text
stringlengths 1
1.59M
| meta
dict |
|---|---|
Thanks Peter. I'm actually looking for the Master Agreement, not the initial
facility agreement. I know that Paul (or someone) had converted the original
master agreement from WordPerfect to Word. I thought it would be handy to
have the file.
Thanks,
Kay | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Hey Guys.
I had a long talk with NCPA today and set up so that we again can do the
ZP26/NP15 Buy-Resale on a Realtime basis. We are not doing a profit split
this time, we are paying them $25/MW instead. This basically enables us to
shift 21MW across PATH15 and not be subject to Congestion as NCPA has
Grandfather Rights across the path. This is a sweet strategy when the
SP15/NP15 spread is there and PATH15 is congested. NCPA's capacity is 21MW,
but I would not recommend doing more than 20MW. There are others who know
about this opportunity but are not currently using it (WESCO especially). So
by doing only 20MW we do not remind them of NCPA.
The way this works is that we call NCPA and ask their capacity across PATH15.
And tell them you want to schedule the BR through whatever hour.
IN CAPS:
We sell to NCPA in ZP26.
We buy from NCPA in NP15.
We can buy SP15 to fill our ZP26 sale (we just shift the load from SP15 to
ZP26, so enter a EPMI CALPOOL).
PG&E is NCPA's SC, so if you are not passing Phase two give them a call.
NCPA's tel#: (916) 786-3520
PG&E tel# : (415) 973-1969
If you guys have any questions just ask me.
Geir | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
----- Forwarded by Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT on 01/31/2001 02:13 PM -----
Lou Stoler
01/30/2001 11:18 AM
To: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: ISDA Schedule
----- Forwarded by Lou Stoler/HOU/ECT on 01/30/2001 11:17 AM -----
"Robert Stephens" <[email protected]>
01/29/2001 06:13 PM
To: "W. Cleland Dade" <[email protected]>, "Heather Brown"
<[email protected]>, "Richard Rice" <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: ISDA Schedule
Attached is a draft of the Schedule to the ISDA. As representatives of
Enron, including the Enron lawyers ultimately responsible for the preparation
of the Schedule, have not yet had the chance to review the foregoing it
remains subject to their further comments.
- #1249108 v2 - ISDA SCHEDULE - METALS.doc | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
I haven't looked at this yet, but I wanted to get it to you. I'll send the
terms and conditions separately.
Kay
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 12/06/2000 05:33
PM ---------------------------
"Thompson, Peter J." <[email protected]> on 12/06/2000 05:30:01 PM
To: "Kay Mann (E-mail)" <[email protected]>
cc: "Pipitone, Paul" <[email protected]>, "Cobb, Chris"
<[email protected]>
Subject: Exhibits to the CA Energy Development Agreements
Attached please find clean and blackline versions of the exhibits to
the CA Energy Development Agreements.
To complete the exhibits, we need to include the following:
1. Exhibits B-1, H-2 and R need to be added.
2. Do we need to add language to section B of Exhibit A-1 because
these are dual fuel turbines?
3. Should the scope be changed in Exhibit B because these are dual
fuel turbines?
4. In Section 3.1 of Exhibit K, the terms "Specific Date" and
"Recovery Schedule" are not defined.
5. For Exhibit T, please confirm that Enron has received all of the
documents that it should have received by now.
6. If required, we need to have a Seller Parent Guaranty for
Exhibit C-1.
<<Exhibits to CA Development Turbine Agreement.DOC>> <<Exhibits to CA
Energy Break-Out Agreements.DOC>>
- Exhibits to CA Development Turbine Agreement.DOC
- Exhibits to CA Energy Break-Out Agreements.DOC | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Czesc Ludmilo,Wicku i Wicusiu
Co slychac. W Polsce zimno, ponuro, w Gdansku aktualnie odwilz, co sprzyja
grypie. Uciekamy przed grypa na tydzien do Bialki Tatrzanskiej pod
Zakopanem. Bylismy tam w zeszlym roku przez 4 dni w zimie i bardzo nam sie
podobalo. Gory w zimie sa naprawde piekne. Bylismy pierwszy raz w zimie w
gorach od 25 lat.
Bardzo bedziemy chcieli wpasc jutro do Pabianic (albo w drodze powrotnej do
Gdanska). Nie wiem, czy to sie uda, bo wieczor zapada bardzo wczesnie, a ja
nie moge jezdzic w nocy. Latwo sie mecze i szybki zasypiam .Bylem u Twoich
dziewczyn we wrzesniu, przypominalem sobie stare czasy jak nocowalismy u Was
z rodzicami, ojciec siedzial na lezaku pod jablonia. Ech.
Bylo, minelo.Slyszalem, ze Wicusiowi idzie nadzwyczajnie. Pamietam, jakim Ty
byles ulubienicem taty (Peptydy w Juracie, pamietasz).
Michal ze swoja narzeczona wybiera sie w lecie do Ameryki. Chcialby
podszkolic sie w angielskim i przy okazji troche popracowac. Oboje studiuja
medycyne na trzecim roku. Jak myslisz, mogliby znalezc prace w Houston ? Czy
moglbys im w tym pomoc ? Oni chcieliby tylko znalezc prace, nie chca Was w
niczym absorbowac.
Co o tym myslisz ?
Jak bedziesz znowu w Polsce, daj znac. Musze z przyjemnoscia powiedziec, ze
poglady polityczne Eli, Jadzi i nasze sa identyczne. Nawet nie mamy sie o co
poklocic. Generalnie sie zgadzam z Balcerowiczem, ale uwazam, ze
reforma zdrowia jest do d. Doznajemy tego na wlasnej skorze.
Trzymajcie sie cieplo i do uslyszenia.
Pa,pa Adam T. [email protected] | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Fletch & wife
Dorland & wife
Lorenz & friend
King & wife | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
From discussions with PACAF, USARAK and the NAVFAC Contracting Officers, we
are aware of the following procurements that are intended to be released as a
multi-base effort with a single solicitation. This supersedes my last
transmission on this subject, because the Navy has just released a new RFI
for a grouped series of bases in California.
1. Navy, Southwest.
a. Pt Huneme/Pt Mugu were intended as the first procurement on a bundled
basis, but they are on hold awaiting funding for Phase 2. They need to do
life cycle cost analysis, system condition assessment, and inventory. A
draft RFP will be issued to industry for comment. The final RFP,
optimistically (according to the NAVFAC SWDiv Commander) could be out as
early as this quarter. Doug Powell, the Contracting Officer, says a more
realistic date is April-May of 2000. However, Ralph Torres, the NAVFAC
Business Line Manager for this procurement, is attending a PACFLT meeting
this month in Hawaii to try to hurry this up.
b. A new RFI has just hit the street, due 15 Nov 99, for electrical, gas,
water, and wastewater privatization at 5 USN locations in Southern
California. These are Naval Warfare Assessment Station, Corona, CA; Naval
Air Station, Fallon, NV; Naval Air Station, Lemoore, CA; Naval Weapons
Station, Seal Beach, CA (Main Station); and Naval Weapons Station, Seal
Beach, CA (Detachment Fallbrook).
2. Marines,Southwest.
a. NAVFAC intends to combine 29 Palms, MCLB Barstow, MCAS Yuma and MCRD
San Diego into one procurement. We have responded to the RFI, as we have in
the case of the Navy, 1.a, above. NAVFAC has has funding for Phase 2 for
Barstow and 29 Palms, but not for the other two yet. The RFP is expected to
hit the street in the April-May, 2000 time frame.
b. NAVFAC intends to combine Camp Pendleton, a large base in CA, with a
small base used for mountain warfare training at Bridgeport, CA. The
combination is being made for funding lines and chain of command reasons.
The real plum here is the very large Marine base at Pendleton. The RFP is
currently scheduled for release April, 2000, but we think it will be a few
months later to have the above 4-base procurement hit the street first.
3. Navy, Northwest. NAVFAC intends to release virtually all their
Northwest activities in a single solicitation. This includes the following
locations:
-Naval Subase bangor
-Camp Wesley Harris
-Olalla Housing
-Port Hadlock
-Naval Undersea Warfare Center, Keyport
-Naval Station Bremerton
-Naval Hospital Bremerton
-Jackson Park Naval Houising
-Naval Fuel Depot Manchester
-Naval Station Everett
-Naval Radio Station Jim Creek
-MWR Pacific Beach
-Naval Air Station Whidbey Island
EFSI was invited to present at their Industry forum in Seattle where this
procurement was announced on 4 Aug 99. An RFI is out, with response due 15
Nov 99. The final RFP is scheduled to be released in Jan 01.
4. Joint Regional Privatization Project (JRUPP) Alaska. This is an
agreement with the USAF and the US Army to combine their facilities at
Elmendorf AFB, Kulis ANG Base, the Army National Guard Base, and Ft
Richardson all into a single procurement. DESC is the project manager. An
RFI for these locations just hit the street. Our retired friend, USAF COL
Don Michael Bradford instigated this joint procurement, and is still a good
source of information in the Pacific. Procurement is being accelerated with
the USAF catching up to where the Army is, so schedule for an RFP is
currently unknown. USAF RFIs have just been published. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
I put your $500 check on your bed. Nice ZERO points this week. Do you not want the $630? I only pulled a 5. Really hurts me. But mathematical I still have a chance.
-----Original Message-----
From: Taylor, Michael E
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 9:34 AM
To: 'Doug Block'
Subject: RE: FedEx package
Yes, assuming I get home before the office closes.
I am feeling good as well. I will move up a few spots this week.
-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Block [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 9:26 AM
To: Taylor, Michael E
Subject: FedEx package
I called the 'Stone. They said they are short staffed and may not be able to
put it inside the apartment today. So if its not in there when you get home,
can you pick it up from the office?
Thanks,
Doug Block
Halliburton Audit Services
> * Phone: 713-676-8175
> * Fax: 713-676-3607
> * Email : [email protected]
>
P.S. The winning picks are in. 15 points this week! I'm calling it! | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
We will not agree to the use of the GISB for firm delivery past 30 days. I
will get in touch with Lucci to discuss a master agreement. To speed
things along I will attach a sample of our master for your review. Pending
credits review, we could send you a draft as early as Monday .
Regards,
Debra Perlingiere
Enron North America Corp.
Legal Department
1400 Smith Street, EB 3885
Houston, Texas 77002
[email protected]
Phone 713-853-7658
Fax 713-646-3490 | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Physical only is great! We now await word from Tom.
Thanks!
From: Tana Jones@ECT on 09/26/2000 02:37 PM
To: Camille Gerard/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Tom Moran/HOU/ECT@ECT, Harry M Collins/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: ClickPaper-Woodlands Forest Product
Per our conversation, the above counterparty is approved by Legal to trade
online physical pulp & paper only. We cannot trade financial until Credit
receives financial statements and can determine whether they are an eligible
swap participant or not. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Lisa J. Mellencamp
Enron North America Corp. - Legal
1400 Smith St.
Houston, TX 77002
Tel: (713) 853-7986
Fax: (713) 646-3393
E-mail: [email protected]
----- Forwarded by Lisa Mellencamp/HOU/ECT on 05/17/2001 01:10 PM -----
"BENNETT YOUNG" <[email protected]>
05/17/2001 12:49 PM
To: [email protected], [email protected]
cc: "CARL EKLUND" <[email protected]>, "JOHN KLAUBERG" <[email protected]>,
"JAMES HUEMOELLER" <[email protected]>
Subject: 4799756092ca99bf88256a4a00045971OpenDocument
Judge Montali has issued a tentative ruling on the MidSet QF's motion to
suspend performance under their PPA's. Click on the link below to view a pdf
file containing the 27 page decision.
In summary, the Court's tentative ruling is to deny the QF's request to
suspend the PPA's, to decline to set a deadline for PG&E to assume or reject
the contract and to find that the reasonable rate that PG&E must pay the QF
for energy delivered post petition pending assumption or rejection is the
rate determined by the CPUC in the Wood decision.
The Court then goes on to note that this case is an extraordinary one
requiring extraordinary relief. The Court therefore tentatively ruled that
PG&E should pay some undetermined portion of the pre-petition arrearages to
the QF's in order to ameliorate the burden on the QF's and help get them back
(or keep them) online.
The Court therefore ordered PG&E, MidSet and the Committee to meet and confer
and attempt to reach a resolution of the amount of the arrearage to be paid.
Judge Montali states that "he has it in mind" that the amount perhaps should
be equal to the difference between the Wood rates and the market price.
Call me if you have any questions or have an trouble with the link.
Ben Young
http://www.canb.uscourts.gov/canb/Documents.nsf/bf0c3519af9731c88825671d006664
79/4799756092ca99bf88256a4a00045971?OpenDocument
Bennett G. Young
One Embarcadero Center, Suite 400
San Francisco, California 94111
(415) 951-1167
[email protected]
==============================================================================
This e-mail, including attachments, contains information that is confidential
and may be protected by the attorney/client or other privileges. This
e-mail, including attachments, constitutes non-public information intended to
be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not an intended
recipient, please delete this e-mail, including attachments, and notify me.
The unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this
e-mail, including attachments, is prohibited and may be unlawful.
==============================================================================
- 47997560.url | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
The current versions are all the way at the bottom.
---------------------- Forwarded by Mark - ECT Legal Taylor/HOU/ECT on
06/03/99 09:49 AM ---------------------------
Justin Boyd
05/27/99 11:01 AM
To: Mark - ECT Legal Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Internet Trading - Internet Trading Access and Electronic Trading
Agreements
Mark,
Look forward to your views on the comments expressed by CC, as well as their
minor drafting changes. I have not as yet sent this Sullivan &
Cromwell....may be you would wish to do this as you see fit......
Look forward to seeing you soon in a week or so...
Justin
---------------------- Forwarded by Justin Boyd/LON/ECT on 27/05/99 17:02
---------------------------
Enron Capital & Trade Resources Corp.
From: [email protected] 27/05/99
14:27
To: [email protected]
cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
(bcc: Justin Boyd/LON/ECT)
Subject: Internet Trading - Internet Trading Access and Electronic Trading
Agreements
Further to our meeting yesterday, please find attached a copy of the
Internet Trading Access Agreement ("ITAA") and the Electronic Trading
Agreement ("ETA") marked up with my suggested changes from an English law
perspective. As I mentioned to you yesterday, these documents will also
need to be considered by the overseas lawyers to see whether there are any
overriding local laws which could impact on the use. The overseas lawyers
have copies of these agreements and will include this in their report.
I understand that it is envisaged that the ITAA will be signed off line and
the ETA will be posted on the Website. Each person authorised by a
counterparty with a password must "click through" the Agreement before
commencing trading. This will only be done on one occasion.
We discussed yesterday the risks associated with this approach, namely, that
a counterparty could claim that at the time of entering into the ITAA it was
not aware of the terms of the ETA and therefore, could not be bound by it.
It is clearly important to have certainty that the terms of the ETA are
enforceable as they contain important terms such as indemnities, limitations
of liability etc. Having said that, the view might be taken that by
entering into the ITAA all that has been achieved is that a counterparty
receives a password which enable the counterparty to put itself in a
position where it must consider the ETA before proceeding. Once the
counterparty accesses the Website and sees the ETA a second contract is made
and the ITAA and ETA must then be read together but only at the time that
the counterparty has clicked through the ETA. I suspect that this is the
approach that Sullivan & Cromwell had in mind. It is also worth bearing in
mind that a counterparty may ask for the ETA at the time of entering into
the ITAA or may be relunctant to click through the ETA until they have had
internal legal sign off. This may delay trading.
Nonetheless, I understand that you are keen to proceed with signing the ITAA
off line and the ETA on line and accordingly, the attached documents are
marked up with that structure in mind. As agreed yesterday, I have only
made changes to the document produced by Sullivan & Cromwell where I think
it is necessary for English law purposes or clarification. I have the
following brief comments on the changes I have made:
1. Parties: You will see that both documents are entered into by a
designated
Enron entity for itself and on behalf of all Enron group
undertakings. The reason
for this is that Transactions will actually be made between the
counterparty and
various different Enron entities. We therefore need to ensure that
such Transactions
with each of those Enron entities are governed by the terms of these
documents.
I note from your e-mail yesterday that it was suggested that we need
to list the affiliates
or have one entity enter into the Transactions. I think there may
be some confusion here.
This is not the case. I assume that the current Enron entities
which trade certain
commodities with certain counterparties will continue to do so on
the Website.
The Website will need to be set up in such a way as to achieve this
but I assume that this
causes no problem as each counterparty will see different pages on
the Website depending
on what password has been inserted. The documents now contemplate
this.
2. "Services": I have removed the references to Services as I am not
sure what this means.
I would have thought that these agreements need to govern the
counterparty's access and
utilization of the Website whether or not they actually carry out
any Transactions. Therefore,
I believe that where the Agreement had previously referred to
Services, it can now refer to
"access and utilization of" the Website.
3. Contract Formation: I have inserted a short paragraph in Clause 3
of the ETA which
provides that a Transaction will only be executed once Enron
generates a message of
confirmation of the sale and purchase to a Counterparty and that any
electronic records
of Enron will prevail. I note that Sullivan & Cromwell envisage a
document being attached
which explains this. This is also acceptable.
4. Data Protection: On reflection, it will be more appropriate for
relevant data protection
wording to be on the Website itself rather than in the ITAA or ETA.
This is because the
data protection concerns revolve around data subjects i.e. living
individuals, rather than
corporate entities such as the Counterparty. Before providing
appropriate wording for
this, could you please let me know what information will be
collected by you concerning
living individuals either intentionally or unintentionally. For
example, when a password is
entered will you be able to identify a living individual by this or
can you intentionally or
unintentionally obtain that individual's e-mail address or other
information on them once
they have entered the Site. You will need to check this with your
technical people.
Once you have had a chance to review this perhaps you could let me have your
comments.
I have simultaneously sent this e-mail to my financial regulatory colleagues
for their review. They may have further comments which we will send onto
you as a matter of urgency.
Kind regards
Andrew Wilkinson
<<EnronAgC.doc>> <<EnronAgMU.rtf>> <<TradingAgc.doc>>
<<TradingAgMU.rtf>>
- EnronAgC.doc
- EnronAgMU.rtf
- TradingAgc.doc
- TradingAgMU.rtf | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
SCOTT'S WEATHER FOR 6/5/2001
-----------------------------------------------------------
=========================
YOUR WEATHER CHANGE ALERT
=========================
Houston, TX
Thunderstorms expected Tuesday
weather.com
http://ww9.lfmn.com/s/s.asp?q=1004428047l1c141500r2297e1S8180
Detailed Forecast
http://www.weather.com/weather/local/USTX0617
Storm Watch
http://ww9.lfmn.com/s/s.asp?q=1004428047l3c141500r2297e1S8180
-----------------------------------------------------------
**ADVERTISEMENTS**
-----------------------------------------------------------
SCOTT'S weather.com
Improve My weather Profile
http://ww9.lfmn.com/s/s.asp?q=1004428047l1c163279r2297e1s8180
Change My Registration Information
http://ww9.lfmn.com/s/s.asp?q=1004428047l2c163279r2297e1s8180
Unsubscribe
http://ww9.lfmn.com/s/s.asp?q=1004428047l3c163279r2297e1s8180
Contact Us
http://ww9.lfmn.com/s/s.asp?q=1004428047l4c163279r2297e1s8180
Privacy Policy
http://ww9.lfmn.com/s/s.asp?q=1004428047l5c163279r2297e1s8180
Powered by LifeMinders.com
http://ww9.lfmn.com/s/s.asp?q=1004428047l7c163279r2297e1s8180
Your e-mail address on record with Weather.com is [email protected].
Weather.com e-mails are never sent unsolicited. Weather.com only sends e-mails to registered members. If you would like to unsubscribe, please click below.
http://ww9.lfmn.com/s/s.asp?q=1004428047l6c163279r2297e1s8180
or send an email with "unsubscribe" in the subject line to [email protected].
Copyright ? 2000 Weather.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
---------------------- Forwarded by Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT on 04/06/2000
07:30 AM ---------------------------
Mark McClure
04/05/2000 02:55 PM
To: Donna Greif/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Robert Superty/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathryn Bussell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert
Cotten/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gary L Payne/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Pinion/HOU/ECT@ECT,
George Smith/HOU/ECT@ECT, Katherine L Kelly/HOU/ECT@ECT, Randall L
Gay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Edward Terry/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bryce
Baxter/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Sitara Release (Re: Changes in Global due to Consent to
Assignment)
Volume Management should be fine with this change. All name changes will be
still attached to the original path of the Buy/Sell deal. The Settlement
Group will have to make sure that the new name that is being added to the
deal has the appropriate 'Statement Group' attached. Other than that this
change should flow smoothly.
Thanks,
m.m.
From: Donna Greif
04/05/2000 01:18 PM
To: Kathryn Bussell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert Cotten/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark
McClure/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gary L Payne/HOU/ECT, Richard Pinion/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert
Superty/HOU/ECT@ECT, George Smith/HOU/ECT@ECT, Katherine L Kelly/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Randall L Gay/HOU/ECT@ECT, Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Edward
Terry/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Dave Nommensen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Diane E Niestrath/HOU/ECT@ECT, Carrie
Hollomon/HOU/ECT@ect, Bryce Baxter/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathryn Cordes/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Dana Daigle/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Elizabeth L Hernandez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Julie
Meyers/HOU/ECT@ECT, B Scott Palmer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephanie Sever/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Dianne J Swiber/HOU/ECT@ECT, Peggy Hedstrom/CAL/ECT@ECT, Dianne
Seib/CAL/ECT@ECT, Sylvia A Campos/HOU/ECT@ECT, Linda S Bryan/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Faye Ellis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Consemiu/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Mills/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Russ Severson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Martha Stevens/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karie
Hastings/HOU/ECT@ECT, Regina Perkins/HOU/ECT@ECT, Imelda Frayre/HOU/ECT@ECT,
William E Kasemervisz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Hunaid Engineer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven
Gullion/HOU/ECT@ECT, Larrissa Sharma/HOU/ECT@ECT, Thomas Engel/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Sitara Release (Re: Changes in Global due to Consent to
Assignment)
FYI....
This change went in for the Deal Validation group. It gives them the
ability to change counterparties names after bridge back.
Impact to Logistics - Unify
If a counterparty name change takes place to deals that have been bridge
backed, it could cause problems on EDI pipes as that new counterparty name
will flow over to Unify and repathing should eventually take place.
One problem may be with the Imbalance data sets, which are not in production
yet......(EDI Imbalance Qtys would not match up to paths)
This may also cause an issue with the scheduled quantities (especially where
nominations were sent for entire month)
can't remember the rules on this one, but I think Unify does have some safe
guards (idiot proofs) to force re-pathing.
Unify does have the ability to over-ride duns numbers, yet would still cause
an additional step for EDI the scheduler would need to think through in order
to get a clean quick response.
What are (if any) impacts to Vol Mgt if counterparty name changes take
place? (prior periods? re-pathing?)
I have a call into Diane and Dave both. After speaking w/ them, hopefully I
can get a clear understanding of the true impact. I am sure we'll need to
put some processes and procedures together for Deal Validation to follow when
these type of changes are needed.
Will keep you posted.
Thanks,
dg
From: Thomas Engel 04/05/2000 09:44 AM
To: Kathryn Cordes/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dana Daigle/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Elizabeth L
Hernandez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Julie Meyers/HOU/ECT@ECT, B Scott Palmer/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Stephanie Sever/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dianne J Swiber/HOU/ECT@ECT, Peggy
Hedstrom/CAL/ECT@ECT, Dianne Seib/CAL/ECT@ECT
cc: Sylvia A Campos/HOU/ECT@ECT, Linda S Bryan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Faye
Ellis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Consemiu/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Mills/HOU/ECT@ECT, Russ
Severson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Martha Stevens/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karie Hastings/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Regina Perkins/HOU/ECT@ECT, Imelda Frayre/HOU/ECT@ECT, William E
Kasemervisz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Hunaid Engineer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steven
Gullion/HOU/ECT@ECT, Larrissa Sharma/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Greif/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Sitara Release (Re: Changes in Global due to Consent to Assignment)
Regarding the ability to change counterparties on deals in SITARA with
confirmed volumes - Tom's words of caution:
If someone calls you and wants to change a counterparty - we created the
ability for you to invalidate the deal - and
then change the counterparty - however - I did add a warning message:
"Warning - changing counterparty on deal with confirmed volumes - make sure
pipeline allows this change."
Some pipelines do not allow us to change counterparties after there is
feedback - I assume for the same reasons
we had this rule - it used to blow up our old scheduling systems
(pre-UNIFY). Some pipelines will require a new
deal and we will have to zero out the old deal.
Before you make the change - make sure the logistics person is aware - just
in case it causes problems with their
pipeline. Sorry - I don't know which pipes these are - you will have to ask
the UNIFY team.
There is one rule still in place - you can change from ENA-IM East to ENA-IM
Market East - but not from
ENA-IM Texas to HPLC-IM HPLC - when changing business units - they must be
the same legal entity.
"Warning - not the same legal entity"
Also - beware of making contract and counterparty changes to Service deals
(Transport Capacity, Storage, Cash Out).
Once the deal is invalidated - there are no rules. Don't forget - the items
were locked down for a reason.
If you invalidate a service deal - and change the previously locked down
data that was validated - and someone used these
deals in UNIFY - it is highly likely that the UNIFY deals and paths created
using these deals will get corrupted. Always check
with someone from UNIFY to make sure no one used these deals for anything in
UNIFY.
---------------------- Forwarded by Thomas Engel/HOU/ECT on 04/05/2000 09:47
AM ---------------------------
From: Scott Mills on 04/04/2000 07:38 PM
To: Kathryn Cordes/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dana Daigle/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Elizabeth L
Hernandez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Julie Meyers/HOU/ECT@ECT, B Scott Palmer/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Stephanie Sever/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dianne J Swiber/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Steve Jackson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Thomas Engel/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sylvia A
Campos/HOU/ECT@ECT, Linda S Bryan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Faye Ellis/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna
Consemiu/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Sitara Release (Re: Changes in Global due to Consent to Assignment)
With the release that was put out Tuesday evening, Deal Validation should be
able to change the counterparty on deals where the volume is something other
than expected (e.g. confirmed, nominated, scheduled, etc.).
In addition, this release will also capture "near-time" the contract changes
that are made in global. This means that need for server bounces will not be
necessary.
New/Changes to contracts will show up without having to get out of deal
manager.
New Counterparties, and new/changes to facilities will require getting out
of all active Sitara apps (except for launch pad).
Once out of all apps, start a new app - the respective information that you
are looking for will appear.
