Dan and myself were on the line for about 20 minutes, finished and got off.
Dan has contacted, by e-mail, some of the major customer groups with the
suggestion of a broad coalition response to the ACR.  I suggested he send a
note calling for a conference call with them on Monday, Nov. 26 at 2:30
Pacific.  Same dial-in as before.
 
What time did you try to call in?  Sometimes this service gives me troubles.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff [mailto:Jeff.Dasovich@ENRON.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 2:32 PM
To: Aaron Thomas
Subject: RE: IMPORTANT ! !


did i miss the call?  all i'm getting is music.

-----Original Message-----
From: Aaron Thomas [mailto:aaron.thomas@aesmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 11:34 AM
To: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: RE: IMPORTANT ! !


Jeff
 
I asked ARMers to get together by phone today on this.  Can you make it?  
 
Here is the number
 

How do folks feel about a call on this subject today.  Say around 2 PM
Pacific.
 
If this works for folks, lets use my dial-in number
 
888.621.9536
PC *3957889*
 
Aaron

-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff [mailto:Jeff.Dasovich@ENRON.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 8:49 AM
To: Dan Douglass; ARM; Vicki Sandler; Todd Torgerson; Tamara Johnson; Mara,
Susan; Steve Schleimer; Steve Huhman; Roger Pelote; Rob Nichol; Randy
Hickok; Peter Blood; Nam Nguyen; Karen Shea; Jim Crossen; Janie Mollon; Jack
Pigott; Greg Blue; George Vaughn; Gary Ackerman; Ed Cazalet; Denice Cazalet
Purdum; Curtis Kebler; Curt Hatton; Corby Gardiner; Charles Miessner;
Carolyn Baker; Bill Ross; Alden Hoekstra; Max Bulk
Cc: Gregg Klatt; Ed Duncan; Erica.Manuel@edelman.com; Fairchild, Tracy
Subject: RE: IMPORTANT ! !


Thanks, Dan.  I'm having a very difficult time seeing how Enron will have
any choice other than to vigorously (and respectfully) 1) decline to offer
up any contracts and 2) assert our view that Karl Wood it is unfair to
attempt to impose any quid pro quo, i.e., forcing folks to waive their due
process rights by declining to hand contracts over to Karl.
 
Best,
Jeff

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Douglass [mailto:douglass@energyattorney.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 9:58 AM
To: ARM; Vicki Sandler; Todd Torgerson; Tamara Johnson; Mara, Susan; Steve
Schleimer; Steve Huhman; Roger Pelote; Rob Nichol; Randy Hickok; Peter
Blood; Nam Nguyen; Karen Shea; Jim Crossen; Dasovich, Jeff; Janie Mollon;
Jack Pigott; Greg Blue; George Vaughn; Gary Ackerman; Ed Cazalet; Denice
Cazalet Purdum; Curtis Kebler; Curt Hatton; Corby Gardiner; Charles
Miessner; Carolyn Baker; Bill Ross; Alden Hoekstra; Max Bulk
Cc: Gregg Klatt; Ed Duncan; Erica.Manuel@edelman.com; 'Fairchild, Tracy'
Subject: IMPORTANT ! !


Attached is a ruling issued yesterday by Commissioner Wood directing that
ESPs and customers file copies of direct access contracts with the
Commission by December 3.  The contracts will be available to ALL other
parties who sign a "suitable" protective order.  The Ordering Paragraphs
read as follow:

1.     By December 3, 2001, any party who believes that it has a direct
access contract or agreement potentially affected by an order to suspend
direct access as of July 1, 2001 or a date earlier than September 20, 2001,
shall submit a true and correct copy of each of the actual contracts or
agreements along with any arguments as to the impact of such an order.  A
failure to submit this information for the Commission's consideration will
be considered a waiver of the arguments related to claims involving the
contracts and agreements.  Initially, the true and correct copy of each of
the actual contracts or agreements shall be filed under seal with the
Commission's Docket Office and served on Administrative Law Judge (ALJ)
Robert Barnett.

2.     Office of Ratepayer Advocates shall work with the parties who have
executed direct access contracts or agreements to develop a proposed
protective order and nondisclosure agreement for Commission staff, which
shall be submitted to ALJ Barnett by December 3.  

3.     The electric service providers and customers who are parties shall
work with other parties and shall jointly submit a proposed protective order
and nondisclosure agreement that will cover parties other than Commission
staff by December 11, 2001. 

4.     Parties' supplemental comments to the comments they filed in response
to the October 23rd Assigned Commissioner Ruling shall be submitted by
January 4, 2002.


As a preliminary matter, of course, AReM and WPTF do not, in their own
names, have direct access contracts.  However, certain members of AReM and
WPTF are direct parties to the proceeding and need to consider what course
they wish to take.  The group also needs to consider if they wish to fight
this Order on Constitutional or procedural grounds.  I will be considering
our options and get back to you with more detail.  However, as a very
preliminary analysis, it is evident that the Commission does not have
jurisdiction over either ESPs or the customers they serve.  The request is
also particularly outrageous because of the statements that, "A failure to
submit this information for the Commission's consideration will be
considered a waiver of the arguments related to the claims involving the
contracts and agreements" and "Parties to this proceeding may have access to
these contracts and agreements after the appropriate protective order and
nondisclosure agreements are in effect."  The former is a likely denial of
due process and the latter exposes proprietary contracts and pricing
information to ESP competitors and exposes sensitive pricing information to
competitors of energy-dependent customers.  
 
Your thoughts would be appreciated.  My initial reaction  is that this is
time for ESPs and customer groups, such as CMTA, ABAG, CLECA, CIU, EPUC,
SPURR, etc., to band together and fight this at multiple levels, from the
Governor's Office on down, including in the media.  Your thoughts would be
very much appreciated.
 
Dan
 
Law Offices of Daniel W. Douglass
5959 Topanga Canyon Blvd.  Suite 244
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Tel:   (818) 596-2201
Fax:  (818) 346-6502
 <mailto:douglass@energyattorney.com> douglass@energyattorney.com



**********************************************************************
This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate and
may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the
intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by
others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or
authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply
to Enron Corp. at enron.messaging.administration@enron.com and delete all
copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) are not
intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a
binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of its
affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not be
relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise.
Thank you. 
**********************************************************************