Message-ID: <22527188.1075851658640.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 14:42:42 -0700 (PDT) From: mday@gmssr.com To: jeff.dasovich@enron.com Subject: RE: SCE Negative CTC Claim Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: MDay X-To: Dasovich, Jeff X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \Dasovich, Jeff (Non-Privileged)\Dasovich, Jeff\Inbox X-Origin: DASOVICH-J X-FileName: Dasovich, Jeff (Non-Privileged).pst yes, they already told Dan Douglas they would sign a stipulation that replaced the MOU wit the Edison-CPUC settlement. That is more than doable. Dan is drafting the new stipulation now. The stipulation commits SCE to pay once the conditions precedent are met: 1. implementation of the settlement, and 2. approval of the advice letter on prospective calculation of the generation credit. Our only current beef with that is that they exclude the DWR charges. Mike -----Original Message----- From: Dasovich, Jeff [mailto:Jeff.Dasovich@ENRON.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 1:41 PM To: mday@gmssr.com Subject: FW: SCE Negative CTC Claim Any reason in particular that you're of this view? (I'm hoping you'll say that Edison's informed you that it might be doable.) > -----Original Message----- > From: Williams, Robert C. > Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2001 3:31 PM > To: Dasovich, Jeff; 'mday@gmssr.com'; Mara, Susan; > 'jbennett@gmssr.com'; Steffes, James D. > Cc: Sharp, Vicki; Sanders, Richard B. > Subject: SCE Negative CTC Claim > > Mike Day believes that SCE might agree to a new Stipulation in which > they commit to pay our claim if their new deal and their pending > Advice Letter are approved by the CPUC. I have scheduled a call for > tomorrow at 12:30 CST to discuss the terms we would like to see in the > Stipulation (e.g., drop approval of the Advice Letter as a condition, > payment within 10 days after CPUC approval, agreement on the number > set forth in our response to their Data Request, agreement to apply > accrued negative CTC credits to current T&D charges, to name a few). > On the other hand a delay in this proceeding is probably in our > interest, in view of the SCE Counterclaim. Going this route would > probably be in lieu of some of the other alternatives we discussed, so > I believe we will need to get senior management't approval to any > agreement. ********************************************************************** This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply to Enron Corp. at enron.messaging.administration@enron.com and delete all copies 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 anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise. Thank you. **********************************************************************