I mention "near-time" because we are constrained by the amount of time it
takes for the change in Global data to trigger an alert for Sitara who then
updates its information
SRM (x33548)
Cyndie Balfour-Flanagan@ENRON
04/04/2000 03:41 PM
To: Connie Sutton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Linda S Bryan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kathryn
Cordes/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Mills/HOU/ECT@ECT, Richard Elwood/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dave
Nommensen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kenneth M Harmon/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dana
Daigle/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Kathryn Cordes/HOU/ECT@ECT, Elizabeth L
Hernandez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Julie Meyers/HOU/ECT@ECT, B Scott Palmer/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Stephanie Sever/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dianne J Swiber/HOU/ECT@ECT, Gayle
Horn/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Brant Reves/HOU/ECT@ECT, Russell Diamond/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Debbie R Brackett/HOU/ECT@ECT, Steve Jackson/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Changes in Global due to Consent to Assignment
The following changes will be made in the Global Contracts database due to
receipt of executed Consent to Assignment for the following contracts:
Current Counterparty Name Contract Type Contract # 'New' Counterparty
Name
CES - Commonwealth Energy Services GISB 96029892 Commonwealth Energy
Services
CES - Samuel Gary Jr. & Associates, Inc GISB 96029302 Samuel Gary Jr. &
Associates
CES - South Jersey Gas Company GISB 96029143 South Jersey Gas Company
CP name change and Contract Type correction (Contract Type different than
that provided by CES)
Per CES
CES - Southwest Gas Corporation 1/1/98 GISB 96029146
Per Contract File
CES - Southwest Gas Corporation 04/14/93 Master Purchase/Sale Interruptible
(will edit Global #96029146)
&
CES - Southwest Gas Corporation 12/01/94 Master Sale Firm (created new
Global record to accommodate this K, #96037402)
Please note that Southwest Gas Corporation has consented to the assignment of
both of these contracts. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Judy,
I thought I was through, but I'm not.....Can you please send up the the
following contracts:
Wisconsin Power & Light 96045691
WPS 96001003
Also, if someone in my group has already checked it out and returned to you,
just tell me who had it and I'll copy off of them (smile!!).
Also, do you have a copy of the GTC. We have no idea what it is, and we're
looking for the non-performance language associated with it.
Thanks! | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
No GCP adjustments.
Best Rgds.
Samuel x3-9890 (GCP Team)
Enron Net Works _ Global Data Management
From: Tom Moran/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/14/2001 02:00 PM
To: Karen Lambert/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Samuel
Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brant Reves/ENRON@enronXgate,
Debbie R Brackett/ENRON@enronXgate, David Hardy/LON/ECT@ECT, Lesli
Campbell/ENRON@enronXgate, Cynthia Clark/ENRON@enronXgate, Enron Europe
Global CounterParty/LON/ECT@ECT, Stephanie Sever/ENRON@enronXgate, Tom
Moran/ENRON@enronXgate, Claudia Clark/ENRON@enronXgate, William S
Bradford/ENRON@enronXgate, Lisa Lees/ENRON@enronXgate, Juana
Fayett/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jana Morse/Corp/Enron@Enron, Trang Le/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Paul Maley/LON/ECT@ECT, Sonya Clarke/LON/ECT@ECT, Tim Davies/LON/ECT@ECT,
Karen O'Day/ENRON@enronXgate, Tanya Rohauer/ENRON@enronXgate, Kelly
Lombardi/NA/Enron@Enron, Brian Lindsay/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, EOL Call Center@ECT, Bill D Hare/HOU/ECT@ect, Amy
Heffernan/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Molly LaFuze/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Danny Clark/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Stephanie Panus/NA/Enron@Enron, Teresa
Mandola/ENRON@enronXgate, Bill Kyle/ENRON@enronXgate, Amber Ebow/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Wendi Lebrocq/ENRON@enronXgate
cc:
Subject: EOL Approvals: 05-11-01 (Re-send)
Please see attached
Regards,
Tom Moran
3-3017 | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
I believe this is the same order that I requested thru Larry. Make sure we don't double the order.
Thanks,
Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: McFarland, Jean
Sent: Thu 7/26/2001 5:16 PM
To: O'Gorman, Karon; Steward, Larry
Cc: Watson, Kimberly; Janousek, Martha; Ferguson, Mark; Abshire, Scott; Fiscus, John
Subject: Marketing Needs
Karon/Larry -- please order 14 15" flat screens (and cards), and 1 Compaq M300 with all accessories (docking station, DVD, memory, bag, additonal larger battery).
Please code everything towards the "Marketing 41k refresh" bucket. I estimate totol purchase amount to be $14,000.
If you have any questions, please let me know. I will be out of the office on vacation tomorrow but can be reached via cell phone-402-689-1333.
Thanks. Jean | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
CALENDAR ENTRY: INVITATION
Description:
BBQ @ Donnie's
Date: 5/19/2001
Time: 2:00 PM - 6:00 PM (Central Standard Time)
Chairperson: Stacey W White
Detailed Description: | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Mill Run ErrDev is loaded.
The following Turbines are missing:
Jan 22 - #1
Jan 24 - #7
Feb 11 - #1, 5, 9
Feb 8 - #4
Turbine #8 for all of January and most of February had to be rebuilt. The
most recent ErrDev files from Turbine #8 are good so the problem has been
corrected.
---------------------- Forwarded by Patricia Hunter/EWC/Enron on 03/29/2002
11:08 AM ---------------------------
Patricia Hunter
03/27/2002 11:08 AM
To: Mark Fisher/EWC/Enron@Enron
cc: Jeff Marecic/EWC/Enron@Enron, Hollis Kimbrough/EWC/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Somerset ErrDev
The first loading of ErrDev is complete. All of the ErrDev for Somerset
have been loaded (29,334 records). Many duplicates were rejected.
I will be anxious to know if the data in the table meets your needs.
I am working on Mill Run ErrDev as I write this email. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Make a Reservation Hope Takes Flight Help us reach our goal of 2.5 million passengers by 12/31/01 and America West will donate 20 million FlightFund miles to the Miles of Hope program, which provides much needed air transportation to participating charities: the American Red Cross, the Make-A-Wish Foundation, Angel Flight and the National Runaway Switchboard. View Details Fare Sales Mexico Getaway Sale America West announces savings to/from select destinations in Mexico with fares as low as $149 roundtrip. No advance purchase is required. View Details Getaway To Florida Sale Take an additional 5% off already low roundtrip fares from any America West city to Orlando, Tampa, Miami or Fort Lauderdale, FL View Details Americawest.com Specials Take advantage of fares starting at $80 roundtrip between select America West cities. View Details $60 Specials Take advantage of fares starting at $60 roundtrip between select America West cities. View Details Mileage Specials Hyatt Triple Miles Earn Triple FlightFund Miles (1,500 total) 10/1/01 through 12/15/01 for every eligible stay at Hyatt on Capitol Square and Hyatt Regency Dallas/Fort Worth. Visit www.hyatt.com or call 800-233-1234 for details. Show your FlightFund card and request offer FFM3M at check-in. Other restrictions may apply. Vacation Specials These rates are effective for stay Saturday, 10/20/01 through Monday, 10/22/01 and do not include airfare. $65/two nights - Circus Circus, Las Vegas, NV $78/two nights - Excalibur, Las Vegas, NV $100/two nights - Riviera, Las Vegas, NV $111/two nights - Monte Carlo, Las Vegas, NV Book online or call America West Vacations at 800- 356- 6611 for details. Weekend Surf'n Go Fares Fares Departure City Destination City Cars Hotels $159 Austin, TX Los Angeles, CA 10% from $49 $219 Chicago, IL (O'Hare) San Francisco, CA 10% from $99 $179 Colorado Springs, CO Reno, NV NA from $29 $179 Columbus, OH Las Vegas, NV 10% from $49 $89 Columbus, OH New York, NY NA from $99 $149 Denver, CO Phoenix, AZ 10% from $59 $99 El Paso, TX Orange/Santa Ana, CA NA from $119 $99 Fresno, CA Phoenix, AZ 10% from $59 $139 Houston, TX (IAH) Phoenix, AZ 10% from $59 $159 Kansas City, MO Phoenix, AZ 10% from $59 $179 Las Vegas, NV Columbus, OH 10% from $65 $69 Las Vegas, NV Los Angeles, CA 10% from $49 $79 Las Vegas, NV Sacramento, CA NA from $119 $159 Los Angeles, CA Austin, TX 10% from $99 $69 Los Angeles, CA Las Vegas, NV 10% from $49 $89 New York, NY (LGA) Columbus, OH 10% from $65 $99 Orange/Santa Ana, CA El Paso, TX NA NA $79 Orange/Santa Ana, CA Phoenix, AZ 10% from $59 $199 Philadelphia, PA Phoenix, AZ 10% from $59 $149 Phoenix, AZ Denver, CO 10% from $49 $99 Phoenix, AZ Fresno, CA NA NA $139 Phoenix, AZ Houston, TX (IAH) 10% from $55 $159 Phoenix, AZ Kansas City, MO 10% NA $79 Phoenix, AZ Orange/Santa Ana, CA NA from $119 $199 Phoenix, AZ Philadelphia, PA NA from $99 $129 Phoenix, AZ Salt Lake City, UT NA from $109 $109 Phoenix, AZ San Francisco, CA 10% from $99 $179 Reno, NV Colorado Springs, CO 10% NA $79 Sacramento, CA Las Vegas, NV 10% from $49 $129 Salt Lake City, UT Phoenix, AZ 10% from $59 $219 San Francisco, CA Chicago, IL (ORD) 10% from $109 $109 San Francisco, CA Phoenix, AZ 10% from $59 $149 Seattle, WA Tucson, AZ NA from $79 $149 Tucson, AZ Seattle, WA 10% from $65 For travel departing Saturday, 10/20/01 and returning Monday, 10/22/01 or Tuesday, 10/23/01. To purchase a Weekend Surf'n Go special fare or make a reservation for Thrifty Car Rental or Hilton/Doubletree/Embassy Suites weekend specials, go to http://www.americawest.com/specials/sp_emailfares-e.asp Surf'n Go Terms and Conditions: Purchase Ticket By: Friday, 10/19/01, 9:00pm PDT Travel Outbound: Saturday, 10/20/01 Travel Return: Monday, 10/22/01 or Tuesday, 10/23/01 Travel On: Flights operated by America West and America West Express Purchased Through: americawest.com Ticket Refundability: Non- refundable Itinerary Changes: Subject to fare availability, $100 change fee, and difference in fare if applicable Minimum Stay: 2 nights Black Out Dates: None Routing: Roundtrip only, Routing restrictions may apply Other Discounts: Not combinable with any other discount Seat Inventory: Limited - subject to availability Federal Excise Tax: $2.75 per flight segment. A flight segment is defined as a take off and landing Passenger Facility Charges: Up to $20 per person, depending on itinerary Car Terms and Conditions Hotel Terms and Conditions America West Vacations Terms and Conditions: Rates quoted are per person, based on double occupancy, and may not apply to groups or during holiday/convention dates as specified by individual hotels. Terms & Conditions apply. Prices and offers are capacity controlled and subject to change; availability is limited. ? 2000 The Leisure Company. CST 2043556- 20 You have received this message because you subscribed to the Surf'n Go messaging service at americawest.com. To unsubscribe to this weekly mailing, please visit http://www.americawest.com/specials/sp_subscribe.asp . | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
TASK ASSIGNMENT
Task Priority: 1
Task Due On: 2/24/2001
Task Start Date:
To register your Palm Computing
organizer electronically, you must have an Internet connection or a modem connected to your computer.
Or if you prefer, you can fill out and send the mail-in registration card included in your Palm Computing package.
Special rewards only for registered users:
-FREE software programs *
-FREE technical support **
-Upgrade information
-Important updates
* For a complete list of free software, go to www.palm.com/eregdownload
** Subject to change without notice | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
The rough agenda is as follows:
1. Update on conversations with CPUC attorneys (Fergus and Day)
2. Update on status of other companies' responses to CPUC subpoena
3. Update on compilation of trading data to be provided to CPUC (Fergus,
Yoder, Hain, Smith, Aamodt)
4. Legal analysis regarding Enron's objection to specific requests and to
CPUC jurisdiction (Day, Fergus, Watkiss)
5. Assignment of tasks to be accomplished | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Attached is the spreadsheet version of the template we discussed this morning. I have added the additional columns everyone requested. I would now like the business unit leads to fill in the blanks such that we have an initial Power Implementation Plan that can be delivered to Louise on Friday.
With respect to East Power (I am out Thursday and Friday), I am delegating to all of my desk heads the responsibility the following:
1) Have all of the forms attached spreadsheet forms complete
2) A product offering sheet is added to the template.
Fletch & Dana - Please take the lead on creating the product offering list (physical and financial). My recommendation is we put products out through 03 for all regions (financial and physical). Obviously, the physical products will be contingent on receiving a power marketing license.
Cory and Don Baughman - Please take a crack at identifying all of the transmission service agreements we need for the East (Christi has started a list already).
Please call me on my cell (713-856-3923) with any questions.
Kevin Presto
Vice President, East Power Trading
Phone: 713-853-5035
Cell: 713-854-3923
Fax: 713-646-8272 | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
she was not. do you need to see the list again to know where to rank her?
-----Original Message-----
From: Grigsby, Mike
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 2:31 PM
To: Slone, Jeanie
Subject: Elizabeth Shim
Was Elizabeth Shim on the list? I can't remember.
Mike | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
You have received this email because you are listed as a security approver.
Please click
http://itcapps.corp.enron.com/srrs/auth/emailLink.asp?ID=000000000009596&Page=
Approval to review and act upon this request.
Request ID : 000000000009596
Request Create Date : 12/7/00 4:03:17 PM
Requested For : [email protected]
Resource Name : EOL US Backoffice Product Data Manager
Resource Type : Applications | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
FYI.... See below.
Thanks to all for your help!
---------------------- Forwarded by Laura Wente/HOU/ECT on 10/31/2000 02:25
PM ---------------------------
"Meyers, Alan" <[email protected]> on 10/31/2000 02:03:00 PM
To: "Laura Wente (E-mail)" <[email protected]>, "Jake Thomas (E-mail)"
<[email protected]>, "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Biltmore Extravaganza
Hope you all made it home in good shape. All of us from Avista got back
pretty much on time.
Please accept our sincere thanks for hosting the three of us and our wives
this past week. The Biltmore experience was truly unique and very much
appreciated by all of us. The meals, rooms, and grounds were all
spectacular. And then there was the SPA--my wife won't stop talking about
it! She doesn't often travel with me, and certainly has never received that
kind of attention on any trip we've made together.
Thanks also for the golf; TPC is definitely the most noteworthy course I've
ever been on. I have a lot of practicing to do before I go back.
All in all, it was great fun. We were expecting it to be just that, but
once again you've exceeded our expectations.
Thanks,
Alan Meyers
Avista Power / Avista-Steag
West 201 North River Drive
Spokane, WA 99201
(509) 495-4533
[email protected] | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Kate, I have a couple of confirms I received from BPA with the following
info. I spoke with BPA and they said that their trader had talked to Sean
Crandall and agreed to Mid Columbia as the Delivery point, however in the
Enpower they have Northwest Delivered. Could you please check into:
#492613.01, 492612.01, 492611.01, 488524.01, 488523.01 These all say NW in
the system but BPA has Mid C on confirm
#491609.01 This trade has a trade date of 1/8/01. But on BPA's confirm they
have a trade date of 1/5/01. Could you ask Mike who did the trade which is
correct?
Thanks,
Kimberly | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
i cannot make it tonight. i have a customer dinner. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
We met with the legislator who is in charge of the Summer 2001
subcommittee today to discuss Enron's buy down proposal. Dave Freeman
had discussed the idea with her previously, however, his version
required that the contract be for a pre-arranged price, based on the
notice you were given presumably by the ISO, i.e. 24 hours = x, 12 hours
= y, etc. Consequently, her concern with our proposal was the
uncertainty of allowing customers to choose whether or not they want to
shut down based on price versus requiring them to shut down to meet
demand, i.e. a modified interruptable.
She requested that we provide her with information about existing buy
down programs and their successes. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
If you want to pick up a player - you need to let me know by today - b/c I
will be on vacation tomorrow. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
will do! All lists are currently under construction. Will you forward your
list as well?
I decided to wait until Thanksgiving to give you G's portrait - is that okay
with you? I CAN send it sooner if you prefer. Her school pics are in now
too.
Sorry I didn't call back last night. We were toy shopping with Grandma Sally
and then it was time for dinner, etc., etc. and got a call from Mema where
she immediately launched into all of her health problems. Was Dreamy Eric
to your liking?
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, November 13, 2000 2:02 PM
To: Karin Shelton
Subject: message from Santa
Santa is going on a trip to Costa Rica right before Christmas and would
like to finish shopping, er, making gifts prior to the trip...not to
mention Santa has a very busy party schedule once December gets under
way...
wish lists for you, Jim and P-nut would be much appreciated! | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Tana and Mark:
Susan Trevino is now running the reports for NYMEX limits.
If you have any questions,please contact her.
I will be here through the end of the week but thereafter will be in Portland.
If you have any questions, give me a shout.
Many thanks for your patience the last few months.
Best Regards,
Tobin | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Paul,
FYI. This is the document which starts the move into the ABB facility
agreements.
Kay
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 10/23/2000 04:22
PM ---------------------------
"ROB TAYLOR" <[email protected]> on 10/23/2000 04:12:48 PM
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Attached Files
Attached are clean and marked versions of the Purchase Option Assignment and
Assumption Agreement. Please insert the date of the ABB Agreement (p. 1) as
well as descriptive information of the equipment being purchased (Schedule 1).
Please let me know if you have any questions or comments regarding the
attached.
Regards,
Rob Taylor
Andrews & Kurth L.L.P.
Chase Tower
600 Travis Street
Suite 4200
Houston, Texas 77002
Tel: (713) 220-4436
Fax: (713) 238-7273
[email protected]
This e-mail (and any attachment(s) hereto) is intended only for use by the
addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or
confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this
e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this e-mail (and any attachment(s) hereto) is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately
notify me at (713) 220-4436 and permanently delete the original and any copy
of such e-mail and destroy any printout of such e-mail.
- Purchase.DOC
- Purchase.DOC | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Thanks...It just seems like all the time.
Andy Zipper@ENRON
10/24/2000 03:41 PM
To: John Arnold/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: Sunday
FYI regarding Sunday outages.
---------------------- Forwarded by Andy Zipper/Corp/Enron on 10/24/2000
03:38 PM ---------------------------
From: Bob Hillier on 10/24/2000 02:22 PM
To: Andy Zipper/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc: David Forster/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jay Webb/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Sunday
Andy, Here is what I am aware of regarding availability of EOL for Sunday
Trading.
The first Sunday that we opened for trading (I believe it was 10/1), we
experienced a shutdown of the entire site late Saturday which, unfortunately
included our monitors, which is why we were not aware of it until just prior
to trading time. Trading was to open at 2:00pm and we had the site up by
aprox 2:15pm.
I am not aware of any issues on 10/8 and 10/15.
This past Sunday, 10/22 we had a problem with a release that we pushed out on
Saturday. We are working on our release procedures and will make every
effort to have smoother releases in the future.
I hope this answers your questions, if not feel free to give me a call.
3-0305
bbh
Andy Zipper
10/24/2000 09:04 AM
To: Bob Hillier/NA/Enron@Enron, David Forster/Corp/Enron@Enron, Jay
Webb/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: sunday
Can we get to the bottom of this asap.
---------------------- Forwarded by Andy Zipper/Corp/Enron on 10/24/2000
09:02 AM ---------------------------
John Arnold@ECT
10/22/2000 06:23 PM
To: Andy Zipper/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject:
Andy:
I tried to open EOL at 4 on Sunday, but we had systems problems that delayed
the opening until 6:05. This is the third time in four or five sessions when
EOL had problems on Sunday. Anything you can do to improve reliability would
be appreciated.
John | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
andragogy (AN-druh-go-jee) noun
The methods or techniques used to teach adults.
[Andr- variant of andro-, male + (ped)agogy.]
"As all the patients undergoing cataract surgery are mature adults, the
theory of androgogy is more appropriate."
Jean Cooper, Teaching patients in post-operative eye care: The demands
of day surgery, Nursing Standard, Apr 28, 1999.
This week's theme: words from the world of learning and the learned.
.............................................................................
There is nothing like dream to create the future. Utopia to-day, flesh and
blood tomorrow. -Victor Hugo, poet, novelist, and dramatist (1802-1885)
Feeling information overload? Sign off a few mailing lists. If you wish
to unsubscribe from AWAD, send a blank message to [email protected] with
the word unsubscribe in the subject line of your message. Of course, we'd
rather you stay with us. After all, it is only a `word' a day. (-:
Pronunciation:
http://wordsmith.org/words/andragogy.wav
http://wordsmith.org/words/andragogy.ram | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
I am open from 3:00 to 4:00 on Thursday - have to meet with Enron's legal
counsel from Sydney at 4:00, followed by a 4:30 meeting with Delainey on a
proposed asset sale. I have rescheduled my meeting with the Sydney guy
several times this week, and I think this may be my last shot of meeting with
him during this trip. Is an hour sufficient? --Sally
Thomas D Gros@ENRON
10/18/2000 02:38 PM
To: Sally Beck/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: CommodityLogic Demos
Tomorrow at 3:00 works for the demo guys. Is it still OK on your calendar? | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Russ,
Attached are the Central Curve files and their status (old/new).
Ashley R. Worthing
Enron NetWorks
Risk Management - West Desk
713-345-3727 | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
http://www.scottgertner.com/
SPYRO GYRA June
at Scott Gertner's SKYBAR
Smooth, fusion jazz.
Twenty years ago, long before the coining of the radio-generated buzzwords
"New Adult Contemporary" or "Smooth Jazz," Spyro Gyra was jamming and
having a grand old time creating their own instrumental hybrid, incorporating
elements of R&B, Latin, Brazilian -- whatever struck their collective fancy.
Their infectious sound has become a forerunner of today's popular style.
=========================================================
&World Class Entertainment with the Most Spectacular View in Houston8
3400 Montrose Boulevard, Penthouse, Houston, Texas 77006
??????????????????????????????????????????????????? 713.520.9688
713.520.9905 FAX www.scottgertner.com
- 46399 | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Dear Editorial Review Board Members,
For some reason, only one page was attached to your prior email. Attached
this time is the full press release regarding out annual meeting. Let me
know if you have concerns, otherwise we will let Laurie distribute it on
Monday. Sorry for the confusion. Best Regards, JoAnn Garcia
- pr000802.PDF | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
I had to move the Friday, May 12, lunch meeting to a larger conference room.
The meeting will be in EB30C1 from 11:30 am to 1:00 pm.
Kaye | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
We don't have the tickets just yet. I will look into it and try to get them
sometime next week. In the past week we didn't get them until the week
before the tourney. I will let you know ASAP. Talk to you soon.
Ben | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
[email protected] writes to the NYISO_TECH_EXCHANGE Discussion List:
NYISO opens its Virtual Marketplace on November 1. Whether you've
registered to participate in it, are considering doing so, or are
interested in its potential impact on the existing markets, you'll want to
attend one of the two upcoming seminars scheduled for October 16 and 29.
The programs will cover:
NYISO bidding fundamentals - a short overview for those new to the
NYISO marketplace
Virtual Transaction basics
Virtual Transaction entry
Virtual Transaction charges
Billing
Credit requirements
Illustrations and examples
Market Monitoring functions involving Virtual Transactions
Each one-day program will be intensive and practical. It will address your
virtual bidding options and the impact these bids will have on prices in
both the day-ahead and real-time markets. It will give you a good picture
as to how this market works and how your participation may be advantageous
to you.
The day-ahead and real-time markets will change as a result of this new
option. Therefore, this course will be extremely valuable, not only to
those bidding virtual transactions, but also to everyone bidding load or
supply in the existing energy markets.
The course will be run on the following dates as indicated:
October 16 Albany Marriott, 189 Wolf Road, Albany, New York
October 29 Desmond Hotel, 660 Albany-Shaker Road, Albany, New York
Course Registration will begin at 8:00 am and the course will start at 8:30
am. Wrap-up each day will be by 4:00 pm.
Register for the seminar through our web site at:
http://www.nyiso.com/services/training/cinfo/index.html | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Thanks for the note, that was very sweet of you. I always believe in helping
wherever I can, b/c the next day it'll be me! | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
...okay, maybe it's not THAT good but it's cooked and the beer is plentiful.
Hey everyone,
Just wanted to test the waters and see what kind of interest there was in
doing Steak Night tomorrow night at Little Woodrows. I feel like it's been a
while since we really rallied the troops and I know I have personally missed
the interaction. It's also been a while since we've attempted to solve the
worlds problems over cold Shiner and I think the world may be the worse for
it. So, get back to me and let me know if anyone's up for an evening of
eating, drinking and most definitely being merry. If it looks like 'a go',
I'll shoot everyone a follow-up email complete with ETA.
The one and only,
sscott5
"If we could just get everyone to close their eyes and visualize world peace
for an hour, imagine how serene and quiet it would be until the looting
started." | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Drew, I think your last question is the one most critical to us at this point. The marketers can go out and start selling the project but are having a hard time defining how the capacity will be allocated. I left a message yesterday for Mary K. regarding these same issues. Thanks.
Drew Fossum
02/14/2001 04:38 PM
To: Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, [email protected], Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Keith Petersen/Enron@EnronXGate
cc: Shelley Corman/Enron@EnronXGate, Maria Pavlou/Enron@EnronXGate, Steven Harris/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Jeffery Fawcett/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Kevin Hyatt/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Lorraine Lindberg/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
Subject: TW Expansion
There were several questions left for legal/regulatory to work on at the close of our meeting today. I'll try to restate them, and add my initial thoughts, so we can all be sure to focus on the correct problems.
Q 1. Can TW use "negotiated rate" agreements for its new 150 mm/d expansion?
A. Yes. Independence, Guardian, and other new pipeline projects were certificated on the basis of negotiated rate contracts. The only restriction is that we need to always offer cost-based recourse rate service as an alternative to negotiated rates. We hope to use negotiated rate agreements for the entire 150 mm of capacity, but we won't know until the contracts are executed how much of it will be negotiated rate contracts and how much of it will be under recourse rate contracts. I guess that means that in the cert. app., we just tell the commission that we will be 100% at risk and that given the huge interest in the open season, we have no doubts about our ability to sell the full 150. We should also tell the Commission we expect to sell the capacity using negotiated rate contracts or recourse rate contracts or a combination of both.
Q 2. Can we give prospective customers a "cafeteria style" menu of options (to steal Jeff's term), like the following:
1. 5 yr. neg. rate deal at a locked in $.60 plus fuel and surcharges (or whatever number we decide on)
2. 10 y. neg. rate deal at a locked in $.45 plus fuel and surcharges
3. 15 yr. neg rate deal at a locked in $.35 blah blah
4 . 15 yr cost based recourse rate plus fuel and surcharges (importantly this option is not locked in and will float with TW's actual rate levels and fuel retainage percentages)
A. I think the answer here is "yes." Whatever options we come up with for 1, 2, and 3, we will always have to offer 4 as well. Susan and Steve Stojic: please confirm that we have the right to define specific negotiated rate options and stick to them. Otherwise, this negotiated rate approach could get completely unstructured such that we end up with some guys taking our specific options and other guys custom tailoring weird variations (like a 7 yr, 231 day contract at $.51764, for example). I'm not sure that would be a bad thing, but we need to think about it. We need to be sure we can tell a customer "no" and make it stick if he tries to mix and match by asking for the 5 yr term and the $.35 rate, for example. I think we can lay out options of our choosing and then enforce a "no substitutions" policy (this is sticking with the "cafeteria" theme) but we need to be sure.
Q.3. If we can use the "cafeteria options" approach, how much flexibility do we have in structuring the options?
A: This one is hard. We need to be sure that the price and term we choose to offer for options 1-3 is solely within our discretion. We don't want to be second guessed by FERC as to whether we should have offered option 1 at $.58 instead of $.60. Susan and Steve: if you guys confirm that we have discretion in how to structure our negotiated rate options, does that mean we can slant the economics of the negotiated rate options so they are a better deal than the recourse option (for most shippers)? I.e., could we deliberately incent shippers to sign on for the short term deals--i.e., by offering options 1-3 at $.55, $.45 and $.40 instead of the $.60, $.45, and $.35 shown above. I suspect that is what Guardian and the other pipes did to obtain 100% subscription under neg. rate deals.
