Texas SET Issue 087

Title:	PUCT Substantive Rule §25.493 (e) states that ERCOT “shall develop procedures to facilitate the expeditious transfer of large numbers of customers from one rep to another.”
Next Step:	Approved per email received by TX SET Chair
Status:	Closed on 09/27/2010

Date	Gov Body		Next Steps
09/27/2010	Texas SET WG	Approved	Approved per email received by TX SET Chair
06/30/2010	Texas SET WG	Deferred/Tabled	Change Control pending until 3.0A redlines can be accepted in order to prevent confusion.
06/01/2010	Texas SET WG	Deferred/Tabled	Kathryn will write Change Control to add new “AQ” code to indicate transfer due to acquisition vs Mass Transition.
02/22/2010	Texas SET WG	Deferred/Tabled	Continued review of redlined language for RMGRR. Reviewed draft Acquisition Requirments document.
01/28/2010	Texas SET WG	Deferred/Tabled	Continued review of redlined language for RMGRR. Will do final review of RMGRR at next meeting with goal of finalizing the language for submission.
12/07/2009	Texas SET WG	Deferred/Tabled	Received input from the PUCT staff that the Long-Term Acquisition Solution is still necessary. Reviewed redlined RMGRR. RMGRR will be sent to the list serve for further review and will be discussed again at the Jan SET Meeting.
10/27/2009	Texas SET WG	Deferred/Tabled	There was not consensus that the Long Term Solution is needed to comply with 25.493 as some Market Participants believe that the current Switching Processes are adequate to comply with this rule. Texas SET Leadership will ask PUCT Staff for input on whether current Switch Processes meet the requirements in 25.493 or whether the Long Term Solution (as discussed by Texas SET and Acquisition Task Force) is still needed.
09/29/2009	Texas SET WG	Deferred/Tabled	Updated the General Issues to be addressed Next Steps: 1. Evaluate Pending Transaction Evaluations done by ERCOT 2. Draft PRR and RMGRR 3. Decide what code should be used to identify the drops as Acquisition a. Allow for reporting on volumes b. Allows the TDSPs and ERCOT to set up a process that would not de-certify the DUNS associated with the Transition 1.4. Jennifer will draft RMGRR and PRR language to review at the October meeting
06/23/2009	Texas SET WG	Deferred/Tabled	The Expedited Switch rule was approved; however Texas Set will delay discussions on this issue until revisions for both POLR and Expedited Switch rules are approved to help prevent any confusion.
05/18/2009	Texas SET WG	Deferred/Tabled	Texas SET will continue to monitor the Rulemaking and anticipate that the rule may be approved at the 5/21 Open Meeting
03/24/2009	Texas SET WG	Deferred/Tabled	Texas SET will continue to monitor the Expedited Switch Rulemaking and will circulate the Assumptions/Questions document to Texas SET and RMS for comments once Expedited Switch is finalized.
02/23/2009	Texas SET WG	Deferred/Tabled	Finalized PRR and RMGRR for Short-Term Solution and will submit for approval. Developed assumptions and questions for Long-Term Solution to be addressed by Market Participants to aid in the development of language for the Long-Term Solution. Assumptions/Questions document posted to key documents for this Issue.
01/21/2009	Texas SET WG	Deferred/Tabled	Drafted RMGRR language for short-term solution to be reviewed at next TX SET meeting. ERCOT Market Rules will be asked to check with legal and see if there is a need for an accompanying PRR to clarify language around re-certification after a Mass Transition. Long term solution will be discussed (and RMGRR language drafted) at the next TX SET meeting.
09/25/2008	Texas SET WG	Deferred/Tabled	General Issues to be Addressed o How to account for Pending Switches and MVIs o Should ERCOT automatically cancel all pending enrollments to the selling REP? o Is ERCOT responsible for confirming that the seller is the Rep of Record for all ESIs on the list? o Off-Cycle Switches for acquisitions may need to be estimated, depending on volume. o Would these be treated as Drops or Switches? o 814_14 and 814_11 vs. 814_05 and 814_06 o A new process could limit credit exposure to entire market by providing a possible alternative to Drop to POLR o Need to establish timelines/deadlines for steps of the process to be completed by o TDSPs are net set up to effectuate switches on non-business days o Some TDSPs stated that they are opposed to effectuating switches on a non-business day unless required by Rule (as in the POLR Rule) o Any change we decide on is likely going to be too big for a SIR and require a Project and/or a TX SET release • Any proposed solution needs to consider both a full buy-out/REP leaving market and partial buy-out where REP remains in the market • Should we consider supporting both an on-cycle and off-cycle version of the solution to account for different levels of urgency? • TX SET believes that the current process for Mass Transition could be used to transfer some (with remainder going to POLR) or all of a defaulting REP’s ESI IDs to an acquiring/designated CR as a short term option (as was done this Spring) Two Options: 1) Leveraging the Mass Transition Process for Acquisitions • TDSPs have processes set up around the “TS” code and do not believe that this code can be used for this process. • ERCOT also has logic built around the “TS” code that would not work for this scenario o Pending transactions, etc… • We could create a new code for Acquisitions and re-write Pending transaction rules 2) ERCOT creates off-cycle switches from a list and TDSP doesn’t need to know it is due to acquisition • If the volume is too high for TDSPs to get actual reads, they would estimate the reads without having to modify current processes • Requested switch date in the transactions could be as early as 2 business days in the future without requiring a change to TDSP processes • Stacking logic and handling of pending transactions at ERCOT could be impacted

Status:	Closed
Date Posted:	09/25/2008
Sponsor:	RMS
Urgent:	No
Sections:	TBD
Description:	Currently, there is no process for transitioning a large number of ESIIDs from one REP to another due to an acquisition. Such a process would allow a REP who is in financial difficulty to sell their ESIIDs to another REP and then quickly transition their Customers to the purchasing REP. This ability could reduce the number of Mass Transitions to POLR experienced by the Market.
Reason:	Develop a process for transitioning large numbers of ESIIDs from one REP to another due to a merger or acquisition by leveraging the existing functionality at ERCOT.