Subject: RE: NYPA study-Winter Locational ICAP requirements
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 03:46:00 -0700 (PDT)

[email-masked] writes to the NYISO_TECH_EXCHANGE Discussion List:

This raises concerns about what functions any ISO should take on in the
long run.  Here the ISO used its limited resources, ones which many members
want directed to specific high priority projects... such as virtual
bidding, to perform a study on ICAP that we did not know about until a
flurry of emails arrive.  The point is, the ISO better serves by focusing
its talent and limited time on facilitating the operation of a workable,
reliable, cost effective and efficient power market and by performing
studies consistent with member priorities.  Not by performing studies at
the request of one member, unless they are part of a clearly defined and
approved process like that for interconnections.  The ISO should work as a
"market facilitator," and as such expend its talents on providing accurate
and timely pricing, billing, and tracking of energy transactions within,
into, and out of New York.

The NYISO's need to periodically address market reliability issues and to
initiate studies should continue, in the near term.   Market participants
can raise concerns about reliability issues or submit studies they perform
to the ISO and if the ISO believes that they have merit, we can all review
and debate them and not be advantaged or disadvantaged by some activities
that the ISO decided to undertake with one member.  The ISO should not
pirate market participants' opportunities to analyze the dynamics of
generation availability, transmission, ICAP, and demand to discover areas
for investment.

What better stimulus than ROI is there to seek out opportunities and
eradicate inefficiencies in the market?  Let the market work, and the ISO
facilitate.

Chad Wagner
Dynegy