California ISO Report. Regional Marginal Losses Surplus Allocation Impact Study
|
|
- Maryann French
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 California ISO Report Regional Surplus Allocation Impact Study October 6, 2010
2 Regional Surplus Allocation Impact Study Table of Contents Executive Summary Issue and Background Study Framework Study Approach Surplus Determination MLS Allocation to Measured Demand Regional MLS Allocation - No Path 26 Adjustment versus Path 26 Adjustment Results Results CAISO Proposal and Recommendations...12 CAISO/M&ID/MA&D/Holly Liu 10/06/2010, page 2 of 12
3 Regional Surplus Allocation Impact Study Prepared for Discussion at Market Performance and Planning Forum on Executive Summary October 21, 2010 The California ISO currently allocates the Surplus (MLS) pro-rata to all Measured Demand (internal demand plus exports) and the filed methodology was accepted by FERC in the MRTU Order dated September 21, In filed comments on the ISO MRTU Tariff, PG&E suggested an alternative approach to allocate MLS first based on actual contributions to marginal losses surplus in each of two regions within the ISO balancing authority area, namely, northern California and southern California before allocating to metered demand in each region. The ISO conducted a study in April 2007 to assess the distributional impacts of both methods. 1 That study found that the results based on both allocation methods were not significantly different, and concluded to keep the FERC filed and accepted methodology. Because the earlier study was based on market simulation data and may not be representative of actual market outcomes, the ISO previously committed to stakeholders to update that study using one year of market data after the startup of the new market on April 1, This report provides an update of the April 2007 study. The study compared the impact of MLS allocation based on the regional contribution to actual marginal losses (regional approach) versus system-wide allocation of MLS to measured demand (filed methodology) in two regions - Northern California and Southern California. Two alternative regional approaches were calculated: Regional approach1: Regional actual losses Regional approach 2: Regional actual losses accounting for losses in one regional supporting service of load in another region based on Path 26 actual flow adjustment 1 In the Se0ptember 21, 2006 MRTU Order, the Commission has stated that the method for disbursing the amounts of any over collections should not directly reimburse customers for their marginal losses payments, as such a reimbursement would interfere with the goal of basing prices on marginal losses and would undermine price signals to investors and load, which has been set forth in the Commission s early rulings on the excess losses revenue refund. In this Order, the Commission has rejected PG&E s proposal due to potential arbitrariness in the selection of a reference location and inconsistency with FERC s early rulings. (Order Conditionally Accepting the California ISO's Electric Tariff Filing to Reflect Market Redesign and Technology Upgrade in Docket Nos. ER and ER , et al. September 21, 2006, PP ) CAISO/M&ID/MA&D/Holly Liu 10/06/2010, page 3 of 12
4 The premise of the study is that if the filed MLS allocation methodology results in losses allocation close to or between the two regional approaches then the filed methodology would be assumed to be sufficient. However, if the filed MLS allocation methodology results fall substantially outside of the regional approaches then further consideration of an alternative regional allocation may be warranted. The latest study found that the allocation based on the filed methodology for the Northern region was lower than the estimated range indicated by the two regional approaches in the study. Results indicate that for the first year of operation of the new market, the filed methodology resulted in an $18.8 million (22%) and $13.8 million (18%) lower MLS allocation to northern load than regional approach 1 and approach 2, respectively. Conversely, the results indicate that MLS allocated to southern regional load using the filed methodology exceeds the regional approach 1 and regional approach 2 by $18.8 million (18%) and $13.8 million (13%),, respectively. Since the ISO did not utilize the scheduled path 26 flows from the actual Day-Ahead Market because of the lack of availability of such data, the study utilized actual path 26 data for the analysis of regional approach 2. In order to confirm the impact of using actual path 26 data instead of scheduled path 26 data from the Day-Ahead Market, the ISO has obtained path 26 scheduled flows for 30 selected days by rerunning the day ahead market, and has re-estimated the results by replacing the metered flows with the scheduled flows for these 30 days. Although the re-estimated results reduced the difference between the filed rate methodology and the regional approaches, the difference was insignificant. While any MLS allocation method has a degree of arbitrariness due to selection of the reference location as well as the lack of specific balanced association between a specific participants supply and demand, the difference between the filed MLS methodology and alternative regional approaches are significant enough to justify further consideration. As a result, the ISO proposes to consider potential changes in the MLS allocation methodology through a stakeholder policy review initiative. The ISO proposes to begin a stakeholder initiative on the MLS allocation methodology in the 1 st quarter of In the meantime, the ISO intends to analyze data covering the period after April 1, 2010, which will further inform the stakeholder process. 1 Issue and Background The California ISO (ISO) currently allocates marginal losses surplus (MLS) pro-rata to all Measured Demand (internal demand plus exports). This methodology was filed by the ISO and accepted by FERC in the MRTU Order dated September 21, In filed comments on the ISO MRTU Tariff, PG&E raised concern that the ISO proposal may fail to recognize the regional differences in actual losses costs and proposed an alternative approach to allocate MLS based on CAISO/M&ID/MA&D/Holly Liu 10/06/2010, page 4 of 12
