text
stringlengths 1
1.59M
| meta
dict |
|---|---|
The reservation deadline for the October 6 boat cruise has been extended. There is still time and space available so you won't miss any of the fun! Complete the information below to make your reservation today.
The HBS Club is sponsoring an event on the Star Cruiser, a 90 foot luxury entertainment yacht. Bring your spouse or a guest and enjoy an evening out with dinner and music and see the sunset and the lights of Kemah!
DATE: Saturday, October 6, 2001
TIME: 6:30 pm to 7:00 pm Boarding; 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm Cruise
PLACE: Star Fleet Marina, 280 Grove Road, Kemah, TX
COST: Platinum Members: No charge Guests: $65
Gold Members: $55 Guests: $65
Silver Members: $65 Guests: $70
(Covers dinner, beer/wine bar and cruise)
RSVP: RESERVATIONS REQUIRED By 5:00 pm on October 4, 2001
email [email protected], phone (281) 424-3084,
fax (281) 424-4770 or at www.hbshouston.org
To learn more about the Star Cruiser visit www.starfleetyachts.com .
Reservation - Saturday, October 6, 2001 "Evening on the Star Cruiser"
Member Name:
Guest Name:
Platinum Members: No charge Guests: $65
Gold Members: $55 Guests: $65
Silver Members: $65 Guests: $70
Payment Method (Check one)
1. _____ Credit card on file
2. _____ Credit Card (Visa, MC) Number: ________________ Exp Date: ______
3. _____ Cash or Check enclosed
RESERVATIONS REQUIRED. Reservations accepted until 5:00 pm on October 4,
2001. Fax this form to (281) 424-4770, e-mail [email protected], or call (281) 424-3084.
***************
Dottie Kerr ([email protected])
Administrator for Harvard Business School Club of Houstonhttp://www.hbshouston.org/
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
713-650-1960
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Hello! Megan Rogers has just sent you a greeting card from Bluemountain.com.
You can pick up your personal message here:
http://www7.bluemountain.com/cards/boxg227236u6/3pts7dry66z9fu.html
Your card will be available for the next 90 days.
This service is 100% FREE! :) Have a good day and have fun!
________________________________________________________________________
Accessing your card indicates agreement with Blue Mountain's Website Rules:
http://www.bluemountain.com/home/WebsiteRules.html
Send FREE Blue Mountain cards to friends and family (and attach gifts too!)
http://www.bluemountain.com
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
10,545 will be delivered to Mobil Beaumont from Cipco for 6th only.
|--------+----------------------->
| | Marta K |
| | Henderson |
| | |
| | 09/06/00 |
| | 09:21 AM |
| | |
|--------+----------------------->
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| |
| To: Darrel F. Bane/EastTexas/PEFS/PEC@PEC, John
A. |
| Bretz/GCS/CEC/PEC@PEC, Chad W. Cass/GCS/CEC/PEC@PEC, Michael
R. |
| Cherry/EastTexas/PEFS/PEC@PEC, Bruce
McMills/FtWorth/PEFS/PEC@PEC, |
| William E. Speckels/GCS/CEC/PEC@PEC, Donna
C. |
| Spencer/GCS/CEC/PEC@PEC, Julia A. Urbanek/GCS/CEC/PEC@PEC, Dora
J. |
| Levy/GCS/CEC/PEC@PEC, [email protected],
[email protected], |
| [email protected], Sharon
Beemer/FtWorth/PEFS/PEC@PEC, |
| Connie
Wester/EastTexas/PEFS/PEC@PEC |
|
cc: |
| Subject: Intraday Eastrans Nomination change for
9/6/00 |
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Deliveries continue to be 30,000
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Attached are some slides that INGAA recently put together to demonstrate
that (1) marketing affiliates do not hold capacity solely on affiliated
pipelines and (2) that marketing affiliates receive discounts that are
comparable to the discounts given to marketers as a class.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Larry - I've received a copy of the compliance order. It assesses a penalty
of $15,000 per day for each day of violation (May 1996 to September 8, 1997
or 496 days). This results in a fine of $7.44 million. I hope the order
has a typo and the NMED meant a penalty of "up to" $15,000 per day of
violation. If this is not a typo I see no downside to asking for a hearing
and a settlement conference. We may do so anyway. Since we only have till
mid-July to file the request for hearing which must include very specific
admissions or denials and the basis of our affirmative defenses, I'd like
Larry to flesh out the notes below and pull any relevant documentation
together.....
Dave - let's discuss counsel for this matter in the morning and I'd like to
make a call to NMED counsel. I'd be tempted to bring Braddock in even though
this is New Mexico...
-----Original Message-----
From: Nutt, David
Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2001 5:59 AM
To: Soldano, Louis
Subject: RE: Compliance Order, P-1 C/S
Lou -- I spoke with Larry the other evening about this and will be more than
happy to work on it until you resurface. I'm actually out of the office all
next week while on vacation in Florida but I'll have a computer (email
capable) with me so I'll be in touch.
-----Original Message-----
From: Soldano, Louis
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 5:53 PM
To: Nutt, David
Subject: FW: Compliance Order, P-1 C/S
dave - can you keep at it until the end of next week?? we have another mega
deal we are tryig to close by then....thx
-----Original Message-----
From: Campbell, Larry [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 5:45 PM
To: Shafer, John; Kendrick, William
Cc: Jensen, Ruth; Phillips, Marc; Nutt, David; Soldano, Louis; Jolly, Rich
Subject: Compliance Order, P-1 C/S
Transwestern received a Compliance Order from the State of New Mexico, Air
Quality Bureau, for an outstanding turbine replacement activity at the P-1
C/S which occurred in 1996. Transwestern had met with the AQB over this
issue in 1996 and assumed that the issue had been resolved, as no further
actions were received from the agency until this Compliance Order was
received. The issue in question was Transwestern's replacement of
interchangeable internal components from a 4700 turbine into the existing
smaller turbine (3505). The larger internal components (inlet guide
vanes/nozzles) which were placed into the 3505 were mechanically derated to
simulate conditions of the smaller turbine. When Transwestern received
permit approval from the AQB to operate at the larger turbine capacity,
Transwestern made the upgrade adjustments and then operated at the higher
turbine value 4700. The AQB did not understand that Transwestern could not
make the adjustments to the inlet guide vanes as any such activity by
Transwestern would void the warranty with Soalr Mfg. Only Solar is
authorized to make adjustments to the turbine. This prevents Transwestern
from randomly and arbitrarily manipulating and adjusting horsepowers of this
turbine at their descretion.
In the 1996 meeting with the AQB, Transwestern committed to conducting a
emissions test of the 4700 to determine if emissions were more or less than
the permitted values for the 3505. It was shown that emissions from the 4700
were less than that permitted by the AQB for the 3505. It should also be
mentioned that the 3505 was a regerative turbine and the 4700 is a simple
cycle.
Apparently, EPA has mandated that the AQB act on all issues considered to
be outstanding as determined by the EPA. Dave Nutt has been sent the
Compliance Order to review. Under the conditions of the Order, Transwestern
has 30 days to request another hearing.
Id like to have a group discussion to decide how Transwestern will manage and
handle this issue. Would someone contact Anabelle and have her set up a
conference call for sometime next week?
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
The attached file contains updated July 2000 volume requirements for CES. The
changes relative to the original request sent on 6/23/00. Changes are
described on the worksheet labelled 'Comments' under the date 06/26/00. The
only other change that I currently anticipate is to NIPSCO when they post our
July requirements on their EBB.
Please call me if you have questions, etc.
Doug Kinney
Ph: 703-561-6339
Fax: 703-561-7317
- July00_FOM_Req02.xls
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
PLEASE send. thanx
---------------------- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 09/10/99 02:27
PM ---------------------------
From: "Julian Poole/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT" AT ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@CCMAIL on
09/10/99 04:04 PM
To: Sara Shackleton@ECT
cc: Brent Hendry AT ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@CCMAIL, Federico Cerisoli AT
ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@CCMAIL
Subject: Duke's ISDA
Sara, could you pls. fax us a copy of the ISDA document you signed and sent
to Duke Energy Intl'.
I understand Duke never sent us their signed document. Is that right?
Fax # (5411) 4315-2514
Regards, Julian
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Recall that at 4:05 PM on Wednesday, June 27th, we are scheduled to see the
Giants clobber the bums.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
---------------------- Forwarded by Kay Mann/Corp/Enron on 05/25/2001 11:13
AM ---------------------------
Keegan Farrell
05/25/2001 11:12 AM
To: Rae Meadows/ENRON@enronXgate
cc: (bcc: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron)
Subject: Legal precedence
This is just too funny not to pass along! Have a great weekend!
Subject: Three Kick Rule
A big city lawyer went duck hunting in South Louisiana. He shot and
dropped a bird, but it fell into a farmer's field on the other
side of a fence.
As the lawyer climbed over the fence, an elderly farmer drove up on? his
tractor and asked him what he was doing. The litigator responded, "I shot a
duck and it fell in this field, and now I'm going in to retrieve it."
The old farmer replied. "This is my property, and you are not
coming over here."
The indignant lawyer said, "I am one of the best trial attorneys in the U.S.
and, if you don't let me get that duck, I'll sue you and
take everything you own."
The old farmer smiled and said, "Apparently, you don't know how we do things
in Louisiana. We settle small disagreements like this with the Louisiana
Three Kick Rule."
The lawyer asked, "What is the Louisiana Three Kick Rule?"
The Farmer replied. "Well, first I kick you three times and then you kick me
three times, and so on, back and forth, until someone gives up."
The attorney quickly thought about the proposed contest and decided that he
could easily take the old codger. He agreed to abide by the local custom. The
old farmer slowly climbed down from the tractor and
walked up to the city feller. His first kick planted the toe of his heavy
work boot into the lawyer's groin and dropped him to his knees. His second
kick nearly ripped the man's nose off his face. The barrister was flat on his
belly when the farmer's third kick to a kidney nearly caused him to give up.
The lawyer summoned every bit of his will and managed to get
to his feet and said, "Okay, you old coot now it's my turn."
(I love this part......)
The old farmer smiled and said, "Naw, I give up. You can have
the duck."
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
----- Forwarded by Becky Spencer/HOU/ECT on 04/25/2001 07:44 AM -----
PERRODIN Maud <[email protected]>
04/25/2001 04:03 AM
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: RE: Document you sent to Enron
Becky,
As regards the ISDA agreement I sent to Brent Hendry, the name of the trader
in charge of the transaction at Enron is Steven Vu.
We look forward to receiving your comments on this agreement, together with
the draft confirmation of the transaction at your earliest convenience.
Kind regards.
Maud PERRODIN
Legal Adviser
Tel : + 33 1 45 96 20 19
Fax : + 33 1 45 96 25 40
-----Message d'origine-----
De : [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Envoy, : mardi 24 avril 2001 18:51
? : [email protected]
Objet : Document you sent to Enron
Hello, Maud!
My name is Becky Spencer and I work for Brent Hendry. In answer to your
question of this morning, yes, Brent did receive the document you sent to
him on April 12th. Could you please let us know the name of the contact
person here at Enron to whom you have been speaking so we can better
coordinate our discussions with you?
Thank you! We look forward to doing business with you.
Becky Spencer
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street 38th Floor
Houston TX 77002
713-853-7599 Office
713-646-3490 Fax
My e-mail address: [email protected]
Brent Hendry's e-mail address: [email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
478199 has been changed to 164.95 price. And 477087 has been changed to
Q3-01.
Thanks,
Kate
Kerri Thompson@ENRON
12/12/2000 07:56 AM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: natsource checkout
has 478199 been changed yet?
Kate Symes @ ECT 12/11/2000 04:39 PM
To: Kerri Thompson/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: natsource checkout
Yes, these are deals 478198 and 478199. Both are entered under Natsource, and
should be for Q1-01. 478199 was entered with the wrong price (165.05). It
should be 164.95, and I'll change it when the Risk girls are done with their
calc.
Thanks,
Kate
Kerri Thompson@ENRON
12/11/2000 02:32 PM
To: Kate Symes/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: natsource checkout
missing 2 deals
buys ees
164.95
25 mw
Q1
np15
sell duke
jan
25 mw
np-15
165.00
these 2 deals kind of recognize 478198, and 478199.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Thanks again.
James D Foster@EES
02/28/2001 01:09 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/Na/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: CPUC inquiry re gas customer turnbacks
Your understanding of my previous dissertation is correct. -Jim
From: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON on 02/28/2001 01:04 PM CST
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON
To: James D Foster/DUB/EES@EES
cc: Catherine Woods/DUB/EES@EES, Dennis Harris/DUB/EES@EES, Harry
Kingerski/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@ENRON, Karen
Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, [email protected], Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Peggy
Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@ENRON, Roger O
Ponce/HOU/EES@EES, [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: CPUC inquiry re gas customer turnbacks
Thanks very much for getting back to us. So if I understand the bottom
line: 1) the customer was mistakenly put back to SoCal (due to the dual
service territory character of the customer's facilities), 2) the customer
will be returned to our service, 3) the customer's contract with us expires
on 5/31, and 4) the customer will have the option of re-signing with us, or
returning to SoCalGas when the contracts ends on 5/31? If I've confused
anything, please let me know. And thanks again for helping track down the
info.
Best,
Jeff
James D Foster@EES
02/28/2001 12:56 PM
To: Catherine Woods/DUB/EES@EES, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Dennis
Harris/DUB/EES@EES
cc: Roger O Ponce/HOU/EES@EES, Catherine Woods/DUB/EES@EES, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen
Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, [email protected], Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Harry
Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, [email protected],
[email protected]
Subject: Re: CPUC inquiry re gas customer turnbacks
Upon research, it was discovered that this customer has two active meters in
two different Utilities (PG&E, and SOCAL) under the same contract. This is
the reason for the confusion. For tracking purposes, we "break-out" meters
by LDC in order to assign our customers to reps familiar with a particular
LDC. Those customers that have multiple LDC's under the same contract are
assigned to the same rep. This allows the customers to speak to the same
individual for all of their accounts.
Unfortunately the site in question was identified in error as a single site
only. The site in PG&E was assigned to Dennis Harris, while the site in
SOCAL, because of the low usage, was identified for transition to SOCAL.
This was not our intention. The data has been realigned and Dennis Harris
now has access to both records.
I spoke to Dennis regarding this issue, and he will contact the customer,
explain why it occurred, stop the transition to SOCAL for this site, should
the customer choose to; as well as coordinate a renewal for this customer
going forward, as their current agreement is to expire 05/31/01.
Catherine Woods
02/28/2001 08:53 AM
To: Foster
cc:
Subject: CPUC inquiry re gas customer turnbacks
Can you indentify the owner of this record?
Thank you!
---------------------- Forwarded by Catherine Woods/DUB/EES on 02/28/2001
08:52 AM ---------------------------
From: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON on 02/27/2001 05:47 PM CST
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON
To: Roger O Ponce/HOU/EES@EES, Catherine Woods/DUB/EES@EES, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen
Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, [email protected], Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Harry
Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: CPUC inquiry re gas customer turnbacks
Catherine/Roger:
Here are some more details forwarded by our outside counsel.
Best,
Jeff
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 02/27/2001 05:44 PM -----
MBD <[email protected]>
02/27/2001 05:25 PM
To: "'Jeff Dasovich Enron SF'" <[email protected]>
cc: "'Sandi McCubbin Enron SF'" <[email protected]>, "'Sue Mara at Enron
SF'" <[email protected]>
Subject: CPUC inquiry re gas customer turnbacks
Jeff:
Here is some more useful information. Sarita Sarvate of the CPUC spoke to
the woman in person. The school in question is the Providence High School
in Burbank, California (not Ontario), operated by the Sisters of Providence.
Ms. Kathy Pentalio (sp?) at 818-846-8140 wrote to the CPUC asking about the
school's options after receiving phone and letter notification that their
gas service would be terminated by Enron. Apparently the Sisters also
operate a hospital which is also served by Enron. Ms. Pentalio indicated
that she was told that the school would no longer be served on the same
contract as the hospital (claimed to be an attractive 86 cents/th rate)
because the school's load was so small that it was a core customer, while
the hospital was a noncore customer with a larger load. Neither Ms.
Sarvate nor Ms. Pentalio was clear if the school was served as a core
aggregation customer or as part of the Sisters of Providence noncore
contract. Ms. Pentalio claimed she spoke with Enron employees Dennis Harris
in Dublin, Ohio as well as Roger Pons in New Mexico. She indicated that
service would be terminated on June 1, 2001 and she is looking for
alternative sources of gas.
Sarita Sarvate of the CPUC Energy Division would like to understand the
specifics of this case, but her main concern, and the purpose for sending a
letter (if she does send one) is that Dynergy has told her that a number of
small noncore businesses are being returned to the utilities by marketers
because they no longer meet credit requirements. She assumed that must be
true with Enron as well. I indicated to her that she should never assume
that we are doing what Dynegy is doing and that we would respond and advise
her if there was any significant trend of noncore customer turnbacks. The
Commission's concern, which I know you understand, is that it is phasing out
the core subscription schedule (and has a moratorium on switches to the
SoCalGas core subscription schedule) therefore leaving no place for such
customers to go if they cannot contract with a replacement aggregator.
Please advise me of what you discover about this matter and we can talk
further about a response to the CPUC. Thank you.
Mike Day
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Louise,
This is the last version of your bio I have:
Rodney
----
Rodney Reagor
Corporate Marketing
Enron Corp
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
That deal is one deal. My trader likes to see it broken out in two deals.
You will see that one deal is priced at zero and the basis adjustment in on
the other leg. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks.
PL
3-7376
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
i wanted to stay for a few weeks. just kidding. i am thinking 3-4 days.
they is robbie and becky. let me know what they say.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Hi Vince, Paulo Oleira (one of the M.I.T attending our meeting on wed)'s
research interest turned out to be a match for April Hodgeson (VP of content
origination). I had him talk to April (Stinson was on the call as well) to
discuss his research interest and what he would likely to do for April. I
suggested (and April agrees) that Paulo would intern with her and Matt and
perform research on how end users (consumers and business) improved
experience with ePowered content can be quantified. This may include
performing control experiments at M.I.T. We decided not to over specify what
he would do since it is likely to change as soon as he arrives. I suggested
once he starts, he will work with April and Matt Harris (VP enterprise
origination) and they will define what the student needs to complete for the
internship.
Addiontionally, Tom Gros agrees that this type of research are needed and
this is a great way to start.
I will proceed to have recruiting contact the student with an offer to start
around May 22, 2000 unless someone tells me otherwise.
Regards,
Ravi.
P.S. Charlene, please include Paulo in your May 22, 2000 start group. Paulo
will report to me within EBS research group but will work on a day-to-day
basis with April and Matt. As you've mentioned that compensation is somewhat
fixed but please keep in mind that this person is a PhD candidate with very
specialized skill set. Please contact Vince before extending an offer that
may be too low, etc.
----- Forwarded by Ravi Thuraisingham/Enron Communications on 02/17/00 09:27
AM -----
Charlene Jackson@ENRON
02/17/00 08:25 AM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Celeste Roberts/HOU/ECT@ECT, Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ravi
Thuraisingham/Enron Communications@Enron Communications@ECT
Subject: Re: Summer Internship Position
Celeste,
We need to make sure that the interns in Vince's group are coordinated and
incorporated with the rest of the summer associates. They should be offered
the same starting dates, I believe they are May 22, 2000 June 5, 2000. I am
not sure about the June date. Would you check and let Vince know. They
should also be offered the same starting salary package as the others. They
will be included in training (a few days) and any other events we host.
Thanks
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Hi, Jeff --
I just had to write to someone who understands how CRAZY the electricity
argument is getting. Make sure to check out the Union-Tribune's Web site
today to peruse the articles on dereg (www.uniontrib.com). Jan
Smutney-Jones did a good job responding to Rosenfeld's voter initiative
plan , but the headline and the front page only lead people to believe that
there's no alternative but going back to regulation -- and a state-owned
power authority at that (imagine!). It would have been very good to have
ARM get a mention as well -- but maybe it isn't ready to be public yet.
When the group does put a stake in the ground, it will have to be sure to
craft its messages in a way that avoids the appearance of reacting to
Rosenfeld rather than being the pro-active and pro-consumer ESP's.
I don't know if it's in your best interest, and I'd like to hear your
thoughts on this, but since the reporters are either being very biased or
not hearing enough from the pro-competition side, would an op-ed from Enron
help calm things down and give people a chance to hear about what positive
benefits a competitive market -- if allowed to exist -- can bring? I
thought the WSJ article on Monday was great, but few San Diegans read the
Journal and rely on the UT for their news. However, the editorial pages
are well read and may serve you well. I can help out your team on drafting
this if you're interested. Or if there's any other information gathering
you need, just let me know.
Anyway -- hope you had a good Thanksgiving and that you'll be able to come
down here soon.
Have a good Wednesday,
Dana
Dana Perino
[email protected]
619-234-1300 ext. 238
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
-----Original Message-----
From: Pehlivanova, Biliana
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 9:24 AM
To: Beylin, Anya; Guzman, Julio; Marolo, Massimo; Pimenov, Vladi
Subject: FW: DYN($42/sh)/ENE($7/sh) Merger At Risk. - Simmons and Company latest thoughts
-----Original Message-----
From: Bhatia, Randy
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 8:55 AM
To: Gossett, Jeffrey C.; Keiser, Kam; Jones, Brad; O'Rourke, Ryan; Pehlivanova, Biliana
Subject: FW: DYN($42/sh)/ENE($7/sh) Merger At Risk. - Simmons and Company latest thoughts
got this from a friend at dynegy. written by someone at Simmons & Co., Inc.
To: Sales Trading
11/21/01 07:42 cc:
AM Subject: DYN($42/sh)/ENE
($7/sh) Merger At
Risk.
SUMMARY: We are reducing our estimated probability that the DYN/ENE merger
is completed to less than 50%/50% based on our belief that ENE's existing
wholesale and retail businesses are having a difficult time maintaining
their volumes and margins. We have discussed ENE's need to improve counter
party confidence on a number of occasions over the last few weeks, and we
believe counter party confidence deteriorated further based on the
information included in the 10Q, and the strong negative reaction in the
stock and bond markets yesterday. The tone of our discussions with
competing traders and marketers (representative of ENE's counter
parties--which are critical in maintaining ENE's volumes) is becoming more
negative. While ENE is continuing to confirm that volumes are improving
since the lows on November 9, our market intelligence is suggesting
improment has stalled. In addition and probably related, ENE's liquidity
position seems to be continuing to deteriorate despite significant recent
capital infusions. We are reducing 4Q01 estimates to reflect lower volume
and margin assumptions. What would get us more comfortable? ENE 8K
disclosure confirming higher volume and decent margins (ENE has committed
to provide 4Q guidance by early-mid December, and/or a change in the tone
of the counter parties that would suggest they are increasing trading
activities with ENE.
OPINION ON THE STOCKS:
ENE. No change in our opinion on ENE--the upside potential is simply
not worth the downside risk.
DYN. DYN is likely to benefit in almost all outcomes. If our concerns
about counter party confidence prove to be wrong, the upside associated
with the accretion in the transaction would likely be huge. However, we
sense DYN is getting frustrated by continued restatement of earnings,
unexpected debt triggers and worse than expected liquidity problems. If
the transaction falls apart, DYN would have some transaction costs that
would negatively impact cash flow in the near-term, but DYN would
benefit from gaining market share and hiring some of ENE's talent away
longer term. A potential downside case for DYN is that DYN retrades the
deal on recent information, but is forced to reduced its flexibility to
terminate the transaction through material adverse change
considerations, this out come would concern us. We continue to believe
DYN is a solid long-term holding for investors. However, we are
recommending caution with new money, due to our belief that DYN still
has $5/sh to $7/sh of "deal" premium factored into the current stock
price which could be at risk if the deal fails. We do not believe DYN
has significant accounts receivable exposure to ENE in the event the ENE
has further liquidity problems (we believe DYN's trading agreement with
ENE limits exposure to maybe $100 to $150 MM).
COUNTER PARTY INCENTIVES: ENE identified in its 10Q that transaction
volume (especially long-term transactions) have declined since the 3Q. If
you are a utility or industrial customer, why enter into a long-term
transaction with ENE? Why not go directly to DYN or diversify with other
suppliers? If you are a natural gas or power producer, why create the
account receivable risk? If you are a counter party, strategically why
would you contribute to the continuation of the ENE machine--to the
ultimate benefit of strengthening another competitor (DYN)? We believe
that ENE is offering attractive financial incentives (premium purchases
and/or discounted sales) to entice counter parties to trade with them.
However, this would also suggest ENE margins may be getting squeezed.
EPS ESTIMATES (new/old/consensus):
4Q01-$0.20/0.35/0.42, FY01-$1.55/1.70/1.78, FY02-$1.50/1.50/1.90
We are reducing expectations for margins in the Wholesale segment from
9cts/mmbtu to 7cts/mmbtu--negatively impacting 4Q EPS by 10cts/sh. In
addition, we expect contributions from Enron Energy Services will be
lower due to challenges in closing long-term transactions (much of EES's
earnings are mark-to-market recognition of the value created in
long-term agreeements) impacting our estimate by 5cts/sh.
*****************************************************************************************************
This e-mail is based on information obtained from sources which Simmons &
Company International believes to be reliable, but Simmons & Company
International does not represent or warrant its accuracy. The opinions and
estimates contained in this e-mail represent the views of Simmons & Company
as of the date of the e-mail, and may be subject to change without prior
notice. Simmons & Company International, its partners and/or employees may
have positions in the securities discussed. Simmons & Company
International may make a market in the securities discussed and may have
served as a financial advisor and/or underwriter to companies discussed.
Simmons & Company International will not be responsible for the consequence
of reliance upon any opinion or statement contained in this e-mail. This
e-mail is confidential, and may not be reproduced, in whole or in part,
without the prior written permission of Simmons & Company International.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Congratulations! That's fantastic. My sister, Chrissi, had her second (a
boy - Will Rogers Morgan) on Friday, so I have been a hospital alot these
past three days. Hope everything is going great and hope to hear from you
soon.
Regards,
Ben
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Teresa G. Bushman
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street, EB 3835A
Houston, TX 77002
(713) 853-7895
fax (713) 646-3393
[email protected]
----- Forwarded by Teresa G Bushman/HOU/ECT on 12/22/2000 04:54 PM -----
"Rosser, Dianna" <[email protected]>
12/19/2000 06:12 PM
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>,
"'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>,
"'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>, "'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>, "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>,
"'jaime_p_'" <[email protected]>, "'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>, "'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>, "'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>, "'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>, "'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>, "'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>, "'sean_o'[email protected]'" <sean_o'[email protected]>
cc: "Shouse, August" <[email protected]>, "'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>, "'[email protected]'"
<[email protected]>
Subject: Enron/Mahonia transaction documents
Attached please find clean copies of the following documents that we have
drafted:
1. Margin Agreement
2. Margin Price Confirmation Letter
3. Enron Guaranty
4. Consent and Agreement (Enron)
5. Consent and Agreement (ENAC)
6. Forward Sale Agreement
7. Confirmation Letter
8. Letter Agreement regarding duplicate delivery of information
Please feel free to contact August Shouse or me with any comments or
questions.
Warm regards,
Dianna J. Rosser
Vinson & Elkins L.L.P.
Business and International Section
3300 First City Tower
1001 Fannin Street
Houston, Texas 77002-6760
tel: (713) 758-3688
fax: (713) 615-5899
email: [email protected]
<<Houston_404948_1.DOC>> <<Houston_404950_1.DOC>>
<<Houston_404917_3.DOC>> <<Houston_404914_2.DOC>> <<Houston_404942_3.DOC>>
<<Houston_404981_2.DOC>> <<Houston_404983_2.DOC>>
<<Houston_404980_1.DOC>>
++++++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
- Houston_404948_1.DOC
- Houston_404950_1.DOC
- Houston_404917_3.DOC
- Houston_404914_2.DOC
- Houston_404942_3.DOC
- Houston_404981_2.DOC
- Houston_404983_2.DOC
- Houston_404980_1.DOC
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
thanks!!!
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Forgot, I'm leaving town tomorrow afternoon. Will be back Thursday morn.
We'll do it some other time.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
---------------------- Forwarded by Phillip M Love/HOU/ECT on 06/07/2000
06:29 PM ---------------------------
Jim Little
05/15/2000 12:28 PM
To: Phillip M Love/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Revised March OA
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 12/22/2000
05:56 PM ---------------------------
Li Sun@ENRON
12/04/2000 08:07 AM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Off-balance sheet Deal JEDI II
Hi, Vinice,
Please see attached the informaiton regarding JEDI II.
Li
---------------------- Forwarded by Li Sun/NA/Enron on 12/04/2000 07:03 AM
---------------------------
Shirley A Hudler @ ECT
11/30/2000 05:29 PM
To: Li Sun/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Information requested
See if this works for you. Let me know what else you might need.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
FYI
---------------------- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 09/01/99 05:52
PM ---------------------------
Sara Shackleton
09/01/99 05:41 PM
To: [email protected], [email protected]
cc: [email protected]
Subject: Financial Trading Issues in Brazil
Although I am still waiting for another Brazilian visa, I would like to pose
several potential dates to meet with you regarding Enron North America Corp.
trading issues. I am presently considering several time periods:
September 9,10, 12-17,19-24
Obviously, I can be available at any time during the month of Septermber as
well as future months. But I would like to get started as soon as possible.
If you could kindly e-mail or call me (713/853-5620), I can elaborate
further. Thank you. Sara
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Rick, attached is a site you have to see! Click on the address below.
