mimo/stacking (including tx set version 2.0) post implementation success report

1

MIMO/Stacking(Including Tx SET Version 2.0)

Post Implementation Success Report

2


Benefits Expected(as presented to RMS prior to implementation)

– Significant reduction in NFI rejects

– Significant reduction in need for Safety Net Move-Ins

– Better manages customer expectations (Dates, billing, etc.)

– Fewer backdated clean up efforts

– Fewer Cancel/Re-bills

– Helps keep systems in sync

– Reduces UFE

– Reduces transaction volume

– Expedites connecting and billing the customers by the correct CR

– Improves transaction reliability

3


Benefits Expected (grouped into 8 categories)1. Significant reduction in NFI rejects

• 7 statistics2. Significant reduction in need for Safety Net Move-Ins

• 6 statistics3. Expedites connecting and billing the customers by the correct CR / Better

manages customer expectations (Dates, billing, etc.)• 6 statistics

4. Fewer Cancel/Re-bills / Helps keep systems in sync• 4 statistics

5. Reduces UFE / Helps keep systems in sync• 2 statistics

6. Fewer backdated clean up efforts / Helps keep systems in sync• 4 statistics

7. Reduces transaction volume• 7 statistics

8. Improves transaction reliability• 2 statistics

4


Percent of NFI Rejects by Order Type1.1.1 – Benefits 1,2,3,&7

4.14%

0.01%

2.00%

0.01%

1.43%

0.00%1.20%

0.08%0.93%

0.00%0.98%

0.00%1.02%

0.00%

3.33%

0.15%

3.31%

0.18%

3.49%

0.17%

3.74%

0.16%

3.15%

0.17%

3.11%

0.15%

3.13%

0.19%

1.86%

0.14%

1.59%

0.16%

1.79%

0.14%

1.95%

0.14%

1.51%

0.13%

1.61%

0.14%

1.46%

0.16%

2.06%

0.01%

2.10%

0.01%

2.18%

0.03%

2.13%

0.00%

1.76%

0.00%

3.49%

0.00%

2.27%

0.00%0.00%

2.00%

4.00%

6.00%

8.00%

10.00%

12.00%

2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2004 2005 2004 2005

Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb

Switch

Move-Out

Move-In

Drop to AREP

NFI Rejects

Order Type

5


Quantity of NFI Rejects by Order Type1.1.2 – Benefits 1,2,3,&7

6281 242 1 246 172 1 121 121 125

7130

388

6996

383

7429

335

6541

303

6058

323

6114

306

6040

351

1454

8

1375

5

1228

13

851

1

882

2

1311

1

727

2145

216

1939

209

2101

178

1960

173

1649

158

1793

157

1673

1740

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2004 2005 2004 2005


Move-Out

Switch

Move-In

Drop to AREP

Sum of Quantity

Order Type

NFI Rejects have been reduced by an average of

94.7%

6


Quantity of All Rejects by Order TypeRejects for DUP – Duplicate and DOT – Duplicate Original Transaction Id have been removed

1.1.4b – Benefits 1,2,&7

2185 1672715 267 982 269 576 317 473 226 416 380 363 98

10755

3544

11717

2900

10215

2634

9008

2555

10136

2625

8947

2579

8544

2473

5686

4389

5872

3719

5257

3131

5310

2877

4895

2835

5160

2416

4587

2372

4184

3794

3825

2169

3936

1637

4026

1369

5294

4375

3157

1564

2329

1427

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2004 2005 2004 2005


Switch

Move-Out

Move-In

Drop to AREP

Rejects for DUP - Duplicate and DOT - Doplicate Original Transaction Id have been removed

Average rejects on Switches decreased by 38.9%Average rejects on Move-Outs decreased by 43.5%Average rejects on Move-Ins decreased by 72.1%Average rejects on DTAs decreased by 40.9%Average rejects on All Enrollments decreased by 56.3%

7


Success Rate of Accepted Move-InsCompletion percentage of orders once they have been accepted – does not include rejected requests

1.3.2 – Benefits 1 & 8

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%

2004 2005 2004 2005 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004

Jan Feb Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

(Discludes rejected requests)This chart shows the completion percentage of orders once they are Accepted

The success rate of Service Orders that are not rejected has dropped by an average of 0.001%

The purpose of this chart is to show that while reduced the number of orders being reject, it did not result in an increase of orders being cancelled. The reduction in rejects has led directly to an increase in successful orders.

8


Quantity of Backdated Move-In RequestsMeasures Move-Ins with a requested date that is earlier than the date the request is received by ERCOT

1.6.1 – Benefits 1,2,4,6,7, & 8

11295

5392

12395

3097

10432

2998

8357

2651

12238

3327

8414

3093

7885

3283

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2004 2005 2004 2005


Backdated Requests

Does not include orders that are completed in the past but were requested in the future

This represents a 66.4% average reduction in requests for Back-Dated

Move-Ins

9


Quantity of Re-Bills on Final UsageMetrics for Move-Ins and Switches only

1.4.1 – Benefits 1,2,3, & 4

13604

9433

12669

8753

11705

7462

89368136

10710

7058

8409

7055

9470

3134

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2004 2005 2004 2005


This represents a 32.4% decrease in the use of the Cancel/Re-Bill process

Cancel Rebills have been reduced, as expected, due to an improved CWE process, reduction in need for Safety Net, reduction in NFI, imroved transaction reliability, and other MIMO initiatives.