5 actual contributions to marginal losses surplus in each region. 2 To address PG&E s concern, the ISO conducted and published a study in April 2007 to assess the distributional impacts of both methods (the April 2007 study). 3 That study found that the results based on both allocation methods were not significantly different, and concluded to keep the current methodology. Because the previous study was based on market simulation data and may not be representative of actual market outcome, the ISO has committed to stakeholders to update that study using one year of market operation data after the startup of the New Market. This report provides an update of the April 2007 study using market operation data from April 1, 2009 to March 31, Study Framework This study adopts the same approach as described in the April 2007 study. An overview of the approach is provided here and more details can be found in the previous report. This paper compares the impact of MLS allocation based on regional contribution to actual marginal losses versus system-wide allocation of MLS to Measured Demand. Measured Demand is metered Demand plus Real-Time interchange export schedules 4. Two regions - Northern California (NP15 plus ZP26, collectively designated as NP26) and Southern California (SP26) are used. Specifically, the study computes the MLS in each of these two regions and compares them to the MLS allocation to these regions based on metered Demand. For the purpose of this study, actual and marginal losses costs in Northern and Southern California were calculated. Transmission losses costs on Path 26 are either included in the In the September 21, 2006 MRTU Order, the Commission accepted the CAISO s proposed methodology and found that it allows the market participants to pay the marginal cost of energy. The Commission stated that the method for disbursing the amounts of any over collections should not directly reimburse customers for their marginal losses payments, as such a reimbursement would interfere with the goal of basing prices on marginal losses and would undermine price signals to investors and load, which has been set forth in the Commission s early rulings on the excess losses revenue refund. In this Order, the Commission has rejected PG&E s proposal due to potential arbitrariness in the selection of a reference location and inconsistency with FERC s early rulings. (Order Conditionally Accepting the California ISO's Electric Tariff Filing to Reflect Market Redesign and Technology Upgrade in Docket Nos. ER and ER , et al. September 21, 2006, PP ) Regional Allocation Impact Study, April For purposes of the allocation of marginal losses surplus, the Real-time interchange export schedule at each inter-tie scheduling point is the non-negative net export (i.e., the export minus the import, if the net is an export; otherwise zero) at that scheduling point. This is to avoid potentially perverse scheduling incentives that could result from allocating marginal losses surplus based on exports alone, whereby large quantities of otherwise cancelling import and export schedules could be submitted by an SC at a scheduling point to increase the SC s share of marginal losses surplus. CAISO/M&ID/MA&D/Holly Liu 10/06/2010, page 5 of 12
6 Northern region or the Southern region depending the direction of flow on Path 26. The MLS is determined by the difference between marginal and actual losses costs in each region. Regional MLS are estimated in two scenarios: adjusted (referred below as Path 26 Adjustment) versus unadjusted regional MLS (or No Path 26 Adjustment). Since transmission losses incurred in one region cannot be attributed to demand in that region alone, the actual and marginal losses costs in each region are adjusted to reflect the impact of demand in one region on the losses in the other region. For example, a share of the transmission losses costs within the Northern or the Southern region is deemed to be caused by demand 5 in the other region, and should be allocated to the other region accordingly. In this study, the amount of transmission losses costs in each region incurred to serve demand in the other region was estimated based on the direction and magnitude of Path 26 flow. A portion of the actual losses and marginal losses costs in the region on the exporting side of Path 26 was allocated to the region on the importing side of Path 26. For example, when Path 26 flow is in the north to south direction, some of the losses in the Northern California region are incurred to serve demand in the Southern California region; therefore, a portion of the losses costs in the Northern region were allocated to the Southern region. This applies to both actual and marginal losses. The difference between the adjusted marginal and actual losses costs in each region is the adjusted MLS. To determine what fraction of the losses in one region should be allocated to the other region given the direction and magnitude of the Path 26 Flow, a Path 26 adjustment factor (defined in the next section) was used to estimate the share of losses in one region attributable to demand in the other region. Finally, the regional MLS resulting from the two bookends, No Path 26 Adjustment and Path 26 Adjustment, are compared to the regional MLS derived by allocating system-wide MLS to Measured Demand in each region. If the latter falls into the range of the two bookends, then the difference between these two allocation methodology is not considered to be significant. As an equivalent measure, an average marginal losses surplus rate per MWh of demand was also calculated for both regions and for each of the three scenarios discussed above. 5 The demand in each region includes load in that region as well as net exports from that region to other control areas. CAISO/M&ID/MA&D/Holly Liu 10/06/2010, page 6 of 12
7 3 Study Approach 3.1 Surplus Determination Actual losses cost is calculated as total transmission losses (MW) evaluated at the energy component of the system LMPs. Regional Cost ($/h) = Regional (MW) System Marginal Energy Cost ($/MWh) on Path 26 were included in either one or the other region depending on the direction of the Path 26 flow. When the Path 26 flow is in N-S direction, losses on Path 26 are included in the Southern California, and vice versa. on the ties are included in the relevant region regardless of the direction of the flow on the ties since those either serve internal regional demand (if in the import direction) or exports (if in the export direction), both of which were included in the relevant regional Measured Demand. The Cost at each resource was calculated as net load 6 at that resource multiplied by the LMP Component at that resource. The Regional Marginal Cost is the sum of marginal losses cost at each resource in that region. The Marginal Cost on Path 26 7 was included in either the Northern or the Southern region depending on the direction of the flow on Path 26. If Path 26 flow is N-S, marginal losses cost on Path 26 is included in the Southern region and excluded from the Northern region, and vice versa. Regional Cost ($/h) = j { Net Load at resource j (MW) LMP Component at resource j ($/MWh)} The difference between the marginal and actual losses cost determines the marginal losses surplus. 6 Net load as defined here is the difference between load and generation (i.e., load generation) at the 7 specific location, and could be positive or negative. The Cost of Path 26 is the flow into Path 26 multiplied by the LMP Component of terminal where flow is entering Path26 minus the flow exiting Path 26 multiplied by the LMP Component of the terminal where flow is existing Path26. CAISO/M&ID/MA&D/Holly Liu 10/06/2010, page 7 of 12