(click on night life and then photo gallery)
http://www.buzzlady.com/houston.html
gngr
713-853-7751
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
-----Original Message-----
From: Bharati, Rakesh
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 1:07 AM
To: Yoho, Lisa; Huson, Margaret
Cc: Kaminski, Vince J
Subject: New Version (Grammatical Changes Only)
Here is a grammatically correct version. Hopefully it will make for somewhat easier reading. In my haste to get it out, I did not check the grammar carefully.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
Rakesh
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
To update you on the status of this customer. With regards to the Master
Agreement, we await their response regarding two points in the Guaranty.
Concerning the GISB, at their request I have e-mailed again our draft.
Debra Perlingiere
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street, EB 3885
Houston, Texas 77002
[email protected]
Phone 713-853-7658
Fax 713-646-3490
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Per your conversation with Steve.
----- Forwarded by Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron on 02/05/2001 12:02 PM -----
Maureen McVicker
02/02/2001 05:46 PM
To: Sherri Sera/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Talking Points - Chambers
Here are the talking points for Jeff's discussion with Chambers
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
---------------------- Forwarded by Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT on 06/07/2001 12:32
PM ---------------------------
From: Kevin Garland/ENRON@enronXgate on 06/07/2001 12:30 PM
To: Greg Whalley/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ken Rice/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, David W Delainey/HOU/EES@EES
cc:
Subject: FW: Draft of Organizational Announcement
Attached is a draft of the organizational announcement. Please provide
comments.
KG
Subject: Draft of Organizational Announcement
Announcing the Formation of One Corporate Equity Investing Unit
To better develop and manage equity investment opportunities related to our
core businesses, Enron has formed one corporate equity investment unit. This
new unit, Enron Principal Investments, will combine the existing investment
units of ENA, EBS and Enron Investment Partners. Additionally, the Enron
Special Asset Group will also become part of Enron Principal Investments.
The strategy of Enron Principal Investments will be to work with the all the
business units of Enron to identify, execute, and manage equity investments,
which leverage the Enron's unique and proprietary knowledge. These
investments may be in the form of venture capital, LBO's, traditional private
equity and distressed debt positions.
Kevin Garland will serve as Managing Director, overseeing all activities of
Enron Principal Investments. Gene Humphrey, Michael Miller, Dick Lydecker,
and their groups, will join Kevin and his group to form this new investments
unit.
This new group will report to an investment committee consisting of Greg
Whalley, Ken Rice, and Dave Delainey. Please join me in congratulating and
supporting Kevin, Gene, Michael, Dick and the other members of this group in
this effort.
Jeff Skilling
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Geoff,
I have one of my counterparties, Wiser Oil Company. That would like to do a novation agreement to place Morgan Stanley as the counterparty for two of their trades they have with us. These guys have done ALL of their hedging over the past 3 yrs with me and don't want to trade with anyone else, but the board would like to put in their annual report that they have trades with both Enron and Morgan, for their protection. One trade (# VB4147) is a 1 Qtr. 2002 Crude Collar for 1000 BPD and we are out of the money a little over $300,000. The other (#Y33851) is a gas collar for 5000 mmbtu for the summer (Apr-Oct '02), which they owe us a little over $34,000. I was told that you are the person that I need to have look at if we can do this. I am leaving at 1:00 to head to Chicago, so could you please get back with Fred on this one. Thanks
Mark
Mark D. Smith
Manager
Enron North America
713-853-6601
[email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Mark,
Here is a draft for the Fee Agreement language for the margining. this
language should tie with the liquidated damages language that you have for
the RTA. I think that we will need to remove the words or settle from the
liquidated damages paragraph. Brokers do not have settlement risk.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
The Unify2k Gas Production database will be available for one last round of functionality testing from 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. on Wednesday 6/6/01. This is not a scripted test. Please feel free to test ANY and all functionality that will give you a greater comfort level with the new system. The Sitara Bridge and Bridgeback will be available during this time.
Please use the following environment for this testing:
Menu Option: Unify2k (Gas)
Server: Unify2k Gas Production
Data: May 29, 2001
Gas Day: May 29, 2001
If you have any questions, of find issues please contact one of the following individuals:
Logistics & Vol. Mgmt - Hina Patel x5-4875
Settlements - Tommy Simpson x5-8229
General Questions - Tony Dugger x5-4371
Jill Hopson x5-4839
Thank you,
TD
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Well, wouldn't you know it. I couldn't find the most recent version in my
email. But here's the 10.03 version with a few edits. Couple of other
points:
I still very much like the idea of taking the table out and includling as an
attachment.
I still think that the table doesn't explicitly address an option Rick may be
thinking about "Maintain presence with fewer resources." Think it's
something we need to focus on.
Have a great weekend.
Spreadsheet to follow.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
call me if you have any questions.
thanks,
theresa
x58173
---------------------- Forwarded by Theresa Vos/Corp/Enron on 11/29/2000
02:12 PM ---------------------------
Theresa Vos
11/28/2000 12:00 PM
To: David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mike J Miller/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Ozzie Pagan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Kevin M Presto/HOU/ECT@ECT, Ben
Jacoby/HOU/ECT@ECT, Scott Healy/HOU/ECT@ECT, Robert P Virgo/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Jeffrey Keenan/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Moore/Corp/Enron@Enron, Georgeanne
Hodges/HOU/ECT@ECT, Clement Lau/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mitch Robinson/Corp/Enron@Enron,
Jinsung Myung/Corp/Enron@Enron, Kay Chapman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Felicia
Doan/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lisa Zarsky/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jim Curry/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Warren
Schick/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jody Pierce/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tammy R
Shepperd/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan Helton/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: 2000 Cost Summary thru 11/17
Attached is the Cost Summary for the 2000 Peakers with actuals thru
11/17/00. I still have not received any cost reports from Nepco. Please
call me if you have any questions.
thanks,
theresa
x58173
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
***************************************************************
Do you want to give your child a head start in school?
Try Hooked on Phonics. $20 Instant Savings - Click here!
http://quinst.com/clk/mogelepgeichimmalt
***************************************************************
The Word of the Day for October 27 is:
nyctalopia \nik-tuh-LOH-pee-uh\ (noun)
: night blindness
Example sentence:
George's nyctalopia gives him a tendency to walk into
furniture unless he turns on all the lights.
Did you know?
"Nyctalopia" comes to us from the Latin word "nyctalops,"
which means "suffering from night blindness." It is ultimately
derived from the Greek word "nyktalops," which was formed by
combining the word for "night" ("nyx") with the words for
"blind" and "eye" ("alaos" and "ops," respectively). English
speakers have been using "nyctalopia" to refer to reduced
vision in faint light or at night since the 17th century. We
added the somewhat more pedestrian "night blindness" to the
lexicon in the 18th century.
----------------
Brought to you by Merriam-Webster, Inc.
http://www.Merriam-Webster.com
----------------
***************************************************************
Do you have the skills you need to get a good job?
If you want to secure your future, you need training.
http://links.quinstreet.com/adclick?area=fensuihagunduo
***************************************************************
Visit http://www.Merriam-Webster.com/service/subinst.htm to
subscribe to or unsubscribe from the Word of the Day mailing list.
To subscribe to the list by e-mail, send a blank e-mail to
[email protected].
To unsubscribe via e-mail, send a blank e-mail to
[email protected].
If you have questions about your subscription, write to
[email protected]. Send other questions
or comments about the Word of the Day to
[email protected].
(c) 2001 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Wine
Wine glasses
Knives
Sharpener
Place mats
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Please find attached a copy of the Password Application and Electronic
Trading Agreement for EnronOnline. If I can be of further assistance please
call me at (713) 853-3399.
"Randal Rombeiro" <[email protected]>
01/23/2001 08:25 AM
To: <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Fwd: Re: Electronic Trading Agreement (ETA)
Tana,
Please see the attached. I would like to have a copy of the Electronic
Trading Agreement (ETA).
Thank you,
Randal Rombeiro
--------------------------
Randal Rombeiro
Assistant Treasurer
Worthington Industries, Inc.
Voice - 614-840-3574
Fax - 614-438-7508
E-mail - [email protected]
Received: from ftp1.wthg.com (ftp1.wii-corp.com [170.103.141.2]) by
gw.wthg.com; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 09:19:30 -0500
Received: from postmaster.enron.com (outbound5.enron.com [192.152.140.9]) by
ftp1.wthg.com (8.9.3 (PHNE_18979)/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA06553 for
<[email protected]>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 09:19:50 -0500 (EST)
From: [email protected]
Received: from nahou-msmsw03px.corp.enron.com ([172.28.10.39]) by
postmaster.enron.com (8.8.8/8.8.8/postmaster-1.00) with ESMTP id OAA00077 for
<[email protected]>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 14:19:14 GMT
Received: from ene-mta01.enron.com (unverified) by
nahou-msmsw03px.corp.enron.com (Content Technologies SMTPRS 4.1.5) with ESMTP
id <[email protected]> for
<[email protected]>; Tue, 23 Jan 2001 08:19:14 -0600
Subject: Re: Electronic Trading Agreement (ETA)
To: [email protected]
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.3 March 21, 2000
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 08:19:11 -0600
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on ENE-MTA01/Enron(Release 5.0.6 |December
14, 2000) at 01/23/2001 08:17:46 AM
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Randal,
I am not involved with the EnronOnline. I suggest you contact Tana Jones @
(713) 853-3399, in order to request such documentation.
Susan S. Bailey
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street, Suite 3806A
Houston, Texas 77002
Phone: (713) 853-4737
Fax: (713) 646-3490
E:mail: [email protected]
"Randal Rombeiro"
<RIROMBEI@worthingtonindus To:
<[email protected]>
tries.com> cc:
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Subject: Electronic
Trading Agreement (ETA)
01/22/2001 05:48 PM
Susan,
Can you please e-mail or fax this agreement to me? Enron has requested
that we sign up for online trading and this agreement is not available on
the website @ EnronOnline. If you need to fax it, my fax # is
614-438-7508.
Thanks,
Randal Rombeiro
--------------------------
Randal Rombeiro
Assistant Treasurer
Worthington Industries, Inc.
Voice - 614-840-3574
Fax - 614-438-7508
E-mail - [email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Hi Jim
Per our telecon. Pls call me upon reading and we'll discuss the fwd path
Regards
sunil
---------------------- Forwarded by Sunil Deshmukh/AIGTC/US on 05/24/2001
01:51 PM ---------------------------
Sunil Deshmukh on 05/21/2001 03:07:54 PM
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Solution to the Enron's dabhol Power Plant Situation
Hi Wade
It was nice catching up on the old stuff.
Attached, pls find the summary of my thoughts on the subject. As time is of
the essence, I am confident, I can structure a solution that will be
satisfactory to all parties and fulfils your objective.
Pls run this by Jeff and other key people . I wud like to present my
solution to them.
As I mentioned, Ambassador Wisner is fully supportive of my efforts and we
can find a way that works
Regards
sunil
Sunil Deshmukh
MD, Structured Transactions
AIG Energy Trqding
203-861-3804 W
203-322-0546 H
---------------------- Forwarded by Sunil Deshmukh/AIGTC/US on 05/21/2001
02:52 PM ---------------------------
Sunil Deshmukh on 05/11/2001 12:23:08 PM
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Solution to the Enron's dabhol Power Plant Situation
Hi Jeff
I have the following thoughts for a clean solution to the Dabhol Power
Plant situation
Background
Locals:
Local govt in the State of Maharashtra wants to squeeze them by forcing
them to keep the plant operating but refusing to pay [ standard Chinese
torture in the 3rd world when the real pain starts after you part with the
money and stuck in the tar pit]
The Central govt characters were previously involved with the "fast track"
approval , are now hesitant to help out for the fear of political damage .
The elctricity is now too expensive for the locals due to $/Rupee and Oil
Price hit per the original contract that locals signed and did not hedge!
This has become an unpopular political football with prior champions
running for cover, so only bad things will come out of it if the agony
prolongs
Enron:
Enron has made a paradygm shift from physical to intellectual assets, so
the India Powe Plant does not fit the forward path
This is an example of "how not to do things" as it was done with highest
profile and with open involvement of political Mafia, involving broad
allegations of corruption and highly unusual approval and guarantee
process. Enron does not need this "Tar Baby" any more
If they get rid of this problem, the stock is likely to go up 10 % , a
better arbitrage for getting rid of this liability
AIG:
Ambassador Wisner, Vice Chairman of AIG was the US Ambassador to India
during this period and knows all the cast of characters and the situation
well. He is also the President of the Indo-American Chamber of Commerce and
is trying to reconcile the situation. Since he is wearing 2 hats, he does
not want to approach Enron for a role in getting rid of this liability. I
have discussed this issue with him at length
I am the only person who knows ALL the cast of characters involved in this
drama very well. I have met Ken as we were keynote speakers at a conference
and later met in NY for personal chat. Jeff gave me a personal tour of the
trading floor when he was the head of trading at Enron and I was head of
trading at Citibank.. Sanjay Bhatnagar, their previous India man whio
worked closely with Rebecca is also known to me .
Additionally, I personally know the current Chief Minister of the State of
maharashtra, Vilasrao Deshmukh, all the Left Front partners, Mr Pawar who
initially approved the deal as the previous Chief Minister. I also know Mr
Munde and Mr Thakare, the two politicians who approved the expansion of
this project when they were in power. Current minister in charge of the
Power Portfolio is also a friend of mine. My contacts with all of these
people were developed over the past 10-20 years and are on a close
personal basis; hence, I have a neutral, trusted position with all
concerned
I have close contact with Reliance and Tatas and personally discussed
this situaton with the owners during my trip to Bombay last week. As you
know, nothing gets done there without Reliance's blessings
Solution;
If Enron empoweres me, I can negotiate a clean break in this situation
that will be mutually beneficial and free up the management's energies to
focus on the main business. Ambassador Wisner is fully supportive of this,
as he just does not want to take personal initiative for the reasons of
apparent confliict of interest .
I can broker political and business peace with a clean sale of assets to
the locals or their nominees at a fair market value. Enron , being a
"merchant-operator', understands the concept of "mark-to-market" valuation
better than anyone else
This is more of a negotiated solution, brokered by a skillful negotiator
with "East-West" skills and connections rather than an M&A transaction
The lenders' interests are not aligned with those of Enron and a separate
peace needs to be brokered with the locals, if they so desire
Dealing with the burocrats with politicians playing " puppeteers" in the
background will cause further "quicksand" effect
Time is of the essence as this is akin to the "perishable goods" problem
I wud like to get together with the key decision makers on the Enron side
to present this view
You know my professional background and qualification and I feel very
confident that I am the only person in the unique position to extricate all
concerned with the ability to forge a fair solution
Sunil Deshmukh:
Education- MS Chem Engg, MBA, JD, Licences to practice law in the US
Experience-- MD Structured Transactions, AIG Energy, Greenwich, CT
Previously, MD and Head, Global Commodity
Derivatives Business , Citibank, NY
Head, Crude Oil Trading,
Louis Dreyfus, Wilton, CT
Sr Trader, J. Aron, NY
Worked for BP and Exxon
Regards
sunil
***************************************************************************
Important:
This electronic mail message and any attached files contain information
intended for the exclusive use of the individual or entity to whom it is
addressed and may contain information that is proprietary, privileged,
confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you
are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any viewing,
dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication may be subject
to legal restriction or sanction. Please notify us immediately of any
unintended recipients and delete the original message without making any
copies.
***************************************************************************
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Les,
Thanks. The same to you. Merry Christmas to you and your family.
Vince Kaminski
Les Clewlow <[email protected]> on 12/19/99 02:39:58 PM
To: Vince J Kaminski@ECT, Grant Masson@ECT, Paul
Quilkey/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:
Subject: Merry Xmas and a Happy New Year!
Hi All
Merry Xmas and a Happy New Year!
Les.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
I need your dues by COB today!
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
John, Good to hear from you. Things are going fine.
There aren't really any parking garages close to the ballpark and getting
near the ballpark on an open lot will be damn near impossible. I believe
metro will be running a shuttle from open lots in downtown which are probably
about 10 blocks away from the park. There are several of these lots around
the Enron building and Smith and Lousiana St. Might be worth checking the
either the Metro web site or the Enron Field web site to get exact details on
the Shuttle routes. I believe the shuttle will drop off directly in front of
the park.
I received the Nemec Family Reunion flyer recently. Looks like your whole
family got drafted into service this year. I guess thats a danger of showing
up at those things.
Take care and we'll talk to you later.
John Nemec <[email protected]> on 03/24/2000 10:01:15 AM
Please respond to [email protected]
To: Gerald Nemec <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject:
Hey Gerald how are things going?
I need your expertise...(scary isn't it).
With the baseball season approaching, I am looking for recommendations on
where to park downtown. Do you know of any parking garages that are
somewhat close and are charging $5-$10?
Please advise. Thanks!
John Nemec
713-525-9556
[email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
----- Forwarded by Richard B Sanders/HOU/ECT on 06/14/2000 08:56 AM -----
"Bill W. Ogden" <[email protected]>
06/13/2000 05:12 PM
Please respond to bogden
To: "Richard Sanders" <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Enron/Natole
Richard:
In looking at the Natole file today it was brought to my attention that we
have an outstanding bill for legal fees and expenses unpaid from February.
The bill is invoice 00020782 dated 2/29/00 in the amount of $17,312.28.
Could you please have someone look for this one and see if it can be
approved for payment? Thanks in advance for your help.
Best regards,
Bill Ogden
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Sara I agree that the confirmation should be in a form that is acceptable to
ENA. We attempted to put use an ENA confirmation format. I have incorporated
your comments into our latest draft. I did this with some caution as there
appears to be slight differences between it and the draft you sent me. I
suggest if you find our section 2 satisfactory then you lift it and place it
in your standard confirmation. On the issues you raised.
1 October is correct as the termination date as time is measured from 9am
each day. Hence 30 September finishes at 8:59am on 1 October
The Payment Date should be at least 20 Business Days after the BoM readings
to determine the Floating Amount. An alternative wording could be "the
earlier of the [specified date] or 20 Business Days after...."
The "Strike Amount Differential" and "Payment Amount" could be worded
alternatively as in the pro forma ENA confirmation attached.
Would you forward your final wording.
David Minns
04/27/2000 09:23 AM
To: Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Raymond Yeow/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
Subject: Re: HDD Swap between ENA and Aquila Risk Management Corporation
Thanks for that Shari. I have your fax. I will respond today
Sara Shackleton@ECT
04/27/2000 08:54 AM
To: David Minns/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT
cc:
Subject: HDD Swap between ENA and Aquila Risk Management Corporation
Hi, David! Hope all is well. Since the referenced swap has been documented
by ENA, I am now reviewing the Transaction. I have a number of questions,
many the result of my unfamiliarity with your Australian Reference/Fallback
weather stations and a few other comments. I thought I would mark this up
and fax it to you which I will do shortly. Sara
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
FYI
Sara Shackleton
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith Street, EB 3801a
Houston, Texas 77002
713-853-5620 (phone)
713-646-3490 (fax)
[email protected]
----- Forwarded by Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT on 04/24/2001 01:00 PM -----
Cheryl Nelson@ENRON
Sent by: Cheryl Nelson@ENRON
04/24/2001 12:48 PM
To: Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: I may be a few minutes late for the meeting today because I have to
run an emergency errand.
Cheryl Nelson
Senior Counsel
EB3816
(713) 345-4693
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Enron Kids
No donation is too small!
Please contact Stephanie Truss, 5-3861, or Martha Keesler, 5-2423, to make a cash donation. The deadline for making your cash donation is Thursday, December 6, 2001.
EWS Legal
Gordon Elementary School Adoption
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Here is the detail of yesterday's position. Let me know if there's anything
else you need.
Thanks,
Robin
x713-345-7478
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Denys Watson
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
please put in rolodex.
---------------------- Forwarded by Jeffrey A Shankman/HOU/ECT on 12/18/2000
08:06 AM ---------------------------
Jay Perl <[email protected]> on 11/15/2000 09:28:36 AM
To: "Jeff Shankman (E-mail)" <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Hey Poookie
I'd have emailed you earlier, but you keep changing your email address.
Well, I'm here at Sempra marketing power.
Thanks again for all your help. Hope your new house is a babe magnet.
Going to Vegas for Day of the Trader. Shank dogggy dog dog.
See ya.
Jay Perl
Sempra Energy Trading
office: 203-355-5074
cell: 914-261-6025
email: [email protected]
****************************************************************************
This e-mail contains privileged attorney-client communications and/or
confidential information, and is only for the use by the intended recipient.
Receipt by an unintended recipient does not constitute a waiver of any
applicable privilege.
Reading, disclosure, discussion, dissemination, distribution or copying of
this information by anyone other than the intended recipient or his or her
employees or agents is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
communication in error, please immediately notify us and delete the original
material from your computer.
Sempra Energy Trading Corp. (SET) is not the same company as SDG&E or
SoCalGas, the utilities owned by SET's parent company. SET is not regulated
by the California Public Utilities Commission and you do not have to buy
SET's products and services to continue to receive quality regulated service
from the utilities.
****************************************************************************
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
<html>
<head>
<title>Untitled Document</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><center>
<table width="540" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="3" bordercolor="#999999">
<tr bgcolor="#0099FF">
<td bgcolor="#FFFFFF" height="48">
<div align="center"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">If
you do not wish to receive email from Bargain Bazaar, please Click Here:<br>
<a href="http://www.m-ul.com/e/unsub.cgi?l=9997&m=1736394363">UNSUBSCRIBE</a>
</font></div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
<br>
<table width="540" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" bordercolor="#999999">
<tr>
<td>
<table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5">
<tr align="center">
<td><img src="http://www.m-ul.com/email/images/accessories/credithunter-header.jpg" width="525" height="79"></td>
</tr>
<tr align="center">
<td>
<table width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="10" height="265" cellspacing="0">
<tr>
<td valign="top" height="73" bordercolor="#FFFFFF">
<p align="center">
<a href="http://www.m-ul.com/e/c.cgi?j=20020106_16&e=1736394363&r=u1160&d=6&p=1"><img src="http://www.m-ul.com/email/images/html072301/468x60bluefree_s.gif" width="468" height="60" border="0"></a></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" height="220" bordercolor="#FFFFFF"> <b>Dear
PATRICE, </b>
<p align="left"><b>Click here to get a <font color="#0066FF">FREE</font>
copy of your <font color="#99FF00"><font color="#000000">Online
Credit Report</font></font><font color="#000000">!</font></b></p>
<p align="left"><b>Plus, along with your <font color="#0066FF">FREE</font>
<font color="#0066FF">Credit Report</font><font color="#000000">,</font>
you'll receive OnlineCreditInfo.com Credit Monitoring Service
- <font color="#0066FF">FREE</font> for thirty days - with
no obligation. </b></p>
<p><b>So sign up now to receive your <font color="#0066FF">FREE</font>
Personal Credit Report delivered online on our Secure and
Confidential Web Site.</b></p>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" height="48" bordercolor="#FFFFFF" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div align="center"><a href="http://www.m-ul.com/e/c.cgi?j=20020106_16&e=1736394363&r=u1160&d=6&p=2"><img src="http://www.m-ul.com/email/images/html072301/FreeReport_ClickHere.jpg" width="302" height="111" border="0"></a></div>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</td>
</tr>
</table></center>
<img height="1" width="1" src="http://www.m-ul.com/e/e_open.cgi?j=20020106_16&mail_id=1736394363"></body>
</html>
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Scott, I appreciate your note and I am sure that you will work well with
Chris. I have always believed in your talents and capabilities - I won't be
far ....
Regards
Delainey
---------------------- Forwarded by David W Delainey/HOU/ECT on 02/09/2001
05:52 PM ---------------------------
Enron North America Corp.
From: Scott Healy 02/07/2001 08:15 PM
To: David W Delainey/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject:
Congratulations on the new position! I guess they thought that double or
tripling your budget wasn't a big enough challenge for you! Best wishes, I
am sure you will be successful. ENA won't seem the same without you.
I want to thank you about your advice on Calger. He is great to work for. I
am starting to crank again, just like 1998 (still my most enjoyable year at
Enron)
Good luck!
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Thank you for your call. I'm very sad, a bit angry with the doctors, and tired. Your voice cheered me up. Love, Kay
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld (www.BlackBerry.net)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
As you know, the Enron Management Conference will be held Wednesday through Friday, November 14-16, 2001, at the Westin La Cantera Resort in San Antonio, Texas.
This has been an eventful and challenging year for Enron. Now, more than ever, it is fitting to bring Enron's leaders together. After all, it is up to our management team to lead our company through these challenging times. Together, we will define Enron's character and determine Enron's destiny.
We have a great program planned for this year's conference. I'm delighted that General Norman Schwarzkopf will join us as a keynote speaker on leadership. I'm equally pleased to welcome back Gary Hamel, who will help us process the past year and prepare for future success. As I've said before, we are a company that continues to look to the future, and there are many exciting things in store for us.
I look forward to seeing you at this very important meeting.
Regards,
Ken Lay
NOTE: This year, registration for the Management Conference will be conducted electronically. Below is a link to the online registration website along with instructions for navigating the site. Everyone must register by Friday, November 2.
http://www.mplanners.com/enron
When you access the Management Conference online registration website, enter your eMail Address and Password (password: enron) in the specified boxes. The first time you access the site, you will be prompted to enter your First Name and Last Name. Once completed, click Submit.
On the next page, click Sign Up Now to register. You will be prompted to enter your basic information and make selections for your hotel room, travel and preferred activity. In the scroll box to the right, you can review and print the conference agenda, a list of activities, as well as travel arrangements and other general information.
After you have entered the necessary information, you can Review Your Registration or simply Log Out. Your registration information will be automatically submitted.
Once registered, you can reaccess the site at any time to review or change previous elections. When reentering the site, you only need to enter your eMail Address and Password.
If you experience any problems accessing the site, please contact Marge Nadasky at 713-853-6631.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Ben,
Per my voice mail, I am with PECO Energy and am the PECO team lead on the
Enron opportunity. CSFB (Lou Iaconetti) has informed us that PECO has been
selected to proceed into Round II of the bidding process on the Lincoln,
Gleason and Wheatland peaking units. I would appreciate it if you could
let me know what dates are available for site visits.
Thanks for your help.
Mike Cazaubon
610-765-5925
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Steve,
This is a third draft of a letter to Wyden re: information release. The
latest draft incorporates comments of Tim Belden and Jim Steffes.
Who do you recommend I work with to get this letter finalized?
Alan Comnes
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Stinson,
No problem.
Vince
Stinson Gibner
05/10/2000 10:17 AM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Shirley Crenshaw/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: 1/2 day off
Vince,
I am planning to attend my monthly director's meeting in Spearman, TX, on
Tuesday, May 16.
I would also like to take 1/2 day of vacation on the morning of Wednesday,
May 17, and plan to be back in the office after lunch.
thanks,
Stinson
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Terry, please plan on attending next Wednesday's meeting for the demonstration on the handheld
devices. Thanks. Lynn
-----Original Message-----
From: Winters, Ricki
Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2001 5:45 PM
To: Blair, Lynn; Bryant, Mike; Corman, Shelley; Dietz, Rick; Holmes, Bradley; January, Steven; Nacey, Sheila; Scott, Donna; Winters, Ricki
Cc: McFarland, Jean; Brown, Sharon; Garcia, Ava; Carrillo, Alma
Subject: Shelley's Staff Meetings
Shelley's Monday and Wednesday staff meetings have been relocated to ECN42C2 thru December. On Wednesday October 10th we have invited Jean McFarland to discuss various brands of handheld communication devices from 9:00 until 10:00AM.
Please forward this memo to individuals that you feel may benefit from learning more about standard cost effective communication tools that Enron supports.
Thank you, Ricki
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Group,
Yesterday 11 /11 and this morning 11/12 the ISO cut one of our schedules
where Enron was exporting from SP 15, to NOb more specifically the schedule
looks like this: CISO-EPMI-SCL. Per Sean Crandall starting tomorrow and
forward we will not allow the ISO to cut our schedules UNTIL all the OTHER
nonfirm schedules are cut FIRST. This is made possible by new FTRs that Chris
Mallory scheduled on the Sp/NOB path.
As a result of having firm transmission rights If the ISO calls and cuts one
of our schedules at NOB we need to make sure and ask the ISO that the other
nonfirm schedules are cut first then we can accept our cut.
For any further questions on this matter contact Sean Crandall or Chris
MAllory
thanks
Monika
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
584137
broker has light load
584125
should be mirant
thanks
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
---------------------- Forwarded by Amanda Huble/NA/Enron on 11/28/2000 08:42
AM ---------------------------
David Dronet
11/28/2000 08:41 AM
To: Amanda Huble/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Gas Fundamentals Website Update
Morning,
As some of you may have noticed we have added security to the Gas
Fundamentals Website.
If you encounter this screen when accessing http://gasfundy.corp.enron.com
simply login with your Windows Domain name and password. This is the same
account you would use to logon to
your PC. If you do not wish to be prompted with this information again,
check the "Save this password in your password list" option and
you will not encounter this pop up when accessing the website.
Thank you,
David Dronet
xt 53482
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Vail??? Flagstaff??? Man, I'm in the wrong business. Now listen Stumpy, if
you think you're going to Vail so some half-#%$#ed customer can run over your
OTHER knee with a snow mobile, right before your wedding, well think again,
buster.
I'll see if we can set up a meeting on Thursday the 2nd.
Signed,
Stuck in Lodi Again
Jeffery Fawcett
10/11/2000 03:39 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Susan Scott/ET&S/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Meeting with PG&E, Gas Accord OII
Jeff,
Got your voicemail and I think you've got the right idea. I spoke with the
lovely Ms. Scott and she and I agreed that: (1) we don't want to endure a
marathon afternoon (or two) of PG&E preaching the Gospel according to Baja
Path, and (2) a more compressed 2-hour, mano-y-mano visit with Mr. Cherry to
discuss Enron's and Transwestern's position in the Gas Accord would be much
more useful to all parties. Given the fact that TW has another customer
meeting next week in Vail, and I've made a tentative commitment to meet with
a customer in Flagstaff the following week, the only time I can reasonably
fit in a trip to visit PG&E would be to arrive Wed. night, Nov. 1, and meet
Thursday a.m., Nov. 2. (Remember, I'm getting married that Saturday, Nov.
