dataset_id
int64 0
5.47k
| email_body
stringlengths 800
9.73k
|
|---|---|
2,800 |
Subject: RE: Edison's Argument Regarding PX Credit
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/1587.
=====================================
Jeff, I have looked at your fax. This is a tough one, due to conflicting agendas. If we are actually PAID the PX Credits (or the remaining cumulative unpaid credit balances) SCE may be correct, e.g. if an ESP's purchased wholesale energy at the PX Credit rate or lower, than their total cost of energy supply is the same or less than that of a Bundled customer. The impact on the TRA account should have been the same regardless of customer type, but only if they can prove the PX credit actually equals their purchase cost. This may re-open the audit issue. How does anyone really know that SCE did not enter into purchase contracts at other than PX - market rates? If they did, they credits should be in this account as well.
As you know, we have not been PAID these PX amounts.
I probably do not have enough history re the TRA accounting to give you a good defense against their argument, other than a non-by passable charge should not apply if the credit is not PAID.
One other thought, shouldn't the amount of unrecovered TRA also be born by the utility (of course, it would help if they were not almost bankrupt). The intent all along is the utilities were given a set period of time to recover this amount, and once the time elapsed, tough luck. How does this play into this. Should they be kept whole, if they were not able to execute this plan.
Thanks,
Wanda
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2001 6:23 PM
To: Tribolet, Michael; Curry, Wanda
Subject: Edison's Argument Regarding PX Credit
I'd like to fax you something that Edison sent in support of their argument that:
1) by virture of the PX credit framework, DA customers contributed to Edison's undercollection, and,
2) DA customers should therefore contribute to the recovery of the undercollection.
Could I get your fax numbers? Would like to get your comments once you've reviewed the argument. Thanks.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
2,801 |
Subject: Re: Conflicts of Interest
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8572.
=====================================
Nice job. Thanks.
"Philip K. Verleger" <[email protected]>
01/24/2001 04:32 PM
To: "INTERNET:[email protected]" <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Conflicts of Interest
Jeff
I have never been accused of being subtle. However, someone had to say it
and it is better to say it now than to have it come out later.
Phil
Dear David:
I am writing this note to you and not the committee. I am worried
that too many of the signatories can be accused of trying use their
academic positions to achieve results desired by their consulting clients.
I riase this issue because more than one person has told me that "Paul
Joscow is owned by Edison." While such statements are generally wrong I
believe you need to be sensitive to the potential attack. In particular, I
worry that our efforts will be undermined if too many of the individuals
signing the report have had extensive dealings with the state's three
largest utilities. I can just see the headline "Apologists for utilities
offer solutions to state's energy problems."
You know we will be attacked after we issue the manifesto. The
question is, will the attacks have merit. If we were all white as the
driven snow there would be no problem. However, under such circumstances
we would all be poor.
For this reason it is important to get independent academics and
non-academics with no connections to the utilities or generators to sign
the manifesto. I fall into this later category as, I believe, do a number
of other individuals. The addition of Solow would obviously help as would
Arrow or McFadden. Dale Jorgenson would also be a great addition because
he has never worked or testified for these firms. The same goes for Paul
Krugman. On the other hand, Pual brings some heavy baggage.
I understand it is important to have as many names attached to the
manifesto as possible. However, Paul's name may hurt.
Phil
=====================================
|
2,802 |
Subject: Re: CLECA Solutions for the Energy Crisis
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/4409.
=====================================
Thanks very much Dave. We've got the proposal (and we've got a few issues
with it).
Rog:
I know that you're swamped managing EES' book, etc. So I'd be happy to fill
Dave in on EES' view of CLECA's proposal, the negotiations that are underway
generally, and what we're cooking up to try to help the negotitations along.
Just let me know.
Also, Dave, be happy to talk to Hanson, and fill them in one what's going on
out there if that would be useful.
Jeff
David Parquet@ECT
12/07/2000 03:32 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J
Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Roger Yang/SFO/EES@EES, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: CLECA Solutions for the Energy Crisis
I got this from Hanson. Please advise as to which points we agree with and
which we disagree with. I want to know because I talk to this guy quite a
bit and EES and ENA are trying to do a deal with him. I probably will have
several opportunities to influence him, if necessary. Barbara Barkovich and
Bill Booth probably had a big hand in developing this doc.
Any follow up necessary?
----- Forwarded by David Parquet/SF/ECT on 12/07/2000 01:28 PM -----
"Bouse, Earl" <[email protected]>
12/07/2000 09:29 AM
To: "Dave Parquet (E-mail)" <[email protected]>, "Lyle White (E-mail)"
<[email protected]>, "Dave Kates (E-mail)" <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: CLECA Solutions for the Energy Crisis
Greetings:
Attached for your information is the subject "solution" document. We have
passed this on to the Governor's staff and Assembly Member Rod Wright has
included it in his briefing book.
<<CLECA Solutions to Electrical Crisis.doc>>
!?????? Earl F. Bouse, Jr.
??????? Hanson Aggregates Mid-Pacific
??????? Hanson Permanente Cement
_??????(925) 426-4084
'?????? (925) 426-4060
??????? [email protected]
??????? [email protected]
- CLECA Solutions to Electrical Crisis.doc
=====================================
|
2,803 |
Subject: Update on Dunn Witch Hunt Hearings
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/12541.
=====================================
Senator Dunn conducted a press briefing earlier today in regards to his
"Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the Wholesale Energy
Market." ?
Following is a summary of what was discussed:
Today's hearing:
Where: ?Room 3191, 1pm
Who: Carol Coy, South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCE was invited but unable to attend due to the bankruptcy issue which
apparently ?????consumes all of ?their time and resources....
Topic: ?The "laundering" of air emissions credits. ??Apparently the cost of
air emissions credits is pushed up due to the laundering of credits by
generators, and as a result should not be used to justify high electricity
prices. ?
Upcoming Hearings:
When: ?Friday, June 22
Topic: ?Plant operations
Who: ?TBD
When: ?Friday, June 29
Who: ??GENERATORS TESTIFY
Other items discussed:
Documents requests issued to LADWP and DWR. ?LADWP has apparently been very
very very "very cooperative" with the request. ?
Subpoenas have been issued to Duke, Dynegy, AES, NRG, Enron, Reliant,
Williams
A subpoena was issued to SCE requesting the following information:
?1. ?Internal documents related to the surveillance of market
competitiveness. ?2. ?Maintenance records and 3. ?Internal documents related
to the sale of California generation assets.
A subpoena was issued to Morgan Stanley, who was retained to prepare
documents related to the sale of some of California's generation assets.
????????????? ?NOTE: ?The point is that the price paid for generation assets
was "much higher" than many experts anticipated. ?The committee will be
looking into whether generators purchased these assets at significantly
higher prices because they knew they would have market power -- and the
ability to set prices high.
Subpoenas will be issued to PG&E and SDG&E
Please feel free to call if you have any other questions. ?Thanks - Jean
--
Jean Munoz
McNally Temple Associates, Inc.
916-447-8186
916-447-6326 (fx)
=====================================
|
2,804 |
Subject: Re: SF Gate: Enron's secret bid to save deregulation/PRIVATE
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/13157.
=====================================
just calling them as i see them. i WISH that i were glad to be back. but
who knows, this core/noncore thing just might work . please keep all fingers
and toes crossed indefinitely.
Best,
jeff
Karen Denne
05/29/2001 02:50 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Re: SF Gate: Enron's secret bid to save deregulation/PRIVATE
MEETING: Chairman pitches his plan to prominent Californians
You're too kind -- and you're always a pick-me-up -- thanks! Glad you're
back. missed you last week (even tho you called in!)
From: Jeff Dasovich on 05/29/2001 01:23 PM
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: SF Gate: Enron's secret bid to save deregulation/PRIVATE
MEETING: Chairman pitches his plan to prominent Californians
I'd blow it off. Your batting 0.9999999999. In anybody's book, that's
phenomenal. Don't look back. And PR, under the circumstances, is doing a
stellar job overall. Vacation was nice. Thanks. Bad thing is it made me
realize how much more of it I need (and likely ain't gonna get soon).
Best,
Jeff
Karen Denne
05/29/2001 01:07 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Re: SF Gate: Enron's secret bid to save deregulation/PRIVATE
MEETING: Chairman pitches his plan to prominent Californians
That's what I told AP, but after I looked like a major doofus on the front
page of the Chronicle... The last few weeks have not been pretty for PR...
How was your vacation?
From: Jeff Dasovich on 05/29/2001 11:13 AM
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
To: Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Re: SF Gate: Enron's secret bid to save deregulation/PRIVATE
MEETING: Chairman pitches his plan to prominent Californians
Seems to have Riordan written all over it. I say "no big deal." We're
talking to everyone. No secrecy involved. We'll keep talking, being
constructive and trying to help develop solutions that work for CA. Your
thoughts?
=====================================
|
2,805 |
Subject: Free Bottle of Wine!!!
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/11925.
=====================================
Hi all,
We are doing an analysis of training in various size companies, and would
appreciate
your responses to the following questions (there's only 10).
Names of all respondents who reply by Friday will be ENTERED INTO A DRAWING
for a BOTTLE OF WINE!
Answer as many of them as you want. Thank you VERY MUCH for your time with
this!!
With your answers Jim & I will be one step closer to graduation :)
- Kelly & Jim
------------
1) How many employees are in your company? What industry is the company
in?
2) Do you have a training program for your job function - mandatory,
voluntary, or none?
3) Do you do your job better as a result of the training you received?
If you haven't received training, would you do your job better had you
receive some?
4) If yes, how long is the training conducted? Is it conducted on a regular
basis?
5) Is your training conducted by professional trainers or through a
mentor-type system or some other way? Which one would you prefer?
6) What kind of training, if any, would you like to have right now? Why?
7) Do you think training should be conducted at all levels of the
organization? Why?
8) What type of training do you think is unnecessary at your company?
What kind of training should be mandatory? Why?
9) Would you feel better about the company or the team knowing that everyone
went
through a structured training program?
10) Rank the statements below regarding your perceptions about training (1 is
most mportant):
I do it because it is mandatory;
I do it because it will help me learn my job quicker;
I do it because it will give me skills I can use in my next job;
I do it because it will help the company be more profitable;
I do it because it allows me to refresh my skills;
I do it because it is a way to get away from my job
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
=====================================
|
2,806 |
Subject: California: A midcourse assessment of the campaign "conf. call"
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4805.
=====================================
The above referenced call has been scheduled as follows, please mark your
calendars:
Date: Thursday, March 22
Time: 11:00am - 12:30pm (CST)
Number: 1-800-283-1805
Location: The War Room (EB4701)
The agenda for the call will be as follows:
1) The Strategy of the
campaign ...so far
2)Where we're
winning??
3) Where we're losing
4) What we're doing
right
5) What we're
doing wrong
6) What we're not
doing
7) Where we go
from here
Lora - Please have Tom Briggs participate on behalf of Linda. Thanks
gngr
713-853-7751
----- Forwarded by Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron on 03/21/2001 11:14 AM -----
Ginger Dernehl
03/20/2001 03:01 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Mark
Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Paul
Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron
cc: Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron, Cindy Derecskey/Corp/Enron@Enron, Lora
Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Maureen
McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Marcia A Linton/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda J
Noske/HOU/ECT@ECT
Subject: Conf. Call re: California
Rick would like to schedule a 90 minute conference call regarding
"California: A midcourse assessment of the campaign". Please respond "ASAP"
which dates/times listed below will work best with your schedules.
Thursday, March 22 11:00am-12:30pm (CST)
Friday, March 23 10:30am - 12:00pm (CST)
12:00pm - 1:30pm (CST)
3:30pm - 5:00pm (CST)
gngr
713-853-7751
=====================================
|
2,807 |
Subject: Economic Outlook Forum November 9, 2001
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/722.
=====================================
Dear Haas Evening MBA Students,
On Friday afternoon November 9, 2001, some of the School's most distinguished economists and I will participate in a "teach-in" about the US economy. "Economic Outlook Forum 2001" will examine economic conditions in the United States in the wake of the tragic events of September 11 and the ongoing war on terrorism. I am fortunate to co-chair this session with Professor Ben Hermalin, who will begin serving as Interim Dean of the Haas School in January 2002. Professor Hermalin will moderate the panel presentations and following discussion. In addition to myself, our economic commentators will be Professors Severin Borenstein, Jerry Engel, Rich Lyons, Ken Rosen, Hal Varian, and Janet Yellen. An agenda for the program is attached.
I hope you may be able to join me for the Economic Outlook Forum in the School's Arthur Andersen Auditorium on Friday November 9, 2001 at 4:00pm. Tickets for the program will be available in your program office starting Tuesday evening October 23. They will be distributed on a first-come, first-served basis. As you know, seating in the auditorium is limited. If you are interested in participating in this discussion, I urge you to obtain a ticket as soon as possible. Out of respect for your fellow students, please do not claim a ticket unless you are sure you will be able to use it. There also will be a limited of standing room tickets available the day of the event. I realize that many of you will not be able to take time away from your jobs to come to Berkeley for this event. I am looking into the possibility of having a Web simulcast of the program in which you could participate. I will keep you apprised about our progress in developing this feature.
I look forward to seeing you at the Economic Outlook Forum and responding to your comments and questions about the economy and about these exceptional national circumstances.
Sincerely,
Laura D'Andrea Tyson
Dean
=====================================
|
2,808 |
Subject: Re: MEETING RE: CALIFORNIA
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/265.
=====================================
Please get us a phone for the room. Start the meeting at seven a.m.
---------------------- Forwarded by Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT on 09/07/2000 09:07
AM ---------------------------
Jeff Dasovich@EES
09/06/2000 06:47 PM
To: Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT
cc:
Subject: Re: MEETING RE: CALIFORNIA
As you know, I have great interest. However, I've checked flight schedules
to come out Tuesday night, and to put it mildly, it's very ugly. Seems like
alot to arrive in D.C. around 3 AM only to turn around and head back to the
left coast the next day at 3-4 PM. But I think the meeting should go ahead
and take place anyway. Is there any chance that Lisa could get a phone in
your meeting room so that I could participate by conference call? Sorry for
the headache. Let me know. Thanks again for the chat this PM.
Best,
Jeff
Paul Kaufman@ECT
09/06/2000 07:06 PM
To: James D Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Susan J Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Mary
Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES, Mona Petrochko, Sandra
McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@Enron, Sarah
Novosel/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: [email protected]@ECT
Subject: MEETING RE: CALIFORNIA
By this e-mail I'm requesting that we all meet on Wednesday, September 13,
2000, for breakfast to discuss the California/FERC wholesale issues that have
been plaguing us and will plague us over the next year or so. I suggest
that the meeting be limited to: (1) an identification of the inventory of
forums we are facing; and (2) our allocation of resources to the inventory.
If time permits, we can also have a substantive discussion of the issues. In
this regard, if its ready, we can present an overview of the California
strategy that is being developed (initially) by Sandi and Jeff.
Respond ASAP directly to Lysa Akin with your interest in participating in
this meeting.
Lysa: once we have a head count, please get us a meeting room and
breakfast. We'll need an easel with paper and markers.
=====================================
|
2,809 |
Subject: Got leads?
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/1713.
=====================================
Haas students:
We all know that recruiting is going to be a challenge this year and
utilizing all available
resources will heighten our chances for success. Haas students bring a
wealth of contacts
to the program and we in the Career Center want to be sure to tap into it to
benefit
your fellow classmates.
If you have a contact that you think would be interested in hearing about
the ways that a
company can connect with Haas students through either formal or informal
recruiting events
(on-campus presentations and interviews, job fairs, job postings, student
club firm nights, etc.),
please send us the person's contact info. It might be a hiring manager you
worked with or for.
It might be someone within the company's human resources department that has
not interacted with Haas.
It might be a personal contact that has a small business looking for that
one key person. Regardless,
we would appreciate the opportunity to pursue the potential recruiting
contact. Please provide the
following if available:
Contact name, company, title, phone number, email address, any additional
recruiting-related
info (type of position (s)he may be interested in recruiting MBA's for, past
Haas/MBA hiring, etc.)
Depending on which industry your contact is in, please email your response
to the appropriate
account manager as follows:
Rich Wong - technology and entertainment/media - [email protected]
Jenny Rowe - consulting, consumer products, healthcare/biotech/medical
devices, education, not-for-profit - [email protected]
Mark Friedfeld - finance/investment banking, real estate -
[email protected]
On behalf of your Haas schoolmates, thanks for any leads you can provide.
Regards,
The Haas Account Managers
Rich Wong
Account Manager, Technology & Entertainment
MBA Recruiting
Haas School of Business Career Center
545 Student Services Building #1900
Berkeley, CA 94720-1900
ph: 510-643-4211
fax: 510-643-5257
email:[email protected]
=====================================
|
2,810 |
Subject: Re:
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/3894.
=====================================
Rosie--the energy breakout session in Los Angeles runs from 1:45 to 3:00 (I
think you might be getting your 2:15 info from the May 3rd agenda which is in
SanJose).
If Ken would like to attend the reception that night at 6:00,I would love to
have him do that. I also have a call in to Exelon what John Rowe's schedule
looks like later in the afternoon.
I will talk to Dasovich about who will be going to the Bryson meeting with
Ken.
Rosalee Fleming
04/27/2001 07:38 AM
To: Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Re:
Hi Sue -
I did receive a fax - thought it was just a clean copy, though, so I'd better
pay better attention to it. I will try to do a schedule for everyone today
of the meetings I've arranged. He is meeting with John Bryson, CEO of Edison
International 5/2 at 3:30.
Do I read the new schedule correctly that Ken will be through at 2:15 or does
he stay for the Media Availability with the Republican Governors? I think he
needs to leave for the meeting with Bryson at 3:00 as their office is in
Rosemead, CA. Does Steve attend this meeting?
Also, does Ken attend the Reception at 6:00?
Rosie
From: Susan M Landwehr on 04/27/2001 06:18 AM
To: Rosalee Fleming/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc: Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject:
Rosie---FYI---as we talked about yesterday, John Rowe, the co-CEO of Exelon
(which is the merger of PECO and Commonwealth Edison) will also be attending
the Republican Governors event in Los Angeles on May 2nd. Mr. Rowe is also
the current president of EEI--the national association that all of the
investor owned utilities belong to.
I would like to schedule 30-45 minutes for Ken to meet with him--primarily to
talk about FERC issues (open access).
I'll call you later today to see how Ken's schedule is shaping up. Did you
get the fax that I sent earlier in the week with the updated RGA
schedule/agenda?
=====================================
|
2,811 |
Subject: Deloitte Job Description
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/347.
=====================================
Here is the Deloitte job description. It was posted on HotJobs yesterday.
It is also posted on the Deloitte website.
Deloitte & Touche
Senior Associate
#JREED.CF.SR.SF
08/07/2001
San Francisco, CA
The Deloitte & Touche LLP National Corporate Finance practice, located in
offices throughout the United States, is looking for qualified candidates to
work with other team members on significant transactions involving privately
held businesses and middle market sized divisions/subsidiaries of large
public companies.
Description:
Analyze companies from a financial, operational, and industry perspective.
Build complex financial models utilizing Microsoft Excel. Research
industries, specific companies, and market data.
Interview top management and owners of client businesses. Write offering
memorandums, reports, and engagement letters. Create and deliver client
proposals to obtain new engagements.
Qualifications:
High performing MBA with a concentration in Finance or Accounting, who has
graduated or is graduating in December of 2000 or May of 2001. Professional
demeanor and strong communication skills, both written and oral. 2 - 5 years
previous experience employing analytical and communication skills.
Self-starter, with solid team skills and desire to contribute to a growing,
dynamic practice. Proficient in Windows computing environment, especially
Excel, Word, and PowerPoint.
Deloitte & Touche offers an environment that attracts superior
professionals, offers substantial opportunities and is committed to
supporting a work/life balance unique to the professional services arena.
Visit our website at http://www.us.deloitte.com
Deloitte & Touche is an equal opportunity employer. We recruit, employ,
train, compensate and promote without regard to race, religion, creed,
color, national origin, age, gender, sexual orientation, marital status,
disability, veteran status or any other basis protected by applicable
federal, state or local law.
=====================================
|
2,812 |
Subject: Database Tracking of Activities
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/823.
=====================================
The Government Affairs group is involved in diverse and complex activities. Tracking and quantifying these activities is important for several obvious reasons - to keep upper management apprised of our activities; to illustrate the value added and risk managed by our group; and to keep each other properly informed so that we can better coordinate our efforts.
Currently, these activities take place on an ad-hoc manual basis, which is time-consuming and inefficient. We have a tool already in place to track our activities - the Project Tracking database in Lotus Notes. Currently this application is used primarily for RCR's, but beginning November 1, 2001, the Government Affairs group will use this application to track all projects and efforts - replacing the need for manual updated spreadsheets and activity quantification "fire-drills". The Projects have several features to allow capture of sub-sets of information, including Updates, Risk, Origination and Valuation.
** Please note that this will become the only way that we'll gather this information. In other words, if you don't enter your data into Project Tracking, we won't know what you're doing! **( all other reports will be eliminated)
The current Lotus Notes application will be discontinued as of October 31,2001 and will be converted to a web-based product. You'll find the web-based version as easy or even easier to use than Lotus Notes. Additionally, conversion to a new database structure will allow for more versatile report extraction.
Before the conversion of the project data from Lotus Notes to Oracle, we need to do some data cleanup. Please expect a call in the next two weeks from Elizabeth Linnell, Bryan Gottfredson, or Darran Binns to schedule some time with you in person or on the phone regarding your current project list, additional projects to add, and a brief overview of the new system. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions and/or concerns.
=====================================
|
2,813 |
Subject: Philips Electronics & Silicon Valley Mfg. Group - 2002 Good
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/1113.
=====================================
Mike Falarski,PSVC and Carl Guardino,SVMG would like to invite you to
"Philips Electronics & Silicon Valley Mfg. Group - 2002 Good Government
Luncheon Series".
Note from Mike Falarski,PSVC and Carl Guardino,SVMG:
CARL GUARDINO, President & CEO, Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group and MIKE
FALARSKI, Director, Philips Electronics will be hosting the next Good
Government Luncheon Series (GGLS). The 10 year series was previously hosted
by Amdahl Corporation and is being re-launched in 2002. The first luncheon
will be held at the Philips Silicon Valley Center in Sunnyvale at noon,
Monday, January 14, 2002. The speaker will be Philip Angelides, Treasurer,
State of California.
