[Watchdogs] Austin Water Rates

CBMassmann at aol.com CBMassmann at aol.com
Wed May 20 10:41:30 CDT 2009


Just because some other utility is using a given billing strategy doesn't  
make it correct. If a water line or a pump breaks why should the higher user 
pay  disproportionately more to have it repaired?   Why  should the high 
user pay more of the office expense for billing and  collecting?   
 
 
In a message dated 5/20/2009 10:26:26 A.M. Central Daylight Time,  
stlouis_98 at hotmail.com writes:

More  on Austin City Water Rates:
Under 2000 Gallons:  98 cents per  1000 gallons
Over 15000 Gallons:  $7.63 per 1000  gallons

The rates per 1000 gallons increase at 2000 gallons, 9000  gallons and 
15000 gallons.  


> From:  watchdogs-request at pec4u.org
> Subject: Watchdogs Digest, Vol 13, Issue  15
> To: watchdogs at pec4u.org
> Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 12:00:13  -0500
> 
> Send Watchdogs mailing list submissions to
>  watchdogs at pec4u.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World  Wide Web, visit
> http://pec4u.org/mailman/listinfo/watchdogs
>  or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>  watchdogs-request at pec4u.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing  the list at
> watchdogs-owner at pec4u.org
> 
> When replying,  please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re:  Contents of Watchdogs digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's  Topics:
> 
> 1. Rewarding Conservation (alfred stlouis)
> 2.  Re: Rewarding Conservation (Paul Langston)
> 3. Austin Energy (Williams,  Mark (San Antonio))
> 
> 
>  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>  
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 16:40:15 -0500
>  From: alfred stlouis <stlouis_98 at hotmail.com>
> Subject:  [Watchdogs] Rewarding Conservation
> To:  <watchdogs at pec4u.org>
> Message-ID:  <BAY105-W2818366A2A741C813509CDFA5A0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type:  text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
> 
> 
> I reviewed the  rate structure of the City of Austin water utility: it is 
an inverted rate  structure, and the big residential user, the water hogs, 
pay about 7 times  more per gallon than the most conservative user of water, 
users who use 2000  gallons or less per month. This type of rate structure 
rewards conservation  with cheaper rates and it penalizes the heavy user 
with higher costs.  Al
> 
> > From: watchdogs-request at pec4u.org
> >  Subject: Watchdogs Digest, Vol 13, Issue 14
> > To:  watchdogs at pec4u.org
> > Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 12:00:11 -0500
>  > 
> > Send Watchdogs mailing list submissions to
> >  watchdogs at pec4u.org
> > 
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via  the World Wide Web, visit
> >  http://pec4u.org/mailman/listinfo/watchdogs
> > or, via email, send a  message with subject or body 'help' to
> >  watchdogs-request at pec4u.org
> > 
> > You can reach the  person managing the list at
> > watchdogs-owner at pec4u.org
>  > 
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more  specific
> > than "Re: Contents of Watchdogs digest..."
> >  
> > 
> > Today's Topics:
> > 
> > 1. As  President Reagan would say "There you go again" (Mark Williams)
> >  2. Re: increasing the (effective) rate as we cut our power usage
> >  (Mike M)
> > 3. Sufficiently Schooled! (Mark Williams)
> >  4. Re: Sufficiently Schooled! (Bill Christensen)
> > 
> >  
> >  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>  > 
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 19:53:08  -0500
> > From: "Mark Williams" <skyewill at gvtc.com>
>  > Subject: [Watchdogs] As President Reagan would say "There you go
>  > again"
> > To: "'Paul Langston'" <langston at zeecon.com>,  <joesummy at moment.net>,
> > "'Racis, Michael'"  <michael.racis at peci.com>, "'Paul Hilgers'"
> >  <paul.hilgers at peci.com>
> > Cc: watchdogs at pec4u.org
>  > Message-ID:  <E6B51C1B8DD748A29455DDDA3E787733 at FAMILYDESKTOP>
> >  Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> > 
> >  Paul
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > As President  Reagan would say, "There you go again". The rate does not
> > change  when you conserve power. Every one pays the same rate for
> >  electricity and the same meter fee for the same class of customer.
