NB (69)
E_0548 — Check complaint
Check complaint
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Designation | Check complaint |
| Market role | NB |
| Regulatory determination / chapter | GPKE |
| Section | 6.42.1: AD: Complaint about a definition of the NB from LF to NB |
| Check identifiers | Response: 19123 |
| EBD version | 4.3 |
| As at | — |
Decision tree
| Step | Check | Result | Code | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 | Does the requester complain about the absence of the rolled-out metering time period definition? | yes | → Step 20 | — |
| — | — | no | → Step 40 | — |
| 20 | Does the code of the metering time period definition match a code from the overview of metering time definitions valid for the disputed time period? | no | A01 | Code of the metering time period definition is not used |
| — | — | yes | → Step 30 | — |
| 30 | Was the rolled-out metering time period definition sent to the requesting party? | yes | A02 | Rolled-out metering time period definition has been sent Note: The business transaction with which the rolled-out metering time period definition was transmitted must be named as a reference |
| — | — | no | → Step 200 | — |
| 40 | Does the requester complain about an implausible rolled-out metering time period definition? | yes | → Step 50 | — |
| — | — | no | → Step 70 | — |
| 50 | Has a rolled-out metering time period definition with a higher version already been sent with the code of the metering time period definition? | yes | A03 | A rolled-out metering time period definition with a higher version has already been sent for the metering time period definition code Note: The business transaction with which the rolled-out metering time period definition was transmitted must be named as the reference. |
| — | — | no | → Step 60 | — |
| 60 | Is the transmitted rolled-out metering time period definition plausible? | yes | A04 | Rolled-out metering time period definition is plausible |
| — | — | no | → Step 200 | — |
| 70 | Does the LF complain about the absence of the rolled-out switching time definition? | yes | → Step 80 | — |
| — | — | no | → Step 100 | — |
| 80 | Does the code of the switching time definition match a code from the overview of switching time definitions valid for the disputed time period? | no | A05 | Code of the switching time definition is not used |
| — | — | yes | → step 90 | — |
| 90 | Was the rolled-out switching time definition sent to the LF? | yes | A06 | Rolled-out switching time definition has been sent Note: The business transaction with which the rolled-out switching time definition was transmitted must be named as a reference |
| — | — | no | → Step 200 | — |
| 100 | Does the LF complain about an implausible rolled-out switching time definition? | yes | → Step 110 | — |
| — | — | no | → Step 130 | — |
| 110 | Has a rolled-out switching time definition with a higher version already been sent with the code of the switching time definition? | yes | A07 | A rolled-out switching time definition with a higher version has already been sent for the switching time definition code Note: The business transaction with which the rolled-out switching time definition was transmitted must be named as the reference. |
| — | — | no | → Step 120 | — |
| 120 | Is the transmitted rolled-out switching time definition plausible? | yes | A08 | Rolled-out switching time definition is plausible |
| — | — | no | → Step 200 | — |
| 130 | Does the LF complain about the absence of the rolled-out power curve definition? | yes | → Step 140 | — |
| — | — | no | → Step 160 | — |
| 140 | Does the code of the power curve definition match a code from the overview of power curve definitions valid for the disputed time period? | no | A09 | Code of the power curve definition is not used |
| — | — | yes | → Step 150 | — |
| 150 | Was the rolled-out power curve definition sent to the LF? | yes | A10 | Rolled-out power curve definition has been sent Note: The business transaction with which the rolled-out power curve definition was transmitted must be named as a reference. |
| — | — | no | → Step 200 | — |
| 160 | Does the LF complain about an implausible rolled-out power curve definition? | yes | → Step 170 | — |
| — | — | no | → Step 200 | — |
| 170 | Has a rolled-out power curve definition with a higher version already been sent with the code of the power curve definition? | yes | A11 | A rolled-out power curve definition with a higher version has already been sent for the power curve definition code Note: The business transaction with which the rolled-out power curve definition was transmitted must be named as the reference. |
| — | — | no | → Step 180 | — |
| 180 | Is the transmitted rolled-out power curve definition plausible? | yes | A12 | Rolled-out power curve definition is plausible |
| — | — | no | → Step 200 | — |
| 200 | Has a previously unspecified error occurred? | yes | A99 | Rejection Other Note: The identified problem must be described/named in the response. End of usability: 01.04.2027 00:00 |
| — | — | no | End | Correct the definition and carry out the transmission again. |
Result codes
| Result code | Cluster | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
A01 | — | Code of the metering time period definition is not used |
A02 | — | Rolled-out metering time period definition has been sent Note: The business transaction with which the rolled-out metering time period definition was transmitted must be named as a reference |
A03 | — | A rolled-out metering time period definition with a higher version has already been sent for the metering time period definition code Note: The business transaction with which the rolled-out metering time period definition was transmitted must be named as the reference. |
A04 | — | Rolled-out metering time period definition is plausible |
A05 | — | Code of the switching time definition is not used |
A06 | — | Rolled-out switching time definition has been sent Note: The business transaction with which the rolled-out switching time definition was transmitted must be named as a reference |
A07 | — | A rolled-out switching time definition with a higher version has already been sent for the switching time definition code Note: The business transaction with which the rolled-out switching time definition was transmitted must be named as the reference. |
A08 | — | Rolled-out switching time definition is plausible |
A09 | — | Code of the power curve definition is not used |
A10 | — | Rolled-out power curve definition has been sent Note: The business transaction with which the rolled-out power curve definition was transmitted must be named as a reference. |
A11 | — | A rolled-out power curve definition with a higher version has already been sent for the power curve definition code Note: The business transaction with which the rolled-out power curve definition was transmitted must be named as the reference. |
A12 | — | Rolled-out power curve definition is plausible |
A99 | — | Rejection Other Note: The identified problem must be described/named in the response. End of usability: 01.04.2027 00:00 |
Notes on this page
Role of the numbers: »response« are the check identifiers that list this tree in the ebd_code column of the check identifier table (knowledge-collection · FV 202610); »checked« is the difference set to it from the return path of the process steps.
Consistent with the generated process
All 13 result codes of the decision tree are contained in the generated process E_0548.bpmn.