Message-ID: <1553299.1075858675247.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 08:32:03 -0700 (PDT)
From: c..williams@enron.com
To: d..steffes@enron.com, jeff.dasovich@enron.com, b..sanders@enron.com, 
	richard.shapiro@enron.com
Subject: Negative CTC Issues
Cc: vicki.sharp@enron.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Bcc: vicki.sharp@enron.com
X-From: Williams, Robert C. </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=RWILLIA2>
X-To: Steffes, James D. </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Jsteffe>, Dasovich, Jeff </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Jdasovic>, Sanders, Richard B. </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Rsander>, Shapiro, Richard </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Rshapiro>, 'mday@gmssr.com', 'jklauber@llgm.com'
X-cc: Sharp, Vicki </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Notesaddr/cn=dc350363-f761e300-862564c2-54998e>
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Sanders, Richard B (Non-Privileged)\Sanders, Richard B.\EES Neg CTC
X-Origin: Sanders-R
X-FileName: Sanders, Richard B (Non-Privileged).pst

Two questions:

    1.  How do we fight the notion that a FERC retroactive determination of "just and reasonable rates" should be re-injected into the calculation of negative CTCs?  It seems to me that there are at least equitable arguments against that.  Will this be a CPUC or FERC issue?

    2.  Can we use the utilities' underscheduling to push them back on this, legally or in negotiations?   Since they contributed to the market disfunction, shouldn't they have to live with the consequences?