FYI,
This morning Ercot asked us to run all three units for a manual OOM.    Our Resource plan indicated that our total minimum was 220.    I believe that we had a discussion with Ercot indicating that our minimum on a 2 on 1 config was 280.    We ran at 280,  but our resource plan was not updated.     Ercot called mid-morning to say that they only wanted 220.   It is possible that we will be punished financially (receive the balancing energy price) for the 60 mw's over their request.

The point is,   the Resource Plan is the only thing binding.    We must reflect our true minimums at all times.    If the situation changes intraday,  we need to make changes in the resource plan to reflect what we can actually do.


Please see the e-mail below from Alan.

JMF
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Serio, Erik  
Sent:	Wednesday, September 26, 2001 11:30 AM
To:	Forney, John M.
Subject:	FW: Frontera Resource Plan - Min/Max MWs
Importance:	High



 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Chen, Alan  
Sent:	Tuesday, September 25, 2001 3:07 PM
To:	Broussard, Richard; Comeaux, Keith; Kumar, Madhup; Laverell, Justin; Lenartowicz, Chris; Serio, Erik; Stewart, Kirk; Will, Lloyd
Subject:	Frontera Resource Plan - Min/Max MWs
Importance:	High

All,

ERCOT is questioning us the resource plan we put in the MOS, especially the Min/Max MWs for STG001. If we only have one CT running, then the Min/Max for ST would be 58/80 MWs instead of 130/184 MWs. Here is a list of points I got from Frontera for your reference:

1. One CT running:
	CTG101		STG001
MW	80		58
MW	100		64
MW	110		66
MW	120		68
MW	130		70
MW	140		74
MW	150		80

2. Both CT's running:
	CTG101		CTG201		STG001
MW	80		80		130
MW	100		100		140
MW	110		110		148
MW	120		120		151
MW	130		130		154
MW	140		140		158
MW	150		150		165

If you have questions, please let me know. Thanks.

Alan Chen
x37027