>  > 
> > 
> > 
> > Why is this so hard for you to  figure out?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  Mark
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _____ 
>  > 
> > From: watchdogs-bounces at pec4u.org  [mailto:watchdogs-bounces at pec4u.org] 
On
> > Behalf Of Paul  Langston
> > Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 11:19 AM
> > To:  joesummy at moment.net; Racis, Michael; Paul Hilgers
> > Cc:  watchdogs at pec4u.org
> > Subject: Re: [Watchdogs] "PEC partners with  TexasIsHot campaign"
> > pressrelease
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Dear Joe: Thanks for fowarding the Press Release  of May 15, 2009.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I  assume that your new partners, TexasIsHot, are aware that under the
>  > present rate schedules, PEC shows its appreciation for conserving 
power  by
> > increasing the rate as we cut our power usage.
> >  
> > Regards, Paul Langston
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > 
> > From:  joesummy at moment.net 
> > 
> > Cc: watchdogs at pec4u.org  
> > 
> > Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 9:39 AM
> >  
> > Subject: [Watchdogs] "PEC partners with TexasIsHot campaign"  press 
release
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
>  > Please consider the attached PEC press release. The release  highlights
> > PEC's new conservation partnership with TexasIsHot.  readers.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > The press  release has been formatted as MS Word document.
> > 
> >  
> > _____ 
> > 
> > 
> >  _______________________________________________
> > 
> >  
> > _____ 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > An HTML  attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL:  
<http://pec4u.org/pipermail/watchdogs/attachments/20090517/1918b402/attachment-0001.html>
>  > 
> > ------------------------------
> > 
> >  Message: 2
> > Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 18:23:53 -0700 (PDT)
>  > From: Mike M <mikemcgmail-bucks at yahoo.com>
> > Subject:  Re: [Watchdogs] increasing the (effective) rate as we cut our
> >  power usage
> > To: 'Paul Langston' <langston at zeecon.com>,  watchdogs at pec4u.org
> > Message-ID:  <918721.78845.qm at web82608.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> > Content-Type:  text/plain; charset="utf-8"
> > 
> > Paul,
> > I  see Mark, the new apologist for the PEC old guard, is insufficiently 
schooled  in the impact, ?on the ratepayer, of fixed costs and variable 
costs.? Of  course, the rate for electricity is the variable cost, i.e., use 
more, pay  more.? But what he denies is the impact of the fixed cost, the 
meter fee.? The  fee bears an inversely proportional impact on the ratepayer.? 
The conserver of  energy feels a greater burden from the fee than does the 
heavy user.
>  > That's why there has been so much interest here in the proposed change 
to  the fee.
> > Mike
> > 
> > --- On Sun, 5/17/09,  Mark Williams <skyewill at gvtc.com> wrote:
> > 
> >  From: Mark Williams <skyewill at gvtc.com>
> > Subject:  [Watchdogs] As President Reagan would say "There you go again"
> >  To: "'Paul Langston'" <langston at zeecon.com>, joesummy at moment.net,  
"'Racis, Michael'" <michael.racis at peci.com>, "'Paul Hilgers'"  
<paul.hilgers at peci.com>
> > Cc: watchdogs at pec4u.org
>  > Date: Sunday, May 17, 2009, 7:53 PM
> > 
> > 
>  > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > Paul
> > ?
> > As President Reagan would say,  ?There you go again?.? The rate does 
not change when you conserve power.?  Every one pays the same rate for 
electricity and the same meter fee for the  same class of customer.
> > ?
> > Why is this so hard for  you to figure out?
> > ?
> > Mark
> > ?
>  > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > From:  watchdogs-bounces at pec4u.org [mailto:watchdogs-bounces at pec4u.org] 
On Behalf Of  Paul Langston
> > Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 11:19 AM
> >  To: joesummy at moment.net; Racis, Michael; Paul Hilgers
> > Cc:  watchdogs at pec4u.org
> > Subject: Re: [Watchdogs] "PEC partners with  TexasIsHot campaign" 
pressrelease
> > ?