We are deeply indebted to Carl Guardino for arranging for Mr. Angelides to
speak. As the State of California faces serious budget problems in the New
Year, Mr. Angelides is California's constitutional chief financial officer.
Hence, his comments on how our elected officials can work together to solve
the State's pressing problems will be very informative and of interest.
Since seating is limited, we strongly recommend you visit Evite website to
RSVP and for additional information about the event.
Click below to visit Evite for more information about the event and also to
RSVP.
http://www.evite.com/r?iid=BSWFMPFNZEIEETUFBVCG
This invitation was sent to you by Mike Falarski,PSVC and Carl Guardino,SVMG
using Evite. To remove yourself
from this guest list please contact us at [email protected]
This Evite Invite is covered by Evite's privacy policy*.
To view this privacy policy, click here:
http://www.evite.com/privacy
*********************************
*********************************
HAVING TROUBLE?
Perhaps your email program doesn't recognize the Web address as an active
link. To view your invitation, copy the entire URL and paste it into your
browser.
If you would like further assistance, please send
email to [email protected]
* Updated 03/15/01.
=====================================
|
2,814 |
Subject: Your VentureWire Professional Two-Week, No-Risk Trial
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/665.
=====================================
You've been selected to be part of a small group to
review our new premium service, VentureWire Professional,
the market-leading information service in private equity
and venture capital.
Unless you tell us otherwise, now, your no-risk,
no-obligation, two-week free trial of VentureWire
Professional will start on Monday.
http://alert.venturewire.com/no_thanks.asp?i=NQNKQLMILP
I'm sure you've noticed that our original service,
VentureWire, has become two separate services:
VentureWire Professional, which has all the deals,
every day, and all the exclusive details you've come
to depend on; and VentureWire Alert, a free, simplified
service for those with a general interest in private
capital markets.
VentureWire Professional is delivered to you every
morning via e-mail, and provides even more valuable
tools, analysis, and data via the Web site
http://professional.venturewire.com
The service also brings you the most comprehensive,
searchable deal database of its kind, with more than
24,000 financings and other industry events, and can
be searched and sorted the way you analyze the market
-- by company, sector, type of financing, industry,
and region.
To start the free trial on Monday to VentureWire
Professional, do nothing. Here are your other options:
Subscribe:
I'll sign up for VentureWire Professional at the
Charter Discount rate.
http://professional.venturewire.com/splash.asp
No Thanks:
I'll stay with my free VentureWire Alert subscription.
Don't send me the free trial to VentureWire Pro at
this time.
http://alert.venturewire.com/no_thanks.asp?i=NQNKQLMILP
During your trial, we'll be sending you a few notes to
explain some of the most useful features and benefits of
VentureWire Professional. Click the link if you're
interested in learning more about our significant
discounts for multiple subscriptions.
http://professional.venturewire.com/groupsub.asp
I look forward to having you as a subscriber.
Thank You,
Brian O'Connell
Publisher
=====================================
|
2,815 |
Subject: RE: Cal Journal Ad #2
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8124.
=====================================
I think the sentence that say "immediately drive down the wholesale-cost of
power" needs to be reworked. It should change the blended retail rate
downward, but I'd expect the spot market--particularly this summer's--to be
thinner & more volatile. ABB
Andrew B. Brown
Ellison, Schneider & Harris, LLP
2015 H Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 447-2166
Fax: (916) 447-3512
mailto:[email protected]
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication and any accompanying document(s)
are confidential and privileged. They are intended for the sole use of the
addressee. If you receive this transmission in error, you are advised that
any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in
reliance upon the communication is strictly prohibited. Moreover, any such
inadvertent disclosure shall not compromise or waive the attorney-client
privilege as to this communication or otherwise. If you have received this
communication in error, please contact the sender at the internet address
indicated or by telephone at (916)447-2166. Thank you.
-----Original Message-----
From: Katie Kaplan [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2001 6:37 PM
To: Tom Ross; Sue Mara; Stephanie-Newell; Rob Lamkin; Richard Hyde;
Pigott Jack; Paula Hall-Collins; Norton Kelli; McNally Ray; Marty
Wilson; Lynn Lednicky; Kristin Vellandi; kent Palmerton; Katie Kaplan;
Kassandra Gough; Karen Edson; Julee Malinowski-Ball; John Stout; Joe
Ronan; Jeff Dasovich; Jean Munoz; Jan Smutny-Jones; Greg Blue; Curtis
Kebler; Bob Weisenmiller; Baker Carolyn; B Brown Andy; Andy Brown;
Douglas Kerner; John Larrea
Cc: Carol H Hudson; Steven Kelly
Subject: FW: Cal Journal Ad #2
Importance: High
Here is the second Cal Journal ad. Please take a look and get any comments
back to me by 3:00 tomorrow (Thursday January 4th). Please let me know if
you can't open it.
Thanks
Katie Kaplan
Manager of State Policy Affairs
Independent Energy Producers Association
(916) 448-9499
=====================================
|
2,816 |
Subject: RE: Meetings w/Consumer Groups
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', 'James; Guerrero', 'Janel; Kaufman', 'Paul; Shapiro', 'Richard;', 'Steffes']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/3535.
=====================================
Where are you?
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Tue 5/8/2001 6:51 PM
To: Denne, Karen
Cc: Steffes, James; Guerrero, Janel; Kaufman, Paul; Shapiro, Richard;
McCubbin, Sandra; Mara, Susan; Tribolet, Michael; [email protected]; Landwehr,
Susan
Subject: Meetings w/Consumer Groups
Greetings:
Steve Kean and I met today with Jack Stewart, Pres. of the California
Manufacturer's and Technology Ass. and Alan Zaremberg, CEO of the California
Chamber of Commerce.
Jack Stewart was happy to hear about our efforts and is generally
supportive--particularly regarding direct access--but wants more information
regarding the core/noncore proposal. We have a meeting set up for Thursday
morning at 8 AM in the SF office to discuss it further. Stewart will bring
Keith McCrea, long-time lawyer for CMA to the meeting on Thursday.
Zaremberg was extremely happy to hear about our efforts and the overall
package, and was much more receptive to the core/noncore proposal. Though
he, too, would like more details. Turns out the he and Bill Hauck--former
Wilson administration official and now head of the California Business
Roundtable---have been walking the halls of the capital urging the same thing
we've been urging, i.e., D's and R's need to get together (read "grow up")
and do a comprehensive deal.
Steve and I had an impromptu meeting with Hauck, and then I followed up with
him in the afternoon---he, too, is very supportive.
We stressed how important it is for business leaders to aggresively support
and pitch:
1) the idea that both sides of the aisle, and the governor, need to resolve
this now, and
2) the framework for a comprehensive solution along the lines that we've
described.
They agree, and while we have a good bit of additional work to due before
they are vociferous advocates for the core/noncore proposal, they certainly
didn't reject the idea.
Will report back on the Thursday follow-up with CMTA.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
2,817 |
Subject: Fwd: DJ Calif Officials Look Into Merging Cal-ISO And CalPX
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/1616.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES on 09/21/2000 01:13 PM -----
"Ronald Carroll" <[email protected]>
09/21/2000 08:53 AM
To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Fwd: DJ Calif Officials Look Into Merging Cal-ISO And CalPX
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 08:10:21 -0500
From: "Tracey Bradley" <[email protected]>
To: "Deanna King" <[email protected]>, "Paul Fox" <[email protected]>,
"Ronald Carroll" <[email protected]>
Subject: DJ Calif Officials Look Into Merging Cal-ISO And CalPX
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
DJ Calif Officials Look Into Merging Cal-ISO And CalPX
Copyright , 2000 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
LOS ANGELES (Dow Jones)--California state officials are studying the
possibility of merging the state's Independent System Operator with the
California Power Exchange.
The state auditor's office met Monday with the ISO to look into the
ISO's operations and its relationship with the CalPX, according to documents
obtained by Dow Jones Newswires.
The audit was requested by state senator Steve Peace, D-El Cajon, who
believes a merger between the ISO and the CalPX would make California's
electricity market more competitive, said Jan Smutny-Jones, chairman of the
ISO Board of Governors.
The ISO controls 75% of the state's electricity grid and real-time
electricity market. The CalPX is the spot market where electricity is bought
and sold in the state.
The ISO will meet again with the auditor's office early next week. The
audit will be complete by spring, said state auditor Mary Noble.
By Jessica Berthold, Dow Jones Newswires; 323-658-3761
mailto:[email protected]
(END) Dow Jones Newswires 20-09-00
1603GMT
=====================================
|
2,818 |
Subject: CPUC DRAFT DECISIONS RELEASED --Rate design for 3 cent Rate
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/12315.
=====================================
* from Govt Affairs
* DA customers are exempt from both plans
---------------------- Forwarded by Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES on 05/10/2001
05:59 PM ---------------------------
Susan J Mara@ENRON
05/10/2001 04:23 PM
Apologies to those who already got this from Harry.
Sue Mara
Enron Corp.
Tel: (415) 782-7802
Fax:(415) 782-7854
----- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/NA/Enron on 05/10/2001 02:20 PM -----
Harry Kingerski
05/10/2001 12:31 PM
CORRECTION - last line, Monday, May 14
Harry Kingerski
05/10/2001 01:16 PM
2 proposed decisions were released last night by the California PUC - one by
the Judge and one by Chairman Lynch.
Direct access customers are exempt from the surcharge.
Each customer class is allocated an equal 3 cents, plus an amount to cover
the shortfall from having residential usage up to 130% of baseline exempt
from the surcharge (as required by law). Each decision allocates a
substantial portion of the subsidy to non-residential classes, although Lynch
does this to a lesser extent
The new rates become effective June 1, and the shortfall from the actual
effective date of the increase, March 27, through June 1 will be amortized
over 12 months.
Residential rate design - 5 tiers will be put in place; the 5th tier (300+%
of baseline) gets a 35 cent per kwh rate
Non-residential rate design - recommendations to put all of the increase into
summer on-peak were rejected. About 60% of increase put into summer.
Real Time Pricing was endorsed - will further explore in workshops starting
later in May. Voluntary program will be started.
In a vindictive outlash, Lynch decision requires federal facilities to pay
market prices under new schedules to be developed by the utilities
Judge's decision seems to require surcharge to show up as a separate line
item; Lynch's decision requires that it not be shown separately
Oral argument occurs Friday and final decision is expected to be voted out
Monday, June 14.
=====================================
|
2,819 |
Subject: Re:
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/1167.
=====================================
Thanks, Sue. Agreed.
Also, I met today with Bowen & Co. re: interconnection. We have some
decisions to make on that front, too, which will also require a bit of
discussion.
Tracy, I'm sure that Scott's in Istanbul and Donald's in Marrakesh. Could
you try to track those two broadband cowboys down and see if we can set up a
conference call for next Wedneday (hopefully, that's ample lead time)?
Finally, the draft final tariff (in strike-out-underline form) will be ready
for review by COB Friday. I'll email it around. Hope all is well with all.
Best,
Jeff
From: Sue Nord@ENRON on 09/06/2000 12:35 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES
cc: Donald Lassere/NA/Enron@ENRON, Scott Bolton/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications@EES, Tracy Cooper/Enron Communications@ENRON COMMUNICATIONS
Subject: Re:
Hi Jeff,
Here are my votes:
If we have the documents in hand, great.
If we don't have them in hand, asking Bowen to produce samples probably would
do quite a bit to speed the process. I assume he probably has a good idea
of what they should look like.
A short call to be sure we're all on the same page is a good idea.
Best regards,
Sue
Jeff Dasovich@EES
09/05/2000 04:48 PM
To: Donald Lassere/NA/Enron@Enron, Scott Bolton/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Scott Bolton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Sue
Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Tracy Cooper/Enron Communications@ENRON
COMMUNICATIONS@ENRON
cc:
Subject:
Greetings:
As part of our final tariff filing, we need to submit "sample" forms for
things like a Disconnect Notice, Sample Bill and New Service Orders.? Do we
have any? Have we had to file any elsewhere? If not, do we want Bowen & Co.
to "create" some for us to review, or do we prefer to find the right folks
internal to EBS and create them internally? Make sense to arrange a 15-30
minute call to discuss how to execute? All opinions, views, etc. are
encouraged and welcome.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
2,820 |
Subject: FW: GCIM/CPIM
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/1427.
=====================================
Please add Alan to all of your E-mails about California.
---------------------- Forwarded by Mary Hain/HOU/ECT on 11/06/2000 09:05 AM
---------------------------
From: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON on 11/04/2000 05:19 PM CST
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich@ENRON
To: Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Mona L
Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Mary Hain/HOU/ECT@ECT,
Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, [email protected], Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: FW: GCIM/CPIM
FYI. How to remedy the "PX only" flaw in California's market has been on the
table for some time. I've felt for some time that the gas model offers a
good point of departure for coming up with a more rationale alternative to
the current framework.
As mentioned in a previous note, I made that point at the California Energy
Market conference last week. The EOB's chief economic consultant, who also
spoke at the conference, was intrigued by my comments and has asked me to go
up to Sacramento sometime in the next week or two to discuss it--and other
options--with him.
My understanding is that the idea coincidentally got some attention at the
Wright meeting last week. With all of that in mind, I wanted to pass on a
very brief summary of the gas procurement mechanisms currently in place for
PG&E and SoCalGas that I asked Mike Day's shop to draft up last month. It
might come in handy as prep for the call on Monday to discuss the Wright
meeting.
Best,
Jeff
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 11/04/2000 05:11 PM -----
MBD <[email protected]>
10/04/2000 06:06 PM
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: FW: GCIM/CPIM
Had to resend this
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MBD
> Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2000 4:03 PM
> To: 'Jeff Dasovich Enron SF'
> Subject: GCIM/CPIM
>
> Here is a short "piece" (not a memorandum) describing the gas
> procurement indexes.
>
> <<X17222.DOC>>
- X17222.DOC
=====================================
|
2,821 |
Subject: Table of FERC Issues & Proceedings
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/3235.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Bernadette Hawkins/Corp/Enron on 05/17/2001 12:38 PM -----
Ray Alvarez
05/17/2001 10:35 AM
To: Steve Walton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Alan
Comnes/PDX/ECT@ECT, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Rebecca W
Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Donna Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected], Phillip K
Allen/HOU/ECT@ECT, Linda J Noske/HOU/ECT@ECT, Dave Perrino/SF/ECT@ECT, Don
Black/HOU/EES@EES, Robert Frank/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Bernadette Hawkins/Corp/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Re: Western Wholesale Activities - Gas & Power Conf. Call
Privileged & Confidential Communication
Attorney-Client Communication and Attorney Work Product Privileges Asserted
PLEASE MARK YOUR CALENDAR
Date: Every Thursday
Time: 1:00 pm Pacific, 3:00 pm Central, and 4:00 pm Eastern time,
Number: 1-888-271-0949
Host Code: 661877 (for Ray only)
Participant Code: 936022 (for everyone else)
The table of the on-going FERC issues and proceedings is being updated for
use on today's conference call, and will be distributed to the group by
Bernadette Hawkins. It is available to all team members on the O drive.
Please feel free to revise/add to/ update this table as appropriate.
Proposed agenda for this afternoon:
Comment opportunity on ISO tariff compliance filing ,in FERC market
monitoring and mitigation proceeding, EL00-95-12. (item 9f)
Rehearing of FERC market monitoring and mitigation order in EL00-95-12 (item
9d)
Underscheduling penalty- will it be applied or waived? (FERC market
monitoring and mitigation order in EL00-95-12)
ISO de-rating of ATC complaint- status (item 20)
Status item 22
ISO governance comment opportunities (item 32)
FERC staff technical conference on inter- and intrastate gas pipeline
capacity CA- update (item 31)
Please feel free to communicate to the group any additional agenda items you
may have.
=====================================
|
2,822 |
Subject: Utilities, Electric: Deregulation: PG&E moves to end rate freeze by
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', "nicholas.o'[email protected]", '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/809.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Miyung Buster/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT on 10/04/2000 12:18 PM
-----
[email protected]
09/28/2000 01:19 PM
Please respond to nobody
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Utilities, Electric: Deregulation: PG&E moves to end rate freeze by
2002
PGOmoves to end rate freeze by 2002
?
09/25/2000
The Energy Report
(c) Copyright 2000 Pasha Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) plans to raise additional capital to offset
the mounting costs of wholesale energy in the California market and complete
the divestiture of its generation assets, allowing it to charge its retail
customers market rates, according to filings the company has made at the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
In an 8-K filing, PGOCorp. told the SEC that its utility subsidiary may issue
long-term debt to finance the high costs of wholesale electricity that
plagued California's deregulated market this summer. In addition, PGOfiled an
application with the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) on Sept. 8
requesting the authority to raise an additional $1.4 billion in short-term
financing, it told the SEC. This would be in addition to $1.7 billion in
short-term financing that the PUC has allowed PGOto raise, as well as an
existing $1 billion revolving credit facility the company has used to support
commercial paper issuance.
Folder Name: Utilities, Electric: Deregulation
Relevance Score on Scale of 100: 97
______________________________________________________________________
To review or revise your folder, visit Dow Jones CustomClipsor contact Dow
Jones Customer Service by e-mail at [email protected] by phone
at 800-369-7466. (Outside the U.S. and Canada, call 609-452-1511 or contact
your local sales representative.)
______________________________________________________________________
Copyright (c) 2000 Dow Jones &Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
=====================================
|
2,823 |
Subject: RE:
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/1397.
=====================================
Not a problem, Jimmie. About this week's case. Been travelling. I'm back.
Kim: in your absence on Monday, we talked a little about how to proceed on
the next case. How's this sound: everyone takes a question. If the answer
to one question depends on the answer to another, the folks doing those
questions should get together and discuss. Everyone should distribute to the
team a draft of the answer to the question by tomorrow (Thursday) night.
Then folks could look at the responses, make suggestions, comments, etc. and
distribute via email by Noon on Saturday. I'll then compile in a form that
we can submit on Monday. Thoughts?
I have randomly selected questions: here are the results. Jeff--#3;
Jimmie--#1; Kim--#2; Dylan--#4. If folks are comfortable with this
distribution, let me know.
Best,
Jeff
"Jackson, James (JCJA)" <[email protected]> on 09/13/2000 01:58:27 PM
To: "'Dylan Windham'" <[email protected]>, [email protected],
[email protected]
cc: [email protected]
Subject: RE:
Team
My Haas e-mail is forwarded to my work e-mail. Last week I was on vacation
and did not see any of these e-mails. I worked all 4 questions in what
turned out to be a parallel path (I will say your compiled answers were a
lot better than mine). Anyway, please add my home e-mail address
"[email protected]" (Thats a zero next to the 2) in addition to my hass email
address. This will give me access to the data regardless of where I'm at.
This is particularly important on weekends. Sorry I let you down on the
first case.
Jimmy
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dylan Windham [SMTP:[email protected]]
> Sent: September 11, 2000 7:44 AM
> To: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject:
>
>
>
> Hello gang,
>
> Here is the latest version with Kimberly's changes. Review it and send me
> any changes.
>
> --Dylan
> << File: E220 Northrop Casewrite up.doc >>
=====================================
|
2,824 |
Subject: GA II Feb. 7 Meeting: Resent
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8723.
=====================================
CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT DOCUMENT
PER CPUC RULE 51
All Parties -
We are re-sending this message from yesterday, regarding the February 7
meeting. I apparently did something wrong with the addressing, and many of
the messages were "returned to sender."
I am re-sending it, just to be sure that everyone receives notice of the
February 7 meeting.
Thank you.
Frank Lindh
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
(415) 973-2776
CONFIDENTIAL SETTLEMENT DOCUMENT
PER CPUC RULE 51
INTERESTED PARTIES:
Based on discussions with a number of parties, we have determined that there
is general support for a one-day informational Gas Accord II Workshop on
Wednesday, February 7, 2001.
Accordingly, PG&E will host an informational meeting on February 7, in San
Francisco. We have shortened the workshop, from two days to one very full
day, and will focus on the major issues and proposals. Attached is our
suggested agenda with topics listed by their associated section in our
December 2000 comprehensive Settlement Proposal.
The February 7 Workshop will start at 9:00 a.m. and end around 5:00 p.m. We
will be meeting at PG&E headquarters, in Conference Room 300, 77 Beale
Street, San Francisco. We will not be providing lunch at this workshop due
to spending restrictions. However, we hope to provide coffee and water.
At this point, we also would request that all parties to reserve February 21
and 22, 2001, on their calendars, for the next workshop and feedback
discussion on PG&E's December 2000 Settlement Proposal.
We look forward to meeting with those of you who can attend on February 7.
Also, we continue to be available at any Party's request to meet
individually to go over the December Settlement Proposal in detail. Please
feel free to contact either of us, and we can make the necessary
arrangements.
Frank Lindh Ray Williams
415-973-2776 415-973-3634
[email protected] [email protected]
<<Agenda 2-7-01 GA II Workshop.doc>>
- Agenda 2-7-01 GA II Workshop.doc
=====================================
|
2,825 |
Subject: California Settlement
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/distributed_generation/19.
=====================================
I spoke with John Nimmons regarding the subject settlement discussions on
Tuesday. He shared with me his view on several matters.
1. He's not sure what SCE is up to. He believes they will not move off of
their position of DG ownership however convoluted it may be (basically they
want to keep the "option open" of customer-side DG ownership). He also
believes they most likely will not participate in further discussions. He
has a call into SCE to see if he can come to some understanding on where they
stand. (He also said they indicated they are most likely going to drop out
of DPCA).
2. John believes PG&E was responding to the Commission's position regrading
DG ownership as outined in the Cmmisson's rule that states the Commission has
not found any compelling reason to prevent ownership of DG bu UDC's. He
thinks they are not interested in customer-side DG as a business but only as
an option to site mobile DG under emergency conditions. He also believes
that this issue is not a showstopper for them and they would most likely give
it up (DG ownership) if others such as DPCA and Enron would support a PBR
that gave them the right incentives.
3. Next Monday's meeting will focus on the distribution only wheeling tariff
issue (minutes of the last meeting and an agenda for Monday's meeting should
be out today). He thinks this will be the most contentious issue of all
based on his reading of the utilities' testimony. The utilities' postitions
are that you can't separate distribution from transmission when dealing with
the grid since their is much interdepence.
I think we should continue to participate in these meetings. I'm planning
on participating by phone. I don't expect SCE to participate but if we
change PGE's ownership position we would have 2 of the 3 utilities with us
which strengthens our position. It will also be interesting to see what the
utilities have to say regarding distribution only tariffs. ANy thoughts?
