project prioritization history

Download Project Prioritization History

Post on 17-Jan-2016




0 download

Embed Size (px)


Yearly Project Prioritization Process Overview and New MO Projects Troy Anderson et. al. June 2007. Project Prioritization History. Pre-2006 1 PPL (Project Priority List) for the entire organization Created the concept of capability - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • *Yearly Project Prioritization Process Overviewand New MO Projects

    Troy Anderson et. al.

    June 2007


  • *Project Prioritization HistoryPre-20061 PPL (Project Priority List) for the entire organizationCreated the concept of capabilityAllowed delivery teams to go below the cutline to maximize resource utilization

    2006 - Creation of CARTs (Continuous Analysis & Requirements Teams)5 PPLs (one per CART) created to support the reality that resource limitations are a critical factor in project planning and deliveryResource constraints within a CART are the most common delivery limitationEstablished funding allocation rules to help ensure that available funds are allocated to the most critical projectsEstablished relationships between CARTs and market subcommittees to ensure market representation in the process


  • *Yearly Project Prioritization Process Step 1Each CART uses the current PPL as a starting point for planning the next years project listDetermine which projects will complete prior to year endThese projects are not relevant for next years planningDetermine which projects will not complete by the end of 2007Budget estimate completed for current year vs. next year spendingGiven a 0 Previously Approved priority on the new PPLRanked in same order as current year PPL unless otherwise determinedUse decimal rank (0.1, 0.2, etc.)Work with the market to determine the following:Add new efforts that are likely to be undertaken in the next yearBased on market input, ERCOT will estimate the cost of new projectsIf any projects on the list should be deleted


  • *Yearly Project Prioritization Process Step 2Prioritizing and ranking the next years PPLDetermine proper priority for all projectsSee Guiding Principles of Project Prioritization for guidance Rank projects within each prioritySort the rows within each priority in order of importanceHighest 1 Critical item should be ranked 1Number the rest of the list 2, 3, 4, etc. until you reach the last item in the 4 Medium priorityParking Lot items are not rankedDecimal rankings (such as 3.5 and 4.5) are reserved for new projects or project re-rankings which occur over the course of the yearAgreement between market subcommittees and ERCOT CART members on project prioritization and rank is important because the same delivery resources are used to deliver similar projects


  • *Yearly Project Prioritization Process Step 3Determination of delivery capability by CARTEach CART analyzes estimated resource demands of the projects on the list to determine how many projects on the list can be addressed in the upcoming yearA Resource Capability Line is added to the PPL to indicate the projects that can be expected to be worked in the next yearProjects will move in relation to this line over the course of the year as new projects are added, budget estimates are revised, and projects are re-ranked


  • *Yearly Project Prioritization Process Step 4Stakeholder approval of next years project list priority, rank and resource capability lineMarketSeek market subcommittee approval of draft PPLs at June meetings Seek PRS approval at June meetingSeek TAC approval at July meetingERCOTSeek SRT (Strategic Review Team [ERCOT directors]) approval in JuneSeek EC (Executive Committee) approval in JuneBoard of DirectorsSeek Finance & Audit Committee and Board of Directors approval in August/September timeframe


  • *Yearly Project Prioritization Process Step 5Upon Board of Directors approval, the new PPL will become the current PPL to reflect the revised priorities and new additions to the CART plansAs the end of the current year approaches, if it appears that project funding is running less than budget, CARTs may be encouraged to initiate projects scheduled to start in the next year


  • *Yearly Project Prioritization Process Project Status ValuesFollowing are the project status values used on the PPL (in alphabetical order):

    Below LineProject is below the cutline (not funded) CancelledProject has been cancelled (budget will be zero)ClosingProject has implemented deliverables but final accountingactivities are still taking placeCompleteProject is complete and final cost is knownExecutionProject is in the process of creating and installing the deliverables as assigned (follows Planning phase)InitiationProject is just starting (PM assigned, initial documents are completed, etc.) NewProject is newly added to the listNot Yet StartedProject is above the line but has not yet been startedOn HoldProject is temporarily on holdPlanningProject is planning out the design of the deliverable(s) and resources required to implement


  • *COMS Extract, Report & Web Services Monitoring & Usage StatisticsJackie Ashbaugh


  • *BackgroundThis project provides research capabilities for Commercial Operations extract, report and web services data for internal business users, which include monitoring functionality and usage analysis capabilities. It consolidates and automates multiple manual efforts that occur today to monitor extract creations through market postings. Current methods provide limited reporting capability. For example:RMC provides limited ability to report on download stats on TML.Inquiries regarding points in the life cycle from creation to delivery for extracts and reports, the information must be pieced together from multiple systems and groups. Usage and download statistics are not consistently available across extracts/reports/web services.