8 3.2 MLS Allocation to Measured Demand The system-wide MLS was allocated to the Measured Demand in each region on an hourly basis. The sum of the regional load and tie exports from each region for each hour is the relevant Demand for the region. 3.3 Regional MLS Allocation - No Path 26 Adjustment versus Path 26 Adjustment As discussed in section 2, regional actual and marginal losses costs were calculated for two regional approaches, Path 26 Adjustment and No Path 26 Adjustment. In the Path 26 Adjustment scenario, a portion of the actual losses and marginal losses costs in the region on the exporting side of Path 26 was allocated to the region on the importing side of Path 26. A Path 26 Factor was defined as follows to determine how much to allocate from one region to the other given the direction and magnitude of Path 26 flow. If Path 26 Flow is N-S, P26 N-S Factor = Path 26 Flow/(Northern Region Demand + Path 26 Flow) If Path 26 Flow is S-N, P26 S-N Factor = Path 26 Flow/(Southern Region Demand + Path 26 Flow). The adjustment to actual and marginal losses costs based on the Path 26 Factor is summarized in the following Table. CAISO/M&ID/MA&D/Holly Liu 10/06/2010, page 8 of 12
9 Table 1A. Surplus Allocation (Path 26 Flow is North to South). NP26 No Path 26 Adjustment Path 26 Adjustment = NP26 Actual (excluding Path 26 Actual ) = NP26 - Path 26 Marginal * (1 - Path 26 NS Factor) * (1-Path 26 NS Factor) SP26 = SP26 + Path 26 Actual = SP26 + Path 26 Marginal + *Path 26 NS Factor + Marginal *Path 26 NS Factor Table 1B. Surplus Allocation (Path 26 Flow is South to North). NP26 No Path 26 Adjustment Path 26 Adjustment = NP26 Actual + Path 26 Actual = NP26 +Path 26 Marginal + *Path 26 NS Factor + Marginal *Path 26 SN Factor SP26 = SP26 (excluding Path 26 ) = SP26 - Path 26 Marginal * (1 - Path 26 SN Factor) * (1 - Path 26 SN Factor) CAISO/M&ID/MA&D/Holly Liu 10/06/2010, page 9 of 12
10 The difference between the regional marginal and actual losses cost determines the marginal losses surplus contribution in each region. The marginal losses surplus was calculated for each of the two regional approaches, No Path 26 Adjustment and Path 26 Adjustment, for each region on an hourly basis. The hourly values were then summed up for each month, and for the 12-month study period. 4 Results 4.1 Proxy for Path 26 Flow Due to lack of data for day-ahead path 26 scheduled flow, metered flow on Path 26 are used as a proxy for the study period. To validate the use of metered flow, the ISO has obtained path 26 scheduled flow by rerunning the day-ahead save cases in the Network Application environment for selected 30 days (two days per month including a weekday and weekend plus six days when metered path 26 flow are not available). For the selected 30 days, the metered flow and scheduled flow on path 26 demonstrate same trend and pattern, however there are some differences in magnitude. Results Month Results The MLS allocation results are presented in Table 2. The corresponding results on MLS allocations rates are shown in Table 3 respectively. The results indicate that, from April 2009 to March 2010, the share of MLS in the Northern region was $86 million (or $0.79 per MWh of load) based on the demand ratio allocation method (i.e., the filed methodology). On the other hand, using a regional-based MLS allocation scheme would have resulted in an estimated share of MLS between $99.2 and $104.3 million (or $0.92 to $0.97 per MWh of load). Similarly, the share of MLS in the Southern region was $104 million (or $0.80 per MWh of load) based on the demand ratio allocation method. Using a regional-based MLS allocation scheme would result in an estimated share of MLS between $85.5 and $90.5 million (or $0.66 to $0.69 per MWh of load). CAISO/M&ID/MA&D/Holly Liu 10/06/2010, page 10 of 12
11 Table 2. Surplus Allocation, April 2009 ~ March System MLS System Load Ratio Method (Filed Methodology) No Path 26 Adjustment Bookend Path 26 Adjustment Bookend NP26 SP26 NP26 SP26 NP26 SP26 Apr-09 $10.9 $5.0 $5.9 $6.5 $4.4 $6.2 $4.7 May-09 $15.8 $7.2 $8.6 $10.1 $5.7 $9.6 $6.2 Jun-09 $13.2 $6.2 $7.0 $7.9 $5.3 $7.6 $5.7 Jul-09 $18.4 $8.1 $10.2 $11.4 $6.9 $10.6 $7.8 Aug-09 $16.8 $7.4 $9.4 $9.2 $7.6 $8.9 $7.9 Sep-09 $16.1 $6.9 $9.2 $9.0 $7.1 $8.8 $7.3 Oct-09 $17.0 $7.6 $9.4 $7.1 $9.8 $7.2 $9.8 Nov-09 $13.9 $6.3 $7.6 $6.9 $6.9 $6.9 $7.0 Dec-09 $22.0 $10.1 $11.9 $11.0 $11.1 $10.7 $11.3 Jan-10 $17.0 $7.7 $9.3 $8.8 $8.2 $8.3 $8.7 Feb-10 $14.3 $6.5 $7.8 $7.9 $6.4 $7.1 $7.2 Mar-10 $14.4 $6.5 $7.9 $8.4 $6.0 $7.5 $6.9 Total $189.8 $85.5 $104.3 $104.3 $85.5 $99.2 $90.5 Table 3. Surplus Allocation Rates ($/MWh Load), April 2009 ~ March System MLS System Load Ratio Method (Filed Methodology) No Path 26 Adjustment Bookend Path 26 Adjustment Bookend NP26 SP26 NP26 SP26 NP26 SP26 Apr-09 $0.60 $0.60 $0.60 $0.78 $0.45 $0.75 $0.48 May-09 $0.78 $0.77 $0.78 $1.08 $0.52 $1.02 $0.57 Jun-09 $0.65 $0.66 $0.65 $0.83 $0.50 $0.80 $0.53 Jul-09 $0.78 $0.78 $0.78 $1.09 $0.53 $1.01 $0.60 Aug-09 $0.72 $0.72 $0.72 $0.89 $0.59 $0.86 $0.61 Sep-09 $0.72 $0.72 $0.72 $0.94 $0.56 $0.92 $0.57 Oct-09 $0.88 $0.88 $0.89 $0.83 $0.93 $0.83 $0.92 Nov-09 $0.76 $0.75 $0.76 $0.84 $0.69 $0.83 $0.70 Dec-09 $1.13 $1.13 $1.13 $1.22 $1.05 $1.19 $1.08 Jan-10 $0.91 $0.91 $0.91 $1.04 $0.80 $0.98 $0.85 Feb-10 $0.86 $0.86 $0.86 $1.04 $0.70 $0.94 $0.78 Mar-10 $0.78 $0.78 $0.79 $1.01 $0.59 $0.90 $0.68 Total $0.80 $0.79 $0.80 $0.97 $0.65 $0.92 $0.69 CAISO/M&ID/MA&D/Holly Liu 10/06/2010, page 11 of 12
