RSS Feed for Proposed Revision Request - 1650

PRR - 1650

Value cannot be null. Parameter name: stream

Initial Comment for PRR - 1650

Description: It would be most helpful to detail how the automated process will respond to each of the resource constraint examples.
-By Bonnie Blair (Cities of Anaheim, Azusa, Banning, Colton, Pasadena, and Riverside, CA) on Monday, October 13, 2025 3:08:27 PM

Response: 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.
-By Martin, Michael on Tuesday, October 28, 2025 3:29:49 PM

Announcement for PRR - 1650

Description: Please see CAISO's answer to SCE's question posted on 10/28/2025
-By Martin, Michael on Thursday, October 30, 2025 4:20:45 PM

Recommendation Comment for PRR - 1650

Description: 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.
-By Bonnie Blair (Cities of Anaheim, Azusa, Banning, Colton, Pasadena, and Riverside, CA) on Monday, November 17, 2025 7:19:39 AM

Recommendation Comment for PRR - 1650

Description: PG&E supports the CAISO's solution to address individual resources causing infeasibilities.
-By Alan Meck (PG&E) on Monday, November 17, 2025 4:11:39 PM

Recommendation for PRR - 1650

Proposed Language:

Approve as submitted

Apparent Requirement: NA
Priority: NA
Action: Approve the BPM PRR as submitted
Effective Date:
Other Actions: Answered questions from Bonnie Blair, see PRR detail

Final Decision for PRR - 1650

Final Decision: Proceed with modified example per request
Stakeholder Comment: NA
Action: Adopt the recommendation as modified
Effective Date: 01/01/0001