EDEWG Change Request

This EDEWG Change Request can be found on the PUC website at http://www.puc.state.pa.us/electric/electric_edewg_download.aspx

Requester’s Name:
Christina Navadauskas / EDC/EGS Name:
Duquesne Light Company / Phone # :
412-393-6192
Date of Request:
1 / 19 / 2005 / Affected EDI Transaction Set #(s):
814 Change, 814 Enrollment, & 814 Reinstatement Transactions / E-Mail Address:

Requested Priority
High / Requested Implementation Date:
ASAP / Status:
03/11/05 Approved / Implemented in 02/2007 version

Brief Explanation

Modify language throughout EDEWG 814 change, enrollment, & reinstatement transactions to agree with the data dictionary for the LIN: AMT01 and AMT02 for Capacity Obligation and Transmission Contribution amounts. Affected segments: AMT*KC and AMT*KZ.

Wording change is related to removal of word ‘obligation’ and replacement with ‘contribution’.

Detail Explanation

1. AMT01 to say ‘Contribution’ (delete ‘Obligated’ for ‘KC’ and delete ‘Mortgager’s Monthly Obligation for ‘KZ’).

AMT*KC wording will be:

Contribution.

Capacity Contribution (aka Load Responsibility). Peak load contributions provided to PJM for

Installed Capacity calculation (coincident with PJM's peak).

AMT*KZ wording will be:

Contribution:

Transmission Contribution. Customer's peak load contribution provided to PJM for the transmission

service calculation (coincident with LDC peak)

2. AMT02 to say:

AMT*KC: Capacity Contribution / Load Responsibility

AMT*KZ Transmission Contribution

For Change Control Manager Use Only:

Date of EDEWG Discussion:
3/10/05 / Expected Implementation Date:
TBD

EDEWG Discussion and Resolution:

2/3/05: EDEWG discussed the change. It was determined each PA EDC should respond to Sandra Rice with their use of either “Obligation” or “Contribution” for the AMT*KC and AMT*KZ segments. EDEWG will revisit during March 2005 call.

3/10/05: EDEWG discussed the change. All utilities provided positive feedback to Sandra Rice regarding CC42 with exception of UGI. Sandra would contact them directly and if there was no objection, CC42 would be approved.

3/11/05: Sandra stated, “UGI does not agree with the wording, however they would will not stop the CC from being approved. Therefore EDEWG approves this CC.

Priority Classifications

Emergency Priority / Implemented within 10 days or otherwise directed by EDEWG
High Priority / Changes / Enhancements implemented with 30 days. The next release, or as otherwise directed by EDEWG
Low Priority / Changes / Enhancements implemented no earlier than 90 days, Future Release, or as otherwise directed by EDEWG

Please submit this form via e-mail to both the PUC at and to the

Change Control Manager, Sandra Rice at

Your request will be evaluated and prioritized at an upcoming EDEWG meeting or conference call.

1