12 Day Sample Results To assess the impact of using actually metered path 26 flows instead of scheduled dayahead path 26 flows, the total marginal losses surplus for the selected 30 days where actual scheduled day-ahead path 26 flow data were obtained through rerunning the day-ahead market instead of using actual metered flow on Path 26. The results for these selected days were $14.3 million system-wide, and the MLS for NP26 was $6.5 million, but it could be between $7.4 million and $7.6 million based on regional allocation method. The results of these selected days indicate that for the first year of operation of the new market, the filed methodology resulted in an a 17% and 13% difference in MLS allocation to northern load than regional approach 1 and approach 2, respectively. These results are not significantly lower in terms of percentage difference as the results observed using actual measured Path 26 flows for the entire period of April 1, 2009-March 31, Table 4. Surplus Allocation for 30 Selected Days with Path26 Rerun Data. System Load Ratio No Path 26 No. of System Method Adjustment Path 26 Adjustment Selected MLS (Filed Methodology) Bookend Bookend Days NP26 SP26 NP26 SP26 NP26 SP26 30 $14.3 $6.5 $7.8 $7.6 $6.7 $7.4 $6.9 5 ISO Proposal and Recommendations The study results comparing the filed MLS methodology with alternative regional allocation methodologies are sufficiently different that the ISO proposes to consider the matter of MLS allocation further. The ISO proposes to start a stakeholder policy initiative in the 1 st quarter of In the meantime, the ISO intends to analyze data covering the period after April 1, 2010, which will further inform the stakeholder process. CAISO/M&ID/MA&D/Holly Liu 10/06/2010, page 12 of 12
Marginal Loss Surplus Allocation Study (Progress Report)
Marginal Loss Surplus Allocation Study (Progress Report) Farrokh Rahimi Principal Market Engineer Stakeholder Meeting, August 17, 2006 Overview Market Initiatives Stakeholder Meeting of July 18-19: Agreed
More informationIf there are any questions concerning this filing, please contact the undersigned.
California Independent System Operator Corporation June 13, 2008 The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20426 Re: One Hundred
More informationAugust 24, The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, D.C.
California Independent System Operator Corporation August 24, 2007 The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20426 Re: One Hundred
More informationJanuary 25, The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, D.C.
California Independent System Operator Corporation January 25, 2008 The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20426 Re: One Hundred
More informationMONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT June 2009
California Independent System Operator MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT June 2009 151 Blue Ravine Road Folsom, CA 95630 (916) 351-4000 CALIFORNIA INDEPENDENT SYSTEM OPERATOR CORPORATION MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT
More informationDepartment of Market Monitoring White Paper. Potential Impacts of Lower Bid Price Floor and Contracts on Dispatch Flexibility from PIRP Resources
Department of Market Monitoring White Paper Potential Impacts of Lower Bid Price Floor and Contracts on Dispatch Flexibility from PIRP Resources Revised: November 21, 2011 Table of Contents 1 Executive
More informationNYISO s Compliance Filing to Order 745: Demand Response. Wholesale Energy Markets
NYISO s Compliance Filing to Order 745: Demand Response Compensation in Organized Wholesale Energy Markets (Docket RM10-17-000) Donna Pratt NYISO Manager, Demand Response Products Market Issues Working
More informationMemorandum. This memorandum requires Board action. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
California Independent System Operator Corporation Memorandum To: ISO Board of Governors From: Keith Casey, Vice President, Market & Infrastructure Development Date: June 14, 2018 Re: Decision on congestion
More informationEIM market monitoring and market issues/performance
EIM market monitoring and market issues/performance Energy Imbalance Market Regional Issues Forum April 6, 2016 Eric Hildebrandt, Director Department of Market Monitoring EIM Market Monitoring Page 2 Mission
More informationQUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT March 31, 2018
California Independent System Operator QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT March 31, 2018 250 Outcropping Way Folsom, CA 95630 (916) 351-4000 CALIFORNIA INDEPENDENT SYSTEM OPERATOR CORPORATION QUARTERLY FINANCIAL
More informationQUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT June 30, 2017
California Independent System Operator QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT June 30, 2017 250 Outcropping Way Folsom, CA 95630 (916) 351-4000 CALIFORNIA INDEPENDENT SYSTEM OPERATOR CORPORATION QUARTERLY FINANCIAL
More informationContingency Reserve Cost Allocation. Draft Final Proposal
Contingency Reserve Cost Allocation Draft Final Proposal May 27, 2014 Contingency Reserve Cost Allocation Draft Final Proposal Table of Contents 1 Introduction... 3 2 Changes to Straw Proposal... 3 3 Plan
More informationTwo-Tier Real-Time Bid Cost Recovery. Margaret Miller Senior Market and Product Economist Convergence Bidding Stakeholder Meeting October 16, 2008
Two-Tier Real-Time Bid Cost Recovery Margaret Miller Senior Market and Product Economist Convergence Bidding Stakeholder Meeting October 16, 2008 The CAISO has posted an Issue Paper exploring the redesign
More informationDistribution Group Study Process. August 26, 2014
Distribution Group Study Process August 26, 2014 Agenda Overview Applying for DGSP DGSP Interconnection Process Applicability and Utility Contacts Questions 2 Process Overview Open Window Period Evaluation
More information2003 Annual Report on Market Issues and Performance
2003 Annual Report on Market Issues and Performance Board of Governors Meeting April 22, 2004 Greg Cook Manager of Market Monitoring Issues in 2003-04 CALIFORNIA ISO and FERC: Continue to work through
More informationPEAK RELIABILITY COORDINATOR FUNDING
PEAK RELIABILITY COORDINATOR FUNDING Straw Proposal May 8, 2015 Assessment of 2 Peak Reliability Coordinator Charges Straw Proposal Table of Contents 1 Introduction... 3 2 Background... 3 3 Plan for Stakeholder
More informationQUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT December 31, 2017
California Independent System Operator QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT December 31, 2017 Preliminary and Unaudited 250 Outcropping Way Folsom, CA 95630 (916) 351-4000 CALIFORNIA INDEPENDENT SYSTEM OPERATOR
More informationCalifornia ISO. Flexible Ramping Product Uncertainty Calculation and Implementation Issues. April 18, 2018
California Independent System Operator Corporation California ISO Flexible Ramping Product Uncertainty Calculation and Implementation Issues April 18, 2018 Prepared by: Kyle Westendorf, Department of Market
More informationPrice Inconsistency Market Enhancements. Revised Straw Proposal
Price Inconsistency Market Enhancements Revised Straw Proposal August 2, 2012 Price Inconsistency Market Enhancements Table of Contents 1 Introduction... 3 2 Plan for Stakeholder Engagement... 3 3 Background...
