Enron Mail

From:jeff.dasovich@enron.com
To:alan.comnes@enron.com, angela.schwarz@enron.com, beverly.aden@enron.com,bill.votaw@enron.com, brenda.barreda@enron.com, carol.moffett@enron.com, cathy.corbin@enron.com, chris.foster@enron.com, christina.liscano@enron.com, craig.sutter@enron.com, dan
Subject:PG&E Motion For Special Hearings
Cc:
Bcc:
Date:Tue, 19 Jun 2001 10:36:00 -0700 (PDT)

----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 06/19/2001 05:36 PM -----

=09"Dan Douglass" <douglass@energyattorney.com<
=0906/18/2001 07:56 PM
=09=09=20
=09=09 To: "Tamara Johnson" <tjohnso8@enron.com<, "Robert Berry" <berry@apx=
.com<,=20
"Denice Cazalet Purdum" <dpurdum@apx.com<, "Ed Cazalet" <ed@cazalet.com<,=
=20
"Bill Ross" <billr@calpine.com<, "Bob Anderson" <Bob_Anderson@apses.com<,=
=20
"Carolyn Baker" <cabaker@duke-energy.com<, "Charles Miessner"=20
<camiessn@newwestenergy.com<, "Corby Gardiner" <jcgardin@newwestenergy.com<=
,=20
"Curt Hatton" <curt.hatton@neg.pge.com<, "Curtis Kebler"=20
<curtis_l_kebler@reliantenergy.com<, "Gary Ackerman"=20
<foothillservices@mindspring.com<, "George Vaughn"=20
<gavaughn@duke-energy.com<, "Greg Blue" <gtbl@dynegy.com<, "Jack Pigott"=20
<jackp@calpine.com<, "Janie Mollon" <jsmollon@newwestenergy.com<, "Jeff=20
Dasovich" <jeff.dasovich@enron.com<, "Joe Paul" <jmpa@dynegy.com<, "Nam=20
Nguyen" <nam.nguyen@powersrc.com<, "Randy Hickok" <rjhickok@duke-energy.com=
<,=20
"Rob Nichol" <rsnichol@newwestenergy.com<, "Roger Pelote"=20
<roger.pelote@williams.com<, "Steve Huhman" <steve.huhman@mirant.com<, "Sue=
=20
Mara" <susan_j_mara@enron.com<, "Vicki Sandler" <vicki_sandler@apses.com<
=09=09 cc:=20
=09=09 Subject: PG&E Motion For Special Hearings



PG&E has filed the attached?=01&Motion for Further Proceedings Regarding=
=20
Implementation of the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) Reven=
ue=20
Requirement Pursuant to Public Utilities Code Section 360.5 and Water Code=
=20
Sections 80002.5 and 80110.=018? The Motion requests that the Commission =
=20
provide an opportunity for expedited evidentiary hearings and development o=
f=20
a formal record on the calculation, allocation, rate design and=20
implementation of DWR=01,s revenue requirement and Fixed DWR Set-Aside und=
er AB=20
1X and the Commission=01,s decisions implementing AB 1X.? The Motion does =
not=20
request any Commission proceedings to review the reasonableness or amount =
of=20
DWR=01,s revenue requirement.? However, without hearings and a formal reco=
rd on=20
the allocation of DWR=01,s revenue requirement, PG&E contends that there i=
s a =20
significant risk of disagreement and litigation among interested parties an=
d=20
DWR over the allocation of DWR=01,s revenue requirement and the revenue=20
requirement needed by the utilities to continue serving their retail=20
customers and paying their existing power suppliers.? The utility also mak=
es=20
the dramatic statement that:
?
"If it takes interested parties 24 hours a day, seven days a week locked in=
=20
a room together to reach this consensus and secure the revenue stream for=
=20
both DWR and the utilities, PG&E is willing to devote the time, effort and=
=20
resources to do so."
?
With regard to DA suspension, PG&E states that, "Finally, in a June 12, =20
2001, letter to interested parties, the DWR, State Treasurer=01,s Office an=
d =20
Department of Finance requested certain protections against customers who=
=20
might seek to avoid paying DWR=01,s revenue requirement by switching to=20
alternative energy providers under direct access programs, an issue which=
=20
would need to be resolved by the Commission or the Legislature prior to=20
implementation of DWR=01,s revenue requirement."? There is no other refere=
nce=20
to DA suspension, but this makes it sound as if the issue would be inclujd=
ed=20
in the proceeding proposed by PG&E.
?
Under the expedited schedule proposed by PG&E, the Commission would be abl=
e=20
to issue a final decision on all DWR revenue requirement issues by July 26,=
=20
2001(although the caption for this section says July 19, the text and a=20
schedule shows the later date).? DWR testimony would be due on June 27 and=
=20
intervenor and utility testimony on July 2.
?
?
?
Dan Douglass
5959 Topanga Canyon Blvd.? Suite 244
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Tel:?? (818) 596-2201
Fax:? (818) 346-6502
douglass@energyattorney.com
?
?
Dan Douglass
5959 Topanga Canyon Blvd.? Suite 244
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Tel:?? (818) 596-2201
Fax:? (818) 346-6502
douglass@energyattorney.com

?

- Blank Bkgrd.gif
- 6-18-01 PG&E Motion.doc