Rule Change: Completed

Overview

On 15 October 2009 the Commission published its final Rule determination and final Rule on the Reliability Panel’s proposal relating to Improved RERT Flexibility and Short-notice Reserve Contracts. The Rule determination and Rule are made in accordance with section 102 and 103 of the National Electricity Law and adopt the position of the Rule change proposal. The Rule commences on 15 October 2009. The reasoning for the Commission’s decision to make the Rule is provided in the final Rule determination.
View more

<p>
On 15 October 2009 the Commission published its final Rule determination and final Rule on the Reliability Panel&rsquo;s proposal relating to Improved RERT Flexibility and Short-notice Reserve Contracts.&nbsp;The Rule determination and Rule are made in accordance with section 102 and 103 of the National Electricity Law and adopt the position of the Rule change proposal.&nbsp; The Rule commences on 15 October 2009.&nbsp;The reasoning for the Commission&rsquo;s decision to make the Rule is provided in the final Rule determination.</p>
<p>
On 11 August 2009, the Commission received a Rule change proposal from the Reliability Panel proposing to amend the Reliability and Emergency Reserve Trader (RERT) arrangements.&nbsp; The Reliability Panel requested that the Commission assess the Rule change proposal under an expedited process as it considerd the matter urgent.</p>
<p>
The Rule change proposal sought to:</p>
<ul type="disc">
<li>
provide a framework to implement changes to the operation of the RERT to facilitate long-notice, medium-notice and short-notice reserve contracting;</li>
<li>
clarify that AEMO can form a RERT panel; and</li>
<li>
clarify that AEMO may use reserve contracts during system security events.</li>
</ul>
<p>
These proposed changes involved (amongst other things):</p>
<ul type="disc">
<li>
requiring the Reliability Panel to publish interim amendments to its RERT guidelines; and</li>
<li>
requiring AEMO to publish interim amendments to its RERT procedures.</li>
</ul>
<p>
On 20 August 2009 the Commission published a notice under sections 95 and 96 of the National Electricity Law (NEL):</p>
<ul>
<li>
inviting written submissions on this Rule change proposal; and</li>
<li>
stating its intention to assess this Rule change proposal under an expedited process as it is considered to be urgent.</li>
</ul>
<p>
Objections to the Rule change proposal being assessed under the expedited process&nbsp;were due by 3 September 2009.&nbsp; Submissions to the Rule change proposal were due by 17 September 2009.&nbsp; The Commission&nbsp;also published a consultation paper to provide guidance to stakeholders in commenting on the Rule change proposal.</p>
<p>
On 3 September 2009 the Commission received an objection, jointly submitted by the National Generators Forum (NGF) and the Electricity Retailers Association of Australia (ERAA), to the assessment of this Rule change proposal under an expedited process.&nbsp;</p>
<p>
On 18 September 2009 the Commission informed the parties objecting to the expedited assessment of this Rule change proposal of its decision to continue to treat the proposal as a request for an urgent Rule, and therefore for it to be assessed under the expedited process set out in section 96 of the NEL.&nbsp; A copy of the letter to the parties setting out the Commission&#39;s reasons can be found below.</p>
<p>
On 1 October 2009 the Commission issued a notice under section 107 of the NEL to extend the time to publish the final determination for this Rule change proposal by 1 week.&nbsp; The final determination was due to be published on 8 October 2009.&nbsp; The extension of time was required for the Commission to consider complex and difficult issues to do with the assessment of the proposed arrangements.</p>
<p>
On 8 October 2009 the Commission issued a further notice under section 107 of the NEL to extend the time to publish the final determination for this Rule change proposal by a further week.&nbsp; The final determination was due to be published on 15 October 2009.&nbsp; The extension of time was required for the Commission to further consider complex and difficult issues to do with the assessment of the proposed arrangements.</p>

View less

Documentation