Message-ID: <28655624.1075851630246.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 15:27:59 -0700 (PDT) From: jeff.dasovich@enron.com To: wbooth@booth-law.com Subject: RE: Reponse to Angelides Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: Dasovich, Jeff X-To: 'William Booth' X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \Dasovich, Jeff (Non-Privileged)\Dasovich, Jeff\Sent Items X-Origin: DASOVICH-J X-FileName: Dasovich, Jeff (Non-Privileged).pst Nice job. In line with your letter, and in response to Wood's questionnaire about rolling the suspension date back to July 1, don't you think it is absolutely necessary to have hearings in order to establish a record prior to any decision? Wood throws around the $10 billion number in his questionnaire (ruling, whatever), without any substantiation whatsoever. Shouldn't DWR and its rev. req. be thoroughly scrutinized in the hearing room before making a decision. Seems logical though 1) logic has prevailed much lately and 2) I'm not a lawyer, so I could be missing the boat completely. Best, Jeff -----Original Message----- From: William Booth [mailto:wbooth@booth-law.COM] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 4:37 PM To: 'Dorothy Rothrock'; William Booth; cra@calretailers.com; ek@a-klaw.com; mikahl@ka-pow.com; djsmith@s-k-w.com; dhunter@s-k-w.com; Derek Naten; 'Dominic DiMare'; Barbara R. Barkovich (E-mail); Keith McCrea (E-mail); Dan L Carroll (E-mail) Cc: Dasovich, Jeff; Evelyn Elsesser; Loren Kaye Subject: RE: Reponse to Angelides Dorothy -- Attached is a another version of the letter that takes a little different approach. What do you think? I worried that your first letter looks a little like an invitation to pile on the exit fees, of all types and in any magnitude. I think we need to attack the premise that any DA causes an increase in DWR costs for other customers. Bill -----Original Message----- From: Dorothy Rothrock [mailto:drothrock@cmta.net] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 1:35 PM To: wbooth@booth-law.com; cra@calretailers.com; ek@a-klaw.com; mikahl@ka-pow.com; djsmith@s-k-w.com; dhunter@s-k-w.com; Derek Naten; 'Dominic DiMare' Cc: Dasovich, Jeff; Evelyn Elsesser; Loren Kaye Subject: Reponse to Angelides Wanna sign onto this letter to Loretta? Any suggestions? We could make it a CEA thing. (I am copying Jeff D. as a courtesy...I think we need this to be just a customer deal). Dot 498-3319 This e-mail is intended solely for use of the individual to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by replying to the original sender of this note. Thank You.