Seems to me that that's exactly what the letter is saying and represents the 
commitment that we've made to our customers since raising the issue of 
re-sourcing, i.e., they'll pay the cost embedded in the contract, period. No 
more and less. I've assumed that the exposure associated with the 
utility-sourced electricity is substantially lower than the exposure 
associated with the customers remaining DA customers.  Can you verify Mike 
Smith?  Thanks.

Best,
Jeff



	MDay <MDay@GMSSR.com>
	03/20/2001 11:18 AM
		 
		 To: "'karen smith'" <msmith7043@houston.rr.com>, Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com, 
MDay <MDay@GMSSR.com>
		 cc: 
		 Subject: RE: Sutter Ltr

Within the context of the current situation it makes sense.  But are you
really intending that Enron will pay the difference between the bundled rate
and the cost of power purchased by DWR when Sutter gets a bill for that from
PG&E?  If you are this makes sense.  If not, we should not send it and need
to discuss it further.  Mike Day

-----Original Message-----
From: karen smith [mailto:msmith7043@houston.rr.com]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 8:45 PM
To: Jeff.Dasovich@enron.com; mday@gmssr.com
Subject: Fw: Sutter Ltr


Jeff and Mike--attached is a letter we propose to send to our customer
Sutter Health as a "we're here for you" type gesture.  There has been some
UCCSU-type noise from this customr and we want to try to head it off.  Could
you please review and comment on my language regarding the rate surcharges
and make sure I've got the point right? What I want to make clear is that
these rate surcharges have no bearing on our K (we're covering them) and
that our decision to D-DASR these accounts has no bearing on the effect of
such surcharges on the completion of our K.  Please let me know if this
makes sense.  We are trying to get this out in the am, so if you can comment
tonite or first thing tomorrow that would be great.  Just respond to my work
e-mail at msmith1@enron.com.  Thanks.  Mike Smith


----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike D Smith" <msmith1@enron.com>
To: "Jeff Messina" <jmessina@enron.com>; "Robert C Williams"
<Robert_C_Williams.EnronXGate@enron.com>; "Peggy Mahoney"
<pmahoney@enron.com>; "Vicki Sharp" <vsharp@enron.com>
Cc: <msmith7043@houston.rr.com>
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2001 2:17 PM
Subject: Sutter Ltr


>
>
> Please review the attached.  May want to send it out yet this evening.
Please
> send comments to me at both addresses above.
> ---------------------- Forwarded by Mike D Smith/HOU/EES on 03/19/2001
04:16 PM
> ---------------------------
>
>
> Eric Letke
> 03/19/2001 03:57 PM
>
> To:   Carol Moffett/HOU/EES@EES
> cc:   Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES
> Subject:  Sutter Ltr
>
> Mike, this looks good.  Carol, can you try and get this to Marty for
review?
> ---------------------- Forwarded by Eric Letke/DUB/EES on 03/19/2001 03:56
PM
> ---------------------------
>
>
>  (Embedded     Enron Energy Services
>  image moved
>  to file:      From:  Mike D Smith
>  pic06568.pcx) 03/19/2001 03:52 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
> To:   Eric Letke/DUB/EES@EES
> cc:   msmith7043@houston.rr.com
> Subject:  Sutter Ltr
>
>      Please review and comment before I send this around
>
> (See attached file: Sutter Health 3-19-01.doc)
>
>
>
>