RE: Correct vote items!

I must object to the introduction of item 4 (the UDCs' alternate to the
MDMA committee's recommendation of a 1/1/99 EDI implementation date for
meter reads) at the Plenary session, because has not been approved at
the committee level.  The MDMA committee can decide whether to take this
proposal under consideration.  However, if the MDMA committee does take
item 4 under consideration, I ask that an alternative should also be
considered, as follows.

"MDMAs will be required to continue to produce CMEP output as they are
now doing until 12/31/99, but if an ESP asks to receive data in EDI
format, it must be provided in addition to the CMEP output, beginning
1/1/99.  The EDI output may be produced by an automated conversion of
the CMEP output to EDI format, which can be run on a scheduled basis
that can lag the posting of the CMEP output by up to two hours.  This
interim requirement may be satisfied by a simple conversion of the CMEP
data into a specified subset of the ANSI X12 Transaction Set 867 EDI
format."

ORA has already demonstrated that CMEP output can be converted to EDI
format, and is providing the source code free to market participants.
Any remaining mapping issues can be expeditiously dealt with, and if any
problems arise in the use of the EDI files, the CMEP files would
continue to be available.  The UDCs do not need to convert their
internal systems from CMEP to EDI until they are ready, except to run
the file conversion program on an automated basis.

---
Jim Price, ORA, jep@cpuc.ca.gov

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Stacey, Kirsten [SMTP:KSM8@pge.com]
> Sent:	Friday, June 19, 1998 4:28 PM
> To:	'pswg exploder'; 'pswg web'
> Subject:	URG: Correct vote items!
> Sensitivity:	Private
> 
> Please toss the earlier version of vote items I sent out yesterday.
> They
> contain the WRONG information.
> 
> This document includes the most up-to-date worker qualification
> section as
> well as two proposals on an implementation date for EDI. From the
> e-mails
> that have been exchanged the MDM committee may want to revisit the EDI
> topic
> further so the vote is not definite. 
> 
> I've also provided a slot for the future of PSWG since we will be
> discussing
> and hopefully voting on that on Thursday as well.
> 
> Kirsten
> 
>   <<Plvot3.doc>>  << File: Plvot3.doc >> 
.