4th!!!)
If we can't work this schedule out, then, in order to include me, we'll have
to wait until I get back in mid-November. If you think TW needs to get the
face time a little earlier, maybe you and Ms. Scott can meet with him without
the benefit of me dragging you down.
Will you get back with us? Thanks.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Set up by Kim Hillis.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
T O D A Y G O D I S F I R S T
Marketplace Meditations
by Os Hillman
The Purpose of Crucibles
The crucible for silver and the furnace for gold, but the Lord
tests the heart.
- (Proverbs 17:3)
This proverb describes one of God's strangest mysteries. It is a
description of God's formula to refine the human heart in order
to bring out its finest qualities. The significant leaders who
make the greatest mark for the Kingdom had to experience their
own crucible and fire. Without it, the dross can never be removed
from the human heart. Without it, the encumbrances weigh us down.
God understands the human heart. He understands that for us to
become all that He hopes for us, there are seasons of fire.
Joseph went through many tests. Succeeding in the test qualified
him for greater responsibility. The greater the use in the
Kingdom the greater the crucible to prepare the right foundation.
Some of God's greatest crucibles are found in the marketplace
where we live every day: the employee who betrays our trust, the
client who refuses to pay, the vendor who falls short of our
expectations.
Each of these is God's tests to find out how we will respond.
What tests are being brought your way today? His grace has been
provided that we might pass the tests that He brings before us.
Should we fail, we need not fear. His grace is sufficient for
this as well. Ask God for the grace to walk with Him in whatever
tests He has placed before you this day. He is able to accomplish
what He wants for you.
Published and distributed by Crosswalk.com, this daily devotional is
written by Os Hillman ([email protected]). Os is president of
Marketplace Leaders, an Atlanta based ministry teaching Biblical
principles for career and business success. He offers a FREE newsletter
and other resources at:
http://www.marketplaceleaders.org
Order "TGIF: Today God I s First" - 365 daily meditations to motivate
and inspire for $17 for TGIF subscribers. Click here to order:
http://www.marketplaceleaders.org/displayroom/skudetail.nhtml?uid=10055
To support Os Hillman & Marketplace Leaders , click:
https://nhf.org/applications/donate.htm?FDN=Marketplace%2BLeaders
Mail: 3520 Habersham Club Drive, Cumming, Georgia 30041 USA.
____________________SUBSCRIPTION INFO_______________________
* You subscribed to Marketplace Meditations as:
< [email protected] >
* To unsubscribe from this newsletter immediately, click here:
< http://link.crosswalk.com/UM/U.ASP?A3.12.261895 >
If that link is not clickable, simply copy and paste it into
your browser window.
* To change your address: unsubscribe your old address
and then subscribe your new address.
* To subscribe, send an email to:
< [email protected] > or go to
< http://www.crosswalk.com/lists > for a complete list of
our newsletters.
* Copyright ? 2001 Crosswalk.com, Inc. and its Content
Providers. All rights reserved.
____________________________________________________________
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
DOUGLAS GILBERT-SMITH,
?
The PEP system closes on Friday, May 25, 2001.
?
Our records indicate that one or more of your direct reports has suggested
reviewers that you have not yet approved. Feedback cannot be provided on
your employee until you approve the reviewers.
?
Please log into PEP at http://pep.enron.com and select Supervisor Services
from the Main Menu to approve your employees' reviewers.
?
If you have any questions regarding the PRC process or the PEP system, please
contact the PEP Help Desk at:
Houston: 1.713.853.4777, Option 4 or email: [email protected]
London: 44.207.783.4040, Option 4 or email: [email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
With ECS (Enron Center South) rapidly approaching completion, Enron is forced
to change the numbering scheme on the existing Stentofon system. To increase
our capacity to support this expansion, we must increase the number of valid
Stentofon address numbers. Enron currently uses 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600
and 900 series numbers for the addresses. In order to add more addresses to
the system, Enron will be converting the dial plan from a three digit dialing
system to a four digit dialing scheme on the Stentofon system. This
conversion is scheduled to occur on the weekend of May 18th.
In efforts to minimize confusion, we will convert all Stentofon addresses in
EB1 to a 4000 series number. (i.e. If your Stento number was 364, then
your new number will be 4364.) We will also change all speed dials to
reflect the new dialing scheme. Please instruct the users within your group
of this change.
Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.
Regards,
Darren Adamik
Mgr.-Trading Technology
Enron Net Works, LLC
713.853.4764 Office
713-853-9828 Fax
mailto:[email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
[IMAGE]
CO.O.L. Travel Specials
[IMAGE]
Wednesday, May 02, 2001 ?
Specials for peter keavey[IMAGE]
Fare Sale
[IMAGE]
Global Fare Sale
Save up to 15% on travel from the US to Tokyo, Hong Kong, and select
destinations in South America, Central America, Mexico and the Caribbean. And
save up to 10% on travel within the U.S. and from the U.S. to Canada and
Europe. Don't wait though because these seats are limited. For details and
to purchase your ticket now visit:www.continental.com Click for more info
?
This week's e-mail includes: CO.O.L. Travel Specials, Featured Fares,
Continental Vacation Offers, Westin Hotels & Resorts, Sheraton Hotels &
Resorts, Four Points by Sheraton, St. Regis, The Luxury Collection and W
Hotels Offers, Hilton Hotel & Resort Offers, Alamo Rent A Car Offers,
National Car Rental Offers.
CO.O.L. Travel Specials
Airport Hubs
This week's specials are good for the following markets departing Saturday,
May 5 and returning on either Monday, May 7 or Tuesday, May 8, 2001. Please
see the Terms and Conditions listed at the end of this e-mail.
OnePass Miles CO.O.L. Travel Specials Offers
For OnePass members, here are special opportunities to redeem miles for
travel to the following destinations. As an additional benefit, OnePass Elite
members can travel using the miles below as the only payment necessary.
To use your OnePass miles (as listed below) to purchase CO.O.L. Travel
Specials, you must call 1-800-642-1617. There will not be an additional $20
charge when redeeming OnePass miles for CO.O.L. Travel Specials through the
toll-free reservations number.
If not using your OnePass miles, purchase CO.O.L. Travel Specials online
until 11:59pm (CST) Friday at www.continental.com. You can also purchase
CO.O.L. Travel Specials for an additional cost of $20 per ticket through our
toll-free reservations number at 1-800-642-1617.
Travel may originate in either city.
From/To Cleveland
$29 + 12,500 Miles or $119 - Islip/ Long Island, NY
$29 + 10,000 Miles or $99 ? - Syracuse, NY
From/To Houston
$29 + 12,500 Miles or $139 - Albuquerque, NM
$29 + 12,500 Miles or $119 - Alexandria, LA
$29 + 10,000 Miles or $89 ? - Corpus Christi, TX
$29 + 12,500 Miles or $139 - Ft. Lauderdale, FL
$29 + 10,000 Miles or $89 ? - Harlingen/Rio Grand Valley, TX
$29 + 10,000 Miles or $89 ? - Jackson, MS
$29 + 12,500 Miles or $139 - Jacksonville, FL
$29 + 12,500 Miles or $139 - Los Angeles, CA
$29 + 10,000 Miles or $99 ? - McAllen /Rio Grand Valley, TX
$29 + 17,500 Miles or $179 - Milwaukee, WI
$29 + 17,500 Miles or $189 - Montrose, CO
$29 + 17,500 Miles or $169 - Norfolk, VA
$29 + 17,500 Miles or $179 - Orange County/Santa Ana, CA
$29 + 12,500 Miles or $139 - Pensacola, FL
$29 + 12,500 Miles or $139 - Providence, RI
$29 + 12,500 Miles or $139 - Raleigh Durham, NC
$29 + 12,500 Miles or $139 - San Diego, CA
$29 + 12,500 Miles or $139 - Savannah, GA
From/To New York/Newark
$29 + 12,500 Miles or $139 - Birmingham, AL
$29 + 10,000 Miles or $99 ? - Boston, MA
$29 + 10,000 Miles or $89 ? - Buffalo, NY
$29 + 10,000 Miles or $89 ? - Burlington, VT
$29 + 15,000 Miles or $159 - Columbia, SC
$29 + 12,500 Miles or $139 - Dayton, OH
$29 + 15,000 Miles or $159 - Greenville/Spartanburg, SC
$29 + 10,000 Miles or $109 - Manchester, NH
$29 + 12,500 Miles or $129 - Raleigh Durham, NC
return to top
Featured Fares Sample Destination
Choose your fare, find your flight. Or, quickly sift through all our great
featured fares by choosing a destination or origin. Be spontaneous. Get out
of town. Current Featured Fares destinations include:
New York, Atlanta, Los Angeles, Houston,
Cleveland, Phoenix, and many more.
Note: Featured Fares change often. To see a regularly-updated online list and
purchase our Featured Fares, visit the Web site at: www.continental.com
(Capacity controls and other restrictions apply.)
[IMAGE]
Continental Vacation Offers
Are you thinking about how you are going to plan you next vacation? Let
Continental Airlines Vacations take the hassle out of vacation planning with
easy-to-plan travel packages that provide exciting destinations plus memories
that will last a lifetime!
Check out www.coolvacations.com/internetdeals.asp to see our featured
destinations:
Florida - Disney's Yacht Club Resort
Las Vegas - MGM Grand
Florida - Clear Water Beach
Mexico - Cancun
Europe - Paris
[IMAGE]
Partner Hotel Specials
Starwood Hotels
CO.O.L. Travel Specials Last-minute Weekend Rates from Westin Hotels &
Resorts, Sheraton Hotels & Resorts, Four Points by Sheraton, St. Regis, The
Luxury Collection and W Hotels
Visit our site for booking these and other Last-Minute Weekend Rates for
this weekend May 4 - May 8, 2001. promo.starwood.com/csco
Alabama
Birmingham - Sheraton Birmingham - $ 60.00
California
Rancho Bernardo - Four Points by Sheraton Rancho Bernardo - $ 74.00
San Diego - Sheraton San Diego Hotel and Marina - $ 155.00
Costa Mesa - The Westin South Coast Plaza - $ 88.00
Los Angeles - W Los Angeles Westwood - $ 219.00
Los Angeles - Sheraton Gateway Hotel Los Angeles Airport - $ 77.00
Los Angeles - The Century Plaza Hotel & Spa - $ 139.00
Los Angeles - The Westin Los Angeles Airport - $ 84.00
Los Angeles - The St. Regis, Los Angeles - $ 387.00
Monrovia - Four Points by Sheraton Monrovia - $ 65.00
Pomona - Sheraton Suites Fairplex - $ 69.00
Santa Monica - Four Points by Sheraton Santa Monica - $ 95.00
Universal City - Sheraton Universal Hotel - $ 99.00
Connecticut
Stamford - The Westin Stamford - $ 77.00
Stamford - Sheraton Stamford Hotel - $ 71.00
Florida
Bal Harbour - Sheraton Bal Harbour Beach Resort - $ 276.00
Dania - Sheraton Fort Lauderdale Airport Hotel - $ 109.00
Fort Lauderdale - Sheraton Suites Cypress Creek Ft. Lauderdale - $ 97.00
Ft. Lauderdale - The Westin Fort Lauderdale - $ 97.00
Plantation - Sheraton Suites Plantation - Ft. Lauderdale West - $ 97.00
Massachusetts
Boston - The Westin Copley Place - $ 179.00
Boston - Sheraton Boston Hotel - $ 189.00
Braintree - Sheraton Braintree Hotel - $ 119.00
Burlington - Four Points by Sheraton Burlington - $ 77.00
Danvers - Sheraton Ferncroft Resort - $ 105.00
Framingham - Sheraton Framingham Hotel - $ 97.00
Hyannis - Sheraton Hyannis Hotel - $ 115.00
Lexington - Sheraton Lexington Inn - $ 78.00
Newton - Sheraton Newton Hotel - $ 109.00
Wakefield - Sheraton Colonial Hotel and Golf Club Boston - $ 90.00
Waltham - The Westin Waltham-Boston - $ 90.00
Waltham - Four Points by Sheraton Waltham - $ 100.00
New Hampshire
Manchester - Four Points by Sheraton Manchester - $ 69.00
New Jersey
Atlantic City - Sheraton Atlantic City Convention Center Hotel - $ 83.50
Edison - Sheraton Edison Hotel Raritan Center - $ 75.00
Elizabeth - Four Points by Sheraton Newark Airport - $ 77.00
Parsippany - Sheraton Parsippany Hotel - $ 70.00
Piscataway - Four Points by Sheraton Piscataway - $ 65.00
New York
Jamaica - Sheraton JFK Airport Hotel - $ 110.00
New York City - Sheraton Russell Hotel - $ 179.00
New York City - The St. Regis - $ 580.00
New York City - Sheraton Manhattan Hotel - $ 169.00
North Carolina
Chapel Hill - Sheraton Chapel Hill Hotel - $ 77.00
Rhode Island
Warwick - Sheraton Providence Airport Hotel - $ 79.00
Texas
Houston - The Westin Galleria Houston - $ 64.00
Houston - Sheraton Houston Brookhollow Hotel - $ 45.00
Houston - The St. Regis, Houston - $ 106.00
Vermont
Burlington - Sheraton Burlington Hotel and Conference Center - $ 77.00
Virginia
Norfolk - Sheraton Norfolk Waterside Hotel - $ 88.00
Wisconsin
Brookfield - Sheraton Milwaukee Brookfield Hotel - $ 65.00
For complete details on these offers, please refer to the terms and
conditions below.
return to top
CO.O.L. Travel Specials on Hilton Hotels and Resorts
Hilton logo
The following rates are available May 5-7, 2001 and are priced per night.
Cities listed are for the nearest airport, not necessarily for the location
of the hotel.
Boston, MA
Hilton Dedham Place, Dedham, MA - $119
Hilton Boston Logan Airport - $139
Hilton Boston Back Bay - $209
Cleveland, OH
Hilton Cleveland East/Beachwood Beachwood, OH - $99
Fort Lauderdale, FL
Hilton Fort Lauderdale Airport, Dania, FL - $109
Houston, TX
Hilton Houston Southwest - $109
Irvine, CA
Hilton Irvine/Orange County Airport - $179
Los Angeles, CA
Hilton Burbank Airport & Convention Center Burbank, CA - $159
Doubletree Hotel Los Angeles-Westwood - $179
Hilton Irvine/Orange County Airport - Irvine, CA $179
New York, NY & Newark, NJ
Hilton Hasbrouck Heights, Hasbrouck Heights, NJ - $159
Raleigh/Durham, NC
Hilton Durham, Durham, NC - $139
To book this week's special rates for Hilton Family Hotels, visit and book at
www.hilton.com/specials/values_main.html
Special rates apply only for the dates listed at each hotel and are subject
to availability. Check hilton.com for specific dates at each Hilton Family
Hotel. Or call at 1-800-774-1500 and ask for Value Rates. Restrictions apply
to these rates.
return to top
Partner Car Rental Specials
CO.O.L. Travel Specials from Alamo Rent A Car
This week, Alamoc offers great rates in the following cities. Rates listed
below are valid on compact class cars at airport locations listed. Other car
types may be available. Rates are valid for rentals on Saturday, May 5,
2001 with returns Monday, May 7, 2001 or Tuesday, May 8, 2001.
Alamo logo
$26 a day in: Albuquerque, NM (ABQ)
$18 a day in: Birmingham, AL ((BHM)
$26 a day in: Boston, MA (BOS)
$18 a day in: Buffalo, NY (BUF)
$20 a day in: Cleveland, OH (CLE)
$26 a day in: Newark, NJ (EWR)
$26 a day in: Fort Lauderdale, FL (FLL)
$18 a day in: Houston, TX (IAH)
$26 a day in: Jacksonville, FL (JAX)
$20 a day in: Los Angeles, CA (LAX)
$18 a day in: Milwaukee, WI (MKE)
$26 a day in: Pensacola, FL (PNS)
$26 a day in: Providence, RI (PVD)
$18 a day in: Raleigh-Durham, NC (RDU)
$20 a day in: San Diego, CA (SAN)
$20 a day in: Savannah, GA (SAV)
$20 a day in: Orange County, CA (SNA)
To receive special Continental CO.O.L. discounted rates, simply make advance
reservations and be sure to request ID # 596871 and Rate Code 33. Book your
reservation online at: www.alamo.com or contact Alamo at 1-800 GO ALAMO.
*If you are traveling to a city or a different date that is not listed, Alamo
offers great rates when you book online at: www.alamo.com
For complete details on these offers, please refer to Alamo's terms and
conditions below.
return to top
CO.O.L. Travel Specials from National Car Rental
This week, Nationalc offers great rates in the following cities. Rates
listed below are valid on intermediate class cars at airport locations
listed. Other car types may be available. Rates are valid for rentals on
Saturday, May 5, 2001 with returns Monday, May 7, 2001 or Tuesday, May 8,
2001.
National logo
$29 a day in: Albuquerque, NM (ABQ)
$28 a day in: Alexandria, LA (AEX)
$21 a day in: Birmingham, AL ((BHM)
$29 a day in: Boston, MA (BOS)
$51 a day in: Burlington, VT (BTV)
$21 a day in: Buffalo, NY (BUF)
$23 a day in: Cleveland, OH (CLE)
$21 a day in: Columbia, SC (CAE)
$21 a day in: Dayton, OH (DAY)
$29 a day in: Newark, NJ (EWR)
$29 a day in: Fort Lauderdale, FL (FLL)
$23 a day in: Greenville/Spartanburg, SC (GSP)
$29 a day in: Harlingen, TX (HRL)
$21 a day in: Houston, TX (IAH)
$21 a day in: Jackson, MS (JAN)
$29 a day in: Jacksonville, FL (JAX)
$23 a day in: Los Angeles, CA (LAX)
$29 a day in: McAllen, TX (MFE)
$21 a day in: Manchester, NH (MHT)
$21 a day in: Norfolk, VA (ORF)
$29 a day in: Pensacola, FL (PNS)
$21 a day in: Raleigh-Durham, NC (RDU)
$23 a day in: San Diego, CA (SAN)
$23 a day in: Savannah, GA (SAV)
$23 a day in: Orange County, CA (SNA)
$21 a day in: Syracuse, NY (SYR)
$28 a day in: Tampa, FL (TPA)
To receive your special Continental Airlines CO.O.L. Travel Specials
discounted rates, simply make your reservations in advance and be sure to
request Product Code COOLUS. To make your reservation, contact National at
1-800-CAR-RENT (1-800-227-7368), or book your reservation online at
www.nationalcar.com. Please enter COOLUS in the Product Rate Code field, and
5037126 in the Contract ID field to ensure you get these rates on these dates.
* If you are traveling to a city or a different date that is not listed,
National offers great rates when you book online at: www.nationalcar.com
For complete details on these offers, please refer to National's terms and
conditions below.
return to top
Terms and Conditions
CO.O.L. Travel Special Rules
Fares include a $37.20 fuel surcharge. Passenger Facility Charges, up to $12
depending on routing, are not included. Up to $2.75 per segment federal
excise tax, as applicable, is not included. Applicable International and or
Canadian taxes and fees up to $88, varying by destination, are not included
and may vary slightly depending on currency exchange rate at the time of
purchase.
For a complete listing of rules please visit: www.continental.com
Alamo Rent A Car's Terms and Conditions:
www.alamo.com
National Car Rental Terms and Conditions:
Customer must provide Contract ID# at the time of reservation to be eligible
for discounts. Offer valid at participating National locations in the US and
Canada. Minimum rental age is 25. This offer is not valid with any other
special discount or promotion. Standard rental qualifications apply. Subject
to availability and blackout dates. Advance reservations required. Geographic
driving restrictions may apply.
Terms and Conditions for Westin, Sheraton, Four Points, St. Regis, The Luxury
Collection, and W Hotels:
promo.starwood.com
return to top
This E-mail message and its contents are copyrighted and are proprietary
products of Continental Airlines, Inc. Any unauthorized use, reproduction, or
transfer of the message or its content, in any medium, is strictly prohibited.
Unfortunately, mail sent to this address cannot be answered. Please send all
inquiries to: [email protected]
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
[IMAGE]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
-----Original Message-----
From: Hedstrom, Peggy
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 6:14 AM
To: Reeves, Kathy; Gillis, Brian; Scott, Laura; Mckay, Jonathan
Subject: RE: Currency Issues Memo
I am out of the office on Monday afternoon. Can we meet on Tuesday instead?
Peggy
-----Original Message-----
From: Reeves, Kathy
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 5:35 AM
To: Hedstrom, Peggy; Gillis, Brian; Scott, Laura; Mckay, Jonathan
Subject: Currency Issues Memo
Please review the attached fx memo I have prepared. Can every body meet Monday June 25th at 2:00 pm to go over it?
This is the memo that we are going to give to the doorstep auditors and it will also provide me guidance as to the way to proceed in solving our fx issues.
Kathy
<< File: FX_ISSUES_0601.doc >>
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Stan-
If there is anything I can do or get Mike to do in order to pull his team
together then please let me know. I am open to any suggestions or concerns
you may have.
Mike has expressed an interest in me becoming a leader in developing the
culture and morale (Manager, Employee & Community Relations) of EOTT. I feel
I can do an extremely good job at this....and could even do a better job if I
had the help and support of Enron. Please let me know your thoughts on
this....I feel that being engaged more with Enron will show a significant
difference at EOTT. I think it is real important for EOTT Employees to feel
like we are part of Enron....
(as you know, being a part of such a highly respected company adds quite a
bit of value....as well as pride!)
Some ideas:
1. Tapping into Enron's training and development
2. Benefits
3. Employee Recognition Programs
4. Overall ideas Enron has that will assist in team building
5. Mentoring Programs
I just want you to know that I am willing to take on whatever task you would
like to hand to me....I am also very interested in finding out how EOTT can
benefit from Enron....anyone that you feel I should contact at Enron...please
let me know!
I am ready to help make EOTT a wonderful and HAPPY place to work.....(maybe
even a name change wouldn't be such a bad idea....)
Thanks for listening!
Shelly
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
My comments on Bob's memo.
Best,
Jeff
Vicki Sharp@EES
03/14/2001 02:05 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Jim Steffes
cc:
Subject: Negative CTC Memo for Delainey
would like your comments
---------------------- Forwarded by Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES on 03/14/2001 02:05
PM ---------------------------
From: Robert C Williams/ENRON@enronXgate on 03/14/2001 01:08 PM
To: Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry
Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Mike Smith/WSX/AZURIX@Exchange
cc: [email protected]@SMTP@enronXgate
Subject: Negative CTC Memo for Delainey
Please review the attached if you have time and let me have any comments.
Thanks.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
John,
Please be advised that effective Monday, December 4 you will need to access
DynegyDirect with the following log in:
User ID: JARNOLD
Password: enron1
Please note that these are case sensitive.
Your current log in will no longer be available on Monday.
Thank you,
Stephanie Sever x33465
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Phillip,
I hope you had a great Thanksgiving holiday. I just wanted to drop you a
note to see if you wanted me to look for anything else for you. We placed
the $1mm in the munis. Let me know if you need anything else.
Sincerely,
Steve
******************************************************
Notice Regarding Entry of Orders and Instructions:
Please do not transmit orders and/or instructions
regarding your UBSPaineWebber account(s) by e-mail.
Orders and/or instructions transmitted by e-mail will
not be accepted by UBSPaineWebber and UBSPaineWebber
will not be responsible for carrying out such orders
and/or instructions.
Notice Regarding Privacy and Confidentiality:
UBSPaineWebber reserves the right to monitor and
review the content of all e-mail communications sent
and/or received by its employees.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Concur Expense (XMS) Upgrade!
With the upgrade of Concur Expense going live on Monday, July 2, this is a
reminder to have all of your open expense reports
submitted and approved in the current XMS system by this Wednesday, June 27.
Logon instructions for the new Concur Expense system will be delivered via
email to everyone on Friday, June 29th.
To review the Transition Schedule, please click on the following link:
http://isc.enron.com/site/XMSchange.htm
If you have any other questions about the new upgrade, please contact the ISC
Call Center at 713-345-4727.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Today's Associates PRC meeting that was to begin at 1:30 has been cancelled
and will be rescheduled for a date yet to be determined. Both the morning
Analyst PRC meeting and the Associates PRC meeting were scheduled for the
same location and with Joe Sutton as chair. The Analysts PRC meeting is
apparently running very long, so someone from the program office called to
cancel the Associates PRC meeting for this afternoon. I will let you know as
soon as I know a rescheduled date.
In preparation for today's PRC meeting, I was able to meet in person with
most of your supervisors to get input on your job responsiblities,
accomplishments and performance. For those that were unavailable for a
meeting, we managed a phone call or at least a series of voice mails to
accomplish the same thing. I also have any materials that you may have
provided to your supervisor for the mid-year review process, as well as
copies of the internal feedback that was gathered through the PEP system.
With this delay in the meeting date, I have the time to ask for a copy of
your resume. The PRC process clearly focuses on your performance
specifically from January through June 2000. However, it would be helpful to
me in representing you to at least be familiar with your backgrounds. Please
e:mail a copy to me or you can send a hard copy to EB3015. A couple of you
have come by my office to meet with me. I would also be happy to put a name
and face together for others of you or to talk by phone if you are not in
Houston. My extension is 35926.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Hi John,
I'm out of town, but will give this a look when I return.
Kay
[email protected] on 01/30/2001 05:16:08 PM
To: [email protected]
cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Confidentiaility Agreements regarding enovate
Hello Kay -
It's been a long time since we've last spoken and I hope things are well.
In November, Gregg Penman had sent me two confidentiality agreements related
to enovate and asked that I forward any comments to you directly. I finally
have reviewed them and have a couple comments.
The only proposed changes that need explanation are in paragraphs 1 and 3 of
each agreement. Paragraphs 1 and 3 are typical provisions in a
confidentiality agreement where each side is evaluating a transaction.
However, the confidential information disclosed under these particular
agreements is going to be used not only for trading activities but also in
connection with audit rights related to an existing and ongoing contractual
relationship. The confidentiality agreements should not affect enovate's
and PMW's rights under the LLC Agreement. Accordingly, the proposed changes
are my attempt to clarify the usual text.
Please call if you wish to discuss. I believe my procrastination has
resulted in the business people wanting to sign these up next week, so your
attention to this is appreciated. Thanks.
<<Conf Ag enovate L.L.C. (evaluation of enovate LLC) v1 ENOVATE CMTS
MRK.doc>> <<Conf Ag Peoples Energy Resources Corp. (evaluation of enovate
LLC) revision 3 PEC CMTS.doc>>
----------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential
and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission,
dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance
upon, this information by persons or entities other than the
intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error,
please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
- Conf Ag enovate L.L.C. (evaluation of enovate LLC) v1 ENOVATE CMTS MRK.doc
- Conf Ag Peoples Energy Resources Corp. (evaluation of enovate LLC)
revision 3 PEC CMTS.doc
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Kevin,
I am not sure by what date you require a color copier but if you can wait
until April, Lanier has let me know that they ARE going to release their NEW
22 Copy Per Minute color copier @ that time. Please look @ the attached
spreadsheet and compare the cost with the $ 24 CPM Canon copier sent to you
on 01/31/2000:
Let me know what you think.
Thanks, Iain.................
Iain Russell
02/01/2000 10:11 AM
To: Kevin G Moore/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mike A Roberts/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Revised 10 CPM Color Copier Information
Kevin,
I revised the cost on the 10 CPM Tab under CPI : -->
Thanks, Iain...................
---------------------- Forwarded by Iain Russell/EPSC/HOU/ECT on 02/01/2000
10:05 AM ---------------------------
Color Copier Information
From: Iain Russell on 01/31/2000 11:45 PM
To: Kevin G Moore/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mike A Roberts/HOU/ECT@ECT, Shirley
Crenshaw/HOU/ECT@ECT, Carole Rogers/EPSC/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Color Copier Information
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Enron: Withdrawing 300 MW From Summer Peaking Program
Wednesday, November 1, 2000 02:18 PM
?Mail this article to a friend
(Corrected 1:59 pm)
NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--In response to new California power market rules
proposed Wednesday by the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Enron
Corp (ENE, news, msgs) has canceled some new generator projects it was
discussing with the state's electric grid operator, Enron said.
The generators that are no longer financially feasible would have amounted to
300 megawatts of new generation installed in California next spring, Enron
said. The company, however, continues to negotiate other new generator
projects with the California Independent System Operator.
The FERC Wednesday proposed limiting the California Power Exchange's price
setting mechanism to $150 a megawatt-hour. The preliminary order could become
a federal mandate by the end of the year, after the FERC takes comments from
the public, or it could be modified.
Enron and 13 other companies, meanwhile, are in final negotiations with the
ISO for the new peaking capacity for next summer. The ISO plans to pay a
total of $255 million a year for three years to the power companies for
installing the new generators, which the power companies will own.
In addition, California's three investor-owned utilities would pay the
generators for any electricity the new generators produce. Pricing for the
power would likely be based on the daily price set by the state-chartered
CalPX.
"There's too much uncertainty that we would be able to recover the cost
associated with those specific projects. For the purposes of making capital
commitments, we view this as a $150 price cap," Enron's Mark Palmer said.
Earlier Wednesday, the ISO's chief operating officer, Terry Winter, expressed
concern that FERC's proposed new rules could jeopardize some of the projects.
FERC's proposals Wednesday are the result of a two-month investigation of
California's wholesale electricity market, where prices this summer were
three times what they were a year earlier. To meet the state's rising demand
for power, California's three utilities have paid billions of dollars more
than anticipated to independent power producers in order to keep the lights
on.
By Mark Golden, Dow Jones Newswires; 201-938-4604; [email protected]
Quote for referenced ticker symbols: EIX, ENE, PCG, SRE
, 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Please see the following articles:
Sac Bee, Tues, 5/1: "$18 billion power tab projected: An immediate
outcry greets Davis' plan for state energy purchases through June 2002"
Sac Bee, Tues, 5/1: "PUC seeks to retain PG&E control"
Sac Bee, Tues, 5/1: "Legislators propose tax on energy profits"
Sac Bee, Tues, 5/1: "Dan Walters: Davis finally generates an energy plan,
but will it work?"
Sac Bee, Tues, 5/1: "Soaring energy bills hurt eateries: Many restaurants in
capital area,
despite good patronage, expect to raise menu prices"
Sac Bee, Mon, 4/30: "Empowering the public (Editorial)
Obstacles keep cities out of energy"
Sac Bee, Tues, 5/1: "Daniel Weintraub: An energy trader says it's time to
limit profits" (Editorial)
LA Times, Tues, 5/1: "Power Companies Step Up Lobbying"
LA Times, Tues, 5/1: "Power Marketer Ordered by FERC to Refund $8 Million"
LA Times, Tues, 5/1: "Davis Turns to Bankruptcy Court for Help in Plan to Buy
Power Grid"
SF Chron, Tues, 5/1: "Feds want surcharge to pay utilities' debts
THE PLAN: Additional rate boost likely, cash would go to power suppliers"
SF Chron (AP), Tues, 5/1: "Lawmakers offer bills aimed at cutting natural
gas prices"
SF Chron (AP), Tues, 5/1: "Developments in California's energy crisis"
SF Chron, Tues, 5/1: "Second try for tax cut in Oakland
Smaller utility levy likely after Brown veto"
SF Chron, Tues, 5/1: "Feds want surcharge to pay utilities' debts
THE PLAN: Additional rate boost likely, cash would go to power suppliers"
SF Chron, Tues, 5/1: "Warning of a summer power 'Armageddon'
Davis aide paints dire scenario in push for bonds to buy power "
Mercury News, Tues, 5/1: "Cheney rejects conservation"
Mercury News (AP), Tues, 5/1: "Federal energy regulators propose surcharge
plan
to pay utilities' debt"
Mercury News, Tues, 5/1: "Record prices for power expected this summer in
U.S."
Mercury News, Tues, 5/1: "Davis calls generators on carpet"
Mercury News, Tues, 5/1: "PG&E lobbied heavily just before bankruptcy"
OC Register, Tues, 5/1: "Cheney outlines energy strategy for U.S."
OC Register, Tues, 5/1: "Bush taking a supply-side policy on energy"
OC Register, Tues, 5/1: "Power supplier will pay to settle"
OC Register, Tues, 5/1: "Energy notebook: Bills target high natural-gas
prices"
OC Register, Tues, 5/1: "Leadership blackout
Gov. Davis seems unplugged in dealing with the crisis "
(Commentary)
Individual.com (Bridgenews), Tues, 5/1: "Calif. Gov Davis/ PG&E utility
creditors may like grid sale --Davis sees Calif energy supply
outstripping need by fall '03 --Davis/ PG&E credit"
Individual.com (AP), Tues, 5/1: "Davis Optimistic Despite Power Woes"
NY Times, Tues, 5/1: "Cheney Promotes Increasing Supply as Energy Policy"
NY Times, Tues, 5/1: "River's Power Aids California and Enriches the
Northwest"
Wash. Post, Tues, 5/1: "Bush Energy Plan Will Emphasize Production; Cheney:
Conservation Is Part of Effort"
Energy Insight, Tues, 5/1: "Western Dreaming: A Buyer's Cartel"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
$18 billion power tab projected: An immediate outcry greets Davis' plan for
state energy purchases through June 2002.
By Emily Bazar and Jim Sanders
Bee Capitol Bureau
(Published May 1, 2001)
Seeking to sell his energy rescue plan to reluctant Republicans, Gov. Gray
Davis on Monday released a long-awaited financial plan that shows the state
will spend more than $18 billion on electricity through June 2002, but can
maneuver the energy crisis without additional rate increases or draining the
state budget.
His projections, however, were immediately attacked by lawmakers and industry
experts, who called them overly optimistic and unrealistic.
The plan, which Davis is using to bolster his energy effort with legislators
and Wall Street, is based on a series of assumptions, among them that the
state will pay significantly less for electricity on the spot market during
the hottest summer months than it pays now, and that dozens of shuttered
small generators will start selling discount electricity again.
"No one has a crystal ball into the future," state Treasurer Phil Angelides
told reporters. "The administration's plan makes some assumptions, as any
plan must. The question is, are they reasonable assumptions, and what do we
need to do collectively to make the plan succeed?"
The Democratic governor has long faced criticism for refusing to divulge
details about the state's power purchases, both on the expensive spot market
and under long-term contracts.
Last week, the issue was thrust into the forefront when Assembly Republicans
told the governor they would not vote for a bill authorizing the sale of $10
billion in revenue bonds to pay for the state's power purchases until they
received additional information.
If legislators don't pass the bill -- which requires a two-thirds majority
and, therefore, Republican votes -- Angelides said the state might miss a May
8 deadline for closing on a crucial $4.1 billion bridge loan.
On Monday, Davis relented, releasing his response in the form of an
inch-thick document filled with tables, bar graphs and projections. The plan
gives the first detailed, month-by-month account of the state Department of
Water Resources' expected power purchases through 2002.
But the projections failed to win votes immediately in the Assembly
Republican caucus, where Minority Floor Leader Dave Cox said he is not yet
ready to support the proposed $10 billion in bonds. The caucus will meet
today to decide what to do next, he said.
"Many of the assumptions are questionable and there is no answer as to what
will happen if the assumptions prove incorrect," said Assemblyman Keith
Richman, R-Sun Valley. "I'm very concerned."
Davis' plan relies on numerous estimates, including likely summer
temperatures and annual rainfall, and an assumption that Californians will
use 7 percent less energy this year than they did last year.
Private consultants who helped draft the plan also predicted that most of the
small generators that stopped producing electricity because they hadn't been
paid for months will resume production at discounted rates. They argued that
their assumptions are conservative and allow for unexpected changes.
"There are lots of variables that are not simply assumptions," said Joseph
Fichera, an investment banker with Saber Partners in New York City and a
consultant to the administration. "I would say probably 80 percent is what we
know are facts and 20 percent are expectations."
Republican lawmakers and others were particularly uncomfortable with the
administration's conclusion that the state will spend an average of $195 per
megawatt-hour for electricity on the spot market in July, August and
September, the hottest months of the year when electricity is expected to be
sold at a premium.
Some have predicted that the costs could go much higher.
"There's a reasonable chance this summer that the state will be paying $1
billion per week" for electricity, Severin Borenstein, head of the University
of California Energy Institute, told state regulators last week.
With summer prices forecast to be $500 to $700 per megawatt-hour, and the
state Department of Water Resources expected to need more than 200,000
megawatt-hours a day, it would be easy to rack up billion-dollar power bills,
he said in an interview.
The state spent $90 million on power on a single day last week, but prices
declined somewhat afterward, according to the governor's press office.
Davis' Cabinet secretary, Susan Kennedy, defended the estimated summertime
cost, saying the state has secured enough long-term contracts to limit its
exposure to the most expensive spot market prices.
"It's almost impossible to say what's plausible and what isn't," said Mike
Florio, an attorney with The Utility Reform Network, a Bay Area consumer
group.
It makes sense that power costs, overall, would drop as more long-term
contracts kick in and the state buys less electricity on the spot market, he
said. But many of those contracts are still being negotiated.
"What this assumes about contracts that have not been signed is the really
interesting question," he said.
Assemblyman Tony Strickland, R-Thousand Oaks, said the Davis administration
hasn't been able to provide assurances that if bonds are sold now, more won't
be needed in the future.
"Their assumptions are nothing more than educated guesses," Strickland said.
"And the educated guess of the Legislature was that we wouldn't be in the
power buying business in the first place."
Kennedy conceded that the administration's plan has its limits, and won't
prevent the state from experiencing rolling blackouts in the coming months if
prices get too high or its assumptions are proved wrong.
"The bottom line will be we will either need to borrow a little bit more or
we're going to see more blackouts," she said.
The Bee's Emily Bazar can be reached at (916) 326-5540 or [email protected].
Bee staff writers Carrie Peyton and John Hill contributed to this report.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------
PUC seeks to retain PG&E control
By Claire Cooper
Bee Legal Affairs Writer
(Published May 1, 2001)
SAN FRANCISCO -- Warning that California consumers and the state economy
could be in grave danger, the state Public Utilities Commission urged a
federal bankruptcy judge Monday not to sever the commission's regulatory
control of Pacific Gas and Electric Co.
On April 9, three days after filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection,
PG&E petitioned the Bankruptcy Court to block parts of a recent PUC order.
PG&E said the provisions conflicted with bankruptcy rules and interfered with
its legal right to recover skyrocketing wholesale energy coasts.
The provisions at issue -- adopted by the PUC on March 27 along with a 30
percent rate increase -- imposed new accounting requirements on the
utilities, but the consequences were potentially dramatic. Depending on the
way certain costs are counted, PG&E may or may not be entitled to early
termination of an electricity rate freeze adopted by the Legislature five
years ago.
PG&E said the accounting provisions changed the rules retroactively and
artificially extended the rate freeze.
But the PUC disagreed -- and said the issue is even larger. In a series of
documents filed Monday, the commission characterized PG&E's petition as "the
first step in (the company's) plan to deregulate itself." If PG&E succeeds in
stripping California of its power to regulate its electric utilities, the
commission said, "PG&E may be able to claim an artificial end to the rate
freeze, which could result in drastically higher retail electric rates. The
harm to California's consumers and economy could be grave."
The commission said that the petition should be dismissed on grounds of
"sovereign immunity" -- the state's right not to be sued by private parties
-- and because the nation's bankruptcy laws bar interference with the state's
exercise of its regulatory powers.
"The accounting proposal the commission adopted was illegal before we filed
for Chapter 11," PG&E spokesman Ron Low said Monday. "Now that we are in
Chapter 11, it not only affects our shareholders, it also impacts our
creditors."
The Bee's Claire Cooper can be reached at (415) 551-7701 or
[email protected].
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
Legislators propose tax on energy profits
By Kevin Yamamura
Bee Capitol Bureau
(Published May 1, 2001)
With power producers reaping profits that increased fivefold last year, some
state lawmakers are pushing a tax on future earnings as the best way to keep
generators honest.
California would recoup 100 percent of power profits deemed unreasonable
through a "windfall profits tax" proposed by state Sen. Nell Soto, D-Pomona.
Her bill, SB 1x, cleared the Senate Appropriations Committee on Monday on a
7-3 vote.
The proposal would force generators to give the state any money collected
above a reasonable limit determined by the state Public Utilities Commission.
That money probably would be doled out in equal portions to state taxpayers,
possibly through income tax returns, though details remain vague.
The bill is aimed principally at five out-of-state companies -- AES Corp.,
Duke Energy Corp., Dynegy Inc., Mirant and Reliant -- that bought California
power plants under deregulation and saw profits increase last year at an
average of 508 percent, according to Democratic estimates.
"What this bill says is, 'You can't come in and rip us off,' " said Senate
President Pro Tem John Burton, D-San Francisco.
Critics said the proposal would only discourage companies from building new
power plants in California or producing power when the state needs it most.
During the worst of California's energy blues, utilities and the state have
paid generators and marketers well above 30 cents per kilowatt-hour.
Soto has suggested an 8 cents a kilowatt-hour cap, meaning that any price
charged above that would be considered unreasonable. If a generator were to
charge 30 cents, for instance, it would have to return 22 cents to the state
in the form of the new tax.
Although the proposal could have the direct effect of knocking down soaring
energy prices, it would also send a message that the state will not tolerate
price gouging, some lawmakers said.
"We have been royally mistreated," said Sen. Jack Scott, D-Altadena, a
co-author of the bill. "And we have allowed a great deal of California money
to leave the state at the expense of ratepayers, taxpayers and businesses."
But energy producers challenged the bill, saying it would simply discourage
companies from building plants in California or from upgrading existing
facilities.
The tax "does nothing to solve the fundamental problem in California, and
that's mainly the lack of supply," said Richard Wheatley, a spokesman for
Houston-based Reliant.
"There is no way, given natural-gas prices today, that we could make any
money under the price caps in this bill," said Carl London, a lobbyist for
InterGen, a Boston-based generator.
In turn, the state's businesses would suffer through sustained power
blackouts because supply would remain low, said Carrie Lee-Coke, general
counsel of the California Manufacturers and Technology Association.
"There is one simple truth, and that is there is too little energy
production," Lee-Coke said, calling Soto's bill the "wrong medicine" for
California.
Although electricity generated in California would be affected, it is unclear
whether the state can legally impose restrictions on power from outside the
state.
Republicans on Monday opposed the plan, citing disincentives for power
companies to boost supply and resultant blackouts. But the bill needs support
only from majority Democrats to pass.
"The economic reality is that the people cannot afford to be gouged any
longer," Soto said.
The Bee's Kevin Yamamura can be reached at (916) 326-5542 or
[email protected].
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
Dan Walters: Davis finally generates an energy plan, but will it work?
(Published May 1, 2001)
After months of issuing buzzwords, sound bites and bold predictions that
proved wrong, Gov. Gray Davis finally unveiled Monday what aides said was a
comprehensive plan to shepherd California through the energy crisis.
The thick compendium of charts, tables and narrative, prepared by a financial
consulting firm and peddled to legislators and journalists by a squad of
administration aides, was designed to bolster Davis' case for legislative
approval of a $12.5 billion bond issue. About half the money would repay the
state's beleaguered general fund, which has been drained for power purchases,
and the rest would ease the impact on ratepayers' bills for future power
purchases.
Administration officials insisted it is a realistic scheme based on
reasonable assumptions -- but legislators of both parties remained skeptical
since the governor's previous assumptions and projections about the crisis
had proved to be uniformly wrong. It remains uncertain, therefore, whether
the bond issue bill that the administration says is vital will win
legislative approval this week -- at least in the size Davis is seeking. Even
Democrats are wary.
Legislative analysts zeroed in on a couple of assumptions that are central to
the workability of the plan:
That Californians will severely curtail their energy use this summer in
response to supply shortages, a big ad campaign and sharp price increases.
That the state can buy spot market power this summer at rates far below what
it has been paying and what the power futures market indicates will be the
summer spot price.
If either of those two assumptions is off the mark, the state could face
severe and prolonged blackouts and/or could go billions of dollars deeper
into debt.
Administration aides insisted that their assumptions are reasonable, based on
what is known now about power consumption habits and the availability and
price of power for the summer, when demand usually rises sharply to run air
conditioning.
"This is not a guess," Susan Kennedy, a top Davis aide, told reporters in
response to sharp questioning about the plan's projection of making spot
market power purchases during the summer at an average of $195 per
megawatt-hour, 40 percent less than what the state is paying now. The current
futures market price for California-delivered power in July and August is
about $500 per megawatt-hour, but administration officials insist they have
contracted for much of the summer peak load at lower costs, leaving less
exposure to the spot market.
If it all works as Davis hopes, customers of the three major utilities --
about 70 percent of Californians -- will see a sharp boost in their rates
soon, and that will be enough to finance the $20 billion in power purchase
debts incurred by the utilities and the state so far, plus pay for future
purchases.
The bonds would pick up the costs not covered by the raised rates in the
early years of the scheme, then be paid off later as rates remain high but
power costs go down. A sharp decline in power costs later in the decade is
another major assumption in Davis' plan, based on still another assumption
that massive generating facilities will be built within a few years.
The administration's new set of assumptions replaces suppositions that proved
to be very wrong, such as Davis' oft-expressed belief that power rates would
not have to be raised. And the new scheme also includes elements that Davis
had rejected last year, such as long-term contracting for power and the
ability of rate increases to drive down consumption.
Will it work? Will ratepayers, taxpayers, voters, financiers, legislators and
others be persuaded that Davis finally has his act together and that his
scheme is workable and fair? And will consumer activists be placated by a
plan that assumes ratepayers will shoulder the utilities' massive debts? Stay
tuned. This crisis is still a long way from being a footnote to California
history.
The Bee's Dan Walters can be reached at (916) 321-1195 or [email protected]
.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
Soaring energy bills hurt eateries: Many restaurants in capital area, despite
good patronage, expect to raise menu prices.
By Cathleen Ferraro
Bee Staff Writer
(Published May 1, 2001)
So far, it appears to be the economic slump that wasn't.
Across the region, most restaurateurs say they aren't seeing patrons pull
back on how often they eat out or what they order. That's significant because
dining out is one of the first luxuries people typically eliminate when times
get rough -- or even appear to be slowing down.
At the same time, restaurant owners who say business is good remain anxious
about the relentless energy crisis. They complain about big utility bills
that promise to stay bloated through the summer and about higher operating
costs from vendors now passing along their own inflated energy expenses.
That all adds up to pricier menus.
"I hoped not to increase prices, but there's no slack when basic utilities
are so high now," said Barbara Mikacich, owner of Sacramento's Andiamo
restaurant, which expects to come out with a new menu in June.
With a few exceptions, local bakery cafes, pizza shops, swanky steakhouses
and more are about to raise food prices while trying to cut back on energy
use. Restaurants are taking such steps because they're bracing for more
energy problems and fear that the economic downturn -- while not obvious now
-- could be around the corner.
"We're watching all the little things," said Mark Platt, operating partner at
P.F. Chang's China Bistro in Roseville where sales are still strong. "But
there's no dramatic way for us to save on our use of gas here. We have to use
woks."
No menu price hikes or staff layoffs are in the wind at P.F. Chang's, Platt
said. But the popular restaurant has changed some of its routine tasks to
offset gas and electric utility bills that have climbed from a combined
$12,500 a month when it opened in September to $16,000 now.
So each morning, cooks at P.F. Chang's no longer spend 20 minutes over
gas-fired flames removing carbon from the bottom of nine main woks. Now they
get the job done in five minutes.
Meanwhile, the restaurant's timers have been adjusted so that lights and air
conditioners turn on later in the day and shut off sooner.
Elsewhere in Roseville, Carvers Steaks & Chops -- traditionally a lunchtime
hot spot with developers, bankers and other professionals -- stopped using
its five gas fireplaces.
"We used to run them from 11 a.m. to 11 p.m., six days a week," said general
manager Gary Kowalsky. "But we quit lighting them because they're strictly
for ambience."
Prompting that change is Carvers' combined utility bill. It used to run
$6,000 a month but has jumped to $10,000.
No layoffs are planned at Carvers. Menu price hikes took effect six weeks ago
when the restaurant added 50 cents to $1 to the prices for steak dishes.
At Casey's Bakery & Cafe on Sacramento's Folsom Boulevard, the gas bill has
doubled since February, said owner Casey Hayden. So instead of running
convection ovens "all day long," as he put it, the shop organizes jobs now so
that more pastries and desserts bake at the same time, reducing use of the
cafe's gas ovens.
In mid-March, Casey's reduced its operating hours from six days a week down
to just three, Friday through Sunday, in response to the energy crunch,
stagnant walk-in business during the week and an increase in wholesale
accounts.
Sacramento's Cafe Melange at 24th Street and Second Avenue also slashed hours
due to higher utility costs, closing now at 7 p.m. instead of 11 p.m. Owner
Marrie Morris said she may raise prices in the next month or two.
Heating and cooling the large warehouse environment of Fox & Goose Public
House on R Street has always been challenging. But now the midtown restaurant
is facing a Pacific Gas and Electric bill that topped $1,200 in March -- or
double the amount from a year earlier.
That strain on top of higher produce, dairy and labor costs has prompted Fox
& Goose to print a new menu due out in June. It will include some of the most
popular items from the now-closed Greta's Cafe -- previously operated by Fox
& Goose owner Allyson Dalton -- and several higher priced items.
"About 50 percent of the menu is going up, but nominally, 2 to 3 percent,"
said Dalton.
Sacramento's Original Pete's pizza chain, which is slated to open a Davis
outlet, its sixth, this week, cut off its janitorial service. The cleaning
duties will be handled by staffers. The restaurant also turned off many
lights and now runs just one oven instead of two during slow times. It, too,
plans to raise menu prices soon.
"We will take a very modest increase across the board, about 3 percent," said
founder Steve Presson, who also noted "early warning signs" of an economic
slowdown, including more customers writing bad checks, credit card numbers
being denied and the use of fraudulent cards.
Now with the threat of rolling summer blackouts, restaurateurs are even
edgier because such power outages might discourage dining out, typically more
popular during warm weather and extra daylight hours.
A blackout at Carvers, the Roseville steakhouse, for example, would mean a
shutdown of its gas valves and computer-operated cash register system, said
manager Kowalsky.
"I hope there's some resolution to all of this," he said. "I can't imagine
anything worse than a building full of hungry people who you can't serve."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
Bee Editorial
Empowering the public
Obstacles keep cities out of energy
(Published April 30, 2001)
In a city the size of Davis, how many citizens does it take to kill an
initiative to create a public power agency and remove PG&E as the supplier of
electricity? Only three. That's because, under state law, a five-member
government agency, the county Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO),
which operates largely in obscurity, can reject the proposal before it even
gets to the ballot box.
Over the past several decades, laws such as this have made it harder for
communities to leave the domain of the investor-owned utilities and turn
power into a public enterprise. Sacramento's long struggle to create its
municipal utility district (SMUD) began in the 1920s. It took two decades of
fighting a resistant PG&E for SMUD to get into the distribution business. If
today's laws were in effect back then, Sacramentans might still be fighting,
or have given up long ago.
Amid the pile of energy-related legislation in the capitol is one that seeks
to remove these roadblocks to public power. At the heart of SB 23x by Sens.
Nell Soto of Pomona and John Burton of San Francisco are two valuable
reforms. If the private utilities don't manage to kill this bill, the future
will provide interesting choices for communities that are beginning to assess
their energy options.
The first reform in SB 23x would be to prevent LAFCOs from blocking elections
to decide whether to create a public power agency. LAFCOs now hold this veto
power. This is how residents in and around the city of Davis were prevented
last year from voting on a public power initiative on the ballot. They had
thousands of signatures on their initiative petitions. But they didn't have
three votes on LAFCO. SB 23x would give LAFCO an advisory role, so that
voters can take their findings into consideration.
The second reform would change what happens when a newly formed public power
agency decides to purchase the local electric distribution lines from PG&E. A
law passed in the early 1990s gave PG&E considerable leverage in court to
challenge whether it's necessary for the municipal utility to buy its wires.
PG&E seeks to substitute its will for that of the voters. SB 23x returns to
the municipal utility the legal presumption that it can take over the lines,
leaving the courts to settle on the appropriate price. This is the proper
role of the courts.
A new municipal utility doesn't necessarily have to buy the lines and get
into the distribution business. It may simply buy power in bulk and pass on
the savings to its citizens. The first step is for communities to assess
their options. Davis residents are once again mulling secession from PG&E, as
are activists in Fresno, communities within Orange County and San Francisco.
It's too soon to say whether these seeds of a modern-day public power
movement ultimately come to fruition. Yet the mere threat of secession acts
as an appropriate check against the investor-owned utilities. Communities are
not their hostages. SB 23x returns to communities the power of choice.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
Daniel Weintraub: An energy trader says it's time to limit profits
(Published May 1, 2001)
In a sea of angry finger-pointing, name-calling and ridicule, Keith Bailey
stands out as an island of calm, a lonely voice of reason who understands
that a company's long-term self-interest is about more than how much money it
can make today.
Most Californians probably have never heard of Bailey, a Kansas City native
and chief executive officer of Tulsa-based Williams Cos. -- a private energy
trader that has profited handsomely from the state's recent miseries. But
Golden Staters from Gov. Gray Davis on down ought to embrace this Oklahoma
resident. He might be the man who saves our future.
Bailey is proposing that federal electricity regulators place temporary caps
on the profits that he and his competitors may earn between now and fall
2002, when supply and demand will be closer to balance and sanity might
return to the West's energy market.
His rationale is this: To save California's private electricity market, new
power plants are desperately needed. But not enough of those plants will be
built if generators are not confident they will be paid for the product they
already are providing.
Californians, though, don't want to promise payment without knowing they will
be able to afford the bill. Short-term caps on profits, Bailey believes, are
the best way to ease the state's fears, get everybody paid and move on to a
system that works -- for suppliers and customers.
"One of the things we are hoping to do with our proposal is create something
that California can look at and say, 'So long as prices are determined on
this basis, we're prepared to pay,' " Bailey said in an interview. "This is a
mechanism that lets the state say, 'We're not signing a blank check. We don't
know what the price is going to be, but we do know how it will be
determined.' "
Bailey's proposal is different from the limited price caps approved last week
by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission -- and far better for California.
The federal caps would come with all sorts of strings attached, would kick in
only during emergencies and would be focused on prices, not profits. Bailey
is proposing that all power sold from now through summer 2002 be priced at
the cost of producing it, plus a profit of 15 percent. That's more than a
regulated utility would make but less than most private companies seek, and
far less than electricity providers have been earning of late.
Cynics might note that Bailey is proposing caps only after his company has
squeezed all it can from California. The firm reported last week that profits
doubled in the first quarter of 2001 over a year ago, with pretax income from
its energy services nearly tripling, to $600 million. Much of the 4,000
megawatts of electricity that Williams controls in California is already
committed in long-term contracts -- so Bailey has relatively little to lose
if what remains can only be sold at controlled prices.
But here is at least one measure of Bailey's sincerity: His company still is
owed $252 million for electricity it has provided California. And he's not
insisting that the debt be paid before his proposed profit caps take effect,
or even as part of the deal.
"Clearly there is a past that has to be dealt with," he said. "Whether that
ultimately gets dealt with in bankruptcy court or negotiations with the
parties, it will sort itself out one way or another. Perhaps if we find
prices that work going forward, that could be used as a framework."
Bailey, an engineer by training, says no one should mistake his proposal for
a lack of confidence in free markets. He still firmly believes that a
deregulated energy market would be best for California and the rest of the
West in the long term. He just wants to make sure there is a long term.
Bailey is watching, and listening, to California. He hears talk of seizing
power plants, of turning to a public power system. He describes these ideas
as Draconian and says they would not solve the problem. But he also knows
there is a limit to what Californians -- and their elected leaders -- can
take.
"I recognize we live in a democracy, and lots of things could happen," he
said.
What he is proposing, in effect, is a safety valve. He wants to limit the
market in order to save it.
"This is an extraordinary situation," Bailey said. "We need to help create
some breathing room. ... We all have to work together, and this is the right
thing to do."
Bailey's proposal, made at a conference of energy producers and traders in
Oklahoma last week, was almost lost amid all the focus on the price caps
approved in Washington. But there is still time to give the idea the
attention it deserves. Properly nourished, it could be the breakthrough that
solves this crisis. Davis and others in California should seize the moment.
The Bee's Daniel Weintraub can be reached at (916) 321-1914 or at
[email protected].
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------
Power Companies Step Up Lobbying
By JULIE TAMAKI and MIGUEL BUSTILLO, Times Staff Writers
?????SACRAMENTO--As California's electricity crisis exploded this year, so
did lobbying by energy companies.
?????Pacific Gas & Electric Co., which has filed for bankruptcy protection,
spent $622,000 lobbying lawmakers and Gov. Gray Davis' administration during
the first three months of the year, according to reports filed with the state
Monday.
?????The reports show that seven energy companies spent more than $1 million
on lobbying as they ramped up their response to the crisis. Houston-based
power producer Reliant Energy, for example, spent nearly $100,000 on lobbying
firms through March 31--almost four times the $25,523 it spent during all of
last year.
?????The documents show that lobbyists for the firms were hard at work trying
to influence a horde of energy-related measures, from legislation to set new
rates for small power producers to a bill that put California in the
electricity purchasing business.
?????PG&E spokesman Ron Low said his company racked up hundreds of thousands
of dollars in expenses in its unsuccessful effort to reach an agreement with
the state on the purchase of its transmission lines. An unprecedented number
of energy-related bills added to PG&E's need to hire lobbyists, Low said.
?????"During the first quarter this year, more than 350 bills were introduced
in the Legislature that deal with the energy industry," Low said. "Almost all
those bills affected our customers and required staff analysis, testimony
before legislative committees, and questions to be answered for legislators
and their staff."
?????Sempra Energy, the parent firm of San Diego Gas & Electric, spent
$192,000 lobbying lawmakers in Sacramento and regulators at the Public
Utilities Commission, roughly half of what it spent all of last year.
?????The utility also made campaign contributions to political parties and
Sacramento politicians, giving $250 to Lt. Gov. Cruz Bustamante, $750 each to
Assembly members Keith Richman (R-Northridge) and George Runner Jr.
(R-Lancaster) and $1,000 to Sen. Kevin Murray (D-Culver City), among others.
?????A lobbying report for the parent company of Southern California Edison
was not available Monday evening. The reports were required to be filed both
electronically and by mail, postmarked by midnight Monday.
?????Electricity merchants and generators also boosted their spending. El
Paso Energy Corp., which owns one of the main natural gas pipelines into
California, spent nearly $22,000. It reported lobbying Davis' office and the
California Energy Commission.
?????Lobbyists hired by the company, according to the report, also spent $607
on dinners held in January and February with five lawmakers and an Assembly
staff member to discuss energy-related issues.
?????Assemblyman Roderick Wright, the Los Angeles Democrat who chairs the
Assembly's Utilities and Commerce Committee, dined with a lobbyist
representing El Paso on Feb. 21 at the Esquire Grill, a Sacramento
restaurant, according to the report. Assemblyman Joe Canciamilla
(D-Pittsburg), who heads a subcommittee exploring natural gas issues, also
ate at the Esquire on El Paso's tab that night.
