Re: 2 proposals for the June 25 PSWG Plenary meeting
Young:
I basically support your concept on the ongoing modifications, but we need
to mesh the wording with George Roberts proposal. Yours seems a lot
briefer and more subjective...which is what is called for....I was not able
to open your file to view the ppt file on organization.....can you bring
hard copy to the meeting?
Thanks
Bill B
At 4:50 PM -0700 6/17/98, Nguyen, Young wrote:
>PSWG Plenary:
>
>We would like to make two proposals for your discussions and adoption
>(maybe?) in the June 25, 1998 PSWG Plenary meeting:
>
>Proposal #1: PSWG Report Format & Structure ( Please see the attached
>document, Young will explain this in the meeting)
>
> <<Rptorg.ppt>>
>
>Proposal #2: For on-going modifications of CPUC metering
>standards/requirements, the following paragraph is proposed to include in
>the final report:
>
>"Because metering technology will be changing over time, there will be a
>need to have a process in California to revise the CPUC-approved permanent
>metering requirements. However, it is not known how often modification of
>these permanent metering requirements should be needed. Therefore, the
>process shall be that when a need for modifying the CPUC-approved metering
>requirements arises, an entity (UDC, MSP, ESP, non-profit organization,
>etc.) shall file with the CPUC a petition to modify the CPUC-approved
>metering requirements. If the CPUC can decide to modify within its
>technical and regulatory capabilities and after the CPUC receives and
>reviews comments from other entities, the CPUC will issue its decisions
>accordingly. If the CPUC would like market participants to seek solutions
>on this issue, it will order the PSWG to reconvene, discuss the issue and
>make recommendations within a reasonable period. The need for such
>modification of metering requirements may be metering technology
>obsolescence, new metering standards that are beneficial to consumers,
>safety issues, etc."
>
>Personal comments: The PSWG already discussed this at length in the last
>meeting, and maybe it is better off to let the Commission decide "when PSWG
>shall be needed again." Surely that when there is such a need, you as a
>representative of your own entity will not be shy of submitting such a
>petition to the CPUC, and that petition will be the trigger for the PSWG
>process, and the CPUC may order the PSWG to reconvene just like what it did
>in the CPUC Decision D97-12-048, dated December 3, 1997.
>
>Please feel free to provide your inputs and suggestions to what is written
>above. How about... let's get it done and focus on the report because time
>is running out on us soon.
>
>
>Tim Vahlstrom and Young Nguyen
>(415-973-1084) (415-973-1686)
>PG&E
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:Rptorg.ppt (SLD3/PPD3) (000023CA)
Willam J. Buckley
Director of Technical Standards
ITRON
PO BOX 15288
SPOKANE, WA 99215
509-891-3744
FAX:509 891-3590
EMAIL: mailto:bill.buckley@itron.com
Home email: mailto:Wjbuckley@aol.com
Home Phone: 509-922-1676
For More Information on ITRON see our WEB page http://www.itron.com
.
References: