Message-ID: <5601736.1075858660426.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 20:29:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: heather.mathis@enron.com
To: stacey.bolton@enron.com, richard.ring@enron.com, marianne.castano@enron.com
Subject: CA BIZMIX Issues
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-From: Heather Mathis <Heather Mathis/HOU/EES@EES>
X-To: Stacey Bolton <Stacey Bolton/NA/Enron@Enron>, Richard Ring <Richard Ring/HOU/EES@EES>, Marianne Castano <Marianne Castano/HOU/EES@EES>
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \RRING (Non-Privileged)\EESIRenewableEnergy
X-Origin: Ring-R
X-FileName: RRING (Non-Privileged)1.pst

Hello all!

I met with Diann Huddleson today and she clarified some issues for me regar=
ding the DASRing of customers in California.  Unfortunately it wasn't what =
we wanted to hear.

On the easy side of things, all residential customers (PGE, SCE, SDG&E) wer=
e turned back to the utilities starting May 30th (DASRs were submitted and =
they are cycling off now depending upon meter reading cycles, etc.)  These =
customers received a letter letting them know about it.

On the commercial side of things (Diann had no distinctions between small c=
ommercial & large commercial & industrial customers), SDG&E customers have =
been ours all along and have never been DASRed and reDASRed.  In PGE & SCE,=
 IBM behind PGE was also never put through the DASR process and has continu=
ously received our product.  All other PGE & SCE customers were originally =
submitted for DASRing back to the utilities on - January 31!!!!!  That prov=
ides enough issues of its own, but I'll get to that.  PGE did a virtual swi=
tch so as of Jan 31 all these customers became PGE's again, but with SCE, w=
hen a customer was switched depending upon meter reading cycles, etc.  All =
de-DASRed customers were then re-DASRed back to us starting June 21, and Di=
ann indicated that not only all of our old customers were re-DASRed, but ne=
w contracts were being executed and these new customers were also being DAS=
Red to us.  No communication about all of this has been sent to the custome=
rs, but as we discussed, some personal basis notice may have been given to =
our larger customers through the reps.

So - I'm not worried about the residential side - we'll have to send them a=
n annual historical label next April (with perhaps a letter explaining why =
they're still receiving info from us).  As far as the commercial/industrial=
 .......

1.  No notice was provided to probably the majority of the customers.
2.  They've been receiving system mix since Feb 1 and we've been proceeding=
 as if it were actually BIZMIX - i.e. the 2nd quarter labels they just rece=
ived indicated BIZMIX, as appropriate to the customer.
3.  What are the new customers (those as being DASRed to us the first time =
as of June 21) being told they are receiving?  Are they being marketed BIZM=
IX?
4.  As far as dates are concerned for reporting purposes, will we just use =
those given as the date of submission (i.e. Jan 31, May 30, June 21) as it =
is impossible to pinpoint when each individual customer transferred?

Let me know your input.

Heather