More informationMemorandum. This memorandum does not require Board action. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
California Independent System Operator Corporation Memorandum To: ISO Board of Governors From: Eric Hildebrandt, Executive Director, Market Monitoring Date: November 7, 2018 Re: Department of Market Monitoring
More informationPEAK RELIABILITY COORDINATOR FUNDING. Draft Final Proposal. May 28, 2015
PEAK RELIABILITY COORDINATOR FUNDING Draft Final Proposal May 28, 2015 2 Assessment of Peak Reliability Coordinator Charges Draft Final Proposal Table of Contents 1 Introduction... 3 2 Background... 3
More informationALSTON&BIRD LLP The Atlantic Building 950 F Street, NW Washington, DC
ALSTON&BIRD LLP The Atlantic Building 950 F Street, NW Washington, DC 20004-1404 202-756-3300 Fax: 202-756-3333 March 2, 2011 The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
More informationCalifornia ISO October 1, 2002 Market Design Elements
California October 1, 2002 Market Design Elements California Board of Governors Meeting April 25, 2002 Presented by Keith Casey Manager of Market Analysis and Mitigation Department of Market Analysis 1
More informationFDD FIRM STORAGE SERVICE NORTHERN NATURAL GAS COMPANY
FDD FIRM STORAGE SERVICE NORTHERN NATURAL GAS COMPANY FIRM STORAGE SERVICE OPTIONS Northern s firm storage service is provided pursuant to the FDD Rate Schedule located in Northern s FERC Gas Tariff. The
More informationCalifornia Independent System Operator Corporation Fifth Replacement Electronic Tariff
Table of Contents 28. Inter-SC Trades... 2 28.1 Inter-SC Trades Of Energy... 2 28.1.1 Purpose... 2 28.1.2 Availability Of Inter-SC Trades Of Energy... 2 28.1.3 Submission Of Inter-SC Trades Of Energy...
More informationThis report summarizes key market conditions, developments, and trends for September 2001.
California Independent System Operator Memorandum To: ISO Board of Governors From: Anjali Sheffrin, Director of Market Analysis CC: ISO Officers, ISO Board Assistants Date: October 19, 21 Re: Market Analysis
More informationCalifornia ISO. Q Report on Market Issues and Performance. August 22, Prepared by: Department of Market Monitoring
California Independent System Operator Corporation California ISO Q2 2016 Report on Market Issues and Performance August 22, 2016 Prepared by: Department of Market Monitoring TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive
More informationSouthern California Edison Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No E Rosemead, California (U 338-E) Cancelling Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No.
Southern California Edison Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No. 54897-E Rosemead, California (U 338-E) Cancelling Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No. 53225-E Schedule CBP Sheet 1 APPLICABILITY The Capacity Bidding Program
More information2017 Annual Update to the PSE Formula Rate
2017 Annual Update to the PSE Formula Rate PSE Transmission Customer Meeting Lynn Dillender Federal and Regional Policy Chelsey Neil Supervisor Transmission Services July 20, 2017 Agenda Formula Rate Annual
More informationFurther information on mid-year tariff changes following the September 2010 Customer Seminars
Further information on mid-year tariff changes following the September 2010 Customer Seminars National Grid received a number of questions at the Customer Seminars on National Grid s proposal to update
More informationCalifornia ISO. February 29, 2008
California ISO Your Link to Power California Independent System Operator Corporation February 29, 2008 The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, NE
More informationSummary of Prior CAISO Filings and Commission Orders Concerning CAISO Market Redesign Efforts
Summary of Prior CAISO Filings and Commission Orders Concerning CAISO Market Redesign Efforts 1. Commission Directives to Submit a Market Redesign Plan The direct origin of the requirement that the CAISO
More informationBalance-of-Period TCC Auction
Balance-of-Period TCC Auction Proposed Credit Policy Sheri Prevratil Manager, Corporate Credit New York Independent System Operator Credit Policy Working Group May 29, 2015 2000-2015 New York Independent
More informationATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY BPU NJ
Attachment 1 Attachment 1 Page 1 of 3 ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC COMPANY BPU NJ No. 11 Electric Service - Section IV Revised Sheet Replaces Revised Sheet No. 60 RIDER (BGS) Basic Generation Service (BGS) Basic
More informationFERC EL Settlement Agreement
FERC EL05-121-009 Settlement Agreement Ray Fernandez Manager, Market Settlements Development Market Settlements Subcommittee June 14, 2018 Settlement Agreement Details Settlement Agreement Details FERC
More informationFERC Order Minute Settlements Manual Revisions
FERC Order 825 5 Minute Settlements Manual Revisions Ray Fernandez Manager, Market Settlements Development Market Settlements Subcommittee October 30, 2017 Impacted Settlement Manuals M-27 Open Access
More informationXML Publisher Balance Sheet Vision Operations (USA) Feb-02
Page:1 Apr-01 May-01 Jun-01 Jul-01 ASSETS Current Assets Cash and Short Term Investments 15,862,304 51,998,607 9,198,226 Accounts Receivable - Net of Allowance 2,560,786
More informationFlexible Capacity Requirements for 2019 through 2021
Flexible Capacity Requirements for 2019 through 2021 Clyde Loutan - Principal, Renewable energy Integration Amber Motley - Manager, Short Term Forecasting Stakeholder Conference Call January 29 th, 2018
More informationMRTU. CRR Settlements. CRR Educational Class #10
