Message-ID: <6718758.1075860518671.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 05:53:00 -0800 (PST)
From: tim.belden@enron.com
To: richard.shapiro@enron.com, mark.haedicke@enron.com, 
	richard.sanders@enron.com, greg.whalley@enron.com, 
	james.fallon@enron.com, mary.hain@enron.com
Subject: PX Investigation
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Tim Belden
X-To: Richard Shapiro, Mark E Haedicke, Richard B Sanders, Greg Whalley, James B Fallon, Mary Hain
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Richard_Sanders_Dec2000\Notes Folders\All documents
X-Origin: Sanders-R
X-FileName: rsander.nsf

The attached PDF file summarizes our view (Mary Hain's and mine) of the 
possible outcomes of taking the PX investigation the FERC route or the PX 
Settlement route.  To make a commercial decision, we need to know what 
jurisdiction we would like this case to be settled in and the rules of 
engagement in each jurisdiction.  For example, if we do a FERC filing we must 
meet a "just and reasonable" standard while if we appeal an ADR decision to 
FERC we have to prove that the ADR finding was "Arbitrary and Capricious."  
Please review the attached file and let me know if any of it is wrong.  
Personally, I need more input from legal and regulatory on what our odds of 
winning our in the different juridictions before I can make an informed 
decision.