?????The Houston-based power firm Dynegy Inc. spent $32,261 on lobbying
through March 31, compared to $24,000 during all of last year. Another
Houston energy company, electricity marketer Enron Corp., spent $66,994.
?????Duke Energy is among the firms paying top dollar for Sacramento
lobbyists as it seeks to build power plants in California to capitalize on
the state's energy shortage. The company reported spending more than $62,000
on lobbying through March 31--more than it spent all of last year.
?????"We would be remiss in not ensuring that our voice is heard in
Sacramento," said Duke Energy spokesman Tom Williams, adding that his firm's
proposed Moss Landing power plant would provide "30% of the new generation
[of electricity] for the whole state of California in 2002."
?????"They're [lobbyists] not speaking for us, he added. "They're helping us
know exactly who to speak with to make sure we're appropriately heard--and
frankly, to ensure that we can get our power plants built."
---
?????Times staff writer Nancy Vogel contributed to this story.
Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------
Power Marketer Ordered by FERC to Refund $8 Million
Energy: Williams Energy agrees to pay but admits no wrongdoing in taking
plants offline.
By NANCY VOGEL and ROBERT J. LOPEZ, Times Staff Writers
?????In the first action of its kind during the California energy crisis,
federal regulators have ordered an out-of-state electricity marketer to
refund $8 million in connection with allegations that plants were improperly
shut down to hike power prices.
?????Tulsa-based Williams Energy Marketing & Trading has agreed to pay the
refund under an order issued Monday by the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission.
?????The firm, which admitted no wrongdoing in the settlement agreement, was
probed for allegedly forcing utilities to pay higher prices by taking key
generating units in Long Beach and Huntington Beach offline in April and May
of last year.
?????Paula Hall-Collins, a Williams spokeswoman, said her company settled to
end the matter. She said that the company would have been exonerated had it
pursued the case.
?????"We decided to go ahead with the settlement in order to put it behind us
and move forward to more productive matters concerning California power
issues," she said.
?????While federal investigations of alleged overcharges by several firms are
continuing, Monday's order marked the first time a major power merchant has
been forced to pay back earnings since California forged into electricity
deregulation in 1996.
?????Critics and the state's independent grid operator have accused power
sellers of unjustly ratcheting up electricity prices in part by taking plants
offline.
?????In the case of Williams, the federal energy panel investigated the
shutdown of power plants that were obligated to provide electricity to the
state.
?????Desperate for power, California's grid operator had to turn to another
provider and pay as much $750 per megawatt-hour--more than 10 times the
normal price. The $8-million refund will go back to the grid operator.
?????Williams markets power produced at California plants owned by AES Corp.
of Arlington, Va.
?????Federal investigators probed the actions of both Williams and AES, but
the refund order affects only Williams. Initially, FERC had sought a refund
of about $10.8 million, but settled for $8 million in the compromise
agreement.
?????AES spokesman Aaron Thomas said the power plants in question were shut
down because of mechanical problems. He noted that his firm derived no profit
from the replacement power sold by Williams.
?????"We literally get paid to convert Williams' gas into Williams'
electricity, which they then sell into the marketplace," Thomas said. "We're
not paying any fines, and we didn't do anything wrong."
---
?????Times staff writers Rich Connell and Richard Simon contributed to this
story.
Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
Davis Turns to Bankruptcy Court for Help in Plan to Buy Power Grid
Utility: He seeks support from panel representing creditors of PG&E. The firm
has rebuffed state's offers.
By DAN MORAIN and RICHARD SIMON, Times Staff Writers
?????SAN FRANCISCO--Foiled in his first attempt to buy Pacific Gas &
Electric's transmission grid, Gov. Gray Davis said Monday that he has tried a
new tactic: bypassing the company and attempting to build support for the
deal in Bankruptcy Court.
?????Davis' plan to buy the grid appeared to have ended disastrously last
month when the giant utility filed for bankruptcy protection. But Davis said
his advisors now are trying to sell the idea to a committee of PG&E creditors
that hold a stake in the utility's Chapter 11 proceeding.
?????The creditors committee, representing the hundreds of companies owed
money by PG&E, does not by itself hold the power to accept or reject the
deal, which Davis sees as a key to his plan to restructure the state's
crippled electricity system. But the committee will play an important role in
any reorganization plan that is ultimately hammered out in U.S. Bankruptcy
Court.
?????Given that power, Davis sent advisors to brief the committee last
Wednesday. The advisors told the committee about the deal they struck with
Southern California Edison to buy its share of the statewide transmission
grid, and the similar deal that PG&E rejected.
?????"I'm not saying they embraced it entirely," Davis said, after speaking
at a conference of technology entrepreneurs put on by the J.P. Morgan
investment bank. "But they liked parts of it, asked good questions, and I
thought it was a good beginning."
?????Paul Aronzon, the lead lawyer for the creditors committee, stressed that
the meeting with Davis' advisors would not lead directly to a deal. The
governor's representatives "did not come out and say, 'Would you guys sell us
the transmission grid?' " he said. Rather, Aronzon said, the advisors simply
brought the creditors up to speed on what Davis has put on the table.
?????Davis has offered more than $7 billion to buy the transmission systems
of Edison, San Diego Gas & Electric and PG&E. So far, only Edison has
accepted the deal. The cash infusion would help the utilities restructure
their debts, and ultimately relieve the state of the need to continue buying
electricity on their behalf.
?????The Davis administration made public Monday its most detailed breakdown
yet on the costs it expects to incur purchasing electricity over the next
years.
?????However, the extra information failed to satisfy Republican lawmakers,
who are holding up legislation needed to repay the state budget for the
billions already spent on electricity.
?????California will spend $15 billion buying power this year, according to
projections by Davis' advisors.
?????But that total will drop to $9 billion next year and $7 billion the next
as long-term electricity contracts, energy conservation efforts and new power
supplies combine to lower the state's costs.
?????With money from higher electric rates and a planned $12.5-billion bond,
the state should be able to cover the costs of power and operate at a surplus
starting in November 2002, the administration projected.
?????Several Republicans took note of the date: It is the month of the 2002
gubernatorial election, when Davis is expected to seek a second term.
?????The figures were based on a dizzying number of assumptions about the
state's energy future. The projections assume, for example, that Californians
will reduce energy consumption by 7%, and that 90% of the state's alternative
energy producers will soon generate electricity again. Now only about 65% are
online.
?????Davis administration officials defended the figures, saying that they
were conservative.
?????The reaction to the figures reflects a growing rift between Democrats
and Republicans over how best to solve the state's problems. Efforts have
been lurching unsteadily on several fronts, including the courts, the state
Legislature and Congress, with considerable political head-butting taking
place in the last two.
?????In Washington today, a key congressional panel is expected to take up
emergency legislation intended to help California, although Davis and other
Democrats have criticized the effort as useless.
?????The bill's 19 provisions would, among other things, provide federal aid
to relieve a bottleneck in the state's transmission system, permit governors
to obtain temporary waivers of environmental rules to boost power supplies,
and direct federal disaster officials to help California prepare for
blackouts.
?????A spokesman for Davis said the Republican-drafted legislation offers "a
lot of things we don't need, and fails to address the one thing we do need,"
namely firm price controls on wholesale electricity sales.
?????Democrats and Republicans have strong, fundamental disagreements about
how best to solve the crisis, with Democrats supporting price controls, if
only temporarily, and many Republicans, including President Bush, opposed to
tampering with the market.
?????Several Democrats who attended a White House ceremony Monday to mark
Bush's first 100 days in office spoke briefly to the president about the
energy situation.
?????"He was not very sympathetic," said Rep. Bob Filner (D-San Diego), an
advocate of price controls. "They have their minds pretty well made up."
?????In one effort to seize the initiative, a divided state Senate
Appropriations Committee approved a bill Monday that would impose a windfall
profits tax on electricity sellers who gouge California consumers. Revenue
from the tax would flow back to Californians in the form of a credit on their
state income taxes, starting next April 15.
?????"Our backs are to the wall," said one sponsor of the bill, Sen. Jack
Scott (D-Altadena). "We believe that this is one time when we can stand up to
an avaricious energy generator and say, 'No more.' "
?????On a 7-3 vote, Democrats on the committee voted for the bill, SB1X, and
Republicans lined up against it. The measure moved to the Senate floor, where
it will require only a simple majority of 21 votes and is expected to pass.
?????Davis has said he is open to signing a windfall profits bill, but he has
not publicly lobbied for its passage.
?????Also Monday, legislation was introduced in the Assembly to bolster
natural gas supplies in the state. Tight supplies have led to soaring costs
for natural gas, the fuel most commonly used to generate electricity in
California.
---
?????Morain reported from San Francisco and Simon from Washington. Times
staff writers Miguel Bustillo, Carl Ingram and Julie Tamaki in Sacramento,
Tim Reiterman in San Francisco and Mitchell Landsberg in Los Angeles
contributed to this story.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------
Feds want surcharge to pay utilities' debts
THE PLAN: Additional rate boost likely, cash would go to power suppliers
Carolyn Said, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 1, 2001
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2001/05/01/MN9985.DTL
Federal energy regulators have proposed a surcharge on wholesale electricity
sales in California to compensate generating companies, angering state
officials who say the idea amounts to gouging consumers.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission suggested collecting the money to
reimburse electricity suppliers who have debts from Pacific Gas and Electric
Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. Power
companies accrued some $6 billion in unpaid bills from California's
struggling utilities in late 2000 and early this year, until the state
stepped in to take over the purchasing of power.
"Under the pretense of helping California, (FERC) is proposing to steal
additional money from California ratepayers to pad the pockets of the greedy
energy companies," Gov. Gray Davis said in a statement. "FERC does not care
one wit about the ratepayer. Their plan is a total capitulation to the energy
companies."
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who has been an outspoken critic of FERC's
policies in California, said the surcharge would "ensure that power
generators get paid fully for their price gouging. That is outrageous and
will further alienate Californians."
The surcharge presumably would be levied on the California Department of
Water Resources, which, as the state's purchasing agent, has already spent
more than $5 billion on power since January. The DWR's costs, in turn, are
likely to be borne by California's consumers and taxpayers.
FERC would require the California Independent System Operator, which runs the
state's power grid, to collect the surcharge. But state regulators could
challenge the surcharge.
"We have 30 days to comment to FERC and are considering our options," said
Sean Gallagher, state counsel at the California Public Utilities Commission.
"If (FERC's) concern is public policy and maintaining just and reasonable
prices for consumers, I don't quite understand why they would get into the
middle of a legal wrangle about past bills' getting paid," said Severin
Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy Institute in
Berkeley. "It is true the firms would like to get paid. I'm not sure what
FERC has to do with helping them collect their money."
A 'GOUGING TAX'
Consumer advocates characterized the surcharge as a "gouging tax" that
underscores the Bush administration's close ties to energy firms, many of
which are based in President Bush's home state of Texas.
"This is evidence that FERC and the administration are more interested in
protecting the energy industry than the consumers or taxpayers of
California," said Doug Heller, a consumer advocate with the Los Angeles-based
Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. "It's back-billing us to pay
prices that were unjust and unreasonable per the FERC's own analysis."
FERC's Curt Hebert, a Mississippi Republican whom President Bush appointed
chairman of the commission, was behind the surcharge proposal, which he told
the Wall Street Journal was a way "to stabilize the market." Hebert did not
return calls for comment.
The surcharge was proposed in FERC's 39-page "mitigation" plan to alleviate
wholesale electricity prices in California during power emergencies; the plan
was released last week. FERC said it would accept public comment on the
proposal for 30 days, after which it would decide whether to implement it.
COMPLICATED ISSUES
Even the power industry, the presumptive beneficiary of the surcharge, did
not express whole-hearted support for it.
"I'm glad they brought it up," said Gary Ackerman, executive director of the
Western Power Trading Forum, which represents all major buyers and sellers of
wholesale electricity in California. "But it skirts the issue of what's state
regulated and what's federally regulated. I'm not sure how federal regulators
can pass a charge on wholesale costs which then ends up on consumers, without
the state saying it's OK."
Some of the proposal's wording is unclear. It discusses, for example, whether
the surcharge money "should cover all past-due amounts or only future unpaid
bills starting from the date the plan is begun."
The reference to "future unpaid bills" is puzzling since, with the state of
California picking up the tab, electricity suppliers no longer are
accumulating unpaid bills from the utilities.
"That could become a self-fulfilling prophecy; we don't want to go there,"
Ackerman said about the idea of "future unpaid bills."
The FERC proposal also implies that electricity generators have reduced
production in California, an allegation the power companies themselves deny.
FERC asked for comments on whether the surcharge "would help to increase
production by creating a greater assurance that generators will be paid."
E-mail Carolyn Said at [email protected].
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
Lawmakers offer bills aimed at cutting natural gas prices
JENNIFER COLEMAN, Associated Press Writer
Tuesday, May 1, 2001
,2001 Associated Press
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2001/05/01/state0
949EDT0128.DTL&type=news
(05-01) 06:49 PDT SACRAMENTO (AP) -- Gov. Gray Davis is relying on stringent
conservation measures, increased electricity supply and quick Legislative
authority to proceed with a $12.5 billion revenue bond issue to head off
blackouts this summer.
Davis administration officials briefed lawmakers Monday on the governor's
plan to rescue Southern California Edison by buying the utility's
transmission lines.
The extra financial details Davis' representatives gave Assembly Republicans
include forecasts of the Department of Water Resources' summer power
purchases -- the same figures the state will use to find buyers for $12.5
billion in bonds to pay for future power.
Those forecasts, some Republicans said, count on too many things falling into
place, including the assumption that all of the state's financially troubled
alternative energy producers will be online.
Though energy analysts have predicted skyrocketing energy costs for summer --
up to $1,500 per megawatt hour -- the governor's plan calculates an average
cost of $195 per megawatt hour over June, July and August.
That's because DWR cut long-term contracts covering a major part of the
electricity needed during peak times, said Ron Nichols, senior managing
director for Navigant Consulting Inc.
Long-term contracts and conservation will minimize the effect of the expected
high spot prices, Nichols said.
In essence, Davis aides, much of the conservation will be spurred by sticker
shock felt by consumers when they get their higher rates on their June bills.
PG&E customers will see a 34 percent increase, Southern California Edison's
will jump 32 and San Diego Gas and Electric rates will jump 44 percent.
Davis' consultants predict the state can conserve up to 7,234 megawatts
during peak demand -- about 16 percent of a 45,000 megawatt load that summer
weather can bring on. One megawatt is roughly enough power for 750 homes.
Much of that conservation, 2,484 megawatts, will come from three different
conservation programs through the California Independent System Operator,
keeper of the state's power grid.
Davis' ''20/20'' conservation plan is expected to cut another 2,200 megawatts
of demand. The rest of the cuts come from the sticker shock of higher
consumer rates and by estimating how much less power Californians are using
this year compared to last year.
``If we're wrong, there are certain reserves built in,'' said Susan Kennedy,
deputy chief of staff and secretary of cabinet. Either the state borrows more
or there will be blackouts, she added, and if the price of power goes higher
than expectations, the state won't be able to afford it.
By the end of 2002, Davis estimates, DWR will spend $26.9 billion to buy
power for customers of the three financially ailing utilities. Of that, $12.5
billion will be paid for by revenue bonds that will add up to one cent per
kilowatt hour to customer bills for 15 years.
The Legislature approved the revenue bonds based on a formula that would set
the amount of the issue. Now Davis' representatives say it's urgent that the
Legislature approve a bill with a firm cap so they could begin the bond sale.
``We need the unambiguous authority to sell bonds. We need it right now. We
cannot afford any delays,'' Kennedy said.
A bill putting a $10 billion limit on the bonds stalled in the Assembly last
week after Republicans refused to vote for it until they received more
details about Davis' power buys and long-term contracts.
Republicans wondered about the ability of the alternative generators to be
online, a sentiment shared by the industry. Currently, about one-third are
off-line now because PG&E and Edison owe them more than $1 billion.
The Public Utilities Commission ordered the utilities to pay those generators
every other week starting April 1, but the large debts have the generators
fighting to stay open, said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the
Independent Energy Producers.
Davis' predictions aren't rosy, but realistic, said Joseph Fichera, a
financial adviser for the governor. ``It minimizes the risk of blackouts, but
you can never eliminate it.''
Also Monday, an Assembly subcommittee unveiled four bills Monday designed to
increase supplies of natural gas, including streamlining approvals for gas
storage and new pipelines.
After conducting hearings on the market, the subcommittee is recommending the
state streamline the PUC's process to approve underground natural gas storage
facilities and new pipelines, allow lower-grade California natural gas to be
used by industrial users and reform tariffs to see if they discourage
investments in a variety of natural gas-related ventures.
Meanwhile, the state remained free of power alerts Tuesday morning as
reserves stayed above 7 percent.
On the Net:
The bill numbers are: AB78x by Canciamilla; AB73x by Canciamilla and
Dickerson; AB23x, by Assemblyman Dennis Cardoza, D-Atwater, and Assemblywoman
Barbara Matthews, D-Tracy; and AB42x, by Diaz.
Read the bills at www.assembly.ca.gov
,2001 Associated Press ?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
Developments in California's energy crisis
The Associated Press
Tuesday, May 1, 2001
,2001 Associated Press
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2001/05/01/state0
946EDT0127.DTL&type=news
, , -- (05-01) 06:46 PDT Developments in California's energy crisis:
TUESDAY:< ?-- An Assembly electricity oversight committee releases report on its ?investigation of alleged natural gas price and supply manipulation. ?-- The state remains free of power alerts as electricity reserves stay above ?7 percent. ?MONDAY:<
-- Gov. Gray Davis' staff briefs Assembly Republicans on the plan to purchase
Southern California Edison's transmission lines. The governor estimates that
during peak hours this summer, Californians can conserve more than 7,000
megawatts. That's enough power for more than 5 million homes. Davis' advisers
say the Legislature needs to quickly approve a bill that would let the state
issue bonds to buy power for customers of Pacific Gas and Electric, San Diego
Gas and Electric and Edison. The bonds would also repay the general fund for
the more than $5 billion the state has already spent on power.
-- PG&E's transmission lines could still be bought by the state despite the
utility seeking bankruptcy protection when an earlier deal with state
negotiators fell through, Davis says. Davis tells reporters that a creditors
committee of businesses owed money by PG&E asked the state for a briefing on
talks to buy San Diego Gas and Electric Co.'s transmission lines. Davis says
he believes there is still some possibility of buying PG&E's lines.
-- Williams Energy agrees to pay $8 million to settle charges by federal
regulators that the company withheld power to drive up prices.
``We decided to settle to put this behind us and to put our full attention
toward more productive matters in relation to California versus going through
a costly and long hearing process,'' said Williams spokeswoman Paula
Hall-Collins. She said Williams ``is confident that a full hearing of the
facts would have exonerated us entirely.''
-- Members of the Assembly Subcommittee on Natural Gas Costs and Availability
unveil legislation to cut natural gas prices.
-- The state Assembly approves a bill that lets a private energy company
purchase a shuttered PG&E power plant. The North American Power Group plans
to reopen the Kern Power Plant that PG&E shut down in 1985. Once renovated,
it will provide enough electricity about 180,000 homes. The bill moves to the
Senate.
-- The state remains free of power alerts as electricity reserves stay above
7 percent.
<
WHAT'S NEXT:<
-- Davis' representatives continue negotiating with Sempra, the parent
company of San Diego Gas and Electric Co., to buy the utility's transmission
lines.
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.
Edison and PG&E 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 two 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 raised rates as much as 46 percent to
help finance the state's multibillion-dollar power buys.
,2001 Associated Press ?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
Second try for tax cut in Oakland
Smaller utility levy likely after Brown veto
Tyche Hendricks, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 1, 2001
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/05/01/M
NE216500.DTL&type=news
Oakland -- The Oakland City Council is set to scale back plans for a
six-month cut in the city's utility users tax in the face of a first-ever
veto by Mayor Jerry Brown, who said the city may not be able to afford the
cut.
A week after the council voted 5 to 2 to give residents relief on their
skyrocketing gas and electric bills by reducing the tax the city imposes,
council members said yesterday that they will reconsider the plan and may
give a break only to the poorest Oaklanders.
City Council President Ignacio De La Fuente, the author of the tax cut
proposal, said he plans to revise the measure at tonight's council meeting.
Under the revision, low-income residents would be exempt from the tax, which
could cost the city an estimated $300,000.
"The mayor has some legitimate concerns," De La Fuente said. He said he would
postpone consideration of a cut for all residents until after the state has
approved its budget for the coming year.
The council's latest move came after Brown last week invoked his authority to
block legislation, a power he was granted under the 1998 strong-mayor
ordinance that he wrote and voters approved.
In the letter, Brown said the six-month tax break would take $1.6 million
from the city coffers and could be construed as a permanent tax cut, which
under state Proposition 218 would require approval by two-thirds of the
voters to reinstate.
"In addition," the mayor wrote, "the current budget hemorrhaging in
Sacramento threatens to reduce expected state revenues to the city on which
the current city budget is based." Brown said he would support relief for
those least able to pay.
The council had planned to temporarily reduce the city's utility tax from 7.
5 percent to roughly 6 percent for most residents and eliminate it entirely
for low-income households that qualify for PG&E's assistance program.
After the council approved the tax cut last week, city leaders heard a report
from the city manager's budget analyst confirming that state money for
California's cities might be reduced for the next fiscal year.
"We all wanted to do this," said Councilwoman Jane Brunner, referring to
herself and four other council members, including De La Fuente, who voted for
the utility tax relief.
"But they are saying that the (state's) energy costs may dip into some of the
regular general fund money (for city and county governments). And that may be
very significant."
Councilwoman Nancy Nadel, who voted against the tax cut along with Dick
Spees, said tax relief for low-income residents would cost the city roughly
$300,000, which she called a more reasonable figure. The eighth council
position was vacant last week but will be filled tonight when council member-
elect Moses Mayne is sworn in.
Brown's action marks the first time he has exercised his law-blocking power
under Measure X, which allows the mayor to send new legislation back to the
council for reconsideration if it is passed with fewer than six votes.
If the council cannot muster six votes on its second review, the law would
not take effect.
Russo said the fact that Brown has not used his veto power until now, more
than halfway into his four-year term, shows that he is able to work with the
council.
"I think it's significant that this is first time (he's used the veto)," said
Russo. "It has been 2 1/2 years of some pretty controversial and contentious
stuff."
E-mail Tyche Hendricks at [email protected].
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 13
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
Feds want surcharge to pay utilities' debts
THE PLAN: Additional rate boost likely, cash would go to power suppliers
Carolyn Said, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, May 1, 2001
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/05/01/M
N9985.DTL&type=news
Federal energy regulators have proposed a surcharge on wholesale electricity
sales in California to compensate generating companies, angering state
officials who say the idea amounts to gouging consumers.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission suggested collecting the money to
reimburse electricity suppliers who have debts from Pacific Gas and Electric
Co., Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. Power
companies accrued some $6 billion in unpaid bills from California's
struggling utilities in late 2000 and early this year, until the state
stepped in to take over the purchasing of power.
"Under the pretense of helping California, (FERC) is proposing to steal
additional money from California ratepayers to pad the pockets of the greedy
energy companies," Gov. Gray Davis said in a statement. "FERC does not care
one wit about the ratepayer. Their plan is a total capitulation to the energy
companies."
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who has been an outspoken critic of FERC's
policies in California, said the surcharge would "ensure that power
generators get paid fully for their price gouging. That is outrageous and
will further alienate Californians."
The surcharge presumably would be levied on the California Department of
Water Resources, which, as the state's purchasing agent, has already spent
more than $5 billion on power since January. The DWR's costs, in turn, are
likely to be borne by California's consumers and taxpayers.
FERC would require the California Independent System Operator, which runs the
state's power grid, to collect the surcharge. But state regulators could
challenge the surcharge.
"We have 30 days to comment to FERC and are considering our options," said
Sean Gallagher, state counsel at the California Public Utilities Commission.
"If (FERC's) concern is public policy and maintaining just and reasonable
prices for consumers, I don't quite understand why they would get into the
middle of a legal wrangle about past bills' getting paid," said Severin
Borenstein, director of the University of California Energy Institute in
Berkeley. "It is true the firms would like to get paid. I'm not sure what
FERC has to do with helping them collect their money."
A 'GOUGING TAX'
Consumer advocates characterized the surcharge as a "gouging tax" that
underscores the Bush administration's close ties to energy firms, many of
which are based in President Bush's home state of Texas.
"This is evidence that FERC and the administration are more interested in
protecting the energy industry than the consumers or taxpayers of
California," said Doug Heller, a consumer advocate with the Los Angeles-based
Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights. "It's back-billing us to pay
prices that were unjust and unreasonable per the FERC's own analysis."
FERC's Curt Hebert, a Mississippi Republican whom President Bush appointed
chairman of the commission, was behind the surcharge proposal, which he told
the Wall Street Journal was a way "to stabilize the market." Hebert did not
return calls for comment.
The surcharge was proposed in FERC's 39-page "mitigation" plan to alleviate
wholesale electricity prices in California during power emergencies; the plan
was released last week. FERC said it would accept public comment on the
proposal for 30 days, after which it would decide whether to implement it.
COMPLICATED ISSUES
Even the power industry, the presumptive beneficiary of the surcharge, did
not express whole-hearted support for it.
"I'm glad they brought it up," said Gary Ackerman, executive director of the
Western Power Trading Forum, which represents all major buyers and sellers of
wholesale electricity in California. "But it skirts the issue of what's state
regulated and what's federally regulated. I'm not sure how federal regulators
can pass a charge on wholesale costs which then ends up on consumers, without
the state saying it's OK."
Some of the proposal's wording is unclear. It discusses, for example, whether
the surcharge money "should cover all past-due amounts or only future unpaid
bills starting from the date the plan is begun."
The reference to "future unpaid bills" is puzzling since, with the state of
California picking up the tab, electricity suppliers no longer are
accumulating unpaid bills from the utilities.
"That could become a self-fulfilling prophecy; we don't want to go there,"
Ackerman said about the idea of "future unpaid bills."
The FERC proposal also implies that electricity generators have reduced
production in California, an allegation the power companies themselves deny.
FERC asked for comments on whether the surcharge "would help to increase
production by creating a greater assurance that generators will be paid."
E-mail Carolyn Said at [email protected].
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
Warning of a summer power 'Armageddon'
Davis aide paints dire scenario in push for bonds to buy power
Lynda Gledhill, Greg Lucas, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau
Tuesday, May 1, 2001
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle
URL:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/05/01/M
N192706.DTL&type=news
Sacramento -- Trying to drum up support to issue $12.5 billion in bonds to
buy power, a top adviser to Gov. Gray Davis warned lawmakers yesterday of
"Armageddon" this summer if key assumptions on energy generation and
conservation fail to materialize.
Presenting a 67-page document to lawmakers, Davis' top energy consultants
said numerous assumptions -- such as increased conservation and more
alternative generating facilities returning to full operation -- must pan
out.
Without that, Davis' Cabinet secretary, Susan Kennedy, said an "Armageddon
scenario" would take place, according to numerous lawmakers in the meeting.
That could include more blackouts or additional borrowing, Kennedy said in a
briefing later with reporters. "Everything has to fall in place."
But one key assumption was immediately blasted by an energy industry official
as "completely unrealistic."
The administration document forecasts that 90 percent of the state's
alternative generators will be back on line by June. About one-third are
currently not operating because they are not being paid by California's debt-
ridden utilities.
"That is complete lunacy at this point," said Jerry Bloom, a spokesman for
the California Cogeneration Council. "The assumption simply does not reflect
the reality of the market. It shows once again that the governor is not
listening."
Among the other assumptions is a 7 percent conservation rate and the approval
of the deal between the state and Southern California Edison Co. for the
purchase of the utility's transmission lines. Davis has set a target of
conserving 10 percent.
In San Francisco yesterday, Davis told a high-tech business conference that
the state will have to walk a tightrope to get through the summer.
"We are going to have to set the Guinness Book of Records in this state in
order to avoid disruptions this summer," he said.
State Treasurer Phil Angelides said the assumptions were "fair and rational"
but warned many of the assumptions are beyond the state's control.
"The biggest threat to making this plan work is if generators take prices
from the current level, which is horrendous, to obscenely horrendous," he
said after meeting with Assembly Republicans for an hour on the proposed bond
sale.
The dire scenarios were used by the administration officials to convince
Assembly Republicans to approve a bond authorization, which is scheduled to
come up for a vote on Thursday.
GOP members balked at approving the huge bond issuance without further
details from the administration. But yesterday's information simply raised
more questions in many minds.
"It's kind of like peeling back an onion -- as you peel something back you
find something else out," said Assemblyman George Runner, R-Lancaster.
Assemblyman Tony Strickland, R-Thousand Oaks, said Republicans want to be
sure there won't be a continuing need to issue larger amounts of bonds in the
future.
"The governor's office is asking us to approve the biggest bond in American
history, and we're just supposed to trust them on a lot of this stuff," he
said. "What happens if the assumptions don't happen? Do we need another $7
billion or $10 billion in loans? Is the existing rate structure enough or
will they ask for more? We want to know."
Republican votes are needed to approve the bond issuing authority on an
urgency basis.
The current bill only allows for $10 billion, but the administration now says
it needs $12.5 billion. Kennedy said another request for more financing will
be made later to close that gap.
The predictions use the rate increase proposed by Davis, which averages about
37 percent. His rate increase would pay off not only the revenue bond issued
by the state, but also a $8 billion bond issued by the utilities to pay off
some of their back debt.
Angelides has pressed for the bonding authority because the commitments for
short-term bridge loans -- which would provide the state with money during
the several weeks it would take to issue the bonds -- expire on May 8.