Q.4. How do we allocate capacity to customers if demand exceeds supply???
A. Ideally, we'd be able to allocate the 150 to the guys who want to buy it the way we'd prefer to sell it. Under the above example, assuming Stan, Danny and Steve decide short term deals are better, what if we get 100 mm/d of offers on each of the 4 rate/term options described above. That's 400 mm/d of demand for a 150 mm/d project. Can we sell 100 to the guys who want option 1 ($.60/5 yrs) and the remaining 50 to the 10 yr/$.45 guys? That really hoses the recourse bidders. Do we have to cover the recourse demand first and then allocate the remaining capacity pro rata to everyone else? Pro rata to everyone? Under the rule that negotiated rate bids have to be deemed to be at max rate for purposes of allocation, pro rata to everyone may be the right answer. Or at least its the answer until we've filled the recourse rate guys' orders, then we can give the remaining capacity to the neg. rate guys whose bids we value most highly (using some objective nondiscriminatory calculation of course). Ugh.
Susan and Steve--please take a crack at questions 2-4. I think 1 is answered already. I haven't done any research yet, so maybe these questions are easier than they currently seem to me. Get me and MKM on the phone at your convenience to discuss. We've gotta move quick so the marketers can get out and sell this stuff. DF | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Attached are some articles concerning further development and elaboration on
the California power crisis and testimony to the Senate Energy, Utilities and
Communications Committee by the CEO of CAL-ISO concerning the power
issues/problems.
Testimony before Senate Energy, Utilities & Communications Committee And the
Assembly Utilities & Commerce Committee
By Terry M. Winter, President and CEO
California Independent System Operator
August 10, 2000
An August 10th article from Natural Gas Intelligence that talks of the
defensive posture the California Independent System Operator (Cal-ISO) has
taken concerning the accusations that Governor Davis' emergency electricity
report had made about the new deregulated market.
An article from Natural Gas Intelligence talks about the vote, on July 31st,
by the California Independent System Operator (Cal-ISO) Board to move the
price cap to $250. The pros and cons of the price cap are mentioned, as well
as other remedies for the power situation. Also, there are several comments
in the article from California Senator Steve Peace on how "dysfunctional" the
market is and why it should be restructured. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Hey Becky,
I haven't heard from you in a while. I know, I know, you haven't heard from
me either. I wanted to check in and see how you're doing. I talked to
Shannon and she filled me in on how Megan's doing. I want you to know my
family and I are praying for you guys. I know everyone says this but if
there is anything I can do I'd love to help out. I'm going Christmas
shopping this weekend if you need me to pick up anything for you. I've got
to finish all my shopping and buy something for my mom from my dad. He had a
hip replacement in October and is still hobbling around. He's actually doing
really well considering he had major surgery. I think he expected to be
running marathons by now.
I'd love to tell you at lot of interesting things going on in my life right
now, but unfortunately my life can be summed up in one word right
now...WORK. I think my other group members are trying to kill me this
month. We have a group of three people and at least two have to be here each
day. Well, I have to work a double shift to cover for someone all but one
week this month. So that's pretty much all I have time to do now. In fact
I'm headed home pretty soon to take a nap before my next shift this
afternoon. That is the one bonus of this split shift day.
Let me know how you're doing when you get a chance.
Robin | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
No concerns--I think we ought to go. Thanks. DF
From: Mary Kay Miller 01/18/2001 06:14 PM
To: Drew Fossum/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Coverage of SoNat gas quality tech. conference
For your info- any concern with us attending? We could get some good
intelligence in how FERC is feeling about these quality issues. MK
---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Kay Miller/ET&S/Enron on 01/18/2001
06:10 PM ---------------------------
Nancy Bagot
01/18/2001 02:47 PM
To: Lisa Yoho/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Shelley Corman/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Janet Butler/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Mary Kay
Miller/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Robert Kilmer/FGT/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Coverage of SoNat gas quality tech. conference
Lisa, as the pipelines are very interested, I will be covering Monday's
technical conference on the Producers' petition for a temporary restraining
order to prevent SoNat from shutting in natural gas supply upstream of the
Toca processing plants in Louisiana.
I am happy to send you a copy of my summary of that conference. If you have
particular interests outside of the general legal arguments and Staff
position, let me know and I will listen for your issues as well.
-Nancy | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Rod:
I spoke with their counsel today and he promised to look at the comments that
I sent him a few weeks ago and to try to get this finalized by May 1st. I'll
keep you posted.
Carol | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Is the October 13, rev 3 the final version?
Kay
Rusty Stevens
11/01/2000 12:26 PM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron, Kathleen Carnahan/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Fred Mitro/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: Schaffer Land Option - Pontiac Site
The tract is a 29.46 acre parcel that is just west of the site for our
plant. We need to secure it to prevent other houses from being built on our
perimeter (sound receptors). We have just worked hard to buy the other two
houses adjacent to the property to fix this problem. Its a nice situation
since the tract is long and narrow, so we get maximum sound receptor
protection for minimal acreage purchases. I had sent a memo to Karen Way a
while back asking them to work on this and you cautioned me to make sure I
ran kick off of outside counsel on a project past you first (if that jogs
your memory).
Anyway, this is a finishing touch on Pontiac, and I have promised the
landowner a document a while back, so I would appreciate our turning it to
him in the near future. I have been preoccupied on some stuff in Florida,
but feel badly that we haven't gotten this out to this guy sooner. I will
make the apology phone call (blame the big company lawyers - of course) and
let him know its on its way and not to give up on us.
Kathleen and I have already discussed this today.
How's everything going by the way ? Long time no see.
Kay Mann
11/01/2000 11:27 AM
To: Rusty Stevens/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Kathleen Carnahan/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re: Schaffer Land Option - Pontiac Site
Rusty,
You are going to have to refresh my recollection as to this piece of land.
Kathleen, could you please get with Rusty or Fred to see what's up.
Thanks,
Kay
Rusty Stevens
10/31/2000 11:26 AM
To: [email protected], [email protected], Kay
Mann/Corp/Enron@Enron, Fred Mitro/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Schaffer Land Option - Pontiac Site
I wanted to send out a reminder to everyone that I had indicated to Mr.
Schaeffer that we would be sending him a document last week and to suggest
that we try to get something out to him this week if at all possible.
Since our critical final zoning vote is next Thursday, I want to make sure we
don't give him any reason to get "up in arms" over this issue and start
thinking we have just been leading him along without intending to follow
through on the deal. Mark and Karen have done such an exemplary job on the
zoning (record time) that I don't want anything to get in our way at the
final moment. Mr. Schaeffer is one of the wealthier and more influential
farmers in the area, and has thus far been pretty quiet at the meetings,
however, he pointedly cornered me at the end of our last meeting to ask about
this issue. Lets keep him happy.
Please let me know if we can get it out this week, so I can call him and
apologize for the delay and give him a new improved delivery date of the
draft documents.
Thanks. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Joe:
Did you ever contact them about the confirms that they sent to us? Are they
now signing our confirms? Please advise as to what, if anything, I need to
be doing on this. Thanks.
Carol | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
The enclosed research report is being sent to you from PaineWebber by:
Emery Financial Group
713-957-7020
[email protected]
Please contact them if you have any questions or would like to discuss this
material.
The information contained in the attached research report is believed to be
reliable, but its accuracy is not guaranteed. PaineWebber Incorporated
and/or Mitchell Hutchins Asset Management Inc., affiliated companies and/or
their officers, directors, employees or stockholders may at times have a
position, including an arbitrage position, in the securities described herein
and may sell or buy them to or from customers. These companies may from time
to time act as a consultant to a company being reported upon.
You will need the Adobe Acrobat Reader to view this document. If you don't
already have it just click on this link,
http://www.adobe.com/prodindex/acrobat/readstep.html, and follow the
on-screen instructions. The Acrobat Reader is free of charge.
- P004548420001208D01.pdf | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
i talked with sanders yesterday about our reactions to this subpoena and the one from the state senate. we are having a meeting on monday morning to discuss what to do.
-----Original Message-----
From: Delainey, David
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 8:58 AM
To: Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ENRON
Subject: Attorney General Subpoena--EES Customers and Contracts
As per our discussion - fyi
Delainey
---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/EES on 07/06/2001 08:57 AM ---------------------------
Janet R Dietrich
07/03/2001 05:28 PM
To: Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate
cc: Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES, Kay Chapman/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Attorney General Subpoena--EES Customers and Contracts
Lovely. I would like to discuss this further. Can we set up some time Thursday pm? Kay, will you coordinate a time that works for everyone? Thanks.
---------------------- Forwarded by Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES on 07/03/2001 05:26 PM ---------------------------
From: Robert C Williams/ENRON@enronXgate on 07/03/2001 05:05 PM
To: Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Marty Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: Attorney General Subpoena--EES Customers and Contracts
California counsel have advised us that, in view of the broad authority given the AG to investigate unfair business practices, a court will almost certainly order us to produce our contracts to the AG in response to the outstanding subpoena. For the same reason a motion to quash the subpoena directed to PG&E, which seeks the identity of our customers and their status as direct access or on UDC service, would also likely fail. They recommend that we voluntarily offer to produce the contracts and concentrate on protecting the more sensitive commercial documents (such as the type of documents Dennis Benevides develops) from disclosure. Even with respect to those they are not very optimistic, given that the AG is willing to enter a protective order committing to keep the contents of those documents confidential.
Please let me know if you concur with this recommendation or would like to discuss on a conference call.
P.S. If we do decide to produce our contracts we will first have to notify our customers pursuant to the confidentiality provisions of the contracts.
<Embedded Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)> | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
FYI. Some interesting tid-bits from CMTA.
-----Original Message-----
From: Geri L. Royer [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2001 2:43 PM
Cc: Royer, Geri
Subject: CMTA Legislative Weekly - 10/15/01
The CMTA Fall Conference scheduled for
October 30 - November 2 has been canceled.
_____
Legislative Weekly
October 15, 2001
Issue 40, Volume 3
A weekly publication from the
California Manufacturers & Technology Association
detailing legislative and regulatory developments in Sacramento
ECONOMIC SUMMIT
In the wake of repeated economic blows on the state's business community and announcements of losses, layoffs and declining tax revenues, the Governor has stated his intention to hold an Economic Summit in early November with business and labor leaders, and professional economists to identify and discuss measures to stimulate California's economy. The date and participants will be announced this week. Governor Davis is also considering the possibility of calling a Special Legislative Session to enact such measures immediately. In an effort to avoid or minimize a looming State budget deficit, the Department of Finance has instructed state agencies to cut their budgets by 15%.
CMTA's members are devising a priority list of policies that should be adopted to help mitigate the effects of the international economic cooling and hopefully, stave-off recession in this state.
POWER AUTHORITY MEETING
Renewables and the Power Authority
At an October 5 Consumer Power and Conservation Financing Authority (Power Authority) meeting in San Francisco, Chairman David Freeman acknowledged that renewable peaking capacity may comprise a significant portion of the 15 percent reserve the Authority expects to establish to prevent future price spikes in the cost of electricity.
Freeman indicated that the Authority has received proposals for 18,000 MW in peaker capacity, which have been evaluated and winnowed down to 3,000 MW. While commitments to build these peaker facilities have not yet been formalized, the Power Authority is moving forward with proposals for a few hundred renewable megawatts.
Freeman also indicated that at least two state biomass plants are at risk of shutting down. He believes that these plants should continue to run, despite the high costs associated with this market. Power Authority staff has been asked to look at options to keep the plants operating, and to report back to the Power Authority.
Board member Donald Vial expressed concern at the way in which the Power Authority is looking at the 15 percent reserve. He believes that the reserve should be a working capacity margin used to phase out dirty plants and to move into, and to promote renewables.
Board member John Stevens pointed out that the Power Authority has limited funding with which to purchase peaking capacity, and reminded the members that any plan must reasonably balance the costs associated with the generation capacity.
Department of Water Resources Update
The Power Authority also received a report from staff of the Department of Water Resources (DWR) who indicated that the Department is looking at load curtailment, renewables and new supplies that ideally are north of Path 15. The Department believes it has been instrumental in keeping the spot market under control and minimizing the number of blackouts experienced this summer. The Department also gave a great deal of credit to customers who have been instrumental in preventing blackouts through conservation.
The Department will be updating its energy portfolio needs, and posting its information on its website at www.cers.water.ca.gov, sometime next week.
Public Utilities Commission Natural Gas Infrastructure Report
Barbara Hale, the Director of Strategic Planning at the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) provided an update on the Natural Gas Infrastructure Report that is due to the Power Authority by November 15. Ms. Hale indicated that the PUC is working with the California Energy Commission (CEC) to evaluate the adequacy of the natural gas infrastructure, including interstate pipelines, intrastate pipelines, local distribution, storage and backbone. The PUC fully expects to have the report finalized and ready to deliver to the Power Authority by November 15.
Preliminary findings indicate that in-ground storage is at 85 percent of capacity, a healthy margin to meet demands through the winter. While there still is room to inject additional natural gas, the PUC is expecting a moderate winter with low gas demand.
Chairman Freeman requested that the Natural Gas Infrastructure Report also include a forecast of natural gas availability from the lower 48 states and Canada, as well as whether or not California may depend on these sources to meet its needs.
Board Member Vial questioned if the unbundling of storage has been successful. Ms. Hale replied that the PUC is monitoring non-core use, and that preliminary findings indicate that many non-core customers are increasing their use of storage.
Activities Related to Renewable Energy and Conservation
Staff at the Power Authority reported that coordination between the PUC and the Power Authority is necessary to optimize conservation, energy efficiency, and demand response. Specifically, the Power Authority is putting together a residential loan program; financing for efficiencies in public buildings; and, financing for small commercial and industrial upgrades. The Power Authority believes that the small commercial and industrial market is the most under-served, due to the multiple demands on owners and their lack of resources. The Power Authority is looking at ways to assist these customers in retrofitting their facilities.
At the other end of the spectrum, the Power Authority believes that large commercial and industrial customers require the least assistance. The Power Authority believes these customers are well served under current programs, but acknowledged that many of the demand response programs would be better coordinated under the administration of just one agency.
Finally, Board Member Vial questioned why there has been little emphasis on real time pricing. Power Authority staff agreed that real time pricing has not been a priority, and that the infrastructure to implement a real time pricing program does not currently exist. Staff did indicate, however, that a recent $35 million investment in meters should help to incentivize these programs.
Freeman concluded that it is important for the Power Authority to build on the momentum of conservation, and he acknowledged that technology finally is being priced such that real time pricing makes sense and likely will be an integral part of the Power Authority's program.
Laura Doll Named as New Executive Director
Laura Doll of Austin, Texas was approved as the Chief Executive Officer of the Power Authority at the October 5 Board meeting. Most recently, Doll was Director of Customer Service for Grande Communications. She also has held the positions of Senior Vice President for Planergy, as well as Chief Administrative Officer for Austin Energy. Doll received a master of public affairs from the University of Texas at Austin, and a bachelor of arts degree from Virginia Polytechnic Institute. She will receive an annual salary of $200,000.
COMPUTER RECORDS CONFIDENTIALITY BILL VETOED (AGAIN)
Governor Davis vetoed SB 147 by Senator Debra Bowen (D-Marina Del Rey) on October 8. The bill would have required employers to prepare and distribute by hard copy or electronically, a company monitoring policies and practices notice to each employee, to collect and verify their understanding of the notice, and file and maintain each employee's signed notice indefinitely. This is the third time Senator Bowen's notice bill has been vetoed by the Governor and we hope that the bill has struck out.
In his veto message, the governor referred to some of the concerns expressed by employers such as the need to monitor and control the use of company property for business purposes. Also employers are potentially liable for the misuse of computers for improper purposes, such as sexual harassment, defamation and the like, so employers have a legitimate reason to monitor e-mail and computer files from time to time.
The Governor said in closing his veto message, " I support reasonable privacy protections for employees in the workplace and my Administration proposed amendments which would carry out the intent of the bill without imposing undue regulatory burdens and potential legal exposure to businesses for doing what any employee should assume is the employer's right when they accept employment. Senator Bowen rejected the proposed amendments. Thus, I must veto the bill a third time."
This is a significant victory for employers. The bill had the potential to open up Pandora's box on employee notices in the workplace by greatly expanding the scope, confirmation and tracking of notices. CMTA applauds the Governor's veto of SB 147.
GOVERNOR SIGNS MERCURY LEGISLATION
Governor Davis has signed legislation to place new controls on products containing mercury. SB 633 by Senator Byron Sher (D-Palo Alto) places new controls on the disposal of appliance and vehicle components found to contain mercury.
"I am signing this bill because it will help reduce the amount of mercury added to the environment by broken and discarded thermometers, novelty products, and by mercury-containing electrical switches that are not removed before junked vehicles are crushed or shredded," said Davis.
SB 633 also bans the sale of new automobiles in California after January 1, 2005 that contain mercury electrical switches.
LATE BREAKING NEWS:
SB 71 (Burton D-San Francisco), Workers' Compensation, vetoed by the Governor.
www.cmta.net <http://www.cmta.net/>
California Manufacturers & Technology Association
980 9th Street, Suite 2200
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 441-5420 phone
(916) 447-9401 fax
You are receiving this message today because your company is a valued member of the California Manufacturers & Technology Association (CMTA). While we'd be pleased to continue to tell you about CMTA's efforts to make California a better place for manufacturing you can unsubscribe by e-mailing a message to [email protected] | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
The trade confirmation for your order(s) is now available online at etrade.com(sm).
Use the URL(s) below to view (customer log on required).
The information contained in this confirmation shall be binding upon you if you do not object,
either in writing or via electronic mail, within two (2) days after the confirmation is first received by you.
E*TRADE's new radio show E*TRADE On Air! is an informative and slightly irreverent view of the financial
world broadcast live at 9:00 a.m. ET weekdays. To access this and other streaming audio or video programs
--including WebFN--click Media Center on the etrade.com Home page.
Need to make a deposit? Do it online with E*TRADE's Cash Transfer Service. Sign up now or use your existing
link at http://cashtransfer.etrade.com and you can order a transfer of funds from your checking account into
your E*TRADE brokerage account today, or any time of the day or night. No writing checks, no stamps, and no
snail mail!
Document ID: 20011122032241565830070748
https://trading.etrade.com/cgi-bin/gx.cgi/applogic+accttaxbridge?page=CONFIRM&cmd=display&doctype=cnf&document_id=20011122032241565830070748 | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
There are 2 sheets in the following attachment that contain Enron transactional data for the Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) and Dynegy Direct, labeled as follows:
"Enron Activity - Dynegy Direct"
"Enron Activity - ICE"
Note: Total activity for Dynegy Direct is not available, therefore Enron's Percentage can not be calculated.
Let me know if you have any questions or comments.
Matt Motsinger
EnronOnline
713-853-5221
<Embedded Picture (Metafile)> | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Do you have a list of ongoing projects the Southern Cone Gov't Affairs group
is engaged in? Please forward to me if you do.( If something does'nt already
exist, perhaps you could pull something together at your earliest convenience
) Also, any information as to relative priority of these projects and level
of resources ( both internal and external ) you have committed by project
would be helpful. I look forward to getting down to Sao Paulo soon to visit
with you and your group. Hope your move goes uneventfully. Thanks for all
your help. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Louis
Thank you!
I have been really crazy and was going to come down and talk to you this
afternoon.
They were deducting me for parking 9 and parking 11.
Thanx again,
Chris Dorland | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Stephen Klein has requested a draft confirmation for a proposed transaction
with Bay State Paper Company. I have attached the worksheet containing the
credit provisions. This is a bit different from our standard terms, so call
me if you have questions. Stephen is hoping to show this to the customer by
the close of business today. If your schedules do not permit for that quick
of a turnaround, please give him a call to let him know a more appropriate
timeline (X5-7233).
Thanks,
Tanya | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META NAME="GENERATOR" CONTENT="Microsoft FrontPage 4.0">
<META NAME="ProgId" CONTENT="FrontPage.Editor.Document">
<TITLE> U.S. Transmission Industry Report</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF">
<DIV ALIGN="center">
<CENTER>
<TABLE BORDER="0" CELLPADDING="4" WIDTH="600">
<TR>
<TD><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://www.pmaconference.com/imagesemail/id000013/001.ht3.jpg" WIDTH="590" HEIGHT="156"></TD>
</TR>
</CENTER>
<TR>
<TD WIDTH="600" VALIGN="top">
<P ALIGN="left"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE="mso-fareast-font-family: Times New Roman; mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA">Energy
Info Source's U.S. Transmission Report is a <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:
normal">550-page, 4 part</B> report which provides all you need to know about
the fast ch!
anging transmission industry. The report takes a wide-ranging
look at changes in the <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">structure</B>
of the business, assesses current and projected <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">reliability</B>
issues, examines how transmission is effecting <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:
normal">bulk power</B> markets, and analyzes the FERC-mandated RTO filings.</SPAN></FONT><SPAN STYLE="font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:
"Times New Roman""></o:p>
</SPAN></TD>
<CENTER>
</CENTER>
</TR>
<CENTER>
<TR>
<TD WIDTH="600" VALIGN="top">
<IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://www.pmaconference.com/imagesemail/id000013/ustran1.jpg" width="590" height="59"></TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD WIDTH="600" VALIGN="top">
<FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Now in its 15th year of publication,
Wheeling & Transmission Monthly is the only source of comprehensive
information on transmis!
sion and bulk power filings at the FERC. Every
filing at FERC during the past month is summarized, complete with docket
number for pulling the entire file. The most important filings are
featured in "Bulk Power Highlights." WTM also covers the key
decisions at FERC, and stories at the Regional Transmission
Organizations and Independent System Operators. It is a continuing
update to your U.S. Transmission Industry Report. Normally $345, it is
FREE with your order of the U.S. Transmission Report. Delivered in pdf
format by email. Published by the Power Marketing Association.</FONT></TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>
</CENTER>
</DIV>
<CENTER>
<TABLE BORDER="0" CELLPADDING="3" CELLSPACING="3" WIDTH="600">
<TR>
<TD>
<P ALIGN="center"><A HREF="http:/www.pmaconference.com/transinfo.pdf"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2"><B>Click
Here to Download Ordering Information, a Complete Table of Cont!
ents and
a Free Issue of Wheeling & Transmission Monthly</B></FONT></A></TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>
</CENTER>
<DIV ALIGN="center">
<CENTER>
<TABLE BORDER="0" CELLPADDING="3" CELLSPACING="3" WIDTH="600">
<TR>
<TD>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://www.pmaconference.com/imagesemail/id000013/001.ht4.gif" width="585" height="19"></P>
<UL>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">The
<B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">History</B> of Transmission
in the U. S. </FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">The
Impact of FERC <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">Orders 888</B>
and <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">889</B> </FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="Mso!
Normal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">FERC's
Push Toward RTOs through the <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">Merger
Approval Process</B> <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Discussion
of the <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">Creation of TransCos</B>
<o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Detailed
Analysis of FERC <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">Order 2000</B>
<o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">D!
etailed
Discussion, Analysis, and Comparison of October 15 RTO Filings --
including <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">Innovative Rate
Treatments</B> <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Discussion
of Current ISOs and Projections on their <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">Jan.
15 RTO Filings</B> <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Listing
of FERC <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">Dockets</B> and <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">Policy
Statements</B> Regarding RTOs <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><B STYLE!
="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Maps</FONT></SPAN></B><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman">
of Proposed TransC0 and RT0 Territories </SPAN></FONT></LI>
</UL>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://www.pmaconference.com/imagesemail/id000013/001.ht5.gif" WIDTH="585" HEIGHT="19"><o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></P>
<UL>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Review
of NERC's 2000 <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">Reliability</B>
Assessment <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT !
FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Review
of FERC Investigation of <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">Bulk
Power</B> Markets <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Discussion
of <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">California's</B> Wholesale
Market Problems <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Analysis
of Pricing Trends and <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">Price
Caps</B> in ISOs <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">FERC
Action On <B STYLE="mso-bidi-f!
ont-weight:normal">October 15th RTO
Filings</B> <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Detailed
Discussion, Analysis, and Comparison of <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">January
15 RTO Filings</B> <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Tables</FONT></SPAN></B><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman">
of Regional Demand and Capacity </SPAN></FONT></LI>
</UL>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://www.pmaconference.com/imagesemail/id000013/002.ht8.gif" WIDTH="585" HEIGHT="19"></P>
<UL>
<LI>
<P CLASS="!
MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Analysis
of FERC Conditional Approval of <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">GridSouth
TransCo</B> <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">GridSouth?s
Request for Clarification on FERC Order <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Analysis
of FERC Conditional Approval of <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">GridFlorida
TransCo</B> <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Analysis
!
of FERC Rejection of Southern Company?s <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">SeTrans
GridCo</B> <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Analysis
of FERC Directed Changes to <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">Southwestern
Power Pool/Entergy Hybrid RTO</B> Proposal <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI>
<P CLASS="MsoNormal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2">Update
on <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal">Alliance</B> and <B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:
normal">Midwest ISO</B> Settlement <o:p>
</o:p>
</FONT></SPAN></LI>
<LI><FONT SIZE="2"><FONT FACE="Verdana"><SPAN STYLE="mso-fareast-font-family: Times New Roman; mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman!
; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA">Analysis
of FERC Conditional Approval of </SPAN></FONT><B STYLE="mso-bidi-font-weight:normal"><SPAN STYLE="mso-fareast-font-family: Times New Roman; mso-bidi-font-family: Times New Roman; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA"><FONT FACE="Verdana">RTO
West</FONT></SPAN></B></FONT></LI>
</UL>
<P><IMG BORDER="0" SRC="http://www.pmaconference.com/imagesemail/id000013/ustran1.gif" WIDTH="585" HEIGHT="19"></P>
<UL>
<LI>
<P ALIGN="left"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000">History of
<B> FERC</B> RTO
Activities <o:p>
</FONT></LI>
<LI>
<P ALIGN="left"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000">Analysis of
<B> Southeastern RTO</B> Mediation
Report</FONT></LI>
<LI>
<P ALIGN="left"><FONT FACE=!
"Verdana" SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000">Analysis of
<B> Northeastern RTO </B> Mediation
Report <o:p>
</o:p></FONT></LI>
<LI>
<P ALIGN="left"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000">Update on RTOs -
<B> Alliance and Midwest</B> <o:p>
</o:p></FONT></LI>
<LI>
<P ALIGN="left"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2" COLOR="#000000">Update on
<B> TransCos - ITC</B>, <B>TransLink</B>, and <B>
WestConnect</B></FONT><B><SPAN STYLE="font-family:Arial;mso-bidi-font-family:
"Times New Roman""><FONT COLOR="#000000"><o:p>
</FONT>
</SPAN></B></LI>
</UL>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD>
<P ALIGN="center"><A HREF="http:/www.pmaconference.com/transinfo.pdf"><FONT FACE="Verdana" SIZE="2"><B>Click
Here to Download Ordering Information, a Complete Table of Contents and
a Free Issue of Wheeling & Transmission Monthly</B></FONT></A></TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>
<!
