Message-ID: <20305801.1075843843010.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 11:34:00 -0800 (PST) From: jeff.dasovich@enron.com To: james.steffes@enron.com, susan.mara@enron.com Subject: Recent Emergency Filings Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: Jeff Dasovich X-To: James D Steffes, Susan J Mara X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \Jeff_Dasovich_June2001\Notes Folders\Sent X-Origin: DASOVICH-J X-FileName: jdasovic.nsf ----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 01/23/2001 07:34 PM ----- MBD 01/23/2001 07:13 PM To: "'Jeff Dasovich Enron SF'" , "'Sue Mara at Enron SF'" , "'Sandi McCubbin Enron SF'" cc: Subject: Recent Emergency Filings Here is the current list of emergency actions, motions, etc. by the utilities and other notable parties in recent days. 1. SCE has filed a motion for summary judgement and a motion for injunctive relief in its "filed rate doctrine" case in Federal District Court in LA to require the CPUC to declare the rate freeze over and for a court order requiring the CPUC to raise Edison's rates to recover all past and current power costs. This is a potentially critical case. 2. PG&E filed a motion to require SoCalGas to deliver gas to it for core consumption under the mutual assistance statute and their agreement with SoCalGas. SoCalGas has strongly protested the motion. 3. PG&E has filed a motion to permit gas suppliers to receive a security interest in the utility's accounts receiveables (CPUC approval required under Sec. 851) in order for such suppliers to obtain collateral from the utility which does not require cash. Expedited two day response time was requested. The ALJ will issue a ruling determining how much time we will have to respond. 4. PG&E has filed an advice letter seeking to replace the weighted day ahead PX price with the ISO ex post energy price as the cost element in the PX credit for direct access customers. 5. ORA/TURN have filed an emergency petition seeking to modify the EFO and OFO procedures under the PG&E gas accord, specifically seeking to waive EFO and OFO penalties and reducing the diversion charges the core would pay when the noncore's gas is diverted to serve core load. The charge would be reduced to the actual cost of gas, thereby depriving noncore customers and their suppliers of the cost of interstate transmission and any costs assciated with the loss of the gas supply and its effect on the customers' operations. CMTA has filed strong opposition. This is what we are aware of as of today. Mike Day