I (PSCO TP & CA) agree with Don.  I thought we were trying to get away from
time changes !

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Lacen, Don [SMTP:DLACEN@pnm.com]
> Sent:	Thursday, October 11, 2001 7:01 AM
> To:	Interchange Scheduling & Accounting Subcommittee (ISAS)
> Subject:	RE: Scheduling Time constant
> 
> Since PPT changes twice a year and it does not resolve this scheduling
> problem, where PST would!  I recommend (PNM-CA/TP) we drop this issue
> until we can agree on a constant time zone standard (which we will never
> agree on).
> 
> Don Lacen 
> Public Service Company of New Mexico 
> Transmission Services Coordinator 
> Alvarado Square, MS EP11 
> Albuquerque, NM, 87158 
> 505-241-2032 
> dlacen@pnm.com 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Franz, Marilyn [ <mailto:MFranz@SPPC.com>] 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2001 2:43 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> 
>