Subject: RE: Past Due Process
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 09:04:04 -0800 (PST)

So the short answer is that EES needs to change its procedures?  Also, is the 50kw right for all markets?

Jim

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Ogenyi, Gloria  
Sent:	Friday, November 09, 2001 10:58 AM
To:	Steffes, James D.
Cc:	Kingerski, Harry
Subject:	RE: Past Due Process

Jim,

Review of the past due process flow chart shows substantial compliance with the rules, except that the final notice (termination notice) in the 2nd chart must specify a termination date that is not less than 10 days from date notice was issued. Thus the next action cannot commence earlier than the 23rd day per this time line. However, under the rules EES can issue the termination notice any time after the 2nd day following the past due date, ie on or at any time after the 5 days set in the first chart. Please note that for larger than >50KW customers, EES can by agreement with the customer, further shorten the timeline in the rules.

To facilitate full compliance with the rules regarding valid reasons for termination, issuance of termination notice, and contents of the notice, I have provided short attachements of rule requirements.

 << File: Termination Prohibited.doc >>  << File: Termination notices - Content.doc >> 

Please call with any questions,
Gloria

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Steffes, James D.  
Sent:	Friday, November 02, 2001 1:34 PM
To:	Ogenyi, Gloria
Subject:	FW: Past Due Process
Importance:	High

Does this process conform w/ regulatory reqts?

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Grubbs, Heidi  
Sent:	Friday, November 02, 2001 11:34 AM
To:	Ader, Jeff; Apollo, Beth; Bernstein, Mark; Bertasi, Ron; Campbell, Scott; Cross, Darren; Dayao, Anthony; Devries, Paul; Dobler, Mark; Earle, Joseph; Frazier, Lamar; Golden, Jeff; Gustafson, Ken; Harris, Mike; Hughes, Evan; Letke, Eric; Mahoney, Peggy; Meyers, Steven R; Pieper, Kalen; Raghavan, Suresh; Richter, Jeff; Roberts, Dave; Stubblefield, Wade; Tilney, Elizabeth; Williams, Jimmie; Wood, James; Adams, Gregory T.; Blachman, Jeremy; Black, Don; Cox, David; Crossley Cooke, Charlie; Gahn, Scott; Herndon, Rogers; Holmes, Sean A.; Lipshutz, Cheryl; Mann, Michael; Milnthorp, Rob; Muench, Gayle W.; Muller, Mark S.; Pagan, Ozzie; Rexrode, Stuart; Schwarz, Angela; Sharp, Greg; Sharp, Vicki; Steffes, James D.; Sutter, Craig H.; Harris, Molly; Bradford, William S.; Herod, Brenda F.; O'Neil, Murray P.; Smith, Ben; Hughes, Evan; Hurt, Robert; Sova, Gary; Frank, Mark; Thatcher, Stephen; Barrett, Misty; Bahner, Rita; [email-masked]'; [email-masked]'; [email-masked]'; Krautz, Michael; Grubbs, Heidi
Cc:	Delainey, David W.; Dietrich, Janet; Leff, Dan; Lavorato, John
Subject:	Past Due Process
Importance:	High

Attached is the past due process as approved by The Office of the Chair. We will begin implementing the process effective immediately. Additionally, we will be rolling out a separate process for dispute resolution and for the termination procedures by Service Management. If you have any questions or comments, please call me or Joni Fisher. 

Mike Krautz
Sr. Director
Accounts Receivable

 << File: Past Due Process Flowcharts.ppt >>