Message-ID: <13809944.1075840028891.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 14:01:08 -0700 (PDT) From: mark.hackney@aps.com To: isas@wscc.com Subject: Scheduling Time constant Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: Hackney, Mark W(Z39911) 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: 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