MRTU CRR Settlements CRR Educational Class #10 Contents Why is CRR Settlements process important to understand Definition of LMP and CRR Types of CRRs: Obligation vs Option Point to Point and Multi Point
More informationHYDROELECTRIC INCENTIVE MECHANISM
Filed: 0-0- EB-0-000 Tab Schedule Page of 0 0 HYDROELECTRIC INCENTIVE MECHANISM.0 PURPOSE This evidence provides a description of the hydroelectric incentive mechanism and presents a review of how this
More informationMarch 19, MidAmerican Central California Transco, LLC Docket No. ER
1050 Thomas Jefferson Street, NW Seventh Floor Washington, DC 20007 (202) 298-1800 Phone (202) 338-2416 Fax Douglas W. Smith (202) 298-1902 dws@vnf.com March 19, 2019 Via e-filing Kimberly D. Bose Secretary
More informationProposal for FERC Fee Recovery
Proposal for FERC Fee Recovery Cheryl Hussey Vice President & Chief Financial Officer New York Independent System Operator Chris Russell Manager Customer Settlements New York Independent System Operator
More informationDevelopment of Economy and Financial Markets of Kazakhstan
Development of Economy and Financial Markets of Kazakhstan National Bank of Kazakhstan Macroeconomic development GDP, real growth, % 116 112 18 14 1 113,5 11,7 216,7223,8226,5 19,8 19,8 19,3 19,619,7 199,
More informationNEAS ENERGY - Route to Market
NEAS ENERGY - Route to Market Overview Wholesale Power Market developments Revenue Profiles Secured and Unsecured FIT CFD v ROC PPA Key terms and conditions PPA Backstop PPA Cash flows for CfD and ROC
More informationCongestion Revenue Rights (CRR) Auction Efficiency Track 1B
Congestion Revenue Rights (CRR) Auction Efficiency Track 1B Pre-Market Simulation Webinar October 31, 2018 Radha Madrigal External Training and Readiness The information contained in these materials is
More informationMarket Surveillance Committee Activities September By Frank Wolak Chairman of the ISO Market Surveillance Committee
Market Surveillance Committee Activities September 2004 By Frank Wolak Chairman of the ISO Market Surveillance Committee Four Opinions in Progress Trading Hubs Solution to the Seller s Choice Contracts
More informationPortland General Electric Company Sheet No SCHEDULE 201 QUALIFYING FACILITY 10 MW or LESS AVOIDED COST POWER PURCHASE INFORMATION
Portland General Electric Company Sheet No. 201-1 PURPOSE SCHEDULE 201 QUALIFYING FACILITY 10 MW or LESS AVOIDED COST POWER PURCHASE INFORMATION To provide information about Standard Avoided Costs and
More information4.1 Daily & Hourly Bid Components
4.1 Daily & Hourly Bid Components This section is based on CAISO Tariff Section 30.4 Election for Start-Up and Minimum Load Costs and Section 39.6.1.6. (Start-Up and Minimum Load Costs are not applicable
More informationSpheria Australian Smaller Companies Fund
29-Jun-18 $ 2.7686 $ 2.7603 $ 2.7520 28-Jun-18 $ 2.7764 $ 2.7681 $ 2.7598 27-Jun-18 $ 2.7804 $ 2.7721 $ 2.7638 26-Jun-18 $ 2.7857 $ 2.7774 $ 2.7690 25-Jun-18 $ 2.7931 $ 2.7848 $ 2.7764 22-Jun-18 $ 2.7771
More informationUNITED STATES OF AMERICA 117 FERC 61,356 FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 117 FERC 61,356 FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Before Commissioners: Joseph T. Kelliher, Chairman; Suedeen G. Kelly, Marc Spitzer, Philip D. Moeller, and Jon Wellinghoff.
More informationExecutive Summary. July 17, 2015
Executive Summary July 17, 2015 The Revenue Estimating Conference adopted interest rates for use in the state budgeting process. The adopted interest rates take into consideration current benchmark rates
More informationTABLE OF CONTENTS. Executive Summary... ES-1 1. Market Structure and Design Changes General Market Conditions
TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary... ES-1 1. Market Structure and Design Changes... 1-1 1.1 Introduction/Background...1-1 1.2 Market Design Changes...1-1 1.2.1 Real Time Market Application (RTMA)...1-1
More informationLarge Commercial Rate Simplification
Large Commercial Rate Simplification Presented to: Key Account Luncheon Red Lion Hotel Presented by: Mark Haddad Assistant Director/CFO October 19, 2017 Most Important Information First There is no rate
More informationCOMMENTS OF NV ENERGY LOCAL MARKET POWER MITIGATION ENHANCEMENTS DRAFT FINAL PROPOSAL DATED JANUARY 31, 2019 CAISO STAKEHOLDER PROCESS
COMMENTS OF NV ENERGY LOCAL MARKET POWER MITIGATION ENHANCEMENTS DRAFT FINAL PROPOSAL DATED JANUARY 31, 2019 CAISO STAKEHOLDER PROCESS February 8 th, 2019 NV Energy appreciates the opportunity to comment
More informationComments of Pacific Gas & Electric Company Energy Imbalance Market Draft Tariff Language
Comments of Pacific Gas & Electric Company Energy Imbalance Market Draft Tariff Language Submitted by Company Date Submitted Will Dong Paul Gribik (415) 973-9267 (415) 973-6274 PG&E December 5, 2013 Pacific
More informationCommon stock prices 1. New York Stock Exchange indexes (Dec. 31,1965=50)2. Transportation. Utility 3. Finance
Digitized for FRASER http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 000 97 98 99 I90 9 9 9 9 9 9 97 98 99 970 97 97 ""..".'..'.."... 97 97 97 97 977 978 979 980 98 98 98 98 98 98 987 988
More information,QWHU]RQDO&RQJHVWLRQ0DQDJHPHQW
,QWHU]RQDO&RQJHVWLRQ0DQDJHPHQW 0DUNHW Ã 6XPPDU\ÃRIÃÃ,QWHU]RQDOÃ&RQJHVWLRQÃ0DQDJHPHQWÃ 0DUNHWÃ 5.1.1 Overview Under the current zonal model, the CAISO manages congestion in the forward market only on major
More informationREAL EARNINGS DECEMBER 2018
Transmission of material in this release is embargoed until 8:30 a.m. (EST), Friday, January 11, 2019 USDL-19-0019 Technical Information: (202) 691-6555 cesinfo@bls.gov www.bls.gov/ces Media Contact: (202)
More informationSouthern California Edison Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No E Rosemead, California (U 338-E) Cancelling Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No.
