RE: Clarification/revised meter communication diagram

I have to agree.  Without explaination, this is certainly
less-than-obvious.  My only hunch is that someone want to continue to
look at the "meter product", while CPUC regulations should only be
addressing the minimum performance requirements of the "meter proper":
accuracy, reliability, etc.  Everything having to do with the
meter-reading paraphernalia should be addressed together in the
appropriate subgroup.


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Greg Lizak [SMTP:Greg.Lizak@itron.com]
> Sent:	Saturday, March 21, 1998 4:37 PM
> To:	DMN5%Fsv%Csv@bangate.pge.com; pswg2web@dradmin.cpuc.ca.gov;
> pswg@dradmin.cpuc.ca.gov; tcv1%Fsv%Csv@bangate.pge.com;
> KSM8%GIR%BCS@bangate.pge.com
> Subject:	re:Clarification/revised meter communication diagram
> 
> Young,
> 
> It seems that a communication device is a communication device and
> therefore should be part of the Meter Communications Committee.  I am
> therefore not sure why communication devices should be moved from the
> Meter
> Communications Committee to the Meter Equipment Committee.
> 
> The write up "Clarification/revised meter communication diagram" is
> very
> good and should be considered a proposal that should be discussed at
> the
> next PSWG meetings.
> 
> Gregory Lizak, Itron
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >All
> >
> >Attached is the revised document which includes the modified diagram
> and
> >a clarification on the three boxes [labeled (1) to (3)] in the
> diagram.  The
> >three boxes are also the scope of the meter Communications Committee.
> >
> >Young Nguyen
> >PG&E
> >
> >=====================================================================
> >
> >
> >Attachment converted: GL Power Book:98330OAS.DOC (WDBN/MSWD)
> (0001DD70)
> 
> 
.