10


Cancelled with ExceptionQuantity of orders cancelled for A95 – Cancelled with Exception

2.2.2 – Benefits 3,4, & 6

73

193

7460

84

22 18 17

65 59

3445 42

239

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2004 2005 2004 2005


Quantity of orders cancelled for A95 - Cancelled w ith Exception

Prior to MIMO, these orders almost always resulted in - Out of synch conditions - Safety Net orders - Backdated Move-In requests - DEV issues - Cancel/Re-bills.These order no longer cause these adverse conditions.

11


Invalid ESI ID RejectsQuantity of Move-Ins rejected for A76 – Invalid ESI ID

2.1.2 – Benefits 7

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

Apr-03

May-03

Jun-03

Aug-03

Sep-03

Oct-03

Nov-03

Dec-03

Jan-04

Feb-04

Mar-04

Apr-04

May-04

Jun-04

Jul-04 Aug-04

Sep-04

Oct-04

Nov-04

Dec-04

Jan-05

Feb-05

Quantity of Move-Ins rejects for A76 - Invalid ESI ID

Mid-Term MIMO Stacking

Mid-Term MIMO reduced the frequency of rejections for Invalid ESI ID by 71.3%

Stacking reduced the frequency of rejections for Invalid ESI ID by 40.1%

Total reduction in rejects for Invalid ESI Id is 82.8%

12


Percent of Drop to AREPs with an 814_14Percent of Drop to AREP orders where ERCOT generated an 814_14 Enrollment Request to the AREP

4.11.1b – Benefits 7

93.39% 95.91% 98.22%

75.80%

97.99%92.60%

99.03%

88.50%

99.19%

49.44%

99.22%

53.91%

99.15%

70.51%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%

2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2004 2005 2004 2005


Percent of requests w here ERCOT generated an 814_14 drop notif ication to the AREP

There has been a 23.2% reduction in volume of 814_14 transactions by percentage of initiating

814_10s

13


Percent of Move-Out to CSAs with an 814_22Percent of Move-Out to CSA orders where ERCOT generated an 814_22 Enrollment Request to the CSA CR

4.12.1b – Benefits 7

101.00% 103.04%98.26%

80.69%

101.01%

107.61%

101.14%95.27%

97.76%95.01%

98.36%

92.27%

98.56%

88.46%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%

110.00%

2003 2004 2004 2005 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2004 2005

Aug Feb Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan

Percent of requests w here ERCOT generated an 814_22 notif ication to the CSA CR

The average number of Move-Out to CSA Orders that receive 814_22s has decreased by 4.8%

14


Quantity of Orphan AccountsTDSPs provided quantity of Orphan Accounts at the end of each month

1.5.1 – Benefits 5

15


Quantity of Safety Nets Requested1.2.1

16


Quantity of Safety Nets without EDIQuantity of orders where EDI was not received by the time the order was worked

1.2.1b

17


Concurrent ProcessingConcurrent processing of transactions was a major part of Stacking.

The following details the occurrences of multiple service orders completing successfully – Benefits 1,2,3,4,& 6:

– Multiple Move-Ins – 15,224 occurrences

– Drop to AREP prior to a Move-In - 580 occurrences

– Drop to AREP prior to a Switch - 175 occurrences

– Switch prior to a Move-In - 362 occurrences

– Switch prior to a Move-Out - 149 occurrences

– Multiple Switches – 69 occurrences

– Drop to AREP prior to a Move-Out - 49 occurrences

Orders were successfully processed concurrently a total of 16,606 times between August and February

18


Other Stacking Stats:– There has been a 27.2% reduction in the average number of

rejects for Move-Ins leapfrogging. (1.6.3)

– The Move-Out retry is effective in allowing appropriate Move-Outs to be processed instead of being rejected. (4.1.1)

– To ensure that Move-Outs and Drop to AREPs are properly authorized, ERCOT is canceling Move-Outs and Drop to AREPs at the evaluation window if the REP is no longer the REP of Record. (4.2.1 - Benefits 3, 5, &6)

• August through February Volume – 5,199

– ERCOT is successfully canceling Move-Outs when they are scheduled on the same day as a Move-In on the same ESI ID. This contributes to market synchronization. (4.4.1)

• August through February volume – 30,847

19


Other Stacking Stats (cont.):– Drop to AREPs are being successfully canceled when scheduled

on the same ESI ID as a Switch with the same or later date. This is helping to enforce the customers right to choose. (4.5.1)

• August through February Volume – 5,510

– The new iteration counter is allowing REPs to submit multiple Date Changes on a single order and these are helping to ensure the customer is getting the last date they requested. (4.13.1)

– Market participants are now electronically notified of Duplicate transactions. (4.14.1)

• August through February Volume = 55,864

– TDSPs are effectively rejecting backdated Move-Ins and Move-Outs that are not part of a coordinated back-office cleanup. (5.4.1)

• August and September Volume = 4194

20


Questions?

mimo/stacking (including tx set version 2.0) post implementation success report

Documents