TX SET agreed to move this issue to "approved" per the creation of the change control that creates the long-term solution. Short term solution is that ERCOT files MarkeTrak issues to CRs when their MVO is cancelled. Long-term solution is captured in Change Control 2008-718.
TX SET agreed to move this issue to "approved" per the creation of the change control that creates the long-term solution. Short term solution is that ERCOT files MarkeTrak issues to CRs when their MVO is cancelled. Long-term solution is captured in Change Control 2008-718.
Drafted market notice to go out by 2-16-08 describing new market process whereby ERCOT initiates MarkeTrak Issues to identify cancelled Move Out’s to the submitting CR. Process to become effective on 2-25-08. Also, Kathy Scott submitted a draft Change Control for the long-term solution to this issue.
Plan is to run daily report and log MarkeTrak issues to CRs that MVO was trumped by MVI (manual process for ERCOT) -- Since January 1, 2008 ERCOT found 77 Move-Outs that fall into this scenario, which is more than what was expected. Periodic status check will be provided to TX SET. ERCOT will send Market Notice to communicate plan for daily report and MarkeTrak issues will be logged for this scenario.
Possibility that the TDSPs would question a Move-Out and Move-In, which trumps, if current processes are changed to cancel the MVO following receipt of the 814_04 by ERCOT. CRs would need to investigate ESI IDs when and if they received the 814_06 transaction in situations where they were also the submitter of the 814_24 Move-out. ERCOT will bring back information to TX SET at the January 2008 meeting -- information includes cost estimates for providing a report that looks for Move-Ins that trumped Move-Out request identified by CR.
Investigation to be completed by ERCOT to determine how many instances has occurred under this same scenario, also to determine what it would take to make the appropriate changes. Per the team it makes sense to look at scheduled date due to permit pending, changes to requested dates for move-ins, cancellation request of move-ins or complete unexecutable Move-ins that could prolong the actual date in which the move-out is completed, if it is completed at all.
Background
Status:
Closed
Date Posted:
09/28/2007
Sponsor:
CenterPoint Energy
Urgent:
No
Sections:
814_24
Description:
Currently, it seems that ERCOT is canceling 814_24 Move-outs after receiving the 814_03 transaction for ‘MOVE OUT CANCELLED DUE TO AN INCOMING MOVE IN’. ERCOT did not wait to receive the 814_04 transaction before sending the Non-Response driven Cancel. The issue with this is that the 814_03 contains the "Requested Date", where as the 814_04 contains the actual "Scheduled Date". Since the Scheduled date and the requested date could differ, this leaves the losing CR with added days of being the Rep of Record. CenterPoint Energy would like to request that ERCOT should use the 814_04 transaction as the trigger to send the Cancel opposed to the 814_03. This would allow a greater accuracy for when the MVI is scheduled, especially in the event of a change of the requested date for the MVI.
Reason:
Since the Scheduled date and the requested date could differ, this leaves the losing CR with added days of being the Rep of Record and customer charges for dates they should not be responsible for in the usage/billing. This would allow a greater accuracy for when the MVI is scheduled, especially in the event of a change in requested date for the MVI. Final billed customers are negatively impacted due to they are being charged a longer duration of time than what they should because the Move-Out date is based upon the MVI date, which could be days and weeks later based upon the TDSPs scheduled date.
