|
|
Enron Mail |
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ANSI_X3.4-1968 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-From: Dasovich, Jeff </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=JDASOVIC< X-To: Shapiro, Richard </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Rshapiro< X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \RSHAPIRO (Non-Privileged)\Shapiro, Richard\Deleted Items X-Origin: Shapiro-R X-FileName: RSHAPIRO (Non-Privileged).pst Buckle up and hold tight. Like I said before, you've got an immense amount= of support and respect from your group, irrespective of the outcome. Man,= who ever woulda thunk... FYI: Calger came down from Portland to talk to the troops--he was pretty d= arn tough on his criticism of old management (the one's who have left) and = said the new team is pushing hard to clean things up and right the ship---h= e did a pretty good job. Guess the question remains, Is the mess too big t= o clean up? Also, touch based with Jim when you get a minute re: meeting today with Edi= son to try to get our money back. Edison is being an absolute *$#-hole. T= heir bottom line, if you can believe it, is that WE OWE THEM money. The ar= rogance is astounding. We're contemplating as an option recommending to you= and management that we join with others and threaten to take Edison in inv= oluntarily---just contemplating at this point, though. ??If you have any qu= estions, just let me know. But essentially, the meeting followed along the= outlines of the note I sent out a couple of days ago outlining Edison's po= sition (which I'm re-attaching).??Best,?Jeff?? -----Original Message-----?F= rom: =09Dasovich, Jeff ?Sent:=09Tuesday, October 30, 2001 4:59 PM?To:=09Tr= ibolet, Michael; Mellencamp, Lisa; Swain, Steve; Huddleson, Diann; Steffes,= James D.; Curry, Wanda; Mara, Susan; Shapiro, Richard?Subject:=09Conversat= ion with Fielder of Edison??The call was pretty tough. ?Quick side bar: Ed= ison is very concerned about TURN getting a stay from the court on the EIX/= PUC settlement .?At the start of the call, Fielder said that he'd fax me th= e judge's ruling in the TURN appeal, but based on how the call went, I'm no= t sure if he'll send it. ?As we conjectured sometime back, Edison is indeed= talking about charging us (through a reduced PX credit) for our "share" of= the undercollection.?Our "share" would be paid down through a reduction in= the PX credit over the life of the settlement (presumably about 2-3 years)= .?In short, with one hand Edison would pay us what they owe us; with the ot= her hand, Edison would take it back.?Edison intends (as we conjectured) to = base the amount of the undercollection owed by DA customers on the percenta= ge of load they represent (e.g., if DA is (was) 10% of the load, they would= pay for 10% of the undercollection).?We had a very "animated" discussion t= hat went back and forth for some time. ?I told him that there's been some = gross misunderstanding since his proposal simply doesn't track.?Fielder sai= d that they believe their argument is solid.?Here's how we left it--he's go= ing to get back to us by COB today or tomorrow and tell us what Edison's ca= lculation is of our "share" of the undercollection.?We can discuss further = on the call that Wanda's setting up for tomorrow.??If you have any question= s between now and then, =09give a holler.??Best,?Jeff? -----Original Messag= e-----?From: =09Dasovich, Jeff ?Sent:=09Monday, October 29, 2001 6:55 PM?T= o:=09Dasovich, Jeff; Steffes, James D.; Mara, Susan; Tribolet, Michael; Mel= lencamp, Lisa; Curry, Wanda; Williams, Robert C.; 'Mike Day (E-mail)'?Cc:= =09Shapiro, Richard; Sanders, Richard B.; Sharp, Vicki?Subject:=09RE: Propo= sed SCE Negotiation Strategy??Couple of additional pieces of information:??= In conjunction with the issue paying ESPs past due PX amounts, Edison has a= ffirmed that it will be making a proposal regarding how it wants to calcula= te the PX credit going forward.?It remains unclear whether Edison will try = to fold controversial issues into negotiations on getting paid past due PX = credit amounts(e.g., PX credit contributed to undercollection and therefore= DA customers should help pay down the undercollection; DA customers must p= ay for stranded DWR contracts, etc.). ?So while Edison is making good nois= es about wanting to settle (which is a certainly a step in the right direct= ion), it's still unclear whether they intend to attach terms to the deal th= at make the whole thing a nonstarter.?Got a call into John Fielder to try t= o get answers to some of these questions.?Will report back when (and if) we= get some answers.??Best,?Jeff?? -----Original Message-----?From: =09Dasovi= ch, Jeff ?Sent:=09Monday, October 29, 2001 5:27 PM?To:=09Steffes, James D.= ; Mara, Susan; Tribolet, Michael; Mellencamp, Lisa; Curry, Wanda; Williams,= Robert C.; 'Mike Day (E-mail)'?Cc:=09Shapiro, Richard; Sanders, Richard B.= ; Sharp, Vicki?Subject:=09RE: Proposed SCE Negotiation Strategy??With respe= ct to past due PX credit amounts, Edison has told folks today that:??Edison= will distribute a one-pager by mid-day tomorrow laying out its proposal fo= r how to handle payment of past due PX credit amounts.?Edison is trying to = meet individually with all ESPs prior to the Nov. 7th prehearing conference= at the PUC to discuss and hopefully reach agreement with ESPs on its propo= sal.?Edison hopes to make progress with the ESPs between now and the Nov. 7= th prehearing conference, and if so, intends to tell the judge that the PUC= should delay action on the complaints pending settlement.??We'll distribut= e Edison's proposal as soon as we get it.??Best,?Jeff???
|