> > 
> >  Dear Joe:? Thanks for fowarding the Press Release of May 15, 2009.
>  > 
> > ?
> > 
> > I assume that your new  partners, TexasIsHot, are aware that under the 
present rate schedules, PEC  shows its appreciation for conserving power by 
increasing the rate as we cut  our?power usage.
> > 
> > Regards, Paul Langston
>  > 
> > ?
> > 
> > 
> > ----- Original  Message ----- 
> > 
> > From: joesummy at moment.net 
>  > 
> > Cc: watchdogs at pec4u.org 
> > 
> > Sent:  Sunday, May 17, 2009 9:39 AM
> > 
> > Subject: [Watchdogs]  "PEC partners with TexasIsHot campaign" press 
release
> > 
>  > ?
> > 
> > Please consider the attached PEC press  release. The release highlights
> > PEC's new conservation  partnership with TexasIsHot.? readers.
> > 
> > 
>  > 
> > The press release has been formatted as MS Word  document.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  _______________________________________________
> > 
> >  
> > 
> >  ?_______________________________________________
> > Watchdogs  mailing list
> > Watchdogs at pec4u.org
> >  http://pec4u.org/mailman/listinfo/watchdogs
> > NEW INSTRUCTIONS: To  remove yourself from this list, please send an 
email to
> >  watchdogs-request at pec4u.org with UNSUBSCRIBE in the SUBJECT line. Or 
go  to
> > http://pec4u.org/mailman/listinfo/watchdogs
> > and  follow the instructions at the bottom of the page. 
> >  -------------- next part --------------
> > An HTML attachment was  scrubbed...
> > URL:  
<http://pec4u.org/pipermail/watchdogs/attachments/20090517/bc1ea608/attachment-0001.html>
>  > 
> > ------------------------------
> > 
> >  Message: 3
> > Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 20:41:55 -0500
> >  From: "Mark Williams" <skyewill at gvtc.com>
> > Subject:  [Watchdogs] Sufficiently Schooled!
> > To:  <mikemcgmail-bucks at yahoo.com>
> > Cc:  watchdogs at pec4u.org
> > Message-ID:  <95B79C6353EF48A085711D493001363F at FAMILYDESKTOP>
> >  Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> > 
> >  >>From far me supporting the old guard. I can wait until all of them  
are
> > gone.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  If you want the true economic impact to the customer, you would 
support  the
> > $39.90 monthly meter fee and the lower per KWH power cost.  Anything 
else is
> > sending the wrong economic signal.
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > Support the $39.90 per month meter  fee and the operating costs of PEC 
would
> > drop more quickly  because everyone would be on the board of directors 
for
> > cost  control now!
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > The  conserver of energy needs to feel the correct cost, not some  
subsidized
> > cost.
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > I am more than sufficiently schooled in the impact as I used to  run the
> > economic and planning department of a very large company.  Now I run 
part of
> > the marketing department for the company and in  2008, I managed over 
$3.8
> > billion in sales. Yes that is right  BILLION.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I think the  interest here is for the heavy consumer to subsidize the 
low
> >  consumer. Nothing more.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  Mark
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _____ 
>  > 
> > From: watchdogs-bounces at pec4u.org  [mailto:watchdogs-bounces at pec4u.org] 
On
> > Behalf Of Mike M
>  > Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 8:24 PM
> > To: 'Paul Langston';  watchdogs at pec4u.org
> > Subject: Re: [Watchdogs] increasing the  (effective) rate as we cut our
> > powerusage
> > 
>  > 
> > 
> > 
> > Paul,
> > 
>  > I see Mark, the new apologist for the PEC old guard, is  insufficiently
> > schooled in the impact, on the ratepayer, of fixed  costs and variable
> > costs. Of course, the rate for electricity is  the variable cost, i.e., 
use
> > more, pay more. But what he denies  is the impact of the fixed cost, the
> > meter fee. The fee bears an  inversely proportional impact on the 
ratepayer.
> > The conserver of  energy feels a greater burden from the fee than does 
the
> > heavy  user.
