ERCOT (Catherine Meiners) stated she needed examples of this issue because she was not able to find any problems where this response occurred. Johnny stated if he could not get any examples by the next meeting this issue will be withdrawn
Maybe resolved via MarkeTrak instead of providing a daily report to CR. ERCOT will provide additional information at the next meeting concerning issuing a MarkeTrak issue for this scenario. CR should receive the necessary information via MarkeTrak and submit the appropriate transactions.
ERCOT investigation determined the issue was when the MVO was issued first then the MVI came in, which became a MVI Permit Pending, canceling the original MVO issued earlier. Results of the investigation found 1,645 ‘MOX’ of which 8 Permit Pending fall into the scenario that is being discussed on this issue and 17 MVI were cancelled (investigation period covered 12/1 – 12/15 --15 days). Need to know why TDSPs ask to cancel the MOX request (backed-out). Question: should ERCOT only cancel MVO when MVI is scheduled instead of pending because of Permit/Cancellation issues for the MVI? Continue to investigate and research the problem, also to determine what best resolution should be for this issue. Also, ERCOT will send some additional information to the TDSPs to investigate why they requested MOX cancellations via either FasTrak or MarkeTrak of ERCOT. Because of the 3.0 changes nothing automated can be implemented at this time to correct this problem. Possible solution is a spreadsheet report with ESI IDs that fall into the MOX scenario (Daily report).
Per ERCOT, research is needed to investigate real scenarios and recommend some solutions to this issue. ERCOT is requesting 1-month to investigate. Current findings provided by ERCOT were 110 transactions had permit pending where the MVO was rejected for ‘MOX’. Possible suggestions: 1. Do not cancel a MVO for MOX when the MVI is schedule; wait for the 814_04 from the TDSPs. 2. Do away from MOX completely and update Protocol language to allow for this practice. Discuss following investigation/research at the December 12, 2006 meeting.
Background
Status:
Closed
Date Posted:
10/19/2006
Sponsor:
TXU Energy
Urgent:
No
Sections:
814_24, 814_08 Cancel
Description:
Pending customer-requested MVO is canceled by ERCOT per stacking rule if MVI is received for same day or earlier. ERCOT pends MVI for permit, and Cancels the MVO. If Permit is not received in 20 days or customer cancels the MVI, the existing customer remains active even though they requested a MVO because their MVO was cancelled by ERCOT. Customer gets a bill for 20 days or more past the date they requested their service to stop because of the current stacking rule.
Reason:
Customer may get several days of usage charged to them due to their MVO being canceled and replaced in the ERCOT stacker due to a MVI request. The existing customer requested the MVO and can’t be responsible for the new tenant meeting their permit requirement. The customer-requested MVO should be worked no matter what the status of the MVI, when ERCOT has cancelled an original MVO from the current CR. The MVO customer complains about being billed for service past their request date and the CR usually ends up refunding money to the customer. There is significant financial impact to the CR that requested the MVO.
