Enron Mail

From:jeff.dasovich@enron.com
To:douglass@energyattorney.com
Subject:RE: DA Suspended, but NOT retroactively
Cc:
Bcc:
Date:Thu, 20 Sep 2001 15:38:21 -0700 (PDT)

I figured that's what happened. Faxing as we speak.
=20
Best,
Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Douglass [mailto:douglass@energyattorney.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 4:39 PM
To: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: Re: DA Suspended, but NOT retroactively


Jeff, my email was based solely on listening to the meeting over the teleph=
one. Sue called me about what you said and indicated she would fax it, but=
it has not come in yet. Could you fax it to me at the number below, pleas=
e? Thanks!
=20
Dan
=20
Law Offices of Daniel W. Douglass
5959 Topanga Canyon Blvd. Suite 244
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Tel: (818) 596-2201
Fax: (818) 346-6502
douglass@energyattorney.com <mailto:douglass@energyattorney.com<

----- Original Message -----=20
From: Dasovich, Jeff <mailto:Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com<=20
To: Dan Douglass <mailto:douglass@energyattorney.com<=20
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 12:56 PM
Subject: RE: DA Suspended, but NOT retroactively

Dan. You might want to amend. The decision puts everyone on notice that t=
he Commission is going to consider taking it back to July 1---no info on wh=
at the decision process would be.
=20
Best,
Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Douglass [mailto:douglass@energyattorney.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 2:34 PM
To: ARM
Cc: Vicki Sandler; Tamara Johnson; Mara, Susan; Steve Huhman; Roger Pelote;=
Rob Nichol; Randy Hickok; Nam Nguyen; Jim Crossen; Dasovich, Jeff; Janie M=
ollon; Jack Pigott; Greg Blue; George Vaughn; Gary Ackerman; Ed Cazalet; De=
nice Cazalet Purdum; Curtis Kebler; Curt Hatton; Corby Gardiner; Charles Mi=
essner; Carolyn Baker; Bill Ross; Karen Shea; Max Bulk
Subject: DA Suspended, but NOT retroactively


The Commission has just voted 3-2 to approve the draft ALJ Barnett decision=
, modified to be prospective only. There is NO retroactive suspension.
=20

Carl Wood introduced the ALJ's draft decision, with a diatribe against dire=
ct access. He said that DA is a subsidy from less attractive customers to =
large customers and an example of the saying that, "big dogs eat first and =
big dogs eat best." He added that most comments advocated delay of suspens=
ion and no retroactivity. He said he "finds it hard to consider these comm=
ents to be anything but misleading and disingenuous." He added that, "Smal=
l consumers effectively have no options." He said retroactivity will be th=
e subject of further review, although it was not clear what this meant. Wi=
thin 14 days, the UDCs must inform the Energy Division of steps taken not t=
o accept DASRs for contracts entered into after 9/20/01. He said that dire=
ct access is half of the failed deregulation process; the other half was op=
ening ourselves up to the erratic wholesale market. He said that supporter=
s of DA engage in "hollow rhetoric." The market has failed in the state, a=
nd, "We need to put an end to the lack of social responsibility in the elec=
tric market."

He concluded that several commenters had indicated that direct access was a=
way for making green power available to residential customers. He respond=
ed that this just means other customers are getting more dirty coal-fired p=
ower. He concluded that advocates of direct access make a "fraudulent clai=
m of customer choice."=20

Commissioner Bilas then spoke for his alternate, responding to Wood. He sa=
id he had learned how to count, and he can count to three. He then briefly=
summarized his alternate. First, he expressed disappointment in the Sacra=
mento process and the fact that they had not yet done something to rescue d=
irect access. Second, he indicated his view of DA was a lot different from=
that of other people. He said he had always opposed the AB 1890 provision=
that instituted the UDC buy-sell arrangement, saying that it eliminated th=
e largest customers from direct access. Commissioner Duque then spoke brie=
fly to indicate his support for the Bilas alternate draft decision and his =
strong support for direct access.=20

Commissioner Brown said first, "In the weight of these sad times we must ob=
ey. We are paying the price of the severe energy crisis which occurred las=
t year and the extraordinary means that were used to resolve it." In an or=
dinary market, he thinks DA is good, but there is no way it can coexist wit=
h the State's $22 billion worth of bonds. Therefore, there is no question =
that it has to be suspended. "We probably should have done so months ago, =
in order to avoid a last-minute stampede." There is an inequity between cu=
stomers that have moved to opt for direct access and those who have not. B=
ut sometimes "you don't have a lot of good choices, and this is one of thos=
e times." "If future legislation comes forward, and we hope that it would,=
" the Commission will attempt to revise this action. =20

President Lynch noted the State Senate leadership has written asking for a =
study to be delivered by 1/1/02 as to how DA can be maintained without bias=
to ratepayers and she supported this action.=20

Bilas and Duque indicated they will both file dissents.=20

In conclusion, we have prevailed in our opposition to retroactive direct ac=
cess suspension. We now need to consider whether we want to contest the su=
spension itself, on legal/procedural grounds.

Dan
=20
Law Offices of Daniel W. Douglass
5959 Topanga Canyon Blvd. Suite 244
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Tel: (818) 596-2201
Fax: (818) 346-6502
douglass@energyattorney.com <mailto:douglass@energyattorney.com<

=20



**********************************************************************
This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate an=
d may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the =
intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by othe=
rs is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or author=
ized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply to E=
nron Corp. at enron.messaging.administration@enron.com and delete all copie=
s of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) are not intended=
to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a binding =
and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of its affiliates) and=
the intended recipient or any other party, and may not be relied on by any=
one as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise. Thank you.=20
**********************************************************************