1 Update from ERCOT Retail Market Services to RMS April 23, 2003

2 Retail Market Update Topics –GISB 1.4 –Market Participant Testing –Texas Set 1.5 Update –Move-In/Move-Out Task Force –ERCOT Data Transparency –Fastrak Submittals –Market Synchronization –Inadvertent Switches

3 Market Participant Testing Flight Test V1.5 Overview RMS 04/23/03

4 Congratulations! Flight Test V1.5 Overview

5 Fourteen (14) new Competitive Retailers tested their systems to enter the retail market A total of 43 Competitive Retailer systems were tested Seven (7) TDSP supported flight testing and tested their systems Approximately 23,000 transactions were passed between trading partners during the execution of the scripts required for testing V1.5 Approximately 177 trading partner relations were tested during the execution of the scripts required for testing V1.5 Flight V1.5 – Interesting Facts

6 Testing started on schedule on 2/24/03 and the scheduled timeline of testing was a total of 7 frames (weeks) The majority of the market concluded their testing work during Frame 6 with the new trading relationships ending in Frame 7 on schedule. The first two (2) Muni/Coop TDSP territories tested their systems in preparation for opening their territories for retail competition Flight V1.5 – Interesting Facts

7 “This process, although challenging at times, was another example of all market participants coming together to help promote retail competition in Texas." Flight V1.5 – News Release Clip

8 Flight 3801 – TX SET Version 1.3 Transactions = 6940 Expected end date - 9/5/01 Actual end date - 9/21/01 Flight 1001 – TX SET Version1.4 Transactions = Expected end date - 11/23/01 Actual end date - 12/03/01 Flight V1.5 – TX SET Version 1.5 Transactions ~ Expected end date - 4/7/03 Actual end date - 4/7/03 Migration date - 4/11/03 Flight V1.5 Comparison to Past Flights

9 Flight V1.5 – Lessons Learned TTPT will be discussing in detail at meeting on 4/24 and will host a market workshop. Categories –Checklist Setups –Communication / Expectations –Education of market rules –Portal –Scripts –System Date –Test Bed Setup –Transactions for Future Frames –Testing Signoff Worksheet / Technical Connectivity Worksheet

10 Flight V1.5 - Questions?

11 Texas Set V.1.5 Presented by David Odle

12 The Texas Retail Market is now running in TX SET V1.5 !!! Market Migrated to production ON TIME the weekend of 4/11. First week has not presented any significant issues. What could we do better next time (at a glance) Everything. The highest impact area that should be improved upon is requirements understanding.

13 Next Steps The V1.5 Coordination Team will meet on May 27 th for a Lessons Learned session. That meeting will conclude all meetings for V1.5 and will officially end the V1.5 Coordination Team. Mission: Accomplished

14 Move-In/Move-Out Task Force

15 MIMO Solution to Stacking Schedule 3/26/03High-level Requirements Specifications Finalized 3/28/03Requirements distributed to market for comment 4/17/03End of comment period 4/22/03Joint meeting between MIMO and Tx SET 4/24-25/03MIMO team comment review 5/7/03Market Educational Seminar 5/15/03RMS vote on High Level Requirements 5/20-21/03MIMO team begin work on PRR

16 ERCOT Data Transparency

17 ERCOT Data Transparency (PR# )ETS / TX Set 1.5 (PR# ) –Successfully implemented on April 12, 2003 in conjunction with the TX Set 1.5 project (PR# 20124)Performance Measures (PR# 20124) –Design Documentation completed April 8, 2003 –Code migration to production scheduled May 6, 2003 –All transactions will be re-summarized from January 1, 2003 –Official report generated May 9, 2003 for internal review –Filing package preparation and delivery to PUC by May 15, 2003

18 ERCOT Data Transparency (PR# 30054)ERCOT Data Transparency (PR# 30054) –An evaluation process is currently in place and is tasked with determining the current status of ERCOT Market Deliverables which include the following: SCR727, Siebel Extract, 997 Report, Market Participant Report, Load Report, Performance Measures Report (Market Metrics) –Based on information and reports currently being provided, we need to determine if there are any additional requirements that must be addressed

19 ERCOT Data Transparency and Transaction Integrity Initiatives Texas Set v completed MI/MO Solutions (non stacking) - Q2 MI/MO Stacking – vote May RMS SCR 727 Extracts - completed Siebel Service Order Extracts – completed ERCOT Portal “Find Transactions” Functionality – completed PUCT Market Metrics Reporting (ETS) – Q2