=====================================
|
2,826 |
Subject: RE: Proposal AREM response to UDC Joint Filing - Implementation o f
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]; [email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/2092.
=====================================
how about 4:00 p.m. conference call?
-----Original Message-----
From: Rebecca Schlanert [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 2:33 PM
To: '[email protected]'; [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: RE: Proposal AREM response to UDC Joint Filing - Implementation
o f Su spension DA
I would be open to this as well.
Rebecca
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [SMTP:[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 11:21 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: Proposal AREM response to UDC Joint Filing - Implementation
> of Su spension DA
>
> I have had an opportunity to talk to most of you regarding the attached
> proposal. I apologize I ran out of time yesterday and didn't catch
> everyone.
>
> NWE would like to propose a slightly different take on our AREM filing
> having had a chance to think more about it. I wanted to run it by
> everyone
> to get your thoughts before submitting a redline. If you feel this
> warrants
> a conference call I will gladly set one up for today. Time is of the
> essence and would appreciate your feedback as soon as possible. If we all
> agree, I would like to get the re-write with everyone's blessing to Dan by
> tomorrow at 8:00 am. or sooner.
> <<arm-puc-plan.doc>>
> Proposal Benefits
>
> 1. We look more reasonable and agree to much of what UDCs are
> proposing.
> 2. Accommodates most, if not all, of ESP and customer concerns.
> 3. Strong argument for avoiding any contract review. Our
> verification proposal could backfire; PUC could accept our approach, but
> add
> details which goes toward ESPs submitting contracts to the PUC for review
> and validation
> Thank you,
> Janie Mollon
> Manager, Legislative and Regulatory Affairs
> Office: 602-629-7758
> FAX: 602-629-7772
> Mobile: 602-625-3892
> << File: arm-puc-plan.doc >>
=====================================
|
2,827 |
Subject: PG&E utility gives Calpine debt priority status.
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/880.
=====================================
USA: UPDATE 1-PG&E utility gives Calpine debt priority status.
07/06/2001
Reuters English News Service
(C) Reuters Limited 2001.
(changes 1st paragraph, adds details, company statement)
SAN JOSE, Calif., July 6 (Reuters) - Independent power generator Calpine Corp. said on Friday that its contracts with Pacific Gas and Electric Co. will be altered, ensuring that Calpine will continue to supply power to the bankrupt California utility and that it will get paid more than $250 million for power already sold.
Calpine stocks rose more than 14 percent, or more than $5, to $43 after the announcement.
As part of the contract modification, the $267 million, with interest, that the utility, a unit of PG&E Corp , owes Calpine in past due receivables under the contracts, will be elevated to "administrative priority status," a claim which is paid before any other general unsecured creditors.
Calpine will get the money, in a lump sum, as soon as PG&E has a confirmed reorganization plan, which can take as long as four to six months from now, Calpine said.
The move is also a step in the process of untangling California's energy crisis, which stemmed from a flawed deregulation plan that has hit the state with a series of rolling blackouts.
Under the agreement, Calpine will continue to receive its contractual capacity payments, but it has also set up a fixed rate contract for the next five years of about 5.37 cents per kilowatt-hour.
The contracts are known as qualifying facility contracts because Calpine's power plants are qualifying facilities. These types of facilities represent more than 20 percent of the state's power supply and sell power generated from renewable energy sources to the regulated utilities.
"Calpine is the first power company to modify its QF contract with PG&E to ensure that Northern California consumers will continue to benefit from these affordable and reliable energy resources," Calpine senior vice president James Macias said in a statement.
=====================================
|
2,828 |
Subject: Re: Talking points on gas in CA
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/13011.
=====================================
Jennifer:
I think that Jeff (from Transwestern) should take a look and provide any
comments that he might have. Jeff, feel free to send any comments directly
to Jennifer (and copy me, too, since I'm always interested in your
comments). Thanks.
Best,
Jeff
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 05/23/2001 05:07 PM -----
Rebecca W Cantrell@ECT
05/23/2001 03:08 PM
To: Jennifer Thome/NA/Enron@ENRON
cc: Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Ban
Sharma/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ray
Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Nancy Bagot/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Janel
Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Stephanie Miller/Enron@EnronXGate, Mary
Schoen/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, Donna
Fulton/Corp/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Re: Talking points on gas in CA
A few comments. Also, I reorganized the format extensively for what I
thought was a better flow. I didn't mark the changes, because it got too
confusing.
You can incorporate Christi's revisions with mine. I was just about through
when I got her message, so I didn't try to start over. Please call me at
X.35840 if you have any questions.
Jennifer Thome@ENRON
05/23/2001 08:13 AM
To: Rebecca W Cantrell/HOU/ECT@ECT, Christi L Nicolay/HOU/ECT@ECT
cc: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Ban
Sharma/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe
Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Ray Alvarez/NA/Enron@ENRON, Nancy
Bagot/OTS/Enron@ENRON, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron
Subject: Talking points on gas in CA
Becky and Christi:
Attached are revised talking points on natural gas in CA. I have made
revisions to reflect our discussion yesterday (e.g., no price caps, basis
differential is not explained by transportation costs, etc.).
As discussed, I hope to get input from the gas fundamentals group tomorrow
and finalize this document by Friday.
I welcome your feedback.
Jennifer
5-3550
=====================================
|
2,829 |
Subject: (BN ) Argentina's Buenos Aires Province, Azurix Set Pact, P
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5621.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Sharonda Stephens/Corp/Enron on 01/26/2001 07:41 AM -----
"ANN SCHMIDT, ENRON CORP." <[email protected]>
01/26/2001 07:16 AM
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: (BN ) Argentina's Buenos Aires Province, Azurix Set Pact, P
enron story
Argentina's Buenos Aires Province, Azurix Set Pact, Paper Says
1/26/1 7:7 (New York)
Buenos Aires, Jan. 26 (Bloomberg) -- Argentina's Buenos Aires
province will likely sign an accord with water company Azurix
Corp., a unit of the world's largest energy trader, Enron Corp.,
in the next week, newspaper El Cronista reported, citing company
and government officials.
The agreement will lay out a number of projects Azurix will
complete in the next year to improve drinking water services in
the province. The improvements will cost $30 million to $40
million, Eduardo Sicaro, undersecretary of public services for
Buenos Aires province, told the paper.
The agreement would bring to a close an earlier conflict in
which Buenos Aires Gov. Carlos Ruckauf said the province might try
to revoke Azurix's contract for poor service. Ruckauf said he
would convene special legislative sessions to consider revoking
the company's contract.
Houston-based Azurix has invested $94 million of the $439
million it promised to win a 30-year water concession with
Argentina's most populous province. Residents of Bahia Blanca, a
port and petrochemical center, complained in May of foul smelling
water.
(El Cronista, 1/26, p. 12) {ELCR <GO>}
--Athena Jones in Buenos Aires (5411) 4321-7738 or
[email protected] through the New York newsroom at (212) 318-
2300/rhj
Story illustration: To chart Azurix's share price since its sale
of stock, see {AZX US <Equity> GP W <GO>}.
Company news:
ENE US <Equity>
AZX US <Equity>
1010Z AR <Equity>
NI codes:
NI US
NI COS
NI TX
NI NRG
NI PIP
NI CMD
NI UTI
NI GAS
NI WATER
NI ARGENT
NI ORDER
NI GOV
NI POL
NI SUM
-0- (BN ) Jan/26/2001 12:07 GMT
=====================================
|
2,830 |
Subject: Re: AHP Case
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/3378.
=====================================
Gents:
Here it is. Please insert directly any proposed edits using
strike-out-underline. Need them no later than 10 AM tomorrow in order to
have incorporated and ready to go for class tomorrow. Dylan, just go ahead
and put your operating cash flow nos. in (and any other changes you have) and
send on back. All: recall that we are limited to 4 pages of text.
Best,
Jeff
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
02/25/2001 11:57 AM
To: Dylan Windham <[email protected]>
cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: AHP Case
Greetings:
I'm going to finish this up in the next few hours and send out. Dylan, go
ahead and calculate using operating cash rather than income and send along
and I'll incorporate. I'll try to work Jimmy's stuff in a bit, too.
Best,
Jeff
Dylan Windham <[email protected]>
02/22/2001 11:48 PM
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected]
cc:
Subject: AHP Case
Jeff:
I just got done ready your memo. I really liked what you have done. I did
not want to make any direct changes, but rather just pose a few questions
for discussion.
First, when I calculated how long it would take to purchase the shares
without debt I did use the net income number. It might be better to change
them to the operating cash flow number. If you guys would like, I can
recalculate them.
I agree that having higher amounts of debt will fend off take overs.
Are we planing to calculate the amount the tax shield will increase the
value of the company. If we assume that the debt will be held in
perpetuity, we can directly compute the amount. Let me know and I can run
the numbers.
Also, Jimmy when you do the color graphs you want to do. Try some MM pie
charts (just kidding)
Good job,
Let me know what I can do to help.
Dylan
=====================================
|
2,831 |
Subject: Re: REVISED Merged Leg Document
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/689.
=====================================
Folks:
Here are my edits. For simplicity, I accepted all the other changes and put mine in strike-out-underline.
They are confined to the direct access section, and to the provisions regarding "spot market service" in particular. Based on our negotiations, I think it's accurate to state that spot market service was never discussed as "an option to elect." Instead, the language in the agreement states that it is a "backstop," in the event that on any given day a customer's ESP doesn't show up with the power. In effect, it retains the utility's duty to serve, like the gas side, but does not expose the utility to any risk of cost recovery for the spot service provided. I've also added provisions which obligate the utility to provide spot market service in the event that at the outset of the program (i.e., the transition date), the customer, for whatever reason fails to elect Term Service or Direct Access Service. In both cases, the spot services lasts for a maximum of 30 days, after which the customer must choose Term or Direct Access Service.
Please take a look at the language. While I haven't put any "stakes in the ground" up till now, I feel strongly about these changes (for reasons I'm happy to discuss), and if folks have issues with incorporating it into the document, I'd request that we have a very brief call to discuss. I believe that the language as proposed captures my conversation with Dorothy.
In addition, I've also taken a stab at language requested by Delainey, i.e., "what to do about DA in the interm?" There may be better ways to craft the language, but I took a shot nonetheless.
Finally, I'm assuming, based on yesterday's call, that, by delivering this document to the Speaker today, no one is giving their approval, support, or anything else for each and every provision. I'm not prepared to, and cannot, do that at this time.
Thanks again to all for all the effort (and to Dorothy for her patience in hearing me out earlier).
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
2,832 |
Subject: Proposed Rule Changes: STATIONARY INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINES
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/28098.
=====================================
On 6/20/01, I attended a Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
hearing regarding stationary internal combustion engines (including Diesel
Standby Generators).
The proposed regulation was "framed" in the following context:
BAAQMD is the only district in CA not now requiring permits for standby
engines 3-5k units are estimated in Bay Area, Avg. 350hp
While the previous hearings (5/11) had promised the final draft by 5/20/01,
the newest revisions were posted on Tuesday (6/19). Evidently there were
last minute changes and a conclusion that the appropriate California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) document needs changes. They may have
another workshop, possibly before the August 1st meeting, although it wasn't
clear if they can get the proper notices and input prior to that time.
The item was continued - Possible Final Action To Be Taken on August 1,
2001, although it may be continued again.
The new revisions are attached:
<<r0908dr5.pdf>> <<r0201dr6.pdf>>
They can be fount at: http://www.baaqmd.gov/ruledev/reg-pmt/r0201ph1.htm
MY CONCLUSIONS AND QUESTIONS/CONCERNS THAT REMAIN
* It is doubtful that any rule change would be approved in time to provide
relief for this summer (2001).
* We remain under the old rule exemption for fixed standby generators that
has a limit of 200 hours per year emergency runtime and 100 hours testing
maximum.
* In Regulation 2, Rule 1 - 114.2 - 2.3 states exemption for "Portable
internal combustion engines and standby internal combustion engines which
are at a location for less than 72 consecutive hours". Does this mean the
previous guideline of BAAQMD not regulating mobile sources unless in place a
year is now just 72 hours?
I am reviewing the proposed changes further and plan to participate in
future workshops and the hearing on August 1, 2001.
...Steve
Stephen Motzko, CSP
Solectron Corporate EHS Manager
Phone: 510-661-3979
Fax: 510-661-3992
email: [email protected]
- r0908dr5.pdf
- r0201dr6.pdf
=====================================
|
2,833 |
Subject: RE: NYT Article about Ex Commissioner Fessler
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/216.
=====================================
Sorry, I got worked up and my blood boiling.
Jessie J. Knight Jr.
President & CEO
San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2000 4:24 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: NYT Article about Ex Commissioner Fessler
glad to hear that you're back, generalissimo. we will follow you up the
hill.
seriously, though, you will start seeing/hearing from us quite soon., e.g.,
skilling's at the national press club this thursday.
Jessie Knight <[email protected]> on 09/05/2000 06:04:33 PM
To: "'Jeff Dasovich'" <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: RE: NYT Article about Ex Commissioner Fessler
Jeff,
I chuckled to read about Dan being the center of Dante's Inferno core,
but quickly was overcome more by disdain of the simpleton Mr. Palast's
wretched journalistic license. Why don't you get Skillings, Michaels,
McCrae, Levin et al to answer all the preposterous revisionist pablum that
is saturating the marketplace as we speak? Is there or was there only one
Jessie Knight who lived that 6-year hell to have crap like this spread
about? Where are all the direct access/bilateral
contract/anti-poolco/anti-Hogan/anti-Harvard Electricity Group/anti-command
& control proponents? It is sad for me to hear the deafening silence out
of
a community that I helped lead to battle and to leave and see that most
have
abandoned the cause to leave it the world to the government infidels that
want to and will certainly re-create the Gulag.
Jessie J. Knight Jr.
President & CEO
San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Dasovich [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2000 3:01 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: NYT Article about Ex Commissioner Fessler
---------------------- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES on 09/05/2000
05:00 PM
---------------------------
(See attached file: State Deregulates.doc)
=====================================
|
2,834 |
Subject: SCE
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/legislation/8.
=====================================
This is what transpired on yesterday's conference call regarding
Edison's legislative proposal:
Participants: NEV, Green Mountain, Utility.com, TURN, Reliant, Don
Fields
Rick Counnihan met with Edison and John White to discuss the proposal.
Edison discussed four issues which they would like to link to the public
goods charge extension which I have listed below. These issues differ
from the original issues which Edison said we all took out of context.
According to Rick, John didn=01,t say much other than he wants to establish
emission standards for DG.
Public Goods Extension =01) Edison would like to extend the charge but
change how money is allocated.
Maintain Wire Franchise =01) Edison would like to own, operate and plan the
distribution system. They believe there should be charges associated
with this, perhaps non-bypassable, but that that should be worked out by
the CPUC. They also indicated that the utilities should no longer own
DG systems.
Procurement Charges =01) Edison would like to procure energy wholesale from
a variety of sources, including the PX, and distribute with no mark-up
to their customers.
Revenue Cycle Services =01) Edison believes the metering/billing area is
too contentious and they will not address it. This does not mean the
unions won=01,t address it in exchange for supporting the public goods
extension which they oppose.
Edison said PG&E may want help with the irrigation districts who are
encroaching on their distribution system in exchange for support. No
word on Sempra. Edison was also confident that they could kill an
extension because so many people have problems with it including Rod
Wright
and the unions.
With respect to the coalition, it was agreed that each entity would
continue to take meetings and discuss the issue from their prospective.
We=01,d like to do so with John=01,s supprt but Rick will have to check wit=
h
him first. We plan on having another conference call on Monday, March
13 at 4pm.
Scott Govenar
=====================================
|
2,835 |
Subject: Full Panel Hearing I99-07-003
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', 'Glen; Harris', 'Jeff; Hass', 'Dasovich', '[email protected]', 'Steven; [email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/12753.
=====================================
-----Original Message-----
From: "Halligan, Julie" <[email protected]>@ENRON
[mailto:IMCEANOTES-+22Halligan+2C+20Julie+22+20+3Cjmh+40cpuc+2Eca+2Egov+3E+40E
[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 5:01 PM
To: Fawcett, Jeffery
Subject: RE: Full Panel Hearing I99-07-003
Thank you for the notice, I will circulate an agenda on Monday, May 21st.
-----Original Message-----
[Fawcett, Jeffery]
From: Fawcett, Jeffery [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2001 1:58 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Dasovich, Jeff; Hass, Glen; Harris, Steven; [email protected]
Subject: Full Panel Hearing I99-07-003
Ms. Halligan,
Mr. Mark Baldwin with Interstate Gas Services will be representing
Transwestern Pipeline Company during Tuesday's hearing. Transwestern is
a party of record in this proceeding. Mr. Baldwin is Transwestern's
California consultant, and is well versed in state regulatory matters
and, in particular, this docket. On behalf of Transwestern, Mr. Baldwin
will address the following issues:
1. The PD in light of recent events in both the natural gas and
electricity markets in California.
2 A comparison of certain features of the PD and the alternative
settlement (Comprehensive Settlement) supported by SoCalGas Company and
the majority of the stakeholders, including Transwestern Pipeline.
3. The relationship between the CPUC's decision in this proceeding and
the ongoing investigation of the sufficiency of infrastructure for both
natural gas and electricity.
My understanding is that the CPUC prefers the speakers be brief. With
your permission, Mr. Baldwin's remarks will be limited to no more than 5
minutes, with an opportunity for questions to follow.
Please let me know if there are any other guidelines the CPUC would like
parties to follow in this proceeding. Also, please let me know if there
are any questions that I can answer for you.
Jeffery C. Fawcett
Transwestern Pipeline Company
713-853-1521
[email protected]
=====================================
|
2,836 |
Subject: RE: Second Draft of AReM Comments on UDCs' Joint Filing - READ
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ["arem'@enron.com", '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/2085.
=====================================
Dan:
I have made only a few minor changes. Additionally:
* Should we briefly define nominal rationale in a footnote?
* Could number 7 be condensed? It seems a bit drawn out at four
pages.
* Under C.1. I believe the DASR Cut-Off Date refers to Connect DASRs
only. Everything the UDCs have submitted to date states they will continue
to accept all other types of DASR requests including Disconnects and
Updates, therefore I deleted the first example on our second objection.
This also appears to bring our third objection in to question as well.
* Should we mention that the UDCs did not clarify their definition of
DASR? I am certain that they intended to say Connect DASRs, not all DASRs.
(I have confirmed this with SDG&E and PG&E and am waiting on a response from
SCE.)
* You mention you are waiting for something from Jeff Dasovich on the
final item. Have you received anything? All I have seen is an outline type
document sent around on the 21st, is there something additional? I have
some questions concerning how we would send a DASR to the PUC. Perhaps I
have missed something. If you, or someone in AReM, could explain I would
appreciate it.
Thank you,
Rebecca A. Schlanert
Commonwealth Energy Corporation
electricAMERICA
714.481.6598
[email protected]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Douglass [SMTP:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2001 10:51 AM
>
> After sending off last night's first draft, I had an additional idea which
> is incorporated into this second, redlined draft. What I added was Four
> Principles by which each of the utilities' proposed rules should be
> measured. They are as follows:
>
> First: Is it fair to all concerned?
>
> Second: Is it administratively feasible and reasonable?
>
> Third: Does it promote the nominal rationale for which the
> Legislature directed that direct access could be suspended?:
>
> Fourth: Is it lawful?
>
>
<<11-28-01 ARM Comments - Draft 2.DOC>>
=====================================
|
2,837 |
Subject: New, Lower Prices--Save 30% or More on Books over $20
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/1245.
=====================================
<http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/marketing/html-mailings/shift/html_header_lower_price3.gif>
Save 30% or more <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/browse/-/283155/ref=mk_cust_sos2_1>
Dear Amazon.com Customer,
As someone who's purchased books in the past, you might be interested to learn that we've just lowered prices in our bookstore. Now you can save 30% or more on books <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/browse/-/283155/ref=mk_cust_sos2_2> over $20 (unless clearly marked otherwise)--that's at least $6 off every title.
Choose from tons of popular titles <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/browse/-/283155/ref=mk_cust_sos2_3> throughout the store--whether you're into Business & Investing, Computers & Internet, Biographies & Memoirs (that's me), Home & Garden, Literature & Fiction (my wife loves that one), Reference, or Health, Mind & Body, you'll save 30% or more on great books in every category. So check out our bookstore <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/browse/-/283155/ref=mk_cust_sos2_4> today and take advantage of our new, lower prices on books over $20.
Happy book-shopping,
Steve Kessel <http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/marketing/html-mailings/signatures/kessel-sig.gif>
Steve Kessel
General Manager of Books, Music, DVD and Video
Amazon.com <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/subst/home/home.html/ref=mk_cust_sos2_5>
<http://images.amazon.com/images/G/01/marketing/orange-arrow.gif>Search for more All Products Electronics Books Tools Music DVD VHS Wireless Outdoor Living Kitchen Software Video Games Toys Outlet Auctions zShops
We hope you enjoyed receiving this message. However, if you'd rather not receive future e-mails of this sort from Amazon.com, please visit your Amazon.com account page <http://www.amazon.com/your-account/> and under the Your Account Settings heading, click the "Update your communication preferences" link.
Please note that this e-mail was sent to the following address: [email protected]
=====================================
|
2,838 |
Subject: Fw: SBE Adopts Revised Rule 905
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/775.
=====================================
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Chris Micheli=20
To: Peter Michaels ; Hal Kessler ; Rina Venturini ; Mohammed Alrai ; Mike M=
onagan ; Kent Robertson ; Katherine Potter ; Kassandra Gough ; Juan Rodrigu=
ez ; Joe Ronan ; Jack Pigott ; Eileen Koch ; Bill Highlander ; Barbara LeVa=
ke ; Aymee Ramos ; Theo Pahos ; Steve Ponder ; Stephanie Newell ; Scott Sad=
ler ; Scott Govenar ; Ron Tom ; Richard Hyde ; Pete Conaty ; Paula Soos ; J=
ulee Ball ; John Norwood ; Chuck Cole ; Carolyn McIntyre ; Bev Hansen ; Car=
l London ; Thomas McMorrow ; Susan McCabe ; Steven Kelley ; Roger Pelote ; =
Robert Ross ; Rachel King ; Phil Isenberg ; Maureen O'Haren ; Lynn Lednicky=
; Kent Palmerton ; Katie Kaplan ; John Stout ; John Larrea ; Jean Munoz ; =
Jan Smutny Jones ; Hedy Govenar ; Greg Blue ; Delaney Hunter ; David Peters=
; Anne Kelly ; Andy Brown ; Will Brown ; Teresa Casazza ; Ron Roach ; Rex =
Hime ; Matt Sutton ; Lorraine Albrecht ; Lisa Frank ; Lance Hastings ; LaJu=
ne Bush ; Jot Condie ; Joe Ackler ; Jim Lites ; James Clark ; Greg Turner ;=
Gina Rodriquez ; George Miller ; Gavin McHugh ; Fred Taugher ; Fred Pownal=
l ; Fred Main ; Eric Miethke ; David R Doerr ; David Nagler ; Charles T Hal=
nan ; Carolyn J. Veal-Hunter ; Brian Maas ; Barry Brokaw ; Amy E. Garrett=
=20
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 4:05 PM
Subject: SBE Adopts Revised Rule 905
The State Board of Equalization (SBE) earlier today voted 3-1 to adopt a re=
vised Rule 905, to go to state assessment of power plants. They adopted th=
e staff recommendation, but changed the effective date to January 1, 2003. =
This is being done in an effort to "push the Legislature to act on AB 81 (=
Migden)." The motion was made by Controller Connell and SBE Members Chiang=
and Klehs voted in support. Parrish abstained, while Andal voted no.
Chris Micheli, Esq.
Carpenter Snodgrass & Associates
1201 K Street, Suite 710
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 447-2251
FAX: (916) 445-5624
EMAIL: [email protected]
=====================================
|
2,839 |
Subject: CA PUC - Fiber in Gas Pipelines
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5113.
=====================================
Wilson, please see below. It looks like in CA ALL projects need to have CEQA
review regardless if they have been previously permitted or not.
COMPETITIVE LOCAL ENTRY
CALIFORNIA
ALJ mulls penalty for Pacific Pipeline
Administrative Law Judge Sarah Thomas has decided to examine whether the
Public Utility Commission should penalize Pacific Pipeline Systems (PPS)
for constructing fiber optic facilities without first receiving PUC
approval or undergoing an environmental review. PPS has asked the PUC
for third-party access to fiber optic cable located in PPS's crude oil
pipelines.
During a proceeding on PPS's request, the ALJ learned that the company
also intended to construct facilities to accommodate the third-party
access and lease them to Qwest Communications Corp. PPS completed the
construction after filing the application.
Thomas issued a draft decision granting the application and establishing
a second phase to consider whether PPS should be fined or sanctioned.
(12/1/00 a.m.) The commission withdrew the draft decision in order to
conduct and complete the penalty phase before issuing a decision on the
application.
During the penalty phase, the commission will examine (1) why PPS
constructed fiber optic facilities before obtaining PUC authorization or
an environmental review and (2) whether the company violated the
California Environmental Quality Act, commission rules, the public
utilities code, or any other legal requirements. If the PUC determines
that PPS violated the law or commission rules, the commission will
decide whether and how the company should be penalized.
Thomas said she will hold a March 28 prehearing conference if PPS
requests one. If the company decides against the hearing, it must file
a brief and its evidence by March 28. (Application no. 99-11-027,
Application of Pacific Pipeline Systems LLC for Authorization Pursuant
to Public Utilities Code Section 851 et seq. To Permit the Use of
Certain Fiber Optic Telecommunications Facilities)
=====================================
|
2,840 |
Subject: Jim Cramer's Fall Forecast & Investing Strategy Conference - August
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/28261.
=====================================
Dear TSC community,
I know what you=01,re wondering; =01&When is everything going to turn arou=
nd?=018
Everyone is wearing that question on his or her face. I call it
THE LOOK: The look of disillusionment, of lethargy, of confusion.
Of when will =01+the good times=01, return?
And everywhere I am, whether on CNBC, at my desk, or on Wall Street,
I=01,m asked the same thing, =01&Cramer, when will the market turn around?=
=018
And I say, =01&That=01,s not the question you should be asking. The
question to be asked is =01+How are YOU are going to make money in THIS mar=
ket?=018
Join me Monday evening, August 6 in New York City and I will show you
how to choose winning stocks, steer clear of the losers, and identify
the sectors that will side step the market=01,s volatility, and much more!
All to make you money!
Don't look for a magic bullet to solve everything. It doesn't exist.
Take action. I will show you how.
Register today! Save $100 by registering before July 23rd !
I=01,m looking forward to seeing you in August.
Click here to register http://www.seeuthere.com/event/579242482754 or
call TheStreet.com Customer Service Department at 1-800-562-9571,
Monday-Friday, 8am-8pm EST.
Sincerely,
Jim Cramer
Co-founder/TheStreet.com
Chief Markets Commentator/CNBC
This email has been sent to you by TheStreet.com because
you are a current or former subscriber (either free-trial
or paid) to one of our web sites, www.thestreet.com or www.realmoney.com. I=
f=20
you are not a current or former
subscriber, and you believe you received this message in
error, please forward this message to [email protected],
or call our customer service department at 1-800-562-9571.
Please be assured that we respect the privacy of our subscribers.
To view our privacy policy, please click here:
http://www.thestreet.com/tsc/about/privacy.html
If you would prefer not to receive these types of emails from
us in the future, please send us an email at any time to
[email protected].
=====================================
|
2,841 |
Subject: Re: Draft Legislation for FL
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8188.
=====================================
For our call next week on the state initiative, please see below. Thanks,
Scott
Scott Bolton
12/18/00 03:49 PM
To: Marchris Robinson/NA/Enron
cc: Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@ENRON, Donald
Lassere/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Xi Xi/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@ENRON, Mona L
Petrochko/NA/Enron@ENRON, Stephen D Burns/Corp/Enron@Enron, Margo
Reyna/NA/Enron@ENRON, Tracy Cooper/Enron Communications@Enron Communications,
Lara Leibman/NA/Enron@ENRON, Barbara A Hueter/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Draft Legislation for FL
MR - This is the old draft from the Broadband "coalition" - the new one
hasn't yet arrived and I want you to have something to forward to the Gov's
office. Make sure we can provide an updated version in the next week. I
don't anticipate many revisions from this version except for a stronger
emaphasis on enforcement of Sec. 253 of the Telecom Act (dealing with
barriers to entry). Also, I'm uncomfortable with the draft language on
state/munuicipal networks - it may go against our broader digital divide
rhetoric. We should portray this as the "Broadband Infrastructure
Improvement Act of 2001" with the following goals:
1. Favor and encourage private investment and private management of
high-speed competitive broadband infrastructure and associated
telecommunications and data services.
2. Prohibit excessive state and local charges for high-speed broadband
networks and competitive telecommunications and data services;
3. Continue to encourage that the content and commercial environment of the
Internet remain free from unnecessary regulations or monopolistic policies;
and
4. Encourage self-governance and public/private partnerships in addressing
the issues of the Digital Divide.
Let's discuss in greater detail tomorrow in NY.
ALL - EVERYONE'S COMMENTS/QUESTIONS ARE APPRECIATED. We'll have a more
detailed group meeting on this soon. Thanks.
=====================================
|
2,842 |
Subject: TAR&L MEETING - 2/5/01/AGENDA
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8752.
=====================================
As many of you may be aware, it was decided in last week's TAR&L meeting to
reschedule from Thursday, February 1 to Monday, February 5, 2001 from 8:30
a.m. to 11:30 a.m. This meeting will be held in EB 4325 (same as last
week). A light breakfast will be provided.
The dial-in information is as follows:
International Participants: 1-805-240-9463, passcode 449834
Domestic Participants: 1-888-232-3866, passcode 449834
Host/Houston (Gardner): 1-888-232-3866, passcode 860073 (host only)
Listed below is the agenda provided by Wayne Gardner. Should you have any
questions or requirements, please do not hesitate to contact me at extension
37097.
Thank you!
Angie Buis
Senior Administrative Assistant
EBS Tax
(713) 853-7097
----- Forwarded by Angie Buis/Enron Communications on 01/31/01 02:21 PM -----
Wayne Gardner
01/31/01 02:07 PM
To: Angie Buis/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
cc:
Subject: TARL
I. Report from Singapore--developments in overall strategy
1. Turn-over Fee issues
2. Pioneer Status
3. Licensing
II. Japan
A. Entity, Tax and Management issues
1. Commercial and Operational implications of outside counsel advice,
including
-- operational constraints to avoid requirement to establish a branch or
attracting tax
2. Any additional or follow-up inquiries
B. Licensing
1.Time-line and responsibilities for preparing applications
2.Open issues regarding EBS "yakkans", including
--which business activities require filed tariffs
--what form filing should take--i.e., the full Master or in the form of
responses to the Ministry form
3. Commercial implications of filing yakkans
-- commercial and regulatory flexibility of changing yakkans
--dealing with parties' conflicting yakkans
III. Other Jurisdictions
A. Korea
--status of Hanaro and required regulatory work
IV. Status of BMC Network
W. Wayne Gardner
Enron Broadband Services
1400 Smith Street
Houston, TX 77002-7361
Phone: 713 853 3547
Fax: 713 646 2532
=====================================
|
2,843 |
Subject: Corporate Sponsors Reception - FAQ
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/56.
=====================================
Since the Corporate Sponsors Reception is a new event, I am sure that you
have numerous questions. Please feel free to call or email me directly
with any questions or concerns that you may have.
In hopes of anticipating some of your questions, I offer the FAQ below:
WHY IS THE EVENT IN BERKELEY, AND NOT SAN FRANCISCO?
I received 43 responses from students regarding the proposed location of
the event. 23 wanted to have the event at Haas, 20 wanted the event in
SF. Since this was very close to a 50/50 split we also looked at the
number of students who have class on Tuesday evenings - approximately half
of the student body. Given the simple majority of declared preference and
the desire to have maximum attendance, we chose the Haas location.
WHO SHOULD I INVITE?
We will be giving each student two invitations to extend to managers. We
suggest that you invite your direct supervisor and your benefits/human
resources manager. Please use your best judgement.
WHAT SORT OF TRANSPORTATION ASSISTANCE IS AVAILABLE TO MY MANAGER?
We will provide free parking to those who indicate that they will be
driving to the event. If your manager is going to join you on the shuttle
bus from the South Bay, Peninsula or BART, you MUST tell us in advance so
that we can ensure adequate capacity for students and guests. Shuttle buses
will run on their normal schedule - so managers using this option will
commit to spending a long evening on campus.
ARE TUESDAY CLASSES CANCELLED?
No, if you have class on Tuesday, please attend your class as usual. The
reception will be during your class break. Your managers can join you at
that time, either after attending the seminar, or having just arrived on
campus.
CAN I BRING MY MANAGER TO MY TUESDAY CLASS?
The program office is not opposed to this option, but you MUST tell us if
you intend to do so. We will then be able to make sure that there are
enough seats for enrolled students and also that the faculty member does
not object.
=====================================
|
2,844 |
Subject: RE: Booked PX Credits
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/371.
=====================================
I will be here all day. Afternoon is better than the morning. You name the time.
Wanda
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 4:51 PM
To: Curry, Wanda
Cc: Tribolet, Michael
Subject: RE: Booked PX Credits
Thanks very much for all your help. Can I call you tomorrow morning to discuss?
Best,
Jeff
PS Shapiro likes to kid. We're going to do everything we can in the meeting to try to settle this darn thing.
-----Original Message-----
From: Curry, Wanda
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 4:42 PM
To: Dasovich, Jeff
Cc: Tribolet, Michael
Subject: Booked PX Credits
<< File: PX Summary 091401.xls >>
Jeff,
I have attached a file showing the SCE receivable amount of ($109,292,004.75) Due Enron. This amount is net of the payments made by SCE. A few cautions, these amounts are reported more by Enron accounting month vs. utility bill cycle month. But at least it highlights the rapid fall off starting in the March, when most of the customers had been returned to Bundled Utility Service.
To obtain a more accurate projection of the receivable as of January 18, 2001 or at any point would require this information be sorted differently and require allocation assumptions to handle the bill cycle vs. accounting vs. PX end date.
Hopefully this will be enough to get you ready for Monday's meeting. Call me if you would like to discuss. FYI, I have also included information re PG&E. If you are asked, these amounts are directly from the utility bills, not an Enron's calculation.
We have not really tried to "tie" these numbers with the utility, but in all cases these amounts were pulled directly from the utility bills. Any errors would be due to omissions or query compilation errors. EES could be prepared to actually reconcile these with SCE, if you give the go-ahead to do so.
Let me know what you think, or if you need anything else. If you follow Rick's suggestion, it might be a short meeting anyway.
Wanda
=====================================
|
2,845 |
Subject: Senate letter
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/381.
=====================================
Hi,
Good work Jeff. Dunn would think twice after receiving it. The
following are some general comments about the letter, which makes some
excellent points. First, I think the letter should go to all Senators
individually, by name. Perhaps a more productive approach may be to
point out to them that they should clearly understand the ramifications
of what they are voting on when they vote on the contempt order (rather
than point out to Dunn the error of his ways). Rather than focus on
Dunn's committee, maybe we lay out the facts of the negotiation that led
us to court and urge them to consider them before they take this
historic vote. We can still say we weren't part of the original 1890
problem and we're only an infintesimal part of the current problem. But
from there we should ask them to stand up for due process and civil
rights and use the arguments in the letter to support why they ought to
reject the contempt order. Using liberal arguments to a democrat
audience makes some sense in this regard, but we might need help from
Sanders on the civil libertarian arguments that sell best.
An interesting opening might be: Several politicians in California have
confided to Enron representatives over the course of the last several
months that politics is a "blame game", and unfortunately Enron makes an
excellent target. While we at Enron understand the need to blame
outsiders when things go wrong, we believe that you will be going much
further than blaming if you vote to place Enron in contempt of the
Senate Select Committee to Investigate Price Manipulation of the
Wholesale Energy Market. You will, in fact, be eroding the basic
protections afforded citizens bla, bla,, bla.
Its late in the day and I'm leaving for a short break tomorrow so I'm
rambling. But you get my idea. Ignore at will. I won't be checking
e-mail until Aug. 13th but my cell phone may be working at the farm in
North Dakota (and I may want to connect with civilization, so don't
hesitate to call).
=====================================
|
2,846 |
Subject: Re: Campaign Leadership Call "Mandatory"
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/10482.
=====================================
Jeff,
Here is the int'l dial # for this call:
703-736-7385
Also, Rick knows you are on vacation this week (no charge!)
gngr
713-853-7751
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
03/28/2001 09:04 PM
To: Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Re: Campaign Leadership Call "Mandatory"
Rick:
My apologies. The family events here in Mexico have conflicted with the
calls. But I will be on the call tomorrow. (Anything to save $25!)
One thing. I'm not sure that I can dial into an 800 number here in Mexico.
Ginger: Could I possibly call you at 4:30 and have you conference me in to
the 800 number?
Best,
Jeff
Ginger Dernehl
03/28/2001 11:46 AM
To: Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel
Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Howard Fromer/NA/Enron@Enron, Joe
Hartsoe/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan M Landwehr/NA/Enron@Enron, Daniel
Allegretti/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Cindy Derecskey/Corp/Enron@Enron, Marcia A Linton/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda
J Noske/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lysa Akin/PDX/ECT@ECT, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron,
Bernadette Hawkins/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Lora Sullivan/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Terri
Miller/NA/Enron@Enron, Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Campaign Leadership Call "Mandatory"
Message from Rick:
The Campaign Leadership Call, which takes place daily at 4:30pm CST, is
"Mandatory". If you are unable to attend, it will be necessary for you to
have someone participate on the call in your behalf. Please notify Rick or
myself, if you are unable to participate and let us know who will be
participating for you. A fine of $25.00 will be assessed to those who do not
participate or have someone participate for them. The monies collected will
go to a charity of the group's choice.
Thanks and please don't hesitate to call me if you have any questions.
gngr
713-853-7751
=====================================
|
2,847 |
Subject: FW: EPUC Comments re DWR Decision
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/51.
=====================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Douglass [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 10:46 PM
To: ARM; Vicki Sandler; Tamara Johnson; Mara, Susan; Steve Huhman; Roger Pelote; Rob Nichol; Randy Hickok; Nam Nguyen; Jim Crossen; Dasovich, Jeff; Janie Mollon; Jack Pigott; Greg Blue; George Vaughn; Gary Ackerman; Ed Cazalet; Denice Cazalet Purdum; Curtis Kebler; Curt Hatton; Corby Gardiner; Charles Miessner; Carolyn Baker; Bill Ross; Karen Shea; Max Bulk
Subject: EPUC Comments re DWR Decision
Attached are EPUC's comments opposing the draft decision. They argue that, "The DD implicitly overstates the Commission's obligation under these provisions and, consequently, risks the public interest. While the Commission must assure recovery of the costs incurred by DWR, the statute does not require the Commission to assure full recovery of a fixed value in the face of variable assumptions. Failing to address these variables could lead to unnecessary rate increases and further injury to the state's economy. Moreover, while the Commission must adopt a "stop gap" allocation of DWR costs among utilities to determine who will make the payments, there is statutory requirement or practical need for a final, absolute allocation to be adopted before a more careful examination can be made."
EPUC concludes by saying that it, "urges the Commission to tailor narrowly its decision adopting a DWR revenue requirement. The Commission should adopt a mechanism, as described herein, that would limit or eliminate the difference between DWR actual costs and utility remittances. The Commission should also adopt only an interim inter-utility allocation, to be reconciled with a final methodology pending a careful and thorough examination of cost responsibility."
Dan
Law Offices of Daniel W. Douglass
5959 Topanga Canyon Blvd. Suite 244
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Tel: (818) 596-2201
Fax: (818) 346-6502
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
=====================================
|
2,848 |
Subject: Re: Interconnection agreements
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/890.
=====================================
We talked about this in detail with Steve when he was in Houston. Please
check with him. The idea is that there would be the flexibility necessary to
do just about anything. Also, there are problems with the decision that
Steve was going to talk with Pulsifer about. Need to get status of those
conversations.My understanding was that, if there's a problem with the
decision, perhaps our filing would be pushed a bit past the Tuesday. We'll
need to find that out, too.
Jeremy Meier <[email protected]> on 08/30/2000 11:27:10 AM
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Re: Interconnection agreements
J:
Are there additional service offerings (DWDM, etc.) that Enron wants to
offer in California (Steve indicated you guys talked about that) - and if
so, is there a narrative or did Steve get any specific info - for filing
with CPUC per final Decision?
We have to file updated tariffs next Tuesday - and want to include the
latest company service offerings.
J
[email protected] wrote:
> Hi. Thanks for all the help. Life's nuts. I'll try to give you a call
> later in the day and catch up.
>
> Jeremy Meier <[email protected]> on 08/25/2000 05:56:29 PM
>
> To: [email protected]
> cc:
> Subject: Interconnection agreements
>
> Jeff:
>
> Welcome back. We did send the Analysis Memo last week to all, with some
> small difficulty discerning correct email addresses for the various
> folks. Please let us know if anyone did not get their copy.
>
> You have several electronic version of interconnection agreements for
> California, and we can discuss at your convenience. The process for
> adopting an agreement "as is" is fairly straightforward in Calif and
> will not take that long (a few weeks).
>
> We are also filing updated pages for tariffs, including substantive
> service changes which Steve mentioned. We can show you any documents
> before filing (9/5/00 is the last day).
>
> Please feel free to let us know any questions,
>
> Jeremy Meier
> Blumenfeld & Cohen
=====================================
|
2,849 |
Subject: Draft Decision on SDG&E Voluntary Rate Stabilization Program for
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/2099.
=====================================
Enron, through the coalition ARM, supported SDG&E's proposal to implement the
voluntary, large customer opt-in. SDG&E had some fairly tough credit and
repayment requirements. The Draft Decision, NOT FINAL, issued by Cmmr. Wood
adopts the proposal with 2 modifications, that I don't believe are
problematic for us. Any concerns, please let Jeff or Marcie know.
---------------------- Forwarded by Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron on 11/30/2000
11:52 AM ---------------------------
JMB <[email protected]> on 11/20/2000 03:40:46 PM
To: "'[email protected]'" <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: Draft Decision on SDG&E Voluntary Rate Stabilization Program for
Large Customers
Commission Wood issued a Draft Decision on the rate stabilization program
for SDG&E's large customers required by AB 265. If you remember, SDG&E
filed its proposal to implement the program in mid-September. ARM filed
reply comments supporting the proposal advanced by SDG&E. The Draft
Decision adopts SDG&E's proposal with a few minor changes. Having reviewed
the draft decision, in my opinion, the few changes made do not impact ARM's
interests and thus do not merit commenting.
The changes made by the Draft Decision include:
1. The Draft Decision provides for a 12 month amortization period of the
undercollected amount for agricultural customers whose demand is less than
100 kW. (This would just be a limited exception to SDG&E's overall proposal
that customers under the program would have to pay the entire settlement
amount the month following either removal from the program or being on the
program for 12 consecutive months.
2. The Draft Decision provides for alternate means of showing
creditworthiness to be eligible for the program.
The commission wants to vote on this Draft Decision at the December 7th
meeting. Accordingly comments are due November 27.
If you have any questions, call me. Unfortunately I do not have the Draft
Decision electronically, but it is short and readily faxable.
Jeanne
=====================================
|
2,850 |
Subject: PG&E utility gives Calpine debt priority status.
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/28394.
=====================================
USA: UPDATE 1-PG&E utility gives Calpine debt priority status.
07/06/2001
Reuters English News Service
(C) Reuters Limited 2001.
(changes 1st paragraph, adds details, company statement)
SAN JOSE, Calif., July 6 (Reuters) - Independent power generator Calpine
Corp. said on Friday that its contracts with Pacific Gas and Electric Co.
will be altered, ensuring that Calpine will continue to supply power to the
bankrupt California utility and that it will get paid more than $250 million
for power already sold.
Calpine stocks rose more than 14 percent, or more than $5, to $43 after the
announcement.
As part of the contract modification, the $267 million, with interest, that
the utility, a unit of PG&E Corp , owes Calpine in past due receivables under
the contracts, will be elevated to "administrative priority status," a claim
which is paid before any other general unsecured creditors.
Calpine will get the money, in a lump sum, as soon as PG&E has a confirmed
reorganization plan, which can take as long as four to six months from now,
Calpine said.
