Retail Market Subcommittee Update to TAC March 4, 2004

Reconnect/Disconnect Task Force – Draft PUCT customer protection rules authorize REPs to disconnect service to customers for non-payment following notice and offer for deferred payment arrangements – Proper management of transactions and business process interfaces is critical to ensure service is reconnected in a timely manner if customer is disconnected and subsequently makes payment – With strong encouragement from PUCT Staff, RMS commissioned a Reconnect/Disconnect task force to develop/document process that will be used by market participants to prepare for and implement any rule as approved – Task force co-chairs : –Shannon Bowling, Cirro Energy, Blake Gross, AEP Companies

Texas Retail Market Test Plan – ERCOT protocols section 23 direct Texas Test Plan Team to establish processes and procedures for testing commercial operations of retail systems – The Texas Market Test Plan Document fulfills that directive – Version 1.2 of the Texas Market Test Plan is reformatted for ease of use, restructures testing guidelines, adds an Appendix E, updates TxSET business process scenarios and includes NAESB EDM data transport methods – RMS unanimously approved version 1.2 of the Texas Market Test Plan on 2/12/04 and requests TAC approval of same

Cancel by Customer Objection Clean-up – Chronology of Event(s) – 7/25/03 FasTrak issue highlights problem (ERCOT runs queries and gathers data from TDSPs) – 8/14/03 Discussion at RMS (with PUCT staff and consumer representatives participating); direction to resolve using customer preference, assigned to inadvertent gain task force (ERCOT gathers data from CRs to compile integrated view) – 9/26/03 Discussion at RMS; scenarios and counts presented, agreement to use FasTrak process and on resolution steps for 2 of 8 scenarios (89% of total instances) where TDSP and CRs are in synch – 10/16/03 and beyond On-going tracking/discussion at RMS – 1/8/04 Issue presented at TAC meeting

Cancel by Customer Objection Clean-up – Description of Scenarios – Based on TDSP and CR view of status, switches were either completed or cancelled in each party’s systems – For the TDSP and CRs involved in the switch, 8 combination of completed/cancelled are possible (combinations and breakdown by scenario on following slide) – In 2 of the 8 combinations, these parties are aligned (all view as completed, or all view as cancelled) – Of 972 instances, 868 (89%) involved no TDSP/CR discrepancy – For the remaining 104 instances, CR records involving transaction processing and customer communications were researched – Corrective steps (transactions, data repairs, billing) based on customer view required coordination/consensus among parties

Cancel by Customer Objection Clean-up

– Competitive Retailers involved in clean-up activity ENTERGY SOLUTIONS LTD FIRST CHOICE POWER RELIANT ENERGY HL AND P (LSE) CPL RETAIL ENERGY LP (LSE) WTU RETAIL ENERGY LP (LSE) CIRRO GROUP INC SPARK ENERGY LP REPUBLIC POWER DBA ENERGY AMERICA ACN ENERGY INC (LSE) GEXA CORP DBA GEXA ENERGY CORP (LSE) GREEN MOUNTAIN ENERGY RELIANT ENERGY RETAIL SERVICES LLC TXU ENERGY ASSURANCE ENERGY (TXU RESIDENTIAL POLR) TXU SESCO ENERGY SERVICES COMPANY (SUBLSE)

Cancel by Customer Objection Clean-up – Key Statistics – For entire population (972 instances), – 96% residential, 3% small non-res, 1% large non-res – For instances with ownership out-of-synch (104 instances) – 94% residential, 6% small non-res, 0% large non-res – The instances where ERCOT was unable to confirm cancellation delivery were bounded by the period 8/02 – 7/03 – Specific details associated with each instance are not available in ERCOT systems, compilation of additional detail (usage consumption, billing amounts and dates issued – if any, supplemental customer contact records, etc.) by CRs would require significant resources and potentially involve commercially sensitive information

Cancel by Customer Objection Clean-up – ERCOT has implemented process and system fixes to ensure cancel transactions are forwarded and to monitor on-going operations for exceptions – As of March 2, 2004, 6 FasTrak issues, involving 31 ESIs and 5 retailers remained in progress per the official FasTrak designation – Retailers have indicated that agreement has been reached regarding resolution on all issues (pending final confirmation by all parties), although FasTrak documentation does not yet reflect that indication – Unless otherwise directed by TAC, RMS will push for final resolution of subject FasTrak issues and report such to TAC