> > 
> > That's why there has been so much interest  here in the proposed change 
to
> > the fee.
> > 
>  > Mike
> > 
> > --- On Sun, 5/17/09, Mark Williams  <skyewill at gvtc.com> wrote:
> > 
> > From: Mark  Williams <skyewill at gvtc.com>
> > Subject: [Watchdogs] As  President Reagan would say "There you go again"
> > To: "'Paul  Langston'" <langston at zeecon.com>, joesummy at moment.net, 
"'Racis,
>  > Michael'" <michael.racis at peci.com>, "'Paul Hilgers'"  
<paul.hilgers at peci.com>
> > Cc: watchdogs at pec4u.org
>  > Date: Sunday, May 17, 2009, 7:53 PM
> > 
> >  Paul
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > As President  Reagan would say, "There you go again". The rate does not
> > change  when you conserve power. Every one pays the same rate for
> >  electricity and the same meter fee for the same class of customer.
>  > 
> > 
> > 
> > Why is this so hard for you to  figure out?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  Mark
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _____ 
>  > 
> > From: watchdogs-bounces at pec4u.org  [mailto:watchdogs-bounces at pec4u.org] 
On
> > Behalf Of Paul  Langston
> > Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 11:19 AM
> > To:  joesummy at moment.net; Racis, Michael; Paul Hilgers
> > Cc:  watchdogs at pec4u.org
> > Subject: Re: [Watchdogs] "PEC partners with  TexasIsHot campaign"
> > pressrelease
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > Dear Joe: Thanks for fowarding the Press Release  of May 15, 2009.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I  assume that your new partners, TexasIsHot, are aware that under the
>  > present rate schedules, PEC shows its appreciation for conserving 
power  by
> > increasing the rate as we cut our power usage.
> >  
> > Regards, Paul Langston
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > 
> > From:  <mailto:joesummy at moment.net> joesummy at moment.net 
> > 
>  > Cc: <mailto:watchdogs at pec4u.org> watchdogs at pec4u.org 
> >  
> > Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 9:39 AM
> > 
> >  Subject: [Watchdogs] "PEC partners with TexasIsHot campaign" press  
release
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  Please consider the attached PEC press release. The release highlights
>  > PEC's new conservation partnership with TexasIsHot. readers.
> >  
> > 
> > 
> > The press release has been formatted  as MS Word document.
> > 
> > _____ 
> > 
>  > _______________________________________________
> > 
>  > _____ 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  _______________________________________________
> > Watchdogs mailing  list
> > Watchdogs at pec4u.org
> >  http://pec4u.org/mailman/listinfo/watchdogs
> > NEW INSTRUCTIONS: To  remove yourself from this list, please send an 
email to
> >  watchdogs-request at pec4u.org with UNSUBSCRIBE in the SUBJECT line. Or 
go  to
> > http://pec4u.org/mailman/listinfo/watchdogs
> > and  follow the instructions at the bottom of the page. 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > -------------- next part --------------
>  > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL:  
<http://pec4u.org/pipermail/watchdogs/attachments/20090517/20f0d68c/attachment-0001.html>
>  > 
> > ------------------------------
> > 
> >  Message: 4
> > Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 23:49:59 -0500
> >  From: Bill Christensen <billc_lists at greenbuilder.com>
> >  Subject: Re: [Watchdogs] Sufficiently Schooled!
> > To:  watchdogs at pec4u.org
> > Message-ID:  <a06230922c6369400a16f@[192.168.50.3]>
> > Content-Type:  text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
> > 
> > At  8:41 PM -0500 5/17/09, Mark Williams wrote:
> > >From far me  supporting the old guard. I can wait until all of them 
are gone.
> >  >
> > >If you want the true economic impact to the customer,  you would 
> > >support the $39.90 monthly meter fee and the lower  per KWH power 
> > >cost. Anything else is sending the wrong  economic signal.
> > 
> > Actually, the *best* economic  signal - and one that many here have 
> > been trying to drive home -  is to push to reduce the high expense 
> > load which accounts for  that high monthly per-meter cost, not to roll 
> > over and accept  $39.90/month as what it *should* cost.
