Up through 1992, the rules book included a section on interpretations.
I dug up a copy of this and came up with a few interesting things.
 
Rick Scero writes:
>Answer of 1 each would be incorrect here.  At 10:00, Team B received a PP
>opportunity. At 11:00, they received another as there are now two players who
>have caused their team to be shorthanded. At 11:30, Team B just went 0-1 until
>the second penalty expired, then they are 0-2. Team A gets a PP opportunity at
>13:00.
>     10:00 - 5x4 - 1st opportunity Team B
>     11:00 - 5x3 - 2nd opportunity Team B
>     11:30 - 4x3 - Team B 0-1
>     12:00 - 4x4 - No opportunity here - even strength
>     13:00 - 4x5 - Team A opportunity, Team B 0-2
 
The reason I disagreed with this is that 4-2-c reads, "If the opposing
team scores a goal while a team is short-handed by one or more minor
or bench minor penalties, the short-handed team shall be permitted to
replace immediately on the ice the first player whose minor or bench
minor penalty caused the team to be shorthanded."
 
The 1992 interpretations illustrate this.  There is no example exactly
like the one I suggested.  However, there is the following:
 
"SITUATION 1. Player A1 has a delayed penalty for slashing, then
commits a second foul by tripping the puck carrier.  Meanwhile, the
whistle blows because A2 and B1 are roughing.  All occur at 5:30.
SUMMARY: Team A                       Team B
         A1 - two min. slashing       B1 - two min. roughing
              two min. tripping
         A2 - two min. roughing
At 6:20, Team B scores.  Which penalty expires?  RULING: A1's first
penalty expires because he "caused" the short-handed situation.  A2
and B1 received coincidental minor penalties. ..."
 
The interpretations make it very clear in this and other situations
that in the event of a power play goal, the penalty to expire shall be
the one that caused the SH situation.
 
Back to my example...from 10:00 to 12:00, it would seem to be the
first minor that expires if a goal is scored because TeamA remained
shorthanded throughout, even when it went from 5x3 to 4x3 (when B1
went off at 11:30).  Then at 12:00, when A1 comes out to make it 4x4,
TeamB still had only one opportunity.  It remains 4x4 until A2 comes
out, and then TeamA has its one opportunity until B1 comes out.
 
I don't believe another opportunity can be "awarded" at 11:00 when
TeamA goes down 5x3, because it is still the same player whose penalty
caused his team to be shorthanded.  If there had been no TeamB penalty
at 11:30, then at 12:00 when A1 came out, it would have become A2's
penalty that caused the SH situation and that should be when the
second opportunity would have begun.  But since there was a TeamB
penalty, A2's penalty never caused a (new) SH situation. (or did it?
read on...)
 
Adding to the confusion (mine, anyway) is the following:
 
"SITUATION 7: A1 receives a major penalty at 1:00; A2 receives a minor
at 1:30, and B1 receives a minor at 2:00.  TeamB scores at 2:30.
RULING: A2 comes onto the ice (see 4-2-c).  Even though A1 initially
caused the shorthanded situation, A2 also caused a shorthanded
situation."
 
So here, it DOES seem to matter.  If you go by this and change A1's
major to a minor, then it would mirror my example.  If A2 would still
come out in that case, then Rick would be right.
 
But in other examples, it is made clear that it is "the first player
whose penalty caused the team to be shorthanded."  Maybe the key is
whether they do indeed draw a distinction between different
shorthanded situations.  Maybe I have answered my own question...and
if so, I have learned something (and this wasn't a complete waste of
time :-)).
 
>Evaluating how many opportunities a team has is never based on how many times
>they score.
 
Technically, this is correct.  But it seems to me that it should be
based on when there is a change in which penalty would expire if a
goal were to be scored.  I think I tried to say this at one point but
I may not have been too clear.
 
In regard to the question of a goal occurring two mins into a PP, I
found the following:
 
"SITUATION 6: A Team A player is serving a double minor penalty (four
minutes).  Team B scores with exactly 2:00 remaining on penalty clock.
RULING: The second minor is waived, since the first minor has "expired"
and the Team A player comes onto the ice (see 4-2-c)."
 
This tells us two things:
 
1) A penalty expires exactly 2 minutes into it.  The PPG here is
counted against the second penalty.
2) The clock to go by is the penalty clock, not the game clock.  If in
the BG-MSU situation, the penalty time read 0:00 when the goal was
scored, then the goal is not a PPG (against that specific penalty).
 
It's always possible that, as Glen pointed out to me in email, the
penalty time and game time may not be synchronized.  I don't know if
all clocks work the same way.  Sometimes you'll see the game time
change first and then the penalty time.  In every case, it is the
penalty time that is the determining factor.
---                                                                   ---
Mike Machnik                                            [log in to unmask]
Cabletron Systems, Inc.                                    *HMM* 11/13/93
<<<<< Color Voice of the Merrimack Warriors (station TBA for 94-95) >>>>>