next meeting is scheduled for June 5 and will be conducted via Webex.

▶️ 8.2 - NOGRR275, Eliminate Scheduling Center Requirements for QSEs That Are Not WAN Participants

• Motion to recommend approval of NOGRR275 as recommended by ROS in the 5/1/25 ROS Report added to the combo ballot.
• Discussion focused on NOGRR275 regarding scheduling center requirements.
• A motion was suggested to put NOGRR275 on the combo ballot for approval.
• ROS had recommended approval in the May 1 ROS report.
• No objections or abstentions were noted for the motion.
• Action was delegated to Cory to handle the motion.

▶️8.3 - NOGRR277, Related to NPRR1282, Ancillary Service Duration under Real-Time Co-Optimization – URGENT

• Motion to recommend approval of NOGRR277 as recommended by ROS in the 5/20/25 ROS Report passed unanimously with 2 abstensions.
• NOGRR277 was discussed under the ROS update and was previously approved by ROS via email vote with one abstention.
• There were no objections to placing the NOGRR on the combo ballot.
• The group voted to recommend approval of NOGRR277 as guided by ROS in the May 2025 ROS report, with one abstinence.
• Several representatives provided their votes, with two abstentions from Bob Helton and Caitlin Smith.
• Motion passed with approval from various representatives, indicating the motion carried.
• Post-vote, the meeting was adjourned for a 20-minute break before resuming with subcommittee updates.

▶️ 8.4 - PGRR125, Update of LSIPA Compliance Attestation – URGENT

• Motion to recommend approval of PGRR125 as recommended by ROS in the 5/1/25 ROS Report as revised by TAC added to the combo ballot.
• Discussion on desktop edits for PGRR125, focusing on referencing a system to the RIOO throughout the planning guide.
• Motion to recommend approval of PGRR125 in line with the ROS May first report, revised by TAC, including the discussed edits.
• Suggestion to add the motion to a combo ballot.
• Cory tasked with safeguarding the motion.

▶️ 9 - WMS Report (Vote)

WMS-Report-to-TAC---May-28-2025.pdf

• Blake Holt presented the WMS report.
• Final discussion was held on the ADER phase three governing document.
• Interested parties including Leap, Voltus, Vistra, Enchanted Rock, and Tesla participated.
• WMS voted 90% in favor of the concepts jointly filed by Vistra and Enchanted Rock.
• Ryan King is scheduled to discuss those concepts in more detail.
• Ino Gonzalez provided an overview of the RMR life cycle uplift costs.
• Necessary agreements regarding the RMR uplift costs have not been completed.
• Ino Gonzales committed to provide another update at the next meeting.

▶️9.1 - WMS Strategic Objectives

• Motion to approve the WMS Strategic Objectives as presented added to the combo ballot.
• WMS has agreed on a new set of strategic objectives.
• There are some approved items pending an IA, with updates expected next month.

▶️9.2 - ADER Phase 3 Governing Document

• Motion to endorse the ADER Phase 3 Governing Document as presented added to the combo ballot.
• The ADER Phase 3 Governing Document was an action item from TAC to WMS and has been closed out by the WMS side.
• There was a discussion about tabling the document until the next TAC meeting due to significant edits and lack of detailed discussions at subcommittee or working group levels.
• Voltus is interested in exploring options regarding two main issues: the authority given to LSE QSEs over their portfolio in context of the ADER pilot and a provision related to rejecting specific premises from ADER aggregation.
• Voltus emphasizes the importance of a deadline for LSE QSEs to respond to third-party QSEs, suggesting possibly a 30-day window.
• There is a goal to present the governing document to the board in June, but it is not mandated.
• The procedural necessity of a TAC vote for advancing the document was questioned and left for further clarification.
• Ned Bonskowski commented that the timing for responses should be worked out between the parties directly and need not be included in the governing document.

▶️ 9.2.1 - ERCOT Presentation

ADER-Pilot-Project-Phase-II-Update_TAC.pdf

• ERCOT plans to bring Phase 3 governing document to the board in June.
• An associated report covers phase two experience, results, and issues.
• The presentation highlighted phase two findings with 3 ADRs qualified at 15 megawatts energy, 8 megawatts Non-Spin reserve service, and 9 additional ADRs in registration.
• Phase 3 proposed enhancements include increased pilot participation limits and a new participation model similar to a non-controllable load resource.
• Discussion on telemetry validation enhancements and zonal dispatch analysis concerns.
• Phase 3 governing document approved by WMS, accommodating 60 megawatts for energy and 84 megawatts for ancillary services.
• Immediate increase proposed to 160 megawatts and 80 megawatts for energy and ancillary services due to growing interest.
• Clarification requested on ERCOT's discretion in participation limits.
• Presentation aims to move pilot to permanent market design.
• Discussion on whether to vote on the phase three governing document; voting tabled for board meeting.
• Support expressed for WMS governing document compromise, balancing retail and third-party access concerns.

