1 RMS Update on Move-In / Move-Out Task Force October 16, 2002

2 Airfare… $

3 Mileage… $512.00

4 Accommodations… $747.26

5 Visiting 18 Market Participants in 11 days about the Move-In Move-Out Issues… Priceless!

6 Some things money can’t buy, for everything else there’s… Larry Grimms’ Credit Card

7 MP Visits Purpose –‘Root out’ all sources of pain associated with Move-Ins –Get each MPs opinion of worst problems –Discuss possible solutions –Find out if identified problems are common among all types of market participants –Discuss concepts with consumer advocacy group –Verify that all participants are dedicated to solving the problems and aware of the possible systemic impacts –Discuss deployment of workarounds (Safety Net, Same CR Move- Ins, etc.)

8 MP Visits

9 Audience –TDSPs (5 - CenterPoint, AEP, Oncor, Entergy, TNMP) –AREPs (4 - Reliant Retail, AEP, TXU E, Entergy) –CREPs (6 - Coral, GEXA, Republic, TCE, Constellation New Energy, Green Mountain) –Vendors (2 - Exolink, EC Power) –Consumer Protection (1 - Public Utility Council)

10 MP Visits Results –Identified several issues that were not previously identified –Confirmed several common problems across many Market Participants –Discussed concepts for solving identified issues –Developed an average ‘pain’ level and frequency for major issues based on input from each MP –Discussed several concepts with consumer advocacy group to verify compliance with Customer Protection –Revealed inconsistencies and improper executions of workarounds

11 MIMO Workshop

12 MIMO Workshop Attendees –CenterPoint –TXU Energy –Oncor –TCE –Republic –Entergy Solutions –Entergy Gulf States –AEP Retail –Reliant Resources –Green Mountain

13 MIMO Workshop Methods –Three type of issues; System, Execution, & Market Gaps –Two measurements for identifying order of discussion for issues; pain level and quantity of ESI Ids affected. –The issues that are being pursued first are those that rank high on the pain level and quantity affected and are easy to repair, second are those that either are easy to fix but don’t rank high on the measurements or rank high on the measurements and are difficult to fix. The last category (rank low on pain and quantity, but are difficult to fix) are those that are most likely to remain as workarounds for a longer period of time. –Three time frames for solutions; Short-Term (solutions that can be implemented immediately or prior to next April), Mid-Term (solutions that can be implemented next year after April), and Long-Term (solutions that can be implemented after 1/1/2004)

14 MIMO Workshop Results –32 Concepts were discussed 7 Concepts were dismissed for various reasons 1 Concept was determined as solved in Version Concepts were discussed –4 Concepts were tabled until additional information can be obtained –19 Concepts were discussed at length and are being considered for recommendation to RMS »10 Short-Term »9 Mid-Term 1 Concept was not discussed (lack of time)

15 Recommendations to RMS

16 Recommendations Clarification of Switch vs. Move-In A switch transaction is to be used when a customer wants to switch providers without changing their premise; it is intended to switch a customer from one CR to another. A Move-In is used when different customer is requesting power at an ESI ID than the customer that was formerly associated with the ESI ID whether or not the premise is de- energized. It needs to be noted that a CR using a Move-In transaction to affect a switch violates procedures that have been put in place by the Public Utility Commission including Customer Protection rules. Misuse of the Switch or Move-In transactions may result in disciplinary action from the PUC.

17 Recommendations Safety Net Guidelines (Short-Term) –The requested date on a Move-In sent through ERCOT that is intended to match with a Safety Net Move-In previously sent to the TDSP must have the same requested date as the Safety Net Move- In. –CRs should send Safety Net Move-Ins one day prior to the requested date on the Safety Net Move-In and only after validating against one of the ERCOT reports or one of the TDSP reports to avoid duplication with a previously submitted 814_16 through ERCOT. –The MIMO Task Force is working on some procedures for the TDSPs, but these procedures are not ready for RMS presentation

18 Recommendations Expediting ESI ID Creates (Short-Term) –When possible, TDSPs should create ESI Ids off Development/Builder plats. Create transactions may contain default values for required fields if doing so increases the speed at which the Create transaction is sent to ERCOT. Any other reasonable means of speeding up the ESI ID Create process should be seriously entertained. –Timing around changing the default values to corrected values with an 814_20 maintain need to be established.

19 Recommendations ERCOT Monitoring (Short-Term) –The recommendation is that ERCOT monitors potential cancel with exceptions. This monitoring should be performed by daily pulling a report of any Instances that are scheduled to go cancelled with exception within 5 business days. After verifying that the 814_04 (or 814_25) has not been received, ERCOT should generate a report for each of the TDSPs that they can use to expedite the 814_04s (or 814_25). –The recommendation is that ERCOT monitor the following transactions for rejects: 814_07s, 814_09s, 814_13s, 814_15s, 814_23s, 814_19s, 814_21s, 814_29s (after version 1.5). Rejects should be followed up with the sender of the reject. In some cases, it may be necessary to route an original transaction (814_06, 814_08, etc,) to the MP that should have received the transaction.

20 Recommendations Programmatically prohibit back-dated transactions (Short- Term) –CRs will programmatically not allow backdated Move-Ins and Move-Outs at the customer service/Call Center level. Only situations that CRs may back date Move-Ins and Move-Outs are for: Transactions for Move-Ins or Move-Outs previously requested on safety net (since safety net does not allow back dated Move- Ins and Move-Outs) Back office clean up efforts coordinated with ERCOT and TDSP (QRE, Market Sync, etc.) This includes any efforts regardless of effective date that are coordinated with ERCOT and TDSPs.

21 Recommendations Effective Date on Meter Number Correction (Short-Term) –If the TDSP needs to make a meter correction, the 814_20 maintain transaction will have an effective date of the later of these 2 dates: The value from the DTM151 of the last usage transaction that contained the prior meter #. The value from the Date on the last initial read.

22 Recommendations Date Reasonableness at ERCOT (Short-Term) –ERCOT should reject any initiating transactions with requested implementation dates of more than 90 calendar days in the future or 270 calendar days in the past.

23 Questions?

24 RMS Vote

25 Next Steps

26 Next Steps MIMO Taskforce meetings –October 23, & 24 in Austin –October 29, & 30 in Dallas (tentative) Recommendations to RMS at November RMS meeting –Potentially 15 Concepts Release of implementation timelines Development of Texas Set Change Controls, Protocol Revision Requests, and RFP (If necessary) Deployment of Solutions Re-Evaluation of Move-In/Move-Out processes

27 Thank-you