RE: Letter to Judge Malcolm - RCS Closing Argument

Commissioner Duque and Commissioner Knight agree that the Commission
should postpone closing argument in this case until after the parties
have had time to consider the SDG&E proposal.  I will issue a ruling in
the next week or two rescheduling the hearing, keeping in mind the
scheduling conflicts some of you have identified.  Mr. Lehrer,  unless I
hear back from you,  I will rely on you to make sure that parties who
might not be on this e-mail list are contacted today about the
cancellation of tomorrow's hearing. Thank you.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Niven, Andrew [SMTP:ALN2@pge.com]
> Sent:	Friday, June 12, 1998 10:19 AM
> To:	'edf@cpuc.ca.gov'; 'kdw@cpuc.ca.gov'; 'malcantar@aandellp.com';
> 'sharon.arceneaux-ebenebe@pacificorp.com'; 'cbaker@ns.net';
> 'bbarkovich@aol.com'; 'blunden@hotmail.com'; 'wbooth@jtcb.com';
> 'abb@eslawfirm.com'; 'mcbyer@earthlink.net'; Counihan, Rick;
> 'rczahar@aol.com'; 'mday@gmssr.com'; 'rumla@earthlink.net';
> 'cte@eslawfirm.com'; 'eelsesser@aandellp.com';
> 'difellman@earthlink.net'; 'bfinkelstein@turn.org';
> 'njfuruta@efawest.navfac.navy.mil'; 'jgray@gmssr.com';
> 'lindseyhowdowning@dwt.com'; 'caj@cpuc.ca.gov';
> 'mdjoseph@adamsbroadwell.com'; 'sjubien@energy.state.ca.us';
> 'rjuels@scwater.com'; 'cmkehrein@ems-ca.com'; 'kkelley@hesinet.com';
> 'chrisk@cellnet.com'; 'dank@edf.com'; 'ronknecht@aol.com';
> 'lkristov@energy.state.ca.us'; 'ylw@aol.com'; 'dlf@cpuc.ca.gov';
> Lehrer, James M; 'jleslie@luce.com'; 'rliebert@cfbf.com';
> 'llk@cpuc.ca.gov'; 'dmarcus@slip.net'; 'bmcc@mccarthylaw.com';
> 'scm@mrwassoc.com'; 'kmccrea@sablaw.com'; 'jeff@jbsenergy.com';
> 'bho@cpuc.ca.gov'; 'mpalme1@ect.enron.com'; 'spatrick@pacent.com';
> 'klpeterson@chrm.com'; 'jep@cpuc.ca.gov'; 'mrostker@gmssr.com';
> 'bwa@slip.net'; 'pschmiege@omm.com'; 'mshames@ucan.org';
> 'askaff@chrm.com'; 'jsole@hooked.net'; 'jsqueri@gmssr.com';
> 'athomas@newenergy.com'; 'vthompso@sdge.com'; 'kim@cpuc.ca.gov';
> 'mwynne@uoc.com'; 'jharris@hrdb.com'; 'rates@dra1.cpuc.ca.gov'; Gross,
> Burton; 'www.powersavers@pacbell.com'; 'napedersen@jonesday.com';
> 'eric@gcnet.org'; 'Quon, Susan L'
> Cc:	Arriola, Paula K
> Subject:	RE: Letter to Judge Malcolm - RCS Closing Argument
> 
> 	To clarify Jim Lehrer's point about scheduling during the weeks
> of
> July 13 and 20, I will be unavailable Wednesday, July 15, through
> Tuesday,
> July 21.