However, most of the GOP members of the Assembly said they have not been
convinced of the need for the bridge loans.
Runner said normal budgetary borrowing will keep the general fund whole until
the bonds can be issued. Republicans believe the emphasis on the short term
funding is to allow Davis to present a rosier budget later this month.
Tim Gage, Davis' director of finance, said the authorization is needed
immediately to give sellers confidence that the state is credit-worthy and
can continue to purchase power. Currently, the state is being charged a
credit premium, he said.
"I'm deeply concerned if the bridge loan, the first step, doesn't come
together it will do harm getting the energy bond to the market," Angelides
said.
Meanwhile, the state Public Utilities Commission yesterday accused Pacific
Gas & Electric Co. of trying to use bankruptcy to escape state regulation and
raise rates drastically.
The PUC asked a federal bankruptcy judge to dismiss PG&E's challenge to
accounting changes ordered by the state commission on March 27 that would
make it harder for the utility to pass along to customers its $8.9 billion
debt for electricity purchases.
Chronicle staff writers Bob Egelko and Tanya Schevitz contributed to this
story.
E-mail Lynda Gledhill at [email protected] and Greg Lucas at
[email protected].
,2001 San Francisco Chronicle ? Page?A - 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
Cheney rejects conservation
Posted at 11:03 p.m. PDT Monday, April 30, 2001
BY JIM PUZZANGHERA
Mercury News Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON -- The energy woes of California and the nation cannot be solved
with price controls or conservation, but only by increasing the country's
supply of oil and natural gas and using more coal and nuclear power, Vice
President Dick Cheney said Monday.
Cheney was laying the groundwork for the announcement later this month of a
major energy proposal. The vice president argued that without adopting the
Bush administration plan, California's energy crisis may spread to the rest
of the country.
``A few years ago, many people had never heard the term `rolling blackout.'
Now, everybody in California knows the term all too well. And the rest of
America is starting to wonder when these rolling blackouts might roll over
them,'' Cheney said in a Toronto speech to the Associated Press.
``Without a clear, coherent energy strategy for the nation, all Americans
could one day go through what Californians are experiencing now, or worse,''
warned Cheney, who leads the administration's high-level energy task force.
Cheney's speech was notable more for its tone than its substance. Much of the
detail he offered is similar to what Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham laid
out last month. He reiterated the need for more than 1,300 new power plants
and 38,000 miles of additional natural gas pipeline. Cheney also repeated an
administration claim that the area to be opened for drilling in Alaska's
environmentally sensitive Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would be smaller
than Washington's Dulles airport.
But Cheney, who ran a Texas company that provided services to the energy
industry, used blunt language to dismiss the idea that conservation could be
a major solution to the problem.
``The aim here is efficiency, not austerity,'' Cheney said, rejecting the
notion that Americans should be told to ``do more with less.''
``Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient
basis for a sound, comprehensive energy policy,'' he said.
Contrast with Gov. Davis
Large-scale conservation is one of California Gov. Gray Davis' efforts for
getting through this summer without extensive blackouts. Earlier this
monthLast month, Davis approved an $850 million energy conservation plan that
offers incentives to try to shave at least 2,000 megawatts during peak hours
from the state's electricity usage.
Davis on Monday blasted condemned Bush and Cheney for belittling conservation
programs.
``It's clear that the Bush administration has an energy bias. Both the
president and the vice president come from an oil- and gas-producing state.
That is their bias,'' Davis said, referring to Bush's Texas oil roots and
Cheney's tenure as the head of Texas-based Halliburton Co. ``And I do believe
we should build more plants and produce more energy, but at the same time, we
must become more energy-efficient.''
Davis and other California officials have also pushed the administration to
limit the price of electricity throughout the West this summer. Although
federal regulators approved measures last week designed to rein in the cost
of electricity in California, the plan fell far short of hard price caps.
Cheney on Monday restated the White House's opposition to price caps, saying
they were among a number of the ``usual quick fixes'' that have failed to
solve the problem over the years.
``Price controls, tapping strategic reserves, creating new federal agencies
-- if these were any solution, we'd have resolved the problems a long time
ago,'' Cheney said.
Other sources rejected
The vice president rejected the idea that alternative sources of energy could
replace our dependence on fossil fuels such as oil, gas and coal, at least
for a long time.
``The reality is that fossil fuels supply virtually a hundred percent of our
transportation needs and an overwhelming share of our electricity
requirements,'' he said. ``For years down the road, this will continue to be
true.''
The solution, he said, is to find more oil and natural gas by to increase
drilling for oil and natural gas in the United States, making more use of
find new ways to burn coal more cleanly and put a renewed emphasis on nuclear
power.
``Fortunately for the environment, one-fifth of our electricity is nuclear
generated,'' he said. ``If we're serious about environmental protection, then
we must seriously question the wisdom of backing away from what is, as a
matter of record, a safe, clean and very plentiful energy source.''
Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club, said the White House is
trying to convince people that their plan to ramp up increase energy
production, even at the expense of environmental concerns, is the only way to
solve the energy problems.
``From the beginning, the administration has wanted to tell the American
people that they didn't have any choice, that the only way they could
transport themselves to work, heat their houses, toast their toast .?.?. was
to ruin the environment,'' he said.
The environmental leader saw a sign of desperation, however, in Cheney's
speech. ``They've been out pushing this agenda for a hundred days and the
American people are rejecting it,'' Pope said.
Bush's low grade
Several recent polls have shown Bush scoring low on his handling of
environmental and energy issues. A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll released
last week, showed 61 percent of respondents rated Bush's performance on
energy as ``only fair'' or ``poor.''
Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Palo Alto, said the administration was going backward with
its proposals. She joined with more than 30 of her colleagues from California
and Washington to write to Secretary Abraham on Monday to criticize the
handling of the energy crisis.
``We can do much better than this,'' Eshoo said of the crystallizing White
House plan. ``I don't think we need to sacrifice our environment in order to
move ahead.''
Mercury News Staff Writer Michael Bazeley contributed to this report.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------
Federal energy regulators propose surcharge plan to pay utilities' debt
Posted at 5:51 a.m. PDT Tuesday, May 1, 2001
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- A surcharge on wholesale electricity prices has been
proposed by federal energy regulators as a way to pay utilities' debts.
The move angers state officials who say the suggestion amounts to gouging
customers.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, has been an outspoken critic of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's policies in California. She said the
surcharge would ``ensure that power generators get paid fully for their price
gouging.''
``That is outrageous and will further alienate Californians,'' she said.
Late last year and early this year, power companies accrued about $6 billion
in unpaid bills from the state's ailing utilities. FERC suggested collecting
the money to reimburse suppliers who have debts from PG&E, Southern
California Edison and San Diego Gas and Electric Co.
The surcharge would likely be levied to the state's Department of Water
Resources. As the state's purchasing agent, that department has spent more
than $5 billion on power since January.
If the proposal is approved, FERC would require the California Independent
System Operator, which runs the state's power grid, to collect the surcharge.
``We have 30 days to comment to FERC and are considering our options,'' said
Sean Gallagher, state counsel at the California Public Utilities Commission.
AP-WS-05-01-01 0357EDT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Record prices for power expected this summer in U.S.
Published Tuesday, May 1, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News
BY WILLIAM CLAIBORNE
Washington Post
CHICAGO -- The rest of the United States is virtually certain to escape
rolling blackouts this summer like the ones that have plagued California, but
record price increases for electricity are likely in many places, energy
experts agree.
Despite their confidence that they can survive everything but an extremely
hot summer without power outages, managers of the nation's interconnecting
electrical power grids are anxiously awaiting new power plants that are
scheduled to come online. They are also promoting conservation and seeking
ways to avoid distribution logjams during peak demand periods this summer.
``We see a big distinction between California and the rest of the country,''
said David Costello, an economist in charge of short-term forecasting for the
Energy Information Administration, the statistical arm of the Energy
Department. ``We have no real reason to believe any place is unusually at
risk.''
But record spikes in the price of electricity are a given for this summer,
some industry analysts say, because a growing proportion of power plants run
on natural gas, which has doubled in price over the past year.
The Energy Department estimates that electricity demand will grow 2.3 percent
nationally this year, with much higher increases in the West and the South.
At the same time, the reserve capacity margin that utilities try to build
into their systems to handle the hottest days -- when use of air conditioners
and other appliances taxes supplies -- has been falling in some regions to
well less than the desired 15 percent above peak summer loads.
That means utilities may have to import large volumes of electricity over
transmission systems that were not designed to handle them. What power
officials are hoping to avoid are critical shortfalls in generating capacity,
followed by overwhelming strains on aging high-voltage transmission lines as
power is bought and sold in increasingly competitive electricity markets.
Even though scores of new power plants have been built in the Northeast,
South and Midwest in recent months and many more are being planned, the
expected 15 percent increase in new generation will not be fully online for
another two years.
That leaves parts of the nation vulnerable to outages if there are prolonged
heat waves this summer, or if utilities are unable to start up new or rebuilt
gas-fired power plants as scheduled, according to energy experts.
Apart from California, the worst problems are expected in adjoining western
states, as California electrical grid managers scramble to buy electricity at
a time when power production at the region's hydroelectric dams is already
being cut because of shrinking water levels in reservoirs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
Davis calls generators on carpet
Published Tuesday, May 1, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News
BY MICHAEL BAZELEY
Mercury News
Gov. Gray Davis has asked power generators to Sacramento next week for a
meeting intended to ``make sure they feel some of the pain'' of the state's
energy woes.
Davis and other officials have portrayed the generators -- who own the power
plants that supply the state's electricity -- as the black-hatted villains of
the energy crisis. Along with the utilities and consumer groups, Davis has
accused the companies of taking advantage of the energy shortage by charging
exorbitant prices for their power. They have denied that.
Davis said he would use the meeting to tell the companies ``not to rip us
off'' and to be ``good citizens.''
``These energy companies have made more money than any company in America,''
Davis said at a San Francisco event to promote conservation. ``They haven't
done it by making a better product. They haven't done it by providing better
service. They just bought our plants and are selling us back the power at
extraordinarily unheard-of rates. .?.?. They should participate collectively
in the solution of this problem.''
Davis said he also would meet with the owners of ``qualifying facilities,''
the smaller power generators that provide about one-fourth of the state's
electrical power.
Many of the generators have been either scaling back output or shutting down
entirely, contending that the state's two largest utilities owe them $1.5
billion.
Davis said he expected the power generators to agree to accept partial
payment for the energy they've sold the utilities.
Larger power generators are owed $5 billion to $15 billion for energy they
sold to the state and utilities, said Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of
the Independent Energy Producers Association.
An official with Mirant Corp., which says it is owed $385 million, said he
was aware of the meeting with Davis, but he did not know the topic.
``We're very willing to send someone, if the governor is willing to work with
the generators on a cooperative solution,'' said spokesman Brian O'Neel.
Also Monday, Davis said that Pacific Gas & Electric Co. could still be forced
to sell its power transmission lines to the state, even though the utility is
now under the protection of federal bankruptcy court.
Davis had been working on a deal to buy the company's lines. But those talks
fell through weeks ago, and on April 6, PG&E filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy
protection.
Speaking to reporters at a technology conference, Davis said a creditors
committee of businesses owed money by PG&E is considering asking the
bankruptcy judge to force a sale of the utility's power lines to the state.
Davis said his advisers met with the committee recently to brief them on
talks to buy the transmission lines of financially troubled San Diego Gas &
Electric Co.
The governor would like to take over the state's 32,000-mile power grid so he
can control the flow of electricity through the state and gain a negotiating
advantage when dealing with power producers.
Southern California Edison has already agreed to sell its power lines to the
state.
Mercury News Staff Writer Steve Johnson contributed to this report.
Contact Michael Bazeley at [email protected] or (415) 434-1018.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------
PG&E lobbied heavily just before bankruptcy
Published Tuesday, May 1, 2001, in the San Jose Mercury News
BY DION NISSENBAUM
Mercury News Sacramento Bureau
SACRAMENTO -- In the three months before it declared bankruptcy, Pacific Gas
& Electric Co. spent nearly $650,000 lobbying state officials -- about
two-thirds of what the company spent all of last year trying to change
California laws.
The figures, reported Monday to the California secretary of state, offered
concrete evidence of the aggressive lobbying effort made by the now-bankrupt
utility to press its case. And it outraged consumer activists and state
leaders.
``Clearly it confirms that PG&E's priority wasn't keeping rates low,'' said
Steve Maviglio, spokesman for Gov. Gray Davis. ``They spent more time and
energy propping up their corporate image than paying attention to
California's energy needs.''
In all of 2000, when the first signs of the energy crisis appeared, the
utility spent about $900,000 lobbying state leaders. In the first three
months of 2001, PG&E spent $644,000. Ron Low, a PG&E spokesman, said the
spending came in response to hundreds of bills introduced at the special
legislative session on the energy crisis called by Davis and hundreds of
hours spent in Sacramento talking with state leaders about the company's
plight.
``The bills and legislation had the potential to impact our customers,'' Low
said. ``We were providing testimony at committees, information requested by
legislators and doing the analysis required.''
In trying to sway California officials, PG&E hired some of the state's most
prominent lobbyists. Among those enlisted by PG&E were Platinum Advisors, a
firm headed by former Davis campaign finance adviser Darius Anderson and a
law firm headed by the chief of staff to former GOP Gov. George Deukmejian.
PG&E dwarfed other energy interests with its lobbying, but other power
companies spent tens of thousands of dollars in Sacramento.
San Diego Gas & Electric spent more than $190,000 in the first three months
of 2001, almost as much as for all of 2000.
Southern California Edison, which spent $1.4 million on lobbying last year,
had not filed its latest report as of Monday night.
All three utilities have spent the past year trying to persuade state leaders
to rescue them from bankruptcy. During the crisis, the state has stepped in
to buy energy for the utilities, agreed to raise rates and offered a complex
bailout plan.
Edison agreed last month to the bailout offer, but PG&E turned down the same
deal and declared bankruptcy April 6.
Contact Dion Nissenbaum at [email protected] or (916) 441-4603.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------
Cheney outlines energy strategy for U.S.
The vice president says California-type blackouts are possible elsewhere.
May 1, 2001
By SANDRA SOBIERAJ
The Associated Press
TORONTO Vice President Dick Cheney warned Monday that the whole nation could
face California-style blackouts as he outlined a national energy strategy
relying heavily on oil, coal, natural gas and nuclear-power development - but
not conservation.
"The aim here is efficiency, not austerity," Cheney told editors and
publishers at The Associated Press annual meeting. The nation cannot "simply
conserve or ration our way out of the situation we're in."
In his first extensive remarks about the energy recommendations his
Cabinet-level task force will make to Bush by the end of May, Cheney blamed
current shortages on shortsighted decisions in the past. He said
conservation, while perhaps "a sign of personal virtue," does not make for
sound or comprehensive policy.
Saving the specifics for his boss to review and then announce, Cheney
promised "a mix of new legislation, some executive action as well as private
initiatives" to cope with rising energy prices and growing demand.
He said anew that the administration intends to push for drilling in the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge despite strong congressional opposition.
He rejected price controls, tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve or
creating new bur eaucracies.
Over the next two decades, it will take between 1,300 and 1,900 new power
plants - or one every week for 20 years - just to meet projected increases in
nationwide demand, Cheney said.
Energy shortages in California already have forced rolling blackouts. And he
said, "Without a clear, coherent energy strategy for the nation, all
Americans could one day go through what Californians are experiencing now, or
even worse."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------
Bush taking a supply-side policy on energy
Cheney says oil, coal and natural gas will be the primary resources for
'years down the road.'
May 1, 2001
By JOSEPH KAHN
The New York Times
WASHINGTON - Vice President Dick Cheney said Monday that oil, coal and
natural gas will remain America's primary energy resources for "years down
the road," and that the Bush administration's energy strategy will aim mainly
to increase the supply of fossil fuels, rather than limit demand.
Cheney, who ran the Dallas-based oil-services company Haliburton Inc. before
becoming vice president, offered a supply-oriented energy philosophy that
seems likely to dominate the report his task force is expected to issue as
early as mid-May.
The report to President George W. Bush is expected to recommend legislation,
executive actions and incentives for the private sector.
His comments, delivered to the annual meeting of The Associated Press in
Toronto, seemed partly a combative response to Democrats and
environmentalists who argue that the Bush administration has used
California's electricity shortages as a pretext to enact energy policies that
have been favored by industry executives for many years.
In discussing their energy plans recently, administration officials have put
the most emphasis on opening protected lands to oil and gas exploration,
while rolling back environmental rules that inhibit the burning of coal and
the construction of pipelines and refineries.
Bush's most-visible steps to combat what he labeled an energy crisis have
alienated environmentalists. He rejected a treaty that would reduce emissions
of gases cited as a cause of global warming and backtracked on his own pledge
to require controls on greenhouse-gas emissions by power plants, citing
urgent energy needs.
Cheney said drastic measures were necessary because the needs are so great.
He estimated that the country needs 38,000 miles of new pipelines to carry
natural gas, for example.
Coal, Cheney said, has been neglected. It is America's "most-plentiful source
of affordable energy." He said people who seek to phase out its use, largely
because they consider it a major source of air pollution, "deny reality."
He said the most environmentally friendly way to increase energy supplies was
to extend the life of existing nuclear plants and grant permits to build new
ones, because they have zero emissions of greenhouse gases.
Utility-industry executives have applauded the administration's support of
nuclear power, but questioned the economic viability of building new nuclear
power plants anytime soon. Environmentalists dispute Cheney's contention that
nuclear power is the cleanest source of energy because they say the mining
and enriching of uranium and the storage of nuclear waste are environmental
hazards.
Cheney indicated the administration would put some weight on energy
efficiency.
New technology - like computer screens that use far less power and
energy-efficient light bulbs - have an important role because they can save
energy without reducing living standards, he said. But he said he would
oppose any measure based on the premise that Americans now "live too well" or
that people should "do more with less."
Some people who have talked with administration officials about the
forthcoming energy plan expect that the policy will include some tax-related
measures to promote efficiency. Among those considered most likely: Granting
tax credits for people who buy fuel-efficient automobiles and for power
companies that produce electricity using renewable energy sources, like
solar, wind and geothermal.
He said new drilling technologies mean that exploration can take place in the
19-million acre refuge, which President Eisenhower made protected federal
land, without disturbing the habitat for caribou and other wildlife. The
affected area totals no more than 2,000 acres, he said, "one-fifth the size
of Dulles Airport" outside Washington.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------
Power supplier will pay to settle
Regulators to accept $8 million settlement from Williams Cos. over price
hikes last year.
May 1, 2001
By KATE BERRY
The Orange County Register
An energy company accused of withholding power to drive up prices in
California's electricity market agreed to pay $8 million in a settlement
approved Monday by federal energy regulators.
The settlement is the first by a company accused of charging excessive
electricity prices in the state.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission accepted the settlement in which
Williams Cos., of Tulsa, Okla., will refund the state's grid operator $8
million for power sold at more than 10 times what it otherwise would have
cost.
The purchases were made in a 10-day period last April and May. Regulators
said Williams deliberately kept generating units in Long Beach and Huntington
Beach offline to raise prices. The California Independent System Operator,
which manages the state's electric grid, designated those units to supply
power during periods of peak demand at contracted prices.
The FERC order stated that "Williams had a financial incentive to prolong
outages," at the two plants, which are owned by AES Corp.
Williams would have been paid $63 a megawatt hour if the two power plants had
been online, the FERC order stated. Instead, the company was paid $750 a
megawatt hour for electricity from other AES generating units during that
period.
AES had said the units were taken offline for repairs. AES, which sells all
power generated at its three plants in Southern California to Williams under
a contract, did not share in the profits from the power sales.
Officials at Williams have repeatedly denied that the units were deliberately
shut down. As part of the settlement, the company did not admit wrongdoing.
Federal officials had required Williams and AES to justify more than $40
million charged to the ISO. The companies faced paying a maximum of $10.8
million in refunds.
In a separate matter, Williams is one of several power providers accused by
federal regulators of overcharging the ISO $124 million for power in January
and February. The power providers are still disputing those charges.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------
Energy notebook: Bills target high natural-gas prices
State measures aim to boost production, speed OKs on new storage tanks and
order tariff review.
May 1, 2001
From Register news services
SACRAMENTO California lawmakers introduced measures intended to lower the
price of natural gas, which has been as much as 10 times higher in the state
than in other parts of the country.
The four measures, introduced by members of the state Assembly, would speed
up the approval of underground gas-storage tanks, encourage the production of
natural gas for industrial uses, and order the review of tariffs relating to
natural gas.
"This market has gone out of control," said Joe Canciamilla, chairman of the
Assembly's subcommittee on natural gas and author of two of the bills
introduced Monday.
Almost 80 percent of electricity produced in California is generated by
burning natural gas. High electricity prices in the state, which have led to
the near insolvency of California's two largest electric utilities, have been
blamed partly on high natural-gas prices.
PG&E Corp.'s Pacific Gas & Electric, the state's No. 1 electric utility,
filed for bankruptcy protection this month after running up $9 billion in
power-buying losses. Edison International's Southern California Edison, the
state's second largest utility, also is on the verge of bankruptcy after
accruing more than $5.4 billion in power losses.
Under the state's deregulation laws, wholesale power prices have been allowed
to float, while consumer rates have been temporarily frozen.
AB78X, by Canciamilla, a Democrat from Pittsburg, would streamline the
approval of new underground tanks so more natural gas could be stored in
California and demand for gas from out of state would be smoothed out. AB23X
directs the Public Utilities Commission to review all natural-gas tariffs.
AB73X, co-sponsored by Canciamilla, would allow natural gas unfit for use in
residences to be sold to industrial customers. AB42X reduces to one year from
as much as two years the permitting process for pipeline construction.
Regulators mull surcharge to help pay off generators
WASHINGTON U.S. energy regulators are considering whether to force
California's electricity grid operator to impose a surcharge on power sales
to pay for more than $14 billion owed to generators by California utilities.
The proposal is part of the price mitigation order for California issued by
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission last Wednesday. The public can
comment on the proposal for 30 days before the commission decides whether to
implement it.
The Edison Electric Institute, an industry group, cautiously supported the
idea. "We're in favor of anything that keeps the lights on in California,"
said spokeswoman Pat McMurray. "Anything that keeps the generators selling
into California is good," she said, adding that the group had yet to study
the proposal carefully.
The FERC is proposing that an unspecified surcharge be placed in an escrow
account by the California Independent System Operator to ensure that
generators are paid. Whether the surcharge would be applied toward past bills
or future power bills is open for debate, according to the order.
California utilities have amassed billions of dollars in debt buying
wholesale power at high prices while being limited by law as to what they can
charge consumers. The state is preparing to sell $10 billion in bonds to pay
for electricity this summer, when blackouts are expected as demand exceeds
supplies.
Jan Smutny-Jones, executive director of the Independent Energy Producers
Association, said his group is still "trying to sort out how something like
that might work," but offered no further comment.
There is also a question whether the FERC has jurisdiction to order the
California ISO to collect the surcharge, said Edison Electric Institute
spokeswoman McMurray, adding that the issue may have to be clarified later.
PG&E still may sell its transmission lines to state
SAN FRANCISCO California's largest utility still may sell its transmission
lines to the state despite seeking bankruptcy protection when an earlier deal
with state negotiators fell through, Gov. Gray Davis said Monday.
Davis told reporters that a creditors committee of businesses owed money by
Pacific Gas and Electric Co. asked state negotiators for a briefing on talks
to buy the transmission lines of financially troubled San Diego Gas and
Electric Co., whose parent company is Sempra Energy.
"The creditors committee called us and asked for a briefing on Sempra last
week," Davis said, adding he believes there is some possibility of buying
PG&E's lines. "It helps us because it helps get PG&E back in."
PG&E did not immediately return calls for comment.
The utility filed for Chapter 11 protection April 6 after failed attempts by
the state to buy its transmission lines to help the troubled utility pull
itself out of a multi-billion dollar debt.
The governor struck a $3.5 billion deal with Southern California Edison Co.
for its lines, undeveloped land and the promise of relatively cheap power.
The deal requires legislative approval. The state has offered $1 billion to
Sempra Energy for a similar package.
Davis told a crowd at investment firm J.P. Morgan's H&Q Technology Conference
that his state is boosting spending on technology research and education
incentives to keep California attractive to investment.
In other news:
The state paid nearly $90 million to buy electricity on each of a couple of
days last week as Californians turned up their air conditioning amid
unseasonably warm temperatures, according to state finance officials.
That amount is double what the state had been paying for a day's worth of
power earlier this year, but only a slight increase from the $73 million it
has been paying recently since the Pacific Gas & Electricity Co. bankruptcy
filing.
Also on Friday, state finance officers asked for an additional $500 million
from the legislature to buy power. That brings the total amount that the
state has set aside for electricity since January to $6.2 billion.
A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit Monday filed by Duke Energy against Gov.
Gray Davis over energy contracts the state seized earlier this year from
Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric.
U.S. District Court Judge Terry Hatter ruled that Davis has immunity under
the 11th Amendment, which prevents residents of one state from suing the
government of another state in federal court.
The Associated Press and Bloomberg News contributed to this report.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------
Tuesday, May 1, 2001
Leadership blackout
Gov. Davis seems unplugged in dealing with the crisis
April 29, 2001
By Steven Greenhut
The Orange County Register
We've seen it a bazillion times on TV and in the movies. A crisis threatens a
family, a community, a nation. Perhaps the threat comes from an enemy during
wartime. Or from a gang of criminals, corporate polluters, corrupt government
officials or aliens from Mars.
Out of nowhere, someone - sometimes from the least expected place - steps to
the plate. It's not just in the movies. History books are filled with the
likes of George Washington, Winston Churchill, Lech Walesa. People who seized
the moment and made it their own; people who chose to lead - and worry about
the consequences later.
History books are filled, also, with those who ducked for cover, pointed
fingers or ran away.
No one would have believed it, but in spring 2001 the nation's most populous
state is struggling with looming blackouts, soaring electricity rates, state
legislators blustering about Evil Power Producers and proposing "solutions"
that lost credence when the Berlin Wall fell. And rather than lead, the man
on the hot seat has become angry, immobile. He stands there, yelling "It's
not my fault," and waiting for the mess to evaporate.
Most Californians sympathize with Gov. Gray Davis, who just a few months ago
was viewed as an inevitable presidential contender. We know he didn't create
the current mess.
But it's Davis' moment, nonetheless. One would have thought the man who spent
his career plotting his rise to the governor's office would have had some
underlying reason for aspiring to the post. Anyone can be a leader when
there's nothing to do but spend a surplus. But the real test comes when the
chips are down.
No one should pin their hopes on politicians. Typically, pols should tend to
the administrative affairs of government and let a free people live free
lives. But the electricity imbroglio is a government-created mess that
initially requires a government solution.
After all, we're talking about highly regulated utilities. It is a botched
state de-regulation plan - actually a re-regulation plan - that exacerbated
the energy problems. And it has been the state's unwillingness to allow power
generators to build plants that has added to supply shortfalls.
There are two directions to choose: Toward a system owned and operated by the
state government, or toward a market-based system that treats electricity
like any other commodity. The price of natural gas, food, clothing and other
essentials are allowed to rise and fall, according to the marketplace.
Why is electricity so holy?
If prices are allowed to float, and generators are allowed to provide the
juice to fill demand, soon enough a competitive market will overtake the
initial price jumps and force prices down again. Sen. Tom McClintock,
R-Thousand Oaks, one of the few rational voices in Sacramento, argues that
Davis should have returned the surplus to taxpayers, who would have then had
the means to pay for the initial price spikes.
Instead, Davis has spent the surplus buying electricity, allowing taxpayers
to foot the bill because he refuses to allow customers (Aren't they the same
people?) to pay market prices. Adding insult to injury, he refuses to make
his dealings public.
Furthermore, Davis could have stabilized the situation last year when leaders
of the state's utilities tried in vain to get his attention about looming
problems and to urge limited price increases and use of long-term contracts
to buy power. Instead, Davis and his handpicked political crony who runs the
Public Utilities Commission did nothing - except let a problem spiral into a
full-blown crisis.
Without any leadership from the top, Californians hear a cacophony of
proposals from below.
The Legislature, dominated by Democrats far out on the "left-wing yahoo"
scale, are talking about Texas power generators in the same overheated
rhetoric some right-wingers use to talk about the Chinese communists. One
talked about sending tanks to Houston.
Understandably, the utility companies are looking out for their own
interests.
Pacific Gas & Electric, angry that the governor refused to do anything about
the crisis, declared bankruptcy the day after Davis' say-nothing address to
Californians this month. As some commentators note, PG&E is far more
comfortable dealing with a bankruptcy judge than dealing with a governor and
legislators who starred in "Clueless in Sacramento."
By contrast, Southern California Edison has chosen not to file bankruptcy
now, preferring instead to sell the state its transmission lines as a way to
generate cash to keep this quasi-private entity going.
John Bryson, a longtime Davis associate and a creature of the
government/regulatory/utility model, frankly admits that the main rationale
for selling the lines to the state is to keep his company afloat, independent
and credit worthy.
But it's a lousy idea for taxpayers, who would gain a multibillion-dollar
liability badly in need of costly maintenance. I don't blame Bryson (who, by
the way, co-founded the left-wing Natural Resources Defense Council early in
his career) for looking out for his company first. But what's good for the
utilities is not necessarily good for taxpayers.
Then there are the self-proclaimed consumer advocates. Their goal seems to be
to destroy the utilities so bureaucrats can run the system. These are people
who believe markets are the spawn of Satan.
Republicans have generally been content to let Davis twist in the wind, which
isn't the best leadership model, either. Sen. McClintock and a few others
have offered meaty ideas. But they are a minority of a minority and have no
real political muscle in the Democrat-dominated statehouse.