/CENTER>
</DIV>
</BODY>
</HTML> | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Steve:
here are some of the major headlines for California. I have not found the
report dealing with FERC and the rest of the country, yet. I will continue
to look for more FERC trade press reports. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
http://home.earthlink.net/~goodspeeds/ADS.HTM
\\\|///
\\ - - //
_____ ( @ @ ) _____
( ___ )----------------oOOo-(_)-oOOo----------------( ___ )
| | | |
| / | Jeffrey Oh | / |
| / | Enron North America 503.464.7789 | / |
| / | 121 SW Salmon Street 503.464.3740 (fax) | / |
| / | 3WTC0306 [email protected] | / |
| / | Portland, OR 97204 | / |
| / | | / |
|___| .oooO |___|
(_____)--------------- ( )-- Oooo. ---------------(_____)
\ ( ( )
\_) ) /
(_/ | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
see below.
Federal price limits backfire
Some generators withhold power rather than abide by rate caps
David Lazarus, Chronicle Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 4, 2001
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/07/04/M
N186091.DTL
Officials in California and Nevada, after months of lobbying for federal
regulators to cap Western power prices, warned yesterday that the newly
imposed limits have had the unintended consequence of increasing a threat of
blackouts in the two states.
The warnings were issued as California came within minutes of rolling
blackouts yesterday afternoon, and one day after the first-ever rolling
blackouts in Las Vegas forced energy-hungry casinos to shut off fountains and
reduce air conditioning.
The two states are asking the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to take a
closer look at the so-called price mitigation plan and come up with revisions
that would deter power companies from withholding electricity during
shortages.
"We need some clarity to this order," said Oscar Hidalgo, a spokesman for the
California Department of Water Resources, which is spending billions of
dollars to keep the state's lights on.
"Generators need to be held accountable," he said.
The crux of the problem is that price limits kick in during shortages, yet
power companies say these caps force them to sell power at below-market rates
during periods of high demand.
Some companies have responded by holding back power rather than face the
expense of shipping electricity from state to state. Each mile that
electricity must be transmitted adds to the overall cost.
"No one's going to pay for transmission if the cost is near the caps," said
Gary Ackerman, executive director of the Western Power Trading Forum, an
energy-industry association in Menlo Park.
Ackerman said several companies in his organization decided that there was no
economic advantage to offering power in regional markets when price controls
are in effect.
"This means individual regions like California or Las Vegas could end up not
having enough," Ackerman said. "It increases the threat of blackouts."
BLACKOUT ALERT CANCELED
California authorities issued a blackout alert at 1:45 p.m. yesterday when
power reserves dipped to dangerously low levels. They canceled the alert
about an hour later, after finding additional supplies.
"Everyone in the West is fighting for megawatts," said Stephanie McCorkle, a
spokeswoman for the California Independent System Operator, which oversees
the state's power network.
The Golden State's latest brush with lights-out conditions came a day after
Nevada experienced its own rolling blackouts for the first time, prompting
heavy power users such as the MGM Grand and Caesars Palace to dim their
lights.
Don Soderberg, chairman of the Nevada Public Utilities Commission, said that
the sudden power emergency took state authorities by surprise and that they
are investigating to see what role the federal price limits may have had in
exacerbating Monday's shortage.
"We're looking very closely at this," he said. "There seems to be a potential
for unintended consequences."
Specifically, Soderberg said Nevada is focusing on operators of older, less-
efficient plants who would find profit margins shrinking, if not vanishing,
under capped prices.
"We're going to see how the caps might have played into this," he said.
The federal ceiling in 10 Western states, excluding California, is about $92
per megawatt hour. In California, a 10 percent surcharge is added because of
the state's credit risk, bringing the price to just over $101.
Ackerman at the Western Power Trading Forum said regional price controls have
extended California's power crisis to neighboring states.
"California sneezed and the rest of the region caught the virus," he said.
'LAWYERS LOOKING FOR LOOPHOLES'
California and Nevada officials, however, said that they still have faith
that price limits can stabilize Western electricity markets but that federal
regulators may have to tweak the system so that power companies cannot
withhold output.
"The generators have banks of lawyers looking for loopholes (in the plan),"
said Hidalgo at the Department of Water Resources.
Unfortunately, it may take some time for the regulators to revisit an issue
that they took up only with the greatest reluctance. For months, federal
regulators refused to impose price controls, preferring instead to let supply
and demand determine costs.
Hidalgo said that when it appeared that power companies were throttling back
on output Monday, California officials immediately dialed the hot line number
provided by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in case of emergencies.
"No one answered," he said. "They were closed."
State officials tried again yesterday, and this time were told that the
commission would look into the matter. They were not given a time frame for
when the commission might come up with a response.
E-mail David Lazarus at [email protected].
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1
Out-of-state generators pull plug over uncertainty on price controls
By Dale Kasler
Bee Staff Writer
(Published July 3, 2001)
Confused by the federal government's new controls on electricity prices,
generators withheld so much power from California on Monday that the state
was nearly plunged into rolling blackouts, state officials said.
The confusion began when the state's electric grid operators declared a Stage
1 power alert in the early afternoon, triggering the price caps for the first
time since they went into effect June 21.
Out-of-state generators pulled about 1,500 megawatts of electricity off the
table at midafternoon, enough to power about 1.1 million homes, because of
uncertainty about how much they could charge under the new Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission pricing system, said Oscar Hidalgo, spokesperson for
the state Department of Water Resources. The department buys electricity for
the state's financially distressed utilities.
"They didn't understand what they were going to be paid; there was confusion
over the FERC order," Hidalgo said. "We saw 1,500 megawatts disappear."
The problem was exacerbated by a heat wave across the West, which forced
California to compete with other states for scarce electricity, he said.
Rolling blackouts hit southern Nevada.
Most California officials credit the FERC system, which is based on a
variable price cap, with reining in what had been a runaway wholesale power
market. But power generators have complained that the price caps, by limiting
profits, could discourage the production of critically needed electricity.
And as Monday's episode suggested, even the uncertainty about where the cap
will fall could lead to unexpected shortages.
"That's the risk that you run (with price controls)," said Arthur O'Donnell,
editor of the newsletter California Energy Markets. "People want any kind of
certainty at all."
Hidalgo said the state avoided blackouts only because of last-minute imports
from the Bonne'ville Power Administration, the federal agency that markets
government-produced hydroelectric power in the Pacific Northwest. The state
went into a Stage 2 power alert, the next-to-last level before blackouts are
ordered. The alert was canceled in late afternoon.
The blackouts would have been the first in California since May 8.
FERC imposed a round-the-clock ceiling on power throughout the West. The
price fluctuates and is tied to the production costs of the least-efficient
plant operating in California during a "power alert" declared by the
Independent System Operator, which runs the state's power-transmission grid.
When there's no alert, prices can't exceed 85 percent of the cap that was
established during the latest alert.
Until Monday, the maximum price held steady at about $101 a megawatt-hour in
California. But when the ISO declared a Stage 1 power alert in early
afternoon, signifying that reserve supplies had dwindled to less than 7
percent of demand, confusion set in, Hidalgo and others said.
Because of a steep drop in the price of natural gas, which fuels many
California power plants, suppliers knew the cap would fall. But no one knew
by how much until the price was posted by the ISO.
The ceiling for California fell to about $77 at 3 p.m. but was back up to $98
in two hours, according to the ISO. Those prices include the 10 percent
premium that sellers can charge California because FERC said there's a credit
risk in selling to the state.
O'Donnell said it's likely suppliers will pull back from the market every
time the ISO declares a power alert.
In-state generators have to operate their plants if summoned by the ISO. But
out-of-state suppliers can withhold supplies, and on Monday it was the
out-of-staters that were pulling back, Hidalgo said.
The Bee's Dale Kasler can be reached at (916) 321-1066 or [email protected].
Power Sales Halted by New Pricing Curbs
Electricity: Confused suppliers, unsure what they will be paid, refuse to
sell to state, which asks FERC for a ruling but doesn't get it.
By NANCY VOGEL, Times Staff Writer
?????SACRAMENTO--Confusion over new federal price restrictions prompted
several electricity sellers to back away from sales to California on Monday
afternoon, pushing the state closer to blackouts, energy officials said.
?????The state lost sales that would have provided enough electricity to
supply more than 1 million homes, said Ray Hart, deputy director of the
California Department of Water Resources, which has been buying much of the
state's electricity since January.
?????At least five companies producing or marketing power "are telling us
that since they don't know what they're going to get paid, they're not going
to take the risk, and so they're not going to sell the energy," Hart said.
?????The electricity sales fell through after power consumption soared in
summer heat and grid operators were forced to declare a Stage 1 emergency,
meaning reserves had dipped below 7%. It was the first such emergency since
May 31.
?????Under a June 19 order by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
intended to bring down wholesale electricity markets across the West, a power
emergency in California triggers the setting of a new price limit that
applies to power plant owners from Washington to Arizona.
?????The new price is supposed to be based upon whatever it costs to run the
most inefficient, expensive power plant selling electricity to California
grid operators during the first full hour of a Stage 1 emergency.
?????But much uncertainty remains about exactly how and when the new price is
supposed to be established under the commission's order, and that apparently
drove away sellers, Hart said.
?????Shortly after the state issued the Stage 1 alert at 1:30 p.m., putting
the old price limit of $90 per megawatt-hour in question, companies that had
committed to provide the state electricity hour by hour Monday afternoon
backed out, Hart said. The companies include TransAlta Energy Marketing of
Oregon, Constellation Power of Baltimore and Sempra Energy Trading, a unit of
the San Diego-based energy conglomerate.
?????Forced to dip even deeper into the state's power reserves and declare a
Stage 2 emergency, water agency officials called the federal energy
commission's hotline for clarification about what the new price should be and
when it should take effect. They got no answer.
?????Hart said commission officials reached at home promised to try to
clarify their order today. One outstanding question is what obligations power
suppliers have to deliver electricity to California in an emergency.
?????Both buyers and sellers in the market agree that the new price, when it
is set, will probably be lower than $90 per megawatt-hour because the price
of natural gas, the main fuel in California power plants, has dropped lately.
?????Temperatures soared several degrees higher Monday than grid operators
had anticipated. But they said they expected to avoid rolling blackouts in
part because the Bonneville Power Administration in Portland, Ore., had
agreed to provide several hundred megawatts of Pacific Northwest hydropower
each hour in exchange for a return of electricity from California later this
summer.
?????"Bonneville is giving us emergency power to get us through," Hart said.
Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times
James D Steffes
07/06/2001 10:04 PM
To: Jeffrey T Hodge/Enron@EnronXGate, Robert C Williams/Enron@EnronXGate
cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda
Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan Comnes/Enron@EnronXGate, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron,
Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sarah Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON,
[email protected]
Subject: ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGDE - Draft FERC Brief on Settlement Process
The attached is a rough draft of a potential filing Enron would make in to
Judge Wagner in the Settlement process (it is unclear if this would remain
confidential per the gag order).
Please provide Ray Alvarez your comments. This would be filed as early as
Monday am.
Jim | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Have tax problems? Do you owe the IRS money? We can help!
Our licensed agents can help you with both past and present
tax debt. We also deal with more than just taxes, such as:
- Tax Preparation
- Audits
- Seizures
- Bank Levies
- Asset Protection
- Audit Reconsideration
- Trust Fund Penalty Defense
- Uncollectible Status
- Penalty Appeals
- Penalty Abatement
- Wage Garnishments
.. and more!
To receive FREE information on tax help, please fill out the
form below. There are no obligations, and supplied information
is kept strictly confidential. Please note that this offer
only applies to US citizens. Application processing may take
upto 10 business days.
**********
Full Name:
Address:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
Home Phone:
Work Phone:
Best Time to Call:
E-Mail Address:
Estimated Tax Debt Size:
**********
Thank you for your time.
Note: If you wish to receive no further advertisements
regarding this matter or any other, please reply to this
e-mail with the word REMOVE in the subject. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 6:10 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: daily crude & ngas charts 4/18
The information contained herein is based on sources that we believe to be
reliable, but we do not represent that it is accurate or complete. Nothing
contained herein should be considered as an offer to sell or a solicitation
of an offer to buy any financial instruments discussed herein. Any
opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author. As such, they
may differ in material respects from those of, or expressed or published by
on behalf of Carr Futures or its officers, directors, employees or
affiliates. ? 2001 Carr Futures
The charts are now available on the web by clicking on the hot link(s)
contained in this email. If for any reason you are unable to receive the
charts via the web, please contact me via email and I will email the charts
to you as attachments.
Crude http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/crude47.pdf
Natural Gas http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/ngas47.pdf
Nat Gas Strip Matrix
http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/StripmatrixNG47.pdf
Nat Gas Spread Matrix
http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/SpreadmatrixNG47.pdf
Crude and Products Spread Matrix
http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/SpreadmatrixCL47.pdf | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 05/08/2001 04:39 PM -----
Aparna Rajaram/ENRON@enronXgate
05/08/2001 04:36 PM
To: Kelly Lombardi/NA/Enron@Enron, Samuel Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bernice
Rodriguez/HOU/ECT@ECT, Bill D Hare/HOU/ECT@ect, Steve Venturatos/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Samuel Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tanya Rohauer/ENRON@enronXgate, Tom
Moran/ENRON@enronXgate, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Frank L
Davis/ENRON@enronXgate, Ken Curry/ENRON@enronXgate, Nicole
Hunter/ENRON@enronXgate, Lesli Campbell/ENRON@enronXgate, Angela Y
Brown/ENRON@enronXgate, Amber Ebow/HOU/ECT@ECT, Karen Lambert/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Fraisy George/ENRON@enronXgate
cc:
Subject: Click Paper Approvals, 05-08-2001
Please see attached.
Aparna Rajaram
Ph: (713) 345-4563
Fax: (713) 853-9476
[email protected] | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
---------------------- Forwarded Message: ---------------------
From: Mail Administrator <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Mail System Error - Returned Mail
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 23:23:43 +0000
This Message was undeliverable due to the following reason:
Each of the following recipients was rejected by a remote mail server.
The reasons given by the server are included to help you determine why
each recipient was rejected.
Recipient: <[email protected]>
Reason: 5.1.1 <[email protected]>... User unknown
Please reply to [email protected]
if you feel this message to be in error.
- C.DTF
Received: from webmail.worldnet.att.net ([204.127.135.43]) by
mtiwmhc22.worldnet.att.net (InterMail vM.4.01.02.39 201-229-119-122)
with SMTP id
<20001024232342.PJIM1460.mtiwmhc22.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net>;
Tue, 24 Oct 2000 23:23:42 +0000
Received: from [192.152.140.9] by webmail.worldnet.att.net; Tue, 24 Oct 2000
23:23:42 +0000
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Electricity Summit at U.C. Berkeley (fwd)
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 23:23:42 +0000
X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (May 2 2000)
X-Authenticated-Sender: [email protected]
Message-Id:
<20001024232342.PJIM1460.mtiwmhc22.worldnet.att.net@webmail.worldnet.att.net>
sounds like it could be good. I'll be a NARUC in San
Diego.
---------------------- Forwarded Message: ---------------------
From: pwpens <[email protected]>
To: (Recipient list suppressed)
Subject: Electricity Summit at U.C. Berkeley
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2000 10:16:14 -0700
Register now to attend the
ELECTRICITY SUMMIT AT U.C. BERKELEY, NOVEMBER 13, 2000
U.C. Berkeley's Goldman School of Public Policy, with additional support
from the U.C. Berkeley's Competition Policy Center and the U.C. Energy
Institute, will host a meeting of industry representatives, policy makers,
consumers representatives, legislators and researchers to discuss the
electricity restructuring experience and potential solutions to the
difficulties that California and other governments have encountered. The
summit will run from 12:30-6pm with two roundtable discussions that will
include a wide variety of viewpoints.
For registration information and further details, go to
http://gspp.berkeley.edu/events/electricity_summit_conference.htm | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Mary Kay:
Please coordinate activities in this area with the Omaha Planning team through Bryan Reinecke - Planning Coordinator. Ken Anderson will be the primary person on the team picking up the work Eric did for us.
Happy Holidays!
P.S. (your original e-mail had "Paul" Lowry listed. I assume you meant "Phil" so I changed it.)
John R. Keller
Vice President, Planning & Power Services
Enron Transportation Services
713-646-7624
[email protected]
-----Original Message-----
From: Miller, Mary Kay
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 6:15 PM
To: Miller, Mary Kay; Pribble, Dan; Lowry, Paul; Neubauer, Dave; Porter, J. Gregory; Dornan, Dari; Kirk, Steve; Rice, Randy; January, Steve; Blair, Lynn; Darveaux, Mary; Fossum, Drew; Keller, John R.; Gottsponer, Morgan
Cc: McCarty, Danny; Corman, Shelley
Subject: RE: Producer meeting
Phil/John/ Morgan, since Eric has left, can you let us know who to work with on the allocations alternatives??
-----Original Message-----
From: Miller, Mary Kay
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 8:46 AM
To: Pribble, Dan; Lowry, Paul; Neubauer, Dave; Porter, J. Gregory; Dornan, Dari; Kirk, Steve; Winckowski, Michele; Loeffler, Michael; Rice, Randy; January, Steve; Blair, Lynn; Darveaux, Mary; Fossum, Drew
Cc: Horton, Stanley; McCarty, Danny; Corman, Shelley
Subject: Producer meeting
The meeting yesterday with about 7 small producers in Okla went fairly well. It is obvious that they now realize that the cost of processing, if necessary is there obligation, not Northerns.
We heard the same rhetoric about the history, for the past 30 years it is has been a "wet" system and they entered into contracts without any processing obligations. Northern' can't change due to this and historical operation and "unwaive" the high c6+ based on the highest receipt levels. They (Dan?? ) was very insistent that if a problem occurred, all shippers should be pro rated and NNG's tariff should be enforced at the tailgate of the Bushton plant, not the point of receipt as the tariff currently states. They asked us to file to change, potentially incorporate a default processing agreement that had to be used in the event of high concentrations of C6+-- I think you get the drift of the discussions-- don't just cut my gas, cut everyone
To Do's
We agreed to look at data from last year (assuming we have it available) to determine what the allocations would have been under the following scenarios:
a) Allocation as proposed- highest levels
b) Allocation based on prorata at Bushton outlet
c) Allocation based on prorata at Demarc
Greg is to get in contact with Mitch Hertz (their attorney) to discuss feasibility of requiring gas quality waiver at the tailgate of Bushton:
what FERC would do--
what about other shippers--
what is Bushton isn't running
what about a default processing agreement being required
Hypothetical allocations above, can FERC require
Dari, can you find the status and outcome of a Southern docket filed last year?
Mary D. validate that we can't require the plant to run--
Mike Loeffler- check Oklahoma state proceeding to find any filing by Energex and Transok relating to gas being "dry" may not yet be filed--- need to watch for it
Timing--- we said we would attempt to get back to them mid January--
If you have any questions, please feel free to call myself or Dave N. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Hello Jonda,
I know your getting ready to go on vacation and I just wanted you to know that I called the credit card companies and had them mail me my YTD statements. They would not fax it. So, I would just attach a letter saying were waiting on the companies or leave it blank (N/A).
Anyway, she sent me another e-mail and I have not replied to any of them just to let you and Mr. Fulenweider know. Have a great vacation..you deserve it!!
-Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: <[email protected]>@ENRON
Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 5:51 PM
To: Stepenovitch, Joe
Subject: Payton
Hello, I just wanted to say I hope your weekend went well. Payton is growing like a weed. He is now tickalish. He also has learned how to scream, now that's about all he does. He has a walker and he loves to sit in it and just talk away. He is such a happy baby, everyone enjoys him and loves to see him, he's so pleasant. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
did i win my bet? | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Bob, please advise Rosalee Fleming with respect to this issue. Thank you. Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: Fleming, Rosalee
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 6:20 AM
To: Derrick Jr., James
Subject: FW: Expense Reports Awaiting Your Approval
Jim, did Ken get a chance to discuss this expense report with you? It is mainly for late charges to an American Express bill that Andy was late paying. He and I both felt it was the principal of the charges that neither of us really wanted to approve.
Thanks.
Rosie
p.s. If he didn't get a chance, I will be happy to print out for you.
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2001 11:19 PM
To: Fleming, Rosalee
Subject: Expense Reports Awaiting Your Approval
The following reports have been waiting for your approval for more than 4 days. Please review.
Owner: Andrew S Fastow
Report Name: AFastow 110601
Days In Mgr. Queue: 19 | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
FYI
-----Original Message-----
From: Kingerski, Harry
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2001 9:18 AM
To: Shapiro, Richard
Cc: Keene, Patrick
Subject: FW: FW: ERCOT Residential/Industrial Service Mix Requirements
... some recent history. I had left the message with Rogers Herndon.
-----Original Message-----
From: Keller, James
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2001 11:12 AM
To: Castano, Marianne
Cc: Kingerski, Harry; Ogenyi, Gloria
Subject: Re: FW: ERCOT Residential/Industrial Service Mix Requirements
You are correct! This is not a new issue, but it seems to resurface on a regular basis. The issue has been pointed out regularly (the first time in connection with the license and regularly thereafter) and each time the business has said not to worry, if they can't cut a deal with New Power they will just pay the $1/MW. EES has assumed it will pay the $1/MW since day one!
Jim
Marianne Castano
08/23/2001 08:33 AM
To: Harry Kingerski/ENRON@enronXgate @ ENRON, Gloria Ogenyi/Enron@EnronXGate
cc: James E Keller/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Re: FW: ERCOT Residential/Industrial Service Mix Requirements
Harry and Gloria:
Jim Keller and I have indeed dealt with this issue in the past (it actually came up at the time we were applying for our TX marketer license).
It is my understanding, and Jim, please comment if my information is "stale", that we were going to choose the option set forth in Sec. 39.352(g)(3), which allows us to make a payment into the System Benefit Fund. This approach was discussed with Dennis Benevides, and then, I believe, with Don Black, and they were OK with our pursuing this course, in lieu of having TNPC provide service to residentials on our behalf.
Please call me if you have any questions: 814-835-0793.
Marianne
From: Harry Kingerski/ENRON@enronXgate on 08/22/2001 04:06 PM
To: Marianne Castano/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: FW: ERCOT Residential/Industrial Service Mix Requirements
Marianne - per my voicemail.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ogenyi, Gloria
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 12:06 PM
To: Hamb, Edward
Cc: Blachman, Jeremy; Gahn, Scott; Letke, Eric; Wood, James; Presto, Kevin M.; Curry, Mike; Wagner, Joseph; Misra, Narsimha; Dietrich, Janet; Collins, Patricia; Keene, Patrick; Kingerski, Harry; Steffes, James D.; Ryall, Jean; Shapiro, Richard; Herndon, Rogers; Nicolay, Christi L.
Subject: ERCOT Residential/Industrial Service Mix Requirements
Ed,
Residential Obligation
Section 39.352(g) of Senate Bill 7 provides that for any REP serving an aggregate load in excess of 300 MW, 5% of the load must consist of residential customers. A REP can fulfil this requirement by:
1. Demonstrating that it directly serves residential load amounting to 5% of its total load
2. That another REP serves the residential load on its behalf, or
3. It pays 1 dollar per MWH of required 5% load into the System Benefit Fund.
EES can fulfil its obligation by entering into an agreement with New Power to serve residential load on its behalf, or can pay the 1$ per MWH penalty.
There is an annual compliance reporting requirement and EES can demonstrate compliance if it has an agreement with New Power.
EES Contract,
For price to beat customers, the utilities have by Commission rule, the obligation to allow customers to come and go without restraint for the 5 year period conmmencing 1/2/02. The Commission concern may be that Enron will abuse this provision by gaming the system. The Enron contracts as currently written are within the rules as approved by the Commission. Until the utilities move to amend the relevant rules, the Commission can only exercise its displeasure by appropriate oversight and enforcement to determine what conduct amounts to abuse and gaming. I think it will ultimately be a question of degree and pattern of switching. The onus will be on the affiliated REPs to prove abuse and gaming. Fundamentally, it is in the best interest of the market to allow customers to come and go. Customer mobility is the best customer protection in a competitive market. Besides, a restraint on customer mobility could have a chilling effect on competition as it will increase customer inertia. The Commission will carefully weigh any course of action to insure that they achieve a reasonable balance. For larger than 1MW customers, they can agree to long term contracts and a restriction on their ability to come and go.
Please call with any questions,
Gloria
-----Original Message-----
From: Hamb, Edward
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2001 10:32 AM
To: Ogenyi, Gloria
Subject: Re: Update: Enron Direct Telesales Initiative in NY, NJ and TX
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: ERCOT Residential/Industrial Service Mix Requirements
get on this. we need to discuss
---------------------- Forwarded by James M Wood/HOU/EES on 08/22/2001 10:20 AM ---------------------------
From: Rogers Herndon/ENRON@enronXgate on 08/22/2001 09:27 AM
To: Jeremy Blachman/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Gahn/HOU/EES@EES, Eric Letke/HOU/EES@EES, James M Wood/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Kevin M Presto/ENRON@enronXgate, Mike Curry/ENRON@enronXgate, Joseph Wagner/ENRON@enronXgate, Narsimha Misra/ENRON@enronXgate, Janet R Dietrich/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: ERCOT Residential/Industrial Service Mix Requirements
Everyone -
I was just informed by EPMI that there may be a requirement for Retail Energy Providers in ERCOT to serve a certain mix of residential rate class/industrial rate class customers once a certain industrial threshold is crossed (300 Mw of industrial rate class load).
EWS has not set it itself up to monitor such requirements. Therefore, I cannot comment on the accuracy or details of this requirement. However, it is something we definitely need to look into. In addition, we (EPMI/EWS) are getting feedback from the TX PUC that they are not pleased with how they see the pilot and the market structure unfolding. Specifically, they are not pleased with retail energy providers' contracts that contemplate the right to switch between direct access and tariff (and visa-versa). We will monitor and need to get more clarity on how the PUC intends to address their displeasure.
On the residential requirement front, someone needs to address this. Specifically, is this true. If so, what rate classes are considered industrial vs. commercial? Is there a similar requirement for commercial load? Is TI considered industrial? Do we already have industrial customers in our portfolio? Who in EES tracks and monitors issues like these as we enter markets?
Mike Curry is in the process of tracking this info down from an EPMI perspective as they are focusing on more of the pure, large industrial customers. We will share any information Mike receives with the EES group.
RH
<Embedded Picture (Device Independent Bitmap)>
<Embedded StdOleLink> | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Ricardo,
I will be joining the East power desk at the beginning of October and I am
trying to get up to speed on the PJM market. Kevin Prestor thought you would
be able to help me find some data. I am looking for the following historics
in excel format (send as much data as you have and feel free to include
anything else that you think might be relevant):
- Daily prices for PJM( West), Cinergy, NEPP, NYPP, TVA and ERCOT
- HDD's and CDD's for Philedelphia, Allentown Washington DC, Baltimore,
Pittsburg, Newark, New York City, Cinncinati and any other cities that are
relevant ?
- Supply outage data for PJM
- Daily Import / Exprot data for PJM
- Historic daily nat gas prices Transco Zone 6 ( NY and Non-NY), Chicago, ...
???
Again, please feel free to make any suggestions. I am very new to the world
of power and it is likely that I have overlooked something very obvious.
