02: Please supply any comments related to the Confirming and Declining Energy Deployment section (3).

 | 
PROMPT 2
 |   |   |   |   | 



July 24, 2024, 3:03 p.m.
JERRET FISCHER | SRP

SRP suggests the WPP clarify whether there are any specific actions required between WRAP participants for confirming or declining energy deployment that are not an available action in the PIT.


July 24, 2024, 4:34 p.m.
MATT HAYES | BPA
No response submitted.

July 24, 2024, 4:43 p.m.
TYLER MOORE | Arizona P…

No comments at this time.


July 24, 2024, 4:56 p.m.
NICOLE BLACKWELL | Idaho Pow…
No response submitted.

July 24, 2024, 6:09 p.m.
SANDEAP REDDY | Puget Sou…

First sentence of the section is a bit confusing as it implies that the deficient participant has to confirm energy on the preschedule day. Perhaps it can be rewritten in the following way  can be rewritten as follows -


"A deficient Participant will notify the PO via the PIT of its need for Energy Deployment up to the MW amount of the Participant’s confirmed request for Holdback Requirement as established on the Preschedule Day."
 


July 24, 2024, 8:40 p.m.
BENJAMIN FAULKINBERRY | PacifiCor…
No response submitted.

July 24, 2024, 9:57 p.m.
GABRIELLE GLYNN | Tacoma Po…

“Any Participant for which the Program Operator calculated during the Preschedule Day a negative Sharing Requirement for the hour in question shall have zero Holdback Requirement and shall not have any Energy Deployment obligation for that hour.”

While this language is consistent with BPM 204, Tacoma would like to allow for the possibility that a deficit Participant (per the Sharing Calculation) that does not request or Opt-In for Holdback Capacity should still be able to offer resources to the WRAP via Voluntary Holdback. In that case the language above would need to be adjusted.