Subject: MORE CLARIFICATION FW: E-Tag 1.7 Issues
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 11:39:32 -0700 (PDT)

TO HELP CLARIFY MY EARLY COMMENT. THE WSCC REQUIRES THE PATH (POR-POD)IN E-TAG NOW AND IN 1.7, WITHOUT THE PATH THE TAG BECOME USELESS.

Don Lacen 
Public Service Company of New Mexico 
Transmission Services Coordinator 
Alvarado Square, MS EP11 
Albuquerque, NM, 87158 
505-241-2032 
[email-masked] 

-----Original Message----- 
From: Lacen, Don 
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 8:26 AM 
To: 'Bob Cummings'; OASIS Scheduling Collaborative 
Cc: Interchange Subcommittee; Interchange Distribution Calculator 
Working Group; 'WSCC - ISAS' 
Subject: RE: E-Tag 1.7 Issues 

THIS MIGHT NOT WORK IN THE IDC, BUT IT IS A REQUIREMENT FOR THE WSCC. CAN WE MAKE THIS WORK TO ACCOMPLISH ALL OF OUR REQUIREMENTS?

Don Lacen 
Public Service Company of New Mexico 
Transmission Services Coordinator 
Alvarado Square, MS EP11 
Albuquerque, NM, 87158 
505-241-2032 
[email-masked] 

-----Original Message----- 
From: Bob Cummings [<mailto:[email-masked]>] 
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 8:03 AM 
To: OASIS Scheduling Collaborative 
Cc: Interchange Subcommittee; Interchange Distribution Calculator 
Working Group 
Subject: RE: E-Tag 1.7 Issues 

Dear OSCers, 

Doing away with the path, or even not keeping it serial within the 1.7 
tags is unacceptable because it will not work with the IDC. 

Sure you could program the IDC to reconstruct the path, but the 
processing time then becomes a performance issue for the IDC. That is 
not acceptable...ALL tags in the EI go to the IDC, so it becomes a real 
processing problem. 

Remember these things work as a single system! E-Tag 1.7 will NOT be 
implemented without working properly with the IDC...they are 
interdependent. 

-----Original Message----- 
From: [email-masked] [<mailto:[email-masked]>] 
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 10:31 AM 
To: Hagge, Jerry W. 
Cc: Interchange Subcommittee; OASIS Scheduling Collaborative; 
[email-masked] 
Subject: Re: E-Tag 1.7 Issues 

Jerry, 

  I also do not recall any discussion regarding doing away with the path 
on 
ETag 1.7.  I would be interested in knowing how the TISWG and the IS 
would 
be unaware of this issue if in fact there is a push to elliminate paths. 

Thoughts? 
Julie 

************************************************************************ 
********************** 
This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon Generation 
Company 
proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject 
to copyright 
belonging to the Exelon family of Companies.  This E-mail is intended 
solely for 
the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed.  If you 
are not the 
intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any 
dissemination, 
distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the contents of 
and 
attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. 
If you have 
received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and 
permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and any 
printout. 

Thank You. 
************************************************************************ 
*********************