Thanx,
Chris Dorland
403-974-6910 | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
9:09:11 Synchronizing Mailbox 'Perlingiere, Debra'
9:09:11 Synchronizing Hierarchy
9:09:12 Synchronizing Favorites
9:09:12 Synchronizing Folder 'Inbox'
9:09:14 7 item(s) added to offline folder
9:09:14 Canceled | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
REVISED
> ISO Market Participants:
> On April 26, 2001, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
> issued its "Order Establishing Prospective Mitigation and Monitoring Plan
> for the California Wholesale Electric Markets and Establishing an
> Investigation of Public Utility Rates in Wholesale Western Energy
> Markets." One of the fundamental principles of this Order is to:
> "Require sellers with PGAs as well as non-public utility
> generators located in California, that make sales through the ISO's
> markets or that use the ISO's interstate transmission grid (with the
> exception of hydroelectric power), to offer all their available power in
> real time during all hours."
> The Order also requires generators covered by the Order to report
> certain generator performance data to the ISO.
> On April 27th and 30th and on May 7th, the ISO issued Market Notices
> on the Order's requirement for submission of generator performance data.
> Since that time, the ISO has received several questions regarding the
> applicability of the Order to Qualifying Facilities (QFs). By this
> Supplemental Market Notice, the ISO clarifies the Order's applicability
> to QFs as follows:
> Applicability
> The Order sets forth a "must-offer" obligation on certain
> generators, requiring these generators to offer to the ISO, in real-time,
> all available capacity not under contract. At Section II.B. "Selling
> Obligations," the Order provides that the following categories of
> generators are subject to the must-offer requirements:
> * Those generators with Participating Generator Agreements (PGAs);
> * All sellers into ISO markets, including non-public utility sellers,
> that own or control generators located in California;
> * To the extent all sellers of energy that own or control generators
> in California (including non-public utilities) are not selling "into ISO
> markets", the Order includes all sellers that own or control generators in
> California (including non-public utilities) whose power uses the
> ISO-controlled interstate transmission facilities.
> The Order applies to all QFs in California. All QFs in California
> use the interstate transmission facilities operated by the ISO, whether
> supplying power under power purchase agreements (PPA) with the UDCs or
> engaging in bilateral transactions. Whether or not a QF must comply with
> the reporting requirements outlined below depends on the specific
> circumstances applicable to the facility.
> If a QF supplies all of its power pursuant to its power purchase
> agreement (PPA) with the UDC, the QF does not have available capacity
> subject to the "must-offer" condition and it does not have to comply with
> reporting requirements outlined below. In these circumstances, the power
> generated under the contract is already scheduled with the ISO and is
> serving load in California.
> If a QF has either: (1) a PPA with the UDC that has expired (or who
> has received a regulatory or court order allowing the QF to sell the
> contracted-for capacity to third parties) or (2) capacity in excess of the
> amounts under contract to the UDCs, then the QF is subject to the
> "must-offer" condition and it must comply with reporting requirements
> outlined below.
> Reporting Requirements
> In addition to establishing a "must-offer" obligation, the Order
> requires generators to provide certain operating data to the ISO to enable
> it to verify the amount of available capacity from each generating unit as
> defined above. Each above-defined generating unit must submit to the ISO
> data on:
> 1. Pmax;
> 2. Pmin;
> 3. Unit ramp rate;
> 4. Heat rates (for units using natural gas as their
> primary fuel);and
> 5. Emission rates (for units using natural gas as their
> primary fuel).
> Please ensure that all of the above-mentioned data is submitted to
> Jim Price at the ISO ([email protected]) no later than 5:00 p.m. PST on
> Wednesday, May 16. Although the deadline for submitting heat and emission
> rates was May 1, the ISO will accept those data through May 16, 2001.
> Thank you for your cooperation.
>
> Byron B. Woertz, Jr.
> Director, Client Relations
> (916) 608-7066
> (800) 481-7037 - Pager | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Coaches,
As you can see we are still in need of the volunteers for this years
tournament. Please respond to me ASAP with the three names choices of your
volunteers. Thanks,
Louis Martinez
Hi everyone,
Well I have volunteered to schedule all the volunteers for the NIT
tournament. I drafted Ashley Wagner to help with this task. I need all the
School Commissioners to contact your coaches and ask them to email me their
3 volunteers asap. If they do not have email access would you please get
the names and email them to me? Those of you who have the names and have
just been waiting to find out what to do with them, now can unload them on
me.
Ashley Wagner and myself will start calling them (so please include a phone
number!) to see when they would like to work. The first names we get will
be the first we call so they will get the best choice of fields and times.
So do them a favor and get them in soon!!!
Thanks for your help on this.
Tammie Self
(281)955-5031 | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Ben
Attached is a short form estimate I had on Pittsburg which is a 2 X 1 GE7FA
plant. Also included is Linden 6 (which is a 7FA with an HRSG supplying steam
to an existing facility, i.e. no steam turbine). Pittsburg is an outdoor
plant so should represent a fairly competitive deal.
I also have some place a 1 X 1 that we just got on Coyote Springs.
Bruce | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Is it true that tomorrow is your birthday? If so, Happy Birthday!!! | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
John, we are working out some issues with the station 1 permit and the EPA
permits for 3 and 4. Briefly here they are.
First issue, that we did not anticipate from the ADEQ. It applies to hours
of operation for the generator. The ADEQ has restricted hours of operation
because we are close to the PSD levels at the facility. In talking to
Shdeish, the ADEQ protects itself and applies a 10% safety factor on all
applications that approach PSD to ensure that the PSD levels are not
triggered. This is there policy not regulation. What is ironic is that
they accepted our calculations for the netting, but did not indicate that
they would apply any safety factor for their comfort. Im concerned about the
time frame to iron out this issue and the construction start date. I need
some guidance. Do we want to spend time fighting this, not knowing how long
it will take to resolve or do we bite the bullet and put on a catlytic
converter for the generator and have unlimited operating hours? In speaking
with Shudeish, I got the impressions that when an application approaches the
PSD limit, they want to see the applicant apply CEMS or some kind of control
technology just to be sure that they stay under the 250 ton limit. I know
time is of the essence.
Second issue. The EPA has given us a pretty good permit for stations 3 and
4, but have restircted us to ppmvd values for NOx and CO, instead of lb./hr
or ton/yr. The values that they have given us in the permit are OK (25 ppmvd
for NOx and CO) at base load operation. GE will guarantee this. However, at
lower tempertures and at reduced loads of 60%, the manufactures numbers are
40 ppmvd for NOx and CO. We cant live with this. In our application, we
stated that we would be operating at low loads for 20% of the time and we
applied a 15% safety factor for the higher NOx and CO levels and presented
this in lb.hr and tons/yr. This would have covered us, but because the
permits limits are in ppmvd, we would exceed these limits during low loads
and low temps. I have requested from Roger that we would accept permit
conditions that would allow us 40 ppmvd during low temps and low loads with
with requiring us to do associated recordkeeping and Roger said that he would
bring this before his management. Ill keep you apprised of this issue.
---------------------- Forwarded by Larry Campbell/ET&S/Enron on 10/10/2001
08:17 AM ---------------------------
From: John Shafer/ENRON@enronXgate on 10/09/2001 10:43 PM CDT
To: Larry Campbell/ET&S/Enron@ENRON, Ruth Jensen/ENRON@enronXgate
cc: William Kendrick/ENRON@enronXgate
Subject: RE: Staions 3 and 4 air permit comments to EPA
Larry,
Please also keep Jerry D. Martin in the loop on progress with the permits.;
Thanks, John
-----Original Message-----
From: Campbell, Larry
Sent: Tue 10/9/2001 4:48 PM
To: Jensen, Ruth
Cc: Kendrick, William; Shafer, John
Subject: RE: Staions 3 and 4 air permit comments to EPA
this is what Im trying for.; The permits dont hold us to a mass rate of
emissions, just ppmvd.; We covered ourselves when we presented emisisons
rates of t/yr in the application, but the EPA came back with NSPS limits,
which of course hurt us when we operate at loads of less than 64%.; We can
either cave in to their NSPS limits and when we get under low load condtions,
just do a bunch of recycling which wastes gas, or we can spend some valuable
time trying to get the EPA to give us emission limitations; in lb/hr or
t/yr.; Im discussing this with the EPA permit engineer.;; He is checking with
his management on this issue.; Ill keep you apprised.;;
From:;; Ruth Jensen/ENRON@enronXgate on 10/09/2001 04:36 PM CDT
To:;;;; Larry Campbell/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
cc:;;;; William Kendrick/ENRON@enronXgate
Subject:;;;;;;; RE: Staions 3 and 4 air permit comments to EPA
I agree with your comments.; Can't we get a lb/hr limit (based on the
netting calculations) that we can live with?; We're only required to have a
ppm limit that matches NSPS requirements, and that value would be a lot
greater than 25 ppmv.
Ruth
;-----Original Message-----
From: ; Campbell, Larry;
Sent:;; Tuesday, October 09, 2001 3:55 PM
To:;;;; Jensen, Ruth; Kendrick, William; [email protected]
Subject:;;;;;;; Staions 3 and 4 air permit comments to EPA
Jon and Ruth, presented below are the comments to the air perimts at 3 and
4.; Please review for clairty and content.; I have spoken to Roger Kohn about
all of these issues and the only one which may be a problem is with No. 2.;
He is checking on what the EPA can do about this.; I have spoken to Arnold
Eisenstein about what we can do with the strict 25 ppmvd requriement for NOx
and CO and he has said that we can hold to the 25 ppm value by doing some
major gas recycling.; This is a fuel waste and costly.; Anyway, depending
upon how long this issue delays the issuance of the permit will undoubtably
determine whether we give in to the 25 ppmvd or hold out for 40 ppmvd.; Id
like your comments asap.
;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;; 1.;;;;; The responsible official name change to; Danny
Pribble.
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; 2..;;; The draft permit limits NOx and CO emissions
to 25 ppmv at 15% O2, based on a 3-hour average, except during periods of
startup; ;;;;;;; and shutdown.; At 60F and above the GE data indicates that
these rates are achievable under all operating conditions.; However, GE
;;;; ;;;;;;; data indicates that NOx and CO may be as high as 40 ppmv during
low-load conditions of 60%and lower.
;;;;;;; The permit application represented turbine operations at base load
80% of the time with reduced load operations (64% load) occurring ;; no more
than 20% of the time.; The potential to emit calculations presented the
emissions in the application in units of lb.hr and ton/yr. ;;;; These values
were accepted by the EPA for the netting analysis, and; took were taken into
account by the EPA (See EPA Statement ;;;;;;; of Basis document).; Because
the permit conditions hold us to ppmvd values and not lb/yr or ton/year
values, Transwestern is ;; ;;;;;;; concerned that under low load conditions
of less than 60%, the emissions of NOx and CO would be 40 ppmvd.;
Transwestern is ;;;; requesting that; a provision be made in the permit
conditions that; emissions of NOx and CO be held to 40 ppmvd during the 20 %
of ;;;; the time that the turbines operating conditions is less than or equal
to 60%.
3.;;;;; The word "Catepillar" is mispelled throughout the permit.
4.;;;;; Permit conditions for sulfur testing in the fuel gas requires
Transwestern to use methodologies (wet chemistry technology) that are
not;;; ;;;; normally used to monitor and measure sulfur in the natural gas.;
Transwestern has received approval from the EPA for other custom ;;;;; fuel
monitoring schedules to use; "GPA Standard 2377" (length of stain tube) or
gas chromatography as the proposed methodology; to ;;;; monitor sulfur in the
natural gas.
;;;;;;;; | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Please see the attached per our discussion this afternoon.
I can be reached at 713-853-6027 or 713-416-8814 if you have any questions.
Rick Hill
Generation Investments Group
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
The information in this email may be confidential and/or privileged. This
email is intended to be reviewed by only the individual or organization named
above. If you are not the intended recipient or an authorized representative
of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review,
dissemination or copying of this email and its attachments, if any, or the
information contained herein is prohibited. If you have received this email
in error, please immediately notify the sender by return email and delete
this email from your system. Thank You. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
That's fine. Go ahead and change the deal if you need to.
D
Tom Acton@ENRON
03/02/2000 10:22 AM
To: Daren J Farmer/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vance L Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: WELLS
Dallas at meter 986789 would like to decrease from 12079 to 12000. Let me
know " D " | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Shelley, Sheila, and Galen,
Attached is an excel workbook with worksheets for each individual month's imbalance calculations. Please call or email if you have any questions. Thx, Jim | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
There is an amendment to the TVA Interconnection Agreement in the due
diligence files that is not signed by TVA. Was one ever signed? Please
advise ASAP.
Zisman | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Liz,
I will be out of the office the morning of Wednesday, Feb. 14, 2001.
Thanks,
Errol | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Invoice for this shipment to be due on April 17 per below agreement.
Dan
---------------------- Forwarded by Dan Masters/HOU/ECT on 03/21/2001 09:58
AM ---------------------------
"Joseph McKechnie" <[email protected]> on 03/21/2001 09:58:49 AM
To: [email protected]
cc: "Christopher Skinner" <[email protected]>, "Bradford Witmer"
<[email protected]>, "Rudy Adamiak" <[email protected]>, "Jane
Michalek" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Invoice for April delivery of "Methane Arctic"
Dan: I have discussed the below with Jane, on Rudy's behalf, and we are Ok
with
your proposal of Invoice Due Date of 17 April.
Thanks
Joe
[email protected] on 03/21/2001 03:34:29 PM
To: Rudy Adamiak/Cabot LNG@Cabot LNG
cc: Joseph McKechnie/Cabot LNG@Cabot LNG, Jane Michalek/Cabot LNG@Cabot LNG
Fax to:
Subject: Invoice for April delivery of "Methane Arctic"
Rudy-
Per our conversation last week, the "Methane Arctic" will be delivered on
to EcoElectrica on April 2, but you had mentioned the possibility of
adjusting the due date for the invoice. We didn't discuss an exact date,
but the plant would like to see a due due date of April 17 if that works
for you. Please advise.
Thanks,
Dan Masters
- att1.eml | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Mike:
Here are the answers to your questions. Please give us a call if you have
any more questions. Thanks!
Ben | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
no-just a real man
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 10:07 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
missed it - you must think i am a perve
how is the new floor
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2001 10:06 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
Did you watch the Victoria's Secret Fashion Show last week
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 7:27 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
i thought felicity was supposed to be a good girl??
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 8:41 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
I missed half of it but it was pretty good. Ben found out thatDFelicity cheated on him
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2001 8:04 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
how was felicity??
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 10:27 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
probably
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 9:51 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
you would be so bored
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 9:39 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
Lucky for me that retirement is also an option
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 9:25 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
so - are you going to sign on with reliant or eprime or cinergy or who??
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 9:06 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
possibly-in my old age
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:42 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
a little fiesty this morning??
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:38 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
It was really good. Next wek you can watch Jennfer Lopez-I bet you can watch her bits and pieces.
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:32 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
bits and pieces - you?
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 7:00 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
Did you watch Michael Jackson yesterday?
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 11:41 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
um yeh - - me too, can i fit in your suitcase??
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 10:43 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
My resume is finished and the job offers are pooring in
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 10:26 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
no overlap in EES - have you written yours, or are you just going to retire...
ha ha
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 10:18 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
you should be working on your resume
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 9:57 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
actually forced myself to read last night - trying to get smart
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 9:55 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
They have some cute guy lawyers this year-but I bet you probably watch that manly Monday night Football.
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 9:55 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
bits and pieces - never really got into Ally
i assume you did..
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 9:53 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
Did you watch Ally last night?
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 9:50 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
such a tough life
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2001 9:49 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
I saw the tv advertisement last night for Temptation Island for Thursday. I think it may conflict with Will and Grace. Could be a tough night.
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 4:00 PM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
it looks to be on Thursdays at 8
http://www.fox.com/temptation2/home.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 3:45 PM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
I was looking in the TV guide and did not see where it is on this week let me know if they changed the date and time.
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 11:49 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
um.....no....sorry - i guess he is why you are watching?
aren't there good looking boys on the island?
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 11:20 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
Have you seen Ben on Felicity?
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 11:01 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
i don't understand how you put Felicity on the same level at TI2...
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 10:45 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
I am a desperate person for entertainment-what can I say.
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 10:35 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
that is horrible - i am embarrassed for you...
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 10:31 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
it's on the sasme night as Felicity
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 10:30 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: RE: How good is Temptation Island 2
that's no fun
-----Original Message-----
From: Tholt, Jane M.
Sent: Monday, November 12, 2001 10:27 AM
To: Evans, Ted
Subject: FW: How good is Temptation Island 2
-----Original Message-----
From: Evans, Ted
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2001 7:46 AM
To: Tholt, Jane M.
Subject: How good is Temptation Island 2
I'm not sure I'm going to watch it. None of the people really interest me | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
ISO Market Participants:
As announced in a Market Notice on Thursday, July 19, the ISO will hold a
conference call tomorrow, August 2, to discuss the ISO's proposed process
for granting and terminating termprary waivers of the FERC must-offer
obligation for generating units with long start-up times. The conference
call will take place between 10:30 a.m. and 12:30 p.m. Call-in information
was sent to you in a previous email, and is included in the present
attachment.
Attached to this notice is a document which provides the ISO's responses to
the comments some of you submitted on the July 24 Draft Proposal. Please
review this document prior to the conference call. Thank you.
Byron B. Woertz
Director, Client Relations
Phone: (916) 608 7066
<<Aug. 1 Comments on Must-Offer FINAL.doc>> | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Thanks for letting me know about the change in this deal. I looked at the
audit viewer, and it jogged my memory a bit. Mike originally entered this
deal as Q2 off peak; then he came over to me the next day and said it should
have been Cal'03-Cal'04. So we changed it, and it must have messed up the
strips somehow. Anyway, if it checks out with the broker, that sounds good
enough for me.
Thanks again,
Kate | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
The attached confirm is a swap. There is no need for a rep in the confirm.
If a weather deal is structured as an option, Gordon Heaney (backed by Diane
Anderson) who confirms weather transactions, adds the weather-specific Trade
Option rep into the confirmation. The desk uses a template for options. Let
me know if you have any other questions. Sara
Tana Jones
08/07/2000 10:52 AM
To: Brent Hendry/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: weather confirm
I thought this was what we were already doing. Sara, Mark, wasn't that your
understanding?
Brent Hendry@ENRON
08/07/2000 10:45 AM
To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Re: weather confirm
When the Master does not have the weather modification to the Trade Option
Exemption representation then I think we should include it in the confirm. Is
this feasible?
Tana Jones@ECT
08/07/2000 10:25 AM
To: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brent
Hendry/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Re: weather confirm
Tanya forwarded the attached confirm on to me. Are we supposed to have that
weather rep also in confirmations when we trade under a master?
----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 08/07/2000 10:24 AM -----
Tanya Rohauer
08/07/2000 10:21 AM
To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: weather confirm
---------------------- Forwarded by Tanya Rohauer/HOU/ECT on 08/07/2000 10:17
AM ---------------------------
From: Diane Anderson @ ENRON 08/07/2000 10:09 AM
To: Tanya Rohauer/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: weather confirm | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Learn Technical Analysis
Two Full Days, December 4-5, 2001
Marriott West Loop, Houston, Texas
Energy Traders, Marketers and Buyers. This two full day class serves as both an introduction to those new to technical analysis and a refresher for experienced traders. Technicals are taught in a logical, systematic manner oriented to equip both physical and paper traders to buy low, sell high and manage risk in the real world in a logical, methodical manner.
In this class you will: Ascertain when and how to take profit and cut losses. Find out how to set up a strategy by identifying probable market direction and turns as well as likely targets using chart patterns. Learn to use both traditional indicators like moving averages and stochastics, as well the state-of-the-art methods which won Cynthia Kase the coveted Market Technicians Association's "Best of the Best" award. Content Charting Basics, Types of Charts, Support and Resistance When to Buy or Sell (Entry Techniques) When to Exit Based on Signals (Momentum and Divergence) How to Exit Based on Stops (Managing Trade Risk) Chart Patterns and Forecasting Basics (Candlesticks, Elliott Wave, Flags, etc.) Statistical Hedging
Regular: $995.00 Two or More: $895.00 *** Click Here to Register! *** Click Here for More Information About the Presenters Who Should Attend Detailed Agenda and Schedule Other Classes Offered By Kase [IMAGE] Kase and Company also offers In House Training Classes. For more information please email us at [email protected] or call at (505) 237-1600 | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
As some of you know, I am leaving Enron and heading to Wyoming for a five
month ski trip across Greater Yellowstone this winter. The trip is going to
be on MountainZone.com, a web site that follows outdoor expeditions. After
each part of our trip, we will send in pictures and written updates. Here is
the address:
http://ski.mountainzone.com/2001/yellowstone/html/index.html
My email after leaving Enron will be: [email protected]
It's been a lot of fun working with everyone here. All the best in 2001!
Regards,
Winston | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Hey Robin,
I think your NGMR/AECO/C equiv factors are still out. I checked May 02 and
July 02 and they both have 0.80, whereas it should have 1.00. Please see the
table below. This should hopefully correct our differences!! (currently
about 50 contracts). | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
The information contained herein is based on sources that we believe to be
reliable, but we do not represent that it is accurate or complete. Nothing
contained herein should be considered as an offer to sell or a solicitation
of an offer to buy any financial instruments discussed herein. Any
opinions expressed herein are solely those of the author. As such, they
may differ in material respects from those of, or expressed or published by
on behalf of Carr Futures or its officers, directors, employees or
affiliates. , 2001 Carr Futures
The charts are now available on the web by clicking on the hot link(s)
contained in this email. If for any reason you are unable to receive the
charts via the web, please contact me via email and I will email the charts
to you as attachments.
Crude Spread http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/crudespread48.pdf
Heat Spread http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/heatspread48.pdf
Unleaded Spread
http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/unleadspread48.pdf
Heat Crack http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/heatcrack48.pdf
Gas Crack http://www.carrfut.com/research/Energy1/gascrack48.pdf
Carr Futures
150 S. Wacker Dr., Suite 1500
Chicago, IL 60606 USA
Tel: 312-368-6149
Fax: 312-368-2281
[email protected]
http://www.carrfut.com | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
----- Forwarded by Tana Jones/HOU/ECT on 06/06/2001 08:06 AM -----
Wendi Lebrocq/ENRON@enronXgate
06/05/2001 05:19 PM
To: Karen Lambert/ENRON@enronXgate, Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Samuel
Schott/ENRON@enronXgate, Brant Reves/ENRON@enronXgate, Debbie R
Brackett/ENRON@enronXgate, Cynthia Clark/ENRON@enronXgate, Enron Europe
Global CounterParty/LON/ECT@ECT, Stephanie Sever/ENRON@enronXgate, Tom
Moran/ENRON@enronXgate, Claudia Clark/ENRON@enronXgate, William S
Bradford/ENRON@enronXgate, Lisa Lees/ENRON@enronXgate, Juana
Fayett/ENRON@enronXgate, Jana Morse/Corp/Enron@Enron, Trang
Le/ENRON@enronXgate, Paul Maley/Enron@EUEnronXGate, Sonya Clarke/LON/ECT@ECT,
Tim Davies/LON/ECT@ECT, Karen O'Day/ENRON@enronXgate, Tanya
Rohauer/ENRON@enronXgate, Kelly Lombardi/ENRON@enronXgate, Brian
Lindsay/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, EOL Call Center@ECT, Bill
D Hare/ENRON@enronXgate, Amy Heffernan/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Molly LaFuze/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Danny
Clark/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Stephanie
Panus/NA/Enron@Enron, Teresa Mandola/ENRON@enronXgate, Bill
Kyle/ENRON@enronXgate, Amber Ebow/ENRON@enronXgate, Thu Pham
Arnold/ENRON@enronXgate, Tandra Coleman/ENRON@enronXgate, Lesli
Campbell/ENRON@enronXgate, Wendi Lebrocq/ENRON@enronXgate, Mark
Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: EOL Approvals: 06-05-01
Please see attached
Regards,
Wendi LeBrocq
3-3835 | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Please see the following articles:
Sac Bee, Tues, 6/26: Energy-refund talks open on divisive note
Sac Bee, Tues, 6/26: Daniel Weintraub: Davis' energy contracts preserve
long-term pain
Sac Bee, Tues, 6/26: State, generators lock horns in talks
Sac Bee, Tues, 6/26: Davis commends 3 'heroes' in generator refunds fight
Sac Bee, Tues, 6/26: San Onofre blast released no radiation, spokesman says
Sac Bee, Mon, 6/25: Congress demands list of participants in Cheney energy
meetings
Sac Bee, Mon, 6/25: Creditor expects no quick fix in PG&E's venture into
bankruptcy
LA Times, Tues, 6/26: State, Power Firms Urged to Make a Deal
LA Times, Tues, 6/26: Commerical Real Estate Apartments to Provide Own Power
LA Times, Tues, 6/26: Officials Oppose Utility Choice Power
SF Chron, Tues, 6/26: Billions of dollars at stake as power talks begin
SF Chron, Tues, 6/26: Compromise urged in electricity refund talks
SF Chron, Tues, 6/26: Developments in California's energy crisis
SF Chron, Tues, 6/26: News briefs on California's power crisis
Mercury News, Tues, 6/26: The haggling over refunds is under way
OC Register, Tues, 6/26: Power workers supported
OC Register, Tues, 6/26: Judge sets tone at energy talks
NY Times, Tues, 6/26: California and Energy Providers in Talks Over Electric
Fees
NY Times, Tues, 6/26: Cheney Withholds List of Those Who Spoke to Energy Panel
WSJ, Tues, 6/26: Love, War and California Electricity
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
Energy-refund talks open on divisive note
By David Whitney
Bee Washington Bureau
(Published June 26, 2001)
WASHINGTON -- More than 130 lawyers and corporate chiefs crowded into a
courtroom Monday to begin secret talks aimed at ending months of bitterness
and accusations over who should pay for California's haywire energy market.
But the largely closed-door sessions before a Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission judge could be doomed from the start by sharply divided estimates
of how much money it will take to leave the past behind and launch California
toward a new energy future.
The state says its consumers have been overcharged by at least $8.9 billion,
but Curtis Wagner, FERC's chief administrative law judge who is presiding
over the settlement negotiations, said he believes at most it will be $2
billion to $2.5 billion.
"We told everyone that $8.9 billion is the floor. It is the most conservative
possible number," Michael Kahn, a power grid official who is heading the
state's delegation, told reporters after Monday's talks.
The state's firm stance and Wagner's 15-day deadline for results had many
predicting that little would come of the talks.
"I believe California is going to scuttle the talks. I believe that nothing
will be good enough for them," said Arthur O'Donnell, editor of California
Energy Markets, an industry newsletter.
More than $6 billion of the state's claims involve deals that are ineligible
for refunds because of the seller or the date sold, O'Donnell said. FERC
doesn't have jurisdiction over all traders, and it already has excluded many
months of trades from refunds.
If the parties fail to settle within 15 days, Wagner has another week to
submit his own recommendations to the five FERC commissioners on how he
thinks they should resolve the disputes.
Wagner warned the parties that settlement would be the far preferable course.
"I can tell you now that you are far better off to work out the refund issue
in these settlement proceedings," the blunt-speaking judge said. "The time to
put California's past energy problems to rest and (to) structure a new
arrangement for California's energy future is now."
Wagner held out a carrot to the generators, who have been pummeled by Gov.
Gray Davis and state Attorney General Bill Lockyer over allegations of market
manipulation to drive up prices and their profits. "There are questions
concerning whether the settlement should offer immunity from existing and
future lawsuits and prosecutions against generators," Wagner said.
