http://nodal.ercot.com 1

1
Texas NodalCRR API UpdateCompiled By Shawna R.
JirasekJuly 23, 2007
2
CRR API History

• October 2006
• CRR Requirements reviewed with TPTF where API was
  initially brought up as a concern.
• CRR Project Budget was already baselined, so
  program approval required for additional API
  functionality and funding required for
  development, integration, and testing.
• November 2006
• CRR CSD reviewed with TPTF where API
  functionality concerns were clarified.
• December 2006
• Motion passed directing the CRR Project Team to
  submit Change Request to add API capability to
  CRR System. API capability is not explicitly
  described in the Nodal Protocols or TPTFs
  Transition Plan document, but MPs have made clear
  their desire for ERCOT to provide the capability
  for all market systems.
• Change Request drafted and submitted to Nodal
  Change Control Board (CCB).
• March 2007
• Change Request initially rejected by Nodal CCB as
  it was thought to affect Nodal program critical
  path, considered additional scope, and is not
  must-have for Nodal Go-Live.
• MPs appealed Nodal CCB decision and requested
  review with ERCOT BOD.
• May 2007
• ERCOT determined that API could be adopted
  without affecting Nodal critical path. Request
  would be for funding only.
• CRR API Change Request was reviewed and rejected
  by ERCOT BOD. Details presented included
• Cost Impact Total 500K - 1M (CRR, EIP, and
  INT)
• Schedule Impact CRR - 2 month development and
  EIP - 4 months development
• This effort will not be allowed to impact the
  critical path of the program. If necessary,
  release of this functionality will be deferred
  beyond Nodal Go-Live.
• June 2007
• MPs requested CRR API Change Request details to
  ask BOD to reconsider their decision.

3
Other ISO CRR API Use

• New York ISO
• No API currently in use.
• Only the awards part of the TCC system is
  currently automated and does not provide an API.
  
• Planning to provide web-based UI for submittal of
  TCC bids and offers in a future phase.
• Expect development of an upload/download
  interface at that time similar to functionality
  MPs use in energy market for accessing bids and
  schedules via market information system.
• California ISO
• No API currently in use.
• Enhancement under consideration to put one into
  place to assist clients in automated interaction
  with all systems. 
• MPs request implementation as a "highly
  desirable" feature.
• Midwest ISO
• No API currently in use.
• Received some MP requests but no significant
  value yet established to justify cost to develop.
• ISO New England
• Awaiting official response indicating use/not
  used.
• Received informal information indicating no API
  currently in use.
• PJM
• No response received.

4
Things to Consider

• Cost to develop during Nodal timeline will
  minimize cost impact.
• CRR, EIP, and INT Project Teams in place through
  ITEST. Thus, additional internal costs for this
  support would be minimal.
• Development could occur following CRR FAT. API
  functionality could be available by or shortly
  after Nodal Go-Live.
• If developed after June 2008 cost impact will
  significantly increase.
• If added to 2009 PPL, there is risk that API
  project might not be prioritized above cut-line.