Southern California Edison Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No. 57616-E Rosemead, California (U 338-E) Cancelling Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No. 53885-E Schedule CPP Sheet 1 APPLICABILITY This Schedule is optional for
More informationFTR Credit Requirements Mark-to-Auction (MTA)
FTR Credit Requirements Mark-to-Auction (MTA) Bridgid Cummings Credit Market Implementation Committee November 7, 2018 FTR Mark-to-Auction Market value decline can be an indicator of increasing FTR risk
More informationTGC-1 9M 2017 IFRS Results. November 8, 2017 Saint Petersburg
TGC-1 9M 2017 IFRS Results November 8, 2017 Saint Petersburg Disclaimer The information contained herein has been prepared using information available to Public Joint Stock Company Territorial generating
More informationREAL EARNINGS AUGUST 2018
Transmission of material in this release is embargoed until 8:30 a.m. (EDT), Thursday, September 13, 2018 USDL-18-1454 Technical Information: (202) 691-6555 cesinfo@bls.gov www.bls.gov/ces Media Contact:
More informationCost Estimation of a Manufacturing Company
Cost Estimation of a Manufacturing Company Name: Business: Date: Economics of One Unit: Manufacturing Company (Only complete if you are making a product, such as a bracelet or beauty product) Economics
More informationUNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION ) California Independent System ) Docket Nos. ER06-615-000 Operator Corporation ) ER07-613-000 ) ) (not consolidated) ) STATUS REPORT
More informationREAL EARNINGS JUNE 2018
Transmission of material in this release is embargoed until 8:30 a.m. (EDT), Thursday, July 12, 2018 USDL-18-1144 Technical Information: (202) 691-6555 cesinfo@bls.gov www.bls.gov/ces Media Contact: (202)
More informationUNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION California Independent System ) Docket No. ER19-385-000 Operator Corporation ) COMMENTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MARKET MONITORING FOR
More informationTransmission Access Charge Informational Filing
California Independent System Operator September 27, 213 The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 2426 Re: California Independent
More informationInformational Filing of Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator, Inc. s Independent Market Monitor
Potomac Economics, Ltd. 9990 Fairfax Boulevard, Suite 560 Telephone: 703-383-0720 Fairfax, Virginia 22030 Facsimile: 703-383-0796 Honorable Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
More informationALSTON&BIRD LLP The Atlantic Building 950 F Street, NW Washington, DC
The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20426 ALSTON&BIRD LLP The Atlantic Building 950 F Street, NW Washington, DC 20004-1404
More informationSouthern California Edison Company s Testimony on Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project (TRTP)
Application Nos.: Exhibit No.: Witnesses James A. Cuillier Gary L. Allen (U -E) Southern California Edison Company s Testimony on Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project (TRTP) Cost Recovery And Renewable
More informationEnergy Imbalance Market Neutrality Technical Workshop. Conference Call: September 3, 2013 Updated: September 5, 2013
Energy Imbalance Market Neutrality Technical Workshop Conference Call: September 3, 2013 Updated: September 5, 2013 Neutrality accounts needed since not all energy is settled through real-time market An
More information1.1. Version No. Settlements / Rerun. Version Date 02/02/04 Effective Date 01/16/04. Frequently Asked Questions
Table of Contents: Purpose... Page 2 1. File Headers... Page 2 2. File Format... Page 2 3. Dispute Timeline... Page 2 4. Data Delivery Timeline... Page 2 5. Difference Between this Re-run and the FERC
More informationSouthern California Edison Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No E Rosemead, California (U 338-E) Cancelling Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No.
Southern California Edison Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No. 64409-E Rosemead, California (U 338-E) Cancelling Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No. 58722-E Schedule NEM Sheet 1 APPLICABILITY Applicable to Eligible Customer-Generators
More informationSCHEDULE C ELECTRICITY PURCHASE AGREEMENT TERM SHEET TRANSMISSION AND LARGE DISTRIBUTION CONNECTED PROJECTS
SCHEDULE C ELECTRICITY PURCHASE AGREEMENT TERM SHEET TRANSMISSION AND LARGE DISTRIBUTION CONNECTED PROJECTS The following is a summary of the key terms and conditions of the proposed standard form electricity
More information1st Qua u r a ter e M e M e e t e in i g 2nd Qua u r a ter e M e M e e t e in i g
2012 SERTP Welcome SERTP 2012 First RPSG Meeting & Interactive Training Session 1 2012 SERTP The SERTP process is a transmission planning process. Please contact the respective transmission provider for
More information2011 Budget Initial Stakeholder Call
2011 Budget Initial Stakeholder Call Michael Epstein Director of Financial Planning June 23, 2010 Agenda TOPIC PRESENTER Introduction Steve Berberich Budget principles & strategic initiatives Steve Berberich
More informationMay 15, Duke Energy Ohio, Inc., and Duke Energy Kentucky, Inc. Formula Rate Annual Update Docket No. ER
Gary A. Morgans 202 429 6234 gmorgans@steptoe.com 1330 Connecticut Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036-1795 202 429 3000 main www.steptoe.com The Hon. Kimberly D. Bose Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
More informationCalifornia ISO. Q Report on Market Issues and Performance. February 14, Department of Market Monitoring
California Independent System Operator Corporation California ISO Q4 2017 Report on Market Issues and Performance February 14, 2018 Department of Market Monitoring TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive summary...
More information5.2 Transmission Congestion Credit Calculation Eligibility.
5.2 Transmission Congestion culation. 5.2.1 Eligibility. (a) Except as provided in Section 5.2.1(b), each FTR Holder shall receive as a Transmission Congestion Credit a proportional share of the total
More informationSouthern California Edison Stakeholder Comments. Energy Imbalance Market 2 nd Revised Straw Proposal issued July 2, 2013
Southern California Edison Stakeholder Comments Energy Imbalance Market 2 nd Revised Straw Proposal issued July 2, 2013 Submitted by Company Date Submitted Paul Nelson (626) 302-4814 Jeff Nelson (626)
More informationThis report summarizes key market conditions, developments, and trends for November 2001.
