|
|
Enron Mail |
Scott's Comments to comments in blue
From: Leslie Lawner@ENRON on 04/25/2001 01:39 PM To: JBennett <JBennett@GMSSR.com<, Scott Stoness/HOU/EES@EES, Tamara Johnson/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: FW: Here are my comments to Scott's comments. Revenue allocation: I strongly recommend that we stay silent on this until after the recommended decision comes out. I feel that our support could easily be the kiss of death to a particular proposal. The bottom line is that our proposal works with any allocation method. We can support the one that is accepted in the recommended decision or argue for another but I would hold off in this round. Agree While some of the additions to rate design section seem to be along the lines of what we put in the record, both in direct and on cross, I think the free rider, CBL stuff is new and could be stricken, and may just make our stuff seem more complicated. Agree I have similar concerns about the alternate interim proposal in this brief, seems like it includes lots of facts we did not put in our testimony. We did put the facts in in the response to data we filed with ALJ on monday. If you are referring to ratios between on and off peak. PX credit based on market value -- the hearing examiner has no authority to address this issue so why put it in? In a case like this with such a short time frame, decision makers who want to be diligent and read everything that is filed, will resent having to read stuff that is not germane to the issues at hand. It is gratuitous and likely to aggravate her. I was responding to PGE testimony. We at least should say - that the CPUC should not determine the outcome of this recommendation because it is outside of the scope of this hearing. If you agree that it is outside the scope. Otherwise how can we not respond JBennett <JBennett@GMSSR.com< 04/25/01 01:20 PM To: "Lelie Lawner (E-mail)" <Leslie.Lawner@enron.com< cc: Subject: FW: -----Original Message----- From: JBennett Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 12:42 PM To: Lelie Lawner (E-mail) Subject: FW: Leslie -- I just got this from Scott. I thought you should see his more detailed thoughts on the brief. Jeanne -----Original Message----- From: sstoness@enron.com [mailto:sstoness@enron.com] Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 12:30 PM To: tjohnso8@enron.com Cc: JBennett@GMSSR.com Subject: (See attached file: Brief CA from Scott.DOC) As promised but I ran out of steam. - Brief CA from Scott.DOC
|