|
|
Enron Mail |
Yesterday in a conversation with Mike Day, he confirmed we have no basis in
AB 1890 or anything else to claim entitlement to continuation of some type of market based credits. Given that interpretation, we tentatively decided the advice letter protest would be drafted to say at least these things - 1) the PE credit should include the 4 cents of surcharge (the 1 from January plus the latest 3 now subject to rate design hearings) 2) there is no restriction on the PE credit going negative. 3) the tariff should be clarified to say it excludes DWR purchases, assuming that is the case. If we are going to otherwise object to the Advice Letter, the approach could be: 1) the Commission needs to generically address the replacement of PX credits and not allow one utility to change it through an advice letter; 2) the Commission has not addressed the entitlement of DA customers to hydro assets and must make a determination on this; 3) if the Commission approves this Advice Letter, it should say SCE has no further claim to stranded costs on its generation; 4) as an interim measure until the Commission fully looks at PX credit calculations, we recommend that SCE adopt a PX proxy, such as Dow Jones. This approach allows us to argue process rather than entitlement to market based credits. Given all the time constrains, I'd suggest we capture these latter issues through a very simple 1-2 paragraphs. Bob, I know you're getting a call together; I'll call you to confirm. Robert C Williams/ENRON@enronXgate 04/24/2001 08:47 AM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, mday@gmssr.com@SMTP@enronXgate, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Wanda Curry/HOU/EES@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES Subject: FW: DA Account Balances As you can see from below, I don't see how we can support the PE Advice Letter. We reserved our right to oppose it in the stip. I think we should clarify that SCE will acknowledge our full claim ($124 million) without any offset in exchange for our cooperation with the MOU. -----Original Message----- From: Megan.Scott-Kakures@sce.com@ENRON [mailto:IMCEANOTES-Megan+2EScott-Kakures+40sce+2Ecom+40ENRON@ENRON.com] Sent: Monday, April 23, 2001 2:52 PM To: Williams, Robert C. Cc: Jennifer.Tsao@sce.com Subject: DA Account Balances Attached is our record of credit balances for Enron DA accounts, as of April 20. The $84 million or so I referenced this morning is our calculation of what SCE owed through 1/18. If the PE credit methodology is approved and applied back to January 19, then Enron would be rebilled for $68 million (for transmission and distribution charges), which offset against the earlier credit and the credit calculated for 1/19 - 4/20, reduces the total credit owed to $62 million. As we discussed, Jenny is more familiar than I with the details of the credits and will call you back with someone from our Billing/Credit group who is even more familiar. (See attached file: Enron PX Credits as of 4-20-01.xls) - Enron PX Credits as of 4-20-01.xls
|