|
|
Enron Mail |
Jeanne - I think you have all the relevant issues. On allocation, we said in
initial comments we favor an equal 3 cents increase to all classes. Can we tweak this to say now, what we don't want is a reallocation based on perceived rate inequities, and any of the other methods are acceptable (3 cents, top 100 hours, 99px load weighted costs, equal % of gen costs) but after seeing all the testimony we think equal % of gen costs is preferable. If asked, that's what I will say. Some of the other outline points will really require "new" testimony, so we'll have to talk about that. JBennett <JBennett@GMSSR.com< 04/18/2001 08:22 PM To: jlewis@enron.com, sstoness@enron.com, tjohnso8@enron.com, "Harry Kingerski (E-mail)" <Harry.Kingerski@enron.com< cc: Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com, James.D.Steffes@enron.com, Leslie.Lawner@enron.com, Susan.J.Mara@enron.com, Robert.Neustaedter@enron.com Subject: Outline of Brief for Rate Design Proceeding Attached is an proposed outline of the Brief we will file next week in the Rate Design Case. As you will see, the outline is more in the way of putting out thoughts and highlighting where we need to reach some closure on certain items as well as where I need some more input from you. I would like feed back on this by the end of the day Friday, as I plan to spend some time on the brief this weekend. Perhaps we could spend some time talking about it on either Thursday or Friday mornings' call. <<X23731.DOC<< Jeanne Bennett - X23731.DOC
|