​​​

Proposed Revision Request Detail Help
PRR Life Cycle******Pending Final Decision***
PRR Details
PRR #
1650
Title New Market Automation to prevent Market Disruptions in RTD and STUC
Date Submitted 9/29/2025 2:44 PM
PRR Category B
Priority Normal
Owner Martin, Michael (CAISO)
Status Pending Final Decision
Status End Date 11/17/2025 11:59 PM
Related BPM Market Operations
BPM Section Section 7.10.4 Procedures in the Event of Failure of the RTUC/RTED Market Processes.
RSS Subscribe
Existing Language
 

​See Attached​

Proposed Language
 

​See Attached​

Reason For Revision
 

Introduction of new RTD and STUC market automated logic that allows the market to identify resource constraints that will lead to a market disruption​.  

Announcements
Please see CAISO's answer to SCE's question posted on 10/28/2025
Posted On - 10/30/2025 4:20 PM
Impact Analysis
Impact Analysis not available.
Initial Comments
It would be most helpful to detail how the automated process will respond to each of the resource constraint examples.
10/13/2025 3:08 PM
Logged By - Bonnie Blair (Cities of Anaheim, Azusa, Banning, Colton, Pasadena, and Riverside, CA)
---------------------------------------------
The design of this enhancement replaces the RTD infeasible dispatch with the previous dispatch for only the specific  resource regardless of the specific type of constraint that may be causing this issue.  Market Quality we report and disccuss quarterly on the frequency and constraints for transparency.  Operators will monitor for patterns of specific resources causing issues and should a pattern emerge, Operations will reach out to the SC with assistence from the Customer Experience department.  
10/28/2025 3:29 PM
Responded By - Martin, Michael (CAISO)
Recommendation Comments
PG&E supports the CAISO's solution to address individual resources causing infeasibilities.
11/17/2025 4:11 PM
Logged By - Alan Meck (PG&E)
The Six Cities continue to have questions regarding the application of the automated process to the examples given in the PRR. 
The first example describes an infeasibility between the Base Schedule for one hour and a Base Schedule for the same resource for the following hour.  It is the Six Cities’ understanding that Base Schedules are submitted and subject to modification by EIM Entities.  How will the automated process operate with respect to the Base Schedules?  Will it hold the initial Base Schedule and reject the Base Schedule for the subsequent hour?  Will it omit both Base Schedules from the RTD optimization?  What notifications will be provided to the EIM Entity that submitted the Base Schedules?  Please clarify.
The second example describes an Exceptional Dispatch that directs an infeasible transition from one MSG configuration to another.  It is the Six Cities’ understanding that Exceptional Dispatches are entered manually by CAISO operators.  Will the automated process hold the resource at the initial configuration and override the transition directed by the Exceptional Dispatch, or will it simply reject the Exceptional Dispatch altogether?  What communications will occur with the CAISO operator that entered the Exceptional Dispatch?  Please clarify.
11/17/2025 7:19 AM
Logged By - Bonnie Blair (Cities of Anaheim, Azusa, Banning, Colton, Pasadena, and Riverside, CA)
Attachments