Bill,

In light of the response below, let's change gears.  In lieu of preparing the 
three scenarios previously requested, what we would like to do at the 12:30 
pm PSTconference call, in addition to a general discussion of the results of 
your original analysis,  we would like you to modify the study with regard to 
the following 3 issues; 1) Assume that SB47X is not implemented, 2) Utilize a 
9% discount rate, and 3) Assume a dry season as most likely case.  It is our 
hope that you will be able to complete that analysis in time for the call.  
Please express the results in terms of cents/kwh and percentage increase over 
existing commercial/industrial rates.

Thanks.  Look forward to speaking with you later.

Robert




	"Bill Monsen" <wam@mrwassoc.com>
	03/06/2001 10:31 PM
		 
		 To: Robert.Neustaedter@enron.com
		 cc: ryy@mrwassoc.com, rbw@mrwassoc.com
		 Subject: Re: California Rate Assessment (371.35)


Robert,

Thanks for the note. A conference call at 12:30 pm PST would work for us.
However, on that call, we will not be able to present results of the
additional scenarios that you defined in your e-mail. The model that we
used was an annual rate model. The analysis that you are proposing would
require a monthly model, which would take additional time to develop.
Perhaps we should discuss this prior to the call at 2:30 pm CST. Roger and
I will give you a call when we get into the office on Wednesday morning.
This should be around 11 am CST.

Best regards,

Bill

At 05:32 PM 3/6/01 , Robert.Neustaedter@enron.com wrote:
>Bill and Roger,
>
>Thanks for the quick turn-around on the analysis.  I hope the weekend was
>not totally ruined.  After review of the study, we thought it would be
>useful to further expand the scenarios into a Worst, Base and Best Case.
>The scenarios we would like you to run are outlined in the attached file.
>Each scenario would reflect a wet, dry and normal weather case.
>Please note that each scenario has a different date for surcharge
>implementation.  The Best Case reflects the date included in your original
>analysis.  Along those lines, would you please expand on the rationale for
>assuming the 1/01/02 implementation date.
>
>In addition to reflecting the rate impact on a cents per kwh basis, please
>include a percent impact as well.
>
>Like our original request, we are on a fast-track.  We would like to
>schedule a conference call for 2:30 p.m. central time Wednesday (March 7)
>to discuss the results of your analysis.  Hopefully, the data you have
>already generated can be quickly "massaged" to accomodate the scenarios
>requested.
>
>Please call me at 713 853 3170 if you have any questions.
>
>Robert
>
>(See attached file: California Rate Scenarios.doc)