> > 
> > The real  meat of the question is to find out why it's so high 
> > compared to  other coops. Is it because of the size or density of the 
> > service  area? Is it because upper management is paid too much? Is 
> > it  because the operation is running inefficiently or wasting 
> >  resources?
> > 
> > >
> > >Support the $39.90  per month meter fee and the operating costs of 
> > >PEC would  drop more quickly because everyone would be on the board 
> > >of  directors for cost control now!
> > 
> > Though true, I  don't think that would be a wise approach. The 
> > pitchforks are,  like, all pointy and the torches pollute the air ;-)
> > 
>  > >
> > >The conserver of energy needs to feel the correct  cost, not some 
> > >subsidized cost.
> > 
> >  However, there's nothing wrong in my book with penalizing the 
> >  flagrant non-conserver with stepped-up rates.
> > 
> > Hand  in hand with that, there should be a weatherization/energy 
> >  conservation team who can help those with extremely inefficient homes 
>  > identify and fix the worst problems for a reasonable fee. Those fees  
> > could be spread out over the projected payback period in cases  of 
> > true economic hardship, so that the consumer wouldn't  actually pay 
> > any more than they would have without the  conservation measures, but 
> > would require less energy (especially  important during peak) and once 
> > paid back would be paying  reduced bills.
> > 
> > >
> > >I think the  interest here is for the heavy consumer to subsidize the 
> > >low  consumer. Nothing more.
> > >
> > 
> > Perhaps.  Or perhaps it's in making PEC look at where the big leaks 
> > are  and plugging them, saving all of us money and making for a more 
> >  efficient company overall.
> > 
> > 
> > --  
> > Bill Christensen
> >  <http://greenbuilder.com/contact/>
> > 
> > Green  Building Professionals Directory:  
<http://directory.greenbuilder.com>
> > Sustainable Building  Calendar: <http://www.greenbuilder.com/calendar/>
> > Green  Real Estate: <http://www.greenbuilder.com/realestate/>
> >  Straw Bale Registry: <http://sbregistry.greenbuilder.com/>
> >  Books/videos/software: <http://bookstore.greenbuilder.com/>
> >  
> > 
> > ------------------------------
> >  
> > _______________________________________________
> >  Watchdogs mailing list
> > Watchdogs at pec4u.org
> >  http://pec4u.org/mailman/listinfo/watchdogs
> > 
> >  
> > End of Watchdogs Digest, Vol 13, Issue 14
> >  *****************************************
> 
>  _________________________________________________________________
>  Hotmail? has ever-growing storage! Don?t worry about storage limits.
>  
http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Storage?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_Storage1_052009
>  -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was  scrubbed...
> URL:  <http://pec4u.org/pipermail/watchdogs/attachments/20090518/56df25
05/attachment-0001.html>
>  
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
>  Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 11:46:43 -0500
> From: "Paul Langston"  <langston at zeecon.com>
> Subject: Re: [Watchdogs] Rewarding  Conservation
> To: "alfred stlouis" <stlouis_98 at hotmail.com>,  <watchdogs at pec4u.org>
> Message-ID:  <3DE43725E97F49EFAFC8695E2EF5A5DB at langston>
> Content-Type:  text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
> 
> Dear Al: Same with the  Austin Energy. I have a condo in Austin but I am 
not there often. The rate for  those who use 500KWH or less is 8.4 cents per 
KWH. Austin Energy helps with  conservation. But, what do they know? PEC 
charges $73.40 for that 500 KWH and  that averages at 14.68 cents per KWH. 
Compare 8.4 cents to 14.68  cents.
> Austin Energy charges only $6.00 fee for the meter. All the  info is on 
the bill for the customer to see. PEC is fast changing from a rural  co-op to 
an urban co-op. Old habits have to change.