20 FasTrac Stats

21 FasTrak “Day-To-Day” Stats as of Reporting encompasses issues from and ESI ID counts from (when day-to-day spreadsheet process began) Issues rejected by ERCOT are not included in the ESI ID count Issues closed by the MP before ERCOT performs analysis are not included in the ESI ID count FasTrak modifications underway to enhance reporting

22 FasTrak “ESI ID Extract Variance” Stats as of Reporting encompasses to report date (no issues prior) Issues closed by the MP before ERCOT performs analysis are not included in the ESI ID count Trade Dates effected are not reportable due to inconsistencies of MPs completing FasTrak – Change to group by effected Trade Month FasTrak modifications underway to enhance reporting

23 ESI ID Extract Users Guide “Parking Lot” Items from If future changes are made to the DDL adding columns/data, etc., how does this impact the historical data that MPs already have in their databases? Answer: Any migration of new elements or database structure will be accomplished via a release mechanism similar to changes to other extracts ERCOT provides the Market. Multiple parties could submit multiple issues for the same ESI ID to different parties. How would the market identify and reconcile? Answer: ERCOT will upload all ERCOT related issues and determine overlaps during analysis. TDSPs will need to develop a similar mechanism Prioritization needs to be addressed if a large volume of variances are received. Is there a reason that we would need this information (ESI ID premise type) for reporting? Answer: Decision was reached at RMS to use only the effected Trade Day for prioritization. (Discuss change to Trade Month)

24 ESI ID Extract Users Guide “Parking Lot” Items from Can we capture specific reason for closure in FasTrak, e.g., not all required data provided in spreadsheet? Answer: Issues “Rejected” by ERCOT will include comments to identify the rejection reason(s). How can we identify that an issue has been reviewed (issue changes from “new” to “In progress”) or if additional information has been remanded back to the submitter for additional information? Answer: Progress report updates or addition of comments now causes the Issue ID to change color to RED for the other party. Appropriate target for issue resolution – timing, etc.? Potential for this being integrated into the PUCT Performance Measures or Protocols? Answer: Analysis responses are expected within 7 days of submittal. Measurement of timing response and turn-around will require additional functionality and perhaps a project.

25 ESI ID Extract Users Guide “Parking Lot” Items from After the “catch-up” period, Market Participants must submit Data Extract Variance issues at least 150 days prior to the scheduled settlement of a trade day. RMS will revisit this bullet point thirty days prior to the end of the “Catch-up” period. (Pending RMS review) Reporting components and responsibilities need to be better defined: −What are CR and TDSP reporting responsibilities? −Advanced reporting by ERCOT will require RMS project approval and potential implementation of a new FasTrak like mechanism The Following reporting components are not available from ERCOT: –Number/% not resolved by resettlement of trade day and report by reason, e.g., waiting on response from TDSP/CR. (ERCOT to investigate if this is available) –Number/% of issues closed by ERCOT prior to resettlement of the trade day, but not closed by submitting party. (ERCOT to investigate if this is available)

26 Sync Activities

27 Market Sync Activity Status as of OwnerOriginal Quantity % Complete Comments ERCOT CRs AEP_Central AEP_North Centerpoint Oncor Sharyland TNMP *183,596 *239,713 *11,001 *2,921 *38,328 *62,086 *268 *8, % 92.63% 67.59% 76.79% 98.15% 99.17% 4.10% 83.00% Total Distinct ESI IDs 435, 811 Market cannot attain 100% completion due to some changes to ESI IDs after Priority 5 closed by RMS resolution on * Priorities 1,2 & 4 (Part 1)

28 ERCOT Internal Systems Synchronization as of

29 Unauthorized Switch/Move-In Clean-up

30 Problem No process defined Once you have a conference call, everyone knows Conference call logistics a) Conference call logistics b) CR knows TDSP Problem Process not agreed to by all MPs Slide provided for discussion purposes only regarding ERCOT facilitation role. There is currently no “Market Approved” Mechanism for handling Unauthorized or Inadvertent switches/Move-ins.

31 Slide provided for discussion purposes only regarding ERCOT facilitation role. There is currently no “Market Approved” Mechanism for handling Unauthorized or Inadvertent switches/Move-ins.