RE: ESC conference calls to discuss individual Business Practices

John, just a couple of quick comments.

First BP 9 is identified as an "independent issue" and BP 4 is identified as
a "dependent Issues", yet both of these BP's work in tandem. I would think
both of these should be "dependent", unless I am missing something. I
guess I would have the same comment for BP #25.

The last page describes BP's (1, 10, and 12) that the WSCC is asking to be
worked independently. I am not sure what this means - a West and East
proposal for each of these practices?

Does BP 24 (Curtailments and Reloads) assume a common (nationwide)
Congestion Management scheme, or is this BP totally unrelated or
insignificant to any Congestion Management scheme (physical or financial)?

Thanks John,

John Canavan
Montana Power Company

< -----Original Message-----
< From: Hormozi, John [SMTP:jhormo@ladwp.com]
< Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 5:22 PM
< To: Electronic Scheduling Work Group
< Subject: ESC conference calls to discuss individual Business
< Practices
<
< Greetings, everyone.
<
< The message below, from the ESC's Mike McElhany, describes the ESC's
< effort to subdivide its 31 proposed business practices into
< "model-independent" and "model-dependent" business practice sublists.
< The ESC intends to debate the "model-independent" business practices
< first, in anticipation of upcoming FERC pronouncements on transmission
< market models.
<
< At last week's WSCC Electronic Scheduling Work Group Meeting (which
< followed the ESC meeting), I promised to reproduce my breakdown lists
< (that I handed to Mike on my way out the door) and forward them to you
< for your perusal. Specifically, we in WSCC should check whether we
< concur with this first-cut categorization. Remember: for this question,
< we're not talking about the pros and cons of each business practice, but
< simply identifying which ones, as currently drafted, presuppose a
< particular transmission model -- be it physical, financial, or some
< hybrid of the two.
<
< Guess what? The attached list below, which Mike prepared for the ESC,
< is MY breakdown! (Thanks, Mike.) So here it is for you to see. After
< reading my meeting notes, I'm not sure whether this was supposed to go
< to the entire ESWG or only to an ESWG task force (Bob Harshbarger,
< please refresh my memory on this), so I chose to err on the side of
< wider dissemination.
<
< Unless anyone out there strongly feels otherwise (and I recommend we
< read the actual business practices before reaching such a conclusion), I
< believe this breakdown to be accurate enough to facilitate discussion.
< I suggest we proceed with our strategem of organizing ESWG conference
< calls &/or meetings on the business practices (of course, at our
< chairman's discretion) in advance of the corresponding ESC conference
< calls, now that we know the ESC's game plan.
<
< In case of questions, you can reach me by replying to this e-mail or at
< (818) 771-6775.
<
< Sincerely,
< John Hormozi, LADWP
<
< -----Original Message-----
< From: Mike McElhany [mailto:McElhany@wapa.gov]
< Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 12:56 PM
< To: estf@nerc.com
< Subject: ESC conference calls to discuss Business Practices
<
<
< All,
<
< At the ESC meeting held in Las Vegas last week it was decided to hold
< a number of conference calls to futher the development of the 31
< Business Practices. We have come up with a 1st cut list of the BPs that
< are not impacted by the 8 design issues that we filed with FERC. Our
< intention is to hold conference calls on 2-4 BPs at a time, these calls
< are open to any and all. We will announce which BPs are to be
< discussed, the outstanding items, and any comments that have been
< received as part of the agenda for each conference call. This is not
< intended to be the final review of the BPs, rather it will help get some
< actual work accomplished. I have attached the 1st cut of the BPs that
< are independant of Design Issues, and ask for input as to the order and
< the groups of BPs that should be discussed. I would like to schedule
< the 1st call for Wednesday the 30th. If you have concerns with the
< lists and/or the grouping of the BPs, please respond as soon as
< possible. On Monday the 28th, the offical announcement and agenda for
< the 1st conference call will be sent. Please get your comments to me if
< you are not able to participate on any particular call. It may be that
< some the the BPs will be included in multiple conference calls, so you
< will have several opportunities to participate.
<
< Mike << File: Independent of RTO Design Issues.doc <<