We just completed our weekly conference call with UC/CSU and their are some 
noteworthy developments.  Diann, Maurice and I participated.  We need to 
consider the ramifications and set actions accordingly. I've put 
actions/questions in bold below.

EDI Transfer Agreements

UC and CSU are going to complete the EDI transfer agreements and get back to 
us this week.  They have come to the realization that the utilities are 
resourcing their supply and that they need to take us up on our EDI offer in 
order to address billing issues.  They want us to assure them that cut-off 
notices, which will consequently be directed to us, are adequately addressed 
to prevent actual cut-offs from occurring.  Diann is addressing.

DR-SC Services

UC and CSU have elected to use APX to provide Demand Relief-Schedule 
Coordination services for their DRP instead of Enron.  UC/CSU apparently need 
to get a copy of their executed DR-SC agreements to the ISO by tomorrow (May 
15), or run the risk of forfeiting their participation.  We are not able to 
provide a commitment of getting their proposed Letter Agreement executed in 
their timeframe (tomorrow).  (I informed my counterparts that we did not 
receive the draft agreement until Wednesday of last week, two weeks later 
than originally promised, and that Enron should not be held accountable for 
the delay.  Maric of UC informed me that UC did not provide the agreement to 
us earlier because they first wanted to know their supply status (DA vs. 
utility supply).  I reminded Maric (and CSU) that our offer to provide DR-SC 
services was independent of their energy supply status).  Bob, Kristen - as a 
result, I will not be forwarding our red-line of their draft agreement.

Meter Installs

My counterparts at UC and CSU confirmed that SCE would not receive resistance 
at campuses to install the SCE meters.  However, this was conditional that we 
coordinate with the campuses ahead of time.  Though I don't believe we are 
obligated to do this, I see no harm in sharing with UC/CSU and the campuses 
the SCE transition dates, and offering to coordinate with their campuses.  
Also, I am working with Diann and Maurice to determine our most cost 
effective approach for continuing to provide interval data reporting 
services.  Recall that we had before recommended the dual sockets, however, 
we are now looking into using IDR read-only access from the utility meters as 
a reduced-cost option.  We did not offer this today, and are scheduled to 
meet with UC and CSU tomorrow to discuss further.  Mike, Bob, Kristen - do 
you see any harm in us offering a different approach at this point (i.e., 
utility IDR meters with Enron read-only provision instead of dual sockets)?

Surcharges

Maric asked we give her assurance we were not planning to pass through 
surcharges to the campuses.  I informed her we were considering doing just 
that and that we would be taking up with them at some time in the future 
(perhaps during mediation discussions).  Interestingly, she did not point to 
the contract in dissuading us, giving me the impression that they may believe 
the contract is in our favor on this.  Instead, she pointed out some written 
testimony Enron had provided where we are on record as saying we would not 
pass through the surcharges to our customers.  Jeff, anyone - Any background 
on this purported testimony?

Let me know if you have any questions.  Ideas, suggestions welcome.

Tom