▶️10 - Credit Finance Sub Group (CFSG) Report

TAC_CFSG_28May2025.pdf

• The meeting was held on May 19 and covered several NPRRs and credit updates related to real-time co-optimization plus batteries.
• A CRR credit proposal from DC Energy was reviewed, highlighting the need for potential changes to CRR obligation collateral. ERCOT will conduct a gap analysis.
• Discussions included credit exposure calculations and potential revisions due to new AS virtual offers.
• ERCOT presented a market credit risk corporate standard initiative to assess market participants' risk exposure.
• A risk-based assessment of default risk is being introduced to better understand and mitigate potential default scenarios.
• ERCOT emphasized this initiative as a market education event, not altering credit calculations or collaterals.
• The session included a presentation on stress-testing scenarios similar to industry standards in banking to prepare for extreme volatility.
• Credit highlights showed minimal changes with no significant activities or unusual collateral calls.

▶️11 - Large Load Working Group (LLWG) Report

▶️11.1 - Confirmation of LLWG Leadership (Vote)

• Motion to approve the LLWG Leadership as presented:  Chair - Bob Wittmeyer; Vice Chair - Patrick Gravois added to the combo ballot.
• The main discussion focused on voltage and ride-through issues to protect the grid from load loss.
• 3 gigawatts in West Texas were approved, but potential load losses of 2,500 megawatts were noted in case of voltage issues.
• Workshops will be held on July 11 to address the data center and large load side of voltage issues.
• Interest was expressed in hearing from engineers and regional solutions, particularly from battery technology providers.

▶️11.2 - Large Load Interconnection Status Update

LLI-Queue-Status-Update---2025-5.pdf

• The large load queue has grown significantly in the past year from mid-40s gigawatt range to 56 gigawatts.
• There was a net increase of 19 gigawatts in the queue, including new projects and cancellations.
• Breakdown of project statuses includes: Energized, Approved to Energize, Planning Studies Approved, Under ERCOT Review, and Studies Submitted.
• In the past year, 1,395 MW of load was approved to energize.
• Of the 6,874 MW approved to energize, about half are in the Western zone, while the remainder is distributed in other load zones.
• Standalone projects comprise 5,609 MW and colocated projects account for 1,265 MW.
• ERCOT observed a non-simultaneous monthly peak consumption of 3,489 MW in May, slight decrease from last month.
• The simultaneous monthly peak consumption was 3,441 MW in May, showing a slight increase from last month.
• Project distribution by size: 93 projects in the 75-250 MW range, 66 in the 250-500 MW range, 53 in the 500-1000 MW range, and 56 projects over 1000 MW.
• There were discussions on the need for further breakdown of project details, especially with NPRR1267 requests.
• Stakeholders expressed interest in understanding project churn rate and how approvals evolve, considering some approved projects might later opt out.

▶️12 - RTC+B Task Force Report

12_RTCBTF_TAC_Update_05282025.pdf

Stakeholder_Initiative_Pause_Final.pdf

• Update on the status of RTC+B task force report and additional agenda adjustments.
• Confirmation of PUCT approval for top 3 NPRRs, advancing RTC state of charge.
• NPRR1290 filed but tabled at PRS for September board review.
• Completion of various deliverables, with focus on market trials and training modules.
• Highlighted the upcoming go-live transition plan and protocol waivers for December 5 go live.
• Established FAQ document for quick reference among market participants.
• Posted sample settlement statement and extracts; structure remains unchanged despite detail updates.
• Emphasis on the closed-loop LFC handbook and development of a transition cut over plan.
• Discussion on the proposal to remove system lambda capping logic; not pursued for go-live list.
• Outline of ongoing market trials, visibility into scorecards, and exit criteria.
• Plans for transmission cutover in line with telemetry and operational setups.
• Emphasis on collaboration in prioritizing initiatives relative to RTC implementation efforts.
• Proposal to pause non-priority NPRRs to focus resources on mandatory regulatory items.
• Clarification sought on NPRRs that require or do not require significant ERCOT analysis.
• Consideration of factors like avoiding market disruptions when prioritizing initiatives.
• Potential scheduling for RTC+B successor task force or workshops for ongoing dialogue and planning.

