VEE Issues

All,

Please review the following message from Kathy Smith of ABB on VEE issues:


I'm working with both the Joint UDC/MDMA meetings, the MUG, and the PSWG
regarding VEE rules, and am trying to collect open issues, areas in the rules
that need clarification, etc.  A few people at the meetings last week
expressed
that there were problems with the existing rules for interval data.  Please
send me your questions, areas that you believe require clarification, etc, by
MONDAY, APRIL 23.  I will distribute to the VEE experts at the UDCs and anyone
else who is interested, and set up a conference call to try to get resolution
to these items.   The document will be updated and redistributed and reposted.
If you are interested in participating in the conference call (this will be
VERY detailed and technical), let me know and I'll make sure you're notified.
Once we have the interval data issues resolved, we'll move on to VEE rules for
monthly data.

If you need a copy of the existing rules, they are posted on the web site at
http://162.15.5.2:80/wk-group/dai/dai3/    - the date is 12/17/97, and it was
posted by Tom Lofgren as Final VEE Document.

These are the open items requiring clarification for the rules for interval
data that were brought up at the MUG meeting 2/23/98:

1.  If interval data passes sum check after manual analysis, rules say that
the
data should be marked as verified.  By the rules, this data does not have
to be
spike checked, etc.  However, the verified in this case only means that the
data has been verified as passing the sum check.  This data should still be
passed through the other checks.  Document needs to be clarified.

2.  VEE Estimation for partial days: Can you use intervals in partial days for
historical estimation?
Yes.  This needs to be added to the next version of the document.

3.  How should "estimation" be done when you discover a meter was programmed
for a different interval than required for settlement or UDC/ESP tariffs?
There are four cases:
a.  The meter is programmed to collect data at a smaller interval than the
MDMA
Server expects, and the meter's interval evenly divides into the MDMA Server's
interval - for example, the meter was programmed to collect 5 minute data, and
the MDMA Server requires 15 minute data.  The proposed solution - sum the 5
minute intervals into 15 minute intervals.  The data would be marked as either
validated or verified (assuming it passed all the other VEE tests).

b.  The meter is programmed to collect data at a larger interval than the MDMA
Server requires, but consistent with the UDC tariff.  For example, the
meter is
programmed to collect 60 minute intervals, the MDMA Server requires 15 minute
intervals, and the tariff requires hourly intervals.  This data would not be
marked as estimated (per the CPUC decision).

c.  The meter is programmed to collect data at a larger interval than the MDMA
Server and meter's tariff require.  For example, the meter is programmed to
collect 60 minute intervals, but the MDMA Server and tariff require 15 minute
intervals.

d.  The meter is programmed to collect data at a smaller interval than the
MDMA
Server requires, but it doesn't evenly divide into the MDMA Server interval
size.  (This is the least likely of the three to occur.)  For example, the
meter is programmed to collect 10 minute intervals, and the MDMA Server
requires 15 minute intervals. This would be estimated through simple
interpolation and would be marked estimated.


Thanks!



.