California argues that power plant owners and traders manipulated a badly
flawed market to drive up prices, racking up $9 billion in overcharges from
May 2000 until May 2001. But electricity sellers say they obeyed the law, and
they contend it's unfair to change the rules retroactively.
Assuming the refund issue is resolved, Wagner said there are at least six
other issues on the table. They include agreement on moving power out of the
volatile spot market and selling it under long-term contracts; eliminating
natural gas transmission constraints blamed for the high cost of gas in
California; and settlement of financial issues connected with PG&E's
bankruptcy filing.
Wagner began the brief, public opening of the negotiations by reading a
statement from FERC's two newest members, Patrick Wood III and Nora Mead
Brownell, the forces behind the order convening the talks.
Wood and Brownell said in a statement that it is in "everyone's best interest
to bring closure" to the crisis, and urged the participants to resist trying
to blame each other for the power debacle. "Everyone must leave (the
negotiations) with more than they came in with," they said.
But skepticism remained high Monday. "We didn't take two weeks to get into
this," said one participant late in the day. "It's hard to see how we'll get
out of this in two weeks."
Among the participants are legal teams representing about 50 government
agencies, utilities and power generators, including Pacific Gas and Electric
Co., Southern California Edison, San Diego Gas & Electric and their corporate
parents and subsidiaries.
The talks also include municipal utilities such as the Sacramento Municipal
Utility District, more than a dozen California towns and irrigation
districts, and utilities in Washington, Montana, Idaho, Colorado, New Mexico
and Arizona.
Meanwhile, FERC commissioners Wood and Brownell were in Sacramento to confer
with Davis and legislative leaders, then conduct a fact-finding hearing with
California regulators on the high price of natural gas.
Brownell and Wood, Davis said, are "committed to working together with us to
drive down the price of natural gas in California to get it closer to what
the rest of the country is paying."
"I think we are turning a corner," he said. "Conservation has been
spectacular. The outlook looks much more positive than it did two months
ago."
For more information: For the latest information on the state's energy
crisis, including rolling blackouts, visit www.sacbee.com. Also, sign up for
the latest news headlines and Stage 3 power alerts at
www.sacbee.com/news/news2go
The Bee's David Whitney can be reached at (202) 383-0004 or
[email protected].
Bee Staff Writers Carrie Peyton and Emily Bazar contributed to this report.
Daniel Weintraub: Davis' energy contracts preserve long-term pain
(Published June 26, 2001)
With blackouts held at bay, federal price controls taking effect and the spot
market cost for wholesale electricity declining toward historic lows, things
are looking good for Gov. Gray Davis. If current trends continue, the
governor's public approval ratings might soon resemble one of those fever
charts tracking the meteoric rise in electricity prices last winter.
But even if his strategy turns out to be a political success, a major problem
created by the governor's approach will loom as a quiet threat to the state's
economy for years to come.
The centerpiece of his solution to the energy crisis was a series of 38
agreements with electricity generators under which the state will buy power
for the next 10 years. Davis signed those deals in desperation, just when
prices were peaking, with the very companies he has been accusing of gouging
the state.
Now that prices have begun to fall, Davis is taking credit. His advisers are
even trying to suggest that the existence of the long-term contracts has
contributed to the more favorable conditions in the market.
"It's economics 101," says David Freeman, one of the governor's closest
energy advisers.
But the most famous rule of economics 101 -- the law of supply and demand --
suggests that the contracts have little, if anything, to do with the recent
decline in electricity prices. In a properly functioning market, prices
decline when supply exceeds demand. When demand chases a limited supply,
prices climb. It's true that the contracts have reduced the state's demand
for power on the spot market. But they also have reduced, by an identical
amount, the supply of electricity available on the spot market. That
shouldn't have any effect on the price.
Long-term contracts, used prudently, are a fine idea, but they are not
necessary for a stable market to exist. For two years after California's
deregulation plan took effect, the state's utilities bought power at
rock-bottom prices without the benefit of any contracts at all. By state
edict, all electricity was bought and sold on the spot market, and as long as
supply was plentiful, the price was low. The generators were standing in line
to sell us their electricity.
Then, a little more than a year ago, things went haywire. Demand caught up
with supply, and at the same time, the price of natural gas, which is used to
produce most of our electricity, rose rapidly. The design of the electricity
system created by the state also appears to have allowed the private
generators to game the market. It's still not clear whether their behavior
was legal or not, but they did gain the upper hand. We needed their
electrons, and the generators suddenly were in the position to demand any
price they liked.
It was at just this moment that Davis decided to lock up as much electricity
as he could under contract. Wanting to avoid a retail rate increase that he
feared would prove unpopular, Davis sought the lowest possible price. To get
it, he signed contracts with the longest possible terms. Shorter terms would
have preserved the state's flexibility for the future. But the governor said
he was willing to pay a price for stability, and so he locked every customer
of Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison into his plan.
Some suggest it's unfair to second-guess Davis now that prices have begun to
decline and his contracts are starting to look expensive. Severin Borenstein,
an economist and energy expert at UC Berkeley, compares the governor's
strategy to buying homeowners insurance.
"If your house doesn't burn down," Borenstein says, "that doesn't mean it was
a mistake to buy the insurance."
The trouble is that Davis bought his policy after the house was already on
fire. Peter Navarro, a UC Irvine economics professor and consumer advocate,
warned at the time that the governor was pursuing a faulty strategy. He
correctly saw then that the same private generators on whom Davis was
declaring war were rubbing their hands at the prospect of signing deals with
the governor at top-of-the-market prices.
"They know there is going to be a highly competitive market in a couple of
years," Navarro told me in March. "Rather than have to fight it out in the
spot market at that point, of course they'd want to lock in 10-year
contracts. The governor is adopting a long-term strategy to address what is
essentially a short-term problem."
Now, with prices drifting back down even sooner than expected, Navarro is
more convinced than ever that Davis erred.
"The contracts were bargained in a panic from the utmost position of
weakness," Navarro said last week. "The cumulative effect of this strategic
error will be a cost in the billions. It will be like driving the California
economy with the emergency brake on."
Voters may never notice the drag. But if companies start eyeing lower
electricity rates in Nevada and Arizona, and jobs get harder to come by, all
of California will be paying a long-term price for the governor's desire to
avoid some short-term pain.
The Bee's Daniel Weintraub can be reached at (916) 321-1914 or at
[email protected].
State, generators lock horns in talks
Davis' $8.9 billion refund call too high, judge says
By Toby Eckert
COPLEY NEWS SERVICE
June 26, 2001
WASHINGTON -- California officials staked out a tough bargaining position
yesterday at the start of talks aimed at resolving disputes over refunds and
other thorny issues arising from the state's power crisis.
California's lead negotiator, Michael Kahn, called the $8.9 billion in
refunds Gov. Gray Davis has demanded from power sellers "an extremely
conservative estimate" and indicated the state would reserve the right to
press for more in court.
The judge overseeing the hearings has called the state's refund estimate too
high.
Some power industry sources, meanwhile, were pessimistic about whether the
negotiations would lead to a settlement between the long-warring sides, given
the state's position.
Some 150 representatives from state agencies, cities, utilities and numerous
power-generating and marketing firms packed a hearing room at the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission for the first day of the talks. The negotiators
will attempt to settle the state's claim that power sellers have gouged
California for more than a year, and the sellers' contention that they are
still owed billions of dollars for power they provided.
Pacific Northwest states were also invited into the discussions and are
seeking $6 billion in refunds from the power companies.
The electricity sellers deny wrongdoing, saying several factors converged to
drive up prices, including California's faulty power deregulation law, a huge
spike in the price of natural gas that is used to generate most electricity
in the state, and a short supply of electricity.
Speaking to reporters during a break in the closed-door session, Kahn said
the state would not trim its estimate of what it believes it is owed for
electricity overcharges. Kahn chairs the Independent System Operator, the
organization that manages most of California's power grid.
"Let there be no mistake. We are not going to ask the courts or FERC in
proceedings for $9 billion. We're going to ask for a lot more money than that
in our litigation position," he said. "The governor has said that he believes
FERC should order refunds at $8.9 billion now."
FERC Chief Administrative Law Judge Curtis Wagner Jr., who is mediating the
talks, has said he believes the refund amount the state is seeking is far too
high. A more realistic figure would be around $1 billion to $2.5 billion, he
said.
Wagner also said that one of the issues up for discussion would be whether
power generators should be offered immunity from current and future legal
action if a settlement is reached.
Kahn argued that the time period subject to refunds should start in May 2000,
when power prices started a dramatic upward spiral in California. Wagner had
indicated he would scrutinize prices going back only to October, when FERC
started examining the market.
When California officials took the price curbs that FERC approved last week
for future power sales and applied them to power charges going back to May
2000, the refunds owed to the state would came to roughly $9 billion, out of
$43.8 billion in total sales, Kahn said.
"I am absolutely confident that we have valid legal claims back to May. There
is no way that we are going to do anything to compromise those claims. That
includes last summer, when San Diegans were terribly overcharged," Kahn said.
"Last summer is a very important period to Californians that are seeking
redress. And we are not going to abandon those claims just because .?.?. FERC
has decided not to include them," he added.
Wagner asked the California officials to provide more information to back
their numbers.
Power sellers continued to maintain that Davis' estimates of excessive power
charges are wildly inflated. One group that represents generators gave a
bleak prognosis on the chances for a settlement.
"It's hard for us to contemplate how we're going to come to some agreement
with 130 players in the room," said Gary Ackerman, executive director of the
Western Power Trading Forum.
"We stand by our business dealings in California," said Richard Wheatley, a
spokesman for Reliant Energy, one of the companies targeted by the state for
refunds. "Our power was priced competitively."
But Wagner, a courtly veteran of such complex discussions, appeared to take
the sparring in stride.
"Everybody has to stick to their guns for a while," he told reporters after
the first day of talks ended. "Everybody has their say, and now we're getting
ready to get down to brass tacks."
Still, the starkly different positions taken by the state and the power
sellers illustrate the daunting task facing Wagner after months of bitter
charges and countercharges between the two sides. FERC, which ordered the
settlement talks as part of its price-curb order, gave the parties 15 days to
reach an agreement.
If they fail, Wagner will have an additional seven days to make a
recommendation to FERC.
"I can tell you now that you are far better off to work out the refund issue
in these settlement proceedings," Wagner admonished the parties before the
hearing room doors were closed to the media. "The time to put California's
past energy problems to rest and structure a new arrangement for California's
energy future is now."
Wagner, who underlined his role as a broker by sitting among the parties to
the talks instead of presiding from the bench, also warned the participants
not to talk to reporters about specific negotiations.
While most of the attention has focused on refunds, Wagner laid out a broad
agenda for the talks, including:
?Moving more power sales in California into long-term contracts and away from
the volatile spot market.
?Ensuring there is a "creditworthy party" to pay for power in California.
?Resolving concerns about the independence of the California grid manager,
the Independent System Operator, whose board is appointed by Davis.
?Exploring natural gas issues, including transportation constraints and high
prices in Southern California.
?The bankruptcy of California's largest utility, Pacific Gas and Electric,
which sought protection from creditors after it was unable to pay soaring
wholesale power costs.
Davis commends 3 'heroes' in generator refunds fight
By Bill Ainsworth
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
June 26, 2001
SACRAMENTO -- Gov. Gray Davis praised three former employees at Duke Energy's
Chula Vista plant as "heroes" yesterday for coming forward with allegations
that Duke policies created power shortages that raised electricity prices.
For the second time in recent days, the three plant veterans dominated events
in Sacramento with explosive allegations of mismanagement and market
manipulation by a company that has reaped enormous profits in California.
Ed Edwards, Glenn Johnson and Jimmy Olkjer made those claims, under oath, on
Friday before a state Senate committee.
Davis and other Democratic politicians yesterday said these first insider
accounts of how power plant operations might have manipulated prices will
help the state in its attempt to get $9 billion in refunds from Duke and
other energy generating companies.
"There's no question in my mind a lot of money has been stolen from
California, and these men are going to help us get it back," said
Assemblywoman Barbara Matthews, D-Tracy.
The ex-employees told Davis that Duke risked jeopardizing equipment by
constantly powering the 706-megawatt plant up and down, dumped new spare
parts and took working turbines off-line for "economic reasons."
Davis said the power plant workers confirmed his suspicions that North
Carolina-based Duke and other companies engaged in price gouging.
"There's a concerted effort to suck every dime out of California and send it
back to Houston or North Carolina," he said.
Davis cautioned that he hadn't yet heard Duke's version of events. "The
company is entitled to their point of view," he said. "But they've got some
explaining to do."
Duke Energy spokesman Tom Williams called the governor's meeting with the
former workers "unfair and unproductive."
Williams said a review of company logs shows that during a Stage 3 energy
alert the Chula Vista plant powered down under orders from California's
electricity grid manager, the Independent System Operator.
He said the company was doing its job by supplying the state with "spinning
reserves" that could be added to the system in 10 minutes to balance the load
-- that is, to make sure that supply equaled demand.
ISO spokeswoman Stephanie McCorkle said the agency buys four types of
ancillary services to balance the load, including spinning reserves.
But she said only Duke can release information from Jan. 16. Williams said
Duke soon plans to release logs from that day and several others.
Meanwhile, another former Chula Vista plant employee confirmed the
allegations of the other three workers. All of them had worked for San Diego
Gas & Electric when the utility owned the plant before Duke took over its
operation. Duke was required to keep the SDG&E employees on for two years,
but it then let many of them go.
Rick Connors, a former operator who turned down an offer from Duke to stay on
at the South Bay plant, said the plant output frequently was down for
"economic reasons."
The governor brought up those allegations during a subsequent meeting with
two new FERC commissioners, Pat Wood and Nora Brownell. Davis asked the
federal regulators to look into possible price gouging, the high price of
natural gas and the $9 billion in refunds he is seeking.
After meeting with Davis, Wood said he thinks California will emerge from the
energy crisis in 2003 or 2004 and become an energy trendsetter. He said he
believes California leaders have the will to build more power plants and
improve natural gas pipelines that fuel new generators. But he cautioned that
there will be "some short-term pain."
"I think you folks will seem some blackouts this summer," he said.
Staff writer Ed Mendel contributed to this report.
San Onofre blast released no radiation, spokesman says
But motorists on I-5 weren't so sure
By Bruce Lieberman
UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER
June 26, 2001
SAN ONOFRE -- Charlene Engel was driving with a few friends up Interstate 5
Sunday when she saw flames and smoke shoot suddenly skyward from the nuclear
power plant.
Pieces of silvery material were fluttering through the air and drifting
toward the freeway. Traffic began speeding up.
"Everybody sort of saw it and thought, 'Oh my God, have we just been
irradiated or what?'?" said Engel, a Rancho Bernardo artist.
In fact, the explosion of a transformer was far outside the twin reactors at
the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, and posed no radiation danger, Ray
Golden, a plant spokesman, said yesterday.
But Engel and her friends, who were heading to the Los Angeles County Museum
of Art for a Winslow Homer exhibit, didn't know that. "You don't actually
know how things are hooked up, so you don't want to hang around," Engel said.
"We moved north pretty quickly."
Santee resident Richard Carrico, whose niece was driving him to Dana Point,
said the fireball rose about 50 feet. "My God, I thought she was going to
faint," said Carrico, 93.
No one was injured in the explosion, which occurred at 11:03 a.m. and was
followed by a fire that lasted about 40 minutes. The transformer was
destroyed, but no other equipment at the plant was damaged and the twin
reactors continued to operate at full power without interruption, Golden
said.
Yesterday, San Onofre investigators were still trying to figure out why the
transformer failed. They should have some answers, and a new transformer
installed, in about a week.
The transformer was one of 54 in the plant's switching yard used to reduce
the voltage of a sample of outgoing electricity. The so-called "potential
transformers" step down the current sample to 115 volts so instruments can
test the amperage and wattage. Electricity leaves San Onofre at 238,000 volts
in transmission lines.
The explosion scattered shards of ceramic and aluminum debris, and 90 gallons
of burning insulation oil, hundreds of feet, Golden said. Pieces of the
transformer, some as large as one foot square, landed on Old Highway 101.
Plant operators feared debris would land on I-5, but the California Highway
Patrol did not report any there, a dispatcher said. The CHP received several
911 calls from drivers reporting a fireball.
The last time a potential transformer exploded at the plant's switching yard
was in 1994, Golden said. Plant workers discovered that corrosion caused by
ocean air rusted the transformer's carbon-steel casing, allowing water to
enter and contaminate the insulation oil.
After that, the plant replaced four transformers and repaired three. All are
periodically washed down with high-pressure fire hoses to prevent corrosion,
Golden said. He would not speculate on the cause of the latest explosion, or
whether it could lead to the replacement of other transformers.
"If the root cause shows that it needs to be repaired or replaced, it will,"
he said.
Although Sunday's explosion did not shut down the plant or release any
radiation, it was the latest in a string of mishaps this year. On Feb. 2, a
faulty circuit breaker ignited a fire and cut off lubricating oil to Unit 3's
turbine generators, causing about $45 million in damage and shutting the
reactor down for four months.
On May 30, a portable crane dropped 40 feet to the ground when a sling on a
large gantry crane failed. On June 6, workers inadvertently overfilled a
300-gallon steel bin with hydrazine, a toxic chemical used to purify water in
the plant's cooling systems, spilling about 20 gallons.
Golden said the four accidents this year do not indicate that the plant is
unsafe. "We perform hundreds, if not thousands, of work activities a day," he
said.
Congress demands list of participants in Cheney energy meetings
By Scott Lindlaw
ASSOCIATED PRESS
June 25, 2001
WASHINGTON ) Congressional investigators are intensifying pressure on the
White House to identify who met privately with Vice President Dick Cheney's
energy task force.
The General Accounting Office has sent Cheney's lawyer a 10-page letter
asserting a legal right to the lists and advising Cheney that it may make a
formal demand for the information, rather than the polite requests it has
made in recent weeks.
Comptroller General David M. Walker "is prepared to issue a demand letter ...
if we do not receive timely access to the information," the GAO said in a
10-page letter dated Friday from office General Counsel Anthony H. Gamboa to
David S. Addington, attorney for the vice president.
The GAO is the investigative arm of Congress, and it has legal authority to
federal agency records under the law. A demand letter could begin a legal
battle: It would give Cheney's office 20 days to respond, either by turning
over the names, or providing a reason why it is not compelled to do so, said
Lynn Gibson, a lawyer for the GAO.
If Cheney declined to turn over the records, the GAO would notify Congress
and Attorney General John Ashcroft, among others. The GAO would also be
authorized to file a civil action in court seeking the record, Gibson said.
She knew of no previous case in which the GAO was forced to go to court to
obtain agency records.
The White House team that developed the national energy plan, released last
month, met with more than 130 interest groups, from environmentalists and
unions, often at odds with Republicans, to major Bush supporters who got
private sessions with Cheney.
Reps. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., and John Dingell, D-Mich., in April asked the
GAO to provide information on who served on the task force, what information
was presented to the panel, who presented it and what the task force spent.
The White House has asserted that the GAO does not have the authority to ask
for names of participants. However, it agreed that the GAO is entitled to
financial records of the task force, and two administration officials said
the vice president's office provided 77 pages of financial documents to the
GAO last week.
The GAO contends it is entitled to a wider range of records. Federal law
"extends GAO's audit authority to all matters related to the use of public
money, not just matters related to costs of activities," it argued in its
letter to Cheney. "Over the years, GAO has conducted many reviews that
involve a wide range of White House programs and activities."
Juleanna Glover Weiss, a spokeswoman for Cheney, declined to comment on the
GAO's assertions, other than to say, "I'm sure the GAO and the vice
president's office will be talking about that."
Waxman and Dingell called on Cheney to provide the information they seek.
"The vice president should stop stonewalling and start cooperating with GAO's
investigation," Waxman said Monday. "Congress is entitled to know the
identity of the special interests that met with the Cheney energy task
force."
Creditor expects no quick fix in PG&E's venture into bankruptcy
By Ed Mendel
June 25, 2001
SACRAMENTO -- California's biggest utility, Pacific Gas and Electric, thought
it was moving toward an early exit from the power crisis by filing for
Chapter 11 bankruptcy in early April.
The top PG&E executive, Robert Glynn, optimistically told a Wall Street
publication that he hoped a settlement might be negotiated with creditors in
four to six months.
But an official with one of the 12 parties on the PG&E creditors committee,
which includes the Bank of America and the state of Tennessee, said he does
not see a quick end to the bankruptcy.
"My personal opinion," David Adante, executive vice president of Davey Tree
Surgery, said last week, "is that it's going to take longer than everyone
would like."
Adante said he thinks a resolution is likely to go beyond the bankruptcy
court and involve the state Public Utilities Commission, Gov. Gray Davis and
perhaps the Legislature.
"The rate part won't be resolved in the bankruptcy process," said Adante.
Davey Tree Surgery, which is based in Kent, Ohio, trims trees that encroach
on power lines for several California utilities.
PG&E owes Davey Tree $13 million, making it one of the smallest creditors on
a committee that includes big power providers, Enron and Dynegy, and big Wall
Street firms, Morgan Guaranty and Merrill Lynch.
A turning point in the PG&E bankruptcy may have come earlier this month when
the federal bankruptcy judge, Dennis Montali, declared that electricity rates
should be set by state regulators.
Experts disagreed about whether a bankruptcy judge could order a rate change
for a utility without the approval of state regulators, in this case the PUC.
"The public interest is better served by deference to the regulatory scheme
and leaving the entire regulatory function to the regulator," Montali ruled.
PG&E said it entered bankruptcy because the regulatory process failed,
denying a rate increase last fall that might have prevented the utility from
running up what it says is a debt of at least $8 billion.
PG&E also said the political process failed when, among other things, the
governor's negotiator broke a handshake agreement that included the state
purchase of PG&E's transmission system.
"But we have said all along that intersection with the regulatory and
political process would probably reoccur," a PG&E spokesman said last week.
The Legislature, after months of delay, held a hearing last week on the
governor's plan to keep Southern California Edison out of bankruptcy, which
includes the state purchase of the Edison transmission system.
Legislative leaders say the plan is too generous to Edison. Undaunted, Davis
hopes to win legislative approval of some version of his Edison plan, and
then persuade the PG&E creditors committee to accept a similar plan. But even
if Davis can get his rescue plan approved by the Legislature and the PG&E
committee, it's likely to be challenged with a ballot initiative by consumer
groups, who denounce the proposal as a "bailout" for utilities.
Meanwhile, the period in which only PG&E can file a bankruptcy reorganization
plan ends Aug. 5, allowing creditors or other parties to make proposals. And
if the Legislature does not act by Aug. 15, the agreement that the governor
negotiated with Edison can be waived by either party.
But of course, as with most things in the electricity crisis, the deadlines
could be extended.
ED MENDEL is Capitol bureau chief for the Union-Tribune.
State, Power Firms Urged to Make a Deal
Energy: Mediator says a refund pact would benefit both sides. Meanwhile,
Davis tones down his rhetoric as regulators come calling.
By MEGAN GARVEY and DAN MORAIN, Times Staff Writers
?????WASHINGTON--After being vilified for months by Gov. Gray Davis, federal
energy regulators here and in Sacramento took steps Monday to show they are
determined to respond to California's energy crisis.
?????A top federal regulator began mediating Davis' demand for nearly $9
billion in what the governor says are overcharges by power generators--and
warned a room full of dark-suited lawyers, energy executives and state
officials here that they will be "far better off" if they decide among
themselves how big a refund the state is due.
?????Meanwhile, in Sacramento, Patrick H. Wood III and Nora M. Brownell,
President Bush's first appointees to the five-member Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, spent the afternoon conferring with Davis and
legislative leaders. Then they held a fact-finding hearing with California
regulators on the high price of natural gas, the fuel that spins most new
electricity turbines in California.
?????"We're going to be working together through tough issues," Brownell
said. "We're going to work through them and solve them and move forward. It
is a lot easier when people have sat down and gotten to know each other."
?????Davis has been attacking federal energy regulators--a majority of whom
are holdovers from the Clinton administration--for failing to take a variety
of steps to bail California out of its energy woes.
?????On Monday, however, Davis toned down his bellicose attacks on the
federal commission. Brownell and Wood, Davis said, are "committed to working
together with us to drive down the price of natural gas in California to get
it closer to what the rest of the country is paying."
?????"I think we are turning a corner," Davis said, as temperatures across
the state were moderate and electricity demand was low. "Conservation has
been spectacular. Californians have responded heroically. The federal
government is now finally taking some positive actions. The outlook looks
much more positive than it did two months ago."
?????The developments in Washington and Sacramento come as Davis issues
campaign-style demands for more aid from the federal government and as polls
show that voters are skeptical of how Davis and Bush are handling
California's energy crisis.
?????Republican lawmakers in Sacramento contend that the regulatory
commission has granted Davis virtually everything he has sought. The
commission earlier this month imposed temporary price restraints, a step
Davis said is helping to lower wholesale electricity prices paid by the state.
?????Senate Republican leader Jim Brulte said Monday that he has "no doubt"
the commission, known as FERC, will order power generators to issue refunds
to California, as Davis has requested.
?????But Brulte, of Rancho Cucamonga, also predicted that Davis will find the
order wanting: "The governor's game is a political one. . . . The Davis
administration has a clear strategy--that no matter what FERC does, it isn't
enough."
?????In Washington, the roughly 150 participants who showed up for day one of
a 15-day settlement conference on refunds showed little sign they were ready
to agree, at least not yet.
?????For now, the differences remain considerable: about $9 billion in
refunds demanded by California's representatives at the talks, plus $6
billion more that other Western states say they have been unfairly charged.
Power generators hotly dispute those figures.
?????"The time to put California's past energy problems to rest and structure
a new arrangement for California's energy future is now," said Curtis L.
Wagner, the chief administrative law judge for FERC. "We can do it if we try."
?????Wagner, who told reporters last week he believed refunds of about $2
billion were probably justified, is mediating the closed-door talks. Davis is
asking that the refunds cover the period since May 2000.
?????"These out-of-state energy companies are taking us for a ride," Davis
said in a brief interview in Sacramento on Monday. "I am determined to get
every penny back that California is owed. The generators have bilked us
mercilessly, and I'm fighting back. I'm not giving up nothing."
?????Consumers wouldn't see refunds directly. Rather, the money would go to
the state or to private utilities, such as Southern California Edison, for
electricity purchases made during the energy crisis.
?????Participants in the Washington meeting represent about 70 entities with
stakes in the electricity dispute. If they fail to reach agreement among
themselves within the allotted 15 days, Wagner will have seven days to make a
formal recommendation of his own to FERC's five-member governing board.
?????The settlement negotiations are confidential; Wagner promised those
present he would shred his notes and transcripts at their completion. He
allowed reporters in the hearing room, where oversized pots of coffee perched
on every table, only long enough to listen to his opening remarks and to a
prepared statement he read from two of the five FERC commissioners.
?????Wagner, who asked that all sides send advocates with the authority to
reach an agreement, said the issues to be resolved include:
?????* Refunds for past electricity purchases, including how much money is
involved and who needs to be paid.
?????* Moving additional quantities of electricity off the spot market and
into long-term contracts.
?????* Ensuring that generators receive payment for electricity already
provided.
?????* The bankruptcy of Pacific Gas & Electric.
?????Wagner said the talks also should address whether any settlement
provides generators with immunity from existing and future lawsuits and
prosecutions.
?????The statement from FERC commissioners Wood and Brownell encouraged
participants to "focus on what they absolutely need and not what they want."