▶️13 - ERCOT Reports - 12:05 p.m.

▶️13.1 - Outage Coordination Outage Capacity Calculation and Process (Possible Vote)

• Update on proposed revisions to the MDRPOC methodologies, seeking feedback from stakeholders.
• Revisions aim to provide sufficient outage capacity compared to historical levels, applying risk-based methodology for outages more than seven days ahead.
• The proposed revision incorporates feedback from stakeholders, presenting a new MDRPOC curve for better thermal generation resource evaluation.
• Stakeholders expressed appreciation for accommodating feedback and extending the first-year methodology, which helps with planning scheduled outages.
• Discussion about incorporating minimum outage levels in winter and summer to spread outages throughout the year.
• Stakeholders raised questions regarding changes in minimum outage levels from previous presentations and whether minimum levels could be included in protocol language for better scheduling certainty.
• Consideration of historical outage performance before and after MDRPOC implementation to inform current methodology revisions.
• Suggestions were made to consider average over requested time windows instead of individual days impacting outage requests.
• Ongoing collaboration with stakeholders and updates planned for approval in June 2025.

▶️13.2 - Segment Membership Update

• Consideration of changes to the bylaws which were last discussed in the Fall.
• 3 groups submitted proposals for bylaw changes
• No responses to the proposals were received.
• A draft version of the bylaws has been prepared, incorporating red lines and correcting typos and inconsistencies.
• Ongoing litigation from the 2022 bylaws update is still not resolved.
• Expected a finalized opinion regarding the litigation but it's still pending.
• An update will be planned for the June board meeting pending finalization of litigation.
• Awaiting recommendations from the Legal department on the path forward.

▶️13.3 - Firm Fuel Supply Service Settlement Report

FFSS Settlement Report 2025.pdf

• The obligation period for the season was from 11/15/2024 to 03/15/2025.
• 33 generation resources were awarded as primary FFSSRs.
• The clearing price was $12,240 per megawatt, with 4,195 megawatts of capacity procured for about $51,300,000.
• The standby fee settlement amount was $49,700,000, slightly less due to availability reduction factors.
• No fuel replacement costs were incurred.
• The estimated standby fee clawback amount was about $7,300,000.
• Clawbacks are based on paragraphs 9, 11, and 13 of the protocol, reflecting issues like unavailability during a watch, failure to deliver a 95% average HSL, and mechanical failures.
• Six resources incurred clawback charges for various reasons related to availability and performance.
• Discussion occurred on cap and budget limits for procurement, with confirmation that the procurement cleared at the cap set this season.
• The cap had been lowered by the Commission, which affected the clearing price.
• Clarification that settlements are involved only at the end of the process, with procurement details requiring follow-up.
• Bryan Sams confirmed the procurement cleared at the new cap and emphasized competitive procurement.

▶️ 13.4 - RPG Project - Combined Delaware Basin Stage 5 Project and Alternative (Possible Vote)

Oncor WETT Delaware Basin Stage 5_EIR_TAC_May_2025.pdf

• Motion to endorse the RPG Project - Combined Delaware Basin Stage 5 Project and Alternative (Oncor Option) added to the combo ballot
• Introduction of Oncor Delaware Basin Stage 5 project for RPG review by Prabhu Gnanam from ERCOT.
• Original project submitted in May 2024, with an alternate project submitted in August 2024.
• Initial project cost of $744 million, requiring CCN; portion of cost is $305 million.
• Primary driver is reliability issues identified in the Delaware Basin integration study (2019).
• Identification and confirmation of project needs in 2023 RTP, 2025 case, and 2024 Permian Basin reliability study.
• Comparison of project options reveals Oncor as the preferred choice.
• ERCOT recommends the Oncor option for reliability issues in the forest weather zone.
• In-service date for the project expected by December 2029.
• Total estimated project cost is $855.3 million.
• Major project components include several new and upgraded lines and stations (e.g., Clear Fork to La Mesa, La Mesa to Faraday).
• SSR screening showed no adverse impacts from the project.
• Congestion and sensitivity analysis found no additional congestion or issues.

