RE: Proposal AREM response to UDC Joint Filing

Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: jsmollon@newwestenergy.com
X-To: RSchlanert@electric.com, JSMOLLON@newwestenergy.com, arem@electric.com
X-cc: douglass@energyattorney.com, Dasovich, Jeff </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=JDASOVIC<
X-bcc:
X-Folder: \JDASOVIC (Non-Privileged)\Dasovich, Jeff\Deleted Items
X-Origin: Dasovich-J
X-FileName: JDASOVIC (Non-Privileged).pst

how about 4:00 p.m. conference call?

-----Original Message-----
From: Rebecca Schlanert [mailto:RSchlanert@electric.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 2:33 PM
To: 'jsmollon@newwestenergy.com'; arem@electric.com
Cc: douglass@energyattorney.com; Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com
Subject: RE: Proposal AREM response to UDC Joint Filing - Implementation
o f Su spension DA

I would be open to this as well.

Rebecca

< -----Original Message-----
< From: jsmollon@newwestenergy.com [SMTP:jsmollon@newwestenergy.com]
< Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 11:21 AM
< To: arem@electric.com
< Cc: douglass@energyattorney.com; Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com
< Subject: Proposal AREM response to UDC Joint Filing - Implementation
< of Su spension DA
<
< I have had an opportunity to talk to most of you regarding the attached
< proposal. I apologize I ran out of time yesterday and didn't catch
< everyone.
<
< NWE would like to propose a slightly different take on our AREM filing
< having had a chance to think more about it. I wanted to run it by
< everyone
< to get your thoughts before submitting a redline. If you feel this
< warrants
< a conference call I will gladly set one up for today. Time is of the
< essence and would appreciate your feedback as soon as possible. If we all
< agree, I would like to get the re-write with everyone's blessing to Dan by
< tomorrow at 8:00 am. or sooner.
< <<arm-puc-plan.doc<<
< Proposal Benefits
<
< 1. We look more reasonable and agree to much of what UDCs are
< proposing.
< 2. Accommodates most, if not all, of ESP and customer concerns.
< 3. Strong argument for avoiding any contract review. Our
< verification proposal could backfire; PUC could accept our approach, but
< add
< details which goes toward ESPs submitting contracts to the PUC for review
< and validation
< Thank you,
< Janie Mollon
< Manager, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs
< Office: 602-629-7758
< FAX: 602-629-7772
< Mobile: 602-625-3892
< << File: arm-puc-plan.doc <<