Who is left? Who you gonna call? Who is going to keep the still-thriving
California economy from going south?
The answer is Gray Davis. It's his hour, his moment, his crisis. The answers
are out there if only this "pragmatic" and "centrist" governor would be
willing to look to the market rather than the government. (Hint: See
solutions outlined on these pages today.)
It's time to stop delaying, blustering, blaming others. It's time for Davis
to remind Californians why they elected him governor. Steven Greenhut is an
Orange County Register editorial writer.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------
[B] Calif. Gov Davis/ PG&E utility creditors may like grid sale --Davis sees
Calif energy supply outstripping need by fall '03 --Davis/ PG&E credi <>
By Cristine Denver
San Francisco, April 30 (BridgeNews) - California Gov. Gray Davis said
Monday he has spoken with creditors of Pacific Gas & Electric, the
utility that
filed for bankruptcy April 6, and they like the idea of potentially selling
the
company's transmission network to the state. Sempra Energy will also likely
agree to a similar deal, Davis said.
* * *
The California Department of Water Resources signed a memorandum of
understanding to buy Southern California Edison's grid for $2.76 billion. The
deal is intended to help pay for past power costs, which drove Pacific Gas
&
Electric, the state's biggest utility, to seek bankruptcy protection.
Sempra, whose utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, has been able to recover
surging electricity costs, "will also take something along (the) lines," of
Edison, Davis said.
Sempra CEO Stephen Baum has consistently told analysts that San Diego Gas
&
Electric Co. and the state are in negotiations on the transmission purchase
and
that the price would be approximately 2.3 times the book value, which Baum
told
analysts last week was $433 million. The question has been the timing of a
Sempra deal. Sempra, and its regulated utility, are not under the same
financial pressure to sell its transmission system. SDG&E was not forced
into a
major liquidity crisis as were PG&E Co. and Southern California Edison.
SDG&E
was able to pass on soaring purchase power costs to ratepayers, while the
state's other two investor-owned utilities were unable to raise rates.
On the sidelines with reporters at the J.P. Morgan Technology conference
here, Davis was asked what would make him think that Pacific Gas &
Electric
Co.'s creditors might favor a deal similar to one worked out with Edison
International subsidiary Southern California Edison, and currently in
negotiations with Sempra Energy unit San Diego Gas & Electric Co.
Davis responded saying that, "The creditors committee called us and asked
for a briefing." Davis said the creditors, "like part of it (the Edison
plan), and asked some good questions."
In his presentation at the conference, Gov. Davis described the state's
strategy for solving the currently electric power supply crunch in four words:
"Build more power plants." Davis outlined the quick approvals that have been
made to get power plants sited and construction started. He told the
conference
that by the fall of 2003, the state, "will finally have more power than
California needs. We are on the glide path toward that goal; but can't make up
for the inaction of the past 12 years overnight."
Davis was making a veiled reference to the 12 years during which Republican
governors occupied the office previous to Davis' election. It was during the
administration of Republican Pete Wilson that California's deregulation plan
was passed by the Legislature.
In addition to the power plant facility build up California will undergo,
u
Davis touted conservation efforts the state is making to reduce demand this
summer.
"We're going to have to set the Guinness record for conservation in order
to avoid major disruptions this summer," Davis said. End
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------
Davis Optimistic Despite Power Woes
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) via NewsEdge Corporation -
Pacific Gas and Electric Co., which owes
billions of dollars and is seeking bankruptcy protection, still may
sell its transmission lines to the state, Gov. Gray Davis said
Monday.
Davis told reporters that a committee made up of businesses owed
money by PG&E has asked for a briefing on the state's efforts to
buy the transmission lines of another financially troubled utility,
San Diego Gas and Electric Co., a unit of Sempra Energy.
``The creditors committee called us and asked for a briefing on
Sempra last week,'' Davis said at a technology conference hosted by
J.P. Morgan, adding he believes there is some possibility of buying
PG&E's lines. ``It helps us because it helps get PG&E back in.''
PG&E did not immediately return calls for comment.
PG&E, California's largest utility, filed for Chapter 11
protection April 6 after failed attempts by the state to buy its
transmission lines.
The governor struck a $3.5 billion deal with Southern California
Edison Co. for its lines, undeveloped land and the promise of
relatively cheap power. The deal requires legislative approval. The
state has offered $1 billion to Sempra Energy for a similar
package.
Since January, the state has committed more than $6 billion to
buying electricity for the customers of PG&E, SoCal Edison and
SDG&E.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
National Desk; Section A
CHENEY PROMOTES INCREASING SUPPLY AS ENERGY POLICY
By JOSEPH KAHN
?
05/01/2001
The New York Times
Page 1, Column 6
c. 2001 New York Times Company
WASHINGTON, April 30 -- Vice President Dick Cheney said today that oil, coal
and natural gas would remain the United States' primary energy resources for
''years down the road'' and that the Bush administration's energy strategy
would aim mainly to increase supply of fossil fuels, rather than limit
demand.
In his most comprehensive comments to date on the energy task force he is
heading on behalf of President Bush, Mr. Cheney dismissed as 1970's-era
thinking the notion that ''we could simply conserve or ration our way out''
of what he called an energy crisis.
The only solution, he said, is a government-backed push to find new domestic
sources of oil and gas, including in protected areas of the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge, and an all-out drive to build power plants -- a need that he
says will require one new electricity-generating plant a week for 20 years.
''America's reliance on energy, and fossil fuels in particular, has lately
taken on an urgency not felt since the late 1970's,'' Mr. Cheney said.
''Without a clear, coherent energy strategy, all Americans could one day go
through what Californians are experiencing now, or worse.''
Mr. Cheney, who ran the oil-services company Halliburton Inc. before becoming
vice president, offered a supply-oriented energy philosophy that seems likely
to dominate the report the cabinet-level task force is expected to issue as
early as mid-May. The report is expected to recommend legislation, executive
actions and incentives for the private sector.
The vice president's comments, delivered to the annual meeting of The
Associated Press in Toronto, seemed partly a combative response to Democrats
and environmentalists who argue that the Bush administration has used
California's electricity shortages as a pretext to enact energy policies that
have been favored by industry executives for many years.
In discussing their energy plans recently, administration officials have put
the most emphasis on opening protected lands to oil and gas exploration,
while rolling back environmental rules that inhibit the burning of coal and
the construction of pipelines and refineries. They have also strongly
advocated the use of nuclear power.
Critics have faulted the administration for moving quickly to abandon a
treaty on global warming and rejecting controls on carbon dioxide emissions
from power plants, steps Mr. Bush said were vital because of energy
shortages. The administration has also come under withering criticism for
delaying stricter standards on arsenic in drinking water.
Mr. Cheney said today that environmentalists had taken things too far. He
said a recent television advertisement showing a child asking for more
arsenic in her water was a ''cheap shot.''
Drastic measures to increase energy supplies are justified, he said, because
the geometry of supply and demand curves are so alarming. He estimated that
the country needed 38,000 miles of new pipelines to carry natural gas,
covering the distance of Maine to California more than 12 times over.
Coal, Mr. Cheney said, has been neglected. It is the United States' ''most
plentiful source of affordable energy.'' He said people who sought to phase
out its use, largely because they considered it a major source of air
pollution, ''deny reality.''
He said the most environmentally friendly way to increase energy supplies was
to extend the life of existing nuclear plants and grant permits to build new
ones, because they had no emissions of greenhouse gases.
''We can safeguard the environment by making greater use of the cleanest
methods of power generation we know,'' he said, speaking of nuclear power.
''If we are serious about environmental protection, then we must seriously
question the wisdom of backing away from what is, as a matter of record, a
safe, clean and very plentiful energy source.''
Utility industry executives have applauded the administration's support of
nuclear power, but questioned the economic viability of building new nuclear
power plants anytime soon. Environmentalists dispute Mr. Cheney's contention
that nuclear power is the cleanest source of energy because they say the
mining and enriching of uranium and the storage of nuclear waste are hazards.
Mr. Cheney indicated that the administration would put some emphasis on
energy efficiency. New technology -- like computer screens that use far less
power and energy-efficient light bulbs -- have an important role because they
can save energy without reducing living standards, he said. But he said he
would oppose any measure based on the premise that Americans now ''live too
well'' or that people should ''do more with less.''
''The aim here is efficiency, not austerity,'' he said. ''Conservation may be
a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis for a sound,
comprehensive energy policy.''
Some people who have talked with administration officials about the energy
plan expect that the policy will include some tax-related measures to promote
efficiency. Among those considered most likely are tax credits for people who
buy fuel-efficient automobiles and for power companies that produce
electricity using renewable energy sources.
But the budget Mr. Bush submitted to Congress in early April sharply reduced
spending by the Department of Energy on research and development for energy
efficiency and renewable energy technologies.
''They give lip service to efficiency, but their whole emphasis is on
supply,'' said Senator Jeff Bingaman, a New Mexico Democrat who has
introduced energy legislation that he says strikes a finer balance between
increasing supply and controlling demand.
In a report to be released later this week, the American Council for an
Energy-Efficient Economy estimates that raising the fuel efficiency of cars
and light trucks by what it calls a modest amount could do far more to reduce
reliance on imported oil than drilling for oil in the Arctic National
Wildlife Refuge.
Fuel economy standards reached their peak in 1988, when the average passenger
vehicle covered 26 miles on a gallon of gas. The average fell to 24 miles per
gallon last year, because more Americans drive light trucks, which have lower
mandated efficiency standards than cars.
Raising average fuel use by cars and light trucks to 35 miles per gallon by
2010 would result in oil savings of 1.5 million barrels a day by that time,
the report says. The United States Geological Survey estimates that the
Alaskan refuge would probably produce 580,000 barrels a day later this
decade.
Mr. Cheney did not discuss the merits of raising government-mandated
Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards in his address today. But he
strongly defended the administration's proposal to allow drilling for oil and
gas in the Alaskan refuge.
The administration has sent mixed signals recently on how hard it intends to
push to open the refuge. Christie Whitman, the Environmental Protection
Agency administrator, said earlier this month that the energy plan would not
emphasize drilling in the Alaskan wilderness, but other officials
contradicted her.
Mr. Cheney left little doubt of his support. He said new oil-drilling
technologies meant that exploration could take place in the 19-million-acre
refuge without disturbing wildlife. The affected area totals no more than
2,000 acres, he said, ''one-fifth the size of Dulles Airport.''
Photo: Vice President Dick Cheney said yesterday in Toronto that the
administration's energy policy would support more nuclear plants.
(Reuters)(pg. A20)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------
National Desk; Section A
River's Power Aids California And Enriches the Northwest
By BLAINE HARDEN
?
05/01/2001
The New York Times
Page 1, Column 5
c. 2001 New York Times Company
GEORGE, Wash. -- Doing something nice for California has never been a
priority here in the Columbia River Basin, where high-voltage power lines
lope across irrigated fields of alfalfa, potatoes and wheat.
Politicians from California, as farmers in this area will explain at great
length, have been scheming for decades to siphon off the basin's cheap
electricity and water.
Californians, however, have been noticeably less irritating as of late.
Having fouled up electricity deregulation six ways from Sunday, they are
skidding into the summer air-conditioning season desperately short of power.
In the last year, much of their salvation has come from the Columbia River,
whose monstrous dams are the largest hydroelectricity machines in North
America.
All along the river, from Portland, Ore., to British Columbia, utility
companies, aluminum makers and farmers have joined to help save California --
but at a staggering price. Charging whatever California's dysfunctional power
market will bear, people in this narrow stretch of the Northwest have created
a kind of Kuwait along the Columbia.
With their record profits, some public utilities are wiring the emptiness of
Eastern Washington with fiber optics, buying diesel generators to make still
more power and paying Wall Street-style wages to electricity traders -- while
making sure that their electricity rates remain among the cheapest in North
America. Just north of the border in British Columbia, a state-owned utility
luxuriated in its California windfall by mailing out rebate checks to 1.6
million customers.
Their good fortune, though, has come with a measure of ambivalence and may
well be short-lived. A severe drought is already hurting farmers across the
region. If it continues, utilities along the river will have to buy power and
may be punished by the same market forces that gave them a windfall.
''This is not nice money,'' said Alice Parker, a retired farmer who heads a
group that promotes irrigation in the Columbia Basin. ''It is something that
is offered to us not to use water so Californians can run their
air-conditioners.''
Nice or not, a whole lot of money flooded into the Columbia Basin.
North of here in sparsely populated Chelan County, a publicly owned utility
that has two dams on the Columbia made three times as much money last year
than it ever had before. With just 35,000 local customers, the utility last
year had a $58.2 million profit. It paid its two top power traders $285,000
each, an astonishing income in a county where per capita income is less than
$25,000 a year. The utility refuses to reveal the traders' names for fear
their children might be kidnapped.
The chief operating officer of Chelan County Public Utility District
acknowledged that increases in the cost of power were ''huge'' and
''obscene.'' But the executive, Charles J. Hosken, added, ''We would be
imprudent if we did not maximize this market for our customer owners.''
Next door in equally sparse Grant County, a public utility that also owns two
dams on the Columbia has made even more money maximizing the market. It had a
record $88.8 million in profits last year -- more than double its best
previous year.
Grant County Public Utility District, which has just 40,000 retail customers,
is using its windfall to help build a $70 million fiber optic network for
local residents. It has also bought 20 diesel generators to guard against
power shortages and, if possible, exploit the power gold-rush. The utility
estimates that those generators could add $50 million to profits in the
coming year.
Like Chelan, Grant is using its profits as a kind of drought insurance to
insulate its customers from high market prices for electricity, when, as now,
local needs exceed generating capacity in the river. Power rates in Grant and
Chelan Counties are about one-fifth as much as in New York City.
Grant County's utility has rejected, for the time being, the idea of giving a
share of its profits to its customers.
''How would it look if Grant County gives away rebates while so many people
are paying more for electricity?'' asked Lon Topaz, director of resource
management for the utility. ''It would be lousy politics.''
An Upside-Down Economy
The second-worst drought on record in the Columbia River Basin has combined
with California's deregulation mess to further distort the energy market.
Drought has not only helped increase the price at which electricity can be
sold on the spot market -- 10 to 20 times as much as last year's price -- it
has strengthened a compelling bottom-line rationale for conservation. Every
megawatt not purchased and used in the Northwest (often at locked-in,
long-term prices that are a fraction of the current market rate) can be sent
south to California. For many utilities, conservation spells local savings
and a long-distance bonanza.
As a result, a regional economy built on half a century of cheap hydropower
has been stood on its head. Irrigation farmers here are being paid up to $440
an acre not to farm.
Similarly, aluminum companies are collecting about $1.7 billion this year by
not making aluminum. Companies like Alcoa have earned profits that delight
Wall Street, while keeping about 10,000 workers on their payroll, by
reselling hydropower that they bought in the mid-1990's under a cheap
long-term contract.
Even residential customers are being offered a chance to make a few dollars
from the power crunch. Avista Utilities has announced that it will pay its
customers in Washington and Idaho 5 cents for every kilowatt they do not use,
if their consumption falls more than 5 percent below last year's level.
For utilities in the Northwest, by far the largest profits from California's
electricity crisis have been secured in British Columbia. A number of private
American utilities have also benefited from California's troubles.
BC Hydro, a utility owned by British Columbia with dams on the Columbia and
Peace Rivers, is the first corporation in the history of the province to
exceed $1 billion in profits, as measured in Canadian currency ($712 million
in United States currency).
To celebrate, the provincial government ordered BC Hydro to do something it
had never done before. The utility mailed each of its customers a check for
$130. BC Hydro also guaranteed them no increases in electricity rates, which
have not gone up for seven years.
''We are just happy to be lucky that we have reservoirs and dams that were
built by people of great foresight,'' said Brian R. D. Smith, chairman of BC
Hydro.
When reminded that a March study by the California Independent System
Operator, which runs that state's power grid, accused BC Hydro of market
manipulation and profit gouging, Mr. Smith was less happy.
''All they do is scream and shout and they won't pay you the money they owe
you,'' he said, arguing that his company has gone out of its way to help
California in its hour of need. Gouging has nothing to do with it, he said,
adding that it was California's ''awful mess'' in deregulating power markets
that fueled BC Hydro's record profits.
A Good Deal for Farmers
In the beginning, that is to say when federal money began transforming the
Columbia from the world's premier salmon highway into a chain of adjustable
lakes, no one paid much attention to electricity. The river possessed a third
of America's hydroelectric potential, but there were not enough people in the
Northwest to use more than a fraction of it, and long-distance high-voltage
transmission lines did not exist.
The main intention, when New Deal dollars began raining on the Northwest in
the 1930's, was to create family farms. Grand Coulee Dam, the biggest dam in
North America and by far the largest hydroelectric plant, was primarily
designed as a water-delivery device for farmers.
Since then, as 6,000 miles of tunnels and concrete canals were built to
shuttle water around in sagebrush country, each 960-acre farm in the Columbia
Basin Federal Irrigation Project was blessed with at least $2.1 million in
federal infrastructure subsidies, according to the Bureau of Reclamation,
which built it.
In addition, farmers are guaranteed access to cheap water from the Columbia
and the right to buy all the electricity they needed to pump that water out
of the river -- at $1.50 a megawatt. A megawatt of electricity currently
sells for $375 to $400 on the spot market. As Paul Pitzer, a Columbia Basin
historian, has written, farmers here have always felt that ''no price is too
high to pay for their water so long as someone else is paying the bill.''
This year, though, the price finally became unbearably high for the
Bonneville Power Administration, a nonprofit agency that markets electricity
from 29 federal dams on river. The agency calculated that if it could
persuade farmers in the project not to irrigate 90,000 acres of land, water
left in the Columbia would produce electricity worth as much as $129 million
(if it had to be purchased at current market prices).
In a buyout that is without precedent in the Pacific Northwest, Bonneville is
paying 800 farmers a total of $30 million. The farmers receive $330 for each
acre they do not farm. On top of that, Grant County's public utility is
paying many of the same farmers about $100 an acre not to farm their land.
On April 13, about 20 irrigators gathered for lunch at the Martha Inn Cafe
here in George to discuss the buyout. Since farm prices are low this year,
they agreed that it was a good deal.
Still, the farmers, who do not like to be reminded of the federal subsidies
that keep their irrigation system afloat, said they worried about the
precedent they set when they traded water for cash.
''This has to be a temporary deal,'' said Tom Flynt, 52, who normally farms
900 acres but has taken 150 acres out of production because of the buyout.
''If anybody thought this would affect their water rights, there would be no
takers.''
Several farmers said they did not like the idea of their water supporting the
lifestyles of urban people, especially Californians, who, those who were
interviewed said, do not appreciate the food that the farmers put on their
table.
''We feel that Americans are making decisions with their mouths full,'' said
Tricia C. Lubach, a marketing consultant whose husband is an irrigation
farmer. ''Not too long ago they didn't worry about where the power comes
from. Someday they may think about where the food comes from.''
A 'Wonderful Energy Fit'
A couple of hundred miles northwest of George, in a penthouse conference room
that overlooks Vancouver harbor, Mr. Smith, the chairman of British
Columbia's most profitable company, explained in mid-April what a pain it was
selling electricity to Californians.
''People say to me what are you doing selling power to those ungrateful
Californians,'' he said. It does not help, he added, that the state is behind
on its bills by about $300 million.
Still, neither BC Hydro nor the provincial government can afford to lose
California's money. The utility has become a cash cow for the provincial
budget, which in the last decade has received more than $3.7 billion from BC
Hydro.
''We have a wonderful energy fit,'' Mr. Smith said, referring to BC Hydro's
power-trading relationship with California, if not to Californians
themselves. ''We have oversupply in the summer when they have got high
demand, and we have got undersupply in the winter when they have got stuff to
give to us.''
BC Hydro has acknowledged that it massages its hydropower system to sell
power when it is most needed -- and most expensive -- in California. The
utility closes the faucets on its dams at night during the summer, storing
water while meeting local electricity needs with cheap off-peak power brought
from across the West. In the morning, when prices peak, it opens the faucets
and zaps electricity off to California.
''We spill water during the day,'' Mr. Smith said. ''Why? Is it because we
can make more money? No. It's because that is when everybody wants
electricity, for God's sake.''
Questions about profit gouging on the part of dam-dependent utilities in the
Northwest may soon be moot. Drought has reduced the Columbia River runoff so
far this year to about half of what is considered normal.
The shortfall dovetails with higher costs for natural-gas-fired power plants
and a growing gap on the West Coast between demand for electricity and
capacity to generate it.
''Absent being successful in getting loads down, we could be looking at
quadrupling of the power rates,'' said Paul Norman, head of power operations
at Bonneville.
Unless conservation increases or the drought eases, Mr. Norman warned that by
late summer, the Northwest's era of cheap power could come to a sudden and
painfully expensive end.
Photo: Electricity generated by Rock Island Dam in Chelan County, Wash.,
helped the county's public utility earn a record $58.2 million in profits
last year. (Larry Davis for The New York Times)(pg. A20) Graph: ''The Public
Utilities'' NET OPERATING PROFITS Graph tracks operating profits since 1995
for the following: Grant County Wnapum and Priest Rapids Dams Chelan County
Rocky Reach and Rock Island Dams BC Hydro All major hydroelectric dams in
British Colombia (Source: The public utilities)(pg. A20) Chart/Map: ''One
River's Bonanza'' Some public utilities that own dams along the Columbia
River, which has one third of the hydroelectric potential in North America,
are selling power to California and making record profits. Map of the United
States and Canada follows the path of the Columbia River. (pg. A20)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
A Section
Bush Energy Plan Will Emphasize Production; Cheney: Conservation Is Part of
Effort
Mike Allen
?
05/01/2001
The Washington Post
FINAL
Page A01
Copyright 2001, The Washington Post Co. All Rights Reserved
TORONTO, April 30 -- Vice President Cheney said today that the Bush
administration's energy policy will emphasize increased generation over
conservation and rely on an ambitious expansion of the country's oil, coal
and natural gas industries in addition to a broader reliance on nuclear
power.
Providing a preview of the recommendations the administration's energy task
force will make to President Bush in the next few weeks, Cheney said he sees
no "quick fixes" to the problems that have led to rolling blackouts in
California and forecasts of higher gasoline prices for motorists this summer.
"The potential crisis we face is largely the result of short-sighted domestic
policies -- or, as in recent years, no policy at all," Cheney told editors
and publishers at the Associated Press's annual meeting. "As a country, we
have demanded more and more energy. But we have not brought online the
supplies needed to meet that demand."
He said 1,300 to 1,900 new power plants will be needed over the next 20
years.
Cheney, who is heading the task force that has been meeting in private since
January, provided few details of the panel's conclusions. He said it would
recommend "a mix of new legislation, some executive action as well as private
initiatives" to bolster energy production.
But he made clear that the administration will base its policy on promoting a
vigorous expansion of the traditional energy industry and will avoid the
kinds of austerity measures that marked the country's response to the energy
crisis in the 1970s.
"To speak exclusively of conservation is to duck the tough issues," Cheney
said. "Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a
sufficient basis -- all by itself -- for a sound, comprehensive energy
policy."
Cheney said alternative energy sources such as wind and solar power may
provide an important part of the country's energy strategy in the years to
come but that it is premature to rely on them now. "Years down the road,
alternative fuels may become a great deal more plentiful," he said. "But we
are not yet in any position to stake our economy and our own way of life on
that possibility."
Bush promised during last year's campaign to develop a muscular national
energy strategy, and named Cheney to head the task force less than two weeks
after taking office. Various sectors of the energy industry have billions of
dollars riding on the outcome of the administration's policy review.
Cheney said the plan will call for increased exploration for new sources of
oil, coal and natural gas, and construction of refineries, plants and
pipelines. He reiterated the administration's support for drilling in
Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which he said could be tapped for
oil without disrupting its environment.
Cheney, who was chairman of the oil services firm Halliburton Co. before
taking office, called coal "the most plentiful source of affordable energy in
the country" and said it will remain the nation's primary source of
electricity for years.
"Coal is not the cleanest source of energy," Cheney said, "and we must
support efforts to improve clean-coal technology to soften its impact on the
environment."
The vice president called nuclear power one of "the cleanest methods of power
generation that we know."
"But the government has not granted a single new nuclear power permit in more
than 20 years," Cheney said. "If we're serious about environmental
protection, then we must seriously question the wisdom of backing away from
what is, as a matter of record, a safe, clean and very plentiful energy
source."
Officials with the coal and nuclear power industries, which have had little
to celebrate in recent years, welcomed Cheney's remarks.
"Bless his heart," said Bill Raney, president of the West Virginia Coal
Association. "We have been something of the whipping child for some time now.
This is kind of like your dad when he compliments you when you were growing
up. We've got people in Washington talking to us now."
Steve Kerekes, a spokesman for the Nuclear Energy Institute, said it was
"heartening to see that the administration is not only recognizing but
publicly acknowledging the positive role that nuclear energy plays in a
diverse portfolio of energy sources."
Several environmental groups said the policy outlined by Cheney could negate
whatever good will the administration had gained with its recent spate of
environmentally friendly announcements. Philip E. Clapp, president of the
National Environmental Trust, called Cheney's prescription "an
across-the-board attack on the environment."
Lois Corbett, executive director of the Toronto Energy Alliance, said: "I'd
hate to think we'll have to throw up a huge iron curtain to keep American
smog and acid rain on the American side. Clean-coal technology is an
oxymoron. It's a dirty fuel."
Raney and other coal industry officials were summoned to an administration
briefing last week in which Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham and other
administration officials promised that coal would be a key part of the energy
policy.
Attendees said that although no specifics were discussed about tax breaks or
relaxed regulations, they were assured the administration would work for a
more stable and predictable process of getting permits to build or renovate
coal-fired generating plants.
Administration officials said Bush's budget includes $150 million for
developing clean-coal technology, new methods for converting coal to energy
that result in less pollution. Cheney called conservation "an important part
of the total effort."
Contact: http://www.washingtonpost.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------
Western Dreaming -- a buyer's cartel 5/1/01
By Kathleen McFall
[email protected]
In California, the cost of electricity was $7 billion in 1999, $32 billion
last year, and if expectations hold true, will rise to $65 billion this year,
said California Sen. Dianne Feinstein recently. As a consequence of this
escalation, the pressure is mounting on state and federal legislators to
solve the California crisis*or to find someone else to blame it on. It's
increasingly looking like political suicide to do nothing.
Initiatives and insults are flying, and the only consensus in this
politically charged debate is that Western states are facing a grim summer,
and merchant power companies*an easy target*are somehow fleecing California.
In this atmosphere, an interesting, albeit fringe, idea was recently posed in
a report by economist Peter Navarro of the University of California-Irvine
and Michael Shames of the San Diego-based consumer group the Utility
Consumers' Action Network (UCAN).
"California should join with Oregon and Washington to create a buyers' cartel
to offset the market power of the Western generators. This multistate buyers'
cartel should offer to pay a reasonable price for power to the sellers'
cartel members*but not a penny more," said the report.
The report named Mirant, Enron, Dynegy, Reliant and Williams Cos. as members
of a "sellers' cartel."
While the idea may be organizationally untenable, it nevertheless places the
California situation in an interesting conceptual framework, given the
politicization of the crisis. It's certainly an approach many politicians
would rally around if they could figure out a way to use it to reduce OPEC's
market influence.
The buyers' cartel
Shames, a consumer advocate, gained notoriety as the author of a 1999 paper
(posted on UCAN's Web site) that predicted today's energy crisis. He said the
idea has garnered a positive response, in some circles.
"Surprisingly so," Shames said. "Supportive sentiments have been echoed by
the head of DWR [California Department of Water Resources] and a number of
economists including Paul Krugman in a New York Times op-ed piece." According
to Shames, the recent Senate Bill SBX-73 introduced in California embodies
the critical elements of the cartel approach.
UCAN proposes the approach only as a backup plan in the event that the
Western situation turns catastrophic this summer. "One could view it as an
insurance policy; it would not need to be used unless the governor's summer
strategy begins to falter. It contains two elements: creation of a hard-nosed
'buyers' cartel' and, if necessary, the forced sale of in-state generation
plants to the state," said the report.
Each day, a Western states buyers' cooperative would set a price it considers
fair and reasonable, based on the cost of producing electricity, natural gas
prices or other fuels, and a generous double-digit profit margin in order to
ensure future investment in the power infrastructure.
A power plant operator that wanted to sell electricity in these three Pacific
Coast states would meet the price set by the cooperative. Those who didn't
like the price could shut down their plants and sit out the market for the
day, said Shames and Navarro.
For this plan to be effective, the report's authors concede California's
legislature would have to pass emergency legislation to modify current law
requiring California's independent system operator to purchase power "at any
price" to keep the lights on.
"This will empower the buyer's cartel to enforce its fair price offer," said
the report. It would also hold consumers hostage to a battle between cartels.
Blackouts as leverage
"The formation of a buyers' cartel will almost certainly spark retaliatory
blackouts as the sellers' cartel tests the political will of our legislators
and governor. Indeed, the bold measures proposed here will require political
fortitude," the report asserts.
To respond to this eventuality, instead of random rolling blackouts sweeping
the state without notice, rotating outages would be planned and telegraphed
ahead of time. "That would give predictability to business and residents,
which is what most people want. It also would tip off the crooks, of course,
who might prey on homes suddenly left without alarms. But the cops,
forewarned as well, could mobilize ahead of them with extra patrols,"
suggests the report.
The authors believe calling the bluff once or twice would be enough to bring
costs down to reasonable levels and break the "seller" cartel's market grip.
