Comments on Market Update - May 14, 2026

1. Please provide a detailed description of the item of interest regarding the EDAM results, including relevant observations, impacts, and supporting information where applicable.

A few questions:

1. Can you explain the $274/MWH RC prices in HE 18 on 5/28?

2. Can you talk about the congestion in SDG&E's area on 5/28?

3. Can you explain why the CRR and CRA intiatiaves were delayed to incorporate new information -- can you explain what new information is and how/where we can access it?

Thanks,

Michele

1. Please provide a detailed description of the item of interest regarding the EDAM results, including relevant observations, impacts, and supporting information where applicable.

We have noticed a number of discrepancies and missing data in revenue adjustment reports since EDAM go-live.   We have also noticed that there have been updates to some of these reports from earlier in the month.  Please inform market participants of known issues and your plans to address them.  

Also, there have been a number of IFM price correction notification messages on OASIS.  What were the issues that led to these price corrections and how extensive are the price corrections and how substantial are the changes in price per MW/h?

Thank you - Justin 

1. Please provide a detailed description of the item of interest regarding the EDAM results, including relevant observations, impacts, and supporting information where applicable.

Evidence of the use of imbalance reserves to address uncertainty: 

1. Are the procured quantities of IR sufficient to meet the actual delta between the day ahead forecast and the FMM/RTD forecasts? 

2. Are the procured IR resources bid into the real time market and available for dispatch? 

3. How much other capacity is bid into the FMM and RTD markets to meet EDAM BAA loads: without IR awards but with RC awards; with neither IR nor RC awards.  This capacity would include EDAM BAA capacity and WEM BAA capacity if available for transfer and there is transfer capacity available. 

4. What is the frequency of $1000 MCE prices in the FMM and/or RTD compared to prior to EDAM go-live? 

1. Please provide a detailed description of the item of interest regarding the EDAM results, including relevant observations, impacts, and supporting information where applicable.

Subject: Clarification Request on BAA Power Balance Shadow Prices and MCC-to-MEC Treatment

On page 14 of 16 of the DMM comments on the EDAM Draft Final Proposal, the DMM stated:

“DMM does not oppose the ISO’s proposal to establish a marginal energy component of LMP for each BAA rather than using the system marginal energy component and including BAA-specific shadow prices in the congestion component of LMP. DMM requests that the ISO publish a mathematical formulation for the proposed approach, clearly specifying the formulation of each BAA’s power balance constraint, transfer constraints, and how the respective shadow prices enter the formulation of LMP for each BAA.”

Consistent with this request, please provide the mathematical formulation supporting the implemented approach, including the BAA power balance constraint, applicable transfer constraints, and how associated shadow prices enter into LMP via MEC and MCC.

Please provide confirmation that all costs within the “BAA POWER BALANCE” scheduling constraint shadow price bucket, including infeasibility pricing, are now included in MEC. Please clarify whether any other scheduling constraint shadow price buckets have moved from MCC to MEC, or whether the BAA POWER BALANCE bucket is the only one reclassified. Please communicate any change in settlement treatment or confirm if charge code settlement treatment has not changed. Where is the congestion impact from BAA POWER BALANCE settled within WEIM charge codes now that it is a component of MEC rather than MCC (what specific changes or reclassifications to charge code accounting occurred?).

Finally, it would be extremely beneficial to the WEIM community if the CAISO provided a concise before-and-after example showing how BAA power balance shadow prices (and any other cost bucket changes) flowed to MCC prior to EDAM and how they now flow to MEC, including the resulting LMP component impacts. This example should also detail the changes in settlement impacts.

1. Please provide a detailed description of the item of interest regarding the EDAM results, including relevant observations, impacts, and supporting information where applicable.

SDG&E appreciates CAISO extending the Market Update meetings to discuss DAME/EDAM results.

We request CASIO address the following questions during their May 28 Market update: will there be more price corrections for the second half of May? Does CAISO believe prices for RC and IR have generally stabilized? SDG&E is seeing significant decreases in settlements revenues compared to the market awards from May 1-May 14 and appreciates that CAISO has made price corrections for that time period. However, SDG&E is still seeing price spikes in awards for dates after May 14. For example, SDG&E saw ~$50/MW for RCU on May 27 for HEs 3, 4, and 22. We would like CAISO to discuss whether these continued price spikes (post-May 14) for RC are to be expected going forward. If this is the case, what are the drivers of these price spikes? Is this related to the DEB for RC?  

Thank you, SDG&E looks forward to further discussion of these topics during the upcoming meeting. 

1. Please provide a detailed description of the item of interest regarding the EDAM results, including relevant observations, impacts, and supporting information where applicable.