▶️13.5 - Real-Time Market Price Correction - Generic Transmission Constraint incorrectly being considered in SCED

Potential Price Correction Mar. 29 '25 - Generic Transmission Constraint incorrectly being considered in SCED.pdf

• A software update led to a configuration parameter reset to its default value, impacting March 28 and 29.
• The reset parameter caused post-contingency interface violations to impact SCED, triggering price corrections.
• Constraints reached maximum shadow price of $5,251 per MWh during affected intervals.
• Price corrections for March 28 were completed within the two-business-day deadline; March 29 corrections were delayed.
• A market notice was issued in early April, and a follow-up notice affirmed intent to seek board review.
• Analysis identified 12 counterparties with over 2% impact greater than $20,000, and 12 with 20% impact over $2,000.
• Maximum absolute impact observed was nearly $100,000, with significant percentage changes noted.
• Net change in statement charges was about negative $80,000, a 0.4% change.
• Next steps involve seeking board approval for price corrections in June.
• Discussion on frequency of price corrections, noting increased complexity, not frequency.
• Proposal for evaluating thresholds for board consideration and implementing additional controls was discussed.
• Plans to present data on price corrections to the board with proposed recommendations were mentioned.
• Board updates will include a segment on transmission planning, with multiple presenters slated.

▶️14 - Other Business

▶️14.1 - Board/Stakeholder Engagement Update

Board-Stakeholder-Engagement-Update-(528-TAC)-v3.pdf

• TAC leadership selected the presenters for the June Board Session on transmission planning.

▶️14.2 - Action Items List Review

• Review of action items list conducted by Martha Henson.
• Focus on item number 10 from the list: ADER Pilot Program (TAC Leadership).
• Recommendation to remove ADER item from WMS action item list.
• No resistance faced to the recommendation.
• Suggestion to also remove the ADER item from the TAC action item list.
• Acknowledgment that future changes to governing documents are unclear.
• Agreement to remove the item from lists and have future revisions handled by WMS.

▶️14.3 - Biennial TAC/TAC Subcommittee Structural and Procedural Review

TAC-Stakeholder-Body-Structural-and-Procedural-Review.pdf

• The review was previously conducted annually but now occurs biennially.
• Significant developments have occurred since 2023 in the council's procedures or structures.
• Emphasis on enhancing transparency, efficiency, and effectiveness in stakeholder processes.
• Recognition of the difficulty stakeholders face in attending numerous meetings, necessitates a focus on streamlining processes.
• Suggestions to improve coordination among groups and meetings, especially when dealing with similar topics.
• Importance of clarity regarding the purpose and objectives of various stakeholder groups.
• Proposal for a self-assessment for working group and subcommittee leadership, to evaluate processes.
• Kristy Ashley highlighted the robust nature of ERCOT's stakeholder process but noted areas for improvement since Winter Storm Uri, including the steep increase in meetings.
• Concerns about timely posting of meeting materials, given the increase in the number of important meetings.
• Recommendation for group chairs to evaluate the necessity of meetings and possibly adjust the frequency to every other month.
• Introduction of a previously effective rule by Ken Donahue where agenda items without posted materials in advance would not be discussed to maintain meeting efficiency.
• Planning to send out self-assessment surveys with feedback expected before July 4, allowing for agenda adjustments before the next board meeting in September.
• Future discussions and reviews scheduled after collecting self-assessments, with final recommendations to be presented at the August TAC meeting.

▶️ 15 - MDRPOC Methodology (Vote)

• Motion to endorse the ERCOT Maximum Daily Planned Resource Planned Outage Capacity (MDRPOC) as presented carries unopposed with 10 abstentions. 
• Discussion on MDRPOC methodology and whether TAC wishes to provide technical advice to the June board.
• Consideration of filing a comment to the NPRR1287 for further enhancement.
• Vote was conducted via a separate ballot to allow more time for review and record any no votes or abstentions.
• Votes recorded with several abstentions due to lack of time: Motion carried unopposed with 10 abstentions.
• Eric Goff highlighted the significant number of abstentions and suggested discussing the reasons for abstention at the board meeting.
• Consensus on sending out an email to ask for reasons behind abstentions for this particular item.
• Conclusion reached to note the vote outcome and discussion in TAC meeting highlights.

▶️15 - Combo Ballot

• Motion to approve the combo ballot as presented passed unanimously.

▶️ 16 - Adjourn