> 
>   	Andy Niven
> 
> > -------
> > From: 	Quon, Susan L[SMTP:QUONSL@sce.com]
> > Sent: 	Thursday, June 11, 1998 3:21 PM
> > To: 	'edf@cpuc.ca.gov'; 'kdw@cpuc.ca.gov';
> 'malcantar@aandellp.com';
> > 'sharon.arceneaux-ebenebe@pacificorp.com'; 'cbaker@ns.net';
> > 'bbarkovich@aol.com'; 'blunden@hotmail.com'; 'wbooth@jtcb.com';
> > 'abb@eslawfirm.com'; 'mcbyer@earthlink.net'; Counihan, Rick;
> > 'rczahar@aol.com'; 'mday@gmssr.com'; 'rumla@earthlink.net';
> > 'cte@eslawfirm.com'; 'eelsesser@aandellp.com';
> 'difellman@earthlink.net';
> > 'bfinkelstein@turn.org'; 'njfuruta@efawest.navfac.navy.mil';
> > 'jgray@gmssr.com'; 'lindseyhowdowning@dwt.com'; 'caj@cpuc.ca.gov';
> > 'mdjoseph@adamsbroadwell.com'; 'sjubien@energy.state.ca.us';
> > 'rjuels@scwater.com'; 'cmkehrein@ems-ca.com'; 'kkelley@hesinet.com';
> > 'chrisk@cellnet.com'; 'dank@edf.com'; 'ronknecht@aol.com';
> > 'lkristov@energy.state.ca.us'; 'ylw@aol.com'; 'dlf@cpuc.ca.gov';
> Lehrer,
> > James M; 'jleslie@luce.com'; 'rliebert@cfbf.com'; 'llk@cpuc.ca.gov';
> > 'dmarcus@slip.net'; 'bmcc@mccarthylaw.com'; 'scm@mrwassoc.com';
> > 'kmccrea@sablaw.com'; 'jeff@jbsenergy.com'; Niven, Andrew;
> > 'bho@cpuc.ca.gov'; 'mpalme1@ect.enron.com'; 'spatrick@pacent.com';
> > 'klpeterson@chrm.com'; 'jep@cpuc.ca.gov'; 'mrostker@gmssr.com';
> > 'bwa@slip.net'; 'pschmiege@omm.com'; 'mshames@ucan.org';
> > 'askaff@chrm.com'; 'jsole@hooked.net'; 'jsqueri@gmssr.com';
> > 'athomas@newenergy.com'; 'vthompso@sdge.com'; 'kim@cpuc.ca.gov';
> > 'mwynne@uoc.com'; 'jharris@hrdb.com'; 'rates@dra1.cpuc.ca.gov';
> Gross,
> > Burton; 'www.powersavers@pacbell.com'; 'napedersen@jonesday.com';
> > 'eric@gcnet.org'
> > Cc: 	Arriola, Paula K
> > Subject: 	FW: Letter to Judge Malcolm - RCS Closing Argument
> > 
> > >
> > >Dear Judge Malcolm:
> > >
> > >I am sending this note on behalf of Southern California Edison,
> Pacific
> > Gas &
> > >Electric, and San Diego Gas & Electric.  The three utilities
> believe that
> > >there would be value in conducting a closing argument in advance of
> the
> > oral
> > >argument to the full Commission.  We recommend, however, that the
> date of
> > the
> > >closing argument be postponed, for two reasons.
> > >
> > >First, the Commissioners may wish to hear argument on the proposed
> > agreement
> > >between SDG&E and certain other parties.  We understand that the
> proposed
> > >agreement is still being discussed, and SCE and PG&E have not been
> > advised of
> > >its details.  It seems appropriate to postpone the closing argument
> until
> > the
> > >proposed agreement has been made public and the parties have had an
> > >opportunity to evaluate how it might apply to SCE and PG&E.
> > >
> > >Second, the closing argument may be more helpful once the record is
> > closed
> > >and the parties' positions more fully defined.  Under the current
> > schedule,
> > >the Commission will receive additional rebuttal testimony after the
> > closing
> > >argument.  Moreover, the Commissioners may benefit from seeing the
> > parties'
> > >briefs in advance of the argument.
> > >
> > >For these reasons, the three utilities propose that the oral
> argument be
> > >rescheduled to a date after the reply briefs have been filed.
> Because
> > >counsel for SCE and PG&E will be unavailable the week of July 13,
> we
> > suggest
> > >the argument be scheduled the week of July 20 or thereafter.
> > >
> > >Thank you for your kind consideration of our suggestion.
> > >
> > >			Very truly yours,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >			James M. Lehrer
> > >
> > >
> > 
.