Ernie Podraza, Direct Energy

PWG Meeting Notes

Wednesday, July 22, 2009

Attendees Carl Raish, ERCOT Ernie Podraza, Direct Energy Calvin Opheim, ERCOT Sonja Mingo, ERCOT Adrian Marquez, ERCOT Bill Boswell, ERCOT Jim Lee, Direct Energy Diana Ott, ERCOT Ed Echols, Oncor Phone Lloyd Young, AEP Steven Bargas, Tenaska Kelly Gilbert, TNMP

Agenda Item 1 through 3: Ernie Podraza welcomed everyone and read the antitrust admonition.

Ernie provided the COPs meeting update and Calvin briefly updated the group with what he presented at COPs.

PWG reviewed the June draft meeting notes

Action item: ERCOT to post the final meeting notes from June to the website for June.

Agenda Item 4 and 5: Review of LPGRR033 and LPGRR034:

PWG reviewed the impact analysis for LPGRR033. PWG had no comments; the LPGRR will be presented to COPs on August 11th

Action Item: ERCOT will correct the description for LPGRR033 on the impact analysis

PWG reviewed LPGRR034, (updating the calendar in the decision tree) there were no comments, the impact analysis will be brought back to PWG next month Carl mentioned that ERCOT is reviewing something called “other binding documents” and there is a possibility that the LRS documents concerning the TDSP and ERCOT transactions might fall under this document. There are several other documents on the PWG website under Key Documents that PWG felt might be important to also be considered. Ernie asked the group how they felt. After some discussion Carl suggested we create an LPGRR with minimal effort and move the items into the LPGRR.

Action Item: PWG will visit the topic called “other binding documents” and determine if the LRS documents should be moved into the LPG or not at the next PWG meeting

Discussion around if it is necessary to rewrite the entire section for Load Research since it is unknown what is going to happen with the Load Research Sample with the installation of advanced meters. Ed mentioned that the Load Research data will be available for all the advanced meters soon including the No Demand customers.

Agenda Item 6: New ERCOT Expedited Switch Rules:

PWG discussed the new switch process and the affect of it to the 867 process. Even though ERCOT will be reads daily, the 814-20s to change a profile type still have to line up with a NIDR monthly reading.

Agenda Item 7: Status Report on RMWG on IDR to AMS for under 700kW

Calvin the presentation showing what the AMIT group has decided concerning the IDR requirement report. Market Participants were guided as to where to find the presentation for future reference.

Lloyd with AEP thought the PWG should look at the IDR requirement report and section 7.13.2.1 in the RMG.

In summary any ESIID that exceeds the 700kW level will be required to have an IDR traditional meter installed, a profile of BUSIDRRQ, and be settled through the 867 process. Any profile of BUSIDRRQ must have usage sent by the traditional 867 process. Advanced meter interval data usage must be sent in thought the lse file format and the monthly usage will still be sent in but not loaded for settlement

On July 29th the Retail Meter Working Group will meet and try to address the Guides and Protocol changes needed for advanced meters. Some discussion around if PWG should take up the issue and try and prevent the ESIIDs that are on advanced meters to not go through the IDR requirement report. Agenda Item 8: What would happen to UFE if no adjustment to profiles during Hurricane Ike settlement – update of SEWG discussions

Calvin briefly described the plan for the ERCOT analysis to try and answer the question, and at the end of the day UFE will stay be the same. Calvin is confident that we will see negative UFE up to 30 percent during the hurricane and then later it will swing the other way.

Some key items to note: MCP was really high during the hurricane; and then the MCP prices dropped drastically after the hurricane, the TDSPs had bad estimations which resulted with high amounts of energy being billed during the hurricane and less billed when the prices dropped

Agenda Item 9: UFE discussion

a) The shift in proportion of UFE to NIDR metered premises as AMS matures

b) UFE allocation factors in lieu of AMS meter installations

Carl reviewed the spreadsheet posted to the PWG website for the meeting “UFE Allocation CLR”. A lengthy discussion around this topic ended with Ernie summarizing the overall discussion and reviewed the goal given to PWG from COPs. For the allocation factors there seems to be an unfair treatment, but according to the spreadsheet the treatment for the group is the same before the transition and during the transition

Agenda Item 10: Distribution loss factors in relation to UFE

Action Item: Ernie will put together a list of suggestions to look at and send it out

Agenda Item 11: Evaluate the methodology for profile scaling factors (per UFETF 11-16- 07) planned for July

Bill presented evaluation of profiling scaling factor posted to the PWG website

Agenda Item 12: Load Research Project Update and Timeline

Reviewed the LRS presentation posted to the PWG website Agenda Item 13: Annual Validation Updates

Diana reviewed the annual validation slides. Discussion around if the 2010 annual validation should include the NIDR and the advanced meter customers or should it only be for the remaining NIDR group by itself, or should we not do annual validation at all. Ernie asked if ERCOT would be able to quantify what happens if we do or do not do this? Discussion about what are the ramifications about not changing anything.

Action Item: Ernie will put together a list of questions pertaining to annual validation and how Market Participants are using the daily forecast and backcast and send it out to the PWG exploder for feedback

PWG reviewed the goals for 2009 and made updates to the document. ERCOT will post the updated goals to the PWG website