RSS Feed for Proposed Revision Request - 1647

PRR - 1647

Value cannot be null. Parameter name: stream

Initial Comment for PRR - 1647

Description: The attachment is not consistent with the PRR description but appears to relate to PRR 1650.
-By Bonnie Blair (Cities of Anaheim, Azusa, Banning, Colton, Pasadena, and Riverside, CA) on Monday, October 13, 2025 3:10:58 PM

Announcement for PRR - 1647

Description: This PRR is on hold to give the CAISO an opportunity to develop language that better accomplishes LSA’s purpose.
-By Williamson-Duffney, Joseph on Thursday, October 16, 2025 12:35:04 PM

Initial Comment for PRR - 1647

Description: The document attached to this PRR is inconsistent with the topic for 1647. The stated goal of the PRR is to clarify that financial-security posting requirements should exclude coverage for the cost of Network Upgrades approved in the Transmission Planning Process. EDF Power Solutions agrees that such costs should be excluded even in the scenario that the CAISO the study report amendment is not yet published. Which upgrades need to be excluded in this scenario is logically clear. Excluding them from project study costs in the GIA reduces administrative burden for all parties (avoiding a later amendment to reconcile information) and improves developer ability to seek, execute, and manage power purchase agreements and arrangements for financial security. Submitted by: Raeann Quadro, Gridwell Consulting
-By Williamson-Duffney, Joseph on Friday, October 17, 2025 12:41:18 PM

Recommendation Comment for PRR - 1647

Description: The Recommendation Details suggest approving the PRR "as modified," but as of the comment date, the attachment to the PRR appears to include only the language originally proposed by the PRR sponsor. The Six Cities request that the CAISO clarify whether the attachment currently reflects the language the CAISO proposes to adopt. If it does not, the Six Cities further request that the CAISO provide the modified language it proposes to adopt and extend the Recommendation Comment period for potential comments on the modified language.
-By Bonnie Blair (Cities of Anaheim, Azusa, Banning, Colton, Pasadena, and Riverside, CA) on Thursday, January 8, 2026 12:43:11 PM

Announcement for PRR - 1647

Description: This PRR will go through an additional review cycle as the recommendation was not posted prior to the January comment deadline.
-By Madrigal, Radha on Monday, January 26, 2026 1:31:21 PM

Recommendation Comment for PRR - 1647

Description: LSA's intent in submitting this PRR was to relieve ICs from any further security postings based on Network Upgrades for which they are no longer responsible. The Recommendation relieves ICs from having to make the third posting for such upgrades, but not the second posting. LSA's suggested edits to Section 8.4.1 here are intended to provide that relief for the second posting as well, as soon as possible after the Transmission Plan is approved.
-By Susan R. Schneider (Phoenix Consulting) on Monday, February 9, 2026 10:46:48 AM

Announcement for PRR - 1647

Description: The CAISO updated its proposal. See most current attachment for the added language.
-By Wilson, Daune on Tuesday, February 10, 2026 5:40:20 PM

Announcement for PRR - 1647

Description: The CAISO updated its proposal. See the most current attachment for the updated language.
-By Wilson, Daune on Thursday, February 19, 2026 9:25:32 AM

Recommendation for PRR - 1647

Proposed Language:

Approve as modified.

Action: Approve the BPM PRR as modified.
Effective Date: 01/01/0001

Final Decision for PRR - 1647

Final Decision: Change management process completed. The latest redline version of the BPM will be published to the Document Library.
Stakeholder Comment: consensus achieved
Action: Adopt the recommendation as modified
Effective Date: 02/27/2026