The move is also a step in the process of untangling California's energy
crisis, which stemmed from a flawed deregulation plan that has hit the state
with a series of rolling blackouts.
Under the agreement, Calpine will continue to receive its contractual
capacity payments, but it has also set up a fixed rate contract for the next
five years of about 5.37 cents per kilowatt-hour.
The contracts are known as qualifying facility contracts because Calpine's
power plants are qualifying facilities. These types of facilities represent
more than 20 percent of the state's power supply and sell power generated
from renewable energy sources to the regulated utilities.
"Calpine is the first power company to modify its QF contract with PG&E to
ensure that Northern California consumers will continue to benefit from these
affordable and reliable energy resources," Calpine senior vice president
James Macias said in a statement.
=====================================
|
2,851 |
Subject: Re: Interconnection Meeting
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4686.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Lara Leibman/NA/Enron on 03/27/01 02:38 PM -----
Sue Nord
03/26/01 04:41 PM
To: Lara Leibman/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Re: Interconnection Meeting
It's on my calendar.
Lara Leibman
03/26/2001 03:54 PM
To: Fred Enochs/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Shirley
Sidler/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Nicole La/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Gunnar Frey/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Geoffrey Allen/Enron Communications@Enron Communications,
David Reinfeld/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Brian
Bradford/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Tom Madaras/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications, Neil Carpino/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Debra Bailey/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, David
Koogler/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Paul Puchot/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications
cc: Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, John
Neslage/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Kristina Mordaunt/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications
Subject: Interconnection Meeting
On Monday, April 9th, Mona, John and I would like to meet with all of you to
review the agreements that we have and will have selected by then for
interconnection purposes with the various ILECs. The meeting will take place
in EB 4746.
We will forward specific materials to you in advance of the meeting for your
review. It is our objective to obtain your sign-off regarding the selected
agreements. In the event that there are significant issues remaining, we
would like to chart the appropriate course of action -- i.e., either pursue
negotiation with individual ILECs or opt-in and seek specific amendments.
We would like to begin at 1pm. Please reserve the duration of the afternoon
as we have several states' agreements to review. Also, I would appreciate it
if you would RSVP. Thanks.
Regards,
Lara
=====================================
|
2,852 |
Subject: RE: NDA
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Countee', 'Janice M." <[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/eci/45.
=====================================
Here is the NDA. You need to select the Read Only option in order to open
and print. Please print 2 originals for signature so each party has an
original executed NDA. After the other party executes it, you will need to
get an EBS attorney to initial it before an EBS VP or above can execute it on
our behalf. Please make sure I get an executed original back. Thanks
Robin L. Hill
Legal Specialist
Enron Broadband Services
(713)853-3255
(713)646-8537 fax
[email protected]
Jeff Dasovich@EES
04/14/00 02:57 PM
To: Robin Hill/Enron Communications@Enron Communications
cc:
Subject: RE: NDA
---------------------- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES on 04/14/2000 12:57
PM ---------------------------
"Tobin, James M." <[email protected]> on 04/14/2000 12:52:49 PM
To: "'Jeff Dasovich'" <[email protected]>
cc: "Countee, Janice M." <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: NDA
Jeff:
1. California Independent System Operator Corporation
2. 151 Blue Ravine Road
Folsom, CA 95630
3. Dennis Fishback, Chief Information Officer
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Dasovich [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 12:13 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: NDA
Jim: If you could provide the following info, I can get you a draft NDA for
your and the ISO's consideration very soon. Thanks alot.
Best,
Jeff
1) Legal entity name
2) Business Address
3) Name(s) and title(s) of signatory party at the ISO
============================================================================
This message contains information which may be confidential and privileged.
Unless you are the addressee (or authorized to receive for the addressee),
you may not use, copy or disclose to anyone the message or any information
contained in the message. If you have received the message in error, please
advise the sender by reply e-mail @mofo.com, and delete the message.
Thank you very much.
============================================================================
=====================================
|
2,853 |
Subject: Government Affairs-The Americas Dept. Meeting - December 8, 2000
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/4022.
=====================================
The next Government Affairs-The Americas meeting will soon be upon us.
Dinner at Ruggles Restaurant, Enron Field, Thursday, December 7 will begin at
7:00pm and will be casual dress. For those of you staying at the Doubletree,
there is shuttle service available from the hotel. Please contact the
Concierge desk 25 minutes before departure to request the shuttle service.
The address for the restaurant is: 333 Crawford Street, Houston, TX 77002
(713)259-8080.
The department meeting on Friday, December 8 will begin at 8:30am and
conclude by 3:00pm and will take place at the Doubletree Hotel in the De
Zavala room (please see attached agenda). It's Friday, so casual dress is
required! A continental breakfast will be available beginning at 7:30am for
all the early birds.
One last thing, the room block will be cut off by close of business tomorrow,
Thursday, November 30. Please make your room reservation if you haven't done
so already.
Look forward to seeing everyone next week and please call me with any
questions.
gngr
713-853-7751
----- Forwarded by Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron on 11/29/2000 02:56 PM -----
Ginger Dernehl
10/30/2000 12:05 PM
Government Affairs-The Americas Dept. Meeting - December 8, 2000
The next Government Affairs-The Americas meeting will be held in Houston, TX
at the DoubleTree Hotel on Friday, December 8, 2000. A block of rooms has
been reserved under "Enron Corp - Government Affairs" and each individual is
required to make their own reservation. The group dinner will be held on
Thursday, December 7 at Ruggles Restaurant, Enron Field at 7:00pm. Please
let me know of your plans to attend the dinner and meeting by Wednesday,
November 15.
Hotel information below:
DoubleTree Hotel
400 Dallas Street
Houston, TX 77002
713-759-0202 Phone #
713-654-0727 Fax#
Additional information regarding the meeting will follow, but please remember
to make your reservation and call me if you have any questions.
gngr
713-853-7751
=====================================
|
2,854 |
Subject: RE: Pescetti
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/726.
=====================================
Oh, great. Our next call will be from Steve Peace.
-----Original Message-----
From: Shapiro, Richard
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 10:54 AM
To: Dasovich, Jeff; Kaufman, Paul; Mara, Susan; Steffes, James D.
Subject: Re: Pescetti
Next seat is a Dem. Seat.
--------------------------
Rick S.
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff <[email protected]>
To: Kaufman, Paul <[email protected]>; Mara, Susan <[email protected]>; Steffes, James D. <[email protected]>; Shapiro, Richard <[email protected]>
CC: Dasovich, Jeff <[email protected]>
Sent: Tue Oct 23 10:16:39 2001
Subject: Pescetti
Paul:
Got your voice mail regarding Anthony Pescetti running for a FERC seat. Here are some quick thoughts. Sue likely has some additional experiences and information to share. Be happy to discuss further.
* Republican assemblymember from the Sacramento area.
* Was a member of the Sacramento muni utility district prior to going to the legislature.
* Republican (minority) head of the assembly electricity oversight committee (the one that Rod Wright chairs).
* Don't recall that he's ever seen a a pro-utility bill that he didn't like.
* In fact, he sponsored some legislation just this past session that would have locked the utilities in to major parts of the gas industry, and specifically wold have locked out competition. It was strongly opposed by industry and defeated.
* When push came to shove, I can't think of a time he didn't side with the utilities.
* Even when the Assembly Republicans were doing of good job of bottling up Davis' ridiculous bailout bills in Rod Wright's committee, Pescetti seemed to go along more to tweek the Democrats than to foster competition.
* And even then, he followed; he didn't lead--other, more junior, members on the committee led.
* Can't recall a time that he's been there for us.
I'd be happy to talk with him, but if we need someone at the Rick level to contact him, that's great, too. Just let me know.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
2,855 |
Subject: Re: Great News!
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2492.
=====================================
I just figured it was a way for you to finally track him down---you know,
show up at his class and get midevil on his ass for a few minutes....
That is a great solution! You mean work part time, or go to school part
time. Very selfishly, I'm of course very glad that you're staying in the
evening program. We're actually getting together on Sunday (I hope I didn't
mess things up). Yes, it's for finance, though you're welcome to join---we
can use all the help that we can get.
I'm really glad to hear that things are going better. You seemed in pretty
good spirits on Tuesday, though I guess that could have partially been due to
the big celebration over getting your first ticket. Congratulations! I'll
buy you a beer. I have a feeling that the only reason you haven't gotten one
until now is because you've managed to talk your way out of many.
Best,
Jeff
Courtney Abernathy <[email protected]>
10/19/2000 09:11 AM
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Re: Great News!
It was a little dramatic when I saw that Tuesday
night. I feel a bit overwhelmed that he's back. The
quality, the learnings! What to do? If only I can
find a way to get in the class. Jeez! Seriously
though-you like the offering? Thanks for checking in
on Tuesday. Things are better...less overwhelmed by
decisions and such. Staying part-time (decision as of
Monday). Expect to spend more time in SF with the job
after next week. Want to keep my options open and
feel I can do that better hanging out in the evening
program. Jackie mentioned that you are all grouping
on Sat to study..is this for finance? Talk to you
soon-
Courtney
--- [email protected] wrote:
>
> Knew you'd be dying to know that Barry Staw will be
> teaching a class on
> "Creativity" in the Spring. Be sure to reserve your
> place today!
>
> Best,
> Jeff
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf! It's FREE.
http://im.yahoo.com/
=====================================
|
2,856 |
Subject: Re: REVISED Merged Leg Document
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/28469.
=====================================
Folks:
Here are my edits. For simplicity, I accepted all the other changes and put
mine in strike-out-underline.
They are confined to the direct access section, and to the provisions
regarding "spot market service" in particular. Based on our negotiations, I
think it's accurate to state that spot market service was never discussed as
"an option to elect." Instead, the language in the agreement states that it
is a "backstop," in the event that on any given day a customer's ESP doesn't
show up with the power. In effect, it retains the utility's duty to serve,
like the gas side, but does not expose the utility to any risk of cost
recovery for the spot service provided. I've also added provisions which
obligate the utility to provide spot market service in the event that at the
outset of the program (i.e., the transition date), the customer, for whatever
reason fails to elect Term Service or Direct Access Service. In both cases,
the spot services lasts for a maximum of 30 days, after which the customer
must choose Term or Direct Access Service.
Please take a look at the language. While I haven't put any "stakes in the
ground" up till now, I feel strongly about these changes (for reasons I'm
happy to discuss), and if folks have issues with incorporating it into the
document, I'd request that we have a very brief call to discuss. I believe
that the language as proposed captures my conversation with Dorothy.
In addition, I've also taken a stab at language requested by Delainey, i.e.,
"what to do about DA in the interm?" There may be better ways to craft the
language, but I took a shot nonetheless.
Finally, I'm assuming, based on yesterday's call, that, by delivering this
document to the Speaker today, no one is giving their approval, support, or
anything else for each and every provision. I'm not prepared to, and cannot,
do that at this time.
Thanks again to all for all the effort (and to Dorothy for her patience in
hearing me out earlier).
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
2,857 |
Subject: RE: trying to locate PX Credit information
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/571.
=====================================
Jeff,
Diann Huddleson has spoken with PG&E on numerous occasions, and they have confirmed that effective as of January 19, 2001, they began using a Weighted Average cost of Generation/Purchase for the calculation of the PX amount. I will coordinate between Tamara and the Services group which has this information and make sure everyone is on the same page. I also support Tamara's desire to reconcile, at a tariff level, the curves to actual utility bills.
Thanks,
Wanda
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 5:00 PM
To: Curry, Wanda; Tribolet, Michael
Cc: Kingerski, Harry; Lawner, Leslie; Steffes, James; Mara, Susan
Subject: trying to locate PX Credit information
Hi Wanda/Michael. You aware of this? I don't recall having received anything from PG&E.
Best,
Jeff
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 07/16/2001 04:57 PM -----
Tamara Johnson@EES 07/16/2001 04:19 PM To: JMB <[email protected]>, Harry Kingerski/Enron@EnronXGate, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Leslie Lawner/Enron@EnronXGate, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Diann Huddleson/HOU/EES@EES, Mary Lynne Ruffer/HOU/EES@EES cc: Subject: trying to locate PX Credit information
PG&E has changed the method of calculating the PX Credit recently. Prior to June they appeared to be using a market based price for power, but in June the credit dropped to about $40/MWh which looks like utility-owned gen.
We want to make sure we are not missing a utility-levied charge in our forward curves ( e.g. CTC charge that will be applied to DA) so we're trying to verify the utilities' method of calculating PX credits.
I talked to the PG&E accounting person who said that their Regulatory group has sent Enron's regulatory group information on the way the PX Credit is calculated. Can someone locate this information and forward it to me as soon as possible? Given that our customers are all switching to DA we don't want to discover there's a charge we don't know about.
Thanks,
Tamara.
=====================================
|
2,858 |
Subject: Re: Time Warner
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent/4406.
=====================================
OK Gang:
Well, I=01,ve been crunching numbers all day, and haven=01,t yet gotten to =
the=20
writing. I've attached Dylan's original responses for reference. Figure=
=20
it'll be a memo from Time's CEO to the Time Board.
I=01,ve leaving now for Mendocino, but will be back early tomorrow to finis=
h=20
this up. Please check out the spreadsheet.
The case is sort of confusing=01*how do Time=01,s analysts value Time at $1=
89-212,=20
when they=01,re trading at 109 the day before the announcement of the deal =
with=20
Warner. That doesn=01,t jive. Are they saying that, absent synergies, the=
=20
combined Time/Warner is worth the enterprise value of Time at 189-212 plus=
=20
the enterprise value of Warner at $63-71 (again, the analysts valuation)? =
=20
That just seems ridiculous, give where they=01,re trading.
Anyway, here=01,s where my analysis is heading----tell me if I=01,m smoking=
crack.
The deal isn=01,t really $175 per share. It=01,s $175 LESS the taxes that =
will=20
have to paid (since it=01,s a purchase deal) PLUS the value of the tax shie=
ld=20
created by the net increase of $8.9B in new debt that Paramount will take=
=20
on. Does this seem right? Could folks look at my spreadsheet? I=01,ve go=
t it=20
conceptually set up, but I=01,m not quite sure how to calculate the taxes p=
aid=20
under the purchase method or the value of the tax shield (assuming that thi=
s=20
is correct. If I=01,m just completely out of it with this angle, just let =
me=20
know. In any case, seems that there=01,s some value in the tax-free=20
(Time-Warner) versus the taxable (Time-Paramount) deals. Presumably, we=20
could take the total enterprise value of Time-Warner (nontaxed) and compare=
d=20
it to the total enterprise of Paramount-Time (taxed) and compare the two. =
I=01,
ve got a hunch that the Time-Warner number may win the day, but I haven=01,=
t=20
gotten that far in the crunching yet.
In any case, I=01,ll be back around Noon tomorrow and will crank the puppy =
out.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
2,859 |
Subject: FW: Urgent: Revised Letter to Angelides et al
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/295.
=====================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Fairchild, Tracy [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2001 6:12 PM
To: Allen, Stevan; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; Britton McFetridge; [email protected];
Dave Modisette; [email protected]; [email protected]; Dian Grueneich;
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
Fairchild, Tracy; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; James Simonelli;
Janie Mollon; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; Julee Ball; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; Manuel, Erica; Margaret Catzen; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; Paul Bauer;
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; Warner, Jami; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]
Subject: Urgent: Revised Letter to Angelides et al
DAC members,
You should find that the attached letter incorporates the changes that we
agreed to on today's conference call. Please notify me immediately if any
of the content is a problem for you. Please note that I have listed ALL
members of the DAC as signatories to the letter. The final thing I need
from you is emailed approval from each of your orgs to send the document
with your group listed on it.
If you do not want your organization listed on this letter, or if I have
inadvertently left yours off, please let me know ASAP. Edelman plans to
disseminate the letter by COB tomorrow. Thanks for your prompt attention to
this.
Tracy Fairchild
Senior Account Supervisor
Edelman Public Relations Worldwide
[email protected]
(916) 442-2331
(916) 447-8509 (fax)
<<DAC letter to Angelides et al 080901.doc>>
=====================================
|
2,860 |
Subject: Draft Legislative Language
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['James D', 'Mary Hain@Enron', '[email protected]', 'Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES', 'West GA']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/804.
=====================================
---------------------- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/SFO/EES on 08/28/2000 01:44
PM ---------------------------
Mona L Petrochko@ENRON
08/25/2000 08:41 PM
To: Dennis Benevides/HOU/EES@EES, Roger Yang, Edward Hamb/HOU/EES@EES, James
M Wood/HOU/EES@EES, Martin Wenzel/SFO/HOU/EES@EES, Douglas
Condon/SFO/EES@EES, Greg Cordell, Chris Hendrix/HOU/EES@EES, Gary
Mirich/HOU/EES@EES, Jennifer Rudolph/HOU/EES@EES, Karen Denne@Enron, Peggy
Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES
cc: West GA, Mary Hain@Enron, Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, James D
Steffes/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/HOU/EES@EES, Steven J
Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Draft Legislative Language
We have seen an early release of legislative language. It is SB 1433
Alpert/Davis.
1. It institutes a rate cap of 6.5 cents/kWh for residential and small
commercial retroactive to June 2000 through December 31, 2002. It leaves the
ability for the Commission to extend to 2003 if in the public interest. (We
will strike the last part.)
Small commercial customers are all accounts on Schedule A, all accounts who
are general acute care hospitals, public and private k-12 schools and all
accounts on AL-TOU (up through 6000 kWh/billing period)
2. Provides an opt-in provision for large commercial/agricultural/industrial
customers with an annual true-up.
The sense I got was that CMTA/CLECA may have asked for this. It gives
legislative cover. Will be difficult to administer and the true-up will
discourage sign up.
Please let me know if you agree.
3. Provides that overcollections of PPA/QFs/SONGs will be used to offset
undercollections of cap.
Our comment is that the overcollections, on a pro-rata basis will be used to
offset the cap. All customers pay stranded costs associated with those
contracts, all customers should receive stranded benefits.
4. SDG&E is still subject to reasonableness review by the Commission. To
the extent FERC orders refunds as part of its investigation, such refunds
will go to SDG&E's customers.
Not too bad.
=====================================
|
2,861 |
Subject: FW: TURN Comments on DWR Decision
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/52.
=====================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Douglass [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2001 10:30 PM
To: Vicki Sandler; Tamara Johnson; Mara, Susan; Steve Huhman; Roger Pelote; Rob Nichol; Randy Hickok; Nam Nguyen; Jim Crossen; Dasovich, Jeff; Janie Mollon; Jack Pigott; Greg Blue; George Vaughn; Gary Ackerman; Ed Cazalet; Denice Cazalet Purdum; Curtis Kebler; Curt Hatton; Corby Gardiner; Charles Miessner; Carolyn Baker; Bill Ross; Karen Shea; Max Bulk; ARM
Subject: TURN Comments on DWR Decision
As you know, a draft decision was issued a few days ago by ALJ Pulsiver regarding the DWR revenue requirement. Attached are TURN's comments. The introduction gives a cogent summary of the consumer group's view of DWR's demands:
"TURN continues to believe that CDWR has grossly inflated its revenue requirement by billions of dollars through the use of extremely high gas prices and ridiculously high ancillary service costs that are unrelated to current market conditions. We understand that CDWR has the right under the Water Code to completely ignore consumer interests, recognize that it has done so in this case, and have come to expect that the Department will continue to do so. CDWR, not the Commission, is the cause of a revenue requirement that is probably bloated by as much as $2 billion of unnecessary costs."
TURN also concludes that the Draft Decision places too much of a burden on PG&E and advocates that the "Commission should also adopt TURN's weighted load method of allocating ancillary services among utilities so that PG&E's extensive self-provision of ancillary services is not siphoned off to benefit other utilities."
Its suggested rates are shown on the following table:
Dan
Law Offices of Daniel W. Douglass
5959 Topanga Canyon Blvd. Suite 244
Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Tel: (818) 596-2201
Fax: (818) 346-6502
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]><?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
=====================================
|
2,862 |
Subject: Re: IMPORTANT THINGS
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/7931.
=====================================
First, Eldon, I just want to tell you how psyched I am for New Year's.
Thanks so much for arranging it. We'll have a great time--and Cameron and I
have already ironed out a nice deal concerning eyeing the Playmates. (I
suggest you do the same, Jeff, or are you above gawking at plastic tits?)
Cameron says: I can stare at whoever I want! Not bad, eh?
Jeff and I have our fig leaves all picked out...
As far as fetching you at LAX... Because Cameron and I (and PP and Jeff?)
are going down on the 30th, we should rent a car then. When Eldon and Nancy
come in, we'll already have a car, and so we can just collect you and go
right to the hotel. Does that sound okay? That way, you guys won't have to
rent a car when you get in. (I'll put Eldon on as a driver so that he can
take over behind the wheel, if he wants to do that.) What kind of car should
I get? Do we drive to the mansion? Now that I think about it, that would
mean we need to squeeze 6 in one car. Anyway, let me know what your thought
are on this.
Have a great time with the Hopkins. Merry Christmas to PP and Jeff. I'll see
the rest of you on the beach!
>From: Nancy Sellers <[email protected]>
>To: Cameron <[email protected]>, Jeff Dasovich <[email protected]>,
>"Prentice @ Berkeley" <[email protected]>, Prentice Sellers
><[email protected]>, Scott Laughlin <[email protected]>
>Subject: IMPORTANT THINGS
>Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 08:09:58 -0800
>
>Dad forgot to mention:
>
>* DRESS CODE (strictly enforced): Black tie or lingerie - so Jeff and
>Scott if you do not own a tux you will need to rent one or a peignoir!
>
>* I think we should all try to depart at about the same time so we can go
>to the airport together.
>
>* Can anyone pick us up at the airport when we arrive on Sunday?
>
>
>Nancy
>(707) 251-4870 (phone)
>(707) 265-5446 (fax)
>"Plus je bois, mieux je chante"
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
=====================================
|
2,863 |
Subject: GA Accomplishments - Valuation Methodology - and other issues
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ["nicholas.o'[email protected]", '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/2875.
=====================================
Colleagues:
I hope that a short note on methodology on accomplishments' valuation will be
of help to all of us at this stage. Up to this moment, the current criteria
is still the same established by Jim, John, and Gia Team in the last two
years. Its purpose was, and still, is to ensure that Public Affairs
continues to generate more value than actual expense. The process,
hopefully, should drive GA staff to view themselves as "originators" creating
bottom-line value through (as an example):
revenue enhancement (new opportunity, market expansion)
cost reduction (e.g., fee delay, rate decrease).