But sorting out which is which may prove challenging.
?????The head of California's delegation, for example, reiterated Davis'
demands for $8.9 billion in refunds.
?????"We want our refunds. We want them now," Michael Kahn, one of Davis' top
energy advisors, told reporters during a break in the negotiations.
?????Kahn said the officials he is representing--the governor, state
legislators, the Electricity Oversight Board and the Public Utilities
Commission--consider the $8.9 billion figure to be an "extremely conservative
estimate."
?????He indicated the delegation had little interest in relinquishing the
right to sue for additional funds, even if power generators offered to make
refunds for time periods before the Oct. 2 cutoff that FERC has proposed.
?????As they have in the past, electricity generators staked out a far
different position, characterizing as "absurd" the state's overcharge
estimate.
?????"We've done absolutely nothing wrong," said Tom Williams, a spokesman
for Duke Energy Co., adding that his company was "gratified that all the
parties are at the table to discuss this."
?????The settlement negotiations were mandated by FERC last week as the
agency put in place an expanded "price mitigation plan" for Western
electricity markets.
---
?????Garvey reported from Washington, and Morain from Sacramento.
Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times
Business; Financial Desk
Commerical Real Estate Apartments to Provide Own Power
MORRIS NEWMAN
?
06/26/2001
Los Angeles Times
Home Edition
Page C-1
Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company
With its wall of fins, abstract patterns and varying surfaces and colors,
Colorado Court in Santa Monica is shaping up to be a real head-turner.
But the apartment complex is no mere exercise in style over substance. What
makes the project groundbreaking in power-starved California is that it will
generate nearly all its own energy: electricity , heat and hot water, all
from alternative technologies.
The 44-unit complex at 5th Street and Colorado Avenue, scheduled to open in
October, will be adorned with 199 solar panels, which will supply about a
third of the building's electricity . The rest of the power will come
primarily from a micro-turbine, a generator that runs on clean-burning
natural gas. Southern California Edison will supply only a fraction of the
building's energy needs.
"Colorado Court is unique because the building will produce 92% of its own
power, which is very significant," said Bob Johnson, managing director of
California Energy Coalition, a nonprofit energy conservation group based in
Laguna Beach. In comparison, solar power sources for a proposed single-family
subdivision in Placer County would supply 30% to 50% of household energy
needs.
Intended as "single-room occupancy" housing for low-income renters, the
$5.8-million Santa Monica project has become a closely watched test case of
still-experimental electricity generation equipment.
Though not outlandish, the Colorado Court building probably will make many
driving down 5th Street look twice: Framed inside a rectangular shell of
light-colored plaster and concrete is a giant window of dark glass; the
"window" is an assemblage of many solar panels. The rear of the building is
covered in an abstract pattern of vertical fins; the fins shade the
building's southern face from direct sunlight.
Sensible Concept for Low-Income Tenants
Although some may be surprised that a building intended for low-income
residents is the beneficiary of expensive energy technology, the concept
makes sense for people with limited incomes, said Robin Raida, project
manager for the builder, Community Corp. of Santa Monica. Energy efficiency
is "especially important in affordable housing, because our tenants don't
have extra money to spend on high utility bills," she said.
A host of public and private entities--including the cities of Santa Monica
and Irvine, Southern California Edison and the California Energy
Coalition--are involved in planning, funding and monitoring the innovative
building. The two cities, the conservation group and the utility have formed
a group known as Regional Energy Efficiency Initiative, which has contributed
about $250,000 to energy-saving devices in the building. In addition, Santa
Monica itself is contributing about $250,000 toward electricity generators.
The building will be loaded with energy-saving and environmentally benign or
"sustainable" devices. Heat from the micro-turbine will produce hot water,
eliminating the need for a conventional water heater.
The project also uses compact fluorescent lighting throughout the building,
insulation made from recycled material and double-pane windows with a layer
of heat-retardant krypton gas. Each apartment will be equipped with
energy-saving refrigerators that do not use chlorofluorocarbons, the widely
used refrigerant linked to damage in the Earth's ozone layer.
Prevailing breezes will cool the building, which will have no mechanical air
conditioners. The U-shaped structure "acts like a giant wind scoop," said
architect Larry Scarpa, a principal of Santa Monica-based Pugh & Scarpa.
In yet another "green" flourish, the building will collect all the rainwater
from the alley behind the property and funnel it into a series of underground
chambers. The water will slowly percolate back into the soil, which will
filter the pollutants from the water while preventing contaminated water from
spilling into Santa Monica Bay. The drainage system was paid for separately
by the city of Santa Monica.
The concept of a building that would be energy self-sufficient emerged about
two years ago, when Santa Monica officials met with members of the California
Energy Coalition. The city's Housing Division, which funds construction of
low-income housing, chose to make a low-income housing project into a dream
project of "green" construction, and Colorado Court became the target.
"We needed a demonstration project because a lot of developers feel that the
technologies are unproven," Raida said.
A number of apartment buildings in Santa Monica and Irvine are to be equipped
with energy-saving technology by the Regional Energy Efficiency Initiative,
but the Santa Monica building is the only project attempting to provide its
own power as well.
Rebates from the state Energy Commission helped defray the high cost of the
energy-generating equipment. The state's rebate on the solar panels, which
cost about $225,000, will be about $62,000. The $57,000 micro-turbine and
heat exchanger will yield a $15,000 rebate from Southern California Gas Co.
If recent research and development has yielded new ways of conserving energy
and producing electricity , regulations and building codes have not kept
pace.
Prospects Uncertain for Conventional Buildings
In one instance, architects had to obtain special permission from the city to
hang solar panels outside the exterior stairwells because building inspectors
said the solar panels "enclosed" the stairwells and triggered requirements
for floors, ceilings and fire-rated walls.
If energy-saving devices and electrical generators make sense for a building
that has $500,000 in subsidies, do the same costly materials make sense for a
conventional apartment building? Opinions vary.
Even with rebates, the added cost of the conservation and energy-generating
equipment may be a hard sell for developers of market-rate apartment units.
Such developers often sell their projects shortly after completion and might
not be able to fetch a higher price for energy-efficient buildings.
For a nonprofit like Community Corp., which plans to retain ownership of its
buildings for 80 years, the added front-end cost could be worthwhile because
the equipment will hold down energy costs for low-income tenants for years.
California ; Metro Desk
Officials Oppose Utility Choice Power: They say users leaving traditional
firms could jeopardize state's repayment of $50 billion in energy purchases.
TIM REITERMAN
?
06/26/2001
Los Angeles Times
Home Edition
Page B-1
Copyright 2001 / The Times Mirror Company
Consumer choice was a mantra when California moved in 1996 to restructure its
electricity industry. But the right of utility customers to shop around for
power is falling victim to the state's own strategy to drag itself from the
energy debacle.
Warning of a "spiral of declining customers and rising power rates," top
state officials are calling for swift action to curtail the freedom of
utility patrons to buy from alternative electricity providers.
They fear that California 's ability to pay for nearly $50 billion in past
and future electricity purchases would be jeopardized unless regulators or
legislators suspend or restrict the state's so-called direct-access program.
A flight of customers from the traditional utilities, the officials say,
would saddle the remaining businesses and consumers with paying off an unfair
share of those billions.
Under direct access, thousands of utility customers--ranging from big
commercial and industrial users to environmentally aware residential
consumers who wanted "green power"--signed up with companies promising lower
prices, better service or the security of long-term contracts.
But the energy crisis changed all that.
In January, the state's Department of Water Resources became the major
electricity purchaser for most Californians, as skyrocketing wholesale prices
put Pacific Gas & Electric Co. and Southern California Edison deeply into
debt and many suppliers refused to sell to them. The same legislation that
authorized the department's purchases called on the California Public
Utilities Commission to suspend direct access until the state stops buying
power--which could be almost two decades under some of the long-term
contracts the state has signed with suppliers.
The commission is poised to vote Thursday on a proposal to suspend direct
access by July 1, and it is expected to pass. Bills in the Legislature would
resurrect the program while requiring new customers to pay "exit fees"
designed to protect the state's planned $13.4-billion bond sale for
electricity purchases, but the proposals have been mired in negotiations.
In any case, state officials say they can ill afford to lose big commercial
and industrial users as utility customers help pay off the state's current
$8-billion power tab and more than $40 billion in long-term power contracts.
"If such customers are permitted to 'exit the system' without [paying] their
share of costs incurred by DWR . . . the burden of covering debt service
payments will fall on a smaller base of remaining customers, significantly
and unfairly increasing their power rates," said a June 12 memo from state
Treasurer Phil Angelides and the heads of the Finance and Water Resources
departments to the PUC and the Legislature.
"There is a concern that as power rates paid by the remaining customers would
rise, customers would have additional economic incentive to abandon DWR
power, creating a spiral of declining customers and rising power rates," the
memo said.
Statewide, the total number of direct-access customers has fallen from a peak
of more than 200,000 to about 88,000 in mid-May. Figures from the California
Energy Commission show that these customers--including hotel and hospital
chains, factories, farms, the state's university systems and about 78,000
residences--accounted for about 2.1% of the power consumed in California .
The level of participation by residential customers was 1.1%--about a third
as high as for large commercial and industrial customers.
The penetration rates were much higher early this year, when about 13% of
industrial users had direct-access contracts. But many providers sent their
customers back to Edison, PG&E and San Diego Gas & Electric, as wholesale
energy costs soared and they could not compete with the utilities, whose
rates were frozen by the 1996 deregulation law.
One provider, AES NewEnergy, claims 60 to 70 customers, ranging from
mom-and-pop stores to grocery chains. About a year ago, the company had 150
to 200 customers.
"Direct access is at the heart of the concept of competition and choice,"
said Aaron Thomas, the company's manager of government relations. "The [PUC]
order stinks, and it is not necessary to put a stake in the heart of direct
access to float a bond."
Said Rick Counihan, a spokesman for Green Mountain Energy: "Unless we see a
legislative solution, direct access is dead. We're being driven out of
California ."
Green Mountain, a Vermont-based company that sells power from renewable
sources, has seen its California customer base shrink from 60,000 to 7,000,
all in San Diego and Orange counties.
Although they have never fled en masse to direct access, many businesses and
institutions want to maintain direct access as an option, especially because
it is uncertain whether the state's power contracts will prove to be a
bargain or a bust in the long run.
Bill Dombrowski, president of the California Retailers Assn., representing
more than 50 large companies, said it is important to maintain direct access
as an option because "the market is in a shambles."
"At its peak, before the market was dysfunctional, you saw 5% to 10%
reductions [in electricity rates] compared to local utilities, which is
significant dollars when you are talking about larger companies," he said.
Like other proponents, Dombrowski maintains that the fears expressed by state
officials and Wall Street bond underwriters are exaggerated.
"Realistically, you will not see a wave of people going to direct access," he
said.
The utilities commission measure, which would halt new direct-access
enrollments, was put off until this week in hopes that a solution could be
worked out in Sacramento. PUC Commissioner Jeff Brown, one of three
appointees of Gov. Gray Davis on the five-member commission, said that, like
the governor, he favors direct access on philosophical grounds but sees no
way to avoid suspending the program.
"We are tied up in the realities of the bond sale," he said. "If the
Legislature wants to do something in the future, fine."
Commissioner Richard Bilas, another supporter of direct access, acknowledges
that "it could at the margins jeopardize the bond sale." But direct access,
he said, "is what restructuring was about in the first place. . . . Without
it, you no longer have restructuring."
Advocates of direct access remain hopeful that a legislative solution could
balance the desires of the business community and the bond underwriters. A
bill by state Sen. Debra Bowen (D-Marina del Rey) would require exit fees and
other provisions sought by state finance officials.
Billions of dollars at stake as power talks begin
MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer
Tuesday, June 26, 2001
,2001 Associated Press
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2001/06/26/financ
ial0338EDT0014.DTL
(06-26) 00:38 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) --
Energy users and providers are billions of dollars apart in their estimates
of how much the power crisis in the Western states has cost. The federal
official overseeing confidential settlement talks wants them to come to terms
quickly.
With just two weeks to reach agreement, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
chief administrative law judge Curtis L. Wagner said he wants all sides to
start using realistic numbers when they meet Tuesday for the second day of
negotiations.
"Now we're getting ready to get down to brass tacks," Wagner said Monday,
after the first day of talks.
Led by California, Western states say power-generating companies overcharged
them by $15 billion in the past year.
Michael Kahn, California's chief negotiator, said the $9 billion in refunds
his state claims it is owed should be the first order of business. "We want
our refunds. We want them now," said Kahn, chairman of the California
Independent System Operator, which manages the state's power grid.
The states claim that the companies unfairly drove up prices to take
advantage of a power shortage. Prices frequently surpassed $300 a
megawatt-hour, 10 times what they were in 1999. One megawatt is enough to
power about 750 homes.
The power companies argue that the charges were justified. In some cases,
older, more costly power plants were pressed into service to deal with the
high demand and tight supply.
Wagner attributed the states' claims to the rhetorical flourishes that often
accompany the start of negotiations. "Everybody has to stick to their guns
for a while," he said.
The judge, who is playing a mediator's role in the negotiations, said he has
seen nothing to change his previously stated view that refunds in any
settlement probably would not exceed $2.5 billion.
He cautioned all sides that a brokered settlement would be preferable to a
plan he would recommend to federal regulators should talks fail.
More than 150 people representing about six dozen entities gathered in a
government hearing room for negotiations. The talks were one result of a
federal order last week extending price controls on spot power sales in
California and imposing limits in 10 other Western states.
Wagner laid out several issues negotiators will have to tackle, including how
much generators are owed for power they supplied to California without
getting paid.
The size of the refunds and the unpaid bills "must be, both ways, resolved at
the outset to put everyone on the same playing field," Wagner said. Any
settlement probably would also have to answer whether the generators should
have immunity from existing and future lawsuits and prosecution, he said.
The parties also have to try to reach agreement on additional long-term power
contracts, which would reduce the amount of power California would have to
purchase on the volatile spot market.
The attendees included representatives from California and a dozen city and
county governments, investor-owned and municipal utilities, power generators
and natural gas companies.
On the Net: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission: www.ferc.gov/
,2001 Associated Press ?
Compromise urged in electricity refund talks
Zachary Coile, Chronicle Washington Bureau
Tuesday, June 26, 2001
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/06/26/M
N122522.DTL
Washington -- With armies of lawyers on each side, California officials and
representatives of the nation's power generators began the first day of
federally ordered settlement talks yesterday far apart on the issue of
electricity refunds.
California officials, including attorneys for the investor-owned utilities,
stuck to their claim that the state was owed nearly $9 billion in alleged
overcharges by the generators.
But electricity suppliers were equally adamant in their opposition to
refunds, arguing the prices they charged were legitimate. Suppliers are
demanding payment for billions of dollars they are owed for electricity
already sold into the state.
The mediator in the talks, veteran Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
administrative law Judge Curtis L. Wagner Jr., warned both sides they would
have to compromise -- or accept a settlement imposed by federal regulators.
"The time to put California's past energy problems to rest and structure a
new arrangement for California's energy future is now," Wagner said. "We can
do it if we try."
The difficulty of the task was made clear when the judge asked those in the
hearing room yesterday to stand and identify themselves. About 140 people --
nearly all lawyers -- stood to declare which state, city, power exchange or
generator they represented.
In addition to a host of energy firms, other Western states are involved in
the talks. Officials in Washington and Oregon say they may ask for up to $6
billion in refunds.
Wagner opened the talks by reading a letter from new FERC Commissioners
Patrick Wood and Nora Mead Brownell urging both sides to compromise.
"Parties must only focus on what they absolutely need, not what they want,"
the statement read. "This is not the place to debate the shopping list, nor
is it the place to assign blame."
If the parties can't settle the money fight in 15 days, Wagner will have
seven days to recommend action to FERC's five commissioners.
"I can tell you now that you are far better off to work out the refund issue
in these settlement proceedings than to have me recommend an answer to the
commission," Wagner said.
As the talks started in Washington, Wood and Brownell met yesterday in
Sacramento with Gov. Gray Davis, legislative leaders and other groups
involved in solving the energy crisis.
Davis said in a statement that he was more encouraged by FERC's actions
recently since the two joined the regulatory body.
"In a refreshing change . . . these commissioners offered a problem-solving
approach in resolving California's energy challenge," Davis said.
Wood expressed optimism the settlement talks would be fruitful.
"I think it is far better to settle than to stretch out through litigation,
even if the state were to ultimately prevail," he said. "This is really
(about) businesspeople who need to re-establish a business relationship that
has been poisoned."
Although the divide between California officials and the generators is vast,
some have faith in the mediator, a 72-year-old judge with a track record of
reaching settlements in difficult cases.
"He's a miracle worker," said FERC commissioner William Massey. "He's very
good at persuading parties that it's in their best interests to settle rather
than proceed" with lawsuits.
Wagner set the tone yesterday by ordering reporters out of the hearing room
after half an hour explaining the ground rules. And Wagner warned
participants to keep the discussions confidential.
"I would hate to read something in the business section tomorrow that
somebody said here today," Wagner said.
Michael Kahn, chairman of California's Independent System Operator, said the
state would hold firm to its request for $8.9 billion in refunds. Any refunds
would go to the electricity buyers -- the utilities and the Department of
Water Resources, which has bought energy on behalf of the state since
January.
But to suppliers, even the word "refund" is an unacceptable term.
"Certainly, you will not find a supplier who will agree that they have been
overcharging anyone in California, so clearly any refund obligation will be
contested," said Mark Stultz, a vice president of the Electric Power Supply
Association, which represents the generators. "The suppliers will argue the
charges were appropriate for the market conditions."
State officials may face difficulty recovering the full amount, based on
electricity sales from May 2000 to May 2001. Under FERC rules, overcharges
can only be authorized after a formal investigation is ordered, which began
Oct. 2,
2000.
"There is no way that we're going to do anything to compromise those claims,
" Kahn said. "That includes last summer, when San Diegans were terribly
overcharged. That includes last summer, when there were no credit problems,
and the gas situation was not anywhere near as severe as it was later in the
year, and still there were hideous (electricity) prices."
POWER ISSUES
These are some of the items administrative law Judge Curtis L. Wagner Jr.
expects to tackle during settlement talks between Western state officials and
power generators:
-- -- California's claim that the generators overcharged the state by nearly
$9 billion for electricity.
-- Generators' claims of overdue payments, estimated at several billion
dollars, due them from PG&E and other utilities.
-- Long-term power contracts, which would reduce the amount of power
California must purchase on the volatile spot market.
-- Ensuring a creditworthy party to pay for power.
-- Natural gas prices and pipeline capacity, particularly in Southern
California.
-- PG&E's bankruptcy proceedings. Source: Chronicle staff and news services
Chronicle staff writer Lynda Gledhill contributed to this report from
Sacramento. / E-mail Zachary Coile at [email protected].
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 3
Developments in California's energy crisis
The Associated Press
Tuesday, June 26, 2001
,2001 Associated Press
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2001/06/26/state1
039EDT0149.DTL
(06-26) 07:39 PDT (AP) --
Developments in California's energy crisis:
TUESDAY:
* No power alerts Tuesday as electricity reserves stay above 7 percent.
MONDAY:
* Gov. Gray Davis meets with three former energy company employees he calls
"heroes" for testifying that Duke Energy reduced power production at times
when the state needed it most, charges the Charlotte, N.C.-based company
denies.
* A Federal Energy Regulatory Commission hearing officer begins attempting to
negotiate a settlement between the state and energy producers over the $9
billion Davis says the state is owed for overcharges.
* FERC commissioners Pat Wood and Nora Brownell meet with Davis and attend
California Energy Commission meeting.
* The Senate, by a 34-0 vote, gives final approval to a resolution asking
Congress to allow states to extend daylight-saving time to the full year to
save energy. The resolution by Sen. Betty Karnette, D-Long Beach, will be
sent to Congress and President Bush.
* A bill to give customers a one-month schedule of when they might be
vulnerable to rolling blackouts is rejected by the Assembly Energy Costs and
Availability Committee.
* In a pre-emptive strike against rolling blackouts, Azusa's city-owned
utility encourages industries to shut down before power supplies get tight.
* No power alerts Monday as electricity reserves stay above 7 percent.
* Edison International stock drops 41 cents to $11.57. PG&E Corp. falls 25
cents to $11.70. Sempra Energy rises 19 cents to $26.94.
WHAT'S NEXT:
* Three Senate committees plan hearings on Davis' proposal to aid financially
strapped Southern California Edison: Natural Resources Committee Tuesday,
Energy Committee Wednesday and Judiciary Thursday.
* Senate Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation sets a Thursday
deadline for power generators to comply with document subpoenas or face
contempt citations.
THE PROBLEM:
High demand, high wholesale energy costs, transmission glitches and a tight
supply worsened by scarce hydroelectric power in the Northwest and
maintenance at aging California power plants are all factors in California's
electricity crisis.
Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas and Electric say they've lost
nearly $14 billion since June to high wholesale prices the state's
electricity deregulation law bars them from passing on to consumers. PG&E,
saying it hasn't received the help it needs from regulators or state
lawmakers, filed for federal bankruptcy protection April 6. Electricity and
natural gas suppliers, scared off by the companies' poor credit ratings, are
refusing to sell to them, leading the state in January to start buying power
for the utilities' nearly 9 million residential and business customers. The
state is also buying power for a third investor-owned utility, San Diego Gas
& Electric, which is in better financial shape than much larger Edison and
PG&E but also struggling with high wholesale power costs.
The Public Utilities Commission has approved average rate increases of 37
percent for the heaviest residential customers and 38 percent for commercial
customers, and hikes of up to 49 percent for industrial customers and 15
percent or 20 percent for agricultural customers to help finance the state's
multibillion-dollar power buys.
Track the state's blackout warnings on the Web at
www.caiso.com/SystemStatus.html.
,2001 Associated Press ?
News briefs on California's power crisis
Tuesday, June 26, 2001
,2001 Associated Press
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2001/06/26/state0
539EDT0120.DTL
(06-26) 02:39 PDT TEMECULA, Calif. (AP) --
Residents who live along a proposed power line through southwestern Riverside
County are infuriated that San Diego Gas & Electric Co. officials would step
foot on their property to conduct land surveys without asking first.
The company recently mailed letters to residents who may be affected by the
proposed 31-mile power line that will connect its grid to a unit operated by
Southern California Edison. The letter informed residents that crews would be
conducting the surveys over the next few months.
Company officials said they are protected by law to survey the land. But
opponents said it is unclear if the company has access to the property
because legal questions have been raised about the utility's eminent domain
powers.
Some residents have threatened to call police if SDG&E officials come on
their property.
"I was furious," said Eve Brehm, 73, who lives in the affected area. "They
haven't bought it yet (her land) and they don't have my permission to be out
there."
Company officials said the letters are giving residents proper notification
for work that needs to be done.
"We are doing everything we can to avoid any inconvenience to property
owners," said SDG&E spokeswoman Jacqueline Howells. "There is no legal
requirement for notification, but we sent the letters out as a courtesy to
keep the property owners informed."
SAN CLEMENTE, Calif. (AP) -- A transformer explosion at the San Onofre
Nuclear Generating Station caused a fire outside its twin reactors but no one
was injured, said a plant spokesman.
Sunday's explosion posed no radiation danger to people, according to plant
spokesman Ray Golden, but it did scare a few motorists who were driving by
the reactors and saw a fireball rise 50 feet into the air.
"You don't actually know how things are hooked up, so you don't want to hang
around," said Burt Engel, who was driving from San Diego to Los Angeles
County. "We moved north pretty quickly."
The explosion occurred shortly after 11 a.m. and was followed by a fire that
lasted about 40 minutes. The transformer was destroyed but no other equipment
was damaged, Golden said. The twin reactors continued to operate without
interruption.
The explosion sent shards of aluminum and ceramic debris skyward, some of it
landing on Old Highway 101. None of the debris fell on nearby Interstate 5,
authorities said.
The transformer was one of several dozen that is used to reduce the voltage
of a sample of outgoing electricity. The explosion was the fourth accident at
the plant this year.
A faulty circuit breaker caused a fire in February that cut electricity to an
oil pump which lubricates steam turbines. The accident forced the closure of
one of its generators for four months. Repair work cost nearly $50 million.
,2001 Associated Press ?
The haggling over refunds is under way
Posted at 9:40 p.m. PDT Monday, June 25, 2001
BY JIM PUZZANGHERA
Mercury News
WASHINGTON -- The warring parties in the California electricity crisis
funneled into a room here Monday morning to try to cut through the animosity
and agree how much in refunds the state will get from energy suppliers.
Billions of dollars are at stake as legal teams from California, its
utilities and dozens of power suppliers try to negotiate a settlement by July
10. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission set up the settlement conference
to resolve California's claims that energy suppliers have overcharged the
state $8.9 billion for power since last spring.
The commission has ordered about $124 million in refunds for a small portion
of that time. Power companies balk at the suggestion they overcharged, saying
it is they who are owed billions by state utilities that haven't paid their
bills for electricity purchases.
Deadlock warning
If the parties can't settle the dispute during the talks, Judge Curtis
Wagner, a straight-talking, 72-year-old administrative law judge, will
recommend a solution to the commission.
``I can tell you now that you're far better off to work out the refund issues
in these settlement proceedings than to have me recommend an answer to the
commission,'' Wagner warned the 150 participants before the confidential
talks began. ``The time to put California's past energy problems to rest and
structure a new arrangement for California's energy future is now. We can do
it if we try.''
Early indications were that a settlement will be difficult, although state
and federal officials in Sacramento talked with optimism about a new level of
cooperation.
But at the meeting in Washington, the head of California's team gave no
ground Monday, reiterating the state's position that it wants all of the $8.9
billion Gov. Gray Davis demanded during congressional testimony last week.
Michael Kahn, chairman of the state's Independent System Operator, said that
all the parties in California -- the governor, the attorney general, the ISO,
the Public Utilities Commission and the three investor-owned utilities -- are
presenting a unified front.
``We are all together along with representatives from the Legislature,'' Kahn
said, ``in saying the same thing to FERC and saying the same thing to the
generators: We want our refunds. We want them now, and we want that to be the
first order of business.''
Kahn said the $8.9 billion figure is bolstered by initial estimates by the
state of overcharges if a new price-limit formula approved by the commission
last week had been in effect since May 2000. The total is ``an extremely
conservative estimate,'' he said, and the state will ask for ``a lot more
money'' if the issue is referred to the commission for action, or if the
whole dispute goes to court. The total amount of electricity purchases by
California and its utilities during that 13-month period was $43.8 billion.
But how far back the state could seek refunds is one of several issues Wagner
said must be determined in the settlement talks. The commission has said it
has authority to order refunds only from last October, though everything is
subject to negotiations. Wagner said last week he believes the amount
suppliers owe the state is about $2.5 billion.
The state estimates it was overcharged $2.94 billion from May 2000 to
September 2000, according to a confidential ISO breakdown obtained by the
Mercury News. The breakdown of alleged overcharges by 44 suppliers goes only
through February 2001, when the state estimated overcharges at $6.8 billion,
a figure recently updated through the end of May to $8.9 billion.
For the whole period from May 2000 to February 2001, the biggest
over-chargers were Williams Energy Services Corp., $861 million; Duke Energy
Trading and Marketing, $805 million; and Southern Company Energy Marketing,
$754 million.
