Subject: FW: Phase 6 Comparison: Plan vs Dave Analysis
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2001 11:58:04 -0800 (PST)

Please see the attached comparison of the Phase 6 that we have in the 2002-2006 Plan versus Dave's analysis.

For the Plan, we ran it with and without Phase 6 to determine the incremental change.  The worksheet attached also shows the Returns on Equity and Capitalization (with and without) based on the Plan runs.

You will have a reasonable apples-to-apples if you compare the amounts at the Operating Income level because Dave did not assume how it was financed in his analysis however my depreciation is GAAP but Dave's is Tax.

There are only two significant differences:

1)  For conservatism, Dave used the settled rate rather than the rate refund floor rate in 2004.  In Dave's calculations this made a difference of  about 2.9 cents (77.60 cts vs. 74.71 cts. ) for the customers other than FP&L in 2004.  There is no difference for FP&L because their 2004 rate cap is 74.60 cts, lower than either the settled or rate refund floor rates.  (Per Dave, in the risk analyses the rate refund floor impact WAS included.)

2)  We got a lower Ad Valorem tax estimate from Ted Ryan than what Dave used.