Praise the lord and pass the ammunition, Edison appears to agree with us in
opposing PG&E's petition.  Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony.Archer@sce.com [mailto:Anthony.Archer@sce.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2000 10:35 AM
To: sesco-lf@att.net; kmccrea@sablaw.com; johnj@bradyberliner.com;
defrawis@efaches.navfac.navy.mil; rcsstl@cdmnet.com;
mbrubaker@consultbai.com; wcamp@mail.pnm.com; fspasaro@socalgas.com;
napedersen@jonesday.com; athomas@newenergy.com; mwynne@gridservices.com;
afinley@mwd.dst.ca.us; lisa_g_urick@calpx.com; douglass@arterhadden.com;
utilities@azusa.ca.gov; rjuels@scwater.com; burkee@cts.com;
dbb@sdcity.sannet.gov; jleslie@luce.com; pszymanski@sempra.com;
stan.marks@nrgenergy.com; mshames@ucan.org; jwalsh@sdge.com;
information@competisys.com; dkolk@compenergy.com; rboyd@enron.com;
btenney%landuselaw.com.@sce.com; dhmaynor@worldnet.att.net;
furutanj@efawest.navfac.navy.mil; chrisk@cellnet.com;
mdjoseph@adamsbroadwell.com; fosterbc@sce.com; lhubbard@sempra.com;
bfinkelstein@turn.org; yladso19@idt.net; jes@cpuc.ca.gov;
chrisw@greenlining.org; susan.brown@lif.org; imoosen@gralegal.com;
oshirock@pacbell.net; pxo2@pge.com; phanschen@mofo.com;
scarter@nrdc.org; rschmidt@bartlewells.com; chilen@llgm.com;
bloomje@la.whitecase.com; blunden@hotmail.com; mrostker@gmssr.com;
spbl@cwclaw.com; rgex@skjerven.com; mday@gmssr.com;
lindseyhowdowning@dwt.com; ssmyers@hooked.net; rochmanm@spurr.org;
rumla@earthlink.net; igsinc@ix.netcom.com; wbooth@booth-law.com;
mgomez1@bart.gov; askaff@energy-law-group.com; pjpowerlaw@aol.com;
steves@schiller.com; rbw@mrwassoc.com; difellman@energy-law-group.com;
dmarcus@slip.net; gmorris@emf.net; tomb@crossborderenergy.com;
brbarkovich@earthlink.net; pmcdonnell@txues.com;
mpretto@ci.santa-clara.ca.us; elozowicki@sjo.coudert.com;
bmcc@mccarthylaw.com; chrism@mid.org; bill@jbsenergy.com;
cmkehrein@ems-ca.com; pvermeulen@resis.com; lwhouse@el-dorado.ca.us;
cabaker@duke-energy.com; ed@clfp.com; mboccadoro@aol.com;
bob.burt@macnexus.org; abb@eslawfirm.com; pstohr@dbsr.com;
hylaw@pacbell.net; njohnson@ciwmb.ca.gov; kmills@cfbf.com;
conkling@up.edu; jcpaine@stoel.com; danmeek@teleport.com;
dws@keywaycorp.com; terrence.moran@pseg.com; bbarclay@kslaw.com;
dwmp@dwmpdc.com; tgaljhc@aol.com; fpc_ca@pacbell.net; dnorris@sppc.com;
dnelson@sppc.com; RASHORTZ@morganlewis.com; JOHNSONPAMELA@LACOE.EDU;
jsilva@edisonenterprises.com; jbarthrop@powersavers.com;
ewills@globalfrontiers.com; ppejh@west.net; aliciato@msn.com;
jxm@cpuc.ca.gov; saw@cpuc.ca.gov; esa.sf@esassoc.com;
sandreson@mofo.com; epoole@adplaw.com; jasonm@newsdata.com;
eke@aelaw.com; pbray@newpower.com; mathewtrask@earthlink.net;
ell5@pge.com; white@gsb.stanford.edu; rfigueroa@rhainc.com;
gtbl@dynegy.com; sia2@pwrval.com; honest@compuserve.com;
blaising@braunlegal.com; TWETZEL@THERMOECOTEK.COM; pprice@quiknet.com;
jdh@eslawfirm.com; jonathan.teague@dgs.ca.gov; braun@cmua.org;
ddavie@hesinet.com; mpa@aelaw.com; nancy.towne_smith@pacificorp.com;
josterberg@wwpco.com; ang@cpuc.ca.gov; ctd@cpuc.ca.gov; edf@cpuc.ca.gov;
dmg@cpuc.ca.gov; dot@cpuc.ca.gov; yee@cpuc.ca.gov; hms@cpuc.ca.gov;
jjj@cpuc.ca.gov; jsw@cpuc.ca.gov; jab@cpuc.ca.gov; jci@cpuc.ca.gov;
lss@cpuc.ca.gov; mdm@cpuc.ca.gov; mlc@cpuc.ca.gov; wsc@cpuc.ca.gov;
sfc@cpuc.ca.gov; shg@cpuc.ca.gov; scr@cpuc.ca.gov; wsm@cpuc.ca.gov;
dfukumot@energy.state.ca.us; kgriffin@energy.state.ca.us;
mmesseng@energy.state.ca.us; dhungerf@energy.state.ca.us;
LKristov@energy.state.ca.us; mjaske@energy.state.ca.us;
jtachera@energy.state.ca.us
Subject: Response by SCE to Petition by PG&E; and Response by SCE to ALJ
Ruling of 11/28, 12-11-00.


Attached is SCE's Response to Petition By PG&E For Modification of D.
97-10-087

and, Response of SCE to ALJ Ruling of 11-28-00, both in R/I 94-04-021/032.

These documents were filed and served yesterday, 12-11-00, and are being
sent today because of technical difficulties experienced yesterday by SCE.

Please contact me if you cannot access these documents.

Many thanks,

(See attached file: Response of SCE to Pet by PG&E.doc)(See attached file:
Document2_.rtf)

Information in the headers for this message suggest that it
may be spoofed and that its authenticity should be verified.


 - Response of SCE to Pet by PG&E.doc
 - Document2_.rtf