Other concerns
Among other subjects to be negotiated are who should get refunds and immunity
for suppliers from future lawsuits for overcharges. In convening the
negotiations, FERC commissioners said they hoped many issues could be
addressed in addition to refunds, including more long-term contracts between
the state and power suppliers.
At the end of the first day of talks, Wagner said the state and some others
were digging in. In all, about 50 parties sent representatives, ranging from
energy suppliers to utilities to municipalities. Wagner admonished them all
to keep the talks confidential.
``Everybody has to stick to their guns for a while,'' he said, noting the
negotiations may have to go late into the evenings and into weekends to meet
the deadline.
In Sacramento on Monday, the newest commissioners to join FERC -- Pat Wood
and Nora Brownell -- praised California for its handling of the energy
crisis.
Wood, a Texan appointed by President Bush and expected to become the next
FERC chairman, said he had come to California to help ``patch up'' the
state's strained relationship with federal regulators.
After meeting with Davis and legislative leaders, Wood said he was ``more
hopeful today than I was at any time in the past year.''
``They are very committed to getting this energy cowboy back on the bucking
bronco,'' he said.
Davis, who has bashed Bush and federal regulators for weeks, also changed his
tone.
``From my conversations with these commissioners, it appears that FERC may
finally be poised to do its job controlling energy costs,'' he said in a
prepared statement.
Mercury News Staff Writer Dion Nissenbaum contributed to this report.
Power workers supported
Earlier testimony about deliberate manipulation of power plants is backed up
by a new group of employees.
June 26, 2001
By KIMBERLY KINDY
The Orange County Register
SACRAMENTO A second wave of former power-plant workers stepped forward Monday
to say they witnessed power merchants intentionally damage generators -
including some in Orange County - a practice they believe led to price
gouging of Californians.
The generating companies, Duke Energy and AES Corp., also denied the new
round of allegations, made by a half-dozen workers who took their stories
public or contacted legislators with offers to provide sworn testimony.
One of those speaking out Monday, a former manager at Duke's Chula Vista
plant, told The Orange County Register that he supports the testimony of
three former colleagues who Friday told a Senate committee that new parts at
the plant were destroyed, routine maintenance was neglected and generators
were unnecessarily throttled down.
Rick Connors said that unlike the three Chula Vista plant workers who
testified earlier, he was offered continued employment by Duke and cannot be
dismissed by the company as a terminated employee with an ax to grind.
"I listened to the entire hearing. I can tell you that everything they said
was the truth; nothing they said was even a stretch,'' said Connors, who has
decided to retire and become a card dealer instead of working for Duke, which
took over the plant from San Diego Gas & Electric and laid off many of his
experienced co-workers.
Connors and another new witness, Dan Davis, a former electrician at the
AES-owned Huntington Beach plant, each on Monday said they saw maintenance
schedules at their respective plants abandoned and generators constantly
turned on and off, which damaged them.
"They learned that they would operate one generator and make more money than
if they were operating three,'' said Connors.
Conners had worked at the plant 20 years before Duke took it over in 1998 and
said he was familiar with generation levels before and after the takeover.
Conners said that even though Duke dramatically cut back on how much it ran
its generators in the first year, Duke executives boasted to employees at a
company party that they had made as much money in their first year as SDG&E
had made in the previous five.
Similarly, Davis said, the generators at the AES plant in Huntington Beach
would be ramped down and quickly ramped up again.
He believes this wear and tear coupled with a lack of maintenance not only
helped create an immediate scarcity in the market but also created an
environment of constant breakdowns - which created further scarcity.
"At first I thought they were stupid,'' said Davis, who now works for the
union representing plant workers. "I had been there 10 years and I was
watching them destroy the plant. But then I saw how it made them money.
Breakdowns made them money."
Both companies vigorously denied the allegations.
"Any talk of us intentionally breaking down equipment is ludicrous,'' said Ed
Blackford, manager of the AES plant. "When our units break down, we lose
money. We have commitments and if we can't produce that electricity, we have
to go out into the market and buy it."
Duke spokesman Tom Williams said he is sure the workers saw changes in the
way the plants were operated after deregulation - but said their conclusions
of price-fixing and gouging are off base.
"It's highly offensive to us,'' said Williams. "They were seeing things from
their own viewpoint and they don't see the full picture."
Duke took out a full page ad in today's Orange County Register and other
newspapers that says the powering up and down was done at the order of the
Independent System Operator, which manages the state's power grid. Williams
acknowledged, however, that some of those orders were made by Duke itself,
but couldn't say what percentage.
The advertisement doesn't address the allegation that equipment was
intentionally mistreated or replacement parts scrapped, although Duke said
earlier that the parts were obsolete and it was more cost-efficient to order
parts as needed.
ISO spokeswoman Stephanie McCorkle said its orders to power suppliers to ramp
generators up and down are confidential and she could not verify Williams'
explanation. However, the ISO, she said, would give Duke orders to ramp up
and down no more often than every 10 minutes.
A review of three days of logs obtained by the Register showed that on more
than a dozen occasions, orders were given in two-, three- or four-minute
intervals - the so-called dramatic "yo-yoing" of the generators that some
legislators say indicates Duke was acting by itself.
Williams said the bottom line is that forced outages at the Chula Vista plant
were done under Duke's control just 1.1 percent of the time, compared to 1.8
percent under SDG&E.
Those numbers, however, are disputed. Frank Wolak, a Stanford economics
professor who oversees the ISO's market-surveillance committee, said the
forced outage numbers have only been reliable for the past six months.
"There is no independent verification of these numbers until Jan. 1, 2000,
until the governor required that they report this information every single
day,'' Wolak said. "That information isn't any good."
Wolak also said the employees are correct about the destructive results of
the constant ramping up and down, comparing it to the wear and tear on a car
that travels through a succession of city traffic lights vs. a clear freeway.
The governor Monday stood by the three former Chula Vista workers who
testified Friday, calling them "brave individuals."
"I am enormously proud of these people who would step forward, risk the
harassment and retaliation these big energy companies are known for," Davis
said just before having breakfast with the men.
Judge sets tone at energy talks
He suggests that all sides, including the state delegation, would be better
off settling.
June 26, 2001
By DENA BUNIS
The Orange County Register
WASHINGTON On the first day of talks over how to settle billions of dollars
of refund claims and other issues surrounding California's electricity
crisis, a federal energy judge gave a friendly warning to the more than 140
people in his hearing room:
"I can tell you now that you are far better off to work out the refund issue
in these settlement hearings than to have me recommend an answer to the
commission," Curtis L. Wagner, chief administrative law judge for the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, said Monday.
The FERC ordered a 15-day settlement conference for stakeholders in the
electricity crisis to resolve such issues as alleged generator overcharges,
how much generators still have to sell to California and the future of
long-term contracts.
The first day ended where it began:
"California wants $8.9 billion worth of refunds," Michael Kahn, chairman of
California's Independent System Operator and Gov. Gray Davis' representative
at the talks, said during a break.
Kahn and the rest of the state delegation met for 90 minutes with Wagner on
Monday afternoon. Kahn then got on a plane for California. The state has
until Wednesday to produce more information for the judge.
Wagner later met with power sellers in an effort to understand their
position, which is that the state's refund figure is laughable.
"Now we're ready to get down to brass tacks," Wagner said. The veteran energy
jurist wasn't phased by Kahn's and Davis' hard line on the $9 billion refund
figure, even though Wagner signaled last week that a couple of billion in
refunds is more likely.
"Everybody has to stick to their guns for a while," Wagner said. The judge
wouldn't say how he arrived at his refund estimate. But within Davis' $9
billion estimate is more than $4 billion that he says is owed to the state by
entities over which the FERC has no control, such as municipal power
companies. In addition, the state has calculated the $9 billion based on
alleged overcharges from May 2000 to May 2001. The FERC began calculating
overcharges in October 2001.
There's no way, Kahn said, that the state will abandon its overcharge claims
for last summer.
The first day's proceedings were largely theater. The conference started with
a statement from Wagner, including his reading of a letter from new FERC
Commissioners Patrick Wood and Nora Brownell, both of whom were in Sacramento
on Monday researching the natural-gas issue.
"This is not the place to debate the shopping list," the letter said. "Nor is
it a place to assign blame. Everyone must leave with something more than they
came in with."
Then representatives from the power sellers, the utilities, the state and
interests from throughout the West introduced themselves to each other.
After that, Wagner closed the conference and admonished all the parties not
to talk about what goes on in the closed hearing room.
Business/Financial Desk; Section C
California and Energy Providers in Talks Over Electric Fees
By JOSEPH KAHN
?
06/26/2001
The New York Times
Page 7, Column 1
c. 2001 New York Times Company
WASHINGTON, June 25 -- For the first time since the end of the Clinton
administration, California and the companies that sell it electricity sat at
the same table today to try to resolve a multibillion-dollar feud over the
state's energy bills.
California is demanding that power companies refund as much as $9 billion for
what it says were overcharges, while power companies say that the state's
nearly insolvent utilities owe them billions of dollars. City and state
officials from across the West are also participating in the negotiations.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission convened the talks, which are
scheduled to last up to two weeks. The sessions are the first since top
Clinton administration officials tried and failed to broker a settlement to
California 's electricity crisis in their waning days in office.
''The time to put California 's past energy problems to rest and structure a
new arrangement for California 's energy future is now,'' said Curtis Wagner,
an administrative law judge for the energy commission who is presiding over
the settlement talks.
The proceeding, which was standing-room-only on opening day, attracted scores
of people representing multiple sides in the dispute. The main participants
are electricity generating companies, electric utilities, and public
officials from state and local governments and regulatory agencies.
Mr. Wagner urged the public officials and companies involved to reach an
agreement on how much California and other states in the Western grid should
have paid for power over the last year, when California 's partly deregulated
market broke down. He said that if they failed to do so by July 10, he would
recommend a solution to the energy agency's five commissioners, who would
then have the option of imposing a settlement.
Wholesale power costs in California , which totaled $7 billion in 1999,
soared to about $27 billion last year and, by some state estimates, could
double again this year. The higher costs, which have not been fully passed
along to consumers, have rendered California 's two main utility companies
unable to pay their bills and forced the state to buy power in their place.
The opening bid by Gov. Gray Davis, who set out his views in a letter sent to
the energy commission today, is that the leading electricity generators
should refund about $9 billion that ''they have overcharged the people of the
state of California .'' Michael Kahn, chairman of the California Independent
System Operator, is leading the state delegation.
Generating companies have dismissed that figure as grossly inflated. They
acknowledge that prices are high. But they say the charges are linked to
shortages of natural gas, a crucial fuel for electricity generation, and were
set fairly in a free market.
The companies also contend that a large proportion of what they have billed
California is a credit premium justified because wobbly utilities owe them as
much as $15 billion. Reliant Energy, Duke Energy, the Williams Companies, the
Enron Corporation and the Mirant Corporation are among the major sellers of
electricity in the Western region.
The energy commission, which has the duty of determining ''just and
reasonable'' electricity prices under a New Deal-era law, long ago found that
the California market had become dysfunctional and that prices were
unjustified. But the agency has struggled to come up with a method for
determining fair rates, changing its method three times in recent months.
So far, the agency has identified about $125 million in potential
overcharges. But that number was reached using a restrictive method that the
agency has since abandoned.
Last week, the agency adopted a new price control regime that is intended to
limit price spikes throughout the West. If the controls it is using now were
retroactively applied to electricity sales made over the last year, the
generators would be asked to refund much more money. By some estimates, the
refunds could total more than $1 billion but seem likely to fall well short
of the $9 billion California is seeking.
National Desk; Section A
Cheney Withholds List of Those Who Spoke to Energy Panel
By JOSEPH KAHN
?
06/26/2001
The New York Times
Page 17, Column 1
c. 2001 New York Times Company
WASHINGTON, June 25 -- Vice President Dick Cheney has declined to identify
the people who met privately with his energy task force, raising tensions
with Congressional investigators who have repeatedly requested the
information.
The General Accounting Office, an investigative arm of Congress, sent Mr.
Cheney's office a letter late last week complaining that a month had passed
since it first submitted an inquiry about the workings of the task force. The
letter said the vice president had a legal obligation to provide the
information immediately.
Mr. Cheney's office said the letter was sent one day after it submitted 77
pages of documents to the accounting office.
''Our correspondence crossed in the mail,'' said Juleanna Glover Weiss, a
spokeswoman for Mr. Cheney.
But Ms. Weiss said the vice president had not provided the names of people,
including industry executives, who may have influenced the formation of the
Bush administration's energy policy, which was released last month.
''Our counsel and the G.A.O. will continue to talk about this,'' Ms. Weiss
said.
The energy task force Mr. Cheney headed spent several months compiling a
lengthy energy strategy that contained about 150 recommendations for
administrative and legislative actions to address what it termed an energy
crisis.
Administration officials have said that they met with a wide variety of
people concerned about energy issues, including executives of oil, natural
gas, electricity , nuclear power and energy infrastructure companies. They
have declined to provide a list of people who had access to the task force.
Some Democrats have asserted that leading Republican donors had special
access to the task force and that the energy policy is skewed toward measures
favored by major corporations. Two Democratic representatives, Henry A.
Waxman of California and John D. Dingell of Michigan, asked the accounting
office to report on the officials who served on the task force, what
information was collected by the panel, whom they met with and how much the
task force spent.
The White House provided the G.A.O. with the financial records of the task
force. But administration officials have told the investigative body that
they are not compelled to provide the names of outsiders who met with the
task force.
The accounting office's general counsel, Anthony H. Gamboa, said in a letter
to Mr. Cheney's office last week that the investigative body is entitled to
more information.
The letter warned that if the White House does not provide the full range of
information the G.A.O. is seeking, it may issue a ''demand letter,'' a more
formal request. Under the law, the White House would have 20 days to respond.
If the dispute continues, the accounting office could bring a civil action
against the administration.
Love, War and California Electricity
By Susan Lee
?
06/26/2001
The Wall Street Journal
Page A22
(Copyright (c) 2001, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)
California 's energy crisis presents at least a dozen major policy issues,
but perhaps the most complicated question -- and the one with the least
satisfactory solution -- is who should pay for past power usage.
Specifically, who should pay wholesale electricity suppliers for juice that
was consumed after wholesale prices rose fiercely above fixed retail prices?
Between May 2000 and January 2001, before the state of California intervened,
a $14 billion gap opened up between what the suppliers charged and the
utilities could pay.
Right now, nobody is paying. To be sure, Gov. Gray Davis has issued a
memorandum of understanding in which he suggests that ratepayers would bear
part of the repayment burden in the form of a surcharge on their electricity
bills, and taxpayers would bear another part in helping fund the state's
purchase of utilities' transmission grids. But the memorandum is just a vague
promise, and is already in deep political trouble.
It isn't fair to leave power suppliers hanging; the power was used and must
be paid for. The problem is that, just as in love and war, the California
energy mess no longer has a fair solution.
There are several groups of potential payers. The No. 1 target group is
consumers, or ratepayers, on the grounds that they used the power and thus
should pay its market cost. Yet consumers demanded the amount of power they
used based on its low retail price. It's hardly fair to now go back and raise
the price retroactively. After all, if the price had been higher, consumers
would have used less of it.
A second group of potential payers are the taxpayers, on the grounds that
this is a big political and regulatory problem for the entire state of
California . Since most taxpayers are voters and since voters are ultimately
responsible for the acts of officials they elect, fairness dictates that
taxpayers ought to suffer the punishment for the botched deregulation scheme.
But this solution, too, has flaws. Although sticking taxpayers with the bill
might result in taxpayers (to the extent they are voters) throwing the
political and regulatory bums out, it doesn't locate the economic burden
efficiently. As distinct groups, taxpayers and consumers may overlap, but
they aren't identical.
And then there is a third group -- the utilities themselves -- on the grounds
that they shouldn't have been running around buying power they knew they
couldn't afford. Although this may satiate a certain blood lust (who doesn't
loathe utilities?), utilities are regulated companies and operate under
regulatory constraints and imperatives. Accordingly, they bought power on
behalf of ratepayers and they bought it like mad until they went bankrupt.
Too, it might be argued that shareholders have already "paid" -- shares of
Pacific Gas & Electric and Southern California Edison have lost 50% to 60% of
their value since the crisis began.
There is one other group of sitting ducks, the suppliers, on the grounds that
they are, in the words of Gov. Davis, pirates and marauders who profited from
California 's crisis. But aside from basic questions of equity, suppliers
have already paid a price in the form of (still mounting) legal bills to
defend themselves from charges of profiteering, as well as in the lost
opportunity to deploy the money owed to them. Moreover, suppliers already can
be expected to bear some of the payment burden since Mr. Davis has indicated
they will not be repaid dollar for dollar,
Finally, there is the group who is most at fault but the least likely to
suffer -- the regulators and politicians -- on the grounds that they pretty
much created the mess and they surely haven't moved to clean it up.
Regulators, most pointedly, because they refused to let the utilities hedge
their purchases of electricity when they pleaded to do so in 1999.
Politicians, in particular the governor, because they dithered for over a
year, preferring to blame the problem on someone else. Although putting this
group out of work might be the most satisfying civic outcome, the solution is
a flop if financial restitution is the goal.
The latest, most popular approach to solving the mess is to look at the
transfer of wealth, required in any case, that would take place under each
payment scenario. This is what some of California 's politicians mean when
they complain that full restitution means transferring $14 billion from the
state of California to the evil out-of-state power suppliers. But, as Irwin
Stelzer, economist at the Hudson Institute, points out, there is a long
history of wealth transfers to tote up.
Initially, when the botched deregulation plan was agreed to several years
ago, it involved a transfer of wealth from ratepayers to shareholders. That
is, the utilities were concerned about making back their so-called stranded
costs, mostly from overbudget nuclear power plants. Those stranded costs were
to be paid by fixing, or freezing, rates at a level that would provide "pay
back" to the utilities for their nuclear construction. However, when
wholesale prices shot up a year ago, the utilities (and their shareholders)
were caught paying much more money for power than the rates they were allowed
to charge. And so the transfer of wealth reversed itself -- shareholders
subsidized ratepayers.
Now, if Mr. Davis's memorandum of understanding becomes operative, the
transfer of wealth changes again. Ratepayers will get socked by a surcharge
on their electricity bills and taxpayers by the state's purchase of
transmission lines. Taxpayers might also get hit if the bond issue goes off
as planned in August and, as expected, erodes California 's credit quality.
That erosion would mean that all state agencies that issue bonds would be
required to pay higher interest rates. (In fact, California 's bond rating
has already been downgraded by two major rating agencies.)
Simply put, looking at the transfers of wealth doesn't yield a clear-cut or
fair solution to the payment problem either.
All this leaves politics to dictate the answer, and the shape of it is
already apparent. Suppliers, ratepayers, taxpayers and shareholders will bear
the cost while the politicians and regulators evade the consequences. In
short, the unfairness of love and war doesn't hold a candle to politics in
California .
---
Ms. Lee is a member of the Journal's editorial board. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Ferc 101/102
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
Understanding FERC's Role and How it Impacts Rapidly Changing Wholesale Power Markets Across the U.S.
[IMAGE]
FERC 101/102: Changing Wholesale Power Markets February 11-12, 2002 - New York, NY ? March 4-5, 2002 Chicago, IL Click Here to Download a Complete Conference Brochure
[IMAGE]
Includes Special In-Depth Analysis of Pending Federal Legislations, Causes and Consequences of the Enron Meltdown and Potential Impact of FERC's Decision to Revoke Authority to Sell Power at Market-Based Rates [IMAGE] Attend and learn about FERC, the California Crisis, market power and steps FERC under Pat Wood is likely to take to reshape the power industry in coming months. Course Locations & Dates February 11-12, 2002 New York, NY March 4-5, 2002 Chicago, IL 18 hours of CLE Credit available! $150 Early Bird Registration Discount available for payments received by deadline. Energy Business Watch's "FERC ELECTRICITY COURSE 101" provides a comprehensive overview of how FERC's actions affect the power industry for those seeking to get up to speed or refreshed on what the Agency does and how it affects wholesale power markets. The course also examines how FERC's role is changing under Pat Wood (the Commission's new Chairman) and provides an overview of what to expect next as a result of the Enron bankruptcy, pending federal legislation and FERC's new test for assessing market power. Energy Business Watch's "FERC ELECTRICITY COURSE 102" examines in-depth the most important federal issues facing the power industry, including lessons leaned from the California experience, the Commission's new Supply Margin Assessment (SMA) test for assessing market power, the continuing debate over transmission pricing and price caps, FERC's changing approach to enforcement and the likely outcome of FERC's efforts to force formation of "Super-Regional" RTO's.
Click Here to Download a Complete Conference Brochure
[IMAGE]
This pair of FERC courses is presented by Andy Weissman, Publisher of Energy Business Watch and Chairman of Energy Ventures Group, Energy Business Watch's parent company Andy is a well-known expert on electric utility industry restructuring, with over 25 year's experience as a partner in major law firms practicing before the FERC and state regulatory commissions throughout the United States. He has advised over 40 major investor-owned electric utilities, independent power producers, natural gas suppliers and power marketers on all aspects of FERC practice and procedure and helped FERC to formulate new policy for the industry. In recent years, he has been a leader nationally in bringing innovative new technologies to the power industry helping to launch companies now backed by several of the largest players in the industry. Earlier in his career, Andy helped to pioneer the market for buying and selling emission rights under the Clean Air Act, structuring numerous precedent-setting deals. He has presented the FERC 101 & 102 program on 19 prior occasions at locations across the U.S.
[IMAGE]
Energy Business Watch is a new daily news service linking the worlds of Washington, Houston and New York and points in between with intelligence and analysis that goes beyond the headlines, by some of the most experienced reporters covering energy today.
[IMAGE]
Click Here to Download a Complete Conference Brochure | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
FYI
---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES on 03/24/2000
10:31 AM ---------------------------
From: John Hardy@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 03/24/2000 09:28 AM
Sent by: Helen Rizzo@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
To: Tom Briggs/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: (bcc: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES)
Subject: Re: Bank lobbying
Tom,
Rick reminded me that I hadn't responded -- sorry. Here are my my
adjustments, but I think the document on the whole is very good.
John
Tom Briggs@ECT
02/28/2000 09:53 AM
To: John Hardy/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:
Subject: Bank lobbying
John: I have outlined some ideas in the attached draft memo. I am not clear
whther we are preparing a formal policy memo articulating why and how we
should approach the Bank (and other IFIs) or whether I should be doing
something entirely different. Give me your thoughts. | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Steve, Greg and Maria will be flying out on the following schedule:
Monday, December 3 3:30p - 4:54p
Tuesday, December 4 3:30p - 4:54p
Steve's Flight?
Monday, December 3 2:40p - 5:15p
Monday, December 4 2:00p - 4:35p or
5:05p - 7:33p
Hotel - O'hare Hilton (the meeting will take place here)
Hotel - Hyatt seven blocks away
Let me know which would you prefer....
adr
Audrey D. Robertson
Transwestern Pipeline Company
email address: [email protected]
(713) 853-5849
(713) 646-2551 Fax | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
To close the loop on this, I think Lori should review Bob's findings and
comment on same once she returns from vacation. SWD
"Baird, Bob" <[email protected]>
06/30/00 04:10 PM
To: "'Horton, Stan'" <[email protected]>
cc: Steve Duffy/Houston/Eott@Eott, "Pena, Carlos" <[email protected]>
Subject: Available Cash for the Fourth Quarter
CONFIDENTIAL/ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE
Stan:
I have given considerable thought to the issue you raised in the
meeting on June 15 -- that is, whether the amount of Available Cash for the
fourth quarter of 1999 could be recomputed so that the issuance of APIs for
that quarter could be rescinded. My delay in getting back to you was
occasioned by the fact that I went on vacation shortly after that meeting
and just returned to work yesterday.
The reason the question is worth exploring is this --- Enron Corp.
has certain rights under its support agreement with EOTT, and it is entitled
to exercise those rights notwithstanding the fact that it also has a
fiduciary duty as a controlling shareholder. I approached the question
solely as counsel for Enron and from the standpoint of evaluating the merits
of any claim that Enron could make that the API issuance should be
rescinded. From that standpoint it is no different from asking: if EOTT
were dealing with an unrelated third party would that third party have a
claim for rescission? Unfortunately, based on the facts as I understand
them, I have been unable to formulate a claim that has sufficient merit to
be worthy of assertion, as explained below.
The computation of Available Cash for any quarter is based on (a)
cash receipts and disbursements and (b) increases or reductions in cash
reserves, which the General Partner "determines in its reasonable discretion
to be necessary or appropriate." Thus, the question is whether there is a
basis for recomputing the cash receipts or the reserves for the fourth
quarter.
Cash Receipts. I would think there may well be a valid claim in a
situation in which EOTT made a mistake in its calculations of cash receipts
or disbursements, even if that mistake was discovered several months later.
It is my understanding, however, that the scrub-down of the books for the
fourth quarter turned up only immaterial discrepancies from the amounts that
had been calculated for the fourth quarter in mid-February, when the
distribution of Available Cash for the quarter was made. Thus, I am aware
of no meritorious argument that Enron is entitled to rescission because of
EOTT's mistakes in calculating its cash receipts or disbursements for the
quarter. That being the case, the only other issue that is worth focusing
on is the reserves.
Reserves. The only component of the reserves that I am aware of
that is large enough to bear scrutiny is the theft-related insurance item.
There were no cash receipts from the insurance prior to the distribution, so
any claim for rescission must focus on the amount of reserves for the fourth
quarter. If the level of reserves was determined in a manner that was not
consistent with the "reasonable discretion" standard set forth in the
partnership agreement, Enron would have a valid claim for rescission.
Presumably had the General Partner known in mid-February that insurance
would cover the $3 million loss (other than the $500,000 deductible), it
would have reduced reserves by $2.5 million (either by setting aside less in
reserves or releasing reserves established in prior quarters), which would
have produced $2.5 million of additional Available Cash. In that case there
would not have been any APIs required. Is there a basis for a claim that
the General Partner did not use "reasonable discretion" when it established
the level of reserves? Based on the facts as I understand them, I have been
unable to come up with a good argument that the General Partner was not
using its "reasonable discretion" in making the determination it made. It
is my understanding that, although at the time the General Partner was aware
that it had theft insurance, it did not know whether the insurance would
cover the entire $3 million loss or merely the $800,000 in fair market value
of the product at the time of the theft (less the $500,000 deductible). I
also understand that the insurance carrier had not admitted liability at
that time, so there was some question whether there would be any insurance
proceeds. Thus, it seems it would be very difficult to establish that the
General Partner did not use its reasonable discretion.
The partnership agreement makes it clear that the amount of
Available Cash is to be computed based on (a) actual receipts and
disbursements during the quarter and (b) distributions from the operating
partnerships and reserves established, or changes in reserves, that in each
case occur prior to the "date on which the Partnership makes its
distribution of Available Cash in respect of such quarter." Thus, the
partnership agreement leaves no room for going back and redoing reserves
based on events that occur after the distribution for the quarter.
Please call if you have any questions about this analysis or if you
think I do not have my facts straight or need additional facts. You can
reach me at 713/758-2414.
Robert S. Baird
Vinson & Elkins L.L.P.
One American Center
600 Congress Avenue
Austin, Texas 78701-3200
Office phone: 512/495-8451
Fax: 512/236-3210
Home phone: 512/347-8065
Car phone: 512/627-8065
Pager: 1-888-487-2651
Voice mail: 512/495-8696, x8451
Internet: [email protected] | {
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
} |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.