July 3, 2023, 2:26 p.m.
IAN WHITE | SE

Shell Energy North America (US), L.P. ("Shell Energy") appreciates the opportunity to submit comments on the Section 105 -- Qualifying Resources BPM.  


July 10, 2023, 2:09 p.m.
MICHAEL WATKINS | Seattle City Light

City Light recommends that a table should be added to each business practice.

City Light recommends that any references to other documents contain a link or reference to where those documents can be found.


July 11, 2023, 7:50 a.m.
WILLIAM GODDARD | Calpine Energy Solutions
No response submitted.

July 13, 2023, 2:50 p.m.
KATIE NELSON | BPA

DISREGARD - OUTDATED COMMENTS


July 14, 2023, 12:41 p.m.
CONNOR CURSON | Powerex

Powerex would like to highlight the usage of the terms “unit”, “plant”, and “resource” throughout the BPM. While some aspects of the Forward Showing do involve unit level data, a Resource under WRAP is accredited QCC at the plant level. The choice of wording should be clear when a requirement is for a plant versus a unit.

Powerex also cautions on using defined terms in the BPM with capitalization, unless that term is included in the Definitions section of the BPM, or in the Tarriff. An example would be the term "Historical Outage Evaluation Equivalent" being used in Appendix A, but no other mention of what that defined term is. If no definition is necessary, then Powerex suggests removing the capitalization from the term.

Powerex also believes the BPM would benefit from having section headers and numbering, along with a Table of Contents. This would help participants navigate the BPM and be able to find relevant sections as needed.


July 17, 2023, 3:37 p.m.
LEAH MARQUEZ-GLYNN | Tacoma Power

While we found Business Practice Manual 105 to be an insightful document, we struggled somewhat with it as a business practice.  Our expectation of WRAP business practices is that they provide a set of instructions for WPP participants to perform so that they may achieve certain requirements of the WRAP tariff.  This document seems to read more broadly, including processes occurring at the WPP or the Program Operator (PO).  While we appreciate the WPP and PO being transparent about their activities, it sometimes causes confusion as to whether a particular activity is the responsibility of the WRAP participant, WPP, or PO.  Other information included in the document including examples and background is likewise informative, but these sections do not directly help us meet our commitments under the tariff.  As a result, we have found ourselves doing more searching and interpreting than we would normally expect in a business practice document.  As WPP progresses with Business Practice development, we would encourage it do modify its approach along the following:

1. Publish an outline or title summary of all anticipated business practices

2. Publish a business practice that contains all acronyms and definitions

3. Publish any form or workbook identified in a draft business practice at the time of the draft business practice posting

4. In initial business practice versions, limit discussion of background, purpose, or examples and instead focus on developing concise documents that identify actions required of program participants.


July 18, 2023, 8:54 a.m.
KATIE NELSON | BPA

The usage of the terms “unit”, “plant”, “project” and “resource” throughout the BPM is confusing, they should be defined and used appropriately. While specific aspects of the Forward Showing, such as outages, use unit level data, a Resource has an accredited QCC at the plant/project level.  The use of ‘unit’ in plant/project level descriptions is confusing.


July 18, 2023, 9:28 a.m.
LORI HERMANSON | Avista

How are forced outages treated? Or is this addressed in another BPM and, if so, which one?

Maintenance outages outages is not included in this document- should it be? If so, how should planned maintenance be considered for outage of 3 days or less (full exclusion or partial capacity reduction?) Also how to consider cascading unit outages at multi unity facilities, where no more than 1 unit is out at a time? 


July 18, 2023, 1:42 p.m.
TYLER MOORE | Arizona Public Service

APS would support evaluation of resources utilizing PCAP methodology in the future, but is supportive of the current UCAP at this time. 


July 18, 2023, 3:02 p.m.
LINDSEY SCHLEKEWAY | NVE
No response submitted.

July 18, 2023, 3:48 p.m.
AMY BURTON | PSE

please delete my test comment


July 18, 2023, 3:50 p.m.
CAMILLE CHRISTEN | Idaho Power Company
No response submitted.

July 18, 2023, 4:28 p.m.
BENJAMIN FAULKINBERRY | PacifiCorp Energy Supply Management
No response submitted.

July 18, 2023, 4:29 p.m.
JERRET FISCHER | SRP

 No comment at this time.


July 18, 2023, 4:47 p.m.
SACHI BEGUR | Puget Sound Energy

Please include section numbers throughout the document.

These capitalized terms are not defined in the tariff or BPM105 (there are probably more, here is a sample):

  1. WPP Data Instruction Manual
  2. Data Instruction Manual
  3. Max Capacity (In Table 1, ESR section)
  4. Advanced Assessment Data Request
  5. Hydro QCC Workbook
  6. Cascaded Dual Plant