Stakeholder center

Comments on 2/24 SH Call

Imbalance Reserves Mosaic Parameter Requirements

Print
Comment period
Feb 24, 11:30 am - Mar 17, 05:00 pm
Submitting organizations
View by:

Pacific Gas & Electric
Submitted 03/17/2025, 03:19 pm

Contact

Todd Ryan (tmrt@pge.com)

1. Provide your organization’s comments on equal-weighted hscore: whether or not it’s useful, if a different formulation (e.g., not equal-weighted / different metrics composition) would be preferred.

No comment

2. Provide your organization’s comments on the proposed quality assurance (QA) methodology. Please distinguish between proposed use in onboarding or in a “production” scenario.

No comment

3. Provide your organization’s comments on CAISO's draft recommendation of applying QA methodology to historical training set.

No comment

4. Provide your organization’s comments on CAISO's draft recommendation of retaining dynamic threshold percentile at 99%.

No comment

5. Provide your organization’s comments on CAISO's draft recommendation of changing static threshold calculation to Sample Scheme 4 with 150 Sample Days [ss4,150].

No comment

6. Provide your organization’s comments on if there are additional metrics you would like the CAISO to present when analyzing the overall performance of the mosaic methodology.

No comment

7. Provide your organization’s comments on whether this presentation met your expectations of the overall Imbalance Reserves Mosaic Parameter Requirements initiative? If no, please elaborate.

PG&E appreciates CAISO for considering previous stakeholder comments to provide additional metrics and clarification of its methods and commends CASIO for its thorough and well-presented analysis. PG&E believes CAISO has reached reasonable conclusions based on its presentation and agrees with its final recommendations. 

8. Provide any additional comments.

No comment

Back to top