As a Measure Developer uploading deemed load shape 8760s, I want to see which Impact Profiles were generated, updated, or reused so that I can understand what impact profiles were generated or failed, and identify any existing impact profiles that were replaced.

Following a load shape upload and Impact Profile generation, Measure Developers currently have limited visibility into what processing occurred.

Users cannot easily determine:

• Which Impact Profiles were newly generated

• Which Impact Profiles failed to generate

• If possible why they failed to generate

• Which IOU AC territories and climate zones were impacted

• Whether existing Impact Profiles were replaced by the upload

This lack of transparency makes it difficult for users to validate processing outcomes, troubleshoot issues, and understand the downstream impacts of their uploads.

The summary should support partial success scenarios where some Impact Profiles generate successfully while others fail.

Processing failures should only roll back the affected Impact Profiles and should preserve any unrelated or previously existing data.

Related to bug ticket:

https://cpuccedars.featurebase.app/p/load-shape-impact-profile-generation-can-become-stuck-after-errors

Related to ticket around better visibility and traceability between eTRM and CEDARS:

https://cpuccedars.featurebase.app/p/load-shapes-improve-traceability-and-visibility-of-load-shape-techid

Proposed Improvement

Introduce an Impact Profile generation summary, using the existing Claims QC Summary pattern as the UX model, to provide users with clear visibility into processing outcomes.

The summary should display:

• Impact Profiles successfully generated

• Existing Impact Profiles updated

• Existing Impact Profiles reused with no changes

• Impact Profiles that failed to generate

• Associated IOU service territories

• Associated climate zones