Re: NYPA study-Winter Locational ICAP requirements ,
 "Stephen Fernands" <srfernands@cesolution.com> writes to the 
NYISO_TECH_EXCHANGE Discussion List:

Studies...We just want out April 2000 True Up Bills.
Please.
Stephen Fernands
Consultant
AES NewEnergy

----- Original Message -----
From: <Tom.May@enron.com>
To: <nyiso_tech_exchange@global2000.net>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 1:21 PM
Subject: RE: NYPA study-Winter Locational ICAP requirements


>
> Tom.May@enron.com writes to the NYISO_TECH_EXCHANGE Discussion List:
>
>
> I would like to pay the NYISO to conduct a study for me on the price
impact
> of the transmission outages planned each day.  Since I would be paying for
> this, I wouldof course be entitled to get the results one day in advance
of
> all other market participants.  The ISO would of course be free to release
> the results to the rest of the marketplace just following the release of
> the day ahead results each day.  This would ultimately be in the best
> interests of the marketplace since I would immediately arbitrage the daily
> market to the correct prices and thereby increase efficiency.  Upon
review,
> all would be amazed at just how efficient the marketplace has become based
> upon how accurate it was at predicting settlement prices.
>
> Tom May
> Enron
>
>
>
>
> "Gantner, Craig" <craig.gantner@nrgenergy.com>@lists.thebiz.net on
> 04/25/2001 06:33:59 AM
>
> Please respond to market_relations@nyiso.com
>
> Sent by:  owner-nyiso_tech_exchange@lists.thebiz.net
>
>
> To:   "'market_relations@nyiso.com'" <market_relations@nyiso.com>,
>       nyiso_tech_exchange@global2000.net
> cc:
>
> Subject:  RE: NYPA study-Winter Locational ICAP requirements
>
>
> "Gantner, Craig" <craig.gantner@nrgenergy.com> writes to the
> NYISO_TECH_EXCHANGE Discussion List:
>
> If I read Mr. Palazzo's message correctly, the ISO is acting as a paid
> consultant doing contract work for NYPA?
>
> Now I am starting to share some of Roy's discomfort.
>
> Not only does this call into question the objectivity of such contracted
> studies, it also offers some insight into the inability for non-paying
> participants to get their technical issues addressed by the ISO.
> Craig Gantner
> NRG Power Marketing
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Palazzo, William [mailto:William.Palazzo@nypa.gov]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2001 6:17 AM
> To: 'market_relations@nyiso.com'; nyiso_tech_exchange@global2000.net
> Subject: RE: NYPA study-Winter Locational ICAP requirements
>
>
>
> "Palazzo, William" <William.Palazzo@nypa.gov> writes to the
> NYISO_TECH_EXCHANGE Discussion List:
>
> In response to Roy's comments.  NYPA is paying for all the work conducted
> by
> the ISO staff.  NYPA defined the study objective and all the ISO staff did
> was conduct the MARS studies and document the results in the write-up we
> provided to the tech exchange.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roy J. Shanker [mailto:royjshanker@worldnet.att.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2001 7:35 PM
> To: market_relations@nyiso.com; nyiso_tech_exchange@global2000.net
> Subject: RE: NYPA study-Winter Locational ICAP requirements
>
>
>
> "Roy J. Shanker" <royjshanker@worldnet.att.net> writes to the
> NYISO_TECH_EXCHANGE Discussion List:
>
> As a separate item to the concerns I had about the technical content, I
was
> a little confused on what was done here administratively. The last
> paragraph
> says something about NYPA sharing the study. I didn't think they had
> anything at all to say about it in the first place if it is an ISO work
> product. If they do, could you explain why this is the case? If the ISO
did
> this, why wasn't this all posted on the OASIS at the same time NYPA got
> this? The date on this shows a March 26 release.  Ignore these comments if
> this was done, but I wasn't aware of this.
>
> I am more than a little uncomfortable with a single market participant
> having a month's lead time on ISO studies that can have significant
> commercial impact. Think about the implications of this in the context of
> people negotiating long term bi lateral ICAP agreements over the last
> month.
> Depending on your take on the type of market changes that this type of
> analysis might support, there could be enormous changes to the economics
of
> seasonal versus annual agreements, choice of equipment etc. This simply
> isn't fair. Even if posted, this type of work by the ISO that can have
> large
> potential commercial impacts should go out on all of the distributions at
> the same time as release to anyone and OASIS posting.
>
> Roy J. Shanker
> 9009 Burning Tree Road
> Bethesda, MD 20817
> 301-365-3654
> 301-365-3657 FAX
> royjshanker@worldnet.att.net
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-nyiso_tech_exchange@lists.thebiz.net
> [mailto:owner-nyiso_tech_exchange@lists.thebiz.net]On Behalf Of Palazzo,
> William
> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 3:42 PM
> To: 'nyiso_tech_exchange@global2000.net'
> Subject: NYPA study-Winter Locational ICAP requirements
>
>                 At NYPA's request ISO staff conducted a limited analysis
of
> the winter locational ICAP requirements for Long Island and New York City
> areas.  While such ICAP requirements have historically been set as a
single
> number for the entire year, it is NYPA's belief that this holdover from
the
> old way of doing business must be re-examined.  It is NYPA's belief that
> most if not all of the contribution to loss of load risk occurs in the
> summer months.  As such, some reduction in winter ICAP requirements should
> be possible with no impact on the Loss of Load criterion of one day in ten
> years.
>
>                 NYPA requested that the ISO start with the database that
> resulted in the locational requirements of 80% and 98% for New York City
> and
> Long Island, respectively.   At NYPA's request the ISO modeled winter
> ratings on the transmission interfaces into NYC and LI and determined how
> much the 80% and 98% could be reduced in the winter before any impact on
> the
> statewide Loss Of Load  occurred.  The report indicates that winter
> requirements of 75% and 92% of the summer peak load resulted for NYC and
> LI,
> respectively.
>
>         While this in no way reflects an exhaustive analysis of winter
> locational requirements, the results from this study suggest that some
> reduction in the winter         requirement may be warranted and a
> consideration of seasonal requirements should be incorporated in future
> ICAP
> requirement studies.   NYPA believes that       having an ICAP requirement
> for summer and winter seasons based on the LSE's peak load for the
> respective season would send the proper ICAP price signal.
>
>
>                 NYPA is sharing the study results in the attached report
in
> an effort to begin a dialog which we hope will lead to a broader
> examination
> of locational requirements when the issue is revisited again next year.
We
> would appreciate hearing the views of other market participants.
>
>  <<NYPA_LR_wint.PDF>>  <<TRAN_SYS_001129.PDF>>
>
>
>
>
>
market_relations@nyiso.com, nyiso_tech_exchange@global2000.net