    COMS Extract, Report & Web Services Monitoring & Usage Statistics


  • *COMS Extract, Report & Web Services Monitoring & Usage StatisticsScopeConsistent monitoring processes and usage statistics for Report, Extract, and Web Services for all systems. Develop business procedures for supporting COMS extracts, reports and web services ERCOT market SLA reporting Operational and Usage statistics ERCOT internal dashboard



  • *PRR-478Use of Lagged Dynamic Samples for New Profiles

    Calvin OpheimJune 11, 2007PRR-478 Use of Lagged Dynamic Samples for New Profiles Calvin Opheim


  • Background

    This is a change to the method for creating Load Profiles allowing for the use of lagged dynamic samples for new profiles adopted subsequent to market open

    This project is necessary in order to enable wholesale settlement of Demand Response programs

  • *Market BenefitsAllowing the use of lagged dynamic samples for new profiles will provide three important benefits to the market:The time lag between approving a new profile and being able to settle ESI IDs using the new profile will be significantly reducedNew profiles are expected to be subject to significant population change as new ESI IDs are identified for inclusion in the profile; lagged-dynamic samples will accommodate these changes more quickly, accurately and efficiently than is possible with adjusted static modelsUse of lagged dynamic samples will allow the market to audit ESI IDs being assigned to new profiles and will create an incentive for CRs using the profile to limit the inclusion of ESI IDs to those appropriate to the profile


  • *Impact Analysis / Cost EstimateLodestar will require system enhancements to introduce lagged dynamic samples, including creation of dynamic samples, as well as processes/coding for the automation of scripts and statistics. ERCOT Profiling staff will test and maintain the new profiles as they are developed.

    The estimated cost is < $100k


  • *Questions?


  • *PRR-385Changes for Implementation of Direct Load Control (DLC)

    Calvin Opheim


  • BackgroundModify language in Protocols to better represent how Direct Load Control (DLC) will be implemented in ERCOT

    Procedural changes to implement DLC programs. The requested changes include:Removing detailed DLC implementation information from the Protocols and moving them into the Load Profiling GuidesModifying language to be consistent with the revisions made with respect to profiling ESI IDs in DLC programsCoinciding with revisions in Load Profiling Guides Revision Request (LPGRR 2003-001)LRPRR has language which outlines the process for bidding DLC demand reductions into the BUL marketMinor wording changes

  • *BUL BackgroundBalancing Up Loads are loads registered to bid into BES marketEnabled by PRR 302, 419, 448 & PIP 112 (2003)

    Individual BULs must be IDR-metered (telemetry not required)

    When a BUL is dispatched and load is shed, QSEs representing BULs receive:Energy-imbalance payment in normal SettlementAdditional payment = MCPC in the non-spin market for that interval


  • *BUL Background (continued)Individual BUL compliance is evaluated on a baseline developed from the loads performance over prior 10 like days (enabled)

    BUL program for individual loads is available but currently unsubscribed

    BUL will go away entirely upon launch of Texas Nodal


  • *BUL Background -- DLCDirect Load Control programs were viewed as the vehicle for smaller customers to participate in the ERCOT Balancing Energy market

    While developing Protocols for DLC Settlement (2002-03), PWG also developed Protocols to enable DLC to provide BUL service

    Project to enable DLC Settlement, including BUL participation, did not make the PPL cut-line due to lack of a sponsoring REPLanguage has been gray-boxed since 2003


  • *BUL Background -- DLCPRR-385 defines an algorithm for determining DLC baseline DLC baseline is based on proxy day (if available) or profile

    DLC Settlement can be enabled without the BUL provisionsIncluding BUL in the


View more >