We did recommend using the DJ index.  But subsequent to that, I believe we filed as part of the "ARM" coalition, recommending a bottom's-up approach.  Is that right Sue?  However, I don't think it's accurate to say that we "withdrew" the DJ index recommendation.  Both our original DJ recommendation, and the bottom's up recommendation, are still sitting at the PUC.  I think that's how things currently stand.

Best,
Jeff

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Steffes, James D.  
Sent:	Thursday, October 11, 2001 11:05 AM
To:	Dasovich, Jeff
Subject:	FW: CA question


FYI
 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Steffes, James D.  
Sent:	Thursday, October 11, 2001 7:51 AM
To:	Mara, Susan; Swain, Steve
Subject:	FW: CA question

Steve --

We did originally file that the replacement for the PX Credit should be the DJ Index.  My recollection is that we did withdraw this argument, however I've include Sue Mara on this to double check.  If we haven't, I'd guess that is no longer URM's position?

Jim

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Swain, Steve  
Sent:	Wednesday, October 10, 2001 4:54 PM
To:	Steffes, James D.
Subject:	CA question

I spoke with Mary Lynne today, and she said that once upon a time (after the PX expired) we filed something asking the CPUC to make the DJ index a substitute for the PX credit.  Does this ring a bell?  And the more important question -- did we ever withdraw that request?  Thanks.