California Independent System Operator Memorandum To: ISO Board of Governors From: Anjali Sheffrin, Director of Market Analysis CC: ISO Officers, ISO Board Assistants Date: February 1, 22 Re: Market Analysis
More informationSouthern California Edison Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No E Rosemead, California Cancelling Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No E
Southern California Edison Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No. 29205-E Rosemead, California Cancelling Revised Cal. PUC Sheet No. 23729-E Schedule DM Sheet 1 APPLICABILITY Applicable to domestic service including
More informationFactor Leave Accruals. Accruing Vacation and Sick Leave
Factor Leave Accruals Accruing Vacation and Sick Leave Factor Leave Accruals As part of the transition of non-exempt employees to biweekly pay, the UC Office of the President also requires standardization
More informationReview of Registered Charites Compliance Rates with Annual Reporting Requirements 2016
Review of Registered Charites Compliance Rates with Annual Reporting Requirements 2016 October 2017 The Charities Regulator, in accordance with the provisions of section 14 of the Charities Act 2009, carried
More informationUNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION California Independent System Operator Corporation ) ) ) Docket No. ER13-872-000 MOTION TO INTERVENE AND COMMENTS OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
More informationCongestion Revenue Rights Settlement Rule
California Independent System Operator Corporation Congestion Revenue Rights Settlement Rule Department of Market Monitoring August 18, 2009 I. Background Under nodal convergence bidding, the California
More informationCongestion Revenue Rights (CRR) - Requesting the UAC to recommend the CRR Product for Council approval
Attachment A Congestion Revenue Rights (CRR) - Requesting the UAC to recommend the CRR Product for Council approval UAC Presentation May 2, 2007 Presentation Outline CAISO s Timetable for Implementation
More information1.2 The purpose of the Finance Committee is to assist the Board in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities related to:
Category: BOARD PROCESS Title: Terms of Reference for the Finance Committee Reference Number: AB-331 Last Approved: February 22, 2018 Last Reviewed: February 22, 2018 1. PURPOSE 1.1 Primary responsibility
More informationLOUISVILLE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY Gas Rates 2018 Monthly Billing Adjustments
2018 Monthly Billing Adjustments GAS LINE TRACKER CHARGES GAS LINE TRACKER CHARGES DSM (2) PER MONTH PER METER PER MONTH PER CCF TAX CUTS AND JOBS ACT $ Per CCF Firm Trans. SURCREDIT ($ per ccf) (3) GAS
More informationHistorical Pricing PJM COMED, Around the Clock. Cal '15 Cal '16 Cal '17 Cal '18 Cal '19 Cal '20 Cal '21 Cal '22
$50 Historical Pricing PJM COMED, Around the Clock $48 $46 $44 $42 $40 $38 $36 $34 $32 $30 $28 $26 Cal '15 Cal '16 Cal '17 Cal '18 Cal '19 Cal '20 Cal '21 Cal '22 The information presented above was gathered
More informationElectric Avoided Cost Meeting. 1:30-3:30 p.m. May 12, 2017
Electric Avoided Cost Meeting 1:30-3:30 p.m. May 12, 2017 Agenda Introduction OPUC Energy Trust Schedule for updates Overview of Process to Update Avoided Costs Proposed Updates for 2017 Possible Future
More informationConvergence Bidding Overview. Jenny Pedersen Julianne Riessen Client Training Team
Convergence Bidding Overview Jenny Pedersen Julianne Riessen Client Training Team Agenda Introductions Defining Convergence Bidding Project Participating in the Markets Registration and Affiliations Eligible
More informationPacific Gas and Electric Company. Statement of Estimated Cash Flows April 20, 2001
Pacific Gas and Electric Company Statement of Estimated Cash Flows April 20, 2001 This document provides the latest forecast of cash flows for Pacific Gas and Electric Company (the Company ). The purpose
More informationFiscal Year 2018 Project 1 Annual Budget
Fiscal Year 2018 Project 1 Annual Budget Table of Contents Table Page Summary 3 Summary of Costs Table 1 4 Treasury Related Expenses Table 2 5 Summary of Full Time Equivalent Table 3 6 Positions Cost-to-Cash
More informationQUESTION 2. QUESTION 3 Which one of the following is most indicative of a flexible short-term financial policy?
QUESTION 1 Compute the cash cycle based on the following information: Average Collection Period = 47 Accounts Payable Period = 40 Average Age of Inventory = 55 QUESTION 2 Jan 41,700 July 39,182 Feb 18,921
More informationAPPROVED February 27, 2018 DIRECTOR of PUBLIC UTILITY DIVISION
February 27, 2018 February 27, 2018 February 27, 2018 Supplemental Page Fuel Cost Adjustment Factors Public Service Company Oklahoma Fuel Cost Adjustment Factors ($/kwh) Period Service Service Service
More informationPARADISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT
PARADISE IRRIGATION DISTRICT 6332 Clark Rel I P.O. Box 2409 I Paradise, California 95967 I 530.$77.4971 I Fax 530.$76.04$3 1. Cash position At 5/31/2017 the Districts total cash position was $2,337,027.46.
More informationHUD NSP-1 Reporting Apr 2010 Grantee Report - New Mexico State Program
HUD NSP-1 Reporting Apr 2010 Grantee Report - State Program State Program NSP-1 Grant Amount is $19,600,000 $9,355,381 (47.7%) has been committed $4,010,874 (20.5%) has been expended Grant Number HUD Region
More informationISO Tariff Original Sheet No. 637 ISO TARIFF APPENDIX L. Rate Schedules
Original Sheet No. 637 ISO TARIFF APPENDIX L Rate Schedules Original Sheet No. 638 Schedule 1 Grid Management Charge The Grid Management Charge (ISO Tariff Section 8.0) is a formula rate designed to recover
More informationDkt. No. ER Draft Informational Filing. Table of Contents
Table of Contents Worksheet Name Schedule Purpose Overview Base TRR Components. BaseTRR 1 Full Development of Retail and Wholesale Base TRRs. IFPTRR 2 Calculation of the Incremental Forecast Period TRR
More information