The value calculation process focused on the following rules (called SCORE):
Simplicity
Consistency
Objectivity
Reasonableness
Equity
Perhaps it is helpful to list some of the methodologies submitted so far.
With no specific preference, they are:
A percentage of Enron's business on a specific hub, or transmission
connection (the percentage is subjectively determined)
Impact of a specific deal on Enron's stock price (in total or part, again,
subjectively determined)
The result of what-if analysis to estimate the would be cost had the
legislation passed (or did not pass), or a settlement reached (or not reached)
The amount of financing needs that was secured for a deal
NPV of a project. An extension would be the size of market identified or
deals originated.
The market size that Enron is targeting.
Value at risk in a specific project or activity
The methodology adopted by the relevant regulatory regimen to calculated
specific cost item that have been deferred, reduced, or avoided. An
extension would be the impact of tariffs determination after intervention (in
part or total).
The buy/sell spread of a portion of the market size that was released after
intervention.
I shall keep you posted with any change--in any case, it shall not happen
without full consultation with you--meanwhile, please let me know if you have
any question in this regard.
Brgrds
AI
713-853-3037
=====================================
|
2,864 |
Subject: Re: Please Take a Look--Draft Slides for Monday Talk in New York on
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', 'Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron']
File: dasovich-j/sent/11895.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 07/09/2001 02:23 PM -----
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
07/09/2001 02:16 PM
To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Re: Please Take a Look--Draft Slides for Monday Talk in New York on
California Crisis
Yes. Thanks very much Maureen and Ginger. There is a subsequent power point
presentation that I'm fairly confident I distributed (may have done so after
I got back from New York, so you might also want to search Steve and Rick's
in-boxes through the first two weeks of February). Thanks again for the help.
Best,
Jeff
Richard Shapiro
07/09/2001 01:46 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Please Take a Look--Draft Slides for Monday Talk in New York on
California Crisis
Was'nt there an earlier powerpoint?
---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron on 07/09/2001
01:45 PM ---------------------------
Maureen McVicker
07/09/2001 01:43 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Please Take a Look--Draft Slides for Monday Talk in New York on
California Crisis
HERE'S A DRAFT OF THE EXNET PRESENTATION. I'LL KEEP LOOKING FOR THE FINAL
VERSION.
----- Forwarded by Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron on 07/09/2001 01:42 PM -----
From: Jeff Dasovich on 01/26/2001 12:22 PM
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
To: [email protected], Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON,
Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected], Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Please Take a Look--Draft Slides for Monday Talk in New York on
California Crisis
I've still got considerable work to do, but wanted to make sure all had a
chance to review and comment well in advance of finalizing. I'm giving a
talk at Exnet on Monday about California. Attached is a draft of the
slides. All comments welcome and appreciated. I'm continuing to work on
it. Thanks very much.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
2,865 |
Subject: Idahoans reducing power for reward
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/13355.
=====================================
Utility's incentive program gets OK
Some East Idahoans will see rewards for reducing power use
The Associated Press
Following the lead of their counterparts in Oregon, Idaho regulators on
Friday approved a revised incentive program to convince customers of Utah
Power & Light Co. to scale back electricity usage.
The Public Utilities Commission approved a conservation program that rewards
customers reducing their monthly demand by 10 percent from a year ago by
reducing their bills by 10 percent.
PacifiCorp, which serves about 56,000 eastern Idaho customers through Utah
Power & Light, had originally proposed rewarding only customers who cut
demand by 20 percent with a 20 percent reduction in bills.
Significant curtailment in demand will reduce the amount of power the company
has to buy at exorbitant prices on the wholesale market.
But the commission, reinforced by environmental and consumer interests,
questioned whether any customers would be able to reach that level of energy
savings in a region where few have air conditioners.
It asked the utility for more information to justify that plan, and
PacifiCorp came back with the lower threshold for triggering the bill
reductions.
"Conservation gained through this program will benefit both the company and
its residential customers by reducing the company's reliance on power
purchases from the wholesale market," the commission said.
But the three members also said they were "still concerned that most
customers will find it difficult to achieve the 10 percent reduction."
Last month, the Oregon Public Utility Commission raised the same questions
about the 20 percent threshold for a bill reduction and eventually ordered
PacifiCorp to provide a 10 percent threshold as well.
The action followed a report that customers of PacifiCorp and Portland
General Electric, Oregon's two largest utilities, trimmed electricity use by
less than 4 percent during the first five months of this year despite
campaigns urging conservation.
=====================================
|
2,866 |
Subject: Legal Group Plans Suit to Void California Power Contracts
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', ".'[email protected]", ".'[email protected]", '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/1576.
=====================================
FYI.
Legal Group Plans Suit to Void California Power Contracts
2001-11-07 14:20 (New York)
Legal Group Plans Suit to Void California Power Contracts
Escondido, California, Nov. 7 (Bloomberg) -- A conservative
legal foundation said it will file a lawsuit tomorrow to void long-
term contracts California signed with power generators, claiming
they put an unfair burden on taxpayers.
The United States Justice Foundation intends to sue in
Sacramento County Superior Court, said Richard D. Ackerman, lead
counsel on the case for the group. The USJF wants a court to
terminate the long-term power contracts and require money already
paid to the generators to be returned to the state.
The USJF proposes a class action to represent California
taxpayers and alleges violations of the state's business and open-
meeting laws. Ackerman said his group may need to forge new law to
succeed in the case.
``You're gonna have some serious legal battles that may go to
the appeals level in this case,'' Ackerman said.
California officials last spring signed about $43 billion in
long-term power contracts after two investor-owned utilities
became insolvent. Governor Gray Davis has said the contracts were
needed to bring stability to California's energy market. Since
then, the cost of power has dropped, leaving California with
contracts to buy electricity above spot-market prices.
Enron Corp., Southern California Edison Company, Pacific Gas
& Electric Company, Green Mountain Energy, San Diego Gas &
Electric Company, Reliant Energy Company, PacifiCorp Power
Marketing, Inc., Alliance Colton LLC, and Calpine Energy Company
have electricity contracts with the state, according to a USJF
press release.
The USJF said it sent a letter to California officials giving
them notice of its intent to sue. The group, which calls itself
``Your conservative voice in the courts'' on its Web site, is
supported by individual donations, Ackerman said.
--Michael B. Marois in Sacramento (916) 503-1612
=====================================
|
2,867 |
Subject: EvMBA Seminar in Int. Business 2001 - Spam Update
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/8190.
=====================================
Dear EvMBA students,
Please ignore this message if you did not apply for the summer
international program.
Unfortunately, very few of the 56 people who applied managed to provide me
with their e-mail addresses, hence the need for this spam message.
For those of you who applied, please note that you were asked for some
specific information. Without this information your participation in the
program can not be decided:
1. The semester level that you are currently (January 2001) enrolled in.
(47 out of 56 provided this.)
2. Your e-mail address (25 out of 56 provided this.)
3. Your preferences for program (53 indicated a first preference, 27
indicated a second and only 8 indicated a third.) At a minimum please
indicate your first preference. If no second preference is indicated you
will ONLY be considered for the first preference.
In order to proceed I would like those of you who did not provide complete
information to do so as soon as possible. Once I have complete information
we will establish a priority list for each program.
A total of 5 people who have participated previously have applied to
participate again.
Each program will enroll a maximum of 15 participants, for a total of 30.
With 56 applicants we will thus not be able to accommodate everyone. We
will, however, establish a waiting list. In 2000, we moved a total of 9
applicants from the initial waiting list into actual participation.
We have not yet made a determination between the Latin America and Pacific
destinations. Demand exceeds places for both. Given the recent (over the
last few weeks) increase in unrest in Jakarta we are reconfirming the
reasonableness of this destination.
Future messages will be sent to a specific e-mail alias.
Regards,
Sebastian
===============================
Sebastian Teunissen
Director of International Affairs
Haas School of Business
University of California, Berkeley
Berkeley, California 94720-1900 USA
Tel: (510) 643-4999
Fax: (510) 642-8228
http://www.haas.berkeley.edu/HaasGlobal
=====================================
|
2,868 |
Subject: UC Berkeley Entrepreneurs Forum, Thursday, October 25, 2001
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: []
File: dasovich-j/inbox/631.
=====================================
UC Berkeley Entrepreneurs Forum
Thursday, October 25, 2001
6:30 - 8:30 PM
Haas School of Business
Arthur Andersen Auditorium
_________________________________
Topic: Beyond the Genome: What's Next in BioTech?
Speakers: Brian Atwood, Managing Director, Versant Ventures;
Barry Bunin, CEO & Co-Founder, Libraria;
Gajus Worthington, President, CEO & Co-Founder, Fluidigm.
Moderated by Betsy O'Neill, Manager, Business Development,
Tularik.
With the sequencing of the human genome virtually complete, the
biotechnology industry is in a state of flux. Two years ago genomics
companies were all the rage, but now that genomic information is becoming a
commodity, they are scrambling to create more attractive business
models. At the same time new companies have appeared with technologies for
streamlined exploitation of this deluge of information, and numerous, more
mature product-oriented biotechnology companies are at long last bringing
new drugs to the market. The panelists at our October Forum will discuss
the impact that the genomic roller coaster ride has had on the sector and
share their vision for the future of the industry.
Registration: There are special rates for faculty and staff. Faculty and
staff are encouraged to pre-register by E-mail.
Note registration procedure for students:
a) in person with cash or check in room F450 or F449, weekdays 9AM to 4PM.
b) with Mc/Visa over the phone, please call (510) 642 4255
The fee for pre- registration is $5. There will be a $10 registration fee
at the door. Note: On-site registration is subject to space available. Pre-
registration for students and staff closes at 4PM on Tuesday, October 23 or
earlier if it is sold out.
Information:
For more information on the series, please visit our Website at
http://www.haas.berkeley.edu/groups/lester/bef.html
If you wish to read more about this particular event, please go to:
http://www.haas.berkeley.edu/groups/lester/oct01.html
=====================================
|
2,869 |
Subject: FW: Policy forum on the future of electricity deregulation in CA
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/gspp_conference/21.
=====================================
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Lazarus [SMTP:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 12:27 PM
> To: '[email protected]'
> Subject: RE: Policy forum on the future of electricity deregulation in CA
>
> I'm not really big on panel discussions, but an event such as you described
> would no doubt provide helpful perspective on a distinctly thorny issue.
> Hard to say, though, what kind of media attention you'd get. These things
> tend to be pretty dry, jargon or no.
>
> Best,
> David Lazarus
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 4:38 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Policy forum on the future of electricity deregulation in CA
>
>
> Mr. Lazarus,
> As a member of the alumni board of the Goldman School of Public Policy at
> U.C.
> Berkeley, I am writing to guage your interest in a debate forum, held at the
> policy school, on appropriate policy responses to the current economic and
> reliability crisis in California. The idea is to advance reasoned debate
> with
> top academics and top policy makers, using jargon-free language the general
> public can follow. I work for an independent electric market analysis group
> in
> the Mid-Atlantic area, and my goal here is to follow the policy school's
> reputation for independent and careful analysis to challenge the views of
> the
> many various emotionally and politically motivated advocates. We have no
> preconceived agenda other than trying to objectively advance public policies
> that benefit the public. The school and a few of the top economists in the
> field are very interested in this idea. I've read your articles on the
> subject
> in the Chronicle and our hope is that you will find such a forum useful and
> newsworthy. What do you think? We would try to make it suit your needs if
> you
> have opinions on the timing, forum, and speakers.
> Rob
>
> Rob Gramlich
> Sr. Economist
> PJM Market Monitoring Unit
> (610) 666-4291
> [email protected]
=====================================
|
2,870 |
Subject: Re: URGENT - ACTION - Meeting Notice = 3/11/01
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/5010.
=====================================
UC/CSU has brought an action in Federal Court in Oakland seeking to have its
physical delivery service returned to direct access.
Would the regulatory affairs team I am copying on this letter decide who the
point person should be for us to communicate with. We would hope that you
could participate in the call or we could debrief you afterwards. Thanks.
Dan Leff
03/10/2001 05:56 AM
To: Donna Teal/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Tom Riley/Western Region/The Bentley
Company@Exchange, Douglas Huth/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Marty
Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff Messina/HOU/EES@EES, Mike D
Smith/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: Re: URGENT - ACTION - Meeting Notice = 3/11/01
Mike Smith needs to be involved in all of this communication
Thank you - Dan
Donna Teal
03/09/2001 10:48 PM
To: Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Tom Riley/Western Region/The Bentley
Company@Exchange, Douglas Huth/HOU/EES@EES, Peggy Mahoney/HOU/EES@EES, Marty
Sunde/HOU/EES@EES, Dan Leff/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES
cc: Jeff Messina/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: URGENT - ACTION - Meeting Notice = 3/11/01
Please plan to attend this meeting; Tom and Doug, please call in.
Date: Sunday, March 11
Time: 1:00 - 5:00 pm
Location: EB872
Topic: UC/CSU
Host: Jeff Messina
Dial In No.: 1-800-991-9019
Passcode: 6 0 6 9 9 6 3
Conference call phone number 800-766-1863 - - confirmation no. 3702121
If you have any questions, please call Jeff Messina at 281-361-9185.
Regards,
Donna for Jeff Messina
Contact Information
Name Office No. Pager No. Home No. Cell No.
V. Sharpe 713-853-7413 713-472-8072 713-822-3048
T. Riley 925-543-3703 888-937-4479 925-254-6416 510-928-9292
D. Huth 925-543-3709 888-797-9446 925-362-0008 925-381-7205
P. Mahoney 713-345-7034 713-667-8511 713-504-4338
M. Sunde 713-853-7797 888-753-9478 713-355-9138 713-553-1582
D. Leff 713-853-7903 713-688-1622 281-650-1199
E. Hughes 713-345-3311 713-444-3125
J. Messina 713-853-9293 888-395-3127 281-361-9185 713-504-9031
=====================================
|
2,871 |
Subject: Re: California SB 23X
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/3613.
=====================================
I think that we should be careful. Private label activity can occur with a
city today in California if the Muncipal government agrees. I would not want
to try and "thread the needle" on a very specific muni language right now in
CA - too much activity.
Jim
From: Jeff Dasovich on 05/04/2001 04:36 PM
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
To: Robert Davis/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange@EES
cc: Daniel Allegretti/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff Ader/HOU/EES@EES, Richard
Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Susan J
Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra
McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Janel Guerrero/Corp/Enron@Enron, Karen
Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON
Subject: Re: California SB 23X
Thanks for the note. We'll need to to discuss this a bit further, since it
could be a very sensitive issue for us (e.g., "Enron's answer to the
electricity crisis in municipalization). If spun right, could provide an
interesting opportunity, however.
Best,
Jeff
Robert Davis/Western Region/The Bentley Company@Exchange
05/04/2001 04:08 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Ader/HOU/EES@EES, Daniel
Allegretti/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: California SB 23X
Gentlemen,
California State Senator Nell Soto (D-Ontario Dist.32) has authored SB 23 X
which is intended to streamline the formation of public power districts in
California.
Here is an opportunity for Enron to get involved and flex some muscle and win
on several fronts. I think Enron is uniquely qualified to work with
municipalities to provide private labeled products or services that will
create a winning situation for all parties involved (including the IOUs).
I am extremely interested in working on such an effort and would very much
enjoy sharing my ideas in more detail at any time. Please feel free to
contact me.
Thanks all,
Robert Davis, Account Manager
Enron Energy Services
611 Anton Blvd. Suite 700
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Phones:
Office 714-434-1800 ext.455
Cell 714-267-0968
Pager 888-935-2143
=====================================
|
2,872 |
Subject: Re: California
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/28184.
=====================================
I'll see what i can do and get back to you.
Best,
Jeff
"Seabron Adamson" <[email protected]>
06/27/2001 10:01 AM
Please respond to seabron.adamson
To: <[email protected]>
cc:
Subject: California
Jeff:
One of my senior colleagues is visiting San Francisco on July 2nd and 3rd,
with two senior members of the government of New South Wales (Australia) in
tow. Frontier are advising the NSW government on their electric
restructuring process. My coleague Danny Price is a real star on power
markets - he has worked on it for longer than I have even.
Inevitably, these people are interested in understanding the California
meltdown. We have scheduled for them to meet a range of folks in California,
including two of the CPUC Comissioners, Lorreta Lynch's chief of staff, Cal
ISO, PG&E, one of the generators, etc. They are forewarned that the CPUC and
Davis's office will be all political bluster.
Any chance they might catch up with someone from Enron for an hour? Could
buy you a nice lunch on Monday July 2nd? Enron has a substntial operation in
Australia but I guess that is a bit out of your balliwick.
I realize this is a very late (and unusual request) so I completely
understand if it is inconvenient or impossible.
Cheers
Seabron
This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the
addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or
confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this
e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly
prohibited.
If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify me at
(617) 354-0060 and permanently delete the original and any copy of any
e-mail and any printout thereof.
Seabron Adamson
Frontier Economics Inc
Two Brattle Square
Cambridge, MA 02138 USA
Ph: (617) 354-0060
Fax: (617) 354-0640
[email protected]
www.frontier-economics.com
=====================================
|
2,873 |
Subject: Re: Meeting w/Sempra
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/2302.
=====================================
Roger. Mums the word on the gov.
Steven J Kean
10/11/2000 03:03 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Re: Meeting w/Sempra
sounds good. I think we should not talk about the conversations with the
governor . . . I'd rather not prompt them to go to the gov (presumably to
object to the gov talking to us without talking to them at the same time).
Jeff Dasovich
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
10/11/2000 02:54 PM
To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected], Sandra
McCubbin/SFO/EES@EES, Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Harry Kingerski/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J
Mara/SFO/EES@EES, Mona L Petrochko/SFO/EES@EES, [email protected], Karen
Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Meeting w/Sempra
FYI. Recently, Chris Calger has asked me to set up a meeting with Sempra.
ENA's seeking deals with the two big CA gas IOUs (PG&E and SoCalGas) that
would give ENA access to their assets. In short, ENA wants to offer a
complete outsource deal for the IOUs' core gas load (i.e., rez and small
commercial customers). ENA would take responsibility for providing service
for delivery at the city gate and in return would manage all of core's assets
(upstream of the city gate). We're meeting with Sempra's "Chief Regulatory
Office" (Bill Reed) and Sempra's CFO next Thursday to discuss.
Given the fact that Sempra's primarily focused on electricity, the plan is to
lead off the meeting with a couple of electricity solutions as a bridge to
the gas offer. For electricity, the plan has two pieces: 1) a commodity
offer that beats the 6.5 cent cap (i.e., nothing fancy) and 2) "Deal Bench"
services with the intent of establishing a procurement mechanism for SDG&E
that the California PUC could pre-approve (thereby eliminating some of the
immense regulatory risk SDG&E now faces).
Wanted to run this by folks to gauge reactions. We'll distribute the slides
we're putting together as soon as they're drafted--hopefully by COB Friday.
Best,
Jeff
=====================================
|
2,874 |
Subject: RE: How to get your Outlook mail remotely
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/93.
=====================================
Thank you.
-----Original Message-----
From: Hrach, April
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 5:52 PM
To: Alamo, Joseph; Brodbeck, Kelly; Browner, Victor; Calvert, Gray; Carranza, Octavio; Danielson, Michael; Dasovich, Jeff; Deane, Ryan; Dyer, Laird; Fillinger, Mark; Ha, Vicky; Hrach, April; Mara, Susan; Mcdonald, Michael; McKalip-Thompson, Catherine; Parquet, David; Perrino, Dave; Petrochko, Mona L.; Qureishi, Ibrahim; Russell, Dean; Schoen, Mary; Turnipseed, Edith; Wehn, Samuel; Wong, Michael; Zavala, Cristina
Subject: How to get your Outlook mail remotely
Importance: High
Hey Everybody!
Now that I have had a chance to test remote mail myself I think I can give you the basics and hopefully field your questions.
You can access your Outlook mail from any computer connected to the internet without logging on to any Enron dial-ups or sites.
To repeat: You can get to your Outlook mail without connecting to Enron.
On any internet connected computer type mail.enron.com in the address box.
At this point a logon box will appear. It says, 'Please type your user name and password.'. This is the exact user name and password
you use to logon to your Enron computer.
A Microsoft Outlook Web Access page should open up. Mine opens directly to my Inbox, yours should too. If not, one of the shortcuts in
the vertical 'tool bar', on the left side of the screen shout be an Inbox icon. Click on it.
To see your folders you will need to click on the word 'Folders' on the left side, vertical 'tool bar'.
Please try this at work so I can help answer your questions and concerns before you are out and about trying this new system.
Note: When accessing email through the internet you will not have a spell check option. Your best bet is to copy/paste the email
to a word or excel sheet and spell check it there. Then make the necessary adjustments in your email before sending.
Please contact me with any questions you have, or if you need help logging on.
April
=====================================
|
2,875 |
Subject: Electronic Mail Retention
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/445.
=====================================
Can you help me with this? I can never get Sanders to respond. Could you try to get an answer for me?
Sue Mara
Enron Corp.
Tel: (415) 782-7802
Fax:(415) 782-7854
----- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/NA/Enron on 07/26/2001 01:39 PM -----
Susan J Mara 07/25/2001 01:38 PM To: Richard B Sanders/Enron@EnronXGate cc: James D Steffes/Enron@EnronXGate, Richard Shapiro/Enron@EnronXGate, Joseph Alamo/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Electronic Mail Retention
Richard,
Several months ago, I was notified by you that my e-mails were being collected. Therefore, I kept doing what I've been doing all along since I joined Enron -- saving those emails I need for my job and deleting others. Given this new notice from you, I am confused about what to do. I do not have enough guidance. I get hundreds of emails every day. I respond to many of them. Do I save all email receipts and responses? Do I save a subset? What is the basis for saving some and deleting others? Can't my trash file and my e-mail system just be stored by IT centrally in Houston? Please respond.
Sue Mara
Enron Corp.
Tel: (415) 782-7802
Fax:(415) 782-7854
----- Forwarded by Susan J Mara/NA/Enron on 07/25/2001 01:31 PM -----
Mark Haedicke and Richard Sanders Sent by: Enron Announcements 07/25/2001 01:19 PM To: Individuals Exempted from Retention Policy cc: Subject: Electronic Mail Retention
This is a reminder that due to the various proceedings ongoing in California, please do not delete any email or electronic data that relates to the Company's past, current or future business in California. Deletion of such data could subject both you and the Company to allegations of deliberate destruction of evidence, contempt of court, and civil and criminal penalties. To preserve such data, please have your assistant create a folder entitled "California Data" and move all emails and other data to that folder. Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions, please contact Richard Sanders at x35587 or Mark Haedicke at x36544.
