Day 1 -- March 27, 2006

1

Texas SET Meeting

• Antitrust Admonition
• Antitrust Admonition reviewed -- No questions
• Introductions
• See Texas SET Attendance Worksheet
• Approval of the Draft February 28, 2006 Meeting Notes:
• Notes approved as written.
• Recent decisions about Notes, Action Items, Issue Log, Issue Form and Change Control Form.
• Leadership will draft language to add to the Change Control Form and website to indicate the Change Control form is for Texas SET use only after Issue Approval.
• Reviewed location of Action Items Log and the format for Agendas and Meeting Notes on the Texas SET Webpage.
• RMS Update
• TAC Update - TX SET discussion at TAC
• TAC directed TX SET to file PRR regarding mass transition; very important priority to the Board and to TAC.  
• How long will long term solution take?
• What can be done by the end of year and how much will you be able to reduce the timeline?
• Shannon Bowling - long term timeline -- 6 day transition process -- TX SET solution is very comprehensive;
• RMS to report back next month (1) long term solution -- confirm for TAC the timeline to get everything implemented and how it will reduce the timeline (2) tell us what part of the "Cadillac version" can be done on a quicker timeline, and how many days would the transition be reduced, and the timeline to get that done. 

Kathy Scott

10:00 AM

2

Mass Transition

• Long Term Timeline Discussion -- Start to Finish
• Publish Guides and Requirements Development, Testing, TX SET Version Release, and Implementation Deadline Discussion
• Issues and Limitations associated with Implementation
• Phased Approach -- Barebones vs. Cadillac
• POLR Rulemaking Discussion
• MT Project Discuss Issues and Timeline Impacts
• Terms and Conditions Rulemaking Discussion
• MT Project Discuss Issues and Timeline Impacts

TX SET should we separate the T&Cs from MT Project to prioritize one development effort over the other to hopefully gain ground on the implementation timeline?  

• Comments by Glen Wingerd:
• Implementation without CIR can save time but parsing down any further will not really save time. 
• Implementation of two versions would require two implementation flights and would be a large cost to the Market. 
• Guides should not be published before approval of the PUCT POLR Rule.
• Timelines for rule makings and testing would result in the 0407 test flight at best. 
• Bill Reily pointed out that 1007 is being recommended for T’s and C’s and would make 0407 difficult.
• Brad Trietsch stated that it is important that the Market understand that the cost of two implementations is not beneficial.
• Mass Transition Business Requirements Document.
• Reviewed and made appropriate changes -- see Key Documents
• Market Participants and ERCOT need to review what it would take to implement changes in their systems.
• Reviewed list of pending transaction scenarios.
• See MassDropScenerios030906 in Key Documents. 

10:30 AM

Lunch

12:00 PM

3

Mass Transition -- Continued

• Continued review of Business Requirements Document.
• Need to determine if testing will be required for all Market Participants or just those that are assigned, or may be assigned, to serve as POLR. 
• Glen reviewed possible project timeline. 
• 5/16 Board Approval
• 5/22 Project Initiation
• 6/5 Planning
• 7/17 Business Requirements
• 7/24 Sign Off on Business Requirements
• 8/7 Conceptual Design
• 9/18 Design Document
• 10/2 Sign Off on Design Document
• 12/11 Build Complete
• 2/5 UAT Complete
• Flight 0407 (Tentative Flight -- hasn’t been scheduled yet)
• Implementation May 31
• ERCOT does not feel implementing Rules separate from submission of 03 because the build would only be a few weeks difference
• ERCOT will be ready to present this timeline to TAC at the next meeting. 
• Timeline assumes that the POLR rule does not change anything. 
• ERCOT will look at timeline and propose areas where the timeline can be shaved.
• This timeline was presented as the very best case scenario and the following potential delays were mentioned:

·         RFP - 6.5 weeks

·         Return to board for additional funds - 2 months

·         Final POLR rule that requires changes to solution - Unknown, but at least 2 months

o       It was also conveyed that this timeline of 12 months and 15 days was at the most conservative end of ERCOT’s 12 to 18 month estimate that was originally delivered and that any change to this would be an extension, not a compression.

1:00 PM

Adjourn

4:00 PM

Day 2 -- March 28, 2006

1

Mass Transition -- Continued from Day 1

• What information is needed by Market Participants (TX SET) and ERCOT to internally discuss the Mass Transition Project?  Questions that need to be answered by all and responses will be discussed at the Wednesday, April 5, 2006 TX SET Meeting:

• What timeline does your company support concerning Mass Transition Long Term Solution?
• Can your company support a solution that could be implemented by end of year 2006?
• Can your company be ready to Market Text Phase I as documented by TX SET in Flight 1006?  Phase II?  Why or why not?
• Does your company support a phased approach, if the approach allows for an earlier/faster implementation (with the understanding that this would require second release and full Market Test)?
• If the outcome of this investigation determines that an implementation would be later than 1st Quarter 2007, then what are your company’s issues and/or concerns?

• Market Participants and ERCOT to provide input at April 5th meeting.
• Reviewed Draft PRR for Section 15.1.2.9 Mass Customer Drop
• Reviewed and made appropriate changes.
• Mass Drop Rules -- Glen Wingerd
• Reviewed and made appropriate changes -- See Key Documents
• Customer Mailer for Drop to POLR
• Should ERCOT look at sending a Customer Mailer for Mass Transition Customers?
• ERCOT stated that it can be added to the scope and would be part of the budget.
• Kathy Scott stated that it might be more for RMS discussion and decision than TX SET.

9:00 AM

Lunch

12:00 PM

2

Implementation Guides to Support Mass Transition

• 814_08 -- Johnny Robertson
• 814_14 and 814_15 -- Bill Reily
• Others
• 814_03 -- Bare Bones -- Kathy Scott
• 814_04 -- Bare Bones -- Kathy Scott
• Reviewed and made appropriate changes.
• Action item for TX SET members that were assigned to revise/update 814_11, 814_14 and 814_15 transactions to present as barebones to TX SET at next meeting.  

1:00 PM

3

Next Scheduled Meeting -- April 5, 2006

• TX SET may need to meet more frequently to accomplish RMS Mass Transition Deadlines.
• Working Group Participants provide input on possible scheduling of meetings. 
• Should TX SET meeting expand to 3 days or should meetings go to twice a month, both would be 2 day meetings?
• Better to plan for 3 days and then it is there if we need it for Market Coordination Team. 

4

Review Issues Log -- If Time Permits

• Review/Update TX SET Issues Log
• Review Open Action Items from February 28th Meeting 

Adjourn

3:00 PM