Message-ID: <746842.1075840028841.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 19:39:03 -0700 (PDT) From: bharsh@puget.com To: isas@wscc.com Subject: RE: Scheduling Time constant Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: Harshbarger, Robert X-To: Interchange Scheduling & Accounting Subcommittee (ISAS) X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \ExMerge - Scholtes, Diana\STF\Current issues X-Origin: SCHOLTES-D X-FileName: Hi Marilyn - Thanks for the Vancouver notes. Regarding the item on POR/PODs - since the meeting, Mark sent out the Clarification letter of September 24 (attached) stating we use the WSCC POR/POD acronyms until 1.7 hits the streets. E-Tag 1.7 will use the POR/PODs that TPs have attempted to register http://reg.tsin.com/ . Although not part of the actual meeting, it might be good to add a reference to the clarification letter so readers can get the latest and greatest direction concerning POR/PODs usage. <> Robert Harshbarger Puget Sound Energy OASIS Trading Manager 425.462.3348 (desk) 206.604.3251 (cell) > ---------- > From: Franz, Marilyn[SMTP:MFranz@SPPC.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 2:42 PM > To: Interchange Scheduling & Accounting Subcommittee (ISAS) > Subject: RE: Scheduling Time constant > > <> > SPPC Transmission would like to go forward with PPT as a common scheduling > time for the same reasons the expressed by WMIC. > > Also, attached are the minutes for the Vancouver meeting. > > Thanks, > Marilyn Franz > Sierra Pacific Power Transmission > 775-834-4322 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hackney, Mark W(Z39911) [mailto:Mark.Hackney@aps.com] > Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 11:01 AM > To: Interchange Scheduling & Accounting Subcommittee (ISAS) > Subject: Scheduling Time constant > > > It's been brought to my attention that we never resolved the issue of the > common scheduling time (no Freudian slip on the acronym). The group > agreed > to a PST value in July, but we wanted to survey the OC and WMIC first > before > going further. That was to be one of our topic in Vancouver. Well.... > > So, I'd like to get a feel from the group: the survey leaned toward > Pacific > Prevailing Time as that match up with energy products, so.. continue to go > forward with PST as in July, modify our suggestion to PPT or drop all > together and wait to see if NERC is going to come up with something. If > we > decide to go with either PST or PPT, I will get the OC Steering to help > with > clarification on this as a due process item or an item that can be brought > to the OC for vote in 2002. In addition, I would think that most would > agree that implementation if it takes affect would be favorable at the > April > 2002 time change, so that is my suggestion that we use, if ISAS goes > forward > with the request to the OC. > > Please get back with your thought by next Wednesday so I can put together > something for the upcoming OC meetings. > > Mark W. Hackney > Section Leader > Pre and Real-time Transmission Scheduling > APS OATT Administration > Arizona Public Service Company > 602.250.1128 - Office > 602.908.1423 - Cell > 602.250.1155 - Fax > mailto:Mark.Hackney@aps.com > _________________________________________________________________ > Click to add my contact info to your organizer: > http://my.infotriever.com/cc2tf0ey > > --------- Inline attachment follows --------- From: Hackney, Mark W(Z39911) To: Interchange Scheduling & Accounting Subcommittee (ISAS) Date: Monday, September 24, 2001 3:17:54 PM Subject: Clarification Letter Please read attached letter: <> Mark W. Hackney Section Leader Pre and Real-time Transmission Scheduling APS OATT Administration Arizona Public Service Company 602.250.1128 - Office 602.908.1423 - Cell 602.250.1155 - Fax mailto:Mark.Hackney@aps.com _________________________________________________________________ Click to add my contact info to your organizer: http://my.infotriever.com/cc2tf0ey