Message-ID: <30023578.1075852136568.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2001 15:17:58 -0700 (PDT) From: nancy.hetrick@enron.com To: elbarrow@cps-satx.com, dorothea.stockstill@mirant.com, kevin-gresham@reliantenergy.com, dljones@cps-satx.com, tnoel@ercot.com, cmoseley@ercot.com Subject: ERCOT Budget Items Cc: rms@ercot.com, set@ercot.com, testplan@ercot.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: rms@ercot.com, set@ercot.com, testplan@ercot.com X-From: "Hetrick, Nancy" @ENRON X-To: elbarrow@cps-satx.com, dorothea.stockstill@mirant.com, kevin-gresham@reliantenergy.com, dljones@cps-satx.com, tnoel@ercot.com, cmoseley@ercot.com X-cc: rms@ercot.com, set@ercot.com, testplan@ercot.com X-bcc: X-Folder: \CDEAN (Non-Privileged)\Dean, Clint\Deleted Items X-Origin: DEAN-C X-FileName: CDEAN (Non-Privileged).pst It has come to the attention of RMS that many items that had been identified as requested/required ERCOT system changes were inadvertently not included in the ERCOT 2002 budget. I have attached a spreadsheet with more detail regarding these items. Three PRRs (258, 259, 260) and one PIP were included in the budget. We also had one PRR (261 - CR Notification) that had been returned to RMS and TX SET for changes and resubmission that was not included. This PRR was a High Priority/High Impact RMS issue previously identified in our RMS workshops. PRRs 262, 263, 264, 265, and 266 were all approved by TAC but we are unsure where these items fit in the budget process and the status of the associated ERCOT system changes. In addition, we also have the following items that were not included: * Three approved change controls (Nos. 155, 178 and 179) * Two emergency changes that ERCOT and MPs request be implemented ASAP: (1) CR cancellation of a switch and (2) Premise Info Rejects * Four additional items that require ERCOT system change requests RMS also feels that once the market opens on January 2, 2002, there is a huge potential that additional issues/problems requiring system changes will become evident and that there needs to be some type of contingency funding for these types of items that have not yet been identified. The majority of changes on the retail side do not require protocol revisions and as I have mentioned previously, there is no documented process, procedures, or prioritization for ERCOT System Change Requests. I feel like this is one reason that these items were not originally included in the budget. On behalf of RMS, I would appreciate your assistance in getting these key items added to the ERCOT 2002 budget. I have spoken to Cheryl Moseley about these items also. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Thanks for your time and assistance. <> Nancy A. Hetrick Enron Corp. Director, Government Affairs Phone: 712-366-3399 Pager: 888-912-1426 ********************************************************************** This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply to Enron Corp. at enron.messaging.administration@enron.com and delete all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) are not intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of its affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not be relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise. Thank you. ********************************************************************** - ERCOT Budget Future Releases_Retail Issues_102601.doc