1.

Antitrust Admonition

ERCOT strictly prohibits market participants and their employees who are participating in ERCOT activities from using their participation in ERCOT activities as a forum for engaging in practices or communications that violate the antitrust laws.  The ERCOT Board has approved guidelines for members of ERCOT Committees, subcommittees and working Groups to be reviewed and followed by each market participant attending ERCOT meetings.  If you have not received a copy of these Guidelines, please send an email to Brittney Albracht balbracht@ercot.com to receive a copy.

K. Scott

9:00a.m.

2.

Deliverables from Mass Transition Taskforce Meeting (2.07.06)

What format should SET develop to document Mass Transition Project?  Should we also include flow process along with business requirements for each flow developed?

• TX SET team discussed creating a business requirements document.  Group agreed that any required content of the business requirements document should correspond to information in a governing document, such as Protocols, Retail Market Guide, or Texas SET Guides.

Review Mass Transition draft PRR for Section 15

• How will customer information be initially loaded?  .CSV files? 
  • Texas SET AI: develop format for .CSV for initial load of information at ERCOT
  • Texas SET AI: Develop process for loading this information at ERCOT and the TDSPs.  How large can the file be?  How many files?  What timeframe is necessary? 
• TXUES concerned with using the 814_PC to send maintenance customer information to ERCOT when there was a process in place (system benefit fund) that was already working for this purpose.  TXUES does not support using the 814_PC for this process.  It was recommended that TXUES could use the PRR comment process to voice these concerns. 
• The 814_PC would be sent to the TDSP through ERCOT
• Texas SET AI: What needs to change in the 814_PC? 
• Texas SET AI: The 814_18 needs the customer billing address added to allow ERCOT to store the billing address information in the situations where the defaulting CR is a CSA, and the CSA is currently the ROR.  ERCOT would need that billing address information to send to the POLR or designated CR.

 Review Mass Transition draft RMGRR

• Open Item:  Situations exist today where the defaulting CR is the CSA CR, and a MVO submitted causes the ESI ID to become de-energized, with no notification sent to the Landlord.  Team needs direction on what to do with the CSAs held by the defaulting CR that are not currently the Rep or Record.  Solution currently being developed by the Market assumes that the PUCT Customer Protection rules provide guidelines for notifying the Landlord to set up a contract with a new CR.  POLRs would assume responsibilities for ESI IDs where the CSA is the ROR. 
• MVO scenarios:  Move Outs that would be completed unexecutable (814_28 ‘09’) by the TDSP will be treated as a second move out request, meaning that the TDSP will make all reasonable efforts to get a meter read, and if necessary -- send an estimated final read.  In order to accomplish this, the TDSP will need an indicator on the MVO to know to treat it in this manner.
• Texas SET AI: Move out needs the ‘TS’ indicator added to it.  TDSPs will use this to key off of when determining whether to complete unexecute it or not.
• MVI scenarios -- no comments

Visio Flow Review

• TDSPs will be required to provide continuous review of the ESI ID list to see if there are any safety nets to a different CR for the affected ESI IDs.  This process will continue to occur up until the transition date.  TDSPs will need to be able to handle rejecting the 814_03 from ERCOT in the event they have a safety net MVI to a different CR for that ESI ID.
• TDSP AI:  Develop proposal for review process of ESI IDs for Safety Nets
• Texas SET AI:  Document full business process for this scenario.  Add Reject code to the 814_04 for TDSPs to use when Safety Net exists for Defaulting CR ESI ID.
• ERCOT would like to leave open the decision on whether or not the BGN02/06 would be the same in the 814_03’s in a defaulting scenario.  This will depend on how ERCOT generates these 814_03’s. 
• ERCOT AI:  Find out if the BGN02/BGN06 in the 814_03 will be the same number or different
• Pending MVO Evaluation Period:  If requested date is greater than 2 days after the transition date, ERCOT will send an 08 out to the TDSP and defaulting CR upon receipt of the 814_04 and an 814_11 to the defaulting CR indicating the transition date.
• Texas SET AI: Document full business process for this scenario.  This will be added to Protocols, Section 15.1.2.9
• Customer information:  How will this be stored?  Will this information be provided to the POLR in the scenarios where ERCOT requires the POLR to send a MVI?  Is the information stored after the Service Order at ERCOT is complete
• ERCOT AI:  Develop a proposal for how customer information should be stored at ERCOT and triggers for storing that information.
• Mass Transition where Default CR is CSA CR -- proposal for ERCOT to generate the 24 instead of the 03 in a MVO to CSA scenario. 
• Texas SET AI: Analysis on the demand for this request.  Cost may outweigh the benefit to this solution.  Better answer may be to have the CR resubmit a Move-out. 
• Texas SET AI:  Compare Solution to Stacking scenarios with the new Drop to POLR process for gaps and changes.  

TX SET

9:30a.m.

Lunch

12:00p.m.

3.

Mass Transition Checkpoint

• Does TX SET have all necessary documentation and requirements from the Mass Transition Task Force and/or other WG or Subcommittees to begin building transaction changes?
• What other items may be needed, investigated, or researched?
• What is the timeline for building requirements?

TX SET

2:00p.m.

Adjourn

3:00p.m.