1 / 8

Additional Discussion – NPRR709, Revisions to Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedure

Additional Discussion – NPRR709, Revisions to Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedure. Nathan Bigbee Jonathan Levine Chad V. Seely ERCOT Legal. NPRR709 Discussion – Overview. Background and Short Description Procedural History Summary of Comments Review of Commenting Process Proposal.

richarddanderson
Download Presentation

Additional Discussion – NPRR709, Revisions to Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedure

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Additional Discussion – NPRR709, Revisions to Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedure Nathan Bigbee Jonathan Levine Chad V. Seely ERCOT Legal

  2. NPRR709 Discussion – Overview • Background and Short Description • Procedural History • Summary of Comments • Review of Commenting Process Proposal Additional Discussion re NPRR709

  3. NPRR709 – Background ERCOT has noted that ADR requests often present challenging questions of market policy. In those cases, ERCOT believes additional stakeholder input may be helpful in reaching an appropriate resolution. However, under the existing ADR procedures, there is no process by which ERCOT can solicit comments from stakeholders on such issues. At the July 31, 2014 TAC meeting, ERCOT Staff proposed sponsoring an NPRR to allow ERCOT to solicit comments from stakeholders on issues that arise in an ADR proceeding. Additional Discussion re NPRR709 Discussion re NPRR709

  4. NPRR709 – Short Description Main Purpose: To provide a process for stakeholders to comment on issues that arise in an ADR proceeding. Summary of Changes: • Adds a process for stakeholders to comment on: (1) all ADR written requests, and (2) in certain cases, issues for which ERCOT determines broader stakeholder input may be helpful in reaching an appropriate resolution of the claim. • Provides public notice of the rationale for ADR resolutions. • Eliminates mediation and arbitration. • Clarifies and improves supporting language. Impact Analysis: $20k-$40k; 3-5 months; changes to MIS, EIS, ERCOT.com. Additional Discussion re NPRR709 Discussion re NPRR709

  5. NPRR709 – Procedural History • May 27, 2015: NPRR709 posted. • June 11, 2015: PRS tabled NPRR709 and requested that ERCOT arrange a workshop. • July 1, 2015: ERCOT Staff and stakeholders conducted a workshop on NPRR709. • July – October: Four sets of stakeholder comments posted. • October 15, 2015: PRS continued to table NPRR709. Participants suggested another workshop to review and discuss comments received to date. Additional Discussion re NPRR709 Discussion re NPRR709

  6. NPRR709 – Summary of Comments Received Three commenters accept ERCOT’s proposal to publish a Market Notice at an ADR proceeding’s conclusion, but delete the process by which stakeholders may comment on an ongoing proceeding: • Calpine 7/13/15: Express concern that opinions expressed by a group of Market Participants could unduly influence ERCOT and delay ADR resolution. • LCRA 8/4/15: Express concern with potential for disclosure of Market Participants’ confidential and competitively sensitive issues and information; suggest that policy discussions take place through the stakeholder committee process. • GSEC 10/6/15: Agree with Calpine and LCRA; issues of policy are better addressed in the stakeholder process or at the PUCT. One commenter supports NPRR709 as submitted, including the commenting process. • TIEC 10/6/15: Express support for opening ADR proceedings to stakeholder input, given the implications the ADR process may have for stakeholders that are not directly involved in the dispute; concerns about confidentiality are not a persuasive reason for rejecting the proposed commenting process. Additional Discussion re NPRR709 Discussion re NPRR709

  7. NPRR709 – Review of Commenting Process Proposal • Market Participant requesting ADR submits written request. Written request will be attached to ERCOT Market Notice, so submitter may provide a second copy redacting all Protected Information for ERCOT to attach. • No later than 7 days after ADR initiation date, ERCOT provides Notice to parties and Market Notice to stakeholders, attaching ADR request, redacted if necessary. • No later than 14 days after ERCOT’s Market Notice, stakeholders may comment on the ADR request. • If ADR proceeding involves one or more issues for which broader stakeholder input may be helpful, no later than 35 days after ADR initiation date, ERCOT may issue a Market Notice soliciting comments. • If ERCOT issues a Market Notice soliciting comments, no later than 14 days after issuance, Stakeholders, PUCT or Texas RE may comment on issues contained in the Market Notice. Additional Discussion re NPRR709 Discussion re NPRR709

  8. NPRR709 – Discussion Feedback on comments posted so far? Ideas for other options? Questions? Additional Discussion re NPRR709

More Related