> Sincerely, Paul  Langston
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: alfred stlouis  
> To: watchdogs at pec4u.org 
> Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 4:40  PM
> Subject: [Watchdogs] Rewarding Conservation
> 
>  
> I reviewed the rate structure of the City of Austin water utility: it  is 
an inverted rate structure, and the big residential user, the water hogs,  
pay about 7 times more per gallon than the most conservative user of water,  
users who use 2000 gallons or less per month. This type of rate structure  
rewards conservation with cheaper rates and it penalizes the heavy user with 
 higher costs. Al
> 
> -------------- next part  --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:  
<http://pec4u.org/pipermail/watchdogs/attachments/20090519/f20c5f03/attachment-0001.html>
>  
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
>  Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 11:54:33 -0500
> From: "Williams, Mark (San  Antonio)" <Mark.Williams at valero.com>
> Subject: [Watchdogs] Austin  Energy
> To: "watchdogs at pec4u.org" <watchdogs at pec4u.org>
>  Message-ID:
>  <90F88E7E0E63FA4DA61B879BB0F3B0360493FDD7DA at MSSAVS80.corp.valero.com>
>  Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Doesn't Austin  Energy have a nuke in their power portfolio?
> 
> 
>  
> From: watchdogs-bounces at pec4u.org  [mailto:watchdogs-bounces at pec4u.org] 
On Behalf Of Paul Langston
> Sent:  Tuesday, May 19, 2009 11:47 AM
> To: alfred stlouis;  watchdogs at pec4u.org
> Subject: Re: [Watchdogs] Rewarding  Conservation
> 
> Dear Al: Same with the Austin Energy. I have a  condo in Austin but I am 
not there often. The rate for those who use 500KWH or  less is 8.4 cents per 
KWH. Austin Energy helps with conservation. But, what do  they know? PEC 
charges $73.40 for that 500 KWH and that averages at 14.68  cents per KWH. 
Compare 8.4 cents to 14.68 cents.
> Austin Energy charges  only $6.00 fee for the meter. All the info is on 
the bill for the customer to  see. PEC is fast changing from a rural co-op to 
an urban co-op. Old habits  have to change.
> Sincerely, Paul Langston
> ----- Original  Message -----
> From: alfred  stlouis<mailto:stlouis_98 at hotmail.com>
> To:  watchdogs at pec4u.org<mailto:watchdogs at pec4u.org>
> Sent: Monday,  May 18, 2009 4:40 PM
> Subject: [Watchdogs] Rewarding  Conservation
> 
> I reviewed the rate structure of the City of  Austin water utility: it is 
an inverted rate structure, and the big  residential user, the water hogs, 
pay about 7 times more per gallon than the  most conservative user of water, 
users who use 2000 gallons or less per month.  This type of rate structure 
rewards conservation with cheaper rates and it  penalizes the heavy user 
with higher costs. Al
> 
> --------------  next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>  URL:  
<http://pec4u.org/pipermail/watchdogs/attachments/20090519/b448fd50/attachment-0001.html>
>  
> ------------------------------
> 
>  _______________________________________________
> Watchdogs mailing  list
> Watchdogs at pec4u.org
>  http://pec4u.org/mailman/listinfo/watchdogs
> 
> 
> End of  Watchdogs Digest, Vol 13, Issue 15
>  *****************************************

 
____________________________________
Hotmail® goes with you. _Get it on your BlackBerry or iPhone._ 
(http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/Mobile?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tutorial_Mobile1_052
009)   =

_______________________________________________
Watchdogs mailing  list
Watchdogs at pec4u.org
http://pec4u.org/mailman/listinfo/watchdogs
NEW  INSTRUCTIONS: To remove yourself from this list, please send an email 
to  watchdogs-request at pec4u.org with UNSUBSCRIBE in the SUBJECT line. Or go 
to  http://pec4u.org/mailman/listinfo/watchdogs
and follow the instructions at  the bottom of the page. 

**************Recession-proof vacation ideas.  Find free things to do in 
the U.S. 
(http://travel.aol.com/travel-ideas/domestic/national-tourism-week?ncid=emlcntustrav00000002)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://103.greenbuilder.com/pipermail/watchdogs/attachments/20090520/041d0ba1/attachment.html>


More information about the Watchdogs mailing list