SCE offers the following comments and questions for CAISO below:

1. Prior to EDAM, the majority of the Flexible Ramp Aggregate Awards of FRU and FRD in RTPD and RTD were shown to be in the FRU_PASS_GRP and FRD_PASS_GRP under the Flexible Ramp Aggregate Awards report in Oasis. After EDAM, the amounts of Flexible Ramp Aggregate Awards shown have been generally very small and in many hours are shown as null despite their being amounts shown in the Flexible Ramping Requirements. Please explain what caused these changes and whether this is a reporting error after EDAM was launched or if procurement amounts have changed. 

2. SCE has observed significantly higher RCU procurement amounts after EDAM was launched when compared to RUC quantities prior to EDAM launch.  SCE suspects that these higher quantities of RCU could potentially be due to convergence bidding. However, the correlation between higher convergence bidding and higher RCU procurement amounts are not always apparent on every trading day.  SCE requests CAISO to provide more transparency on how RCU and RCD procurement are calculated.   

3. SCE has not seen Day-Ahead Advisory RSE results published prior to the 10am binding run. SCE has only seen the Advisory results published the day after the binding run which is too late.  CAISO states under section 21.1.1 of the EDAM BPM:  

Using best efforts, market operator will produce advisory RSE runs that are automatically executed every 30 minutes between 06:00 and 09:00 (Note: additional publications are under consideration). The final binding RSE will be conducted for all EDAM entities every day at approximately 10 a.m. prior to running the day-ahead market. Note: Should the 09:00 and 09:30 Advisory runs fail and not be able to complete successfully, the market operator will send a system message, escalate to IT teams, and use best efforts to ensure an advisory execution is provided with a minimum of 15-minutes before a binding RSE post-10:00. 

The Advisory RSE result is designed to provide market participants with the ability to see whether there is a presumed pass or fail before the binding RSE run (10 a.m.).  SCE has inquired about the RSE Advisory report and was pointed to a CMRI report called the “RSE Binding/Advisory Contribution Schedules” which does not provide a “pass” or “fail” status, but instead a list of resources that contribute to the RSE test.    

1. Please provide a detailed description of the item of interest regarding the EDAM results, including relevant observations, impacts, and supporting information where applicable.

We noticed an issue with the latest invoices for 4/24/26-4/30/26 that I have not seen in 5+ years of covering CAISO;  starting on 4/25 the Day Ahead Energy, Congestion, Loss Settlement (CC6013) plus Real Time Convergence Bidding Energy Congestion and Loss Settlement (CC6473) no longer equal the indicative calculation of DA + RTPD LMPs as they should.  I found this interesting as it started a week prior to the EDAM go-live (I believe when bidding opened up for the EDAM).  I have spoken with two other market participants that have confirmed they are seeing the same issue.  I did open up a CIDI ticket about this but as it seems to be more widespread than just our company I was wondering if CAISO was aware of this issue? 

1. Please provide a detailed description of the item of interest regarding the EDAM results, including relevant observations, impacts, and supporting information where applicable.

We have several questions and observations we are hoping the CAISO can help address during the call as well as some data requests. 

1. Are resources being awarded RCU and/or RCD at negative prices and if so how much? 

2. Can the CAISO confirm that when a resource is awarded RCU up to pmin it should not be subject to no-pay so long as it has an energy offer in the real-time market that supports the RCU award?

3. Can the CAISO please provide more details on exactly how the IRU/IRD and RCU/RCD no-pay quantity is calcuated? The settlements BPM references a calculated input that is not defined.

4. We have noticed that there are some pnodes associated with CAISO interties that have a zero GHG component even though they are importing into the CAISO. In other words they are now being priced in the same manner as resources outside the GHG area even though prior to EDAM they were priced in the same manner as resources internal to the GHG area. Can the CAISO please explain why the GHG component at those locations is zero instead of non-zero?

5. Do non-RA VERs that chose to not submit an energy bid into the IFM have a bid generated for them for RCU? In other words, are non-RA VERs forced to participate in RCU?

6. Can the CAISO add into the Daily Market Reports the requirements for RCU and RCD?

7. Can the CAISO add into the Daily Market Reports any operating adjustments made to RCU and RCD?

8. We have noticed that not all the data needed to perform shadow settlements have been available to participants. Is the CAISO aware of a data issue that is preventing that data from being available?

9. Can the CAISO add to either the Daily Market Reports and/or OASIS the transfer limits and what is being transfered from and to each BAA (not just the net flows of all products aggregated)? For example, how much energy is being transfered from CAISO to PACE. Right now the chart just shows that the CAISO is transfering energy out of its BAA to other BAA(s).