All--  Attached are my proposed edits to the "framework" in redline
form.  The vast majority are simply editorial changes designed to clarify
language without changing the intended meaning.  I would call your
attention to Sections 5.1 and 6.3 as the potentially more substantive
suggestions.  Since the change to 6.3 primarily adds detail to what is
clearly described as a small customer proposal and not an agreed-upon item,
I would hope that it won't cause any problems.  The proposed change to 5.1
is not intended to change the agreed-upon allocation of costs, but simply
to provide us with some badly needed "cover."  Edison undercollections
would be recovered out of "headroom" in existing rates (as was our shared
intention), and those rates could only change as provided in Section
4.  Thus, core customers would not escape any of the charges that they are
expected to bear, but we would provide less of a fat target for others to
shoot at.  I can be available to discuss this further if needed after the
Senate Judiciary committee hearing on the MOU scheduled for Thursday
morning (415-254-3597).
         The proposed letter is another matter altogether.  It is so
replete with language that we find troubling that an attempt to edit it
seemed fruitless.  Lenny will circulate a much shorter proposed alternative
that simply states what the attached document is, without attempting to
characterize people's reasons for supporting it.  If that approach is not
acceptable, then TURN will not sign on to the letter itself but rather will
provide a sentence or two of explanation over our separate
signature.  Hopefully one or the other of these approaches will
work.   Thank you all for your hard work on this effort, but I must confess
that I did not personally find it to be "oddly satisfying."     MIKE






At 04:56 PM 6/27/2001 -0700, Delaney Hunter wrote:
>Folks-
>If you can believe it, here are the final draft and cover letter. Please
>look over both of them carefully. If you are good to go let me know -- I
>still have your signatures from the last cover letter and will use those if
>all are amenable. If there are BIG issues with either document please reply
>to ALL members yourselves - don't make me have to send them out to everyone.
>
>Thanks to all,
>Delaney
>

 - FrameworkEdits.doc