=====================================
|
2,876 |
Subject: FW: Utility authority to engage in derivative transactions
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/403.
=====================================
Jeff:
This info. on CA is very helpful to a project I am working on. Please forward to me additional info. you get on hedging in CA. Thanks!
Hope all is well with you, Jennifer
-----Original Message-----
From: Landwehr, Susan M.
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 8:59 PM
To: Thome, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Utility authority to engage in derivative transactions
Jennifer--info for your matrix on California
-----Original Message-----
From: Lawner, Leslie
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 8:57 AM
To: Landwehr, Susan M.
Subject: FW: Utility authority to engage in derivative transactions
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 12:41 PM
To: Tycholiz, Barry; Lawner, Leslie; Miller, Stephen; Cantrell, Rebecca W.
Subject: Utility authority to engage in derivative transactions
Barry, et al:
FYI. Some initial info I got from our outside council regarding utility authority to engage in financial risk management tools. More info to follow as we get it. If you have quesitons, comments, or suggestions for additional research needed, just holler. Please forward to others who might need it.
Best,
Jeff
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Electric: SCE, PG&E and SDG&E are all authorized to enter into bilateral
forward transactions with non-ISO or PX parties. D.00-08-023 and
D.00-09-075. These transactions are limited to contracts which must expire
on or before 12-31-05. Initial contracts are subject to a blanket
reasonableness test (if less than 5% above cost of non-forward cost of
portfolio=deemed reasonable) but contracts after 12-31-02 will be subject
to a CPUC preapproval process.
Gas: PG&E authorized to use gas hedges for all purposes (D.98-12-082) but
limited to contracts expiring on or beforce 12-31-02 and limited to $200
million in cost or 800 MMcfd in volume. We are looking for a similar
resolution or decision for Sempra. Haven't found it yet, but we believe
they have been given similar authority.
=====================================
|
2,877 |
Subject: Follow up for Ken Lay
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4753.
=====================================
Please call the GAP lady- you're the right person. Thanks.
---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron on 03/22/2001
06:22 PM ---------------------------
From: Janel Guerrero on 03/22/2001 10:17 AM
To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Mark Palmer/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Cindy
Derecskey/Corp/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Paul
Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Jeff
Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, Vance
Meyer/NA/Enron@ENRON, Leslie Lawner/NA/Enron@Enron, James D
Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron@Enron, Ginger
Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Steven J Kean/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Follow up for Ken Lay
Everyone,
I am beginning to receive phone calls and emails from some of the CA
businesses that Ken sent letters to on Monday. I will be tracking these
businesses through a database, but we need to start following up with phone
calls and additional information.
I will keep you posted on who is asking for more information, and all
materials that we send to these businesses going foward. However, I will
need your help in placing follow up phone calls.
To that end, I would like Mark and Rick to make the first two phone calls
today. Keep in mind we sent out two letters. Before you contact these
folks, you might want to check the list to see which letter we sent out.
(I'm attaching the final list. The highlighted companies - 15 - received
the letter from Ken that indicated he would follow up personally. Everyone
else - 100 - received the generic letter).
****Whomever you talk with, be sure and confirm the address and phone number
and names for where we should send future information (see list) thanks!!!
Mark Palmer
Ms. Kris Essell (check the spelling when you talk with her)
Public Affairs Rep to Chairman Sherry Lansing
Paramount Pictures
323-956-5202
Asked for additional materials
Rick Shapiro
Tamsin Randlett
Senior Director, Government Affairs
Gap Inc.
415-427-3516
Asked for additional materials
=====================================
|
2,878 |
Subject: RE: Governor's Birthday party invite
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/2291.
=====================================
No invite here.
I thought Gray was too old for birthdays!
Maybe IEP should give him a nice big candle to light the cake.
Kent
-----Original Message-----
From: Julee Malinowski-Ball [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 8:44 AM
To: Nam Nguyen; Bill Carlson; Bill Woods; Bob Ellery; Bob Escalante; Carolyn
Baker; Curtis Kebler; David Keane; David Parquet; Dean Gosselin; Duane
Nelson; Ed Tomeo; Frank DeRosa; Greg Blue; Hap Boyd; [email protected]; Jack
Pigott; Jeff Dasovich; Jim Willey; Joe Greco; Joe Ronan; John Stout;
Jonathan Weisgall; Kassandra Gough; Ken Hoffman; Kent Fickett; Lynn
Lednicky; Marty McFadden; Paula Soos; Richard Hyde; Robert Lamkin; Roger
Pelote; Stephanie Newell; Steve Ponder; Steven Kelley; Sue Mara; Tandy
McMannes; Tony Wetzel; Trond Aschehoug; William Hall
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Fw: Governor's Birthday party invite
See below.
----- Original Message -----
From: Larrea, John <mailto:[email protected]>
To: 'Julee <mailto:[email protected]> Malinowski-Ball'
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2000 7:56 AM
Subject: Governor's Birthday party invite
Julee, Williams received a faxed invitation to the Governor's
Birthday party at Haim Saben's house about a week and a half ago. Do you
know if any other generators or marketers in IEP received the invite? Who
in IEP would know?
John G. Larrea
Governmental Relations
850 Stillwater Road, Suite 150
West Sacramento, CA 95605
(916) 376-3650
(916) 376-3610
(916) 616-7062 mobile
[email protected]
PG&E National Energy Group and any other
company referenced herein that uses the PG&E name or
logo are not the same company as Pacific Gas and
Electric Company, the regulated California utility. Neither
PG&E National Energy Group nor these other
referenced companies are regulated by the California Public
Utilities Commission. Customers of Pacific Gas and Electric Company
do not have to buy products from these companies in order
to continue to receive quality regulated services from the utility.
=====================================
|
2,879 |
Subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL: DASR Update
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/11778.
=====================================
I think we definitely need clarification on the July date, but we should
defer to Tom Riley on approaching UC/CSU for help.
James D Steffes@ENRON
07/19/2001 12:47 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Jeremy Blachman@EES,
[email protected]@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Diann Huddleson@EES, Mike D
Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/Enron@EnronXGate
cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: CONFIDENTIAL: DASR Update
The attached indicates that UC/CSU are still not fully back to DA. Does it
make sense to try and get their help in making sure that the legislation does
not limit their return to DA? What is our current relationship with that
customer?
Also, does anyone have any problems with Govt Affairs using this information
when we are asking for "clarification" on the July 12 date? It may be
helpful to highlight for the key legislative members exactly who they are
hurting with their decisions.
Thanks,
Jim
To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeremy Blachman
cc: [email protected], Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Diann Huddleson, Mike D
Smith/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: DASR Update
This is the daily report we get regarding DASR's. We regularly scrub this
report for accuracy but it can give you a feel for where we are in the
process. The "CA DASR Scorecard" is a summary.
Again, we'll continue to improve the accuracy of the reporting and will keep
you in the loop.
Please let me know if you need additional information.
Thanks,
Evan
---------------------- Forwarded by Evan Hughes/HOU/EES on 07/19/2001 12:27
PM ---------------------------
[email protected] on 07/19/2001 08:32:16 AM
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Reports for this morning's meeting
Here are the reports for the 9:00 CDT update.
(See attached file: 071801 500 PM CA COMM STATUS RPRT.xls) (See attached
file: CA DASR Scorecard 071801 500PM.doc)
- 071801 500 PM CA COMM STATUS RPRT.xls
- CA DASR Scorecard 071801 500PM.doc
=====================================
|
2,880 |
Subject: Fw: CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/521.
=====================================
The CAISO recently filed Amendment 30, which would provide the CAISO with
the authority to engage in forward contracts/purchasing, etc. to meet
reliability requirements. This filing is in response to the language in the
FERC San Diego Order which suggested that the FERC believes the CAISO should
have this authority. Clearly, this raises issues about the role of the
CAISO in the forward markets as a policy matter, but FERC is likely to
approved this authority anyway.
The CAISO Board is addressing this matter as part of its Comprehensive
Market Reform Project. The CAISO Board at the September 7 meeting deferred
the issues of the 2-day ahead market (as well as the policy matter of the
CAISO buying forward) until the October meeting. However, later during
Executive Session, the CAISO Board apparently approved Amendment 30.
At this point in time, IEP is not planning on responding to Amendment 30.
This position is primarily driven by limited funds in the
Restructuring/Transmission Task Force account and, given the forces aligned
in support, taking this issue up seem problematic. Please let me know if
anyone differs with this assessment and would like to see IEP comment
(recognizing that funds would be required to accomplish this).
----- Original Message -----
From: Andy Brown <[email protected]>
To: Steven Kelly (E-mail) <[email protected]>; Katie Kaplan (E-mail)
<[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Cc: Douglas Kerner <[email protected]>; Chris Ellison <[email protected]>;
Eric Janssen <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2000 3:55 PM
Subject: CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGED ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION
> Attached is a memo which briefly describes CAISO's Amendment 30 and a
> potential response approach for IEP. The filing will be due October 2,
> which effectively means that we must decide what IEP wants to say by the
> 27th, if the "final draft" is to be circulated to interested membership
> before filing. ABB
> <<000918_IEP_mmo_CAISO_AM30.doc>>
>
- 000918_IEP_mmo_CAISO_AM30.doc
=====================================
|
2,881 |
Subject: ENERGY COST IMPACTS - SECOND REQUEST
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: []
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/29096.
=====================================
July 24, 2001
TO:? ALL CMTA MEMBERS
FM:? JACK M. STEWART
SUBJECT: ENERGY COST IMPACTS - SECOND REQUEST
WE NEED YOUR IMMEDIATE HELP!
In June, the CPUC allocated the largest electric rate increase in history.?
The vast majority of the increase was allocated to the largest business
customers, who received rate increases of 60% to 87%.? Some customers have
reported June bills with increases as high as 140%.
Now, the Assembly and Senate are about to act on legislation to deal with
Southern California Edison's (SCE) nearly $4 billion under collection
(debt).? As currently drafted, SBX2 78 would allocate all the SCE debt to
business customers.
The Senate has already passed SBX2 78 and the Assembly has scheduled a
Friday, July 27 vote on the bill.
It is critical that we understand the impact that higher rates are having on
manufacturers and their ability to remain competitive in California.? Without
clear examples of how increased electricity rates are impacting large users,
our ability to stop additional cost shifts to industrial users is severely
hampered.
We need your help to make our message loud and clear.? If you have been hurt
by the soaring cost of electricity, let us know your story in an email or
phone call.
Examples may be in the form of product price increases, plant slowdowns,
layoffs, reductions in force, putting expansion plans on hold, sending
production out of state, etc.
It would be most helpful if we could use the name of your company along with
your story, but if you prefer that your information remain anecdotal, we will
respect your confidentiality.
?
If you have already responded to our earlier solicitation for information,
thank you.? If you have an update, please let us know.
Please reply by return email, fax (916/447-9401) or by calling me at
916/498-3329.
P.S.? We also need information from PG&E customers.? If the legislature
agrees to the Edison deal, it is likely to become the template for repaying
the PG&E debt.
?
- groyer.vcf
=====================================
|
2,882 |
Subject: Re: Please Take a Look--Draft Slides for Monday Talk in New York on
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/896.
=====================================
----- Forwarded by Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron on 07/09/2001 02:23 PM -----
Jeff Dasovich Sent by: Jeff Dasovich 07/09/2001 02:16 PM To: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Re: Please Take a Look--Draft Slides for Monday Talk in New York on California Crisis
Yes. Thanks very much Maureen and Ginger. There is a subsequent power point presentation that I'm fairly confident I distributed (may have done so after I got back from New York, so you might also want to search Steve and Rick's in-boxes through the first two weeks of February). Thanks again for the help.
Best,
Jeff
Richard Shapiro 07/09/2001 01:46 PM To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Please Take a Look--Draft Slides for Monday Talk in New York on California Crisis
Was'nt there an earlier powerpoint?
---------------------- Forwarded by Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron on 07/09/2001 01:45 PM ---------------------------
Maureen McVicker
07/09/2001 01:43 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: Ginger Dernehl/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: Please Take a Look--Draft Slides for Monday Talk in New York on California Crisis
HERE'S A DRAFT OF THE EXNET PRESENTATION. I'LL KEEP LOOKING FOR THE FINAL VERSION.
----- Forwarded by Maureen McVicker/NA/Enron on 07/09/2001 01:42 PM -----
From: Jeff Dasovich on 01/26/2001 12:22 PM
Sent by: Jeff Dasovich
To: [email protected], Paul Kaufman/PDX/ECT@ECT, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron@ENRON, Sandra McCubbin/NA/Enron@Enron, [email protected], Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Karen Denne/Corp/Enron@ENRON
cc:
Subject: Please Take a Look--Draft Slides for Monday Talk in New York on California Crisis
I've still got considerable work to do, but wanted to make sure all had a chance to review and comment well in advance of finalizing. I'm giving a talk at Exnet on Monday about California. Attached is a draft of the slides. All comments welcome and appreciated. I'm continuing to work on it. Thanks very much.
Best,
Jeff
<Embedded StdOleLink>
=====================================
|
2,883 |
Subject: FW: Utility authority to engage in derivative transactions
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/29307.
=====================================
Jeff:
This info. on CA is very helpful to a project I am working on. Please
forward to me additional info. you get on hedging in CA. Thanks!
Hope all is well with you, Jennifer
-----Original Message-----
From: Landwehr, Susan M.
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 8:59 PM
To: Thome, Jennifer
Subject: FW: Utility authority to engage in derivative transactions
Jennifer--info for your matrix on California
-----Original Message-----
From: Lawner, Leslie
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2001 8:57 AM
To: Landwehr, Susan M.
Subject: FW: Utility authority to engage in derivative transactions
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 12:41 PM
To: Tycholiz, Barry; Lawner, Leslie; Miller, Stephen; Cantrell, Rebecca W.
Subject: Utility authority to engage in derivative transactions
Barry, et al:
FYI. Some initial info I got from our outside council regarding utility
authority to engage in financial risk management tools. More info to follow
as we get it. If you have quesitons, comments, or suggestions for additional
research needed, just holler. Please forward to others who might need it.
Best,
Jeff
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++
Electric: SCE, PG&E and SDG&E are all authorized to enter into bilateral
forward transactions with non-ISO or PX parties. D.00-08-023 and
D.00-09-075. These transactions are limited to contracts which must expire
on or before 12-31-05. Initial contracts are subject to a blanket
reasonableness test (if less than 5% above cost of non-forward cost of
portfolio=deemed reasonable) but contracts after 12-31-02 will be subject
to a CPUC preapproval process.
Gas: PG&E authorized to use gas hedges for all purposes (D.98-12-082) but
limited to contracts expiring on or beforce 12-31-02 and limited to $200
million in cost or 800 MMcfd in volume. We are looking for a similar
resolution or decision for Sempra. Haven't found it yet, but we believe
they have been given similar authority.
=====================================
|
2,884 |
Subject: RE: Merry Xmas?
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4424.
=====================================
I will see you tonight. I am going to dinner with the illustrious Jessica,
but will be home later...
Cameron Sellers
Vice President, Business Development
PERFECT
1860 Embarcadero Road - Suite 210
Palo Alto, CA 94303
[email protected]
650.798.3366 (direct dial)
650.269.3366 (cell)
650.858.1095 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 12:34 PM
To: Cameron Sellers
Subject: RE: Merry Xmas?
where've we been? where've you been? really only stay at my house on
school nites (monday/thursday). will be chez toi tonite. would LOVE to go
back this weekend (it's gorgeous---TONS of iris, apple blossoms, wild
flowers, etc.), but alas, we promised you're folks we'd plant tomatoes this
weekend. I'm going to put down nice gravely rock around the beds, so it
looks more like Italy, or France or something and we don't get all the
weeds. Sorry about S.D., but it will be super nice down there. Be sure to
go to Black's Beach. And golf and Torrey Pines. See you tonite?
Cameron
Sellers To: "'[email protected]'"
<cameron@perf <[email protected]>
ect.com> cc:
Subject: RE: Merry Xmas?
04/10/2001
02:35 PM
Where have you been - I haven't seen you guys at all. Staying at your
house
a little more these days?? When are you going back up to the dome? We are
leaving Friday for San Diego to spend the easter holiday (yeah, whatever)
with Scotty's mom.
Cameron Sellers
Vice President, Business Development
PERFECT
1860 Embarcadero Road - Suite 210
Palo Alto, CA 94303
[email protected]
650.798.3366 (direct dial)
650.269.3366 (cell)
650.858.1095 (fax)
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 12:28 PM
To: Cameron Sellers
Subject: RE: Merry Xmas?
Not a problem. Just couldn't believe that they screwed it up so much.
There's 3 ft of new power at Squaw!!!!
=====================================
|
2,885 |
Subject: Report on 6-26-01 Meetings with CPUC re Direct Access
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/12291.
=====================================
Sue Mara and I joined representatives of ABAG, New West, New Energy, Green
Mountain Energy and Commonwealth in a series of meetings with Commissioners
and advisors on the two orders set for Thursday, June 28 on PX credits and
direct access.
Republican Commissioners Bilas and Duque are very unhappy and cynical about
their chances of reversing the order suspending direct access. They do feel
that the discussion about the PX credits and the limitation of recovery of
the credits to billing credits can be bifurcated and postponed to another
decision at a later date. Procedural issues have arisen related to giving
public notice of any amendments, but all the offices gave some indication
that the delay in considering this issue was a 90% + possibility.
On direct access itself, Brown, the swing vote, repeatedly asked us to help
him by getting the legislature to pass a direct access bill. He will vote
for the suspension unless the legislature acts or the administration
(Davis/Angelides) changes its mind. The same message came from the other
offices. Notwithstanding the ongoing global settlement discussions, I
recommend that we work with all the ESPs and the direct access coalition to
try to get a separate D/A bill passed immediately. All of the other ESPs
are trying to reach Burton, Bowen, Angelides (the Treasurer) and Davis, in
that order, to try to get something to break loose.
What is the status of discussions in Sacramento? We made a strong pitch for
the Commission to grant a delay in the vote on Thursday, and one is
possible, especially if we have lots of direct access supporters asking for
more time at the Commission and in Sacramento. They all understand that the
bonds will not be issued in the next three weeks. Our window of time in
which to act is likely to be the end of July, if the Treasurer and the Gov
try to rush the issuance of the bonds.
Can we convene a conference call to coordinate any remaining options for a
quick rifle shot bill on direct access?
Let's talk tomorrow.
Mike Day
=====================================
|
2,886 |
Subject: FW: Nevada PUC Acts To Change Or Void Long-Term Pwr Contracts
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/sent_items/546.
=====================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Dasovich, Jeff
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2001 12:48 PM
To: Calger, Christopher F.; Belden, Tim; Kaufman, Paul
Subject: Nevada PUC Acts To Change Or Void Long-Term Pwr Contracts
FYI.
Nevada PUC Acts To Change Or Void Long-Term Pwr Contracts
LOS ANGELES -(Dow Jones)- The Nevada Public Utilities Commission Wednesday voted to allow its General Counsel Office to take any action necessary to try to void or renegotiate long-term electricity contracts entered into by the state's two largest utilities, a PUC spokeswoman said.
The contracts would force Sierra Pacific Resources' (SRP) utilities Sierra Pacific Power Co. and Nevada Power Co. to pay a higher price for power than current market rates, said Don Soderberg, PUC chairman.
"We paid high prices when the prices were high, but to pay high prices when the prices are low is outrageous," Soderberg said.
No one at Sierra Pacific or Nevada Power was available to comment on which companies have signed contracts with the utilities, or the value of the contracts.
The PUC action follows a letter sent by Gov. Kenny Guinn to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in early October asking that the utilities be allowed to renegotiate the contracts.
The General Counsel's office will now have authority to file with FERC and in court to plead against the current contracts.
Sierra Pacific has said that a June FERC order that capped wholesale power prices has penalized the company. Sierra Pacific signed its forward contracts to escape high spot market prices, only to have those contracts end up being more expensive than the capped spot market prices, the company has said. As well, if the company wants to sell any surplus power into the spot market, it will now receive less for that power under the cap, it has said.
California 's Public Utilities Commission is also pushing for renegotiation of $43 billion in long-term contracts signed by the state, which has been buying power on behalf of cash-strapped utilities since January.
=====================================
|
2,887 |
Subject: Moving on
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/1747.
=====================================
Paul, Tim, and Jeff,
I want to thank you again for offering me such a great opportunity. Merrie
and
I were very close to taking the job and had already picked out a school for
the
kids and a few neighborhood options. As I said, it was the potential new PJM
opportunities that cause us to turn it down. However there is more to the
story
that I should explain because I've accepted a job with PG&E in Maryland and
that
may look bad from your perspective. Unfortunately for me, after PJM's major
re-organization announced last week, the PJM positions were less desirable
than
I had hoped. I have been recused from many of my monitoring duties for a
while
following PJM's code of conduct and I took the opportunity to talk to former
colleagues who are now at PG&E. Due to the code of conduct, I'm either on the
job market or not, there's no in between, so I hope you understand that I
needed
to consider my options all at once. I met with PG&E and they immediately made
an offer for a position in a group doing mostly analysis and some policy if I
want it which is perfect. You all know how much we want to be in Washington
because of our families and most of our friends. They want me to quit this
week
since I'm prevented from doing any work. The Enron offer started this ball
rolling and initially we were only considering that. People say I'm crazy to
turn it down which is probably true. I hope you were able to find someone
suitable for your position. If you're still looking, I know one top-notch
person FERC who would be perfect and who is outdoorsy and single so he might
jump at the opportunity to be in Portland. His name is Paul Sotkiewicz
(pronounced Sutkee-evich), PhD econ from Minnesota, not "pointy headed" as
Jeff
would say. I wish you all the best. Tim and Jeff I hope we can stay in touch
on GSPP-related issues. They have the school moving in very positive
directions. I'll give you my contact information when I have it.
Rob
Rob Gramlich
PJM Market Monitoring Unit
(610) 666-4291
[email protected]
=====================================
|
2,888 |
Subject: nan
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/12143.
=====================================
Greetings Laura and Marybeth:
Laura:
If you have the time and the inclination, I'd like to spend a half-hour
briefing you on the energy situation. I apologize for the brevity of this
note, but can fill you in more if you think that there's value in chatting.