Merchant power companies would have to answer both to stockholders and the
outrage of public opinion if plants were intentionally idled during a
blackout. Blackouts appear to be inevitable this summer due to genuine power
shortages, but this approach would at least contain the price of available
power according to the logic of the report. The authors say that it's "a plan
that a free-market economist could love. Buyers pooling their clout to win a
better price. People sacrificing to get what they want. Generators free to
participate, or not."
If the blackouts grew too disruptive, Shames and Navarro said, Gov. Gray
Davis and his counterparts in Oregon and Washington would have to use
emergency powers to seize the plants that refuse to play the game. That's
when things would get ugly.
Bunker mentality
The Shames and Navarro proposal has, at its core, a presumption of unfair
practices by merchant power, something these companies and other economists
would certainly refute. Ironically, this cartel approach could work in favor
of merchant power as well as buyers, demonstrating that blackouts are not
linked to market manipulation.
Beyond theory, the idea would be difficult from a practical standpoint yet it
illustrates the growing frustration at many levels with the extraordinary
Western power market. As the report's authors conclude, by this summer, with
the air conditioning off and California's budget in tatters, "a buyers'
cartel could look downright reasonable."
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
here you joe...let me know what your comments are
(See attached file: StorageLeaseLettterAgree2-14-02.doc)
(See attached file: StorageLeaseRevisions-2.doc)
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Ted,
Item # 5 will require help from IT. My understanding is that currently we are
receiving the
positions aggregated to a daily level.
Also, I talked to Tanya about visiting MG in New York. She is leaving for
vacation on the 26th of July
and can go for a day to NYC prior to this date.
I think that it makes a lot of sense for her to visit MG and to kick
the tires. I asked her to coordinate the trip with you: it makes sense
for both of you to go together. I may join you depending on my availability.
Vince
From: Ted Murphy
07/11/2000 03:20 PM
To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: VAR Priorities
Vince/John,
Below is a brief summary of near-term projects for the enhancement of VAR and
the use of VAR. As you can tell some are not directly Research issues (some
require the guidance but not direct work product), and are very North
American Wholesale-centric.
Vince,
I think that the only one in which progress requires your input to get kick
started is #5. All others are in progress with Tanya/Grant involved through
Jeff Shankman's regular meeting.
We would like to get your input as to your priorities (we were thinking Top
5?) and then start knocking some of them out. It is not meant to be
exhaustive and is focused on fixes as opposed to overhauls.
Thanks
Ted
---------------------- Forwarded by Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT on 07/11/2000 03:10 PM
---------------------------
From: Ted Murphy
06/28/2000 07:45 AM
To: Rick Buy
cc:
Subject: VAR Priorities
Rick,
This is my initial attempt to summarize our meeting with John. The next
steps would be to solicit feedback from other interested parties and scope
the resources and responsibilities.
Ted
Rick Buy, John Lavorato and I met to discuss priorities as it relates to the
calculation of VAR. We are making the following recommendations
1) Inclusion of monthly index positions into VAR calculations as the
indicies set in North American Natural Gas
2) Development of a methodology to re-run correlations (factor loadings)
including criteria, responsibilities and acceptance/rejection criteria
3) Development of process by which to analyze the output of factor loading
process. Database to store output and management reports.
4) Finalize debate on the calculation of Forward/Forward volatility
5) Scope a project to analyze the possibility of calculating hourly
volatility for power.
It was further recommended that we continue to not include unpriced index
positions in VAR calculation.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Hi Richard,
I am emailing you a spreadsheet that summarizes the generation information that we have recorded for the Monthly Performance Reports that listed generation produced in 2000. The spreadsheet that has the information is titled "Facility Breakdown". Please feel free to call or email me if you have any questions regarding the data.
If your records do not match the information provided, please let me know as soon as possible so that we can resolve the discrepancy. Thank you for your time and assistance.
Rasa Keanini
Customer Credit Subaccount
(916) 654-5379
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Toby, thank you for the message. I look forward to seeing you when things settle down a bit. My best to you and the SPA. Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: "Toby Mattox" <[email protected]>@ENRON
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2001 8:06 PM
To: Derrick Jr., James
Subject: The Acquisition
Hello Jim,
Boy, it must be quite hectic for you and your staff. I trust you are in a protected position, and that the buyout will be advantageous to you personally. You are a terrific person, and I know you are invaluable to Enron; I believe you will do quite well, whatever happens. Just wanted you to know I'm thinking positive thoughts for you. Toby
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Thanks. Who was able to do it?
Kay
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
************************************************
Weekly Web Specials
************************************************
________________________________________________________
1) WEB SPECIALS INTRODUCTION
Web Specials are a great way to save on flights with Alaska Airlines and
Horizon Air. Web Specials can only be purchased online through the Alaska
Airlines/Horizon Air Web Site. Hurry, seats are limited, prices and markets
subject to change.
Our Web Specials are available via our home page at http://www.alaskaair.com
or
http://www.horizonair.com
________________________________________________________
2) WEB SPECIALS VALID DATES
Alaska Airlines and Horizon Air offer Web Specials for travel:
Originating:
Wednesday, April 18, 2001
Thursday, April 19, 2001
Saturday, April 21, 2001
Returning:
Saturday, April 21, 2001
Monday, April 23, 2001
Tuesday, April 24, 2001
________________________________________________________
3) WEB SPECIALS FARES
All fares quoted in US dollars, without airport fees and segment tax.
Roundtrip Coach fares for travel between:
Anchorage, AK Barrow, AK $209.00
Anchorage, AK Butte, MT $369.00
Anchorage, AK Cordova, AK $89.00
Anchorage, AK Eugene/Springfield, OR $279.00
Anchorage, AK Ontario, CA $279.00
Anchorage, AK Orange/Santa Ana, CA $289.00
Anchorage, AK Phoenix, AZ $289.00
Anchorage, AK Sacramento, CA $269.00
Anchorage, AK Seattle, WA $189.00
Barrow, AK Anchorage, AK $209.00
Boise, ID Spokane, WA $59.00
Burbank, CA Portland, OR $149.00
Butte, MT Anchorage, AK $369.00
Butte, MT Eugene/Springfield, OR $149.00
Butte, MT Ketchikan, AK $349.00
Butte, MT Ontario, CA $199.00
Butte, MT Orange/Santa Ana, CA $209.00
Butte, MT Phoenix, AZ $219.00
Butte, MT Sacramento, CA $149.00
Butte, MT Seattle, WA $99.00
Butte, MT Spokane, WA $139.00
Cordova, AK Anchorage, AK $89.00
Cordova, AK Juneau, AK $79.00
Cordova, AK Yakutat, AK $69.00
Eugene/Springfield, OR Anchorage, AK $279.00
Eugene/Springfield, OR Butte, MT $149.00
Eugene/Springfield, OR Ketchikan, AK $249.00
Eugene/Springfield, OR Ontario, CA $179.00
Eugene/Springfield, OR Orange/Santa Ana, CA $189.00
Eugene/Springfield, OR Phoenix, AZ $199.00
Eugene/Springfield, OR Sacramento, CA $149.00
Eugene/Springfield, OR Seattle, WA $59.00
Eugene/Springfield, OR Spokane, WA $119.00
Juneau, AK Cordova, AK $79.00
Ketchikan, AK Butte, MT $349.00
Ketchikan, AK Eugene/Springfield, OR $249.00
Ketchikan, AK Seattle, WA $209.00
Los Angeles, CA Vancouver, BC $139.00
Ontario, CA Anchorage, AK $279.00
Ontario, CA Butte, MT $199.00
Ontario, CA Eugene/Springfield, OR $179.00
Ontario, CA Seattle, WA $149.00
Ontario, CA Spokane, WA $159.00
Orange/Santa Ana, CA Anchorage, AK $289.00
Orange/Santa Ana, CA Butte, MT $209.00
Orange/Santa Ana, CA Eugene/Springfield, OR $189.00
Orange/Santa Ana, CA Seattle, WA $179.00
Petersburg, AK Spokane, WA $209.00
Phoenix, AZ Anchorage, AK $289.00
Phoenix, AZ Butte, MT $219.00
Phoenix, AZ Eugene/Springfield, OR $199.00
Phoenix, AZ Seattle, WA $179.00
Phoenix, AZ Spokane, WA $179.00
Portland, OR Burbank, CA $149.00
Portland, OR San Francisco, CA $79.00
Sacramento, CA Anchorage, AK $269.00
Sacramento, CA Butte, MT $149.00
Sacramento, CA Eugene/Springfield, OR $149.00
Sacramento, CA Seattle, WA $79.00
Sacramento, CA Spokane, WA $99.00
San Francisco, CA Portland, OR $79.00
San Francisco, CA Vancouver, BC $99.00
Seattle, WA Anchorage, AK $189.00
Seattle, WA Butte, MT $99.00
Seattle, WA Eugene/Springfield, OR $59.00
Seattle, WA Ketchikan, AK $209.00
Seattle, WA Ontario, CA $149.00
Seattle, WA Orange/Santa Ana, CA $179.00
Seattle, WA Phoenix, AZ $179.00
Seattle, WA Sacramento, CA $79.00
Seattle, WA Spokane, WA $59.00
Seattle, WA Wrangell, AK $199.00
Spokane, WA Boise, ID $59.00
Spokane, WA Butte, MT $139.00
Spokane, WA Eugene/Springfield, OR $119.00
Spokane, WA Ontario, CA $159.00
Spokane, WA Petersburg, AK $209.00
Spokane, WA Phoenix, AZ $179.00
Spokane, WA Sacramento, CA $99.00
Spokane, WA Seattle, WA $59.00
Vancouver, BC Los Angeles, CA $139.00
Vancouver, BC San Francisco, CA $99.00
Wrangell, AK Seattle, WA $199.00
Yakutat, AK Cordova, AK $69.00
Additional markets are available at
http://shopping.alaskaair.com/webspecials/start.asp
Check the Alaska Web Specials page periodically as additional markets and
dates
may be added.
________________________________________________________
4) WEB SPECIALS RULES
* Valid on Alaska Airlines or Horizon Air only.
* Seats are limited and may not be available on all flights/dates.
* Offer is for a very limited time and is subject to change without notice.
* Valid on new bookings only.
* Reservations must be made using the Alaska Airlines Web Site. Tickets
require
immediate purchase by credit card when reservations are made.
* Ticketing will be electronic, using Instant Ticket services.
* Tickets are non-refundable, non-changeable and are of no value after the
last
date of your planned travel.
* Fares quoted do not include Passenger Facilities Charges of up to $18 or
segment fees of $2.75 per flight segment. A flight segment is defined as one
takeoff and one landing.
* Other restrictions apply.
________________________________________________________
5) HILTON HOTEL SPECIALS
For special value rates at Hilton Hotels in Alaska Airlines cities visit the
Hilton web site at http://www.hilton.com/specials/values/akairvalues.html
========================================================
You are receiving this message today because you subscribed to our Email
Notification Service. While we'd be pleased to continue to tell you about our
great products and prices, you can unsubscribe by visiting our Web site at
http://www2.alaskaair.com/listserv/webmail.asp
Please do not respond to this message. Mail sent to this address cannot be
answered.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
This is getting a bit confusing - is this list included in Bryan's "Final"
list?
Paul Simons
02/21/2000 11:20 AM
To: Edmund Cooper/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: More Reference Credits - Please Approve
Ed
Let's discuss.
Paul
---------------------- Forwarded by Paul Simons/LON/ECT on 21/02/2000 17:16
---------------------------
Bryan Seyfried
21/02/2000 16:50
To: Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: More Refernce Credits - Please Approve
---------------------- Forwarded by Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT on 21/02/2000
16:51 ---------------------------
David Weekes
21/02/2000 15:11
To: William S Bradford/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Eklavya Sareen/LON/ECT@ECT, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT
Subject: More Refernce Credits - Please Approve
Bill
These are more names for European reference credits which Brian intends to
trade offline. With the exception of two names ( TXU Europe and Helsinga
Energia) the names look OK to me. (They are all either publicly rated
investment grade names or e - rated 5+ subs of major groups). Are there any
names here that you have an issue with ?
David
---------------------- Forwarded by David Weekes/LON/ECT on 21/02/2000 15:00
---------------------------
Eklavya Sareen 16/02/2000 15:15
To: Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT, David Weekes/LON/ECT@ECT, Janine
Juggins/LON/ECT@ECT
cc: Martin McDermott/LON/ECT@ECT, Bryan Seyfried/LON/ECT@ECT, John
Metzler/LON/ECT@ECT, Tomas Valnek/LON/ECT@ECT
Subject: More Refernce Credits - Please Approve
Dear All,
Attached is a list of 49 additional reference credits that we want to quote
on the webpage.
Could you please look through these names and let us know if you approve.
Thanks,
Eklavya
x-36759.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Enron is in the process of re-negotiating our contract with Dow Jones
Interactive and we need to know if you are currently
accessing this data. In the near future there will be a cost associated with
this information and you are currently listed as
having a license.
Please click on the below link and let us know if you need continued access
to this service.
http://nahou-webcl1.corp.enron.com/inquisite/DJI/DJI.html
Thank You,
Market Data
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Aaron:
It is highly likely that AES would exercise their early purchase option in
May. As such, I want to make sure we are thinking about the duties,
obligations, and indemnities among the parties under the circumstance that
AES owns the member interests in Haywood, and ENA is continuing its efforts
to achieve the milestone of the interconnection agreement through August 1. I
also want to make sure we have adequate indemnities from AES regarding
actions we will undertake to achieve the interconnection milestone. At the
end of the day, ENA will be focused on two things: (i) causing TVA to lower
its Network Upgrade estimate from the current level of $4.8 million, and (ii)
causing TVA to produce an interconnection agreement in substantially the same
form as the Gleason interconnect agreement. Obviously, with AES owning the
Haywood member interests and being in the driver's seat, they will play a key
role in whether these two items are achieved. I want to make sure that the
same standards which applied to us prior to them exercising their early
option (i.e. we were on the hook to use reasonable commercial efforts to
achieve the milestones) now applies to them during the period that we are
still trying to achieve the milestones.
With Stuart's concurrence, I'd like you to further review the documents and
make a recommendation as to what other changes, if any, we should make, to
protect our upside under the circumstance described above.
Thanks,
Ben
"Aaron Roffwarg" <[email protected]> on 05/01/2001 06:49:19 PM
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
cc: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Subject: Greystone/Haywood - Extension of Dates
Ben and Stuart,
Attached is Amendment #2 to the SPA reflecting the business terms Ben and I
discussed this afternoon. As you will see this structure (with the
promissory note) is different from the structure described by Steve Hase in
the attached email. Please let me know if the deal has evolved since our
latest discussions. Please note that this is being sent to ENA only. Please
call me with your comments at your earliest convenience. Best regards.
Aaron P. Roffwarg
Bracewell & Patterson, LLP
South Tower Pennzoil Place
711 Louisiana St.
Houston, Texas 77002
(713) 221-1117 (Ph)
(713) 221-2184 (Fax)
CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT:
This information is intended only for the use of the individual or
entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is
privileged, confidential, and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable
law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any dissemination of this information is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this information in error, please notify us
immediately by telephone at (713) 221-1117 or by fax at (713) 221-2184,
and confirm that you have destroyed this information and any copies.
Thank you.
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Received: from mcafee.bracepatt.com by bracepatt.com; Tue, 01 May 2001
15:29:24 -0500
Received: FROM aesc.com BY mcafee.bracepatt.com ; Tue May 01 15:40:09 2001
-0500
X-Proxy: keymaster.bracepatt.com protected
Received: from 207.92.93.17 ([207.92.93.2]) by aesc.com with Microsoft
SMTPSVC(5.0.2172.1); Tue, 1 May 2001 16:22:53 -0400
Message-id: <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 16:32:21 -0400
Subject: Re: Greystone/Haywood - Extension of Dates
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
From: "Steve Hase" <[email protected]>
References: <11A113B59DF4D311A0DE00805FA7F323028FC4E6@DCMAIL1>
In-Reply-To: <11A113B59DF4D311A0DE00805FA7F323028FC4E6@DCMAIL1>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Return-Path: [email protected]
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 May 2001 20:22:53.0236 (UTC)
FILETIME=[800B0F40:01C0D27C]
Audrey,
Ben and I have reached an agreement which will be documented as follows:
1) Extension of Dates -- May 11 becomes May 9 (Wed)
2) Ben will edit the latest version of the Amendment #2 so that
a) on Aug 1, we pay the greater of the $1.5MM ($2.5 less $1 paid at
exercise) and the Additional Compensation (less the $1 MM)
b) a separate agreement whereby Corp guarantees the payment on Aug 1.
The intention is to sign the Amendment #3 before 5/9.
Thanks everyone for making this happen.
Steve Hase
- #1283523 v5 - AMENDMENT NO 2 TO SPA.doc
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Gary,
Here are the PX's comments on the ISO's contract definition.
Thanks,
Max
(See attached file: ISO Draft Product Description Comments.doc)
- ISO Draft Product Description Comments.doc
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
TO: JGS Faculty & Staff
From: Loranda Iverson <[email protected]>
Subject: Herman Brown Road Reconstruction
IMPORTANT NOTICE
Weather permitting, the roadway to Herman Brown Hall will be reconstructed starting Wednesday 1/23/02. The work will be completed on Friday 1/25/02 and the roadway will be open to car traffic by Saturday 1/26/02.
Please direct your questionS and concerns to Max Amery @ ext. 5350.
Suzana G. Vazquez
Staff Assistant
Jesse H. Jones Graduate School
of Management
[email protected]
(713) 348-3736
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Logon id jhodge2 passwd ae3n2002 was not included when request was processed.
Sandra Hart
Corp IT Security
Enron Net Works
office ( 713 ) 853-9565
pager ( 713 ) 327-8225
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
When I was at the site it said that it had sent a new password to me at
[email protected]. Didn't get here. I give up.
From: Suzanne Adams@ECT on 05/25/2001 09:21 AM
To: Kay Mann/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: invoices
Did they actually change it. If not try your birthyear and then your birthday
19550805 for example. My birthday is 8/5/55
Kay Mann@ENRON
05/25/2001 08:56 AM
To: Suzanne Adams/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: invoices
never received a pass word.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Enron's NY Risk Management Seminar will take place on Thursday, April 6th in
New York City. Below are:
Enron Invitation
Enron letter to NY policymakers
List of NY policymakers who are planning to attend
List of wholesale customers invited
Schedule of presenation
List of NY Policy Makers Attending
Assemblyman Paul Tonko
John Howard, Chief of Staff to Assemblyman Tonko
John Cahill, Senior Policy Advisor to Govenor Pataki
Mary Ellen Burns, Assistant Attorney General - Energy Division
Gavin Donohue, Independent Power Producers of New York
Richard Miller, Senior VP for Energy, NY City Economic Development Corporation
(Just as an aside, our power traders met separately with a large group of PSC
staffers in March to discuss Risk Management)
Updated Invite List
Schedule of Presenation
Michael Brown, Power Outlook, 30-40 minutes
Craig Breslau, Natural Gas Outlook, 30-40 minutes
Janelle Scheuer, Hedging Strategies, 1 hour
Gary Taylor, Weather Risk Management, 15-20 minutes
Binders with all presentations will be made available to attendees
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
---------------------- Forwarded by Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT on 10/13/2000
05:07 PM ---------------------------
"Makiko Sato" <[email protected]> on 10/13/2000 03:58:56 PM
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: IEOR MONDAY SEMINAR - OCTOBER 23, 2000
?
?
INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING AND OPERATIONS RESEARCH
MONDAY SEMINAR
IEOR 298-1 - FALL 2000
Monday, October 23, 2000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------
"Volatility of Electricity Prices - Measurement and Analysis of Underlying
Causes"
Dr. Vincent Kaminski
Managing Director and Head of Research for Enron Corp.
?
Abstract:
The last three years were characterized by exceptionally high volatility of
the power prices in the US markets. The market developments have created a
number of unique challenges for energy industry economists. One immediate
question we have to answer is how to measure volatility of energy prices.
Although we can all agree that the prices in the power markets are
characterized by high variability, the traditional measures used in
financial economics (annualized standard deviation of log price returns) may
not fit well electricity prices.
The second challenge is to explain the sources of high price volatility and
to answer the question to what extent it can be attributed to problems that
can be addressed in the long run. Such problems include flaws in market
design that allow some market participants to abuse market power, limited
availability and/or unequal access to transmission, temporary shortages of
generation capacity. Some factors underlying high volatility of electricity
prices may be of permanent nature and may be a necessary price to pay for
increased market efficiency and expanded customer choice.
TIME AND LOCATION: 3:30 - 5:00 P.M. - 3108 ETCHEVERRY
REFRESHMENTS: 3:00 P.M. - 4TH FLOOR HALLWAY
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Attached is draft. Want to review with Bob before we send out.
Thanks
e
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Mary, sorry for not getting back to you soooner.
Of the three concepts, only (i) Market Opening condition is proving sellable,
and then only on the basis the it is bilateral and for physical
transactions. The other 2 concepts: (ii) modified Market Disruption; or
(iii) suspension of obligations if Enron is subject to
judicial/regulatory/legislative action (intended to address Project Stanley),
are proving to be unworkable concepts. I believe these latter 2 issues and
Market Opening Risk for financials will be resolved commercially as something
that will be lived with. The traders/marketers have all three concepts
however.
With repsect to the summary of deals that may be subject to Market Disruption
as a result of changing legislation or Pool Rules, as we previously
discussed, I am not sure where that work product was going, other than
somebody (I believe Lavo) wanted the summary for information purposes (i.e.
as the deals were already done, the risk is what it is). If there is some
other impetus for your report and I need to do something further, please let
me know.
Many thanks for all of the hard and thoughtful work.
Peter.
MARY COOK
12/04/2000 08:46 AM
To: Jeffrey T Hodge/HOU/ECT@ECT, Peter Keohane/CAL/ECT@ECT, Greg
Johnston/CAL/ECT@ECT, Mark Powell/CAL/ECT@ECT, Derek Davies/CAL/ECT@ECT
cc: Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Canadian Power Confirms
Attached is a redraft of the three proposed points for inclusion in each of
financial and physical power confirms. Please review and advise of any
further comments or thoughts.
It is my understanding that it has been decided that Canada wants to negate
Market Disruption concepts on the basis of changes to EUA or Pool rules. I
have also negated force majeure claims on the same basis (typically not apt
in financial--however, since it could be argued I added it in the financial
confirm language as well). Question: Would we also want to add "any other
excuse of performance" to this concept? Such language would afford a broader
sweep in respect of various claims, however, (i) the sweep may be too broad
in light of it covering any change in the EUA or Pool rules and (ii)
ultimately, we may want some flexibility to argue other points. Advise.
Under Performance Suspension the intent is to carve out the "trade" for
suspension, while leaving the other aspects of the masters/gtcs in place,
such as bankruptcy and other termination events.
Mary
Cordially,
Mary Cook
Enron North America Corp.
1400 Smith, 38th Floor, Legal
Houston, Texas 77002-7361
(713) 345-7732 (phone)
(713) 646-3490 (fax)
[email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Thanks for the info. I'll direct it to her the next time.
Samuel Schott
05/08/2001 05:24 PM
To: Tana Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Cheryl Johnson/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc: Stephanie Sever/Enron@EnronXGate, Marilyn Colbert/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lisa
Lees/Enron@EnronXGate, Tom Moran/Enron@EnronXGate, Marcus
Nettelton/NA/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Re: EOL approvals, 05-02-01 _ GCP Response - Attn. Global SAP
Hello Tana,
The Global SAP team (Cheryl Johnson) handles any Counterparty Name changes
upon receipt of support documentation from the Counterparty.
Please forward any such documentation to Cheryl Johnson.
Thanks,
Best Rgds.
Samuel x3-9890 (GCP Team)
Enron Net Works _ Global Data Management
From: Tana Jones on 05/08/2001 05:08 PM
To: Samuel Schott/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: Marilyn Colbert/HOU/ECT@ECT, Stephanie Sever/Enron@EnronXGate, Lisa
Lees/Enron@EnronXGate, Tom Moran/Enron@EnronXGate, Marcus
Nettelton/NA/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Re: EOL approvals, 05-02-01 _ GCP Response
Pursuant to the documentation the counterparty provided when they entered
into the power EEI, and at the direction of Marcus Nettelton, a lawyer in the
power group, the counterparty name for the Port of Oakland should set up in
GCP as follows:
The City of Oakland, a municipal corporation acting by and through its Board
of Port Commissioners
GCP, if you could please redo the counterparty name, and Stephanie, if you
could please resubmit the PA to match the counterparty name, then we can get
this one done...
Samuel Schott
05/03/2001 09:24 AM
To: Walter Guidroz/ENRON@enronXgate @ ENRON, Karen Lambert/HOU/ECT@ECT, Tana
Jones/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Taylor/HOU/ECT@ECT, Brant
Reves/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, Debbie R Brackett/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, David
Hardy/LON/ECT@ECT, Lesli Campbell/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, Cynthia
Clark/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, Enron Europe Global CounterParty/LON/ECT@ECT,
Stephanie Sever/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, Tom Moran/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON,
Claudia Clark/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, William S
Bradford/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, Lisa Lees/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, 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@ENRON, Tanya Rohauer/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON,
Kelly Lombardi/NA/Enron@Enron, Brian Lindsay/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications@ENRON, EOL Call Center, Bill D Hare/HOU/ECT@ect, Amy
Heffernan/Enron Communications@Enron Communications@ENRON, Molly LaFuze/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications@ENRON, Danny Clark/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications@ENRON, Stephanie Panus/NA/Enron@Enron,
Teresa Mandola/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON, Bill Kyle/ENRON@enronXgate@ENRON,
Amber Ebow/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: EOL approvals, 05-02-01 _ GCP Response
Any GCP adjustments will be highlighted in blue.
Best Rgds.
Samuel x3-9890 (GCP Team)
Enron Net Works _ Global Data Management
From: Walter Guidroz/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/02/2001 04:40 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
cc:
Subject: EOL approvals, 05-02-01
Please see attached.
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Upon further review, these two folks already have Scheduling access.
d.n.
-----Original Message-----
From: Luu, Duong
Sent: Friday, February 1, 2002 10:50 AM
To: Semperger, Cara; Nommensen, Dave; Crooks, William
Cc: O'Neil, Murray P.; Smith, Will; May, Tom
Subject: RE: I need estate logins by the end of business today for Mike Purcell and Serena Bishop
Cara,
Dave Nommensen will assume estate responsibilities.
Regards,
dluu
-----Original Message-----
From: Semperger, Cara
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 9:48 AM
To: Luu, Duong
Cc: O'Neil, Murray P.; Crooks, William; Smith, Will; May, Tom
Subject: I need estate logins by the end of business today for Mike Purcell and Serena Bishop
I have been told today that these folks will have to do all of our scheduling as of Monday, they are being trained today but will have to have working logins patterned after Donald Robinson by the end of business today.
Serena Bishop ( I do not know what she has access to, she was the California scheduler)
Mike Purcell (already has access to some things, but please check his access)
If this cannot be done, please call Murray O'Neil asap. His Cell is 503-702-9846
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
de nada
-----Original Message-----
From: Mara, Susan
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 1:08 PM
To: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: RE: DA ISSUES
Thanks
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 11:07 AM
To: Mara, Susan
Subject: RE: DA ISSUES
got that one covered too while you were out.
-----Original Message-----
From: Mara, Susan
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 12:30 PM
To: Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: FW: DA ISSUES
Importance: High
here is another one. I can call George if you didn't
-----Original Message-----
From: Waidelich, George
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2001 10:19 AM
To: Mara, Susan; Dasovich, Jeff
Subject: DA ISSUES
Sue, Jeff, below is a question from a customer we did a contract with in August 2001. How can I answer his question below. The filing attached asked for ESP's to provide copies of the contracts signed after July 1, 2001. Is this something we have done?
GW
---------------------- Forwarded by George Waidelich/SFO/EES on 11/26/2001 10:16 AM ---------------------------
<< OLE Object: Picture (Device Independent Bitmap) >>
[email protected] on 11/26/2001 08:10:18 AM
To: "George Waidelich" <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: DA ISSUES
George,
Any ENRON action required on the attached?
Hope that you had a good holiday.
JW
(See attached file: WO_66473_1.DOC)(See attached file: WO_66335_1.DOC)
?????????????????????????????
Jim Wikenczy
Corporate Planning Manager
TABC, Inc.
6375 Paramount Boulevard
P.O. Box 2140
Long Beach, CA 90801-2140
Telephone: (562) 984-3389
FAX: (562) 984-6805
email: [email protected]
??????????????????????????????
- WO_66473_1.DOC << File: WO_66473_1.DOC >>
- WO_66335_1.DOC << File: WO_66335_1.DOC >>
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
Robert E. Bruce
Senior Counsel
Enron North America Corp.
T (713) 345-7780
F (713) 646-3393
[email protected]
|
{
"pile_set_name": "Enron Emails"
}
|
FYI.
Carl,
Will you please have someone input this information into the pricing model?
Thanks,
Michelle
---------------------- Forwarded by Michelle Parks/Corp/Enron on 04/20/2000
09:38 AM ---------------------------
"Chris Lloyd" <[email protected]> on 04/20/2000 09:13:33 AM
To: <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: CA & Turbine Payments
Michelle, I just faxes you an executed copy of the CA.
In addition, please find the turbine payment schedule, attached. We are
possibly signing a deal for the April 2000 payment ($69MM) tomorrow (so move
quickly if you want that one!). Therefore, I would suggest that you mainly
focus on the payments scheduled after April 2000. Finally, please keep in
mind that the last column is for ABB turbines for our Arkansas project (the
rest are GE).
Please give me a call to discuss. I should be in the office today until
around 2:00, and then back on Monday.
Regards,
Chris Lloyd
Manager-Corporate Development
Panda Energy International, Inc.
(972) 455-3806 Direct
(972) 455-3796 Fax
- Turbine Payment Scheda.xls
|
{
"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.