Edison  Pst Transition Rate Design testimony filing date delayed to Dec1.? 
Case  includes big move to fixed distribution charges and re standby rates.?  
Parties with concerns are encouraged to file re impact on self-generation.?  
The application may be available on PUC or SCE website.
?

Jay Morse 
Project Coordinator, Distributed Generation  
Office of Ratepayer Advocates  
California Public Utilities Commission  
415-703-1587 
-----Original Message-----
From: Wetzell, Mark S.  [mailto:msw@cpuc.ca.gov] 
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2000 11:39  AM
To: 'kmccrea@sablaw.com'; 'michael-briggs@reliantenergy.com';  
'defrawis@efaches.navfac.navy.mil'; 'rcsstl@cdmnet.com';  
'mbrubaker@consultbai.com'; 'alex.goldberg@williams.com';  
'barbara_klemstine@apsc.com'; 'jlyoung@sempra.com'; 
'napedersen@jonesday.com';  'athomas@newenergy.com'; 'lgurick@calpx.com'; 
'douglass@arterhadden.com';  'reedba@sce.com'; 'kmelville@sempra.com'; 
'jbarthrop@powersavers.com';  'mcbyer@earthlink.com'; 'gackerman@wptf.org'; 
'furutanj@efawest.navfac.navy.mil';  'mdjoseph@adamsbroadwell.com'; 
'bfinkelstein@turn.org'; Zeller, Jason;  'imoosen@gralegal.com'; 
'glsg@pge.com'; 'phanschen@mofo.com'; 'scarter@nrdc.org'; 
'epoole@adplaw.com';  'chilen@llgm.com'; 'jbennett@gmssr.com'; 
'regaffairs@sf.whitecase.com';  'lys@aelaw.com'; 
'rick.counihan@greenmountain.com'; 'kfyip@seiworldwide.com';  
'wbooth@booth-law.com'; 'brbarkovich@earthlink.net'; 'berry@apx.com';  
'scottst@mid.org'; 'jeff@jbsenergy.com'; 'blaising@braunlegal.com'; 
'jsole@caiso.com'; 'jweil@aglet.org';  'abb@eslawfirm.com'; 
'abb@eslawfirm.com'; 'pstohr@dbsr.com';  'jtachera@energy.state.ca.us'; 
'kmills@cfbf.com'; 'mpa@aelaw.com'; 'dws@keywaycorp.com';  
'jazayeria@sec.com'; 'LVanWagenen@sempra.com'; 'jskillman@compenergy.com';  
'risom@ix.netcom.com'; 'fosterbc@sce.com'; 'rschmidt@bartlewells.com';  
'luluw@newsdata.com'; 'ell5@pge.com'; 'rbw@mrwassoc.com'; 'rmccann@cal.net';  
'karen@klindh.com'; Stevens, Maria E.; Carter, Norman H.; Lafrenz, Donald 
J.;  Hendry, James; Halligan, Julie; Wetzell, Mark S.; Ebke, Maryam; Casey, 
Sean F.;  'dhungerf@energy.state.ca.us'; 'mjaske@energy.state.ca.us'
Subject:  A.00-01-009, Edison Rate Design; Update to tentative  schedule



NOTICE TO PARTIES: 

Unfortunately, as of today, it is still not possible  to establish a final 
schedule for this proceeding.? Pending issuance of a  ruling establishing the 
final schedule, the following information is provided  for the guidance of 
the parties.

The June 19, 2000 ALJ Ruling established a tentative  schedule that provided 
for service of ORA testimony on August 29, intervenor  testimony on October 
9, rebuttal testimony on October 30, and hearings in  November.? Following 
that ruling, ORA proposed a modification to that  schedule.? ORA proposed 
that if Edison submitted its updated testimony by  July 7, 2000, ORA's 
testimony would be due on September 22, 2000, or 24 days  later than the 
previously scheduled date.? 

By e-mail notice sent to parties on June 29, 2000, I  announced that I 
anticipated granting ORA's request, and that subject to further  ruling, the 
subsequent events in the June 19 tentative schedule would also be  set back 
by approximately 24 days.? Edison served me with its revised  testimony on 
July 27, 2000, and ORA served me with its testimony on September  22, 2000.? 

Based on the foregoing, and in the absence of further  modification to the 
schedule, intervenor testimony would be due approximately 24  days after 
October 9, or November 2; rebuttal testimony would be due  approximately 24 
days after October 30, or November 27 (due to holidays); and  hearings would 
be in December.? 

However, it is now clear that hearings cannot be  scheduled before January 
2001.? Accordingly, it is both possible and  reasonable to extend the time 
for intervenor and rebuttal testimony while  generally preserving time 
intervals between intervenor testimony, rebuttal, and  hearings.? To the 
extent possible, the final schedule will take into  account the schedule for 
the PG&E rate design case as wll as the holiday  season.? In any event, 
intervenor testimony will not be due before December  1, 2000, and rebuttal 
testimony will not be due before December 21,  2000.

On August 15, 2000, the public participation hearings  that had been 
scheduled for September 18-20 were removed from the Daily  Calendar.? The 
August 15 notice stated that the Commission had removed this  matter from its 
Calendar.? The intent was to remove the scheduled public  participation 
hearings from the Calendar, not to suspend the schedule for  processing this 
matter.? I regret any confusion that may have been caused  by the wording of 
the August 15  notice.?????????