FW: IMPORTANT ! ! ,
 How do folks feel about a call on this subject today.  Say around 2 PM Paci=
fic.
=20
If this works for folks, lets use my dial-in number
=20
888.621.9536
PC *3957889*
=20
Aaron
=20
=20
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Douglass [mailto:douglass@energyattorney.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 7:58 AM
To: ARM; Vicki Sandler; Todd Torgerson; Tamara Johnson; Sue Mara; Steve Sch=
leimer; Steve Huhman; Roger Pelote; Rob Nichol; Randy Hickok; Peter Blood; =
Nam Nguyen; Karen Shea; Jim Crossen; Jeff Dasovich; Janie Mollon; Jack Pigo=
tt; Greg Blue; George Vaughn; Gary Ackerman; Ed Cazalet; Denice Cazalet Pur=
dum; Curtis Kebler; Curt Hatton; Corby Gardiner; Charles Miessner; Carolyn =
Baker; Bill Ross; Alden Hoekstra; Max Bulk
Cc: Gregg Klatt; Ed Duncan; Erica.Manuel@edelman.com; 'Fairchild, Tracy'
Subject: IMPORTANT ! !


Attached is a ruling issued yesterday by Commissioner Wood directing that E=
SPs and customers file copies of direct access contracts with the Commissio=
n by December 3.  The contracts will be available to ALL other parties who =
sign a "suitable" protective order.  The Ordering Paragraphs read as follow=
:

1.     By December 3, 2001, any party who believes that it has a direct acc=
ess contract or agreement potentially affected by an order to suspend direc=
t access as of July 1, 2001 or a date earlier than September 20, 2001, shal=
l submit a true and correct copy of each of the actual contracts or agreeme=
nts along with any arguments as to the impact of such an order.  A failure =
to submit this information for the Commission's consideration will be consi=
dered a waiver of the arguments related to claims involving the contracts a=
nd agreements.  Initially, the true and correct copy of each of the actual =
contracts or agreements shall be filed under seal with the Commission's Doc=
ket Office and served on Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Robert Barnett.

2.     Office of Ratepayer Advocates shall work with the parties who have e=
xecuted direct access contracts or agreements to develop a proposed protect=
ive order and nondisclosure agreement for Commission staff, which shall be =
submitted to ALJ Barnett by December 3. =20

3.     The electric service providers and customers who are parties shall w=
ork with other parties and shall jointly submit a proposed protective order=
 and nondisclosure agreement that will cover parties other than Commission =
staff by December 11, 2001.=20

4.     Parties' supplemental comments to the comments they filed in respons=
e to the October 23rd Assigned Commissioner Ruling shall be submitted by Ja=
nuary 4, 2002.

As a preliminary matter, of course, AReM and WPTF do not, in their own name=
s, have direct access contracts.  However, certain members of AReM and WPTF=
 are direct parties to the proceeding and need to consider what course they=
 wish to take.  The group also needs to consider if they wish to fight this=
 Order on Constitutional or procedural grounds.  I will be considering our =
options and get back to you with more detail.  However, as a very prelimina=
ry analysis, it is evident that the Commission does not have jurisdiction o=
ver either ESPs or the customers they serve.  The request is also particula=
rly outrageous because of the statements that, "A failure to submit this in=
formation for the Commission's consideration will be considered a waiver of=
 the arguments related to the claims involving the contracts and agreements=
" and "Parties to this proceeding may have access to these contracts and ag=
reements after the appropriate protective order and nondisclosure agreement=
s are in effect."  The former is a likely denial of due process and the lat=
ter exposes proprietary contracts and pricing information to ESP competitor=
s and exposes sensitive pricing information to competitors of energy-depend=
ent customers. =20
=20
Your thoughts would be appreciated.  My initial reaction  is that this is t=
ime for ESPs and customer groups, such as CMTA, ABAG, CLECA, CIU, EPUC, SPU=
RR, etc., to band together and fight this at multiple levels, from the Gove=
rnor's Office on down, including in the media.  Your thoughts would be very=
 much appreciated.
=20
Dan
=20
Law Offices of Daniel W. Douglass
5959 Topanga Canyon Blvd.  Suite 244
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Tel:   (818) 596-2201
Fax:  (818) 346-6502
douglass@energyattorney.com <mailto:douglass@energyattorney.com>
e-mail <.arm@enron.com>, jeff.dasovich@enron.com