In a nutshell, there's a concerted effort underway----one last big push----to
try to get a comprehensive solution in place for California that works for
the majority of constituencies (i.e., broad coalition right and left of
center).
The deal would be bi-partisan.
If successful, the deal would:
Put rates in place that reflect and cover costs, repay debts, send the right
price signals for efficiency, but fall short of "shock therapy."
Return the utility to creditworthiness as a result of the new rates.
Use the minimum amount of State- and utility-backed bonds to finance the
solution
Turn the procurement role back over to the utilities (and away from the
State) once creditworthiness is established---3-6 months following the rate
changes.
Establish the competitive market structure that California was promised but
never got---consumer choice for all customers; 18-24 months later, large
industrial would be required to procure electricity needs from the market.
NOT include government takeovers of the industry (e.g., sale of utility
transmission assets to the State would not be part of any deal).
Include a contribution from large players, e.g., utilities and suppliers.
Resolve the myriad lawsuits, investigations, etc.
Those involved still believe that there is a need for a group of "wise
persons" to help get the deal done. L. Summers is willing; others are being
considered. Your name has come up. But that issue can be addressed later.
The goal of a phone call would be to bring you up to speed on the events,
which are breaking quickly.
Hope all is well and hope to talk to you soon. Congratulations on Haas' #7
ranking in US News and World Report.
Best,
Jeff
Office 415.782.7822
Pager 888.916.7184
Home 415.621.8317
Cell 415.505.6633
=====================================
|
2,889 |
Subject: Re: Just an Idea
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/2094.
=====================================
SGT Reyna,
Definitely a good idea -- and one that EBS has flirted with a couple of
times. In early '99 the Network Development group sent me out to meet with
military facilities managers along our proposed fiber route from Houston to
Jacksonville. I had a few good meetings, stocked up on cheap class six
liquor, and reported back some interest from the Navy. Unfortunately there
was not much follow up from our sales folks (though it did begin our
relationship with NASA).
6 Months later a new vertical was set up at EBS to sell services to federal
agencies, including the DOD. The group piggy-backed their efforts with Enron
Federal Solutions - the EES-esque vertical to outsource energy to military
bases. However, because of much legislative and regulatory uncertainty (Bob
Frank can elaborate) the EBS tie-in never really took off with the EFS
business.
The upshot? I think there is still a viable business there, especially if we
can demonstrate massive cost savings to the DOD through our trading
organization, but EBS has never fully engaged in a focused effort in this
area. The only way I see EBS at this point doing any significant deals with
the DOD is if they create a better team - with federal government knowledge
and a handle on military-speak to pursue these deals, or if EBS "falls into"
opportunities through origination leads that come from our group (much like
the U.S. Space Alliance-NASA leads) or through ENA/EES. A good idea --
difficult to execute.
Thoughts anyone?
SPC Bolton
Margo Reyna@ENRON
11/30/00 08:41 AM
To: Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Scott Bolton/Enron Communications@Enron
Communications, Marchris Robinson/NA/Enron@Enron
cc:
Subject: Just an Idea
Although it is altogether different from the electric industry, is it
possible that EBS could realize significant commercial opportunities if it
were to look into providing broadband services to military bases?
Margo Reyna
Regulatory Analyst
Enron Corp., Government Affairs
Phone: 713-853-9191
=====================================
|
2,890 |
Subject: Year End 2000 Performance Feedback
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/1467.
=====================================
NOTE: YOU WILL RECEIVE THIS MESSAGE EACH TIME YOU ARE SELECTED AS A REVIEWER.
You have been selected to participate in the Year End 2000 Performance
Management process by providing meaningful feedback on specific employee(s).
Your feedback plays an important role in the process, and your participation
is critical to the success of Enron's Performance Management goals.
To complete requests for feedback, access PEP at http://pep.corp.enron.com
and select Perform Review under Performance Review Services. You may begin
providing feedback immediately and are requested to have all feedback forms
completed by Friday, November 17, 2000.
If you have any questions regarding PEP or your responsibility in the
process, please contact the PEP Help Desk at:
Houston: 1.713.853.4777, Option 4
London: 44.207.783.4040, Option 4
Email: [email protected]
Thank you for your participation in this important process.
The following is a CUMULATIVE list of employee feedback requests with a
status of "OPEN." Once you have submitted or declined an employee's request
for feedback, their name will no longer appear on this list.
Review Group: ENRON
Feedback Due Date: Nov 17, 2000
Employee Name Supervisor Name Date Selected
------------- --------------- -------------
BOLTON, SCOTT RICHARD S SHAPIRO Nov 06, 2000
CONDON, CHARLES D MARTIN J WENZEL Nov 03, 2000
FAWCETT, JEFFERY C JESS K HYATT Nov 01, 2000
HAMILTON, TIMOTHY J JAMES W LEWIS Oct 25, 2000
KAUFMAN, PAUL J RICHARD S SHAPIRO Oct 31, 2000
MANDELKER, JEANNIE KAREN L DENNE Nov 06, 2000
MCLAUGHLIN, TRACY SCOTT BOLTON Oct 25, 2000
NORD, BONNIE S RICHARD S SHAPIRO Nov 03, 2000
O'CONNELL, EARLENE ELIZABETH C LINNELL Nov 01, 2000
=====================================
|
2,891 |
Subject: Re:
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/3680.
=====================================
There's a place for working and re-working. There's also a a very important
place in art--writing in particular--for spontaneity and whim. I'd do a
tweak here and a snip there, but quickly and only around the edges, and
submit it as a film review. It's novel, it's fun, and exposure'd a good
thing.
Things are good. Going to be weary for the next 3-4 weeks until schools out,
though.
Best,
Jeff
"Scott Laughlin" <[email protected]>
11/20/2000 04:15 PM
To: [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Re:
Thanks for your suggestions. It's good to know, not only for this, but for
the future as well. I don't know what the hell Cameron wants to do. She
thinks that she is some kind of expert editor, when really she is a goddamn
lawyer who has read a book or two! She does want it to be the best it can
be, but it is ultimately not that important! Oh well. I'm just going to go
ahead and do what I want with it anyway.
Hope all's well.
>From: [email protected]
>To: "Scott Laughlin" <[email protected]>
>Subject: Re:
>Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 15:59:53 -0600
>
>
>I don't get it. What does she want to do?
>
>
>
> "Scott
> Laughlin" To: [email protected]
> <scottwl@hotm cc:
> ail.com> Subject:
>
> 11/17/2000
> 09:48 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>Jeff,
>
>Cameron doens't want you to send that Grinch thing out to anyone. Not that
>she would. She wants to edit it, and try to send it out all at once.
>Whatever. I'm forced to tell you.
>
>B.O.
>_________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
>Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
>http://profiles.msn.com.
>
>
>
>
>
______________________________________________________________________________
_______
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
=====================================
|
2,892 |
Subject: Update on Real Time Pricing
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/4077.
=====================================
An update on Real Time Pricing for the SVMG Energy Committee:
The CEC has received $35 million through recently-enacted legislation to
install interval meters on loads > 200 kW and upgrade those existing
real-time meters for communication that require it. They are working with
Roger Levy, a consultant, to finalize contracts with the utilities to begin
installing meters in May. The CEC's contact at PG&E is Tom Smith.
To implement required billing changes, Roger Levy reports that the utilities
seem open to outsourcing if necessary. Several vendors have been identified
and the CEC and the utilities are evaluating them. The need to outsource and
the scope depends on the RTP rate design.
John Wilson at the CEC is charged with heading up rate design. He is in
contact with the PUC's energy director if RTP is to be implemented through
utility rates and a CPUC process. As an alternative, DWR itself could bill
for power it purchases using RTP, effectively functioning as an Energy
Service Provider.
Art Rosenfeld briefed the Governor and received a supportive reaction last
Thursday.
To reiterate, Real Time Pricing is the only initative currently in
discussion that would create an incentive to reduce demand precisely during
those periods when actual supply is shortest relative to demand (and prices
are highest). It is essential to avoid blackouts that demand reductions
occur when they are most needed, given current projections of thousands of
MW of shortfall. Current demand reduction programs are not projected to
cover the anticipated shortfall, and rates designed with higher prices
during certain time periods cannot deliver a customer demand response to
actual conditions.
Since this affects all SVMG members either directly or indirectly, I believe
we need to give consideration to how to establish the historical use basis
against which deviations subject to real time pricing would be measured, and
also whether participation should be mandatory or voluntary, and what the
alternatives would be.
Regards,
Peter Evans
=====================================
|
2,893 |
Subject: RE: Pre-Semester Pow-Wow
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/215.
=====================================
You are all confirmed...the place is not.
Unfortunately Laurel's is too close to the real thing...it sucks! So I canceled
I made a res at Cafe Monk on 4th between Brennan and Brannon. Other suggestions were Thirsty Bear and Cha-Cha-Cha, both good, but greasy food.
Any oppositions to Cafe Monk, or better suggestions? (I tried Boogaloos but they are closed Thursday)
-----Original Message-----
From: Kelly, Jacqueline
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 12:52 PM
To: Kelly, Jacqueline; 'Chris Neale (E-mail)'; 'Courtney Abernath (E-mail)'; 'Deepika (E-mail)'; 'Jeff Dasovich (E-mail)'; 'Paul Brodie (E-mail)'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; Erin Brewer (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Pre-Semester Pow-Wow
I booked a table for 12 at 8pm at Laurels on 205 Oak st between (cross street is the street between laguna and gough) 934-1575 is the phone number.
Cuban Cuisine.
I have confirmed:
Deepika (2)
Courtney(2)
Blake(2)
Chris(2)
Anil(2)
ted and me(2)
Let me know if more are coming so I can extend the reservation.
See you there!!
-----Original Message-----
From: Kelly, Jacqueline
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 8:06 AM
To: Chris Neale (E-mail); Courtney Abernath (E-mail); Deepika (E-mail); Jeff Dasovich (E-mail); Paul Brodie (E-mail); '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'
Subject: Pre-Semester Pow-Wow
I hope you had a great summer!!
Lets get together and catch up before school starts next Thursday, August 23.
Details to follow...
Let me know if you can make it, and suggested places to meet. Invite others as well.
Also, we need to discuss the December trip in Tahoe to celebrate!!
Hope to see you next week!
Jacqueline Kelly
Treasury
Charles Schwab & Co, Inc
(415) 667-3915
Warning: All e-mail sent to or from this address will be received or otherwise
recorded by the Charles Schwab corporate e-mail system and is subject to
archival, monitoring or review by, and/or disclosure to, someone other than the
recipient.
=====================================
|
2,894 |
Subject: CA CEO Contact Info
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/notes_inbox/3193.
=====================================
Here's the info I have from the biz cards I collected yesterday (Ahhhhnold
didn't have one...)
Pat -- Would you please add to my rolodex? Also, if you have any phone
messages this week from CEOs w/ assistant names and numbers, pls route to
this distribution. thx. kd
Sun Microsystems
Piper Cole
Vice President
Global Public Policy
901 San Antonio Road, UPAL01-554
Palo Alto, CA 94303-4900
phone: 650-336-6633
fax: 650-336-0835
[email protected]
www.sun.com/policy
Exocus Communications, Inc.
Casey Beyer
Director, Government and Industry Relations
2831 Mission College Boulevard
Santa Clara, CA 95054
phone: 408-346-2474
cell: 408-464-8126
fax: 408-346-2420
[email protected]
Thomas E. Patterson
Sidley Austin Brown & Wood
555 West Fifth Street
Los Angeles, CA 90013
phone: 213-896-6037
fax: 213-896-6600
[email protected]
Eric Moses
Assistant Deputy Mayor
Office of the Mayor
Los Angeles, CA 90012
phone: 213-847-3574
pager: 213-350-9416
fax: 213-485-1286
[email protected]
Robert A. Day
Chairman/CEO
Trust Company of the West
865 South Figueroa Street
Los Angeles, CA 90017
phone: 213-244-0004
fax: 213-244-0588
200 Park Avenue
New York, New York 10166
phone: 212-771-4004
fax: 212-771-4001
Bruce Karatz
Chairman & CEO
KB Home
10990 Wilshire Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90024
phone: 310-231-4000
fax: 310-231-4290
designated contact: Larry Gotlieb (political affairs)
310-231-4000
Robert V. Sinnott
Managing Partner - Energy Investments
Kayne Anderson
1800 Avenue of the Stars
Second Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067
phone: 310-284-5508
fax: 310-284-6490
[email protected]
Kenneth T. Lombard
President
Magic Johnson Theatres/Johnson Development Corporation
9100 Wilshire Boulevard, suite 710 East
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
phone: 310-247-1994
fax: 310-247-0733
[email protected]
Kenneth T. Lombard
President
Los Angeles Board of Water and Power Commissioners
Department of Water and Power
City of Los Angeles
111 N. Hope Street, room 1555
Los Angeles, CA 90012
phone: 213-367-1356
Selim Zilkha
[email protected]
=====================================
|
2,895 |
Subject: REMINDER: HTC presents Siebel Systems this evening - 6pm in C220
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/inbox/1480.
=====================================
This is a reminder for tonight's talk - open to all students, faculty and
staff.
>Interested in customer relationship management?
>
>Curious about how a CEO gets business value from deploying e-Business
>software applications?
>
>Want to learn more about the communications and media industry?
>
>Want a job in alliance management, business development, product
>management or marketing?
>
>Interviewing soon with Siebel Systems?
>
>
>You are invited to a talk on ...
>
>"Relationship Management - the Siebel Way"
>
>by
>Dan Ford, General Manager, Siebel Systems
>Siebel Communications and Media Business Unit
>
>Date: Thursday, November 1st, 2001
>Time: 6:00 to 7:00 p.m. with refreshments from 5:30 p.m.
>Location: Cheit 220
>
>Siebel Systems is the worldwide market leader for integrated e-business
>applications for customer relationship management (CRM), partner
>relationship management (PRM) and employee relationship management (ERM).
>This talk, organized by the Haas Technology Club, focuses on the business
>issues associated with the relationship management market. There will also
>be an opportunity to see how the Siebel product is used to deliver value.
>
>Dan Ford is the General Manager of Siebel Systems' Siebel Communications &
>Media Business Unit.
>Siebel Communications & Media is an organization focused on the
>development, delivery and support of comprehensive eBusiness solutions for
>the communications and media industries. Before joining Siebel Systems in
>1998, Dan held executive positions in sales, product management and
>marketing at AT&T and GTE. Dan holds an MBA from Wharton Business School,
>an MA in International Studies from the University of Pennsylvania, and a
>BA from Stanford University.
>
>Topics to be covered include:
>
>What are today's challenges in the communications and media industries?
>What is the relationship management market?
>What is Siebel's approach and why is this so successful?
>Where have Siebel delivered quantifiable business benefits?
>
>
>Mark your diary today!
=====================================
|
2,896 |
Subject: Re: CONFIDENTIAL: DASR Update
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/520.
=====================================
I think we definitely need clarification on the July date, but we should defer to Tom Riley on approaching UC/CSU for help.
James D Steffes@ENRON
07/19/2001 12:47 PM
To: Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron, Susan J Mara/NA/Enron, Jeremy Blachman@EES, [email protected]@EES, Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Diann Huddleson@EES, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES, Evan Hughes/HOU/EES@EES, Harry Kingerski/Enron@EnronXGate
cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron
Subject: CONFIDENTIAL: DASR Update
The attached indicates that UC/CSU are still not fully back to DA. Does it make sense to try and get their help in making sure that the legislation does not limit their return to DA? What is our current relationship with that customer?
Also, does anyone have any problems with Govt Affairs using this information when we are asking for "clarification" on the July 12 date? It may be helpful to highlight for the key legislative members exactly who they are hurting with their decisions.
Thanks,
Jim
To: James D Steffes/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeremy Blachman
cc: [email protected], Vicki Sharp/HOU/EES@EES, Diann Huddleson, Mike D Smith/HOU/EES@EES
Subject: DASR Update
This is the daily report we get regarding DASR's. We regularly scrub this report for accuracy but it can give you a feel for where we are in the process. The "CA DASR Scorecard" is a summary.
Again, we'll continue to improve the accuracy of the reporting and will keep you in the loop.
Please let me know if you need additional information.
Thanks,
Evan
---------------------- Forwarded by Evan Hughes/HOU/EES on 07/19/2001 12:27 PM ---------------------------
[email protected] on 07/19/2001 08:32:16 AM
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
cc:
Subject: Reports for this morning's meeting
Here are the reports for the 9:00 CDT update.
(See attached file: 071801 500 PM CA COMM STATUS RPRT.xls) (See attached
file: CA DASR Scorecard 071801 500PM.doc)
- 071801 500 PM CA COMM STATUS RPRT.xls
- CA DASR Scorecard 071801 500PM.doc
<Embedded StdOleLink>
=====================================
|
2,897 |
Subject: Important Notice - Inter-SC Trades with Adjustment Bid Update
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]', '[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/1525.
=====================================
Trade Application
The final version of the trade application for the launch of State 6.7 will be
posted behind the Participants only section in the folder entitled "Inter-SC
Trades" on Monday, September 18th. We anticipate this will be the final
version
of the trade application prior to launch. We will send a market message when
the trade application is ready for download.
Market Simulation
This is our final week of market simulation. As of late Friday afternoon, we
had
not been given any information regarding additional testing with the ISO
direct,
however they have made the emmunlator available to us to turn schedules
around.
NOTE: If you have not taken the opportunity to test your systems against the
trade application during previous market simulation days, we encourage you to
test with the trade application being posted today sometime this week.
Inter-SC Resource
All Inter-SC Resources must be entered into PowerBase prior to 5:00 PM on
Friday, September 22, 2000. Please forward all requests for resources to
Steven
Sweet at [email protected] prior to Friday. Steven can be reached at (626)
537-3264.
DATA FREEZE
In preparation for the launch of Stage 6.7, there will be a data freeze
effective September 24th through October 11th. To ensure the stability of our
system, we will not be able to effect any changes to your resources during
that
time. If you have any questions regarding the freeze, you can contact me at
(626) 537-3263.
Conference Call
We will have a conference call on Wednesday, September 27, 2000 to discuss
launch status and to review the changeover schedule for the new environment.
Call information is as follows:
Date: Wednesday, September 27, 2000
Time: 1:00 PM
Duration: 1/2 hour
Phone #: (888) 452-9851
Passcode: Release 6.7
Leader: Cleo Center
Materials for the call will be forwarded to you for your review prior to the
call.
We look forward to your participation and to a smooth and successful launch.
We appreciate your continued support.
Thank you.
=====================================
|
2,898 |
Subject: FW: Orbitz Travel Purchase Confirmation
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/deleted_items/380.
=====================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Orbitz Traveler Care [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 8:14 PM
To: Prentice Sellers
Subject: Orbitz Travel Purchase Confirmation
Hello Prentice,
Thanks for using Orbitz as your travel partner for this journey.
We are preparing the details for your trip, along with lots of helpful
destination information that we'll email to you within 24 hours. At this
time, we're confirming the details of your travel requests.
Please review this confirmation carefully:
Your air reservation number is (RLN) MONHHN.
AirFare Quoted: USD $751.38 (including taxes)
These tickets may carry restrictions.
Sunday, September 2
San Francisco International Airport (SFO) TO Boston Logan International
Airport (BOS)
Flight: United Airlines 998
Departure: September 2 9:00 AM PDT (SFO)
Arrival: September 2 5:43 PM EDT (BOS)
Class: Economy
Sunday, September 9
Boston Logan International Airport (BOS) TO San Francisco International
Airport (SFO)
Flight: United Airlines 999
Departure: September 9 4:05 PM EDT (BOS)
Arrival: September 9 7:26 PM PDT (SFO)
Class: Economy
Please note: changes to your itinerary may result in additional fees.
Passengers on this record:
Prentice Sellers
Jeffrey Dasovich
Billing/Delivery Information
Orbitz Member Name: Prentice Sellers
Address:
366 Dolores St. #3
San Francisco, California 94110
United States
E-Mail: [email protected]
Phone:
If changes to your travel plans become necessary, you can reach us at
Traveler Care on the Orbitz web site
(http://www.orbitz.com/App/traveler_care/support/customer_service_email.jsp)
,
or call an Orbitz Customer Service Representative at 888-656-4546. We
encourage
your comments and suggestions as we strive to meet your expectations for
your
journey and your Orbitz experience. If you are interested in purchasing
travel
protection for this trip, click here for an introduction to Access America:
http://www.etravelprotection.com/servlet/WASCPure?csid=EML&accam=F027211
Thank you for your business. Orbitz Cares
=====================================
|
2,899 |
Subject: Fwd: Cruise update--decision time
Sender: [email protected]
Recipients: ['[email protected]']
File: dasovich-j/all_documents/347.
=====================================
Must have had an old address-- the message came back and I am resending.
Already sent to Nancy and Steve.
Debbie
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: [email protected]
From: [email protected]
Full-name: Dasovichd
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 11:47:12 EST
Subject: Cruise update--decision time
To: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
X-Mailer: AOL 4.0 for Windows 95 sub 38
Hello everyone,
After much research and some delay, I have the info that I think will work
well for Mom and Dad. I tried to combine a NICE cruise (good food,
accommodation, itinerary) with cost.
Here's what I have come up with:
Princess Cruises
Dawn Princess (ship), July 17 departure, 7 night cruise
Vancouver-Inside passage-Ketchikan-Juneau-Skagway-Glacier Bay-College Fjord
crossing-Seward(Anchorage)
Outside room with balcony
$2555.45/per person
I also think that they should spend a day in Vancouver before the cruise.
That adds $258/night (I think they should stay 2 nights--they fly up
Saturday, have Saturday night and Sunday, board the ship on Monday). The
somewhat high price is because they stay at either the Four Seasons or Sutton
Place.
The total is $6026 or $1506 for each of us (if I did the math right--check
it). This price includes airfare, port charges, all food etc on board. It
doesn't include alcohol or sodas on board, any excursions taken in port
(sightseeing tours), tips for cabin steward, waiter and busboy (about $200
for the trip). So we could also throw in a few hundred dollars of mad money.
This price ($2555.45 per person with the hotel in Vancouver) is really
great--they are doing some kind of special. Holland America is much more and
a comparable cruise with no balcony is $2440).
I have a reservation for them which is good until Monday. There is a $500
deposit required with the balance due 60 days before departure.
Let me know what you think--comments, etc.
Debbie
=====================================
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.