PUC commissioners met January 19th for most of the day to discuss market design changes. Evident from early in the meeting was all five commissioners’ support for some variation of the PCM (performance credit mechanism).
Commissioners batted around a number of ideas to add clarity to the market change. None were supportive of a capacity market and were clear that payments without performance would not win approval. The general concept of the PCM remained the same, and other topics were raised:
- Protections against market power abuse and affiliate abuse were topics of discussion and are to be added to the design.
- The term of the PCM (day, week, month, year) remains to be determined, as does the forward period during which PCMs can be traded.
- Geographic divisions were discussed and were offered as an idea.
- Defining “eligible resources” spurred a somewhat heated conversation between Chairman Lake and Commr. Glotfelty. Glotfelty was adamant that energy efficiency and distributed resources should be able to participate in the PCM. Lake was less convinced.
- Consumer cost was a focus of comments from Commr. Cobos.
The commissioners voted unanimously on a draft proposal that is to be refined through the IMM, ERCOT and PUC staff. There is a great deal of structure that remains to be completed before this becomes a serious proposal.
As the PUC meeting concluded, Chairman Schwertner submitted a letter to PUC commissioners today expressing his displeasure with the PCM, its similarity with a capacity market, and his intention to bring a different plan to the table.
A HillCo Report covering the meeting follows.