Re: Draft IEP Hydro Comments: Including Attachment

Steven (and all):

I reviewed the draft and have the following comments which I have already
communicated to Diane Fellman, before I realized that you asked for comments
to go through you.

1. Might want to further clarify that the scope of issues addressing
disposition, whether or not the Commission grants an OII, should address
environmental review, market power and interim credit. This should go into
the Introductory section.
2. Page 6, Data that is of a non-confidential nature should be publically
available. Data which is confidential should be available to bidders
subject to a confidentiality agreement. PG&E should also consider other
means to access such data other than through visiting the data room, ie.
electronically.
3. Page 9, CAPPA, in addition to determine whether or not it is appropriate
for the utility to retain the contracts, the Commission should require that
PG&E value these assets, in accordance w/ the draft decision (should be voted
out on Thursday) and in compliance w/ the statute which requires the net
valuation of all above and below market assets.
4. I understand the reason for pursuing interim credit vs. interim
valuation. It is likely to become a semantic discussion though.
5. Suggested that you include the basis of evaluating bids as between
individual bundles and watershed.

Please call me if you have comments/questions. 415-782-7821

"Steven Kelly" <steven@iepa.com< on 11/01/99 07:06:13 AM
Please respond to "Steven Kelly" <steven@iepa.com<

To: Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, "Jake M. Rudisill" <jake@calpine.com<, "Bill
Woods" <billw@calpine.com<, "William F Hall III" <wfhall2@duke-energy.com<,
"Curtis Kebler" <Curtis_l_Kebler@reliantenergy.com<, "Steve Ponder"
<steve_ponder@fpl.com<
cc:

Subject: Draft IEP Hydro Comments: Including Attachment

Oops! I forgot the attachment.
- att1.htm
- Hydro - IEP Limited Protest to PG&E - Draft 11-1-99.rtf